fortified brass

technohic

Rikumaru wrote: »

Mayrael wrote: »

It got nerfed... No one knows why but ZOS is ZOS.

It got nerfed because defensive sets > offensive sets. Spriggans gives 3450 pen while brass gave 5k resistances. Now brass gives 3460 resistances so it's equal with offensive sets such as spriggans or spinners.

Well looking at sets is one thing. Looking at armor weights is another. If I'm looking for survivability and a damage balance; fortified was a good way to get survivability and use medium or light passives. Now it feels like you're better off with full offense due to the stat allocation it offers vs offensive sets; or running heavy.

Lughlongarm

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

***5h wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

Jimmy_The_Fixer wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

.TL;DR: Their balancing efforts often trend towards heavy-handed and inconsistent.

I disagree with this. They are being pretty clear about the way zos wants their game.

Then we have 2 piece weapon sets like Blackrose Resto and DW that are much more impactful than Brass, a 5pc set.

The resto and dw are behind content though, you have to earn them, even if you think nbrp is trival, brass is a crafted, anyone can craft it, so the weapon sets ought to be more impactful.

I would disagree, putting “more powerful” sets in the game isn’t the design of ESO, weapon sets should be another option and never a straight upgrade.

Like, yes it is, that is why every DPS has a vMA staff/bow or master bow. You give up a lot to run a weapon, so it best be a straight upgrade.

I just noticed this is in the PvP section, look, pvp especially, you need good reasons that I just not run 2 five piece sets, so weapon sets need to do better then a second 5 piece.


Also, I never said "more powerful", the phrase was "more impactful".

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

Jimmy_The_Fixer wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

Jimmy_The_Fixer wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

.TL;DR: Their balancing efforts often trend towards heavy-handed and inconsistent.

I disagree with this. They are being pretty clear about the way zos wants their game.

Then we have 2 piece weapon sets like Blackrose Resto and DW that are much more impactful than Brass, a 5pc set.

The resto and dw are behind content though, you have to earn them, even if you think nbrp is trival, brass is a crafted, anyone can craft it, so the weapon sets ought to be more impactful.

I would disagree, putting “more powerful” sets in the game isn’t the design of ESO, weapon sets should be another option and never a straight upgrade.

Like, yes it is, that is why every DPS has a vMA staff/bow or master bow. You give up a lot to run a weapon, so it best be a straight upgrade.

I just noticed this is in the PvP section, look, pvp especially, you need good reasons that I just not run 2 five piece sets, so weapon sets need to do better then a second 5 piece.


Also, I never said "more powerful", the phrase was "more impactful".

The weapons need to be worse than a second 5 piece since you can do backbar/frontbar setups to run a weapon and get the full value of a 5 piece. Making the weapons overly strong gives a disadvantage to builds that can’t make good use of one of the arena weapons.

Or is the current PvE meta to run vMA without a frontbar 5set?

They need to be better then a five piece at least 50% of the time, so it makes sense to back bar them. Come on man, that is what we are talking about, not this herr der front bar vMA weapons durr stuff.

100% wrong.

Very convincing argument. I recant everything.

now it is very hard to justify sets like armor master, Pariah , Bloodspawn

Armor master- you need to use a specific skill every 10 seconds to get the buff.

Pariah- you need to take damage to get the buff

Bloodspawn- 6% chance to get buff on damage.

All these are very different then the free ~5100 resists brass used to give.

.Nords resistance passives are also a rule breaker now compared

So funny to see this after years of 6% flat damage mitigation from nords being considered the worst class passive.

.1 moster set bonus resistance passive(pirate skeleton) are almost the same as 5 set bonus resistance(brass).

I tried to draw attention to this matter on the pts but no one responded, this is like slimecraw giving 7.6% spell and weapon crit. Or molag Kena giving 258 spell and weapon damage. Resists on monster helms, those being Chudan , Lord warden and pirate skeleton need to be the same 1487 resists as a 2-4 piece bonus.

. So ya, the standards for resistances are all over the place.

They are in a much better spot now that they agree what the base is, 1487 armor, and that a permanent five piece like brass is 2.31* that. I mean, if you think resists are the only thing "all over the place, that do you think of BSW? Of elemental succession? Of all these spell/weapon damage sets that give various amounts?

Armor master- Yes, you need to use a skill you would probably use regardless if you chose to go with this set. You also get the benefit of using this set as back bar set. This is probably more of boon than a penalty for high level players.

Pariah - You get the mitigation when you need it the most, mitigation as mechanic does nothing for if you don't take dmg. With the nerf to brass, Pariah will over preform brass when you HP is 70% or lower. Very good synergy with vemp passive.

Bloodspawn - 6% is nothing, even one player is enough for this set to be up 75% of the time. Vs 2 players+ it will be up 100% of the time(if you take dmg). Got additional benefit of ulti rege. This proc worth is x4, 5 piece bonuses(x2 brass, x2 hide). I dont think there is another set in the game with that amount of value.

Yes - they all are different to the ~5100 resists brass used to give , but They felt competitive more or less. ATM No one will use brass over the over options.

Nords - Not sure how your remark regarding the old 6% is relevant to the current argument(as yes the 6% was not amazing, ZOS just game this almost the same bonus on as 2 piece jewelry bonus, x% mitigation and resistances are not valued the same, see also brass vs swift). Races big bonus was balanced around 5 set piece bonus. Orc/high elf SD/WP is less than Hunding's Rage vlaue, berton cost reduction is less than seducer etc.. Nord resistances is > brass.

1 monster set bonus resistance - nerfing those sets without changes to other monster sets will just make Bloodspawn and troll even more dominate than they are now. Not sure it is the right solution.

BSW and elemental succession are much more problematic to value and compare to alternative. succession for example is only good magdk and nothing more(good set but very niche). Burning Spellweave is not consistent, it got both proc change and CD which make this set hard to use(risk reward relationship). Most magicka builds will use neither(In PVP ofc).

OG_Kaveman

@Lughlongarm the point of all that is that is static vs something that is a proc chance, the static one ought to be lower. brass was not. it needed to be standardized. whether you think "6% is nothing" or "You get the mitigation when you need it the most" is not the point.

brass vs swift

brass impacts everything, including pve mobs, swift is just other players, so swift needs to be better, so your point makes no sense.

Races big bonus was balanced around 5 set piece bonus

this is factually wrong, or at least the wrong way to look at it, the bonuses are balanced around the single set bonues, IE, the 258 spell/weapon damage or 2k mag and stam, is double what a single set bonus gives you. the nord passive armor bonus was simply directly translated from 6% flat mitigation to 6% armor, being 660 is 1% armor, that leads to 660*6 = 3960. that is how ZoS got that one. a double single armor is 1487*2 or 2974 amour, i mean, i would fine if they nerfed nord armor to 2974 instead of 3960. in the end, all the races bonuses are between 4-6 single set bonuces. here is a great thread, https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/455493/new-racial-passives-comparison
, in case you are having trouble understanding this concept.


though in that thread, @WrathOfInnos, you have this-

3960 Spell and Physical Resistance. Referenced Fortified Brass set. 1.78 SB

what does this mean?

WrathOfInnos

Doesn’t really apply anymore, that was using the old values of Fortified Brass as a baseline. It’s now clear that was not the intended balance point of armor. This indirectly makes Nord stronger than indicated there.

With the new armor balance on set bonuses (1487 standard), the Nord 3960 is 2.66 set bonuses.

Asardes

Comparing armor bonuses with racial passives is like comparing apples to oranges. None of those are equal and there is no reason why they should be.

Lughlongarm

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

@Lughlongarm the point of all that is that is static vs something that is a proc chance, the static one ought to be lower. brass was not. it needed to be standardized. whether you think "6% is nothing" or "You get the mitigation when you need it the most" is not the point.

brass vs swift

brass impacts everything, including pve mobs, swift is just other players, so swift needs to be better, so your point makes no sense.

Races big bonus was balanced around 5 set piece bonus

this is factually wrong, or at least the wrong way to look at it, the bonuses are balanced around the single set bonues, IE, the 258 spell/weapon damage or 2k mag and stam, is double what a single set bonus gives you. the nord passive armor bonus was simply directly translated from 6% flat mitigation to 6% armor, being 660 is 1% armor, that leads to 660*6 = 3960. that is how ZoS got that one. a double single armor is 1487*2 or 2974 amour, i mean, i would fine if they nerfed nord armor to 2974 instead of 3960. in the end, all the races bonuses are between 4-6 single set bonuces. here is a great thread, https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/455493/new-racial-passives-comparison
, in case you are having trouble understanding this concept.


though in that thread, @WrathOfInnos, you have this-

3960 Spell and Physical Resistance. Referenced Fortified Brass set. 1.78 SB

what does this mean?

"Nord
- 1500 Max Stamina. 1.14 SB
- 5 Ultimate every 10s when taking damage. Referenced Werewolf Hide set. 1.16 SB
- 1000 Max Health. 0.69 SB
- 2310 Frost Resistance. 0.87 SB
- 3960 Spell and Physical Resistance. Referenced Fortified Brass set. 1.78 SB
- Total: 5.64 SB"

This is direct comparison between nord resistances and brass. Comparing the biggest race bonus to a similar 5 piece bonus was one of the method they used to rank the overall racial passives value(you can see same thing with breton and seducer).


-claiming all proc conditions are equal is just wrong. There is a very big difference between "you have 1% to heal for 50% of max health" and "while your health is lower than 50%, heal for 50% of your max health. The first is very unreliable healing set, the other is god mod, you cannot die set. There is a big relevance to the proc condition. Actually, sets like Pariah and Troll king are not even considered as a proc mechanic. PROC stands for -programmed random occurrence. Nothing random about Pariah, and its average value is higher compared to brass. This is not a matter of opinion it is a mathematical fact.

-I didnt say 6% is nothing and it doesn't matter what I think. This is how ZOS is valuating % mitigation compared to resistances mitigation, it is not same thing.


-It is funny you try to dance around the topic instead of dressing the issue. This is obviously a PvP related discussion as selfish defensive sets are not very popular in PVE. Swift vs Brass is a very obvious comparison .Brass used to be a fair competitive set and now it is complete trash. Would you use it?

Lughlongarm

WrathOfInnos wrote: »

Doesn’t really apply anymore, that was using the old values of Fortified Brass as a baseline. It’s now clear that was not the intended balance point of armor. This indirectly makes Nord stronger than indicated there.

With the new armor balance on set bonuses (1487 standard), the Nord 3960 is 2.66 set bonuses.

This!!!

OG_Kaveman

claiming all proc conditions are equal

You are putting words in my mouth. I did not claim this. My claim is that if something has a proc, it ought to be better then something that is up all the time, or non proc. You are the one taking it to ridiculous ends. Don't be obtuse.

Actually, sets like Pariah and Troll king are not even considered as a proc mechanic. PROC stands for -programmed random occurrence. Nothing random about Pariah, and its average value is higher compared to brass.

How pedantic. It is merely a shorthand, a saying. Stop. Being. Obtuse.

Lughlongarm

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

claiming all proc conditions are equal

You are putting words in my mouth. I did not claim this. My claim is that if something has a proc, it ought to be better then something that is up all the time, or non proc. You are the one taking it to ridiculous ends. Don't be obtuse.

Actually, sets like Pariah and Troll king are not even considered as a proc mechanic. PROC stands for -programmed random occurrence. Nothing random about Pariah, and its average value is higher compared to brass.

How pedantic. It is merely a shorthand, saying. Stop. Being. Obtuse.

Ya man whatever, you obviously cannot counter any of my points and still doubling down on your position which was proven to be wrong. Sorry, but I'm not the one being Obtuse.

I'm also 100% positive you are not using Brass and even if were in the market for a defensive set , brass would have been at the bottom of your list. I think this sums it up.

OG_Kaveman

Lughlongarm wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

claiming all proc conditions are equal

You are putting words in my mouth. I did not claim this. My claim is that if something has a proc, it ought to be better then something that is up all the time, or non proc. You are the one taking it to ridiculous ends. Don't be obtuse.

Actually, sets like Pariah and Troll king are not even considered as a proc mechanic. PROC stands for -programmed random occurrence. Nothing random about Pariah, and its average value is higher compared to brass.

How pedantic. It is merely a shorthand, saying. Stop. Being. Obtuse.

Ya man whatever, you obviously cannot counter any of my points and still doubling down on your position which was proven to be wrong. Sorry, but I'm not the one being Obtuse.

I'm also 100% positive you are not using Brass and even if were in the market for a defensive set , brass would have been at the bottom of your list. I think this sums it up.

K

Emma_Overload

I should have known the minute I started running Nord on my Mag Sorc, the forums would start begging for a nerf

Lughlongarm

Emma_Overload wrote: »

I should have known the minute I started running Nord on my Mag Sorc, the forums would start begging for a nerf

Naa, this was really not the point of the discussion. Just another benchmark to show how bad is the brass set.
Nords are fine.

Sergykid

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

Mayrael wrote: »

It got nerfed... No one knows why but ZOS is ZOS.

it is very clear why, it was overbuget for the armor it provided. simple. before you had 2975 spell or physical resists. now you get 1487 of both on a set bonus, to mirror the spell/physical penetration set bonus. since we know that ZoS wants 5 piece set to be 2.31x the set bonus, that leaves the 3460 to be the correct one to have on brass. brass is now the exact armor/resists mirror of hundings/julianos. 129 weapon/spell multiplied by 2.31 is ~299. it is also the mirror for spriggan/spriggans.

the reason is clear. the 5 piece set bonus was over budget. a 5 piece is, by ZoSs own statements, suppose to be 2.31x a single set bonus. and since a single set bonus of armor is now 1487 armor, both spell and physical, the 5170 resists from brass needed to be lower to 3460 to have the set adhere to ZoSs stated goal. whether you agree with this goal, is another ball of wax.

pariah grants the same as brass even at above 70% hp. Under 70% hp pariah is better. There is not one single reason why would you want brass over pariah. Combat reason not budget one (one set crafted, one set dropped).

Rikumaru

Mayrael wrote: »

Rikumaru wrote: »

Mayrael wrote: »

It got nerfed... No one knows why but ZOS is ZOS.

It got nerfed because defensive sets > offensive sets. Spriggans gives 3450 pen while brass gave 5k resistances. Now brass gives 3460 resistances so it's equal with offensive sets such as spriggans or spinners.

:crickets: looking at pariah, NMA, BRP DW and resto :scratchingmyhead: I don't think we should balance sets like this, because some things are scaling and calculating differently.

I agree, I would like a set which scales upto 10k pen depending on my missing health.

Mr_Walker

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

I disagree with this. They are being pretty clear about the way zos wants their game.

Wut? Dots just got buffed to the moon, then smashed back in to the ground.

OG_Kaveman

Mr_Walker wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

I disagree with this. They are being pretty clear about the way zos wants their game.

Wut? Dots just got buffed to the moon, then smashed back in to the ground.

we are talking about armor set bonuses, not skill damage coefficient.

this is the clear message that i am refereeing too-

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/365904/pc-mac-patch-notes-v3-1-5-horns-of-the-reach

. Mundus Stone values and bonuses have been re-tuned with a focus on improving overall diversity. The Lady was upgraded to grant both Spell and Physical Resistance, and The Lover was completely redesigned to grant Spell and Physical Penetration to counteract The Lady and provide greater flexibility in stat choices.

We’ve also standardized Mundus Stone values against other systems that grant similar bonuses, such as enchantments or Item Sets, so you can customize the stats you care about in each system without needing to worry about weighing the exact values against each other. Mundus Stones are now equivalent to 1.85x of an Item Set bonus.

. Similar to how Mundus Stones were changed, Weapon Trait values have also been rebalanced with a focus on improving overall diversity. Weapon Trait values have a 1:1 pairing with the effectiveness of Mundus Stones; this means if you want armor, you can get the Lady Mundus Stone or a Defending weapon and they will both give you 2752 armor.

. The bonus for having 5 pieces is approximately 2.31x the value of a one-piece bonus. For example, you can get a set bonus of 129 Spell Damage, or a 5-piece bonus of 299 Spell Damage on Julianos.

Some sets, such as Necropotence, have conditional bonuses. Since it’s harder to get these bonuses, we are allowing them to provide up to a 25% increase over other sets. This is why Draugr Hulk now gives 2540 max resource and Necropotence now gives 3150. .

Derra

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

Mayrael wrote: »

It got nerfed... No one knows why but ZOS is ZOS.

it is very clear why, it was overbuget for the armor it provided. simple. before you had 2975 spell or physical resists. now you get 1487 of both on a set bonus, to mirror the spell/physical penetration set bonus. since we know that ZoS wants 5 piece set to be 2.31x the set bonus, that leaves the 3460 to be the correct one to have on brass. brass is now the exact armor/resists mirror of hundings/julianos. 129 weapon/spell multiplied by 2.31 is ~299. it is also the mirror for spriggan/spriggans.

the reason is clear. the 5 piece set bonus was over budget. a 5 piece is, by ZoSs own statements, suppose to be 2.31x a single set bonus. and since a single set bonus of armor is now 1487 armor, both spell and physical, the 5170 resists from brass needed to be lower to 3460 to have the set adhere to ZoSs stated goal. whether you agree with this goal, is another ball of wax.

Sadly nobody at zos understands how pariah works.