Starlight_Knight wrote: »This set is pretty much bis for any class mag or stam atm.
JumpmanLane wrote: »Who told you that lie? On a MagDk anyways, there’s way better stuff to run. Succession for one is WAY more damage.
Bear in mind, leap’s cheap; but ANYTHING that increases the cost of your ulti is trash. NMA is FAR from bis on a MagDk.
JumpmanLane wrote: »Who told you that lie? On a MagDk anyways, there’s way better stuff to run. Succession for one is WAY more damage.
Bear in mind, leap’s cheap; but ANYTHING that increases the cost of your ulti is trash. NMA is FAR from bis on a MagDk.
I am a MagDK that runs NMA but what about the battle roar passive ability that scales off ult cost? How does that factor into which set is best for a MagDK?
I did however look at the Succession set and I must admit I will be farming for it soon for when I decide to slot a lot of flame damage abilities.
JumpmanLane wrote: »JumpmanLane wrote: »Who told you that lie? On a MagDk anyways, there’s way better stuff to run. Succession for one is WAY more damage.
Bear in mind, leap’s cheap; but ANYTHING that increases the cost of your ulti is trash. NMA is FAR from bis on a MagDk.
I am a MagDK that runs NMA but what about the battle roar passive ability that scales off ult cost? How does that factor into which set is best for a MagDK?
I did however look at the Succession set and I must admit I will be farming for it soon for when I decide to slot a lot of flame damage abilities.
Uh...so you’re gonna take a cost increase to improve your resource return on leap? I’d say the gains are negligible.
You’re giving up a ton of damage to your spammable (whip), heals on embers, and damage off of your flame glyph (which you should be running). NOT to mention leap. Engulfing. Burning talons even (which you could run lol). Flame staff. You could even back bar ice staff for giggles.
If you’re running MagDk and not running a ton of flame skills. What are you running.
NMA? I unno. Better things to run than that.
JumpmanLane wrote: »JumpmanLane wrote: »Who told you that lie? On a MagDk anyways, there’s way better stuff to run. Succession for one is WAY more damage.
Bear in mind, leap’s cheap; but ANYTHING that increases the cost of your ulti is trash. NMA is FAR from bis on a MagDk.
I am a MagDK that runs NMA but what about the battle roar passive ability that scales off ult cost? How does that factor into which set is best for a MagDK?
I did however look at the Succession set and I must admit I will be farming for it soon for when I decide to slot a lot of flame damage abilities.
Uh...so you’re gonna take a cost increase to improve your resource return on leap? I’d say the gains are negligible.
You’re giving up a ton of damage to your spammable (whip), heals on embers, and damage off of your flame glyph (which you should be running). NOT to mention leap. Engulfing. Burning talons even (which you could run lol). Flame staff. You could even back bar ice staff for giggles.
If you’re running MagDk and not running a ton of flame skills. What are you running.
NMA? I unno. Better things to run than that.
Probably best just to show you.
https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Special:EsoBuildData?id=183004
gatekeeper13 wrote: »Dont know about PVE but a 5% cost increase in PVP makes the set pure garbage. The extra penetration and weapon dmg doesnt make it any better than Julianos/Hundigs or Spriggan's/Spinner's. Its actually worse.
gatekeeper13 wrote: »Dont know about PVE but a 5% cost increase in PVP makes the set pure garbage. The extra penetration and weapon dmg doesnt make it any better than Julianos/Hundigs or Spriggan's/Spinner's. Its actually worse.
So much so that nobody is using it in PvP!
No, wait...
JumpmanLane wrote: »Starlight_Knight wrote: »This set is pretty much bis for any class mag or stam atm.
Who told you that lie? On a MagDk anyways, there’s way better stuff to run. Succession for one is WAY more damage.
Bear in mind, leap’s cheap; but ANYTHING that increases the cost of your ulti is trash. NMA is FAR from bis on a MagDk.
Unless something changed I’m pretty sure that sorc pets don’t scale with spell damage. In that case NMA doesn’t scale well for pet sorcs.
Shields also scale with max mag and not spell damage. Not so good for nma on mag sorcs.
Bobby_V_Rockit wrote: »Unless something changed I’m pretty sure that sorc pets don’t scale with spell damage. In that case NMA doesn’t scale well for pet sorcs.
Shields also scale with max mag and not spell damage. Not so good for nma on mag sorcs.
Shield’s cap before the bonus wears off. I use nma and false god and my empowered ward sits at full strength (50% and total health)
Bobby_V_Rockit wrote: »Unless something changed I’m pretty sure that sorc pets don’t scale with spell damage. In that case NMA doesn’t scale well for pet sorcs.
Shields also scale with max mag and not spell damage. Not so good for nma on mag sorcs.
Shield’s cap before the bonus wears off. I use nma and false god and my empowered ward sits at full strength (50% and total health)
I have 40 k magicka in no cp, and it still doesnt hit that cap.
Bobby_V_Rockit wrote: »Bobby_V_Rockit wrote: »Unless something changed I’m pretty sure that sorc pets don’t scale with spell damage. In that case NMA doesn’t scale well for pet sorcs.
Shields also scale with max mag and not spell damage. Not so good for nma on mag sorcs.
Shield’s cap before the bonus wears off. I use nma and false god and my empowered ward sits at full strength (50% and total health)
I have 40 k magicka in no cp, and it still doesnt hit that cap.
Damage shield reduced by 50% in Cyrodil, check your stats
relentless_turnip wrote: »JumpmanLane wrote: »Starlight_Knight wrote: »This set is pretty much bis for any class mag or stam atm.
Who told you that lie? On a MagDk anyways, there’s way better stuff to run. Succession for one is WAY more damage.
Bear in mind, leap’s cheap; but ANYTHING that increases the cost of your ulti is trash. NMA is FAR from bis on a MagDk.
Completely agree, I started dragonhold using nma on my magdk... It's no where near as good as succession in terms of damage and sustain was really noticeable..