ESO: QoL changes

Sleep · December 2019

I like 2678

lillybit · December 2019

I think you're confusing "things you want" with "things that would be good for the game." They aren't the same thing and most people don't want them. For example, if people wanted non-CP pvp, that would be the most popular campaign instead of a virtual ghost town.

cheifsoap · December 2019

Disingenuous post is disingenuous. These aren't all QoL improvements, they're more like "thing i dislike about the game and you should change them to make me happy".

Enemy-of-Coldharbour · December 2019

It would be nice if fishing reward XP. The more rare the fish the more XP awarded. It would also be nice if we could fillet whole stacks of fish instantly instead of one at a time.

mursie · December 2019

cheifsoap wrote: »

Disingenuous post is disingenuous. These aren't all QoL improvements, they're more like "thing i dislike about the game and you should change them to make me happy".

guilty as charged i guess.

Next time I should really open with a statement about how these changes are just my humble opinion on QoL improvements...and may not be the opinion of everyone.

oh wait....

wolfie1.0. · December 2019

Shanehere wrote: »

Aaluvien wrote: »

At some point ZOS will ask themselves when Cyro just needs to be put out of its misery and stop the bad PR.

Kittytravel wrote: »

Shanehere wrote: »

And the craft bag thing is exactly his point. Inventory space should not be the big incentive for paying a subscription for this game, that should be available at base... that is what is ridiculously wrong with it.

Okay I don't think anyone disagrees but then you have to give ZOS a way to retain the sub to keep their game up and none of you ever do. If this comes across as a personal attack it is very much not meant to but a lot of us are tired of seeing.
"ZOS the craft bag should be for everyone to fix inventory issues!"
Okay but ZOS has to make money so what do they replace it with to retain subs?
"Uhmmm no they don't." or "Uhmm they can get (insert not at all as incentivizing bonus here)."

At the end of the day the craft bag has become the inherent selling point to ESO+ and is a massive part of their income and they can no longer separate the two because that's their game structure.

You say "that's their only good way of making money and keeping people subbed" and I am saying that it is disappointing it has come down to that, going off of Mursie's original point. Also, we don't have to "give ZOS a way to retain the sub" as the consumer, they're supposed to be ones coming up with the ideas that make having a subscription too good to pass up, and not hooking player's arms by saying you can't store crafting materials unless you pay.

XP gains and cosmetics were two of Mursie's alternatives...

Maybe instead of charging people $100 to buy an in-game house only purchaseable through the Crown Store, maybe make all houses, cosmetics outfits, mounts, etc. obtainable by in-game achievements that are only accessible through DLC content, which requires a sub.

I think Implementing half the things that are locked in the Crown Store in the actual game, that promotes players to work towards something rewarding that they can show off as something that they earned rather than bought would easily boost subscriptions.

I don't know, I'm not part of the ZOS marketing team. However, I don't think the craft bag is be the be all end all for retaining subscriptions if they think about it long enough.

Well you say that it's not up to the consumer to decide what goes into the sub and what doesn't....yet we are here in the forum as consumers telling ZOS what to put into their sub....

At the end of the day you a correct only ZOS can really change, but consumers can impact that change. We wont buy something if we dont see value.

I can tell you right now that there is a portion of subs out there that never buy crowns that aren't part of the sub. Crown items discounted or no will not sell subs. Neither will exp boosts. Uncapping CP limits would but that is way pay to win. Houses wont sell as many.

As far as moving things out of the crown store. Well that's a revenue loss for ZOS they wont do that. Just use the gifting system to buy crowns with gold. That makes both ZOS and players happy

Aznarb · December 2019

Add mount and craft horrible research system and I'm with you @OP
Or make them account wide.

tmbrinks · December 2019

I got the same vibe as many others here.

OP is stating things they'd like to see changed for themselves, not really as QoL improvements.

Many of them defeat the purpose of the game, change things unnecessarily because they don't fit in their "box" of what the game should be.

There are no-CP options for open world PVP, no need to force on others.

Forcing solo queue in BGs... right... (separate.. maybe)

Craft bag is the reason to Sub. No XP gains, No CP gains, no cosmetics are going to be as "valuable" as the craft bag. That said, the game is perfectly playable without the craft bag, you just have to be aware of your inventory and focus on specific things rather than trying to do all the things.

I stopped here as well... since this got to be an "entitlement" post with the craft bag discussion, and these go downhill fast.

EDIT: ooh, there's the downhill... as I read the 2nd page... lol

idk · December 2019

lillybit wrote: »

I think you're confusing "things you want" with "things that would be good for the game." They aren't the same thing and most people don't want them. For example, if people wanted non-CP pvp, that would be the most popular campaign instead of a virtual ghost town.

This is a great point and my thought when I read it.

No offense to OP either. Often suggestions are from an individuals perspective. That perspective is not always shared by the player base (or even forum base) as a whole and often does not take into consideration how it would impact other aspects of the game.

After all, our opinions come from our own slice of the game.

MrGhosty · December 2019

I see no harm in asking for stuff you'd personally like to see improved, but I don't see most of these happening or are already being worked on in some form.

In regards to cp level on gear, I would be bummed to see it go as we lose more progression. Hitting max level is really just the start of your journey as a player, not the endpoint. 1-50 is there to teach you the basic of basics and from 50 onward you're picking up all the stuff that comes after. It is my humble opinion that removing cp level on gear would lead to freshly minted level fifites wandering into content they are ill prepared for and having a much more negative experience, likely impacting them in the long term.

What I would like to see implemented, is a means for gear to be leveled to the next "tier" so that should they ever increase the gear score cap, people's hard earned time and resources would not be wasted. Ideally it would be balanced to be easier for new players to just acquire the next level of gear, but not so expensive to make leveling it up unworkable for existing players.

robwolf666 · December 2019

nafensoriel wrote: »

Ok I'll bite...

1] CP is being changed. We have no information on this but anyone with a brain expects a major revamp of the system.
Screwing with CP before that revamp is just a waste of dev time.

Really? Great, they're going to eff-up my builds again? Wonderful...

El_Borracho · December 2019

Shanehere wrote: »

El_Borracho wrote: »

(2) So you want a brand-new player who just hit level 50 to be able to get end-game gear. Ugh. Could not imagine the pugs as a result. Might as well dig up dungeon group finder, kill it, and bury it again

It takes about 1-3 weeks to level up to Level 50, without XP scrolls or double XP events, depending on how often you play. Do you really think you were able to do any trials at that point? How about vet ICP for tanks who want Lord Warden helmet? Vet COS for Velidreth? Vet Scalecaller for Zaan? Vet Bloodroot for Earthgore?

You need CP to be able to survive some, if not most, PVE endgame content. Zero CP level 50's don't have it. Below CP 160 players do not need endgame gear to do content they don't have the resistances to survive. They need experience, figuring out a rotation, and leveling skills more than farming gear that won't be useful until they hit at around CP 300.

(4) Just stop with this. The craft bag is the #1 reason people get ESO+. Not gonna happen.

It takes 1-3 weeks to level up to 50 and maybe 1 week to get CP160... do you really think 160 champion points is a huge indication of growth? Most people are still "new" until 500-600CP.

And yeah, taking away CP is going to make the content more difficult, or they can scale it down to equal it out. Either way, I still think it's a good call.

And the craft bag thing is exactly his point. Inventory space should not be the big incentive for paying a subscription for this game, that should be available at base... that is what is ridiculously wrong with it.

I don't think CP 160, CP 300, or CP 810 is a sign of anything. Seen enough CP 810's spamming execute any time they see a boss to know that. But I would bump the gateway up to CP 300 to coincide with DLC dungeons, but this has more to do with CP required for resistances, damage, and health than skill.

I admit, there is a pretty big selfish component to this. While I run with guilds, I also pug stuff too, and I don't want to deal with new players blowing up trials and vet dungeons they are not ready for. We've all been there. Brand-new to the game, thinking "If only I get this set, my DPS will go through the roof." Then you get the set and you are still hitting 12K because you don't know what the heck you are doing and you don't have the CP to hit harder.

I only mention CP 160 in the same breath as skill because this suggestion by the OP only applies to the brand-new player. Anyone else has a main and all the CP in the world for their alternate once they hit level 50. So why should a set be available to a player who can't survive the content in order to farm it due to lack of CP? If you tell someone that a set like Relequen is available to them on day one or at level 50, they will try to get it. And I don't care how easy nCR is, a brand-new, CP-less character isn't going very far in nCR no matter how much food they eat.

Shanehere · December 2019

DaveMoeDee wrote: »

XP gains are useless. Long time players have long been at max CP.

I'm confused by your post. You want to both remove craft bag from sub AND move all cosmetics into the game to be acquired for just purchasing DLC, which is extremely cheap considering we already pay for the chapter? So I can get all cosmetics by buying 2 dungeons and 1 zone DLC? And never have to sub again?

I don't think your plan is good at all. I mean, I would love it since I just want the crafting bag. I don't care about cosmetics. I'll save a ton on subs and I already have 27k crowns from subs that I can use to buy the smaller DLCs. I can sub once a year to do DLC dungeons.

XP gains weren't my suggestion. But they are never useless, as people often create new toons.

Also emphasized my not being part of the ZOS marketing team.

Was leaning more towards achievements that give access to attachments are locked behind a sub, regardless of if you own the DLC or not. I thought I worded it pretty clearly but I guess it was confusing.

Housing and fashion is the true endgame for a lot of the player base. A lot of the "casual" twitch streamers with large audiences are obsessed with housing and cosmetics. I think giving people the accessibility to work for these things through playing the game and earning it could encourage people to remain subbed, on top of giving a feeling of reward.

Not saying it's the clear-cut golden idea that should be implemented, I was just using it as a suggestion based simply on empirical evidence knowing that a large amount of the population enjoys that sort of content. The original argument was that the craft bag is the only thing worth subbing for, and the players are to blame for that because we aren't telling ZOS what incentives they should provide for us to keep us paying. I don't agree with that, but I played ball anyways and came up with those suggestions.

There are players who are not into any of that stuff, including me, that would need something else to keep their subscription. For me, I don't know what that is personally, but I still don't think it's right that they are purposely locking such an important part of the game that should just be base for the quality of life of all players because the nature of the game requires you to have so many items. It's greedy and it looks bad.

If the craft bag was base-game from the get-go, and it was never an incentive, they would have come up with a million ideas by now.

"But how else are they going to make money?" My point is: That's not my problem, and it's not a good look that after 5 years you don't know your player base well enough to come up with a bunch of ideas without having to hang a hugely important quality of life aspect of the game behind a paid subscription.

EDIT (unrelated): Oh yeah and not having mount training character-wide sucks and is super overkill given they already have daily log-in rewards. If you have 12 characters it takes like 10 minutes to individually log onto every one of them everyday just to train their mounts.

Shanehere · December 2019

lillybit wrote: »

I think you're confusing "things you want" with "things that would be good for the game." They aren't the same thing and most people don't want them. For example, if people wanted non-CP pvp, that would be the most popular campaign instead of a virtual ghost town.

People want to PvP. Regardless of their preference of CP or no-CP, faction locked or standard, they will put aside their preference to go to a campaign that actually has people playing in it, and right now that is Kaal.

Myself and a lot of regulars loved Sotha Sil, but I see them all in Kaal even if they really don't prefer it for the sole reason being theres action there. It's incredibly sad but it's how it is. Some people can't even play in Kaal because the lag gets so bad.

He also gave a pretty sound explanation for why it would be good for the game, and not just because it's "something he wanted" as you claim: It scaled horribly in BGs and they got rid of it, and it discourages new players when they jump into Cyrodiil and they get wrecked by max CP players who have crazy stat buffs because of it.

"Then the new players should just PvP in the no-CP campaign until they get higher CP"
Despite you already saying it's a dead campaign, keeping the two options (CP and no-CP) in open world is just dividing an already dwindling population at this point.

"But if there's only one or two Cyrodiil campaigns it would get so laggy and everyone won't be able to play and just quit"
Yeah, so maybe they should work on fixing server performance soon. It's only been 5 years.

LoneStar2911 · December 2019

mursie wrote: »

Next time I should really open with a statement about how these changes are just my humble opinion on QoL improvements...and may not be the opinion of everyone.

oh wait....

You can't fix stupid. Lol. What I've certainly learned about the forums is that you can't put any ideas out there without a large amount of people giving you hell for it.
Good try, though. I liked your original post.

NBrookus · December 2019

The crafting bag is probably the one thing that that players of all kinds, whether they do housing of fashion or PVE or PVP or putter around killing mudcrabs, can use and enjoy but isn't P2W in any way.

As much as I'd like to get one for free, as a value added perk for subscribers it's brilliant. They'd have to replace it with something just as useful for everyone. The only other thing that might be close is the Outfit System, and then they'd have to take that away from people, which would cause an uproar.

I've got 1300ish CP and 50ish XP scrolls in the bank... an XP boost isn't something I would even notice. Certainly not pay for.

mursie · December 2019

NBrookus wrote: »

The crafting bag is probably the one thing that that players of all kinds, whether they do housing of fashion or PVE or PVP or putter around killing mudcrabs, can use and enjoy but isn't P2W in any way.

As much as I'd like to get one for free, as a value added perk for subscribers it's brilliant. They'd have to replace it with something just as useful for everyone. The only other thing that might be close is the Outfit System, and then they'd have to take that away from people, which would cause an uproar.

I've got 1300ish CP and 50ish XP scrolls in the bank... an XP boost isn't something I would even notice. Certainly not pay for.

there are over 400 unique crafting ingredients in the game in addition to hundreds of gear, food, maps, etc.. other drops.

with 70 bag spots to start the game, it is absolutely un-enjoyable for a new player to explore tamriel and pick up ingredients from mining with the limited space they have. the crafting bag needs to be base to the game so these ingredients auto deposit.

if you want to make eso+ have benefit - make it do exactly what it does for bank space etc.... extend the cap. I.E - the base functionality of a craft bag needs to be in game but eso+ will allow you to have unlimited space for ingredients where as the base game caps these ingredients in your craft bag.

xenowarrior92eb17_ESO · December 2019

You forgot to add the most important part of all...ESO+ members gets housing caps increased x4 times! im not joking...I want more caps cuz 700 for notable homes is a joke...my creativity is gutted by that.

Tommy_The_Gun · December 2019

El_Borracho wrote: »

(4) Just stop with this. The craft bag is the #1 reason people get ESO+. Not gonna happen.

I dont want to be rude or anything, so apologise for saying that, but: This game does not need subscribers
or subscription model to gain sit ton of $$$ profit. In fact this game would have died if they did not switched to B2P model.

zyk · December 2019

NBrookus wrote: »

The crafting bag is probably the one thing that that players of all kinds, whether they do housing of fashion or PVE or PVP or putter around killing mudcrabs, can use and enjoy but isn't P2W in any way.

There are so many DLCs now, that alone should be enough of a perk along with the monthly crowns. And if someone has actually paid for all the DLC, then IMO they've contributed enough.

This game just isn't worth the price a traditional sub to remove a crippling bottleneck. The craft bag isn't a feature as much as it is a solution to a problem ZOS designed by bloating inventory.

Set the craft bag free. Let the strength of the content dictate the value of ESO+.

And the best part is, if they free us from inventory management extortion, they can finally give us ESSENTIAL new features like an equipment bag and streamline components in the game.

I think it would help make ESO a more popular game and therefore increase Crown sales and in the big picture, perhaps, drive even more ESO+ subs, even if a lower percentage of the playerbase subscribe. This game is way too tedious. When it's not your main game anymore, doing anything is like walking in mud.

lillybit · December 2019

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

El_Borracho wrote: »

(4) Just stop with this. The craft bag is the #1 reason people get ESO+. Not gonna happen.

I dont want to be rude or anything, so apologise for saying that, but: This game does not need subscribers
or subscription model to gain sit ton of $$$ profit. In fact this game would have died if they did not switched to B2P model.

Really? You're trying to say that a company doesn't need a reliable source of income? I guess all those megaservers are free to use, and the staff to maintain them are all volunteers...

Not saying they don't make massive profits but all companies rely on a steady cash flow regardless of one off purchases

Tommy_The_Gun · December 2019

lillybit wrote: »

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

El_Borracho wrote: »

(4) Just stop with this. The craft bag is the #1 reason people get ESO+. Not gonna happen.

I dont want to be rude or anything, so apologise for saying that, but: This game does not need subscribers
or subscription model to gain sit ton of $$$ profit. In fact this game would have died if they did not switched to B2P model.

Really? You're trying to say that a company doesn't need a reliable source of income? I guess all those megaservers are free to use, and the staff to maintain them are all volunteers...

Not saying they don't make massive profits but all companies rely on a steady cash flow regardless of one off purchases

What I was trying to say is: The source of income is tiny. Too little number of players use it. And speaking of reliability & stability - it is declining. At this point I would be surprised if more than 5% player base used it (In fact I asked in game here and there in a couple of guilds and it was never higher than 5%).

The thing is, I do believe that at this point, if income from ESO+ was taken away, ZOS would barely feel it. Vast majority of cash comes from Chapters, people buying story DLCs and crowns in crown store (huge amount of "regular" players compared to tiny number of ESO+ users).

Other thing is that ESO+ is actually more harmful than useful. Let me explain:
It divides the player base. Some people want to be "VIP" so they pay for it and use ESO+. This actually makes some players that would normally buy something discouraged to paying at all.

That is why I actually thought that this game would be way better for everyone if it did not had premium account at all.

(Once again, I want dont want to be rude or anything. I know many people here can be triggered if you will criticize product they bought and they feel personally attacked if you criticise something They use / identify with).

Sergykid · December 2019

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

lillybit wrote: »

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

El_Borracho wrote: »

(4) Just stop with this. The craft bag is the #1 reason people get ESO+. Not gonna happen.

I dont want to be rude or anything, so apologise for saying that, but: This game does not need subscribers
or subscription model to gain sit ton of $$$ profit. In fact this game would have died if they did not switched to B2P model.

Really? You're trying to say that a company doesn't need a reliable source of income? I guess all those megaservers are free to use, and the staff to maintain them are all volunteers...

Not saying they don't make massive profits but all companies rely on a steady cash flow regardless of one off purchases

[snip]

actually ESO+ is much more purchased than u think. Most of the players i know in my guilds have it. I don't have it, but i also support the game in a different way that i see was not specified here:

gifts. I paid millions of gold (and will in the soon future too) to buy things with Crowns, this means i pay for the game with other people's real money.

richo262 · December 2019

mursie wrote: »

Quality of Life changes that, imho, could help bring more enjoyment and life back into this game:

1. Scrap CP from PvP. It has already been identified and implemented in battlegrounds. It needs to go for all aspects of PvP. It is a time-gate 25-30% stat buff mechanic that kills the initiative of new players to join the game and participate in one of the best end-game activities you can have - open world pvp. As long as you have CP included in PvP, new player growth, for pvp, will continue to stagnate and die

2. Scrap 160CP from end-game gear. End-game gear should be level 50 gear. period. I.E - no cp gear. It is a weird and frustrating experience for a new player to reach level 50 for the first time and realize the gear they are obtaining from dungeons, etc... is infact still not end-game gear because no-CP somehow still needs 160CP to be functional.

3. Remove Group queing from battlegrounds. Either create a separate solo que system for BG's or make it only solo que. Group que functionality against solo que players is a harmful system that kills pvp growth of your game for new and existing players.

4. the Craft Bag needs to be base to the game. Locking it behind ESO+ is extortion. But more than just this, new players experiencing ESO will quickly abandon this game due to the horrific inventory / bag space system that currently exists. Find other ways to incentivize people into purchasing the subscription. Cosmetics and XP+ gains are examples of great ways to do this. Fundamental inventory management systems are absolutely not.

5. Please give potions unique identifier names. Why are their seven variants of "Essence of Health" now, and finding the variant you are looking for on a guild trader is a six hour ordeal even with 3rd party assistance such as tamrieltradecentre.com

6. It goes without saying that the group finder needs to function properly - but it also needs to be more expansive to elements such as trials, DSA, and BRP. You've built these experiences into your game but have not properly created tools for players to easily experience them. The result - many of these experiences sit empty and unexplored by a large number of players

7. performance in pvp - specifically lag in openworld - needs to be addressed. Smart Healing, while novel in concept, likely needs to go - with healing being restricted to only group members in an effort to reduce server loads.

8. Openworld bottlenecks need to be reviewed/addressed - the size of the map, the # of players allowed into an openworld instance - aoe calculations for damage/healing abilities all should be re-assessed for a streamlined approach that improves openworld performance dramatically

9. Remove faction lock or create faction re-assignment tokens. With 12 toons equally spread across three factions, I always kept the game fresh by playing different toons in open world with different functions (i.e. bombing vs. healing vs. brawler vs. rogue.... etc..) - yet now, with the faction lock implementation, I have kept a number of toons "on the shelf' due to being locked out of the only pvp campaign i find remotely enjoyable (no-cp). The CP no faction lock campaign is a great addition, it in combination with bullet point 1 above would solve this QoL issue

Good Luck ESO team. Let's make ESO great again!

1. I don't do PVP much so cannot really comment.
2. They should revert back to 5 tier of mats for BS / WW / Cloth / Alc / Ench too.
3. I don't BG much so cannot really comment.
4. Craft bag is not extortion. I don't sub either, and I know it's value is worth sub for many. I would agree the amount of garbage in this game is ridiculous and inventory management used to be a hassle but it wasn't a chore. Craft bag was a convenience not a necessity. Current rate of garbage in this game is putting more pressure on inventory management becoming a chore. ZOS should cull the garbage from the game, small things, like cull the amount of Potency runes to 10 (5 greater, 5 lesser), remove Jejota and make Ta green, remove the req for Poison Solvents, Remove the requirement for trait items (except Nirnhoned and a few Jewelry traits) where research is all you need to craft. ZOS should seriously cull many clutter items from the game. They should also allow the sale of 3mo ESO+ subscriptions as tokens that can be placed on the guild store.
5. If they removed level requirements for potions and poisons (which they should) they could recycle the images for certain potions and poisons so each type of poison has their own unique image making them more identifiable.
6. Agreed, they should probably fix the existing system before adding more to it though.
7. See 1.
8. I have not noticed any significant open world performance issues, unless this is Cyro related.
9. They should make Any Race - Any Alliance DLC free to play, give anybody that bought it a few crown crates as a thanks and then go back to each race having their own unique start location. Imperial gets to choose. A Nord starts in EP so he is locked to EP, if another character on the account locks to another faction the Nord cannot follow, however, if the Nord completes Cadwell Silver (DC) the Nord can now join EP and DC, If the Nord completes Gold (AD) then that character is now no longer bound to any faction and can go with whatever the account is locked to. That way Faction lock is still in effect, the benefits of it (spying) are there, but it won't truly hinder a player from legitimately playing on all their characters.

DaveMoeDee · December 2019

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

lillybit wrote: »

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

El_Borracho wrote: »

(4) Just stop with this. The craft bag is the #1 reason people get ESO+. Not gonna happen.

I dont want to be rude or anything, so apologise for saying that, but: This game does not need subscribers
or subscription model to gain sit ton of $$$ profit. In fact this game would have died if they did not switched to B2P model.

Really? You're trying to say that a company doesn't need a reliable source of income? I guess all those megaservers are free to use, and the staff to maintain them are all volunteers...

Not saying they don't make massive profits but all companies rely on a steady cash flow regardless of one off purchases

What I was trying to say is: The source of income is tiny. Too little number of players use it. And speaking of reliability & stability - it is declining. At this point I would be surprised if more than 5% player base used it (In fact I asked in game here and there in a couple of guilds and it was never higher than 5%).

The thing is, I do believe that at this point, if income from ESO+ was taken away, ZOS would barely feel it. Vast majority of cash comes from Chapters, people buying story DLCs and crowns in crown store (huge amount of "regular" players compared to tiny number of ESO+ users).

Other thing is that ESO+ is actually more harmful than useful. Let me explain:
It divides the player base. Some people want to be "VIP" so they pay for it and use ESO+. This actually makes some players that would normally buy something discouraged to paying at all.

That is why I actually thought that this game would be way better for everyone if it did not had premium account at all.

(Once again, I want dont want to be rude or anything. I know many people here can be triggered if you will criticize product they bought and they feel personally attacked if you criticise something They use / identify with).

Please stop pretending you have any idea how much revenue ZOS gets from sub. This is absurd.

We can all fish for justifications for an argument if we want to force the issue. But please stop making up fake facts.

Sadly, most people argue by having their conclusion and then vomiting every thought that pops into their head that feels to them like support, regardless of empirical support.

Even if we use your numbers, 5% having sub (let's say at $13.50/month as we don't know what package each is buying), we are talking about $8 per year per player. What percentage buy the expansion? If 100% but it at release at full price (some of us pre-order with a discount), that is $40 per person per year. How is $8 per person tiny if you are claiming the chapter is the biggest source of revenue? And that is assuming 100% of players buy the chapter. This also isn't considering the cut that goes to 3rd parties that sell the game. I would guess that ZOS pockets a larger percentage of the sub cost than the MSRP of the chapter at launch (thus all the discounts on pre-orders).

Considering how poorly that math works out for your position, I have to wonder how much you thought this through. Thing is, software companies actually do the math when making these decisions. They don't just assert whatever off the cuff.

El_Borracho · December 2019

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

El_Borracho wrote: »

(4) Just stop with this. The craft bag is the #1 reason people get ESO+. Not gonna happen.

I dont want to be rude or anything, so apologise for saying that, but: This game does not need subscribers
or subscription model to gain sit ton of $$$ profit. In fact this game would have died if they did not switched to B2P model.

While you might be right, the alternative a lot of games are using these days are microtransactions. For example, GTA Online. Absolutely murdered what was a very fun, very balanced game.

I am okay with forking over the $77 every 6 months to continue to play. Yeah, its not free and I wish it was cheaper. But for the amount of time I spend playing this game its worth it. And if the alternative is going to the microtransactions model, I'll gladly pay what I am now

Katahdin · December 2019

Shanehere wrote: »

lillybit wrote: »

I think you're confusing "things you want" with "things that would be good for the game." They aren't the same thing and most people don't want them. For example, if people wanted non-CP pvp, that would be the most popular campaign instead of a virtual ghost town.

People want to PvP. Regardless of their preference of CP or no-CP, faction locked or standard, they will put aside their preference to go to a campaign that actually has people playing in it, and right now that is Kaal.

Myself and a lot of regulars loved Sotha Sil, but I see them all in Kaal even if they really don't prefer it for the sole reason being theres action there. It's incredibly sad but it's how it is. Some people can't even play in Kaal because the lag gets so bad.

He also gave a pretty sound explanation for why it would be good for the game, and not just because it's "something he wanted" as you claim: It scaled horribly in BGs and they got rid of it, and it discourages new players when they jump into Cyrodiil and they get wrecked by max CP players who have crazy stat buffs because of it.

"Then the new players should just PvP in the no-CP campaign until they get higher CP"
Despite you already saying it's a dead campaign, keeping the two options (CP and no-CP) in open world is just dividing an already dwindling population at this point.

So your solution is to remove CP and force your preferred option?

Yes people go where the action is but the fact is that the population is in Kaal because most prefer CP PVP, not the other way around.

So if anything should be removed is the least popular option if it's empty and dead, not the most popular.

Shanehere · December 2019

Katahdin wrote: »

Shanehere wrote: »

lillybit wrote: »

I think you're confusing "things you want" with "things that would be good for the game." They aren't the same thing and most people don't want them. For example, if people wanted non-CP pvp, that would be the most popular campaign instead of a virtual ghost town.

People want to PvP. Regardless of their preference of CP or no-CP, faction locked or standard, they will put aside their preference to go to a campaign that actually has people playing in it, and right now that is Kaal.

Myself and a lot of regulars loved Sotha Sil, but I see them all in Kaal even if they really don't prefer it for the sole reason being theres action there. It's incredibly sad but it's how it is. Some people can't even play in Kaal because the lag gets so bad.

He also gave a pretty sound explanation for why it would be good for the game, and not just because it's "something he wanted" as you claim: It scaled horribly in BGs and they got rid of it, and it discourages new players when they jump into Cyrodiil and they get wrecked by max CP players who have crazy stat buffs because of it.

"Then the new players should just PvP in the no-CP campaign until they get higher CP"
Despite you already saying it's a dead campaign, keeping the two options (CP and no-CP) in open world is just dividing an already dwindling population at this point.

So your solution is to remove CP and force your preferred option?

Yes people go where the action is but the fact is that the population is in Kaal because most prefer CP PVP, not the other way around.

So if anything should be removed is the least popular option if it's empty and dead, not the most popular.

At this point you seem to be arguing just to argue, taking "I prefer no-CP" from my post and immediately claiming I'm just arguing for my own preferences.

It has nothing to do with my preferences or not, like I literally cited in the post that you quoted: it scales better overall, making it easier to balance as a result. It also promotes newer players to try out PvP, and won't divide the populations.

If CP was never implemented ever, we would never be having this conversation about "preferences" because ZOS would never have given us all of these options. If CP never existed there would still be at least a full campaign at this point. People don't go into Kaal just because they like CP, that is not why it is popular. People are going in there because it's the only campaign that is ever decently populated. I already said this but you must have missed it.

Sotha Sil used to be like just as populated, Haderus way back when was also decent, and now the population has dwindled down for a variety of different things and this is the only one left. Even when the new campaign opened up everyone was scared to switch over because they didn't want to be locked into a potentially dead campaign.

Making the Cyrodiil campaigns only CP would also deter anyone not 700CP+ to go into Cyrodiil. That's my argument for just making it no CP, not because it is my preference. Read the entirety of posts if you want meaningful discussion rather than just taking one sentence out of context and basing your argument off of that.

Rahar · December 2019

The only point I'd have to disagree on is scrapping CP PvP. No-CP is filled with gimmicks: proc sets, bombard, one trick pony builds, etc, and is especially difficult for some magicka builds (lol NB) due to inherent extremely expensive stamina mechanics. That doesn't mean that CP PvP is perfect. It really isn't, and has problems of its own. But the gimmicks and disadvantages for some classes aren't as much of an issue.

However, if we made some of the passive sustain inherent or reduced max CP to 400-500, we'd be in a good place barring some other adjustments to base mechanics. I made a comment to this end in another thread, which was:

Rahar wrote: »

Honestly, I think that CP is one of the main issues in PvP when game performance is taken out of the running. Namely, it scales too high right now, and break free/roll dodge is too expensive without it.

What this results in is a CP environment where damage mitigation and healing is in abundance (due to CP percentage bloat combined with recent damage nerfs) and a non-CP environment that's actual cancer because of all the effects/sets that are being put in to be effective in CP and extreme passive damage mitigation being necessary because roll dodge/block/break free costs too much without CP. CP fights often end in stalemates and no-CP fights often abuse cheap gimmicks like bombard to bait expensive roll dodges.

The only real way to fix this is a redesign of the CP system; however, giving less points for PvP would be a decent short term fix. ~500 is my suggestion. Then, removing the "Reduce cost of X by Y%" points would be the next step, followed by a static cost reduction for break free & friends and close look at how you can make a progression system interesting without turning to flat percentages, which have a habit of getting out of control very quickly.

When that's all said and done and everything works without the scales being tipped badly in one direction or another, just remove no-CP and balance one PvP mode.

Of course, there are certain classes and skills that need some effects pruned or added to them to either bring them in line or give them more use, but that can come later when the core issues (like lag!) are fixed.

The rest of your points are spot on. I especially like 2 and 3.