Its wierd to read about "Active Combat" after what was done to DoTs in U35.
Because of long DoTs we have situations where we use spammable 10, 15+ times in a row which results in... boring combat. Well maybe some players like it but for me it was the biggest problem with U35. And lets not forget about fights where sticky DoTs become usless because Boss will remove them before they do any damage...
Its wierd to read about "Active Combat" after what was done to DoTs in U35.
Because of long DoTs we have situations where we use spammable 10, 15+ times in a row which results in... boring combat. Well maybe some players like it but for me it was the biggest problem with U35. And lets not forget about fights where sticky DoTs become usless because Boss will remove them before they do any damage...
Honestly. I am trying to decide where the DoT timer change in U35 fits into the core strategy. I have tentatively placed it under "Mastery" in the "game is too hard to master" category.
spartaxoxo wrote: »You say that valuing mastery is a core goal, and I agree with that. But, the degree to which it is valued ensures a pretty unhealthy level of players in endgame. It makes the ability to participate at all, just because some people left in a bad patch, dire. Take U35, lots of people left. But, with what a million or so added accounts you claimed this year, you'd think at least some of those people would be replaced by other skilled players who just needed training. And yet, Craglorn just got emptier. Queue times got longer. Etc.
I assume that you guys recognized this, because ostensibly you wanted to lower the ceiling. But, these changes also seem to be hard focused on nerfing the various ways players who can't or won't put together those highly specific builds play. The mid tier builds. In fact, almost everytime you guys announce you're lowering the ceiling, it seems the gap between mid-tier players and endgame players grows even wider.
So, when do you feel that "play as you want" wears out it's welcome?
IMO, this is an entirely empty statement. You plan on prioritizing fun? Ok. But also acknowledge that "fun" is subjective and that you will make changes and adjustments in the future in the name of "fun"? Ok... this whole paragraph is left totally vague so that any future changes that players don't like can be explained away with "But GUYS! We support fun! And this change will lead to more fun. We know what's best. Promise!".ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »In a nutshell, we want combat to feel fun and rewarding to all players... we recognize that what feels “fun and rewarding” is a little different for everyone... not hard rules or a definition... we strive to meet when considering adjustments to combat in ESO
The list is pointless, so I'm ignoring it. Yes, you support wearing any kind of armor or slotting skills. Obviously.ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »Play The Way You Want
We strive to provide freedom and flexibility ... We value diversity of choice and playstyle with abilities, weapons, and armor. ... every character should have the capacity to protect their group, mend allies, or devastate foes.
...
How does development plan on handling the META? I think many players would argue there AREN'T "a large number of choices", because 80% of sets aren't viable. Some are on the cusp perhaps, but again, I stand behind ~80% of sets are garbage.ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »Mastery
Our combat is designed to challenge you along two primary paths: character builds and skillful execution.... your character build should test your ability to refine a large number of choices... fast-paced, active combat.
So, making FUNCTIONAL changes to things like Jabs for GCZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »Mastery
- Optimizing ability rotations and timing
0_0 Nice to hear official support for LA weaving. I'm sure it's been stated in other places. To what degree does the combat team want LA weaving to play a part in combat tho? Changes to Empower seem to imply not that much... leaving this statement to be kinda emptyZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »Mastery
- Light attack weaving
Do you acknowledge that "hybridization" is incomplete? What are your thoughts on the concept that it's impossible to balance everything in the game to be viable? Doesn't this entire post just summarize as "players can expect to see more of the same changes we have been making"? Do you think players are tired of the game pounding whatever nail is standing out this week?ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »we've used ... feedback from the community and hard data metrics. Outside of some outstanding combat bugs, we believe taking all these into account has now gotten combat in a better place, where ESO is more enjoyable for a variety of playstyles. Much of the work we’ve done over the past few years – such as updating the Champion Point system and the hybridization work – has vastly improved build options, gameplay variety and build equality, which supports several of our values. We know it hasn't always been easy and we sincerely appreciate everyone giving their feedback and spending their time in Tamriel over the years.
spartaxoxo wrote: »You say that valuing mastery is a core goal, and I agree with that. But, the degree to which it is valued ensures a pretty unhealthy level of players in endgame. It makes the ability to participate at all, just because some people left in a bad patch, dire. Take U35, lots of people left. But, with what a million or so added accounts you claimed this year, you'd think at least some of those people would be replaced by other skilled players who just needed training. And yet, Craglorn just got emptier. Queue times got longer. Etc.
I assume that you guys recognized this, because ostensibly you wanted to lower the ceiling. But, these changes also seem to be hard focused on nerfing the various ways players who can't or won't put together those highly specific builds play. The mid tier builds. In fact, almost everytime you guys announce you're lowering the ceiling, it seems the gap between mid-tier players and endgame players grows even wider.
My concern is that when the GAME is what is paying the bills, management needs to be doing things that will make people pay for the game. This is increasingly not the situation with ESO. With ESO, the financial purpose of the game is becoming more and more to bring players to the Crown Store.
It is not necessary to make the best game possible when this is what the purpose of the game is. New content only needs to be just average enough to not drive players away.
ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »
Just to make sure we're all on the same page, these values have been our guiding principles for years and are the things we will continue to be our goals moving forward. Nothing here is technically new, outside of simply sharing it with everyone.
All players? What about tanks? Ever since I started playing at the very end of 2019 tanks had any semblance of power, meaningful crowd control and just plain fun stripped from them. Tanks went from being able to off-tank and carry a bad PUG to being utterly helpless, then U35 slashed the average group damage making tanking in PUGs even more of a nightmare. It's also a role that's required to maintain a lot more equipment sets than damage dealers and change them according to the group's needs. Things are looking grim for tanks even without the block and barswap bugs in the picture.ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »So, what is our vision for combat in ESO? In a nutshell, we want combat to feel fun and rewarding to all players.
Why is this called a deep dive? I feel like anyone who actually bothered to learn about the combat would basically know all this stuff already.