Clarification: how is CP getting translated over?

furiouslog

Sju wrote: »

Simple reason: You did not earn the extra xp needed for the boost you think you deserve.

That is a matter of perspective. You're holding CP as a constant value before and after the change, and allowing the effort required to earn it "float" as a matter of developer design. Players who disagree are considering the relative value of CP before and after as a function of XP gained before and after. So how do we arrive at an objective measure of relative value?

If CP before = CP after, none of this would be an issue. What drives the sense of unfairness is that the buffed stats profile you can derive from 810 "old CP" is not achievable at 810 "new CP". That means that old CP does not equal new CP, and as such, your assumptions about the constant value of CP are flawed, as is the reason you supplied.

trackdemon5512

@furiouslog lets just end this

1. Will the CP 2.0 cap raising to 3600 mean all our CP from 1.0 will scale up? Is the experience growth in CP2.0 different from CP1.0?
No, your CP will not scale up. However, we will be changing the experience growth scale so that players under CP 1800 will grow very quickly. Compared to CP1.0, a fresh new player would need 56% LESS experience to reach max CP cap in CP2.0 (3600). As a reminder, you don’t need to be max CP to do well!
CP 1800 is the new expected curve for diminishing experience, but Enlightenment is the same.
Around CP 2000, there are no more passives to unlock, but you will have access to Quality of Life changes.
An 810 on CP1.0 will feel just as strong walking into CP2.0.

2. If the current meta in CP1.0 is for a player to be around CP 300+ to complete a competitive veteran trial, what is the equivalent CP that players should try to “hit” for CP2.0? Is any of the dungeon content harder to reflect the higher CP2.0 cap?
We didn’t change the difficulty requirements for dungeon finder. 300-600 CP is where ideally, you should be able to do vet content.
If you’re aiming for a leaderboard CP, you’ll probably need to be around 800-1100. The majority of the player-base right now sits around CP 410.
If you’re at CP1.0 810, you should be able to do all of the exact same content with CP2.0.
There is also no affect to the battlegrounds with the CP changes.
The cap on gear has been at 160 forever, and we don’t foresee that changing anytime soon either.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/563606/cp-2-0-faq/p1

furiouslog

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

@furiouslog lets just end this

1. Will the CP 2.0 cap raising to 3600 mean all our CP from 1.0 will scale up? Is the experience growth in CP2.0 different from CP1.0?
No, your CP will not scale up. However, we will be changing the experience growth scale so that players under CP 1800 will grow very quickly. Compared to CP1.0, a fresh new player would need 56% LESS experience to reach max CP cap in CP2.0 (3600). As a reminder, you don’t need to be max CP to do well!
CP 1800 is the new expected curve for diminishing experience, but Enlightenment is the same.
Around CP 2000, there are no more passives to unlock, but you will have access to Quality of Life changes.
An 810 on CP1.0 will feel just as strong walking into CP2.0.

2. If the current meta in CP1.0 is for a player to be around CP 300+ to complete a competitive veteran trial, what is the equivalent CP that players should try to “hit” for CP2.0? Is any of the dungeon content harder to reflect the higher CP2.0 cap?
We didn’t change the difficulty requirements for dungeon finder. 300-600 CP is where ideally, you should be able to do vet content.
If you’re aiming for a leaderboard CP, you’ll probably need to be around 800-1100. The majority of the player-base right now sits around CP 410.
If you’re at CP1.0 810, you should be able to do all of the exact same content with CP2.0.
There is also no affect to the battlegrounds with the CP changes.
The cap on gear has been at 160 forever, and we don’t foresee that changing anytime soon either.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/563606/cp-2-0-faq/p1

Are my maxed stats going to get reduced if I am currently at 810, excluding trade off restrictions? Yes. Then it's a nerf. Very simple.

Flamebait

furiouslog wrote: »

Sju wrote: »

Simple reason: You did not earn the extra xp needed for the boost you think you deserve.

That is a matter of perspective. You're holding CP as a constant value before and after the change, and allowing the effort required to earn it "float" as a matter of developer design. Players who disagree are considering the relative value of CP before and after as a function of XP gained before and after. So how do we arrive at an objective measure of relative value?

If CP before = CP after, none of this would be an issue. What drives the sense of unfairness is that the buffed stats profile you can derive from 810 "old CP" is not achievable at 810 "new CP". That means that old CP does not equal new CP, and as such, your assumptions about the constant value of CP are flawed, as is the reason you supplied.

Flawed logic, CP before is exactly equal to CP after. Relative value of CP before and after is arguable but the number of CP before and after is exactly set. If you have 900 CP now you have 900 CP after the patch, perhaps the CP is not as effective but that does not change the fact that your CP is the same, especially when they have directly stated they want to reduce both current power and power creep.

Also if you actually check in the game itself, then XP is literally a currency used for the purpose of buying CP, it states very clearly you have # of XP until next CP, not you have a running total of XP and that equal to # of CP. If they had a running total of XP on your character you could make the argument being here but honestly you already purchased the CP with XP and now they are reducing the cost so you want more CP without doing anything. To be fair they really should have gotten rid of CP with the new system, made it a completely new advancement system and given a certain amount of whatever the new point are depending on current CP up to a maximum amount, but they tried to keep things going in a uniform way and this is the result.

furiouslog

Flamebait wrote: »

Flawed logic, CP before is exactly equal to CP after. Relative value of CP before and after is arguable but the number of CP before and after is exactly set. If you have 900 CP now you have 900 CP after the patch, perhaps the CP is not as effective but that does not change the fact that your CP is the same, especially when they have directly stated they want to reduce both current power and power creep.

Also if you actually check in the game itself, then XP is literally a currency used for the purpose of buying CP, it states very clearly you have # of XP until next CP, not you have a running total of XP and that equal to # of CP. If they had a running total of XP on your character you could make the argument being here but honestly you already purchased the CP with XP and now they are reducing the cost so you want more CP without doing anything. To be fair they really should have gotten rid of CP with the new system, made it a completely new advancement system and given a certain amount of whatever the new point are depending on current CP up to a maximum amount, but they tried to keep things going in a uniform way and this is the result.

As has already been discussed in this thread, I backed off of the XP calculation solution, and proposed that a fair solution would be to take whatever new CP was required to produce equivalent post-balance stats, and make that the new 810. For sake of the example, skinnycheeks' calculation of 1170 seems to be about where everyone agrees. So, what I think is fair is that everyone who hit 810 gets 1170 as their baseline (an adjustment of 360 to achieve parity with what you've already earned), and then the incremental CP earned over 810 provides the basis for the new CP you are allocated. So if you have 1000 CP today, you'd get 1360 CP on March 8.

I think that hits a lot of sweet spots with respect to achieving objectives for leaving plenty of improvement grind, fairness to veteran players, narrowing the performance distribution, and giving significant benefits to newer players for progression.

Flamebait

In all fairness I would actually rather see them reduce the total CP and required CP while converting CP directly across. If they reduced the total to say 2k CP with needing 800 (rather than 810 since most things seem to be 25 and 50 pts on the PTS) to reach the end of meaningful vertical progression that would be a good thing. It would help the veteran players and the new and future players.

The main problem with changing the CP any person has is that it's always going to result in this argument, either people didn't get as much as they felt or they got too much and feel like they have lost something by not getting to do the work. Crunching down the total CP earnable while also reducing the amount needed to achieve parity would be the best way to help the vast majority that I can see, although then there are people over 2000 already that might feel it's unfair but you can never please everyone.

furiouslog

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

@furiouslog lets just end this

1. Will the CP 2.0 cap raising to 3600 mean all our CP from 1.0 will scale up? Is the experience growth in CP2.0 different from CP1.0?
No, your CP will not scale up. However, we will be changing the experience growth scale so that players under CP 1800 will grow very quickly. Compared to CP1.0, a fresh new player would need 56% LESS experience to reach max CP cap in CP2.0 (3600). As a reminder, you don’t need to be max CP to do well!
CP 1800 is the new expected curve for diminishing experience, but Enlightenment is the same.
Around CP 2000, there are no more passives to unlock, but you will have access to Quality of Life changes.
An 810 on CP1.0 will feel just as strong walking into CP2.0.

2. If the current meta in CP1.0 is for a player to be around CP 300+ to complete a competitive veteran trial, what is the equivalent CP that players should try to “hit” for CP2.0? Is any of the dungeon content harder to reflect the higher CP2.0 cap?
We didn’t change the difficulty requirements for dungeon finder. 300-600 CP is where ideally, you should be able to do vet content.
If you’re aiming for a leaderboard CP, you’ll probably need to be around 800-1100. The majority of the player-base right now sits around CP 410.
If you’re at CP1.0 810, you should be able to do all of the exact same content with CP2.0.
There is also no affect to the battlegrounds with the CP changes.
The cap on gear has been at 160 forever, and we don’t foresee that changing anytime soon either.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/563606/cp-2-0-faq/p1

Thanks for posting that, but I already saw it and disregarded it because the basis for their statements was that members of the development team tested their content themselves at different CP benchmarks. It's not a representative sample of performance distribution - their skill will be higher than the average players. Also, they use ranges, and the words "about" and "should" a lot.

Clear character stats math provides a more precise measure of potential ability than a small set of results from a small sample of players. If you were marginal on clearing something due to personal limitations, then having your stats reduced could have a negative influence on your ability to clear.

Either way, it's not clearing that irritates me. It's that I already have my character specced a certain way. If I'm at 810, I'd need to grind more to get back to where I was before the change, which is a large opportunity cost of game time if my focus is on getting back to parity, or I'd have to wait for months to get there naturally given my usual game time. That's the fundamental problem. It's not that their are "stealing" my XP. They are requiring me to spend more time to re-earn what I already earned, which does nothing to help new players.

the1andonlyskwex

furiouslog wrote: »

Thanks for posting that, but I already saw it and disregarded it because the basis for their statements was that members of the development team tested their content themselves at different CP benchmarks. It's not a representative sample of performance distribution - their skill will be higher than the average players. Also, they use ranges, and the words "about" and "should" a lot.

ZOS answered your question, directly and definitively. You can't just pretend the answer doesn't exist because you don't like what they had to say.

furiouslog

Flamebait wrote: »

In all fairness I would actually rather see them reduce the total CP and required CP while converting CP directly across. If they reduced the total to say 2k CP with needing 800 (rather than 810 since most things seem to be 25 and 50 pts on the PTS) to reach the end of meaningful vertical progression that would be a good thing. It would help the veteran players and the new and future players.

The main problem with changing the CP any person has is that it's always going to result in this argument, either people didn't get as much as they felt or they got too much and feel like they have lost something by not getting to do the work. Crunching down the total CP earnable while also reducing the amount needed to achieve parity would be the best way to help the vast majority that I can see, although then there are people over 2000 already that might feel it's unfair but you can never please everyone.

Given that they designed the tree with future expandability in mind, and also given the upward slope in XP required to progress on the high end of the tree, I would think that veteran players would still feel like they had plenty of room to grow. If there are any vets worried about getting too much CP, I'd like to hear their perspectives, but I think that the unfairness on the bottom end trumps the incremental enjoyment that a vet sitting on 3000 CP today would have in the future if they didn't get their CP reduced by enough.

furiouslog

the1andonlyskwex wrote: »

furiouslog wrote: »

Thanks for posting that, but I already saw it and disregarded it because the basis for their statements was that members of the development team tested their content themselves at different CP benchmarks. It's not a representative sample of performance distribution - their skill will be higher than the average players. Also, they use ranges, and the words "about" and "should" a lot.

ZOS answered your question, directly and definitively. You can't just pretend the answer doesn't exist because you don't like what they had to say.

I'm not pretending anything. I'm saying they did not provide a clear answer on the issue I'm highlighting. In other words, they are not answering my follow up question, which I trust does not need to be stated again.

Or to articulate in your own terms, you can't just pretend that they answered the question when they didn't.

Flamebait

furiouslog wrote: »

Given that they designed the tree with future expandability in mind, and also given the upward slope in XP required to progress on the high end of the tree, I would think that veteran players would still feel like they had plenty of room to grow. If there are any vets worried about getting too much CP, I'd like to hear their perspectives, but I think that the unfairness on the bottom end trumps the incremental enjoyment that a vet sitting on 3000 CP today would have in the future if they didn't get their CP reduced by enough.

I think perhaps I wasn't clear in the way I said it. What I was thinking when I mentioned total reduction would actually not affect the ability to change the scale in the future. I was talking about something similar to a change where the current points cost say 50CP in 5 increments of 10Cp. However if they were to change it to require 35Cp in 5 increments of 7CP, you maintain the scaling exactly as it is now while reducing the amount needed to end vertical progression by 30% and they could either keep the total cap at 3600 or even reduce it by 30%.

A change such as that would enable newer players to catch up at the faster rate, while also not requiring a change over of CP. The current amount needed is around 1140CP, which if reduced by 30% would equal out to 798, meaning if they carried CP over directly as it is a person at 810 would be essentially finished with vertical and anyone past it would be already heading through the horizontal progression. As this would simply be a crunching of the numbers needed to allocate to a star also it maintains full ability to add further on with little to no changes to the current system.

bayushi2005

Because everybody is sure they will be as strong post patch as they have been since hitting 810, prices of aetherial dust, ambrosia, perfect roe and crafting writs remained stable.. Right.

I find this song to be a perfect illustration of our situation, I expect it to be deleted soon, so catch it while it lasts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cE4lpSFNFUE

trackdemon5512

furiouslog wrote: »

the1andonlyskwex wrote: »

furiouslog wrote: »

Thanks for posting that, but I already saw it and disregarded it because the basis for their statements was that members of the development team tested their content themselves at different CP benchmarks. It's not a representative sample of performance distribution - their skill will be higher than the average players. Also, they use ranges, and the words "about" and "should" a lot.

ZOS answered your question, directly and definitively. You can't just pretend the answer doesn't exist because you don't like what they had to say.

I'm not pretending anything. I'm saying they did not provide a clear answer on the issue I'm highlighting. In other words, they are not answering my follow up question, which I trust does not need to be stated again.

Or to articulate in your own terms, you can't just pretend that they answered the question when they didn't.

5. Total DPS output seems lower in CP2.0. What’s the reasoning for this? Will tanks/healers get more utility in CP2.0?

The overall goal was to reduce the power of high end damage and efficiency by 15-20% with CP 2.0, as there is a significant delta in power between many players. However, due to the penetration bug we saw on LIVE and PTS, we didn't fully reach that goal, and will continue investigating solutions, such as potentially reducing passive power from the CP system further, as well as looking into more outlying problems.
For healers, we recognize that the healing tree is limited right now. We do have plans to try and expand the healing tree further in terms of slottable nodes. (see #7)
For tanks, no large changes from CP1.0 to CP2.0 at this time.

The overall goal was to reduce the power of high end damage and efficiency by 15-20%

The answer is right there. They're intentionally nerfing top range ups and efficiency. It's been needed as the upper echelon of players have been hitting insane numbers which I'm quite sure the developers did not intend for. 110-120k DPS on combat dummies is absolutely stupid ridiculous. If this was a game like Street Fighter and solo that would be one thing. But its an MMORPG that depends on players being on a fair and balanced footing. If there was a power gap of that magnitude and the developers say that you can still complete the same content it's all good.

I mean in recent months how many Tick Tock Tormentors have popped up? Immortal Redeemers are a dime a dozen all thanks to the insane power creep. If anyone complains that particular endgame content is too difficult to complete then really the solution isn't to raise player damage as that widens a player gulf. The smart decision is to retool and nerf the content which has less far reaching implications.

If you're looking to get back to where you were with the latest patch (don't say CP810 because Ive seen how much damage has increased since Murkmire first popped in) the developer is actively telling you "No, we don't want you playing like that. That's not our intention and it's an unhealthy meta".

DaveMoeDee

furiouslog wrote: »

Flamebait wrote: »

Flawed logic, CP before is exactly equal to CP after. Relative value of CP before and after is arguable but the number of CP before and after is exactly set. If you have 900 CP now you have 900 CP after the patch, perhaps the CP is not as effective but that does not change the fact that your CP is the same, especially when they have directly stated they want to reduce both current power and power creep.

Also if you actually check in the game itself, then XP is literally a currency used for the purpose of buying CP, it states very clearly you have # of XP until next CP, not you have a running total of XP and that equal to # of CP. If they had a running total of XP on your character you could make the argument being here but honestly you already purchased the CP with XP and now they are reducing the cost so you want more CP without doing anything. To be fair they really should have gotten rid of CP with the new system, made it a completely new advancement system and given a certain amount of whatever the new point are depending on current CP up to a maximum amount, but they tried to keep things going in a uniform way and this is the result.

As has already been discussed in this thread, I backed off of the XP calculation solution, and proposed that a fair solution would be to take whatever new CP was required to produce equivalent post-balance stats, and make that the new 810. For sake of the example, skinnycheeks' calculation of 1170 seems to be about where everyone agrees. So, what I think is fair is that everyone who hit 810 gets 1170 as their baseline (an adjustment of 360 to achieve parity with what you've already earned), and then the incremental CP earned over 810 provides the basis for the new CP you are allocated. So if you have 1000 CP today, you'd get 1360 CP on March 8.

I think that hits a lot of sweet spots with respect to achieving objectives for leaving plenty of improvement grind, fairness to veteran players, narrowing the performance distribution, and giving significant benefits to newer players for progression.

They didn't do this when they increased the max to 810. Why would they do it now?

Are you also saying to give 360 CP to people with 500 CP? Because I assume that even they were acquiring CP at a slower rate that they will after the update. Every time they increased the CP cap, it moved the curve of XP needed to acquire CP. Obviously we should not give such a boost to those of us with 810+ CP while not giving it to someone with 500 CP who also had slower CP accumulation pre-patch.

I am suspicious of anyone only talking about what boon can be given to 810+ CP players.

remosito

DaveMoeDee wrote: »

furiouslog wrote: »

Flamebait wrote: »

Flawed logic, CP before is exactly equal to CP after. Relative value of CP before and after is arguable but the number of CP before and after is exactly set. If you have 900 CP now you have 900 CP after the patch, perhaps the CP is not as effective but that does not change the fact that your CP is the same, especially when they have directly stated they want to reduce both current power and power creep.

Also if you actually check in the game itself, then XP is literally a currency used for the purpose of buying CP, it states very clearly you have # of XP until next CP, not you have a running total of XP and that equal to # of CP. If they had a running total of XP on your character you could make the argument being here but honestly you already purchased the CP with XP and now they are reducing the cost so you want more CP without doing anything. To be fair they really should have gotten rid of CP with the new system, made it a completely new advancement system and given a certain amount of whatever the new point are depending on current CP up to a maximum amount, but they tried to keep things going in a uniform way and this is the result.

As has already been discussed in this thread, I backed off of the XP calculation solution, and proposed that a fair solution would be to take whatever new CP was required to produce equivalent post-balance stats, and make that the new 810. For sake of the example, skinnycheeks' calculation of 1170 seems to be about where everyone agrees. So, what I think is fair is that everyone who hit 810 gets 1170 as their baseline (an adjustment of 360 to achieve parity with what you've already earned), and then the incremental CP earned over 810 provides the basis for the new CP you are allocated. So if you have 1000 CP today, you'd get 1360 CP on March 8.

I think that hits a lot of sweet spots with respect to achieving objectives for leaving plenty of improvement grind, fairness to veteran players, narrowing the performance distribution, and giving significant benefits to newer players for progression.

They didn't do this when they increased the max to 810. Why would they do it now?

Are you also saying to give 360 CP to people with 500 CP? Because I assume that even they were acquiring CP at a slower rate that they will after the update. Every time they increased the CP cap, it moved the curve of XP needed to acquire CP. Obviously we should not give such a boost to those of us with 810+ CP while not giving it to someone with 500 CP who also had slower CP accumulation pre-patch.

I am suspicious of anyone only talking about what boon can be given to 810+ CP players.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1uS2H-elnpVngKOMBqwl3LHytDHSOBwmDfDoQHHOtoh4/edit?usp=sharing

if you wanna check for yourself what boost and what difference in the gain curve there is pre and post patch.

As you'll note the difference is very low at low cp and increses to 2x as fast at 809 where it jumps to >3x due to penalty of 1.5x on prepatch. After 1800 where 1.5x penalty applies as well post patch it drops back down to a bit over 2x.

remosito

bayushi2005 wrote: »

Because everybody is sure they will be as strong post patch as they have been since hitting 810, prices of aetherial dust, ambrosia, perfect roe and crafting writs remained stable.. Right.

horizontal progression and multipurpose chars are quite the draw too. And those require very high cp. And Xp booster potions to get there faster.

bayushi2005

remosito wrote: »

bayushi2005 wrote: »

Because everybody is sure they will be as strong post patch as they have been since hitting 810, prices of aetherial dust, ambrosia, perfect roe and crafting writs remained stable.. Right.

horizontal progression and multipurpose chars are quite the draw too. And those require very high cp. And Xp booster potions to get there faster.

I consider horizontal progression a part of "general strenght" of a given character, I don't limit it to "combat capability".

furiouslog

Flamebait wrote: »

furiouslog wrote: »

Given that they designed the tree with future expandability in mind, and also given the upward slope in XP required to progress on the high end of the tree, I would think that veteran players would still feel like they had plenty of room to grow. If there are any vets worried about getting too much CP, I'd like to hear their perspectives, but I think that the unfairness on the bottom end trumps the incremental enjoyment that a vet sitting on 3000 CP today would have in the future if they didn't get their CP reduced by enough.

I think perhaps I wasn't clear in the way I said it. What I was thinking when I mentioned total reduction would actually not affect the ability to change the scale in the future. I was talking about something similar to a change where the current points cost say 50CP in 5 increments of 10Cp. However if they were to change it to require 35Cp in 5 increments of 7CP, you maintain the scaling exactly as it is now while reducing the amount needed to end vertical progression by 30% and they could either keep the total cap at 3600 or even reduce it by 30%.

A change such as that would enable newer players to catch up at the faster rate, while also not requiring a change over of CP. The current amount needed is around 1140CP, which if reduced by 30% would equal out to 798, meaning if they carried CP over directly as it is a person at 810 would be essentially finished with vertical and anyone past it would be already heading through the horizontal progression. As this would simply be a crunching of the numbers needed to allocate to a star also it maintains full ability to add further on with little to no changes to the current system.

Yeah, that would work.

furiouslog

DaveMoeDee wrote: »

They didn't do this when they increased the max to 810. Why would they do it now?

Are you also saying to give 360 CP to people with 500 CP? Because I assume that even they were acquiring CP at a slower rate that they will after the update. Every time they increased the CP cap, it moved the curve of XP needed to acquire CP. Obviously we should not give such a boost to those of us with 810+ CP while not giving it to someone with 500 CP who also had slower CP accumulation pre-patch.

I am suspicious of anyone only talking about what boon can be given to 810+ CP players.

I don't want a boon, per se, although I think CP earned should stay earned. I just don't want a detriment.

ApoAlaia

furiouslog wrote: »

DaveMoeDee wrote: »

They didn't do this when they increased the max to 810. Why would they do it now?

Are you also saying to give 360 CP to people with 500 CP? Because I assume that even they were acquiring CP at a slower rate that they will after the update. Every time they increased the CP cap, it moved the curve of XP needed to acquire CP. Obviously we should not give such a boost to those of us with 810+ CP while not giving it to someone with 500 CP who also had slower CP accumulation pre-patch.

I am suspicious of anyone only talking about what boon can be given to 810+ CP players.

I don't want a boon, per se, although I think CP earned should stay earned. I just don't want a detriment.

Me neither; I wasn't after a boon, I wasn't asking to be awarded unearned experience, I wanted my legitimately accrued experience to apply to the heavily revised requirements.

Alas according to the developers the experience I have accrued over the past few years is somehow lesser in quality than the one that will be awarded moving forward thus needing significantly more of it to qualify for the same [CP].

Grimm_Cortex

Ranger209 wrote: »

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/563606/cp-2-0-faq/p1

ok, so they explain how they will manage it, but not why and certainly not why they ignore our time spent in the game !

In fact, they reduce the necessary XP by 56% for new players, why they still ignore the ancient one ? Not a clue !

Sju

ApoAlaia wrote: »

furiouslog wrote: »

DaveMoeDee wrote: »

They didn't do this when they increased the max to 810. Why would they do it now?

Are you also saying to give 360 CP to people with 500 CP? Because I assume that even they were acquiring CP at a slower rate that they will after the update. Every time they increased the CP cap, it moved the curve of XP needed to acquire CP. Obviously we should not give such a boost to those of us with 810+ CP while not giving it to someone with 500 CP who also had slower CP accumulation pre-patch.

I am suspicious of anyone only talking about what boon can be given to 810+ CP players.

I don't want a boon, per se, although I think CP earned should stay earned. I just don't want a detriment.

Me neither; I wasn't after a boon, I wasn't asking to be awarded unearned experience, I wanted my legitimately accrued experience to apply to the heavily revised requirements.

Alas according to the developers the experience I have accrued over the past few years is somehow lesser in quality than the one that will be awarded moving forward thus needing significantly more of it to qualify for the same [CP].

But you are absolutely asking for unearned experience.

Pink_Pixie

Sju wrote: »

ApoAlaia wrote: »

furiouslog wrote: »

DaveMoeDee wrote: »

They didn't do this when they increased the max to 810. Why would they do it now?

Are you also saying to give 360 CP to people with 500 CP? Because I assume that even they were acquiring CP at a slower rate that they will after the update. Every time they increased the CP cap, it moved the curve of XP needed to acquire CP. Obviously we should not give such a boost to those of us with 810+ CP while not giving it to someone with 500 CP who also had slower CP accumulation pre-patch.

I am suspicious of anyone only talking about what boon can be given to 810+ CP players.

I don't want a boon, per se, although I think CP earned should stay earned. I just don't want a detriment.

Me neither; I wasn't after a boon, I wasn't asking to be awarded unearned experience, I wanted my legitimately accrued experience to apply to the heavily revised requirements.

Alas according to the developers the experience I have accrued over the past few years is somehow lesser in quality than the one that will be awarded moving forward thus needing significantly more of it to qualify for the same [CP].

But you are absolutely asking for unearned experience.

No idea how you came to that conclusion, they have already earned it, so therefore, it's not asking for something that is unearned.

ApoAlaia

Sju wrote: »

ApoAlaia wrote: »

furiouslog wrote: »

DaveMoeDee wrote: »

They didn't do this when they increased the max to 810. Why would they do it now?

Are you also saying to give 360 CP to people with 500 CP? Because I assume that even they were acquiring CP at a slower rate that they will after the update. Every time they increased the CP cap, it moved the curve of XP needed to acquire CP. Obviously we should not give such a boost to those of us with 810+ CP while not giving it to someone with 500 CP who also had slower CP accumulation pre-patch.

I am suspicious of anyone only talking about what boon can be given to 810+ CP players.

I don't want a boon, per se, although I think CP earned should stay earned. I just don't want a detriment.

Me neither; I wasn't after a boon, I wasn't asking to be awarded unearned experience, I wanted my legitimately accrued experience to apply to the heavily revised requirements.

Alas according to the developers the experience I have accrued over the past few years is somehow lesser in quality than the one that will be awarded moving forward thus needing significantly more of it to qualify for the same [CP].

But you are absolutely asking for unearned experience.

I really have no idea how you reach that conclusion. I qualify for the CP I have because I have earned the experience required to qualify for the CP I have.

Care to elaborate?

trackdemon5512

Grimm_Cortex wrote: »

Ranger209 wrote: »

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/563606/cp-2-0-faq/p1

ok, so they explain how they will manage it, but not why and certainly not why they ignore our time spent in the game !

In fact, they reduce the necessary XP by 56% for new players, why they still ignore the ancient one ? Not a clue !

Perhaps it’s better to think in the terms “end of life”. Every game seemingly has an EOL point where it all creatively ends. Maybe the game persists but development ends on it. Now who knows where we are in ESO’s finite life but each year we edge closer to the end.

That said there is no way you can attract new players if they can’t catch up to the current base. Sure the current base has played more and earned more but if things stay the same you have players that will never ever catch up to them.

The majority of those players will inevitably quit. Partially out of a sense of futility, partially out of be ostracized. It isn’t as if we don’t already see the CP point elitism that has subtly invaded the game.

- Someone isn’t max CP? They’re not good enough for this random dungeon. Kick.
- You arent max CP? You can’t join this vet trial

Even the various popular websites that cater to builds on the web focus on either no CP for BGs and max CP for builds with anything in between left as incomplete and unwanted. It’s that vertical type of progression ZOS seeks to eliminate as it’s unhealthy.

So how do you heal? You create a finite point of vertical gains. Done with CP2.0. You allow newer players to catch up quickly. Done with CP2.0. You create rewards so that there is a reason for veterans to continue playing after reaching their current vertical apex. Done in CP2.0. And you make it dynamic/expandable to compensate for whatever comes forward. Done in CP2.0.

The new system and the refinement to XP gains and CP earned is deliberate. ZOS doesn’t want you at max (you’ll leave from nothing to work towards) and they don’t want newer players to slog (they’ll leave from feeling never good enough). This all works and it’s coming at the cost that while your CP is solidified, your total XP doesn’t mean anything.

AlnilamE

furiouslog wrote: »

Flamebait wrote: »

In all fairness I would actually rather see them reduce the total CP and required CP while converting CP directly across. If they reduced the total to say 2k CP with needing 800 (rather than 810 since most things seem to be 25 and 50 pts on the PTS) to reach the end of meaningful vertical progression that would be a good thing. It would help the veteran players and the new and future players.

The main problem with changing the CP any person has is that it's always going to result in this argument, either people didn't get as much as they felt or they got too much and feel like they have lost something by not getting to do the work. Crunching down the total CP earnable while also reducing the amount needed to achieve parity would be the best way to help the vast majority that I can see, although then there are people over 2000 already that might feel it's unfair but you can never please everyone.

Given that they designed the tree with future expandability in mind, and also given the upward slope in XP required to progress on the high end of the tree, I would think that veteran players would still feel like they had plenty of room to grow. If there are any vets worried about getting too much CP, I'd like to hear their perspectives, but I think that the unfairness on the bottom end trumps the incremental enjoyment that a vet sitting on 3000 CP today would have in the future if they didn't get their CP reduced by enough.

Personally, I've been playing since launch. I'm a casual player, but I have played long enough that I have just over 1400 CP.

I've never earned a CP that cost less than 400k XP. When the cap was introduced, I was just above it, and I have remained above it since.

If we go by @remosito contention that XP we earn unequitably is "stolen", then I've had 33% of my XP stolen since the cap was introduced. That's without counting the recalculations of the XP curve as the CP cap was lifted.

I don't see it that way, but still, consider that any CP I've earned since the cap was introduced cost between 600k and 1.2 million XP, and DID NOTHING FOR ME AT THE TIME IT WAS EARNED.

Being above the cap, CP was always just a number with no actual effect on my gameplay until maybe YEARS after they were earned.

So, for one, I'm doubly happy because 1) for the first time ever it's going to take me less than 400k XP to earn a CP, at least for the next 300 or so, and 2) every CP I earn from Monday on is actually going to have an effect on my gameplay.

I don't mind it taking time, as long as progress is being made. I may actually spend more time playing now (not grinding, actually doing stuff I enjoy, like questing, dungeons, trials and PvP)

Note that I play no-CP PvP so other PvPers having more CP than me doesn't matter.

furiouslog

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

Perhaps it’s better to think in the terms “end of life”. Every game seemingly has an EOL point where it all creatively ends. Maybe the game persists but development ends on it. Now who knows where we are in ESO’s finite life but each year we edge closer to the end.

That said there is no way you can attract new players if they can’t catch up to the current base. Sure the current base has played more and earned more but if things stay the same you have players that will never ever catch up to them.

Great point, but I have two counterpoints:

1. I don't think that nerfing veteran players existing stats and capabilities significantly in the name of closing the gap is equitable and fair to people who have already been supporting their game. It's too great of a cost with little benefit in extending EOL. In my case, under the example solution I provided, I'd get 1660 CP instead of 1300 CP. That's plenty of space for my characters o grow, and it does not put me so far ahead of new players that they can't catch up under the new XP curve. I still would have spent more XP to get to that level then they will.

2. The game is more popular than it's ever been (part of the reason they are probably improving accessibility - check Steamcharts), which is encouraging for EOL - and an additional reason why fully invested players who obviously want to continue playing should not get nerfed, especially given the amount of horizontal progression currently available to them and possibly in the future as they continue to make changes.

You made additional points about elitism. Sharing my experience, I agree, but the CP system won't fix that. A friend and I left an elitist guild and started our own with the intent of helping new players who wanted to progress move up and get to veteran content. We started almost a year ago, and we launched our first home-grown prog group last week, which is awesome. But, it's also a long time. I get that. Yet, if I wake up on Tuesday and can't do the same DPS and survive as well on my magplar anymore as a result of nerfs, I'm not going to want to have to grind for weeks to get where I was. It's a disincentive to stay and keep doing what I do. Some people on my team will have it a lot worse given their current CP, which makes it harder to clear when it's already challenging as is. Does that make sense?

Pallio

Take the old CP system, make it super confusing and less effective. The end.

Sju

ApoAlaia wrote: »

Sju wrote: »

ApoAlaia wrote: »

furiouslog wrote: »

DaveMoeDee wrote: »

They didn't do this when they increased the max to 810. Why would they do it now?

Are you also saying to give 360 CP to people with 500 CP? Because I assume that even they were acquiring CP at a slower rate that they will after the update. Every time they increased the CP cap, it moved the curve of XP needed to acquire CP. Obviously we should not give such a boost to those of us with 810+ CP while not giving it to someone with 500 CP who also had slower CP accumulation pre-patch.

I am suspicious of anyone only talking about what boon can be given to 810+ CP players.

I don't want a boon, per se, although I think CP earned should stay earned. I just don't want a detriment.

Me neither; I wasn't after a boon, I wasn't asking to be awarded unearned experience, I wanted my legitimately accrued experience to apply to the heavily revised requirements.

Alas according to the developers the experience I have accrued over the past few years is somehow lesser in quality than the one that will be awarded moving forward thus needing significantly more of it to qualify for the same [CP].

But you are absolutely asking for unearned experience.

I really have no idea how you reach that conclusion. I qualify for the CP I have because I have earned the experience required to qualify for the CP I have.

Care to elaborate?

You earned the experience for the cp you have now. Can you or someone please give a legitimate reasoning for why you think you earned more cp than you already have without doing any work? Because I still haven't seen a good argument for it

I could give you the wage analogy, or the vma weapons analogy, but we all know it'll just be another argument trying to convince us it is wrong, even though it is the same exact thing.

furiouslog

Sju wrote: »

You earned the experience for the cp you have now. Can you or someone please give a legitimate reasoning for why you think you earned more cp than you already have without doing any work? Because I still haven't seen a good argument for it

I could give you the wage analogy, or the vma weapons analogy, but we all know it'll just be another argument trying to convince us it is wrong, even though it is the same exact thing.

I think I've provided a good argument, but you'll have to go back a few posts and check it out.