Why nerf Iceheart?

snoozy

any chance we can get the shield buffed to at least 6k? come on zos, throw us a bone. make mother ciannait the same value. then both sets might actually be viable.

pretty please???

dazee

Joy_Division wrote: »

ZOS pays way too much attention to elite end-game PvE players and PvP complainers and "balances" the game to their standards rather than the vast majority of the community.
.

I like how you think, you embrace logic and reason, despite being a class rep it didnt go to your head, and you realize who the game SHOULD be balanced around.

ESO_Nightingale

dazee wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

ZOS pays way too much attention to elite end-game PvE players and PvP complainers and "balances" the game to their standards rather than the vast majority of the community.
.

I like how you think, you embrace logic and reason, despite being a class rep it didnt go to your head, and you realize who the game SHOULD be balanced around.

When it's a game, removing the fun from it is absolutely the wrong way to go. I think moderation between endgame and casual is the best way to do things. Make fun changes that have an impact in right area. That seems difficult to do. But for warden, we have a list going that tries to do that.

Olupajmibanan

snoozy wrote: »

any chance we can get the shield buffed to at least 6k? come on zos, throw us a bone. make mother ciannait the same value. then both sets might actually be viable.

pretty please???

How about making Iceheart, Mother Ciannait and all other shielding sets to be % of max hp? With a flat cap of course to prevent tanks from having unreasonably big shields. Let's say Iceheart and Mother Ciannait to shield you for 40% of your max hp with maximum possible shield 10k. This would promote appropriate character building while giving us the possibility to retain old shield strength. Instead of running with 16k hp, slapping 10k (with CPs) shields Iceheart on yourself and being done with it you would have to adjust your health accordingly to have reasonable shield size. This would also promote use of Wardens and their Minor Toughness buff.

What do you guys think?

ZOS_FalcoYamaoka

Greetings,

Some posts have been removed due to being off topic to the current topic of the thread. Please keep your responses on topic when adding to the discussion.

snoozy

Olupajmibanan wrote: »

snoozy wrote: »

any chance we can get the shield buffed to at least 6k? come on zos, throw us a bone. make mother ciannait the same value. then both sets might actually be viable.

pretty please???

How about making Iceheart, Mother Ciannait and all other shielding sets to be % of max hp? With a flat cap of course to prevent tanks from having unreasonably big shields. Let's say Iceheart and Mother Ciannait to shield you for 40% of your max hp with maximum possible shield 10k. This would promote appropriate character building while giving us the possibility to retain old shield strength. Instead of running with 16k hp, slapping 10k (with CPs) shields Iceheart on yourself and being done with it you would have to adjust your health accordingly to have reasonable shield size. This would also promote use of Wardens and their Minor Toughness buff.

What do you guys think?

i support this idea

sonwon.1_ESO

snoozy wrote: »

any chance we can get the shield buffed to at least 6k? come on zos, throw us a bone. make mother ciannait the same value. then both sets might actually be viable.

pretty please???

Agreed, please make Iceheart useful again.

thadjarvis

Dusk_Coven wrote: »

Instead, you ISOLATE the change you want and tweak it. In this case, AchievementXYZ. You make that specific content harder to achieve so that you can be happy with your tiny percentile of people who can carry others wanting to buy it. Especially when not everyone is an initial Elsweyr release stamina Necromancer using the item you are trying to adjust.

They did with HoF in the same patch. They nerfed HoF initially with a stated intent to make difficult content easier. Then weeks later decided to nerf IH as it was stated as it made difficult content too easy...?!

1. Make things easier (nerf HoF),
2. make things harder (nerf IH), OR
3. leave it alone....

Whether one agrees upon the difficulty direction those options are at least coherent. Nerfing both is just mind boggling to me. Honestly, I’d be fine with any of the 3 options over the chosen route.

So, what is the ZoS path going forward: easier, harder, or a mishmash? I have no clue but will have to assume the latter. Eg will an IH wearing mag 1st prog group find vHoF easier or harder?

pklemming

What I am taking away from this is that ZoS are not interested in a game that is either disabled, or new player friendly. Multiple posts have pretty much gone over what this set is often used for, and by whom, and there is still silence. If that is the public image they wish to portray, then they are doing an awesome job.

Rolandaxx

ESO_Nightingale wrote: »

When it's a game, removing the fun from it is absolutely the wrong way to go.

Could not agree with this more.

NerevarineLoL

pklemming wrote: »

What I am taking away from this is that ZoS are not interested in a game that is either disabled, or new player friendly. Multiple posts have pretty much gone over what this set is often used for, and by whom, and there is still silence. If that is the public image they wish to portray, then they are doing an awesome job.

Please don't use "disabled or new people" as an argument, because ZOS already caters to them - the game is evenly split between normal and veteran content. Anything outside of group content doesn't even have a veteran option. All normal content can be tackled by pairing two easy-to-acquire sets and primarily using heavy attacks, on any class/attribute specs. Normal content is specifically made for people who aren't too interested in combat challenges but would rather experience story.

Veteran content is made for people who enjoy MMORPG aspect of the game more and would rather challenge themselves. It is also often split into veteran and veteran hardmode, as well as providing additional challenges (no-death, speedrun, everything at once, specific "roleplaying" achievements, etc.). It is completely optional content - no one is forcing you to play difficult content to experience story, and majority of the gear can be obtained through normal content or other means (Golden for monster sets, for example). Even the perfected versions of trial gear offer only a small boost in stats that does not turn a weak player into a strong one.

It would be unfair to people seeking challenge to see difficult content drop in quality because new and/or disabled people have harder time completing completely optional content. I personally have never even heard of any sort of game - video or real life - getting its difficulty adjusted so that both disabled/new people as well as healthy/experienced people would be able to compete on the same level.

So, stop hiding behind *** arguments - some people here at least had the guts to come clean and say that they used Iceheart to get through difficult content without doing all the mechanics properly and now they'll have to adjust and learn to block, dodge, move away, etc. Others brought up reasonable arguments such as Iceheart being already weak and only ice damage-themed monster set just got weaker, despite the real reason for the nerf being the insane free shield.

A good chunk of posts here presented baseless arguments, how they will no longer be able to complete optional difficult content without actually trying it with the new Iceheart on PTS. I've yet to see a single post going over a logged fight to compare new IH with the old one and show how much exactly it affects them even in solo content such as vMA, which is easy to test. And the fact that there are multiple threads on this set, sometimes reaching 27 pages, makes it clear that, in no way, Iceheart was a niche set that only new and/or disabled people used. If anything, it shows that a lot of people used it as a means to make difficult content, that they were otherwise unprepared for, slightly easier - a fact some people clearly stated in this very thread, without masking it with some baseless arguments about ZOS not catering to disabled people or that they only nerfed it to boost sales of the new DLC.

And of course nearly no one called for IH nerfs - same reason why nearly no one asks for changes to Barrier's shield value. It is primarily a PvE oriented set which lowers the entry level for veteran content, allowing people to make more mistakes than they would otherwise (while also still requiring to do at least the bare minimum of moving occasionally). You'll find several comments here and outside of forums where endgame people (i.e. groups that push for scores or at least go for optimized trial triple runs) are/were unhappy with the safety net IH and/or Barrier provide, but that is because it allows/-ed people to completely ignore playing around some of the mechanics, dying a bit less often - often just enough to complete the content - and then come in and demand special treatment for having beaten difficult content. However, same endgame people didn't go around making a lot of threads asking for nerfs to IH and/or Barrier because they know that the amount of people who beat a trial triple with Barriers and Icehearts and then go apply for score pushing guilds, carry runs and so on are a minority and the remaining PvE community doesn't deserve to be punished because of a small group of arrogant people.

But, of course, keep in mind that not asking for a nerf doesn't mean that one can't be justified. That's the majority of pro-nerf people you see commenting here - people who didn't necessarily ask or want the nerf, but are happy to see IH receiving some changes.

thadjarvis wrote: »

They did with HoF in the same patch. They nerfed HoF initially with a stated intent to make difficult content easier. Then weeks later decided to nerf IH as it was stated as it made difficult content too easy...?!

HoF changes are completely unrelated to Iceheart. HoF has been infamous for having a much higher entry bar than other trials, especially requiring a good coordination between tanks. It is also probably the only trial that offered nothing except for the feeling of accomplishment for completing it - the loot is, generally, undesirable, with only one set being used by a few classes, the length, the bugs and the performance in the trial means that most groups will either work on a single clear for the skin or a single clear for TTT, with little-to-no interested in replayability.Code has gone more into detail about why some of the changes to HoF are welcome and are reasonable in this thread. But, again, it had nothing to do with Iceheart, because, most of all, no other trial has received such major changes in combination with nerf to Iceheart, and the idea that the two nerfs are somehow connected or even related is probably even more outlandish than claiming that Iceheart was nerfed to push out disabled/new people out of the game.

thadjarvis

@NerevarineLoL

I don't think it would have stirred up the plethora of posts if the current PTS IH was the original proposed change put out in a bigger patch. The threads are long bc there's really no other PvE nerf to complain about this patch. Whining is an online forum mantra.

In fact, I agree with everything up to the relation to HoF. From your link:

"[Code's alternative suggested changes]...will make it easier for people to deal with the mechanic by lowering the bar for and thus promoting skillful play. In contrast, reducing the damage [example of ZoS's changes] will make it easier for people to deal with the mechanic by making the mechanic less consequential, easier to ignore, and this discourages skillful play. I think most will agree that one of these is a better solution than the other."

They choose changes to HoF that made it easier to disregard mechanics and at the same time lessened the utility of a tool (IH) to disregard mechanics. That's what I find perplexing. The current IH change + all of Code's suggestions would have been my preference.

Hurbster

Personally, I think that the rollback they did is what they wanted all along. When they announced the 12s cooldown it was just a smokescreen for the change they really wanted to make. Get people all angry and then -'oh back to 6s, that's not so bad'. Covering for the shield nerf which is what they really wanted.

Because fun and interesting build are not allowed, obviously.

Stevie6

Did some testing after the patch and Iceheart is now DOA. 4800 shield is a nothing burger. Ave Joe Player/Casual Player will have to rely on a damage set like grothdar (next to be nerfed) for basic game content. Heh, might as well nerf Psijic passive shield as well when doing a block lol.

SidraWillowsky

Stevie6 wrote: »

Did some testing after the patch and Iceheart is now DOA. 4800 shield is a nothing burger. Ave Joe Player/Casual Player will have to rely on a damage set like grothdar (next to be nerfed) for basic game content. Heh, might as well nerf Psijic passive shield as well when doing a block lol.

It's beyond dead. Obliterated. Decimated. Annihilated. You get the idea. I was hoping it would somehow not be as bad as I thought it would be, but it's actually worse.

Stevie6

What ZOS should have done is keep the original shield and drop the damage altogether and just add a cool frost animation. However, I REALLY don't think anyone in their right mind will run the dungeon anymore for the helm..not worth it. They could delete the dungeon and make it into housing hehe.

Dusk_Coven

Hurbster wrote: »

Because fun and interesting build are not allowed, obviously.

Also because people making smart choices in their build is not allowed.
Now we'll have to choose something else... that'll end up being nerfed too.

IronWooshu

This nerf is a tragedy to this game. This was my first ever monster set. I used it to solo farm on my Magplar and now it's barely better than the enchant you can get on a weapon and it's a monster set hidden behind harder content and RNG.

Night_Child

So, this set NOW has a damage shield that absorbs 5000 and can proc every 6 seconds. Every 6 seconds isn't bad, but 5000?! I'm not going to be nasty or rude, but hear me out:

Problem - NPCs (mostly bosses) have attacks that hit harder than 30k. A DPS' health sits roughly at 20k on average. That tells me that Ice Heart's 6 second cooldown is useless because any shield that mitigates 5000 damage is also useless.

Solution - Bring the shield absorbtion to a minimum 7,000 / maximum 10,000...up from 5000. Raise the cooldown to a minimum 7 seconds / maximum 10 seconds...up from 6 seconds; and slightly increase the damage it causes so tank-ish players feel like they are actually doing damage...even if it's only scratching the armor plate of the enemies. Also, create different monster sets that are not so comparible with each other, but that they are SO different, each set creates value depending on the situation.

I started on release back when Vet 12 (10 for PC) was actually a thing. This game has come a long way, but trust the ones on here that know what they are talking about. I'm not talking about meta players getting butt hurt becaused you messed up their metaness. This monster set isn't even meta. Resurrect Ice Heart. Give it new life, but don't do this to the ONLY frost damage monster set in the game. You have different armor sets that cause frost damage, but Ice Heart is the monster set that speaks for Ice loving players. Think about my answer to the problem.

Maxdevil

Any chance to see a buff to the set?

RaptorRodeoGod

The set seemed to recieve favorable proc scaling in Blackwood and is above Skoria and Nerien'eth in DPS tests

Maxdevil

The set is pretty weak right now and with ice being reworked I think it should receive some love, the set is really interesting with ice mechanics oriented in critical damage(minor Brittle) and damage shield from warden/ heavy attack with a ice staff. It is too bad that it’s not good at the moment, the set really had the flavor of what a ice set should look like.

ESO_Nightingale

RaptorRodeoGod wrote: »

The set seemed to recieve favorable proc scaling in Blackwood and is above Skoria and Nerien'eth in DPS tests

Unfortunately in actual content it's a lot lower since the damage is dependant on the shield staying up.

ESO_Nightingale

Maxdevil wrote: »

The set is pretty weak right now and with ice being reworked I think it should receive some love, the set is really interesting with ice mechanics oriented in critical damage(minor Brittle) and damage shield from warden/ heavy attack with a ice staff. It is too bad that it’s not good at the moment, the set really had the flavor of what a ice set should look like.

I think that the set is okay we just need to get more frost damage monster sets. Pretty sure it's like 9 of them are flame damage related and we haven't gotten a new frost damage monster set ever in any new dlc appart from the existing iceheart.

ZOS_Icy

Greetings,

We have closed this topic as it was originally created in February 2020 and the information may no longer be relevant. In many cases, it's better to create a new thread on a topic that you want to discuss as opposed to bumping one that is rather old.

Thank you for your understanding