Should the changes to Ice Heart be Reverted?

Shaloknir · February 2020

Yes

ESO_Nightingale wrote: »

#SaveIceheart!

I must join this movement #saveIceheart!

kojou · February 2020

Yes

Just adding my support.

Alienoutlaw · February 2020

Yes

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

frankly who cares about immortal redeemer and such "logs" not everything is about the "end game elite" if you are able to run that content you dont need to run ice heart any way, this change affects the other 98% of the players that also play ESO

Miswar · February 2020

Yes

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

Have you investigation furthered into console world where you lucky to get off skills now days?

I doubt it.. also out of curiosity what is it from you if the changes were reverted?

Not like your scoreruns were threatened or anythung.

....nut yeah nerfing this monster is unneeded and it seems 93% of people feel that way.

iCaliban · February 2020

Yes

The_Lex wrote: »

Abso-effin-lutely.

The nerf is a greedy, lazy, unimaginative cash grab.

Nothing else needs to be said.

themaddaedra · February 2020

No

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

frankly who cares about immortal redeemer and such "logs" not everything is about the "end game elite" if you are able to run that content you dont need to run ice heart any way, this change affects the other 98% of the players that also play ESO

How easy it is to call something elitism and make your argument against it eh? It has nothing to do with elitism, it's valid data on how powerful the set is. You could apply it to dungeons or whatever you want. It's not like the issue is with roleplay. Trial, dungeon, elite, new player... The subject is about absorbing damage.

Alienoutlaw · February 2020

Yes

themaddaedra wrote: »

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

frankly who cares about immortal redeemer and such "logs" not everything is about the "end game elite" if you are able to run that content you dont need to run ice heart any way, this change affects the other 98% of the players that also play ESO

How easy it is to call something elitism and make your argument against it eh? It has nothing to do with elitism, it's valid data on how powerful the set is. You could apply it to dungeons or whatever you want. It's not like the issue is with roleplay. Trial, dungeon, elite, new player... The subject is about absorbing damage.

how is data from 1-2% of the player base regarded as valid?

themaddaedra · February 2020

No

Miswar wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

Have you investigation furthered into console world where you lucky to get off skills now days?

I doubt it.. also out of curiosity what is it from you if the changes were reverted?

Not like your scoreruns were threatened or anythung.

....nut yeah nerfing this monster is unneeded and it seems 93% of people feel that way.

What does the nerf have to do with your missing skills? We are discussing an item set and your point is entirely different. If you want performance improvement for your platform you have my support, but that is not the case here.

satanio · February 2020

Yes

themaddaedra wrote: »

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

frankly who cares about immortal redeemer and such "logs" not everything is about the "end game elite" if you are able to run that content you dont need to run ice heart any way, this change affects the other 98% of the players that also play ESO

How easy it is to call something elitism and make your argument against it eh? It has nothing to do with elitism, it's valid data on how powerful the set is. You could apply it to dungeons or whatever you want. It's not like the issue is with roleplay. Trial, dungeon, elite, new player... The subject is about absorbing damage.

You do realize that, based on your investigation, Mother Ciannait should be nerfed too right?
Don't try to justify this nerf, it's too obvious that they nerfed it just because of Mother Ciannait.

edit:typo

themaddaedra · February 2020

No

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

frankly who cares about immortal redeemer and such "logs" not everything is about the "end game elite" if you are able to run that content you dont need to run ice heart any way, this change affects the other 98% of the players that also play ESO

How easy it is to call something elitism and make your argument against it eh? It has nothing to do with elitism, it's valid data on how powerful the set is. You could apply it to dungeons or whatever you want. It's not like the issue is with roleplay. Trial, dungeon, elite, new player... The subject is about absorbing damage.

how is data from 1-2% of the player base regarded as valid?

Are you joking or are you serious? Why does it matter where the data comes from? Sorry neither me nor any of my friends are running random normals with Iceheart and saving logs for me to check them. Result wouldn't be different tho as the set doesn't work differently in different types of content.

Looks like your whole point is against the elite who do hardcore content, not against the nerf itself.

Asardes · February 2020

No

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

Asardes wrote: »

Xvorg wrote: »

Asardes wrote: »

satanio wrote: »

Asardes wrote: »

Casting what is basically your standard [skill] every [period of time] with no cost and doing some [thing on top] was simply out of line with other 2p sets.

Invalid point -> Chudan? Thorvukuun? Skorya?
You can't justify this nerf. This is done just to promote new monster set.

Those sets give you a Major buff, two minor debuffs (AoE), and a predictible proc with a telegraph respectively. I do agree that Chudan is quite overloaded and the bonuses should be decreased. Either change Major to Minor Resolve, or eliminate either the health or armor bonus from it.

The proc condition of IH are stupid. 6 secs cd on a set that has a 20% chance on a crit is more than OK.

Skoria has 8% chance on a DoT

So if you want to be carried by IH you must build towards crit chance so you can proc it immediately after the effect ended. It is pointless to try to do it on heavy armor because the proc will not be reliable, you can't build enough crit chance on heavy unless you sacrifice one slot on magelight, and even with that, it will not be enough.

edit: Even the extra lolled Combat Physician has an easier proc and a better shield.

Actually I have Ice Heart on a tank I made just for laughs, the only instance I used the set. And even with just Blockade, Winter's Revenge and LA/HA weave it's up about 50-60%. Each DoT has ticks, and any tick has a chance to crit, so if you run enough DoTs, and weave or hit with skills with multiple components (ex. Force Pulse) that crit individually, you will keep it up quite a lot, probably over 70% on a DD build. Of course, in PvP you have much less DoTs and much more direct damage, so unless you're using Force Pulse/Crushing Shock the up time will be less. On the other hand you can proc Skoria basically when it's off cooldown, if you run 3-4 DoTs, I have it on many PvE builds, and also a few PvP ones and it procs like clockwork even if mathematically the proc rate is low.

how many other defensive MONSTER sets have a 12sec cool down?

There isn't an exact rule, but if you look at various other defensive & healing sets: Bloodspawn (6%, 6s up time,6s cooldown) Bogdan the Nightflame (10%, 6s up time, 10s cooldown), Earthgore (100%, 6s up time, 35s cooldown), Symphony of Blades (100%, 6s up time, 18s cooldown), Sentinel of Rkugamz (10%, 8s up time, 15s cooldown) Shadowrend (15%, 15s up time, 15s cooldown), Thurvokun (100%, 4s up time, 8s cooldown), Vykosa (100%, 3s up time, 15s cooldown) one thing I see is that the bigger the effect, the longer the cooldown and/or the lower the chance to proc. The only rule breaker so to speak is Lord Warden (50%, 10s, 10s) that gives a beefy AoE resistance bonus equivalent to ~5% mitigation, but it's balanced by the fact is's fixed once it proc. If this is the rule the developers. So the new set and Ice Heart will be not only balanced with one another, but also with the other defensive and healing sets currently in game.

Alienoutlaw · February 2020

Yes

themaddaedra wrote: »

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

frankly who cares about immortal redeemer and such "logs" not everything is about the "end game elite" if you are able to run that content you dont need to run ice heart any way, this change affects the other 98% of the players that also play ESO

How easy it is to call something elitism and make your argument against it eh? It has nothing to do with elitism, it's valid data on how powerful the set is. You could apply it to dungeons or whatever you want. It's not like the issue is with roleplay. Trial, dungeon, elite, new player... The subject is about absorbing damage.

how is data from 1-2% of the player base regarded as valid?

Are you joking or are you serious? Why does it matter where the data comes from? Sorry neither me nor any of my friends are running random normals with Iceheart and saving logs for me to check them. Result wouldn't be different tho as the set doesn't work differently in different types of content.

Looks like your whole point is against the elite who do hardcore content, not against the nerf itself.

10/10 for a good try i'll give you that

but your argument just does not stack up and trying to twist the direction of this thread into something else wont work neither will i rise to the bait.

themaddaedra · February 2020

No

satanio wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

frankly who cares about immortal redeemer and such "logs" not everything is about the "end game elite" if you are able to run that content you dont need to run ice heart any way, this change affects the other 98% of the players that also play ESO

How easy it is to call something elitism and make your argument against it eh? It has nothing to do with elitism, it's valid data on how powerful the set is. You could apply it to dungeons or whatever you want. It's not like the issue is with roleplay. Trial, dungeon, elite, new player... The subject is about absorbing damage.

You do realize that, based on your investigation, Mother Ciannait should be nerfed too right?
Don't try to justify this nerf, it's too obvious that they nerfed it just because of Mother Ciannait.

edit:typo

I have no such desires to justify anything, as i am not the angry joe here. And i made my points regarding Iceheart, as my data is on Iceheart. Haven't said anything about new one, nor will i say anything until i actually see how it works out.

Bexy · February 2020

Yes

I am utterly disappointed.

I finally got the Iceheart helm in December from the golden vendor and now it's getting nerfed... This set made combat A LOT MORE FUN to me as a solo quester. It was not overpowered, it was a great solo set. No one uses it for endgame group content, it doesn't harm anyone, so why take the fun away from us solo players?

Please revert the changes!

themaddaedra · February 2020

No

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

frankly who cares about immortal redeemer and such "logs" not everything is about the "end game elite" if you are able to run that content you dont need to run ice heart any way, this change affects the other 98% of the players that also play ESO

How easy it is to call something elitism and make your argument against it eh? It has nothing to do with elitism, it's valid data on how powerful the set is. You could apply it to dungeons or whatever you want. It's not like the issue is with roleplay. Trial, dungeon, elite, new player... The subject is about absorbing damage.

how is data from 1-2% of the player base regarded as valid?

Are you joking or are you serious? Why does it matter where the data comes from? Sorry neither me nor any of my friends are running random normals with Iceheart and saving logs for me to check them. Result wouldn't be different tho as the set doesn't work differently in different types of content.

Looks like your whole point is against the elite who do hardcore content, not against the nerf itself.

10/10 for a good try i'll give you that but your argument just does not stack up and trying to twist the direction of this thread into something else wont work neither will i rise to the bait.

Sure

satanio · February 2020

Yes

themaddaedra wrote: »

satanio wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

frankly who cares about immortal redeemer and such "logs" not everything is about the "end game elite" if you are able to run that content you dont need to run ice heart any way, this change affects the other 98% of the players that also play ESO

How easy it is to call something elitism and make your argument against it eh? It has nothing to do with elitism, it's valid data on how powerful the set is. You could apply it to dungeons or whatever you want. It's not like the issue is with roleplay. Trial, dungeon, elite, new player... The subject is about absorbing damage.

You do realize that, based on your investigation, Mother Ciannait should be nerfed too right?
Don't try to justify this nerf, it's too obvious that they nerfed it just because of Mother Ciannait.

edit:typo

I have no such desires to justify anything, as i am not the angry joe here. And i made my points regarding Iceheart, as my data is on Iceheart. Haven't said anything about new one, nor will i say anything until i actually see how it works out.

You are contradicting yourself. Why are you making your points if you don't want to justify anything?
You haven't said anything about the new one, but that doesn't mean, that based on your investigation, the new one is too OP!
And not to be rude or anything, but please, just read the tooltip of the new one - Mother Ciannait, and stop pretending that you don't know what it does.

Nerfing Icehearth in spite of Mother Ciannait is not good direction.

edit:typo

idk · February 2020

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Not sure what was expected in a poll like this. Maybe try a poll that ask about reverting all nerfs handed down over the past year.

i wanted a visual aid to help get the point across about how angry players are with the change, a picture speaks a 1000 words and all thats and faster than actually reading the what will be 1000's of comments

I expect Zos is aware that a poll like this would result in what we see here. Considering it completely ignores the reasoning they provided it's value seems diminished.

themaddaedra · February 2020

No

satanio wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

satanio wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

frankly who cares about immortal redeemer and such "logs" not everything is about the "end game elite" if you are able to run that content you dont need to run ice heart any way, this change affects the other 98% of the players that also play ESO

How easy it is to call something elitism and make your argument against it eh? It has nothing to do with elitism, it's valid data on how powerful the set is. You could apply it to dungeons or whatever you want. It's not like the issue is with roleplay. Trial, dungeon, elite, new player... The subject is about absorbing damage.

You do realize that, based on your investigation, Mother Ciannait should be nerfed too right?
Don't try to justify this nerf, it's too obvious that they nerfed it just because of Mother Ciannait.

edit:typo

I have no such desires to justify anything, as i am not the angry joe here. And i made my points regarding Iceheart, as my data is on Iceheart. Haven't said anything about new one, nor will i say anything until i actually see how it works out.

You are contradicting yourself. Why are you making your points if you don't want to justify anything?
You haven't said anything about the new one, but that doesn't mean that based on your investigation new one is too OP!
And not to be rude or anything, but please, just read the tooltip of the new one - Mother Ciannait, and stop pretending that you don't know what it does.

Nerfing Icehearth in spite of Mother Ciannait is not good direction.

That is not a fact, that is your assumption. What i said is a fact, based on actual numbers from actual content. You can say anything you want from this point, i have done enough effort to discuss facts versus assumptions. Not a fan of trying to talk to angry crowds. I am out of this discussion, cheers.

code65536 · February 2020

Yes

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

Um, even if you cast an active shield (larger than IH), if you *** up your storm kite, you're still dead because the damage amp from each successive storm tick is huge.

It's the same thing with looking at how much "healing" Igneous Shield does in a log. It looks like a lot, but if you take it away by running a non-DK tank, you don't really feel the difference. Why not? Because there's only a somewhat narrow window where the shield can actually "save" someone. If the damage is too high, it'll eat through the shield and they'll die anyway. E.g., failing a dodge on Raptors or messing up storm kite or eating multiple storm ticks. And most of the time, the damage is too low to kill you anyway, and so the shield effectively steals the credit for "healing" that otherwise would've been done by actual healing.

But yes, there is a window of incoming damage strength where the shield would make a difference. But it's a relatively narrow window. It gives people some margin of error for small mistakes. But it won't save anyone from a major mistake. I tried Iceheart for my IR. Switched back to Slimecraw after one run. Hyperbolic statements like "That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live." suggests that you haven't actually tried it, because if you did, I doubt you'd characterize it as being that strong.

That said, 8-9s cooldown does seem fine.

satanio · February 2020

Yes

idk wrote: »

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Not sure what was expected in a poll like this. Maybe try a poll that ask about reverting all nerfs handed down over the past year.

i wanted a visual aid to help get the point across about how angry players are with the change, a picture speaks a 1000 words and all thats and faster than actually reading the what will be 1000's of comments

I expect Zos is aware that a poll like this would result in what we see here. Considering it completely ignores the reasoning they provided it's value seems diminished.

Their reasoning is flawed, because it could be applied on Mother Ciannait aswell. But somehow, I don't understand how, Mother Ciannait inherited old Icehearth CD and dodged the nerfhammer.

themaddaedra · February 2020

No

code65536 wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

Um, even if you cast an active shield (larger than IH), if you *** up your storm kite, you're still dead because the damage amp from each successive storm tick is huge.

It's the same thing with looking at how much "healing" Igneous Shield does in a log. It looks like a lot, but if you take it away by running a non-DK tank, you don't really feel the difference. Why not? Because there's only a somewhat narrow window where the shield can actually "save" someone. If the damage is too high, it'll eat through the shield and they'll die anyway. E.g., failing a dodge on Raptors or messing up storm kite and eating 3 ticks. And most of the time, the damage is too low to kill you anyway, and the shield gets credit for "healing" that otherwise would've been done by the healer.

But yes, there is a window of incoming damage strength where the shield would make a difference. But it's a relatively narrow window. It gives people a bit more margin of error for small mistakes. But it won't save anyone from a major mistake. I tried Iceheart for my IR. Switched back to Slimecraw after one run. Statements like "That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live." suggests that you haven't actually tried it, because if you did, I doubt you'd characterize it as being that strong.

Not really. First of all, there's next to zero healing from healers in some content like Asylum hardmode or 3 dd dungeon runs. They are in the far corners of the world. And regardless of the fact that the incoming damage might be too big or too small, absorbing upto %50 of incoming damage with zero effort is still way too powerful. And either with an Iceheart proc, or an actual damage shield skill, you can eat 2 storms and still live. Difference with Iceheart is it doesn't require any reaction. You could **** up a storm and take 2 hits and be very bad at reacting with a shield skill and die, or you could take those hits with Iceheart on and live.

As i said the cooldown looks too much, i'd like it reduced. But reverting this nerf will once again make Iceheart too strong.

Miswar · February 2020

Yes

themaddaedra wrote: »

Miswar wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

Have you investigation furthered into console world where you lucky to get off skills now days?

I doubt it.. also out of curiosity what is it from you if the changes were reverted?

Not like your scoreruns were threatened or anythung.

....nut yeah nerfing this monster is unneeded and it seems 93% of people feel that way.

What does the nerf have to do with your missing skills? We are discussing an item set and your point is entirely different. If you want performance improvement for your platform you have my support, but that is not the case here.

it has basis with all things in the game. You know game should be in playable status which it is barely with imagination.

Again what is this nerf gaining you? You can look your data but is you data realiable. Propaby not since it sounds like your game runs smoothly.

Also you skipped nicely to answer the question why you are actually againts this nerf? The set helped some people with performance crap to survive, some progression guilds to make some trial runs a bit smoother etc... so whats wrong with that.. nothing.

The analysis sounds like boring excel sheet which is not aimed at you but there is certain developer in combat team who is very much guilty of loving his spread sheets than actual gameplay.

These kind of nerfs serve noone and just show how utterly clueless the game developers can be to be very blunt.

iCaliban · February 2020

Yes

Bexy wrote: »

I am utterly disappointed. I finally got the Iceheart helm in December from the golden vendor and now it's getting nerfed... This set made combat A LOT MORE FUN to me as a solo quester. It was not overpowered, it was a great solo set. No one uses it for endgame group content, it doesn't harm anyone, so why take the fun away from us solo players? Please revert the changes!

Look, im sorry to say this. But you "finally" got the helm? Vet direfrost is not even a dlc dungeon.

As a solo quester this nerf is of absolutely no concern to you. Overland quests are designed to be incredibly easy

Xvorg · February 2020

Yes

themaddaedra wrote: »

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

frankly who cares about immortal redeemer and such "logs" not everything is about the "end game elite" if you are able to run that content you dont need to run ice heart any way, this change affects the other 98% of the players that also play ESO

How easy it is to call something elitism and make your argument against it eh? It has nothing to do with elitism, it's valid data on how powerful the set is. You could apply it to dungeons or whatever you want. It's not like the issue is with roleplay. Trial, dungeon, elite, new player... The subject is about absorbing damage.

Yup, but the problem is that ZoS is selling you a set that defensively does the same than IH... but only to classes that can afford a cast time skill.

I cannot support that, even if the data is right. They had plenty of chances to nerf the set, why they just nerfed it now, when they are giving us another moster set with a shield is beyond my understanding... or maybe not...

Vevvev · February 2020

Yes

I don't even use the set but this change isn't necessary.

themaddaedra · February 2020

No

Xvorg wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

themaddaedra wrote: »

I have investigated many Immortal Redeemer and Gryphon Heart logs and parses with Iceheart, and the result is it absorbs from %40(really bad procs) to %50(really good procs) of incoming damage.

That saves you from total reFardation. You could use Iceheart and take a shower in meteor storm and still live. Set was broken OP, this is a fact. And it's not like they nerfed it by a very large margin, no need to revert anything.

If anything, they could reduce the cooldown to like... 8-9 seconds? 12 seems bit off the rail. That's all.

frankly who cares about immortal redeemer and such "logs" not everything is about the "end game elite" if you are able to run that content you dont need to run ice heart any way, this change affects the other 98% of the players that also play ESO

How easy it is to call something elitism and make your argument against it eh? It has nothing to do with elitism, it's valid data on how powerful the set is. You could apply it to dungeons or whatever you want. It's not like the issue is with roleplay. Trial, dungeon, elite, new player... The subject is about absorbing damage.

Yup, but the problem is that ZoS is selling you a set that defensively does the same than IH... but only to classes that can afford a cast time skill.

I cannot support that, even if the data is right. They had plenty of chances to nerf the set, why they just nerfed it now, when they are giving us another moster set with a shield is beyond my understanding... or maybe not...

I believe they tried to make them alternatives for each other: One of them providing a shield with some damage while other is providing a very similar shield with magicka return instead. Idea is cool, but Iceheart cooldown is too much.

Juhasow · February 2020

No

Reverted ? No
Tweaked a little ? Yes.

Juhasow · February 2020

No

satanio wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Not sure what was expected in a poll like this. Maybe try a poll that ask about reverting all nerfs handed down over the past year.

i wanted a visual aid to help get the point across about how angry players are with the change, a picture speaks a 1000 words and all thats and faster than actually reading the what will be 1000's of comments

I expect Zos is aware that a poll like this would result in what we see here. Considering it completely ignores the reasoning they provided it's value seems diminished.

Their reasoning is flawed, because it could be applied on Mother Ciannait aswell. But somehow, I don't understand how, Mother Ciannait inherited old Icehearth CD and dodged the nerfhammer.

Maybe because proc conditions are also one of the factors worth to take into consideration ? Iceheart while in combat can keep up very high uptime without forcing user to any specific actions. You just do Your thing and it just procs over and over almost on cooldown. New monster set have very specific proc conditions that are limiting the use it and require specific playstyles from user.

Xebov · February 2020

No

They should not revert it, they should tweak it.

The set is to strong for way to long now. Every somewhat noticeable DD has it for certain cases. The forums even reflect that given the huge amount of players voring for a revert or expressing their dislike. Its the same situation we had some time ago when they changed the shields and ppl acted like its the end of the world.

Alienoutlaw · February 2020

Yes

Xebov wrote: »

They should not revert it, they should tweak it.

The set is to strong for way to long now. Every somewhat noticeable DD has it for certain cases. The forums even reflect that given the huge amount of players voring for a revert or expressing their dislike. Its the same situation we had some time ago when they changed the shields and ppl acted like its the end of the world.

it was for many many many sorcs