PDA

View Full Version : Healer's group heal - why so weak?


Jorlen
05-10-2010, 10:18 AM
I'm just curious.

The healer's tree is mainly to heal, but his most useful spell would be a group heal.

My question is, why is it so expensive to raise in skills for the weak heal you get? I mean, I understand that beacuse it heals many, it would be less effective as a trade-off, but I think the amount is simply too weak for the points invested.

Am I alone in thinking this? I don't touch the spell in its current form and never will, and that's a shame beacuse I like healing my group in multiplayer.

graffen69
05-10-2010, 11:20 AM
I agree.
I would never waiste any points into it at its current cost and with a 10 sec RT (Reuse Time). For that cost it better heal a lot better.
I think the heal amount should be somewhere in the middle of Lesser Heal & Greater Heal. If youre playing a Priest youre better of putting 1 point into the Shaman skill "Divine Intervention", even though it has a 5 min RT.

Jorlen
05-10-2010, 11:35 AM
I agree.
I would never waiste any points into it at its current cost and with a 10 sec RT (Reuse Time). For that cost it better heal a lot better.
I think the heal amount should be somewhere in the middle of Lesser Heal & Greater Heal. If youre playing a Priest youre better of putting 1 point into the Shaman skill "Divine Intervention", even though it has a 5 min RT.

I didn't even realize it had a 10 second cool down!

IMO:

- double or even triple the heal amount
- remove the reuse time completely (as a trade off, the cast time can be increased)

Cadfan
05-10-2010, 11:46 AM
Its probably calibrated from DoP, actually. In that game you sometimes had a team of 5 allies, and the more allies you have, the more powerful a group heal becomes.

graffen69
05-10-2010, 11:58 AM
While on the subject of the priest class (sort of...) i dont see why the Shaman Trees Protection: Resistance Skills (the 4 in same line) has to have a Duration Time. Not to far fetched to compare with the Gladiators 3 Focus Skills which are permanent once turned on.

Jorlen
05-10-2010, 01:54 PM
While on the subject of the priest class (sort of...) i dont see why the Shaman Trees Protection: Resistance Skills (the 4 in same line) has to have a Duration Time. Not to far fetched to compare with the Gladiators 3 Focus Skills which are permanent once turned on.

Can the shaman "buffs" be cast on others or are they self-only?

DeathKnight1728
05-10-2010, 03:00 PM
I believe that the buffs can be cast on both, being that the priest class line is party friendly. That was how it was in DOP (which uses the same engine). If you can't do that, then the priest line would be a cruel joke since its the best party class to have in a multiplayer game....imho

graffen69
05-10-2010, 03:15 PM
Jorlen wrote Can the shaman "buffs" be cast on others or are they self-only?
Im not sure on the Shaman Protection-line of spells since i never played my Priest in MP and cant recall checking when i had a Npc escort mission or an occasional pet from summon altars. But if they do work like the gladiators Focus skills in that regard, then no they are self only.
But i very much like to see these kinds of Buffs working in group. Now if Defenders only could get a ditto HP Regen buff and Arcane Mages a similair Mana Reg Buff, i be as happy as a kid in a candystore :)

Markoff Chaney
05-10-2010, 07:05 PM
Playing mostly as a pure Priest in MP, I can verify that the buffs can be cast on party members and even on NPCs, if you so desire. This makes the buffs fantastic and gives increased survivability that is needed when some mob gets a nice crit off.

I can also verify that a single point in Group Heal, as it currently stands, is a point wasted. ;) Even if the cooldown were removed, the expenditure needed, point wise, would be greatly better served by dumping those points into your lesser and greater heals and use more intelligent positioning.

Jorlen
06-07-2010, 04:27 PM
Shadow - Thanks for tweaking this in the latest patch.

Not sure if I'd be pushing my luck for asking this, but is there any chance the reuse time can be lowered by say, 50%? :)

Shadow
06-07-2010, 07:58 PM
I'll look at it.