The Gold Road Chapter – which includes the Scribing system – and Update 42 is now available to test on the PTS! You can read the latest patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/656454/
Frost damage for Warden
-
Trixterion✭✭ESO_Nightingale wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
based on what you've said here, i don't think you understand how damage types work in this game. changing one skill from magic to frost doesn't "destroy the main archetype of magden" i don't get where that's coming from since it doesn't fundamentally change gameplay or themes on the class. all it does is improve chilled proc chance in aoe, in exchange for a little bit of aoe overcharged, already provided by other classes anyway, and it interacts better with sets since the only one it currently works with at the moment is war maiden. if you hate frost so much, i'm sorry, but that's what the class does.
That's pretty heavy insult to me as frostmage main in almost any game that has it. My idea is to give Frostden something instead of Deep Fissure and replace as much skills as possible not the damage type. What will you choose as Frostden: aoe direct frost damage after delay skill that has better utility other than Major Breach or you will be fine with Frost Deep Fissure? Aoe magica steal with Major Breach should be a weapon of heal and tank or Magden for extra 2% damage done.
Maybe one day there will be an expansion with The College of Winterhold added similar to the Psijic Order skill Line, damm even spellcraft would be cool since there were practiced Shalidor's Magic and there are exactly 5 schools of magic(Alteration, Conjuration, Destruction, Illusion, and Restoration). Maybe I ask to much, but class identity comes from it skills and if all archetypes use the SAME skills there is nothing unique about them besides item sets and rotation. I want Frostden to visually and by quality of its skills be distinct from any other Warden; "new" spammable is a step in the right direction for my goal while Frost Deep Fissure is directly opposite one.1 -
ESO_Nightingale✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
based on what you've said here, i don't think you understand how damage types work in this game. changing one skill from magic to frost doesn't "destroy the main archetype of magden" i don't get where that's coming from since it doesn't fundamentally change gameplay or themes on the class. all it does is improve chilled proc chance in aoe, in exchange for a little bit of aoe overcharged, already provided by other classes anyway, and it interacts better with sets since the only one it currently works with at the moment is war maiden. if you hate frost so much, i'm sorry, but that's what the class does.
That's pretty heavy insult to me as frostmage main in almost any game that has it. My idea is to give Frostden something instead of Deep Fissure and replace as much skills as possible not the damage type. What will you choose as Frostden: aoe direct frost damage after delay skill that has better utility other than Major Breach or you will be fine with Frost Deep Fissure? Aoe magica steal with Major Breach should be a weapon of heal and tank or Magden for extra 2% damage done.
Maybe one day there will be an expansion with The College of Winterhold added similar to the Psijic Order skill Line, damm even spellcraft would be cool since there were practiced Shalidor's Magic and there are exactly 5 schools of magic(Alteration, Conjuration, Destruction, Illusion, and Restoration). Maybe I ask to much, but class identity comes from it skills and if all archetypes use the SAME skills there is nothing unique about them besides item sets and rotation. I want Frostden to visually and by quality of its skills be distinct from any other Warden; "new" spammable is a step in the right direction for my goal while Frost Deep Fissure is directly opposite one.
i'm sorry that i insulted you.
But, getting a new frost damage skill doesn't mean that it'll replace deep fissure, that is incredibly unlikely, and if it did happen it wouldn't be benficial for the class design since we just have so few class skills already, deep fissure is the gameplay anchor skill of our class. we use it on frostden regardless since it makes up a lot of our damage, it's also so much easier for zenimax to change a damage type, special effects and sound effects than it is to remake an entire skill, and even then, like i said we would still be using deep fissure anyway, and the fact that it could apply aoe chilled and interact with our frost sets is very useful for our viability. it's clear to me that we see things very differently. you have an idealistic view of what should happen (which is fine, don't get me wrong), I just do not see zos doing that since it means putting more resources in. I am trying to push to get legitimately cheap and useful changes first that i know will work, frost shalks is one of those. i am not against getting actual frost damage skills, see my AB4.0 suggestion, but that suggestion was designed specifically to work with deep fissure, especially in pvp environments. frostden is a warden, and that means it's going to be using warden skills. deep fissure dealing frost damage doesn't actually hurt anyone, and it helps us regardless of if we are a frostden or not. regular magicka warden deals frost damage with winter's revenge anyway. so there's really no harm.Edited by ESO_Nightingale on July 21, 2021 2:07PMPvE Frost Warden Main and teacher for ESO-U. Frost Warden PvE Build Article: https://eso-u.com/articles/nightingales_warden_dps_guide__frost_knight. Come Join the ESO Frost Discord to discuss everything frost!: https://discord.gg/5PT3rQX4 -
Stx✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭The class also does animal/nature stuff. I would argue that's the main theme over frost, as frost is just one out of three trees.
I stand by what I said. Designing a class to be half frost mage half druid was a bad design choice from the beginning, because those are two popular archetypes in RPGs and both sides want the class to work for them.
I will say that I don't see an issue per se with changing certain animal skills to be frost damage. Mechanically it would work fine. It starts to get messy when you look at it from a theme perspective though.4 -
Trixterion✭✭The class also does animal/nature stuff. I would argue that's the main theme over frost, as frost is just one out of three trees.
I stand by what I said. Designing a class to be half frost mage half druid was a bad design choice from the beginning, because those are two popular archetypes in RPGs and both sides want the class to work for them.
I will say that I don't see an issue per se with changing certain animal skills to be frost damage. Mechanically it would work fine. It starts to get messy when you look at it from a theme perspective though.
Exactly, we have like 3 never used morphs in Ice tree, why won't we try to convince devs to change them into useful frost damage skills instead of changing damage type of some skills(because that won't solve the problem, it will just work as substitute)?Edited by Trixterion on July 21, 2021 5:54PM2 -
WillyOneBlood✭✭✭The class also does animal/nature stuff. I would argue that's the main theme over frost, as frost is just one out of three trees.
I stand by what I said. Designing a class to be half frost mage half druid was a bad design choice from the beginning, because those are two popular archetypes in RPGs and both sides want the class to work for them.
I will say that I don't see an issue per se with changing certain animal skills to be frost damage. Mechanically it would work fine. It starts to get messy when you look at it from a theme perspective though.
I'm pretty sure frost is also a part of nature, unless it's man made. I would argue frost is the main theme over animals as animals is jus one out of the three trees.1 -
WrathOfInnos✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭WillyOneBlood wrote: »The class also does animal/nature stuff. I would argue that's the main theme over frost, as frost is just one out of three trees.
I stand by what I said. Designing a class to be half frost mage half druid was a bad design choice from the beginning, because those are two popular archetypes in RPGs and both sides want the class to work for them.
I will say that I don't see an issue per se with changing certain animal skills to be frost damage. Mechanically it would work fine. It starts to get messy when you look at it from a theme perspective though.
I'm pretty sure frost is also a part of nature, unless it's man made. I would argue frost is the main theme over animals as animals is jus one out of the three trees.
Also trees are one of the three trees.
Warden’s frost does seem to be man-made, but their animals and plants are also man-made.
1 -
Trixterion✭✭WillyOneBlood wrote: »The class also does animal/nature stuff. I would argue that's the main theme over frost, as frost is just one out of three trees.
I stand by what I said. Designing a class to be half frost mage half druid was a bad design choice from the beginning, because those are two popular archetypes in RPGs and both sides want the class to work for them.
I will say that I don't see an issue per se with changing certain animal skills to be frost damage. Mechanically it would work fine. It starts to get messy when you look at it from a theme perspective though.
I'm pretty sure frost is also a part of nature, unless it's man made. I would argue frost is the main theme over animals as animals is jus one out of the three trees.
I would argue about frost and nature magic: frost magic is one of 3 main branches of Destruction school of magic, where elements according to TES logic should manifest themselves clearly: frost should snare, freeze and provide defensive buffs; fire should provide both burst damage and dot ignition; while electro should provide teleportation, speed and disintegration(aka execute, which we miss, RIP infamous Sorc passive); btw where our chain lightning and fireball?!
While Nature magic in TES was always part of druid circles; so that when you summon animals you would expect them to deal either form of physical(if animal is a real), poison/bleed damage(if you recall either blood or earth element to create them) or magic damage(if animal you have summoned considered some sort of spiritual being). So technically you can imbue spiritual being with some solid matter to provide it with body it's currently missing, so that for instance it can be stone or even stalgrim bear an even bear made of poisonous vines but there is still one limitation applied it should be created from something organic and that and that entirely eliminates stalgrim and stone bears because they are not bears in that case but elementals.
Destruction magic in all its manifestations should provide you feeling of a pyromaniac(inser here your favorite element, mine is Ice, but pyro is easier to explain), who runs around and screams like Melman from the first Madagascar cartoon " FIRE, FIRE!" or " I AM THE FIRELORD OF DESTRUCTION, KNEEL BEFORE ME OR TURN TO THE ASH". While druid should say with his skills "THE NATURE WILL DESTROY YOU AND IF THAT WON'T BE ENOUGH MY SPIRIT ANIMALS WILL TEAR YOU APART".
But Warden has its own way. Remember Glenumbra's sisters that worship both nature and elements, so technically our Warden worship both nature and water element so I don't see here any problem, but nature and Ice magic should differ one from another for the reasons of 2 completely different feeling they provide.0 -
Faulgor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭The class also does animal/nature stuff. I would argue that's the main theme over frost, as frost is just one out of three trees.
I stand by what I said. Designing a class to be half frost mage half druid was a bad design choice from the beginning, because those are two popular archetypes in RPGs and both sides want the class to work for them.
I will say that I don't see an issue per se with changing certain animal skills to be frost damage. Mechanically it would work fine. It starts to get messy when you look at it from a theme perspective though.
Yeah. Until they add a Conjuration staff that gives everyone the option to summon animal companions, I think supplementing frost Wardens with skills from the Destruction staff skill line is the best option. Outside of magDK I don't think there's any reasonable build that can source all their damage from just one element, so that might not be a realistic expectation.
By the way, why are we only talking about Wardens as frost mages? Everybody else is apparently bound to fire until the end of time?Alandrol Sul: He's making another Numidium?!?
Vivec: Worse, buddy. They're buying it.1 -
YandereGirlfriend✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.4 -
ESO_Nightingale✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.
Pretty sure shalks should do fire damage if they were actually "real". But it's very easy to explain. It's warden "storytelling" magic, they're literally spectral. And if warden can't imbue it's magical animals with frost then why can it cast winter's embrace skills?
You could also ask "why does necromancer's blastbones do fire damage?". It's kinda all stupid anyway. So I'm also baffled that a few people are against it.Edited by ESO_Nightingale on July 21, 2021 10:16PMPvE Frost Warden Main and teacher for ESO-U. Frost Warden PvE Build Article: https://eso-u.com/articles/nightingales_warden_dps_guide__frost_knight. Come Join the ESO Frost Discord to discuss everything frost!: https://discord.gg/5PT3rQX0 -
YandereGirlfriend✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭ESO_Nightingale wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.
Pretty sure shalks should do fire damage if they were actually "real". But it's very easy to explain. It's warden "storytelling" magic, they're literally spectral. And if warden can't imbue it's magical animals with frost then why can it cast winter's embrace skills?
You could also ask "why does necromancer's blastbones do fire damage?". It's kinda all stupid anyway. So I'm also baffled that a few people are against it.
The observation of Shalks doing Flame Damage is a good one and that likely is what they should have chosen from a lore and basic world-building point of view (though they still can attack without using Flame - which would be basic Physical Damage).
The whole "storytelling" thing is and always was a complete hand-wave to any established TES lore so that they could rope in other standard fantasy tropes for a class that should not even exist in the setting.
But I think that you missed the part where I was agreeing with you about Frost Shalks. My argument is that the Companions being Magic Damage was lame and arbitrary to begin with so "arbitrarily" changing them again to Frost Damage isn't some titanic lore tragedy.2 -
ESO_Nightingale✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭YandereGirlfriend wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.
Pretty sure shalks should do fire damage if they were actually "real". But it's very easy to explain. It's warden "storytelling" magic, they're literally spectral. And if warden can't imbue it's magical animals with frost then why can it cast winter's embrace skills?
You could also ask "why does necromancer's blastbones do fire damage?". It's kinda all stupid anyway. So I'm also baffled that a few people are against it.
The observation of Shalks doing Flame Damage is a good one and that likely is what they should have chosen from a lore and basic world-building point of view (though they still can attack without using Flame - which would be basic Physical Damage).
The whole "storytelling" thing is and always was a complete hand-wave to any established TES lore so that they could rope in other standard fantasy tropes for a class that should not even exist in the setting.
But I think that you missed the part where I was agreeing with you about Frost Shalks. My argument is that the Companions being Magic Damage was lame and arbitrary to begin with so "arbitrarily" changing them again to Frost Damage isn't some titanic lore tragedy.
I know you were agreeing i was just adding more to your argument. Because it's all silly anyway. Frost animal companions isn't going to ruin the class like some people think.Edited by ESO_Nightingale on July 21, 2021 10:47PMPvE Frost Warden Main and teacher for ESO-U. Frost Warden PvE Build Article: https://eso-u.com/articles/nightingales_warden_dps_guide__frost_knight. Come Join the ESO Frost Discord to discuss everything frost!: https://discord.gg/5PT3rQX1 -
Trixterion✭✭The class also does animal/nature stuff. I would argue that's the main theme over frost, as frost is just one out of three trees.
I stand by what I said. Designing a class to be half frost mage half druid was a bad design choice from the beginning, because those are two popular archetypes in RPGs and both sides want the class to work for them.
I will say that I don't see an issue per se with changing certain animal skills to be frost damage. Mechanically it would work fine. It starts to get messy when you look at it from a theme perspective though.
Yeah. Until they add a Conjuration staff that gives everyone the option to summon animal companions, I think supplementing frost Wardens with skills from the Destruction staff skill line is the best option. Outside of magDK I don't think there's any reasonable build that can source all their damage from just one element, so that might not be a realistic expectation.
By the way, why are we only talking about Wardens as frost mages? Everybody else is apparently bound to fire until the end of time?
Excuse me, but aren't 2/3 of Sorcerer's skills considered to be Conjuration magic?1 -
Trixterion✭✭YandereGirlfriend wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.
Pretty sure shalks should do fire damage if they were actually "real". But it's very easy to explain. It's warden "storytelling" magic, they're literally spectral. And if warden can't imbue it's magical animals with frost then why can it cast winter's embrace skills?
You could also ask "why does necromancer's blastbones do fire damage?". It's kinda all stupid anyway. So I'm also baffled that a few people are against it.
The observation of Shalks doing Flame Damage is a good one and that likely is what they should have chosen from a lore and basic world-building point of view (though they still can attack without using Flame - which would be basic Physical Damage).
The whole "storytelling" thing is and always was a complete hand-wave to any established TES lore so that they could rope in other standard fantasy tropes for a class that should not even exist in the setting.
But I think that you missed the part where I was agreeing with you about Frost Shalks. My argument is that the Companions being Magic Damage was lame and arbitrary to begin with so "arbitrarily" changing them again to Frost Damage isn't some titanic lore tragedy.
For clarification, I personally fine with frost animals, but I have extra conditions:
• if ALL animal skills dealt frost damage, that would be fine, but how can anyone justify only ONE skill among animals that deals frost damage while others - magic? My thoughts - either all or nothing;
• if Warden was proposed from the beginning as an Ice mage with Conjuration skills(like Sorcerer, but replace all lightning with ice), I would be fine either with all or partial Ice damage for Conjuration skills, but how can we fit all that flower-based healing tree into this concept? My thoughts - if ZOS was trying to make Druid class into the game, it would be more beneficial for them to provide any non-animal or flower-based skills as [weather-based skills]/[wild fire]/[earthquake] and I guess that would be a copy past from D&D that also has right to exist. It's a shame in this case that we have only Ice aspect of the weather and where are those people who fight over call of lightning or earthquake or chain incineration? I am not one of them, so they are either silent or fine with it.
In conclusion, if all magic-based damage skills were turned into frost-based and corresponding passive skills were remade from "+10% for magic and frost damage" into "+10% for bleed and frost damage" and "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled enemies" into "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled and bleeding enemies", that would be fine for the Frostden, but that would make Frostbite mandatory and narrow build diversity. Solution for Frostden should be: either you play with summoned animals or not, like pet and non-pet Sorcerers, that would be ideal for build diversity.0 -
ESO_Nightingale✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Trixterion wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.
Pretty sure shalks should do fire damage if they were actually "real". But it's very easy to explain. It's warden "storytelling" magic, they're literally spectral. And if warden can't imbue it's magical animals with frost then why can it cast winter's embrace skills?
You could also ask "why does necromancer's blastbones do fire damage?". It's kinda all stupid anyway. So I'm also baffled that a few people are against it.
The observation of Shalks doing Flame Damage is a good one and that likely is what they should have chosen from a lore and basic world-building point of view (though they still can attack without using Flame - which would be basic Physical Damage).
The whole "storytelling" thing is and always was a complete hand-wave to any established TES lore so that they could rope in other standard fantasy tropes for a class that should not even exist in the setting.
But I think that you missed the part where I was agreeing with you about Frost Shalks. My argument is that the Companions being Magic Damage was lame and arbitrary to begin with so "arbitrarily" changing them again to Frost Damage isn't some titanic lore tragedy.
For clarification, I personally fine with frost animals, but I have extra conditions:
• if ALL animal skills dealt frost damage, that would be fine, but how can anyone justify only ONE skill among animals that deals frost damage while others - magic? My thoughts - either all or nothing;
• if Warden was proposed from the beginning as an Ice mage with Conjuration skills(like Sorcerer, but replace all lightning with ice), I would be fine either with all or partial Ice damage for Conjuration skills, but how can we fit all that flower-based healing tree into this concept? My thoughts - if ZOS was trying to make Druid class into the game, it would be more beneficial for them to provide any non-animal or flower-based skills as [weather-based skills]/[wild fire]/[earthquake] and I guess that would be a copy past from D&D that also has right to exist. It's a shame in this case that we have only Ice aspect of the weather and where are those people who fight over call of lightning or earthquake or chain incineration? I am not one of them, so they are either silent or fine with it.
In conclusion, if all magic-based damage skills were turned into frost-based and corresponding passive skills were remade from "+10% for magic and frost damage" into "+10% for bleed and frost damage" and "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled enemies" into "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled and bleeding enemies", that would be fine for the Frostden, but that would make Frostbite mandatory and narrow build diversity. Solution for Frostden should be: either you play with summoned animals or not, like pet and non-pet Sorcerers, that would be ideal for build diversity.
if having all of them dealing frost damage makes frostbite necessary, then just shalks changing wouldn't and honestly i'd personally be happy with the state of animal companions if they just touched deep fissure's damage type and kept everything else magic. sub assault already deals a weird type of damage compared to the rest of the kit stamden had. poison. so it doesn't really make a difference if it is the only one that deals frost. in the case where new added damage skills to magden proves too much, removing the magic bonus damage would be a fair compensating nerf, since it's one of the few raw damage bonuses that pads magden's damage in pve to the point where's its one of the better dps, where the frost bonus damage is what actually makes frostden specifically viable, it's just nice flavour for regular magden, only boosting winter's revenge.PvE Frost Warden Main and teacher for ESO-U. Frost Warden PvE Build Article: https://eso-u.com/articles/nightingales_warden_dps_guide__frost_knight. Come Join the ESO Frost Discord to discuss everything frost!: https://discord.gg/5PT3rQX1 -
Excelsus✭✭✭✭I'm of the mind that both magic and frost have a right to exist in Warden's kit. I love frost mage. I'm happy we're seeing that emerge and its clear it wasnt Zos's original plan, ice was supposed to be just tanking and I love that player feedback has helped slowly carve out a frost dps/support mage but I dont want it to come at the cost of Wardens magic side. Yes Templars and Nightblade have magic skills but Warden has a FULL magic damage kit and that juicy 10% magic damage and lore wise yes they are weaving animals out of pure story. A unique form of magic that does have deep ties to the Wood Elf lore but also Bretons like the Wryd and Hircine followers exploit this well of power. Gameplay wise Warden vampire with War Maiden is amazing. Its how I got my first Spirit Slayer. Great damage, synergy, aoe overcharge. If we changed Animal Companions to frost, it would be sacrificing one (admittedly niche) playstyle for another (admittedly niche) playstyle. I think this situation simply highlights the need for more skill trees. Ive said it before but we need another mages guild skill line with some classic ice skills like lingering chill and frost atronach. That would give every class the ability to be a brittle mage while cementing Warden as the best applicator without needing to change the animal skill lines and rip off Wardens magic builds.0
-
WrathOfInnos✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Trixterion wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.
Pretty sure shalks should do fire damage if they were actually "real". But it's very easy to explain. It's warden "storytelling" magic, they're literally spectral. And if warden can't imbue it's magical animals with frost then why can it cast winter's embrace skills?
You could also ask "why does necromancer's blastbones do fire damage?". It's kinda all stupid anyway. So I'm also baffled that a few people are against it.
The observation of Shalks doing Flame Damage is a good one and that likely is what they should have chosen from a lore and basic world-building point of view (though they still can attack without using Flame - which would be basic Physical Damage).
The whole "storytelling" thing is and always was a complete hand-wave to any established TES lore so that they could rope in other standard fantasy tropes for a class that should not even exist in the setting.
But I think that you missed the part where I was agreeing with you about Frost Shalks. My argument is that the Companions being Magic Damage was lame and arbitrary to begin with so "arbitrarily" changing them again to Frost Damage isn't some titanic lore tragedy.
For clarification, I personally fine with frost animals, but I have extra conditions:
• if ALL animal skills dealt frost damage, that would be fine, but how can anyone justify only ONE skill among animals that deals frost damage while others - magic? My thoughts - either all or nothing;
• if Warden was proposed from the beginning as an Ice mage with Conjuration skills(like Sorcerer, but replace all lightning with ice), I would be fine either with all or partial Ice damage for Conjuration skills, but how can we fit all that flower-based healing tree into this concept? My thoughts - if ZOS was trying to make Druid class into the game, it would be more beneficial for them to provide any non-animal or flower-based skills as [weather-based skills]/[wild fire]/[earthquake] and I guess that would be a copy past from D&D that also has right to exist. It's a shame in this case that we have only Ice aspect of the weather and where are those people who fight over call of lightning or earthquake or chain incineration? I am not one of them, so they are either silent or fine with it.
In conclusion, if all magic-based damage skills were turned into frost-based and corresponding passive skills were remade from "+10% for magic and frost damage" into "+10% for bleed and frost damage" and "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled enemies" into "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled and bleeding enemies", that would be fine for the Frostden, but that would make Frostbite mandatory and narrow build diversity. Solution for Frostden should be: either you play with summoned animals or not, like pet and non-pet Sorcerers, that would be ideal for build diversity.
Why would it need to be all or none? I could see Fire Shalks dealing Fire Damage (or maybe make it into a Thunderbug for Shock Damage), a Polar Bear dealing Frost Damage. Fetcher Infection should also be Fire damage if we’re getting technical.
It’s similar to how Necromancer summons work. The Frozen Flesh Colossus deals Frost Damage, the exploding Skeleton deals Fire Damage, and the Skeleton casting Lightning spells deals Shock Damage.
“Magic Damage” seems to be vaguely defined, and overused. Conceptually I don’t really understand what it means. The recipient experiences the same effect from Nightblade’s Dark Shade and Templar’s Radiant Oppression? Seems unlikely, more of a catch-all.Edited by WrathOfInnos on July 22, 2021 6:04PM2 -
Trixterion✭✭WrathOfInnos wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.
Pretty sure shalks should do fire damage if they were actually "real". But it's very easy to explain. It's warden "storytelling" magic, they're literally spectral. And if warden can't imbue it's magical animals with frost then why can it cast winter's embrace skills?
You could also ask "why does necromancer's blastbones do fire damage?". It's kinda all stupid anyway. So I'm also baffled that a few people are against it.
The observation of Shalks doing Flame Damage is a good one and that likely is what they should have chosen from a lore and basic world-building point of view (though they still can attack without using Flame - which would be basic Physical Damage).
The whole "storytelling" thing is and always was a complete hand-wave to any established TES lore so that they could rope in other standard fantasy tropes for a class that should not even exist in the setting.
But I think that you missed the part where I was agreeing with you about Frost Shalks. My argument is that the Companions being Magic Damage was lame and arbitrary to begin with so "arbitrarily" changing them again to Frost Damage isn't some titanic lore tragedy.
For clarification, I personally fine with frost animals, but I have extra conditions:
• if ALL animal skills dealt frost damage, that would be fine, but how can anyone justify only ONE skill among animals that deals frost damage while others - magic? My thoughts - either all or nothing;
• if Warden was proposed from the beginning as an Ice mage with Conjuration skills(like Sorcerer, but replace all lightning with ice), I would be fine either with all or partial Ice damage for Conjuration skills, but how can we fit all that flower-based healing tree into this concept? My thoughts - if ZOS was trying to make Druid class into the game, it would be more beneficial for them to provide any non-animal or flower-based skills as [weather-based skills]/[wild fire]/[earthquake] and I guess that would be a copy past from D&D that also has right to exist. It's a shame in this case that we have only Ice aspect of the weather and where are those people who fight over call of lightning or earthquake or chain incineration? I am not one of them, so they are either silent or fine with it.
In conclusion, if all magic-based damage skills were turned into frost-based and corresponding passive skills were remade from "+10% for magic and frost damage" into "+10% for bleed and frost damage" and "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled enemies" into "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled and bleeding enemies", that would be fine for the Frostden, but that would make Frostbite mandatory and narrow build diversity. Solution for Frostden should be: either you play with summoned animals or not, like pet and non-pet Sorcerers, that would be ideal for build diversity.
Why would it need to be all or none? I could see Fire Shalks dealing Fire Damage (or maybe make it into a Thunderbug for Shock Damage), a Polar Bear dealing Frost Damage. Fetcher Infection should also be Fire damage if we’re getting technical.
It’s similar to how Necromancer summons work. The Frozen Flesh Colossus deals Frost Damage, the exploding Skeleton deals Fire Damage, and the Skeleton casting Lightning spells deals Shock Damage.
“Magic Damage” seems to be vaguely defined, and overused. Conceptually I don’t really understand what it means. The recipient experiences the same effect from Nightblade’s Dark Shade and Templar’s Radiant Oppression? Seems unlikely, more of a catch-all.
You know, any Conjuration spell by default deal magic damage(2/3 of Sorcerer's skills are Conjuration and they heavily emphasized around either magic or shock[and this damage type in particular only applies if you're the Lightning Sorcerer therefore they are imbued with it]).
So technically, if all skills were dealing their damage corresponding to the animal they represent that would be fine if they were real animals not the ones that disappear after attack. Necromancer has skeletons that actually die without being directly killed, while flies or bear technically could enter that category, how does shalks and cliff racer get them killed? Do they have some suicidal mechanism irl? Maybe if we were able to summon Ice Wrath that has the same skill description and damage as shalks that would be great. We need an actual Destruction and Conjuration skills available to all classes because that will solve so many problems0 -
ESO_Nightingale✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭WrathOfInnos wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.
Pretty sure shalks should do fire damage if they were actually "real". But it's very easy to explain. It's warden "storytelling" magic, they're literally spectral. And if warden can't imbue it's magical animals with frost then why can it cast winter's embrace skills?
You could also ask "why does necromancer's blastbones do fire damage?". It's kinda all stupid anyway. So I'm also baffled that a few people are against it.
The observation of Shalks doing Flame Damage is a good one and that likely is what they should have chosen from a lore and basic world-building point of view (though they still can attack without using Flame - which would be basic Physical Damage).
The whole "storytelling" thing is and always was a complete hand-wave to any established TES lore so that they could rope in other standard fantasy tropes for a class that should not even exist in the setting.
But I think that you missed the part where I was agreeing with you about Frost Shalks. My argument is that the Companions being Magic Damage was lame and arbitrary to begin with so "arbitrarily" changing them again to Frost Damage isn't some titanic lore tragedy.
For clarification, I personally fine with frost animals, but I have extra conditions:
• if ALL animal skills dealt frost damage, that would be fine, but how can anyone justify only ONE skill among animals that deals frost damage while others - magic? My thoughts - either all or nothing;
• if Warden was proposed from the beginning as an Ice mage with Conjuration skills(like Sorcerer, but replace all lightning with ice), I would be fine either with all or partial Ice damage for Conjuration skills, but how can we fit all that flower-based healing tree into this concept? My thoughts - if ZOS was trying to make Druid class into the game, it would be more beneficial for them to provide any non-animal or flower-based skills as [weather-based skills]/[wild fire]/[earthquake] and I guess that would be a copy past from D&D that also has right to exist. It's a shame in this case that we have only Ice aspect of the weather and where are those people who fight over call of lightning or earthquake or chain incineration? I am not one of them, so they are either silent or fine with it.
In conclusion, if all magic-based damage skills were turned into frost-based and corresponding passive skills were remade from "+10% for magic and frost damage" into "+10% for bleed and frost damage" and "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled enemies" into "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled and bleeding enemies", that would be fine for the Frostden, but that would make Frostbite mandatory and narrow build diversity. Solution for Frostden should be: either you play with summoned animals or not, like pet and non-pet Sorcerers, that would be ideal for build diversity.
Why would it need to be all or none? I could see Fire Shalks dealing Fire Damage (or maybe make it into a Thunderbug for Shock Damage), a Polar Bear dealing Frost Damage. Fetcher Infection should also be Fire damage if we’re getting technical.
It’s similar to how Necromancer summons work. The Frozen Flesh Colossus deals Frost Damage, the exploding Skeleton deals Fire Damage, and the Skeleton casting Lightning spells deals Shock Damage.
“Magic Damage” seems to be vaguely defined, and overused. Conceptually I don’t really understand what it means. The recipient experiences the same effect from Nightblade’s Dark Shade and Templar’s Radiant Oppression? Seems unlikely, more of a catch-all.
Yeah this all or nothing argument makes no sense to me. It just seems like nonsense not based on any objective fact but rather just feelings. I still have yet to see any argument that has at least partially convinced me that frost shalks isn't a good idea.Edited by ESO_Nightingale on July 22, 2021 11:13PMPvE Frost Warden Main and teacher for ESO-U. Frost Warden PvE Build Article: https://eso-u.com/articles/nightingales_warden_dps_guide__frost_knight. Come Join the ESO Frost Discord to discuss everything frost!: https://discord.gg/5PT3rQX2 -
Oakiyo✭✭✭Lol, how does this thread turned into an RP discussion about warden?
Every single skill type of damage can have an RP justification. Whether shalk do frost or fire damage, you can put any explaination you want.
Switching animal companion skills to frost damage is about performance of the class. Being able to build into one element is not only pleasant from the RP perspective, but it can also help diversity in raid / dungeon composition if a warden is in charge for the minor brittle uptime instead of a support.
Also, magden has serious lacks in the pvp departement. It doesn't have a reliable cc, it doesn't have execute (no, the bear doesn't count ...), skills are very expensive, ... So being able to at least have a better pressure ability would help a lot to compensate these weaknesses until ZOS address them (I hope they will one day ...).
And for Frostbite becoming mandatory ... Well, there is already sets that are mandatory on any other class. I don't see any probleme here. On the contrary, you could finally have a different setup viable instead of sorrow/false god or Bahsei's/sorrow + kilt
I agree about the +10% magic damage being removed if this change was made tho.Edited by Oakiyo on July 23, 2021 11:42AM1 -
Trixterion✭✭ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WrathOfInnos wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.
Pretty sure shalks should do fire damage if they were actually "real". But it's very easy to explain. It's warden "storytelling" magic, they're literally spectral. And if warden can't imbue it's magical animals with frost then why can it cast winter's embrace skills?
You could also ask "why does necromancer's blastbones do fire damage?". It's kinda all stupid anyway. So I'm also baffled that a few people are against it.
The observation of Shalks doing Flame Damage is a good one and that likely is what they should have chosen from a lore and basic world-building point of view (though they still can attack without using Flame - which would be basic Physical Damage).
The whole "storytelling" thing is and always was a complete hand-wave to any established TES lore so that they could rope in other standard fantasy tropes for a class that should not even exist in the setting.
But I think that you missed the part where I was agreeing with you about Frost Shalks. My argument is that the Companions being Magic Damage was lame and arbitrary to begin with so "arbitrarily" changing them again to Frost Damage isn't some titanic lore tragedy.
For clarification, I personally fine with frost animals, but I have extra conditions:
• if ALL animal skills dealt frost damage, that would be fine, but how can anyone justify only ONE skill among animals that deals frost damage while others - magic? My thoughts - either all or nothing;
• if Warden was proposed from the beginning as an Ice mage with Conjuration skills(like Sorcerer, but replace all lightning with ice), I would be fine either with all or partial Ice damage for Conjuration skills, but how can we fit all that flower-based healing tree into this concept? My thoughts - if ZOS was trying to make Druid class into the game, it would be more beneficial for them to provide any non-animal or flower-based skills as [weather-based skills]/[wild fire]/[earthquake] and I guess that would be a copy past from D&D that also has right to exist. It's a shame in this case that we have only Ice aspect of the weather and where are those people who fight over call of lightning or earthquake or chain incineration? I am not one of them, so they are either silent or fine with it.
In conclusion, if all magic-based damage skills were turned into frost-based and corresponding passive skills were remade from "+10% for magic and frost damage" into "+10% for bleed and frost damage" and "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled enemies" into "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled and bleeding enemies", that would be fine for the Frostden, but that would make Frostbite mandatory and narrow build diversity. Solution for Frostden should be: either you play with summoned animals or not, like pet and non-pet Sorcerers, that would be ideal for build diversity.
Why would it need to be all or none? I could see Fire Shalks dealing Fire Damage (or maybe make it into a Thunderbug for Shock Damage), a Polar Bear dealing Frost Damage. Fetcher Infection should also be Fire damage if we’re getting technical.
It’s similar to how Necromancer summons work. The Frozen Flesh Colossus deals Frost Damage, the exploding Skeleton deals Fire Damage, and the Skeleton casting Lightning spells deals Shock Damage.
“Magic Damage” seems to be vaguely defined, and overused. Conceptually I don’t really understand what it means. The recipient experiences the same effect from Nightblade’s Dark Shade and Templar’s Radiant Oppression? Seems unlikely, more of a catch-all.
Yeah this all or nothing argument makes no sense to me. It just seems like nonsense not based on any objective fact but rather just feelings. I still have yet to see any argument that has at least partially convinced me that frost shalks isn't a good idea.
Ok, do you consider an aoe Minor Maim and Major Fracture on your demand with 2nd hardest hitting ability connected to this effects(outside ultimate ones for obvious reasons) that also boost your damage done by 2% without anything to sacrifice for justifying it usage(you don't need any set or a particular weapon to achieve its potential) as OP ability? There is no such thing that has 0 downsides and has such powerful effects in ESO(yeah there is aoe Major and Minor Defile but stupid skeleton has pathfinding problems therefore it cannot proc on cooldown so it's fine). So convince me why after changing it into frost with obvious Tanking bonuses it won't get itself nerfed to the ground with damage reduced by half as all Tanking damage abilities deal way too low damage or has clanking animation that messing with GCD or has short duration on their DOTs or has any kind of requirement that will mess up the caster for group benefit(say hello to the Stone Giant). I don't want this ability to be nerfed 1 update after it will be changed into frost damage skill. Shalks way too good so that 1 buff can make them OP0 -
ESO_Nightingale✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WrathOfInnos wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.
Pretty sure shalks should do fire damage if they were actually "real". But it's very easy to explain. It's warden "storytelling" magic, they're literally spectral. And if warden can't imbue it's magical animals with frost then why can it cast winter's embrace skills?
You could also ask "why does necromancer's blastbones do fire damage?". It's kinda all stupid anyway. So I'm also baffled that a few people are against it.
The observation of Shalks doing Flame Damage is a good one and that likely is what they should have chosen from a lore and basic world-building point of view (though they still can attack without using Flame - which would be basic Physical Damage).
The whole "storytelling" thing is and always was a complete hand-wave to any established TES lore so that they could rope in other standard fantasy tropes for a class that should not even exist in the setting.
But I think that you missed the part where I was agreeing with you about Frost Shalks. My argument is that the Companions being Magic Damage was lame and arbitrary to begin with so "arbitrarily" changing them again to Frost Damage isn't some titanic lore tragedy.
For clarification, I personally fine with frost animals, but I have extra conditions:
• if ALL animal skills dealt frost damage, that would be fine, but how can anyone justify only ONE skill among animals that deals frost damage while others - magic? My thoughts - either all or nothing;
• if Warden was proposed from the beginning as an Ice mage with Conjuration skills(like Sorcerer, but replace all lightning with ice), I would be fine either with all or partial Ice damage for Conjuration skills, but how can we fit all that flower-based healing tree into this concept? My thoughts - if ZOS was trying to make Druid class into the game, it would be more beneficial for them to provide any non-animal or flower-based skills as [weather-based skills]/[wild fire]/[earthquake] and I guess that would be a copy past from D&D that also has right to exist. It's a shame in this case that we have only Ice aspect of the weather and where are those people who fight over call of lightning or earthquake or chain incineration? I am not one of them, so they are either silent or fine with it.
In conclusion, if all magic-based damage skills were turned into frost-based and corresponding passive skills were remade from "+10% for magic and frost damage" into "+10% for bleed and frost damage" and "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled enemies" into "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled and bleeding enemies", that would be fine for the Frostden, but that would make Frostbite mandatory and narrow build diversity. Solution for Frostden should be: either you play with summoned animals or not, like pet and non-pet Sorcerers, that would be ideal for build diversity.
Why would it need to be all or none? I could see Fire Shalks dealing Fire Damage (or maybe make it into a Thunderbug for Shock Damage), a Polar Bear dealing Frost Damage. Fetcher Infection should also be Fire damage if we’re getting technical.
It’s similar to how Necromancer summons work. The Frozen Flesh Colossus deals Frost Damage, the exploding Skeleton deals Fire Damage, and the Skeleton casting Lightning spells deals Shock Damage.
“Magic Damage” seems to be vaguely defined, and overused. Conceptually I don’t really understand what it means. The recipient experiences the same effect from Nightblade’s Dark Shade and Templar’s Radiant Oppression? Seems unlikely, more of a catch-all.
Yeah this all or nothing argument makes no sense to me. It just seems like nonsense not based on any objective fact but rather just feelings. I still have yet to see any argument that has at least partially convinced me that frost shalks isn't a good idea.
Ok, do you consider an aoe Minor Maim and Major Fracture on your demand with 2nd hardest hitting ability connected to this effects(outside ultimate ones for obvious reasons) that also boost your damage done by 2% without anything to sacrifice for justifying it usage(you don't need any set or a particular weapon to achieve its potential) as OP ability? There is no such thing that has 0 downsides and has such powerful effects in ESO(yeah there is aoe Major and Minor Defile but stupid skeleton has pathfinding problems therefore it cannot proc on cooldown so it's fine). So convince me why after changing it into frost with obvious Tanking bonuses it won't get itself nerfed to the ground with damage reduced by half as all Tanking damage abilities deal way too low damage or has clanking animation that messing with GCD or has short duration on their DOTs or has any kind of requirement that will mess up the caster for group benefit(say hello to the Stone Giant). I don't want this ability to be nerfed 1 update after it will be changed into frost damage skill. Shalks way too good so that 1 buff can make them OP
When did i say it would always apply chilled and that nothing should be sacrificed for it? I've been pretty clear that it would help our AoE chilled application along with a little bit of single target since it's a main rotational skill used regardless on frostden. I've personally been wanting to ditch minor berserk, minor vuln and the bonus magic damage for a long time in return for a class kit that actually synergises with itself and has more than 4 damage skills, I'm fairly sure most people who have seen my comments and talk with me about this topic know this as well. How is frost damage shalks suddenly overpowered when it's change barely effects regular magden while helping the struggling frostden a lot?PvE Frost Warden Main and teacher for ESO-U. Frost Warden PvE Build Article: https://eso-u.com/articles/nightingales_warden_dps_guide__frost_knight. Come Join the ESO Frost Discord to discuss everything frost!: https://discord.gg/5PT3rQX0 -
Trixterion✭✭ESO_Nightingale wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WrathOfInnos wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.
Pretty sure shalks should do fire damage if they were actually "real". But it's very easy to explain. It's warden "storytelling" magic, they're literally spectral. And if warden can't imbue it's magical animals with frost then why can it cast winter's embrace skills?
You could also ask "why does necromancer's blastbones do fire damage?". It's kinda all stupid anyway. So I'm also baffled that a few people are against it.
The observation of Shalks doing Flame Damage is a good one and that likely is what they should have chosen from a lore and basic world-building point of view (though they still can attack without using Flame - which would be basic Physical Damage).
The whole "storytelling" thing is and always was a complete hand-wave to any established TES lore so that they could rope in other standard fantasy tropes for a class that should not even exist in the setting.
But I think that you missed the part where I was agreeing with you about Frost Shalks. My argument is that the Companions being Magic Damage was lame and arbitrary to begin with so "arbitrarily" changing them again to Frost Damage isn't some titanic lore tragedy.
For clarification, I personally fine with frost animals, but I have extra conditions:
• if ALL animal skills dealt frost damage, that would be fine, but how can anyone justify only ONE skill among animals that deals frost damage while others - magic? My thoughts - either all or nothing;
• if Warden was proposed from the beginning as an Ice mage with Conjuration skills(like Sorcerer, but replace all lightning with ice), I would be fine either with all or partial Ice damage for Conjuration skills, but how can we fit all that flower-based healing tree into this concept? My thoughts - if ZOS was trying to make Druid class into the game, it would be more beneficial for them to provide any non-animal or flower-based skills as [weather-based skills]/[wild fire]/[earthquake] and I guess that would be a copy past from D&D that also has right to exist. It's a shame in this case that we have only Ice aspect of the weather and where are those people who fight over call of lightning or earthquake or chain incineration? I am not one of them, so they are either silent or fine with it.
In conclusion, if all magic-based damage skills were turned into frost-based and corresponding passive skills were remade from "+10% for magic and frost damage" into "+10% for bleed and frost damage" and "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled enemies" into "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled and bleeding enemies", that would be fine for the Frostden, but that would make Frostbite mandatory and narrow build diversity. Solution for Frostden should be: either you play with summoned animals or not, like pet and non-pet Sorcerers, that would be ideal for build diversity.
Why would it need to be all or none? I could see Fire Shalks dealing Fire Damage (or maybe make it into a Thunderbug for Shock Damage), a Polar Bear dealing Frost Damage. Fetcher Infection should also be Fire damage if we’re getting technical.
It’s similar to how Necromancer summons work. The Frozen Flesh Colossus deals Frost Damage, the exploding Skeleton deals Fire Damage, and the Skeleton casting Lightning spells deals Shock Damage.
“Magic Damage” seems to be vaguely defined, and overused. Conceptually I don’t really understand what it means. The recipient experiences the same effect from Nightblade’s Dark Shade and Templar’s Radiant Oppression? Seems unlikely, more of a catch-all.
Yeah this all or nothing argument makes no sense to me. It just seems like nonsense not based on any objective fact but rather just feelings. I still have yet to see any argument that has at least partially convinced me that frost shalks isn't a good idea.
Ok, do you consider an aoe Minor Maim and Major Fracture on your demand with 2nd hardest hitting ability connected to this effects(outside ultimate ones for obvious reasons) that also boost your damage done by 2% without anything to sacrifice for justifying it usage(you don't need any set or a particular weapon to achieve its potential) as OP ability? There is no such thing that has 0 downsides and has such powerful effects in ESO(yeah there is aoe Major and Minor Defile but stupid skeleton has pathfinding problems therefore it cannot proc on cooldown so it's fine). So convince me why after changing it into frost with obvious Tanking bonuses it won't get itself nerfed to the ground with damage reduced by half as all Tanking damage abilities deal way too low damage or has clanking animation that messing with GCD or has short duration on their DOTs or has any kind of requirement that will mess up the caster for group benefit(say hello to the Stone Giant). I don't want this ability to be nerfed 1 update after it will be changed into frost damage skill. Shalks way too good so that 1 buff can make them OP
When did i say it would always apply chilled and that nothing should be sacrificed for it? I've been pretty clear that it would help our AoE chilled application along with a little bit of single target since it's a main rotational skill used regardless on frostden. I've personally been wanting to ditch minor berserk, minor vuln and the bonus magic damage for a long time in return for a class kit that actually synergises with itself and has more than 4 damage skills, I'm fairly sure most people who have seen my comments and talk with me about this topic know this as well. How is frost damage shalks suddenly overpowered when it's change barely effects regular magden while helping the struggling frostden a lot?
A little bit of math, that doesn't work as intended in our game:
• there is a tank set, that creates small whirls of ice around while blocking and it's said that the base chance to apply chilled is 15%, but with 1h charged it provides 100% uptime on chilled always without any brainpower to use it - just hold your block;
• frost shalks chilled proc chance = 5%[base aoe direct damage]×(1+100%[Elemental Force]+220%[Charged]+60%[CP])=24%, that ain't much at first glance but if we take into account uptime it would be even worse;
• nobody really know the proc chance of Winter's Revenge, but without frost staff it alone can provide 50-60% uptime.
The real problem here is that ANY Winter's Embrace ability will have ~10% better chance to apply chilled and ~20% more uptime on chilled than any other ability UNLESS it specifies directly in the skill's description. A small pitiful number on skill that can only hit once every 3 seconds will raise your uptime only by 10%, that almost worthless unless you use it as only source of chilled1 -
Trixterion✭✭Moreover, if you will spam Unstable Wall of frost in aoe scenario, you will get from it 3 times more chilled procs than from single cast of frost shalks and that is my POV - frost shalks 3 times worse than Unstable Wall of frost as a source of aoe chilled and if there will be any skill that will be better in applying chilled than stupid spam of wall, it should be created from any useless morphs in Winter's Embrace so that it will have 200% extra chance unless there will be skill that has increased base status chance. Frost shalks as a dps increase is fine while as the source of chilled it's questionable1
-
ESO_Nightingale✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WrathOfInnos wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.
Pretty sure shalks should do fire damage if they were actually "real". But it's very easy to explain. It's warden "storytelling" magic, they're literally spectral. And if warden can't imbue it's magical animals with frost then why can it cast winter's embrace skills?
You could also ask "why does necromancer's blastbones do fire damage?". It's kinda all stupid anyway. So I'm also baffled that a few people are against it.
The observation of Shalks doing Flame Damage is a good one and that likely is what they should have chosen from a lore and basic world-building point of view (though they still can attack without using Flame - which would be basic Physical Damage).
The whole "storytelling" thing is and always was a complete hand-wave to any established TES lore so that they could rope in other standard fantasy tropes for a class that should not even exist in the setting.
But I think that you missed the part where I was agreeing with you about Frost Shalks. My argument is that the Companions being Magic Damage was lame and arbitrary to begin with so "arbitrarily" changing them again to Frost Damage isn't some titanic lore tragedy.
For clarification, I personally fine with frost animals, but I have extra conditions:
• if ALL animal skills dealt frost damage, that would be fine, but how can anyone justify only ONE skill among animals that deals frost damage while others - magic? My thoughts - either all or nothing;
• if Warden was proposed from the beginning as an Ice mage with Conjuration skills(like Sorcerer, but replace all lightning with ice), I would be fine either with all or partial Ice damage for Conjuration skills, but how can we fit all that flower-based healing tree into this concept? My thoughts - if ZOS was trying to make Druid class into the game, it would be more beneficial for them to provide any non-animal or flower-based skills as [weather-based skills]/[wild fire]/[earthquake] and I guess that would be a copy past from D&D that also has right to exist. It's a shame in this case that we have only Ice aspect of the weather and where are those people who fight over call of lightning or earthquake or chain incineration? I am not one of them, so they are either silent or fine with it.
In conclusion, if all magic-based damage skills were turned into frost-based and corresponding passive skills were remade from "+10% for magic and frost damage" into "+10% for bleed and frost damage" and "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled enemies" into "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled and bleeding enemies", that would be fine for the Frostden, but that would make Frostbite mandatory and narrow build diversity. Solution for Frostden should be: either you play with summoned animals or not, like pet and non-pet Sorcerers, that would be ideal for build diversity.
Why would it need to be all or none? I could see Fire Shalks dealing Fire Damage (or maybe make it into a Thunderbug for Shock Damage), a Polar Bear dealing Frost Damage. Fetcher Infection should also be Fire damage if we’re getting technical.
It’s similar to how Necromancer summons work. The Frozen Flesh Colossus deals Frost Damage, the exploding Skeleton deals Fire Damage, and the Skeleton casting Lightning spells deals Shock Damage.
“Magic Damage” seems to be vaguely defined, and overused. Conceptually I don’t really understand what it means. The recipient experiences the same effect from Nightblade’s Dark Shade and Templar’s Radiant Oppression? Seems unlikely, more of a catch-all.
Yeah this all or nothing argument makes no sense to me. It just seems like nonsense not based on any objective fact but rather just feelings. I still have yet to see any argument that has at least partially convinced me that frost shalks isn't a good idea.
Ok, do you consider an aoe Minor Maim and Major Fracture on your demand with 2nd hardest hitting ability connected to this effects(outside ultimate ones for obvious reasons) that also boost your damage done by 2% without anything to sacrifice for justifying it usage(you don't need any set or a particular weapon to achieve its potential) as OP ability? There is no such thing that has 0 downsides and has such powerful effects in ESO(yeah there is aoe Major and Minor Defile but stupid skeleton has pathfinding problems therefore it cannot proc on cooldown so it's fine). So convince me why after changing it into frost with obvious Tanking bonuses it won't get itself nerfed to the ground with damage reduced by half as all Tanking damage abilities deal way too low damage or has clanking animation that messing with GCD or has short duration on their DOTs or has any kind of requirement that will mess up the caster for group benefit(say hello to the Stone Giant). I don't want this ability to be nerfed 1 update after it will be changed into frost damage skill. Shalks way too good so that 1 buff can make them OP
When did i say it would always apply chilled and that nothing should be sacrificed for it? I've been pretty clear that it would help our AoE chilled application along with a little bit of single target since it's a main rotational skill used regardless on frostden. I've personally been wanting to ditch minor berserk, minor vuln and the bonus magic damage for a long time in return for a class kit that actually synergises with itself and has more than 4 damage skills, I'm fairly sure most people who have seen my comments and talk with me about this topic know this as well. How is frost damage shalks suddenly overpowered when it's change barely effects regular magden while helping the struggling frostden a lot?
A little bit of math, that doesn't work as intended in our game:
• there is a tank set, that creates small whirls of ice around while blocking and it's said that the base chance to apply chilled is 15%, but with 1h charged it provides 100% uptime on chilled always without any brainpower to use it - just hold your block;
• frost shalks chilled proc chance = 5%[base aoe direct damage]×(1+100%[Elemental Force]+220%[Charged]+60%[CP])=24%, that ain't much at first glance but if we take into account uptime it would be even worse;
• nobody really know the proc chance of Winter's Revenge, but without frost staff it alone can provide 50-60% uptime.
The real problem here is that ANY Winter's Embrace ability will have ~10% better chance to apply chilled and ~20% more uptime on chilled than any other ability UNLESS it specifies directly in the skill's description. A small pitiful number on skill that can only hit once every 3 seconds will raise your uptime only by 10%, that almost worthless unless you use it as only source of chilled
So. In your last comment you were saying it would be broken if it could apply chilled and do frost damage and now you're saying it would be useless if it could apply chilled since the number is low. The number is small, but it does still apply chilled on one of our rotational skills with a chance in AoE every 3 seconds.Edited by ESO_Nightingale on July 24, 2021 5:25AMPvE Frost Warden Main and teacher for ESO-U. Frost Warden PvE Build Article: https://eso-u.com/articles/nightingales_warden_dps_guide__frost_knight. Come Join the ESO Frost Discord to discuss everything frost!: https://discord.gg/5PT3rQX0 -
Trixterion✭✭ESO_Nightingale wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WrathOfInnos wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.
Pretty sure shalks should do fire damage if they were actually "real". But it's very easy to explain. It's warden "storytelling" magic, they're literally spectral. And if warden can't imbue it's magical animals with frost then why can it cast winter's embrace skills?
You could also ask "why does necromancer's blastbones do fire damage?". It's kinda all stupid anyway. So I'm also baffled that a few people are against it.
The observation of Shalks doing Flame Damage is a good one and that likely is what they should have chosen from a lore and basic world-building point of view (though they still can attack without using Flame - which would be basic Physical Damage).
The whole "storytelling" thing is and always was a complete hand-wave to any established TES lore so that they could rope in other standard fantasy tropes for a class that should not even exist in the setting.
But I think that you missed the part where I was agreeing with you about Frost Shalks. My argument is that the Companions being Magic Damage was lame and arbitrary to begin with so "arbitrarily" changing them again to Frost Damage isn't some titanic lore tragedy.
For clarification, I personally fine with frost animals, but I have extra conditions:
• if ALL animal skills dealt frost damage, that would be fine, but how can anyone justify only ONE skill among animals that deals frost damage while others - magic? My thoughts - either all or nothing;
• if Warden was proposed from the beginning as an Ice mage with Conjuration skills(like Sorcerer, but replace all lightning with ice), I would be fine either with all or partial Ice damage for Conjuration skills, but how can we fit all that flower-based healing tree into this concept? My thoughts - if ZOS was trying to make Druid class into the game, it would be more beneficial for them to provide any non-animal or flower-based skills as [weather-based skills]/[wild fire]/[earthquake] and I guess that would be a copy past from D&D that also has right to exist. It's a shame in this case that we have only Ice aspect of the weather and where are those people who fight over call of lightning or earthquake or chain incineration? I am not one of them, so they are either silent or fine with it.
In conclusion, if all magic-based damage skills were turned into frost-based and corresponding passive skills were remade from "+10% for magic and frost damage" into "+10% for bleed and frost damage" and "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled enemies" into "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled and bleeding enemies", that would be fine for the Frostden, but that would make Frostbite mandatory and narrow build diversity. Solution for Frostden should be: either you play with summoned animals or not, like pet and non-pet Sorcerers, that would be ideal for build diversity.
Why would it need to be all or none? I could see Fire Shalks dealing Fire Damage (or maybe make it into a Thunderbug for Shock Damage), a Polar Bear dealing Frost Damage. Fetcher Infection should also be Fire damage if we’re getting technical.
It’s similar to how Necromancer summons work. The Frozen Flesh Colossus deals Frost Damage, the exploding Skeleton deals Fire Damage, and the Skeleton casting Lightning spells deals Shock Damage.
“Magic Damage” seems to be vaguely defined, and overused. Conceptually I don’t really understand what it means. The recipient experiences the same effect from Nightblade’s Dark Shade and Templar’s Radiant Oppression? Seems unlikely, more of a catch-all.
Yeah this all or nothing argument makes no sense to me. It just seems like nonsense not based on any objective fact but rather just feelings. I still have yet to see any argument that has at least partially convinced me that frost shalks isn't a good idea.
Ok, do you consider an aoe Minor Maim and Major Fracture on your demand with 2nd hardest hitting ability connected to this effects(outside ultimate ones for obvious reasons) that also boost your damage done by 2% without anything to sacrifice for justifying it usage(you don't need any set or a particular weapon to achieve its potential) as OP ability? There is no such thing that has 0 downsides and has such powerful effects in ESO(yeah there is aoe Major and Minor Defile but stupid skeleton has pathfinding problems therefore it cannot proc on cooldown so it's fine). So convince me why after changing it into frost with obvious Tanking bonuses it won't get itself nerfed to the ground with damage reduced by half as all Tanking damage abilities deal way too low damage or has clanking animation that messing with GCD or has short duration on their DOTs or has any kind of requirement that will mess up the caster for group benefit(say hello to the Stone Giant). I don't want this ability to be nerfed 1 update after it will be changed into frost damage skill. Shalks way too good so that 1 buff can make them OP
When did i say it would always apply chilled and that nothing should be sacrificed for it? I've been pretty clear that it would help our AoE chilled application along with a little bit of single target since it's a main rotational skill used regardless on frostden. I've personally been wanting to ditch minor berserk, minor vuln and the bonus magic damage for a long time in return for a class kit that actually synergises with itself and has more than 4 damage skills, I'm fairly sure most people who have seen my comments and talk with me about this topic know this as well. How is frost damage shalks suddenly overpowered when it's change barely effects regular magden while helping the struggling frostden a lot?
A little bit of math, that doesn't work as intended in our game:
• there is a tank set, that creates small whirls of ice around while blocking and it's said that the base chance to apply chilled is 15%, but with 1h charged it provides 100% uptime on chilled always without any brainpower to use it - just hold your block;
• frost shalks chilled proc chance = 5%[base aoe direct damage]×(1+100%[Elemental Force]+220%[Charged]+60%[CP])=24%, that ain't much at first glance but if we take into account uptime it would be even worse;
• nobody really know the proc chance of Winter's Revenge, but without frost staff it alone can provide 50-60% uptime.
The real problem here is that ANY Winter's Embrace ability will have ~10% better chance to apply chilled and ~20% more uptime on chilled than any other ability UNLESS it specifies directly in the skill's description. A small pitiful number on skill that can only hit once every 3 seconds will raise your uptime only by 10%, that almost worthless unless you use it as only source of chilled
So. In your last comment you were saying it would be broken if it could apply chilled and do frost damage and now you're saying it would be useless if it could apply chilled since the number is low. The number is small, but it does still apply chilled on one of our rotational skills with a chance in AoE every 3 seconds.
I definitely can't see the line: to be reliable source of chilled it should have 15% at base which would make it OP(that's what I meant in the first place), otherwise return is diminished so that there will be almost no difference whether it would be frost or magic damage, and tank can apply aoe chilled with 100% uptime, so what's the point of your change other than {+6% more damage of this skill +10% uptime on aoe chilled} which equally means less than 3% aoe and single target dps? On trash fight even Frozen Device will apply chilled more regularly. Your pov sounds for me as one of those lines in patch notes where devs say something like "we have increased frost damage on Frostbite by 2%, but upon next patch we will buff fire staves by 2% so that the gap will never narrow, and btw here is your frost spammable as you asked with 100% chilled chance - enjoy". The changes are good but the gap will never narrow unless steps we are doing will be big enough.1 -
ESO_Nightingale✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WrathOfInnos wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.
Pretty sure shalks should do fire damage if they were actually "real". But it's very easy to explain. It's warden "storytelling" magic, they're literally spectral. And if warden can't imbue it's magical animals with frost then why can it cast winter's embrace skills?
You could also ask "why does necromancer's blastbones do fire damage?". It's kinda all stupid anyway. So I'm also baffled that a few people are against it.
The observation of Shalks doing Flame Damage is a good one and that likely is what they should have chosen from a lore and basic world-building point of view (though they still can attack without using Flame - which would be basic Physical Damage).
The whole "storytelling" thing is and always was a complete hand-wave to any established TES lore so that they could rope in other standard fantasy tropes for a class that should not even exist in the setting.
But I think that you missed the part where I was agreeing with you about Frost Shalks. My argument is that the Companions being Magic Damage was lame and arbitrary to begin with so "arbitrarily" changing them again to Frost Damage isn't some titanic lore tragedy.
For clarification, I personally fine with frost animals, but I have extra conditions:
• if ALL animal skills dealt frost damage, that would be fine, but how can anyone justify only ONE skill among animals that deals frost damage while others - magic? My thoughts - either all or nothing;
• if Warden was proposed from the beginning as an Ice mage with Conjuration skills(like Sorcerer, but replace all lightning with ice), I would be fine either with all or partial Ice damage for Conjuration skills, but how can we fit all that flower-based healing tree into this concept? My thoughts - if ZOS was trying to make Druid class into the game, it would be more beneficial for them to provide any non-animal or flower-based skills as [weather-based skills]/[wild fire]/[earthquake] and I guess that would be a copy past from D&D that also has right to exist. It's a shame in this case that we have only Ice aspect of the weather and where are those people who fight over call of lightning or earthquake or chain incineration? I am not one of them, so they are either silent or fine with it.
In conclusion, if all magic-based damage skills were turned into frost-based and corresponding passive skills were remade from "+10% for magic and frost damage" into "+10% for bleed and frost damage" and "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled enemies" into "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled and bleeding enemies", that would be fine for the Frostden, but that would make Frostbite mandatory and narrow build diversity. Solution for Frostden should be: either you play with summoned animals or not, like pet and non-pet Sorcerers, that would be ideal for build diversity.
Why would it need to be all or none? I could see Fire Shalks dealing Fire Damage (or maybe make it into a Thunderbug for Shock Damage), a Polar Bear dealing Frost Damage. Fetcher Infection should also be Fire damage if we’re getting technical.
It’s similar to how Necromancer summons work. The Frozen Flesh Colossus deals Frost Damage, the exploding Skeleton deals Fire Damage, and the Skeleton casting Lightning spells deals Shock Damage.
“Magic Damage” seems to be vaguely defined, and overused. Conceptually I don’t really understand what it means. The recipient experiences the same effect from Nightblade’s Dark Shade and Templar’s Radiant Oppression? Seems unlikely, more of a catch-all.
Yeah this all or nothing argument makes no sense to me. It just seems like nonsense not based on any objective fact but rather just feelings. I still have yet to see any argument that has at least partially convinced me that frost shalks isn't a good idea.
Ok, do you consider an aoe Minor Maim and Major Fracture on your demand with 2nd hardest hitting ability connected to this effects(outside ultimate ones for obvious reasons) that also boost your damage done by 2% without anything to sacrifice for justifying it usage(you don't need any set or a particular weapon to achieve its potential) as OP ability? There is no such thing that has 0 downsides and has such powerful effects in ESO(yeah there is aoe Major and Minor Defile but stupid skeleton has pathfinding problems therefore it cannot proc on cooldown so it's fine). So convince me why after changing it into frost with obvious Tanking bonuses it won't get itself nerfed to the ground with damage reduced by half as all Tanking damage abilities deal way too low damage or has clanking animation that messing with GCD or has short duration on their DOTs or has any kind of requirement that will mess up the caster for group benefit(say hello to the Stone Giant). I don't want this ability to be nerfed 1 update after it will be changed into frost damage skill. Shalks way too good so that 1 buff can make them OP
When did i say it would always apply chilled and that nothing should be sacrificed for it? I've been pretty clear that it would help our AoE chilled application along with a little bit of single target since it's a main rotational skill used regardless on frostden. I've personally been wanting to ditch minor berserk, minor vuln and the bonus magic damage for a long time in return for a class kit that actually synergises with itself and has more than 4 damage skills, I'm fairly sure most people who have seen my comments and talk with me about this topic know this as well. How is frost damage shalks suddenly overpowered when it's change barely effects regular magden while helping the struggling frostden a lot?
A little bit of math, that doesn't work as intended in our game:
• there is a tank set, that creates small whirls of ice around while blocking and it's said that the base chance to apply chilled is 15%, but with 1h charged it provides 100% uptime on chilled always without any brainpower to use it - just hold your block;
• frost shalks chilled proc chance = 5%[base aoe direct damage]×(1+100%[Elemental Force]+220%[Charged]+60%[CP])=24%, that ain't much at first glance but if we take into account uptime it would be even worse;
• nobody really know the proc chance of Winter's Revenge, but without frost staff it alone can provide 50-60% uptime.
The real problem here is that ANY Winter's Embrace ability will have ~10% better chance to apply chilled and ~20% more uptime on chilled than any other ability UNLESS it specifies directly in the skill's description. A small pitiful number on skill that can only hit once every 3 seconds will raise your uptime only by 10%, that almost worthless unless you use it as only source of chilled
So. In your last comment you were saying it would be broken if it could apply chilled and do frost damage and now you're saying it would be useless if it could apply chilled since the number is low. The number is small, but it does still apply chilled on one of our rotational skills with a chance in AoE every 3 seconds.
I definitely can't see the line: to be reliable source of chilled it should have 15% at base which would make it OP(that's what I meant in the first place), otherwise return is diminished so that there will be almost no difference whether it would be frost or magic damage, and tank can apply aoe chilled with 100% uptime, so what's the point of your change other than {+6% more damage of this skill +10% uptime on aoe chilled} which equally means less than 3% aoe and single target dps? On trash fight even Frozen Device will apply chilled more regularly. Your pov sounds for me as one of those lines in patch notes where devs say something like "we have increased frost damage on Frostbite by 2%, but upon next patch we will buff fire staves by 2% so that the gap will never narrow, and btw here is your frost spammable as you asked with 100% chilled chance - enjoy". The changes are good but the gap will never narrow unless steps we are doing will be big enough.
It isn't supposed to be really reliable. it doesn't get effected by the chilled bonus to winter's embrace skills. It's just an extra chance in aoe on a rotational skill. And you're also forgetting that the fact it would deal frost damage means it will gain bonuses from frostbite, elemental sucession and ysgramor's birthright rather than just war maiden. These add up to a meaningful buff that isn't hard to do relative to other changes zos has done in the past.Edited by ESO_Nightingale on July 24, 2021 10:30AMPvE Frost Warden Main and teacher for ESO-U. Frost Warden PvE Build Article: https://eso-u.com/articles/nightingales_warden_dps_guide__frost_knight. Come Join the ESO Frost Discord to discuss everything frost!: https://discord.gg/5PT3rQX1 -
Trixterion✭✭ESO_Nightingale wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WrathOfInnos wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.
Pretty sure shalks should do fire damage if they were actually "real". But it's very easy to explain. It's warden "storytelling" magic, they're literally spectral. And if warden can't imbue it's magical animals with frost then why can it cast winter's embrace skills?
You could also ask "why does necromancer's blastbones do fire damage?". It's kinda all stupid anyway. So I'm also baffled that a few people are against it.
The observation of Shalks doing Flame Damage is a good one and that likely is what they should have chosen from a lore and basic world-building point of view (though they still can attack without using Flame - which would be basic Physical Damage).
The whole "storytelling" thing is and always was a complete hand-wave to any established TES lore so that they could rope in other standard fantasy tropes for a class that should not even exist in the setting.
But I think that you missed the part where I was agreeing with you about Frost Shalks. My argument is that the Companions being Magic Damage was lame and arbitrary to begin with so "arbitrarily" changing them again to Frost Damage isn't some titanic lore tragedy.
For clarification, I personally fine with frost animals, but I have extra conditions:
• if ALL animal skills dealt frost damage, that would be fine, but how can anyone justify only ONE skill among animals that deals frost damage while others - magic? My thoughts - either all or nothing;
• if Warden was proposed from the beginning as an Ice mage with Conjuration skills(like Sorcerer, but replace all lightning with ice), I would be fine either with all or partial Ice damage for Conjuration skills, but how can we fit all that flower-based healing tree into this concept? My thoughts - if ZOS was trying to make Druid class into the game, it would be more beneficial for them to provide any non-animal or flower-based skills as [weather-based skills]/[wild fire]/[earthquake] and I guess that would be a copy past from D&D that also has right to exist. It's a shame in this case that we have only Ice aspect of the weather and where are those people who fight over call of lightning or earthquake or chain incineration? I am not one of them, so they are either silent or fine with it.
In conclusion, if all magic-based damage skills were turned into frost-based and corresponding passive skills were remade from "+10% for magic and frost damage" into "+10% for bleed and frost damage" and "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled enemies" into "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled and bleeding enemies", that would be fine for the Frostden, but that would make Frostbite mandatory and narrow build diversity. Solution for Frostden should be: either you play with summoned animals or not, like pet and non-pet Sorcerers, that would be ideal for build diversity.
Why would it need to be all or none? I could see Fire Shalks dealing Fire Damage (or maybe make it into a Thunderbug for Shock Damage), a Polar Bear dealing Frost Damage. Fetcher Infection should also be Fire damage if we’re getting technical.
It’s similar to how Necromancer summons work. The Frozen Flesh Colossus deals Frost Damage, the exploding Skeleton deals Fire Damage, and the Skeleton casting Lightning spells deals Shock Damage.
“Magic Damage” seems to be vaguely defined, and overused. Conceptually I don’t really understand what it means. The recipient experiences the same effect from Nightblade’s Dark Shade and Templar’s Radiant Oppression? Seems unlikely, more of a catch-all.
Yeah this all or nothing argument makes no sense to me. It just seems like nonsense not based on any objective fact but rather just feelings. I still have yet to see any argument that has at least partially convinced me that frost shalks isn't a good idea.
Ok, do you consider an aoe Minor Maim and Major Fracture on your demand with 2nd hardest hitting ability connected to this effects(outside ultimate ones for obvious reasons) that also boost your damage done by 2% without anything to sacrifice for justifying it usage(you don't need any set or a particular weapon to achieve its potential) as OP ability? There is no such thing that has 0 downsides and has such powerful effects in ESO(yeah there is aoe Major and Minor Defile but stupid skeleton has pathfinding problems therefore it cannot proc on cooldown so it's fine). So convince me why after changing it into frost with obvious Tanking bonuses it won't get itself nerfed to the ground with damage reduced by half as all Tanking damage abilities deal way too low damage or has clanking animation that messing with GCD or has short duration on their DOTs or has any kind of requirement that will mess up the caster for group benefit(say hello to the Stone Giant). I don't want this ability to be nerfed 1 update after it will be changed into frost damage skill. Shalks way too good so that 1 buff can make them OP
When did i say it would always apply chilled and that nothing should be sacrificed for it? I've been pretty clear that it would help our AoE chilled application along with a little bit of single target since it's a main rotational skill used regardless on frostden. I've personally been wanting to ditch minor berserk, minor vuln and the bonus magic damage for a long time in return for a class kit that actually synergises with itself and has more than 4 damage skills, I'm fairly sure most people who have seen my comments and talk with me about this topic know this as well. How is frost damage shalks suddenly overpowered when it's change barely effects regular magden while helping the struggling frostden a lot?
A little bit of math, that doesn't work as intended in our game:
• there is a tank set, that creates small whirls of ice around while blocking and it's said that the base chance to apply chilled is 15%, but with 1h charged it provides 100% uptime on chilled always without any brainpower to use it - just hold your block;
• frost shalks chilled proc chance = 5%[base aoe direct damage]×(1+100%[Elemental Force]+220%[Charged]+60%[CP])=24%, that ain't much at first glance but if we take into account uptime it would be even worse;
• nobody really know the proc chance of Winter's Revenge, but without frost staff it alone can provide 50-60% uptime.
The real problem here is that ANY Winter's Embrace ability will have ~10% better chance to apply chilled and ~20% more uptime on chilled than any other ability UNLESS it specifies directly in the skill's description. A small pitiful number on skill that can only hit once every 3 seconds will raise your uptime only by 10%, that almost worthless unless you use it as only source of chilled
So. In your last comment you were saying it would be broken if it could apply chilled and do frost damage and now you're saying it would be useless if it could apply chilled since the number is low. The number is small, but it does still apply chilled on one of our rotational skills with a chance in AoE every 3 seconds.
I definitely can't see the line: to be reliable source of chilled it should have 15% at base which would make it OP(that's what I meant in the first place), otherwise return is diminished so that there will be almost no difference whether it would be frost or magic damage, and tank can apply aoe chilled with 100% uptime, so what's the point of your change other than {+6% more damage of this skill +10% uptime on aoe chilled} which equally means less than 3% aoe and single target dps? On trash fight even Frozen Device will apply chilled more regularly. Your pov sounds for me as one of those lines in patch notes where devs say something like "we have increased frost damage on Frostbite by 2%, but upon next patch we will buff fire staves by 2% so that the gap will never narrow, and btw here is your frost spammable as you asked with 100% chilled chance - enjoy". The changes are good but the gap will never narrow unless steps we are doing will be big enough.
It isn't supposed to be really reliable. It's an extra chance in aoe on a rotational skill. And you're also forgetting that the fact it would deal frost damage means it will gain bonuses from frostbite, elemental sucession and ysgramor's birthright rather than just war maiden. These add up to a meaningful buff that isn't hard to do relative to other changes zos has done in the past.
It will be just 3% extra dps, nonetheless nobody runs war maider or ysgramor's birthright to buff just 3 skills. The cange to frost reach was noticeable ~5k dps increase while nobody even notices your change. That's, my friend, sounds like a change for the sake of change0 -
Oakiyo✭✭✭Trixterion wrote: »It will be just 3% extra dps, nonetheless nobody runs war maider or ysgramor's birthright to buff just 3 skills. The cange to frost reach was noticeable ~5k dps increase while nobody even notices your change. That's, my friend, sounds like a change for the sake of change
If shalk isn't enough, why not switching all animal companion skills to frost damage then ? The benefice would be better.1 -
ESO_Nightingale✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WrathOfInnos wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Trixterion wrote: »ESO_Nightingale wrote: »WillyOneBlood wrote: »For me, they should make all the DPS skills in each class do one type of damage and then have the destro staff and guild skills as an option where you get the other elements from. I'm not saying give each class the same buffs and an interupt and a stun etc Purely from a role playing point of view though because I understand that in end game you need different types of damage skills to complete the content. But why do none of the animal companions do frost damage?
i'd prefer if all of our skills did frost damage but, for now, frost damage deep fissure is simply the best candidate for an immediate type swap, it doesn't really change anything for the negative except for losing a minor amount of AoE overcharged. instead it would give chilled which is a lot more useful and it just helps us out a lot as frostdens since that's the goal we try to achieve, works better with class passives and item sets too. there's really no reason not to do it. if sub assault deals poison damage when the rest of stamden's kit does bleed and physical, why shouldn't deep fissure be better off with a more benificial type?
The main theme with Magden is that Animal Companion skill line entirely focuses around animals, magic damage and damage modifiers. Magic damage was ALWAYS the hardest hitting in terms of pure numbers(we all know this skills, no need to name them, and this was designed the way it is probably because pure magic damage didn't provide any additional damage because it hadn't any status effects when it was introduced). What you are asking is not an improvement over Warden skill lines but a replacement that will destroy the main Magden archetype in favor of Frostden. We should propose developers to create new skills or improve underrated skills rather than buffing already fine-performing skills to make them op. Frostden should be new archetype that has as little in common as possible with magden so that it would feel at least as different as ElfBane support DK vs pure dps DK(at least in terms of rotation they are different). Frost mages always were different in almost any game, here are some examples:
• frost deals more damage on impact, but skills have higher cost and longer cooldown;
• frost trades it's dps for snares, better shields, frost armor, ice block, freezing enemy into frost statue, and other COOL stuff.
Following this logic solution for Frostden should be implemented via choosing between extra 2% damage of all skills for each Animal companion ability and skills that provide better utility, like what was done with Frost Reach - we traded our decent spammable and extra 2% damage of all our skills for reliable source of Brittle and semi-decent dot attached to it so that now we can remain 95% uptime without Charged trait, or we can now use both berserker enchantment and frost enchantment on our backbar. The idea behind Frostden should be: harder to play than Magden, you deal 10% less damage overall than Magden but your crit damage is higher, you have different skill setup than Magden, your sustain suffers but you have more utility and survivability over Magden.
People who think that having Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is fine but who panic at the thought of them dealing Frost Damage instead puzzle me greatly.
The ONLY type of damage that animals should do - if you really think about it- is either Physical or Bleed - anything else makes absolutely zero sense.
So, if we can now accept that the truth that Animal Companions dealing Magic Damage is and always was an arbitrary and nonsensical choice that was only selected because magDens needed their attacks to scale with Magic-related stats - then we can also come around to converting them to Frost Damage in order to assist with Frost Warden theming and improving their DPS.
Pretty sure shalks should do fire damage if they were actually "real". But it's very easy to explain. It's warden "storytelling" magic, they're literally spectral. And if warden can't imbue it's magical animals with frost then why can it cast winter's embrace skills?
You could also ask "why does necromancer's blastbones do fire damage?". It's kinda all stupid anyway. So I'm also baffled that a few people are against it.
The observation of Shalks doing Flame Damage is a good one and that likely is what they should have chosen from a lore and basic world-building point of view (though they still can attack without using Flame - which would be basic Physical Damage).
The whole "storytelling" thing is and always was a complete hand-wave to any established TES lore so that they could rope in other standard fantasy tropes for a class that should not even exist in the setting.
But I think that you missed the part where I was agreeing with you about Frost Shalks. My argument is that the Companions being Magic Damage was lame and arbitrary to begin with so "arbitrarily" changing them again to Frost Damage isn't some titanic lore tragedy.
For clarification, I personally fine with frost animals, but I have extra conditions:
• if ALL animal skills dealt frost damage, that would be fine, but how can anyone justify only ONE skill among animals that deals frost damage while others - magic? My thoughts - either all or nothing;
• if Warden was proposed from the beginning as an Ice mage with Conjuration skills(like Sorcerer, but replace all lightning with ice), I would be fine either with all or partial Ice damage for Conjuration skills, but how can we fit all that flower-based healing tree into this concept? My thoughts - if ZOS was trying to make Druid class into the game, it would be more beneficial for them to provide any non-animal or flower-based skills as [weather-based skills]/[wild fire]/[earthquake] and I guess that would be a copy past from D&D that also has right to exist. It's a shame in this case that we have only Ice aspect of the weather and where are those people who fight over call of lightning or earthquake or chain incineration? I am not one of them, so they are either silent or fine with it.
In conclusion, if all magic-based damage skills were turned into frost-based and corresponding passive skills were remade from "+10% for magic and frost damage" into "+10% for bleed and frost damage" and "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled enemies" into "+10% critical damage dealt to chilled and bleeding enemies", that would be fine for the Frostden, but that would make Frostbite mandatory and narrow build diversity. Solution for Frostden should be: either you play with summoned animals or not, like pet and non-pet Sorcerers, that would be ideal for build diversity.
Why would it need to be all or none? I could see Fire Shalks dealing Fire Damage (or maybe make it into a Thunderbug for Shock Damage), a Polar Bear dealing Frost Damage. Fetcher Infection should also be Fire damage if we’re getting technical.
It’s similar to how Necromancer summons work. The Frozen Flesh Colossus deals Frost Damage, the exploding Skeleton deals Fire Damage, and the Skeleton casting Lightning spells deals Shock Damage.
“Magic Damage” seems to be vaguely defined, and overused. Conceptually I don’t really understand what it means. The recipient experiences the same effect from Nightblade’s Dark Shade and Templar’s Radiant Oppression? Seems unlikely, more of a catch-all.
Yeah this all or nothing argument makes no sense to me. It just seems like nonsense not based on any objective fact but rather just feelings. I still have yet to see any argument that has at least partially convinced me that frost shalks isn't a good idea.
Ok, do you consider an aoe Minor Maim and Major Fracture on your demand with 2nd hardest hitting ability connected to this effects(outside ultimate ones for obvious reasons) that also boost your damage done by 2% without anything to sacrifice for justifying it usage(you don't need any set or a particular weapon to achieve its potential) as OP ability? There is no such thing that has 0 downsides and has such powerful effects in ESO(yeah there is aoe Major and Minor Defile but stupid skeleton has pathfinding problems therefore it cannot proc on cooldown so it's fine). So convince me why after changing it into frost with obvious Tanking bonuses it won't get itself nerfed to the ground with damage reduced by half as all Tanking damage abilities deal way too low damage or has clanking animation that messing with GCD or has short duration on their DOTs or has any kind of requirement that will mess up the caster for group benefit(say hello to the Stone Giant). I don't want this ability to be nerfed 1 update after it will be changed into frost damage skill. Shalks way too good so that 1 buff can make them OP
When did i say it would always apply chilled and that nothing should be sacrificed for it? I've been pretty clear that it would help our AoE chilled application along with a little bit of single target since it's a main rotational skill used regardless on frostden. I've personally been wanting to ditch minor berserk, minor vuln and the bonus magic damage for a long time in return for a class kit that actually synergises with itself and has more than 4 damage skills, I'm fairly sure most people who have seen my comments and talk with me about this topic know this as well. How is frost damage shalks suddenly overpowered when it's change barely effects regular magden while helping the struggling frostden a lot?
A little bit of math, that doesn't work as intended in our game:
• there is a tank set, that creates small whirls of ice around while blocking and it's said that the base chance to apply chilled is 15%, but with 1h charged it provides 100% uptime on chilled always without any brainpower to use it - just hold your block;
• frost shalks chilled proc chance = 5%[base aoe direct damage]×(1+100%[Elemental Force]+220%[Charged]+60%[CP])=24%, that ain't much at first glance but if we take into account uptime it would be even worse;
• nobody really know the proc chance of Winter's Revenge, but without frost staff it alone can provide 50-60% uptime.
The real problem here is that ANY Winter's Embrace ability will have ~10% better chance to apply chilled and ~20% more uptime on chilled than any other ability UNLESS it specifies directly in the skill's description. A small pitiful number on skill that can only hit once every 3 seconds will raise your uptime only by 10%, that almost worthless unless you use it as only source of chilled
So. In your last comment you were saying it would be broken if it could apply chilled and do frost damage and now you're saying it would be useless if it could apply chilled since the number is low. The number is small, but it does still apply chilled on one of our rotational skills with a chance in AoE every 3 seconds.
I definitely can't see the line: to be reliable source of chilled it should have 15% at base which would make it OP(that's what I meant in the first place), otherwise return is diminished so that there will be almost no difference whether it would be frost or magic damage, and tank can apply aoe chilled with 100% uptime, so what's the point of your change other than {+6% more damage of this skill +10% uptime on aoe chilled} which equally means less than 3% aoe and single target dps? On trash fight even Frozen Device will apply chilled more regularly. Your pov sounds for me as one of those lines in patch notes where devs say something like "we have increased frost damage on Frostbite by 2%, but upon next patch we will buff fire staves by 2% so that the gap will never narrow, and btw here is your frost spammable as you asked with 100% chilled chance - enjoy". The changes are good but the gap will never narrow unless steps we are doing will be big enough.
It isn't supposed to be really reliable. It's an extra chance in aoe on a rotational skill. And you're also forgetting that the fact it would deal frost damage means it will gain bonuses from frostbite, elemental sucession and ysgramor's birthright rather than just war maiden. These add up to a meaningful buff that isn't hard to do relative to other changes zos has done in the past.
It will be just 3% extra dps, nonetheless nobody runs war maider or ysgramor's birthright to buff just 3 skills. The cange to frost reach was noticeable ~5k dps increase while nobody even notices your change. That's, my friend, sounds like a change for the sake of change
Exactly, if the entire kit isn't magic damage, war maiden isn't getting it's full value, it's also one set where as there are more that work with frost shalks. why should deep fissure remain magic damage? A change for the sake of change? No. There's valid arguments that we've argued to you time and time again and you refuse to listen to them.PvE Frost Warden Main and teacher for ESO-U. Frost Warden PvE Build Article: https://eso-u.com/articles/nightingales_warden_dps_guide__frost_knight. Come Join the ESO Frost Discord to discuss everything frost!: https://discord.gg/5PT3rQX0