Before Asking for Our Thoughts on Update 13 Combat Changes

SwaminoNowlino · January 2017

@ZOS_GinaBruno, @ZOS_JessicaFolsom, @ZOS_KaiSchober, @ZOS_RichLambert, @Wrobel, @ZOS_BrianWheeler

Just want to say, and I think others agree, that asking us to comment on class and ability changes without knowing the underlying reasoning for the changes does not lead to a whole lot of productive conversation. As in just about any serious discussion in life, it is hard to derive substantive conversation without the context.

What is the reason for this change? Was something over performing? Under performing? Or did the metrics simply suggest no one was using it? Is it part of a larger change on the horizon, that we need to adjust values now to get people used to before we make a sweeping change later?

If you read the threads, you see a lot of "OMG, you hate my class!" Not a whole lot of substantive discussion because people simply can't see the logic or reasoning behind the change. Without the necessary context to make a judgement, its hard to say whether the change is good or not. Maybe we can live with a change because x is coming in the next patch. Or "We didn't have time to get everything in this first PTS round, but we have a plan to adjust y in the next two weeks."

We had a great thread a month or so ago discussing communication between the Devs and the players. Show us you listened. We don't always have to agree with you on everything, but things may be much more palatable when the underlying reasoning is explained. Or maybe you're basing a decision off of a specific metric, but your metric may not tell you why that metric is the way it is.

We need to see your vision for the game. We need to see your vision for combat. We need to see your vision for Cyrodiil. Without this context, we have a really hard time seeing eye to eye on a lot of this stuff.

Update 13 was the housing update. Your artist and content gen teams were slammed. What was Wheeler working on for the past 9 months? What was Wrobel working on for the last 9 months? This was the big balance patch. This was the Cyrodiil improvement patch. Nadda. Vendors in Cyrodiil. No updates to capture mechanics for towns or IC districts. No updates to siege. No additional disincentives to zerging. Please, talk to us, please. An old request, and one that feels like we are talking to a wall, but it needs said.

Rohamad_Ali · January 2017

The lack of discussion and communication from ZOS has made me feel like my input is of no value anymore . So why should I bother ....

It took me 10 minutes to write that sentence in a constructive manner . My heads full of ^#%* symbols and my profanity filter is clogged .

Zakor · January 2017

With the lack of communication and the current patch notes I get more frustrated every second I don't see any explaination from ZOS. I really had my hopes high for this patch, telling myself "THIS time it will be different. They had so much feedback to look through and implement, THIS time we will have a great balance patch." Well, guess what...

I start to think that our feedback directly went to the bin.... at least it looks like that. Will I waste more of my time with feedback threads? Definitively not.

SwaminoNowlino · January 2017

I don't want the conversation to devolve into the whole "you ignored us" thing. That's been discussed numerous times. I just wanted to suggest that if they want meaningful feedback, we need to know the context behind the various changes. Something may look like a nerf in a patch note and on the pts, but it may actually make sense in a larger context when presented with why the change was made.

Zakor · January 2017

SwaminoNowlino wrote: »

I don't want the conversation to devolve into the whole "you ignored us" thing. That's been discussed numerous times. I just wanted to suggest that if they want meaningful feedback, we need to know the context behind the various changes. Something may look like a nerf in a patch note and on the pts, but it may actually make sense in a larger context when presented with why the change was made.

Even in the context of "In the next update we introduce xyz" a nerf still will be a nerf. And a nerf where we asked desperatly for a buff is worth questioning.
Actually they had tons of feedback since thieves guild hit PTS and made nothing out of that. I personally hope they haven't published everything in this first round and the "major balance" will hit next week.
Anyway, they clearly have to explain some of those things. But all we get is silence. Sure, a sneak peak on their scope would maybe help us understand, but even that would include communication that is not present atm. The main problem is their lack of communication so. I actually wouldn't have the feeling of "being ignored" if they would finally make official statements and start communicating with us. This silence is as horrible as this "balancing"

Rohamad_Ali · January 2017

SwaminoNowlino wrote: »

I don't want the conversation to devolve into the whole "you ignored us" thing. That's been discussed numerous times. I just wanted to suggest that if they want meaningful feedback, we need to know the context behind the various changes. Something may look like a nerf in a patch note and on the pts, but it may actually make sense in a larger context when presented with why the change was made.

There has to be a conversation with ZOS before its even possible to devolve . Nothing has devolved here . I also believe that not using any of the suggestions provided for different classes over the last year would in fact be considered ignoring feedback . That's not unfair to say when it in fact happened .

The feedback that was taken into consideration and implemented was from two years ago on AOE caps .

There's no reward in pandering the discussion into a false positive light for the Devs . They will do what they want in the end regardless of criticism , whether constructively written or with a lot of asterisks ...

zyk · January 2017

My guess is that ESO is doing well financially via ultra-casual players and therefore ZOS execs think core gamers are lucky to get the minimal attention we receive. They most likely laugh at our posts and criticize us for having a sense of entitlement. The Wrobels @ ZOS are free to implement their whims without accountability as long as it doesn't interfere with the target audience.

I now consider ESO to be a social game with a combat system thrown in. I play mainly for social reasons. I don't see why a hardcore gamer would play ESO exclusively for a core gaming experience anymore.

SwaminoNowlino · January 2017

Rohamad_Ali wrote: »

SwaminoNowlino wrote: »

I don't want the conversation to devolve into the whole "you ignored us" thing. That's been discussed numerous times. I just wanted to suggest that if they want meaningful feedback, we need to know the context behind the various changes. Something may look like a nerf in a patch note and on the pts, but it may actually make sense in a larger context when presented with why the change was made.

There has to be a conversation with ZOS before its even possible to devolve . Nothing has devolved here . I also believe that not using any of the suggestions provided for different classes over the last year would in fact be considered ignoring feedback . That's not unfair to say when it in fact happened .

The feedback that was taken into consideration and implemented was from two years ago on AOE caps .

There's no reward in pandering the discussion into a false positive light for the Devs . They will do what they want in the end regardless of criticism , whether constructively written or with a lot of asterisks ...

There is no pandering here. I simply stated that if you want to have that conversation and express those gripes, there are already several avenues on the forums to do so. This conversation would ideally be different. Instead of demanding they listen, I'm simply asking them to provide a little context and depth so folks can provide more holistic feedback.

Zakor · January 2017

@SwaminoNowlino
Your problems is in fact the same as ours at the moment. To fulfil your asking they would need to read/listen to this thread and react based on it. That's exactly what we were waiting for the last year.

The problem still is the communication between devs and com. Nothing else. As soon(tm) as we improve the communication we can talk about backgrounds and scope. The thing I miss is a dialog between the two sides. Their activity is far too low.

SwaminoNowlino · January 2017

Zakor wrote: »

@SwaminoNowlino
Your problems is in fact the same as ours at the moment. To fulfil your asking they would need to read/listen to this thread and react based on it. That's exactly what we were waiting for the last year.

The problem still is the communication between devs and com. Nothing else. As soon(tm) as we improve the communication we can talk about backgrounds and scope. The thing I miss is a dialog between the two sides. Their activity is far too low.

Perhaps. But I do know that Gina and Jessica, maybe especially Jessica, do read virtually everything posted. And perhaps, just perhaps, Wrobel or Brian would be more receptive to laying out their overall vision instead of being approached from an automatically hostile point of view. Look at the changes to sorc shields. It took a few level headed folks asking for Wrobel's vision and he made a whole post about it. Never hurts to try.

Zakor · January 2017

Well, normally I try to avoid that "hostile point of view". But after writing a few VERY long feedback threads and participating in dozens of discussion regarding the changes that should have taken place today you should be able to understand that I'm close to done with the "friendly" approach as it seems to be useless.
Anyway, good luck for your try. But after the last year I'm pretty sure nothing will happen. After every update the communication went up a bit just to vanish into oblivion 4 weeks later. Still waiting for the detailed DK-Vision that was promised back with TG like the sorcs (and only the sorcs) got it (since they were the loudest in the forums).