Your defensive sets are NOT being procced by enemy siege — Intended? Justified?

TheYKcid

As part of the Wolfhunter update, Cyrodiil siege weapons were adjusted to no longer trigger proc sets, as indicated in the patch notes:

General

• Siege weapon damage and effects will no longer proc item sets.

This was, ostensibly, a response to the massive outcry against Sload's—one aspect of this issue was how people were using siege weapons to not only deal huge amounts of siege damage from a position of safety, but ALSO deal additional stacking damage from Sload's, which was procced by the former. To a lesser extent, some other sets like Bahraha's Curse were also very effective for this purpose. Prohibiting siege users from activating their proc sets in such a manner was a good change.

However, this change has resulted in a very questionable side-effect: taking siege damage from an enemy source is not proccing your own defensive item sets.

This was tested with the sets Bloodspawn & Seventh Legion Brute—both of which have a chance to proc upon taking any form of damage. I had a friend from an enemy alliance spamming multiple catapults & ballistas on me over a period of 15 minutes, and not a single proc was achieved. The only workaround we discovered was through fire-based siege, which has a chance to proc the Burning status effect, which in turn can proc defensive sets—an exceptionally low probability as it needs to pass two rounds of RNG.

Perhaps this is a bug, but it could also be intended since the wording of the patch notes is very general—hence I am posting here for now, instead of the bug report subforum.

However, if this is intended function, then it is completely unjustified. Defensive sets are meant to encourage playstyles in which you are actively taking lots of incoming damage in order to receive your buffs, a high-risk-high-reward design that fosters dynamic play. Taking siege damage is entirely consistent with this design philosophy—siege damage is one of the deadliest damage sources, and if you're receiving it, it probably means you're actively doing something productive, such as pushing a breach.

This is entirely unrelated to the intended goal of the Wolfhunter change—to prevent situations where players were circumventing the requirement of offensive proc sets (being in combat and actively dealing damage) by sieging from a mile away in complete safety, leading to boring turtle play.

Therefore, whether buggy or intentional, it would be reasonable to recode siege damage so it can once again proc defensive sets on targets receiving the damage.

Thanks to @allahdine for being my Ebonheart siege monkey.

idk

I would hope this is just a case of Zos not thinking things through (we have seen enough of this) and no one tested it on the PTS.

TheYKcid

@ZOS_Wrobel @ZOS_RobGarrett

Aliyavana

Agreed. Defensive sets encourage a damage taking risky playstyle and siege damage is just that

susmitds

@ZOS_BrianWheeler

therift

idk wrote: »

I would hope this is just a case of Zos not thinking things through (we have seen enough of this) and no one tested it on the PTS.

Probably untested on the PTS since it seems the primary purpose of the PTS now is to practice group content in order to post 'World's First!' threads minutes after the Update goes live.

geonsocal

RIP: siege + vicious death :'(

a match made in oblivion...

Acrolas

TheYKcid wrote: »

Defensive sets are meant to encourage playstyles in which you are actively taking lots of incoming damage in order to receive your buffs, a high-risk-high-reward design that creates dynamic play. Taking siege damage is entirely consistent with this design philosophy—siege damage is one of the deadliest damage sources, and if you're receiving it, it probably means you're actively doing something productive, such as pushing a breach.

That's a lot of assumption to pack into one paragraph.

Maybe I can try it out?

I'm sorry that you can no longer cheese your way into keeps. You don't care about the 1200 health proc off Seventh. You care about accidentally getting the extra 500 weapon damage by being in the wrong place at the right time and then milking off your breach healers to cheese in some more ranged kills.

So I'm sorry if I'm not really buying how it's completely unjustified.

TheYKcid

Acrolas wrote: »

TheYKcid wrote: »

Defensive sets are meant to encourage playstyles in which you are actively taking lots of incoming damage in order to receive your buffs, a high-risk-high-reward design that creates dynamic play. Taking siege damage is entirely consistent with this design philosophy—siege damage is one of the deadliest damage sources, and if you're receiving it, it probably means you're actively doing something productive, such as pushing a breach.

That's a lot of assumption to pack into one paragraph.

Maybe I can try it out?

I'm sorry that you can no longer cheese your way into keeps. You don't care about the 1200 health proc off Seventh. You care about accidentally getting the extra 500 weapon damage by being in the wrong place at the right time and then milking off your breach healers to cheese in some more ranged kills.

So I'm sorry if I'm not really buying how it's completely unjustified.

Because the goal of the change was to stop people from proccing free damage via sets off-of low-risk siege weapons. Not this.

But do go on with the condescending replies, it's a game we can both play! For instance:

Everyone knows what kind of player defends siege while hating on the perceived "1vX sets" such as 7th.

Starts with a Z.

Ends with an ergling.

Synnastix

Proc or no proc, can’t have it both ways.

TheYKcid

jonswowgothackedub17_ESO wrote: »

Proc or no proc, can’t have it both ways.

Why?

Dealing and receiving damage are vastly different concepts, and are not lumped into the same treatment in any other aspect of the game.

Solariken

It seems fine as is. I look at it this way - if I'm fighting players while under siege fire, the defensive stuff will be proccing anyway. If I'm not fighting players, I can pay more attention to siege fire and either not get hit or just heal through.

TheYKcid

Solariken wrote: »

It seems fine as is. I look at it this way - if I'm fighting players while under siege fire, the defensive stuff will be proccing anyway. If I'm not fighting players, I can pay more attention to siege fire and either not get hit or just heal through.

The problem isn't just ballistas/trebs.

There are situations in which you have no choice BUT to take siege damage. Such as manning a ram at a keep's door (oils), or pushing through a breach (stacked scattershot & meatbag AoEs).

It's not reasonable design to force players to take siege damage, while simultaneously not allowing their sets—that are designed TO help them endure said damage—to even function.

Ruckly

Changing the rules for two sets even if it is logically sound: why bother? How would it work with Meridia’s Blessed Armor? You blind the person on siege so their siege misses? I don't see how a big rock hurtling through the air and exploding on the ground in a group of 80 people can ever miss.

Valrien

therift wrote: »

idk wrote: »

I would hope this is just a case of Zos not thinking things through (we have seen enough of this) and no one tested it on the PTS.

Probably untested on the PTS since it seems the primary purpose of the PTS now is to practice group content in order to post 'World's First!' threads minutes after the Update goes live.

@therift You're really gonna do this in ANOTHER thread?

They tested the content extensively and submitted countless bug reports to bring it to the point where it was able to be cleared.

Stop being salty about it

RedRook

I never get to see one guy shooting another guy with every kind of siege for 15 minutes.

If it was an oversight, it would be nice if they fixed it.

If it was intentional though, I can live with it. I died several times during the sloadspree to that **** proccing off siege damage, and it was ubersuck. I'm prepared to make sacrifices to not see that particular cheese ever again. And I know the cheese sets will keep coming, so this will do.

(edited for Stupid)

Ruckly

RedRook wrote: »

I never get to see one guy shooting another guy with every kind of siege for 15 minutes.

If it was an oversight, it would be nice if they fixed it. I mean, if they want Earthgore (for example) in Cyrodiil, it's just as legit it should proc in a rain of siege as anywhere else.

If it was intentional though, I can live with it. I died several times during the sloadspree to that **** proccing off siege damage, and it was ubersuck. I'm prepared to make sacrifices to not see that particular cheese ever again. And I know the cheese sets will keep coming, so this will do.

Earthgore procs of a HoT not siege(or any kind of damage).

RedRook

Ruckly wrote: »

RedRook wrote: »

I never get to see one guy shooting another guy with every kind of siege for 15 minutes.

If it was an oversight, it would be nice if they fixed it. I mean, if they want Earthgore (for example) in Cyrodiil, it's just as legit it should proc in a rain of siege as anywhere else.

If it was intentional though, I can live with it. I died several times during the sloadspree to that **** proccing off siege damage, and it was ubersuck. I'm prepared to make sacrifices to not see that particular cheese ever again. And I know the cheese sets will keep coming, so this will do.

Earthgore procs of a HoT not siege(or any kind of damage).

Duh. *forehead smack*

My bad. Thanks.

therift

Valrien wrote: »

therift wrote: »

idk wrote: »

I would hope this is just a case of Zos not thinking things through (we have seen enough of this) and no one tested it on the PTS.

Probably untested on the PTS since it seems the primary purpose of the PTS now is to practice group content in order to post 'World's First!' threads minutes after the Update goes live.

@therift You're really gonna do this in ANOTHER thread?

They tested the content extensively and submitted countless bug reports to bring it to the point where it was able to be cleared.

Stop being salty about it

Oh all right, lol

TheYKcid

Ruckly wrote: »

Changing the rules for two sets even if it is logically sound: why bother? How would it work with Meridia’s Blessed Armor? You blind the person on siege so their siege misses? I don't see how a big rock hurtling through the air and exploding on the ground in a group of 80 people can ever miss.

@Ruckly To clarify: I only stated that I had tested this bug/feature using those two sets in particular, because I happen to own them, NOT that changes should be applied to two sets only (it should be a general fix/adjustment).

Anyway, on topic—the scenario you presented wouldn't happen, since you can't block siege damage, and thus cannot proc Meridia's off it.

But... even if you could, there still wouldn't be any mechanical issues. "Miss" only applies to targeted abilities. So, for instance, someone with Meridia's procced on them would still be able to lay down a destro blockade and deal damage as per normal, blockade being an AoE. Likewise, you'd still be able to deal siege damage normally even if you had a 100% miss debuff on you.

Ruckly

Another problem is siege procing juggernaut. Typically it is better to take the death from siege then to give up your 1 minute cooldown since if you are using juggernaut it is to increase your health ceiling by 9k and at the same time to keep you out of execute territory. I use it on my magplar when I want extra tankiness and I use barrier if I want to get through a gap. Once I am through I rely on it to keep me alive against enemy players while spamming heals on my own team.

TheYKcid

Barrier + heals should be enough to get you through the breach without dropping into execute range I would think.

Personally though, I would MUCH prefer to make it though the breach in one piece—even if it means consuming a proc—and then reorganize in one of the adjacent towers, a position of relative safety. As opposed to dying on the breach and potentially putting rezzers in danger, the breach being such a high-focus position with lots of damage flying around.

Either way, individual tactics shouldn't have any bearing on the consistency of general game mechanics.

Ruckly

The problem is it being proced before I attempt the breach. Juggernaut is intended to work the way it is intended to work and isn't an individual tactic any more than any other set. One could say standing in scatter shot and healing yourself is an intended tactic to get an ult proc off of bloodspawn or standing in scattershot with seventh legion and self healing is intended to increase the odds of getting the weapon damage proc. Neither set really aids against siege since armor has no effect on siege damage taken and the heal from seventh legion relative to siege damage is negligible. Seventh legion doesn't increase the amount of siege damage you do. If you want to take the wording of seventh legion literally then it should proc off a lvl 1 gradual ravage health pot.

TheYKcid

Ruckly wrote: »

The problem is it being proced before I attempt the breach. Juggernaut is intended to work the way it is intended to work and isn't an individual tactic any more than any other set. One could say standing in scatter shot and healing yourself is an intended tactic to get an ult proc off of bloodspawn or standing in scattershot with seventh legion and self healing is intended to increase the odds of getting the weapon damage proc. Neither set really aids against siege since armor has no effect on siege damage taken and the heal from seventh legion relative to siege damage is negligible. Seventh legion doesn't increase the amount of siege damage you do. If you want to take the wording of seventh legion literally then it should proc off a lvl 1 gradual ravage health pot.

Juggernaut would be working exactly the way its described—proccing when you're at low health to provide an emergency heal.

With regard to the point you raised on 7th—it absolutely DOES help you deal with incoming damage.

The entire point of 7th legion is not as a dedicated damage set. Stam characters have FAR better options for pure damage (eg. Spriggan's, Automaton) that offer the additional advantage of being single-barred. The reason why the raw weapon damage from a 7th proc is valued is because it boosts your heals, and it does this when you need it the most—receiving lots of incoming damage.

There is no reason to invalidate a set when the user is undergoing the exact conditions it was designed to function under. Even if a specific set isn't helping in a specific scenario, that is no good excuse for inconsistent game mechanics across the board.

FYI: ravage health pots do proc 7th Legion.

Ruckly

The game mechanics are consistent. You consistently don't proc a set when taking siege damage.

All this aside the primary beneficiaries of procs off siege would be ball groups that stand in siege with HoT stacks. The player that tries to avoid siege but gets nicked here or there I don't think the slightly increased chance of an 8% proc or 6% proc really is a great boon to them compared to ball groups who stand in siege and consistently take siege damage. You can make a poll and see what people in general think. I don't really have more antithesis to provide other than the sets highlighted are not siege mitigation sets but rather are intended for combat between players. If they proc off a lvl 1 gradual ravage health pot however then there isn't much reason for them not to proc off siege. I would use shalk/bloodspawn +gradual ravage health pot to generate ult on a sorc to get negate asap.

The_Brosteen

jonswowgothackedub17_ESO wrote: »

Proc or no proc, can’t have it both ways.

Its seems like your saying "if I cant proc sloads a vd off of siege safely behind a wall you shouldnt be able to get a bs and 7th legion proc while fighting the hord of zerglings pouring out the keep." Do I have that right?