Please remove the new damage shield from the game and restore the Iceheart set to what it was.

Letholdrus

Fixing something that is broken by braking something else that was perfectly fine does not fix the initial broken thing. All you left with are two useless broken things.

Remove the new abysmal damage monster set completely from the game, and revert the changes to the Iceheart set.

Iceheart has a lot of in game flavor and fits a frost mage / warden theme perfectly. It was not overpowered in the least (looking at you Zaan, please don't go and break Zaan now as well).

Really, I would rather have no new monster set at all, compared to getting a great thematical set broken.

Noxavian

Letholdrus wrote: »

Fixing something that is broken by braking something else that was perfectly fine does not fix the initial broken thing. All you left with are two useless broken things.

Remove the new abysmal damage monster set completely from the game, and revert the changes to the Iceheart set.

Iceheart has a lot of in game flavor and fits a frost mage / warden theme perfectly. It was not overpowered in the least (looking at you Zaan, please don't go and break Zaan now as well).

Really, I would rather have no new monster set at all, compared to getting a great thematical set broken.

I suppose I'm just surprised out of every thematic in that dungeon/final boss fight, the thing they choose to put on the monster set is the shield? Like what? Why not let us summon a mini pulsing damage thing? How about a rotating effect that has a chance to summon a big revenant, stranglers, etc, etc? Could even make it elemental based if you wanted to.

Like Im just confused out of all the interesting things we fought in that dungeon the thing the design team thought of was "oooh big shield that restores less than 1k magicka when broken. That will be useful"

Firstly the whole restoring 600 magicka thing is quite possibly one of the most useless monster set effects I have ever seen. That isn't even half a spell in most cases...

vgabor

They made a new garbage monster set, and when that was pointed out on pts forum and compared it to Iceheart, they made Iceheart garbage too. That's called balancing I guess these days...

akdave0

How about they revert shields back to the way they were before Morrowind since the pvp people claim that it isn’t code bound and they now have battle spirit. There is no reason why this shouldn’t happen.

drkfrontiers

Letholdrus wrote: »

Iceheart has a lot of in game flavor and fits a frost mage / warden theme perfectly. It was not overpowered in the least (looking at you Zaan, please don't go and break Zaan now as well).

And... yet you couldn't help yourself. You ask for a set not to be nerf ..by pointing to another set which you think deserves one. The logic defies reason.

Hurbster

Agreed.

Rave the Histborn

Letholdrus wrote: »

Fixing something that is broken by braking something else that was perfectly fine does not fix the initial broken thing. All you left with are two useless broken things.

Remove the new abysmal damage monster set completely from the game, and revert the changes to the Iceheart set.

Iceheart has a lot of in game flavor and fits a frost mage / warden theme perfectly. It was not overpowered in the least (looking at you Zaan, please don't go and break Zaan now as well).

Really, I would rather have no new monster set at all, compared to getting a great thematical set broken.

good DoT with a large radius plus a large damage shield

it wasn't overpowered in the least

I'm not sure that means what you think it means

Letholdrus

Rave the Histborn wrote: »

Letholdrus wrote: »

Fixing something that is broken by braking something else that was perfectly fine does not fix the initial broken thing. All you left with are two useless broken things.

Remove the new abysmal damage monster set completely from the game, and revert the changes to the Iceheart set.

Iceheart has a lot of in game flavor and fits a frost mage / warden theme perfectly. It was not overpowered in the least (looking at you Zaan, please don't go and break Zaan now as well).

Really, I would rather have no new monster set at all, compared to getting a great thematical set broken.

good DoT with a large radius plus a large damage shield

it wasn't overpowered in the least

I'm not sure that means what you think it means

Compared to some other sets out there for PvE, no, it was not overpowered at all.

Apart from that, the point of this post is that nerfing Iceheart doesn't fix the crappy new set. It only makes both sets crappy.

Buff sets that are currently only good for disenchanting.

Letholdrus

drkfrontiers wrote: »

Letholdrus wrote: »

Iceheart has a lot of in game flavor and fits a frost mage / warden theme perfectly. It was not overpowered in the least (looking at you Zaan, please don't go and break Zaan now as well).

And... yet you couldn't help yourself. You ask for a set not to be nerf ..by pointing to another set which you think deserves one. The logic defies reason.

If you reread my post, I said the opposite. ZoS created all sets, they know the stats of each and every set, including information such as which pieces are worn in trails and which aren't.

Nerfing Iceheart to make the new set look better made no sense. That is why I implied that by nerfing for instance Zaan to fix Iceheart or the new set now will also make zero sense.

Can't fix a broken wheel by braking a working one.

drkfrontiers

Letholdrus wrote: »

drkfrontiers wrote: »

Letholdrus wrote: »

Iceheart has a lot of in game flavor and fits a frost mage / warden theme perfectly. It was not overpowered in the least (looking at you Zaan, please don't go and break Zaan now as well).

And... yet you couldn't help yourself. You ask for a set not to be nerf ..by pointing to another set which you think deserves one. The logic defies reason.

If you reread my post, I said the opposite. ZoS created all sets, they know the stats of each and every set, including information such as which pieces are worn in trails and which aren't.

Nerfing Iceheart to make the new set look better made no sense. That is why I implied that by nerfing for instance Zaan to fix Iceheart or the new set now will also make zero sense.

Can't fix a broken wheel by braking a working one.

Ah sorry I misunderstood you then! My stupid.

ESO_Nightingale

Lol let's nerf every set because it has a niche- ZOS

Edit: i *** up my formatting. Didn't mean to post a comment to Rave.

snoozy

get rid of the damage, make a separate frost dmg monster set and restore iceheart's shield. also buff mother ciannait on par so we can pretend it is worth getting.
please and thank you.

snoozy

Letholdrus wrote: »

drkfrontiers wrote: »

Letholdrus wrote: »

Iceheart has a lot of in game flavor and fits a frost mage / warden theme perfectly. It was not overpowered in the least (looking at you Zaan, please don't go and break Zaan now as well).

And... yet you couldn't help yourself. You ask for a set not to be nerf ..by pointing to another set which you think deserves one. The logic defies reason.

ZoS created all sets, they know the stats of each and every set, including information such as which pieces are worn in trails and which aren't.

you know, sometimes i really doubt they actually have an overview of their own game. the changes made are often so absurd, only someone who doesn't play could come up with them.

Alienoutlaw

whilst i support the OP the fact is ZOS will not change Ice Heart back, the fact it took the whole community to come together just to get a compromise when they realised we wouldnt go quietly was a miracle, as far as they are concerned they "listened" case closed unfortunately

yRaven

For me Iceheart is still better than the 2.0 version and i still use it sometimes

Letholdrus

yRaven wrote: »

For me Iceheart is still better than the 2.0 version and i still use it sometimes

Hi friend, with Iceheart 2.0 are you referring to the new set from the new dungeon?

seerevaloc

Personally I didn't feel the Iceheart v2.0 change too deep. I was using it with my Magplar, and still using when necessary.
The previous version was better indeed, and no, it wasn't OP but neither the new one is too weak.

Point is, people, can't agree over "What is considered OP"

- A minmaxer won't use Iceheart for damage maximization at all. So I don't share the "Good DoT with Large Radius with Large Damage Shield" comment. It is used when someone needs defensive settings by sacrificing from some damage. Who needs damage use Slimecraw, Zaan, Grothdarr, Dual Crit, Ilambris, etc. and DoT wasn't that OP-good already. There's no big difference between 800 and 600 either.

- What strange is; Dev comment says this change is requested by community feedback. Which indirectly pointing to Class Representatives in my opinion. So just a handful end-game meta-player finds it too OP, the rest of community must obey the nerfed version now if this is true; I just hope it's not true.

- If some people still feeling uncomfortable & find that DoT way higher than it should be, then nerf the DoT, not damage shield. That is what I find a little meaningless.

Hf.

Dracane

Mother Ciannait is not even working properly. Eventually, the animation just stays on you and the shield will never proc on you again until you unslot it. Apart from it being way too weak, just like Iceheart now.

Agenericname

seerevaloc wrote: »

Personally I didn't feel the Iceheart v2.0 change too deep. I was using it with my Magplar, and still using when necessary.
The previous version was better indeed, and no, it wasn't OP but neither the new one is too weak.

Point is, people, can't agree over "What is considered OP"

- A minmaxer won't use Iceheart for damage maximization at all. So I don't share the "Good DoT with Large Radius with Large Damage Shield" comment. It is used when someone needs defensive settings by sacrificing from some damage. Who needs damage use Slimecraw, Zaan, Grothdarr, Dual Crit, Ilambris, etc. and DoT wasn't that OP-good already. There's no big difference between 800 and 600 either.

- What strange is; Dev comment says this change is requested by community feedback. Which indirectly pointing to Class Representatives in my opinion. So just a handful end-game meta-player finds it too OP, the rest of community must obey the nerfed version now if this is true; I just hope it's not true.

- If some people still feeling uncomfortable & find that DoT way higher than it should be, then nerf the DoT, not damage shield. That is what I find a little meaningless.

Hf.

I believe the devs said that the nerf was to bring it in line with their "standards."

I don't remember community feedback of any type having anything to do with the nerf.

Even if they said that, I doubt that I'd take it very seriously. Even PvPers haven't asked to nerf it. That alone speaks volumes.

seerevaloc

Agenericname wrote: »

seerevaloc wrote: »

Personally I didn't feel the Iceheart v2.0 change too deep. I was using it with my Magplar, and still using when necessary.
The previous version was better indeed, and no, it wasn't OP but neither the new one is too weak.

Point is, people, can't agree over "What is considered OP"

- A minmaxer won't use Iceheart for damage maximization at all. So I don't share the "Good DoT with Large Radius with Large Damage Shield" comment. It is used when someone needs defensive settings by sacrificing from some damage. Who needs damage use Slimecraw, Zaan, Grothdarr, Dual Crit, Ilambris, etc. and DoT wasn't that OP-good already. There's no big difference between 800 and 600 either.

- What strange is; Dev comment says this change is requested by community feedback. Which indirectly pointing to Class Representatives in my opinion. So just a handful end-game meta-player finds it too OP, the rest of community must obey the nerfed version now if this is true; I just hope it's not true.

- If some people still feeling uncomfortable & find that DoT way higher than it should be, then nerf the DoT, not damage shield. That is what I find a little meaningless.

Hf.

I believe the devs said that the nerf was to bring it in line with their "standards."

I don't remember community feedback of any type having anything to do with the nerf.

Even if they said that, I doubt that I'd take it very seriously. Even PvPers haven't asked to nerf it. That alone speaks volumes.

Hi @Agenericname

Developer Comment:
Spoiler
Iceheart has long been a powerful defensive set that has become a staple for situations where you want to sacrifice damage for survivability, especially in instances such as Maelstrom Arena and no-death Trial runs. While we love the idea of sets that help make these challenges easier, the overall value of the defensive power from this set was far too enabling for its ease of proc conditions and passive gameplay. We’ve opted to reduce the size of the shield, and slightly reduce the damage for maintaining the shield while retaining the ease of proc and high uptime, since much of the feedback for the set was based on the desire to keep those specific qualities.

Perhaps I misunderstood that part, from what I understand they set the new specific qualities since much of the feedback was based on the desire to keep those (newly set) specific qualities.

Agenericname

seerevaloc wrote: »

Agenericname wrote: »

seerevaloc wrote: »

Personally I didn't feel the Iceheart v2.0 change too deep. I was using it with my Magplar, and still using when necessary.
The previous version was better indeed, and no, it wasn't OP but neither the new one is too weak.

Point is, people, can't agree over "What is considered OP"

- A minmaxer won't use Iceheart for damage maximization at all. So I don't share the "Good DoT with Large Radius with Large Damage Shield" comment. It is used when someone needs defensive settings by sacrificing from some damage. Who needs damage use Slimecraw, Zaan, Grothdarr, Dual Crit, Ilambris, etc. and DoT wasn't that OP-good already. There's no big difference between 800 and 600 either.

- What strange is; Dev comment says this change is requested by community feedback. Which indirectly pointing to Class Representatives in my opinion. So just a handful end-game meta-player finds it too OP, the rest of community must obey the nerfed version now if this is true; I just hope it's not true.

- If some people still feeling uncomfortable & find that DoT way higher than it should be, then nerf the DoT, not damage shield. That is what I find a little meaningless.

Hf.

I believe the devs said that the nerf was to bring it in line with their "standards."

I don't remember community feedback of any type having anything to do with the nerf.

Even if they said that, I doubt that I'd take it very seriously. Even PvPers haven't asked to nerf it. That alone speaks volumes.

Hi @Agenericname

Developer Comment:
Spoiler
Iceheart has long been a powerful defensive set that has become a staple for situations where you want to sacrifice damage for survivability, especially in instances such as Maelstrom Arena and no-death Trial runs. While we love the idea of sets that help make these challenges easier, the overall value of the defensive power from this set was far too enabling for its ease of proc conditions and passive gameplay. We’ve opted to reduce the size of the shield, and slightly reduce the damage for maintaining the shield while retaining the ease of proc and high uptime, since much of the feedback for the set was based on the desire to keep those specific qualities.

Perhaps I misunderstood that part, from what I understand they set the new specific qualities since much of the feedback was based on the desire to keep those (newly set) specific qualities.

The feedback was to keep those qualities, but not at the new values. Most people didn't want Icehearts touched at all.

DR4GONFL1

Disappointed -

I have 2 sets of Icehearts of which i farmed for, transmitted a pice and golden out for probable the cost of 200K (50k each roughly), 50 transmute crystals for one piece and time framing. This set is what I've been using for awhile, it works well, I've invested time and money into it and now because ESO's new monster isn't all that it should be its been decided the best why to make it appeal is to make what I already have crap!!!

So now I have an option of this mediocre set or that mediocre set. I've already had to adapt to nerf's to the magic class and now my monster set is garbage and the new monster set is garbage.

For the future just make new sets good...

Parrot1986

DR4GONFL1 wrote: »

Disappointed -

I have 2 sets of Icehearts of which i farmed for, transmitted a pice and golden out for probable the cost of 200K (50k each roughly), 50 transmute crystals for one piece and time framing. This set is what I've been using for awhile, it works well, I've invested time and money into it and now because ESO's new monster isn't all that it should be its been decided the best why to make it appeal is to make what I already have crap!!!

So now I have an option of this mediocre set or that mediocre set. I've already had to adapt to nerf's to the magic class and now my monster set is garbage and the new monster set is garbage.

For the future just make new sets good...

Garbage is an over reaction, you lost a free 3k shield and a little bit of damage from a set that did negligible damage to begin with.

With dampen Magika, psijic skill and iceheart you still have 18k shield so 36k equivalent health essentially. If you’re still dying it’s either to one shots that either tank should be taking or you should be avoiding or to just standing in stupid.

I don’t agree with Zos nerfing Iceheart to make another set seem better when that set was poorly designed to begin with but iceheart is not garbage and still very useful for some players in some scenarios.

Rave the Histborn

Letholdrus wrote: »

Rave the Histborn wrote: »

Letholdrus wrote: »

Fixing something that is broken by braking something else that was perfectly fine does not fix the initial broken thing. All you left with are two useless broken things.

Remove the new abysmal damage monster set completely from the game, and revert the changes to the Iceheart set.

Iceheart has a lot of in game flavor and fits a frost mage / warden theme perfectly. It was not overpowered in the least (looking at you Zaan, please don't go and break Zaan now as well).

Really, I would rather have no new monster set at all, compared to getting a great thematical set broken.

good DoT with a large radius plus a large damage shield

it wasn't overpowered in the least

I'm not sure that means what you think it means

Compared to some other sets out there for PvE, no, it was not overpowered at all.

Apart from that, the point of this post is that nerfing Iceheart doesn't fix the crappy new set. It only makes both sets crappy.

Buff sets that are currently only good for disenchanting.

Most pve sets disnt have 2 functions they do very well.

"The new set is crappy" isnt really an argument so you're not really appealing to much. I mean I'd we take that ans your line of logic they should just buff it so you dont want to use ice heart. Either way not a good look

Shantu

From an entertainment value perspective there was no reason to touch Iceheart. But we should get used to it. Time and time again we've seen In the new combat development paradigm, "standards" take precedence over entertainment. Can't help but think this will come back to haunt them at some point.

Agenericname

Rave the Histborn wrote: »

Letholdrus wrote: »

Rave the Histborn wrote: »

Letholdrus wrote: »

Fixing something that is broken by braking something else that was perfectly fine does not fix the initial broken thing. All you left with are two useless broken things.

Remove the new abysmal damage monster set completely from the game, and revert the changes to the Iceheart set.

Iceheart has a lot of in game flavor and fits a frost mage / warden theme perfectly. It was not overpowered in the least (looking at you Zaan, please don't go and break Zaan now as well).

Really, I would rather have no new monster set at all, compared to getting a great thematical set broken.

good DoT with a large radius plus a large damage shield

it wasn't overpowered in the least

I'm not sure that means what you think it means

Compared to some other sets out there for PvE, no, it was not overpowered at all.

Apart from that, the point of this post is that nerfing Iceheart doesn't fix the crappy new set. It only makes both sets crappy.

Buff sets that are currently only good for disenchanting.

Most pve sets disnt have 2 functions they do very well.

"The new set is crappy" isnt really an argument so you're not really appealing to much. I mean I'd we take that ans your line of logic they should just buff it so you dont want to use ice heart. Either way not a good look

Ice Hearts didn't have 2 functions that it did very well. At best one, the damage is rather mediocre. If the shield were removed and the damage of the set had to stand alone, nobody would use it. Every other damage set, within reason, would outperform it.

The new set doesn't apply universally. It needs a channelled or cast time ability to work. It's not an attractive alternative for any player that doesn't use one.

ATreeGnome

To be honest, I do think that Iceheart had too much combined offensive and defensive power for how easy the proc condition was and the potential for nearly 100% uptime. Even with the changes it's still going to be the best DPS monster set choice for most groups that want to attempt no death achievements. Having a 2 piece sets that gives 833 spell crit, an effective 5k max health boost, and a 500 DPS (before scaling) AoE DOT is still a lot of power density.

You cited Za'an as being an overpowered monster set, but I think you're forgetting how few situations there are where it actually performs well. It's bad in any trash fights, all of sunspire, cloudrest, asylum Sanctorium, most bosses in halls of fabrication, and is iffy for maw of lorkhaj. There is a long list of dungeon bosses as well that I won't bother going in to. The point is, it's a set that's REALLY good in a few situations and terrible in others. That's a good place for a set to be. The drawbacks balance the power. Iceheart, as it was, didn't have enough drawbacks for the level of power it offered.

DreadDaedroth

Yes it's a shame they nerfed Iceheart so bad and they even have the phony pretence of having listened to players feedback. Weird how this set did too only after two weeks of update 25 pts after years of no issues.

D0PAMINE

I'm not thrilled that they nerfed it, however, I don't feel like the set is unusable. I still keep it for when I need to replace Zaan or Grundwulf without loosing crit.

hasi

I'm glad it's gone.
No more Gryphon Heart, Tick-Tock Tormentor and Immortal Redeemer Titles by using this Monsterset. They'll actually have to earn it, yay.

ShawnLaRock

Umm... it’s still totally fine. I think it was Dooma who streamed a flawless VMA using it just to point out how much it was still proc’ing, and how well it still works.

S.