PTS Update 46 - Feedback Thread for Subclassing

katorga

Pain point: Rushing Agony automation proc still not nerfed, still turns large scale PvP upside down

bingo.

Freelancer_ESO

Did the sublcassling quest teach you everything you had to learn for using this system?

I think so?

Is there anything confusing about the UI or the methods to engage with Subclassing?

I'd expected it to unlock a bit faster if you already had the classes fully maxed but, it's not the end of the world.

How long did it take you to level up a subclassed skill line?

I just hit 50 on the first subclassed skill line that I did and it took a few days of play albeit not explicitly rushing towards maxing it.

Do you plan to use this feature when it goes live?

I probably will level up all of the skill lines and then once that is done use it on new builds I make.

Did you have fun experimenting with the system?

Not yet. Generally, much of my effort in builds is about buffs because the buffs in ESO are quite impactful. For example, I was leveling the Green Balance line first for the Maturation passive. I think much of the fun with the system would be after you've got everything unlocked but, even then one might end up being boring and going for passives or buffs. I thought I was going to be fun and exciting with scribing but in the end most of my selections were about trying to be optimal.

TX12001rwb17_ESO

I do not see how it is even lore friendly to suddenly learn to be an Arcanist, don't they get their power from a magic tome that specifically chose them?

Xarc

TX12001rwb17_ESO wrote: »

I do not see how it is even lore friendly to suddenly learn to be an Arcanist, don't they get their power from a magic tome that specifically chose them?

Personally, as a necromancer, I plan to become a lich. I would like to learn a tome if possible. Thank you.

MurkyWetWolf198

The experience and skill point requirements feel like an unnecessary barrier to entry

StarOfElyon

Holycannoli wrote: »

Plus pure classes are nerfed. If you don’t want to subclass you are penalized. How is that possibly acceptable?

This is the question.

Wereswan

MurkyWetWolf198 wrote: »

The experience and skill point requirements feel like an unnecessary barrier to entry

This is what gets me about it: the only limits on the system in its current form seem to be aimed at making it grindier, rather than reining in the power leap (because ~40% more DPS is not "creep.")

Tigertron

I agree with multi class. There is no sub about it you are morphed into the best parts of three classes.

I was curious about it but now that I’ve tried it I don’t think I like it. What am I? A Frankenstein? And the animations? I’m guessing the animations are broken on pts but man is that janky.

I see high end players hitting 175k+. In the first three days of pts? Imagine what will happen once they figure out the meta. One shooting world boss is fun? You thought overland was easy? It’s going to be nothing but an inconvenience now.

And it’s all intentional! Crazy times.

AdmiralDigby

I don't think anyone (or at least very few) are against multiclassing if the bottom two things are true:

1. The games isn't destroyed with bugs (like the current pts is).
2. Multiclassing & Pureclass's do aproximately the same DPS (+/- 5-10%)

With these two criteria. Multiclassing just allows more options without completely destroying the game via powercreep & making pure class's obsolete.

evLRise

tomofhyrule wrote: »

A lot of people feared Subclassing would be like Hybridization - a system which is designed to give more flexibility, but in reality coerced people into running a specific setup unless they actively chose to nerf themselves.

Pure classes should not be underpowered compared to hybrids. If anything, the pure classes should have more raw power than hybrid classes.

The best way to do something like that would be to nerf all tooltips by some percentage if a character takes up a subclass. In that way, the player needs to choose between keeping the raw power of a single class, or reducing their power in exchange for more versatility.

As it is, the players can choose 'nothing changes' versus 'more power and more versatility,' which is not a reasonable choice. Even when subclassing in games like D&D, adding more subclasses is a way to give characters more options, but you do so at the expense of accessing the most powerful features of your original class.

I love all the people referencing D&D as they really have not the slighest clue what they're talking about.

Imagine a lv 20 bugbear with battlemaster 11, gloomstalker 4, monk 2, assassin 3.

Good luck landing 500+ damage first turn on any "pure" class.

Subclassing looks very fun. There are certain skills that need some balance, as they perform significantly better than intended when mixed with certain things, but other than that it looks like an amazing concept.

From a PvP perpective, I've been tempering with several ideas so far. The main issue is not necessarily subclassing, as for PvP you can't afford going full damage / heal / tank if you want a well rounded build. The issue is how accessible non-class skills are to fill the gap, scribing especially ( wield soul is a strong enough burst heal that it doesn't matter if I trade my class specific heals for more damage for example. Vigor is another example ).

There's plenty of ways to go about fixing, and it doesnt necessarily have to be nerfs or buffs, as pure class balance needs to be taken into account as well. Simply moving problematic skills to a different skill line for example should be a good enough fix to prevent abuse scenarios.

KapiteinBoterham

I do not like the idea of being forced to update my builds with sub-classing to compete with other players. Please balance this very carefully guys!

tomofhyrule

evLRise wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

A lot of people feared Subclassing would be like Hybridization - a system which is designed to give more flexibility, but in reality coerced people into running a specific setup unless they actively chose to nerf themselves.

Pure classes should not be underpowered compared to hybrids. If anything, the pure classes should have more raw power than hybrid classes.

The best way to do something like that would be to nerf all tooltips by some percentage if a character takes up a subclass. In that way, the player needs to choose between keeping the raw power of a single class, or reducing their power in exchange for more versatility.

As it is, the players can choose 'nothing changes' versus 'more power and more versatility,' which is not a reasonable choice. Even when subclassing in games like D&D, adding more subclasses is a way to give characters more options, but you do so at the expense of accessing the most powerful features of your original class.

I love all the people referencing D&D as they really have not the slighest clue what they're talking about.

Imagine a lv 20 bugbear with battlemaster 11, gloomstalker 4, monk 2, assassin 3.

You're right, I don't know much about D&D. So please teach me:

What is a unique ability of a Level 20 Battlemaster?
Can your hypothetical multiclassed bugbear do that?

What is a unique ability of a Level 20 Gloomstalker?
Can your hypothetical multiclassed bugbear do that?

What is a unique ability of a Level 20 Monk?
Can your hypothetical multiclassed bugbear do that?

What is a unique ability of a Level 20 Assassin?
Can your hypothetical multiclassed bugbear do that?

Oh, you mean that if you go all in in a single class, that you will have unique abilities that you won't get to if you spread out your class instead? So it's almost like a player needs to make a choice: do they want to hard focus into a single class and access the most powerful abilities, or do they want to be more versatile by taking several classes, but sacrifice being able to get to the top-level abilities of any of those Classes.

Yes, ESO can't do something like that - the equivalent would be that only a pure Templar would be able to get the top-level abilities (e.g. Radiant Destruction, Sun Shield, and Rune Focus). However, since ESO's doing a class line swap instead, there has to be some other mechanism for players to choose power versus versatility.

I'm amazed at the number of people who are looking at a clear 50% DPS increase because of stacking passives (that were not intended to work together in the first place), and not thinking "hmm... this looks like something that could be problematic." Are y'all seriously expecting that that won't cause some serious nerfs that'll make U35 look like a soft caress? The whole point of that was to rein in DPS; what do you think this is going to do?

PrinceShroob

evLRise wrote: »

I love all the people referencing D&D as they really have not the slighest clue what they're talking about.

Imagine a lv 20 bugbear with battlemaster 11, gloomstalker 4, monk 2, assassin 3.

Well, that's not really comparable.

Firstly, you're playing with a gamemaster and other players who are--presumably--your close friends. There's a level of mutual give-and-take between everyone. Some players are excellent role-players and storytellers, but not so great at combat while others are the reverse. If your fellow players don't care about you dominating combat, great, but otherwise, they'll get frustrated by you constantly stealing the spotlight--the combat equivalent of a player who tries to make all conversations with NPCs about them. You should probably care about what your friends think if you want them to stay your friends.

Secondly, the gamemaster can adjust for how well you perform at combat. The gamemaster could put you in a situation where you're out of your element, such as a gala where your Persuasion modifier is -1 because you put your Charisma at 8. Or the gamemaster could pit you against an enemy that directly counters you, such as a creature completely immune to magical and nonmagical Slashing, Bludgeoning, and Piercing Damage. Or, obviously, the gamemaster could simply disallow multiclassing at the table.

Finally, though, the biggest hurdle to your example is that your build is going to be weaker as you level because, while other single-classed characters are gaining the top-tier abilities of their classes, you're taking your first level in Ranger--and at level 12 in particular, giving up a feat. How fast you level in Dungeons and Dragons or any tabletop is up to the gamemaster, and most campaigns don't go to level 20, anyway. It's all well and good to have a multiclass planned out... but not if you're going to be dead weight for most of the campaign because your build won't come online until level 8, and this campaign will only get to level 4.

Multiclassed overpowered builds in a tabletop are always restricted by the fact that the gamemaster has the last say, and how strong they are is tempered by how long it takes to get them ready. But in a trifecta core, the goal is "get the clear," not "everyone have fun," and unlike in a tabletop, you can simply not participate in endgame content or PvP until the build is finished.

And there's no "making up for" performance differences in some other way--sure, you might get a bit of slack by being friends with the raid lead, but if everyone else is leaps and bounds ahead of you because you won't subclass, you'll be kicked.

Zyaneth_Bal

tomofhyrule wrote: »

evLRise wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

A lot of people feared Subclassing would be like Hybridization - a system which is designed to give more flexibility, but in reality coerced people into running a specific setup unless they actively chose to nerf themselves.

Pure classes should not be underpowered compared to hybrids. If anything, the pure classes should have more raw power than hybrid classes.

The best way to do something like that would be to nerf all tooltips by some percentage if a character takes up a subclass. In that way, the player needs to choose between keeping the raw power of a single class, or reducing their power in exchange for more versatility.

As it is, the players can choose 'nothing changes' versus 'more power and more versatility,' which is not a reasonable choice. Even when subclassing in games like D&D, adding more subclasses is a way to give characters more options, but you do so at the expense of accessing the most powerful features of your original class.

I love all the people referencing D&D as they really have not the slighest clue what they're talking about.

Imagine a lv 20 bugbear with battlemaster 11, gloomstalker 4, monk 2, assassin 3.

You're right, I don't know much about D&D. So please teach me:

What is a unique ability of a Level 20 Battlemaster?
Can your hypothetical multiclassed bugbear do that?

What is a unique ability of a Level 20 Gloomstalker?
Can your hypothetical multiclassed bugbear do that?

What is a unique ability of a Level 20 Monk?
Can your hypothetical multiclassed bugbear do that?

What is a unique ability of a Level 20 Assassin?
Can your hypothetical multiclassed bugbear do that?

Oh, you mean that if you go all in in a single class, that you will have unique abilities that you won't get to if you spread out your class instead? So it's almost like a player needs to make a choice: do they want to hard focus into a single class and access the most powerful abilities, or do they want to be more versatile by taking several classes, but sacrifice being able to get to the top-level abilities of any of those Classes.

Yes, ESO can't do something like that - the equivalent would be that only a pure Templar would be able to get the top-level abilities (e.g. Radiant Destruction, Sun Shield, and Rune Focus). However, since ESO's doing a class line swap instead, there has to be some other mechanism for players to choose power versus versatility.

I'm amazed at the number of people who are looking at a clear 50% DPS increase because of stacking passives (that were not intended to work together in the first place), and not thinking "hmm... this looks like something that could be problematic." Are y'all seriously expecting that that won't cause some serious nerfs that'll make U35 look like a soft caress? The whole point of that was to rein in DPS; what do you think this is going to do?

Indeed. You’d think they would at least introduce a couple of new abilities to each class, so base classes get something new and relevant too. But instead we get a reuse of what already exists, basically a feature made out of nothing. With no regards to balance or diversity at that.

Aylish

I‘d prefer a 4th class tree where we could slot any other class‘ skill line, so it‘s really more about SUBclassing than the multiclassing we‘re about to get.

Xarc

Aylish wrote: »

I‘d prefer a 4th class tree where we could slot any other class‘ skill line, so it‘s really more about SUBclassing than the multiclassing we‘re about to get.

The problem is that some would be too powerful by combining passives. It is better to replace than to add.

Major_Mangle

One part of me is like:
Ye this isn´t healthy for the game due to the obscene power-creep and homogenization it will lead to further down the lines...

But at the same time, ZOS hasn´t cared about balance the last few years anyway so might as well open Pandora´s box and let it spiral out of control. Will at least give us 2-3 months of some broken/fun shenanigans....

Zyaneth_Bal

Major_Mangle wrote: »

One part of me is like:
Ye this isn´t healthy for the game due to the obscene power-creep and homogenization it will lead to further down the lines...

But at the same time, ZOS hasn´t cared about balance the last few years anyway so might as well open Pandora´s box and let it spiral out of control. Will at least give us 2-3 months of some broken/fun shenanigans....

It will be 2-3 days then it’s going to feel boring and bland. That’s how I feel after 2 days of pts at least.

Aylish

Xarc wrote: »

Aylish wrote: »

I‘d prefer a 4th class tree where we could slot any other class‘ skill line, so it‘s really more about SUBclassing than the multiclassing we‘re about to get.

The problem is that some would be too powerful by combining passives. It is better to replace than to add.

It‘s already too powerful when we look at 200k+ DPS with multiclassing on PTS because they didn‘t design the classes properly due to skill tree 1 relying on skill tree 2 on a “pure“ class.

New classes (warden and ahead) are also ahead of the old classes due to their 1 heal, one DPS, one tank skill tree where old classes were more theme based.
New classes can multiclass better this way.

Alag

When it was first announced, my reaction was like "Oh, god, no". But if I think about it "deeper", I realize that it is not so much about the sub-classing (or multi-classing in this case), but more about the balancing concerns.

As tests on PTS clearly shows, main problem is that people are able to do 170+ DPS without too much efford. I understand, that today's trend is to make games easier, so everyone can feel to be super strong without actually need of practicing, experimenting or studying, but we already have arcanist for that.

The fact, that overal DPS is going to be increased by so much but the content stays at same difficulty will mean, that content is going to be actually easier. Including Hard modes in dungeons or trials. People can just skip some mechanics already today and this will be now even more. And that I perceive like serious harm to game play.

I also agree with concerns about critically decreased diversity.

Let's see, maybe there will be some changes made based on feedback, before it will go out. There are some interesting ideas into the brainstorming and the ZOS team can take some of them and eventually evolve them into something concrete. I hope in that. If it is going to be released in current stage, I might consider of leaving the game and from what I could see, there are more of us.

Dino-Jr

After playing around with the sub-classing options I think its pretty cool and I am looking forward to trying it in full when it goes live.

That said I do think you need to seriously consider a way to only scale targeted Class Skills down when they are used in a Sub Class Skill Line. Over time I think you will badly need a lever so players choosing 3 of a Single Class don't feel like they have lost something here.

Sub-classing will still feel attractive for a huge # of reasons in the vast majority of cases and mechanically if I need an execute from another class I will use it even if its power level is slightly reduced from what it would be if I played just that class.

It could be something like applying some baseline stat increases when a sub-class is not selected so you don't have to maintain 2 versions of various skills but to me that's not targeted enough as the vast majority of skills are not an issue when made available to other classes.

Would prefer to see sub-class versions of specific skills your worried about becoming an issue.

master_vanargand

Let's break the class identities in real world.
For example, a soldier + a doctor + a assasin.
For example, a teacher + a caregiver + a thief.
For example, a white + a black + an asian.
For example, a mammal + a plant + an amphibian.
I know these sound exaggerated, but that's this update.
Oh, strange and mess. this update is stupid.

ForumBully

master_vanargand wrote: »

Let's break the class identities in real world.
For example, a soldier + a doctor + a assasin.
For example, a teacher + a caregiver + a thief.
For example, a white + a black + an asian.
For example, a mammal + a plant + an amphibian.
I know these sound exaggerated, but that's this update.
Oh, strange and mess. this update is stupid.

Ok you know it's possible to learn many things in the real world right? And you know race and species aren't learned right?

sans-culottes

ForumBully wrote: »

master_vanargand wrote: »

Let's break the class identities in real world.
For example, a soldier + a doctor + a assasin.
For example, a teacher + a caregiver + a thief.
For example, a white + a black + an asian.
For example, a mammal + a plant + an amphibian.
I know these sound exaggerated, but that's this update.
Oh, strange and mess. this update is stupid.

Ok you know it's possible to learn many things in the real world right? And you know race and species aren't learned right?

The examples given—however strained—do inadvertently prove that one can possess multiple identities at once. That said, I’m reminded of the old aphorism: “a jack of all trades is a master of none.” The irony here is that those who specialize, who deliberately commit to one path or class identity, now risk being structurally disadvantaged. Rather than deepening the fantasy, subclassing threatens to flatten it. A “phantasy,” perhaps—something once coherent that now flickers with contradiction.

gorynych_88

master_vanargand wrote: »

Let's break the class identities in real world.
For example, a soldier + a doctor + a assasin.
For example, a teacher + a caregiver + a thief.
For example, a white + a black + an asian.
For example, a mammal + a plant + an amphibian.
I know these sound exaggerated, but that's this update.
Oh, strange and mess. this update is stupid.

If compare nowadays changes with real life then more exact will be smthng like:
"You worked as surgeon (and was a good specialist) for the half of your lifetime, but at one morning you did wake up, come to your workplace and found out that your brain and hands somehow lost some parts of your experience and you don't know how to operate some of medical equipment you need to do your job good. In addition, your head of the hospital invited you to his parlor to put you in the fact that you're now should do the work not only as surgeon but also to perform the duties of an accountant and a plumber (at professional level tho) in order to receive the same paychecks as before and if you refuse to comply then your salary will be reduced at half and you will be demoted to position of the nurse."

The way they started those changes make me and my friends and guildies feel exactly like this and it's something opposite to "fun" and "variety", isn't it?
Even if not speaking of balance at all and complete impossibility to get to even its likeness with this way.

ForumBully

We need to buff analogies before there's more

gorynych_88

ForumBully wrote: »

We need to buff analogies before there's more

For now there are no any constructive reactions for ton of good ideas community offered to smooth out the corners of this system and its impact on pure classes, at this forum and not only. But they continue to keep silence and apply bizzare changes to class abillities that will exactly make pure-class players suffer and seems like they don't want to change their plan. So what else left to do.

Varana

ForumBully wrote: »

We need to buff analogies before there's more

Eventually, one analogy will hit the mark and be easily meme-able to ridicule the ridiculousness of this, we just have to try.
As gorynych said, there's not much else to do anyway.

ForumBully

Varana wrote: »

ForumBully wrote: »

We need to buff analogies before there's more

Eventually, one analogy will hit the mark and be easily meme-able to ridicule the ridiculousness of this, we just have to try.
As gorynych said, there's not much else to do anyway.

Like Deltias pool noodle jabs....I can't not see it now.

master_vanargand

Batman, Superman, Rorschach.
When combine the three heroes together, it end up with the World-destroying monster.
If a human tries to become a god, the world will end.
ESO is the same. Create a god-like class and the world will be destroyed.