Is now a good time to implement an element/type weakness?

SneaK · April 8

Thinking about u50… I’m excited about the masteries mostly. One thing that been brought up a lot over the years is having a counter damage type for each class. We are seeing flame damage output from the DK, and speculation is frost for warden but who knows. What I think would be nice to see is a negative damage type per class, so when all things are said and done, we’d having certain classes geared better to counter certain classes.

Where this gets tricky and why I’m asking the question now, when the masteries go live, DK will still be the only refresh completed, who also has access to the masteries. So a pure DK will be even stronger than it is now. Im fine with the wait, I want them to get the refreshes correct. But I think implementing a counter damage type pure class, would be a good balance decision.

Example,
Base class DK, increases physical damage against you by 10%.

Same for every class though, I don’t know which damage types should go where cause I don’t know the ins/outs of ZOS design model for the refreshes, but I think having a counter dmg type would keep things fresh for the classes that still need love and ultimately would create more versatility with builds.

tomofhyrule · April 8

I honestly would like to see some weakness/effectiveness type mechanic. Nothing groundbreaking (probably like 5% max), but it would definitely fit with the series as a whole.

We even have remnants of that in game now, what with Nords having frost resist and Dunmer having fire resist. It'd be interesting to play that up a bit.

But for the Mastery thing? Uhh, no. The point of the Masteries is to allow monoclasses to compete with the cracked monsters that Subclassing allows for. If you're gonna put weaknesses on monoclasses while not putting any on Subclasses... uhh, yeah...

AScarlato · April 8

It sounds interesting but how would it be implemented? Would this be put on monsters?

Not sure if this would result in some min-maxing where certain classes are wanted more for their opposing elemental advantage.

It seems the game has trended towards hybridization so not sure if it would fit into that direction, but I do like interesting mechanics.

Also not sure I'd love it for PvP, with some classes getting an inherent advantage over you just for existing.

SneaK · April 8

tomofhyrule wrote: »

I honestly would like to see some weakness/effectiveness type mechanic. Nothing groundbreaking (probably like 5% max), but it would definitely fit with the series as a whole.

We even have remnants of that in game now, what with Nords having frost resist and Dunmer having fire resist. It'd be interesting to play that up a bit.

But for the Mastery thing? Uhh, no. The point of the Masteries is to allow monoclasses to compete with the cracked monsters that Subclassing allows for. If you're gonna put weaknesses on monoclasses while not putting any on Subclasses... uhh, yeah...

Fact, I guess in my mind I was mostly thinking of where a DK will be once the masteries drop. It would likely be a lot easier/better to just say X% of ____ damage type per base class.

Treeshka · April 8

Maybe they can add this sort of thing for certain mobs. For example frost damage doing %5 more damage to fire based mobs, like Fire Atronachs. Fire damage doing %5 more to Frost Atronachs.
Fire damage to fire based mobs may stay same, but then this would only add power to the already creeped up damage numbers we see right now.

SneaK · April 8

tomofhyrule wrote: »

I honestly would like to see some weakness/effectiveness type mechanic. Nothing groundbreaking (probably like 5% max), but it would definitely fit with the series as a whole.

We even have remnants of that in game now, what with Nords having frost resist and Dunmer having fire resist. It'd be interesting to play that up a bit.

But for the Mastery thing? Uhh, no. The point of the Masteries is to allow monoclasses to compete with the cracked monsters that Subclassing allows for. If you're gonna put weaknesses on monoclasses while not putting any on Subclasses... uhh, yeah...

I took out the link to the masteries. But I don’t think 5% is enough, I think 10% would be just fine. At the end of the day your base class would only counter one other class, assuming the assigned damage types are like DK with Flame only. You’d still be able to compete against your counters just fine with a proper build.

SneaK · April 8

AScarlato wrote: »

It sounds interesting but how would it be implemented? Would this be put on monsters?

Not sure if this would result in some min-maxing where certain classes are wanted more for their opposing elemental advantage.

It seems the game has trended towards hybridization so not sure if it would fit into that direction, but I do like interesting mechanics.

Also not sure I'd love it for PvP, with some classes getting an inherent advantage over you just for existing.

It would be a flat debuff against you. So yes, if your class took an extra 10% flame damage there would be certain dungeons or monsters that would be harder. IMO that would add a good layer to the game. In PvP, it would be awesome honestly, 10% isn't enough to make it a landslide counter, but it would at least create a weakness that could be focused on. If the DK changes are telling us anything, it’s that the level of power is going to be greatly increased across the board, it would be a nice change to have at least 1 specific counter to each refresh. It’s the same concept with people that have built poison/flame builds to burn through werewolves or vamps.

Vaqual · April 8

There are many small things that could make combat more interesting, but I doubt that such efforts would be well received as long as the actual class reworks are not completed.

SneaK · April 8

Vaqual wrote: »

There are many small things that could make combat more interesting, but I doubt that such efforts would be well received as long as the actual class reworks are not completed.

I would argue now would be better than after the refreshes. They’re currently experimenting, and this would at the very least create more variety in terms of classes played cause depending on dmg types you could actually choose specific things to fight against the meta, rather than just meta vs meta.

Vaqual · April 8

SneaK wrote: »

Vaqual wrote: »

There are many small things that could make combat more interesting, but I doubt that such efforts would be well received as long as the actual class reworks are not completed.

I would argue now would be better than after the refreshes. They’re currently experimenting, and this would at the very least create more variety in terms of classes played cause depending on dmg types you could actually choose specific things to fight against the meta, rather than just meta vs meta.

Sure there are pros and cons, but although it is often claimed that "other teams are working on that", work hours are a finite resource. I'd rather play the last class rework a day sooner than to be diverted by flavour changes.

Erickson9610 · April 8

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Nothing groundbreaking (probably like 5% max)

Bringing attention to Werewolf's 25% extra Poison Damage taken and Vampire's extra 5/8/13/20% Flame Damage taken, color coded for viewing convenience:

Would be nice if Vampires and Werewolves didn't suffer so much from elemental weaknesses. 5% is too little for normal Classes if we compare to these curses.

spartaxoxo · April 8

This used to be more of a thing wayyyyyy back when and they changed it because it impacted gameplay too much.

Necrotech_Master · April 9

spartaxoxo wrote: »

This used to be more of a thing wayyyyyy back when and they changed it because it impacted gameplay too much.

this

even back then it was only like 10% values and the numbers were smaller and less inflated from what they are now and was still an issue

SneaK · April 9

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

This used to be more of a thing wayyyyyy back when and they changed it because it impacted gameplay too much.

this

even back then it was only like 10% values and the numbers were smaller and less inflated from what they are now and was still an issue

Not even close tbh, no one stacked mitigation like now and access to majors and minors were much harder to come by. People also had at least 33% less HP.

Jestir · April 9

We already see things like this in the form of morag tong deciding what morph of grin focus and incap are better

Expanding this along with how the class reworks are seeming to focus each class into its own theme/element would make only certain classes "viable" in an encounter and would just end up with "you must be this class with these morphs to do this content" same as we do now but more annoying

SneaK · April 9

Jestir wrote: »

We already see things like this in the form of morag tong deciding what morph of grin focus and incap are better

Expanding this along with how the class reworks are seeming to focus each class into its own theme/element would make only certain classes "viable" in an encounter and would just end up with "you must be this class with these morphs to do this content" same as we do now but more annoying

Not a big PvEr but I doubt 10% damage taken on a specific element is gonna lock out people from content. I don’t feel like I’ve seen a lot of folks posting no vamps in group finder.

Jestir · April 9

SneaK wrote: »

Jestir wrote: »

We already see things like this in the form of morag tong deciding what morph of grin focus and incap are better

Expanding this along with how the class reworks are seeming to focus each class into its own theme/element would make only certain classes "viable" in an encounter and would just end up with "you must be this class with these morphs to do this content" same as we do now but more annoying

Not a big PvEr but I doubt 10% damage taken on a specific element is gonna lock out people from content. I don’t feel like I’ve seen a lot of folks posting no vamps in group finder.

Outside of "no oakensoul" you don't see that very much in group finder now but it's still one of the most consistent and loudest complaints about any form of organized PvE

Necrotech_Master · April 9

SneaK wrote: »

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

This used to be more of a thing wayyyyyy back when and they changed it because it impacted gameplay too much.

this

even back then it was only like 10% values and the numbers were smaller and less inflated from what they are now and was still an issue

Not even close tbh, no one stacked mitigation like now and access to majors and minors were much harder to come by. People also had at least 33% less HP.

my comment was about PVE, there wasnt really much of this in pvp except people stacking fire resist if they were a vamp (which is still possible to do today)

DestroyerPewnack · April 9

This used to exist back when the game first came out, but they removed it. I like the idea, especially if it's paired with new gear sets that buff those elements even more, instead of the new sets we get every update that no one uses.

I think there used to be a gear set that buffed fighters guild abilities, and buffed them up even more against werewolves, undead and daedra, but then they changed it to something useless. Same for soul magic.
It would be great if they were added again, because it would mean different dungeons/trials would require different builds, if you want to play optimally. But if they implement this, then I'd like to see more armory slots added, and for the saved builds to remove the gear from your inventory and place it in the armory's inventory. Otherwise, we'll be running around with bags full all the time. :P

code65536 · April 9

tomofhyrule wrote: »

I honestly would like to see some weakness/effectiveness type mechanic. Nothing groundbreaking (probably like 5% max), but it would definitely fit with the series as a whole.

As mentioned in the post above, this used to be a thing back in the day. Frost damage against fire atros, fire damage against frost atros. Shock damage against Dwemer automata. There even used to be loading screen tips about certain types of damage being more effective.

It was removed after a few years.

On one hand, the system was inconsistent and not well-telegraphed, so I can see why they'd want to removed it. But I would've preferred that they fleshed it out more rather than remove it.