Are Wards underpowered?

[Somanta]

Im lvl 28 Mystic and can keep a group alive with ease in RoV fighting against lvl 32+ mobs. After first ward absorbs the special hit and my slow/debuffs are landed, I can keep alive the tank just with wards (Adept1) and maybe some occasional heal. Sometimes my wards lasts full duration and sometimes 2-3 seconds when the mob executes another special.

[Quilli]

Eloora if Reactive would heal our ward would that solve the 2 healer problem?

 

So if you still have ward up and get hit reactive trigers and heals back some portion of the ward.  Same with HOT

 

 

Thoughts?

[Sens]

Quilliam, that's a very interesting suggestion for how to solve the problems with priest compatability.

 

My only concern is that it might be too effective and would make it hard to balance group dynamics for 1 or 2 healer groups.

 

My 2 coppers is that perhaps the amount of protection just needs to scale a bit more at the higher level content end. My wards are very effective now (level 24) and when working in two priest groups we don't expect to both be completely effective. I'm effective on one tank by myself, having a second priest on the same tank leaves them only in backup mode until the tanks health starts to fall. Then if the fight is continuing I can continue and the templar can add their reactive heals and we can maintain the tank where I alone was having trouble. This allows me to not go into chain cast mode.

 

It's all in the strategy applied... That's the great thing about EQ2. I'm so much more involved in tactics than I've ever been in any other MMORPG. Usually priests/clerics/healers just punch a button when a health bar goes down and their job is done, but not in EQ2! :smileyhappy:

[Spaz]

Just so you know. People complain in the Templar forum of exactly the opposite. That templars are the [Removed for Content] and that Mystics are too powerful.

 

I personally don't believe it to be true. It all depends on skill. I as a templar have never had any trouble keeping up with healing as long as I make use of all of my resources.

 

Having not played a Mystic I can't say what the correct strategy for keeping up with healing for you guys is, but I am sure it exists.

 

The true answer for any group that wants to take down orange/red ^^ mobs is to have two healers of different types. Since there are no issues with stacking of heals between the different sub-classes having two of the heal buff up on the MT gives ample time to reset things when they go down. You just have to learn to have all the heal spells you need lined up in your hot bars and hit them again just as they go down. I know that personally I am counting the number of times the heal proc goes off on my MT and start casting the next heal so it lands just as the previous one goes down.

 

None of the EQ2 healing classes can use the old EQ1 strategy of throw the big heal when the tank is at X% of health.

[FelixDomesticus]

Some mobs (not even nameds) can hit my ward down in one combat round. It sort of sucks that when combat ends I am oom and cleric still has 35-50% of power left. And that assumes that we have same amount of power to begin with.Wards should absolutely take damage AFTER mitigation. That would put as to same position with other priest classes.

[Ender]

First off. . . LOL!I have a 35 templar, 29 mystic, 31 warden.I can heal well with all of them. I prefer the templar only cuz it looks cool in armor. Other than that, I've had no real problems with any of them. Having to use lvl 12 spells when you're in your 30's is annoying tho...In short, play what you want, don't believe the hype. If you don't like what you're playing, then you can always reroll.

[disru]

---

EnderMX wrote:First off. . . LOL!I have a 35 templar, 29 mystic, 31 warden.I can heal well with all of them. I prefer the templar only cuz it looks cool in armor. Other than that, I've had no real problems with any of them. Having to use lvl 12 spells when you're in your 30's is annoying tho...In short, play what you want, don't believe the hype. If you don't like what you're playing, then you can always reroll.

---

This thread isn't about hating our class, I myself am enjoying a mystic/shaman very much. It is about an analysis of wards in comparison to the other priest's specialized form of healing. If the majority opinion is that wards are fine, then great. If most feel that they need work, which appears to be the case, hopefully this thread will draw some attention.

[Ender]

thats true. . . but since i have all 3 healer classes i dont have much to worry about =)

[Fashion_dealer]

The only thing I can think of is that they figure that cause we get slow we don't need to heal as much?

 

Our heals + slow =same healing capacity of other priests

 

With slow I can heal as effectively, it seems, as other classes. So you can't think of wards idependently, they combine automatically with our other spells.

 

 

Arzanes

Message Edited by Fashion_dealer on 12-10-2004 01:55 PM

[disru]

---

Fashion_dealer wrote:

The only thing I can think of is that they figure that cause we get slow we don't need to heal as much?

Our heals + slow =same healing capacity of other priests

With slow I can heal as effectively, it seems, as other classes. So you can't think of wards idependently, they combine automatically with our other spells.

Arzanes

Message Edited by Fashion_dealer on 12-10-2004 01:55 PM

---

pasted from one of my previous replies:Debuffs are not relative in this discussion in my opinion because all the priests get their own form of those too. (example: yes shaman get slow to help lessen damage but clerics get the physical damage mitigation buff which also lessens damage).

[cas]

Hey all,

 

I do not feel that our Wards are underpowered at all..  Granted they are pretty much useless with out our other spells to back them up..  Once you throw slow and delusion on all the mobs the ward lasts 3 times as long..  I always felt they were a little to powerful..  I am lvl 24 I usually only fight group ^^ orange or higher..  I always grp with a second healer any even another Mystic I have had great success with them all..

 

Plus if you think about it if you are un happy with our Ward find a Monk to be MT  our wards rock with them..  Let's see a Templar keep a monk healed they got a smaller amount of AC but they dodge more....  So they take more damage than there reactive heal almost every hit dont you think they would be chain casting them..  also for a druid a paladan type class would be good they got self wards and heals to help you out...  It just finding the right mix..  I have had all 6 tanks in groups before and I have found out its easier for us shamans to heal a Brawler type class just for there dodge....  But I have yet to have any serious problems at all..

 

24th Mystic 20th Provisioner

[Banditman]

That may be, but the question then is "Are Cleric and Druid special heals worthless without an additional spell?"

 

[Nnath]

I would say yes, they are useless without additional spells.  Clerics and druids do not keep tanks alive with only reactives and regens against anything even close to white group^^.  With special attacks that do way more damage per round than either of those heal, combined with regular hard hits, both need to always mix in regular heals with the special heals.  Mystics wards are actually less worthless, using your logic, as they can, if chain cast, be nearly the only spelll we need.  Mix in two debuffs (haze+str/sta) and we can almost exclusively cast wards.  That is not the case with reactives or regens; they always require a mix of special and regular heals (against ^^ stuff anyway).

 

I would not argue that we are more efficient healers then either, particularly templars, but I do think we compare nicely when debuffs, wards, and heals are mixed together. True efficieny numbers could not be even speculated until, as others have pointed out, actually log parsing is completed.  The very basic example in the original post is not at all a typical fight for a group.

 

And while wards may not be as efficient in most tank situations, they do come in handy when a mage/scout/monk starts getting hit.  A situation where regens or reactives are virtually useless becasue they do not come close to coving the damage inflicted.

[FelixDomesticus]

---

Fashion_dealer wrote:

The only thing I can think of is that they figure that cause we get slow we don't need to heal as much?

 

Our heals + slow =same healing capacity of other priests

 

With slow I can heal as effectively, it seems, as other classes. So you can't think of wards idependently, they combine automatically with our other spells.

 

 

Arzanes

Message Edited by Fashion_dealer on 12-10-2004 01:55 PM

---

Do not start that again. I absolutely hated how SOE handled shamans in Eq1 due to fact that that they had slow. They nerfed shaman to useless, nerfed even slow and then had enough and I quit Eq1. I do not want to see that happening again in Eq2!! I see only minuscule differences between "slowed" and unslowed mobs, so I usually do not even use slows because benefits are so small. I do not want that they AGAIN calculate all heals based on slowed mobs and then use slows against shamans when healing should be adjusted to new situations.

[Fae]

Seeing as I'm only level 10, and eagerly awaiting my first ward, I do still have concerns.

 

For nearly two days I didn't pick my class becaus eof this very issue. I love shamans, and their spells more then the other preists. Cleric wasn't a consideration, since there are too many of them about anyhow. Druid was the other class I was deciding between, since they have Heal over times -- my favorite type.

 

Druids and Shamans are very near in characteristics. I chose shaman over druid for the small differences: bear form, more buffs, slow etc. The reason I didn't jump on board was because I knew there would be a problem with wards, and had been talking to many different higher level people about it.

 

I hope they make wards absorb after mitigation -- I may find myself re-rolling a druid if they do not.

[Epon]

Coming from the standpoint of another healer (Warden) I would say that wards can be pretty useless when Im teamed with a Mystic. They might help when the mage is getting hit on. When usedon the main tank they do just about nothing since I keep them pretty much at full health with or without one. The wards last a very limited time, maybe 3 hits.

 

I will be testing the usefulness of wards soon, as I made a Kerran Shaman as of late to group with my friends while they catch up to my Warden. Im debating my choice in a shaman over a cleric now, because I think that the AC/HP buffs of a Templar would far outweigh the power of a ward.

 

These are just from my view points while teamed with one, not while healing in a group with just a mystic.

[Amra]

from what i heard, heavy armor tanks don't reduce dmg of special attacks, and if ppl r saying slow is useless because most of the dmg comes from special attacks, then won't that make wards just as good as the other 2 heals? maybe even better?

[Mystiq]

---

Eponyx wrote:

Coming from the standpoint of another healer (Warden) I would say that wards can be pretty useless when Im teamed with a Mystic. They might help when the mage is getting hit on. When usedon the main tank they do just about nothing since I keep them pretty much at full health with or without one. The wards last a very limited time, maybe 3 hits.

 

I will be testing the usefulness of wards soon, as I made a Kerran Shaman as of late to group with my friends while they catch up to my Warden. Im debating my choice in a shaman over a cleric now, because I think that the AC/HP buffs of a Templar would far outweigh the power of a ward.

 

These are just from my view points while teamed with one, not while healing in a group with just a mystic.

---

Even if you feel that wards are useless when combined with your healing, keep testing. Realize that the druid/shaman combination is a very effective 2 healer combo (regenerating health while being warded is awesome) and should be taken advantage of by finding harder enemies to kill. Also realize that these harder enemies will barrage and special attack your tank faster than you can keep him regen'd, and using direct heals too much is a major power drain. Not sure what level you are but trust me, as you go up, this is all true. Having the tank warded on a pull and off and on during the fight does make a difference. I am not now, nor will I ever discount the usefulness of another healer's spells and healing ability. I understand how they work and respect their role. Shamans are specialized in damage mitigation and prevention, period. This may account for why some people have trouble determining their effectiveness. It is when our debuffing spells do not land or are not powerful enough, that the rest of our tools start to diminish in their returns.

[Ouba]

Level 30 defiler here.

 

On inc i land on the mob: fuliginous sphere(24 secs), degeneration(70 secs), revulsion (70 secs), comtamination (24 secs). I sustain both dots (sphere and contamination). The effect of all those dots and debuffs are important; they lower the total power of the mob or and hp, slow the mob, mob hits for alot less and do considerable dmg with 2 dots. I also do Vile imprecation (100 dmg nuke with massive debuff to cold fire disease poison resists, last 24 secs)

 

Warding is out of the question since i ALWAYS team with a caster and we do ancient crucible non stop (+12% total power regen HO) and that ward often end up breaking the HO. Since that HO uses a direct heal i dont need to use wards anyway. And i also feels that wards have been utterly useless ever since i got to level 20. Healing ritual adept3 has been my main form of healing.

 

Doing this HO non stop (and yes defilers are the best priest to open up this one with vile or our fast casting dots) and maintaining the dots/debuffs i often end up almost not healing except for the heal i have to do during the HO and then i finish the fight almost at full power because of this HO. Also the mobs is so severely debuffed that it deals like 50% of its normal dammage if not more (some mobs have innate huge strenght values and others dont). Also you have to note that the slow component of fuliginous and degeneration seems to stack (one is a dot and other is a pure debuff)...so pay attention to this.

 

So in short, defilers are very good healers when we play with HO and are by far the best damage dealers and mitigators but this doesnt invole the use of our useless wards.

Oubaro

level 30 defiler

 

 

[Shef]

I agree with most of what has been said here about wards being less effective than the specialized healing abilities of the other two healing classes.  I play a Templar and a Shaman (working on Mystic) and I've been pretty unimpressed with wards thus far.  Granted, I don't even have Adept 1 versions (much less Adept 3), but when I team with a Cleric I feel almost unnecessary.  The Cleric can almost always keep reactive up while nuking and maintain his healing pretty well.  I often find myself chain-casting ward because of how quickly it runs out (app3 atm) due to the unmitigated damage used to calculate the attack damage taken off the ward.  This leads to both my power pool and the Cleric's being low at the end of the fight, where I have been mostly chain-casting ward while he has been able to chain-nuke and keep Bestowal up for greater heal amount per power cost than ward.  Doesn't seem right.  I may be contributing to keeping the team alive, but to a lesser extent than other healer types.

 

I dunno.  When my Cleric was the level my Shaman is currently, I felt like a far more effective healer.  Perhaps I just play a Cleric better than a Shaman.  Perhaps I'm more confident on my Shaman since I'm no longer learning basic game mechanics (like I was on my Templar) and as such I'm generally fighting harder groups of mobs.  *shrug*

 

I hear wards become significantly more powerful at higher levels, but again, they taper off in effectiveness due to the lack of calculating armor mitigation.  Not to change the subject, but could higher level Mystics/etc comment on the rest of our spell toolset making up for the lack of ward-"healing" described in this thread?  The reason I ask is, if our wards are less effective than a Templar's reactive heals but our single-target and team heals are enough to make up for that, then there really isn't a huge issue for the class as a whole (just for lower-level Shamans who don't have the full toolset yet).  I see Templars in-game (not me) complaining that Shamans have great direct and team heals (in some cases healing for more than those of a Templar), so it's very interesting to me to see the flip-side discussions.

[Epon]

Eloora, Im not saying that the wards arent good, or that Mystics arent good. I was just simply saying that sometimes a second healer isnt needed. Mystics bring alot to the table in terms of grouping. Mystics, in my opinion, are a secondary fallback healer. They are good healers though, all three are good healers.

 

They are no where near balanced. The whole "Slow makes up for ward" excuse doesnt make up for it. I can heal without debuffing on my Warden, a mystic should be able to do the same. The classes are unbalanced, and thats obvious. Some things need to be tweaked, other things need to be really tweaked. But in the end, Id rather have a healer than no healer in my group.

[k]

Do devs read this forum or are we just wasting our time?

 

You are right..the use debuffs and slows to offset the affects is an irrelevant argument when wardens and templars can keep up with single spell. Its just messy and makes mystics less efficient healers. Where is the balance there?

 

It would be nice to at least have a response from SOE.

 

 

[Fae]

I'd love to believe I dind't have to use slow -- or any other debuff for that matter -- since they can easily be resisted. Puts a huge hamper on plans of warding.

 

We shouldn't have to rely on multiple offensive spells to heal.

[Merrygr]

I looked around on the other class boards, and it is funny to see that the clerics have class envy towards us and we to them

 

Seems the druids are not complaining nearly as much. This leads me to believe that they are either better healers or that they have a slightly different mindset. It could also bee that pickup groups don't trust druids to be main healers, so you will see fewer of them in that role.

 

I figure that the only true way of telling if one class is inferior as a healer is to parse them all. Until that is done we have nothing to base our complaints on.

 

I have not had the luxury of grouping with other healers. I know that I can keep a group up against at least yellow^^ mobs. At times it is touch and go, and at times we wipe. I have even kept a group up against a white (blue to rest of group) groupx2^^^ mobs as the single healer. Depending on what we are fighting it is either me or MT that is the limiting factor when it comes to power between fights. I do remember from beta that I felt that the clerics always had more power left after a fight. I have no clue if this was actually the case or if it just felt that way.

 

There are things that makes me feel underpowered. When I cast a ward and it and a big chunk of the MTs hp is eaten by one special attack from the mob. Then I usually have to go into chain casting mode for a bit. Every time that happens I feel like I'm inferior and that my heals suck.

 

I'm not saying we are better or worse healers than clerics or druids. I'm saying that as long as we can't compare true numbers it is a moot point.

[Clericlo]

Alright, I'm a level 18 cleric, and a resident forum-surfer.  All of you are overlooking one HUGE THING! you're comparing your ward healing with a TANK, a GUARDIAN or some such warrior.  Shamen don't work best with TANKS- you are the BEST HEALERS FOR MONKS- with their dodging, your slow, and your wards, they NEVER DIE!  And what's all this complaining I hear about mitigation- you are giving your target 400+ hps, thats A LOT, with my reactive heals, my target can DIE WHILE I STILL HAVE A REACTIVE ON EM!  Your tank will never die if you keep spells up! 

Clerics- best healers for Guardians

Shamen- best healers for monks

Druids- good for either, an omni-class

I personally think that the best combination is a cleric/shaman.  All the stacking buffs and debuffs.  Shaman ward, cleric RH, then don't recast the ward until after the RH is gone, and recast the RH then too- boom, tank never gets below 3 bulbs of health, both healers heal less than half as much due to the complimentary buffs/debuffs, healers never draw aggro due to 2 healers, group never dies!  If they change anything, and i mean anything to benefit shamen, i'm gonna have to reroll, because i love the game, but i love being the best, and shamen would hands down be the best with any tweaking.

If you are still unsure- read the cleric/templar forums- they are more upset then all y'all are.

You got a sweet class, learn to play it right instead of trying to be the main healer when a guardian is main tank- it'll be HARD (but fun) :smileywink:

~Medico of Toxxulia

[Merrygr]

---

Clericlord wrote:

Alright, I'm a level 18 cleric, and a resident forum-surfer.  All of you are overlooking one HUGE THING! you're comparing your ward healing with a TANK, a GUARDIAN or some such warrior.  Shamen don't work best with TANKS- you are the BEST HEALERS FOR MONKS- with their dodging, your slow, and your wards, they NEVER DIE!  And what's all this complaining I hear about mitigation- you are giving your target 400+ hps, thats A LOT, with my reactive heals, my target can DIE WHILE I STILL HAVE A REACTIVE ON EM!  Your tank will never die if you keep spells up! 

Clerics- best healers for Guardians

Shamen- best healers for monks

Druids- good for either, an omni-class

I personally think that the best combination is a cleric/shaman.  All the stacking buffs and debuffs.  Shaman ward, cleric RH, then don't recast the ward until after the RH is gone, and recast the RH then too- boom, tank never gets below 3 bulbs of health, both healers heal less than half as much due to the complimentary buffs/debuffs, healers never draw aggro due to 2 healers, group never dies!  If they change anything, and i mean anything to benefit shamen, i'm gonna have to reroll, because i love the game, but i love being the best, and shamen would hands down be the best with any tweaking.

If you are still unsure- read the cleric/templar forums- they are more upset then all y'all are.

You got a sweet class, learn to play it right instead of trying to be the main healer when a guardian is main tank- it'll be HARD (but fun) :smileywink:

~Medico of Toxxulia

---

I have a problem with the one healer fits one tank thinking. First I don't think the difference is all that big (never tested, so no idea really). Second if it is it is a really stupid decision on SOEs side. The groups should look for a tank or healer. Not look for a monk if they hava a shaman or a cleric if they have a guardian.

As for the clerics being more upset, I think it is just because a) there are more of them and b) they are (in EQ1) used to being the best.

But I do think that all suffer from class envy without really knowing what they are talking about.

[Epon]

Clericlord, Im totally against that mindset. A healer is a healer is a healer. They shouldnt have a specialized tank that they can heal, a healer should be able to heal who he or she chooses equally to any other healer. You shouldnt have to group with a specific class to get your own class to work properly. Its totally rediculous that you would think that you had to. My main, a Warden, doesnt have this problem, and I beleive that a Templar's healing is much more powerful than my own. But should that stop us from being able to keep people alive, no! My Warden can keep anyone alive, save the stupid.

 

Your argument is not a vaild solution to the problem.

[se]

I love my mystic. I can be a primary healer and keep a tank alive, just not as efficiently as a cleric or druid.Saying that we are better healers on monks is not a true statement. If you take the ac mitigation out of the equation then we are equal to clerics and druids. So if you were to assume that a monk had zero ac mitigation (which is obviously not true) then we'd only be equal at healing when the tank was a monk and less efficient with any other tank.We are closer to being as efficient as another healer when healing a monk because the monk relies less on ac mitigation but we are still not equally efficient. The gap grows when the tank is not a monk and it seems to grow even more as we level.

[Saraphi]

My worry is that if two healers are required to do encounters, then there wont be that many groups around at later levels. It was hard enough finding one healer in EQ, nevermind two. I know they increased the power of heals post 20, and have yet to see this, but I dont see any change in the mindset on these boards.

[Crados]

I'd just like to chime in as Defiler and in the same boat as you guys.  Its all there plain as day that wards become near useless at the higher levels. Not sure if mystics get a supposed upgrade ward at lvl 26 like Defilers do but that one is no better than our first one so not helping either.  It almost seems like a bug not to take AC into effect.  I would say if it did take AC into effect that I'd be okay with a slightly longer recast time or mana cost even. Just make the thing useful post lvl 25 or so

 

Cradossk

Lvl 28 Iksar Defiler

Unrest