How are we feeling about Subclassing?
-
ForumBully✭✭✭✭✭
✭ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »xylena_lazarow wrote: »Every concern and worry can also be said about the current indefensible state of the game's metas.
That's just not true. The current state of Corrosive Armor, as an example, is completely fine. It's strong, but fine. Subclassing will give Corrosive Armor to classes that can get a lot more mileage out of it, which will make it completely overpowered again. So it will get a big nerf (or ZOS will leave us in an unfun game state for months again).
That is just one example of many. This is not something that "can be said about the current state of the meta" and it'll be an unfair change to anyone who wants to be a DK purist.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because things are bad, doesn't mean we might as well make things worse.
That's an interpretation. Another is that this change will finally put PvP on another path. One where skills are balanced rather than classes against each other. One where if a "class defining" skill is made useless there is an alternative to simply benching one or several characters that have been rendered inadequate or unplayable. One where class skills buffed beyond reason can be used by any class to level the playing field, at least as far as skill selection goes.
I don't think continuing unbalanced classes forever is an appealing road and I'm excited to see where changing directions can lead
That's the thing. Because ZOS had to face the reality that having to "bench a character" is unacceptable, they were actually forced to make balance changes in the first place. Now if something isn't seeing much use, they can just lean back and ignore it, just like 90% of item sets in this game are getting ignored and how the majority of skills in the game were ignored before Elsweyr.
And again, just because every class has access to the same overpowered tool doesn't make things "okay". The Scalebreaker patch was in a fair state of balance, but it was also rather unfun because dots were so much more powerful than spammables. This is something that will have to be addressed, and that's what makes heavy nerfs inevitable.
We'll end up in a state were all skills will be very comparable. Especially skills that can "set up" a kill will take heavy nerfs, because those can be stacked from multiple classes to increase the kill potential. I'm willing to bet that Shalks, Curse and Blastbones will be turned into dots instead, so that they are "comparable" and "balanced". But that also makes combat as boring as it was in Scalebreaker. That is, assuming we aren't entering a tank meta due to Corrosive and whatever Warden skills will allow.
A lot of what you're describing is, in my opinion, where "class balance" has gotten us. I think class balancing has resulted in an atmosphere where developers are worried about disrupting spreadsheet numbers, and the result of that has been watered down boring single percentage point changes to skills.
Developers can't just take a single skill and make it do something fun because that will disrupt class balance. I hope subclassing puts an end to all that.
Yeah, but that's because of the insistence of having spreadsheet numbers in the first place. What you are describing is bringing back a state where crazy, fun and unique abilities are balanced by the opportunity cost of running them. One of the only remaining opportunity costs we have are morphs. Nightblade Cloak has the opportunity cost attached that the strong self heal of the other morph will be unavailable if you choose the invisibility and vice versa. That's why the Nightblades that go invisible aren't as tough as the Nightblades that aren't. It's a trade-off. There used to be more trade-offs, like the choice of being stamina or magicka. Now ZOS is lowering the trade-offs of choosing a particular class and that will make spreadsheets more important, not less. ZOS homogenized skills so they could implement hybridization. Vigor is as strong on magicka characters now as on stamina character. Soon we'll see them homogenize everything even more as a result of "skills being balanced" rather than classes.
I'm not going to make guesses about what's going to happen, I guess we'll have to find out because it seems like subclassing is happening. I think there's plenty of ways this can go wrong, but after ten years of the same kind of wrong, I'm still excited for any new direction.
If nothing else, the last couple of weeks has shown me that some folks at ZoS remembered that PvP exists, and that what they've been doing isn't working out so well.0 -
Ratzkifal✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »xylena_lazarow wrote: »Every concern and worry can also be said about the current indefensible state of the game's metas.
That's just not true. The current state of Corrosive Armor, as an example, is completely fine. It's strong, but fine. Subclassing will give Corrosive Armor to classes that can get a lot more mileage out of it, which will make it completely overpowered again. So it will get a big nerf (or ZOS will leave us in an unfun game state for months again).
That is just one example of many. This is not something that "can be said about the current state of the meta" and it'll be an unfair change to anyone who wants to be a DK purist.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because things are bad, doesn't mean we might as well make things worse.
That's an interpretation. Another is that this change will finally put PvP on another path. One where skills are balanced rather than classes against each other. One where if a "class defining" skill is made useless there is an alternative to simply benching one or several characters that have been rendered inadequate or unplayable. One where class skills buffed beyond reason can be used by any class to level the playing field, at least as far as skill selection goes.
I don't think continuing unbalanced classes forever is an appealing road and I'm excited to see where changing directions can lead
That's the thing. Because ZOS had to face the reality that having to "bench a character" is unacceptable, they were actually forced to make balance changes in the first place. Now if something isn't seeing much use, they can just lean back and ignore it, just like 90% of item sets in this game are getting ignored and how the majority of skills in the game were ignored before Elsweyr.
And again, just because every class has access to the same overpowered tool doesn't make things "okay". The Scalebreaker patch was in a fair state of balance, but it was also rather unfun because dots were so much more powerful than spammables. This is something that will have to be addressed, and that's what makes heavy nerfs inevitable.
We'll end up in a state were all skills will be very comparable. Especially skills that can "set up" a kill will take heavy nerfs, because those can be stacked from multiple classes to increase the kill potential. I'm willing to bet that Shalks, Curse and Blastbones will be turned into dots instead, so that they are "comparable" and "balanced". But that also makes combat as boring as it was in Scalebreaker. That is, assuming we aren't entering a tank meta due to Corrosive and whatever Warden skills will allow.
A lot of what you're describing is, in my opinion, where "class balance" has gotten us. I think class balancing has resulted in an atmosphere where developers are worried about disrupting spreadsheet numbers, and the result of that has been watered down boring single percentage point changes to skills.
Developers can't just take a single skill and make it do something fun because that will disrupt class balance. I hope subclassing puts an end to all that.
Yeah, but that's because of the insistence of having spreadsheet numbers in the first place. What you are describing is bringing back a state where crazy, fun and unique abilities are balanced by the opportunity cost of running them. One of the only remaining opportunity costs we have are morphs. Nightblade Cloak has the opportunity cost attached that the strong self heal of the other morph will be unavailable if you choose the invisibility and vice versa. That's why the Nightblades that go invisible aren't as tough as the Nightblades that aren't. It's a trade-off. There used to be more trade-offs, like the choice of being stamina or magicka. Now ZOS is lowering the trade-offs of choosing a particular class and that will make spreadsheets more important, not less. ZOS homogenized skills so they could implement hybridization. Vigor is as strong on magicka characters now as on stamina character. Soon we'll see them homogenize everything even more as a result of "skills being balanced" rather than classes.
I'm not going to make guesses about what's going to happen, I guess we'll have to find out because it seems like subclassing is happening. I think there's plenty of ways this can go wrong, but after ten years of the same kind of wrong, I'm still excited for any new direction.
If nothing else, the last couple of weeks has shown me that some folks at ZoS remembered that PvP exists, and that what they've been doing isn't working out so well.
I'd like that kind of optimism where "a new kind of wrong" seems preferable. And you are right about that. It is happening, because when has ZOS ever backed down on something they set their minds on, no matter how nonsensical it was?
There are some guard rails that could be put on subclassing to keep the damage at a minimum, like only allowing one skill line change rather than two. That would be my constructive criticism for the devs.
But it's telling that this feature is highly controversial and from the announcement alone we already got an even split in the community before the actual reality of it has hit us, compared to, say, the announcement of a new weapon type, a new guild skill line or adding a 4th skill line to every class, which would have been universally agreed upon as a good thing.This Bosmer was tortured to death. There is nothing left to be done.4 -
ketsparrowhawk✭✭✭✭✭Absolutely hate the idea. But no denying a fair number of people are into it. What can ya do.8 -
ForumBully✭✭✭✭✭
✭ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »xylena_lazarow wrote: »Every concern and worry can also be said about the current indefensible state of the game's metas.
That's just not true. The current state of Corrosive Armor, as an example, is completely fine. It's strong, but fine. Subclassing will give Corrosive Armor to classes that can get a lot more mileage out of it, which will make it completely overpowered again. So it will get a big nerf (or ZOS will leave us in an unfun game state for months again).
That is just one example of many. This is not something that "can be said about the current state of the meta" and it'll be an unfair change to anyone who wants to be a DK purist.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because things are bad, doesn't mean we might as well make things worse.
That's an interpretation. Another is that this change will finally put PvP on another path. One where skills are balanced rather than classes against each other. One where if a "class defining" skill is made useless there is an alternative to simply benching one or several characters that have been rendered inadequate or unplayable. One where class skills buffed beyond reason can be used by any class to level the playing field, at least as far as skill selection goes.
I don't think continuing unbalanced classes forever is an appealing road and I'm excited to see where changing directions can lead
That's the thing. Because ZOS had to face the reality that having to "bench a character" is unacceptable, they were actually forced to make balance changes in the first place. Now if something isn't seeing much use, they can just lean back and ignore it, just like 90% of item sets in this game are getting ignored and how the majority of skills in the game were ignored before Elsweyr.
And again, just because every class has access to the same overpowered tool doesn't make things "okay". The Scalebreaker patch was in a fair state of balance, but it was also rather unfun because dots were so much more powerful than spammables. This is something that will have to be addressed, and that's what makes heavy nerfs inevitable.
We'll end up in a state were all skills will be very comparable. Especially skills that can "set up" a kill will take heavy nerfs, because those can be stacked from multiple classes to increase the kill potential. I'm willing to bet that Shalks, Curse and Blastbones will be turned into dots instead, so that they are "comparable" and "balanced". But that also makes combat as boring as it was in Scalebreaker. That is, assuming we aren't entering a tank meta due to Corrosive and whatever Warden skills will allow.
A lot of what you're describing is, in my opinion, where "class balance" has gotten us. I think class balancing has resulted in an atmosphere where developers are worried about disrupting spreadsheet numbers, and the result of that has been watered down boring single percentage point changes to skills.
Developers can't just take a single skill and make it do something fun because that will disrupt class balance. I hope subclassing puts an end to all that.
Yeah, but that's because of the insistence of having spreadsheet numbers in the first place. What you are describing is bringing back a state where crazy, fun and unique abilities are balanced by the opportunity cost of running them. One of the only remaining opportunity costs we have are morphs. Nightblade Cloak has the opportunity cost attached that the strong self heal of the other morph will be unavailable if you choose the invisibility and vice versa. That's why the Nightblades that go invisible aren't as tough as the Nightblades that aren't. It's a trade-off. There used to be more trade-offs, like the choice of being stamina or magicka. Now ZOS is lowering the trade-offs of choosing a particular class and that will make spreadsheets more important, not less. ZOS homogenized skills so they could implement hybridization. Vigor is as strong on magicka characters now as on stamina character. Soon we'll see them homogenize everything even more as a result of "skills being balanced" rather than classes.
I'm not going to make guesses about what's going to happen, I guess we'll have to find out because it seems like subclassing is happening. I think there's plenty of ways this can go wrong, but after ten years of the same kind of wrong, I'm still excited for any new direction.
If nothing else, the last couple of weeks has shown me that some folks at ZoS remembered that PvP exists, and that what they've been doing isn't working out so well.
I'd like that kind of optimism where "a new kind of wrong" seems preferable. And you are right about that. It is happening, because when has ZOS ever backed down on something they set their minds on, no matter how nonsensical it was?
There are some guard rails that could be put on subclassing to keep the damage at a minimum, like only allowing one skill line change rather than two. That would be my constructive criticism for the devs.
But it's telling that this feature is highly controversial and from the announcement alone we already got an even split in the community before the actual reality of it has hit us, compared to, say, the announcement of a new weapon type, a new guild skill line or adding a 4th skill line to every class, which would have been universally agreed upon as a good thing.
Personally I'd rather that they went big. Go with the original plan or risk it becoming a watered down underwhelming system before it even gets out of PTS.
Whatever the case, I'm excited for the patch notes. Can't remember the last time that happened1 -
ForumBully✭✭✭✭✭
✭If I think about class skills as skill trees, and class assignments as a particular affinity for a specific skill tree, I think that's a better system than how the game launched. If they build further on that and revamp some otherwise useless skills into something good in general, that's maybe a little better if you happen to be of that class, I wouldn't opposed that path....case by case probably, but it could regain some of the identity that some miss.0 -
Pixiepumpkin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭ForumBully wrote: »If I think about class skills as skill trees, and class assignments as a particular affinity for a specific skill tree, I think that's a better system than how the game launched. If they build further on that and revamp some otherwise useless skills into something good in general, that's maybe a little better if you happen to be of that class, I wouldn't opposed that path....case by case probably, but it could regain some of the identity that some miss.
Understandable, but for many of us who have sunk a ton of money (3k+) into this game, who bought it becasue it had classes and who have poured countless hours into these classes...well this now seems like I am not getting what I paid for.
Continued development, changes, updates....all part of the MMORPG experience. But not when a core function of the game is taken out and playing a class and SEEING that class be played is a core aspect of Elder Scrolls Online."Class identity isn’t just about power or efficiency. It’s about symbolic clarity, mechanical cohesion, and a shared visual and tactical language between players." - sans-culottes8 -
ForumBully✭✭✭✭✭
✭Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »If I think about class skills as skill trees, and class assignments as a particular affinity for a specific skill tree, I think that's a better system than how the game launched. If they build further on that and revamp some otherwise useless skills into something good in general, that's maybe a little better if you happen to be of that class, I wouldn't opposed that path....case by case probably, but it could regain some of the identity that some miss.
Understandable, but for many of us who have sunk a ton of money (3k+) into this game, who bought it becasue it had classes and who have poured countless hours into these classes...well this now seems like I am not getting what I paid for.
Continued development, changes, updates....all part of the MMORPG experience. But not when a core function of the game is taken out and playing a class and SEEING that class be played is a core aspect of Elder Scrolls Online.
Understandable. I've dumped thousands into this game since launch and left because it seemed like it would never change. I waited for class balance that never came. I waited for something...anything to change in PvP and that never changed, at least not for the better. It seemed like the enjoyment for me in ESO was only going down...so I left. I didn't start paying attention again until I heard about Vengeance PvP...I honestly couldn't believe that ZoS actually tried something. So now my curiosity is peaked.0 -
Pixiepumpkin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭ForumBully wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »If I think about class skills as skill trees, and class assignments as a particular affinity for a specific skill tree, I think that's a better system than how the game launched. If they build further on that and revamp some otherwise useless skills into something good in general, that's maybe a little better if you happen to be of that class, I wouldn't opposed that path....case by case probably, but it could regain some of the identity that some miss.
Understandable, but for many of us who have sunk a ton of money (3k+) into this game, who bought it becasue it had classes and who have poured countless hours into these classes...well this now seems like I am not getting what I paid for.
Continued development, changes, updates....all part of the MMORPG experience. But not when a core function of the game is taken out and playing a class and SEEING that class be played is a core aspect of Elder Scrolls Online.
Understandable. I've dumped thousands into this game since launch and left because it seemed like it would never change. I waited for class balance that never came. I waited for something...anything to change in PvP and that never changed, at least not for the better. It seemed like the enjoyment for me in ESO was only going down...so I left. I didn't start paying attention again until I heard about Vengeance PvP...I honestly couldn't believe that ZoS actually tried something. So now my curiosity is peaked.
But that is in part what bothers me.
I hated Cyrodiil when I first tried it (Been PVPing since 2002. Grinded High Warlord in 2004/2005 WOW and played PVP as primary entertainemnt in at least 5 other MMORPGS in the past 20 years). I tried Vengeance (reluctantly, I have a thread whining about it, then loving it...and gave it an edit showing so).
The two things I loved about Vengeance.
1. CLASSES PLAYED LIKE CLASSES FOR TEH FIRST TIME IN ESO (yes I am screaming).
2. Performance was good, but this was less impactful to me as I played Cyrodil about 3x total)
For them to go from "here is what a real class plays like" to "nothing you face will ever be anything you can possibly predict, outside of meta" just feels backwards.
I am all for trying new stuff, but not erasing class identity darn near completely.
I am not trying to whine, but this feels like a literal slap in the face to long time players who have supported the game, dumped thousands (I would guess my family is around the 5k mark). Because a game with no class identity is not the same game I purchased and invested in.
There is a reason sub-classes is possibly the hottest topic in the games history.
EDIT: To put my money where my mouth is, here is a screenshot of my paid for 2025 content pass (that is the new ((broken)) mage portal customized action) and a screen of my store tab.
Edited by Pixiepumpkin on April 13, 2025 8:26PM"Class identity isn’t just about power or efficiency. It’s about symbolic clarity, mechanical cohesion, and a shared visual and tactical language between players." - sans-culottes2 -
ForumBully✭✭✭✭✭
✭Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »If I think about class skills as skill trees, and class assignments as a particular affinity for a specific skill tree, I think that's a better system than how the game launched. If they build further on that and revamp some otherwise useless skills into something good in general, that's maybe a little better if you happen to be of that class, I wouldn't opposed that path....case by case probably, but it could regain some of the identity that some miss.
Understandable, but for many of us who have sunk a ton of money (3k+) into this game, who bought it becasue it had classes and who have poured countless hours into these classes...well this now seems like I am not getting what I paid for.
Continued development, changes, updates....all part of the MMORPG experience. But not when a core function of the game is taken out and playing a class and SEEING that class be played is a core aspect of Elder Scrolls Online.
Understandable. I've dumped thousands into this game since launch and left because it seemed like it would never change. I waited for class balance that never came. I waited for something...anything to change in PvP and that never changed, at least not for the better. It seemed like the enjoyment for me in ESO was only going down...so I left. I didn't start paying attention again until I heard about Vengeance PvP...I honestly couldn't believe that ZoS actually tried something. So now my curiosity is peaked.
But that is in part what bothers me.
I hated Cyrodiil when I first tried it (Been PVPing since 2002. Grinded High Warlord in 2004/2005 WOW and played PVP as primary entertainemnt in at least 5 other MMORPGS in the past 20 years). I tried Vengeance (reluctantly, I have a thread whining about it, then loving it...and gave it an edit showing so).
The two things I loved about Vengeance.
1. CLASSES PLAYED LIKE CLASSES FOR TEH FIRST TIME IN ESO (yes I am screaming).
2. Performance was good, but this was less impactful to me as I played Cyrodil about 3x total)
For them to go from "here is what a real class plays like" to "nothing you face will ever be anything you can possibly predict, outside of meta" just feels backwards.
I am all for trying new stuff, but not erasing class identity darn near completely.
I am not trying to whine, but this feels like a literal slap in the face to long time players who have supported the game, dumped thousands (I would guess my family is around the 5k mark). Because a game with no class identity is not the same game I purchased and invested in.
There is a reason sub-classes is possibly the hottest topic in the games history.
So you favor Vengeance without Subclassing.... honestly I'd take that, but I still like the subclass idea. It's going to have problems, but after so many updates of saying "I don't want to nerf class A, I'd rather see buffs for other classes" and getting nothing combined with the obvious and laughable spreadsheet driven "balancing"...if they want to start something new with Subclasses, I'm in.
Subclasses will probably convince me to play again...but Vengeance will get me to sub again.1 -
Pixiepumpkin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭ForumBully wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »If I think about class skills as skill trees, and class assignments as a particular affinity for a specific skill tree, I think that's a better system than how the game launched. If they build further on that and revamp some otherwise useless skills into something good in general, that's maybe a little better if you happen to be of that class, I wouldn't opposed that path....case by case probably, but it could regain some of the identity that some miss.
Understandable, but for many of us who have sunk a ton of money (3k+) into this game, who bought it becasue it had classes and who have poured countless hours into these classes...well this now seems like I am not getting what I paid for.
Continued development, changes, updates....all part of the MMORPG experience. But not when a core function of the game is taken out and playing a class and SEEING that class be played is a core aspect of Elder Scrolls Online.
Understandable. I've dumped thousands into this game since launch and left because it seemed like it would never change. I waited for class balance that never came. I waited for something...anything to change in PvP and that never changed, at least not for the better. It seemed like the enjoyment for me in ESO was only going down...so I left. I didn't start paying attention again until I heard about Vengeance PvP...I honestly couldn't believe that ZoS actually tried something. So now my curiosity is peaked.
But that is in part what bothers me.
I hated Cyrodiil when I first tried it (Been PVPing since 2002. Grinded High Warlord in 2004/2005 WOW and played PVP as primary entertainemnt in at least 5 other MMORPGS in the past 20 years). I tried Vengeance (reluctantly, I have a thread whining about it, then loving it...and gave it an edit showing so).
The two things I loved about Vengeance.
1. CLASSES PLAYED LIKE CLASSES FOR TEH FIRST TIME IN ESO (yes I am screaming).
2. Performance was good, but this was less impactful to me as I played Cyrodil about 3x total)
For them to go from "here is what a real class plays like" to "nothing you face will ever be anything you can possibly predict, outside of meta" just feels backwards.
I am all for trying new stuff, but not erasing class identity darn near completely.
I am not trying to whine, but this feels like a literal slap in the face to long time players who have supported the game, dumped thousands (I would guess my family is around the 5k mark). Because a game with no class identity is not the same game I purchased and invested in.
There is a reason sub-classes is possibly the hottest topic in the games history.
So you favor Vengeance without Subclassing.... honestly I'd take that, but I still like the subclass idea. It's going to have problems, but after so many updates of saying "I don't want to nerf class A, I'd rather see buffs for other classes" and getting nothing combined with the obvious and laughable spreadsheet driven "balancing"...if they want to start something new with Subclasses, I'm in.
Subclasses will probably convince me to play again...but Vengeance will get me to sub again.
Vengeance was amazing for a plethora of reasons.
• ACTUAL CLASSES
• Balanced PVP (infinitely easier for DEVS to adjust)
• Ability so square up against a sweaty as a new player (not that I am new) and have a chance at victory (albeit a low chance, but its better than getting globaled before you even see action ((I have literally had this done)).
• MASSIVE battles and good performance.
All Vengeance needs is a reward structure and I believe people will play it the most of any PVP format in ESO's history.
Sub-classes however. I will reluctantly wait and see but there is no amount of testing of trying necessary for me to know exactly what will happen with class identity. Skill lines already blur that from weapons and guilds. Taking abilites from other classes just takes things to a whole new (negative) level regarding class identity.
Chances are, I wont play. WOW has housing coming at the end of the year. Wife has already said its the only thiing that kept her from liking WOW. If they do housing justice, which right now looks like they will, then none of you will have to see my complaints ever again on these forums, and ZOS will never have to worry about seeing another dollar from me (not that it matters as MS owns both now).
But that is where I stand. Removing class identity is simply unfathomable for a game that already has established classes. And that is the key."Class identity isn’t just about power or efficiency. It’s about symbolic clarity, mechanical cohesion, and a shared visual and tactical language between players." - sans-culottes3 -
ArctosCethlenn✭✭✭✭people talk about it being more freeform like skyrim/other ES games, but I seem to recall oceans of jokes about everyone eventually becomes a stealth archer in heavy armor in skyrim. Which is also a single player game, not an MMO.
A LOT of pve builds are going to end up perfectly identical across multiple classes, pvp will end up the same. Like yeah, when the most competitive game system you engage with is reading quest text in overland, sure this is great it lets you build whatever you want. But as soon as you're trying to do something more than questing you find out its just the illusion of choice, because many of the choices you can make are inferior and wrong.9 -
Ratzkifal✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »xylena_lazarow wrote: »Every concern and worry can also be said about the current indefensible state of the game's metas.
That's just not true. The current state of Corrosive Armor, as an example, is completely fine. It's strong, but fine. Subclassing will give Corrosive Armor to classes that can get a lot more mileage out of it, which will make it completely overpowered again. So it will get a big nerf (or ZOS will leave us in an unfun game state for months again).
That is just one example of many. This is not something that "can be said about the current state of the meta" and it'll be an unfair change to anyone who wants to be a DK purist.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because things are bad, doesn't mean we might as well make things worse.
That's an interpretation. Another is that this change will finally put PvP on another path. One where skills are balanced rather than classes against each other. One where if a "class defining" skill is made useless there is an alternative to simply benching one or several characters that have been rendered inadequate or unplayable. One where class skills buffed beyond reason can be used by any class to level the playing field, at least as far as skill selection goes.
I don't think continuing unbalanced classes forever is an appealing road and I'm excited to see where changing directions can lead
That's the thing. Because ZOS had to face the reality that having to "bench a character" is unacceptable, they were actually forced to make balance changes in the first place. Now if something isn't seeing much use, they can just lean back and ignore it, just like 90% of item sets in this game are getting ignored and how the majority of skills in the game were ignored before Elsweyr.
And again, just because every class has access to the same overpowered tool doesn't make things "okay". The Scalebreaker patch was in a fair state of balance, but it was also rather unfun because dots were so much more powerful than spammables. This is something that will have to be addressed, and that's what makes heavy nerfs inevitable.
We'll end up in a state were all skills will be very comparable. Especially skills that can "set up" a kill will take heavy nerfs, because those can be stacked from multiple classes to increase the kill potential. I'm willing to bet that Shalks, Curse and Blastbones will be turned into dots instead, so that they are "comparable" and "balanced". But that also makes combat as boring as it was in Scalebreaker. That is, assuming we aren't entering a tank meta due to Corrosive and whatever Warden skills will allow.
A lot of what you're describing is, in my opinion, where "class balance" has gotten us. I think class balancing has resulted in an atmosphere where developers are worried about disrupting spreadsheet numbers, and the result of that has been watered down boring single percentage point changes to skills.
Developers can't just take a single skill and make it do something fun because that will disrupt class balance. I hope subclassing puts an end to all that.
Yeah, but that's because of the insistence of having spreadsheet numbers in the first place. What you are describing is bringing back a state where crazy, fun and unique abilities are balanced by the opportunity cost of running them. One of the only remaining opportunity costs we have are morphs. Nightblade Cloak has the opportunity cost attached that the strong self heal of the other morph will be unavailable if you choose the invisibility and vice versa. That's why the Nightblades that go invisible aren't as tough as the Nightblades that aren't. It's a trade-off. There used to be more trade-offs, like the choice of being stamina or magicka. Now ZOS is lowering the trade-offs of choosing a particular class and that will make spreadsheets more important, not less. ZOS homogenized skills so they could implement hybridization. Vigor is as strong on magicka characters now as on stamina character. Soon we'll see them homogenize everything even more as a result of "skills being balanced" rather than classes.
I'm not going to make guesses about what's going to happen, I guess we'll have to find out because it seems like subclassing is happening. I think there's plenty of ways this can go wrong, but after ten years of the same kind of wrong, I'm still excited for any new direction.
If nothing else, the last couple of weeks has shown me that some folks at ZoS remembered that PvP exists, and that what they've been doing isn't working out so well.
I'd like that kind of optimism where "a new kind of wrong" seems preferable. And you are right about that. It is happening, because when has ZOS ever backed down on something they set their minds on, no matter how nonsensical it was?
There are some guard rails that could be put on subclassing to keep the damage at a minimum, like only allowing one skill line change rather than two. That would be my constructive criticism for the devs.
But it's telling that this feature is highly controversial and from the announcement alone we already got an even split in the community before the actual reality of it has hit us, compared to, say, the announcement of a new weapon type, a new guild skill line or adding a 4th skill line to every class, which would have been universally agreed upon as a good thing.
Personally I'd rather that they went big. Go with the original plan or risk it becoming a watered down underwhelming system before it even gets out of PTS.
Whatever the case, I'm excited for the patch notes. Can't remember the last time that happened
I could respect it if they went bigger, actually removed classes and gave us ESO Combat 2.0. I'd also respect it if they put subclassing on PTS but didn't put it on live until it's actually ready. But I don't think that's what we are going to get.
So if they aren't giving us that, then I'm not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt (again) only to be left in a horrible limbo for at least three months (again).
The reason I think we haven't achieved a good balance state is because ZOS always did sweeping changes rather than doing small changes every second week with bigger changes every quarter, like other games. We never tried that.This Bosmer was tortured to death. There is nothing left to be done.2 -
ForumBully✭✭✭✭✭
✭ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »xylena_lazarow wrote: »Every concern and worry can also be said about the current indefensible state of the game's metas.
That's just not true. The current state of Corrosive Armor, as an example, is completely fine. It's strong, but fine. Subclassing will give Corrosive Armor to classes that can get a lot more mileage out of it, which will make it completely overpowered again. So it will get a big nerf (or ZOS will leave us in an unfun game state for months again).
That is just one example of many. This is not something that "can be said about the current state of the meta" and it'll be an unfair change to anyone who wants to be a DK purist.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because things are bad, doesn't mean we might as well make things worse.
That's an interpretation. Another is that this change will finally put PvP on another path. One where skills are balanced rather than classes against each other. One where if a "class defining" skill is made useless there is an alternative to simply benching one or several characters that have been rendered inadequate or unplayable. One where class skills buffed beyond reason can be used by any class to level the playing field, at least as far as skill selection goes.
I don't think continuing unbalanced classes forever is an appealing road and I'm excited to see where changing directions can lead
That's the thing. Because ZOS had to face the reality that having to "bench a character" is unacceptable, they were actually forced to make balance changes in the first place. Now if something isn't seeing much use, they can just lean back and ignore it, just like 90% of item sets in this game are getting ignored and how the majority of skills in the game were ignored before Elsweyr.
And again, just because every class has access to the same overpowered tool doesn't make things "okay". The Scalebreaker patch was in a fair state of balance, but it was also rather unfun because dots were so much more powerful than spammables. This is something that will have to be addressed, and that's what makes heavy nerfs inevitable.
We'll end up in a state were all skills will be very comparable. Especially skills that can "set up" a kill will take heavy nerfs, because those can be stacked from multiple classes to increase the kill potential. I'm willing to bet that Shalks, Curse and Blastbones will be turned into dots instead, so that they are "comparable" and "balanced". But that also makes combat as boring as it was in Scalebreaker. That is, assuming we aren't entering a tank meta due to Corrosive and whatever Warden skills will allow.
A lot of what you're describing is, in my opinion, where "class balance" has gotten us. I think class balancing has resulted in an atmosphere where developers are worried about disrupting spreadsheet numbers, and the result of that has been watered down boring single percentage point changes to skills.
Developers can't just take a single skill and make it do something fun because that will disrupt class balance. I hope subclassing puts an end to all that.
Yeah, but that's because of the insistence of having spreadsheet numbers in the first place. What you are describing is bringing back a state where crazy, fun and unique abilities are balanced by the opportunity cost of running them. One of the only remaining opportunity costs we have are morphs. Nightblade Cloak has the opportunity cost attached that the strong self heal of the other morph will be unavailable if you choose the invisibility and vice versa. That's why the Nightblades that go invisible aren't as tough as the Nightblades that aren't. It's a trade-off. There used to be more trade-offs, like the choice of being stamina or magicka. Now ZOS is lowering the trade-offs of choosing a particular class and that will make spreadsheets more important, not less. ZOS homogenized skills so they could implement hybridization. Vigor is as strong on magicka characters now as on stamina character. Soon we'll see them homogenize everything even more as a result of "skills being balanced" rather than classes.
I'm not going to make guesses about what's going to happen, I guess we'll have to find out because it seems like subclassing is happening. I think there's plenty of ways this can go wrong, but after ten years of the same kind of wrong, I'm still excited for any new direction.
If nothing else, the last couple of weeks has shown me that some folks at ZoS remembered that PvP exists, and that what they've been doing isn't working out so well.
I'd like that kind of optimism where "a new kind of wrong" seems preferable. And you are right about that. It is happening, because when has ZOS ever backed down on something they set their minds on, no matter how nonsensical it was?
There are some guard rails that could be put on subclassing to keep the damage at a minimum, like only allowing one skill line change rather than two. That would be my constructive criticism for the devs.
But it's telling that this feature is highly controversial and from the announcement alone we already got an even split in the community before the actual reality of it has hit us, compared to, say, the announcement of a new weapon type, a new guild skill line or adding a 4th skill line to every class, which would have been universally agreed upon as a good thing.
Personally I'd rather that they went big. Go with the original plan or risk it becoming a watered down underwhelming system before it even gets out of PTS.
Whatever the case, I'm excited for the patch notes. Can't remember the last time that happened
I could respect it if they went bigger, actually removed classes and gave us ESO Combat 2.0. I'd also respect it if they put subclassing on PTS but didn't put it on live until it's actually ready. But I don't think that's what we are going to get.
So if they aren't giving us that, then I'm not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt (again) only to be left in a horrible limbo for at least three months (again).
The reason I think we haven't achieved a good balance state is because ZOS always did sweeping changes rather than doing small changes every second week with bigger changes every quarter, like other games. We never tried that.
If they do it as they've said, it's as ready as it's going to be without a live test. All the skills aren't changed by being subclasses, so that's easy. Might be some passive issues to iron out in PTS.
I fully anticipate some kind of horrible limbo, but I think it'll be mostly do to some ridiculous old set interactions with the system or some new set they're going to unleash on the world, more than class skills being available to all.
If I start playing again full time it'll probably be no proc...I can't come back to Grey Host in the state I'm sure it's still in...really hoping for some Vengeance 2.0 news in PTS0 -
Ratzkifal✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »xylena_lazarow wrote: »Every concern and worry can also be said about the current indefensible state of the game's metas.
That's just not true. The current state of Corrosive Armor, as an example, is completely fine. It's strong, but fine. Subclassing will give Corrosive Armor to classes that can get a lot more mileage out of it, which will make it completely overpowered again. So it will get a big nerf (or ZOS will leave us in an unfun game state for months again).
That is just one example of many. This is not something that "can be said about the current state of the meta" and it'll be an unfair change to anyone who wants to be a DK purist.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because things are bad, doesn't mean we might as well make things worse.
That's an interpretation. Another is that this change will finally put PvP on another path. One where skills are balanced rather than classes against each other. One where if a "class defining" skill is made useless there is an alternative to simply benching one or several characters that have been rendered inadequate or unplayable. One where class skills buffed beyond reason can be used by any class to level the playing field, at least as far as skill selection goes.
I don't think continuing unbalanced classes forever is an appealing road and I'm excited to see where changing directions can lead
That's the thing. Because ZOS had to face the reality that having to "bench a character" is unacceptable, they were actually forced to make balance changes in the first place. Now if something isn't seeing much use, they can just lean back and ignore it, just like 90% of item sets in this game are getting ignored and how the majority of skills in the game were ignored before Elsweyr.
And again, just because every class has access to the same overpowered tool doesn't make things "okay". The Scalebreaker patch was in a fair state of balance, but it was also rather unfun because dots were so much more powerful than spammables. This is something that will have to be addressed, and that's what makes heavy nerfs inevitable.
We'll end up in a state were all skills will be very comparable. Especially skills that can "set up" a kill will take heavy nerfs, because those can be stacked from multiple classes to increase the kill potential. I'm willing to bet that Shalks, Curse and Blastbones will be turned into dots instead, so that they are "comparable" and "balanced". But that also makes combat as boring as it was in Scalebreaker. That is, assuming we aren't entering a tank meta due to Corrosive and whatever Warden skills will allow.
A lot of what you're describing is, in my opinion, where "class balance" has gotten us. I think class balancing has resulted in an atmosphere where developers are worried about disrupting spreadsheet numbers, and the result of that has been watered down boring single percentage point changes to skills.
Developers can't just take a single skill and make it do something fun because that will disrupt class balance. I hope subclassing puts an end to all that.
Yeah, but that's because of the insistence of having spreadsheet numbers in the first place. What you are describing is bringing back a state where crazy, fun and unique abilities are balanced by the opportunity cost of running them. One of the only remaining opportunity costs we have are morphs. Nightblade Cloak has the opportunity cost attached that the strong self heal of the other morph will be unavailable if you choose the invisibility and vice versa. That's why the Nightblades that go invisible aren't as tough as the Nightblades that aren't. It's a trade-off. There used to be more trade-offs, like the choice of being stamina or magicka. Now ZOS is lowering the trade-offs of choosing a particular class and that will make spreadsheets more important, not less. ZOS homogenized skills so they could implement hybridization. Vigor is as strong on magicka characters now as on stamina character. Soon we'll see them homogenize everything even more as a result of "skills being balanced" rather than classes.
I'm not going to make guesses about what's going to happen, I guess we'll have to find out because it seems like subclassing is happening. I think there's plenty of ways this can go wrong, but after ten years of the same kind of wrong, I'm still excited for any new direction.
If nothing else, the last couple of weeks has shown me that some folks at ZoS remembered that PvP exists, and that what they've been doing isn't working out so well.
I'd like that kind of optimism where "a new kind of wrong" seems preferable. And you are right about that. It is happening, because when has ZOS ever backed down on something they set their minds on, no matter how nonsensical it was?
There are some guard rails that could be put on subclassing to keep the damage at a minimum, like only allowing one skill line change rather than two. That would be my constructive criticism for the devs.
But it's telling that this feature is highly controversial and from the announcement alone we already got an even split in the community before the actual reality of it has hit us, compared to, say, the announcement of a new weapon type, a new guild skill line or adding a 4th skill line to every class, which would have been universally agreed upon as a good thing.
Personally I'd rather that they went big. Go with the original plan or risk it becoming a watered down underwhelming system before it even gets out of PTS.
Whatever the case, I'm excited for the patch notes. Can't remember the last time that happened
I could respect it if they went bigger, actually removed classes and gave us ESO Combat 2.0. I'd also respect it if they put subclassing on PTS but didn't put it on live until it's actually ready. But I don't think that's what we are going to get.
So if they aren't giving us that, then I'm not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt (again) only to be left in a horrible limbo for at least three months (again).
The reason I think we haven't achieved a good balance state is because ZOS always did sweeping changes rather than doing small changes every second week with bigger changes every quarter, like other games. We never tried that.
If they do it as they've said, it's as ready as it's going to be without a live test. All the skills aren't changed by being subclasses, so that's easy. Might be some passive issues to iron out in PTS.
I fully anticipate some kind of horrible limbo, but I think it'll be mostly do to some ridiculous old set interactions with the system or some new set they're going to unleash on the world, more than class skills being available to all.
If I start playing again full time it'll probably be no proc...I can't come back to Grey Host in the state I'm sure it's still in...really hoping for some Vengeance 2.0 news in PTS
There is no "no proc" campaign anymore, just no-CP. Other than outliers like Rush of Agony the proc sets aren't much of an issue anymore because in order for those sets to deal any relevant damage, you need to build damage stats like everyone else. So tanks can't abuse the "free damage" anymore, which is what made them an issue to begin with.
But maybe we could use a no-Subclassing campaign. Not sure if ZOS would ever give us that, because it'd require admitting that their genius idea isn't all that great for PvP. I'd play that.This Bosmer was tortured to death. There is nothing left to be done.0 -
ForumBully✭✭✭✭✭
✭ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »ForumBully wrote: »xylena_lazarow wrote: »Every concern and worry can also be said about the current indefensible state of the game's metas.
That's just not true. The current state of Corrosive Armor, as an example, is completely fine. It's strong, but fine. Subclassing will give Corrosive Armor to classes that can get a lot more mileage out of it, which will make it completely overpowered again. So it will get a big nerf (or ZOS will leave us in an unfun game state for months again).
That is just one example of many. This is not something that "can be said about the current state of the meta" and it'll be an unfair change to anyone who wants to be a DK purist.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because things are bad, doesn't mean we might as well make things worse.
That's an interpretation. Another is that this change will finally put PvP on another path. One where skills are balanced rather than classes against each other. One where if a "class defining" skill is made useless there is an alternative to simply benching one or several characters that have been rendered inadequate or unplayable. One where class skills buffed beyond reason can be used by any class to level the playing field, at least as far as skill selection goes.
I don't think continuing unbalanced classes forever is an appealing road and I'm excited to see where changing directions can lead
That's the thing. Because ZOS had to face the reality that having to "bench a character" is unacceptable, they were actually forced to make balance changes in the first place. Now if something isn't seeing much use, they can just lean back and ignore it, just like 90% of item sets in this game are getting ignored and how the majority of skills in the game were ignored before Elsweyr.
And again, just because every class has access to the same overpowered tool doesn't make things "okay". The Scalebreaker patch was in a fair state of balance, but it was also rather unfun because dots were so much more powerful than spammables. This is something that will have to be addressed, and that's what makes heavy nerfs inevitable.
We'll end up in a state were all skills will be very comparable. Especially skills that can "set up" a kill will take heavy nerfs, because those can be stacked from multiple classes to increase the kill potential. I'm willing to bet that Shalks, Curse and Blastbones will be turned into dots instead, so that they are "comparable" and "balanced". But that also makes combat as boring as it was in Scalebreaker. That is, assuming we aren't entering a tank meta due to Corrosive and whatever Warden skills will allow.
A lot of what you're describing is, in my opinion, where "class balance" has gotten us. I think class balancing has resulted in an atmosphere where developers are worried about disrupting spreadsheet numbers, and the result of that has been watered down boring single percentage point changes to skills.
Developers can't just take a single skill and make it do something fun because that will disrupt class balance. I hope subclassing puts an end to all that.
Yeah, but that's because of the insistence of having spreadsheet numbers in the first place. What you are describing is bringing back a state where crazy, fun and unique abilities are balanced by the opportunity cost of running them. One of the only remaining opportunity costs we have are morphs. Nightblade Cloak has the opportunity cost attached that the strong self heal of the other morph will be unavailable if you choose the invisibility and vice versa. That's why the Nightblades that go invisible aren't as tough as the Nightblades that aren't. It's a trade-off. There used to be more trade-offs, like the choice of being stamina or magicka. Now ZOS is lowering the trade-offs of choosing a particular class and that will make spreadsheets more important, not less. ZOS homogenized skills so they could implement hybridization. Vigor is as strong on magicka characters now as on stamina character. Soon we'll see them homogenize everything even more as a result of "skills being balanced" rather than classes.
I'm not going to make guesses about what's going to happen, I guess we'll have to find out because it seems like subclassing is happening. I think there's plenty of ways this can go wrong, but after ten years of the same kind of wrong, I'm still excited for any new direction.
If nothing else, the last couple of weeks has shown me that some folks at ZoS remembered that PvP exists, and that what they've been doing isn't working out so well.
I'd like that kind of optimism where "a new kind of wrong" seems preferable. And you are right about that. It is happening, because when has ZOS ever backed down on something they set their minds on, no matter how nonsensical it was?
There are some guard rails that could be put on subclassing to keep the damage at a minimum, like only allowing one skill line change rather than two. That would be my constructive criticism for the devs.
But it's telling that this feature is highly controversial and from the announcement alone we already got an even split in the community before the actual reality of it has hit us, compared to, say, the announcement of a new weapon type, a new guild skill line or adding a 4th skill line to every class, which would have been universally agreed upon as a good thing.
Personally I'd rather that they went big. Go with the original plan or risk it becoming a watered down underwhelming system before it even gets out of PTS.
Whatever the case, I'm excited for the patch notes. Can't remember the last time that happened
I could respect it if they went bigger, actually removed classes and gave us ESO Combat 2.0. I'd also respect it if they put subclassing on PTS but didn't put it on live until it's actually ready. But I don't think that's what we are going to get.
So if they aren't giving us that, then I'm not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt (again) only to be left in a horrible limbo for at least three months (again).
The reason I think we haven't achieved a good balance state is because ZOS always did sweeping changes rather than doing small changes every second week with bigger changes every quarter, like other games. We never tried that.
If they do it as they've said, it's as ready as it's going to be without a live test. All the skills aren't changed by being subclasses, so that's easy. Might be some passive issues to iron out in PTS.
I fully anticipate some kind of horrible limbo, but I think it'll be mostly do to some ridiculous old set interactions with the system or some new set they're going to unleash on the world, more than class skills being available to all.
If I start playing again full time it'll probably be no proc...I can't come back to Grey Host in the state I'm sure it's still in...really hoping for some Vengeance 2.0 news in PTS
There is no "no proc" campaign anymore, just no-CP. Other than outliers like Rush of Agony the proc sets aren't much of an issue anymore because in order for those sets to deal any relevant damage, you need to build damage stats like everyone else. So tanks can't abuse the "free damage" anymore, which is what made them an issue to begin with.
But maybe we could use a no-Subclassing campaign. Not sure if ZOS would ever give us that, because it'd require admitting that their genius idea isn't all that great for PvP. I'd play that.
Dang....it really has been awhile. Good to know. Please, bring back Vengeance.1 -
Wereswan✭✭✭✭Elvenheart wrote: »A lot of these comments remind me of what was said when Scribing was first announced, but somehow we survived Scribing and I think we’ll survive Subclassing too.
Part of the reason we "survived" Scribing was because the playtest community made a lot of noise about the really broken bits, and got them toned down before it went live.3 -
Imperial_Archmage✭✭✭✭The only people who seem to be worried about subclassing are hardcore PvPer, which make up an incredibly small percentage of the overall playerbase, and they’re always up in arms when there is even the slightest shift in the meta.
As a PvE only and mostly Solo player, I welcome the change and think it was way overdue. This game is mostly geared towards casual players both with its horizontal progression model and its more laidback and solo friendly atmosphere, so concerns over min-maxing and meta shifts should hardly stand in the way of what would objectively be a fun change.2 -
xylena_lazarow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
I can't wait to minmax some tri class monstrosities. The only players I see worried seem to think the game is mostly fine as is, like it's somehow just one magical silver bullet away from being totally fixed (it's not).Imperial_Archmage wrote: »The only people who seem to be worried about subclassing are hardcore PvPerPC/NA || Cyro/BGs || RIP old PvP build system || bring Vengeance1 -
ForumBully✭✭✭✭✭
✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
I can't wait to minmax some tri class monstrosities. The only players I see worried seem to think the game is mostly fine as is, like it's somehow just one magical silver bullet away from being totally fixed (it's not).Imperial_Archmage wrote: »The only people who seem to be worried about subclassing are hardcore PvPer
This. There seems to be worry about protecting something that is terrible, IMO. And worry that a new system will result in exactly what we have right now, but somehow worse. In PvP, the primary source of imbalance has been sets and a few problematic mechanics (cross healing, for one). Without a change like subclassing, we'd be left with something hopeless. The problems with class balancing have persisted since launch and would continue. Time for a change.1 -
katanagirl1✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Elvenheart wrote: »A lot of these comments remind me of what was said when Scribing was first announced, but somehow we survived Scribing and I think we’ll survive Subclassing too.
Scribing made ball groups worse in Cyrodiil and subclasses will be scribing on steroids.
Khajiit Stamblade main
Dark Elf Magsorc
Redguard Stamina Dragonknight
Orc Stamplar PVP
Breton Magsorc PVP
Dark Elf Magden
Khajiit Stamblade
Khajiit Stamina Arcanist
PS5 NA4 -
wolfie1.0.✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭with PTS patch notes and the massive changes that were made... has anyone changed their mind?
i dont like the caps on targets they have placed on templar and arcanist. i understand them. but i dont like em and its gonna hurt.1 -
katanagirl1✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Imperial_Archmage wrote: »The only people who seem to be worried about subclassing are hardcore PvPer, which make up an incredibly small percentage of the overall playerbase, and they’re always up in arms when there is even the slightest shift in the meta.
As a PvE only and mostly Solo player, I welcome the change and think it was way overdue. This game is mostly geared towards casual players both with its horizontal progression model and its more laidback and solo friendly atmosphere, so concerns over min-maxing and meta shifts should hardly stand in the way of what would objectively be a fun change.
Solo PvE players are the only ones who are not worried, and feel their perceived majority makes it okay for subclasses to ruin the rest of the game.
Nothing against you personally, but I get tired of calls to destroy the gameplay I currently enjoy to the benefit of those who do not play the gameplay I enjoy.
PvE endgame has limited builds now due to hybridization and subclassing will further limit those builds so that is a valid concern as well.
Khajiit Stamblade main
Dark Elf Magsorc
Redguard Stamina Dragonknight
Orc Stamplar PVP
Breton Magsorc PVP
Dark Elf Magden
Khajiit Stamblade
Khajiit Stamina Arcanist
PS5 NA12 -
Wereswan✭✭✭✭wolfie1.0. wrote: »with PTS patch notes and the massive changes that were made... has anyone changed their mind?
i dont like the caps on targets they have placed on templar and arcanist. i understand them. but i dont like em and its gonna hurt.
Four days between the announcement and the first nerfs, awesome.
1 -
Xarc✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
@xarcs FR-EU-PC -Please visit my house ingame !
sorry for my english, it's not my native language, I'm french
"Death is overrated", Xarc
Xãrc -- breton necro - DC - AvA rank50
Xarcus -- imperial DK - DC - AvA rank50 - [pve] pureclass
Elnaa - breton NB - DC - AvA rank50
Xärc -- breton NB - DC - AvA rank49 - [pve] pureclass
Isilenil - Altmer NB - AD - AvA rank41
Felisja - Bosmer NB - DC - AvA rank41
Glàdys - redguard templar - DC - AvA rank40 - [pve & pvp] pureclass
Xaljaa - breton NB - now EP - AvA rank39
Bakenecro - khajiit necro - DC - AvA rank28
Xalisja - bosmer necro - DC - AvA ?
Shurgha - orc warden EP - AvA rank? [pve & pvp]pureclass
Scarlętt - breton templar DC - AvA rank?
- in game since April 2014
- on the forum since December 20140 -
old_scopie1945✭✭✭✭✭I did vote 'cautiously optimistic' but on reflection I am more in the 'worried category' now. Worried about class skills being nerfed, class identity, effects on scribing, effects on my favourite builds, power creep and unbalancing. So many thing can go wrong.0 -
Wereswan✭✭✭✭old_scopie1945 wrote: »I did vote 'cautiously optimistic' but on reflection I am more in the 'worried category' now. Worried about class skills being nerfed, class identity, effects on scribing, effects on my favourite builds, power creep and unbalancing. So many thing can go wrong.
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/676209/pts-patch-notes-v11-0-0#latest
The list of nerfs is already pretty extensive.3 -
AvalonRanger✭✭✭✭✭
✭The ESO has full of "old school game concept" like my childhood days. Each time I see those
update, then I remember family computer age game.
ESO needs younger blood.My playing time Mon-Friday UTC13:00-16:00 [PC-NA] CP over2000 now.
I have [1Tough tank] [1StamSorc-DD] [1Necro-DD] [1Real Healer]
with [1Stam Blade].
But, I'm Tank main player. Recently I'm doing Healer.
2023/12/21
By the way...Dungeon-Meshi(One of Famous Japanese fantasy story comic book) got finale...
Good-bye "King of Monster Eater".
2024/08/23
Farewell Atsuko Tanaka...(-_-) I never forget epic acting for major Motoko Kusanagi.0 -
OldStygian✭✭✭✭Imperial_Archmage wrote: »...hardcore PvPer, which make up an incredibly small percentage of the overall playerbase, and they’re always up in arms...
The above part of your statement is my experience on these forums.
.Edited by OldStygian on April 14, 2025 11:38PM1