MincMincMinc wrote: »

Yall are still using dark magic? I dropped that so fast without a second thought. Darkdeal and persistence doesn't even compare to a line like assassination or animal.

While monomyth is still in untouched, there is next to no reason to look for minor berserk or consider it.

With subclassing the sustain return should be all at once like it was originally intended for the cost reduction low regen sustain model.

MashmalloMan wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

MashmalloMan wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

• impen is still about half of what it should be....... make it 264(4%) or 330(5%) so it is inline with modern crit damage builds

Let's try and math this out using their own standards.

5 piece static sets share a multiplier of about x2.325 from a 1-4 piece bonus, where standards start from, I won't get super into it as most people are aware, but everything is based on these values from Racial passives, to Mundus stones, to enchants, to 5 piece sets. You can find this ratio on Hundings Rage, Fortified Brass, etc, but most importantly in this scenario; Impregnable which adds 1650 Critical Resistance.

• 1650/2.325 = 709.67... rounded up to 710.
• 1-4 piece set bonus = 424
• 424/710 = 0.597... aka, it's 60% of what it should be.

2 conclusions can be made from this data, either way, something is incorrect.

1. Impregnable is over budget, the base 424 crit resist is the standard so the 5 piece bonus should be 424 x 2.325 = 986. Obviously, I don't agree with this one.
2. 1-4 piece bonuses are under budget, 1650/2.325 = 710. This makes more logical sense.

So does Impen stack up? Lets first see what type of ratio we should expect from Armor Traits, again this is assuming ZOS has PERFECTLY balanced everything with their spreadsheets. Nirnhoned would be the easiest seeing as flat armor can be compared 1:1.

• 253/1487 = 0.17
• So, we can assume that an armor trait is roughly 17% of a 1-4 piece bonus.
• 17% of 710 = 120
• Impen = 132
• 132/120 = 1.1

These are fairly close, it shows Impen is actually 10% stronger than it should be. Now obviously, as you put it, Impen FEELS under budget, but their math shows it's not. Comment is getting a bit long, so I'll simplify an example of how they can mathematically adjust things across the board for a new standard that I think would make more sense.

First few rules:

1. Critical Damage : Critical Chance == 2:1 (No change)
2. Critical Damage : Critical Resistance == 1:2 instead of 1:1
3. 5 piece armor bonus == x2.325 (No change)
4. Armor trait == 25% instead of 17%

So how would this look?

• Minor Enervation buffed from -10% to -20% (2x Minor Force).
• 1-4 piece bonuses buffed from 424 (6.42%) to 792 (12%) (4x Critical Chance).
• Impreg 5 piece bonus buffed from 1650 (25%) to 1842 (27.9%).
• Impen armor traits buffed from 132 (2%) to 198 (3%).

This is exactly why ZOS's comments on rebalancing consumables resulting in nerfs makes no sense. THEY decide what the standards are.

First of all, their standards are not perfect, the ratio's should be revisited as the context of the game changes, 2019 was a long time ago.

Secondly, they don't really follow their own standards on the majority of access points to begin with. You think of any meta option people use today, and I guarantee they're all over budget from similar conditions they've created elsewhere in the game. Rallying Cry and Wretched Vitality as quick examples have about 5-6x the value of 1-4 piece bonuses, when the majority of forgotten sets fall between 3-5x. The difference is, both of these meta sets get 100% uptime whereas the others usually have massive drawbacks.

My favourite example is their decision to buff the Serpent mundus stone from 258 to 310, for seemingly no reason at all one patch, probably because no one was using it. This puts it at 2.4x stronger than a 1-4 piece bonus, whereas Warrior (and most of the Mundus stones) are still 2x stronger. Either the 1-4 piece bonus for recovery should be 155 or Warrior needs to be 310 as well.

This is the problem with claiming you use standards for objective truths, we can easily find where someone clearly just felt like buffing or nerfing something because they break the standards that they claim to use, but don't.

Oh let me just clarify. Impen is what it should be when compared to the other traits. The problem is that it is not what it should be when compared to the amount of crit damage available which is exceedingly more important for combat. Ideally impen would temporarily be boosted to combat crit damage, and then over longterm you would introduce more crit resist sources into the game through 2-4 pieces, mundus, cp changes, etc. As more sources get added in you would taper off the impen back to the correct 1:1 standard.

The tension has to be made between opposing stats first. Crit damage vs Crit resist. The next part is you need to remember these are all adding/multiplying up in your stat sheet. So:
CritDmg*sources VS CritRes*sources.

This is a density equation of two materials on a scale. If there are a million sources of crit damage that does X.......Having a handful of crit resist sources that also do X will never be balanced. Either increase the potency of the handful of tooltips or you need widespread changes to add more sources to the game.

---

Yes a standard is a great concept......but in reality the standard means nothing if all stats do not have equal amounts of sources. Lets just say all pen sources are 1:1 with all armor sources. Well if there are 10 choices of armor available, but only 2 choices of pen what do we think is going to happen?

I think there's nothing wrong with the standard concept if it's actually followed (which they don't) and adjusted given the context of the game's landscape (which they haven't). Although your initial proposal of over buffing impen would temporarily solve the problem, I can't realistically see ZOS doing this because they claim to follow their standards like a religion (even though we all know they don't).

I don't think sources needs to be equal either, it just needs equal opportunity. By that I mean, you could make 100 pen sets, but the player base will gravitate to 2-3 like they're already doing, same could be said about Crit Resist with Rallying Cry. For that reason, I'd look at where there is 0 access in addition to buffing the existing values as I covered previously.

Mundus Stones: Warrior is going to disappear when ws damage combines, how great would it be to introduce Crit Resist in its place. Super flexible, this would be helpful for theory crafting and work in no cp environments.

Food: They're eventually going to rework these any way, but imagine you could trade some resources for Crit Resist. Maybe gold foods could give that instead of HP recovery which is useless in PvE and PvP now anyway. Although the fact that gold foods offer a pretty substantial difference from purple is probably something I think ZOS will avoid with the redesign, but just a thought.

Potions: There is still seperate physical and spell resist bonuses, combine this into Armor at a lower value, then redo 1 of the effects into Critical Resistance for 45s. Again, they want to redesign pots, so I have no idea what the end goal is, but if we can get 100% uptime of major buffs like Prophecy and Intellect, I see no reason why we can't have other effects added like Crit Resist to help with build flexibility.

Named buffs: There is Minor Enervation for Minor Force, but there is no counterpart for Minor Brittle. That would be like having no Minor Protection for Minor Vulnerability.

I'd also tackle the root of the issue introduced in u46, I didn't really find Crit Damage to be a problem before subclassing. Really.. it's Monomyth and access to 3 damage skill lines. 4/7 classes have Critical Damage passives, that seems like too much and could easily be reworked into Pen (also a capped stat) or something else entirely.

NB is noticeably too heavy on Crit Damage and Crit Chance making it super optimal in a line with already strong skills, and although Herald isn't super popular in PvP, it is in PvE, and is the only line with 4/4 equally strong damage passives. Most classes have a 3/4 split, with the 1 remaining passive for utility. In the case of Templar, named buffs which may or may not be redundant.

MashmalloMan wrote: »

Stones: Warrior is going to disappear when ws damage combines, how great would it be to introduce Crit Resist in its place. Super flexible, this would be helpful for theory crafting and work in no cp environments.

Kelinmiriel wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Kelinmiriel wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin

What happened to the rest of the 2025 events?

This was the last event tested:

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Events: Witches Festival
[...]
The Impresario will offer the first two of five fragments for the new Wildgrown Chapel of Julianos house. Additional fragments will come in the last two events of the year.

The December event is always New Life, although I've never seen it skipped on the PTS. But what's happening in November?

Thanks!

Seems like for once, they're doing things on PTS out of order. Heart's Day is 100% going to be a February event, so we're still missing the Daedric War in November, New Life in December, and then probably something in January like a MYM. We have the relevant event outfit styles in this patch.

I assume it's that the other events are old so they have been tested extensively, but this is a brand new one so they really want to see it.

Yeah, it seems out of order to me, also. Daedric War? I hadn't known anything about that. I'll look on the PTS for a help file. If there's any other info you've seen about this, I'd appreciate it. Thanks!

I try to stay on top of ticket events as much as possible to keep info in my Event Tracker as accurate and up to date as possible. That's why I always ask these questions when I haven't found it.