Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
X
-
Signia✭✭✭As a tank myself: if your entire build will be "destroyed" by a single enchantment nerf then you need a new build.
Tanks are very flexible in what sets and classes they can use compared to DPS and healers. The very basic ideas of "not dying" and "standing mostly still" are incredibly easy to accomplish in PvE, which leaves a lot of room for experimentation and innovation as to the other support options and utility you can provide to a group.
Part of why I play a tank is because, at the end of the day, you get to be the one guy that nobody bothers about your "numbers." You don't have to care that much about balance changes; you get to be flexible and experimental so long as you meet the very basic requirements expected of a tank.
If you need an enchantment to fulfill those basic requirements, I worry for you.16 -
As a tank myself: if your entire build will be "destroyed" by a single enchantment nerf then you need a new build.
Tanks are very flexible in what sets and classes they can use compared to DPS and healers. The very basic ideas of "not dying" and "standing mostly still" are incredibly easy to accomplish in PvE, which leaves a lot of room for experimentation and innovation as to the other support options and utility you can provide to a group.
Part of why I play a tank is because, at the end of the day, you get to be the one guy that nobody bothers about your "numbers." You don't have to care that much about balance changes; you get to be flexible and experimental so long as you meet the very basic requirements expected of a tank.
If you need an enchantment to fulfill those basic requirements, I worry for you.
I don't think you're understanding this post... The flexibility in sets and weapons tanks now have are going to be destroyed by this change. You will be required to run a staff and Torug's Pact to not take away over 2k penetration from your group. Any serious trial tanks will be costing their group greatly by not running exactly this setup.5 -
As a tank myself: if your entire build will be "destroyed" by a single enchantment nerf then you need a new build.
Tanks are very flexible in what sets and classes they can use compared to DPS and healers. The very basic ideas of "not dying" and "standing mostly still" are incredibly easy to accomplish in PvE, which leaves a lot of room for experimentation and innovation as to the other support options and utility you can provide to a group.
Part of why I play a tank is because, at the end of the day, you get to be the one guy that nobody bothers about your "numbers." You don't have to care that much about balance changes; you get to be flexible and experimental so long as you meet the very basic requirements expected of a tank.
If you need an enchantment to fulfill those basic requirements, I worry for you.
It's not about my build, nor my ability to stay alive. It's about a change that will ruin build diversity, the very thing you're describing. If you want to make this out to be about "my skill level", then thanks man. You're completely missing the point.
It's not a single enchantment either, it's an entire set, weapon, enchantment, and a skill on your bar. All made necessary for use by tanks, via these 1h enchantment changes. Not to effectively stay alive, but to provide an extremely important characteristic of your groups performance.Edited by jesse318sub17_ESO on February 10, 2019 2:10AM8 -
LiquidPony✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »As a tank myself: if your entire build will be "destroyed" by a single enchantment nerf then you need a new build.
Tanks are very flexible in what sets and classes they can use compared to DPS and healers. The very basic ideas of "not dying" and "standing mostly still" are incredibly easy to accomplish in PvE, which leaves a lot of room for experimentation and innovation as to the other support options and utility you can provide to a group.
Part of why I play a tank is because, at the end of the day, you get to be the one guy that nobody bothers about your "numbers." You don't have to care that much about balance changes; you get to be flexible and experimental so long as you meet the very basic requirements expected of a tank.
If you need an enchantment to fulfill those basic requirements, I worry for you.
It's not about my build, nor my ability to stay alive. It's about a change that will ruin build diversity, the very thing you're describing. If you want to make this out to be about "my skill level", then thanks man. You're completely missing the point.
It's not a single enchantment either, it's an entire set, weapon, enchantment, and a skill on your bar. All made necessary for use by tanks, via these 1h enchantment changes. Not to effectively stay alive, but to provide an extremely important characteristic of your groups performance.
Not saying I disagree with the larger point by any means, but if you weren't using Torug's S&B before, why would you *need* to run Torug's destro going forward?1 -
Lightspeedflashb14_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭All serious tanks already had a staff back bar. You are simply limiting yourself unnecessarily when you double bar s/b.4 -
Signia✭✭✭jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »I don't think you're understanding this post... The flexibility in sets and weapons tanks now have are going to be destroyed by this change. You will be required to run a staff and Torug's Pact to not take away over 2k penetration from your group. Any serious trial tanks will be costing their group greatly by not running exactly this setup.
If you actually think that, then you don't make a habit of thinking out of the box, do you?
2k group penetration isn't a huge loss. It's certainly nice to have, sure, but it isn't significant enough to warrant such language as "destroyed." You act as if groups are going to develop a "Torug's or kicked" policy, but that isn't going to happen.
For one, there are far too few tanks in the game for any but the absolute peak damage groups to develop that sort of ultimatum. Secondly, you probably don't have to worry about those peak groups if you actually think that they would prefer for you to run Torug's over... literally any of the other utility sets a tank can utilize to help out the group.
Your thought process seems to follow the logic of: they nerfed 1h enchants, so now everybody will require tanks to run torug's to make up for it.
The actual reality that we face is : they nerfed 1h enchants, that's a pity. Oh well, there are other ways to boost group damage output.
Make no mistake, I'm not arguing in favor of the nerf. I'm simply pointing out that your assumption here is just absurd.jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »If you want to make this out to be about "my skill level", then thanks man. You're completely missing the point.
It's not a single enchantment either, it's an entire set, weapon, enchantment, and a skill on your bar. All made necessary for use by tanks, via these 1h enchantment changes. Not to effectively stay alive, but to provide an extremely important characteristic of your groups performance.
I never mentioned anything about your skill level. It is your thought process that is flawed here. You think that Crushing is far more vital to a group than it actually is. Trying to maintain the enchantment in such a manner is, as you have said, wasteful in that it takes up far too much of your build - which is exactly why groups will not require you to use it and will perhaps even criticize you for using it over any of the other sets that provide better group utility than the "required setup" you predicted ever could.
Extra pen isn't the only way to boost group damage as a tank. Better mobility, increased ultimate gen, boosts to group sustain... many, many other ways to boost your group, and many of them better than wasting a set on Torug's.
Crusher enchant is so good because it DOESN'T require you to use anything but the enchantment slot on one weapon. It's a minimal investment for the effect. It is not worth a 5 piece set bonus for what it contributes.
3 -
LiquidPony wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »As a tank myself: if your entire build will be "destroyed" by a single enchantment nerf then you need a new build.
Tanks are very flexible in what sets and classes they can use compared to DPS and healers. The very basic ideas of "not dying" and "standing mostly still" are incredibly easy to accomplish in PvE, which leaves a lot of room for experimentation and innovation as to the other support options and utility you can provide to a group.
Part of why I play a tank is because, at the end of the day, you get to be the one guy that nobody bothers about your "numbers." You don't have to care that much about balance changes; you get to be flexible and experimental so long as you meet the very basic requirements expected of a tank.
If you need an enchantment to fulfill those basic requirements, I worry for you.
It's not about my build, nor my ability to stay alive. It's about a change that will ruin build diversity, the very thing you're describing. If you want to make this out to be about "my skill level", then thanks man. You're completely missing the point.
It's not a single enchantment either, it's an entire set, weapon, enchantment, and a skill on your bar. All made necessary for use by tanks, via these 1h enchantment changes. Not to effectively stay alive, but to provide an extremely important characteristic of your groups performance.
Not saying I disagree with the larger point by any means, but if you weren't using Torug's S&B before, why would you *need* to run Torug's destro going forward?
On live, if you are to use a set like say... Akaviri Dragonguard instead of Torugs Pact, you can still keep 100% uptime on crusher and you'd only cost the group like 600 pen. And that's all without being forced to use a staff. But with the current changes, full up time without a staff+Torugs is impossible, and you're costing the group about 1600 pen. It goes from being a relatively minor pen loss to a huge loss in potency and consistency of an essential debuff, making it worlds less viable in progression trials situations like vCR+3 to not run a staff with torugs/infused crusher.0 -
Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »All serious tanks already had a staff back bar. You are simply limiting yourself unnecessarily when you double bar s/b.
AllLightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »All serious tanks already had a staff back bar. You are simply limiting yourself unnecessarily when you double bar s/b.
I have tanked and completed all modes of all trials multiple times with my guild, excluding vCR+3 which we are currently progressing through. I also do not use a staff. So you are wrong in saying that all serious tanks use a staff. Actually, few of the serious tanks in my guild prefer to use a staff.Edited by jesse318sub17_ESO on February 10, 2019 2:43AM3 -
validifyedneb18_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »All serious tanks already had a staff back bar. You are simply limiting yourself unnecessarily when you double bar s/b.
This pretty much sums up half the complaints I see on the PTS. People not playing meta complaining that their performance at the high end is getting nerfed.
That said I know some super high end tanks from m'guild that are telling me this update will be pretty bad for tanking, so im inclined to believe them. Not that they're not due a nerf when they can 3-man a DLC dungeon and do no-death, HM and Speedrun all in a single run.Edited by validifyedneb18_ESO on February 10, 2019 2:57AMEU: Magden, Magknight, Stamsorc(*2), Magsorc
NA: Magplar, Magden, PotatoBlade0 -
Lightspeedflashb14_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »All serious tanks already had a staff back bar. You are simply limiting yourself unnecessarily when you double bar s/b.
AllLightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »All serious tanks already had a staff back bar. You are simply limiting yourself unnecessarily when you double bar s/b.
I have tanked and completed all modes of all trials multiple times with my guild, excluding vCR+3 which we are currently progressing through. I also do not use a staff. So you are wrong in saying that all serious tanks use a staff. Actually, few of the serious tanks in my guild prefer to use a staff.
Then you are limiting yourself. You think all Stam DPS want to run dw/bow? All mag dps fire/fire staffs? All healers resto/lighting? If you are are serious are you say you are, you will adapt and see the value in having a secondary weapon that is different from your main.Edited by Lightspeedflashb14_ESO on February 10, 2019 3:02AM0 -
Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »All serious tanks already had a staff back bar. You are simply limiting yourself unnecessarily when you double bar s/b.
AllLightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »All serious tanks already had a staff back bar. You are simply limiting yourself unnecessarily when you double bar s/b.
I have tanked and completed all modes of all trials multiple times with my guild, excluding vCR+3 which we are currently progressing through. I also do not use a staff. So you are wrong in saying that all serious tanks use a staff. Actually, few of the serious tanks in my guild prefer to use a staff.
Then you are limiting yourself. You think all Stam DPS want to run dw/bow? All mag dps fire/fire staffs? All healers resto/lighting? If you are are serious are you say you are, you will adapt and see the value in having a secondary weapon that is different from your main.
So you think that by limiting a tank in his ability to use two sword and shield bars, that build diversity is going to be increased? That's not only wrong, it's backwards.
This is a change meant for DW, and it's affecting double sword and shield users for no reason. This change is unneeded, unintentional, and hurting tanks for no good reason. I have an ice staff, I've used it. I don't want to use it. Because currently I can provide every single buff and debuff a staff user can, with more defense. The staff offers a ranged interrupt, and more sustain tools. This is fine, I personally do not need this. But to make it a requirement to apply appropriate raid penetration... That is not balanced and it kills build diversity.
Oh and if you seriously want to bring up meta... Alcasts DK tank build listed on his website uses double sword and shield. I don't think it gets more meta than Alcast...
And another thing, if you want to see roles homogenized to all play and build like DPS, because the DPS has it that way, then that's a problem. And if you think that all serious magdps run double fire staff, all serious healers use a lightning staff, and not a single serious stam user uses 2h weapons, then you're the one failing to the the value in having varied secondary weapons from your main, not me. I see the value in staff tanking, I just personally do not play to use a staff when I tank. And taking that option away from serious tanks is unnecessary and harmful to role and build diversity, to reiterate my point.Edited by jesse318sub17_ESO on February 10, 2019 3:40AM4 -
jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »All serious tanks already had a staff back bar. You are simply limiting yourself unnecessarily when you double bar s/b.
AllLightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »All serious tanks already had a staff back bar. You are simply limiting yourself unnecessarily when you double bar s/b.
I have tanked and completed all modes of all trials multiple times with my guild, excluding vCR+3 which we are currently progressing through. I also do not use a staff. So you are wrong in saying that all serious tanks use a staff. Actually, few of the serious tanks in my guild prefer to use a staff.
Then you are limiting yourself. You think all Stam DPS want to run dw/bow? All mag dps fire/fire staffs? All healers resto/lighting? If you are are serious are you say you are, you will adapt and see the value in having a secondary weapon that is different from your main.
So you think that by limiting a tank in his ability to use two sword and shield bars, that build diversity is going to be increased? That's not only wrong, it's backwards.
This is a change meant for DW, and it's affecting double sword and shield users for no reason. This change is unneeded, unintentional, and hurting tanks for no good reason. I have an ice staff, I've used it. I don't want to use it. Because currently I can provide every single buff and debuff a staff user can, with more defense. The staff offers a ranged interrupt, and more sustain tools. This is fine, I personally do not need this. But to make it a requirement to apply appropriate raid penetration... That is not balanced and it kills build diversity.
Oh and if you seriously want to bring up "serious player" meta... Alcasts DK tank build listed on his website uses double sword and shield. I don't think it gets more meta than Alcast...
0 -
Lightspeedflashb14_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭So you think that by limiting a tank in his ability to use two sword and shield bars, that build diversity is going to be increased? That's not only wrong, it's backwards.
you can use a double sb/sb now and you will be after. there is just more incentive to have a staff back bar and that is what it needs.But to make it a requirement to apply appropriate raid penetration
if your group cant make up the 1k pen loss, your group needs work.Oh and if you seriously want to bring up meta... Alcasts DK tank build listed on his website uses double sword and shield. I don't think it gets more meta than Alcast...
alcast is for beginners. not serious tanking, look at all @liofa s builds.
you never responded to the fact that all other roles HAVE to use certain weapons, for the group. now that tanks are having to change, you start to complain?
look, i have never said s/b was not getting nerfed, it is, but to have balance, sometimes you got to nerf. you clearly dont like the change and @liofa also objected when ZOS said they were going to do it. but the change is going to happen, most likely, you will just have to adapt, something a great tank like yourself ought to be able to do ezpz.
2 -
LiquidPony✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »LiquidPony wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »As a tank myself: if your entire build will be "destroyed" by a single enchantment nerf then you need a new build.
Tanks are very flexible in what sets and classes they can use compared to DPS and healers. The very basic ideas of "not dying" and "standing mostly still" are incredibly easy to accomplish in PvE, which leaves a lot of room for experimentation and innovation as to the other support options and utility you can provide to a group.
Part of why I play a tank is because, at the end of the day, you get to be the one guy that nobody bothers about your "numbers." You don't have to care that much about balance changes; you get to be flexible and experimental so long as you meet the very basic requirements expected of a tank.
If you need an enchantment to fulfill those basic requirements, I worry for you.
It's not about my build, nor my ability to stay alive. It's about a change that will ruin build diversity, the very thing you're describing. If you want to make this out to be about "my skill level", then thanks man. You're completely missing the point.
It's not a single enchantment either, it's an entire set, weapon, enchantment, and a skill on your bar. All made necessary for use by tanks, via these 1h enchantment changes. Not to effectively stay alive, but to provide an extremely important characteristic of your groups performance.
Not saying I disagree with the larger point by any means, but if you weren't using Torug's S&B before, why would you *need* to run Torug's destro going forward?
On live, if you are to use a set like say... Akaviri Dragonguard instead of Torugs Pact, you can still keep 100% uptime on crusher and you'd only cost the group like 600 pen. And that's all without being forced to use a staff. But with the current changes, full up time without a staff+Torugs is impossible, and you're costing the group about 1600 pen. It goes from being a relatively minor pen loss to a huge loss in potency and consistency of an essential debuff, making it worlds less viable in progression trials situations like vCR+3 to not run a staff with torugs/infused crusher.
Why can't you keep Crusher up with just a staff?
And anyway, just have the offtank and/or one of the healers run an Infused Crusher as well. Doesn't have to be all one person's responsibility (and it usually isn't anyway).1 -
Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »So you think that by limiting a tank in his ability to use two sword and shield bars, that build diversity is going to be increased? That's not only wrong, it's backwards.
you can use a double sb/sb now and you will be after. there is just more incentive to have a staff back bar and that is what it needs.But to make it a requirement to apply appropriate raid penetration
if your group cant make up the 1k pen loss, your group needs work.Oh and if you seriously want to bring up meta... Alcasts DK tank build listed on his website uses double sword and shield. I don't think it gets more meta than Alcast...
alcast is for beginners. not serious tanking, look at all @liofa s builds.
you never responded to the fact that all other roles HAVE to use certain weapons, for the group. now that tanks are having to change, you start to complain?
look, i have never said s/b was not getting nerfed, it is, but to have balance, sometimes you got to nerf. you clearly dont like the change and @liofa also objected when ZOS said they were going to do it. but the change is going to happen, most likely, you will just have to adapt, something a great tank like yourself ought to be able to do ezpz.
So first you say that if my group wants me to provide them optimal pen, they need work... The equivalent of "git gud" if it made any sense in your context. Very nice.
Then you say Alcast is for beginners... Hmm OK yeah he is a beginner. For sure man. All beginner tanks should be in Alkosh right off the bat. Sheesh. lol.
And also the very builds you point me too from Liofa... She is someone who is objecting to these changes as strongly as I am. You cite her as an expert tank, and then put down her opinion. Pick and choose?
And finally you claim I never addressed the fact that you think all specific roles have to use the same weapons all the time. Read my reply. I addressed it thoroughly.
Also, saying that to adapt is something a great tank like myself ought to do "ezpz"... Is not only a very sarcastic and rude comment, but is also not the subject of this thread nor why I am objecting to these changes. Please do try to be more constructive next time my friend.Edited by jesse318sub17_ESO on February 10, 2019 4:29AM3 -
jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »So you think that by limiting a tank in his ability to use two sword and shield bars, that build diversity is going to be increased? That's not only wrong, it's backwards.
you can use a double sb/sb now and you will be after. there is just more incentive to have a staff back bar and that is what it needs.But to make it a requirement to apply appropriate raid penetration
if your group cant make up the 1k pen loss, your group needs work.Oh and if you seriously want to bring up meta... Alcasts DK tank build listed on his website uses double sword and shield. I don't think it gets more meta than Alcast...
alcast is for beginners. not serious tanking, look at all @liofa s builds.
you never responded to the fact that all other roles HAVE to use certain weapons, for the group. now that tanks are having to change, you start to complain?
look, i have never said s/b was not getting nerfed, it is, but to have balance, sometimes you got to nerf. you clearly dont like the change and @liofa also objected when ZOS said they were going to do it. but the change is going to happen, most likely, you will just have to adapt, something a great tank like yourself ought to be able to do ezpz.Edited by jesse318sub17_ESO on February 10, 2019 4:26AM0 -
jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »So you think that by limiting a tank in his ability to use two sword and shield bars, that build diversity is going to be increased? That's not only wrong, it's backwards.
you can use a double sb/sb now and you will be after. there is just more incentive to have a staff back bar and that is what it needs.But to make it a requirement to apply appropriate raid penetration
if your group cant make up the 1k pen loss, your group needs work.Oh and if you seriously want to bring up meta... Alcasts DK tank build listed on his website uses double sword and shield. I don't think it gets more meta than Alcast...
alcast is for beginners. not serious tanking, look at all @liofa s builds.
you never responded to the fact that all other roles HAVE to use certain weapons, for the group. now that tanks are having to change, you start to complain?
look, i have never said s/b was not getting nerfed, it is, but to have balance, sometimes you got to nerf. you clearly dont like the change and @liofa also objected when ZOS said they were going to do it. but the change is going to happen, most likely, you will just have to adapt, something a great tank like yourself ought to be able to do ezpz.
So first you say that if my group wants me to provide them optimal pen, they need work... The equivalent of "git gud" if it made any sense in your context. Very nice.
Then you say Alcast is for beginners... Hmm OK yeah he is a beginner. For sure man. And also the very builds you point me too are made by another person who is objecting to these changes as strongly as I am.
And finally you claim I never addressed the fact that you think all specific roles have to use the same weapons all the time. Read my reply. I addressed it thoroughly.
Also, saying the adapt is something a great tank like myself ought to do... Is not only a very sarcastic and rude comment, but is also not the subject of this thread nor why I am objecting to these changes. Please do try to be more constructive next time my friend.LiquidPony wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »LiquidPony wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »As a tank myself: if your entire build will be "destroyed" by a single enchantment nerf then you need a new build.
Tanks are very flexible in what sets and classes they can use compared to DPS and healers. The very basic ideas of "not dying" and "standing mostly still" are incredibly easy to accomplish in PvE, which leaves a lot of room for experimentation and innovation as to the other support options and utility you can provide to a group.
Part of why I play a tank is because, at the end of the day, you get to be the one guy that nobody bothers about your "numbers." You don't have to care that much about balance changes; you get to be flexible and experimental so long as you meet the very basic requirements expected of a tank.
If you need an enchantment to fulfill those basic requirements, I worry for you.
It's not about my build, nor my ability to stay alive. It's about a change that will ruin build diversity, the very thing you're describing. If you want to make this out to be about "my skill level", then thanks man. You're completely missing the point.
It's not a single enchantment either, it's an entire set, weapon, enchantment, and a skill on your bar. All made necessary for use by tanks, via these 1h enchantment changes. Not to effectively stay alive, but to provide an extremely important characteristic of your groups performance.
Not saying I disagree with the larger point by any means, but if you weren't using Torug's S&B before, why would you *need* to run Torug's destro going forward?
On live, if you are to use a set like say... Akaviri Dragonguard instead of Torugs Pact, you can still keep 100% uptime on crusher and you'd only cost the group like 600 pen. And that's all without being forced to use a staff. But with the current changes, full up time without a staff+Torugs is impossible, and you're costing the group about 1600 pen. It goes from being a relatively minor pen loss to a huge loss in potency and consistency of an essential debuff, making it worlds less viable in progression trials situations like vCR+3 to not run a staff with torugs/infused crusher.
Why can't you keep Crusher up with just a staff?
And anyway, just have the offtank and/or one of the healers run an Infused Crusher as well. Doesn't have to be all one person's responsibility (and it usually isn't anyway).
The reason you can't properly keep crusher up with just the staff, is because without Torugs it is not even guaranteed to proc twice from a single cast of elemental blockade, meaning you'd have to keep 100% up time on blockade, which is honestly very very unlikely.
And the rule of thumb in trials generally goes, if you can make the tank do it then the tank does it. Why not have a stam DPS wear Alkosh? Why not have a magDK for Engulfing Flames? Etc. etc. Not to mention a healer generally doesn't have the same proximity and focus on the boss to apply their crusher reliably like a tank.
And also, the off tank will not be able to proc their crusher on both the mini bosses and main boss at the same time.Edited by jesse318sub17_ESO on February 10, 2019 4:36AM0 -
Juhasow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭So loosing 1-1,3k single target penetration is "completly destructive to PvE tanking" ? Come on stop overexagurating. It's like saying that every raid without templar with power of the light is doomed to fail.2 -
jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »So you think that by limiting a tank in his ability to use two sword and shield bars, that build diversity is going to be increased? That's not only wrong, it's backwards.
you can use a double sb/sb now and you will be after. there is just more incentive to have a staff back bar and that is what it needs.But to make it a requirement to apply appropriate raid penetration
if your group cant make up the 1k pen loss, your group needs work.Oh and if you seriously want to bring up meta... Alcasts DK tank build listed on his website uses double sword and shield. I don't think it gets more meta than Alcast...
alcast is for beginners. not serious tanking, look at all @liofa s builds.
you never responded to the fact that all other roles HAVE to use certain weapons, for the group. now that tanks are having to change, you start to complain?
look, i have never said s/b was not getting nerfed, it is, but to have balance, sometimes you got to nerf. you clearly dont like the change and @liofa also objected when ZOS said they were going to do it. but the change is going to happen, most likely, you will just have to adapt, something a great tank like yourself ought to be able to do ezpz.
So first you say that if my group wants me to provide them optimal pen, they need work... The equivalent of "git gud" if it made any sense in your context. Very nice.
Then you say Alcast is for beginners... Hmm OK yeah he is a beginner. For sure man. And also the very builds you point me too are made by another person who is objecting to these changes as strongly as I am.
And finally you claim I never addressed the fact that you think all specific roles have to use the same weapons all the time. Read my reply. I addressed it thoroughly.
Also, saying the adapt is something a great tank like myself ought to do... Is not only a very sarcastic and rude comment, but is also not the subject of this thread nor why I am objecting to these changes. Please do try to be more constructive next time my friend.LiquidPony wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »LiquidPony wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »As a tank myself: if your entire build will be "destroyed" by a single enchantment nerf then you need a new build.
Tanks are very flexible in what sets and classes they can use compared to DPS and healers. The very basic ideas of "not dying" and "standing mostly still" are incredibly easy to accomplish in PvE, which leaves a lot of room for experimentation and innovation as to the other support options and utility you can provide to a group.
Part of why I play a tank is because, at the end of the day, you get to be the one guy that nobody bothers about your "numbers." You don't have to care that much about balance changes; you get to be flexible and experimental so long as you meet the very basic requirements expected of a tank.
If you need an enchantment to fulfill those basic requirements, I worry for you.
It's not about my build, nor my ability to stay alive. It's about a change that will ruin build diversity, the very thing you're describing. If you want to make this out to be about "my skill level", then thanks man. You're completely missing the point.
It's not a single enchantment either, it's an entire set, weapon, enchantment, and a skill on your bar. All made necessary for use by tanks, via these 1h enchantment changes. Not to effectively stay alive, but to provide an extremely important characteristic of your groups performance.
Not saying I disagree with the larger point by any means, but if you weren't using Torug's S&B before, why would you *need* to run Torug's destro going forward?
On live, if you are to use a set like say... Akaviri Dragonguard instead of Torugs Pact, you can still keep 100% uptime on crusher and you'd only cost the group like 600 pen. And that's all without being forced to use a staff. But with the current changes, full up time without a staff+Torugs is impossible, and you're costing the group about 1600 pen. It goes from being a relatively minor pen loss to a huge loss in potency and consistency of an essential debuff, making it worlds less viable in progression trials situations like vCR+3 to not run a staff with torugs/infused crusher.
Why can't you keep Crusher up with just a staff?
And anyway, just have the offtank and/or one of the healers run an Infused Crusher as well. Doesn't have to be all one person's responsibility (and it usually isn't anyway).
The reason you can't properly keep crusher up with just the staff, is because without Torugs it is not even guaranteed to proc twice from a single cast of elemental blockade, meaning you'd have to keep 100% up time on blockade, which is honestly very very unlikely.
And the rule of thumb in trials generally goes, if you can make the tank do it then the tank does it. Why not have a stam DPS wear Alkosh? Why not have a magDK for Engulfing Flames? Etc. etc.
And also, the off tank will not be able to proc their crusher on both the mini bosses and main boss at the same time.So loosing 1-1,3k single target penetration is "completly destructive to PvE tanking" ? Come on stop overexagurating. It's like saying that every raid without templar with power of the light is doomed to fail.So loosing 1-1,3k single target penetration is "completly destructive to PvE tanking" ? Come on stop overexagurating. It's like saying that every raid without templar with power of the light is doomed to fail.
If you show up to a trial as a tank without a crusher staff(and without Torug's for the up time), the entire group will be losing that penetration, and they will not be happy. They will want you to use that staff, or want to replace you with someone who will. Any serious tanking build will be required to use a staff.
And no, PotL is a single skill, it does not compose a set, weapon type, skill, and enchantment all together.
Non-staff tank builds will no longer be viable in serious trials if this patch goes through as it is.Edited by jesse318sub17_ESO on February 10, 2019 5:00AM0 -
Lightspeedflashb14_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭. Then you say Alcast is for beginners... Hmm OK yeah he is a beginner. For sure man. All beginner tanks should be in Alkosh right off the bat. Sheesh. lol.
And also the very builds you point me too from Liofa... She is someone who is objecting to these changes as strongly as I am. You cite her as an expert tank, and then put down her opinion. Pick and choose?
I did not say alcast himself is a beginner, his builds are. If you look through his builds, he doesn't go straight for alkosh. And you can bet your bottom dollar that the tank that alcast runs with uses a staff back bar. Liofa is a man, he is one of the class representatives for tanking. That is his main. Alcast is a dps main. Nowheres do I put down liofas opinion. Nothing I have stated has said anything about how I feel about the change. You are reading into what I say and making assumptions, just like you did with liofas gender..And finally you claim I never addressed the fact that you think all specific roles have to use the same weapons all the time. Read my reply. I addressed it thoroughly.
I have read your replys, I see Nowheres that you acknowledge that certain roles need to use certain weapons, either for or against that fact, with no build diversity, at the level you claim to be. You say this "And the rule of thumb in trials generally goes, if you can make the tank do it then the tank does it.", Implying that you are all right with being forced to do certain things but when it comes to slotting a staff, or bow for that matter, back bar, you object, this doesn't equal out to me.
Edited by Lightspeedflashb14_ESO on February 10, 2019 5:55AM1 -
jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »So you think that by limiting a tank in his ability to use two sword and shield bars, that build diversity is going to be increased? That's not only wrong, it's backwards.
you can use a double sb/sb now and you will be after. there is just more incentive to have a staff back bar and that is what it needs.But to make it a requirement to apply appropriate raid penetration
if your group cant make up the 1k pen loss, your group needs work.Oh and if you seriously want to bring up meta... Alcasts DK tank build listed on his website uses double sword and shield. I don't think it gets more meta than Alcast...
alcast is for beginners. not serious tanking, look at all @liofa s builds.
you never responded to the fact that all other roles HAVE to use certain weapons, for the group. now that tanks are having to change, you start to complain?
look, i have never said s/b was not getting nerfed, it is, but to have balance, sometimes you got to nerf. you clearly dont like the change and @liofa also objected when ZOS said they were going to do it. but the change is going to happen, most likely, you will just have to adapt, something a great tank like yourself ought to be able to do ezpz.
So first you say that if my group wants me to provide them optimal pen, they need work... The equivalent of "git gud" if it made any sense in your context. Very nice.
Then you say Alcast is for beginners... Hmm OK yeah he is a beginner. For sure man. And also the very builds you point me too are made by another person who is objecting to these changes as strongly as I am.
And finally you claim I never addressed the fact that you think all specific roles have to use the same weapons all the time. Read my reply. I addressed it thoroughly.
Also, saying the adapt is something a great tank like myself ought to do... Is not only a very sarcastic and rude comment, but is also not the subject of this thread nor why I am objecting to these changes. Please do try to be more constructive next time my friend.LiquidPony wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »LiquidPony wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »As a tank myself: if your entire build will be "destroyed" by a single enchantment nerf then you need a new build.
Tanks are very flexible in what sets and classes they can use compared to DPS and healers. The very basic ideas of "not dying" and "standing mostly still" are incredibly easy to accomplish in PvE, which leaves a lot of room for experimentation and innovation as to the other support options and utility you can provide to a group.
Part of why I play a tank is because, at the end of the day, you get to be the one guy that nobody bothers about your "numbers." You don't have to care that much about balance changes; you get to be flexible and experimental so long as you meet the very basic requirements expected of a tank.
If you need an enchantment to fulfill those basic requirements, I worry for you.
It's not about my build, nor my ability to stay alive. It's about a change that will ruin build diversity, the very thing you're describing. If you want to make this out to be about "my skill level", then thanks man. You're completely missing the point.
It's not a single enchantment either, it's an entire set, weapon, enchantment, and a skill on your bar. All made necessary for use by tanks, via these 1h enchantment changes. Not to effectively stay alive, but to provide an extremely important characteristic of your groups performance.
Not saying I disagree with the larger point by any means, but if you weren't using Torug's S&B before, why would you *need* to run Torug's destro going forward?
On live, if you are to use a set like say... Akaviri Dragonguard instead of Torugs Pact, you can still keep 100% uptime on crusher and you'd only cost the group like 600 pen. And that's all without being forced to use a staff. But with the current changes, full up time without a staff+Torugs is impossible, and you're costing the group about 1600 pen. It goes from being a relatively minor pen loss to a huge loss in potency and consistency of an essential debuff, making it worlds less viable in progression trials situations like vCR+3 to not run a staff with torugs/infused crusher.
Why can't you keep Crusher up with just a staff?
And anyway, just have the offtank and/or one of the healers run an Infused Crusher as well. Doesn't have to be all one person's responsibility (and it usually isn't anyway).
The reason you can't properly keep crusher up with just the staff, is because without Torugs it is not even guaranteed to proc twice from a single cast of elemental blockade, meaning you'd have to keep 100% up time on blockade, which is honestly very very unlikely.
And the rule of thumb in trials generally goes, if you can make the tank do it then the tank does it. Why not have a stam DPS wear Alkosh? Why not have a magDK for Engulfing Flames? Etc. etc.
And also, the off tank will not be able to proc their crusher on both the mini bosses and main boss at the same time.So loosing 1-1,3k single target penetration is "completly destructive to PvE tanking" ? Come on stop overexagurating. It's like saying that every raid without templar with power of the light is doomed to fail.So loosing 1-1,3k single target penetration is "completly destructive to PvE tanking" ? Come on stop overexagurating. It's like saying that every raid without templar with power of the light is doomed to fail.
If you show up to a trial as a tank without a staff, the entire group will be losing that penetration, and they will not be happy. They will want you to use that staff, or want to replace you with someone who will. Any serious tanking build will be required to use a staff.
And no, PotL is a single skill, it does not compose a set, weapon type, skill, and enchantment all together.jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »So you think that by limiting a tank in his ability to use two sword and shield bars, that build diversity is going to be increased? That's not only wrong, it's backwards.
you can use a double sb/sb now and you will be after. there is just more incentive to have a staff back bar and that is what it needs.But to make it a requirement to apply appropriate raid penetration
if your group cant make up the 1k pen loss, your group needs work.Oh and if you seriously want to bring up meta... Alcasts DK tank build listed on his website uses double sword and shield. I don't think it gets more meta than Alcast...
alcast is for beginners. not serious tanking, look at all @liofa s builds.
you never responded to the fact that all other roles HAVE to use certain weapons, for the group. now that tanks are having to change, you start to complain?
look, i have never said s/b was not getting nerfed, it is, but to have balance, sometimes you got to nerf. you clearly dont like the change and @liofa also objected when ZOS said they were going to do it. but the change is going to happen, most likely, you will just have to adapt, something a great tank like yourself ought to be able to do ezpz.
So first you say that if my group wants me to provide them optimal pen, they need work... The equivalent of "git gud" if it made any sense in your context. Very nice.
Then you say Alcast is for beginners... Hmm OK yeah he is a beginner. For sure man. And also the very builds you point me too are made by another person who is objecting to these changes as strongly as I am.
And finally you claim I never addressed the fact that you think all specific roles have to use the same weapons all the time. Read my reply. I addressed it thoroughly.
Also, saying the adapt is something a great tank like myself ought to do... Is not only a very sarcastic and rude comment, but is also not the subject of this thread nor why I am objecting to these changes. Please do try to be more constructive next time my friend.LiquidPony wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »LiquidPony wrote: »jesse318sub17_ESO wrote: »As a tank myself: if your entire build will be "destroyed" by a single enchantment nerf then you need a new build.
Tanks are very flexible in what sets and classes they can use compared to DPS and healers. The very basic ideas of "not dying" and "standing mostly still" are incredibly easy to accomplish in PvE, which leaves a lot of room for experimentation and innovation as to the other support options and utility you can provide to a group.
Part of why I play a tank is because, at the end of the day, you get to be the one guy that nobody bothers about your "numbers." You don't have to care that much about balance changes; you get to be flexible and experimental so long as you meet the very basic requirements expected of a tank.
If you need an enchantment to fulfill those basic requirements, I worry for you.
It's not about my build, nor my ability to stay alive. It's about a change that will ruin build diversity, the very thing you're describing. If you want to make this out to be about "my skill level", then thanks man. You're completely missing the point.
It's not a single enchantment either, it's an entire set, weapon, enchantment, and a skill on your bar. All made necessary for use by tanks, via these 1h enchantment changes. Not to effectively stay alive, but to provide an extremely important characteristic of your groups performance.
Not saying I disagree with the larger point by any means, but if you weren't using Torug's S&B before, why would you *need* to run Torug's destro going forward?
On live, if you are to use a set like say... Akaviri Dragonguard instead of Torugs Pact, you can still keep 100% uptime on crusher and you'd only cost the group like 600 pen. And that's all without being forced to use a staff. But with the current changes, full up time without a staff+Torugs is impossible, and you're costing the group about 1600 pen. It goes from being a relatively minor pen loss to a huge loss in potency and consistency of an essential debuff, making it worlds less viable in progression trials situations like vCR+3 to not run a staff with torugs/infused crusher.
Why can't you keep Crusher up with just a staff?
And anyway, just have the offtank and/or one of the healers run an Infused Crusher as well. Doesn't have to be all one person's responsibility (and it usually isn't anyway).
The reason you can't properly keep crusher up with just the staff, is because without Torugs it is not even guaranteed to proc twice from a single cast of elemental blockade, meaning you'd have to keep 100% up time on blockade, which is honestly very very unlikely.
And the rule of thumb in trials generally goes, if you can make the tank do it then the tank does it. Why not have a stam DPS wear Alkosh? Why not have a magDK for Engulfing Flames? Etc. etc.
And also, the off tank will not be able to proc their crusher on both the mini bosses and main boss at the same time.So loosing 1-1,3k single target penetration is "completly destructive to PvE tanking" ? Come on stop overexagurating. It's like saying that every raid without templar with power of the light is doomed to fail.So loosing 1-1,3k single target penetration is "completly destructive to PvE tanking" ? Come on stop overexagurating. It's like saying that every raid without templar with power of the light is doomed to fail.
If you show up to a trial as a tank without a staff, the entire group will be losing that penetration, and they will not be happy. They will want you to use that staff, or want to replace you with someone who will. Any serious tanking build will be required to use a staff.
And no, PotL is a single skill, it does not compose a set, weapon type, skill, and enchantment all together.
Non-staff tank builds will no longer be viable in serious trials if this patch goes through as it is.Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: ». Then you say Alcast is for beginners... Hmm OK yeah he is a beginner. For sure man. All beginner tanks should be in Alkosh right off the bat. Sheesh. lol.
And also the very builds you point me too from Liofa... She is someone who is objecting to these changes as strongly as I am. You cite her as an expert tank, and then put down her opinion. Pick and choose?
I did not say alcast himself is a beginner, his builds are. If you look through his builds, he doesn't go straight for alkosh. And you can bet your bottom dollar that the tank that alcast runs with uses a staff back bar. Liofa is a man, he is one of the class representatives for tanking. That is his main. Alcast is a dps main. Nowheres do I put down liofas opinion. Nothing I have stated has said anything about how I feel about the change. You are reading into what I say and making assumptions..And finally you claim I never addressed the fact that you think all specific roles have to use the same weapons all the time. Read my reply. I addressed it thoroughly.
I have read your replys, I see Nowheres that you acknowledge that certain roles need to use certain weapons, either for or against that fact, with no build diversity, at the level you claim to be. You say this "And the rule of thumb in trials generally goes, if you can make the tank do it then the tank does it.", Implying that you are all right with being forced to do certain things but when it comes to slotting a staff, or bow for that matter, back bar, you object, this doesn't equal out to me.
I'm the one making assumptions? Just wow man. Look at post #13 in this thread please... You're not even fully reading and understanding my post or replies and making the assumptions, to be honest. Also, the very first set alcast recommends is Alkosh in his build page.
And you are very much inferring my and Liofa's opinion is a bad one, which is your entire premise dude. Get real. Either that, or stop replying because we're in agreement these changes are bad for tanks.
And I am fine with doing certain things because as a tank there are certain things you must do, otherwise you are not a tank. But dictating BOTH weapons you use is not something I am fine with, and is certainly, again, not good for build diversity, and in no way "encourages experimentation". Honestly you're not even making any points, you're just arguing about completely irrelevant issues and it's contributing nothing to this thread. Please stay on topic.
0 -
Narvuntien✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭I don't see how it will be destroyed, the enchantment isn't really improving your ability to tank i.e to Survive damage, take aggro of bosses and control trash.
Its reducing group damage without nerfing everyone seems like a win to me.
Sure forcing people to use ice staves, its barely forcing kinda sucks but it is also interesting in that its making people wiegh pros and cons of S&B vs Ice staff when S&B was previously way better.2 -
Narvuntien wrote: »I don't see how it will be destroyed, the enchantment isn't really improving your ability to tank i.e to Survive damage, take aggro of bosses and control trash.
Its reducing group damage without nerfing everyone seems like a win to me.
Sure forcing people to use ice staves, its barely forcing kinda sucks but it is also interesting in that its making people wiegh pros and cons of S&B vs Ice staff when S&B was previously way better.
In order for he entire raid to have access to optimal raid pen, the tank has to run a staff. No question. This is not pros and cons, this is a necessity in any serious group. It's not going to reduce damage, it's going to force raid tanks to use a staff. Plain and simple. You don't see people weigh the pros and cons of alkosh in vet trials, they just make the tank wear Alkosh.Edited by jesse318sub17_ESO on February 10, 2019 7:10AM0 -
zvavi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭@jesse318sub17_ESO
Ok. So few things.
1. cooldown on enchantments didn't become longer. Therefore you don't "have" to use torug's pact any more than what you "had" to before. That fact you stated is plainly wrong. Cooldown on infused crusher will stay the same, and light attacks global cooldown is sthe same as well as the WoE DoT, 1 second. and I have no idea how you managed to keep it up 80% uptime with s/b without torug's. Gj if you managed.
also if you want to have more uptime without torugs, a bow might get u a much better result imo (0.5 sec tics), as much as i am aware of wall will have 100% uptime even without torugs. i might be wrong.
2. It does take flavor out of tanking. But since I have seen the changes, I started practicing destruction staff back bar. And I already saw 85%+ crusher uptime on stationary bosses like last boss in vHRC. While I do think it affects tanking, lowers diversity and makes people try tanking less, I think that time stop Nerf does it much more. Forcing people to DK/warden tank. because other classes LOST their only reliable group CC. #vFL
3. Please. Stop. Quoting people without adding to the conversation just to "make the post go up" in the forums. It doesn't add to the conversation and discourages people to actually try and converse.Edited by zvavi on February 10, 2019 8:55AM0 -
@jesse318sub17_ESO
Ok. So few things.
1. cooldown on enchantments didn't become longer. Therefore you don't "have" to use torug's pact any more than what you "had" to before. That fact you stated is plainly wrong. Cooldown on infused crusher will stay the same, and I have no idea how you managed to keep it up 80% uptime with s/b without torug's. Gj if you managed.
2. It does take flavor out of tanking. But since I have seen the changes, I started practicing destruction staff back bar. And I already saw 85%+ crusher uptime on stationary bosses like last boss in vHRC. While I do think it affects tanking, lowers diversity and makes people try tanking less, I think that time stop Nerf does it much more. Forcing people to DK/warden tank. because other classes LOST their only reliable group CC. #vFL
3. Please. Stop. Quoting people without adding to the conversation just to "make the post go up" in the forums. It doesn't add to the conversation and discourages people to actually try and converse.
First of all, thanks for actually making a constructive reply.
1. The cooldown reduction from Torugs isn't to remedy the enchantments cooldown becoming longer, it's to make blockade proc the crusher glyph more reliably, because otherwise your uptime on blockade will have to be at unrealistic levels to get near 100% uptime in fights where your blockade just won't be up enough. (looking at you vCR) I can get very very good uptime on crusher as is myself without Torugs,(around 90%) I constantly weave light attacks in between the bosses light attacks, and when I use any skills. It also increases my "tank dps" which is... Not important but it keeps me occupied.
2. I think the Time Stop nerf was excessive myself as well. Not in disagreement here.
3. I 100% honestly was not trying to bump the thread, sorry. I'm just very worried about this topic and have been making sure every reply is taken care of promptly. If it's bad practice to quote every response, I guess I won't. Just personally felt the need to do so.
Does it not bump if I just use @insertthenamehereEdited by jesse318sub17_ESO on February 10, 2019 8:43AM0 -
LordTareq✭✭✭✭✭Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »All serious tanks already had a staff back bar. You are simply limiting yourself unnecessarily when you double bar s/b.
Such an elitist attitude lol. Just because someone runs a cookiecutter build he/she just copied from what others say is 'best' doesn't make for a serious or even good tank, just as likely its just a lazy one.2 -
Lightspeedflashb14_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »All serious tanks already had a staff back bar. You are simply limiting yourself unnecessarily when you double bar s/b.
Such an elitist attitude lol. Just because someone runs a cookiecutter build he/she just copied from what others say is 'best' doesn't make for a serious or even good tank, just as likely its just a lazy one.
Lol me? Elitist? I am stating fact. I have 10 toons, including 2 tanks. While I do have the end game vet trial experience the op claims to have, mostly because I have a full time third shift job that changes schedules a lot making it impossible to schedule a video game around, I do have loads of tanking experience. I have around since nova was actually used in vet trials, since we didn't have cp to cover for damage.
@jesse318sub17_ESO @zvavi look at you two, making lists such. So cute.0 -
Blackleopardex✭✭✭✭Yeah, it's a awful and ignorant change when you look at us tanks... As if the game is drowning in tanks, lol...
Edit: I see some people saying that, we already run staff on back-bar. True same for me, however your weaning glyph will still suffer from the change. And this is just decreasing options for tanks and that's a bad thing in the long run. Even tho the back-barstaff is pretty common already, don't support this limitation change. Like I said, we are not drowning in tanks, if anything we need to make tanking more attractive not less.Edited by Blackleopardex on February 10, 2019 9:41AM6 NB: Tank, Healer, Mag/Stam PVE&PVP.
I don't read long signatures: https://www.youtube.com/user/Blackleopardex4 -
Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »All serious tanks already had a staff back bar. You are simply limiting yourself unnecessarily when you double bar s/b.
Such an elitist attitude lol. Just because someone runs a cookiecutter build he/she just copied from what others say is 'best' doesn't make for a serious or even good tank, just as likely its just a lazy one.
Lol me? Elitist? I am stating fact. I have 10 toons, including 2 tanks. While I do have the end game vet trial experience the op claims to have, mostly because I have a full time third shift job that changes schedules a lot making it impossible to schedule a video game around, I do have loads of tanking experience. I have around since nova was actually used in vet trials, since we didn't have cp to cover for damage.
@jesse318sub17_ESO @zvavi look at you two, making lists such. So cute.
Honestly at this point I'm pretty sure he's just trolling. Nova is still a staple skill for vet trials, especially for vHoF HM during execute, please don't listen to what he just said... lolEdited by jesse318sub17_ESO on February 10, 2019 9:42AM0