Half of my endgame PvE guild will most likely quit the game
Teias
✭✭
Hi, my name is Teias and I’m the leader of “Sirions Legion”, one of the biggest German-speaking endgame PVE guilds on PC-EU.
On Monday the 18th of July I posted a poll on our discord to figure out how our community felt about the announced changes to the combat system. I did so for two reasons: on the one hand, out of my own curiosity to see the bigger picture and on the other hand with the intention to write this post with collected input from multiple people from the endgame-part of the game.
Most questions were multiple choice questions with a single choice answer key that asked how people felt about the changes. But every topic also had an optional part where everyone could specify in text what exactly they like/dislike.
A total of 51 people have answered the poll so far, the vast majority before the preview of the week 3 changes, but pretty much the entire criticism still stands even after PTS week 3 patch.
Everyone who answered the poll is (more or less) part of ESO’s “endgame-community”, ranging from those who are still working on their first trifectas to those who already have completed the Planesbreaker achievement.
This post’s goal is to offer both the rest of the ESO-community and the dev’s a clearer view on what a random people sample of ESO’s endgame-community thinks about those changes and how they will not only affect us, but also the low- to mid-tier part of the player base.
“What’s your opinion on the announced light attack changes?”
· 0% - Very positive
· 2% - Somewhat positive
· 23.5% - Neutral/undecided
· 31.4% - Somewhat negative
· 43.1% - Very negative
Two main problems were specified in the full text answers. First being that it’s less rewarding for those that practiced a certain playstyle, which now suddenly is worth so much less, to play said playstyle. This isn’t exclusively concerning the endgame community, but also the mid-tier part of the player base (since light attack weaving is easy to grasp and a good way to increase your damage).
Secondly: nerfing the damage of light attacks doesn’t help anybody. Sure, experienced players have a better light attack uptime, so this change will most likely close the skill-gap, but if your goal is to make the game more accessible for weaker/more inexperienced players, nerfing light attacks won’t help anybody when you don’t “buff” said weaker players in other ways. As the changes are now: It will make the game harder for everyone.
“What is your opinion on the announced damage-over-time changes?”
· 0% - Very positive
· 0% - Somewhat positive
· 11.8% - Neutral/undecided
· 15.7% - Somewhat negative
· 72.5% - Very negative
As you can see, this change isn’t accepted very well, and in the following a lot of different problems were mentioned. By making every DOT last longer you may make weaker players’ rotations less stressful, but at the same time the combat system becomes way less interesting for everyone else, if your rotation is effectively spamming the same skill for multiple seconds. The fast-paced gameplay of ESO is one of the main reasons for us to play this game instead of other MMO’s. Even if the week 3 changes to ground-based skills may not be as dire as those of week one, large parts of the criticism were ignored.
Besides that, the dev’s also contradict their main goal of making the game more accessible. Increasing the duration of “sticky” DOTs may simplify rotations as intended, but by parallelly nerfing overall damage they make the game harder for everyone. Especially considering bosses with invulnerability-phases, or bosses that can cleanse themselves from DOT’s. Also, just flat-out nerfing ground-based DOTs without changing anything else about them to compensate for this nerf, neither closes the skill-gap, nor does it help weaker players. Quite contrary: they either will have a harder time or most likely be unable to clear everything that they can currently clear on the live server.
“What is your opinion on the announced heal-over-time changes?”
· 0% - Very positive
· 0% - Somewhat positive
· 17.6% - Neutral/undecided
· 13.2% - Somewhat negative
· 68.6% - Very negative
Similar problems as with the DOT changes were being mentioned here. Increasing the duration but lowering the tick-intensity makes the game harder, especially for weaker players. “Heal-check-mechanics” like the Dreadsailreef’s final bosses’ Maelstrom-mechanic, Kynes Aegis’ Falgravn execute-phase, or others like Bahsei curses will be tremendously harder to safely heal through. These mechanics aren’t designed to be countered by a “reactive” playstyle ZOS wants to improve, but by a proactive one where the healer anticipates the incoming damage and prepares by precasting HOT’s to be ready on time. Furthermore, leaving non-ground-based-HOTs on a 2s tickrate makes everything worse by making those HOT’s less reliable, since damage income is on a frequency of 0.5 to 1 seconds. Especially weaker and inexperienced players that are sometimes overwhelmed, are more likely to have trouble to react in time when there’s big damage income. This phenomenon will be increased by nerving HOT tick amounts that would have absorbed some of the incoming damage burst. Even worse if the tick-rates are lower because those groups might even lack the smaller heal ticks in critical situations, very likely resulting in wipes.
“What is your opinion on the dmg-nerfs resulting from the announced changes? This question is about the nerfs in general, not about how they are to be implemented.”
· 0% - The dmg-nerfs aren’t enough
· 3.9% - The dmg-nerfs are good as they are
· 70.6% - The dmg-nerfs are too much
· 17.6% - I am neutral/undecided
· 7.9% - Other
As you can see, a vast majority of us believe that this change is just too much. Although most believe that we and other endgame players will be able to adapt to this, midgame-players will have the most problems: they are those progressing vet content and maybe their first hard modes. While some mechanics require a certain amount of damage, some are a lot easier with enough damage, and some might even be skipped entirely. Just straight-out nerfing damage for everyone when your goal is to help weaker players is a fatally wrong approach.
“Do you think the changes will help close the skill-gap?”
· 5.9% - Yes, the changes will close the skill-gap
· 29.4% - No, the changes won’t have any effect on the skill-gap
· 52.9% - No, the changes will even increase the skill-gap
· 2.0% - I am neutral/undecided
· 9.8% - Other
As mentioned earlier, most of us believe that the changes will hit the low to mid-tier players the hardest. Comparing dummy parses, endgame players will most likely lose more damage than the rest and the “damage-gap” might shrink. But in “applied gameplay” (in dungeons and raids) a lot of weaker players will suddenly be unable to clear content they currently clear on the live server. In effect, the “skill-gap” won’t change at all or might increase according to our beliefs.
Something mentioned a lot was making *information* more accessible, like in-game explanations of how weaving works (with more than just a tip in a loading screen), or telling us how much crit-chance we actually gain from a set instead of these weird values that we have to translate ourselves into percentages first. The tutorial only tells us how to block, bash, dodge, and that’s it.
“Do you think the community is involved in the design of the combat changes?”
· 0% - The community is fully involved
· 3.9% - The community is somewhat involved
· 19.6% - I am neutral/undecided
· 27.5% - The community isn’t really involved
· 49% - The community isn’t involved at all
Most of us don’t feel that the community is involved enough in the changes, which is totally understandable seeing the flood of forum comments that we think are getting overheard. I believe the week 3 patch notes speak for themselves. The community criticized every single part of the proposed changes and everything that was changed with week 3 were ground-based HOT’s and DOT’s (while simultaneously still nerfing them although everyone said that these nerfs will make the game harder for everyone, but especially weaker players). Lots of prominent ESO people and content-creators like Nefas, SkinnyCheeks etc. have publicly spoken out against these changes, including a detailed explanation of what exactly is counterproductive. But somehow almost none of this criticism finds its way into the patch notes.
“How will these changes affect your activity in ESO?”
· 0% - I will most likely play more ESO than before the changes
· 11.8% - My activity won’t change
· 21.6% - I will most likely play less ESO than before the changes
· 39.2% - I may quit ESO or raiding entirely after the changes
· 11.8% - I will definitely quit ESO after the changes
· 7.8 % - I am neutral/undecided
· 7.8 % - Other
And here we are at the final question: how all these changes will affect our playtime… and… well… it doesn’t look good. To be honest, I currently fear for the future of our guild and our raid groups considering that we might lose half of our playerbase. And I am not alone on this. Nefas made an amazing video where he talks about the future of his “Project Vitality” and how a lot of its raid leaders will most likely quit because of this patch (or have quit already). The community’s criticism is pretty much about every single aspect of the changes, coming from every part of the players base; from newbies to endgame-enthusiasts. The “best” outcome will most likely have the endgame players, since they “only” receive a minor setback due to some damage nerfs and are annoyed by a less interesting rotation. But this is already enough to get a big part of them to quit the game entirely. The unluckiest parts of the community are the low and midgame-players who suddenly will have a way harder time in every content they used to enjoy. This is especially sad considering that they are the part of the playerbase ZOS wants to help with this patch.
This update’s goal is graspable and reasonable for the majority of ESO players, but it comes with a terrible execution that will result in the complete opposite, upsetting every part of the community. So many different things about this patch are being criticized that it’s highly unlikely and almost humanly impossible to fix everything that ZOS proposed in only two additional patch-iterations (PTS week 5 and then live server). To give my own opinion at the end: I believe it would be best to just scratch all proposed balance changes from this PTS cycle, collect some ideas from the community and then have an additional PTS cycle, sometime between the upcoming live server patch with update 35 and the “regular” PTS-launch of the next update 36, where you test multiple specific changes for an entire week each, like ZOS did with the tests to the proc-set-changes in Cyrodiil.
I really hope that the community will be heard and that ZOS realizes what tremendous and unwanted consequences their planned changes will have.
Edited by Teias on July 28, 2022 3:51PM On Monday the 18th of July I posted a poll on our discord to figure out how our community felt about the announced changes to the combat system. I did so for two reasons: on the one hand, out of my own curiosity to see the bigger picture and on the other hand with the intention to write this post with collected input from multiple people from the endgame-part of the game.
Most questions were multiple choice questions with a single choice answer key that asked how people felt about the changes. But every topic also had an optional part where everyone could specify in text what exactly they like/dislike.
A total of 51 people have answered the poll so far, the vast majority before the preview of the week 3 changes, but pretty much the entire criticism still stands even after PTS week 3 patch.
Everyone who answered the poll is (more or less) part of ESO’s “endgame-community”, ranging from those who are still working on their first trifectas to those who already have completed the Planesbreaker achievement.
This post’s goal is to offer both the rest of the ESO-community and the dev’s a clearer view on what a random people sample of ESO’s endgame-community thinks about those changes and how they will not only affect us, but also the low- to mid-tier part of the player base.
“What’s your opinion on the announced light attack changes?”
· 0% - Very positive
· 2% - Somewhat positive
· 23.5% - Neutral/undecided
· 31.4% - Somewhat negative
· 43.1% - Very negative
Two main problems were specified in the full text answers. First being that it’s less rewarding for those that practiced a certain playstyle, which now suddenly is worth so much less, to play said playstyle. This isn’t exclusively concerning the endgame community, but also the mid-tier part of the player base (since light attack weaving is easy to grasp and a good way to increase your damage).
Secondly: nerfing the damage of light attacks doesn’t help anybody. Sure, experienced players have a better light attack uptime, so this change will most likely close the skill-gap, but if your goal is to make the game more accessible for weaker/more inexperienced players, nerfing light attacks won’t help anybody when you don’t “buff” said weaker players in other ways. As the changes are now: It will make the game harder for everyone.
“What is your opinion on the announced damage-over-time changes?”
· 0% - Very positive
· 0% - Somewhat positive
· 11.8% - Neutral/undecided
· 15.7% - Somewhat negative
· 72.5% - Very negative
As you can see, this change isn’t accepted very well, and in the following a lot of different problems were mentioned. By making every DOT last longer you may make weaker players’ rotations less stressful, but at the same time the combat system becomes way less interesting for everyone else, if your rotation is effectively spamming the same skill for multiple seconds. The fast-paced gameplay of ESO is one of the main reasons for us to play this game instead of other MMO’s. Even if the week 3 changes to ground-based skills may not be as dire as those of week one, large parts of the criticism were ignored.
Besides that, the dev’s also contradict their main goal of making the game more accessible. Increasing the duration of “sticky” DOTs may simplify rotations as intended, but by parallelly nerfing overall damage they make the game harder for everyone. Especially considering bosses with invulnerability-phases, or bosses that can cleanse themselves from DOT’s. Also, just flat-out nerfing ground-based DOTs without changing anything else about them to compensate for this nerf, neither closes the skill-gap, nor does it help weaker players. Quite contrary: they either will have a harder time or most likely be unable to clear everything that they can currently clear on the live server.
“What is your opinion on the announced heal-over-time changes?”
· 0% - Very positive
· 0% - Somewhat positive
· 17.6% - Neutral/undecided
· 13.2% - Somewhat negative
· 68.6% - Very negative
Similar problems as with the DOT changes were being mentioned here. Increasing the duration but lowering the tick-intensity makes the game harder, especially for weaker players. “Heal-check-mechanics” like the Dreadsailreef’s final bosses’ Maelstrom-mechanic, Kynes Aegis’ Falgravn execute-phase, or others like Bahsei curses will be tremendously harder to safely heal through. These mechanics aren’t designed to be countered by a “reactive” playstyle ZOS wants to improve, but by a proactive one where the healer anticipates the incoming damage and prepares by precasting HOT’s to be ready on time. Furthermore, leaving non-ground-based-HOTs on a 2s tickrate makes everything worse by making those HOT’s less reliable, since damage income is on a frequency of 0.5 to 1 seconds. Especially weaker and inexperienced players that are sometimes overwhelmed, are more likely to have trouble to react in time when there’s big damage income. This phenomenon will be increased by nerving HOT tick amounts that would have absorbed some of the incoming damage burst. Even worse if the tick-rates are lower because those groups might even lack the smaller heal ticks in critical situations, very likely resulting in wipes.
“What is your opinion on the dmg-nerfs resulting from the announced changes? This question is about the nerfs in general, not about how they are to be implemented.”
· 0% - The dmg-nerfs aren’t enough
· 3.9% - The dmg-nerfs are good as they are
· 70.6% - The dmg-nerfs are too much
· 17.6% - I am neutral/undecided
· 7.9% - Other
As you can see, a vast majority of us believe that this change is just too much. Although most believe that we and other endgame players will be able to adapt to this, midgame-players will have the most problems: they are those progressing vet content and maybe their first hard modes. While some mechanics require a certain amount of damage, some are a lot easier with enough damage, and some might even be skipped entirely. Just straight-out nerfing damage for everyone when your goal is to help weaker players is a fatally wrong approach.
“Do you think the changes will help close the skill-gap?”
· 5.9% - Yes, the changes will close the skill-gap
· 29.4% - No, the changes won’t have any effect on the skill-gap
· 52.9% - No, the changes will even increase the skill-gap
· 2.0% - I am neutral/undecided
· 9.8% - Other
As mentioned earlier, most of us believe that the changes will hit the low to mid-tier players the hardest. Comparing dummy parses, endgame players will most likely lose more damage than the rest and the “damage-gap” might shrink. But in “applied gameplay” (in dungeons and raids) a lot of weaker players will suddenly be unable to clear content they currently clear on the live server. In effect, the “skill-gap” won’t change at all or might increase according to our beliefs.
Something mentioned a lot was making *information* more accessible, like in-game explanations of how weaving works (with more than just a tip in a loading screen), or telling us how much crit-chance we actually gain from a set instead of these weird values that we have to translate ourselves into percentages first. The tutorial only tells us how to block, bash, dodge, and that’s it.
“Do you think the community is involved in the design of the combat changes?”
· 0% - The community is fully involved
· 3.9% - The community is somewhat involved
· 19.6% - I am neutral/undecided
· 27.5% - The community isn’t really involved
· 49% - The community isn’t involved at all
Most of us don’t feel that the community is involved enough in the changes, which is totally understandable seeing the flood of forum comments that we think are getting overheard. I believe the week 3 patch notes speak for themselves. The community criticized every single part of the proposed changes and everything that was changed with week 3 were ground-based HOT’s and DOT’s (while simultaneously still nerfing them although everyone said that these nerfs will make the game harder for everyone, but especially weaker players). Lots of prominent ESO people and content-creators like Nefas, SkinnyCheeks etc. have publicly spoken out against these changes, including a detailed explanation of what exactly is counterproductive. But somehow almost none of this criticism finds its way into the patch notes.
“How will these changes affect your activity in ESO?”
· 0% - I will most likely play more ESO than before the changes
· 11.8% - My activity won’t change
· 21.6% - I will most likely play less ESO than before the changes
· 39.2% - I may quit ESO or raiding entirely after the changes
· 11.8% - I will definitely quit ESO after the changes
· 7.8 % - I am neutral/undecided
· 7.8 % - Other
And here we are at the final question: how all these changes will affect our playtime… and… well… it doesn’t look good. To be honest, I currently fear for the future of our guild and our raid groups considering that we might lose half of our playerbase. And I am not alone on this. Nefas made an amazing video where he talks about the future of his “Project Vitality” and how a lot of its raid leaders will most likely quit because of this patch (or have quit already). The community’s criticism is pretty much about every single aspect of the changes, coming from every part of the players base; from newbies to endgame-enthusiasts. The “best” outcome will most likely have the endgame players, since they “only” receive a minor setback due to some damage nerfs and are annoyed by a less interesting rotation. But this is already enough to get a big part of them to quit the game entirely. The unluckiest parts of the community are the low and midgame-players who suddenly will have a way harder time in every content they used to enjoy. This is especially sad considering that they are the part of the playerbase ZOS wants to help with this patch.
This update’s goal is graspable and reasonable for the majority of ESO players, but it comes with a terrible execution that will result in the complete opposite, upsetting every part of the community. So many different things about this patch are being criticized that it’s highly unlikely and almost humanly impossible to fix everything that ZOS proposed in only two additional patch-iterations (PTS week 5 and then live server). To give my own opinion at the end: I believe it would be best to just scratch all proposed balance changes from this PTS cycle, collect some ideas from the community and then have an additional PTS cycle, sometime between the upcoming live server patch with update 35 and the “regular” PTS-launch of the next update 36, where you test multiple specific changes for an entire week each, like ZOS did with the tests to the proc-set-changes in Cyrodiil.
I really hope that the community will be heard and that ZOS realizes what tremendous and unwanted consequences their planned changes will have.
39
-
qcell✭✭✭I'm really sorry for your guild.
I know several raid groups and guilds on both NA and EU that are going through this exodus and is affecting the players that want to stay. 12 player rosters can't be filled which in turn drive people away who can't play and would otherwise have stayed.
I understand they accept a certain % of players leaving, and it's accounted in the cost of the changes. Are the ones staying that can't fill rosters already accounted for?
Regarding endgame, specifically latest 2 trials trifectas:
- In NA, 3 raid groups progressing Dreadsail HM had to merge into a new one because of disbanding and lack of players.
- In EU, I know of at least a PB prog group that had players preemptively quit (they're not waiting for the U35 release) and are unable to run.
Sadly, all these stories are anecdotal and not threatening enough for those few American-culture-centric employees making decisions to change their mind.
I started to see the following copy pasta in several discords:
"Did you know that the critically acclaimed MMORPG [redacted] has a free trial, and includes the entirety of the award-winning [redacted] expansion up to level 60 with no restrictions on playtime? Sign up, [redacted]"8 -
FakeFox✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭I believe it would be best to just scratch all proposed balance changes from this PTS cycle
Yes. This should have happend with quite a few PTS cycles. But it never did and I'm quite sure it never will.
EU/PC (GER) - Healermain since 2014 - 50305 Achievement Points - Youtube (PvE Healing Guides, Builds & Gameplay)3 -
geeve420✭I'm really sorry for your guild.
I know several raid groups and guilds on both NA and EU that are going through this exodus and is affecting the players that want to stay. 12 player rosters can't be filled which in turn drive people away who can't play and would otherwise have stayed.
I understand they accept a certain % of players leaving, and it's accounted in the cost of the changes. Are the ones staying that can't fill rosters already accounted for?
Regarding endgame, specifically latest 2 trials trifectas:
- In NA, 3 raid groups progressing Dreadsail HM had to merge into a new one because of disbanding and lack of players.
- In EU, I know of at least a PB prog group that had players preemptively quit (they're not waiting for the U35 release) and are unable to run.
Sadly, all these stories are anecdotal and not threatening enough for those few American-culture-centric employees making decisions to change their mind.
I started to see the following copy pasta in several discords:
"Did you know that the critically acclaimed MMORPG [redacted] has a free trial, and includes the entirety of the award-winning [redacted] expansion up to level 60 with no restrictions on playtime? Sign up, [redacted]"
I'm on Xbox NA and we in the console side are seeing the same thing. We can't even provide feedback as it will be "anecdotal". That being said, the login numbers are falling in my guild and folks are generally just soured. I am a middle to low middle DPS and since these patch notes I have logged in a lot less. I have spent the past year working on my rotation and weaving and managed a strong 70k...now with the math I'm seeing from PTS I'll be back where I started a year ago and have to redo all of my toons. Well.....that doesn't sound like fun and to be quite frank, I'm not going to.
This brings me to the last part of your post....I know exactly what game you're talking about and again to be frank I downloaded it and have put 16 hours into it over the last two days. Instead of relearning, gear farming and dummy humping for another year to get back where I am on ESO, my monthly sub is going to this new to me game. May as well redo stuff in a different world. My Xbox is now a single player game machine and my gaming PC is now for MMO.
I plan to keep an eye on ESO and maybe come back later, but for now it just isn't worth paying to be ignored and have to claw and grind my way back up to where I am now.
Edited by geeve420 on July 28, 2022 5:18PM9 -
CleymenZero✭✭✭✭✭
✭I've already lost a few good players over the last weeks and the PTS patch notes sute didn't help.
I surprised a friend the other day when I told him even I was looking to move on.
He thought I'd be the last to leave ESO but I've been roster progging and really dislike these changes. It really has me looking elsewhere.
By the time they realize how wrong they are and revert, it'll be too late. Even those who still had hope have had their resolve chipped away by all the negativity surrounding these changes.
I'm still astounded that THIS is their vision of the future of the game and that they refuse to make SIGNIFICANT corrections...Edited by CleymenZero on July 28, 2022 6:29PM1 -
doesurmindglow✭✭✭✭✭Yeah, my PVE guild's vDSR prog announced it's disbanding this morning also.
Honestly it's too late for ZOS to stem the bleeding by reverting changes, which I don't think they're even seriously trying to do. Too many groups and players have already left, and much of the PVE raiding scene that supported player progression through their content is already gone.
I have a lot invested in the game, am a part of many good raid groups, and even manage a casual-friendly trading guild. But for the first time, I'm starting to seriously consider leaving also, as the community and relationships I value most are rapidly evaporating before my eyes.Guildmaster : The Wild Hunt (formerly Aka Baka) : AD PC/NA1 -
Jordan.nick11b14_ESO✭✭✭✭This is the worst patch in history. Why are they so hellbent on something so universally hated? Do they want to make us resent them and stop playing the game?3 -
Azyle1✭✭✭✭✭I know myself as well as quite a few players on Xbox will quit if this goes through, even if they made some changes in 1.2 or w/e the most recent one was. Just not happy.0 -
Riptide✭✭✭✭✭
✭The damnable thing of it is that losing people over disgust is so very difficult to undo. Once those folks get invested in something else it will take a very heavy lift indeed to draw them back, or lucky timing.
It is why it is entirely reasonable to hope for, and to push for leadership changes - to Microsoft if need be. Because it isn’t just that this update is being done so poorly, but the timing. It is just flat unbelievable that if they felt they absolutely had to do this that they not do before, not immediately after an expansion.
And if it has to be explained why the latter is the worst possible timing then truly, it is time for fresh folks guiding the ship. You don’t schedule construction at the busiest season of your business, in any business, but in the ebb. You don’t schedule deliveries for the lunch rush. I mean these are things that anyone knows without having to give it deep thought of any kind.
Whoever made that call is the fulcrum.
And by the way, it has been confirmed quietly by insiders to some of us that Microsoft is absolutely watching this unfold with concern. What comes of that in the wake of a noticeable drop in numbers and revenue should that happen, no telling. But it isn’t going unnoticed by any stretch of the imagination.Edited by Riptide on July 28, 2022 7:27PMEsse quam videri.7 -
shadyjane62✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭The damnable thing of it is that losing people over disgust is so very difficult to undo. Once those folks get invested in something else it will take a very heavy lift indeed to draw them back, or lucky timing.
It is why it is entirely reasonable to hope for, and to push for leadership changes - to Microsoft if need be. Because it isn’t just that this update is being done so poorly, but the timing. It is just flat unbelievable that if they felt they absolutely had to do this that they not do before, not immediately after an expansion.
And if it has to be explained why the latter is the worst possible timing then truly, it is time for fresh folks guiding the ship. You don’t schedule construction at the busiest season of your business, in any business, but in the ebb. You don’t schedule deliveries for the lunch rush. I mean these are things that anyone knows without having to give it deep thought of any kind.
Whoever made that call is the fulcrum.
And by the way, it has been confirmed quietly by insiders to some of us that Microsoft is absolutely watching this unfold with concern. What comes of that in the wake of a noticeable drop in numbers and revenue should that happen, no telling. But it isn’t going unnoticed by any stretch of the imagination.
Galaxies.1 -
pklemming✭✭✭✭✭
✭I'm really sorry for your guild.
I know several raid groups and guilds on both NA and EU that are going through this exodus and is affecting the players that want to stay. 12 player rosters can't be filled which in turn drive people away who can't play and would otherwise have stayed.
I understand they accept a certain % of players leaving, and it's accounted in the cost of the changes. Are the ones staying that can't fill rosters already accounted for?
Regarding endgame, specifically latest 2 trials trifectas:
- In NA, 3 raid groups progressing Dreadsail HM had to merge into a new one because of disbanding and lack of players.
- In EU, I know of at least a PB prog group that had players preemptively quit (they're not waiting for the U35 release) and are unable to run.
Sadly, all these stories are anecdotal and not threatening enough for those few American-culture-centric employees making decisions to change their mind.
I started to see the following copy pasta in several discords:
"Did you know that the critically acclaimed MMORPG [redacted] has a free trial, and includes the entirety of the award-winning [redacted] expansion up to level 60 with no restrictions on playtime? Sign up, [redacted]"
A lot of my guild members have headed over to, said, mmorpg. They are not waiting for the patch to hit. They were already tired of changes and this was too much.
1 of my prog guilds looks to be OK... Just 1 , and that is a struggle and a testament to the tenacity of our awesome RL.
I would really.love some intervention sooner rather than later.2