waitwhat wrote: »

Seems like the new changes are fine, and have resolved overpower issues with this set.

Car being too fast? Remove wheels. Call the change fine, it resolved the issue.

waitwhat wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

waitwhat wrote: »

Seems like the new changes are fine, and have resolved overpower issues with this set.

Car being too fast? Remove wheels. Call the change fine, it resolved the issue.

Fair point, but we already have enough public transportation that I don't think the car's absence matters either way.

Just a wild guess here, but i'd say ZOS did not invest developer time just to change one unused set into another unused set.

Chelo wrote: »

Ruckly wrote: »

Purging 3 debuffs every 8 seconds on a direct heal looks good to me. Ballista firebolt applies a debuff that can be removed with a direct heal that also tops you off. Dots can be removed with a direct heal. You get a heal and a purge one GCD every 8 seconds. 8 seconds is not a very long time. If you are playing with a light armor set you are probably mobile enough not to get hit continuously by debuffs. If you are getting hit continuously by debuffs in light armor then what difference does it make whether this set exists as is or never was an idea to begin with? If you think it is that bad don't use it. Shadow Cloak, Ball of Lightning, Reflective Scales, stuns, any skill that decreases the number of hits you take in a given time increases the value of this set. There are also other skills that remove specific debuffs that aren't direct heals e.g. Reflective Plate.

I suppose one way to look at it is whether 400 spell power in whatever school of magic or removing 3 debuffs on a direct heal is better. If you remove 3 dots then you take 3 dots less damage over that 8 second interval. That might add up to 12k damage not applied. Which can be looked at as a passive HoT of 24k/2 over 8 seconds which is a pretty big number. Plus you probably have HoTs anyways. Because it doesn't work so well in a 1vx situation where you have 20 debuffs doesn't make it bad. It certainly looks good for burst recovery.

Dude, the debuffs you removed, can be reapplied to yourself in the next second... You are not getting "debuff immunity" for 8 seconds...

That is true. However with the exception of poisons and bleed passives DoT debuffs require a cooldown to apply. And in the case of poisons they have a 10 second cooldown independent of the GCD. If someone is spamming debuffs on you some of that is going to count for nothing whereas if you apply debuffs to them and they aren't running curse eater all of your debuffs stick.

If someone is spamming poison arrow and only poison arrow and light attack at you curse eater might not be so good in that case but if someone is fighting say a sorc they don't expect a purge and they apply different debuffs i.e. they wouldn't apply the same DoT twice in a row since the second would overwrite the first.

There are skills e.g. Noxious Breath that can apply 5 debuffs in one GCD: 2x weapon poison, skill poison, Major Fracture, and snare. The curse eater set has a lower cool down than weapon poisons. It's value in that situation might be debatable however it's hard to imagine a set that removes debuffs without making debuffs pointless and still knocking out 5 debuffs from one skill. There is earthgore if that is your thing. Having a high cool down earthgore and a low cool down earthgore might kill debuffs altogether what would be left is burst skills and that's it which would be boring.

It's just sad that because the bleed/snare cancer is so common that any form of counter-play gets so much hate it becomes useless... I mean this is a set that could potentially cleans that sloads proc. No no we can't have that, what would the bleeders and dot-roll-cloak-folk do if their dots/bleeds would be sometimes purged and they would actually have to hit their target.

Oh wait what am I saying, there is no cancer at all like that in pvp, counter playing it SLIGHTLY with a purge set would be cancer af...

FrankonPC wrote: »

Blackleopardex wrote: »

It's just sad that because the bleed/snare cancer is so common that any form of counter-play gets so much hate it becomes useless... I mean this is a set that could potentially cleans that sloads proc. No no we can't have that, what would the bleeders and dot-roll-cloak-folk do if their dots/bleeds would be sometimes purged and they would actually have to hit their target.

Oh wait what am I saying, there is no cancer at all like that in pvp, counter playing it SLIGHTLY with a purge set would be cancer af...

you wear this set, you fight me and I am on a sorc.

I apply curse, it's cleansed every single time without you doing anything. My curse will never blow up on you. I could run double dot poisons on my inferno staff and run the asylum destro and at that point maybe curse will stick, but you eliminate a large portion of a classes burst combination by doing nothing.

Bleeds, snares and oblivion damage need adjustments in this game, but you don't treat a house fire with a flame thrower...just like you don't adjust broken bleeds with a broken purge set.

Except it would not, test it yourself and come back here(well obviously to late now but, i bet you did not). Yes the first version of the set could be nasty against a sorc, however your telling a fantasy story, you would apply to many debuffs for me to effectivly remove curse every time as you say, on top of that I'm not arguing for keeping the set how it was originally posted, I'm saying this nerf is by far to hard to make the set usefull.

FrankonPC wrote: »

I apply curse, it's cleansed every single time without you doing anything. My curse will never blow up on you. I could run double dot poisons on my inferno staff and run the asylum destro and at that point maybe curse will stick, but you eliminate a large portion of a classes burst combination by doing nothing.

First thing to note is the set is called Curse Eater so eating sorc's curse is sorta what it should do, just by well it's name, right . It may come with the need to rethink rotations but that's how meta changes are. It's also untrue that you do nothing. You cast a defensive skill while your opponent goes into the offense. And you slot a defensive set while your opponent has likely more offensive power stacked. The set does not add offense, thus bringing the user closer to a "tanky" build. And common sense about defensive builds is that they are indeed harder to take down than glass cannons. There is no entitlement to kill everyone in the game with one burst combo.

Back to the updated set and this thread. The name is very misleading now, it totally flipped from "Curse Eater really strong" to "Curse Eater really weak". I don't mind the change from HoT to direct heal too much (tho there's room for interpretation what a direct heal actually is). But the 4x (!) increased cooldown breaks it. It brings the set into the margin of Wyrd Tree and Stendarr, two highly unpopular sets that need adjustments themselves.

There is a problem with negative effects in PvP, there's no doubt about that. You don't even have to encounter hostile groups to see the debuffs stack like no tomorrow. Attacking a resource on your own shows the insane amount of status effects you pile up within fragments of seconds. And that is actually the balance to the set already. The normal condition in PVP is so rich with debuffs of all kind, the set in its original form on PTS would most likely have just made it a bit easier to deal with but nowhere as powerful as it's percepted.

Please keep in mind that we have snares, bleeds, dots, fractures and so much more. The arguments in this thread against Curse Eater are focused on the one particular debuff they want to stick with the target. But how likely is it to get exactly that one debuff cleansed by the set if you pile up so many debuffs simultaneously?

Yes, in duels the set may be too strong. But you can rule out sets by setting up rules for tournaments which is common practice already. It's a bit weird to have sets balanced around niche scenarios while the general scenarios might actually become more interesting if a set like Curse Eater (in its original PTS form) would be around. Now we don't have the chance to even figure out if that would be the case or not. Because it is utterly useless. Unless ZOS touches it again before release.

As for PVE, it's in-line with Stendarr and Wyrd Tree. So barely any group will use or tolerate this set in the current PTS form, even for specific situations. The cooldown is way too long. The set is not made more interesting, it just turned from one useless to another useless form from a PVE perspective (and as mentioned above, from a PVP perspective also).

Long story short: If you want Curse Eater to matter, make it better.

Curse eater was really strong, a bit broken because had pottential to nulify a lot of dots (mag dk dots for example), bleeds, negative effectes and combo procing every 2 seconds. the cd was strong. making it 8 secs will basicly allow for most negative effects or dots to stay for their full duration, making the set almost useless. I think a middle ground with 5 sec cd will be perfect and procing on every heal so negative effects still have some effect on target but also the curse eater wearer feels that curses are gone.

But as usual devs nuked the set, instead of balancing it . I will still test it, but I wont expect much from it. I currently main a mag dk in PVP and that set would have been a pain in the ass to fight against, still I wanted it in live just because it was the perfect defense vs bleeds.

apri wrote: »

First thing to note is the set is called Curse Eater so eating sorc's curse is sorta what it should do, just by well it's name, right . It may come with the need to rethink rotations but that's how meta changes are. It's also untrue that you do nothing. You cast a defensive skill while your opponent goes into the offense. And you slot a defensive set while your opponent has likely more offensive power stacked. The set does not add offense, thus bringing the user closer to a "tanky" build. And common sense about defensive builds is that they are indeed harder to take down than glass cannons. There is no entitlement to kill everyone in the game with one burst combo.

1. If you want to rework how sorcs do damage in pvp so it's not the same burst combination over and over again, i'm all for it. surely that would take a little longer than a weeks worth of PTS, hence my remarks in a previous post about how a rebalance to how combat functions would make the original version viable. When a class only has one burst combo, there is only one way to kill people.

2. when you cast a defensive skill, you get the benefit of that defensive skill. when you cast a heal over time with this set, you get the benefit of one of the strongest skills in the game for free on top of your defense skill. You could say that there is no entitlement to running a free purge every 2 seconds, and thus the "tanky" build would have to use one of the many different sets, skills, abilities to be "tanky"

There's a reason purify is so strong on a magplar, especially in 1 v 1 situations. There's a reason a lot of small scale players have basically been saying "im gonna slot this set on everything'', because in its first iteration it was really, really strong in small scale combat.

apri wrote: »

FrankonPC wrote: »

I apply curse, it's cleansed every single time without you doing anything. My curse will never blow up on you. I could run double dot poisons on my inferno staff and run the asylum destro and at that point maybe curse will stick, but you eliminate a large portion of a classes burst combination by doing nothing.

First thing to note is the set is called Curse Eater so eating sorc's curse is sorta what it should do, just by well it's name, right . It may come with the need to rethink rotations but that's how meta changes are. It's also untrue that you do nothing. You cast a defensive skill while your opponent goes into the offense. And you slot a defensive set while your opponent has likely more offensive power stacked. The set does not add offense, thus bringing the user closer to a "tanky" build. And common sense about defensive builds is that they are indeed harder to take down than glass cannons. There is no entitlement to kill everyone in the game with one burst combo.

Back to the updated set and this thread. The name is very misleading now, it totally flipped from "Curse Eater really strong" to "Curse Eater really weak". I don't mind the change from HoT to direct heal too much (tho there's room for interpretation what a direct heal actually is). But the 4x (!) increased cooldown breaks it. It brings the set into the margin of Wyrd Tree and Stendarr, two highly unpopular sets that need adjustments themselves.

There is a problem with negative effects in PvP, there's no doubt about that. You don't even have to encounter hostile groups to see the debuffs stack like no tomorrow. Attacking a resource on your own shows the insane amount of status effects you pile up within fragments of seconds. And that is actually the balance to the set already. The normal condition in PVP is so rich with debuffs of all kind, the set in its original form on PTS would most likely have just made it a bit easier to deal with but nowhere as powerful as it's percepted.

Please keep in mind that we have snares, bleeds, dots, fractures and so much more. The arguments in this thread against Curse Eater are focused on the one particular debuff they want to stick with the target. But how likely is it to get exactly that one debuff cleansed by the set if you pile up so many debuffs simultaneously?

Yes, in duels the set may be too strong. But you can rule out sets by setting up rules for tournaments which is common practice already. It's a bit weird to have sets balanced around niche scenarios while the general scenarios might actually become more interesting if a set like Curse Eater (in its original PTS form) would be around. Now we don't have the chance to even figure out if that would be the case or not. Because it is utterly useless. Unless ZOS touches it again before release.

As for PVE, it's in-line with Stendarr and Wyrd Tree. So barely any group will use or tolerate this set in the current PTS form, even for specific situations. The cooldown is way too long. The set is not made more interesting, it just turned from one useless to another useless form from a PVE perspective (and as mentioned above, from a PVP perspective also).

Long story short: If you want Curse Eater to matter, make it better.

It may be slightly on the weak side right now - though I encourage people to actually test that out as far as possible - but it is miles ahead of Wyrd tree.

Minno wrote: »

Reistr_the_Unbroken wrote: »

So basically the set was somehow op, people cried nerf, it got nerfed, and now the set’s useless.

Did I get that right?

Basically. The current live is not attractive enough to justify wasting a 5pc (the main reason no one runs the set). PTS first iteration was buggy in purging cc effects, but also wasn't really tested with actual combat situations while videos showed people using a cc every 2 seconds instead of building up dots/debuffs like you do against templars (it should have been coded to ignore CC and then tested). Second PTS iteration combats large scale situations abusing the set, but no one is going to run it small scale; it hits one person and you wasted a 5pc to get 3 debuffs removed every 8 seconds that someone gets from 1 ability that drops 2 debuffs each cast and 50% reduction on the others. And you need a direct heal for it so basically only templars if wanting to use it for your group, and none of them will run it because it means dropping a defense set.

Overall pure noise from both sides ruined this set. It had potential to be something other than auto purge and something other than the boring defense/offense/sustain stats sets we currently have. It was and currently is stuck between the two; a shame really.

There are plenty direct heals, especially for magicka. NBs are the only class who may have trouble fitting one into their build.

FrankonPC wrote: »

When a class only has one burst combo, there is only one way to kill people.

If there is no way around that one single combo, that should be addressed to improve the variety in the sorc's toolset. It's not the fault of a set that a rotation is rather limited. Key is here that in usual pvp environments, curse will be one of very many debuffs you'll encounter. Having exactly that curse being removed by the set is possible but not very likely. I have quite some experience with magplars in pvp and it can take multiple rituals to cleanse the debuff you need to get rid off. There's just too many snares and lesser debuffs around that are in the way for the purge you actually need. And that's 5 instant purges, only limited by the general skill cooldown.

FrankonPC wrote: »

when you cast a defensive skill, you get the benefit of that defensive skill. when you cast a heal over time with this set, you get the benefit of one of the strongest skills in the game for free on top of your defense skill. You could say that there is no entitlement to running a free purge every 2 seconds, and thus the "tanky" build would have to use one of the many different sets, skills, abilities to be "tanky"

But the same is true for offensive proc sets. It's the nature of the proc set to add something on top of what you do. You deal damage and offensive proc sets add damage to the target without further do. How is it justified to have "free" damage but not free support skills? The price for slotting a support set is the lack of damage. You'll be put into the defense, thus being more tanky than offensive players may like it to be but it is the normal consequence.

I don't see the game break over that but to be clear I would have preferred to test that. And if it is too strong indeed, then (but not prior to testing under proper conditions) it is qualified to be nerfed. Proper PVP conditions are hard to simulate on PTS. And console players are ruled out of it which is disappointing.

FrankonPC wrote: »

There's a reason purify is so strong on a magplar, especially in 1 v 1 situations. There's a reason a lot of small scale players have basically been saying "im gonna slot this set on everything'', because in its first iteration it was really, really strong in small scale combat.

The reality is something else tho. I have talked about duels before. The vast majority of PVP encounters I see in various campaigns are massive zerg fights. Heck, even resources are zerged lately. If you want to play towards campaign goals (point gains, keep takes, scroll runs etc), small scale is a rarity. In those massive fights the set would certainly not over-perform. But you're right that small-scale has its place, too. It's just not what you see in pvp usually. Idk how good or bad the set is in situations of say 4-6 ppl against the same numbers. But we will never find out if we cannot test it properly. That's the key issue of this rushed nerf I'm unhappy with.

apri wrote: »

If there is no way around that one single combo, that should be addressed to improve the variety in the sorc's toolset. It's not the fault of a set that a rotation is rather limited. Key is here that in usual pvp environments, curse will be one of very many debuffs you'll encounter. Having exactly that curse being removed by the set is possible but not very likely. I have quite some experience with magplars in pvp and it can take multiple rituals to cleanse the debuff you need to get rid off. There's just too many snares and lesser debuffs around that are in the way for the purge you actually need. And that's 5 instant purges, only limited by the general skill cooldown.

I agree, Sorcs in general have been pigeonholed into a very specific combination to kill people and having a free ability to remove a skill really hurts the class from a small scale perspective.

These are my thoughts so at least you know where I am coming from, but I am of the belief that PVP balance would be easier to obtain if we provided specific skills and counters for all classes and playstyles. they don't have to be the same, but every class should have skills they "can" equip to counter other classes. if ESO could get to that point to find that sort of balance in play and counter play, large scale combat would be much easier to evaluate and balance from it as well. the problem with a set like this in its first iteration is that it is very specifically strong in small scale situations, so resources, imperial city, dueling. That's not the majority of fights, but with Imperial city being its own campaign later this year it's something worth considering.

But the same is true for offensive proc sets. It's the nature of the proc set to add something on top of what you do. You deal damage and offensive proc sets add damage to the target without further do. How is it justified to have "free" damage but not free support skills? The price for slotting a support set is the lack of damage. You'll be put into the defense, thus being more tanky than offensive players may like it to be but it is the normal consequence.

I'm not a fan of free damage sets either. I don't have as big of an issue with ones that conditionally proc x amount of weapon damage, I am mostly talking about the sets that do stuff for you on light attacks. Those types of sets are lazy imo and I'd rather players provide these sorts of abilities to their own build instead of having it done for them.

With that being said, I think a purge every two seconds was too strong because of what it does to other classes, but there were a lot of other ways to make this set still good and unique, instead of increasing the cool down. I personally like the idea of it giving you immunity for x seconds. There's definitely a middle ground where zenimax can create a set that is new and unique without potentially breaking how classes interact with each other from a combat perspective.

That's the key issue of this rushed nerf I'm unhappy with.

I agree. it will probably get buffed this next week, so there's that to look forward to.

Sharee wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

apri wrote: »

FrankonPC wrote: »

I apply curse, it's cleansed every single time without you doing anything. My curse will never blow up on you. I could run double dot poisons on my inferno staff and run the asylum destro and at that point maybe curse will stick, but you eliminate a large portion of a classes burst combination by doing nothing.

First thing to note is the set is called Curse Eater so eating sorc's curse is sorta what it should do, just by well it's name, right . It may come with the need to rethink rotations but that's how meta changes are. It's also untrue that you do nothing. You cast a defensive skill while your opponent goes into the offense. And you slot a defensive set while your opponent has likely more offensive power stacked. The set does not add offense, thus bringing the user closer to a "tanky" build. And common sense about defensive builds is that they are indeed harder to take down than glass cannons. There is no entitlement to kill everyone in the game with one burst combo.

Back to the updated set and this thread. The name is very misleading now, it totally flipped from "Curse Eater really strong" to "Curse Eater really weak". I don't mind the change from HoT to direct heal too much (tho there's room for interpretation what a direct heal actually is). But the 4x (!) increased cooldown breaks it. It brings the set into the margin of Wyrd Tree and Stendarr, two highly unpopular sets that need adjustments themselves.

There is a problem with negative effects in PvP, there's no doubt about that. You don't even have to encounter hostile groups to see the debuffs stack like no tomorrow. Attacking a resource on your own shows the insane amount of status effects you pile up within fragments of seconds. And that is actually the balance to the set already. The normal condition in PVP is so rich with debuffs of all kind, the set in its original form on PTS would most likely have just made it a bit easier to deal with but nowhere as powerful as it's percepted.

Please keep in mind that we have snares, bleeds, dots, fractures and so much more. The arguments in this thread against Curse Eater are focused on the one particular debuff they want to stick with the target. But how likely is it to get exactly that one debuff cleansed by the set if you pile up so many debuffs simultaneously?

Yes, in duels the set may be too strong. But you can rule out sets by setting up rules for tournaments which is common practice already. It's a bit weird to have sets balanced around niche scenarios while the general scenarios might actually become more interesting if a set like Curse Eater (in its original PTS form) would be around. Now we don't have the chance to even figure out if that would be the case or not. Because it is utterly useless. Unless ZOS touches it again before release.

As for PVE, it's in-line with Stendarr and Wyrd Tree. So barely any group will use or tolerate this set in the current PTS form, even for specific situations. The cooldown is way too long. The set is not made more interesting, it just turned from one useless to another useless form from a PVE perspective (and as mentioned above, from a PVP perspective also).

Long story short: If you want Curse Eater to matter, make it better.

It may be slightly on the weak side right now - though I encourage people to actually test that out as far as possible - but it is miles ahead of Wyrd tree.

Wyrd tree cleanses on average 0.333 debuffs per second. The new curse eater cleanses on average 0.375 debuffs per second. I'm not sure i would call that "miles ahead".

It has a shorter cooldown and only procs on a very specific type of skill, making it easier to control the proc. Additionally it grants some sustain. How biased or disingenious do you have to be to not see that?

Joosef_Kivikilpi wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Reistr_the_Unbroken wrote: »

So basically the set was somehow op, people cried nerf, it got nerfed, and now the set’s useless.

Did I get that right?

Basically. The current live is not attractive enough to justify wasting a 5pc (the main reason no one runs the set). PTS first iteration was buggy in purging cc effects, but also wasn't really tested with actual combat situations while videos showed people using a cc every 2 seconds instead of building up dots/debuffs like you do against templars (it should have been coded to ignore CC and then tested). Second PTS iteration combats large scale situations abusing the set, but no one is going to run it small scale; it hits one person and you wasted a 5pc to get 3 debuffs removed every 8 seconds that someone gets from 1 ability that drops 2 debuffs each cast and 50% reduction on the others. And you need a direct heal for it so basically only templars if wanting to use it for your group, and none of them will run it because it means dropping a defense set.

Overall pure noise from both sides ruined this set. It had potential to be something other than auto purge and something other than the boring defense/offense/sustain stats sets we currently have. It was and currently is stuck between the two; a shame really.

There are plenty direct heals, especially for magicka. NBs are the only class who may have trouble fitting one into their build.

Siphoning Strikes, need I say more??? Probably the easiest as a Nightblade.

If it works, it makes it impossible to control the proc. Doesn't seem like a great idea to me.

Joosef_Kivikilpi wrote: »

Siphoning Strikes, need I say more??? Probably the easiest as a Nightblade.

Siphoning does not proc Curse Eater.

ToRelax wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

It has a shorter cooldown

And it clears less effects. Thats no advantage, that's just a difference. On average, the purge potential is virtually identical.

ToRelax wrote: »

and only procs on a very specific type of skill, making it easier to control the proc.

Healing is too important to postpone just because you are waiting for a specific buff to remove, making this 'advantage' debatable. Plus, you have no control over who gets the cleanse if more than one person is affected by the heal, while wyrd tree is reliable. At best, this is a tie.

ToRelax wrote: »

Additionally it grants some sustain.

The 150 regen is the only real advantage, however putting the curse eater "miles ahead" of wyrd tree, it does not.

There is no inherent advantage to effects removed per time, that's just one way to measure these set's potential. The benefit is always tied to the type of effect removed and the situation at the time, making control and availability extremely important. A purge that procs on cooldown every 15 seconds isn't worth much, a purge that you control and can still activate without sacrificing a gcd when pressured is highly desireable.

Whether it is more desirable to purge 3 effects every 8 seconds or 5 effects every 15 seconds changes depending on circumstances. Neither is inherently better. And any control you think you have over the purging is an illusion, because the price of that control is not healing yourself - in an enviromnent where health bars regularly yo-yo from near empty to full and back in mere seconds.