Great analysis.

Prayer is in very bad spot. Just increasing the shield size to something like 4500 would help a ton, but still would be justified with extremely low proc chance that is even more limited by proc condition of actual heal (not overheal).

Well done

Iskiab wrote: »

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.

Mechanically Iceheart is the same, but with lower power, which is why I focused on relative power rather than mechanics.

Combat Physician would be so great if the cooldown was per target rather than on the set itself.

You'd probably have to lower the shield size, but it would make it into kind of like a Healer's version of Lunar Bastion that would be really nice for PvE and PvP.

idk 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.

idk 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.

Comparing proc conditions is another discussion entirely. I wanted to focus on the potential relative strength of the shields they produce not how they are produced.

In other words answer the question, given a perfect scenario with maximum uptime how much shielding can i get per second?

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.

idk wrote: »

kojou wrote: »

idk wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

idk 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.

If you are wearing one of these sets then you are likely wearing it for the shield not the secondary effect...

I find that standardizing base on the most important aspect of a set is the best way to compare them. You can then take proc conditions and secondary effects into consideration for whatever content you are going to use them for.

Also if you look at point #9 I state "The old Iceheart was actually one of the most powerful options considering it was almost as powerful as the strongest 5 piece bonuses, so it either deserved an adjustment or the 5 piece bonuses are too weak (I think a little of both are true)."

Implying that Iceheart being a 2 piece set and as strong as a 5 piece set was over powered, but I also think that some of the 5 piece bonuses are under powered when compared to other options.

In the end it is just numbers, and I drew my conclusions from them and you are welcome to draw your own opinions and conclusions as well. I just don't see why you were trying to be insulting about it.

kojou 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-

Kolzki 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: »

kojou 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-

********************************************************************************************************
My response to your analysis of the numbers:
********************************************************************************************************

That is the peril of being lazy and using a fan site I guess, but it doesn't change the numbers enough to change the inferences...

Brands of Imperium should go to 802.7. As I mentioned before the shorter formula is just Shield Strength/Cool Down:

12040/15 = 802.7

Ursus should then be 13954/12=1162

I was using the more complicated formula...

(12040*(60/15))/60=802.7 (Note: that is 60/15 not 6/15)

...because I had a cell where I wanted to know the maximum number of procs for a set as well as maximum shielded duration and another cell where I wanted to know the maximum time I could expect to be shielded while using that set.

For example, Brands of Imperium you can expect a maximum of 4 procs (60/15) in 60 seconds for a total maximum shielded time of 24 (6*4) seconds. This was useful to know, but knowing the maximum amount of damage per second the set could mitigate for one player was the more important number to me.

********************************************************************************************************
My response to your statements on group sets vs individual sets:
********************************************************************************************************

First of all, note that this was the Developer Comment from 5.3.2

"Iceheart has long been a powerful defensive set that has become a staple for situations where you want to sacrifice damage for survivability, especially in instances such as Maelstrom Arena and no-death Trial runs. While we love the idea of this set helping in those contexts, the value of defensive and offensive potential this set provided was leagues beyond our standards when comparing it to other sets such as Brands of the Imperium or Phoenix."

Then note my points on the "group sets" sets are the following:

2. Lunar Bastion is a bit underrated. It actually provides a lot of shielding for a group.

3. Brands of Imperium is in an odd place. It only has a range of 8 meters, so it doesn't help in a lot of group situations and the cool down is a bit too high in my opinion. The 10% proc chance is the nail in the coffin for this set.

So, Nowhere in my post did I say that they should be as strong as sets that shield players individually. Although it does seem like the developers are looking at it that way...

Also, I actually think it is completely relevant to compare them, because there should be some consistency. For example, if a "group set" shields for x relative power, then a set that shields an individual person should shield for x*y. If we compare Lunar to Imperium I feel like they should be reasonable close in power (they are both 8 meters and both group sets), but Lunar is mitigating almost 1400 damage per second and Imperium is only about 800, so my conclusion is that Lunar is actually the better set for group play than Imperium.

What I would really like to see is some level of standardization among these sets. Since the combat team decided to bring Iceheart into some standard, I would like to ask "What is the standard?" to the development team, because it really doesn't seem like there is one. We have group sets that aren't really following any standard, individual shielding sets that are all over the place, and then we have Iceheart and Mother Ciannait that seem to adhere to another standard (which is ok since they are 2 piece sets even though I would contend that they are both too weak), but I would like to see some consistency across all sets not just the ones they want to use to sell a DLC.

@Kolzki Your conclusion is quite correct. Most shield sets are in a position where it does not matter if you have them or not. They are so small, that they are just there for the fun, not for any kind of use.

Nobody has time for impactless sets. We have many healing and damage sets that feel very impactful and actually make a difference. Yet defensive sets, mainly speaking about damage shield sets, have none really.

Standardisation is a terrible way to balance sets. Phoenix, a set that gives you a 25k+ shield for a whole 6 seconds, just like all other shields, but only procs once per minute, is plain bad. It should stay up until it's depleted, or it's a complete waste.

I'll just say no to them all.Too bad about Iceheart. I've seen video of people testing it post-nerf and it's no longer worth it, really. If they'd nerfed it down to somewhere around 6500, then it would still be useful, but now....