Maintenance for the week of December 23:
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
Piercing Cold Passive Adjustment Request
ketsparrowhawk
✭✭✭✭✭
Piercing Cold: Reworked this passive to grant varying effects based on your Max Health to better align with the passive being for tanks, while continuing to offer something for damage dealers. This passive now grants Piercing Cold for 6 seconds when you deal Frost Damage, up to once every 6 seconds. If you have 30,000 or more Max Health, Piercing Cold increases the damage you block by 6/12%. If you have less than 30,000 Max Health, it grants you 4/8% damage done.
Hello! This passive would be much easier to take advantage of in PvP if the HP threshold were higher. 35k minimum would make it easier to choose which version of the passive you want in your build. No warden is going to be running around with less than 30k health in PvP.
Thanks!
Ket
6
-
xylena_lazarow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Silly nerf that doesn't even touch the actual PvP Warden meta of 40k hp dual wield vamp slash + Polar Wind spam, ends up instead buffing the defensive back bar of these builds. Kills off a few niche builds that used Master Ice Staff.PC/NA || CP/Cyro || RIP soft caps6 -
SkaiFaith✭✭✭✭✭
✭First I'll copy what I already said on this in the official thread, then I'll add infos:
"I'm mainly a Lightning staff user and I love the fact I now can get 8% damage bonus just by slotting a Scribing Ice ability! BUT then... I realize I have 40K health on my build, so this pushes me to permablock instead...
About class identity and my personal build issue, I would solve it like this: Piercing Cold gives 8% damage bonus when ice damage Is dealt, period, no health requirements since is already reduced from the original 12%... Then add the block damage bonus ONLY if you have 35K+ Health AND equipping an Ice staff (the block damage bonus could be reduced maybe to 8% if considered too OP having both bonuses).
I think this would solve many issues giving bonuses to a wider range of players and still giving an edge to Ice staff on Warden for identity.
PLEASE, I would really like that damage bonus on lightning staff, but having to give up 13K health (3K are added by Warden passive) is too much, especially for Infinite Archive - using Oakensoul I can't have two bars with different health pools to switch bonus."
To this I'll add that Warden Tanks that clear trial trifectas run with over 40K health and they spam Polar Wind: both of these factors are essential. In Infinite Archive too. (Take a look at Hyperioxes)
So I would avoid nerfing Polar Wind and I would get rid of max health requirements for bonuses (Piercing Cold) on Warden, unless they're pushed to 40K OR BETTER they follow the rules I made as example in my original comment - Maybe you could even make the percentages for both bonuses just 6% to start with and then let's see if they can go higher or what, since they could be used in tandem if an ice staff is equipped and health is high...
TLDR:
Piercing Cold: +6% damage done without any health requirement to meet; +6% blocked damage IF 35K health AND with Ice staff. The blocked damage bonus doesn't cancel the damage done bonus.
Start from this ^, eventually adjust percentages.
Don't nerf Polar Wind.Edited by SkaiFaith on July 31, 2024 3:27PMA: "We, as humans, should respect and take care of each other like in a Co-op, not a PvP 🌸"
B: "Too many words. Words bad. Won't read. ⚔️"2 -
ketsparrowhawk✭✭✭✭✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »Silly nerf that doesn't even touch the actual PvP Warden meta of 40k hp dual wield vamp slash + Polar Wind spam, ends up instead buffing the defensive back bar of these builds. Kills off a few niche builds that used Master Ice Staff.
Yep my Winterborn + Master Frost Staff setup has been one of my favs for a long time.. no more
2 -
Skjaldbjorn✭✭✭✭✭
✭From a PVE Stamden DPS and former Warden tank;
35k is probably fine. A shred more isn't. Plenty of tanks run in the 36-38k HP ballpark. The "all PVE tanks run 40k HP" narrative is nonsense.To this I'll add that Warden Tanks that clear trial trifectas run with over 40K health and they spam Polar Wind: both of these factors are essential. In Infinite Archive too. (Take a look at Hyperioxes)
Please stop saying this. I don't care what one tank does. How many trifectas have you tanked? Because I've tanked a ton. I will admit that in the newer trials (SE, LC) stuff hits a lot harder. However, you can still tank the bulk of trifectas in the 36-38k range no problem. Tanks should not be forced to give up resources just to cater to a handful of people running heavy IA builds.
3 -
SkaiFaith✭✭✭✭✭
✭Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Tanks should not be forced to give up resources just to cater to a handful of people running heavy IA builds.
Maybe I'm not getting what you mean but... Can you explain what you would be losing by having this? ->TLDR:
Piercing Cold: +6% damage done without any health requirement to meet; +6% blocked damage IF 35K health AND with Ice staff. The blocked damage bonus doesn't cancel the damage done bonus.
Start from this ^, eventually adjust percentages.
Don't nerf Polar Wind.
A: "We, as humans, should respect and take care of each other like in a Co-op, not a PvP 🌸"
B: "Too many words. Words bad. Won't read. ⚔️"0 -
Highwayman✭✭
This is more than enough head room in pvp too as far as I'm concerned. I could live (a little less, but still) happily at this marker.Skjaldbjorn wrote: »35k is probably fine.0 -
MATH_COW✭✭✭Skjaldbjorn wrote: »From a PVE Stamden DPS and former Warden tank;
35k is probably fine. A shred more isn't. Plenty of tanks run in the 36-38k HP ballpark. The "all PVE tanks run 40k HP" narrative is nonsense.To this I'll add that Warden Tanks that clear trial trifectas run with over 40K health and they spam Polar Wind: both of these factors are essential. In Infinite Archive too. (Take a look at Hyperioxes)
Please stop saying this. I don't care what one tank does. How many trifectas have you tanked? Because I've tanked a ton. I will admit that in the newer trials (SE, LC) stuff hits a lot harder. However, you can still tank the bulk of trifectas in the 36-38k range no problem. Tanks should not be forced to give up resources just to cater to a handful of people running heavy IA builds.
Well then please stop using an argument of autority because you managed to do trifecta trials on that max HP.
That's not because you did it that everybody else cannot do it with more HP.
All the tank I see are always between 40k and 50k HP and work fine with that because having a ton of magicka & stamina will not allow you to tank really better when more HP allow you to eat more damage.
All of that is just different way to play and both can work, so stop calling that nonsense when it's just a different way to play than yours.An Imperial Cow Warden | PC-EU3 -
MATH_COW✭✭✭ketsparrowhawk wrote: »Piercing Cold: Reworked this passive to grant varying effects based on your Max Health to better align with the passive being for tanks, while continuing to offer something for damage dealers. This passive now grants Piercing Cold for 6 seconds when you deal Frost Damage, up to once every 6 seconds. If you have 30,000 or more Max Health, Piercing Cold increases the damage you block by 6/12%. If you have less than 30,000 Max Health, it grants you 4/8% damage done.
Hello! This passive would be much easier to take advantage of in PvP if the HP threshold were higher. 35k minimum would make it easier to choose which version of the passive you want in your build. No warden is going to be running around with less than 30k health in PvP.
Thanks!
Ket
Something even worst is the fact that in same time they completly destroy the healing ability of Artic Blast, which can be more usefull and strong than Polar Wind when you are at high damage between 30k & 35k HP, which will force us to play Polar Wind no matter what but as we will be forced to be under 30k to get the damage bonus Polar Wind become really meh so none of both morph seem usable there.
I guess gonna need to use a scribing healing skill lolEdited by MATH_COW on July 31, 2024 10:30PMAn Imperial Cow Warden | PC-EU4 -
ketsparrowhawk✭✭✭✭✭ketsparrowhawk wrote: »Piercing Cold: Reworked this passive to grant varying effects based on your Max Health to better align with the passive being for tanks, while continuing to offer something for damage dealers. This passive now grants Piercing Cold for 6 seconds when you deal Frost Damage, up to once every 6 seconds. If you have 30,000 or more Max Health, Piercing Cold increases the damage you block by 6/12%. If you have less than 30,000 Max Health, it grants you 4/8% damage done.
Hello! This passive would be much easier to take advantage of in PvP if the HP threshold were higher. 35k minimum would make it easier to choose which version of the passive you want in your build. No warden is going to be running around with less than 30k health in PvP.
Thanks!
Ket
Something even worst is the fact that in same time they completly destroy the healing ability of Artic Blast, which can be more usefull and strong than Polar Wind when you are at high damage between 30k & 35k HP, which will force us to play Polar Wind no matter what but as we will be forced to be under 30k to get the damage bonus Polar Wind become really meh so none of both morph seem usable there.
I guess gonna need to use a scribing healing skill lol
Healing Soul with the Major Vitality script is pretty lit!2 -
MATH_COW✭✭✭ketsparrowhawk wrote: »Healing Soul with the Major Vitality script is pretty lit!
Yeah I tried it for my PvE but just the fact it can heal an ally instead of me make me feel it so unsafe to use sometime.
Sometime it was going on my bear or on my companion and I cannot imagine how frustating it will be when I'll heal an ally in a PvP group instead of me...
This is the same thing than Lotus Flower and Living Vine where I would love the heal to only target myself lol
An Imperial Cow Warden | PC-EU2 -
Skjaldbjorn✭✭✭✭✭
✭Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Tanks should not be forced to give up resources just to cater to a handful of people running heavy IA builds.
Maybe I'm not getting what you mean but... Can you explain what you would be losing by having this? ->
More Stam/Mag. Better resource management.Edited by Skjaldbjorn on August 1, 2024 1:35AM0 -
Skjaldbjorn✭✭✭✭✭
✭Well then please stop using an argument of autority because you managed to do trifecta trials on that max HP.
That's not because you did it that everybody else cannot do it with more HP.
All the tank I see are always between 40k and 50k HP and work fine with that because having a ton of magicka & stamina will not allow you to tank really better when more HP allow you to eat more damage.
All of that is just different way to play and both can work, so stop calling that nonsense when it's just a different way to play than yours.
It's not about "authority", it's about function. In the bulk of content, tanks simply don't need 40k HP. Period. Having a ton of mag and stam is paramount. Tanks get hit in the face, yes, but that is a tertiary job at best. In optimized groups, our key job is support, whether that's buff sets or buff skills.
I've been an EC tank, a WM/MA tank, a Pillager's tank, the list goes on and on. Many buff sets do not have "tank" stats. They drop your HP hard.
There's also content in the game that actually nerfs you for having more HP. In my 3rd Godslayer, I was OT. I was taking first tomb on Lokke. I ran at 35k to help healers clear it faster. There's also fights with anti-heal or heal "shield" mechanics that require the tank to be topped to full HP. In those cases, stacking health is directly detrimental, as many of those abilities do percentage health damage or scale directly off your total max HP.Edited by Skjaldbjorn on August 1, 2024 1:38AM0 -
Skjaldbjorn✭✭✭✭✭
✭And let me just say, when I comment on PVP things and issues, I almost always preface it with the fact that i'm not really a PVPer. I have cursory knowledge of that domain and don't claim otherwise. I understand a lot of basic fundamentals but that's about it. End-game PVE, I absolutely do know a great deal because as a raid lead it's my job to.0 -
SkaiFaith✭✭✭✭✭
✭Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Tanks should not be forced to give up resources just to cater to a handful of people running heavy IA builds.
Maybe I'm not getting what you mean but... Can you explain what you would be losing by having this? ->
More Stam/Mag. Better resource management.
Sorry but I can't see it.
I wrote "35K health good", you wrote "35K health good", where is the issue?
My solution in the TLDR doesn't seem to negatively affect you by what I can understand.A: "We, as humans, should respect and take care of each other like in a Co-op, not a PvP 🌸"
B: "Too many words. Words bad. Won't read. ⚔️"0 -
Skjaldbjorn✭✭✭✭✭
✭Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Tanks should not be forced to give up resources just to cater to a handful of people running heavy IA builds.
Maybe I'm not getting what you mean but... Can you explain what you would be losing by having this? ->
More Stam/Mag. Better resource management.
Sorry but I can't see it.
I wrote "35K health good", you wrote "35K health good", where is the issue?
My solution in the TLDR doesn't seem to negatively affect you by what I can understand.
I have no problem with 35k as the baseline. I have issue with 40k, which you also mentioned.0 -
SkaiFaith✭✭✭✭✭
✭Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Tanks should not be forced to give up resources just to cater to a handful of people running heavy IA builds.
Maybe I'm not getting what you mean but... Can you explain what you would be losing by having this? ->
More Stam/Mag. Better resource management.
Sorry but I can't see it.
I wrote "35K health good", you wrote "35K health good", where is the issue?
My solution in the TLDR doesn't seem to negatively affect you by what I can understand.
I have no problem with 35k as the baseline. I have issue with 40k, which you also mentioned.
Yeah but next time read at least the part I am referring to, I even quoted it and it said 35K right there.
I am for 40K only if they leave the passive as it is now on PTS, but that's not what I am advocating for here - I explained the change I think would work better in my first comment in this thread; the TLDR there is enough to get it. That's my point and what I ask for.Edited by SkaiFaith on August 1, 2024 11:21AMA: "We, as humans, should respect and take care of each other like in a Co-op, not a PvP 🌸"
B: "Too many words. Words bad. Won't read. ⚔️"0 -
Skjaldbjorn✭✭✭✭✭
✭Yeah but next time read at least the part I am referring to, I even quoted it and it said 35K right there.
I am for 40K only if they leave the passive as it is now on PTS, but that's not what I am advocating for here - I explained the change I think would work better in my first comment in this thread; the TLDR there is enough to get it. That's my point and what I ask for.
No see, that's where we disagree. I did read your post. Whether they implement your suggested changes or not, 35k is the correct breakpoint. I have no issue with bumping the number to 35k. Anything over that is detrimental to the very people it is intended to help. I don't mind how they reworked the passive. A change to 35k with block % over and damage % under is perfectly reasonable.0 -
SkaiFaith✭✭✭✭✭
✭Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Yeah but next time read at least the part I am referring to, I even quoted it and it said 35K right there.
I am for 40K only if they leave the passive as it is now on PTS, but that's not what I am advocating for here - I explained the change I think would work better in my first comment in this thread; the TLDR there is enough to get it. That's my point and what I ask for.
No see, that's where we disagree... I don't mind how they reworked the passive...
I'd agree we disagree with each other.Edited by SkaiFaith on August 1, 2024 5:11PMA: "We, as humans, should respect and take care of each other like in a Co-op, not a PvP 🌸"
B: "Too many words. Words bad. Won't read. ⚔️"0 -
Skjaldbjorn✭✭✭✭✭
✭Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Yeah but next time read at least the part I am referring to, I even quoted it and it said 35K right there.
I am for 40K only if they leave the passive as it is now on PTS, but that's not what I am advocating for here - I explained the change I think would work better in my first comment in this thread; the TLDR there is enough to get it. That's my point and what I ask for.
No see, that's where we disagree... I don't mind how they reworked the passive...
I'd agree we disagree with each other.
In my opinion, the people who disagree with the HP gating on the damage bonus are people who simply don't understand/remember Warden's history. Every single time we've had a % damage buff without some form of gate (the ice staff is also a gating mechanic, btw), they've nerfed the class into the floor. Every. Single. Time.
This change should likely prevent the quick turnaround nerfs we've seen over and over again.Edited by Skjaldbjorn on August 1, 2024 5:29PM0 -
SkaiFaith✭✭✭✭✭
✭Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Yeah but next time read at least the part I am referring to, I even quoted it and it said 35K right there.
I am for 40K only if they leave the passive as it is now on PTS, but that's not what I am advocating for here - I explained the change I think would work better in my first comment in this thread; the TLDR there is enough to get it. That's my point and what I ask for.
No see, that's where we disagree... I don't mind how they reworked the passive...
I'd agree we disagree with each other.
In my opinion, the people who disagree with the HP gating on the damage bonus are people who simply don't understand/remember Warden's history. Every single time we've had a % damage buff without some form of gate (the ice staff is also a gating mechanic, btw), they've nerfed the class into the floor. Every. Single. Time.
This change should likely prevent the quick turnaround nerfs we've seen over and over again.
But...it already is a nerf to all those who built around tanky icy builds, which were the main sponsored way to play Warden for a while (true, not from the beginning).A: "We, as humans, should respect and take care of each other like in a Co-op, not a PvP 🌸"
B: "Too many words. Words bad. Won't read. ⚔️"0 -
Skjaldbjorn✭✭✭✭✭
✭But...it already is a nerf to all those who built around tanky icy builds, which were the main sponsored way to play Warden for a while (true, not from the beginning).
Exclusively because it was a way to chain Warden to a garbage weapon as a way to gate their % damage gain. It was terrible design from jump and should have been thrown in the dumpster the moment the idea crawled out of the dark. This is what I mean, Warden either immediately gets nerfed when they get % damage gains, or they have to be chained/gated by something stupid, like the frost staff requirement.
The thing I hate, as I said elsewhere, is that Warden players are so used to the class being garbage and constantly seeing nerfs that we as a "community" have somehow accepted that being stuck with a trash tier weapon that isn't viable in a lot of content is somehow "class identity". Class identity comes from our kit. "Icy builds" are things like Arctic, Winter's, etc. Not a garbage weapon we're stuck with because the devs lacked creativity.0 -
Skjaldbjorn✭✭✭✭✭
✭I also think there's a huge disconnect on "class identity" in other ways, too. Not to say Warden doesn't need mroe ice skills - we do, but Warden isn't just frost or just animals, it's both. Warden's identity exists in both spectrums simultaneously. You can't just decide that one side is identity while the other is not. Zos clearly wanted to move away from the Mag/Stam delineation, and that was a good choice. Class identity was further skewed by "resource identity", which was a bad concept from the start.
DKs are the poison/fire class. Sorcs are the physical/shock class. We've got frost/animals, and both should be equally represented and viable without punishing the other side. Work still needs to be done there. But the game can't be balanced around a "power fantasy". You don't need to have nothing but ice skills. It's fine if you have a mix, because that's the Warden class. Even in the release trailer, there's the bear, there's ice magic, it should be about an overall identity, not a forced juxtaposition.1 -
YandereGirlfriend✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Yeah but next time read at least the part I am referring to, I even quoted it and it said 35K right there.
I am for 40K only if they leave the passive as it is now on PTS, but that's not what I am advocating for here - I explained the change I think would work better in my first comment in this thread; the TLDR there is enough to get it. That's my point and what I ask for.
No see, that's where we disagree... I don't mind how they reworked the passive...
I'd agree we disagree with each other.
In my opinion, the people who disagree with the HP gating on the damage bonus are people who simply don't understand/remember Warden's history. Every single time we've had a % damage buff without some form of gate (the ice staff is also a gating mechanic, btw), they've nerfed the class into the floor. Every. Single. Time.
This change should likely prevent the quick turnaround nerfs we've seen over and over again.
It's because their entire approach with Warden damage is flawed. Why do we continually get trapped into this cycle of stapling random Damage Done mods onto the class instead of actually investing that into their actual skills. Makes zero sense.
Makes it feel as though they like lost the source code for the actual Warden abilities and these random tack-ons are their only means of modifying the class.4 -
SkaiFaith✭✭✭✭✭
✭YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Skjaldbjorn wrote: »Yeah but next time read at least the part I am referring to, I even quoted it and it said 35K right there.
I am for 40K only if they leave the passive as it is now on PTS, but that's not what I am advocating for here - I explained the change I think would work better in my first comment in this thread; the TLDR there is enough to get it. That's my point and what I ask for.
No see, that's where we disagree... I don't mind how they reworked the passive...
I'd agree we disagree with each other.
In my opinion, the people who disagree with the HP gating on the damage bonus are people who simply don't understand/remember Warden's history. Every single time we've had a % damage buff without some form of gate (the ice staff is also a gating mechanic, btw), they've nerfed the class into the floor. Every. Single. Time.
This change should likely prevent the quick turnaround nerfs we've seen over and over again.
It's because their entire approach with Warden damage is flawed. Why do we continually get trapped into this cycle of stapling random Damage Done mods onto the class instead of actually investing that into their actual skills. Makes zero sense.
Makes it feel as though they like lost the source code for the actual Warden abilities and these random tack-ons are their only means of modifying the class.
I don't know... As an Oakensoul user I'm limited to 5+1 Skills and I like having passive bonuses instead of having bonuses bound to the activation of abilities, since it would mean being left without some.
I know Oakensoul gives a lot of buffs and that's cool, it consents me to overlook many skills and stick with less more useful ones, but I'd not like to lose that 12%/8%/whatever because it gets tied to an active ability that would just give me that and I have no space on my bar to put it without losing something I'd prefer fo use - Oakensoul users have hard choices to make when it comes to scribing for example, because of the few slots.
I don't want to make this an Oakensoul thread, just wanted to point out why passives sometimes are a better way to deal with bonuses, imo.A: "We, as humans, should respect and take care of each other like in a Co-op, not a PvP 🌸"
B: "Too many words. Words bad. Won't read. ⚔️"1 -
Theist_VII✭✭✭✭✭
✭Weird, I have my build for next patch already made on live, sitting right below 30k on front bar and am having no problems whatsoever. If anything, it was performing extremely well.
https://youtu.be/_b4wZpoYSwY?si=F25jSBLZHpu-m8F_
In this clip, I wasn’t using Undeath either.
Edit; Oh and before I forget… #nerfPolarWindEdited by Theist_VII on August 1, 2024 9:14PM1 -
pikHz✭✭✭Piercing Cold ultimately ends up being pretty clumsy, as PvP Wardens who want to try to access the damage proc will have to contend with multiple variables that can change their max health - alliance emperor bonus, CP vs no-CP, getting a battleground with a teammate wearing Ebon Armory, etc.
Assuming they considered this + the fairly low health (these days) threshold, my assumption at this point is ZOS really doesn't want PvP Wardens to have access to the damage proc on this, and this is their attempt to accomplish that without opening the 'balance PvP and PvE separately' can of worms of adding a Battle Spirit condition to a passive.4 -
Theist_VII✭✭✭✭✭
✭Piercing Cold ultimately ends up being pretty clumsy, as PvP Wardens who want to try to access the damage proc will have to contend with multiple variables that can change their max health - alliance emperor bonus, CP vs no-CP, getting a battleground with a teammate wearing Ebon Armory, etc.
Assuming they considered this + the fairly low health (these days) threshold, my assumption at this point is ZOS really doesn't want PvP Wardens to have access to the damage proc on this, and this is their attempt to accomplish that without opening the 'balance PvP and PvE separately' can of worms of adding a Battle Spirit condition to a passive.
It’s actually quite easy to manage, you just change your food to lower your health based on the those variables, and for CP, you can opt out of increased health if you’re near breaking over 30,000 health.0 -
ketsparrowhawk✭✭✭✭✭ketsparrowhawk wrote: »Healing Soul with the Major Vitality script is pretty lit!
Yeah I tried it for my PvE but just the fact it can heal an ally instead of me make me feel it so unsafe to use sometime.
Sometime it was going on my bear or on my companion and I cannot imagine how frustating it will be when I'll heal an ally in a PvP group instead of me...
This is the same thing than Lotus Flower and Living Vine where I would love the heal to only target myself lol
Wrong mentality for PvP, brother. If they got the heal then they needed it more than you did. They stay alive that means you don't get outnumbered, they can toss you a heal in return, help take out targets, etc. It's better for you if you prioritize support even as an offensively-focused build.0 -
Skjaldbjorn✭✭✭✭✭
✭YandereGirlfriend wrote: »It's because their entire approach with Warden damage is flawed. Why do we continually get trapped into this cycle of stapling random Damage Done mods onto the class instead of actually investing that into their actual skills. Makes zero sense.
Do you mean adding raw damage to the base skill tooltips themselves?
0 -
xStealthfulxSoul ShrivenPiercing Cold ultimately ends up being pretty clumsy, as PvP Wardens who want to try to access the damage proc will have to contend with multiple variables that can change their max health - alliance emperor bonus, CP vs no-CP, getting a battleground with a teammate wearing Ebon Armory, etc.
Assuming they considered this + the fairly low health (these days) threshold, my assumption at this point is ZOS really doesn't want PvP Wardens to have access to the damage proc on this, and this is their attempt to accomplish that without opening the 'balance PvP and PvE separately' can of worms of adding a Battle Spirit condition to a passive.
i agree they should of just did the battlespirit condition instead of these changes that make warden far worse in pvp and pointless in pve nobody cares for warden tanks we have that already
2