In Regards to upcoming Arcanist "Nerfs"

AtomicFire555 · January 30

This is my first time on this forum so bear with me, i usually have a "wait and see" approach to these things but i had to give my too cents into this. Despite being on this game for 7 years im sure many of you have been here longer or even when it first came out. But anyway....I think its really a bad practice to change a class in a negative way if users have paid for it to begin with. Sure i get you need to "balance" the game but I'm sure there are other ways to do that. Personally id like the changes not to go through and necro changes to be reversed to when it was "good"

Kite42 · January 30

Arcanist plays too strong at the moment I'd say, so a nerf isn't unwarranted. I don't like necro and think they should get some love. Not sure how, they just need to be less fiddly for a start (for my taste).

Pr0Skygon · January 30

This is a very very bad take, even for 1st timer. If your basis for not wanting a class to be nerfed is because you've paid for it, then no class should ever be nerfed. ESO is not a free to play game, we all paid to play every single class in this game. Whether they needed to be nerfed or buffed should be based sorely on their performance relatively compared to others.
Also, don't talk about understanding the issue of "balance" the game, when you actively advocate against the solution. If your idea of "balance" the game is only to bring the gap of all classes closer, and by that logic, ZOS should buff the other 6 classes instead, then you're asking for more power creep and could potentially break the game balance, again. We've already been through this. We don't need another update 35 to keep the game in check by sledgehammer nerf the whole game, again.
The problem and solution is very simple. If there are 7 classes in game, and 1 of them is outperforming the other 6, you should get that 1 class in check. Problem solved.

OtarTheMad · January 30

Pr0Skygon wrote: »

This is a very very bad take, even for 1st timer. If your basis for not wanting a class to be nerfed is because you've paid for it, then no class should ever be nerfed. ESO is not a free to play game, we all paid to play every single class in this game. Whether they needed to be nerfed or buffed should be based sorely on their performance relatively compared to others.
Also, don't talk about understanding the issue of "balance" the game, when you actively advocate against the solution. If your idea of "balance" the game is only to bring the gap of all classes closer, and by that logic, ZOS should buff the other 6 classes instead, then you're asking for more power creep and could potentially break the game balance, again. We've already been through this. We don't need another update 35 to keep the game in check by sledgehammer nerf the whole game, again.
The problem and solution is very simple. If there are 7 classes in game, and 1 of them is outperforming the other 6, you should get that 1 class in check. Problem solved.

To be fair though honestly ZOS changed/nerfed how crux worked completely only about 6 days after Necrom dropped and the way they did it was kind of slimy. They changed it but did not mention it in the patch notes for that day, we all asked if it was intended and got silence for a while to only have them basically say “oops yeah I was intended” like we week or two later.

I am okay with this change surprisingly and I am glad ZOS sees Arc as having a delicate balance.

AtomicFire555 · January 30

OtarTheMad wrote: »

Pr0Skygon wrote: »

This is a very very bad take, even for 1st timer. If your basis for not wanting a class to be nerfed is because you've paid for it, then no class should ever be nerfed. ESO is not a free to play game, we all paid to play every single class in this game. Whether they needed to be nerfed or buffed should be based sorely on their performance relatively compared to others.
Also, don't talk about understanding the issue of "balance" the game, when you actively advocate against the solution. If your idea of "balance" the game is only to bring the gap of all classes closer, and by that logic, ZOS should buff the other 6 classes instead, then you're asking for more power creep and could potentially break the game balance, again. We've already been through this. We don't need another update 35 to keep the game in check by sledgehammer nerf the whole game, again.
The problem and solution is very simple. If there are 7 classes in game, and 1 of them is outperforming the other 6, you should get that 1 class in check. Problem solved.

To be fair though honestly ZOS changed/nerfed how crux worked completely only about 6 days after Necrom dropped and the way they did it was kind of slimy. They changed it but did not mention it in the patch notes for that day, we all asked if it was intended and got silence for a while to only have them basically say “oops yeah I was intended” like we week or two later.

I am okay with this change surprisingly and I am glad ZOS sees Arc as having a delicate balance.

Thank you for being kind. Also your right on.

Trejgon · January 30

AtomicFire555 wrote: »

Sure i get you need to "balance" the game but I'm sure there are other ways to do that.

Here is a thought exercise for you: try to figure out a way to mantain balance based on player data (because no mater what you do players will find ways to make things stronger than what you'd think they will be) that does not ever touch anything any player may have at any point paid for.

As for the topic of arcanist specifically, my main gripe for the moment being with the class design, is that the power budget is allocated in a way that you pretty much have to run cephaliarcs flail+fatecarver for a DPS, or you just... don't do relevant dps. And in content I tend to play most of the time, it would seem every mob has hard CC skill they will drop at the exact perfect moment I start casting fatecarver just to make things awkwardly longer.

On the topic of necro, I did not play the class even remotely enough to have a formed opinion on the state of it. Probably it could use some love, no clue how this love would need to look like tho.

AtomicFire555 · January 30

Trejgon wrote: »

AtomicFire555 wrote: »

Sure i get you need to "balance" the game but I'm sure there are other ways to do that.

Here is a thought exercise for you: try to figure out a way to mantain balance based on player data (because no mater what you do players will find ways to make things stronger than what you'd think they will be) that does not ever touch anything any player may have at any point paid for.

As for the topic of arcanist specifically, my main gripe for the moment being with the class design, is that the power budget is allocated in a way that you pretty much have to run cephaliarcs flail+fatecarver for a DPS, or you just... don't do relevant dps. And in content I tend to play most of the time, it would seem every mob has hard CC skill they will drop at the exact perfect moment I start casting fatecarver just to make things awkwardly longer.

On the topic of necro, I did not play the class even remotely enough to have a formed opinion on the state of it. Probably it could use some love, no clue how this love would need to look like tho.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the "current meta" for dps dragonknight stamblade? Since it got buffed?

Nilandia · January 30

AtomicFire555 wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the "current meta" for dps dragonknight stamblade? Since it got buffed?

In trials, no. Rosters tend to have a few support DPS such as Z'en DK, EC cro, MK sorc, and the like. You may see a templar or two. Every other roster slot is typically filled with stamina arcanists.

Kalle_Demos · January 30

Your take isn't a bad one. There have been many issues with the way 'balance' has been handled over the years. As far as the Arcanist goes...It could've been worse. Look at the Necromancer. There is a fallacy some believe that top of the leaderboards = overpowered. When the Necro was released it was the same.

A loud minority cried for the shiny new thing to be torn down. They got what they wanted and the devs overreacted and well... *waves hands* look around. Thing is, the Necro wasn't actually 'overpowered'. There were adjustments to be made sure but in the hands of the best players everything is overpowered. People at the top of the leaderboards are going to be there no matter what Class they play.

Ironically, the stated reason for the Arcanist nerf is the exact opposite of the one given for the Necromancer Blastbones change. But contradictory changes are nothing new. I expect it at this point. The way they have with words. True artistry there. That said, 'cautious adjustments' are whats needed in terms of balance. I'm glad they chose moderation with the Arcanist instead of overreacting like they did with the Necro.

OtarTheMad · January 30

Kalle_Demos wrote: »

Your take isn't a bad one. There have been many issues with the way 'balance' has been handled over the years. As far as the Arcanist goes...It could've been worse. Look at the Necromancer. There is a fallacy some believe that top of the leaderboards = overpowered. When the Necro was released it was the same.

A loud minority cried for the shiny new thing to be torn down. They got what they wanted and the devs overreacted and well... *waves hands* look around. Thing is, the Necro wasn't actually 'overpowered'. There were adjustments to be made sure but in the hands of the best players everything is overpowered. People at the top of the leaderboards are going to be there no matter what Class they play.

Ironically, the stated reason for the Arcanist nerf is the exact opposite of the one given for the Necromancer Blastbones change. But contradictory changes are nothing new. I expect it at this point. The way they have with words. True artistry there. That said, 'cautious adjustments' are whats needed in terms of balance. I'm glad they chose moderation with the Arcanist instead of overreacting like they did with the Necro.

1000% this.

Entaro · January 30

The class isn't really meaningfully nerfed in any capacity. A massive ranged DoT AoE attack is literally the best mechanical way to deliver damage in ESO in the widest variety of situations. It still plays at almost half the CPM of other classes for the same output. It's tentacle spammable heals the user. It's nerfed pragmatic morph on PTS still provides a 10k damage shield, and in cleave heavy encounters like most recent trial and dungeons, it just effortlessly cooks, especially in azure due to the class design.

The only real effect these changes have is on endgame groups attempting to hit specific DPS breakpoints like Matron skips on Taleria HM, etc.. with the slight damage % nerfs.

ZOS_Icy · January 30

Greetings,

We have recently removed some unnecessary back and forth from this thread. This is a reminder to keep the discussion civil and constructive. Please keep our Community Rules in mind moving forward.

Thank you for your understanding.

TheTuSiK · January 30

ople at the top of the leaderboards are going to be there no matter what Class they play.

Yyyy, no? If that was the case top players could as well play Stamina Wardens instead of Arcanists and get the same results and there is noooo way that happens.

Ezhh · January 30

Current optimised trial rosters usually have two (Zenkosh DK and EC/MK cro) support DDs who do limited damage due to running support sets and who exist to buff the remaining six parse DDs. These six parse DDs, with extremely few exceptions, are all arcanists.

Arcanists are also perfectly decent support choices and often show up as tank or healer in addition to taking all parse DD spots on a roster. Groups where 7/12 players are arcanists are normal.

So while I'm usually strongly against nerfs, this is the most stale meta in terms of class division I have seen in a really long time, and either arcanist badly needs some nerfing, or other classes badly need some love.

nokturnihs · January 30

I think it'd be great to discontinue leaderboards in general. But if we're talking nerfs I'd still say nerf dragon knight into uselessness for a few years - every other class has been dropped down the garbage chute for a while it's time boys for the DKs to hate what ZOS did to their class. After a couple years maybe switch off to nerfing arcanist.

OtarTheMad · January 30

Ezhh wrote: »

Current optimised trial rosters usually have two (Zenkosh DK and EC/MK cro) support DDs who do limited damage due to running support sets and who exist to buff the remaining six parse DDs. These six parse DDs, with extremely few exceptions, are all arcanists.

Arcanists are also perfectly decent support choices and often show up as tank or healer in addition to taking all parse DD spots on a roster. Groups where 7/12 players are arcanists are normal.

So while I'm usually strongly against nerfs, this is the most stale meta in terms of class division I have seen in a really long time, and either arcanist badly needs some nerfing, or other classes badly need some love.

Okay but taking that many Arcanist into a trial is a choice. It’s not like you can’t complete the trial without an Arc. If Arc never existed trial groups would still finish those trials and get the scores and hard achievements and all that… just maybe with a slightly lower score.

I do agree that Arcanist needed more nerfs though, but I wouldn’t say “badly”. I think Flail needs some things moved off it. I’d say the heal and the execute but that’s just me. I like that ZOS is FINALLY learning to nerf things delicately vs a huge hammer smash.

Ezhh · January 30

OtarTheMad wrote: »

Okay but taking that many Arcanist into a trial is a choice. It’s not like you can’t complete the trial without an Arc. If Arc never existed trial groups would still finish those trials and get the scores and hard achievements and all that… just maybe with a slightly lower score.

I'm not sure if you missed the part where I said optimised. It is not a choice. I can't choose for DK or sorc to be the best parse DD for a given trial because I want it that way. What I outlined is the optimal composition for almost all circumstances and that's all there is to it.

I'm saying it would be better for classes to be more equal, and you're saying the top class is fine because others can still clear while being less effective. I don't think any long-term main of a non-arcanist class is going to agree with that.

Uvi_AUT · January 30

They say they nerf Fatecarver to make room for more complex rotations (which is okay in my book), yet they didnt change any other Skills.
I mean, what the what now? What other rotations?

OtarTheMad · January 30

Ezhh wrote: »

OtarTheMad wrote: »

Okay but taking that many Arcanist into a trial is a choice. It’s not like you can’t complete the trial without an Arc. If Arc never existed trial groups would still finish those trials and get the scores and hard achievements and all that… just maybe with a slightly lower score.

I'm not sure if you missed the part where I said optimised. It is not a choice. I can't choose for DK or sorc to be the best parse DD for a given trial because I want it that way. What I outlined is the optimal composition for almost all circumstances and that's all there is to it.

I'm saying it would be better for classes to be more equal, and you're saying the top class is fine because others can still clear while being less effective. I don't think any long-term main of a non-arcanist class is going to agree with that.

I am just tired of ZOS over nerfing classes into the ground. I mean I’m a necro main and somehow my class got nerfed again, how tf is that even possible? I appreciate their decision to nerf it slowly and with care. Hopefully that leads to a better balance overall.

Ezhh · January 30

OtarTheMad wrote: »

I am just tired of ZOS over nerfing classes into the ground. I mean I’m a necro main and somehow my class got nerfed again, how tf is that even possible? I appreciate their decision to nerf it slowly and with care. Hopefully that leads to a better balance overall.

No worries, as I said, usually I'm strongly against nerfs. I'd much prefer to see others classes improved to compare with where arcanist is now than nerf arcanist, but I can't realistically see it happening.

frogthroat · February 1

I fully understand why Arcanist is going to be nerfed. Not only is the dps high with low effort, also tanking is silly. Fun, but silly. You can do that with no gear. And I mean no gear, not even weapons in hand. It's pretty fun when you can tank vDLC dungeons wearing nothing but your fists and still provide more than 15 buffs and debuffs.

But it was known from day 1 that Arcanist is going to be op and it will be nerfed after Necrom sales drop. This Fatecarver nerf is just the first one, but more will come. I will continue tanking with absolutely no gear while it lasts.