killedbyping wrote: »Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.
Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.
killedbyping wrote: »Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.
Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.
omy_mkeb17_ESO wrote: »killedbyping wrote: »Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.
Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.
They consider it the best passive from PvP PoV with a diseased weapon glyph, but....
In Pve it's useless!!!
Thx for the new passive, both PvP and PvE players would make use of this new one.
xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »killedbyping wrote: »Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.
Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.
It's more damage then the new passive just by having fire damage enchant on your weapon, you also don't appear to even know what the passive does. For future reference, status effects are different from weapon enchantsomy_mkeb17_ESO wrote: »killedbyping wrote: »Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.
Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.
They consider it the best passive from PvP PoV with a diseased weapon glyph, but....
In Pve it's useless!!!
Thx for the new passive, both PvP and PvE players would make use of this new one.
Arcane fighter with fire enchant is more damage then the new passive and the new passive is useless in pvp
xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »killedbyping wrote: »Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.
Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.
It's more damage then the new passive just by having fire damage enchant on your weapon, you also don't appear to even know what the passive does. For future reference, status effects are different from weapon enchantsomy_mkeb17_ESO wrote: »killedbyping wrote: »Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.
Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.
They consider it the best passive from PvP PoV with a diseased weapon glyph, but....
In Pve it's useless!!!
Thx for the new passive, both PvP and PvE players would make use of this new one.
Arcane fighter with fire enchant is more damage then the new passive and the new passive is useless in pvp
@xsorusb14_ESO
The way I understood it, and correct me if I'm wrong, is it increased the status effect chance by 100%, bringing it from 10% to 20%. You have tested that this additional 10% chance to proc burning is more dps than the additional dmg after heavy attacks?
xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »killedbyping wrote: »Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.
Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.
It's more damage then the new passive just by having fire damage enchant on your weapon, you also don't appear to even know what the passive does. For future reference, status effects are different from weapon enchantsomy_mkeb17_ESO wrote: »killedbyping wrote: »Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.
Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.
They consider it the best passive from PvP PoV with a diseased weapon glyph, but....
In Pve it's useless!!!
Thx for the new passive, both PvP and PvE players would make use of this new one.
Arcane fighter with fire enchant is more damage then the new passive and the new passive is useless in pvp
killedbyping wrote: »xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »killedbyping wrote: »Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.
Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.
It's more damage then the new passive just by having fire damage enchant on your weapon, you also don't appear to even know what the passive does. For future reference, status effects are different from weapon enchantsomy_mkeb17_ESO wrote: »killedbyping wrote: »Why is this best 2H passive ? 2H weapons have nothing to do with Burning, Chilled and conlused.
If you useing this passive to buff your destro stuff damage then you doing it wrong. It suppose to only work with 2H weapons, not Destroction stuff.
Also, if this was all about weapon enchantments, then this passive just doesnt make any sense. There is no such thing as a CHANCE of weapon enchantment proc. Enchantment proc with 100% every 4 seconds.
They consider it the best passive from PvP PoV with a diseased weapon glyph, but....
In Pve it's useless!!!
Thx for the new passive, both PvP and PvE players would make use of this new one.
Arcane fighter with fire enchant is more damage then the new passive and the new passive is useless in pvp
Im obviously know what this passive does. What im saying, that it isnt supposed to work that way and obviously have nothing to do with 2H weapons at all. Just like fire enchant didnt supposed to proc burning effect.
demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »The new passive would have been good if it did what the patch notes says. Its at the very least not worded at all the same in-game and is worded to be a big nerf if you use elemental enchants.
They should get it working like its worded in the notes if it isnt already.
omy_mkeb17_ESO wrote: »As a NB with no source of elemental dmg and with a "drain stamina" weapon enchant, the Arcane fighter old passive is useless. And i'm sure there are other scenarios like that.
Thinking from DK only perspective is wrong.
I don't have anything against merging the passives... but the new passive will be as usefull for all players.
AshySamurai wrote: »demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »The new passive would have been good if it did what the patch notes says. Its at the very least not worded at all the same in-game and is worded to be a big nerf if you use elemental enchants.
They should get it working like its worded in the notes if it isnt already.
I tested the new passive - it works fine. I had buff to all weapon skills after full charged heavy attack.
demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »AshySamurai wrote: »demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »The new passive would have been good if it did what the patch notes says. Its at the very least not worded at all the same in-game and is worded to be a big nerf if you use elemental enchants.
They should get it working like its worded in the notes if it isnt already.
I tested the new passive - it works fine. I had buff to all weapon skills after full charged heavy attack.
Did you read the patch notes? I don't think you read the patch notes. I even have A big post in the patch notes thread with a picture showing the difference between patch notes and game. And its a fact from my testing that it does not work as worded in the patch notes.
And no, I don't seen your big comment. Patch Notes 1.5 topic have 14 pages. If you have direct link, I would be glad to read it. But anyway, it works fine for me. How you was testing?Increase your damage of the next attack by 5%/10% for 7 seconds after ctivating a fully charged heavy attack.
AshySamurai wrote: »demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »AshySamurai wrote: »demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »The new passive would have been good if it did what the patch notes says. Its at the very least not worded at all the same in-game and is worded to be a big nerf if you use elemental enchants.
They should get it working like its worded in the notes if it isnt already.
I tested the new passive - it works fine. I had buff to all weapon skills after full charged heavy attack.
Did you read the patch notes? I don't think you read the patch notes. I even have A big post in the patch notes thread with a picture showing the difference between patch notes and game. And its a fact from my testing that it does not work as worded in the patch notes.
Yep, I read patch notes. And I know about little difference in description. This is the description from the game.And no, I don't seen your big comment. Patch Notes 1.5 topic have 14 pages. If you have direct link, I would be glad to read it. But anyway, it works fine for me. How you was testing?Increase your damage of the next attack by 5%/10% for 7 seconds after ctivating a fully charged heavy attack.
http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/135688/pts-patch-notes-v1-5/p1Replaced the Arcane Fighter passive with Follow Up. This will increase your damage by 5%/10% for 7 seconds after activating a fully charged heavy attack.
demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »AshySamurai wrote: »demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »AshySamurai wrote: »demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »The new passive would have been good if it did what the patch notes says. Its at the very least not worded at all the same in-game and is worded to be a big nerf if you use elemental enchants.
They should get it working like its worded in the notes if it isnt already.
I tested the new passive - it works fine. I had buff to all weapon skills after full charged heavy attack.
Did you read the patch notes? I don't think you read the patch notes. I even have A big post in the patch notes thread with a picture showing the difference between patch notes and game. And its a fact from my testing that it does not work as worded in the patch notes.
Yep, I read patch notes. And I know about little difference in description. This is the description from the game.And no, I don't seen your big comment. Patch Notes 1.5 topic have 14 pages. If you have direct link, I would be glad to read it. But anyway, it works fine for me. How you was testing?Increase your damage of the next attack by 5%/10% for 7 seconds after ctivating a fully charged heavy attack.
Don't reword the patch notes to convince yourself.http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/135688/pts-patch-notes-v1-5/p1Replaced the Arcane Fighter passive with Follow Up. This will increase your damage by 5%/10% for 7 seconds after activating a fully charged heavy attack.
First post of the first page. There is no of your next attack there. Where did you read that in the patch notes, seriously? you didn't even spell activating right. Did you even do a simple copy/paste to prevent any chance in error? How does one fail at copy/paste?
AshySamurai wrote: »Yep, @demonlkojipub19_ESO, chill. And next time try to read carefully.
@Darkonflare15. Tested new passive few minutes ago ine more time, and for me it works as says ingame description - only next attack. So yes, if I had a full charged heavy, and if I used skill next, but don't hit any target, bonus still with me. But if I hit any target with skill/light attack - bonus disappear. Need to check if this bonus stacks (few heavy attack in a row). That would be too OP. But I don't think it stacks. I think bonus just applies on next heavy attack, disappears and after heavy you get new bonus.
demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »So lets ignore saying it will dobone thing then have it do another. Why dont they just not do patch notes or equally mess up every detail.
What i want to know is where that detail comes from and why it fails to match. You two may not sweat the small stuff but i do.
Thejollygreenone wrote: »demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »So lets ignore saying it will dobone thing then have it do another. Why dont they just not do patch notes or equally mess up every detail.
What i want to know is where that detail comes from and why it fails to match. You two may not sweat the small stuff but i do.
If you noticed, back in the guild summit they discussed this change and it was yet another description. Something along the lines of 'increases damage of heavy attacks by 10%'
Since it has changed twice now, I can only image the differences had arisen simply from ZoS changing their minds about what they want the passive to do and the magnitude of effectiveness it presents.
Developers even change their minds about abilities once they've been on live for months. Personally, I think it's fair to allow them to change their minds a few times before an ability/passive is even on live servers.
Of course we want the most effective highest dps giving option that was thought of, which can be warrant for some distress to us, the players, when it doesn't happen, but ZoS may not think that's such a great idea. I still like to think that the dev team ultimately knows what's best for the game, even though many would argue, rightfully so, that it's a pipe dream.
That's my two cents on the reason why, at least.
Thejollygreenone wrote: »demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »So lets ignore saying it will dobone thing then have it do another. Why dont they just not do patch notes or equally mess up every detail.
What i want to know is where that detail comes from and why it fails to match. You two may not sweat the small stuff but i do.
If you noticed, back in the guild summit they discussed this change and it was yet another description. Something along the lines of 'increases damage of heavy attacks by 10%'
Since it has changed twice now, I can only image the differences had arisen simply from ZoS changing their minds about what they want the passive to do and the magnitude of effectiveness it presents.
Developers even change their minds about abilities once they've been on live for months. Personally, I think it's fair to allow them to change their minds a few times before an ability/passive is even on live servers.
Of course we want the most effective highest dps giving option that was thought of, which can be warrant for some distress to us, the players, when it doesn't happen, but ZoS may not think that's such a great idea. I still like to think that the dev team ultimately knows what's best for the game, even though many would argue, rightfully so, that it's a pipe dream.
That's my two cents on the reason why, at least.
demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »Thejollygreenone wrote: »demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »So lets ignore saying it will dobone thing then have it do another. Why dont they just not do patch notes or equally mess up every detail.
What i want to know is where that detail comes from and why it fails to match. You two may not sweat the small stuff but i do.
If you noticed, back in the guild summit they discussed this change and it was yet another description. Something along the lines of 'increases damage of heavy attacks by 10%'
Since it has changed twice now, I can only image the differences had arisen simply from ZoS changing their minds about what they want the passive to do and the magnitude of effectiveness it presents.
Developers even change their minds about abilities once they've been on live for months. Personally, I think it's fair to allow them to change their minds a few times before an ability/passive is even on live servers.
Of course we want the most effective highest dps giving option that was thought of, which can be warrant for some distress to us, the players, when it doesn't happen, but ZoS may not think that's such a great idea. I still like to think that the dev team ultimately knows what's best for the game, even though many would argue, rightfully so, that it's a pipe dream.
That's my two cents on the reason why, at least.
But that doesn't really excuse the huge lack of communication they seem to have. All it is now, to me, is a big "Just kidding, we aren't really doing this ". Its a huge tease of what it could be and isn't.
And then impulse still reads 8 meters too. Was it really ever supposed to be reduced to 6 meters? was that just a tease to whomever felt impulse needs nerf?
And then they comletely messed up the wording of the critical rush change, and it is actually limited to 68%, not buffed by 68%.
When does it stop? Am I the only one bothered by note failure? Am I only the one who feels the patch notes simply cannot be trusted?
demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »Thejollygreenone wrote: »demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »So lets ignore saying it will dobone thing then have it do another. Why dont they just not do patch notes or equally mess up every detail.
What i want to know is where that detail comes from and why it fails to match. You two may not sweat the small stuff but i do.
If you noticed, back in the guild summit they discussed this change and it was yet another description. Something along the lines of 'increases damage of heavy attacks by 10%'
Since it has changed twice now, I can only image the differences had arisen simply from ZoS changing their minds about what they want the passive to do and the magnitude of effectiveness it presents.
Developers even change their minds about abilities once they've been on live for months. Personally, I think it's fair to allow them to change their minds a few times before an ability/passive is even on live servers.
Of course we want the most effective highest dps giving option that was thought of, which can be warrant for some distress to us, the players, when it doesn't happen, but ZoS may not think that's such a great idea. I still like to think that the dev team ultimately knows what's best for the game, even though many would argue, rightfully so, that it's a pipe dream.
That's my two cents on the reason why, at least.
But that doesn't really excuse the huge lack of communication they seem to have. All it is now, to me, is a big "Just kidding, we aren't really doing this ". Its a huge tease of what it could be and isn't.
And then impulse still reads 8 meters too. Was it really ever supposed to be reduced to 6 meters? was that just a tease to whomever felt impulse needs nerf?
And then they comletely messed up the wording of the critical rush change, and it is actually limited to 68%, not buffed by 68%.
When does it stop? Am I the only one bothered by note failure? Am I only the one who feels the patch notes simply cannot be trusted?
Everything that you just said is pretty much exactly why the PTS exists.
And of course, anything that's been stated has the potential to be changed due to testing on the PTS, and even after hitting live once they get a much more massive amount of data than PTS.
Just because they say "Hey guys, this is what we're thinking of doing" doesn't mean that anything is set in stone.
xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »I wish the devs would comment on why it's being removed