PDA

View Full Version : Is the game designed around 2 healer groups or are Mystics just under powered?


climbhi
12-24-2004, 01:39 AM
<DIV>I play a lvl 21 Mystic on Butcherblock server.  I have given up joining existing group at all posible and have resorted to building my own questing and exp groups.  The reason I do this is so that I can put together a strong group with few deaths.  The combination that seems to work the best is two healers a Mystic and druid or cleric but never two Mystics (too much overlap), Chanter, a good tank I personally like Pallies and two rangers or other good DPS melee classes (two tanks seems to be a waste of DPS.).  I also like to match the Tanks level to the mobs that we are fighting.  No matter  how good of a healer I am I cannot keep a tank alive who is always attacking reds. (With strong red mobs the tank seems to die with 25% of the encouters with the healers going oom the remaining 75%).   These type of groups rock people tend to stay longer than they intend because the exp is so good because there is almost no down time and its alot of fun without people complaining or name calling after mistakes, we just recover from over pulls and over conns and move on.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I started making my own groups after seeing groups comprising 5 tanks and me or 1 tank 4 casters and myself.  With too many tanks the aggro keeps on switching from one tank to another and its a total waste to heal multiple toons at the same time.  When these groups got adds I died because all the chain healing caused too much aggro and the melee classes don't pay attention to my health bar and relize that I am being beat on.  They instead complain that I did not heal them fast enough not realizing that my heal spells do not refresh fast enough to heal myself and 1-2 other toons.  It also seems like when you have too many tanks they tend to over pull thinking that one of the other tanks can just off tank- But I have to heal the second tank.  I hate when the puller consistantly over pulls when there is only one healer.  I think that they never look at my power bar before they pull and just assume that I can keep them alive.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>No matter what group set up I make the key ingedient for success is a good match between the tanks and mob's levels.  Too big of an over conn means death.  I wish Tanks and groups would take this into consideration before accusing the healer of not doing there job.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I wish that Mystics could sustain the typical exp group without a second healer?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My question are the game encouters designed around 2 healer groups or mystics are just under powered and cannot support a groups healing needs as well as a Druid or Cleric?  Can the other two healing classes keep a group alive without a second healer?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thank you for your input.</DIV>

Kalam
12-24-2004, 02:54 AM
<DIV>I kept a lvl 27ish group alive in Ruins of Varsoon as the sole healer with minimal downtime and one Evac not long ago.  The group was Guardian, Bruiser, Rogue, Wiz, Necro and me Mystic,  fighting ^ ^ Orange and Red Golems and Skeletons, and with the frequent add from Golem roamers.  We added an Inquisitor a couple hours later, which did make my job easier but the group was actually slightly less efficient.  The group was very good and everyone knew how to play their class.  I was also drinking Tier 4 drink which greatly helped reduce downtime.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Two healers are nice sometimes depending on group makeup and skill, but it's never required to be successful.  Groups with decent gear, upgraded spells and proper food/drink can operate very well with a Mystic as a sole healer, particularly if the group's members know what they're doing.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

leatia
12-24-2004, 03:34 AM
Aggro switches will drain power for any priest class. It's just a more precious resource for Mystics.. and not all of them have discovered Antonican Coffee yet. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />A Mystic can function as the sole/primary healer if mob selection is better balanced to the group at hand. Groups with a lot of aggro switches will require weaker mobs. Groups with high dps, a stout tank and no aggro/add problems can obviously take on tougher mobs.In general, it's just "safer" to have two healers and when things get bad, having a secondary healer is a necessity. Recast times on heals when multiple group members are taking damage causes deaths- no matter how good a healer or how much power you may have. On the really tough, TOUGH mobs- the first few seconds are critical to get it slowed/delusioned and having someone else with their finger on a heal button (thanks to our .7 second wards) takes a huge load off a shaman's shoulders in high resist situations.

ErylFly
12-24-2004, 06:39 AM
<DIV>26 Mystic here, and I can do it in most groups just fine.  It all depends on where and what you are fighting.  A good example is the boat ride for the Enchanter lands quest.  I can handle it if the tank is good enough, and he doesn't get knocked around and loose sight.  Since we can't control that yet, though I have an idea I suggested to my guild to have 2 healers so he doesn't loose agro when that happens.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Situations that need 2 healers need 2 healers.  It isn't us alone effected, a warden/fury couldn't do it alone, and neither could a templar/inquisitor do it alone in situations like that.</DIV>

Aei
12-24-2004, 11:24 AM
I would have to say that so far, I really think mystics are underpowered.My main is a level 28 mystic. I have also leveled a cleric and a druid up to early twenties, to see what they play like...And have found that the druid and clerics are vastly more effective then my shaman. I have actually begun debating switching to the druid as my main, because I am enjoying it far more. My main problem is the ward.. it is just not as effective a heal. I've stopped warding my tank pretty much entirely recently, and our effectiveness has dramatically improved. No wards means more power for my DoTs, and he stops taking that annoying massive damage that sometimes happens when a ward goes down due to a large hit. The remaining damage goes straight to his hp, without being mitigated by armor, and that can often break a combat for us.I love the shaman, but I'm becoming increasingly more and more disappoitned with our defining characteristic. <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Banditman
12-24-2004, 07:44 PM
<DIV>So much depends on your tank.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>A tank who spends good money on his armor is MUCH easier to keep alive than a tank who doesn't understand the value of good armor.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I too was able to function as the only healer in a Varsoon group at L26.  Yes, we had some deaths - mainly due to adds.  The mobs were orange and red to me.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The thing that having 2 healers does for you is give you some margin for error.  When things go bad, you have that extra mana bar full of healing goodness waiting in the wings.</DIV>

VaporRang
12-25-2004, 05:55 AM
<DIV>I have a level 31 mystic and a level 31 monk. I duo box at all times. I usually build my own groups with a second healer so they can just spot heal and I will keep the wards rolling. I have done some groups with just me as healer. Personally I like having my own healer so I know at least one healer is healing. I have had some bad runs with people who have not learned how to play there class or what ever. I did duo box both boat rides for EL and zek. That was a work out the EL trip I had to MT with my monk also so it was crazy. I personally like my mystic. I also prefer a pally to tank. A friend of mine from EQ 1 played a pally there and is now. So I use him most of the time. I have noticed that since I have gotten into EL and Zek that the skill of players has increased some. Up untill just shorlty after 25 I was always worreid about random invites with the debt system now and all. I have not played a cleric or druid in EQ2 so cant say how they are balanced but I think mystics are a must in a group and when you pair them with a druid or cleric xp on hard mobs is cake. Anyway just my 2 cents!!!!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Karla
12-28-2004, 03:19 AM
<DIV>Does AC rating the chance of getting hit as well as the amount of soakage?</DIV>

leatia
12-28-2004, 03:36 AM
<blockquote><hr>Karlace wrote:<DIV>Does AC rating the chance of getting hit as well as the amount of soakage?</DIV><hr></blockquote>Not really, but it could very possibly appear that way.A completely mitigated hit may show up as a "miss" in Everquest. EQ2 may follow the same basis. Figure Mob_XYZ hits for 33-250, it lands a particularly weak hit of about 42... a 1600ac tank's armor mitigates this weak blow 100%, the hit shows up as a "miss"- since the client readback wont exactly log ".. hits YOU for 0 points of damage" (or negatives).This isn't the same as complete evasion. AGL and DEF ratings are typically what roll complete evades. It's just hard to parse a log and know with complete certainty which misses are due to evasion, and which misses are due to 100% (or more) mitigation of weak hits.

Banditman
12-28-2004, 08:24 PM
<DIV>Too many unknowns at this point.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In the above theory, AC mitigation is a set number of HP of mitigation as opposed to a percentage.  That could well be right, I don't know.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I've personally always thought of AC mitigation as simply full damage minus "whatever" percentage.</DIV>

B33FReap
01-01-2005, 12:41 AM
<DIV>I don't think many people realize it but I have come up with a very awsome strat for a group first off I am a 32 Mystic next in line come a bard type due to 2 things one power regen for the group and second agi stat buff now comes the fun one my tank is a monk with high agi around 89 before buffed reason for this is he doesn't get hit often and my ward usually lasts until the timer runs out then dps like rangers bruisers and such and sometimes ill take a second high ac tank like a paly or guardian just to off tank the monk if it get really crazy with many adds or something with a master1 str and sta debuff and the dps mobs die very quick and the most hated and unbelievable monk as tank doesnt get hit</DIV>

Banditman
01-01-2005, 01:18 AM
<DIV>Back to English class for you.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Sentences are your friend.  Seriously.</DIV>

Gnome mercy
01-01-2005, 03:02 PM
<DIV>lol everything he said there was pretty much one sentence...if you cant put it together then English class for ju. Seriously</DIV>

B33FReap
01-02-2005, 12:29 AM
<DIV>sorry i didnt realize i was getting graded on grammer on this forum if you cant read and understand what i said i dont really care...</DIV>

LadySyl
01-02-2005, 02:43 AM
Try grouping with a bruiser or monk tank, you'll find your power going much further.

Launie
01-02-2005, 01:16 PM
<DIV>Try inspecting your tank when your in groups. Healing is only half of the equation in EQ. The tank being able to take hits is the other half. Healers take the heat because their failings are more obvious. I am totally amazed at the amount of 20 something tanks that are wearing jewelry that is quested at like level 5. When really jewelry isnt all that expensive to buy. Then group with a tank that has spent the time on their gear, you will see a huge difference. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I guess what it comes down to is when your looking at forming a group, look at all the factors. In some groups you will be able to heal and others you probably wont. Dont be in a rush to blame mystics as a class. </DIV>

Wzierbovs
01-04-2005, 08:04 PM
IMO it depends a lot on several things: - Level of mobs- AC of the tank- Whether there is a bard or an enchanter in the group- Whether you're consuming appropriate power-regenerating drinkFor myself, as a 44 Mystic, at the Cazic Thule temple top, I can hold heals as a single healer just fine with tier 4 drinks, and if there is a bard or enchanter in the group, and about similar level tank. Things get a little rougher at Permafrost, so most groups seem to prefer a second (backup) healer, or a tank which can cast heals.

Banditman
01-04-2005, 08:09 PM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> B33FReaper wrote:<BR> <DIV>sorry i didnt realize i was getting graded on grammer on this forum if you cant read and understand what i said i dont really care...</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P>Which is exactly the point.</P> <P>Your message is being lost because of poor grammar.</P>

Aaldaaf
01-05-2005, 06:31 AM
<DIV>Unless you have an enchanter two healers allow the group to push harder and take more chances.  The nice part about being a Mystic is you have plenty you can do to help if the Templar doesn't need much support.  If the fight gets hard or an add walks in then it's back to full bore healing and warding.  It is hard to keep things slowed when the fight goes wrong if you are the only healer, it takes time to sort out the targets and keep slows and debufs up and that is dangerous if the tank is about to die.  Even in a simple grind camp the Templars like wards at the start since that gives them time to use their debufs.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Two healers aren't required but it is a good idea in many cases.</DIV>

Banditman
01-05-2005, 07:41 PM
<DIV>Correct.  Exactly.</DIV>

zaneluke
01-05-2005, 10:52 PM
<DIV>I have been in tons of different group combinations. So long as there is at least one healer and a good good tank you will be fine.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Best group? For me and my playing style. I like mystic,templar, two tanks, bard and wizzie. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But any combo will really work. I have played sole healer in runnyeye with a good tank. And died 3 times in a row as sole healer in ruins with a crappy tank.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Weirdest group? Mystic 4 wizzies and a tank. Very fast fights. </DIV>

Lathi
01-06-2005, 06:55 AM
<DIV>I play a 26 templar a 27 mystic and a 24 defiler. frop my experience i can say that mystics can keep groups alive much longer.  Honestly it all comes down to debuffs. If i slow- or slow stack (both your slows will stack on under level 30 mobs)- and delusion a mob my tank can kill the mob that is yellow^^ or under with one ward or basicly no heals. orange and up youll need a few wards but it call comes down to debuffs. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you slap down your slows and delusion- adepts- that mob is toast.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now i will agree that against multiple mobs untill mystics get that group encounter slow templars rule because of the reactives but when fighting one or two ornage or red ^^ ~fear the debuffs. Just slow both mobs and your good to go. The tanks i group with will take my slows and debuffs anyday before a templar. They even have a maco for me when i get both slows on- they say: Go Go uba slows =) </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I like grouping with templars and druids but all groups know that mystics are the main- healers- our wards come first- and with the debuffs they acually last longer then 5 seconds.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Tira</DIV> <DIV>Tiresa</DIV> <DIV>Theresa</DIV>

Banditman
01-07-2005, 02:20 AM
<DIV>Debuffs have no place in a healing discussion until they are mana free, instant cast, unresistable and encounter wide.</DIV>

Launie
01-07-2005, 02:59 AM
<DIV>Interesting statement Bandit, would like an explanation. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I am relatively new to the shaman class in EQ but here is my impression of debuffs.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Slows, decrease the attack speed of a mob=mob hits less, tank takes less damage, needs less heals. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>That is one example of our debuffs, but if you read what each debuff does, you can see how it will help in the healing in some way.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Debuffs have always been a factor in healing groups in everquest. I do know that they arent as powerful as in EQ 1, but I dont see them as anywhere close to pointless. </DIV>

Launie
01-07-2005, 03:00 AM
<DIV>oops double post</DIV><p>Message Edited by Launie on <span class=date_text>01-06-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:00 PM</span>

Gaineew
01-07-2005, 03:19 AM
<DIV>In my opinion, two healers is the safe bet and allows you to take on more challenging fights.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now, I played an enchanter for 65 levels in EQ1. So, when I got the ward in EQ2 as a shaman, I took it as not a heal but something like a rune. Which is what it is. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I see people contsantly saying that Mystics are underpowered, but in many ways I feel it is exactly the opposite. I can keep a 6 person group alive (if we're not being ballsy) without a problem. Limited downtime, etc. Then again, I don't even attempt to keep my tank's health in the green. I keep him to yellow and I'm fine. A ward here, a heal there and a slow to keep things running smoothly. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Comparing Shaman heals to say, a Druid, I find something rather interesting. Druid heals hit for more, but they have slower cast times. Shaman have faster heals for less. That, to me, seems fair. Druids have heals over time, and we have wards. Granted, Wards are not as "overpowering" as I first thought, but I find no problem with them. If your group can mitigate damage with any kind of skill, you don't need heals that rival Cleric or Druid.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In my opinon, playing a shaman is not just about heals. We can slow, cure, debuff, ward, AND heal. We're NOT clerics. We shouldn't have to pretend we are. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I adore playing a shaman and wouldn't play anything else at this point. </DIV>

Banditman
01-07-2005, 04:55 AM
<DIV>Another one.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>*sigh*</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you do not consider Wards as heals, could you tell me what our specialty heal is then?</DIV>

Banditman
01-07-2005, 05:14 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Launie wrote:<BR> <DIV>Interesting statement Bandit, would like an explanation. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I am relatively new to the shaman class in EQ but here is my impression of debuffs.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Slows, decrease the attack speed of a mob=mob hits less, tank takes less damage, needs less heals. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>That is one example of our debuffs, but if you read what each debuff does, you can see how it will help in the healing in some way.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Debuffs have always been a factor in healing groups in everquest. I do know that they arent as powerful as in EQ 1, but I dont see them as anywhere close to pointless. </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P>Right.  Be happy to.</P> <P>First, you have to understand that Clerics and Druids also get debuffs.  We are not the only ones.  There is another thread here somewhere, I think it's a response by disrupt, where he does a nice comparison of the debuffs each Priest class has.  Sorry I don't have it bookmarked.</P> <P>Please understand that the numbers I'm about to use are just that - numbers.  I'm not trying to show you a whole encounter, just a piece of one in order to demonstrate the reasons why debuffs should not be a part of the healing arguement.</P> <P>Lets take a chunk of time at the beginning of an encounter where our enemy (or enemies) is going to do 1000 HP of raw damage.</P> <P>Now, look at a Cleric.  They have a specialty heal, Bestowal of Vitae, that heals for a total of around 510 HP at App 3.  That spell costs 55 mana to cast.  Because of the way AC mitigation works, our tank is really only going to take 500 points of damage because his armor is going to absorb a LOT of punishment meant for the tank.  That one heal cast by the Cleric, costing 55 mana, is enough healing power to completely cover the damage dealt by the mobs.</P> <P>Same chunk of time, Druid this time.  They use Regrowth, which heals for 480 HP at App 3.  That spell also costs 55 mana to cast.  Once again, AC mitigation is going to do a LOT of work for the Druid, absorbing 50% of the incoming damage.  So, there are still 500 HP to be healed, and a Druids Regrowth covers 480 HP of it.  I can live with a tank losing 20 HP on 1000 raw damage.  So can the tank.  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>Now, Shaman.  We have Spectral Ward which gives us a 403 point "buffer" against incoming damage.  It costs 55 mana to cast.  But wait!  I have to debuff ?  That costs mana.  (lets say its 35 mana, I'm probably wrong, but its close enough for our purposes here).  Let's assume Slow is 25% Slow, meaning that the mob does 25% less total damage.  Remember, that 25% though is only of it's STANDARD melee.  Combat Arts / Skills / Spells / Specials are not affected.  Lets say that of the 1000 raw, 1/3 is special, 2/3 is standard.  So after we debuff with Slow, the total damage we have to deal with is 833 HP.  (I skipped a LOT of steps there for brevity, you can find the full explanation in another thread)  Now, to deal with the 833 points of damage, we have to cast TWO Wards @ 55 mana each, PLUS our Slow at 35 mana.  Remember, our Wards are placed against RAW damage, not against AC mitigated damage.  We have to deal with ALL of it.</P> <P>Compare:</P> <P>A Cleric spends 55 mana casting one spell to deal with 1000 points of raw damage.  A Druid spends 55 mana casting one spell to deal with 1000 points of raw damage.  A Shaman spends 145 mana casting 3 spells to deal with 1000 points of raw damage.</P> <P> </P> <P>Now consider:</P> <P>Of our 3 spells, one can be resisted, meaning we'd then have to burn an additional 55 mana to Ward for the damage Slow is NOT preventing because of the resist.</P> <P>What if it's actually multiple mobs?  Slow wouldn't even prevent the 25% of standard melee damage because it would need to be cast on EACH member of the opposing "team".</P> <P> </P> <P>This is why debuffs should never be a part of the healing equation.  Balance is simply too hard to come to.</P><p>Message Edited by Banditman on <span class=date_text>01-06-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:16 PM</span>

Peri
01-07-2005, 06:44 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR> <DIV>Another one.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>*sigh*</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you do not consider Wards as heals, could you tell me what our specialty heal is then?</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> don't tell me we have to convince another one :smileytongue:

Gaineew
01-07-2005, 01:37 PM
<DIV>Well, maybe I'm being naive or what  have you, but I just don't see the problem. I'm not a "high level" Mystic, being level 23, but I have absoultely no problems when it comes to healing, and if I do, it's not a big deal to ask another healer to group with me. Personally, I enjoy working with another healer. (I have a RL friend who plays a 24 druid and we can kick some mob-butt when we're teamed) Why? Maybe its because I'm lazy or something, but I think it's because I don't have an overlarge ego.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm not saying there aren't problems with our class, hey, there are always problems with ANY class. All I am saying is that the ward shouldn't be taken as a heal. "Speciality" heals? My god. What the heck does that even mean? So we have to "blow" more mana to heal or slow, or whatever. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And debuffs not counting in heal spell discussion? How do you figure? I have found that debuffing mobs saves me a TON of power. I hit Delusion on a few mobs and WHAM, my heals can instantly become slower.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Comparing us to clerics and druids is a complete waste of time. I don't see how we're nerfed nor how SoE is going to "fix it". maybe our Ward should be revisited, but complaining about it gets us no where. I think by just adjusting our approaches to certain fights, we can show what a Mystic is really made of. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And no one has to "convert" me. I am not just "another one". Thanks for offending me, though.</DIV>

Launie
01-07-2005, 04:23 PM
<DIV>Have to agree with you on the statement that "balance is too hard to come by".  In EQ 1 there was no such thing as even close to balance if you crunched the numbers between the priest classes. I played a druid and a cleric in EQ live,  not sure they will ever come by true balance. At least its a little closer in EQ 2. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I was more than a little disturbed today talking to a cleric about their damage dealing spells. His nuke did twice the damage, as did his dot. Plus he has better heals. All I guess is the price we pay for a extremely watered down version of slow? Or maybe its the price to pay to look like a morbidly obese bear....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Pass1o
01-07-2005, 04:30 PM
<DIV>Okey i really had some time thinking about it yesterday after being terribly frustrated with the new patch....</DIV> <DIV>It seems like SOE had to fill one more priest slot so they just came up with the shammy...Not a good healer..not a good offensive priest...not the best buffer...we mystics are supposed to be good in our own way with our unique spells that no other priest class  have aka wards...and now let me ask you SOE how is this a balanced game if our wards suck.....i mean i'm not using wards anymore the new training ward i got takes like 350 demage before it vanishes..which mean 2 secs against a level 22+mob.....now i can't even stack it with another ward because of the timer..till the the recast is over the first ward is already gone...jee</DIV> <P>Message Edited by Pass1onZ on <SPAN class=date_text>01-07-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:31 AM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Pass1onZ on <span class=date_text>01-07-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:32 AM</span>

Gaineew
01-07-2005, 07:58 PM
<DIV>Well, I don't know why a cleric's damage and dot spells would do more damage, unless the cleric and the spell were higher level. I mean, the Adepts and Apps do make a rather large difference in my opinion.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for not using a ward against a 22+ level mob...I don't see why. I do it all the time and it works fine for me. I've never had a tank die because I've run out of power. (Although, some of my more ballsy friends have had to be chain minor healed to stay alive...)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I know clerics and druids and it seems we are all balanced in some way. Druid heals heal more, but slower. Shaman heals are for less, but faster. I think the Cleric heals are somewhere in the middle. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Honestly though, I've seen some of the more difficult encounters require at least two healers. Of any combination. Cleric/Druid, Druid/Shaman, Shaman/Cleric...it seems that yes, the game was built this way. I know a level 24 cleric who can't keep a tank up to save his life during a difficult encounter. Add another healer in there and it's a whole new ballgame.  Two healers doesn't make a class "weak". I think it makes you free to use other abilities. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I've seen so many classes "crying nerf" lately, that its rather sad. You should hear my husband go on and on about the changes to his Sneaks. Its not just us who have "problems" with our class. In fact, I think others are MUCH worse off.</DIV>

Banditman
01-07-2005, 08:02 PM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaineewop wrote:<BR> <DIV>Well, maybe I'm being naive or what  have you, but I just don't see the problem. I'm not a "high level" Mystic, being level 23, but I have absoultely no problems when it comes to healing, and if I do, it's not a big deal to ask another healer to group with me. Personally, I enjoy working with another healer. (I have a RL friend who plays a 24 druid and we can kick some mob-butt when we're teamed) Why? Maybe its because I'm lazy or something, but I think it's because I don't have an overlarge ego.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm not saying there aren't problems with our class, hey, there are always problems with ANY class. All I am saying is that the ward shouldn't be taken as a heal. "Speciality" heals? My god. What the heck does that even mean? So we have to "blow" more mana to heal or slow, or whatever. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And debuffs not counting in heal spell discussion? How do you figure? I have found that debuffing mobs saves me a TON of power. I hit Delusion on a few mobs and WHAM, my heals can instantly become slower.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Comparing us to clerics and druids is a complete waste of time. I don't see how we're nerfed nor how SoE is going to "fix it". maybe our Ward should be revisited, but complaining about it gets us no where. I think by just adjusting our approaches to certain fights, we can show what a Mystic is really made of. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And no one has to "convert" me. I am not just "another one". Thanks for offending me, though.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P>When you have more experience, you will begin to see.  When you spend a large block of time trying to solo heal a group, you will begin to see.</P> <P>The promise made to the players in the beginning was that all healers would be equal but unique.  The point we are trying to make is that this is not the case currently.</P> <P>We have a significant amount of data here that shows what we have all experienced anecdotally.</P>

Lyones
01-07-2005, 09:25 PM
Something alot of people are leaving out. It has become common practice (dating back to EQ1 really) for healers to play "up a level". I've seen 19th lvl healers in TS and 16th lvl healers in SH. I've heard of similar accounts at higher levels. It seems alot harder in EQ2 for an under leveled healer to fully keep a tank managed (no matter what class combinations) and it becomes especially hard if the tank isn't a high lvl. Examples. Doing crows the other day with my shaman. I was 19 with a 15th lvl tank. We had no problems. I decided to nuke and trade off with the 17th shaman that showed up. That arrangement lasted one fight as we had a near death experience... the relative levels of the tank vs. the healer vs. the mobs are crucial in determining success rate...

Banditman
01-07-2005, 10:16 PM
<DIV>That is a point of sorts.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The real comparison is tank level to mob level.  Healers have the spells they have.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But tanks, ESPECIALLY avoidance based tanks, have a much harder time dealing with mobs as those mobs are higher and higher over the level of the tank.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So, facing a L20 mob, a L15 tank is going to have problems, regardless of his healer.  A L20 tank vs a  L15 mob on the other hand may not need a healer at all.</DIV>

Aaldaaf
01-08-2005, 06:50 AM
<DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Give me a monk and I'll out heal any other priest class.   Well in reality I won't heal much but keep the slows on and ward up and make the cleric want to just go on follow and watch TV.  Give me a guardian and my work is cut out for me, I can help the cleric but can't match his reactives.    I'm using wards on level 50 mobs all day and they still have an impact.  I don't buy this line that shaman can't heal and our class is useless.   I don't want to be a dime a dozen templar, I like being a rare but very powerful (when used right) class.  I'm sure we could be stronger and the wards could be tougher or respect the tanks AC but mystic is a very playable class today and I think a lot of fun.  I have no regrets I chose to be a mystic.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And no debuf comes close to the impact of slow, you can see the difference in the damage rate to the tank when it wears off, other spells don't have anywhere near that impact.  Counting the number of debufs a Templar has is like comparing his pennies to your dime, you still have more.</DIV>

Gaineew
01-08-2005, 04:48 PM
<DIV>To the above, "Hear, Hear!!"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Banditman, we're going to have to agree to disagree. Please don't treat me like I'm a five-year old. You may be a higher level shaman and into all these wicked zones, but don't discount my opinion because I have "less experience". I see perfectly well the disadvantages of our class. I just don't think its something to get my knickers in a twist about. If you want to, have at it. But the more you talk to me, the more I realize you enjoy telling people they are wrong. So I think I'll just keep my opinion to myself now.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>To whomever said that the tank/healer level makes a difference...yes, it does. I have a good friend who plays a 28 Bezerker, and our level difference makes it very difficult. However, as I've begun to "catch-up" to him, I notice a difference. Its interesting. I'll have to test a few theories tonight.</DIV>

Leji
01-08-2005, 09:39 PM
<DIV>The increase in damage output of the mobs is exponential.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This means that while wards do alright in the teen levels and the 20s, you will experience and quick and steady change around lvl 30.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Earlier in the game the mitigation power of the tank doesn't matter all that much. So to heal with 0 migitation wards isnt't that much of an issue. When you will hit lvl 30+, the mobs will start to hit for 600-800+ unmitigated hits.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Stop yelling how wards are fine because at your level of the game they are. You did not experience the higher levels. Us however have experienced both your level of the game and higher levels. Try to get some hints about the whole picture because you didn't experience all of it yourself yet.</DIV>

Gaineew
01-09-2005, 02:40 PM
<DIV>Wow, that was amazingly condesending. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In any event. I have noticed some amount of difference. Yesterday I was in a less than perfectly set up group and I never once casted a ward. I didn't need to and when I thought I did, it seemed to do nothing. So, I stand corrected. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I still don't think complaining and making "lesser Mystics" feel they can't have an opinion that differs from the higher levels is an all right thing for any of us to do. At least I'll know when to keep my mouth shut on these boards.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Xalibur
01-10-2005, 04:54 AM
<DIV>some facts from out of the game</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>with my cleric bud and i was in a group in thundersteps, me a lvl 21 mystic, he beein a lvl 20 cleric. We tested our healing power (the other priest just dealt dps then).</DIV> <DIV>To keep the tank alive (wards and heals) in the FULL group i was at 30-40% Power after each fight, where the cleric was at 80% after each mob...</DIV> <DIV>balanced ? i spent 3 times amount of power to do the same thing the cleric did. (Group comment: YAY, cleric roxx, shaman sucks). We did this for about 15 minutes, but then group started to massivly complain about MY downtime. Back  in EQ1 we at least had canni and regen/torpor/quiescence to counter sucky heals. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And for those all that are saying "you need a monk to tank".</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>- not possible to explain this to a group, as many ppl dont even know that mystics can heal - it sucks that every time i go to a group i have to prove that i actually can heal a bit. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by Xalibur on <span class=date_text>01-09-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:58 PM</span>

Merrygr
01-10-2005, 10:57 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Xalibur wrote:<BR> <DIV>some facts from out of the game</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>with my cleric bud and i was in a group in thundersteps, me a lvl 21 mystic, he beein a lvl 20 cleric. We tested our healing power (the other priest just dealt dps then).</DIV> <DIV>To keep the tank alive (wards and heals) in the FULL group i was at 30-40% Power after each fight, where the cleric was at 80% after each mob...</DIV> <DIV>balanced ? i spent 3 times amount of power to do the same thing the cleric did. (Group comment: YAY, cleric roxx, shaman sucks). We did this for about 15 minutes, but then group started to massivly complain about MY downtime. Back  in EQ1 we at least had canni and regen/torpor/quiescence to counter sucky heals. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And for those all that are saying "you need a monk to tank".</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>- not possible to explain this to a group, as many ppl dont even know that mystics can heal - it sucks that every time i go to a group i have to prove that i actually can heal a bit. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P>Message Edited by Xalibur on <SPAN class=date_text>01-09-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:58 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>This is exactly the type of comparisons I have been looking for. We have seen numbers in many many posts, but without real comparisons they mean little (to me). With a comparison like this the numbers are a great tool to back the findings of real comparisons.</P> <P>I have always "known" (as in firmly believed, but not proven) that there was a difference in efficiency between a cleric and us (druids too?). The numbers you show are even worse than I thought they would be. If the difference was that big I would have assumed that others (the ones actually on the receiving end of our heals) would have spoken up.</P> <P>15 minutes is not nearly enough of a test. You could have gotten unlucky and the cleric lucky in all the encounters, but this gives a good indication.</P> <P>Given the silent treatment we have gotten I'm not sure how much of a difference knowing the facts will make though .......</P>

Aaldaaf
01-10-2005, 11:38 AM
<DIV>My issue isn't with wards and their effectiveness, it's with the conculsion that Mystics are broken and must be fixed.   Asking the creators of the game if they intended for us to be a bit weaker in solo healing and why is a good question.  Demanding a fix is not productive, we aren't broken, we can play and add great value, we are in high demand for groups.   Yes I've seen the current high end of the game and even died to The Shadow of Vox (6600 damage from a single spell).  The fact that we can out perform other healers in some situations shows that a good effort at balance has been made, it may not be completely right but it isn't radically wrong either.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I think the power cost of wards should be lowered some to allow us to be less dependent on having a cleric, and I hope that position gets pushed foward in a sound and constructive way.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As to the title question, a fight in Permafrost with a mysitc or a cleric leaves the healer are 20-30% power with waits, with both they end up at 80% and the next fight is started as fast as we can run to the spawn.  We complement each other extremely well, to me that is much more important than power per cast.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Krelias
01-10-2005, 11:41 AM
<DIV>Xalibur, maybe also post this info in the Gameplay section under Spells, etc.  Seems they pay more attention there and a start at some hard data certainly can't hurt.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Sintef</DIV> <DIV>28 Defiler</DIV>

Merrygr
01-10-2005, 12:24 PM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Aaldaaf wrote:<BR> <DIV>My issue isn't with wards and their effectiveness, it's with the conculsion that Mystics are broken and must be fixed.   Asking the creators of the game if they intended for us to be a bit weaker in solo healing and why is a good question.  Demanding a fix is not productive, we aren't broken, we can play and add great value, we are in high demand for groups.   Yes I've seen the current high end of the game and even died to The Shadow of Vox (6600 damage from a single spell).  The fact that we can out perform other healers in some situations shows that a good effort at balance has been made, it may not be completely right but it isn't radically wrong either.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>[Snip]</DIV> <P><BR> <HR> </P></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>I couldn't care less about the effectiveness of wards as such either. All I want is to be about as efficient a healer as the other archetypes. I'm almost 100% convinced that we are no were near them when it comes to multi mob encounters. Against single mobs we are likely at least on par with them, but it would be becasue of slow (and I don't want a single debuff to have that kind of impact).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Basically at this point in time all I ask for (and I will now feedback) is that the devs acknowledge that we are unhappy. I don't want to get into a situation where Mystics are percieved as inferior. Even if we are as good as the other healers a reputation like that can take forever to fix.</DIV>