Literally no one wants Iceheart to be nerfed.

Noxavian · February 2020

Title says it all. This was the very first monster set I farmed because it looked cool and had a very neat practical effect that was powerful and fun.

Instead of nerfing this set, why not try to use this set as an example of what people like? I don't understand...

MashmalloMan · February 2020

Because, they created a standard for sets that gives shields and this set was over budget for their spreadsheet. They used 2 5 piece sets as a comparison.

The problem is, even if it was above standard, they compared it with sets that aren't monster sets. Their standard can't be the same between the 2.

Also, this thread will be locked, there is a better, longer thread they want people to use, not sure there is any point in you making a new thread when you could of commented in 1 of the others. You didn't exactly say anything that hasn't been said already.

Juhasow · February 2020

Well sometimes what we need is not what we want. Reality is that iceheart is extremly strong set as it stands right now. But they could atleast buff the damage instead of completly nerfing every aspect. Especially that new monster set Mother Ciannait is basically made for templars and shows middle finger to everyone else. It will give more shield on average plus some buff to sustain. Like templars dont have it all already they're now getting dedicated monster sets...

Xorsius · February 2020

Noxavian wrote: »

... Because it looked cool and had a very neat practical effect that was powerful and fun.

This is one reason why I got Iceheart tbh. While I love being able to use Fire and Shock as a MagSorc, I wanted to be able to use Frost as well in some decent capacity and be able to use all three elements at once as a result.

woe · February 2020

Wow some numbers changed and it still does the EXACT SAME THING. Better cry and never use it again!!!

Alienoutlaw · February 2020

deflorate wrote: »

Wow some numbers changed and it still does the EXACT SAME THING. Better cry and never use it again!!!

tell that to the 400 or so people on the other thread

satanio · February 2020

deflorate wrote: »

Wow some numbers changed and it still does the EXACT SAME THING. Better cry and never use it again!!!

In reality it does less than 50% of its former self.
Stop lying on the forums. Your reply is misleading.

Sephyr · February 2020

deflorate wrote: »

Wow some numbers changed and it still does the EXACT SAME THING. Better cry and never use it again!!!

This is exactly why we can't have decent conversations with the actual developers. Because it gets covered up by stuff like what you just posted.

macsmooth · February 2020

MashmalloMan wrote: »

Because, they created a standard for sets that gives shields and this set was over budget for their spreadsheet. They used 2 5 piece sets as a comparison.

The problem is, even if it was above standard, they compared it with sets that aren't monster sets. Their standard can't be the same between the 2.

Also, this thread will be locked, there is a better, longer thread they want people to use, not sure there is any point in you making a new thread when you could of commented in 1 of the others. You didn't exactly say anything that hasn't been said already.

It’s funny how Mother Ciannait isn’t held to the same standards, for the life of me I can’t workout why that is....... oh wait......

ESO_Nightingale · February 2020

#SaveIceheart

ZOS_Volpe · February 2020

Greetings,

Because there is a thread already open on this topic, we're going to close this one down so that all feedback can be consolidated in one place. You may continue the discussion here.

Thank you for your understanding.