Parasaurolophus wrote: »

I used to play mages, knights, berserkers, rogues or sorcerers. Now each of my characters is forced to be a Frankenstein monster, assembled from a variety of poorly combined pieces. I absolutely dislike the idea that we are forced to use certain weapons just because of one passive skill or one imba ability. I like the idea of ​​hybridizing class abilities, that would be a really good idea. But when hybridization is aimed at weapon and guild abilities, what many here feared happens - hybridization has become homogenization.
I don't like that my magical nightblade now carries a large two-handed sword and looks more like a berserker than a wizard.
I don't even feel like I'm a battle mage. I just... I don't know...
I just want to say that work on hybridization should be continued and there should be strong changes.

You do know you don't have to do those things if you don't want to, right? No one is forcing you to play your characters with skills or weapons you don't want them to, so...why do it? Hybridization actually allows for more options, such as Stamsorcs actually being able to use more than three Class skills now, and no one being locked exclusively to staffs for Mag and everything else for Stam.

alberichtano wrote: »

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

I used to play mages, knights, berserkers, rogues or sorcerers. Now each of my characters is forced to be a Frankenstein monster, assembled from a variety of poorly combined pieces. I absolutely dislike the idea that we are forced to use certain weapons just because of one passive skill or one imba ability. I like the idea of ​​hybridizing class abilities, that would be a really good idea. But when hybridization is aimed at weapon and guild abilities, what many here feared happens - hybridization has become homogenization.
I don't like that my magical nightblade now carries a large two-handed sword and looks more like a berserker than a wizard.
I don't even feel like I'm a battle mage. I just... I don't know...
I just want to say that work on hybridization should be continued and there should be strong changes.

Honestly I haven't paid much attention to the whole process, mainly because I know I will never be a "1337" player with roof-touching DPS-stats, but as I understand the changes made, I just wonder why they even keep magica and stamina apart as two different stats. I mean, at this point, they might as well just put them together and call it "Endurance" or something, and have one resource to keep track of instead of two. And then anyone can use whatever weapon they want. *shrugs*

We still have two separate resources because you'll still have a "main" resource. Mag characters can use utility from DW now, but they won't be able to sustain any actual spammables because they won't have the Stamina for it. This wasn't to let anyone use any skill from any skill line regardless of Mag or Stam, it was just to open up more options for all characters while still keeping some restrictions.

To be optimal we have always been hemmed into one weapon or another depending on the purpose of the build. That hasn’t changed.

Last time I tried it I wound up with d orbitals all over the place.

I really wish all skills had a Magicka and a Stamina option.
So to have a viable Stamina DPS / Healer, without the need to put points into Magicka.

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

Now each of my characters is forced

No.

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

I used to play mages, knights, berserkers, rogues or sorcerers. Now each of my characters is forced to be a Frankenstein monster, assembled from a variety of poorly combined pieces. I absolutely dislike the idea that we are forced to use certain weapons just because of one passive skill or one imba ability. I like the idea of ​​hybridizing class abilities, that would be a really good idea. But when hybridization is aimed at weapon and guild abilities, what many here feared happens - hybridization has become homogenization.
I don't like that my magical nightblade now carries a large two-handed sword and looks more like a berserker than a wizard.
I don't even feel like I'm a battle mage. I just... I don't know...
I just want to say that work on hybridization should be continued and there should be strong changes.

I respect your opinion. When the game first started removing stats back before One Tamriel, I was disappointed. I liked when my dragon knight could use a 2h/Fire staff build. That build was as close to how I played TES 3. Now I can do it again. It probably isn't the best build, but it is a solid functional build now. So, the hybridization has pros and cons, but the pros are better for me than the cons.

LashanW wrote: »

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

I used to play mages, knights, berserkers, rogues or sorcerers. Now each of my characters is forced to be a Frankenstein monster, assembled from a variety of poorly combined pieces. I absolutely dislike the idea that we are forced to use certain weapons just because of one passive skill or one imba ability. I like the idea of ​​hybridizing class abilities, that would be a really good idea. But when hybridization is aimed at weapon and guild abilities, what many here feared happens - hybridization has become homogenization.
I don't like that my magical nightblade now carries a large two-handed sword and looks more like a berserker than a wizard.
I don't even feel like I'm a battle mage. I just... I don't know...
I just want to say that work on hybridization should be continued and there should be strong changes.

Who is forcing you? Score pushing groups?

Yes. Perhaps instead of "force" we should say "impel", or even "compel", i.e. to "forcefully impel".

I don't really PvE, but I've noticed over the years how it's a popular idea that even if you're not in a score pushing group, you should build and play as though you were to practice, otherwise you're a sub-par PvE'r. For years I saw new players told they were simply unable to Random PUG Tank until they farmed Alkosh, which was ridiculous advice and which I suspect played some part in the low popularity of Random PUG Tanking. There's no theorycrafting for Tanks, there's no reason to think about builds or anything, just run Maw 50 times and then you're allowed to tank. Again I don't really PvE but it seemed like there were an awful lot of would-be 4 man players told they need to build like they're going into competitive 12 man.

Anyhow in my opinion, the ideal is:

1. All things are possible / passable, in the spirit of TES

2. The math should be such that classic RPG archetypes achieve the greatest maximal Power, at the expense of RP, fun, or tactical enjoyment

I like the idea of building into specific elements. For StamDK and StamCro we could perhaps use a bit of work to impel us into a Poison and Disease focus, respectively, whereas now StamDK must use some Flame damage to maximize damage output, and StamCro most use some Frost. (in PvP anyhow)

But, in my opinion, by far the highest priority thing to facilitate "Elemental Focus": a revision of Ancient Knowledge.

You aren't forced to play that way at all. The difference is, you now have a choice to use new spells; you're mistaking that for a compulsion.

This patch has had its fill of irritating problems (looking at you, Zone Map), but I'm in love with the hybridization. Nothing much changed for my warrior or mage builds, but now I can play a battlemage that actually feels like a battlemage, and I couldn't be happier for it.

With the tank argument. Honestly if you can pull aggro and don't be squishy (the literal only two requirements of a tank) I don't care what you do with your build. You'll always have those meta pushing stupid heads trying to push what they think is correct on people. During MyM I was unfortunately put in a group with the most condescending, rude, annoying, person. Who kept going on and on in chat about how if you're not wearing Pale Order you're doing it wrong, and making comments on everyone's build. You know what I did? I ignored him... even when my chat filled up with all the reasons he was better and so much knowledgeable of PvP. Despite me getting 22 kills and him getting only 5 in that death match... so if you get kicked from a pug from people like that. Good! They did you a favor by making certain you don't have to deal with their existence anymore. You're a tank. You'll pop the que again in 10 seconds anyways (when group finder is actually working). This is a video game. The people who get sweaty over a video game are not worth your time.

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

I used to play mages, knights, berserkers, rogues or sorcerers. Now each of my characters is forced to be a Frankenstein monster, assembled from a variety of poorly combined pieces. I absolutely dislike the idea that we are forced to use certain weapons just because of one passive skill or one imba ability. I like the idea of ​​hybridizing class abilities, that would be a really good idea. But when hybridization is aimed at weapon and guild abilities, what many here feared happens - hybridization has become homogenization.
I don't like that my magical nightblade now carries a large two-handed sword and looks more like a berserker than a wizard.
I don't even feel like I'm a battle mage. I just... I don't know...
I just want to say that work on hybridization should be continued and there should be strong changes.

Strong agree. I feel like its a trend that's been developing for a long time, and now they've really gone ahead and thrown it up to 11. I really don't like it.

You can play how you want, of course, but why is it that whatever concept you come up with (unless its a slave to numbers only) is likely to be so very drastically underpowered compared to the current meta? Horribly, pathetically, drastically underpowered?

Imagination has no currency, power and efficiency are the domain of number crunchers.

We aren't playing in a vacuum. Its an MMO, and we're surrounded by people. Its ignorant to think that most people are going to feel happy playing what they want while other players melt the world around them. Why would I want to play my frost mage when it feels so drastically underpowered compared to the people around me? Why would I want to hold my team-mates back? Why would I want to feel so relatively weak? The game system and the vast power gap is implicitly telling you you're just plain wrong. The developer on stream chuckling at the pug with the "wrong" morph, saying "Sigh. They'll learn" is explicitly telling you you're wrong.

Yes, choice. We have the choice of playing what we want and sucking, or forgetting all that and conforming to "slot whatever gives you the highest numbers, nothing else matters"

Arunei wrote: »

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

I used to play mages, knights, berserkers, rogues or sorcerers. Now each of my characters is forced to be a Frankenstein monster, assembled from a variety of poorly combined pieces. I absolutely dislike the idea that we are forced to use certain weapons just because of one passive skill or one imba ability. I like the idea of ​​hybridizing class abilities, that would be a really good idea. But when hybridization is aimed at weapon and guild abilities, what many here feared happens - hybridization has become homogenization.
I don't like that my magical nightblade now carries a large two-handed sword and looks more like a berserker than a wizard.
I don't even feel like I'm a battle mage. I just... I don't know...
I just want to say that work on hybridization should be continued and there should be strong changes.

Hybridization actually allows for more options, such as Stamsorcs actually being able to use more than three Class skills now, and no one being locked exclusively to staffs for Mag and everything else for Stam.

I mean, you could've still used those sorc skills before. Same argument

francesinhalover wrote: »

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

I used to play mages, knights, berserkers, rogues or sorcerers. Now each of my characters is forced to be a Frankenstein monster, assembled from a variety of poorly combined pieces. I absolutely dislike the idea that we are forced to use certain weapons just because of one passive skill or one imba ability. I like the idea of ​​hybridizing class abilities, that would be a really good idea. But when hybridization is aimed at weapon and guild abilities, what many here feared happens - hybridization has become homogenization.
I don't like that my magical nightblade now carries a large two-handed sword and looks more like a berserker than a wizard.
I don't even feel like I'm a battle mage. I just... I don't know...
I just want to say that work on hybridization should be continued and there should be strong changes.

forced? what do you mean, you can still play full mag or full stam.
no ones forcing you outside of yourself.

Come on folks... many players like to be the best they can be. There is no question that raid leaders will request people to have a certain build for raid composition and we know that isn't the majority of players. But not only is that NOT BAD to be at that level of skill (so let's not pretend stubbornly sticking to a build you had in 2018 is good for your end game raid team), but there's a whole lot of in between the "I do whatever I want and am OK" and "I must be BIS meta"... including the folks who don't want to be theory crafters and will go to the content creators to look for builds. As certain things become meta, these are the suggestions that come out in most of the builds and it is where a lot of people start to get better at their roles.

I'm hearing the OP saying that they don't like the meta with hybridization. Let's not get side tracked by the word "forced." I'm on the fence about it myself but, as someone who is not a theory crafter, I'm waiting to see how things settle and how many oddball changes become "the standard recommendation" before judging if this has gone too far. It might be fun, or all my DPS toons might end up with the same weapon. We'll see. I know that I personally hated it when swords were BIS for healing (it was just so awkward) and yes, while you don't HAVE to do it, if you're trying to get better, trying what the "best" folks do is typically the road many go down.

@Urzigurumash your alkosh argument only serves to illustrate how out of date your knowledge of PvE is. Alkosh has been a dead set since they added minor breach to pierce armour, and then salted the ground of Maw by adding Crimson Oath Rive. There are no good sets from Maw.

As to your assumptions that people are forced into using specific gear setups, you are confusing dummy parse meta setups with what people use in actual content. Go look at ESO logs and you'll find the highest dps sorc is running double inferno for bahsei HM.

I'll give you a tip as a raid lead, I don't care what build people use as long as it's the best they can bring. Sure we'll organise some support sets to maximise the group dps potential, but if someone gets better dps with DW and 2h compared to double inferno or vice versa in actual content, then that's what I want them to do.

Urzigurumash wrote: »

chuck-18_ESO wrote: »

You aren't forced to play that way at all. The difference is, you now have a choice to use new spells; you're mistaking that for a compulsion.

This patch has had its fill of irritating problems (looking at you, Zone Map), but I'm in love with the hybridization. Nothing much changed for my warrior or mage builds, but now I can play a battlemage that actually feels like a battlemage, and I couldn't be happier for it.

...
I am very much in favor of this hybridiziation, but I agree, the benefits for playing an "archetype" should be increased. Back during the old Armor passive system I wrote volumes on this forum about how in PvP some melee players should wear Heavy, not Medium. Medium and Duel Wield are for Rogues, Heavy and 2H are for Warriors. Berserker is somewhere between the two. Pure Warriors and pure Rogues should have mathematical advantages over Berserkers, but Berserkers enjoy some tactical flexibility the other two do not.
...

I've had similar sentiments, that the choices of armor weight, weapon type, etc. shouldn't absolutely determine each other, but should have results that impact and combine with each other to open up different choices regarding build and playstyle. In other words, I prefer asking the question "Why might I want to run light armor and a bow on this character" rather than saying "I should run light armor on this character because I use a staff" or "I should be using a two-hander because I'm using medium armor".

In what I've heard about New World (no experience actually playing it, so...), I do like the ideas that they used for their armor weights. That the heavy armors provide more protection at the cost of mobility while the light armors enable higher mobility at the cost of protection with medium armors sitting in the middle. It's an interesting concept that I think ZOS tried to go for with the benefits and penalties, but they messed it up by including damage mitigation/taken—which was already inherent in armor values—and in essence created an attempt at Rock-Paper-Scissors.

Of course, this all applies to PVP more-so than PVE, where the ability to survive in melee, access to mobility, effectiveness at range, and just general build diversity is more common. PVE relies too much on mathematical optimization and dealing with mechanics that force certain build types to be better at completing content. In order for build choices and options (such as melee/ranged, mobility/stability) to matter in PVE, then encounters need designed in ways such that those choices have more impact on the approach to the encounter.

Vaoh wrote: »

Hybridization is very different from homogenization. It has pros and cons but provides a really great opportunity for this game to be much more fun.

There are now many more options for our builds and it gets rid of the extremely forced “Magicka vs Stamina” stuff. The main downside is that we are going from effectively 10 class specs (Mag/Stam per class), down to 5 class specs (Hybrid per class) but that each of these specs are now more unique.

So where do we go from here? Imo......
Damage Types.
• Like all the good games - give us ways to invest heavily into Fire Damage, or Physical Damage, or Frost Damage, etc. Gear and the CP system can play a huge part in this.
• Give enemies proper resistances. For example, a Storm Atronach having 75% resistance to Shock Damage. In other words damage types actually matter.
• Fix the many skills that were screwed up in this long time “Magicka vs Stamina” nonsense. For example, Biting Jabs which should go back to being a Magic Damage skill instead of randomly being Physical just because “StAm NeEdEd A mOrPh”. Smh.
New Classes
• With damage types actually mattering, the game is much more fun and immediately far more balanced. You don’t have every class competing to have the “BeSt DpS”.
• Since classes now each matter in different areas, it is easy to create new classes. Need Frost Damage? New class. Want to add a new Water Damage type? New class. Etc. Everyone is better at certain scenarios. New classes build massive hype for the game.

Idk. Just my ideas. There is a lot of potential but this is ZOS so I have no hope 🤷‍♂️

Agreed, and I certainly do hope that these changes mean a shift towards actual meaningful morph options for damaging abilities, rather than "obligatory Magicka morph" and "obligatory Stamina morph".