PDA

View Full Version : Type of ward


Noosehunt
01-25-2005, 04:33 AM
If you were asked for a change in the way wards worked, would you ask for:1. Ward that absorbed more damage, same timers on them.2. Ward that absorbed less damage, no timer, but would disappear when it absorbed all the damage.3. Ward that absorbed less damage, but was put "after the AC", with timer.4. Ward that absorbed even less damage, but put "after the AC", without timer.5. Don't care, it's fine, and working as intended.6. Don't care, I'm going to roll a non-healer.7. Don't care, I'm going to play now.8. We had a ward? Why was I spam healing?9. Wards exactly as is, but block some % of damage from specials as well.Too bad there isn't a polling feature on this board...-NHEdit: Added #9<p>Message Edited by Noosehunter on <span class=date_text>01-28-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:45 PM</span>

disru
01-25-2005, 04:37 AM
From the choices you've given I'd go with #3.But it shouldn't have to absorb less damage because the druid and cleric special heals already have a higher value than wards =p

Mystiq
01-25-2005, 05:37 AM
<DIV>Based on those choices I'd prolly choose #3 as well, with some expanded explanation. I think our wards should take on the AC of the target it is cast on, to maintain the balance of the spell's power and utility. Also I'm not sure just how much I would reduce the amout that wards absorb, but it should closely match the power of the reactives and regens of the same level given to druids and clerics.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This solution only solves part of the problem with wards IMO. I still do not like the way that wards work with reactive heals (i.e. they don't). Call me never satisfied, but I really wish someone could come up with a workable, implementable way to change wards so that they do not block reactives from firing. It's probably a tall order, and would require reworking the way wards work completely.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Noosehunt
01-25-2005, 06:06 AM
True. I didn't want to open "that can of worms" by putting down an arbitrary number for "less". I thought maybe we could start something constructive and see what most would "feel" that the fix should be.Maybe there should be one or two more options, to place the ward before or after the reactives?-NH

Kalam
01-25-2005, 06:12 AM
<DIV>Vote #3 for me as well.  Although I don't necessarily know whether or not they'd need to be reduced in the amount of damage they absorb.  All I'd ask is that they are balanced against the other Priest class specialty heals.  If that means reducing the absorption amount then so be it, as long as it's balanced.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Again I have two issues with Wards.  1) They should absorb damage after AC mitigation and 2) they should absorb all types of Combat Arts and Spells.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

kenji
01-25-2005, 09:06 AM
<DIV>right now i will choose #8....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>if they really fix us with choices, i will choose #3....but our ward already 20% less than other priests special heals...still need less value? then they are close to instant heals lol</DIV>

Aaldaaf
01-25-2005, 09:27 AM
<DIV>You don't offer a choice I would support.  While lowering the ward and allowing it to count target AC would help with the main tank it would eliminate one of our best features, we keep a caster taking damage alive better than any other healer.  There has to be a way to improve wards without ruining one of the shaman's strengths</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Increasing the damage it absorbs or just lowering the power cost would help without  taking something valuable away.</DIV>

Mystiq
01-25-2005, 11:10 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Aaldaaf wrote:<BR> <DIV>You don't offer a choice I would support.  While lowering the ward and allowing it to count target AC would help with the main tank it would eliminate one of our best features, we keep a caster taking damage alive better than any other healer.  There has to be a way to improve wards without ruining one of the shaman's strengths</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Increasing the damage it absorbs or just lowering the power cost would help without  taking something valuable away.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P>How is a ward absorbing damage <EM>after </EM>AC mitigation not better than a ward absorbing with NO mitigation? A caster still has an AC greater than zero, therefore a ward that applied the target's AC when absorbing hits is better than what we have now.</P> <P>BTW, if our ability to heal casters getting aggro they have no business with is our "strength", color me disappointed.</P> <P> </P>

Aaldaaf
01-25-2005, 02:22 PM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>>>> 3. Ward that absorbed less damage, but was put "after the AC", with timer.<BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>It's the <STRONG>absorb less damage</STRONG> that only pays back if the target has high AC.  If wards can be imporved without giving up the ability to save casters/scouts/healers then why not.  Over the course of a hunt in a zone with fast respawns and roamers, you will at one time or another have a fight go bad.  Now if you have a tank that pulls into the intersection where 3 roamers cross... I like being the best class at saving the day. <BR>

Banditman
01-25-2005, 07:21 PM
<DIV>3 is close, but still wrong.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Our Wards are already (as mentioned above) weaker than the other specialty heals, and we dont have AC mitigation.  Further decreasing the value would be like . . . </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>SOE Dev:  "Hey Clerics, we're thinking of decreasing the value of your reactive heal and having it take effect before AC mitigation.  What do you think?"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Clerics:  "That'd be great!"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>SOE Dev:  "Ok!  You'll see it next patch!"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>SOE Dev leaves the room.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Clerics:  "Ok guys, what WoW server are we playin' on?"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Cor
01-25-2005, 08:26 PM
<DIV>Vote ====> 1. Ward that absorbs more damage, same timers on them.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I actually dislike the idea of adding mitigation based on the target's AC.  I would prefer one of these two solutions:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1. Our wards have a set amount of mitigation based on the level of the caster.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>OR</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>2. Our wards gain the ability to absorb more damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I like the way wards work now.  I just wish they were a little bit more effective.  I think adding the targets mitigation to the wards would be too powerful.  I know that's not a popular opinion on these forums and I may change my mind as I delve into the 30's and beyond but right now that's how I feel.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Coren,</DIV> <DIV>29 Mystic</DIV>

Kalam
01-25-2005, 10:05 PM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Coren wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>2. Our wards gain the ability to absorb more damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I used to think I wanted this as well, but after I thought about it, I realized that simply increasing the raw damage absorption would overpower Wards on low AC classes like leather and cloth wearers.  Having Wards work after AC mitigation wouldn't overpower them at all ... as long as the amount of post AC mitigated damage they absorb is balanced with other Priest specialty heals.<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Remember guys that the bottom line with Wards is efficiency.  As it stands now, I get more bang for my buck Warding a Monk, or a Druid, or a Wizard only because they aren't mitigating as much of the incomming damage as a Plate wearing high AC class.  Thus the more AC a person has the less efficient Wards are.  So in a sense Wards are punished for players trying to get their AC has high as possible.  We even have an AC buff which by casting actually makes our Wards less efficient.  That's wrong.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Noosehunt
01-25-2005, 10:27 PM
Does anyone know if the reactive heals are stackable? Wards are stackable, and increasing the amount of damage they can absorb could be "unfair" if reactive heals/regen aren't stackable.Maybe past 50, we'd get something like Torpor/Q... Keep dreaming.-NH

Kalam
01-25-2005, 10:38 PM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Noosehunter wrote:<BR>Does anyone know if the reactive heals are stackable? Wards are stackable, and increasing the amount of damage they can absorb could be "unfair" if reactive heals/regen aren't stackable.<BR><BR>Maybe past 50, we'd get something like Torpor/Q... Keep dreaming.<BR><BR>-NH<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P>Yes Cleric reactives stack.  They all don't fire at the same time, but when one expires the other takes over.  I believe Clerics can have up to 3 reactives queued up at one time.</P> <P> </P>

Spag
01-25-2005, 11:38 PM
<DIV>Coren,</DIV> <DIV>   It would absolutely have to be the the AC of the target of the ward.  If you simply raise the HP of the ward you will completely throw off any attempt at balance.  As the ward would be way too powerful on low AC class characters.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This of course would make soloing alot easier, but would not be fair to the other healers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Remember we are just trying to be equal, not almighty.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Assigning the ward the AC of the target would be a huge step towards equality since the damage the other healers deal with is already mitigated by the AC of their target.  I dont see how asking for us to use the same numbers in the equation as the other healer classes are using would make us "too powerful".</DIV>

Banditman
01-25-2005, 11:46 PM
<DIV>Yes, exactly.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>We aren't asking to be better than everyone else.  I don't want a ton of Mystics running around because they are perceived as "uber".<BR><BR>I do however want to be equal.  My specialty heal should have the same end result for the same amount of mana as a Cleric or Druid.  Right now, I am healing less for the same amount.  That isn't balanced or fair.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Give Shaman Wards that are equal in size to Cleric and Druid specialty heals, place them after AC mitigation and the Class is BALANCED.</DIV>

Mystiq
01-26-2005, 01:23 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote: <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Give Shaman Wards that are equal in size to Cleric and Druid specialty heals, place them after AC mitigation and the Class is BALANCED.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I wouldn't go so far as to say that this balances our class with other priests once and for all. It helps to balance our special line of healing when compared to reactives and HoT's, and I would certainly welcome this change, but that is by no means the only way in which Mystics fall behind other priests. I don't want to start a whole different discussion here because I'm still in the midst of gathering data, but I just wanted you all to be aware. </P> <P>I spend a lot of time with Templars and Wardens, and I know what they are capable of doing with equivilent spells of the same level. And yes, I know what I am capable of doing with my spells as well ( I didn't get to where I am just by having a lot of free time to play). Call it class envy if you like, but why should this even exist if the classes are supposed to be balanced and equally effective?</P> <P> </P>

Spag
01-26-2005, 01:44 AM
<DIV>I agree that adding ac mitigation of the target to the ward will go along way, it will not make us equal, even as far as wards go.  Even if there was AC mitigation there is still a 20-25% difference in the amount that the ward will protect for, vs what the other healers comparable specials will heal for, as well as the possibility of what someone else said, where our higher level direct heals are much less effective than other classes higher level direct heals.  Unless this is what you are working on.</DIV>

Cor
01-26-2005, 01:56 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Spagma wrote:<BR> <DIV>Coren,</DIV> <DIV>   It would absolutely have to be the the AC of the target of the ward.  If you simply raise the HP of the ward you will completely throw off any attempt at balance.  As the ward would be way too powerful on low AC class characters.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This of course would make soloing alot easier, but would not be fair to the other healers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Remember we are just trying to be equal, not almighty.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Assigning the ward the AC of the target would be a huge step towards equality since the damage the other healers deal with is already mitigated by the AC of their target.  I dont see how asking for us to use the same numbers in the equation as the other healer classes are using would make us "too powerful".</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV> </DIV> <P>I disagree.  I think that adding a little bit extra to the max damage absorbtion of our wards would make them just strong enough to create the balance we are all looking for.  I don't think our wards are far off from balance as it is.  I don't really want us to be the same as the other classes.  I realize that they get a big break since their heals get the advantage of armor mitigation but I like the fact that wards work the way they do.  I like the fact that the Mage classes love us because our wards work almost as well on them as it does on Warriors.  I realize that Sony has a very difficult task, trying to create balance, or percieved balance,  between the classes, especially when one of the three doesn't take armor mitigation into account. But I really don't want my wards to be a lot more effective on some classes than on others.  I don't want my ward to drop even more quickly when a Mage is getting attacked because it's using his armor mitigation.  </P> <P> What I don't like is the fact that our wards will drop so quickly against multiple mobs.  I don't mind that debuffs are considered such a large part of our ability to "heal" (And like it or not that was how Sony designed it) but there should be group debuffs (especially attack speed debuffs) a lot earlier with less of a chance to resist or they need to add a little to our ward's damage absorbtion.</P> <P>I don't completely disagree with you folk.  I understand where you're coming from.  I just don't want my wards changed in that way.  I do think, however, that any damage that makes it past a ward (the extra damage on the hit that drops the ward) should be mitigated.  I just don't understand their thinking on making that hit go past armor.</P> <P>Anyway.  This post got away from me a bit. :smileytongue:</P> <P>Coren,</P> <P>29 Mystic</P> <P> </P>

Banditman
01-26-2005, 02:02 AM
<DIV>No, that is not how Sony designed it.  That is  how they designed EQLive.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It was stated in beta that healing was to balance in and of itself outside of any additional utility one Class might bring over another of the same Archtype.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If that has changed, it needs to be stated, because in that case things are even further out of balance than it might appear.</DIV>

Spag
01-26-2005, 02:26 AM
<DIV>Coren,</DIV> <DIV>    Thats the beauty of adding AC mitigation, is that your ward will work better on your mage than it does now, but also better on everyone than it does now.  Mind you, it won't be over powering.  Remember mages are supposed to be glass cannons, they are not meant to take a beating.  If they attempt to balance by doubling the ward, it will become effective on tanks, but way to powerful on low AC players.  You will be turning that glass cannon into a brick [FaarNerfed!]house.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now this will cause mystics to be over powered as I have mentioned before, as we will become the end all be all damage prevention class.  Personally I dont want to see Mystic / Wizard combos running around owning everything in site.  But it sounds like this is what you are looking to do.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Right now wards use AC 0, mages atleast have some AC level, so the ward will still work better than it does now, it just wont make them godlike.</DIV>

Cor
01-26-2005, 02:27 AM
<DIV>LOL.  I feel your pain Banditman.  I don't pay as much attention to what Sony said during it's beta days (Especially since they completely revamped the priest subclasses just before the end of beta) as some of you guys do.  I just look at what is available to us now.  We are the only ones that have the ability to significantly decrease a mobs combat damage.  (How significantly is debateable especially against even con and higher mobs but still much better than the other healing subclasses)  We are also the only ones that cannot <STRONG>effectively</STRONG> use our signature "heal" spell without the aid of debuffs.  I'm not saying that Sony intended it to be this way from the beginning.  I'm just saying that that's how it is designed right now.  And, you know, I don't mind that setup.  It's more of a pain that the other classes but still effective.   My problem comes with the fact that our debuffs are too weak or our wards are too weak.  One or the other needs to be tweaked a bit.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I know.  Not a popular statement.  But I'm not trying to be popular.  I'm just trying to express my opinion. :smileyhappy:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Coren,</DIV> <DIV>29 Mystic</DIV>

Cor
01-26-2005, 02:36 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Spagma wrote:<BR> <DIV>Coren,</DIV> <DIV>    Thats the beauty of adding AC mitigation, is that your ward will work better on your mage than it does now, but also better on everyone than it does now.  Mind you, it won't be over powering.  Remember mages are supposed to be glass cannons, they are not meant to take a beating.  <STRONG>If they attempt to balance by doubling the ward</STRONG>, it will become effective on tanks, but way to powerful on low AC players.  You will be turning that glass cannon into a brick [FaarNerfed!]house.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now this will cause mystics to be over powered as I have mentioned before, as we will become the end all be all damage prevention class.  Personally I dont want to see Mystic / Wizard combos running around owning everything in site.  But it sounds like this is what you are looking to do.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Right now wards use AC 0, mages atleast have some AC level, so the ward will still work better than it does now, it just wont make them godlike.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Spagma,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I will state this again:  I do not want a large increase in the ward's damage prevention capabilities.  I want to see a small increase.  I certainly don't want to double their strength.  As far as Mystic/Wizard combos...I like the fact that our wards work well for them too but with the small increase that I stated I wanted this wouldn't be prudent.  When the ward breaks (and it will) the wizard would be swiss cheese.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As I stated before:  I like that our wards work well for all classes.  By your statements I see that you believe that they are already too powerful for the lower AC classes and too weak for the higher AC classes?  Oh wait.  I'm putting words in your mouth.  I'm sure you don't appreciate that.  Niether do I.  Please read what I write and make any comment on it you wish but try to react to what I've actually written. :smileysad:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thanks,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Coren,</DIV> <DIV>29 Mystic</DIV>

Spag
01-26-2005, 03:04 AM
<DIV>I have read what you wrote, and it seems you like being the savior of the weak.  Good for you, don't pigeon hole the rest of us for your ego trip.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You are close about the wards.  They are underpowered for the higher ac players but they are not too powerful for the lower AC classes, they are pretty close to just right for them, slightly more underpowered than I would like.  AC mitigation will fix both situations.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Do you not see that other healers special heals take place after AC mitigation, we ( boldly speaking for everyone) only want to have the same numbers factor into the equation.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Adding only a little bit would not help enough.  When it is guestimated that ac mitigation is somewhere about 50% on a good tank, this means your ward will have to be twice as powerful just to be equally effective on this tank as the other healer classes are by default.  If you only added 10-20% HP to wards, we would still be underpowered on those tanks, but begin to be overpowered on low ac class.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Doing this will upset balance even more.  Again most people here are looking for equality.  I take this to mean "I want to be able to heal/protect a group as effectively as any other healer, albeit in a differerent way" (wards vs special heals).  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I dont want to be geared to only being useful in protecting low AC class players, this is not equality, since the majority of the time it is going to be a high AC level player taking the beating for the rest of the group.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I respect that you have your opinion, and you are entitled to it.  My opinion is that you are wrong, and your desire for a stronger ward will only cause more problems and widen the gap of equality.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Remember, with AC mitigation built into the ward, your ward will still work as well for mages as it does now, in fact it will work a little better as some AC is better than 0 AC.  Your mage friends will still be impressed by your ability to keep them from damage.  However your tank friends will now be impressed with your ability to be as effective as any other healer.</DIV>

Banditman
01-26-2005, 07:39 PM
<DIV>I sincerely hope that AC mitigation is greater than 50 percent on a good tank.  I parsed my own mitigation a level or two ago, with some of my green AQ armor still on . . . I was mitigating 50 percent.  At the time I was using a Symbol, and am now using a Shield (I get Blocks) and my armor is now all yellow or orange.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Since I'm not a Guardian, I can't tell you what the actual numbers are, but I can tell you that if I as a Guardian found out a Priest was mitigating anywhere near as well as I was there would be some serious splainin for SOE to do.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It seems that perhaps a Guardian might mitigate at 60 percent or more, given that my green, medium armor was mitigating at 50 percent.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Spag
01-26-2005, 09:08 PM
<DIV>Right, I was just going off the numbers you posted, in your "By the numbers" threads.</DIV>

Banditman
01-26-2005, 09:18 PM
<DIV>Yea, I know.  I think I may have been low.  I was using numbers developed by disrupt based upon a L23 Guardian.  It appears that mitigation increases with level.  Not greatly, but over time, it appears to add up.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Once again, it appears that even the most favorable picture of Wards shows them to be underpowered, and when viewed in any sort of realistic role, they are approaching only "situational" use.</DIV>

Melamp
01-27-2005, 01:04 AM
<DIV>Also to be balance you need to consider all applications.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Are any of you raiding?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1) Are all priest spam healing? if so are all heals about the same? heal strength...mana cost, recast timers?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>2) Is only one priest class using their specials while the others spam? </DIV> <DIV>ie; clerics chain reactive while others spam heal or shamans chain warding while others spam?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>are wards misunderstood and not used? </DIV> <DIV>or are they really underpowered</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Using a master ward and still geting hit for 4x the amout of damage the ward absorbs isn't good but with AC mitagation will it bring it up to being balanced with others?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>more often than not im still concerned about not getting the heal that the ward is suppose to deliver when it expires, this may not affect the MT but when someone else gets a bit of agro and you ward them and the MT regains agro it helps that you don't have to heal.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Spag
01-27-2005, 01:34 AM
<DIV>The point that this brings up then would be that they absolutely need to fix the ward stacking problem.  Currently with 2 wards stacked when the final amount of damage is used on the first ward the remaining damage from the hit is passed on to the target completely bypassing the second ward.  Any further hits then go to the ward, like they are supposed to.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Like you said in a raid, the mob will hit for 4x of what the ward can handle.  If the target has 3 or 4 wards on them, as would happen in a raid situation, the damage from the single hit needs to be applied to the wards one by one until there is no damage left from the attack, or there are no wards remaining, then the rest of the damage can be passed to the target.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I guess other than that, I completely missed the point of your post.</DIV>

Vand
01-27-2005, 01:53 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Melampus wrote:<BR> <DIV>Also to be balance you need to consider all applications.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Are any of you raiding?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1) Are all priest spam healing? if so are all heals about the same? heal strength...mana cost, recast timers?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>2) Is only one priest class using their specials while the others spam? </DIV> <DIV>ie; clerics chain reactive while others spam heal or shamans chain warding while others spam?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>are wards misunderstood and not used? </DIV> <DIV>or are they really underpowered</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Using a master ward and still geting hit for 4x the amout of damage the ward absorbs isn't good but with AC mitagation will it bring it up to being balanced with others?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>more often than not im still concerned about not getting the heal that the ward is suppose to deliver when it expires, this may not affect the MT but when someone else gets a bit of agro and you ward them and the MT regains agro it helps that you don't have to heal.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>I was in a low-level pickup raid this weekend against the named Dragon in Antonica.  The whole fight went really quickly and was kinda confusing, being my first raid.  I was able to refresh my ward on the MT immediately after the fight started (it was already gone too), then hit Healing Ritual and then, to buy time to cast another WSS, I got my Eidolic Ward off.  Right as the EW landed, the tank died, and my ward was still up.  </FONT></DIV> <DIV></FONT> </DIV> <DIV>I was one of 4 healers all spamming heals.  The DOTs were incredible and I'm pretty sure that was what killed the tank.  If this is an indication of raiding, then Wards suck in a raid.  Cosidering the ward is a heal, the tank died with a full one on him. /:boggle</FONT></DIV> <DIV></FONT> </DIV> <DIV>Attaching wards to AC will have another benefit that nobody has really mentioned of increasing the wards strength with levels.  As it looks to me now by reading posts on this board, that wards come and go in effectiveness at certain levels.  I reason that there are gaps in levels where mob's damage is increasing faster than the wards effectiveness.  Thus some level 25's say wards are worthless and some 40's say wards are are worth using again at some point.  </FONT></DIV> <DIV></FONT> </DIV> <DIV>Also the new changes in how AC is being reported, I'm betting will show that some high Agi avoidance tanks have similar or even greater AC than some mitigation tanks.  This new number (same actual AC different report) should put all tanks on a level AC range, and thus using that to adjust our Wards will balance us across the classes.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In response to the OP, "none of the above".  Wards should heal more <EM>types</EM> of damage (thinking DOT's though not exclusively) after AC, with the actual amount of damage balanced to match Templars and Druids.  Timers at about the same.</FONT><EM> </EM></DIV>

Banditman
01-27-2005, 02:04 AM
<DIV>We have not yet confirmed that whole theory about the remaining portion of a hit after a Ward breaks being passed on sans mitigation to the HP of the tank.  I personally do think this is the case, I'm simply unable to come up with a good way to test it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If that is in fact what is happening, and this is by design then Wards would be ineffective used against mobs that can hit for 1.5 times the value of the Ward.  The farther above the 1.5 it gets, the more danger to the tank who is Warded.  At 2 times the value of the Ward a tank takes the full value of the blow as if there were no Ward, but he mitigated it.  Above that you start biting into his mitigation and really hurting the tank.</DIV>

Spag
01-27-2005, 02:32 AM
<DIV>I was not referring to it being passed on without mitigation as that has not been proven, but the fact that the remaining damage is passed on to the tank instead of the 2nd ward was supported in atleast one of your other log posts.</DIV>

Banditman
01-27-2005, 02:36 AM
<DIV>Ah, yes, that's stupid too.</DIV>

Mystiq
01-27-2005, 03:36 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Melampus wrote:<BR> <DIV>Also to be balance you need to consider all applications.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Are any of you raiding?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1) Are all priest spam healing? if so are all heals about the same? heal strength...mana cost, recast timers?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>2) Is only one priest class using their specials while the others spam? </DIV> <DIV>ie; clerics chain reactive while others spam heal or shamans chain warding while others spam?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>are wards misunderstood and not used? </DIV> <DIV>or are they really underpowered</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Using a master ward and still geting hit for 4x the amout of damage the ward absorbs isn't good but with AC mitagation will it bring it up to being balanced with others?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>more often than not im still concerned about not getting the heal that the ward is suppose to deliver when it expires, this may not affect the MT but when someone else gets a bit of agro and you ward them and the MT regains agro it helps that you don't have to heal.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P>My guild has been raiding a lot lately. In doing so I have had a chance to see a good deal of heal numbers from the other healers, as well as how effective my wards are on tough mobs.</P> <P>1) All priests are expected to be spam healing on the main tank. This includes wards, reactives, hots and direct heals as well. While I haven't been able to pin down the exact amount of the Templar's best heal (level 46 - Greater Restoration) I believe it to be in the ballpark of our biggest heal, which is also the level 46 one - Enlightened Healing. Note though that GR also acts as a cure for noxious effects, and I'm almost positive it has the same power cost. Enlightened Healing at adept 3 heals for 955 hit points, one second cast, 13 second recast, 238 power. The Warden's level 46 big "direct" heal is called Verdant Rapture, and if you want to see what this puppy can do, check out this <A href="http://home.ripway.com/2004-12/223120/EQ%20II/healmuch.jpg" target=_blank>little chat</A> I had with our guild's best warden. If after reading that, you don't see a slight disparity in the healing ability of supposedly identical spells, then please stop reading now, there is nothing more I have to say to you. <STRONG>The direct heals that all priests get are absolutely not balanced at this time.</STRONG> However, this deserves a thread all its own, so, moving on....</P> <P>I don't know what I would expect more....balance within spells given to all priests (or at least templar/warden/mystic) at the exact same levels, or balance among our "special" and primary lines of healing which distinguish us yet should be equally effective in their purpose.</P> <P>2) In my experience all healers use their entire arsenal of heals on the MT in a raid situation, most likely due to the absence of a complete heal. Perhaps in the future a more organized system will be better, but for now this works.</P> <P>On a positive note, wards are absolutely used on our raids and, in my opinion and our MT's opinion (who's also my husband), vital to success. Even in their current state, wards help a lot when you're dealing with mobs whose regular hits are upwards of 3k. You wanna talk about efficient - chaining wards (and guards for Defilers) on a Guardian tanking a x4 mob is it, provided it is when the mob is putting out consistant high hits. Even wards can time out on raid mobs if not placed at the proper time...and therein lies an inherant problem for all priests - timing for max efficiency. It can be a guessing game sometimes, but I digress....</P> <P>There are many ways in which wards can be boosted or changed in order to make them more balanced when compared to reactives and regens. I'm not sure that, given the chance to have the final say, I would know what best serves us with these changes. The heal after the ward expires was supposedly removed during beta but the descriptions were never changed. I was never quite sure if it meant that the heal would occur after the ward timed out and dropped, or dropped due to absorbing its full amount of damage. Being that our "special" healing line is the only one that doesn't actually "heal" damage at all, it might behoove the devs to reimpliment this feature of our wards.</P> <P>Regards,</P>

Melamp
01-27-2005, 04:08 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Eloora wrote:<BR> <P>Even in their current state, wards help a lot when you're dealing with mobs whose regular hits are upwards of 3k. You wanna talk about efficient - chaining wards (and guards for Defilers) on a Guardian tanking a x4 mob is it, provided it is when the mob is putting out consistant high hits. Even wards can time out on raid mobs if not placed at the proper time...</P> <P> </P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>2 questions on this? Which will take parsing to answer correctly I would assume.</P> <P> </P> <P>1) your heal does 900+ direct, your ward does 1000-1500 </P> <P>tanking the X4 mobs you generally will have a tank with 7k+ hp and 4k+ ac</P> <P>at what point (oppinion only) do wards not taking in affect mitagtion become less useful mana/time wise then your heal?</P> <P> </P> <P>2) If they fixed wards so that you get the remaining asorbtion turned in to a heal when the timer expires, how much do you you think that puts us in line with other healers?</P> <P> </P> <P>This would take a dev to answer correctly, 4000 ac is quite a bit, how much does that mitagate? if it's only a 3rd of the damage then it would bring wards on par with heals but with less mana cost so it would be very efficent.</P> <P>if the 4000ac mitagates more then it's better for the tank to take the damage and heal that damage directly. but a sliding scale with the mitagation % and mana cost of heal</P> <P> </P> <P><BR> </P>

Mystiq
01-27-2005, 06:30 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Melampus wrote: <P>tanking the X4 mobs you generally will have a tank with 7k+ hp and 4k+ ac</P> <P>at what point (oppinion only) do wards not taking in affect mitagtion become less useful mana/time wise then your heal?</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I"m really not good with technical analyses, let me just state that right off the bat lol. That is Banditman's line of work, but he's a bum and isn't leveling fast enough :smileytongue:. Anyways, I use a combination of wards and heals at all intervals of a tough fight. Even if I think I should continue to chain ward the MT through a series of hard hits, I know I need to let the reactive heals work some, so I supplement with heals. Obviously if the MT is very low on health he doesn't need to sit in the orange with wards stacked on him, he needs to be healed, whether it's efficient or not. My opinion stands, though, that wards not taking mitigation into consideration is neither efficient nor "the best" solution in any situation. It's what we have, and we have to make it work for now.</FONT></P> <P>2) If they fixed wards so that you get the remaining asorbtion turned in to a heal when the timer expires, how much do you you think that puts us in line with other healers?</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I suppose this would be better than nothing. Adding an actual healing aspect to wards would probably be a nice change. The part I don't like is the fact that you're getting healed only after the ward has timed out....so a couple of different things are happening here. 1) The warded person hasn't been taking very much damage if the ward has timed out. 2) The more damage the warded person has taken, the less they will be healed for IF the ward times out first. 3) In a raid situation, the warded tank is likely being spammed with heals by classes better suited to doing so, making it very likely that he is back at full health when the unabsorbed ward falls off. So yeah, it'd be something, but nowhere near the end-all be-all of balance as far as our special lines go compared to other healers. I would be somewhat afraid to actually ask for this change in case the devs wanted to be lazy and not focus on other ways of balancing the classes as well.</FONT></P> <P>This would take a dev to answer correctly, 4000 ac is quite a bit, how much does that mitagate? if it's only a 3rd of the damage then it would bring wards on par with heals but with less mana cost so it would be very efficent.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>My tank estimates that he mitigates about 50% of incoming damage, including specials. Wards have 0 mitigation, and specials blow right thru (my tank feels that some specials do not get thru and are absorbed by wards). </FONT></P> <P>if the 4000ac mitagates more then it's better for the tank to take the damage and heal that damage directly. but a sliding scale with the mitagation % and mana cost of heal</P> <P> </P> <P><BR> </P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

Spag
01-27-2005, 08:33 PM
<DIV>2) If they fixed wards so that you get the remaining asorbtion turned in to a heal when the timer expires, how much do you you think that puts us in line with other healers?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This would not even come close to equality.  If the ward times out, there is likely no damge, other than maybe some DOTs and specials that went through, not a big concern.  But remember they would have to time out to get this, not too likely in most situations, except at the end of the fight.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>There are many things that cause our wards to be less effective than they should be.  Just recapping as I will refer to a few of these shortly:</DIV> <DIV>* 0 AC mitigation</DIV> <DIV>* 0 protection from DoTs </DIV> <DIV>* Spotty protection against specials</DIV> <DIV>* lower HP on ward when compared to hp healed by other priest classes special spells of same level.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>(In either case the DoTs and specials issue needs to be addressed one way or another.)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for your statement, in order to put us in line with the other healers, they would have to take AC mitigation into account, but would also include an 80-100 HP heal  (based on Banditmans numbers for spectral ward)  when the ward has absorbed its final amount of damage (not when it times out).  The heal amount would need to scale with the other wards as well.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I believe this would put us in line with the other classes, just my thoughts.</DIV>

Banditman
01-27-2005, 08:57 PM
<DIV>The reason Wards are used in Raids is actually easy to explain without numbers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Basically, you are simply using the Ward to give everyone else a chance to land a heal.  It doesn't gain them much time, but it gains a little, and that could be the difference.  Here's a quick numbers analysis:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Tank has 6.5k HP, mitigates 60%.  Mob hits for 3k raw with a delay of 30 (hits twice every 6 seconds), specials for 4500 once every 12 seconds.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So, in 12 seconds, the mob does 16500 HP of damage raw.  (ouch)  Un-Warded, the tank mitigates that down to 6600 HP.  Please say a little prayer for your dead tank.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now, two Wards at 1500 each in that time would knock 3k off the top, leaving 13500 HP of damage to be mitigated.    That comes out to 5400 points of damage, meaning our tank is still alive, and everyone has a little longer to land that heal.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Sure, you've only bought 3 seconds, but sometimes that's enough.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>(ps . . . <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> @ Eloora.  I'm leveling as fast as I can, but right now our guild is capping at 35 to let some folks catch up.  I need some high level Mystics to help me with data)</DIV>

Banditman
01-27-2005, 09:04 PM
<DIV>Ah.  Someone mentioned a sliding scale with mitigation and a mana to HP ratio.  Here is what you want:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>On a tank that mitigates 50% damage or greater, it is more efficient to simply heal the damage with the blast heals.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>A typical blast heal runs at around 3.6 damage healed per mana.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>A Ward "heals" for around 7.5 damage healed per mana.  However, that is BEFORE mitigation.  So, after mitigation of 50%, it's about 3.75 damage healed per mana.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The big difference between Shaman and other Priests shows up right there.  Druids and Clerics maintain their damage healed per mana ratio of 7.5 at a mitigation level of 50%.  Shaman do not.</DIV>

Kalam
01-27-2005, 09:52 PM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The big difference between Shaman and other Priests shows up right there.  Druids and Clerics maintain their damage healed per mana ratio of 7.5 at a mitigation level of 50%.  Shaman do not.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yep.  There it is in a nutshell.</P> <P><BR> </P>

Melamp
01-27-2005, 10:07 PM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now, two Wards at 1500 each in that time would knock 3k off the top, leaving 13500 HP of damage to be mitigated.    That comes out to 5400 points of damage, meaning our tank is still alive, and everyone has a little longer to land that heal.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Which ward are you talking about that does 1500?</P> <P>and with taking 50% mitagation you just need to find a heal that does 750 for the same amt of mana.</P> <P>Sorel's Healing Liturgy will come CLOSE to that with a 1 sec casting time.</P> <P>You're better off spamming heal as well<BR></P>

Spag
01-27-2005, 10:39 PM
<DIV> <DIV>The point Banditman is trying to make with this is that the 750 HP that the ward would effectively negate are payed forward.  Which means the tank is still alive and can be healed.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>A quick example:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>6500 + 750 = 7250 (of total mitigated HP)</DIV> <DIV>then mob hits for 6600</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>7250 - 6600 = 650 = tank still alive.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>VS</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>6500 - 6600 = -100 = tank dead and you cant cast your 700+ heal spell on a dead tank.</DIV></DIV>

Banditman
01-28-2005, 01:35 AM
<DIV>Right, what Spagma said.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>There are times when efficiency goes out the window in the face of staying alive.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I agree, it's more efficient to spam heal that tank with instant heals.  No doubt about it.  That's a major problem with Wards that myself and others have been trying to get acknowledged for quite some time now.</DIV>

Noosehunt
01-28-2005, 02:58 PM
This rarely happens. Sometimes I am spamming heal so much that my healing spell icons haven't refreshed yet, so I have to lay a ward instead. I guess that's better than nothing.-NH

Banditman
01-28-2005, 07:08 PM
<DIV>Believe me, of all people, I'm not one to make a case for Wards "working properly".  I believe they are grossly broken.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I was simply trying to demonstrate how in an insane situation a Ward (or two) might buy a few seconds of time for a heal to refresh and be cast.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Yea, a Ward is "better than nothing" . . . . barely.</DIV>

Ascensionf
01-28-2005, 08:16 PM
I would choose #5 because wards are perfectly fine and balanced as they are.-quirk

Spag
01-28-2005, 08:33 PM
<DIV>"I would choose #5 because wards are perfectly fine and balanced as they are."</DIV> <DIV>-------------------------------------------------</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>What color is the sky in your world?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Edit: added quote.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Spagma on <span class=date_text>01-28-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:01 PM</span>

Banditman
01-28-2005, 08:51 PM
<DIV>Lavender.  You?</DIV>

Eepop
01-29-2005, 12:44 AM
<DIV>How about number 9?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>9. Wards exactly as is, but block some % of damage from specials as well.</DIV>

Banditman
01-29-2005, 01:40 AM
<DIV>Gosh, that'd be a great solution, Wards would drop even faster!  :rolleyes:</DIV>

Noosehunt
01-29-2005, 01:48 AM
<blockquote><hr>Spagma wrote:<DIV>What color is the sky in your world?</DIV><hr></blockquote>Careful here. Some players haven't seen the sky in a long time.-NH

Melamp
01-29-2005, 02:24 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Spagma wrote:<BR> <DIV> <DIV>The point Banditman is trying to make with this is that the 750 HP that the ward would effectively negate are payed forward.  Which means the tank is still alive and can be healed.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>A quick example:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>6500 + 750 = 7250 (of total mitigated HP)</DIV> <DIV>then mob hits for 6600</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>7250 - 6600 = 650 = tank still alive.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>VS</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>6500 - 6600 = -100 = tank dead and you cant cast your 700+ heal spell on a dead tank.</DIV></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P>Then the ward is only useful on the initial pull</P> <P>If a mob is expected to hit for more than the HP of the MT then only sending the mt out with the ward on to take that first hit is logical. Unless you plan on keeping the MT above 90% health for duration of a 30-45 min fight.</P> <P>During the fight the ward is gonna take longer to cast than the heal and unless mt is about 90% health might as well heal.</P> <P>I agree you should always ward the the tank when he's about to pull the mob...but once engage healing seems to be better</P>

Banditman
01-29-2005, 03:40 AM
<DIV>Initial pull and when you are caught with all instant heals recycling.</DIV>

disru
01-29-2005, 03:46 AM
And for manastone to cannibalize off of

Melamp
01-29-2005, 11:19 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Disrupt, that's not the old Crimson Twilight/Silent Tempest from Drinal is it?</DIV>

disru
01-31-2005, 12:12 PM
yes, but we don't really have any ST people that came to eq2, its mostly old school Crimson Twilight people from mith marr and drinal.

Melamp
01-31-2005, 08:50 PM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> disrupt wrote:<BR>yes, but we don't really have any ST people that came to eq2, its mostly old school Crimson Twilight people from mith marr and drinal.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Haha, I remember old school CT on drinal, and Winters Light..hell I remember Seventh Ward</P> <P> </P> <P><BR> </P>