A Look at the PTS Cycle: Quarterly Updates and the Problems They Cause

Anyammis

I know this pts cycle has been pretty contentious, but this has been something I've been thinking for years and wanted to throw out there as feedback that doesn't fit in another thread potentially. For a while now I have have wondered if part of the root of eso's problems stem from the fact that updates are quarterly. I know there are perks to the current system like knowing exactly when content is coming, knowing the gist of what to expect for each of the quarterly updates, etc, but it also has brought up problems that are reaching a boiling point.

The biggest problem is the fact that ESO balances the game quarterly means that changes when they happen are often more dramatic, broken builds/skills/classes/etc and underperforming are left unchecked and ignored for months or upwards of years. Even if other games release content at a rare pace, they balance things at a higher frequency to help keep players from feeling frustrated and stuck. Leaving balancing issues and bugs for at least three months and then dramatically changing things can make it hard for people to keep up as well. Players who only enjoy one class or role may often find patches where they feel absolutely useless and like they are weighing people down in group content, while people also get sick of everybody and their mother abusing the flavor of the patch cycle build for what seems like ages.

I know there are reasons for doing quarterly content patches but I am asking ZOS to reconsider making balance patches/changes so infrequent and to consider separating the two. Please consider why other games balance every few weeks instead of few months. Please consider how the infrequent nature of balance patches causes feedback to get more contentious, angry, and vitriolic as players feel desperate and at their wit's end over certain pain points that last far too long. I know this won't solve all the problems but I feel it could help a lot.

FantasticFreddie

First, I think they need to make changes to skills and combat less frequently. Everything quarter is exhausting, and I hate it.
I think introducing sets quarterly with the new content is fine. In an ideal world, pts tests those new set values and the new content, zos listens to us and adjusts before the patch goes live, and then adjusts JUST the new content as needed over the next patch.

No more changing the way CORE COMBAT works every 3 months, 8 years into the game.
If any big adjusts really really need to be made, make those ONCE a year, during ONE release, and let us test them for a much longer cycle--closer to 3 months than 1.

FantasticFreddie

As it is, I am still adjusting my toons from last patch and I'm seeing yet another on the horizon, and I give up. I am not going to do it. I'm pulling back from end game content entirely, and sticking to overland and quests. What's the POINT if as soon as I start to get comfortable with a class and skills I can see yet another change coming where I'll need to relearn my class?

VaranisArano

More frequent changes might work if ZOS were in fact aiming to get ESO's combat to a balanced state andleaving it for a while.

But that's not how ZOS does balance. Instead, they approach balance like it's a game of "King of the Hill." Every so often, they knock the old king off the top of the hill and put a new top parser in his place. They let the new king enjoy the view for a while, and then repeat the process. You can't let the new king get too comfortable or the peasants at the bottom get too upset, of course. Those players might get bored and go to other games.

It creates a cycle of player engagement where people want to be the king, then have to grind to build up the new king, the repeat the process with the next king, until eventually the change fatigue sets in and the player decides they aren't going to bother with the hill anymore. But in the process, players spend a lot more time trying to get back on top of the hill than they would if ZOS got ESO's combat to a balanced state and leaving it there.

Quarterly updates seems to be about ZOS' sweet spot. Three months for the stuff that's egregiously overpowered as king of the hill, six to nine months for the stuff that just needs shaking up, a yearly shift in combat, and a big DPS nerf about every 2 years.

Anyammis

FantasticFreddie wrote: »

First, I think they need to make changes to skills and combat less frequently. Everything quarter is exhausting, and I hate it.
I think introducing sets quarterly with the new content is fine. In an ideal world, pts tests those new set values and the new content, zos listens to us and adjusts before the patch goes live, and then adjusts JUST the new content as needed over the next patch.

No more changing the way CORE COMBAT works every 3 months, 8 years into the game.
If any big adjusts really really need to be made, make those ONCE a year, during ONE release, and let us test them for a much longer cycle--closer to 3 months than 1.

What I'm proposing is smaller, less dramatic, more frequent changes and maybe one big patch a year, which is what most other games out there do. The problem is changes are big but four times a year. Smaller adjustments are easier to adapt to, it's the big changes that are really killer.

Pevey

The problem is less the frequency and more that zos doesn’t seem to know how to make balance changes correctly. Look at 2h as backbar option. Instead of bringing it back in line, they just deleted it. It might as well not exist. They should have brought it in line so that backbar bow, staff, dw, 2h are all roughly equal options. But they are not capable of that.

gariondavey

Anyammis wrote: »

FantasticFreddie wrote: »

First, I think they need to make changes to skills and combat less frequently. Everything quarter is exhausting, and I hate it.
I think introducing sets quarterly with the new content is fine. In an ideal world, pts tests those new set values and the new content, zos listens to us and adjusts before the patch goes live, and then adjusts JUST the new content as needed over the next patch.

No more changing the way CORE COMBAT works every 3 months, 8 years into the game.
If any big adjusts really really need to be made, make those ONCE a year, during ONE release, and let us test them for a much longer cycle--closer to 3 months than 1.

What I'm proposing is smaller, less dramatic, more frequent changes and maybe one big patch a year, which is what most other games out there do. The problem is changes are big but four times a year. Smaller adjustments are easier to adapt to, it's the big changes that are really killer.

I think this is a good idea.

JustAGoodPlayer

All we really need is fix really week sets and builds to make it playable with out top DPS META builds get power from it.

Not game destruction of the game each update.

Some DK and some other classes skills need a rework !

Because skills just do not normally work !

As exampke DK wings need a buff/rework.
Morph of chain that you jump to target needs rework.
Mud throwing fist needs rework.

Classes have a lot of useless skills. A lot of good skills can be added as active skills in CP, as example fire atronah pet !

You can do so much good to the game.

Stop doing ... what you are doing )))

Dalsinthus

Small changes with better variable control would let them actually achieve balance. That’s how things are done in science and engineering, to great success. The schedule of changes is less important than changing 1 thing at a time, testing it, and adjusting based on those results. Limit variables, use controls, use the scientific method.

Unfortunately that is not the ZOS way. They change hundreds of things at once and think they are smart enough to fine tune it exactly right. It’s been worse than ever the past 3 years under this combat team. No one is that smart. To think otherwise is arrogance. (I don’t mean to insult the devs here, who I like and respect. I am calling out the behavior I don’t like, not the people.)

But we’ve had years and years of this. It is unlikely that the culture and methods at ZOS are going to significantly change.

For example, during the live stream on Monday when asked about change fatigue, Wheeler refused to commit to stabilizing things going forward. It’s just not he and his team want to operate. He also said it was hard to do a combat tutorial because it might limit their ability to change things in the future. So nothing is sacred, change is the only thing we should expect.

They’re communicating this to us quite clearly with their words and actions. We need to make decisions about our engagement with their game accordingly.

JustAGoodPlayer

Dalsinthus wrote: »

Small changes with better variable control would let them actually achieve balance. That’s how things are done in science and engineering, to great success. The schedule of changes is less important than changing 1 thing at a time, testing it, and adjusting based on those results. Limit variables, use controls, use the scientific method.

Unfortunately that is not the ZOS way. They change hundreds of things at once and think they are smart enough to fine tune it exactly right. It’s been worse than ever the past 3 years under this combat team. No one is that smart. To think otherwise is arrogance. (I don’t mean to insult the devs here, who I like and respect. I am calling out the behavior I don’t like, not the people.)

But we’ve had years and years of this. It is unlikely that the culture and methods at ZOS are going to significantly change.

For example, during the live stream on Monday when asked about change fatigue, Wheeler refused to commit to stabilizing things going forward. It’s just not he and his team want to operate. He also said it was hard to do a combat tutorial because it might limit their ability to change things in the future. So nothing is sacred, change is the only thing we should expect.

They’re communicating this to us quite clearly with their words and actions. We need to make decisions about our engagement with their game accordingly.

Now a lot of players even can say correct values to fix. Before last PTS patch i can do it easely. After some patches like this ... players already will not understand what is going on. If some one will play offcorse.

To destroy the game you need month, to create it - years !

Firstmep

Quarterly updates are for financial reasons, plain and simple.
They boost sales, so the game looks better for the company and investors.

PrincessOfThieves

It's an old game.It really is exhausing that they seem to change their "vision" of what the game should be in every update.
I think they should leave core combat as is and only tweak content and sets. Maybe some people would be overpowered, but the majority isn't. Xalvakka hm? vDSR hm? Banished cells 2 is still considered hard by average players. They will never see any dlc vets, even without hms, if you keep pushing them down.