Lightining staff is too strong now

thedoodle_90

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

The only thing that needs to change here is that it needs to not buff the already absurdly over performing Arcanist beam. Every other class should be fine with this change. The literally only problem is the stupid beam. Which means, since it's unfair to exempt a single skill, that the beam needs about a 12% nerf to compensate. Maybe even more.

You must not play Arcanist. The beam is strong but it takes a lot of work and your damage can tnak if you have to dodge or are CC by the NUMEROUS bosses than randomly CC and target people. Unlike say DOT heavy DK who can keep chugging along. Nerfing the beam would make arcanist useless.

LittlePinkDot

lQrukl wrote: »

Honestly, I love this new DoT/Direct identity of staves, but DoT effects usually deal 15-35% of general dps in PvE (besides Arcanist), with ~35-40% max on DK
And even with that fact, Lightining also extra buffs channeled effects...
Isn't it too much for one weapon? Inferno also needs some love to be competitive. Maybe let Inferno to buff channeled as well, instead of Lightining?


Heavy attacks can be adjusted separately from this passive somehow, and not exclusive to Lightning Staff

So does this mean that inferno staff makes weakness to elements stronger than lightning or frost staff.

And does this mean an inferno staff increases the damage of poison/diseased enchants?
What about a DoT from a proc set?

LittlePinkDot

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

The only thing that needs to change here is that it needs to not buff the already absurdly over performing Arcanist beam. Every other class should be fine with this change. The literally only problem is the stupid beam. Which means, since it's unfair to exempt a single skill, that the beam needs about a 12% nerf to compensate. Maybe even more.

Why??? The beam sucks.
Your opponent just moves out of the way, then uses something to interrupt your channel.

Jazraena

danno8 wrote: »

skinnycheeks wrote: »

danno8 wrote: »

BasP wrote: »

So I thought I'd try out the different weapons (except Frost Staff and S&B) on the front bar of an Arcanist and despite the fact that the buffs the Lightning Staff gives seems like an especially good fit for the Arcanist, DW still came out on top for me. I must say I'm terrible at parsing (as you can see below) and I didn't use a meta setup, so please take these tests with a huge grain of salt, but perhaps someone still finds the results interesting.

Lightning Staff: 96400 DPS
DW: 107990 DPS (102K with the same skill bars as the Lightning Staff)
Bow: 100939 DPS (with Endless Hail instead of Poison Injection the DPS was similar)
Inferno Staff: 96167 DPS

Is lightning even working? Your fatecarver is nearly exactly the same average and max damage per hit with lightning compared to fire staff. I wouldn't expect exactly 12% increase but I would expect AN increase.

edit: Also the DoT's on your Fire Stick setup are just barely any better as well. Like 2-3% tops. Somethings up.

lightning and flame staff both boost beam the same - 12% to DoT with flame or 12% to channel with lightning. flame is probably actually ever so slightly better than lightning for an arcanist.

I thought DoT's were fire and forget over time skills, whereas channels were not considered DoT's since you don't fire and forget.

I mean Jabs hasn't been affected by DoT increasing sets for a long time. It is considered a channelled, direct damage AoE skill. Radiant is considered a channelled, direct damage single target skill.

If that is not the case then why do they need to specify channels and DoT's in the above tooltips for the new effect? Wouldn't all channels just be DoTs and included with Flame Sticks by nature?

Edit: Well apparently Fatecarver and Radiant are channelled DoT's.

Apparently playing this game for nearly 10 years has no bearing on whether one can easily recognize a skills basic classifications. On a side note, does that mean that Jabs will double dip into Lightning because it is a Channelled, direct damage skill?

A year or so back, a friend and I did some testing and came to the conclusion that it's sometimes entirely random what CP Stars apply, what bonuses from equipment apply and what proc sets are being triggered.

As in, something you might consider a Single Target Direct Damage effect was boosted by Lightning Staves, a DoT CP and triggered a proc set supposedly firing off single target damage.

A lot makes sense, but non-trivial amounts of things were all over the place.

Faulgor

So did anyone test yet if jabs double-dips into the lightning staff bonus? Is jabs good again?

Lightning Staff front, Merciless Charge 2H back sounds kinda fun.

Hotdog_23

kojou wrote: »

I feel like skills should have an advanced stats tab that lists what components are what kind of damage. It is really annoying to have to test to see what passives boosts what skills (even more annoying when something turns out to be bugged but that is a different problem).

Just want to second this idea. Some form of this request has been made numerous times over the years, and have been pasted over by ZOS just as many times. Know it would be such a boom for console players who have no access to combat metrics.

Honestly, with so many different buffs, CPs, types of damage etc. Believe it would be helpful to the combat team as well for a reference. It would take time to implement and test everything for ZOS, but it would be so very helpful and clear the air about so many questions people have about skills and damage and what effects it.

Stay safe

Brandark

Looks like this might give Templars a little indirect boost. Not really fond of using a staff, but at this point I'll take what I can get.

JerBearESO

Why are so many confused about DoT channels. It's not like the variable has to be one or the other, because these can be two separate variables....

the1andonlyskwex

Faulgor wrote: »

So did anyone test yet if jabs double-dips into the lightning staff bonus? Is jabs good again?

Lightning Staff front, Merciless Charge 2H back sounds kinda fun.

I haven't tested, but I seriously doubt anything double dips. Based on my reading of the patch notes, they just check whether the attack is direct damage or channeled and if the answer is yes it gets a 12% boost. It's almost certainly just one buff with two different trigger conditions, not two separate buffs.

danno8

the1andonlyskwex wrote: »

Faulgor wrote: »

So did anyone test yet if jabs double-dips into the lightning staff bonus? Is jabs good again?

Lightning Staff front, Merciless Charge 2H back sounds kinda fun.

I haven't tested, but I seriously doubt anything double dips. Based on my reading of the patch notes, they just check whether the attack is direct damage or channeled and if the answer is yes it gets a 12% boost. It's almost certainly just one buff with two different trigger conditions, not two separate buffs.

I know you're not but,

*ahem*

"You must be new here"

danno8

JerBearESO wrote: »

Why are so many confused about DoT channels. It's not like the variable has to be one or the other, because these can be two separate variables....

For me it probably has to do mostly with Jabs. It was considered a DoT years ago and was affected by CP stars that increased DoT damage. It made sense since you are doing the damage over time (1.1 seconds back then).

Then they changed it to be direct damage for some balancing reason. It may be the only direct damage channel in the game, I don't really know, but the question now is why would it still be an exception?

I mean all channels in the game that I can think of do their damage "over time" so shouldn't they all be considered DoT's as well? Or should they be their own thing and just make DoT's that you "set and forget" be the official DoT's and channels be something different?

Faulgor

the1andonlyskwex wrote: »

Faulgor wrote: »

So did anyone test yet if jabs double-dips into the lightning staff bonus? Is jabs good again?

Lightning Staff front, Merciless Charge 2H back sounds kinda fun.

I haven't tested, but I seriously doubt anything double dips. Based on my reading of the patch notes, they just check whether the attack is direct damage or channeled and if the answer is yes it gets a 12% boost. It's almost certainly just one buff with two different trigger conditions, not two separate buffs.

How does Deadly Strike behave in this regard? Is e.g. Fatecarver double dipping into the DoT and Channeled buffs?
I've only ever used it for jabs, which hasn't been a DoT in quite some time.

lQrukl

On the other hand, could Wall of Storms get some love to keep lightning staff competitive backbar weapon as well?
Current utility of walls looks very skewed:

Wall of Fire: +10% Burning Enemies, +5% Encratis, +6% Engulfing
Wall of Storms: ...eh?... 7 sec offbalance for Concussed enemies with 15 cooldown after it ends?

Groups already have Ruinous Scythe with 100% offbalace proc chance for trashpacks
Would be great to add something more generic instead, like to make additional damage by Concussed status effect inside wall of Storms

@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_Kevin please, notice

MashmalloMan

lQrukl wrote: »

On the other hand, could Wall of Storms get some love to keep lightning staff competitive backbar weapon as well?
Current utility of walls looks very skewed:

Wall of Fire: +10% Burning Enemies, +5% Encratis, +6% Engulfing
Wall of Storms: ...eh?... 7 sec offbalance for Concussed enemies with 15 cooldown after it ends?

Groups already have Ruinous Scythe with 100% offbalace proc chance for trashpacks
Would be great to add something more generic instead, like to make additional damage by Concussed status effect inside wall of Storms

@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_Kevin please, notice

All the blockades should deal extra damage to enemies with matching status effects, then give fire blockade something completely new.

Getting really tired of morph choices mostly being based off of whichever deals more damage. They need to seriously rethink skill design with hybridization.

lQrukl

MashmalloMan wrote: »

All the blockades should deal extra damage to enemies with matching status effects, then give fire blockade something completely new.

Well, so Engulfing and Encratis need a rework, to not exalt fire damage
And after that inferno needs light attacks boost, like 6/12% buff to dots and direct singe damage skills , just like storm staff buffs direct damage -> buffs light attacks

MashmalloMan wrote: »

Getting really tired of morph choices mostly being based off of whichever deals more damage. They need to seriously rethink skill design with hybridization.

Agree!

Radiant Destruction should heal in both morphs, but Radiant Glory heals more and Radiant Oppression e.g. cannot be interrupted or reveals enemy for 3 seconds


Searing Strike should increase its damage based on duration in base. Venomous Claw could last longer. Burning Embers could deal more damage by inital hit, to be matched with VC in total damage output


Necromancer right now is a whole pain point for every player that want to choose non-hybrid playstyle, but Engulfing&Encratis rework could smooth that in Blastbones and Ricochet Skull cases (bis for now)
Mystic Siphon should deal equal damage with Detonating Siphon, e.g. having increased dot component but without explosion
Not shure about Skeletal Archer vs Skeletal Arcanist, but would be great to not separate stamina/magicka morphs by damage per cast diff as well
I like change of Glacial Colossus, because longer buff helps dealing damage both in group and solo content

Zodiarkslayer

danno8 wrote: »

I thought DoT's were fire and forget over time skills, whereas channels were not considered DoT's since you don't fire and forget.

I mean Jabs hasn't been affected by DoT increasing sets for a long time. It is considered a channelled, direct damage AoE skill. Radiant is considered a channelled, direct damage single target skill.

If that is not the case then why do they need to specify channels and DoT's in the above tooltips for the new effect? Wouldn't all channels just be DoTs and included with Flame Sticks by nature?

Edit: Well apparently Fatecarver and Radiant are channelled DoT's.

Apparently playing this game for nearly 10 years has no bearing on whether one can easily recognize a skills basic classifications. On a side note, does that mean that Jabs will double dip into Lightning because it is a Channelled, direct damage skill?

Most of your questions become clear when you thoroughly read the tooltips. Every ability has attributes that determine under which classification they fall.
And they are not excluding themselfs from one another.

The difference between a DoT and a channel is obvious when you look at cast time and effect time.
DoT: instant cast and much longer effect time
Channel: cast time and effect time are identical.
So everyone understand now, that DoTs and channels are NOT the same?

The Champion Point stars give their bonus by checking their respective prerequisites.
Understanding that principle you get why more than one CP star can buff the damage of one ability, but not all.

Having that in mind, the most important question to the changes of the staffs is whether there is only one buff from Lightning Staff, that has two activation conditions. Or, if we are talking about two seperate buffs.
The next question should be, if the buffs attach to the abilities and stay active with the ability, or if it is a global buff, that deactivates with bar swapping to another weapon type.

Based on the answers to that we might see a Magicka META with Inferno Staff backbar and Lightning Staff frontbar, because this way all abilities can get a 12% damage buff.

MashmalloMan

Zodiarkslayer wrote: »

danno8 wrote: »

I thought DoT's were fire and forget over time skills, whereas channels were not considered DoT's since you don't fire and forget.

I mean Jabs hasn't been affected by DoT increasing sets for a long time. It is considered a channelled, direct damage AoE skill. Radiant is considered a channelled, direct damage single target skill.

If that is not the case then why do they need to specify channels and DoT's in the above tooltips for the new effect? Wouldn't all channels just be DoTs and included with Flame Sticks by nature?

Edit: Well apparently Fatecarver and Radiant are channelled DoT's.

Apparently playing this game for nearly 10 years has no bearing on whether one can easily recognize a skills basic classifications. On a side note, does that mean that Jabs will double dip into Lightning because it is a Channelled, direct damage skill?

Most of your questions become clear when you thoroughly read the tooltips. Every ability has attributes that determine under which classification they fall.
And they are not excluding themselfs from one another.

The difference between a DoT and a channel is obvious when you look at cast time and effect time.
DoT: instant cast and much longer effect time
Channel: cast time and effect time are identical.
So everyone understand now, that DoTs and channels are NOT the same?

The Champion Point stars give their bonus by checking their respective prerequisites.
Understanding that principle you get why more than one CP star can buff the damage of one ability, but not all.

Having that in mind, the most important question to the chamges of the staffs is whether theee is only one buff from Lightning Staff, that has two activation conditions. Or, if we are talking about two seperate buffs.
The next question should be, if the buffs attach to the eabilities and stay active with the ability, or if it is a global buff, that deactivates with bar swapping to another weapon type.

Based on the answers to that we might see a Magicka META with Inferno Staff backbar and Lightning Staff frontbar, because this way all abilities can get a 12% damage buff.

Pretty simple list of clearly identifyable variables every skill falls under. None of these are mutually exclusive.

1. Cast - Instant or Cast Time or Channel
2. Targetting Type- Single Target or AOE
3. Targetting - Self Applied or Target applied or Ground Applied
4. Damage - Direct or DOT
5. Element - Martial (Poison, Physical, Bleed, Disease) or Magical (Magic, Fire, Shock, Frost)
6. Distance - Melee or Ranged
7. Cost - Magicka, Stamina, HP, Ultimate

This right here is why it wouldn't be as difficult as it seems to create a system like spell crafting using a template like Scrying+Enchanting and the above variables to decide the budget of a skill, and therefore it's proposed outcome.

Wishful thinking.