Why is New Moon Acolyte still not allowed in no-proc PVP?

StarOfElyon

I don't get it? It's not even a proc set.

jaws343

I wonder if it has to do with the fluctuating nature of the cost increase. Since it is a % value, it is constantly providing a different value against different skills every second. A skill could cost 1K resources 1 second and 1.2K the next, because of passives, or even enemy debuffs, requiring the set to constantly check against the current cost of the skill to apply the cost reduction.

Doesn't exactly explain why they would exclude this, but include Battlefield Acrobat and Alteration Mastery.

But it was clear back when they first removed proc sets from Cyrodil that Proc doesn't mean some sort of ability that procs. PROC explicitly means a set that runs a check against the server to provide an action. In this case, the set checks the cost of your skill and adds 5%. That is a proc because it is running a check to do an action.

YandereGirlfriend

jaws343 wrote: »

I wonder if it has to do with the fluctuating nature of the cost increase. Since it is a % value, it is constantly providing a different value against different skills every second. A skill could cost 1K resources 1 second and 1.2K the next, because of passives, or even enemy debuffs, requiring the set to constantly check against the current cost of the skill to apply the cost reduction.

Doesn't exactly explain why they would exclude this, but include Battlefield Acrobat and Alteration Mastery.

But it was clear back when they first removed proc sets from Cyrodil that Proc doesn't mean some sort of ability that procs. PROC explicitly means a set that runs a check against the server to provide an action. In this case, the set checks the cost of your skill and adds 5%. That is a proc because it is running a check to do an action.

You highlight clear inconsistencies in their logic but I would chip in the king of server updates which is Pariah, which requires a recalculation of your mitigation after ever single tick of damage is applied.

Nobody can, with a straight face, say that Pariah should make it in but that a relatively simple "proc set" such as Master's Destro (which activates only when you use the skill Destructive Touch) should be banned.

Tommy_The_Gun

Same for Gaze of Sithis. It is not even a proc. Especially if you consider that Shapeshifter's Chain is on the list - and it also has a condition check and technically more serious one as it gives you stat boost only while transformed vs Gaze or NMA that both give permanent bonus.

There are more weird inconsistencies like this. For example, Night's Silence set:
(5 items) Ignore the Movement Speed penalty of Sneak.

It is not a proc set, but it has a condition check. But somehow some sets with condition check are on the list, while others are not...

StarOfElyon

jaws343 wrote: »

I wonder if it has to do with the fluctuating nature of the cost increase. Since it is a % value, it is constantly providing a different value against different skills every second. A skill could cost 1K resources 1 second and 1.2K the next, because of passives, or even enemy debuffs, requiring the set to constantly check against the current cost of the skill to apply the cost reduction.

Doesn't exactly explain why they would exclude this, but include Battlefield Acrobat and Alteration Mastery.

But it was clear back when they first removed proc sets from Cyrodil that Proc doesn't mean some sort of ability that procs. PROC explicitly means a set that runs a check against the server to provide an action. In this case, the set checks the cost of your skill and adds 5%. That is a proc because it is running a check to do an action.

If that's the case, vampirism is the worst thing to happen to the game's servers.

ExistingRug61

Pure speculation:

I suspect that perhaps ZOS is actually changing something in the background for the sets on the list so their effects work in slightly different ways to no longer be classed as “procs” so they can get around whatever global change has been introduced to block procs from working.

If this is the case it would explain why there are some extra sets that are included initially (ie they have changed these ones), and then some more to be included soon (they are working on changing these ones).

This would mean whether a set gets included isn’t based purely on the type of effect but rather whether ZOS has got around to identifying the set as one that could be changed and actually changing it. This is the only thing I can think of to explain the inconsistency.

neferpitou73

Because ZOS used a dart board to decide what sets would be allowed?

They allowed Silks which would be the same deal you'd think. IDK

The bigger mystery to me is why Maelstom Destro is ok but resto isn't.

YandereGirlfriend

ExistingRug61 wrote: »

Pure speculation:

I suspect that perhaps ZOS is actually changing something in the background for the sets on the list so their effects work in slightly different ways to no longer be classed as “procs” so they can get around whatever global change has been introduced to block procs from working.

If this is the case it would explain why there are some extra sets that are included initially (ie they have changed these ones), and then some more to be included soon (they are working on changing these ones).

This would mean whether a set gets included isn’t based purely on the type of effect but rather whether ZOS has got around to identifying the set as one that could be changed and actually changing it. This is the only thing I can think of to explain the inconsistency.

This is likely true in a general sense but it is not clear at all their criteria for allowing some sets (like Pariah) and disallowing other sets (like Clever Alchemist) even though the former is FAR more computationally complex than the latter.

ExistingRug61

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

ExistingRug61 wrote: »

Pure speculation:

I suspect that perhaps ZOS is actually changing something in the background for the sets on the list so their effects work in slightly different ways to no longer be classed as “procs” so they can get around whatever global change has been introduced to block procs from working.

If this is the case it would explain why there are some extra sets that are included initially (ie they have changed these ones), and then some more to be included soon (they are working on changing these ones).

This would mean whether a set gets included isn’t based purely on the type of effect but rather whether ZOS has got around to identifying the set as one that could be changed and actually changing it. This is the only thing I can think of to explain the inconsistency.

This is likely true in a general sense but it is not clear at all their criteria for allowing some sets (like Pariah) and disallowing other sets (like Clever Alchemist) even though the former is FAR more computationally complex than the latter.

Yeah it’s not clear or consistent.

It could be that it is based on how easy or difficult a sets effect is to change the code for the specific set so that it works.

Alternatively, It could also be that these were simply the sets ZOS decided to change based on some other obscured reason.

Spurius_Lucilius

Also I did not see Heartland Conqueror on the list... This is my favorite set this patch

StarOfElyon

Spurius_Lucilius wrote: »

Also I did not see Heartland Conqueror on the list... This is my favorite set this patch

Oh no!!! It's mine too!

Faulgor

ExistingRug61 wrote: »

Pure speculation:

I suspect that perhaps ZOS is actually changing something in the background for the sets on the list so their effects work in slightly different ways to no longer be classed as “procs” so they can get around whatever global change has been introduced to block procs from working.

If this is the case it would explain why there are some extra sets that are included initially (ie they have changed these ones), and then some more to be included soon (they are working on changing these ones).

This would mean whether a set gets included isn’t based purely on the type of effect but rather whether ZOS has got around to identifying the set as one that could be changed and actually changing it. This is the only thing I can think of to explain the inconsistency.

Yeah that's obviously it. I thought they said as much in the patch notes, but it's only implied.

Considering Orgnum's Scales is included now, I hope we can also expect Ancient Dragonguard and Titanborn to show up eventually.

Thuragan

Theres no logic to their cherry picking of what sets are proc or no proc. We are being gaslighted into believing this will somehow improve performance because we have not seen any improvements from their previous tests. Instead of actually addressing the issue, they are removing our choices and playstyles and dumbing down the game.

Cyrdemaceb17_ESO

StarOfElyon wrote: »

I don't get it? It's not even a proc set.

tested it on no cp/no proc. NMA still works it is just not listed.

Tommy_The_Gun

Cyrdemaceb17_ESO wrote: »

StarOfElyon wrote: »

I don't get it? It's not even a proc set.

tested it on no cp/no proc. NMA still works it is just not listed.

Interesting. I assume there are more sets that would work but are not listed. Does Gaze of Sithis work in no-proc too ?

Cyrdemaceb17_ESO

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

Cyrdemaceb17_ESO wrote: »

StarOfElyon wrote: »

I don't get it? It's not even a proc set.

tested it on no cp/no proc. NMA still works it is just not listed.

Interesting. I assume there are more sets that would work but are not listed. Does Gaze of Sithis work in no-proc too ?

Funny thing is, ...when I use GoS on Ravenwatch (no CP, no Proc) on PTS, I get all the HP, HP reg (minus 50%), Armor.... but the block mitigation seems to be not reduced to zero due to being a proc (at least on Advanced Stats tab).

Girl_Number8

Feels like the game is still in beta after all these years

vesselwiththepestle

jaws343 wrote: »

Doesn't exactly explain why they would exclude this, but include Battlefield Acrobat and Alteration Mastery.

They even included Red Eagle's Fury, which is really similar to New Moon's Acolyte...

Vanzen

What are the monster sets allowed ? if any