Maintenance for the week of August 31:
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – September 3, 10:00AM EDT (14:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – September 3, 10:00AM EDT (14:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
ZOS, why is werewolf balancing ‘unchanging’?
-
Wuuffyy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Bushido2513 wrote: »Bushido2513 wrote: »Bushido2513 wrote: »madmufffin wrote: »Bushido2513 wrote: »Just sharing for context but get at least somebody is happy with updated pve dps!
https://youtu.be/8ZRM7emO9og?is=ld0qtKUCMUFCS_py
166k on a DK means NB is probably hitting like 180k+, and he did it in takeaway so sustain isn't horrifically bad. Good to see.
Yes, DPS is manageable but still any build such as an IA build, Vestige build, a tank (I have all of these builds by the way so can personally see the difference between live and PTS) (these types of builds focusing on health especially), and ANY sorc wolf is heavily affected for PvE post-nerf.
The bits I have provided on sustain are 'PvP builds' that focus on damage (whereas a tank for example would focus on buffing the group with a similar outcome on 'flexibility'), health for healing and as a buffer to damage taken (granted no minor resolve and limited mitigation passives), and sustain are very reflective of these types of builds and 'environmental + rotational pressure' yet they still burn out within 20 seconds of what I still consider to be 'light PvP combat' (no significant 'forced rolling' of any kind either through burst, significant snares, or immobilizes).
Especially in the case of a tank, fighting a Marauder in IA, or anything on Vestige- my Rampage is very likely to build much slower than a direct parse on a player or a dummy and as a result 'stabilization of sustain' becomes less possible. As a quick reminder, I'm allotted no more than 4-6 or so heals in a row depending on how I build wolf if built relatively appropriately and if I'm needing to 'heal on the go', the amount of healing I can dedicate specifically to sustain 'when needed' changes as a significant variable and healing in a pseudo-constant manner results in a hefty DPS loss for as long as I can manage that.
Common sense will tell you that 'stam wolf with attributes in stam' will do decently in PvE'. I imagine that in a group setting, especially with as much time on target as they had, they wouldn't have even needed Takeaway to manage.
I see a lot of your time devoted to this is the way I want to play and this is the the proposed nerfs don't work for me. I only see a few players who seen to feel the same.
I support you or anyone giving their opinions because it's an open space.
What I'm starting to wonder is, how many feel the way you do or are trying to do the things you're trying to do?
It seems like the community overall isn't as reactive to what you're looking for and I'm wondering if it's because not many care about ww or not many want to do what you're trying to do?
That's just a point to say hey if we're talking about a play style that is very niche then that has to be accounted for as well.
Again, I'm not against pve wolf at all but pvp wolf needs to be viable while not overwhelming to others in pvp, same as any skill line in pvp
It isn't 'the way I feel'.
Werewolf OBJECTIVELY did HORRIBLE before the rework.
UNDERSTAND they took damage, healing (up to 43% off the burst heal now on PTS), and DoT uptime (this was a drastic change done DURING THE REWORK PTS essentially for damage levels achieved through Signet) in exchange for the sustain given during U50.
Reducing healing, and allowing nothing significant healing-wise aside from health-based healing obviously serves to spread the user very thin as they must continue to build MORE of that resource for a similar level of healing, NOT less.
This affects basically any tank build IN PVE despite them saying 'THEY ARE HAPPY WITH PVE'. A tank, DOESN'T BUILD LARGE SWATHES OF STAMINA- that's not normal. I have OTHER RESOURCES and OTHER THINGS to ATTEND TO. Additionally, REMOVING STATIC REVERB doesn't exactly 'help sorc wolf' in PvE- it basically turns it into a non-viable options for anything but a haphazard support (compared to an actual sorc DPS support) overnight.
IA AND Vestige require you build COMPLETELY DIFFERENTLY as well. SOMETIMES HEALTH STACK is REQUIRED.
Building health is one thing, but it almost always directly coincides with reduced damage AND sustain. You can't expect werewolf to do well in PvP when it was objectively worse with more damage (tooltips on passives), utility (defiles), and higher uptimes (on all DoTs) AND has to stack more health for similar amounts of healing (which results in LESS damage, not more AND less sustain, not more).
It isn't logical and it doesn't make sense based on the game's own systems for give and take.
It's equally illogical that our only wep/spell damage scaling heal tooltips for 20% less than a breath of life and provides a unique debuff of 12%-damage-taken on the individual too ergo equating to needing MORE healing on average rather than LESS to succeed.
Werewolf is also a unique case in that if you don't beat your opponent's HPS, THEY DON'T DIE. This is UNLIKE ANY OTHER playstyle in this game that can rely on SOME level of burst to achieve the goal of defeating an opponent WITHOUT overwhelming their HPS. This isn't a playstyle that has a tremendous amount of give against competent opponents with high resource sustain (CoF and CoE) in addition to high healing (especially with any off-heals in the mix).
If I fight another werewolf averaging 3k DPS to my 5K HPS, they AREN'T KILLING ME- that's just how it is. That's them 'trying to build sustain and health for their own healing' and objectively not doing enough damage.
What data of any kind do you provide here, now? I want to know. I answer your questions, I give rebuttals; other people provide information to you, yet you 'sweep it under the rug' and go on further tangents and ask more questions.
When can you provide something meaningful to the conversation? I grow tired of talking in circles.
Wow you're missing the point in a big way.
There's no data I can provide here because my goals and your goals aren't the same. Also it's very much feeling based because there is no universal measure of anything you're talking about.
I'm not debating was there a nerf because that's not a question.
The question is how good or bad is ww post nerf and that's all feeling.
Sure you can say hey if xyz class can do it then why can't this skill line do it? But your comparing a skill line to a class and that's apples and oranges first of all.
There is no known metric in eso of what a nuanced thing should be.
Even if you say you can't do something, you're only speaking for yourself without a massive amount of multi player based data to back it up, which none of us has.
Your evidence is actually anecdotal even though you're providing data because you're only providing your data. For it to hold we would need to see the same data from several players and even then we have to expand to the multi thousand scenarios that the eso experience can provide.
To be fair and respectful to a logical and investigative process, you're one person or maybe even a few people reporting on something that has several thousand scenarios that you didn't test. It's an interesting read and gives some ideas for the devs to look at but it's nowhere near as telling as actually seeing the numbers in effect on live where many other players including console can chip in
To me the data anyone gives is just a clue to the devs where to look but this game has too many scenarios in this case for any one or even 10 data points to tell the story especially when a consensus can't be easily gained
The only fact we all agree on is that werewolf got nerfed. Past that I've mostly just seen personal preference on what people believe is personally acceptable.
There is no 'feeling' in what I relayed.
As per usual- you aren't actually reading responses and immediately going for discredit with no data or pertinent information.
You have missed my point in a bigger way.
Someone else can kindly go back and forth with you, I'm good here for this very moment on that note- thank you!
I'm happy to provide crazy amounts of data when you can say that you'll accept that what I say is acceptable is acceptable and that there's no longer a question. Deal?
No it's not a deal because that would be ridiculous because your goals aren't mine.
So what data would you like me to provide? I never even said ww was fine just that one or a few persons isn't enough to go off of.
Even if I say pts werewolf is ok you've just going to dismiss it as me not wanting what you want so what's the point?
Don't respond if you don't like. I'm certainly not here to even remotely trying to force a discussion from those that aren't interested. Put me on ignore if you like but I have and will share my opinion on the topic at my discretion, same as anyone here.
Any data from you on the PTS on the start would be good. Timestamped and validation of testing from a reputable source would help also.
Something that demonstrates that you're here to be more than a 'contradictory voice' without substantive evidence. I am happy to refute whatever is provided, as needed.
My argument is that werewolf was in a known and objectively worse state that triggered the need for balance changes WITH the visual rework. They removed tools (damage, uptimes, and defiles that assist against HPS, and 'on-demand' healing) to provide sustain, and then removed the vast majority of the given sustain without returning any of the tools werewolf lost when it was in that objectively worse state they've placed it much closer to.
So far, the rework has not changed the fundamentals of 'werewolf combat' (you either overwhelm your opponent's HPS or you don't) and the main source of combat comes from either its neutral game or the following Rampage which simply serves to enhance its 'neutral game' (in other words, does not add damage/healing of its own). They have weakened this neutral game with an incentive to 'make it to Rampage' and my argument is that many builds understandably cannot 'make it to Rampage' in a way that is 'healthy' for what werewolf uniquely requires for actual PvP (damage to overwhelm HPS, health to scale for healing and survivability, and cost reduction so that 'pressure' doesn't fizzle out soon after and/or doesn't become overtly strained against 'real combat' factors like immobilizes/snares/CCs/burst-window dodges/movement).
In my tests with others here, my tests on live, most of which I provide data from- I am demonstrating that 'building for sustain' in the current environment is not feasible in a 'healthy way' for wolf. Earlier in this thread, I provided a build where I verifiably had 2.2k stam recov and 35k health while in 6 medium. My heal? 6.7k on a non-crit. My crit is low and this is my only on-demand heal.
In other words, I'm 'building for sustain' in the most unrealistic way possible (6 med, lol), while keeping a 'health-based healing buffer' amounting to a measly 35k health (this is essentially health accounting for not having the same damage mitigation as others via block passives on sword and board, morph-dependent minor+ major protection, and lack of minor resolve). In PvP, you objectively could not survive any real pressure outside of 'Rampage' that required you to peel off of your target for any reason with your only on-demand heal being 6.7k non-crits without line-of-sight.
Beyond this, the developers cited the following:
-the devs are 'happy with PvE'
yet all nerfs affect PvE in varying ways. Static Reverb was a heavy and indirect nerf to anything Pure-Sorc-Wolf in PvE; It's also fairly obvious that doubling and tripling resources costs would have an impact on PvE. It can be offset by groups and can be better negated by a stam-stacking werewolf but any werewolf that isn't stam-stacking to 'make it to the next Rampage' is clearly and heavily affected. PvE tanks don't build stam in that way, solo IA builds pushing high runs don't build straight stam, mag builds don't build straight stam.
(there is a reason we had a 30% stam bar modifier where we now only and strangely retain the density for scaling but not that actual resource increase even post-sustain-nerf)
-a goal of the rework was to make mag builds viable
they are certainly no longer viable in PvP as my stam is bottoming-out within 15-20 seconds (I can't even make it to Rampage), and I have 30k health for the health-scaling still with 35k mag. That was with an 'odd' setup using Imperial, Shapeshifter's, and 5 med... something a mag build wouldn't normally have that would cause them 'burn out' even faster without these niche items before reaching Rampage. Additionally, the MSatar person or whatever even said in actual content (so not on a 21m dummy) that mag builds play incredibly rough and he appears to be a competent player in PvE at that (so your average player is not going to transform from a mag sorc, for example, and find any degree of success).
One could argue a better solution now would be 'Highest resource; lowest resource' scaling like Arcanist however nothing at all was done this patch despite mag being clearly unviable outside of optimized groups and niche full time-on-target situations with low pressure.
-in the U50 patch it was stated our damage was reduced to give us the sustain... damage, and uptimes we did not re-gain after losing sustain (in other words, we traded these things as part of an 'equivalent exchange' from when we were objectively worse yet did not regain any portion of them)
Edited by Wuuffyy on August 25, 2026 6:59PMWuuffyy,
'end-game' PvE and PvP player
ESO player since 2014 (Xbox and PC for PTS)
-new players, feel free to DM for guidance!4 -
Wuuffyy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭I'd also like to add on the cosmetic note that there exists no real and actual gain for disabling ALL of werewolf's EXISTING 'customized actions', especially paid cosmetics.
I could understand (and still do) discontinuing future 'customized actions' for werewolf however removing existing customized actions like recalls such as the one I am telling you I paid for EXPLICITLY due to how WELL it works in werewolf (new Ayelid crate bundle recall) is NOT okay with me, understandably.
This was their reasoning:
Less than 2 sentences or so on the week 1 PTS notes where I have had absolutely 0 say-so as to their decision. That is both frustrating and wrong.Edited by Wuuffyy on August 25, 2026 7:49PMWuuffyy,
'end-game' PvE and PvP player
ESO player since 2014 (Xbox and PC for PTS)
-new players, feel free to DM for guidance!4 -
Bushido2513✭✭✭✭✭gammelscroll wrote: »Bushido2513 wrote: »Bushido2513 wrote: »Bushido2513 wrote: »madmufffin wrote: »Bushido2513 wrote: »Just sharing for context but get at least somebody is happy with updated pve dps!https://youtu.be/8ZRM7emO9og?is=ld0qtKUCMUFCS_py
166k on a DK means NB is probably hitting like 180k+, and he did it in takeaway so sustain isn't horrifically bad. Good to see.
Yes, DPS is manageable but still any build such as an IA build, Vestige build, a tank (I have all of these builds by the way so can personally see the difference between live and PTS) (these types of builds focusing on health especially), and ANY sorc wolf is heavily affected for PvE post-nerf.
The bits I have provided on sustain are 'PvP builds' that focus on damage (whereas a tank for example would focus on buffing the group with a similar outcome on 'flexibility'), health for healing and as a buffer to damage taken (granted no minor resolve and limited mitigation passives), and sustain are very reflective of these types of builds and 'environmental + rotational pressure' yet they still burn out within 20 seconds of what I still consider to be 'light PvP combat' (no significant 'forced rolling' of any kind either through burst, significant snares, or immobilizes).
Especially in the case of a tank, fighting a Marauder in IA, or anything on Vestige- my Rampage is very likely to build much slower than a direct parse on a player or a dummy and as a result 'stabilization of sustain' becomes less possible. As a quick reminder, I'm allotted no more than 4-6 or so heals in a row depending on how I build wolf if built relatively appropriately and if I'm needing to 'heal on the go', the amount of healing I can dedicate specifically to sustain 'when needed' changes as a significant variable and healing in a pseudo-constant manner results in a hefty DPS loss for as long as I can manage that.
Common sense will tell you that 'stam wolf with attributes in stam' will do decently in PvE'. I imagine that in a group setting, especially with as much time on target as they had, they wouldn't have even needed Takeaway to manage.
I see a lot of your time devoted to this is the way I want to play and this is the the proposed nerfs don't work for me. I only see a few players who seen to feel the same.
I support you or anyone giving their opinions because it's an open space.
What I'm starting to wonder is, how many feel the way you do or are trying to do the things you're trying to do?
It seems like the community overall isn't as reactive to what you're looking for and I'm wondering if it's because not many care about ww or not many want to do what you're trying to do?
That's just a point to say hey if we're talking about a play style that is very niche then that has to be accounted for as well.
Again, I'm not against pve wolf at all but pvp wolf needs to be viable while not overwhelming to others in pvp, same as any skill line in pvp
It isn't 'the way I feel'.
Werewolf OBJECTIVELY did HORRIBLE before the rework.
UNDERSTAND they took damage, healing (up to 43% off the burst heal now on PTS), and DoT uptime (this was a drastic change done DURING THE REWORK PTS essentially for damage levels achieved through Signet) in exchange for the sustain given during U50.
Reducing healing, and allowing nothing significant healing-wise aside from health-based healing obviously serves to spread the user very thin as they must continue to build MORE of that resource for a similar level of healing, NOT less.
This affects basically any tank build IN PVE despite them saying 'THEY ARE HAPPY WITH PVE'. A tank, DOESN'T BUILD LARGE SWATHES OF STAMINA- that's not normal. I have OTHER RESOURCES and OTHER THINGS to ATTEND TO. Additionally, REMOVING STATIC REVERB doesn't exactly 'help sorc wolf' in PvE- it basically turns it into a non-viable options for anything but a haphazard support (compared to an actual sorc DPS support) overnight.
IA AND Vestige require you build COMPLETELY DIFFERENTLY as well. SOMETIMES HEALTH STACK is REQUIRED.
Building health is one thing, but it almost always directly coincides with reduced damage AND sustain. You can't expect werewolf to do well in PvP when it was objectively worse with more damage (tooltips on passives), utility (defiles), and higher uptimes (on all DoTs) AND has to stack more health for similar amounts of healing (which results in LESS damage, not more AND less sustain, not more).
It isn't logical and it doesn't make sense based on the game's own systems for give and take.
It's equally illogical that our only wep/spell damage scaling heal tooltips for 20% less than a breath of life and provides a unique debuff of 12%-damage-taken on the individual too ergo equating to needing MORE healing on average rather than LESS to succeed.
Werewolf is also a unique case in that if you don't beat your opponent's HPS, THEY DON'T DIE. This is UNLIKE ANY OTHER playstyle in this game that can rely on SOME level of burst to achieve the goal of defeating an opponent WITHOUT overwhelming their HPS. This isn't a playstyle that has a tremendous amount of give against competent opponents with high resource sustain (CoF and CoE) in addition to high healing (especially with any off-heals in the mix).
If I fight another werewolf averaging 3k DPS to my 5K HPS, they AREN'T KILLING ME- that's just how it is. That's them 'trying to build sustain and health for their own healing' and objectively not doing enough damage.
What data of any kind do you provide here, now? I want to know. I answer your questions, I give rebuttals; other people provide information to you, yet you 'sweep it under the rug' and go on further tangents and ask more questions.
When can you provide something meaningful to the conversation? I grow tired of talking in circles.
Wow you're missing the point in a big way.
There's no data I can provide here because my goals and your goals aren't the same. Also it's very much feeling based because there is no universal measure of anything you're talking about.
I'm not debating was there a nerf because that's not a question.
The question is how good or bad is ww post nerf and that's all feeling.
Sure you can say hey if xyz class can do it then why can't this skill line do it? But your comparing a skill line to a class and that's apples and oranges first of all.
There is no known metric in eso of what a nuanced thing should be.
Even if you say you can't do something, you're only speaking for yourself without a massive amount of multi player based data to back it up, which none of us has.
Your evidence is actually anecdotal even though you're providing data because you're only providing your data. For it to hold we would need to see the same data from several players and even then we have to expand to the multi thousand scenarios that the eso experience can provide.
To be fair and respectful to a logical and investigative process, you're one person or maybe even a few people reporting on something that has several thousand scenarios that you didn't test. It's an interesting read and gives some ideas for the devs to look at but it's nowhere near as telling as actually seeing the numbers in effect on live where many other players including console can chip in
To me the data anyone gives is just a clue to the devs where to look but this game has too many scenarios in this case for any one or even 10 data points to tell the story especially when a consensus can't be easily gained
The only fact we all agree on is that werewolf got nerfed. Past that I've mostly just seen personal preference on what people believe is personally acceptable.
There is no 'feeling' in what I relayed.
As per usual- you aren't actually reading responses and immediately going for discredit with no data or pertinent information.
You have missed my point in a bigger way.
Someone else can kindly go back and forth with you, I'm good here for this very moment on that note- thank you!
I'm happy to provide crazy amounts of data when you can say that you'll accept that what I say is acceptable is acceptable and that there's no longer a question. Deal?
No it's not a deal because that would be ridiculous because your goals aren't mine.
So what data would you like me to provide? I never even said ww was fine just that one or a few persons isn't enough to go off of.
Even if I say pts werewolf is ok you've just going to dismiss it as me not wanting what you want so what's the point?
Don't respond if you don't like. I'm certainly not here to even remotely trying to force a discussion from those that aren't interested. Put me on ignore if you like but I have and will share my opinion on the topic at my discretion, same as anyone here.
Wth are you talking about? Emo much?
You don't want to read feelings into what I say. There usually aren't any. It's just a discussion about a game.1 -
Arunei✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
There is no opinion in this matter. Data does not operate on opinion, it operates on facts and information. And if someone is claiming something works, then objectively they need to provide the data that backs that up. Trying to say "in someone's experience" does not provide anything meaningful. People could hide behind this reasoning even if they have little to no experience in something. Someone's supposed "experience" does not matter if it is not providing objective proof of something. Experience without backing it up is about as useful as no experience whatsoever.Bushido2513 wrote: »
Except yes, he DOES need to provide proof of his claims. This is the PTS the whole point of things is to provide actual data, not pointless hearsay that has been proven already NOT TO WORK. If he's going to sit here and parrot the same nonsense without backing it up, it's not data, it's nothing. Empty words. It's someone who wants WW to be nerfed and is spreading their own misinformation about X or Y working when his ""advice"" was followed.Bushido2513 wrote: »
I don't know what makes it clear you're just here to be contrary and hate on WW more than this right here. You have been asked repeatedly for proof of the claims you're making, but you just keep coming up with passive-aggressive excuses to avoid actually giving any proof to validate your claims. It's obvious you haven't done any testing and are just out here saying whatever sound remotely like it should work, even though proof that it DOESN'T has been provided. Kind of like when you kept claiming you dueled Wuuffey but then offered absolutely 0 proof of it and folded when pressed about it.Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
That was with tri-pots, 5 medium, Shapeshifter's, and Imperial. That's pretty sustainy.
Both with that being said, I actually did run with "Orzo food" (remember, I told you this already?), and I had even attempted with Takeaway Broth and pretty quickly and obviously determined that decreasing your max resources makes the sustain worse and not better. Running 2,000+ stam recov after a tri-pot resulted in no meaning increases over the above build:Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
This is a way to build it that is MAXIMIZING reduction, using tri-pots, and gaining sustain. That doesn't work.
Running Orzo food was worse, in-fact (as your resource pools are already very low and they have reduced healing which requires more health and not less to remediate reductions... with that being said):HalensShade wrote: »[snip]
[snip]
Imperial, swap from bewitched to orzo food, sorc CoE class mastery. Done and WW is still OP
Haha! You tried this on the other thread too xD-madmufffin wrote: »
It's still fine on sorc with Orzo food nice try
No, sorry. This is me on the 6m dummy with "Orzo Food", 6 medium, all tri-glyphs on my sorcwolf without CoE (subclassed to get more power given no more static reverb):
I lasted 15 seconds... I made it less than half of my bar for Rampage.
See, that's the beauty of it. Even dropping down to 35k health (trying to keep a decent level of healing even though I'll fall over with 35k health, no minor resolve, in 6 medium in an actual PvP environment)... "Orzo food" causes me to lose far too much max resource so despite higher recov... I still burn out nearly instantly.
This is on an Imperial btw... which makes this EVEN WORSE as my max resources are higher and my costs are 6% cheaper across the board.
CoE is a MAJOR plummet in damage, additionally, picking sorc masteries without reverb now causes you to lose HEAPS of damage over other classes and their masteries/subclassing, and the sustain decrease nerf for CoE (along with the sustain decrease of less max resources for CoE-scaling with something like "Orzo" food) causes even the sustain gained to be woefully less impactful as well over running sustain in other ways for other classes/subclassing.
[edited to remove quote]
Do you have any data of your own to support your claims?
Sustain set, serpent and Orzo solves the issue. Sorry you struggle to adapt.
Nope, we tried with all sorts of things including over 30% reduction to stamina abilities, "Orzo Food", cost glyphs @AdonisJorge, and more.
Beyond that, how much damage do you believe werewolf is capable of losing before it can no longer kill competent players/ any reasonable amount of time?
It had more damage across the board before the rework. How could it logically lose damage, I build more sustain on wolf than I ever have before (as they remove the sustain), and it somehow do better than it did for me before the rework?
Do you have any timestamped PTS CMX data to validate your point?
Sounds like it's just a YOU issue then and the rest of us are good / adapted. Sorry bud
Hmm, very strange. It's a logical issue because they reduced the damage (from when it objectively was awful), took away defiles (pressure on healing and shielding), gave it sustain, removed the sustain, and didn't return the damage...
I built for sustain as I have very clearly demonstrated via logical data and CMX parses and yet burn out in 20 seconds or less (even at the expense of more damage). I also have a plethora of people I've tested on this PTS with the same claim of the hindrance of the sustain and the egregious stat spread that wolf requires (remember, reducing the healing doesn't exactly give me the option of building less health especially when I cannot bolster my tankiness with a sword and board/minor resolve, for example)...
...yet you are saying 'build better' but cannot provide any data or proof to back up the claim that you know how to build in a way that is fundamentally better than me (who did verifiably proficiently with wolf pre-rework and who does verifiably proficiently with wolf post-rework) or any of those I have verifiably fought against, with proof, on PTS.
I am choosing to not engage with you anymore for the time being as I wish to engage in 'good faith' arguments only. Thank you, once again!
I'm not here to help you learn WW or theorycraft builds after the changes. Sorry maybe someone on YT can help you out.
You do realize the burden of proof is on a person making a claim, yes? If what you keep saying is true, why are you so afraid to post proof of it? And please don't try hiding behind excuses of "look at Youtube lel" because NONE of those builds are the one YOU are CLAIMING ""works"" on the PTS right now. Other builds dont mean anything, they have no bearing on this conversation.
You are making claims. Offer your proof. That's how it works, not hiding behind "I'm not here to theorycraft for you". This isn't about making builds, this is about offering objective proof of something.
ETA Also how are people even supposed to test what you keep claiming ""works"" if you refuse to tell people what ""works"" beyond the absolute vaguest things? Because proof of builds following your ""advice"" not working has been shown, and yet you STILL keep insisting that it's the other person essentially being bad. Despite them doing what you say allegedly ""works"". So again...show proof. Because otherwise you're offering nothing to the conversation but misinformation yourself.
Well yes and no. I see the point the person is making here and I see where I think you may be going wrong.
They dun don't need to prove anything because they aren't saying the build will be amazing just playable.
Here's the issue, what's playable? Pve, pvp, cp, no cp, dungeon, trial, duel, etc. Playable builds for those require very different things.
At a base level if I tell you to strap on all sustain gear, enchants, mundus, and food, we know you'll be able to perform skills so it's playable.
Now what I suspect you or anyone else is asking is show me a build with performance in any of the categories I just named and to be honest that's not realistic because playable is in the mind of the player and their goals which can be all over the place.
So functionally is ww technically playable, of course. Is it going to be at the levels it was before, of course not. Can it reach even near those levels in xyz environment, probably not.
Could you build something and play it and have fun, that's up to reach personal player and preference.
Obviously those the really enjoy ww are not happy with the change and want at or near the same level of performance. And it's a good idea to ask for what you want but also accept and pay what they decide upon in the end, or not, but it's still probably going to happen.
Playable isn't that complicated in this instance. It means whether you run out of resources faster than other Classes or have to give up more damage, healing, or tanking ability to build into more than any other Class would. No build is playable if you're running out of resources quickly or if you have to spec so much into sustain that it negatively impacts your overall ability to do whatever it is you're trying to.
If dude is SO SURE that his ""advice"" works as well as he claims it does, what genuine legit reason can he have for not backing it up with proof? None, it's why all his avoidance has been passive-aggressive nothings. But I doubt he's going to offer proof of anything. Given none of my last few posts directed at him have been acknowledged, I'm being ignored.
You missed the point. You're confusing absolute and opinion.
His opinion based on his experience is that this will work and it's true because it's based on his opinion and expectations.
See if he says ok I built all into sustain and it works for me then you're going to say it doesn't have enough damage or defense. Then if he shows it he having those in a situation he deems appropriate then you're going to say well that's not what I was talking about and now all the sudden he's trying to build a spec that matches up to your expectations which is crazy to chase. That's why he's right in saying he doesn't have to prove anything to you, because at the end of the day he's not responsible for meeting your expectations of what playable is as long as he meets his own.
Now if he claimed that he could beat you in a duel or in a pve parse then he'd need to back up those claims but saying if you make these changes I think it would be playable isn't a claim that has to be backed up because it's not based on logic, it's mostly opinion if not feeling which really shouldn't be argued.
Sure, what works for one person might not work for another. In fact it's pretty well-known that you can give two people the same exact build with the only difference between their skill level, and typically the person with more skill and, yes, experience, will do decently better than the person with less skill. But that's not what's being debated here. What's being asked for is the barest hint of proof that his "advice" actually works. That he can make a build that has good sustain without giving up so much of everything else that the sustain is pointless because he can't deal, tank, or heal enough damage.
He's claiming that his build is still able to beat people on the PTS after swapping some stuff around but refuses to post proof. This isn't about moving goalposts like you seem to be making it out to be. Literally all any of us asking for proof are doing is asking for proof that he actually swapped his build around like he claimed to and was still doing fine in PvP. That is it. Nothing more. It's got nothing to do with wanting to say "oh well you have good sustain but your damage is low". Because if he has a build that can actually sustain and kill other players reliably then it would inherently mean the build is strong.
But he refuses. He refuses to post evidence that his so-called build even exists. He isn't providing proof that he's not just saying whatever sounds like it should work. There's nothing from him to back up that his build performs like he's claiming. Why would you believe someone making a claim like this without any proof that they even have the build they're claiming works? When numerous times Wuuffy has posted proof that the stuff doesn't work as claimed?
Also I'd like to bring up again that Mamba and Wuuffy were supposed to duel and Mamba never posted any proof of that either, despite claiming that Wuuffy showed up in a stalemate build. It's a pattern, if it needs to be pointed out. Say X thing and then offer no evidence of it. It feels like the PTS of U50 all over again, when people were submitting "proof" of WW being too strong in PvP but not being transparent in what they were or weren't using. It was mostly in regards to Signet (people not admitting they were using it but their CMX giving it away b/c of the various status procs) or using things like CoE. Incorrect and insincere data, along with just flat out bad faith lying, can do quite a bit of harm. It's why people ask for data with full transparency, not just taking a person's word on something because "trust me bro".PC-NA | Been around since closed beta | Alt account: Arunei PC-NA
Avid RPer. Hit me up in-game @Ras_Lei if you're interested in getting together for some arr-pee shenanigans!
RP Characters:
Sarah Lacroix: Breton Vampire who really really REALLY likes likes learning Magick and also her Altmer husbando
Kaalhil Swiftstrike: Tiny shapeshifting monster hunter Bosmeri lady with enough sass to kill a dragon or ten
Gwendolyn Jenelle: Friendly healer with a coffee addiction and her own medical practice
Krisiel: Literally crazy Werewolf, no like legit insane. She nuts
Kiju Veran: Ex-Fighters Guild Suthay who likes to punch things and is also a spy and ALSO a Werewolf
Niralae Elsinal: Young Altmeri woman with way too much Magicka and Vampire husbando
Slondor: TESified Slenderman, except lazier and has more of a thing for deals than Clavicus Vile does
Marius Vastino: Sarah's Imperial apathetic sire who likes to monologue
Lirawyn Calatare: Traveling performer and bard who's 101% vanilla bean
Soliril Larethian: Blind alchemist who uses animals to see and brews plagues in his spare time4 -
Bushido2513✭✭✭✭✭
There is no opinion in this matter. Data does not operate on opinion, it operates on facts and information. And if someone is claiming something works, then objectively they need to provide the data that backs that up. Trying to say "in someone's experience" does not provide anything meaningful. People could hide behind this reasoning even if they have little to no experience in something. Someone's supposed "experience" does not matter if it is not providing objective proof of something. Experience without backing it up is about as useful as no experience whatsoever.Bushido2513 wrote: »
Except yes, he DOES need to provide proof of his claims. This is the PTS the whole point of things is to provide actual data, not pointless hearsay that has been proven already NOT TO WORK. If he's going to sit here and parrot the same nonsense without backing it up, it's not data, it's nothing. Empty words. It's someone who wants WW to be nerfed and is spreading their own misinformation about X or Y working when his ""advice"" was followed.Bushido2513 wrote: »
I don't know what makes it clear you're just here to be contrary and hate on WW more than this right here. You have been asked repeatedly for proof of the claims you're making, but you just keep coming up with passive-aggressive excuses to avoid actually giving any proof to validate your claims. It's obvious you haven't done any testing and are just out here saying whatever sound remotely like it should work, even though proof that it DOESN'T has been provided. Kind of like when you kept claiming you dueled Wuuffey but then offered absolutely 0 proof of it and folded when pressed about it.Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
That was with tri-pots, 5 medium, Shapeshifter's, and Imperial. That's pretty sustainy.
Both with that being said, I actually did run with "Orzo food" (remember, I told you this already?), and I had even attempted with Takeaway Broth and pretty quickly and obviously determined that decreasing your max resources makes the sustain worse and not better. Running 2,000+ stam recov after a tri-pot resulted in no meaning increases over the above build:Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
This is a way to build it that is MAXIMIZING reduction, using tri-pots, and gaining sustain. That doesn't work.
Running Orzo food was worse, in-fact (as your resource pools are already very low and they have reduced healing which requires more health and not less to remediate reductions... with that being said):HalensShade wrote: »[snip]
[snip]
Imperial, swap from bewitched to orzo food, sorc CoE class mastery. Done and WW is still OP
Haha! You tried this on the other thread too xD-madmufffin wrote: »
It's still fine on sorc with Orzo food nice try
No, sorry. This is me on the 6m dummy with "Orzo Food", 6 medium, all tri-glyphs on my sorcwolf without CoE (subclassed to get more power given no more static reverb):
I lasted 15 seconds... I made it less than half of my bar for Rampage.
See, that's the beauty of it. Even dropping down to 35k health (trying to keep a decent level of healing even though I'll fall over with 35k health, no minor resolve, in 6 medium in an actual PvP environment)... "Orzo food" causes me to lose far too much max resource so despite higher recov... I still burn out nearly instantly.
This is on an Imperial btw... which makes this EVEN WORSE as my max resources are higher and my costs are 6% cheaper across the board.
CoE is a MAJOR plummet in damage, additionally, picking sorc masteries without reverb now causes you to lose HEAPS of damage over other classes and their masteries/subclassing, and the sustain decrease nerf for CoE (along with the sustain decrease of less max resources for CoE-scaling with something like "Orzo" food) causes even the sustain gained to be woefully less impactful as well over running sustain in other ways for other classes/subclassing.
[edited to remove quote]
Do you have any data of your own to support your claims?
Sustain set, serpent and Orzo solves the issue. Sorry you struggle to adapt.
Nope, we tried with all sorts of things including over 30% reduction to stamina abilities, "Orzo Food", cost glyphs @AdonisJorge, and more.
Beyond that, how much damage do you believe werewolf is capable of losing before it can no longer kill competent players/ any reasonable amount of time?
It had more damage across the board before the rework. How could it logically lose damage, I build more sustain on wolf than I ever have before (as they remove the sustain), and it somehow do better than it did for me before the rework?
Do you have any timestamped PTS CMX data to validate your point?
Sounds like it's just a YOU issue then and the rest of us are good / adapted. Sorry bud
Hmm, very strange. It's a logical issue because they reduced the damage (from when it objectively was awful), took away defiles (pressure on healing and shielding), gave it sustain, removed the sustain, and didn't return the damage...
I built for sustain as I have very clearly demonstrated via logical data and CMX parses and yet burn out in 20 seconds or less (even at the expense of more damage). I also have a plethora of people I've tested on this PTS with the same claim of the hindrance of the sustain and the egregious stat spread that wolf requires (remember, reducing the healing doesn't exactly give me the option of building less health especially when I cannot bolster my tankiness with a sword and board/minor resolve, for example)...
...yet you are saying 'build better' but cannot provide any data or proof to back up the claim that you know how to build in a way that is fundamentally better than me (who did verifiably proficiently with wolf pre-rework and who does verifiably proficiently with wolf post-rework) or any of those I have verifiably fought against, with proof, on PTS.
I am choosing to not engage with you anymore for the time being as I wish to engage in 'good faith' arguments only. Thank you, once again!
I'm not here to help you learn WW or theorycraft builds after the changes. Sorry maybe someone on YT can help you out.
You do realize the burden of proof is on a person making a claim, yes? If what you keep saying is true, why are you so afraid to post proof of it? And please don't try hiding behind excuses of "look at Youtube lel" because NONE of those builds are the one YOU are CLAIMING ""works"" on the PTS right now. Other builds dont mean anything, they have no bearing on this conversation.
You are making claims. Offer your proof. That's how it works, not hiding behind "I'm not here to theorycraft for you". This isn't about making builds, this is about offering objective proof of something.
ETA Also how are people even supposed to test what you keep claiming ""works"" if you refuse to tell people what ""works"" beyond the absolute vaguest things? Because proof of builds following your ""advice"" not working has been shown, and yet you STILL keep insisting that it's the other person essentially being bad. Despite them doing what you say allegedly ""works"". So again...show proof. Because otherwise you're offering nothing to the conversation but misinformation yourself.
Well yes and no. I see the point the person is making here and I see where I think you may be going wrong.
They dun don't need to prove anything because they aren't saying the build will be amazing just playable.
Here's the issue, what's playable? Pve, pvp, cp, no cp, dungeon, trial, duel, etc. Playable builds for those require very different things.
At a base level if I tell you to strap on all sustain gear, enchants, mundus, and food, we know you'll be able to perform skills so it's playable.
Now what I suspect you or anyone else is asking is show me a build with performance in any of the categories I just named and to be honest that's not realistic because playable is in the mind of the player and their goals which can be all over the place.
So functionally is ww technically playable, of course. Is it going to be at the levels it was before, of course not. Can it reach even near those levels in xyz environment, probably not.
Could you build something and play it and have fun, that's up to reach personal player and preference.
Obviously those the really enjoy ww are not happy with the change and want at or near the same level of performance. And it's a good idea to ask for what you want but also accept and pay what they decide upon in the end, or not, but it's still probably going to happen.
Playable isn't that complicated in this instance. It means whether you run out of resources faster than other Classes or have to give up more damage, healing, or tanking ability to build into more than any other Class would. No build is playable if you're running out of resources quickly or if you have to spec so much into sustain that it negatively impacts your overall ability to do whatever it is you're trying to.
If dude is SO SURE that his ""advice"" works as well as he claims it does, what genuine legit reason can he have for not backing it up with proof? None, it's why all his avoidance has been passive-aggressive nothings. But I doubt he's going to offer proof of anything. Given none of my last few posts directed at him have been acknowledged, I'm being ignored.
You missed the point. You're confusing absolute and opinion.
His opinion based on his experience is that this will work and it's true because it's based on his opinion and expectations.
See if he says ok I built all into sustain and it works for me then you're going to say it doesn't have enough damage or defense. Then if he shows it he having those in a situation he deems appropriate then you're going to say well that's not what I was talking about and now all the sudden he's trying to build a spec that matches up to your expectations which is crazy to chase. That's why he's right in saying he doesn't have to prove anything to you, because at the end of the day he's not responsible for meeting your expectations of what playable is as long as he meets his own.
Now if he claimed that he could beat you in a duel or in a pve parse then he'd need to back up those claims but saying if you make these changes I think it would be playable isn't a claim that has to be backed up because it's not based on logic, it's mostly opinion if not feeling which really shouldn't be argued.
Sure, what works for one person might not work for another. In fact it's pretty well-known that you can give two people the same exact build with the only difference between their skill level, and typically the person with more skill and, yes, experience, will do decently better than the person with less skill. But that's not what's being debated here. What's being asked for is the barest hint of proof that his "advice" actually works. That he can make a build that has good sustain without giving up so much of everything else that the sustain is pointless because he can't deal, tank, or heal enough damage.
He's claiming that his build is still able to beat people on the PTS after swapping some stuff around but refuses to post proof. This isn't about moving goalposts like you seem to be making it out to be. Literally all any of us asking for proof are doing is asking for proof that he actually swapped his build around like he claimed to and was still doing fine in PvP. That is it. Nothing more. It's got nothing to do with wanting to say "oh well you have good sustain but your damage is low". Because if he has a build that can actually sustain and kill other players reliably then it would inherently mean the build is strong.
But he refuses. He refuses to post evidence that his so-called build even exists. He isn't providing proof that he's not just saying whatever sounds like it should work. There's nothing from him to back up that his build performs like he's claiming. Why would you believe someone making a claim like this without any proof that they even have the build they're claiming works? When numerous times Wuuffy has posted proof that the stuff doesn't work as claimed?
Also I'd like to bring up again that Mamba and Wuuffy were supposed to duel and Mamba never posted any proof of that either, despite claiming that Wuuffy showed up in a stalemate build. It's a pattern, if it needs to be pointed out. Say X thing and then offer no evidence of it. It feels like the PTS of U50 all over again, when people were submitting "proof" of WW being too strong in PvP but not being transparent in what they were or weren't using. It was mostly in regards to Signet (people not admitting they were using it but their CMX giving it away b/c of the various status procs) or using things like CoE. Incorrect and insincere data, along with just flat out bad faith lying, can do quite a bit of harm. It's why people ask for data with full transparency, not just taking a person's word on something because "trust me bro".
Ok I'm going to try to address this in good faith.
Here's the problem with trying to prove yourself in a situation like this. Ok so he shows you the build. Then let's say he shows you beating someone in a duel.
People will just give reasons why the example isn't valid. Or they will say okay well what about when I want to do zyz, bet you can't do that.
Okay I said good faith so sure maybe he's making it up. What I'm saying is that I've been in the exact position when people say show me and when the subject has layers it becomes a trap because either you're going to show them what works for you and what you're happy with and they just dismiss it because it wasn't what they wanted or you show them perhaps that it's a skill issue and they still dismiss it because they don't want to learn your different way.
What I'm saying is this, I learned a long time ago to not try to prove yourself on a nuanced subject because sometimes if you're happy and the other person isn't for whatever reason, is just best to leave it because either way it's an inconvenience that only takes time away from what you're enjoying.
Notice that even when I asked for more data I was clear that it wasn't for me but might help devs. I was giving my opinion as someone that does development.
Again I'm not saying this person isn't making it up , I'm saying I've been on his side of things and can relate to that situation where you just say to the person, sorry if you can't figure it out or be happy but I can't be inconvenienced to explain it or compare what makes me happy that doesn't work for you.
Of course we can get all lost in asking someone to try to prove their statements. But we could also just say ok well there's one vote for it's ok, now let's move on and just accept that he declined to share further details.
If we're looking for change then let's do so in a productive way vs badgering someone that clearly isn't interested in further helping. There's all kinds of reasons his opinion could be invalid in regards to ww, no need to really dig in on it I'd say.0 -
Wuuffyy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Bushido2513 wrote: »
There is no opinion in this matter. Data does not operate on opinion, it operates on facts and information. And if someone is claiming something works, then objectively they need to provide the data that backs that up. Trying to say "in someone's experience" does not provide anything meaningful. People could hide behind this reasoning even if they have little to no experience in something. Someone's supposed "experience" does not matter if it is not providing objective proof of something. Experience without backing it up is about as useful as no experience whatsoever.Bushido2513 wrote: »
Except yes, he DOES need to provide proof of his claims. This is the PTS the whole point of things is to provide actual data, not pointless hearsay that has been proven already NOT TO WORK. If he's going to sit here and parrot the same nonsense without backing it up, it's not data, it's nothing. Empty words. It's someone who wants WW to be nerfed and is spreading their own misinformation about X or Y working when his ""advice"" was followed.Bushido2513 wrote: »
I don't know what makes it clear you're just here to be contrary and hate on WW more than this right here. You have been asked repeatedly for proof of the claims you're making, but you just keep coming up with passive-aggressive excuses to avoid actually giving any proof to validate your claims. It's obvious you haven't done any testing and are just out here saying whatever sound remotely like it should work, even though proof that it DOESN'T has been provided. Kind of like when you kept claiming you dueled Wuuffey but then offered absolutely 0 proof of it and folded when pressed about it.Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
That was with tri-pots, 5 medium, Shapeshifter's, and Imperial. That's pretty sustainy.
Both with that being said, I actually did run with "Orzo food" (remember, I told you this already?), and I had even attempted with Takeaway Broth and pretty quickly and obviously determined that decreasing your max resources makes the sustain worse and not better. Running 2,000+ stam recov after a tri-pot resulted in no meaning increases over the above build:Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
This is a way to build it that is MAXIMIZING reduction, using tri-pots, and gaining sustain. That doesn't work.
Running Orzo food was worse, in-fact (as your resource pools are already very low and they have reduced healing which requires more health and not less to remediate reductions... with that being said):HalensShade wrote: »[snip]
[snip]
Imperial, swap from bewitched to orzo food, sorc CoE class mastery. Done and WW is still OP
Haha! You tried this on the other thread too xD-madmufffin wrote: »
It's still fine on sorc with Orzo food nice try
No, sorry. This is me on the 6m dummy with "Orzo Food", 6 medium, all tri-glyphs on my sorcwolf without CoE (subclassed to get more power given no more static reverb):
I lasted 15 seconds... I made it less than half of my bar for Rampage.
See, that's the beauty of it. Even dropping down to 35k health (trying to keep a decent level of healing even though I'll fall over with 35k health, no minor resolve, in 6 medium in an actual PvP environment)... "Orzo food" causes me to lose far too much max resource so despite higher recov... I still burn out nearly instantly.
This is on an Imperial btw... which makes this EVEN WORSE as my max resources are higher and my costs are 6% cheaper across the board.
CoE is a MAJOR plummet in damage, additionally, picking sorc masteries without reverb now causes you to lose HEAPS of damage over other classes and their masteries/subclassing, and the sustain decrease nerf for CoE (along with the sustain decrease of less max resources for CoE-scaling with something like "Orzo" food) causes even the sustain gained to be woefully less impactful as well over running sustain in other ways for other classes/subclassing.
[edited to remove quote]
Do you have any data of your own to support your claims?
Sustain set, serpent and Orzo solves the issue. Sorry you struggle to adapt.
Nope, we tried with all sorts of things including over 30% reduction to stamina abilities, "Orzo Food", cost glyphs @AdonisJorge, and more.
Beyond that, how much damage do you believe werewolf is capable of losing before it can no longer kill competent players/ any reasonable amount of time?
It had more damage across the board before the rework. How could it logically lose damage, I build more sustain on wolf than I ever have before (as they remove the sustain), and it somehow do better than it did for me before the rework?
Do you have any timestamped PTS CMX data to validate your point?
Sounds like it's just a YOU issue then and the rest of us are good / adapted. Sorry bud
Hmm, very strange. It's a logical issue because they reduced the damage (from when it objectively was awful), took away defiles (pressure on healing and shielding), gave it sustain, removed the sustain, and didn't return the damage...
I built for sustain as I have very clearly demonstrated via logical data and CMX parses and yet burn out in 20 seconds or less (even at the expense of more damage). I also have a plethora of people I've tested on this PTS with the same claim of the hindrance of the sustain and the egregious stat spread that wolf requires (remember, reducing the healing doesn't exactly give me the option of building less health especially when I cannot bolster my tankiness with a sword and board/minor resolve, for example)...
...yet you are saying 'build better' but cannot provide any data or proof to back up the claim that you know how to build in a way that is fundamentally better than me (who did verifiably proficiently with wolf pre-rework and who does verifiably proficiently with wolf post-rework) or any of those I have verifiably fought against, with proof, on PTS.
I am choosing to not engage with you anymore for the time being as I wish to engage in 'good faith' arguments only. Thank you, once again!
I'm not here to help you learn WW or theorycraft builds after the changes. Sorry maybe someone on YT can help you out.
You do realize the burden of proof is on a person making a claim, yes? If what you keep saying is true, why are you so afraid to post proof of it? And please don't try hiding behind excuses of "look at Youtube lel" because NONE of those builds are the one YOU are CLAIMING ""works"" on the PTS right now. Other builds dont mean anything, they have no bearing on this conversation.
You are making claims. Offer your proof. That's how it works, not hiding behind "I'm not here to theorycraft for you". This isn't about making builds, this is about offering objective proof of something.
ETA Also how are people even supposed to test what you keep claiming ""works"" if you refuse to tell people what ""works"" beyond the absolute vaguest things? Because proof of builds following your ""advice"" not working has been shown, and yet you STILL keep insisting that it's the other person essentially being bad. Despite them doing what you say allegedly ""works"". So again...show proof. Because otherwise you're offering nothing to the conversation but misinformation yourself.
Well yes and no. I see the point the person is making here and I see where I think you may be going wrong.
They dun don't need to prove anything because they aren't saying the build will be amazing just playable.
Here's the issue, what's playable? Pve, pvp, cp, no cp, dungeon, trial, duel, etc. Playable builds for those require very different things.
At a base level if I tell you to strap on all sustain gear, enchants, mundus, and food, we know you'll be able to perform skills so it's playable.
Now what I suspect you or anyone else is asking is show me a build with performance in any of the categories I just named and to be honest that's not realistic because playable is in the mind of the player and their goals which can be all over the place.
So functionally is ww technically playable, of course. Is it going to be at the levels it was before, of course not. Can it reach even near those levels in xyz environment, probably not.
Could you build something and play it and have fun, that's up to reach personal player and preference.
Obviously those the really enjoy ww are not happy with the change and want at or near the same level of performance. And it's a good idea to ask for what you want but also accept and pay what they decide upon in the end, or not, but it's still probably going to happen.
Playable isn't that complicated in this instance. It means whether you run out of resources faster than other Classes or have to give up more damage, healing, or tanking ability to build into more than any other Class would. No build is playable if you're running out of resources quickly or if you have to spec so much into sustain that it negatively impacts your overall ability to do whatever it is you're trying to.
If dude is SO SURE that his ""advice"" works as well as he claims it does, what genuine legit reason can he have for not backing it up with proof? None, it's why all his avoidance has been passive-aggressive nothings. But I doubt he's going to offer proof of anything. Given none of my last few posts directed at him have been acknowledged, I'm being ignored.
You missed the point. You're confusing absolute and opinion.
His opinion based on his experience is that this will work and it's true because it's based on his opinion and expectations.
See if he says ok I built all into sustain and it works for me then you're going to say it doesn't have enough damage or defense. Then if he shows it he having those in a situation he deems appropriate then you're going to say well that's not what I was talking about and now all the sudden he's trying to build a spec that matches up to your expectations which is crazy to chase. That's why he's right in saying he doesn't have to prove anything to you, because at the end of the day he's not responsible for meeting your expectations of what playable is as long as he meets his own.
Now if he claimed that he could beat you in a duel or in a pve parse then he'd need to back up those claims but saying if you make these changes I think it would be playable isn't a claim that has to be backed up because it's not based on logic, it's mostly opinion if not feeling which really shouldn't be argued.
Sure, what works for one person might not work for another. In fact it's pretty well-known that you can give two people the same exact build with the only difference between their skill level, and typically the person with more skill and, yes, experience, will do decently better than the person with less skill. But that's not what's being debated here. What's being asked for is the barest hint of proof that his "advice" actually works. That he can make a build that has good sustain without giving up so much of everything else that the sustain is pointless because he can't deal, tank, or heal enough damage.
He's claiming that his build is still able to beat people on the PTS after swapping some stuff around but refuses to post proof. This isn't about moving goalposts like you seem to be making it out to be. Literally all any of us asking for proof are doing is asking for proof that he actually swapped his build around like he claimed to and was still doing fine in PvP. That is it. Nothing more. It's got nothing to do with wanting to say "oh well you have good sustain but your damage is low". Because if he has a build that can actually sustain and kill other players reliably then it would inherently mean the build is strong.
But he refuses. He refuses to post evidence that his so-called build even exists. He isn't providing proof that he's not just saying whatever sounds like it should work. There's nothing from him to back up that his build performs like he's claiming. Why would you believe someone making a claim like this without any proof that they even have the build they're claiming works? When numerous times Wuuffy has posted proof that the stuff doesn't work as claimed?
Also I'd like to bring up again that Mamba and Wuuffy were supposed to duel and Mamba never posted any proof of that either, despite claiming that Wuuffy showed up in a stalemate build. It's a pattern, if it needs to be pointed out. Say X thing and then offer no evidence of it. It feels like the PTS of U50 all over again, when people were submitting "proof" of WW being too strong in PvP but not being transparent in what they were or weren't using. It was mostly in regards to Signet (people not admitting they were using it but their CMX giving it away b/c of the various status procs) or using things like CoE. Incorrect and insincere data, along with just flat out bad faith lying, can do quite a bit of harm. It's why people ask for data with full transparency, not just taking a person's word on something because "trust me bro".
Ok I'm going to try to address this in good faith.
Here's the problem with trying to prove yourself in a situation like this. Ok so he shows you the build. Then let's say he shows you beating someone in a duel.
People will just give reasons why the example isn't valid. Or they will say okay well what about when I want to do zyz, bet you can't do that.
Okay I said good faith so sure maybe he's making it up. What I'm saying is that I've been in the exact position when people say show me and when the subject has layers it becomes a trap because either you're going to show them what works for you and what you're happy with and they just dismiss it because it wasn't what they wanted or you show them perhaps that it's a skill issue and they still dismiss it because they don't want to learn your different way.
What I'm saying is this, I learned a long time ago to not try to prove yourself on a nuanced subject because sometimes if you're happy and the other person isn't for whatever reason, is just best to leave it because either way it's an inconvenience that only takes time away from what you're enjoying.
Notice that even when I asked for more data I was clear that it wasn't for me but might help devs. I was giving my opinion as someone that does development.
Again I'm not saying this person isn't making it up , I'm saying I've been on his side of things and can relate to that situation where you just say to the person, sorry if you can't figure it out or be happy but I can't be inconvenienced to explain it or compare what makes me happy that doesn't work for you.
Of course we can get all lost in asking someone to try to prove their statements. But we could also just say ok well there's one vote for it's ok, now let's move on and just accept that he declined to share further details.
If we're looking for change then let's do so in a productive way vs badgering someone that clearly isn't interested in further helping. There's all kinds of reasons his opinion could be invalid in regards to ww, no need to really dig in on it I'd say.
You (on the first page):
Bushido2513 wrote: »Also I think that it's easy to just say well hey this is where it will end up based on simple math but that's not really testing across the range of player population. Just saying I'd rather see more cmx style data comparison.
Me:
I'd get whatever video is necessary for this point if any combat dev/ @ZOS_Kevin @ZOS_JessicaFolsom asked for exactly what is wanted via demonstration (because, it's quite frankly a waste of my time if it'll never be seen anyway)... otherwise, I don't have to supply a video when I have logic and a plethora of other people who have verifiably tested on the PTS telling you the exact same thing.
Also you:
'Hey, you know all that proof, logic, and info you provided- yeah it doesn't count because "I'm a developer", my goalpost has moved, and your statements and data are actually invalid'
Also, 'I cannot provide any data or evidence of my own even though I'm the one who asked YOU for it and denied it anyway'
Of course this is all completely disregarding that I'm applying logic on developer statements that are now contradictory to their cited goals such as mag wolf viability (mag werewolves ARE NOT viable in PvP and only consistently viable in organized content/Rampage spam in PvE); losing damage for sustain, losing the sustain, and then not regaining the damage in any capacity (and having been objectively worse with MORE damage with LESS sustain); them being 'happy with PvE' but affecting PvE also with double and triple sustain costs and then making 'pure sorc wolf damage dealer' completely unviable with targeted static reverb changes weeks later...
...all this with the CMX data YOU (again) asked ME for despite me clearly stating I wouldn't know exactly what they'd want with any certainty (but I provided the data ANYWAY)
Not to mention, completely disregarding my logical platform to be frustrated as a customer when cosmetics that are working perfectly fine for me on live (and one I explicitly purchased to mesh with wolf) are disabled next patch with a 2 sentence explanation that reasons nothing with any validity other than 'because we wanted to'.
You are not arguing in good faith. You are being a contrarian.Edited by Wuuffyy on August 25, 2026 9:34PMWuuffyy,
'end-game' PvE and PvP player
ESO player since 2014 (Xbox and PC for PTS)
-new players, feel free to DM for guidance!4 -
Bushido2513✭✭✭✭✭Bushido2513 wrote: »
There is no opinion in this matter. Data does not operate on opinion, it operates on facts and information. And if someone is claiming something works, then objectively they need to provide the data that backs that up. Trying to say "in someone's experience" does not provide anything meaningful. People could hide behind this reasoning even if they have little to no experience in something. Someone's supposed "experience" does not matter if it is not providing objective proof of something. Experience without backing it up is about as useful as no experience whatsoever.Bushido2513 wrote: »
Except yes, he DOES need to provide proof of his claims. This is the PTS the whole point of things is to provide actual data, not pointless hearsay that has been proven already NOT TO WORK. If he's going to sit here and parrot the same nonsense without backing it up, it's not data, it's nothing. Empty words. It's someone who wants WW to be nerfed and is spreading their own misinformation about X or Y working when his ""advice"" was followed.Bushido2513 wrote: »
I don't know what makes it clear you're just here to be contrary and hate on WW more than this right here. You have been asked repeatedly for proof of the claims you're making, but you just keep coming up with passive-aggressive excuses to avoid actually giving any proof to validate your claims. It's obvious you haven't done any testing and are just out here saying whatever sound remotely like it should work, even though proof that it DOESN'T has been provided. Kind of like when you kept claiming you dueled Wuuffey but then offered absolutely 0 proof of it and folded when pressed about it.Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
That was with tri-pots, 5 medium, Shapeshifter's, and Imperial. That's pretty sustainy.
Both with that being said, I actually did run with "Orzo food" (remember, I told you this already?), and I had even attempted with Takeaway Broth and pretty quickly and obviously determined that decreasing your max resources makes the sustain worse and not better. Running 2,000+ stam recov after a tri-pot resulted in no meaning increases over the above build:Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
This is a way to build it that is MAXIMIZING reduction, using tri-pots, and gaining sustain. That doesn't work.
Running Orzo food was worse, in-fact (as your resource pools are already very low and they have reduced healing which requires more health and not less to remediate reductions... with that being said):HalensShade wrote: »[snip]
[snip]
Imperial, swap from bewitched to orzo food, sorc CoE class mastery. Done and WW is still OP
Haha! You tried this on the other thread too xD-madmufffin wrote: »
It's still fine on sorc with Orzo food nice try
No, sorry. This is me on the 6m dummy with "Orzo Food", 6 medium, all tri-glyphs on my sorcwolf without CoE (subclassed to get more power given no more static reverb):
I lasted 15 seconds... I made it less than half of my bar for Rampage.
See, that's the beauty of it. Even dropping down to 35k health (trying to keep a decent level of healing even though I'll fall over with 35k health, no minor resolve, in 6 medium in an actual PvP environment)... "Orzo food" causes me to lose far too much max resource so despite higher recov... I still burn out nearly instantly.
This is on an Imperial btw... which makes this EVEN WORSE as my max resources are higher and my costs are 6% cheaper across the board.
CoE is a MAJOR plummet in damage, additionally, picking sorc masteries without reverb now causes you to lose HEAPS of damage over other classes and their masteries/subclassing, and the sustain decrease nerf for CoE (along with the sustain decrease of less max resources for CoE-scaling with something like "Orzo" food) causes even the sustain gained to be woefully less impactful as well over running sustain in other ways for other classes/subclassing.
[edited to remove quote]
Do you have any data of your own to support your claims?
Sustain set, serpent and Orzo solves the issue. Sorry you struggle to adapt.
Nope, we tried with all sorts of things including over 30% reduction to stamina abilities, "Orzo Food", cost glyphs @AdonisJorge, and more.
Beyond that, how much damage do you believe werewolf is capable of losing before it can no longer kill competent players/ any reasonable amount of time?
It had more damage across the board before the rework. How could it logically lose damage, I build more sustain on wolf than I ever have before (as they remove the sustain), and it somehow do better than it did for me before the rework?
Do you have any timestamped PTS CMX data to validate your point?
Sounds like it's just a YOU issue then and the rest of us are good / adapted. Sorry bud
Hmm, very strange. It's a logical issue because they reduced the damage (from when it objectively was awful), took away defiles (pressure on healing and shielding), gave it sustain, removed the sustain, and didn't return the damage...
I built for sustain as I have very clearly demonstrated via logical data and CMX parses and yet burn out in 20 seconds or less (even at the expense of more damage). I also have a plethora of people I've tested on this PTS with the same claim of the hindrance of the sustain and the egregious stat spread that wolf requires (remember, reducing the healing doesn't exactly give me the option of building less health especially when I cannot bolster my tankiness with a sword and board/minor resolve, for example)...
...yet you are saying 'build better' but cannot provide any data or proof to back up the claim that you know how to build in a way that is fundamentally better than me (who did verifiably proficiently with wolf pre-rework and who does verifiably proficiently with wolf post-rework) or any of those I have verifiably fought against, with proof, on PTS.
I am choosing to not engage with you anymore for the time being as I wish to engage in 'good faith' arguments only. Thank you, once again!
I'm not here to help you learn WW or theorycraft builds after the changes. Sorry maybe someone on YT can help you out.
You do realize the burden of proof is on a person making a claim, yes? If what you keep saying is true, why are you so afraid to post proof of it? And please don't try hiding behind excuses of "look at Youtube lel" because NONE of those builds are the one YOU are CLAIMING ""works"" on the PTS right now. Other builds dont mean anything, they have no bearing on this conversation.
You are making claims. Offer your proof. That's how it works, not hiding behind "I'm not here to theorycraft for you". This isn't about making builds, this is about offering objective proof of something.
ETA Also how are people even supposed to test what you keep claiming ""works"" if you refuse to tell people what ""works"" beyond the absolute vaguest things? Because proof of builds following your ""advice"" not working has been shown, and yet you STILL keep insisting that it's the other person essentially being bad. Despite them doing what you say allegedly ""works"". So again...show proof. Because otherwise you're offering nothing to the conversation but misinformation yourself.
Well yes and no. I see the point the person is making here and I see where I think you may be going wrong.
They dun don't need to prove anything because they aren't saying the build will be amazing just playable.
Here's the issue, what's playable? Pve, pvp, cp, no cp, dungeon, trial, duel, etc. Playable builds for those require very different things.
At a base level if I tell you to strap on all sustain gear, enchants, mundus, and food, we know you'll be able to perform skills so it's playable.
Now what I suspect you or anyone else is asking is show me a build with performance in any of the categories I just named and to be honest that's not realistic because playable is in the mind of the player and their goals which can be all over the place.
So functionally is ww technically playable, of course. Is it going to be at the levels it was before, of course not. Can it reach even near those levels in xyz environment, probably not.
Could you build something and play it and have fun, that's up to reach personal player and preference.
Obviously those the really enjoy ww are not happy with the change and want at or near the same level of performance. And it's a good idea to ask for what you want but also accept and pay what they decide upon in the end, or not, but it's still probably going to happen.
Playable isn't that complicated in this instance. It means whether you run out of resources faster than other Classes or have to give up more damage, healing, or tanking ability to build into more than any other Class would. No build is playable if you're running out of resources quickly or if you have to spec so much into sustain that it negatively impacts your overall ability to do whatever it is you're trying to.
If dude is SO SURE that his ""advice"" works as well as he claims it does, what genuine legit reason can he have for not backing it up with proof? None, it's why all his avoidance has been passive-aggressive nothings. But I doubt he's going to offer proof of anything. Given none of my last few posts directed at him have been acknowledged, I'm being ignored.
You missed the point. You're confusing absolute and opinion.
His opinion based on his experience is that this will work and it's true because it's based on his opinion and expectations.
See if he says ok I built all into sustain and it works for me then you're going to say it doesn't have enough damage or defense. Then if he shows it he having those in a situation he deems appropriate then you're going to say well that's not what I was talking about and now all the sudden he's trying to build a spec that matches up to your expectations which is crazy to chase. That's why he's right in saying he doesn't have to prove anything to you, because at the end of the day he's not responsible for meeting your expectations of what playable is as long as he meets his own.
Now if he claimed that he could beat you in a duel or in a pve parse then he'd need to back up those claims but saying if you make these changes I think it would be playable isn't a claim that has to be backed up because it's not based on logic, it's mostly opinion if not feeling which really shouldn't be argued.
Sure, what works for one person might not work for another. In fact it's pretty well-known that you can give two people the same exact build with the only difference between their skill level, and typically the person with more skill and, yes, experience, will do decently better than the person with less skill. But that's not what's being debated here. What's being asked for is the barest hint of proof that his "advice" actually works. That he can make a build that has good sustain without giving up so much of everything else that the sustain is pointless because he can't deal, tank, or heal enough damage.
He's claiming that his build is still able to beat people on the PTS after swapping some stuff around but refuses to post proof. This isn't about moving goalposts like you seem to be making it out to be. Literally all any of us asking for proof are doing is asking for proof that he actually swapped his build around like he claimed to and was still doing fine in PvP. That is it. Nothing more. It's got nothing to do with wanting to say "oh well you have good sustain but your damage is low". Because if he has a build that can actually sustain and kill other players reliably then it would inherently mean the build is strong.
But he refuses. He refuses to post evidence that his so-called build even exists. He isn't providing proof that he's not just saying whatever sounds like it should work. There's nothing from him to back up that his build performs like he's claiming. Why would you believe someone making a claim like this without any proof that they even have the build they're claiming works? When numerous times Wuuffy has posted proof that the stuff doesn't work as claimed?
Also I'd like to bring up again that Mamba and Wuuffy were supposed to duel and Mamba never posted any proof of that either, despite claiming that Wuuffy showed up in a stalemate build. It's a pattern, if it needs to be pointed out. Say X thing and then offer no evidence of it. It feels like the PTS of U50 all over again, when people were submitting "proof" of WW being too strong in PvP but not being transparent in what they were or weren't using. It was mostly in regards to Signet (people not admitting they were using it but their CMX giving it away b/c of the various status procs) or using things like CoE. Incorrect and insincere data, along with just flat out bad faith lying, can do quite a bit of harm. It's why people ask for data with full transparency, not just taking a person's word on something because "trust me bro".
Ok I'm going to try to address this in good faith.
Here's the problem with trying to prove yourself in a situation like this. Ok so he shows you the build. Then let's say he shows you beating someone in a duel.
People will just give reasons why the example isn't valid. Or they will say okay well what about when I want to do zyz, bet you can't do that.
Okay I said good faith so sure maybe he's making it up. What I'm saying is that I've been in the exact position when people say show me and when the subject has layers it becomes a trap because either you're going to show them what works for you and what you're happy with and they just dismiss it because it wasn't what they wanted or you show them perhaps that it's a skill issue and they still dismiss it because they don't want to learn your different way.
What I'm saying is this, I learned a long time ago to not try to prove yourself on a nuanced subject because sometimes if you're happy and the other person isn't for whatever reason, is just best to leave it because either way it's an inconvenience that only takes time away from what you're enjoying.
Notice that even when I asked for more data I was clear that it wasn't for me but might help devs. I was giving my opinion as someone that does development.
Again I'm not saying this person isn't making it up , I'm saying I've been on his side of things and can relate to that situation where you just say to the person, sorry if you can't figure it out or be happy but I can't be inconvenienced to explain it or compare what makes me happy that doesn't work for you.
Of course we can get all lost in asking someone to try to prove their statements. But we could also just say ok well there's one vote for it's ok, now let's move on and just accept that he declined to share further details.
If we're looking for change then let's do so in a productive way vs badgering someone that clearly isn't interested in further helping. There's all kinds of reasons his opinion could be invalid in regards to ww, no need to really dig in on it I'd say.
You (on the first page):
Bushido2513 wrote: »Also I think that it's easy to just say well hey this is where it will end up based on simple math but that's not really testing across the range of player population. Just saying I'd rather see more cmx style data comparison.
Me:
I'd get whatever video is necessary for this point if any combat dev/ @ZOS_Kevin @ZOS_JessicaFolsom asked for exactly what is wanted via demonstration (because, it's quite frankly a waste of my time if it'll never be seen anyway)... otherwise, I don't have to supply a video when I have logic and a plethora of other people who have verifiably tested on the PTS telling you the exact same thing.
Also you:
'Hey, you know all that proof, logic, and info you provided- yeah it doesn't count because "I'm a developer", my goalpost has moved, and your statements and data are actually invalid'
Also, 'I cannot provide any data or evidence of my own even though I'm the one who asked YOU for it and denied it anyway'
Of course this is all completely disregarding that I'm providing logic and developer statements that are now contradictory to their cited goals such as mag wolf viability (mag werewolves ARE NOT viable in PvP and only consistently viable in organized content/Rampage spam in PvE); losing damage for sustain, losing the sustain, and then not regaining the damage in any capacity (and having been objectively worse with MORE damage with LESS sustain); them being 'happy with PvE' but affecting PvE also with double and triple sustain costs and then making 'pure sorc wolf damage dealer' completely unviable with targeted static reverb changes weeks later...
...all this with the CMX data YOU (again) asked for despite me clearly stating I wouldn't know exactly what they'd want with any certainty (but I provided the data ANYWAY)
Not to mention, completely disregarding my logical platform to be frustrated as a customer when cosmetics that are working perfectly fine for me on live (and one I explicitly purchased to mesh with wolf) are disabled next patch with a 2 sentence explanation that reasons nothing validity other than 'because we wanted to'.
You are not arguing in good faith. You are being a contrarian.
I'll be plain. I never asked you or anyone for anything explicitly. I stated my preference on what helps me understand something. Also what night help devs understand your point. Your cause is yours to defend. I'm only giving input on how I read it or what might help get it across.
I'm not ignoring your data directly. It just doesn't mean all that much to me because I prefer large sample sizes and server end stats.
As players of the game we both have a right to weigh in. My apologies if you thought I was asking you directly for anything or that I truly care if you submit anything.
ESO devs make the call. I'm just discussing the game experience I care about.0 -
Arunei✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Okay, you keep making this about moving the goalposts with proof when I've stated clearly why it's nothing like that. I LITERALLY said if he could post proof of his build having good sustain while also reliably being able to kill people that would inherently make it a good build. But you keep wanting to stick on the point of "You're just going to move the goalposts if proof is provided about the sustain matter". This is an excuse. You don't avoid posting proof because you're afraid of moving goalposts. You post it to shoot them down, to prove THEM wrong.Bushido2513 wrote: »
There is no opinion in this matter. Data does not operate on opinion, it operates on facts and information. And if someone is claiming something works, then objectively they need to provide the data that backs that up. Trying to say "in someone's experience" does not provide anything meaningful. People could hide behind this reasoning even if they have little to no experience in something. Someone's supposed "experience" does not matter if it is not providing objective proof of something. Experience without backing it up is about as useful as no experience whatsoever.Bushido2513 wrote: »
Except yes, he DOES need to provide proof of his claims. This is the PTS the whole point of things is to provide actual data, not pointless hearsay that has been proven already NOT TO WORK. If he's going to sit here and parrot the same nonsense without backing it up, it's not data, it's nothing. Empty words. It's someone who wants WW to be nerfed and is spreading their own misinformation about X or Y working when his ""advice"" was followed.Bushido2513 wrote: »
I don't know what makes it clear you're just here to be contrary and hate on WW more than this right here. You have been asked repeatedly for proof of the claims you're making, but you just keep coming up with passive-aggressive excuses to avoid actually giving any proof to validate your claims. It's obvious you haven't done any testing and are just out here saying whatever sound remotely like it should work, even though proof that it DOESN'T has been provided. Kind of like when you kept claiming you dueled Wuuffey but then offered absolutely 0 proof of it and folded when pressed about it.Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
That was with tri-pots, 5 medium, Shapeshifter's, and Imperial. That's pretty sustainy.
Both with that being said, I actually did run with "Orzo food" (remember, I told you this already?), and I had even attempted with Takeaway Broth and pretty quickly and obviously determined that decreasing your max resources makes the sustain worse and not better. Running 2,000+ stam recov after a tri-pot resulted in no meaning increases over the above build:Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
This is a way to build it that is MAXIMIZING reduction, using tri-pots, and gaining sustain. That doesn't work.
Running Orzo food was worse, in-fact (as your resource pools are already very low and they have reduced healing which requires more health and not less to remediate reductions... with that being said):HalensShade wrote: »[snip]
[snip]
Imperial, swap from bewitched to orzo food, sorc CoE class mastery. Done and WW is still OP
Haha! You tried this on the other thread too xD-madmufffin wrote: »
It's still fine on sorc with Orzo food nice try
No, sorry. This is me on the 6m dummy with "Orzo Food", 6 medium, all tri-glyphs on my sorcwolf without CoE (subclassed to get more power given no more static reverb):
I lasted 15 seconds... I made it less than half of my bar for Rampage.
See, that's the beauty of it. Even dropping down to 35k health (trying to keep a decent level of healing even though I'll fall over with 35k health, no minor resolve, in 6 medium in an actual PvP environment)... "Orzo food" causes me to lose far too much max resource so despite higher recov... I still burn out nearly instantly.
This is on an Imperial btw... which makes this EVEN WORSE as my max resources are higher and my costs are 6% cheaper across the board.
CoE is a MAJOR plummet in damage, additionally, picking sorc masteries without reverb now causes you to lose HEAPS of damage over other classes and their masteries/subclassing, and the sustain decrease nerf for CoE (along with the sustain decrease of less max resources for CoE-scaling with something like "Orzo" food) causes even the sustain gained to be woefully less impactful as well over running sustain in other ways for other classes/subclassing.
[edited to remove quote]
Do you have any data of your own to support your claims?
Sustain set, serpent and Orzo solves the issue. Sorry you struggle to adapt.
Nope, we tried with all sorts of things including over 30% reduction to stamina abilities, "Orzo Food", cost glyphs @AdonisJorge, and more.
Beyond that, how much damage do you believe werewolf is capable of losing before it can no longer kill competent players/ any reasonable amount of time?
It had more damage across the board before the rework. How could it logically lose damage, I build more sustain on wolf than I ever have before (as they remove the sustain), and it somehow do better than it did for me before the rework?
Do you have any timestamped PTS CMX data to validate your point?
Sounds like it's just a YOU issue then and the rest of us are good / adapted. Sorry bud
Hmm, very strange. It's a logical issue because they reduced the damage (from when it objectively was awful), took away defiles (pressure on healing and shielding), gave it sustain, removed the sustain, and didn't return the damage...
I built for sustain as I have very clearly demonstrated via logical data and CMX parses and yet burn out in 20 seconds or less (even at the expense of more damage). I also have a plethora of people I've tested on this PTS with the same claim of the hindrance of the sustain and the egregious stat spread that wolf requires (remember, reducing the healing doesn't exactly give me the option of building less health especially when I cannot bolster my tankiness with a sword and board/minor resolve, for example)...
...yet you are saying 'build better' but cannot provide any data or proof to back up the claim that you know how to build in a way that is fundamentally better than me (who did verifiably proficiently with wolf pre-rework and who does verifiably proficiently with wolf post-rework) or any of those I have verifiably fought against, with proof, on PTS.
I am choosing to not engage with you anymore for the time being as I wish to engage in 'good faith' arguments only. Thank you, once again!
I'm not here to help you learn WW or theorycraft builds after the changes. Sorry maybe someone on YT can help you out.
You do realize the burden of proof is on a person making a claim, yes? If what you keep saying is true, why are you so afraid to post proof of it? And please don't try hiding behind excuses of "look at Youtube lel" because NONE of those builds are the one YOU are CLAIMING ""works"" on the PTS right now. Other builds dont mean anything, they have no bearing on this conversation.
You are making claims. Offer your proof. That's how it works, not hiding behind "I'm not here to theorycraft for you". This isn't about making builds, this is about offering objective proof of something.
ETA Also how are people even supposed to test what you keep claiming ""works"" if you refuse to tell people what ""works"" beyond the absolute vaguest things? Because proof of builds following your ""advice"" not working has been shown, and yet you STILL keep insisting that it's the other person essentially being bad. Despite them doing what you say allegedly ""works"". So again...show proof. Because otherwise you're offering nothing to the conversation but misinformation yourself.
Well yes and no. I see the point the person is making here and I see where I think you may be going wrong.
They dun don't need to prove anything because they aren't saying the build will be amazing just playable.
Here's the issue, what's playable? Pve, pvp, cp, no cp, dungeon, trial, duel, etc. Playable builds for those require very different things.
At a base level if I tell you to strap on all sustain gear, enchants, mundus, and food, we know you'll be able to perform skills so it's playable.
Now what I suspect you or anyone else is asking is show me a build with performance in any of the categories I just named and to be honest that's not realistic because playable is in the mind of the player and their goals which can be all over the place.
So functionally is ww technically playable, of course. Is it going to be at the levels it was before, of course not. Can it reach even near those levels in xyz environment, probably not.
Could you build something and play it and have fun, that's up to reach personal player and preference.
Obviously those the really enjoy ww are not happy with the change and want at or near the same level of performance. And it's a good idea to ask for what you want but also accept and pay what they decide upon in the end, or not, but it's still probably going to happen.
Playable isn't that complicated in this instance. It means whether you run out of resources faster than other Classes or have to give up more damage, healing, or tanking ability to build into more than any other Class would. No build is playable if you're running out of resources quickly or if you have to spec so much into sustain that it negatively impacts your overall ability to do whatever it is you're trying to.
If dude is SO SURE that his ""advice"" works as well as he claims it does, what genuine legit reason can he have for not backing it up with proof? None, it's why all his avoidance has been passive-aggressive nothings. But I doubt he's going to offer proof of anything. Given none of my last few posts directed at him have been acknowledged, I'm being ignored.
You missed the point. You're confusing absolute and opinion.
His opinion based on his experience is that this will work and it's true because it's based on his opinion and expectations.
See if he says ok I built all into sustain and it works for me then you're going to say it doesn't have enough damage or defense. Then if he shows it he having those in a situation he deems appropriate then you're going to say well that's not what I was talking about and now all the sudden he's trying to build a spec that matches up to your expectations which is crazy to chase. That's why he's right in saying he doesn't have to prove anything to you, because at the end of the day he's not responsible for meeting your expectations of what playable is as long as he meets his own.
Now if he claimed that he could beat you in a duel or in a pve parse then he'd need to back up those claims but saying if you make these changes I think it would be playable isn't a claim that has to be backed up because it's not based on logic, it's mostly opinion if not feeling which really shouldn't be argued.
Sure, what works for one person might not work for another. In fact it's pretty well-known that you can give two people the same exact build with the only difference between their skill level, and typically the person with more skill and, yes, experience, will do decently better than the person with less skill. But that's not what's being debated here. What's being asked for is the barest hint of proof that his "advice" actually works. That he can make a build that has good sustain without giving up so much of everything else that the sustain is pointless because he can't deal, tank, or heal enough damage.
He's claiming that his build is still able to beat people on the PTS after swapping some stuff around but refuses to post proof. This isn't about moving goalposts like you seem to be making it out to be. Literally all any of us asking for proof are doing is asking for proof that he actually swapped his build around like he claimed to and was still doing fine in PvP. That is it. Nothing more. It's got nothing to do with wanting to say "oh well you have good sustain but your damage is low". Because if he has a build that can actually sustain and kill other players reliably then it would inherently mean the build is strong.
But he refuses. He refuses to post evidence that his so-called build even exists. He isn't providing proof that he's not just saying whatever sounds like it should work. There's nothing from him to back up that his build performs like he's claiming. Why would you believe someone making a claim like this without any proof that they even have the build they're claiming works? When numerous times Wuuffy has posted proof that the stuff doesn't work as claimed?
Also I'd like to bring up again that Mamba and Wuuffy were supposed to duel and Mamba never posted any proof of that either, despite claiming that Wuuffy showed up in a stalemate build. It's a pattern, if it needs to be pointed out. Say X thing and then offer no evidence of it. It feels like the PTS of U50 all over again, when people were submitting "proof" of WW being too strong in PvP but not being transparent in what they were or weren't using. It was mostly in regards to Signet (people not admitting they were using it but their CMX giving it away b/c of the various status procs) or using things like CoE. Incorrect and insincere data, along with just flat out bad faith lying, can do quite a bit of harm. It's why people ask for data with full transparency, not just taking a person's word on something because "trust me bro".
Ok I'm going to try to address this in good faith.
Here's the problem with trying to prove yourself in a situation like this. Ok so he shows you the build. Then let's say he shows you beating someone in a duel.
People will just give reasons why the example isn't valid. Or they will say okay well what about when I want to do zyz, bet you can't do that.
Okay I said good faith so sure maybe he's making it up. What I'm saying is that I've been in the exact position when people say show me and when the subject has layers it becomes a trap because either you're going to show them what works for you and what you're happy with and they just dismiss it because it wasn't what they wanted or you show them perhaps that it's a skill issue and they still dismiss it because they don't want to learn your different way.
What I'm saying is this, I learned a long time ago to not try to prove yourself on a nuanced subject because sometimes if you're happy and the other person isn't for whatever reason, is just best to leave it because either way it's an inconvenience that only takes time away from what you're enjoying.
Notice that even when I asked for more data I was clear that it wasn't for me but might help devs. I was giving my opinion as someone that does development.
Again I'm not saying this person isn't making it up , I'm saying I've been on his side of things and can relate to that situation where you just say to the person, sorry if you can't figure it out or be happy but I can't be inconvenienced to explain it or compare what makes me happy that doesn't work for you.
Of course we can get all lost in asking someone to try to prove their statements. But we could also just say ok well there's one vote for it's ok, now let's move on and just accept that he declined to share further details.
If we're looking for change then let's do so in a productive way vs badgering someone that clearly isn't interested in further helping. There's all kinds of reasons his opinion could be invalid in regards to ww, no need to really dig in on it I'd say.
I don't understand why you keep wanting to make this a matter of not posting because "the goalposts" might be moved. It's just saying that people are more than justified to not post proof of their claims simply because people might try to prove them wrong. Plenty of other people don't have a problem with providing proof despite that possibility. It's the whole dang point of the PTS. To find out what actually works and what doesn't.
This isn't about "proving yourself". We are on the Public Test Server. This is about testing and showing the results for both devs and other players to see and think about. What Mamba has been doing is literally nothing but saying over and over that "it's fine I can do it trust me if you can't you suck" without any proof. And that's the thing, too; he is actively insulting other players for "not being able to figure it out" or "not being as good" as he is. When you are not only making the same claim over and over but insulting the people who are asking for something as simple as a CMS screen...yeah, you probably don't have any meaningful data to show.
It seems that what matters more here isn't providing actual data and proof backing up claims. What matters more is that people don't have their egos threatened because of the possibility that proof they post gets questioned in some way. I'm not going to reply after this because it's not accomplishing anything. At the end of the day, no matter how much someone doesn't like it, we are on the test server. The entire point is to be testing things and then reporting what we find, not being rude, passive-aggressive, and evasive when asked for evidence of a claim.PC-NA | Been around since closed beta | Alt account: Arunei PC-NA
Avid RPer. Hit me up in-game @Ras_Lei if you're interested in getting together for some arr-pee shenanigans!
RP Characters:
Sarah Lacroix: Breton Vampire who really really REALLY likes likes learning Magick and also her Altmer husbando
Kaalhil Swiftstrike: Tiny shapeshifting monster hunter Bosmeri lady with enough sass to kill a dragon or ten
Gwendolyn Jenelle: Friendly healer with a coffee addiction and her own medical practice
Krisiel: Literally crazy Werewolf, no like legit insane. She nuts
Kiju Veran: Ex-Fighters Guild Suthay who likes to punch things and is also a spy and ALSO a Werewolf
Niralae Elsinal: Young Altmeri woman with way too much Magicka and Vampire husbando
Slondor: TESified Slenderman, except lazier and has more of a thing for deals than Clavicus Vile does
Marius Vastino: Sarah's Imperial apathetic sire who likes to monologue
Lirawyn Calatare: Traveling performer and bard who's 101% vanilla bean
Soliril Larethian: Blind alchemist who uses animals to see and brews plagues in his spare time4 -
HunterDawn✭✭✭Since the Werewolf playerbase is small, our feedback can simply be brushed aside. Is this really ZOS’s design ethos😅? @ZOS_Kevin @ZOS_JessicaFolsomThe incredibly fun U51 update is right around the corner😊! Go renew your Plus memberships everyone😅!7 -
Bushido2513✭✭✭✭✭
Okay, you keep making this about moving the goalposts with proof when I've stated clearly why it's nothing like that. I LITERALLY said if he could post proof of his build having good sustain while also reliably being able to kill people that would inherently make it a good build. But you keep wanting to stick on the point of "You're just going to move the goalposts if proof is provided about the sustain matter". This is an excuse. You don't avoid posting proof because you're afraid of moving goalposts. You post it to shoot them down, to prove THEM wrong.Bushido2513 wrote: »
There is no opinion in this matter. Data does not operate on opinion, it operates on facts and information. And if someone is claiming something works, then objectively they need to provide the data that backs that up. Trying to say "in someone's experience" does not provide anything meaningful. People could hide behind this reasoning even if they have little to no experience in something. Someone's supposed "experience" does not matter if it is not providing objective proof of something. Experience without backing it up is about as useful as no experience whatsoever.Bushido2513 wrote: »
Except yes, he DOES need to provide proof of his claims. This is the PTS the whole point of things is to provide actual data, not pointless hearsay that has been proven already NOT TO WORK. If he's going to sit here and parrot the same nonsense without backing it up, it's not data, it's nothing. Empty words. It's someone who wants WW to be nerfed and is spreading their own misinformation about X or Y working when his ""advice"" was followed.Bushido2513 wrote: »
I don't know what makes it clear you're just here to be contrary and hate on WW more than this right here. You have been asked repeatedly for proof of the claims you're making, but you just keep coming up with passive-aggressive excuses to avoid actually giving any proof to validate your claims. It's obvious you haven't done any testing and are just out here saying whatever sound remotely like it should work, even though proof that it DOESN'T has been provided. Kind of like when you kept claiming you dueled Wuuffey but then offered absolutely 0 proof of it and folded when pressed about it.Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
That was with tri-pots, 5 medium, Shapeshifter's, and Imperial. That's pretty sustainy.
Both with that being said, I actually did run with "Orzo food" (remember, I told you this already?), and I had even attempted with Takeaway Broth and pretty quickly and obviously determined that decreasing your max resources makes the sustain worse and not better. Running 2,000+ stam recov after a tri-pot resulted in no meaning increases over the above build:Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
This is a way to build it that is MAXIMIZING reduction, using tri-pots, and gaining sustain. That doesn't work.
Running Orzo food was worse, in-fact (as your resource pools are already very low and they have reduced healing which requires more health and not less to remediate reductions... with that being said):HalensShade wrote: »[snip]
[snip]
Imperial, swap from bewitched to orzo food, sorc CoE class mastery. Done and WW is still OP
Haha! You tried this on the other thread too xD-madmufffin wrote: »
It's still fine on sorc with Orzo food nice try
No, sorry. This is me on the 6m dummy with "Orzo Food", 6 medium, all tri-glyphs on my sorcwolf without CoE (subclassed to get more power given no more static reverb):
I lasted 15 seconds... I made it less than half of my bar for Rampage.
See, that's the beauty of it. Even dropping down to 35k health (trying to keep a decent level of healing even though I'll fall over with 35k health, no minor resolve, in 6 medium in an actual PvP environment)... "Orzo food" causes me to lose far too much max resource so despite higher recov... I still burn out nearly instantly.
This is on an Imperial btw... which makes this EVEN WORSE as my max resources are higher and my costs are 6% cheaper across the board.
CoE is a MAJOR plummet in damage, additionally, picking sorc masteries without reverb now causes you to lose HEAPS of damage over other classes and their masteries/subclassing, and the sustain decrease nerf for CoE (along with the sustain decrease of less max resources for CoE-scaling with something like "Orzo" food) causes even the sustain gained to be woefully less impactful as well over running sustain in other ways for other classes/subclassing.
[edited to remove quote]
Do you have any data of your own to support your claims?
Sustain set, serpent and Orzo solves the issue. Sorry you struggle to adapt.
Nope, we tried with all sorts of things including over 30% reduction to stamina abilities, "Orzo Food", cost glyphs @AdonisJorge, and more.
Beyond that, how much damage do you believe werewolf is capable of losing before it can no longer kill competent players/ any reasonable amount of time?
It had more damage across the board before the rework. How could it logically lose damage, I build more sustain on wolf than I ever have before (as they remove the sustain), and it somehow do better than it did for me before the rework?
Do you have any timestamped PTS CMX data to validate your point?
Sounds like it's just a YOU issue then and the rest of us are good / adapted. Sorry bud
Hmm, very strange. It's a logical issue because they reduced the damage (from when it objectively was awful), took away defiles (pressure on healing and shielding), gave it sustain, removed the sustain, and didn't return the damage...
I built for sustain as I have very clearly demonstrated via logical data and CMX parses and yet burn out in 20 seconds or less (even at the expense of more damage). I also have a plethora of people I've tested on this PTS with the same claim of the hindrance of the sustain and the egregious stat spread that wolf requires (remember, reducing the healing doesn't exactly give me the option of building less health especially when I cannot bolster my tankiness with a sword and board/minor resolve, for example)...
...yet you are saying 'build better' but cannot provide any data or proof to back up the claim that you know how to build in a way that is fundamentally better than me (who did verifiably proficiently with wolf pre-rework and who does verifiably proficiently with wolf post-rework) or any of those I have verifiably fought against, with proof, on PTS.
I am choosing to not engage with you anymore for the time being as I wish to engage in 'good faith' arguments only. Thank you, once again!
I'm not here to help you learn WW or theorycraft builds after the changes. Sorry maybe someone on YT can help you out.
You do realize the burden of proof is on a person making a claim, yes? If what you keep saying is true, why are you so afraid to post proof of it? And please don't try hiding behind excuses of "look at Youtube lel" because NONE of those builds are the one YOU are CLAIMING ""works"" on the PTS right now. Other builds dont mean anything, they have no bearing on this conversation.
You are making claims. Offer your proof. That's how it works, not hiding behind "I'm not here to theorycraft for you". This isn't about making builds, this is about offering objective proof of something.
ETA Also how are people even supposed to test what you keep claiming ""works"" if you refuse to tell people what ""works"" beyond the absolute vaguest things? Because proof of builds following your ""advice"" not working has been shown, and yet you STILL keep insisting that it's the other person essentially being bad. Despite them doing what you say allegedly ""works"". So again...show proof. Because otherwise you're offering nothing to the conversation but misinformation yourself.
Well yes and no. I see the point the person is making here and I see where I think you may be going wrong.
They dun don't need to prove anything because they aren't saying the build will be amazing just playable.
Here's the issue, what's playable? Pve, pvp, cp, no cp, dungeon, trial, duel, etc. Playable builds for those require very different things.
At a base level if I tell you to strap on all sustain gear, enchants, mundus, and food, we know you'll be able to perform skills so it's playable.
Now what I suspect you or anyone else is asking is show me a build with performance in any of the categories I just named and to be honest that's not realistic because playable is in the mind of the player and their goals which can be all over the place.
So functionally is ww technically playable, of course. Is it going to be at the levels it was before, of course not. Can it reach even near those levels in xyz environment, probably not.
Could you build something and play it and have fun, that's up to reach personal player and preference.
Obviously those the really enjoy ww are not happy with the change and want at or near the same level of performance. And it's a good idea to ask for what you want but also accept and pay what they decide upon in the end, or not, but it's still probably going to happen.
Playable isn't that complicated in this instance. It means whether you run out of resources faster than other Classes or have to give up more damage, healing, or tanking ability to build into more than any other Class would. No build is playable if you're running out of resources quickly or if you have to spec so much into sustain that it negatively impacts your overall ability to do whatever it is you're trying to.
If dude is SO SURE that his ""advice"" works as well as he claims it does, what genuine legit reason can he have for not backing it up with proof? None, it's why all his avoidance has been passive-aggressive nothings. But I doubt he's going to offer proof of anything. Given none of my last few posts directed at him have been acknowledged, I'm being ignored.
You missed the point. You're confusing absolute and opinion.
His opinion based on his experience is that this will work and it's true because it's based on his opinion and expectations.
See if he says ok I built all into sustain and it works for me then you're going to say it doesn't have enough damage or defense. Then if he shows it he having those in a situation he deems appropriate then you're going to say well that's not what I was talking about and now all the sudden he's trying to build a spec that matches up to your expectations which is crazy to chase. That's why he's right in saying he doesn't have to prove anything to you, because at the end of the day he's not responsible for meeting your expectations of what playable is as long as he meets his own.
Now if he claimed that he could beat you in a duel or in a pve parse then he'd need to back up those claims but saying if you make these changes I think it would be playable isn't a claim that has to be backed up because it's not based on logic, it's mostly opinion if not feeling which really shouldn't be argued.
Sure, what works for one person might not work for another. In fact it's pretty well-known that you can give two people the same exact build with the only difference between their skill level, and typically the person with more skill and, yes, experience, will do decently better than the person with less skill. But that's not what's being debated here. What's being asked for is the barest hint of proof that his "advice" actually works. That he can make a build that has good sustain without giving up so much of everything else that the sustain is pointless because he can't deal, tank, or heal enough damage.
He's claiming that his build is still able to beat people on the PTS after swapping some stuff around but refuses to post proof. This isn't about moving goalposts like you seem to be making it out to be. Literally all any of us asking for proof are doing is asking for proof that he actually swapped his build around like he claimed to and was still doing fine in PvP. That is it. Nothing more. It's got nothing to do with wanting to say "oh well you have good sustain but your damage is low". Because if he has a build that can actually sustain and kill other players reliably then it would inherently mean the build is strong.
But he refuses. He refuses to post evidence that his so-called build even exists. He isn't providing proof that he's not just saying whatever sounds like it should work. There's nothing from him to back up that his build performs like he's claiming. Why would you believe someone making a claim like this without any proof that they even have the build they're claiming works? When numerous times Wuuffy has posted proof that the stuff doesn't work as claimed?
Also I'd like to bring up again that Mamba and Wuuffy were supposed to duel and Mamba never posted any proof of that either, despite claiming that Wuuffy showed up in a stalemate build. It's a pattern, if it needs to be pointed out. Say X thing and then offer no evidence of it. It feels like the PTS of U50 all over again, when people were submitting "proof" of WW being too strong in PvP but not being transparent in what they were or weren't using. It was mostly in regards to Signet (people not admitting they were using it but their CMX giving it away b/c of the various status procs) or using things like CoE. Incorrect and insincere data, along with just flat out bad faith lying, can do quite a bit of harm. It's why people ask for data with full transparency, not just taking a person's word on something because "trust me bro".
Ok I'm going to try to address this in good faith.
Here's the problem with trying to prove yourself in a situation like this. Ok so he shows you the build. Then let's say he shows you beating someone in a duel.
People will just give reasons why the example isn't valid. Or they will say okay well what about when I want to do zyz, bet you can't do that.
Okay I said good faith so sure maybe he's making it up. What I'm saying is that I've been in the exact position when people say show me and when the subject has layers it becomes a trap because either you're going to show them what works for you and what you're happy with and they just dismiss it because it wasn't what they wanted or you show them perhaps that it's a skill issue and they still dismiss it because they don't want to learn your different way.
What I'm saying is this, I learned a long time ago to not try to prove yourself on a nuanced subject because sometimes if you're happy and the other person isn't for whatever reason, is just best to leave it because either way it's an inconvenience that only takes time away from what you're enjoying.
Notice that even when I asked for more data I was clear that it wasn't for me but might help devs. I was giving my opinion as someone that does development.
Again I'm not saying this person isn't making it up , I'm saying I've been on his side of things and can relate to that situation where you just say to the person, sorry if you can't figure it out or be happy but I can't be inconvenienced to explain it or compare what makes me happy that doesn't work for you.
Of course we can get all lost in asking someone to try to prove their statements. But we could also just say ok well there's one vote for it's ok, now let's move on and just accept that he declined to share further details.
If we're looking for change then let's do so in a productive way vs badgering someone that clearly isn't interested in further helping. There's all kinds of reasons his opinion could be invalid in regards to ww, no need to really dig in on it I'd say.
I don't understand why you keep wanting to make this a matter of not posting because "the goalposts" might be moved. It's just saying that people are more than justified to not post proof of their claims simply because people might try to prove them wrong. Plenty of other people don't have a problem with providing proof despite that possibility. It's the whole dang point of the PTS. To find out what actually works and what doesn't.
This isn't about "proving yourself". We are on the Public Test Server. This is about testing and showing the results for both devs and other players to see and think about. What Mamba has been doing is literally nothing but saying over and over that "it's fine I can do it trust me if you can't you suck" without any proof. And that's the thing, too; he is actively insulting other players for "not being able to figure it out" or "not being as good" as he is. When you are not only making the same claim over and over but insulting the people who are asking for something as simple as a CMS screen...yeah, you probably don't have any meaningful data to show.
It seems that what matters more here isn't providing actual data and proof backing up claims. What matters more is that people don't have their egos threatened because of the possibility that proof they post gets questioned in some way. I'm not going to reply after this because it's not accomplishing anything. At the end of the day, no matter how much someone doesn't like it, we are on the test server. The entire point is to be testing things and then reporting what we find, not being rude, passive-aggressive, and evasive when asked for evidence of a claim.
Ok let me help you understand what I'm seeing here and why this doesn't work.
Let's have some fun and take out the goalpost argument completely. You use words like good and reliably. So those are the kind of words that leave room for argument. Instead I want you to post EXACT numbers of exactly what you want to see. Don't use any ambiguous language, be precise on exactly the build you want to see. Be precise on exactly the opponent you want them to beat to satisfy what you deem good or reliable.
Tell me every scenario in exact detail and exact numbers that you need to see for this person's claims to be valid in a way at which point you will no longer dispute and simply accept that they are right and you are wrong.
I give this as an example really and as a point. You want to take out the goalpost then you tell us exactly and I mean EXACTLY what you need to see using mathematical expressions and no language that can be interpreted.
Because when you use words that can have different meaning then we have to agree on that meaning and that's where the problem comes in. Get it?
At least if you provide this then I can respect that you're asking a question that isn't at all open ended or that can't be left to chance.
Then if they don't want to provide that evidence I can certainly see it as more of a failing on their part because you're no longer being less than precisely clear about what you are asking.0 -
Bushido2513✭✭✭✭✭HunterDawn wrote: »Since the Werewolf playerbase is small, our feedback can simply be brushed aside. Is this really ZOS’s design ethos😅? @ZOS_Kevin @ZOS_JessicaFolsom
If you give in to one then you'll have the vamps and the psijic bros coming through the door looking for a handout too!
I kid I kid, It's actually pretty sad in a way because unlike other skill lines they gave players something they could really invest in then yanked it from them. I can't wait for overpowered wolf to be gone from pvp but I would certainly welcome just regular ol playable and generally competitive wolf to pvp, even if it isn't actually class. But then again I think everyone should be allowed to fight and given decent tools to bring a fair challenge.0 -
Daoin✭✭✭✭✭An American Werewolf in Cyrodiil ? sounds like a movie material to me and should be recognized as a class because of the culture0 -
Bushido2513✭✭✭✭✭An American Werewolf in Cyrodiil ? sounds like a movie material to me and should be recognized as a class because of the cultureAn American Werewolf in Cyrodiil ? sounds like a movie material to me and should be recognized as a class because of the culture
I just played this conversation out in my head.
Man I just got 12 kills in pvp.
Oh yeah what class?
Werewolf
That's a class now?
Well, they recognize it as one.
0 -
Wuuffyy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭HunterDawn wrote: »Since the Werewolf playerbase is small, our feedback can simply be brushed aside. Is this really ZOS’s design ethos😅? @ZOS_Kevin @ZOS_JessicaFolsom
The answer to this is more obvious than not- yes.
Along with the playstyle as a whole.
Never mind what they took away and never returned which made it incompetent in many areas, even based on their own spreadsheet rule of 'equivalent exchange'.Edited by Wuuffyy on August 28, 2026 2:16PMWuuffyy,
'end-game' PvE and PvP player
ESO player since 2014 (Xbox and PC for PTS)
-new players, feel free to DM for guidance!2 -
Wuuffyy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Bushido2513 wrote: »
Okay, you keep making this about moving the goalposts with proof when I've stated clearly why it's nothing like that. I LITERALLY said if he could post proof of his build having good sustain while also reliably being able to kill people that would inherently make it a good build. But you keep wanting to stick on the point of "You're just going to move the goalposts if proof is provided about the sustain matter". This is an excuse. You don't avoid posting proof because you're afraid of moving goalposts. You post it to shoot them down, to prove THEM wrong.Bushido2513 wrote: »
There is no opinion in this matter. Data does not operate on opinion, it operates on facts and information. And if someone is claiming something works, then objectively they need to provide the data that backs that up. Trying to say "in someone's experience" does not provide anything meaningful. People could hide behind this reasoning even if they have little to no experience in something. Someone's supposed "experience" does not matter if it is not providing objective proof of something. Experience without backing it up is about as useful as no experience whatsoever.Bushido2513 wrote: »
Except yes, he DOES need to provide proof of his claims. This is the PTS the whole point of things is to provide actual data, not pointless hearsay that has been proven already NOT TO WORK. If he's going to sit here and parrot the same nonsense without backing it up, it's not data, it's nothing. Empty words. It's someone who wants WW to be nerfed and is spreading their own misinformation about X or Y working when his ""advice"" was followed.Bushido2513 wrote: »
I don't know what makes it clear you're just here to be contrary and hate on WW more than this right here. You have been asked repeatedly for proof of the claims you're making, but you just keep coming up with passive-aggressive excuses to avoid actually giving any proof to validate your claims. It's obvious you haven't done any testing and are just out here saying whatever sound remotely like it should work, even though proof that it DOESN'T has been provided. Kind of like when you kept claiming you dueled Wuuffey but then offered absolutely 0 proof of it and folded when pressed about it.Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
That was with tri-pots, 5 medium, Shapeshifter's, and Imperial. That's pretty sustainy.
Both with that being said, I actually did run with "Orzo food" (remember, I told you this already?), and I had even attempted with Takeaway Broth and pretty quickly and obviously determined that decreasing your max resources makes the sustain worse and not better. Running 2,000+ stam recov after a tri-pot resulted in no meaning increases over the above build:Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
This is a way to build it that is MAXIMIZING reduction, using tri-pots, and gaining sustain. That doesn't work.
Running Orzo food was worse, in-fact (as your resource pools are already very low and they have reduced healing which requires more health and not less to remediate reductions... with that being said):HalensShade wrote: »[snip]
[snip]
Imperial, swap from bewitched to orzo food, sorc CoE class mastery. Done and WW is still OP
Haha! You tried this on the other thread too xD-madmufffin wrote: »
It's still fine on sorc with Orzo food nice try
No, sorry. This is me on the 6m dummy with "Orzo Food", 6 medium, all tri-glyphs on my sorcwolf without CoE (subclassed to get more power given no more static reverb):
I lasted 15 seconds... I made it less than half of my bar for Rampage.
See, that's the beauty of it. Even dropping down to 35k health (trying to keep a decent level of healing even though I'll fall over with 35k health, no minor resolve, in 6 medium in an actual PvP environment)... "Orzo food" causes me to lose far too much max resource so despite higher recov... I still burn out nearly instantly.
This is on an Imperial btw... which makes this EVEN WORSE as my max resources are higher and my costs are 6% cheaper across the board.
CoE is a MAJOR plummet in damage, additionally, picking sorc masteries without reverb now causes you to lose HEAPS of damage over other classes and their masteries/subclassing, and the sustain decrease nerf for CoE (along with the sustain decrease of less max resources for CoE-scaling with something like "Orzo" food) causes even the sustain gained to be woefully less impactful as well over running sustain in other ways for other classes/subclassing.
[edited to remove quote]
Do you have any data of your own to support your claims?
Sustain set, serpent and Orzo solves the issue. Sorry you struggle to adapt.
Nope, we tried with all sorts of things including over 30% reduction to stamina abilities, "Orzo Food", cost glyphs @AdonisJorge, and more.
Beyond that, how much damage do you believe werewolf is capable of losing before it can no longer kill competent players/ any reasonable amount of time?
It had more damage across the board before the rework. How could it logically lose damage, I build more sustain on wolf than I ever have before (as they remove the sustain), and it somehow do better than it did for me before the rework?
Do you have any timestamped PTS CMX data to validate your point?
Sounds like it's just a YOU issue then and the rest of us are good / adapted. Sorry bud
Hmm, very strange. It's a logical issue because they reduced the damage (from when it objectively was awful), took away defiles (pressure on healing and shielding), gave it sustain, removed the sustain, and didn't return the damage...
I built for sustain as I have very clearly demonstrated via logical data and CMX parses and yet burn out in 20 seconds or less (even at the expense of more damage). I also have a plethora of people I've tested on this PTS with the same claim of the hindrance of the sustain and the egregious stat spread that wolf requires (remember, reducing the healing doesn't exactly give me the option of building less health especially when I cannot bolster my tankiness with a sword and board/minor resolve, for example)...
...yet you are saying 'build better' but cannot provide any data or proof to back up the claim that you know how to build in a way that is fundamentally better than me (who did verifiably proficiently with wolf pre-rework and who does verifiably proficiently with wolf post-rework) or any of those I have verifiably fought against, with proof, on PTS.
I am choosing to not engage with you anymore for the time being as I wish to engage in 'good faith' arguments only. Thank you, once again!
I'm not here to help you learn WW or theorycraft builds after the changes. Sorry maybe someone on YT can help you out.
You do realize the burden of proof is on a person making a claim, yes? If what you keep saying is true, why are you so afraid to post proof of it? And please don't try hiding behind excuses of "look at Youtube lel" because NONE of those builds are the one YOU are CLAIMING ""works"" on the PTS right now. Other builds dont mean anything, they have no bearing on this conversation.
You are making claims. Offer your proof. That's how it works, not hiding behind "I'm not here to theorycraft for you". This isn't about making builds, this is about offering objective proof of something.
ETA Also how are people even supposed to test what you keep claiming ""works"" if you refuse to tell people what ""works"" beyond the absolute vaguest things? Because proof of builds following your ""advice"" not working has been shown, and yet you STILL keep insisting that it's the other person essentially being bad. Despite them doing what you say allegedly ""works"". So again...show proof. Because otherwise you're offering nothing to the conversation but misinformation yourself.
Well yes and no. I see the point the person is making here and I see where I think you may be going wrong.
They dun don't need to prove anything because they aren't saying the build will be amazing just playable.
Here's the issue, what's playable? Pve, pvp, cp, no cp, dungeon, trial, duel, etc. Playable builds for those require very different things.
At a base level if I tell you to strap on all sustain gear, enchants, mundus, and food, we know you'll be able to perform skills so it's playable.
Now what I suspect you or anyone else is asking is show me a build with performance in any of the categories I just named and to be honest that's not realistic because playable is in the mind of the player and their goals which can be all over the place.
So functionally is ww technically playable, of course. Is it going to be at the levels it was before, of course not. Can it reach even near those levels in xyz environment, probably not.
Could you build something and play it and have fun, that's up to reach personal player and preference.
Obviously those the really enjoy ww are not happy with the change and want at or near the same level of performance. And it's a good idea to ask for what you want but also accept and pay what they decide upon in the end, or not, but it's still probably going to happen.
Playable isn't that complicated in this instance. It means whether you run out of resources faster than other Classes or have to give up more damage, healing, or tanking ability to build into more than any other Class would. No build is playable if you're running out of resources quickly or if you have to spec so much into sustain that it negatively impacts your overall ability to do whatever it is you're trying to.
If dude is SO SURE that his ""advice"" works as well as he claims it does, what genuine legit reason can he have for not backing it up with proof? None, it's why all his avoidance has been passive-aggressive nothings. But I doubt he's going to offer proof of anything. Given none of my last few posts directed at him have been acknowledged, I'm being ignored.
You missed the point. You're confusing absolute and opinion.
His opinion based on his experience is that this will work and it's true because it's based on his opinion and expectations.
See if he says ok I built all into sustain and it works for me then you're going to say it doesn't have enough damage or defense. Then if he shows it he having those in a situation he deems appropriate then you're going to say well that's not what I was talking about and now all the sudden he's trying to build a spec that matches up to your expectations which is crazy to chase. That's why he's right in saying he doesn't have to prove anything to you, because at the end of the day he's not responsible for meeting your expectations of what playable is as long as he meets his own.
Now if he claimed that he could beat you in a duel or in a pve parse then he'd need to back up those claims but saying if you make these changes I think it would be playable isn't a claim that has to be backed up because it's not based on logic, it's mostly opinion if not feeling which really shouldn't be argued.
Sure, what works for one person might not work for another. In fact it's pretty well-known that you can give two people the same exact build with the only difference between their skill level, and typically the person with more skill and, yes, experience, will do decently better than the person with less skill. But that's not what's being debated here. What's being asked for is the barest hint of proof that his "advice" actually works. That he can make a build that has good sustain without giving up so much of everything else that the sustain is pointless because he can't deal, tank, or heal enough damage.
He's claiming that his build is still able to beat people on the PTS after swapping some stuff around but refuses to post proof. This isn't about moving goalposts like you seem to be making it out to be. Literally all any of us asking for proof are doing is asking for proof that he actually swapped his build around like he claimed to and was still doing fine in PvP. That is it. Nothing more. It's got nothing to do with wanting to say "oh well you have good sustain but your damage is low". Because if he has a build that can actually sustain and kill other players reliably then it would inherently mean the build is strong.
But he refuses. He refuses to post evidence that his so-called build even exists. He isn't providing proof that he's not just saying whatever sounds like it should work. There's nothing from him to back up that his build performs like he's claiming. Why would you believe someone making a claim like this without any proof that they even have the build they're claiming works? When numerous times Wuuffy has posted proof that the stuff doesn't work as claimed?
Also I'd like to bring up again that Mamba and Wuuffy were supposed to duel and Mamba never posted any proof of that either, despite claiming that Wuuffy showed up in a stalemate build. It's a pattern, if it needs to be pointed out. Say X thing and then offer no evidence of it. It feels like the PTS of U50 all over again, when people were submitting "proof" of WW being too strong in PvP but not being transparent in what they were or weren't using. It was mostly in regards to Signet (people not admitting they were using it but their CMX giving it away b/c of the various status procs) or using things like CoE. Incorrect and insincere data, along with just flat out bad faith lying, can do quite a bit of harm. It's why people ask for data with full transparency, not just taking a person's word on something because "trust me bro".
Ok I'm going to try to address this in good faith.
Here's the problem with trying to prove yourself in a situation like this. Ok so he shows you the build. Then let's say he shows you beating someone in a duel.
People will just give reasons why the example isn't valid. Or they will say okay well what about when I want to do zyz, bet you can't do that.
Okay I said good faith so sure maybe he's making it up. What I'm saying is that I've been in the exact position when people say show me and when the subject has layers it becomes a trap because either you're going to show them what works for you and what you're happy with and they just dismiss it because it wasn't what they wanted or you show them perhaps that it's a skill issue and they still dismiss it because they don't want to learn your different way.
What I'm saying is this, I learned a long time ago to not try to prove yourself on a nuanced subject because sometimes if you're happy and the other person isn't for whatever reason, is just best to leave it because either way it's an inconvenience that only takes time away from what you're enjoying.
Notice that even when I asked for more data I was clear that it wasn't for me but might help devs. I was giving my opinion as someone that does development.
Again I'm not saying this person isn't making it up , I'm saying I've been on his side of things and can relate to that situation where you just say to the person, sorry if you can't figure it out or be happy but I can't be inconvenienced to explain it or compare what makes me happy that doesn't work for you.
Of course we can get all lost in asking someone to try to prove their statements. But we could also just say ok well there's one vote for it's ok, now let's move on and just accept that he declined to share further details.
If we're looking for change then let's do so in a productive way vs badgering someone that clearly isn't interested in further helping. There's all kinds of reasons his opinion could be invalid in regards to ww, no need to really dig in on it I'd say.
I don't understand why you keep wanting to make this a matter of not posting because "the goalposts" might be moved. It's just saying that people are more than justified to not post proof of their claims simply because people might try to prove them wrong. Plenty of other people don't have a problem with providing proof despite that possibility. It's the whole dang point of the PTS. To find out what actually works and what doesn't.
This isn't about "proving yourself". We are on the Public Test Server. This is about testing and showing the results for both devs and other players to see and think about. What Mamba has been doing is literally nothing but saying over and over that "it's fine I can do it trust me if you can't you suck" without any proof. And that's the thing, too; he is actively insulting other players for "not being able to figure it out" or "not being as good" as he is. When you are not only making the same claim over and over but insulting the people who are asking for something as simple as a CMS screen...yeah, you probably don't have any meaningful data to show.
It seems that what matters more here isn't providing actual data and proof backing up claims. What matters more is that people don't have their egos threatened because of the possibility that proof they post gets questioned in some way. I'm not going to reply after this because it's not accomplishing anything. At the end of the day, no matter how much someone doesn't like it, we are on the test server. The entire point is to be testing things and then reporting what we find, not being rude, passive-aggressive, and evasive when asked for evidence of a claim.
Ok let me help you understand what I'm seeing here and why this doesn't work.
Let's have some fun and take out the goalpost argument completely. You use words like good and reliably. So those are the kind of words that leave room for argument. Instead I want you to post EXACT numbers of exactly what you want to see. Don't use any ambiguous language, be precise on exactly the build you want to see. Be precise on exactly the opponent you want them to beat to satisfy what you deem good or reliable.
Tell me every scenario in exact detail and exact numbers that you need to see for this person's claims to be valid in a way at which point you will no longer dispute and simply accept that they are right and you are wrong.
I give this as an example really and as a point. You want to take out the goalpost then you tell us exactly and I mean EXACTLY what you need to see using mathematical expressions and no language that can be interpreted.
Because when you use words that can have different meaning then we have to agree on that meaning and that's where the problem comes in. Get it?
At least if you provide this then I can respect that you're asking a question that isn't at all open ended or that can't be left to chance.
Then if they don't want to provide that evidence I can certainly see it as more of a failing on their part because you're no longer being less than precisely clear about what you are asking.
Evidence was provided. You refuse to accept the evidence.
As mentioned before, you are the one that stated you wish to receive evidence at that. My inclination was 'what exactly would they want' as I tagged the 'community representatives' for further insight and yet received no response.
The questions you ask are the same one I asked when an 'esteemed member of the community' came out to state that 'werewolf DPS was doubling everyone else's' during the werewolf rework PTS (U50 PTS) and come to find out that clearly wasn't true as Signet, masteries, and more from that single patch were pushing the bar all the way across the board. I was borderline harassed on the forums (people following me around any post/comment with off-topic attacks on character) and even in-game from people I had never even seen all because I questioned the integrity of data coming from individuals so very highly skewed towards an inclination ('nerf werewolf'), supplying a fraction of the information and verifiable logic I have here on this thread.
Regardless, uptimes and passives that werewolf maintained for years like Savage Strength (cut from 18% to 10%), Berserker Bleed uptime (4 seconds to 1 single second of DoT), and Claws (Condensed to 20 seconds with major and minor defile to 10 seconds and then reduced to 6 seconds) were affected (nerfed) off of essentially 'dueling parses' (which are NOT remotely as stable and replicatable as the one's I'm providing) because individuals who refused to provide info on gear, CP, info on build (all of which I have provided where requested such as 'Shapeshifter's, Imperial, my own stat sheet, etc.) posted CMXs parses and enacted change that was detrimental to the werewolf kit and apparently solved nothing in the dev's vision as the slapped us with 200-300% nerfs to sustain as a 'next-pass'.
So my point lies, if you don't believe in my data- source your own. In the entire time where you've posted in my thread over 50 times, you have not provided data of your own at any point but have rather provided antagonistic comments all the way through even Straw-manning to 'werewolf not a class' as if that changes anything on the topic 'should werewolf be balanced appropriately'.
A minute fraction of the information and data I've provided, spoiled:@ZOS_Kevin * @ZOS_JessicaFolsom (please pass through to combat team) - I don't know what else I can do or say to prove that you are making a mistake. I provide what I can, where I can aimlessly trying to pass the grander point along.
Everytime werewolf 'dies', it is when the sustain is adjusted too heavily or the healing is adjusted too heavily. When you remove damage options like static reverb and leave CoE, you aren't encouraging 'a way out', you're relegating werewolves to yet another subpar option that still lacks the damage with sustain of traditional options like Shapeshifter's chain + Imperial (or in a sense like Oakensoul before). The adjustments to CoE were appropriate, encouraging a choice IS the right path, however the sustain changes are now overkill.
I have attempted to build in a variety of ways where my damage is 'sufficient', which must be consistent and high to outpace rampant healing and sustain (especially CoE mastery Sorc users and CoF skill Dragonknight users), I maintain a certain level of health 35k+, and maintain a certain level of sustain (even if it requires dedicating my race, mythic, and even food) to do so.
In every test I had, Smoked Bear Haunch in ESO and Artaeum Takeaway Broth (shown earlier in this thread via CMX) while seemingly a valid option caused me to lose far too many resources in stam and/or mag to the point that having 2k+ stamina recovery was still a detriment that caused me to burn out within around 15 seconds with essentially no break frees, no rolls, and no blocks (meaning in combat, just like demonstrated before also- I would likely 'burn out' within 4-5 seconds at most).
Building 5 med (22k resistance being nearly unviable in actual content i.e. 'glass cannon' for cost reduction), health where possible for healing, running Shapeshifter's Chain (unique resources and 15% cost reduction), Imperial (Highest Health and Stamina combo with 6% reduction)- I was able to last no more than 20 seconds EVEN with the break free CP (which would not be active in NO-CP BGs) and minimizing rolls (which some snares, immobilizes, and certain skills would force out) before bottoming-out stamina in a very dangerous way:
For an added benefit, with the same reduction gear (which would be abnormal for a mag build), and after stacking 35k+ mag (which caused my health to fall below 30k), I would still burn out within seconds in a dangerous way however only this time it didn't stabilize:
Meanwhile, post nerf-courtesy of our own @Arcana - this is DK on PTS blocking over 100 attacks (holding block) maintaining resource stability the entire time on what is arguably a combination pressure and burst class:
There are many on these forums that will debate this topic in logical fallacies, provide no evidence to back otherwise baseless claims, and are likely here to overwhelm and 'drown out' counter-arguments, however valid-
I know at the end of the day I'm "just a werewolf player" but I implore the team to see the data and logical reasoning along with the promises made by the members who worked so hard to revitalize werewolf in a big way. I have no doubt this PTS patch will make it to live as-is now for werewolf. I ask that over the next 3 months you investigate and determine better solutions for this 'pressure, no burst, low sustain' playstyle you've created and try to understand the changes that made it objectively unviable in the first place.Edited by Wuuffyy on August 28, 2026 2:31PMWuuffyy,
'end-game' PvE and PvP player
ESO player since 2014 (Xbox and PC for PTS)
-new players, feel free to DM for guidance!4 -
RedMamba✭✭✭Bushido2513 wrote: »
Okay, you keep making this about moving the goalposts with proof when I've stated clearly why it's nothing like that. I LITERALLY said if he could post proof of his build having good sustain while also reliably being able to kill people that would inherently make it a good build. But you keep wanting to stick on the point of "You're just going to move the goalposts if proof is provided about the sustain matter". This is an excuse. You don't avoid posting proof because you're afraid of moving goalposts. You post it to shoot them down, to prove THEM wrong.Bushido2513 wrote: »
There is no opinion in this matter. Data does not operate on opinion, it operates on facts and information. And if someone is claiming something works, then objectively they need to provide the data that backs that up. Trying to say "in someone's experience" does not provide anything meaningful. People could hide behind this reasoning even if they have little to no experience in something. Someone's supposed "experience" does not matter if it is not providing objective proof of something. Experience without backing it up is about as useful as no experience whatsoever.Bushido2513 wrote: »
Except yes, he DOES need to provide proof of his claims. This is the PTS the whole point of things is to provide actual data, not pointless hearsay that has been proven already NOT TO WORK. If he's going to sit here and parrot the same nonsense without backing it up, it's not data, it's nothing. Empty words. It's someone who wants WW to be nerfed and is spreading their own misinformation about X or Y working when his ""advice"" was followed.Bushido2513 wrote: »
I don't know what makes it clear you're just here to be contrary and hate on WW more than this right here. You have been asked repeatedly for proof of the claims you're making, but you just keep coming up with passive-aggressive excuses to avoid actually giving any proof to validate your claims. It's obvious you haven't done any testing and are just out here saying whatever sound remotely like it should work, even though proof that it DOESN'T has been provided. Kind of like when you kept claiming you dueled Wuuffey but then offered absolutely 0 proof of it and folded when pressed about it.Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
That was with tri-pots, 5 medium, Shapeshifter's, and Imperial. That's pretty sustainy.
Both with that being said, I actually did run with "Orzo food" (remember, I told you this already?), and I had even attempted with Takeaway Broth and pretty quickly and obviously determined that decreasing your max resources makes the sustain worse and not better. Running 2,000+ stam recov after a tri-pot resulted in no meaning increases over the above build:Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
This is a way to build it that is MAXIMIZING reduction, using tri-pots, and gaining sustain. That doesn't work.
Running Orzo food was worse, in-fact (as your resource pools are already very low and they have reduced healing which requires more health and not less to remediate reductions... with that being said):HalensShade wrote: »[snip]
[snip]
Imperial, swap from bewitched to orzo food, sorc CoE class mastery. Done and WW is still OP
Haha! You tried this on the other thread too xD-madmufffin wrote: »
It's still fine on sorc with Orzo food nice try
No, sorry. This is me on the 6m dummy with "Orzo Food", 6 medium, all tri-glyphs on my sorcwolf without CoE (subclassed to get more power given no more static reverb):
I lasted 15 seconds... I made it less than half of my bar for Rampage.
See, that's the beauty of it. Even dropping down to 35k health (trying to keep a decent level of healing even though I'll fall over with 35k health, no minor resolve, in 6 medium in an actual PvP environment)... "Orzo food" causes me to lose far too much max resource so despite higher recov... I still burn out nearly instantly.
This is on an Imperial btw... which makes this EVEN WORSE as my max resources are higher and my costs are 6% cheaper across the board.
CoE is a MAJOR plummet in damage, additionally, picking sorc masteries without reverb now causes you to lose HEAPS of damage over other classes and their masteries/subclassing, and the sustain decrease nerf for CoE (along with the sustain decrease of less max resources for CoE-scaling with something like "Orzo" food) causes even the sustain gained to be woefully less impactful as well over running sustain in other ways for other classes/subclassing.
[edited to remove quote]
Do you have any data of your own to support your claims?
Sustain set, serpent and Orzo solves the issue. Sorry you struggle to adapt.
Nope, we tried with all sorts of things including over 30% reduction to stamina abilities, "Orzo Food", cost glyphs @AdonisJorge, and more.
Beyond that, how much damage do you believe werewolf is capable of losing before it can no longer kill competent players/ any reasonable amount of time?
It had more damage across the board before the rework. How could it logically lose damage, I build more sustain on wolf than I ever have before (as they remove the sustain), and it somehow do better than it did for me before the rework?
Do you have any timestamped PTS CMX data to validate your point?
Sounds like it's just a YOU issue then and the rest of us are good / adapted. Sorry bud
Hmm, very strange. It's a logical issue because they reduced the damage (from when it objectively was awful), took away defiles (pressure on healing and shielding), gave it sustain, removed the sustain, and didn't return the damage...
I built for sustain as I have very clearly demonstrated via logical data and CMX parses and yet burn out in 20 seconds or less (even at the expense of more damage). I also have a plethora of people I've tested on this PTS with the same claim of the hindrance of the sustain and the egregious stat spread that wolf requires (remember, reducing the healing doesn't exactly give me the option of building less health especially when I cannot bolster my tankiness with a sword and board/minor resolve, for example)...
...yet you are saying 'build better' but cannot provide any data or proof to back up the claim that you know how to build in a way that is fundamentally better than me (who did verifiably proficiently with wolf pre-rework and who does verifiably proficiently with wolf post-rework) or any of those I have verifiably fought against, with proof, on PTS.
I am choosing to not engage with you anymore for the time being as I wish to engage in 'good faith' arguments only. Thank you, once again!
I'm not here to help you learn WW or theorycraft builds after the changes. Sorry maybe someone on YT can help you out.
You do realize the burden of proof is on a person making a claim, yes? If what you keep saying is true, why are you so afraid to post proof of it? And please don't try hiding behind excuses of "look at Youtube lel" because NONE of those builds are the one YOU are CLAIMING ""works"" on the PTS right now. Other builds dont mean anything, they have no bearing on this conversation.
You are making claims. Offer your proof. That's how it works, not hiding behind "I'm not here to theorycraft for you". This isn't about making builds, this is about offering objective proof of something.
ETA Also how are people even supposed to test what you keep claiming ""works"" if you refuse to tell people what ""works"" beyond the absolute vaguest things? Because proof of builds following your ""advice"" not working has been shown, and yet you STILL keep insisting that it's the other person essentially being bad. Despite them doing what you say allegedly ""works"". So again...show proof. Because otherwise you're offering nothing to the conversation but misinformation yourself.
Well yes and no. I see the point the person is making here and I see where I think you may be going wrong.
They dun don't need to prove anything because they aren't saying the build will be amazing just playable.
Here's the issue, what's playable? Pve, pvp, cp, no cp, dungeon, trial, duel, etc. Playable builds for those require very different things.
At a base level if I tell you to strap on all sustain gear, enchants, mundus, and food, we know you'll be able to perform skills so it's playable.
Now what I suspect you or anyone else is asking is show me a build with performance in any of the categories I just named and to be honest that's not realistic because playable is in the mind of the player and their goals which can be all over the place.
So functionally is ww technically playable, of course. Is it going to be at the levels it was before, of course not. Can it reach even near those levels in xyz environment, probably not.
Could you build something and play it and have fun, that's up to reach personal player and preference.
Obviously those the really enjoy ww are not happy with the change and want at or near the same level of performance. And it's a good idea to ask for what you want but also accept and pay what they decide upon in the end, or not, but it's still probably going to happen.
Playable isn't that complicated in this instance. It means whether you run out of resources faster than other Classes or have to give up more damage, healing, or tanking ability to build into more than any other Class would. No build is playable if you're running out of resources quickly or if you have to spec so much into sustain that it negatively impacts your overall ability to do whatever it is you're trying to.
If dude is SO SURE that his ""advice"" works as well as he claims it does, what genuine legit reason can he have for not backing it up with proof? None, it's why all his avoidance has been passive-aggressive nothings. But I doubt he's going to offer proof of anything. Given none of my last few posts directed at him have been acknowledged, I'm being ignored.
You missed the point. You're confusing absolute and opinion.
His opinion based on his experience is that this will work and it's true because it's based on his opinion and expectations.
See if he says ok I built all into sustain and it works for me then you're going to say it doesn't have enough damage or defense. Then if he shows it he having those in a situation he deems appropriate then you're going to say well that's not what I was talking about and now all the sudden he's trying to build a spec that matches up to your expectations which is crazy to chase. That's why he's right in saying he doesn't have to prove anything to you, because at the end of the day he's not responsible for meeting your expectations of what playable is as long as he meets his own.
Now if he claimed that he could beat you in a duel or in a pve parse then he'd need to back up those claims but saying if you make these changes I think it would be playable isn't a claim that has to be backed up because it's not based on logic, it's mostly opinion if not feeling which really shouldn't be argued.
Sure, what works for one person might not work for another. In fact it's pretty well-known that you can give two people the same exact build with the only difference between their skill level, and typically the person with more skill and, yes, experience, will do decently better than the person with less skill. But that's not what's being debated here. What's being asked for is the barest hint of proof that his "advice" actually works. That he can make a build that has good sustain without giving up so much of everything else that the sustain is pointless because he can't deal, tank, or heal enough damage.
He's claiming that his build is still able to beat people on the PTS after swapping some stuff around but refuses to post proof. This isn't about moving goalposts like you seem to be making it out to be. Literally all any of us asking for proof are doing is asking for proof that he actually swapped his build around like he claimed to and was still doing fine in PvP. That is it. Nothing more. It's got nothing to do with wanting to say "oh well you have good sustain but your damage is low". Because if he has a build that can actually sustain and kill other players reliably then it would inherently mean the build is strong.
But he refuses. He refuses to post evidence that his so-called build even exists. He isn't providing proof that he's not just saying whatever sounds like it should work. There's nothing from him to back up that his build performs like he's claiming. Why would you believe someone making a claim like this without any proof that they even have the build they're claiming works? When numerous times Wuuffy has posted proof that the stuff doesn't work as claimed?
Also I'd like to bring up again that Mamba and Wuuffy were supposed to duel and Mamba never posted any proof of that either, despite claiming that Wuuffy showed up in a stalemate build. It's a pattern, if it needs to be pointed out. Say X thing and then offer no evidence of it. It feels like the PTS of U50 all over again, when people were submitting "proof" of WW being too strong in PvP but not being transparent in what they were or weren't using. It was mostly in regards to Signet (people not admitting they were using it but their CMX giving it away b/c of the various status procs) or using things like CoE. Incorrect and insincere data, along with just flat out bad faith lying, can do quite a bit of harm. It's why people ask for data with full transparency, not just taking a person's word on something because "trust me bro".
Ok I'm going to try to address this in good faith.
Here's the problem with trying to prove yourself in a situation like this. Ok so he shows you the build. Then let's say he shows you beating someone in a duel.
People will just give reasons why the example isn't valid. Or they will say okay well what about when I want to do zyz, bet you can't do that.
Okay I said good faith so sure maybe he's making it up. What I'm saying is that I've been in the exact position when people say show me and when the subject has layers it becomes a trap because either you're going to show them what works for you and what you're happy with and they just dismiss it because it wasn't what they wanted or you show them perhaps that it's a skill issue and they still dismiss it because they don't want to learn your different way.
What I'm saying is this, I learned a long time ago to not try to prove yourself on a nuanced subject because sometimes if you're happy and the other person isn't for whatever reason, is just best to leave it because either way it's an inconvenience that only takes time away from what you're enjoying.
Notice that even when I asked for more data I was clear that it wasn't for me but might help devs. I was giving my opinion as someone that does development.
Again I'm not saying this person isn't making it up , I'm saying I've been on his side of things and can relate to that situation where you just say to the person, sorry if you can't figure it out or be happy but I can't be inconvenienced to explain it or compare what makes me happy that doesn't work for you.
Of course we can get all lost in asking someone to try to prove their statements. But we could also just say ok well there's one vote for it's ok, now let's move on and just accept that he declined to share further details.
If we're looking for change then let's do so in a productive way vs badgering someone that clearly isn't interested in further helping. There's all kinds of reasons his opinion could be invalid in regards to ww, no need to really dig in on it I'd say.
I don't understand why you keep wanting to make this a matter of not posting because "the goalposts" might be moved. It's just saying that people are more than justified to not post proof of their claims simply because people might try to prove them wrong. Plenty of other people don't have a problem with providing proof despite that possibility. It's the whole dang point of the PTS. To find out what actually works and what doesn't.
This isn't about "proving yourself". We are on the Public Test Server. This is about testing and showing the results for both devs and other players to see and think about. What Mamba has been doing is literally nothing but saying over and over that "it's fine I can do it trust me if you can't you suck" without any proof. And that's the thing, too; he is actively insulting other players for "not being able to figure it out" or "not being as good" as he is. When you are not only making the same claim over and over but insulting the people who are asking for something as simple as a CMS screen...yeah, you probably don't have any meaningful data to show.
It seems that what matters more here isn't providing actual data and proof backing up claims. What matters more is that people don't have their egos threatened because of the possibility that proof they post gets questioned in some way. I'm not going to reply after this because it's not accomplishing anything. At the end of the day, no matter how much someone doesn't like it, we are on the test server. The entire point is to be testing things and then reporting what we find, not being rude, passive-aggressive, and evasive when asked for evidence of a claim.
Ok let me help you understand what I'm seeing here and why this doesn't work.
Let's have some fun and take out the goalpost argument completely. You use words like good and reliably. So those are the kind of words that leave room for argument. Instead I want you to post EXACT numbers of exactly what you want to see. Don't use any ambiguous language, be precise on exactly the build you want to see. Be precise on exactly the opponent you want them to beat to satisfy what you deem good or reliable.
Tell me every scenario in exact detail and exact numbers that you need to see for this person's claims to be valid in a way at which point you will no longer dispute and simply accept that they are right and you are wrong.
I give this as an example really and as a point. You want to take out the goalpost then you tell us exactly and I mean EXACTLY what you need to see using mathematical expressions and no language that can be interpreted.
Because when you use words that can have different meaning then we have to agree on that meaning and that's where the problem comes in. Get it?
At least if you provide this then I can respect that you're asking a question that isn't at all open ended or that can't be left to chance.
Then if they don't want to provide that evidence I can certainly see it as more of a failing on their part because you're no longer being less than precisely clear about what you are asking.
Evidence was provided. You refuse to accept the evidence.
As mentioned before, you are the one that stated you wish to receive evidence at that. My inclination was 'what exactly would they want' as I tagged the 'community representatives' for further insight and yet received no response.
The questions you ask are the same one I asked when an 'esteemed member of the community' came out to state that 'werewolf DPS was doubling everyone else's' during the werewolf rework PTS (U50 PTS) and come to find out that clearly wasn't true as Signet, masteries, and more from that single patch were pushing the bar all the way across the board. I was borderline harassed on the forums (people following me around any post/comment with off-topic attacks on character) and even in-game from people I had never even seen all because I questioned the integrity of data coming from individuals so very highly skewed towards an inclination ('nerf werewolf'), supplying a fraction of the information and verifiable logic I have here on this thread.
Regardless, uptimes and passives that werewolf maintained for years like Savage Strength (cut from 18% to 10%), Berserker Bleed uptime (4 seconds to 1 single second of DoT), and Claws (Condensed to 20 seconds with major and minor defile to 10 seconds and then reduced to 6 seconds) were affected (nerfed) off of essentially 'dueling parses' (which are NOT remotely as stable and replicatable as the one's I'm providing) because individuals who refused to provide info on gear, CP, info on build (all of which I have provided where requested such as 'Shapeshifter's, Imperial, my own stat sheet, etc.) posted CMXs parses and enacted change that was detrimental to the werewolf kit and apparently solved nothing in the dev's vision as the slapped us with 200-300% nerfs to sustain as a 'next-pass'.
So my point lies, if you don't believe in my data- source your own. In the entire time where you've posted in my thread over 50 times, you have not provided data of your own at any point but have rather provided antagonistic comments all the way through even Straw-manning to 'werewolf not a class' as if that changes anything on the topic 'should werewolf be balanced appropriately'.
A minute fraction of the information and data I've provided, spoiled:@ZOS_Kevin * @ZOS_JessicaFolsom (please pass through to combat team) - I don't know what else I can do or say to prove that you are making a mistake. I provide what I can, where I can aimlessly trying to pass the grander point along.
Everytime werewolf 'dies', it is when the sustain is adjusted too heavily or the healing is adjusted too heavily. When you remove damage options like static reverb and leave CoE, you aren't encouraging 'a way out', you're relegating werewolves to yet another subpar option that still lacks the damage with sustain of traditional options like Shapeshifter's chain + Imperial (or in a sense like Oakensoul before). The adjustments to CoE were appropriate, encouraging a choice IS the right path, however the sustain changes are now overkill.
I have attempted to build in a variety of ways where my damage is 'sufficient', which must be consistent and high to outpace rampant healing and sustain (especially CoE mastery Sorc users and CoF skill Dragonknight users), I maintain a certain level of health 35k+, and maintain a certain level of sustain (even if it requires dedicating my race, mythic, and even food) to do so.
In every test I had, Smoked Bear Haunch in ESO and Artaeum Takeaway Broth (shown earlier in this thread via CMX) while seemingly a valid option caused me to lose far too many resources in stam and/or mag to the point that having 2k+ stamina recovery was still a detriment that caused me to burn out within around 15 seconds with essentially no break frees, no rolls, and no blocks (meaning in combat, just like demonstrated before also- I would likely 'burn out' within 4-5 seconds at most).
Building 5 med (22k resistance being nearly unviable in actual content i.e. 'glass cannon' for cost reduction), health where possible for healing, running Shapeshifter's Chain (unique resources and 15% cost reduction), Imperial (Highest Health and Stamina combo with 6% reduction)- I was able to last no more than 20 seconds EVEN with the break free CP (which would not be active in NO-CP BGs) and minimizing rolls (which some snares, immobilizes, and certain skills would force out) before bottoming-out stamina in a very dangerous way:
For an added benefit, with the same reduction gear (which would be abnormal for a mag build), and after stacking 35k+ mag (which caused my health to fall below 30k), I would still burn out within seconds in a dangerous way however only this time it didn't stabilize:
Meanwhile, post nerf-courtesy of our own @Arcana - this is DK on PTS blocking over 100 attacks (holding block) maintaining resource stability the entire time on what is arguably a combination pressure and burst class:
There are many on these forums that will debate this topic in logical fallacies, provide no evidence to back otherwise baseless claims, and are likely here to overwhelm and 'drown out' counter-arguments, however valid-
I know at the end of the day I'm "just a werewolf player" but I implore the team to see the data and logical reasoning along with the promises made by the members who worked so hard to revitalize werewolf in a big way. I have no doubt this PTS patch will make it to live as-is now for werewolf. I ask that over the next 3 months you investigate and determine better solutions for this 'pressure, no burst, low sustain' playstyle you've created and try to understand the changes that made it objectively unviable in the first place.
Did you just reply to yourself three times to bump the thread up? ROFL... that's reportable btw1 -
Arunei✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
What are you talking about, they were clearly replying to two other people. There are those who will reply to things individually sometimes to keep their replies shorter or make it easier on them to keep track of who they're replying to. Are you just looking for things to "report" or something?Bushido2513 wrote: »
Okay, you keep making this about moving the goalposts with proof when I've stated clearly why it's nothing like that. I LITERALLY said if he could post proof of his build having good sustain while also reliably being able to kill people that would inherently make it a good build. But you keep wanting to stick on the point of "You're just going to move the goalposts if proof is provided about the sustain matter". This is an excuse. You don't avoid posting proof because you're afraid of moving goalposts. You post it to shoot them down, to prove THEM wrong.Bushido2513 wrote: »
There is no opinion in this matter. Data does not operate on opinion, it operates on facts and information. And if someone is claiming something works, then objectively they need to provide the data that backs that up. Trying to say "in someone's experience" does not provide anything meaningful. People could hide behind this reasoning even if they have little to no experience in something. Someone's supposed "experience" does not matter if it is not providing objective proof of something. Experience without backing it up is about as useful as no experience whatsoever.Bushido2513 wrote: »
Except yes, he DOES need to provide proof of his claims. This is the PTS the whole point of things is to provide actual data, not pointless hearsay that has been proven already NOT TO WORK. If he's going to sit here and parrot the same nonsense without backing it up, it's not data, it's nothing. Empty words. It's someone who wants WW to be nerfed and is spreading their own misinformation about X or Y working when his ""advice"" was followed.Bushido2513 wrote: »
I don't know what makes it clear you're just here to be contrary and hate on WW more than this right here. You have been asked repeatedly for proof of the claims you're making, but you just keep coming up with passive-aggressive excuses to avoid actually giving any proof to validate your claims. It's obvious you haven't done any testing and are just out here saying whatever sound remotely like it should work, even though proof that it DOESN'T has been provided. Kind of like when you kept claiming you dueled Wuuffey but then offered absolutely 0 proof of it and folded when pressed about it.Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
That was with tri-pots, 5 medium, Shapeshifter's, and Imperial. That's pretty sustainy.
Both with that being said, I actually did run with "Orzo food" (remember, I told you this already?), and I had even attempted with Takeaway Broth and pretty quickly and obviously determined that decreasing your max resources makes the sustain worse and not better. Running 2,000+ stam recov after a tri-pot resulted in no meaning increases over the above build:Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
This is a way to build it that is MAXIMIZING reduction, using tri-pots, and gaining sustain. That doesn't work.
Running Orzo food was worse, in-fact (as your resource pools are already very low and they have reduced healing which requires more health and not less to remediate reductions... with that being said):HalensShade wrote: »[snip]
[snip]
Imperial, swap from bewitched to orzo food, sorc CoE class mastery. Done and WW is still OP
Haha! You tried this on the other thread too xD-madmufffin wrote: »
It's still fine on sorc with Orzo food nice try
No, sorry. This is me on the 6m dummy with "Orzo Food", 6 medium, all tri-glyphs on my sorcwolf without CoE (subclassed to get more power given no more static reverb):
I lasted 15 seconds... I made it less than half of my bar for Rampage.
See, that's the beauty of it. Even dropping down to 35k health (trying to keep a decent level of healing even though I'll fall over with 35k health, no minor resolve, in 6 medium in an actual PvP environment)... "Orzo food" causes me to lose far too much max resource so despite higher recov... I still burn out nearly instantly.
This is on an Imperial btw... which makes this EVEN WORSE as my max resources are higher and my costs are 6% cheaper across the board.
CoE is a MAJOR plummet in damage, additionally, picking sorc masteries without reverb now causes you to lose HEAPS of damage over other classes and their masteries/subclassing, and the sustain decrease nerf for CoE (along with the sustain decrease of less max resources for CoE-scaling with something like "Orzo" food) causes even the sustain gained to be woefully less impactful as well over running sustain in other ways for other classes/subclassing.
[edited to remove quote]
Do you have any data of your own to support your claims?
Sustain set, serpent and Orzo solves the issue. Sorry you struggle to adapt.
Nope, we tried with all sorts of things including over 30% reduction to stamina abilities, "Orzo Food", cost glyphs @AdonisJorge, and more.
Beyond that, how much damage do you believe werewolf is capable of losing before it can no longer kill competent players/ any reasonable amount of time?
It had more damage across the board before the rework. How could it logically lose damage, I build more sustain on wolf than I ever have before (as they remove the sustain), and it somehow do better than it did for me before the rework?
Do you have any timestamped PTS CMX data to validate your point?
Sounds like it's just a YOU issue then and the rest of us are good / adapted. Sorry bud
Hmm, very strange. It's a logical issue because they reduced the damage (from when it objectively was awful), took away defiles (pressure on healing and shielding), gave it sustain, removed the sustain, and didn't return the damage...
I built for sustain as I have very clearly demonstrated via logical data and CMX parses and yet burn out in 20 seconds or less (even at the expense of more damage). I also have a plethora of people I've tested on this PTS with the same claim of the hindrance of the sustain and the egregious stat spread that wolf requires (remember, reducing the healing doesn't exactly give me the option of building less health especially when I cannot bolster my tankiness with a sword and board/minor resolve, for example)...
...yet you are saying 'build better' but cannot provide any data or proof to back up the claim that you know how to build in a way that is fundamentally better than me (who did verifiably proficiently with wolf pre-rework and who does verifiably proficiently with wolf post-rework) or any of those I have verifiably fought against, with proof, on PTS.
I am choosing to not engage with you anymore for the time being as I wish to engage in 'good faith' arguments only. Thank you, once again!
I'm not here to help you learn WW or theorycraft builds after the changes. Sorry maybe someone on YT can help you out.
You do realize the burden of proof is on a person making a claim, yes? If what you keep saying is true, why are you so afraid to post proof of it? And please don't try hiding behind excuses of "look at Youtube lel" because NONE of those builds are the one YOU are CLAIMING ""works"" on the PTS right now. Other builds dont mean anything, they have no bearing on this conversation.
You are making claims. Offer your proof. That's how it works, not hiding behind "I'm not here to theorycraft for you". This isn't about making builds, this is about offering objective proof of something.
ETA Also how are people even supposed to test what you keep claiming ""works"" if you refuse to tell people what ""works"" beyond the absolute vaguest things? Because proof of builds following your ""advice"" not working has been shown, and yet you STILL keep insisting that it's the other person essentially being bad. Despite them doing what you say allegedly ""works"". So again...show proof. Because otherwise you're offering nothing to the conversation but misinformation yourself.
Well yes and no. I see the point the person is making here and I see where I think you may be going wrong.
They dun don't need to prove anything because they aren't saying the build will be amazing just playable.
Here's the issue, what's playable? Pve, pvp, cp, no cp, dungeon, trial, duel, etc. Playable builds for those require very different things.
At a base level if I tell you to strap on all sustain gear, enchants, mundus, and food, we know you'll be able to perform skills so it's playable.
Now what I suspect you or anyone else is asking is show me a build with performance in any of the categories I just named and to be honest that's not realistic because playable is in the mind of the player and their goals which can be all over the place.
So functionally is ww technically playable, of course. Is it going to be at the levels it was before, of course not. Can it reach even near those levels in xyz environment, probably not.
Could you build something and play it and have fun, that's up to reach personal player and preference.
Obviously those the really enjoy ww are not happy with the change and want at or near the same level of performance. And it's a good idea to ask for what you want but also accept and pay what they decide upon in the end, or not, but it's still probably going to happen.
Playable isn't that complicated in this instance. It means whether you run out of resources faster than other Classes or have to give up more damage, healing, or tanking ability to build into more than any other Class would. No build is playable if you're running out of resources quickly or if you have to spec so much into sustain that it negatively impacts your overall ability to do whatever it is you're trying to.
If dude is SO SURE that his ""advice"" works as well as he claims it does, what genuine legit reason can he have for not backing it up with proof? None, it's why all his avoidance has been passive-aggressive nothings. But I doubt he's going to offer proof of anything. Given none of my last few posts directed at him have been acknowledged, I'm being ignored.
You missed the point. You're confusing absolute and opinion.
His opinion based on his experience is that this will work and it's true because it's based on his opinion and expectations.
See if he says ok I built all into sustain and it works for me then you're going to say it doesn't have enough damage or defense. Then if he shows it he having those in a situation he deems appropriate then you're going to say well that's not what I was talking about and now all the sudden he's trying to build a spec that matches up to your expectations which is crazy to chase. That's why he's right in saying he doesn't have to prove anything to you, because at the end of the day he's not responsible for meeting your expectations of what playable is as long as he meets his own.
Now if he claimed that he could beat you in a duel or in a pve parse then he'd need to back up those claims but saying if you make these changes I think it would be playable isn't a claim that has to be backed up because it's not based on logic, it's mostly opinion if not feeling which really shouldn't be argued.
Sure, what works for one person might not work for another. In fact it's pretty well-known that you can give two people the same exact build with the only difference between their skill level, and typically the person with more skill and, yes, experience, will do decently better than the person with less skill. But that's not what's being debated here. What's being asked for is the barest hint of proof that his "advice" actually works. That he can make a build that has good sustain without giving up so much of everything else that the sustain is pointless because he can't deal, tank, or heal enough damage.
He's claiming that his build is still able to beat people on the PTS after swapping some stuff around but refuses to post proof. This isn't about moving goalposts like you seem to be making it out to be. Literally all any of us asking for proof are doing is asking for proof that he actually swapped his build around like he claimed to and was still doing fine in PvP. That is it. Nothing more. It's got nothing to do with wanting to say "oh well you have good sustain but your damage is low". Because if he has a build that can actually sustain and kill other players reliably then it would inherently mean the build is strong.
But he refuses. He refuses to post evidence that his so-called build even exists. He isn't providing proof that he's not just saying whatever sounds like it should work. There's nothing from him to back up that his build performs like he's claiming. Why would you believe someone making a claim like this without any proof that they even have the build they're claiming works? When numerous times Wuuffy has posted proof that the stuff doesn't work as claimed?
Also I'd like to bring up again that Mamba and Wuuffy were supposed to duel and Mamba never posted any proof of that either, despite claiming that Wuuffy showed up in a stalemate build. It's a pattern, if it needs to be pointed out. Say X thing and then offer no evidence of it. It feels like the PTS of U50 all over again, when people were submitting "proof" of WW being too strong in PvP but not being transparent in what they were or weren't using. It was mostly in regards to Signet (people not admitting they were using it but their CMX giving it away b/c of the various status procs) or using things like CoE. Incorrect and insincere data, along with just flat out bad faith lying, can do quite a bit of harm. It's why people ask for data with full transparency, not just taking a person's word on something because "trust me bro".
Ok I'm going to try to address this in good faith.
Here's the problem with trying to prove yourself in a situation like this. Ok so he shows you the build. Then let's say he shows you beating someone in a duel.
People will just give reasons why the example isn't valid. Or they will say okay well what about when I want to do zyz, bet you can't do that.
Okay I said good faith so sure maybe he's making it up. What I'm saying is that I've been in the exact position when people say show me and when the subject has layers it becomes a trap because either you're going to show them what works for you and what you're happy with and they just dismiss it because it wasn't what they wanted or you show them perhaps that it's a skill issue and they still dismiss it because they don't want to learn your different way.
What I'm saying is this, I learned a long time ago to not try to prove yourself on a nuanced subject because sometimes if you're happy and the other person isn't for whatever reason, is just best to leave it because either way it's an inconvenience that only takes time away from what you're enjoying.
Notice that even when I asked for more data I was clear that it wasn't for me but might help devs. I was giving my opinion as someone that does development.
Again I'm not saying this person isn't making it up , I'm saying I've been on his side of things and can relate to that situation where you just say to the person, sorry if you can't figure it out or be happy but I can't be inconvenienced to explain it or compare what makes me happy that doesn't work for you.
Of course we can get all lost in asking someone to try to prove their statements. But we could also just say ok well there's one vote for it's ok, now let's move on and just accept that he declined to share further details.
If we're looking for change then let's do so in a productive way vs badgering someone that clearly isn't interested in further helping. There's all kinds of reasons his opinion could be invalid in regards to ww, no need to really dig in on it I'd say.
I don't understand why you keep wanting to make this a matter of not posting because "the goalposts" might be moved. It's just saying that people are more than justified to not post proof of their claims simply because people might try to prove them wrong. Plenty of other people don't have a problem with providing proof despite that possibility. It's the whole dang point of the PTS. To find out what actually works and what doesn't.
This isn't about "proving yourself". We are on the Public Test Server. This is about testing and showing the results for both devs and other players to see and think about. What Mamba has been doing is literally nothing but saying over and over that "it's fine I can do it trust me if you can't you suck" without any proof. And that's the thing, too; he is actively insulting other players for "not being able to figure it out" or "not being as good" as he is. When you are not only making the same claim over and over but insulting the people who are asking for something as simple as a CMS screen...yeah, you probably don't have any meaningful data to show.
It seems that what matters more here isn't providing actual data and proof backing up claims. What matters more is that people don't have their egos threatened because of the possibility that proof they post gets questioned in some way. I'm not going to reply after this because it's not accomplishing anything. At the end of the day, no matter how much someone doesn't like it, we are on the test server. The entire point is to be testing things and then reporting what we find, not being rude, passive-aggressive, and evasive when asked for evidence of a claim.
Ok let me help you understand what I'm seeing here and why this doesn't work.
Let's have some fun and take out the goalpost argument completely. You use words like good and reliably. So those are the kind of words that leave room for argument. Instead I want you to post EXACT numbers of exactly what you want to see. Don't use any ambiguous language, be precise on exactly the build you want to see. Be precise on exactly the opponent you want them to beat to satisfy what you deem good or reliable.
Tell me every scenario in exact detail and exact numbers that you need to see for this person's claims to be valid in a way at which point you will no longer dispute and simply accept that they are right and you are wrong.
I give this as an example really and as a point. You want to take out the goalpost then you tell us exactly and I mean EXACTLY what you need to see using mathematical expressions and no language that can be interpreted.
Because when you use words that can have different meaning then we have to agree on that meaning and that's where the problem comes in. Get it?
At least if you provide this then I can respect that you're asking a question that isn't at all open ended or that can't be left to chance.
Then if they don't want to provide that evidence I can certainly see it as more of a failing on their part because you're no longer being less than precisely clear about what you are asking.
Evidence was provided. You refuse to accept the evidence.
As mentioned before, you are the one that stated you wish to receive evidence at that. My inclination was 'what exactly would they want' as I tagged the 'community representatives' for further insight and yet received no response.
The questions you ask are the same one I asked when an 'esteemed member of the community' came out to state that 'werewolf DPS was doubling everyone else's' during the werewolf rework PTS (U50 PTS) and come to find out that clearly wasn't true as Signet, masteries, and more from that single patch were pushing the bar all the way across the board. I was borderline harassed on the forums (people following me around any post/comment with off-topic attacks on character) and even in-game from people I had never even seen all because I questioned the integrity of data coming from individuals so very highly skewed towards an inclination ('nerf werewolf'), supplying a fraction of the information and verifiable logic I have here on this thread.
Regardless, uptimes and passives that werewolf maintained for years like Savage Strength (cut from 18% to 10%), Berserker Bleed uptime (4 seconds to 1 single second of DoT), and Claws (Condensed to 20 seconds with major and minor defile to 10 seconds and then reduced to 6 seconds) were affected (nerfed) off of essentially 'dueling parses' (which are NOT remotely as stable and replicatable as the one's I'm providing) because individuals who refused to provide info on gear, CP, info on build (all of which I have provided where requested such as 'Shapeshifter's, Imperial, my own stat sheet, etc.) posted CMXs parses and enacted change that was detrimental to the werewolf kit and apparently solved nothing in the dev's vision as the slapped us with 200-300% nerfs to sustain as a 'next-pass'.
So my point lies, if you don't believe in my data- source your own. In the entire time where you've posted in my thread over 50 times, you have not provided data of your own at any point but have rather provided antagonistic comments all the way through even Straw-manning to 'werewolf not a class' as if that changes anything on the topic 'should werewolf be balanced appropriately'.
A minute fraction of the information and data I've provided, spoiled:@ZOS_Kevin * @ZOS_JessicaFolsom (please pass through to combat team) - I don't know what else I can do or say to prove that you are making a mistake. I provide what I can, where I can aimlessly trying to pass the grander point along.
Everytime werewolf 'dies', it is when the sustain is adjusted too heavily or the healing is adjusted too heavily. When you remove damage options like static reverb and leave CoE, you aren't encouraging 'a way out', you're relegating werewolves to yet another subpar option that still lacks the damage with sustain of traditional options like Shapeshifter's chain + Imperial (or in a sense like Oakensoul before). The adjustments to CoE were appropriate, encouraging a choice IS the right path, however the sustain changes are now overkill.
I have attempted to build in a variety of ways where my damage is 'sufficient', which must be consistent and high to outpace rampant healing and sustain (especially CoE mastery Sorc users and CoF skill Dragonknight users), I maintain a certain level of health 35k+, and maintain a certain level of sustain (even if it requires dedicating my race, mythic, and even food) to do so.
In every test I had, Smoked Bear Haunch in ESO and Artaeum Takeaway Broth (shown earlier in this thread via CMX) while seemingly a valid option caused me to lose far too many resources in stam and/or mag to the point that having 2k+ stamina recovery was still a detriment that caused me to burn out within around 15 seconds with essentially no break frees, no rolls, and no blocks (meaning in combat, just like demonstrated before also- I would likely 'burn out' within 4-5 seconds at most).
Building 5 med (22k resistance being nearly unviable in actual content i.e. 'glass cannon' for cost reduction), health where possible for healing, running Shapeshifter's Chain (unique resources and 15% cost reduction), Imperial (Highest Health and Stamina combo with 6% reduction)- I was able to last no more than 20 seconds EVEN with the break free CP (which would not be active in NO-CP BGs) and minimizing rolls (which some snares, immobilizes, and certain skills would force out) before bottoming-out stamina in a very dangerous way:
For an added benefit, with the same reduction gear (which would be abnormal for a mag build), and after stacking 35k+ mag (which caused my health to fall below 30k), I would still burn out within seconds in a dangerous way however only this time it didn't stabilize:
Meanwhile, post nerf-courtesy of our own @Arcana - this is DK on PTS blocking over 100 attacks (holding block) maintaining resource stability the entire time on what is arguably a combination pressure and burst class:
There are many on these forums that will debate this topic in logical fallacies, provide no evidence to back otherwise baseless claims, and are likely here to overwhelm and 'drown out' counter-arguments, however valid-
I know at the end of the day I'm "just a werewolf player" but I implore the team to see the data and logical reasoning along with the promises made by the members who worked so hard to revitalize werewolf in a big way. I have no doubt this PTS patch will make it to live as-is now for werewolf. I ask that over the next 3 months you investigate and determine better solutions for this 'pressure, no burst, low sustain' playstyle you've created and try to understand the changes that made it objectively unviable in the first place.
Did you just reply to yourself three times to bump the thread up? ROFL... that's reportable btwEdited by Arunei on August 28, 2026 2:50PMPC-NA | Been around since closed beta | Alt account: Arunei PC-NA
Avid RPer. Hit me up in-game @Ras_Lei if you're interested in getting together for some arr-pee shenanigans!
RP Characters:
Sarah Lacroix: Breton Vampire who really really REALLY likes likes learning Magick and also her Altmer husbando
Kaalhil Swiftstrike: Tiny shapeshifting monster hunter Bosmeri lady with enough sass to kill a dragon or ten
Gwendolyn Jenelle: Friendly healer with a coffee addiction and her own medical practice
Krisiel: Literally crazy Werewolf, no like legit insane. She nuts
Kiju Veran: Ex-Fighters Guild Suthay who likes to punch things and is also a spy and ALSO a Werewolf
Niralae Elsinal: Young Altmeri woman with way too much Magicka and Vampire husbando
Slondor: TESified Slenderman, except lazier and has more of a thing for deals than Clavicus Vile does
Marius Vastino: Sarah's Imperial apathetic sire who likes to monologue
Lirawyn Calatare: Traveling performer and bard who's 101% vanilla bean
Soliril Larethian: Blind alchemist who uses animals to see and brews plagues in his spare time5 -
Wuuffyy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
What are you talking about, they were clearly replying to two other people. There are those who will reply to things individually sometimes to keep their replies shorter or make it easier on them to keep track of who they're replying to. Are you just looking for things to "report" or something?Bushido2513 wrote: »
Okay, you keep making this about moving the goalposts with proof when I've stated clearly why it's nothing like that. I LITERALLY said if he could post proof of his build having good sustain while also reliably being able to kill people that would inherently make it a good build. But you keep wanting to stick on the point of "You're just going to move the goalposts if proof is provided about the sustain matter". This is an excuse. You don't avoid posting proof because you're afraid of moving goalposts. You post it to shoot them down, to prove THEM wrong.Bushido2513 wrote: »
There is no opinion in this matter. Data does not operate on opinion, it operates on facts and information. And if someone is claiming something works, then objectively they need to provide the data that backs that up. Trying to say "in someone's experience" does not provide anything meaningful. People could hide behind this reasoning even if they have little to no experience in something. Someone's supposed "experience" does not matter if it is not providing objective proof of something. Experience without backing it up is about as useful as no experience whatsoever.Bushido2513 wrote: »
Except yes, he DOES need to provide proof of his claims. This is the PTS the whole point of things is to provide actual data, not pointless hearsay that has been proven already NOT TO WORK. If he's going to sit here and parrot the same nonsense without backing it up, it's not data, it's nothing. Empty words. It's someone who wants WW to be nerfed and is spreading their own misinformation about X or Y working when his ""advice"" was followed.Bushido2513 wrote: »
I don't know what makes it clear you're just here to be contrary and hate on WW more than this right here. You have been asked repeatedly for proof of the claims you're making, but you just keep coming up with passive-aggressive excuses to avoid actually giving any proof to validate your claims. It's obvious you haven't done any testing and are just out here saying whatever sound remotely like it should work, even though proof that it DOESN'T has been provided. Kind of like when you kept claiming you dueled Wuuffey but then offered absolutely 0 proof of it and folded when pressed about it.Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
That was with tri-pots, 5 medium, Shapeshifter's, and Imperial. That's pretty sustainy.
Both with that being said, I actually did run with "Orzo food" (remember, I told you this already?), and I had even attempted with Takeaway Broth and pretty quickly and obviously determined that decreasing your max resources makes the sustain worse and not better. Running 2,000+ stam recov after a tri-pot resulted in no meaning increases over the above build:Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
This is a way to build it that is MAXIMIZING reduction, using tri-pots, and gaining sustain. That doesn't work.
Running Orzo food was worse, in-fact (as your resource pools are already very low and they have reduced healing which requires more health and not less to remediate reductions... with that being said):HalensShade wrote: »[snip]
[snip]
Imperial, swap from bewitched to orzo food, sorc CoE class mastery. Done and WW is still OP
Haha! You tried this on the other thread too xD-madmufffin wrote: »
It's still fine on sorc with Orzo food nice try
No, sorry. This is me on the 6m dummy with "Orzo Food", 6 medium, all tri-glyphs on my sorcwolf without CoE (subclassed to get more power given no more static reverb):
I lasted 15 seconds... I made it less than half of my bar for Rampage.
See, that's the beauty of it. Even dropping down to 35k health (trying to keep a decent level of healing even though I'll fall over with 35k health, no minor resolve, in 6 medium in an actual PvP environment)... "Orzo food" causes me to lose far too much max resource so despite higher recov... I still burn out nearly instantly.
This is on an Imperial btw... which makes this EVEN WORSE as my max resources are higher and my costs are 6% cheaper across the board.
CoE is a MAJOR plummet in damage, additionally, picking sorc masteries without reverb now causes you to lose HEAPS of damage over other classes and their masteries/subclassing, and the sustain decrease nerf for CoE (along with the sustain decrease of less max resources for CoE-scaling with something like "Orzo" food) causes even the sustain gained to be woefully less impactful as well over running sustain in other ways for other classes/subclassing.
[edited to remove quote]
Do you have any data of your own to support your claims?
Sustain set, serpent and Orzo solves the issue. Sorry you struggle to adapt.
Nope, we tried with all sorts of things including over 30% reduction to stamina abilities, "Orzo Food", cost glyphs @AdonisJorge, and more.
Beyond that, how much damage do you believe werewolf is capable of losing before it can no longer kill competent players/ any reasonable amount of time?
It had more damage across the board before the rework. How could it logically lose damage, I build more sustain on wolf than I ever have before (as they remove the sustain), and it somehow do better than it did for me before the rework?
Do you have any timestamped PTS CMX data to validate your point?
Sounds like it's just a YOU issue then and the rest of us are good / adapted. Sorry bud
Hmm, very strange. It's a logical issue because they reduced the damage (from when it objectively was awful), took away defiles (pressure on healing and shielding), gave it sustain, removed the sustain, and didn't return the damage...
I built for sustain as I have very clearly demonstrated via logical data and CMX parses and yet burn out in 20 seconds or less (even at the expense of more damage). I also have a plethora of people I've tested on this PTS with the same claim of the hindrance of the sustain and the egregious stat spread that wolf requires (remember, reducing the healing doesn't exactly give me the option of building less health especially when I cannot bolster my tankiness with a sword and board/minor resolve, for example)...
...yet you are saying 'build better' but cannot provide any data or proof to back up the claim that you know how to build in a way that is fundamentally better than me (who did verifiably proficiently with wolf pre-rework and who does verifiably proficiently with wolf post-rework) or any of those I have verifiably fought against, with proof, on PTS.
I am choosing to not engage with you anymore for the time being as I wish to engage in 'good faith' arguments only. Thank you, once again!
I'm not here to help you learn WW or theorycraft builds after the changes. Sorry maybe someone on YT can help you out.
You do realize the burden of proof is on a person making a claim, yes? If what you keep saying is true, why are you so afraid to post proof of it? And please don't try hiding behind excuses of "look at Youtube lel" because NONE of those builds are the one YOU are CLAIMING ""works"" on the PTS right now. Other builds dont mean anything, they have no bearing on this conversation.
You are making claims. Offer your proof. That's how it works, not hiding behind "I'm not here to theorycraft for you". This isn't about making builds, this is about offering objective proof of something.
ETA Also how are people even supposed to test what you keep claiming ""works"" if you refuse to tell people what ""works"" beyond the absolute vaguest things? Because proof of builds following your ""advice"" not working has been shown, and yet you STILL keep insisting that it's the other person essentially being bad. Despite them doing what you say allegedly ""works"". So again...show proof. Because otherwise you're offering nothing to the conversation but misinformation yourself.
Well yes and no. I see the point the person is making here and I see where I think you may be going wrong.
They dun don't need to prove anything because they aren't saying the build will be amazing just playable.
Here's the issue, what's playable? Pve, pvp, cp, no cp, dungeon, trial, duel, etc. Playable builds for those require very different things.
At a base level if I tell you to strap on all sustain gear, enchants, mundus, and food, we know you'll be able to perform skills so it's playable.
Now what I suspect you or anyone else is asking is show me a build with performance in any of the categories I just named and to be honest that's not realistic because playable is in the mind of the player and their goals which can be all over the place.
So functionally is ww technically playable, of course. Is it going to be at the levels it was before, of course not. Can it reach even near those levels in xyz environment, probably not.
Could you build something and play it and have fun, that's up to reach personal player and preference.
Obviously those the really enjoy ww are not happy with the change and want at or near the same level of performance. And it's a good idea to ask for what you want but also accept and pay what they decide upon in the end, or not, but it's still probably going to happen.
Playable isn't that complicated in this instance. It means whether you run out of resources faster than other Classes or have to give up more damage, healing, or tanking ability to build into more than any other Class would. No build is playable if you're running out of resources quickly or if you have to spec so much into sustain that it negatively impacts your overall ability to do whatever it is you're trying to.
If dude is SO SURE that his ""advice"" works as well as he claims it does, what genuine legit reason can he have for not backing it up with proof? None, it's why all his avoidance has been passive-aggressive nothings. But I doubt he's going to offer proof of anything. Given none of my last few posts directed at him have been acknowledged, I'm being ignored.
You missed the point. You're confusing absolute and opinion.
His opinion based on his experience is that this will work and it's true because it's based on his opinion and expectations.
See if he says ok I built all into sustain and it works for me then you're going to say it doesn't have enough damage or defense. Then if he shows it he having those in a situation he deems appropriate then you're going to say well that's not what I was talking about and now all the sudden he's trying to build a spec that matches up to your expectations which is crazy to chase. That's why he's right in saying he doesn't have to prove anything to you, because at the end of the day he's not responsible for meeting your expectations of what playable is as long as he meets his own.
Now if he claimed that he could beat you in a duel or in a pve parse then he'd need to back up those claims but saying if you make these changes I think it would be playable isn't a claim that has to be backed up because it's not based on logic, it's mostly opinion if not feeling which really shouldn't be argued.
Sure, what works for one person might not work for another. In fact it's pretty well-known that you can give two people the same exact build with the only difference between their skill level, and typically the person with more skill and, yes, experience, will do decently better than the person with less skill. But that's not what's being debated here. What's being asked for is the barest hint of proof that his "advice" actually works. That he can make a build that has good sustain without giving up so much of everything else that the sustain is pointless because he can't deal, tank, or heal enough damage.
He's claiming that his build is still able to beat people on the PTS after swapping some stuff around but refuses to post proof. This isn't about moving goalposts like you seem to be making it out to be. Literally all any of us asking for proof are doing is asking for proof that he actually swapped his build around like he claimed to and was still doing fine in PvP. That is it. Nothing more. It's got nothing to do with wanting to say "oh well you have good sustain but your damage is low". Because if he has a build that can actually sustain and kill other players reliably then it would inherently mean the build is strong.
But he refuses. He refuses to post evidence that his so-called build even exists. He isn't providing proof that he's not just saying whatever sounds like it should work. There's nothing from him to back up that his build performs like he's claiming. Why would you believe someone making a claim like this without any proof that they even have the build they're claiming works? When numerous times Wuuffy has posted proof that the stuff doesn't work as claimed?
Also I'd like to bring up again that Mamba and Wuuffy were supposed to duel and Mamba never posted any proof of that either, despite claiming that Wuuffy showed up in a stalemate build. It's a pattern, if it needs to be pointed out. Say X thing and then offer no evidence of it. It feels like the PTS of U50 all over again, when people were submitting "proof" of WW being too strong in PvP but not being transparent in what they were or weren't using. It was mostly in regards to Signet (people not admitting they were using it but their CMX giving it away b/c of the various status procs) or using things like CoE. Incorrect and insincere data, along with just flat out bad faith lying, can do quite a bit of harm. It's why people ask for data with full transparency, not just taking a person's word on something because "trust me bro".
Ok I'm going to try to address this in good faith.
Here's the problem with trying to prove yourself in a situation like this. Ok so he shows you the build. Then let's say he shows you beating someone in a duel.
People will just give reasons why the example isn't valid. Or they will say okay well what about when I want to do zyz, bet you can't do that.
Okay I said good faith so sure maybe he's making it up. What I'm saying is that I've been in the exact position when people say show me and when the subject has layers it becomes a trap because either you're going to show them what works for you and what you're happy with and they just dismiss it because it wasn't what they wanted or you show them perhaps that it's a skill issue and they still dismiss it because they don't want to learn your different way.
What I'm saying is this, I learned a long time ago to not try to prove yourself on a nuanced subject because sometimes if you're happy and the other person isn't for whatever reason, is just best to leave it because either way it's an inconvenience that only takes time away from what you're enjoying.
Notice that even when I asked for more data I was clear that it wasn't for me but might help devs. I was giving my opinion as someone that does development.
Again I'm not saying this person isn't making it up , I'm saying I've been on his side of things and can relate to that situation where you just say to the person, sorry if you can't figure it out or be happy but I can't be inconvenienced to explain it or compare what makes me happy that doesn't work for you.
Of course we can get all lost in asking someone to try to prove their statements. But we could also just say ok well there's one vote for it's ok, now let's move on and just accept that he declined to share further details.
If we're looking for change then let's do so in a productive way vs badgering someone that clearly isn't interested in further helping. There's all kinds of reasons his opinion could be invalid in regards to ww, no need to really dig in on it I'd say.
I don't understand why you keep wanting to make this a matter of not posting because "the goalposts" might be moved. It's just saying that people are more than justified to not post proof of their claims simply because people might try to prove them wrong. Plenty of other people don't have a problem with providing proof despite that possibility. It's the whole dang point of the PTS. To find out what actually works and what doesn't.
This isn't about "proving yourself". We are on the Public Test Server. This is about testing and showing the results for both devs and other players to see and think about. What Mamba has been doing is literally nothing but saying over and over that "it's fine I can do it trust me if you can't you suck" without any proof. And that's the thing, too; he is actively insulting other players for "not being able to figure it out" or "not being as good" as he is. When you are not only making the same claim over and over but insulting the people who are asking for something as simple as a CMS screen...yeah, you probably don't have any meaningful data to show.
It seems that what matters more here isn't providing actual data and proof backing up claims. What matters more is that people don't have their egos threatened because of the possibility that proof they post gets questioned in some way. I'm not going to reply after this because it's not accomplishing anything. At the end of the day, no matter how much someone doesn't like it, we are on the test server. The entire point is to be testing things and then reporting what we find, not being rude, passive-aggressive, and evasive when asked for evidence of a claim.
Ok let me help you understand what I'm seeing here and why this doesn't work.
Let's have some fun and take out the goalpost argument completely. You use words like good and reliably. So those are the kind of words that leave room for argument. Instead I want you to post EXACT numbers of exactly what you want to see. Don't use any ambiguous language, be precise on exactly the build you want to see. Be precise on exactly the opponent you want them to beat to satisfy what you deem good or reliable.
Tell me every scenario in exact detail and exact numbers that you need to see for this person's claims to be valid in a way at which point you will no longer dispute and simply accept that they are right and you are wrong.
I give this as an example really and as a point. You want to take out the goalpost then you tell us exactly and I mean EXACTLY what you need to see using mathematical expressions and no language that can be interpreted.
Because when you use words that can have different meaning then we have to agree on that meaning and that's where the problem comes in. Get it?
At least if you provide this then I can respect that you're asking a question that isn't at all open ended or that can't be left to chance.
Then if they don't want to provide that evidence I can certainly see it as more of a failing on their part because you're no longer being less than precisely clear about what you are asking.
Evidence was provided. You refuse to accept the evidence.
As mentioned before, you are the one that stated you wish to receive evidence at that. My inclination was 'what exactly would they want' as I tagged the 'community representatives' for further insight and yet received no response.
The questions you ask are the same one I asked when an 'esteemed member of the community' came out to state that 'werewolf DPS was doubling everyone else's' during the werewolf rework PTS (U50 PTS) and come to find out that clearly wasn't true as Signet, masteries, and more from that single patch were pushing the bar all the way across the board. I was borderline harassed on the forums (people following me around any post/comment with off-topic attacks on character) and even in-game from people I had never even seen all because I questioned the integrity of data coming from individuals so very highly skewed towards an inclination ('nerf werewolf'), supplying a fraction of the information and verifiable logic I have here on this thread.
Regardless, uptimes and passives that werewolf maintained for years like Savage Strength (cut from 18% to 10%), Berserker Bleed uptime (4 seconds to 1 single second of DoT), and Claws (Condensed to 20 seconds with major and minor defile to 10 seconds and then reduced to 6 seconds) were affected (nerfed) off of essentially 'dueling parses' (which are NOT remotely as stable and replicatable as the one's I'm providing) because individuals who refused to provide info on gear, CP, info on build (all of which I have provided where requested such as 'Shapeshifter's, Imperial, my own stat sheet, etc.) posted CMXs parses and enacted change that was detrimental to the werewolf kit and apparently solved nothing in the dev's vision as the slapped us with 200-300% nerfs to sustain as a 'next-pass'.
So my point lies, if you don't believe in my data- source your own. In the entire time where you've posted in my thread over 50 times, you have not provided data of your own at any point but have rather provided antagonistic comments all the way through even Straw-manning to 'werewolf not a class' as if that changes anything on the topic 'should werewolf be balanced appropriately'.
A minute fraction of the information and data I've provided, spoiled:@ZOS_Kevin * @ZOS_JessicaFolsom (please pass through to combat team) - I don't know what else I can do or say to prove that you are making a mistake. I provide what I can, where I can aimlessly trying to pass the grander point along.
Everytime werewolf 'dies', it is when the sustain is adjusted too heavily or the healing is adjusted too heavily. When you remove damage options like static reverb and leave CoE, you aren't encouraging 'a way out', you're relegating werewolves to yet another subpar option that still lacks the damage with sustain of traditional options like Shapeshifter's chain + Imperial (or in a sense like Oakensoul before). The adjustments to CoE were appropriate, encouraging a choice IS the right path, however the sustain changes are now overkill.
I have attempted to build in a variety of ways where my damage is 'sufficient', which must be consistent and high to outpace rampant healing and sustain (especially CoE mastery Sorc users and CoF skill Dragonknight users), I maintain a certain level of health 35k+, and maintain a certain level of sustain (even if it requires dedicating my race, mythic, and even food) to do so.
In every test I had, Smoked Bear Haunch in ESO and Artaeum Takeaway Broth (shown earlier in this thread via CMX) while seemingly a valid option caused me to lose far too many resources in stam and/or mag to the point that having 2k+ stamina recovery was still a detriment that caused me to burn out within around 15 seconds with essentially no break frees, no rolls, and no blocks (meaning in combat, just like demonstrated before also- I would likely 'burn out' within 4-5 seconds at most).
Building 5 med (22k resistance being nearly unviable in actual content i.e. 'glass cannon' for cost reduction), health where possible for healing, running Shapeshifter's Chain (unique resources and 15% cost reduction), Imperial (Highest Health and Stamina combo with 6% reduction)- I was able to last no more than 20 seconds EVEN with the break free CP (which would not be active in NO-CP BGs) and minimizing rolls (which some snares, immobilizes, and certain skills would force out) before bottoming-out stamina in a very dangerous way:
For an added benefit, with the same reduction gear (which would be abnormal for a mag build), and after stacking 35k+ mag (which caused my health to fall below 30k), I would still burn out within seconds in a dangerous way however only this time it didn't stabilize:
Meanwhile, post nerf-courtesy of our own @Arcana - this is DK on PTS blocking over 100 attacks (holding block) maintaining resource stability the entire time on what is arguably a combination pressure and burst class:
There are many on these forums that will debate this topic in logical fallacies, provide no evidence to back otherwise baseless claims, and are likely here to overwhelm and 'drown out' counter-arguments, however valid-
I know at the end of the day I'm "just a werewolf player" but I implore the team to see the data and logical reasoning along with the promises made by the members who worked so hard to revitalize werewolf in a big way. I have no doubt this PTS patch will make it to live as-is now for werewolf. I ask that over the next 3 months you investigate and determine better solutions for this 'pressure, no burst, low sustain' playstyle you've created and try to understand the changes that made it objectively unviable in the first place.
Did you just reply to yourself three times to bump the thread up? ROFL... that's reportable btw
I appreciate it @Arunei but no need to worry about it. This person has been following me around nearly every thread for the past several weeks to a month. That last response was actually because I didn't realize that @Bushido2513 (another individual with no PfP, no data of their own, and contrarian responses such as 'werewolf not a class') had essentially 'taken a strike at your own character' for being defensive of the data and info provided.
At this point, if they want to try and 'weaponize' the system further- they are more than welcome to in my book. It's pretty clear to me unless something changes that nothing I or anyone with this sentiment says is being heard in any meaningful capacity so it'd just serve to take the agency (and ergo 'due diligence') out of my own fingers.
Edit: honestly, if the combat team wants to come out with half of the sentiment these individuals possess such as werewolf is 'noob mode'/'meme spec', 'should not be competitive' in PvE/PvP then I'm ready to move on because I've had nothing but toxic interactions with anything 'werewolf' from this community and I'm personally over these types of interactions againEdited by Wuuffyy on August 28, 2026 5:16PMWuuffyy,
'end-game' PvE and PvP player
ESO player since 2014 (Xbox and PC for PTS)
-new players, feel free to DM for guidance!5 -
gammelscroll✭✭✭
What are you talking about, they were clearly replying to two other people. There are those who will reply to things individually sometimes to keep their replies shorter or make it easier on them to keep track of who they're replying to. Are you just looking for things to "report" or something?Bushido2513 wrote: »
Okay, you keep making this about moving the goalposts with proof when I've stated clearly why it's nothing like that. I LITERALLY said if he could post proof of his build having good sustain while also reliably being able to kill people that would inherently make it a good build. But you keep wanting to stick on the point of "You're just going to move the goalposts if proof is provided about the sustain matter". This is an excuse. You don't avoid posting proof because you're afraid of moving goalposts. You post it to shoot them down, to prove THEM wrong.Bushido2513 wrote: »
There is no opinion in this matter. Data does not operate on opinion, it operates on facts and information. And if someone is claiming something works, then objectively they need to provide the data that backs that up. Trying to say "in someone's experience" does not provide anything meaningful. People could hide behind this reasoning even if they have little to no experience in something. Someone's supposed "experience" does not matter if it is not providing objective proof of something. Experience without backing it up is about as useful as no experience whatsoever.Bushido2513 wrote: »
Except yes, he DOES need to provide proof of his claims. This is the PTS the whole point of things is to provide actual data, not pointless hearsay that has been proven already NOT TO WORK. If he's going to sit here and parrot the same nonsense without backing it up, it's not data, it's nothing. Empty words. It's someone who wants WW to be nerfed and is spreading their own misinformation about X or Y working when his ""advice"" was followed.Bushido2513 wrote: »
I don't know what makes it clear you're just here to be contrary and hate on WW more than this right here. You have been asked repeatedly for proof of the claims you're making, but you just keep coming up with passive-aggressive excuses to avoid actually giving any proof to validate your claims. It's obvious you haven't done any testing and are just out here saying whatever sound remotely like it should work, even though proof that it DOESN'T has been provided. Kind of like when you kept claiming you dueled Wuuffey but then offered absolutely 0 proof of it and folded when pressed about it.Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
That was with tri-pots, 5 medium, Shapeshifter's, and Imperial. That's pretty sustainy.
Both with that being said, I actually did run with "Orzo food" (remember, I told you this already?), and I had even attempted with Takeaway Broth and pretty quickly and obviously determined that decreasing your max resources makes the sustain worse and not better. Running 2,000+ stam recov after a tri-pot resulted in no meaning increases over the above build:Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
This is a way to build it that is MAXIMIZING reduction, using tri-pots, and gaining sustain. That doesn't work.
Running Orzo food was worse, in-fact (as your resource pools are already very low and they have reduced healing which requires more health and not less to remediate reductions... with that being said):HalensShade wrote: »[snip]
[snip]
Imperial, swap from bewitched to orzo food, sorc CoE class mastery. Done and WW is still OP
Haha! You tried this on the other thread too xD-madmufffin wrote: »
It's still fine on sorc with Orzo food nice try
No, sorry. This is me on the 6m dummy with "Orzo Food", 6 medium, all tri-glyphs on my sorcwolf without CoE (subclassed to get more power given no more static reverb):
I lasted 15 seconds... I made it less than half of my bar for Rampage.
See, that's the beauty of it. Even dropping down to 35k health (trying to keep a decent level of healing even though I'll fall over with 35k health, no minor resolve, in 6 medium in an actual PvP environment)... "Orzo food" causes me to lose far too much max resource so despite higher recov... I still burn out nearly instantly.
This is on an Imperial btw... which makes this EVEN WORSE as my max resources are higher and my costs are 6% cheaper across the board.
CoE is a MAJOR plummet in damage, additionally, picking sorc masteries without reverb now causes you to lose HEAPS of damage over other classes and their masteries/subclassing, and the sustain decrease nerf for CoE (along with the sustain decrease of less max resources for CoE-scaling with something like "Orzo" food) causes even the sustain gained to be woefully less impactful as well over running sustain in other ways for other classes/subclassing.
[edited to remove quote]
Do you have any data of your own to support your claims?
Sustain set, serpent and Orzo solves the issue. Sorry you struggle to adapt.
Nope, we tried with all sorts of things including over 30% reduction to stamina abilities, "Orzo Food", cost glyphs @AdonisJorge, and more.
Beyond that, how much damage do you believe werewolf is capable of losing before it can no longer kill competent players/ any reasonable amount of time?
It had more damage across the board before the rework. How could it logically lose damage, I build more sustain on wolf than I ever have before (as they remove the sustain), and it somehow do better than it did for me before the rework?
Do you have any timestamped PTS CMX data to validate your point?
Sounds like it's just a YOU issue then and the rest of us are good / adapted. Sorry bud
Hmm, very strange. It's a logical issue because they reduced the damage (from when it objectively was awful), took away defiles (pressure on healing and shielding), gave it sustain, removed the sustain, and didn't return the damage...
I built for sustain as I have very clearly demonstrated via logical data and CMX parses and yet burn out in 20 seconds or less (even at the expense of more damage). I also have a plethora of people I've tested on this PTS with the same claim of the hindrance of the sustain and the egregious stat spread that wolf requires (remember, reducing the healing doesn't exactly give me the option of building less health especially when I cannot bolster my tankiness with a sword and board/minor resolve, for example)...
...yet you are saying 'build better' but cannot provide any data or proof to back up the claim that you know how to build in a way that is fundamentally better than me (who did verifiably proficiently with wolf pre-rework and who does verifiably proficiently with wolf post-rework) or any of those I have verifiably fought against, with proof, on PTS.
I am choosing to not engage with you anymore for the time being as I wish to engage in 'good faith' arguments only. Thank you, once again!
I'm not here to help you learn WW or theorycraft builds after the changes. Sorry maybe someone on YT can help you out.
You do realize the burden of proof is on a person making a claim, yes? If what you keep saying is true, why are you so afraid to post proof of it? And please don't try hiding behind excuses of "look at Youtube lel" because NONE of those builds are the one YOU are CLAIMING ""works"" on the PTS right now. Other builds dont mean anything, they have no bearing on this conversation.
You are making claims. Offer your proof. That's how it works, not hiding behind "I'm not here to theorycraft for you". This isn't about making builds, this is about offering objective proof of something.
ETA Also how are people even supposed to test what you keep claiming ""works"" if you refuse to tell people what ""works"" beyond the absolute vaguest things? Because proof of builds following your ""advice"" not working has been shown, and yet you STILL keep insisting that it's the other person essentially being bad. Despite them doing what you say allegedly ""works"". So again...show proof. Because otherwise you're offering nothing to the conversation but misinformation yourself.
Well yes and no. I see the point the person is making here and I see where I think you may be going wrong.
They dun don't need to prove anything because they aren't saying the build will be amazing just playable.
Here's the issue, what's playable? Pve, pvp, cp, no cp, dungeon, trial, duel, etc. Playable builds for those require very different things.
At a base level if I tell you to strap on all sustain gear, enchants, mundus, and food, we know you'll be able to perform skills so it's playable.
Now what I suspect you or anyone else is asking is show me a build with performance in any of the categories I just named and to be honest that's not realistic because playable is in the mind of the player and their goals which can be all over the place.
So functionally is ww technically playable, of course. Is it going to be at the levels it was before, of course not. Can it reach even near those levels in xyz environment, probably not.
Could you build something and play it and have fun, that's up to reach personal player and preference.
Obviously those the really enjoy ww are not happy with the change and want at or near the same level of performance. And it's a good idea to ask for what you want but also accept and pay what they decide upon in the end, or not, but it's still probably going to happen.
Playable isn't that complicated in this instance. It means whether you run out of resources faster than other Classes or have to give up more damage, healing, or tanking ability to build into more than any other Class would. No build is playable if you're running out of resources quickly or if you have to spec so much into sustain that it negatively impacts your overall ability to do whatever it is you're trying to.
If dude is SO SURE that his ""advice"" works as well as he claims it does, what genuine legit reason can he have for not backing it up with proof? None, it's why all his avoidance has been passive-aggressive nothings. But I doubt he's going to offer proof of anything. Given none of my last few posts directed at him have been acknowledged, I'm being ignored.
You missed the point. You're confusing absolute and opinion.
His opinion based on his experience is that this will work and it's true because it's based on his opinion and expectations.
See if he says ok I built all into sustain and it works for me then you're going to say it doesn't have enough damage or defense. Then if he shows it he having those in a situation he deems appropriate then you're going to say well that's not what I was talking about and now all the sudden he's trying to build a spec that matches up to your expectations which is crazy to chase. That's why he's right in saying he doesn't have to prove anything to you, because at the end of the day he's not responsible for meeting your expectations of what playable is as long as he meets his own.
Now if he claimed that he could beat you in a duel or in a pve parse then he'd need to back up those claims but saying if you make these changes I think it would be playable isn't a claim that has to be backed up because it's not based on logic, it's mostly opinion if not feeling which really shouldn't be argued.
Sure, what works for one person might not work for another. In fact it's pretty well-known that you can give two people the same exact build with the only difference between their skill level, and typically the person with more skill and, yes, experience, will do decently better than the person with less skill. But that's not what's being debated here. What's being asked for is the barest hint of proof that his "advice" actually works. That he can make a build that has good sustain without giving up so much of everything else that the sustain is pointless because he can't deal, tank, or heal enough damage.
He's claiming that his build is still able to beat people on the PTS after swapping some stuff around but refuses to post proof. This isn't about moving goalposts like you seem to be making it out to be. Literally all any of us asking for proof are doing is asking for proof that he actually swapped his build around like he claimed to and was still doing fine in PvP. That is it. Nothing more. It's got nothing to do with wanting to say "oh well you have good sustain but your damage is low". Because if he has a build that can actually sustain and kill other players reliably then it would inherently mean the build is strong.
But he refuses. He refuses to post evidence that his so-called build even exists. He isn't providing proof that he's not just saying whatever sounds like it should work. There's nothing from him to back up that his build performs like he's claiming. Why would you believe someone making a claim like this without any proof that they even have the build they're claiming works? When numerous times Wuuffy has posted proof that the stuff doesn't work as claimed?
Also I'd like to bring up again that Mamba and Wuuffy were supposed to duel and Mamba never posted any proof of that either, despite claiming that Wuuffy showed up in a stalemate build. It's a pattern, if it needs to be pointed out. Say X thing and then offer no evidence of it. It feels like the PTS of U50 all over again, when people were submitting "proof" of WW being too strong in PvP but not being transparent in what they were or weren't using. It was mostly in regards to Signet (people not admitting they were using it but their CMX giving it away b/c of the various status procs) or using things like CoE. Incorrect and insincere data, along with just flat out bad faith lying, can do quite a bit of harm. It's why people ask for data with full transparency, not just taking a person's word on something because "trust me bro".
Ok I'm going to try to address this in good faith.
Here's the problem with trying to prove yourself in a situation like this. Ok so he shows you the build. Then let's say he shows you beating someone in a duel.
People will just give reasons why the example isn't valid. Or they will say okay well what about when I want to do zyz, bet you can't do that.
Okay I said good faith so sure maybe he's making it up. What I'm saying is that I've been in the exact position when people say show me and when the subject has layers it becomes a trap because either you're going to show them what works for you and what you're happy with and they just dismiss it because it wasn't what they wanted or you show them perhaps that it's a skill issue and they still dismiss it because they don't want to learn your different way.
What I'm saying is this, I learned a long time ago to not try to prove yourself on a nuanced subject because sometimes if you're happy and the other person isn't for whatever reason, is just best to leave it because either way it's an inconvenience that only takes time away from what you're enjoying.
Notice that even when I asked for more data I was clear that it wasn't for me but might help devs. I was giving my opinion as someone that does development.
Again I'm not saying this person isn't making it up , I'm saying I've been on his side of things and can relate to that situation where you just say to the person, sorry if you can't figure it out or be happy but I can't be inconvenienced to explain it or compare what makes me happy that doesn't work for you.
Of course we can get all lost in asking someone to try to prove their statements. But we could also just say ok well there's one vote for it's ok, now let's move on and just accept that he declined to share further details.
If we're looking for change then let's do so in a productive way vs badgering someone that clearly isn't interested in further helping. There's all kinds of reasons his opinion could be invalid in regards to ww, no need to really dig in on it I'd say.
I don't understand why you keep wanting to make this a matter of not posting because "the goalposts" might be moved. It's just saying that people are more than justified to not post proof of their claims simply because people might try to prove them wrong. Plenty of other people don't have a problem with providing proof despite that possibility. It's the whole dang point of the PTS. To find out what actually works and what doesn't.
This isn't about "proving yourself". We are on the Public Test Server. This is about testing and showing the results for both devs and other players to see and think about. What Mamba has been doing is literally nothing but saying over and over that "it's fine I can do it trust me if you can't you suck" without any proof. And that's the thing, too; he is actively insulting other players for "not being able to figure it out" or "not being as good" as he is. When you are not only making the same claim over and over but insulting the people who are asking for something as simple as a CMS screen...yeah, you probably don't have any meaningful data to show.
It seems that what matters more here isn't providing actual data and proof backing up claims. What matters more is that people don't have their egos threatened because of the possibility that proof they post gets questioned in some way. I'm not going to reply after this because it's not accomplishing anything. At the end of the day, no matter how much someone doesn't like it, we are on the test server. The entire point is to be testing things and then reporting what we find, not being rude, passive-aggressive, and evasive when asked for evidence of a claim.
Ok let me help you understand what I'm seeing here and why this doesn't work.
Let's have some fun and take out the goalpost argument completely. You use words like good and reliably. So those are the kind of words that leave room for argument. Instead I want you to post EXACT numbers of exactly what you want to see. Don't use any ambiguous language, be precise on exactly the build you want to see. Be precise on exactly the opponent you want them to beat to satisfy what you deem good or reliable.
Tell me every scenario in exact detail and exact numbers that you need to see for this person's claims to be valid in a way at which point you will no longer dispute and simply accept that they are right and you are wrong.
I give this as an example really and as a point. You want to take out the goalpost then you tell us exactly and I mean EXACTLY what you need to see using mathematical expressions and no language that can be interpreted.
Because when you use words that can have different meaning then we have to agree on that meaning and that's where the problem comes in. Get it?
At least if you provide this then I can respect that you're asking a question that isn't at all open ended or that can't be left to chance.
Then if they don't want to provide that evidence I can certainly see it as more of a failing on their part because you're no longer being less than precisely clear about what you are asking.
Evidence was provided. You refuse to accept the evidence.
As mentioned before, you are the one that stated you wish to receive evidence at that. My inclination was 'what exactly would they want' as I tagged the 'community representatives' for further insight and yet received no response.
The questions you ask are the same one I asked when an 'esteemed member of the community' came out to state that 'werewolf DPS was doubling everyone else's' during the werewolf rework PTS (U50 PTS) and come to find out that clearly wasn't true as Signet, masteries, and more from that single patch were pushing the bar all the way across the board. I was borderline harassed on the forums (people following me around any post/comment with off-topic attacks on character) and even in-game from people I had never even seen all because I questioned the integrity of data coming from individuals so very highly skewed towards an inclination ('nerf werewolf'), supplying a fraction of the information and verifiable logic I have here on this thread.
Regardless, uptimes and passives that werewolf maintained for years like Savage Strength (cut from 18% to 10%), Berserker Bleed uptime (4 seconds to 1 single second of DoT), and Claws (Condensed to 20 seconds with major and minor defile to 10 seconds and then reduced to 6 seconds) were affected (nerfed) off of essentially 'dueling parses' (which are NOT remotely as stable and replicatable as the one's I'm providing) because individuals who refused to provide info on gear, CP, info on build (all of which I have provided where requested such as 'Shapeshifter's, Imperial, my own stat sheet, etc.) posted CMXs parses and enacted change that was detrimental to the werewolf kit and apparently solved nothing in the dev's vision as the slapped us with 200-300% nerfs to sustain as a 'next-pass'.
So my point lies, if you don't believe in my data- source your own. In the entire time where you've posted in my thread over 50 times, you have not provided data of your own at any point but have rather provided antagonistic comments all the way through even Straw-manning to 'werewolf not a class' as if that changes anything on the topic 'should werewolf be balanced appropriately'.
A minute fraction of the information and data I've provided, spoiled:@ZOS_Kevin * @ZOS_JessicaFolsom (please pass through to combat team) - I don't know what else I can do or say to prove that you are making a mistake. I provide what I can, where I can aimlessly trying to pass the grander point along.
Everytime werewolf 'dies', it is when the sustain is adjusted too heavily or the healing is adjusted too heavily. When you remove damage options like static reverb and leave CoE, you aren't encouraging 'a way out', you're relegating werewolves to yet another subpar option that still lacks the damage with sustain of traditional options like Shapeshifter's chain + Imperial (or in a sense like Oakensoul before). The adjustments to CoE were appropriate, encouraging a choice IS the right path, however the sustain changes are now overkill.
I have attempted to build in a variety of ways where my damage is 'sufficient', which must be consistent and high to outpace rampant healing and sustain (especially CoE mastery Sorc users and CoF skill Dragonknight users), I maintain a certain level of health 35k+, and maintain a certain level of sustain (even if it requires dedicating my race, mythic, and even food) to do so.
In every test I had, Smoked Bear Haunch in ESO and Artaeum Takeaway Broth (shown earlier in this thread via CMX) while seemingly a valid option caused me to lose far too many resources in stam and/or mag to the point that having 2k+ stamina recovery was still a detriment that caused me to burn out within around 15 seconds with essentially no break frees, no rolls, and no blocks (meaning in combat, just like demonstrated before also- I would likely 'burn out' within 4-5 seconds at most).
Building 5 med (22k resistance being nearly unviable in actual content i.e. 'glass cannon' for cost reduction), health where possible for healing, running Shapeshifter's Chain (unique resources and 15% cost reduction), Imperial (Highest Health and Stamina combo with 6% reduction)- I was able to last no more than 20 seconds EVEN with the break free CP (which would not be active in NO-CP BGs) and minimizing rolls (which some snares, immobilizes, and certain skills would force out) before bottoming-out stamina in a very dangerous way:
For an added benefit, with the same reduction gear (which would be abnormal for a mag build), and after stacking 35k+ mag (which caused my health to fall below 30k), I would still burn out within seconds in a dangerous way however only this time it didn't stabilize:
Meanwhile, post nerf-courtesy of our own @Arcana - this is DK on PTS blocking over 100 attacks (holding block) maintaining resource stability the entire time on what is arguably a combination pressure and burst class:
There are many on these forums that will debate this topic in logical fallacies, provide no evidence to back otherwise baseless claims, and are likely here to overwhelm and 'drown out' counter-arguments, however valid-
I know at the end of the day I'm "just a werewolf player" but I implore the team to see the data and logical reasoning along with the promises made by the members who worked so hard to revitalize werewolf in a big way. I have no doubt this PTS patch will make it to live as-is now for werewolf. I ask that over the next 3 months you investigate and determine better solutions for this 'pressure, no burst, low sustain' playstyle you've created and try to understand the changes that made it objectively unviable in the first place.
Did you just reply to yourself three times to bump the thread up? ROFL... that's reportable btw
I appreciate it @Arunei but no need to worry about it. This person has been following me around nearly every thread for the past several weeks to a month. That last response was actually because I didn't realize that @Bushido2513 (another individual with no PfP, no data of their own, and contrarian responses such as 'werewolf not a class') had essentially 'taken a strike at your own character' for being defensive of the data and info provided.
At this point, if they want to try and 'weaponize' the system further- they are more than welcome to in my book. It's pretty clear to me unless something changes that nothing I or anyone with this sentiment says is being heard in any meaningful capacity so it'd just serve to take the agency (and ergo 'due diligence') out of my own fingers.
Edit: honestly, if the combat team wants to come out with half of the sentiment these individuals possess such as werewolf is 'noob mode'/'meme spec', 'should not be competitive' in PvE/PvP then I'm ready to move on because I've had nothing but toxic interactions with anything 'werewolf' from this community and I'm personally over these types of interactions again
There is no point discuss with them. When gutted werewolf goes live they will still die alot in PvP and still be bad. they just move on to cry for nerf for something else. I see them try to get sorcs gutted. They never stop, cause they cant see how bad they are , and they will never improve in pvp. Just call for nerf on everything.
Good players will still beat them on every nerfed classEdited by gammelscroll on August 28, 2026 5:29PM1 -
Panderbander✭✭✭✭✭
✭
What are you talking about, they were clearly replying to two other people. There are those who will reply to things individually sometimes to keep their replies shorter or make it easier on them to keep track of who they're replying to. Are you just looking for things to "report" or something?Bushido2513 wrote: »
Okay, you keep making this about moving the goalposts with proof when I've stated clearly why it's nothing like that. I LITERALLY said if he could post proof of his build having good sustain while also reliably being able to kill people that would inherently make it a good build. But you keep wanting to stick on the point of "You're just going to move the goalposts if proof is provided about the sustain matter". This is an excuse. You don't avoid posting proof because you're afraid of moving goalposts. You post it to shoot them down, to prove THEM wrong.Bushido2513 wrote: »
There is no opinion in this matter. Data does not operate on opinion, it operates on facts and information. And if someone is claiming something works, then objectively they need to provide the data that backs that up. Trying to say "in someone's experience" does not provide anything meaningful. People could hide behind this reasoning even if they have little to no experience in something. Someone's supposed "experience" does not matter if it is not providing objective proof of something. Experience without backing it up is about as useful as no experience whatsoever.Bushido2513 wrote: »
Except yes, he DOES need to provide proof of his claims. This is the PTS the whole point of things is to provide actual data, not pointless hearsay that has been proven already NOT TO WORK. If he's going to sit here and parrot the same nonsense without backing it up, it's not data, it's nothing. Empty words. It's someone who wants WW to be nerfed and is spreading their own misinformation about X or Y working when his ""advice"" was followed.Bushido2513 wrote: »
I don't know what makes it clear you're just here to be contrary and hate on WW more than this right here. You have been asked repeatedly for proof of the claims you're making, but you just keep coming up with passive-aggressive excuses to avoid actually giving any proof to validate your claims. It's obvious you haven't done any testing and are just out here saying whatever sound remotely like it should work, even though proof that it DOESN'T has been provided. Kind of like when you kept claiming you dueled Wuuffey but then offered absolutely 0 proof of it and folded when pressed about it.Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
That was with tri-pots, 5 medium, Shapeshifter's, and Imperial. That's pretty sustainy.
Both with that being said, I actually did run with "Orzo food" (remember, I told you this already?), and I had even attempted with Takeaway Broth and pretty quickly and obviously determined that decreasing your max resources makes the sustain worse and not better. Running 2,000+ stam recov after a tri-pot resulted in no meaning increases over the above build:Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »AdonisJorge wrote: »Every class/skill line more often the reworked ones had some kind of compensation from the sustain nerfs. Sorcerers got Crystal Weapon and Static reverb changes, DK got landslide and monster damage to not nuke it from PVE. Werewolves got a high five from ZOS and that is it, incredible the double standard here
Landslide has been the hot topic amongst pvers ever since rework because it was absolutely not fit for current realities. It has to do with other dk changes but not with core of flames sustain nerf which is only on paper basically.
Sorc got no “compensation” for cut sustain either. Static was changed because it was way too potent with ww’s huge number of bleed ticks, cw is an attempt to account for that somewhat.
DK nerfs+ compensation (week 1):
(Pyrebrand was also given landslide stacks as an 'invisible change' cited later in week 2)
---
Wolf nerfs week 1:
(on all but Claw Fury that sees a 2k per second heal with 20k health in PvE or a 2k per second heal with over 40k in PvP for context; this is NOT skill you see in the majority of PvE or PvP; massives sustain nerfs with double and tripling costs... outside of CoE we never had 'infinite bi-sustain' through mag... we become like everyone else except health-based healing for the trade-off of no substantial damage-based healing to be found)
Sorc 'changes' in week 1"
(they get a 'unique buff' of their own while in groups; one that previously overlapped with a single NB in group; yes I understand it's a controversial change along with Templar's)
~~~
DK buff/compensation (official) week 2:
(Pyrebrand buff)
Wolf changes:
None.
Sorc changes:
None.
~~~
DK changes+compensation week 3:
(They took the 'edge' off whip by 25% of total max, took the flat damage off Earthen for PvP, buffed Landslide uptime and stack maximum, and reduced core of flame from 15% to 12% which is still the equivalent of 2,700 'mag recov' when missing 23,000 mag i.e. a non-substantial nerfs in terms of what this skill does in PvP)
Wolf Changes:
Bloody Gnash (bite; not the 'PvP morph') bug fix
Sorc Changes:
None
~~~
DK changes week 4:
None
Wolf Changes
Indirect but significant- COMPLETELY lose access to static reverb while in PvP AND PvE and additionally cannot 'crutch on CoE' as this is now a weaker passives and pure sorc becomes a much more significant damage loss due to lack of static reverb.
Sorc Changes:
(CoE rightfully nerfed but the same situation as CoF... 50k mag equates to '1,500' mag recov which is just 'off the top, doesn't change much'; Blood Magic nerfed by about 40% but was just 'free healing', and then a sidegrade change were you can no longer proc Static on non-sorc abilities but the chance and 'MS' cadence is MUCH better as a result)
~~~
Wolf (again) had its cost doubled and tripled in Week 1 along with the burst heal (only on-demand heal) reduced by another 10% and increased as well. Quick note: wolf NEVER had 'infinite mag sustain' outside of 'CoE' potentially and making it to 'Rampage'.
Week 3 hit wolf REALLY hard indirectly making Pure Sorc almost completely unviable (Static Reverb only procs with 'sorc abilities; the only way to recoup damage when running a pure sorc over another class or subclassing was static reverb while using CoE for sustain) in both PvP AND PvE.
And here we are where parse after parse I am running out of stamina in 15-20 seconds while building the best I can for reduction to 'make it to Rampage' and it still falling woefully short even when I'm not pressured. Again, the worst part being it ALL affects PvE.
WW, Sorc and DK all got sustain nerfed. Adapt like the rest of us. We all know they are all 3 broken and now have been adjusted.
This is CoF post-nerf.
Over 100 blocks not letting go of RMB with sustain holding perfectly strong>>>
(courtesy of @Arcana ; unrelated to me but sorry for the extra tag annoyance- haha!)
Compared to an examples of wolf Sustain now building Imperial, Shapeshifter's (15%), 5 med/1 heavy/1 light (burning out usually in sub 20 seconds for stam):
That's because you refuse to run a sustain set and Orzo food
This is a way to build it that is MAXIMIZING reduction, using tri-pots, and gaining sustain. That doesn't work.
Running Orzo food was worse, in-fact (as your resource pools are already very low and they have reduced healing which requires more health and not less to remediate reductions... with that being said):HalensShade wrote: »[snip]
[snip]
Imperial, swap from bewitched to orzo food, sorc CoE class mastery. Done and WW is still OP
Haha! You tried this on the other thread too xD-madmufffin wrote: »
It's still fine on sorc with Orzo food nice try
No, sorry. This is me on the 6m dummy with "Orzo Food", 6 medium, all tri-glyphs on my sorcwolf without CoE (subclassed to get more power given no more static reverb):
I lasted 15 seconds... I made it less than half of my bar for Rampage.
See, that's the beauty of it. Even dropping down to 35k health (trying to keep a decent level of healing even though I'll fall over with 35k health, no minor resolve, in 6 medium in an actual PvP environment)... "Orzo food" causes me to lose far too much max resource so despite higher recov... I still burn out nearly instantly.
This is on an Imperial btw... which makes this EVEN WORSE as my max resources are higher and my costs are 6% cheaper across the board.
CoE is a MAJOR plummet in damage, additionally, picking sorc masteries without reverb now causes you to lose HEAPS of damage over other classes and their masteries/subclassing, and the sustain decrease nerf for CoE (along with the sustain decrease of less max resources for CoE-scaling with something like "Orzo" food) causes even the sustain gained to be woefully less impactful as well over running sustain in other ways for other classes/subclassing.
[edited to remove quote]
Do you have any data of your own to support your claims?
Sustain set, serpent and Orzo solves the issue. Sorry you struggle to adapt.
Nope, we tried with all sorts of things including over 30% reduction to stamina abilities, "Orzo Food", cost glyphs @AdonisJorge, and more.
Beyond that, how much damage do you believe werewolf is capable of losing before it can no longer kill competent players/ any reasonable amount of time?
It had more damage across the board before the rework. How could it logically lose damage, I build more sustain on wolf than I ever have before (as they remove the sustain), and it somehow do better than it did for me before the rework?
Do you have any timestamped PTS CMX data to validate your point?
Sounds like it's just a YOU issue then and the rest of us are good / adapted. Sorry bud
Hmm, very strange. It's a logical issue because they reduced the damage (from when it objectively was awful), took away defiles (pressure on healing and shielding), gave it sustain, removed the sustain, and didn't return the damage...
I built for sustain as I have very clearly demonstrated via logical data and CMX parses and yet burn out in 20 seconds or less (even at the expense of more damage). I also have a plethora of people I've tested on this PTS with the same claim of the hindrance of the sustain and the egregious stat spread that wolf requires (remember, reducing the healing doesn't exactly give me the option of building less health especially when I cannot bolster my tankiness with a sword and board/minor resolve, for example)...
...yet you are saying 'build better' but cannot provide any data or proof to back up the claim that you know how to build in a way that is fundamentally better than me (who did verifiably proficiently with wolf pre-rework and who does verifiably proficiently with wolf post-rework) or any of those I have verifiably fought against, with proof, on PTS.
I am choosing to not engage with you anymore for the time being as I wish to engage in 'good faith' arguments only. Thank you, once again!
I'm not here to help you learn WW or theorycraft builds after the changes. Sorry maybe someone on YT can help you out.
You do realize the burden of proof is on a person making a claim, yes? If what you keep saying is true, why are you so afraid to post proof of it? And please don't try hiding behind excuses of "look at Youtube lel" because NONE of those builds are the one YOU are CLAIMING ""works"" on the PTS right now. Other builds dont mean anything, they have no bearing on this conversation.
You are making claims. Offer your proof. That's how it works, not hiding behind "I'm not here to theorycraft for you". This isn't about making builds, this is about offering objective proof of something.
ETA Also how are people even supposed to test what you keep claiming ""works"" if you refuse to tell people what ""works"" beyond the absolute vaguest things? Because proof of builds following your ""advice"" not working has been shown, and yet you STILL keep insisting that it's the other person essentially being bad. Despite them doing what you say allegedly ""works"". So again...show proof. Because otherwise you're offering nothing to the conversation but misinformation yourself.
Well yes and no. I see the point the person is making here and I see where I think you may be going wrong.
They dun don't need to prove anything because they aren't saying the build will be amazing just playable.
Here's the issue, what's playable? Pve, pvp, cp, no cp, dungeon, trial, duel, etc. Playable builds for those require very different things.
At a base level if I tell you to strap on all sustain gear, enchants, mundus, and food, we know you'll be able to perform skills so it's playable.
Now what I suspect you or anyone else is asking is show me a build with performance in any of the categories I just named and to be honest that's not realistic because playable is in the mind of the player and their goals which can be all over the place.
So functionally is ww technically playable, of course. Is it going to be at the levels it was before, of course not. Can it reach even near those levels in xyz environment, probably not.
Could you build something and play it and have fun, that's up to reach personal player and preference.
Obviously those the really enjoy ww are not happy with the change and want at or near the same level of performance. And it's a good idea to ask for what you want but also accept and pay what they decide upon in the end, or not, but it's still probably going to happen.
Playable isn't that complicated in this instance. It means whether you run out of resources faster than other Classes or have to give up more damage, healing, or tanking ability to build into more than any other Class would. No build is playable if you're running out of resources quickly or if you have to spec so much into sustain that it negatively impacts your overall ability to do whatever it is you're trying to.
If dude is SO SURE that his ""advice"" works as well as he claims it does, what genuine legit reason can he have for not backing it up with proof? None, it's why all his avoidance has been passive-aggressive nothings. But I doubt he's going to offer proof of anything. Given none of my last few posts directed at him have been acknowledged, I'm being ignored.
You missed the point. You're confusing absolute and opinion.
His opinion based on his experience is that this will work and it's true because it's based on his opinion and expectations.
See if he says ok I built all into sustain and it works for me then you're going to say it doesn't have enough damage or defense. Then if he shows it he having those in a situation he deems appropriate then you're going to say well that's not what I was talking about and now all the sudden he's trying to build a spec that matches up to your expectations which is crazy to chase. That's why he's right in saying he doesn't have to prove anything to you, because at the end of the day he's not responsible for meeting your expectations of what playable is as long as he meets his own.
Now if he claimed that he could beat you in a duel or in a pve parse then he'd need to back up those claims but saying if you make these changes I think it would be playable isn't a claim that has to be backed up because it's not based on logic, it's mostly opinion if not feeling which really shouldn't be argued.
Sure, what works for one person might not work for another. In fact it's pretty well-known that you can give two people the same exact build with the only difference between their skill level, and typically the person with more skill and, yes, experience, will do decently better than the person with less skill. But that's not what's being debated here. What's being asked for is the barest hint of proof that his "advice" actually works. That he can make a build that has good sustain without giving up so much of everything else that the sustain is pointless because he can't deal, tank, or heal enough damage.
He's claiming that his build is still able to beat people on the PTS after swapping some stuff around but refuses to post proof. This isn't about moving goalposts like you seem to be making it out to be. Literally all any of us asking for proof are doing is asking for proof that he actually swapped his build around like he claimed to and was still doing fine in PvP. That is it. Nothing more. It's got nothing to do with wanting to say "oh well you have good sustain but your damage is low". Because if he has a build that can actually sustain and kill other players reliably then it would inherently mean the build is strong.
But he refuses. He refuses to post evidence that his so-called build even exists. He isn't providing proof that he's not just saying whatever sounds like it should work. There's nothing from him to back up that his build performs like he's claiming. Why would you believe someone making a claim like this without any proof that they even have the build they're claiming works? When numerous times Wuuffy has posted proof that the stuff doesn't work as claimed?
Also I'd like to bring up again that Mamba and Wuuffy were supposed to duel and Mamba never posted any proof of that either, despite claiming that Wuuffy showed up in a stalemate build. It's a pattern, if it needs to be pointed out. Say X thing and then offer no evidence of it. It feels like the PTS of U50 all over again, when people were submitting "proof" of WW being too strong in PvP but not being transparent in what they were or weren't using. It was mostly in regards to Signet (people not admitting they were using it but their CMX giving it away b/c of the various status procs) or using things like CoE. Incorrect and insincere data, along with just flat out bad faith lying, can do quite a bit of harm. It's why people ask for data with full transparency, not just taking a person's word on something because "trust me bro".
Ok I'm going to try to address this in good faith.
Here's the problem with trying to prove yourself in a situation like this. Ok so he shows you the build. Then let's say he shows you beating someone in a duel.
People will just give reasons why the example isn't valid. Or they will say okay well what about when I want to do zyz, bet you can't do that.
Okay I said good faith so sure maybe he's making it up. What I'm saying is that I've been in the exact position when people say show me and when the subject has layers it becomes a trap because either you're going to show them what works for you and what you're happy with and they just dismiss it because it wasn't what they wanted or you show them perhaps that it's a skill issue and they still dismiss it because they don't want to learn your different way.
What I'm saying is this, I learned a long time ago to not try to prove yourself on a nuanced subject because sometimes if you're happy and the other person isn't for whatever reason, is just best to leave it because either way it's an inconvenience that only takes time away from what you're enjoying.
Notice that even when I asked for more data I was clear that it wasn't for me but might help devs. I was giving my opinion as someone that does development.
Again I'm not saying this person isn't making it up , I'm saying I've been on his side of things and can relate to that situation where you just say to the person, sorry if you can't figure it out or be happy but I can't be inconvenienced to explain it or compare what makes me happy that doesn't work for you.
Of course we can get all lost in asking someone to try to prove their statements. But we could also just say ok well there's one vote for it's ok, now let's move on and just accept that he declined to share further details.
If we're looking for change then let's do so in a productive way vs badgering someone that clearly isn't interested in further helping. There's all kinds of reasons his opinion could be invalid in regards to ww, no need to really dig in on it I'd say.
I don't understand why you keep wanting to make this a matter of not posting because "the goalposts" might be moved. It's just saying that people are more than justified to not post proof of their claims simply because people might try to prove them wrong. Plenty of other people don't have a problem with providing proof despite that possibility. It's the whole dang point of the PTS. To find out what actually works and what doesn't.
This isn't about "proving yourself". We are on the Public Test Server. This is about testing and showing the results for both devs and other players to see and think about. What Mamba has been doing is literally nothing but saying over and over that "it's fine I can do it trust me if you can't you suck" without any proof. And that's the thing, too; he is actively insulting other players for "not being able to figure it out" or "not being as good" as he is. When you are not only making the same claim over and over but insulting the people who are asking for something as simple as a CMS screen...yeah, you probably don't have any meaningful data to show.
It seems that what matters more here isn't providing actual data and proof backing up claims. What matters more is that people don't have their egos threatened because of the possibility that proof they post gets questioned in some way. I'm not going to reply after this because it's not accomplishing anything. At the end of the day, no matter how much someone doesn't like it, we are on the test server. The entire point is to be testing things and then reporting what we find, not being rude, passive-aggressive, and evasive when asked for evidence of a claim.
Ok let me help you understand what I'm seeing here and why this doesn't work.
Let's have some fun and take out the goalpost argument completely. You use words like good and reliably. So those are the kind of words that leave room for argument. Instead I want you to post EXACT numbers of exactly what you want to see. Don't use any ambiguous language, be precise on exactly the build you want to see. Be precise on exactly the opponent you want them to beat to satisfy what you deem good or reliable.
Tell me every scenario in exact detail and exact numbers that you need to see for this person's claims to be valid in a way at which point you will no longer dispute and simply accept that they are right and you are wrong.
I give this as an example really and as a point. You want to take out the goalpost then you tell us exactly and I mean EXACTLY what you need to see using mathematical expressions and no language that can be interpreted.
Because when you use words that can have different meaning then we have to agree on that meaning and that's where the problem comes in. Get it?
At least if you provide this then I can respect that you're asking a question that isn't at all open ended or that can't be left to chance.
Then if they don't want to provide that evidence I can certainly see it as more of a failing on their part because you're no longer being less than precisely clear about what you are asking.
Evidence was provided. You refuse to accept the evidence.
As mentioned before, you are the one that stated you wish to receive evidence at that. My inclination was 'what exactly would they want' as I tagged the 'community representatives' for further insight and yet received no response.
The questions you ask are the same one I asked when an 'esteemed member of the community' came out to state that 'werewolf DPS was doubling everyone else's' during the werewolf rework PTS (U50 PTS) and come to find out that clearly wasn't true as Signet, masteries, and more from that single patch were pushing the bar all the way across the board. I was borderline harassed on the forums (people following me around any post/comment with off-topic attacks on character) and even in-game from people I had never even seen all because I questioned the integrity of data coming from individuals so very highly skewed towards an inclination ('nerf werewolf'), supplying a fraction of the information and verifiable logic I have here on this thread.
Regardless, uptimes and passives that werewolf maintained for years like Savage Strength (cut from 18% to 10%), Berserker Bleed uptime (4 seconds to 1 single second of DoT), and Claws (Condensed to 20 seconds with major and minor defile to 10 seconds and then reduced to 6 seconds) were affected (nerfed) off of essentially 'dueling parses' (which are NOT remotely as stable and replicatable as the one's I'm providing) because individuals who refused to provide info on gear, CP, info on build (all of which I have provided where requested such as 'Shapeshifter's, Imperial, my own stat sheet, etc.) posted CMXs parses and enacted change that was detrimental to the werewolf kit and apparently solved nothing in the dev's vision as the slapped us with 200-300% nerfs to sustain as a 'next-pass'.
So my point lies, if you don't believe in my data- source your own. In the entire time where you've posted in my thread over 50 times, you have not provided data of your own at any point but have rather provided antagonistic comments all the way through even Straw-manning to 'werewolf not a class' as if that changes anything on the topic 'should werewolf be balanced appropriately'.
A minute fraction of the information and data I've provided, spoiled:@ZOS_Kevin * @ZOS_JessicaFolsom (please pass through to combat team) - I don't know what else I can do or say to prove that you are making a mistake. I provide what I can, where I can aimlessly trying to pass the grander point along.
Everytime werewolf 'dies', it is when the sustain is adjusted too heavily or the healing is adjusted too heavily. When you remove damage options like static reverb and leave CoE, you aren't encouraging 'a way out', you're relegating werewolves to yet another subpar option that still lacks the damage with sustain of traditional options like Shapeshifter's chain + Imperial (or in a sense like Oakensoul before). The adjustments to CoE were appropriate, encouraging a choice IS the right path, however the sustain changes are now overkill.
I have attempted to build in a variety of ways where my damage is 'sufficient', which must be consistent and high to outpace rampant healing and sustain (especially CoE mastery Sorc users and CoF skill Dragonknight users), I maintain a certain level of health 35k+, and maintain a certain level of sustain (even if it requires dedicating my race, mythic, and even food) to do so.
In every test I had, Smoked Bear Haunch in ESO and Artaeum Takeaway Broth (shown earlier in this thread via CMX) while seemingly a valid option caused me to lose far too many resources in stam and/or mag to the point that having 2k+ stamina recovery was still a detriment that caused me to burn out within around 15 seconds with essentially no break frees, no rolls, and no blocks (meaning in combat, just like demonstrated before also- I would likely 'burn out' within 4-5 seconds at most).
Building 5 med (22k resistance being nearly unviable in actual content i.e. 'glass cannon' for cost reduction), health where possible for healing, running Shapeshifter's Chain (unique resources and 15% cost reduction), Imperial (Highest Health and Stamina combo with 6% reduction)- I was able to last no more than 20 seconds EVEN with the break free CP (which would not be active in NO-CP BGs) and minimizing rolls (which some snares, immobilizes, and certain skills would force out) before bottoming-out stamina in a very dangerous way:
For an added benefit, with the same reduction gear (which would be abnormal for a mag build), and after stacking 35k+ mag (which caused my health to fall below 30k), I would still burn out within seconds in a dangerous way however only this time it didn't stabilize:
Meanwhile, post nerf-courtesy of our own @Arcana - this is DK on PTS blocking over 100 attacks (holding block) maintaining resource stability the entire time on what is arguably a combination pressure and burst class:
There are many on these forums that will debate this topic in logical fallacies, provide no evidence to back otherwise baseless claims, and are likely here to overwhelm and 'drown out' counter-arguments, however valid-
I know at the end of the day I'm "just a werewolf player" but I implore the team to see the data and logical reasoning along with the promises made by the members who worked so hard to revitalize werewolf in a big way. I have no doubt this PTS patch will make it to live as-is now for werewolf. I ask that over the next 3 months you investigate and determine better solutions for this 'pressure, no burst, low sustain' playstyle you've created and try to understand the changes that made it objectively unviable in the first place.
Did you just reply to yourself three times to bump the thread up? ROFL... that's reportable btw
I appreciate it @Arunei but no need to worry about it. This person has been following me around nearly every thread for the past several weeks to a month. That last response was actually because I didn't realize that @Bushido2513 (another individual with no PfP, no data of their own, and contrarian responses such as 'werewolf not a class') had essentially 'taken a strike at your own character' for being defensive of the data and info provided.
At this point, if they want to try and 'weaponize' the system further- they are more than welcome to in my book. It's pretty clear to me unless something changes that nothing I or anyone with this sentiment says is being heard in any meaningful capacity so it'd just serve to take the agency (and ergo 'due diligence') out of my own fingers.
Edit: honestly, if the combat team wants to come out with half of the sentiment these individuals possess such as werewolf is 'noob mode'/'meme spec', 'should not be competitive' in PvE/PvP then I'm ready to move on because I've had nothing but toxic interactions with anything 'werewolf' from this community and I'm personally over these types of interactions again
I, sadly, think they just did come out with that sentiment. Evidence was given, promptly ignored, and we just got a "we hear you but uh... lol get reckt, test more on live lolololol"Leader of Lycan Syndicate, PC NA's tri-faction werewolf guild.~~~Played since the beta, got the monkey.~~~"The blood of the pack is now yours. They are your only family, your only allegiance!"6 -
coop500✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭HunterDawn wrote: »Since the Werewolf playerbase is small, our feedback can simply be brushed aside. Is this really ZOS’s design ethos😅? @ZOS_Kevin @ZOS_JessicaFolsom
Quite simply, yes. They're a business. Worse still, they're a business that's on the chopping block if they don't make good money soon and keep as many players as possible.
More people want to see WW put into worthless meme status again than see it be viable.
It's not personal unfortunately, we're just the unfortunate lambs, ironically enough.Hoping for more playable races.
Hoping the game and it's team remains alive.
BRING BACK MAGICKA WEREWOLVES TO PVE1 -
HunterDawn✭✭✭bilibili.com/video/BV1eZ4k6mEbW/#reply315637193200
What terrific burst‑damage output for a berserker. It seems you are perfectly happy with this version of Werewolf.😅 @ZOS_Kevin @ZOS_JessicaFolsomThe incredibly fun U51 update is right around the corner😊! Go renew your Plus memberships everyone😅!6 -
Bushido2513✭✭✭✭✭HunterDawn wrote: »Since the Werewolf playerbase is small, our feedback can simply be brushed aside. Is this really ZOS’s design ethos😅? @ZOS_Kevin @ZOS_JessicaFolsom
Quite simply, yes. They're a business. Worse still, they're a business that's on the chopping block if they don't make good money soon and keep as many players as possible.
More people want to see WW put into worthless meme status again than see it be viable.
It's not personal unfortunately, we're just the unfortunate lambs, ironically enough.
I wouldn't say must people want anything other than to enjoy pvp.
I'm curious to see where wolf goes after changes go live and I'll be happy to play in pvp that isn't full of them but I certainly have no issue seeing them as much as I see any other spec.
I mean really why would anyone be upset at ww just because? Most people are just annoyed with over tuned performance, same as dk.
I firmly believe if we actually killed of every spec that ever killed us then there would be no game because I've certainly been killed by pretty much everything.
Just saying this because I keep seeing this idea that people have it out for wolves. They don't, they have it out for clearly over performing spec.
We didn't even get a choice as to what the nerf would be. So blame zos for the harsh nerf but don't blame players in mass for reporting what was going on0 -
acanca✭✭✭Bushido2513 wrote: »HunterDawn wrote: »Since the Werewolf playerbase is small, our feedback can simply be brushed aside. Is this really ZOS’s design ethos😅? @ZOS_Kevin @ZOS_JessicaFolsom
Quite simply, yes. They're a business. Worse still, they're a business that's on the chopping block if they don't make good money soon and keep as many players as possible.
More people want to see WW put into worthless meme status again than see it be viable.
It's not personal unfortunately, we're just the unfortunate lambs, ironically enough.
I wouldn't say must people want anything other than to enjoy pvp.
I'm curious to see where wolf goes after changes go live and I'll be happy to play in pvp that isn't full of them but I certainly have no issue seeing them as much as I see any other spec.
I mean really why would anyone be upset at ww just because? Most people are just annoyed with over tuned performance, same as dk.
I firmly believe if we actually killed of every spec that ever killed us then there would be no game because I've certainly been killed by pretty much everything.
Just saying this because I keep seeing this idea that people have it out for wolves. They don't, they have it out for clearly over performing spec.
We didn't even get a choice as to what the nerf would be. So blame zos for the harsh nerf but don't blame players in mass for reporting what was going on
Yeah, good mindset. I think the nerfs for ww are misguided mainly because they leave stuff that is actually problematic be while nerfing stuff that was only ever a problem in conjuncture with CoE (which also got nerfed)
I think ww might still be viable in some capacity but the overwhelming crutch that was CoE + static is gone so we'll have to wait and see. It cant be as problematic as be4 because well, coe is gone so no more infinite sustain and insane healing and the stam cost changes also basically means no more dodge rolling 10 times more than other builds (which lets be honest was a bit of an issue). I will be really sad if no build is viable next patch for ww but also a bit surprised, the kit lacks burst, sure, but it also makes a cohesive whole and has pretty neat skills even if we dont get a 2nd bar, cant go lower than 40k because all heals scale with max hp, the stam sustain is rough, cant use backbar sets, cant use mythics that check for which bar you are on (cause ww transformation counts as backbar when you enter combat).2 -
Faltasë✭✭✭✭✭This kind of heavy handed WW stuff feels pretty similar to post-greymoor.
Matter fact, this is just Greymoor 2.0 lol
Also good job moderators on stopping RedMambas literal harassment. You give me a permanent warning and a suspension from trying to reduce the uncivilness of the forums and yet this guy can just go around straight up harassing people and making the forums a more toxic place and get away with it. Congrats on your *** forum moderation model.
XBOX 2015-2019
PC-NA 2019-2022, 2025-present
Please keep fixing the combat. It's good to fix the combat.
Auri-El is the one true God.3 -
gammelscroll✭✭✭This kind of heavy handed WW stuff feels pretty similar to post-greymoor.
Matter fact, this is just Greymoor 2.0 lol
Also good job moderators on stopping RedMambas literal harassment. You give me a permanent warning and a suspension from trying to reduce the uncivilness of the forums and yet this guy can just go around straight up harassing people and making the forums a more toxic place and get away with it. Congrats on your *** forum moderation model.
why even reply to that idiot? And give him attention? Just ignore him. No one cares about a random1 -
Bushido2513✭✭✭✭✭gammelscroll wrote: »This kind of heavy handed WW stuff feels pretty similar to post-greymoor.
Matter fact, this is just Greymoor 2.0 lol
Also good job moderators on stopping RedMambas literal harassment. You give me a permanent warning and a suspension from trying to reduce the uncivilness of the forums and yet this guy can just go around straight up harassing people and making the forums a more toxic place and get away with it. Congrats on your *** forum moderation model.
why even reply to that idiot? And give him attention? Just ignore him. No one cares about a random
Ignoring may solve the problem for you but that just leaves them free to engage in potentially negative behavioral with others without ever being given a warning, penalty, or becoming known.
At least now if it happens again there's a history to look at.
1 -
AdonisJorge✭✭✭HunterDawn wrote: »bilibili.com/video/BV1eZ4k6mEbW/#reply315637193200
What terrific burst‑damage output for a berserker. It seems you are perfectly happy with this version of Werewolf.😅 @ZOS_Kevin @ZOS_JessicaFolsom
1 - WW too OP it needs a nerf. you did 100k oblivion damage with your busts, DK had no chance
2 - Say good bye to your bashweaving, Break Free or the need to dodge roll on high pressure scenarios4
