ESO In-game Racial Diversity and How to Fix It

alterfenixeb17_ESO

Iluvrien wrote: »

The OP seems to want to increase diversity by homogenizing all of the races.

It seems more than a little ironic to me.

This really. it does indeed sound like attempt to increase diversity by removing it completely in the end.

BlueRaven

phileunderx2 wrote: »

So you are saying that if someone were to make a Nord necromancer healer that they would not be able to complete end game content with it.
Which is weird as I have a Nord necromancer healer and I use her successfully in end game content and I should not be able to complete vet trials nor vet dlc content.. But how is it that I have done so? Multiple times, in many different venues?
Seriously race isn't that big of a deal.

No, not at all, but you are definitely putting yourself at a disadvantage and that should not be.

Skyrim had distinct racials, and yet each were equally viable to do a mage build, assassin, or two-handed fighter.

It really is not that difficult to design the eso races in a similar manner.

BlueRaven

alterfenixeb17_ESO wrote: »

Iluvrien wrote: »

The OP seems to want to increase diversity by homogenizing all of the races.

It seems more than a little ironic to me.

This really. it does indeed sound like attempt to increase diversity by removing it completely in the end.

You can have races that are equally good at all roles and classes, yet have distinct abilities and differences.

Kuratius

BlueRaven wrote: »

alterfenixeb17_ESO wrote: »

Iluvrien wrote: »

The OP seems to want to increase diversity by homogenizing all of the races.

It seems more than a little ironic to me.

This really. it does indeed sound like attempt to increase diversity by removing it completely in the end.

You can have races that are equally good at all roles and classes, yet have distinct abilities and differences.

In principle yes, but you wouldn't trust ZOS to come up with a good system for it without literally making all races reskins.

There was a thread a while ago that tried to mathematically quantify racial bonuses, and while in the end we came up with a good (read:better than ZOS, more consistent and more line with how players perceive racial power) system, it wasn't perfect and likely never would've been.

Also, some racial bonuses like the argonian potion passive are currently in principle incompatible with being balanced without a redesign simply because their power spikes so much when used with e.g. a potion cooldown reduction build. You can't balance something like that just by tweaking numbers otherwise you'll end up hurting viable build diversity massively. The race will be either OP with that one specific build or underpowered for all others. You can't get out of that dilemma when a specific build can act as a massive force multiplier for a particular passive.


So in practice, this is a hard problem. ZOS could probably do a better job of it than they have now if they hire a few mathematicians, but you don't just need math for this kind of thing, else everything becomes bland and stale.

Chilly-McFreeze

Franchise408 wrote: »

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

AlnilamE wrote: »

In that case you are hanging out with the wrong people, but that's not a game design problem.

It actually is, because the game continues to be designed in such a way to encourage that dynamic.

Maybe, but this topic is about racials, not about the grand scheme of things on build options and the concept of a meta.

This thread is about racials and the concept of certain races, due to their passive, being the only choice for particular roles. I.E. the meta

But that's the literal point of the Most Effective Tactic Available! From all the hundreds if not thousands of possible combinations of sets, food, mundus, CP, passives, weapons, skills, rotation and races you choose what is mathematically the best. That's the very definition of it.

If you erase racials, or swap them with exchangeable backgrounds, you will still be caught in the ways of "most effective this or that". You will still be forced to choose the set of passives that replace racials to be the very best. To what end? To please the meta crowd. Nobody outside of progression groups should really care about that as long as you fullfill your chosen role. And that works currently very well with each race / class combination.

Also, I like how you ignored the very core of my answers twice to come back to your basic nuisance with the game. What you argue against shouldn't be racials but the dichotomy of mag/stam in general. Your mage-warding sword fighter will remain off-meta because one scales with max mag the other with stam stats. (I deliberately ignore e.g. Brawler, hardening enchant, the ward CPs and Spell Recharge 2nd effect). Racials have only a very small impact in the greater picture.

BlueRaven wrote: »

phileunderx2 wrote: »

So you are saying that if someone were to make a Nord necromancer healer that they would not be able to complete end game content with it.
Which is weird as I have a Nord necromancer healer and I use her successfully in end game content and I should not be able to complete vet trials nor vet dlc content.. But how is it that I have done so? Multiple times, in many different venues?
Seriously race isn't that big of a deal.

No, not at all, but you are definitely putting yourself at a disadvantage and that should not be.

Skyrim had distinct racials, and yet each were equally viable to do a mage build, assassin, or two-handed fighter.

It really is not that difficult to design the eso races in a similar manner.

You're cutting things a bit short as you're only pointing on skill caps and initial skill boni here. What about Abilities and Powers? High Elfs will always have 50 more magicka than every other race with the otherwise same build. Imperials will always find more gold. Khajiit will deal better unarmed damage. Even the movement speed was depending on the height of the race.

Franchise408

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

AlnilamE wrote: »

In that case you are hanging out with the wrong people, but that's not a game design problem.

It actually is, because the game continues to be designed in such a way to encourage that dynamic.

Maybe, but this topic is about racials, not about the grand scheme of things on build options and the concept of a meta.

This thread is about racials and the concept of certain races, due to their passive, being the only choice for particular roles. I.E. the meta

But that's the literal point of the Most Effective Tactic Available! From all the hundreds if not thousands of possible combinations of sets, food, mundus, CP, passives, weapons, skills, rotation and races you choose what is mathematically the best. That's the very definition of it.

If you erase racials, or swap them with exchangeable backgrounds, you will still be caught in the ways of "most effective this or that". You will still be forced to choose the set of passives that replace racials to be the very best. To what end? To please the meta crowd. Nobody outside of progression groups should really care about that as long as you fullfill your chosen role. And that works currently very well with each race / class combination.

Also, I like how you ignored the very core of my answers twice to come back to your basic nuisance with the game. What you argue against shouldn't be racials but the dichotomy of mag/stam in general. Your mage-warding sword fighter will remain off-meta because one scales with max mag the other with stam stats. (I deliberately ignore e.g. Brawler, hardening enchant, the ward CPs and Spell Recharge 2nd effect). Racials have only a very small impact in the greater picture.

BlueRaven wrote: »

phileunderx2 wrote: »

So you are saying that if someone were to make a Nord necromancer healer that they would not be able to complete end game content with it.
Which is weird as I have a Nord necromancer healer and I use her successfully in end game content and I should not be able to complete vet trials nor vet dlc content.. But how is it that I have done so? Multiple times, in many different venues?
Seriously race isn't that big of a deal.

No, not at all, but you are definitely putting yourself at a disadvantage and that should not be.

Skyrim had distinct racials, and yet each were equally viable to do a mage build, assassin, or two-handed fighter.

It really is not that difficult to design the eso races in a similar manner.

You're cutting things a bit short as you're only pointing on skill caps and initial skill boni here. What about Abilities and Powers? High Elfs will always have 50 more magicka than every other race with the otherwise same build. Imperials will always find more gold. Khajiit will deal better unarmed damage. Even the movement speed was depending on the height of the race.

You're talking to someone (me) who despises the meta and thinks the meta and all the min / maxers who obsess over finding it ruin RPG's and MMO's, for all the reasons I expressed earlier: It removes the choice. The fact that there are other combinations offers only an illusion of choice, because the only choice is to play that meta setup. Anything else is intentionally disadvantaging yourself. There is no "choices in RPG's should have consequences", which was the original statement I was responding to. Choices having consequences is choosing Aldmeri Dominion and the consequence being unwelcome in Mournhold. Choices having consequences is choosing to sacrifice The Prophet, and the consequences being the loss of benefits that come from the character, as well as how the other characters choose to engage with you now. Racial passives determining meta and determining that certain races are only viable in specific roles is not a meaningful choice with consequences, because anything else other than the meta choice is an active disadvantage and objectively the "wrong" choice.

So yes, I am arguing against the meta and the game design that actively encourages the meta to be the only choice. Meta ruins games.

Chilly-McFreeze

Franchise408 wrote: »

So yes, I am arguing against the meta and the game design that actively encourages the meta to be the only choice. Meta ruins games.

I'm fine with that. But to erase the meta you'd need to remove every build choice possible.

p00tx

Unless you're pushing endgame content or running with sweaty groups, it really doesn't make a massive difference. They've homogenized literally everything so that you guys can play however you want. You can honestly do every bit of vet content in the game with whatever build you want, as long as you can manage at least a passable rotation. I wouldn't even worry about it until you decide you want to start pushing hardmodes, and even then we have some end game players who manage to bring goofy builds through and get completes. There's a guy with Godslayer who roleplays literally everything on Argonian. Have fun!