Maintenance for the week of June 8:
• [IN PROGRESS] PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – June 8, 1:00AM EDT (5:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [IN PROGRESS] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – June 7, 10:00PM EDT (June 8, 2:00 UTC) - June 8, 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [IN PROGRESS] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – June 7, 10:00PM EDT (June 8, 2:00 UTC) - June 8, 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [IN PROGRESS] PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – June 8, 1:00AM EDT (5:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [IN PROGRESS] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – June 7, 10:00PM EDT (June 8, 2:00 UTC) - June 8, 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [IN PROGRESS] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – June 7, 10:00PM EDT (June 8, 2:00 UTC) - June 8, 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
Maintenance for the week of June 8:
• [COMPLETE] PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – June 8, 1:00AM EDT (5:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [EXTENDED] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – June 7, 10:00PM EDT (June 8, 2:00 UTC) - June 8, 4:00PM EDT (2000 UTC)
• [EXTENDED] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – June 7, 10:00PM EDT (June 8, 2:00 UTC) - June 8, 4:00PM EDT (20:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – June 8, 1:00AM EDT (5:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [EXTENDED] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – June 7, 10:00PM EDT (June 8, 2:00 UTC) - June 8, 4:00PM EDT (2000 UTC)
• [EXTENDED] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – June 7, 10:00PM EDT (June 8, 2:00 UTC) - June 8, 4:00PM EDT (20:00 UTC)
[Poll] Inflated Stats - Like or Dislike?
Wolfaen
✭✭✭
With the new inflated stats introduced in 1.6. I'd like to hear the opinions of the community on who likes the change and supports it, vs who dislikes it and wishes it was changed back to pre 1.6 numbers.
Personally I dislike the change and see no reason for why it was done. To me it just over-complicates everything and was unnecessary. I hope they consider changing it back.
Does anyone know if ZOS explained themselves on this subject?
What do you guys think?
TO ZOS: If this poll results show a large majority of players dislike the change, I hope you guys will consider reverting back to the more simple stats that most of us came to love..
Edited by Wolfaen on March 10, 2015 11:52PM Personally I dislike the change and see no reason for why it was done. To me it just over-complicates everything and was unnecessary. I hope they consider changing it back.
Does anyone know if ZOS explained themselves on this subject?
What do you guys think?
TO ZOS: If this poll results show a large majority of players dislike the change, I hope you guys will consider reverting back to the more simple stats that most of us came to love..
Wolfaen Moltencloak | Imperial Dragon Knight
Wolfaen Bloodcloak | Dark Elf Nightblade
Wolfaen | High Elf Sorcerer
Wolfaen Bloodcloak | Dark Elf Nightblade
Wolfaen | High Elf Sorcerer
[Poll] Inflated Stats - Like or Dislike? 208 votes
Like - I support the change to larger stat numbers
40%
84 votes
Dislike - I prefer the non-inflated stats, Pre 1.6
59%
124 votes
1
-
Thymos✭✭✭✭✭Like - I support the change to larger stat numbersYou cannot consider your idea of a majority of players disliking the change. Every single player that doesn't vote should be considered as being ok with the change. Unless you can get every player to vote, this poll means little.The Older Gamers Recruitment Thread
Always accepting new members for NA and EU server. PvP PvE RP all welcome. Must be 25+ yo to join.
http://www.theoldergamers.com/5 -
nalimoleb14_ESO✭✭✭✭Dislike - I prefer the non-inflated stats, Pre 1.6Had the inflated stats been this way since launch I wouldn't mind, but now in 1.6 it's hard to tell whether your build is better than worse than in 1.5 because now it's like 'YEAHHH 27K DPS wait I don't know what that means...'10 -
Soulshine✭✭✭✭✭
✭With the new inflated stats introduced in 1.6. I'd like to hear the opinions of the community on who likes the change and supports it, vs who dislikes it and wishes it was changed back to pre 1.6 numbers.
Personally I dislike the change and see no reason for why it was done. To me it just over-complicates everything and was unnecessary. I hope they consider changing it back.
Does anyone know if ZOS explained themselves on this subject?
What do you guys think?
TO ZOS: If this poll results show a large majority of players dislike the change, I hope you guys will consider reverting back to the more simple stats that most of us came to love..
ZoS did explain very thoroughly the reasons behind the change, in a lot of detail, but unfortunately much of that explanation was given at the Guild Summit presentation last year rather than fully spelled out in more official communication for all players.
Sage described the reasons for removing the soft caps, overhauling the game and adding in what he called "granularity" (numerous times...) to the system, in order for players to see that things like a .1% added to their stats would have meaning. On the "back end" of the game, a point added into any given stat would be working once you invest the point, but you as a player would not notice the change if the numbers on the front end for the user did not change. You can hear Sage discuss this in the very first 5 minutes of the presentation.3 -
Phinix1✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Poll needs a "makes no difference whether you move the decimal point a couple places" option.Edited by Phinix1 on March 11, 2015 12:43AM16 -
Soulshine✭✭✭✭✭
✭AlienDiplomat wrote: »Poll needs a "makes no difference whether you move the decimal point a couple places" option.
Yep.
0 -
Wolfaen✭✭✭Dislike - I prefer the non-inflated stats, Pre 1.6AlienDiplomat wrote: »Poll needs a "makes no difference whether you move the decimal point a couple places" option.
Yep.
My bad. Will do a better job on my poll design next time.
Thank you Soulshine for answering my question though.Wolfaen Moltencloak | Imperial Dragon Knight
Wolfaen Bloodcloak | Dark Elf Nightblade
Wolfaen | High Elf Sorcerer0 -
Panda244✭✭✭✭✭
✭Dislike - I prefer the non-inflated stats, Pre 1.6No "I Hate With the Burning Passions of a Thousand Suns" option?
@Wolfaen I am disappoint.Aldmeri Dominion For Life!
Crassus Licinius II - DK - V14 - Former Emperor of Blackwater Blade NA (The Dragonknight that refuses to go Vampire.)
N'tel Arlena - NB - V14 - Retired Sap Tank of Haderus NA, Harasser of Many (Also, not a vampire. Goes by nickname Nutella.)
#FreeZazeer
#FreeGooey
#FreeAsgari
#FreeAoE
#FreeSubtomik
#FreeMBF
Officially Resigned From Cyrodiil As Of 4/15/15 10:24 PM EST.3 -
Panda244✭✭✭✭✭
✭Aldmeri Dominion For Life!
Crassus Licinius II - DK - V14 - Former Emperor of Blackwater Blade NA (The Dragonknight that refuses to go Vampire.)
N'tel Arlena - NB - V14 - Retired Sap Tank of Haderus NA, Harasser of Many (Also, not a vampire. Goes by nickname Nutella.)
#FreeZazeer
#FreeGooey
#FreeAsgari
#FreeAoE
#FreeSubtomik
#FreeMBF
Officially Resigned From Cyrodiil As Of 4/15/15 10:24 PM EST.1 -
Personofsecrets✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Dislike - I prefer the non-inflated stats, Pre 1.6dont like. makes people think things that aren't trueRest in Peace:
The Dragonknight
2014-2025
This commemoration is for the class that has constantly been plundered and dismantled by designers for no obvious reason while other classes continue to have coherent skill lines and feel both powerful and cool.0 -
Yolokin_Swagonborn✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Dislike - I prefer the non-inflated stats, Pre 1.6The inflated stats hide the fact that your character has about 1.5K (15K in inflated numbers) less resources in 1.6 than you had in 1.5.
These resources that you earned with your precious weekly game time were taken from you and locked behind the champion system. This is the part that people don't seem to grasp about the champion system:- Investing champion points into stam,magicka, and health actually increases your stats in each.
- To get back to where you were in 1.5, you need roughly 300 champion points. (100 in each attribute tree).
This has interesting implications further down the line as hardcore players begin to accumulate more champion points than players that play less often.- A player with 300 champion points has a significant statistical advantage in competitive endgame play over a player who does not - and I'm not even talking about champion point passives.
- Anyone who played PvP shortly after launch remembers the futility of fighting a VR10 at sub-VR level in cyrodiil. Well that feeling will return.
- Also get ready for "Trials group LFM. Must have 150CP"
Was this the replacement for veteran ranks we were promised? Oh wait, veteran ranks are still in the game indefinitely. And now we have an account wide version of veteran ranks with a different name and a longer timetable.Edited by Yolokin_Swagonborn on March 11, 2015 8:08AM4 -
Grim13✭✭✭✭✭
✭Dislike - I prefer the non-inflated stats, Pre 1.6It's unnecessary bollocks.
..but, hey, what can you do... Zos are gonna Zos.2 -
Like - I support the change to larger stat numbersanyone who thinks they just added zeros really has no clue at all.3
-
Dislike - I prefer the non-inflated stats, Pre 1.6
You can't be seriousYou cannot consider your idea of a majority of players disliking the change. Every single player that doesn't vote should be considered as being ok with the change. Unless you can get every player to vote, this poll means little.1 -
kongkim✭✭✭✭✭Like - I support the change to larger stat numbersReally don't see a problem here. Haters gonna hate.1 -
Panda244✭✭✭✭✭
✭Dislike - I prefer the non-inflated stats, Pre 1.6
Problem is it makes the math a little harder to do in your head, bigger numbers, bigger calculations, that's fact... Anyway. The opinion is that most people think it makes the game look uglier, and it does, again. Just my opinion. I can't stand WoW because of it's horrid out of date graphics and the absurd damage numbers, it also changed the entire game. We can't compare our new 1.6 builds to the old 1.5 builds without extensive math and testing.Really don't see a problem here. Haters gonna hate.
"I have 4,561 Stamina Regen!"
What the hell does that even mean in comparison to 1.5?!?!?!
Aldmeri Dominion For Life!
Crassus Licinius II - DK - V14 - Former Emperor of Blackwater Blade NA (The Dragonknight that refuses to go Vampire.)
N'tel Arlena - NB - V14 - Retired Sap Tank of Haderus NA, Harasser of Many (Also, not a vampire. Goes by nickname Nutella.)
#FreeZazeer
#FreeGooey
#FreeAsgari
#FreeAoE
#FreeSubtomik
#FreeMBF
Officially Resigned From Cyrodiil As Of 4/15/15 10:24 PM EST.2 -
ElliottXO✭✭✭✭✭Dislike - I prefer the non-inflated stats, Pre 1.6dylanjaygrobbelaarb16_ESO wrote: »anyone who thinks they just added zeros really has no clue at all.
Anyone who thinks they can't just simply divide the already adjusted numbers of 1.6 by 10 has no clue at all.0 -
sagitter✭✭✭✭✭Like - I support the change to larger stat numbersYou really can t understand that the inflated stats are needed for better and clear values of champion system right?
1 -
Majic✭✭✭✭✭Like - I support the change to larger stat numbersI like it because bigger numbers mean I'm more uber!
I'M OVER 9000!*
But seriously, I think it's better for the game in the long run, and an issue that's going to go away on its own because ZOS isn't going to reverse it and, frankly, in six months no one is going to care -- not even those of us who (understandably) aren't thrilled with the change now -- because it will be the "new normal" and players would be even more vexed if ZOS even considered changing it back.
So, as is so often the case in these fine forums, the question is moot, but no harm in asking.
* "Pay no attention to that nerf behind the curtain!"
Epopt Of The Everspinning Logo, Church Of The Eternal Loading Screen
And verily, verily, spaketh the Lord: "Error <<1>>"0 -
BlackEar✭✭✭✭✭Like - I support the change to larger stat numbersThe problem with polls like these are that is biased and based on our experience with the patch. A lot of people feel underpowered since the patch and this will affect their view on the new inflation.
If this was simply a question of UI it would be different, but this is affecting players in a lot of ways. The poll is not considering that.Bjorn Blackbear - Master Angler - Collector - Black Market Mogul - Ebonheart Pact - Exterminatus - EU.
Achievement hunter:
Visit my profile page to find out about which achievement I am currently hunting.
Check out Anemonean's thieving guide!1 -
Gargragrond✭✭✭Dislike - I prefer the non-inflated stats, Pre 1.6Big numbers are slower to read and process, and they look ugly. This will not change no matter how accustomed you become in the future. Brains will always process smaller number faster. Extra precision is not needed to see the differences provided by CP-system within reasonable precision.
This is purely UI -issue, nothing would change with game mechanics or balance if the last digits are stripped from the UI.
It is pointless to compare the new numbers with 1.5 values (no matter what scaling factors you use) as the core game mechanics has changed drastically. Why is blancing/nerfing issues always brought into conversation about usability as it has nothing to do with it.4 -
LtCrunch✭✭✭✭✭
✭Like - I support the change to larger stat numbers
You mean like how people think leaving the pinions untouched at a dolmen improves the chances a boss will spawn?Personofsecrets wrote: »dont like. makes people think things that aren't true
NerdSauce GamingLaughs-At-Wounds - Sap tanking since 03/30/14ßrandalf - Light armor tanking since 03/03/15Brandalf Beer-Belly - Tanking drunk since 12/30/160 -
ForTheRealm✭✭✭Dislike - I prefer the non-inflated stats, Pre 1.6You cannot consider your idea of a majority of players disliking the change. Every single player that doesn't vote should be considered as being ok with the change. Unless you can get every player to vote, this poll means little.
Like every poll this is just a representation of view of players. However like in every poll, every single player that doesn't vote should be considered as having no special opinion (missing in-between choice) on that subject.0 -
Iago✭✭✭✭✭either or works for meThat which we obtain to cheap we esteem to lightly, it is dearness only that gives everything its value.
-Thomas Pain0 -
Seraphyel✭✭✭✭✭Like - I support the change to larger stat numbersLike.
Inflated numbers needed to be done with 1.6 and the CS.0 -
ElliottXO✭✭✭✭✭Dislike - I prefer the non-inflated stats, Pre 1.6Like.
Inflated numbers needed to be done with 1.6 and the CS.
So now when you get a bonus from the CS of 0,1% you actually think it makes a difference because your armor rose from 23546 to 23549?
0,1% is 0,1%. Anyone with half a brain knows that is barely an increase no matter what the number tells you.3 -
Merlight✭✭✭✭✭Dislike - I prefer the non-inflated stats, Pre 1.6Sage described the reasons for removing the soft caps, overhauling the game and adding in what he called "granularity" (numerous times...) to the system, in order for players to see that things like a .1% added to their stats would have meaning. On the "back end" of the game, a point added into any given stat would be working once you invest the point, but you as a player would not notice the change if the numbers on the front end for the user did not change. You can hear Sage discuss this in the very first 5 minutes of the presentation.
"If you're adding 1%, we have to make that feel meaningful to you."
The failure here is, that for some people, adding 0.1% to 1000 doesn't feel more meaningful than adding 0.1% to 100. Because it actually is equally meaningless. If it doesn't make a difference in combat, I don't care whether it makes a difference in the character sheet. Had they stuck with the original numbers, they could''ve added an option to extend display past the decimal point, for people who really want to see all those minuscule increases.
EU ‣ Wabbajack nostalgic ‣ Blackwater Blade defender ‣ Kyne wanderer
The offspring of the root of all evil in ESO by DeanTheCat
Why ESO needs a monthly subscription
When an MMO is designed around a revenue model rather than around fun, it doesn’t have a long-term future. ― Richard A. Bartle
Their idea of transparent, at least when it comes to communication, bears a striking resemblance to a block of coal. ― lordrichter
... in the balance of power between the accountants and marketing types against the artists, developers and those who generally want to build and run a good game then that balance needs to always be in favour of the latter - because the former will drag the game into the ground for every last bean they can squeeze out of it. ― Santie Claws1 -
ebunts14_ESO✭✭✭Dislike - I prefer the non-inflated stats, Pre 1.6It is solely for the min/max players. Honestly that isn't that many players when compared to total number of players in game.0
-
Spottswoode✭✭✭✭✭Like - I support the change to larger stat numbers
You realize, of course, that this logic defeats the purpose of democratic process. Most people just don't care. (Much as in politics.)You cannot consider your idea of a majority of players disliking the change. Every single player that doesn't vote should be considered as being ok with the change. Unless you can get every player to vote, this poll means little.AlienDiplomat wrote: »Poll needs a "makes no difference whether you move the decimal point a couple places" option.
Compounding interest disagrees.Proud Player of The Elder Bank Screen Online.
My khajiit loves his moon sugar.
Steam Profile
Libertas est periculosum. Liberum cogitandi est haeresis. Ergo, et ego terroristis.
Current main PC build:
i7 3770 (Not overclocking currently.)
MSI Gaming X GTX 1070
32gb RAM
Laptop:
i7-7700HQ
GTX 1060
16gb RAM
Secondary build:
i3 2330
GTX 660
8gb RAM0 -
Seraphyel✭✭✭✭✭Like - I support the change to larger stat numbersLike.
Inflated numbers needed to be done with 1.6 and the CS.
So now when you get a bonus from the CS of 0,1% you actually think it makes a difference because your armor rose from 23546 to 23549?
0,1% is 0,1%. Anyone with half a brain knows that is barely an increase no matter what the number tells you.
0,1% may always be 0,1% but if your initial number is higher the resulting number is higher as well.
100,1 couldn't be displayed properly, 1001 can. That's the only difference.0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYqUcJeHsUo