Being lied to, again.

[alxsen]

*sigh*

 

The archtype system is based on a key rule that is: "each class and subsequent subclass can fulfill the main role of the archtype equally well, though perhaps in different ways."

 

That is what we were told, and promised. Well, quite frankly, we were lied to.

 

I am not here to argue about whether or not other classes heal better than wardens/furies. We all know that is true. Sure, regens are unique type of healing and as such, can be used in other ways and perhaps be more effective under the right circumstances. However, the same can be said for wards and reactives, so in that aspect we are equal.

 

Unfortunately that is where the similarities and equality stop. Cleric and shaman heals are simply put, more powerful.

 

Now, i know alot of people who chose the druid path chose it because they wanted versatility, and didn't particularly like being the main healer. That's fine, but you have to realize, that is eq1's druid philosophy, and i personally want what i was promised.

 

Regens sorely need to be looked into and enhanced.

 

Now for my general griping and whining =P.  I want a real "upgrade" to a spell, heck, i think we all do. I am pretty sure that this is a wide-spread problem which most classes are having to deal with.

 

Now, there are some nice point to point breakdowns that dissect the upgrades and prove that they are in fact slight increases.  this one comes to mind: http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=16&message.id=924 .The problem is the word slight. with the mobs increasing in strength drastically, and dealing 100's of points of damage more than before. Who cares if your spell heals for 4 ticks longer, but heals at a lesser rate and just barely heals more in the end, and only costs 10 power less? who cares if your new instant adds a miniscule stat increase for 20 secs, heals 10 more at MAX LVL,which is generally 10 levels after you get it, and costs 50 more power?

 

What good is effeciency if you can't dish out enough heals to stay with the damage? And more often than not, when you try and can just barely keep them alive, you will get aggro and die for your efforts. This problem is small in the lower levels, but it becomes a fairly moderate problem in mid-level, and will only get exponentially worse and become a nightmare at lvl 50.

 

note: All my whining is pre-big patch. So if they fix this and i look like a jerk, please forgive me =P

Message Edited by alxsen20 on 12-17-2004 10:00 PM

[elorei]

just so you know, clerics are in the same boat.

 

lvl 11 reactive > lvl 20+ reactive.

 

that said, druids and shamen are about to become totally pointless if the patch notes for the test server are accurate.

 

the patch notes state that reactives will STACK.

 

this basically will make clerics the best (like 2-4 times better than anyone else) heaers by a mile.  of course, the patch wording could be wrong, the patch notes might be referring to something entirely different, who knows.

 

but taken at face value "vitaes will now properly stack" will pretty much doom all other healers into being subpar.

 

 

[FumoFu]

gutted :smileysad: sigh*

 

 

[TimboSilvermi]

/hands out cookies

 

I love my Fury.  As either primary or secondary healer, I can keep the tanks on their feet and, when I (remember to) use my aggro reducer, avoid getting pummeled too badly.  I prefer to leave primary healing to the Templars though, if for no other reason that they wear plate armor.

 

If you're this unhappy with your Fury, and you really want to be the best healer in the game, you may want to consider rerolling now rather than investing more time in a class that you don't enjoy.

 

Personally, this class is exactly what I wanted.

[skerry]

I normally don't say this, but have to in this case.

 

Whatever it is you are doing to say your warder / fury cannot heal well, or is overshadowed by the other healers,  you are definatlely doing something wrong or not getting it.

 

We heal differently, not better not worse, just differently.  I will grant you that our style of healing does not set well with people because it is not a full health style healing, but really.. we do just fine.

[Neko]

---

skerry wrote:

I normally don't say this, but have to in this case.

 

Whatever it is you are doing to say your warder / fury cannot heal well, or is overshadowed by the other healers,  you are definatlely doing something wrong or not getting it.

 

We heal differently, not better not worse, just differently.  I will grant you that our style of healing does not set well with people because it is not a full health style healing, but really.. we do just fine.

---

I agree.

I have little problem healing and have actually be told that I am a 'healing machine, better than any cleric..'

Its all about knowing how to use the class properly.

Wood screws are just as effective (if not more) than nails, but not if you attempt to pound them in with a hammer like they are a nail.

[Racmo]

I think what the poster was saying is that it gets significantly tougher to keep the tanks up as you level.  To me, this means that our tools we use are degrading.  Are all priests in this boat....I don't know.  I'm hearing they are.

 

I do spend almost all of my time casting heals.  This interferes with the HOs, this also doesn't let me do other stuff like debuff or nuke.  The poster has a point and more than one person is observing it.  To say I'm a healer and shouldn't nuke or debuff...well, why did they give me the spells if I'm not supposed to use them? 

 

As for you posters that reply - Reroll another character or you're not playing your character right.  The amount of arrogance of these statements is staggering.

 

To the poster that said reroll...He shouldn't have to.  He was told something by SOE.  He was PROMISED this.  He shouldn't have to reroll.

 

To the poster that says he doesn't know how to play his character...I guess you should write up a guide so that those of us that have played 5 years as healers in EQ1 and now in EQII have no clue how to figure out a games mechanics.  You do realize it's not that difficult to figure out strategies to heal?   Yes, we did figure them out...that's why we're still playing and healing, but we also recognize what we view as shortcomings and will post to get them considered.

 

Racmoor

[elorei]

---

Neko wrote:

---

skerry wrote:

I normally don't say this, but have to in this case.

 

Whatever it is you are doing to say your warder / fury cannot heal well, or is overshadowed by the other healers,  you are definatlely doing something wrong or not getting it.

 

We heal differently, not better not worse, just differently.  I will grant you that our style of healing does not set well with people because it is not a full health style healing, but really.. we do just fine.

---

I agree.

I have little problem healing and have actually be told that I am a 'healing machine, better than any cleric..'

Its all about knowing how to use the class properly.

Wood screws are just as effective (if not more) than nails, but not if you attempt to pound them in with a hammer like they are a nail.

---

if reactives do indeed stack on test (i havent tested it out, so this may be a fale alarm):

 

then with a MASTER1 version of your regen you will heal the tank for 876 damage in the time a cleric can heal for over 5000 with adept1s (using just reactives) assuming the tank is getting hit by 6 or more mobs (and this is a regular occurance later on when groups of mobs come 6 at a time).

 

yes, currently druids are great healers, if the patch is indeed allowing stacking of reactives,  then druids will not be in the same ballpark at all.

 

then what?

 

debuff?  ok, the intimidation line, its great.  guess what, clerics get the same thing, but they hit the ENTIRE encounter, yup, theirs is AE.

 

nuke?  clerics nuke just as hard. (i believe the AEs for fury are a little better actually, ill get exact numbers later if you like)

 

DoT?  templar DoTs actually do MORE damage than a fury (no experience with inquisitors on this matter, so i cant compare).

 

buff?  templar buffs are extremely powerful.  do they get procs? no.  but they still get incredible buffs.

 

 

so what then?  you can proc, and you get the best group invis ability in the game.  is this good enough for you?

[TimboSilvermi]

I should have remembered the #1 rule of posting on the SOE boards:

 

Don't feed the trolls.

[KEW]

I am sorry to say that I think you have it wrong. In almost all of the guild groups, and pick up groups I participate in, I am always the main healer. I have no trouble keeping the tank alive. I do not have much trouble keeping the whole party alive. I admit that post 20, I really believe in a 2 healer group. If one goes 00power, or 1 goes down there is always a back up. You are doing something wrong if you can not function as the main healer. Our type of healing does take practice and the tank understanding how we heal.

Have fun with it! Practice Practice!

 

 

[TimboSilvermi]

"Wood screws are just as effective (if not more) than nails, but not if you attempt to pound them in with a hammer like they are a nail"

 

That is the best quote I've seen that expresses how Furies are "as good as" Templars at healing, just not "exactly the same as" them.  Hell, if every class did everything the same way, what would be the point in having classes?  MIght as well be a skill-based game like AC.

 

I agree that post 20, and especially post 25, two healers are a must.  Doesn't matter what class they are, but IMO the group will be much more effective if they are different classes.

 

I group with a Templar regularly, and we know to watch each other's Power and aggro.  He knows that I'll use my Regen line to help save his healing Power, and I know to back off on the nukes when I see his Power dropping fast.  He knows that his job is to keep the main tank up, and I know that mine is to "spot heal" everyone else in the group (including the Templar and myself).  When I group with other folks we divide up tasks differently.  Sometimes I'm the main healer, but oftentimes not, and either way works just fine.

[lordofdrago]

I'm a 26 Bruiser so I'm not in the high end game yet and only have a 22 Defiler, 12 Fury, 12 Enchanter, 12 Wizard as alts. I've played EQ1 since the week it released, one of my alts is a 57 Cleric. I've played Dark Ages since it released as well and have a 43 Bard. Both EQ1, Dark Ages and some games have very simliar healing stratgies.. which is to say they really have non. In most games you know excalty how much you can heal in a given period of time and it is always the same. Damage taken is usually fairly constant from start to finish as well. If you get a little behind in healing, you just chain heal to catch up.EQ2 is NOT those games. There many encounters that seem very difficult to complete until you learn the strategy. There is no chain healing here like there was in EQ1. Damage is not constant like EQ1. In my experienceso far, I see at least 6 reasons why things are a little difficult.1) There is no chain healing. Healers need a new plan. We tanks need to remember that.2) Mobs have comba arts too... As a tank I hate see the damage roll like this: 40, 42, 38, 41, 189, 41, 37, etc. They do more than WILD SWING. Damage taken can very wildly. Only when a mob is drained of power is the fight asy and damage consistant.3) We are all still learning. There is no shame in this.4) Things are probably still being tuned.. and will be turned for months.5) Sometimes it takes trying a few different class to 15 or 20 to truly understand ones calling.. or lack there of. I have had 2 Shadow Knight up to about level 15. SK wasn't for me. Bruiser I love though. Had a cleric to 12, didn't like it. For some reaosn, Druid I love. 6) Although any member of an Arch Class can fill a basic role. We have to understand that each arch class will have to do it differently AND in some cases one will be better than another. Bruisers are in the fighter arch class, however, they don't tank nearly as well as guardians. I can tank, just not as well, and not as well with a cleric instead of a defiler heaing. Bruisers tank better with wards than reactive heals. That's ok with me though because bruisers have the highest DPS in the fighter arch class.I know that it took me a while to see that I was bringing baggage from "old lives". I grouped with a Fury, Clove, over the weeked. She was the only healer and did an excellence job While we took 1 and 2 up yellows. Better than many Clerics I've grouped with. On the recieving end, Furies sure seem decent to to me.Just my 2 cents.Balance Blackrain, 26 Bruiser / 22 Tailor, OasisEdited: I said HO, meant to refer to combat arts.. I started to mix two trains of thought.

Message Edited by lordofdragons on 12-21-2004 04:48 PM

[deore]

---

Neko wrote:

---

skerry wrote:

I normally don't say this, but have to in this case.

Whatever it is you are doing to say your warder / fury cannot heal well, or is overshadowed by the other healers, you are definatlely doing something wrong or not getting it.

We heal differently, not better not worse, just differently. I will grant you that our style of healing does not set well with people because it is not a full health style healing, but really.. we do just fine.

---

I agree.

I have little problem healing and have actually be told that I am a 'healing machine, better than any cleric..'

Its all about knowing how to use the class properly.

Wood screws are just as effective (if not more) than nails, but not if you attempt to pound them in with a hammer like they are a nail.

---

Agreed. Agreed.We are as good a healer as clerics and shamans. We are not clerics in lion form so don't try to have the same healing output as they do because we don't and there's a good reason for that. We have other ways, than pure healing, to keep our group/tank alive and kicking.As a fun exercise, go into a quiet corner or your room, cancel all your buffs and write down your base stats. In turn, cast each of your buff on yourself, notice the stats boosts and then cancel it. You will notice that we have some defense buffs that are simply AWESOME. (Hint: check out the stats boosts from willowskin and you'll know what druids are about. Spoiler: +300AC,very nice AGI/resists boosts at adept3)- Clerics just heal the damage as it happens. Almost no mitigation, just pure healing.- Shamans use wards to absorb a certain amount of damage and they have some big heals to cast between wards when the group starts taking full damage.- Druids have continuous damage mitigation through AC/AGI/resists buffs, so the whole group only takes a fraction of the damage at any time.If you upgrade your buff spells and keep the buffs up, your group would take MUCH less damage than it would with a cleric, that's why you do NOT need the big heals a cleric has. Our biggest defense buffs last for hours so they won't drop mid-fight like shamans' wards(that's why they need big heals to bring health back up between recast of wards).We are not a big numbers class. We don't do big numbers, either on healing or damage. We are all about the little things, like a catalyzer. Boost all the melees damage output by buffing their STR, AGI and procs. Debuff mobs defense so that melees can do even more damage. A few DoTs to add even more damage over time. Mobs STR debuffs and group overall defense buffs to reduce damage taken.If you play it properly, regens will be enough most of the time. Direct heals are for emergencies and if you are already keeping your regens up, the heals we have are enough.Nukes and direct heals are just icing on the cake and the lowest of a druid/Fury's priority, IMO.I'm level 27, I am loving my Fury and wouldn't have it any other way. I am most of the time the main/only healer in my group and have no problem keeping up. For an XP group, having a healer duo(priests of different class) does improve the group's efficiency, though.

[Ver]

I simply can't wait until the Fury's that say that healing is fine for us gets to the higher levels.  At 41, the tank has more HP than he did at level 12.  The mobs hit for harder than they did at level 12.  Groups pull more mobs than they did at level 12, yet my regrowth is still my primary heal, which I got at level 12.  Things are out of whack right now.  I have yet to have an upgrade to regrowth, bloom, efflo, winds of renewal, or sylvan wind.  These are still my only real methods of healing.  That is a problem.

 

Verax

[alxsen]

hmm, i like that you posters who believe me to have it wrong like your class. I didn't say that i didn't like my class, i beleive it is a great class and enjoy it much.

but you really do not have the experience to tell me i am wrong at this point. i am talking about end game, and the end game is dark and gloomy. i am lvl 42 almost 43, creatures 1 hit for 800-1.5k w/specials and normal hit for 300. and have 2-3 specials they cycle through usually. i still have not recieved a heal spell better than regrowth, the last one you will get before expansion past lvl 50 is wild bloodflow at lvl 40. it heals for less than regrowth, albeit for a longer duration.

 

unfortunately a longer duration doesn't mean squat if it only lasts 40 % longer but costs twice as much and heals for less each tick. like i said, it doesn't matter how long a regen lasts if it can't keep up with damage. a 10 pnt regen for an hour at a cost of 10 power is an awesomely efficient spell, but it won't keep anyone alive in battle.

 

and as for you posters who think we shouldn't have equal heals, or be able to be main healer.... this is eq2, and yes we should because that is what we are supposed to do.

 

Dalcharias made a better post on that, than i ever could, check it out here if you need the info.

 

http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=spellart&message.id=2831&page=4

[ren]

Well -- I mean, ask a Warden how much they heal for and then tell them how much you do -- they will laugh in your face.

Furies best heal at 50 is ~1240 in 30 seconds and a 700 direct heal at App2.  Only, that App2 costs 246 mana and the Master1 Efflo is 122 (half that cost) for 623 pts of healing.

 

I know Wardens 10+ levels lower than me that can already heal better than that.  And not by a small margin, either.

 

In fact, for perspective, Paladins have near-equal healing power to a Fury.  At 50 they get Pious Aid which does ~650pts of healing for 140 mana and has a cast/recast of 2s/5s.  (our 623 is 3s/7s, and our 700 is 3s/9s).

 

 

Our procs are insane, this is true, but we gotta have at least half the healing power of every other priest class and that, imo, is just uncalled for.  Wardens have nukes and dots just as good as us, if not better, and their adepts actually drop in zones that people go to. 

 

 

I mean, you can say that you heal fine at level 27 and I'll believe you.  I healed fine at 27, too.  When you are healing for the same amount you did at 27 but are now 50 and the mobs are hitting for 800-1.5ks and spamming insane damage specials, you will see that our other spells don't really make up for the lack of an efficient healing line.

[Kewstu121]

the Fury is great for healing and also for damaging.

 

And good for backup heals when your cleric decides he is gonna attempt to get involved with the killing of Yellow 2Up grps in Stormhold.

 

By this I mean, this idiot of a cleric was not thinking about his main part of the grp to HEAL, there he was getting a beating and using his mana up on damage spells, so I had to keep the grp alive with heals whilst group telling this idiot to get out of the aggro and heal.

 

We killed the mobs and then had a little talk about his role.  After that grp worked very well killing Orange double ups with relative ease.

[deore]

I think it had been known for a while:Warden = Healer/Defensive priestFury = Healer/Offensive priestWhen I picked Fury, I knew we were an offensive priest. I knew there was a price to pay in the long run. We can't expect to heal and protect as well as other healers and have offensive buffs they don't.You also say that this shows post 40. I mean, if our healing power is almost as good as the others for 40 out of 50 levels and we also get offensive buffs, that's great.Everyone seems to agree that post 25 you need 2 healers in the group, anyway. I'm guessing we will be picked to increase the damage output of the group, speedup the fights and backup/help the primary healer.Hey, you made it to 50 within a month of the game coming out, the class can't be THAT bad.

[digitalchi]

I'd say people should not look at fury as a healer but as someone who boosts the offensive nature of group just as a previous poster says and what it says in the description of the fury:"Furies harness the powers of storms and control the forocity of nature. They command the feral spirits of the wilderness to strengthen and heal thier companions."Notice strengthen is a key word there. If you compare this to a Warden they get:"Wardens are protectors of the woodlands and defenders of wildlife. They tap into the power of nature to mend wounds and purge ailments that affect their allies."This just enforces the vision for each of the subclasses under druid have, the fury is geared towards making the group more offensive and the warden more defensive.So to play a fury as a healer is not what the fury is intended to be. Yes it has a healing role but that is not it's sole role. So people thinking that the Fury is broken or not as good is because they are not playing the fury as they should be.

[Katx]

That's wrong, digitalchimp.  The "goal" or "vision" is that each class/subclass of an archetype should be equally able to perform that archetype's main role.  Which, in the case of a Fury is HEALER.  Not "back-up" healer.  Not primary of boosting offense or lokewarm offense while healing a bit.  But HEALER.  We should not have to settle for having to use level 12 healing spells at level 50.  This is a major problem and makes Furies broken in terms of being able to fulfill their stated archetype role as HEALER.

 

We all get something as a secondary to differentiate us - but that doesn't mean we should be gimped in our main role as HEALERS.

[digitalchi]

It depends on how you look at it. We are able to perform a healer role just differently than other subclasses. But even if people deem it to be less powerful in healing, we can still heal. However we can also do other things.But I do agree, we shouldn't have to use level 12 healing at level 50.

[Kullak]

Ok, instead of the debating i'll just throw in some helpful suggestions to help you find your role successfully as a fury.

 

1) Regrowth and Fleshweave stack, as do other regens later.  Regrowth heals much larger amounts while fleshweave lasts almost twice as long AND augments your tanks damage output.  Stack the two and touch heal with bloom.  (obviously strategies change as you level and more tools become available, this is what i do at 27)

 

2) Adept3... get at least a few of them.  Go buy some corals/silvers and find a scholar/sage.  You should at least adpt3 some or all of your healing spells to maximize efficiency. (more healed per power used)  Also adept3 some key buffs.  I found that adpt3 willowskin adds like 300 ac... as opposed to something around 100 ac at adpt1... 200 extra ac to everyone in the group worth it to anyone else?  I use vigor on myself to enhance my power pool, and since i can never have enough power, i adpt3ed it too.  Every adept3 you upgrade for yourself makes you that much more competitive and competent.

 

3) Know how and when and to what degree to be offensive.  My philosophy as a fury healer is to do one thing.  Make sure MY party outlasts THEIR party.  Whether I do that by helping burn them down mobs before they can touch my tank or by pumping life into my tank is entirely up to me and is VERY situational.  Learn these situations so you don't make bad judgements.  Some mobs are so good at dishing damage but have so few HP, i can usually do better by dropping a regrowth on my tank and then quickly dotting and nuking the first mob to death(minding agro of course) thus eliminating a large percentage of the opposing groups dps, every mob less in that group substantially decreases their output and makes it easier for me to keep up, so sometimes it is a good judgement to lend an offensive hand.  Also there is more to fury offense than DoTs and DDs.  We got great damage shields, proc buffs, and other buffs that increase our group dps and thus increase the probability that my party will outlast the enemy in the end.  Make use of these or your aren't filling the potential of your class... even if the 3 minute buff time is obnoxiously annoying.

 

4) If you are determined to make a class work, you will find a way.  It's all about perception and attitude. If you have a negative outlook how are you possibly going to give your best effort, reach your potential, and discover new potential?  You'll stick yourself in your self-dug rut.

 

Ive been in many groups that have commented on how I was the best healer they have played with.  I have also played in groups that had other healers and I have been able to fit in a dps/buff/assistance role really well.  I have even at one point had a group that wanted me to group w/ them even though i was going extended afk just because my adpt 3 concentration buffs make such a difference that in some cases mobs just cant land most of their hits anymore.  Personally however I thinl versatility is my fury's largest strength and asset.

 

Not trying to talk myself up, just letting you know that a fury is quite viable and effective.

 

Corvidae

Fury, 27

Neriak

[UnluckyChar]

I don't know what class you're playing, but my lvl 29 Fury seems to be able to outheal every Defiler, Mystic, Warden, Inquisitor, and Templar I've grouped with.  At level 26, I was able to solo-heal the Zek boat ride. I am not disappointed with my healing abilities at all, except for the fact that Fleshweave is so much worse than Regrowth (but I believe this is the case for all healing classes.)

 

The only conflicts I see developing between the Warden/Fury and the Shamans/Clerics is that their heals are preventative in nature, while our heals are restorative in nature.  If the shaman/cleric of the group manages to prevent all damage, then our healing abilities serve no purpose whatsoever, because we have no hitpoints to restore. However, in most cases, especially as I've gotten higher in level (because we are still relying on our old healing spells), the Shaman/Cleric and I work together.

 

As a side note, I did not pick the Druid for versatility, I picked the Druid because I didn't like the thought of being a Shaman or a Templar. (I wanted to go Inquisitor, but my guild is Qeynos-based, and Templars don't sound fun) I played a Cleric in EQ1, and I love playing the main healer in EQ2.

[Ee]

---

Kullak wrote:

 

1) Regrowth and Fleshweave stack, as do other regens later. 

 

Corvidae

Fury, 27

Neriak

---

Sadly, in your long well thought out post - you lost a lot of credability in your first line.    Regrowth and Fleshweave do NOT stack, unless this has been changed in the last 48 hours.  Sure, both buff icons appear on you - but only one heals.

 

 

Also, everyone that claims the role of a Fury is to be a backup healer and others that claim we can heal just fine - you both may be right to some degree (not at all in my opinion, but lets say you are).   How come I keep getting new heals every two or three levels?  If I am a backup healer, why are the same number of my skills heals as other priest types?  A paladin is a backup healer, not a Fury.   Also, why are these skills a complete waste of primary hotbar space?   If level 40+ people are using a level 12 heal that has been "upgraded" more than once - there is something definatly wrong, and needs to be fixed.  Now, I can heal - and I do all the time, but I am not even using Fury specific heals to do it.   It is not only annoying, but a total kick in the [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] that half my knew spells are a joke.

[ren]

I'm not debating whether or not a level 20-35ish Fury can heal well.  I know that we heal quite well/adequately at these levels.  Enough so to be primary healer.  In fact, I was primary healer for my group up to 50, but look at my healing power now as opposed to level 30:

 

(I am ignoring group heals since they are rarely used and I don't think that there is actually anyone out there that disputes that these aren't broken)

 

Level 30:

Regrowth (AD3) - 118/tick for 18 seconds for 62 mp (2s/5s)

Bloom (M1) - 306+ 60 for 3 ticks for 65 mp (2s/4s)

Effloresce (M1) - 623 instant heal for 122 mp (3s/7s)

 

Level 50 (not counting the spells I had at 30):

Wild Bloodflow (AP2) - 124/tick at 30 seconds for 150 mp  (2s/5s)

Feral Salve (AD1) - 503 instant heal for 141 mp (2s/4s)

Ferine Elixer (AP2) - 710 instant heal for 226mp (3s/9s)

 

 

I have a heal that does only 100hp more for DOUBLE the mana cost and has a longer recast.  My Feral Salve heal is almost exactly the same, with the only benefit being that Feral Salve has a nice proc that goes off fairly often at Adept1 -- I've come to just forget that this is a heal and just use it as a buff.  The only redeeming defense is that I have M1s and AD3s.  I wish that a sage could level quickly because I would love to see how much they heal for after I dump 10s of plat into making one and buying the master versions. 

 

My only REAL complaint at this point is the removal of the sta/str from Ferine Elixer and the reduction of mana cost or the upping of its healing power.  Nobody cares that Ferine Elixer has str/sta when it only lasts 9 seconds.  Those two stats are worthless and making it last cost more for 9 seconds of a worthless buff is just a slap in the face.  Also, I'd like to know how exactly Wild Bloodflow works, because I am not entirely sure that it does work that well and it is quite a bit of a mana hog.  As for the other stuff, I can try to wait patiently to see if the adepts/masters make any difference. 

 

 

Edit: Oh, and can we get our single target heal adepts to actually drop?  I mean, I don't need anymore Owl's Restoration or Howl of the Untamed -- 5-6hp/mp on a group heal isn't exactly something I drool over when Sylvan Wind and Winds of Regrowth are upwards of 15-25hp/mp.

 

 

Message Edited by rensu on 12-22-2004 01:27 PM

Message Edited by rensu on 12-23-2004 10:15 AM

[Neko]

If we were such 'bad healers' then are those that are able to perform 'super players'?   Probably not.

 

However this does indicate where the 'difference' can be found... in the player.

 

Its not the class not fitting the game, but rather the user not fitting the class.  

 

It doesn't mesh for you, but it meshes quite well for others.

 

That is not to imply that you are a bad player, but simply that you are not an optimum player for a Fury. 

 

 

[Ee]

Yeah, good point Neko!   All of our 20+ heals are weak compared to the sub 20 ones to force us to prove our skill !  /sarcasm 

[deore]

*Maybe* the regens/heals are the way they were meant to be but they should be stacking and a bug is preventing them to.One thing is for sure, there are enough people complaining that Fury class is broken as a healer that if it is really broken and not the way it was meant to be then the devs will surely notice it and fix it.At the moment, we have to trust those that are already 40+ about how it will be at 40+ but most of the people we've seen complain are much lower level and I know, from experience, that Fury is working just fine at least until 30. Those people that are below 30 and complaining surely aren't playing the class right since I find at these levels we are almost overpowered compared to the other healers (those I've grouped with anyway).

[TimboSilvermi]

"..most of the people we've seen complain are much lower level and I know, from experience, that Fury is working just fine at least until 30. Those people that are below 30 and complaining surely aren't playing the class right since I find at these levels we are almost overpowered compared to the other healers (those I've grouped with anyway)."

 

Thank you, thank you, thank you.  My sentiments exactly.

[Daran]

I took a quick glance at the boards for the Mystic Class, according to the 5 seconds it took me to read the post Wards Stack.Now if Wards Stack and Reactive heals are going to stack.....come on people make the jump with me....Regens are suppossed to stack!I'm thinking that there were some major stacking issues with buffs and such, if you think of it it makes sense. Ward is a rune and works prety simply absorbing damage. Reactives are a bit more complicated since they are triggered whenever combat damage occurs. Regens are just slightly less complicated in a world of no stacking limits (we dont live in that world)So instead of going on about how much we suck, why not think for a moment in terms of this.....If Regrowth and Fleshweave (and subsequent upgrades) were allowed to stack, would you be able to heal effectively at level 20, 30, 40, and 50.If regens stacked would it be stupidly powerful?If regens stacked with some restrictions, say one long 30sec regen with no stats and one short 12 sec regen with some secondary boost like offensive procs or such could stack, would it be effective?The devs aren't dumb, they aren't ignorant. They are professional coders doing things with 1s and 0s that I cant even begin to wrap my head around. There is room for improvement and tweaking....that being said, I will say that things like this needed to be done in beta testing. Imagine if a console game that cant be patched were released with the bugs that online games have? the company would be out of business in no time, Patches and such are crutches that online game developers have taken to using as a form of game development, which is unfortunate for the players of these games