Priest Starter Ability Issue/Suggestions - Page 3

Beyoncia · 10-16-2014, 08:18 PM

It is so Equilibrium. BigGrin

I'm glad the buff has been changed.

Buffrat · 10-16-2014, 11:23 PM

I'd like to think they removed it because it screwed up the scaling of mitigation and was really OP for tank damage reduction against level 108 mobs, but maybe I'm wrong.

Mermut · 10-17-2014, 01:57 AM

That may be one reason, but if that was the only reason, they likely would have continued to exclude priests from their own buff.

Lemon Wolf · 10-17-2014, 12:30 PM

Mages should not have a higher mitigation than leather wearing healers it would go against the very basic mechanics in the game. Cloth->Leather->Chain->Plate
Just because Buff is playing in a top raiding guild doesnt mean his point of view is superior or better than other peoples views.
I have done quite a bit of raiding in the last 9,5 years,i know my ways around the game. But that doesnt matter what matters is that the devs shouldnt go against the basic mechanics or they should get rid of them. Excluding priests of their own buff was a mistake as there was no apparent way of compensating the lack of mitigation,besides it doesnt make any sense to put a mitigation handicap on healers. I am curious about the new armor values tho "if" druid armor has a significant increase in mitigation it would at least make a little sense. Its a good thing they changed it.

Yes indeed. And it wasnt presented in a nice way. It was like "i am playing top end therefore i am always right". That is arrogant.

Gaealiege · 10-17-2014, 02:56 PM

I'm not buying that argument. That's purely an American perspective. The idea that the highest end isn't an expert in comparison to the average player is illogical.

Reminds me of a quote from Dr. Asimov. "Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."

You're presenting a red herring, Kalika. I didn't suggest Buff was right about anything involving the buff. I suggested he was right that he's been top end for years and the majority of the players here struggle to clear easy content.He knows what he's doing and he clearly understands mechanics if you've seen him post before.

Given that mobs will be designed around the mitigation or max hp on the buff, it's a completely moot point either direction. The mobs will be designed with those buffs in mind.

Also, many of you are posting in a manner that makes it clear you've never beta tested before. Many of the buffs, abilities, and gear we'll see in beta will be entirely different in two weeks. Sitting and arguing over a mechanic that in no way has been tested is pure idiocy.

Kari · 10-17-2014, 03:51 PM

Highest end plays under totally different conditions than the average player, especially healers who are highly impacted by the dps, resists and mitigation of their group. The design has to work for average players as well as the high end.

There was a high end shaman posting in another thread that he solo healed dominion with unadorned gear and mostly apprentice 1 spells, which is more a testament to his group's abilities than shaman healing power. That doesn't mean the rest of us should pick up a pug and go in there with crap gear and spells.

Lemon Wolf · 10-17-2014, 03:54 PM

An american perspective? Nonsense.
You dont have to play at the high end to be knowledgeable in this game. Theres something called experience. Using Asimovs quote in such a manner is a shame really.

So?

Idiocy? Discussing work in progress stuff the devs come up with is idiocy?
Discussion is part of the beta testing progress.By the way you dont have to test a buff that leaves you with less mitigation because the result is pretty obvious. Less mitigation than other classes = mobs hit you harder. Its not rocket science.
What were you expecting?

Daalilama · 10-17-2014, 05:31 PM

Lemon has some good points especially the one on the select few who seem to have taken the route that discussing the starter priest ability as it was with the physical mitigation except for the healer prior to it being "tested" is simply smoke and mirrors especially considering other classes abilities that were being discussed based not on testing but on what players high end middle and low were able to read and theorize on potential problems....end of the day it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that at best the buff in its original incarnation was simply going to leave solo healers with a net deficit of 3800 physical mitigation (but mages and scouts personal buffs would being increased) which again would potentially make those archtypes have considerably more physical mitigation that the solo healer (regardless of armor type). The concern was more than warranted.

As for the assumption that Gaealiege made about believing most of us from our responses have never beta tested before...considering the majority of respondents in this thread I have seen in beta's past that's a pretty weak assumption and you know what they say about assuming.

Kalika · 10-17-2014, 06:06 PM

Eq2u mecanics at best involve primary school mathematics and logic ;-)

Indeed Asimov was sort of right granted that you assume that raiders do have knowledge ;-) , knowledge is quite different from being informed of an exhaustive set of trivial rules.

Gaealiege · 10-17-2014, 10:52 PM

The forums are just full of logical fallacies today.

Any laymen can do some research on any topic and accrue knowledge. That doesn't mean I'm going to accredit the laymen with any suitable level of knowledge when compared to someone that has the credentials of expertise. High end players are far and away more knowledgeable than your average player. It's not really something you can refute.

You're absolutely right that it involves very little to understand a basic mathematical formula. Go ahead and ask about some of the more obscure ones in chat. Ask about ability modifier. Most players don't have a clue how to calculate appropriate levels of ability mod among other things. Seems that primary school mathematics and logic is beyond the average Joe.

Going a step further than that though, given your line of argumentation clearing the content is so easy anyone can do it. Unfortunately the raid progression data suggests otherwise. People are taking pointers from the top end, getting AA builds from the top end, gear choices, etc because they trust the source of information to be authoritative.

Knowledge is precisely being informed of trivial rules. Knowledge is defined as facts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject. I'm uncertain how you think that the combat formula wouldn't be encompassed in that.

It doesn't matter if it requires someone with an expertise in liquid thermal dynamics to discern. The scientific method works as such. You formulate a question (was done here), postulate a hypothesis (was done here), usually multiple predictions are selected as possibilities (done here), THEN YOU TEST YOUR HYPOTHESIS (not done), and from that we create an analysis (somehow this was done without any testing). Despite what you think to be common sense, it isn't. Until you can show me numbers that would have suggested something was wrong, I'm sticking with all of this conjecture being idiocy. As that is precisely what it was.

Lemon Wolf · 10-18-2014, 02:56 AM

Right.

Oh will you just stop it. Talking about logical fallacies. It doesnt matter where you are in the game the mechanics are the same. The only difference between heroic instances and raids are that the mobs hit harder,have some special abilities and you have to follow certain scripts but the underlying mechanics are the same. People playing instances can be just as knowledgeable as high end raiders. But i guess thats the illogical nature of the human heart,the high end people have the best gear so they think they must be better and smarter. Thats an illusion.

A raids success is not purely based on knowledge,time and discipline are a key factor and people working together perfectly. You can have the smartest most knowledgeable players but if they lack discipline things will not go well.

There will always be people who are not willing to invest much time and effort delving into the mechanics of the game. And as i mentioned earlier thats part of the illusion i was talking about. People think that because the top end raiders have the best gear they must be the smartest.

In science especially when its about experiments you also keep in mind that you learn from previous experiments. After all those years we pretty much know what mitigation does. And as i already stated less mitigation= mobs hit you harder. And vice versa. Now lets assume we would test two functioning hotplates by holding a hand on it. You would burn yourself and you would know it hurts. Now would you really test the second one even tho you knew exactly that you would burn your hand again? Please tell me you wouldnt be that dum...ehm naive. Your statement about testing the mitigation loss is equally dumb. It is plain obvious what it does. Seriously its like insisting on testing if you would suffocate in a vaccum.

Oh well there you answered my question about the experiment you really would burn your hand twice.

Samo · 10-18-2014, 01:46 PM

I'm not sure I see the point of a healer buff that increases the group's max HP. Assuming every healer has this buff (which they do), and each of those healers will always have it up (which they will), a group's HP is essentially unchanged from an AoE damage balance point of view. That is assuming the damage is balanced around groups only having one healer (or not if the buffs don't stack stack from 2 healers).

I suppose you could say a lot of buffs in this game are no-brainers, but if they're adding a new one (or a modification to one) it would be nice if it made the game more dynamic. Maybe change the buff where you could choose to apply it group-wide, or apply a larger amount to a single player.

MindNumb · 10-19-2014, 09:11 PM

This really sucks now. So now we are making people have a larger hp pool so more hp for us to heal. Now unless heals themselves are getting a boost similar to the gain that hp gets, it will initially be like when ToV launched and hp pools jumped. Personally I would have liked the mit buff over hp, even if the priest didn't get it. It makes the group take less damage. I don't care if the mage has more mit than me, guess what he's easier to heal taking less damage.

Shanoi · 10-21-2014, 01:11 AM

I would rather see the buff return to a mitigation buff rather than max HP buff. Higher HP pools means more that needs to be healed which leaves less time for doing DPS/de-buffing. Higher mitigation means less incoming damage which equals more time for those happy extras that priests are now generally expected to do.

The lack of mitigation for the priest does seem rather unfair to melee healers, but is perfectly fine for my fury. I would like to kindly recommend a return to the mitigation buff and either make it apply to the priest as well, or give melee priests increased mitigation in their self-buffs to compensate for that lack.

Gaealiege · 10-21-2014, 03:58 PM

Using this logic, nothing based around mechanics needs tested in beta. Those are clearly idiotic rebuttals. Using the simpleton argument that common sense is the driving force behind untested changes, we wouldn't have a single use for testing as common sense would dictate the behavior. Unfortunately reality doesn't work that way. Data must be compiled and analyzed. This is why we don't allow the uneducated to give opinions on facts. We allocate that responsibility to those with credentials and evidence.

Lemon Wolf · 10-21-2014, 09:03 PM

I am sorry but you just dont get it. You read what you want to read. Besides i never said that mechanics dont need any testing.

As i mentioned earlier we already know what mitigation does. We "tested" it on live servers for 10 years now. I really wonder how you can be so blind to the obvious. It has nothing to do with common sense it has something to do with experience.

Whos we? Oh right. Well go on show me your master degree in Everquest 2.
And please stop the wannabe science wise talk i am working in a field where i have to conduct experiments on a daily basis.

quisling · 10-22-2014, 08:26 AM

LOL pretty much. If the tank and the dps in have gear that overwhelms the fight, you could have a merc heal the fight.

Gaealiege · 10-22-2014, 07:02 PM

Let's try this again. If we've tested mitigation for 10 years, we've also tested all of the other current mechanics, as the only new mechanic involve crits. Your suggestion would mean that we do not need to test anything that has been in the game, mechanically speaking, previous to this expansion. So that means there is nothing beyond legendary, fabled, and mythical crits that need testing. I wonder if you'd argue that these don't need testing as well, as we've clearly had years to comprehend the basic mechanics of critical hits. That is as reductionist as an argument gets, which again, is an ignorant argument.

"We" are the scientific community. You know, the people with doctorates and Master's degrees. Myself and many others. I don't care if you dabble in minor experiments in a factory. You're clearly not well versed in how research works. Nothing is assumed when you're adding variables. The prestige is an addition to a current spell and as such evoked much wailing from a group of people that took no time to test their hypothesis. Do you even know if physical AEs are common? Nope. You didn't do any testing. You all simply spouted ignorant drivel as if that qualified as proper testing and understanding of mechanics. This behavior, along with playing beta as a preview to content, is just ridiculous.

This type of argumentation always reminds me of uneducated individuals talking about how they know more than their physicians. It would be humorous if it wasn't so sad.

Anghammarad · 10-22-2014, 07:32 PM

I did enounter lots of physical AOEs while only doing the signature timeline...

Lemon Wolf · 10-22-2014, 07:36 PM

Stop assuming things. I am talking about the mitigation not other things.

See above. No its not ignorant.

Ah right. So having a doctorate or a masters degree in something makes you an expert in EQ2? Interesting.

I am working in an apothecary not some factory.

You are wrong i know how it works.

The devs clearly stated that you need higher mitigation against mobs higher than lvl 104.They even added lists which show exactly how much damage a player would mitigate. What does that tell us? We need MORE mitigation in order to survive. So what do you think would happend if a healer has lower mitigation than other classes. Would the healer take less damage? No,that would contradict the info the devs gave us. Would the healer take more damage? Yes! Why? Because the devs told us exactly in detail what mitigation does against higher level mobs.

Again just read the above i am tired of repeating myself.

Completely besides the point.

Well if you dont like my ignorant drivel feel free to ignore it. But since you did so much testing clearly you could show us that lower mitigation equals less damage taken.

Your comparison is beyond ridiculous.

Anastaise · 10-27-2014, 06:22 PM

It doesn't look like they have adjusted the encounters to account for the loss of 3800 physical mitigation. I did the brokenskull bay zone Hoist the Yellow Jack and the physical ae that ticks "Swarthy Slice" was ticking for over 600k every few seconds on each group member except the tank (he was getting hit about 250k per tick). The group was taking far worse damage than current end-game raid encounters and this is a mid-level heroic zone. This needs to be addressed. We either need to have the physical mitigation restored to our group buffs and have it apply to the priest (without stacking) or the physical ae's need to be significantly reduced.

Daalilama · 10-27-2014, 07:04 PM

Yeah that's what I was afraid of....

Daalilama · 10-28-2014, 06:53 PM

Gaeal...how can you on one hand dismiss the need for physical mitigation for healers(stating we would not be tanking I mean really that argument holds zero water) when on the other hand Anastaise has brought up the issue with at least one det nailing the group for 600k physical hits/tick...which you seem to either ignore or not relevant to your diatribes.

Lemon Wolf · 10-29-2014, 01:01 PM

Not at all.

So the lists the devs posted are not considered valid? Are those part of the idiocy? If yes then you just stated that the devs are idiots as they provided them. But please go ahead show me that less mitigation equals less damage taken. Can you do that?

This is not about testing what mitigation does its about the data the devs gave us.

Did the devs post any new data on these? Any lists or something that show a change in their mechanic?

Look at the list for crying out loud would you? Its what the devs implemented if thats not proof enough maybe we can get a certifying notary for the devs.

You have been playing EQ2 right? Your not just some theorist talking? You heard about aggro changes etc? What about the melee priests. They have those skills for a reason and some even depend on them for healing purposes.

You just dont know what you are talking about.

This is a most stupid statement.
Btw you should really work on your attitude your "highness",the level of arrogance in your posts is mind boggling.

10-16-2014, 08:18 PM	#61
Beyoncia Active Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	Lemon Wolf said: ↑ “Is it just me or does that statement sound pretty arrogant?” It is so Equilibrium. I'm glad the buff has been changed.

10-17-2014, 01:57 AM	#63
Mermut Well-Known Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	Buffrat said: ↑ “I'd like to think they removed it because it screwed up the scaling of mitigation and was really OP for tank damage reduction against level 108 mobs, but maybe I'm wrong.” That may be one reason, but if that was the only reason, they likely would have continued to exclude priests from their own buff.

10-17-2014, 12:30 PM	#64
Lemon Wolf New Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	Gaealiege said: ↑ “How is it arrogance when he's right? Buff plays at the top level and has for years. It's arrogant to assume you know better than the best. It's not arrogant to assume the best knows better than your average Joe player.” Mages should not have a higher mitigation than leather wearing healers it would go against the very basic mechanics in the game. Cloth->Leather->Chain->Plate Just because Buff is playing in a top raiding guild doesnt mean his point of view is superior or better than other peoples views. I have done quite a bit of raiding in the last 9,5 years,i know my ways around the game. But that doesnt matter what matters is that the devs shouldnt go against the basic mechanics or they should get rid of them. Excluding priests of their own buff was a mistake as there was no apparent way of compensating the lack of mitigation,besides it doesnt make any sense to put a mitigation handicap on healers. I am curious about the new armor values tho "if" druid armor has a significant increase in mitigation it would at least make a little sense. Its a good thing they changed it. Torri said: ↑ “Superior knowledge is not arrogance. Arrogance if it exists comes from how that knowledge is presented” Yes indeed. And it wasnt presented in a nice way. It was like "i am playing top end therefore i am always right". That is arrogant.

10-17-2014, 03:54 PM	#67
Lemon Wolf New Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	Gaealiege said: ↑ “I'm not buying that argument. That's purely an American perspective. The idea that the highest end isn't an expert in comparison to the average player is illogical.” An american perspective? Nonsense. You dont have to play at the high end to be knowledgeable in this game. Theres something called experience. Using Asimovs quote in such a manner is a shame really. Gaealiege said: ↑ “He knows what he's doing and he clearly understands mechanics if you've seen him post before.” So? Gaealiege said: ↑ “Sitting and arguing over a mechanic that in no way has been tested is pure idiocy.” Idiocy? Discussing work in progress stuff the devs come up with is idiocy? Discussion is part of the beta testing progress.By the way you dont have to test a buff that leaves you with less mitigation because the result is pretty obvious. Less mitigation than other classes = mobs hit you harder. Its not rocket science. What were you expecting?

10-17-2014, 06:06 PM	#69
Kalika Well-Known Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	Gaealiege said: ↑ “I"Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." .” Eq2u mecanics at best involve primary school mathematics and logic ;-) Indeed Asimov was sort of right granted that you assume that raiders do have knowledge ;-) , knowledge is quite different from being informed of an exhaustive set of trivial rules.

10-16-2014, 11:23 PM	#62
Buffrat Well-Known Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	I'd like to think they removed it because it screwed up the scaling of mitigation and was really OP for tank damage reduction against level 108 mobs, but maybe I'm wrong.

10-17-2014, 02:56 PM	#65
Gaealiege Active Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	I'm not buying that argument. That's purely an American perspective. The idea that the highest end isn't an expert in comparison to the average player is illogical. Reminds me of a quote from Dr. Asimov. "Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." You're presenting a red herring, Kalika. I didn't suggest Buff was right about anything involving the buff. I suggested he was right that he's been top end for years and the majority of the players here struggle to clear easy content.He knows what he's doing and he clearly understands mechanics if you've seen him post before. Given that mobs will be designed around the mitigation or max hp on the buff, it's a completely moot point either direction. The mobs will be designed with those buffs in mind. Also, many of you are posting in a manner that makes it clear you've never beta tested before. Many of the buffs, abilities, and gear we'll see in beta will be entirely different in two weeks. Sitting and arguing over a mechanic that in no way has been tested is pure idiocy.

10-17-2014, 03:51 PM	#66
Kari Active Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 3	Highest end plays under totally different conditions than the average player, especially healers who are highly impacted by the dps, resists and mitigation of their group. The design has to work for average players as well as the high end. There was a high end shaman posting in another thread that he solo healed dominion with unadorned gear and mostly apprentice 1 spells, which is more a testament to his group's abilities than shaman healing power. That doesn't mean the rest of us should pick up a pug and go in there with crap gear and spells.

10-17-2014, 05:31 PM	#68
Daalilama Well-Known Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	Lemon has some good points especially the one on the select few who seem to have taken the route that discussing the starter priest ability as it was with the physical mitigation except for the healer prior to it being "tested" is simply smoke and mirrors especially considering other classes abilities that were being discussed based not on testing but on what players high end middle and low were able to read and theorize on potential problems....end of the day it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that at best the buff in its original incarnation was simply going to leave solo healers with a net deficit of 3800 physical mitigation (but mages and scouts personal buffs would being increased) which again would potentially make those archtypes have considerably more physical mitigation that the solo healer (regardless of armor type). The concern was more than warranted. As for the assumption that Gaealiege made about believing most of us from our responses have never beta tested before...considering the majority of respondents in this thread I have seen in beta's past that's a pretty weak assumption and you know what they say about assuming.

10-17-2014, 10:52 PM	#70
Gaealiege Active Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	The forums are just full of logical fallacies today. Any laymen can do some research on any topic and accrue knowledge. That doesn't mean I'm going to accredit the laymen with any suitable level of knowledge when compared to someone that has the credentials of expertise. High end players are far and away more knowledgeable than your average player. It's not really something you can refute. You're absolutely right that it involves very little to understand a basic mathematical formula. Go ahead and ask about some of the more obscure ones in chat. Ask about ability modifier. Most players don't have a clue how to calculate appropriate levels of ability mod among other things. Seems that primary school mathematics and logic is beyond the average Joe. Going a step further than that though, given your line of argumentation clearing the content is so easy anyone can do it. Unfortunately the raid progression data suggests otherwise. People are taking pointers from the top end, getting AA builds from the top end, gear choices, etc because they trust the source of information to be authoritative. Knowledge is precisely being informed of trivial rules. Knowledge is defined as facts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject. I'm uncertain how you think that the combat formula wouldn't be encompassed in that. It doesn't matter if it requires someone with an expertise in liquid thermal dynamics to discern. The scientific method works as such. You formulate a question (was done here), postulate a hypothesis (was done here), usually multiple predictions are selected as possibilities (done here), THEN YOU TEST YOUR HYPOTHESIS (not done), and from that we create an analysis (somehow this was done without any testing). Despite what you think to be common sense, it isn't. Until you can show me numbers that would have suggested something was wrong, I'm sticking with all of this conjecture being idiocy. As that is precisely what it was.

10-18-2014, 02:56 AM	#71
Lemon Wolf New Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	Gaealiege said: ↑ “The forums are just full of logical fallacies today.” Right. Gaealiege said: ↑ “Any laymen can do some research on any topic and accrue knowledge. That doesn't mean I'm going to accredit the laymen with any suitable level of knowledge when compared to someone that has the credentials of expertise. High end players are far and away more knowledgeable than your average player. It's not really something you can refute.” Oh will you just stop it. Talking about logical fallacies. It doesnt matter where you are in the game the mechanics are the same. The only difference between heroic instances and raids are that the mobs hit harder,have some special abilities and you have to follow certain scripts but the underlying mechanics are the same. People playing instances can be just as knowledgeable as high end raiders. But i guess thats the illogical nature of the human heart,the high end people have the best gear so they think they must be better and smarter. Thats an illusion. Gaealiege said: ↑ “Going a step further than that though, given your line of argumentation clearing the content is so easy anyone can do it. Unfortunately the raid progression data suggests otherwise.” A raids success is not purely based on knowledge,time and discipline are a key factor and people working together perfectly. You can have the smartest most knowledgeable players but if they lack discipline things will not go well. Gaealiege said: ↑ “People are taking pointers from the top end, getting AA builds from the top end, gear choices, etc because they trust the source of information to be authoritative.” There will always be people who are not willing to invest much time and effort delving into the mechanics of the game. And as i mentioned earlier thats part of the illusion i was talking about. People think that because the top end raiders have the best gear they must be the smartest. Gaealiege said: ↑ “The scientific method works as such. You formulate a question (was done here), postulate a hypothesis (was done here), usually multiple predictions are selected as possibilities (done here), THEN YOU TEST YOUR HYPOTHESIS (not done)” In science especially when its about experiments you also keep in mind that you learn from previous experiments. After all those years we pretty much know what mitigation does. And as i already stated less mitigation= mobs hit you harder. And vice versa. Now lets assume we would test two functioning hotplates by holding a hand on it. You would burn yourself and you would know it hurts. Now would you really test the second one even tho you knew exactly that you would burn your hand again? Please tell me you wouldnt be that dum...ehm naive. Your statement about testing the mitigation loss is equally dumb. It is plain obvious what it does. Seriously its like insisting on testing if you would suffocate in a vaccum. Gaealiege said: ↑ “Until you can show me numbers that would have suggested something was wrong, I'm sticking with all of this conjecture being idiocy. As that is precisely what it was.” Oh well there you answered my question about the experiment you really would burn your hand twice.

10-18-2014, 01:46 PM	#72
Samo New Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	I'm not sure I see the point of a healer buff that increases the group's max HP. Assuming every healer has this buff (which they do), and each of those healers will always have it up (which they will), a group's HP is essentially unchanged from an AoE damage balance point of view. That is assuming the damage is balanced around groups only having one healer (or not if the buffs don't stack stack from 2 healers). I suppose you could say a lot of buffs in this game are no-brainers, but if they're adding a new one (or a modification to one) it would be nice if it made the game more dynamic. Maybe change the buff where you could choose to apply it group-wide, or apply a larger amount to a single player.

10-19-2014, 09:11 PM	#73
MindNumb New Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	This really sucks now. So now we are making people have a larger hp pool so more hp for us to heal. Now unless heals themselves are getting a boost similar to the gain that hp gets, it will initially be like when ToV launched and hp pools jumped. Personally I would have liked the mit buff over hp, even if the priest didn't get it. It makes the group take less damage. I don't care if the mage has more mit than me, guess what he's easier to heal taking less damage.

10-21-2014, 01:11 AM	#74
Shanoi New Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	I would rather see the buff return to a mitigation buff rather than max HP buff. Higher HP pools means more that needs to be healed which leaves less time for doing DPS/de-buffing. Higher mitigation means less incoming damage which equals more time for those happy extras that priests are now generally expected to do. The lack of mitigation for the priest does seem rather unfair to melee healers, but is perfectly fine for my fury. I would like to kindly recommend a return to the mitigation buff and either make it apply to the priest as well, or give melee priests increased mitigation in their self-buffs to compensate for that lack.

10-21-2014, 03:58 PM	#75
Gaealiege Active Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	“Oh will you just stop it. Talking about logical fallacies. It doesnt matter where you are in the game the mechanics are the same. The only difference between heroic instances and raids are that the mobs hit harder,have some special abilities and you have to follow certain scripts but the underlying mechanics are the same.” “In science especially when its about experiments you also keep in mind that you learn from previous experiments. After all those years we pretty much know what mitigation does. And as i already stated less mitigation= mobs hit you harder. And vice versa.” Using this logic, nothing based around mechanics needs tested in beta. Those are clearly idiotic rebuttals. Using the simpleton argument that common sense is the driving force behind untested changes, we wouldn't have a single use for testing as common sense would dictate the behavior. Unfortunately reality doesn't work that way. Data must be compiled and analyzed. This is why we don't allow the uneducated to give opinions on facts. We allocate that responsibility to those with credentials and evidence.

10-21-2014, 09:03 PM	#76
Lemon Wolf New Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	Gaealiege said: ↑ “Using this logic, nothing based around mechanics needs tested in beta. Those are clearly idiotic rebuttals.” I am sorry but you just dont get it. You read what you want to read. Besides i never said that mechanics dont need any testing. Gaealiege said: ↑ “Using the simpleton argument that common sense is the driving force behind untested changes, we wouldn't have a single use for testing as common sense would dictate the behavior. Unfortunately reality doesn't work that way. Data must be compiled and analyzed.” As i mentioned earlier we already know what mitigation does. We "tested" it on live servers for 10 years now. I really wonder how you can be so blind to the obvious. It has nothing to do with common sense it has something to do with experience. Gaealiege said: ↑ “This is why we don't allow the uneducated to give opinions on facts. We allocate that responsibility to those with credentials and evidence.” Whos we? Oh right. Well go on show me your master degree in Everquest 2. And please stop the wannabe science wise talk i am working in a field where i have to conduct experiments on a daily basis.

10-22-2014, 08:26 AM	#77
quisling Active Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	Kari said: ↑ “Highest end plays under totally different conditions than the average player, especially healers who are highly impacted by the dps, resists and mitigation of their group. The design has to work for average players as well as the high end. There was a high end shaman posting in another thread that he solo healed dominion with unadorned gear and mostly apprentice 1 spells, which is more a testament to his group's abilities than shaman healing power. That doesn't mean the rest of us should pick up a pug and go in there with crap gear and spells.” LOL pretty much. If the tank and the dps in have gear that overwhelms the fight, you could have a merc heal the fight.

10-22-2014, 07:02 PM	#78
Gaealiege Active Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	Let's try this again. If we've tested mitigation for 10 years, we've also tested all of the other current mechanics, as the only new mechanic involve crits. Your suggestion would mean that we do not need to test anything that has been in the game, mechanically speaking, previous to this expansion. So that means there is nothing beyond legendary, fabled, and mythical crits that need testing. I wonder if you'd argue that these don't need testing as well, as we've clearly had years to comprehend the basic mechanics of critical hits. That is as reductionist as an argument gets, which again, is an ignorant argument. "We" are the scientific community. You know, the people with doctorates and Master's degrees. Myself and many others. I don't care if you dabble in minor experiments in a factory. You're clearly not well versed in how research works. Nothing is assumed when you're adding variables. The prestige is an addition to a current spell and as such evoked much wailing from a group of people that took no time to test their hypothesis. Do you even know if physical AEs are common? Nope. You didn't do any testing. You all simply spouted ignorant drivel as if that qualified as proper testing and understanding of mechanics. This behavior, along with playing beta as a preview to content, is just ridiculous. This type of argumentation always reminds me of uneducated individuals talking about how they know more than their physicians. It would be humorous if it wasn't so sad.

10-22-2014, 07:32 PM	#79
Anghammarad Active Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	I did enounter lots of physical AOEs while only doing the signature timeline...

10-22-2014, 07:36 PM	#80
Lemon Wolf New Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	Gaealiege said: ↑ “Let's try this again. If we've tested mitigation for 10 years, we've also tested all of the other current mechanics, as the only new mechanic involve crits. Your suggestion would mean that we do not need to test anything that has been in the game, mechanically speaking, previous to this expansion.” Stop assuming things. I am talking about the mitigation not other things. Gaealiege said: ↑ “So that means there is nothing beyond legendary, fabled, and mythical crits that need testing. I wonder if you'd argue that these don't need testing as well, as we've clearly had years to comprehend the basic mechanics of critical hits. That is as reductionist as an argument gets, which again, is an ignorant argument.” See above. No its not ignorant. Gaealiege said: ↑ “"We" are the scientific community. You know, the people with doctorates and Master's degrees. Myself and many others.” Ah right. So having a doctorate or a masters degree in something makes you an expert in EQ2? Interesting. Gaealiege said: ↑ “I don't care if you dabble in minor experiments in a factory.” I am working in an apothecary not some factory. Gaealiege said: ↑ “You're clearly not well versed in how research works.” You are wrong i know how it works. Gaealiege said: ↑ “Nothing is assumed when you're adding variables.” The devs clearly stated that you need higher mitigation against mobs higher than lvl 104.They even added lists which show exactly how much damage a player would mitigate. What does that tell us? We need MORE mitigation in order to survive. So what do you think would happend if a healer has lower mitigation than other classes. Would the healer take less damage? No,that would contradict the info the devs gave us. Would the healer take more damage? Yes! Why? Because the devs told us exactly in detail what mitigation does against higher level mobs. Gaealiege said: ↑ “The prestige is an addition to a current spell and as such evoked much wailing from a group of people that took no time to test their hypothesis.” Again just read the above i am tired of repeating myself. Gaealiege said: ↑ “Do you even know if physical AEs are common?” Completely besides the point. Gaealiege said: ↑ “You all simply spouted ignorant drivel as if that qualified as proper testing and understanding of mechanics. This behavior, along with playing beta as a preview to content, is just ridiculous.” Well if you dont like my ignorant drivel feel free to ignore it. But since you did so much testing clearly you could show us that lower mitigation equals less damage taken. Gaealiege said: ↑ “This type of argumentation always reminds me of uneducated individuals talking about how they know more than their physicians. It would be humorous if it wasn't so sad.” Your comparison is beyond ridiculous.

10-27-2014, 06:22 PM	#81
Anastaise Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	It doesn't look like they have adjusted the encounters to account for the loss of 3800 physical mitigation. I did the brokenskull bay zone Hoist the Yellow Jack and the physical ae that ticks "Swarthy Slice" was ticking for over 600k every few seconds on each group member except the tank (he was getting hit about 250k per tick). The group was taking far worse damage than current end-game raid encounters and this is a mid-level heroic zone. This needs to be addressed. We either need to have the physical mitigation restored to our group buffs and have it apply to the priest (without stacking) or the physical ae's need to be significantly reduced.

10-27-2014, 07:04 PM	#82
Daalilama Well-Known Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	Yeah that's what I was afraid of....

10-28-2014, 06:53 PM	#83
Daalilama Well-Known Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	Gaeal...how can you on one hand dismiss the need for physical mitigation for healers(stating we would not be tanking I mean really that argument holds zero water) when on the other hand Anastaise has brought up the issue with at least one det nailing the group for 600k physical hits/tick...which you seem to either ignore or not relevant to your diatribes.

10-29-2014, 01:01 PM	#84
Lemon Wolf New Member Join Date: Jan 1970 Posts: 0	Gaealiege said: ↑ “So your argument boils down to "Nuh uh."” Not at all. Gaealiege said: ↑ “You haven't managed to refute anything I've typed, which isn't surprising given the idiocy you continue to propagate in the thread.” So the lists the devs posted are not considered valid? Are those part of the idiocy? If yes then you just stated that the devs are idiots as they provided them. But please go ahead show me that less mitigation equals less damage taken. Can you do that? Gaealiege said: ↑ “Your argument is that we don't need to test mitigation because we know how it works.” This is not about testing what mitigation does its about the data the devs gave us. Gaealiege said: ↑ “We also know how potency, critical bonus, ability modifier, critical chance, strikethrough, etc. work. This clearly means we can safely assume, without testing, that these are either working fine or aren't based on a casual reading. That is in fact quite ignorant.” Did the devs post any new data on these? Any lists or something that show a change in their mechanic? Gaealiege said: ↑ “I get the distinct feeling that you don't comprehend how your response "We don't need to test it" generalizes to every mechanic under the same umbrella of "it existed before and we know how it worked before." This discussion is going in circles as it usually does when someone without any evidence tries to argue their stance based on none.” Look at the list for crying out loud would you? Its what the devs implemented if thats not proof enough maybe we can get a certifying notary for the devs. Gaealiege said: ↑ “Your priest doesn't need physical mitigation unless your priest is taking physical damage. Your priest isn't going to be tanking and therefore won't have need for mitigation outside of a physical AE. Does this really have to be spelled out for you?” You have been playing EQ2 right? Your not just some theorist talking? You heard about aggro changes etc? What about the melee priests. They have those skills for a reason and some even depend on them for healing purposes. Gaealiege said: ↑ “Being the equivalent of a pharmacist's assistant certainly doesn't qualify you for comprehending data analysis. Not even close. This is glaringly apparent in your piecemeal responses. Taking a response line by line to respond with "nuh uh" hardly makes for a logical or articulate rebuttal.” You just dont know what you are talking about. Gaealiege said: ↑ “As I've already iterated, unless there are copious quantities of physical AEs, no one beyond the tank will require physical mitigation.” This is a most stupid statement. Btw you should really work on your attitude your "highness",the level of arrogance in your posts is mind boggling.