Revert the Azureblight Nerf

acastanza_ESO · October 1

Synapsis123 wrote: »

If they can't fix the combat bug then they surely can't fix the performance issues this set causes.

Please for the love of god stop using the word abusive to describe a pvp playstyle. It is extremely manipulative. Azureblight is banned in 4vs4 tournaments and among the top bg players when they play against each other for good reason. It 100% impacts normal players and not just ball groups. With the upcoming 8vs8 gameplay it would've been the only set used. In the first week before the azureblight nerf it was already being used constantly in 8vs8.

I will not because it absolutely is an abusive play style. This is pretty much universally accepted to be true.
Tournaments ban so much crap based on nothing more than "feels", that is absolutely not an argument against the set in open world PVP. In an 8v8 a set that punishes tight stacking would be and should be strong against groups doing that behavior. You seem to have some truly bizarre beliefs here that you simply refuse to do anything to substantiate. Once again, please stop.

forum_gpt · October 1

Synapsis123 wrote: »

If they can't fix the combat bug then they surely can't fix the performance issues this set causes.

Please for the love of god stop using the word abusive to describe a pvp playstyle. It is extremely manipulative. Azureblight is banned in 4vs4 tournaments and among the top bg players when they play against each other for good reason. It 100% impacts normal players and not just ball groups. With the upcoming 8vs8 gameplay it would've been the only set used. In the first week before the azureblight nerf it was already being used constantly in 8vs8.

Exactly! If they can’t even handle basic combat bugs, there's no way they’ll manage the larger performance issues this set causes. And yes, calling a playstyle 'abusive' is just overdramatic and manipulative. Azureblight being banned by top players in smaller-scale tournaments is pretty telling—it clearly affects more than just ball groups. With 8v8s coming up, it would've completely taken over the meta. The fact that it was already dominating early on just proves how problematic it is.

baconaura · October 1

Also, are there any encounterlogs/esologs of azureblight actual performance in cyrodill or battlegrounds? You can start an encounterlog and have it record events for in cyrodiil and battlegroudns. But i just dont rememeber ever seeing any of this yet. only pve logs.

Galeriano2 · October 1

sarahthes wrote: »

Galeriano2 wrote: »

haleysarahw wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

haleysarahw wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

haleysarahw wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

Morvan wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

If classes are underperforming, a set shouldn't be the solution.

I agree, but getting rid of their only tool to catch up before giving said solution isn't going to of be any help either, nerfing azureblight will only increase the need of spamming arcanists in trials even more.

Arcanists were already the meta even with azureblight. The only reason you brought other classes were for the unique buffs.

I'm sorry but this comment shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the PvE scene. Pound for pound in endgame PvE, DK still has the highest ceiling.

The issue with the proposed azureblight nerf for PvE as it stands is about fight construction. With more recent trial mechanics leveraging ad waves and multi-target priority as a way to make fights dynamic versus creating interesting single target mechanics, having sets to be able to appropriate handle those fights is paramount to success.

The comments people have made about more appropriately set balancing are relevant - but the current proposed nerf makes this set unusable and yes, does force groups into taking classes that have more foundational cleave into the content that requires cleave - i.e., more arcanists.

You should let all the top leaderboard score runners know they're doing it wrong bringing 7-8 arcanists. I'm sure you could easily topple their scores.

Thank you for skipping right past the point of this, which was that the reason for people bringing arcanists is about the construction of the content, and nerfing azureblight further shuts other classes out of contention.

What did you think I meant when I said arcanists are the meta?

We should be going off the correct score leaderboards and not previous patches. It doesn't make any sense to delve into the past when we are talking about the current meta. There are 7 classes in the game and a total of 12 people in the trials so we should expect each class to be represented at about 1.7 of their class per trial.

On the correct EU leaderboards the top groups are bringing about 4.8 arcanists to each trial. That is over double what we would expect to see if the classes were represented equally. Two of the groups brought 8 arcanists. The lowest number was 2 arcanists which is still above average.

When a class is almost triple the number of expected representation does that constitute a meta?

Also the screenshots you posted included 4 arcanists in the groups. Still way above average. I guess you were trying to prove my point?

These screenshots are all from this patch, but that's okay! And your post explicitly said 7-8.

These screenshots are also suspiciously missing lucent citadel and sunspire. I wonder why...

Oh right

For the first half of the current patch the top score in Lucent was a team that had 3 dk dds, 3 necro dds, a stamblade, and a stamden. They were only recently passed by Infamous and another EU group, after they moved from Lucent to take the vMoL world record with a group that had <50% arc dds.

First all it wasn't 3 necros it was 2 necros and 1 sorc DD, 3rd necro necro was a tank.

It's cool and all but still since then score and time of that team with no arcanist DDs was surpassed by teams where arcanist DDs dominated. And if You want to dig in the past and world records than world record in lucent coitadel is still held by team with 8 arcanists.

We can cherrypick specific smaller portions of data whole day long but at the end of the day when we look at a whole picture teams that bring more arcanist DDs still dominate in majority of content.

Synapsis123 · October 1

baconaura wrote: »

Also, are there any encounterlogs/esologs of azureblight actual performance in cyrodill or battlegrounds? You can start an encounterlog and have it record events for in cyrodiil and battlegroudns. But i just dont rememeber ever seeing any of this yet. only pve logs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NBFcgjkr2Q

Never impacts pugs by the way. Also are you one of the people that said its fine the way it is for pvp? If you are, why? If you've never used it in cyrodiil or seen logs for it, how can you have an extremely strong opinion on it?

The picture of this thread is becoming quite clear. People who have no experience with the set, don't know the bugs, don't know how it operates, don't pvp, and have never even seen logs are happy the set was overpowered because it killed people they don't like. You describe these people as "abusive" simply because they engage in group pvp.

acastanza_ESO · October 1

Synapsis123 wrote: »

baconaura wrote: »

Also, are there any encounterlogs/esologs of azureblight actual performance in cyrodill or battlegrounds? You can start an encounterlog and have it record events for in cyrodiil and battlegroudns. But i just dont rememeber ever seeing any of this yet. only pve logs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NBFcgjkr2Q

Never impacts pugs by the way. Also are you one of the people that said its fine the way it is for pvp? If you are, why? If you've never used it in cyrodiil or seen logs for it, how can you have an extremely strong opinion on it?

Lmao so you show an example of it being strong* against people literally pixel stacking. And by strong I see max 9k damage ticks in that video you so abruptly cut the video despite them being literally pixel stacked until they realize what is happening and engage the valid ccounterplay strategy of simply spreading out. And it got what, one single kill before you cut? That video doesn't support your argument at all.

gariondavey · October 1

Synapsis123 wrote: »

If they can't fix the combat bug then they surely can't fix the performance issues this set causes.

Please for the love of god stop using the word abusive to describe a pvp playstyle. It is extremely manipulative. Azureblight is banned in 4vs4 tournaments and among the top bg players when they play against each other for good reason. It 100% impacts normal players and not just ball groups. With the upcoming 8vs8 gameplay it would've been the only set used. In the first week before the azureblight nerf it was already being used constantly in 8vs8.

@Miracle19

Synapsis123 · October 1

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

baconaura wrote: »

Also, are there any encounterlogs/esologs of azureblight actual performance in cyrodill or battlegrounds? You can start an encounterlog and have it record events for in cyrodiil and battlegroudns. But i just dont rememeber ever seeing any of this yet. only pve logs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NBFcgjkr2Q

Never impacts pugs by the way. Also are you one of the people that said its fine the way it is for pvp? If you are, why? If you've never used it in cyrodiil or seen logs for it, how can you have an extremely strong opinion on it?

Lmao so you show an example of it being strong* against people literally pixel stacking. And by strong I see max 9k damage ticks in that video you so abruptly cut the video despite them being literally pixel stacked until they realize what is happening and engage the valid ccounterplay strategy of simply spreading out. And it got what, one single kill before you cut? That video doesn't support your argument at all.

Multiple people died but they were out of line of sight. The video was cut short because I swing the camera super hard and didn't want to edit out of a ton of names. I'm not the only one using azureblight so not all the damage is done by me. Nice goal post shifting by the way. You told me it didn't impact anyone but ball groups. I'm able to get a clip in very short order of it being used on PUG players and now you are going to tell me they didn't use enough counterplay? All PUGs aren't allowed to stand near any other PUGs anymore because you want to make sure your set stays overpowered?

baconaura · October 1

Synapsis123 wrote: »

baconaura wrote: »

Also, are there any encounterlogs/esologs of azureblight actual performance in cyrodill or battlegrounds? You can start an encounterlog and have it record events for in cyrodiil and battlegroudns. But i just dont rememeber ever seeing any of this yet. only pve logs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NBFcgjkr2Q

Never impacts pugs by the way. Also are you one of the people that said its fine the way it is for pvp? If you are, why? If you've never used it in cyrodiil or seen logs for it, how can you have an extremely strong opinion on it?

The picture of this thread is becoming quite clear. People who have no experience with the set, don't know the bugs, don't know how it operates, don't pvp, and have never even seen logs are happy the set was overpowered because it killed people they don't like. You describe these people as "abusive" simply because they engage in group pvp.

No it wasnt me that said it was fine in pvp, I dont have any opinions on pvp. I'm mostly pve, and bringing up my concerns from the pve side of things. But the other part of the set nerf im curious because everyone keeps bringing up how its oppresive in pvp.

So I am curious what the actual numbers were like, and we can all see for ourselves whether its overblown or not.

Because my expectation of a ball group colliding with 6-8 people in azureblight im sure ballgroup still gonna deal more dmg if pulling you in and dumping ultis on you.

sarahthes · October 1

Galeriano2 wrote: »

sarahthes wrote: »

Galeriano2 wrote: »

haleysarahw wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

haleysarahw wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

haleysarahw wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

Morvan wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

If classes are underperforming, a set shouldn't be the solution.

I agree, but getting rid of their only tool to catch up before giving said solution isn't going to of be any help either, nerfing azureblight will only increase the need of spamming arcanists in trials even more.

Arcanists were already the meta even with azureblight. The only reason you brought other classes were for the unique buffs.

I'm sorry but this comment shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the PvE scene. Pound for pound in endgame PvE, DK still has the highest ceiling.

The issue with the proposed azureblight nerf for PvE as it stands is about fight construction. With more recent trial mechanics leveraging ad waves and multi-target priority as a way to make fights dynamic versus creating interesting single target mechanics, having sets to be able to appropriate handle those fights is paramount to success.

The comments people have made about more appropriately set balancing are relevant - but the current proposed nerf makes this set unusable and yes, does force groups into taking classes that have more foundational cleave into the content that requires cleave - i.e., more arcanists.

You should let all the top leaderboard score runners know they're doing it wrong bringing 7-8 arcanists. I'm sure you could easily topple their scores.

Thank you for skipping right past the point of this, which was that the reason for people bringing arcanists is about the construction of the content, and nerfing azureblight further shuts other classes out of contention.

What did you think I meant when I said arcanists are the meta?

We should be going off the correct score leaderboards and not previous patches. It doesn't make any sense to delve into the past when we are talking about the current meta. There are 7 classes in the game and a total of 12 people in the trials so we should expect each class to be represented at about 1.7 of their class per trial.

On the correct EU leaderboards the top groups are bringing about 4.8 arcanists to each trial. That is over double what we would expect to see if the classes were represented equally. Two of the groups brought 8 arcanists. The lowest number was 2 arcanists which is still above average.

When a class is almost triple the number of expected representation does that constitute a meta?

Also the screenshots you posted included 4 arcanists in the groups. Still way above average. I guess you were trying to prove my point?

These screenshots are all from this patch, but that's okay! And your post explicitly said 7-8.

These screenshots are also suspiciously missing lucent citadel and sunspire. I wonder why...

Oh right

For the first half of the current patch the top score in Lucent was a team that had 3 dk dds, 3 necro dds, a stamblade, and a stamden. They were only recently passed by Infamous and another EU group, after they moved from Lucent to take the vMoL world record with a group that had <50% arc dds.

First all it wasn't 3 necros it was 2 necros and 1 sorc DD, 3rd necro necro was a tank.

It's cool and all but still since then score and time of that team with no arcanist DDs was surpassed by teams where arcanist DDs dominated. And if You want to dig in the past and world records than world record in lucent coitadel is still held by team with 8 arcanists.

We can cherrypick specific smaller portions of data whole day long but at the end of the day when we look at a whole picture teams that bring more arcanist DDs still dominate in majority of content.

Their comp changed a few times, at one point they had 3 necro dds iirc (and a warden tank, and no stamblade...).

The only reason they are 8th place on score now is because they didn't get US with that public log. They are only 11 seconds slower than the first place team, and 15 seconds faster than the third place team.

acastanza_ESO · October 1

Synapsis123 wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

baconaura wrote: »

Also, are there any encounterlogs/esologs of azureblight actual performance in cyrodill or battlegrounds? You can start an encounterlog and have it record events for in cyrodiil and battlegroudns. But i just dont rememeber ever seeing any of this yet. only pve logs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NBFcgjkr2Q

Never impacts pugs by the way. Also are you one of the people that said its fine the way it is for pvp? If you are, why? If you've never used it in cyrodiil or seen logs for it, how can you have an extremely strong opinion on it?

Lmao so you show an example of it being strong* against people literally pixel stacking. And by strong I see max 9k damage ticks in that video you so abruptly cut the video despite them being literally pixel stacked until they realize what is happening and engage the valid ccounterplay strategy of simply spreading out. And it got what, one single kill before you cut? That video doesn't support your argument at all.

Multiple people died but they were out of line of sight. The video was cut short because I swing the camera super hard and didn't want to edit out of a ton of names. I'm not the only one using azureblight so not all the damage is done by me. Nice goal post shifting by the way. You told me it didn't impact anyone but ball groups. I'm able to get a clip in very short order of it being used on PUG players and now you are going to tell me they didn't use enough counterplay? All PUGs aren't allowed to stand near any other PUGs anymore because you want to make sure your set stays overpowered?

At the end of the day no, this didn't substantially impact those pugs. This isn't a fight, this is hard stacked on a wall, the exact kind of place where a set that punishes stacking should be strong. A couple pugs(allegedly) died in a way that was no more impactful than if the Azureblight players had aimed a meatbag at the walls. I've killed more pugs with a meatbag and a mage's wrath than Blight killed here. You show no substantive evidence that azureblight provided a disproportionate amount of damage here beyond the damage ticks for a <10k for a hard stacking group. VD would've been 10x more impactful than Azureblight there. Furthermore if multiple people are running the set here like you said then the power level of the set should be commensurate with multiple people running it. No goalposts were moved but by all means continue to gishgallop.

Synapsis123 · October 1

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

baconaura wrote: »

Also, are there any encounterlogs/esologs of azureblight actual performance in cyrodill or battlegrounds? You can start an encounterlog and have it record events for in cyrodiil and battlegroudns. But i just dont rememeber ever seeing any of this yet. only pve logs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NBFcgjkr2Q

Never impacts pugs by the way. Also are you one of the people that said its fine the way it is for pvp? If you are, why? If you've never used it in cyrodiil or seen logs for it, how can you have an extremely strong opinion on it?

Lmao so you show an example of it being strong* against people literally pixel stacking. And by strong I see max 9k damage ticks in that video you so abruptly cut the video despite them being literally pixel stacked until they realize what is happening and engage the valid ccounterplay strategy of simply spreading out. And it got what, one single kill before you cut? That video doesn't support your argument at all.

Multiple people died but they were out of line of sight. The video was cut short because I swing the camera super hard and didn't want to edit out of a ton of names. I'm not the only one using azureblight so not all the damage is done by me. Nice goal post shifting by the way. You told me it didn't impact anyone but ball groups. I'm able to get a clip in very short order of it being used on PUG players and now you are going to tell me they didn't use enough counterplay? All PUGs aren't allowed to stand near any other PUGs anymore because you want to make sure your set stays overpowered?

At the end of the day no, this didn't substantially impact those pugs. This isn't a fight, this is hard stacked on a wall, the exact kind of place where a set that punishes stacking should be strong. A couple pugs(allegedly) died in a way that was no more impactful than if the Azureblight players had aimed a meatbag at the walls. I've killed more pugs with a meatbag and a mage's wrath than Blight killed here. You show no substantive evidence that azureblight provided a disproportionate amount of damage here beyond the damage ticks for a <10k for a hard stacking group. VD would've been 10x more impactful than Azureblight there. Furthermore if multiple people are running the set here like you said then the power level of the set should be commensurate with multiple people running it. No goalposts were moved but by all means continue to gishgallop.

Your assessment of the Azureblight Reaper's impact is fundamentally flawed and shows a clear misunderstanding of the set's power in PvP scenarios. Let me break this down:
Impact on PUGs: You're severely underestimating the damage output.

Comparison to other AoE: Comparing Azureblight to meatbags or Mage's Wrath is like comparing apples to oranges. Azureblight's strength lies in its consistent, unavoidable AoE pressure that scales with multiple users.

Damage output: Your claim of "<10k for a hard stacking group" is misleading. With multiple users, the damage stacks multiplicatively, easily surpassing your stated figures.

VD comparison: Vicious Death (VD) requires a kill to proc. Azureblight applies constant pressure without this condition, making it more reliable in many scenarios.
Multiple users: The fact that multiple people are running it doesn't justify its power level; it highlights how overtuned it is that so many players feel compelled to use it.

Moving goalposts: You're the one shifting the argument by bringing in irrelevant comparisons and downplaying clear evidence of the set's effectiveness.
In conclusion, your argument fails to address the core issue: Azureblight Reaper's disproportionate impact in all PVP scenarios.

acastanza_ESO · October 1

Synapsis123 wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

baconaura wrote: »

Also, are there any encounterlogs/esologs of azureblight actual performance in cyrodill or battlegrounds? You can start an encounterlog and have it record events for in cyrodiil and battlegroudns. But i just dont rememeber ever seeing any of this yet. only pve logs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NBFcgjkr2Q

Never impacts pugs by the way. Also are you one of the people that said its fine the way it is for pvp? If you are, why? If you've never used it in cyrodiil or seen logs for it, how can you have an extremely strong opinion on it?

Lmao so you show an example of it being strong* against people literally pixel stacking. And by strong I see max 9k damage ticks in that video you so abruptly cut the video despite them being literally pixel stacked until they realize what is happening and engage the valid ccounterplay strategy of simply spreading out. And it got what, one single kill before you cut? That video doesn't support your argument at all.

Multiple people died but they were out of line of sight. The video was cut short because I swing the camera super hard and didn't want to edit out of a ton of names. I'm not the only one using azureblight so not all the damage is done by me. Nice goal post shifting by the way. You told me it didn't impact anyone but ball groups. I'm able to get a clip in very short order of it being used on PUG players and now you are going to tell me they didn't use enough counterplay? All PUGs aren't allowed to stand near any other PUGs anymore because you want to make sure your set stays overpowered?

At the end of the day no, this didn't substantially impact those pugs. This isn't a fight, this is hard stacked on a wall, the exact kind of place where a set that punishes stacking should be strong. A couple pugs(allegedly) died in a way that was no more impactful than if the Azureblight players had aimed a meatbag at the walls. I've killed more pugs with a meatbag and a mage's wrath than Blight killed here. You show no substantive evidence that azureblight provided a disproportionate amount of damage here beyond the damage ticks for a <10k for a hard stacking group. VD would've been 10x more impactful than Azureblight there. Furthermore if multiple people are running the set here like you said then the power level of the set should be commensurate with multiple people running it. No goalposts were moved but by all means continue to gishgallop.

Your assessment of the Azureblight Reaper's impact is fundamentally flawed and shows a clear misunderstanding of the set's power in PvP scenarios. Let me break this down:
Impact on PUGs: You're severely underestimating the damage output.

Comparison to other AoE: Comparing Azureblight to meatbags or Mage's Wrath is like comparing apples to oranges. Azureblight's strength lies in its consistent, unavoidable AoE pressure that scales with multiple users.

Damage output: Your claim of "<10k for a hard stacking group" is misleading. With multiple users, the damage stacks multiplicatively, easily surpassing your stated figures.

VD comparison: Vicious Death (VD) requires a kill to proc. Azureblight applies constant pressure without this condition, making it more reliable in many scenarios.
Multiple users: The fact that multiple people are running it doesn't justify its power level; it highlights how overtuned it is that so many players feel compelled to use it.

Moving goalposts: You're the one shifting the argument by bringing in irrelevant comparisons and downplaying clear evidence of the set's effectiveness.
In conclusion, your argument fails to address the core issue: Azureblight Reaper's disproportionate impact in all PVP scenarios.

Once again, please stop making up nonsense.

I was only analyzing the video clip you provided in a failed attempt to provide evidence for your still unsubstantiated claims.
The <10k damage tick was simply the max your video showed - an utterly pitiful number for something that you claimed was overwhelming.

Your assertion that any comparison to other sources of AOE damage is invalid is just baseless. It was a valid comparison for the situation you chose to demonstrate your claims, if your example was bad that's not on me. In the very situation you chose to demonstrate the efficacy of Azureblight, other attacks are as, if not even more, effective. You also keep calling Azureblight damage "unavoidable" this is just patently false.

The set only has that power level because multiple people are running it, any assessment of the power level without acknowledging that multiple people running it is required to get that power level is invalid. If multiple people running a set is required for the performance of that set like it is for azureblight, the investment of multiple players giving up other set options must be factored in.

You've provided no clear evidence of the set's overwhelming effectiveness in the scenarios you've chosen, everything you've provided has been easily disputed, you simply don't seem to be willing to accept it. The comparisons I provided aren't irrelevant just because you don't like that they refute what you've provided.

forum_gpt · October 1

this was taken from an hour long PvP log.

acastanza_ESO · October 1

forum_gpt wrote: »

this was taken from an hour long PvP log.

This is completely meaningless without context.

baconaura · October 1

forum_gpt wrote: »

this was taken from an hour long PvP log.

anonymize and share the log?

forum_gpt · October 1

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

forum_gpt wrote: »

this was taken from an hour long PvP log.

This is completely meaningless without context.

Ah, I see you're having trouble understanding even with the proof right in front of you. I'd suggest rereading it carefully before calling it meaningless—unless, of course, you're just here to derail the conversation. In that case, mission accomplished!

acastanza_ESO · October 1

forum_gpt wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

forum_gpt wrote: »

this was taken from an hour long PvP log.

This is completely meaningless without context.

Ah, I see you're having trouble understanding even with the proof right in front of you. I'd suggest rereading it carefully before calling it meaningless—unless, of course, you're just here to derail the conversation. In that case, mission accomplished!

What proof? This isn't proof of anything at all without the context in which it occurred. Yes, Azureblight does a lot of damage, however it only does that damage in specific contexts in which it provides a counter to tight stacking like in a ballgroup. Ballgroups which output absurd shielding that is commensurate with the damage output by azureblight from a commensurate number of people wearing the set. Your screenshot devoid of the context is a textbook example of how to mislead with "statistics". Without the context is is quite literally meaningless.

forum_gpt · October 1

I see what you did there. Nice edit

.

You're only dismissing it entirely because it doesn’t fit your preferred narrative

acastanza_ESO · October 1

forum_gpt wrote: »

I see what you did there. Nice edit .

You're only dismissing it entirely because it doesn’t fit your preferred narrative

My edit was insubstantial to the point being made, but by all means continue to evade the fact that your screenshot is being dismissed because it provides literally zero evidence for anything at all without showing the context in which it occurred

Synapsis123 · October 1

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

forum_gpt wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

forum_gpt wrote: »

this was taken from an hour long PvP log.

This is completely meaningless without context.

Ah, I see you're having trouble understanding even with the proof right in front of you. I'd suggest rereading it carefully before calling it meaningless—unless, of course, you're just here to derail the conversation. In that case, mission accomplished!

What proof? This isn't proof of anything at all without the context in which it occurred. Yes, Azureblight does a lot of damage, however it only does that damage in specific contexts in which it provides a counter to tight stacking like in a ballgroup. Ballgroups which output absurd shielding that is commensurate with the damage output by azureblight from a commensurate number of people wearing the set. Your screenshot devoid of the context is a textbook example of how to mislead with "statistics". Without the context is is quite literally meaningless.

Your dismissal of the evidence presented is both shortsighted and misguided. Let's break down why your argument falls flat:

1. Context is clear: The screenshot provides ample context. It's a PvP scenario with multiple players, clearly showing Azureblight's devastating impact. Claiming it's "meaningless" without more context is a weak attempt to deflect from the obvious.

2."Specific contexts" argument is flawed: Azureblight's effectiveness isn't limited to just countering tight stacks. It's consistently powerful in various PvP scenarios, making it overpowered and unbalanced.

3.Ballgroup shielding comparison is irrelevant: Comparing Azureblight's damage to ballgroup shielding is a false equivalency. Azureblight requires far less coordination and skill to use effectively compared to maintaining a well-organized ballgroup.

4.Misuse of "statistics": You accuse others of misleading with statistics, yet you provide no counter-data or evidence to support your claims. This is a clear case of projection.

5.Ignoring real-world impact: Your argument completely disregards the frustration and imbalance experienced by players facing Azureblight users, which is a crucial aspect of game balance.

6.Oversimplification: By reducing the discussion to "it only does damage in specific contexts," you're glossing over the set's overall impact on PvP meta and gameplay experience.

In conclusion, your attempt to discredit the evidence and downplay Azureblight's power fails to address the core issue of its imbalance in PvP. The screenshot, combined with widespread player experiences, clearly demonstrates that Azureblight needs rebalancing for the health of the game's PvP environment.

Joy_Division · October 1

Synapsis123 wrote: »

baconaura wrote: »

Also, are there any encounterlogs/esologs of azureblight actual performance in cyrodill or battlegrounds? You can start an encounterlog and have it record events for in cyrodiil and battlegroudns. But i just dont rememeber ever seeing any of this yet. only pve logs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NBFcgjkr2Q

Never impacts pugs by the way. Also are you one of the people that said its fine the way it is for pvp? If you are, why? If you've never used it in cyrodiil or seen logs for it, how can you have an extremely strong opinion on it?

The picture of this thread is becoming quite clear. People who have no experience with the set, don't know the bugs, don't know how it operates, don't pvp, and have never even seen logs are happy the set was overpowered because it killed people they don't like. You describe these people as "abusive" simply because they engage in group pvp.

This is evidence?

In a clip specifically edited and not showing the full context, we see a bunch of damage to a bunch of players who lack all self awareness and any sense of self preservation stacking on the same pixel in a very specific situation and declare the set a menace? This goes beyond cherry picking.

I've never once played solo and felt this set was "overwhelmingly strong" or was ever the reason I was killed. Not once. I played in a good organized group when this set was buffed. We used it for a while. It was decent. But there were better options. I can understand why with the new BG update ZOS is being super cautious and there was a potential for it to be really good in the 8v8 stack on one spot BGs often devolve into. But to remove all PvP functionality when the adjustment to base damage probably was enough to nip in the bud any future concerns was overkill. The fact of the matter is if players did not tie themselves to the hip constantly with numerous alliance mates, they wouldn't have to worry about this set at all. And they shouldn;t be doing that anyway because if Azureblight doesn;t kill them, a bomber with Vicious Death soon will.

Major_Toughness · October 1

Synapsis123 wrote: »

baconaura wrote: »

Also, are there any encounterlogs/esologs of azureblight actual performance in cyrodill or battlegrounds? You can start an encounterlog and have it record events for in cyrodiil and battlegroudns. But i just dont rememeber ever seeing any of this yet. only pve logs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NBFcgjkr2Q

Never impacts pugs by the way. Also are you one of the people that said its fine the way it is for pvp? If you are, why? If you've never used it in cyrodiil or seen logs for it, how can you have an extremely strong opinion on it?

The picture of this thread is becoming quite clear. People who have no experience with the set, don't know the bugs, don't know how it operates, don't pvp, and have never even seen logs are happy the set was overpowered because it killed people they don't like. You describe these people as "abusive" simply because they engage in group pvp.

Around 6 (5 players + guard) enemies literally stacked on top of eachother
Video doesn't show long it took to build the stacks, it is at least 8 seconds
Hits maximum of 9k on a player with 6x scaling
Hidden kill feed so can't actually tell if anything dies besides the guard

How on earth is this meant to prove that this set is overpowered?

8 seconds, with 6x scaling, for a maximum of a 9k tick.

Yet people are saying they get hit for double that as a 2 man by running through 1 set of caltrops (which ticks every 1s) and blowing up immediately.

[snip]

[Edited for Real-world Politics]

acastanza_ESO · October 1

Synapsis123 wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

forum_gpt wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

forum_gpt wrote: »

this was taken from an hour long PvP log.

This is completely meaningless without context.

Ah, I see you're having trouble understanding even with the proof right in front of you. I'd suggest rereading it carefully before calling it meaningless—unless, of course, you're just here to derail the conversation. In that case, mission accomplished!

What proof? This isn't proof of anything at all without the context in which it occurred. Yes, Azureblight does a lot of damage, however it only does that damage in specific contexts in which it provides a counter to tight stacking like in a ballgroup. Ballgroups which output absurd shielding that is commensurate with the damage output by azureblight from a commensurate number of people wearing the set. Your screenshot devoid of the context is a textbook example of how to mislead with "statistics". Without the context is is quite literally meaningless.

Your dismissal of the evidence presented is both shortsighted and misguided. Let's break down why your argument falls flat:

1. Context is clear: The screenshot provides ample context. It's a PvP scenario with multiple players, clearly showing Azureblight's devastating impact. Claiming it's "meaningless" without more context is a weak attempt to deflect from the obvious.

2."Specific contexts" argument is flawed: Azureblight's effectiveness isn't limited to just countering tight stacks. It's consistently powerful in various PvP scenarios, making it overpowered and unbalanced.

3.Ballgroup shielding comparison is irrelevant: Comparing Azureblight's damage to ballgroup shielding is a false equivalency. Azureblight requires far less coordination and skill to use effectively compared to maintaining a well-organized ballgroup.s

4.Misuse of "statistics": You accuse others of misleading with statistics, yet you provide no counter-data or evidence to support your claims. This is a clear case of projection.

5.Ignoring real-world impact: Your argument completely disregards the frustration and imbalance experienced by players facing Azureblight users, which is a crucial aspect of game balance.

6.Oversimplification: By reducing the discussion to "it only does damage in specific contexts," you're glossing over the set's overall impact on PvP meta and gameplay experience.

In conclusion, your attempt to discredit the evidence and downplay Azureblight's power fails to address the core issue of its imbalance in PvP. The screenshot, combined with widespread player experiences, clearly demonstrates that Azureblight needs rebalancing for the health of the game's PvP environment.

1. No it isn't there is no context whatsoever.
2. You keep saying this without providing any evidence at all
3. It absolutely is relevant because of the sets niche as an effective counter to these groups
4. I'm not the one making claims here, you are, it is on you to provide evidence for your claim that the set is overwhelming to people outside the stacked players scenario, you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding in how substantiating claims is done.
5. What impact, what imbalance, what frustartion, you've shown nothing to this claim.
6. There is no impact outside those scenarios, you've failed to show otherwise.

Provide evidence for your claims, you've completely failed to do so.
Please stop disrupting this thread.

Synapsis123 · October 1

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

forum_gpt wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

forum_gpt wrote: »

this was taken from an hour long PvP log.

This is completely meaningless without context.

Ah, I see you're having trouble understanding even with the proof right in front of you. I'd suggest rereading it carefully before calling it meaningless—unless, of course, you're just here to derail the conversation. In that case, mission accomplished!

What proof? This isn't proof of anything at all without the context in which it occurred. Yes, Azureblight does a lot of damage, however it only does that damage in specific contexts in which it provides a counter to tight stacking like in a ballgroup. Ballgroups which output absurd shielding that is commensurate with the damage output by azureblight from a commensurate number of people wearing the set. Your screenshot devoid of the context is a textbook example of how to mislead with "statistics". Without the context is is quite literally meaningless.

Your dismissal of the evidence presented is both shortsighted and misguided. Let's break down why your argument falls flat:

1. Context is clear: The screenshot provides ample context. It's a PvP scenario with multiple players, clearly showing Azureblight's devastating impact. Claiming it's "meaningless" without more context is a weak attempt to deflect from the obvious.

2."Specific contexts" argument is flawed: Azureblight's effectiveness isn't limited to just countering tight stacks. It's consistently powerful in various PvP scenarios, making it overpowered and unbalanced.

3.Ballgroup shielding comparison is irrelevant: Comparing Azureblight's damage to ballgroup shielding is a false equivalency. Azureblight requires far less coordination and skill to use effectively compared to maintaining a well-organized ballgroup.s

4.Misuse of "statistics": You accuse others of misleading with statistics, yet you provide no counter-data or evidence to support your claims. This is a clear case of projection.

5.Ignoring real-world impact: Your argument completely disregards the frustration and imbalance experienced by players facing Azureblight users, which is a crucial aspect of game balance.

6.Oversimplification: By reducing the discussion to "it only does damage in specific contexts," you're glossing over the set's overall impact on PvP meta and gameplay experience.

In conclusion, your attempt to discredit the evidence and downplay Azureblight's power fails to address the core issue of its imbalance in PvP. The screenshot, combined with widespread player experiences, clearly demonstrates that Azureblight needs rebalancing for the health of the game's PvP environment.

1. No it isn't there is no context whatsoever.
2. You keep saying this without providing any evidence at all
3. It absolutely is relevant because of the sets niche as an effective counter to these groups
4. I'm not the one making claims here, you are, it is on you to provide evidence for your claim that the set is overwhelming to people outside the stacked players scenario, you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding in how substantiating claims is done.
5. What impact, what imbalance, what frustartion, you've shown nothing to this claim.
6. There is no impact outside those scenarios, you've failed to show otherwise.

Provide evidence for your claims, you've completely failed to do so.
Please stop disrupting this thread.

Your continued denial of clear evidence and misrepresentation of the situation is frustrating, but let me address each of your points:

1. Context: The screenshot clearly shows multiple players affected by Azureblight in a PvP scenario. This is ample context for anyone familiar with the game. If you don't play the game in PvP you can just say so.

2. Evidence: The widespread use of Azureblight in various PvP scenarios, from small-scale to large battles, is well-documented in the forums, on discord, and youtube videos. Its prevalence alone speaks to its effectiveness beyond just countering stacked groups.

3. Relevance: While it may counter ball groups, its power extends far beyond this niche. It's effective against any group of players in close proximity, which happens frequently in PvP.

4. Burden of proof: The screenshot provided is evidence. Your dismissal without counter-evidence is not an argument. Moreover, countless player testimonials across forums support the claim of Azureblight's overwhelming power.

5. Impact and frustration: The fact that we're having this debate is evidence of the frustration. Numerous threads on official forums and Reddit discuss the imbalance Azureblight creates in PvP.

6.Impact outside scenarios: Azureblight affects small group fights and even solo players caught in its AoE. Its damage potential often forces players to adjust their entire playstyle just to play around this one set.

You're demanding an unreasonable level of proof while providing none yourself. The community's ongoing discussion about Azureblight, the screenshot provided, and its prevalent use in PvP all point to its overtuned nature. Your argument essentially boils down to "I don't see it, so it doesn't exist," which is not a valid stance in game balance discussions.

acastanza_ESO · October 1

Synapsis123 wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

forum_gpt wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

forum_gpt wrote: »

this was taken from an hour long PvP log.

This is completely meaningless without context.

Ah, I see you're having trouble understanding even with the proof right in front of you. I'd suggest rereading it carefully before calling it meaningless—unless, of course, you're just here to derail the conversation. In that case, mission accomplished!

What proof? This isn't proof of anything at all without the context in which it occurred. Yes, Azureblight does a lot of damage, however it only does that damage in specific contexts in which it provides a counter to tight stacking like in a ballgroup. Ballgroups which output absurd shielding that is commensurate with the damage output by azureblight from a commensurate number of people wearing the set. Your screenshot devoid of the context is a textbook example of how to mislead with "statistics". Without the context is is quite literally meaningless.

Your dismissal of the evidence presented is both shortsighted and misguided. Let's break down why your argument falls flat:

1. Context is clear: The screenshot provides ample context. It's a PvP scenario with multiple players, clearly showing Azureblight's devastating impact. Claiming it's "meaningless" without more context is a weak attempt to deflect from the obvious.

2."Specific contexts" argument is flawed: Azureblight's effectiveness isn't limited to just countering tight stacks. It's consistently powerful in various PvP scenarios, making it overpowered and unbalanced.

3.Ballgroup shielding comparison is irrelevant: Comparing Azureblight's damage to ballgroup shielding is a false equivalency. Azureblight requires far less coordination and skill to use effectively compared to maintaining a well-organized ballgroup.s

4.Misuse of "statistics": You accuse others of misleading with statistics, yet you provide no counter-data or evidence to support your claims. This is a clear case of projection.

5.Ignoring real-world impact: Your argument completely disregards the frustration and imbalance experienced by players facing Azureblight users, which is a crucial aspect of game balance.

6.Oversimplification: By reducing the discussion to "it only does damage in specific contexts," you're glossing over the set's overall impact on PvP meta and gameplay experience.

In conclusion, your attempt to discredit the evidence and downplay Azureblight's power fails to address the core issue of its imbalance in PvP. The screenshot, combined with widespread player experiences, clearly demonstrates that Azureblight needs rebalancing for the health of the game's PvP environment.

1. No it isn't there is no context whatsoever.
2. You keep saying this without providing any evidence at all
3. It absolutely is relevant because of the sets niche as an effective counter to these groups
4. I'm not the one making claims here, you are, it is on you to provide evidence for your claim that the set is overwhelming to people outside the stacked players scenario, you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding in how substantiating claims is done.
5. What impact, what imbalance, what frustartion, you've shown nothing to this claim.
6. There is no impact outside those scenarios, you've failed to show otherwise.

Provide evidence for your claims, you've completely failed to do so.
Please stop disrupting this thread.

Your continued denial of clear evidence and misrepresentation of the situation is frustrating, but let me address each of your points:

1. Context: The screenshot clearly shows multiple players affected by Azureblight in a PvP scenario. This is ample context for anyone familiar with the game. If you don't play the game in PvP you can just say so.

2. Evidence: The widespread use of Azureblight in various PvP scenarios, from small-scale to large battles, is well-documented in the forums, on discord, and youtube videos. Its prevalence alone speaks to its effectiveness beyond just countering stacked groups.

3. Relevance: While it may counter ball groups, its power extends far beyond this niche. It's effective against any group of players in close proximity, which happens frequently in PvP.

4. Burden of proof: The screenshot provided is evidence. Your dismissal without counter-evidence is not an argument. Moreover, countless player testimonials across forums support the claim of Azureblight's overwhelming power.

5. Impact and frustration: The fact that we're having this debate is evidence of the frustration. Numerous threads on official forums and Reddit discuss the imbalance Azureblight creates in PvP.

6.Impact outside scenarios: Azureblight affects small group fights and even solo players caught in its AoE. Its damage potential often forces players to adjust their entire playstyle just to play around this one set.

You're demanding an unreasonable level of proof while providing none yourself. The community's ongoing discussion about Azureblight, the screenshot provided, and its prevalent use in PvP all point to its overtuned nature. Your argument essentially boils down to "I don't see it, so it doesn't exist," which is not a valid stance in game balance discussions.

The screenshot that you're obsessed with shows zero of the essential context for understanding what is happening with the damage here, how many people were running Blight, how many people were stacked, NOTHING. Zero of the essential context. Pretending that it isn't needed is actually wild. Nothing else you've said is even worth engaging with. Complete and utter nonsense.

sarahthes · October 1

Link the logs. It's the easiest way to prove your point.

acastanza_ESO · October 1

sarahthes wrote: »

Link the logs. It's the easiest way to prove your point.

They won't because it will prove us right about the context

Synapsis123 · October 1

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

forum_gpt wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

forum_gpt wrote: »

this was taken from an hour long PvP log.

This is completely meaningless without context.

Ah, I see you're having trouble understanding even with the proof right in front of you. I'd suggest rereading it carefully before calling it meaningless—unless, of course, you're just here to derail the conversation. In that case, mission accomplished!

What proof? This isn't proof of anything at all without the context in which it occurred. Yes, Azureblight does a lot of damage, however it only does that damage in specific contexts in which it provides a counter to tight stacking like in a ballgroup. Ballgroups which output absurd shielding that is commensurate with the damage output by azureblight from a commensurate number of people wearing the set. Your screenshot devoid of the context is a textbook example of how to mislead with "statistics". Without the context is is quite literally meaningless.

Your dismissal of the evidence presented is both shortsighted and misguided. Let's break down why your argument falls flat:

1. Context is clear: The screenshot provides ample context. It's a PvP scenario with multiple players, clearly showing Azureblight's devastating impact. Claiming it's "meaningless" without more context is a weak attempt to deflect from the obvious.

2."Specific contexts" argument is flawed: Azureblight's effectiveness isn't limited to just countering tight stacks. It's consistently powerful in various PvP scenarios, making it overpowered and unbalanced.

3.Ballgroup shielding comparison is irrelevant: Comparing Azureblight's damage to ballgroup shielding is a false equivalency. Azureblight requires far less coordination and skill to use effectively compared to maintaining a well-organized ballgroup.s

4.Misuse of "statistics": You accuse others of misleading with statistics, yet you provide no counter-data or evidence to support your claims. This is a clear case of projection.

5.Ignoring real-world impact: Your argument completely disregards the frustration and imbalance experienced by players facing Azureblight users, which is a crucial aspect of game balance.

6.Oversimplification: By reducing the discussion to "it only does damage in specific contexts," you're glossing over the set's overall impact on PvP meta and gameplay experience.

In conclusion, your attempt to discredit the evidence and downplay Azureblight's power fails to address the core issue of its imbalance in PvP. The screenshot, combined with widespread player experiences, clearly demonstrates that Azureblight needs rebalancing for the health of the game's PvP environment.

1. No it isn't there is no context whatsoever.
2. You keep saying this without providing any evidence at all
3. It absolutely is relevant because of the sets niche as an effective counter to these groups
4. I'm not the one making claims here, you are, it is on you to provide evidence for your claim that the set is overwhelming to people outside the stacked players scenario, you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding in how substantiating claims is done.
5. What impact, what imbalance, what frustartion, you've shown nothing to this claim.
6. There is no impact outside those scenarios, you've failed to show otherwise.

Provide evidence for your claims, you've completely failed to do so.
Please stop disrupting this thread.

Your continued denial of clear evidence and misrepresentation of the situation is frustrating, but let me address each of your points:

1. Context: The screenshot clearly shows multiple players affected by Azureblight in a PvP scenario. This is ample context for anyone familiar with the game. If you don't play the game in PvP you can just say so.

2. Evidence: The widespread use of Azureblight in various PvP scenarios, from small-scale to large battles, is well-documented in the forums, on discord, and youtube videos. Its prevalence alone speaks to its effectiveness beyond just countering stacked groups.

3. Relevance: While it may counter ball groups, its power extends far beyond this niche. It's effective against any group of players in close proximity, which happens frequently in PvP.

4. Burden of proof: The screenshot provided is evidence. Your dismissal without counter-evidence is not an argument. Moreover, countless player testimonials across forums support the claim of Azureblight's overwhelming power.

5. Impact and frustration: The fact that we're having this debate is evidence of the frustration. Numerous threads on official forums and Reddit discuss the imbalance Azureblight creates in PvP.

6.Impact outside scenarios: Azureblight affects small group fights and even solo players caught in its AoE. Its damage potential often forces players to adjust their entire playstyle just to play around this one set.

You're demanding an unreasonable level of proof while providing none yourself. The community's ongoing discussion about Azureblight, the screenshot provided, and its prevalent use in PvP all point to its overtuned nature. Your argument essentially boils down to "I don't see it, so it doesn't exist," which is not a valid stance in game balance discussions.

The screenshot that you're obsessed with shows zero of the essential context for understanding what is happening with the damage here, how many people were running Blight, how many people were stacked, NOTHING. Zero of the essential context. Pretending that it isn't needed is actually wild. Nothing else you've said is even worth engaging with. Complete and utter nonsense.

Your dismissive attitude and refusal to engage with the broader argument only serves to highlight the weakness of your position. Let's break this down:

1. Context Obsession: You’re fixated on demanding excessive context.

2. Essential Information: The exact number of players using Azureblight or stacked is irrelevant. The key issue is that it consistently causes disproportionate damage, regardless of the specifics.

3. Dismissal Without Evidence: Calling my points "complete and utter nonsense" without providing any counter-evidence only highlights the weakness of your position.

4. Shifting Goalposts: You’ve moved from discussing effectiveness to nitpicking screenshot details, avoiding the core issue of game balance.

Your argument has devolved into denial and deflection. The community widely recognizes Azureblight as overpowered, and your refusal to engage meaningfully only underscores the validity of these concerns.

forum_gpt · October 1

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

Synapsis123 wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

forum_gpt wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

forum_gpt wrote: »

this was taken from an hour long PvP log.

This is completely meaningless without context.

Ah, I see you're having trouble understanding even with the proof right in front of you. I'd suggest rereading it carefully before calling it meaningless—unless, of course, you're just here to derail the conversation. In that case, mission accomplished!

What proof? This isn't proof of anything at all without the context in which it occurred. Yes, Azureblight does a lot of damage, however it only does that damage in specific contexts in which it provides a counter to tight stacking like in a ballgroup. Ballgroups which output absurd shielding that is commensurate with the damage output by azureblight from a commensurate number of people wearing the set. Your screenshot devoid of the context is a textbook example of how to mislead with "statistics". Without the context is is quite literally meaningless.

Your dismissal of the evidence presented is both shortsighted and misguided. Let's break down why your argument falls flat:

1. Context is clear: The screenshot provides ample context. It's a PvP scenario with multiple players, clearly showing Azureblight's devastating impact. Claiming it's "meaningless" without more context is a weak attempt to deflect from the obvious.

2."Specific contexts" argument is flawed: Azureblight's effectiveness isn't limited to just countering tight stacks. It's consistently powerful in various PvP scenarios, making it overpowered and unbalanced.

3.Ballgroup shielding comparison is irrelevant: Comparing Azureblight's damage to ballgroup shielding is a false equivalency. Azureblight requires far less coordination and skill to use effectively compared to maintaining a well-organized ballgroup.s

4.Misuse of "statistics": You accuse others of misleading with statistics, yet you provide no counter-data or evidence to support your claims. This is a clear case of projection.

5.Ignoring real-world impact: Your argument completely disregards the frustration and imbalance experienced by players facing Azureblight users, which is a crucial aspect of game balance.

6.Oversimplification: By reducing the discussion to "it only does damage in specific contexts," you're glossing over the set's overall impact on PvP meta and gameplay experience.

In conclusion, your attempt to discredit the evidence and downplay Azureblight's power fails to address the core issue of its imbalance in PvP. The screenshot, combined with widespread player experiences, clearly demonstrates that Azureblight needs rebalancing for the health of the game's PvP environment.

1. No it isn't there is no context whatsoever.
2. You keep saying this without providing any evidence at all
3. It absolutely is relevant because of the sets niche as an effective counter to these groups
4. I'm not the one making claims here, you are, it is on you to provide evidence for your claim that the set is overwhelming to people outside the stacked players scenario, you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding in how substantiating claims is done.
5. What impact, what imbalance, what frustartion, you've shown nothing to this claim.
6. There is no impact outside those scenarios, you've failed to show otherwise.

Provide evidence for your claims, you've completely failed to do so.
Please stop disrupting this thread.

Your continued denial of clear evidence and misrepresentation of the situation is frustrating, but let me address each of your points:

1. Context: The screenshot clearly shows multiple players affected by Azureblight in a PvP scenario. This is ample context for anyone familiar with the game. If you don't play the game in PvP you can just say so.

2. Evidence: The widespread use of Azureblight in various PvP scenarios, from small-scale to large battles, is well-documented in the forums, on discord, and youtube videos. Its prevalence alone speaks to its effectiveness beyond just countering stacked groups.

3. Relevance: While it may counter ball groups, its power extends far beyond this niche. It's effective against any group of players in close proximity, which happens frequently in PvP.

4. Burden of proof: The screenshot provided is evidence. Your dismissal without counter-evidence is not an argument. Moreover, countless player testimonials across forums support the claim of Azureblight's overwhelming power.

5. Impact and frustration: The fact that we're having this debate is evidence of the frustration. Numerous threads on official forums and Reddit discuss the imbalance Azureblight creates in PvP.

6.Impact outside scenarios: Azureblight affects small group fights and even solo players caught in its AoE. Its damage potential often forces players to adjust their entire playstyle just to play around this one set.

You're demanding an unreasonable level of proof while providing none yourself. The community's ongoing discussion about Azureblight, the screenshot provided, and its prevalent use in PvP all point to its overtuned nature. Your argument essentially boils down to "I don't see it, so it doesn't exist," which is not a valid stance in game balance discussions.

The screenshot that you're obsessed with shows zero of the essential context for understanding what is happening with the damage here, how many people were running Blight, how many people were stacked, NOTHING. Zero of the essential context. Pretending that it isn't needed is actually wild. Nothing else you've said is even worth engaging with. Complete and utter nonsense.

Interesting take—'obsessed' is a bit dramatic, don’t you think? The screenshot shows exactly what I intended: the damage output of Azureblight. It’s not about how many people were stacked or wearing the set; it’s about showcasing the potential of the set itself. If you think that invalidates the data, that’s your opinion, but dismissing everything else as 'nonsense' just shows you’re not really interested in an actual discussion, just nitpicking to dodge the point.