Healing

I was just wondering if i am the only one that wants healing to be restricted to the cleric primary or secondary? The reason i think this would be best is for the following.
1) if you give other classes heals it makes that class have an edge over other classes. One can burst a person down and blink away and heal and then come back.
2) WOW brought out what happens when u have to many classes that can heal. Made mages indestructible. rogues could stealth and heal them selves. Ret pallys could off heal. It made DPS classes way more tank to almost the point of not needing a tank. To be frank the amount of healing is what ruined that game.
3) u still have 16 classes that would have heals although the cleric secondary heals should be weaker. This is more than enough i feel.
Feel free to disagree. this is more of a debate.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Songcaller

You complain of everyone healing themselves, well, if you take Life Secondary from Cleric, you will have heals. You can imagine how your fears will then be realised because everyone who wishes to use the tactics describe would just roll Cleric Life Secondary.

Have you played large scale pvp before or just wow pvp?

Dygz

The other Archetype with heals is Bard.

Songcaller

Bards are intended to not be purely support focussed. They will be a "jack of all trades", including offensive and defensive combat abilities in addition to support abilities and buffs.[3][4]
Certain higher tier Bard abilities will utilize proximity-based ground templates that require the party or raid to move into (and out of) formations indicated by the template to gain added benefits or buffs.[5][3]
Bards may offer proximity-based or proc-based healing to a much lesser degree than Clerics.[6]
This may be outdated, as Bards have been more recently referred to as a non-healing support class.[2]
Bards will have a wide range of abilities to choose from, such as wordsmithing, acting, and musical aspects.[7]
Bards may be able to play musical instruments, such as Flutes and Bagpipes.[8][9]
Bards will not be the "downtime" class. This is the role of social spaces within nodes.[4]
Bards will have utility outside of combat, like all other classes.[10]
Restoring rested XP will not be a Bard utility.

Quote from Wiki.

AidanKD

Just on the topic of balance i guess using your one quote:

1) if you give other classes heals it makes that class have an edge over other classes. One can burst a person down and blink away and heal and then come back.

This isn't a design issue as much as it is a balance issue. First of all - we have to remember that the game isn't designed around 1v1 (nor was WoW anyway, as annoying as that may be to hear).

If a class can compete with lets say "dual dps" archetypes, I would expect them to have more damage, be it burst or sustained - but overall damage more, than a class which has forgone one for a tank/support archetype. If that is not the case, either they hard counter you - or it's probably something that should be balanced better.

But that doesn't mean it's designed poorly. Intrepid are very pro feedback so lets hope that they get this right and keep vigilant, but if not the community will definitely be vocal!

Songcaller

Aidan, I agree with your statements, however, both Cleric and Bard and Summoner are all Damage/Support Archetypes. They are active classes in both damage and heals. I'm not sure if it would even be possible for a Cleric to fill all the hotbars with support skills only. I'm not sure its even possible for a Bard to give an active buff with any passive skills.

We are yet to see the combat revamp, or the fighter (the healer killer slanted to be). So, at the moment balance is a desire but not a main concern. We need to experience the combat when all base archetypes are available so we can glean what the combat flows like. Balance comes after that.

One does not have to out dps or outnumber someone else when counters are involved. The idea would be to speed combat up with tactical pursuits. In A1 a Cleric could survive for ages against multiple foes (balance issue too, but, because the same classes all fought each other, there were no real counters because 3 classes can't all counter each other). There were only equal fights, slaughters and slogs. Not to mention the chain issues prior to the cc nerf.

Its a difficult topic to discuss because there are so many facets to pvp, so many facets to the classes, so many facets to the augments and so many facets to the combinational options that I couldn't possibly cover every eventuality. Not to mention the current changes underway. Not sure if we'll hear/see something at the end of this week?

AidanKD

I mean I get where you're coming from but we are theorising the whole process not just where we are not - it's very much a conceptual discussion. For that reason you can't really just leave balance out of the discussion.

Clerics being "unkillable" was very much a balance issue in A1. It just wasn't an issue for the A1 itself because that wasn't the purpose of the test.

Just think of the traditional trinity of DPS > Support/healer > Tank > DPS. Archetypes seem to blur the lines a bit but i'd say that two exclusively dps archetypes should be superior to a healer even if they are support/support. But perhaps if they are heal/tank it might be a closer matchup - assuming the model even somewhat resembles this - which it probably won't

The main reason i mention balance - is when it comes to Alpha 2 no doubt people will be saying how strong x,y and z is. And that might not be an issue of design - it may genuinely just be balance - number tuning and nothing more.

Archetypes throw so much into the mix that until we see it in action we can't really know. But given that this discussion at the moment can only really be conceptual - I think that there isn't a whole lot of room for saying that something is wrong or right - as much as we can only really say that we agree or or disagree.

I am doubtful of a combat update this month as much as I would love it. Best thing you can do is ask a question which isn't too wide but maybe regarding a specific feature and maybe it'll get a shoutout in the stream.

Songcaller

I'm all for balance, I just didn't want to use the old 'Still in development' meme. So I tried to elaborate. Then I realised the size of the scope and could not spend the amount of time possible to explain properly. The reason I mention the combat update is because prior to A1 end we had potentially three heal sources - Cleric, Bard and Summoner (Pet Summons). Now, after combat revamp we might have only Cleric and Summoner (Pet Summons). We have effectively removed a large chunk of healing (not massed healing but supportive healing) from the dynamic if the change is true.

Obviously, I can't state from external tests what difference it will make - I have neither seen Bard nor Summoner in action. I just wanted to give you my viewpoint on the 'Square' (DPS, Buff, Heal, Tank).

Caww

I don't mind restricted heal archtypes but we do need an effective assortment of heal potions and foodbuffs for health recovery.

Ludullu

Healing issues could be outdesigned w/o even touching the combat. Have a counter on all healing abilities (augmented ones included). If you cast the same healing ability twice in a row, the mana consumption doubles. Three times? Triples. And so on.

And give cleric a ton of situational or just varied heals, so that they can still heal a party w/o any real problems, but if they had to heal a single target or themselves, they'd have to use the stronger heals because weak/party heals are not enough.

Mb make the party heals have a "gives mana regen if the spell hits >1+X targets" effect and give it a big mana cost. Now the cleric can heal the party and sustain mana, while not being able to heal themselves with that spell because it's too costly. You can then play off of that design by giving bards a melee "prevent mana regen on target" debuff, so that in pvp bards need to get to the enemy cleric to prevent them from healing the party w/o losing mana. And now you have the enemy party trying to see who's the bard to prevent that debuff. And you got yourself an interesting pvp interaction, while also "nerfing" clerics.

The same effect is applicable to any class that gets cleric augments. They can still heal with their skills, but they'll have to dance around mana usage to prevent themselves from becoming useless.

Those are obviously just rough examples, but I just wanted to show that OPness of classes is not necessarily linked to combat changes or anything of the sort. Maybe by combat changes you meant something else though, in which case, I misunderstood it.

Songcaller

I'm a little confused, you say you don't want to touch the combat mechanics then your whole post explains how you would change the combat mechanics, then at the end you say that Opness of classes is not necessarily linked to combat mechanics and that I might have meant something else?

It is impossible for us to make progress, because, there is a combat revamp going on. It was the same during the last combat revamp - we discuss the old model to death only to find we have to do it all again when the iteration changes.

Ludullu

Neurath wrote: »

I'm a little confused, you say you don't want to touch the combat mechanics then your whole post explains how you would change the combat mechanics, then at the end you say that Opness of classes is not necessarily linked to combat mechanics and that I might have meant something else

So just as I said at the end, I guess I misunderstood what others mean by "combat revamp". To me, ability design is not the same as "do I swing a weapon w/o a target or do I need to click on someone" or "do I move with my ability when I use it?".

You can still use my example in both tab and action combat. And from what I understood, the problem was with exactly that, the way the combat works, and not the abilities that make use of that combat base. Maybe I was wrong in that assumption.

Songcaller

Well, the abilities were placeholders last I heard. Which means, abilities could be received later or not at all in the live game. I would consider abilities to be part of combat. Of course, from an external point of view I can't verify which parts of combat are under revamp - its been like a blackhole on information for a lot of things since A1 really.

Ludullu

Neurath wrote: »

Well, the abilities were placeholders last I heard. Which means, abilities could be received later or not at all in the live game. I would consider abilities to be part of combat. Of course, from an external point of view I can't verify which parts of combat are under revamp - its been like a blackhole on information for a lot of things since A1 really.

Yeah, that is very true. We know next to nothing and I doubt we will anytime this year.

Uthehoe

I have played new world, WOW, FFXIV, Skyrim. But i am by no means a professional gamer or a person who plays to be the best build. I usually play what no one plays. But in this game i already know i am going to primary tank because i love grabs in pvp.

superhero6785

Any archetype can take a Cleric secondary to most likely gain some minor healing effects. But, they are sacrificing benefits from other secondary choices. Remember, they've stated they will be balancing for group play, not solo play. So in a 1v1, someone with self heals may have an advantage. But, in a group your likely going to do better with a dedicated healer and your tank & DPS be focused on maximizing damage, CC, and mitigation.

Songcaller

I won't make comments on your position because I understand and agree. However, I can't confirm right now what life secondary does (never seen it) and we are under combat revamp.

Leiloni

NiKr wrote: »

Healing issues could be outdesigned w/o even touching the combat. Have a counter on all healing abilities (augmented ones included). If you cast the same healing ability twice in a row, the mana consumption doubles. Three times? Triples. And so on.

And give cleric a ton of situational or just varied heals, so that they can still heal a party w/o any real problems, but if they had to heal a single target or themselves, they'd have to use the stronger heals because weak/party heals are not enough.

Most games already are designed this way. Typically you'll have just one or two spammable heals with little or no CD, but they often heal for less. Good for filler or low damage situations, but not enough by itself when under pressure. Usually it's just a single target heal but sometimes you might also get a lower healing AoE that's spammable. Then the chunkier, "good" heals are on longer CDs and with a high mana cost, or just have some other situational requirement for use (a proc of some sort, etc.).

The only game I've ever heard of where you could spam every heal without any cooldown was ESO and you had to deal with mana issues if you did that. But nearly every other MMO places limitations like the above on healing abilities (and really most DPS/tanking abilities as well).

keenow

I always main Healer and I'm with OP on this one. I think heals should be limited to the Cleric main classes. Or at minimum, any healing granted to a DPS-(Cleric secondary) class to not be a full heal/healthbar recovery. Maybe a light HoT or small instant heal with a long cooldown (equal to at most a fifth the caster's healthbar). A heal that could be used as a buffer, but not a recovery.

A lot of issues I run into with when DPS have healing abilities in PvP is they have, what I call "O' sh♥t!" heals. But for this post we'll call them "recovery" heals--a heal that can be cast at the last minute on the brink of death and will return half or more of your healthbar that instantly puts you back into the green. So, you can cast it even if you're taken by surprise. Its effectively a health potion with a mana cost. I cast these "recovery" heals when the raid is taking large amounts of damage at once to save key players from falling, or when a tank misses a block and takes a face-full of dragon.

The issue I see is a game will grant these large "recovery" heals to DPS, which is helpful for PvE. It helps them survive large boss damage even if they stood in the wrong area, but usually breaks PvP. I can only speak from a healer's perspective, but when this happens, I find these 1v1 fights that last forever in an endless stall--and they just never end unless someone else intervenes. Either someone comes save me or someone helps murder me. (Both are welcome at that point!) I've literally stalled someone long enough until my friend arrived from the other side of the map to save me. What happens is they start attacking me and I out-heal all of their damage and burst damage. They aren't able to output enough dps to take me down even while popping abilities. I pass a heal-check. They fail a DPS-check. A good DPS will damage me faster than I can heal or utilize non-damage skills, such as a buff, to give them the extra damage they need; or a stun, to interrupt my healing enough to take me down. (I have some opinions about stunlocks but we can circle back to that later.) A bad DPS will not only fail to out-DPS me, they won't time their stuns effectively, so even if they stun me, because they didn't put any thought into when they're stunning, I'm able to recover from the stun and re-heal my healthbar.

They're usually counting on my mana bar to run out. But a key part of healing is mana bar management. Any healer worth their salt knows how to prolong it almost indefinitely--and is also probably carrying enough mana potions to be borderline over-encumbered by them. I know I am! My favorite content is to heal for is speedruns--meaning no mana breaks!

SO. By definition of a 1v1, I as a healer, not only am I out-healing damage; to win I have to damage them back, which isn't something my class is built for. So, I will be multi-tasking, slowly ticking down their health, while mitigating their higher damage. And this is where the DPS heal comes in; they'll pop a heal that will put their healthbar back to half or more. I don't have burst dps abilities. I literally don't have the capacity to damage them any faster than I was previously and their heal will come off cooldown. Even if I utilize a stun (if] available to healers) near low health, they'll recover before the stun is over and use this instant "recovery" heal to reset the fight. Rinse and repeat. It always feels bad. I pass all my class' core checks while multitasking (healing and mana management). They fail all their class' core checks (dps and stuns) without multitasking, but they're able to heal on par with me even though they don't specialize in it with a single button. And I can't dps on par with them because I don't specialize in it. It ends in this prolonged, never-ending draw that can't end without outside interference. So I never win on my own skill. GAH! Feels bad man.

I want to say, I'd be perfectly happy to draw with a dps who healed with health potions--because then they would've come to the fight just as prepared as I was. And that would be funny as heck! Both of us chugging our endless potions. That would be totally acceptable and a memorable battle I'm sure I'd be laughing through!
Some people are saying the game isn't balanced around 1v1; and I think that's a poor excuse in a game that will have so much open world pvp. I know from experience, anyone with a hint of bloodlust is going to take a jab at a healer questing solo. And a healer shouldn't be doomed to lose every ambush they run into. Sure! Lose any encounter they get outplayed in, of course, but if a DPS gets outplayed by a healer, they should die; not draw.
The solution isn't to give the healer more damage. If I pick a healer, I wanted fancy heals, not fancy damage. And having damage on top of heals not only makes me overpowered, it's just more things I have to manage, making the class abilities feel cluttered. The solution is to reduce the DPS' heals or make their heals skill-based.

This is why I like the compromise of giving them light heals or HoTs. Not a recovery heal, but a buffer heal that buys time.

For example, a Cultist (Rogue/cleric) can activate a healing ability that lasts for a few seconds that allows them to leech a percentage of the health of the damage they do for those few seconds. So, they could pop it, then pop all their large damage bursts for a decent heal--which would require some forethought and preparation by them. Or they could pop all of their big damage abilities, realize they're in trouble, cast their heal and hopefully eke out enough damage with the lesser dps abilities to stave off death. This would make their heals dependent on skill.
Or a small instant heal with a long cooldown equal to a fifth of a Acolyte (Mage-cleric)'s healthbar, so if they find themselves standing in an AoE, they can cast it and buy themselves enough time to run out of danger. The heal buys them time in an emergency and their health is low to begin with, so an instant heal is more appropriate because they're squishy and they have less time to react before they're dead.
Or a small bubble to a melee class; a HoT that can be placed on the floor in a small area, that they'd have to stand in it to heal themselves. Enemies could then run out of their range and they'd have to decide between chasing their prey or healing themselves. Which would make for more dynamic plays and smarter choices.

Recovery heals should never be given to DPS, even on large cooldowns, because it encourages bad plays. It encourages DPS in PvE to stand in the fire because they know they'll survive it. There is no longer a cost for bad placement. And it rewards DPS in PVP who can't even output enough DPS to down a squishy healer, so they never learn how to improve their damage output or time stuns. because when the outcome for bad plays isn't death; the assumption is that it is ok to repeat it.
I'd be perfectly onboard with giving them no heals at all, but I'm probably biased. If heals are given, it should only be a "buffer" that buys time, but not a full "recovery" to a bad play.

My one exception is Paladins (Tank/Heal). It would make total sense if they had a large recovery heal. They should be geared towards survival, not dps anyway.

TL;DR
Don't give DPS large, instant heals. Light, unspamable HoTs are probably ok?

Suralus

Oh man, healing discussion has began. I love healers/support and such will be one. Let's have faith with Intrepid see what they can come up with!

Dygz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtVUiS7yAHE&t=3518s
Mark 59:03
"Clerics as well as Bards will have direct healing effects. Bards will be much, much less. And the Bards will be proximity based as opposed to direct target or otherwise. Clerics/x will be the predominate healing force, with some supplemental healing that would be more over-time healing or proc-based healing based on the action of players that's assigned to the Bard role."
---Steven

Child Item