New Jump Points on almost every CP star - read before reassigning your CP

Rinmaethodain · May 2017

If you dont follow PTS subforum, here is a thing, as @Asayre found out (and later other people joined in), starting from Morrowind almost every CP star will use so called "jump points" (before it was limited only to two CP stars). What does it mean? Even if we can distribute 100CP into specific star, it might happen that even if adding 5CP promises us X.X% of increase(decrease) of something, it wont happen because we did not reach next "jump point".

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/340367/impact-of-mage-champion-point-rebalances/p1

Taken from that thread, for a CP star that max out at 15% the jump points are at 0, 4, 7,11,15,19,23,27,32,37,43,49,56,64,75,100 CP's.
This practically means that if you are currently at 4CP in that tree and you want to add more CP in there, if you wont reach next jump point (at 7CP) all the new CP are wasted.
Other example is that if you are at 75CP, all the CP added in there, untill you reach 100CP, do not give you any benefit (beside generic slight increase to max resources). If its a "Reduce damage taken" CP passive, the damage you take will be exactly same at 75CP as at 99CP (despite that in between these points, CP passive tooltip is suggesting that you should notice difference).

Whoever wants to learn more about this, please visit mentioned thread while we go back to the point. And what is the point? Just like with many other things, players are not told about this anywhere. If nobody would discover it players would invest CP, expecting X.X% change in stats (as its promised by CP tooltip) while they are getting nothing.

Despite these jump points being in game, players are still told in CP toltips that adding 1CP will give them increase/decrease to stat while in most extreme cases they would need to add whole 24CP for a change to happen.

The sole existence of "jump points" aside, I personally thing that worst thing about it is that players are not properly informed about it. Why tell us we will get 0.5% increase of something if its not true? Why not make it show real numbers as "next increase at X CP"?

idk · May 2017

Generally devs do not tell the players how combat aspects actually work. While Devs should know about how the CP math works, they generally are not as knowledgeable as many of the theorycrafters and number crunchers such as @Asayre

Often Devs learn the details of how their game works from players like Asayre. It is why Zos brought in a group of players a couple months ago. We have learned Zos had them test with only the CP changes they planned for this update which is very illogical way for Zos to test their system.

My guess is Zos wanted to merely USE the players they invited as scape goats for the additional changes they brought in, to suggest that these changes may have been from their feedback.

I digress, yes, players should read that thread.

GrumpyDuckling · May 2017

Misleading players.

If the "jump point" findings are accurate, then the tooltips are inaccurate, therefore misleading to players.

Nyladreas · May 2017

How sad...

This post should get pinned on top.
.

Izaki · May 2017

I don't think Jump Points were ever intended...

Magdalina · May 2017

Interesting. I wonder if this is intended.

Mojmir · May 2017

Magdalina wrote: »

Interesting. I wonder if this is intended.

If zos denied it,would you believe them?

Mrs_Malaka · May 2017

I am willing to be the majority of ESO's players are NOT theorycrafters and/or "number crunchers", therefore, allowing for a lot of players wondering why they don't feel as powerful even though they have X amount of CP in their constellations. Hmm, just a thought...

Magdalina · May 2017

Mojmir wrote: »

Magdalina wrote: »

Interesting. I wonder if this is intended.

If zos denied it,would you believe them?

I wouldn't rule this out as impossible tbh. If there's one thing I have full faith in in regards to ESO it's Zeni's talent at breaking absolutely random things

If it's intended I can't quite wrap my mind around why that would be. Intentionally misleading tooltips would be a stealth nerf to players believing them but wouldn't really matter for the theory crunchers and everyone following their builds/information. So only thing it'd achieve would be a bigger gap between "good" and "bad" players? Not sure why they'd want that.

D0ntevenL1ft · May 2017

@Asayre has some of the best posts about this game; love seeing information like this and people who can scientifically number crunch to show us how things really are

clocksstoppe · May 2017

And where exactly is your proof that these jump points exist?

Gandrhulf_Harbard · May 2017

IzakiBrotherSs wrote: »

I don't think Jump Points were ever intended...

Well, if you are saying that "jump points" are not deliberte, that would mean the Dev team are wholly incompetent.

If they are deliberate then the Dev team has been lying to the playerbase.

Not a particularly favourable dilemma to be on the horns of.

All The Best

Darlgon · May 2017

I would lean more tword.. that was something found early in Beta. We will see what lands in live after ZoS revamped stuff.

Rinmaethodain · May 2017

clocksstoppe wrote: »

And where exactly is your proof that these jump points exist?

@clocksstoppe logged in to game, and tested it, Assigned CPs into stars and wrote down results finding out at untill they reach certain value there is no effect at all,

essi2 · May 2017

A Zenimax Company misleading people!

Never!

Seriously though, this is *** up.

zaria · May 2017

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

IzakiBrotherSs wrote: »

I don't think Jump Points were ever intended...

Well, if you are saying that "jump points" are not deliberte, that would mean the Dev team are wholly incompetent.

If they are deliberate then the Dev team has been lying to the playerbase.

Not a particularly favourable dilemma to be on the horns of.

All The Best

The note said that the 1-15% bonuses was rounded dowm to integer and giving no bonuses before you jump to the next.
So if you have 4cp you get 1%, 6 also give 1% but 7cp give 2%, 75cp give 14%, so does 99cp, 100cp give 15%

And no it don't make any sense at all outside an small stealth nerf.
More so it will confuse people and it will mostly affect the ones not knowing the random ways the game work.

danno8 · May 2017

So the jump points are only at whole 1% increases basically? The 1.3, 1.6, 1.9 for example (made up) do nothin until you hit 2%?

Lexxypwns · May 2017

More *** to exploit for Pvp

@waffenacht

DeadlyRecluse · May 2017

If it's stated in-game (on the champion point screen) that values are rounded down to the nearest whole number, it seems fine.

If that is NOT stated, then I'd lean towards misleading.

Emma_Overload · May 2017

This is unbelievable, even by the standards that ZOS has already set for themselves since 2014. I can't believe they're going to let something so sloppy make it to the live server!

Easily_Lost · May 2017

So what is the big deal? If you don't like using CP points, don't use them.

Kram8ion · May 2017

If it's true that's f**ked up
Smells like a phase out of cp

SquareSausage · May 2017

Wow, absolutely crazy, cant believe this is the case with ALL CP skills, mental.

Siluen · May 2017

It would definitely need to state something along the lines of "values will be rounded down to the last full percentage point". Or change the interface of the champion points in a way you can see you are saving up to the next full percentage point instead of recieving a 0.X% increment. These jump points are not absolutely awful as long as there is some clarity involved so we can make an informed decision.

Acrolas · May 2017

hagermanj wrote: »

So what is the big deal?

The big deal is that CP shouldn't be rounding numbers at all. If you have 5.9%, you should have 5.9%. Most people would not put another point in because 5.9% is almost 6% and acceptably close to a whole number.

A system that doesn't look at 5.9% and 6.1% and say that both are ~6% is a broken system.

MissBizz · May 2017

So 75 is the new 100?

Rev Rielle · May 2017

Putting CP into that point still moves you towards that 'jump point' as it's called.
The only real issue here is if you don't get to a whole percentage point increment before starting to allocate points into another starsign.
To that end some clarification would be nice in the in-game Help section regarding Champion Point Percentages.

danno8 · May 2017

MissBizz wrote: »

So 75 is the new 100?

For those 15% stars, I doubt many will spend 25 more points in them for a 1% extra increase when you can get a much larger front loaded option elsewhere.

I am actually thinking 56 points at 12% out of 15% is pretty good. 56% input for 80% of a stars total power, giving you 44 points to spend elsewhere (coincidentally 43 points is a jump number).

zaria · May 2017

DeadlyRecluse wrote: »

If it's stated in-game (on the champion point screen) that values are rounded down to the nearest whole number, it seems fine.

If that is NOT stated, then I'd lean towards misleading.

Still its pointless, it has less than 1% impact obviously, a bit more if some pull two stars up to 90% or similar.
I think its to get people to spread the point out a bit more. I found that out myself after understanding how the system works.
an 1% bonus in something marginal is better than an 0.1% good bonus in something strong.
The CP system is pretty confusing as it is, no point making it even harder to understand.

Darlgon · May 2017

Just going to throw in here.. below is what the CP system looked like in December 2015. The second page was the number putting a CP in would change the results.

I am.. kinda failing to see how this is such a big change from then.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bEnMf-3WPBoUorripNx_ltYTP7kerXf9LsYi5YSi-6g/edit?usp=sharing

ADarklore · May 2017

Is this what Rich, I believe it was Rich, was explaining about the new CP on ESO Live; he said that anything after 50 points diminished returns became much more severe. They said they wanted players to start putting points in multiple locations, so they front-loaded the system.