View Full Forums : Welcome to the PRIEST convention


Cassea
09-06-2002, 09:22 AM
I would like to welcome our brother and sister preists or healers as you would to the first annual Priest Convention.

(pause for applause)

I see we have a good number of Clerics

(pause for cheers from the Cleric section)

Shaman

(pause for cheers from the Shamen)

and Druids

(Pause for wild cheers from the treehuggers)

I would also like to thank the few Paly's, Rangers and Beastmasters who have crashed our little convention and are now in the back drinking all the beer.

You are of course welcome but please no dueling inside the convention hall.

I wish to remind you all that next years convention has been set for Qeynos and will be hosted by the Clerics.

It our hope that we can get together like this and discuss how we can better ALL the healing classes with the goal of helping each of us become better at what we do.

We have a rigorous schedule and I want to announce that the Cleric's demonstration of their new found Melee abilities has been pushed back from 2:15 to 2:30.

/end roleplay

/begin RL talk

I invite all Clerics/Druids/Shamen/Rangers/Palys/Beastlords to discuss POSITIVE ways in which we all can evolve into better healers. Let's discuss balance (this is only in this section as other classes would not find this post elsewhere), strategies, tactics and any other things that would be discussed at a REAL convention.

We will, of course, boot out any rabble rousers who do not wish to be productive and I wish to remind you that we will enforce civility at all times.

Disagreements are fine - personal attacks are not

SO leave the stereotypes and exagerations outside and let the discussion begin!

Cassea
09-06-2002, 09:31 AM
I will start...

We have 6 healing classes in this game.

Clerics/Paly's

Druids/Rangers

Shamen/Beastlords

Each has a main and a secondary. Each gains it's powers from the parent class.

Paly's get a res from their Cleric parent.

Rangers get SOW from their Druid parent.

Rangers have asked in the past for at least gate. I know they are a melee class but then again so are Paly's. I wonder if the Druids would mind teaching Ranger's the secret of gating and even a few self only ports?

I also wonder if Druids should be asking for a HoT or just direct heals and I would hope that a Cleric could do as much melee damage as a Druid could nuke in a similar timeframe AND using the SAME mana.

Aorion
09-06-2002, 09:37 AM
Well first off, I'll point out the obvious that I speak just as one Cleric and not all. That being said...

I feel that the Cleric healing side is full. I have enough variations of healing now to cover almost anything. This is not true for the other healing classes. The cry"Clerics Camp" usually means the battle is lost, even if it might have been won if Clerics stayed. This is because the "backup" healers don't have enough backup in their spells.

I would personally like it where having 2 Priest classes in one group is considered a good thing. Both adding to dps if needed and both being able to heal as needed. As long as it's set up so that only one healer if preferred because of lack of dps or lack of healing by one or the other, it will cause a competition that shouldn't be there. Our arguements should be over who's God can outdrink the others, not over which class should be able to be in a group.

As to fixxing that, I'm not good at coming up with spells and such. I've seen quite a few who are. I agree we should talk amonst ourselves and see where the worst problem areas are, and work towards fixing those for Everybodys benefit.

Cassea
09-06-2002, 09:42 AM
Our arguements should be over who's God can outdrink the others, not over which class should be able to be in a group


ROTFL

Thanks for that!

You do know, of course, that Tunare can outdrink them all. If you don't believe me go ask her *smiles*

Aidon Rufflefuzz
09-06-2002, 09:45 AM
No melee or hybrid class should get gate. Gate is a caster/priest oh @#%$ card.

That being said...I don't really care if Rangers get self only ports. Give them a 12 second cast time which is easy to interrupt so they don't become ranger gate spells.

Sorrun
09-06-2002, 09:46 AM
A couple obvious ones to me...

1. SoW... no reason this shoudlnt go to clerics when 2 of the 3 priest classes already share it.

2. Invis.... all three should have it with clerics getting thier special undead version and druids getting a special animal version. Do shaman have a special version?

I may add more later but for now those are my current thoughts and have been for some time. SoW isnt a druid spell despite what many druids want to think... it has always been a shared spell between shaman and druids that rangers for some reason were given to appease them.

aandaie
09-06-2002, 09:48 AM
The way to balance priests is to not give them all things that the other priests have. Its to give them equal desireability to groups from better spells which fit their individual archetypes.

No priest should ever touch, come near or remotely resemble the healing power of the cleric. No group should ever be saying, "we need a healer, but lets get a druid instead of a cleric because...." In every case a cleric should be preferred as a main healer, that is what a cleric IS by definition.

No priest should ever touch or come near the all around
utility, damage and moderate healing potential of the druid.
For that niche in the group no other class should ever even be an afterthought. Currently druids are not as strong in this regard as they should be.

No priest should ever touch, or come near, the all around
hp buffing, mob slowing or mob debuffing power of the shaman
whose healing potential should probably fall somewhat below the druids since its just not a role they fall into.

All of these classes CAN be stronger in what they do the best ALREADY without stepping on each other's toes. All of these classes should NEVER be able to solo as well or be as desired as a healer alone. The druid should always be the king soloer while the cleric is always the king healer.

Balance is, by definition, ALL the things you can do weighed on a scale. If you try to instead balance ONE area such as group healing at level 60, its just not going to work. Soloing potential being balanced alone at 60 is the same way.

I think even bringing hybrid types into the discussion muddles it. They are not even part of it since their strength lies elsewhere, nor are they "priests."

Clerics should NEVER, EVER, NEVER, FOR ALL TIME, get SOW.
No other priest should EVER, NEVER for all time get any kind of XP resurrects.
Ranger should, of course, NEVER, EVER for all time get any kind of gate or port. Once again, taking what other classes do and giving it to someone else is not balance but rather removing individuality. "Balance" would be making them stronger in their own ways.
I don't see it as, " I want to do something more like the cleric can!" but rather as "I want to do MORE of the kinds of things I already can."

Cassea
09-06-2002, 09:52 AM
I have no problem with that. I think the Shamen/Druid "nature" theme is why we got it and they did not.

After AA-3 I'm not sure it's the cookie they want by heck... why not.

Not getting invis for Clerics is just silly. I've never used the Animial invis so I'm not sure that quite equates to Undead invis but so what. *smiles*

Maybe one LONG casting self gate per continent for Rangers?

Zabrina65
09-06-2002, 09:53 AM
This is a great idea! /cheer

One thing I'd like to say is that while we're all priests, I'd like a system where we're still all differentiated. Eventhough we're all priests, I don't want the lines to get so blurred, that we get indistinguishable from each other.

Here's how I see our roles:

Cleric: Power Healer, not much else

Druid: Offensive Versatility, Spot Healer

Shaman: Defensive Versatility, Spot Healer


I'm not creative, but I'd like to see spells that define those roles more distinctly.

Also, I wouldn't mind seeing all of us get all the same heals as far as how many HP are healed, but I'd like to see them differentiated by a difference in mana required and/or casting time.

Anyway, great idea for a cooperative discussion.

Zabrina
55 Cleric
Tunare

Sorrun
09-06-2002, 09:54 AM
Except Aandaie, you are buying into the fundamental flaw of the game that assumes clerics should be the best healer...

Cassea, based on previous posts some time ago, is trying to think through a new approach... that being that a priest class is a priest class and should heal roughly the same... from a healing perspective, each class should be relatively the same.

In other words, factor OUT healing as a balance item... use other approaches to balance the three. Including healing is the fundamental flaw of EQ since as we have discovered, healing is a fundamental NEED in most areas of the game. Many abilities used to balance non-clerics against thier improved healing are NOT fundamental needs in many areas of the game.

Mocean
09-06-2002, 09:56 AM
Give shamans a fixed duration invis, they currently do not have one.

Falamil Woodhelven
09-06-2002, 10:07 AM
All of these classes CAN be stronger in what they do the best ALREADY without stepping on each other's toes. All of these classes should NEVER be able to solo as well or be as desired as a healer alone. The druid should always be the king soloer while the cleric is always the king healer.



Clerics have always been a healing specialist, but the situation has escalated such that many raid level encounters may not be undertaken without disproportionally large numbers of clerics. No other class has been able to fill in if a cleric is absent, and healing is too important of a role to allow one class to dominate it so completely. After these changes are complete, clerics will still be the very best of healers but other priests class are able to substitute to some degree. -- Rich


"All priests should offer a similar level of value in solo, group, and raid situations, and they won't be considered balanced until this is true." Rich Waters



Guess what, Aaandie?


You're wrong.


The dev team has clearly stated that they want all three priest classes of equal value in all three environments.


Let's try to focus our discussion on how we can rationally and within some kind of rolepaying perspective reach that stated goal.

Zabrina65
09-06-2002, 10:10 AM
Sorrun,

I like what you said, but what else do clerics do beside heal? I like this summoned hammer so that we could melee a bit, but that seemed to really strike a spark with many classes, not just the priests.

As I said above, give all the priests the same direct heals, differentiate them by the mana efficiency and casting time. If you do that though, I almost think clerics need more than the summoned hammer to equal the druids' and shamans' other abilities. Increasing cleric melee to equal those skills would put us past some of the melee classes in damage output and I think that's going too far.

Zabrina
55 Cleric
Tunare

Aorion
09-06-2002, 10:10 AM
Aye I like the distinguishing to be

Cleric/melee
Druid/caster
Shaman/buff/debuff

I've started each class at least once. We all start off the same. A club, a Heal, a buff. We all buff ourselves, go out an whack on rats to get levels. After that it starts to change. As a Cleric, I could still melee well up to about level 30, then my melee gets so bad and the tanks start needing more heals, that i become the typical sit and med healer. I think this patch attempted to fix that.

Shamans fall along their line fairly well, I think, but a Shaman would have to say exactly has I haven't played with them enough to say.

Druids on the other hand move away from melee and into the casting part fairly quickly. They just can't take the hits to stand toe to toe with mobs. The fear kite of animals lets them keep their weapon skill up wor awhile, but they move more and more away from that.

The problem as I see it is for Clerics the focused too much on the major, not at all on the minor. Druids they focused to much on the minor, not on the major. So picking one side to work on (healing) doesn't balance us. They need to pick the side that got weaken and work on that to "balance" us. Healing for druids, more defensive ability for Clerics so we can use our new spells.

Btw. Bristlebane can outdrink any and all. Look at him. He was modeled on a Bowery bum. Could drink straight alcohol by the gallons and never blink an eye.

Cassea
09-06-2002, 10:14 AM
I would like Clerics, Druids and Shamen to stop thinking of each other as "them" and start thinking as "us"

We should compete based on skill and character and not class.

Each class should has a specialty where they are desired in one case whereas another class in a different case.

If you had to start over a new character and it had to be a Cleric/Druid/Shamen it should be a hard decision. Something to really study and think about. Balance each classes abilities and you play style.

When you are a Raid Leader you want to be able to say...


Hmmm I'll need 3 Clerics for this, 3 Druids for that and 3 Shamen for this

and NOT

Hmmmm I' need 6 Clerics but I only have 4. I'll make due with some Druids and/or Shamen.

This only happens because there is such a disparity in "basic" healing ability IMHO

ElethiomelTimberfall
09-06-2002, 10:17 AM
Btw. Bristlebane can outdrink any and all.


Are you joking? Tunare is the total prototypical party girl. She not only outdrinks all the others, but gets to go home with whichever one she likes (unless that ho Erollisi is around!)

Seriena
09-06-2002, 10:18 AM
/cheer Cassea

Great roleplay..really enjoyed that thank you :)

*walks up to the podium* (prays for forgiveness from the spell checkers in the audiance)

Just going to comment on one point, I wouldn't mind rangers getting gate. However, they are half melee as well as half druid. They get heals and sows, dual wield and archery. Gate might be more of a "caster" thing, to far to one side for a hybrid to manage.

That's all.

*Sits back down in my uncomfortable folding chair and listens as all the clerics and druids start yelling at each other again*

Gimli fan
09-06-2002, 10:21 AM
I am not sure a Druid wants to be balanced by being a utility class that is to severly blunted in either healing / offense / utility.

It seems that offense and utility are there. Healing is such a large part of this blood bath of a game as well all know, that this portion is what I am most concerned about.

I believe Shammy's are very close to their latter age incarnation. They need a healing boost. I would say less so than druids as melee buffs and slow far outweigh DS. Not sure about the pets, but that also should be considered.
Perhaps one healing spell for Shammys while druids recieved multiple healing spells (or a unique new time of healing spell such as DA/B that can be cast on others). I anticipate reading the thoughs of Shammy's as to what their needs are, and how their powers provide for them/others in solo/group/raid.

Clerics obv. have the healing and the offense was upgraded. Their utility is a tad weak. Rez, invis -v- undead, DA/B, Atone, great AC & HP buffs, mana regen, and root is a great package. Add in the still expensive home city ports and you are close, maybe a piece of candy or two and set. (I would say give em what they most want, invis. Only reason not to would be Roleplay, but FV is only one server. Balance wise I think they are ok, heck give clerics the weak invis my enchanter gets...it breaks right away very often :( ) Add harmony and remove the indoor/outdoor useless pacify line, or add a harmony like ability. Surely with rez as the best utility spell in the game, two new trick such as the ones I mention will make clerics utility well above average.

I think after taking mana and aggro into consideration Druids should be able to fit either roll very well. Not often do you want to heal - DOT - heal - heal - nuke - heal in a real group or raid. I would rather take either nich and allow my mana to permit me to fullfill the roll. Keep people alive, and when speed is a factor keep mobs in camp steadily. If offense is requested play treehuggin wizard. 9/10 cleric or 9/10 wiz as the numbers demand, keeping in mind that offense comes from a whole host of sources while healing is ultra-critical to every encounter and comes from limited resources.
Add CH or partial, a good group or single target pulse heal spell, and a low mana quick cast ~1500 hp heal.
I would be willing to listen to nuking or now DOT druids that cite needs in the offense department.

Rangers need Sow2 that is a 1 - 2 hour buff of near Spirit of Cheeta speed, an indoor Run3 speed group buff, and perhaps a nice regen spell or direct heal.

Pallys need an upgrade to direct healing, and an upgrade to group healing to keep up with the Cleric group heal.

Dont know what BL need in addition to the pally melee buffs they just got.

Croff Dancingbear
09-06-2002, 10:34 AM
Clerics wear plate - let them melee a bit for non raid exp.

Shamans stem the Beastlords - give them an upgraded pet and some new intresting non dot debuffs. Maybe like a chance to Riptose-dodge-etc 50% less.

Druids have the most spell damaging spells - Give them more dots and DD's.

All three priest classes should have gotten the new 3 heals. Think about that one please.

Clerics need some thing to do after raids. The preasure of people depending on you 100% is too much to then get a group where people depend on you 100%.

Shamans need some thing to do during raids. I hate that alot of my friends have changed their main class due to being turned into a buff bitch- buff whore.

Shamans and Druids should both get some sort of CH line spell.
Clerics should get a short type regen line spell(nothing great).

Druids are least wanted in groups at high levels imo. Every player is destine to be level 60. Give Druids some thing special to add to groups. If Clerics can 100% CH-exp res, and Shamans can slow-haste and almost CH like a Druid plus get Tropor, the Druids are still one item short in my book for group exp.

I would want to leave what the Druids should get up to the Druids. Let the devs listen to them since they are the ones who truley understand their class.

WTF why are all of my posts turning into novels 8(

Gniss
09-06-2002, 10:47 AM
I've always advocated letting all the priests cast all the spells, but at either 1.5 or 2 times the mana cost for a non-class spell.

ElethiomelTimberfall
09-06-2002, 10:54 AM
Can we just all agree that Tunare is the hardest drinking deity and is still throwing back cocktails long after the other lightweights have passed out? Then we can talk about healing.

We need to get our priorities straight here!

vetoafauna
09-06-2002, 10:58 AM
read the whole post before you disagree please.

first off i feel that all three priests should be able to CH. perhaps give it a new name, "Chloro-Fill" or something, and make it cost 450 mana. clerics bring enough to the healing table with group heals, HoTs, and fast heals that they would still always be the prefered healer but not needed exessively for CH chains on raids.

that said, keep res limited to clerics, but give druids and shamans revive at 55 or so. its not like anyone would ever take a revive, but only for desperate measures.

clerics nuke 79% efficiently as druids do currently, with a spell thats 4 levels lower than the druid one i'm using to compare. albeit it's magic based, so give them a line of disease spells that are about equally efficient with longer cast times and instant recast times. also give clerics charm undead line, as well as dire charm undead aa skill. also allow Y5 to last while sitting.

shamen are pretty well balanced, with mandatory debuffs and buffs, and able to keep sustained dps equal to a druid (at least) with cann. not much change needed, maybe faster repop on some of their aa skills but nothing major.

druids, if ch enabled, would be pretty close to balanced. the only things i would have to suggest from here on would be an upgrade to bladecoat, a group version of potg that doesn't add any hp but would still add mana regen and ac(something worth mgbing) that most clerics would probably prefer over baotr (assuming focus is available). this would give druids a desirable raid buff that doesn't constantly get overwritten.

rangers, starfire at 60 and superior heal at 60. maybe even a self only potg.

paladins, DL at 60 and they should be offered healing adept/gift mastery aa for those that wish to persue healing farther.

beastlords, really no idea on these guys since RN only has a handful of 60 ones. they seem pretty distant from real "healers" so i'd think whatever they have is probably sufficient.


there ya go, all priests being able to keep close to equal sustained dps. all priest classes having different unique buffs viable for raids and groups, all of which stack. all priest classes being able to heal in *most* group situations but clerics still the most versitile, and the pressure to have tons of clerics on raids is relieved (and even if clerics/priests arent NEEDED there will never be too many on a raid). Clerics keep the monopoly on rez, druids keep the monopoly on ports and a few utilities, shamans keep the monopoly on slow and real resist debuffs. all's well that ends well.

Croff Dancingbear
09-06-2002, 11:00 AM
"I've always advocated letting all the priests cast all the spells, but at either 1.5 or 2 times the mana cost for a non-class spell."

I would have to disagree. That is more like swaping feet with some initial pain due to ripping off your old ones, more then stepping on toes.

I like being diffrent then the other Priests, but there should be some balance.

Peyotie
09-06-2002, 11:05 AM
Can EVERY preist class agree on one thing? Generally 2 preists per group is a GOOD thing? So now we have the following combinations. What is balanced about them and what needs work? I'm talking in ALL cases between 1 to 60 and beyond. From EC to Ssra.

Druid/Cleric
Cleric/Shaman
Shaman/Druid

Why don't we start there and work up? Look at it this way guys. If the groups can come to a consensus (i highly doubt it but here is wishing) then it would be a GREAT thing to go to Verant and say 'Listen in general clerics, druids, and shaman agree that THIS is what we need done to our classes. Please look at it and consider it. Put in REAL number examples, not BS ones. Med rates, damage rates, healing rates, ALL of it.

Elawnah
09-06-2002, 11:08 AM
As a priest, my main duty is keeping my group alive. All 3 priests should offer equal offence (Nukes, etc), defence (buffs), and healing capability. We should be interchangable with eachother.

In D&D, Clerics and Druids heal equally. The only diffrence being Clerics get their healing one spell level prior to Druids. They are both equally powerful in other aspects, the Cleric taking powers from their god and Druids taking powers from nature. Neither one is necessairly better than the other, but they do offer something diffrent while remaining equally good healers.

However, this isn't D&D, and the game works diffrently. With that said I think that a few changes could be made to have all 3 priest classes useful and important to groups and raids.

Clerics have a very defined role. Most Clerics, from what I have seen, want to offer more offence. The problem being that the other priest classes can't take over healing to allow the Cleric to do this. Judgement is a very nice nuke as far as dam:mana and DPS. Why not give them one more nuke at 60. Make it fire based. I mean, why not? Fire and brimstone and such.

Shaman have a very defined role. Most Shaman, from what I have seen, are happy with their place. They can heal reasonably well with Torpor, and they get the best slows in the game. They also get the best stat buffs in the game. Their problem is that Torpor has such a lousy drop rate. Either make that spell more common or give Shaman a better direct heal to compensate. (And make it a vendor spell!)

Druids don't have a very defined role. Most Druids, from what I know from personal experience, are generally unhappy with the current state of the class. Druids are the worst of the 3 main priest classes when it comes to healing. We do have considerably better offence than either the Shaman or Cleric. Our nukes are just fine as far as dam:mana and DPS go. Give us another swarm DoT at 58. Move our healing down (Superior Heal to 44. Chloroblast to 51. Natures Touch to 55. And Complete heal at 58.)

Now, our hybrid brothers and sisters.

Paladins. They are the sister class to Clerics. They can heal well (arguably better than Druids), and they can ressurect. Their offence is poor, but their defence is very high. From what I have seen in game, Paladins are very well off. They need no changes to their abilities.

Beastlords. I'll be honest, I don't know a damn thing about this class, how it preforms, or what it could need. =)

Rangers. My people. Rangers heal very poorly. They don't even get Greater Healing until 57. They have nice offence, poor defence. Rangers need some better defence, and they need their heals lowered in level, and they need to be given Superior heal at 58. Why not?

betina
09-06-2002, 11:10 AM
Ok, let's not also forget the distinction that as the game is currently set up, there are secondary roles to the priest class as well in terms of what they cure. These are the utility roles that the priest class fulfills -- the priest classes need to be looked at as filling the same niche, but filling them a little bit differently, and with different capacity.

It's hard to balance them all out.

But yes, I agree, they all do need to be main healers. How you define a main healer is going to vary on some degree.

The Cleric is the equivalent of a Medical Doctor. He's the most civilized, so he has access to technology and knowledge the others don't. (Plate Armor and Healing Power). His power comes most into play when there are large amounts of people together (Group Heals and Res).

The Druids and Shaman, coming from less populated and less civilized cultures are confined by tradition (restrictions on armor). Because their cultures are more primative, their Healing Efficiency is not going to be the fastest or the best, but it does work. Their culture is much more closely knit so I see a lot of Group Spells that might not be necessarily heals, but help out their group (i.e. Group based Buffs). They are better in small groups than in large groups and do a lot of different things.

The Hybrids are basically the paramedics -- they know enough to help out and stop the bleeding, but the person they help still needs to go to the hospital and seek medical attention.

I'd also like to see more of the abilities spread out a little more, but also some specializations by the classes to make them distinct as well. Clerics are the Masters of Poison cures. Shamans are the Masters of Disease Cures. Druids are currently lacking an affliction to cure, but I believe this might be fixed by giving them Abolish Curse.

Example:

Slows: Shaman use a Disease Based Slow. Give them a Cold Based Slow to go with it. Give Clerics A Magic Based Slow, and Druids a Fire Based Slow.

Damage Shields: Currently the Cleric has a few Reverse DS that you cast on the mob. They need some they can cast on the player. Clerics should get a Poison based DS which inflicts poison bonus damage and buffs PR. Shaman should get a Disease based DS which inflicts Disease damage and buffs DR, and Druids should get a new DS (Shield of Seasons) which inflicts Cold Bonus Damage and comes with a FR/CR buff.

Group Resists: Clerics need Group Poison Resist. Druids and Shamans already have their respective Group Resists.

House
09-06-2002, 11:11 AM
If Shamans could heal anywhere close as well as Clerics, they would be too unbalanced against MOBs that can be slowed. Don't forget that we're stopping 75% of melee damage. In a normal experience group, there's already little need for both a Cleric and a Shaman (the Cleric often falls asleep or resorts to meleeing).

Also, I don't think I'm the only Shaman who sees him/herself as primarily a buffer and debuffer. Any improvements to the class, in my opinion, should be made in those areas (though, for the love of Innoruuk, no more stupid group buffs please).

I don't want to be more like a Cleric. I want be a stronger Shaman.

Aorion
09-06-2002, 11:18 AM
The only problem I see with giving Druids/Shamans CH is I think most don't want it. And some that do, wouldn't after a couple of days with it.

Clerics have "grown up" with CH, so we've become used to having it. Druids and Shamans have always have a versitility that they have enjoyed. CH would kill alot of that for them. I could be wrong, but I think on the Druid side, they want a healing ability that helps groups/raids, but doesn't stick them into a forced CH rotation that Clerics currently have. Yet allows a raid to go off withut the need for 10 Clerics to be there.

Off course if we go to the vey High End Mobs, there really isn't any other recourse but CH. Even if you give it another name and mechanic, if it does the exact same thing it would still be CH and stick them in the same position.

Partygirl vs Wino? I take the wino. As for going home with anyone they want, Bristlebane would just get her drunk, talk her into a game of poker, and win her.

Peyotie
09-06-2002, 11:18 AM
EXCELLENT going so far. I applaud the effort Cassae. One suggestion to people though PLEASE NO HYBRIDS. This is a preist forum. ONE thing at a time.

gardeltron
09-06-2002, 11:26 AM
There are some great ideas here. I really like the upgrade the clerics got. It was a nice infusion to a class I consider to be the linchpin of any strong group or guild.

Druids are now much better healers than shamans, and I don't mind it. Torpor is an extremely powerful spell in certain, limited situations. Druids also are very powerful magic damage dealers. I wouldn't mind to see them get even better at this.

Post 50, shamans loose the melee edge they have pre-50. Shaman debuffs are very powerful during the low to mid 50's, but decline in importance as they reach 60 because mobs die so fast that debuffs have little influence on the outcome.

The usefulness of shaman buffs has been vigorously debated within the shaman community. There is a small effect of strength and dexterity buffs, but those effects decline in importance as melees get better equipped and more skilled at 60. The best shaman buff is a proc on high end melee weapons, and adds very little additional power to a melee that has already reached stat caps from equipment and other buffs.

Shaman dps remains pretty stagnant past about 56. Shaman DoTs have some effects, but 9 times out of 10, mobs die before the DoTs do much damage.

To balance the advances in melee skills, the awesome new powers of int casters, the upgrades to clerics, and hopefully new abilities that will be given to druids, shamans should see at least one new heal, improvements to melee abilities, and some new forms of magic damage (definitely a DD, perhaps an upgrade to the pet).

Gimli fan
09-06-2002, 11:27 AM
It is such a problem addressing mitigated damage from slows and such!

How to figure that out?

Without a slowed mob the Druid aint gonna last very long healing in most situations.

vetoafauna
09-06-2002, 11:29 AM
i dont wanna speak for clerics here but arent the primary reasons clerics have always hated ch that 1) they get stuck in ch rotations on raids and 2) it hurts the way they are balanced, losing dps and utility because they have the holy grail of heals?

giving it to all priests would eliminate both of those problems, ch cycles would be a mix of priests and it wouldnt necessarily always be the same people (would depend on the encounter). a non slowable mob might put the shamans in rotation, a mob with wicked ae might put the druids in rotation so clerics can be doing group heals, a mob that needs maximum dps efficiency might put the clerics in cycle so druids could focus on dps.

more about utilizing ALL priest abilities and removing "healing" from a balance issue.

Togh
09-06-2002, 11:49 AM
I'll pipe in on the shaman perspective...

I'm a level 60 shaman, but I'm not in a hard-core raiding guild...

There are not a ton of gripes that most shaman have about their class, but there are few important ones though:

- Spell Drops: Spells are way too rare, especially the class defining spells. Everyone knows that shaman have the most number of rare spells and 2 of those spells are class defining in nature. (Malo, Torpor, Pox of Bertoxxulous, Avatar, Voice of the Berserker, Talisman of the Raptor, Tirgir's Insect, etc.) All of these spells from an expansion that is over 2 years old and many level 60 shaman don't have most of them.

- Raid stacking: Before DOT stacking, more than 2 or 3 shaman at a raid was relatively useless. With DOT stacking, they are slightly less than relatively useless. Some solutions include removing DD component to DOTs to reduce double resist checks and/or adding high damage high mana nukes. The damage dealing capabilities of shaman have not been touched at all since the Kunark expansion!

- Raid healing: Level 60 Shaman don't do too bad with healing support classes on raids with Torpor (but not many shaman have torpor, see above) If verant wants to add a raid level heal to shaman, many shaman believe that adding a CH with component cost would do the trick (maybe a pearl or something, just not a peri). This way it's not exoected to be used too much in groups. Also note: there is a large gap in healing for ordinary groups between Superior Healing and a Torpor equipped level 60 shaman. Maybe add a mini-torpor like spell.

Sure, shaman have lots of other minor issues (alchemy, spell stacking, Avatar as a spell still sucks, etc.), but in general a shaman (with a full spellbook) is somewhat balanced.

As a side note, many shaman are also somewhat upset that clerics are getting bash when shaman have always been the ones up in melee range usually trying to bash with their skill level 1, slam :P

Aorion
09-06-2002, 11:52 AM
While some of these questions are good, they are dangerously close to going into the heated debates elswhere. Try to focus on suggestions about what to do, not on what is out there now.

Reading your 2nd post, Veto, makes it a little clearer to me. I can see your point there. It would undo the whole unbalance that CH has started.

Bristlebane is also the God of Mischief don't forget. He is the Spuds McKenzie of Gods.

Sorrun
09-06-2002, 12:05 PM
I think the angle that may provide the best insight is to think about how the classes would be different if healing were relatively equal. What would make each class stand out?

Shaman already have slow... arguably one of the best abilities in the game.

Clerics already have rez and CH (although I am an advocate of removing it and giving clerics really good heal spells instead).

Druids have a multitude of things we do reasonably well but nothing that really makes us stand out..

That is the price of versatility... :)

I suspect where this discussion will end up is right were it started 3-4 months ago. Druids will need to agree to include others in thier versatility OR agree to give some of it up in order to gain the level of uniqueness that is required to truly balance and fit in well with the other priest classes. The problem with option #1 is that it makes overall class balance exponentially more difficult each time you add an ability to another class. The problem with #2 is that druids seem unwilling to accept that they cant have both worlds... versitility and uniqueness.... they are, afterall, mutually exclusive.

Miss Foxfyre
09-06-2002, 12:35 PM
Cassea, I applaud your effort. I really do. But I got as far as Aandiae's no no no never ever evers and quit reading.

Aorion
09-06-2002, 01:17 PM
Ah well. a noble idea quickly degenerated by those that can't leave the "Yours is bigger than mine" argument on the other topics.

Peyotie
09-06-2002, 01:19 PM
Question. Assuming all 3 preist classes are willing to look at 'balancing' WHAT would each class be willing to give up to the others?
IF clerics give up CH (the real one) WHAT would shamans and druids be willing to give into the mix to pay them back? AND would the clerics accept the transfer.
As it is now the system is not balanced so intermixing will allow the classes to be more balanced. FOR example....in the end clerics should be able to SOLO as well as a shaman and a druid. Druids arguably solo best at quadding. Shamans can solo very similar to reports i've seen in comparison the druids. Clerics on the other hand CANT. Would the preist classes be allright with allowing the clerics an UBER and I mean UBER weapon similar to what clerics have now that POOFS if the cleric groups? I see they have made it so yaulp V poofs when a clerics sits down...they could do the same thing with the weapon. This would completely solve the clerical solo issue without totally throwing grouping out the window. Allow clerics to keep the pet they have now or maybe even the one they had prenerf to balance what they bring to a group...and balance from there.

IF your class had to give up everything but ONE thing what would it be?

As a druid I would say leave my nukes alone. For clerics I would say rezzing and for shamans I would say Canni (everything seems to revolve around their mana regen possibilities from my understanding) ( PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong). Then put EVERYTHING and I mean every other spell we have on the table and be willing to bend back and forth....utility spells, regen, sow, snare, you name it.

Krysteel
09-06-2002, 01:33 PM
There cannot be a rational clear minded conversation between these classes. Too many of us (all classes) are so beaten, bruised, and battered by the nerf stick that at anytime when the first "but you got..." posts start showing up, it gets everybody's ire up and it falls apart from there.

The problem I see (which almost everybody I hope can acknowledge) is there is a fundamental difference between raiding and exp groups. The goals of those endeavors are completely different. In the end class abilities divided between those two cannot be reconciled given the existing mechanics of Everquest.

But to play along because I believe the effort is more important than the actual result:

Clerics specialize in dungeon fighting.
Druids specialize in outdoor fighting.
Shamen can do either equally well.

Yes, there are exceptions, there always will be. But as a general statement, it holds true for the majority of players in those classes. Taken from that perspective, and realizing the focus of the end game, it becomes obvious where the disparity exists. Druids want (and need IMO) more capability in the raid environment. The problem is any new abilities given to druids for raids will also be used for outdoor fighting. If there was a way to limit those new abilities to raids only, then I think a lot of the bickering and sniping would have little basis.

An idea has been brought up for new raid abilities require some moderately expensive reagent to be cast. Ineffective solution. For the power gamers of EQ would by their very nature would increase the power struggle that all of us are feeling. Perhaps proximity to boss mobs could be a method to control when new abilities could be used.

Maybe a bad idea, heck maybe the whole post is bunk. But to have any constructive conversation (whomever the facilitator is) there must be some form of agreement between all the parties. IMO, start small and build from there.

-Krys
58 cleric
Bristlebane server

Cassea
09-06-2002, 01:38 PM
May I have your attention please

*taps microphone*

May I have your attention please

*crowd dies down*

A few of our drunkin Ranger and Paly gate crashers *smiles* have intermingled with the crowd and started a few fights. We have removed them from the building and after a short recess we will move on to our next topic.

/stop roleplay

I just got done deleting a ton of posts in this thread - one of my own also.

I know it's hard to not slip into the old class comparison rants - heck I find myself doing it at times but PLEASE let's keep this constructive.

If a post of yours was nuked please do not take offense as I even nuked one of my own.

There are some great ideas coming out of this and we must all understand that everyone is entitled to their own opinion. There is no wrong or right here just ideas.

I think we all know where we stand right now. This is not the point here. We are all healers who try and keep the main damage dealers alive and toss in a few licks when we can.

I will delete any posts on this thread only that revent into a "your class is better than my class" or "if a warrior had to pick one class to be stranded on a desert island what class would it be"

If you want to step up to the microphone and address the convention of Clerics/Druids/Shamen please be civil.

Thank you!

meysura
09-06-2002, 01:50 PM
<editing out the part answering the already deleted question of which of the 3 healers I'd pick in 2 situations>

As far as other balancing issues go:

Clerics should have invis. No question. Actually, I have no problem at all with clerics getting the usual selection of travel utility spells (lev, eb, see invis, etc.) I consider those pretty basic (like bind and gate) and all other casters/healers get them in some form; clerics should get them as well, even if they're self only. It's not like they're unbalancing spells; they are purely convenience. I don't think SoW is an option though; it's just too out of character.

Clerics should be able to add *some" dps in a group situation, although the new changes may have done enough for them in that area; I really can't say about that yet. I do *not* think clerics should have the offensive capability of a druid, since that is one of the goodies we druids bring to the group table. (Although I'd like to note that druids cannot normally at this time contribute much in the way of dps if we are primary healer; there simply isn't enough mana to do both, given the heals we currently have. That may change though, if/when the cheal goes live. When I am acting as primary healer, I normally limit my damage dealing to items with clicky effects only. I do not nuke unless the mobs are dropping in seconds and minimal damage is being taken.)

I think clerics should have better undead spells added to give them greater soloability. Charm Undead, a dire charm ability for undead, whatever. I think all classes should have some ability to solo because, let's face it, you don't always have time to go LFG.

As for druids, well, the cheal. I have mixed feelings about this one. I honestly don't think as druids that we can take the kind of aggro cheal produces. I wouldn't mind having the spell, simply because I am in a small, cleric light guild, and there are times that it would make the difference between a raid going off, or a raid being cancelled; but it's *not* something I'd be using more than I had to. I do think we should get superior heal at a lower level than we do, perhaps 44 or 49. I say this because my 40s were when I stopped grouping and started soloing. The reason was primarily because that was when I could no longer keep a melee partner alive. It wouldn't hurt to have Chloroblast's level lowered a bit as well, maybe to 52?

I would like to see druids get an upgrade that gives some mana regen at a lower level than we get ptoc/ptog. Form of the Howler is nice; but it's outdoor only and wolfie is kos damn near everywhere but the old world now, so it's use is *extremely* limited. <edit: Now that I think about this, maybe something that's indoors only? We seldom solo inside, so it wouldn't increase our power there; but one problem I notice is running oom when I'm healing a group in a dungeon setting.>

I'd like to see our buffs stack better with cleric buffs, rather than being overwritten.

I'd like to see us get slightly better nukes (a cold-based line, starting fairly early, and of about the same power as our fire based line, sort of a moonfire, jr. line I guess), or an additional (stacks with the ones we already have) DoT line. I'm not talking anything to threaten a wizard here; I feel no need for manaburn. Just something to give us a bit of a boost.

I'd like to see the damage on our group DS be as good as the damage on our single target DS at the same level.

I *don't* think druids need a rez spell, although I don't think a no exp revive type thing for emergencies would be terrible. I could easily live without it though. Or perhaps something like druids get in D&D ~ reincarnate ~ no exp and you come back as a MOB type in zone ~ poofs when you zone, or poofs in a certain about of time (10 min.? 20 min.?) and you return to your bind point. Just something to allow people to loot their corpses basically, or to get the cleric back fast in a wipe out.

I don't think druids need a slow.

Shaman I know very little about. My shammie is only 12. <g> My overall impression is that they're pretty well balanced, with the exception of needing a bit of a healing boost. They're wanted in raids and groups for slow/buffs. They can solo pretty well. I guess I'd have to leave it to them to say what they need. ;)

Meysura
55 druid, nameless

Woody TM
09-06-2002, 02:23 PM
OK my vision is this.

1) take everything a priest is and should be. Gather it all up into a big pile. Take the top 3 things and distribute...next 3 important things distribute etc.

2) I believe that every single class has to specialize in something that will be beneficial more or less.

So for example. Clerics heal and rez and buff. So we depend on clerics to do this for us when we are dieing we don’t want to die or when we die.

Shammys slow, and buff (dex, agi, str, etc.), good Debuffers as well. So we depend on these guys cause it makes the mob easier to kill and they have some of the best stat buffs in game.

Now for druids. We don't specialize. We are a so called jack of all trades. The fact is we cant substitute nor does the raid party want us to substitute for one of our trades. We cant keep a tank healed, we cant debuff as good as a shammy. When a Cleric and or a shammy are not available they don’t look to us....they look at...

Druid shouts, 58 Druid LFG
Person in group that needs a healer shouts, Any Clerics LFG?

Basically there needs to be a way for all of us to work together. Like I’ve said before and as an example, if aego and potg stack Druids would be needed for that. Obviously VI doesn't want it that way and prolly thinks its too powerful. Solution = Make both of them lower ac/hp and add some mana regen.

Another thing I mentioned is this. I play a chanter as a second char. I am always needed for something. CC, Clarity, MR debuff, MR buff, Speed, and I can also be secondary slower or cripple/str debuff char. Do they need to be nerfed (thats not my call), but my opinion says maybe. My opinion says since Druids don't have a specialization besides powerlvling...Give us one of the chanters only better than a chanters. Like GMR. and or MR Debuff (Tash). Nerf chanters MR spells and give Druids some of that love. (Don't flame me chanters I play one too, I love joo guys).

Anyways that is my little say in this.

SoulforgerMountcalm
09-06-2002, 03:30 PM
Cleric

Remove our nukes, judgement etc, get rid of them all together. The only nukes I would like to see a cleric have are undead, and they should be frikking Uber IE: Wiz class dmg.

Get rid of all roots these are nature based spells and should belong only to nature classes IE Druid, Ranger, Shaman, Beast.

Keep heals the way they are. I like the array of cleric heals, and I find them befitting to our class.

The cleric stun line should be tweaked. Even lvl 55+ mobs should stand a chance of getting stunned by a cleric. Separate DD damage from the Stun so either can be resisted but either also has a chance to land.

Upg our Melee skills. 1HB 225Max Offence 225Max 2HB 225 Defense 250. (Waiting on hammers to see what the lvl 58 and 60 are like.) Turn our summoned hammers into a buff or make our "pet" have the proc.

Work on the MoR, MoK line and utilize this earlier in the game to replace magical nukes. I would start this right at lvl 1 all the way up to 60.

Resists should be only Vs disease and poison. Clerics get resist spells that are almost useless in the high end game. Remove all of these spells except our resist spells VS poison and disease.(Upg those)

MR only Malo

Druid

Increase druid DMG on nature based spells. Nature nukes from a druid should be on par with wizard nukes. Dots should also be upgraded since things like frostbite in RL can be a very bad thing :)

Upgrade druid root spells to add a slow to them. Since the power of the earth is trying to suck a mob down it moves slower in melee combat. Say max 35% slow. Snare should also have a melee slow effect say 25% since the mob is fighting against the vines that bind.

Healing spells I personally think a solid 3K heal with a 6 sec cast time and 400mana would work. Also HoT spells should be introduced. Druids here should be the best at overall hp regen (That can be cast on others). Very long lasting versions of Rotg lvl 40ish and a new spell that does x2 RotG lvl 56

Druids resists should be limited to fire, cold and magic.

Nature de-buffs Lower FR, CR, and lesser MR type malo spell.

Shaman

Personally I find this class amazing as is. Overall group regen should not be as good as a druid. Shaman should be the best at slow and the only pure priest class that can cast haste on another person.

Keep malo as is.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To balance the classes should not mean removing the unique abilities of each class.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Soulforger Mountcalm
60 Cleric of Brell

Forin
09-06-2002, 03:53 PM
Hi, I play a Paladin and a Cleric - both of approximately the same level, so it's hard to say who's my main ;)

However, I'd like to toss in my two cents.

I agree with the sentiment that the priest classes shouldn't be diluted. I also agree that the druids and shaman need a high level healing spell to assist on raids. The trick is - how do we give druids and shaman a raid level heal w/o affecting experience group play.

Some thoughts:

(1) On the new heals:
(1a) Make the new heals only work in certain zones - i.e. raid zones. This would require some minor coding by SOE/VI, including a "raid zone" toggle - much like the indoor/outdoor toggle - or -
(1b) Make the new druid and shaman heals have a different mana cost in non-raid zones. This would unfortunately require some major recoding by SOE/VI.

(2) Although many will disagree with me, I don't think clerics need an invis/cammo spell. Just make healing potions stackable by a shaman, that would be enough.

(3) I think some alternate methods for clerics to increase group DPS have been explored on the EQCleric board. The improved pet helps. The improved MoR will also help. Is it enough - I don't know - only time will tell.

And Tunare is a piker. No one outdrinks Brell Serilis. Name another diety who creates races just to have good drinking buddies ;)

*Edit: It must have been a long day..... Wrong tense, dropped a negative - used deleted instead of diluted - sheesh.*

Kalinn
09-06-2002, 04:05 PM
one big point for me is that the healing strength should be somewhat equal amonst all the priest classes, if we truly want them to be balanced. we all heal, that is a major ability of our class, and i dont think thats a place where we should have one strong and the others less. we should all be strong healers, with our non-healing abilities spread out in different directions.

based upon that, our healing can be equal yet different, and different it already is. those differences are where we can be expanded. clerics are healers with variety and mana efficiency and the OOMPH. shaman are healers with limited variety and slows. druids are healers with even more limited variety. to fix the disparity in healing, druids need a bit more variety in the healing to become equal, and that would very easily be fixed with a HoT along the lines of 1200hp for 300 mana, and something *else* that adds to their damage mitigation (i would say regens, however shaman have that as well so it doesnt count as a true difference). all of this takes the current proposed healing upgrades for shm/dru as definate.

i am concerned with the PH (percentage heal) and feel that it may not be enough for druids. mainly because we are getting a double whammy with it. not only does it do limited % of hps, but its capped as well. it really needs to be one or the other, but not both. upon tanks, the % part is better because it limits us in that we could never do more than 75% of what the max hp is for a buffed tank (currently that is about 5600 max, but is highly dependant upon the tank). upon casters, the capped hp is a better choice, because 75% even of a buffed caster can sometimes only be 2400hp. also, the cap/% is more harsh for druid and shamans who are already penalized by having lower buffs. a cleric can not only give 100% healing, but they also can buff nearly 700hp more. another double whammy, where shm/dru are having the penalty of lesser buffs *and* lesser healing (which relies heavily upon total hp since its based upon %). i unfortunately do not have any solution to this double whammy problem.

i feel the basic utility spells should be available to all priests, and all pure casters for that matter. invis, lev, see invis, eb, these should be given to all priests. more class specific utility spells are fine as is for druids and shaman, clerics could use something along the lines of a "half divine aura" for a few minutes, even if self only, where damage taken is halved for the duration. something that lets them avoid danger like shaman and druids do with sow.

an interesting idea my SO and i were discussing was a new AA for clerics based upon an "Intervention of the Gods" idea. a class based aa that gave them the power to *save* one person from death by an instant casting intervention spell, restoring all hit points to the target (not just the current da which is limited usage), or maybe even just half. it could be setup to be available once every 12 game hours (36 minutes) and takes half the total life of the cleric, which requires they be careful as it should cause death to the cleric if the cleric is below 50% life. this should be well within the realm of the cleric, the savior of the priest classes. just an idea, dunno if clerics would like it =)

for offensive power, druids and shaman are fairly well taken care of. we each have our power through different means, clerics using poison and disease dots, druids using animal and elemental based nukes and dots, and clerics using magic based nukes and now melee. the clerics however do need a bit of a boost still, i wouldnt mind seeing their nuke get either upgraded to 1k damage, or leave damage the same with a 25-50 mana reduction in cost. epitaph has nice damage, but is ridiculously high mana cost for its limited undead usage. i'd also like to see clerics at high level get some kind of stun that DOES work on mobs 56+, even if its only a 2 second stun.

buffing ability used to be fairly well distributed before clerics got baotr. it used to be clerics - hp and ac, druids - fewer hp and hp or mana regen, shaman - fewer hp and stat buffs. the shaman and cleric remained the same, however with potc/g not stacking with cleric self mana regen buffs, the druid buffing ability was lessened. that could be cured with a lower mana regen druid buff that stacked with baotr and all other buffs except potc/g, say that gave 3-4 mana regen. that would also equal up the cleric mana regen a bit as well, right now they are well below shaman and druid self regenning ability, which is currently clerics at 6, druids at 9, and shaman at 900 billion =P i'd also like to see a new group buff like was previously mentioned, a group version of the coat spells, that gave ac and thorns, and that stacked with warders protection. this would give us a bit more of a buffing role for raids.

vetoafauna
09-06-2002, 04:19 PM
i'd just like to add, i dont think all priests should be able to heal as well, but rather, as efficiently.

CH is the most efficient heal in the game for mana:hp and this isnt going to change. all priests could get CH and they could all heal equally as efficient, but clerics would STILL lead in most hp/second for group (by a landslide) and target.

of course, should all priests be given CH, clerics would and should defintely get some way to boost sustained dps in group and raid situations, the hammer/pet was a start but a live dot or *another* nuke that checks against a different resist would be in order.

as for clerics getting in excluded from experience groups, all i have to say is they would lose their place as the only viable healer in 55+ dungeons, but thats a far cry from losing a place in exp groups. look around, when a ssra group needs a tank and they see a warrior available do they pass and wait for a shadow knight? of course not. if they see a shadow knight available do they pass and wait for a warrior? nope. these tanks get a group pretty much based on availability, all three classes about equally desired for groups, and while functioning differently still offer the same end result: mobs being tanked efficiently. priest classes should be absolutely no different in terms of groupability in any level dungeon.

CelticCavalier
09-06-2002, 04:35 PM
As a long term player of a shaman (60th level, luckily a mostly full spellbook, and about 220 days played) - yes, this is my main, and my next highest alt is a 35 druid, not played in over a year. I don't want to address other class issues, as I have no background to do so.

I feel that Shaman are mostly balanced, as a class. I don't feel that we need a new heal - instead, VI needs to address the drop rates of our 2 year old spells (Kunark). It's a shame that Torpor is so old, and still sells for 50k+ on most servers.

If (as I expect), VI adds the 75H to us, I'll get it and use it (if you don't use any available tools, you're a fool). Druids getting 1k more on theirs doesn't bother me at all.

Updates - While I feel we're a mostly balanced class, we really haven't gotten anything new in quite some time. I don't really even count our AA, because most of it doesn't really look usefull, outside of Canni, or in raid situations.

I don't like the idea of blending classes - if they're going to update any of us, give us new stuff, in line with the class concept. For Shaman, one I've thought about, is a new line of spells - Totems. Basically, it's a weapon based buff, that adds minor stuff & a proc. Certain Totems only work with certain weapon types, such as a Totem of the Snake would only work for someone who is weilding a piercing weapon. Buffs would add mostly some raw attack, and a proc based on type. (Poison DD for Snake line, Knockback + DD for Bear, etc.)

Bam102465
09-06-2002, 04:51 PM
I will forget someone suggested clerics getting sow. That's way beyond absurd. Invis would be okay though, the normal kind, so they can get around without getting smacked by everything. And give me a break about Tunare, Karana could drink her under the table. :p

I wanted to add that I like the notion of a MR debuff for druids, that would be a huge upgrade. I'm sure the chanters would yell bloody murder but it wouldn't be as good as their's. Just something to take the edge off. I was also really surprised when AA skills came out that we didn't get some kind of fixed duration root. I think it was in to start with on test and they took it out? The root skill they have sucks big time. A root that has less chance of getting knocked out by a nuke, whoopee. That would have been cool about 3 years ago when I was a noob root/nuking instead of root/dotting. :p

I think class balancing goes way beyond spells though. We have to look at the big picture. I have always thought druids really got screwed on equipment choices too. I think a little more content there needs added, as well as more outdoor zones worth a damn, with stuff in them we can charm at higher levels, especially high level plant mobs. Of course we would need a better charm to go with it to control them.

Miss Foxfyre
09-06-2002, 05:11 PM
If (as I expect), VI adds the 75H to us, I'll get it and use it (if you don't use any available tools, you're a fool). Druids getting 1k more on theirs doesn't bother me at all.

Heheh. In all these ridiculously long but well-written debates and discussions, the one thing I've not heard from naysayers is that they'll refrain from buying and using any new healing spells. :D

You can disagree, rant and rave like a madman, and scream all you want, but if we get new heals, you have a simple choice. Don't use the spell if you think it makes your character overpowered. ;)

CelticCavalier
09-06-2002, 05:44 PM
Its not that I think the 75H will make Shaman (or Druids) overpowered. I simply feel that, for Shaman, it's not needed - IF those Shaman have a reasonable expectation of getting Torpor. Which most don't.

For example:
Khura's Focusing, group Focus, Luclin spell. First sold for 15k+, now sells for as low as 3k. Luclin came out how long ago?
Torpor, 1200hp HoT (300/tick), Kunark spell. First sold for lots (no clue), still sells for lots (saw one in the Bazaar for 90k few weeks ago). This is after 2 years of Kunark? And when VI commented about Ancient spells, they said something about every caster being able to get all "normal" spells, but Ancient versions being for the hard core? 90K (or even 60K, which I saw one for later) is pretty hard core by anyone's standards, I think. Not to mention, that one was being sold by a manaburner (guildmate was in the group, lost the roll for it).

Miss Foxfyre
09-06-2002, 05:48 PM
I don't know what server you're on, but I can't buy group Focus for my shaman for 3kpp.

Tiejinnie
09-06-2002, 05:50 PM
I've always held on to the belief that the priest classes are broken down as such:

Cleric - holy people of the church. They have a close bonding with their gods, and through their faith, call upon the gods for their divine favor, be it in the form of healing powers, destruction or even a temporary shielding and health bonus to their comrades. I do not advocate the SoW ability for Clerics. Already in-game are options like Jboots, Horses, SoW potions, Run3 AA to off-set the normal running speed. SoW belongs to "good to have, but not a must to have" item.

Druids - these people have given their lives to tend and care for Mother Nature. They are one with the forests and animals. They are able to use their knowledge of the wild to call forth the wrath of nature to deal a devastating blow to their opponent, and, using this same knowledge, be able to tend to most wounds. Wood-lore is their forte par none.

Shamans - believers of the darker gods. Many have referred to them as witch-doctors or voodoo-men. They have one of the best knowledge of diseases, poisons and other afflictions. Shamans are able to inflict painful and detrimental effects on opponents, and also convert this affliction to heal to a lesser effect.

So... how do we go about balancing these 3 priest classes? [I'd presume that paladins, rangers, beastlords will be easily adjusted after we do so]

[Clerics]
Clerics are pretty much there. I also agree that Clerics have sufficient healing varieties to handle most, if not all situations. The implementation of "solo'ing" components have given them a less "one-faceted" role. While self-invisibility has been something that have been requested often, I personally feel that instead of self-invis, Verant should implement more UNDEAD zones in the game. It's better to change the environment to suit the classes, and not change the class to suit the environment.

[Druids]
Druids haven't been really looked after well IMO. True, I used to belong to the "NO CH TO DRUIDS" camp of players, but after some thought, it becomes evident to me that Druids would still be unable to replace the healing abilities of Clerics in some situations. In raids, this would be very beneficial. In groups, this would also be very beneficial, so long as massive healing is not required. Druids currently have the ability to solo with relative ease as compared with the Cleric-class. However, it pretty much ends there. Druids are very much like a Swiss-army knife. Lots of gadgets, but none are as good as the real thing. I would love to see Druids get something unique to their class that sets them apart from the others. Something which groups will ask,'Hmm, we need a Druid cos we need their XXX.'

[Shamans]
Shamans are an amazing class. The ability to solo with relative ease, and with useful utility spells, Shamans are very welcome in most group set-ups due to their mastery of debuffs and "slow" spells. Among the 3 classes, Shamans are probably the most balanced, and hardly requires much tweaking to make them more desirable.

The above opinions are but my own, and in no way represent the community in it's entirety.

Feel free to debate and discuss the issues. But my personal wish is for Verant to do something about the Druid classes, cos the recent changes have definitely been like "fire-fighting" measures, patchwork if you want to call it.

Cheers!

Grizlor
09-06-2002, 06:17 PM
I don't want to be a Cleric, I want to be a shaman. If I wanted to be a healer I would have been a cleric. There's 100 more important things for me to be doing than keeping my group alive ;) my only complaints would be torpor being restricted to grouped people, as well as the drop rate mentioned above. Be glad you didn't have to cough up 70k for nature's touch :p

Druids are like those little knives you get in The Sharper Image. They have a Knife, a saw, a screw driver, a bottle opener, hell probably some sort of umbrella too. None of them does a particularly good job at what they are supposed to, but they get the job done. Plus it's all together and easily portable.

Now look at yourselves for a second. You can nuke damn near as well as a wizard. Don't give me this garrison's versus moonfire crap... Look at ratios on spells like Elernick's electrical rending or Sunstrike. (Ice spear of solist is good too, but it has a 12 sec refresh).

Now look at your heals. You get a spell that heals slightly more hit points than divine light, for 50 more mana. When they can't CH, A cleric is pretty much stuck in the same boat, especially when they need to bump someone out of low hp agro range quickly. Nature's touch would probably be sufficient if you were alteration specialized. So now, what do you want to do? Damage? or keep people alive? There's two paths, and you don't have enough trail mix to hike both.

I'm lucky enough to have torpor, I know quite a few oracles on my server that have been without it for a good while. I'm sort of flabbergasted that the "Druid CH" gives a 2 and a half times the hit points of my "Efficient heal with drawbacks", costs only double the mana, and does it in ten seconds instead of 24. Not to mention it doesn't lower the person's damage output or make it so they can't move.

I'll concede that maybe you need a slight nod in healing, Perhaps a 1600 point heal over time for 450 mana would give you the bump you need... But ecoming a "Cleric Deluxe with cheese" isn't the answer.

Aludair Autumnwynd
09-06-2002, 06:25 PM
I love many of the suggestions here. Just a quick thought in addition to changes in spells for the druid.. How about the use of the bow added as a Druid skill?

Aludair Autumnwynd
Lvl 60 Druidess
Fury's Edge, MT

Bam102465
09-06-2002, 06:26 PM
It might be better to adjust the environment to the player but it's a lot harder, probably why Verant will never do it because they have been REAL lazy in that area before.

vetoafauna
09-06-2002, 06:34 PM
grizlor, healing is not a class defining ability. if you are a shaman, you are a healer. be as it may not usually a main healer because of clerics ability to heal far and away better than you, but your class is one of the three healing classes in eq. however, unlike druids, yours has a defined role in groups and raids at the upper end game and doesn't need healing improvements to function compitently. as far as druid nukes go, clerics nuke almost efficiently as us and heal 10 fold, and shamen can keep up with druid dps with nukes because of their ability to cann. comparing NT to DL is outdated, DL is many levels lower and there's an upgrade to it now closer in level to NT. honestly if we're so well balanced then explain the lack of desire for druids since the kunark era.

Kimderly
09-06-2002, 06:36 PM
I am confused! How is this better for druids? Screws us with soloing and screws us with groups. Exactly where do we fit in??? Druids get screwed again!

Sighing in the grove,

Kimderly 60th druidress

Miss Foxfyre
09-06-2002, 06:44 PM
So now, what do you want to do? Damage? or keep people alive? There's two paths, and you don't have enough trail mix to hike both.

This shows how much you really know. From day one druids do both. Some specialize in alteration; some specialize in evocation. There are times you have to do both. And what's this crap about trail mix? Druids were made as damage-dealing healers.


I'll concede that maybe you need a slight nod in healing, Perhaps a 1600 point heal over time for 450 mana would give you the bump you need... But ecoming a "Cleric Deluxe with cheese" isn't the answer.

No, you have it backwards. It's not "cleric deluxe." Do you know where the word "deluxe" came from? It's from the French de luxe as in voiture de luxe or montre de luxe -- luxury items. De luxe implies better and higher quality, and druids do not want to be clerics de luxe.

Sleppen
09-06-2002, 06:47 PM
The dev team has clearly stated that they want all three priest classes of equal value in all three environments.

Yes, Waters said that, but is that a good idea in the first place? If we're discussing the best way to achieve balance, let's not exclude the possibility that the development team is heading the wrong direction.

I'd hate to see EQ become like DAoC, where there is so much overlap between classes. We've traveled a long way down that road already, sadly.

Another thing -- this is not a new game, and none of the people here are talking about their level 10 characters. We're talking about a mature game and characters who are 50+. It's awfully late in the day to be talking about radically redefining the classes. You can't generalize about the opinions of the members of any class, but it's fair to say that a lot of clerics don't want to be soloists and that a lot of druids and shamans don't want to be primary healers.

If I've leveled my cleric to 60, do I want someone to tell me that now I can be a soloist meleer? If I've leveled my druid to 60, do I want someone to tell me that now I get stuck in the CH rotation?

Personally, I tend to agree with Aandaie's perspective, though I respect the perspectives of people who disagree. I think there are two problems that have to be addressed:

1. The legitimate need for more effective healing from druids and shamans in the raid context.

2. The fact that the cleric class is so one-dimensional.

The mini-CH on Test was an attempt to address the first problem, but from all reports it didn't achieve its objective. I'll bet that the development team retools the mini-CH into something more effective in the raid context. I don't perceive any serious need for expanded druid or shaman healing in the group context, and I don't think Verant does, either.

The hammer is an attempt to address the second problem. Personally, I don't like it, but that's a topic for a different thread. I would have preferred to see clerics get some sort of crowd control function that would help when you don't have an enchanter or bard, or when the enchanter or bard is hard pressed. Maybe a low-resist AE root, or a longer lasting stun (something like Screaming Terror). That would give clerics a function in groups other than healing, without stepping on anyone else's toes (it's hard to imagine anyone saying, "Take the cleric, we don't really need clarity/manasong or haste").

If you feel that druids need help in groups, there are ways to provide that help without giving druids a CH. Upgrade the nukes. Upgrade the bear pet (remember that the hammer pet used to be a joke, too). Upgrade the damage shield. Or all of the above. Make it so that a group would want a cleric and a druid, not one or the other.

Don't try to turn druids into clerics in leather armor, and don't try to turn clerics into soloing machines. You can balance the classes without homogenizing them.

I think clerics should have better undead spells added to give them greater soloability.

First, you'd have to add more high-level undead mobs. If Verant did that, there might not be a great deal of need for additional spells.

When a Cleric and or a shammy are not available they don’t look to us....they look at...

Druid shouts, 58 Druid LFG
Person in group that needs a healer shouts, Any Clerics LFG?

That's mostly because people are creatures of habit. It's taken a long time for a lot of people to realize that a druid can fill the healing role in most groups, but people are catching on. Even if you think druids need upgraded healing in the group context, you could meet that need with something like a Divine Light heal, and it might even be more functional than the proposed mini-CH.

Do they need to be nerfed (thats not my call), but my opinion says maybe.

Enchanters are overpowered in the group context, though not in the raid context. The problem is it's hard to get people to play enchanters (same with bards). I like the idea of giving GRM to druids, though that wouldn't really do much for balance.

(1a) Make the new heals only work in certain zones - i.e. raid zones. This would require some minor coding by SOE/VI, including a "raid zone" toggle - much like the indoor/outdoor toggle - or -
(1b) Make the new druid and shaman heals have a different mana cost in non-raid zones. This would unfortunately require some major recoding by SOE/VI.

In addition, the places that are "raid zones" will change over time. There are experience groups and soloists in Fear. I know of at least one single group that killed a mob in the west wing of ToV. With the way that the power level in the game has skyrocketed, not much would shock me any more.

I don't feel that we need a new heal - instead, VI needs to address the drop rates of our 2 year old spells (Kunark). It's a shame that Torpor is so old, and still sells for 50k+ on most servers.

I don't play a shaman, but I second that comment. The same is true of a few other Kunark-era spells, like Emissary of Thule for necromancers.

Closing comment:

Despite what my signature line says, I'm a retired level 60 cleric. During my years of playing a cleric, I got really sick of hearing all of the class envy stuff on both sides of the fence. All of the priest classes are guilty of the whining and complaining that goes with class envy. It disgusted me to see people threatening to quit the game because the initial version of the cleric hammer was so powerful.

None of us are ever going to get everything we want. But it doesn't have to be a zero-sum game. Each class can be improved and balanced without screwing over, or taking something from, the other classes. Druids and shamans can do just fine without CH, and clerics can do just fine without SoW, invisibility, slow, or TPs. We don't have to have homogenized classes like DAoC.

Forin
09-06-2002, 07:41 PM
Sleppen, you raise a good point. Yeah, on further reflection the "raid zone vs. non-raid zone" thing won't work. Its a great idea at first, but all that will happen is that shaman and druids would start forming groups to farm the perimeter mobs in those zones.

How about this:

Make the CH spell require a no-rent non-consumed component which can only be summoned by clerics? Make that spell cost 11PP or 22PP (the dreaded peridot(s)) and the item would be a soulbound "gift of healing focus". That way you'd be able to enable healing for raids but then it would evap after the raid. You'd have to make it soulbound to prevent people from doing the corpse no-rent item retention gambit.

Alternatively, we can make the spell a buff with a 11PP or 22Pp cost.

Another tweak: Make the focus like the shards used to port to Luclin. They don't survive zoning.

Kalinn
09-06-2002, 07:52 PM
it's fair to say that a lot of clerics don't want to be soloists and that a lot of druids and shamans don't want to be primary healers

you are correct...

BUT!

what clerics and druids and shaman all want is to be able to do those things IF THEY HAVE TO OR WANT TO. clerics complain about the lack of soloability when they are unable to find groups, druids complain about the lack of healing ability to be primary healers when placed in that role. shaman... well they are just demi-gods already =P

on raids im a healer, and very often a primary healer in the group im in. now i didnt ask to be put as primary healer, thats just where i was needed, and since i can heal, albeit poorly, thats where i get shunted. and i want to be able to do the job i need to do, and i currently cant with the tools we have just now.

Legolys
09-06-2002, 09:02 PM
If you feel that druids need help in groups, there are ways to provide that help without giving druids a CH. Upgrade the nukes. Upgrade the bear pet (remember that the hammer pet used to be a joke, too). Upgrade the damage shield. Or all of the above. Make it so that a group would want a cleric and a druid, not one or the other.

This is where the other quote is so important:

No other class has been able to fill in if a cleric is absent, and healing is too important of a role to allow one class to dominate it so completely. – Rich Waters

Groups looking for healing are *far* too dependent on clerics at the moment. If there was one cleric for every 5 other players on all the time, then great. But we know that's not nearly the case, so groups either wait for a cleric or settle for "less healing".

Who gets *kicked out* of the group when a cleric does show up? You guessed it - The druid. Read some of the horror stories here. Groups can be just plain rude to druids. It basically comes down to, "Can you go port the cleric here so that we can kick you out of the group when he arrives?"

Looking at a zone with a good experience modifier now, what is the one thing that most impacts the speed at which a group can get experience? It's the healer's mana pool. If the healer is oom, the group *has* to wait. With a druid's heals costing more mana, taking longer to cast, and doing less healing than a cleric's, our groups' downtime is more. Add to that that clerics now get a way to cause some manaless damage if they don't need to med (while druids *must* med due to the reduced efficiency of their heals) and the disparity widens. Add to that that clerics now have a better dot than druids (yes, at 250 mana, the hammer-pet is a *dot*) and the disparity widens even further.

With clerics now being able to do more damage than druids *while still healing*, yes, I think it's necessary that druids be able to heal *just as well* as clerics.

daser
09-06-2002, 09:30 PM
OK this is what i would like done to each classes.

Clerics: They are fine now if the damn hammer dont outdamages Melee classes.

No changes needed.


Shamans: They are a Great class and very desired in all situations, but lacks alittle bit in healing.

Give Shamans the new cleric spell Ethereal Healing, so they can spot heal better..(Excactly the same spell, not something with crappy castime or manaratio.)



Druids: If they bend over alittle more they will be broken forever.

Give Druids the new cleric spell Ethereal Healing, so they can spot heal better.(Excactly the same spell, not something with crappy casttime or manaratio.)

Druid nukes are ok but AA skills isnt.

Give Druids the AA skill SCS.
Give Druids the Class AA skill SCF for extra chance to crit.

Remove 2 useless AA skills skills to compensate.

Druids should have a upgraded Dot in high lvls.( Dont know any numbers)

Fix on epic helped, but was poorly done. (Verant please fix its duration or up the Damage.)

Summary

Ethereal Heal shared by all classes would fix alot, and since clerics only got it 3 days ago, they might consider sharing.

Druids need much more than the others to be fixed and disereble for a group, and none of the changes are owerpowering unless VERANT thinks Ethereal heal is too good a spell.(I KNOW IT MAKES ME DROOL, AND I DONT WANT CH EVER)

PS. More than 30 buffslots on mobs makes STACKING issues for Druids and Shamans even better than 30 does.= )

pointman eq
09-06-2002, 10:00 PM
This is what the classes represent. Reason I bring this up is that so many seems confused about it saying we are all healingoriented classes.

This are the official class descriptions, the ones we all read before making our character.

Cleric: A Cleric is a holy woman born with the power to heal, and, to a lesser extent, call upon the wrath of her deity to smite her foes. Prayer is how the Cleric gains her ability.

Druid: A Druid is the master of the outdoors and befriends all flora and fauna. Creatures rarely ever attack him unless he attacks first. He is a clerical spellcaster who focuses on all things natural, allowing him to call upon Nature for aid and defense.

Shaman: Similar to a Cleric, but closer to a tribal witch doctor, the Shaman can be found amongst the more primitive races. Her primary focus is healing, but she can employ many augmentation and offensive spells as well.


When reading this it looks to me like shamans would be second (or even par) to Clerics (in healing) and Druids more oriented for charms, buffs and utility...

Thank you

vetoafauna
09-06-2002, 10:17 PM
charms, buffs, and utility.

we can charm animals, but only under a certain level limit and seeing as half the animals out there arent even flagged as animal, we're really limited here. i cant think of any raid worthy zone with charmable animals in it, and now that group exp comes from 55+ mobs and the cap on charm is so low, dire especially, we cant charm many animals for exp grinds.

we have no buffs that another class doesnt have a better version of, the only exceptions i can think of are cos (big frickin deal) and pog but that only applies to a small handful of classes and if symbol is readily available.

and about utility.... i've never seen someone get a group because they can EB or lev or invis vs animal. speaking of our utility lines which of these havent been given to other classes in the form of spells or right click items?

Miss Foxfyre
09-06-2002, 10:23 PM
This is what the classes represent. Reason I bring this up is that so many seems confused about it saying we are all healingoriented classes.

Those descriptions are passé.


When reading this it looks to me like shamans would be second (or even par) to Clerics (in healing) and Druids more oriented for charms, buffs and utility...

He is a clerical spellcaster who focuses on all things natural, allowing him to call upon Nature for aid and defense.

Did you see that part? Clerical spellcaster? Using your own argument, clerical is the modifier that qualifies what kind of spellcaster a druid is. The dependent clause following that narrows the scope to nature, so it's exactly what Scirocco said before -- nature priest.

Forin
09-06-2002, 10:27 PM
Actually - clerical can mean "capable or reading and writing" ;)

Sleppen
09-06-2002, 10:31 PM
Kalinn, you say --

what clerics and druids and shaman all want is to be able to do those things IF THEY HAVE TO OR WANT TO.

But then you say --

on raids im a healer, and very often a primary healer in the group im in.

Obviously, you ARE doing the job when you have to. Yes, I understand that you think you need more healing power (I didn't quote those passages from your post, but I'm not ignoring them). But that is a different matter than saying that you cannot act as a primary healer.

Step back and try to look at this from an objective perspective. I know that's hard for everyone. We all want more power for our characters, and the lure of class envy can be overwhelming. But druids are NOT pitiful, incapable healers. As other people have discussed at great length in other threads, there are many experience camps in which druids can -- and frequently do -- serve as the primary healer in place of a cleric.

I'm honest enough to admit that an argument can be made that druids need improved healing for experience groups. (The argument would be weaker for shamans, but let's not go off on that tangent.) If you feel that way, that doesn't mean that druids need a CH, or even a mini-CH. There can be some middle ground solution (such as a druid Divine Light) that doesn't create a whole new set of balance issues.

Legolys, your use of the quote from Rich Waters was disingenuous. Waters was not talking about healing in groups. You omitted the portions of the quote that made it very clear that he was talking about healing on raids. Here is the entire quote, with the sentence you quoted in italics:

It's important that clerics maintain their role as the premier healer of the game. Raid quality heals are being added for other priests to allow them to fulfill their role as secondary healers in most situations. Clerics have always been a healing specialist, but the situation has escalated such that many raid level encounters may not be undertaken without disproportionally large numbers of clerics. No other class has been able to fill in if a cleric is absent, and healing is too important of a role to allow one class to dominate it so completely. After these changes are complete, clerics will still be the very best of healers but other priests class are able to substitute to some degree.

Verant is concerned about over-dependence on clerics in the raid context, not in the group context. Verant didn't design the mini-CH to help you get into groups, but instead was trying to enhance your role as "secondary healers" on raids.

Druids need much more than the others to be fixed and disereble for a group, and none of the changes are owerpowering unless VERANT thinks Ethereal heal is too good a spell.(I KNOW IT MAKES ME DROOL, AND I DONT WANT CH EVER)

Do you mean Ethereal Light or Ethereal Remedy? Those are the upgrades to Divine Light and Remedy, respectively.

Either way, we've got some common ground here. If you feel that druids need more healing in groups, the problem can be fixed short of CH or a mini-CH.

Miss Foxfyre
09-06-2002, 10:32 PM
Forin, in the context of EQ, clerical spellcaster is not going to be interpreted as literate druid. I have read enough about Les guerres religieuses and le mouvement anticlérical to know in which context that meaning would make perfect sense.

Aorion
09-06-2002, 10:43 PM
Ok after a nite of fun in Hate, I'll add my personal opinion about Cleric.

No more heals needed. We are overbalanced in the heal department.

dps. Alot of Clerics will argue with me about this, but with the hammer and pet and current nukes we have, I think our dps is where it should be about. I felt like I was back in my old Oasis days, standing there hitting the mob, but being outdamaged by melee classes and nukers alike.

Buffs. We have plenty of good ones. work out the bouncing/stacking problems on what we have.

Defense. That I think Clerics need a little tweaking on. If we are the melee class of priest, we should not be getting hit for max damage 9 hits out of 10. Actually seeing me dodge an attack every once in awhile be nice too.

Utility. I really don't have a problem with this area except to say have invis potions stack and a set duration. 12p a pop, I don't feel like a set duration is too much to ask for.

Tweak the defense of the Cleric a little (for the better) and I think Clerics are fairly balanced. Great heals, great buffs, mediocre offense, mediocre defense, little utility. Shines in groups, capable of limited solo (most important to me, not having to run from a greenie), and an offense totally seperate from the other healing classes so we don't clash.

Karana drink? You kidding? You can see by the way it rains in SK that she can't hold her liquor past the 1st beer.

Exedor
09-06-2002, 10:50 PM
Our problem as druids is that we're supposed to bring a wide variety of abilities to the table, but we are so far behind in almost all fieldsthat it's just not enough to make guilds, raids and yes, GROUPS to want us.

All AA/friendship issues being equal you just can't say that druids are even 1 quarter as wanted by groups raids and guilds as shaman and clerics are. They flat out are not.

Shamans really are supermen imo, so strongly desired for raids and groups and in many way the best soloing class of all, and byu far the best partner for a duo with a melee. But that doesnt mean they don't "need" anything. Give them divine light and make torpor easier to get and they are good. (I'd also make a quest to turn in JBB for an Iksar usuable version.)

Clerics are "broken with power" on raids, but they needed versatility and fun badly. Being able to dish out some serious melee damage WHILE regaining mana via Yalup 5 delivered that. My cleric is having a blast with it even though I haven't gotten the dropped hammer spells yet I can still solo things I'd have been pulverized by without it (I've been soloing hard hitting, unslowed gorangas like mad with both pre and post nerf 56 hammer). Not to mention the new uber remedy/aoe HoT and other heals, so I think clerics are pretty much as good as they need to get, or will be once the new MoR goes live.

That leaves druids, the red headed stepchild of everquest. Noone wants us, not raids, not guilds not even exp groups. And why should they? Every other class in the game can contribute so much more to every type of environment. With clerics now dishing out far more mana free damage over time than we could ever hope to, it's gonna take a lot more than a 3 k 75 % heal to fix us. A true complete heal, a line of slow spells starting at like 10 % at level 20 scaling to 50% at level 60 along with a revamped version of POTG without the hp component so it stacks would make it just right (to offset the lack of haste when we're shaman/chanterless we'll need more manaregen for heals and damage output).

Groups, raids, and guilds are still going to want an enchanter and shaman for haste and better slow. And clerics for teh best heals, resses, and mana free dps. And they're ALWAYS looking for better DPS which clerics and dot stackable cann5/torpor/jbb shamans deliver(again, WHILE regening mana comaprable to medding). So there's no need to fear that we would supplant these classes. But we might finally be ALMOST "just as desired" as they are. And all three classes would stack with each other perfectly.

Cleric/Druid - Share healing duties, cleric melees druids slows.

Druid/Shaman - Druid is main healer, shaman slow/hastes, spot heals/torpors between fights to save druid mana.

Shaman/Cleric - Same as always but now the cleric is dishing out melee damage and having more fun.

These are the fundamentals that I would use to get the overall balance in line. Now for the "tweaks".

Shamans - Rememeber that jbb for iksars thing I mentioned?... MAKE IT HAPPEN! :)

Clerics - Make Gnomish Vanishing Devices far cheaper to produce :) Ease up on the proc rate nerf on the 56 hammer a bit.

Druids(and magicians) - Seriously improve damage shields damage.

And finally, a little on the Hybrids.

If the shield improvements go well they will fix the main issue for the Knights, which is being out tanked by monks! hehe

Pallies are the only ones who get a REAL taste of the parent classes power with RES. Just imagine what would happen is the RES spells went away :) ? Something is wrong with that. Give shadowknights and rangers at least SOMEHWHAT equivalent powered abilities. Shadowknights are really in a bad state right now. I think a better pet could work, and maybe a self only haste like pallies now have. And for rangers, seriously, at least one self port but preferably I'd give them the whole batch of basic druid self only ports.

kryts44
09-06-2002, 10:58 PM
Hello,

Someone pointed me here because a lot don't really know much about the beastlord and their abilities so I thought I'd pop along and give yous the lowdown. I also play a shaman so I'll add my comments about that class too.

Firstly my first impressions about the ch for druid where, about time but is it enough of a heal to make them more desirable for grouping or indeed raiding.

Having played a shaman for over 3 years my immediate thought about possibly recieving a CH was why do I need that, it just doesn't make sense. I have topor , I don't need CH. when I think back to the role I played in groups and in soloing when this spell would be made available I still come to the same conclusion. I was allways a debuffer and slower, it is what I specialised in, in a tight situation i would heal but that was only as a last resort, it was and never will be my role except perhaps at 60 when raiding where I make a very efficient healer for casters.

Mana regeneration has allways been the top priority for a shaman to make him capable of playing his specialised role which uses up that mana very quickly and wouldn't really put him in the position of being able to be a healer. you would have to balance any sort of CH for a shaman to the extent that it wouldn't benefit him too much in his mana regen which undoubtably makes a worthwhile CH for them not an option. When you go into raiding at hi levels Your shaman becomes very efficient indeed but I still don't see the need for them to become better healers. He allready has a defined role and it can't be replaced even to a lesser extent. The main problem with this was allways you only needed one to do the job but more was desireable because they have a terrible habbit of getting themselves killed doing that job:) With dot stacking all the shamans at a raid suddenly become a lot more useful and are not just backup slowers when the one before them gets crunched. I welcome the dot stacking and feel its more than enough to give an allready well balanced class a more usefull role on a raid. they've allways been good soloers although not perhaps as efficient as other classes and will allways be desireable for grouping.

Now onto the beastlord:

It is hard for me to describe the beastlord class without making it sound like a major whine but I will try my best:)

We are a hybrid so some have said and probably moreso than any other class in that we steal skills/spells from a lot of classes.

Healing, we have exactly the same heals as rangers get, I wouldn't consider the healing aspect of the beastlord to remotely resemble the priest classes.
Utility spells, we have a lot of shaman spells in lesser forms and a few that are unique to us only.
Offensive, we are most similar to the monk I would say but in a far lesser degree in that we don't have special moves, we don't have as good defensive capabilites and we don't have anywhere near the damage output.
Pets, we have a unique pet and we are more reliable on it than any other class, we have great heals for it and can add procs to it which can do various things from different types of damage and a special proc that acts like the knockback spell. Some use it as their tank partner and play cleric for it and some have it fight along side them.
AA skills, we have the hybrid archtype and I really don't know how to describe our class skills except to say we don't have any that is unique to us.

The beastlord is a very good soloer at all levels and although not the best he's certainly very capable of it and has no major problems that need attention.

Grouping. We can do ok at lower levels, once groups start to look for the specialised classes we start having less and less to offer. Because we have abilites of many classes then the higher we go the more diluted they get. This has had the effect of making them a very poor choice by the time you get to hi end grouping. When you get laughed out of CT you start to realise there is a slight problem with your grouping desireability:)

Raiding. Pretty much like grouping, we're ok in the lower tier guilds but when you get to the hi end guilds then your typical beastlord offers absolutely nothing they need to make them desireable. we got our spiritual purity upgraded and it has helped those lower down the scale but it seemingly is not enough at the top where everything no matter how much mana regeneration you have needs to evolve around CH rotations and mod rods. In simple terms, if you could kill it without a beastlord before then you don't need them, there is no beastlord only specific loot so you don't need to worry about anything rotting:) . This is where the beastlord has its biggest problem and I'd love to suggest some fixes but I'm not sure what role I'm even supposed have for raiding as there is nothing i'm particulary good at as a class for hi end raiding. I used to get a lot of interested from hi end guilds when i was approaching 60, now that I am 60 and look at their boards, they have their 1 novelty beastlord and are not recruiting any more.

That my sound like a whine but I'm trying to be objective, I've been playing everquest from the start and with all my raiding experience that is my opinion about the Beastlord. I am one of the lucky ones, I get to see some of the best loot in the game but I really can't say I do anything particulary usefull to earn it. Apparently we're an unfinished class according so some threads I've read, I sure hope so.

Anyways, hope that enlightens yous to what a beastlord is, sure hope yous get that healing upgrade, useless or not, I die as quick as the rest when there isn't enough healing to go around:)

Feel free to delete this post if you feel its irrelevant but you did ask the question:)

FireCaller01
09-06-2002, 11:08 PM
I've been reading and lurking for a while and here are my suggestions and observations:

First, we are all priests. No matter how you look at it, we should in some respect all have one thing that holds us together and that would be healing (which is unfortunately the one aspect that is dividing us at the moment).

Second, I think we should all have some sort of a complete heal effect, and we should not all get it at the same time since a lot of EQ content is from D&D and other mythic realms.
What I propose is letting some of our class defining features define our complete heal in some way.

So here is my proposal:

Keep the Cleric complete heal as it is. Clerics are the master of the no-holds-barred direct heal.

Now for the tricky part because it could potentially anger some shammies (sorry). This idea came out of the spell Torpor and some of its effects. This spell should have the same casting time, casting cost, and 100% healing effect of complete heal with a negative effect added in that is made up of our class defining spells. I think both shaman and druids get this spell at 49th or somewhere in there before 54th (after clerics).

Basically I propose this:

That shaman get a complete heal that acts somewhat like torpor. It has the same casting time, cost, and effect of complete heal, but it slows the person healed for the next ten seconds after the heal has landed. I'm not sure of what percentage that the person should be slowed.

That druids get a spell exactly alike to the shaman spell, but one of our class defining spells happens once the spell lands; the person healed is snared for the next 10 seconds.

Basically give shaman and druids a complete heal that has our class defining spell upon it.

As for other things involved in the discussion, I do think that all priest classes should have a group heal of some sort that would help with AoE effects. As for giving clerics some of the utility spells that both druids and shaman share (see invis, lev, invis, eb) I think it would be useful.

Have a marvelous day :)

NoOneOfNote
09-07-2002, 01:56 AM
Heh, since it's not going to matter.

Clerics: Should be dominant in group heals, low agro heals, HP and AC buffs and have some additional defensive buffs they can also cast on themselves. DA on others? Rune? A group with a cleric looking after it should have all sorts of ways to protect itself. They should also have nukes and offensive buffs when fighting their faiths enemy and the forces of the unliving.

Druids: Druids should get decent healing. A 2K CH'like heal sounds fine, and a decent faster heal. They should have complete dominance in buffing. ATK buffs, damage shields, stat buffs, regeneration. They should have a decent pet to add some group DPS, and can retain some elemental nukes. Oh, and movement spells, SoW, Snare, Succor. They should lose ports cause they suit wizards better. You want power? sacrifice some of the convenience you take for granted.

Shaman: Torpor is rare, group only and slow doesn't stack on raids. Shaman should have decent healing, the same as druids. Shaman should be the masters of debuffs, vengeful instruments of the spirits. Huge Dot's, Poison and disease nukes, Reverse lifetaps, Debuffs (including slow) and even taps, both life and abilities from the mob (which stacks with druids). A shaman should also get some decent ability to melee, more offensive than the clerics defensive (druids in the middle).

That sounds like more fun. Now each class has an essential purpose behind its power, rather than the sort of confused vision of the moment. Not going to happen mind you, the rebalance required and the howls of outrage would be immense.

Miss Foxfyre
09-07-2002, 02:37 AM
You want power? sacrifice some of the convenience you take for granted.

Nice backhanded criticism. I don't take convenience spells for granted.

Tarf Crackleberry
09-07-2002, 05:28 AM
Cassea, I think this is a great idea. Please be far more aggressive in nuking posts. If it is a close call, nuke it. We don't need this discussion degenerating into bickering or name callign or class envy.

I think all classes should be equally desirable for soloing, exping and raiding. Equally desirable, not equal in abilities.

Shaman: Shaman can solo, are desirable in exp groups (primarily because slow so rocks) and do not stack well in raids.

Clerics: Clerics melee does allows clerics to solo if over 56 currently. Clerics are very desirable *currrently* in exp groups and essential for raids. They oculd use Tash, since all their spells are magic based.

Druids: Solo I think we agree is fine, exping there is some debate about, raiding i think we can agree they need something.

Cleric melee only fixes clerics post 56. If Cleric melee is to be the solution, that really needs to start around level 29. Clerics need to "grow up" with an expectation of what life will be like, and they need to be able to solo in the mid game, as well as the endgame. On the whole, I believe clerics to be balanced, so long as Ragefire stays "fixed". Tash would be nice.

Druids: Gettign Sup heal at 51 is a joke. That absolutely needs to be bumped down to 44. Druids should get a 2k heal at 51 and a 3k heal at 56. Druid spells need to work both indoors and outdoors. It is just plain stupid to think that Tunare or Karana can not penetrate into a fricking cave. BTW, a cave is just as much part of nature as a forest.

Shaman: Honestly, in my opinion, up the drop rate significantly for those spells, and I don't see a problem with them. Shammys should get a 2k heal at 51 and a 3k heal at 56 in order to participate in raids.

The 2 and 3k heals should both require 400 mana and take 10 secs to cast.

I don't think this removes clerics from exp groups, although I could be wrong. One of the things I have noticed about the cleric melee thing is that I can't both be primary healer for the group AND do the melee. Not enough spell slots for one thing. Same statement that Druids and shammys have been saying for years. Their isn't mana, time or enough spell slots for any class to be both primary healer AND use their other abilities. (this assumes that the group is not bottom feeding in an underpowered zone).

Personally, I think if the cleric melee skills get passed on to younger clerics, shaman spells get additional drops, druid spells work in ALL zones and druids and shammys get the above heals, all three classes would be balanced.

Tarf Crackleberry
High Priest
Quellious server

Edit: I think that would balance the priests vis a vis each other, but perhaps some thought needs to be given to making it desirable to have multiple priests in the same group. Currently, we are talking about why you would want to have ONE priest in a group. Why should the conventiolnal wisdom be that so long as you have one priest in a group that an additional priest would necessarily decrease the groups effectiveness.

toreyj01
09-07-2002, 05:47 AM
Actually starting to get a feeling that we are all starting to treat each other a little nicer, and am quite happy about that indeed :)

The upgrades to the Cleric Class in the past week was a real rollercoaster. As my only character in EQ and my first character I don't have to tell you how slow leveling was, how poor I remain even at level 58. So I am due for a little class envy, but I have never felt that way. Why? Most of my friends are Druids, always have been.

Clerics never wanted changes, so to say that we are whiners in any way is kind of a oversimplification. We only really offered one thing, and although our jobs were boring at least we had one. There was no way that we could solo, groups supplied 100% of our exp, and a great many of us mistrusted Verant to give us skills that would actually help the DPS of an EXP group.

Looked forward to the patch but was saddened that Druids did not get the heal, knew this would cause a firestorm. Then saw that they nerfed essentially "solo" or lower level mobs and thought "oh boy, this is gonna get ugly". And boy did it ever.

Between Clerics laughing like children because we actually had fun for the first time playing EQ, and the shots you took for exp, things boiled over. But now we can see that many good things happened for Druids, dots are stacking, epic snare removed, and hopefully the healing upgrade soon.

So what is left?

Shammies are happy, they are the model of balance. Don't fix what ain't broken.

Clerics are fine with our healing, the new spells replace old spells and are a little better, we didnt ask for em but we will take em and figure out their best uses. If we are mellee then we need a little help, I can get my dex to 255 with Boon but I get owned if I draw agro, and that is with 1000ac. Raise our DEF, Dodge, and 1hb skills just a little and that is all set.

Druids, well the 75% heal will help more than you know, once you are used to it you will be suprised how nice it is. It heals for essentially my complete heal in normal situations. If you are not in a VT raiding guild it is gonna suit you just fine. The casting time is tricky but you will get used to it, just like clerics. ;) Makes you have to consider all kinds of strategy as to when to cast, short casting time heals are no brainers, this takes a little planning, but thats what makes it fun. :)

Other than that I would say that the nukes are pretty nice, the mana free DOT's off your epic are good for longer fights, but would really love to see changes in your damage potential for shorter fights. Think Druids shine in damage, that is their difference in the priest class. So Damage Shields, Attack Buffs, and Hasting should be the cornerstone of your group contribution.

Clerics contribute by mellee DPS and AC/HP, Shamans by pet and Slow/Buffs, Druids by Nukes/Dot's and DS/ATK-Haste. All heal adequately, but you can have all three in a group and each will do something special.

Bam102465
09-07-2002, 06:14 AM
That shows you clerics don't know jack. Karana isn't a woman. It's a man, baby! Go back to Mythology 101, you flunked! :evil:

By the way, I think if Verant had given us a better heal long ago when they should have we wouldn't be having this conversation, even IF they had given clerics all the stuff they just did. Here's been the problem with the druid class: over time we have had more stuff taken away than added. At this point, I think most druids wouldn't be happy with just a better heal and that's where Verant really screwed themselves. They could have gotten away with a lot less to appease druids if they hadn't been destroying the class all this time.

It's not even like I particularly want a percentage CH. But damn it, I don't think it's too much to ask to have a heal that does over 1K HP! It's ludicrous to have our level 60 heal do so little, especially when clerics get CH at 39!!! That was stupid from the start and will always BE stupid. I think we all agree that druids need a better heal so just do it.

As far as the other priest classes, clerics sure as hell don't need anything else now. In fact, if they get something else I swear to god I will quit and never play another Sony game as long as I live. End of conversation on clerics.

I also believe that shamans are good the way they are. In fact, I've thought they were overpowered even. They pretty much have everything druids do, plus some of the best buffs, debuffs, a good pet, and better dots. They don't need anything unless you up the drop of Torpor just to throw them a bone. :p

Naathan Kaine
09-07-2002, 06:57 AM
Biggest problem with any sort of Druid CH is the fact that druids really cant take the aggro that spell creates. They just wind up beat to a pulp. Druids do not have high ac and DA to counteract this. Anyone ever consider a 10 second Heal over time CH? Something along the lines of the topor spell but without the effects, heals the same ammount of hps but instead of instant, maybe in the same ammount of time it takes topor to finish healing. Might create less aggro than a instant 10k heal. Just make it like clerics, 10 sec cast time. If thats a little too tough to code, just give them a 4-5k 6 sec cast heal over time that does the same instead of a straight 10k heal. Maybe even something like a 1k group heal as well for those aoe mob situations. Paly's is already 600 group heal, 400 more for druid cant be all that bad and doesnt really add to druids solo abilities.

I do know that as a damage dealer in raids, i want to be able to be healed and since most of the clerics are tied up in ch chains, that leave druids/shammies to do the healing and druids 1k heal does like 1 bub on me for a rogue. HoT spell that would heal me to full in 3 ticks would be great.

Dunno if im talking outta my a s s, its early in the morning and I havent had my coffee yet.


Naathan Von'Bek
Lvl 60 Assassin
Demodred Spiritstalker
Lvl 56 Preserver
Township Rebellion
$tormhammer.

Naathan Kaine
09-07-2002, 06:59 AM
Ghey double post

Forin
09-07-2002, 07:18 AM
On the 10 second cast, 10 tick HoT spell, I'm not sure that would be effective in raids, even if it was healing 1KHP a tick.

The whole problem is raids being balanced around the CH chain.

IMHO, druids need a better heal for general play, but not a CH. But they need the CH (or a partial one) for raids. You are right in that they might not be able handle the agro generated by a CH in a non-raid situation.

Personally, we need to split those discussions up. We should be talking about what we all need for more balanced group play and what we need for raiding. And looking at how to make it so that one doesn't affect the other.

toreyj01
09-07-2002, 07:18 AM
You would be suprised how little agro it generates in certain circumstances, you just gotta learn where when and how to cast it. Pay attention to agro and learn how to get around it. If it causes a ton of agro spam heal till the MA generates enough hate then you can land it.

Takes a bit of learning, something clerics have done for ages. 1000 AC=1000 AC we take just as much damage as you, even though we wear plate. VI decided to make us mellee so Clerics are scrambling for haste, str and dex gear. If your heal means that you need to seek out more AC then you are essentially in the same boat as we are.

If a cleric had the choice of a 4-5k HOT or a complete heal that would be a tough choice. That would be an overpowering spell in a lot of ways. Complete heal cannot be called overpowering when we have it but too risky when you have it. Yah cast the spell yahs gets the agro, have been told that agro is no stranger to a druid so why is this a problem?

Forin
09-07-2002, 07:43 AM
I agree for grouping a 1000HP per tick HoT would be an incredible tool.

However, for raids, a 1000HP per tick HoT wouldn't be effective. And that's what the spell is supposed to be for, isn't it?

I thought the whole point of the mini-CH is to give druids and shaman an entre into the CH-chain?

Broomhilda
09-07-2002, 07:59 AM
"Clerics should NEVER, EVER, NEVER, FOR ALL TIME, get SOW.
No other priest should EVER, NEVER for all time get any kind of XP resurrects.
Ranger should, of course, NEVER, EVER for all time get any kind of gate or port. Once again, taking what other classes do and giving it to someone else is not balance but rather removing individuality. "Balance" would be making them stronger in their own ways."


Why does any class need the sow spell in EQ anymore when their are options like Jboots, Tboots, horses, and runspeed3? Give them SOW, what does it matter? None of us get groups because of SOW anymore, so why care?

I dont consider ress on par with SOW. However, i do believe EVERY priest class should get some form of Ress. What i mean is a Druid and Shaman should be able to ress just because they are priests, but their ress's should be really gimped, like give back 50% experience or so. I'll betcha almost everybody will still be begging a cleric or paly for ress, but at least when people are desperate or in a rush they dont have to take the full hit.

Ports are abit more like resses imo. Situationally convenient, and i am abit protective of porting. That said i dont mind if another class was able to self port to a much fewer limited locations that we could. I guess i really dont have a problem with those faithstones and stuff.

I dont mind giving away 1/2 of our utility, hell expansions have already done it and most of us never even cared, just wanted compensation. Utility is an afterthought in terms of what a group is looking for, i'm rarely getting picked up for SOW or ports, i'm getting picked up for what i contribute day in and day out, not some once a week evac or some very situational reason that rarely occurs. I'm not some Druid that uses my Druid as some soloing machine when my other character cant find groups either, my Druid is my only character, those people shouldnt be speaking for Druids. Let EVERY class solo, i dont care, EVERY class should be able to solo to some degree, it doesnt affect me in the least, as long as grouping allows for more experience it'll always be prefered.

With all this said, i want to emphasize that i do want compensation for giving other players more of our utility. The people that benefit most from our utility are the powerlvl'd port whores, alts people use only for soloing or pharming purposes, etc. I dont support those people whatsoever, in fact their the biggest problem with our class, and why there are so many of us. People make Druids because of our utility but use that utility to give us a bad name. So passing some of our utility out should result in less of those type of Druids. Imo, thats one of the biggest problems with our class, and why arguing for positive changes to our class is a double edged sword. Your arguing for those gimp druids too, and there are tons of them.

Deneldor2
09-07-2002, 08:20 AM
Whatever happens all I ask is that I remain a druid.

I'd love to see my "own" skills improved.

I dont want CH I'd just like a heal that heals more than 3/4 of a bubble on a tank. 2-3k direct.

I'd like a 59 or even 60 upgrade to WD.

Nukes I'm happy with...nothing needed.

Reduce the duration on my epic to bring it in line with shaman/necro epics.

Heres the contoversial one.

Leave PotG as it is but remove the mana regen.

Add "Natures Gift" at 60...pure mana regen, same as PotG but without the AC/HP. This allows me to give something where aego is available and stops the overpowering effect of aego/potg stacking.

I really cant comment on clerics or shaman as I dont play them. I did though get exp of the 58 drop hammer in Ssraezha last night and our cleric was pretty happy with it. :)

Elaira
09-07-2002, 08:49 AM
I've been trying to look at this situation from a game developer's viewpoint, rather than a priest.

Currently, there doesn't seem to be a concensus about who is wanted more in experience groups: druids or clerics. Shaman are always wanted for their slows. But generally speaking, druids feel they are not (or will not) get groups because clerics are the best healers and now will add more DPS because of their recent upgrades. Many clerics feel that druids will be preferred if they get any kind of complete heal to accompany their many other skills.

I think most will agree, however, that druids do need more of a role on raids. Well, what if druids were given a variation on complete heal (or percentage heal)? This new heal would add a hate increase aspect. This would certainly be wanted in raids for main tank healing chains. Give it the 10 seconds cast time to coincide with traditional CH, but make it fairly mana intensive so that it can't be liberally used or perhaps increase the recast rate a tad.

Conversely, shaman could be given a similar heal that would decrease hate.

I realize that enchanters and shadowknights also have hate increasing/reducing spells, and I'm not sure how the two should interact. Controlling aggro should be a skill that players work together to achieve.

Just tossing out some thoughts.

Bam102465
09-07-2002, 09:10 AM
I see a lot of people concentrating on the raid aspect. I want druids to be viable for everyday grouping too, not just raids. We need an overhaul that upgrades across the board for both of those things.

I also saw a suggestion for a 50% res. NO! Those are just half-measures that will not really upgrade us. The person said it themselves: people will still want the cleric full res, so it would be a bone thrown to us that won't get much usage. We need something to make us DESIRABLE for grouping and raids, which probably means something unique. Barring that, something like a MR debuff or a couple new PC buffs to at least give us something that may not be particularly unique, but at least useful.

XazyMT
09-07-2002, 09:38 AM
After using the new heals, I have to say they are a long time coming, and definitely fit where we were lacking. I use Ethereal Elixir a lot lately, and the other Ethereal heals have definitely helped and made it much easier to heal. Now I am primarily discussing the new heals in raids, since I am one of the main clerics in Fury's Edge a raiding guild. After several high end encounters I have noticed how the new heals have helped a lot as far as healing whoever was on rampage, spot heals, and if there is any problem in a chain to do a quick heal to help. These heal spells are great and really work, and are something that we really did need. At the same time for those really tight chains where there is no med time, you can even use Yaulp to help with mana regen, therefore again helping to make encounters easier.

Then you come to what probably will be next patch, and we will be getting new heals for Druids/shamans since it has been already stated that this will probably happen. My problem is I guess that all these heals while amazing and fit what ALL of our classes were needing only nerf encounters, making them considerably easier from a healing stand point. I have no problem with the spells I just feel that Verant now has to somehow compensate again with the mob difficulties. I do not deny that I play this game for the challenge, and I feel that while the heals are great they just end up nerfing the challenge of all the high end encounters.

As far as to how I would balance the other priest CH spells, I would put it at a slightly higher mana cost then the cleric one, therefore making it viable to use still but at a slightly greater mana cost.

Glynna1
09-07-2002, 11:15 AM
I agree with you somewhat Xazy, however do you let your other priest classes use mod rods? These tend to be for the Clerics only, thus us druids run oom while doing spot heals on MA's. It seems to be a no no for other classes to use these. This of course is when the mob takes a long time to kill.

Seems we tend to get the short end of the stick, or should I say mod rod?

Gniss
09-07-2002, 01:28 PM
How about this:

Since it's heals everyone is complaining about, give ALL three classes the SAME heals at the same levels.

Now, re-balance the classes. Give druids the nukes/regen for faster dead mobs. Give clerics the melee/hp/ac buffs for longer lived parties (counters the faster kill of druid nuke). Give shamen the slows/stat/regen/pet buffs, for reduced need to heal.

There, every class has some way to reduce the healing needed (buffs, regen, whatever), and a way to add DPS (pet, nuke, melee).

Other than that, give each class a secondary role. Druids already have travel (ports), why not give shamen debuffs and clerics atk buffs, or shamen atk buffs and clerics debuffs?

Forin
09-07-2002, 02:56 PM
Bam10246 stated:

I see a lot of people concentrating on the raid aspect. I want druids to be viable for everyday grouping too, not just raids.

The reason we're focusing on that is that THAT is what SOE/VI has stated that the mini-CH's are intended for raid situations.

The issue with that of course is that post level 56, some people on all sides of the fence feel that it imbalances the game from an experience group position.

Do druids and shaman need a bit more healing in the post 50 world, I think the majority feels that the answer to that is YES. But the question is at what level and how much. Unfortunately, SOE/VI rolled out the raid solution first on Test and that's what's caused all of the current furor. Some people on the receiving end who want more healing see those spells and want to fight tooth and nail to keep them, under the irrational assumption that its all or nothing. The thing I like about this thread is that we're discussing the whole problem.

So we've got two issues:

(1) how do we make shaman and druids more effective in raids? If the CH chain is now the tactical model against which all high end encounters are balanced, how do we give Shaman and Druids a roll in that?

(2) How do we prevent the raid solution from breaking the balance on the rest of the game (the experience group model)?

*Edit: One of my statements was a little too inclusive ;) *

Bam102465
09-07-2002, 03:36 PM
I don't care what VI says, that wasn't my point. We're broken for more than just raids. I don't want a cheal that will only come in handy on raids. I want a much better general heal that will come in handy ALL the time.

Forin
09-07-2002, 03:54 PM
I said that too, didn't I?

Can't we discuss the problems seperately?

Velvity Smooth
09-07-2002, 05:26 PM
My main is a cleric.

Clerics received an upgrade to there solo ability to bring them closer... no were near a match but closer to both the druids and shamy's solo ability. This had the side effect of adding to the clerics exp/dps groupablity and was a good thing all around by allowing clerics to add to the group while maintaining their role as primary healer so that any druid/shammy's in the group do not have to make up for the cleric.

I belive we mostly agree that druids and to a lesser extent shamy's need better healing. This will help with two things:
1) Less dependance on clerics for high end raiding.
2) Allow druids / shammy's to heal in group situations

Druids need a raid CH to allow guilds of all ranges the chance at high end content. The problem is that it is the only real thing a cleric brings to a group is CH. It is the bread and butter of the cleric class.... not saying its right... but that is just the way it is. I would give druids a CH but make it prohibitive to use in a non-raid situation. The easiest way I can think of is adding a regent/sacrifice to the spell so that it doesn't replace clerics in group situations. This regent/sacrifice HAS to be expensive in pp or HP (a peridot no less no more or 300ish hp) so as to not be used in group situations. Also both druids and shammy's need a 1200ish heal around 4sec casting time for spot healing NOT emergency healing but group/raid spot healing.

EQ as a whole is broken not just one or two classes. CH has broken it because of mudflation. The only way to fix this is to make CH more available or to continually improve healing across all healing classes indefinitely which in turn will only create more mudflation but EQ1 is to far along to truly fix anymore.

I personally dread another class receiving CH because it is truly the only thing i bring to a group and raiding.... REZ only if I'm not doing my job in the first place =p but i do feel it is necessary.

*please excuse my spelling and / or gramer. If you understand what my point was then the whole purpose of any language has served it's purpose*

Edit: BTW good old Brislty is by far the best bet on a drinking contest. He WILL or at least make u think he has drunk more easily

Joklun
09-07-2002, 05:56 PM
Clerics are very powerfull yet boring, the yaulp and hammer is a nice toy and will help a lot removing the boring side. The new heals do not mean VI will need to improve high end encounters, the new heals are because VI already made high end encounter a little too much. Its not normal to have a need of 10 clerics on a 50 players raid to kill a mob, its not normal either to have them all eat mod rod cause ten is not even enough.
We dont want 20% of clerics in EQ, we dont want other class to disapear cause clerics are so powerfull.

Druids do not want some crappy mana ratio heals they need some good heals too, they arent regenerating mana faster than anyone else. why should they meditate more than others. What D&D gave to druid as special niche was Wildshapes. shapes that were giving special abilities. VI decided that illusion were Enchanter niche only..... could they back a little on that, knowing bards rogues druids shamen allready step a little into that. There is potential here to give druid some power in different situation, some good damage associated with a form of animal, and this being my idea, if they make it outside zones only, I will sue them. Having our last dot at 54 is also kinda bizarre and seem uncomplete.

Shamen I dont know a lot, but I sure would be pissed off to not have my kunarks spells or be oblidge to pay 50+k for them 2 years after kunark is out. the could benifit from some new heals also, since the high end mobs get areas and have so much HPs that figths last 20+ minutes, superior heal isnt cutting it and torpor for those who have still slows and wont be appreciated by melee as much as other heals.

Aorion
09-07-2002, 10:16 PM
Clerics still need some work in the solo dept. Cutting the proc and pet damage in half was just too much. The only thing I (57th) have been able to solo, that was worth anything, is the skeletons in The Grey. But then half the time I get jumped by a worm or Rockhead and have to zone. They either need to put the pet damage back where it was, or put the proc rate at 3/4 of what it was. Give us a bit more defense. I get hit for max damage 9 out of 10 times. I might as well be wearing Leather armor at that rate.

Group wise, it's just going to take time for people to get used to us. Nobody wants to be the training group at that level. And we do have to get used to watching health, moving as the mob moves, and our own version of Bard twisting ( hitting bash, hitting Y5, hitting F# to target group member, hitting heal, hitting assist).

I admit Brell could give Bristlebane a run for his money, but Bristlebane is the Patron God of Pratical Jokes, so sould naturally use one to win any contest. Karana is a man? Then why when it starts raining everybody says "That Mother Karana"?

Sleppen
09-07-2002, 10:36 PM
I see a lot of people concentrating on the raid aspect. I want druids to be viable for everyday grouping too, not just raids. We need an overhaul that upgrades across the board for both of those things.

I'll give a more blunt answer to that comment than some of the other people. Outside of the people who play druids, there is no consensus that druids need any upgrades whatsoever when it comes to experience groups or soloing. In fact, there are a large number of people who feel that druids are overpowered outside of the raid context.

I know that druids have all sorts of wish lists, and I know that druids come to message boards like this and convince each other that they deserve all sorts of upgrades and improvements. Clerics do the same thing on their own boards, and so do shamans. For that matter, you could find the same stuff on just about every class board.

In fact, there really isn't much of a consensus that druids need an upgrade in the raid context. However, there is a strong consensus that the high level game is overly dependent on clerical CHs. That problem could be solved by giving expanded healing to some other class, like paladins or necromancers. It makes a lot more sense to give it to the other priest classes, though.

I don't want to rehash all the silly class envy arguments that litter EQ message boards. Just don't expect anyone to believe that druids are the most pitiful, underpowered, and unwanted class in EQ. For the most part, the only people who buy into that nonsense are druids.

Bam102465
09-08-2002, 06:30 AM
I'm saying add a bigger heal across the board that will be used on both raids and grouping. Druids still get ignored for groups more than other classes.

Aorion
09-08-2002, 07:20 AM
This is aimed at the Druid/Shaman in Raid role not as part of the general balance issue.

Most of what I read is Druids want to have roles in raids. What about a stackable HOT for druids. Say with a stacking limit of 3(I am very bad on game mechanics, so am just going from a non programmer view). 3 druids casting this spell would give the same amount of heal as a Cleric throwing CE? Maybe more healing than CE. Giving the same spell to shamans so that it makes having more druids and shamans on a raid a necessity.

It wouldn't make A Druid as strong on a raid as A Cleric, but would make a call for More Druids and Shamans to come to raids.

/em Notices the Shamans are staying out of the God Drinking contest. They clearly know that Bristlebane is the Tequila shooter King.

Kalinn
09-08-2002, 07:38 AM
Do druids and shaman need a bit more healing in the post 50 world, I think the majority feels that the answer to that is YES. But the question is at what level and how much. Unfortunately, SOE/VI rolled out the raid solution first on Test and that's what's caused all of the current furor

this isnt exactly correct. druids were satisfied with their role in grouping situations and didnt ask for improvements there.

it is VERANT who has stated that all priests were to be balanced in all three areas, solo, group, and raid. and the %heal is a part of that group balancing too. they want to break the healing stranglehold clerics have on groups as well as raids.

with their stated intentions, yes we should push for improvements to both grouping and raiding.


Outside of the people who play druids, there is no consensus that druids need any upgrades whatsoever when it comes to experience groups or soloing. In fact, there are a large number of people who feel that druids are overpowered outside of the raid context

the funny thing about perceptions like that are that they usually come from people who dont have a god damn clue what they are talking about. thats the whole problem with perceptions, they are often WRONG. perhaps they should listen to the druids instead? you know, the people who actually play the class?

*goes into her monotone voice*
warrior taunt is fine. thats my perception, so it must be true, even though i am not a warrior. i dont see warriors having any problem with taunting mobs, they are quite effective at it. they do not need any taunt upgrades.

get it?

Sleppen
09-08-2002, 02:22 PM
the funny thing about perceptions like that are that they usually come from people who dont have a god damn clue what they are talking about. thats the whole problem with perceptions, they are often WRONG. perhaps they should listen to the druids instead? you know, the people who actually play the class?

That may be the single dumbest comment made in this entire thread. Oh, yeah, we'll just let the druids decide whether they're properly balanced or whether they need more power. And then we can let the clerics and shamans make the same decision about their classes. Yeah, right.

Is it possible, just possible, that your opinion about your own class is colored by self-interest and greed? Of course it is. The same is true for people who play every other class.

People in other classes have a lot more objective view of your class than you do. Unlike you, we play with a lot of different druids and see a lot of different playing styles. I wish I had a dollar for every time I had to explain to some level 51 newbie druid (by which I mean the people who solo for 50 levels and then start grouping at level 51) how to play a druid in a group. I'm sure some of those losers are among the people who scream, "Boo hoo, I'm a druid and no one wants me!" The truth of the matter is that they aren't getting groups because they suck.

The druid class is not weak or pitiful. If you think otherwise, then it is YOUR perception that is out to lunch.

vetoafauna
09-08-2002, 02:32 PM
sorry but a class that's supposed to be the secondary healer that heals with less than 10% of the efficiency of a cleric is weak (understatement) no matter how you look at it. not to mention no desired buffs on raids, there's simply no reason for a raiding druid to log on. our sustained dps is lower than any melee, we cannot (read: FACT) keep a group alive on a raid because our heals are so inefficient.

your perception of druids is skewed, i dont know what kind of dream world you're living in where druids are desired and needed in the endgame, but before making flat out stupid statements you should try to snap out of it.

Kalinn
09-08-2002, 04:11 PM
People in other classes have a lot more objective view of your class than you do.

no, its been shown time and time again on this board and others that people in other classes often have a biased view AGAINST our class.

i believe we as a community are very objective on our abilities. we, more than anyone else, know our strengths and our weaknesses. you cannot tell me someone who has never played a druid knows anywhere near as much about the class as someone who has played a druid day in and out for hundreds of days. the people on this board represent probably over a hundred years of experience in a druids skin. no warrior or cleric or any other class can come close to that.

if people bothered to actually read this site, rather than just come here once or twice to read a thread or two before "gracing" us with their infinite wisdom, and had read every single one of the hundreds of posts that went into our requests in the druid petition, then you may understand what a druids perception is.

but it is the ultimate in arrogance to come to a druid class board and tell the members of the community that you, as a non-druid, know better than they do about their class.

Nicholaa Darkling
09-08-2002, 05:40 PM
I normally don't post, but I do read whats going on here. Let me give you a bit of background on myself. I am a level 59 halfling druid from Bristlebane. I have played my class since 1999 so I think I know a bit about it.

We are not completely broken, but saying we are overpowered just makes me laugh. Reading this post got my goat so to say.

People in other classes have a lot more objective view of your class than you do. Unlike you, we play with a lot of different druids and see a lot of different playing styles. I wish I had a dollar for every time I had to explain to some level 51 newbie druid (by which I mean the people who solo for 50 levels and then start grouping at level 51) how to play a druid in a group. I'm sure some of those losers are among the people who scream, "Boo hoo, I'm a druid and no one wants me!" The truth of the matter is that they aren't getting groups because they suck.

/sarcasm on
Really how nice of you, a warrior, to point out how to play a druid. Since you have grouped with lots of them you obviously know all of our spells, how much mana they cast, where they can be used, and what level these spells are. I have grouped with lots and lots of warriors so I am telling you your DPS is fine, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with your taunt. You do not have an objective view of your class.
/sarcasm off

Now really, be realistic. Asking for a new heal is not out of the question. My heal at 59 sucks @#%$. I was told my heal was fine by a friend of mine till they tried to use me as main healer in chardok. We tried the BK and at the end of the night the necro told the guild that "Druids can heal fine with c3, a necro twitch and heal,bard song, and a level 58 paladin heal". When I lost c3 I was having a hard time getting over 40 mana and we had to leave. Now you tell me I am whining when I want an upgrade. You tell me I don't know my class and my class abilities. O by the way I have a hard time getting groups outside of my circle of friends and I did not solo my way to 59 nor do I suck.

Do I want CH, not really. I would rather get a nice group heal that does about 12k hps. If verant wants to give me a CH I am sure as hell going to figure out how to use it properly while grouping.

Now enough of my rant. I Hope you all have a nice day! :)

Nicholaa
59 Darkling of Bristlebane
Order of the Keg *The guild formerly known as Drunken Bandits*


ps. Clerics really should get a self invis

Sorrun
09-08-2002, 06:16 PM
People in other classes have a lot more objective view of your class than you do.

Objective? True...

Knowledgeable? Probably not...

Just like many druids here dont know squat about anything other then being a druid, most non-druids dont fully understand any druid shortcomings.

It is hard to fully understand a class enough to argue class balance for that class without playing it... that is true I think for all classes, not just druids.



EDIT: As a side note, it appears to me that Verant might be toying with removing CH... have a look at the big picture and take in all the recent changes... not definate evidence for sure, but if you look at it from the point of view that a) CH is royally screwed up the end game, and b) removing it is really the only thing to cure the problem... the evidence looks good.

1) Seemingly powerful heals when clerics already have CH and other good heals...

2) No real changes to shaman or druids in healing, arguably the main issues at hand

3) More "testing" is being done with what appear to be more cleric changes on test...

4) who better to test possible heals then clerics who are called on currently to heal 100% of thier time?

In theory, they could remove CH and use these new heals (plus modify existing ones) to compensate. This frees clerics from the obligation of CH duty as well as open the door for true priest balance...

Just my 2 cents based on observations...

Varaho1
09-08-2002, 07:25 PM
I love how you all are overlooking the fact that Sleppen is a Necromancer...

Velvity Smooth
09-08-2002, 07:46 PM
Enough people....

I have seen a lot of good idea's and have learned a lot about the druid class from this thread and others not to mention I was a member of the lone wolfs of norrath for two years (.... try to be a raid organizer for a guild 75% druid) /shrug and I do have a druid alt NOT in the 50 game but I have soloed and grouped with a druid till the mid 47. Enough about how knowledgeable I'm am on druids.... but we are NOT NOT NOT going anywhere further on this thread because of pure and simple bickering... I personably am not going to bother wasting my time on this good idea if I see one more attack on anyone.

/rant off

XXAnthaXX
09-08-2002, 09:33 PM
If rangers want something, why not give them the 3 dozen or so SELF-ONLY melee buffs that druids get that they neither want nor use? Thorncoat? who needs it? rangers. Wolf form attack bonus? who needs it? rangers. Burning hands? who needs it? rangers. Same goes for all the stupid up grades to these spells. Jeepers, I stopped melleeing at level 8.

Lemba
09-08-2002, 09:51 PM
1:18:01 Lemba buys several rounds of drinks for Sleppen.
1:43:03 Lemba gets intoxicated Sleppen to group with her.
1:43:04 Lemba casts superior camoflage on Sleppen.
1:44:37 Lemba decides the camo she cast on Sleppen is ok.
1:44:38 Lemba casts Circle of Misty Thicket.
1:45:12 Lemba slaps Sleppen gently to sober him up.
1:45:14 Lemba tells Sleppen, "Thank you for stopping by the priest convention, but I recommend you go back home immediately. Please don't use any dangerous spells until you sober up fully. Your presence at the PRIEST convention was not helpful. I recomend you start a new thread if you want to aid the developers in balancing the Everquest classes."

2:13:45 Lemba returns to the convention after making sure Sleppen gets home safely.

Thank you to all who have suggested ways to balance the priest classes. I'd like to throw out a suggestion that came from Oldoaktree if I remember correctly:

How about giving druids the ability to summon a new type of "mod rod" that is primarily used by hybrid and melee classes to quickly regain not mana, but life.

It would need to have a down side such as reducing the hybrids mana pool. In the case of warriors, rogues, and monks that have no mana it would do the following: 1) Warriors have no downside-they can use as many of these wonders as they have time to do so while taking care of their main job which is holding the Mobs agro and doing significant melee DPS all while taking a beating no other class can handle. 2) Rogues sacrifice one backstab per use of the 3 charges on this "life mod rod" 3) Monks have a small amount of time added to the refresh timer of their mend wound skill each time they use a charge of a "life mod rod"

If this worked the way I"m envisioning it, then Warriors would gain the most by using these rods, much as clerics gain the most from current Mod Rods. It would enable Druids to have a much sought after role on raids without unbalancing current encounters. The time it would take to pick up these rods and use them would limit the effect to a significant boost but not one that makes things too easy for any encounter.

Before you trash this idea based on the fact that most mages hate being a rod making machine on most raids, please remember that there is no perfect solution to making druids more valuable on raids, and better but not unbalanced healers in exp groups.

FyyrLuStorm
09-08-2002, 09:52 PM
Antha,

lol

Verant should make an option for when we delete some of our spells we can give them to Rangers, I agree.


rofl

I did use to use Firefist as a crap buff, but well, you know...

Kalinn
09-08-2002, 09:55 PM
ummmmm rangers already DO get thorncoats (up to our lvl 49 one), wolf form, and firefist.

Sleppen
09-08-2002, 10:15 PM
your perception of druids is skewed, i dont know what kind of dream world you're living in where druids are desired and needed in the endgame, but before making flat out stupid statements you should try to snap out of it.

I think it's interesting how the druids in this discussion keep switching back and forth from the raid context to the group context when it suits their needs. You're switching back to the raid context, which is different from what we have been discussing.

Okay, let's go there for a moment, and consider what you have to say --

sorry but a class that's supposed to be the secondary healer that heals with less than 10% of the efficiency of a cleric is weak (understatement) no matter how you look at it. not to mention no desired buffs on raids, there's simply no reason for a raiding druid to log on. our sustained dps is lower than any melee, we cannot (read: FACT) keep a group alive on a raid because our heals are so inefficient.

Setting aside CH, druid heals are not dramatically less efficient than cleric heals. The Circle spells are a desired (and in fact important) buff on raids. Comparing the sustained DPS of any caster to a melee is silly because a melee is not limited by mana. Druids frequently keep groups alive on raids as the primary healer, though typically not melee-heavy groups.

If you're so pitiful and useless, why does your guild even take you along? For that matter, why did they even let someone so useless into the guild in the first place?

I really wish that the druid class would get the chip off of its shoulder and lose the inferiority complex. I often wonder whether a lot of the problem with druids is due to the fact that they spend so much time convincing themselves that they suck.

no, its been shown time and time again on this board and others that people in other classes often have a biased view AGAINST our class.

i believe we as a community are very objective on our abilities.

Hooboy. The other druids may clap for you, but you just lost any remaining credibility with every other class in the game. I'm not saying that druids are any worse about this than other classes, but they aren't any better, either.

but it is the ultimate in arrogance to come to a druid class board and tell the members of the community that you, as a non-druid, know better than they do about their class.

I'm here because members of your community invited members of other classes to participate in this discussion. I suppose it was inevitable that people like you couldn't deal with opposing viewpoints.

Really how nice of you, a warrior, to point out how to play a druid. Since you have grouped with lots of them you obviously know all of our spells, how much mana they cast, where they can be used, and what level these spells are.

If you go back to my first post in this thread, you'll find that I'm a retired level 60 cleric. I was also the leader of a raiding guild, and I was the primary strategist and organizer for over 100 raids. I'm not going to claim to be the most uber guy in EQ or the smartest person on this board, but yes, I have a pretty thorough knowledge of druid spells, including everything you mentioned.

And yes, I probably know more about druid spells than a pretty high percentage of druids. Why do I say that? Because I had to spend so much time teaching druids how to play their own class once they got past level 50. (True story: I once had to explain to a level 60 druid how succor worked.)

Does that mean all druids are losers? No way. I played with a lot of great druids who really had their act together. Frankly, I think druids are more knowledgeable these days than they were in the old days. But there are still too many druids who solo for 50 levels, then can't get a group and blame it on the fact that they're a druid. In a lot of those cases, the true reason is either (1) they suck because they don't know how to play a druid in a group, or (2) they don't know anyone because they've been soloing for 50 levels.

As for the BK camp, you're missing the point of your own story. Your group WAS able to hold down the BK camp without a cleric. Yes, you required help from other sources, and you had to leave when you lost clarity. Maybe your group could have stayed if they had a cleric instead of you. But a druid shouldn't be as good a healer as a cleric. What your story illustrates is that a group can find ways to do fairly difficult camps without a cleric. That particular camp turned out to be too difficult after you lost clarity. So what?

If your standard for "balance" is that a druid must be able to replace a cleric in any group, there isn't much for us to discuss. I've heard a rumor that druids can do things other than heal.

It is hard to fully understand a class enough to argue class balance for that class without playing it... that is true I think for all classes, not just druids.

I have to disagree with you there. Let me start by making a point that I think a lot of people are missing. "Balance" requires some sort of comparison. You balance A against B, not just A against A. When we talk about class balance, we are talking about balancing the classes against each other.

You folks may be incredibly knowledgeable about your own class, but that has little to do with balance. Someone does not need to know the nuances of your class to compare the power level of your class to other classes. All they have to do is watch the various classes in operation. If you disagree with that statement, then you must be saying that the only people who can discuss balance are those who are totally knowledgeable about every class in the game. That excludes almost everyone who has posted in this thread.

What a lot of the recent posters are doing is publishing a wishlist of upgrades to the druid class. That isn't about balance. It's about self-interest.

I can guarantee you that a lot of members of my former class feel that they can be "objective" in evaluating the "balance" of the cleric class, and they'll be happy to tell you how knowledgeable they are about the class and about what needs to be done. Yeah, right. No class is objective in evaluating its own balance.

Krysteel
09-08-2002, 10:24 PM
I agree with Sorrun here. Other class observations are probably the most objective yet are most likely unknowledgable about the druid class (with the possible exception of those who have high level druids). Therein lies the problem. Even the most basic tenent of a discussion can't be agreed upon.

It's very obvious that the posters in this thread love playing the game. Nobody here should be calling anybody else an idiot. They just happen to have a vested interest in improving their class. The same viewpoint that others have.

Thought experiement. What would happen if CH was removed from the game? Well ignoring any new heals that may be introduced for the moment, the bulk of the cleric community would completely revolt and probably refuse to attend raids at least for a while. And a lot of high end encounters would become extremely difficult.

I dare say that this is precisely the way some druids feel right now. The status quo thinking of EQ does not include druids in raids. Except for getting people there. I don't subscribe to that thinking at all. I love well played druids. They serve a vital support role in the actual fight portion of a raid. In fact, I have one myself - Menyena - some of you may remember that name. It's been at least a year since I have played her other than to log on to experiment with new abilities granted to druids in patches.

Now before she got shelved she attended some high level raids. The guild she was in demeaned her. Not deliberately, but mostly because there were like 20 druids in the guild and the raid leaders could not think outside the box, regardless of my efforts to enlighten them.

My point? Regardless of what some may think, druids are incredibly useful right now on raids. Yes, it's a small role - not one of extreme power that clerics enjoy - but it is a vital support role. There is always a need for backup healing and the extra nuking power that druids bring to the table. EQ is a old game now, and the mindset is terribly skewed to parsing numbers and maximum DPS possible. People convince themselves that it is the only way they can have fun. To get more loot. The viscious circle goes round and round even faster.

Like the majority of the player base will change their way of thinking and enjoy the game for what it is now. /sarcasm

Stop bickering that so and so classes are a must have and other classes are maginalized because they don't add the maximum possible to raid DPS. But that won't happen. EQ mudflation and the class hierarchies will continue to spiral out of control for many years to come.

-Krysteel
59 Cleric
-Menyena
55 druid
Bristlebane server

vetoafauna
09-08-2002, 10:26 PM
"Setting aside CH"

BZZZZT, WRONG.

when balancing one class against another, you absolutely do not "set aside" perhaps one of the most powerful spells the class has to offer.

vetoafauna
09-08-2002, 10:33 PM
"The Circle spells are a desired (and in fact important) buff on raids"

what raids, nagafen? the only encounters in the high end game i can think of that require fire/cold resistance buffs are glyphed and exiled, but they're trivial with or without circles to anyone that's gonna be killing them to get to cursed. nothing else in ssra requires fr/cr, burrower/aow/tunare don't require fr/cr, vulak doesn't require cr/fr (although it's nice for the ring, it isnt as major as oh, say, heals). seru doesn't require. honestly i can't say on VT because i havent been there, but even if it is important, it obviously isnt important enough to raise our desire on raids.

vetoafauna
09-08-2002, 10:34 PM
"Comparing the sustained DPS of any caster to a melee is silly because a melee is not limited by mana"

it's silly when balancing classes, but it isnt silly when guilds are looking to recruit. if a druid cannot keep decent sustained dps, there's no sympathy for them because they are limited by mana.

FyyrLuStorm
09-08-2002, 10:35 PM
/tar meny

/wave

/bow

vetoafauna
09-08-2002, 10:36 PM
"If you're so pitiful and useless, why does your guild even take you along? For that matter, why did they even let someone so useless into the guild in the first place?"

i'm in a guild that recruits people, rather than classes. however, currently druids are at about the bottom as far as app desirability goes.

vetoafauna
09-08-2002, 10:39 PM
""Balance" requires some sort of comparison"

bzzzt, wrong again. verant said balance isn't achieved via compensation

Kalinn
09-08-2002, 10:43 PM
balance without knowledge means absolutely NUTHIN. case in point: booboo. he's trotted out so often as one of the benefits of being a druid. just because he's a pet doesnt mean he's a benefit =P he's cute, he's fluffy, but in 80+% of situations he's utterly useless.

why do you think there is a whole panel of people involved in the class balancing for verant instead of just one person? because they know that those who play the class know most about it and are best equipped to discuss it.

you cannot evaluate balance if you do not know the strengths and weaknesses of the classes in question. if you try, all you get is ignorant, uninformed perceptions influencing your decisions. and that will not come close to any true balance.

Kulothar
09-08-2002, 11:03 PM
Well, two topics. I started as a healer but now I am referred to as a "Backup" healer.. That is like being recruited by a football team as a quarterback and being kept on the bench as a "Backup" Quarterback. When I started on release day, none of the documentation mentioned that any of the priest classes were "Backups". Sure Druids got heals a little later because of their other abilities but they got them. And what about our other abilities? If Clerics had the same problems with undead as we do with animals they would really be screaming. When was the last time they cast on a skeleton and got the message "This spell only works on undead".

As for Clerics, I think invisibility is reasonable but it also comes in a bottle. I think a lesser SoW along the lines of Jboot speed is reasonable at a couple levels above SoW for druids or 10 levs above Shaman. DS vs undead is practical that they could cast on tanks.

Shaman have the same rare spell drops problem like druids. The drops should be a bit more common and in more places. Topor shouldnt be so rare and there should be a couple simular spells at lower levels. Maybe the same mana but lesser healing. Shamen should get more gate potions to different locations since the skill required to make them is so high. Overall a CH for Shaman may not be as affective as tweeking some of the slows and HoT spells. A lure based slow would do wonders for their High end game even if it was lv 60 or an arch AA skill.

Druids.. well we have hammered that one long enough. From powerful pre-50 and viable healers to "Backup". Too many options and anything that would help would be welcomed but would bring an outcry from the other classes. Heck, take the 50 cap off my dodge and I would be happy. We aren't wizzies so our DD's are ok if we could heal. Simular heals but at higher levels is the logical solution and if they are group heals or HoT verant would not consider them too unbalancing. I guess our Treeform is our HoT spell. Back when we could move in Treeform that would even have been a viable option.. Treeform HoT that was outdoor only that heals but lowers runspeed and fire resistance. A minor slow lesser than a shamans would help even if it only worked on animals or summoned or just outdoors. But then we get back to the problem that most high level animals are not labeled as animals.

The hybrid classes all need some work since the upgrade in Cleric Melee skills.. More 2hs damage and Defence for Pallies, Snare and root for BST, and for our bretheren the Rangers there are many things that would help.. Gate at 51, a personal gate for each level after with Egress at 60 would be nice. A spell that puts a proc on their bow. Fear animal. They get a lot of our minor offensive skills but they do need some help to raise their DPS but survive. If anyone, they should have a fixed time camo.

There are 3 healing classes and there are 3 hybrids. Each has their niche but there is no reason that one should be in a separate league from its counterparts.

Rainus7
09-08-2002, 11:13 PM
'Setting aside CH, druid heals are not dramatically less efficient than cleric heals. The Circle spells are a desired (and in fact important) buff on raids. Comparing the sustained DPS of any caster to a melee is silly because a melee is not limited by mana. Druids frequently keep groups alive on raids as the primary healer, though typically not melee-heavy groups.'

Not dramatically less efficient? Compare ratio of Cleric's Celestial Elixir Vs Nature's touch (59 spell vs 60 spell)
Celestial Healing, Divine Light, Remedy Vs Chloroblast
(excluding the new heals Clerics just got in the new patch)
I'm not much into numbers, but I do know my cleric can keep my rogue up and tanking with less than a bulb of mana while my druid will labour with more than 2/3 of his mana pool ..
Circle spells desired? LoL ... I guess if you guild is still mainly stucked at doing West or East ToV, Kunark Dragons ... maybe .. and one druid on the raid can pretty much handle this ... Druids frequently keep group alive on raids ... mm'kay .. I'm not even close to the class of some druids on this board .. but I have unbuffed hp of 2k odd, raided buffed to 4kish ... and guess how much mana it require for me to keep myself alive even ... not to mention other CASTERS in group ... Sorry sir, but you don't know what you are talking about right here

'If you're so pitiful and useless, why does your guild even take you along? For that matter, why did they even let someone so useless into the guild in the first place?'

Check the rosters of all servers' tier 1 or tier 2 Guilds lately?
How many Druids do you see on the roster? ...
I will tell you .. typically you see 1-5 druids usually on the roster ... and guess what .. cleric numbers are twice that ...
and then look on the recruitment page ...
Druid .... 60 with <insert huge number> AA points
Cleric .... 56

You look at that and tell me what's wrong



'I really wish that the druid class would get the chip off of its shoulder and lose the inferiority complex. I often wonder whether a lot of the problem with druids is due to the fact that they spend so much time convincing themselves that they suck.'

Play a druid 1-60 .. without twinking, without PLing ... and try the best of your ability to learn to group .. group from 30-60 .. and yet still have problems getting a group .. or accepted to good guilds and being wanted and desired for raids ...
then come back and tell us that we don't suck

'Hooboy. The other druids may clap for you, but you just lost any remaining credibility with every other class in the game. I'm not saying that druids are any worse about this than other classes, but they aren't any better, either.'

And I suppose you a warrior and a necromancer are appointed official spokesman for all other classes
/sarcasm off


'If you go back to my first post in this thread, you'll find that I'm a retired level 60 cleric. I was also the leader of a raiding guild, and I was the primary strategist and organizer for over 100 raids. I'm not going to claim to be the most uber guy in EQ or the smartest person on this board, but yes, I have a pretty thorough knowledge of druid spells, including everything you mentioned.'

Did you play a druid? Just because you are leader doesn't mean you know ALL the classes as well as the individual who play each class ... Don't know about you ... most raid leaders I know just pretty much ... Druid01 Ro1, Druid2 Ro2 ... the rest of you secondary healers spam heals ... doesn't take a genius raid leader to do that ..

'And yes, I probably know more about druid spells than a pretty high percentage of druids. Why do I say that? Because I had to spend so much time teaching druids how to play their own class once they got past level 50. (True story: I once had to explain to a level 60 druid how succor worked.)'

So? I had to teach a 60 monk what FD means and a 60 rogue how to evade ... so does that mean alot of monk and rogues out there can't play their class and I claim to know monks and rogues way more that alot of them ?

'Does that mean all druids are losers? No way. I played with a lot of great druids who really had their act together. Frankly, I think druids are more knowledgeable these days than they were in the old days. But there are still too many druids who solo for 50 levels, then can't get a group and blame it on the fact that they're a druid. In a lot of those cases, the true reason is either (1) they suck because they don't know how to play a druid in a group, or (2) they don't know anyone because they've been soloing for 50 levels.'

I agree .. but you are dealing largely with a community of druids here who have been here since day 1 and love their class deeply and play it day in day out, raiding, grouping .. so take that stereotype and toss it away ... for every druid who solo to 60 .. I can easily point to you a necro, wizard, monk who is PLed , solo to 60 ... what implication ? totally none


'As for the BK camp, you're missing the point of your own story. Your group WAS able to hold down the BK camp without a cleric. Yes, you required help from other sources, and you had to leave when you lost clarity. Maybe your group could have stayed if they had a cleric instead of you. But a druid shouldn't be as good a healer as a cleric. What your story illustrates is that a group can find ways to do fairly difficult camps without a cleric. That particular camp turned out to be too difficult after you lost clarity. So what?'

shouldn't be as good as cleric I agree .. but how far is the question .. what most people don't understand is that .. I like most druids .. just want the same balance for druids at 50 to 60 .... compared to other priest like we were from 1 to 40s ... that too much to ask ?

'If your standard for "balance" is that a druid must be able to replace a cleric in any group, there isn't much for us to discuss. I've heard a rumor that druids can do things other than heal.'

this argument is flawed .. Druids can do many things .. this utility is by nature our strength ... but one thing is constant .. the amount of things we can do is constrained by mana pool .. nuke yes .. sustained dps via nuking means high aggro and no mana left to heal or evac etc ... I will elaborate more but I'm kinda of lazy .. there's plenty of discussion on this on class balancing forum .. do check it out


'I have to disagree with you there. Let me start by making a point that I think a lot of people are missing. "Balance" requires some sort of comparison. You balance A against B, not just A against A. When we talk about class balance, we are talking about balancing the classes against each other.

You folks may be incredibly knowledgeable about your own class, but that has little to do with balance. Someone does not need to know the nuances of your class to compare the power level of your class to other classes. All they have to do is watch the various classes in operation. If you disagree with that statement, then you must be saying that the only people who can discuss balance are those who are totally knowledgeable about every class in the game. That excludes almost everyone who has posted in this thread.

What a lot of the recent posters are doing is publishing a wishlist of upgrades to the druid class. That isn't about balance. It's about self-interest.

I can guarantee you that a lot of members of my former class feel that they can be "objective" in evaluating the "balance" of the cleric class, and they'll be happy to tell you how knowledgeable they are about the class and about what needs to be done. Yeah, right. No class is objective in evaluating its own balance. '


Since I play BOTH a cleric and druid .. does that mean my opinions are objective enough to balance both ?

Another perspective .. how would someone not familiar with the nuance of each class be able to understand the relative power level of each class and balance them accordingly ?
You will be balancing each class based on what you perceived their power levels to be ... big difference ...

Peoni
09-09-2002, 12:30 AM
Wouldn't it be nice on a raid against an undead mob, for clerics to be those dealing out the damage instead of sitting in a Cheal chain ?

Priests
Just a word on ressurects - I'm old school D&D, Druids should not be getting any kind of ressurect. Death is just a part of the cycle of life and is accepted by druids as something that comes to all living beings.
Clerics are the class to fight tooth and nail and go as far as bringing back the dead. A reincarnation type of spell would be more appropriate for druids - but I think something like that is outside the scope of this version of EQ.

Melee - Again, melee strength of all priests is terribly substandard - I don't think we should be double attacking 250 capped etc, but I don't think we should have much trouble putting down a mob 20 levels below us. Again its my D&D roots, but Clerics and Druids were much stronger in comparison to their EQ classes in melee.

Buffs - Resolve the stacking issues with Cleric/Druid buffs - allow them to stack so that all priests can involve themselves in the buff orgy of raids and groups. At present (regardless of how its intended) their is conflict in stacking issues between the very best of druid and cleric buffs - this only serves as a means to cause undue aggrivation between the two priest classes. The same goes for focus/BaotR

Ritual magic - this really includes all pure casters/priests. Write spell code that requires multiple casters/priests to come together and each participating in the casting of a spell that is much stronger than any class can do on their own - actually make priests/casters want to group with each other, rather than be fighting with each other for spots in groups.

Clerics

Upgrade their nukes versus undead, make them lure based resists, make them hit hard, damn hard - so that when it comes to nuking undead, there is no question which priest would be that of choice.

Utility - See invis, Enduring Breath are spells a cleric should have - SoW and Levitate may be extending outside a clerics spheres. Invisibility ? call it something else, like sanctuary and make it self only - so that their 'god' is preventing harm come to them.

Druids

Complete Heal - Give them the raid essential heal - so long as only clerics have Cheal, they will be the only class ever to sit in a Cheal chain - which just continues the stigma and pressure on the cleric class.

Offensively keep their nukes progressing as they are now in line with wizards - do to the druid anti-summoned line (and magician) what gets done to clerics vs undead. An upgrade to Kunark dots is probably worth considering.

Other Heals - To me, regeneration is more representative of Nature, and as such I thought good HoT type spells are more in line with druid healing - both single target and group versions.

Shaman

Complete Heal - again give them this raid essential heal, not only does this instantly increase the viability and usefulness of shaman on raids it means clerics can actually take turns in doing something than sit in a heal chain.

Offensive ability - Most shaman damage comes from DoT type spells, hopefully the new dot stacking code as helped with alot of this.


Just remember this - that giving a 70% heal is not going to fix the problem of clerics sitting in chains, it has to be the real deal. Otherwise you'll have exactly the same situation as you have now - Tanks/raid leaders aren't going to trust a 70% heal to do the job, so clerics will spend their entire raid career in chains - and that is the hard cold fact.

Sleppen
09-09-2002, 01:44 AM
"Setting aside CH"

BZZZZT, WRONG.

Bzzzzt, wrong. Druids are secondary healers on raids (which is what we're talking about here). CH is the primary healer's spell. When you compare the mana efficiency of regular heals to the mana efficiency of CH, you're comparing apples and oranges.

"The Circle spells are a desired (and in fact important) buff on raids"

what raids, nagafen?

Try ToV, or for that matter anything involving fire or cold dragons. Only a small percentage of the people who play EQ are ever going to get past ToV. The examples you give are mobs that the vast majority of EQ players will never even see.

If you're claiming that druids are unbalanced in raids because of what's going on in Vex Thal, you should bear in mind that any "balancing" is going to affect raids to Hate, Fear, Kael Arena, and the like. It would be a dreadful mistake to use the "end game" as a model for balancing the entire 50+ game.

"Comparing the sustained DPS of any caster to a melee is silly because a melee is not limited by mana"

it's silly when balancing classes, but it isnt silly when guilds are looking to recruit.

We're talking about balancing classes, so it would seem that we agree on this one.

""Balance" requires some sort of comparison"

bzzzt, wrong again. verant said balance isn't achieved via compensation

Comparison does not mean the same thing as compensation. Check the dictionary. To determine whether druids are balanced with other classes, you have to compare druids to the other classes. Duh.

why do you think there is a whole panel of people involved in the class balancing for verant instead of just one person? because they know that those who play the class know most about it and are best equipped to discuss it.

Sure, but Verant doesn't say to that person, "What do we have to give to the members of [insert name of class] to make them happy?" Or at least I hope they don't.

Again, the druid class's wishlist of upgrades has nothing to do with class balance. The same is true of the wishlist that can be found on the board for every other class.

When was the last time they cast on a skeleton and got the message "This spell only works on undead".

Actually, that used to happen to me all the time on high level mobs. No joke.

Not dramatically less efficient? Compare ratio of Cleric's Celestial Elixir Vs Nature's touch (59 spell vs 60 spell)
Celestial Healing, Divine Light, Remedy Vs Chloroblast

Let's split up that list. You only name three regular heals: Divine Light, Remedy, and Chloroblast. Chloroblast is analogous to Remedy, and it does not have a dramatically worse ratio. There is no druid equivalent to Divine Light, but the ratio on DL is not dramatically better than Chloroblast. Remember that the original post was saying that druid heals have less than 10 percent of the efficiency of cleric heals.

Comparing Celestial Healing to Chloroblast is apples and oranges again. HoT spells have much better ratios than regular heals.

Druids got the short end of the stick on Nature's Touch. No one disputes that. Celestial Elixir and Torpor both blow it away. It's not so much a question of the ratio as it is that Nature's Touch just isn't worth much.

Druids frequently keep group alive on raids ... mm'kay .. I'm not even close to the class of some druids on this board .. but I have unbuffed hp of 2k odd, raided buffed to 4kish ... and guess how much mana it require for me to keep myself alive even ... not to mention other CASTERS in group ... Sorry sir, but you don't know what you are talking about right here

See my comment above. If you're using Vex Thal as the standard for effectiveness of a druid, you've got problems, unless you're proposing a change that would ONLY affect the post-ToV game.

I will tell you .. typically you see 1-5 druids usually on the roster ... and guess what .. cleric numbers are twice that ...
and then look on the recruitment page ...
Druid .... 60 with <insert huge number> AA points
Cleric .... 56

You look at that and tell me what's wrong

Verant has told us, and most of us already knew. The high level game is too dependent on cleric CHs. If you look at the whole recruitment page, you'll see that the cleric requirements are lower than any other class. I played a cleric for a long time, but I'm not about to deny that the high level raiding game depends too much on clerics.

But you're trying to take that fact and transform it into proof that druids are underpowered on raids. That doesn't follow. Verant could solve the problem with dependence on clerical CHs by giving some form of CH to paladins, necromancers, or beastlords. Just because there's a bottleneck, it doesn't follow that druids have to be the beneficiary of the fix.

If Verant decides to give a CH to another class, and they gave me a vote, I'd probably vote for druids. You can make a better case for druids being underpowered than you can for shamans, and the idea of giving a CH to one of the other classes just seems a little weird. The problem then becomes how to do that without making druids greatly overpowered outside of the raid context.

Play a druid 1-60 .. without twinking, without PLing ... and try the best of your ability to learn to group .. group from 30-60 .. and yet still have problems getting a group .. or accepted to good guilds and being wanted and desired for raids ...
then come back and tell us that we don't suck

Maybe so, but when you spend all your time telling everyone how much you suck, it doesn't help you get groups, and it doesn't help you get into guilds. Is it possible that the druid class is perpetuating the negative stereotype that we're talking about? You bet it is.

And I suppose you a warrior and a necromancer are appointed official spokesman for all other classes

No, but I'm still right on that point.

shouldn't be as good as cleric I agree .. but how far is the question .. what most people don't understand is that .. I like most druids .. just want the same balance for druids at 50 to 60 .... compared to other priest like we were from 1 to 40s ... that too much to ask ?

No, but it's hard to achieve. After three expansions, it's hard to even remember what the balance was like back then. The best druid heal would have been Greater Healing. Clerics got Superior Healing and CH. CH wasn't as big a deal because the maximum level was 50, and the most HPs any warrior had was, what, 4000? Maybe less? You wouldn't use CH on a Naggy or Vox raid because of aggro and the slowness of the spell.

If you just look at healing, things weren't balanced at all back in those days. Or were they? Mobs also had a lot less HPs, and they didn't hit as hard. GH wasn't such a puny healing spell in those circumstances.

So how do you re-create a balance that has been dead for almost three years? I'd hate to even try.

I will elaborate more but I'm kinda of lazy .. there's plenty of discussion on this on class balancing forum .. do check it out

Yeah, and I'm too lazy to go to another board to find an argument that you haven't even articulated.

Since I play BOTH a cleric and druid .. does that mean my opinions are objective enough to balance both ?

No, it just means that you're non-objective about two classes, rather than one. :)

Another perspective .. how would someone not familiar with the nuance of each class be able to understand the relative power level of each class and balance them accordingly ?
You will be balancing each class based on what you perceived their power levels to be ... big difference ...

No, you'd be balancing based on the actual results that you observed, which are more meaningful than theoretical discussions about power levels.

XazyMT
09-09-2002, 03:38 AM
I do fully agree shamans and druids do need better heals, I think the current one that is on test would be a great upgrade. At the same time while peope may scoff at me for this, I do think it should cost more mana then the current cleric CH, and have a tad longer recast time. Now I am thinking of it for balancing it still leaves clerics as a better healer, yet at the same time giving the needed upgrade.

Just for the record, yes I have leveled 2 druids up, one to 60 one to 52, have played a 60 shaman in my past, I am currently one of the main clerics in Fury's Edge who deals in strat etc.. Peoni in response to you how 70% heal does not cut it, I currently know of a different guild on other server who do AL, and even AoW and several other encounters with 5-6 clerics and using druids as part of the chain. Yes I admit it is a number of druids to make for one cler, BUT they do it! And as someone who makes groups, I know the power and usefullness of a druid in a group as is, so I would not begin to underestimate how much assistance the new heals would be.

Just curious how everyone here talks about balance, what about mob difficulty balance? It sounds good to balance and give upgrades to all these classes, but by doing so it also nerfs high end encounters. As someone who plays for the challange, I already find the celric new heals amazingly powerful and versatile which has already made encounters easier. Do not get me wrong I do think the new heals should go live, but at the same time do consider how encounters should be upgraded as well then.

vetoafauna
09-09-2002, 04:14 AM
"Bzzzzt, wrong. Druids are secondary healers on raids (which is what we're talking about here). CH is the primary healer's spell. When you compare the mana efficiency of regular heals to the mana efficiency of CH, you're comparing apples and oranges."

No, druids are only secondary healers because people have come to accept this is all they are good for. I'm by no means asking for druids be on par with cleric healing in terms of overall versitality, but CH very much has to be taken into consideration seeing as its the only viable heal on a tank atm, in raid situations especially.

"Try ToV, or for that matter anything involving fire or cold dragons. Only a small percentage of the people who play EQ are ever going to get past ToV. The examples you give are mobs that the vast majority of EQ players will never even see."

And because the vast majority of EQ players will never see these mobs (which i wouldnt even go so far as to agree with, but i'll humor you), druids should lose their balance? Some guilds finished with ToV months ago, and outside of that there's no desire for fr/cr buffs. Perhaps guilds should have left their druids in tov.

"If you're claiming that druids are unbalanced in raids because of what's going on in Vex Thal, you should bear in mind that any "balancing" is going to affect raids to Hate, Fear, Kael Arena, and the like. It would be a dreadful mistake to use the "end game" as a model for balancing the entire 50+ game."

It'd also be a dreadful mistake to balance a class based on crap some people finished doing months/years ago. I dont see your point here, a cleric's efficiency healing continues to grow as a tanks hp increases (into VT), but the druid class should some how not exceed the capability they have at the time their guilds are in PoF?

"We're talking about balancing classes, so it would seem that we agree on this one."

No, we were talking about a druid's desirability to a guild. A guild will not look at a druid and a rogue and say "well, the druid does significantly less damage than the rogue, although his damage is limited by mana, so we can recruit him for dps instead." Again, I'm not pushing for druid dps to exceed what it's already at, but when people are looking for dps then do not turn to druids.

"Comparison does not mean the same thing as compensation. Check the dictionary. To determine whether druids are balanced with other classes, you have to compare druids to the other classes. Duh."

honestly i misread this and thought you said compensation, forgive me it was late at night.

"Actually, that used to happen to me all the time on high level mobs. No joke."

Try charming half the animals in eq.

"If Verant decides to give a CH to another class, and they gave me a vote, I'd probably vote for druids. You can make a better case for druids being underpowered than you can for shamans, and the idea of giving a CH to one of the other classes just seems a little weird. The problem then becomes how to do that without making druids greatly overpowered outside of the raid context."

while we're comparing classes, what would they be overpowered compared to? clerics? well, i think the idea would be to balance clerics outside of raids to be equal strength to that of a CHing druid.

Sorrun
09-09-2002, 06:02 AM
What's with all the damn buzzers? Is that required to quote someone? :)

Sleppen, I disagree... you can only possibly fully understand the classes you have played and it is incredibly arrogant to think that by leading even 1000 raids that you understand a class you never played. Are druids as broken as some druids want to believe... probably not.. but that doesnt make you the druid expert nor does it make many druids here experts on clerics for the same reasons... or shaman or any other class for that matter.

The principle applies across the board...

phluux
09-09-2002, 06:24 AM
I just skipped a few pages and posts because they were class comparison posts. My druid has been my primary since April 1999. I've played a cleric in raids and been in cheal rotations. Thats all the exp I've had with a cleric. Never played a shaman. I have a 54 beastlord. With all that said, here's my take on things.

First, Beastlords are not healers. Calling them a priest class is a stretch. ;) Their best heal is Greater Healing and it should stay that way. What Beastlords need is pet oriented.

Druids -- I don't want a cheal because I don't want to be stuck in a cheal rotation. I would rather have a 2-3k heal that is reasonably efficient. I don't want to spend a ton of mana on a 2-3k heal because I simply won't use it. I would like to see Nature's Recovery brought more in-line with Torpor or a celestial elixir type spell, and I wouldn't mind seeing some sort of group heal.

I want a dot upgrade. Having a level 53 dot as my highest dot at level 60 is disappointing and was hopefully an oversight on Verant's part.

I want a CLASS-SPECIFIC ability... but I don't know what that is right now. :)

My nukes are good (Moonfire, Wildfire, Breath of Karana). I'm happy with them, however I wouldn't *mind* having SCFM. I'm not requesting it though.

The removal of snare on the epic was a good thing. This weekend I grouped with 5 other guild druids and we tore things up. It would be NICE if it was reduced from a 3 minute dot to 1 or even 2 minutes.

Druids should be able to channel their magic together and do some powerful things. This was suggested before, and I think its a great idea but don't know if it would even be possible with the current game engine. Whether its a manaburn-type nuke, a complete heal or whatever. There should (and this would be) a reason to enjoy and benefit having druids on your raid. Problem is that I think this would be pretty complicated for Verant to do, so its a long shot.. but it certainly would rock!

Rainus7
09-09-2002, 06:45 AM
'Bzzzzt, wrong. Druids are secondary healers on raids (which is what we're talking about here). CH is the primary healer's spell. When you compare the mana efficiency of regular heals to the mana efficiency of CH, you're comparing apples and oranges.'


Which is why I left out CH for comparison ? doh


'Try ToV, or for that matter anything involving fire or cold dragons. Only a small percentage of the people who play EQ are ever going to get past ToV. The examples you give are mobs that the vast majority of EQ players will never even see.

If you're claiming that druids are unbalanced in raids because of what's going on in Vex Thal, you should bear in mind that any "balancing" is going to affect raids to Hate, Fear, Kael Arena, and the like. It would be a dreadful mistake to use the "end game" as a model for balancing the entire 50+ game.'

You a retro player or something? So you are saying we should use stuff in the last expansion for balancing when another expansion is due like in 2 months or so ?

Let's split up that list. You only name three regular heals: Divine Light, Remedy, and Chloroblast. Chloroblast is analogous to Remedy, and it does not have a dramatically worse ratio. There is no druid equivalent to Divine Light, but the ratio on DL is not dramatically better than Chloroblast. Remember that the original post was saying that druid heals have less than 10 percent of the efficiency of cleric heals.

'Comparing Celestial Healing to Chloroblast is apples and oranges again. HoT spells have much better ratios than regular heals.

Druids got the short end of the stick on Nature's Touch. No one disputes that. Celestial Elixir and Torpor both blow it away. It's not so much a question of the ratio as it is that Nature's Touch just isn't worth much.'

Well it seems you can agree there can be no comparison since all the heals that a druid has at 60 is so subpar that it might as well be rotten apples .. since I can't even compare a heal we get at 55 to celestial heal (44 spell if I'm not wrong)

'See my comment above. If you're using Vex Thal as the standard for effectiveness of a druid, you've got problems, unless you're proposing a change that would ONLY affect the post-ToV game.'

Click on my profile .. see ANY VT, NTOV gear ? ... nopes just your everyday Full Skyshrine armor plus a few quest item here and there .. not really that tough for anyone to get with some time and effort ...
Sorry to burst your bubble .. Not been to VT .. and not likely to see it sometime before 2003 ...
You obviously haven't gone out of Velious much if you think so ... read my previous comment on retro player

'Maybe so, but when you spend all your time telling everyone how much you suck, it doesn't help you get groups, and it doesn't help you get into guilds. Is it possible that the druid class is perpetuating the negative stereotype that we're talking about? You bet it is.'

It's a figurative statement on 'walking in someone's shoes for a change before you open your mouth and comment about someone's shoes size' Get it ?

'So how do you re-create a balance that has been dead for almost three years? I'd hate to even try.'

A fixed percentage heal similar to Cheal (can be anything from 1-100%) that will scale so as to speak as players get more and more hp will be a good start ?

Saurin CoTG
09-09-2002, 08:08 AM
Looking at a slightly different approach to this topic, I feel that the balance between a cleric and a shaman are pretty good. The reason? The cleric superior healing ability is measured against the lack of meaningful damage mitigation. The Shamans more modest healing is balanced in a cooperative manner with their superior damage mitigation.

The druid falls somewhere in between and in perhaps fails on both ends. Originally, the increased damage ability of the druid was the balancing factor. Mob dying faster=its own version of damage mitigation. However, druid DPS (Dmg shields, dots, DDs) has not really scaled that well, and in fact, probably can't scale too much more without infringing on other classes. Perhaps some modifications can occur here, but probably not enough to correct the current level of modest healing.

I have long thought the solution was some form of damage mitigation which corresponds with whatever level of healing SOE decides the druid class should have. Obviously, the easiest answer is some form of slow, but I am not sure that is the right answer. I am sure that folks more creative than I am, can come up with alternative damage mitigation spells.

Finally, I agree with Scirocco, in that I would prefer better tools to be a better secondary raid healer (if in fact that is going to be my role) rather than a scaled down version of a primary heal. The additional healing spells they just added to clerics would be more useful than the currently proposed spell on test.

Krysteel
09-09-2002, 08:37 AM
Hi Fyyr! /hug

Cassea, I really enjoyed this thread while it remained constructive. A very good place to cultivate ideas that are somewhat biased but the poster also tries to see the larger picture of how the priests classes should cooperate, not compete - sometimes bitterly.

Unfortunately, the discussion has become polarized. Personal attacks about, "you can't possibly know our plight, go spend 2+ years leveling a druid, then I'll respect your opinion" and "druids can't objectively look at their class because they are too close to the problem". Two things which can't possibly change in the course of the discussion. /sigh

The thread ran almost 4 days before the sniping started. Not bad. Maybe the next attempt will be better. Till next time.

/applaud Cassea

-Krys
59 cleric
Bristlebane server

Bam102465
09-09-2002, 08:52 AM
I agree it seems kind of lame to be using a level 53 DoT at level 60. We probably should have a better dot after WD, but that isn't as important as some other things. None of this will matter though since VI doesn't seem motivated to make druids viable, otherwise they would done so already having seen all the backlash the recent patches have generated.

I wouldn't mind seeing how morons like Sleppen would react if they had fear taken away. Go back to your own boards where you belong.

Broomhilda
09-09-2002, 09:36 AM
"I have to disagree with you there. Let me start by making a point that I think a lot of people are missing. "Balance" requires some sort of comparison. You balance A against B, not just A against A. When we talk about class balance, we are talking about balancing the classes against each other."


I completely agree, which is why i dont understand why some Druids here refuse to compare Druids vs Clerics or Druids vs Shaman. They are our biggest competitors for that healer slot in a group. Every group has to have one, and their choices are Cleric, Shaman, or Druid. To only compare a Druid to a Druid is naive, and makes no sense. And by using the term "balance", i do hope you mean it to be equally desired in exp groups and raids, or some balance thereof. Clerics and Shaman ARE prefered in exp groups over Druids, if you ever did pickup groups you would know that. It has nothing to do with how well a Druid can play his/her class, it has to do with what that group perceives Druids can bring to their group. Clerics are clearly more desirable and contribute more than Druids on raids, this cant be disputed. So wheres the balance you were speaking about?
---------------------

"You folks may be incredibly knowledgeable about your own class, but that has little to do with balance. Someone does not need to know the nuances of your class to compare the power level of your class to other classes. All they have to do is watch the various classes in operation. If you disagree with that statement, then you must be saying that the only people who can discuss balance are those who are totally knowledgeable about every class in the game. That excludes almost everyone who has posted in this thread."


I agree, so IF you ever did pickup groups, you'd know that Druids are the least desired healing class. When a Cleric, Shaman, and Druid are all LFG, dont you see that the Cleric and Shaman are almost always prefered? Why is that? Because there are only 3 priest classes that are considered healers. Every group needs at least one of these, and the 2 most capable at keeping a group alive are Clerics and Shamans, Druids coming in at a distant 3rd. Of course the fact remains that you HAVE to do pickup groups to see this, or you'd have no idea about what classes are truly being picked up first and are prefered in exp groups. So my question to you would be do you base your experiences on desirability from pickup exp groups? Or do you base it on your sheltered environment of grouping with the same people all of the time? If your going to tell me that Clerics and Shamans and Druids are equally desired in pickup groups, then i'll say your a liar because i see it every other day.

Twirlingwood
09-09-2002, 09:39 AM
I can understand other priest classes visiting this board to discusss issues that effect the classes we play. What is harder for me is to read through some ****e written by a warrior/necro telling me how and what my class should be?

go home they miss you

Peace
Thistlewood

Raeyne Goldenleaf
09-09-2002, 10:22 AM
/agree Thistlewood

Sleppen
09-09-2002, 11:06 AM
No, druids are only secondary healers because people have come to accept this is all they are good for.

Go back and check that quote from Rich Waters, which is in an earlier post in this thread. Druids and shamans are secondary healers on raids because that is what Verant intends them to be.

And because the vast majority of EQ players will never see these mobs (which i wouldnt even go so far as to agree with, but i'll humor you), druids should lose their balance? Some guilds finished with ToV months ago, and outside of that there's no desire for fr/cr buffs. Perhaps guilds should have left their druids in tov.

I note that you and the others don't want to address my point. Are you really going to allow the post-ToV game to be the standard for balancing the classes in the entire game? Alternatively, if PoP is filled with fire and cold mobs, does that make druids better balanced? I would hope that the answer to both questions is no. We need to look at the entire raiding game, not just one segment.

"We're talking about balancing classes, so it would seem that we agree on this one."

No, we were talking about a druid's desirability to a guild.&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp

No, you're talking about that. This thread is about class balancing.

Are druids as broken as some druids want to believe... probably not.. but that doesnt make you the druid expert nor does it make many druids here experts on clerics for the same reasons... or shaman or any other class for that matter.

Sure, but when we talk about balancing, we are necessarily talking about multiple classes. I'm reacting to the silly notion that only a druid knows how to balance the druid class.

You a retro player or something? So you are saying we should use stuff in the last expansion for balancing when another expansion is due like in 2 months or so ?

I'm saying that we have to look at the entire 50+ raiding game. If you focus on just the post-ToV game, you run the risk of doing more harm than good.

If the "end game" is really your concern, then why not propose a solution that is geared to the end game? If you really feel that druids are underpowered in the post-ToV game, it's possible to raise the power level in that segment of the game without changing the power level in the other segments of the game. Example: Ancient spells that drop only off end game mobs, or spells that require components, or spells that only work in certain places.

And by using the term "balance", i do hope you mean it to be equally desired in exp groups and raids, or some balance thereof. Clerics and Shaman ARE prefered in exp groups over Druids, if you ever did pickup groups you would know that. It has nothing to do with how well a Druid can play his/her class, it has to do with what that group perceives Druids can bring to their group. Clerics are clearly more desirable and contribute more than Druids on raids, this cant be disputed. So wheres the balance you were speaking about?

Actually, I'd evaluate groups and raids separately. For groups, I think you hit the nail on the head when you talk about a group's perception. A great deal of the problem is that people perceive druids to be less effective than they really are. I'll grant you that clerics and shamans have an advantage in getting groups, but there is a definite trend toward the realization that most experience camps can be handled without a cleric. As the power level in the game continues to rise, more and more people are going to realize that you don't need a CHing cleric to kill frogs in OS.

For raids, the reason that clerics are more desirable is the CH bottleneck. Comparing druids to clerics in the raid context is unreasonable because no class compares to clerics as long as the bottleneck exists. Verant intends to break the bottleneck, which would be a good thing. What we need to think about is how the classes are going to stack up after the bottleneck is broken.

Let me try saying that a different way. Suppose we ranked balance on a 100 point scale, with 50 representing a perfectly balanced class. Let's say that clerics are currently at 100 because of the bottleneck, and that druids are at 40. If we break the bottleneck and give druids a CH, that might move them to 70, while moving clerics to 50.

Oh, don't quibble with my numbers. I'm trying to illustrate a point, not assign real numbers to class balance. If the CH bottleneck is going to get broken, we have to think ahead to how the EQ world will look in the post-bottleneck era. If you're going to get rid of the CH bottleneck, then you have to assign less value to the ability to cast CH.

I wouldn't mind seeing how morons like Sleppen would react if they had fear taken away. Go back to your own boards where you belong.

It's nice to know that the druid community is so open to opposing viewpoints.

I can understand other priest classes visiting this board to discusss issues that effect the classes we play. What is harder for me is to read through some ****e written by a warrior/necro telling me how and what my class should be?

I'm glad to see you took the time to read the posts so carefully. lol

Sorrun
09-09-2002, 11:11 AM
I'm reacting to the silly notion that only a druid knows how to balance the druid class.

Do you trust me to balance necros, warriors or clerics given that I have only played a warrior to 20 and never touched a necro or cleric in recent history?

If so, then we are in complete agreement... :)

Forin
09-09-2002, 11:23 AM
CH is not the be all and end all of healing in a group as a cleric. The HoT spells and better heals are used far, far more often. They are all that is needed and they are very utilitarian.

At this point in the life of EQ, CH is pretty much a spell used predominantly in raids. I know of very few clerics who rely strictly on CH, except in dire emergencies. And then, they either need some serious crowd control to support them or they're going to be firing off Divine Aura/Divine Barrier (or both) until the rest of the group can control the agro again.

One factor that alot of people are ignoring in this thread when comparing druid and cleric healing capabilities:

Specialization.

How many druids specialize in Alteration? Maybe 1/3? Most are probably split between specialization:Conjuration and specialization:Evocation.

How many clerics specialize in Alteration? I don't think we'd be too far off mark if we said 95% or more.

That is a very, very big difference in what's happening. It may take a level 60 cleric with 200 points in specialization:Alteration only a bubble of mana to keep a single group healed in a minor encounter. A druid who has 50 points in specialization:alteration is going to burn at least twice that by paying full cost for the spells and fizzling more. Compound that by less efficient heals (GH vs. SH , SH vs CE or DL) and it gets worse.

In some respects, the choice to go "solo" vs "group" is played out in specialization selections. Clerics predominantly go the Alteration route, and choose group efficiency. Druids don't.

The gyst of what I'm trying to get at is this: You can't have your cake and eat it too. Your ability to solo effectively or group effectively is tied to your specialization choices. That aspect of the game is long standing. It (IMHO) is the crux of the "healing" controversy.

A priest class that has not specialized in Alteration won't be anywhere near as efficient at healing as one who has - spell differences aside. If you want to shift gears from being optimized for solo play to being optimized for group play, the quest is available in the Temple of Solusek Ro to switch your specialization.

Talyena Trueheart
09-09-2002, 11:25 AM
Go back and check that quote from Rich Waters, which is in an earlier post in this thread. Druids and shamans are secondary healers on raids because that is what Verant intends them to be.

Clerics have always been a healing specialist, but the situation has escalated such that many raid level encounters may not be undertaken without disproportionally large numbers of clerics. No other class has been able to fill in if a cleric is absent, and healing is too important of a role to allow one class to dominate it so completely.

Rich Waters

toreyj01
09-09-2002, 11:30 AM
So much for the "Welcome".

Real hard to gain an open discussion with name calling isn't it?

Have a nice day :)

Saurin CoTG
09-09-2002, 11:30 AM
Forin stated:

"How many druids specialize in Alteration? Maybe 1/3"

Actually, the data here at the Grove suggests that druids are just about equally split between alteration and evocation. Almost none go conjuration.

Broomhilda
09-09-2002, 11:36 AM
"As the power level in the game continues to rise, more and more people are going to realize that you don't need a CHing cleric to kill frogs in OS."

Your point here is extremely off. The bar has been raised in terms of where the best experience is, and that is in the harder exp spots. Most groups in CT know a Druid isnt competent enough to fill their healing slot, wheras a Cleric or Shaman are. So 60 Druids are reduced to hopefully beating out lvl 56 clerics and Shamans in OS where they still lose(sadly a 56 Cleric and Shaman can STILL keep a group alive better than a 60 Druid, WTF?). Clerics still get groups over Druids in the easy places, go to OS and see for yourself. I do pickup groups so often that im confident in what i see and know to be true.

Trust me, its very difficult for Druids to get a group when all priest classes are available. We're the least desired priest class for exp groups by a large margin :(

phluux
09-09-2002, 11:40 AM
"We probably should have a better dot after WD, but that isn't as important as some other things."

It may not be as important as raising our healing abilities somewhat, but it is important nevertheless.

The reason why an upgraded dot IS important is because we really shouldn't be asking for better nukes, we're good there. Go with an upgraded DoT and it won't make any wizards mad, and we still wouldn't be as powerful as shaman or necros as far as dots go, so we're not stepping on anyone's toes. :)

Broomhilda
09-09-2002, 11:48 AM
Actually, we'd be stepping on Necro's toes with new DoTs. Personally, i dont think we need one, between what we have in WD, BoR, Epic, and DoD(i guess) we do pretty good damage. Any way we go about it, we'll be stepping on somebodys toes because theres a specialist for almost anything we have that can be improved. The argument shouldnt center around not stepping on anyones toes, thats a fact of reality another class is going to have to accept, and Clerics need to realize that more than anyone else. Especially since the whole reason they got their new abilities was due to Verant setting up giving away some of their healing power.

We HAVE to step on somebodys toes to be improved, unless we get a whole new ability which imo is asking for too much since if the ability was worth a crap, they'd have to redo every encounter for that new ability.

Znail vh
09-09-2002, 11:51 AM
I am curious about the point of a class balance discussion only those who have played a druid to level 60 can understand and agree with?

Quote by Rainus7:
------------------------------------------------------------
Not dramatically less efficient? Compare ratio of Cleric's Celestial Elixir Vs Nature's touch (59 spell vs 60 spell)
Celestial Healing, Divine Light, Remedy Vs Chloroblast
(excluding the new heals Clerics just got in the new patch)
I'm not much into numbers, but I do know my cleric can keep my rogue up and tanking with less than a bulb of mana while my druid will labour with more than 2/3 of his mana pool ..
------------------------------------------------------------
I can help you some with the numbers. NT is 73% as effective as CE. So I think 2/3 of a druids manapool will be more then enuff to keep up with 1/5 of a clerics.


And some suggestions by myself:

The proposed heal on test arent enuff to make druids able to replace clerics in high end raids. But its more then enuff for groups. So I dont like it much, as its raids where the problem of cleric dependancy is. This also applies to 'raid' class xp locations like CT and Sssra.

I want it to be a 'real' CH costing 600-800 mana or if the 'incomplete' heal format is wanted, a 50% heal of max 5000 hp.
The new etheral heals for clerics could also be given out at 75% efficiency to keep in line with the old diffrence.

phluux
09-09-2002, 11:58 AM
Nah, we wouldn't be infringing on necros. Their dots are WAY more powerful than ours. (not to mention great lifetaps which are comparable to druid nukes)

I don't think druids need one thing (75% heal) to be more balanced.. I think they need a few smaller things, one being a 2-3k heal. If they give druids one heal and thats it, I would really be disappointed, because I don't think that in any way offers a group the same perks as having a cleric does.

Still, I'm tired of having watered down versions of this or that, we need something that is unique to the class.

Wonder if they could do anything to improve on the Sunbeam spell. Doh, outdoors only! :(

vetoafauna
09-09-2002, 11:59 AM
look sleppen. what i want for group situations, as a druid, is to be taken into a group and be able to fill the role of a healer should no clerics be available. currently, groups are flat out not taking any healer at all hoping a guild cleric logs on or something before taking a druid, because they know that a druid can't get the job done. for raid situations, i want the number of druids to directly affect the number of clerics that are NEEDED to kill high end mobs (no, not ToV stuff). If that means giving us the ethereal spells so we can be top notch back up and patch healers, so be it. If that means giving us CH so we can be in a cycle, then so be it. I'm gonna give verant the benefit of the doubt and trust they'll make the right decision. I'd also like clerics to be able to quad kite. Seriously, get them out of our hair every time we bring up a balance concern that we can solo to 60 or whatever.

if you dont have anything constructive to add, please, dont let the door hit you on the @#%$

Kalinn
09-09-2002, 12:00 PM
forin, you obviously do not know much concerning the specialization of druids. i would estimate maybe 1% (and thats being generous) are spec conj. the rest are fairly evenly split between alter and evoc.

i AM an alteration spec, and i can tell you it has little to do with making my life easier when it comes to healing. our heals are so far below par that even alter spec makes little difference. the grand effect it has is making our NT/chloro efficiency go from non-alter spec 388 mana (2.62hp/mana) to 356 mana (2.74hp/mana). even after alter specs, these ratios do not come anywhere close to the 4-6.0 hp/mana ratio on the clr/shm HoTs, and certainly wont touch the efficiency of CH.

clerics do NOT choose alt spec because they group more. they choose alt spec because the vast majority of their spells are alt. heals, da's, gate, roots, rez. just as a wizzie chooses evoc, whether they group or solo has nothing to do with it.

a druids spec has little to do with whether they function better in groups or not. what it does affect is how well they function in certain roles. and that depends on the group you are in. sometimes you do more nuking, sometimes you do more healing. but the point of a druid is versatility, and our versatility is not so versatile depending on our spec and our current role.

this could easily be addressed by giving the druids a class based aaxp skill that allows a second specialization to reach 200. and would be very fitting since our only unique class aaxp is the cheesy enhanced root that many druids do not take anyway because of its negative effect on their cc role.

Bam102465
09-09-2002, 01:02 PM
I'm open to things that aren't ignorant. You don't know what you're talking about Sleppen, so that makes what you say ignorant. You aren't offering anything constructive, just more druid-bashing. Come back when you know something about our class and it's role(or lack thereof) in this game. Start with the premise that there's something wrong with druids and we can go from there. And yes, there IS something wrong with the class right now, has been for quite some time. Do that and I will listen to what you say with respectful acknowledgement, even though we still might not agree.

It also doesn't help when people like you come to another classes' boards to try and "muddy the waters". That's when one class feels threatened or has some personal vendetta against another class and comes to their boards to try and confuse or even diffuse the issues but saying things aren't as bad as the other class makes out, etc. Verant comes to the different class boards. Do you think we have a better chance of getting some of these things fixed if it's unanimous that things are broke or when they see a few people say "things aren't all that bad"? Don't speak for us until you play a druid. Oh yeah, and play one more than a week.

I don't go to the necro boards and bash your class(or any other class boards for that matter). If you have something constructive to say then so be it, but if you're just going to claim druids are okay right now then you're clueless and shouldn't be posting here.

Sorrun
09-09-2002, 01:48 PM
I agree that class balance is about comparing A to B to C and back again... that is not the issue.

The issue is that a number of players think they are somehow qualified to knowledgably represent classes they have never played. That is where I have a problem and it isnt limited to the Grove... I see it on almost every board I visit.

In a perfect world, we would have knowledgeble, mature players openly discuss class balance and have no flames, name calling, blatent class envy or other distractions.

In our world, we have immature players who prefer name calling and flames, we have players who are so arrogant to think they can represent another class even though they havent ever played that class and we have rampent paranoia and class envy.

In a perfect world, class balance is definately achievable... in our world, it is virtually impossible. Therefore, we are at the mercy of Verant and thier design team to come up with their definition of class balance... :)

Forin
09-09-2002, 03:45 PM
I apologize if my determination of specialization for druids was a bit off. Note I made it a rhetorical question as I didn't know the number. Thanks for the input :)

Also, personally - I was told to choose specialization:alteration as my specialization route NOT because I had a lot of spells which were alteration BUT SPECIFICALLY so I would heal better. Buffs, etc. were just ancillary.

I think the person said something like this to me: "If you choose any other specialization other than alteration as a cleric, you are a dolt. You will heal like #*(&) and won't be an asset to your group or guild."

My next question: How do druids who are spec:alt find their healing capabilities relative to druids that are spec:evocation?

FyyrLuStorm
09-09-2002, 03:57 PM
Forin,

Aside from some fizzle anomolies with obvious broken spells(fizzle rates).


Alt is 200
Evoc is 50

If I cast an Alt spell, heals for instance, I save 11% of the mana on the cast.

If I cast an Evoc spell, such as a nuke, I save 3% of the mana on the cast.



Is that 8% difference really all that big of a deal?

Aside from Breath of Ro, I don't really think so. Evoc casters have that one over me, big time. I don't cast it, fizzles combined with it's higher resist rate, puts it in the back of the book.

Added note, a fizzle of a spell costs 34% of the spells mana per fizzle.

Kalinn
09-09-2002, 05:08 PM
i can say with absolute sincerity that in my experience as an alteration druid, and i have been an alter druid since i hit lvl 30 3 years ago, our spec makes very little difference in our healing ability at this time.

NT with evoc spec: 388 mana (2.62hp/mana)
NT with alter spec: 356 mana (2.74hp/mana)

where druids differ in healing from the other priests is in basic spell EFFICIENCY when it comes to damage mitigation.

clerics have CH, which delivers lets say only 3000hp healed (and indeed some are more, some are less) for 356 mana, which comes out to 8.42 hp/mana. they also have celestial elixir, 300 for 4 tick HoT for 267 mana, with a ratio of 4.49 hp/mana.

shaman have most importantly slow, which reduces the basic need for healing by up to 75%. on top of that is torpor which delivers 1200hp for 178-194 mana at a ratio of 6.74-6.18 hp/mana (variations due to specialization).

efficiency is affected by mana cost and mana regen. while all priests are decent for mana regen, when it comes to mana cost on healing spells, druids fall WAY short of acceptable in comparison to the other two classes.

Talyena Trueheart
09-09-2002, 09:24 PM
I can help you some with the numbers. NT is 73% as effective as CE.

NT has an hp to mana ratio of 2.445. CE has a hp to mana ratio of 4 (sometimes 5 if you get the extra tick). That makes NT 61% as efficient as CE (or 48.9% if you get that extra tick).

Quelm
09-09-2002, 09:58 PM
How much is the 8% difference? Well, 8% :)

If you pick up 30 mana/tick in an xp group, and do nothing but heal, alteration specialization saves 8% of that over evocation, or 2.4 mana. In this case it is about the equivalent of a FT "1/2" item. Likewise for nukers nuking.

If you spend 4000 mana on heals in a short amount of time, alteration specialization will leave you with 320 more mana over evocation specialization.

Kalinn's point about mana ratios should be explained to folks who come to the boards spouting off about druids who can't heal because they chose Evocation. We can't heal because of bad ratios on our spells with reasonable recast times. Alteration specialization helps a bit, but 112% of 2.4 is still way short of 4, 6 and 10 (rough ratios for CE, HWoP, CH)

Sleppen
09-10-2002, 06:14 AM
Do you trust me to balance necros, warriors or clerics given that I have only played a warrior to 20 and never touched a necro or cleric in recent history?

I accept your ability to comment on the relative balance of those classes and whether those classes need upgrades. If you decided that, say, necros needed an upgrade, I'd assume that you'd check with the necros about possible ways to do it.

The problem I have with what the druid community is saying in this thread is that you're claiming the right to decide whether you need to be upgraded. Forget it, folks. You can't be objective about that.

Talyena, you are the second person in this thread who has butchered the quote from Rich Waters for your own purposes. Let me quote the whole thing again, including the key sentence that you seem so desperate to ignore:

It's important that clerics maintain their role as the premier healer of the game. Raid quality heals are being added for other priests to allow them to fulfill their role as secondary healers in most situations. Clerics have always been a healing specialist, but the situation has escalated such that many raid level encounters may not be undertaken without disproportionally large numbers of clerics. No other class has been able to fill in if a cleric is absent, and healing is too important of a role to allow one class to dominate it so completely. After these changes are complete, clerics will still be the very best of healers but other priests class are able to substitute to some degree.

Your point here is extremely off. The bar has been raised in terms of where the best experience is, and that is in the harder exp spots.

That's relevant only if you feel that a druid must be able to play the primary healer role in every experience camp in the game.

So 60 Druids are reduced to hopefully beating out lvl 56 clerics and Shamans in OS where they still lose(sadly a 56 Cleric and Shaman can STILL keep a group alive better than a 60 Druid, WTF?).

A 56 cleric should be able to outheal a 60 druid. The 56 shaman is more of a problem, frankly. The slow spell gives the shaman an unfair advantage over the druid as a healer.

I am curious about the point of a class balance discussion only those who have played a druid to level 60 can understand and agree with?

You too, huh?

if you dont have anything constructive to add, please, dont let the door hit you on the @#%$ &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp

It's interesting how the druid community also claims the right to decide which comments are constructive and which are not. Non-constructive = disagreeing with druids.

But actually, I respect your candor, Veto. At least you admit that your wishlist is what you "want." You aren't claiming that it has anything to do with "balance."

these ratios do not come anywhere close to the 4-6.0 hp/mana ratio on the clr/shm HoTs, and certainly wont touch the efficiency of CH.

Yes, HoTs are more efficient than regular heals. So what? They are also slow as hell, which makes them much less functional than regular heals. That's the tradeoff.

I don't go to the necro boards and bash your class(or any other class boards for that matter). If you have something constructive to say then so be it, but if you're just going to claim druids are okay right now then you're clueless and shouldn't be posting here.

To the person who started this thread and invited other classes: read this guy's entire post. I think this shows the futility of a thread like this. A lot of the druids on this board just cannot deal with opposing viewpoints. In the eyes of someone like this, a comment is not constructive unless it agrees with the notion that druids require upgrades.

Znail vh
09-10-2002, 06:22 AM
Ah, Talyena, I noticed now that I used old numbers when I did the calculation. Sorry about that.

So, 61% of 2/3 is still better then 1/5. Even using 49% will do that.

CE is also a healing over time and Druids have access to as many as 3 diffrent regen spells that stack (Natureskin, Regrowth and Natures Recovery). They may not be awesome, but they are something druids have and clerics do not.

So outside CH (wich in some form will be given to Druids) and the new etheral heals (wich is part of the balancing upgrades that will give druids something as wel) so are druids not that bad at healing.

Talyena Trueheart
09-10-2002, 06:54 AM
CE is also a healing over time and Druids have access to as many as 3 diffrent regen spells that stack (Natureskin, Regrowth and Natures Recovery).

Using Natureskin means I have to use an inferior buff with very low regen and no group version. As for using inferior buffs goes though, clerics often totally forget about HB once they get aego, yet using HB and symbol means clerics have available to them a 400hp, 420 mana group heal that casts in 3.5 seconds with no recast (except the 2.5 spell refresh) and little or no aggro.

Bam102465
09-10-2002, 09:34 AM
You finally got it Sleppen. Everyone but you seems to realize druids are broken. Now go away.

Kalinn
09-10-2002, 11:25 AM
A 56 cleric should be able to outheal a 60 druid.

accepted, and thats FINE. what is NOT fine is the fact that a 39 cleric can heal better than a 60 druid with 150aaxp. that is not balanced, and that is what our healing requests are meant to address.

a warrior is not meant to deal as much damage as a rogue of equal level/ability/gear. but does a 60 warrior with 150aaxp otudamage a lvl 39 rog/rng/mnk? you are damn right they do, by a hellaciously long shot. thats balanced.

Yes, HoTs are more efficient than regular heals. So what? They are also slow as hell, which makes them much less functional than regular heals. That's the tradeoff.

tradeoffs are understandable. the problem comes in that clerics and shaman have the CHOICE of whether to use the HoT or a direct heal. if mana is fine, use the faster direct heal, if mana is tight, use the more efficient heal and accept the tradeoff. but the druid has no such choice. we are stuck with low efficiency direct heals which drain mana.

for znail and sleppen:
(numbers using non-alter spec for shm and alter spec for dru)
cleric HoT: 267 mana 1200 hp 4.49hp/mana
shaman HoT: 194 mana 1200 hp 6.18hp/mana
druid natures recovery: 223 mana 900 hp 4.03hp/mana

if the cleric HoT is the basis, and the shaman pay for their greater efficiency with the slow that accompanies the healing, what possible benefit is the druid paying for when they have the penalties of not only a lower efficiency but also a duration that is over 7 times longer?

vetoafauna
09-10-2002, 03:57 PM
sorry sleppen but being able to heal at any exp camp in the game vs being PREFERED to clerics are two totally different things. I think druids, and shamans, should be able to heal at any camp out there that would be camped for exp, but i dont think they should ever be picked over a cleric if they are available. thats why CH would work quite well to make such balance, druids/shamans would be able to heal as efficiently as a cleric but they dont have the healing versitality (ER is crazy hp/sec), group heals, aego, or rezzes. Some places, CH simply wont do a whole lot of good and the druid will STILL be oom from chloroblasting a chanter over and over, and thats why any group would RATHER have a cleric, but COULD settle for a druid and actually expect the druid to keep them alive.

ps, yeah i know my "wishlist" is alot. But if ya ask for twice what's balanced, you might end up getting half that.

Forin
09-10-2002, 04:03 PM
I wasn't saying an Spec:Evoc druid couldn't heal, just that theoretically that druid would be at a disadvantage and the discussion didn't seem to be discussing specialization issues.

You seem to feel its not a significant factor. So be it.

However, how does the AA skill spell casting mastery affect it when compounded by specialization? Just a question.

Znail vh
09-10-2002, 04:03 PM
Quote by Vetoafauna:
------------------------------------------------------------
ps, yeah i know my "wishlist" is alot. But if ya ask for twice what's balanced, you might end up getting half that.
------------------------------------------------------------
Problem is that you may get the half you least wanted.

Forin
09-10-2002, 04:12 PM
Another factor...

Personally I think the "group favorability" issue has been mostly a level 56+ issue and strongly associated with "tankflation". Note, please, I said mostly. There are some nasty level bands within either druids or shaman advancement where acting as the sole healer against some content is nigh on impossible. However, the sad fact is that most 56+ tanks can solo level 45 mobs with minimal damage. Adding a priest as a healer has minimal affect on their exp. The end result has been duos camping content which was intended for full groups so a significant number of players end up LFG looking for something, anything, to do. We all look for a reason, and all it takes is one "I don't need you because your a <insert class here>" to get the thunder starting on any of the class boards.

Has anyone noticed a change in this since the 51+ grouping against high end mobs bonus went into effect? More larger groups should mean less LFG overall. If there are more larger groups, then maybe the strife can die down.

Quelm
09-10-2002, 04:30 PM
Forin, my mini-rant wasn't directed at you :) You asked a reasonable question, politely. We've had other visitors to the boards proclaiming that the main reason druids couldn't heal was their choice of Evocation specialization. While it does make a difference, given the vast differences in hp/mana ratios on our spells vs. those of other healers, specialization is insufficient for turning a druid into a high-powered healer.

SCM helps. I have 200 alteration specialization, and SCM3 (still saving up / hunting for a mana pres item), and I can cast Chloroblast & Nature's Touch a lot. With a cleric in the group, I hardly ever heal. RotG and NR are usually worth casting, but Celestial Elixir, Complete Heal, Group Heal/Elixir, or Group Complete Heal are all far more efficient. Without a cleric, a slower is almost mandatory, although damage sharing and judicious use of Mend and damage reducing disciplines like Stonestance or Defensive can keep an unbalanced group going on druid heals. Basically, being a good healer as a druid has more to do with figuring out how not to heal, than it does with spell or skill selection.

errr, /ramble off

-Quelm

Kalinn
09-10-2002, 06:23 PM
how does the AA skill spell casting mastery affect it when compounded by specialization?

i have alter spec, scm2, and mana pres 3 item. and STILL, healing is a large burden because of the inefficiency of our spells. our best efficiency we get is at about 61% the efficiency of clerics HoT, and thats with druid alter spec. the percentages of our healing in comparison to torpor or even a 3k hp CH is absolutely pathetic.

my NT currently does 978 for 314 mana which is a ratio of 3.11 hp/mana. still a far far cry from the 4.49 efficiency of cel elixir, the 8.42 ratio of CH, or the 6.18 of torpor. keep in mind that the other priests can also increase their efficiencies with aaxp and focus items. a cleric and shaman in the same circumstances as i am would have hp/mana healing ratios of 5.08 cel elixir, 9.55 CH, and 6.93 torpor.

but even if alt spec, scm2, and mana pres item were enough to bring druid heal ratios more in line with other priests, one fact still remains true:

a priest class should not be dependant upon focus items, aaxp, or specialization to be an equivalent healer as other priests without the items/aaxp/spec. those things are suppose to make us BETTER healers, not just "almost good enough".

Sleppen
09-11-2002, 07:58 AM
accepted, and thats FINE. what is NOT fine is the fact that a 39 cleric can heal better than a 60 druid with 150aaxp. that is not balanced, and that is what our healing requests are meant to address.

That's not true. A level 39 cleric has CH, Superior Healing, and the mana pool of a level 39 character. The 60 druid is going to blow away a 39 cleric.

I understand that you were using hyperbole. What you have got to accept is that druids are not going to be able to heal as well as a cleric. Although many of you are quick to say that you agree with that, my sense is that a lot of you are in denial. I submit to you that, from a balance perspective, the question isn't whether a 60 druid can outheal a cleric of any level, but rather whether a druid can be a functional substitute for a cleric in a reasonable array of experience camps (not all experience camps). More on this later in the post.

for znail and sleppen:
(numbers using non-alter spec for shm and alter spec for dru)
cleric HoT: 267 mana 1200 hp 4.49hp/mana
shaman HoT: 194 mana 1200 hp 6.18hp/mana
druid natures recovery: 223 mana 900 hp 4.03hp/mana

Just to keep things clear, I've already said in this thread that Nature's Touch is screwed up. I just object to you comparing the mana efficiency of HoTs and regular heals. More on Nature's Touch later in the thread.

yeah i know my "wishlist" is alot. But if ya ask for twice what's balanced, you might end up getting half that.

Again, I appreciate your candor. However, I'm talking about balance.

Okay, while making a long drive yesterday afternoon, I collected my thoughts on this subject. For whatever it's worth, here's what I would do with the druid class:

General Changes

These are changes that have equal applicability to groups and raids. I'd make these changes just because they need to happen and are long overdue.

First, fix Nature's Touch. That spell has been a joke for a long time, and I don't think that any fair minded player in any class would deny that it is underpowered. Druids tend to focus on the lousy ratio, but that's really the secondary problem. The primary problem is that it just doesn't provide a lot of healing. I'd raise the total healing to about 1200 HPs and set a ratio at about ninety percent of the ratio for Celestial Elixir. That would make it a fairly functional spell.

Second, fix PotG. The problem here is stacking. Ironically, the easiest fix would be to add two new cleric spells. That requires a bit of explanation.

Despite what a lot of people think, Aegolism is not actually an upgrade in terms of HP and AC. Aegolism = Heroism + Symbol of Marzin + Bulwark of Faith. The big advantages are that it only takes one buff slot and that it lasts 2.5 hours. Druids have no equivalent to Symbol or Bulwark, but PotG is better than Heroism.

Solution: give clerics a group Symbol spell and a group Bulwark spell at level 60, both of which get 2.5 hour durations. Instead of using Aegolism (which would still be used when there is no druid or when buff slots are limited), the druid casts PotG and the cleric casts the group Symbol and Bulwark spells. This would restore relevance to PotG.

Groups

I'm not sold on the notion that druids need upgrades in groups. Frankly, I don't think there's a consensus in support of that view outside of the druid class.

I suspect that a large percentage of the problem faced by druids in the group context boils down to perceptions. And where do the negative perceptions of druids come from? One of the biggest sources is druids themselves. I don't know how many times I've seen a druid call himself a "pseudo-healer" or a "half-cleric" or something like that. If you folks tell everyone else that you suck and are useless, are you surprised that people believe you?

So that's solution one: quit trashing yourselves. For every one of your stories about how you can't get a group because you're not a cleric, there's a story on the cleric boards about how they're getting passed over for groups in favor of druids. As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle.

If I really believed that druids need an upgrade in groups, I would oppose a CH. That raises too many balance issues with other classes. Druids shouldn't be a true substitute for a cleric, nor should they be able to serve as primary healer in every experience camp. That's just too much. The goal should be to insure that druids can be a functional substitute for a cleric, with assistance from the rest of the group, in a reasonable array of experience camps.

I'd go with a druid version of Divine Light -- a larger heal with a slightly better ratio. Clerics now have Ethereal Light, so there would be no balance issue associated with giving druids a version of Divine Light. When combined with a fix for Nature's Touch, that would be a good upgrade.

Druid nukes could stand an upgrade, either in terms of raising the amount of damage or lowering the resists. As things stand now, this would not create a balance issue with wizards.

Finally, don't forget the druid pet. Yes, it sucks as of now, but so did the clerical hammer. We can give the bear some teeth. Upgrade its damage, give it a small nuke, whatever. This would provide sustained DPS in groups and lower end raids. This wouldn't raise any balance concerns with other classes, unless you went overboard with the damage output of the new bear.

Raids

The first thing you need to understand is that the CH bottleneck is not a druid problem. It's a problem for the whole raiding game. The fact that raids are overly dependent on clerics does not diminish druids. It diminishes the entire raiding game.

The challenge is to solve that problem without creating balance issues outside of the raid context. The mini-CH is a poor solution to the raid problem, and it raises balance issues in the non-raid context.

I like the idea of giving druids a full CH with a component requirement. The new CH would have the same mana requirements and casting time as a clerical CH. It would be usable anywhere. However, it would require some sort of gem, which would be the limiting factor.

You can argue about what the price of the gem would be. I'd probably start out with something expensive like a peridot, then reevaluate after a month or two of observation.

In the raid context, this would give guilds the option of using druids to fill in for clerics. As a raid leader, I would have dearly loved having that option. Believe me, it would have been no big deal to pass out stacks of peridots to the druids. If the choices are (1) "Sorry, we can't raid tonight because we're short on clerics," and (2) "Someone run to a gem merchant and buy four stacks of peridots, then we go kick butt," I'd pick (2) every time. For any raiding guild worth talking about, the cost of a few stacks of periodots is trivial.

This would give druids a new, and important, role on raids. If there are ample clerics, druids can go back to secondary healing and nuking. If clerics are in short supply, druids can step up and fill the gap. The CH bottleneck would be broken. This would also increase the demand for druids in guilds, which seems to be an issue for some of you.

In the group context, the component cost would be a limiting factor because there wouldn't be a guild bank to finance the whole thing. If it turns out that the component requirement is not enough of a limiting factor, we might have to raise the component cost.

In other words, we could use component cost as a balancing tool. If the druid CH is being used too much in groups, we raise the cost. If the druid CH is being used too little on raids, we lower the cost. The clerics will always want the price to be higher, and the druids will always want the price to be lower, but Verant could work to find the balance that is best for the whole game.

Of course, Verant will probably wind up doing something completely different, but that's my take on the issue of druid balancing.

Kalinn
09-11-2002, 08:46 AM
this idea of a component heal that keeps being tossed around is one of the WORST ideas ive ever heard. about the same as the idea that someone put forth a month ago to make druids into twitch bitches just like necros to fix their raid desirability.

using reagents on commonly used spells in eq is a bad idea. while they make some limited sense for lasting effects such as buffs, or lasting pets, they make NO sense for spells that would need to be used on a frequent basis and that give only immediate benefit, such as heals. even some of the spells that use reagents now should have their reagent cost reduced to be more feasible.

I've already said in this thread that Nature's Touch is screwed up. I just object to you comparing the mana efficiency of HoTs and regular heals. More on Nature's Touch later in the thread

natures recovery != natures touch. they are different spells. perhaps you are not familiar with druid spells after all?

natures recovery is what is often compared to the true HoTs. regens are suppose to be efficient, and natures recovery is a super version of regen, yet it does not have anywhere near the efficiency of HoTs. in fact, in comparison it has no bonuses to it at all and has a double penalty of being much much longer duration (7.5 x) with a lesser efficiency.

A level 39 cleric has CH, Superior Healing, and the mana pool of a level 39 character. The 60 druid is going to blow away a 39 cleric.

you are incorrect. a 60 druid even in excellent circumstances is about equal to 1 - 1 1/2 lvl 39 clerics for healing capacity, even with considerations of mana pool. the difference between the two is way too small for comfort. if you dont consider mana pool differences, the 60 druid cant touch the healing efficiency of the cleric at 39. the damage that a 60 warrior can deal over a 39 rogue, or that a 60 magi can deal over a 39 wizard, those are more along the lines of where the healing disparity should be.

by the way, did you know that a lvl 39 clerics superior healing is as efficient as a lvl 60 druids NT? =) the ratios for hp/mana are 2.74439 and 2.74719 respectively.

unless of course its a non-alter spec druid, and then the druid loses out with a ratio of only 2.52061.

so i suppose a 60 druid must choose alteration to be as efficient as a lvl 39 cleric, eh? well, at least if we are talking non-CH spells. because if we consider CH, the 60 druid is still so far behind the 39 cleric its laughable.

vetoafauna
09-11-2002, 01:04 PM
component based CH is a terrible idea. it wouldn't limit it to a raid heal, it would limit it to a RICH heal. people with tons of plat would still use it to grind, guilds without much in the bank wouldnt pay for it on raids. If you wanted to limit a CH to raid only, the best solution i can think of would be to make so every other spell loaded takes 12 seconds to refresh after it's done casting. This way a druid can be in a CH rotation just as effectively as a cleric, but in a group situation if they want to CH they have to wait 12 seconds before they can cast anything OTHER than ch again (which is quite alot of time, really)..... Clerics could easily catch up to a CH-ing druid in dps because the druid wouldnt be able to nuke within 12 seconds of healing.

Forin
09-11-2002, 01:17 PM
In comparing the healing capacity of a level 39 cleric and a level 60 druid. Personally, I understand your point, but please remember that CH will fizzle alot at 39 if cast by a cleric. I doubt your assessment addressed that fact. Frankly, at 39, I found myself using SH far more often than CH because it was frankly more mana efficient because of fizzle losses.

Also comparing regens to HoT's is an error. Regens are NOT HoTs. HoTs are essencially an agro control fix for priest classes. Regens can take the edge off of a fight and decrease downtime, but they aren't intended to be anywhere near the healing capacity of an HoT.

If anyone did compare a druid super-regen to a HoT spell, I wouldn't agree on the comparison. If you want an HoT - ask for one. Don't ask for an upgrade to an otherwise useful spell (and I would consider a super regen to be very useful in certain circumstances).

In essence, I think that druids probably need a HoT with a drawback - something like Torpor. However, instead of slow I'd tie the healing effect to a root ;) . Make it a huge version of Treeform maybe.

They also should probably be given a larger direct heal as noted above.

And tieing a raid intended buff to a gem cost is a valid way to control its use outside of a raid context. Will it work, probably not. The ueber amongst us will be running around burning 1000's of PP casting a spell that the poor cannot and grousing about it (the infamous "Doctor it hurts when I hit my head against the wall!") - meanwhile the less fortunate or casual gamer will not be able to afford casting it so they'll grouse. The sad thing is that while on the surface it seems a good choice, all it will do is cause more angst.

Sleppen
09-11-2002, 02:15 PM
using reagents on commonly used spells in eq is a bad idea. while they make some limited sense for lasting effects such as buffs, or lasting pets, they make NO sense for spells that would need to be used on a frequent basis and that give only immediate benefit, such as heals. even some of the spells that use reagents now should have their reagent cost reduced to be more feasible.

The type of CH that I'm describing would not be a commonly used spell. That's the whole point of requiring a reagent.

natures recovery != natures touch. they are different spells.

Yeah, you're right, I got them mixed up. I'm probably only the millionth person to do that. The comments about Nature's Touch later in that post should have referred to Nature's Recovery.

a 60 druid even in excellent circumstances is about equal to 1 - 1 1/2 lvl 39 clerics for healing capacity, even with considerations of mana pool. the difference between the two is way too small for comfort. if you dont consider mana pool differences, the 60 druid cant touch the healing efficiency of the cleric at 39.

If you're in a place where the cleric would only cast CHs, you may be right. I never played in any places like that outside of the raid context, however. As a cleric, you normally cast CH only on the main tank. You still have to keep the other members of the group alive, as well as healing yourself. The 60 druid is going to be much more effective, especially when you take regen into account. (I haven't been talking about regen because it really isn't analogous to healing spells, but it is absolutely relevant to the overall effectiveness of a druid as a healer.)

by the way, did you know that a lvl 39 clerics superior healing is as efficient as a lvl 60 druids NT? =) the ratios for hp/mana are 2.74439 and 2.74719 respectively.

I haven't used SH in ages, so I'll have to take your numbers on faith. At best, that's an argument for adding a druid version of Divine Light.

so i suppose a 60 druid must choose alteration to be as efficient as a lvl 39 cleric, eh?

If the druid doesn't take Alteration as the prime specialization, the druid can't really complain about a loss of effectiveness as a healer. If you choose to be a nuker, for example, don't complain that you're less effective as a healer. A few clerics actually choose Evocation, and they pay the price for their choice.

If you wanted to limit a CH to raid only, the best solution i can think of would be to make so every other spell loaded takes 12 seconds to refresh after it's done casting. This way a druid can be in a CH rotation just as effectively as a cleric, but in a group situation if they want to CH they have to wait 12 seconds before they can cast anything OTHER than ch again (which is quite alot of time, really)&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp

That's an interesting idea. If you cast CH on a tank in a group, and the enchanter got aggroed, it would be a real problem. That would definitely make the druid CH unattractive in the group context.

HoTs are essencially an agro control fix for priest classes.

HoTs have two other nice qualities. First, you can cast it on someone before they start taking damage, so that there's a built-in heal at the beginning of the fight. Second, it can be a highly efficient heal for non-melees who don't have aggro and who don't need a full CH. An example of that would be an int caster who is getting hit by AE. I'd like to see Nature's Recovery (I used the right name this time) fixed so that it can be used effectively in that way.

Forin
09-11-2002, 02:34 PM
True, the benefits you show for healing other members of the party than the person who is controlling agro (or supposed to be ;) ) are there. But the agro control for the heal is still the primary component. You could just drop an SH or DL or some other spell on them, but you'd take a huge hit in agro for doing so. The HoT let's you spread the agro out so you don't spike above the MT.

Kalinn
09-11-2002, 03:24 PM
If the druid doesn't take Alteration as the prime specialization, the druid can't really complain about a loss of effectiveness as a healer. If you choose to be a nuker, for example, don't complain that you're less effective as a healer. A few clerics actually choose Evocation, and they pay the price for their choice
thats completley ridiculous. ive seen evoc clerics in action, they are NOT that far behind alter clerics. they lose very little effectiveness because the effectiveness and efficiency is already built into their spells. the same cannot be said for druid spells.

this whole specialization argument is invalid. specialization is meant to give you increased mana efficiency in one chosen area. for tunares sake, its only an 8% difference. it is not meant to make you significantly better at that role, and certainly not meant to make you significantly worse at another. and it is DEFINATELY not meant to make you unable to perform in a specific role that others of your class can perform in based upon a different specialization.

there is a difference in "less effective" and "ineffective". an evoc cleric may be a less effective primary healer, but druids, regardless of spec, are ineffective in that same role.

i feel like i am beating my head against a brick wall trying to reason with people who have no experience with what we are discussing. it is more than obvious that opinions are set and not going to change, that is a factor of ignorance. as such, this entire conversation is moot.

*em applies a pooh bandaid and goes around the wall*

vetoafauna
09-11-2002, 03:28 PM
"If the druid doesn't take Alteration as the prime specialization, the druid can't really complain about a loss of effectiveness as a healer"

i gotta call BS here, specialization only makes a very minor percent difference, it was never intended to be picking between a nuker and a healer, this is not DAOC. a cleric that specs evoc can still heal extremely efficient, a mage that specs evocation can still conjure efficiently..... spec doesnt change what class we are.

Talyena Trueheart
09-11-2002, 08:33 PM
If the druid doesn't take Alteration as the prime specialization, the druid can't really complain about a loss of effectiveness as a healer.

Okay, I am an alt druid and our heals suck.

Chronomis
09-12-2002, 09:15 AM
My druid was once spec'ed evocation. Now he's maxed alteration. In everyday use the difference isn't especially noticable. I suppose if I had spent a few hours making careful measurements before and after, I'd be able to say, "Yes, there's a difference." Short of that meticulous measurement, though, I'd be hard pressed to say switching was worth 132.5pp on a ruby. Maybe what druids need for better heals is for the newbie tunic to be changed from a jum jum sack tunic to a white lab coat.

Sleppen
09-12-2002, 10:17 AM
But the agro control for the heal is still the primary component.&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp

From the perspective of a cleric, I never saw it that way. However, I had full plate armor and a lot more HPs than a druid. In the experience group context, getting aggroed wasn't as much of an issue. On raids, casting a fast heal on someone almost never gets you aggroed.

thats completley ridiculous. ive seen evoc clerics in action, they are NOT that far behind alter clerics. they lose very little effectiveness because the effectiveness and efficiency is already built into their spells. the same cannot be said for druid spells.

Actually, you're misconstruing what I said. You were talking about how druids who don't make alteration their prime specialization are at a further disadvantage in terms of mana efficiency. My response remains: so what? If you don't pick alteration as your prime specialization, you pay the price as a healer. That is equally true for clerics and druids. If you play a druid, and you choose evocation, then the gap between you and a cleric is going to widen. However, that's your choice.

The superior efficiency and effectiveness of clerical healing would exist even if specializations were erased from the game.

specialization is meant to give you increased mana efficiency in one chosen area. for tunares sake, its only an 8% difference. it is not meant to make you significantly better at that role, and certainly not meant to make you significantly worse at another.

As your own numbers illustrate, 8 percent is a lot. And yes, specializations absolutely are intended to make you significantly better at the chosen area of specialization.

Choosing one specialization as your primary area does not make you any worse at the other areas, except as compared to players who chose the other areas as their primaries. If you choose Evocation as your primary, you will lose effectiveness as a healer relative to clerics and shamans. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. It's your choice.

If you regret the choice, you can do the quest in Temple of Sol Ro and reset your specializations. A lot of people, including clerics, wind up doing that.

i feel like i am beating my head against a brick wall trying to reason with people who have no experience with what we are discussing. it is more than obvious that opinions are set and not going to change, that is a factor of ignorance. as such, this entire conversation is moot.

Have you considered that this comment might be applicable to you? I suppose your message to the non-druid classes boils down to this: "You're all too stupid to understand my class, and all you want to do is screw over druids." Most impressive.

i gotta call BS here, specialization only makes a very minor percent difference, it was never intended to be picking between a nuker and a healer, this is not DAOC. a cleric that specs evoc can still heal extremely efficient, a mage that specs evocation can still conjure efficiently..... spec doesnt change what class we are.

You're overreacting to what I said. I said that someone who picked evocation would suffer a loss of effectiveness as a healer, not that they would become ineffective. A druid who picks evocation will not heal as well as a druid who picks alteration. Duh. But evocation druids can still heal.

As for the significance of the effect, Kalinn's numbers show that the choice of prime specialization has a noticeable effect on healing efficiency. Not gigantic, but noticeable. When you start calculating and comparing ratios, the effect is fairly significant.

Khuzdul69
09-12-2002, 11:01 AM
Well, here's some class ability breakdowns, additions/upgrades I cooked up quickly in a slow period at work.

Without modifying classes much:

Cleric

Excellent Heals via direct heal
Excellent Heals via "Heal over time" or short regens
Excellent HP/AC buff
Excellent damage against undead mobs via dots/nukes (small upgrade)
Excellent damage against summoned mobs via dots/nukes (upgrade)
Excellent resurrection ability
Very Good poison resists (single person)
Very Good disease resists (single person)
Very Good fire resists (single person)
Very Good cold resists (single person)
Very Good magic resists (single person)
Very Good Armour Class
Good transport related debuffs (roots only)
Good damage to all mobs via nukes (lower recast delay only) (upgrade)
Good damage to all via melee/pet
Good damage vs mobs via reverse damage shield
Good damage to undead via PC proc or bane damage buff (similar to bard song) (added)
Good damage to summoned mobs via PC proc or bane damage buff (similar to bard song) (added)
Mediocre Self Mana Regen
Mediocre damage to all mobs via PC proc buff (similar but less powerful than bard song) (added)
Mediocre transport (self ports via idols/gate)

Druids
Excellent Healing via direct heal (upgrade on test)
Excellent Healing via long regens (upgrade)
Excellent Damage against "monster" type "non-natural/non-sentient" ie abominations against nature creatures via nukes and dots (Added)
Excellent Transport (upgrade runspeed enhancements so self only works indoors) (upgrade)
Excellent Attack buffs (indoor wolf form type spells) (upgrade)
Excellent Fire resists
Excellent Cold resists
Excellent indirect to damage to all via damage sheilds (upgrade)
Very Good poison resists
Very Good disease resists
Very Good magic resists
Very Good damage to all mobs via nukes/dots
Very Good hp/ac buff (upgrade)
Very Good transport related mob de-buffs (snares/roots)
Very Good mob tracking
Very Good crowd control outdoors
Good crowd control indoors (add lull line that works indoors but more resistable) (upgrade)
Good damage to abomination type mobs via PC proc or bane damage buff (similar to bard song) (added)
Good Armour Class
Mediocre Self Mana Regen
Mediocre damage to all via melee/pet

Shamans - Don't level my shaman past the early 40's so may be missing a lot here that I don't know about as opposed to overlooked...
Excellent healing via direct spells (upgrade)
Excellent healing via long regens
Excellent damage to all via dots
Excellent buffs (stats/attack)
Excellent buffs (haste)
Excellent de-buffs (stats/attack)
Excellent de-buffs (all resists)
Excellent debuffs (slow)
Excellent Poison Resists
Excellent Disease Resists
Very Good fire resists (single person)
Very Good cold resists (single person)
Very Good magic resists (single person)
Very good healing via short regens (heal over time)
Very Good HP/AC buffs
Very Good damage to all mobs via nukes (upgrade)
Very Good Armour Class
Very Good Transport (movement speed and player size modification)
Good Resists to all
Good damage to all via melee/pet
Good Self Mana Regen
Mediocre transport (port potions)

Gimli fan
09-12-2002, 11:48 AM
HTML Comments are not allowed

Gimli fan
09-12-2002, 11:55 AM
"Druids shouldn't be a true substitute for a cleric, nor should they be able to serve as primary healer in every experience camp. That's just too much. The goal should be to insure that druids can be a functional substitute for a cleric, with assistance from the rest of the group, in a reasonable array of experience camps."

This is supposed to be a convention, but folks are really starting to dissapoint.

The implication of the above quote is...Save the plumb zones for clerics!

In many ways I agree with you though. Since clerics should be the best healers in the game one would have to extend the logic that they would be wanted (thats what many of us are really talking about...I want to feel wanted...and loved)
:(
in certain groups, preferably many groups.
Of course all the best equipment should drop there as well right? ;)

I have a question for you though. While we should need a group to augment our healing what should that group be? Ex. To EXP CT all you need is a Druid, a lvl 60 Chanty, lvl 58+ Shammy, a 4.5k HP tank, and an epic monk & rouge? It certainly appears the only priest class that must have a slower to function as a healer will be Druids. I would argue that for any zone (perhaps not any mob or area in that zone) you should need any healer, any tank, and any 4 other classes. Why should we need a dream team to be able to heal?


What I strongly disagree with is your gradual shift from facts and mana ratios to, well, wishy washy lines like this.

"And where do the negative perceptions of druids come from? One of the biggest sources is druids themselves. I don't know how many times I've seen a druid call himself a "pseudo-healer" or a "half-cleric" or something like that. If you folks tell everyone else that you suck and are useless, are you surprised that people believe you?"


....But we were just talking about facts and numbers! And its pretty easy to look up the hp heal, mana, cast time and figure it out.

And when you get back to the facts you have to admit you demonstrate a lack of understanding of Druids, rather that you are looking at our problems strickly from Clerics point of view and desires.

"Clerics now have Ethereal Light, so there would be no balance issue associated with giving druids a version of Divine Light."

That is, since clerics got better you can now have a scap. C'mon now why you come here to tell us this kind of stuff?

The following line I consider slight of hand. Throw in something from another class (grenade) while you run off with the goods.

"Druid nukes could stand an upgrade, either in terms of raising the amount of damage or lowering the resists. As things stand now, this would not create a balance issue with wizards."

But why? There are lots of ways to do damage, but so few ways to efficiently heal them. In addition we are so much closer to wizards in terms of nukes than Clerics and heal it aint even funny. This is due to lack of balance over time rather than Druids being more Wiz like. Please open your heart to the fact that this game needs more priests. Every encounter is hack and slash.....gotta cure those wounds or rez bodies.


Uggg it keeps going, now I am ranting.

"The challenge is to solve that problem without creating balance issues outside of the raid context. The mini-CH is a poor solution to the raid problem, and it raises balance issues in the non-raid context."

Oh yeah the group thing.

"I like the idea of giving druids a full CH with a component requirement."

Now why did you have to go and say that?


"If it turns out that the component requirement is not enough of a limiting factor, we might have to raise the component cost."

Sorry but this is translated as == God forbid a Druid heal in one of my EXP zones. Put some freaking stock market yoke around are necks? WE ARE PRIESTS!

(and dont tell me you are not a cleric, sign as a cleric at least)



One more line from a different post:

"The 60 druid is going to be much more effective, especially when you take regen into account. (I haven't been talking about regen because it really isn't analogous to healing spells, but it is absolutely relevant to the overall effectiveness of a druid as a healer.)"

Umm...yeah its applicable beacuse we are in the pathetic situation of comparing a 60th level druids healing to a lvl 39 cleric.


Verant? Hello?

Forin
09-12-2002, 12:26 PM
on agro control and HoTs

From the perspective of a cleric, I never saw it that way. However, I had full plate armor and a lot more HPs than a druid. In the experience group context, getting aggroed wasn't as much of an issue. On raids, casting a fast heal on someone almost never gets you aggroed.


For normal exp grinding, I'd say you are correct. For raids, you are correct. However, if you are doing anything challenging for your level, the agro control factor shows up frequently. I give for example the Twilight Sea hidden area. And even if you have plate armor and more HPs - try getting a spell of while getting pummeled by 2 or more mobs.

Personally, I think part of the balancing should involve giving Druids a HoT with a drawback, like I detailed above.

Bam102465
09-12-2002, 03:41 PM
I'll be damned. I guess there's hope yet. I can't believe Sleppen actually made constructive comments and suggested an upgraded heal. By the way, I don't speak for all druids but I really am NOT out to replace clerics. I've posted in other threads that I would be happy with an over 1K heal. 1.2K range sounds okay to me. There's nothing on this green earth that will EVER convince me that a below 1K heal at level 60 was ever fair or reasonable. I don't think it's too much to ask, especially for the high-end game.

Here's what I would also like to see though:

1. Something to set us apart from other classes and make us more viable for raids and grouping, Barring that, at least something that would be wanted, in the form of a buff or debuff shared from another class but on a lesser scale than their's

2. More outdoor content so we could actually use the other half of our spells. A lot of people seem to forget that some of the spells they use to brand us uber only work outdoors, as well as our best AE's, and the only real stun we get. Not to mention the fact we have a line of charm animal spells that become worthless in the higher levels and a charm plant spell that's even more useless because of the level restriction and lack of quality plant mobs at higher levels.

That's a wish-list. At the very least I want that damn heal and at least one other spell or skill to level us at least a little bit towards being viable again. It's ridiculous for anyone to begrudge us the heal. We are so far behind on the priest curve right now it's pathetic. The heal would not even come close to threatening the cleric's stranglehold on grouping that they greedily cherish so much. End of story.

Rainus7
09-12-2002, 04:35 PM
I think I know the ultimate and one solution to end balancing issues and headache ... especially from VI's point of view heh


Give job of tweaking, balancing Clerics to Druids

Give job of tweaking, balancing Druids to Clerics

heh..

Won't that be fun~

Sleppen
09-13-2002, 07:10 AM
I have a question for you though. While we should need a group to augment our healing what should that group be? Ex. To EXP CT all you need is a Druid, a lvl 60 Chanty, lvl 58+ Shammy, a 4.5k HP tank, and an epic monk & rouge? It certainly appears the only priest class that must have a slower to function as a healer will be Druids. I would argue that for any zone (perhaps not any mob or area in that zone) you should need any healer, any tank, and any 4 other classes. Why should we need a dream team to be able to heal?

In order to achieve that objective, you'd really have to homogenize the classes. A lot of the druids in this thread have bashed on clerics (which is entirely understandable), but who has a bigger niche than enchanters? While your goal sounds nice in theory, I'm not sure I'd want to play in a game where the classes are that interchangeable.

I agree with you that slow is generally overpowered, but it's pretty much woven into the fabric of the game. In some situations, a shaman can be more effective as a healer than a cleric because the shaman can eliminate such a huge percentage of the incoming damage.

What I strongly disagree with is your gradual shift from facts and mana ratios to, well, wishy washy lines like this.

I was explaining why I'm not convinced that druids need an upgrade in the group context. You're free to disagree if you wish.

"Clerics now have Ethereal Light, so there would be no balance issue associated with giving druids a version of Divine Light."

That is, since clerics got better you can now have a scap. C'mon now why you come here to tell us this kind of stuff?

This illustrates the futility of this discussion. I'm focusing on balance. You're focusing on what you would like to have. Those are very different issues.

Clerics are supposed to be superior healers to druids. The balance comes from the versatility of the druid class, and the ability of druids to do a lot of things other than heal. If the top-end regular heal of a cleric was the same as the top-end regular heal of a druid, we would have a balance issue.

"If it turns out that the component requirement is not enough of a limiting factor, we might have to raise the component cost."

Sorry but this is translated as == God forbid a Druid heal in one of my EXP zones. Put some freaking stock market yoke around are necks? WE ARE PRIESTS!

Are you simply incapable of considering the balance implications of giving druids a CH? I know you'd like it, but what would that do to the balance of the classes?

(and dont tell me you are not a cleric, sign as a cleric at least)

I've said several times in this thread that I'm a retired 60 cleric. I don't play a cleric anymore, hence the signature.

I'll comment on Khuzdul's ideas in groups. Let's start with clerical upgrades:

Cleric

Excellent damage against undead mobs via dots/nukes (small upgrade)
Excellent damage against summoned mobs via dots/nukes (upgrade)
Good damage to all mobs via nukes (lower recast delay only) (upgrade)
Good damage to undead via PC proc or bane damage buff (similar to bard song) (added)
Good damage to summoned mobs via PC proc or bane damage buff (similar to bard song) (added)
Mediocre damage to all mobs via PC proc buff (similar but less powerful than bard song) (added)

Basically, you'd give clerics some increased damage output against undead and summoned mobs (and, to a lesser extent, regular mobs). The problem with that is the lack of high-end mobs that are undead or summoned. Even the hornets in BW aren't summoned any more. There may be some summoned mobs in Luclin, but frankly the nukes against summoned mobs were so weak that I never bothered trying them. The basic clerical nuke was roughly equivalent to the specialty nuke against summoned mobs.

In general, I'd prefer a solution that doesn't involve increasing clerical nukes. I'd rather see something like an expanded crowd control function, which would make clerics more distinctive. Druids should be the nukers of the priest classes, not clerics.

Druids
&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp
Excellent Healing via direct heal (upgrade on test)
Excellent Healing via long regens (upgrade)
Excellent Damage against "monster" type "non-natural/non-sentient" ie abominations against nature creatures via nukes and dots (Added)
Excellent Transport (upgrade runspeed enhancements so self only works indoors) (upgrade)
Excellent Attack buffs (indoor wolf form type spells) (upgrade)
Excellent indirect to damage to all via damage sheilds (upgrade)
Very Good hp/ac buff (upgrade)
Good crowd control indoors (add lull line that works indoors but more resistable) (upgrade)
Good damage to abomination type mobs via PC proc or bane damage buff (similar to bard song) (added)
&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp
The first one is the controversial item, of course. As for the others, I don't like the idea of an indoor SoW very much, given that so many people have invested AA on run speed. I don't know that there's much demand for another attack buff, and the stacking issues would probably turn out to be a mess. I'm not sure what you mean about the damage shield. I don't think druids need a better HP/AC buff, just a fix to the stacking problems. I like the idea of some sort of indoor harmony spell, but it could trivialize a lot of dungeon designs.

Shamans

Excellent healing via direct spells (upgrade)
Very Good damage to all mobs via nukes (upgrade)

I really don't know why shamans need upgraded nukes.

Anyway, the bottom line is that you would make a host of upgrades to druids, while making few upgrades to clerics and druids. Obviously, I'm not sold on the notion that druids need that much of an upgrade.

Aidon Rufflefuzz
09-13-2002, 08:00 AM
This illustrates the futility of this discussion. I'm focusing on balance. You're focusing on what you would like to have. Those are very different issues.

This is your fundamental error in judgement. The assumption that you have the faintest idea of what the druid class needs for balance.

We've stated many times..balance is not vs other classes, in toto. The largest chunk of balance in a PvE game is the classes balance vs the NPCs.

In this area, we are drastically and horribly lacking in the role we so often are required to assume while raiding and grouping. We cannot maintain a reasonable level of healing without the aid of a slower..and in many instances even with the aid of the slower, druid healing will drastically increase the downtime of the group. On a raid, especially a raid with an AE or where we are assigned to heal rampage tanks...we simply do not have the adequate healing power to fulfill our task.

Disagree all you like. I've personally done the same healing task with my druid and with a cleric who was significantly lesser equiped than my druid...quite a few times. My druid could not even come close to being the same back-up healer as the cleric. This was even before the new cleric heals which make druids pretty much superflorous on a raid unless you don't have enough clerics...but if you don't have enough clerics now to provide for a CH rotation and back-up healing...you will pretty much be screwed, because a druid cannot make the cut.

What we want..is what we feel will give us the ability to fulfill the roles we are given on raids and in many groups.

Tarf Crackleberry
09-13-2002, 09:16 AM
I would like to see this discussion go back to some other areas. It seems to have turned into a druid balance discussion, which I did not understand to be the point of it.

1). What would help balance the priest classes amongst themselves?

2). What would help balance the priest classes amongst the other 11 or 12 other classes in game?

3). What would help balance the priest classes amongst the monsters that we fight against?

These are all different questions, and might more properly need to be divided out and discussed separately.

Question number 1 leads to the question Why would I pick a member of priest class x over a priest class y or z?

Question number 2 leads to the question Why would I pick a priest class x, when we already have a member of priest class x/y/z in our group and there is a member of other class A looking for group?

Question number 3 leads to the question Is priest class x, y or z effective against mobs of level B or with characteristic C?

Tarf

Khuzdul69
09-13-2002, 10:17 AM
Basicly healing does not stack in a group. Making a class or a group of classes dependant upon a non-stacking skill to get groups is a bad idea. This is where we are now. To really fix the situation, it is not the healing skill that needs to be equalized, but that every class needs to be able to contribute to a group in a fashion that stacks, and be at least good at it. Some classes should be great at it, but then they should bring little else to the table.

What I was trying to do was to make all 3 priest classes distinct in areas outside of healing. That way since they can viably add much more than healing situationally based upon zone/mobs intended to encounter. In the end it should be that you may want a cleric and a druid and a shaman in a 6 person group because they would each bring unique abilities that do stack.

Clerics currently only offer groups one strongly desierable skill that stacks and they are very good at it. Druids bring a few strongly desiered skills to the group that do not stack either, unfortunately the skills they bring are either very situational or they are only good at it opposed to the "very good" specialists.

To do this I was thinking that each priest class would be especially effective against one or two specific mobs only for damage and excel at reducing damage from one or two classes of damage (fire, cold, disease, poison, magic) or be very good at reducing damage to all types. Then because of the limited use of the most effective priest nukes, the Wizards and Magicians who would be as effective or more effecive against ALL mobs would still have a place in terms of damage done.

For example, if clerics had very good undead/summoned mob dps, or could add damage via the melee proc buff (which is my current favourite pet idea), then in a zone where you are going to face undead or summoned mobs, the cleric can be a damage dealer/backup healer and a druid be the primary healer. In a zone with unslowable mobs, the Shammy can be the primary healer and the Druid nuke/damage shield/snare etc.

Hopefully combined with the existing hp/ac buffs and the "mark" spells, the new undead/summoned specfic nukes and the damage proc buffs might be able to allow a cleric to add to a group that already has a healer in addition to "Backup heals" without causing them to melee like paladins.

As for Druids obtaining the most "upgrades", this is because currently they are "jack of all trades" and while pretty good at some things, not truely great at anything. In order to finally "fix" Druids to have a place in a raid/group, in the end Druids need to finally excel in a skill that is used in a group/raid sitation. Most of the "upgrades" I posted for them make them "very good" or excellent in some skills that are group oriented and stackable are also situational/limited in scope or are spells that they (and nobody else but rangers perhaps) currently posess but are currently outdoor only. Making an indoor version won't encroach as much on other classes, especially if you also place limitations or increase resists on them. The "indor movement enhancers" ie the SoW line I proposed was to be self only. It is self only not only because of the AA skill, but also because having one class zip around at sow speeds indoors would probably be less threatening to the balance of existing dungeon designs than having everyone do so.

"Indoor personal sow" combined with a "indoor harmony" that is more resistable, then Druids might be able to get a place as a puller indoors like they are able to do outdoors should there already be a healer in group and no monk. Since the Monk fd split pulling would be more reliable (no magic resists, just need to not fail on fd), they would still be the preferred puller. The druid would only be the desired puller in places where there is not enough room to split the mobs. Sure it may trivialize some dungeon designs, but most encounters are already single pulled by monks so I really don't buy the trivialization argument. If it is really an issue for certain encounters, then they could just flag boss mobs/rares and their guards as not-able-to-be-harmonied.

The attack buff is simply wolf form without the movment speed enhancement or the wolf illusion (thus no wolf form faction changes either) so that it is castable upon others and can work indoors. Since they already have it, the stacking issues have already beem worked out, it's just allowing them to use a nutered form of it indoors.

The shammy nukes, I was specificly thinking about the JBB and making it usable by all shammy races, hehe. I consider the JBB to be a good to very good nuke.... As I said I'm not as familiar with Shammys as the other two classes.

Basicly:

Tanking does not stack in groups
Healing does not stack in groups
Damaging mobs does stack in groups
Evacing does not stack in groups
Crowd Control sort of stacks in groups (the puller as one and mezzer as the second)
Buffing may stack in groups (if the buffs are complimentary or no single classs has good buffs in all buff areas)
Debuffing may stack in groups (same caveat as buffing)

Thus VI should make it so that no class is upon tanking or healing only to find a group. Since there are fewer group desierable abilities than there are classes, no single class should have a lock over any of areas, let alone two. To break the locks over the stackable desierable skills, they should be broken out to other classes who do not yet have stackable desierable skills, but make them only situationally useful such that the classes with the current lock don't get bumped out.

Khuzdul69
09-13-2002, 10:35 AM
Oh, and I had another fine idea for a cleric specific spell, but probaly won't be doable with game mechanics. I thought a damage reducing buff would be nice... cast upon a player and they take 1 to 5 points less damage from a melee hit (target only, castable on 45 and higher characters only, no group version so as not to gimp buff lower level characters where it coudl be unbalancing with mgb or target self).

I am against any sort of "crowd control" or undead slow that other clerics are asking for. Not only are they outside the realm of what clerics currently do, they encroach upon skills that other classes have (enchanter, bard, necro for crowd control, and enchanter bard shaman for slow). That's a non-starter in my opinon, I'd rather try to come up with new abilities not in game for ideas on how to expand roles.

Teaenea
09-13-2002, 12:34 PM
"Druid nukes could stand an upgrade, either in terms of raising the amount of damage or lowering the resists. As things stand now, this would not create a balance issue with wizards."


Tell that to Wizards. I'm sure they would dissagree with you.

As it currently stands, We are much closer in Nuking ability to Wizards than we are with healing ability to clerics.

We're fine were we are for nukes. Not to close, not to far. We are No where near fine on healing ability.

Sleppen
09-13-2002, 12:53 PM
We've stated many times..balance is not vs other classes, in toto. The largest chunk of balance in a PvE game is the classes balance vs the NPCs.

That's true, up to a point. However, a lot of people (including me) would say that the game is out of balance in favor of the players, which has led to the trivialization of many camps and encounters. From that perspective, I don't see how there is any need for an upgrade to any class.

If you want to adjust the balance of one particular class against the NPCs, you can't escape the balance implications for other classes. Just two paragraphs later in your post, you're comparing druids to clerics. That pretty well makes the point.

1). What would help balance the priest classes amongst themselves?

2). What would help balance the priest classes amongst the other 11 or 12 other classes in game?

3). What would help balance the priest classes amongst the monsters that we fight against?

Question (1) inevitably becomes a question of druid balancing, because no one is seriously arguing that clerics or shamans are underbalanced. The complicating factor is the one-dimensional nature of the cleric class.

As for Question (2), I don't perceive a balance problem between the priest classes as a whole and the melees and int casters. The hybrids might have a different view, but I haven't seen much of an issue here.

On Question (3), I don't perceive any need for an increase in the healing power of the priest classes as a whole, other than dealing with the CH bottleneck. It would be nice to see some more undead mobs added for clerics, and some more animals added for druids, but that's not really an issue of balance.

Thus VI should make it so that no class is upon tanking or healing only to find a group. Since there are fewer group desierable abilities than there are classes, no single class should have a lock over any of areas, let alone two. To break the locks over the stackable desierable skills, they should be broken out to other classes who do not yet have stackable desierable skills, but make them only situationally useful such that the classes with the current lock don't get bumped out.

You make a number of good points, but what you're suggesting would require a fairly radical restructuring of the whole game. Just as an example, enchanters currently have a lock on mezzing and clarity. In the group context, enchanters are much more entrenched than clerics. The only competition is bards, but the bard songs aren't as effective, and there just aren't very many bards anyway.

Do we break up the rogue monopoly on backstabbing and lockpicking? The wizard/druid monopoly on evacs? The necromancer monopoly on corpse summoning?

And when we're done, do we change the name of the game to Dark Age of Camelot?

I am against any sort of "crowd control" or undead slow that other clerics are asking for. Not only are they outside the realm of what clerics currently do, they encroach upon skills that other classes have (enchanter, bard, necro for crowd control, and enchanter bard shaman for slow). That's a non-starter in my opinon, I'd rather try to come up with new abilities not in game for ideas on how to expand roles.

Clerics currently do crowd control through root, and fighting undead is part of what a cleric does. CH is outside the realm of what druids currently do, and giving CH to druids would encroach upon skills that other classes have (namely, clerical CH). Is the connection closer? Maybe, but if you think about it you'll see my point. If you want to cross the line between classes in one place, you may be forced to cross the line a second time to restore balance.

The alternative is to shoot for something less radical. Create a version of CH that is limited to raid usage. Make changes at the group level that don't raise serious balance concerns. Otherwise, you wind up creating problems just as fast as you fix them.

Tell that to Wizards. I'm sure they would dissagree with you.

I'm sure they would. And they'd tell me that I don't understand their class, just like some of the people here are doing. Of course, we'd have to pause the conversation while they took a few seconds to manaburn the next dragon.

Aidon Rufflefuzz
09-13-2002, 01:47 PM
That's true, up to a point. However, a lot of people (including me) would say that the game is out of balance in favor of the players, which has led to the trivialization of many camps and encounters.

We are not interested in being balanced for upper seb. We are interested in being balanced in this years game...not the game from two years ago.

Bam102465
09-13-2002, 03:23 PM
Well if you're still not convinced that druids need a heal upgrade for use with experience groups then maybe I spoke too soon. :o

Khuzdul69
09-13-2002, 03:34 PM
If you want radical I can get radical. I have a whole boatload of ideas, but at this point in EQ it's not going to happen so why get all frustrated and piss into the wind?

For crowd control once mobs have entered the camp, Enchanters definately have a lock on it and are head and shoulders above the other two classes, Necro and Bard. For some reason lots of people overlook Necro mezz (including necros themselves), which is unfortunate. A good necro can park far more mobs than a bard can. But since there are two other classes with the skill, if VI should ever decided to create a viable alternative to the enchanter, then upgrading the abilities of the two that currently have the skills is the logical choice rather then cleric/undead mez. Using root to justify adding undead mez is a far stretch. Besides, if people scoff undead nukes/dots because there aren't in the high end game, then why bother with undead mez/slow?

As for stat/haste/slow/resist debuffs, enchanters and shamans are both are viable options so it is not a single class having a lock on it. In addition, some bard songs can stack very well with both classes spells, or work well standalone.

HP/AC buffs however have been in the realm of the Cleric/Druid/Shaman. Instead of trying for other skill areas, why not try to find a way to make HP/AC buffs more desierable for all priest classes?

For ports/evacs, a you pointed out, there are two classes with that ability. Every caster also has gate, priests now have port idols. Everyone has access to TD ports, luclin ports and soon the Plane of Knowledge ports. The breakup of that monopoly is already in the works. Druids and Wizards will still be the best for immediate use/raid mobilizations.

Necro corpse summon - Well they do have a pretty descent lock over that as well. I had proposed a "fix" for it, in that the Necros at high level should get a componentless corpse summon with a hella high mana cost (no items should get it as a click either), and SK's at very high level should get access to the stackable coffin corpse summon, so yes, I do think that that ability needs more dilution.

Rogue backstab - Well in the end Backstab is just situational Melee DPS. Rogues and Monks both have good melee DPS so Melee DPS doesn't need to be farmed out for diversity. Rangers with bows and rogues with backstab are both good example on how to provide the same end result (melee or non magical at the very least dps) in unique and stacking ways.

I feel that the most workable group oriented game will have "core" abilities to be offered by many classes, not a select few. Every class should also be unique and bring enough to the table outside of the core abilities such that any class can stack well in a group with any other class, albeit situationally (always want clerics vs undead/summoned, druids against animals/nature abominations, etc.)

Why are dungeons more difficult than outdoors and have better exp/loot? Because VI designed the game that way. It doesn't have to be that way.. If they put their mind to it and actually made outdoor zones like dungeons then you could say that for outdoor adventures you want a Ranger, and for dungeon crawls you want a Rogue. Bards should be the king of "Urben" encoutners, but that's not happening.

I dont get the DAoC crack, because I've played it, and they too have crappy "class balance" issues and also base their balancing on "balanced group verse environment". Perhaps you ment to say G.U.R.P.S.?

Since I always make long posts I like to sum up for the less attentive or the people who don't want to read the whole way through:

1. "Core" abilities that are always needed should be offered by multiple character classes.
2. All character classes should be unique
3. All unique abilities should be only situationally needed.
4. Each of those situations should be evenly distributed throughout the game such that all classes have encounters and areas where they excel in a group situations that groups actually want to experience/go to.
5. There are lots of alternate ways to enhance existing skills that each class has in a unique way without "infringing" upon other classes turf, especially if there is already some sort of diversity (you infringe on multiple classes turf).

Go out and dream up new and better skills, like my proc/bane damage melee buff, damage reduction buff, etc and come back with ideas that aren't overpowering and you can see that the complete heal issue is ludicrous. Healing, Tanking and Damage Dealing sharing should be a non-issue. Different classes should have different ways of doing it so that they are effective against different types of mobs so no one class or set of classes reigns supreme. The warrior Tank issue is also an obscene artifact of old game design stretched into a monster. Designing encounters such that a incredibly stupid "god" only attacks a puny warrior in front of him because he can "taunt" him while he get's chealed/runed/divine intervention chain cast upon and weaker punks slowly burn down the mob is... silly. I do have lots of ideas on "melee" balance also. Radical... you bet I am, I just know that it's not going to happen in this game so I don't try to burn any credability pushing it on a game that's established and been out for over 3 years.

*edit mentioned Bards with bows in the melee dps paragraph, hehe... ment Rangers

Sleppen
09-13-2002, 11:13 PM
We are not interested in being balanced for upper seb. We are interested in being balanced in this years game...not the game from two years ago.

From a players vs. NPCs standpoint, I'd say things look pretty good for the players right now. Exactly what do you see in the game right now that the players can't handle? Are there any mobs out there that haven't been killed by someone? (And don't say, "The Sleeper." That's more of a special effect than a mob.)

If you want to tie it to the druid class, you need to complete the following sentence, with a straight face: "The players as a whole are out of balance with the NPCs because the druid class does not have _______________." Go ahead, I could use a good laugh.

Using root to justify adding undead mez is a far stretch. Besides, if people scoff undead nukes/dots because there aren't in the high end game, then why bother with undead mez/slow?

Actually, I don't like the idea of an undead mez/slow for exactly the reasons you list. I'd rather see a low-resist AE root spell or a longer lasting stun spell that would have crowd control utility much the same as Screaming Terror. Roots and stuns are not foreign to clerics. Mezzes and slows are, even if you try to use the undead hook.

Bam102465
09-14-2002, 07:31 AM
Roots and snares are a thing of the past anyway. With each new expansion VI makes more and more mobs totally resistant or at least highly resistant. They're too stupid to make them more challenging so that's their copout.

vetoafauna
09-14-2002, 08:32 AM
"From a players vs. NPCs standpoint, I'd say things look pretty good for the players right now. Exactly what do you see in the game right now that the players can't handle? Are there any mobs out there that haven't been killed by someone?"

the real question is, Are there any mobs out there that can't be killed without a druid?

Cassea
09-14-2002, 11:30 AM
I'm back after a week long vacation. I'm glad to see so many good ideas here and that the thread is still open and productive.

I see a bit too much "Druid Only" posts. There are 7000 other threads and it was my intent that this thread could foster productive conversation between "all" of the healing classes.

I thank those who have stayed focused and *BONK* *smiles* those who fell back into single minded one-sided posts.

I can understand how it happens as I can be an offender myself at times but I'll once again be nuking posts that are so far off topic that they are counter productive.

So will ALL Clerics, Druids and Shamen and even the lessor healing classes PLEASE continue to discuss what's on your mind. As long as it's the least bit on topic and not a rant or poor "insert-class here" it will see the light of day otherwise don't waste your time typing that post here - take it to rants.

As I get the time I'll be going back and paring down anything that got past my fellow mods while I was away.

Thank you for your time and understanding in this matter. Please keep the dialog open between our brother and sister healers!

Gimli fan
09-16-2002, 08:20 AM
This thread will continue to deteriorate until Sleppen accidentally quotes and refutes himself, giving us all a good laugh. Not that you are not welcome - visit away, just a little ribbing here.

Got like a convention of two or three people left at this point. The clock is ticking on balance having enough effect before the next expansion.

In fact this thread has been going down hill for some time now, minus some brilliant intervention such as posts like Khuzduls.

----

"The players as a whole are out of balance with the NPCs because the druid class does not have ____a port right to the NPC my group wants to kill___________."

sudawilde
09-17-2002, 05:43 PM
Hmmm....


In all fairness i have never played a cleric or shaman into the top end game and as such, i cant comment too much on either class outside of what i have seen and experienced from my side of the comp.

For the sake of ease, i will start with the Shaman. I saw this same sentiment from other posters, and i agree. Demigods.... 75% slow and uber buffs and a decent ratio heal, they seem set. No one will deny their ability to function in a group as a healer with that kind of slow. Making their smaller heals 75% more effective. Exp groups, raids and soloing they are set. I just wish there was some way to minimize their Canni dependency. Talk about hitting the same button over and over. I have no answers for that problem, but for healing, Perhaps a smaller faster heal with a lower refresh time for those spot heals with no penalties?

Clerics come in second for ease, There is no question in my mind that CH broke the game. In order to keep up with the increased equipment lvls and hp mudflation VI was forced to keep making mobs exponentially more difficult. Raising the need for more variety in heals outside of CH. Clerics were the first to get these spells in the last patch. These spells allowed them to heal with more versatility and increased efficiently. Very likely reducing the need for CH, at least in the short term(hp mudflation will catch up again). They also Gave the cleric a way to melee Semi effectively, and maintain a decent lvl of mana regen. Allowing the cleric to Sustain DPS, but more importantly to me, letting them get off their butts, and play the game a bit. I reveled in the joy this change brought to clerics in my guild and i could not be happier for them. Do clerics need balance in healing? after the 9/4 patch no, if you would have asked me that before the 9/4 patch, i probably would have responded the same.

On to the subject of groups/raids and soloing, i think that clerics need assistance with the soloing, and is beyond capable in groups and raids in much the same way the shaman is. Suggestions for easier soloing? /shrug Dev team help me out here, what ever it is should not give more power to their already very strong hold on groups and raids and there is the inherent problem with cleric soloing, how do you make them better at soloing, with out making them better at grouping. case in point the hammer and pet.

Now for the druid, A subject near and dear to my heart. My only character is a druid. Always has been and always will be as long as i play EQ. Does the druid class need upgrades in healing. When the most efficient heal a character that is supposed to be a healing class has is near 1/2 as mana efficient as the other class's there is some disparity there. Add in the hp mudflation, and you have a situation that needs to be resolved. Can i fill in effectively healing for a group taking AOE damage? NO. Can i effectively heal a tank taking damage from a non slowed mob? Not with out considerable down time. Should i be able to fill those roles? Absolutely. Will a gimp ch or even a full ch allow me to fill that role? for the grouping/raid situation not under AOE yes, for grouping/raid situation with AOE damage? no. So i don't think the CH(in whatever form) is a viable end all answer for the healing issues at hand for the druid. Possibly some form of the spells just granted to clerics would round us out, obviously in a slightly lessened form but not to the degree that they are useless.

As for raid and group desirability and functionality. i think the druid is, out of the three priest class's, the least desired for very obvious and simple reasons stated above. Is there an easy fix down the road? not even close. The issues at hand affecting druids have been adding up for some time now and a quick fix is not going to so solve them.

Having said all that i want to add one more thing, and i wish i didn't have to say this, but i feel i have to for the sake of my druid brothers and sisters. The idea of a component driven CH is easily the most outrageous thing i have seen on any board in a long time. How could anyone justify a PP component for a spell that to be used effectively would have to be cast every 3 minutes plus or minus a few seconds in group situations and far more often for raids? The concept is outrageous, and i will never respond to it gain, i will just cut and paste this paragraph where needed.

Suda Wilde
Fist of FAte
Druid of the Nameless server

Gordarn
09-18-2002, 02:48 PM
The way I look at the 3 Priest Classes is this...

Cleric - Hand of there God on the physical plane, draw their "Power" Directly from their Divine connection to their God.

Shaman - Spiritist, Draws there power from the living spirit within all beings.

Druid - Priest of Nature, Draws Power from the very earth they walk upon.

With this view in mind....

1) Should Druids ever get Rez HELL NO !!! Maybe some form of reincarnation that makes the person into a Wolf for instance and SLOWS CORPSE ROT until a Cleric can actually Rez them.

2) Should Shaman Rez ? or Reincarnate same answer NO WAY !!! Maybe a form of "Spirit Preservation" that will slow down Corpse rot until a Cleric can get to them.

3) Should Clerics get SoW ? NOPE here to. SoW is a form of SPIRIT or NATURE Summoning cant see any thing in the DIVINE that would allow this, sorry Clerics.

4) And this is the BIG ONE in my mind that would make ALL Priests wanted / needed for raids / groups........ We all draw our powers from different "fields" make our buffs STACK, I know there used to be a thing with same type buffs not stacking but I don’t think that is really an issue any more, look what they just did with DoT stacking after all.

You really want us ALL to be used to our fullest ? Try this then...

MT's Group gets Blessing of Aegolism ----- CLERIC
MT's Group gets Protection of the Glade --- DRUID
MT's Group gets <sorry never played a shaman> -- SHAMAN

Once this is done we go back to where we are, kinda, Clerics heal and Melee (I think the Melee upgrade was good here, maybe a little over done but pretty close to right) Shaman to debuffing (and maybe some slightly better nuking) and Backup healing Druids nukeing and Backup healing.

I also think the healing should be evened out a bit more between the 3 Priest classes Druids and Shaman should not get the FULL abilities of the Cleric (there aint no power like the divine after all) but most certainly Druids and Shaman should get better healing potential.

Maybe better HoTs than Clerics have and group versions. The reasoning here is that Divine intervention is more and Immediate thing where as the forces of nature and the living spirit work more slowly to correct things OVER TIME, just makes sense to me that Cleric should be the Kind of DIRECT healing and Shaman / Druids should be far better at Heal over Time.

Shaman pet is good until higher levels, this should be buffed up a bit, not to Mage /BL leaves mind you.

Druid pet is CUTE that’s all it was ever meant to be leave it alone I like my teddy bear, our Animal charms in the higher levels should NOT be level restricted though and the HIGEST of them should be timed not random duration. And we should get a Higher level Snare that is much harder to resist but draws more Agro maybe.

Sorry if I rambled on a bit here, these are my opinions, Im not saying there all posible nor are they the only answers nor that they are even the RIGHT answers. I do however feel the buff stacking thing SHOULD be looked into and if at all posible implimented.


Oh and anyone that thinks they can out Drink the ULTIMATE Party girl lookout Tunare WILL Driink you all under the table !!!