Fair point, but we already have enough public transportation that I don't think the car's absence matters either way.
Fair point, but we already have enough public transportation that I don't think the car's absence matters either way.
Just a wild guess here, but i'd say ZOS did not invest developer time just to change one unused set into another unused set.
Purging 3 debuffs every 8 seconds on a direct heal looks good to me. Ballista firebolt applies a debuff that can be removed with a direct heal that also tops you off. Dots can be removed with a direct heal. You get a heal and a purge one GCD every 8 seconds. 8 seconds is not a very long time. If you are playing with a light armor set you are probably mobile enough not to get hit continuously by debuffs. If you are getting hit continuously by debuffs in light armor then what difference does it make whether this set exists as is or never was an idea to begin with? If you think it is that bad don't use it. Shadow Cloak, Ball of Lightning, Reflective Scales, stuns, any skill that decreases the number of hits you take in a given time increases the value of this set. There are also other skills that remove specific debuffs that aren't direct heals e.g. Reflective Plate.
I suppose one way to look at it is whether 400 spell power in whatever school of magic or removing 3 debuffs on a direct heal is better. If you remove 3 dots then you take 3 dots less damage over that 8 second interval. That might add up to 12k damage not applied. Which can be looked at as a passive HoT of 24k/2 over 8 seconds which is a pretty big number. Plus you probably have HoTs anyways. Because it doesn't work so well in a 1vx situation where you have 20 debuffs doesn't make it bad. It certainly looks good for burst recovery.
Dude, the debuffs you removed, can be reapplied to yourself in the next second... You are not getting "debuff immunity" for 8 seconds...
Here's a sample from a normal raid in combat vs another raid (about 15 of us vs an opposing 15 + about that same number of random others on both sides):
Column #1:Seconds in Combat / Column #2: Negative Effects on Me
1 0
2 0
3 0
4 4
5 7
6 9
7 14
8 9
9 7
10 11
11 14
12 9
13 9
14 4
15 14
16 18
17 17
18 17
19 8
20 5
21 9
22 11
23 10
24 15
25 14
26 8
27 5
28 7
29 7
30 6
31 1
32 0
33 0
34 6
35 11
36 19
37 18
38 19
39 17
40 12
41 7
42 16
43 0 DEAD
44 0 DEAD
45 0 DEAD
The average number of debuffs in combat ranges up to 19. There are periods of combat where for 4-5 seconds it gets close to 20, and for a solid fifteen seconds other than a lingering ritual, it didn't drop much below 10. This is normal for a fight, and I'm playing a MagPlar who can hit lingering ritual often enough!
Removing 3 negative effects every 8 seconds is completely useless. I understand that the whinging of the DoT/Bleed builds made this set change from what was REASONABLE for raids to use, but it's now completely wasted and will likely be used the same amount as before this patch (meaning not at all).
@ZOS_GinaBruno It is very apparent that the people making decisions are listening to the vocal minority of bleed/dot build duellists rather than actually looking at how negative effects occur in combat. There's a reason that raids need a purge-monkey (an honourable position of high sustain whose only job is to cast purge). This set, as it was before allowed that purge monkey to actually do something other than build for spamming one button.
2 effects every 2 seconds would have changed that barrage of debuffs?
That's the point of his comment. Even 2 effects purged wouldn't have done anything, but at least it was better thanan 8 seconds cooldown where your enemy can literally hit you with 2 attacks to stack 4 bleeds + siphoner + poison lol.
And i still haven't seen a video showing a full duel in normal combat. I know some of those creators can light attack weave like lighting; made no sense seeing someone spam one ability every 2 seconds like they were a casual lol.
Blackleopardex wrote: »It's just sad that because the bleed/snare cancer is so common that any form of counter-play gets so much hate it becomes useless... I mean this is a set that could potentially cleans that sloads proc. No no we can't have that, what would the bleeders and dot-roll-cloak-folk do if their dots/bleeds would be sometimes purged and they would actually have to hit their target.
Oh wait what am I saying, there is no cancer at all like that in pvp, counter playing it SLIGHTLY with a purge set would be cancer af...
Blackleopardex wrote: »It's just sad that because the bleed/snare cancer is so common that any form of counter-play gets so much hate it becomes useless... I mean this is a set that could potentially cleans that sloads proc. No no we can't have that, what would the bleeders and dot-roll-cloak-folk do if their dots/bleeds would be sometimes purged and they would actually have to hit their target.
Oh wait what am I saying, there is no cancer at all like that in pvp, counter playing it SLIGHTLY with a purge set would be cancer af...
you wear this set, you fight me and I am on a sorc.
I apply curse, it's cleansed every single time without you doing anything. My curse will never blow up on you. I could run double dot poisons on my inferno staff and run the asylum destro and at that point maybe curse will stick, but you eliminate a large portion of a classes burst combination by doing nothing.
Bleeds, snares and oblivion damage need adjustments in this game, but you don't treat a house fire with a flame thrower...just like you don't adjust broken bleeds with a broken purge set.
First thing to note is the set is called Curse Eater so eating sorc's curse is sorta what it should do, just by well it's name, right . It may come with the need to rethink rotations but that's how meta changes are. It's also untrue that you do nothing. You cast a defensive skill while your opponent goes into the offense. And you slot a defensive set while your opponent has likely more offensive power stacked. The set does not add offense, thus bringing the user closer to a "tanky" build. And common sense about defensive builds is that they are indeed harder to take down than glass cannons. There is no entitlement to kill everyone in the game with one burst combo.I apply curse, it's cleansed every single time without you doing anything. My curse will never blow up on you. I could run double dot poisons on my inferno staff and run the asylum destro and at that point maybe curse will stick, but you eliminate a large portion of a classes burst combination by doing nothing.
Blackleopardex wrote: »
Except it would not, test it yourself and come back here(well obviously to late now but, i bet you did not). Yes the first version of the set could be nasty against a sorc, however your telling a fantasy story, you would apply to many debuffs for me to effectivly remove curse every time as you say, on top of that I'm not arguing for keeping the set how it was originally posted, I'm saying this nerf is by far to hard to make the set usefull.
Fair point, but we already have enough public transportation that I don't think the car's absence matters either way.
Just a wild guess here, but i'd say ZOS did not invest developer time just to change one unused set into another unused set.
Yeah and it is a bummer, but there's a list of priorities and at some point this is going to be outranked. The set is now more useful than it was previously, but there isn't some pressing hole it needs to fill in the way it was formulated when the first patch notes for this update came out.
If there's an issue with purges vis-a-vis status effects in PvP, we need a solution beyond one set to resolve that issue.
First thing to note is the set is called Curse Eater so eating sorc's curse is sorta what it should do, just by well it's name, right . It may come with the need to rethink rotations but that's how meta changes are. It's also untrue that you do nothing. You cast a defensive skill while your opponent goes into the offense. And you slot a defensive set while your opponent has likely more offensive power stacked. The set does not add offense, thus bringing the user closer to a "tanky" build. And common sense about defensive builds is that they are indeed harder to take down than glass cannons. There is no entitlement to kill everyone in the game with one burst combo.
First thing to note is the set is called Curse Eater so eating sorc's curse is sorta what it should do, just by well it's name, right . It may come with the need to rethink rotations but that's how meta changes are. It's also untrue that you do nothing. You cast a defensive skill while your opponent goes into the offense. And you slot a defensive set while your opponent has likely more offensive power stacked. The set does not add offense, thus bringing the user closer to a "tanky" build. And common sense about defensive builds is that they are indeed harder to take down than glass cannons. There is no entitlement to kill everyone in the game with one burst combo.I apply curse, it's cleansed every single time without you doing anything. My curse will never blow up on you. I could run double dot poisons on my inferno staff and run the asylum destro and at that point maybe curse will stick, but you eliminate a large portion of a classes burst combination by doing nothing.
Back to the updated set and this thread. The name is very misleading now, it totally flipped from "Curse Eater really strong" to "Curse Eater really weak". I don't mind the change from HoT to direct heal too much (tho there's room for interpretation what a direct heal actually is). But the 4x (!) increased cooldown breaks it. It brings the set into the margin of Wyrd Tree and Stendarr, two highly unpopular sets that need adjustments themselves.
There is a problem with negative effects in PvP, there's no doubt about that. You don't even have to encounter hostile groups to see the debuffs stack like no tomorrow. Attacking a resource on your own shows the insane amount of status effects you pile up within fragments of seconds. And that is actually the balance to the set already. The normal condition in PVP is so rich with debuffs of all kind, the set in its original form on PTS would most likely have just made it a bit easier to deal with but nowhere as powerful as it's percepted.
Please keep in mind that we have snares, bleeds, dots, fractures and so much more. The arguments in this thread against Curse Eater are focused on the one particular debuff they want to stick with the target. But how likely is it to get exactly that one debuff cleansed by the set if you pile up so many debuffs simultaneously?
Yes, in duels the set may be too strong. But you can rule out sets by setting up rules for tournaments which is common practice already. It's a bit weird to have sets balanced around niche scenarios while the general scenarios might actually become more interesting if a set like Curse Eater (in its original PTS form) would be around. Now we don't have the chance to even figure out if that would be the case or not. Because it is utterly useless. Unless ZOS touches it again before release.
As for PVE, it's in-line with Stendarr and Wyrd Tree. So barely any group will use or tolerate this set in the current PTS form, even for specific situations. The cooldown is way too long. The set is not made more interesting, it just turned from one useless to another useless form from a PVE perspective (and as mentioned above, from a PVP perspective also).
Long story short: If you want Curse Eater to matter, make it better.
Reistr_the_Unbroken wrote: »So basically the set was somehow op, people cried nerf, it got nerfed, and now the set’s useless.
Did I get that right?
Reistr_the_Unbroken wrote: »So basically the set was somehow op, people cried nerf, it got nerfed, and now the set’s useless.
Did I get that right?
Basically. The current live is not attractive enough to justify wasting a 5pc (the main reason no one runs the set). PTS first iteration was buggy in purging cc effects, but also wasn't really tested with actual combat situations while videos showed people using a cc every 2 seconds instead of building up dots/debuffs like you do against templars (it should have been coded to ignore CC and then tested). Second PTS iteration combats large scale situations abusing the set, but no one is going to run it small scale; it hits one person and you wasted a 5pc to get 3 debuffs removed every 8 seconds that someone gets from 1 ability that drops 2 debuffs each cast and 50% reduction on the others. And you need a direct heal for it so basically only templars if wanting to use it for your group, and none of them will run it because it means dropping a defense set.
Overall pure noise from both sides ruined this set. It had potential to be something other than auto purge and something other than the boring defense/offense/sustain stats sets we currently have. It was and currently is stuck between the two; a shame really.
First thing to note is the set is called Curse Eater so eating sorc's curse is sorta what it should do, just by well it's name, right . It may come with the need to rethink rotations but that's how meta changes are. It's also untrue that you do nothing. You cast a defensive skill while your opponent goes into the offense. And you slot a defensive set while your opponent has likely more offensive power stacked. The set does not add offense, thus bringing the user closer to a "tanky" build. And common sense about defensive builds is that they are indeed harder to take down than glass cannons. There is no entitlement to kill everyone in the game with one burst combo.I apply curse, it's cleansed every single time without you doing anything. My curse will never blow up on you. I could run double dot poisons on my inferno staff and run the asylum destro and at that point maybe curse will stick, but you eliminate a large portion of a classes burst combination by doing nothing.
Back to the updated set and this thread. The name is very misleading now, it totally flipped from "Curse Eater really strong" to "Curse Eater really weak". I don't mind the change from HoT to direct heal too much (tho there's room for interpretation what a direct heal actually is). But the 4x (!) increased cooldown breaks it. It brings the set into the margin of Wyrd Tree and Stendarr, two highly unpopular sets that need adjustments themselves.
There is a problem with negative effects in PvP, there's no doubt about that. You don't even have to encounter hostile groups to see the debuffs stack like no tomorrow. Attacking a resource on your own shows the insane amount of status effects you pile up within fragments of seconds. And that is actually the balance to the set already. The normal condition in PVP is so rich with debuffs of all kind, the set in its original form on PTS would most likely have just made it a bit easier to deal with but nowhere as powerful as it's percepted.
Please keep in mind that we have snares, bleeds, dots, fractures and so much more. The arguments in this thread against Curse Eater are focused on the one particular debuff they want to stick with the target. But how likely is it to get exactly that one debuff cleansed by the set if you pile up so many debuffs simultaneously?
Yes, in duels the set may be too strong. But you can rule out sets by setting up rules for tournaments which is common practice already. It's a bit weird to have sets balanced around niche scenarios while the general scenarios might actually become more interesting if a set like Curse Eater (in its original PTS form) would be around. Now we don't have the chance to even figure out if that would be the case or not. Because it is utterly useless. Unless ZOS touches it again before release.
As for PVE, it's in-line with Stendarr and Wyrd Tree. So barely any group will use or tolerate this set in the current PTS form, even for specific situations. The cooldown is way too long. The set is not made more interesting, it just turned from one useless to another useless form from a PVE perspective (and as mentioned above, from a PVP perspective also).
Long story short: If you want Curse Eater to matter, make it better.
It may be slightly on the weak side right now - though I encourage people to actually test that out as far as possible - but it is miles ahead of Wyrd tree.
If there is no way around that one single combo, that should be addressed to improve the variety in the sorc's toolset. It's not the fault of a set that a rotation is rather limited. Key is here that in usual pvp environments, curse will be one of very many debuffs you'll encounter. Having exactly that curse being removed by the set is possible but not very likely. I have quite some experience with magplars in pvp and it can take multiple rituals to cleanse the debuff you need to get rid off. There's just too many snares and lesser debuffs around that are in the way for the purge you actually need. And that's 5 instant purges, only limited by the general skill cooldown.When a class only has one burst combo, there is only one way to kill people.
But the same is true for offensive proc sets. It's the nature of the proc set to add something on top of what you do. You deal damage and offensive proc sets add damage to the target without further do. How is it justified to have "free" damage but not free support skills? The price for slotting a support set is the lack of damage. You'll be put into the defense, thus being more tanky than offensive players may like it to be but it is the normal consequence.when you cast a defensive skill, you get the benefit of that defensive skill. when you cast a heal over time with this set, you get the benefit of one of the strongest skills in the game for free on top of your defense skill. You could say that there is no entitlement to running a free purge every 2 seconds, and thus the "tanky" build would have to use one of the many different sets, skills, abilities to be "tanky"
The reality is something else tho. I have talked about duels before. The vast majority of PVP encounters I see in various campaigns are massive zerg fights. Heck, even resources are zerged lately. If you want to play towards campaign goals (point gains, keep takes, scroll runs etc), small scale is a rarity. In those massive fights the set would certainly not over-perform. But you're right that small-scale has its place, too. It's just not what you see in pvp usually. Idk how good or bad the set is in situations of say 4-6 ppl against the same numbers. But we will never find out if we cannot test it properly. That's the key issue of this rushed nerf I'm unhappy with.There's a reason purify is so strong on a magplar, especially in 1 v 1 situations. There's a reason a lot of small scale players have basically been saying "im gonna slot this set on everything'', because in its first iteration it was really, really strong in small scale combat.
Reistr_the_Unbroken wrote: »So basically the set was somehow op, people cried nerf, it got nerfed, and now the set’s useless.
Did I get that right?
Basically. The current live is not attractive enough to justify wasting a 5pc (the main reason no one runs the set). PTS first iteration was buggy in purging cc effects, but also wasn't really tested with actual combat situations while videos showed people using a cc every 2 seconds instead of building up dots/debuffs like you do against templars (it should have been coded to ignore CC and then tested). Second PTS iteration combats large scale situations abusing the set, but no one is going to run it small scale; it hits one person and you wasted a 5pc to get 3 debuffs removed every 8 seconds that someone gets from 1 ability that drops 2 debuffs each cast and 50% reduction on the others. And you need a direct heal for it so basically only templars if wanting to use it for your group, and none of them will run it because it means dropping a defense set.
Overall pure noise from both sides ruined this set. It had potential to be something other than auto purge and something other than the boring defense/offense/sustain stats sets we currently have. It was and currently is stuck between the two; a shame really.
There are plenty direct heals, especially for magicka. NBs are the only class who may have trouble fitting one into their build.
If there is no way around that one single combo, that should be addressed to improve the variety in the sorc's toolset. It's not the fault of a set that a rotation is rather limited. Key is here that in usual pvp environments, curse will be one of very many debuffs you'll encounter. Having exactly that curse being removed by the set is possible but not very likely. I have quite some experience with magplars in pvp and it can take multiple rituals to cleanse the debuff you need to get rid off. There's just too many snares and lesser debuffs around that are in the way for the purge you actually need. And that's 5 instant purges, only limited by the general skill cooldown.
I'm not a fan of free damage sets either. I don't have as big of an issue with ones that conditionally proc x amount of weapon damage, I am mostly talking about the sets that do stuff for you on light attacks. Those types of sets are lazy imo and I'd rather players provide these sorts of abilities to their own build instead of having it done for them.But the same is true for offensive proc sets. It's the nature of the proc set to add something on top of what you do. You deal damage and offensive proc sets add damage to the target without further do. How is it justified to have "free" damage but not free support skills? The price for slotting a support set is the lack of damage. You'll be put into the defense, thus being more tanky than offensive players may like it to be but it is the normal consequence.
That's the key issue of this rushed nerf I'm unhappy with.
I would favor such a solution over any set, as well. Since we don't have that atm, Curse Eater looked like the best next thing to counter at least some of the increasingly annoying debuffs that are flooding our buff trackers atm. If there's a better solution but to rely on sets or class-restricted/expensive skills, I'm all down for that.I am of the belief that PVP balance would be easier to obtain if we provided specific skills and counters for all classes and playstyles. they don't have to be the same, but every class should have skills they "can" equip to counter other classes.
I hope you are right and they'll do something mindful with the set.it will probably get buffed this next week, so there's that to look forward to.
First thing to note is the set is called Curse Eater so eating sorc's curse is sorta what it should do, just by well it's name, right . It may come with the need to rethink rotations but that's how meta changes are. It's also untrue that you do nothing. You cast a defensive skill while your opponent goes into the offense. And you slot a defensive set while your opponent has likely more offensive power stacked. The set does not add offense, thus bringing the user closer to a "tanky" build. And common sense about defensive builds is that they are indeed harder to take down than glass cannons. There is no entitlement to kill everyone in the game with one burst combo.I apply curse, it's cleansed every single time without you doing anything. My curse will never blow up on you. I could run double dot poisons on my inferno staff and run the asylum destro and at that point maybe curse will stick, but you eliminate a large portion of a classes burst combination by doing nothing.
Back to the updated set and this thread. The name is very misleading now, it totally flipped from "Curse Eater really strong" to "Curse Eater really weak". I don't mind the change from HoT to direct heal too much (tho there's room for interpretation what a direct heal actually is). But the 4x (!) increased cooldown breaks it. It brings the set into the margin of Wyrd Tree and Stendarr, two highly unpopular sets that need adjustments themselves.
There is a problem with negative effects in PvP, there's no doubt about that. You don't even have to encounter hostile groups to see the debuffs stack like no tomorrow. Attacking a resource on your own shows the insane amount of status effects you pile up within fragments of seconds. And that is actually the balance to the set already. The normal condition in PVP is so rich with debuffs of all kind, the set in its original form on PTS would most likely have just made it a bit easier to deal with but nowhere as powerful as it's percepted.
Please keep in mind that we have snares, bleeds, dots, fractures and so much more. The arguments in this thread against Curse Eater are focused on the one particular debuff they want to stick with the target. But how likely is it to get exactly that one debuff cleansed by the set if you pile up so many debuffs simultaneously?
Yes, in duels the set may be too strong. But you can rule out sets by setting up rules for tournaments which is common practice already. It's a bit weird to have sets balanced around niche scenarios while the general scenarios might actually become more interesting if a set like Curse Eater (in its original PTS form) would be around. Now we don't have the chance to even figure out if that would be the case or not. Because it is utterly useless. Unless ZOS touches it again before release.
As for PVE, it's in-line with Stendarr and Wyrd Tree. So barely any group will use or tolerate this set in the current PTS form, even for specific situations. The cooldown is way too long. The set is not made more interesting, it just turned from one useless to another useless form from a PVE perspective (and as mentioned above, from a PVP perspective also).
Long story short: If you want Curse Eater to matter, make it better.
It may be slightly on the weak side right now - though I encourage people to actually test that out as far as possible - but it is miles ahead of Wyrd tree.
Wyrd tree cleanses on average 0.333 debuffs per second. The new curse eater cleanses on average 0.375 debuffs per second. I'm not sure i would call that "miles ahead".
Joosef_Kivikilpi wrote: »Reistr_the_Unbroken wrote: »So basically the set was somehow op, people cried nerf, it got nerfed, and now the set’s useless.
Did I get that right?
Basically. The current live is not attractive enough to justify wasting a 5pc (the main reason no one runs the set). PTS first iteration was buggy in purging cc effects, but also wasn't really tested with actual combat situations while videos showed people using a cc every 2 seconds instead of building up dots/debuffs like you do against templars (it should have been coded to ignore CC and then tested). Second PTS iteration combats large scale situations abusing the set, but no one is going to run it small scale; it hits one person and you wasted a 5pc to get 3 debuffs removed every 8 seconds that someone gets from 1 ability that drops 2 debuffs each cast and 50% reduction on the others. And you need a direct heal for it so basically only templars if wanting to use it for your group, and none of them will run it because it means dropping a defense set.
Overall pure noise from both sides ruined this set. It had potential to be something other than auto purge and something other than the boring defense/offense/sustain stats sets we currently have. It was and currently is stuck between the two; a shame really.
There are plenty direct heals, especially for magicka. NBs are the only class who may have trouble fitting one into their build.
Siphoning Strikes, need I say more??? Probably the easiest as a Nightblade.
And it clears less effects. Thats no advantage, that's just a difference. On average, the purge potential is virtually identical.It has a shorter cooldown
Healing is too important to postpone just because you are waiting for a specific buff to remove, making this 'advantage' debatable. Plus, you have no control over who gets the cleanse if more than one person is affected by the heal, while wyrd tree is reliable. At best, this is a tie.and only procs on a very specific type of skill, making it easier to control the proc.
Additionally it grants some sustain.
Joosef_Kivikilpi wrote: »Siphoning Strikes, need I say more??? Probably the easiest as a Nightblade.
And it clears less effects. Thats no advantage, that's just a difference. On average, the purge potential is virtually identical.It has a shorter cooldownHealing is too important to postpone just because you are waiting for a specific buff to remove, making this 'advantage' debatable. Plus, you have no control over who gets the cleanse if more than one person is affected by the heal, while wyrd tree is reliable. At best, this is a tie.and only procs on a very specific type of skill, making it easier to control the proc.Additionally it grants some sustain.
The 150 regen is the only real advantage, however putting the curse eater "miles ahead" of wyrd tree, it does not.
And it clears less effects. Thats no advantage, that's just a difference. On average, the purge potential is virtually identical.It has a shorter cooldownHealing is too important to postpone just because you are waiting for a specific buff to remove, making this 'advantage' debatable. Plus, you have no control over who gets the cleanse if more than one person is affected by the heal, while wyrd tree is reliable. At best, this is a tie.and only procs on a very specific type of skill, making it easier to control the proc.Additionally it grants some sustain.
The 150 regen is the only real advantage, however putting the curse eater "miles ahead" of wyrd tree, it does not.
There is no inherent advantage to effects removed per time, that's just one way to measure these set's potential. The benefit is always tied to the type of effect removed and the situation at the time, making control and availability extremely important. A purge that procs on cooldown every 15 seconds isn't worth much, a purge that you control and can still activate without sacrificing a gcd when pressured is highly desireable.