Combat Changes and you

[Banditman]

Since this is in fact still not Live, the information I'm giving you may change OFTEN.  In fact, some of it already has and I'll try to account for that as much as possible. First thing first.  You can check out a lot of data here:  <a href="http://mail.thetemplars.net/lines_beta1234.htm" target=_blank>Priest Comparison Chart</a> Wards.  They now kick serious @#$.  It's unbelievable how much difference this change has made.  I'm still not sure they are properly balanced against the other Priests, but the upgrade in healing power we get from this one change alone is simply astounding.  I even had a Ward expire . . . as in . . . the time ran out . . . while a mob was beating on it. Secondly, Oberon.  It is NOT useless anymore.  It's a significant Ward.  Is it good enough for regular use?  I don't really know yet, but the thing is now 1400 HP with 495 HP per tick regen.  It's really quite powerful. Third, the little badger guy, he ROCKS THE HOUSE.  At Adept 1 he heals at 287 HP / tick.  If you haven't upgraded your little buddy, PLEASE, do so now.  He could very well be the best cure for those nasty mob AE's you'll ever see.  30 second duration with a 40 second recast.  He's still not very "Shadowy" though. Avatar is no longer a "duration" spell.  It's a single target toggle-able with unlimited duration.  It has also been beefed up a bit from the version on Live, higher stats, higher haste. Prophetic Guard / Prophetic Shield is now totally useless.  It no longer buffs power pool, it buffs 1000 ish to Noxious but its only a 36 second duration with a five minute recast.  Everyone hates it, we're hoping to get it changed. Mechanically, all spells of a line share a single recast timer.  It sounds like armageddon, but it's not quite that bad.  I'm sure many of you, like me, had quite a number of heals from lower tiers on your hotbars.  I had Minor Healing, Minor Arch Healing, Healing Ritual, Bounty of the Virtuous, Rejuvenating Chant and Enlightened Healing all on my hotbars.  No more.  Look at the link above to read how each "line" breaks down.  No matter how you slice it, every single spell in a line shares a recast timer.  You're probably looking at Rejuvenating Chant and Enlightened Healing as your only hotbar direct heals, perhaps a tertiary hotbar with a couple smaller ones.  We lost some direct heal ability for sure, but you GAINED so much with Wards I don't think you'll notice.  In doing the Solo Arena in Splitpaw under these rules, I rarely ever cast a direct heal anymore, my Ward is simply and significantly better and more efficient. Our damage spells are now a LOT less costly to cast, meaning that doing damage is no longer a huge drain on our ability to heal.  We're still crappy DPS, but at least it isn't costing us as much to do it. Mouring Soul is now a winner.  It no longer roots you, which is a GODSEND, and it is a flat DPS decrease as opposed to a Slow. I could go on for quite a while talking about the changes, but given the link above, it might be easier for me to just answer any questions you might have.

[Purcupile]

<P>Banditman,</P> <P>These changes sound very hopeful.  I have looked at the comparison chart, but being the numbskull that I am would you take us through the explanation of one of the spells...For instance the first spell on the chart is Totemic Aid a1.  Can you explain the meaning of PC C RC HV HPs HPp and the significance of these various categories.  Also under MYSTIC LINES and UTILITY the categories change to V1 V2 V3.  Some of these abreviations I do understand, but there appear to be abbreviations that I am not familiar with. </P> <P> </P> <P>Thanks</P> <P>Purcupile</P> <DIV>As I stated above I am a numbskull...when I rated your original message I accidently clicked one star when I meant to select 5 stars.  Someone please help over-ride my loathsome error.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Purcupile on <span class=date_text>08-05-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:32 AM</span>

[Trathe]

<P>Man Bandit you just made my day.</P> <P>I love you long time!! (j/k)</P> <P>Really though seems to be great changes and I finally get my mitigated wards back been like oh... um... a year.  Yeah though what is up w/ Prophetic!! I mean come on... it isn't like we are power gods compared to other priest classes (if you ask a Templar they are.. but they just whine more).  Perchance they will make Prophocrap (our targetable buff) 1 concentration...</P> <P>My two favorite classes looking optimystic.. heh coercers getting some good changes too.</P> <P>But these changes may be like a fart in a windstorm.. here today gone tomorrow.  When time come for its go live I will be happy or sad then but still here =)</P>

[Banditman]

<div></div>Ok, good questions. First, please understand that the worksheet is still a work in progress.  Without all the data from all the Priests its value is limited. So on to your specific questions. PC is Power Cost.  C is Cast time (in seconds).  RC is ReCast time (in seconds).  HV is <b>supposed</b> to be Heal Value (maximum), but some of the catagories and spell lines aren't actually heals, so HV might be a damage value, or a stat buff value or something else.  I'm going back and re-labeling things as I can.  Thus in some spots you'll see stuff line V1, V2, V3 . . . for Value 1, Value 2, Value 3.  You'll see things like this for instance:  47  STA   STR in those fields.  That would indicate a +47 to Strength and Stamina for the spell in question.  HPs is Heal per Second.  HPp is Heal per Power. A lot of times I don't bother listing cast times for buffs, especially concentration buffs. In the Single Target Spell section, you will see numbers under the C column, and in that chart, the number is the number of Concentration Points that the spell listed takes. Like I said, it's a work in progress.  Once it's more complete, I'll make a legend that explains the notations. <p>Message Edited by Banditman on <span class=date_text>08-05-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:34 AM</span>

[Trathe]

<DIV>Well then got a question for ya if ya know.. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The oracle lines there is no mention of our Damage Proc.. I used to bet on that to solo do we still have it please tell me we do..</DIV><p>Message Edited by Trathe on <span class=date_text>08-05-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:38 AM</span>

[Spag]

Hey guys, glad to hear you are getting much lovin', you all deserve it for sticking it out with your Mystics.  Something I did not do, anyway.   Looks like we (Wardens) are getting hit pretty hard with things.  Well its all still in testing, so we will see how it goes.  Anyway gratz on wards finally working!!!!

[Banditman]

<div></div>Spag - help me out gettin' all that data man! If Wardens are being pushed back to the point that they are no longer balanced with the other Priests, we need to make that case NOW before the changes go live. Trathe - the damage proc is still there on our Ursine line, I just didn't consider it to be important in the overall balance picture.  One annoying thing (speaking of secondary effects) that is missing in our spells is the secondary effects on our Minor Healing line . . . no more cure Noxious built in.  This makes me sad. <p>Message Edited by Banditman on <span class=date_text>08-05-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:43 AM</span>

[Spag]

<DIV>They are working on it over on our forums, I will post a reminder over there to get you that info.</DIV>

[Banditman]

Thanks.  Please understand that my goal is not to get ONLY the Mystics balanced, but to get ALL Priests balanced.  People should play the Priest they like because the "feel" the class, not because one Priest is better than the other. If it means I have to stump for additional Utility for Templars, fine, if they can show it, I can get behind it.  I simply want to see that each Priest has the same opportunity. <div></div>

[Arfiniel]

<P>Thanks banditman, for the great info.  You rock!</P> <P>I was in such a foul mood yesterday, mostly aimed at SOE, and this has restored my spirits immensely!</P> <P>Thank goodness I won that stupid shadowy attendant Master 1 spell woot!!  </P>

[Banditman]

OMG - I cannot wait to see what a Master 1 will do.  287 at Adept 1 is just INSANE.  Even if you figure a modest 20% increase to Master 1 you're looking at 344 / tick.  PER TICK!

[Eepop]

I dont have the spell yet...does the attendant count as a pet? ie, can you change his name with the new pet naming thing? heh, that would be hours of fun <div></div>

[Banditman]

<div></div>Im gonna say no to that one.  Shadowy Attendant always summons a badger named "Aid of the Oracle". Funny thing about that . . . it is so rarely used that sometimes you get a laugh out of it.  I was in LS, Sol Ro temple area with some friends and a Scout who we didn't know.  We had just finished a battle and we asked if there were any named up.  Scout goes . . . . "Yea, something called Aid of the Oracle".  I was fairly amused.  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> I can rename my Splitpaw mushroom pet. <p>Message Edited by Banditman on <span class=date_text>08-05-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:06 PM</span>

[disru]

Nice work in the chart Bandit! Could you take some time to expand on a few things please? ~It looks like all direct heals and group heals  now heal for less but have a lower power cost as well (they do seem to be more efficient health:power wise) ~Our Ritual line now takes 2 seconds to cast but still has a 13 second recast? ~Same thing with our wards as with our heals, except they mitigate now, lower overall hp buffer but also lower power cost. ~Even further nerfage to haze it looks like? is there any scaleability between ranks now outside of the slow %? ~Howl line resistance debuff petty much cut in half? ~With morning soul being a straight decrease in dps, does this make umbral trap obsolete? Thanks again Bandit! <div></div>

[Banditman]

<span><blockquote><hr> ~It looks like all direct heals and group heals  now heal for less but have a lower power cost as well (they do seem to be more efficient health to power wise) <font color="#ffff00">In general, yes.  I haven't found this to be a limiting factor at this point.</font> ~Our Ritual line now takes 2 seconds to cast but still has a 13 second recast? <font color="#ffff00">Yes, this is something that I believe we will need to get addressed.  I am drawing a blank in attempting to explain it.  Our Arch Healing line is a 15 second turn around versus an 11 second turn around for Templars.  I hate to keep comparing to Templars but at present that is the only additional data I have.</font> ~Same thing with our wards as with our heals, except they mitigate now, lower overall hp buffer but also lower power cost. <font color="#ffff00">I suppose the current thinking is that our Wards need less power because they are always perfectly efficient.  I'm not sure I buy that yet, I'm still forming an opinion.</font> ~Even further nerfage to haze it looks like? is there any scaleability between ranks now outside of the slow %? <font color="#ffff00">Since I only have the one Haze (Adept 3), I'll have to see what someone else reports for the Adept 1 or Master 1 version of the spell.  I was however able to see the difference between Spirit of the Elephant Adept 1 and Spirit of the Elephant Adept 3 . . . and there is a significant but not overwhelming difference.  I apologize, I should have written down the exact numbers but I did not.</font> ~Howl line resistance debuff petty much cut in half? <font color="#ffff00">Yes.  Whether or not that is an issue remains to be seen.  However, to me, the more annoying, and possibly troublesome issue is that the duration on that line is now only 36 seconds.  With combat lasting longer, but the debuff at a shorter duration, you find yourself using this multiple times in a single fight.  That could become a problem in more challenging content.</font> ~With morning soul being a straight decrease in dps, does this make umbral trap obsolete? <font color="#ffff00">I can't think of a situation where I'd use Umbral Trap over Mourning Soul now.  Unless they stack.  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></font> Thanks again Bandit! <div></div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[disru]

oh, forgot one! is bounty of the virtuous still on its own timer? <div></div>

[Banditman]

Unfortunately, Bounty of the Virtuous is now virtually worthless.  It doesn't scale up, and it's a L20 spell.  <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Incidentally, BotV isn't on it's own timer, it's actually on the timer with Minor Healing at present.  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Trathe]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR> Spag - help me out gettin' all that data man!<BR><BR>If Wardens are being pushed back to the point that they are no longer balanced with the other Priests, we need to make that case NOW before the changes go live.<BR><BR><BR>Trathe - the damage proc is still there on our Ursine line, I just didn't consider it to be important in the overall balance picture.  One annoying thing (speaking of secondary effects) that is missing in our spells is the secondary effects on our Minor Healing line . . . no more cure Noxious built in.  This makes me sad.<BR><BR> <P>Message Edited by Banditman on <SPAN class=date_text>08-05-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>11:43 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Cool cool thanks.  But, ayup on the damage proc being a basis of balance I would not put it up there either.  It was always just a reason for me to melee behind a mob when some pitifull dps was needed.</P> <P>Man the secondary effects taken out of our minor heals.. aww man.. did that happen to other classes as well?</P>

[Banditman]

Yes, it did.  And it's becoming a REAL issue for Druids in particular who had some HoT components attached to help supplement a lower intial value to the direct.  The initial data I have from Furies in particular is quite alarming.

[Arfiniel]

I'm curious about how the group ward will work now that mitigation will be taken into consideration.  Assume I'm in a full group of 6 players.  Currently, if I use a group ward and only the tank gets hit, that tank gets the full benefit of the ward rather than 1/6 of that ward.  Now, if we take mitigation into effect, I have to assume the ward is using the mitigation of who it is placed on, not the mitigation of who cast it, correct?  (hope that makes sense).  Ok then, same situation:  if the tank is the only one of the 6 getting hit, does he get the benefit of the entire group ward, or 1/6?  I would think putting a mitigation on a group ward would be a programming nightmare, especially when you take into consideration all the different AC's of each of the 6 group members.  Just curious what to expect here, if you get a chance to test it out.  Thanks! <p>Message Edited by Arfiniel on <span class=date_text>08-05-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:01 PM</span>

[Banditman]

As near as I can tell with a Group Ward, the mitigation is calculated when the blow is struck. So, for instance, if a Guardian, Mystic and Warlock were in a group with an active Group Ward: All hits against the Guardian use his mitigation. All hits against the Mystic use his mitigation. All hits against the Warlock use his mitigation.

[Arfiniel]

<DIV>Any change to aqueous spirit?  Don't know whether to upgrade this to ad3 or not, especially if there will be a defense cap anyway...  Also my howling haze is at ad1.. doesn't sound like I should waste a rare on upgrading it either.  Advice?  Thanks!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Edit, just read this written by a druid:</DIV> <DIV>the group cures do not scale with level, nor do the instant cures (sylvan wind for druids). So on 50 none of the training group cures work. This is probly a bug.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Hope I find out before I /respect lol.    <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV><p>Message Edited by Arfiniel on <span class=date_text>08-05-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:20 PM</span>

[SciFiG]

I curious if there were any changes to our combat rezz spells ... irks me that in raids that any other rezzing class outside of a healer can rezz for more and recast it more often.

[Banditman]

<div></div>Aqueous Spirit . . . no longer worth casting IMO.  Defense is not the same as it used to be.  Level of attacker vs level of defender is the primary comparison used to determine whether a blow lands or misses.  Mobs lower level than you miss more, mobs higher than you miss less. I've not investigated the combat rez spells, and didn't really consider them a terribly high priority in light of all the other problems we had.  Sorry. Edit:  Yes, the group cures are a known . . . issue.  The single target cures "theoretically" work, but the group cures no only fail to cure, they are ALL on the same timer now. This leads me to believe that Group Cure will be turned into a line shared by all Priests.<p>Message Edited by Banditman on <span class=date_text>08-05-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:25 PM</span>

[beylanu]

<span><blockquote><hr>Banditman wrote:<span><blockquote><hr>-- snip -- ~Same thing with our wards as with our heals, except they mitigate now, lower overall hp buffer but also lower power cost. <font color="#ffff00">I suppose the current thinking is that our Wards need less power because they are always perfectly efficient.  I'm not sure I buy that yet, I'm still forming an opinion.</font> -- snip --<hr></blockquote></span><div></div><hr></blockquote>A question in regards to this... - does a ward, like ancestral ward, apply a heal at the end, if it expires? If so, then I would say our wards have innate efficiency and should be accounted for in the power to hp ratio.  Last time I checked, it did not, but I figured it's a bug(since the description says it does) and would be fixed. This is why when you used the phrase "always perfectly efficient", I too, don't exactly buy that just yet.  I know those weren't your words, and I'm more or less agreeing with your hesitation. </span><div></div>

[Banditman]

<P>Ok, let me answer your question and explain a bit.</P> <P>To answer directly, no, our Wards do NOT apply a heal at the end.  Defilers do have some Wards with strange on break reactive procs which apply damage to the breaker of the Ward and a heal to the party.</P> <P>Back in beta - original Beta not DoF - our Wards did apply a heal when they expired.  However, it was thought that this particular mechanic was overpowered and removed.  I'd still debate that point, but it's irrelevant.  The remnants of that mechanic remained, as no one bothered to edit the descriptions of each Ward to remove the indications of the mechanic.</P> <P>Now, on to "always perfectly efficient".</P> <P>A Ward is always perfectly efficient because it holds exactly the required amount of healing - every time.</P> <P>This is easier to explain with examples, so let me demonstrate that way.</P> <P>Take a Ward with 1000 HP of power, a Reactive with 5 x 200 healing and a Regen with 10 x 100 (every 3 seconds) healing.  "Theoretically" those three heals are equal.  Now we need a mob and 30 seconds of time.</P> <P>The mob hits as follows:  -50 @ 2 seconds, -250 @ 5 seconds, -50 @ 8 seconds, -50 @ 10 seconds, -50 @ 12 seconds, -50 @ 14 seconds, -100 @ 18 seconds, -150 @ 21 seconds, -100 @ 25 seconds, -150 @ 29 seconds.</P> <P>In total, this mob just did 1000 points of damage, and since each heal is "theoretically" the same, the tank should end up at full HP right?</P> <P>Well, with a reactive, you have 200 per trigger 5 times.  So it would go like this:  -50+200=0, -250+200=-50, -50-50+200=0, -50+200=0, -50+200=0 . . . but now the triggers are used up.  So the remaining damage goes unchecked:  -50-100-150-100-150 = -550 total HP.</P> <P>So, now for a Regen:  -50 @ 2 seconds then +100 @ 3 seconds and back to zero.  -250 at 5 seconds, -150 @ 6 seconds, -200 @ 8 seconds, -100 @ 9 seconds, -150 @ 10 seconds, -100 @ 12 seconds, -150 @ 14 seconds, -50 @ 15 seconds, -50 @ 18 seconds, -100 @ 21 seconds, 0 @ 24 seconds, -100 @ 25 seconds, 0 @ 27 seconds -150 @ 29 seconds and finally @ -50 after 30 seconds.</P> <P>With a Ward, the numbers are simple.  There's 1000 points of damage coming in 30 seconds, and the Ward absorbs it all.</P> <P> </P> <P>This is a very simple example and not very real world at all.  It also gives Clerics no credit for skillful play.  A wise Cleric knows that his Reactives can be very inefficient if used improperly and will allow the tank to drop down into the the yellow before applying a Reactive.  Thus, in the example above, a wise Cleric would ignore the first 5 or 6 hits and THEN apply his Reactive.</P> <P>However, the point remains that no matter when a Ward is applied, it is always exactly the right size.</P> <P> </P> <P>Excellent question though and a good piece of information for Mystics to keep in their heads.</P> <P> </P>

[Dragonreal]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR>Yes, it did.  And it's becoming a REAL issue for Druids in particular who had some HoT components attached to help supplement a lower intial value to the direct.  The initial data I have from Furies in particular is quite alarming.<BR><BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Only wardens can be alarmed by the removal of the secondary regen component because furies did not have this effect on their heals (they got buffs instead). I have yet to find any good info from the warden side with the changes though and the removal of the secondary effects scares the hell outta me =/

[icetower]

<DIV>What will happen with aggro when its assigned to the priest?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Regen and reactive have a max value of hate capped at the value of the tick.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Wards have no such cap. If the tank takes a big hit or nuke on those raid mobs, thats a helluva lot of potential agro. Hmmmm.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Whats my faith in SoE's ability not to screw this up?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[FelixDomesticus]

Extra by forum software <div></div><div></div><p>Message Edited by FelixDomesticus on <span class=date_text>08-06-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:37 PM</span>

[FelixDomesticus]

"Yes, the group cures are a known . . . issue.  The single target cures "theoretically" work, but the group cures no only fail to cure, they are ALL on the same timer now." Same timer? That makes using them pretty hard. Many mobs use several dots and other abilities and if we cannot counter them all it means bad problems. <span></span><div></div>

[FelixDomesticus]

<span><blockquote><hr>icetower wrote:<div></div> <div>What will happen with aggro when its assigned to the priest?</div> <div> </div> <div>Regen and reactive have a max value of hate capped at the value of the tick.</div> <div> </div> <div>Wards have no such cap. If the tank takes a big hit or nuke on those raid mobs, thats a helluva lot of potential agro. Hmmmm.</div> <div> </div> <div>Whats my faith in SoE's ability not to screw this up?</div><hr></blockquote>I have a nasty feeling that wards that Banditman found working very well will be considered as "overpowered" and diluted once again. That also makes agro problem worse. Banditman how removal of parry affects mystics? Is agro survival much harder now?</span><div></div>

[Banditman]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dragonrealms wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR>Yes, it did.  And it's becoming a REAL issue for Druids in particular who had some HoT components attached to help supplement a lower intial value to the direct.  The initial data I have from Furies in particular is quite alarming.<BR><BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Only wardens can be alarmed by the removal of the secondary regen component because furies did not have this effect on their heals (they got buffs instead). I have yet to find any good info from the warden side with the changes though and the removal of the secondary effects scares the hell outta me =/ <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I disagree, Furies have real reason to be alarmed as well.  Current data indicates that their heals are SUPER low - as if a secondary HoT effect SHOULD be there but isn't.  I mean it's really really bad.  Check the worksheet, I believe I've got most of the Fury info updated in there and it is glaringly obvious.  <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Banditman]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FelixDomesticus wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> icetower wrote:<BR> <DIV>What will happen with aggro when its assigned to the priest?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Regen and reactive have a max value of hate capped at the value of the tick.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Wards have no such cap. If the tank takes a big hit or nuke on those raid mobs, thats a helluva lot of potential agro. Hmmmm.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Whats my faith in SoE's ability not to screw this up?</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I have a nasty feeling that wards that Banditman found working very well will be considered as "overpowered" and diluted once again. That also makes agro problem worse.<BR><BR>Banditman how removal of parry affects mystics? Is agro survival much harder now?<BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>The one thing we have to remember is that as Mystics, we've been generating maximum aggro for months now.  Once we realized that Wards were ineffective, we started using direct heals, which have ALWAYS assigned their aggro properly.</P> <P>So, while Clerics will have to learn how to deal with aggro, Mystics will find that aggro is not significantly different that what we've already been dealing with.  Certainly, it won't be any less, but it also won't be any more.</P> <P>As far as a per tick cap on aggro and stuff because of the way Wards work versus HoT's or Reactives, once again, we've already been dealing with MORE aggro than a Ward can generate when using our direct heals.  Still no different than what we've been dealing with for months.</P> <P> </P>

[Trathe]

I just hope our cast time goes back to 1 second if our recast time is going to still be 13 seconds.  To be frank I like the quick cast time and could deal with the 13 recast time.  But adding a sec to the cast time and not bring back down the recast time to coincide with Druids and Clerics major direct heal spells.

[Dragonreal]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dragonrealms wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR>Yes, it did.  And it's becoming a REAL issue for Druids in particular who had some HoT components attached to help supplement a lower intial value to the direct.  The initial data I have from Furies in particular is quite alarming.<BR><BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Only wardens can be alarmed by the removal of the secondary regen component because furies did not have this effect on their heals (they got buffs instead). I have yet to find any good info from the warden side with the changes though and the removal of the secondary effects scares the hell outta me =/ <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I disagree, Furies have real reason to be alarmed as well.  Current data indicates that their heals are SUPER low - as if a secondary HoT effect SHOULD be there but isn't.  I mean it's really really bad.  Check the worksheet, I believe I've got most of the Fury info updated in there and it is glaringly obvious.  <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>At least the furies get some small bit of help with that one buff that was changed to in combat regen (yes I know 89/tick isn't a whole lot, but it's still more than what wardens have since the warden equivalent to the fury +hpregen was a +pow regen and both those buffs were originally out of combat only). Warden regens ahve always been exactly the same amount as fury regens (except for lvl 50 one which furies don't have at all); the only diferences was that wardens had the secondary regens on directs (furies did not ever have this in any form) and wardens had two lines of defensive regen procs. My point was that furies didn't have this component and honestly if they got it and wardens were left wihtout, I would be very peeved about that, especially since they've already stripped wardens of their elemental buffs and given those to the furies, or so the one thread wardens have on their forums about the changes says.</P> <P>What I would have liked to see was one druid class getting the secondary regen effects, thus extra stacking ability, while the other one got very large regen numbers with normal sized directs; idk if anyone else thought of that or would like it but I think it would've been fair. And by very large numbers I mean at lvl 50 have 500-600 per tick like you could get on eqoa.</P>

[Scrav]

A few additional notes which i don't think have been mentioned yet. The prohecy line is now a 1 concentration point spell. Fading Spirit is no longer a self ward, rather a group cure poison/mind on a 2 minute timer... I hear that the bear form line is a 3 conc spell now, but I haven't confirmed it yet. <div></div>

[AdiX__Styxx__]

<P>Banditman YOU rock thank you for sharing all of this wiht the community!</P> <P>My first choice of my toon was a gnome defiler! I just enjoyed the idea of a different way of healing till i started noticing differences in the power usage wiht teh exact same tank and the exact same encounter. So what did i do reroll? no not yet!</P> <P>I made my defiler a provisioner so i could regen faster then other healers and didnt heal or ward the next battle till the tank was in yellow, and my powerbar was full again! This became very tedious to be almost oop every fight tho so thats when i decided to make a new toon and stash away my defiler (Shakes head yes i know, i got no backbone)</P> <P>So i made a guardian and loved every second of it into lvl 50, Tanked a buncha epics soloed iceberg and some other powerfull named mobs which shouldnt be soloable and figured that this class was way overpowered.....</P> <P>So i rerolled again, as a coercer this time with the only knowledge that they get charm! So i XP and XP and XP till lvl 37.6 and finally get charm and to my astonishment (i did have a lotta fun with it) the spell was broke as in keeping the buffs after charm wears off droppin all the hate that was generated my the MT and in the end it became an evac spell by collapsing the game to char select!</P> <P>I still love my chanter very much and got her upto lvl 47 now, heck my guild loves her M1 clarity spell witha  60 regen!</P> <P>Now with the revamp, They are kicking my guardian in the groin HARD</P> <P>They are changing the meaning of playing a coercer totally (see the chanter changes) as in nerfing the clarity lines down to shreds and giving us some more cc and nerfing our mezzes But giving us huge dps upgrades! So not sure how that works out!</P> <P>What makes me very happy is that i finally can play my first choice of class and race, my defiler, i love that lil gnome she is so funny and after revamp she will be immensily powerfull i hope just as powerfull as wardens are or will be after revamp since wardens just OWN the priests!</P> <P>Soe you might have messed up my second choice classes but at least i got my gnome back, Thx a lot banditman for all yer good efforts and time ya put it this to inform us about the changes keep up the good work! /cry pinks away a tear of happyness!</P>

[Banditman]

<DIV>Yes, Ursine line is now 3 CP's, and thus, useless.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Even when solo'ing, its easier to just stick Prophecy/Omen/Auspice on and all your other buffs.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Avatar now uses a CP as well.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm a little miffed about that.  Either Avatar is toggleable or it's a CP, not both.</DIV>

[aprilstor]

<DIV>Is it really a 33% decrease in DPS (mourning soul) Seems like a lot not that Im complaining...just afraid they giveth and taketh away</DIV>

[Scrav]

<span><blockquote><hr>aprilstorme wrote:<div>Is it really a 33% decrease in DPS (mourning soul) Seems like a lot not that Im complaining...just afraid they giveth and taketh away</div><hr></blockquote>It used to be, but I think it has been nearly halfed since then.</span><div></div>

[Stormbil]

Is there any hope of lowering the CP for the ursine line?  It would be VERY disappointing to have this line rendered basically useless because of excessive CPs required. <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Jays]

<P>If "Avatar" takes a concentration slot does that mean it is now a group spell?</P> <P>Ummari </P> <P>Lvl 50 Mystic of Synergy</P> <P>Splitpaw server</P>

[Scrav]

<span><blockquote><hr>Jaysee wrote:<div></div> <p>If "Avatar" takes a concentration slot does that mean it is now a group spell?</p> <p>Ummari </p> <p>Lvl 50 Mystic of Synergy</p> <p>Splitpaw server</p><hr></blockquote>No</span><div></div>

[2of]

<P>Banditman, in exchange for this post I offer to have your children.</P> <P>Thanks for giving me something to look forward to.</P>

[FelixDomesticus]

<span><blockquote><hr>Banditman wrote:<div>Yes, Ursine line is now 3 CP's, and thus, useless.</div> <div> </div> <div>Even when solo'ing, its easier to just stick Prophecy/Omen/Auspice on and all your other buffs.</div> <div> </div> <div>Avatar now uses a CP as well.</div> <div> </div> <div>I'm a little miffed about that.  Either Avatar is toggleable or it's a CP, not both.</div><hr></blockquote>No spell is worth 3 CPs. Or if they are stats should be godly and I doubt that SOE will make it so.</span><div></div>

[Banditman]

I must assume they are removing the Ursine line soon, it is certainly not worth the 3 CP's, or even 2 CP's.  It's basically just a Prophecy with added mitigation now, since the Maul effect has now been removed.  (thx SOE). Since none of us can afford 3 CP's for the minor mitigation, its a goner for sure.

[FelixDomesticus]

Just out of interest: are the fizzle and interrupt rates a huge in test as they are now in live? Some mobs seem to interrupt you with almost every hit. <div></div>

[Trathe]

<span><blockquote><hr>Banditman wrote:I must assume they are removing the Ursine line soon, it is certainly not worth the 3 CP's, or even 2 CP's.  It's basically just a Prophecy with added mitigation now, since the Maul effect has now been removed.  (thx SOE). Since none of us can afford 3 CP's for the minor mitigation, its a goner for sure. <hr></blockquote>This is sad indeed man.. just plain blows.  What is the point of it then?  Bear Illusion?  Come on now..</span><div></div>

[Banditman]

Yes and no. Yes, I am getting interrupted a LOT on Test.  But in the end, it doesn't matter.  (Weird). I've been working over a group of mobs that consists of two triple downs and two double downs (new con system) with the encounter marked as a solo encounter.  I believe this is a L52 group, might have been 51, I just don't remember. Anyway, pre-pull I throw up Umbral Ritual and pull with Howl of the Ancients.  I try to do this from distance and queue up Fury of the Ancients right behind Howl.  This allows me to take some HP off so that the STA debuff portion of Howl is useful. The key is that Fury needs to land before the mobs get to me, because once they do I'm going to be spending the next 10 to 15 seconds stunned.  Once that initial flurry is over, the stuns pretty much stop.  It's pretty rare that anything aside from a CA will stun, and the mobs are blowing all their power in that first 15 seconds. In short, I'm not having any significant trouble solo'ing a yellow 4 mob group that is designated as a solo encounter. I did some small group stuff last night, with a Monk tanking and a 46 Ranger as DPS.  We were taking out ^^^ Heroics, ^^ Heroic groups and ^ Heroic groups. The ^^^ Heroics were no problem.  Monk easily held aggro and keeping up with healing was significantly easier than on live.  Wards were lasting at least 10 seconds, sometimes even 20 seconds.  Word of warning:  DO YOUR MANASTONE QUEST!  Power consumption is a major major issue! The ^^ Heroics came in groups of two, and this is where we started having problems.  The Monk was having trouble keeping aggro on the off target mobs.  The mob he had targeted was nothing, aggro stayed put, but the off target mobs were peeling to me. When we did the ^ Heroics we got groups of 3 and 4 mobs, and the peeling was even worse. In short, Monks, and I'm sure other Tank classes, are currently in need of greater aggro management tools for the off target mobs.

[FelixDomesticus]

I asked about fizzles as pure caster classes seem to have real troubles with them in live servers atm. It seems that SOE did something around Splitpaw live that increased fizzles and interruptions to alarming level. Based on my test with my warlock alt I cannot solo bears in TS anymore as they interrupt me with almost every hit. And when I do not get interrupted I fizzle. It is not that bad with my mystic, but still very clearly noticeable and very annoying if you solo. <div></div>

[Banditman]

Remember, you can only fizzle a spell that is white or greater. Since spell scaling is going away, only one or two spells in your entire lineup will be white at any one time . . . .

[noahwik]

<P>and the new slow at lvl 50 does????</P> <P>thanks in advance,,,</P>

[icetower]

<DIV>Could you expand on the power consumption issue?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If wards are lasting 10 seconds why would we be using a lot of power?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Also in relation to preferred healers, how are templars and wardens comparing in terms of keeping groups alive, and do they use similar amounts of power to do the same job?</DIV>

[Amand]

<FONT color=#ff00ff>First of all let me say "THANK YOU" for your post (Banditman). I'm happy to read that the wards are basically doing what they are supposed to be doing all along, "warding". The thing that worries me, and that I use for soloing and dmg, is the reduction of the Ursine line. That extra maul helps, since I can't for the life of me find a spear that I would choose over a mace or a scourge, Another player mentioned that we will have access to "Great Spears", which might be nice if implemented properly. I already have shadowy attendent at Master 1 (can't use it yet), so hopefully the furry little guy will remain as useful as you have mentioned. I have a couple of rubies to make spells with and was wondring which spells I should upgrade (Im a lvl 41 mystic, close to 42 tho).</FONT> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#cc66ff>Thanks for all your info,</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#cc66ff></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#cc66ff>Cristina</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Banditman]

<div></div>Power consumption: While our spells now all cost less and do more, DPS has taken a SERIOUS beating in this revamp.  Not just Fighers, but EVERYONE's DPS.  Thus, combat now takes a LOT longer . . . and I do mean a LOT longer. On Sunday evening, myself and a Monk from my guild we killing some L52-L53 Heroic mobs.  The con system has changed considerably, they are listed as triple ups, but they are basically a 1 mob encounter that would probably be equivalent to what is currently a double up Heroic. This Monk is no slacker by any means.  Prismatic, Cryptic Reinforced Tunic, Sixta's Knuckles, etc. It took us, literally, 6+ minutes to kill the ONE mob. With the duration decrease on many of our spells, you find yourself debuffing repeatedly.  Howl is almost too much trouble to maintain over the course of a fight, Chimerik definitely is. I used my Manastone as often as I could, had a Translucent Clarity that I used twice, GEB's, Prismatic, Battlement of the Mind ring and still wound up with 30% or less power.  Your average garden variety Mystic could not have kept that up.  It would have wiped the duo. We then added a Ranger to the mix, and still wound up with a lot of down time in between mobs.  I was probably coming in around 40 - 50% power at that point, garden variety Mystic would probably have found the fight difficult but do-able.   The Ranger and Monk were DRAINED completely. I havent had a chance to compare myself to another healer in a real situation at this point, server population is simply too low.  However, there are still some fairly glaring problems with the balance picture.  The chart I'm keeping is still being updated, but you can start to see some alarming trends there. Our badger has been sent back to the useless pile I'm afraid.  Changes coming faster than you can track at this point. I might wait until combat changes settle a little more before deciding, unless of course you don't have Ancestral Aegis, Rejuvenating Chant and Enlightened Healing at Adept 3.  Those are your three big ones for that tier. <p>Message Edited by Banditman on <span class=date_text>08-09-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:40 AM</span>

[Slain]

<P>Questions for Banditman:</P> <P>So what is the overall feel of the changes to Mystics?  Good, Bad or Meh? </P> <P>Wards and Heals seem to be great and good respectively from the posts I see here.  Would you agree?</P> <P>Buffs are not changed considerably except for the nerfing of a couple? (Prophetic Guard)  </P> <P>What about the rumored changes to melee DPS (supposed to be boosted) and Armor/Sheild values?  Are you getting hit less often but harder?  More often but for less?  Are you happy with the increased DPS you're getting off your weapon?</P> <P>The Ursine forms change is a freaking nightmare.  That's the defining "self-only" spell for the class.  I don't go anywhere without bear form up.  Nerfing that is simply [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot].  We need to complain loudly about this.</P> <P>Have our Direct Damage spells been changed any?  I always thought the Grey Wind line was a little underpowered.  </P> <DIV>Thanks for the fantastic chart, post and follow-ups.  You rock.</DIV>

[Banditman]

<span><blockquote><hr>Slainte wrote:<p>Questions for Banditman:</p> <p>So what is the overall feel of the changes to Mystics?  Good, Bad or Meh? </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">Equal parts each.  Wards are good, though perhaps not yet balanced (still too weak perhaps).  A lot of our debuffs got smacked around and durations decreased.</font> </p> <p>Wards and Heals seem to be great and good respectively from the posts I see here.  Would you agree? </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">Wards work.  They are dead sexy healing now.  Minor Healing line is fairly power efficient for me, but I'm sitting on a Master 1.  Arch Healing is still inefficient but it does work.</font> </p> <p>Buffs are not changed considerably except for the nerfing of a couple? (Prophetic Guard) </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">I wouldn't go that far.  Runic Talisman is kinda messy atm, but potentially a superior buff.  Bear form got it's guts stomped out recently.  Prophecy is better, nearly to the useful point now, but needs some tuning to balance with what other Priests get in that line.  Avatar sucks.  1 CP + toggle?  Bogus.  Eidolic Mettle is pretty much unchanged.  Spirit of the Elephant is bigger stats now, considerably bigger.  Still not convinced that it balances at the end game due to the diminishing returns as stats get more and more insane.</font> </p> <p>What about the rumored changes to melee DPS (supposed to be boosted) and Armor/Sheild values?  Are you getting hit less often but harder?  More often but for less?  Are you happy with the increased DPS you're getting off your weapon? </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">I get hit FAR more often but for less damage.  When solo'ing, expect to spend the first 15 seconds of the fight stunned.  My melee is insignificant, even with a Prismatic mace.</font> </p> <p>The Ursine forms change is a freaking nightmare.  That's the defining "self-only" spell for the class.  I don't go anywhere without bear form up.  Nerfing that is simply [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot].  We need to complain loudly about this. </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">It is being discussed.  Heatedly.</font> </p> <p>Have our Direct Damage spells been changed any?  I always thought the Grey Wind line was a little underpowered. </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">They now cost less power and hit for a little less in actual game situations.</font> </p> <div>Thanks for the fantastic chart, post and follow-ups.  You rock. <font color="#ff0000">np.</font> </div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[disru]

Bandit, Did wardens/furies/defilers get a similar change to their form self buff spells? <div></div>

[Banditman]

I have not seen it reported yet, but for some reason some Priest classes are being remarkably closed to sharing information. I personally think it would be better to get all the information on the table right now and make sure that balance is served across all sub-Classes in the Archtype, and that's what I'm driving for with that worksheet.  However, there is a lot of resistance to change, and a lot of unhappiness that is clouding the waters and making good information more difficult to come by than it should be. I can say that MANY abilities across all Archtypes are getting this "Three CP nerf" thrown at them, and no one is happy about it.  I personally can't think of any single ability in the game that is so ungodly powerful that it should require a 3 CP cost of the user.

[Amand]

<FONT color=#cc99ff>Ack! Why did they "nerf" the badger  pet (yet agian, is there anything that could be done about that?). I'm glad I did not waste any money on the Avatar Master 1 that is on my broker. As for Adept 3's I have Ancestral Ageis at adept 3, and Enlightened Helaing also. Rejuvinating chant, well the scholars are not making it and the price for rhodium and rubies on Najena are insane (about 3 plat). However if i survive long enough in Lavastorm, I'll try to mine some more rubies.</FONT> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff66ff>Thanks, </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff66ff>Cristina</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff66ff></FONT> </DIV>

[Ellywen]

<P>Ugh, they nerfed the badger again?  There's been a Shadowy Attendant Master 1 sitting in our guild vault for a while, and myself and another mystic were all ready to go to bid wars on it... ugh, I was really hoping they were going to make that spell useful finally ><</P> <P> </P> <P>One question - I know you said that healing spells on the same line share a reuse timer now.  Does rejuvenating chant share a timer with the splitpaw expansion cure (I love that thing, I can spam it and my power never drops).  Also, were there any changes to the SP cure?</P>

[Banditman]

The SP heal is now a worthless piece of garbage.  Remember, the "neat" thing about this spell in Live is that it continues to grow with you.  So, it's significantly better at L50 than it is at L40. In the revamp, it's a L20 spell, and maxes out there. Revamp is still painting with the roller though, so there may yet be adjustments coming.  Better info by the end of the weekend I hope.

[Fae]

<DIV><STRONG><FONT color=#ffcc00>*** Combat Changes ***<BR></FONT></STRONG><BR>- The health and power of all NPCs has been decreased. This will be most noticeable in heroic and epic encounters.<BR>- Epic encounters will provide greater threat in the form of slightly increased damage. <BR>- Spell casters now make use of a skill called Focus. It is raised by casting spells while being attacked. The Focus skill will be maxed out at the character's current level.<BR>- Your chance to be interrupted while casting is now determined by your Focus skill and the amount of damage being done by your attacker.<BR><STRONG>- Healing spells generate less hate when healing the opponent's main target, and will generate even less when healing someone who is not currently the opponent's main target.</STRONG><BR>- Mitigation values have been spread more evenly across armor slots. Chest and leg slots still provide slightly greater mitigation, though less than they did before. This should make it more beneficial to wear high-mitigation armor in every slot.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG><FONT color=#ffcc00>*** Combat Changes ***<BR><BR></FONT>- Reduced the chance to be interrupted if you take damage while casting, and increased the effectiveness of focus buffs/debuffs.</STRONG><BR>- Resurrection effects should now work properly.</DIV>

[Karlen]

<strong><font color="#ffff00">- Reduced the chance to be interrupted if you take damage while casting, and <font color="#ff00ff">increased the effectiveness of focus buffs/debuffs.</font></font> <font color="#ffffff"><b>What is a focus buff?</b></font> </strong><div></div>

[Banditman]

Apparently, there are buffs that add to your Focus skill now. Focus is the skill that is checked to see if you can continue casting when you take damage.  It's like the Channeling skill in EQLive. My guess is that Mages have these buffs, but it is JUST a guess at this point.

[Dragonreal]

Would it be possible to get info on the cure spells (disregarding the trainings)? Wardens finally got some screens posted on their forums and I saw that one of our t5 deaggro spells has become a group elemental/trauma cure, so was wondering if anything like this happened to any other hlrs. Also kinda think it should be put into the chart as well since that's also a current balance issue on live.

[Onz]

Thx for the comparison Bandit.....Are you planning a spell by spell summary at any point? Or does anyone know whether there is such a post I have not seen any... <div></div>

[Banditman]

<P>Yes, I am working on a spell by spell chart.  I've come across a tool that will allow me to make VERY accurate comparisons between all 6 priets.</P> <P> </P> <P>Yes, one of our aggro droppers was also turned into some sort of cure, I'll have to get those on the next pass since I'm already half done with getting full data lines.</P> <P>I hope to have a completely reworked chart up tomorrow at some point with the Mystic, Templar and Warden data on it in directly comparable form.  I'll be working on the Defiler, Inquisitor and Fury data this weekend if all goes well.</P> <P>Once that pass is done, I'll go back and look at some of the weird changes (like the de-aggro change) that keep popping up.</P>

[Dragonreal]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR> <P>Yes, I am working on a spell by spell chart.  I've come across a tool that will allow me to make VERY accurate comparisons between all 6 priets.</P> <P> </P> <P>Yes, one of our aggro droppers was also turned into some sort of cure, I'll have to get those on the next pass since I'm already half done with getting full data lines.</P> <P>I hope to have a completely reworked chart up tomorrow at some point with the Mystic, Templar and Warden data on it in directly comparable form.  I'll be working on the Defiler, Inquisitor and Fury data this weekend if all goes well.</P> <P>Once that pass is done, I'll go back and look at some of the weird changes (like the de-aggro change) that keep popping up.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Oddly enough... I seriously don't remember posting that question here... I know I did in templar forums but I swear I didn't do it here.. -_-; [Removed for Content] Oh well, I'm goin' batty I guess.. thanks for the reply though =)

[Drefane]

First of all Bandit thank so much for all the info and input your giving us....I know we haven't always seen eye to eye on the mystic class but your input is invaluable.   I saw someone say in server wide chat today that priest class power wasn't going to be wisdom based anymore but all casters were going to be Intelligence based?  I looked in the updates but couldn't find that .....any insight to that comment?  God I hope they are wrong I have a lot invested in getting my wisdom over 200. <div></div>

[Karlen]

<span><blockquote><hr>Larryhg3 wrote:First of all Bandit thank so much for all the info and input your giving us....I know we haven't always seen eye to eye on the mystic class but your input is invaluable.   I saw someone say in server wide chat today that priest class power wasn't going to be wisdom based anymore but all casters were going to be Intelligence based?  I looked in the updates but couldn't find that .....any insight to that comment?  God I hope they are wrong I have a lot invested in getting my wisdom over 200. <div></div><hr></blockquote>But with a high wisdom, you will be protected from enemy spells?</span><div></div>

[Terq]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Larryhg3 wrote:<BR>First of all Bandit thank so much for all the info and input your giving us....I know we haven't always seen eye to eye on the mystic class but your input is invaluable.   I saw someone say in server wide chat today that priest class power wasn't going to be wisdom based anymore but all casters were going to be Intelligence based?  I looked in the updates but couldn't find that .....any insight to that comment?  God I hope they are wrong I have a lot invested in getting my wisdom over 200.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I really can't imagine this being the case.  Everything since the begining of time in MMO's has always had priest power based off wisdom.  I really wouldn't worry about this right now. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>There has been some confusion as to what effect, if any, intellegence would have on our heals.  Some believe a higher int will make the heals more potent.  I have not seen anything to substantiate this though.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Eepop]

<div></div>Woah woah woah folks....int has and wont* have anything to do with priest power. The confusion is that Int will play a part in adding a damage modifier to all damage spells(priest, mage, some abilities of other classes too).  That is it.  Doesnt effect heals, our power pools, buffs, debuffs, or anything else except damage spells. When we nuke something, our int is checked against our targets wisdom, and there is some modifier to damage based on that.  The reverse is also true when we get nuked. * Yes Im in beta. <div></div><p>Message Edited by Eepop on <span class=date_text>08-12-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:24 AM</span>

[Drefane]

Thanks Eopop that is how I was reading it too.....however, this person in the public chat was ADAMANT that I was incorrect.  So much so that I decided to come ask those who are "in the know" you that are in beta.  

[Eepop]

I think the main problem for that person was a tag team of misinformation and a temporary stint on beta of power guzzling combat.  Since then mob hp's have been tuned and power consumption isnt nearly as bad now. I can easily see someone hearing that int will effect the "power of our nukes" and seeing that thier power is running out fast in combat.  Then they reason that since they are running out of power thier pool must be smaller because int is effecting the power cost of thier spells.  But that would a slew of incorrect inferences. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Again 100% certain... Intelligence only plays a role in the amount of damage done by damage spells by providing a modifier when compared to the targets wis.  No spells except for damage spells are affected in any way.  No power cost is affected in any way. Yes I am being repetitive for the sake of stopping misinformation from spreading further. <div></div>

[Banditman]

Exactly so.  There was a tuning done that sped combat up considerably recently. INT does not have any noticeable effects on our ability to perform our primary function, Healing.

[Sacha]

<DIV> <DIV>(repost: was posted in Tester forum, but should belong here really)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As a Mystic I was utterly thrilled (read totally beside myself with glee) to get Fading Spirit Master 1 spell. For those unfamilliar, it is (was) the upgrade to (my now grey) Eidolic Ward, the emergency ward that has no casting time and no power usage, but a very long re-use timer.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Today in Splitpaw I was jumped by 2 yellow Fanatics half way through a fight with a Usurper. Couldn't get a ward up (thanks to the loss of parry, and the new interrupts, and focus is not yet high enough) so thought "ahh I know, time for my faithful Emergency Master Ward."  Hit the icon, started casting. Casting? But it has no casting time!? Interrupted 6 times, died, then took the time to check why my most loved of spells had failed me.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Imagine my surprise when I read: <EM>"Cures noxious and arcane impairments on the mystics group"</EM>   A<STRONG> CURE</STRONG>??<STRONG>.</STRONG>  My Emergency, no-cast-time, no-power, save-yer-butt, 930-point <STRONG>MASTER</STRONG> Ward is now a cure?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I would laugh if it wasn't so tragic.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Please...tell me this is a bug. </DIV></DIV>

[Banditman]

Uhh . . . Fading Spirit is not technically a Ward, it's an aggro dropper.  The Ward attached was a secondary function. Wards of the Eidolon is the spell you're looking for.

[Sacha]

<DIV>Really? The description has the ward as primary function and lists the hate reduction as an "and also".</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But either way, Eidolic Ward is grey and useless. Fading Spirit was a life-saving emergency ward which shielded me from 930 points of damage at Master 1. Until yesterday that is.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Very big loss for my Mystic.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Sacha on <span class=date_text>08-12-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:41 PM</span>

[Banditman]

<div></div>Ok, I've found a way to get the data for all Priest classes at the App 1 level, which will allow for direct comparisons between all Priests. I've only had time to do the "good" or "defensive" sub-Classes so far (Mystic, Templar, Warden).  You really kinda have to know what all the spells do when you go to compare the non-grouped spells. <a href="http://mail.thetemplars.net/lines_beta2.htm" target="_blank">App 1 Priest Comparison</a> I'll work on the "evil" or "offensive" sub-Classes this weekend. Feel free to discuss, while keeping in mind that combat changes are still being painted with a very wide brush at this point.  I'm reserving commentary until I've had time to see the "dark side" as it were. <p>Message Edited by Banditman on <span class=date_text>08-12-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:31 PM</span>

[Vindale]

Can you take pics of all your skills and post em like some of the other classes have? <div></div>

[Banditman]

<P>That is not what I am attempting to do.</P> <P>Screenshots do not allow easy comparison across the Archtype, which is my goal.  I'll leave the screenshots to others.</P>

[Nacire]

Wow, from what I can see sofar it seems mystics will still be the bottom level healers, and unfortunately still the lowest dps.  In a few areas we heal a little faster, but in most cases are FAR outstripped by templars and wardens.  I realize these are still changing and raw numbers don't show how it'll really play out but it does seem that even after the fix us shaman will the the low end.

[Banditman]

<P> </P> <P>Rest assured that if the final numbers do not improve, there will be some significant complaining.  While I understand perhaps why Wards need to be a little less powerful than the heals of other classes, I currently think that it is too much.  Perhaps my analysis of the "evil" Priests will change my mind, but it may convince me even further of some potential discrepancies.</P>

[Fae]

<DIV>Do you really think shamans can't heal? That would be silly to make a class completely unable to do it's job.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Templars are too boring and druids are too fragile. Why do you believe shamans are unable to heal effectively?</DIV>

[Banditman]

<P> </P> <P>Did you review and digest the chart I posted ?</P>

[SweetSyc]

Thanks much Banditman for posting that app1 chart. Those numbers are very encouraging! <div></div>

[Lonespir]

<DIV> <P><SPAN>First of all, a big thanks to Banditman for all of the information that you've given and effort that you've put in to keep us all updated on the combat changes.</SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN>I must say that I had been looking forward to the combat changes with some optimism.  It had been evident for quite a while that there were serious shortcomings with the abilities of the class.  The expectation of fixes to these problems, and balancing the classes, prevented me from retiring my Mystic, and re-rolling as a different class.  The principle of how a mystic functions is what had appealed to me originally when I chose my class, and it still does.   Less and less fun (the main reason why we all play the game) was to be found though in playing a Mystic that struggled to fulfil its role at its level.  I have reached level 43 with my Mystic, but progress has slowed up considerably due to the lack of enjoyment.  I have been more content to see what the changes bring, and in the meantime, help lower level guildies/friends and craft.  </SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN>I have also created a character on Test.  It is still too low a level character though for any meaningful assessment of the changes let alone a direct comparison between the characters.  I must say that I am having more fun playing on Test.  It's not possible to say though whether this is a direct result of the combat changes, or just being at a low level where things are still possible.</SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN>My intention here was to comment on the comparison table provide by Banditman, and not to ramble on so much.  I appreciate that so far there is no data for the more offensive classes: Defiler, Fury, and Inquisitor.  It is, however, possible to comment on the other defensive classes which should, if a rebalance is successful, be comparable to each other.  As things stand at present though this is not true, and is highly disappointing.  There is still almost a month before the changes go live so I still have some hope that matters will be put right.  It is grossly simplifying the situation, but as far as I see it what is needed is that mystics, wardens, and templars should all have very similar healing ability at the same level: single target, group, and special heals.  The dps from each of these classes should also be comparable.  Buffs/debuffs are more difficult, but at the end of the day the buffs/debuffs provided to each class should provide a comparable benefit.  The situation between defilers, inquisitors, and furies should be the same.  The relationship between the defensive and offensive classes: defensive would suggest to me slightly improved healing at the expense of dps, and to be more buff orientated.  Offensive would be the reverse: slightly lower healing with increased dps and more debuffs.</SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN>With Minor Healing Mystics are at all levels very power efficient with the HPp figures, but are lacking when it comes down to the HPs values.  Saving power may all be very good, but not if you're unable to heal at a rate that balances the damage.  Wardens are even worse off than Mystics on this spell line.</SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN>Arch Healing is a similar situation except we don't even have the benefit of being the most power efficient class. </SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN>Mystics actually seem to fare the best with group heals.  We have both the best power efficiency, and heal rate at all levels it would seem.  Wardens have very poor ability with this spell line, but do benefit from quick cast times.  I do wonder what the experience is with interrupts and long cast times.</SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN>As far as special heals are concerned both single target and group, perhaps you can expand on the reasoning why wards should be any less powerful than other classes special heals.  The fact that mitigation is now taken into consideration is definitely a major improvement, but the figures would seem to suggest that wards are still lacking in overall power, and are inefficient.</SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN>The group hp buff provides exactly the same benefit at all levels across the classes with just a variance on the resistance enhanced.  Whilst the Templar class buff details are not available, I would suspect that they are similar to the other classes with just a different stats enhanced.   I find it very hard to compare the AC buffs for equality.  The same goes for the single target buffs.  Not easy for me at least to comment on whether they each provide the same amount of benefit but in different ways.</SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN>Instant damage spell lines do not appear to be balanced at all.  Other than at low levels, where there is a slight discrepancy, Mystics and Templars are evenly matched, but Wardens are superior in this respect both in terms of power efficiency and dps.  The situation is even worse when it comes to the DoT spells.  Wardens again having an advantage with these spells, but Templars have higher dps also.</SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN>Clearly there appears to be a lot more done before the classes are truly balanced.  I just have to hope that this is achieved in the end, and that there will be something to look forward to when the changes go live.</SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#000000 size=3></FONT> </P></DIV>

[Banza]

<DIV>What frustrates me is that they are still doing "sweeping changes" when these "fixes" were first referenced 3+ months ago.  In reference to what I read from posts, how can a spell like Shadowy Attendant go from being very useful one day to arguably worthless the next?  The game designers should have had a table like Banditman has for each and every class, and the direction they were taking should have been cemented long ago.  From what I am reading, I doubt that's the case.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I am definitely of the mindset that I have seen of some posts that come Sept 12 (after all the downtime), things will be broken worse than now.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thank you for all the work and information, Banditman.  You're spending a lot of time doing SoE's work for them, and I hope (for everyone) that it pays off.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Banditman]

<div></div><div></div>Ok, a lot of changes in this new version. <a href="http://mail.thetemplars.net/lines_beta3.htm" target="_blank">App 1 Priest Comparison</a> The tables at the very bottom are very messy and very incomplete, but I did get data added for Fury and Inquisitor spells.  I tried to do Defiler but was unable to do so due to a bug.  Hopefully the bug will be gone and I'll be able to get Defiler data this week. My level of understanding is growing the more Priests I do.  I was able to assimilate a lot more of the overall picture once I had Fury and Inquisitor data.  I added new tables for AE Damage sub-Class and DoT Damage sub-Class as well as finally being able to place the missing Cleric "buff" - which turned out not to be a buff at all. I must admit that I'm currently very puzzled by what is going on in the Druid Class.  With the exception of AE and sub-Class DoT, Wardens are out DPS'ing the Furies while Furies are slightly out Healing Wardens.  Very puzzling. Overall, I'd say there still needs to be a serious balance pass taken on the 5 main lines across the Archtype, because right now it doesn't look very balanced.<p>Message Edited by Banditman on <span class=date_text>08-15-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:44 AM</span>

[Kana]

<DIV>At first glance, our wards seemed alarmingly inefficient when compared to the other specialty heals.  For example, the HP/p ratio for Ancestral Aegis is 30% less than everyone else.  I realize that our new wards are *perfect* heals in the sense that they heal for the exact amount of damage taken, and as such need to have smaller heal value (or longer recast), but 30%?  Seems a bit much.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now, I could swallow that discrepancy if there was a trade-off with HP/s.  Take the Warden spell Chloroplast:  It has a high HP/p ratio (6.1), but the trade-off is the lower HP/s ratio (43.5).  In comparison, the Ancestral Aegis ratios are 4.0 and 59.1.  Okay, so my wards aren't quite as efficient, but I can *heal* more quickly when I need to.  Seems fair, on paper at least.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>However, take a look at the Cleric ratios.  Much higher HP/s <STRONG>AND</STRONG> HP/p.  They can heal 50% more HPs per second, and can do it 50% more efficiently.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Unless I'm misinterpreting the data, this doesn't seem "equal but different".</DIV>

[Banditman]

You have not misinterpreted the data. I agree that certain trade-offs could be balanced, but your interpretation of Clerics vs other Healers seems rather on the accurate side to me.

[Fingolfin2]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kanali wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>.....  Take the Warden spell Chloroplast:  It has a high HP/p ratio (6.1), but the trade-off is the lower HP/s ratio (43.5).  In comparison, the Ancestral Aegis ratios are 4.0 and 59.1.  Okay, so my wards aren't quite as efficient, but I can *heal* more quickly when I need to.  Seems fair, on paper at least.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>However, take a look at the Cleric ratios.  Much higher HP/s <STRONG>AND</STRONG> HP/p.  They can heal 50% more HPs per second, and can do it 50% more efficiently.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Unless I'm misinterpreting the data, this doesn't seem "equal but different".</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Please note that for chloroplast to be that efficient the person being healed can not be at full health at any time during its duration to maintain that HP/p ratio. That can be a significant dent in its efficiency. Personally I feel druids are lacking in HP/s which may make it difficult for them to keep MTs alive when compared to both shamans and clerics. Clerics are clearly superior at all aspects of healing.<BR>

[Eepop]

Yes, but by the same token, regeneration spells are the only specialty heal that can "heal" when a person isnt being attacked.  Wards just sit there and reactives aren't triggered. That said, I do agree that regens need some more oomph  so to speak.  I think they either need to up the values of the tics, or make the tics much closer together. My warden would prefer the second  I think.  Small bursts but one every second or less.  <div></div>

[Banditman]

<div></div>I agree, Druids need some help in HPs areas because of how HoT's work.  If I were king, I'd write Chloroplast like this: Chloroplast: Apprentice 1 Cast:  2 seconds Recast:  10 seconds Power:  220 Effect:  Heals 160 HP instantly plus 160 HP every 2 seconds for 14 seconds This would put Chloroplast at 80 HPs, 5.8 HPp . . . very much in line with what a Cleric can do, while still doing it "differently".  A Cleric could still knock out the entire heal amount of his Reactive in under 6 seconds, making his potential HPs much higher, but at least the differences would be differences and not crippling shortfalls. Druids are always going to have problems in the EQ2 system when large amounts of damage come irregularly.  HoT's are simply the worst thing to have.  Reactives though aren't much better for large amounts of damage at irregular intervals, Wards are actually best for that. Regens are exceptional, especially group Regens, for AE situations where you know you have time before the next AE hits for the Regen to do it's work.  Reactives and Wards both do nothing for that type of situation. But here we are discussing situational things, and that is what we should be discussing if balance is served.  Each Priest should shine in certain situations, where others may struggle, with none being best in all.<p>Message Edited by Banditman on <span class=date_text>08-15-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:35 PM</span>

[Kana]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR> <P>Each Priest should shine in certain situations, where others may struggle, with none being best in all.</P> <P> <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Perfectly stated.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I really don't like the EQLive mentality that Clerics should surpass all in healing power.  If it were that way, Druids would at least have higher DPS.  Where would our niche be?  Buffs?  Oh wait, we get slow.....:smileywink:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Hopefully these changes will acheive the balance we were promised.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thanks Bandit, btw, for all your efforts.  They are greatly appreciated.</DIV>

[Spag]

<P>Personally I would like to see our regens stop ticking when the target is full health.  And start again when the target is no longer full health.  Both wards and reactives work this way, why not regens.</P>

[Banditman]

Incorrect. Wards are the only specialty Heal that works properly when a target is full health.  They are also by far and away, perhaps too far in fact, the lowest value specialty Heals on the chart at this point. Reactives will still fire as soon as the target is hit.  If the Reactive has a value of 150 HP and the blow is for 10 HP, that's 140 HP of wasted healing.  The healing on a Reactive actually comes AFTER the damage is done, which is very important to note both at the high end of the HP bar and even more importantly, at the low end. Frankly, no one should be worried about wasted healing at the top of a tanks HP bar.  If you are in the situation where your heals are being wasted at the top side of the HP bar, then Healing isn't really that big a deal anyway.  Just use smaller heals.

[Spag]

<DIV>Banditman, </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I am not incorrect, I think you have to think about what I said one more time. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If a tank is full health neither a reactive or a ward are expending any HP, though the reactive may waste some HP getting to 100% health.  Both then lie in wait until there is more damage to be taken, and then take action as soon as the target takes (or in case of the ward, would have taken) damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Where as if the target is full health, a regen will continue to tick and waste HP.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The biggest case where this would be utilized is in the casting the special before the pull.  But is also helpful in at any point mid fight where a direct heal brings the target back up to full health.</DIV>

[Banditman]

You won't be doing that anymore, nor will anyone.  Casting a Heal before the tank taunts is pretty much the same as holding a big sign up over your head for the mobs to see that reads "Kill me first!".  Specialty heals are especially bad about this, regardless of flavor. Once again, if you are worried about wasted healing at the top of the bar, you've not seen enough of the "balancing" yet.  While this may be an issue in the Live game, it's not a big deal in the "re-balanced" game. All healers now must wait.  We simply can't afford the aggro of an early heal.  Fortunately, or perhaps unfortunately, combat is now slow enough that it's not an issue most of the time.  It could conceivably become an issue with some hard hitting raid mobs, Darathar comes to mind of course, where you simply can't afford to wait.  The test environment however is currently not very conducive to trying things of this nature. None of my combat revamp Priests are having trouble healing at the moment, but the bar is being raised little by little as a balance point is determined.  I am concerned about the HPs for both Druids, but their efficiency isn't any more or less problematic than any of the other Priests. The main thing I'm concerned with is getting the raw abilities of all Priests balanced.  Situational strength and weakness is part of the "equal but different" axiom.  Giving each Priest relatively equal tools is the goal.  How they use those tools to cover their weaknesses is up to them.

[Spag]

<DIV>I cannot say as to how it is on test, and the aggro generated by specials has always been in place for druids anyway, so the aggro is something that I am used to already.  Also, aggro while soloing is a non issue.  I am not basing my opinion on raid content, but more or less on the everyday grouping, duoing or soloing, where that free heal before the pull can be quite helpful. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I am not saying this is a necessary and I would quit if they did not do it, far from that.  More of just a subtle wish.  I am happy with my warden, but recognize that regens have no scalablity up or down, where as both reactives and wards do.  This change I mentioned would atleast let regens scale down a bit if necessary.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Again I am not delusional, I fully don't expect anything of this nature to even be considered.  Was just saying it would be nice to have some sort of scaling one way or another.</DIV>

[icetower]

<P>Ward may be the "perfect" heal in and of itself but i call Bullsh1t on it being so much better than reactive or regen that it needs to have such low hps/power.</P> <P>Assuming you dont precast on the tank (see aggro) then the tank will lose some hps at the start of the fight.</P> <P>Since wards dont heal back lost hps, <STRONG>then</STRONG> <STRONG>as an overall method of healing,</STRONG> "perfect" efficiency is lost because we have to cast a direct heal to increase hps.</P> <P>Once the tank has lost some hps, the reactive and regen can become the perfect heal because you may never need to cast a low efficiency direct heal during the fight.</P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <P>Message Edited by icetower on <SPAN class=date_text>08-17-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:17 AM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by icetower on <span class=date_text>08-17-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:14 AM</span>

[Banditman]

Not casting a Ward at the start of a fight doesn't negate their perfect efficiency.  They are still exactly the right size. I do agree that perhaps someone went overboard in adjusting for this.

[Eepop]

I would also rise a question to perfect efficiency. Perhaps on the main tank it can be perfectly efficient.  But on others it is not even near it. A mage pulls aggro and is getting beat, the tank turns to taunt the mob off. 1) Druid casts a regen, the mob is peeled off by the tank, and all the lost HPs are restored over time. 2) Cleric casts a reactive, the mob hits a couple times while the tank peels it off, reactive fires and the mage is healed significantly. 3) Shaman casts a ward, the ward absorbs some damage while the tank peels the mob off, and now the mage is at the same HPs he was at before you cast the ward. All could probably keep the mage alive, but the ward would be the least efficient at restoring him to full health. This is just one situation where they are not perfectly efficient, there are likely others.  To add further injury, this is a role that people have somewhat identified shamans with in the past. <div></div>

[Banditman]

That's also a good point.  What happens to the Mage if he pulls aggro a second time, after the Ward has dropped?

[Formangenavn]

A few things to remember when comparing special heals. Regen might have the same total HP heal and even better HP/p then Wards, but it needs 14 sek to heal that much. It does not help to recast it. You , however can <DIV>have a new ward on every 8 sec. That means you can prevent a lot more then we heal. Consider that when you say "but regen can actually heal hitpoints".</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Eepop said "Yes, but by the same token, regeneration spells are the only specialty heal that can "heal" when a person isnt being attacked.  Wards just sit there and reactives aren't triggered."</DIV> <P>Yes, under som conditions this might help us, but normally, if you are not beeing attacked, healing is not a problem as fight will also be over. You, as we, have direct heals for a reason.</P> <P>In many situations our HoTs will work just fine, so will everyone elses heals. But this is not important for thos picking a healer for grp or raid. They will ask themself, can this healer keep us alive when [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] hits the fence?</P> <P>If Warden goes live like he is today, they wil be smart to say no. :smileysad:</P> <DIV><BR></DIV>

[Banditman]

If you'd look at the chart you'd see that Wards aren't anywhere near the same number of hit points as the equivalent heal from either Druids, or god forbid, Clerics. No sense turning this into a "who can do it better" thread.  All of the classes have problems right now, and my aim is to call attention to the overall imbalance across classes, not compare sizes.

[Eepop]

Don't get me wrong, I have a warden as well as a mystic.  I was just saying that none of the heals are "prefectly efficient". I was in no way saying regens are perfect, they need a good bit of oomph added. I really dont want mystic to be any better than any other priest.  I want them all to be able to do the job equally well, so that I can have fun for years to come rolling up different priests. <span>:smileywink:</span> <div></div>

[icetower]

<DIV>How do you ensure balance then, if you don't compare sizes?</DIV>

[Banditman]

There is a lot more to it than size, and you've got to compare it, even at the raw Heal level, across 5 spells at a minimum. Using hypotheticals . . . A Templar may have a more powerful, but less efficient Arch Heal, while Mystics might have a faster more efficient Minor Heal.  That could be balanced, even though the "size" isn't the same. A Templar might have a superior line of "Special" Healing, but have completely inefficient and slow direct heals.  That could be balanced, even though size isn't the same. There are a ton of scenarios where balance could be achieved, without having things equal in "size". Once I get the Defiler data collected and integrated into the App 1 chart, I'll give you a rundown of where I think the balance is sitting.  The chart is there for everyone to see, digest and comment on in the meantime, and I hope that folks will look it over and make some well thought out comments based upon the data it contains.

[Spag]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR>That's also a good point.  What happens to the Mage if he pulls aggro a second time, after the Ward has dropped?<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>You either look at getting a new mage or a new tank  <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>------------------------------</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>One thing to keep in mind people, regens have absolutely 0 scalablility.  They heal x amount of health every x number of seconds.  Reactives and wards can both scale based on incoming damage.  In most cases this causes the regen to not be able to keep up with incoming mob damage, and we are forced to use direct heals to suppliment.  Once wards are fixed both shaman and clerics can easily get through encounters by simply using their single target and group target specials, and recasting when necessary.  Druids will still be stuck burning less efficient direct heals just to keep up with mob damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Also if anyone really thinks that the druid group regen is remotely efficient in everyday use, you have not thought about it long enough.  Lets just say it looks good on paper, and that's it.</DIV>

[Pocca]

Bandit - A couple of questions about your data: Special heals - Can the GROUP wards/reactives still be use by one person in the group (i.e. tank), while the HoT is spread over the whole group? If so, where did you arrive at the numbers for the HV for the druid classes? On the druid classes you list the cast and recast times but don't seem to take the "unload time" into consideration when calculating HPs.  What are the "unload times" for HoTs? Stacking - How do all of the special heals stack: 1) from the same healer (group + single target)? 2) between 2 healers of the same subclass (say 2 mystics both casting Ancestral Aegis)? <div></div>

[Banditman]

<span><blockquote><hr>Pocca wrote:Bandit - A couple of questions about your data: Special heals - Can the GROUP wards/reactives still be use by one person in the group (i.e. tank), while the HoT is spread over the whole group? <font color="#ff0000">Yes, one person can use the entire special heal of a group Ward or Reactive.  This can be a blessing or a curse depending on the situation.  Sometimes it's both at the same time.</font> If so, where did you arrive at the numbers for the HV for the druid classes? <font color="#ff0000">Basically, with Druids, I accounted for the fact that unlike a Ward or Reactive, their special heal is going to hit all 6 group members regardless.  It was either multiply the Druid numbers by 6, or divide the Shaman and Cleric numbers by 6.  Special Healing for a group is really weird, and you have to understand how each style works. As I said, Druids special Heal is always going to get all 6 players.  In the middle, a Reactive will USUALLY get all 6 players, provided it has 6 triggers left before expiring.  At the far end, a Group Ward will almost NEVER get all 6 members of the group. How you view that is up to you.  I can see uses for each one, and weaknesses in each one. </font> On the druid classes you list the cast and recast times but don't seem to take the "unload time" into consideration when calculating HPs.  What are the "unload times" for HoTs? <font color="#ff0000">Actually I did.  By "unload time", I assume you are talking about the duration of time it takes for the full power of the Regen to be expended upon its target.  If you'll notice, my chart shows the "recast" time of the Druid spells as much higher than the Cleric or Shaman ones.  This is because, as some folks have said, it does no good at all to recast a Regen until the prior Regen has expired.  So, when I am showing a 14 second recast on a Regen, what I'm really showing you is the total duration of the Regen.  That much at least I accounted for. </font> Stacking - How do all of the special heals stack: 1) from the same healer (group + single target)? <font color="#ff0000">This works, at least for Druids and Clerics, properly.  At last brush, stacked Wards still took double damage.  In other words, both Wards took damage from every hit.  This may have changed, but collecting data has really put a crimp in my actual "play" time in testing.  I understand "why" it works that way . . . from a Reactive standpoint, you WANT both Reactives to fire at every hit, and you want both Regens to tick . . . but you don't want both Wards to block the same damage.  I can't see this as anything but a bug at this point.</font> 2) between 2 healers of the same subclass (say 2 mystics both casting Ancestral Aegis)? <font color="#ff0000">I haven't had an opportunity to check that particular scenario, but Wards are again a bad example due the double damage bug.  Templars would be a better test bed for that.</font> <div></div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Mercr]

<DIV>Combat Change</DIV> <DIV>- The effectiveness of Strength, Agility, Intelligence, and Wisdom buffs has been increased. The effective cap is set at 10 times the character's level. For example, a level 30 fighter will receive an increasing melee damage bonus up to 300 Strength, while a level 40 wizard will receive an increasing bonus to spell damage up to 400 Intelligence.</DIV> <DIV><BR> </DIV> <DIV>Seems to me like clerics just got another boost in power, since at least on live, we do not have a Wisdom buff.  Is this still the case in beta and what kind of effect does Wisdom have on power pool now that the caps have been raised? </DIV>

[Banditman]

I'll have to check.

[Banditman]

Good news. The Healing portion of the App 1 comparison chart is done.  I finally got the Defiler data I needed. I have NOT got all of the buff, debuff and attack stuff sorted for Defilers, they have some REALLY odd stuff that I'm having trouble classifying.  I'll get it sorted out, but here's the complete comparison chart: <a href="http://mail.thetemplars.net/lines_beta3.htm" target=_blank>App 1 Priest Comparison</a> I'll have some commentary shortly now that I have the full picture.

[Banditman]

Well, the info is there, now to ponder the import of it all.  Let's ponder healing, shall we? First, let's look at the Minor Healing lines.  I'm mostly looking at the T5 level of spells at this point, though the data pretty much holds true across the board. Clerics have a pretty significant advantage in the HPs field here, mainly due to their low cast/recast composite time.  Shaman have a pretty significant advantage in efficiency due to the low power costs.  Druids don't look so hot here, but I'm trying to compare the total healing package so I'll just say that . . . Druids don't look so hot here. In Arch Healing, Clerics take the prize in HPs and HPp.  Not only are they the most powerful healers, they do it as efficiently as any other.  Shaman look ok insofar as efficiency is concerned, but are lacking some serious "burst" ability, mainly due to a SIGNIFICANTLY large recast timer on their Arch Heal.  Druids look . . . weak here as well, losing out in efficiency to everyone and just inching ahead of Shaman in "burst" ability. In Group Healing (direct), Shaman take the prize in both HPs and HPp.  Clerics are pretty close in HPs here, but do have some efficiency deficiencies.  Druids . . . are . . . weak.  :/ In Special Healing, Clerics make everyone else look really foolish for even trying to heal.  Pretty much they way they do on Live currently.  A highly efficient, large burst value special heal.  Druids rival Clerics in efficiency, but have SERIOUS BALANCE ISSUES with their burst ability.  Druids are only able to heal at half the burst a Cleric can.  Shaman have the least efficient Special heal, and are barely ahead of Druids in burst ability. Be careful when reading the numbers for Group Special Healing.  The numbers for Druids have been multiplied by 6 because each player in a Druid's group gets their very own Regen, unlike the Cleric and Shaman specials which are "shared" healing. I guess the best way to look at this heal line is to simply give an example.  Take a 250/tick AE DoT, and look at it over 17 seconds.  Using 17 seconds because that is the fastest any Priest could re-use their heal. Clerics would begin by having their Reactive trigger on every member the first time the AE pulsed.  So, all players would find themselves down 101 HP after the first pulse.  Now, when tick 2 lands, the first 3 players will get healed again and be down 202 HP, but the last 3 players will take the full 250 damage since the triggers are now used up.  These players are down 351 HP.  The final tick of the DoT will put players 1-3 at -452 HP, players 4-6 at -601 HP.  Group net -3159. Shaman would have players 1, 2 and 3 completely unaffected by the first tick of the DoT.  The fourth player would get the remained of the Ward, then take damage, so he would be at -42 HP.  Players 5 and 6 would get no protection at all and land at -250 HP.  From here on, everyone takes full damage with 2 ticks remaining.  So, players 1-3 end up at -500 HP, player 4 ends at -542 HP and players 5-6 end at -750 HP.  Group net -3542 HP. Druids would see their entire party receive the same damage, and the same healing.  Thus, over 17 seconds each Druid healed member receives 750 damage and is healed for 464 leaving them at a net loss of 286 HP.  Group net -1716. So, what does this say about overall balance? Druids have a some advantage in healing an entire group taking damage.  Their special healing is far superior to the other Priests in this respect, but they have that offset by significant disadvantages in direct group healing. If you want to consider overall Priest power for healing a tank, the best way I can think of is to look at "full burn" numbers.  Full burn is when a Priest starts casting his biggest, best heals as quickly as they come up, with no pauses.  In these situations a tank is in extreme jeopardy and needs everything he can get. We'll look at a 30 second span of time and see who has what.  In order to give the Reactives a framework, we'll say the mob lands a blow every second.  Could be a special, could be autoattack, doesn't matter to the Reactive as long as it gets triggered. Templar would cast:  G Rest, G Amel, G Inter, C Inter, G Amel, G Inter, G Rest, G Amel, G Inter, G Amel, G Rest.  He'd heal a total 6108 HP and in doing so burn 1457 power.  Overall, he'd have an HPp of 4.19 and an HPs of 203.6. Inquisitor would cast:  Intolerant, Faithful, Stinging, Salutary, Faithful, Stinging, Intolerant, Faithful, Stinging, Faithful, Intolerant.  He'd heal a total of 6243 HP and in doing so burn 1478 power.  Overall, he'd have a HPp of 4.22 and an HPs of 208.1. Warden would cast:   V Rapt, Plast, Waters, Storm, Waters, V Rapt, Waters, Plast, Waters, V Rapt, Waters.  He'd heal a total of 4245 HP and in doing so burn  1347 power.  Overall, he'd have an HPp of 3.15 and an HPs of 141.5. Fury would cast:  F Elixir, Bloodflow, F Salve, Owls, F Salve, F Elixir, F Salve, Bloodflow, F Salve, F Elixir, F Salve.  He'd heal a total of 4323 HP and in doing so burn 1411 power.  Overall, he'd have an HPp of 3.06 and an HPs of 144.1. A Mystic would cast:  Chant, AA, Enlightened, Chant, AA, Umbral Rit, Chant, AA, Enlightened, Chant, AA.  He'd heal a total of 4683 HP and in doing so burn 1371 power.  Overall, he'd have an HPp of 3.42 and an HPs of 156.1. A Defiler would cast:  F Balm, Mal Shroud, Sacrificial, F Balm, Mal Shroud, Carrion Shield, F Balm, Mal Shroud, Sacrificial, F Balm, Mal Shroud.  He'd heal a total of 4641 HP and in doing so burn 1367 power.  Overall, he'd have an HPp of 3.4 and an HPs of 154.7. O Balance, where are ye?

[Spag]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR><BR>Druids have a some advantage in healing an entire group taking damage.  Their special healing is far superior to the other Priests in this respect, but they have that offset by significant disadvantages in direct group healing.<BR><BR>If you want to consider overall Priest power for healing a tank, the best way I can think of is to look at "full burn" numbers.  Full burn is when a Priest starts casting his biggest, best heals as quickly as they come up, with no pauses.  In these situations a tank is in extreme jeopardy and needs everything he can get.<BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Banditman, </P> <P>   Don't get me wrong here, I think what you are doing is great, and support it completely, but there is something I have to say about your latest comparison.<BR></P> <DIV>I think you have to look at group healing in more way than one.  The way you are looking at it casts the Druids in the best light possible, a situation that only comes about in probably .1% of all gameplay (and I am being generous on that %).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In order for the Druid group regen to reach the efficiency you see here all members of the party would have to have sustained a large amount of damage over a short period of time.  This is not the case in everyday use, and may only come into play during raids.  While the group reactive and the group ward can be utilized to heal or protect a single member of the party for a large amount, this is not the case with the group regen.  All classes can stack their group special with their single target special, but only druids would be foolish to do so.  The problem is there has to be atleast 3 members of a group to have taken the damage before the group regen becomes a viable option.  Anything less and the druid is better off recasting single target regens or direct heals.  While a group ward or group reactive can be usefull and efficient in any given situation, raiding, grouping, duoing, soloing, the druid group spell is not.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The only time I use this spell is when out of combat, after a trap on a chest damages the entire group, and even then a direct group heal is faster, and since we are out of combat, cast, recast, power cost, and efficiency does not matter.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I understand you needed to show it from a full group angle, but don't leave it at that.  If you want to show a fair comparison of these spells, you need to show the other end of the spectrum, show what each of the group specials do for a single target taking damage (which is probably 90% or more of the game situations).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It has not been too much of an issue before due to having quite powerfull direct heals.  These are all "weak" now on test, with the lowest HPs, and the lowest HPp, with the exception of our single target regen which falls somewhere in the middle.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now I realize there is going to be a good amount of tweaking to be done, and hope things get a bit more balanced out.  If there is any chance that your data is used to balance the priests in any way, I would like your data to reflect both ends of the spectrum, not the one that makes us look so great when in reality we will be dealing with the omitted calculations most of the time.</DIV>

[Banditman]

<span><blockquote><hr>Spagma wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Banditman wrote:Druids have a some advantage in healing an entire group taking damage.  Their special healing is far superior to the other Priests in this respect, but they have that offset by significant disadvantages in direct group healing.If you want to consider overall Priest power for healing a tank, the best way I can think of is to look at "full burn" numbers.  Full burn is when a Priest starts casting his biggest, best heals as quickly as they come up, with no pauses.  In these situations a tank is in extreme jeopardy and needs everything he can get. <hr> </blockquote> <p>Banditman, </p> <p>   Don't get me wrong here, I think what you are doing is great, and support it completely, but there is something I have to say about your latest comparison.</p> <div>I think you have to look at group healing in more way than one.  The way you are looking at it casts the Druids in the best light possible, a situation that only comes about in probably .1% of all gameplay (and I am being generous on that %). <font color="#ff0000">Which I said was what I was looking at.  Group healing should mean group healing!  Not massive single target healing.  You see the Cleric and Shaman group heals as a strength, I see them as a weakness.  I'd prefer them to be true group heals, not the "shared" heal that they are now.  6 single target wards, 6 single target reactives, 6 single target regens.  Anything different is not balanced.</font> </div> <div> </div> <div>In order for the Druid group regen to reach the efficiency you see here all members of the party would have to have sustained a large amount of damage over a short period of time.  This is not the case in everyday use, and may only come into play during raids.  While the group reactive and the group ward can be utilized to heal or protect a single member of the party for a large amount, this is not the case with the group regen.  All classes can stack their group special with their single target special, but only druids would be foolish to do so.  The problem is there has to be atleast 3 members of a group to have taken the damage before the group regen becomes a viable option.  Anything less and the druid is better off recasting single target regens or direct heals.  While a group ward or group reactive can be usefull and efficient in any given situation, raiding, grouping, duoing, soloing, the druid group spell is not. <font color="#ff0000">Again, my point is not to say that Druid group healing is better or worse than that possessed by the other Priests, only that it is different and can have significant import in different situations.  If things stay as they are, Druids need to be looked at.  I think the numbers bear that out.  Druid group Regen is SUPER good in raid situations.  You OFTEN have significant amounts of AE damage coming in, and group Regen is by far the most effective way to heal that.  No, it doesn't have the side effect of being an uber single target heal, and when only grind groups are considered, that is a problem.  The obvious solution is to ditch shared healing and make each special group heal a collection of 6 individual heals.</font> </div> <div> </div> <div>The only time I use this spell is when out of combat, after a trap on a chest damages the entire group, and even then a direct group heal is faster, and since we are out of combat, cast, recast, power cost, and efficiency does not matter.</div> <div> </div> <div>I understand you needed to show it from a full group angle, but don't leave it at that.  If you want to show a fair comparison of these spells, you need to show the other end of the spectrum, show what each of the group specials do for a single target taking damage (which is probably 90% or more of the game situations).</div> <div> </div> <div>It has not been too much of an issue before due to having quite powerfull direct heals.  These are all "weak" now on test, with the lowest HPs, and the lowest HPp, with the exception of our single target regen which falls somewhere in the middle. <font color="#ff0000">I think the numbers still bear out that much balancing remains.  Thus the look at the "OH (*#@" ability of each sub-Class in my post.  I think it's pretty clear that in sheer refuse on the propeller type situations, Clerics still have a very significant advantage which seems unwarranted.</font> </div> <div> </div> <div>Now I realize there is going to be a good amount of tweaking to be done, and hope things get a bit more balanced out.  If there is any chance that your data is used to balance the priests in any way, I would like your data to reflect both ends of the spectrum, not the one that makes us look so great when in reality we will be dealing with the omitted calculations most of the time. <font color="#ff0000">I *hope* there is a good bit of tweaking yet to go.  I have no way to confirm that.  As I said, the data is what it is.  If someone wishes to use the data, they must first understand the data, meaning they really have to know how each spell works.  The data is a tool to point out potential problems, of which there are plenty besides group healing.</font> </div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Spag]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><BR><FONT color=#ff0000>Which I said was what I was looking at.  Group healing should mean group healing!  Not massive single target healing.  You see the Cleric and Shaman group heals as a strength, I see them as a weakness.  I'd prefer them to be true group heals, not the "shared" heal that they are now.  6 single target wards, 6 single target reactives, 6 single target regens.  Anything different is not balanced.</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></SPAN> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>I think if this were to happen it would be considered a huge nerf by Clerics and Shaman alike.   Which would illustrate my point that a group special is more than a group spell on an everyday basis.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I also don't know who does much raiding when we get the first of these at level 14 and its upgrade at 28.  These are not raid only spells, and their usefulness should reflect that.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Spagma on <span class=date_text>08-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:12 PM</span>

[Fingolfin2]

<P>Excellent work Banditman you efforts are very appreciated. </P> <P>This comparison really deserves a spot on one of the main boards to get some notice. You would think the devs have a similar chart but given the numbers currently on test and beta and their statement that healing would be equal, how can they?</P> <P>Considering how difficult it is to analyze the special group heal, I do think other more common examples are needed instead of just the AOE healing situation which is honestly not very common in gameplay.  I too think they wards and reactives should not be able to be shared like that to provide a way to balance,  but they are and I think that is not very likely to change.</P> <P> </P> <P> </P><p>Message Edited by Fingolfin2 on <span class=date_text>08-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:36 PM</span>

[Rekl]

<DIV>Banditman that's a very nice analysis, but I have to agree with the other poster about over-emphasizing the usefulness of druid/warden group regens.  Certainly, as you say, they are very nice for countering a low amount of sustained AoE damage.  However, the factor you're neglecting is the ability of a shaman or cleric to utilize their direct group heals (which are greatly improved in usefulness).  This gives a cleric or shaman the ability to use a group ward/reactive and a group direct heal too and, once again, slaughter druids in burst healing... for more mana.  The problem, of course, is that a druid can't really cast a regen prior to an AoE (at least not without a drastic loss of efficency) and by casting it right after the AoE is cast/cured you can't very well effectively utilize your direct group heal (as casting both back to back would take too much time in most realistic scenarios)  The other major factor is that you're considering the aoe to be very low damage, which is mostly untrue.  Raid AoE's are typically in the 1500-2000 damage range (with longer intervals in between).  Theoretically the numbers on group spells may work in druids' favor but in testing they often very similar to other priests (Although admittingly having a templar reactive before and a druid regen after is ideal imo).  I guess the problem is being able to use a reactive/ward before-hand (and have it remain at 100% potency 30 seconds later) grants the clerics/shamans a certain amount of "found time" when the AoE actually hits... effectively increasing their HPs.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Reklaw on <span class=date_text>08-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:44 PM</span>

[Darl]

<P>Banditman</P> <P>I have read everything up to this point and think these analysies have been wonderful. I myself play a mystic and find that having the quantitative values of our heals compared to be a great source of understanding.</P> <P>I have questions, however, that deal with the nature of our buffs.</P> <P>I have read that Avatar now costs a CP as well as being a "toggle" spell. What does "toggle" mean? Having to recast it after a certain amount of time?</P> <P>What buffs did you use on yourself/party before these changes? What do you use now?</P> <P>And finally, what've been some changes to our favorite buffs? Do you personally find them to be a blessing or a curse? What is your personal opinion on that?</P> <P>On this note, I have read that the bear form is pretty useless now, but what reason would the devs have in increasing the CP to 3 for? Was the maul proc (that is now gone I read) that good? I actually did not use bear form that much, unless I was soloing and then if only for a significant amount of time. </P> <P>This ends the writing portion of the exa...err, my question. Sorry for the specific questions, but this has been bugging me for a bit. :smileytongue:</P> <P>Thanks</P> <P>Darluk</P> <P>"Misspellers untie!"</P>

[Banditman]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Darluk wrote:<BR> <P>Banditman</P> <P>I have read everything up to this point and think these analysies have been wonderful. I myself play a mystic and find that having the quantitative values of our heals compared to be a great source of understanding.</P> <P>I have questions, however, that deal with the nature of our buffs.</P> <P>I have read that Avatar now costs a CP as well as being a "toggle" spell. What does "toggle" mean? Having to recast it after a certain amount of time?</P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Worse.  It now costs a CP, and you can STILL only cast it on one person.  It toggles once you cast it, and in order to cast it again, you have to turn it off.  Seems kinda . . . wrong . . . doesn't it?</FONT></P> <P>What buffs did you use on yourself/party before these changes? What do you use now?</P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>On Live, it depends on the situation.  When I'm the only Healer I run Eidolic Mettle, Prophetic Shield, Spirit of the Elephant, Runic Talisman and Ursine Prophet.  In a raid, I run Spirit of the Elephant, Runic Talisman, Ursine Prophet and Prophecy if I am in the MT group and we don't need Noxious resists.  If we need Noxious, I drop Prophesy and go back to my standard group buffs.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>On Beta, when I'm the only Healer I run Eidolic Mettle, Spirit of the Elephant, Runic Talisman, Prophecy and Avatar.  I've not raided yet in Beta to have any idea how things stack up in that situation.</FONT></P> <P>And finally, what've been some changes to our favorite buffs? Do you personally find them to be a blessing or a curse? What is your personal opinion on that?</P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>We lost some power pool when we lost Prophetic Shield, that kinda sucks.  The replacement spell is worthless in it's current form.  I like the change to Prophecy from 2 CP to 1 CP, unfortunately, all it did was replace Ursine Prophet as a self buff in most cases.  The added Ward on Runic Talisman is ultra nice, you really have to play with it to understand.  I don't like that Avatar is toggleable and takes 1 CP.  I wish they would just pick one.  It's not THAT good.  Someone is still having flashbacks from EQLive L60 when Avatar was godly.</FONT></P> <P>On this note, I have read that the bear form is pretty useless now, but what reason would the devs have in increasing the CP to 3 for? Was the maul proc (that is now gone I read) that good? I actually did not use bear form that much, unless I was soloing and then if only for a significant amount of time. </P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>My guess is that the change to Ursine Prophet had to do with PvP balancing.  Probably not the best way to fix a potential problem.  There is also some opinion that it was done because Clerics don't have a self buff.  I don't know which is true, but either seems plausible but poorly executed.</FONT></P> <P>This ends the writing portion of the exa...err, my question. Sorry for the specific questions, but this has been bugging me for a bit. :smileytongue:</P> <P>Thanks</P> <P>Darluk</P> <P>"Misspellers untie!"</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>I think our Warden friends need to go back and look at the chart again.  I can assure you, Wardens have MUCH larger issues than their group healing.  If I was a Warden, I'd be a LOT more concerned about how I was going to keep a tank alive with heals that stack up at about 66% of what a Cleric can do.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Mystics as well.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Banditman on <span class=date_text>08-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:23 AM</span>

[Nacire]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><BR><FONT color=#ff0000>Which I said was what I was looking at.  Group healing should mean group healing!  Not massive single target healing.  You see the Cleric and Shaman group heals as a strength, I see them as a weakness.  I'd prefer them to be true group heals, not the "shared" heal that they are now.  6 single target wards, 6 single target reactives, 6 single target regens.  Anything different is not balanced.</FONT><BR></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I second this sentiment.  Though on live now I do enjoy being able to slap on a grp ward just before pull in either solo grp or raid situations for that one big (and usually mana free by the time combat locks) ward, I to would love it changed to 6 single target wards instead.  In my opinion a GROUP spell should benefit the whole grp evenly, NOT all get expended when the MT takes a big hit.  Pretty much exactly like our group cure elemental now on live applys 6 seperate elemental only wards.  THAT is how grp wards and grp reactives should work.<BR>

[Formangenavn]

<P>Seen this? </P> <P>Moorgard wrote:</P> <P>Class descriptions are a tricky subject. They need to fall somewhere between being so precise that they remove all room for player interpretation and so ambiguous as to be meaningless. Honestly, it's a losing battle, because there's no way to make everyone happy with them.</P> <P>Why? Because, as with most things, different kinds of players want different things. For every person who asks "Please tell me how I'm supposed to play my class," there's another who insists "Don't you dare tell me how to play my class!" Some people want things laid out for them, while others derive pleasure from ignoring boundaries and going their own direction.</P> <P>We lay out the basics for what a class <EM>is</EM>, but ultimately the players define what a class <EM>can be</EM>. No matter how hard we might work on coming up with the perfect class descriptions, our players will rewrite the book every single day. In my opinion, that's a good thing. It really underscores how much you guys and gals contribute to the constant evolution of a persistent world.</P> <P>While there are revised subclass descriptions in the DoF manual (which will be showing up on the website as well), they are only intended to give new players a general idea of what makes their class unique. The basic roles continue to be laid out at the archetype level; discovering how your subclass can best fulfill them (or figuring out how to use your abilities to blaze entirely new trails) is up to you.</P> <P>===========================<BR>Steve Danuser, a.k.a. Moorgard<BR>Game Designer, EverQuest II</P> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Revised subclass description? Beeing a warden, I just hope archtype description doesnt change, or else I see myself in the new (old eq) role as a sub par healer and subpar nuker, which wasnt what I signed up for.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh, and are healer changes done?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <P>Moorgard wrote:</P> <P>Most of the major changes to combat and spells are complete. Some things still on the drawing board:</P> <UL> <LI>Adjusting the way hit point pools are calculated, including the effects of stamina buffs and debuffs. <LI>Making the various spell casting skills more meaningful. <LI>Changing the Attack rating in the Persona window so that it provides useful information. <LI>Revamping the Training spells you get to pick every 10 levels.</LI></UL> <P>And of course, we're doing lots of adjustments and fixes to spells and arts, including errors in their examine information.</P> <P>Please don't take this out of context to mean "what you see on Test now is what is going live, Moorgard said so!" What I'm saying is that most of the major code and data changes (that is, the most time-consuming stuff) is done, and now less time-intensive tasks that depended on those major changes can be put in place. While some of these changes are minor in terms of work required, they can still have a significant impact on the game.</P> <P>We're very pleased with how the combat and spell changes are playing out overall. In the three and a half weeks before this goes live, we'll continue to make improvements to provide the best experience possible. To say Live Update #13 is going to be a big is an understatement to say the least. <IMG height=16 src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif" width=16 border=0></P> <P>===========================<BR>Steve Danuser, a.k.a. Moorgard<BR>Game Designer, EverQuest II </P></DIV>

[Fingolfin2]

I certainly hope discussions such as this are going on in the beta board and are getting addressed or noticed by the devs. The current state of balance has setup an uber healer, average healer and poor healer class. Balanced? not even close.  But then again maybe they've decided healers are not ment to be balanced and are rewriting our roles 9months after the game has been out. <p>Message Edited by Fingolfin2 on <span class=date_text>08-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:27 AM</span>

[Spag]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR> <BR> <DIV>I think our Warden friends need to go back and look at the chart again.  I can assure you, Wardens have MUCH larger issues than their group healing.  If I was a Warden, I'd be a LOT more concerned about how I was going to keep a tank alive with heals that stack up at about 66% of what a Cleric can do.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Mystics as well.</DIV> <P>Message Edited by Banditman on <SPAN class=date_text>08-19-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>01:23 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Banditman,</P> <P>   You bet we are worried about that as well, but you have that laid out pretty well in your chart.  There is really nothing to discuss about that.  We will be completely bottom rung healers if nothing changes to our numbers.  Anyway you look at that data there is no denying that our numbers are terrible.  Which is also why there is no debate over the subject.  </P> <P>The reason we are talking about the group regen, as it is the only thing on your chart that makes us look good, but in reality it just does not work this way.  If Cleric and Shaman specials were a distributed health pool as well, then there would be nothing left to say about it, other than the numbers would have to be brought in line.  But that is not the case, and I do not wish this upon clerics or shaman.  I am not sure why you would either, as it works both ways now, why would you want it to be limited?  The only answer to that question that I can fathom is that by limiting the usefullness of the spell, the values would be increased.  I think if the cleric and shaman group specials were changed to be a distribued health pool, vs the single large health pool as is now, you would become very disappointed.</P> <P>Like I said before, if there is any chance your data would be used in any way to balance the classes, whether it be by the devs, or reffered to by players when compairing spell lines, I want that information to be accurate, and accurate in how its used when compared to how other priests use their comparable spell.  I would hate for someone to look at that and say, "sure its ok to give the druids lower direct healing, they have such great group healing, it will balance them out."  This is what I fear.</P>

[Banditman]

I would MUCH prefer that Cleric and Shaman healing go to individuals as opposed to the current shared healing.  It would be FAR superior to what we have now. We don't NEED the shared heal to keep a tank alive.  We need better single target heals.  We *do* need a way to keep our group alive when everyone is taking damage.  At the end game, AE's are a way of life.  I suppose I'm a little surprised that more named mobs don't have nasty AE's. In life at the top, 6 single Wards would serve Shaman **FAR** better than the current shared healing does.  The shared heal when grinding up is just a crutch we don't need.

[Spag]

<P>I guess then we need to find out how others really feel about this.  Since this is on the Mystic boards, how do other Mystics feel about this?</P> <P>Do you want your group ward to be a single large pool of health, where the HP pool is used by anyone taking damage (as is now)?</P> <P>-or-</P> <P>Do you want your group ward to be divided/distributed, where each player is warded for 1/6 total amount of the total HP of the spell (and have the total HP of the spell increased to offset this change)?</P>

[Eepop]

As a context, I am a level 40 mystic, as such I havent raided much and my guild isnt planning to be doing crazy raiding anytime anyway. With that said, I would want seperate wards, not pooled.  Not because it would work better in my situations, but because it is not nearly as useful as it can be made out to be.  If I use it, it is once before a battle when the tank pulls.  Its recast is too long to bother with it in combat as a single target heal. Further, with the change to wards to assign aggro properly, such prewarding can lead to aggro troubles. Even if it is less useful to me in my grouping context, I want the spell to work for its function, warding the group, not a single target. <div></div>

[Banditman]

<span><blockquote><hr>Nacireen wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Banditman wrote:<span> <blockquote> <div><font color="#ff0000">Which I said was what I was looking at.  Group healing should mean group healing!  Not massive single target healing.  You see the Cleric and Shaman group heals as a strength, I see them as a weakness.  I'd prefer them to be true group heals, not the "shared" heal that they are now.  6 single target wards, 6 single target reactives, 6 single target regens.  Anything different is not balanced.</font></div> <hr> </blockquote></span> <div></div> <hr> </blockquote>I second this sentiment.  Though on live now I do enjoy being able to slap on a grp ward just before pull in either solo grp or raid situations for that one big (and usually mana free by the time combat locks) ward, I to would love it changed to 6 single target wards instead.  In my opinion a GROUP spell should benefit the whole grp evenly, NOT all get expended when the MT takes a big hit.  Pretty much exactly like our group cure elemental now on live applys 6 seperate elemental only wards.  THAT is how grp wards and grp reactives should work. <div></div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Karlen]

>>>With that said, I would want seperate wards, not pooled.  Not because it would work better in my situations, but because it is not nearly as useful as it can be made out to be.  If I use it, it is once before a battle when the tank pulls.  Its recast is too long to bother with it in combat as a single target heal.<<< I find the group ward can be pretty useful in small groups.  I'll group ward and then pull.   Whoever ends up with the aggro gets a single-target ward.  Also useful in pickup groups where not everyone is used to how the others play -- group wards are more forgiving towards poor aggro management. <div></div>

[Spag]

<DIV>Banditman, I must say I am surprised, at the responses so far.  What I still dont get is why.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Here is a basic everyday example. </DIV> <DIV>As is now the ward works in all ways, it can be utilized by 1 member, 2 members or the entire party for up to the full amount of the ward.  Say the ward is 2400 HP (just a made up number), this means that  the tank could use 800 of this, while the mage the pulled aggro for a short time could have used 1200, and the scout that just got a couple ripostes used the other 400.</DIV> <DIV>Amount of ward 2400, amount used 2400  100% efficiency</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As it is being proposed here and we up the ward to 3000HP pool is divided by 6 players (regardless of the number of players in the group).  This means they each have 500 HP ward.  In this same situation, the ward on your Tank expired long ago and has taken 300 damage, your Mage is almost dead as he has taken 700 damage, your scout is unchanged, and there is 1500 HP worth of ward that is going unused, and will expire and be lost in a few seconds as the group ward is only 25 second duration.</DIV> <DIV>Amount of ward 3000, amount used 1500  - 50% efficiency as well as being 1000HP in the hole on your mage and tank</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Unless all 6 members of the group take damage, you lose efficiency quickly.  If you are in group with less than 6 players you lose efficiency.  Why would you want this handicap?  Please explain.  The spell would only be useful in a raid.  If thats all you do or are interested in, fine say so, but most players in the game are not of that level, and do not even raid occasionally.</DIV>

[Mercr]

I agree with Banditman.  Group wards should be just that, protecting the whole group.  It would be nice to be able to ward the entire MT group against an incoming AE as opposed to just blocking a single hit on MT. 

[Banditman]

Because we don't want our ability to heal based upon this. If, in "everyday" play, you have more than one person with aggro you need to fire your tank.  Six single target Wards are far more useful in situations where true group healing is needed. Like it or not, everyone will be at the endgame eventually.  Sooner rather than later since the level cap is only going up by 10.  Once you are at the level cap, you will soon be experiencing situations where true GROUP healing is needed.  Even if you don't raid, take Diamondon in Icy Digs for instance . . . AE. Challenging situations at the end game require the ability to heal (or prevent) damage across an entire group evenly.

[Spag]

<P>Ok then it sounds like the solution would be then to request to have the group heals all work the same way.  Not what I would have wanted but it seems to me I am the minority.  Like I have said before, I don't want to be better than any other healer, I want to be equal.  If you all want to have your group heal as limited as ours is, that will do the job.  </P> <P>Have you already requested this to be changed in the test or beta feedback?</P>

[Banditman]

I cannot comment on anything that happens on the Beta boards unfortunately.  Thats why I brought some of this discussion here once changes went to Test.

[ShilienOrac]

Banditman, I think there is an error in your datasheet. For shamans and clerics single special heals, Hps ratio is Heal / (cast time + recast time), which is correct. For druids, the formula is Heal / (cast time + duration). However, the recast time of a druid's single HoT is lesser than (duration - cast time), so it is theorically possible to refresh the HoT just at the end of its duration. So the formula should be Heal / duration. I suggest you set RC = (duration - casting time) for druid single HoT. The same problem goes for group HoT but this time the recast time is greater than (duration - cast time), so this time the RC colums must be the recast time (ie 12s) instead of the duration. As for the group ward, I would also like 6 invidual wards instead a common big one. <div></div>

[Spag]

interesting point, though the initial heal would use the HPs he has listed, as it would not begin healing until it is casts, subsequent heals using the same spell would use the calculations you described.  Since we are factoring in recast at all, we must assume we are looking for the numbers of the latter.

[Banditman]

<span><blockquote><hr>ShilienOracle wrote:Banditman, I think there is an error in your datasheet. <font color="#ff0000">God knows that's a distinct possibility!  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></font> For shamans and clerics single special heals, Hps ratio is Heal / (cast time + recast time), which is correct.<font color="#ff0000">  </font>For druids, the formula is Heal / (cast time + duration).   However, the recast time of a druid's single HoT is lesser than (duration - cast time), so it is theorically possible to refresh the HoT just at the end of its duration. So the formula should be Heal / duration. I suggest you set RC = (duration - casting time) for druid single HoT. <font color="#ff0000">Ahhhh . . . I see what you are talking about.  I need to change the formula.  I just copied the same formula across all the calculation cells.  Good catch.  Let me fix that right now, thank you.</font> The same problem goes for group HoT but this time the recast time is greater than (duration - cast time), so this time the RC colums must be the recast time (ie 12s) instead of the duration. As for the group ward, I would also like 6 invidual wards instead a common big one. <div></div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Unmask]

<BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR>I would MUCH prefer that Cleric and Shaman healing go to individuals as opposed to the current shared healing.  It would be FAR superior to what we have now.<BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I don't see why you'd want this and I don't think you realize just how bad druid group healing is (currently) because we lack the shared healing pool.</P> <P>There are 2 basic situations:</P> <P>1: Tank takes all damage from 1 or more mobs while the rest of the group attacks/heals.</P> <P>2. Everyone in the group takes damage equally.</P> <DIV>If you scaled encounters between (1) and (2) based on the distribution of damage taken, I can assure you that encounters are much much closer to the 1st situation than the 2nd.  A group heal that has a shared pool is useless in the 2nd situation but is very powerful in the 1st.  A group heal that has no shared pool is only useful in the 2nd situation.  This is how backup healers are born.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>There is too much focus on the efficiency of heals and not enough on what it takes to actually keep the tank alive.  While I realize power concerns are a serious issue, I'd rather have no power and a tank with HP than lots of power and a dead tank.</DIV>

[Eepop]

We are willing to concede the point that our group special is better than druids in situation one.  We really aren't looking to be better healers, we really really want equality.  And if they can't make group regens work in a pooled fashion we are willing to give up  pooled group ward.  We're okay with losing its power in situation one and gaining power in situation two.  Its an issue of equality.  And it sounds like I and several other mystics are prepared to stand up for it. We know what its like to be broken, and we really don't wish it upon anyone else. <div></div>

[Banditman]

<span><blockquote><hr>Unmasked wrote:<blockquote> <hr> Banditman wrote:I would MUCH prefer that Cleric and Shaman healing go to individuals as opposed to the current shared healing.  It would be FAR superior to what we have now. <hr> </blockquote> <p>I don't see why you'd want this and I don't think you realize just how bad druid group healing is (currently) because we lack the shared healing pool. </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">Druid group healing is NOT bad right now, it's GOOD.  The problem is that you see the shared heals as nothing but a big heal for one person.  That should not be how they are used, nor is it in all reality. </font></p> <p><font color="#ff0000">The cast time on group special heals is way too long to be of use the way many people think. </font></p> <p><font color="#ff0000">Having a shared heal is crippling our ability to really focus on the problem.  These type heals should never even enter into a conversation about keeping a tank alive. </font></p> <p><font color="#ff0000">Everyone should have effective GROUP heals and effective TARGETED heals which should be used depending on the situation. </font></p> <p>There are 2 basic situations:</p> <p>1: Tank takes all damage from 1 or more mobs while the rest of the group attacks/heals.</p> <p>2. Everyone in the group takes damage equally.</p> <div>If you scaled encounters between (1) and (2) based on the distribution of damage taken, I can assure you that encounters are much much closer to the 1st situation than the 2nd.  A group heal that has a shared pool is useless in the 2nd situation but is very powerful in the 1st.  A group heal that has no shared pool is only useful in the 2nd situation.  This is how backup healers are born. <font color="#ff0000">EQ2 was built on the premise that any ONE Priest could do the job of healing a group.  There should be no need for a backup healer in EQ2.  Backup healing is an EQLive mindset that needs to die.  If a group takes two healers it's because they NEED two healers, not because they need a backup healer.</font> </div> <div> </div> <div>There is too much focus on the efficiency of heals and not enough on what it takes to actually keep the tank alive.  While I realize power concerns are a serious issue, I'd rather have no power and a tank with HP than lots of power and a dead tank. <font color="#ff0000">No, you don't want to be there I assure you.  This is where Shaman are currently in the grind levels.  Oh, they can heal a tank thru a fight, but at the end they are almost completely drained of power.  It gives them less "OH (*@#" ability and creates a situation where everyone is always waiting on them for power to return.  Not a good place to be.  When a group can take a Shaman and wait 60 second between fights or take another Priest and chain pull, who do you think the group will take? Both measures of healing are important.  HPs and HPp.  Not just one or the other. </font></div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Unmask]

<BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Unmasked wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR>I would MUCH prefer that Cleric and Shaman healing go to individuals as opposed to the current shared healing.  It would be FAR superior to what we have now.<BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I don't see why you'd want this and I don't think you realize just how bad druid group healing is (currently) because we lack the shared healing pool.<BR></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Druid group healing is NOT bad right now, it's GOOD.  The problem is that you see the shared heals as nothing but a big heal for one person.  That should not be how they are used, nor is it in all reality.<BR></FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I'm assuming you're referring to test and not live.  And I think you're missing my point.  Shared heals offer more flexibility.  Relegating them so they are only used in situation (2) is a nerf.  Druid group heals are only useful when the entire group takes damage but if they shared then they would always have some use.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>The cast time on group special heals is way too long to be of use the way many people think.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000><FONT color=#ffff00>That's true.  And I know agro is changing so it may no longer work this way, but group heals are shorter cast time I thought.</FONT></FONT></P><FONT color=#ff0000></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Having a shared heal is crippling our ability to really focus on the problem.  These type heals should never even enter into a conversation about keeping a tank alive.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Keeping the tank alive is the primary focus since if he dies the group/raid wipes.  Anyone else can be rezzed and in a raid zone they can even revive.  In many cases it is simply better to die.  If group heals can be used to keep up with burst damage because they have a shared pool, why shouldn't they enter the conversation?  They do keep the tank alive.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Everyone should have effective GROUP heals and effective TARGETED heals which should be used depending on the situation.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000><FONT color=#ffff00>But that's not how it is.  I would much prefer druid group heals having the ability to share heals rather than shaman and /clerics losing it.  I don't think I'd see it as anything but a nerf if you did.</FONT></FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>There are 2 basic situations:</P> <P>1: Tank takes all damage from 1 or more mobs while the rest of the group attacks/heals.</P> <P>2. Everyone in the group takes damage equally.</P> <DIV>If you scaled encounters between (1) and (2) based on the distribution of damage taken, I can assure you that encounters are much much closer to the 1st situation than the 2nd.  A group heal that has a shared pool is useless in the 2nd situation but is very powerful in the 1st.  A group heal that has no shared pool is only useful in the 2nd situation.  This is how backup healers are born.<BR><BR><FONT color=#ff0000>EQ2 was built on the premise that any ONE Priest could do the job of healing a group.  There should be no need for a backup healer in EQ2.  Backup healing is an EQLive mindset that needs to die.  If a group takes two healers it's because they NEED two healers, not because they need a backup healer.</FONT></DIV><FONT color=#ff0000></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Well I referred to backup healer in another sense.  In any case, the devs </FONT><FONT color=#ffff00>may this premise but you and I know that it never really worked this way.  What they say and do have generally been at odds so I don't believe even they have the EQ1 mindset removed.  I don't disagree that one priest could do the job of healing the group in a typical encounter, but a druid simply cannot keep up with the burst damage of the more challenging encounters and clerics are required for that (and soon maybe even shamans).  </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>The devs admitted that regens have a problem with burst healing.  In response they made our direct heals smaller.  I don't understand this, do you?  If you look at the Warden board you will see their (sort of) reply.  We can heal more in 6s than clerics (they are wrong of course because of the cleric's shared group heal but that's another matter).  They neglect that fights last longer than 6s.  They don't seem to understand that cast time + recast time is the important measure of long term healing and that cast times alone are irrelevant.  They also compared druids using group heals with clerics not using them.  In short, the devs have a serious problem understanding how healing works "in the field".  </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>EQ2 can have all the premises it wants but until the devs actually make the game match the premise, it's just a bunch of words.</FONT></P> <DIV>There is too much focus on the efficiency of heals and not enough on what it takes to actually keep the tank alive.  While I realize power concerns are a serious issue, I'd rather have no power and a tank with HP than lots of power and a dead tank.<BR><BR><FONT color=#ff0000>No, you don't want to be there I assure you.  This is where Shaman are currently in the grind levels.  Oh, they can heal a tank thru a fight, but at the end they are almost completely drained of power.  It gives them less "OH (*@#" ability and creates a situation where everyone is always waiting on them for power to return.  Not a good place to be.  When a group can take a Shaman and wait 60 second between fights or take another Priest and chain pull, who do you think the group will take?<BR><BR>Both measures of healing are important.  HPs and HPp.  Not just one or the other.<BR></FONT></DIV> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Well that's what I meant.  Even if our HP/s and HP/p were equal across the board, that alone doesn't make our ability to keep the MT alive equal.</FONT></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Unmask]

<BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Eepop wrote:<BR>We are willing to concede the point that our group special is better than druids in situation one.  We really aren't looking to be better healers, we really really want equality.  And if they can't make group regens work in a pooled fashion we are willing to give up  pooled group ward.  We're okay with losing its power in situation one and gaining power in situation two.  Its an issue of equality.  And it sounds like I and several other mystics are prepared to stand up for it.<BR><BR>We know what its like to be broken, and we really don't wish it upon anyone else.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Well honestly I'm not looking at this particular issue from a warden perspective but from a raiding perspective.  I know that without crucial intercession we'd wipe a lot more often and probably wouldn't be able to do certain raids without it.  Most of us look at the cleric class as being the only indispensible raiding class (we've even used crusaders as MTs <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> ).  I think it would be a massive blow to gameplay if that shared pool was lost even if druids don't have it, at least for me.  I do not see burst damage going away so removing every class' ability to handle will be a big problem.</P> <P>I just would like some method of dealing with burst damage.  Even with the HoT components in my direct heals I never really had that ability but now it's just worse.<BR></P> <P>That said, if situation 1 is far more common, why would you be more interested in gaining power in situation 2 at the expense of situation 1?</P>

[Eepop]

<DIV>Because if there is a clear division, then the tools that are intended for situation one can be tuned up to be effective.</DIV>

[Spag]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Druid group healing is NOT bad right now, it's GOOD.  The problem is that you see the shared heals as nothing but a big heal for one person.  That should not be how they are used, nor is it in all reality.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE></SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Unfortunately this is how it is used currently, ask any cleric, they will stack their group reactive with their single target reactive, and watch the HPs roll in.  Shaman don't really do this as of now, as wards are broken.  I have read posts where you yourself talked about stacking group wards with single target wards, after they fix mitigation and the double hit bug, and how powerfull they would be, and how well they would stack.</DIV></DIV>

[Banditman]

No, I have no effing clue what they are doing with Druid healing at this point, it doesn't make much sense to me either.  It's fairly obvious that something needs to be done, at least to me. Druid healing needs more burst ability, yes.  That's the HPs side of the equation.  However, leaving Druids completely drained at the end of a fight to achieve that burst heal is not the answer either. So, if they want to keep Druid special healing where it is, great, do so, but increase the size and efficiency of Druid direct healing to compensate. All this plays into what I demonstrated earlier in this thread where I showed what each sub-Class was capable of doing in thirty seconds of full burn healing.  I don't even remember what page it was on at this point, but if you'll back up through the thread you'll see that I did an example of what each class could do when going for max HPs over thirty seconds, and then looked at the efficiency of that period of time.

[Spag]

Heh we have made it full circle.  My original post about our group regen not being a big issue now was because our direct heals offset them.  If we get better direct heals, as in HPp and HPs wise, then it would proably be a non issue.  And when I say higher I mean higher than the other clases.  If it is equal to the other classes, we still lose out.

[Banditman]

<div></div><div></div><div></div>All I am saying, and have been saying, is that when each Priest uses the tools at their disposal, they should have "relatively" equal abilities to perform over a period of time with respect to HPp and HPs.Thus I compared 30 seconds of time across all the Priests, using the tools they each have currently on Test.For reference:<blockquote><hr>Templar would cast:  G Rest, G Amel, G Inter, C Inter, G Amel, G Inter, G Rest, G Amel, G Inter, G Amel, G Rest.  He'd heal a total 6108 HP and in doing so burn 1457 power.  Overall, he'd have an HPp of 4.19 and an HPs of 203.6.Inquisitor would cast:  Intolerant, Faithful, Stinging, Salutary, Faithful, Stinging, Intolerant, Faithful, Stinging, Faithful, Intolerant.  He'd heal a total of 6243 HP and in doing so burn 1478 power.  Overall, he'd have a HPp of 4.22 and an HPs of 208.1.Warden would cast:   V Rapt, Plast, Waters, Storm, Waters, V Rapt, Waters, Plast, Waters, V Rapt, Waters.  He'd heal a total of 4245 HP and in doing so burn  1347 power.  Overall, he'd have an HPp of 3.15 and an HPs of 141.5.Fury would cast:  F Elixir, Bloodflow, F Salve, Owls, F Salve, F Elixir, F Salve, Bloodflow, F Salve, F Elixir, F Salve.  He'd heal a total of 4323 HP and in doing so burn 1411 power.  Overall, he'd have an HPp of 3.06 and an HPs of 144.1.A Mystic would cast:  Chant, AA, Enlightened, Chant, AA, Umbral Rit, Chant, AA, Enlightened, Chant, AA.  He'd heal a total of 4683 HP and in doing so burn 1371 power.  Overall, he'd have an HPp of 3.42 and an HPs of 156.1.A Defiler would cast:  F Balm, Mal Shroud, Sacrificial, F Balm, Mal Shroud, Carrion Shield, F Balm, Mal Shroud, Sacrificial, F Balm, Mal Shroud.  He'd heal a total of 4641 HP and in doing so burn 1367 power.  Overall, he'd have an HPp of 3.4 and an HPs of 154.7.<hr> </blockquote>As you can see, there is really not that great a difference between where Shaman are currently on Test and where Druids are currently on Test. There are however some significant and important differences between where those two classes are and where Clerics are.  If all three Classes of Priest were within the range of difference that Shaman and Druids are (438 HP over 30 seconds), I don't think there'd be any problems at all.  However, when the differences that we see between Clerics and the rest are there (1560 HP over 30 seconds), balance is not served.<p> <span class="time_text"></span></p><p>Message Edited by Banditman on <span class=date_text>08-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:02 PM</span>

[FelixDomesticus]

So there is still the "Cleric is Da Healer and others support" problem? Does not sound good. I bet that next to no dev play shamans and therefore only cleric is interesting to them. Well, I have ordered DoF and will check it and unless it and combat changes are VERY good I quit. I have used last week totally in Lineage II anyway. Zoneless world, non-locked combat and almost free use of buffs and healing to anyone _I_ choose to use them to is very tempting compared to Eq2 style where devs define what you can and cannot do (besides eq2 does not feel like a world when you zone every few minutes or so). <div></div>

[Nacire]

Check the Dev Tracker to see it for yerself but we have a dev statement on the preist balance in actual playtesting.  And with all adept 3 abilities in actual play duo'd with a berserker the mystic actually ended up with more power left, but not by much.

[FelixDomesticus]

<div></div>I checked that. 5% difference is actually so small that it can be caused by random factors. Besides they tested it with SINGLE mob, not grouped monsters. I would like to see how it goes if same test is done with group 2-3 mobs. EDIT: That test is also valid ONLY if ALL priests are using THE VERY SAME GEAR. Otherwise you are partly testing uber gear, not spells. Somehow I doubt that all test priests were using same gear. <div></div><p>Message Edited by FelixDomesticus on <span class=date_text>08-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:40 PM</span>

[Croa]

<div></div>I haven't played a shaman before..  how are the changes compared to live server ability to heal?  <div></div><p>Message Edited by Croake on <span class=date_text>08-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:13 AM</span>

[FelixDomesticus]

<span><blockquote><hr>Croake wrote:<div></div>I haven't played a shaman before..  how are the changes compared to live server ability to heal?  <div></div><p>Message Edited by Croake on <span class="date_text">08-21-2005</span> <span class="time_text">03:13 AM</span></p><hr></blockquote>In live servers shamans are just a shadow of other healers. In live servers there is the one and only templar and others can just dream of its healing powers. It seems that after DoF and live #13 come shamans will be again healers instead of pathetic wannabes they are atm. According to Banditman templar is winner even after DoF + live #13, but difference is small compared to huge gap in live servers atm.</span><div></div>

[OwennII]

Kind of Off Topic, but I a Fading Spirit Master I is for sale for a reasonable price and I was trying to find out if it was worth buying before DoF? Can I get some heads up as to what this spell does in the combat changes? <div></div>

[Banditman]

<span><blockquote><hr>Nacireen wrote:Check the Dev Tracker to see it for yerself but we have a dev statement on the preist balance in actual playtesting.  And with all adept 3 abilities in actual play duo'd with a berserker the mystic actually ended up with more power left, but not by much. <div></div><hr></blockquote> Please link said post.  I am not seeing anything obvious in the Dev Tracker.</span><div></div>

[Mercr]

<P>Priest Comparision Post Link</P> <P>Looks like bogus info to me since I hardly ever duo.  Wish he would have tested with a group or raid.</P> <P><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=comtest&message.id=3326#M3326" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=comtest&message.id=3326#M3326</A></P>

[Banditman]

Looks a little flaky to me too. It doesn't even come close to addressing the burst healing issue, and because you aren't addressing burst healing, you soften the impact of efficiency as well due to power regen.

[Pocca]

I read the report from the dev this morning and for a long while couldn't see how this could be, given the data that Banditman published.  Then it occured to me that maybe the "leveling factor" is DPS of each of the priest classes ("leveling factor" = difference between Banditman's data and this result).  This would translate that Druids have VERY good DPS and Clerics have VERY bad DPS and the mystic is somewhere in between. How this is going to play out in a raid situation where all the healer is doing is buffing, debuffing and mostly healing remains to be seen.  But it doesn't look very good. <div></div>

[Banditman]

I can't see how DPS would have had anything to do with this situation.  We're talking about a 9 minute fight here.  While Priests can do a little DPS over the short term, over the course of 9 minutes the chances that a Priest could afford to spend power on healing AND on DPS is pretty low. Debuffing *might* have made a difference, but with the shorter durations on all debuffs, I have a very hard time swallowing that either. And Adept 3 spells are super high level too.  I'd love to see this tried with App 3, App 4 and Adept 1 spells.

[Terq]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR><BR>And Adept 3 spells are super high level too.  I'd love to see this tried with App 3, App 4 and Adept 1 spells.<BR><BR><BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>That was my first thought as well.  Every spell was adept 3?  A few fabled items?  This deisgner seems to have a significantly over-estimation of what the "average" player is using for gear.</P> <P>The majority of players are going to be using app4 or adept 1 spells.  In fact, I remember an early thread where developers stated that combat was going to be balanced at the app2 level.  With this test, I can only assume that is no longer the case.  I guess that it just troubles me that they seem to be testing this using such a high "baseline" character.  <BR></P>

[Unmask]

<DIV>We've played our healers for many months in real situations.  It seems more than likely that a dev playing a healer class, probably for the first time, and in just one situation, is not likely to play the character as we would.  And a duo situation would not address the differences in how group heals work. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Also if you look at Lockeye's first post he specifically refers to druids as needing to cast minor arch <STRONG>and</STRONG> group heals to get the hp/sec above what a templar does with just minor and arch heals in 6s.  If this is the dev that was balancing healers in beta then it's no wonder they were out of balance in the first place.</DIV>

[Banditman]

I still maintain that the real problem with that fight is the length of time. Now, granted, I am using my current Live numbers here, but let's look at it: My power pool, self buffed, is right at 3000.  I have GEB's, Prismatic and Ring of Shimmering Spirits for Power regen.  I think it's like 21 / tick.  So my total in combat regen is 51 per tick. Over nine minutes, I'd regen: 51 x 10 ticks per minute x 9 minutes = 4590 power regen. Which doesnt include the 8 or 9 times I could have used my Manastone. I sure would love to see the logs of those fights.

[FelixDomesticus]

9 mins sounds like a very long time for a duo with uber gear to kill heroic mob. Even though mob is of higher level than them, but still. <div></div>

[Banditman]

Did anyone mention that Fighter DPS is way down yet?

[Johaan]

<DIV> <P>I have read the thread over the past few days, and I have a question:<SPAN>  </SPAN>How do the other spells available to the different healing classes impact their need to heal?<SPAN>  </SPAN>Asked another way, how do each classes’ buffs and debuffs impact the balance between the classes?</P></DIV>

[Banditman]

Rather minimally really. The AC buffs are all pretty much the same, just have different secondary effects.  Honestly, that's where most of the difference is across the board.  Wardens are still strong against Elemental, Mystics against Noxious, Templars against Arcane. So, against a mob with a lot of Noxious attacks, a Mystic might heal less than a Templar, while against a mob with a lot of Elemental attacks a Mystic and Templar both might heal more than a Warden. None of the buffs really have enough overall difference to change the healing required.  Each buff has a unique flavor, which in certain circumstances might be more beneficial, but over time, I doubt there is a parseable difference.

[Johaan]

<DIV> <P>Banditman, thanks for the reply.<SPAN>  </SPAN></P> <P> </P> <P>What about debuffs and damage shields?<SPAN>  </SPAN>In theory they all decrease the damage absorbed during the encounter.<SPAN>  </SPAN>Some, like damage shields, are supposed to shorten the encounter, while debuffs impair the mobs’ ability to deal damage.</P> <P> </P> <P>Less damage dealt means less damage to heal so, in theory, a less capable healer could still “keep up” with the lessened damage output of a crippled mob.<SPAN>  </SPAN>Looking at the numbers posted to date, I can’t begin to guess if that is true here.</P> <P> </P> <P>Any thoughts on this?</P> <P> </P> <P>Oh, and BTW, kudos on the hard numbers.<SPAN>  </SPAN>This is some of the best stuff I’ve seen posted anywhere.</P></DIV>

[Banditman]

Yea, the desire of the developers from the outset has been that debuffs, dps, damage shields, etc are completely secondary effects.  In other words, healing is intended to balance in a vacuum without any consideration of outside forces or effects. This was the mistake made in EQLive.  Debuffs and buffs became far too much a part of the game for class balance to work properly.  It's still broken over there as far as I know.

[BigDa]

<P>I made a post elsewhere making the point that it looks like the devs do not play mystics and other classes as their mains or do much class play-testing before slamming stuff into test (or even live) given the changes made in the past and for the re-balancing have included some things that mystics (and those other classes) would have spotted after about 30 seconds and got shot down in general.</P> <P>I'll bet those guys weren't mystics or wardens.</P>

[Johaan]

<DIV> <P>Banditman,</P> <P>Perhaps this is something I should ask in a different thread, but what is your opinion on the changes being made to the non-healing abilities of the priest classes?</P> <P><SPAN><FONT face=Arial>Are those secondary traits balanced without consideration of healing?</FONT></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN>Edited to clarify text.</SPAN></P></DIV><p>Message Edited by Johaan on <span class=date_text>08-23-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:20 AM</span>

[Banditman]

That is something I really haven't put a lot of effort into looking at yet.  Healing is my primary concern. However, you can see that I'd like to make that comparison by looking at the data I collected.  I think Clerics might get a bit of the short end on DPS for no real reason.  They have the proper number and distribution of spells, but for some reason they seem a bit on the low side for DPS.  I can't think of a good reason for this. Shaman seem to fall somewhere in the middle, more DPS than Clerics, less than Druids. It's really hard to compare Utility.  Clerics seem a little lacking here as well.  I'd like to see them get a 10 minute re-use, non-combat evac, their current travel utility seems a lot less useful than SOW in many situations.  In addition to SoW, Druids also get either Evac or Invis . . . they certainly aren't hurting here. Debuffs seem fairly balanced, everyone just does different styles and types.  Druids might need a little more help here. All the Priests have a lot of secondary stuff, and it's pretty hard to compare.  Class envy often rears it's head here and clouds the waters.  Clerics who want SoW, Shaman who want Evac, Druids who want whatever . . . I'm inclined to say that secondary effects are close to balanced, but could use some tweaking around.

[Owlbe]

<P>"Debuffs seem fairly balanced, everyone just does different styles and types.  Druids might need a little more help here."</P> <P> </P> <P>I'll say.  </P> <P>Wardens have a agi debuff and only a aoe group version now on test.  For some reason they thought our single target agi debuff one was too powerful or something as we no longer have it.  At the very least give us our single target one back.</P> <P><BR><BR> </P>

[Jays]

What is the story with "Runic Talisman" I have it at Master 1 and am hoping that it has changed for the better! <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Ummari</DIV> <DIV>Lvl 50 Mystic</DIV> <DIV>Splitpaw</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Banditman]

Pretty much it is what it is. AC buff plus a small regenerating Ward.  The little Ward is sometimes nice, sometimes a pain.

[Eepop]

To clarify: The small regenerating ward can cause aggro issues. <div></div>

[Unmask]

<BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR>Yea, the desire of the developers from the outset has been that debuffs, dps, damage shields, etc are completely secondary effects.  In other words, healing is intended to balance in a vacuum without any consideration of outside forces or effects.<BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Actually, a post by Moorguard implies just the opposite.  It was a while ago so I don't know if I could find it but I did refer to it in a discussion on the forums at the time.  I'll have to look for it.  It wasn't an explicit statement to that effect but it seemed to me to be clear enough.<BR>

[Banditman]

If he said something like that it's in direct conflict with what was stated in Beta (original beta).

[Code2501]

<P>Thankyou banditman for your work compiling this,</P> <P>With regards to specialty group heals i can understand the perspective of banditman and the other mystics who have posted in favour of 6xindividual wards/reactives. As it stands their spell is ineffective in what it is supose to do... work for the whole group. </P> <P>Being a warden i will not pretend i know the mystic class better than a mystic, so if they claim that group heals are imbalanced and the numbers clearly show they are then i'll not doubt it. The current situation means that their specialty group heals do not work effectively as GROUP heals, which is what they are called, no? </P> <P>As a warden i certainly do not take kindly to being told by devs that i should use my group heals to compensate for the fact that they gimped us (to put it lightly) in single target heals, so I can understand a mystic saying that they would prefer 1 effective group ward (6x individuals) rather than 1 ineffective group ward than can double as an expensive, slow, 'single target' ward.</P> <DIV>If the Devs are serious about ballance then they really should pay some attention to the good posts here.</DIV>

[Mercr]

So the spells we get every ten levels are master 2s of existing spells.  Anyone know what happened to the group cures?

[Banditman]

Group Cures are currently incapable of curing anything.  We're told it's being addressed.  :/

[Unmask]

<DIV>Our training choices are being replaced by Master II spells so we will no longer have those group cures.  Hopefully we will have others.  In fact I think one of our deagro spells become our group cures. <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV>

[Unmask]

<P>OK I found it.  It's in an odd thread and other than him using the word "healing" it wouldn't seem to have any bearing on us.</P> <P>Here is the quote that stuck in my mind...</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Keep in mind that DPS doesn't exist in a vacuum. If a class has an ability that increases the DPS of others, that's a factor. If another class has the ability to reduce the DPS of the target, that's a factor in both group DPS and healing. It isn't your own DPS numbers alone that show your benefits in a group or solo situation.</FONT></P> <DIV><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=spellart&message.id=41371&query.id=0#M41371" target=_blank>Here</A> is the post.</DIV>

[Banditman]

The replacement for the LOST Group Cures is a spell which DOES NOT cure all possible effects and has a 40 second recast. So, once every 40 seconds you can cure SOME of the effects you might see on your group. For raiders, you may as well just tell them you are removing raid content.  In 40 seconds of raid it's not uncommon to cast 6 to 8 cures of varying types. While I was initially excited about the revamp, I am seeing more and more problems with it as time goes forward. 

[Fae]

<DIV>DoF NDA has been lifted. FYI.</DIV>

[Mercr]

<P>Here we go again.</P> <P>Quote:</P> <DIV>New speed songs for bards (as in both Dirges and Troubadors) will be in the next Beta update.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Healing spells for Priests have also been revised.</DIV> <P>===========================<BR>Steve Danuser, a.k.a. Moorgard<BR>Game Designer, EverQuest II </P>

[FelixDomesticus]

<div></div>Some comparison about heal of priests: <a href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=comtest&message.id=4581&a#M4581" target="_blank">Devs thread</a> And it seems that templars have started the holy whine because they got dropped back to earth.

[watts4]

<DIV> <P><FONT face="Courier New">#s from that post:</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Courier New"></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Courier New"></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Courier New">Healing Line<BR>Classes:        Temp / Inqu / Ward / Fury / Myst / Defi<BR>Cast:           2      2      1.5    1      2      2<BR>Recast:         6      4      5      5      5      6<BR>Power:          1.16x  1x     1x     0.8x   1x     1x/1x<BR>Heal:           8.65x  7.5x   8.5x   6x     7.5x   8.65x<BR>Heal per mana:  7.46   7.5    8.5    7.5    7.5    8.65<BR>Heal Per sec:   .932   1.25   1.3    1.25   1.07   1.08<BR><BR>Arch Healing Line<BR>Classes:        Temp / Inqu / Ward / Fury / Myst / Defi<BR>Cast:           3      3      1.5    1.5    3      3<BR>Recast:         11.5   8      10     8.5    10     11.5<BR>Power:          2x     1.65x  1.65x  1.32x  1.65x  1.65x/1.65x<BR>Heal:           15x    12.5x  15x    10x    12.5x  15x<BR>Heal per mana:  7.5    7.57   9.09   7.57   7.57   9.09<BR></FONT><FONT face="Courier New">Heal Per sec:   .52    .68    .79    .75    .58    .62</FONT><BR><FONT face="Courier New"><BR><BR>Group Healing Line<BR>Classes:        Temp / Inqu / Ward / Fury / Myst / Defi<BR>Cast:           3      3      2.5    1.5    3      3<BR>Recast:         9      6      7.5    7.5    7.5    9<BR>Power:          2.32x  2x     2x     1.6x   2x     2x/1.5x<BR>Heal:           9.89x  8.57x  10x    6.86x  8.57x  9.89x<BR>Heal per mana:  4.262  4.285  5      4.285  4.285  4.945<BR>Heal Per sec:   .355   .476   .5     .476   .408   .412</FONT></P></DIV>

[Banditman]

Forgive me if I don't take their numbers at face value.  I'll plug in the "real world" numbers as soon as I am able to log in without the zone crashing.

[watts4]

<P>Banditman,</P> <P>He also states that wards were decreased "slightly".</P> <P>Please expand on his defenition of slightly :smileyindifferent:</P> <P>thanks you for all the effort you have put into this revamp.  It does not go un-noticed</P> <P> </P> <P>Tac</P>

[FelixDomesticus]

<span><blockquote><hr>watts420 wrote:<div></div> <p>Banditman,</p> <p>He also states that wards were decreased "slightly".</p><hr></blockquote>"Slightly" used by SOE dev in any news related to shamans has usually been first sign of disaster. I just hope that they also dropped casting cost "slightly" too. Somehow I doubt that ward would have been so much better than other heals, so probably some dev who does not play shaman saw someone using them, noticed that they actually worked and therefore called them overpowered and nerfed them.</span><div></div>

[Onz]

<div></div><div></div> <p>For the new healing changes, I do not see how the healing is balanced.  It is obvious when you compare Inquistors and Mystics.  In this comparison:</p> <p>For all 3 healing lines, Inquisitors and Mystics are the same in all aspects except Mystics have a longer recast.   The short duration max hp buff that Mystic have better be really significant to balance this out because reactives > wards based on Banditman's analysis.</p> <p>This is really puzzling to me as Mystics do not excel is any area of healing, save for the short duration max hp buff.  Each subclass has a strength in healing across each healing line except for the Mystic.</p> <p>For example, in the Healing line, let's see where healers rank in each category from.  If a ranking appears more than once there is a tie. A lower number indicates a better ranking.</p> <p><font face="Courier New">Classes:        Temp / Inqu / Ward / Fury / Myst / DefiCast:           3      3      3      1      3      3Recast:         3      1      2      2      2       3Power:          3      2      2      1      2      2*(requires health also)Heal:           1      3      2      4      3      1</font><font face="Courier New">Heal per mana:  4      3      2      3      3      1*(requires health also)Heal Per sec:   5      2      1      2      4      3</font></p> <p>Now lets look at the Arch Healing line in a similar fashion.<font face="Courier New">Classes:        Temp / Inqu / Ward / Fury / Myst / DefiCast:           2      2      1      1      2      2Recast:         4      1      3      2      3      4Power:          3      2      2      1      2      2*(requires health also)Heal:           1      2      1      4      2      1Heal per mana:  3      2      1      2      2      1*(requires health also)Heal Per sec:   6      3      1      2      5      4</font></p> <p>Finally, let's look at group healing.<font face="Courier New">Classes:        Temp / Inqu / Ward / Fury / Myst / DefiCast:           3      3      2      1      3      3Recast:         3      1      2      2      2      3Power:          3      2      2      1      2      2*(requires health also)</font><font face="Courier New">Heal:           2      3      1      4      3      2Heal per mana:  4      3      1      3      3      2*(requires health also)Heal Per sec:   5      2      1      2      4      3</font></p> <p>This does not give a full picture but it shows Mystics seem to be lacking. There is not a single item were Mystics ranks the best.</p><font size="2"> <p></p> <p><span></span></p><span><span><font size="3">Now, lets look at how each subclass compares percentage wise to the highest ranked subclass.<span>  </span>This give a better indication of how far the gap is rather than just a relative ranking.</font></span></span> <p></p> <p><font face="Courier New"><span><span>Healing Line</span> Classes<span>           </span>Temp<span>  </span>Inqu<span>  </span>Ward<span>  </span>Fury<span>  </span>Myst<span>  </span>Defi Cast<span>              </span>-100%<span> </span>-100%<span> </span>-50%<span>  </span>0%<span>    </span>-100%<span> </span>-100% Recast<span>            </span>-50%<span>  </span>0%<span>    </span>-25%<span>  </span>-25%<span>  </span>-25%<span>  </span>-50% Power<span>             </span>-45%<span>  </span>-25%<span>  </span>-25%<span>  </span>0%<span>    </span>-25%<span>  </span>-25% Heal<span>              </span>0%<span>    </span>-13%<span>  </span>-2%<span>   </span>-31%<span>  </span>-13%<span>  </span>0% Healpermana<span>       </span>-14%<span>  </span>-13%<span>  </span>-2%<span>   </span>-13%<span>  </span>-13%<span>  </span>0% HealPersec<span>        </span>-28%<span>  </span>-4%<span>   </span>0%<span>    </span>-4%<span>   </span>-18%<span>  </span>-17%</span> </font></p> <p><font face="Courier New"><span>Arch Healing Line<span>                              </span>Classes<span>           </span>Temp<span>  </span>Inqu<span>  </span>Ward<span>  </span>Fury<span>  </span>Myst<span>  </span>Defi Cast<span>              </span>-100%<span> </span>-100%<span> </span>0%<span>    </span>0%<span>    </span>-100%<span> </span>-100% Recast<span>            </span>-44%<span>  </span>0%<span>    </span>-25%<span>  </span>-6%<span>   </span>-25%<span>  </span>-44% Power<span>             </span>-52%<span>  </span>-25%<span>  </span>-25%<span>  </span>0%<span>    </span>-25%<span>  </span>-25% Heal<span>              </span>0%<span>    </span>-17%<span>  </span>0%<span>    </span>-33%<span>  </span>-17%<span>  </span>0% Heal per mana<span>     </span>-17%<span>  </span>-17%<span>  </span>0%<span>    </span>-17%<span>  </span>-17%<span>  </span>0% Heal Per sec<span>      </span>-34%<span>  </span>-14%<span>  </span>0%<span>    </span>-5%<span>   </span>-27%<span>  </span>-22%</span> <span></span> </font></p> <p><font face="Courier New"><span>Group Healing Line<span>                               </span> Classes<span>           </span>Temp<span>  </span>Inqu<span>  </span>Ward<span>  </span>Fury<span>  </span>Myst<span>  </span>Defi Cast<span>              </span>-100%<span> </span>-100%<span> </span>-67%<span>  </span>0%<span>    </span>-100%<span> </span>-100% Recast<span>            </span>-50%<span>  </span>0%<span>    </span>-25%<span>  </span>-25%<span>  </span>-25%<span>  </span>-50% Power<span>             </span>-45%<span>  </span>-25%<span>  </span>-25%<span>  </span>0%<span>    </span>-25%<span>  </span>-25% Heal<span>              </span>-1%<span>   </span>-14%<span>  </span>0%<span>    </span>-31%<span>  </span>-14%<span>  </span>-1% Heal per mana<span>     </span>-15%<span>  </span>-14%<span>  </span>0%<span>    </span>-14%<span>  </span>-14%<span>  </span>-1% Heal Per sec<span>      </span>-29%<span>  </span>-5%<span>   </span>0%<span>    </span>-5%<span>   </span>-18%<span>  </span>-18%</span></font></p> <p>It sure does seem like Mystics got the short end of the stick.  Decide for yourself.  Like I said. Wards and the short duration hp buff on the heal better be really nice.</p> <p>Ceoin50 Mystic Guk</p></font> <div></div><p>Message Edited by Onz on <span class=date_text>08-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:40 PM</span>

[aprilstor]

<P>I gotta agree with Onz...doesnt look that great for us..especially if our wards are significantly decreased. </P> <P>I have faith in Bandit and the other testers that they will do a great job convincing the developers of the need to keep tweaking. </P> <P>If it doesnt pan out that way...well we have to be better than we are now right?</P>

[FelixDomesticus]

They said that mystic heals give short increase to max health. Is that counted to healing chart and if not is it worth the increased casting time and lowered wards? <div></div>

[Finora]

On the subject of people wanting group wards to be made into 6 individual wards. Please no. I for one am not often actually in a full group and that would hurt any folks that DON"T have full groups all the time or raid.  If anything, make it so it casts an individual ward on all group members equally the amount of the total ward divided by the number of actual group members. I mean if I'm casting a ward for 1200 damage I'd like to actually get that for the power I use. Just making it 6 individual wards of 1/6 the amount of the present total would be an awful change for any that don't do the optimal 6man group /raid thing.

[Zeltaria]

<DIV>I like the group wards just the way they are. I use them way more than the single target wards because they last longer on me if I'm soloing, when I'm fighting I dont have time to keep casting my small ward over and over and over, versus a group ward which would last me a while so I can actually concentrate on getting out a few HO's as well as damage spells to kill a mob. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In group situations the single target ward on the tank is a waste, I always use the group ward because it at least lasts a hit or two on the tank or anyone else who has agro and getting hit for that matter. 6 individual small wards are a waste because not everyone is always getting hit at the same time. At least the group ward does offer (even if limited) group protection, but it offers a large ward for the tank versus our small single target ward.</DIV>

[Spag]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Zeltaria wrote:<BR> <DIV>I like the group wards just the way they are. I use them way more than the single target wards because they last longer on me if I'm soloing, when I'm fighting I dont have time to keep casting my small ward over and over and over, versus a group ward which would last me a while so I can actually concentrate on getting out a few HO's as well as damage spells to kill a mob. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In group situations the single target ward on the tank is a waste, I always use the group ward because it at least lasts a hit or two on the tank or anyone else who has agro and getting hit for that matter. 6 individual small wards are a waste because not everyone is always getting hit at the same time. At least the group ward does offer (even if limited) group protection, but it offers a large ward for the tank versus our small single target ward.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Well in all fairness, the issue with wards only lasting a few seconds has already been resolved.  They will take mitigation into account, and last much longer than they currently do on live.

[FelixDomesticus]

<span><blockquote><hr>Spagma wrote:Well in all fairness, the issue with wards only lasting a few seconds has already been resolved.  They will take mitigation into account, and last much longer than they currently do on live. <div></div><hr></blockquote>So have I heard, but I still fear that we get half diluted wards and heals. SOE is not known for its willingness to fix shamans.</span><div></div>

[Banditman]

Shaman group Wards need to be 6 single target Wards in order to be balanced, just as Cleric Group Reactives need to be 6 single target Reactives in order to be balanced. I said nothing about what the value of those Wards should be, only that they should be balanced against what other Priests get. I don't want Mystics to be the "uber healers" - I want us to be BALANCED.  Right now, I don't think that's the case.

[icetower]

<P>Zeltaria, I understand your opinion in light of the current ward situation but I think some people are missing the point.</P> <P>Firstly single target wards should be made sufficient to keep the mt alive.</P> <P>Group wards should NOT be designed as an uber mt heal. The fact that this is their current purpose simply shows how gimped we are.</P> <P>Group wards should be reserved as something that we cast for example when a timed aoe is about to hit and we need to protect the casters in the group from a near death experience. </P> <P>Sure I will happily accept the group ward in its current state because it will be extremely powerful in single group situations where the mt takes all the damage.</P> <P>But who will keep the group alive in a raid when the boss mob uses up  the whole groups protection by whupping the mt with normal mellee?</P>

[Spag]

<P>At this point I think they should make all specials work in relation to the group.  It can be distributed to the whole group, but base that on the number of people in the group.</P> <P>Total HP pool divided by # of group members, which is then assigned to each member of the group.</P> <P>This way all the specials work similarly, as well as work in 6 man group, like most people here want it, and also work with small groups.  Remember small groups are still groups, and should be able to utilize a group spell, without wasting power.</P>

[Janze]

Something that might make it a little easier to balance yet still not waste power. Have the group ward cast individual wards on each group member always the same size no matter what the size of the group is. Then have the power cost scale depending on the number of group members. Janzert <div></div>

[Zeltaria]

<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P><FONT size=2>Message from Icetower:</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=2>Zeltaria, I understand your opinion in light of the current ward situation but I think some people are missing the point.</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=2>Firstly single target wards should be made sufficient to keep the mt alive.</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=2>Group wards should NOT be designed as an uber mt heal. The fact that this is their current purpose simply shows how gimped we are.</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=2>Group wards should be reserved as something that we cast for example when a timed aoe is about to hit and we need to protect the casters in the group from a near death experience. </FONT></P> <P><FONT size=2>Sure I will happily accept the group ward in its current state because it will be extremely powerful in single group situations where the mt takes all the damage.</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=2>But who will keep the group alive in a raid when the boss mob uses up  the whole groups protection by whupping the mt with normal mellee?</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=2></FONT> </P></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT size=2>Ahh... I understand what you are saying, and I can agree with that.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT size=2>In a raid situation I dont think we'll ever have a chance to keep our group alive without at least another healer there to back each other up and I dont expect to be able to either with the way eq2 works. But, in a single group situation it would be nice to be able to be the only healer and keep the group alive, which in most cases (or in my experience with trying to heal a group while we're taking on somewhat challenging content) we cannot, and if we do, it's only by the skin of our teeth.</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=2>I'd like to thank Banditman and all the mystics who are testing the upcoming changes. I know things will probably be drastically different after the changes go live, and I'm hoping for the best. Thanks for all your hard work trying to get us balanced. </FONT></P>

[FelixDomesticus]

Have you noticed something scary? When Moorgard posts combat change there never seems to be mystic fixes although other priests seem to get them. <div></div>

[tebion]

<span><blockquote><hr>FelixDomesticus wrote:Have you noticed something scary? When Moorgard posts combat change there never seems to be mystic fixes although other priests seem to get them. <div></div><hr></blockquote>at least it seems they ARE working on priests now .. i mean, about time now that its only 2 weeks until the changes going live and the update notes contain priests (at least they get mentioned ...) since 2 or so days, hehe we can just pray and hope ...</span><div></div>

[Godflower]

<P>I would like to chime in with the way I use group wards now.  Since I duo quite a bit with non tanks (mages & scouts) I use the group ward a lot at the beginning of the encounter keep my focus on other things in the encounter (debuf dot HO heal), and when we get an add.  The fluidity of the HP is useful in these situation since aggro can be volitile, particularly with encounters that have more than 1 mob and remain split.  Usually by the the mid point I am the MT of the encounter and use the single heals and wards. but if aggro remains split I continue with the group ward.   In lager group situations I tend to use the group ward as an emergency option since the power consumption and casting time was so high.  Perhaps a way to balance the group ward is to make the cast & recast times longer and/or the duration shorter so that players only use it strategically (like the Phantasam line, but not to that extreme).  I am not in Beta so I have no idea what they are like there there. </P> <P>My 2c</P> <P>Message Edited by Godflower on <SPAN class=date_text>08-31-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>08:05 AM</SPAN> <P><SPAN class=time_text>(bad grammar, spelling and memory! :smileytongue: )</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Godflower on <span class=date_text>08-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:14 AM</span>

[Banditman]

Regardless of how you use it NOW, in order for us to BALANCE, that needs to change. I can't even begin to explain how important this is.

[Eepop]

Put simply...which would you rather have.... 1) Group wards changed to be equal to the other group heals.  And for the situations where we are using it now, we can use the tools actually designed for those situations. 2) Group wards stay as they are, and are constantly used as justification why something else of ours should be gimped. <div></div>

[Godflower]

<P>I many have misinterpereted the orignal idea of framenting the ward into 6 parts, but what about using the group ward for smaller groups - like 2 or 3 players?  How would that work?  </P> <P>If you say something must change, convince me how it will benefit & balance how I play the majority of the time?</P>

[Banditman]

The idea is not to balance how you play, or how I play.  Frankly, the current shared Ward is best for me as it gives me an additional tool for protecting the MT in a raid situation. But that isn't the point. The point is to balance all Priests.  In order to do that, they need to have comparable tools to form an accurate comparison.  Right now, our shared Ward is not comparable to the tools of other Priests, and it doesn't serve the purpose for which it was intended. Group special healing should be used only for healing every member of the group, regardless of the size of the group.  Right now, our shared Ward can and does leave members of a group unprotected at times, and that should never happen.

[FelixDomesticus]

<span><blockquote><hr>FelixDomesticus wrote:Have you noticed something scary? When Moorgard posts combat change there never seems to be mystic fixes although other priests seem to get them. <div></div><hr></blockquote>I have to take back my word. In latest part of LU #13 they seem to have fixed bears to 1 CP and changed reuse times of several spells. And they specifically call bears as SOLO spells now.</span><div></div>

[BigDa]

<BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FelixDomesticus wrote:<BR><SPAN> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FelixDomesticus wrote:<BR>Have you noticed something scary? When Moorgard posts combat change there never seems to be mystic fixes although other priests seem to get them.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I have to take back my word. In latest part of LU #13 they seem to have fixed bears to 1 CP and changed reuse times of several spells. And they specifically call bears as SOLO spells now.<BR></SPAN> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>The bear 'fix' text says it's now 1 conc, but in detailing what it now does it doesn't mention the maul ability anymore...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And the reason that Moorgard rarely mentions Mystic changes in update notes is that they usually put our 'fixes' straight into live, eh? <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV>

[FelixDomesticus]

No maul? So much for that spell line then. Useless. <div></div>

[Godflower]

Im gonna miss maul :smileysad: Hopefully our weapons/nukes get a kick to compensate.

[BigDa]

<DIV>Well I was killing orange con mobs solo with just our DoTs in very quick time last night. Too quick.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Someone suggested that the reason orange mobs were so easy in Beta is that there's a bug the means STR isn't being used to modify damage. That does explain why they weren't doing more damage to me, but does not explain why I was able to kill them real quick using mystic DoTs.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm gonna get some figures right now.</DIV>

[Pass1o]

<DIV>Arrr..just found out warden's get a wolf pet spell..we should've gotten it *frowns*</DIV>

[Dr^Ney]

But we get the BADGER! no use in crying about a druid getting a wolf .... <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[FelixDomesticus]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Dr^Ney wrote:But we get the BADGER! no use in crying about a druid getting a wolf .... <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><hr></blockquote>Badger is lame, even pet gnoll would be more cool. I want pet rat (perfect pet for kerra, if you get bored of it you can eat it)! EDIT: Actually pet raven would be perfect for mystics. </span><div></div><p>Message Edited by FelixDomesticus on <span class=date_text>09-03-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:14 PM</span>

[Silda]

They could give me a pet halfling and i wouldnt care as long as it ACTUALLY WORKED how it was supposed to. <div></div>

[Volka]

<span><blockquote><hr>FelixDomesticus wrote:<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Dr^Ney wrote:But we get the BADGER! no use in crying about a druid getting a wolf .... <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><hr></blockquote>Badger is lame, even pet gnoll would be more cool. I want pet rat (perfect pet for kerra, if you get bored of it you can eat it)! EDIT: Actually pet raven would be perfect for mystics. </span><div></div><p>Message Edited by FelixDomesticus on <span class="date_text">09-03-2005</span> <span class="time_text">03:14 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>Badger owns, cease speaking immediately. A raven wouldn't be half bad, though... seems to suit the role. Some kind of wisp/spirit thing would also work.</span><div></div>

[Zeltaria]

<P>Warlocks already get a familiar that is a Raven.</P> <P> </P> <P>I also greatly miss spirit-doggie =(</P>

[BigDa]

After getting giant beaver and deer as high-level shape-changes you really expect a 'cool' pet? Be thankful it's a badger and not fish or something... It's been obvious for quite a while that us mystics either don't have a dev who plays as main or we do and they are the one all the other devs hate! <p>Message Edited by BigDave on <span class=date_text>09-04-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:55 PM</span>

[FelixDomesticus]

<span><blockquote><hr>BigDave wrote:<div></div>After getting giant beaver and deer as high-level shape-changes you really expect a 'cool' pet? Be thankful it's a badger and not fish or something... It's been obvious for quite a while that us mystics either don't have a dev who plays as main or we do and they are the one all the other devs hate! <div></div><p>Message Edited by BigDave on <span class="date_text">09-04-2005</span> <span class="time_text">11:55 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>Well, since we are talking about mystics shape changes should be some mythical beast like centaur, unicorn, medusa or something like that. And if they want to give us really lame pet how about a pet spider, so small that you can step on it and the one that gets lost when you walk behind the corner?</span><div></div>

[Pass1o]

Yes..our shapeshifting spells are nice...but because they vanish when u zone..people just get tired of recasting every time..I'm not asking for some ubber pet...just something that will stay with me...something like we used to have back in eq1...give me that useless badger...but dont make me recast it every 20 secs(even if it was permenant it would've not been any usefull :p)

[Banza]

<DIV>Glad I changed my sub down to monthly over quarterly cause I don't want more of a commitment.  This rebalance is hilarious.  First off, it was all preceded by "the great priest rebalancing act of 2005", and priest classes have had the fewest bullets in the update notes in the past month (I know, that doesn't mean the changes aren't happening).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But they are COMPLETELY throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks.  The two most obvious examples:</DIV> <DIV>Shadowy attendant -- at start of combat changes on test, it was healing a great amount of HPs.  Then they nerf it to uselessness.  Now it back to "a more appropriate amount".  Then bearform stays with 1 concentration slot.  Then it's jacked to 3.  Now it's none.  [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]!?!!?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And we're all seeing the scrambling they have to do since it's obvious a few of them worked for a good part of the holiday weekend.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So much for Moorgard's statement about how we'd have a month to test the changes.  No, we have a day or two to test a change, then that change completely changes.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Mattim]

So for straight healing/warding is a defiler now stronger than the mystic would you more enlightened folks guess? I've always been intrigued by the class and if it turns out that way I might have to give it a try.. it's those first 20 levels that always start to get to me since I've done them before.

[Eepop]

Defiler heals have a health cost as well as power cost.  This gives them a bit more potency, but requires you do something to keep yourself from getting too beat up. <div></div>

[Mattim]

Yeah, that only further intrigues me, lol. I started a shaman in general because I liked the idea of a weaker healer who prevented damage over strong healing with buffs.I'm particularly interested in torpor though, that could be a tremendous amount of fun as a healing spell goes though. And the effect of our slow should be more noticeable now eh?Characters tend to be a touch-and-go subject with me though, lol. I have four on test server above 20 and all of them on live, six full slots, are above 35. Variety is the spice of life afterall! ^_^

[Eepop]

Hmmm..I dont know a whole lot about how mystics and defilers compare, but from what I can tell, its mostly just a flavor difference. For me its kind of a non-issue, I simply don't like freeport. heh <div></div>

[FelixDomesticus]

<span>Is it true that latest beta patch pretty much destroyed the game in test server? Players seem to be reporting that they have extreme difficulities to kill even mobs in beginner ship, not to even talk about beginner island.  And supposedly it gets even worse when you arrive to freeport/qeynos.</span><div></div>

[Banditman]

The latest patch certainly broke the game to the point of unplayability. Green solo mobs killing players with Legendary and Fabled gear.

[Eepop]

I didnt get alot of play time yesterday, but here are my conclusions. These are from level 50 characters with appr1s and crappy betabuff gear. (One templar and one mystic) Avoidance and mitigation are complete crap on both characters.  Avoidance was literally in the 5% to 10% range for both characters. I tried to fight a level 45/46, one down solo crocadile.  Both got owned pretty hard. Templar had to run, but I don't normally play a templar so I probably wasnt playing it to its full potential. Fighting a 46 croc. Mystic was able to pull it off with very low health and power.  But I play a mystic so I know what to do when its down to the wire.  Fighting a 45 croc. In the end, the fights against solo mobs 4-5 levels down were probably a bit too tough.  Im sure it would have been easier with decent gear and apprentice 4s.  I don't know if it would be enough to make whites takable but I kinda doubt it. One of the devs did say that there was a problem with mobs having some attacks doing too much damage, but I dont know if thats the only problem. So my final conclusion is that its probably not as bad as people are making it out to be, but it is pretty bad.  The worst part though, is not that its harder, but more that this huge sweeping change was made less than a week before release. <div></div>

[TheRealMo]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Eepop wrote:The worst part though, is not that its harder, but more that this huge sweeping change was made less than a week before release. <div></div><hr></blockquote>This does not bode well. They took mitigation out of wards a week before the original beta ended & look how screwed up we've been for the past 10 months. <span>:smileysad:</span> Wholesale changes this close to release tells me that the devs are truly grasping at straws.<span>:smileyindifferent:</span> </span><div></div><p>Message Edited by TheRealMoon on <span class=date_text>09-08-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:03 AM</span>

[Eepop]

On the upside of that though, the sweeping changes are hitting everyone, not just us. Relative to others, we will be much better off after the update than we are before. Whereas now we are about 60% of a templar, afterwards we are about 80-90%.  It aint perfect, but its alot closer. But even then, everyone's(Mobs included) numbers on everything are pretty much going down.  So its very important that we don't try to compare before to after directly. For example, the post by someone complaining that ward values went down...sounds bad until you remember that mitigation is taken into account.  All the changes have to be taken as a whole, and adapted to as such.  Thats why I suggest to outsiders or people coming back to wait a week before asking people's impression of the revamp. <div></div>

[Banditman]

I'm not convinced that those numbers are correct.  I have us pegged at about 70% to 75% of a Cleric, of which Inquisitors are actually the superior healer.  I'm trying to finalize the analysis.

[FelixDomesticus]

<blockquote><hr>Banditman wrote:I'm not convinced that those numbers are correct. I have us pegged at about 70% to 75% of a Cleric, of which Inquisitors are actually the superior healer. I'm trying to finalize the analysis.<hr></blockquote> Have you calculated yet what the numbers after LU #13 will be based on current situation?

[Banditman]

Unfortunately the "current situation" changes pretty much daily, sometimes multiple times per day, on Beta.  It's bloody near impossible to nail down.

[vicario]

<P>Wow...Monday - it's almost showtime people!! :smileyhappy:</P> <P>Then we can discuss it more :smileywink:</P>

[Banditman]

If anyone remains to discuss it with. I am not encouraged by the current state on Beta.  <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[vicario]

I'll still be here - I'm too in love with this game to go elsewhere...:smileytongue:

[Eepop]

I beat the [Removed for Content] Pit Champion yesterday (from impossible on live to fun in beta, ZOMG!).  Thats enough encouragement to keep me here. <div></div>

[Banditman]

I would certainly challenge that "impossible on live" label . . . I only lost once to him, learning enough in that loss to never lose again.

[Eepop]

It was most definitely impossible <u>for me</u> on live as a level 40 mystic in average gear.  Perhaps the tools gained through T5 help considerably, but I dont have those to work with at this time. On live I have fought the champion about 15-20 times, and got completely waxed each time using varied stategies including rare potions, clicky wands, etc. I don't doubt that mystics could beat him before.  I just know that combat has changed benefically for me, turning something that was impossible for me to do, to something that was possible and quite entertaining. <div></div>

[crunchybob]

Yeah same thing here. I've tried him (Pit Champ) 5 or 6 times as a 35 mystic in all yellow crafted gear, adoberg warstaff, in bear form for a little (very little) more dps, using t4 food/drink and invariably I run out of power about the time I get the PC down somewhere between 40-50% and I'm dead around 15 seconds later. Mostly because I'm burning thru self heals. He just pounds the Jebus out of me.

[FelixDomesticus]

My opinion about new system: borked-Way too much fizzles and interrupts-Nukes and dots still take way too much power compared to effects-Mob healers are tuned to hell. Your damage starts to bite when all of them run out of power and thats when you are already low in power-Combat takes ages<div></div>