Are we looking at this, correctly?

Auldwulfe · August 2022

Ok, I am going to give a little background .... I worked Military Intelligence for 8 years, 4 active, 4 reserve.....
And I have a driving NEED to make things make sense......

Now, this thread is NOT trying to justify anyone, nor take away from anyone's valid and reasonable feelings on things.... it's only a perspective.
So, I have been gathering information from ALL over these forums ..... PvP channels, etc.
The one thing that EVERY single PvP player I have spoken to, has pretty much boiled down to the same answer. A build that is optimized for PvE will fail in PvP.
And I know, you are asking "what does this have to do with the patch?" --- well, I am a former government employee, so while I will give you an answer, it's going to take a few words to do so.......

In my opinion, and I stress, all of this is just my observation, and conclusions or opinions drawn from that, they are continuing the hybridization.
For a LONG time before hybridization, we had Stamina or Magicka builds.... you focused everything into either one side, or the other, and maximized your focus ..... I have even seen people scoff at adding ANYTHING to hit points, unless you had a specific skill that was based on max health... and even then "that is what food is for"

Then, they added the hybridization, and EVERYTHING is now scaling off your top stat .... except that the players are still making "stamina builds, or magicka builds" -- throwing ALL their points in one stat, and relying on that stat to carry any random skill they pull from the other pool.... making all skills perform higher.

And, if you go back and look at this same forum from that time, the complaints of "now you'll see random skills stuffed in".... and "I won't know what I am facing, as they could hit you with any skill"..... and "hybridization is going to make EVERY character a cookie cutter same"... and so on. And we see those same arguments being made, right now.

Now, this focus on either "stamina" or "magicka" is great, until you hit PvP --- at which point, Health becomes VERY important, but most players are already used to playing a specific focus, and struggle with the crossover.
Now, skills are being nerfed, and made less dependent on stats..... which means that people can more evenly spread those stats, and the hyper focused characters, while being marginally better, will also have strong weaknesses.....

I think the end game is a more varied playstyle.... based on smaller increments between skills, with the various ones working in different ways to achieve a similar goal .... because in the end, every skill is in one of 3 categories --- damage, heal, or enhancement / utility --- even debuffs enhance your chances by penalizing an opponent in some way ... buffs work on you.

So, in light of this theory, do I think this will work? I am not sure .... but if the goal is to make hybridization universal, then they HAVE to first make the hyper focused Stamsorcs, Magsorcs, Stamdens, or Magplars, etc into Sorcerers, Wardens, Templars, again... with some points in each stat. Then, crossing from PvE to PvP won't be as huge of a jump, and so on.

Now, I also see that, in their teams, they have conflicting programs ... one is working to make the hybrid concept work, one is to sell further expansions, and one is to create new challenges .....
The first and third work ok, if I am right in my above theory.... the second, we already see ... new sets that drop with new expansions, that are then, later, nerfed, as being too powerful.... usually just in time for new sets to drop with a new expansion..... because, unfortunately, the servers and team require money to support them, and many people won't pay money unless they are gaining something new and Powerful. So, in some ways, without accusing anyone of "breaking the system", as they created it that way, they are trying to fix it..... and it would make sense to term it as "improving accessibility, because when finished, this would make more content equally accessible to more people.

I accept that this theory might be wrong ... but I need it to make some sense, and this seems to fit. Although other ideas would be welcome .... we may just be looking at it from the wrong angle.

Auldwulfe

Auldwulfe · August 2022

And I do apologize, I was writing this while at work, in sections.... my grammar is horrible, and it won't let me edit the original.

Auldwulfe

ThirdEye_PULSE · August 2022

I think what your highlighting more than anything else is lack of communication coupled with a clear and defined goal for the future. Coming from a military background, id think you can understand just how important those two things can be for getting everyone moving cohesively in the same direction for the same purpose.

We could speculate all day what their intentions are for the future. The fact is we just dont know. We can pretend that theres logic to their changes. But again, we dont know. If we knew what their roadmap was... we could either agree with it and suffer the stage in between knowing it would get better, or we could disagree with it and move on.

Where are we now? All we see is these small snippets of changes that dont make any sense in the larger picture from where we are. The mind wants to make sense of things, so we fill in the gaps. That doesnt mean their real reasoning is logical or makes sense. It just means our brains are very good at trying to make sense out of confusion and lack of information.

VaranisArano · August 2022

PVPers also have the Stam vs Mag split, it's just that we also tend to run higher HP amounts than most PVEers do. PVEers are more min-maxed, since they only need enough HP to survive the boss attacks that would otherwise be one-shots.

Auldwulfe · August 2022

VaranisArano wrote: »

PVPers also have the Stam vs Mag split, it's just that we also tend to run higher HP amounts than most PVEers do. PVEers are more min-maxed, since they only need enough HP to survive the boss attacks that would otherwise be one-shots.

Exactly, which is why so many PvE'ers shy away from PvP --- they go in, not knowing that, and get smacked around, and assume it's all gear, or all something special, or that they just don't belong there, etc.

So, if you force a situation where those extremely optimized characters in PvE are not any more effective, it creates a system where the characters can flow from one to the other. And divorcing skills from being so strongly attached to stats would do that.

And, if I am understanding everything I am seeing, they lowered the effect stats are having on damage ....
Also, as has been stated by others, this term accessibility is a PR move - because if they came out and told everyone that "we are changing the way every build guide has suggested, and instead aimed at a more unified structure of play.... you'd have a bigger exodus than now......

Auldwulfe

MashmalloMan · August 2022

Health threshold for PVE is good at base character level of 20-22k. Anything more is typically redundant unless you're a tank or you're a newer player that wants a larger buffer.
PVE focus is to output as much DPS as possible, with as little sustain required as possible which is typically covered easily by your food, group synergy's and group sets. Everything you get in ESO is an opportunity/cost decision. By getting more HP, you get less max resource and therefore less damage. By slotting a shield, you get 1 less slot for a damage skill to improve your DPS.
PVP builds are well rounded. You build for sustain, mitigation, health, speed, utiltity. You dodge and block more, there is less synergy's and group sustain sets so typically you build 50-100% more sustain, 28-32k health, 6-10k more armor. The only builds that get away with PVE DPS setups are gankers because their only focus is to blow you up and get out of there.
Skills like static aoe dots are not useful in a PVP environment because human's know to step out of things that hurt them, mobs are not as smart.

I see no issue with the seperation, in fact, it should be further seperated on sets and battlespirit.. There is no fix for the issue you propose because they're completely different environments. PVE build diversity will always be non existant because DPS is the only factor that matters. None of the PVP points of interest are of concern, so you pick what gets you the highest number.

While I believe class identity needs to improve, I'm not a fool. PVE identity is always just going to follow a meta. PVP, solo PVE and 4 man PVE are where your builds can truely be flexible.

We have the tools to adjust builds very quickly with things like armory, food, mundus stones and sets. Changing your character stats or morphs aren't always necessary at this point. It's fairly easy to switch from 1 environment to the other.

Auldwulfe · August 2022

MashmalloMan wrote: »

Health threshold for PVE is good at base character level of 20-22k. Anything more is typically redundant unless you're a tank or you're a newer player that wants a larger buffer.

PVE focus is to output as much DPS as possible, with as little sustain required as possible which is typically covered easily by your food, group synergy's and group sets. Everything you get in ESO is an opportunity/cost decision. By getting more HP, you get less max resource and therefore less damage. By slotting a shield, you get 1 less slot for a damage skill to improve your DPS.

PVP builds are well rounded. You build for sustain, mitigation, health, speed, utiltity. You dodge and block more, there is less synergy's and group sustain sets so typically you build 50-100% more sustain, 28-32k health, 6-10k more armor. The only builds that get away with PVE DPS setups are gankers because their only focus is to blow you up and get out of there.

Skills like static aoe dots are not useful in a PVP environment because human's know to step out of things that hurt them, mobs are not as smart.

I see no issue with the seperation, in fact, it should be further seperated on sets and battlespirit.. There is no fix for the issue you propose because they're completely different environments. PVE build diversity will always be non existant because DPS is the only factor that matters. None of the PVP points of interest are of concern, so you pick what gets you the highest number.

While I believe class identity needs to improve, I'm not a fool. PVE identity is always just going to follow a meta. PVP, solo PVE and 4 man PVE are where your builds can truely be flexible.

We have the tools to adjust builds very quickly with things like armory, food, mundus stones and sets. Changing your character stats or morphs aren't always necessary at this point. It's fairly easy to switch from 1 environment to the other.

Again, common knowledge for experienced players, especially ones who have already done the grinding to get sets for various situations.

But, as we have seen with the buff / nerf cycles .... the devs ARE trying to balance PvE and PvP so that one build is equally good in both.....

I am not saying that I am right, or even that it would work.... I am noting, based on the things we have seen, that this is becoming a more viable theory ... and understanding what they want can maybe help us to voice WHY there are some issues, and they can see WHY people are upset ...

I have seen the data that people are posting from the PTS, and I am comparing it to what the devs have been saying in what communication we get, including all the spoilers they put in..... and there is a disconnect. I am doing everything to approach without any bias, as that is a necessary skill in intelligence work......

I am hoping that those people that know the game, better than I do, can present their data to show more as to why trying to unify everything can't work as well.... not without much deeper changes, and those deeper changes would be the death knell for this game.

Auldwulfe

ThirdEye_PULSE · August 2022

Auldwulfe wrote: »

MashmalloMan wrote: »

Health threshold for PVE is good at base character level of 20-22k. Anything more is typically redundant unless you're a tank or you're a newer player that wants a larger buffer.

PVE focus is to output as much DPS as possible, with as little sustain required as possible which is typically covered easily by your food, group synergy's and group sets. Everything you get in ESO is an opportunity/cost decision. By getting more HP, you get less max resource and therefore less damage. By slotting a shield, you get 1 less slot for a damage skill to improve your DPS.

PVP builds are well rounded. You build for sustain, mitigation, health, speed, utiltity. You dodge and block more, there is less synergy's and group sustain sets so typically you build 50-100% more sustain, 28-32k health, 6-10k more armor. The only builds that get away with PVE DPS setups are gankers because their only focus is to blow you up and get out of there.

Skills like static aoe dots are not useful in a PVP environment because human's know to step out of things that hurt them, mobs are not as smart.

I see no issue with the seperation, in fact, it should be further seperated on sets and battlespirit.. There is no fix for the issue you propose because they're completely different environments. PVE build diversity will always be non existant because DPS is the only factor that matters. None of the PVP points of interest are of concern, so you pick what gets you the highest number.

While I believe class identity needs to improve, I'm not a fool. PVE identity is always just going to follow a meta. PVP, solo PVE and 4 man PVE are where your builds can truely be flexible.

We have the tools to adjust builds very quickly with things like armory, food, mundus stones and sets. Changing your character stats or morphs aren't always necessary at this point. It's fairly easy to switch from 1 environment to the other.

Again, common knowledge for experienced players, especially ones who have already done the grinding to get sets for various situations.

But, as we have seen with the buff / nerf cycles .... the devs ARE trying to balance PvE and PvP so that one build is equally good in both.....

I am not saying that I am right, or even that it would work.... I am noting, based on the things we have seen, that this is becoming a more viable theory ... and understanding what they want can maybe help us to voice WHY there are some issues, and they can see WHY people are upset ...

I have seen the data that people are posting from the PTS, and I am comparing it to what the devs have been saying in what communication we get, including all the spoilers they put in..... and there is a disconnect. I am doing everything to approach without any bias, as that is a necessary skill in intelligence work......

I am hoping that those people that know the game, better than I do, can present their data to show more as to why trying to unify everything can't work as well.... not without much deeper changes, and those deeper changes would be the death knell for this game.

Auldwulfe

Many people better suited than myself have been giving them good, solid data. That hasnt changed much with this patch cycle, even though they say thats what they really want.

To my mind, thats a disconnect in itself. Their paying entirely too much attention to mathematics and data at the expense of the game not being fun anymore.

Keyword: game. We do this for fun. Therefore, that should be your first and main metric before any math is calculated and any spreadsheets are created. Ask yourself "is this fun?"

If it is not, rethink what your doing. Throw out the math. Because what does anything else matter if its not even fun anymore?

If im entirely honest... getting nervous every patch cycle isnt fun. Getting apprehensive like im checking my credit score every new PTS notes to make sure i can keep my class and sets... thats not fun.

They told us one thing. They said "were done with drastic changes."

Next patch cycle? Biggest changes in combat ive seen in years if ever.

So what is it? Who do we trust? Clearly we cant trust whoever said the changes wouldnt be like this anymore. That was a bold faced lie.

Auldwulfe · August 2022

In many ways, this is a conversation between two parties that don't speak the same language ....
We have the devs looking at it from a meta overall approach - the "spreadsheets" that everyone disparages. They look at data, and see that the population is not quite where they want it.

Then we have some very good players on the other side - they parse the dummies VERY well ..... and even though the dummy is NOT a perfect representation of an actual battle ... it does have the advantage of giving better result numbers.

They post their high numbers, and the devs look at it and see that they need to adjust ....
Thing is, they can only do that by cutting out things and trying to balance that way... meanwhile, these very good players that know the game just as well as the devs keep finding new ways to keep those numbers high.

Both sides are not wrong ... the devs want a balanced game where people are having fun, and willing to support it financially. The very good players are doing what comes naturally to humanity... overcoming, and beating the odds.

Thing is, back in the military, I ran about 11 miles a day - I loved to run - and I did 6 and a half minute miles .... but, no matter how much I ran, built stamina, or practiced, I could not run a mile faster than 5:28 --- I am not built for speed. It's the same with gamers -- very good ones are just that, VERY good .... yeah, practice can get you quite far, but there is a point where you hit the natural limits of your own ability..... and that is fine... and there are some people with much different limits than others. I will NEVER be an Olympic runner, especially not now, in my 50's..... but I still loved running.

I will never be a top tier gamer -- I love it, but there is a point where my reflexes just aren't up to where some of these guys are.... and that is ok.

However, because we are dealing with two sides of a discussion, we need to find that common ground where the 7 minute mile runners are.... because right now, we are pulling too hard on the ends of the average.... and that, I believe is why we are seeing such a high amount of shifting around.

I strongly doubt that the devs are all sitting around a table twirling their mustaches, and asking for suggestions on how to upset the people that pay their paychecks off, and make them stop paying......

Auldwulfe

ThirdEye_PULSE · August 2022

Auldwulfe wrote: »

In many ways, this is a conversation between two parties that don't speak the same language ....
We have the devs looking at it from a meta overall approach - the "spreadsheets" that everyone disparages. They look at data, and see that the population is not quite where they want it.

Then we have some very good players on the other side - they parse the dummies VERY well ..... and even though the dummy is NOT a perfect representation of an actual battle ... it does have the advantage of giving better result numbers.

They post their high numbers, and the devs look at it and see that they need to adjust ....
Thing is, they can only do that by cutting out things and trying to balance that way... meanwhile, these very good players that know the game just as well as the devs keep finding new ways to keep those numbers high.

Both sides are not wrong ... the devs want a balanced game where people are having fun, and willing to support it financially. The very good players are doing what comes naturally to humanity... overcoming, and beating the odds.

Thing is, back in the military, I ran about 11 miles a day - I loved to run - and I did 6 and a half minute miles .... but, no matter how much I ran, built stamina, or practiced, I could not run a mile faster than 5:28 --- I am not built for speed. It's the same with gamers -- very good ones are just that, VERY good .... yeah, practice can get you quite far, but there is a point where you hit the natural limits of your own ability..... and that is fine... and there are some people with much different limits than others. I will NEVER be an Olympic runner, especially not now, in my 50's..... but I still loved running.

I will never be a top tier gamer -- I love it, but there is a point where my reflexes just aren't up to where some of these guys are.... and that is ok.

However, because we are dealing with two sides of a discussion, we need to find that common ground where the 7 minute mile runners are.... because right now, we are pulling too hard on the ends of the average.... and that, I believe is why we are seeing such a high amount of shifting around.

I strongly doubt that the devs are all sitting around a table twirling their mustaches, and asking for suggestions on how to upset the people that pay their paychecks off, and make them stop paying......

Auldwulfe

We are talking about a trend here that has been going on since the game started. For 8 years now, weve dealt with wild changes every 3 months. Many people are burnt out from that. They said theyd stop. Yet here we are U35. Its almost like a habit form theyve developed as a company and their doing it without any conscious input.

Funny thing is, no one thats been around long enough is suprised they barely backtracked on anything. This trend isnt going to stop. Theyve never cared what we want for the game. There has barely ever been compromise. There is no middle ground. And thats just the way it is. Thats why most people dont even come here anymore.

VaranisArano · August 2022

Auldwulfe wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

PVPers also have the Stam vs Mag split, it's just that we also tend to run higher HP amounts than most PVEers do. PVEers are more min-maxed, since they only need enough HP to survive the boss attacks that would otherwise be one-shots.

Exactly, which is why so many PvE'ers shy away from PvP --- they go in, not knowing that, and get smacked around, and assume it's all gear, or all something special, or that they just don't belong there, etc.

So, if you force a situation where those extremely optimized characters in PvE are not any more effective, it creates a system where the characters can flow from one to the other. And divorcing skills from being so strongly attached to stats would do that.

And, if I am understanding everything I am seeing, they lowered the effect stats are having on damage ....
Also, as has been stated by others, this term accessibility is a PR move - because if they came out and told everyone that "we are changing the way every build guide has suggested, and instead aimed at a more unified structure of play.... you'd have a bigger exodus than now......

Auldwulfe

And then there's lots of players who DO know that health matters in PVP because PVPers told them so, but decide they aren't going to change their build anyway, and then complain when they get smacked around because don't we mean PVPers know there's an event on?

Frankly, I don't think PVEers are going to enjoy what it takes to change PVE content to better prepare them for combat against intelligent players.

Bosses are going to have to hit burst combos.
NPCs are going to have to attack from stealth.
Enemies aren't going to stand in the AOEs for more than a couple seconds.
Enemies are going to use a lot more CC, and failure to break free is going to kill you.
Enemies are going to target players who fall into execute range.

Most PVE players don't want that sort of Souls-like experience in their questing. And if they don't play Vet content at the level where they really do have to learn to deal with high incoming damage and status effects that are not ignorable, then they are going to struggle in PVP.

Ironically, I think the best PVP prep for a PVEer is Vet Maelstrom or Vateshran. Both are pretty punishing when you are first trying them out. But if you have the situational awareness to work out how to succeed and the mental fortitude to keep trying when you die for nth time, those are the same player-based skills and attitudes you need to succeed at PVP.

ZOS doesn't necessarily have to change PVE content to better prepare them for enemy players, but it at least requires players to understand that overland questing and random normal dungeons doesn't prepare them for jack in PVP.

Auldwulfe · August 2022

VaranisArano wrote: »

Auldwulfe wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

PVPers also have the Stam vs Mag split, it's just that we also tend to run higher HP amounts than most PVEers do. PVEers are more min-maxed, since they only need enough HP to survive the boss attacks that would otherwise be one-shots.

Exactly, which is why so many PvE'ers shy away from PvP --- they go in, not knowing that, and get smacked around, and assume it's all gear, or all something special, or that they just don't belong there, etc.

So, if you force a situation where those extremely optimized characters in PvE are not any more effective, it creates a system where the characters can flow from one to the other. And divorcing skills from being so strongly attached to stats would do that.

And, if I am understanding everything I am seeing, they lowered the effect stats are having on damage ....
Also, as has been stated by others, this term accessibility is a PR move - because if they came out and told everyone that "we are changing the way every build guide has suggested, and instead aimed at a more unified structure of play.... you'd have a bigger exodus than now......

Auldwulfe

And then there's lots of players who DO know that health matters in PVP because PVPers told them so, but decide they aren't going to change their build anyway, and then complain when they get smacked around because don't we mean PVPers know there's an event on?

Frankly, I don't think PVEers are going to enjoy what it takes to change PVE content to better prepare them for combat against intelligent players.

Bosses are going to have to hit burst combos.
NPCs are going to have to attack from stealth.
Enemies aren't going to stand in the AOEs for more than a couple seconds.
Enemies are going to use a lot more CC, and failure to break free is going to kill you.
Enemies are going to target players who fall into execute range.

Most PVE players don't want that sort of Souls-like experience in their questing. And if they don't play Vet content at the level where they really do have to learn to deal with high incoming damage and status effects that are not ignorable, then they are going to struggle in PVP.

Ironically, I think the best PVP prep for a PVEer is Vet Maelstrom or Vateshran. Both are pretty punishing when you are first trying them out. But if you have the situational awareness to work out how to succeed and the mental fortitude to keep trying when you die for nth time, those are the same player-based skills and attitudes you need to succeed at PVP.

ZOS doesn't necessarily have to change PVE content to better prepare them for enemy players, but it at least requires players to understand that overland questing and random normal dungeons doesn't prepare them for jack in PVP.

I understand what you are saying, although I will also note, that I wish we DID have more intelligent NPC Mobs --- or at least, some slider that lets you choose that option ... Lord of the Rings Online has an overland slider that lets you increase difficulty, and that game is much older than ESO.

But from a top down perspective, which is what ZOS is doing.... divorcing your stats from skills and damage seems to make a LOT of sense towards this end goal... from the bottom up, where we are, not so much.
The thing though, is that the flat damage on LA/HA from the start implied that they are wanting stats to have less of an impact - and they tried this nerf before, but had too much opposition - same as here, and again, they walked it back, albeit not as far as before.
But, if you look at your stats with a low level character, and watch, they buff all 3 and then gradually come down as you level -- now everyone knows that, but most people focus, and so one stays up, the others drop as you level. I think they are envisioning everyone spreading their stat points, as opposed to concentrating them all in one stat to maximize bonuses, usually damage.
And I think that this, in their mind, is a way to force a more balanced build on the community... if you no longer get the high DPS from stacking stamina, you will balance it out....

I am NOT saying it's right, good, or even positive..... I am merely looking for their reasoning.
If we can understand what they are trying to do, we can then work on dealing with things.
And, as I noted, I could be way off, as ZOS has been very reluctant to share their vision.
However, as I have gone through the various patch notes, updates, etc, and going back as far as I can find, the hammer blows are getting both wilder and wilder, as well as more frequent, and wider ranging....
They are trying to get somewhere, and it hasn't been working...

Auldwulfe

Amottica · August 2022

Auldwulfe wrote: »

And I do apologize, I was writing this while at work, in sections.... my grammar is horrible, and it won't let me edit the original.

Auldwulfe

There is a cog symbol on the side of the title. That is for accessing the OP to edit it.

Auldwulfe · August 2022

Amottica wrote: »

Auldwulfe wrote: »

And I do apologize, I was writing this while at work, in sections.... my grammar is horrible, and it won't let me edit the original.

Auldwulfe

There is a cog symbol on the side of the title. That is for accessing the OP to edit it.

I found it - and thank you

Auldwulfe

Tannus15 · August 2022

if they no longer tied dps to max stat i'd run 30k health in pve, balancing between health, stam and mag and run double regen drinks, if not triple regen.

I don't need 31k+ max mag. What I need is the ability to sustain the skills i'm casting and enough health to stay alive. the proof of this is everyone is happily running skills from their "off stat" with the current system.

personally i've been expecting this change ever since they changed proc sets to scale damage from damage, healing from resources and the various tank sets from resistances.
like hybridization and potions, it feels like they had an idea, did some of it and then decided the rest was too hard and moved on to the next thing.

chessalavakia_ESO · August 2022

The PTS patch makes it so that the skill that buff heavy attacks and some of the item sets that buff heavy attacks are non-functional in PvP areas and they are significantly more effective in PvP areas for many classes.

If you wanted people to be able to bring their builds from PvE into PvP that is the direct opposite of what you would want to do.

The easiest approach of making players be able to move from PvE to PvP more easily from a skill/itemization perspective would be to nerf or rework items that are good in PvP but sub-optimal in most PvE content.

I'm likely never going to be running Corrosive Armor on my DK in PvE because I don't need more penetration in PvE that badly. But, if I decided to torture myself and go full tryhard in PvP I would likely consider running it with some builds.

I'm never going to be running Balorgh in PvE because with a few very limited exceptions you don't need extra burst damage in PvE. Again, if I decided to torture myself and go full tryhard in PvP I would likely consider running it.

The difference between PvE and PvP players also is not entirely base on gear. Many of the PvP players have spent years fighting and are significantly better at PvP than your average PvE player. The average CP level is far higher in PvP areas than PvE. You could give every PvE player a free set of the meta PvP gear and it still may not make them competitive.

Ragnarok0130 · August 2022

ThirdEye_PULSE wrote: »

I think what your highlighting more than anything else is lack of communication coupled with a clear and defined goal for the future. Coming from a military background, id think you can understand just how important those two things can be for getting everyone moving cohesively in the same direction for the same purpose.

We could speculate all day what their intentions are for the future. The fact is we just dont know. We can pretend that theres logic to their changes. But again, we dont know. If we knew what their roadmap was... we could either agree with it and suffer the stage in between knowing it would get better, or we could disagree with it and move on.

Where are we now? All we see is these small snippets of changes that dont make any sense in the larger picture from where we are. The mind wants to make sense of things, so we fill in the gaps. That doesnt mean their real reasoning is logical or makes sense. It just means our brains are very good at trying to make sense out of confusion and lack of information.

Another former military guy here (MI (enlisted) and Armor (commissioned)), I think if they actually had a plan and vision there would be no "conflicting visions and goals working against one another" in update 35 like the devs admitted to here on the forums. I'm not asking them to adhere to the MDMP, but I am asking them to actually have a plan, a vision, a coherent method to achieve that plan, and for the love of Kyne freaking communicate with the players and don't insult them. I also expect the devs to not dig their heels in and actually walk back changes that the PTS shows don't achieve their goals (and in this case does the exact opposite of the state goal of accessibility). One of the devs said "a little trust is appreciated", and that trust goes both ways. You can't see your customers as toxic adversaries and still service them correctly and build trust.

Players/customers need everything to make sense, especially when those changes adversely affect their enjoyment of the product and service they pay for. The communication by this dev team MUST get better by orders of magnitude if they want ESO to continue to be a financial success.