ZOS - from a Disabled person playing normal content, where's the promised accessibility with U35?
-
Jaraal✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
well, they extended dots for 20 seconds, so players don't need to recast them that much, which leads to a reduction in the requirements for APM. There is a pretty clear developer comment in patch notes about it. Also they reduced bosses health in all vet content.FluffyBird wrote: »What they say doesn't add up with what they do
ZOS trying to balance disabled PvE vs casual PvE vs tryhard PvE vs PvP. If they touch any part of the game, it immediately leads to disappointment of a certain group of players and here i completely agree.
They're not going to be able to please everyone. That's not how it works in life, either.
Extended DOTs are worthless. In most cases, PvE mobs don't last 20 seconds, and in PvP players will still be cleansing and purging them just as fast as before. So basically "extended DOTs" just means "weaker DOTs."
Don't let the spin cloud your vision.30 -
Oreyn_Bearclaw✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
well, they extended dots for 20 seconds, so players don't need to recast them that much, which leads to a reduction in the requirements for APM. There is a pretty clear developer comment in patch notes about it. Also they reduced bosses health in all vet content.FluffyBird wrote: »What they say doesn't add up with what they do
ZOS trying to balance disabled PvE vs casual PvE vs tryhard PvE vs PvP. If they touch any part of the game, it immediately leads to disappointment of a certain group of players and here i completely agree.
They're not going to be able to please everyone. That's not how it works in life, either.
Extended DOTs are worthless. In most cases, PvE mobs don't last 20 seconds, and in PvP players will still be cleansing and purging them just as fast as before. So basically "extended DOTs" just means "weaker DOTs."
Don't let the spin cloud your vision.
It's interesting, I am really trying to look at this from all angles. Do longer dots decrease APMs, technically, yes, but only in the sense that you probably have to bar swap less. Basically a target dummy DPS rotation (no need to react to mechanics) has an APM range of 120-180 (maybe add 1.25 for potion use). 120 is the LA and Skill each second, the other 60 is that in theory you can barswap between each skill. Lets say the average is in the 145-150 range for a high end DPS, this might have reduced those APMs by maybe 10 at most.
Here is the other side. As you stated, these Dots do similar damage per cast, but its also a much longer duration. On the one hand, sure cast, forget, spam away. Most things are dead inside 20 seconds outside of vet content. In vet content however, things actually got more nuanced. Because these DOTs are ticking less per second, your decision making is even more important as to when to let your DOTs fall off as bosses get close to death. I also think it is generally easier to track shorter dots, and use muscle memory to keep them up. Long duration buffs are the ones you realize have been down for 30 seconds. haha.
So really, I think the APM reduction is neglible. The decision making process (what action comes next) on the surface perhaps get easier, but I am not sure that holds up in execute range.
spammable is way easier to perform and if it's a light attack (not skill), then sustain (resources) too.3 DoTs 10s = 18 casts per min and 42 casts of spammable
3 DoTs 20s = 9 casts per min and 51 casts of spammable
As i said, nothing changes in APM
Also LA as spammable are faster than skill, afair. 700ms vs 1 sec.
So technicaly yes, same APM, but it's much simpler.
upd: however, in practice it may be that the boss won't let you spam him, while the long-playing dots will do it
Dont call LAs spammables. You will just confuse the pugs. A spammable is the skill you cast when all other DOTS and buffs are ticking. Also, if you actually do use a LA as a spammable (which is about the puggiest thing you can do), your DPS just got nerf. Floor lowered.Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »I dont struggle with disability, but I will say this. The two easiest PVE classes to play since launch (mag sorc and mag templar), both just got harder to play.
In the world of "increasing DOT lengths to ease rotations," well, sorcs 6 second prey is now mandatory that you are near perfect with it. Recast to soon, you miss the boom. Recast too late, and your pets hit like a wet noodle.
I don't mind so much that they didn't adjust the time, but I do mind that sorc is pigeon-hole'ed to a double pet playstyle, no room for utility skills, and having to use c-frags as a spammable, because it's a nightmare to weave with. I much rather use force pulse and cast frags when they proc.
Sorc is desperately in need of bar space. There is a reason there was an overload bar once upon a time.
I actually dont mind the change to sweeps. I think its easier to weave now, but I havent really parsed to see where the damage lands.
I HATE, and when I say hate, it's because that is the strongest thing I can probably get past the mods, how frags functions as a spammable. Its brilliant as a proc based skill, but having to use it as a channeled spammable is awful. It is the biggest reason I have all but abandoned the class in PVE. At least with sweeps, you are doing AOE damage for the duration, and if something happens mid channel, its not a complete waste of a cast. With Frags, you just sit their waving your hands around, hoping your enemy doesnt break LOS while its happening, and praying you don't need to bar swap, dodge or block anytime soon.
3 changes I would make to sorc immediately.
1. Make prey go boom at 6 seconds for full strength, but if recast early on the same target, it booms for less based on how long they were cursed (longer the curse, bigger the boom). This would be interesting in PVP as it allows you to time it if needed, but it would also make it way less of a penalty for accidently casting early in PVE.
2. I would make the base skill of frags be an instant cast spammable. Adjust the strength as needed. When frags procs, I would make it hit harder, cost less, and I would give strong consideration to another benefit, perhaps making it undodgable, or increase in strength the closer you are. That is more for PVP, but right now, one dodge roll nullifies an entire sorc burst rotation.
3. Remove the necessity to double bar pets. Adjust strength if needed, but sorc bars are the most cramped in ESO. Heck even if you just did it for one of them. I am usually a fan of consistency, but Ill take anything at this point. Another option would be to make 1 morph require one bar slot and the other morph require 2. Adjust them so the one bar morph is likely the better option with high APMS, but the 2 bar morph is perhaps a bit more powerful and plays to the accessibility angle.Edited by Oreyn_Bearclaw on August 23, 2022 6:27PM8 -
Panachudo✭✭Look at this way. Let's say there are 20,000 players a day. 20 of those players have a disability. This prevents them from performing a set of actions that fully exploits the combat system.
Hypothetically: An update was designed to address these 20 players. In this update a developer said that you could slot all DOTs and all AOE to button 1. You choose your spammable for button 2. Potions, were automatic. Special abilities were automatic. The end result would be a 2 button abilities bar. All enabled with a simple click of the accessibility toggle in game. Simple right. Not really. Everyone would do it. Why? Because why work harder to achieve the same result? We are creatures of convenience. This approach would damage 99.9% of the playerbase. It would take away from the skills required to perform complex actions to achieve a goal. The 20 players with disabilities represent just 0.1% of the playerbase (hypothetically). See last paragraph for glaringly obvious solution to this concern.
The majority of replies in this post are skimming over the hard truths of the interpretation of accessibility. It is not for the 0.1% of players with genuine disabilities. It was designed to lower the ceiling (which it did) and raise the floor (which is work in progress). Avoiding this truth is what's causing frustration. We tend to only see and hear that which gels with our own reality. The vastness of reality is far broader than ourselves.
Is this to say that there are no options for disabled players? Not at all. There are options. Adaptive controllers are one. But a glaring and obvious one is macro's. Why not consider reaching out to ZOS in an email and request them to consider your disability for an approval of a macro? You could custom build a macro in any way shape or form and unlimited in number. Pressing one button would pave the way for complex rotations. Suddenly you are pushing high numbers limited only by your imagination. Realistically, concern overcome. Instead of pages and pages of negativity there could be gaming. Just a thought.0 -
jaws343✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »
well, they extended dots for 20 seconds, so players don't need to recast them that much, which leads to a reduction in the requirements for APM. There is a pretty clear developer comment in patch notes about it. Also they reduced bosses health in all vet content.FluffyBird wrote: »What they say doesn't add up with what they do
ZOS trying to balance disabled PvE vs casual PvE vs tryhard PvE vs PvP. If they touch any part of the game, it immediately leads to disappointment of a certain group of players and here i completely agree.
They're not going to be able to please everyone. That's not how it works in life, either.
Extended DOTs are worthless. In most cases, PvE mobs don't last 20 seconds, and in PvP players will still be cleansing and purging them just as fast as before. So basically "extended DOTs" just means "weaker DOTs."
Don't let the spin cloud your vision.
It's interesting, I am really trying to look at this from all angles. Do longer dots decrease APMs, technically, yes, but only in the sense that you probably have to bar swap less. Basically a target dummy DPS rotation (no need to react to mechanics) has an APM range of 120-180 (maybe add 1.25 for potion use). 120 is the LA and Skill each second, the other 60 is that in theory you can barswap between each skill. Lets say the average is in the 145-150 range for a high end DPS, this might have reduced those APMs by maybe 10 at most.
Here is the other side. As you stated, these Dots do similar damage per cast, but its also a much longer duration. On the one hand, sure cast, forget, spam away. Most things are dead inside 20 seconds outside of vet content. In vet content however, things actually got more nuanced. Because these DOTs are ticking less per second, your decision making is even more important as to when to let your DOTs fall off as bosses get close to death. I also think it is generally easier to track shorter dots, and use muscle memory to keep them up. Long duration buffs are the ones you realize have been down for 30 seconds. haha.
So really, I think the APM reduction is neglible. The decision making process (what action comes next) on the surface perhaps get easier, but I am not sure that holds up in execute range.
spammable is way easier to perform and if it's a light attack (not skill), then sustain (resources) too.3 DoTs 10s = 18 casts per min and 42 casts of spammable
3 DoTs 20s = 9 casts per min and 51 casts of spammable
As i said, nothing changes in APM
Also LA as spammable are faster than skill, afair. 700ms vs 1 sec.
So technicaly yes, same APM, but it's much simpler.
upd: however, in practice it may be that the boss won't let you spam him, while the long-playing dots will do it
Dont call LAs spammables. You will just confuse the pugs. A spammable is the skill you cast when all other DOTS and buffs are ticking. Also, if you actually do use a LA as a spammable (which is about the puggiest thing you can do), your DPS just got nerf. Floor lowered.Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »I dont struggle with disability, but I will say this. The two easiest PVE classes to play since launch (mag sorc and mag templar), both just got harder to play.
In the world of "increasing DOT lengths to ease rotations," well, sorcs 6 second prey is now mandatory that you are near perfect with it. Recast to soon, you miss the boom. Recast too late, and your pets hit like a wet noodle.
I don't mind so much that they didn't adjust the time, but I do mind that sorc is pigeon-hole'ed to a double pet playstyle, no room for utility skills, and having to use c-frags as a spammable, because it's a nightmare to weave with. I much rather use force pulse and cast frags when they proc.
Sorc is desperately in need of bar space. There is a reason there was an overload bar once upon a time.
I actually dont mind the change to sweeps. I think its easier to weave now, but I havent really parsed to see where the damage lands.
I HATE, and when I say hate, it's because that is the strongest thing I can probably get past the mods, how frags functions as a spammable. Its brilliant as a proc based skill, but having to use it as a channeled spammable is awful. It is the biggest reason I have all but abandoned the class in PVE. At least with sweeps, you are doing AOE damage for the duration, and if something happens mid channel, its not a complete waste of a cast. With Frags, you just sit their waving your hands around, hoping your enemy doesnt break LOS while its happening, and praying you don't need to bar swap, dodge or block anytime soon.
3 changes I would make to sorc immediately.
1. Make prey go boom at 6 seconds for full strength, but if recast early on the same target, it booms for less based on how long they were cursed (longer the curse, bigger the boom). This would be interesting in PVP as it allows you to time it if needed, but it would also make it way less of a penalty for accidently casting early in PVE.
2. I would make the base skill of frags be an instant cast spammable. Adjust the strength as needed. When frags procs, I would make it hit harder, cost less, and I would give strong consideration to another benefit, perhaps making it undodgable, or increase in strength the closer you are. That is more for PVP, but right now, one dodge roll nullifies an entire sorc burst rotation.
3. Remove the necessity to double bar pets. Adjust strength if needed, but sorc bars are the most cramped in ESO. Heck even if you just did it for one of them. I am usually a fan of consistency, but Ill take anything at this point. Another option would be to make 1 morph require one bar slot and the other morph require 2. Adjust them so the one bar morph is likely the better option with high APMS, but the 2 bar morph is perhaps a bit more powerful and plays to the accessibility angle.
Those are some great sorc suggestions imo.
For 1, I would even add that Haunting Curse should allow the player to activate the second explosion at will within the duration it sticks to a player after the first explosion, allowing for it to be less predictable.
For the pets, they could just give a 60 second duration to them. Forcing recast after 60 seconds, but only requiring 1 bar slot.2 -
Oreyn_Bearclaw✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »
well, they extended dots for 20 seconds, so players don't need to recast them that much, which leads to a reduction in the requirements for APM. There is a pretty clear developer comment in patch notes about it. Also they reduced bosses health in all vet content.FluffyBird wrote: »What they say doesn't add up with what they do
ZOS trying to balance disabled PvE vs casual PvE vs tryhard PvE vs PvP. If they touch any part of the game, it immediately leads to disappointment of a certain group of players and here i completely agree.
They're not going to be able to please everyone. That's not how it works in life, either.
Extended DOTs are worthless. In most cases, PvE mobs don't last 20 seconds, and in PvP players will still be cleansing and purging them just as fast as before. So basically "extended DOTs" just means "weaker DOTs."
Don't let the spin cloud your vision.
It's interesting, I am really trying to look at this from all angles. Do longer dots decrease APMs, technically, yes, but only in the sense that you probably have to bar swap less. Basically a target dummy DPS rotation (no need to react to mechanics) has an APM range of 120-180 (maybe add 1.25 for potion use). 120 is the LA and Skill each second, the other 60 is that in theory you can barswap between each skill. Lets say the average is in the 145-150 range for a high end DPS, this might have reduced those APMs by maybe 10 at most.
Here is the other side. As you stated, these Dots do similar damage per cast, but its also a much longer duration. On the one hand, sure cast, forget, spam away. Most things are dead inside 20 seconds outside of vet content. In vet content however, things actually got more nuanced. Because these DOTs are ticking less per second, your decision making is even more important as to when to let your DOTs fall off as bosses get close to death. I also think it is generally easier to track shorter dots, and use muscle memory to keep them up. Long duration buffs are the ones you realize have been down for 30 seconds. haha.
So really, I think the APM reduction is neglible. The decision making process (what action comes next) on the surface perhaps get easier, but I am not sure that holds up in execute range.
spammable is way easier to perform and if it's a light attack (not skill), then sustain (resources) too.3 DoTs 10s = 18 casts per min and 42 casts of spammable
3 DoTs 20s = 9 casts per min and 51 casts of spammable
As i said, nothing changes in APM
Also LA as spammable are faster than skill, afair. 700ms vs 1 sec.
So technicaly yes, same APM, but it's much simpler.
upd: however, in practice it may be that the boss won't let you spam him, while the long-playing dots will do it
Dont call LAs spammables. You will just confuse the pugs. A spammable is the skill you cast when all other DOTS and buffs are ticking. Also, if you actually do use a LA as a spammable (which is about the puggiest thing you can do), your DPS just got nerf. Floor lowered.Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »I dont struggle with disability, but I will say this. The two easiest PVE classes to play since launch (mag sorc and mag templar), both just got harder to play.
In the world of "increasing DOT lengths to ease rotations," well, sorcs 6 second prey is now mandatory that you are near perfect with it. Recast to soon, you miss the boom. Recast too late, and your pets hit like a wet noodle.
I don't mind so much that they didn't adjust the time, but I do mind that sorc is pigeon-hole'ed to a double pet playstyle, no room for utility skills, and having to use c-frags as a spammable, because it's a nightmare to weave with. I much rather use force pulse and cast frags when they proc.
Sorc is desperately in need of bar space. There is a reason there was an overload bar once upon a time.
I actually dont mind the change to sweeps. I think its easier to weave now, but I havent really parsed to see where the damage lands.
I HATE, and when I say hate, it's because that is the strongest thing I can probably get past the mods, how frags functions as a spammable. Its brilliant as a proc based skill, but having to use it as a channeled spammable is awful. It is the biggest reason I have all but abandoned the class in PVE. At least with sweeps, you are doing AOE damage for the duration, and if something happens mid channel, its not a complete waste of a cast. With Frags, you just sit their waving your hands around, hoping your enemy doesnt break LOS while its happening, and praying you don't need to bar swap, dodge or block anytime soon.
3 changes I would make to sorc immediately.
1. Make prey go boom at 6 seconds for full strength, but if recast early on the same target, it booms for less based on how long they were cursed (longer the curse, bigger the boom). This would be interesting in PVP as it allows you to time it if needed, but it would also make it way less of a penalty for accidently casting early in PVE.
2. I would make the base skill of frags be an instant cast spammable. Adjust the strength as needed. When frags procs, I would make it hit harder, cost less, and I would give strong consideration to another benefit, perhaps making it undodgable, or increase in strength the closer you are. That is more for PVP, but right now, one dodge roll nullifies an entire sorc burst rotation.
3. Remove the necessity to double bar pets. Adjust strength if needed, but sorc bars are the most cramped in ESO. Heck even if you just did it for one of them. I am usually a fan of consistency, but Ill take anything at this point. Another option would be to make 1 morph require one bar slot and the other morph require 2. Adjust them so the one bar morph is likely the better option with high APMS, but the 2 bar morph is perhaps a bit more powerful and plays to the accessibility angle.
Those are some great sorc suggestions imo.
For 1, I would even add that Haunting Curse should allow the player to activate the second explosion at will within the duration it sticks to a player after the first explosion, allowing for it to be less predictable.
For the pets, they could just give a 60 second duration to them. Forcing recast after 60 seconds, but only requiring 1 bar slot.
Not sure I would want a requirement for their current summoning animation while in combat, but I don't mind it in theory. I am just not a fan of skills that lock you into an action. Perhaps casting the active skill associated with the pet, also refreshes the 60 second timer. I also, for example, think that sorcs are extra penalized for dying as they currently stand, as you really have to go through 2 separate channels just to get back into the fight. Not sure I would want a situation where in a dummy parse I need to resummons pets x2 via a channel multiple times.
But if you made it so you would summon them as now, they last for 60 seconds, refreshing with each cast, it accomplishes a couple things.
1. People might actually cast Tormentor once in a while.
2. You likely eliminate them in towns, as most people would let them vanish after they expire.
3. Bar Space.
The downside is that it would be a disadvantage to starting fights from scratch. Say you are on a long ride between keeps and get ganked off your horse, well now you have to summon your healing pet before really engaging, which could be an issue.
Definitely agree with your thoughts on haunting curse. Make the first boom happen based on time, allow the second to be triggered by reapplying to target or something.Edited by Oreyn_Bearclaw on August 23, 2022 7:14PM0 -
deleted221205-002626✭✭✭✭✭As a person who is neurospicy, this update is a disaster.
I have played this game for years and I still don't know weaving. I have tried to learn it so many times, but for me it is just not logical. I have made a bit of progress with those sparse classes and skills you haven't constantly changed (yes I need to learn the whole rotation completely from the scratch if anything changes a bit).
I bought the High Island chapter JUST for the Oakensoul, that is now nerfed to oblivion. I loved every second of the time I had with the ring. All my toons had their one bar builds, and it felt really good to be able to do an actual damage once and not get instantly nuked in PvP.
Now, you have nerfed the light/heavy attacks, as well the overall damage. You realize, the demand for perfect weaving is not gonna go down but up, bc you really need to squeeze the little extra damage that you can have. Witch means endless boring hours in front of a dummy, doing something that feels highly illogical to me. This update has made my gaming harder and the thought of being accepted in vet trials further away.
Also, why in the name of Mara have you nerfed the easiest class, the Templar, so badly? Those pokeypokes are useless now. ;_;
What was the point of all this? Not accessibility, that is for sure.
with my disabilities I agree with this post. i stopped playing for now and am looking for a new game...
Well how fully automatic does a person with disabilities need a game to be? Oakensoul pretty much takes you damn near just watching someone else play on stream!
Like no disrespect but at what point do you realize you have disabilities and are at a disadvantage? It is what it is imo.
Also on some builds the new oakensoul is actually stronger giving you access to buffs you couldn't get before even with 4 working hands!
I myself have a hand injury I'm recovering from and find my ultimate key somewhat awkward but I coul;dnt imagine expecting ZOS to tailor eso to my hand specifically!Edited by deleted221205-002626 on August 23, 2022 7:30PM3 -
Oreyn_Bearclaw✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Look at this way. Let's say there are 20,000 players a day. 20 of those players have a disability. This prevents them from performing a set of actions that fully exploits the combat system.
Hypothetically: An update was designed to address these 20 players. In this update a developer said that you could slot all DOTs and all AOE to button 1. You choose your spammable for button 2. Potions, were automatic. Special abilities were automatic. The end result would be a 2 button abilities bar. All enabled with a simple click of the accessibility toggle in game. Simple right. Not really. Everyone would do it. Why? Because why work harder to achieve the same result? We are creatures of convenience. This approach would damage 99.9% of the playerbase. It would take away from the skills required to perform complex actions to achieve a goal. The 20 players with disabilities represent just 0.1% of the playerbase (hypothetically). See last paragraph for glaringly obvious solution to this concern.
The majority of replies in this post are skimming over the hard truths of the interpretation of accessibility. It is not for the 0.1% of players with genuine disabilities. It was designed to lower the ceiling (which it did) and raise the floor (which is work in progress). Avoiding this truth is what's causing frustration. We tend to only see and hear that which gels with our own reality. The vastness of reality is far broader than ourselves.
Is this to say that there are no options for disabled players? Not at all. There are options. Adaptive controllers are one. But a glaring and obvious one is macro's. Why not consider reaching out to ZOS in an email and request them to consider your disability for an approval of a macro? You could custom build a macro in any way shape or form and unlimited in number. Pressing one button would pave the way for complex rotations. Suddenly you are pushing high numbers limited only by your imagination. Realistically, concern overcome. Instead of pages and pages of negativity there could be gaming. Just a thought.
I dont see how the first part can be true and the second part is a work in progress. A DPS nerf across the board is not effectively lowering the ceiling. The ceiling is only the ceiling as it relates to the floor, cant have one without the other. If they just cut damage by 50% tomorrow, would you call that lowering the ceiling? I sure wouldnt. Just like way back when they added a bunch of zeros to DPS and enemy health. The ceiling wasn't raised in any meaningful way (the skill gap didnt increase because of the extra zeros), it was just different numbers.
I am not sold at this point that any of their changes have done anything but cause a lot of frustration if I am being honest.
The best tool they could have possibly introduced to raise the floor happened last patch, AKA oakensoul, and even that just got nerfed.
Only argument I see that the ceiling was actually lowered is that skilled players are leaving the game in droves. I am a diehard, but admittedly, feeling like I need to start from scratch on every rotation I have ever learned is making me seriously ask if the sun has set for me in Tamriel.Edited by Oreyn_Bearclaw on August 23, 2022 7:44PM9 -
Katheriah✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭It was designed to lower the ceiling (which it did) and raise the floor (which is work in progress). Avoiding this truth is what's causing frustration. We tend to only see and hear that which gels with our own reality. The vastness of reality is far broader than ourselves.
I would like to respectfully point out that this makes absolutely no sense at all, and if you believe this I honestly think you have too much faith.
What is the sense behind first nerfing the group you're claiming to help for the next 3 months? They are effectively locking people out of content. They did not just lower the ceiling, they brought everything down. There are players that barely managed to do vet content and now struggle even more.
Nobody wins with this change. Explain to me why on earth ZOS would first nerf everything to the ground to later raise the ceiling. That just causes frustration that's not needed.
You cannot nerf everyone's damage and healing and then proclaim it's to help make content more accesible. It's not. Don't try to make me believe this is all part of a greater plan, because no solid plan would take so much damage away for months while claiming to make content more accesible.8 -
jaws343✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »Look at this way. Let's say there are 20,000 players a day. 20 of those players have a disability. This prevents them from performing a set of actions that fully exploits the combat system.
Hypothetically: An update was designed to address these 20 players. In this update a developer said that you could slot all DOTs and all AOE to button 1. You choose your spammable for button 2. Potions, were automatic. Special abilities were automatic. The end result would be a 2 button abilities bar. All enabled with a simple click of the accessibility toggle in game. Simple right. Not really. Everyone would do it. Why? Because why work harder to achieve the same result? We are creatures of convenience. This approach would damage 99.9% of the playerbase. It would take away from the skills required to perform complex actions to achieve a goal. The 20 players with disabilities represent just 0.1% of the playerbase (hypothetically). See last paragraph for glaringly obvious solution to this concern.
The majority of replies in this post are skimming over the hard truths of the interpretation of accessibility. It is not for the 0.1% of players with genuine disabilities. It was designed to lower the ceiling (which it did) and raise the floor (which is work in progress). Avoiding this truth is what's causing frustration. We tend to only see and hear that which gels with our own reality. The vastness of reality is far broader than ourselves.
Is this to say that there are no options for disabled players? Not at all. There are options. Adaptive controllers are one. But a glaring and obvious one is macro's. Why not consider reaching out to ZOS in an email and request them to consider your disability for an approval of a macro? You could custom build a macro in any way shape or form and unlimited in number. Pressing one button would pave the way for complex rotations. Suddenly you are pushing high numbers limited only by your imagination. Realistically, concern overcome. Instead of pages and pages of negativity there could be gaming. Just a thought.
I dont see how the first part can be true and the second part is a work in progress. A DPS nerf across the board is not effectively lowering the ceiling. The ceiling is only the ceiling as it relates to the floor, cant have one without the other. If they just cut damage by 50% tomorrow, would you call that lowering the ceiling? I sure wouldnt. Just like way back when they added a bunch of zeros to DPS and enemy health. The ceiling wasn't raised in any meaningful way (the skill gap didnt increase because of the extra zeros), it was just different numbers.
I am not sold at this point that any of their changes have done anything but cause a lot of frustration if I am being honest.
The best tool they could have possibly introduced to raise the floor happened last patch, AKA oakensoul, and even that just got nerfed.
Only argument I see that the ceiling was actually lowered is that skilled players are leaving the game in droves. I am a diehard, but admittedly, feeling like I need to start from scratch on every rotation I have ever learned is making me seriously ask if the sun has set for me in Tamriel.
I mentioned in another thread, but I think there is a bit of miscommunication on the part of ZOS on what they are truly trying to do by lowering the ceiling and raising the floor.
I think they are trying, successfully, to reduce the delta between the ceiling and the floor. Which, at a simple level, they have done. For relative straight forward numbers/math, Say the ceiling was 100K and the floor was 10K, they reduce damage by 20% across the board. The floor is now 5K and the ceiling 80K. Yes, the floor dropped right along with the ceiling. But, the actual delta between the two values dropped, effectively bringing the floor closer to the ceiling. From a 90K difference in DPS to a 75K difference in DPS. They reduce the DPS overall by 20% and effectively reduce the gap between the ceiling and the floor by 20% as well.
Then, when you introduce content and re-balance content, you aren't dealing with a wild delta between the two extremes, which in turn allows you to make content with more reasoned difficulty levels, that have better accessibility and play to the average of players in a more sustainable way.2 -
Katheriah✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Then, when you introduce content and re-balance content, you aren't dealing with a wild delta between the two extremes, which in turn allows you to make content with more reasoned difficulty levels, that have better accessibility and play to the average of players in a more sustainable way.
This may sound nice on paper, but this is not what they did.4 -
jaws343✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Then, when you introduce content and re-balance content, you aren't dealing with a wild delta between the two extremes, which in turn allows you to make content with more reasoned difficulty levels, that have better accessibility and play to the average of players in a more sustainable way.
This may sound nice on paper, but this is not what they did.
It's exactly what they did (are doing) imo.
They even told us they would be adjusting balance in the next few patches as a result of these changes this patch.
They just haven't finished. They did step one, reducing the delta. Step two, likely to come, will be content re-balancing.
Edited to add that I am not even saying this is a good approach, or even the right approach. But it seems to me that they have been pretty clear with what their approach was going to be and has been, and it is a fairly logical approach. Piecing this out over a few updates ensures that they have real, live data in hand, with the damage adjustments, to properly adjust content, or skills, to better align with their goals. They try to shotgun approach the whole thing and it likely blows up in their face even more than it has so far.Edited by jaws343 on August 23, 2022 8:21PM2 -
FeedbackOnly✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
spammable is way easier to perform and if it's a light attack (not skill), then sustain (resources) too.3 DoTs 10s = 18 casts per min and 42 casts of spammable
3 DoTs 20s = 9 casts per min and 51 casts of spammable
As i said, nothing changes in APM
Also LA as spammable are faster than skill, afair. 700ms vs 1 sec.
So technicaly yes, same APM, but it's much simpler.
upd: however, in practice it may be that the boss won't let you spam him, while the long-playing dots will do it
LA is not a spammable. Spammable is a skill. If somebody casts all DoTs and then only spams LA... well, it wont do a lot damage. Its not a HA build where those can hit harder than spammable.
You said this "well, they extended dots for 20 seconds, so players don't need to recast them that much, which leads to a reduction in the requirements for APM."
Now u are saying this "So technicaly yes, same APM, but it's much simpler.".
So... if u think that longer DoTs mean easier rotation then u are wrong, sorry. Im gonna use my main as example.
DoTs on my bar lasts for: 24s, 20s, 24s, 15s, 15s, 12-22-32s (carve), 20s, 18s and on top of that i have passive thats lasts 15s and i need to keep it up by casting needed skills in this timeframe, so every 12s is the best choice. It "looks" easy because those are long right? Wrong. In combat my rotation is a mess. I need to keep my eyes on DoTs duration to not mess up instead of looking at the boss. And 1 mistake in keeping up my passive means that i need to rebuild it in a middle of the combat. I doubt its an "simple" rotation now. Its a lot more dynamic and harder to perform.
There could be easier ones but most will be more dynamic than before which means harder to do.
If DoTs would last for example 10s, 10s, 10s, 20s, 20s then yes, it would be easier. DoTs with timers all over the place? Just harder as only dynamic rotation is possible.
Long DoTs also have a big problem as...
if u can kill target before DoTs would start doing damage - not worth using DoTs, and they last longer now so even stronger enemies will die faster by just spamming 1 button
if boss has teleport mechanic - not worth using DoTs as boss will remove them before those will do any damage
if boss has invulnerable phase - not worth using DoTs as boss wont take any damage from them
So in short, dummy is the only place where those long DoTs are 100% vailable
On top of that DoTs damage was nerfed. So aoe damage went down. All fights where u have to kill few targets at the same time become harder.
And thats all i have to say. More would just become back and forth.
Have fun.
Harder without become more fun too1 -
Riptide✭✭✭✭✭
✭Then, when you introduce content and re-balance content, you aren't dealing with a wild delta between the two extremes, which in turn allows you to make content with more reasoned difficulty levels, that have better accessibility and play to the average of players in a more sustainable way.
This may sound nice on paper, but this is not what they did.
It's exactly what they did (are doing) imo.
They even told us they would be adjusting balance in the next few patches as a result of these changes this patch.
They just haven't finished. They did step one, reducing the delta. Step two, likely to come, will be content re-balancing.
Edited to add that I am not even saying this is a good approach, or even the right approach. But it seems to me that they have been pretty clear with what their approach was going to be and has been, and it is a fairly logical approach. Piecing this out over a few updates ensures that they have real, live data in hand, with the damage adjustments, to properly adjust content, or skills, to better align with their goals. They try to shotgun approach the whole thing and it likely blows up in their face even more than it has so far.
So you aren’t saying it is good, but it is logical and clear….
Anyway.
Simply this - to raise the ceiling and bring down the floor, what is the difference between highest dps players and lowest?
Answer - sets and weaving.
Brass tacks, sets and weaving.
That is the primary difference gap that anyone, anyone can see.
How to decrease the gap?
Eliminate weaving and nerf sets.
That addresses the gap directly.
If you *change* weaving, no ball of any kind is moved, because whatever gap weaving affords will exist - and in fact if it is reduced its importance does not. Only if it is removed or made useless will it address the gap, because the gap is relative and moves with the adjustment.
And so you are left with sets as the main difference in what creates the gap.
Not only were sets largely untouched but new sets were introduced, and the one set piece that did manage to close the gap was addressed poorly.
Rather than make weaving useless, which would in fact address the gap - they made empower necessary and changed it, which only moves, and does not address the gap.
Rather than address sets, which are trivial to obtain by top end players compared to beginners, they hacked at skills and abilities - which are universally used across the board, and does little to nothing to address the gap, since by definition players of all skill levels utilize them.
So I mean, honestly now, is it clear, or logical?
What they say is, and always has been.
It is what they *do* that does not.
I’m not sure why the need to equivocate or attribute positive virtues to this approach that simply do not exist. Only by calling a spade a spade do we have any hope of any kind of an actual clear and logical approach emerging.
Though the chances are precious small of that, it is true, but it does no service to the game or even to ZOS to pretend that the results of U35 are reasonable or match the intimated goals.
Accessibility? Good gracious.
Edited by Riptide on August 23, 2022 10:01PMEsse quam videri.6 -
Jaraal✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Look at this way. Let's say there are 20,000 players a day. 20 of those players have a disability. This prevents them from performing a set of actions that fully exploits the combat system.
Hypothetically: An update was designed to address these 20 players. In this update a developer said that you could slot all DOTs and all AOE to button 1. You choose your spammable for button 2. Potions, were automatic. Special abilities were automatic. The end result would be a 2 button abilities bar. All enabled with a simple click of the accessibility toggle in game. Simple right. Not really. Everyone would do it. Why? Because why work harder to achieve the same result? We are creatures of convenience. This approach would damage 99.9% of the playerbase. It would take away from the skills required to perform complex actions to achieve a goal. The 20 players with disabilities represent just 0.1% of the playerbase (hypothetically). See last paragraph for glaringly obvious solution to this concern.
This is rather misleading, as according to the US Census Bureau, 19% of Americans are disabled, and other sources put the number closer to one in four. So change your example to 3,800 out of 20,000 players, and recalculate.
4 -
Panachudo✭✭This is rather misleading, as according to the US Census Bureau, 19% of Americans are disabled, and other sources put the number closer to one in four. So change your example to 3,800 out of 20,000 players, and recalculate.
You would have to perform a census for the player base to get an accurate stat. Basing it off of your reply would imply that 100% of the population would have to be playing the game. This is not accurate. Also, skimmed over of the hypothetical word. Just like everyone seems to be skimming over the complexities of the original post and the interpretation of accessibility. The root cause of all this back and forth is down to an incorrect interpretation of a word. It's then slung back at ZOS as if they don't care about people with disability. Which is so far from rational. [snip]
[edited for baiting]Edited by ZOS_Lunar on August 24, 2022 1:00PM1 -
Riptide✭✭✭✭✭
✭This is rather misleading, as according to the US Census Bureau, 19% of Americans are disabled, and other sources put the number closer to one in four. So change your example to 3,800 out of 20,000 players, and recalculate.
You would have to perform a census for the player base to get an accurate stat. Basing it off of your reply would imply that 100% of the population would have to be playing the game. This is not accurate. Also, skimmed over of the hypothetical word. Just like everyone seems to be skimming over the complexities of the original post and the interpretation of accessibility. The root cause of all this back and forth is down to an incorrect interpretation of a word. It's then slung back at ZOS as if they don't care about people with disability. Which is so far from rational. [snip]
Actually it was a good point, that 20 out 20,000 absolutely is absolutely misleading. And since a fair bit of the rest of your point rested upon that, it neatly addressed the whole of it by extension and put you off in the Finnish weeds
Edited by ZOS_Lunar on August 24, 2022 1:01PMEsse quam videri.6 -
Riptide✭✭✭✭✭
✭[snip]
I rather think it is more Occam’s Razor at work. It was a soup sandwich of a patch. It didn’t accomplish what it set out to do, it overcomplicated things to little if any net gain, and the across the board 10% boss reduction was not just largely ineffectual but is the sort of desperation duct tape that sets up even more complications as it leaves a persistent residue when removed. There is likely a lot to do before it is untangled and unpacked so that net positives begin to show, and the time spent testing and so on can never be got back. People are worn out, and while a large scale exodus may not happen it is likely numbers will dip - and if U36 is as bad as U35 then things absolutely will become grim for well and true in a way that no feel good posts will cut into. Worse, chances are good the combat team is still coming at this with spreadsheets, “monitoring metrics” and sticking to their guns - which makes week 1 U36PTS in about a month really both looming and likely pivotal.
I reckon various front end devs know all this, and have nothing to put forward that substantively changes things at the moment, and so remain mostly silent until they do. It still hasn’t reached consoles, and then when it does we will be 2-3 weeks out till week 1 PTS. I’d be being careful too, because things may get quite a lot worse before they get better.
The community, most of which is entirely reasonable, are not responsible for this patch - and in fact warned about it for weeks. We didn’t do that because we are some sort of an ugly mob but because we care about and have invested in the game they also, hopefully, love.
[edited to remove reference to removed post]Edited by ZOS_Lunar on August 24, 2022 1:06PMEsse quam videri.7 -
Jaraal✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭It didn’t accomplish what it set out to do, it overcomplicated things to little if any net gain, and the across the board 10% boss reduction was not just largely ineffectual but is the sort of desperation duct tape that sets up even more complications as it leaves a persistent residue when removed.
Which is also rather curious because this appears to be an appeasement to the very players they were focused on nerfing: the top tier folks who mainly do the veteran content. Yet the lower tier folks who deal with disability got their damage and healing reduced while still having to face full health normal bosses. With the net result being raising the ceiling and lowering the floor…. which is contrary to their stated plan.
I can’t wait to see how they explain this in the promised Q&A.11 -
Riptide✭✭✭✭✭
✭Indeed.
I don’t mean to be a cynic but I predict it will be almost have to be cherry picked, as they have demonstrated that admission of mistakes is not to be countenanced.
And some things just are that, mistakes. I hope that ultimately they find it in them to own some of them. It would start the road to a positive pivot.
People love a good comeback story, and thats how ya initiate it in my opinion.
If they entrench, sigh. Be sad indeed to watch that unfold. Few actually want to see the game fail.
But SWG happened. Two months ago bringing up that game seemed absurd to me. Now it doesn’t. ESO’s long term survival is not inevitable, particularly at this stage in its lifespan. A string of detested updates could absolutely initiate a permanent cascade, and anyone intimating otherwise should be roundly doubted. SWG had the strongest IP that has ever existed in our lifetimes, and people were deeply invested.
Its cautionary tale and community exasperation over u35 ought be taken very seriously by the people whose livelihoods depend on avoiding a similar situation. But *shrugEsse quam videri.9 -
francesinhalover✭✭✭✭✭
✭Weaving is easier just house m1 button and do heavy attacks.
Oakensul buffs heavys by 80%.I am @fluffypallascat pc eu if someone wants to play together
Shadow strike is the best cp passive ever!0 -
Amottica✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
well, they extended dots for 20 seconds, so players don't need to recast them that much, which leads to a reduction in the requirements for APM. There is a pretty clear developer comment in patch notes about it.FluffyBird wrote: »What they say doesn't add up with what they do
Extending the duration of Dots only does one thing (technically two but this one relates to the comment quoted.. It changes how often you have to refresh the DoTs but since actions still need to occur between refreshing the DoTs APM should change very little, if at all.
This ofc assumes players are doing some sort of filler between refreshing DoTs vs just standing around.0 -
francesinhalover✭✭✭✭✭
✭SirLeeMinion wrote: »I agree with your thoughts, OP. Until they get things sorted, I've noticed this works pretty well:
Oakensoul (mythic)
Noble duelest silks (from Blessed Crucible)
Sergeant's Mail (from Wayrest sewers)
1 piece slimecraw (from wayrest sewers)
on a sorc with
unstable wall
daedric prey
caltrops
unstable familiar (ignore or replace with matriarch for self heal)
any fighter's guild skill for the passive (ignore this button)
atronach (activate as it's ready)
and lover mundus
On live, it yields about 30k on the 3M / 6M dummy by basically holding down heavy attack and pressing wall, prey, caltrops, prey, wall, prey etc...and a bit under 60K on the 21M dummy. About 2/3 of that damage is the heavy attack, so it's pretty tolerant of missing a skill activation here and there. I'm sure others already have something better but I'm using this until they post their builds.
What ya think of
Daedric prey > crystal frags > (good dot) > vollatile familiar> twilight storm atro ulti
Build
Oakensul
Maw monster set for extra pet
Pillar of nirn light staff+ jewelary + 1 piece body
4piece trial set for body for the 5% dung/trial dmg
6light 1 medium
Undaunted passive for 4% more stats.
For the good dot i'm not sure what to recommend.
Scalding rune does good dmg + mages passives
Lightweight trap does good dmg+ passives however enemies dodge it frequently.
If you use dual wield barbed trap is recommended.
Theres also destro dots, class dots
Use heavys.
You can probably do 60k with thisEdited by francesinhalover on August 24, 2022 3:22AMI am @fluffypallascat pc eu if someone wants to play together
Shadow strike is the best cp passive ever!0 -
Chiaroscuro✭✭✭Greetings,
We've removed some comments as they were non-constructive and off-topic. While we understand that you may have interest in other topics, we ask that threads remain focused on ESO. This is a friendly reminder that comments need to adhere to our Community Rules to avoid thread derailment.
Thank you for your understanding.
I was really hoping for meaningful feedback from staff on this topic.
Instead, as usual, this.7 -
LadyLethalla✭✭✭✭✭
✭I'm going to spend time questing, which I haven't done in a while. Except... more maintenance, in my prime playtime. Guess I'm going to play something else for a while.x-TallyCat-x // PC EU DC - For the Covenant! // ESO Platinum trophy - 16th May 2017.
Melbourne Australia - the land of Potato Internet.WTB ESO OCEANIC SERVER1 -
Joosef_Kivikilpi✭✭✭✭SirLeeMinion wrote: »I agree with your thoughts, OP. Until they get things sorted, I've noticed this works pretty well:
Oakensoul (mythic)
Noble duelest silks (from Blessed Crucible)
Sergeant's Mail (from Wayrest sewers)
1 piece slimecraw (from wayrest sewers)
on a sorc with
unstable wall
daedric prey
caltrops
unstable familiar (ignore or replace with matriarch for self heal)
any fighter's guild skill for the passive (ignore this button)
atronach (activate as it's ready)
and lover mundus
On live, it yields about 30k on the 3M / 6M dummy by basically holding down heavy attack and pressing wall, prey, caltrops, prey, wall, prey etc...and a bit under 60K on the 21M dummy. About 2/3 of that damage is the heavy attack, so it's pretty tolerant of missing a skill activation here and there. I'm sure others already have something better but I'm using this until they post their builds.
If you replace the fighters guild ability for inner light from Mages Guild, you'll receive 12% critical chance as well as being able to activate it for 10 seconds of Empower to increase your heavy attack damage by 80%.
I think this update is absolute trash and I've stopped playing at since PTS week 2 and been enjoying other games now for once, but it doesn't mean I don't care about helping the players in this community. Hope it helps you get through this very, very rough patch and hope ZOS changes their direction quickly with these type of changes and communication.3 -
IZZEFlameLash✭✭✭✭✭
✭Accessibility was this patch's convenient excuse. If they actually wanted to increase accessibility, they would have started with more stuffs like Oakensoul to at least give people easy access to minimal 30k dps which is plenty enough to complete vet dungeons with patient groups.Imperials, the one and true masters of all mortal races of Tamriel5 -
ZOS_LunaradminHello!
We've removed some posts from this thread as they violated our rules on baiting. It’s okay to disagree and debate on the official ESO forums, but we do ask that you keep all disagreements civil, constructive, and on-topic. If a discussion gets heated and turns into a debate, remember that you should stick to debating the post and/or thread topic. It is never appropriate to resort to personal comments or jabs about those participating in the thread discussion.
Thank you for your understanding, and please keep the Community Rules in mind when posting on the forums.The Elder Scrolls Online - ZeniMax Online Studios
Forum Rules | Code of Conduct | Terms of Service | Home Page | Help Site0 -
Oreyn_Bearclaw✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »Look at this way. Let's say there are 20,000 players a day. 20 of those players have a disability. This prevents them from performing a set of actions that fully exploits the combat system.
Hypothetically: An update was designed to address these 20 players. In this update a developer said that you could slot all DOTs and all AOE to button 1. You choose your spammable for button 2. Potions, were automatic. Special abilities were automatic. The end result would be a 2 button abilities bar. All enabled with a simple click of the accessibility toggle in game. Simple right. Not really. Everyone would do it. Why? Because why work harder to achieve the same result? We are creatures of convenience. This approach would damage 99.9% of the playerbase. It would take away from the skills required to perform complex actions to achieve a goal. The 20 players with disabilities represent just 0.1% of the playerbase (hypothetically). See last paragraph for glaringly obvious solution to this concern.
The majority of replies in this post are skimming over the hard truths of the interpretation of accessibility. It is not for the 0.1% of players with genuine disabilities. It was designed to lower the ceiling (which it did) and raise the floor (which is work in progress). Avoiding this truth is what's causing frustration. We tend to only see and hear that which gels with our own reality. The vastness of reality is far broader than ourselves.
Is this to say that there are no options for disabled players? Not at all. There are options. Adaptive controllers are one. But a glaring and obvious one is macro's. Why not consider reaching out to ZOS in an email and request them to consider your disability for an approval of a macro? You could custom build a macro in any way shape or form and unlimited in number. Pressing one button would pave the way for complex rotations. Suddenly you are pushing high numbers limited only by your imagination. Realistically, concern overcome. Instead of pages and pages of negativity there could be gaming. Just a thought.
I dont see how the first part can be true and the second part is a work in progress. A DPS nerf across the board is not effectively lowering the ceiling. The ceiling is only the ceiling as it relates to the floor, cant have one without the other. If they just cut damage by 50% tomorrow, would you call that lowering the ceiling? I sure wouldnt. Just like way back when they added a bunch of zeros to DPS and enemy health. The ceiling wasn't raised in any meaningful way (the skill gap didnt increase because of the extra zeros), it was just different numbers.
I am not sold at this point that any of their changes have done anything but cause a lot of frustration if I am being honest.
The best tool they could have possibly introduced to raise the floor happened last patch, AKA oakensoul, and even that just got nerfed.
Only argument I see that the ceiling was actually lowered is that skilled players are leaving the game in droves. I am a diehard, but admittedly, feeling like I need to start from scratch on every rotation I have ever learned is making me seriously ask if the sun has set for me in Tamriel.
I mentioned in another thread, but I think there is a bit of miscommunication on the part of ZOS on what they are truly trying to do by lowering the ceiling and raising the floor.
I think they are trying, successfully, to reduce the delta between the ceiling and the floor. Which, at a simple level, they have done. For relative straight forward numbers/math, Say the ceiling was 100K and the floor was 10K, they reduce damage by 20% across the board. The floor is now 5K and the ceiling 80K. Yes, the floor dropped right along with the ceiling. But, the actual delta between the two values dropped, effectively bringing the floor closer to the ceiling. From a 90K difference in DPS to a 75K difference in DPS. They reduce the DPS overall by 20% and effectively reduce the gap between the ceiling and the floor by 20% as well.
Then, when you introduce content and re-balance content, you aren't dealing with a wild delta between the two extremes, which in turn allows you to make content with more reasoned difficulty levels, that have better accessibility and play to the average of players in a more sustainable way.
@jaws343
EDIT:
Well I had a clever response with some math, but just realized that in your example, you nerfed the ceiling by 20 and the floor by 50. BRB, Haha.
Take 2:
Always appreciate your take on things, but lets look at this another way. I will except your numbers as stated:
Example 1
I am a 100k DPS (ceiling) and I get into GF with a 10k DPS (floor), for the sake of argument, that is all the damage in the group.
1. The raw Damage Gap is 90k.
2. I am pulling 91% of group damage, they are pulling 9%.
3. Their damage is 10% of mine. (It takes 10 floor players to equal one on the ceiling).
3 ways to basically describe the same thing, the damage gap.
Example 2 (your numbers)
Now the floor is 5k and the ceiling is 80k. (This may be what happened, but it doesnt represent a flat damage nerf across the board. Ceiling is 80% of previous, floor is 50%.)
1. The raw Damage Gap is 75k. Good start.
2. I am now pulling 94% of group DPS. Hmm.. maybe not so good.
3. Their damage is, wait for it, 6.25% of mine. It now takes 16 floor players to equal a ceiling player.
Example 3 (A flat 20% nerf. Ceiling pulling 80k, Floor pulling 8k.)
1. Raw Damage Gap is 72k
2. Ceiling is pulling 91% of group damage. No Change.
3. Floor damage is 10% of ceiling. Again, no change. It still takes 10 of them to equal one guy on the ceiling.
So I ask, in scenarios 2 and 3, did the gap really close? I am not so sure. To meaningfully reduce the gap via nerfs on a percent basis, you have to hit the ceiling harder than the floor, and I am not sure they did. I am also not so sure that 2 isnt closer to what actually happened than 3. This was not a flat damage nerf, there is a lot going on with these changes. Experience tells me that the ceiling is going to figure things out faster than the floor and adapt, so if 2 is in fact a better representation of what happened, or even if the reality is somewhere between 2 and 3, than the problem is even worse.Edited by Oreyn_Bearclaw on August 24, 2022 4:27PM0 -
jaws343✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »Look at this way. Let's say there are 20,000 players a day. 20 of those players have a disability. This prevents them from performing a set of actions that fully exploits the combat system.
Hypothetically: An update was designed to address these 20 players. In this update a developer said that you could slot all DOTs and all AOE to button 1. You choose your spammable for button 2. Potions, were automatic. Special abilities were automatic. The end result would be a 2 button abilities bar. All enabled with a simple click of the accessibility toggle in game. Simple right. Not really. Everyone would do it. Why? Because why work harder to achieve the same result? We are creatures of convenience. This approach would damage 99.9% of the playerbase. It would take away from the skills required to perform complex actions to achieve a goal. The 20 players with disabilities represent just 0.1% of the playerbase (hypothetically). See last paragraph for glaringly obvious solution to this concern.
The majority of replies in this post are skimming over the hard truths of the interpretation of accessibility. It is not for the 0.1% of players with genuine disabilities. It was designed to lower the ceiling (which it did) and raise the floor (which is work in progress). Avoiding this truth is what's causing frustration. We tend to only see and hear that which gels with our own reality. The vastness of reality is far broader than ourselves.
Is this to say that there are no options for disabled players? Not at all. There are options. Adaptive controllers are one. But a glaring and obvious one is macro's. Why not consider reaching out to ZOS in an email and request them to consider your disability for an approval of a macro? You could custom build a macro in any way shape or form and unlimited in number. Pressing one button would pave the way for complex rotations. Suddenly you are pushing high numbers limited only by your imagination. Realistically, concern overcome. Instead of pages and pages of negativity there could be gaming. Just a thought.
I dont see how the first part can be true and the second part is a work in progress. A DPS nerf across the board is not effectively lowering the ceiling. The ceiling is only the ceiling as it relates to the floor, cant have one without the other. If they just cut damage by 50% tomorrow, would you call that lowering the ceiling? I sure wouldnt. Just like way back when they added a bunch of zeros to DPS and enemy health. The ceiling wasn't raised in any meaningful way (the skill gap didnt increase because of the extra zeros), it was just different numbers.
I am not sold at this point that any of their changes have done anything but cause a lot of frustration if I am being honest.
The best tool they could have possibly introduced to raise the floor happened last patch, AKA oakensoul, and even that just got nerfed.
Only argument I see that the ceiling was actually lowered is that skilled players are leaving the game in droves. I am a diehard, but admittedly, feeling like I need to start from scratch on every rotation I have ever learned is making me seriously ask if the sun has set for me in Tamriel.
I mentioned in another thread, but I think there is a bit of miscommunication on the part of ZOS on what they are truly trying to do by lowering the ceiling and raising the floor.
I think they are trying, successfully, to reduce the delta between the ceiling and the floor. Which, at a simple level, they have done. For relative straight forward numbers/math, Say the ceiling was 100K and the floor was 10K, they reduce damage by 20% across the board. The floor is now 5K and the ceiling 80K. Yes, the floor dropped right along with the ceiling. But, the actual delta between the two values dropped, effectively bringing the floor closer to the ceiling. From a 90K difference in DPS to a 75K difference in DPS. They reduce the DPS overall by 20% and effectively reduce the gap between the ceiling and the floor by 20% as well.
Then, when you introduce content and re-balance content, you aren't dealing with a wild delta between the two extremes, which in turn allows you to make content with more reasoned difficulty levels, that have better accessibility and play to the average of players in a more sustainable way.
@jaws343
EDIT:
Well I had a clever response with some math, but just realized that in your example, you nerfed the ceiling by 20 and the floor by 50. Haha.
Take 2:
Always appreciate your take on things, but lets look at this another way. I will except your numbers as stated:
Example 1.
I am a 100k DPS (ceiling) and I get into GF with a 10k DPS (floor), for the sake of argument, that is all the damage in the group.
1. The raw Damage Gap is 90k.
2. I am pulling 91% of group damage, they are pulling 9%.
3. Their damage is 10% of mine. (It takes 10 floor players to equal one on the ceiling).
3 ways to basically describe the same thing, the damage gap.
Example 2, your numbers
Now the floor is 5k and the ceiling is 80k. (This may be what happened, but it doesnt represent a flat damage nerf across the board. Ceiling is 80% of previous, floor is 50%
1. The raw damage GAP is 75k. Good start.
2. I am now pulling 94% of group DPS. Hmm.. maybe not so good.
3. Their damage is, wait for it, 6.25% of mine. It now takes 16 floor players to equal a ceiling player.
Example 3, a flat 20% nerf. Ceiling pulling 80, Floor pulling 8k.
1. Raw Damage gap is 72k
2. Ceiling is pulling 91% of damage. No Change
3. Floor damage is 10% of ceiling. Again, no change. It still takes 10 of them to equal one guy on the ceiling.
So I ask, in scenarios 2 and 3, did the gap really close? I am not so sure. To meaningfully reduce the gap via nerfs on a percent basis, you have to hit the ceiling harder than the floor, and I am not sure they did. I am also not so sure that 2 isnt closer to what actually happened than 3. This was not a flat damage nerf, there is a lot going on with these changes. Experience tells me that the ceiling is going to figure things out faster than the floor and adapt, so if 2 is in fact a better representation of what happened, than the problem is even worse.
Well... that is some unfortunate mathing on my end lol, luckily not in opposition of my argument.
With that fix, it is 8K and 80K DPS after a 20% adjustment, which is an even better 25% reduction in the delta.
Also, oddly your original response showed up when I quoted. And I don't disagree that they didn't implement a flat reduction and that the reduction does vary. And I do think there is still work to be done here. (I actually think the dot changes were unnecessary and that that light/heavy attack changes were effective enough on their own). What I do think is, lower the delta between the ceiling and floor makes it easier to adjust combat and mechanics. It makes it easier because you aren't playing with wild swings of power. It's the same reason they have formalized a ton of damage values and scaling values to be more uniform. It lets them introduce a mechanic or set or skill and have a far more expected outcome of the end damage that skill will provide.0 -
Oreyn_Bearclaw✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »Look at this way. Let's say there are 20,000 players a day. 20 of those players have a disability. This prevents them from performing a set of actions that fully exploits the combat system.
Hypothetically: An update was designed to address these 20 players. In this update a developer said that you could slot all DOTs and all AOE to button 1. You choose your spammable for button 2. Potions, were automatic. Special abilities were automatic. The end result would be a 2 button abilities bar. All enabled with a simple click of the accessibility toggle in game. Simple right. Not really. Everyone would do it. Why? Because why work harder to achieve the same result? We are creatures of convenience. This approach would damage 99.9% of the playerbase. It would take away from the skills required to perform complex actions to achieve a goal. The 20 players with disabilities represent just 0.1% of the playerbase (hypothetically). See last paragraph for glaringly obvious solution to this concern.
The majority of replies in this post are skimming over the hard truths of the interpretation of accessibility. It is not for the 0.1% of players with genuine disabilities. It was designed to lower the ceiling (which it did) and raise the floor (which is work in progress). Avoiding this truth is what's causing frustration. We tend to only see and hear that which gels with our own reality. The vastness of reality is far broader than ourselves.
Is this to say that there are no options for disabled players? Not at all. There are options. Adaptive controllers are one. But a glaring and obvious one is macro's. Why not consider reaching out to ZOS in an email and request them to consider your disability for an approval of a macro? You could custom build a macro in any way shape or form and unlimited in number. Pressing one button would pave the way for complex rotations. Suddenly you are pushing high numbers limited only by your imagination. Realistically, concern overcome. Instead of pages and pages of negativity there could be gaming. Just a thought.
I dont see how the first part can be true and the second part is a work in progress. A DPS nerf across the board is not effectively lowering the ceiling. The ceiling is only the ceiling as it relates to the floor, cant have one without the other. If they just cut damage by 50% tomorrow, would you call that lowering the ceiling? I sure wouldnt. Just like way back when they added a bunch of zeros to DPS and enemy health. The ceiling wasn't raised in any meaningful way (the skill gap didnt increase because of the extra zeros), it was just different numbers.
I am not sold at this point that any of their changes have done anything but cause a lot of frustration if I am being honest.
The best tool they could have possibly introduced to raise the floor happened last patch, AKA oakensoul, and even that just got nerfed.
Only argument I see that the ceiling was actually lowered is that skilled players are leaving the game in droves. I am a diehard, but admittedly, feeling like I need to start from scratch on every rotation I have ever learned is making me seriously ask if the sun has set for me in Tamriel.
I mentioned in another thread, but I think there is a bit of miscommunication on the part of ZOS on what they are truly trying to do by lowering the ceiling and raising the floor.
I think they are trying, successfully, to reduce the delta between the ceiling and the floor. Which, at a simple level, they have done. For relative straight forward numbers/math, Say the ceiling was 100K and the floor was 10K, they reduce damage by 20% across the board. The floor is now 5K and the ceiling 80K. Yes, the floor dropped right along with the ceiling. But, the actual delta between the two values dropped, effectively bringing the floor closer to the ceiling. From a 90K difference in DPS to a 75K difference in DPS. They reduce the DPS overall by 20% and effectively reduce the gap between the ceiling and the floor by 20% as well.
Then, when you introduce content and re-balance content, you aren't dealing with a wild delta between the two extremes, which in turn allows you to make content with more reasoned difficulty levels, that have better accessibility and play to the average of players in a more sustainable way.
@jaws343
EDIT:
Well I had a clever response with some math, but just realized that in your example, you nerfed the ceiling by 20 and the floor by 50. Haha.
Take 2:
Always appreciate your take on things, but lets look at this another way. I will except your numbers as stated:
Example 1.
I am a 100k DPS (ceiling) and I get into GF with a 10k DPS (floor), for the sake of argument, that is all the damage in the group.
1. The raw Damage Gap is 90k.
2. I am pulling 91% of group damage, they are pulling 9%.
3. Their damage is 10% of mine. (It takes 10 floor players to equal one on the ceiling).
3 ways to basically describe the same thing, the damage gap.
Example 2, your numbers
Now the floor is 5k and the ceiling is 80k. (This may be what happened, but it doesnt represent a flat damage nerf across the board. Ceiling is 80% of previous, floor is 50%
1. The raw damage GAP is 75k. Good start.
2. I am now pulling 94% of group DPS. Hmm.. maybe not so good.
3. Their damage is, wait for it, 6.25% of mine. It now takes 16 floor players to equal a ceiling player.
Example 3, a flat 20% nerf. Ceiling pulling 80, Floor pulling 8k.
1. Raw Damage gap is 72k
2. Ceiling is pulling 91% of damage. No Change
3. Floor damage is 10% of ceiling. Again, no change. It still takes 10 of them to equal one guy on the ceiling.
So I ask, in scenarios 2 and 3, did the gap really close? I am not so sure. To meaningfully reduce the gap via nerfs on a percent basis, you have to hit the ceiling harder than the floor, and I am not sure they did. I am also not so sure that 2 isnt closer to what actually happened than 3. This was not a flat damage nerf, there is a lot going on with these changes. Experience tells me that the ceiling is going to figure things out faster than the floor and adapt, so if 2 is in fact a better representation of what happened, than the problem is even worse.
Well... that is some unfortunate mathing on my end lol, luckily not in opposition of my argument.
With that fix, it is 8K and 80K DPS after a 20% adjustment, which is an even better 25% reduction in the delta.
Also, oddly your original response showed up when I quoted. And I don't disagree that they didn't implement a flat reduction and that the reduction does vary. And I do think there is still work to be done here. (I actually think the dot changes were unnecessary and that that light/heavy attack changes were effective enough on their own). What I do think is, lower the delta between the ceiling and floor makes it easier to adjust combat and mechanics. It makes it easier because you aren't playing with wild swings of power. It's the same reason they have formalized a ton of damage values and scaling values to be more uniform. It lets them introduce a mechanic or set or skill and have a far more expected outcome of the end damage that skill will provide.
I think the bold part is likely true. I guess my point is that the raw delta is maybe not the best metric to measure the damage gap. I know for example, when I am playing almost any content, my eyes are not on the raw damage but on the percent of group DPS I am pulling. Some fights I pull 20k, some fights I pull 200k. That part is mostly meaningless to me.
In a trial for example, If I look down and see I am pulling 12+% of Group DPS, I know I am pulling my weight in a good group. If I see 8%, I know I am not, if I see 20%+, I know I am playing with potatoes. LOL. Ultimately, I think percentages give a more accurate picture than raw numbers when trying to compare the floor to the ceiling, and the math is clear that flat damage nerfs don't move that particular needle.
I also agree that nerfing LAs (and Buffing HAs) are a good way to close the gap.
The DOT duration is more interesting to me. I think that actually might close the gap between someone like myself and someone like Skinny Cheeks or Liko (does he still play)? We all have similar pace, neither miss a meaningful number of LAs, where the difference really lies is that they are better at pure dynamic rotations where you bar swap every other skill. My instinct is that those rotations are going to be less impactful, which on the surface, may not be a bad thing. Not sure it does much to the floor, TBH.
Personally I think they took the DOT duration too far. I think a better approach would have been to focus on standardizing buff/dot durations but not necessarily lengthen the duration of the average. For example. Make all durations a multiple of a set integer, say 5 seconds, that way you can have more interesting rotations, but it is relatively easy to build a static one that is competitive because you aren't over or under casting certain skills that can be made to line up nicely. When you have various DOTs of 8,10, 12, 15, it becomes much more difficult to build a static rotation that doesnt by definition over or under cast certain skills.
Boring is the word that comes to mind when most of my DOTS are 20 seconds. LOL.Edited by Oreyn_Bearclaw on August 24, 2022 5:41PM1