Best Of
Re: Cannot put Night Market Relic on the pedestal in Night's Den
PeacefulAnarchy wrote: »You can buy the relic for free from the vendors
Once you have the achievement that grants the furnishing box, which should have it inside.
I think the vendor option is there in case something goes wrong with the delivery mail (or if people happen to look there first rather than taking or opening the box).
Re: Shattered Paths Signet Is Problematic
Minor timidity you get from this mythic should apply out of combat so gankers cant run around with 500 ulti at all times
Ankael07
3
Re: Night Market - Week One Notes
I don’t understand the criticism about social interaction. In most of the groups I’ve been in many people don’t say a word. You can think of playing in a group as having 11 companions. They just help you with hit points and damage. And you can make them go away when the quest is finished.
Edit: The 11 Companions would be a great guild name!
I think some folks have had a bad experience because not every group is pleasant. Some are very selective and will kick you or avoid you if you do not meet their gear or skills standards. (gatekeeping is real)
Asocial people might find public rejection confusing or difficult to not take personally. They want to experience the Night Market and maybe they want the house, but they are loathed to risk that aggressive behavior that sometimes comes with dealing with strangers. (You can see the aggression in the fora. Imagine what it might be like for them in the game chat where the Devs don't see it.)
The house rewards are often viewed as a great reward by those that do not decorate because they give a quick access to various countries on the map for new characters that had not been there.
On the bad side, the Night Market was billed as an event for everyone when it was introduced. While that bill has been toned down, it still rings in the minds of the players that heard it. If the Night Market had been billed as a new approach to a trial dungeon, this whole scene would have been different. The controversy with solo players would not be.
Maybe there is some gatekeeping in vet dungeons and trials but it’s an overreach to say there is gatekeeping in Night Market pickup groups. It sounds like the anxiety you are describing is from people’s past experiences or biases. Then they decide in advance they don’t like the Night Market.
Re: Necro class mastery passives are disappointing
In response to the Malevolent Promise dev comment:
I appreciate the response regarding Malevolent Promise, but I still think there are better solutions that would allow its use in PvP. For instance, since the issue is with the Corpseburster interaction, why not disable Corpseburster in PvP or significantly decrease the set's damage while Battle-Spirit is active? Corpseburster is already a niche PvP set and it would be much better for Necros as a whole to lose only a single set compared to an entire mastery passive. There's many other viable PvP sets, yet only 5 mastery passives per class.
There's a major use case for Malevolent Promise in PvP outside of using Corpseburster. Necro has forever lacked a strong class "sticky" dot, and Malevolent Promise would allow the tether to finally be viable in PvP. The fast ticks, alternate cost, unique damage bonus, and regen/aoe damage make it a conceptually solid skill, but its static nature and small aoe radius unfortunately mean that it's nonviable in dynamic PvP environments. This is of course on top of also being able to get faster corpse generation for skills like Deaden Pain.
Necro's identity goes a lot further than corpse bursting, and many necro players also aren't interested in a Corpseburster playstyle. It seems rather unfair to give Necro one less mastery option than other classes in PvP purely because of one interaction that can be mitigated in other ways.
I also have to question why this passive is being added in the first place if the intention after playtesting was to disable it completely in PvP. If you don't want to restrict Corpseburster in any way, why add a passive that is removed in half the game's content? Corpseburster is already fairly viable in PvE without Malevolent Promise, whereas skills like siphon are otherwise completely nonviable in PvP. Why not add a proc dot or mastery passive that leans into alternate necro themes that could work in all modes of content?
Once again, I don't think pushing this back to the necro rework and/or telling players to just wait for the rework is appropriate here. The necro rework is the second to last and isn't coming for another 2 years. That's far too long to address an issue where an already struggling class gets access to one less passive than other classes (that are also being reworked earlier).
I appreciate the response regarding Malevolent Promise, but I still think there are better solutions that would allow its use in PvP. For instance, since the issue is with the Corpseburster interaction, why not disable Corpseburster in PvP or significantly decrease the set's damage while Battle-Spirit is active? Corpseburster is already a niche PvP set and it would be much better for Necros as a whole to lose only a single set compared to an entire mastery passive. There's many other viable PvP sets, yet only 5 mastery passives per class.
There's a major use case for Malevolent Promise in PvP outside of using Corpseburster. Necro has forever lacked a strong class "sticky" dot, and Malevolent Promise would allow the tether to finally be viable in PvP. The fast ticks, alternate cost, unique damage bonus, and regen/aoe damage make it a conceptually solid skill, but its static nature and small aoe radius unfortunately mean that it's nonviable in dynamic PvP environments. This is of course on top of also being able to get faster corpse generation for skills like Deaden Pain.
Necro's identity goes a lot further than corpse bursting, and many necro players also aren't interested in a Corpseburster playstyle. It seems rather unfair to give Necro one less mastery option than other classes in PvP purely because of one interaction that can be mitigated in other ways.
I also have to question why this passive is being added in the first place if the intention after playtesting was to disable it completely in PvP. If you don't want to restrict Corpseburster in any way, why add a passive that is removed in half the game's content? Corpseburster is already fairly viable in PvE without Malevolent Promise, whereas skills like siphon are otherwise completely nonviable in PvP. Why not add a proc dot or mastery passive that leans into alternate necro themes that could work in all modes of content?
Once again, I don't think pushing this back to the necro rework and/or telling players to just wait for the rework is appropriate here. The necro rework is the second to last and isn't coming for another 2 years. That's far too long to address an issue where an already struggling class gets access to one less passive than other classes (that are also being reworked earlier).
Urvoth
4
Re: Addressing U50 PTS Combat & Ability Concerns
How is Corpsebuster going to be a problem with necromancer groups when the set's damage doesnt even reach force shock and the mastery passive has 2 second cooldown?
Ankael07
4
Re: Update 50 PTS – Week 4 Summary
I appreciate the response regarding Malevolent Promise, but I still think there are better solutions that would allow its use in PvP. For instance, since the issue is with the Corpseburster interaction, why not disable Corpseburster in PvP or significantly decrease the set's damage while Battle-Spirit is active? Corpseburster is already a niche PvP set and it would be much better for Necros as a whole to lose only a single set compared to an entire mastery passive. There's many other viable PvP sets, yet only 5 mastery passives per class.
There's a major use case for Malevolent Promise in PvP outside of using Corpseburster. Necro has forever lacked a strong class "sticky" dot, and Malevolent Promise would allow the tether to finally be viable in PvP. The fast ticks, alternate cost, unique damage bonus, and regen/aoe damage make it a conceptually solid skill, but its static nature and small aoe radius unfortunately mean that it's nonviable in dynamic PvP environments. This is of course on top of also being able to get faster corpse generation for skills like Deaden Pain.
Necro's identity goes a lot further than corpse bursting, and many necro players also aren't interested in a Corpseburster playstyle. It seems rather unfair to give Necro one less mastery option than other classes in PvP purely because of one interaction that can be mitigated in other ways.
I also have to question why this passive is being added in the first place if the intention after playtesting was to disable it completely in PvP. If you don't want to restrict Corpseburster in any way, why add a passive that is removed in half the game's content? Corpseburster is already fairly viable in PvE without Malevolent Promise, whereas skills like siphon are otherwise completely nonviable in PvP. Why not add a proc dot or mastery passive that leans into alternate necro themes that could work in all modes of content?
Once again, I don't think pushing this back to the necro rework and/or telling players to just wait for the rework is appropriate here. The necro rework is the second to last and isn't coming for another 2 years. That's far too long to address an issue where an already struggling class gets access to one less passive than other classes (that are also being reworked earlier).
There's a major use case for Malevolent Promise in PvP outside of using Corpseburster. Necro has forever lacked a strong class "sticky" dot, and Malevolent Promise would allow the tether to finally be viable in PvP. The fast ticks, alternate cost, unique damage bonus, and regen/aoe damage make it a conceptually solid skill, but its static nature and small aoe radius unfortunately mean that it's nonviable in dynamic PvP environments. This is of course on top of also being able to get faster corpse generation for skills like Deaden Pain.
Necro's identity goes a lot further than corpse bursting, and many necro players also aren't interested in a Corpseburster playstyle. It seems rather unfair to give Necro one less mastery option than other classes in PvP purely because of one interaction that can be mitigated in other ways.
I also have to question why this passive is being added in the first place if the intention after playtesting was to disable it completely in PvP. If you don't want to restrict Corpseburster in any way, why add a passive that is removed in half the game's content? Corpseburster is already fairly viable in PvE without Malevolent Promise, whereas skills like siphon are otherwise completely nonviable in PvP. Why not add a proc dot or mastery passive that leans into alternate necro themes that could work in all modes of content?
Once again, I don't think pushing this back to the necro rework and/or telling players to just wait for the rework is appropriate here. The necro rework is the second to last and isn't coming for another 2 years. That's far too long to address an issue where an already struggling class gets access to one less passive than other classes (that are also being reworked earlier).
Urvoth
1
Re: Addressing U50 PTS Combat & Ability Concerns
You stated that Class Mastery was meant to buff (or nerf) classes to balance even before their refresh is released. You can easily change class masteries after the class refresh is finished, so this is not an excuse for leaving NB underperforming before their refresh, which is gonna be happening late 2027…While we recognize some of these problems still exist, this isn’t something we can comprehensively solve until we do the refresh work for the Nightblade class.
This is exactly what I came here to say. Every other class gets to feel decently powerful before their refresh and nightblade has to just...wait?
Emeratis
1
Re: Addressing U50 PTS Combat & Ability Concerns
ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »
Touching on Necromancer first, we’ve seen folks looking for clarification on what the issue was with Malevolent Promise in PvP. The reason behind this change was specifically when it was paired with Corpseburster, it was doing insane damage in PvP – far higher than is fair, […]
Not trying to sound disrespectful but corro DKs are currently hitting in excess of 30k whips so define “fair”?
ZOS: We still have nightmares of the old Harmony + Grave Robber Necros, but instead of reworking Malevolent Promise into something else we are just going to disable it for PvP. We may or may not change it in the future, have fun!!!
Being the only Class(afaik) with the privilege of having a passive that does nothing on 1 game mode isn't really making me hopeful for the rework.
To be fair, Masteries were thrown together relatively late in the game, obviously when they decided to add the 15% Monster Damage to DK's Whip which happened in week 3 or 4 of last PTS. In their dev stream a month later when Gilliam showed the first tease of them, he said he had been hard at work on them for the past 2~3 weeks.
They're probably the best combat balance change they've done in the past 12 years and they came up with it in less than 3 months, so have hope.
Re: Make Pyrebrand crit again
Militan1404 wrote: »Militan1404 wrote: »People are already complaining about a mid set like Serpent's Disdain, and you honestly think it's a good idea to power up Pyreband? It's not happening.
When ZOS nerfs something, they usually don't undo it. It's a good thing I learned a long time ago not to grind hard for gear in this game. I'll just fire siege.
I think it's great idea. Asking for nerfs is weird unless something is grossly uncompetitive like Shattered Paths is making pulse gankers right now. Giving pyrebrand crit would make a mediocre set a little better is all. I've yet to have an encounter in group or 1v1 that makes me think Serpents is a problem.
The people who think Pyrebrand a very strong set at the moment must not even use it. I can tell you, it's not.
Its something funny about someone finding something to be grossly uncompetitive and while being a DK.
Personally, I haven't had trouble with shatter path users but I've seen a lot of complaints from people I respect. And don't worry, your class refresh is coming and the big scary DKs won't seem so scary anymore.
What you trying to imply here that DK aint broken? And the solution is not to make everything else broken to.
Trying to imply? I'll be more frank. 100% DK isn't broken. Is it a better pure class right now than any other pure class? Definitely. But that was the intention of ZOS. The plan is for pure classes to end up stronger after each one is refreshed. Once class mastery passives are released, the pure classes will be much stronger and more competitive. And then each class that is refreshed will also be elevated. It just happens that DK was first and if any other class had been first, you'd be complaining about how that class was broken. But to call something broken is to imply it's not working as intended when DK is working exactly as intended.
No DK is not fine at all, and if you think so i are living in denial. Right now DK has no drawbacks, they have best burst, pressure, infinity sustain, tanky, great heals and mobility all at once. Class mastery wont fix that, not even close and each class would still be lacking in some parts. And some classes even have really bad class mastery passives. With sub-classing it was hard to be a pure class but could be done, and i was even playing a pure dk then and was doing fine. No other class should be brought up to the power creep DK is doing right now, its a no skill carry class right now.
Re: I Don't LIke The Night Market Update
Only the skirmishes come close to "raid strength". The others are much weaker, and all bosses hit for significanly less than their dungeon/overland counterparts.
Gabriel_H
12