Let's Talk about Combat, Content and Accessibility

Mr_Stach

We've talked a lot about Accessibility these past weeks and not going to lie, things are not looking that great.

Finn posted this earlier today in response to adjusting content post U35.
https://twitter.com/thefinninator/status/1552330798929514498?s=20&t=m1w2XeFMGHavQmu25P2rhg

This patch cycle it's pretty easy to get hotheaded any time any dev opens their mouth about anything. But I think we need to talk about the difference between the Combat Balance Team and the Content Design Team.

First of all, the Combat Balance Teams and Content Design Teams are separate.

Combat Balance is outgoing player driven damage, led by Brian Wheeler, Combat Lead Designer.

Content Balance is Incoming non-player driven damage and encounters, led by Mike Finnigan, Lead Content Designer.

Generally, the Content is really good, I've seen some pitchforks at the content being less accessible, I think that is entirely on the Combat Team Balancing the Players damage, not really on the content side, just my thoughts there. Content is less accessible because we do LESS damage, not because the bar suddenly rose.

Also this post is not here to flame Brian or Finn. I'm not trying to demonize either of them here. But let's make sure we point our efforts in the right direction, the Content has been fine and generally great for a long time, now we could definitely use some more PvP Content, maybe a crazy FFA Arena Action in Solstheim, think it over. @ZOS_Finn @ZOS_BrianWheeler

But the Issue is player power getting seriously diminished in the name of Accessibility, if Finn is planning on reeling back the difficulty or something, that's one thing, but we shouldn't need to get to that point hopefully. Let's keep giving some great feedback to hopefully get this patch to where it needs to be.

Thanks for the read.

MashmalloMan

It's both at this point because as our power raises via skill balancing, CP, character base stats and group sets/buffs/debuffs, content rises with it to match what the high end was able to do.

So over the years:

Character power = +++
Group power = +++++
Old content power required = +
New content power required = +++++

On PTS:

Character power = +
Group power = +++
Old content power required = +
New content power required = +++++

CP got so powerful, they shifted it's power onto base characters, this was a good change that resulted in the same power total, but the high end was brought down and the low end was brought up.

PTS changes do nothing but reduce power across the board while content remains the same. Group power effectively doubles what solo players can do because of how much buffs and debuffs are available now.

Marto

Finn's tweet says the team behind encounters is not able to adjust encounter difficulty until after U35 goes through, and the team behind dungeons has an idea of what DPS numbers are going to look like.

It's pointless to judge the changes of U35 as "good" or "bad" by checking if you can beat Rockgrove HM or whatever other piece of content alone.

Content is going to be adjusted. But that adjustment can't start until the balance team decides if the DPS lost is going to be 5% for high end and 20% for low end, 30% on high end and 10% on low end, or whatever X and Y numbers are decided upon.

If you want to judge U35, I think it'd be much better to check a variety of content, and a variety of scenarios.
Can a level 20 character with blue armor solo a worldboss? Can a warden tank tank survive big hits in Normal Frostvault? Can a sorc ganker one-shot anyone in PVP, or just those with light armor?

Of these scenarios, which are overtuned? Which are undertuned? Are buffs providing too much of a damage increase? Is the relative damage of light attacks in an under-geared character high enough to aid newer players?

Trial dummy parses only test 1 scenario. It's the opposite of testing changes in a vacuum.

Mr_Stach

Marto wrote: »

Finn's tweet says the team behind encounters is not able to adjust encounter difficulty until after U35 goes through, and the team behind dungeons has an idea of what DPS numbers are going to look like.

It's pointless to judge the changes of U35 as "good" or "bad" by checking if you can beat Rockgrove HM or whatever other piece of content alone.

Content is going to be adjusted. But that adjustment can't start until the balance team decides if the DPS lost is going to be 5% for high end and 20% for low end, 30% on high end and 10% on low end, or whatever X and Y numbers are decided upon.

If you want to judge U35, I think it'd be much better to check a variety of content, and a variety of scenarios.
Can a level 20 character with blue armor solo a worldboss? Can a warden tank tank survive big hits in Normal Frostvault? Can a sorc ganker one-shot anyone in PVP, or just those with light armor?

Of these scenarios, which are overtuned? Which are undertuned? Are buffs providing too much of a damage increase? Is the relative damage of light attacks in an under-geared character high enough to aid newer players?

Trial dummy parses only test 1 scenario. It's the opposite of testing changes in a vacuum.

Well trial dummy parses test a best case scenario that doesn't exist in the game almost anywhere. It's the "this is the most I can do in perfect conditions".

I'm really hoping we can get some more reversions on some changes next week as well. Otherwise it's just going to be a REALLY sucky patch until Content is able to adjust.

OBJnoob

It’s weird that you say you’re not here to flame anyone but you show both of their mugshots and say which one you think is to blame. Little over the top.

MashmalloMan

Whats funny is the 2 people you listed are doing the best they can and I mostly agree with the direction they want to take the game, the execution on how this is all handeled is the problem.

First of all, finish the first combat overhaul you began at the beginning of 2022 with hybridization instead of starting a new one.

Secondly, power adjustments to character power should be met with adjustments to content within the same patch. This all should of been delayed 3-6 months for them to test what it's like playing new content vs old content. What exactly is the rush?

The only person I really have any blame towards right now is a singular person that happens to treat the community with disrespect as shown on numerous occasions within the past 2 years.

When you're put in public limelight you should have a better understanding of how you represent the product your in charge of. It's appauling and wouldn't stand in any other company.

Nothing like making comments that drive away customers.

MashmalloMan

OBJnoob wrote: »

It’s weird that you say you’re not here to flame anyone but you show both of their mugshots and say which one you think is to blame. Little over the top.

Yeah, the whole picture thing is very odd to be honest. Bit uncomfortable if I were in their position.

The names suffice.

Mr_Stach

MashmalloMan wrote: »

OBJnoob wrote: »

It’s weird that you say you’re not here to flame anyone but you show both of their mugshots and say which one you think is to blame. Little over the top.

Yeah, the whole picture thing is very odd to be honest. Bit uncomfortable if I were in their position.

The names suffice.

You know what. That's fair. I'll remove them.

Mr_Stach

MashmalloMan wrote: »

Whats funny is the 2 people you listed are doing the best they can and I mostly agree with the direction they want to take the game, the execution on how this is all handeled is the problem.

First of all, finish the first combat overhaul you began at the beginning of 2022 with hybridization instead of starting a new one.

Secondly, power adjustments to character power should be met with adjustments to content within the same patch. This all should of been delayed 3-6 months for them to test what it's like playing new content vs old content. What exactly is the rush?

The only person I really have any blame towards right now is a singular person that happens to treat the community with disrespect as shown on numerous occasions within the past 2 years.

When you're put in public limelight you should have a better understanding of how you represent the product your in charge of. It's appauling and wouldn't stand in any other company.

Nothing like making comments that drive away customers.

I think that is some excellent points and I'm curious how it affected things internally. A few years back I worked customer service for a Bank and there was some public uproar because of one of the higher ups and the some of the Investors DM'd him and called us directly. Things got straightened out pretty quickly.

Right now I think that Zos lacks Follow-through on those changes you mentioned. But I also think they lack a vision on what they want they classes to be. People have a lot of things to say about Wrobel, but one thing he really nailed down before he left was Dragonknight, there's a clear vision there. I just don't think that the other classes have except maybe Necromancer. Certainly not Sorc or Warden in my opinion.

MashmalloMan

Mr_Stach wrote: »

MashmalloMan wrote: »

Whats funny is the 2 people you listed are doing the best they can and I mostly agree with the direction they want to take the game, the execution on how this is all handeled is the problem.

First of all, finish the first combat overhaul you began at the beginning of 2022 with hybridization instead of starting a new one.

Secondly, power adjustments to character power should be met with adjustments to content within the same patch. This all should of been delayed 3-6 months for them to test what it's like playing new content vs old content. What exactly is the rush?

The only person I really have any blame towards right now is a singular person that happens to treat the community with disrespect as shown on numerous occasions within the past 2 years.

When you're put in public limelight you should have a better understanding of how you represent the product your in charge of. It's appauling and wouldn't stand in any other company.

Nothing like making comments that drive away customers.

I think that is some excellent points and I'm curious how it affected things internally. A few years back I worked customer service for a Bank and there was some public uproar because of one of the higher ups and the some of the Investors DM'd him and called us directly. Things got straightened out pretty quickly.

Right now I think that Zos lacks Follow-through on those changes you mentioned. But I also think they lack a vision on what they want they classes to be. People have a lot of things to say about Wrobel, but one thing he really nailed down before he left was Dragonknight, there's a clear vision there. I just don't think that the other classes have except maybe Necromancer. Certainly not Sorc or Warden in my opinion.

Yeah, he was good about that. I actually recently watched the livestreams with him going over the Warden's toolkit.

While I don't agree with where they ended up, especially with constant changes over the years that stripped things away.. he had a very clear intent with the class.

His main points were related to growth. Esentially all the skills were designed with delays in mind. All the power for Warden was locked behind getting little upfront, for more on the backend. Whether we agree with that or whether or not it was good design from ESO's standpoint is up for debate, but he had purpose behind the decisions.

• Double casting flies.
• Cliff Racer's long travel time.
• Scorch build up.
• Betty's long animation time to startup.
• Healing Seeds 6s aoe until burst heal.
• Living Trellis delayed burst heal when expires.
• Passive heal when companions end.
• Frozen Gate.

List goes on and on, but he stated the goal and delivered on that, I can't say the same for the current design teams goals. It just seems like they balance by spreadsheet and not by what the class kit is suppose to do or feel like.