Subclassing Destroy player uniquness

BXR_Lonestar

Thysbe wrote: »

moderatelyfatman wrote: »

The really sad thing is the power differential. My nightblade guildie is proud of their difficulty rotations and doesn't mind getting 5% less dps than an arcanist with a much simpler rotation.
Unfortunately he gets 50% less so no endgame dps for him.

Turned my Nb into such a beam abomination - so sad, not a single active skill left. I literally had to gag when taking away the NB skill lines.

I know - I cold play my fancy RP something - what pure builds now are, but I honestly respect my team members time too much to expect them to carry me with a horribly performing char through trifectas.

Carry meaning you perform way below group average, without delivering additional support to me.

Yes. This is pretty much exactly what I've been talking about since subclassing was announced. The meta is just going to get more narrow than it got after Hybridization (which was NOT a good thing), which is only going to further limit build diversity.

Want to tank with the best of them, you need to run XYZ subclasses and use ABC sets.

Want to be the best healer? Same thing.

DPS? It'll get narrowed down to just 2-3 skill lines that you must have to be a top tier DPS, and then players will ONLY run those skill lines.

Very few players want to play offmeta builds unless its specifically for roleplay purposes. Who wants to play a build that they know is inefficient, at least for the long-term? I had my jollies with the Thunderbug, Storm Knight, and Grothdar Proc Tank build for a while too until I needed to get a setup that better supported my group.

Overall, I think subclassing will bring us some short-term fun (if you find a really OP build), and then when the nerfs start happening to control the unchecked powercreep, it is going to be seen as a far bigger detriment to the game than anything else they've done.

licenturion

sans-culottes wrote: »

If you enjoy that kind of chaotic mix-and-match aesthetic, then that’s great. More power to you. But for many of us, thematic coherence and symbolic consistency are part of the appeal. Class identity isn’t about rigid restrictions; it’s about a sense of narrative and visual cohesion. When everything looks and feels interchangeable, the game world starts to lose its texture. Some of us actually like when a Necromancer feels like a Necromancer, not a disco ball.

Oh I agree with you. I was just saying that the game already gave plenty of tools before subclassing that break class and visual identity. But now it is turned up to the max.

I usually keep to my theme visually. I also hate all the weird stuff in Call Of Duty and only use military looking stuff instead of rabbits and zombie skins. But I don't care what others do or dress like.

I am just levelling up the subclass skill lines to have them available for when I need them in an armory build for when I am trying to solo some specific hard stuff or for trials.

Aliyavana

Not ZOS fault players will optimize the fun out of things

Ragnarok0130

francesinhalover wrote: »

Ill take 100 fatecarvers to 10 banners any day. Banner needs a Nerf it isnt needed in the game and destroys FPS.

Not ONLY that it removes the uniqueness of the crux system

That’s your opinion, perhaps you need to upgrade your PC beyond 2014 specs if Banner is tanking your performance?

Valen_Byte

Aliyavana wrote: »

Not ZOS fault players will optimize the fun out of things

Yes, it is. You can't tell me they didn't know exactly what players would do with this system, especially in PVP.

Its not subclassing. Its multiclassing. [snip]

[edited for profanity bypass]

ragnarok6644b14_ESO

I think the number of builds used in endgame will increase relative to the number of builds used in endgame prior to subclassing.

That is, objectively, an expansion of the meta.

I tried to argue this earlier in the drama but no one bit - but I have to say it again, seeing claims that it will narrow the meta.

If you quantitatively measure builds before U46 that were meta/being used in endgame, and you quantitatively measure endgame builds in, say a week, I bet the second number will be larger.

BahometZ

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

I think the number of builds used in endgame will increase relative to the number of builds used in endgame prior to subclassing.

That is, objectively, an expansion of the meta.

I tried to argue this earlier in the drama but no one bit - but I have to say it again, seeing claims that it will narrow the meta.

If you quantitatively measure builds before U46 that were meta/being used in endgame, and you quantitatively measure endgame builds in, say a week, I bet the second number will be larger.

If by more different builds you mean an arc/nb/necro vs an arc/nb/templar as opposed to what was previously an actual necro and an arc, that doesn't seem a fair build comparison.

Where the comp might previously contain a zenkosh dragon knight and an mk sorc, some groups will no longer need either, or it'll be an arc/nb/dk or arc/nb/sorc.

These aren't builds, they're hostile take overs.

ragnarok6644b14_ESO

BahometZ wrote: »

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

I think the number of builds used in endgame will increase relative to the number of builds used in endgame prior to subclassing.

That is, objectively, an expansion of the meta.

I tried to argue this earlier in the drama but no one bit - but I have to say it again, seeing claims that it will narrow the meta.

If you quantitatively measure builds before U46 that were meta/being used in endgame, and you quantitatively measure endgame builds in, say a week, I bet the second number will be larger.

If by more different builds you mean an arc/nb/necro vs an arc/nb/templar as opposed to what was previously an actual necro and an arc, that doesn't seem a fair build comparison.

Where the comp might previously contain a zenkosh dragon knight and an mk sorc, some groups will no longer need either, or it'll be an arc/nb/dk or arc/nb/sorc.

These aren't builds, they're hostile take overs.

I think that is a fair comparison - after all, it's just as different as it was before (the players have made one different choice, just like they did before).

But if the arc/NB/Templar has a different set to take advantage of the templar subclass, and the arc/NB/Necro has yet another set to take advantage of the necromancer subclass, then the builds are meaningfully different in yet another way.

So at worst it is the same number of unique player decisions, and at best it's more unique player decisions.

As for whether or not a given class is needed, the whole point is that there's no such thing as a "given class" anymore. You may see that as a hostile take over, but I see it as an unfair comparison. The prior two were different, but they were the same degree of different (1 player decision) as two of the same class and one different subclass between players.

tsaescishoeshiner

My characters feel more unique than ever. I found I had a sense of which skill lines make more sense for certain characters (whether for playstyle or just for how I see the character), and I'm noticing the sacrifices of losing a skill line for one that's more optimal.

kargen27

Any new weapon line would, other than aesthetics of the attacks, be redundant. There has been a best build since day one. Some players chase that build, some do not. Those that do may feel stuck. With PvE unless you are pushing for leader boards there is no reason to chase the best builds. DPS even from a mediocre build is plenty to do all the content in the game.

You can find trial guilds that will require a certain build and you can find guilds that will let you bring what you want. Many trial guilds offer both through different events. Getting a new combat system didn't suddenly create a type of player that will only run the best and expects those around to do so as well. If that isn't your style stay away from them. Both will be happier.

Jusey1

Valen_Byte wrote: »

Aliyavana wrote: »

Not ZOS fault players will optimize the fun out of things

Yes, it is. You can't tell me they didn't know exactly what players would do with this system, especially in PVP.

Its not subclassing. Its multiclassing. [snip]

You could just not optimize the fun out of things, ye' know? There will always be a meta, ZOS can't control the meta.

[edited to remove quote]

ragnarok6644b14_ESO

Jusey1 wrote: »

Valen_Byte wrote: »

Aliyavana wrote: »

Not ZOS fault players will optimize the fun out of things

Yes, it is. You can't tell me they didn't know exactly what players would do with this system, especially in PVP.

Its not subclassing. Its multiclassing. [snip]

You could just not optimize the fun out of things, ye' know? There will always be a meta, ZOS can't control the meta.

In fairness, ZOS isn't totally helpless - they have a responsibility to make things as balanced as possible.

However, people should never expect things to be balanced perfectly - because even then, something may be harder than something else to achieve the same "balanced" numbers. So there will always be a best thing.

ZOS can ensure balance is good enough that you can win without the meta. But the players have to *accept* that you can win without being meta, or the meta turns from an interesting study in game mechanics into an outright forcing function.

[edited to remove quote]

sarahthes

ADarklore wrote: »

Cardhwion wrote: »

To be honest, there was no "uniqueness" before, at least not for those who played the meta. They played meta then and they will play it now and they will play it tomorrow. No change. No need to complain.

As for the rest - I see people try out stuff, some just having fun. I do too.

Exactly ^THIS! Every time there is a major update, people complain about 'the new meta' and then they mindlessly follow along and let others set the rules for them. Next update, rinse and repeat. In all honesty, perhaps now more endgame players will leave, and we'll see less nerfing for us solo players. As HTM said in his video afterall, it's the solo players keeping ESO alive both financially and in population... and we don't complain except when endgame players get our builds nerfed due to min/maxing.

Wanting endgame players to leave isn't really part of the "You Belong Here" feeling ZOS is wanting to foster with their current advertising materials.

Subclassing has space for everyone, no matter their playstyle.

Dark_Lord_Kuro

I have been saying it from the start. It is an aweful system

Diminish

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

And this is just wrong. It's primarily endgame players who invest in things like houses, all the chapters, DLCs, new classes, and so on—largely to stay competitive and keep up with endgame content.

It's hard to see how solo or non-endgame players, who don't typically engage with that content, would be the main drivers of the game's revenue.

I've noticed you've expressed this opinion in other threads too, and of course you're entitled to your view—but it's off the mark in this case.

This is actually pretty simple... end game players make up a VERY small percentage of the player base. The same goes for those who only PvP. If you don't think that the more "casual" crowd is the driving revenue for this game that's just insane to me. I bet 75% of the games population can barely hit 50-60k DPS, have a very low APM, and struggle with normal DLC content. Lots of players treat this as a solo Elder Scrolls game, and I would bet my account that housing rakes in the most revenue. Who do you think sinks stupid amounts of money into the game buying, and decorating dozens of houses? Surely isn't the score pushers or PvP mains... Even trial guilds with all the bells and whistles in their guild hall is typically a collaborative effort by many people within the guild. There are MANY guilds in this game that offer the same, and never venture into end game veteran content.

I've known so many people on this game that wouldn't last 3 minutes in veteran DLC dungeons, but they have 20+ houses fully decorated to a theme with characters to match. Many even have multiple ESO+ subscribed accounts, with max characters on each. You may not like it, I may not like it, and others may not like it, but that's ESO.

ZOS doesn't cater to end game players, they cater to those who keep the servers online, and the game profitable. This topic has been beaten to death so many times, and has been the known direction for the game for literal years. I enjoy end game myself, and wish a bit more attention was shown to it, but it is what it is; I still login to play, and still find enjoyment in the things I do in game. When that is no longer the case, there are tons of other games available to play. This game truly is "play how you want" within the constraints of the content provided. Mission achieved, ZOS.

sarahthes

Diminish wrote: »

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

And this is just wrong. It's primarily endgame players who invest in things like houses, all the chapters, DLCs, new classes, and so on—largely to stay competitive and keep up with endgame content.

It's hard to see how solo or non-endgame players, who don't typically engage with that content, would be the main drivers of the game's revenue.

I've noticed you've expressed this opinion in other threads too, and of course you're entitled to your view—but it's off the mark in this case.

This is actually pretty simple... end game players make up a VERY small percentage of the player base. The same goes for those who only PvP. If you don't think that the more "casual" crowd is the driving revenue for this game that's just insane to me. I bet 75% of the games population can barely hit 50-60k DPS, have a very low APM, and struggle with normal DLC content. Lots of players treat this as a solo Elder Scrolls game, and I would bet my account that housing rakes in the most revenue. Who do you think sinks stupid amounts of money into the game buying, and decorating dozens of houses? Surely isn't the score pushers or PvP mains... Even trial guilds with all the bells and whistles in their guild hall is typically a collaborative effort by many people within the guild. There are MANY guilds in this game that offer the same, and never venture into end game veteran content.

I've known so many people on this game that wouldn't last 3 minutes in veteran DLC dungeons, but they have 20+ houses fully decorated to a theme with characters to match. Many even have multiple ESO+ subscribed accounts, with max characters on each. You may not like it, I may not like it, and others may not like it, but that's ESO.

ZOS doesn't cater to end game players, they cater to those who keep the servers online, and the game profitable. This topic has been beaten to death so many times, and has been the known direction for the game for literal years. I enjoy end game myself, and wish a bit more attention was shown to it, but it is what it is; I still login to play, and still find enjoyment in the things I do in game. When that is no longer the case, there are tons of other games available to play. This game truly is "play how you want" within the constraints of the content provided. Mission achieved, ZOS.

Endgame players do all those other things too you know. Some of the best houses I've seen have been from active endgame players, it feels like a third of the members of the Mournhold based trade guild I'm in are people I raid with and I recognize another third from PvP. You have to be an endgamer and a quester and a pvper and a crafter and a thief and a fisher (and and and) to get every achievement in the game and there's a few of those people around.

Endgame players are just "players".

Diminish

The problem isn't really the addition to "subclassing" it's that those who voice opinions about how "game breaking" it is thinking they make up 95% of the game's population when it is literally the complete opposite. Subclassing changes will affect the vocal MINORITY the most, whilst being a complete non-issue, and welcomed change to the MAJORITY. These topics pop up after every update. Something always 'breaks the game" yet here we are years later, still playing this "broken pos", and still complaining about it on the forums.

Subclassing is a big change, and a much needed one to shake things up again to draw interest back into the game. It's early, but I personally feel it's hit it's mark so far based on discussios with others. Could it have been handled differently? Sure? [snip] Did it still massively shake up what some like to refer to as viable build options? Absolutely.

I'm calling it now. You will see things like "Lfm, vSS KWTD 150K+ DPS min, link clear" in zone chats / Group Finder now just like there was when 100k was considered top tier, and before that, 80k, and 60k, etc. People seem to forget that lots of the same content was being cleared when 30-40k was considered "god tier". Moral of the story... meta builds are not a mandatory rule imposed by ZOS. People choose to chase them which is them problem, not a problem with the game.

[edited for bashing]

Everest_Lionheart

Diminish wrote: »

The problem isn't really the addition to "subclassing" it's that those who voice opinions about how "game breaking" it is thinking they make up 95% of the game's population when it is literally the complete opposite. Subclassing changes will affect the vocal MINORITY the most, whilst being a complete non-issue, and welcomed change to the MAJORITY. These topics pop up after every update. Something always 'breaks the game" yet here we are years later, still playing this "broken pos", and still complaining about it on the forums.

Subclassing is a big change, and a much needed one to shake things up again to draw interest back into the game. It's early, but I personally feel it's hit it's mark so far based on discussios with others. Could it have been handled differently? Sure? [snip] Did it still massively shake up what some like to refer to as viable build options? Absolutely.

I'm calling it now. You will see things like "Lfm, vSS KWTD 150K+ DPS min, link clear" in zone chats / Group Finder now just like there was when 100k was considered top tier, and before that, 80k, and 60k, etc. People seem to forget that lots of the same content was being cleared when 30-40k was considered "god tier". Moral of the story... meta builds are not a mandatory rule imposed by ZOS. People choose to chase them which is them problem, not a problem with the game.

That’s the crazy part about this community at endgame. You go meta or go home. It’s why I stepped away for nearly 2 years because raid groups were always shifting to whatever the new hotness was and expecting new clears, parses and gear sets within days of new patches dropping. It all became very tiring and sucked the fun right out of the game.

I came back 4 days ago and started questing again to recapture the magic and it feels good to play the game without all these unnecessary restrictions in place due to some ever shifting meta. I got on my main character today, a Khajiit Stamden still wearing pillar and Rele with a Zaan monster set and no mythics, also haven’t even unlocked scribing and went to my trial dummy just to see how rusty I was and managed to break 102K on my first parse.

Sadly I don’t think many trial groups would take a build in this “sorry” state because it’s more than 15% behind the meta in terms of damage.

Fortunately I’m only back in the game to see what content I’ve missed the last couple of years and with the addition of subclasses I can probably solo most of it.

[edited to remove quote]

TX12001rwb17_ESO

Why do people try and cater to only a percentage of the games content.

What exactly is the point of doing trials when you already have the gear you need? is it the achievements? why though when nobody but you can see them? is it because you want the trifecta mount? there far better mounts in the crown store.

I would rather be better at the other 95% of the game using builds that do not require having a group to be powerful.

Ragnarok0130

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

I think the number of builds used in endgame will increase relative to the number of builds used in endgame prior to subclassing. That is, objectively, an expansion of the meta.

There's already precedent for this via hybridization and the answer was fewer viable builds not more.

Ragnarok0130

TX12001rwb17_ESO wrote: »

Why do people try and cater to only a percentage of the games content.

What exactly is the point of doing trials when you already have the gear you need? is it the achievements? why though when nobody but you can see them? is it because you want the trifecta mount? there far better mounts in the crown store.

I would rather be better at the other 95% of the game using builds that do not require having a group to be powerful.

Trials are fun when you're working on clearing vet, then vetHM, then you go for the trifecta. It's fun to play with a core group of players who you get to know and then you see grow and the group solidifies, starts playing well together, and then accomplishes the prog's goals. The feeling of accomplishment when you get the clear is great and it's something you share with your guildmates who ran with you. People normally screenshot the group standing in front of the dead boss at the end.

Regarding your gear comment, we don't raid to get gear, we get gear to raid at harder and harder levels.. Gear is a means to an end not the goal.

ragnarok6644b14_ESO

Ragnarok0130 wrote: »

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

I think the number of builds used in endgame will increase relative to the number of builds used in endgame prior to subclassing. That is, objectively, an expansion of the meta.

There's already precedent for this via hybridization and the answer was fewer viable builds not more.

Huh, and I just got my next vet dlc dungeon trifecta with a build using Spell Parasite and Nobility in Decay.

Truly, there are no off-meta endgame builds after subclassing.

kargen27

TX12001rwb17_ESO wrote: »

Why do people try and cater to only a percentage of the games content.

What exactly is the point of doing trials when you already have the gear you need? is it the achievements? why though when nobody but you can see them? is it because you want the trifecta mount? there far better mounts in the crown store.

I would rather be better at the other 95% of the game using builds that do not require having a group to be powerful.

Your question works for every aspect of the game. Why ever visit a zone again after finishing the quest line? Why kill a world boss more than once? Why harvest ore when you have enough for writs? Why do writs? I have a friend that likes doing the main story line. He has multiple accounts, multiple characters on those accounts and has deleted a character after finishing the main story so he could start a new character and do it again. Another friend had 10 characters with the master fisher achievement before account wide achievements were forced on us. Some people decorate more than one home, some the same home over and over with different seasonal themes. None of that is the wrong way to play and none of that is any more important than any other aspect of the game.
The point of the game is to entertain ourselves for a while however we choose.

BahometZ

This kinda debate just keeps happening every time zos shift combat balance, whether it's changes to classes, skills, gear, or introducing new systems.

Seasoned players will warn about the negative affect it has on the game, roleplayers will gainsay and tell endgamers its our choice to follow the meta and to leave if we don't like it. We have just as much right to enjoy the game as anyone else, we do all the content you do, we spend money. A lot of us will be putting together zany multi-class themed builds outside raid.

It is going to be a lot of fun to a lot of people, but it's absolutely exploded the power creep and narrowed the already narrow endgame meta. This is irrelevant for most people because most content is face-rollingly easy and you can play how you want. But not in organised endgame, which is a part of the game that other players care about.

I don't care about what you and your people run in dungeons or your trials, i'm talking about what core leads are going to be discussing when they put comps together. Role-play does not enter that conversation. They are going to run the set-ups that make progression as quick and smooth as possible. Compromises are made.

The difference between choosing between your necro or dk, templar or arcanist character for a raid, or choosing which third tree to slot on your arcanist (because the meta is arcanist) is not an equivalent choice.

Zos simply did not need to make such an extreme change to reinvigorate gameplay. We've just had scribing introduced, which could've been used to add other class skills to your repertoir.
"Multi-classing" feels like a desperate, hurried attempt to regain players with little consideration about long-term affects.

This whole system could have been approached in a much more careful way:

- Balance the skill lines so some aren't massively ahead of others BEFORE you throw them together into a big soup bowl.
- Address the class disparity of having mixed skill lines or a dps/healer/tank split. Because at the moment the paid classes are over-advantaged by having all relevant role skills in one line, while base game classes have functionailty spread across all three.
- Start with only one added skill tree to test the water. This would be less over-powered, and enable a softly softly balance approach instead of the guaranteed hammer in a few months.
- Give pure class set-ups a way to close the gap meaningfully, like massively buffing class locked sets from infinite archive, and only letting them be worn if all three skill lines are from that class.

I know someone is going to clap back about ra ra I still do this... no one ever said you couldn't...the average player doesn't, yada yada...

You're absolutely right and I don't care.

ragnarok6644b14_ESO

BahometZ wrote: »

You're absolutely right and I don't care.

Then why tell everyone?

Conversations aren't very conversational if they're just one person screaming at a wall.

Yes, endgame players are going to minmax. They'll minmax even if they were aliens playing space monopoly at the lagrange point between a binary star.

How do you stop minmaxing? Make everything a grey-goo of sameness? Remove options?

I suppose if you remove enough options, it does mean the endgame builds are inherently balanced - after all, there's no alternative... maybe they should just have Turning Tide, Relequen's, and Powerful Assault exist as sets so there's no risk of people choosing worse options.

truly perfect bliss.

Major_Mangle

The entire playstyle with fatecarver is just incredibly dull/boring, but it's inevitable to not use it if you want to get into a above average prog group due to its sheer effectiveness.

And ye, this update will lead to less build diversity than before. People fail to realise that whatever the top end min/max players do, drizzle down in the community eventually. What's expected from players who want to "climb the ladder" and join better groups or do more demanding content (especially since ZOS tends to balance new content after whatever powercreep is present) will become more strict, and that's when people will start to complain that the endgame community is "toxic".

Sure if you don't do or plan to do any of that content and just want to roleplay whatever thematic build you like, then sure the update is great. My point is that having options are great, but not when 1-2 options are just wastly superior to everything else to the point where anything else becomes obsolete.

cuddles_with_wroble

Aliyavana wrote: »

Not ZOS fault players will optimize the fun out of things

i dont understand this point of view, how is it so hard to understand that people naturally want to do big damage and kill boss faster?

its not people wanna optimize the fun out of content, they just want to do the most damage and push their characters power to its max because bigger number = brain happy

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

I think the number of builds used in endgame will increase relative to the number of builds used in endgame prior to subclassing.

That is, objectively, an expansion of the meta.

I tried to argue this earlier in the drama but no one bit - but I have to say it again, seeing claims that it will narrow the meta.

If you quantitatively measure builds before U46 that were meta/being used in endgame, and you quantitatively measure endgame builds in, say a week, I bet the second number will be larger.

if you look at any PTS testing or any end game discord you can immediately prove this false, with the addition of everyone being able to have their own crit and pen buffs the amount of support sets and abilities needed is much lower. which then means that even less sets will be viable in end game and considering that in terms of support and dps there is really only 2 functioning combinations anyway that pool is extremely small

Jusey1 wrote: »

Valen_Byte wrote: »

Aliyavana wrote: »

Not ZOS fault players will optimize the fun out of things

Yes, it is. You can't tell me they didn't know exactly what players would do with this system, especially in PVP.

Its not subclassing. Its multiclassing. [snip]

You could just not optimize the fun out of things, ye' know? There will always be a meta, ZOS can't control the meta.

yes they can, they have all the data and they have playtesters.

sure they cant account for the min maxed of min maxed setups but they should generally know what is good and what is not and how powerful things are in comparison to eachother

and if they dont know any of this than isnt that so much worse? how is it that i can tell you how all of this works and what the meta is but the people who created and work on the game cant?

TX12001rwb17_ESO wrote: »

Why do people try and cater to only a percentage of the games content.

What exactly is the point of doing trials when you already have the gear you need? is it the achievements? why though when nobody but you can see them? is it because you want the trifecta mount? there far better mounts in the crown store.

I would rather be better at the other 95% of the game using builds that do not require having a group to be powerful.

dont you see the problem with this? your completely right and that sucks, there is absolutely no point in doing trials or anything else other than the achievement and your also right that there are better mounts in the crown store. trifecta mounts are genuinely difficult to get but even after all that work you get a mount thats less cool than one you could just buy for money...

[edited to remove quote]

sleepy_worm

I feel like, and this is just a vibes thing, the majority of the people who optimize the fun out of the game are actually midgame players, not engaged in the true endgame. As a filthy casual, I may not know what I'm talking about, though. My guild is having a blast seeing what we can do that we couldn't before.

LalMirchi

The rigid freeze while the fluid adapt?

Vulkunne

Lucasalex92 wrote: »

so it seem many players lost their uniqueness because there is this TEMPLATES for must have skills for PVP and PVE other wise you are not good enough ... [snip]

in meantime where is:

Hand to Hand Combat skill line
Mysticism Staff
Illusion Staff
Conjuration Staff
Crossbow
Whip
Spear
Spear + shield skill lines ?

would be also nice if you remake psijic to be more Mage Like not warrior/ninja style skill lines since psijic monks are mostly mages ,,, they study magic ...

i wish we had chain lightning or fire ball that on touch explode and deal aoe dmg

Scribing need more skills to be scribed not only 1 of each, maybe add option to create for us spells/ulti in scribing , allow also for example to choose in scribing bleed/poison/diesease/fire/ice damage + aoe (which u blocked with physical damage mostly only) instead let us choose which aoe type damage it will be dealth, or maybe add oblivion damage too.

So many ideas wasted [snip]

The problem that has been unintentionally created here is the things that many of us hated about certain PvP classes, like Mag Sorc for example are now everywhere. They have literally again, I think with better intentions, opened Pandora's box. In other words, before when in places like Cyrodiil we learned fast who the talented Sorcs was. But now it's everywhere. Things that were bread & butter for Dks like leap, is everywhere with some bombers I know being fond of it.

Subclassing itself is not a bad idea. However, like some other things in life, like the way the culture is with this game, everyone is scoping in on one or two things because they don't understand there are others way to play. So now everyone is getting as much damage and all the good power skills they can, rather than truly making something new and innovative.

Pooling everything that does loads of damage is not innovation, that's just asking for a nerf because it skirts counterplay harribly. And that's what I've seen so far and this is why like when BGs major update was coming I got what I needed and never went back. Well, this time I went back to Cyrodiil but I regert that mistake.

I'm staying out of this PvP for as long as possible because subclass has made things worse in there. Now where there was once a few Sorcs, and now we have factions of them... all doing the same thing. ZOS, thank you for trying, I do like subclassing afterall but gosh I just can't help but wonder if a class change token would have just made things so much simpler you know?

[edited to remove quote]