Kiralyn2000 wrote: »

Perhaps their enjoyment of a class isn't based on "currently most powerful"?

Of which the actual discrepancy in power between them is hardly as extreme as forum and reddit communties would have you believe.

coo

DocFrost72 wrote: »

rustic_potato wrote: »

generalmyrick wrote: »

rustic_potato wrote: »

This is something that has intrigued me for a while. ZOS balancing of the game seems to be cyclical where one particular class gets uberbuffed and performs significantly better than other classes. I typically figure out which class performs best for a patch based on my PTS testing and main that class for the period of that patch for both PVE and PVP.

For example in PVE I used to main a magplar from Thieves guild to Homestead. mSorcs became uber strong in Homestead and I switched to those. In Morrowind it became clear that mNB would be the best performing magika class after PTS testing and have enjoyed playing the class since then.

However I see players who continue to play classes that are underpowered and clearly not the best for that patch and then complain a lot on the forums. I don't really understand why people stick to these classes. Wouldn't the game be more fun if you have a variety of options to choose from and choose the best of those?

can you be sure that your testing applies to every possible situation? (real question, not baiting or whatever the young people do.)

My testing applies to only my play style. For PVE DD my requirements are: has to be magika, has to be able to run vMA is less than 40 mins and do high DPS. I choose which ever class meets those requirements consistently. I could do more DPS if I play stam but that is not my play style.

I think you inadvertently answered your original question

Well part of my question is that why continue to play on a class when it doesn't meet your requirements? I guess attachment to a character is the primary reason from what i can infer from this discussion.

The forums are filled with complaints about how people find that they are not having fun because their class cant do certain things while other classes can do it. Why not play those other classes instead?

rustic_potato wrote: »

This is something that has intrigued me for a while. ZOS balancing of the game seems to be cyclical where one particular class gets uberbuffed and performs significantly better than other classes. I typically figure out which class performs best for a patch based on my PTS testing and main that class for the period of that patch for both PVE and PVP.

For example in PVE I used to main a magplar from Thieves guild to Homestead. mSorcs became uber strong in Homestead and I switched to those. In Morrowind it became clear that mNB would be the best performing magika class after PTS testing and have enjoyed playing the class since then.

However I see players who continue to play classes that are underpowered and clearly not the best for that patch and then complain a lot on the forums. I don't really understand why people stick to these classes. Wouldn't the game be more fun if you have a variety of options to choose from and choose the best of those?

I play one character really. I have three alts for fun but that's all they for. I have one toon, and will weather the storm. In addition prefer to run more niche setups that doing what everyone does.

Because some skills look cool.

Because it suits well a character concept the player has in mind.

Because it offers challenge.

Because a dozen identical characters are a boring and therefore wrong way to play. (Yes, I know it's not how BATW is supposed to be used.)

Because it offers a welcome and refreshing change in gameplay.

Because one likes to experiment new gear/skill combinations.

Because one just likes to try everything the game has to offer.

Because the underpowered of today might always become the new meta when the next update comes, and vice versa.

Because who needs to have the best DPS when one plays a crafter/hunter-gatherer/interior architect?

Simply because one finds a class fun to play, and that fun is what a game is ultimately supposed to be about.

I mostly PvE and have mained a stamplar for about 6 months. It's not the hardest hitting stam DPS but they are desired, I play it well (relative to the people I play with) and I enjoy it. Though admittedly this thread isn't aimed at me, if stamplar became unwanted in trials I'd find something else to play, but that may or may not be the top DPS spec.

rustic_potato wrote: »

This is something that has intrigued me for a while. ZOS balancing of the game seems to be cyclical where one particular class gets uberbuffed and performs significantly better than other classes. I typically figure out which class performs best for a patch based on my PTS testing and main that class for the period of that patch for both PVE and PVP.

For example in PVE I used to main a magplar from Thieves guild to Homestead. mSorcs became uber strong in Homestead and I switched to those. In Morrowind it became clear that mNB would be the best performing magika class after PTS testing and have enjoyed playing the class since then.

However I see players who continue to play classes that are underpowered and clearly not the best for that patch and then complain a lot on the forums. I don't really understand why people stick to these classes. Wouldn't the game be more fun if you have a variety of options to choose from and choose the best of those?

Wouldn't it be great if ZOS actually balanced their game and we wouldn't have to do this?

I think allot of it has to do with ultimately what someone's personal goals are. This isn't necessarily prevalent in forum threads because most people don't feel that ZoS (or anyone) will listen if they simply say, "My class is cool so don't nerf it!" So they tend to respond with numbers and comparisons. So if someone likes a class and how it plays, and they want it to perform better, they will gripe.

If people are happy with a class, they won't gripe on the forums. It's the nature of forums. But griping doesn't mean they don't enjoy the class...It just means that they want the class to do better.

If you want to compare it to sports, it's like supporting a team that doesn't always get into the pro series. You may gripe about certain players, or strategies they employ, or various other things you want to change. But it doesn't mean that you suddenly drop them for the next team that actually does perform. I'm a supporter of my local team, but when I watch the game, it's my local team. I like them. I want them to get better. doesn't mean that I drop them at the shake of a hat.

Now, I don't say this to offend, but only to draw an example: your opinion is what I would often refer to as "Flavor of the Month" playstyle. you play what's top (or what's perceived as top) to gain the most advantage. the class is not as important as the perceived benefits of said class. This changes often, as frequent as Developers make changes to the class, hence the "month" aspect. a FotM player could easily play a totally different toon a month later depending on what is perceived as the "best" at that time.

The FotM player isn't really connected to any class, while the "Fan" player is. It's as simply as that. you can't take forum threads into consideration, because unfortunately whether or not it is started by a Fan or FotM player, most threads devolve into numbers battles. The key here is to understand that each playstyle isn't necessarily more important then the other. unfortunately some people forget that.

IMHO, it's cheesy as hell to play the 'best class' because it's the best...

IMHO, it's no different than playing NBA2K and choosing the Warriors every single time...


I always play my favorite class; screw playing a cheesy Stamblade because it's so powerful (when played correctly of course)...

I'm going to play my favorite class and make it work no matter what...

............"underpowered" for what?

Any class - repeat any class - can comfortably do vet HM dungeons.

Any of them can be set up to do vMA, although of course with differing degrees of comfort.

Any of them can do the "base" trial content, particularly if you are in a decent guild (and one that does not enforce strict party construction rules).

So either the OP needs to really narrow the scope - "why would anyone play an underpowered class in this high-end content under these restrictions" - or accept that most of the game does not actually require, err, well, anything assuming you can pull 20k+ and have a decent utility setup. To wit, my petsorc - magicka petsorc at that - is an Imperial Werewolf (who never transforms, obviously). For reasons that go back a couple of years, but there you are. They can still do pretty much all that I would do in this game up to and including vet HM and vMA, and are pretty bloody effective at what they do, even as I know I can never hit the top tier benchmarks for the class (since race alone is something like 5%-10% of top-level DPS depending on whom one asks).

If I enjoy a class and how it plays - and it were to get nerfed into the ground and felt unplayable, I would not reward the game by changing classes - I'd change games.