Bare with me, I am bored :smileyhappy: I was thinking. Why do healers have to heal the same? There realy is no big difference in hp/sec over time between druids, clerics and shammys. How these heals work in game is a completely different thing however. I am all for diversity, and there is a lot of complaining between classes when someone asks for something that others have. To keep a grp/player alive we have healing, debuffing and buffing. Why not make one of the healers best in one thing eatch? Shammys would be the obvious choice for debuffs. Which one would be best at healing or buffing does not matter to me. Of course you should still be able to do those other things aswell, but I was thinking of a distribution like this, where 3 is best, 2 is average and 1 is low. Druid: Buffs 3 Healing 2 Debuffs 1 Cleric: Healing 3 Buffs 2 Debuffs 1 Shammys: Debuffs 3 Healing 2 Buffs 1 I dont think you would want a healer with very low healing, even if this was infact balanced with other things. Might just be in my mind though. With healing beeing reworked in lu13 I am not sure they would go through it again, but I would like it. It makes classes unique and different. Any thoughts?
IMO I think all healers should heal approximately the same amount of HP's. I think it should remain balanced throughout the classes, but I think you may be on to something if you were to replace healing on that list with curing.
That is the way the game is right now. Except it's like this: Druid: Buffs 1 Healing 1 Debuffs 1 Cleric: Healing 2 Buffs 2 Debuffs 2 Shammys: Debuffs 3 Healing 3 Buffs 3 Don't get me wrong, druids are great healers... when they get the chance to use them, and we're the best AE healers. We're also have the best DPS for priests. That's the difference. Anyone ever wonder why Shamans get the best HP buffs when they can intercept the damage with wards, and druids get the worst ones, and we have to wait until the target takes damage before healing. Healing would be a lot easier if we could swap buffs with shamans and give an extra 2k hp instead of 300. Honestly the only reason we parse good for healing and dps is because that's all we have to do (other than some curing). Shaman are constantly debuffing throughout the fight and they still out parse us. But I guess to answer your original question... Too much difference in healing causes angry players. Just look at my post here!
I do see some problems with healers not beeing able to heal for the same. If healer A heals for 500 hp/sec and healer B heals for 250 hp/sec and reduce incoming dps with 50%, in many cases it would turn out to be the same, but on hard mobs where multiple healers would be needed (like raid) a 50% decrease in incoming dps would be much better. Healing for say 20% less, debuffing 20% better and balancing off with buffs would probably work. 100% balanced under all conditions is not possible. Look at raids today. Would you rather go raiding without your shammy or your druid? :smileyvery-happy:
Well thinking about it I think the current system is like how you described it. Breaking down the classes from best 1 to worst 3 it's like this atm: Buffs: Clerics 1, Shamans 2, Druids 3 Debuffs: Shamans 1, Clerics 2, Druids 3 Aoe Healing/DPS: Druids 1, Clerics 2, Shamans 3 Well something like that at least. I think we give up buffs and debuffs to have the highest dps and best AoE healing. AoE healing translates into raids but having good dps doesn't translate well imo. I'd rather have better buffs at this point and lose some dps, so would most wardens I believe but that's not the system as they've set it up.
Problem is, buffs and debuffs will always be usefull, weither solo, grp or raid. AoE healing is only usefull on some raids. This can not be said to be an equal compensation. Also, even if we had much better dps then the other healers (which looks to me we dont, marginally perhaps but not much) dps is not one of our main function and can not be traded on a one to one basis. The dps would have to be a LOT higher for a little less buffs/debuffs, IMHO
I agree foreman. Also our grp regen is balanced against a how good grp wards/reacts work when only 1 target gets hit vs our grp regen when only 1 target gets hit. I think some buffs need a little buffing grp def buffing for wardens and grp dps buffing for furies and both druids should get their hp buff doubled to about 650 hp at least imo. A good debuff would be nice too.
I'd rather keep our inferior buffs/debuffs/healing and get a big raise in dps. But if they don't increase dps, we ought to be brought up in another department to make us balanced again.
You are a fury (right?) and I respect your descition on beeing able to dps. I am a warden and I realy hope I always will be (become) good at keeping people alive in the most challanging circumstances. I dont have to be good in healing and buffing and debuffing, but I agree, give me something plz.
For true, man... for true. Though my understanding when the game was released and just based on the damage spells (before the druiphobic dps bonus) was that both druids were the damage priests, and the difference between fury and warden was simply that one was more offense and one was more defense; but both were offensive. Now, however, damage potential between priests is so close that either both druids either get a dps bonus, or they work toward making all priests the same (I would prefer the priests being different, and Druids being the high dps ones). Druids are not balanced right now, at all. I would call the underpowering fairly severe, and the more naive people will think I'm crazy for saying so. The bs "learn how to play" crap is inevitable, but I can assure anyone who says that, I play better than they do. The issue is not my skill, as I can surpass most other people... the issue is with a class's potential. Whether or not a few people of another class do not meat their potential, and the person playing the Fury/Warden does is meaningless.
I seem to see a lot of warden/druid healing ability bashing on this board. Myself, I'm playing my first EQ2 character (Warden, 30), so obviously I'm not qualified to comment on those comparisions. However, I have one questions. I took Greater Regrowth Master II at level 24. From the top of my head, the numbers are approximately as follows: 61 power / 99-121 per tick / 6 ticks (initial + every 2 sec for 10 sec) That gives better than 1:10 ratio for power-to-health. None of my other healing spells come even remotely close to this efficiency. In fact, given the size of initial heal (99-121) and cast time (2 sec) -- casting any other heal is pointless and I almost never do it -- unless I'm scrambling to keep up with damage intake vs. some ^^^ or something. So, the question part is: do other healer types (clerics/shamans) get healing spells that are in the same power-to-health ballpark?
Yes they do. Direct heals and special heals are very well balanced in terms of hp/sec. They work a bit differently though.
For a complete list see this thread: http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=spells&message.id=9434 Shammys are e bit lower on efficiency, probably to counter that they have "perfect" heals
Regain: 1476-1800 / 2sec for 153 power. On avr thats 819 hp/sec and ~10,7 hp/power Reactive: 1230-1500 / 2sec for 153 power. On avr 682,5 hp/sec and ~8,9 hp/power (~83,3% of a regain) Ward: 1014 / 2sec for 153 power. 507 hp/sec and ~6,2 hp/power (~61,9% of a regain) Weather or not they are well balanced would be a matter of opinion, and not gonna get into that here cos thats not the issue. But when someone asks something you should at least either give a correct answer or none at all. Saying other healers have the same hp/power ratio and hp/sec ratio is just plain wrong, and those numbers are from your link so clearly you must have known.
Looks nice on paper for your defiler, but its what happens in game that matters. How much waste does your ward heave? How much waste do you think my HoT have? I dont know to be honest, but in game those numbers are a lot closer, I do know that. Edit: But true. On paper there is a significant differnce on special heals between shammy and the others. Message Edited by Formangenavn on 05-31-2006 05:00 AM
Where on earth did you get these numbers from anyway? 819 hp healed every 1 sec? WTH? Get your facts right!
Thats healing pr sec casting time. It doesnt really matter if you look at healing pr sec for a whole cycle of the spell or healing pr sec for cast time or if you wanted to you could just look just look at healing pr cast. The cast/recast timers on the spells are identical so when you compare it these factors become insignificant as long as you keep all 3 spells in the same units. Basic math. The reason i use this is because im more limited by my casting time than my recast time. So its how i normally optimise my healing, by maximising heal pr sec i use to cast it.
Well its the wrong way to compare to HoTs since we are limited to a duration of 10 sec no matter what our recast time is, which is not the case for wards and reactives. Single target HoT: Health/Second: 163.80, Health/Power: 10.71 Single target reactive: Health/Second: 170.63, Health/Power: 8.92 Single target ward: Health/Second: 126.75, Health/Power: 6.63 And this is taken from the thread I linked.
