Juhasow wrote: »

Seriously ? This again ?

maybe if ZOS addressed the issue it wouldn't keep getting brought up

brandonv516 wrote: »

Juhasow wrote: »

Seriously ? This again ?

It's a valid topic and there are plenty of people who want it.

Would they still want it if it came with balance nerfs to those weapon's abilities/passives?

I think the most direct answer is that it would be a huge power increase with no risk/reward component.

5-5-2 for any combination of gear.

Imagine back when pet sorc was way overperforming and BiS was considered necro+ilambris+4moondancer(front bar lightning staff). Now just slap in 450 regen or spell damage for free on a build that was already pretty OP.

I mean don't misunderstand, it would be cool, but it would completely change the balance of ESO for pvp and pve, and not necessarily in a good way.

Juhasow wrote: »

Seriously ? This again ?

YES. This is one of the worst imbalances in the game, and it needs to be addressed.

Shadzilla wrote: »

Strongly disagree with allowing any 2 handed weapon a 2 piece set bonus. ZOS has taken a very long time to achieve the current PVE balance, its at the best state it ever has been and this would completely ruin that.

LOL, what? Two-handers and Bows are TERRIBLE in PvE.

Okay, here's my thoughts on sets... because I don't think I've ever written this down.

If I were designing the sets, I'd run with a system where each piece of a set had a unique bonus.

I'm going to use Hunding's as a very limited example.

Your chest and helm would both have weapon damage increases. Your shoulders could have stamina increases, your pants could have weapon crit, and so on.

In general you could stick unique effects on the chest, and weapons. Red Mountain could add its fire effect to your weapon, for example. A set like Knight Errant would apply its sword and board bonus to your 1h weapon. Possibly with its shield adding another effect.

Instead of collecting pieces of a set to unlock more effects, what you'd be doing is applying more pieces of a set to increase the bonus from that set. So, if you equipped the Hunding's Rage chest piece, you might only see 40 weapon power from it. But, equipping that with additional pieces would cause it to scale up. So, a fully kitted 14pc Hundings Rage in gold could see something closer to 600 weapon power from that piece, plus the rest of their gear.

Okay, so, three things: One: 14pc? Two: Jewelry? Three: Monster Sets, Master and Maelstrom Weapons?

First, count both sets of weapons as constantly equipped for the set. Count 2h weapons as two set pieces (we're not adding new effects, just making the ones that exist slightly more potent.) The biggest change is, this would require making more sets dual function. So things like Knight Errant or Swordsinger would need to have synergy for their off bar weapon. Easiest solution would be to slightly rework these sets to that weapon dedicated sets cue off their equipped weapons. So if you're rocking Knight Errant, with a 2h sword, that one applies a weapon buff to your 2h skills. Though, you could also tweak this so that the set changes slightly, based on its off hand. For example, (again) with Knight Errant, you could actually have a resistance buff that kicks in if you have its Two Hander equipped.

Second and third both work off the same concept. Chimerical items. Chimerical items will count as part of whatever set player has equipped to their chest, but will apply their own bonus instead. For example, if you swap out the head on that Hunding's Build earlier, you'd lose out on the weapon damage bonus from the head, but in its place you'd gain the benefit from whatever monster head you slotted. Monster sets are probably one of the only times where I'd keep the existing set system. Your first one applies a bonus (which scales with your total equipped set pieces), your second one unlocks the bonus power. But, honestly, this could work either way.

Same concept for the special case weapons. Yes, they're there, they do their schtick. But, they also count as part of your set, so you're gaining the weapon's bonus, instead of the bonus from your set's normal weapon.

Assuming there's a real reason we can't have jewelry, then this would be something to do with the 3pc jewelry sets. Make them Chimerical. They match to, and scale off of, your chest piece's set. Don't have a chest piece? Then they'll just build off each other normally.

Another stray concept would be to have crafted sets alter slightly based on their material. For example, if Night's Silence Boots had a stamina regen bonus on medium armor, but changed to a detection radius decrease on light or heavy.

Shadzilla wrote: »

Strongly disagree with allowing any 2 handed weapon a 2 piece set bonus. ZOS has taken a very long time to achieve the current PVE balance, its at the best state it ever has been and this would completely ruin that.

Agree, and by agree know that the exact opposite of this is true, and there isn't a PvE balance at all in regards to this subject.

Bow damage underperforms on a DPS level compared to dual wield. Two hand damage underperforms compared to dual wield. The culprit is the missing set bonus, and it's easy to test.

Create a build, a 5+5+2 build, and test it with dual wield. Now test it as a 5+4+2 build, and even a 5+5+1 build compared to it. Do this by making one of the weapons non-matching so that they trigger no set bonuses.

The results you'll find are relative parity between 5+4+2, 5+5+1 Dual wield, Bow, and Two-Hand builds. The diversity of these builds is actually pretty fantastic. That extra set bonus, however, consistently and reliably puts the dual wield 5+5+2 build ahead of the other two, effectively destroying that diversity simply by existing.

Having a bow equipped on the back bar to use endless hail does nothing to rectify this problem---the entire purpose behind it is to immediately switch back to your front bar to use the ability with 5+5+2 set bonuses because it'd be absurd to stay on the bow bar and neuter yourself. Any build using a two hander is a similar concept, it's there for the rally, not the weapon because staying off that bar as much as possible is what it takes to perform.

As far as the "it's one weapon versus two weapons" logic goes......huh. It's two gloves, too, should each be considered a piece? How about boots? Heck, how about pauldrons, some sets only have one and others two, so that's a thing, right? Pants that are dresses only have one leg holes, but pants with two legs have two leg holes! Even the cuirass sometimes has sleeves, but sometimes has none at all!

So rather than this mundane logic that doesn't actually work, please consider that you're using the Dual wield skill line, or Two Handed weapon skill line, or Bow, or Destruction staff, etc. You're using ONE weapon skill line per bar, with no exceptions, whether that weapon is a stick, two sticks, or a stick and a slab, you're using one weapon skill.

With that in mind, I think your chosen weapons should either count as one set item, even if you're using two of them, or count as two items, even if you're using one of them.

It's also easier to balance. At that point you know how many set bonuses any given setup is going to have and can actually balance the weapons lines against one another, rather than against the hundreds of variables that are varying amounts of set bonuses.

BrianDavion wrote: »

Juhasow wrote: »

Seriously ? This again ?

maybe if ZOS addressed the issue it wouldn't keep getting brought up

I love the fact ZOS just commented on the post....but ignored the question....

Sigtric wrote: »

I'm going to respond directly to the question in the title:

As someone who is doing the best I've ever done in the game right now with a 5/4/2 double destro build, NO.

So just erect a spine of middle finger to 2H and bow builds? Got it.

If you really need 3 item set bonuses instead of 2 to be competent, you need to you know what?

You guessed it, you need to l2p a bit more