Most FAIR solution of scaling from CP 1.0 to CP 2.0
-
JohnOfMarkarth✭✭✭You should be happy that you could allready earn more cp then the cap, there is no mmo where you could earn levels before they upped the level cap, at least I don't know any
Ill try to say it like this...
Its hard to listen to a part of playerbase that is more splintered than Europe before WW I. Its hard to determine what we or you want. I want this, he wants that... she wants something else opposite and he doesnt want to say.
Its much easier to listen to casual/new players who, due to lack of some degree of understanding... seem to have more grounds in common with each other.
TL;DR: Its easier to please 1 half of the new... than to please 1 fifth of the old.
Is there ONE... thing that you can in FULL confidence say... would be something all Vet players wanted and wouldnt create a split in Vet communityI can't do this anymore. Every small ... petit change that went against any semblance of sense has snowballed into an avalanche of (Penn & Teller:) Bulls...!
Gods, bless me with patience.0 -
furiouslog✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Why are the same "zos threw out my playtime/stole my hours" crowd not asking for compensation with the new wayshrine cost reduction passive, or the passive that gives you more gold per chest? Surely all that money you could have saved/made in the past 6 years should be paid back to you?
Well, I suspect because that is a new feature. I don't have an issue with new stuff being added. I have an issue with my existing capabilities being removed, even when controlling for redesigns in the choice-driven format, in combination with the relationship between the sunk costs of my expended effort and the value of its applied rescaling. Does that make sense?1 -
Pink_Pixie✭✭✭Why are the same "zos threw out my playtime/stole my hours" crowd not asking for compensation with the new wayshrine cost reduction passive, or the passive that gives you more gold per chest? Surely all that money you could have saved/made in the past 6 years should be paid back to you?
Kind of irrelevant as the whole discussion is about losing experience we have already earned. Not about gold we've already spent, but to answer the question, I use the horse I paid for to get me around the world.
Though I am pretty sure there was a different reason to post what I quoted above.Edited by Pink_Pixie on March 3, 2021 3:35PM0 -
bayushi2005✭✭✭✭✭Why are the same "zos threw out my playtime/stole my hours" crowd not asking for compensation with the new wayshrine cost reduction passive, or the passive that gives you more gold per chest? Surely all that money you could have saved/made in the past 6 years should be paid back to you?
Probably because every time you teleport you have to press a button, yet you can save even more money but getting there on foot/mount. You always have a choice not to spend your gold. Apparently that it not the case with the XP, after a certain amount of XP is earned the CP is gained, you want it, or not, no confirmation, no spending, no currency exchanged. It's not that ZOS gave us a chance to actually purchase our CP with XP.
Re all people arguing about the CP cap, the CP cap, since introduced, was always 3600, you couldn't earn CPs after that. That is the true max level. The situation with the "soft" (XP penalty per CP point) and "practical" cap is quite unprecedented, because it is like earning levels (with a penalty) AND not being allowed to use them. Hella lot of people quit after the "active cp limit" was introduced. Which MMO prevents you from using your levels before you reach the level cap?
And yes, there was a period when you would meet people with cp 2k+ (with similar perks as we have nowadays) with all their CP active. I have seen only one person with cp 3600, though.Edited by bayushi2005 on March 3, 2021 3:58PMFor some of my creations: ESO by Bayu
Houses:Proudspire Manor - The Folly
Serenity Falls Estate - Serenity Falls
Elinhir Private Arena - Infernace
Moon-Sugar Meadow - Flight Simulator 2E 583
Exorcised Coven Cottage - The Corpse Garden
Tel Galen - Morrowind Memoir
Lakemire Xanmeer Manor - Bling
Hall of The Lunar Champion - The Path to Lichdom
Pariah's Pinnacle - The Other Way
The Observatory Prior - High Energy N1
The Ersthile Sanctuary - Love Me Tender
Coldharbour Surreal Estate Reimagined0 -
Luke_Flamesword✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Loosing experience is fun concept, especially thay ESO UI even don't display how much XP you earned for whole time - only XP at current level, because that's only XP that really matter. Only level matters and level is something which you get and this stays the same. XP is not your treasure, it's only tool used to calculate when you will get a real thing - next level. And this calculations change and will be changed to balance road for new and old players (noone will grind 3 years to make vet trials).
Game don't inform you in any way how many millions of XP you have, because this doesn't matter and this is not what should concern you. If you are attached to your XP numbers, that's problem you create alone. From the game perspective and design - from the beggining it was all about levels only.
Do you also go to shops where they discounted items and you want money back? Do you go to your boss in work and want money for last years, because inflation changed value of your money? How you even live in society with such unrealistic and selfish expectations?
And about surveys - when you ask players which mostly don't have wider perspective and understanding of problem - if they want have lower or higher level, then of course they will want higher. This why game is designed by developers and this is not democratic choice.PC | EU | DC |Stam Dk Breton1 -
CleymenZero✭✭✭✭✭
✭Oh so now you're saying they went straight from 351 to 810, just to try and make it seem like it had any impact at all when done in small stages every year, OK.
The combined effect of it was somewhere in that range.
Without knowing your exact CP at each exact change you can't do that calculation.
yeah...somewhere in the range of 0 (everything done post 810) to 55% (everything done pre 351).....
No you cant do the exact calculations. But it's pretty obvious it's waaay lower than your stated 56%...
since the word "steal" has been thrown around
good to know that you're okay if people steal from you little by little... but draw the line at larger amounts
(Not that I think they're stealing anything from us, refer to my minimum wage argument earlier)
Weeks late here, I'm just reading this now, but your minimum wage argument is not analogous to the situation here.
The proper scenario wouldn't be to talk about back pay but more to talk about ranks, promotions or seniority and recognition.
What's happening now is closer to the following:
You've been working at a place where they "promote" you after a certain amount of hours worked for that company. For every 500 hours, you advance a rank and get a salary bump (a bit like Costco worked back when I was a student and worked there).
One day, management makes changes to the policies and make it so that you'll only need to do 200 hours to advance a rank, all that to retain new workers for the company.
The max salary, at which you were, got bumped from 25$/h to 35$/h.
With this change, you're expecting the 12000 hours you've worked for the company to count for at least a little bit and expect to reach cap right away or at least close to cap.
You then learn that it won't be the case, that you'll remain at your salary and that essentially, someone with less than half you seniority will be earning as much as you in much much less time that it took you.
Another example would be the case where a university wouldn't credit a certain class from another university after a transfer in spite of the fact that the 2 classes are identical essentially forcing you to pay for the credits and invest the time that you've already invested in the previous university.
I could bring up many more examples but that's the best one I've got.
Essentially, it's about time and experience not being recognized not entitlement.
Your example is more applicable to the following:
I used up a lot of surveys before the harvesting passive came to be, since I've wasted so many of them, ZOS should give me a ton of raw material to compensate for the ones I've "wasted" prior to the existence of that passive.
That example is more related to asking for backpay vs asking for experience to be recognized.
The use of the entitlement label to me, especially when it comes to these forums, often exposes the user's ignorance or ineptitude to be a good judge of what is fair and what isn't.
I don't know how to better communicate that but, if this was a court case (I'm exaggerating on purpose), it could easily be won. Again, depends on the jurisdiction but that's the only way I can express how strong the case for fairness VS entitlement is.
In regards to you claiming to be more affected than others, your 2000 CP doesn't put you in the same position as an 1100 CP for example for reasons I hope you understand. You are more affected than others experience points-wise but not CP wise in the sense that you'll be able to fill both your 4 blue orbs and all your yellow orbs both defensive and offensive with leftover for flex orbs. You understand the nuance here?
It's not a CP numbers thing in many case, for me, having more CP is more like I can avoid respec when I swap to pvp vs pve cause I completed the orbs that pertain to both builds so it's just a quick swap. It's a QoL thing more than a prestige thing. It's a: I've never needed to grind any experience and passively got to 1600 CP and you're telling me that after thousands of hours, my current CP in the new system won't allow me much flexibility? I'll have to respec at least twice a month for transmutes.
That move is close but still far from increasing gear gap. Artificial content creation.1 -
furiouslog✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭JohnOfMarkarth wrote: »You should be happy that you could allready earn more cp then the cap, there is no mmo where you could earn levels before they upped the level cap, at least I don't know any
Ill try to say it like this...
Its hard to listen to a part of playerbase that is more splintered than Europe before WW I. Its hard to determine what we or you want. I want this, he wants that... she wants something else opposite and he doesnt want to say.
Its much easier to listen to casual/new players who, due to lack of some degree of understanding... seem to have more grounds in common with each other.
TL;DR: Its easier to please 1 half of the new... than to please 1 fifth of the old.
Is there ONE... thing that you can in FULL confidence say... would be something all Vet players wanted and wouldnt create a split in Vet community
Given the results of the poll, I think your numbers might be off. I offer a mental model:- Group 1: "New" Players
- SubGroup 1A: New players who will become casual players
- SubGroup 1B: New players who intend to progress to endgame
- Group 2: "Casual" Players (under the cap)
- SubGroup 2A: Casual players who will remain casual players
- SubGroup 2B: Casual players who did not progress to endgame due to required effort but will now spend effort on endgame activities due to the accessibility driven by the changes
- Group 3: "Hardcore" Players
- SubGroup 3A: Experienced players who still engage in a casual approach to the game, but have just spent a lot of time to get where they are (e.g. exclusive RP and housing players)
- SubGroup 3B: Experienced players who engage in PVE endgame activities
- SubGroup 3C: Experienced players who engage in PVP endgame activities
Feel free to adjust or change as you see fit, but please follow the rule of exclusivity for group categories. The point is that only ZOS would have any data on those populations and their potential economic upsides when it comes to consumer satisfaction. It's likely that this forum is dominated by Group 3. Groups 1B and 2B are the only ones who benefit from the changes as is, at the exclusion of groups 3B and 3C. If 80% of Group 3 is dissatisfied, the aggregate of Groups 1B, 2B, and 3A would have to be more than 3 times the size of the dissatisfied customers in 3B and 3C.
That also assumes that there is not a solution that pleases both. Can't endgame be more accessible to 1B/2B without destroying the value invested by Groups 3B/3C? I think its possible to please both.
Not addressed to you specifically: Some people are arguing that closing the player performance distribution is part of the intent. It has also been argued that I should accept my nerf as part of meeting this intent, and why should I care about "fairness" when it comes to my own time invested since I have been playing and enjoying the game? The converse of that position is this: why should new players care that I've been rewarded progress that corresponds to my time investment? It should not be a condition that a new player's enjoyment of the game is dependent on the scope of my abilities being reduced significantly relative to my sunk time. What is the cost/benefit of that condition to the new player, and once articulated, is that worth the detriment to hardcore players?
1 -
tmbrinks✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭furiouslog wrote: »I Spend real time to get my EXP.
I do not care if other player can now faster get 1400 and have the same stats, but i do not want to lose my time i spend !
Even if my current CP becomes 3000 and it will be justthe same asnew players 1400 level he get fast - i spend my real time on EXP ing to get my EXP points and i do not want to lose any of it, becouse it is real time i spend to it !
So, you want the new player to lose all their time to catch up to you.
You want the new player to see this daunting "grind" to 1500 CP ahead of them and quit before they ever get into the game (which to ZoS means they never pay... and remember that this is a consumer product, the purpose is for the company to make money).
you dont really need 1500. vertprog tapers off quite a bit before. you'll be close enough to qualify for most stuff much earlier.
and lets not forget the old 810 is the new 1160.
and zos makes money off vets too. They are about to loose 200 bucks a year from me.
I've been saying that 1160 is the current 810 level in every thread on this... and have been lambasted, yelled at, cursed at, gotten hateful DMs on here for saying that. Accused of lying, deceiving, you name it.
Considering most "long-term" players are in the 1200-1300 range (stated in the ESO Live chapter video), I don't see what the issue is then.
People should not be abusive to you due to disagreement. People, don't DM tmbrinks with abuse. Not cool.
Concerning your stipulation: I'm not sure how you got to that number. Using the online calculators, my experience was that in order to spec my main to where it has equivalent ability to where I am now in the blue tree, I figured that I needed somewhere between 500-600 CP available in that tree, assuming that I am only unlocking the skills that I use most often (full disclosure: I don't have the original number, I couldn't save my calculations, and it's possible that I made mistakes, but that was where I landed).
But even if that's so, anyone at 810 and below 1160 is still being punished. Even if only one person gets screwed, the current solution is still unfair given the relationship between intended prior effort and future effort as they relate to progression. The response that I anticipate is that you can't make everyone happy, (I definitely think you can get closer to the mark than 20 percent of the forum community), but if the issue is ZOS failing to meet their own stated objective of avoiding a sense of "player depowerment", what they are doing now is clearly not acceptable.
To address the CP numbers. Here is a video from an end-game content creator. Video linked to a point to show his chart he uses to show the values
https://youtu.be/oPGQeCdqd98?t=282
To address the different values. On LIVE, you cannot get ALL of the passives, you still have to pick and choose. You don't get ALL the bonuses. I main a healer. I run with DPS CP in the blue tree currently on LIVE, because I can't have full points into "blessed" and full points into my other DPS stars. In the new system, I'll actually, finally, be able to do both! So, IMO, it's okay that you don't get to "do all the things" if you're at the equivalent to 810 CP in the new system... as you can't do that now.
1170 (AT FULL PENETRATION, which if in a good group, you don't need) is where you get the full damage bonuses, from your slottables to passives, and even maximizing out the status effects for your role (ironically (probably not) this is almost identical to the amount of XP needed as to get to 810 now)
Getting most resistances to all resistances takes you to 1500. again, you can't get full resistances on LIVE... you have to pick and choose.
Then for off-stats/etc, then it continues to go up from yes.
yes, the vertical progression goes up to close to 2100 CP. But a majority of it is DONE at 1170, less if you don't need full penetration.
(for the "parity" warriors who are sure to comment... yes, somebody who had 5000 hours of playtime is going to be ahead of you with your 3000 hours of playtime, assuming they have more CP... considering how much we've emphasized the "time" aspect, I'm sure none of you have an issue with that, regardless if they scale CP or not, the premise is the same. They've played more, they should be ahead of you)
To address the poll. It's absurdly biased. Are the new players, who would experience the benefits of the lessened curve even on the forums? No, they haven't even started playing. It is akin to asking people their opinions about tacos at a convention for taco lovers. (a bad analogy I know, but the sample of the poll is definitely not representative of all players, so the conclusions made can't really be made)The Unshattered - Tenacious Dreamer - Hurricane Herald - Godslayer - Dawnbringer - Gryphon Heart - Tick Tock Tormenter - Immortal Redeemer - Dro-m'Athra DestroyerThe Unchained - Moth Trusted - The Just - Oathsworn - Bedlam's Disciple - Temporal Tempest - Curator's Champion - Fist of Tava - Invader's Bane - Land, Air, and Sea Supremacy - Zero Regrets - Battlespire's Best - Bastion Breaker - Ardent Bibliophile - Subterranean Smasher - Bane of Thorns - True Genius - In Defiance of Death - No Rest for the Wicked - Nature's Wrath - Undying Endurance - Relentless Raider - Depths Defier - Apex Predator - Pure Lunacy - Mountain God - Leave No Bone Unbroken - CoS/RoM/BF/FH Challenger69,420 achievement points2 -
CleymenZero✭✭✭✭✭
✭Lamagrokie wrote: »So I am at 1200 cp, 1210 actually, and it may have taken me 600M XP to get there why should a person who got there at 515M XP get the same amount of CP as me, and why should I get the same amount as someone who took 700M XP to get to 1210. Why ? Because there was a catch up mechanic. That catchup mechanic is now in place based on an 1800CP level. If you give everyone an adjusted amount of CP base on the difference between the new system and the old then those new people have even a greater need of catching up. They have even further to catch up. That shouldn't be the case, as it removes the whole point of the catch up mechanic in the first place.
I agree that new player should have some catch up mechanic, but this mechanic shouldn't impact on vet player as bad as it's, the price is to high, some players will lose hundred of millions XP
But you've "lost" nothing...
Do you go back to the store when an item gets put on sale and demand the difference in price after you've had it and used it for years?
I mean... I should get all my money back I've spent on chapters for this game because I can now buy them with gold in-game and crown trading.
Sounds ridiculous right? right?
Again, I don't think it's a correct analogy.
Take an 810 CP 1.0 right? That person is currently maxed out in this system. Fast-forward a week, he can't slot or can't complete 4 orbs for his dps role.
Compare his potential to 2000 CP counterpart. In the CP 1.0 system, they are equivalent. In the CP 2.0, they are not.
Have they lost something?
I know the difference won't be huge at all but will there be a difference even if it's only 2-3%?
Your analogy is more alike to having a gear that you golded out nerfed into the ground and asking ZOS to refund you all the mats and transmutes you may have used making the build even though you made a few 100k AP with that build therefore have used it to in full.Edited by CleymenZero on March 3, 2021 6:47PM2 -
JohnOfMarkarth✭✭✭furiouslog wrote: »JohnOfMarkarth wrote: »You should be happy that you could allready earn more cp then the cap, there is no mmo where you could earn levels before they upped the level cap, at least I don't know any
Ill try to say it like this...
Its hard to listen to a part of playerbase that is more splintered than Europe before WW I. Its hard to determine what we or you want. I want this, he wants that... she wants something else opposite and he doesnt want to say.
Its much easier to listen to casual/new players who, due to lack of some degree of understanding... seem to have more grounds in common with each other.
TL;DR: Its easier to please 1 half of the new... than to please 1 fifth of the old.
Is there ONE... thing that you can in FULL confidence say... would be something all Vet players wanted and wouldnt create a split in Vet community
Given the results of the poll, I think your numbers might be off. I offer a mental model:- Group 1: "New" Players
- SubGroup 1A: New players who will become casual players
- SubGroup 1B: New players who intend to progress to endgame
- Group 2: "Casual" Players (under the cap)
- SubGroup 2A: Casual players who will remain casual players
- SubGroup 2B: Casual players who did not progress to endgame due to required effort but will now spend effort on endgame activities due to the accessibility driven by the changes
- Group 3: "Hardcore" Players
- SubGroup 3A: Experienced players who still engage in a casual approach to the game, but have just spent a lot of time to get where they are (e.g. exclusive RP and housing players)
- SubGroup 3B: Experienced players who engage in PVE endgame activities
- SubGroup 3C: Experienced players who engage in PVP endgame activities
Feel free to adjust or change as you see fit, but please follow the rule of exclusivity for group categories. The point is that only ZOS would have any data on those populations and their potential economic upsides when it comes to consumer satisfaction. It's likely that this forum is dominated by Group 3. Groups 1B and 2B are the only ones who benefit from the changes as is, at the exclusion of groups 3B and 3C. If 80% of Group 3 is dissatisfied, the aggregate of Groups 1B, 2B, and 3A would have to be more than 3 times the size of the dissatisfied customers in 3B and 3C.
That also assumes that there is not a solution that pleases both. Can't endgame be more accessible to 1B/2B without destroying the value invested by Groups 3B/3C? I think its possible to please both.
Not addressed to you specifically: Some people are arguing that closing the player performance distribution is part of the intent. It has also been argued that I should accept my nerf as part of meeting this intent, and why should I care about "fairness" when it comes to my own time invested since I have been playing and enjoying the game? The converse of that position is this: why should new players care that I've been rewarded progress that corresponds to my time investment? It should not be a condition that a new player's enjoyment of the game is dependent on the scope of my abilities being reduced significantly relative to my sunk time. What is the cost/benefit of that condition to the new player, and once articulated, is that worth the detriment to hardcore players?
I will reiterate.
I never stated ECONOMIC value of changes... or its money driven base. I stated... without specifying economic or profit implications... that listening to what casuals have to say finds more common ground in their pains (however misplaced) than vets who cant agree on any single point unanimously and tend to be divided mor --- no --- now i see...
nop...
hah... i quoted a wrong person. Thus leading to you answering like if... i meant it as a response to ... that.
And me being grossly confused by implications made against my point... without any clear link to what I said...
in other words... I clicked wrong "quote" buttonI can't do this anymore. Every small ... petit change that went against any semblance of sense has snowballed into an avalanche of (Penn & Teller:) Bulls...!
Gods, bless me with patience.0 -
CleymenZero✭✭✭✭✭
✭CleymenZero wrote: »Oh so now you're saying they went straight from 351 to 810, just to try and make it seem like it had any impact at all when done in small stages every year, OK.
The combined effect of it was somewhere in that range.
Without knowing your exact CP at each exact change you can't do that calculation.
yeah...somewhere in the range of 0 (everything done post 810) to 55% (everything done pre 351).....
No you cant do the exact calculations. But it's pretty obvious it's waaay lower than your stated 56%...
since the word "steal" has been thrown around
good to know that you're okay if people steal from you little by little... but draw the line at larger amounts
(Not that I think they're stealing anything from us, refer to my minimum wage argument earlier)
Weeks late here, I'm just reading this now, but your minimum wage argument is not analogous to the situation here.
The proper scenario wouldn't be to talk about back pay but more to talk about ranks, promotions or seniority and recognition.
What's happening now is closer to the following:
You've been working at a place where they "promote" you after a certain amount of hours worked for that company. For every 500 hours, you advance a rank and get a salary bump (a bit like Costco worked back when I was a student and worked there).
One day, management makes changes to the policies and make it so that you'll only need to do 200 hours to advance a rank, all that to retain new workers for the company.
The max salary, at which you were, got bumped from 25$/h to 35$/h.
With this change, you're expecting the 12000 hours you've worked for the company to count for at least a little bit and expect to reach cap right away or at least close to cap.
You then learn that it won't be the case, that you'll remain at your salary and that essentially, someone with less than half you seniority will be earning as much as you in much much less time that it took you.
Another example would be the case where a university wouldn't credit a certain class from another university after a transfer in spite of the fact that the 2 classes are identical essentially forcing you to pay for the credits and invest the time that you've already invested in the previous university.
I could bring up many more examples but that's the best one I've got.
Essentially, it's about time and experience not being recognized not entitlement.
Your example is more applicable to the following:
I used up a lot of surveys before the harvesting passive came to be, since I've wasted so many of them, ZOS should give me a ton of raw material to compensate for the ones I've "wasted" prior to the existence of that passive.
That example is more related to asking for backpay vs asking for experience to be recognized.
The use of the entitlement label to me, especially when it comes to these forums, often exposes the user's ignorance or ineptitude to be a good judge of what is fair and what isn't.
I don't know how to better communicate that but, if this was a court case (I'm exaggerating on purpose), it could easily be won. Again, depends on the jurisdiction but that's the only way I can express how strong the case for fairness VS entitlement is.
In regards to you claiming to be more affected than others, your 2000 CP doesn't put you in the same position as an 1100 CP for example for reasons I hope you understand. You are more affected than others experience points-wise but not CP wise in the sense that you'll be able to fill both your 4 blue orbs and all your yellow orbs both defensive and offensive with leftover for flex orbs. You understand the nuance here?
It's not a CP numbers thing in many case, for me, having more CP is more like I can avoid respec when I swap to pvp vs pve cause I completed the orbs that pertain to both builds so it's just a quick swap. It's a QoL thing more than a prestige thing. It's a: I've never needed to grind any experience and passively got to 1600 CP and you're telling me that after thousands of hours, my current CP in the new system won't allow me much flexibility? I'll have to respec at least twice a month for transmutes.
That move is close but still far from increasing gear gap. Artificial content creation.
Sorry if some of the stuff I write sounds more offensive than I want it to be. When I see someone trying to make a point with bad analogies, I get the feeling there's dishonesty behind it even though there very well might not be.
Try to look past that.0 -
furiouslog✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
To address the poll. It's absurdly biased. Are the new players, who would experience the benefits of the lessened curve even on the forums? No, they haven't even started playing. It is akin to asking people their opinions about tacos at a convention for taco lovers. (a bad analogy I know, but the sample of the poll is definitely not representative of all players, so the conclusions made can't really be made)
Thanks for sharing that. I'll review the video and see how it compares, and suggest that perhaps it's derived from my misunderstanding of how the tree works. That would still apply to my specific situation though, it's not a remedy for someone who is below the new parity level.
On this comment on bias: I agree that we have a sampling issue, but I think we agree where the sample resides: with veteran players who still support and play the game. I'll ask this question: how does nerfing me (and/or others) and requiring more grind to achieve parity with current ability help a new player who has not even started playing the game? Their accessibility issues have been addressed without even having any skin in the game. The issue of my sense of depowerment has not been addressed, and I have a lot of skin in the game. The forum population represents the most vocal consumers who have similar skin in the game. Does that population not have value to ZOS when it comes to consumer satisfaction, and why wouldn't provisions be made to satisfy this group when satisfaction is easily achieved at no cost to future players?2 -
the1andonlyskwex✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭CleymenZero wrote: »Lamagrokie wrote: »So I am at 1200 cp, 1210 actually, and it may have taken me 600M XP to get there why should a person who got there at 515M XP get the same amount of CP as me, and why should I get the same amount as someone who took 700M XP to get to 1210. Why ? Because there was a catch up mechanic. That catchup mechanic is now in place based on an 1800CP level. If you give everyone an adjusted amount of CP base on the difference between the new system and the old then those new people have even a greater need of catching up. They have even further to catch up. That shouldn't be the case, as it removes the whole point of the catch up mechanic in the first place.
I agree that new player should have some catch up mechanic, but this mechanic shouldn't impact on vet player as bad as it's, the price is to high, some players will lose hundred of millions XP
But you've "lost" nothing...
Do you go back to the store when an item gets put on sale and demand the difference in price after you've had it and used it for years?
I mean... I should get all my money back I've spent on chapters for this game because I can now buy them with gold in-game and crown trading.
Sounds ridiculous right? right?
[snip]
Take an 810 CP 1.0 right? That person is currently maxed out in this system. Fast-forward a week, he can't slot or can't complete 4 orbs for his dps role.
Compare his potential to 2000 CP counterpart. In the CP 1.0 system, they are equivalent. In the CP 2.0, they are not.
Have they lost something? [snip]
I know the difference won't be huge at all but will there be a difference even if it's only 2-3%?
Your analogy is more alike to having a gear that you golded out nerfed into the ground and asking ZOS to refund you all the mats and transmutes you may have used making the build even though you made a few 100k AP with that build therefore have used it to in full.
So, how exactly does re-allocating CP based on XP help this newly minted 810 get back into parity with his 2000 CP counterpart? The 810 will be at something like 1100, while the 2000 will be closer to 3000.
Also, I don't buy the argument that you only need 1100 CP to maximize your role. Sure, that may be what it takes to maximize your dummy parse, but in real PvE content you'll need all of the survivability buffs so the tanks and healers can focus on buffing DPS instead of keeping you alive, and in PvP all stats are important.
The problem with the new CP system isn't the CP conversion itself (you farmed your current CP knowing what the XP-to-CP conversion was, and the fact that the price is changing doesn't suddenly entitle you to a refund), it's the fact that the new system is being sold as focusing on horizontal progression when it really adds a huge new vertical progression grind.Edited by ZOS_Lunar on March 3, 2021 4:55PM3 -
ZOS_LunaradminGreetings!
After some review, we would like to remind everyone that all posts should be kept civil, constructive, and within the guidelines of the community rules we have in place. As they violated our rules regarding baiting, we have removed some comments. If there may be any questions in regards to rules, please feel free to review the Community RulesThe Elder Scrolls Online - ZeniMax Online Studios
Forum Rules | Code of Conduct | Terms of Service | Home Page | Help Site0 -
tmbrinks✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭furiouslog wrote: »
To address the poll. It's absurdly biased. Are the new players, who would experience the benefits of the lessened curve even on the forums? No, they haven't even started playing. It is akin to asking people their opinions about tacos at a convention for taco lovers. (a bad analogy I know, but the sample of the poll is definitely not representative of all players, so the conclusions made can't really be made)
Thanks for sharing that. I'll review the video and see how it compares, and suggest that perhaps it's derived from my misunderstanding of how the tree works. That would still apply to my specific situation though, it's not a remedy for someone who is below the new parity level.
On this comment on bias: I agree that we have a sampling issue, but I think we agree where the sample resides: with veteran players who still support and play the game. I'll ask this question: how does nerfing me (and/or others) and requiring more grind to achieve parity with current ability help a new player who has not even started playing the game? Their accessibility issues have been addressed without even having any skin in the game. The issue of my sense of depowerment has not been addressed, and I have a lot of skin in the game. The forum population represents the most vocal consumers who have similar skin in the game. Does that population not have value to ZOS when it comes to consumer satisfaction, and why wouldn't provisions be made to satisfy this group when satisfaction is easily achieved at no cost to future players?
I agree it does have value. I'm sure they have some analysts that have figured out the number of vet players they may lose and compare it to the number of new players that will stick around...
Which is why previously, I've stated that I'm happy they've found a middle ground. We've just already been on that middle ground, by way of being able to continue to earn CP above the cap that we couldn't spend for a long time. We could have had a hard-cap and no progress above CP 810 period... we'd all have parity then. But there would have been no reward for being a long-term player. You've been earning the "legacy" reward for the last two years, by being able to continue to earn CP. And now these changes give a single, big reward to the new player (in terms of time saved). And in my opinion, they even out and ZoS has found the middle ground.
For those players who are not "long-term" veteran players (I'm thinking <1000 CP), they get the huge benefit of their "grind" to parity being drastically reduced because each CP is going to cost 67% less than it did previously, allowing them to catch up quickly as well (but not as quickly as a brand new player, since much of their CP was earned on the more expensive scale)
There has never been any guarantee that we would get to keep all that CP that we earned above the cap... they are giving it all to us, no additional penalties with the change. We always hoped that we'd get to use it someday (and we are now)
I feel as a veteran player I have gotten my legacy reward by being able to earn CP. Now I get to spend it, and that a new player isn't going to have to play for nearly 7 years to get to my level doesn't concern me. I certainly would have a very difficult time starting this game as a new player today and seeing all the levels above me, it'd be too daunting, I'd feel like I'd never be able to catch up. And I feel if I knew about this change to the system that allows for this growth, but all the "legacy" players were moved so far up the system, I'd feel the same distress. But, knowing that the time it takes for me to reach where these other players are is significantly shorter would make starting this game more palatable and I'd feel like I even have a chance to reach "parity"The Unshattered - Tenacious Dreamer - Hurricane Herald - Godslayer - Dawnbringer - Gryphon Heart - Tick Tock Tormenter - Immortal Redeemer - Dro-m'Athra DestroyerThe Unchained - Moth Trusted - The Just - Oathsworn - Bedlam's Disciple - Temporal Tempest - Curator's Champion - Fist of Tava - Invader's Bane - Land, Air, and Sea Supremacy - Zero Regrets - Battlespire's Best - Bastion Breaker - Ardent Bibliophile - Subterranean Smasher - Bane of Thorns - True Genius - In Defiance of Death - No Rest for the Wicked - Nature's Wrath - Undying Endurance - Relentless Raider - Depths Defier - Apex Predator - Pure Lunacy - Mountain God - Leave No Bone Unbroken - CoS/RoM/BF/FH Challenger69,420 achievement points2 -
Elvenheart✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Pink_Pixie wrote: »I wrote this post just under a month ago, and it tends to explain my own position better and perhaps many others players thoughts on the new system. I'm pasting it below as it still rings true to this thread, and I'll add a few additions at the end to further my thoughts on the matter.
"As a pve and pvp player, and being a huge achievement hunter to boot. I have done nearly every quest available in the game, save for a few here and there. That does not include repeatables, and one epilogue quest that requires to be done 150 times for a five point achievement.
I've fished every zone, done every dungeon and trial numerous times to the point I'm tired of doing them again and again. However, the enjoyment I still get comes from pvp and some pve when new quests and such come out. And I am not even CP 1000 yet, I'm currently CP 968 or something wonky like that.
To cut this a little shorter, there won't be much for myself, or perhaps many others to do to gain the required experience to reach a decent amount of CP to be on par with how my only character is currently. I've enjoyed the game, and very much appreciate how every npc is voice acted. But the direction the game is now going, gives me the impression it's becoming like other MMO's.
To name a couple,
Star Trek online (Aka Grind Trek Online)
Star Wars Knights of the republic (Aka SW cash shop)
To bring a end to my little rant so to speak, I have empathy for players that feel they are being robbed, and I for one do not look forward to these new changes. As there will be very little for myself, and others to do, other than grind zombies. If that is the case, I'm sure there is other games out there, that will fit my personal taste."
I feel the current change only reduces the player base, as many are feeling they are being robbed. Their time and work to progress through the game is being lost. Nothing is fair in the change that is coming, nothing that makes me think I want to log on and I'd like to see what is new and enjoy it as much as I did before.
CP 2.0 adds nothing but disappointment for myself and no doubt many others, as I/we have earned something, which has taken many many hours. There has been no reply from the devs on the points many of us have discussed since CP 2.0 was released on PTS. Instead we're met with silence, this only shows that the community is not listened to. As we pay to play this game, and paying for something that does not live up to expectations is not something many of us will do.
Again, my own perspective is not to resist the change from CP 1.0 to 2.0, it's resistance to take away what I rightfully earned, and to do that, is a bad move from Zos. I know people will say "You've lost nothing" and so on, yet, the numbers tell me different. I cannot recoup the experience that is lost by normal means, and must either do repetitive tasks to gain it again. Or failing that, make a new character....which I enjoy playing one, so that choice is not relevant.
I really like your post. I’ve seen some good discussions both for and against scaling the existing cp, but your post does a good job of pointing out the issue faced by people who have done almost every single non-repeatable quest on their favorite or only character. Like you said, just to get back to the point in power we are now, the choices are to start a new character and redo the non-repeatable quests we’ve already done, just do the repeatable dailies, including battlegrounds/random dungeons, and/or wait for new content with new quests which only come out from time to time. Or start from nothing in a brand new game, leaving behind all we’ve achieved and love in ESO. Irrespective of one’s views about cp, this is an issue to consider. And to those who say that these are the only choices anyway no matter whether they scaled the cp points or not, I would reply that if they scaled the cp, at least we would be in a place where we were continuing to improve our characters going forward and not having to work just to get our characters back to where they are power level-wise right now in the existing system.2 -
tmbrinks✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭CleymenZero wrote: »Lamagrokie wrote: »So I am at 1200 cp, 1210 actually, and it may have taken me 600M XP to get there why should a person who got there at 515M XP get the same amount of CP as me, and why should I get the same amount as someone who took 700M XP to get to 1210. Why ? Because there was a catch up mechanic. That catchup mechanic is now in place based on an 1800CP level. If you give everyone an adjusted amount of CP base on the difference between the new system and the old then those new people have even a greater need of catching up. They have even further to catch up. That shouldn't be the case, as it removes the whole point of the catch up mechanic in the first place.
I agree that new player should have some catch up mechanic, but this mechanic shouldn't impact on vet player as bad as it's, the price is to high, some players will lose hundred of millions XP
But you've "lost" nothing...
Do you go back to the store when an item gets put on sale and demand the difference in price after you've had it and used it for years?
I mean... I should get all my money back I've spent on chapters for this game because I can now buy them with gold in-game and crown trading.
Sounds ridiculous right? right?
[snip]
Take an 810 CP 1.0 right? That person is currently maxed out in this system. Fast-forward a week, he can't slot or can't complete 4 orbs for his dps role.
Compare his potential to 2000 CP counterpart. In the CP 1.0 system, they are equivalent. In the CP 2.0, they are not.
Have they lost something? [snip]
I know the difference won't be huge at all but will there be a difference even if it's only 2-3%?
Your analogy is more alike to having a gear that you golded out nerfed into the ground and asking ZOS to refund you all the mats and transmutes you may have used making the build even though you made a few 100k AP with that build therefore have used it to in full.
[edited for baiting]
It takes less than 600 CP to slot all your actives (you only get 4, and they're less than 50 CP each). So saying an 810 can't do it is unequivocally false.The Unshattered - Tenacious Dreamer - Hurricane Herald - Godslayer - Dawnbringer - Gryphon Heart - Tick Tock Tormenter - Immortal Redeemer - Dro-m'Athra DestroyerThe Unchained - Moth Trusted - The Just - Oathsworn - Bedlam's Disciple - Temporal Tempest - Curator's Champion - Fist of Tava - Invader's Bane - Land, Air, and Sea Supremacy - Zero Regrets - Battlespire's Best - Bastion Breaker - Ardent Bibliophile - Subterranean Smasher - Bane of Thorns - True Genius - In Defiance of Death - No Rest for the Wicked - Nature's Wrath - Undying Endurance - Relentless Raider - Depths Defier - Apex Predator - Pure Lunacy - Mountain God - Leave No Bone Unbroken - CoS/RoM/BF/FH Challenger69,420 achievement points1 -
furiouslog✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭@tmbrinks
Okay, I watched the skinnycheeks video (nice job, skinnycheeks). I main a DPS. I think that where my particular issue resides is that I can respec for 3000g to get conditionally optimal resistances without touching the blue tree. In future, I can't get to optimal resistances without sacrificing damage. I'd say that 1170 is the floor for the current 810 blue tree, and 1560 is the ceiling. Over 1560 is truly horizontal. Somewhere in between those numbers is where my character is currently specced after having just run vMOL (disclosure: I keep nothing in pen for dummies or vet trials).
So anyone landing post-update between 810 and some number between 1170 and 1560 (depending on choices in damage mitigation) is getting nerfed. Do we agree on that?
Side question to anyone: is CP reallocation still going to cost 3000g after the grace period?Edited by furiouslog on March 3, 2021 5:09PM0 -
tmbrinks✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭furiouslog wrote: »@tmbrinks
Okay, I watched the skinnycheeks video (nice job, skinnycheeks). I think that where my particular issue resides is that I can respec for 3000g to get conditionally optimal resistances without touching the blue tree. In future, I can't get to optimal resistances without sacrificing damage. I'd say that 1170 is the floor for the current 810 blue tree, and 1560 is the ceiling. Over 1560 is truly horizontal. Somewhere in between those numbers is where my character is currently specced after having just run vMOL (disclosure: I keep nothing in pen for dummies or vet trials).
So anyone landing post-update between 810 and some number between 1170 and 1560 (depending on choices in damage mitigation) is getting nerfed. Do we agree on that?
Side question to anyone: is CP reallocation still going to cost 3000g after the grace period?
I honestly don't think they're getting "nerfed" perse. Yes, the CP system is nerfing damage across the board, but I'm not talking about that, I think that is intentional design.
At current 810, you can't allocate into everything as is. You have to make choices on whether you want a bonus to heals, or to crit damage, DoT damage (for examples) in the blue tree.
In the new system, at 1560, you have EVERYTHING.. .as in there is no more possible increases you can get in those stars. So I don't think they're equivalent.
I think 810 is about the same as 1170 in the new system, where you have to make some choices on what to pick and decide what's best for your build and situation, we just now have the option to go higher than that and actually get everything.
Above that, we get a little bit more vertical progression (which is nice to feel some growth in our power again) and at even higher the ability to have true horizontal progression (whereby which we save the 3k gold respec cost... and some time)The Unshattered - Tenacious Dreamer - Hurricane Herald - Godslayer - Dawnbringer - Gryphon Heart - Tick Tock Tormenter - Immortal Redeemer - Dro-m'Athra DestroyerThe Unchained - Moth Trusted - The Just - Oathsworn - Bedlam's Disciple - Temporal Tempest - Curator's Champion - Fist of Tava - Invader's Bane - Land, Air, and Sea Supremacy - Zero Regrets - Battlespire's Best - Bastion Breaker - Ardent Bibliophile - Subterranean Smasher - Bane of Thorns - True Genius - In Defiance of Death - No Rest for the Wicked - Nature's Wrath - Undying Endurance - Relentless Raider - Depths Defier - Apex Predator - Pure Lunacy - Mountain God - Leave No Bone Unbroken - CoS/RoM/BF/FH Challenger69,420 achievement points1 -
furiouslog✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
I honestly don't think they're getting "nerfed" perse. Yes, the CP system is nerfing damage across the board, but I'm not talking about that, I think that is intentional design.
At current 810, you can't allocate into everything as is. You have to make choices on whether you want a bonus to heals, or to crit damage, DoT damage (for examples) in the blue tree.
The requirement of placing limits on players by requiring those trade-offs is already designed into the slot bar functionality of the new tree. Not granting the XP equivalent (or some appropriately adjusted amount) is what causes the problem.
I don't have an issue with damage being nerfed across the board (actually I don't like it, but I accept it as part of a rebalancing effort to meet original design intents). What I'm saying is that I can't seem to recreate the CP-adjusted stats I have now given the CP I'm going to inherit, and I imagine that anyone else with my inheritable CP or less is going to have the same issue. I find that unacceptable.
Even setting that aside: if we both accept that 1170 is the new 810, why not just start the floor at 1170, and then give people the delta CP they earned over 810? I'm at 1300 CP. Instead of inheriting 1300 CP, I'd inherit 1660. It's more than I actually think I need, but it's not so much that it overly broadens the player performance distribution, nor does it penalize the players between 810 and 1170. It's a win for everyone.
0 -
Ranger209✭✭✭✭✭Merlin13KAGL wrote: »
Of course we did loose exp.. At least the way I and others see it.
How is it difficult to grasp for some people that some might look at a thing one way and others look at it differently?
Because this formula doesn't change, regardless of "how you look at it."
((CP's you have in 1.0) - (CP's you have in 2.0)) x any XP value here still equals Z E R O.
Your CP's are the same. Your XP earned is the same.
The cost to get there is the only thing changing, and that's for the catch up mechanic, intended for people with far less CP than you have to be complaining here.
It doesn't make you less viable, it allows newer players to become viable faster.
This entitlement perspective is quickly becoming the latest dead horse.
As I said. You can look at it any way you want. All good with me. Where I am from it's totally normal for people
to have a right to their own way of seeing things and expressing them even. (Well.. short of hate speech that is)
Not sure why you feel the need to belittle other for their view when it's different for yours. But maybe you're just from a
very different place than me...
The way I see it CP number is simply an expression of how much Xp you have earned.
If you look at this table: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1uS2H-elnpVngKOMBqwl3LHytDHSOBwmDfDoQHHOtoh4/edit?usp=sharing
You will see:
- CP1.0 a value of 1200 expresses I have made 515M Xp.
- CP2.0 a value of 1200 expresses I have made 206M Xp.
So by keeping our Cp the same I indeed loose 60% of my Xp. Pretty simple.
As for catch up mechanic. Why is there a secondary catchup mechanic involving degrading vet players Xp necessary. That's what the vertical progression cap is there for. Which is generously low imo.
And here is where you are incorrect. In CP 1.0 I have 1200 CP but it took me 654,108,001 XP to get there not 515M. if you are going to reward me with free CP I want what I earned not what you earned so I should be at 2100 CP while you are at 1900 CP because I earned more than you even though our numerical CP number on live is currently the same.
Maybe they should just leave the cap value at 810 so that neither of us will feel like we are getting screwed over by the other. Of course then it will take 5 billion XP to get to 3600 CP instead of 2.2 billion XP, but hey then we will be getting exactly the CP our experience has earned us.
where did you get that 654M value from?
assuming that is actually correct.
so your answer to you not getting correctly boosted to 2100 but only 1900. Is to not boost at all and stay at 1200?
talk about kneejerk, tossing baby out with the bathwater...
I got it by estimating the XP curves at the various stages they were at over time as each cap increase took place and all of the multiple curve renditions as each pertained to my individual leveling experience within that moving framework over time. How did you come up with yours? I did this to show that you have absolutely no interest in basing this off of actual experience gained by individuals, but rather some graphed curves comparing how much XP moving forward each CP will cost, vs. how much XP each CP used to cost. It is not about XP it is about how much XP each CP at different points in time.
If ZOS left the CP cost curve as it is on live now at 810 the curve would be the same as it is on live now, and it would be 515M on both 1.0 and 2.0, I guess leaving you feeling like you are owed nothing, but they do a very solid thing and push that 810 curve back to 1800 literally cutting XP cost of each CP by over half moving forward. Now that they have done that you are trying to double dip on that generosity by saying well look at the curve and how much less XP is required to get to CP blah, blah , blah. The curve is the catch up mechanic. How it flattens each time the cap increases is how it is supposed to work. What you are asking for is to remove the catch up mechanic so that anyone starting the game today will be 500 more CP behind you than what the mechanic was providing for. You are asking them to undo the catch up mechanic for the last 2 years so you can have more CP, and then to reinstitute it going forward so that your future CP will cost 40% of what it does now. This totally shafts anyone starting the game from this point moving forward, actually it shafts everyone who has not yet earned their first CP.1 -
remosito✭✭✭✭✭Merlin13KAGL wrote: »
Of course we did loose exp.. At least the way I and others see it.
How is it difficult to grasp for some people that some might look at a thing one way and others look at it differently?
Because this formula doesn't change, regardless of "how you look at it."
((CP's you have in 1.0) - (CP's you have in 2.0)) x any XP value here still equals Z E R O.
Your CP's are the same. Your XP earned is the same.
The cost to get there is the only thing changing, and that's for the catch up mechanic, intended for people with far less CP than you have to be complaining here.
It doesn't make you less viable, it allows newer players to become viable faster.
This entitlement perspective is quickly becoming the latest dead horse.
As I said. You can look at it any way you want. All good with me. Where I am from it's totally normal for people
to have a right to their own way of seeing things and expressing them even. (Well.. short of hate speech that is)
Not sure why you feel the need to belittle other for their view when it's different for yours. But maybe you're just from a
very different place than me...
The way I see it CP number is simply an expression of how much Xp you have earned.
If you look at this table: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1uS2H-elnpVngKOMBqwl3LHytDHSOBwmDfDoQHHOtoh4/edit?usp=sharing
You will see:
- CP1.0 a value of 1200 expresses I have made 515M Xp.
- CP2.0 a value of 1200 expresses I have made 206M Xp.
So by keeping our Cp the same I indeed loose 60% of my Xp. Pretty simple.
As for catch up mechanic. Why is there a secondary catchup mechanic involving degrading vet players Xp necessary. That's what the vertical progression cap is there for. Which is generously low imo.
And here is where you are incorrect. In CP 1.0 I have 1200 CP but it took me 654,108,001 XP to get there not 515M. if you are going to reward me with free CP I want what I earned not what you earned so I should be at 2100 CP while you are at 1900 CP because I earned more than you even though our numerical CP number on live is currently the same.
Maybe they should just leave the cap value at 810 so that neither of us will feel like we are getting screwed over by the other. Of course then it will take 5 billion XP to get to 3600 CP instead of 2.2 billion XP, but hey then we will be getting exactly the CP our experience has earned us.
where did you get that 654M value from?
assuming that is actually correct.
so your answer to you not getting correctly boosted to 2100 but only 1900. Is to not boost at all and stay at 1200?
talk about kneejerk, tossing baby out with the bathwater...
I got it by estimating the XP curves at the various stages they were at over time as each cap increase took place and all of the multiple curve renditions as each pertained to my individual leveling experience within that moving framework over time. How did you come up with yours? I did this to show that you have absolutely no interest in basing this off of actual experience gained by individuals, but rather some graphed curves comparing how much XP moving forward each CP will cost, vs. how much XP each CP used to cost. It is not about XP it is about how much XP each CP at different points in time.
If ZOS left the CP cost curve as it is on live now at 810 the curve would be the same as it is on live now, and it would be 515M on both 1.0 and 2.0, I guess leaving you feeling like you are owed nothing, but they do a very solid thing and push that 810 curve back to 1800 literally cutting XP cost of each CP by over half moving forward. Now that they have done that you are trying to double dip on that generosity by saying well look at the curve and how much less XP is required to get to CP blah, blah , blah. The curve is the catch up mechanic. How it flattens each time the cap increases is how it is supposed to work. What you are asking for is to remove the catch up mechanic so that anyone starting the game today will be 500 more CP behind you than what the mechanic was providing for. You are asking them to undo the catch up mechanic for the last 2 years so you can have more CP, and then to reinstitute it going forward so that your future CP will cost 40% of what it does now. This totally shafts anyone starting the game from this point moving forward, actually it shafts everyone who has not yet earned their first CP.
I just believe vertical progression cap should be the mechanic for catch up. Which is what devs stated is the intention afaik.
Seeing we already have a working and generously low and nicely tappering off vertical progression cap catch up mechanic.
I feel there isnt a need for a 2nd one that in how ai see it seriously shafts the most loyal player base.
Edited by remosito on March 3, 2021 5:36PMShutYerTrap (selectively mute NPC dialogues (stuga, companions); displayleads (antiquity leads location); UndauntedPledgeQueuer (small daily undaunted dungeon queuer window)0 -
Ranger209✭✭✭✭✭Merlin13KAGL wrote: »
Of course we did loose exp.. At least the way I and others see it.
How is it difficult to grasp for some people that some might look at a thing one way and others look at it differently?
Because this formula doesn't change, regardless of "how you look at it."
((CP's you have in 1.0) - (CP's you have in 2.0)) x any XP value here still equals Z E R O.
Your CP's are the same. Your XP earned is the same.
The cost to get there is the only thing changing, and that's for the catch up mechanic, intended for people with far less CP than you have to be complaining here.
It doesn't make you less viable, it allows newer players to become viable faster.
This entitlement perspective is quickly becoming the latest dead horse.
As I said. You can look at it any way you want. All good with me. Where I am from it's totally normal for people
to have a right to their own way of seeing things and expressing them even. (Well.. short of hate speech that is)
Not sure why you feel the need to belittle other for their view when it's different for yours. But maybe you're just from a
very different place than me...
The way I see it CP number is simply an expression of how much Xp you have earned.
If you look at this table: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1uS2H-elnpVngKOMBqwl3LHytDHSOBwmDfDoQHHOtoh4/edit?usp=sharing
You will see:
- CP1.0 a value of 1200 expresses I have made 515M Xp.
- CP2.0 a value of 1200 expresses I have made 206M Xp.
So by keeping our Cp the same I indeed loose 60% of my Xp. Pretty simple.
As for catch up mechanic. Why is there a secondary catchup mechanic involving degrading vet players Xp necessary. That's what the vertical progression cap is there for. Which is generously low imo.
And here is where you are incorrect. In CP 1.0 I have 1200 CP but it took me 654,108,001 XP to get there not 515M. if you are going to reward me with free CP I want what I earned not what you earned so I should be at 2100 CP while you are at 1900 CP because I earned more than you even though our numerical CP number on live is currently the same.
Maybe they should just leave the cap value at 810 so that neither of us will feel like we are getting screwed over by the other. Of course then it will take 5 billion XP to get to 3600 CP instead of 2.2 billion XP, but hey then we will be getting exactly the CP our experience has earned us.
where did you get that 654M value from?
assuming that is actually correct.
so your answer to you not getting correctly boosted to 2100 but only 1900. Is to not boost at all and stay at 1200?
talk about kneejerk, tossing baby out with the bathwater...
I got it by estimating the XP curves at the various stages they were at over time as each cap increase took place and all of the multiple curve renditions as each pertained to my individual leveling experience within that moving framework over time. How did you come up with yours? I did this to show that you have absolutely no interest in basing this off of actual experience gained by individuals, but rather some graphed curves comparing how much XP moving forward each CP will cost, vs. how much XP each CP used to cost. It is not about XP it is about how much XP each CP at different points in time.
If ZOS left the CP cost curve as it is on live now at 810 the curve would be the same as it is on live now, and it would be 515M on both 1.0 and 2.0, I guess leaving you feeling like you are owed nothing, but they do a very solid thing and push that 810 curve back to 1800 literally cutting XP cost of each CP by over half moving forward. Now that they have done that you are trying to double dip on that generosity by saying well look at the curve and how much less XP is required to get to CP blah, blah , blah. The curve is the catch up mechanic. How it flattens each time the cap increases is how it is supposed to work. What you are asking for is to remove the catch up mechanic so that anyone starting the game today will be 500 more CP behind you than what the mechanic was providing for. You are asking them to undo the catch up mechanic for the last 2 years so you can have more CP, and then to reinstitute it going forward so that your future CP will cost 40% of what it does now. This totally shafts anyone starting the game from this point moving forward, actually it shafts everyone who has not yet earned their first CP.
I just believe vertical progression cap should be the mechanic for catch up. Which is what devs stated is the intention afaik.
Seeing we already have a working and generously low and nicely tappering off vertical progression cap catch up mechanic.
I feel there isnt a need for a 2nd one that in how ai see it seriously shafts the most loyal player base.
What exactly do you mean by vertical progression cap, the fact that at 1200, or 1800, or some CP point that things go horizontal instead of vertical? Or something else?0 -
CleymenZero✭✭✭✭✭
✭the1andonlyskwex wrote: »CleymenZero wrote: »Lamagrokie wrote: »So I am at 1200 cp, 1210 actually, and it may have taken me 600M XP to get there why should a person who got there at 515M XP get the same amount of CP as me, and why should I get the same amount as someone who took 700M XP to get to 1210. Why ? Because there was a catch up mechanic. That catchup mechanic is now in place based on an 1800CP level. If you give everyone an adjusted amount of CP base on the difference between the new system and the old then those new people have even a greater need of catching up. They have even further to catch up. That shouldn't be the case, as it removes the whole point of the catch up mechanic in the first place.
I agree that new player should have some catch up mechanic, but this mechanic shouldn't impact on vet player as bad as it's, the price is to high, some players will lose hundred of millions XP
But you've "lost" nothing...
Do you go back to the store when an item gets put on sale and demand the difference in price after you've had it and used it for years?
I mean... I should get all my money back I've spent on chapters for this game because I can now buy them with gold in-game and crown trading.
Sounds ridiculous right? right?
[snip]
Take an 810 CP 1.0 right? That person is currently maxed out in this system. Fast-forward a week, he can't slot or can't complete 4 orbs for his dps role.
Compare his potential to 2000 CP counterpart. In the CP 1.0 system, they are equivalent. In the CP 2.0, they are not.
Have they lost something? [snip]
I know the difference won't be huge at all but will there be a difference even if it's only 2-3%?
Your analogy is more alike to having a gear that you golded out nerfed into the ground and asking ZOS to refund you all the mats and transmutes you may have used making the build even though you made a few 100k AP with that build therefore have used it to in full.
So, how exactly does re-allocating CP based on XP help this newly minted 810 get back into parity with his 2000 CP counterpart? The 810 will be at something like 1100, while the 2000 will be closer to 3000.
Also, I don't buy the argument that you only need 1100 CP to maximize your role. Sure, that may be what it takes to maximize your dummy parse, but in real PvE content you'll need all of the survivability buffs so the tanks and healers can focus on buffing DPS instead of keeping you alive, and in PvP all stats are important.
The problem with the new CP system isn't the CP conversion itself (you farmed your current CP knowing what the XP-to-CP conversion was, and the fact that the price is changing doesn't suddenly entitle you to a refund), it's the fact that the new system is being sold as focusing on horizontal progression when it really adds a huge new vertical progression grind.
I don't think the goal of CP 2.0 is to help the newly minted 810. The discussion is about FAIR conversion.
The argument the brinks made was concerning "not losing anything". There is a loss as insignificant as it may be.
I don't see where you're coming from.0 -
the1andonlyskwex✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭CleymenZero wrote: »the1andonlyskwex wrote: »CleymenZero wrote: »Lamagrokie wrote: »So I am at 1200 cp, 1210 actually, and it may have taken me 600M XP to get there why should a person who got there at 515M XP get the same amount of CP as me, and why should I get the same amount as someone who took 700M XP to get to 1210. Why ? Because there was a catch up mechanic. That catchup mechanic is now in place based on an 1800CP level. If you give everyone an adjusted amount of CP base on the difference between the new system and the old then those new people have even a greater need of catching up. They have even further to catch up. That shouldn't be the case, as it removes the whole point of the catch up mechanic in the first place.
I agree that new player should have some catch up mechanic, but this mechanic shouldn't impact on vet player as bad as it's, the price is to high, some players will lose hundred of millions XP
But you've "lost" nothing...
Do you go back to the store when an item gets put on sale and demand the difference in price after you've had it and used it for years?
I mean... I should get all my money back I've spent on chapters for this game because I can now buy them with gold in-game and crown trading.
Sounds ridiculous right? right?
[snip]
Take an 810 CP 1.0 right? That person is currently maxed out in this system. Fast-forward a week, he can't slot or can't complete 4 orbs for his dps role.
Compare his potential to 2000 CP counterpart. In the CP 1.0 system, they are equivalent. In the CP 2.0, they are not.
Have they lost something? [snip]
I know the difference won't be huge at all but will there be a difference even if it's only 2-3%?
Your analogy is more alike to having a gear that you golded out nerfed into the ground and asking ZOS to refund you all the mats and transmutes you may have used making the build even though you made a few 100k AP with that build therefore have used it to in full.
So, how exactly does re-allocating CP based on XP help this newly minted 810 get back into parity with his 2000 CP counterpart? The 810 will be at something like 1100, while the 2000 will be closer to 3000.
Also, I don't buy the argument that you only need 1100 CP to maximize your role. Sure, that may be what it takes to maximize your dummy parse, but in real PvE content you'll need all of the survivability buffs so the tanks and healers can focus on buffing DPS instead of keeping you alive, and in PvP all stats are important.
The problem with the new CP system isn't the CP conversion itself (you farmed your current CP knowing what the XP-to-CP conversion was, and the fact that the price is changing doesn't suddenly entitle you to a refund), it's the fact that the new system is being sold as focusing on horizontal progression when it really adds a huge new vertical progression grind.
I don't think the goal of CP 2.0 is to help the newly minted 810. The discussion is about FAIR conversion.
The argument the brinks made was concerning "not losing anything". There is a loss as insignificant as it may be.
I don't see where you're coming from.
I'm firmly in the "be glad ZOS let you advance past CP810 at all" camp, but that doesn't mean I don't have a problem with the CP 2.0 changes more generally.
Rebaselining CP off of XP is a "fix" that only helps people in a pretty narrow CP range (far enough above 810 to have a lot CP that were earned at a high XP cost, but low enough to still get vertical progression from the conversion), while completely breaking the catch up mechanics that MMOs need to maintain endgame population. Everyone below that range still gets screwed by the huge vertical progression in CP 2.0.
The right fix for CP 2.0 is to have real-world vertical progression end around CP1100, which is not currently the case, despite what ZOS claims.0 -
Scardan✭✭✭✭✭Maybe I should try this the next time I get a raise at work... that they owe me back pay at my new rate for all my previously worked hours...
No, this is a completely different situation.
At work, you just get a raise in your salary, but in the game imho you get a minus to the experience earned staying at the same CP level as before, because you stay at same CP as always, but the xp number needed to get there is less.
Edited by Scardan on March 3, 2021 7:22PMLet's be extremely precise in our use of terms.1 -
remosito✭✭✭✭✭Merlin13KAGL wrote: »
Of course we did loose exp.. At least the way I and others see it.
How is it difficult to grasp for some people that some might look at a thing one way and others look at it differently?
Because this formula doesn't change, regardless of "how you look at it."
((CP's you have in 1.0) - (CP's you have in 2.0)) x any XP value here still equals Z E R O.
Your CP's are the same. Your XP earned is the same.
The cost to get there is the only thing changing, and that's for the catch up mechanic, intended for people with far less CP than you have to be complaining here.
It doesn't make you less viable, it allows newer players to become viable faster.
This entitlement perspective is quickly becoming the latest dead horse.
As I said. You can look at it any way you want. All good with me. Where I am from it's totally normal for people
to have a right to their own way of seeing things and expressing them even. (Well.. short of hate speech that is)
Not sure why you feel the need to belittle other for their view when it's different for yours. But maybe you're just from a
very different place than me...
The way I see it CP number is simply an expression of how much Xp you have earned.
If you look at this table: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1uS2H-elnpVngKOMBqwl3LHytDHSOBwmDfDoQHHOtoh4/edit?usp=sharing
You will see:
- CP1.0 a value of 1200 expresses I have made 515M Xp.
- CP2.0 a value of 1200 expresses I have made 206M Xp.
So by keeping our Cp the same I indeed loose 60% of my Xp. Pretty simple.
As for catch up mechanic. Why is there a secondary catchup mechanic involving degrading vet players Xp necessary. That's what the vertical progression cap is there for. Which is generously low imo.
And here is where you are incorrect. In CP 1.0 I have 1200 CP but it took me 654,108,001 XP to get there not 515M. if you are going to reward me with free CP I want what I earned not what you earned so I should be at 2100 CP while you are at 1900 CP because I earned more than you even though our numerical CP number on live is currently the same.
Maybe they should just leave the cap value at 810 so that neither of us will feel like we are getting screwed over by the other. Of course then it will take 5 billion XP to get to 3600 CP instead of 2.2 billion XP, but hey then we will be getting exactly the CP our experience has earned us.
where did you get that 654M value from?
assuming that is actually correct.
so your answer to you not getting correctly boosted to 2100 but only 1900. Is to not boost at all and stay at 1200?
talk about kneejerk, tossing baby out with the bathwater...
I got it by estimating the XP curves at the various stages they were at over time as each cap increase took place and all of the multiple curve renditions as each pertained to my individual leveling experience within that moving framework over time. How did you come up with yours? I did this to show that you have absolutely no interest in basing this off of actual experience gained by individuals, but rather some graphed curves comparing how much XP moving forward each CP will cost, vs. how much XP each CP used to cost. It is not about XP it is about how much XP each CP at different points in time.
If ZOS left the CP cost curve as it is on live now at 810 the curve would be the same as it is on live now, and it would be 515M on both 1.0 and 2.0, I guess leaving you feeling like you are owed nothing, but they do a very solid thing and push that 810 curve back to 1800 literally cutting XP cost of each CP by over half moving forward. Now that they have done that you are trying to double dip on that generosity by saying well look at the curve and how much less XP is required to get to CP blah, blah , blah. The curve is the catch up mechanic. How it flattens each time the cap increases is how it is supposed to work. What you are asking for is to remove the catch up mechanic so that anyone starting the game today will be 500 more CP behind you than what the mechanic was providing for. You are asking them to undo the catch up mechanic for the last 2 years so you can have more CP, and then to reinstitute it going forward so that your future CP will cost 40% of what it does now. This totally shafts anyone starting the game from this point moving forward, actually it shafts everyone who has not yet earned their first CP.
I just believe vertical progression cap should be the mechanic for catch up. Which is what devs stated is the intention afaik.
Seeing we already have a working and generously low and nicely tappering off vertical progression cap catch up mechanic.
I feel there isnt a need for a 2nd one that in how ai see it seriously shafts the most loyal player base.
What exactly do you mean by vertical progression cap, the fact that at 1200, or 1800, or some CP point that things go horizontal instead of vertical? Or something else?
yes. thats what I mean.ShutYerTrap (selectively mute NPC dialogues (stuga, companions); displayleads (antiquity leads location); UndauntedPledgeQueuer (small daily undaunted dungeon queuer window)0 -
CleymenZero✭✭✭✭✭
✭the1andonlyskwex wrote: »CleymenZero wrote: »the1andonlyskwex wrote: »CleymenZero wrote: »Lamagrokie wrote: »So I am at 1200 cp, 1210 actually, and it may have taken me 600M XP to get there why should a person who got there at 515M XP get the same amount of CP as me, and why should I get the same amount as someone who took 700M XP to get to 1210. Why ? Because there was a catch up mechanic. That catchup mechanic is now in place based on an 1800CP level. If you give everyone an adjusted amount of CP base on the difference between the new system and the old then those new people have even a greater need of catching up. They have even further to catch up. That shouldn't be the case, as it removes the whole point of the catch up mechanic in the first place.
I agree that new player should have some catch up mechanic, but this mechanic shouldn't impact on vet player as bad as it's, the price is to high, some players will lose hundred of millions XP
But you've "lost" nothing...
Do you go back to the store when an item gets put on sale and demand the difference in price after you've had it and used it for years?
I mean... I should get all my money back I've spent on chapters for this game because I can now buy them with gold in-game and crown trading.
Sounds ridiculous right? right?
[snip]
Take an 810 CP 1.0 right? That person is currently maxed out in this system. Fast-forward a week, he can't slot or can't complete 4 orbs for his dps role.
Compare his potential to 2000 CP counterpart. In the CP 1.0 system, they are equivalent. In the CP 2.0, they are not.
Have they lost something? [snip]
I know the difference won't be huge at all but will there be a difference even if it's only 2-3%?
Your analogy is more alike to having a gear that you golded out nerfed into the ground and asking ZOS to refund you all the mats and transmutes you may have used making the build even though you made a few 100k AP with that build therefore have used it to in full.
So, how exactly does re-allocating CP based on XP help this newly minted 810 get back into parity with his 2000 CP counterpart? The 810 will be at something like 1100, while the 2000 will be closer to 3000.
Also, I don't buy the argument that you only need 1100 CP to maximize your role. Sure, that may be what it takes to maximize your dummy parse, but in real PvE content you'll need all of the survivability buffs so the tanks and healers can focus on buffing DPS instead of keeping you alive, and in PvP all stats are important.
The problem with the new CP system isn't the CP conversion itself (you farmed your current CP knowing what the XP-to-CP conversion was, and the fact that the price is changing doesn't suddenly entitle you to a refund), it's the fact that the new system is being sold as focusing on horizontal progression when it really adds a huge new vertical progression grind.
I don't think the goal of CP 2.0 is to help the newly minted 810. The discussion is about FAIR conversion.
The argument the brinks made was concerning "not losing anything". There is a loss as insignificant as it may be.
I don't see where you're coming from.
I'm firmly in the "be glad ZOS let you advance past CP810 at all" camp, but that doesn't mean I don't have a problem with the CP 2.0 changes more generally.
Rebaselining CP off of XP is a "fix" that only helps people in a pretty narrow CP range (far enough above 810 to have a lot CP that were earned at a high XP cost, but low enough to still get vertical progression from the conversion), while completely breaking the catch up mechanics that MMOs need to maintain endgame population. Everyone below that range still gets screwed by the huge vertical progression in CP 2.0.
The right fix for CP 2.0 is to have real-world vertical progression end around CP1100, which is not currently the case, despite what ZOS claims.
The reason why players we're "allowed" past max CP (which wasn't 810 back then) is because they said themselves initially that the CP system was designed with a max of 3600.
Here's a very summarized series of events (many of which you may already be aware of) :
- CP is implemented, max CP then is 510 I believe but they say it is designed and balanced to go up to 3600
- POWER CREEP
- they stop increasing CP cap while they figure the way forward (CP cap is 810 at that time) *what are they supposed to do? Some people are above CP 810 and have been for a while, do you remove CP slap everyone at 810 or just let them keep increasing?*
- CP 2.0 is announced, experience curve is drastically modified, and they skyrocket directly to CP 3600
- it is also announced that CP will be directly converted
Knowing this, the camp of "be glad they allowed it to go past 810" is moot. It is the result of a decision made long ago, a fait accompli where it was too late to backtrack.
Easy to see now with all those threads that CP should've been reigned in at 810 for everyone but they didn't know exactly where they were gonna go with this system.
Concerning the rebaselining:
It would effectively help everyone including CP 810. CP 810, we now know would be CP 1100 with the rebaselining. I would become CP 2400 and many of my friends would be in the 1600-1800s. Win win win because even brand new players can catch up relatively fast.
Let's face it, the difference between no-CP and max CP in 1.0 VS no-CP and max-CP in 2.0 is dramatic both defensively and offensively. Off the top of my head, I think the damage increase is in the range of 20-30% with CP 2.0 whereas it is around what? 60%? So it's not like it is penalizing newer players. With rebaselining, new players see no difference and veterans would only gain. By not doing so, you are denying advancement to veteran players while benefiting new players in no way.1 -
the1andonlyskwex✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭I know the history, and it supports my position, not yours. The only thing new about the current CP cap increase is the magnitude.
The main problem with rebaselining is that it undermines the whole point of the CP curve, which is to allow newer players to catch up to veterans. If everyone gets rebaselined, then the curve no longer helps new players catch up (because the veterans got moved forward on the curve). Rebaselining penalizes new players because it makes it harder for them to catch up to the veterans.
By allowing people to earn beyond the current cap, ESO is already letting veterans get farther ahead of new players than most other games would.1