zoltar said:Well, it's not that canceling a heal because you need to do something else urgently is tedious. What you are calling tedious is repeatedly starting a cast "just in case" then canceling your heal in favor of doing nothing over and over again. And I would agree with you there. But that needs its own creative solution such as having mana drain while you cast. I also think having a huge heal on a super long cast is a bad design because (among other reasons) it encourages that type of behavior.
Agreed 100%.
zoltar said:I don't think your comparison to an instant heal works. Giving a healer flexibility in the sense that they have the ability to choose the right tool for the right job is good. I'm not against having more tools, but I am against letting one tool do the job that another is designed for in the name of "options and flexibility". Changing your target on the fly doesn't require any more thinking on your feet compared to traditional heal targeting, it just lets you avoid making the difficult choice to cancel your cast and possibly avoid having to use an emergency heal for the emergency.
Still not seeing it the same way here. In most of my healing experience, when things go to hell in a hand basket, you need all the cooldowns and emergency heals you can utilize to try and save your party or raid. Yes, being able to transfer the initial heal to the Enchanter helps, but it's not that much different than interrupting and casting your instaheal/ward/whatever "oh crap" ability. What it does is allows you to put that resource towards saving the enchanter and then allows you to burn your instant cooldown on saving the rogue. Meanwhile, you still have to try and heal the tank who never got the original heal because you changed targets, and, at this point, probably yourself as well due to heal aggro. I don't see this one tool doing the job of an instant heal by any stretch, especially if that instant heal, like in EQ2, is manafree. I also disagree changing the target on the fly doesn't require strategy and thinking on your feet, it certainly does. You have to decide if your primary target can survive without the heal you were about to cast. You have to decide whether switching targets is the proper move, maybe interrupting and dropping a group heal is a better option. Just because you move one heal to the enchanter (my favorite example because it's so often true), does not mean you aren't going to have to use that emergency heal directly after. You just now have a more flexibility and options with that initial heal you were casting.
zoltar said:P.S. Typically when you pray for healing, you are praying for a specific individual, so I don't think your earlier argument that changing the target of your heal makes sense form a lore perspective works. It would be like "Dear lord, as you know Mary has the flu. Please, in your infinite wisdom and kindness, allow Mary to ... oh wait, I just got a text. John has cancer. Forget all that stuff I said about Mary and please cure John's cancer. Thank you lord".
Touche. But, to be fair, that's kind of how I pray. It's pretty scattershot, mostly whatever pops into my head at a given moment. Lots of run on sentences and smashed together thoughts.
Foolbok23 said: Since most are using EQ1 as an example in this thread I'll continue to do so. While pugging in a group and the shaman or druid were casting their longest cast time heal non-stop, I'd be immediately ooc'ing for a replacement for myself. Both classes are under utilizing their dps and support spells, while trying to emulate an extremely subpar cleric in healing. Heck, I'd even find a replacement for myself even if the said healer was a cleric for relying on one spell. The original poster stated that it would come in handy if the group had multiple adds and they could heal hop to save the enchanter when casting CHeal instead of the tank. Assuming the heal is going to land in the last two seconds of the cast time it wouldn't matter who received the heal unless the tank had an aoe taunt or stun. I say this because no matter who received the heal all mobs would be beating on the cleric due to the insane healing agro of CHeal. Forcing the cleric to spam quick heals on themselves if they're able to survive. My main in EQ1 was a shaman, who pugged a ton when my dou partner wasn't on or it was too early for my nightly AA group. Once I started casting a spell I was already tabbing, MT assisting, or using the function keys to target a party member or pet for my next spell even before my prior spell had landed. Heal hopping would negate that ability for me. As to the argument for using it to save a druid/enchanter when their pet broke is complete folly. Most of the time they know how long their charm will last unless the pet has high MR or is taking damage. Most people that charm will tell the group not to pull again because their charm is aboot to wear off, this allows the tank to be free to taunt once charm is broken. Pre charm nerf in EQ1 our nightly AA group would run Ixxil((?) Zone you'd access after completing the sewer trials in OoW or GoD). We'd have a mage alt right before the zone entrance to summon pet weapons and the items for attack haste. We'd zone in with a druid and enchanter in the group, both would charm mobs followed by giving those pets str, dex, and haste buffs along with the summoned mage items. You'd be able to get an AA in twenty minutes, but the risk was great. Fastest heal I had was 1.6 or 1.8 sec with aa, the heal wasn't fast nor powerful enough before the charmer died. Root was under a sec with aa and the aa root was instant, rooting their pet once it broke charm is what kept them alive and not a heal. Naturally I'd heal them once root had landed. After recasting charm you could annul/dispel the root. I would agree with the clerics in EQ1 needed an overhaul due to how boring it was to play unless the group was fighting undead. I would also like to say that slow should never have been added into the game. After Velious it was no longer the holy trinity but the all-mighty quad.
Most of this sounds close to accurate, but my experience with EQ1 was from beta through Planes, and then again on the progression servers through Velious. Especially now, on the Progression servers, with the enchanters charming the Alizewasaur in OOT for mass xp grinding, the group healer has to be on point to keep that enchanter alive because there is no telling when the charm is going to break. A good enchanter keeps his distance and gets his root off, but that sucker resists it frequently and you have to get a heal on that chanter or that hasted and buffed dino is going to wipe your entire group in seconds. I have no idea how EQ1 changed or adapted during the time period you played. It got pretty cheezy in PoP and lost a lot of the magic for me (and apparently a ton of other people). It sounds like they made charm more controllable. I hope they keep it unpredictable and sporadic in Pantheon. It's an overpowered ability, so it needs significant risk. A good enchanter and healer can do some serious work though.
Also, in Classic EQ, the Cleric was able to tank quite well. He could handle mobs beating on him, and well, if he held aggro through healing himself, it just made it easier on the DPS. It wasn't the ideal set up, but it was completely functional and as effective, if not more, than having a Ranger tank, which they were expected to do in Classic.
For the most part, I tend to join the legion of voices that believe EQ1 started to die during Luclin and did die during PoP. The Classic version of EQ though was a thing of beauty with Velious being the master stroke. I would like to recreate that type of game and play experience, but the Warrior, Rogue, Wizard, and Cleric need to be made significantly more fun. They look like they have done so with the Rogue and Wizard already. The Druid should play like some mix of EQ2's Fury, EQ1's Druid, and Rift's Chloromancer. EQ1's Shaman, Monk, Shadow Knight, Paladin, Magician, Enchanter, and Ranger (PoP version) were excellent and should largely be copied with improvements. The Bard should be a mix of EQ2's Dirge, EQ1's Bard, and Vanguard's Bard. The Necromancer needs an overhaul to make it more group centric and useful, if they turn it into a control oriented class, that would be ideal and round out the control options. I'm excited to dive into Pantheon's classes and see what they have come up with.
@Mathir
That's a fun fact because , I've never played an MMO where the healer was the GOD of whatever. I've played a dozen of MMO's during the last 18 years, and the healer while important, never was stated as "the most important thing ever" and I'm sorry to bring you back on earth level : it isn't. I suspect you to play healers mains most of the time, and to overemphasise the role you chose, which is not a surprising fact as it's typical people overvalue what they do and undervalue what other do, a simple human behaviour.
Nothing gets down as long as the healer is alive, because when mana consumption is a thing, the healer will run out of mana and everyone will die. Every role has to play in a way it gives breath to others. The tank has to focus on threat to make the DPS role convenient while taking as little damage as possible to make the healer role get a non frenetic pace. The healer has to keep the tank alive, and patch heal the DPS to make sure the boss is managed by a sturdy character, and the boss is DPSed to death, and the DPS have to take as little damage as possible while burning the boss to make sure neither the tank die before the end, neither the healer runs out of mana. Every role impact the others, and while the tank and heal have a specific cap to attain to make an encounter done, the more DPS there is, the faster the encounter is done and the easier the fight will be due to less time to risk errors, bad streaks and such.
Thus, while everyone needs a good and solid balanced gameplay, no one needs a supertool because they play the hardest role ever or whatever.
MauvaisOeil said:@Mathir
That's a fun fact because , I've never played an MMO where the healer was the GOD of whatever. I've played a dozen of MMO's during the last 18 years, and the healer while important, never was stated as "the most important thing ever" and I'm sorry to bring you back on earth level : it isn't. I suspect you to play healers mains most of the time, and to overemphasise the role you chose, which is not a surprising fact as it's typical people overvalue what they do and undervalue what other do, a simple human behaviour.
Nothing gets down as long as the healer is alive, because when mana consumption is a thing, the healer will run out of mana and everyone will die. Every role has to play in a way it gives breath to others. The tank has to focus on threat to make the DPS role convenient while taking as little damage as possible to make the healer role get a non frenetic pace. The healer has to keep the tank alive, and patch heal the DPS to make sure the boss is managed by a sturdy character, and the boss is DPSed to death, and the DPS have to take as little damage as possible while burning the boss to make sure neither the tank die before the end, neither the healer runs out of mana. Every role impact the others, and while the tank and heal have a specific cap to attain to make an encounter done, the more DPS there is, the faster the encounter is done and the easier the fight will be due to less time to risk errors, bad streaks and such.
Thus, while everyone needs a good and solid balanced gameplay, no one needs a supertool because they play the hardest role ever or whatever.
All classes have their role, I said that, but you're an MMO newbie if you think healers aren't the end-all, be-all. They always have been, and they always will be, at least in any challenging, group based game. I already explained how you can get around not having any other class in the game except for heals. The other main concept is that healers are largely the most underplayed role because you're not doing a lot of pew-pew damage, they get blamed for every wipe, and there is generally just a lot of stress playing that role in a high stakes environment, in large part due to DPS classes not knowing how to play the game. It's natural that the best players gravitate towards the most demanding and difficult role, you want to be challenged and you want to be needed/important. Anyone that played EQ1, EQ2, Vanguard, and even Vanilla WoW knows that the healer is king. And they certainly are the Gods of the group. If you don't believe me, lets group up in game somestime. I'll decide whether you live or die. Hint: You're going to die.
As for a "supertool", it's definitely not. It makes perfect sense that not only healers, but also DPS spell casters, should be able to aim their abilities whereever they want up to the point they release the spell. It's called adapting and adjusting on the fly to new circumstances. It's just an asinine train of thought to have a game filled with traps, AoEs, and other spontaneous events and spells but to lock the player into a pre-determined course of action that he can't adjust to the dynamics the game throws at him at a moment's notice. Dynamic Heal Targeting, if that's the fancy name we're going with, is an example of emergent gameplay and it will be in the game at launch. No doubt about it. They can title it that and they can sell it as an example of emergent game play right now. If emergent game play is the thing that made EQ1 special, like they keep saying, then they need to foster as many of these unexpected gems as they can.
Joppa you've pulled this project up out of it's fuzzy troll ashes. Keep on making good decisions. With the leaked news today about Daybreak having EQ3 in development for over a year with the goal to compete specficially against Pantheon for the old school space, you need to keep hitting home runs on every strategic choice. The pressure is on. I'd rather give you folks my hard earned cash than some Russian Oligarchs, and I've come to trust your judgement for the most part so far. The true test is going to be if you can embrace and adapt to things you did not foresee in your personal design documents because they are just better ideas or add strategy, flexibility, and fun to the game with minimal downside. Dynamic healing is just one of hopefully many emergent factors or even "bugs" that collectively could add to the appeal and retention of your game by offering something fresh, new, and strategic. Some of these things will be worth keeping and adapting to, some will not. Will be interesting to see which direction you go as emergent factors and dynamic "bugs" pop up to potentially reveal unexpected options that could be further fleshed out.
Amazing how hard minded you are, despite healers beeing way more popular than tanks on any MMO you can play, you can assume the contrary and make a full argumentation out of a false assertion.
I do not intent to shift this into a war, thus I will remain to the basic of communication : Your opinion is only tied to yourself, and maybe you would benefit somehow to accept that fact.
My opinion on the subject didn't change either.
If you want to add strategy to switching heal targets mid-cast, make it so there's a penalty so you have to think instead of spamming F1-F6 until you find the health bar that needs it the most. Maybe it's an increase in heal aggro if there is a switch. Maybe it's a money donation (!!) to your god/entity when the switch is made. Maybe the heal is only 50% effective if you switch targets.
Or maybe make it for one spell per healing class that's an epic questline and that spell becomes the reward.
The thing is right now, is that it's not a planned feature...which means that whatever content is already done might need to be completely revisited to have everything rebalanced to account for target switching mid-cast. I have no idea how developed some of those components are at this point in time, but I sure would hate for that feature to trivialize some of the content because nobody gets in danger of dying ever anymore, thanks to heal switch-a-roo.
Ludek said:If you want to add strategy to switching heal targets mid-cast, make it so there's a penalty so you have to think instead of spamming F1-F6 until you find the health bar that needs it the most. Maybe it's an increase in heal aggro if there is a switch. Maybe it's a money donation (!!) to your god/entity when the switch is made. Maybe the heal is only 50% effective if you switch targets.
Or maybe make it for one spell per healing class that's an epic questline and that spell becomes the reward.
The thing is right now, is that it's not a planned feature...which means that whatever content is already done might need to be completely revisited to have everything rebalanced to account for target switching mid-cast. I have no idea how developed some of those components are at this point in time, but I sure would hate for that feature to trivialize some of the content because nobody gets in danger of dying ever anymore, thanks to heal switch-a-roo.
Not a bad idea, it could be balanced around "the target receive the healing corresponding to the % of time he was selected during the cast".
100% of the cast equal 100% of the heal.
Switching mid cast means 50% of the heal.
Switching at the last 10% means a really weak heal but still a reaction gain over a complete recast.
Of course the full mana would be consumed by the spell at the end of the cast of progressively, making it a possible reaction gain at some cost.
MauvaisOeil said:Amazing how hard minded you are, despite healers beeing way more popular than tanks on any MMO you can play, you can assume the contrary and make a full argumentation out of a false assertion.
I do not intent to shift this into a war, thus I will remain to the basic of communication : Your opinion is only tied to yourself, and maybe you would benefit somehow to accept that fact.
My opinion on the subject didn't change either.
All good brother. You're entitled to your point of view. It's definitely wrong in regards to the healer stuff, but nobody bats 1.000%.
Tralyan said:This reminds of the kind of DnD players I don't like.
The ones that roll a dice to see if they land the hit, and THEN say what attack they're using. That way, if it misses, they can backtrack and just say it was a regular old hit. Shady SoB's.
Keep it traditional.
I enjoy a good analogy as much as the next guy, but that one does not fit. I'm a lot of things, but I don't lie, cheat, or steal. Switching a heal to someone else at the last moment is just flexibility, it in no way is cheating or gives you an unfair advantage. There are going to be repercussions due to not healing the original intended target, you're just hoping you made the right decision to switch and that you can get back to that tank with another heal before he bites the big one. It's a small difference from self-interrupting and casting on a new target which has been the traditional method. That tedium and unececessary step is removed. The impact and effect is largely the same, however now the best healers will be quick and think on their feet.
Traditional is old and boring. They gave the rogue CC. Traditionally the rogue didn't have CC. That's a positive change that creates more strategy and utility. Is that cheating now as well since where before an add might have killed the group but now the rogue can use Smoke and Mirrors on it to lock it down? Is that the type of player you despise? Think it through a little bit more. People are so resistent to change. We're trying to advance the genre here and give people new playstyles and options. The name of the game is strategy and flexibility. If they don't have a ten second cast Complete Heal, which I don't believe they will have, then we're just talking about adapting your short cast, moderate effect heals on the fly when crap hits the fan. Any healer should embrace that. The vast majority of the time your heal is going to go where you originally intended it ala the great tradition. More options and flexibilty are always desired. It allows the healer to seperate themselves from the rest of the healing pack.
Mathir said:Tralyan said:This reminds of the kind of DnD players I don't like.
The ones that roll a dice to see if they land the hit, and THEN say what attack they're using. That way, if it misses, they can backtrack and just say it was a regular old hit. Shady SoB's.
Keep it traditional.
I enjoy a good analogy as much as the next guy, but that one does not fit. I'm a lot of things, but I don't lie, cheat, or steal. Switching a heal to someone else at the last moment is just flexibility, it in no way is cheating or gives you an unfair advantage. There are going to be repercussions due to not healing the original intended target, you're just hoping you made the right decision to switch and that you can get back to that tank with another heal before he bites the big one. It's a small difference from self-interrupting and casting on a new target which has been the traditional method. That tedium and unececessary step is removed. The impact and effect is largely the same, however now the best healers will be quick and think on their feet.
Traditional is old and boring. They gave the rogue CC. Traditionally the rogue didn't have CC. That's a positive change that creates more strategy and utility. Is that cheating now as well since where before an add might have killed the group but now the rogue can use Smoke and Mirrors on it to lock it down? Is that the type of player you despise? Think it through a little bit more. People are so resistent to change. We're trying to advance the genre here and give people new playstyles and options. The name of the game is strategy and flexibility. If they don't have a ten second cast Complete Heal, which I don't believe they will have, then we're just talking about adapting your short cast, moderate effect heals on the fly when crap hits the fan. Any healer should embrace that. The vast majority of the time your heal is going to go where you originally intended it ala the great tradition. More options and flexibilty are always desired. It allows the healer to seperate themselves from the rest of the healing pack.
I agree on the flexibility part. What I don't agree with are those who believe a cancelled cast shoudn't still cost mana - that was where the analogy was going. I don't have a problem with being able to switch targets (though I believe that in itself should come with additional penalties), but I don't agree with the folks in this thread that believe interrupting a cast, midcast, shouldn't result in a loss of mana. If you make a decision, altering that decision should come with a cost, no matter the class.
They gave the rogue CC, yes, and that's great. Dollars to donuts, using that CC skill would result in higher aggro for the rogue. That's a cost, or a "penalty" of using that skill in the event that it fails, is resisted, or the timer simply runs out. That rogue is going to get smacked around a bit. That's the risk of having more options available. (I also realize this is an assumption. CC in EQ generated a lot of aggro)
I'm not resistant to change. I'm resistant to making decisions not come with consequences of SOME kind. Being able to switch targets on the fly, or interrupt mid cast after the decision is made without suffering any penalties is what I'm against. I suppose I could have made that more clear on my last post.
Tralyan said:I agree on the flexibility part. What I don't agree with are those who believe a cancelled cast shoudn't still cost mana - that was where the analogy was going. I don't have a problem with being able to switch targets (though I believe that in itself should come with additional penalties), but I don't agree with the folks in this thread that believe interrupting a cast, midcast, shouldn't result in a loss of mana. If you make a decision, altering that decision should come with a cost, no matter the class.
They gave the rogue CC, yes, and that's great. Dollars to donuts, using that CC skill would result in higher aggro for the rogue. That's a cost, or a "penalty" of using that skill in the event that it fails, is resisted, or the timer simply runs out. That rogue is going to get smacked around a bit. That's the risk of having more options available. (I also realize this is an assumption. CC in EQ generated a lot of aggro)
I'm not resistant to change. I'm resistant to making decisions not come with consequences of SOME kind. Being able to switch targets on the fly, or interrupt mid cast after the decision is made without suffering any penalties is what I'm against. I suppose I could have made that more clear on my last post.
I appreciate that clarification. We're on the same page for the most part. I'm a big fan of flexibility and options, I have no problem if that added flexibility comes with a penalty associated with it. That probably just adds even MORE strategy and cost/benefit instant analysis. On board.
Fair point on the rogue pulling aggro with his mez, but the healer would pull aggro as well throwing more heals around, especially if it's not on the tank or if there are adds in the group, which if you're changing targets at the last second, clearly something isn't going as planned. So, like the rogue, the healer is putting himself at more risk.
The plan seems to be to penalize you some degree if you interrupt a spell intentionally via mana cost. I'm good with that. I don't see a need to penalize for switching heal targets though, you're a healer, you're supposed to heal, I don't believe the target matters. The penalty is the mana cost, aggro pull, and the fact you didn't heal the person you originally planned on healing who now might die. That's the penalty. Somebody else needed that heal, they didn't get it, the healer has to hope they can get back to them before they die. I understand we're all kind of arguing different aspects to this thing, but for the life of me, I don't get why people are complaining about being able to change the original heal target to adapt to a new circumstance. Nothing new is added, the mana cost is the same, the heal amount is the same, the time to cast is the same, only the target is different. I have no plans to play a DPS caster class, but I think they should have the ability to change targets until the spell is completely cast as well. It just makes logical sense and gives more flexibility and responsiveness to combat a challenging and dynamic environment or encounter.
Tralyan said: ... What I don't agree with are those who believe a cancelled cast shoudn't still cost mana - that was where the analogy was going. I don't have a problem with being able to switch targets (though I believe that in itself should come with additional penalties), but I don't agree with the folks in this thread that believe interrupting a cast, midcast, shouldn't result in a loss of mana. If you make a decision, altering that decision should come with a cost, no matter the class. ...
It's worth re-iterating that no other MMO I know of (outside of channeled spells) has this "feature" of consuming mana during the casting time of a spell. Most if not all (that I know of) only consume mana at the end of the spell cast (outside of channeled spells).
It seems very unlikely that this "feature" will been seen as positive, given it's the exact oppposite of how it was done in EQ1, EQ2, Vanguard, and as far as I know, all other North American made MMO's. If it was done in Asian/Korean MMO's, I've never seen it there either, but I admit, I haven't played them all.
It's fine if you want that "feature", but it's new, and it's punitive to pure casters, compared to how it was in EQ1. That may not go over very well with the target demographic.
What if changing your cast resulted in reduced effectiveness of the spell? Would make sense that if you have to change your focus at the last minute, your concentration would take a hit reducing your spells potency. People would be less apt to cast large heals in that case limiting a mechanic like this to extreme emergencies.
After think a bit more about the "dynamic heal targeting" I've gotta say no to it, in terms of fluidity of gameplay and ease of use It might be a really good thecninacal detail, but in practice it just does not belong in a sloer paced strategic MMORPG.
Firstly being able to switch target mid heal, will lead to twitch gameplay, where the best healer players are the ones with the faster reflexes to switch targets mid heals at the last second, and "snipe" the heal as fast as possible, secondly, it will take away the "1-2sec reactivness" of the healer role, instead of a player having to take 1-2 seconds to react to a certain event ( such as tank taking dmg, dpsers getting aggro, nukes from NPC damaging the party) the player will instanly be able to react to this damage making it harder to balance things around the healers, because they can just fully heal a target within a moments notice. Another thing to consider is the effectivness of the heals cast time, quicker and more expensive heals will be devalued because of this mechanics, and instant cast heals (if they exist) will also be diminished in usefullness.
I don't think switching targets after you started to heal someone is a good thing.
I would just cast my 3 second "big" heal over and over and switch to whoever needed a heal at the time. canceling the action if no one needs healed.
This removes any need for skills. a brain dead monkey could heal if you could switch targets mid heal.
jpedrote said:After think a bit more about the "dynamic heal targeting" I've gotta say no to it, in terms of fluidity of gameplay and ease of use It might be a really good thecninacal detail, but in practice it just does not belong in a sloer paced strategic MMORPG.
Firstly being able to switch target mid heal, will lead to twitch gameplay, where the best healer players are the ones with the faster reflexes...
Except traditional mechanics require better/faster reflexes in some ways.
If you begin a 4 second heal and at 2 seconds realise you need to swap targets, you have to hit the cancel key ('duck' in EQ) and then choose another target and pound the heal key repeatedly so that the millisecond its cooldown ends the new heal starts. Sure, you effectively have 2 seconds to change target and restart the spell, but it's not a calm and collected tactical two seconds.
With the flexi heal you just pick another target. No cancelling and no excruciating cooldown while you mash that heal key 50 times per second while watching a health bar inch toward the "FFS HEALER WHAT ARE YOU DOING?!" point.
In both spells you are having to watch for other party members being hit. In both there's that panic moment needing fast relexes.
As I said, personally I think it shouldn't just get left on as an extra mechanic on top of traditional heals - I think that's the way some are looking at this and I agree that would be 'too much', but correctly balanced it could make an interesting additional tactic for healers from a new line of heals.
But I don't think it necessarily creates 'twitch' play at all.
Kytastrophe said:Sorry, I have to disagree with the folks who like this 'feature' and agree with Chris (Joppa?)
I've selected a target, I've begun to cast spell x. I should expct it to land on the character (PC or NPC) targets at the time casting began.
Chris Perkins (Joppa) forum handle is Joppa.
I am Groot.