RighteousBacon wrote: »

First of all I’m mainly a PvP player, but I’ve heard all the PvE players complaining about the nerfs made specifically for PvP reasons and I understand the struggle. That’s why I’m bringing up this topic.

What reason does ZOS have for not balancing these two parts of the game separately? What opstacles lie ahead? What is keeping them from doing this? I suppose it could just be laziness but what other excuses could be made?

It's not laziness it is too hard to say in non pvp areas a move does xyz and in pvp areas it does abc. If one part of the move breaks it would mess up a lot of balance.

The only thing they can do is have pve players keep their skills through level up like we have now, but make it so pvp moves become available in support/assault skill line.

If they did that then they could Nerf the pvp section or Nerf the pve section when they need to, bit again that is a lot of coding tbh.

1. Give skill 2 tooltips : pve and pvp.
2. Battle spirit activate tooltip 2 (pvp) at skill, without spirit works first pve tooltip.
3. Balance it separately.
4. Profit?
Looks like not, because zos too lazy to make this system.

RighteousBacon wrote: »

First of all I’m mainly a PvP player, but I’ve heard all the PvE players complaining about the nerfs made specifically for PvP reasons and I understand the struggle. That’s why I’m bringing up this topic.

What reason does ZOS have for not balancing these two parts of the game separately? What opstacles lie ahead? What is keeping them from doing this? I suppose it could just be laziness but what other excuses could be made?

It has no reasons other than their own arrogance and refusal to acknowledge the reality that no game has ever successfully balanced PVE and PVP as a single entity. There is no obstacle to them implementing a dressing room so that we can have distinct PVE and PVP setups, which we would swap between with one click at no cost, so that we could optimise each mode as best we can whilst they develop each mode as best they can. No obstacle other than themselves. It should have been done five years ago and they know it.

VaranisArano wrote: »

ZOS doesnt want to separate development for PVP and PVE, preferring to encourage players to play both.

For one, ESO would suffer if it tried to compete with dedicated PVP games on its own. Likewise, it's not as good of an RPG as the single player TES games.

Second, PVP and PVE players have different development desires, and if you separate them, you have to satisfy both groups separately. PVP will want new modes. PVE will want new content. ZOS will have to provide both at the same time instead of staggered like they do now, or risk losing interest.

Finally, separation won't solve the issue of PVE nerfs. ZOS often changes things to create horizontal progression - its a cheap way to keep things fresh when you've beaten all the boss fights a dozen times. The Devs would continue to change PVE, nerfing and buffing various thinga, just to keep players from getting bored.

This...has nothing to do with balancing skills separately though. Making skills behave differently depending on PvE or PvP wouldn't have any affect on the game's actual content at all. It's not like making Skill A do something different in PvP than it does in PvE is going to suddenly remove any specific type of content, be it questing, RP, PvP stuff, trials, etc. Why would PvPers want or need new modes simply because certain skills operate differently in dungeons/overworld stuff than in Cyrodiil/BG? Why would PvE want more content? This is stuff people are already asking for, it has nothing to do with separating PvE and PvP.

And there are a lot of nerfs that seem to happen because something is performing too well in either PvE or PvP. You cannot truly balance skills around two completely different modes of gameplay. Something that's fine against mobs in a dungeon might be too powerful against actual human players, and thus it gets nerfed and loses some of its use in PvE.

VaranisArano wrote: »

ZOS doesnt want to separate development for PVP and PVE, preferring to encourage players to play both.

For one, ESO would suffer if it tried to compete with dedicated PVP games on its own. Likewise, it's not as good of an RPG as the single player TES games.

Second, PVP and PVE players have different development desires, and if you separate them, you have to satisfy both groups separately. PVP will want new modes. PVE will want new content. ZOS will have to provide both at the same time instead of staggered like they do now, or risk losing interest.

Finally, separation won't solve the issue of PVE nerfs. ZOS often changes things to create horizontal progression - its a cheap way to keep things fresh when you've beaten all the boss fights a dozen times. The Devs would continue to change PVE, nerfing and buffing various thinga, just to keep players from getting bored.

If ZOS genuinely wanted to encourage players to play both modes they'd separate them properly. Right now everybody gets the worst of both worlds, bad balancing because ZOS is always wrecking one mode to fix a problem in the other, and players because it's so hard to swap between modes. For the sake of the argument, if you were a dedicated PVE player and ZOS wanted you to try PVP, would you prefer the current situation where it's so much trouble to reconfigure your character you just don't bother and go in knowing you'll get shredded or would you prefer to click a switch and instantly be as best configured for PVP as you can manage? Right now we are stuck with the former and it's not just bad, it's stupid.

echo2omega wrote: »

Before you ask for PVP and PVE to be balanced separately make your own game (board game/card game/whatever) that has separate PVE and PVP.

Most games with both PVE and PVP modes balance them separately. This is because experience shows that their needs are too different for them to be balanced as a single entity. ZOS' problem is that it stubbornly refuses to acknowledge that they made a big mistake.

IxSTALKERxI wrote: »

Balance pvp and ignore pve.
Then balance the health pools and mechanics of all the content in pve.
Then you'll have balanced both, zos has been doing it back to front lol.

This!

No NPC complains about balance. So have them take different amounts of damage from different classes / builds.
Increase the Damage / Healing done and taken for each class individually in PvE somewhere hidden in the background. You already got the technology for that: the Slayer and Aegis buffs. Adjusting PvE would then be as simple as changing a few digits of these few modifiers.

And why should the balance of abilities be focused on PvP and not PvE? B/c in PvP relative performance matters, while in PvE you predominantly only have to achieve absolute values - e.g. the arbitrary level of 55k DPS. If you reach that level then you can complete all content as a DPS. Your class can only do 49k DPS? No Problem, ZOS adjust the PvE damage multiplier by times 1.1224 (i.e. increase your PvE damage by 12.24%) and you will reach that DPS level.

The other classis doing 58K DPS? Not really an issue since you can already complete all content (and achievements) with your 55K DPS.

What about Leaderboards, here the relative performance matters even in PvE? Not a problem! ZOS simply applies a multiplier to the leaderboard points based on the DPS difference of your class.

Would any of this work in PvP? No!

In PvP it matters very much how strong one class / build is compared to another (relative performance!). And having multiple classes / builds, a similar adjustment in PvP would require constantly changing Damage / Healing done and taken multipliers to constantly adjust depending on what other class / build you are fighting against. And since targets oftentimes shift in rapid succession such an adjustment in PvP would be a huge strain on the server and/or client.

Also in PvP you might be fighting multiple classes/builds at the same time, which would make the calculation of such multipliers very messy and would put an even bigger strain on the server and/or client.

Ff14 does it good.

It's bull that it can't be done when we already have skills that behave differently in PvE and PvP. Devs just need to be given the green light to do it for all skills, and it would be done.

echo2omega wrote: »

Before you ask for PVP and PVE to be balanced separately make your own game (board game/card game/whatever) that has separate PVE and PVP.

Thanks, very constructive

RighteousBacon wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Most nerfs or changes are made with PvE in mind. rarely are abilities actually changed because of PvP. What happens is a class starts to perform better in pve content than other classes and then ZoS will nerf that class to bring it in line with the other classes. For proof you can just look at magblade. Magblade has never been a top tier PvP class ever but it gets nerfed literally every patch to balance it for PvE. There aren't actually many nerfs made with pvp in mind

So the Major Defile change to Incap was for PvE? Gotcha

Let's please not start another round of who is to blame for some unwanted balance changes. It's not really helping here.

Instead of balancing PvE and PvP separately, ZoS should balance PvE monsters to be closer to PvP players.

Kulvar wrote: »

Instead of balancing PvE and PvP separately, ZoS should balance PvE monsters to be closer to PvP players.

This thought has occurred to me before as well. I do see some challenges - particularly with taunt and crowd control. Taunting an enemy player is not gonna happen I figure but not being able to taunt a boss is not good either. Stun/immobilizing a boss would be fun but likely lead to a complete rework of boss mechanics. Certainly some things to be worked out. On the other hand, perhaps if PvE monsters could deliver crit damage like PvP players do, it might simplify gear selection (impen vs infused/divines).

Beating a dead horse

NyassaV wrote: »

Beating a dead horse

Schrödinger has upgraded to a horse on forums. The state it exists in depends on the viewer of the forum.