"ESO: The Future of The Frost Staff" Survey by the ESO Frost Discord

TheValkyn

AndrewQ84 wrote: »

See, I would've done this, but I am not adding my @name to the survey. I do not want that info being used. The fact that it is required put me off right away. That being said, frost staff should remain for tanking and make it better suited for it.

@AndrewQ84 Your @name is already public information. If someone wants it then they will have it.

TheValkyn

Nerouyn wrote: »

Are you kidding me?!

What is your Ingame @name? *

And while there's an option to say "I don't want to say" the survey won't actually let you choose that. Account name is required.

Your account name is literally half of what anyone needs to hack your account.

The reason forums have different user names to account login names (email) and account login names is for protection.

Yet here you are... With your @ name out for everyone to see. Also, if ESO recognizes the IP address doesn't match what they have on record then you must verify your account.

ESO_Nightingale

Malicious?

D0PAMINE

ESO_Nightingale wrote: »

Malicious?

I doubt it was malicious, you've been here for a while and are active in the community. It might be a TOS thing because of the @name even though it's public info anyway.

ESO_Nightingale

D0PAMINE wrote: »

ESO_Nightingale wrote: »

Malicious?

I doubt it was malicious, you've been here for a while and are active in the community. It might be a TOS thing because of the @name even though it's public info anyway.

Yeah I'm gonna ask them about it. I don't recall making a malicious link. I made a survey using Google forms. Ive even asked @Masel about it. I thought this'd be fine.

lelink88

maybe we should give ZoS a letter about that problem at PaX EAST

ESO_Nightingale

lelink88 wrote: »

maybe we should give ZoS a letter about that problem at PaX EAST

About the frost staves or about the deletion of the link? if it's about the frost staves we've sent one a little over a month ago with our most liked and well recieved ideas. For anyone wondering it was mostly pain points and a bug or 2 but it did include the Tri Focus - Elemental Susceptibility, Arctic Wind Master Plan, Glacial Presence and Crystallised Sword ideas as they are our most solid. We do have more solid ideas now but i think we should wait until Elsweyr's last week of PTS at the very least to write a new one.

Alucardo

Frost, and all elemental DAMAGE has historically been used as a mages main source of damage. Generally the mage will master one element and use a series of spells around it (not talking about ESO here). For "tanking", they would use spells to protect themselves from magic (Alteration skill line I believe, definitely not frost), or enhance their mitigation. Melee types obviously used shields and heavy armor.
From the very beginning I was against the use of ice staves, and frost magic as a whole (Warden), for tanking. Not only is it lore breaking, but it looks and feels completely stupid.
I would have liked to seen it stayed as a damage option.

ESO_Nightingale

Alucardo wrote: »

Frost, and all elemental DAMAGE has historically been used as a mages main source of damage. Generally the mage will master one element and use a series of spells around it (not talking about ESO here). For "tanking", they would use spells to protect themselves from magic (Alteration skill line I believe, definitely not frost), or enhance their mitigation. Melee types obviously used shields and heavy armor.
From the very beginning I was against the use of ice staves, and frost magic as a whole (Warden), for tanking. Not only is it lore breaking, but it looks and feels completely stupid.
I would have liked to seen it stayed as a damage option.

It's time we rose up to get frost (at least fixed)!

Roboplus

Since there's no form, I'll just post my suggestion.

Tri Focus
Fully-charged Flame Staff Heavy Attacks deal [6% / 12%] additional damage. Shock Staff Heavy Attacks damage nearby enemies for [50% / 100%] of the damage done. Fully-charged Frost Staff Heavy Attacks charge [16% / 33%] faster, but are [8% 16%] less effective, and grant a damage shield that absorbs [641 / 1280] damage. While a Frost Staff is equipped, blocking costs Magicka instead of Stamina.

This would place Frost Staff Heavy Attack speed closer to SnB and give Frost Staff Heavy Attacks a unique mechanic compared to Fire Staff Heavy Attacks (which both currently have the same charge speed and single heavy hit).
---

Destructive Clench
Cast Time: Instant
Target: Enemy
Range: 17 meters
Cost: 3802 Magicka
Devastate an enemy with an enhanced charge from your staff, dealing 3692 Magic Damage and an additional [4764 / 4819 / 4875 / 4923] Magic Damage over 8 seconds. Flame Clench knocks the enemy back and deals additional damage over time. Frost Clench immobilizes the enemy and you gain Minor Heroism, granting you 1 Ultimate every 1.5 seconds for 8 seconds. Shock Clench stuns the enemy and deals damage to other nearby enemies.

I don't personally feel there should be a ranged source of Minor Heroism, but this is provided for completion's sake in case that is deemed necessary. At a minimum, it would aid both Frost Tanks and Frost DPS.
---

Elemental Susceptibility
Cast Time: Instant
Target: Enemy
Range: 17 meters
Duration: [21 / 22 / 23 / 24] seconds.
Cost: 2700 Magicka
Role: Tank
Send the elements to strip an enemy's defenses and afflict them with Major Breach and Major Fracture for [21 / 22 / 23 / 24] seconds, reducing Spell Resistance and Physical Resistance by 5280. Your next Fully-charged Heavy Attack used within 10 seconds will taunt the enemy to attack you for 15 seconds.

With this, Inner Fire still has a purpose (as an instant taunt), so you're not at an advantage over SnB for bar space (as they will already have Inner Fire slotted). The differences in duration are to allow for mixing/overlapping with Inner Fire. A Magicka cost has been added to account for increased function.
---

Quasar (formerly Elemental Ring)
Cast Time: Instant
Target: Ground
Range: 28 meters
Radius: 10 meters
Cost: 6000~ (7000~?) Magicka
Release a surge of gravitational energy, dealing [4767 / 4818 / 4871 / 4923] Magic Damage to enemies at the target location and drawing them to within 3 meters of the spell's epicenter. This attack cannot be blocked or reflected.

Rather than drawing enemies directly to you like Chains/Leash, this allows you to draw enemies together to a distant point. The cost has been significantly increased to account for greater efficiency, range, and additional application in PvP.

ESO_Nightingale

Roboplus wrote: »

Since there's no form, I'll just post my suggestion.

Tri Focus
Fully-charged Flame Staff Heavy Attacks deal [6% / 12%] additional damage. Shock Staff Heavy Attacks damage nearby enemies for [50% / 100%] of the damage done. Fully-charged Frost Staff Heavy Attacks charge [25% / 50%] faster, but are [25% 50%] less effective, and grant a damage shield that absorbs [641 / 1280] damage. While a Frost Staff is equipped, blocking costs Magicka instead of Stamina.

This would place Frost Staff Heavy Attack speed closer to SnB and give Frost Staff Heavy Attacks a unique mechanic compared to Fire Staff Heavy Attacks (which both currently have the same charge speed and single heavy hit).
---

Destructive Clench
Cast Time: Instant
Target: Enemy
Range: 17 meters
Cost: 3802 Magicka
Devastate an enemy with an enhanced charge from your staff, dealing 3692 Magic Damage and an additional [4764 / 4819 / 4875 / 4923] Magic Damage over 8 seconds. Flame Clench knocks the enemy back and deals additional damage over time. Frost Clench immobilizes the enemy and you gain Minor Heroism, granting you 1 Ultimate every 1.5 seconds for 8 seconds. Shock Clench stuns the enemy and deals damage to other nearby enemies.

I don't personally feel there should be a ranged source of Minor Heroism, but this is provided for completion's sake in case that is deemed necessary. At a minimum, it would aid both Frost Tanks and Frost DPS.
---

Elemental Susceptibility
Cast Time: Instant
Target: Enemy
Range: 17 meters
Duration: [21 / 22 / 23 / 24] seconds.
Cost: 2700 Magicka
Role: Tank
Send the elements to strip an enemy's defenses and afflict them with Major Breach and Major Fracture for [21 / 22 / 23 / 24] seconds, reducing Spell Resistance and Physical Resistance by 5280. Your next Fully-charged Heavy Attack used within 10 seconds will taunt the enemy to attack you for 15 seconds.

With this, Inner Fire still has a purpose (as an instant taunt), so you're not at an advantage over SnB for bar space (as they will already have Inner Fire slotted). The differences in duration are to allow for mixing/overlapping with Inner Fire. A Magicka cost has been added to account for increased function.
---

Quasar (formerly Elemental Ring)
Cast Time: Instant
Target: Ground
Range: 28 meters
Radius: 10 meters
Cost: 6000~ (7000~?) Magicka
Release a surge of gravitational energy, dealing [4767 / 4818 / 4871 / 4923] Magic Damage to enemies at the target location and drawing them to within 3 meters of the spell's epicenter. This attack cannot be blocked or reflected.

Rather than drawing enemies directly to you, this allows you to draw enemies together to a distant point. The cost has been significantly increased to account for greater efficiency, range, and additional application in PvP.

i've got to say not bad! I really like making a heavy attack taunt only on susceptibility while making tri focus work for everyone else. only thing i don't like is how harshly the heavy attacks are punished for being faster. i'd rather make it 15% and then 30% faster if that's what it took to not reduce it's damage.

frost clench with minor heroism seems really strong but MAN that makes me want to use it now. i'd accompany this by making Icy Rage cost 14% less which was an idea that our discord had already. It might close the gap in power between the ultimates.

Quasar seems like it's pretty interesting and it's got some neat applications for tanks. this is if you rein it in a little bit. 10 meters is massive. 6 is fine and it should be blockable.

Overall i'd give this an 8.5 out of 10! This is great stuff! You should definitely join our discord if you haven't already!

Roboplus

ESO_Nightingale wrote: »

i've got to say not bad! I really like making a heavy attack taunt only on susceptibility while making tri focus work for everyone else. only thing i don't like is how harshly the heavy attacks are punished for being faster. i'd rather make it 15% and then 30% faster if that's what it took to not reduce it's damage.

I wasn't paying attention to the math (or the wording) and got that wrong. I edited the post, but it should have been [16% / 33%] faster, but are [8% 16%] less effective. The idea being to reduce Frost Staff Heavy Attack charge time to match SnB, but without competing directly with Flame Staff (since faster heavy attacks are easier to get off and lead to less time not using abilities). I suppose it's possible to leave damage uneffected by the reduced charge time. Mostly it was meant as a reduction to resource recovery and proc chance. A previous conversation on the subject highlighted how bad it could get in PvP if Frost Staff Heavy Attacks were faster and still had the same proc chance.

lelink88

ESO_Nightingale wrote: »

lelink88 wrote: »

maybe we should give ZoS a letter about that problem at PaX EAST

About the frost staves or about the deletion of the link? if it's about the frost staves we've sent one a little over a month ago with our most liked and well recieved ideas. For anyone wondering it was mostly pain points and a bug or 2 but it did include the Tri Focus - Elemental Susceptibility, Arctic Wind Master Plan, Glacial Presence and Crystallised Sword ideas as they are our most solid. We do have more solid ideas now but i think we should wait until Elsweyr's last week of PTS at the very least to write a new one.

agree

Tommy_The_Gun

Seeing all the changes that were done in the game since the class reps program stared, I can clearly see what the problem is. I suspected it and even warned about such a posiblity when the class reps program started. And it seems that my worries have confirmend multiple times so far. This is another confirmation.

In short: class reps, no matter what, seems to only look at the 2 aspects of the game: PvE DPS and PvP DPS. That is a horible mistake they make and they dont even seem to realize this. In other words: they are biased. They seem not to care about tanking or healing in both PvE & PvP. In fact I even seen peaople claming that Healers & Healing in PvP is "cancer" since DPS cant kill stuff and the same goes for Tanking since too tanky player = DPS cant kill it.
As for the PvE we already seen numerous tank nerfs and healer nerfs. And who benefited from those nerfs ? You guessed it ! DPS.
To simply put it: Class representative program lacks objectivism and compromise.

People wanted to have magicka tank so ZOS made frost staff an option for it. But that was pre - class rep change.
After class reps program was introduced peaple wanted WW to be an option for a Tank too. But no. It was taken hostage by DPS.
Also I am starting to see more and more threads like "make one handed and shieald to be a DPS vailable" poping up.

Imho class reps program does not work. Although I was "told" that it is run by experienced players it is very narrow and shallow. It does not serve majority of players but a tiny minority. Yes, I am actally going to say that: game was much better before class reps program started. I play this game since relese (2014 so I have a good reference point of its history & over time changes).
It simply feels like class reps dont care about all players and feedback they were supoused to gather, but rather try push their own vision of the game. In other words : abuse their position as a class representative.
Recent split amongs class reps and one of them quiting their role as a class reps makes this look even worse. Not to mention class reps use discord server to discuss changes and non class reps have very limited acces to it. So most of the changes are being discussed behind closed doors. Not discusing this openly on eso forums make it look even more shady.
In its current state class rep program is a waste of time and is more harmfull for the game than beneficial. Class reps program should be terminated and closed as it does not serve its purpose.

If you are a class rep and you are reading it dont be mad on me. I am just trying to show to you how it looks from the other perspective. From a perspective of a long term eso player (veteran of both pve & pvp) that just like you (at least your original goal) tries to make game better for everyone.

ESO_Nightingale

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

Seeing all the changes that were done in the game since the class reps program stared, I can clearly see what the problem is. I suspected it and even warned about such a posiblity when the class reps program started. And it seems that my worries have confirmend multiple times so far. This is another confirmation.

In short: class reps, no matter what, seems to only look at the 2 aspects of the game: PvE DPS and PvP DPS. That is a horible mistake they make and they dont even seem to realize this. In other words: they are biased. They seem not to care about tanking or healing in both PvE & PvP. In fact I even seen peaople claming that Healers & Healing in PvP is "cancer" since DPS cant kill stuff and the same goes for Tanking since too tanky player = DPS cant kill it.
As for the PvE we already seen numerous tank nerfs and healer nerfs. And who benefited from those nerfs ? You guessed it ! DPS.
To simply put it: Class representative program lacks objectivism and compromise.

People wanted to have magicka tank so ZOS made frost staff an option for it. But that was pre - class rep change.
After class reps program was introduced peaple wanted WW to be an option for a Tank too. But no. It was taken hostage by DPS.
Also I am starting to see more and more threads like "make one handed and shieald to be a DPS vailable" poping up.

Imho class reps program does not work. Although I was "told" that it is run by experienced players it is very narrow and shallow. It does not serve majority of players but a tiny minority. Yes, I am actally going to say that: game was much better before class reps program started. I play this game since relese (2014 so I have a good reference point of its history & over time changes).
It simply feels like class reps dont care about all players and feedback they were supoused to gather, but rather try push their own vision of the game. In other words : abuse their position as a class representative.
Recent split amongs class reps and one of them quiting their role as a class reps makes this look even worse. Not to mention class reps use discord server to discuss changes and non class reps have very limited acces to it. So most of the changes are being discussed behind closed doors. Not discusing this openly on eso forums make it look even more shady.
In its current state class rep program is a waste of time and is more harmfull for the game than beneficial. Class reps program should be terminated and closed as it does not serve its purpose.

If you are a class rep and you are reading it dont be mad on me. I am just trying to show to you how it looks from the other perspective. From a perspective of a long term eso player (veteran of both pve & pvp) that just like you (at least your original goal) tries to make game better for everyone.

They need a healer class rep now so if you'd like to "apply", i guess message @KenaPKK. They are looking for one. If you have problems with the tanking class rep, talk to @Liofa. The problem with frost staves is they were rushed in and aren't acommodated for with changed skills. They're just kind of there and haven't recieved direct updates in so long. Its a good idea for short term. But so far it seems like the majority of people who've voted want frost to be DPS. An alteration staff is also something that could work because it's the magic closely related to tanking. I could see that working. As it stands, the frost staff needs some changes in one direction or the other. Its currently at the cross roads between dps and tanking. I personally think best case scenario is the implementation of an alteration staff next chapter along with a weapons update that makes ice for dps again but I've still included that tanking option for those who still want it anyways. Your opinions do matter.

Masel

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

Seeing all the changes that were done in the game since the class reps program stared, I can clearly see what the problem is. I suspected it and even warned about such a posiblity when the class reps program started. And it seems that my worries have confirmend multiple times so far. This is another confirmation.

In short: class reps, no matter what, seems to only look at the 2 aspects of the game: PvE DPS and PvP DPS. That is a horible mistake they make and they dont even seem to realize this. In other words: they are biased. They seem not to care about tanking or healing in both PvE & PvP. In fact I even seen peaople claming that Healers & Healing in PvP is "cancer" since DPS cant kill stuff and the same goes for Tanking since too tanky player = DPS cant kill it.
As for the PvE we already seen numerous tank nerfs and healer nerfs. And who benefited from those nerfs ? You guessed it ! DPS.
To simply put it: Class representative program lacks objectivism and compromise.

People wanted to have magicka tank so ZOS made frost staff an option for it. But that was pre - class rep change.
After class reps program was introduced peaple wanted WW to be an option for a Tank too. But no. It was taken hostage by DPS.
Also I am starting to see more and more threads like "make one handed and shieald to be a DPS vailable" poping up.

Imho class reps program does not work. Although I was "told" that it is run by experienced players it is very narrow and shallow. It does not serve majority of players but a tiny minority. Yes, I am actally going to say that: game was much better before class reps program started. I play this game since relese (2014 so I have a good reference point of its history & over time changes).
It simply feels like class reps dont care about all players and feedback they were supoused to gather, but rather try push their own vision of the game. In other words : abuse their position as a class representative.
Recent split amongs class reps and one of them quiting their role as a class reps makes this look even worse. Not to mention class reps use discord server to discuss changes and non class reps have very limited acces to it. So most of the changes are being discussed behind closed doors. Not discusing this openly on eso forums make it look even more shady.
In its current state class rep program is a waste of time and is more harmfull for the game than beneficial. Class reps program should be terminated and closed as it does not serve its purpose.

If you are a class rep and you are reading it dont be mad on me. I am just trying to show to you how it looks from the other perspective. From a perspective of a long term eso player (veteran of both pve & pvp) that just like you (at least your original goal) tries to make game better for everyone.

Is that so? As a matter of fact, we are not the ones making changes at all. Let me just give you a few examples:

We suggested having dual wield enchantment power being reduced because it was a source of dual wield superiority that caused issues on both sides of the game and reduced diversity, PvP and PvE. However, we also suggested excluding one-hand and shield from that change and suggested various ways to go about it, for example to include it in a passive to keep the enchantment strength. The devs decided to do the first part, but ignored the second. It's not on our hands what they do with the feedback we provide.

We do consider tanking and healing in all the feedback we deliver. In terms of frost staffs, we told them multiple times that players want frost to be an option for damage dealers too, and that tanks want a different dedicated magicka weapon for tanking (possibly an alteration staff/1 hand and rune, whatever). But introducing a new weapon into the game is a lot of work to do (you have to create models for all styles, change the loot tables, implement a skill line, generate animations etc.) so my suspicion is that they wanted to create that weapon through the ice staff instead, simply because it was a lot easier to do.

We told them that healers want to feel needed as well. In both PvE and PvP, healers have no recognition whatsoever. They dont show on the Battleground Scoring, they cant prove how many player lives they saved in Trials or PvP groups, they can only show their debuff uptimes and thats what they're measured on mostly. And where do you see nerfs to healers that DPS did benefit from?

People start scapegoating us more and more, but its not us that make changes, it's the devs. We can technically influence it a little bit through the feedback we give, but in the end, we arent decision makers, we are merely "consultants" in a way.

You accuse us to be biased, which is true for every individual on this planet in some sort of way. But you accuse us to be universally biased towards DPS, which is entirely false. You do know that we have PvP and PvE healers in our group? We also have more than one Tank in our group who is affected by changes that are made to them.

The game was better before the program started? I'd like you to tell me why you think that is the case.You want the old proc set meta in PvP back, where people just one-shot you with spamming viper+tremorscale stun+taunt? You want the old burning spellweave-meta in PvE where everyone used that one set everywhere? You want unkillable tanks in PvP back where heavy armor was better for damage and tankiness without a doubt? What exactly makes you look back for and say: yeah, times were better back then...

Also, in terms of open discussion: Most of us have experienced how these forums and discords can be if you say something that some people do not agree on (it doesnt take many to derail a discussion). Within this environment, an open discussion would be a very bad idea. All it would lead to is that every statement we or the devs make is going to cause an outrage by one or the other part of the community because there is alwas going to be someone that does not want changes happening.

I'm not mad at you btw, I'd just liek to understand where that negativity towards the program comes from!

ANGEL_BtVS

The ice staff is a destruction staff, and it should be used for dps. Ice mages have been a thing in the lore, and ice staffs have always been considered destruction staffs along with fire and lightning. If it were up to me, zos would introduce an alteration staff that is used for support purposes, including tanking. That's a win/win if you ask me.

Alucardo

Roboplus

Masel wrote: »

Is that so? As a matter of fact, we are not the ones making changes at all. Let me just give you a few examples:

We suggested having dual wield enchantment power being reduced because it was a source of dual wield superiority that caused issues on both sides of the game and reduced diversity, PvP and PvE. However, we also suggested excluding one-hand and shield from that change and suggested various ways to go about it, for example to include it in a passive to keep the enchantment strength. The devs decided to do the first part, but ignored the second. It's not on our hands what they do with the feedback we provide.

We do consider tanking and healing in all the feedback we deliver. In terms of frost staffs, we told them multiple times that players want frost to be an option for damage dealers too, and that tanks want a different dedicated magicka weapon for tanking (possibly an alteration staff/1 hand and rune, whatever). But introducing a new weapon into the game is a lot of work to do (you have to create models for all styles, change the loot tables, implement a skill line, generate animations etc.) so my suspicion is that they wanted to create that weapon through the ice staff instead, simply because it was a lot easier to do.

We told them that healers want to feel needed as well. In both PvE and PvP, healers have no recognition whatsoever. They dont show on the Battleground Scoring, they cant prove how many player lives they saved in Trials or PvP groups, they can only show their debuff uptimes and thats what they're measured on mostly. And where do you see nerfs to healers that DPS did benefit from?

People start scapegoating us more and more, but its not us that make changes, it's the devs. We can technically influence it a little bit through the feedback we give, but in the end, we arent decision makers, we are merely "consultants" in a way.

You accuse us to be biased, which is true for every individual on this planet in some sort of way. But you accuse us to be universally biased towards DPS, which is entirely false. You do know that we have PvP and PvE healers in our group? We also have more than one Tank in our group who is affected by changes that are made to them.

The game was better before the program started? I'd like you to tell me why you think that is the case.You want the old proc set meta in PvP back, where people just one-shot you with spamming viper+tremorscale stun+taunt? You want the old burning spellweave-meta in PvE where everyone used that one set everywhere? You want unkillable tanks in PvP back where heavy armor was better for damage and tankiness without a doubt? What exactly makes you look back for and say: yeah, times were better back then...

Also, in terms of open discussion: Most of us have experienced how these forums and discords can be if you say something that some people do not agree on (it doesnt take many to derail a discussion). Within this environment, an open discussion would be a very bad idea. All it would lead to is that every statement we or the devs make is going to cause an outrage by one or the other part of the community because there is alwas going to be someone that does not want changes happening.

I'm not mad at you btw, I'd just liek to understand where that negativity towards the program comes from!

I wasn't worried until after having read this.

I like Frost Staff tanking. It's visually distinct from tanking in any other MMO I've played outside of the super hero genre. There's no flashing auras, there isn't a bunch of shouting, there's no association with earth or metal. Even if they made another tanking weapon, I'd still want to use Frost Staff to tank. This is why any suggestion I make involves Frost Staff as both a tanking and DPSing tool, instead of separating them and making a new weapon. But for that matter...

ESO_Nightingale wrote: »

But so far it seems like the majority of people who've voted want frost to be DPS. An alteration staff is also something that could work because it's the magic closely related to tanking. I could see that working.

Of course more people want it to be a DPS weapon. There are more DPS than tanks. Probably to the tune of 10:1, if not more. Based on the queues I've experienced, even healers outnumber tanks by at least 2:1.

And if they made a new tanking staff, why would it be Alteration instead of Illusion? Lore-wise, Illusion has the closest thing to a taunt, and it possesses debuffs. Those are the things most valued on SnB. I could see Calm or Blind being turned into a Maim debuff. Frenzy could be a taunt/Fracture/Breach. And lore-wise, the noise caused by sound related spells can inflict damage on the subject. Which means all of those skills could logically deal damage, the same way SnB does.

Alteration has the Armors (like Stoneflesh) and the Shields, but SnB only has the one absorb/reflect (which is Mysticism, which technically still existing in this era) with zero damage resist or mitigation improvements outside of blocking. Alteration Staff would make more sense as an alternative to Restoration Staves, focusing primarily on shielding and resisting damage in place of healing it.

macsmooth

I’m not on discord so you can make a entry for me please

Frost staff should stay tanking and defence but improve the tanking capabilities

Remove the taunt from heavy attack and put it on a skill with a fracture capability too make it a alternative to sword and board

ESO_Nightingale

macsmooth wrote: »

I’m not on discord so you can make a entry for me please

Frost staff should stay tanking and defence but improve the tanking capabilities

Remove the taunt from heavy attack and put it on a skill with a fracture capability too make it a alternative to sword and board

Thanks. Ill add it.

ESO_Nightingale

Roboplus wrote: »

Masel wrote: »

Is that so? As a matter of fact, we are not the ones making changes at all. Let me just give you a few examples:

We suggested having dual wield enchantment power being reduced because it was a source of dual wield superiority that caused issues on both sides of the game and reduced diversity, PvP and PvE. However, we also suggested excluding one-hand and shield from that change and suggested various ways to go about it, for example to include it in a passive to keep the enchantment strength. The devs decided to do the first part, but ignored the second. It's not on our hands what they do with the feedback we provide.

We do consider tanking and healing in all the feedback we deliver. In terms of frost staffs, we told them multiple times that players want frost to be an option for damage dealers too, and that tanks want a different dedicated magicka weapon for tanking (possibly an alteration staff/1 hand and rune, whatever). But introducing a new weapon into the game is a lot of work to do (you have to create models for all styles, change the loot tables, implement a skill line, generate animations etc.) so my suspicion is that they wanted to create that weapon through the ice staff instead, simply because it was a lot easier to do.

We told them that healers want to feel needed as well. In both PvE and PvP, healers have no recognition whatsoever. They dont show on the Battleground Scoring, they cant prove how many player lives they saved in Trials or PvP groups, they can only show their debuff uptimes and thats what they're measured on mostly. And where do you see nerfs to healers that DPS did benefit from?

People start scapegoating us more and more, but its not us that make changes, it's the devs. We can technically influence it a little bit through the feedback we give, but in the end, we arent decision makers, we are merely "consultants" in a way.

You accuse us to be biased, which is true for every individual on this planet in some sort of way. But you accuse us to be universally biased towards DPS, which is entirely false. You do know that we have PvP and PvE healers in our group? We also have more than one Tank in our group who is affected by changes that are made to them.

The game was better before the program started? I'd like you to tell me why you think that is the case.You want the old proc set meta in PvP back, where people just one-shot you with spamming viper+tremorscale stun+taunt? You want the old burning spellweave-meta in PvE where everyone used that one set everywhere? You want unkillable tanks in PvP back where heavy armor was better for damage and tankiness without a doubt? What exactly makes you look back for and say: yeah, times were better back then...

Also, in terms of open discussion: Most of us have experienced how these forums and discords can be if you say something that some people do not agree on (it doesnt take many to derail a discussion). Within this environment, an open discussion would be a very bad idea. All it would lead to is that every statement we or the devs make is going to cause an outrage by one or the other part of the community because there is alwas going to be someone that does not want changes happening.

I'm not mad at you btw, I'd just liek to understand where that negativity towards the program comes from!

I wasn't worried until after having read this.

I like Frost Staff tanking. It's visually distinct from tanking in any other MMO I've played outside of the super hero genre. There's no flashing auras, there isn't a bunch of shouting, there's no association with earth or metal. Even if they made another tanking weapon, I'd still want to use Frost Staff to tank. This is why any suggestion I make involves Frost Staff as both a tanking and DPSing tool, instead of separating them and making a new weapon. But for that matter...

ESO_Nightingale wrote: »

But so far it seems like the majority of people who've voted want frost to be DPS. An alteration staff is also something that could work because it's the magic closely related to tanking. I could see that working.

Of course more people want it to be a DPS weapon. There are more DPS than tanks. Probably to the tune of 10:1, if not more. Based on the queues I've experienced, even healers outnumber tanks by at least 2:1.

And if they made a new tanking staff, why would it be Alteration instead of Illusion? Lore-wise, Illusion has the closest thing to a taunt, and it possesses debuffs. Those are the things most valued on SnB. I could see Calm or Blind being turned into a Maim debuff. Frenzy could be a taunt/Fracture/Breach. And lore-wise, the noise caused by sound related spells can inflict damage on the subject. Which means all of those skills could logically deal damage, the same way SnB does.

Alteration has the Armors (like Stoneflesh) and the Shields, but SnB only has the one absorb/reflect (which is Mysticism, which technically still existing in this era) with zero damage resist or mitigation improvements outside of blocking. Alteration Staff would make more sense as an alternative to Restoration Staves, focusing primarily on shielding and resisting damage in place of healing it.

Whatever floats your boat. Either works for me.

Masel

Roboplus wrote: »

Masel wrote: »

Is that so? As a matter of fact, we are not the ones making changes at all. Let me just give you a few examples:

We suggested having dual wield enchantment power being reduced because it was a source of dual wield superiority that caused issues on both sides of the game and reduced diversity, PvP and PvE. However, we also suggested excluding one-hand and shield from that change and suggested various ways to go about it, for example to include it in a passive to keep the enchantment strength. The devs decided to do the first part, but ignored the second. It's not on our hands what they do with the feedback we provide.

We do consider tanking and healing in all the feedback we deliver. In terms of frost staffs, we told them multiple times that players want frost to be an option for damage dealers too, and that tanks want a different dedicated magicka weapon for tanking (possibly an alteration staff/1 hand and rune, whatever). But introducing a new weapon into the game is a lot of work to do (you have to create models for all styles, change the loot tables, implement a skill line, generate animations etc.) so my suspicion is that they wanted to create that weapon through the ice staff instead, simply because it was a lot easier to do.

We told them that healers want to feel needed as well. In both PvE and PvP, healers have no recognition whatsoever. They dont show on the Battleground Scoring, they cant prove how many player lives they saved in Trials or PvP groups, they can only show their debuff uptimes and thats what they're measured on mostly. And where do you see nerfs to healers that DPS did benefit from?

People start scapegoating us more and more, but its not us that make changes, it's the devs. We can technically influence it a little bit through the feedback we give, but in the end, we arent decision makers, we are merely "consultants" in a way.

You accuse us to be biased, which is true for every individual on this planet in some sort of way. But you accuse us to be universally biased towards DPS, which is entirely false. You do know that we have PvP and PvE healers in our group? We also have more than one Tank in our group who is affected by changes that are made to them.

The game was better before the program started? I'd like you to tell me why you think that is the case.You want the old proc set meta in PvP back, where people just one-shot you with spamming viper+tremorscale stun+taunt? You want the old burning spellweave-meta in PvE where everyone used that one set everywhere? You want unkillable tanks in PvP back where heavy armor was better for damage and tankiness without a doubt? What exactly makes you look back for and say: yeah, times were better back then...

Also, in terms of open discussion: Most of us have experienced how these forums and discords can be if you say something that some people do not agree on (it doesnt take many to derail a discussion). Within this environment, an open discussion would be a very bad idea. All it would lead to is that every statement we or the devs make is going to cause an outrage by one or the other part of the community because there is alwas going to be someone that does not want changes happening.

I'm not mad at you btw, I'd just liek to understand where that negativity towards the program comes from!

I wasn't worried until after having read this.

I like Frost Staff tanking. It's visually distinct from tanking in any other MMO I've played outside of the super hero genre. There's no flashing auras, there isn't a bunch of shouting, there's no association with earth or metal. Even if they made another tanking weapon, I'd still want to use Frost Staff to tank. This is why any suggestion I make involves Frost Staff as both a tanking and DPSing tool, instead of separating them and making a new weapon. But for that matter...

ESO_Nightingale wrote: »

But so far it seems like the majority of people who've voted want frost to be DPS. An alteration staff is also something that could work because it's the magic closely related to tanking. I could see that working.

Of course more people want it to be a DPS weapon. There are more DPS than tanks. Probably to the tune of 10:1, if not more. Based on the queues I've experienced, even healers outnumber tanks by at least 2:1.

And if they made a new tanking staff, why would it be Alteration instead of Illusion? Lore-wise, Illusion has the closest thing to a taunt, and it possesses debuffs. Those are the things most valued on SnB. I could see Calm or Blind being turned into a Maim debuff. Frenzy could be a taunt/Fracture/Breach. And lore-wise, the noise caused by sound related spells can inflict damage on the subject. Which means all of those skills could logically deal damage, the same way SnB does.

Alteration has the Armors (like Stoneflesh) and the Shields, but SnB only has the one absorb/reflect (which is Mysticism, which technically still existing in this era) with zero damage resist or mitigation improvements outside of blocking. Alteration Staff would make more sense as an alternative to Restoration Staves, focusing primarily on shielding and resisting damage in place of healing it.

Thing is, we have to provide Feedback that players provide us. If the majority of players tells us they want ice staff to be a dps weapon, that's what we tell the devs. We can tell them there's also people that like frost staff tanking (as a matter of fact, I do myself, even though i think it is poorly implemented), but if the majority of players tell us that they'd prefer it to be a dd weapon, we can't ignore them.

To the point that there are more DDs than tanks: yes, we know that, and we take that into account. We value each role similarly, as opposed to what has been said before in this thread.

ESO_Nightingale

Masel wrote: »

Roboplus wrote: »

Masel wrote: »

Is that so? As a matter of fact, we are not the ones making changes at all. Let me just give you a few examples:

We suggested having dual wield enchantment power being reduced because it was a source of dual wield superiority that caused issues on both sides of the game and reduced diversity, PvP and PvE. However, we also suggested excluding one-hand and shield from that change and suggested various ways to go about it, for example to include it in a passive to keep the enchantment strength. The devs decided to do the first part, but ignored the second. It's not on our hands what they do with the feedback we provide.

We do consider tanking and healing in all the feedback we deliver. In terms of frost staffs, we told them multiple times that players want frost to be an option for damage dealers too, and that tanks want a different dedicated magicka weapon for tanking (possibly an alteration staff/1 hand and rune, whatever). But introducing a new weapon into the game is a lot of work to do (you have to create models for all styles, change the loot tables, implement a skill line, generate animations etc.) so my suspicion is that they wanted to create that weapon through the ice staff instead, simply because it was a lot easier to do.

We told them that healers want to feel needed as well. In both PvE and PvP, healers have no recognition whatsoever. They dont show on the Battleground Scoring, they cant prove how many player lives they saved in Trials or PvP groups, they can only show their debuff uptimes and thats what they're measured on mostly. And where do you see nerfs to healers that DPS did benefit from?

People start scapegoating us more and more, but its not us that make changes, it's the devs. We can technically influence it a little bit through the feedback we give, but in the end, we arent decision makers, we are merely "consultants" in a way.

You accuse us to be biased, which is true for every individual on this planet in some sort of way. But you accuse us to be universally biased towards DPS, which is entirely false. You do know that we have PvP and PvE healers in our group? We also have more than one Tank in our group who is affected by changes that are made to them.

The game was better before the program started? I'd like you to tell me why you think that is the case.You want the old proc set meta in PvP back, where people just one-shot you with spamming viper+tremorscale stun+taunt? You want the old burning spellweave-meta in PvE where everyone used that one set everywhere? You want unkillable tanks in PvP back where heavy armor was better for damage and tankiness without a doubt? What exactly makes you look back for and say: yeah, times were better back then...

Also, in terms of open discussion: Most of us have experienced how these forums and discords can be if you say something that some people do not agree on (it doesnt take many to derail a discussion). Within this environment, an open discussion would be a very bad idea. All it would lead to is that every statement we or the devs make is going to cause an outrage by one or the other part of the community because there is alwas going to be someone that does not want changes happening.

I'm not mad at you btw, I'd just liek to understand where that negativity towards the program comes from!

I wasn't worried until after having read this.

I like Frost Staff tanking. It's visually distinct from tanking in any other MMO I've played outside of the super hero genre. There's no flashing auras, there isn't a bunch of shouting, there's no association with earth or metal. Even if they made another tanking weapon, I'd still want to use Frost Staff to tank. This is why any suggestion I make involves Frost Staff as both a tanking and DPSing tool, instead of separating them and making a new weapon. But for that matter...

ESO_Nightingale wrote: »

But so far it seems like the majority of people who've voted want frost to be DPS. An alteration staff is also something that could work because it's the magic closely related to tanking. I could see that working.

Of course more people want it to be a DPS weapon. There are more DPS than tanks. Probably to the tune of 10:1, if not more. Based on the queues I've experienced, even healers outnumber tanks by at least 2:1.

And if they made a new tanking staff, why would it be Alteration instead of Illusion? Lore-wise, Illusion has the closest thing to a taunt, and it possesses debuffs. Those are the things most valued on SnB. I could see Calm or Blind being turned into a Maim debuff. Frenzy could be a taunt/Fracture/Breach. And lore-wise, the noise caused by sound related spells can inflict damage on the subject. Which means all of those skills could logically deal damage, the same way SnB does.

Alteration has the Armors (like Stoneflesh) and the Shields, but SnB only has the one absorb/reflect (which is Mysticism, which technically still existing in this era) with zero damage resist or mitigation improvements outside of blocking. Alteration Staff would make more sense as an alternative to Restoration Staves, focusing primarily on shielding and resisting damage in place of healing it.

Thing is, we have to provide Feedback that players provide us. If the majority of players tells us they want ice staff to be a dps weapon, that's what we tell the devs. We can tell them there's also people that like frost staff tanking (as a matter of fact, I do myself, even though i think it is poorly implemented), but if the majority of players tell us that they'd prefer it to be a dd weapon, we can't ignore them.

To the point that there are more DDs than tanks: yes, we know that, and we take that into account. We value each role similarly, as opposed to what has been said before in this thread.

People also think that I'm attacking tanking. I've clearly stated both options as possible routes we will advocate for. And I've also been incorporating ideas for the "losing" side so that they don't feel like they've been destroyed. If that side is Damage for example, then we still have ideas to help them on a tanking staff. Vise Versa.

Gnortranermara

It's long past time to admit failure, revert Frost staff 100% back a proper DPS weapon, and implement Alteration staff tanking.

ESO_Nightingale

Okay everyone, the link is back up.

Personofsecrets

Frost staff tanking was contrived from the start.

Gnortranermara

Masel wrote: »

But introducing a new weapon into the game is a lot of work to do (you have to create models for all styles, change the loot tables, implement a skill line, generate animations etc.) so my suspicion is that they wanted to create that weapon through the ice staff instead, simply because it was a lot easier to do.

No models are necessary for a new staff (Alteration). Loot table changes are basically a copy/paste job. A whole new mag tank skill line would produce better results than a few poorly-conceived passives. Animations are probably the most labor-intensive part of the job, and well... good! The art team is awesome. They seem to be the only ones doing their job sometimes.

Austinseph1

Just change the way staves work a bit, You already only ever wield staves on 1 hand anyway so let us equip staves and if you add a shield it halves damage, enchants, and traits as well as adds taunt to heavy. But when ts by itself it functions as a normal dps staff. The game already allows the use of a shield and staff together while previewing so it seems like the idea was there at one point. But that way you can have tanks of every magic, and dps can keep any element as well. More tanking options wouldn't hurting anybody. Weapons seem to be heavily weighted to DPS. Tanks used to only have S&B and healers had the heal staff. This way you have 4 tanking options, and people can keep playing dungeons without mistaking frost staves and making tanks unhappy lol.

ESO_Nightingale

We are currently at 152 responses.