Lock thread plz, question has long been answered.

BejaProphet

Here is what I understood him to say:

We heard complaining about how long it took to reach optimal builds...so we took away the top half of everything from you, so now your much weaker builds are the new “optimal” and you get there fast. Yay!

But I’m struggling to get my mind around this. Is he seriously saying that hardy and elemental aegis are going to be a mere 2% mitigation???? Is he really saying that the tanks are going to need to use our champion bar slots for 6% mitigation?

(Edit note: sorry, he said maximum of 2 stages, so these would be 4% mitigation)

Seriously, right now tanks use our champion bars to slot 10% mitigation buffs that do not overlap. Meaning for three slots we get a total of 10% mitigation coverage. Now we are using 3 slots for a grand total of 6% mitigation?

I’m sincerely asking. Am I understanding this right?

Mr_Gallows

A horisontal progression where it's options for playstyle rather than vertical discovery of how to be OP is a good change. It is also what they advertised in the early life of the game

While it may not be perfect and while they should add more options to support this... it is a better design principle in terms of gameplay and balance

BejaProphet

You didn’t answer my question. I’m not trying to be rhetorical, I want to know if I’m misunderstanding him.

Mr_Gallows

BejaProphet wrote: »

You didn’t answer my question. I’m not trying to be rhetorical, I want to know if I’m misunderstanding him.

Well I don't know exactly... besides it may change. I think the most important matter is the general direction. Details will change.

ealdwin

It’s a bit unclear as to what the full effect of the change will be, just that number of stages will be decreased. This may mean less points to reach the full potential (so 20 for 10% mitigation rather than 50), or it may mean less overall power (so only 5%). Or it could be a few things in between. We will most likely have to wait to see what the patch notes say on Monday.

CaptainVenom

Yes? No?

To me, they said they are going to reduce the maximum amount of points to get the same stats we got now, only with more points.

For example: instead of having to spend 40 points into Eldritch Insight to get 1.040 Magicka, you now only need 20 to get that. If I understood it right, that is.

Sandman929

I think people are reading into things quite a bit:

we are reducing the number of stages on passive stars in the Warfare and Fitness constellations by two more stages, to a maximum of 2 stages per passive star. This will greatly lower the number of points required to get to a more optimal build in both of those constellations

So that says reducing stages to get to "optimal" not necessarily that the total value is diminished.

while also taking some of the power out of the high-end experience.

Some power out of the high-end experience...sure that sounds like a reduction, but it's very vague and doesn't specify any stars at all by name.

BejaProphet

Yeah, what you guys are suggesting is what I hope he means but then he threw in that little statement, this will lower the cost, “while also taking some of the power out of the high end experience.”

Given that statement I have to conclude he means they are removing the top two stages both cost and benefit.

Sandman929

BejaProphet wrote: »

Yeah, what you guys are suggesting is what I hope he means but then he threw in that little statement, this will lower the cost, “while also taking some of the power out of the high end experience.”

Given that statement I have to conclude he means they are removing the top two stages both cost and benefit.

I think it's clear there will be some reductions, I don't think it's clear where those will be. But of course every chicken little is going to start screaming about how their favorite things have been halved before even seeing the PTS notes.

It might very well be the case, but that's not clear yet.

BejaProphet

Fair enough. But hope it’s not like it sounds. I’m trying not to be premature. I really am making this thread to check if I’m hearing it right.

Sandman929

BejaProphet wrote: »

Fair enough. But hope it’s not like it sounds. I’m trying not to be premature. I really am making this thread to check if I’m hearing it right.

I get it. And your worst interpretation might be exactly what we get, but lets hope not.

Sanguinor2

Keep in mind that in the FAQ about the new CP system Zos flat out told us that they intend to nerf us further. We will likely see a reduction on monday.

colossalvoids

Sounded absolutely like it. For non english speaker as me at the very least. But what's the actual reduction is yet unknown and I just hope for a bit of sanity left there, at least that it's not something set in stone and would be looked at after all the feedback given.

Tommy_The_Gun

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/569953/update-30-combat-preview/p1

"To address these concerns, we are reducing the number of stages on passive stars in the Warfare and Fitness constellations by two more stages, to a maximum of 2 stages per passive star. This will greatly lower the number of points required to get to a more optimal build in both of those constellations, while also taking some of the power out of the high-end experience."

So, yes, there will be nerfs. It all depends on what they mean by "some"

carlos424

ealdwin wrote: »

It’s a bit unclear as to what the full effect of the change will be, just that number of stages will be decreased. This may mean less points to reach the full potential (so 20 for 10% mitigation rather than 50), or it may mean less overall power (so only 5%). Or it could be a few things in between. We will most likely have to wait to see what the patch notes say on Monday.

We will have to wait and see, yes. But these same questions were asked when they announced that they would decrease stages during the last pts cycle. History shows us that they will reduce the stages as well as the corresponding power. (i.e. 40 points would give you 10%, now 20 points will give you 5%).

Luke_Flamesword

I don't mind whole playerbase nerfs as long as they will also nerf most difficult content in game. Most of content is too easy, so going down with endgame power may be good, but at the same time it would be nice to have possibility to finish some harder content without being total hardcore or breaking keyboard...

What I don't like it this game is fact that for most time I'm doing things that are too easy (which is boring) or too difficult (which is frustrating because I'm not Dark souls type guy).

Masel

Sandman929 wrote: »

I think people are reading into things quite a bit:

we are reducing the number of stages on passive stars in the Warfare and Fitness constellations by two more stages, to a maximum of 2 stages per passive star. This will greatly lower the number of points required to get to a more optimal build in both of those constellations

So that says reducing stages to get to "optimal" not necessarily that the total value is diminished.

while also taking some of the power out of the high-end experience.

Some power out of the high-end experience...sure that sounds like a reduction, but it's very vague and doesn't specify any stars at all by name.

It means that the power is reduced. They've did that once when they cut them from 5 to 4, why would they do it different now?

Sandman929

Masel wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

I think people are reading into things quite a bit:

we are reducing the number of stages on passive stars in the Warfare and Fitness constellations by two more stages, to a maximum of 2 stages per passive star. This will greatly lower the number of points required to get to a more optimal build in both of those constellations

So that says reducing stages to get to "optimal" not necessarily that the total value is diminished.

while also taking some of the power out of the high-end experience.

Some power out of the high-end experience...sure that sounds like a reduction, but it's very vague and doesn't specify any stars at all by name.

It means that the power is reduced. They've did that once when they cut them from 5 to 4, why would they do it different now?

I'm not saying they won't. I just prefer to react to facts not speculation.

Tommy_The_Gun

Luke_Flamesword wrote: »

I don't mind whole playerbase nerfs as long as they will also nerf most difficult content in game. Most of content is too easy, so going down with endgame power may be good, but at the same time it would be nice to have possibility to finish some harder content without being total hardcore or breaking keyboard...

What I don't like it this game is fact that for most time I'm doing things that are too easy (which is boring) or too difficult (which is frustrating because I'm not Dark souls type guy).

I played a lot in Dark Souls and "Souls-like" games, and the major difference between those games and ESO harder content is that...

Dark Souls are at least "fair" when it comes to difficulty, consistent rule set and transparent mechanics. Even something as "one shots" do not exist in Sols. With right build, one shots, are no longer one-shots.

In ESO however... anything goes...

Someone is attacking you and it is telegraphed... and you take some dmg. But that OTHER boss in other dungeon telegraphs exactly same thing and... oh... why did he killed me in one hit ? The other boss in other dungeon did not.... ESO, compares to Souls, feels like a one cheap death trap. Despite devs effort, nothing is consistent.

I don't want to sound rude, so please, dear devs, treat it as a friendly feedback. If the only way to make something more challenging is to tweak numbers and add badly telegraphed one-shots, and unbreakabble CCs then as a player, I would say, you should re-evaluate some things and try to come up with better solution.

I like challenging games, but I don't like frustrating games.

BejaProphet

I realize threads take on a life of their own, but can we try not to turn it into a debate about game difficulty?

I really want to know if anybody hears something to clarify these vague developer statements, and I’d like to leave the thread a good spot for that.

Luke_Flamesword

I like challenging games, but I don't like frustrating games.

That's good point (and whole post). It's crazy when you doing just fine with good gear and skills and then boom - you are one-shoted by stupid mechanic. I fight with some boss, blocking and interrupting, roll dodging AOEs like ninja, making decent damage, 80% health of boss burned and than 1 second attack and I'm dead. I didin't even see it coming. It's so frustrating and not fair...

Maybe it's time to even give up with tanks mechanic? This whole mess have only one purpose - to maintain illusion that tank is necessary for content. It's so "fun" that almost noone wants to do it, and people spent crazy amounts of time with their healers and dds waiting for any tank. I see tanks on forum most time complaint about fact that, they can't make any non-tank content, beacuse they don't make any damage. Maybe better will be just with pure DPS and tanky DPS (free choice of player). For dynamic game like ESO it will be more fun without this archaic tank mechanic...

You can make fun mechanics without forcing one guy to stand still and just take damage on him. Also healers can be more important and fun, when they will be only support.

Langeston

It's vaguely written. My initial reading of it is different from yours.

I posted this in another thread:

Here is the pertinent section:

We also are keenly aware of the passive power this system added in the initial offering and the concerns you all have about getting optimal builds as soon as possible.

To address these concerns, we are reducing the number of stages on passive stars in the Warfare and Fitness constellations by two more stages, to a maximum of 2 stages per passive star. This will greatly lower[ing] the number of points required to get to a more optimal build in both of those constellations, while also taking some of the power out of the high-end experience.

If you ignore everything but the bolded part:

We also are keenly aware of the ... concerns you all have about getting optimal builds as soon as possible. To address these concerns, we are ... greatly lower[ing] the number of points required to get to a more optimal build in both of those constellations[.]

It seems to me they're saying that where you used to have to put 50 CP into a constellation to get a 10% buff last patch, next patch you'll only have to put ~25 or so into it. The buff itself doesn't change — only the cost to you does.*

The part after the bolded text ("while also taking some of the power out of the high-end experience.") just means that people with 3300 CP aren't going to be as OP compared to 810s because the 810s are going to be getting a relative buff.

* Of course it's entirely possible that I could be the one misreading this, but I don't think I am.

Masel

Sandman929 wrote: »

Masel wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

I think people are reading into things quite a bit:

we are reducing the number of stages on passive stars in the Warfare and Fitness constellations by two more stages, to a maximum of 2 stages per passive star. This will greatly lower the number of points required to get to a more optimal build in both of those constellations

So that says reducing stages to get to "optimal" not necessarily that the total value is diminished.

while also taking some of the power out of the high-end experience.

Some power out of the high-end experience...sure that sounds like a reduction, but it's very vague and doesn't specify any stars at all by name.

It means that the power is reduced. They've did that once when they cut them from 5 to 4, why would they do it different now?

I'm not saying they won't. I just prefer to react to facts not speculation.

I was on the preview server and the power has been cut in half. 2 stages, same power per stage as before = half the power.

So im not speculating, I've seen it first hand.

Faded

BejaProphet wrote: »

Here is what I understood him to say:

We heard complaining about how long it took to reach optimal builds...so we took away the top half of everything from you, so now your much weaker builds are the new “optimal” and you get there fast. Yay!

But I’m struggling to get my mind around this. Is he seriously saying that hardy and elemental aegis are going to be a mere 2% mitigation???? Is he really saying that the tanks are going to need to use our champion bar slots for 6% mitigation?

(Edit note: sorry, he said maximum of 2 stages, so these would be 4% mitigation)

Seriously, right now tanks use our champion bars to slot 10% mitigation buffs that do not overlap. Meaning for three slots we get a total of 10% mitigation coverage. Now we are using 3 slots for a grand total of 6% mitigation?

I’m sincerely asking. Am I understanding this right?

That's not how I read it, but I see many people drawing the same conclusions you are. We'll see when the PTS drops in three days.

Masel

Langeston wrote: »

It's vaguely written. My initial reading of it is different from yours.

I posted this in another thread:

Here is the pertinent section:

We also are keenly aware of the passive power this system added in the initial offering and the concerns you all have about getting optimal builds as soon as possible.

To address these concerns, we are reducing the number of stages on passive stars in the Warfare and Fitness constellations by two more stages, to a maximum of 2 stages per passive star. This will greatly lower[ing] the number of points required to get to a more optimal build in both of those constellations, while also taking some of the power out of the high-end experience.

If you ignore everything but the bolded part:

We also are keenly aware of the ... concerns you all have about getting optimal builds as soon as possible. To address these concerns, we are ... greatly lower[ing] the number of points required to get to a more optimal build in both of those constellations[.]

It seems to me they're saying that where you used to have to put 50 CP into a constellation to get a 10% buff last patch, next patch you'll only have to put ~25 or so into it. The buff itself doesn't change — only the cost to you does.*

The part after the bolded text ("while also taking some of the power out of the high-end experience.") just means that people with 3300 CP aren't going to be as OP compared to 810s because the 810s are going to be getting a relative buff.

* Of course it's entirely possible that I could be the one misreading this, but I don't think I am.

This is false. They've just taken out stages, cutting power in half. You'll need less cp to max out, but the power you get out of it is reduced as well.

Sandman929

Masel wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

Masel wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

I think people are reading into things quite a bit:

we are reducing the number of stages on passive stars in the Warfare and Fitness constellations by two more stages, to a maximum of 2 stages per passive star. This will greatly lower the number of points required to get to a more optimal build in both of those constellations

So that says reducing stages to get to "optimal" not necessarily that the total value is diminished.

while also taking some of the power out of the high-end experience.

Some power out of the high-end experience...sure that sounds like a reduction, but it's very vague and doesn't specify any stars at all by name.

It means that the power is reduced. They've did that once when they cut them from 5 to 4, why would they do it different now?

I'm not saying they won't. I just prefer to react to facts not speculation.

I was on the preview server and the power has been cut in half. 2 stages, same power per stage as before = half the power.

So im not speculating, I've seen it first hand.

Well there ya go. Since I haven't seen it first hand, the conversation here was speculation. Seems like it would have been faster to just say it definitely is, rather than question why they would do it differently (also speculation).
If it is, then it is.

BejaProphet

@Masel how have you seen it? I thought the test server won’t get it until Monday?

Masel

BejaProphet wrote: »

@Masel how have you seen it? I thought the test server won’t get it until Monday?

We've been invited on a blackwood preview server over the last week to test the chapter early. These changes were on that build, but ive known that this was likely to happen for a couple weeks already. Just couldn't tell people because of NDA before, but anything we've seen on the preview is fair game so I can confirm it this way.

BejaProphet

Wow, thank you for the input. So it is that bad. I can not fathom their thinking.

We wait years for a character advancement system, only to find it’s going to be border line meaningless it is so weak? I honestly don’t know if my love for the game can survive that.

Sandman929

BejaProphet wrote: »

Wow, thank you for the input. So it is that bad. I can not fathom their thinking.

We wait years for a character advancement system, only to find it’s going to be border line meaningless it is so weak? I honestly don’t know if my love for the game can survive that.

Maybe it'll see some changes in the PTS process...optimistic, I know, but this kind of reduction does make it pretty pointless.

BejaProphet

Sandman929 wrote: »

BejaProphet wrote: »

Wow, thank you for the input. So it is that bad. I can not fathom their thinking.

We wait years for a character advancement system, only to find it’s going to be border line meaningless it is so weak? I honestly don’t know if my love for the game can survive that.

Maybe it'll see some changes in the PTS process...optimistic, I know, but this kind of reduction does make it pretty pointless.

It’s all we can hope for, right?