Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »

keep the nerfs in pvp and leave pve alone

why on earth would anyone imagine you can balance both at the same time

get a grip

With the exception of the Armor skill changes to require 5 pieces (nerfed the Tava's Favor + Bloodspawn for ulti-generation combo) what problems are you seeing with Heavy Armor in PVE?

I main a tank in PVE and haven't seen any problems. Then again, as a tank, I'm not really relying on my gear or passives to do damage anyway. The sustain changes with Morrowind were arguably aimed more at PVE DPS counts rising beyond what the developers could account for without creating content that no one but the top-percenters could complete, so again, nothing that my tank couldn't adapt to.

pieratsos wrote: »

Samadhi wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

Samadhi wrote: »

Cactus316000 wrote: »

The problem with heavy armor is over performing sets i.e Ravager, Seventh legion, Knight errant, etc.
...
Medium armor gets no shields, reduce roll dodge and is extremely squishy.
And Heavy armor has amazing healing, resources back, no real loss of damage compared to medium armor, amazing over performing sets where does that leave medium armor as viable for pvp?
...

You mention both Ravager and Seventh Legion Brute,
which have an 8% chance of buffing for 10 seconds and a 10% chance of buffing for 5 seconds respectively

How do you feel running Ravager + Seventh Legion compares to running Automaton + Sword Dancer
do you feel the % chance for temporary proc is better than the permanent stack on physical damage dual wield skills?
do you feel the survivability of Heavy Armour offsets having to wait for procs?
do you feel resource pools are too readily available for players in heavy when the procs temporarily buff them?

Comprehend that you are expressing an issue with sets that stack up Weapon Damage stat
so comparing them directly, what do you feel makes the proc chance of Heavy more beneficial than the constant pool of Medium

Your argument has one big issue. It doesnt take into account the heavy/medium armor playstyles. You cant just look at the sets on paper and completely ignore how PVP is actually played.
...

Was not an argument, was a line of inquiry
if specific sets are the issue, then what is it about Heavy Armour more generally that makes those sets an issue

pieratsos wrote: »

...
And the other big thing is that heavy armor can also use those medium armor sets that u mentioned very easily. On the contrary, medium armor cant use heavy armor sets as effectively cause that usually means healthy jewellery and heavy armor sets in general have limited synergy with medium armor. They require you to get hit and medium armor is built around not getting hit.

Yes, this is why they were mentioned
Personally run my Sword Dancer set as 3 jewelry and 2 weapons, so it can be in Light, Heavy, or Medium setups
but why, for example, is 7th legion an issue but something like 5 Sword Dancer + 5 crafted Heavy Hundings Rage did not receive mention?

Is it the survivability associated with Heavy that makes proc sets worthwhile?
If so, what is facilitating that survivability? If it is Armour Rating, then is there potential benefit to a Fortified Brass Medium set for % based Stamina Regen, Cost Reduction and Weapon Damage stat?
Would a Medium Fortified Brass + Sword Dancer setup with Shuffle work in place of straight Heavy tanking -- why or why not?
What areas is Medium underperforming in such that it does not facilitate interesting play?

Is it more advantageous to go 5 Heavy + 2 Medium or straight 7 Heavy,
if the latter, which aspect of the available stat bonuses from doing so makes it advantageous?
Is it because of the added capacity to Health stack?

Looking at 'overperforming' sets necessitates looking at what factors make them perform so much better than others
simply nerfing the sets will cause people to come up with new sets to use instead

I was talking about the argument that you cant compare the two setups because of proc chance vs 100% uptime. And the reason why you can compare them is burst. ...

Except there was no point where that argument was made in my posts
you seem to be under the impression that my questioning is dictating something
this is not the case; am simply seeking to unearth the core of the issue

pieratsos wrote: »

...It doesnt matter if you have 100% uptime or not. Its not a DPS parse. No build in the game stays on offense 100% of the time. Especially medium armor builds. Its about getting the kill. If the proc is there when it matters then who gives a crap about the set not being procced when i was running behind a tower. ...

Yes, and the goal is to tease out what makes the proc so readily available when it matters
The argument hinges on an "If"
so why is something that inconsistently gives 500 weapon damage considered worth more than something that consistently gives 400 or 450
and can be worn with a Heavy Armour set
Is it because health stack increases the viability?

Would it be Viable to use 5 Ravager with a 5 Medium 2 Heavy build since it procs under the circumstances of offense rather than defense
if not, what is the factor that makes it work with heavy rather than with Medium

pieratsos wrote: »

...
Also you are talking about fortified brass in medium. But you see, thats the whole issue. The fact that we are even talking about brass in medium is the damn problem. Im not talking about a couple of specific builds and their effectiveness just for the sake of being in medium armor. Im talking about the medium armor playstyle in general. If i have to play like a heavy build to be viable then whats the point of playing in medium. Whats the point of having distinct playstyles based on armor type for that matter if at the end of the day there is only one viable playstyle.

The point of talking about Fortified Brass is to figure out what area of the stats is causing overperformance for Heavy
if the added survivability from Armour + Spell Resistance pool is creating the gap that facilitates sustaining combat long enough to kill a less sustainable Medium Armour build, then does the Brass set mitigate the issue
ie: if Fortified Brass is sufficient to mitigate the issue and make a rolly-polly Medium build viable, then a potential increase to the base Armour rating of Medium across the board may be beneficial
so that people can roll around in Senche and have control over when their buff procs rather than having to sustain combat until that burst capacity is available

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

Valencer wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

PVP SHOULD NOT IMPACT PVE. PVP SHOULD NOT IMPACT PVE. REPEAT AFTER ME. This is non negotiable. By removing HA players ability to use shuffle, they objectively worsened the ability of tanks to stack defenses. That is objective, you cannot argue it, you cannot despute it. And if tanking is going to be something that we still need (And given there's anoher thread asking how we encourage it due to the -lack- of tanks) it's time to own up to the consequences of PVP's actions, and stop nerfing one for the sake of the other.

The only thing that changed in PvE is that Tava's isn't an option for DK tanks anymore. What are you even talking about?

Noone ever used shuffle in PvE for the sake of being tankier

I dont think you can speak for everyone, but puting it aside.

The point, which many people seem hell bent on avoiding, is that nothing done for the sake of PVP should have an impact on PVE meta, and it does frequently in reguard for tanking. Nerfs to heavy armor, tank skills, blocking in general, the evidence and list is as long as the list of updates. It's time it stopped here.

Youre just cherry picking examples and assuming these nerfs are only done for the sake of PvP.

There's also buffs, like when heavy armour got its' constitution passive buffed by about 300% (constitution is still far stronger than before that old buff, even post-morrowind nerf) and got bonus heavy attack resource returns added to its' passives. Up until morrowind you could easily permablock in PvE with no CP investment into block cost reduction whatsoever... maybe the developers didn't like that either?

And again, ebon+alkosh/torug's has been the go-to setup for most main tanks for ages now. Tava's only really saw use as a filler set if there was nothing better to slot on the off-tank or whatever. So pretending like locking shuffle out of a PvE tank's arsenal is somehow some kind of big change in the meta is disingenuous at best.

I don't speak for everyone, but I have extensive and regular experience tanking in every trial (with hardmode) and what you're saying just doesn't add up. You don't speak for everyone either.

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

[

If you were running shuffle, plus the set that gives ult on dodge, and hist bark, you were running the meta.

and that is how we know you know NOTHING about balance, neither PvE or PvP. Is imposible to run hirst bark + tava's favor. As usual, those who commets thinks like "pvp balance ruins PvE" are blatantly ignorant about game mechanincs to actually have a valid opinion on anything related about balance.

I am going to do possible alternate future prediction.

1. Heavy and light armor are not nerfed and medium gets the right buff and makes it a balanced option based on play style. Lets say that the medium armor buff has a lot to do with evasion and roll dodge/crit.

The crying on the forums will be so loud becasue of good PVP players using the medium armor to evade damage, that it will be deafening. Why do I say this? Because this is exactly what happened when PVP players were roll dodging all over Cyro.

Here's to hoping that ZOS can find the right place for medium regardless of what people say about it(with the exception of people testing and giving back real feedback).

I finally figured out what shuffle was... the skill morph I didn't pick XD

uggh, another "nerf heavy armor" thread. Guess what? There is more than just PvP in this game. If they nerf heavy armor any further it MUST be added to the battle spirit debuff, otherwise it will be impossible to survive as a tank in PvE vs. things like The Warrior in vHRC.

Aside from that, if 90% of people in PvP wear heavy armor, I would guess its not heavy armor that is the problem, its damage output in PvP where people are forced to wear heavy just to survive more than a few seconds.

pieratsos wrote: »

Samadhi wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

Samadhi wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

Samadhi wrote: »

Cactus316000 wrote: »

The problem with heavy armor is over performing sets i.e Ravager, Seventh legion, Knight errant, etc.
...
Medium armor gets no shields, reduce roll dodge and is extremely squishy.
And Heavy armor has amazing healing, resources back, no real loss of damage compared to medium armor, amazing over performing sets where does that leave medium armor as viable for pvp?
...

You mention both Ravager and Seventh Legion Brute,
which have an 8% chance of buffing for 10 seconds and a 10% chance of buffing for 5 seconds respectively

How do you feel running Ravager + Seventh Legion compares to running Automaton + Sword Dancer
do you feel the % chance for temporary proc is better than the permanent stack on physical damage dual wield skills?
do you feel the survivability of Heavy Armour offsets having to wait for procs?
do you feel resource pools are too readily available for players in heavy when the procs temporarily buff them?

Comprehend that you are expressing an issue with sets that stack up Weapon Damage stat
so comparing them directly, what do you feel makes the proc chance of Heavy more beneficial than the constant pool of Medium

Your argument has one big issue. It doesnt take into account the heavy/medium armor playstyles. You cant just look at the sets on paper and completely ignore how PVP is actually played.
...

Was not an argument, was a line of inquiry
if specific sets are the issue, then what is it about Heavy Armour more generally that makes those sets an issue

pieratsos wrote: »

...
And the other big thing is that heavy armor can also use those medium armor sets that u mentioned very easily. On the contrary, medium armor cant use heavy armor sets as effectively cause that usually means healthy jewellery and heavy armor sets in general have limited synergy with medium armor. They require you to get hit and medium armor is built around not getting hit.

Yes, this is why they were mentioned
Personally run my Sword Dancer set as 3 jewelry and 2 weapons, so it can be in Light, Heavy, or Medium setups
but why, for example, is 7th legion an issue but something like 5 Sword Dancer + 5 crafted Heavy Hundings Rage did not receive mention?

Is it the survivability associated with Heavy that makes proc sets worthwhile?
If so, what is facilitating that survivability? If it is Armour Rating, then is there potential benefit to a Fortified Brass Medium set for % based Stamina Regen, Cost Reduction and Weapon Damage stat?
Would a Medium Fortified Brass + Sword Dancer setup with Shuffle work in place of straight Heavy tanking -- why or why not?
What areas is Medium underperforming in such that it does not facilitate interesting play?

Is it more advantageous to go 5 Heavy + 2 Medium or straight 7 Heavy,
if the latter, which aspect of the available stat bonuses from doing so makes it advantageous?
Is it because of the added capacity to Health stack?

Looking at 'overperforming' sets necessitates looking at what factors make them perform so much better than others
simply nerfing the sets will cause people to come up with new sets to use instead

I was talking about the argument that you cant compare the two setups because of proc chance vs 100% uptime. And the reason why you can compare them is burst. ...

Except there was no point where that argument was made in my posts
you seem to be under the impression that my questioning is dictating something
this is not the case; am simply seeking to unearth the core of the issue

pieratsos wrote: »

...It doesnt matter if you have 100% uptime or not. Its not a DPS parse. No build in the game stays on offense 100% of the time. Especially medium armor builds. Its about getting the kill. If the proc is there when it matters then who gives a crap about the set not being procced when i was running behind a tower. ...

Yes, and the goal is to tease out what makes the proc so readily available when it matters
The argument hinges on an "If"
so why is something that inconsistently gives 500 weapon damage considered worth more than something that consistently gives 400 or 450
and can be worn with a Heavy Armour set
Is it because health stack increases the viability?

Would it be Viable to use 5 Ravager with a 5 Medium 2 Heavy build since it procs under the circumstances of offense rather than defense
if not, what is the factor that makes it work with heavy rather than with Medium

pieratsos wrote: »

...
Also you are talking about fortified brass in medium. But you see, thats the whole issue. The fact that we are even talking about brass in medium is the damn problem. Im not talking about a couple of specific builds and their effectiveness just for the sake of being in medium armor. Im talking about the medium armor playstyle in general. If i have to play like a heavy build to be viable then whats the point of playing in medium. Whats the point of having distinct playstyles based on armor type for that matter if at the end of the day there is only one viable playstyle.

The point of talking about Fortified Brass is to figure out what area of the stats is causing overperformance for Heavy
if the added survivability from Armour + Spell Resistance pool is creating the gap that facilitates sustaining combat long enough to kill a less sustainable Medium Armour build, then does the Brass set mitigate the issue
ie: if Fortified Brass is sufficient to mitigate the issue and make a rolly-polly Medium build viable, then a potential increase to the base Armour rating of Medium across the board may be beneficial
so that people can roll around in Senche and have control over when their buff procs rather than having to sustain combat until that burst capacity is available

The argument does not hinges on an "if". By ur logic, proc sets back in the day were balanced because of "if" they proc. I dont know if u actually ever played with 7th legion but u should really try it before saying "if it procs". That set has no cooldown. You have a couple of dots on you and it will be up 100% of the time.
...

7th Legion + Sword Dancer actually
as was stated earlier, my Sword Dancer set can be combined with Medium, Heavy, or Light if so chosen

pieratsos wrote: »

...
Also your comparison of 7th vs sword singer and automaton doesnt even make any sense. You are comparing apples with oranges. You cant compare them but even if u do then 7th is superior in every possible way. 7th buffs ur overall wpn dmg. That means everything you do including ur heals on top of already giving you a heal when it procs. Automaton/sword singer buffs a specific type of dmg. That means no heals, some dmg abilities will not be buffed and the dmg buff is also lower that 7th. Thats not even a comparison. 7th makes them look useless. Automaton and sword singer are the sets with the "if". Not 7th.
...

Sword Singer was not mentioned, you are confusing the Two Handed set with the Dual Wield set
Tho, Sword Singer does buff the heal from Rally in a manner similar to how Sword Dancer buffs the effective heal on Bloodthirst

but, at least, you are getting into where you feel the issue is here in a more practical sense
to argue that the set is overperforming because it buffs all damage and healing is something they can actually look at adjusting

pieratsos wrote: »

...
No, the problem with brass isnt to figure out what sort of buffs medium needs to be viable. Thats exactly what i told you. The issue isnt that brass makes medium viable. The issue is the way its doing it. If the solution to medium is play like heavy e.g buff the resistances of medium then why not just play in heavy or have distinct armor playstyles. If thats the solution then you may as well delete armor types and just let people choose the armor passives they want. Whats the point of having different versions of the same thing.

If Brass 'solves' the issue, then something needs to be done about Medium survivability
that can be buffing the armour value to make roll-dodge viable again; that may be altering the effects of roll dodge while specifically wearing Medium

If Brass does not impact the issue in a meaningful way, then it would be rewarding to examine resource regeneration and cost reduction
or, potentially, the level of crit rate and amount of weapon power provided

since you are expressing disdain for 7th Legion's Capacity to impact a general spectrum of skills as opposed to a specific subset,
perhaps they need to introduce limitations to its proc chance
if that is not enough to solve it, then the issue is not singular sets overperforming it is a broader issue with Heavy
it would be unfortunate to have 7th nerfed, then simply have people calculate another set that performs to the necessary specifications

What are your feelings on Veiled Heritance as providing an 400 point increase with a broader proc condition than Ravager?
Is there a threshhold for an 'acceptable' level of Weapon Damage buff,
or does ZOS need to examine all skill scaling more generally?

COUGHCOUGHCOUGH.
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/375983/the-heavy-armour-meta-isnt-as-2d-as-everyone-thinks-zoss-blanket-fixes-will-not-work/p1

Little old, and the stamDK meta build has been rather long dead post shuffle nerf. Basically cancer tank builds come from a combo of strong things. One person running your heavy armour isn't a tippytop tank, and weakening it affects them, not the ones hopping the latest minmaxed gear.

Goshua wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

I'm always amazed by the people who think that people can't/shouldn't be mobile or active on the battlefield in heavy armor. That's simply not how it was historically.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzTwBQniLSc

Now, that's not to say that ZOS has gotten the balance of tankiness to damage potential quite right - they certainly haven't. But please don't repeat bad myths about historical armor in order to justify your argument. That's bad history. Real armor is so much cooler than that.

What is true is that they tired fast. Doing a few star jumps and push ups is not in the same ball park as being in a skirmish and fighting for your life against multiple opponents, any longer than 5 mins solid you'd be worn out in HA.

Alright, although really not relevant to a discussion about a magic based game, let's talk history.

Whenever you think about what was done in history, it's useful to keep in mind that people are people. They weren't inherently dumber in the middle ages. From that perspective, who in their right mind is going to run out in heavy armor that is a distinct disadvantage? Medieval fighters, even inexperienced ones, knew that they would likely be fighting all day for several days... It was also no secret that even on horseback, if you wore heavy armor, you risked being pulled off by peasants and stabbed to death on the ground...

People get confused because most surviving examples of armor are heavy. However, those pieces survived because they weren't used much... Usually ceremonial armor. Battle worthy armor was extremely valuable, and handed down generation to generation, or taken off the battle field, but in either case used until unusable. People that fight in armor today often use modern materials to avoid having to replace their armor every couple of years. Fighting and sweat are both hard on armor.

This article is fairly accurate.

http://knowledgenuts.com/2014/05/17/knights-armor-was-much-much-lighter-than-you-think/

Take a trip to the Tower of London. The plate used in battle is the medieval equivalent of modern 18 gauge mild steel. In other words, very thick tin foil...

The same applies to weapons. Weapons were also fairly light, about 2.5-3lbs, with 2h being about 4.5lbs. Conditioning makes everything easier, but if you weigh 120-160lbs (not many fat people back then), no amount of conditioning is going to let you swing a 10lb sword all day, or even for a short time.

Another source of people's misconceptions about armor come from bad articles on energy consumption of armored fighters, which are almost always based on late period tournament armor, or the heaviest examples from a battle, which were typically ceremonial armor of a non-combatant (old nobility, etc.). Some existing examples of jousting or ceremonial armor weigh more than 100lbs, but they were designed for a very specific purpose and not used aside from that purpose.

Exhaustion was an issue with plate, but had little to do with the weight of the armor or even the type of armor. Rather, it has to do with helmets. Wealthier combatants could use close faced helmets. Closed face helmets limit the amount of available oxygen, even with multiple 'air holes.' This is not particular to plate, it just was more likely that if you wore plate, you also wore a closed face helm.

If you really want to know what is and is not reasonable, there are multiple medieval reenactment or recreation groups where you can go experience armored combat first hand. If you stick with it, you'll find that the weights I quote above are pretty reasonable for a well conditioned fighter, and anything heavier is a recipe for loss.

Honestly- heavy, medium, and light armor are performing well.

The issue is with various builds (as it's been mentioned several times). Seventh Legion, Ravager, etc should be toned down. Drop the weapon damage to around 300-350. No heavy armor should get buffs above 400 damage. I would, of course, like to see some heavy armor sets that buff your magic damage the way that 7th Legion/Ravager do (but not at 500-600 damage!) However, let's be realistic: saying that heavy armor shouldn't receive any bonuses to damage is like saying that medium/light armor should get no bonuses toward health or resistance.

Medium armor doesn't need a buff. Honestly- imagine how hard stamblades will cloak kill you with more buffs.

Light armor is fine as well.

...just my two cents.


PS: Buff mDKs.