hard core players are vocal minority on the forum. the problem is that they cause the power creep. and like years later when games like WoW are bad they wonder. "wow they really *** the game up!" like no you did.

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

The upcoming proc set unleashed terror is the perfect example. That set looks like tons of fun. Many high end players forego gap closers and have for many years: because gap closers can be buggy, unresponsive, and put you in a horrible position strategically, as well as being resource inefficient. This proc set brings new life to these gap closers and opens up all kinds of new build ideas. That to me is fun: and I don’t care if an elitist who is obsessed with measuring skill thinks that it lowers the skill cap.

I don't think there's a problem with that. Strictly speaking that's not even a proc set, it just supercharges one of your abilities while you sacrifice stats for it. There's no RNG or cooldown. It just turns one of your skills into a DOT and creates a playstyle for you to make decisions around. If you want to lean into that with a vMA battleaxe go ahead: it could be broken if the numbers are poorly thought out but that's a problem with stat sets too. Caluurion based on crit damage rewards cloak + concealed weapon, and that's fine as long as the burst numbers aren't off the charts (off-the-charts numbers are a possibility for any offensive set).

What's problematic is that a tank can take advantage of that just as well because the tooltip doesn't scale. And it becomes especially problematic when the proc condition is just having a detectable pulse because that turns DPS skills that have little to no payoff on tanks (or even light attacks) into something they can take advantage of even if they're invested entirely in health.

There's no reason why that can't be changed. Many "proc" sets could have the exact same tooltip or even be balanced towards viability on DPS without creating constant, passive, braindead pressure and encouraging tanks to wear them.

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

How is not doing a thing more skillful than e.g. weaving?

How is giving up a few k resources a bad thing if the procced damage outclassed anything you lose? Not to mention the 40k health proc builds that are floating around?

How is forcing cooldowns 6 years after release suddenly a good thing?

How is being hardcountered anything but bad design?


How about a massive meta change propose for you: my main class hardcounters yours main class and I proc 13k extra damage by not spending resources via light attacks - all for the cost of what? 300 spell dmg or the likes?

I kinda respect your opinion but sorry, this just hurts reading.

Correct

ZarkingFrued wrote: »

Why are those players elite? Because they're better. Why? Because they understand the game better. Proc sets are not skill based, pushing one button in a video game and getting two high damage hits is not a smart design, it specifically there to carry players who are not good at video games or have lower reaction times.

Here is that bias again. Lets break it down:

ZarkingFrued wrote: »

roc sets are not skill based, pushing one button in a video game and getting two high damage hits is not a smart design

Your opinion - not fact. Also, completely irrational. If you can't deal with getting two high damage hits from target, then either you lack the skill to build well, or the skill to react faster.

ZarkingFrued wrote: »

it specifically there to carry players who are not good at video games or have lower reaction times.

Your opinion again, not fact. In fact, it is specifically there to make sure bad players that can't deal with having the reaction time to dodge / expect caluurion with a hard hitting skill as well pay for it. So it helps seperate the bad players that can't deal with procs, from the good players running procs and dealing with them.

Do you see how this is just as rational? Do you see the bias there?

If a counter argument can be made and it just becomes my opinion vs your opinion.

ZarkingFrued wrote: »

Not everyone in a video game needs to be on the same level. Some will be dominate, others will play but never be able to compete with the better players. That's ok. That is how all of life works.

That is correct. That is why players in this game tend to create a fantasy-environment/world for themselves, where they think their arbitrary rules, make them more skilled.

Example, this game usually has 2-3 pages of rules for 1v1 tournaments, CP players saying non-CP players are #$%#$ and non-CP players saying CP players are basically on CP free-tanky/sustain crutches, etc... You're doing no different. You're taking your opinions, and trying to present them as FACTS of skill difference.

If you took your last line of advice, you would be comfortable with the fact that it's ok to have proc builds hard-counter non-tanky builds, and to realise that 1vX should be impossible in a well balanced game and so on.

If you want a pure contest to measure some fantasy skill value, put players in a game with no different variables and no RNG. Same gear. Same skills. Same stats. No Crits chance, etc.

You'll quickly see that most competitive PC games that are successful dont do that, they thrive on dissimilar and hard counter framework of metas and counter metas. So lets all stop pretending this game has some absolute measure of skill.

logically the correct response to "proc" metas is to just be tanky enough that the first burst or 2 or 3 procs firing at once won't kill you.
Since you have to sacrifice a lot of raw dps stats to pull that off you can balance it by using proc sets yourself.
As far as I can see the inevitable outcome of these changes is everyone moving towards heavy armour proc set builds.

This is why ZoS originally changed proc sets to not crit but also to apply dots instead of a single large hit.