DO NOT REMOVE ARCANE FIGHTER (2H TALENT)

Pixysticks

PLEASE do not remove this talent, merge your new talent with this one. It's the best 2h passive you have and you guys are unintentionally destroying a lot of specs by trying to buff the tree.

tplink3r1

+1

AshySamurai

I like a new passive. It's less bugged and IMO more usefull than Arcane Fighter. Now executener hit like a train.

killedbyping

Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.

Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.

omy_mkeb17_ESO

killedbyping wrote: »

Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.

Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.

They consider it the best passive from PvP PoV with a diseased weapon glyph, but....
In Pve it's useless!!!
Thx for the new passive, both PvP and PvE players would make use of this new one.

Xsorus

killedbyping wrote: »

Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.

Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.

It's more damage then the new passive just by having fire damage enchant on your weapon, you also don't appear to even know what the passive does. For future reference, status effects are different from weapon enchants

omy_mkeb17_ESO wrote: »

killedbyping wrote: »

Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.

Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.

They consider it the best passive from PvP PoV with a diseased weapon glyph, but....
In Pve it's useless!!!
Thx for the new passive, both PvP and PvE players would make use of this new one.

Arcane fighter with fire enchant is more damage then the new passive and the new passive is useless in pvp

AshySamurai

More about status effect and weapon enchants. Status Effects and you

Erock25

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

killedbyping wrote: »

Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.

Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.

It's more damage then the new passive just by having fire damage enchant on your weapon, you also don't appear to even know what the passive does. For future reference, status effects are different from weapon enchants

omy_mkeb17_ESO wrote: »

killedbyping wrote: »

Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.

Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.

They consider it the best passive from PvP PoV with a diseased weapon glyph, but....
In Pve it's useless!!!
Thx for the new passive, both PvP and PvE players would make use of this new one.

Arcane fighter with fire enchant is more damage then the new passive and the new passive is useless in pvp

@xsorusb14_ESO‌

The way I understood it, and correct me if I'm wrong, is it increased the status effect chance by 100%, bringing it from 10% to 20%. You have tested that this additional 10% chance to proc burning is more dps than the additional dmg after heavy attacks?

Xsorus

Erock25 wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

killedbyping wrote: »

Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.

Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.

It's more damage then the new passive just by having fire damage enchant on your weapon, you also don't appear to even know what the passive does. For future reference, status effects are different from weapon enchants

omy_mkeb17_ESO wrote: »

killedbyping wrote: »

Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.

Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.

They consider it the best passive from PvP PoV with a diseased weapon glyph, but....
In Pve it's useless!!!
Thx for the new passive, both PvP and PvE players would make use of this new one.

Arcane fighter with fire enchant is more damage then the new passive and the new passive is useless in pvp

@xsorusb14_ESO‌

The way I understood it, and correct me if I'm wrong, is it increased the status effect chance by 100%, bringing it from 10% to 20%. You have tested that this additional 10% chance to proc burning is more dps than the additional dmg after heavy attacks?

Remember arcane fighter doesn't just take into account weapon enchants, it'll double the chance of any status effect procing ability you have, for instance standard would have double the chance to apply burning on the enemy which would in turn build more ultimate. To get the bonus after heavy you have to fully charge it, and that'll be a dps loss over weaving light attacks with abilities alone

killedbyping

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

killedbyping wrote: »

Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.

Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.

It's more damage then the new passive just by having fire damage enchant on your weapon, you also don't appear to even know what the passive does. For future reference, status effects are different from weapon enchants

omy_mkeb17_ESO wrote: »

killedbyping wrote: »

Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.

Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.

They consider it the best passive from PvP PoV with a diseased weapon glyph, but....
In Pve it's useless!!!
Thx for the new passive, both PvP and PvE players would make use of this new one.

Arcane fighter with fire enchant is more damage then the new passive and the new passive is useless in pvp

Im obviously know what this passive does. What im saying, that it isnt supposed to work that way and obviously have nothing to do with 2H weapons at all. Just like fire enchant didnt supposed to proc burning effect.

Thejollygreenone

killedbyping wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

killedbyping wrote: »

Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.

Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.

It's more damage then the new passive just by having fire damage enchant on your weapon, you also don't appear to even know what the passive does. For future reference, status effects are different from weapon enchants

omy_mkeb17_ESO wrote: »

killedbyping wrote: »

Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.

Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.

They consider it the best passive from PvP PoV with a diseased weapon glyph, but....
In Pve it's useless!!!
Thx for the new passive, both PvP and PvE players would make use of this new one.

Arcane fighter with fire enchant is more damage then the new passive and the new passive is useless in pvp

Im obviously know what this passive does. What im saying, that it isnt supposed to work that way and obviously have nothing to do with 2H weapons at all. Just like fire enchant didnt supposed to proc burning effect.

...What? Fire enchants aren't supposed to proc the burning effect?

Arcane Fighter isn't supposed to double someones chance of proccing burning, or more importantly the disease healing debuff status effect?

How was Arcane Fighter 'supposed to work' then?

Pixysticks

If you guys are bent about putting that new talent in the game and replacing Arcane Fighter, can you at least merge them?

demonlkojipub19_ESO

The new passive would have been good if it did what the patch notes says. Its at the very least not worded at all the same in-game and is worded to be a big nerf if you use elemental enchants.

They should get it working like its worded in the notes if it isnt already.

AshySamurai

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

The new passive would have been good if it did what the patch notes says. Its at the very least not worded at all the same in-game and is worded to be a big nerf if you use elemental enchants.

They should get it working like its worded in the notes if it isnt already.

I tested the new passive - it works fine. I had buff to all weapon skills after full charged heavy attack.

omy_mkeb17_ESO

As a NB with no source of elemental dmg and with a "drain stamina" weapon enchant, the Arcane fighter old passive is useless. And i'm sure there are other scenarios like that.
Thinking from DK only perspective is wrong.
I don't have anything against merging the passives... but the new passive will be as usefull for all players.

Varicite

omy_mkeb17_ESO wrote: »

As a NB with no source of elemental dmg and with a "drain stamina" weapon enchant, the Arcane fighter old passive is useless. And i'm sure there are other scenarios like that.
Thinking from DK only perspective is wrong.
I don't have anything against merging the passives... but the new passive will be as usefull for all players.

Except for PvP players.

Maybe thinking of this from a PvE only perspective is also wrong. : )

PS) You could have chosen an enchant that actually synergized w/ your passive instead of using drain stamina....

Either way, I wouldn't mind merging them. I don't really mind the change either; I did like a more reliable disease proc on 2h though.

demonlkojipub19_ESO

AshySamurai wrote: »

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

The new passive would have been good if it did what the patch notes says. Its at the very least not worded at all the same in-game and is worded to be a big nerf if you use elemental enchants.

They should get it working like its worded in the notes if it isnt already.

I tested the new passive - it works fine. I had buff to all weapon skills after full charged heavy attack.

Did you read the patch notes? I don't think you read the patch notes. I even have A big post in the patch notes thread with a picture showing the difference between patch notes and game. And its a fact from my testing that it does not work as worded in the patch notes.

Pixysticks

The talent is so terrible to begin with, please just merge it if anything, or else leave Arcane Fighter in the game.

AshySamurai

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

AshySamurai wrote: »

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

The new passive would have been good if it did what the patch notes says. Its at the very least not worded at all the same in-game and is worded to be a big nerf if you use elemental enchants.

They should get it working like its worded in the notes if it isnt already.

I tested the new passive - it works fine. I had buff to all weapon skills after full charged heavy attack.

Did you read the patch notes? I don't think you read the patch notes. I even have A big post in the patch notes thread with a picture showing the difference between patch notes and game. And its a fact from my testing that it does not work as worded in the patch notes.

Yep, I read patch notes. And I know about little difference in description. This is the description from the game.

Increase your damage of the next attack by 5%/10% for 7 seconds after ctivating a fully charged heavy attack.

And no, I don't seen your big comment. Patch Notes 1.5 topic have 14 pages. If you have direct link, I would be glad to read it. But anyway, it works fine for me. How you was testing?

demonlkojipub19_ESO

AshySamurai wrote: »

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

AshySamurai wrote: »

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

The new passive would have been good if it did what the patch notes says. Its at the very least not worded at all the same in-game and is worded to be a big nerf if you use elemental enchants.

They should get it working like its worded in the notes if it isnt already.

I tested the new passive - it works fine. I had buff to all weapon skills after full charged heavy attack.

Did you read the patch notes? I don't think you read the patch notes. I even have A big post in the patch notes thread with a picture showing the difference between patch notes and game. And its a fact from my testing that it does not work as worded in the patch notes.

Yep, I read patch notes. And I know about little difference in description. This is the description from the game.

Increase your damage of the next attack by 5%/10% for 7 seconds after ctivating a fully charged heavy attack.

And no, I don't seen your big comment. Patch Notes 1.5 topic have 14 pages. If you have direct link, I would be glad to read it. But anyway, it works fine for me. How you was testing?

Don't reword the patch notes to convince yourself.

Replaced the Arcane Fighter passive with Follow Up. This will increase your damage by 5%/10% for 7 seconds after activating a fully charged heavy attack.

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/135688/pts-patch-notes-v1-5/p1

First post of the first page. There is no of your next attack there. Where did you read that in the patch notes, seriously? you didn't even spell activating right. Did you even do a simple copy/paste to prevent any chance in error? How does one fail at copy/paste?

Darkonflare15

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

AshySamurai wrote: »

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

AshySamurai wrote: »

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

The new passive would have been good if it did what the patch notes says. Its at the very least not worded at all the same in-game and is worded to be a big nerf if you use elemental enchants.

They should get it working like its worded in the notes if it isnt already.

I tested the new passive - it works fine. I had buff to all weapon skills after full charged heavy attack.

Did you read the patch notes? I don't think you read the patch notes. I even have A big post in the patch notes thread with a picture showing the difference between patch notes and game. And its a fact from my testing that it does not work as worded in the patch notes.

Yep, I read patch notes. And I know about little difference in description. This is the description from the game.

Increase your damage of the next attack by 5%/10% for 7 seconds after ctivating a fully charged heavy attack.

And no, I don't seen your big comment. Patch Notes 1.5 topic have 14 pages. If you have direct link, I would be glad to read it. But anyway, it works fine for me. How you was testing?

Don't reword the patch notes to convince yourself.

Replaced the Arcane Fighter passive with Follow Up. This will increase your damage by 5%/10% for 7 seconds after activating a fully charged heavy attack.

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/135688/pts-patch-notes-v1-5/p1

First post of the first page. There is no of your next attack there. Where did you read that in the patch notes, seriously? you didn't even spell activating right. Did you even do a simple copy/paste to prevent any chance in error? How does one fail at copy/paste?

Umm dude chill. He said this is from the game not the patch notes because in the game it says next attack but I have tested it and the passive do seem to work like how it is in the game and the patch notes are wrong I agree.

AshySamurai

Yep, @demonlkojipub19_ESO‌, chill. And next time try to read carefully.

@Darkonflare15‌. Tested new passive few minutes ago ine more time, and for me it works as says ingame description - only next attack. So yes, if I had a full charged heavy, and if I used skill next, but don't hit any target, bonus still with me. But if I hit any target with skill/light attack - bonus disappear. Need to check if this bonus stacks (few heavy attack in a row). That would be too OP. But I don't think it stacks. I think bonus just applies on next heavy attack, disappears and after heavy you get new bonus.

Darkonflare15

AshySamurai wrote: »

Yep, @demonlkojipub19_ESO‌, chill. And next time try to read carefully.

@Darkonflare15‌. Tested new passive few minutes ago ine more time, and for me it works as says ingame description - only next attack. So yes, if I had a full charged heavy, and if I used skill next, but don't hit any target, bonus still with me. But if I hit any target with skill/light attack - bonus disappear. Need to check if this bonus stacks (few heavy attack in a row). That would be too OP. But I don't think it stacks. I think bonus just applies on next heavy attack, disappears and after heavy you get new bonus.

Yeah the first time I did it. I forgot my weapon had Glyph of power on it but then I change to a regular weapon to test it out and I notice that the skill worked just like the tooltip in the game.

demonlkojipub19_ESO

So lets ignore saying it will dobone thing then have it do another. Why dont they just not do patch notes or equally mess up every detail.


What i want to know is where that detail comes from and why it fails to match. You two may not sweat the small stuff but i do.

Thejollygreenone

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

So lets ignore saying it will dobone thing then have it do another. Why dont they just not do patch notes or equally mess up every detail.


What i want to know is where that detail comes from and why it fails to match. You two may not sweat the small stuff but i do.

If you noticed, back in the guild summit they discussed this change and it was yet another description. Something along the lines of 'increases damage of heavy attacks by 10%'

Since it has changed twice now, I can only image the differences had arisen simply from ZoS changing their minds about what they want the passive to do and the magnitude of effectiveness it presents.

Developers even change their minds about abilities once they've been on live for months. Personally, I think it's fair to allow them to change their minds a few times before an ability/passive is even on live servers.

Of course we want the most effective highest dps giving option that was thought of, which can be warrant for some distress to us, the players, when it doesn't happen, but ZoS may not think that's such a great idea. I still like to think that the dev team ultimately knows what's best for the game, even though many would argue, rightfully so, that it's a pipe dream.

That's my two cents on the reason why, at least.

Varicite

Thejollygreenone wrote: »

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

So lets ignore saying it will dobone thing then have it do another. Why dont they just not do patch notes or equally mess up every detail.


What i want to know is where that detail comes from and why it fails to match. You two may not sweat the small stuff but i do.

If you noticed, back in the guild summit they discussed this change and it was yet another description. Something along the lines of 'increases damage of heavy attacks by 10%'

Since it has changed twice now, I can only image the differences had arisen simply from ZoS changing their minds about what they want the passive to do and the magnitude of effectiveness it presents.

Developers even change their minds about abilities once they've been on live for months. Personally, I think it's fair to allow them to change their minds a few times before an ability/passive is even on live servers.

Of course we want the most effective highest dps giving option that was thought of, which can be warrant for some distress to us, the players, when it doesn't happen, but ZoS may not think that's such a great idea. I still like to think that the dev team ultimately knows what's best for the game, even though many would argue, rightfully so, that it's a pipe dream.

That's my two cents on the reason why, at least.

Honestly, for those clipping Heavy Attacks into Wrecking Blow and repeating while keeping DoTs up (the basis of 2h PvE dps builds that can actually parse decently), the difference between the tooltip descriptions really doesn't mean much.

Your Heavy will still buff Wrecking Blow, and Wrecking Blow will still buff your heavy. It's still a net dps gain.

The only real difference that I can see is that we won't be able to smash a heavy attack right before the execute phase to spam multiple Executioners w/ the damage buff.

But hey, Momentum is now awesome, so that tends to make up for it imo.

demonlkojipub19_ESO

Thejollygreenone wrote: »

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

So lets ignore saying it will dobone thing then have it do another. Why dont they just not do patch notes or equally mess up every detail.


What i want to know is where that detail comes from and why it fails to match. You two may not sweat the small stuff but i do.

If you noticed, back in the guild summit they discussed this change and it was yet another description. Something along the lines of 'increases damage of heavy attacks by 10%'

Since it has changed twice now, I can only image the differences had arisen simply from ZoS changing their minds about what they want the passive to do and the magnitude of effectiveness it presents.

Developers even change their minds about abilities once they've been on live for months. Personally, I think it's fair to allow them to change their minds a few times before an ability/passive is even on live servers.

Of course we want the most effective highest dps giving option that was thought of, which can be warrant for some distress to us, the players, when it doesn't happen, but ZoS may not think that's such a great idea. I still like to think that the dev team ultimately knows what's best for the game, even though many would argue, rightfully so, that it's a pipe dream.

That's my two cents on the reason why, at least.

But that doesn't really excuse the huge lack of communication they seem to have. All it is now, to me, is a big "Just kidding, we aren't really doing this ". Its a huge tease of what it could be and isn't.

And then impulse still reads 8 meters too. Was it really ever supposed to be reduced to 6 meters? was that just a tease to whomever felt impulse needs nerf?

And then they comletely messed up the wording of the critical rush change, and it is actually limited to 68%, not buffed by 68%.

When does it stop? Am I the only one bothered by note failure? Am I only the one who feels the patch notes simply cannot be trusted?

Varicite

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

Thejollygreenone wrote: »

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

So lets ignore saying it will dobone thing then have it do another. Why dont they just not do patch notes or equally mess up every detail.


What i want to know is where that detail comes from and why it fails to match. You two may not sweat the small stuff but i do.

If you noticed, back in the guild summit they discussed this change and it was yet another description. Something along the lines of 'increases damage of heavy attacks by 10%'

Since it has changed twice now, I can only image the differences had arisen simply from ZoS changing their minds about what they want the passive to do and the magnitude of effectiveness it presents.

Developers even change their minds about abilities once they've been on live for months. Personally, I think it's fair to allow them to change their minds a few times before an ability/passive is even on live servers.

Of course we want the most effective highest dps giving option that was thought of, which can be warrant for some distress to us, the players, when it doesn't happen, but ZoS may not think that's such a great idea. I still like to think that the dev team ultimately knows what's best for the game, even though many would argue, rightfully so, that it's a pipe dream.

That's my two cents on the reason why, at least.

But that doesn't really excuse the huge lack of communication they seem to have. All it is now, to me, is a big "Just kidding, we aren't really doing this ". Its a huge tease of what it could be and isn't.

And then impulse still reads 8 meters too. Was it really ever supposed to be reduced to 6 meters? was that just a tease to whomever felt impulse needs nerf?

And then they comletely messed up the wording of the critical rush change, and it is actually limited to 68%, not buffed by 68%.

When does it stop? Am I the only one bothered by note failure? Am I only the one who feels the patch notes simply cannot be trusted?

Everything that you just said is pretty much exactly why the PTS exists.

And of course, anything that's been stated has the potential to be changed due to testing on the PTS, and even after hitting live once they get a much more massive amount of data than PTS.

Just because they say "Hey guys, this is what we're thinking of doing" doesn't mean that anything is set in stone.

demonlkojipub19_ESO

Varicite wrote: »

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

Thejollygreenone wrote: »

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

So lets ignore saying it will dobone thing then have it do another. Why dont they just not do patch notes or equally mess up every detail.


What i want to know is where that detail comes from and why it fails to match. You two may not sweat the small stuff but i do.

If you noticed, back in the guild summit they discussed this change and it was yet another description. Something along the lines of 'increases damage of heavy attacks by 10%'

Since it has changed twice now, I can only image the differences had arisen simply from ZoS changing their minds about what they want the passive to do and the magnitude of effectiveness it presents.

Developers even change their minds about abilities once they've been on live for months. Personally, I think it's fair to allow them to change their minds a few times before an ability/passive is even on live servers.

Of course we want the most effective highest dps giving option that was thought of, which can be warrant for some distress to us, the players, when it doesn't happen, but ZoS may not think that's such a great idea. I still like to think that the dev team ultimately knows what's best for the game, even though many would argue, rightfully so, that it's a pipe dream.

That's my two cents on the reason why, at least.

But that doesn't really excuse the huge lack of communication they seem to have. All it is now, to me, is a big "Just kidding, we aren't really doing this ". Its a huge tease of what it could be and isn't.

And then impulse still reads 8 meters too. Was it really ever supposed to be reduced to 6 meters? was that just a tease to whomever felt impulse needs nerf?

And then they comletely messed up the wording of the critical rush change, and it is actually limited to 68%, not buffed by 68%.

When does it stop? Am I the only one bothered by note failure? Am I only the one who feels the patch notes simply cannot be trusted?

Everything that you just said is pretty much exactly why the PTS exists.

And of course, anything that's been stated has the potential to be changed due to testing on the PTS, and even after hitting live once they get a much more massive amount of data than PTS.

Just because they say "Hey guys, this is what we're thinking of doing" doesn't mean that anything is set in stone.

Theres a higher chance of a pointed out error in the game going live anyways. Just like ultimate damage did even tho it had several threads and pre-release reminder threads. Won't be surprised if it gets pushed live, impulse is still 8m, etc., and nothing else said about any of it for over a month after.

Xsorus

I wish the devs would comment on why it's being removed

Varicite

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

I wish the devs would comment on why it's being removed

If I were to hazard a guess, it's probably because:

1) The tooltip is ambiguous and confusing to many players. Does it mean it procs 100% every 4 seconds? Does it mean it has double the chance to proc? (It's the latter, to my understanding)

2) Partially because of #1, but also because secondary effects are not explained well, many 2 hand users did not know how to correctly take advantage of this passive to synergize w/ their role.

3) Because of #1 and #2, the passive did not really do much for a large portion of the player base. The new passive is much more straightforward and easier to understand for people trying to maximize their builds.

Just my guesses, obviously could be completely wrong, lol.