The real reason why people are so negative when new patches come out.

zassasaurus

The main issues with they way zos nerfs things is that they go way too over the top. Sure, reduce sustain which before morrowind was pretty much unlimited, but what zos did was nerf every single source of sustain in the whole game. Same with mag dk changes this patch, reduced the opportunity to power lash due to off balance cool down AND gave the power lash proc a cooldown.... They are just far too heavy handed.

Ladislao

Nah, I believe in ZOS and what they're doing.

Pr0Skygon wrote: »

So why choose magWarden?

Because you like it. And your preferences will not affect what content you can beat.
I'm not talking about the minmax that I mentioned above.

Pr0Skygon wrote: »

And please do remember 1 very important thing: You can use magWarden to beat vHOF, doesn't mean the class setup is good, it means your group is good. You can easily replace that magWarden spot for a magNB or magSorc, and has an easier time in there. If you just want to have fun, then magWarden is fine. If you want to talk about "balance", then no, magWarden is not "balanced" at all.

Does this mean that a group of wardens can not beat vHoF? Or it means that it will be harder?
And what about solo trial? Can they beat it?

And notice, I've never said in the last post that they are balanced. But they are not disbalanced so much as to be unplayable.

Anhedonie

Absolutely right, nerfs are way out of controls.

The main issue is ZOS doesn't tweak overperforming stuff. They nerf the *** out of it untill it's no longer useable.

Pr0Skygon

I liked some nerfs, but also hate some.

Ladislao wrote: »

Pr0Skygon wrote: »

So why choose magWarden?

Because you like it. And your preferences will not affect what content you can beat.
I'm not talking about the minmax that I mentioned above.

Pr0Skygon wrote: »

And please do remember 1 very important thing: You can use magWarden to beat vHOF, doesn't mean the class setup is good, it means your group is good. You can easily replace that magWarden spot for a magNB or magSorc, and has an easier time in there. If you just want to have fun, then magWarden is fine. If you want to talk about "balance", then no, magWarden is not "balanced" at all.

Does this mean that a group of wardens can not beat vHoF? Or it means that it will be harder?
And what about solo trial? Can they beat it?

And notice, I've never said in the last post that they are balanced. But they are not disbalanced so much as to be unplayable.

So you willing to slow down your group progression, the other 11 member of your raid, and make their gameplay a lot more punishing and harder, just because you like Warden? Really? You can say that to your guild? Shame on you sir.
And yes, as I've said before, you can still play Warden as always, it's still fun, you can beat everything with a magWarden in fact, but this is a group play game, a multiplayer game, and I don't want to become a potential burden to my team, just because of my personal references.

Jhalin

Absolutely right, nerfs are way out of controls.

Olupajmibanan wrote: »

Pr0Skygon wrote: »

Olupajmibanan wrote: »

You indirectly stated that constant balancing is a must in competitive games which ESO, sadly, isn't. That's why they can nerf anything like they want, because nothing important happens. It will not affect the competitive ranked ladder because there isn't such thing.

And this is exactly my issue. ESO could bring ranked mode to battlegrounds. That would actually solved a lot of problems:
1. Competition is a must in any PvP scenario to keep players playing. (Who would watch or even participate in Olympics if it was for fun only)
2. Possibility to enter esports scene which means cash, cash and even more cash (that's what matter for ZoS the most). And possibility to organize tournaments to increase popularity and cash even further (yeaaaaah ZoS, that's what you like).
3. ZoS would have to think and test a lot before they nerf or buff something. Now they do it just for the sake of nerfing like this: "Let's nerf something because we didn't nerf anything in a while".

Increased PvP population, a lot more dolars for ZoS, periodic balancing with competitive ladder in mind. Everyone is happy not?

Hum you do have a point.
Though I might have confused people with my first point. I brought up games like Overwatch because those characters in that game is pre-made, while characters in ESO is custom made by each players. It's really not fun seeing your baby get nerfed to the ground for god know what reason

It's the same like nerfing your favourite champion in LoL. You have all of skins for him, many experience with him, etc. etc. and they completely nerf him.

At least in League the devs pay attention and respond to player feedback. The PBE is updated near daily to ensure that their balance changes are working as intended before a patch goes live.

I can't say the same for ZOS and their massive nerf bazooka. When's the last time we actually got any kind of buff to our damage? Or a buff to sustain? Every time I look at the Patch Notes it's just more power being chipped away from the players.

CrazYDunm3r

I liked some nerfs, but also hate some.

The problem is is that the ceiling is lowered so much to a point where skill to kill someone is diminished by a lot in my opinion.

Pr0Skygon

I liked some nerfs, but also hate some.

RDMyers65b14_ESO wrote: »

Everyone is going to see things from their own perspective. What is a nerf to one person is likely seen as something positive for another. There is absolutely no possible way to please everyone. ZOS is doing what they can, but sometimes it is too far one way or the other. Data gets skewed based on the time and place that it is collected. No matter how much you may read about things on these forums, the majority of the players don't post and probably just play the game as it is. As they are the majority, ZOS has to do what is best for them, not all of the forum people.

my friend I'm sorry in advance if I might sound harsh, but I've seen so many comment similar like yours, both in this forum and in real life, and it irritates me everytime.
Being positive is good, but too much positive may cause more harm. You cannot just see people take away your stuff, and then say "hey, it's ok, there's still positive in this". And then when you see someone else got their stuff stolen, will you just say that same thing? Cause I can't. My main isn't Templar (it's DK), but when I see ZOS stripped away their stun, their damage, I feel sad for them, not sugar coating ZOS's actions.

Yes, you cannot satisfy everyone, the quote as old as time. But what you can do however, is to please the majority. Now you may say "but I don't see any majority says anything". Simple, the majority of players don't post anything, because they either are casual, play ESO for fun, or they simply want to avoid feedbacks and negativity. But that has nothing to do with ZOS doing right or wrong. Do you remember when Dragon Blood totally sucks for magDK? And when ZOS finally changed it last year, everyone praise ZOS to high heaven, saying that they've always want this. But they forgot the few people on forum that actually voiced about it, and the funny part is, those guys was being slammed by so many folks. But they were right.

CrazYDunm3r

I liked some nerfs, but also hate some.

Pr0Skygon wrote: »

RDMyers65b14_ESO wrote: »

Everyone is going to see things from their own perspective. What is a nerf to one person is likely seen as something positive for another. There is absolutely no possible way to please everyone. ZOS is doing what they can, but sometimes it is too far one way or the other. Data gets skewed based on the time and place that it is collected. No matter how much you may read about things on these forums, the majority of the players don't post and probably just play the game as it is. As they are the majority, ZOS has to do what is best for them, not all of the forum people.

my friend I'm sorry in advance if I might sound harsh, but I've seen so many comment similar like yours, both in this forum and in real life, and it irritates me everytime.
Being positive is good, but too much positive may cause more harm. You cannot just see people take away your stuff, and then say "hey, it's ok, there's still positive in this". And then when you see someone else got their stuff stolen, will you just say that same thing? Cause I can't. My main isn't Templar (it's DK), but when I see ZOS stripped away their stun, their damage, I feel sad for them, not sugar coating ZOS's actions.

Yes, you cannot satisfy everyone, the quote as old as time. But what you can do however, is to please the majority. Now you may say "but I don't see any majority says anything". Simple, the majority of players don't post anything, because they either are casual, play ESO for fun, or they simply want to avoid feedbacks and negativity. But that has nothing to do with ZOS doing right or wrong. Do you remember when Dragon Blood totally sucks for magDK? And when ZOS finally changed it last year, everyone praise ZOS to high heaven, saying that they've always want this. But they forgot the few people on forum that actually voiced about it, and the funny part is, those guys was being slammed by so many folks. But they were right.

I agree! I've seen some very honest DK feedback from DK's in the forums past week, but sometimes they are too eager to give up on certain skills where I just frown upon.

playsforfun

Others (Comment bellow your opinion).

humans don't like change.

Ladislao

Nah, I believe in ZOS and what they're doing.

Pr0Skygon wrote: »

So you willing to slow down your group progression, the other 11 member of your raid, and make their gameplay a lot more punishing and harder, just because you like Warden? Really? You can say that to your guild? Shame on you sir.

And yes, as I've said before, you can still play Warden as always, it's still fun, you can beat everything with a magWarden in fact, but this is a group play game, a multiplayer game, and I don't want to become a potential burden to my team, just because of my personal references.

Unfortunately, this is minmax thinking. "You willing to slow down your group progression just because you like non-meta race?"
If you really play warden well, it's unlikely that anyone will pay attention to it. Otherwise, why complain about the balance at all? Perfect balance will never be. Play meta classes in each patch and rejoice. You do not want to be a burden, do you?

However, I have no purpose to change your mind. And, frankly, we have already moved away from the topic of conversation.

Tasear

Others (Comment bellow your opinion).

For record,

My dk is being buffed with lower block cost. What they did was balanced it for did type of playstyles.


synergy cool down was scary scary. Went a bit off the rails for a bit too.

Now for the record, off balance changes was a buff to my warden who uses a different way then lighting blockade for off balance.

So it's not necessarily nerfs, but we'll balance for others playing styles.

Now on to point ...we need a land or something with harder content or scaling needs to hit us more. The power creep is results of one tamerial. We simply need more complicated areas. Things that require teamwork to succeed. Not more Health more of a challenge and less forgiveness.

Edziu

I liked some nerfs, but also hate some.

nerfs are inevitable but also if there are to much nerfs then its not healthy, like those with sustain for dk before and with morrowind those nerfs are out of control!
yes...some nerfs was needed but some and in no on that high lvl how ZOS done it... for example take away cost reduction in skill from cp while raising base cost of many abilities...this was nonsense to implement both at once....

Septimus_Magna

I liked some nerfs, but also hate some.

Nerfs should improve balance between classes and mag/stam builds.

Sometimes skills are nerfed on poorly performing classes which I really dont understand. And sometimes the best performing dps class gets a buff while the under performing classes are left behind.

I also feel that nerfs are usually quite severe, 25 or 50% reduction is not common in ESO. Skills that are over performing can go from too strong to useless in a single update. We have seen this time and time again, I'd rather see smaller nerfs that gradually reduce a problem and small buffs on the other side to make both sides more evenly matched.

Balancing class performance in pve and pvp with magicka and stamina builds is undoubtedly very complicated. Making big changes in a complex equation will usually not help stabilize it.

AcadianPaladin

Absolutely right, nerfs are way out of controls.

I'm a simple PvE player. I dread each patch / 'update' because with each one my characters (and hence the game) become less fun.

Pr0Skygon

I liked some nerfs, but also hate some.

Tasear wrote: »

For record,

My dk is being buffed with lower block cost. What they did was balanced it for did type of playstyles.


synergy cool down was scary scary. Went a bit off the rails for a bit too.

Now for the record, off balance changes was a buff to my warden who uses a different way then lighting blockade for off balance.

So it's not necessarily nerfs, but we'll balance for others playing styles.

Now on to point ...we need a land or something with harder content or scaling needs to hit us more. The power creep is results of one tamerial. We simply need more complicated areas. Things that require teamwork to succeed. Not more Health more of a challenge and less forgiveness.

The block cost reduce only apply for non tank character. Since they also nerfed block cost reduction in the background, if you're a tank running 3 block cost reduction on jewelry, you'll see a big nerf. To be precise, on live, block cost can go down to 86, while on pts, it's minimum is about 364.

Pr0Skygon

I liked some nerfs, but also hate some.

Ladislao wrote: »

Pr0Skygon wrote: »

So you willing to slow down your group progression, the other 11 member of your raid, and make their gameplay a lot more punishing and harder, just because you like Warden? Really? You can say that to your guild? Shame on you sir.

And yes, as I've said before, you can still play Warden as always, it's still fun, you can beat everything with a magWarden in fact, but this is a group play game, a multiplayer game, and I don't want to become a potential burden to my team, just because of my personal references.

Unfortunately, this is minmax thinking. "You willing to slow down your group progression just because you like non-meta race?"
If you really play warden well, it's unlikely that anyone will pay attention to it. Otherwise, why complain about the balance at all? Perfect balance will never be. Play meta classes in each patch and rejoice. You do not want to be a burden, do you?

However, I have no purpose to change your mind. And, frankly, we have already moved away from the topic of conversation.

I think you don't understand how we use the word "balanced" in games like these.
Of course, nothing is absolute, because absolute is meaningless, great quote, wrong place. "Balanced" here implement that every single class setup have a chance to compete with any others, without sacrificing fun factor, nor depends on circumstances. For example, magTemplar are really good in vHOF, but not anywhere else compare to others. You must understand that comparing 1 class to another is inevitable, and actually a healthy action. It keeps every class driving forward to the best in a fair playground. Right now, this is not the case. You can take your 12 man Warden team and do every single content in this game. But here the problem, why would you do it? When you can have a lot easier time with a "meta" setup? Don't get me wrong, I despite that word, "meta", but it's not forged by players, it is forged by the lack of caring from ZOS. Seriously, at one point, ZOS stated that DK was suppose to be tank. While on other hand, they claim that every class can do every roles. None sense.
And if you can play Warden really well, then good for you, but how do you compare your warden to other class setup? That's the problem here.
And if you have problem with minmax, then I'm just gonna say this: This is at core, an RPG. We all want to be the best as we can, we want to feel good, we want to become something we can't real life, that's why we play games. It's power fantasy. And it'll be a fail power fantasy if your neighbor can do a lot better than you, just because the devs decided it.

Ep1kMalware

Absolutely right, nerfs are way out of controls.

Ladislao wrote: »

Pr0Skygon wrote: »

So you willing to slow down your group progression, the other 11 member of your raid, and make their gameplay a lot more punishing and harder, just because you like Warden? Really? You can say that to your guild? Shame on you sir.

And yes, as I've said before, you can still play Warden as always, it's still fun, you can beat everything with a magWarden in fact, but this is a group play game, a multiplayer game, and I don't want to become a potential burden to my team, just because of my personal references.

Unfortunately, this is minmax thinking. "You willing to slow down your group progression just because you like non-meta race?"
If you really play warden well, it's unlikely that anyone will pay attention to it. Otherwise, why complain about the balance at all? Perfect balance will never be. Play meta classes in each patch and rejoice. You do not want to be a burden, do you?

However, I have no purpose to change your mind. And, frankly, we have already moved away from the topic of conversation.

I have to side with this guy. Homestead patch I played arguably the worst dps class in the game with a dps score of 41k (given major breach). I was anything but a burden to my team.

RobbieRocket

Others (Comment bellow your opinion).

Nerfs are made in an effort to improve the popularity of or the quality of the game.

We can discuss all day if those 2 things are or should be the same, or not. The point is that the nerfs are made for the purpose of game-balancing or perceived/populist game-balancing. Over tinkering is tempered with leaving things over/under-powered.

My personal opinion (which I suppose does not really matter) is that they have improved the balance overall. Would I like to see some changes and do I have ideas what they could do or introduce? Oh yes

I think it is good that a company seems to trying to update or improve its product.

Elsonso

Others (Comment bellow your opinion).

Pr0Skygon wrote: »

I don't know about you guys, but for me ESO has always been a power fantasy game, which is reasonable for a fantasy RPG. I play ESO to feel powerful, not to be stuffed into a box, and be told what I should be, and can't be. That's actually what ZOS promised us when they first announced ESO, "play as you want". But lately, I've seen that concept been driven out by ZOS, update by update.

I think a lot of people have the wrong idea about "play as you want". Play as you want means that you can complete a lot of the game without optimal builds. Some builds are easier. Some builds are harder. You can do the full range of builds. That is "play as you want". It does not mean that every build is top of the line for every purpose. It does not mean that every one of the 10 classes is good at the three traditional dungeon roles. It does mean you are free to try, although, some end game content might be extremely challenging.

It does not mean "win doing whatever you want to do."

What is happening here is that ESO is not really designed to be "balanced". I doubt that it ever will be. I hope that it never will be. I can't imagine a more boring game. I am perfectly fine with entire classes being not the best suited for certain roles.

Moving on... Players seek out their own boxes and place themselves in those boxes. These boxes exist, not because ZOS wants people to be boxed into certain roles, but because the players create them. They love the boxes. They spend a lot of time talking about them, and shun those who don't join them. Non-conformists are ridiculed here on the forum almost daily.

The real reason why people are so negative when new patches come out is that they are too comfortable in their box. ZOS comes along and shakes the box. ZOS shakes the box because the box itself is not important. Other factors are more important than the box. People don't like their box disturbed. They want ZOS to kick someone else's box.

Anyway, that is my theory.

RobbieRocket

Others (Comment bellow your opinion).

lordrichter wrote: »

Pr0Skygon wrote: »

I don't know about you guys, but for me ESO has always been a power fantasy game, which is reasonable for a fantasy RPG. I play ESO to feel powerful, not to be stuffed into a box, and be told what I should be, and can't be. That's actually what ZOS promised us when they first announced ESO, "play as you want". But lately, I've seen that concept been driven out by ZOS, update by update.

I think a lot of people have the wrong idea about "play as you want". Play as you want means that you can complete a lot of the game without optimal builds. Some builds are easier. Some builds are harder. You can do the full range of builds. That is "play as you want". It does not mean that every build is top of the line for every purpose. It does not mean that every one of the 10 classes is good at the three traditional dungeon roles. It does mean you are free to try, although, some end game content might be extremely challenging.

It does not mean "win doing whatever you want to do."

What is happening here is that ESO is not really designed to be "balanced". I doubt that it ever will be. I hope that it never will be. I can't imagine a more boring game. I am perfectly fine with entire classes being not the best suited for certain roles.

Moving on... Players seek out their own boxes and place themselves in those boxes. These boxes exist, not because ZOS wants people to be boxed into certain roles, but because the players create them. They love the boxes. They spend a lot of time talking about them, and shun those who don't join them. Non-conformists are ridiculed here on the forum almost daily.

The real reason why people are so negative when new patches come out is that they are too comfortable in their box. ZOS comes along and shakes the box. ZOS shakes the box because the box itself is not important. Other factors are more important than the box. People don't like their box disturbed. They want ZOS to kick someone else's box.

Anyway, that is my theory.

Very nicely worded and I think you have very much hit the nail on the head...
(now, were you using a conventional hammer or did you use a wooden block? ...because you know which one you should have used for optimal force... and acceptance into our vet Metaphor would most certainly not accept your use of dual spanners...)

Apache_Kid

Absolutely right, nerfs are way out of controls.

How come when there is a nerf that is needed for PvP and it effects PvE, players get mad and angry at other PvP players instead of being mad and angry at ZoS for choosing to not balance both game-types seperately? It seems to me that this anger is entirely misdirected.

What am I missing here?

DocFrost72

Pr0Skygon wrote: »

Wing wrote: »

I was a fan of the whole "were only going to mess with classes during major updates so people don't have to re gear etc." thing, until it translated to

"some of your characters might be useless or broken until the next major update but this is for your convenience"

My magWarden is still level 6, since July. Everyone knows why.

*This is not my parse, I stink at magic.*

Ep1kMalware

Absolutely right, nerfs are way out of controls.

Apache_Kid wrote: »

How come when there is a nerf that is needed for PvP and it effects PvE, players get mad and angry at other PvP players instead of being mad and angry at ZoS for choosing to not balance both game-types seperately? It seems to me that this anger is entirely misdirected.

What am I missing here?

Because of the pvp players actually put any effort into pvp instead of comming hete and crying their crybaby tears out then the nerfs would not be considered.

It's like when a pve player asks 'nerf tanks' because they tried it once haphazardly and got destroyed. Or nerf wgt because they refuse to read strats online or cooperate/communicate with group.

Except pvp doesn't have content to nerf, so they go for the next best thing.

Sabbathius

Others (Comment bellow your opinion).

In most games, I look forward to new patch notes. Sure, some nerfs are inevitable, and some changes I might disagree with, but usually it's well within tolerable limits. And often, on closer inspection, and following much discussion, I can actually see the sense in a lot of these changes.

ESO is the exception to this rule, and each time I see a new patch I literally DREAD what new level of nonsense it is about to bestow upon us. Case in point, this latest patch and the new brilliant "tactical" interrupt scheme. Which is SO BAD that they have been creating exceptions for this NEW ruleset every single PTS patch! First they had to make an exception for rezzing. Then they had to make an exception for battleground pick-ups. And so on. Here's a hint, guys: if you made a system, but to keep the game functional you have to immediately have to start creating exceptions for this new ruleset, then the system is BAD! Go back to the drawing board, and try again! Don't just take an ill-conceived idea, patch it haphazardly with exceptions to make it fit, and just jam it in there.

And that's just the INTENTIONAL stuff! Look at all the unintentional stuff just this PTS cycle again. First they give us a new off-balance system to test, and for the first 2 weeks the way it works is broken, so we can't test it. Now, this week's patch broke all CC/CC breaking. Oh, sure, they're aware it's a problem, and will fix it. NEXT WEEK! So what are we doing this week? Twiddling our thumbs, that's what. Most other companies would have a fix if not the same day, then within a couple of days. Even if the problem is too big to quickly solve, they would at least reverse the change so that testing can continue while they re-implement the feature that broke the system in the first place. But not ZOS. If it's screwed this week, we're lucky to see a patch fix it next week. By comparison, Blizzard would often hotfix it within hours.

Finally, the worst offender is the sense that they really have no idea what they're doing sometimes. Some changes are just baffling. Their intent may be sensible, but the way they attempt to solve the issue is often nonsensical and ineffective, and only creates additional issues without solving the issue it was intending to solve in the first place. Honestly, I could live with all of the above, except for this. THIS is the one I have hardest time with. With some developers, my faith in their decision-making is bordering on absolute. Even if I don't see it, I know enough to know that there IS a reason, and it works. Because past performance proved it time and time again. But not with these guys.

And the final pet peeve is that their priorities are just way off, which also adds to the negativity of seeing them. I mean, don't get me wrong, the new Barbie Dress-Up system is nice and all. But that's something you add to the game that already runs like a Swiss watch. Not something you do for a game that has many mechanical and balance and performance issues, and is still very low on basic quality of life features. But compared to the rest, this is barely a bleep on the radar.

Apache_Kid

Absolutely right, nerfs are way out of controls.

Ep1kMalware wrote: »

Apache_Kid wrote: »

How come when there is a nerf that is needed for PvP and it effects PvE, players get mad and angry at other PvP players instead of being mad and angry at ZoS for choosing to not balance both game-types seperately? It seems to me that this anger is entirely misdirected.

What am I missing here?

Because of the pvp players actually put any effort into pvp instead of comming hete and crying their crybaby tears out then the nerfs would not be considered.

It's like when a pve player asks 'nerf tanks' because they tried it once haphazardly and got destroyed. Or nerf wgt because they refuse to read strats online or cooperate/communicate with group.

Except pvp doesn't have content to nerf, so they go for the next best thing.

Ok but all of this would be moot if ZoS would just do what everyone wants and balance the two separately so this doesn't answer my question it just provides a toxic opinion of those of us who PvP.

Valykc

Absolutely right, nerfs are way out of controls.

Some nerfs are justifiable, but others, such as resource sustain, are completely ridiculous. I hated that change when I tested in in Morrowind Beta and I hate it now. Another thing I hate is that they refuse to balance PvE and PvP separately because “it’s too hard” or “they want the game to be the same across the board”, yet when you introduce battle spirit which increase Health, lowers resources pools, and gets damage/healing in half, then you are already separating the two content areas. But instead of doing it right we get a “bandaid” solution that doesn’t work well and doesn’t make the content very enjoyable on either side when things get nerfed. The biggest problem is that ZOS seems to have their nerf hammer glued to their hand and instead of seeing what class skills over-perform (but are still balanced) and buffing the similar skills in other classes, they will just nerf that skill to the ground until it’s another dead skill that no one uses. I’m waiting for that to happen to Shimmering Shield. Instead of buffing DK Wings or Defensive Posture, or other skill, shimmering will be buried awith all the others.

Motherball

Others (Comment bellow your opinion).

Nerfs (and buffs) are fine if they are done well. I have very little faith in the developers of this game to do them well. Balance changes seems very random and arbitrary except for hot topic issues in which case they go way overboard and refuse to relook at them once live. Do they ever make changes from pts to live?

Apache_Kid

Absolutely right, nerfs are way out of controls.

Valykc wrote: »

Some nerfs are justifiable, but others, such as resource sustain, are completely ridiculous. I hated that change when I tested in in Morrowind Beta and I hate it now. Another thing I hate is that they refuse to balance PvE and PvP separately because “it’s too hard” or “they want the game to be the same across the board”, yet when you introduce battle spirit which increase Health, lowers resources pools, and gets damage/healing in half, then you are already separating the two content areas. But instead of doing it right we get a “bandaid” solution that doesn’t work well and doesn’t make the content very enjoyable on either side when things get nerfed. The biggest problem is that ZOS seems to have their nerf hammer glued to their hand and instead of seeing what class skills over-perform (but are still balanced) and buffing the similar skills in other classes, they will just nerf that skill to the ground until it’s another dead skill that no one uses. I’m waiting for that to happen to Shimmering Shield. Instead of buffing DK Wings or Defensive Posture, or other skill, shimmering will be buried awith all the others.

Yeah the resource sustain nerf was all about that .01 percent of players that could melt bosses in seconds on vet-mode and the rest of us players still progressing took a huge hit to our progression paths because of it and still haven't recovered. It lowered the ceiling for the top players and drastically lowered the floor for players still progressing at the time and for all new players after that. Completely agree here.

Gilvoth

Absolutely right, nerfs are way out of controls.

#stopthenerfs

stop nerfing stuff

Jayman1000

Others (Comment bellow your opinion).

is cuz of luv