PTS Update 15 - Feedback Thread for Item Sets, Monster Masks & General Itemization

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO

STEVIL wrote: »

dpencil1 wrote: »

*By "proven wrong" I mean shown that the nerf still leaves Necro in a strong enough place to be as or more desirable than other magicka dps sets. I certainly respect that it is not a terrible set, even with the nerf, but if it is surpassed far enough by other sets, especially ones that don't have conditions, then the incentive to use Necro seems to be quite diminished.

Quick question before anybody tries to prove you wrong by your required standards...

does your math factor in the boosts to shields that a maxmagica based set provides or the boosts to pets that a maxmagica set provides as well as just looking at the DPS tallies in whatever set-piece abstract you choose to imagine? or is it just seen through DPS colored glasses?

If not, can you allow that for some if necro "needs to be this" conclusion (match close enough the other DPS sets output) AND on top of that also had the shield thingy ignored then the proof may not be in that narrow portion of the pudding but more in the whole dessert including the shield cake and the pets whipped topping as well?

Maybe go to the thread and read some of the responses? He goes through all these concerns and much more. The necro nerf is completely and utterly unnecessary.

STEVIL

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

dpencil1 wrote: »

*By "proven wrong" I mean shown that the nerf still leaves Necro in a strong enough place to be as or more desirable than other magicka dps sets. I certainly respect that it is not a terrible set, even with the nerf, but if it is surpassed far enough by other sets, especially ones that don't have conditions, then the incentive to use Necro seems to be quite diminished.

Quick question before anybody tries to prove you wrong by your required standards...

does your math factor in the boosts to shields that a maxmagica based set provides or the boosts to pets that a maxmagica set provides as well as just looking at the DPS tallies in whatever set-piece abstract you choose to imagine? or is it just seen through DPS colored glasses?

If not, can you allow that for some if necro "needs to be this" conclusion (match close enough the other DPS sets output) AND on top of that also had the shield thingy ignored then the proof may not be in that narrow portion of the pudding but more in the whole dessert including the shield cake and the pets whipped topping as well?

Maybe go to the thread and read some of the responses? He goes through all these concerns and much more. The necro nerf is completely and utterly unnecessary.

"Goes thru" these concerns? Thats generous.

Hint I did look thru the thread. Seemed pretty cleat these issues of shield and pet were pushed aside because they could not be quantified by the mather to satisfy them.

In short, they were just handwaved away.

That is FINE as long as the so-called analysis in used to support a conclusion in which they have no impact.

If the conclusion was "by this calculation necro is 7th ot 4th depending on nerf and sorrow is 1st..." and nothing more that would be fine cuz we would know this was not making claims about broader things than just the chart.

But, as soon as that ranking is used to justify a conclusion that the nerf is "completely and utterly unnecessary" the choice to toss those out is no longer appropriate.

By asking the questions hete, right after the post here, i was giving the poster the option to acknowledge the issue and address it here.

The more one just discards concerns that dont support the claim instead of including them and dealing with them the more one cripples your own conclusions.

No sure, one can stand by the throw out the shield math cuz it doesn't help my case logic and pretend its not a factor that should weigh in on is the nerf appropriate, but then, if one were to say "hey, lets give julianos and sorrw sets an additional 3k buff to shields as part of their 5pc bonus" my bet is there would be lotsa folks who would suggest that a 3k buff to shields is not trivial enough to be ignored on magica sets - well except maybe those wanting nerco to keep it.

dpencil1

I am working on a follow-up thread using a realistic build setup and will try to examine the differences in shield, pet, additional resources for castings, and weaker weapon attacks. I will happily admit that I am not in the same league as Asayre when it comes to this stuff, and much of what I have written in that thread has been a process of discovery for me. I don't want to hold on to the claim that Necro's nerf was too much if it looks unjustified to say that. In the simple way I compared the sets before, I know I was leaving out a lot of other variables that can come in and change things. The point was to simply looks at the raw power of the sets themselves, isolated from the many permutations that can occur when a player actively builds to take advantage of a particular set.

Rataroto

@ZOS_GinaBruno How about you foward a request to change the "Twin blade and blunt" passive on the Mace part of it? With sharpened being nerfed (keep in mind I actually like this change), make it so Maces now give a FLAT value of penetration, that way it is on par with the rest of the game, including the sharpened trait itself, set bonuses and the cp system.

PVE - You see, while the maximum potential in PVE is 1820 penetration and that IS a very nice ammount, the value gets calculated after reductions and penetration, meaning when you have (rounded numbers), 5000 from Two fanged Snake, 5000 from Major fracture, 3000 from alkosh and 1000 from Minor fracture, you're at 14000 penetration, and then the mace will grand 10% of 4200 only, and thats 420, a MAJOR loss, making it so 1h maces are useless in pve every time. Making so it gives a nice flat value as of like 2000 is a good change.

PVP - in PVP players tend to be around 20000 resistences, being that maces are nice agaisnt pesky tanks that cap at 35000, in this case the 2h maces are VERY strong, if you take 5000 from a major fracture on them, maces will be giving 6000 penetration and that is quite nice. but again, if you have major and minor fracture ( stamplars of the world), as well as spriggans lets say, you're taking 5000,1000,4000, armor, thats 10000 reduced armor, and the mace value falls down 5000, still very good but it starts getting diminishing returns. In case of attacking a light armored target with lets say 22000 resistences, with spriggans and major fracture (9000 penetration), you're only getting 2600 penetration. All and all, the 2h maces don't fluctuate so hard because there aren't as much debuffs in cyrodiil, however giving them a 4000 - 5000 base penetration would be nice to keep values from changing midfight. (I am aware that maces are SUPOSED to be counter-tanks, so it makes more sense to be worth in that case)

In sumary, either make it so maces have a flat value of penetration, or make it so it calculates prior to any debuffs or penetration you already have(this second one is most unlikely due to programing). Maces as of now have no place is PVE and would be nice to have more variety of options. a good exemple would be that a Sharpened Dagger is equal or almost equal as a Precise Mace (=

FlyingFigNewton

Can ZOS please look into opening consecutive undaunted chests and getting the same exact items. I've had it happen multiple times, it's definitely a thing.

TyroneShoelaces

Wait like 34 seconds, then open it again!

CurvedSwords123

Gotta hate these threads. Always full of neckbeards begging for other ppl's monster sets or builds to get nerfed. That's exactly what we need right? More nerfs...

CurvedSwords123

Let me ask for a monster set buff. Stormfist is WAY to back-loaded when it comes to damage. Retool it so it can have some usage in PVP pls.

CurvedSwords123

CurvedSwords123 wrote: »

Let me ask for a monster set buff. Stormfist is WAY to back-loaded when it comes to damage. Retool it so it can have some usage in PVP pls.

*too back-loaded rather.