Raising the floor

Rugby_hook

ZOS_Hadeostry wrote: »

Greetings,

After further review we have decided to move this thread to a category we think is more appropriate for this topic.

Thank you for your understanding

@ZOS_Hadeostry Would it be possible in the future to state where threads get moved? It would make it so much easier to try and follow conversations. Thank you in advance for your consideration.

Ragnarok0130

BlueRaven wrote: »

Agenericname wrote: »

BlueRaven wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

I really do not understand what the fascination is with trying to nerf the highest-end groups. Competitive, score-pushing groups are not hurting anyone and the game would be in such a better position if the developers would just left them alone and instead focus exclusively on bringing up the bottom tier of players.

It’s not the high end players fault, but high end players do “hurt” (not really the right word for it) the game as zos needs to give those players content and content costs money.
So let’s pretend that high end players are 5% of the player base (percentage just for example, not suggesting real numbers here) but the percentage of the budget used to make content for them is say 10%. That is bad.
But if they can push the 5% downward to say the top 20%. And they use that 10% of the budget for that group. That would be much better.

If they can make hard content that appeals to more players then just the small percentage of high end players that would be ideal.

EDIT: If the high end player group is too small for the budget allotted to make content that appeals to them, they become a budget liability.(?) Is that a better way of putting it?

That content doesnt exist solely for high end groups. It exists for anyone willing to try. For everyone of those 600 characters that cleared vRG HM, many others are progging or have tried. Its serves as the next level of challenge, or goal if you will, for a much larger number of people.

If the entire game were vSO or vSO HM, then there wouldnt be a reason, or not much of one, to chase gear, new mythics, or stay on the meta treadmill at all, which ZOS counts on.

That is a bit disingenuous. If only 600 odd characters (not accounts from what I understand) complete the content, that content is not “pulling its weight”. And I would suggest few players are “aspiring” to do that content. I would further suggest few people even know what that content is.

So zos is left with a decision:

A) Make easier content and just say “sorry, you don’t get anything” to top end players.

B ) Curb top end players dps and make content that their new dps limits (and others of now similar dps) can enjoy.

I think “B” is the way to go. But either way I don’t care that much about it. I am much more interested in the lives of people who don’t even pull 15k dps.

"A" would likely be the path to success and guys like Nefas actually recommend that COA. Scorepushers have scorepushing as their reward so they are in fact getting something even if it's a 5-10 minute world record run.

Another scenario would be to implement a damage cap like they did with the crit damage cap and leave everything under the cap unaffected hence they are limiting, not lowering the ceiling and the floor is unaffected unlike in U35 where accessibility was chanted by ZoS and the low end like a mantra while actually lowering the floor.

BlueRaven

Ragnarok0130 wrote: »

BlueRaven wrote: »

Agenericname wrote: »

BlueRaven wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

I really do not understand what the fascination is with trying to nerf the highest-end groups. Competitive, score-pushing groups are not hurting anyone and the game would be in such a better position if the developers would just left them alone and instead focus exclusively on bringing up the bottom tier of players.

It’s not the high end players fault, but high end players do “hurt” (not really the right word for it) the game as zos needs to give those players content and content costs money.
So let’s pretend that high end players are 5% of the player base (percentage just for example, not suggesting real numbers here) but the percentage of the budget used to make content for them is say 10%. That is bad.
But if they can push the 5% downward to say the top 20%. And they use that 10% of the budget for that group. That would be much better.

If they can make hard content that appeals to more players then just the small percentage of high end players that would be ideal.

EDIT: If the high end player group is too small for the budget allotted to make content that appeals to them, they become a budget liability.(?) Is that a better way of putting it?

That content doesnt exist solely for high end groups. It exists for anyone willing to try. For everyone of those 600 characters that cleared vRG HM, many others are progging or have tried. Its serves as the next level of challenge, or goal if you will, for a much larger number of people.

If the entire game were vSO or vSO HM, then there wouldnt be a reason, or not much of one, to chase gear, new mythics, or stay on the meta treadmill at all, which ZOS counts on.

That is a bit disingenuous. If only 600 odd characters (not accounts from what I understand) complete the content, that content is not “pulling its weight”. And I would suggest few players are “aspiring” to do that content. I would further suggest few people even know what that content is.

So zos is left with a decision:

A) Make easier content and just say “sorry, you don’t get anything” to top end players.

B ) Curb top end players dps and make content that their new dps limits (and others of now similar dps) can enjoy.

I think “B” is the way to go. But either way I don’t care that much about it. I am much more interested in the lives of people who don’t even pull 15k dps.

"A" would likely be the path to success and guys like Nefas actually recommend that COA. Scorepushers have scorepushing as their reward so they are in fact getting something even if it's a 5-10 minute world record run.

Another scenario would be to implement a damage cap like they did with the crit damage cap and leave everything under the cap unaffected hence they are limiting, not lowering the ceiling and the floor is unaffected unlike in U35 where accessibility was chanted by ZoS and the low end like a mantra while actually lowering the floor.

Sure I get why people like “A”.

I just think zos would not like to see videos of people 2-3 players killing 12 player content. Curbing top end dps would help prevent that.

Either way it does not really affect me.

MidniteOwl1913

Rugby_hook wrote: »

ZOS_Hadeostry wrote: »

Greetings,

After further review we have decided to move this thread to a category we think is more appropriate for this topic.

Thank you for your understanding

@ZOS_Hadeostry Would it be possible in the future to state where threads get moved? It would make it so much easier to try and follow conversations. Thank you in advance for your consideration.

Yeah, I'd like a link, but really if you go to the top and look there is a Forums>English>x where X is where the post got moved to. It's not ideal like I said a link would be better.

Rugby_hook

MidniteOwl1913 wrote: »

Rugby_hook wrote: »

ZOS_Hadeostry wrote: »

Greetings,

After further review we have decided to move this thread to a category we think is more appropriate for this topic.

Thank you for your understanding

@ZOS_Hadeostry Would it be possible in the future to state where threads get moved? It would make it so much easier to try and follow conversations. Thank you in advance for your consideration.

Yeah, I'd like a link, but really if you go to the top and look there is a Forums>English>x where X is where the post got moved to. It's not ideal like I said a link would be better.

Thank you! I never noticed this before. This is helpful.

ZOS_Suserial

Hi,

Just to note, that when a thread is moved a link is left in its place to help those looking for it find it in its new place. It is a temporary link, but it’s what we can do to help those that have already engaged with it.

And as was stated you can check where the thread is by checking the top left of the page.

example:
Forums > English > Combat & Character Mechanics it will update to show the threads current location

charley222

the issue with this game is so simple , stop the power creep gear , this just put the older gear useless now the game have amost 1000 item set and 90% are useless , add on the top now he have group power greep set ,that only buff zerg ball /facepalm this is just out of control . group and party buff are way to strong and on the top you have powerfull set gear

p00tx

BlueRaven wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

I really do not understand what the fascination is with trying to nerf the highest-end groups. Competitive, score-pushing groups are not hurting anyone and the game would be in such a better position if the developers would just left them alone and instead focus exclusively on bringing up the bottom tier of players.

It’s not the high end players fault, but high end players do “hurt” (not really the right word for it) the game as zos needs to give those players content and content costs money.
So let’s pretend that high end players are 5% of the player base (percentage just for example, not suggesting real numbers here) but the percentage of the budget used to make content for them is say 10%. That is bad.
But if they can push the 5% downward to say the top 20%. And they use that 10% of the budget for that group. That would be much better.

If they can make hard content that appeals to more players then just the small percentage of high end players that would be ideal.

EDIT: If the high end player group is too small for the budget allotted to make content that appeals to them, they become a budget liability.(?) Is that a better way of putting it?

Honestly though, they don't need to cater to us at all. Many of us still run the older, easier content, no matter how many fancy new trials they give us. They've already shown they're more than willing to throw endgame under the bus and tell us to buzz off, so why go to the trouble of tailoring content for us? Just make the content for the wider community, then let us play it how we want. Us completing it quickly and efficiently isn't going to hurt the community or have any negative effects on the trial at all. If it's too easy and we get bored, it's an "us" problem. After all, we're just a teeny, tiny, insignificant portion of the community anyway, as we're constantly reminded.

PrinceShroob

With regard to in-game resources, in addition to the Build Advisor builds not having been updated since release (for example, the Arcane Warrior build for Sorcerer does not recommend Crystal Weapon, despite being a stamina Sorcerer build), the Synergy descriptions in the Help menu have obviously not been updated since release and still describe the original functionality of certain synergies (for example, saying Blessed Shards only restores stamina).

I think this should quell any questions about how much the devs care about having information be accessible.

Uvi_AUT

There needs to be some kind of DPS-Cap. Maybe then the new dungeons would be better. Seriously, after 1000s of hours I still havent finished most of the DLC-Veterandungeons (I exclusively play PUG) because of how batcrap crazy the difficulty is compared to the vanilla-veterandungeons.

xthrshx

Uvi_AUT wrote: »

There needs to be some kind of DPS-Cap. Maybe then the new dungeons would be better. Seriously, after 1000s of hours I still havent finished most of the DLC-Veterandungeons (I exclusively play PUG) because of how batcrap crazy the difficulty is compared to the vanilla-veterandungeons.

How is making other people weaker going to help you clear content you’re not able to clear?

Jazraena

I believe their point is that, due to the wide range in DPS, content has an extremely wide difficulty range as well, with the newest vets and hardmores being a lot more difficult than older content; similar to how it already is with trials.

Which isn't an entirely wrong assessment to make, tbf, though I don't see how a cap could be realized.

Pelanora

I imagine the spread of skills and of dps among players is largely a bell curve. Thus, zos should spend most on the middle for most return, with content for that middle group, and least on the top top end group. I wonder what it costs putting out extreme end content, vs new dungeons/public dungeons and over land content which suit the middle. What does the high end vet content team cost vs the revenue it brings in with players buying it? I bet not more than revenue of new content for the mid range players.

And I bet the middle is c30k to 50k dps. Less probably.

I've said it elsewhere, and I'll say it again, zos needs to hire an economist, it doesn't make rational decisions.
And that's what they took out for bashing. And if they think that is bashing, I'm pretty worried.

[snip]
[edited for bashing]


If zos wants to stop the drive to high dps, it needs to stop creating the demand for it. Simple.

Uvi_AUT

Jazraena wrote: »

I believe their point is that, due to the wide range in DPS, content has an extremely wide difficulty range as well, with the newest vets and hardmores being a lot more difficult than older content; similar to how it already is with trials.

Which isn't an entirely wrong assessment to make, tbf, though I don't see how a cap could be realized.

Exactly. I dont mind difficult, but Veteran DLC is just ridiculous.
If ZOS needs to do something for the 1%, they should do what WoW did. Make dungeons infinite scalable. So us normies can play the content, while the Elites can push the highest possible difficulties.