EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire - View Single Post

Raidi Sovin'faile · 08-04-2007, 03:21 AM

Belaythien wrote:

Paladins have heals where we've got damage. That's the way it is. If they get increased heals for free why do we have to pay so much to stay where we are? Why didn't we get better heals too? Your argument is flawed.

Well, it wasn't really an argument.. so much as trying to make sense of the change. Like I said, SoE obviously considers Heals on a different scale than Damage, whether you do or not. Note that I didn't say that I think it's correct, rather that it's how SoE must be looking at it. Belaythien wrote:

As far as different scales are concerned it's not apples and oranges. In fact it's pretty straight forward. Simply compare the amount of damage a DD does with the amount of heals a healer does. DDs nuke for 10s of thousands of damage whereas healers heal for a few thousand. They may be on different scales but it's the other way around. You need way more damage than you need healing. That's totally contrary to the values of those buffs. It does however make it more obvious that they inteded to nerf SKs overproportionally.

Heals are needed in a different way than Damage. Damage you do right from the start of the fight until the Mob dies, in fact.. it's the reason the mob dies. The more damage you do, the faster the mob dies. Higher damage is ALWAYS useful, no matter the situation, because it will always have an effect: making the fights shorter. Heals are only needed as people get damaged. Also, you aren't healing constantly until the fight ends, basically.. having a set # of damage to heal up to to end the fight. Rather, the MT has a set amount of "leeway", his hitpoints, and the heals have to overcome the incoming damage so that the leeway isn't used up and the MT dies. Having a larger heal overall is more important, because it can handle larger damage without risk of death. Basically, Heals per Second is not how you value heal spells, and thus any numeric bonuses to healing is treated differently than Damage per Second. Lastly, there's maybe 3-6 people using this healing at any one time, whereas depending on your class choices, you could have upwards of 12-15 people using the spell damage increase (2 Crusaders, 6 Mages, Bards, some Priests, and multiples of these classes). Anything that will affect more players will have it's value lower than the one that affects fewer. Whether this warrants dropping Strength off any of your buffs is unknown to me. I don't have an SK to test it out myself. Some folks are saying there's little difference in their personal DPS (same as the Paladin) and now they can boost "some" dps for nearly half a raid force once GU 38 comes around (like Pallies boosting Heals some). Maybe their experience is unique though... I do think, however, that Heals and Damage, even if just looking at the number of people being affected, need to be viewed differently.

08-04-2007, 03:21 AM	#23
Raidi Sovin'faile Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,320	Belaythien wrote: Paladins have heals where we've got damage. That's the way it is. If they get increased heals for free why do we have to pay so much to stay where we are? Why didn't we get better heals too? Your argument is flawed. Well, it wasn't really an argument.. so much as trying to make sense of the change. Like I said, SoE obviously considers Heals on a different scale than Damage, whether you do or not. Note that I didn't say that I think it's correct, rather that it's how SoE must be looking at it. Belaythien wrote: As far as different scales are concerned it's not apples and oranges. In fact it's pretty straight forward. Simply compare the amount of damage a DD does with the amount of heals a healer does. DDs nuke for 10s of thousands of damage whereas healers heal for a few thousand. They may be on different scales but it's the other way around. You need way more damage than you need healing. That's totally contrary to the values of those buffs. It does however make it more obvious that they inteded to nerf SKs overproportionally. Heals are needed in a different way than Damage. Damage you do right from the start of the fight until the Mob dies, in fact.. it's the reason the mob dies. The more damage you do, the faster the mob dies. Higher damage is ALWAYS useful, no matter the situation, because it will always have an effect: making the fights shorter. Heals are only needed as people get damaged. Also, you aren't healing constantly until the fight ends, basically.. having a set # of damage to heal up to to end the fight. Rather, the MT has a set amount of "leeway", his hitpoints, and the heals have to overcome the incoming damage so that the leeway isn't used up and the MT dies. Having a larger heal overall is more important, because it can handle larger damage without risk of death. Basically, Heals per Second is not how you value heal spells, and thus any numeric bonuses to healing is treated differently than Damage per Second. Lastly, there's maybe 3-6 people using this healing at any one time, whereas depending on your class choices, you could have upwards of 12-15 people using the spell damage increase (2 Crusaders, 6 Mages, Bards, some Priests, and multiples of these classes). Anything that will affect more players will have it's value lower than the one that affects fewer. Whether this warrants dropping Strength off any of your buffs is unknown to me. I don't have an SK to test it out myself. Some folks are saying there's little difference in their personal DPS (same as the Paladin) and now they can boost "some" dps for nearly half a raid force once GU 38 comes around (like Pallies boosting Heals some). Maybe their experience is unique though... I do think, however, that Heals and Damage, even if just looking at the number of people being affected, need to be viewed differently.