YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

AyaDark wrote: »

Let us just calculate:

Infused rings:
250*3 = 750 wpd/spd
Destro stuff: 1300 spd
Glyph for spd in weapon: 500

2500 SPD.

If you use SPD set with 500 SPD - 3000SPD in sum.

With 20% and 10% spd buff:

3900spd.

So even if you have only 1proc and 1not proc set and monster helmet it always us nerf.

What a changes is it ?

And NORDS was nerfed before !!!

Now it is just dead even more.

What a balancing is it ?????

I am redgard already !!! By the way !

You're forgetting about the base 1000 Weapon and Spell Damage that all characters receive simply for being Level 60.

GreenHere wrote: »

Well, so much for being able to use fun proc sets on my tank to make solo PvE questing less tedious, I guess...

RIP my Ashen Grip + Grothdarr DK fire-breather build. It was fun while it lasted! Guess I better hurry up and get some questing in before the nerfs. :P


Really wish they could have found a better way to balance things than kicking tanks in the nuts YET AGAIN.
I am, however, 0% surprised


Also, the numbers they picked... oof. Weapon Damage can easily soar past 7K for most builds, while the same isn't generally true for Spell Damage; and Max Magicka can get a lot higher a lot more easily than Max Stam... I swear, sometimes it almost seems like they don't even play their own game. How are the same numbers equally applicable to totally different build types? Am I alone in thinking mDPS/sDPS/Healer/Tank specs need different goalposts?

Athan1 wrote: »

Tharonil wrote: »

I was not crying. For me everything was fine the way it is on live servers. You only see people complain if they are affected. Now I'm crying :'(

Please don't cry... Look, proc sets were overperforming because they were offering free damage and heals with zero effort. Proc sets didn't get nerfed, if anything they were previously overtuned and now they just were set to be "fair".

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

GreenHere wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

I see some mild "L2P" and build construction problems arising again and again in this and related threads.

For "tanks" in Overland content - I'm sorry to say but being a tank in Overland content is largely pointless as mobs are simply not very dangerous. You can easily afford to slot some damage skills and you don't need 64 points into Health. You can also afford to use a pure damage set or two. You don't actually need to hold block at all times so there are plenty of opportunities to fit in damage abilities in between enemy heavy attacks.

For non-tank Overland questers - your proc sets don't really do much damage at all compared to actual abilities. Nearly all proc sets are tuned to do between 2k-3k DPS which is quite low indeed if that is what you are relying upon for your damage. You will be much better served by using your abilities as well as more stat-based damage sets. You don't even need to use light attacks or play like an elite raider to out-DPS your proc sets with abilities, just set down one or two AoE DoTs and then use your spammable skill.

For everyone - One companion at 10k DPS will already replace ALL THREE of your proc sets so you will come out miles ahead versus where you are today in overall damage if you use one.

No offense, but it seems posts like these entirely miss the point those of us raising the concern have...

"Mild L2P & build construction problems" are exactly the people who will have their damage lowered by these changes, meanwhile if you gear up for it you could potentially get more "free damage" out of proc sets than before. Sounds like raising the ceiling and lowering the floor to me. "Companions will offset, so no problem!" (paraphrasing) is even worse, because now we're talking about a feature that not everyone wants to (or should have to) rely on to help them through content. (An optional, paid DLC, potentially annoying feature to boot!) It's not about the spec of the character, or the difficulty of the content -- it's about taking power away from already-low-power players, and allowing more to people who already know how to get way more than they need to begin with. It seems like the wrong direction to be heading. From the low-damage side of the fence, at least.

Obviously you don't need to be a tank to get through a Delve or story quests. It's even actively counterproductive -- most people know this. BUT, as someone who has a dedicated tank character or three, I know what it's like to feel like you need to switch things up to get content done in a timely manner when you're by yourself on those characters. I don't mind terribly, but I need skill points to buy damage skills... in addition to all the points I already have dedicated to all my tank, crafting, and other miscellaneous skills. And even then, due to attribute & CP distributions, it can be slow going. So some "free damage" gear can make things easier -- and more fun -- where it would otherwise be a tedious slog in my normal tanky tank gear. But if damage proc sets are going to be rewarding damage stat stackers, and punishing us lowly peasants with unoptimized stats... well, it sure seems like a step back from ZOS' previous efforts to make hybrids & other non-optimized setups less left-out.

And all that doesn't even address the above points about stam/mag & WD/SD not scaling equally. Why have equal scaling goalposts for inherently unequal stats? Seems questionable, no?


I get that all this might be a good change for PvP, because having players with 60K Health, 9001 HP Regen, & 40K Resistances who can also just slap on a proc set and suddenly blast a 50,000 damage rainbow out of their butt for no sacrifice on their part is maybe a tiny bit unbalanced. Don't get me wrong, reigning in crazy over-the-top proc builds sounds good to me too. But this current scaling solution looks like it's going to punish the lower and "in-betweener" builds in PvE as a consequence, which seems antithetical to ZOS' recent stated goals of raising the floor and lowering the ceiling on that front, doesn't it?

The bottom line is, it seems like these changes serve to further limit build diversity and freedom -- especially at the low end. They take effectiveness away from builds that never had all that much, and give more to people who arguably don't even need it. They punish builds that don't adhere to the "right way" of building your character. Which sucks.

This is really a fantastic comment with a ton of very valid points.

This is how I think of the problem: in a game - any game - there will always be a tension between the various strategies employed to reach the end state (in this example, let's call it a delve boss). Some will be more efficacious, some will be less, but there will always be a most efficient as well as a least efficient way to solve the problem. Min/maxers inhabit one end of that continuum and casual questers (usually) inhabit the other. How can you please all parties at once? In my view, you simply can't. You can do your best but ultimately game balance is a zero-sum affair.

I sympathize with (nearly) anyone whose builds lose power to serve a greater design goal. I have enough characters that I am both winning and losing with literally every patch that comes out. But "play the way you want" as a slogan only gets you so far in actual content. Some players, for example, will want to do a Pacifist run and object to the very slaying of quest bosses, but that is an unavoidable problem in a game designed entirely around killing monsters that necessarily precludes those (very small number) of players who wish to play in that way from playing the game as they please.

Now, a low-power player isn't choosing to stand athwart the game's entire genre in their chosen playstyle (like the Pacifist) but they are objectively not playing the game as it is being balanced by the developers. Not using abilities every GCD, not using Light Attacks in between abilities, not using DoTs to supplement a spammable attack, not selecting the types of gear that the developers intend for their role to wear, all of these things will degrade performance toward achieving the game's goal (killing the delve boss). The question is, how many of these things can you allow players to ignore (or, perhaps much more likely, remain unaware of) while still providing them with an enjoyable experience?

IMO, you can ignore a handful of the above options but you can't ignore all of them and that is what I see a lot of other posters wanting to do. At a certain point (and the game is admittedly atrocious at explaining any game mechanics to new players), you have to engage with the core systems of the game and play at least somewhat as the developers intend for you to play. Does this violate "play the way you want" technically? It does, but the developers can only make so many accommodations.

IMO, if a player does not know about various mechanics or about more efficient ways to build their character, then it should be relayed to them without any sort of stigma attached (I remember dying infinitely at the first Summerset quest boss years ago and not knowing how to heal myself...). But I don't think that we should expend much energy trying to accommodate players who are aware of mechanics but who nonetheless affirmatively refuse to engage with them. In no way do I think that that describes the majority of low-power players but it does describe a certain genre of posters in these threads. For players willing to learn, education is by far the best aid for obtaining a rewarding gameplay experience.

Finally, in more practical terms, we don't have enough information about this change to justify the angst so far emitted. We don't know if the scaling on sets will be 0-100% from 0 to 5500 Weapon/Spell Damage or if it will be 50-100%. Recall, a player has almost 3000 Weapon/Spell Damage simply as a function of equipping a gold-level weapon, so even in a worst-case scenario of scaling, players will be receiving over 50% of their current values. From there, it is a trivial matter to slot a Major Sorcery/Brutality skill and invest in some Weapon/Spell Damage glyphs and you are likely sitting at nearly 4000. That is far from a Herculean lift for any casual player and 4000/5500 is still 75% of the original damage from a set. For sets that only do 3-4k DPS to begin with, we are only talking about a ~1k DPS loss per proc set, which is trivial for any player and can be surmounted by one AoE DoT.

As for Companions, end-game players did not ask for them; rather, they are entirely intended for this very use-case. Casual players and RP players are likely those who will enjoy interacting with them and learning their stories. Yes, it is from a Chapter but it is far from being "Pay 2 Win." Most players of ESO (at any power level or content interest) were going to buy the expansion at some point anyway (and at a certain point in time it will become part of the base game like Morrowind and Summerset).

Faylestar wrote: »

But yes, they can. Here's a build that's not even particularly built for high Weapon Damage

Yes, people are running 3 gold infused jewelry pieces in general-use gearsets without trying to stack weapon damage, this is entirely believable.

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

This is how I think of the problem: in a game - any game - there will always be a tension between the various strategies employed to reach the end state (in this example, let's call it a delve boss). Some will be more efficacious, some will be less, but there will always be a most efficient as well as a least efficient way to solve the problem. Min/maxers inhabit one end of that continuum and casual questers (usually) inhabit the other. How can you please all parties at once? In my view, you simply can't. You can do your best but ultimately game balance is a zero-sum affair.