ZOS - HA builds need your help, we are dying.

Rishikesa108 · September 3

Bguk wrote: »

Rishikesa108 wrote: »

Bguk wrote: »

I want a one button build, parsing the same as one/two bar builds, for the sake of inclusion and accessibility.

There has to be a line.

Nice straw man argument, but nobody here is asking for a 'one-button build that out-parses 2-bar rotations'.
Resorting to absurd extremes just to invalidate a legitimate conversation about accessibility is a textbook logical fallacy.
There is a massive, healthy middle ground between a 40-button sweaty rotation and completely breaking a playstyle that thousands of players rely on due to physical limitations or different preferences.
The 'line' you are talking about shouldn't be drawn at the expense of player health and inclusion, especially when classes like the Arcanist already enjoy a highly efficient, low-intensity meta with zero backlash.
Stop pretending that wanting a viable, functional Heavy Attack build is the same as asking for a free win

I am asking for a one button bar build so my friend and I can play. Is that wrong?

EDIT: Removed bad words.

If you or your friend genuinely need lower-intensity setups, then you should be supporting this thread instead of using accessibility as a punchline.
That is the whole point: ensuring that players with real physical barriers or different preferences have viable options to enjoy the game.
Trying to turn a serious conversation about inclusion into a joke by demanding a 'one-button instant win' is exactly the kind of toxic gatekeeping that hurts the community.
A viable Heavy Attack build isn't a free pass—it's a necessity for many.
True inclusion means wanting everyone to have a way to play the game, without mocking the setups they rely on.

Valkanos · September 3

Rishikesa108 wrote: »

If you or your friend genuinely need lower-intensity setups, then you should be supporting this thread instead of using accessibility as a punchline.
That is the whole point: ensuring that players with real physical barriers or different preferences have viable options to enjoy the game.
Trying to turn a serious conversation about inclusion into a joke by demanding a 'one-button instant win' is exactly the kind of toxic gatekeeping that hurts the community.
A viable Heavy Attack build isn't a free pass—it's a necessity for many.
True inclusion means wanting everyone to have a way to play the game, without mocking the setups they rely on.

I truly 100% agree with you. And I could even say more about what you said and explain my own point of view. But then this whole topic would probably just end up being [snip] [snip], because ZoS wouldn't like me saying what I actually want to say, and the 2bar players would be more than happy to jump on it. And in the end, we'd just finish with the classic: "Make your own groups".
So... well... I agree with you.

But I have to say this: We all agree that it's amazing that ESO offers accessible builds to players who genuinely need them. But what's the point if ZoS doesn't care about the gatekeeping, and then goes as far as excluding those same players from their own game? vCR HM (unsolved), NightMarket(unsolved), Solo dungeons (Solved)

Bguk · September 3

I support this thread, and any that will support me in my now quest for getting a one button build.

What I don't support is people being made pariahs for not wanting one bar, soon one button, builds in their groups. People can make groups as they please. Including those who only want one bar, or who don't care how many bars/buttons are used.

Valkanos · September 3

Bguk wrote: »

I support this thread, and any that will support me in my now quest for getting a one button build.

What I don't support is people being made pariahs for not wanting one bar, soon one button, builds in their groups. People can make groups as they please. Including those who only want one bar, or who don't care how many bars/buttons are used.

You're right... sadly.

But I truly wish ZOS would put an end to this and understand that the excuse you guys always use; “People can make their own groups as they please" isn't a valid argument.
If you want to create a group with whatever requirements you want, you should do that outside the game, through Discord, Telegram, or whatever platform you prefer.
But if you're using Group Finder, an in-game tool designed to find players and form groups, then everyone playing the game should be allowed to use it without being excluded, mocked, or treated differently simply because of the build they choose to play.
But anyway...
There's absolutely nothing new in this thread. There's nothing new in your reply, nothing new in my reply, and nothing new in any of the comments here.
And, of course, absolutely nothing is going to change. Just another useless topic whose destiny is to be closed.

edit:
Why do you go to Discord or wherever to create a Trifecta group? Why not do it through Group Finder? Because the other players aren't good enough for you? Fair enough.
But then... you use Group Finder to run a single Veteran Trial\Dungeon, and you really believe you should have the same right to exclude other players? Actually, you do.
But how sad is that?

Bguk · September 3

Valkanos wrote: »

Bguk wrote: »

I support this thread, and any that will support me in my now quest for getting a one button build.

What I don't support is people being made pariahs for not wanting one bar, soon one button, builds in their groups. People can make groups as they please. Including those who only want one bar, or who don't care how many bars/buttons are used.

You're right... sadly.

But I truly wish ZOS would put an end to this and understand that the excuse you guys always use; “People can make their own groups as they please" isn't a valid argument.
If you want to create a group with whatever requirements you want, you should do that outside the game, through Discord, Telegram, or whatever platform you prefer.
But if you're using Group Finder, an in-game tool designed to find players and form groups, then everyone playing the game should be allowed to use it without being excluded, mocked, or treated differently simply because of the build they choose to play.
But anyway...
There's absolutely nothing new in this thread. There's nothing new in your reply, nothing new in my reply, and nothing new in any of the comments here.
And, of course, absolutely nothing is going to change. Just another useless topic whose destiny is to be closed.

edit:
Why do you go to Discord or wherever to create a Trifecta group? Why not do it through Group Finder? Because the other players aren't good enough for you? Fair enough.
But then... you use Group Finder to run a single Veteran Trial\Dungeon, and you really believe you should have the same right to exclude other players? Actually, you do.
But how sad is that?

You sounds an awful lot like someone who was forum banned a couple months back...

Just because you disagree with the group argument doesn't mean it's invalid. You can think it's wrong, inhuman, whatever word you want to throw out, it is a valid argument. If ZOS changes the group finder to say no one can use the group finder to be excluded, so be it. Until then, group creators can set the makeup of their group how they see fit.

DenverRalphy · September 3

Valkanos wrote: »

Bguk wrote: »

I support this thread, and any that will support me in my now quest for getting a one button build.

What I don't support is people being made pariahs for not wanting one bar, soon one button, builds in their groups. People can make groups as they please. Including those who only want one bar, or who don't care how many bars/buttons are used.

You're right... sadly.

But I truly wish ZOS would put an end to this and understand that the excuse you guys always use; “People can make their own groups as they please" isn't a valid argument.

Actually it is. A player can form up a group stipulating any conditions they wish. I could list a "Bomser Bow Builds wearing the Nordic Bather's Towl only! Voice chat required and all chatter limited to speaking in Pirate Speak, strictly enforced!" in group finder if I wish. And then freely kick any who don't comply.

Daoin · September 3

terminator stuff sometimes in finder, and for my maybe forst 5 or 6 years playing eso being asked to join discord felt like an eso shakedown, still dont really like to chat but got used to listening...finder can still be terminator stuff though

Magic_Charmer · September 3

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Valkanos wrote: »

Bguk wrote: »

I support this thread, and any that will support me in my now quest for getting a one button build.

What I don't support is people being made pariahs for not wanting one bar, soon one button, builds in their groups. People can make groups as they please. Including those who only want one bar, or who don't care how many bars/buttons are used.

You're right... sadly.

But I truly wish ZOS would put an end to this and understand that the excuse you guys always use; “People can make their own groups as they please" isn't a valid argument.

Actually it is. A player can form up a group stipulating any conditions they wish. I could list a "Bomser Bow Builds wearing the Nordic Bather's Towl only! Voice chat required and all chatter limited to speaking in Pirate Speak, strictly enforced!" in group finder if I wish. And then freely kick any who don't comply.

Comparing a fun, themed roleplay run (like Bosmer in towels speaking like pirates) to the systematic exclusion of functional, accessible builds from standard Veteran content is a complete false equivalence.
If you list a pirate-themed towel run, people join because they want to opt into a joke. Nobody is getting hurt, and it’s a specific, self-contained event.But when people use the Group Finder for a standard Veteran Dungeon or Trial, they are just trying to clear the content using the playstyle that works best for them—and for many, due to accessibility or physical limitations, that's a One-Bar HA build.
Using the "my group, my rules" argument to justify toxicity, mocking, or kicking someone who is perfectly capable of clearing the content just because they aren't playing a sweaty 2-bar meta build isn't "freedom of choice"—it's just toxic elitism masking itself as group management.

Magic_Charmer · September 3

Valkanos wrote: »

...

And, of course, absolutely nothing is going to change. Just another useless topic whose destiny is to be closed
.....

Looking at how this discussion is evolving, I sadly have to agree with the pessimism expressed by Valkanos earlier. We are just proving their point.

Instead of addressing the actual core issue of accessibility and the impact of these heavy-handed nerfs, the conversation immediately derailed into the usual "my group, my rules" arguments and defensive elitism.

History shows that whenever a massive wave of valid feedback is raised, it’s met with radio silence from the devs. It is incredibly disheartening to realize we are just going in circles, repeating the same arguments while knowing deep down that ZOS will likely ignore the community’s concerns and just let another thread fade away or get locked.

Valkanos · September 3

Magic_Charmer wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Valkanos wrote: »

Bguk wrote: »

I support this thread, and any that will support me in my now quest for getting a one button build.

What I don't support is people being made pariahs for not wanting one bar, soon one button, builds in their groups. People can make groups as they please. Including those who only want one bar, or who don't care how many bars/buttons are used.

You're right... sadly.

But I truly wish ZOS would put an end to this and understand that the excuse you guys always use; “People can make their own groups as they please" isn't a valid argument.

Actually it is. A player can form up a group stipulating any conditions they wish. I could list a "Bomser Bow Builds wearing the Nordic Bather's Towl only! Voice chat required and all chatter limited to speaking in Pirate Speak, strictly enforced!" in group finder if I wish. And then freely kick any who don't comply.

Comparing a fun, themed roleplay run (like Bosmer in towels speaking like pirates) to the systematic exclusion of functional, accessible builds from standard Veteran content is a complete false equivalence.
If you list a pirate-themed towel run, people join because they want to opt into a joke. Nobody is getting hurt, and it’s a specific, self-contained event.But when people use the Group Finder for a standard Veteran Dungeon or Trial, they are just trying to clear the content using the playstyle that works best for them—and for many, due to accessibility or physical limitations, that's a One-Bar HA build.
Using the "my group, my rules" argument to justify toxicity, mocking, or kicking someone who is perfectly capable of clearing the content just because they aren't playing a sweaty 2-bar meta build isn't "freedom of choice"—it's just toxic elitism masking itself as group management.

"Using the "my group, my rules" argument to justify toxicity, mocking, or kicking someone who is perfectly capable of clearing the content just because they aren't playing a sweaty 2-bar meta build isn't "freedom of choice"—it's just toxic elitism masking itself as group management".

It is. And they're allowed to do it. So... who's wrong here?

Magic_Charmer · September 3

Valkanos wrote: »

Magic_Charmer wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Valkanos wrote: »

Bguk wrote: »

I support this thread, and any that will support me in my now quest for getting a one button build.

What I don't support is people being made pariahs for not wanting one bar, soon one button, builds in their groups. People can make groups as they please. Including those who only want one bar, or who don't care how many bars/buttons are used.

You're right... sadly.

But I truly wish ZOS would put an end to this and understand that the excuse you guys always use; “People can make their own groups as they please" isn't a valid argument.

Actually it is. A player can form up a group stipulating any conditions they wish. I could list a "Bomser Bow Builds wearing the Nordic Bather's Towl only! Voice chat required and all chatter limited to speaking in Pirate Speak, strictly enforced!" in group finder if I wish. And then freely kick any who don't comply.

Comparing a fun, themed roleplay run (like Bosmer in towels speaking like pirates) to the systematic exclusion of functional, accessible builds from standard Veteran content is a complete false equivalence.
If you list a pirate-themed towel run, people join because they want to opt into a joke. Nobody is getting hurt, and it’s a specific, self-contained event.But when people use the Group Finder for a standard Veteran Dungeon or Trial, they are just trying to clear the content using the playstyle that works best for them—and for many, due to accessibility or physical limitations, that's a One-Bar HA build.
Using the "my group, my rules" argument to justify toxicity, mocking, or kicking someone who is perfectly capable of clearing the content just because they aren't playing a sweaty 2-bar meta build isn't "freedom of choice"—it's just toxic elitism masking itself as group management.

"Using the "my group, my rules" argument to justify toxicity, mocking, or kicking someone who is perfectly capable of clearing the content just because they aren't playing a sweaty 2-bar meta build isn't "freedom of choice"—it's just toxic elitism masking itself as group management".

It is. And they're allowed to do it. So... who's wrong here?

ZOS allowing it is exactly why the system is broken. Just because the game tools legally permit someone to be toxic, it doesn’t make the behavior any less toxic or right.

That's the entire point of this thread: we are asking ZOS to step in and fix both the balance and the tools, because leaving it up to "player freedom" has only resulted in a community that actively excludes and mocks people who need accessibility options.

When the system allows elitism to thrive at the expense of player inclusion, it's the system itself that is wrong.

DenverRalphy · September 3

Magic_Charmer wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Valkanos wrote: »

Bguk wrote: »

I support this thread, and any that will support me in my now quest for getting a one button build.

What I don't support is people being made pariahs for not wanting one bar, soon one button, builds in their groups. People can make groups as they please. Including those who only want one bar, or who don't care how many bars/buttons are used.

You're right... sadly.

But I truly wish ZOS would put an end to this and understand that the excuse you guys always use; “People can make their own groups as they please" isn't a valid argument.

Actually it is. A player can form up a group stipulating any conditions they wish. I could list a "Bomser Bow Builds wearing the Nordic Bather's Towl only! Voice chat required and all chatter limited to speaking in Pirate Speak, strictly enforced!" in group finder if I wish. And then freely kick any who don't comply.

Comparing a fun, themed roleplay run (like Bosmer in towels speaking like pirates) to the systematic exclusion of functional, accessible builds from standard Veteran content is a complete false equivalence.
If you list a pirate-themed towel run, people join because they want to opt into a joke. Nobody is getting hurt, and it’s a specific, self-contained event.But when people use the Group Finder for a standard Veteran Dungeon or Trial, they are just trying to clear the content using the playstyle that works best for them—and for many, due to accessibility or physical limitations, that's a One-Bar HA build.
Using the "my group, my rules" argument to justify toxicity, mocking, or kicking someone who is perfectly capable of clearing the content just because they aren't playing a sweaty 2-bar meta build isn't "freedom of choice"—it's just toxic elitism masking itself as group management.

Doesn't matter whether it's a fun joke RP group, or an endgame HM Trial run. The person creating the group can choose exactly what they want in their group.

"My group, my rules" isn't toxic nor mocking. Players get to freely choose who they wish to play with. Sweaty players are completely within their rights to form groups filled with only sweaty meta builds. It's not toxic elitism in the least.

Players don't get to force themselves upon other players who simply don't wish to play with them. Might be a hard pill to swallow, but that's the skinny of it.

[edit] edited pronouns

Valkanos · September 3

And... ZoS will never fix this.

Wanna know what I truly believe? If that day ever comes and ZoS actually has to take a serious position on all of this, I genuinely believe they'll eventually get rid of Oakensoul, Rakkhat's, and all 1bar\HA builds altogether. I really, really believe this.
Because from what I've seen, it's simply easier for ZoS to deal with 2bar players than to come up with a fair solution for HA/1bar players.

There's a lot ZOS could do for HA\1bar players.
For example; they could introduce a group bonus that scales with the number of HA\1bar players in the group. The more 1bar players you have, the stronger the bonus becomes, benefiting the entire group.
HA\1bar players could make their own groups, just like 2bar players always suggest. 2bar players would be happy because they wouldn't have to exclude anyone anymore. Everyone gets to play the way they enjoy, everyone gets to find a group, and the whole community benefits from it.
That would actually give players a reason to group together and say; "Let's get as many 1bar players as possible".
It wouldn't make HA builds stronger than 2bar builds. It would simply give them their own group synergy and make playing together rewarding.
Imagine having a full group of HA\1bar players and getting a powerful group-wide bonus because everyone is using the same playstyle.
There are so many ways ZoS could make this work. They just need to give players a reason to play together, instead of giving them reasons to exclude each other.

But honestly, all of this is just a dream of mine. I know nothing like this will ever happen... sadly.

Magic_Charmer · September 3

@DenverRalphy
No one is trying to "force themselves" into groups where they aren't wanted. If a group advertisement explicitly states they are looking for a 130k+ DPS meta setup, a One-Bar HA player simply won't apply.
That's common sense.

The actual issue isn’t "freedom of choice"; it's the fact that even when groups do not specify restrictions, or when people are just running standard Veteran content, HA players are frequently kicked on sight or mocked the second a lightning staff is spotted. There is a massive difference between setting clear goals for a group and actively breeding a toxic environment where an entire archetype of players is treated like pariahs.

That being said, @Valkanos is completely right. It is incredibly sad that the only solution proposed by 2-bar players is permanent segregation ("go make your own groups").

Your idea of a group synergy bonus scaling with the number of One-Bar/HA players is brilliant. It would turn a source of community toxicity into a rewarding gameplay mechanic. It would give people a reason to play together and collaborate instead of looking for excuses to exclude each other.

But as you sadly pointed out, ZOS prefers heavy-handed nerfs over creative, inclusive design. It’s much easier to just break a playstyle than to actually fix the underlying tools and foster a healthier community.

Magic_Charmer · September 3

Valkanos wrote: »

And... ZoS will never fix this.

Wanna know what I truly believe? If that day ever comes and ZoS actually has to take a serious position on all of this, I genuinely believe they'll eventually get rid of Oakensoul, Rakkhat's, and all 1bar\HA builds altogether. I really, really believe this.
.....

Just to add to what @Valkanos said about ZOS potentially removing Oakensoul or Rakkhat's altogether out of convenience:

While I completely share your frustration with how they handle balance, I think such a drastic, convoluted move is highly unlikely. Even ZOS must understand that completely deleting the very gear that enables accessibility for thousands of players would be absolute overkill. It would trigger an unprecedented backlash and a massive exodus of paying subscribers, making it a terrible business decision.

They will probably keep delivering lazy, heavy-handed nerfs to alter how they work, but outright removal? I think even ZOS knows that would be a step too far.

tixiyweter · September 3

Wow - so many replys I will try to read them all, but for HA builds we need to start from.
And the most important thing to start with is some thing that was unjustly taken away.

Our AOE DPS is the most important thing for the build. We need kill trash fast if we can not normally DPS solo targets.

The next important thing is - that we need more usefull sets. As example we have sets like Roaring Opportunist.

It can be good HA build if we add as example 1000 HA damage like Aether set have.

There are a lot of useless sets now, that for HA can be changed to playable buff sets as LA players have.

As example craftable set Might of the Lost Legion can be remade to HA set to - now it is useless.

All we need is thingth that was taken away as AOE DPS back and some good buff sets with + HA damage on it. It is not to much to ask for.

But the most important thing is our AOE damage. Because with out it we are just a useless build that can not PVP and even can not normally PVE, becouse in PVE you need to kill trash fast if you have not got a lot of damage.

Thank you to much fo so many comments in the topic. I did not think that it will be so popular.

tixiyweter · September 4

Rishikesa108 wrote: »

Bguk wrote: »

Rishikesa108 wrote: »

Bguk wrote: »

I want a one button build, parsing the same as one/two bar builds, for the sake of inclusion and accessibility.

There has to be a line.

Nice straw man argument, but nobody here is asking for a 'one-button build that out-parses 2-bar rotations'.
Resorting to absurd extremes just to invalidate a legitimate conversation about accessibility is a textbook logical fallacy.
There is a massive, healthy middle ground between a 40-button sweaty rotation and completely breaking a playstyle that thousands of players rely on due to physical limitations or different preferences.
The 'line' you are talking about shouldn't be drawn at the expense of player health and inclusion, especially when classes like the Arcanist already enjoy a highly efficient, low-intensity meta with zero backlash.
Stop pretending that wanting a viable, functional Heavy Attack build is the same as asking for a free win

I am asking for a one button bar build so my friend and I can play. Is that wrong?

EDIT: Removed bad words.

If you or your friend genuinely need lower-intensity setups, then you should be supporting this thread instead of using accessibility as a punchline.
That is the whole point: ensuring that players with real physical barriers or different preferences have viable options to enjoy the game.
Trying to turn a serious conversation about inclusion into a joke by demanding a 'one-button instant win' is exactly the kind of toxic gatekeeping that hurts the community.
A viable Heavy Attack build isn't a free pass—it's a necessity for many.
True inclusion means wanting everyone to have a way to play the game, without mocking the setups they rely on.

HA builds is already not only that. It is a legacy of a long long time living build that is comfortable to play.
As example new DK long breath builds casn do good damage and are simple too. Arcanist builds with beam are the same.

HA is alternative option of this builds with long legacy.

I play 2 bar HA build - i love that i have slots for heals, group heal. HA gives me this option even when my back bar rotation is LA based. It is perfect build that was made on big AOE DPS and support options. We lose AOE DPS and build is unpayable now, but i hope ZOS will help and revert changes back.

1 bar HA build is simple. But the same time arcanist build or DK build with long breath on 1 panel is simple too.
2 panel version of this builds doo more DPS, the same time HA build is limited on how many DOTs we can cast in between of our HAs and all other slots can be for support skills, this is awesom gameplay.

With long DOTs we lose this option but now, with new DK shot DOTs we get it back.

HA builds use the same skills as other builds, the only difference is we do not spam LA+Spammable.
We cast the same DOTs any META build use, but in more comfortable way.

As example: new DK long breath builds cast the same long casting skill with out unnecessary spam.

On 2 bars HA builds we have the same LA part of rotation as any other builds has, but the main our damage is lazy HA + DOT.

It is comfortable to play, it do not make any unnecessary key press.

And with good AOE DPS it is effective. But if we lose this damage our HA builds stop working.

Becouse it was made on AOE DPS of HA. Like as example DK and arcanist long casting skills are very good AOE skills too.

Their builds would not be good if it would be only solo damage too.

So the HA nerf was the strike of the builds main idea and it was very heavy. I hope it would be some day fixed.

Because we can not normally play with this nerf.

Soarora · September 4

Magic_Charmer wrote: »

As a One-Bar HA player myself, I really struggle to understand the glaring double standard within the community regarding "easy" playstyles.Why is there so much gatekeeping and general dislike toward One-Bar Heavy Attack builds, while classes like the Arcanist get a completely free pass?
Let’s be honest: Arcanist players can literally press two buttons, channel a beam, and melt everything while completely bypassing complex rotations and weaving.
Yet, nobody questions their right to access endgame content, and it is widely accepted as efficient meta.
But the moment we want to play a viable, accessible Heavy Attack build, it’s suddenly treated with hostility or labeled as a "crutch for lazy players."
We aren't asking to out-parse 200k DPS complex 2-bar rotations.
We just want our chosen playstyle to remain viable and have decent AoE tools, just like other modern, low-intensity setups currently do in the game.

The following is only my opinion and I will not claim to have the power to tell you the opinion of all, but it is better than hearing it second hand from someone who doesn’t have a negative view of oakenHA. I seek no argument, my mind will not be changed, I just want to help with understanding.

Arcanist HAS been viewed as a problem, and now I see that problem as people return to high CPM builds. Like the oakenHA meta (yes, it was meta for a time), people found it boring and it does have less skill expression than a high CPM build. However, I think Arcanist succeeded as an accessibility build where oakenHA failed.

Why? Well, I admit my bias, I have never played a HA build. My understanding of the progression curve with the build is simply “you use this one build in almost every circumstance” and the skill is in not cancelling your HA before the damage goes off. Arcanist, however, has skill expression: knowing when to languid vs use another ult, knowing how to position onesself to get the most enemies within the beam/knowing how to reduce or amplify cleave, not beaming before having 3 crux or not beaming at a poor time that would result in being bashed or block casting before the beam is over, adapting skill bars to the fight (i.e. destro vs 2h backbar, what your flex skills are for a group buff/debuff or major resolve or banner or what have you), etc.

Arcanist, crucially, also lacks healer and tank oriented buffs whilst oakensoul does… my major problem with the mythic. Arcanist is overly survivable as a DPS, but it cannot heal other people like an oakensorc and it does not have self-sourced buffs such as minor aegis, minor courage, or minor protection (just to name a few).

It is also a 2-bar build. It is not simply “press beam”, then you are a poor arcanist. It is not simply “flail, flail, beam”, you will still not reach greatness that way. You have to line up your 2 bars worth of DoTs and buffs so that you can beam. All that whilst trying to catch off-balance windows, if you are sweaty.

But I, in my previous post, said I am an oakenHA hater. I do not hate Rakkhat, I celebrate it. I do think HA deserves to be a valid playstyle, just not with oakensoul. Rakkhat removes my problem with oakenHA: the build does not have an abundance of buffs no regular dps would ever have, it makes use of both bars (not that someone needs to use both, but to not be so attached to having one locked away), and it does not have the infinite sustain of oakenHA.

HA is a style of build, if it can be given its own skill curve along the lines of a high CPM build or beam arcanist, then by all means, let it be amongst peers. OakenHA just did this very poorly and the community around it doesn’t help with people not wanting to accept HA, in part due to experiences of people finding HA players to have refusal to change their builds for the benefit of the whole— a mindset (of benefitting the whole) prevalent in endgame… whilst arcanist players have throughout the class’ existence have been requested to run specific skills (cruxweaver, zenas’, rune of the colorless pool, etc) and have not had so much complaining.

Rishikesa108 · September 4

The obsession with how much 'effort' another player puts into their build stems from an unnecessary fixation on how others enjoy the game.
If everyone simply focused on their own gameplay and personal achievements, this friction wouldn't exist.
We have seen this exact dynamic before with rewards. During the 10th Anniversary event, many of us spent countless hours, even losing sleep, grinding relentlessly for rare weapon style pages within a tight 15-day window.
A few months later, ZOS made those exact same styles incredibly easy to obtain, practically handing them out.
I was one of those players who sweat and grinded for them originally, but I didn't complain or demand that others be denied those rewards just because I had a harder time. I was happy for the newer players who got them with less effort.
That is a healthy mindset. It is unfortunate to see a defensive attitude just because someone else achieves viable results with a lower-intensity setup.
Video games are meant to accommodate a wide variety of playstyles, and for many, these simpler builds are a physical necessity, not a shortcut.
ZOS should focus on broadening accessibility for the health of the entire community, rather than catering to arguments based purely on resentment over alternative playstyles.

Umbracat449 · September 4

The amount of time eso players spend worrying about how others eso players combat and play, is astonishing.

Renato90085 · September 4

The 2 problem with the HA build is
1. the meta back bar weapon( vma greatsword) meta is too powerful ,since sublcass every class/build main dmg type all is direct dmg ,and oakenring gives you nothing in pve endgame(oaken all buffs in pveendgame from sup role),so run oaken is like give up 15%(back bar dmg part)+16%(vma weapon) dmg and got nothing
2. HA build still only have suck gear like sergeant worth run,
it like you guys give up 40% dmg and hope run heaavy armor can hit top 0.1% player dps
and player skill gaps,meta 2 bar build top player dps is 210k+,but most only do 160-170
one bar(no ha) build top parse is 140-151k,most do 90-120k

tixiyweter · September 4

Renato90085 wrote: »

The 2 problem with the HA build is
1. the meta back bar weapon( vma greatsword) meta is too powerful ,since sublcass every class/build main dmg type all is direct dmg ,and oakenring gives you nothing in pve endgame(oaken all buffs in pveendgame from sup role),so run oaken is like give up 15%(back bar dmg part)+16%(vma weapon) dmg and got nothing
2. HA build still only have suck gear like sergeant worth run,
it like you guys give up 40% dmg and hope run heaavy armor can hit top 0.1% player dps
and player skill gaps,meta 2 bar build top player dps is 210k+,but most only do 160-170
one bar(no ha) build top parse is 140-151k,most do 90-120k

In my opinion for now the real problem is:
1) AOE DPS lost from nerf
2)Sets are not balanced - as example sergant gives 2400 HA dps, while other sets give only 1600 DPS to HA.
Sergant is easy t activate and other sets just need to be buffed to sergants or at least to 2000 + HA values.
3)We have not got good buff set as example Aether gives 800 to HA and 5%buff to DPS on target. (Minor Vulnerability for 10 seconds, increasing their damage taken by 5%.)
If as example set would be buffed to 1000-1200 HA damage and would be make as standart of HA set - we can get as example the same 1000-1200 HA damage on Roaring Opportunist set. That the same buff party about 5% of damage.
The same we can get analogs of sets like alkosh and all other buff sets.
With such change party of HA players can buff each other DPS and even if HA have about 100-120kDPS - if each member buff 5% of DPS it would be 140-160k DPS.
4)Lose of Mailstrom HA damage from Maelstrom's Lightning Staff - that can be added in monster helmet. As example:
Maelstrom's monster helmet that gives 1300 damage to HA and light attacks. As it gives before but already on monster helmet

As example on Undaunted Unweaver and Undaunted Infiltrator can be add unique 2-3% buff to party. The same on Noble Duelist. As example buff party on magic/phisic/bleed damage - the next party members skill after fully charged HA would make 2k damage in 5 seconds, Stack up to 5 times. Adding this bonus to already existing HA DPS would be greate party buff.

Even with out to much DPS - HA can be good if it has AOE damage back and can buff DPS.

---

offtopic:

The same for skills as beam and long DK breath - it can buf party on some procent of damage when used (as example at lest 200 wpd/spd) - to make such builds more needed and usefull in party game play.

Trial bosses can be buffed to more defense to have as example 4k more def. Than builds based on gear that gives more penetration and light armour will play more free. And it will not only be builds based on medium armour.

Vma greatsword is good - but on not META build it makes not as much DPS compared to bow as example.
I play bow bow not META build and have the same DPS with greatsword and daggers in it. So it is very good balanced.

tixiyweter · September 4

Soarora wrote: »

Magic_Charmer wrote: »

As a One-Bar HA player myself, I really struggle to understand the glaring double standard within the community regarding "easy" playstyles.Why is there so much gatekeeping and general dislike toward One-Bar Heavy Attack builds, while classes like the Arcanist get a completely free pass?
Let’s be honest: Arcanist players can literally press two buttons, channel a beam, and melt everything while completely bypassing complex rotations and weaving.
Yet, nobody questions their right to access endgame content, and it is widely accepted as efficient meta.
But the moment we want to play a viable, accessible Heavy Attack build, it’s suddenly treated with hostility or labeled as a "crutch for lazy players."
We aren't asking to out-parse 200k DPS complex 2-bar rotations.
We just want our chosen playstyle to remain viable and have decent AoE tools, just like other modern, low-intensity setups currently do in the game.

The following is only my opinion and I will not claim to have the power to tell you the opinion of all, but it is better than hearing it second hand from someone who doesn’t have a negative view of oakenHA. I seek no argument, my mind will not be changed, I just want to help with understanding.

Arcanist HAS been viewed as a problem, and now I see that problem as people return to high CPM builds. Like the oakenHA meta (yes, it was meta for a time), people found it boring and it does have less skill expression than a high CPM build. However, I think Arcanist succeeded as an accessibility build where oakenHA failed.

Why? Well, I admit my bias, I have never played a HA build. My understanding of the progression curve with the build is simply “you use this one build in almost every circumstance” and the skill is in not cancelling your HA before the damage goes off. Arcanist, however, has skill expression: knowing when to languid vs use another ult, knowing how to position onesself to get the most enemies within the beam/knowing how to reduce or amplify cleave, not beaming before having 3 crux or not beaming at a poor time that would result in being bashed or block casting before the beam is over, adapting skill bars to the fight (i.e. destro vs 2h backbar, what your flex skills are for a group buff/debuff or major resolve or banner or what have you), etc.

Arcanist, crucially, also lacks healer and tank oriented buffs whilst oakensoul does… my major problem with the mythic. Arcanist is overly survivable as a DPS, but it cannot heal other people like an oakensorc and it does not have self-sourced buffs such as minor aegis, minor courage, or minor protection (just to name a few).

It is also a 2-bar build. It is not simply “press beam”, then you are a poor arcanist. It is not simply “flail, flail, beam”, you will still not reach greatness that way. You have to line up your 2 bars worth of DoTs and buffs so that you can beam. All that whilst trying to catch off-balance windows, if you are sweaty.

But I, in my previous post, said I am an oakenHA hater. I do not hate Rakkhat, I celebrate it. I do think HA deserves to be a valid playstyle, just not with oakensoul. Rakkhat removes my problem with oakenHA: the build does not have an abundance of buffs no regular dps would ever have, it makes use of both bars (not that someone needs to use both, but to not be so attached to having one locked away), and it does not have the infinite sustain of oakenHA.

HA is a style of build, if it can be given its own skill curve along the lines of a high CPM build or beam arcanist, then by all means, let it be amongst peers. OakenHA just did this very poorly and the community around it doesn’t help with people not wanting to accept HA, in part due to experiences of people finding HA players to have refusal to change their builds for the benefit of the whole— a mindset (of benefitting the whole) prevalent in endgame… whilst arcanist players have throughout the class’ existence have been requested to run specific skills (cruxweaver, zenas’, rune of the colorless pool, etc) and have not had so much complaining.

I personally do not like 1 bar HA builds too. But it is simple and has not got HA builds utility on save skills.

The same time I do not like Rakkhat mythical. I do not like mythical to start with. I like monster helmets more.
And if Maelstrom's monster helmet that gives 1300 damage to HA and light attacks would be added it would be greate.

The same for new Arena or any thing else lightning staff, that gives 1300 damage to HA and light attacks.

That weapon buff HA a lot. It can be hard to get thing in some new Arena or Solo dungeon and it can buff HA a lot.

To not base build on Rakkhat mythical. I do not like that it do not restore resources with HA.

In our time builds do not have problems with resources - even on HA, but I like full resources and thing that it is business card and part of identity of HA build like AOE DPS that we have some times ago.

With out all that - we are just bad light atack builds.

SerafinaWaterstar · September 4

I know a guildee that has specialised in 1 bar builds, and does very well indeed; their 1 bar warden was particularly effective.

Have played 1 bar sorc, and 2 bar arcanist, and I disagree with a poster here that the arc is more ‘complicated’ to play. It really is not.

I don’t understand the 1 bar hatred. Anything that enables players to access parts of the game that previously were very ‘gatekept’ is good.

There are complaints here about the lack of players doing trials - well what do you expect if there are people preventing others from joining, rather than encouraging? Trial leads that ask for unrealistic top tier damage based on what they have seen on a stream are not helpful.

1 bars gave some players a chance to join, and do decent damage. So what is the issue?

tixiyweter · September 4

SerafinaWaterstar wrote: »

I know a guildee that has specialised in 1 bar builds, and does very well indeed; their 1 bar warden was particularly effective.

Have played 1 bar sorc, and 2 bar arcanist, and I disagree with a poster here that the arc is more ‘complicated’ to play. It really is not.

I don’t understand the 1 bar hatred. Anything that enables players to access parts of the game that previously were very ‘gatekept’ is good.

There are complaints here about the lack of players doing trials - well what do you expect if there are people preventing others from joining, rather than encouraging? Trial leads that ask for unrealistic top tier damage based on what they have seen on a stream are not helpful.

1 bars gave some players a chance to join, and do decent damage. So what is the issue?

If speak about HA builds - I like play style - where you can use only part of DPS skills because they are on reload and have a lot of utility skills that you can use any time you need that do not make you lose DPS.

But I have nothing against 1 bar builds. I just like to have more skills and I like to swap panel

kafedristoran · September 4

tixiyweter wrote: »

Hello.

We need your help. With the latest rework of the Lightning Staff, we lost the ability to properly damage large groups of targets.
Please restore the passive. Our build was built on it, without it, we're just wasting our time heavy-attacking.

Use aoe skills, you still have a panel for them or your skill panel is empty and you are only holding LMB?

tixiyweter · September 4

kafedristoran wrote: »

tixiyweter wrote: »

Hello.

We need your help. With the latest rework of the Lightning Staff, we lost the ability to properly damage large groups of targets.
Please restore the passive. Our build was built on it, without it, we're just wasting our time heavy-attacking.

Use aoe skills, you still have a panel for them or your skill panel is empty and you are only holding LMB?

It is not effective on HA build. The same time all build was made before to make AOE dps from HA, so it is not an option.
We use hard hitting skills on 1 target to have at least some damage on single target, we need our spammable HA be a AOE DPS to make all build work.

mocap · September 4

Ulfsild + Pulsar combo easily kills a regular pack of 32k mobs.

HA is at good spot atm. Have pure NB with stats:
42k+ HP
30k resistances + major evasion
17k pen
63k+ DPS 3m parse (rotation: Surprise + HA + HA, repeate)
6k HPS and 16k burst (crit)
Infinite mag and stam sustain (no potions)

It's a mirracle ZOS didn't nerf it yet.

Valkanos · September 4

mocap wrote: »

Ulfsild + Pulsar combo easily kills a regular pack of 32k mobs.

HA is at good spot atm. Have pure NB with stats:
42k+ HP
30k resistances + major evasion
17k pen
63k+ DPS 3m parse (rotation: Surprise + HA + HA, repeate)
6k HPS and 16k burst (crit)
Infinite mag and stam sustain (no potions)

It's a mirracle ZOS didn't nerf it yet.

63k DPS only? Did you miss half your HA on the dummy? Because that seems really low. Post a screenshot of the parse so the experts can have a look and give you some free tips on how to keep pressing that one button. It really shouldn’t be this complicated.

ketsparrowhawk · September 4

Valkanos wrote: »

mocap wrote: »

Ulfsild + Pulsar combo easily kills a regular pack of 32k mobs.

HA is at good spot atm. Have pure NB with stats:
42k+ HP
30k resistances + major evasion
17k pen
63k+ DPS 3m parse (rotation: Surprise + HA + HA, repeate)
6k HPS and 16k burst (crit)
Infinite mag and stam sustain (no potions)

It's a mirracle ZOS didn't nerf it yet.

63k DPS only? Did you miss half your HA on the dummy? Because that seems really low. Post a screenshot of the parse so the experts can have a look and give you some free tips on how to keep pressing that one button. It really shouldn’t be this complicated.

"3m parse".. I assume that's not on a trial dummy so no group buffs/debuffs present.