Set Name Relative Power Undaunted Bastion 1596.4 Combat Physician 1584.5 Lunar Bastion 1391.5 Haven of Ursus 1349.1 Brands of Imperium 931.2 Whitestrake's Retribution 798.2 Phoenix 483.4 Prayer Shawl 468.8 Old Iceheart 1433.3 Old Mother Ciannait 300.0 New Iceheart 833.3 New Mother Ciannait 833.3
I used Iceheart as a PvE magblade healer. Reason I used it was it’s a self shield, and healers have to face tank mobs a lot in dungeons, especially if you use sap.
The total output wasn’t what made Iceheart good, it was where the shield went.
Most of the sets that proc a shield proc it off taking damage. As such those sets are not comparable to Iceheart as OP as I understand OP is making it.
Essentially, a player is going to crit very often on a single target than a player taking damage from a single target. Further, some of the sets have additional effects that need to be taken into consideration. BoiP only shields vs Iceheart shields and does damage. You cannot compare only the shield and ignore the rest of the benefits.
I am not knocking the idea of comparing the sets. I am just calling into question some aspects used here.
YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Most of the sets that proc a shield proc it off taking damage. As such those sets are not comparable to Iceheart as OP as I understand OP is making it.
Essentially, a player is going to crit very often on a single target than a player taking damage from a single target. Further, some of the sets have additional effects that need to be taken into consideration. BoiP only shields vs Iceheart shields and does damage. You cannot compare only the shield and ignore the rest of the benefits.
I am not knocking the idea of comparing the sets. I am just calling into question some aspects used here.
The damage of Iceheart is beyond trivial though and most casters are well out of melee range, which reduces it to effectively zero.
Without asking them all individually, I would bet that most Iceheart users would be happy ditching the damage altogether if they could have kept the shield mechanic intact.
Most of the sets that proc a shield proc it off taking damage. As such those sets are not comparable to Iceheart as OP as I understand OP is making it.
Essentially, a player is going to crit very often on a single target than a player taking damage from a single target. Further, some of the sets have additional effects that need to be taken into consideration. BoiP only shields vs Iceheart shields and does damage. You cannot compare only the shield and ignore the rest of the benefits.
I am not knocking the idea of comparing the sets. I am just calling into question some aspects used here.
YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Most of the sets that proc a shield proc it off taking damage. As such those sets are not comparable to Iceheart as OP as I understand OP is making it.
Essentially, a player is going to crit very often on a single target than a player taking damage from a single target. Further, some of the sets have additional effects that need to be taken into consideration. BoiP only shields vs Iceheart shields and does damage. You cannot compare only the shield and ignore the rest of the benefits.
I am not knocking the idea of comparing the sets. I am just calling into question some aspects used here.
The damage of Iceheart is beyond trivial though and most casters are well out of melee range, which reduces it to effectively zero.
Without asking them all individually, I would bet that most Iceheart users would be happy ditching the damage altogether if they could have kept the shield mechanic intact.
But in melee range, it does provide something and regardless of how trivial we consider it to be it must be considered. Heck, if players are willing to give up the damage component then they should use a set that procs a shield on damage.
That reminds me of another aspect missing from the comparison. Sets like BoiP are 5 pieces and Iceheart is only 2. That makes the comparison of Mother Ciannait to Iceheart more comparable and your "analysis" seems to demonstrate they are balanced.
OG_Kaveman wrote: »i get what you are going for here but brands of the Brands of Imperium is a group set, you have to multiply it by 6 to get the true value for the set. so that one is more then what you are saying, same as lunar bastion.
also, how did you do the math for these sets? i get (12040 * (15/6)*6)/ 60 = 3010 for imperium and ((2399/2)*6) = 7197 for lunar bastion, since you can have 100% uptime on if you have 2 synergys. the trade off is fair though, imperium has a much larger shield for the group when it is up then bastion, meaning it can save the group from a larger hit then bastion, even though bastion will give you more shielding over time on average AND you need 2 synergys off cooldown for that amount of shielding. and have you used imperium as a tank ever? that 10% is plenty enough to have the shield for your group off cooldown.
YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Most of the sets that proc a shield proc it off taking damage. As such those sets are not comparable to Iceheart as OP as I understand OP is making it.
Essentially, a player is going to crit very often on a single target than a player taking damage from a single target. Further, some of the sets have additional effects that need to be taken into consideration. BoiP only shields vs Iceheart shields and does damage. You cannot compare only the shield and ignore the rest of the benefits.
I am not knocking the idea of comparing the sets. I am just calling into question some aspects used here.
The damage of Iceheart is beyond trivial though and most casters are well out of melee range, which reduces it to effectively zero.
Without asking them all individually, I would bet that most Iceheart users would be happy ditching the damage altogether if they could have kept the shield mechanic intact.
But in melee range, it does provide something and regardless of how trivial we consider it to be it must be considered. Heck, if players are willing to give up the damage component then they should use a set that procs a shield on damage.
That reminds me of another aspect missing from the comparison. Sets like BoiP are 5 pieces and Iceheart is only 2. That makes the comparison of Mother Ciannait to Iceheart more comparable and your "analysis" seems to demonstrate they are balanced.
Analysis in quotes? Really? Bait much?
Also, I don't recall ever saying that I thought 5 piece bonuses and 2 piece monster sets should be equal.
YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Most of the sets that proc a shield proc it off taking damage. As such those sets are not comparable to Iceheart as OP as I understand OP is making it.
Essentially, a player is going to crit very often on a single target than a player taking damage from a single target. Further, some of the sets have additional effects that need to be taken into consideration. BoiP only shields vs Iceheart shields and does damage. You cannot compare only the shield and ignore the rest of the benefits.
I am not knocking the idea of comparing the sets. I am just calling into question some aspects used here.
The damage of Iceheart is beyond trivial though and most casters are well out of melee range, which reduces it to effectively zero.
Without asking them all individually, I would bet that most Iceheart users would be happy ditching the damage altogether if they could have kept the shield mechanic intact.
But in melee range, it does provide something and regardless of how trivial we consider it to be it must be considered. Heck, if players are willing to give up the damage component then they should use a set that procs a shield on damage.
That reminds me of another aspect missing from the comparison. Sets like BoiP are 5 pieces and Iceheart is only 2. That makes the comparison of Mother Ciannait to Iceheart more comparable and your "analysis" seems to demonstrate they are balanced.
Analysis in quotes? Really? Bait much?
Also, I don't recall ever saying that I thought 5 piece bonuses and 2 piece monster sets should be equal.
Comparing them as you are it does appear you are considering them equal. It does not appear any effort is made to make adjustments or even acknowledgments of that major difference. It is the same with the additional effects begin left out of the picture.
The only comparison that seems valid, imo, is Mother Ciannait and Iceheart since both do have a damage component though an actual comparison of that aspect is also needed. While it is not intended to offend, I am calling into question the method used.
OG_Kaveman wrote: »i get what you are going for here but brands of the Brands of Imperium is a group set, you have to multiply it by 6 to get the true value for the set. so that one is more then what you are saying, same as lunar bastion.
also, how did you do the math for these sets? i get (12040 * (15/6)*6)/ 60 = 3010 for imperium and ((2399/2)*6) = 7197 for lunar bastion, since you can have 100% uptime on if you have 2 synergys. the trade off is fair though, imperium has a much larger shield for the group when it is up then bastion, meaning it can save the group from a larger hit then bastion, even though bastion will give you more shielding over time on average AND you need 2 synergys off cooldown for that amount of shielding. and have you used imperium as a tank ever? that 10% is plenty enough to have the shield for your group off cooldown.
I realize that Imperium is a group set, but size of a group can be variable, so you have to consider that based on what content you are doing (solo vs 4 person vs 12 person). I believe it has a limit of 6 players that it shields though. My contention is that the range (8m) is too small, and that the proc chance is too low to make it very worthwhile. When you compare it to Lunar Bastion (which is also a group set and also 8 meters), Lunar Bastion is stronger in terms of shield per second.
My calculation for Imperium is:
(13968*(60/15))/60=931.2
And Lunar Bastian is:
(2783*(60/2))/60 = 1391.5
Basically saying that Imperium has a potential shielding of 931.2 shield points per second, and Lunar Bastion 1391.5.
Obviously you could just divide 2783/2 and get the same answer since it produces a 2783 every 2 seconds, but I did it all on a spreadsheet and used the same formula for all the sets.
An interesting analysis. There are details to the how and why certain sets are used though that the numbers only partially capture. Up time and shield size are really important for a big reason: mitigating one shots. If you can survive those then healing can do the rest.
Imperium provides a large enough shield for the group to stop one shots but doesn’t have great up time. If the shield is up you live. If it’s down then you die. Lunar basition can have good up time but the shield is small. It might be up but you might still die. It’s a cool set that still might be useful but there are better sets for tanks to use to support the group (offensively). The reality is that this is not the set that tanks farm from maw of lorkhaj.
Combat physician has a big shield but it is single target and procs from a crit heal. You want a lot of chances to crit and you want to control who gets it (i.e. yourself). This makes it most useful on chars with single target self heal over time with lots of chances to crit: mag sorcs (crit surge) and maybe magblades (heal morph of cloak). You also have to have to not be at full health to receive the heal for a chance to proc... not great.
Prayer shawl is multi target but has a low proc chance, requires actual healing to proc and has a small shield. It’s pretty bad.
The other sets mostly suffer from similar problems. They can look good on paper but they have awkward proc conditions, targeting, bad up time or too small a shield to prevent one shots.
In summary:
Big shield & big uptime: you live.
Big shield & low uptime: rng you might not die.
Small shield & big uptime: you live against stuff that you could heal through anyway if you didn’t stand in stupid.
Small shield & small uptime: rethink your life choices.
Olupajmibanan wrote: »An interesting analysis. There are details to the how and why certain sets are used though that the numbers only partially capture. Up time and shield size are really important for a big reason: mitigating one shots. If you can survive those then healing can do the rest.
Imperium provides a large enough shield for the group to stop one shots but doesn’t have great up time. If the shield is up you live. If it’s down then you die. Lunar basition can have good up time but the shield is small. It might be up but you might still die. It’s a cool set that still might be useful but there are better sets for tanks to use to support the group (offensively). The reality is that this is not the set that tanks farm from maw of lorkhaj.
Combat physician has a big shield but it is single target and procs from a crit heal. You want a lot of chances to crit and you want to control who gets it (i.e. yourself). This makes it most useful on chars with single target self heal over time with lots of chances to crit: mag sorcs (crit surge) and maybe magblades (heal morph of cloak). You also have to have to not be at full health to receive the heal for a chance to proc... not great.
Prayer shawl is multi target but has a low proc chance, requires actual healing to proc and has a small shield. It’s pretty bad.
The other sets mostly suffer from similar problems. They can look good on paper but they have awkward proc conditions, targeting, bad up time or too small a shield to prevent one shots.
In summary:
Big shield & big uptime: you live.
Big shield & low uptime: rng you might not die.
Small shield & big uptime: you live against stuff that you could heal through anyway if you didn’t stand in stupid.
Small shield & small uptime: rethink your life choices.
If increasing shield size is out of question (judging from ZoS's actions), just allowing Prayer Shawl to proc from overheals would make a world of difference and possibly bring this set from oblivion. It's a simple one level transition from SS+SU to SS+BU category but still enough to make the set relevant.
OG_Kaveman wrote: »OG_Kaveman wrote: »i get what you are going for here but brands of the Brands of Imperium is a group set, you have to multiply it by 6 to get the true value for the set. so that one is more then what you are saying, same as lunar bastion.
also, how did you do the math for these sets? i get (12040 * (15/6)*6)/ 60 = 3010 for imperium and ((2399/2)*6) = 7197 for lunar bastion, since you can have 100% uptime on if you have 2 synergys. the trade off is fair though, imperium has a much larger shield for the group when it is up then bastion, meaning it can save the group from a larger hit then bastion, even though bastion will give you more shielding over time on average AND you need 2 synergys off cooldown for that amount of shielding. and have you used imperium as a tank ever? that 10% is plenty enough to have the shield for your group off cooldown.
I realize that Imperium is a group set, but size of a group can be variable, so you have to consider that based on what content you are doing (solo vs 4 person vs 12 person). I believe it has a limit of 6 players that it shields though. My contention is that the range (8m) is too small, and that the proc chance is too low to make it very worthwhile. When you compare it to Lunar Bastion (which is also a group set and also 8 meters), Lunar Bastion is stronger in terms of shield per second.
My calculation for Imperium is:
(13968*(60/15))/60=931.2
And Lunar Bastian is:
(2783*(60/2))/60 = 1391.5
Basically saying that Imperium has a potential shielding of 931.2 shield points per second, and Lunar Bastion 1391.5.
Obviously you could just divide 2783/2 and get the same answer since it produces a 2783 every 2 seconds, but I did it all on a spreadsheet and used the same formula for all the sets.
thing is, you have to take the absolute best case for each set, otherwise you are just making up arbitrary rules.
your imperium is wrong, the shield only stays up for 6 seconds of that 15, so you have to take that 15 seconds and divide it by 6, leading to (12040 * (6/15)*6)/ 60 = 481.6 for imperium, and it is 12040 for the ward, not 13968 like esosets says, see this in game screenshot i took 5 minutes ago-
i would use en.uesp.net for all your eso needs, the site is updated much more and more accurately then any other. though, obviously, it is still a fan site and can be wrong, it is better then any other site on the internet.
like i said, i get what you are trying for but you really ought not have bastion and imperium on the list, they are not the same function as the rest. they are group sets and the rest only funtion to one person at a time.
looking closer as well, Haven of Ursus is wrong too, 2 people get the ward and the ward is only up for 6 seconds of the 12, so it would be (13954 *(6/12)*2)/60 = 232, not what you have, again, eso sets is wrong with the ward size, it is 13954, not 16189, like it says on eso sets. see here-