The Elder Scrolls Online

Maintenance for the week of October 5:
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – October 8, 8:00AM EDT (12:00 UTC) – 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
The Markarth DLC and Update 28 base game patch are now available to test on the PTS! Read the full patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/categories/pts/

So when's Dragon's Blood getting nerfed?

Leave a Reply
TheBull
TheBull
✭✭✭✭✭
✭
It's pretty stupid as it stands. Didn't Wheeler say, "DKs still have too much survivability" about a month ago?

Update please!
Edited by TheBull on July 23, 2014 6:24PM
Killed by Sunshine 1vX How I see it.
Killed by Early Bright - Blood Flow - Magicka NB Build
Twitch - SunshineNB
Youtube - The Redguard
Quote
  • kieso
    kieso
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    tomorrow.
    Quote
  • jelliedsoup
    jelliedsoup
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    As an NB if I can't stun a dk it's dark cloak time.
    www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=Ks8_KGHqmO4
    Quote
  • dsalter
    dsalter
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    personally i'd rather see it either stops magicka regeneration for 5seconds (not that great but it's a nerf) or reduces the effect of your next Dragons blood cast within 10 seconds
    sotonin wrote: »
    onlinegamer1 wrote: »
    NookyZooky wrote: »
    kb.lang_ESO wrote: »
    WebBull wrote: »
    Just quit and then you wont have to worry about it any more. NB's seem to do fine against me if they play their role right. Might want to study up.
    Agreed, dragons blood only restores 30% of missing health.
    the spammability is the problem. not the effects of the ability.

    Um.... what?

    Do you understand math? (specifically, percentages)

    If you are at 40% health (meaning, you are DOWN 60%), then you get back 30% of 60%, or 20% of your total health. You are now at 60% (meaning, DOWN 40%).

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 40%, or 13%. You are now at 73% (meaning, DOWN 27 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 27%, or 9%. You are now at 82% (meaning, DOWN 18 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 18%, or 6%. You are now at 88% (meaning, DOWN 12 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 12%, or 4%. You are now at 92% (meaning, DOWN 8 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 8%, or 2.6%. You are now at 94-95% (meaning, DOWN 5 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 5%, or 1.6%. You are now at 96% (meaning, DOWN 4 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 4%, or 1.3%. You are now at 97% (meaning, DOWN 3 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 3%, or 1%. You are now at 98% (meaning, DOWN 2 %)


    "Spam..... I do not thin' that word means what you thin' it means." - Enigo Montoya

    I don't know anybody who can spam it that long.... If they can then good on them for having such awesome magicka. Realistically maybe 3 times before out of mana. maybe a few more. But you are forgetting the most important part of your equation. WHILE you are spamming this your magicka is draining and you are still being attacked and losing health. so it would take a lot more than what you described to get to full. It just doesn't happen. In fact my DK's survivability is pretty damn weak compared to some other classes skill combinations.

    Hold Block and casting is where it shines. DK's take massive punishment while blocking and can insta cast it at the same time.
    PLEASE REPLY TO ME WITH @dsalter otherwise i'm likely to miss the reply if its not my own thread

    EU - [Arch Mage Dave] Altmer Sorcerer
    Fight back at the crates and boxes, together we can change things.

    Quote
  • Mojomonkeyman
    Mojomonkeyman
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭
    So, according to your flawless logic, why did we need a nerf on BE again, Kirsika? Ah right, there`s not only black & white, but a wide variety of nuances inbetween... which make certain aspects "fun" to play against or no so "fun".

    You all mustve been very vocal against the BE nerf... or it`s just bias speaking.
    Edited by Mojomonkeyman on July 23, 2014 9:01PM
    Koma Grey, Chocolate Thunder, Little Mojo, Dagoth Mojo & Mojomancy
    Quote
  • PBpsy
    PBpsy
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    WebBull wrote: »
    Just quit and then you wont have to worry about it any more. NB's seem to do fine against me if they play their role right. Might want to study up.
    I agree. I have been having a lot more problems against invulnerable templars lately than invulnerable DKs when playing my NB.
    Edited by PBpsy on July 23, 2014 9:14PM
    ESO forums achievements
    Proud fanboi
    Elitist jerk
    Troll
    Hater
    Fan of icontested(rainbow colors granted)
    Quote
  • Jaxom
    Jaxom
    ✭✭✭✭
    How do you kill a DK? Bring 6 friends.

    How do you kill a sorc? CC them so they can't run with BE.

    How do you kill a NB? Put a DoT on them so they can't cloak.

    How do you kill a templar? Hold Block.

    Fixed that for you. :) CC is really only appropriate for a Sorc due to BE. Even if you CC a DK, unless you can burst them down in the first 2 seconds from stealth, you are probably not going to win unless specifically speced to kill DK's.

    NB's and Templar's are still in the bottom half of that equation. You catch a NB out of position, they are dead. If you avoid the Templar's spear knockdown, they typically arent a problem.


    The problem is that after that initial burst, say you get a DK down to 20% (fairly realistic from stealth). They pop GDB twice, and they go from 20% health to around 65-70% health in a matter of a second. I'm not saying to completely destroy the skill, but if they tweaked the numbers a bit, I dont think that's unreasonable.
    thenoore.com
    Quote
  • moxiesauce
    moxiesauce
    ✭✭✭
    Yea its a strong ability but damn how many times do we need a nerf, while they are at it nerf templar heals, those are just about as strong and hit other players.. so silly.
    Quote
  • shanersimms_ESO
    shanersimms_ESO
    ✭✭✭
    Sharee wrote: »
    onlinegamer1 wrote: »
    NookyZooky wrote: »
    kb.lang_ESO wrote: »
    WebBull wrote: »
    Just quit and then you wont have to worry about it any more. NB's seem to do fine against me if they play their role right. Might want to study up.

    Agreed, dragons blood only restores 30% of missing health.
    the spammability is the problem. not the effects of the ability.

    Um.... what?

    Do you understand math? (specifically, percentages)

    If you are at 40% health (meaning, you are DOWN 60%), then you get back 30% of 60%, or 20% of your total health. You are now at 60% (meaning, DOWN 40%).

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 40%, or 13%. You are now at 73% (meaning, DOWN 27 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 27%, or 9%. You are now at 82% (meaning, DOWN 18 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 18%, or 6%. You are now at 88% (meaning, DOWN 12 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 12%, or 4%. You are now at 92% (meaning, DOWN 8 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 8%, or 2.6%. You are now at 94-95% (meaning, DOWN 5 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 5%, or 1.6%. You are now at 96% (meaning, DOWN 4 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 4%, or 1.3%. You are now at 97% (meaning, DOWN 3 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 3%, or 1%. You are now at 98% (meaning, DOWN 2 %)


    "Spam..... I do not thin' that word means what you thin' it means." - Enigo Montoya

    That example ignores the fact the opponent is continually burning his resources trying to kill the DK. So the spam really looks more like this:

    40% health -> use GDB.
    40% health -> use GDB
    40% health -> use GDB

    while the opponent burns his resources down to nothing.


    Isn't it funny when someone criticizes someone else for "not knowing how to math" and then post such nonsense? hehehe

    In any case, you are absolutely right and the aggressor is burning through far more stats than the DK who is just using his single ability to negate the damage of 3 abilities from the aggressor.
    -Lord Shaszahan the Archmage, of The Septim Bloodline
    Quote
  • arkansas_ESO
    arkansas_ESO
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭
    Mojomonkeyman wrote: »
    So, according to your flawless logic, why did we need a nerf on BE again, Kirsika? Ah right, there`s not only black & white, but a wide variety of nuances inbetween... which make certain aspects "fun" to play against or no so "fun".

    You all mustve been very vocal against the BE nerf... or it`s just bias speaking.

    I think BE was overpowered in terms that a lot of CC didn't affect it. If you immobilized a sorc with something like Dark Talons, they could still BE away. If you snared them heavily, they could still use it. If you tried to use Invasion to CC them before they BE'ed, they'd go down but would still teleport away, meaning you would have to use Invasion again to get within close range of them. If they wanted to rework the nerf of BE in that it's distance was affected by the snares and CC on the sorc, I'd be all for it.
    ＦＯＲＵＭＰＬＡＲ

    Grand Overlord 25/8/17
    Quote
  • arkansas_ESO
    arkansas_ESO
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭
    shanersimms_ESO wrote: »
    onlinegamer1 wrote: »
    NookyZooky wrote: »
    kb.lang_ESO wrote: »
    WebBull wrote: »
    Just quit and then you wont have to worry about it any more. NB's seem to do fine against me if they play their role right. Might want to study up.

    Agreed, dragons blood only restores 30% of missing health.
    the spammability is the problem. not the effects of the ability.

    Um.... what?

    Do you understand math? (specifically, percentages)

    If you are at 40% health (meaning, you are DOWN 60%), then you get back 30% of 60%, or 20% of your total health. You are now at 60% (meaning, DOWN 40%).

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 40%, or 13%. You are now at 73% (meaning, DOWN 27 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 27%, or 9%. You are now at 82% (meaning, DOWN 18 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 18%, or 6%. You are now at 88% (meaning, DOWN 12 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 12%, or 4%. You are now at 92% (meaning, DOWN 8 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 8%, or 2.6%. You are now at 94-95% (meaning, DOWN 5 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 5%, or 1.6%. You are now at 96% (meaning, DOWN 4 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 4%, or 1.3%. You are now at 97% (meaning, DOWN 3 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 3%, or 1%. You are now at 98% (meaning, DOWN 2 %)


    "Spam..... I do not thin' that word means what you thin' it means." - Enigo Montoya

    And then the ESO Gods said:

    "Let there be Reflective Scales and Syrabane Set Bonus. With these our children can maintain infinite mana, immune from projectiles as their mana regens, thus sustaining a continued never-ending spam of Green Dragon's Blood which restores stam to parry anything else."

    From this moment forth, Cyrodiil PvP has remained unbalanced even to this day.

    The End.

    :)

    The Syrabane set is nerfed in the PTS, and will most likely be nerfed in the server come Update 3. It's pretty much worthless now.
    ＦＯＲＵＭＰＬＡＲ

    Grand Overlord 25/8/17
    Quote
  • CapuchinSeven
    CapuchinSeven
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭
    onlinegamer1 wrote: »
    NookyZooky wrote: »
    kb.lang_ESO wrote: »
    WebBull wrote: »
    Just quit and then you wont have to worry about it any more. NB's seem to do fine against me if they play their role right. Might want to study up.

    Agreed, dragons blood only restores 30% of missing health.
    the spammability is the problem. not the effects of the ability.

    Um.... what?

    Do you understand math? (specifically, percentages)

    If you are at 40% health (meaning, you are DOWN 60%), then you get back 30% of 60%, or 20% of your total health. You are now at 60% (meaning, DOWN 40%).

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 40%, or 13%. You are now at 73% (meaning, DOWN 27 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 27%, or 9%. You are now at 82% (meaning, DOWN 18 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 18%, or 6%. You are now at 88% (meaning, DOWN 12 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 12%, or 4%. You are now at 92% (meaning, DOWN 8 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 8%, or 2.6%. You are now at 94-95% (meaning, DOWN 5 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 5%, or 1.6%. You are now at 96% (meaning, DOWN 4 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 4%, or 1.3%. You are now at 97% (meaning, DOWN 3 %)

    If you then "spam" it again, you get back 30% of 3%, or 1%. You are now at 98% (meaning, DOWN 2 %)


    "Spam..... I do not thin' that word means what you thin' it means." - Enigo Montoya

    I honestly wonder how players like you would cope playing something like a Nightblade that can literally be crippled by having a single, weak 1 hit per second DOT on them.

    Your example conveniently forgets a few of the minor details to make your point sound stronger.
    Quote
Sign In or Register to comment.