HebrewHatchet wrote: »Let's make sure we are on the same page here
You are the third dot from the 7,000,000,000 from the left. I think I see me over there on the right.
None of us have any idea of the big picture. We all see these little frames and compartments and think we can extrapolate that out to scale of the playerbase.
Know what, the most you can actively be a part of is 2,499 players. This is your community. 5 guilds, 500 people, minus yourself.
You could then take a strawpoll of those people and try to take some info from that, but its such a small sample size your data will be completely broken.
Remember that not everyone is the same as yourself, even though it feels that way.
They have access to the data. We don't. 100% of these posts and ideas are just that, ideas, conjecture, speculation.
Not to say I don't agree with the concept and the ideals behind it, but don't think that we can affect change by being on the forums.
Last maths were done someone figured out it was less than 1% of all players that visit these forums, so uh how can a vocal minority of super low % mean anything?
I have to agree here. Any modern development team listens to and reacts to data, and that data is undoubtedly collected right there in the code. They can see if nightblades die less often than sorcerers, if dragonknights put out less damage on average than the other classes, or how often Templars cast breath of life compared to their other class skills. It's naive to think that they don't have a rich interface that gives them deep insight with mathematical precision with regards to how the game runs, how the game is balanced, and how players play.
The discussion here is just another data point that, frankly, has much less weight than the numbers that their platform aggregates. In fact, I would argue that this forum is more of a public relations platform than anything else and that whenever the forum thinks that they affected something, it is actually just a case of misattributed causality, and that the change was going to happen regardless of the discussions on the forums.
Please note I do agree with those saying ZOS can do better, I believe so as well and have asked on the forums and in messages many times for better communication from them. However we also seem to forget the that before what we have now it was even worse.
The road ahead posts that were given in the past were (sorry to say) not exactly what's being asked for here. Go back and read them and it's all generic "we will bring x system, no ETA" "we're working on lag" "we're continuing our fight on bots!" etc.
What we're asking for is more of a development insight post, or a DevBlog.
An article written by the lead developer of that field (this case Wrobel) saying
Two of the first questions asked to him were mine, and it's not that I didn't like the answers given, the problem was that the answers he gave were nonsensical and frankly, startlingly indicative of a lack of knowledge of game mechanics - particularly for the combat lead. As an example, one of my questions was whether he was comfortable with templars being more heavily impacted by the rapid maneuvers nerf since they are more likely than any other class to heal/buff another player and thereby lose their own rapids buff. His answer, templars can use Honor of the Dead to heal themselves - indicating he is either unaware of how smart healing works and how that's just as likely to heal the random pug next to you as it yourself, or that he is unaware Honor of the Dead is not a self-based heal like dragon's blood. The answer did not fit the reality of the in-game mechanics. Responses like that were hardly limited to one question, which only furthered the inclination to make more memes about how ridiculous the combat team development and viewpoints have become.Please note I do agree with those saying ZOS can do better, I believe so as well and have asked on the forums and in messages many times for better communication from them. However we also seem to forget the that before what we have now it was even worse.
The road ahead posts that were given in the past were (sorry to say) not exactly what's being asked for here. Go back and read them and it's all generic "we will bring x system, no ETA" "we're working on lag" "we're continuing our fight on bots!" etc.
What we're asking for is more of a development insight post, or a DevBlog.
An article written by the lead developer of that field (this case Wrobel) saying: This is our plans for X, we plan to achieve it with Y, the issues we face are X.
However the moment he takes the time out to write that and it gets published the entire thread will be "WHY YOU IGNORE TEMPLARS!!!" "JUST QUIT!" "LOL DOESN'T PLAY HIS OWN GAME" and nothing actually thanking him for giving us that insight and very few posts saying "Hey Wrobel, you spoke about X here maybe a possible solution you didn't think of is Y"
Considering that response he would get (and honestly can you say that wouldn't be the response given?) then why would he/they waste their time on that blog. Sure it makes it look like communication is going better, but no one will care for what's said only that none of their personal issues were addressed.
Also we had over an hour of Q&A on ESO Live with Wrobel, he answered a lot of questions for us, just once again some people didn't like the answers given, so they decided ZOS are not listening.
Two of the first questions asked to him were mine, and it's not that I didn't like the answers given, the problem was that the answers he gave were nonsensical and frankly, startlingly indicative of a lack of knowledge of game mechanics - particularly for the combat lead. As an example, one of my questions was whether he was comfortable with templars being more heavily impacted by the rapid maneuvers nerf since they are more likely than any other class to heal/buff another player and thereby lose their own rapids buff. His answer, templars can use Honor of the Dead to heal themselves - indicating he is either unaware of how smart healing works and how that's just as likely to heal the random pug next to you as it yourself, or that he is unaware Honor of the Dead is not a self-based heal like dragon's blood. The answer did not fit the reality of the in-game mechanics. Responses like that were hardly limited to one question, which only furthered the inclination to make more memes about how ridiculous the combat team development and viewpoints have become.
You do realize Honor the Dead heals you plus 1 ally, it infact is a self heal. It also has nothing to do with rapids. Nor does rapid have anything to do with being a templar. I am not sure you know what you are talking about my friend.
FatKidHatchets wrote: »
You do realize Honor the Dead heals you plus 1 ally, it infact is a self heal. It also has nothing to do with rapids. Nor does rapid have anything to do with being a templar. I am not sure you know what you are talking about my friend.
HebrewHatchet wrote: »Let's make sure we are on the same page here
You are the third dot from the 7,000,000,000 from the left. I think I see me over there on the right.
None of us have any idea of the big picture. We all see these little frames and compartments and think we can extrapolate that out to scale of the playerbase.
Know what, the most you can actively be a part of is 2,499 players. This is your community. 5 guilds, 500 people, minus yourself.
You could then take a strawpoll of those people and try to take some info from that, but its such a small sample size your data will be completely broken.
Remember that not everyone is the same as yourself, even though it feels that way.
They have access to the data. We don't. 100% of these posts and ideas are just that, ideas, conjecture, speculation.
Not to say I don't agree with the concept and the ideals behind it, but don't think that we can affect change by being on the forums.
Last maths were done someone figured out it was less than 1% of all players that visit these forums, so uh how can a vocal minority of super low % mean anything?
I have to agree here. Any modern development team listens to and reacts to data, and that data is undoubtedly collected right there in the code. They can see if nightblades die less often than sorcerers, if dragonknights put out less damage on average than the other classes, or how often Templars cast breath of life compared to their other class skills. It's naive to think that they don't have a rich interface that gives them deep insight with mathematical precision with regards to how the game runs, how the game is balanced, and how players play.
The discussion here is just another data point that, frankly, has much less weight than the numbers that their platform aggregates. In fact, I would argue that this forum is more of a public relations platform than anything else and that whenever the forum thinks that they affected something, it is actually just a case of misattributed causality, and that the change was going to happen regardless of the discussions on the forums.
The difference is that numbers need to be interpreted (and the extent that ZOS even uses such tools remains a complete mystery given their shroud of secrecy and refusal to improve communication), and can be interpreted incorrectly. Breath of Life is cast more than any other templar skill according to the 'interface'? Maybe that means it's OP and needs to be nerfed, maybe that means it isn't a strong enough heal and has to be spammed for healing to be effective, maybe that means there are a lack of better healing alternatives, maybe that means the other templar skills are just not working/balanced correctly and more templars decide to be healers. All of those interpretations lead to completely different outcomes and have completely different root problems - the forums and player feedback provide a guide to interpreting the raw numbers, and at least on some fronts, the combat team has chosen to go it solo even though the feedback has remained static for years and counter to what the combat team seems to think the solution needs to be. No one is asking for the combat team to listen to every single post or every single feedback, but when the feedback is consistent over the course of years and the players just keep getting angrier and angrier - maybe the combat team needs to look unto themselves and their vision as being the problem.
HebrewHatchet wrote: »Let's make sure we are on the same page here
You are the third dot from the 7,000,000,000 from the left. I think I see me over there on the right.
None of us have any idea of the big picture. We all see these little frames and compartments and think we can extrapolate that out to scale of the playerbase.
Know what, the most you can actively be a part of is 2,499 players. This is your community. 5 guilds, 500 people, minus yourself.
You could then take a strawpoll of those people and try to take some info from that, but its such a small sample size your data will be completely broken.
Remember that not everyone is the same as yourself, even though it feels that way.
They have access to the data. We don't. 100% of these posts and ideas are just that, ideas, conjecture, speculation.
Not to say I don't agree with the concept and the ideals behind it, but don't think that we can affect change by being on the forums.
Last maths were done someone figured out it was less than 1% of all players that visit these forums, so uh how can a vocal minority of super low % mean anything?
I have to agree here. Any modern development team listens to and reacts to data, and that data is undoubtedly collected right there in the code. They can see if nightblades die less often than sorcerers, if dragonknights put out less damage on average than the other classes, or how often Templars cast breath of life compared to their other class skills. It's naive to think that they don't have a rich interface that gives them deep insight with mathematical precision with regards to how the game runs, how the game is balanced, and how players play.
The discussion here is just another data point that, frankly, has much less weight than the numbers that their platform aggregates. In fact, I would argue that this forum is more of a public relations platform than anything else and that whenever the forum thinks that they affected something, it is actually just a case of misattributed causality, and that the change was going to happen regardless of the discussions on the forums.
The difference is that numbers need to be interpreted (and the extent that ZOS even uses such tools remains a complete mystery given their shroud of secrecy and refusal to improve communication), and can be interpreted incorrectly. Breath of Life is cast more than any other templar skill according to the 'interface'? Maybe that means it's OP and needs to be nerfed, maybe that means it isn't a strong enough heal and has to be spammed for healing to be effective, maybe that means there are a lack of better healing alternatives, maybe that means the other templar skills are just not working/balanced correctly and more templars decide to be healers. All of those interpretations lead to completely different outcomes and have completely different root problems - the forums and player feedback provide a guide to interpreting the raw numbers, and at least on some fronts, the combat team has chosen to go it solo even though the feedback has remained static for years and counter to what the combat team seems to think the solution needs to be. No one is asking for the combat team to listen to every single post or every single feedback, but when the feedback is consistent over the course of years and the players just keep getting angrier and angrier - maybe the combat team needs to look unto themselves and their vision as being the problem.
if you want better input, listen to the people doing the work(players) instead of the bean counters.
some of these posts made by players are more well thought out and descriptive than anything ive heard or seen from development side. In that case I would say its passion not biased. totally agree there are some "opinionated" players, but the golden rule is "give them what they need not what they want". part of the business is to be able to gauge and judge which is which. I don't think we cant help them with that aspect.HebrewHatchet wrote: »Let's make sure we are on the same page here
You are the third dot from the 7,000,000,000 from the left. I think I see me over there on the right.
None of us have any idea of the big picture. We all see these little frames and compartments and think we can extrapolate that out to scale of the playerbase.
Know what, the most you can actively be a part of is 2,499 players. This is your community. 5 guilds, 500 people, minus yourself.
You could then take a strawpoll of those people and try to take some info from that, but its such a small sample size your data will be completely broken.
Remember that not everyone is the same as yourself, even though it feels that way.
They have access to the data. We don't. 100% of these posts and ideas are just that, ideas, conjecture, speculation.
Not to say I don't agree with the concept and the ideals behind it, but don't think that we can affect change by being on the forums.
Last maths were done someone figured out it was less than 1% of all players that visit these forums, so uh how can a vocal minority of super low % mean anything?
I have to agree here. Any modern development team listens to and reacts to data, and that data is undoubtedly collected right there in the code. They can see if nightblades die less often than sorcerers, if dragonknights put out less damage on average than the other classes, or how often Templars cast breath of life compared to their other class skills. It's naive to think that they don't have a rich interface that gives them deep insight with mathematical precision with regards to how the game runs, how the game is balanced, and how players play.
The discussion here is just another data point that, frankly, has much less weight than the numbers that their platform aggregates. In fact, I would argue that this forum is more of a public relations platform than anything else and that whenever the forum thinks that they affected something, it is actually just a case of misattributed causality, and that the change was going to happen regardless of the discussions on the forums.
The difference is that numbers need to be interpreted (and the extent that ZOS even uses such tools remains a complete mystery given their shroud of secrecy and refusal to improve communication), and can be interpreted incorrectly. Breath of Life is cast more than any other templar skill according to the 'interface'? Maybe that means it's OP and needs to be nerfed, maybe that means it isn't a strong enough heal and has to be spammed for healing to be effective, maybe that means there are a lack of better healing alternatives, maybe that means the other templar skills are just not working/balanced correctly and more templars decide to be healers. All of those interpretations lead to completely different outcomes and have completely different root problems - the forums and player feedback provide a guide to interpreting the raw numbers, and at least on some fronts, the combat team has chosen to go it solo even though the feedback has remained static for years and counter to what the combat team seems to think the solution needs to be. No one is asking for the combat team to listen to every single post or every single feedback, but when the feedback is consistent over the course of years and the players just keep getting angrier and angrier - maybe the combat team needs to look unto themselves and their vision as being the problem.
if you want better input, listen to the people doing the work(players) instead of the bean counters.
But those same players are the ones who who demand every thing which they don't understand is OP, that their class is the weakest no matter what, that every other class is OP no matter what.
Sure the players have a good sense of what's happening in the game but we also have a bias towards our class being the best. When I see a change to a DK I shug and don't care, when I see a change to a NB I study it fully and start to think how this effects me.
They've said in an ESO plus before that when they have meetings about things they also have the data regarding the subject as well to see what the game is saying vs what the forums is saying. This is what all games I have played do, the difference here though is that data is is not released to us with the change.
Again I go back to the Alliance War skill unlock changes. We all raged like crazy this was too low and everyone would have them in a day etc. Then ZOS showed us the actual numbers and it was a huge WTF moment to see it was taking most casual gamers 600 something days to unlock it all.
After seeing those numbers we could see why they came to their conclusion and where it was too fast for a good player or not could see it was better for the game and the wider player base.
GrumpyDuckling wrote: »WalkingLegacy wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I certainly wouldn't want to be a member of the team who is responsible for balance. It's just too difficult when I try to realistically think about the task of balancing everything as a whole.
However, because it's necessary to strive for balance, perhaps the combat team could implement a system that removes the 4 classes that we currently have (Templar, Dragonknight, Nightblade, Sorcerer) and instead allows us to choose 3 of the 12 skill lines for building our character.
Then, the issue is not about balancing classes, but instead, about balancing skill lines. This would drastically reduce the amount of work for the combat team and also give players more options. Then we wouldn't have whole groups of people complaining that their entire class feels useless to them (as we currently have with Templars).
I don't think that solves an issue of balance because we would still have the same trees. Instead of classes, it would be skill lines. Same problem, different way the skills are presented to us.
They've convulated their own issue of balance with Vet ranks and Champion Points.
I like the point @eliisra conveys.
ZoS or Matt presenting to us what path they're going down in regards to the game direction would probably clarify things for us.
What I like about the idea of removing classes (which has been stated before, by others) and only focusing on skill lines is that then an entire class won't be deemed "worthless" by players, like we currently have with Templars. I'm not saying that removing classes would fix balance, but it makes it easier to balance combat.
Can you imagine the difficulty and stress of having to balance 12 skill lines that are permanently locked into 4 specific classes? Why not remove the restrictions and only have to worry about the skill lines themselves?
some of these posts made by players are more well thought out and descriptive than anything ive heard or seen from development side. In that case I would say its passion not biased. totally agree there are some "opinionated" players, but the golden rule is "give them what they need not what they want". part of the business is to be able to gauge and judge which is which. I don't think we cant help them with that aspect.HebrewHatchet wrote: »Let's make sure we are on the same page here
You are the third dot from the 7,000,000,000 from the left. I think I see me over there on the right.
None of us have any idea of the big picture. We all see these little frames and compartments and think we can extrapolate that out to scale of the playerbase.
Know what, the most you can actively be a part of is 2,499 players. This is your community. 5 guilds, 500 people, minus yourself.
You could then take a strawpoll of those people and try to take some info from that, but its such a small sample size your data will be completely broken.
Remember that not everyone is the same as yourself, even though it feels that way.
They have access to the data. We don't. 100% of these posts and ideas are just that, ideas, conjecture, speculation.
Not to say I don't agree with the concept and the ideals behind it, but don't think that we can affect change by being on the forums.
Last maths were done someone figured out it was less than 1% of all players that visit these forums, so uh how can a vocal minority of super low % mean anything?
I have to agree here. Any modern development team listens to and reacts to data, and that data is undoubtedly collected right there in the code. They can see if nightblades die less often than sorcerers, if dragonknights put out less damage on average than the other classes, or how often Templars cast breath of life compared to their other class skills. It's naive to think that they don't have a rich interface that gives them deep insight with mathematical precision with regards to how the game runs, how the game is balanced, and how players play.
The discussion here is just another data point that, frankly, has much less weight than the numbers that their platform aggregates. In fact, I would argue that this forum is more of a public relations platform than anything else and that whenever the forum thinks that they affected something, it is actually just a case of misattributed causality, and that the change was going to happen regardless of the discussions on the forums.
The difference is that numbers need to be interpreted (and the extent that ZOS even uses such tools remains a complete mystery given their shroud of secrecy and refusal to improve communication), and can be interpreted incorrectly. Breath of Life is cast more than any other templar skill according to the 'interface'? Maybe that means it's OP and needs to be nerfed, maybe that means it isn't a strong enough heal and has to be spammed for healing to be effective, maybe that means there are a lack of better healing alternatives, maybe that means the other templar skills are just not working/balanced correctly and more templars decide to be healers. All of those interpretations lead to completely different outcomes and have completely different root problems - the forums and player feedback provide a guide to interpreting the raw numbers, and at least on some fronts, the combat team has chosen to go it solo even though the feedback has remained static for years and counter to what the combat team seems to think the solution needs to be. No one is asking for the combat team to listen to every single post or every single feedback, but when the feedback is consistent over the course of years and the players just keep getting angrier and angrier - maybe the combat team needs to look unto themselves and their vision as being the problem.
if you want better input, listen to the people doing the work(players) instead of the bean counters.
But those same players are the ones who who demand every thing which they don't understand is OP, that their class is the weakest no matter what, that every other class is OP no matter what.
Sure the players have a good sense of what's happening in the game but we also have a bias towards our class being the best. When I see a change to a DK I shug and don't care, when I see a change to a NB I study it fully and start to think how this effects me.
They've said in an ESO plus before that when they have meetings about things they also have the data regarding the subject as well to see what the game is saying vs what the forums is saying. This is what all games I have played do, the difference here though is that data is is not released to us with the change.
Again I go back to the Alliance War skill unlock changes. We all raged like crazy this was too low and everyone would have them in a day etc. Then ZOS showed us the actual numbers and it was a huge WTF moment to see it was taking most casual gamers 600 something days to unlock it all.
After seeing those numbers we could see why they came to their conclusion and where it was too fast for a good player or not could see it was better for the game and the wider player base.
dimensional wrote: »I think one of the best things that ZOS and the combat team could do to help this situation is to provide more immediate relief in terms of balance changes, rather than waiting every quarter for the next DLC to come out to implement those. Why can't the incremental patches include more concrete changes? Games like League of Legends (the most popular, most competitive game on the planet) manage to routinely address balance issues through regular patches. ZOS says they want to take it slow so they don't break the game or muck up other areas, and I do understand that... but surely there is a middle ground here, some sort of compromise that we can reach that will make people happy while also maintaining the integrity of the game?
I think if this singular issue is addressed, no matter what kind of changes we see in particular, you will show the community and the players who pay for this game and all of its content that you're listening and are willing to deliver excellent continued support to your game. This to me is probably the most important thing that the developers should consider right now, even more than the content. You can add new DLC all you want and I'm sure people will continue to buy it, but those numbers will dwindle and get smaller and smaller over time as people become disillusioned with the product they bought. Please don't fall into this trap ZOS! We all love ESO here and we want to continue playing this game and supporting you all for years to come.
dimensional wrote: »I think one of the best things that ZOS and the combat team could do to help this situation is to provide more immediate relief in terms of balance changes, rather than waiting every quarter for the next DLC to come out to implement those. Why can't the incremental patches include more concrete changes? Games like League of Legends (the most popular, most competitive game on the planet) manage to routinely address balance issues through regular patches. ZOS says they want to take it slow so they don't break the game or muck up other areas, and I do understand that... but surely there is a middle ground here, some sort of compromise that we can reach that will make people happy while also maintaining the integrity of the game?
I think if this singular issue is addressed, no matter what kind of changes we see in particular, you will show the community and the players who pay for this game and all of its content that you're listening and are willing to deliver excellent continued support to your game. This to me is probably the most important thing that the developers should consider right now, even more than the content. You can add new DLC all you want and I'm sure people will continue to buy it, but those numbers will dwindle and get smaller and smaller over time as people become disillusioned with the product they bought. Please don't fall into this trap ZOS! We all love ESO here and we want to continue playing this game and supporting you all for years to come.
They have explained this in the past.
They are limited in what they can adjust in a incremental patch.
They explained on a ESO live or on the forums somewhere and I don't want yo get it wrong. Basically, if it is a value tweak they can touch it in a incremental. If it invokes almost anything outside of changing a value the process becomes a lot more involved and tested and is put into larger patches which are tested more extensively.
To be honest it this is more or less a QA check to make sure they don't break things they can't fix and they still mange to sometimes. If you remember snares and sneaking in IC even with testing and QA.
I would much prefer they don't get into adjunct changes with incremental patches.
NeillMcAttack wrote: »I just want to say that i agree with and support the vast majority of the devs decisions. I also understand that these things take a lot of time especially with the scheduled expansions that are planned. Most players i feel that come here to complain and "discuss" what's unfair are looking at the situation from a very narrow perspective.
Let's face it, most complaints come from PvP gameplay (which for the record is what made me fall in love with this game). And i don't agree with what players are complaining about the vast majority of the time, and while many here want what is said on the forums to be taken more seriously, i for one don't want the game most "complainers" are shouting for.
Examples of what i mean: People asking for "balance" between all the individual classes; "why does this class not have this kind of passive?". "How come I can't apply this buff?". Like, I don't want a game balanced around 1v1's. In the future we could end up with FOTM builds that are used on every class and race. Same buffs, same utillity, same DPS, Practically the exact same skill bars.... on different classes!!!??
And what is even funnier is people will also claim "But its supposed to be play how you want??". Well then learn how to play that way instead of asking for it to be handed to you. These are complaints I don't want taken too seriously.
Another example, while i think of it, is people laughing at the 'Templar house' comment, because i've seen what he is talking about. One of the guys i run dungeons with always fills both the tank and healer roll on all vet dungeons, all speed runs, everything. "Templar OP pls nerf zos"!! And before anyone brings it up he also runs this build in the sewers. He has sustained us and tanked through waves of blues and yellows.... literally!
All I'm saying is that (inside this rant, sry) I hope ZOS, with their much broader perspective continue to build and balance for group play. Not solo play. Because if most of the issues brought up here were taken too seriously we could end up where every class has access to every skill line, every race has every passive, and gameplay becomes boring because the learning will have stopped.
Now with that, I'm off to craft some gear for my NB to try and turn him into a tank for vet dungeons. If he isn't as effective as i hope maybe ill come back to complain that i don't have access to Dragon Blood
NeillMcAttack wrote: »I just want to say that i agree with and support the vast majority of the devs decisions. I also understand that these things take a lot of time especially with the scheduled expansions that are planned. Most players i feel that come here to complain and "discuss" what's unfair are looking at the situation from a very narrow perspective.
Let's face it, most complaints come from PvP gameplay (which for the record is what made me fall in love with this game). And i don't agree with what players are complaining about the vast majority of the time, and while many here want what is said on the forums to be taken more seriously, i for one don't want the game most "complainers" are shouting for.
Examples of what i mean: People asking for "balance" between all the individual classes; "why does this class not have this kind of passive?". "How come I can't apply this buff?". Like, I don't want a game balanced around 1v1's. In the future we could end up with FOTM builds that are used on every class and race. Same buffs, same utillity, same DPS, Practically the exact same skill bars.... on different classes!!!??
And what is even funnier is people will also claim "But its supposed to be play how you want??". Well then learn how to play that way instead of asking for it to be handed to you. These are complaints I don't want taken too seriously.
Another example, while i think of it, is people laughing at the 'Templar house' comment, because i've seen what he is talking about. One of the guys i run dungeons with always fills both the tank and healer roll on all vet dungeons, all speed runs, everything. "Templar OP pls nerf zos"!! And before anyone brings it up he also runs this build in the sewers. He has sustained us and tanked through waves of blues and yellows.... literally!
All I'm saying is that (inside this rant, sry) I hope ZOS, with their much broader perspective continue to build and balance for group play. Not solo play. Because if most of the issues brought up here were taken too seriously we could end up where every class has access to every skill line, every race has every passive, and gameplay becomes boring because the learning will have stopped.
Now with that, I'm off to craft some gear for my NB to try and turn him into a tank for vet dungeons. If he isn't as effective as i hope maybe ill come back to complain that i don't have access to Dragon Blood
Most of the pvp balance gripes ARE about group play though. It doesn't quite matter if I'm all that mobile in a 1v1, with the exception of my opponent being able to escape and deny me a kill. It certainly does matter if I go to a keep fight and there are 4 casts of bombard for every 1 cast of my purify and I'm rooted in place the entire time without strong shields or mitigation like magma shell. I can buy some of what you're saying, but you instantly lose me when you get to the dreaded templar house. Faceroll easy pve and baddies in the sewers do not mean the 'templar house' is sufficient or strong. The ongoing complaints regarding that are two-fold.
First, other classes are better equipped skill-line wise for that style of play. Second, that style of play makes you stronger when you're stationary and less strong when mobile; when the game promotes mobility across the board as the preferred playstyle - stationary is left in the dust. The stationary 'house' falls apart in VMA or in pvp against competent opponents.
NeillMcAttack wrote: »NeillMcAttack wrote: »I just want to say that i agree with and support the vast majority of the devs decisions. I also understand that these things take a lot of time especially with the scheduled expansions that are planned. Most players i feel that come here to complain and "discuss" what's unfair are looking at the situation from a very narrow perspective.
Let's face it, most complaints come from PvP gameplay (which for the record is what made me fall in love with this game). And i don't agree with what players are complaining about the vast majority of the time, and while many here want what is said on the forums to be taken more seriously, i for one don't want the game most "complainers" are shouting for.
Examples of what i mean: People asking for "balance" between all the individual classes; "why does this class not have this kind of passive?". "How come I can't apply this buff?". Like, I don't want a game balanced around 1v1's. In the future we could end up with FOTM builds that are used on every class and race. Same buffs, same utillity, same DPS, Practically the exact same skill bars.... on different classes!!!??
And what is even funnier is people will also claim "But its supposed to be play how you want??". Well then learn how to play that way instead of asking for it to be handed to you. These are complaints I don't want taken too seriously.
Another example, while i think of it, is people laughing at the 'Templar house' comment, because i've seen what he is talking about. One of the guys i run dungeons with always fills both the tank and healer roll on all vet dungeons, all speed runs, everything. "Templar OP pls nerf zos"!! And before anyone brings it up he also runs this build in the sewers. He has sustained us and tanked through waves of blues and yellows.... literally!
All I'm saying is that (inside this rant, sry) I hope ZOS, with their much broader perspective continue to build and balance for group play. Not solo play. Because if most of the issues brought up here were taken too seriously we could end up where every class has access to every skill line, every race has every passive, and gameplay becomes boring because the learning will have stopped.
Now with that, I'm off to craft some gear for my NB to try and turn him into a tank for vet dungeons. If he isn't as effective as i hope maybe ill come back to complain that i don't have access to Dragon Blood
Most of the pvp balance gripes ARE about group play though. It doesn't quite matter if I'm all that mobile in a 1v1, with the exception of my opponent being able to escape and deny me a kill. It certainly does matter if I go to a keep fight and there are 4 casts of bombard for every 1 cast of my purify and I'm rooted in place the entire time without strong shields or mitigation like magma shell. I can buy some of what you're saying, but you instantly lose me when you get to the dreaded templar house. Faceroll easy pve and baddies in the sewers do not mean the 'templar house' is sufficient or strong. The ongoing complaints regarding that are two-fold.
First, other classes are better equipped skill-line wise for that style of play. Second, that style of play makes you stronger when you're stationary and less strong when mobile; when the game promotes mobility across the board as the preferred playstyle - stationary is left in the dust. The stationary 'house' falls apart in VMA or in pvp against competent opponents.
I'm not saying everything is perfect. Just that i would prefer much more informed input than what is read here. But i will stand by what i say about the templar class. A templar's sustain is definately the most reliable, in group play, positioning is most important and with higher mobility i can honestly see them becoming unrivaled.
VMA is not group content so it should stand to reason that other classes may have an easier time in succeeding therein.
With regards PvP, I don't think you can tell me a better class to build on to provide healing, protection, and stamina to your friendlies. Honestly, to say the strongest and most reliable healing class is the weakest in PvP tells me that you are not looking at it from a group PvP perspective.
If you are being hit with 3 bombards and can't deal with it you are out of position but arguing possibilities is guaranteed to get us nowhere.
NeillMcAttack wrote: »NeillMcAttack wrote: »I just want to say that i agree with and support the vast majority of the devs decisions. I also understand that these things take a lot of time especially with the scheduled expansions that are planned. Most players i feel that come here to complain and "discuss" what's unfair are looking at the situation from a very narrow perspective.
Let's face it, most complaints come from PvP gameplay (which for the record is what made me fall in love with this game). And i don't agree with what players are complaining about the vast majority of the time, and while many here want what is said on the forums to be taken more seriously, i for one don't want the game most "complainers" are shouting for.
Examples of what i mean: People asking for "balance" between all the individual classes; "why does this class not have this kind of passive?". "How come I can't apply this buff?". Like, I don't want a game balanced around 1v1's. In the future we could end up with FOTM builds that are used on every class and race. Same buffs, same utillity, same DPS, Practically the exact same skill bars.... on different classes!!!??
And what is even funnier is people will also claim "But its supposed to be play how you want??". Well then learn how to play that way instead of asking for it to be handed to you. These are complaints I don't want taken too seriously.
Another example, while i think of it, is people laughing at the 'Templar house' comment, because i've seen what he is talking about. One of the guys i run dungeons with always fills both the tank and healer roll on all vet dungeons, all speed runs, everything. "Templar OP pls nerf zos"!! And before anyone brings it up he also runs this build in the sewers. He has sustained us and tanked through waves of blues and yellows.... literally!
All I'm saying is that (inside this rant, sry) I hope ZOS, with their much broader perspective continue to build and balance for group play. Not solo play. Because if most of the issues brought up here were taken too seriously we could end up where every class has access to every skill line, every race has every passive, and gameplay becomes boring because the learning will have stopped.
Now with that, I'm off to craft some gear for my NB to try and turn him into a tank for vet dungeons. If he isn't as effective as i hope maybe ill come back to complain that i don't have access to Dragon Blood
Most of the pvp balance gripes ARE about group play though. It doesn't quite matter if I'm all that mobile in a 1v1, with the exception of my opponent being able to escape and deny me a kill. It certainly does matter if I go to a keep fight and there are 4 casts of bombard for every 1 cast of my purify and I'm rooted in place the entire time without strong shields or mitigation like magma shell. I can buy some of what you're saying, but you instantly lose me when you get to the dreaded templar house. Faceroll easy pve and baddies in the sewers do not mean the 'templar house' is sufficient or strong. The ongoing complaints regarding that are two-fold.
First, other classes are better equipped skill-line wise for that style of play. Second, that style of play makes you stronger when you're stationary and less strong when mobile; when the game promotes mobility across the board as the preferred playstyle - stationary is left in the dust. The stationary 'house' falls apart in VMA or in pvp against competent opponents.
I'm not saying everything is perfect. Just that i would prefer much more informed input than what is read here. But i will stand by what i say about the templar class. A templar's sustain is definately the most reliable, in group play, positioning is most important and with higher mobility i can honestly see them becoming unrivaled.
VMA is not group content so it should stand to reason that other classes may have an easier time in succeeding therein.
With regards PvP, I don't think you can tell me a better class to build on to provide healing, protection, and stamina to your friendlies. Honestly, to say the strongest and most reliable healing class is the weakest in PvP tells me that you are not looking at it from a group PvP perspective.
If you are being hit with 3 bombards and can't deal with it you are out of position but arguing possibilities is guaranteed to get us nowhere.
This wasn't the thread meant for detailed feedback and ideas. There have been dozens and dozens of those, and they've been largely ignored by the devs. I have literally no idea how to respond to someone that says templars have the most reliable sustain when nightblades have more sustain simply from passives, not to mention siphoning attacks. I've clocked more hours on my templar than any other class and spend the majority of my pvp time in large or small groups, so yes, I certainly do look at things from a group perspective. The damage creep has been consistent and pronounced patch to patch, and will only get worse next patch. Prox det doing double damage, no barriers, heal debuffs like fasalla's guile, purge cost going up and hitting fewer, siege buffs, rapids nerf - these are all things that promote high burst and provide disincentives to sustain, which means that healing ends up being the least effective means of sustain, and shields ends up being the best. We can debate this if you'd like, but the argument is pretty stacked against you.
You clearly have rose colored glasses on when it comes to templars, so for the sake of not obliterating the last few remaining hopeful templars still standing, I'll leave things be and simply refer you to the 80 page templar thread on PTS that will raise every point and counter point I'd end up making to your post anyway.
As an aside, maybe it's an EU vs NA thing, but bombard has already become the new steel tornado. Being spam rooted has nothing to do with positioning and everything to do with it just being spammed the entire fight by opponents. We'll also see a bunch more DKs next patch and therefore have talons on top of all of the bombard spam. If you haven't experienced this yet on EU, hope you never have to.
Enraged_Tiki_Torch wrote: »If you claim Templars are at the bottom or have ever been at the bottom: your either parroting people who have either never spend a significant amount of time playing one, you've pigeonholed yourself into a playstyle which has weaknesses that are commonly exploited or you just started yourself. I apologize for this reality check but you simply can not have any concept in the range of options the Templar class gives when you rely on spamming 1 ability over and over while occasionally struggling to move your finger off to hit another button.
The other issue is players who refuse to criticize their own character and figure out ways to make adjustments to fix the issues they are having. Every complaint has an answer but just as an example because Wrobel's comment has become a meme/joke. Yeah Templars, it's hard to protect the house and not get run over when you can't properly avoid WB or your running 7 light with divine traits and CP into Quick Recovery. Think...
As a Templar since pre-release, I do not struggle like so many claim to but I have also mastered the class and MORE IMPORTANTLY I don't want anymore dumbing down of this game. Hopefully this so-called nerf will force people to stop relying on this cruise control through content which is what BoL has become. Only then will we may be able to address the real issues with the class. Instead of OMG posts saying "you mean I can only heal 2 people with an ability instead of 3", "you mean I can't just go zombie mode through content pressing just 1 button and winning anymore".
This is a silly request. My apologies for not agreeing with the vast majority...
Enraged_Tiki_Torch wrote: »
As a Templar since pre-release, I do not struggle like so many claim to but I have also mastered the class and MORE IMPORTANTLY I don't want anymore dumbing down of this game. Hopefully this so-called nerf will force people to stop relying on this cruise control through content which is what BoL has become. Only then will we may be able to address the real issues with the class. Instead of OMG posts saying "you mean I can only heal 2 people with an ability instead of 3", "you mean I can't just go zombie mode through content pressing just 1 button and winning anymore".
This is a silly request. My apologies for not agreeing with the vast majority...
Enraged_Tiki_Torch wrote: »@Zheg No I don't agree with the majority of posts about Templar issues. Sadly because most of them are filled with "wheres our buffs", or "why you nerfing us". The well thought out threads I evaluate each respectively if they actually address issues and don't sound like the former examples.
DPS gone up? No, that was 1.6 when people were getting 1 shot. That doesn't happen nearly as much as it once did. I agree health totals haven't gone up, so that means DPS has gone down not up. However, if that is an issue for someone maybe add some health to your character. Then again that is my point... Most people don't do that, they instead ask for nerfs or buffs from Zenimax because they are too stubborn to fix it themselves.
I have yet to hear a top Templar ask for buffs or nerfs, they wouldn't be top if they did. They are for those who are struggling with stubbornness and want Zenimax to spend worktime fixing their problems.
As far as healing though DPS burst, NO I don't have any argument supporting that you should be able to in 1 press of a button clear an enemies DPS which required them pushing more than 1 button. 1 cast of BoL should not be able to heal someone from almost dead to full health. I don't agree with that. The fact this is a current issue provides more than enough evidence we are having healing and not dps shoved down our throat.
As far as Zenimax, bending to the requests of the players and responding to legitimate concerns are 2 different things. I wouldn't dare call them perfect cause there are still issues unfixed. I agree (I guess) that I am in Wrobels camp cause I love the combat system. I just wish more attention was giving to fixing issues instead of looking at the infinite # of threads filled with illegitimate concerns from people who refuse to try.
Animal_Mother wrote: »
Look at it from another point of view. Templars have had major issues, some of them nearly two years old, why mess with BoL at this juncture?
Animal_Mother wrote: »Some mobility and survivability. A charge that is reliable. Shoot, with the changes appearing soon, I'd like a reduction in the cost to cast BoL - which even before factoring the incoming healing reduction, is still the most expensive heal in the game.