Why even bother with having a PTS

InvitationNotFound · May 2017

Biro123 wrote: »

Many people don't understand the purpose of a test server. I see this in a lot of games.

See I am a software developer. And developing software goes through a process of..:

1. Determine requirements - ie. what do we want to build/change
2. Do the design - ie. How are we going to achieve that - which programs/databases etc. need to change
3. Do the build - ie. changing the code
4. Unit testing - does the code change do as per the design states
5. Systems testing - do all the code changes fit together
6. User/Beta/QA testing - Does the whole thing work as determined by the Requirements (1.)

We are at stage 6. A long way down the development cycle. The aim of this test is to check if the requirements have been met. This means that if the requirement states that Constitution should return 60% less than it used to - is it now returning 60% less than it used to? If it isn't - its a bug. If it is - its working as intended

And that is the key word. Working As Intended - Intended is determined in black and white in the Requirements.

You guys are all asking for the requirements to change - Now don't get me wrong - ZoS probably are listening to the feedback - but changing requirements part way through a project creates a LOT of risk, a LOT of re-work and a LOT of retesting.
The way Requirement changes are generally done is by creating NEW requirements for the next project - which starts at step 1 again.

TLDR;
It will likely be a while till the feedback you are giving now gets to the PTS - and it will probably NOT be in this patch.

It does NOT mean this testing is pointless - AS LONG AS YOU REPORT ANY BUGS/EXPLOITS YOU FIND. Also the early feedback (as opposed to waiting till live) gives them a head start in the next patch wich probably will take some of the comments on-board.

Or the whole development life cycle is broken. Cut it to smaller pieces and verify if everything works out as expected. Do it more "agile" and not like we used to do it decades ago. Blindly following some requirements, which normally change during the development, is pretty stupid. And yet, it is what we see with every PTS, they get a huge amount of complaints with every PTS and the game is getting worse with every PTS, but yes, keep following the same stupid process over and over again.

Furthermore, I doubt that the feedback provided will influence the next patch. I even doubt that anyone has provided such *** up feedback that could have ended in this current patch.

Feanor · May 2017

If that is true then why are we asked for feedback. Bug hunting would suffice.

NightbladeMechanics · May 2017

Carbonised · May 2017

Spoiler

Biro123 wrote: »

Many people don't understand the purpose of a test server. I see this in a lot of games.

See I am a software developer. And developing software goes through a process of..:

1. Determine requirements - ie. what do we want to build/change
2. Do the design - ie. How are we going to achieve that - which programs/databases etc. need to change
3. Do the build - ie. changing the code
4. Unit testing - does the code change do as per the design states
5. Systems testing - do all the code changes fit together
6. User/Beta/QA testing - Does the whole thing work as determined by the Requirements (1.)

We are at stage 6. A long way down the development cycle. The aim of this test is to check if the requirements have been met. This means that if the requirement states that Constitution should return 60% less than it used to - is it now returning 60% less than it used to? If it isn't - its a bug. If it is - its working as intended

And that is the key word. Working As Intended - Intended is determined in black and white in the Requirements.

You guys are all asking for the requirements to change - Now don't get me wrong - ZoS probably are listening to the feedback - but changing requirements part way through a project creates a LOT of risk, a LOT of re-work and a LOT of retesting.
The way Requirement changes are generally done is by creating NEW requirements for the next project - which starts at step 1 again.

TLDR;
It will likely be a while till the feedback you are giving now gets to the PTS - and it will probably NOT be in this patch.

It does NOT mean this testing is pointless - AS LONG AS YOU REPORT ANY BUGS/EXPLOITS YOU FIND. Also the early feedback (as opposed to waiting till live) gives them a head start in the next patch wich probably will take some of the comments on-board.

Except you're flat out wrong.

Yes, glorified bugfixing is a part of the PTS (and pretty much the only part where we are actually heard, though not always).

However:

This is the official feedback thread for class balance. Specific feedback that the team is looking for includes the following:
In general, what are your thoughts on the class balance in this update?

How long did it take you to run out of resources? What did you do in this case?

Did you change your character/build in any way because of these changes? How so?

This isn't bugfixing, man, this is asking for feedback on the content. Go to the Morrowind Closed Beta, and there are even more official thread asking for feedback on content, experience, opinions etc. Not just asking for "Hey, did you guys run into any bugs while doing content XYZ?"

So yeah, considering that the devs do ask for feedback on specific content and balancing issues that go beyond glorified bugfixing, I don't really buy into your premise.

I mean, I'd be completely ok if devs just came out and said "hey sod you guys, we don't want any feedback regarding our content, just bugfixing, thanks". At least then I'd know where they stood, and I could just pass on wasting my time helping them bugfix for free.

The issue at hand here is that 90 % of the community agrees on a certain direction for the game (not to mention a lot of more specifics on the Morrowind Closed Beta forum that do not pertain to class balancing issues or the sustain issue), and that feedback is continually being ignored in the PTS cycles, just like it was in the past in all the other PTS cycles, which makes this whole process extremely frustrating and ungratifying.

pattyLtd · May 2017

Most of the PTS feedback is probably coming from log files (indirect player feedback) not from what we post about it.
These changes will happen there is no way around them besides not playing it.

Biro123 · May 2017

Carbonised wrote: »

Spoiler

Biro123 wrote: »

Many people don't understand the purpose of a test server. I see this in a lot of games.

See I am a software developer. And developing software goes through a process of..:

1. Determine requirements - ie. what do we want to build/change
2. Do the design - ie. How are we going to achieve that - which programs/databases etc. need to change
3. Do the build - ie. changing the code
4. Unit testing - does the code change do as per the design states
5. Systems testing - do all the code changes fit together
6. User/Beta/QA testing - Does the whole thing work as determined by the Requirements (1.)

We are at stage 6. A long way down the development cycle. The aim of this test is to check if the requirements have been met. This means that if the requirement states that Constitution should return 60% less than it used to - is it now returning 60% less than it used to? If it isn't - its a bug. If it is - its working as intended

And that is the key word. Working As Intended - Intended is determined in black and white in the Requirements.

You guys are all asking for the requirements to change - Now don't get me wrong - ZoS probably are listening to the feedback - but changing requirements part way through a project creates a LOT of risk, a LOT of re-work and a LOT of retesting.
The way Requirement changes are generally done is by creating NEW requirements for the next project - which starts at step 1 again.

TLDR;
It will likely be a while till the feedback you are giving now gets to the PTS - and it will probably NOT be in this patch.

It does NOT mean this testing is pointless - AS LONG AS YOU REPORT ANY BUGS/EXPLOITS YOU FIND. Also the early feedback (as opposed to waiting till live) gives them a head start in the next patch wich probably will take some of the comments on-board.

Except you're flat out wrong.

Yes, glorified bugfixing is a part of the PTS (and pretty much the only part where we are actually heard, though not always).

However:
show previous quotes

This is the official feedback thread for class balance. Specific feedback that the team is looking for includes the following:
In general, what are your thoughts on the class balance in this update?

How long did it take you to run out of resources? What did you do in this case?

Did you change your character/build in any way because of these changes? How so?

This isn't bugfixing, man, this is asking for feedback on the content. Go to the Morrowind Closed Beta, and there are even more official thread asking for feedback on content, experience, opinions etc. Not just asking for "Hey, did you guys run into any bugs while doing content XYZ?"

So yeah, considering that the devs do ask for feedback on specific content and balancing issues that go beyond glorified bugfixing, I don't really buy into your premise.

I mean, I'd be completely ok if devs just came out and said "hey sod you guys, we don't want any feedback regarding our content, just bugfixing, thanks". At least then I'd know where they stood, and I could just pass on wasting my time helping them bugfix for free.

The issue at hand here is that 90 % of the community agrees on a certain direction for the game (not to mention a lot of more specifics on the Morrowind Closed Beta forum that do not pertain to class balancing issues or the sustain issue), and that feedback is continually being ignored in the PTS cycles, just like it was in the past in all the other PTS cycles, which makes this whole process extremely frustrating and ungratifying.

I'm pretty sure I said that they want the feedback - it's just unlikely that changes they decide off the back of it will bi in place before it goes live.

Biro123 · May 2017

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

show previous quotes

Biro123 wrote: »

Many people don't understand the purpose of a test server. I see this in a lot of games.

See I am a software developer. And developing software goes through a process of..:

1. Determine requirements - ie. what do we want to build/change
2. Do the design - ie. How are we going to achieve that - which programs/databases etc. need to change
3. Do the build - ie. changing the code
4. Unit testing - does the code change do as per the design states
5. Systems testing - do all the code changes fit together
6. User/Beta/QA testing - Does the whole thing work as determined by the Requirements (1.)

We are at stage 6. A long way down the development cycle. The aim of this test is to check if the requirements have been met. This means that if the requirement states that Constitution should return 60% less than it used to - is it now returning 60% less than it used to? If it isn't - its a bug. If it is - its working as intended

And that is the key word. Working As Intended - Intended is determined in black and white in the Requirements.

You guys are all asking for the requirements to change - Now don't get me wrong - ZoS probably are listening to the feedback - but changing requirements part way through a project creates a LOT of risk, a LOT of re-work and a LOT of retesting.
The way Requirement changes are generally done is by creating NEW requirements for the next project - which starts at step 1 again.

TLDR;
It will likely be a while till the feedback you are giving now gets to the PTS - and it will probably NOT be in this patch.

It does NOT mean this testing is pointless - AS LONG AS YOU REPORT ANY BUGS/EXPLOITS YOU FIND. Also the early feedback (as opposed to waiting till live) gives them a head start in the next patch wich probably will take some of the comments on-board.

Or the whole development life cycle is broken. Cut it to smaller pieces and verify if everything works out as expected. Do it more "agile" and not like we used to do it decades ago. Blindly following some requirements, which normally change during the development, is pretty stupid. And yet, it is what we see with every PTS, they get a huge amount of complaints with every PTS and the game is getting worse with every PTS, but yes, keep following the same stupid process over and over again.

Furthermore, I doubt that the feedback provided will influence the next patch. I even doubt that anyone has provided such *** up feedback that could have ended in this current patch.

I'm pretty sure we can't tell them what methodologies to use.. True Agile development involves constant, hands-on interaction with the product-owner, and short, 2-week development cycles to produce slices of functionality into a live system to build up bit by bit, take the feedback and feed it into the backlog.
And the thing here - in most businesses, the product owner is(reperesents) the users. They tell the developers hat is needed to support their business. This is very different. I'd hate to see the kind of game that would be collectively created by this community.

Morrowind is using a big-bang release, not an agile release strategy. They may have had sprints internally - building up their alpha servers bit-by-bit - but you can't realistically do that with a beta-test. Before anything like this can be released to the adoring fans, you have to make damn sure it works - and that means a LOT of internal testing of the whole thing beforehand. Changes after that point - especially functional changes can invalidate all that testing. They have only so much time to incorporate what comes from the beta testing - make those changes and do another internal test before release - and they're always gonna prioritise stuff that isn't working.

Sigma957 · May 2017

No harm comes from sharing your thoughts on changes when they are constructive but all these people saying the changes are s*** or I'm quitting when this goes live doesn't help things. I don't really like the changes to repentance for example and have suggested maybe change it yourself and 2 other players get the health and stamina gain with a 5 second cooldown as a sort of compromise. I don't even pretend this will be considered.

Reverb · May 2017

Barring minor changes, what makes it to PTS is what will be going live. I've learned to not even expect reported bugs (sometimes major ones) to be fixed before going live.

The only exception can think of is the nerf to sorc curse. Zeni changed direction on that due to "overwhelming feedback". They didn't care about the feedback on the rest of the classes then, and they don't now.

Darlgon · May 2017

Sigh.

Just making sure you understand. One hundred Beta testers yelling about sustain changes, out of 20,000 testers and the data they collect from all those testers with server tools, that disagrees with your view and reinforces their view of their balance changes are working, means nothing is going to change.

MaxwellC · May 2017

@Carbonised
Yup I feel you mate, I've spoke with ZOS through mail offering statistics for PvP if they could simply port over a setup since the current templates do not have anything of what I have live and my PC character is a Mag DK with like 280 CP lol. My Live Stam DK is almost a General and has a nice setup.
There's a lot of things I've stated why I would like to see it brought to the DKs, I do it each and every PTS (starting from IC launch) and the thing is, none of those changes have ever been made. Heck I asked for them to fix dragonfire scale back in IC (Imperial city PTS) and they ended up nerfing it so it would not reflect meteors; claiming that meteors are a unique ultimate but hey... you can still reflect sorcerer overloads

.

Honestly there is no way to get these changes reverted and that's because they just look at one side and not the over until someone wastes hours of their own time putting in some massive analysis which may or may not get taken seriously. If you're a steamer your voice will be heard because that's something they care about; not what one random on the forum states, no matter how true it is.

Cously · May 2017

I tested PTS, as a DK I have to focus more on tanking and make some adjusments. It isn't as good on live but it's still possible. However it is no longer fun. Resource management is tedious now, just like the grind to get the best gear. They will still get my money because I'm an Elder Scrolls fan, but those who are here for the gameplay, I won't cast a stone if they decide to quit, it's way too frustrating. ESO is an awesome Elder Scrolls title but a mediocre MMO from a PVE point of view. Back to PVP and RP with me.

ZOS_GinaBruno · May 2017

To be fair, there have been changes in each PTS patch, but they aren't the changes you're looking for (sorry, had to get a #MayTheFourth joke in today somewhere). At the risk of regurgitating the same thing we've said before, we do care about your feedback, but keep in mind there's feedback coming from many different sources, some of which everyone here doesn't see (like in-game feedback, for example). Also, we need to take a look at what's best for the entire game and for its future. Your feedback isn't useless - we do read, and we do take everything into consideration.

SorataArisugawa · May 2017

Carbonised wrote: »

Spoiler

Biro123 wrote: »

Many people don't understand the purpose of a test server. I see this in a lot of games.

See I am a software developer. And developing software goes through a process of..:

1. Determine requirements - ie. what do we want to build/change
2. Do the design - ie. How are we going to achieve that - which programs/databases etc. need to change
3. Do the build - ie. changing the code
4. Unit testing - does the code change do as per the design states
5. Systems testing - do all the code changes fit together
6. User/Beta/QA testing - Does the whole thing work as determined by the Requirements (1.)

We are at stage 6. A long way down the development cycle. The aim of this test is to check if the requirements have been met. This means that if the requirement states that Constitution should return 60% less than it used to - is it now returning 60% less than it used to? If it isn't - its a bug. If it is - its working as intended

And that is the key word. Working As Intended - Intended is determined in black and white in the Requirements.

You guys are all asking for the requirements to change - Now don't get me wrong - ZoS probably are listening to the feedback - but changing requirements part way through a project creates a LOT of risk, a LOT of re-work and a LOT of retesting.
The way Requirement changes are generally done is by creating NEW requirements for the next project - which starts at step 1 again.

TLDR;
It will likely be a while till the feedback you are giving now gets to the PTS - and it will probably NOT be in this patch.

It does NOT mean this testing is pointless - AS LONG AS YOU REPORT ANY BUGS/EXPLOITS YOU FIND. Also the early feedback (as opposed to waiting till live) gives them a head start in the next patch wich probably will take some of the comments on-board.

Except you're flat out wrong.

Yes, glorified bugfixing is a part of the PTS (and pretty much the only part where we are actually heard, though not always).

However:
show previous quotes

This is the official feedback thread for class balance. Specific feedback that the team is looking for includes the following:
In general, what are your thoughts on the class balance in this update?

How long did it take you to run out of resources? What did you do in this case?

Did you change your character/build in any way because of these changes? How so?

This isn't bugfixing, man, this is asking for feedback on the content. Go to the Morrowind Closed Beta, and there are even more official thread asking for feedback on content, experience, opinions etc. Not just asking for "Hey, did you guys run into any bugs while doing content XYZ?"

So yeah, considering that the devs do ask for feedback on specific content and balancing issues that go beyond glorified bugfixing, I don't really buy into your premise.

I mean, I'd be completely ok if devs just came out and said "hey sod you guys, we don't want any feedback regarding our content, just bugfixing, thanks". At least then I'd know where they stood, and I could just pass on wasting my time helping them bugfix for free.

Yeah right. Would be a valid comment, if you hadn't decided to start the thread with "sorcs got (just) a 10% nerv, but DK got lots of sustain problems, and that get changed..." Sorcs suffer a lot of the previous changes as well. But nice try to shine unbiased...

Carbonised wrote: »

The issue at hand here is that 90 % of the community agrees on a certain direction for the game (not to mention a lot of more specifics on the Morrowind Closed Beta forum that do not pertain to class balancing issues or the sustain issue), and that feedback is continually being ignored in the PTS cycles, just like it was in the past in all the other PTS cycles, which makes this whole process extremely frustrating and ungratifying.

You don't know what 90% of the community wants. Where did you get the numbers from? Did you ask all of your friends and look some streams? For what it's worth I like the idea of the changes. Maybe the approach is a little bit to much, but getting heavy attacks back in the game is nice. You can do your all-time-weaving, if you specc more in reg, and sacrifice weapon DMG or others. Yeah haevy attacks are back in the game. It doesn't mean, that you are doing nothing else in a fight.

t3hdubzy · May 2017

Uriel_Nocturne · May 2017

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

To be fair, there have been changes in each PTS patch, but they aren't the changes you're looking for (sorry, had to get a #MayTheFourth joke in today somewhere). At the risk of regurgitating the same thing we've said before, we do care about your feedback, but keep in mind there's feedback coming from many different sources, some of which everyone here doesn't see (like in-game feedback, for example). Also, we need to take a look at what's best for the entire game and for its future. Your feedback isn't useless - we do read, and we do take everything into consideration.

Fair points, but the changes you're referencing are minor, cosmetic changes; and the community here, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, game-magazine Forums, Streamers on Twitch and YouTube, etc., are all very unhappy and voicing their well-thought out and numbers-proven concerns over the blanket nerfs you're making to every area of Sustain and Cost Reduction in the game.

But even with the entire internet blowing up with discontent over your proposed changes; all we get is that you're going to steam on ahead regardless of the legions of players who are not happy with these changes in any way?

This is not an "I quit" post. But the changes you guys are powering on with have really and seriously decreased my desire to log in to your game each night.

I usually log in for 2-4 hours every night, which is 14-28 hours per week. Since these changes are steaming ahead and you're blatantly ignoring feedback that doesn't agree with the massive, core-mechanics changes that you're forcing on a player base that doesn't want them, I've only logged in to the Live server for a total of around 4 hours in the last two weeks.

Is that your goal? Because that's what it's done to me, and according to... pretty much everywhere I go in the internet, that's what it's doing to a lot of players as well.

We don't care that you guys at ZOS think these changes are "what's best for the game". We're testing your content, your changes, and WE'RE giving you numbers, experiences, and evidence that proves that your ideas ARE NOT what's "best for the game". In fact, what we're finding is; your proposed changes are highly detrimental to the game.

But as you illustrated so eloquently in your post, you (as an entire company) aren't actually listening, nor do you care.

These PTS servers and Forums are a placebo. There to make us think that our opinions, numbers, videos, and evidence have weight with your developers; when in fact that have no weight at all.

So you tell me, Gina. With these changes destroying three out of five classes and (despite what you guys say about wanting "fast-paced combat") greatly slowing combat and player potency dropping into the gutter, what is there that should tempt me to log-in more than the minuscule four (4) hours a week that I've dropped to since 3.0 arrived her on the PTS?

You're taking three years worth of work, building up characters I love and am very happy playing, and you're flushing it with these changes. Three years building up my characters, just to have them become VASTLY weaker (and nigh unplayable) with the Morrowind patch.

Aside from the pathetic cosmetic changes that do nothing to fix the abortive issues to player strength that these patches are doing, what are you guys doing to actually "listen" to us?

Because with the gaming internet in the state that it's in over your changes; do you think the line of "it may not be what you want, but nerfing your characters into the ground is what we feel is best", do you really think that's going to go over well with the players once this goes live?

Because the Streamers that you value so highly are already spreading the word that these changes are atrocious. And thier fans/followers? They listen, whereas you (as a company) obviously are not.

Kilandros · May 2017

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

To be fair, there have been changes in each PTS patch, but they aren't the changes you're looking for (sorry, had to get a #MayTheFourth joke in today somewhere). At the risk of regurgitating the same thing we've said before, we do care about your feedback, but keep in mind there's feedback coming from many different sources, some of which everyone here doesn't see (like in-game feedback, for example). Also, we need to take a look at what's best for the entire game and for its future. Your feedback isn't useless - we do read, and we do take everything into consideration.

@ZOS_GinaBruno There's been a lot of angst RE: the state of DK, specifically mDK. Last year, when there were similar concerns about the state of Stamina Sorcerer Wrobel did like a mini QA to provide the players with an idea of where he saw the class headed. Any chance we could get something similar on DK? I think some of our stress could be assuaged if we could at least see the direction Development has for this class.

HugeMuffin · May 2017

Group Finder fixes?

Can you guys take a week off of nerfing my toons and fix the group finder?

Rouven · May 2017

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

To be fair, there have been changes in each PTS patch, but they aren't the changes you're looking for (sorry, had to get a #MayTheFourth joke in today somewhere). At the risk of regurgitating the same thing we've said before, we do care about your feedback, but keep in mind there's feedback coming from many different sources, some of which everyone here doesn't see (like in-game feedback, for example). Also, we need to take a look at what's best for the entire game and for its future. Your feedback isn't useless - we do read, and we do take everything into consideration.

Look who shot first.

Gomumon · May 2017

eso_nya wrote: »

They make changes, and state, that the goal is, to make sustain more difficult, so u cant run pure glasscannon anymore.

There is feedback, that u cant run pure glasscannon anymore, as u have to use heavyattacks and/or sustainset and/or drop dmgglyphs for sustain ones.

In my opinion, this is exactly the feedback they expected and wanted to hear.

Alcast already showed that swapping glyphs doesn't do sh*t.

They need some sort of standard. Like:
1. At CP 300, you will be 3/5 as strong as you are at max (75% is ridiculous).
2. At Max, in a 4 man group with tanks and healers doing their job, a max DPS should be able to go all out for 50% of the average vet boss fight.
3. No more than 10% of the boss fight should be heavy attacking in max level group with near perfect synergy (meaning that the DPS should be able to get most of their resources back in 10% of the time).
4. A the average boss fight should take X minutes with said group.

Then scale everything off that. Individually, you'd still be forced to rely on a higher percentage of heavy attacks on live because you would be having to focus on defense and resource management (without healer) as well as damage.

This way, lower levels still have something to achieve, and can trade DPS for sustain, while higher levels are rewarded by being able to feel more powerful by slowly shedding sustain builds for max DPS as they near CP cap. Lower levels would be fully capable of completing content, but would just not be able to do it as fast as a max level group.

t3hdubzy · May 2017

tinbromide wrote: »

Group Finder fixes?

Can you guys take a week off of nerfing my toons and fix the group finder?

Lol ive at least found that a lot of times the group gets formed and as long as no one accepts the next pop up you can all travel back....however when you blue screen at the last boss and get kicked from the group like me last night, you stop doing pve

Dissentinel · May 2017

Kilandros wrote: »

show previous quotes

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

To be fair, there have been changes in each PTS patch, but they aren't the changes you're looking for (sorry, had to get a #MayTheFourth joke in today somewhere). At the risk of regurgitating the same thing we've said before, we do care about your feedback, but keep in mind there's feedback coming from many different sources, some of which everyone here doesn't see (like in-game feedback, for example). Also, we need to take a look at what's best for the entire game and for its future. Your feedback isn't useless - we do read, and we do take everything into consideration.

@ZOS_GinaBruno There's been a lot of angst RE: the state of DK, specifically mDK. Last year, when there were similar concerns about the state of Stamina Sorcerer Wrobel did like a mini QA to provide the players with an idea of where he saw the class headed. Any chance we could get something similar on DK? I think some of our stress could be assuaged if we could at least see the direction Development has for this class.

Or how about the Nightblade? We're virtually unviable in every role in PvE, and not only were we denied buffs with Morrowind, we were actually nerfed. Siphoning Strikes is just about the only thing Nightblades have going for them on live, but that was nerfed yet again (It was nerfed once a year or two ago) in Morrowind. On the PTS, it is better to spend your time and ability slot on something else, because the net resources gained from Siphoning Strikes is now not much more than a heavy attack.

t3hdubzy · May 2017

Kilandros wrote: »

show previous quotes

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

To be fair, there have been changes in each PTS patch, but they aren't the changes you're looking for (sorry, had to get a #MayTheFourth joke in today somewhere). At the risk of regurgitating the same thing we've said before, we do care about your feedback, but keep in mind there's feedback coming from many different sources, some of which everyone here doesn't see (like in-game feedback, for example). Also, we need to take a look at what's best for the entire game and for its future. Your feedback isn't useless - we do read, and we do take everything into consideration.

@ZOS_GinaBruno There's been a lot of angst RE: the state of DK, specifically mDK. Last year, when there were similar concerns about the state of Stamina Sorcerer Wrobel did like a mini QA to provide the players with an idea of where he saw the class headed. Any chance we could get something similar on DK? I think some of our stress could be assuaged if we could at least see the direction Development has for this class.

I agree, with introdu tion of a new class and serious changes to others, itd be great to get an idea from the developer on the pros and cons of each class.

I need to be sold on why magblade is still viable

ZOS_GinaBruno · May 2017

Kilandros wrote: »

show previous quotes

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

To be fair, there have been changes in each PTS patch, but they aren't the changes you're looking for (sorry, had to get a #MayTheFourth joke in today somewhere). At the risk of regurgitating the same thing we've said before, we do care about your feedback, but keep in mind there's feedback coming from many different sources, some of which everyone here doesn't see (like in-game feedback, for example). Also, we need to take a look at what's best for the entire game and for its future. Your feedback isn't useless - we do read, and we do take everything into consideration.

@ZOS_GinaBruno There's been a lot of angst RE: the state of DK, specifically mDK. Last year, when there were similar concerns about the state of Stamina Sorcerer Wrobel did like a mini QA to provide the players with an idea of where he saw the class headed. Any chance we could get something similar on DK? I think some of our stress could be assuaged if we could at least see the direction Development has for this class.

Short answer is DKs likely won't be seeing a ton of changes before we go live; this class is still quite powerful (as it should be being a tank), even after some of the adjustments we've made to other classes and abilities.

tinbromide wrote: »

Group Finder fixes?

Can you guys take a week off of nerfing my toons and fix the group finder?

We've made some fixes on the backend that should've made the Group Finder issues better on the PTS. Have you tried it out there versus what's currently on Live?

STEVIL · May 2017

Repeating i know what some have said but...

PTS is not now, never was intended to be and never will be a vehicle for 11th hour drastic changes in the direction of the river. Those major course shifts were planned and decided way before pts. Anybody thinking the minute fraction of players participating in PTS (or the slightly not as minute fraction who follow the streamers, eso live, forums et al) are ever going to change the course of the river are just not being realistic.

That is not the same as saying your feedback isnt being heard.

Darlon · May 2017

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Short answer is DKs likely won't be seeing a ton of changes before we go live; this class is still quite powerful (as it should be being a tank), even after some of the adjustments we've made to other classes and abilities.

Who decided that all DK's should be tanks ?

HugeMuffin · May 2017

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

show previous quotes

tinbromide wrote: »

Group Finder fixes?

Can you guys take a week off of nerfing my toons and fix the group finder?

We've made some fixes on the backend that should've made the Group Finder issues better on the PTS. Have you tried it out there versus what's currently on Live?

My friend and I tried to use the dungeon finder on pts, got a group disband once we dropped into the dungeon and figured that there weren't any meaningful changes to group finder. I know a sample size of 1 isn't science, but after only seeing the removal of a cool down for AVA groups (3.0.0) and role icons not showing up (3.0.1), we assumed that the core faults with the group finder weren't addressed when we encountered a major usability flaw that existed exactly as it did in live.

Kilandros · May 2017

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

show previous quotes

Kilandros wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

To be fair, there have been changes in each PTS patch, but they aren't the changes you're looking for (sorry, had to get a #MayTheFourth joke in today somewhere). At the risk of regurgitating the same thing we've said before, we do care about your feedback, but keep in mind there's feedback coming from many different sources, some of which everyone here doesn't see (like in-game feedback, for example). Also, we need to take a look at what's best for the entire game and for its future. Your feedback isn't useless - we do read, and we do take everything into consideration.

@ZOS_GinaBruno There's been a lot of angst RE: the state of DK, specifically mDK. Last year, when there were similar concerns about the state of Stamina Sorcerer Wrobel did like a mini QA to provide the players with an idea of where he saw the class headed. Any chance we could get something similar on DK? I think some of our stress could be assuaged if we could at least see the direction Development has for this class.

Short answer is DKs likely won't be seeing a ton of changes before we go live; this class is still quite powerful (as it should be being a tank), even after some of the adjustments we've made to other classes and abilities.
show previous quotes

tinbromide wrote: »

Group Finder fixes?

Can you guys take a week off of nerfing my toons and fix the group finder?

We've made some fixes on the backend that should've made the Group Finder issues better on the PTS. Have you tried it out there versus what's currently on Live?

@ZOS_GinaBruno Thank you for the reply! As someone who mains a non-tank DK I think it would be really helpful to have a Q&A with Development on the class. I am increasingly feeling pigeonholed into the "tank" playstyle which isn't why I initially rolled the class.

Gilvoth · May 2017

STEVIL wrote: »

PTS is not now, never was intended to be and never will be a vehicle for 11th hour drastic changes in the direction of the river. Those major course shifts were planned and decided way before pts. Anybody thinking the minute fraction of players participating in PTS (or the slightly not as minute fraction who follow the streamers, eso live, forums et al) are ever going to change the course of the river are just not being realistic.

That is not the same as saying your feedback isnt being heard.

are you a developer in eso ?

Gomumon · May 2017

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Short answer is DKs likely won't be seeing a ton of changes before we go live; this class is still quite powerful (as it should be being a tank)

@ZOS_GinaBruno I thought the point was for each class to be free of role restrictions? I mean, wasn't this the excuse given behind nerfing the Templar? Seems to me that DKs should make viable DPS as well--which, as people are saying, they're not.