Proposed alternative to the Siphoning Attacks / Leeching Strikes changes, and why:

bubbygink

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

IzakiBrotherSs wrote: »

??? Doesn't change the fact that the skills work very differently and that the mechanics of Siphoning Attacks allow you to keep applying pressure while keeping resources in check. So yeah, in PvE, Siphoning Attacks is by far the best sustain skill in the game. You can't compare a magblade to a stamsorc because the fundamental mechanics of the two specs are completely different. But here you are comparing magblades (apples) to stam sorcs (oranges). At least compare magblades to mag sorcs, as both are magicka classes.

Btw on my DK, I sustain with 700 recovery. Except that on my DK I also gain Major Mending and I'm not locked in a channel that is interruptable by any magicka sorc (and there are a lot of those). In fact, while I'm bursting I'm restoring resources too. What's so special about Dark Deal? Sustaining with no recovery isn't something inherent to a stamsorc. Every class can pull it off in heavy armor. The whole point of running heavy is to not have to run recovery genius. So yeah, compared to other existing resource management mechanics on the live server, Dark Deal isn't the only one that allows for running virtually no recovery. In PvE, its by far the least appealing, because it costs you DPS. You can even build a heavy armor stamblade that relies on solely Siphoning and Heavy attacks to sustain.

Not gonna bother with the "do you even NB?" part because I main a stamblade, which is obviously why I'm in this thread in the first place.

I wasn't saying I'll have to *gasp* spam Dark Deal more (L2Read), I was saying that reliance on Dark Deal will be higher due to the cost reduction removal, but the magicka sustain from constitution is also gone, which means that you essentially will only be able to Dark Deal half as much as you can now, but you will need more than that. So that is pretty much the end of sustaining with 800 recovery. But I'm guessing you're too busy hating on everyone who plays Sorc that you didn't even bother to read properly and understand the conclusion. So I'll put my conclusion again for you: you won't be able to rely solely on Dark Deal for sustaining. That also applies to every other class and their own resource restoring mechanics that were making recovery trivial.

Also I wasn't the one who initially wrote about "X magicka per second (which was referencing PvE anyway)", I was replying to someone's post who had already made that statement. In PvE that statement is indeed pretty exact.

No, I understood that point exactly which is why I found it a bit funny: stam sorcs are complaining that they may have to actually run another source of sustain in Morrowind instead of just exclusively relying on Dark Deal - this reads like a hilarious first world problem, like stam sorcs don't get how good they have it. The point I'm trying to make here is one of balance. I agree with you that in many ways comparing the two skills is like comparing apples to oranges. I believe Dark Deal is superior for sustaining (as I detailed above) while you said you believe SA is better - let's agree to disagree. But surely you can agree they were at least somewhat comparable in their ability to sustain, right? So therein lies my issue - why was SA nerfed to the ground while Dark Deal was left untouched? It just doesn't make sense and nightblades are getting the shaft here.

So yes, I agree that stam sorcs will have to rely on another source of sustain other than Dark Deal in Morrowind. They won't be able to get away with running 600-800 regen, boo freaking hoo. The only issue stam sorcs are facing is the CP nerf, they still have an unnerfed Dark Deal for regen - a skill so powerful that it previously made all other sources of sustain unnecessary for stam sorcs. Meanwhile Magblades are going to suffer the same struggle with the CP nerf AND we not longer have our useful SA - clearly we will be in a tougher spot. As I said in a previous post, I want to hear ZoS's logic behind this inconsistency in the nerfs.

While I think it is important to look at the sustain capabilities of other classes to give the SA nerf context, I don't want to derail this thread into talking about stam sorc sustain. But I did want to highlight that Dark Deal, a skill I think is OP, didn't get nerfed while SA did but I will just leave it at that and get back to discussing the SA changes specifically.

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

@bubbygink I was just writing a post comparing Siphoning to ele drain... I am going to be genuinely butthurt if I have to slot ele drain instead of siphoning just to sustain and have to give up mark. I freakin love mark.

I'll have to take a look at the post when you finish it. I am curious to see your take on it. Sadly it isn't so clear cut anymore as to which is better. Ele drain forces you to debuff each target while siphoning attacks allows you to simply self buff. But the big benefit to Ele drain is that it is free. It also gives you the 8% destro passive if you don't want to run EotS, clench, etc. The magicka sustain for both is close to equal on paper but I am not sure about the differences in practice and I would be curious to see if you've done any testing. SA gives the heal component now (*sigh* give me back my stam recovery) while Ele drain applies major fracture and breach.

So I agree that if you use Ele drain you would want to drop mark : / That is certainly unfortunate because both morphs of mark are useful in my opinion so it sucks for it to be redundant with Ele drain in such a big way.

Izaki

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

bubbygink wrote: »

IzakiBrotherSs wrote: »

??? Doesn't change the fact that the skills work very differently and that the mechanics of Siphoning Attacks allow you to keep applying pressure while keeping resources in check. So yeah, in PvE, Siphoning Attacks is by far the best sustain skill in the game. You can't compare a magblade to a stamsorc because the fundamental mechanics of the two specs are completely different. But here you are comparing magblades (apples) to stam sorcs (oranges). At least compare magblades to mag sorcs, as both are magicka classes.

Btw on my DK, I sustain with 700 recovery. Except that on my DK I also gain Major Mending and I'm not locked in a channel that is interruptable by any magicka sorc (and there are a lot of those). In fact, while I'm bursting I'm restoring resources too. What's so special about Dark Deal? Sustaining with no recovery isn't something inherent to a stamsorc. Every class can pull it off in heavy armor. The whole point of running heavy is to not have to run recovery genius. So yeah, compared to other existing resource management mechanics on the live server, Dark Deal isn't the only one that allows for running virtually no recovery. In PvE, its by far the least appealing, because it costs you DPS. You can even build a heavy armor stamblade that relies on solely Siphoning and Heavy attacks to sustain.

Not gonna bother with the "do you even NB?" part because I main a stamblade, which is obviously why I'm in this thread in the first place.

I wasn't saying I'll have to *gasp* spam Dark Deal more (L2Read), I was saying that reliance on Dark Deal will be higher due to the cost reduction removal, but the magicka sustain from constitution is also gone, which means that you essentially will only be able to Dark Deal half as much as you can now, but you will need more than that. So that is pretty much the end of sustaining with 800 recovery. But I'm guessing you're too busy hating on everyone who plays Sorc that you didn't even bother to read properly and understand the conclusion. So I'll put my conclusion again for you: you won't be able to rely solely on Dark Deal for sustaining. That also applies to every other class and their own resource restoring mechanics that were making recovery trivial.

Also I wasn't the one who initially wrote about "X magicka per second (which was referencing PvE anyway)", I was replying to someone's post who had already made that statement. In PvE that statement is indeed pretty exact.

No, I understood that point exactly which is why I found it a bit funny: stam sorcs are complaining that they may have to actually run another source of sustain in Morrowind instead of just exclusively relying on Dark Deal - this reads like a hilarious first world problem, like stam sorcs don't get how good they have it. The point I'm trying to make here is one of balance. I agree with you that in many ways comparing the two skills is like comparing apples to oranges. I believe Dark Deal is superior for sustaining (as I detailed above) while you said you believe SA is better - let's agree to disagree. But surely you can agree they were at least somewhat comparable in their ability to sustain, right? So therein lies my issue - why was SA nerfed to the ground while Dark Deal was left untouched? It just doesn't make sense and nightblades are getting the shaft here.

So yes, I agree that stam sorcs will have to rely on another source of sustain other than Dark Deal in Morrowind. They won't be able to get away with running 600-800 regen, boo freaking hoo. The only issue stam sorcs are facing is the CP nerf, they still have an unnerfed Dark Deal for regen - a skill so powerful that it previously made all other sources of sustain unnecessary for stam sorcs. Meanwhile Magblades are going to suffer the same struggle with the CP nerf AND we not longer have our useful SA - clearly we will be in a tougher spot. As I said in a previous post, I want to hear ZoS's logic behind this inconsistency in the nerfs.

While I think it is important to look at the sustain capabilities of other classes to give the SA nerf context, I don't want to derail this thread into talking about stam sorc sustain. But I did want to highlight that Dark Deal, a skill I think is OP, didn't get nerfed while SA did but I will just leave it at that and get back to discussing the SA changes specifically.

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

@bubbygink I was just writing a post comparing Siphoning to ele drain... I am going to be genuinely butthurt if I have to slot ele drain instead of siphoning just to sustain and have to give up mark. I freakin love mark.

I'll have to take a look at the post when you finish it. I am curious to see your take on it. Sadly it isn't so clear cut anymore as to which is better. Ele drain forces you to debuff each target while siphoning attacks allows you to simply self buff. But the big benefit to Ele drain is that it is free. It also gives you the 8% destro passive if you don't want to run EotS, clench, etc. The magicka sustain for both is close to equal on paper but I am not sure about the differences in practice and I would be curious to see if you've done any testing. SA gives the heal component now (*sigh* give me back my stam recovery) while Ele drain applies major fracture and breach.

So I agree that if you use Ele drain you would want to drop mark : / That is certainly unfortunate because both morphs of mark are useful in my opinion so it sucks for it to be redundant with Ele drain in such a big way.

When did I say that rely on something else than Dark Deal was a problem? I never complained about it. I don't like Dark Deal as a skill at all. I just said I never understood why people were so fond of it/were complaining about it, I personally never liked that skill since DB. I don't know why you're making those assumptions.

SA is without a doubt better in PvE, there's no real question/debate about it, however now on PTS its not even worth slotting even in PvE (and the heal with crits is still terrible). There's a reason why Stam Sorcs had to go Redguard (not "had to" but it was highly advised if you didn't want to eat shards all trial long) and NBs had the benefit of going Khajiit for full damage. In PvP, there's some debate and opinions etc. I think we had a misunderstanding there, I'm pretty conscious of the fact that SA isn't as good as Dark Deal in terms of sustain in PvP (but I do think DK sustain is better overall), I believe the way SA functions is better than Dark Deal. Don't ask me why Dark Deal wasn't nerfed, I'd love to hear a reason for that myself to be honest... I've always thought that it would be much better for both PvP balance and PvE sustain, to make it a HoT + resourse restore over time (like 10 seconds or something), but that's just my opinion.

Frankly, I do hope that they revert/lighten up the class changes, because they really just introduced too much *** at once and re-learning the game that you've been playing for a while is just plain stupid. I'd say starting out with CP changes and if that doesn't achieve their goals, go in and start nerfing skills NEXT PATCH. Not all in one go. But hey... Whatever.

bubbygink

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

IzakiBrotherSs wrote: »

When did I say that rely on something else than Dark Deal was a problem? I never complained about it. I don't like Dark Deal as a skill at all. I just said I never understood why people were so fond of it/were complaining about it, I personally never liked that skill since DB. I don't know why you're making those assumptions.

SA is without a doubt better in PvE, there's no real question/debate about it, however now on PTS its not even worth slotting even in PvE (and the heal with crits is still terrible). There's a reason why Stam Sorcs had to go Redguard (not "had to" but it was highly advised if you didn't want to eat shards all trial long) and NBs had the benefit of going Khajiit for full damage. In PvP, there's some debate and opinions etc. I think we had a misunderstanding there, I'm pretty conscious of the fact that SA isn't as good as Dark Deal in terms of sustain in PvP (but I do think DK sustain is better overall), I believe the way SA functions is better than Dark Deal. Don't ask me why Dark Deal wasn't nerfed, I'd love to hear a reason for that myself to be honest... I've always thought that it would be much better for both PvP balance and PvE sustain, to make it a HoT + resourse restore over time (like 10 seconds or something), but that's just my opinion.

Frankly, I do hope that they revert/lighten up the class changes, because they really just introduced too much *** at once and re-learning the game that you've been playing for a while is just plain stupid. I'd say starting out with CP changes and if that doesn't achieve their goals, go in and start nerfing skills NEXT PATCH. Not all in one go. But hey... Whatever.

I'm not a big PvEer but yes I would agree SA is better than Dark Deal for PVE. I suppose I was focusing my response on PvP though which I didn't make clear. I think I did partially misunderstand where you were coming from but think I am on the same page now. I also think sustain in this game has become trivial so I am glad something is being done to address this issue. Battlegrounds, where I will focus most of my time, being no CP is fine by me. I am also ok with the armor sustain nerfs.

However, I think ZoS was totally off base with how they nerfed the class sustain mechanics. Like you said, I think they may have done too much in one go. But more concerning to me is how they totally changed a core mechanic for nightblades. It isn't like they just nerfed the values SA restores, they totally gutted the duel resource sustain. SA has been turned into a magickasteel + redundant HoT. I really hope ZoS reconsiders this especially considering this may be the most one-sided poll I have ever seen on the forums - over 96% agree that the current PTS version of SA needs to change.

NightbladeMechanics

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

TLDR stam sorcs can use nothing but heavy armor passives, heavy attacks, and dark deal to sustain on live. Mageblades cannot rely on only heavy armor passives, heavy attacks, and siphon attacks to sustain on live.

Dark deal didn't get nerfed.

Siphon attacks did.

Mageblades are sad.

Stap nerf mageblades.

argouru

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

TLDR stam sorcs can use nothing but heavy armor passives, heavy attacks, and dark deal to sustain on live. Mageblades cannot rely on only heavy armor passives, heavy attacks, and siphon attacks to sustain on live.

Dark deal didn't get nerfed.

Siphon attacks did.

Mageblades are sad.

Stap nerf mageblades.

Stamblades arr hurt worse by the change to the skill. At least Magblades can use the Restore Magicka shield to regain some resources as an alternative self-activated power. Stamblades only had synergies, potions and Siphoning Strikes. Now, SS and the LA morph are too expensive to even count as a resource regen power anymore.

NightbladeMechanics

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

argouru wrote: »

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

TLDR stam sorcs can use nothing but heavy armor passives, heavy attacks, and dark deal to sustain on live. Mageblades cannot rely on only heavy armor passives, heavy attacks, and siphon attacks to sustain on live.

Dark deal didn't get nerfed.

Siphon attacks did.

Mageblades are sad.

Stap nerf mageblades.

Stamblades arr hurt worse by the change to the skill. At least Magblades can use the Restore Magicka shield to regain some resources as an alternative self-activated power. Stamblades only had synergies, potions and Siphoning Strikes. Now, SS and the LA morph are too expensive to even count as a resource regen power anymore.

I don't know about pve today since stam is so outclassed, but..

1) when I used to pve on my stamblade,
I never needed shards or Siphoning Attacks and I did well. Do they require sustain assistance now for some reason?

2) brawly heavy armor PvP stamblades use Siphoning Attacks and will lament the PTS changes, but medium armor stamblades use drink and never slot the skill.

Overall, yes the skills' costs are prohibitive for use as sustain tools.

As I stated in the OP, this is mainly a PvP thread. PvE dps sustain only requires one resource pool and comes with all those synergies for sustain assistance, and there is another thread discussing the Siphoning Attacks changes in context of nightblade tanking.

Izaki

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

TLDR stam sorcs can use nothing but heavy armor passives, heavy attacks, and dark deal to sustain on live. Mageblades cannot rely on only heavy armor passives, heavy attacks, and siphon attacks to sustain on live.

Dark deal didn't get nerfed.

Siphon attacks did.

Mageblades are sad.

Stap nerf mageblades.

Stamblades too.

crobarXIII

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

Just a thought for changes to leeching strikes
-increase duration to 30
-restores 2000 stamina when using a light attack with a 4/5 second cooldown

Currently on pts this ability seems to be lackluster in my opinion I'm not on pts to actually test. With a 20 second duration, fight mechanics, missed light attacks & in the case of tanks we have to be careful when using light attacks it doesn't seem worth the slot or cast

kadar

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

2) brawly heavy armor PvP stamblades use Siphoning Attacks and will lament the PTS changes...

-Me. Much lament, very sorrow.

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

TLDR stam sorcs can use nothing but heavy armor passives, heavy attacks, and dark deal to sustain on live. Mageblades cannot rely on only heavy armor passives, heavy attacks, and siphon attacks to sustain on live.

Dark deal didn't get nerfed.

Siphon attacks did.

Mageblades are sad.

Stap nerf mageblades.

I've been playing my mageblade in Cyro lately. It's harder than Stamblade. Possibly I'm just bad at it....Likely it's both.

Drishtan

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

This thread is more geared toward PvP since PvE sustain is more focused on one resource pool than two.

TLDR: Mageblade relies on coupled magicka and stamina sustain from Siphoning Attacks, so the ability should retain resource return of both types, even if it gets nerfed.

Understand that I'm in full support of a nerf to the skill in the context of sweeping sustain nerfs gamewide, and I'm in full support of everyone needing to build more sustain. However, I reiterate that mageblade's viability and play patterns rely on strong magicka AND stamina sustain mechanics NOT received from gear.

No, those % regen passives are not sufficient. Every class gets some mild sustain passives like those, but active sustain sources are always still required. I know someone's going to get triggered by that.. lol

Mageblade relies on magicka sustain from Siphoning attacks because:

• it has low tooltip damage. Mageblades have to build damage to deal damage. You'll never see a snb heavy Seducer mageblade deal the same damage as a DK or magplar in the same build, nor will a mageblade in Seducer + Engine Guardian be as lethal as a sorc wearing those sets. Sorcs are naturally more lethal with lower spell damage because they have multiple undodgeable attacks and can layer multiple attacks into a single global cooldown.
• it has to constantly cast abilities. A mageblade letting up pressure on its enemies will lose control of the fight, fall on the defensive, and die due to weak defensive mechanics compared to other classes. Mageblades have high sustain demands.

Mageblade relies on stamina sustain from Siphoning attacks because:

• everyone needs stamina sustain from somewhere.
• it can't afford to invest in building stamina sustain via sets, mundus, or jewelry glyphs without losing lethality. Sorcs acquire their stam sustain this way, but sorcs need less stam sustain because they can streak away from fights to regen stam or set up defensive positions with mines and atronach. Sorcs can also afford to build stam regen because they are more lethal at lower spell damage values than mageblades, as I mentioned above.
• mageblade has no burst heal besides ults. DKs have Battle Roar and Helping Hands for stam sustain and a big burst heal. Templars have an equally strong burst heal, but only Repentance for stam sustain. Notice how much time they spend in mist form. Mageblades expend a lot of stamina defensively.

My proposal:

Siphoning Strikes (unmorphed):

• costs magicka
• lasts 20 seconds
• Your light and heavy attacks heal you for 1539 health and restore 396 magicka.

These are the PTS values. I'm trying to stick to those.

Siphoning Attacks:

• costs magicka
• lasts 20 seconds
• Your light and heavy attacks heal you for 1539 health and restore 396 magicka and stamina.

Adds stamina return, retaining the bi-stat resource sustain of the live version and the nerfed values of the PTS version.

Leeching Strikes:

• costs magicka
• lasts 20 seconds
• Your light and heavy attacks restore 1539 health.
• Your light and heavy attacks apply Minor Defile and Minor Vulnerability for 2 seconds. Attacking another target ends these debuffs and applies them to the new target.

Trades the magicka sustain for a new, highly aggressive morph. Nightblade is the debuff class, so giving it access to these two new and seldom accessible debuffs makes thematic sense. Their short durations and single target requires the nightblade to stay on the offense, choose the correct primary target, and gives the target counterplay. With the sustain constrictions of next patch, this morph will also come with a serious tradeoff.

I picked 2 seconds because that's the current duration of Fasalla's, another debuff which requires constant contact to upkeep. I'd be perfectly happy with a duration of 1.5 seconds, but I don't think the duration should go lower since 1 second is the global cooldown and weaving perfectly at the global cooldown is physically impossible due to hardware delays and travel time of attacks.

Honestly, any alternative for Leeching Strikes would be cool by me. Stam return + heal + one debuff would be appealing to a lot of players as well, as would many other ideas. I picked a combination of effects with no resource return in order to make Siphoning Attacks the dedicated sustain morph and Leeching Strikes the dedicated aggressive morph. Having two sustain morphs (the way it has always been on live) clearly isn't working.

Why should we not have dedicated stam and magicka morphs?

• Stam classes have used magicka skills for utility forever. What else are they going to do with their magicka? Examples include fear, cloak, igneous shield, fossilize, restoring focus, extended ritual, crit surge, and streak. Unless all of those abilities get distinguished stamina morphs, why should Siphoning Attacks have distinguished stamina and magicka morphs?
• Mageblade in particular relies on hybrid resource return for PvP. Brawly play styles of stamblade do as well, but I speak for mageblade.

Now it's entirely possible that the PTS changes are completely fine. If mageblade remains lethal after building sufficient stam sustain in its gear, then we don't have a problem. In fact, we have buffs. I write this post as in worry, and to hear others' thoughts on the matter.

Thanks for reading.

Great suggested change.

Skooma Approved!

NightbladeMechanics

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

Drishtan wrote: »

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

This thread is more geared toward PvP since PvE sustain is more focused on one resource pool than two.

TLDR: Mageblade relies on coupled magicka and stamina sustain from Siphoning Attacks, so the ability should retain resource return of both types, even if it gets nerfed.

Understand that I'm in full support of a nerf to the skill in the context of sweeping sustain nerfs gamewide, and I'm in full support of everyone needing to build more sustain. However, I reiterate that mageblade's viability and play patterns rely on strong magicka AND stamina sustain mechanics NOT received from gear.

No, those % regen passives are not sufficient. Every class gets some mild sustain passives like those, but active sustain sources are always still required. I know someone's going to get triggered by that.. lol

Mageblade relies on magicka sustain from Siphoning attacks because:

• it has low tooltip damage. Mageblades have to build damage to deal damage. You'll never see a snb heavy Seducer mageblade deal the same damage as a DK or magplar in the same build, nor will a mageblade in Seducer + Engine Guardian be as lethal as a sorc wearing those sets. Sorcs are naturally more lethal with lower spell damage because they have multiple undodgeable attacks and can layer multiple attacks into a single global cooldown.
• it has to constantly cast abilities. A mageblade letting up pressure on its enemies will lose control of the fight, fall on the defensive, and die due to weak defensive mechanics compared to other classes. Mageblades have high sustain demands.

Mageblade relies on stamina sustain from Siphoning attacks because:

• everyone needs stamina sustain from somewhere.
• it can't afford to invest in building stamina sustain via sets, mundus, or jewelry glyphs without losing lethality. Sorcs acquire their stam sustain this way, but sorcs need less stam sustain because they can streak away from fights to regen stam or set up defensive positions with mines and atronach. Sorcs can also afford to build stam regen because they are more lethal at lower spell damage values than mageblades, as I mentioned above.
• mageblade has no burst heal besides ults. DKs have Battle Roar and Helping Hands for stam sustain and a big burst heal. Templars have an equally strong burst heal, but only Repentance for stam sustain. Notice how much time they spend in mist form. Mageblades expend a lot of stamina defensively.

My proposal:

Siphoning Strikes (unmorphed):

• costs magicka
• lasts 20 seconds
• Your light and heavy attacks heal you for 1539 health and restore 396 magicka.

These are the PTS values. I'm trying to stick to those.

Siphoning Attacks:

• costs magicka
• lasts 20 seconds
• Your light and heavy attacks heal you for 1539 health and restore 396 magicka and stamina.

Adds stamina return, retaining the bi-stat resource sustain of the live version and the nerfed values of the PTS version.

Leeching Strikes:

• costs magicka
• lasts 20 seconds
• Your light and heavy attacks restore 1539 health.
• Your light and heavy attacks apply Minor Defile and Minor Vulnerability for 2 seconds. Attacking another target ends these debuffs and applies them to the new target.

Trades the magicka sustain for a new, highly aggressive morph. Nightblade is the debuff class, so giving it access to these two new and seldom accessible debuffs makes thematic sense. Their short durations and single target requires the nightblade to stay on the offense, choose the correct primary target, and gives the target counterplay. With the sustain constrictions of next patch, this morph will also come with a serious tradeoff.

I picked 2 seconds because that's the current duration of Fasalla's, another debuff which requires constant contact to upkeep. I'd be perfectly happy with a duration of 1.5 seconds, but I don't think the duration should go lower since 1 second is the global cooldown and weaving perfectly at the global cooldown is physically impossible due to hardware delays and travel time of attacks.

Honestly, any alternative for Leeching Strikes would be cool by me. Stam return + heal + one debuff would be appealing to a lot of players as well, as would many other ideas. I picked a combination of effects with no resource return in order to make Siphoning Attacks the dedicated sustain morph and Leeching Strikes the dedicated aggressive morph. Having two sustain morphs (the way it has always been on live) clearly isn't working.

Why should we not have dedicated stam and magicka morphs?

• Stam classes have used magicka skills for utility forever. What else are they going to do with their magicka? Examples include fear, cloak, igneous shield, fossilize, restoring focus, extended ritual, crit surge, and streak. Unless all of those abilities get distinguished stamina morphs, why should Siphoning Attacks have distinguished stamina and magicka morphs?
• Mageblade in particular relies on hybrid resource return for PvP. Brawly play styles of stamblade do as well, but I speak for mageblade.

Now it's entirely possible that the PTS changes are completely fine. If mageblade remains lethal after building sufficient stam sustain in its gear, then we don't have a problem. In fact, we have buffs. I write this post as in worry, and to hear others' thoughts on the matter.

Thanks for reading.

Great suggested change.

Skooma Approved!

I am endorsed by an underground drug smuggling ring...

I'll take it!

NightbladeMechanics

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

The_Outsider wrote: »

2) brawly heavy armor PvP stamblades use Siphoning Attacks and will lament the PTS changes...

-Me. Much lament, very sorrow.

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

TLDR stam sorcs can use nothing but heavy armor passives, heavy attacks, and dark deal to sustain on live. Mageblades cannot rely on only heavy armor passives, heavy attacks, and siphon attacks to sustain on live.

Dark deal didn't get nerfed.

Siphon attacks did.

Mageblades are sad.

Stap nerf mageblades.

I've been playing my mageblade in Cyro lately. It's harder than Stamblade. Possibly I'm just bad at it....Likely it's both.

Hey cool! Mageblade takes a lot of practice to get a hang of. It's an unforgiving class, but it's really fun. Don't be discouraged!

Autolycus

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

bubbygink wrote: »

The_Outsider wrote: »

The issue with that, is that currently the strength of the skill is to have 100% uptime during combat. You'd be refreshing it before the duration expired based on the ebb and flow of combat, so you'd never get that resource refund.

I'm also okay with the way they changed the ability, although I do prefer the old functionality. I'm just not okay with where the values landed based on the stated purpose of the change. Basically, the new version is a nerf to survivability when it's whole purpose is to aid our survivability.

This certainly raises the skill required to play MB, probably already the most difficult class, by a huge amount. I would guess that most players don't weave perfectly - e.g. I notice many of my guild members struggle weaving on resto bar, many wont weave btw shields, many won't weave when needing to use fear. These players will really have no use for siphoning attacks, it will just drain their magicka. Whatever happened ZoS's whole "trying to reduce clunkiness and difficulty" thing they claimed they had going with the last patch? Yes, skilled nightblades that are very comfortable weaving will still be able to derive benefit from it. They will start to gain back resources after 9 seconds or so when not LoSing. But they will have to be careful not to recast too often. And in situations with lots of LoSing it is a wash anyway.

I actually agree with your whole post, I just wanted to isolate this part to add my two cents about the bolded portion specifically.

Based on what I've seen, read, and personally tested so far, I don't think the best players are going to get any use of it either. The fully leveled version of SA I believe is 398 per light attack, which means in under absolutely perfect conditions, no mechanics and no mistakes, it will take 5s to break even. Note that I agree with your perspective in that we won't be doing a light attack every second, but for just a moment let's assume we do. This means that we can get as much as 398 * 15s = ~5,970 magicka back. This covers the cost of.... two skills?

I do a lot more than 2 skills per every 15s... The idea that this will compensate for anything while active is seriously laughable imho (we haven't even accounted for poisons yet). I honestly have a hard time seeing the benefit of casting it at all. I sincerely do not expect for SA to single-handedly sustain me, not even kind of; I do genuinely understand and respect the value of pushing us towards accounting more for sustain and costs. But with the current cost/benefit of SA, it takes away from whatever rotation or skill priorities we use to be of almost no use... I mean we are actually dedicating a whole GCD that could go to some form of damage, CC, healing, or any other utility instead.

A lot can change in the coming weeks, and I hope it does. I just don't see how even the players who are best at light attack weaving (particularly in pvp) will see this as a better option to really anything. Tbh, I think I'd rather Spell Symm.

kadar

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

Autolycus wrote: »

bubbygink wrote: »

The_Outsider wrote: »

The issue with that, is that currently the strength of the skill is to have 100% uptime during combat. You'd be refreshing it before the duration expired based on the ebb and flow of combat, so you'd never get that resource refund.

I'm also okay with the way they changed the ability, although I do prefer the old functionality. I'm just not okay with where the values landed based on the stated purpose of the change. Basically, the new version is a nerf to survivability when it's whole purpose is to aid our survivability.

This certainly raises the skill required to play MB, probably already the most difficult class, by a huge amount. I would guess that most players don't weave perfectly - e.g. I notice many of my guild members struggle weaving on resto bar, many wont weave btw shields, many won't weave when needing to use fear. These players will really have no use for siphoning attacks, it will just drain their magicka. Whatever happened ZoS's whole "trying to reduce clunkiness and difficulty" thing they claimed they had going with the last patch? Yes, skilled nightblades that are very comfortable weaving will still be able to derive benefit from it. They will start to gain back resources after 9 seconds or so when not LoSing. But they will have to be careful not to recast too often. And in situations with lots of LoSing it is a wash anyway.

I actually agree with your whole post, I just wanted to isolate this part to add my two cents about the bolded portion specifically.

Based on what I've seen, read, and personally tested so far, I don't think the best players are going to get any use of it either. The fully leveled version of SA I believe is 398 per light attack, which means in under absolutely perfect conditions, no mechanics and no mistakes, it will take 5s to break even. Note that I agree with your perspective in that we won't be doing a light attack every second, but for just a moment let's assume we do. This means that we can get as much as 398 * 15s = ~5,970 magicka back. This covers the cost of.... two skills?

I do a lot more than 2 skills per every 15s... The idea that this will compensate for anything while active is seriously laughable imho (we haven't even accounted for poisons yet). I honestly have a hard time seeing the benefit of casting it at all. I sincerely do not expect for SA to single-handedly sustain me, not even kind of; I do genuinely understand and respect the value of pushing us towards accounting more for sustain and costs. But with the current cost/benefit of SA, it takes away from whatever rotation or skill priorities we use to be of almost no use... I mean we are actually dedicating a whole GCD that could go to some form of damage, CC, healing, or any other utility instead.

A lot can change in the coming weeks, and I hope it does. I just don't see how even the players who are best at light attack weaving (particularly in pvp) will see this as a better option to really anything. Tbh, I think I'd rather Spell Symm.

Yup. To quote myself from earlier in the thread:

Warden's netch being costless is a good point. In order to fully recoup the 2k cost of Siphoning Attacks, we will have to attack 5 times. That's a third of the ability's duration on live, and a quarter on PTS. I like that Siphoning has a cost, but I don't like that the only resource I get back is the same one I pay to cast it in the first place. At least on live, I'm paying magicka for some immediate stam sustain.

Yup. And how long will it take me to land 5 light attacks in the heat of combat against roll-dodging, cloaking, shuffling targets? And that's if I've got a bow or a Staff! How long will it take me on my DW/2H build? 10 seconds? 15? The purpose of Siphoning attacks is resource management and now: survivability. The new iteration of the skill simply provides none of that.

In a practical, real game play situation, even perfect weaves will not gain any resources or healing at all. At bare minimum, not enough to justify slotting the skill or blowing a GCD to cast it.

Autolycus

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

The_Outsider wrote: »

Autolycus wrote: »

bubbygink wrote: »

The_Outsider wrote: »

The issue with that, is that currently the strength of the skill is to have 100% uptime during combat. You'd be refreshing it before the duration expired based on the ebb and flow of combat, so you'd never get that resource refund.

I'm also okay with the way they changed the ability, although I do prefer the old functionality. I'm just not okay with where the values landed based on the stated purpose of the change. Basically, the new version is a nerf to survivability when it's whole purpose is to aid our survivability.

This certainly raises the skill required to play MB, probably already the most difficult class, by a huge amount. I would guess that most players don't weave perfectly - e.g. I notice many of my guild members struggle weaving on resto bar, many wont weave btw shields, many won't weave when needing to use fear. These players will really have no use for siphoning attacks, it will just drain their magicka. Whatever happened ZoS's whole "trying to reduce clunkiness and difficulty" thing they claimed they had going with the last patch? Yes, skilled nightblades that are very comfortable weaving will still be able to derive benefit from it. They will start to gain back resources after 9 seconds or so when not LoSing. But they will have to be careful not to recast too often. And in situations with lots of LoSing it is a wash anyway.

I actually agree with your whole post, I just wanted to isolate this part to add my two cents about the bolded portion specifically.

Based on what I've seen, read, and personally tested so far, I don't think the best players are going to get any use of it either. The fully leveled version of SA I believe is 398 per light attack, which means in under absolutely perfect conditions, no mechanics and no mistakes, it will take 5s to break even. Note that I agree with your perspective in that we won't be doing a light attack every second, but for just a moment let's assume we do. This means that we can get as much as 398 * 15s = ~5,970 magicka back. This covers the cost of.... two skills?

I do a lot more than 2 skills per every 15s... The idea that this will compensate for anything while active is seriously laughable imho (we haven't even accounted for poisons yet). I honestly have a hard time seeing the benefit of casting it at all. I sincerely do not expect for SA to single-handedly sustain me, not even kind of; I do genuinely understand and respect the value of pushing us towards accounting more for sustain and costs. But with the current cost/benefit of SA, it takes away from whatever rotation or skill priorities we use to be of almost no use... I mean we are actually dedicating a whole GCD that could go to some form of damage, CC, healing, or any other utility instead.

A lot can change in the coming weeks, and I hope it does. I just don't see how even the players who are best at light attack weaving (particularly in pvp) will see this as a better option to really anything. Tbh, I think I'd rather Spell Symm.

Yup. To quote myself from earlier in the thread:

Warden's netch being costless is a good point. In order to fully recoup the 2k cost of Siphoning Attacks, we will have to attack 5 times. That's a third of the ability's duration on live, and a quarter on PTS. I like that Siphoning has a cost, but I don't like that the only resource I get back is the same one I pay to cast it in the first place. At least on live, I'm paying magicka for some immediate stam sustain.

Yup. And how long will it take me to land 5 light attacks in the heat of combat against roll-dodging, cloaking, shuffling targets? And that's if I've got a bow or a Staff! How long will it take me on my DW/2H build? 10 seconds? 15? The purpose of Siphoning attacks is resource management and now: survivability. The new iteration of the skill simply provides none of that.

In a practical, real game play situation, even perfect weaves will not gain any resources or healing at all. At bare minimum, not enough to justify slotting the skill or blowing a GCD to cast it.

Oops, I didn't see that post from earlier. My bad!

I do hope that there are some adjustments in our favor in the coming weeks. I don't expect to be spoon fed resources, I just want it to be balanced. And right now it is not.

TheBonesXXX

@NightbladeMechanics

Summed up my nightblade come Morrowind.

NightbladeMechanics

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

What exactly did ZOS say on the ESO live?

Pijng

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

What exactly did ZOS say on the ESO live?

Here
https://youtu.be/uSjITuUedNA?t=16m24s

NightbladeMechanics

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

Thanks.

I am disappointed that ZOS failed to return the dual resource sustain to Siphoning Attacks. I feel like ZOS isn't interested in how their classes actually work, just homogenizing them. I am discouraged.

thankyourat

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

Thanks.

I am disappointed that ZOS failed to return the dual resource sustain to Siphoning Attacks. I feel like ZOS isn't interested in how their classes actually work, just homogenizing them. I am discouraged.

Yes it's very disappointing they are slowly making every class function the same. Does the heal from siphoning attacks scale with CP?

Avran_Sylt

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

How about:

Leeching Strikes (unmorphed):
costs magicka or stamina (chooses highest percentage)
lasts 20 seconds
Your light and heavy attacks heal you for 1539 health and restore 396 magicka or stamina (based on your lowest %).

Siphoning Attacks:
costs magicka
lasts 20 seconds
Your light and heavy attacks heal you for 769 health and restore 594 magicka

Enervating Strikes:
costs stamina
lasts 20 seconds
Your light and heavy attacks restore 769 health and restore 594 stamina

So the skill is general for the first morph (and you would keep it unmorphed it you wanted to have it return both) and then as you use it your character can specialize.

I do like the idea of adding minor vulnerability in with something, so how about:

Grim Focus:
Build up deadly momentum to gain Minor Berserk, increasing your damage done by 8% for 20 seconds.
While active, hitting an enemy with 4 Light or Heavy Attacks changes this ability into Assassin’s Will, allowing you to fire a single shot from a spectral bow at an enemy to deal [x] Magic Damage and applying minor vulerability for 10 seconds. (the vulnerability aspect being present for all morphs)

zyk

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

Thanks.

I am disappointed that ZOS failed to return the dual resource sustain to Siphoning Attacks. I feel like ZOS isn't interested in how their classes actually work, just homogenizing them. I am discouraged.

It's brutal. If this change goes live, they'll have destroyed every magicka nb pvp playstyle I've played over the past year and a half.

@ZOS_RichLambert Please engage the Magicka Nightblade community on these changes? You've gimped cloak playstyles already and now we're losing our brawling capability. We need a stam recovery option.

Open world PVP is going to be... Sorcs. Sometimes it's like that is already true.

Derra

Minor defile and minor vulnerability seems a little over the top tbh.

NightbladeMechanics

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

Derra wrote: »

Minor defile and minor vulnerability seems a little over the top tbh.

You wouldn't think so if you realized how much sustain we would be giving up by not using Siphoning Attacks.

But it looks like ZOS doesn't want us using that skill anyways.

Moncho11

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

I play on console and I have already removed it from my bars. I'm trying to play with as many of the changes done so as not to get used to the old way(never coming back).You can run double dps 5 sets but will need some stam regen or cost reduction glyphs along with stam pots. In group with good shard support you can get away from pots and you can get away with replacing a glyph for weapon dmg. Now I play an imperial with no racials for regen which would probably make it easier if I were redguard or bosmer.

The main issue with change is Nightblade's we're already lower in DPS chain than everybody except maybe stamplars. With all the changes across the board we are all back to the same boat but then ZOS insults use with 75% nerf to siphoning. Yes other classes got a nerf but not 75% to their main sustain ability. Despite the feedback the change in 3.0.2 is not any better as the total net return is less for player who learns their class. Also it requires the same amount of light/ heavy attacks to get resources spent back.

Takes-No-Prisoner

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

olsborg wrote: »

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

This thread is more geared toward PvP since PvE sustain is more focused on one resource pool than two.

TLDR: Mageblade relies on coupled magicka and stamina sustain from Siphoning Attacks, so the ability should retain resource return of both types, even if it gets nerfed.

Understand that I'm in full support of a nerf to the skill in the context of sweeping sustain nerfs gamewide, and I'm in full support of everyone needing to build more sustain. However, I reiterate that mageblade's viability and play patterns rely on strong magicka AND stamina sustain mechanics NOT received from gear.

No, those % regen passives are not sufficient. Every class gets some mild sustain passives like those, but active sustain sources are always still required. I know someone's going to get triggered by that.. lol

Mageblade relies on magicka sustain from Siphoning attacks because:

• it has low tooltip damage. Mageblades have to build damage to deal damage. You'll never see a snb heavy Seducer mageblade deal the same damage as a DK or magplar in the same build, nor will a mageblade in Seducer + Engine Guardian be as lethal as a sorc wearing those sets. Sorcs are naturally more lethal with lower spell damage because they have multiple undodgeable attacks and can layer multiple attacks into a single global cooldown.
• it has to constantly cast abilities. A mageblade letting up pressure on its enemies will lose control of the fight, fall on the defensive, and die due to weak defensive mechanics compared to other classes. Mageblades have high sustain demands.

Mageblade relies on stamina sustain from Siphoning attacks because:

• everyone needs stamina sustain from somewhere.
• it can't afford to invest in building stamina sustain via sets, mundus, or jewelry glyphs without losing lethality. Sorcs acquire their stam sustain this way, but sorcs need less stam sustain because they can streak away from fights to regen stam or set up defensive positions with mines and atronach. Sorcs can also afford to build stam regen because they are more lethal at lower spell damage values than mageblades, as I mentioned above.
• mageblade has no burst heal besides ults. DKs have Battle Roar and Helping Hands for stam sustain and a big burst heal. Templars have an equally strong burst heal, but only Repentance for stam sustain. Notice how much time they spend in mist form. Mageblades expend a lot of stamina defensively.

My proposal:

Siphoning Strikes (unmorphed):

• costs magicka
• lasts 20 seconds
• Your light and heavy attacks heal you for 1539 health and restore 396 magicka.

These are the PTS values. I'm trying to stick to those.

Siphoning Attacks:

• costs magicka
• lasts 20 seconds
• Your light and heavy attacks heal you for 1539 health and restore 396 magicka and stamina.

Adds stamina return, retaining the bi-stat resource sustain of the live version and the nerfed values of the PTS version.

Leeching Strikes:

• costs magicka
• lasts 20 seconds
• Your light and heavy attacks restore 1539 health.
• Your light and heavy attacks apply Minor Defile and Minor Vulnerability for 2 seconds. Attacking another target ends these debuffs and applies them to the new target.

Trades the magicka sustain for a new, highly aggressive morph. Nightblade is the debuff class, so giving it access to these two new and seldom accessible debuffs makes thematic sense. Their short durations and single target requires the nightblade to stay on the offense, choose the correct primary target, and gives the target counterplay. With the sustain constrictions of next patch, this morph will also come with a serious tradeoff.

I picked 2 seconds because that's the current duration of Fasalla's, another debuff which requires constant contact to upkeep. I'd be perfectly happy with a duration of 1.5 seconds, but I don't think the duration should go lower since 1 second is the global cooldown and weaving perfectly at the global cooldown is physically impossible due to hardware delays and travel time of attacks.

Honestly, any alternative for Leeching Strikes would be cool by me. Stam return + heal + one debuff would be appealing to a lot of players as well, as would many other ideas. I picked a combination of effects with no resource return in order to make Siphoning Attacks the dedicated sustain morph and Leeching Strikes the dedicated aggressive morph. Having two sustain morphs (the way it has always been on live) clearly isn't working.

Why should we not have dedicated stam and magicka morphs?

• Stam classes have used magicka skills for utility forever. What else are they going to do with their magicka? Examples include fear, cloak, igneous shield, fossilize, restoring focus, extended ritual, crit surge, and streak. Unless all of those abilities get distinguished stamina morphs, why should Siphoning Attacks have distinguished stamina and magicka morphs?
• Mageblade in particular relies on hybrid resource return for PvP. Brawly play styles of stamblade do as well, but I speak for mageblade.

Now it's entirely possible that the PTS changes are completely fine. If mageblade remains lethal after building sufficient stam sustain in its gear, then we don't have a problem. In fact, we have buffs. I write this post as in worry, and to hear others' thoughts on the matter.

Thanks for reading.

While I like your suggestion here, I would rather do this for leeching strikes.

Leeching Strikes:

• costs magicka
• lasts 20 seconds
• Your light and heavy attacks restore 1539 health and 396 stamina.
• You gain minor mending for 20 seconds.

Good suggestions so far

bubbygink

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

Well it is starting to become clear that ZoS have no intention to revert this skill. Anybody have ideas on how to manage stamina next patch? Something like amberplasm? Maybe try to stick to heavy for some stam restore via constitution? Could something like 5H1M1L with 5 Julianos + 5 lich + 2 monster pieces + witchmothers work? Maybe with some prismatic glyphs to give more max stam? Going to have to prepare for a post-SA world in Morrowind.

kadar

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

bubbygink wrote: »

Well it is starting to become clear that ZoS have no intention to revert this skill. Anybody have ideas on how to manage stamina next patch? Something like amberplasm? Maybe try to stick to heavy for some stam restore via constitution? Could something like 5H1M1L with 5 Julianos + 5 lich + 2 monster pieces + witchmothers work? Maybe with some prismatic glyphs to give more max stam? Going to have to prepare for a post-SA world in Morrowind.

I read the new notes full of hope and optimism....

*cries quietly alone (because there are no more NBs left)*

arkansas_ESO

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

bubbygink wrote: »

Well it is starting to become clear that ZoS have no intention to revert this skill. Anybody have ideas on how to manage stamina next patch? Something like amberplasm? Maybe try to stick to heavy for some stam restore via constitution? Could something like 5H1M1L with 5 Julianos + 5 lich + 2 monster pieces + witchmothers work? Maybe with some prismatic glyphs to give more max stam? Going to have to prepare for a post-SA world in Morrowind.

Heavy's better than light next patch IMO since the lack of cost reduction CP means you won't be able to keep up shields (and no shields=dead.) I swapped out Siphoning for Degeneration in battlegrounds and didn't really notice a difference in magic sustain in five heavy, and Degneration heals for almost as much as Siphoning, but also gives Major Sorcery+Empower and has a chance to proc Valkyn.

bubbygink

Don't keep the PTS changes exactly as they are. (May not necessarily support this proposal. Discuss other ideas!)

arkansas_ESO wrote: »

Heavy's better than light next patch IMO since the lack of cost reduction CP means you won't be able to keep up shields (and no shields=dead.) I swapped out Siphoning for Degeneration in battlegrounds and didn't really notice a difference in magic sustain in five heavy, and Degneration heals for almost as much as Siphoning, but also gives Major Sorcery+Empower and has a chance to proc Valkyn.

Without a chance to get much testing in, I tend to agree. I may try to make the best of the new SA's heal and wear heavy and just stack healing and rely a lot less on casting expensive damage shields. Swallow soul is still a relatively cheap skill and can be combined with path + degeneration + SA to give some solid healing per second. I'm thinking of trying out 2 valkyn + 5 julianos + 5 lich with witchmothers. I really do want to try out the war maiden set but would probably have to go 5 light if I did so.