Rich Lambert's Comments About The Current State of Balance

Stamicka

Balance after subclassing has been brought up a lot here on the forums. After a Reddit "Ask Us Anything" and other attempts to communicate with the community, players are still confused about what's going on with balance. Rich Lambert gave an interview recently where he gave us a very insightful take about the issue:

“I'm really happy with it, overall, just the amount of customisation that is now possible as a result of that is mind-blowing,” he says. “There's a ‘meta’, right? People say this is the only way you can do a thing. I love going against that, pushing the boundaries, and showing this group does it this way, and that works for them, but this works for me.

“I think overall it's been really positive in the community. I mean, obviously, there's feedback, especially at the top end, where they're like, ‘Now everything's the same.’ Only because you want it to be that way.”

“We went in eyes wide open,” he says. “We’re confident enough that we know the system's going to work, but we're also confident that players are going to find unique combinations of things, or do things that we didn't necessarily think about and potentially break things. We were comfortable with that. We knew that was going to come.”

Full interview here: https://www.thegamer.com/elder-scrolls-online-interview-directors-leads-sublassing-controversy-balancing-stop-killing-games/

I think it's interesting that ZOS is comfortable with the imbalance that subclassing causes because of the freedom of choice it gives. It's also interesting to see the common argument that meta is just something that the players make up and it doesn't need to be followed. What does everyone think?

Frayton

What does everyone think?

He's right.

Treeshka

You do not need to follow the meta to complete the overland content that is for sure and for the normal difficulty of dungeons and raids. So in theory you can complete the entire game with non meta builds.

The other side is where you want to tackle the hardest raids and want to get trifectas on them. There is little room for freedom in this. In theory you can probably do it with non meta builds. But why would you? It is already challenging enough for most players. There is some insane damage checks in Ossein Cage trial at least for last boss.

In this matter, there is also player mind comes into the equation as well. While you can be doing everything meta and pulling insane damage numbers, your teammate may not. Do you think that group will stay like that with no toxicity or bashing? Maybe if you succeed, but if not surely some gears will grind to each other eventually.

Stamicka

Frayton wrote: »

What does everyone think?

He's right.

So do you think that balancing is not important because a "meta" doesn't need to be followed?

I think it's a true statement that meta doesn't need to be followed. In practice that means you will do lower damage than you could be doing in trials, you might not make it on to teams, and you'll be outmatched in PvP constantly. This argument doesn't address the fact that in certain environments, performance measured against other players matters. Most people don't want to be unnecessarily gimped. They are essentially punishing being creative when creative builds underperform so much compared to what's meta.

moderatelyfatman

Stamicka wrote: »

Balance after subclassing has been brought up a lot here on the forums. After a Reddit "Ask Us Anything" and other attempts to communicate with the community, players are still confused about what's going on with balance. Rich Lambert gave an interview recently where he gave us a very insightful take about the issue:

“I'm really happy with it, overall, just the amount of customisation that is now possible as a result of that is mind-blowing,” he says. “There's a ‘meta’, right? People say this is the only way you can do a thing. I love going against that, pushing the boundaries, and showing this group does it this way, and that works for them, but this works for me.

“I think overall it's been really positive in the community. I mean, obviously, there's feedback, especially at the top end, where they're like, ‘Now everything's the same.’ Only because you want it to be that way.”

“We went in eyes wide open,” he says. “We’re confident enough that we know the system's going to work, but we're also confident that players are going to find unique combinations of things, or do things that we didn't necessarily think about and potentially break things. We were comfortable with that. We knew that was going to come.”

Full interview here: https://www.thegamer.com/elder-scrolls-online-interview-directors-leads-sublassing-controversy-balancing-stop-killing-games/

I think it's interesting that ZOS is comfortable with the imbalance that subclassing causes because of the freedom of choice it gives. It's also interesting to see the common argument that meta is just something that the players make up and it doesn't need to be followed. What does everyone think?

I think there has been a loss of nuance here. The vast majority of players won't have any issue if the new meta if it is only 5% ahead of the next 5 strongest builds:

Would players have been upset with hybridisation if hybrids did only 2-5% more damage of their older stam/mag builds.

Would people be upset at the Arcanist if they could get within 5% of the damage in actual content of their Nightblade, Warden or Templar mains?

And don't get me started on subclassing.

What Rich Lambert appears to conflate is the push back from the community isn't regarding imbalance but imbalance so massive that players are forced to play in a way they do not wish to complete harder content. The most recent example is with subclassing where pure class players received a nerf in order to reign in subclassing dps. A friend of mine who mains on a pureclass nightblade has to work harder to complete the same content that he has been doing for years due to the nerfs in the Assassination skill line.

Renato90085

this different answers depending on the group
if you ask a new/casual gamer,this is right,because overload can nude play,player's own ability suck than they bear pet attack
if you are med player ,this is worng,because top player use meta ,you just lose big power,got carry or kick in pve,in pvp dead so quick
if you are top,still wrong,the 3-4 line auto better than anything ,yes,we can do any build too,if trial from is not last 3 year new,because old pve in now just a joke
and ppl feedback not delete meta,it impossible
they just want close the gap

StihlReign

Alternate Universe.

BretonMage

Does he actually play the game? Don't mean to be snarky, but if you're spending any amount of time in content other than overland, then you'd know how agonising it is to stand there plinking limply at an enemy when you know you can melt them on another build.

flizomica

Frankly I agree with most of that perspective.

For the content that the overwhelming players engage with, balance really doesn't matter, and subclassing opens up many new ways of roleplaying your character or engaging with the game. Why hold back on more build freedom if it's going to be a net positive for 99% of players?

Like for myself, the hardest thing I do these says is vet DLC dungeons (not the newer HMs), and thematic-but-still-effective builds 0% hold me back from completing them - and that's content significantly more difficult than what the average player does.

I think in practice, the problem is twofold:

There are many mid-skilled players who know enough to look up builds but not enough to think for themselves. Since most posted builds are going to be meta/minmaxed, I think that gives the impression to many players that certain builds/classes/skill lines/sets are meaningfully stronger than others in the context in which they play - i.e. they have to follow the player-made meta.

In reality, if you're only ever going to do content that "requires" a maximum of 80k DPS or whatever, you can get there in thousands of different off-meta ways and still have a character that feels both good to play and very strong in the content you engage with. If you choose to follow copypasted builds while not doing content that remotely requires it, that is 100% your choice and a box you are putting yourself into.

However, at high-end levels of the game, "play how you want" just doesn't work well in practice. There's a level of gameplay where the perspective has to shift from your own enjoyment to the needs of the group. Following the meta is also a way of establishing shared group norms - like if the content is really challenging, knowing that everyone is on the same footing and trying their best from the get-go helps with group cohesion.

Anecdotally, the prog groups I've been in with a relaxed approach to who brings what have sometimes ended up very toxic - if you start to struggle to clear something, it's hard to approach someone and ask that they change their build to help everyone clear it. because the established norm was caring more about your own build/enjoyment than the group... which isn't productive if you start to hit a wall. And nobody is going to have fun dying to the same encounter over and over again.

colossalvoids

I'll restrain myself quite a bit and only do a small remark on it.

Having such a balance state, where most item sets are essentially a "noob trap" and not a viable option is making community even more separated. As simple as one person is seeing they're doing 80% of damage in a dungeon as a tank, it's already a material for a potential conflict. Or group of friends raiding together, surely someone could be hard carried there and it's not a big deal but some dissatisfaction might easily arise for both carriers and the carried, it all can start from the state of balance rather than people's sentiment alone. It circles back to Brian's "all sets have it's place".

Morvan

Very casual player standpoint, it's easy to say "meta doesn't matter" if you're doing content where it's negiligible, it's like comparing a match and a flamethrower underwater.

Of course you can go off meta, get creative, and still pull off massive DPS, but the average group struggles in high end content EVEN if they're running whatever meta is, so there's no room to get comfortable there for most.

And it's not just about you, it's about your team, if you're not bringing the best you can to your group, you're making the decision to make whatever content you're doing worse for everyone, if ONLY the combat team would care more about balance to allow different subclassing combos to be on the same level, it wouldn't be much of a problem.

loosej

His comments seem to address the meta in group-based PvE. What about players who (used to) enjoy PvP?

ArctosCethlenn

Most players only have a limited amount of time they can play each day. Sure, you can probably clear all pve content including vet trials with an off meta build, but it'll be slower. That means more chances for individual players to make mistakes and more mechanics to deal with, which'll further slow the group down on top of the lower damage. It's not a matter of players wanting everything to be the same.

Also, I don't want to join a group and feel like deadweight. Even if I'm just playing with friends, I'd feel like an *** if I told them "I know we could have an easier time running this and maybe enough time to run it multiple times tonight if I hump the meta, but I want to feel unique so we won't be able to farm it as many times, deal with it."

Most folks aren't chasing the meta in pve because big numbers are the only thing that makes them Feel Alive, they're doing it because they want to fully contribute to the groups they join.

Then, of course, pvp. I play a relatively off meta build there. Do you think I don't know it puts me at a disadvantage vs meta builds? Do you think it feels good to feel neglected by zos, knowing I'd have an easier time if I gave up on trying to make the playstyle I enjoy (ranged, soulcleaver magblade) work? At least I'm playing nightblade which... is still a nightblade, even if I'm running a worse version of nightblade. It could always be worse, I could be a necromancer enjoyer.

Rich is just telling people who enjoy off-meta classes or playstyles "play how you want and deal with being at a disadvantage, have fun fighting uphill with an arm cut off". PVP is a competitive environment, there's always going to be a meta but the difference between a player chasing after the meta and one just playing a class or build they enjoy is far too large compared to a couple years ago.

How often do you get into a fight now and see Storm Calling and Assassination together, with animal or spear to round it out and of course healing soul + vitality script for a burst heal? How often do you see smallscale/solo builds (shockingly) choose to run Restoring Light for a defensive line, instead of bone tyrant or draconic? It's almost like some skill lines/combos are so much stronger than the competing options that you'd need to be a masochist to not use them.

loosej

I just read the full article, and I'm confused about the titles of the sections and their content...

Title: The ESO Team Doesn’t Shy Away From Its Mistakes

Content: Making games is hard. (No mistakes mentioned)

Title: There Are Still Missteps To Learn From

Content: Subclassing turned out great, people complaining just play it wrong. (No missteps mentioned)

Meanwhile, Steam player numbers (the only public metric we have) started dropping dramatically, and continue to do so, with the release of subclassing...

Meiox

Stamicka wrote: »

Frayton wrote: »

What does everyone think?

He's right.

So do you think that balancing is not important because a "meta" doesn't need to be followed?

I think it's a true statement that meta doesn't need to be followed. In practice that means you will do lower damage than you could be doing in trials, you might not make it on to teams, and you'll be outmatched in PvP constantly. This argument doesn't address the fact that in certain environments, performance measured against other players matters. Most people don't want to be unnecessarily gimped. They are essentially punishing being creative when creative builds underperform so much compared to what's meta.

you can try to balance as much as you want, there will allways be a meta.
People even choose a race where they get just a small benefit over another race, therefore if the second best build would be 1% less effectiv they would still just use the meta build

BasP

Meiox wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

Frayton wrote: »

What does everyone think?

He's right.

So do you think that balancing is not important because a "meta" doesn't need to be followed?

I think it's a true statement that meta doesn't need to be followed. In practice that means you will do lower damage than you could be doing in trials, you might not make it on to teams, and you'll be outmatched in PvP constantly. This argument doesn't address the fact that in certain environments, performance measured against other players matters. Most people don't want to be unnecessarily gimped. They are essentially punishing being creative when creative builds underperform so much compared to what's meta.

you can try to balance as much as you want, there will allways be a meta.
People even choose a race where they get just a small benefit over another race, therefore if the second best build would be 1% less effectiv they would still just use the meta build

While it's true that there'll always be a meta, I don't believe that's a good excuse for not trying to balance the game properly. A meta build can deal over 20% more DPS than some off-meta (or pure class) builds at the moment, and it'd be nice if that gap was reduced a bit in my opinion.

Jaimeh

I mean, obviously, there's feedback, especially at the top end, where they're like, ‘Now everything's the same.’ Only because you want it to be that way.”

This rings a little out of touch or sort of cavalier, imo. Of course people at the top end would love to be more creative with their playstyles, but some fights are designed in a way that you need to optimize in very specific combos to clear. I would love for the devs to show us a quite off-meta composition clearing hard encounters with decent times/vitality.

Sadras

For me, he's right.

We're all different players with different playstyles and wishes, and we're all going to be somewhat selfish and wanting our own playstyle to be supported, that's in the nature of such a broad game. High-end players for whom metas are relevant have their concerns that they voice, and that's valid for them, I'm sure.

I don't need metas for what I do, and I want maximum freedom, roleplaying opportunities, room for creativity and self-expression and just messing around with different things and trying new things whenever I want. I was getting bored with the rigid classes after so many years, and I think subclassing is awesome. If it was after me, I'd abolish classes altogether and just free up all the skills and passives as a huge pool, or in a Skyrim-esque tree. Since that would very likely be an absolute headache to build and maintain for the studio, I think the current version is very decent, and I'm having a lot of fun levelling the skill lines one by one and being able to stay on my main character for it all.

Obviously these takes are fundamentally opposed, and I'm not going to speak for other people, but to make me happy and keep me as a customer, they did exactly the right thing.

CP5

ArctosCethlenn wrote: »

Most players only have a limited amount of time they can play each day. Sure, you can probably clear all pve content including vet trials with an off meta build, but it'll be slower. That means more chances for individual players to make mistakes and more mechanics to deal with, which'll further slow the group down on top of the lower damage. It's not a matter of players wanting everything to be the same.

Also, I don't want to join a group and feel like deadweight. Even if I'm just playing with friends, I'd feel like an *** if I told them "I know we could have an easier time running this and maybe enough time to run it multiple times tonight if I hump the meta, but I want to feel unique so we won't be able to farm it as many times, deal with it."

Most folks aren't chasing the meta in pve because big numbers are the only thing that makes them Feel Alive, they're doing it because they want to fully contribute to the groups they join.

Then, of course, pvp. I play a relatively off meta build there. Do you think I don't know it puts me at a disadvantage vs meta builds? Do you think it feels good to feel neglected by zos, knowing I'd have an easier time if I gave up on trying to make the playstyle I enjoy (ranged, soulcleaver magblade) work? At least I'm playing nightblade which... is still a nightblade, even if I'm running a worse version of nightblade. It could always be worse, I could be a necromancer enjoyer.

Rich is just telling people who enjoy off-meta classes or playstyles "play how you want and deal with being at a disadvantage, have fun fighting uphill with an arm cut off". PVP is a competitive environment, there's always going to be a meta but the difference between a player chasing after the meta and one just playing a class or build they enjoy is far too large compared to a couple years ago.

How often do you get into a fight now and see Storm Calling and Assassination together, with animal or spear to round it out and of course healing soul + vitality script for a burst heal? How often do you see smallscale/solo builds (shockingly) choose to run Restoring Light for a defensive line, instead of bone tyrant or draconic? It's almost like some skill lines/combos are so much stronger than the competing options that you'd need to be a masochist to not use them.

That is exactly my position. I want to play some of my alts, but in dungeons my arcanist just clears things some much better. And they're more survivable, easier to use, more forgiving, so much so that my alts feel like a burden on the group to bring, and I don't want to make my friends deal with that.

jm42

BretonMage wrote: »

Does he actually play the game?

he has spreadsheets

DenverRalphy

Where do pure class builds that took a performance hit fit in with his statement? Dk's, Necros, and Sorcs to some extent, aren't all too thrilled with the changes to their respective classes.

noblecron

I'd agree with lambert but everyone else's posts here make more sense. I don't even think he pvp's. I don't even know if he plays with other players or if they just use the private dev server.

ssewallb14_ESO

They don't take high level end-game seriously. This hasn't really changed in 10 years.

I wish they would consider how boring beaming is though, even not at the high end. Consider that people feel forced into it due to how much better it performs in 95% of situations. This is really really bad for player retention which was already an issue.

Ezhh

Yes, of course meta doesn't matter at all.

Unless:

• You want to be wanted by any group that can actually clear harder content.
• You like to complete as many achievements as you can.
• You are any level of competitive and like to try reach big numbers.
• You like to learn about game mechanics and test builds to find what gives the best results.
• You like to feel efficient and powerful when playing.
• You want to feel like you are keeping up with and not holding back your friends/groups who run meta setups.
• You like the challenge of clearing the most difficult content.

Sure, there is always going to be a meta. The problem is when the gap gets so big.

I am so tired of PvE damage dealer being Herald of the Tomb + whatever currently supports it best. If the devs are honestly happy with this state, I'm glad I've stopped supporting via ESO+.

DenverRalphy

Beyond any reasoning to justify following the meta, there's a simple gameplay factor as well.

The game is centered around the player being the hero of the story. Players by nature will strive to build their hero to be the best they can posssibly attain. At least pre-subclassing player characters only need strive to be the best possible <insert class here> possible. Post subclassing that turns into striving to be the best all around class agnostic character possible.

Reasons for building meta aside.. When playing an RPG, building a hero that's "good enough to get by" isn't all that exciting.

Finedaible

I agree with Lambert that Subclassing has enabled more choices, with some more powerful than others. What baffles me though is that they don't seem to want to enable any real choices regarding armor set balance.

You got alllllll these cool sets like Morkuldin, Unfathomable Darkness, Winterborn, etc. which expand what your character can do, but are ultimately under-powered for any serious content. Morkuldin requires you to know all 9 traits to craft it too by the way, you'd think it would be worth being able to craft.

Nowadays it isn't even worth running a full monster set for their second effect either since you generally end up losing power that way. Mythics are nice, but monster masks used to be a cool thing.

We also need new 3-piece sets, the original Imperial City sets have no place in the game right now.

ArctosCethlenn

Sadras wrote: »

For me, he's right.

We're all different players with different playstyles and wishes, and we're all going to be somewhat selfish and wanting our own playstyle to be supported, that's in the nature of such a broad game. High-end players for whom metas are relevant have their concerns that they voice, and that's valid for them, I'm sure.

I don't need metas for what I do, and I want maximum freedom, roleplaying opportunities, room for creativity and self-expression and just messing around with different things and trying new things whenever I want. I was getting bored with the rigid classes after so many years, and I think subclassing is awesome. If it was after me, I'd abolish classes altogether and just free up all the skills and passives as a huge pool, or in a Skyrim-esque tree. Since that would very likely be an absolute headache to build and maintain for the studio, I think the current version is very decent, and I'm having a lot of fun levelling the skill lines one by one and being able to stay on my main character for it all.

Obviously these takes are fundamentally opposed, and I'm not going to speak for other people, but to make me happy and keep me as a customer, they did exactly the right thing.

Ok but zos actually making an effort to balance various class lines will not have a negative impact on your experience at all. If you don't care about the meta and just care about freedom and creativity, congrats you still have the exact same freedom and creativity to do whatever you want even if zos balances class lines for endgame content.

Major_Mangle

As much of a convenience arcanist and herald of tome is with it's "easy mode" with clearing content, I find it to be incredibly dull and uninspiring to play. The undaunted event makes it much more prominent as I find zero reasons to play anything else as a DD. Every other option is just vastly inferior and makes content take longer and becomes more inconvenient than it has to be.

Support roles (tank/healer) are somewhat better since it offers more options depending on content you do (trials/dungeons). ZOS doesn't need to "buff everything else" but actually bring down herald of tome as a skilline. A single skilline should not have both the best AoE (fatecarver) and single target skill (runeblades) for PvE.

ArctosCethlenn

BasP wrote: »

While it's true that there'll always be a meta, I don't believe that's a good excuse for not trying to balance the game properly. A meta build can deal over 20% more DPS than some off-meta (or pure class) builds at the moment, and it'd be nice if that gap was reduced a bit in my opinion.

When the gap is smaller it ends up giving hardcore players a lot more freedom of choice; its hard to justify taking a 20 or 25% damage hit to play your favorite spec/build, but 3 or 5%? If someone is really good at DK dps but only mediocre at the rigid meta build, that's a small enough difference to overcome with personal skill. 25%? not a chance.

Sadras

ArctosCethlenn wrote: »

Ok but zos actually making an effort to balance various class lines will not have a negative impact on your experience at all. If you don't care about the meta and just care about freedom and creativity, congrats you still have the exact same freedom and creativity to do whatever you want even if zos balances class lines for endgame content.

Absolutely agreed, that's obvious. But if the question is, should they have done subclassing even if it leads to imbalances, yes or no, then I say yes, I want the subclassing.
Improvements are never a bad thing.

React

Meta absolutely matters in any competitive content, and pretending that it doesn't is spitting in the face of your veterans. His statements might apply to casual content such as overland, normal dungeons and trials, and vet dungeons. But in terms of vet trials, HM vet content and PVP, they're just objectively wrong.

The very systems he references as providing this "freedom of choice" are the exact ones which have widened the gap between meta and off meta setups. Pre hybridization I was able to play off-meta magicka and stamina builds that more often than not could compete with high-skill full meta players, because the gap wasn't nearly as wide. Nowadays if you play some off meta setup and you come up against an average/above average player running a best in slot meta setup, it is highly unlikely you will be able to overcome the power difference regardless of the skill gap.

This sucks for veterans and casuals alike. Veterans are bored and fed up of playing/fighting the exact same builds all the time (in pvp and pve!), and casuals hate the "unkillable one shot builds" that are smashing them with 2-3x their stat density.

Him saying this after the complete lack of care for balancing over the past few years since hybridization and subclassing is very telling. It speaks volumes to why the ship has been steered so far in the wrong direction.