Can the vicious class nerf/buff cycle be broken?

LadyLavina · February 2023

I'm probably a unicorn in this situation, as none of the controversy affects what I do in game,

but for everyone else, the flow of things seems to go like this at the moment:

"X class is so weak, it needs a buff , Y class needs a nerf"
-changes happen-
"X class is completely broken and OP , nerf to the ground, Why do they keep nerfing Y class? So unfair, ZOS loves X class"

Is this a balance issue or is it just the fact that you'll never please everyone no matter what you do as a developer?

Let's keep any replies within TOS so admins are happy as I feel a constructive conversation could be had here.

KlauthWarthog · February 2023

It is an issue caused by how ZoS has chosen to make changes: big number swings, on major updates.
It would not be as big an issue if the changes were more frequent, with smaller magnitudes.

Today we get things like "X synergy now deals -47% damage" on top of "Y trait no longer buffs synergies" which effectively nukes whatever build was associated with it.
We should get stuff like "Z ability now deals -3% damage" and, if it is still not enough to bring it in line, a couple weeks later, "Z ability now deals -4% damage" and so on.
Smaller, more frequent tweaks would eventually lead to a more balanced combat environment. Tossing buckets of large numbers all over the place will not.

LadyLavina · February 2023

KlauthWarthog wrote: »

It is an issue caused by how ZoS has chosen to make changes: big number swings, on major updates.
It would not be as big an issue if the changes were more frequent, with smaller magnitudes.

Today we get things like "X synergy now deals -47% damage" on top of "Y trait no longer buffs synergies" which effectively nukes whatever build was associated with it.
We should get stuff like "Z ability now deals -3% damage" and, if it is still not enough to bring it in line, a couple weeks later, "Z ability now deals -4% damage" and so on.
Smaller, more frequent tweaks would eventually lead to a more balanced combat environment. Tossing buckets of large numbers all over the place will not.

Ya I can agree with that, perhaps they could *eventually* want X synergy to deal 47% less than it currently does, but gradually ramp it down to see how the decrease affects the game. You're 100% spot on there, I feel

propertyOfUndefined · February 2023

I personally look forward to balance adjustments because they lead to shifts in the meta, which lead me to trying to figure out an anti-meta. That means a lot of trial-and-error, which means I need gold, which means I need to actually do content. Without these frequent changes, I'd get bored and stop playing.

ghastley · February 2023

Only by eliminating classes. Without an unchangeable component, everyone would be able to use the current META build, and complain about lack of diversity instead.

VaranisArano · February 2023

No, because that cycle is essential to horizontal progression. The Devs have to shake up the meta in large and small ways every update so that ESO doesn't stagnate and players are always striving towards some goal.

It would take a fundamental rethink about how ESO is meant to be played moving forward to change that.

Soarora · February 2023

VaranisArano wrote: »

No, because that cycle is essential to horizontal progression. The Devs have to shake up the meta in large and small ways every update so that ESO doesn't stagnate and players are always striving towards some goal.

It would take a fundamental rethink about how ESO is meant to be played moving forward to change that.

The thing is, though that it’s become a problem. Website holders/youtubers don’t update their builds as much anymore. It’s a lot of parsing just to become irrelevant in 3 months. And people have become frustrated with the constant grind and re-learning. When I was progressing to endgame I found it a struggle to keep up with meta shifts as I was learning the basics and having to deal with the drastic swings without knowing why.

merpins · February 2023

It's really just 1 issue; PVP and PVE being balanced together. The game modes need to be balanced separately for balance to be achievable.

Alpheu5 · February 2023

I think the problem can be boiled down to a change in design philosophy over the years. Newer classes have a skill line more focused in one of the 3 roles from the very beginning and the expectation is set, while the older ones have been shifted over the years to try and stay true to their original design but refitted to be more damage, healer, or tank focused. Of course, they can't just rebuild them from the ground up all in one go because that would make a lot of people upset, so they have to wiggle around with the numbers so the skills can do what they need to do without taking 4 years to get there through tiny, incremental, quarterly changes.

Sometimes they strike gold on the first try and we get Crystal Weapons replacing Crystal Blast. Sometimes it's a huge miss and we get that one patch where PvP Sorcs didn't have a source of Major Sorcery.