Proc Sets Are Fun: The Silent Majority

Rianai

fred4 wrote: »

Rianai wrote: »

One year ago ZOS overbuffed DoTs despite overwhelming negative feedback from the PTS. Turns out, the feedback was right and the meta was awful. So the next update ZOS backpedals and (over) nerfs DoTs. And now they add the same (if not more) amounts of dmg back, but with even less efford required and after 20% healing nerf. How anyone could defend such obviously illogical and imbalanced changes is beyond my understanding.

You do it, because everyone makes mistakes, not just ZOS. Community feedback has also resulted in stillborn armor sets and I seem to remember a lot of fuss about an ability - I think it was Onslaught - that turned out just about right or some armor set that was left unchanged throughout the PTS and no one ever used it on live.

I'm in this thread not because I vehemently disagree with what people actually want to do. Like you, I'm more afraid of what ZOS' sledgehammer will do than the mostly reasonable propositions from Frank. The reason I'm here has to do with the OPs assessment that changes are pushed by a vocal minority of elists and purists, which resonates a lot with me. The impression I have is that many would rather see proc sets impounded into the ground or, at the very least, nerfed harder than what I would consider justified. I'm here to voice my opposition to that.

Scalebreaker meta was too much DoT dmg and ZOS obviously agreed, otherwise they wouldn't have nerfed those. Doesn't matter whether that decision was based on community feedback or their own findings (more likely the latter, otherwise they wouldn't have overdone the nerfs). So how can it be justified to bring back the same amounts of dmg, but with 20% less healing? How could it be considered balanced now when it obviously wasn't balanced a year ago?

Also a few more underused sets are still better than a few op ones completely rendering everything else worthless and Onslaught had to be nerfed multiple times until it was "just about right". Hardly arguments against listening to feedback.

Brrrofski

Also OP, you talk about "elitists". Well with yeh two examples I pointed out, most of the player base won't think like that. It's the so called "elitists" that will be able to see all the extra little things of how to get yeh most out of this meta and fully utilise proc sets.

SilverKatz

proc sets simply making trashs easily kill a good player , so they can tbagg.

Langeston

exiledtyrant wrote: »

To truly prove proc sets are doing more damage than stat based sets you would have to provide a much more rigorous test:

Agree. You would have to do a whole suite of tests.

1. Match the highest stat based set vs the highest proc based set within a 10 second window. Necropotence + Clever alchemist under spell power pot vs Caluurions + Overwhelming with spell power pot.

Partially agree. I think the window should be no bigger than 5 seconds, as that is roughly the size of the window we're looking at with regard to most of the complaints re: proc sets. Class should be controlled (use two templars, wardens, necros, etc.) which would reduce the number of variables by quite a bit. I also think stam toons should probably be used, seeing as most of the stronger proc sets right now appear to be stam, and those are what people seem to be concerned about for the most part.

2. Have both sets under the effect of malacath so their is no critical variance.

I don't necessarily agree. Whether or not Malacath is used should be based on whether or not it will benefit said build. For instance on a Templar or NB using sets that include lines of crit, Malacath may hamstring the build's burst. Any variance should be able to be accounted for by multiple, averaged tests. If Malacath will benefit the proc build (likely) it should definitely be used.

3. Match a fairly net neutral helm set that is not prone to variance and player error that benefits both proc and stat based sets equally. I would suggest slimecrawl as nothing can be more generic and straightforward than 8% damage to everything.

Disagree. I think that the proc build should use whatever proc monster set will be beneficial to it's burst. After all, the purpose of this test is to determine just how extreme proc builds are, no? If you're using Malacath you may not want to use Slimecraw as you'd be wasting 3.9% crit (small yes, but it adds up) instead, something like Grothdarr may be a better option. By the same token, the stat build should use whatever set benefits it's burst the most.

4. Test a PvP rotation over 10 seconds with 1, 2 , and 3 weaved skills and determine total damage done after battle spirit for each.

Disagree for the same reason as #1 re: length of burst window.

5. Test a PvP opening rotation using 1, 2, and 3 weaved skills and determine how much burst happens within the time frame for each after battle spirit.

Partially agree. Timeframe should be 5 seconds (give or take) and the rotation should be whatever the given class would normally use, unless the proc sets require a different action. Since most proc sets now only require damage to be done, the same rotation should be able to be used on both builds in most cases.

I would hypothesize that there is more burst potential within the first few hits of a proc set than a stat based set which than either falls off altogether or equalizes at the 10 second mark. This should be especially true on the 1 ability weave vs the 3 ability weave test as stat based sets get stronger the more damage abilities are used. All this would mean is that proc sets have a niche of being bursty ( better vs lower resistance / health / sustain targets) and stat sets are better at sustained damage ( better vs high resistance / health / sustain targets).

This is what I would assume as well, but as I stated earlier I think sustained damage is largely irrelevant with regard to this topic. Sure there are plenty of high resistance / health / sustain targets in PVP, but they aren't likely the ones worried about all of the incoming proc sets. What people are worried about is lack of counterplay — if you survive for 10 seconds, then there was counterplay.

If the burst itself is considered to high than the burst sets have to be put to the test vs setups that counter burst before even considering a nerf. That means taking the standardized test I mention above and stacking it against sets like Juggernaut, Orgnum's Scales etc.. and seeing if burst resistant setups are being overwhelmed. If procs sets warp the meta in a ways that counter based sets can't do their job that is an argument I can get behind. Even then it would have to prove that time to kill is so out of wack that under normal circumstances use of LOS and team play are circumvented by it.

Disagree. If the burst is too high, the burst is to high. Whether or not defensive proc sets can survive offensive proc set burst is irrelevant — if the defensive proc sets are altogether stronger than the offensive proc sets and are not overwhelmed, it doesn't change the fact that the burst from proc sets was found to be unacceptably high. Also, I feel like this is telling people that if they want to survive the impending proc set free-for-all they'll just have to use defensive proc sets, and that is not an acceptable solution IMO.

Dueling is not going to provide this kind of data. The game by design is set up to have class imbalance and extremely niche sets to provide and counter metas within the game. These imbalances are put in place to encourage group play and place safety valves on one setup vs another. You can't balance that kind of system in a 1 v1 environment.

Partially agree. I don't think that 1v1 scenarios should be the only form of test used, but they definitely are relevant to the conversation. Unless you never find yourself in 1v1 scenarios.

(This are just my initial thoughts. I haven't considered them too much, and could definitely be persuaded to change my mind given good enough counterpoints.)

FrankonPC

fred4 wrote: »

From a personal point of view, dumping on Caluurion affects the viability of my build big time. I have no problem with some of your suggestions, such as allowing only one proc set or disallowing Malacath. Others, like reducing all proc damage in both CP and no CP are scary. Doesn't look like you're married to that, but just be mindful of the collateral damage of some of your ideas. They can kill niche builds, such as mine, not just the all proc cheese builds, if you want to call them that. All this uproar and what will ZOS do? They're not known for being subtle.

Absolutely! You get about 38% more damage on your gank burst combination with caluurions compared to its next best counterpart next patch, war maiden. No wonder you've been so vehement against these changes and definitely not the neutral party you were claiming to be earlier in this thread.

When one option gives you 38% more burst damage than its next best competitor, I would classify that as imbalance. People have been complaining about new moon in the forums for the last few months, but the difference between that and titanborn wasn't nearly as drastic as this current difference is.

If caluurions can carry your burst this much, imagine what it does on other, better, more stream lined specs, especially now that you can proc it every 10 seconds with a light attack. I've ran caluurions on just about every class in the game, with this new proc change it will be pretty easy to line up successful burst with it.

The only thing that was stopping caluurions from over-performing was the critical strike proc condition. Only magblades could proc it consistently, and only melee magblades could have it proc AND land consistently. Now any spec that knows how to count to 10 will be able to line up this burst into an ultimate combination. The tooltip on this set is about as much damage as ferocious leap on mag dk, every 10 seconds. I really don't understand how you guys disagree that guaranteed ultimate level burst every 10 seconds is healthy for the game. This WILL be the go to set over literally any other front bar set on every mag spec in the game. Count to 10, line up your burst combination and get a free 20k proc with your light attack weave. Yes, as I said before, it's free. That's also not variety or balance, this is just replacing one meta set with another.

It's easy for you as a magblade to avoid fights that you find unfavorable, because as you said, you sometimes just watch. What about the specs that can't just cloak away? Are they supposed to deal with the imbalance of proc sets because you want a semi-viable magblade? That really doesn't seem to be in the interest of balance to me.

Here's my thing fred. I love playing melee magblade, I've tried different iterations for patches. I even tried one this patch about a month ago. It's a long lost playstyle and it really is too bad. With caluurions you can still make it work, but the problem isn't with melee magblade, it's stacking caluurions on classes or specs that already have good tools at their disposal, offensively and defensively. I am all for buffing melee magblade and making them viable again, but through skills and abilities available in their kit. I think if people genuinely care about balance in the game, and not about what kills their specific build, they would consider this as well. You should be pushing for buffs to concealed weapon as well as the removal to cast times on ultimates, not keeping caluurions as it is. You talk on here a lot to make change...defending caluurions to be the melee magblade crutch is holding back your spec.

Gorreck

Rianai wrote: »

[Scalebreaker meta was too much DoT dmg and ZOS obviously agreed, otherwise they wouldn't have nerfed those. Doesn't matter whether that decision was based on community feedback or their own findings (more likely the latter, otherwise they wouldn't have overdone the nerfs).

My bet would be this will be exactly like the DOT mess; proc set buffs go live, as is, then proc set buffs are nerfed to below where they are now in a few patches.

Leaving proc sets weaker than they are on Live now.

fred4

@FrankonPC, this has been emotionally exhausting. I'm not sure I regret anything I said. I acknowledge and understand your definition of "free proc damage" now, even if I disagree on how powerful that feels in game, in so far as I've used it. I run only stat-based builds on the 5 other classes that I play (stam DK, both types of templars, magsorc, magden). I have not felt that procs are overbearing in CP, on live, to fight against. I have used Overwhelming Surge purely for the nightblade detection utility on templar in the past. I rated it in the same ballpark as Spinner, New Moon or any number of front bar sets. Auroran's Thunder? Who runs that? <--- Not all proc sets are automatically OP, but fun, right? Now I just want to respond to your last paragraph:

FrankonPC wrote: »

Here's my thing fred. I love playing melee magblade, I've tried different iterations for patches. I even tried one this patch about a month ago. It's a long lost playstyle and it really is too bad. With caluurions you can still make it work, but the problem isn't with melee magblade, it's stacking caluurions on classes or specs that already have good tools at their disposal, offensively and defensively.

I share the concern of what the removal of the crit condition will do. I'm just not so dead sure that it will shift the meta drastically. I tried it on magplar once. It wasn't a revelation. There's a high chance that your Sweeps will proc it first time, every time at point blank range. Let's say you start with Toppling Charge, that may also proc it and stun. Why isn't every melee magplar running it on live right now? I think I've run into a single one in the space of a year. Templar is also a crit class. I'm not sure how much more enticing Malacath + Caluurion will be on that class, if at all. I'm also not sure how much of the proliferation of Grothdarr and Maw of the Infernal builds is due to Malacath hype or genuine advantage.

I am all for buffing melee magblade and making them viable again, but through skills and abilities available in their kit. I think if people genuinely care about balance in the game, and not about what kills their specific build, they would consider this as well. You should be pushing for buffs to concealed weapon as well as the removal to cast times on ultimates, not keeping caluurions as it is.

You talk on here a lot to make change

I actually don't. I tend to talk against change. I just want to hang on to what I have. I have no faith that ZOS will ever put melee magblade right or even just that someone who matters drops in on this thread, but I fear that they will blanket nerf something that will leave magblade as collateral damage yet again.

In terms of the broader picture, I don't even want to think about the combinations of new and revised proc sets with Malacath. As usual, I think ZOS are doing too much too quickly and they should at the very least disable Malacath with procs, even just to provide better stability from patch to patch and because no one is sure what will happen. You're probably going to screw up balancing procs, as long as Malacath is an option. This is where I differ from sabresandiego_ESO. Meta changes are all good and well, but it's been such a roller coaster since the arrival of Brian Wheeler, it's been too much. I have meta fatigue.

Gorreck

fred4 wrote: »

This is where I differ from sabresandiego_ESO. Meta changes are all good and well, but it's been such a roller coaster since the arrival of Brian Wheeler, it's been too much. I have meta fatigue.

Indeed. I cannot see it stopping any time soon. I wouldn't mind if it ended in genuine balance, but it is always overbuff then overnerf (or vice versa), rinse & repeat.

Just leaving everyone exhausted, confused and wondering what is going to be arbitarily massively changed next.

Kadoin

I wouldn't have a problem with proc sets damage if actual skills and heals weren't inferior to proc sets across the board, unless you make a large investment into them, which, at that point makes a proc build always have an advantage over you because you lack either crit, sustain, or enough stam/stam regen to break free while the proc build can have all of that and procs.

Next patch, allowing some of these proc sets to go unchecked is a very misguided decision in PvP especially. I like my hybrids and my hybrid builds using proc set tactically too, but I will not sit here and pretend that something unbalanced is balanced and fair, just because some people want to equate always winning with minimum effort to fun.

fred4

@FrankonPC, I think something that's not been thoroughly discussed is burst coordination. The reason Caluurion works on magblade is not merely the reliable crit activation from Cloak, it's that nightblades naturally seek to control the flow of the fight. They can cloak away, heal up, wait until the 10 seconds are up, then burst again. You can argue that other classes may achieve this via bar swapping, but I think the start / stop nature of nightblade fights lends itself particularly well to Caluurion.

When comparing a burst proc set, like Caluurion, to ultimates, that is also something to bear in mind. You don't truly control the set's activation outside of being a nightblade ganker. Take Flight is devastating, because the DK controls the activation time, once enough ultimate is saved up. I think a large reason why people play stat-based builds is that they get better control over the burst, even if the potential burst is capped much lower. They can also burst more frequently. For example a stamden can theoretically pull a Sub Assault, Dizzying, Executioner combo every 3 seconds. The same argument was made to me by Langeston once. He'd rather fire two spectral bows with slightly greater damage in the time it takes for the next Caluurion proc. A practical issue contributing to this, these days, is that a Master's destro staff is almost mandatory for a stat-based build. This inconveniently competes with Caluurion for the front bar weapon slot. There aren't that many Caluurion nightblades out there. There are probably not that many magblades full stop, I guess. (Talking open world CP).

I hadn't thought too much about it, but I think this is another reason why the "free" damage argument rubs me the wrong way. These are genuine reasons why people play stat-based builds over procs.

MincVinyl

fred4 wrote: »

@FrankonPC, I think something that's not been thoroughly discussed is burst coordination. The reason Caluurion works on magblade is not merely the reliable crit activation from Cloak, it's that nightblades naturally seek to control the flow of the fight. They can cloak away, heal up, wait until the 10 seconds are up, then burst again. You can argue that other classes may achieve this via bar swapping, but I think the start / stop nature of nightblade fights lends itself particularly well to Caluurion.

When comparing a burst proc set, like Caluurion, to ultimates, that is also something to bear in mind. You don't truly control the set's activation outside of being a nightblade ganker. Take Flight is devastating, because the DK controls the activation time, once enough ultimate is saved up. I think a large reason why people play stat-based builds is that they get better control over the burst, even if the potential burst is capped much lower. They can also burst more frequently. For example a stamden can theoretically pull a Sub Assault, Dizzying, Executioner combo every 3 seconds. The same argument was made to me by Langeston once. He'd rather fire two spectral bows with slightly greater damage in the time it takes for the next Caluurion proc. A practical issue contributing to this, these days, is that a Master's destro staff is almost mandatory for a stat-based build. This inconveniently competes with Caluurion for the front bar weapon slot. There aren't that many Caluurion nightblades out there. There are probably not that many magblades full stop, I guess. (Talking open world CP).

I hadn't thought too much about it, but I think this is another reason why the "free" damage argument rubs me the wrong way. These are genuine reasons why people play stat-based builds over procs.

It is hard to say that because it is on a 10s window and procs free of so many simple conditions(light attacks) it is hard to use it for burst compared to anything else. Even without one barring to guarantee when you want to proc it, all you need is an addon to track it, much like tracking your enchant procs if you are really having trouble. Even then, most stat builds run similarly timed sets, which require you to then use those stats via skills instead of free guaranteed damage.

Then to compare the tooltip being equal to most ultimates.

Animation wise for caluurions and other proc sets is not easy to see at all....not to mention caluurions in particular has the animation go on the caster.

The timing is every 10s a 20k proc....the equivalent ult takes between 60-90sec(depending on ult gen sources....build investment). Imagine getting a free ult every 10s for only losing 300damage to ~600damage(similar proc conditions). Why wouldnt you give up the 300-600 damage? Sure you lose a bit of healing, but making kills easy to grab is well worth it at this point.

ealdwin

Gorreck wrote: »

fred4 wrote: »

This is where I differ from sabresandiego_ESO. Meta changes are all good and well, but it's been such a roller coaster since the arrival of Brian Wheeler, it's been too much. I have meta fatigue.

Indeed. I cannot see it stopping any time soon. I wouldn't mind if it ended in genuine balance, but it is always overbuff then overnerf (or vice versa), rinse & repeat.

Just leaving everyone exhausted, confused and wondering what is going to be arbitarily massively changed next.

Agreed. I don't mind farming for the new sets that come with each patch, or even older sets that have recently become more valuable for a certain build.

But at some point, I just want to enjoy playing the game and not have to run the same content over and over again to stay viable.

jaws343

fred4 wrote: »

@FrankonPC, I think something that's not been thoroughly discussed is burst coordination. The reason Caluurion works on magblade is not merely the reliable crit activation from Cloak, it's that nightblades naturally seek to control the flow of the fight. They can cloak away, heal up, wait until the 10 seconds are up, then burst again. You can argue that other classes may achieve this via bar swapping, but I think the start / stop nature of nightblade fights lends itself particularly well to Caluurion.

When comparing a burst proc set, like Caluurion, to ultimates, that is also something to bear in mind. You don't truly control the set's activation outside of being a nightblade ganker. Take Flight is devastating, because the DK controls the activation time, once enough ultimate is saved up. I think a large reason why people play stat-based builds is that they get better control over the burst, even if the potential burst is capped much lower. They can also burst more frequently. For example a stamden can theoretically pull a Sub Assault, Dizzying, Executioner combo every 3 seconds. The same argument was made to me by Langeston once. He'd rather fire two spectral bows with slightly greater damage in the time it takes for the next Caluurion proc. A practical issue contributing to this, these days, is that a Master's destro staff is almost mandatory for a stat-based build. This inconveniently competes with Caluurion for the front bar weapon slot. There aren't that many Caluurion nightblades out there. There are probably not that many magblades full stop, I guess. (Talking open world CP).

I hadn't thought too much about it, but I think this is another reason why the "free" damage argument rubs me the wrong way. These are genuine reasons why people play stat-based builds over procs.

As someone who was running this on my sorc during the MYM event, the burst window can be lined up fairly effectively if you play at range. The travel time is relatively slow enough to line up the 3 seconds of curse, a frag cast, a force pulse cast, and a fury cast, all landing within a short window. The difference is, on live I have to wait for the crit damage to proc it so it is hard to tell when to stsrt the burst. With the changes, I can cast curse, hit FP and know that caluurians will proc, can cast the frag proc if it is up, and that damage will go off within a few seconds. Every time. Finish with an execute if it is even needed. Often it isn't. And if the frag proc isn't up, fury is usually enough to finish with the other damage as well. This is every 10 seconds. I know my sorc is going to be running this for sure. I'll probably run the same thing I did on live minus 1 5 piece set and adding malacath. Caluurian, malacath, pirate skeleton, and some random stat heavy 2-4 piece. Or even potentates 1 piece and a few pieces of trainee. Going to be ridiculous. It already was ridiculous on live.

HankTwo

Ok, so first of all its a bit hilarious that the OP calls fake news on videos that contradict his pov, but at the same time he himself claims that there is a slilent majority that likes proc sets with zero evidence to back it up.

But now to the main topic. I've read this claim a lot now, that proc sets are balanced compared to stat sets because the latter also increases your healing. The question is, why compare proc sets to weapon damage sets and not purely offensive sets like spriggans or deadly strikes to begin with? Both proc sets and these purely offensive stat boosts are much more similar because they dont increase your defense so its the better comparison anyway.

That being said lets make some quantitative comparisons now, shall we? First lets look at spriggans. Since the 5 piece bonus of this set increases your penetration by 3450, it increases your true damage done by around 5.5% to 10.5%, depending on the amount of resistances your target has. Lets look at a realisitc estimation for no CP. If your target has 24k resistances and you apply major fracture and have a sharpend weapon (but nothing else) your targets effective armor before spriggan would be 16k.
--> (1 - (16000-3450)/66000) / (1 - 16000/33000) = 1.069
As we can see, in this case spriggans would increase your damage by 6.9%. For simplicity and the sake of argument lets make this flat 7%.

Now lets look at on of the strong pts proc sets, for example red mountain. This set deals 5918 damage every 2 seconds, or 2959 damage per second. Now, for spriggans to outperform this set on average against a single target, you would need to deal 2959 / 0.07 = 42271 (!) tooltip damage per second to your target, and that averaged over time (note that both red mountain, but also most likely the majority of your offensive skills can be dodged, so dodge shouldnt impact red mountain vs spriggan much differently). I think this calc already speaks for itself but lets look at some more.

For the next comparison, lets see how deadly strikes would compare against one of the 20k dot damage over 10 seconds proc sets (unleashed terror, widowmaker, icy conjurer, ...) on a pure dot pressure build. Note, that deadly strikes with its 20% damage buff already vastly outperforms a set like spriggans on a pure dot build. However, how would it compare to lets say unleashed terror?

For this comparison we have to look how skill dots compare to the proc. For this we will take a template build with ~30k stam and ~4.4k weapon damage (overall decent stats for no cp. Definitely on the high end for a build with a second offensive 5 piece, in our case deadly strikes or unleashed terror, to spare. Note that the higher we go the more it gets in favor for deadly strikes). Since other percentage damage buffs would increase skill dots and proc dots just the same way, they will be ignored for this comparison. Now lets look at some classic dot skill and see how much damage they deal:

- Rending shlashes: 2*2638 + 8529 = 13805 over 10 seconds
- Quick cloak: 1199 * 11 = 13189 over 10 seconds
- Carve: 6389 + 6538 = 12927 over 10 seconds
- Poison injection: 4257 + 8529 = 12786 over 10 seconds (not counting the extra execute damage. At constant 25% health this would be 19179 damage)
- Twin blade and blunt/heavy weapons bleed passive: 10995 damage over 6 seconds with RNG proc condition
- Consuming trap: 12756 over 10 seconds
- Noxious breath: 6600 + 11484 = 18084 damage over 14 seconds (~ 13k over 10 seconds)
- Venomous claw: 4257 + 14846 * 1.6 (stacked average damage increase) = 28010 over 14 seconds (~ 20k over 10 seconds. This is the one clear outlier but imo its fair since stam dk has no shalks, blastbones, relentless focus, ...)
- Growing swarm: 13178 over 10 seconds

As we can see, most of the classic, on target dot skills deal around 13k-14k damage over 10 seconds. Now, to reach the 19728 damage over 10 seconds from unleashed terror, you would need 19728 / 0.2 = 98640 dot damge over 10 seconds from skills on the deadly strikes build. Since the usual dot skill deals 14k damge during this duration, you would need 7 (!) normal dot skills on target for deadly strikes to have the same impact as unleashed terror. Thats 7 gcds and 7 skill resources spent on the deadly strikes build vs 1 gcds and 1 skill resource spent on the build with the proc to get the same benefit. At the very least this proves that dot proc sets are very overpowered compare to skill dots, even with the overall best fully offensive dot damge increase set taken into consideration.

Now, this already should show how proc sets are imbalanced compared to these fully offensive stat sets, but I have one last comparison for you: Plague slinger vs ballista bow ult, since they actually have very similar functionality. Plague slinger deals 5160 * 5 = 25800 damage over 5 seconds every 8 seconds. Since the proc condition is simply getting damaged, this basically guarantees a proc on cd. Now, on our 30k stam 4.4k weapon damage template, the bow ballista ult deals 57197 damage over 5 seconds, with a 175 ultimate cost. This means that plague slinger deals 45% of its damage, so this one five piece gives almost half a bow ult ever 8 seconds.

In the end, we could talk about crit, but as others have pointed out malacaths band can easily equalize this aspect anyway. Beyond that a build with 60% extra crit damage and 30% crit chance targeting a player with 30% crit resistance will have its damage increased by the crits by 9% averaged over time, so you can include it in the calculations if you really want to.

FrankonPC

MincVinyl wrote: »

It is hard to say that because it is on a 10s window and procs free of so many simple conditions(light attacks) it is hard to use it for burst compared to anything else. Even without one barring to guarantee when you want to proc it, all you need is an addon to track it, much like tracking your enchant procs if you are really having trouble. Even then, most stat builds run similarly timed sets, which require you to then use those stats via skills instead of free guaranteed damage.

Then to compare the tooltip being equal to most ultimates.

Animation wise for caluurions and other proc sets is not easy to see at all....not to mention caluurions in particular has the animation go on the caster.

The timing is every 10s a 20k proc....the equivalent ult takes between 60-90sec(depending on ult gen sources....build investment). Imagine getting a free ult every 10s for only losing 300damage to ~600damage(similar proc conditions). Why wouldnt you give up the 300-600 damage? Sure you lose a bit of healing, but making kills easy to grab is well worth it at this point.

Exactly this. It procs every 10 seconds on your light attack weave. Just about every mag spec in the game is using a staff and they are light attack weaving while going on the offensive. You can compare for yourself the pros of having caluurions front bar vs a set like spinners, new moon, war maiden etc, but a 20k guaranteed burst on a light attack every 10 seconds is something good players can and will incorporate into their toolkit. Caluurions has always had a powerful tooltip, but the only thing stopping it from being super overtuned on other classes was that you couldn't guarantee the lineup of the proc on your burst combination, now you can.

My current combination on magplar i hit purifying light, shock clench, topple, sweeps and crescent. I am probably going to take purifying light off and replace it with something else as it currently stands, so it will be shock clench into a topple. shock clench procs caluurions, i toppling charge in and get the knockdown WITH the proc landing almost at the exact same time. I get ultimate level damage every time i guarantee a toppling knockdown. You can do this effectively on mag sorc with streak and a mag dk with talons.

All you have to do is know how to line up burst and count to 10 and you're getting so much more damage with caluurions compared to war maiden, bsw, etc. This will be THE set to run on a lot of specs due to its conditional change.

sabresandiego_ESO

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

HankTwo

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a '[snip]'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

[Edit to inappropriate content]

jaws343

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Pvp is quite literally the competitive player verse player environment of the game. If players aren't going in there to win and be competitive maybe it isn't the game mode for them. Fun really shouldn't be a determining factor in regards to balancing competitive gameplay.

sabresandiego_ESO

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

I'm not calling anyone an elitist specifically, I'm speaking about them in general since they are usually the types who are constantly measuring their skill against others and complaining that certain aspects of the game are not fair. You can be against procs and not be an elitist: I never said otherwise.

As for your comparison of proc sets vs deadly strikes: you completely forget that deadly strikes is always active and can not be countered. A proc set usually has counterplay, and is affected by things such as switching targets as well. Also: many people can in fact land 7 dots in the time it takes a proc set to recharge -> dot builds can. And back to my main point: many people find procs to be plain fun since they change game mechanics and often have cool animations.

Nobody has the right to tell others how to play the game just because they don't like something or consider it "cheese". Their definition of skill is not some biblical passage. If I run across someone using triple proc sets, I think no less of them. Literally everything in the game is fair, and made up rules of how to play simply do not exist.

Look at how many proc sets Zenimax creates. If what I was saying was untrue: why would they do so? This game is a business after all.

Rianai

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

As for your comparison of proc sets vs deadly strikes: you completely forget that deadly strikes is always active and can not be countered. A proc set usually has counterplay, and is affected by things such as switching targets as well. Also: many people can in fact land 7 dots in the time it takes a proc set to recharge -> dot builds can. And back to my main point: many people find procs to be plain fun since they change game mechanics and often have cool animations.

You can't counter Deadly Strike directly because there is nothing to counter. The set doesn't do anything on its own after all. But you can counter the skills it buffs, so your whole counterplay argument does not make sense whatsoever. Also please show me a build that can slot 7 different DoTs and still have slots left for essential skills such as cc, heals, defensive, buffs, ... as well as the ability to apply and keep all of them up while still staying alive under pressure. And even if it was somehow possible to achieve similar results, the effort vs reward ratio would be completely out of proportion.

Some players liking procs for whatever reason is also no justification to completely throw any semblance of balance over board.

sabresandiego_ESO

Rianai wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

As for your comparison of proc sets vs deadly strikes: you completely forget that deadly strikes is always active and can not be countered. A proc set usually has counterplay, and is affected by things such as switching targets as well. Also: many people can in fact land 7 dots in the time it takes a proc set to recharge -> dot builds can. And back to my main point: many people find procs to be plain fun since they change game mechanics and often have cool animations.

You can't counter Deadly Strike directly because there is nothing to counter. The set doesn't do anything on its own after all. But you can counter the skills it buffs, so your whole counterplay argument does not make sense whatsoever. Also please show me a build that can slot 7 different DoTs and still have slots left for essential skills such as cc, heals, defensive, buffs, ... as well as the ability to apply and keep all of them up while still staying alive under pressure. And even if it was somehow possible to achieve similar results, the effort vs reward ratio would be completely out of proportion.

Some players liking procs for whatever reason is also no justification to completely throw any semblance of balance over board.

You can literally cast poison injection 7 times on seven different people to accomplish that. And I've already stated that I consider the imbalance claims of proc sets to be a fake narrative, and have done my best to support that argument. I'm not going to go over it again repeatedly.

HankTwo

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

As for your comparison of proc sets vs deadly strikes: you completely forget that deadly strikes is always active and can not be countered. A proc set usually has counterplay, and is affected by things such as switching targets as well.

Aha. Unleashed Terror: 'When you deal direct damage with a Charge, Leap, Teleport, or Pull ability, you cut your enemy, causing them to bleed for 10 seconds, dealing 19728 Physical Damage over the duration. This ability can occur once every 10 seconds per target.'

Anything else you got to add? Would also be interested to hear about the spriggans comparison.

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

Also: many people can in fact land 7 dots in the time it takes a proc set to recharge -> dot builds can.

The whole point of this comparison was to see the difference on a full dot build. One requires a single skill to get the full benefit while the other requires the user to apply his whole dot rotation on target. But be my guest: try full dot build with deadly strike + spriggans vs 2 strong dot proc sets from the pts in no CP. Rest of the build and skill setup should be the same. Imo THIS would be a good and fair comparison between proc sets and offensive stat sets, since both builds stats as well as the healing capability would be extremely similar. Only real difference would be the offensive power of the 5 pieces.

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

And back to my main point: many people find procs to be plain fun since they change game mechanics and often have cool animations.

Doesnt change the fact that they should be balanced accordingly. And I have no problem with mechanic driven proc sets like Kjalnars nightmare for example. However, with the changes on the PTS a lot of proc sets have a guaranteed proc on stuff like dealing damage, getting damaged, doing one light attack, and so on. They dont change game mecahnics in any meaningful way whatsoever.

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

Look at how many proc sets Zenimax creates. If what I was saying was untrue: why would they do so? This game is a business after all.

ZOS does all kind of weird changes. At times, even when the vast apparent majority of people really dislike them. Best example: cast times on ults.
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/484941/cast-time-on-ultimate-or-not (July 2019, 82% dont want cast times on ults)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/489379/cast-time-ultis (August 2019, 89% want cast times removed)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/498109/do-you-enjoy-cast-times-on-ultimates (October 2019, 83% dont enjoy cast times)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/508430/ult-cast-times (January 2020, 81% want cast times removed)

This disproves your assumption.

Rianai

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

Rianai wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

As for your comparison of proc sets vs deadly strikes: you completely forget that deadly strikes is always active and can not be countered. A proc set usually has counterplay, and is affected by things such as switching targets as well. Also: many people can in fact land 7 dots in the time it takes a proc set to recharge -> dot builds can. And back to my main point: many people find procs to be plain fun since they change game mechanics and often have cool animations.

You can't counter Deadly Strike directly because there is nothing to counter. The set doesn't do anything on its own after all. But you can counter the skills it buffs, so your whole counterplay argument does not make sense whatsoever. Also please show me a build that can slot 7 different DoTs and still have slots left for essential skills such as cc, heals, defensive, buffs, ... as well as the ability to apply and keep all of them up while still staying alive under pressure. And even if it was somehow possible to achieve similar results, the effort vs reward ratio would be completely out of proportion.

Some players liking procs for whatever reason is also no justification to completely throw any semblance of balance over board.

You can literally cast poison injection 7 times on seven different people to accomplish that. And I've already stated that I consider the imbalance claims of proc sets to be a fake narrative, and have done my best to support that argument. I'm not going to go over it again repeatedly.

And those 7 PIs are going to do what against those 7 players? And those 7 players are going to do what against that poor soul spamming PI?

Btw 1 stamsorc with Unleashed Terror streaking over those 7 players would apply 7x as much dmg within 1s as the PI spamming player with Deadly Strike in 7s. Balanced ...

And you haven't provided anything to show the discussed procs are balanced.

sabresandiego_ESO

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

As for your comparison of proc sets vs deadly strikes: you completely forget that deadly strikes is always active and can not be countered. A proc set usually has counterplay, and is affected by things such as switching targets as well.

Aha. Unleashed Terror: 'When you deal direct damage with a Charge, Leap, Teleport, or Pull ability, you cut your enemy, causing them to bleed for 10 seconds, dealing 19728 Physical Damage over the duration. This ability can occur once every 10 seconds per target.'

Anything else you got to add? Would also be interested to hear about the spriggans comparison.

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

Also: many people can in fact land 7 dots in the time it takes a proc set to recharge -> dot builds can.

The whole point of this comparison was to see the difference on a full dot build. One requires a single skill to get the full benefit while the other requires the user to apply his whole dot rotation on target. But be my guest: try full dot build with deadly strike + spriggans vs 2 strong dot proc sets from the pts in no CP. Rest of the build and skill setup should be the same. Imo THIS would be a good and fair comparison between proc sets and offensive stat sets, since both builds stats as well as the healing capability would be extremely similar. Only real difference would be the offensive power of the 5 pieces.

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

And back to my main point: many people find procs to be plain fun since they change game mechanics and often have cool animations.

Doesnt change the fact that they should be balanced accordingly. And I have no problem with mechanic driven proc sets like Kjalnars nightmare for example. However, with the changes on the PTS a lot of proc sets have a guaranteed proc on stuff like dealing damage, getting damaged, doing one light attack, and so on. They dont change game mecahnics in any meaningful way whatsoever.

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

Look at how many proc sets Zenimax creates. If what I was saying was untrue: why would they do so? This game is a business after all.

ZOS does all kind of weird changes. At times, even when the vast apparent majority of people really dislike them. Best example: cast times on ults.
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/484941/cast-time-on-ultimate-or-not (July 2019, 82% dont want cast times on ults)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/489379/cast-time-ultis (August 2019, 89% want cast times removed)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/498109/do-you-enjoy-cast-times-on-ultimates (October 2019, 83% dont enjoy cast times)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/508430/ult-cast-times (January 2020, 81% want cast times removed)

This disproves your assumption.

Zenimax doesn't usually do what a vocal majority says in the forums (this isn't a democracy). Sometimes they do cave to pressure: But usually they do what their dev team decides. Often times the majority is wrong when it comes to high performance.

Zenimax ultimately does what they think is best for the game overall. Sometimes they are wrong. But they have data that you and I don't, and I wouldn't be so quick to believe that they are incompetant. They are the ones who made this game: and they continue to make proc sets. Just maybe, they know something that you don't.

sabresandiego_ESO

Rianai wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

Rianai wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

As for your comparison of proc sets vs deadly strikes: you completely forget that deadly strikes is always active and can not be countered. A proc set usually has counterplay, and is affected by things such as switching targets as well. Also: many people can in fact land 7 dots in the time it takes a proc set to recharge -> dot builds can. And back to my main point: many people find procs to be plain fun since they change game mechanics and often have cool animations.

You can't counter Deadly Strike directly because there is nothing to counter. The set doesn't do anything on its own after all. But you can counter the skills it buffs, so your whole counterplay argument does not make sense whatsoever. Also please show me a build that can slot 7 different DoTs and still have slots left for essential skills such as cc, heals, defensive, buffs, ... as well as the ability to apply and keep all of them up while still staying alive under pressure. And even if it was somehow possible to achieve similar results, the effort vs reward ratio would be completely out of proportion.

Some players liking procs for whatever reason is also no justification to completely throw any semblance of balance over board.

You can literally cast poison injection 7 times on seven different people to accomplish that. And I've already stated that I consider the imbalance claims of proc sets to be a fake narrative, and have done my best to support that argument. I'm not going to go over it again repeatedly.

And those 7 PIs are going to do what against those 7 players? And those 7 players are going to do what against that poor soul spamming PI?

Btw 1 stamsorc with Unleashed Terror streaking over those 7 players would apply 7x as much dmg within 1s as the PI spamming player with Deadly Strike in 7s. Balanced ...

And you haven't provided anything to show the discussed procs are balanced.

If streak applies unleashed terror to everyone: That does sound incredibly powerful and fun. If it's too strong, they can always nerf it down the road. I honestly don't think its too good. Venemous smite is already an AOE proc dot that's even stronger: and while the set definitely is one of the best in the game in BG's I don't consider it OP. Its no more OP than something like New Moon Acolyte, Balorghs, or Eternal Vigor (all super strong stat sets).

Rianai

Venomous is tame compared to some of the new procs. And NMA is getting nerfed and will be absolute garbage in comparison. Balorgh has the potential to be very strong, but with low uptime and requires proper burst combos to be useful. Eternal Vigor is not an offensive set, and while it provides too much stats compared to other stat sets, there is not much point bringing it up in a discussion about dmg sets. It simply has an entirely different purpose.

HankTwo

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

As for your comparison of proc sets vs deadly strikes: you completely forget that deadly strikes is always active and can not be countered. A proc set usually has counterplay, and is affected by things such as switching targets as well.

Aha. Unleashed Terror: 'When you deal direct damage with a Charge, Leap, Teleport, or Pull ability, you cut your enemy, causing them to bleed for 10 seconds, dealing 19728 Physical Damage over the duration. This ability can occur once every 10 seconds per target.'

Anything else you got to add? Would also be interested to hear about the spriggans comparison.

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

Also: many people can in fact land 7 dots in the time it takes a proc set to recharge -> dot builds can.

The whole point of this comparison was to see the difference on a full dot build. One requires a single skill to get the full benefit while the other requires the user to apply his whole dot rotation on target. But be my guest: try full dot build with deadly strike + spriggans vs 2 strong dot proc sets from the pts in no CP. Rest of the build and skill setup should be the same. Imo THIS would be a good and fair comparison between proc sets and offensive stat sets, since both builds stats as well as the healing capability would be extremely similar. Only real difference would be the offensive power of the 5 pieces.

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

And back to my main point: many people find procs to be plain fun since they change game mechanics and often have cool animations.

Doesnt change the fact that they should be balanced accordingly. And I have no problem with mechanic driven proc sets like Kjalnars nightmare for example. However, with the changes on the PTS a lot of proc sets have a guaranteed proc on stuff like dealing damage, getting damaged, doing one light attack, and so on. They dont change game mecahnics in any meaningful way whatsoever.

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

Look at how many proc sets Zenimax creates. If what I was saying was untrue: why would they do so? This game is a business after all.

ZOS does all kind of weird changes. At times, even when the vast apparent majority of people really dislike them. Best example: cast times on ults.
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/484941/cast-time-on-ultimate-or-not (July 2019, 82% dont want cast times on ults)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/489379/cast-time-ultis (August 2019, 89% want cast times removed)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/498109/do-you-enjoy-cast-times-on-ultimates (October 2019, 83% dont enjoy cast times)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/508430/ult-cast-times (January 2020, 81% want cast times removed)

This disproves your assumption.

Zenimax doesn't usually do what a vocal majority says in the forums (this isn't a democracy). Sometimes they do cave to pressure: But usually they do what their dev team decides. Often times the majority is wrong when it comes to high performance.

Zenimax ultimately does what they think is best for the game overall. Sometimes they are wrong. But they have data that you and I don't, and I wouldn't be so quick to believe that they are incompetant. They are the ones who made this game: and they continue to make proc sets. Just maybe, they know something that you don't.

This is all you got to say? OK, if all the other points are of no interest to you then so be it.

Saying proc changes are good because ZOS knows whats good for the game sounds like absurd dogmatism to me. But anyway, you admitted yourself: 'Sometimes they are wrong'. This pretty much closes the case, since they also could be wrong this time. Whats funny to me is that there are myriads of very overpowered or underpowered set proposals from ZOS on first PTS weeks that they immediately adjusted afterwards (less so for underpowered stuff) because of community response. This to me shows that at least parts of their team are far from infallible.

Anyway, if you want to continue the discussion then focus on the actual stuff we know and not some obscure hidden knowledge of ZOS that neither of us can assess.

sabresandiego_ESO

Rianai wrote: »

Venomous is tame compared to some of the new procs. And NMA is getting nerfed and will be absolute garbage in comparison. Balorgh has the potential to be very strong, but with low uptime and requires proper burst combos to be useful. Eternal Vigor is not an offensive set, and while it provides too much stats compared to other stat sets, there is not much point bringing it up in a discussion about dmg sets. It simply has an entirely different purpose.

I can also hit acid spray once and land 7dots in one ability. If unleashed terror wasn’t good, nobody would want to use it. Why would they take the time to create new content, where the rewards are clearly worse than sets that have been in the game for years: such as necropotence combined with amberplasm or some other incredibly good stat set combo that has stood the test of time.

I’m more excited by unleashed terror than all other new sets in the game and I don’t even use gap closers currently! I want to see it in action, and would love to have it used against me. It also makes me want to theory craft builds that use a gap closer.

I will not buy into the proc alarmism and hysteria, and I have provided evidence for why I believe it’s fake news. I don’t see viper/tremor repeat any time soon. And like I said before, if any proc set does overperform (which is entirely possible) -> they will have the data and simply nerf it in the future.

Gilvoth

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

As for your comparison of proc sets vs deadly strikes: you completely forget that deadly strikes is always active and can not be countered. A proc set usually has counterplay, and is affected by things such as switching targets as well.

Aha. Unleashed Terror: 'When you deal direct damage with a Charge, Leap, Teleport, or Pull ability, you cut your enemy, causing them to bleed for 10 seconds, dealing 19728 Physical Damage over the duration. This ability can occur once every 10 seconds per target.'

Anything else you got to add? Would also be interested to hear about the spriggans comparison.

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

Also: many people can in fact land 7 dots in the time it takes a proc set to recharge -> dot builds can.

The whole point of this comparison was to see the difference on a full dot build. One requires a single skill to get the full benefit while the other requires the user to apply his whole dot rotation on target. But be my guest: try full dot build with deadly strike + spriggans vs 2 strong dot proc sets from the pts in no CP. Rest of the build and skill setup should be the same. Imo THIS would be a good and fair comparison between proc sets and offensive stat sets, since both builds stats as well as the healing capability would be extremely similar. Only real difference would be the offensive power of the 5 pieces.

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

And back to my main point: many people find procs to be plain fun since they change game mechanics and often have cool animations.

Doesnt change the fact that they should be balanced accordingly. And I have no problem with mechanic driven proc sets like Kjalnars nightmare for example. However, with the changes on the PTS a lot of proc sets have a guaranteed proc on stuff like dealing damage, getting damaged, doing one light attack, and so on. They dont change game mecahnics in any meaningful way whatsoever.

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

A huge majority of the player base plays the game for fun: not to measure their skill constantly. That's the disconnect that many elitist pvpr's can't grasp. Many of their thoughts/concerns are valid, but most of them are ego driven because they are always measuring the size of everyone's "skill".

Calling the opposition 'elitists' is as much of an argument as me calling you a 'proctard'. Since we want to have a constructive discussions lets not do that, shall we? After all, these ad hominems lead to nothing. Now, do you have any solid points to refute for example my comparisons between spriggans/deadly strikes and proc sets?

Look at how many proc sets Zenimax creates. If what I was saying was untrue: why would they do so? This game is a business after all.

ZOS does all kind of weird changes. At times, even when the vast apparent majority of people really dislike them. Best example: cast times on ults.
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/484941/cast-time-on-ultimate-or-not (July 2019, 82% dont want cast times on ults)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/489379/cast-time-ultis (August 2019, 89% want cast times removed)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/498109/do-you-enjoy-cast-times-on-ultimates (October 2019, 83% dont enjoy cast times)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/508430/ult-cast-times (January 2020, 81% want cast times removed)

This disproves your assumption.

Zenimax doesn't usually do what a vocal majority says in the forums (this isn't a democracy). Sometimes they do cave to pressure: But usually they do what their dev team decides. Often times the majority is wrong when it comes to high performance.

Zenimax ultimately does what they think is best for the game overall. Sometimes they are wrong. But they have data that you and I don't, and I wouldn't be so quick to believe that they are incompetant. They are the ones who made this game: and they continue to make proc sets. Just maybe, they know something that you don't.

well said
exactly the truth
what you just said is all that this thread needs, the developers know what they are doing nothing more needs to be said on this subject.
the problem is that people refuse to accept this and they honestly believe they are in charge and they work feverishly to make mass threads to get what they want put into the game instead of just enjoying the game for what it is.

Ajaks

Dovahmiim wrote: »

...

And you haven't provided anything to show the discussed procs are balanced.

He was nearly bullied in to duels and he proved his claims. I think that if you strive for objectivity you have to give him that.