Why nerf Iceheart?

Kemenril

Dagoth_Rac wrote: »

Nerfing Iceheart is not just about nerfing Iceheart. It feels like another proclamation of, "Thou shalt use the min/max meta DPS sets! Thou shalt bow down at the altar to DPS! No other way is permissible!"

I feel like this is very true. It's a shot across the bow for hybrid and solo play. It's ANTI-meta in everything but its popularity among a wide diversity of players. But here's the thing: very few, if any, of those players use the set for competitive reasons. It's mostly for niche or solo play, where there were a LOT of niches it filled.

The reason why so many are upset is that this probably affects many people in many different ways.

Which is ANOTHER reason why this is a bad design choice: it misses the obvious fact that Iceheart was an "everyman" set that literally nobody was bothered by. It was the Ned Flanders of Monster Sets: good natured, helpful, but never overbearing or flashy.

Don't nerf Ned Flanders, ZOS.

Cravencat

Thank you ZOS for reading our comments regarding Iceheart. I hope you also realize from these comments how important a survivability set is for a certain segments of players. A set like Iceheart helps some non-elite players to at least crawl through game content that we would otherwise not be able to play. Please consider creating more functional survivability sets rather than effectively removing the one set that was actually useful and fun to play.

snoozy

Cravencat wrote: »

Thank you ZOS for reading our comments regarding Iceheart. I hope you also realize from these comments how important a survivability set is for a certain segments of players. A set like Iceheart helps some non-elite players to at least crawl through game content that we would otherwise not be able to play. Please consider creating more functional survivability sets rather than effectively removing the one set that was actually useful and fun to play.

EXACTLY this

Dragonredux

This nerf is uncalled for, pvpers and endgame pve'ers never used it, it was probably the most balanced middle ground set in this game. Nerfing the shield or the damage, I'll get annoyed but I'll get over it eventually, but that cooldown? Oh the set is dead to me now. I'll take Imperium since you used that as an example, the reason that set isn't really used is because that cooldown is too high on a defensive set to be reliable enough to keep people alive. I said it once and I say it again, BUFF the other sets like Imperium, figure out their problems and try to adjust it. I would love to use other sets in this game but a lot of sets have very underwhelming 5pc effects, if you keep nerfing monster sets like this at a certain point people will just start stacking 1 pc effects and forget the 2pc.

And for the people comparing this to Grothdarr, you're forgetting one thing. The shield goes down, the damage goes.

FoxEsquire

ZOS, PLEASE Don't nerf the Iceheart set. If it ain't broke, don't "fix" it. Stop alienating your player base each patch with bs "patches" and nerfs like this. Didn't you folks learn anything from last Fall? Try instead to make Mother Ciannait actually good. How about making the new helm set Iceheart on steroids? Folks will farm it then. For now it appears you can only use Mother Ciannait on couple niche builds anyway. Waste of time and bag space, imo. Iceheart can be used on everything just about.

thadjarvis

@Dagoth_Rac

Solid point. If a good chunk of a group isn't at burning strategy DPS level (or even desire to burn), the content can become significantly more difficult. IH was always one of several great tools for groups that cannot burn through a mechanic. Same for solo. It was particularly helpful for players starting in vDLC content.

It seems they are also specifically targeting that group of players with HoF changes to make the hardest (non-HM) vDLC easier to clear. Many of the changes seemed to focus on making the DPS level lower to use more burn strategies (or at least skip a few of the repeating mechanics).

The net of the two changes seems to be to reinforce the importance as you put it so well to simply kill it faster as opposed to playing through mechanics with safety tools.

nightstrike

LukosCreyden wrote: »

As a solo player, this is kind of disappointing.

I am honestly not that great at this game, but Iceheart lets me do things like solo DLC dungeons on normal, so I can experience the content the developers make and just have a good time.
That is going to be a whole lot more difficult now. It really is quite discouraging.

Iceheart isn't like other sets that have been nerfed in the past; it doesn't break PVP, it doesn't trivialize endgame content, it is just a solid set for the solo player.

I almost always disagree with nerfs, as they take something that feels powerful and fun and just make it less so. The fact that this nerf comes so soon after the discussion about solo players missing out on stories in dungeon content adds a little extra sting, as this set allowed us to experience that content.

Maybe I am over-exaggerating, but I feel that nerfing this set is a nerf against solo players and ESO has always been special BECAUSE you can really be a solo player. I feel like this is a step in taking away something that makes ESO what it is.

Hey @ZOS_GinaBruno , I hate throwing out the ZOS tag, but could you pass these thoughts on to the combat balancing folk? I know I am just a drop in the ocean here, but this is something that I would hope they could see, even if it doesn'tt end up changing anything.

Couldn't agree more....

I'm in the exact same boat -- I like to solo content so that I can enjoy the stories, dialogue, voiceovers, and graphical detail that I paid thousands of dollars for.

Losing that ability because a new DLC set sucks is not what I want in a content provider, ZOS.

markulrich1966

ZOS's assumption is wrong, that this set would be popular in trials only.

I use it to do daily worldboss quests, elsweyr, but mainly summerset.

The slight AOE and shield is not spectacular, but just enough to deal with all the mudcrabs of queen of the reef. It makes the small, but required difference to the other popular old set, slimecraw.
It is NOT strong enough to solo B'Korgen for me, but I can do him at least with support of 1 other player.

Why is it so important?

On xbox NA, I do NOT need iceheart.
Because there I can do 8 summerset bosses within 1-2 hours each day with other players. So many people around.

But not on xbox EU. You meanwhile rarely find other worldboss hunters in summerset.
So even WITH iceheart, I often skip those bosses now, as it is too tiring. Northern Elsweyr actually becomes similar, now that the hype is over.

With the set nerfed, I will not be able to play them at all.

This would be no issue, if ZOS would implement another suggestion formerly made, to scale the boss strength depending on the server population. But as such a change would require much coding, I doubt that it will ever happen.

So ZOS, it is up to you. Nerf the set, and thus stop people from being able to play your content.
Or accept the current "imbalance", as long as you are not able to balance server-population, too.

I mean... somewhen when you can't play content, why should you continue to play the game?

DustyWarehouse

The primary reason for people to play new DLC dungeons past the first run-through is to get the new gear. Everyone knows that's why dungeon DLCs sell as well as they do (which is an assumption; if they don't sell that well, why do ZOS make them?) Once you have your gear, there is zero replay value in dungeons (at least that's how I feel). People grinding undaunted levels tend to not touch DLC dungeons because they're long, boring and often just the right difficulty to make them less appealing to someone who just wants undaunted level 9.

So from a business perspective it makes sense to put sets in a new dungeon that people will want over other sets that are already in the game. The issue here is that the new set is not a viable replacement for Iceheart. ZOS didn't even balance Iceheart with the new set. So it doesn't even make business sense. It just pisses people off.

Adding ever more sets to the game creates a number of problems: set uniqueness is diminished with each new set added, it is harder to balance all the sets in the game, and without making the new sets better than the old ones, no one wants to buy the related DLC (or even do the dungeons at all, for ESO+ players).

Having "standards" is a way to balance, but right now those standards are being followed so blindly they are causing an even greater issue; just look at this thread. I wonder if they've considered adjusting their standards instead of Iceheart? Looking at numbers when balancing is important for sure, but experiencing them in the game is even more so and I don't feel like ZOS do this at all.

And why was Iceheart even looked at? Because the community made the comparison between it and the new monster set. Imagine if ZOS were able to preemptively make this kind of comparison during or prior to designing a new monster set.

My faith in the teams responsible for combat and balance (skills and sets) is at an all-time low. And it hits hard because, along with terrible performance, it has made almost all of my close friends leave the game.

Moloch1514

Sadly we wouldnt care about this if not for the horrible Murkmire shield nerf. We had to adapt, and Iceheart was an option. Now it isnt because of this bogus "standardization".

What ever happened to @ZOS_RobGarrett by the way? I remember he was the one communicating with us once.

Darkstorne

DustyWarehouse wrote: »

Having "standards" is a way to balance, but right now those standards are being followed so blindly they are causing an even greater issue; just look at this thread. I wonder if they've considered adjusting their standards instead of Iceheart? Looking at numbers when balancing is important for sure, but experiencing them in the game is even more so and I don't feel like ZOS do this at all.

So much this ^

Agenericname

Dagoth_Rac wrote: »

I think the reason this nerf has touched a nerve actually goes deeper than, "make a lousy new monster set look less lousy by nerfing an existing set."

In just about every game on Earth, there are multiple ways to approach clearing content. And the two most common are:

1). Fast, high risk, high damage approaches that aim to kill everything before it kills you
2). Slow but steady, low risk, low damage approaches that aim at avoiding dying more than getting a high score

But ESO has a weird design where the first option is actually less risky. And the second approach barely exists. This is one of the most DPS-centric games ever created. If you are struggling with a boss, the answer is almost always, "Kill it faster." Even if you are struggling with a mechanic, doing more damage to avoid mechanic or more damage so you see mechanic fewer times, is usually best option.

Iceheart was one of the only options for this slow, steady, methodical approach to clearing content. You were not going to get any high scores. Were going to get less drops because it takes you twice as long to kill stuff. You often had to deal with mechanics that faster groups avoid. But it was an alternate way to approach content.

Nerfing Iceheart is not just about nerfing Iceheart. It feels like another proclamation of, "Thou shalt use the min/max meta DPS sets! Thou shalt bow down at the altar to DPS! No other way is permissible!"

It's more than simply nerfing a set that I use to make another look more attractive. Its nerfing a set that I rarely use but often carry to give me a set that I may not benefit from at all. I don't like cast times. It doesn't apply nearly as universally as Ice Hearts.

The rest i agree with. I primarily run the vet DLCs and see the set quite often in some of the more difficult fights. If you ended up with a new(er) player in your group struggling to stay alive, often enough this set could help them at least familiarize themselves with the mechanics. People already complain about that content. How will this make it more friendly?

Even realizing that they're going to far, it still doesn't seem like they give that demographic of player, or many other demographics.

I'm beginning to think that sacrificing fun at the altar of balance isn't always a great idea.

Nordic__Knights

I see their doing what they done about bluescreening to us here to next this well be moved to tec support and never be seen its getting old that they never hear us out

Dusk_Coven

Kemenril wrote: »

I mean... somewhen when you can't play content, why should you continue to play the game?

Maybe they are learning from PC(EU). Bet you there are still people renewing their subs even though they keep getting kicked out of Cyrodiil.

mav1234

Balance in sets and skills is extremely important, sure. But balance is not determined by raw numbers in a spreadsheet.

Iceheart *was* balanced because it provided a strong option for soloing in PvE content but did not influence any other content in the game. It was not so strong it was mandatory, either - I've done Maelstrom on a slew of Mag toons and never used it. It was extremely weak in group PvE and in PvP. It had no usage outside of some niche soloing activities; this was despite its apparent relative strength compared to (haha) Phoenix etc. That tells us how balanced the set was, actually, and tells us more about the lack of strength of Phoenix.

Perhaps instead of knocking out Iceheart, the developers should have examined the other sets they mentioned and decide where they might improve them for their own niche usage. That would bring more sets into usage, rather than knocking out a used set.

Dusk_Coven

DustyWarehouse wrote: »

The primary reason for people to play new DLC dungeons past the first run-through is to get the new gear. Everyone knows that's why dungeon DLCs sell as well as they do (which is an assumption; if they don't sell that well, why do ZOS make them?) Once you have your gear, there is zero replay value in dungeons (at least that's how I feel).

Assuming that people actually want those rewards (and a lot of people don't give an indrik's arse about a lot of sets in a lot of dungeons, DLC or otherwise), once people have the rewards, they don't care AND they don't care to help others by spending a big portion of their grind time. Then the content becomes dead.

It's the same with SWTOR's Macrobinoculars mission arc. Dead content now. People LITERALLY have the final mission sitting in their quest log FOR OVER A YEAR because they can't find anyone to help them and a full group of 4 is mandatory for mechanics. People who do help them get basically nothing useful for their time.

HackTheMinotaur

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

We’ve been reading everyone’s feedback about the recent change to Iceheart (not just on the forums, but other channels and sources as well) and we appreciate you taking the time to let us know your thoughts. We know it’s frustrating to see a strong set get adjusted in this way, but it was a necessary step to bring it a little closer in strength with existing and upcoming sets.

That said, based on some in-game data, testing, and the feedback we’ve been reading, we’re going to make further adjustments to this set in next week’s PTS patch. The plan is to make the baseline function meet the same standards as the Mother Ciannait set, with a 5k shield that lasts up to 6 seconds with a 6 second cooldown. With Iceheart's auxiliary function being focused on preserving the shield to get as much effectiveness out of the damage as possible, and Ciannait around rushing in boldly to break the shield to maximize the Magicka gain, there will be a better parity between the two that helps them both meet our standards as well as feel different from an engagement standpoint.

I hope this turns out better than it sounds. For one, “boldly breaking” a damage shield goes against the concept of a damage shield. You want a damage shield to last as long as possible.

I also hope that solo players are not penalized for being hit by an enemy while using Iceheart. Again, you need to consider the real use case, not an ideal case or how you think the set should.

The reality is that most players use Iceheart when solo or tanking and are therefor taking damage all the time. They should not be penalized in that regard.

@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_Gilliam

Hurbster

Nerf Iceheart - said no-one who actually plays the game ever.

NoNameNamer

I cannot describe how upset I am over this nerf. You took a great and fun set nobody complained about and effectively made it useless. You had some players that were enjoying the game that now suddenly don't. No sane person can possibly justify a move like this.

karekiz

Altyrann wrote: »

the value of defensive and offensive potential this set provided was leagues beyond our standards when comparing it to other sets such as Brands of the Imperium or Phoenix.

I know, how about you add Phoenix an ability where if you die it has a very high recast time, but will revive you from death. Maybe people would use it for specific situations as a Get out of jail free card. That way this under-used set would see more play.

Ohh wait.

Xvorg

karekiz wrote: »

Altyrann wrote: »

the value of defensive and offensive potential this set provided was leagues beyond our standards when comparing it to other sets such as Brands of the Imperium or Phoenix.

I know, how about you add Phoenix an ability where if you die it has a very high recast time, but will revive you from death. Maybe people would use it for specific situations as a Get out of jail free card. That way this under-used set would see more play.

Ohh wait.

You mean like that fire bird from ancient Mythology? But why a set called Phoenix should do that?

Vaoh

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

We’ve been reading everyone’s feedback about the recent change to Iceheart (not just on the forums, but other channels and sources as well) and we appreciate you taking the time to let us know your thoughts. We know it’s frustrating to see a strong set get adjusted in this way, but it was a necessary step to bring it a little closer in strength with existing and upcoming sets.

That said, based on some in-game data, testing, and the feedback we’ve been reading, we’re going to make further adjustments to this set in next week’s PTS patch. The plan is to make the baseline function meet the same standards as the Mother Ciannait set, with a 5k shield that lasts up to 6 seconds with a 6 second cooldown. With Iceheart's auxiliary function being focused on preserving the shield to get as much effectiveness out of the damage as possible, and Ciannait around rushing in boldly to break the shield to maximize the Magicka gain, there will be a better parity between the two that helps them both meet our standards as well as feel different from an engagement standpoint.

It’s rare that players all across the game are so unanimously against a change. The feedback for Iceheart is everywhere. We don’t want a good set which has been perfect for years to get put in the trash.

Feedback was given to you regarding why the new Mother Ciannait set was weak in 5.3.0. It’s like we’re being punished for giving feedback.

Don’t “balance” a new set by ruining an old one. Smh.

agingerinohio

I have to agree with Hack the Minotaur. This was a tasteless nerf to promote their new dlc set....which will only be great on Templar's. The only way I could see the new set working on any class other than magplar, would be if they used Channeled Acceleration.

Bucky_13

Kemenril wrote: »

fred4 wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

We know it’s frustrating to see a strong set get adjusted in this way, but it was a necessary step to bring it a little closer in strength with existing and upcoming sets.

It is not frustrating, it is bewildering. It was not a strong set.

It was not a strong set.


This cannot be repeated enough. They're nerfing a One Tamriel set that had a small and enthusiastic community who used it, but was neither meta nor considered by any single player as being OP.

It was not a strong set.

It's the dumbest change since they changed Rapid Maneuver and screwed over stealth characters for solo PvE.

Veinblood1965

xWarbrain wrote: »

"We love that people use it for vMA, but we don't want you to use it for vMA anymore."

That's kind of what I read into that also, was shaking my head.

evoniee

if anything not balanced, they will fix it, it will hit the sweet spot.

Moloch1514

evoniee wrote: »

if anything not balanced, they will fix it, get over it, grow up.

In the words of Rich Lambert, you know you don't have to be here, right?

ESO_Nightingale

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

We’ve been reading everyone’s feedback about the recent change to Iceheart (not just on the forums, but other channels and sources as well) and we appreciate you taking the time to let us know your thoughts. We know it’s frustrating to see a strong set get adjusted in this way, but it was a necessary step to bring it a little closer in strength with existing and upcoming sets.

That said, based on some in-game data, testing, and the feedback we’ve been reading, we’re going to make further adjustments to this set in next week’s PTS patch. The plan is to make the baseline function meet the same standards as the Mother Ciannait set, with a 5k shield that lasts up to 6 seconds with a 6 second cooldown. With Iceheart's auxiliary function being focused on preserving the shield to get as much effectiveness out of the damage as possible, and Ciannait around rushing in boldly to break the shield to maximize the Magicka gain, there will be a better parity between the two that helps them both meet our standards as well as feel different from an engagement standpoint.

You guys better revert the damage

NupidStoob

TIL there is a huge amount of players that unironically think current Icehart is totally fine and not overperforming. One of the biggest crutch sets this game has ever seen.

It's mainly used on magicka classes which already have access to shields and are generally safer than stamina due to being ranged. Elsweyr brought us PFG which allows to sustain fine with bistat food which also means that the HP for magicka classes has gone up by 2-3k compared to before that. With Artaeum Pickled Fish Bowl every magicka DD has over 18K HP. Now add ebon and a warden healer to the group and everyone sits above 20K. With expansive frost cloak from warden healer and proper CP allocation you will also have over 20k resistances to the primary damage type of a trial as well as all the other ridiculous amounts of mitigation you get from having 270 points to spend into red CP.

Barrier got buffed to hit 12 people as well.

On top of all this you still want Iceheart which gives you a shield as strong or stronger than a regular magicka shield with autocast every 6-8 seconds as well as dealing half the damage grothdarr does.

All this stuff added together plus the huge amount of dps powercreep has made Immortal Redeemer, Tick Tock Tormentor and Gryphon Heart already total joke achievements. Yet ZoS is still nerfing trials as well regularly.

Despite all this people have the nerve to say that ZoS isn't holding the hands of casual players by bringing a ridiculous set like Iceheart more in line.

Tannus15

I have to say this is pretty funny

With Iceheart's auxiliary function being focused on preserving the shield to get as much effectiveness out of the damage as possible

that tiny aoe and tiny dps from the shield

Ciannait around rushing in boldly to break the shield to maximize the Magicka gain

600 magicka every 6 seconds. wtf is that meant to do?
just,
Wut?
the "auxiliary function" doesn't mean anything. it's a shield set. that's it, it all comes down to the proc condition and frequency of the shield

What makes iceheart good apart from the shield? the 1pc crit.

What will make Ciannait good? Your build has a channelled spammable. In a nut shell, you're a jabsplar. jabs with this is an aoe cone that heals and shields you.
Apart from that maybe a rapid strikes stam build might run this over ice heart for a vMA flawless.