Race Change Tokens - PLEASE DISCUSS/SUPPORT

CleymenZero · February 2019

DISCLAIMER (my assessment of the situation and my opinions):

- I am a fan of the racial passive changes, they bring fun changes and most importantly bring much needed balance

- To adapt to new changes, real world money is required whereas to adapt to a new weapon-trait meta, you need to farm weapons or transmute crystals. I am OK with changes requiring a bit of grind but not with changes inducing someone to pay real-world money. My opinion but if you are OK with paying, I want you as a customer as well.

- The level of satisfaction with the amount of tokens granted is a direct function of the number of characters you have. The more characters, the less likely you are to be happy with the 3 race-change tokens granted

- ZOS did not have to give those tokens, they could've made us pay for ALL our race changes but this isn't about entitlement but about fairness

- They did not have to change racial passives to bring balance either (which cost money to change) and could've brought balance through other means like modification of the way the CP system functions

- As customers, nobody gains anything by shutting down a discussion, I am trying to bring a discussion about compensation for race changes, if you don't need anything, don't use it but shutting the discussion down has 2 negative effects on the customers:
- It makes those that need/want more compensation get nothing and leaves them dissatisfied
- It opens the door to more monetization tactics

- I am an ESO+ subscriber and I purchase Crowns for different needs so I am OK with supporting the game

I have had many discussions about the race changes and its impact and I have to say that I am disappointed to see what happened.

The compensation being what it is, the amount of race-change tokens allotted for someone who has 14 characters is too low and the "sale" they are having is what I predicted: Monetization of the Meta

I put sale in brackets here because I've seen 50% off sales in the past and this meager 20% is, to me, unacceptable if you take into account that these are changes THEY introduced to bring balance to different races but they could've found ways to bring balance that did not have to do with racial passives hence would not require you to spend money.

Yes the term "monetization of the meta" is strong for a change bringing races so close together in terms of DPS but the fact remains that IF those were the passives that were in effect some 8 to 19 months ago when I created my characters, my roster would've been completely different.

And that detail is irritating since I feel that those changes implemented after the fact could cause me to spend money is, I find, dishonest.

I want to ask other users what they think. Without even demanding compensation, do you think the fact that the changes require money is acceptable?

For those unsatisfied, would a more reasonable sale, again considering that they introduced those changes, make it more acceptable?

If so, what would be a reasonable sale?

You obviously know my answer to most of these question but if forced to pay money, I would consider at least 50-66% off to be acceptable. Why not sell token packs? 3k Crowns for 6 tokens. Selling a pack of token for a similar price would say: "We made changes, yes, but we're not going to give you guys everything so I'll cut you a deal to appease you".

I'm at least asking ZOS to meet me halfway.

Sylvermynx · February 2019

I'm not race changing anyone. And I don't have any need for the Adventurer Pack. So for me, it's all a moot point. I have multiple toons of each race - 21 total at last count. I'll be adding 1 more to my main account, three more to my second account. They'll be spread over the current available races.

I don't expect ZOS is going to "meet" you halfway, but good luck with it.

VexingArcanist · February 2019

CleymenZero wrote: »

The compensation being what it is, the amount of race-change tokens allotted for someone who has 14 characters is too low

I have 15 characters. I do NOT need to change 15 character's races. Why do you need to change 14? This smacks of entitlement "while you are giving out free change tokens I want enough for my entire account cause...I WANT THEM!"

kmcaj · February 2019

I want to change my only character due to changes but I can't change to any of the options I would play. Not starting over with so much time already invested.

bjsaustrwb17_ESO · February 2019

I've always been of the opinion (in any game), that if you build based on the meta, then you should expect the meta to change over time. Expecting what was 'best' 8-19 months ago to stay 'best' forever would have been naive. Part of the risk of building per the meta is that when it changes you either need to change with it, or accept it.

I don't think changing the meta by way of changing racial passives is in any way dishonest.

I don't think giving 3 free race tokens and offering a discount beyond that is a case of over monetisation.

Taleof2Cities · February 2019

CleymenZero wrote: »

I want to ask other users what they think. Without even demanding compensation, do you think the fact that the changes require money is acceptable?

Literally NO ONE is required to pay real money for race tokens or Any Race Any Alliance. With crown gifting you can buy them with in-game gold.

One of the reasons why all of this complaining in the forums baffles me ...

Itzmichi · February 2019

Selling skyreach runs 1 potato / run.

VaranisArano · February 2019

I appreciate that ZOS listened and added 2 more free race changes.

I appreciate that ZOS listened and added Name Change tokens. That's fantastic for those of us who gave our characters Lore-friendly names.

I'm sure that both of those decisions played into why the discount is only 20%.

On the other hand, for anyone who wants to race change more than 3 characters due to the magnitude of the changes to their builds, I can see where 20% is a disappointing discount. Especially since if you want to have a lore-friendly name, you need the more expensive Race & Name Change token.

Bottom line, I don't think ZOS was going to please ALL players AND their accountants.

redspecter23 · February 2019

bjsaustrwb17_ESO wrote: »

I don't think giving 3 free race tokens and offering a discount beyond that is a case of over monetisation.

Look at it from the opposite side. Lets say hypothetically that ZOS allowed for one change per character instead of a 3 character token system. What would they stand to lose? They would gain some goodwill with the community and the only cost to them is the lost revenue from the race change tokens they currently have on sale.

To me, that reads as monetization. They could have very easily done one per character, but chose not to. We now have a situation where at least some players will go to the store to get more tokens to change extra characters. That's the very definition of monetization. Whether or not someone considers it overmonetization I suppose is subjective, but the intent is quite clear that they wanted to make money off of this change.

max_only · February 2019

You have a reasonable presentation, good luck getting a reasonable answer. It’s possible someone could come in here and discuss the ins and outs without resulting to judgemental labels, but you’ve already got one of “those”. “Entitlement” is just a buzzword people use to shut out conversation.

To your point, on one hand it doesn’t bother me, one or none would have been just as well.

Alas I have been crippled with the imagination of how other people are affected by circumstances that don’t bother me (it’s called empathy). I get it. Since I have a sense of “fairness” on the playground I would have let the race changing be free for at least a week, followed by a 50% sale for the rest of the month and rolled ARAA(Any Race Any Alliance) into the subscription if not the base game. (Btw I also paid full price for all of these and more)

On the other hand, Zos has shareholders to report to and their satisfaction is paramount if the lights are going to stay on and the playground remains open. To that end I “get” why ARAA has remained separate, however it doesn’t mean that the tokens couldn’t have gone on a further sale.

On the last hand

3 is better than none and Zos did listen to the players on this. They absolutely did listen.

Edit! I stand corrected you got a few reasonable responses! Amazing!

thedude33 · February 2019

Nope, can't support. Three is more than enough. It's three more than I will need.

CleymenZero · February 2019

Sylvermynx wrote: »

I'm not race changing anyone. And I don't have any need for the Adventurer Pack. So for me, it's all a moot point. I have multiple toons of each race - 21 total at last count. I'll be adding 1 more to my main account, three more to my second account. They'll be spread over the current available races.

I don't expect ZOS is going to "meet" you halfway, but good luck with it.

That's fine.

2 accounts with 21 characters... That's not realistic for most players. I already think I spend too much time on the game and I have 14 and don't plan to be active on more than 1 account. Do you also sub on both accounts?

You don't expect ZOS to meet anyone halfway but did you expect them to give 3 tokens? If not, that doesn't show a very good track record... It's not about what you expect but what is reasonnable. You saying that you're OK with it just makes you a good customer.

CleymenZero · February 2019

VexingArcanist wrote: »

CleymenZero wrote: »

The compensation being what it is, the amount of race-change tokens allotted for someone who has 14 characters is too low

I have 15 characters. I do NOT need to change 15 character's races. Why do you need to change 14? This smacks of entitlement "while you are giving out free change tokens I want enough for my entire account cause...I WANT THEM!"

You didn't read anything lol. There's even a part where I suggest better promotions on race change tokens...

Where did it say that I wanted to change 14 characters. I'm saying 3 out of 14 is unreasonable.

Sometimes I wonder why I even interact with people on the internet. If it's not about a cool new costume, people get enraged and scream "ENTITLEMENT"!!!!!!!!!!!!

AlienatedGoat · February 2019

Honestly I was ok with the 3 tokens until they stuck with keeping Orc the defacto stam DPS meta race and Nord the defacto tank meta race.

I'll need to race change at least 8 characters to keep them competitive. That's kind of crappy since they were all competitive pre-patch.

CleymenZero · February 2019

bjsaustrwb17_ESO wrote: »

I've always been of the opinion (in any game), that if you build based on the meta, then you should expect the meta to change over time. Expecting what was 'best' 8-19 months ago to stay 'best' forever would have been naive. Part of the risk of building per the meta is that when it changes you either need to change with it, or accept it.

I don't think changing the meta by way of changing racial passives is in any way dishonest.

I don't think giving 3 free race tokens and offering a discount beyond that is a case of over monetisation.

Thank you for your good point. It is an opinion that differs from mine but I see no bigotry but only an honest assessment.

Your point has value if you refuse to play meta but what is the point of having anything better than anything else then? If you see something that is better, you will not try to attain it? Playing meta is and will always be an important part of gaming.

Start watching from 10:14 seconds:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjjfFN7b8VE

CleymenZero · February 2019

Taleof2Cities wrote: »

CleymenZero wrote: »

I want to ask other users what they think. Without even demanding compensation, do you think the fact that the changes require money is acceptable?

Literally NO ONE is required to pay real money for race tokens or Any Race Any Alliance. With crown gifting you can buy them with in-game gold.

One of the reasons why all of this complaining in the forums baffles me ...

True, there is Crown gifting, I didn't see that as an option. You could have said it in a more constructive way but that's you so wtv.

Now what is the going rate per Crowns these days? 200-300 gold? It will increase by a significant amount now that a bunch of players are going to use it to get tokens. At 3k Crowns a token that's anywhere from 600k-900k gold.

The easiest way to get it if you run solo would be through writs, on 14 toons I get about 50k+ gold per day so that's 12 to 18 days of writs. At an hour and something of doing this, that's 12 to 18 hours of griding per token. Not too bad. But then you're spending a lot of game time doing writs and that will take your enjoyment of the game away...

Fair enough. You could work on your communication skills but that's fair.

CleymenZero · February 2019

max_only wrote: »

You have a reasonable presentation, good luck getting a reasonable answer. It’s possible someone could come in here and discuss the ins and outs without resulting to judgemental labels, but you’ve already got one of “those”. “Entitlement” is just a buzzword people use to shut out conversation.

To your point, on one hand it doesn’t bother me, one or none would have been just as well.

Alas I have been crippled with the imagination of how other people are affected by circumstances that don’t bother me (it’s called empathy). I get it. Since I have a sense of “fairness” on the playground I would have let the race changing be free for at least a week, followed by a 50% sale for the rest of the month and rolled ARAA(Any Race Any Alliance) into the subscription if not the base game. (Btw I also paid full price for all of these and more)

On the other hand, Zos has shareholders to report to and their satisfaction is paramount if the lights are going to stay on and the playground remains open. To that end I “get” why ARAA has remained separate, however it doesn’t mean that the tokens couldn’t have gone on a further sale.

On the last hand 3 is better than none and Zos did listen to the players on this. They absolutely did listen.

Edit! I stand corrected you got a few reasonable responses! Amazing!

I'm surprised as well. Supportive or not, your post was of great quality. Thank you.

CleymenZero · February 2019

redspecter23 wrote: »

bjsaustrwb17_ESO wrote: »

I don't think giving 3 free race tokens and offering a discount beyond that is a case of over monetisation.

Look at it from the opposite side. Lets say hypothetically that ZOS allowed for one change per character instead of a 3 character token system. What would they stand to lose? They would gain some goodwill with the community and the only cost to them is the lost revenue from the race change tokens they currently have on sale.

To me, that reads as monetization. They could have very easily done one per character, but chose not to. We now have a situation where at least some players will go to the store to get more tokens to change extra characters. That's the very definition of monetization. Whether or not someone considers it overmonetization I suppose is subjective, but the intent is quite clear that they wanted to make money off of this change.

Great feedback.

To add more context, I never mentioned that it was over-monetization but that monetizing the changes was, in my opinion, dishonest.

You captured well the nuance those 2 and made it clearer. Thanks.

CleymenZero · February 2019

AlienatedGoat wrote: »

Honestly I was ok with the 3 tokens until they stuck with keeping Orc the defacto stam DPS meta race and Nord the defacto tank meta race.

I'll need to race change at least 8 characters to keep them competitive. That's kind of crappy since they were all competitive pre-patch.

I want to change less than 8 but you get my point. It is simply not reasonable based on the scope of the changes.

I don't think the person who said they had 21 characters has anything close to competitive. Those toons could do writs or stay parked all year for all we know. On the other hand, I chose which DPS I want to bring when doing trials that don't force 8 magblades...

Thanks for the support.

r34lian · February 2019

I don't understand why people follow meta so religiously in this game as if this has esport or something at the end of the day you're only doing single player game content but in group and pvp is lul in this game

moses1763 · February 2019

meta chasing is fun in the beginning until it becomes tedious then after a while you just can't to it anymore...

I changed three and the others outta twelve with #13 inbound soon will have to adapt to the changes as is since the changes to them can be fixed with a lil gear and cp fixin.

Ri_Khan · February 2019

They should've given everyone the option to change all of their characters races + names once, with free or discounted respec's for a week as well. They have some serious gall putting those tokens on sale.

I'm not sure what you'd call this but some of these terms seem fitting.

CleymenZero · February 2019

Soul19reaper wrote: »

I don't understand why people follow meta so religiously in this game as if this has esport or something at the end of the day you're only doing single player game content but in group and pvp is lul in this game

I don't even see it necessarily as meta chasing. In principle, I made a choice for each of my characters based on the roles. My choices would've been different if the passives were and if money or grinding my love of the game away to exchange gold for Crowns wasn't involved, I wouldn't say a word.

I have a few million gold that I've accumulated over the months I've played and potentially seeing half of it go away because of a change in the passives, if I want to be perfectly confortable with my characters' races, is an unnecessary expense created by the developers. It wasn't needed to achieve balance. They could've done perks that activated through CP that would've been perfectly fine.

Yes you can't please everyone but you shouldn't upset a portion of your player base, some of the the higher-tiered PVE portion from what I've seen through the different threads created on the subject, to bring some sort of balance where the ones that are completely satisfied aren't meta-chasers.

You see the irony in this? The non-meta-chasers don't care about racial passives. It doesn't affect them. They're not pulling 45-50k single target DPS on a 6M dummy so they essentially don't care about balance.

The end-game pve'er (yes I know it's not all of them that are upset, some still don't care) are the ones who care about balance. They're the ones who never picked Orc for their stamDPS and essentially the ones targeted by the changes. But these changes will make them race-change because they chose the best stamDPS in the first place, ZOS changed racial passives to make Orc more attractive but essentially made them the best and the meta-chasers WILL race-change. Am I clear enough? Do you see the issue?

CleymenZero · February 2019

moses1763 wrote: »

meta chasing is fun in the beginning until it becomes tedious then after a while you just can't to it anymore...

I changed three and the others outta twelve with #13 inbound soon will have to adapt to the changes as is since the changes to them can be fixed with a lil gear and cp fixin.

My point right below your comment might interest you. The TLDR is that, in principle, it doesn't have to be about metachasing but about having made choices based on some information and that being turned on its head. The fact that money or large amounts of gold are required to adapt is what irks me.

Again on metachasing, I made a point about the fact that the ones that are satisfied are for the most part not "competitive" players.

So the balance changes targeted the competitive players, the ones more likely to race-change to adapt and that is what annoys me. They made the changes for the portion of the player base that is more likely to be unsatisfied with the process required to change. So you have the support of the masses but not the support of the ones that are most affected by the changes. Is it worth it?

JKorr · February 2019

CleymenZero wrote: »

bjsaustrwb17_ESO wrote: »

I've always been of the opinion (in any game), that if you build based on the meta, then you should expect the meta to change over time. Expecting what was 'best' 8-19 months ago to stay 'best' forever would have been naive. Part of the risk of building per the meta is that when it changes you either need to change with it, or accept it.

I don't think changing the meta by way of changing racial passives is in any way dishonest.

I don't think giving 3 free race tokens and offering a discount beyond that is a case of over monetisation.

Thank you for your good point. It is an opinion that differs from mine but I see no bigotry but only an honest assessment.

Your point has value if you refuse to play meta but what is the point of having anything better than anything else then? If you see something that is better, you will not try to attain it? Playing meta is and will always be an important part of gaming.

Start watching from 10:14 seconds:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjjfFN7b8VE

For some players, perhaps. For the non-competitive, I-don't-care-if-you-can-kill-my-character-by-twitching-a pinkie-finger, playing for fun, enjoyment, game world, story players? um...what is a "meta" supposed to be, anyway? Don't care about leaderboards, will never manage to set records for trials, avoid pvp and battlegrounds like the plague.... Don't need the toxic my character can kill yours l2p git gud noob mindset, so..... If I'm enjoying playing the character, then it works, and its all good. I'll never use the race change tokens, for me they are totally pointless.

Full roster of characters currently; will make a new character to see what the new option for necromancer is like. I'll pick a race according to what will fit the character I want to make. Still won't care about the meta.

barney2525 · February 2019

I had to force myself to read it all. And after I waded through I came to the realization - Lots of people have No Idea How Good They Have It Here.

I suffered through 4 years of Archeage before finally calling it quits. You are making One very huge mistake.

The Race tokens are Not "compensation". To make that statement that these tokens are compensation is blatantly untrue.

Compensation is what you receive When you Can't play the game. The servers go down for an extended period of time (we're talking days, not hours) and the player can Not access the game. Once it is fixed, based on the length of time lost, players receive compensations.

This is a change. And I would like to point out, despite the claims of falling skies, the change is Not that major. ( OOOOh, you can only do 4850 damage now instead of 5000 ). There is No reason for Any compensation for simply making a few changes.

This is a Gift. (Granted, the gift still works Only within the confines of your specific game package. If you haven't paid for Imperials, you won't be able to race change into one. If you haven't paid for Any Alliance, whatever Alliance the character is will limit your choices as to what race you can switch to.) Zos understood that some people would feel their characters have been horribly abused by the changes, and so they offer you 3 free race changes.

This is Not "compensation". It's a gift. It's out of generosity.

Take it. Say thank you. Go play the game.

Uryel · February 2019

CleymenZero wrote: »

- I am a fan of the racial passive changes, they bring fun changes and most importantly bring much needed balance

And I am not. Where you see balance, I see watering down the flavour of each race, reducing the spots they would shine to make them all alot more "Meh, that will do, I guess".

Also, that "needed balance" might have been needed in PvP, I wouldn't know, but I really don't see it bring anything to the table in PvE. The worst of the worst being the Bosmers now ripped forcefully of their stealth bonus. People had accounted for it when creating their characters, and now 5 years worth of character tuning, 3 decades of lore and 5 previous games in the series are down the drain because of that supposed need for "balance".

Because whiners gonna whine and gankers gonna gank, snipers are apparently a problem and the only way they could be dealt with was by taking stealth away from a race... Expect gankers to be come Khajiits, whiners to start whining in a week or two when the gankers will have found new ways to one-shot everyone, and then we'll see what new nerf will damage us PvE players because of sore losers in a war that doesn't even concern us at all.

CleymenZero wrote: »

- The level of satisfaction with the amount of tokens granted is a direct function of the number of characters you have. The more characters, the less likely you are to be happy with the 3 race-change tokens granted

No. The level of satisfaction, or lack thereof, is directly proportional to how much you favorite character / gameplay is being impacted or removed from the game through this changes, ad how much you wanted to change race.

If you're a PvP player craving for "balance", then you're probably good. If you're high end content PvE raider, then I have no idea how you feel, but chances are good you won't be TOO mad. Generally speaking those guys don't have a zillion super optimised characters, so a small number of race change tokens should be enough.

Now, if you're a rather casual player, not doing PvP or high end content, but enjoying questing and overland stuff... What good does it do that your Altmer now regenerates it lower ressource pool ? How is your magicka based Dragon Knight Dunmerthat you created especially because there would be a fire damage bonus any better ? How is your sneak thief Bosmer any more playable with his "amazing" ability to detect stealthy enemies that don't even exist in the game at all ?

Most of those changes were made for PvP, and have a meaningful impact on non-PvP user, and most of them not in a good way. The worst of all being the Bosmers losing stealth, of course.

Race change is only fun if you WANT to change race. Not if you must to remain competitive (but chances are good that people who care mostly about being competitive don't care much what their character look like), and certainly not if you have to chose between keeping your gameplay or keeping your character's identity.

For all I care, ZOS could have given me 3 times the numbers of characters on my account in tokens and a bonus 10 000 crowns, I'd still be crossed. Removing stealth from the Bosmers is against the lore, against everything Bosmer players have been working on for the past 5 years, and replacing it with the most useless passive ever, stealth detection, that has no use in PvE since there are no stealthed enemies, is ludicrous.

But hey, at least you're right, they didn't have to give those tokens. They could have simply weathered the full anger of their customers and adapted to the loss of income from all the PvP crowd that would have ragequitted.

Facefister · February 2019

I wouldn't use them because there might be an adjusting in near future.

kmcaj · February 2019

they don't do what the name implies unless you buy otherwise useless cash grab upgrades

CleymenZero · February 2019

JKorr wrote: »

CleymenZero wrote: »

bjsaustrwb17_ESO wrote: »

I've always been of the opinion (in any game), that if you build based on the meta, then you should expect the meta to change over time. Expecting what was 'best' 8-19 months ago to stay 'best' forever would have been naive. Part of the risk of building per the meta is that when it changes you either need to change with it, or accept it.

I don't think changing the meta by way of changing racial passives is in any way dishonest.

I don't think giving 3 free race tokens and offering a discount beyond that is a case of over monetisation.

Thank you for your good point. It is an opinion that differs from mine but I see no bigotry but only an honest assessment.

Your point has value if you refuse to play meta but what is the point of having anything better than anything else then? If you see something that is better, you will not try to attain it? Playing meta is and will always be an important part of gaming.

Start watching from 10:14 seconds:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjjfFN7b8VE

For some players, perhaps. For the non-competitive, I-don't-care-if-you-can-kill-my-character-by-twitching-a pinkie-finger, playing for fun, enjoyment, game world, story players? um...what is a "meta" supposed to be, anyway? Don't care about leaderboards, will never manage to set records for trials, avoid pvp and battlegrounds like the plague.... Don't need the toxic my character can kill yours l2p git gud noob mindset, so..... If I'm enjoying playing the character, then it works, and its all good. I'll never use the race change tokens, for me they are totally pointless.

Full roster of characters currently; will make a new character to see what the new option for necromancer is like. I'll pick a race according to what will fit the character I want to make. Still won't care about the meta.

You fit my observation perfectly and I've made a point about it one or 2 posts up.

The ones telling me the meta chasers are silly are the ones that don't care about performance and aren't the ones affected by racial passives in the first place. You have no support or empathy for players like me because you probably won't ever see the difference passives make if you're not pushing your DPS.

For you, you could play a Nord Sorc that looks like Shalidor because the loss of DPS would never affect you. You WOULD do more DPS if you made a toon that looked like Vanus Galerion or Manimarco but you want to play a Nord. That's fine.

I'm fine with you playing like you do, you probably enjoy the game more than me this way but I couldn't enjoy the game like you do anyways so that's what I go for.

CleymenZero · February 2019

barney2525 wrote: »

I had to force myself to read it all. And after I waded through I came to the realization - Lots of people have No Idea How Good They Have It Here.

I suffered through 4 years of Archeage before finally calling it quits. You are making One very huge mistake.

The Race tokens are Not "compensation". To make that statement that these tokens are compensation is blatantly untrue.

Compensation is what you receive When you Can't play the game. The servers go down for an extended period of time (we're talking days, not hours) and the player can Not access the game. Once it is fixed, based on the length of time lost, players receive compensations.

This is a change. And I would like to point out, despite the claims of falling skies, the change is Not that major. ( OOOOh, you can only do 4850 damage now instead of 5000 ). There is No reason for Any compensation for simply making a few changes.

This is a Gift. (Granted, the gift still works Only within the confines of your specific game package. If you haven't paid for Imperials, you won't be able to race change into one. If you haven't paid for Any Alliance, whatever Alliance the character is will limit your choices as to what race you can switch to.) Zos understood that some people would feel their characters have been horribly abused by the changes, and so they offer you 3 free race changes.

This is Not "compensation". It's a gift. It's out of generosity.

Take it. Say thank you. Go play the game.

You focused a lot on the word compensation then you acquiesce that ZOS understood that some players would feel that their characters were "abused".

Point is, I when meta switched from Nirn/Infused to double infused, I transmuted, if I didn't have enough for all the gear I had, I grinded the crystals. Now mets switched to nirn/sharp or sharp/sharp for stam and I have to do this all over again but I don't mind.

The changes having a monetization component to it is a problem. It's a matter of ethics, of principle. To me it's a potential slippery slope but most people only think about what's immediate. You don't think anything of it now but another change in the future requires you to pay to adapt and, you'll be the one crying.

The conversation is a but selfish right now. I've stated that as customers you stand to gain nothing by opposing it and potentially lose in the future whereas, if you support you either gain nothing because you won't use it or gain something you could use.

One of the issues driving the opposition is the fact that the ones not supporting this are the ones that won't ever be able to see the difference in passives because they don't have either the skills or the desire to push their DPS.

Also your point about being fine with what is happening because you've seen worse is very silly. Here is a gross exaggeration: "I'm fine with annual murder rate being at 7% in my current city because it used to be 12% in the other place I lived". I don't see how an objectively bad or questionable situation is fine because you've seen worse. I really can't see how that works.

Without even considering the meta it's about the fact that players made choices for races and that the choices would've been different st this point.