Page 9 of 30 FirstFirst ...
7
8
9
10
11
19
... LastLast
  1. #161
    They see no CD on smite and see that it causes atonement thus they assume all your atonement is done by casting smite... because doing otherwise wouldn't support the picture they are trying to paint.

  2. #162
    You do realize you're arguing semantics here and trying to make Atonement sound more complicated than it really is, right?

  3. #163
    Quote Originally Posted by Noradin View Post
    They see no CD on smite and see that it causes atonement thus they assume all your atonement is done by casting smite... because doing otherwise wouldn't support the picture they are trying to paint.
    Quote Originally Posted by KaPe View Post
    You do realize you're arguing semantics here and trying to make Atonement sound more complicated than it really is, right?
    Pretty much this. Casting a Holy Fire (or a Solace) and an offensive Penance really is no different except for the animation that goes off, the two of them have a cooldown, and you can move during the two of them. But seeing as they're both higher DPS/HPS than Smite, you cast them pretty much on rotation for no loss at all.

    Despite using three spells, Atonement is not a complicated mechanic by any stretch of the imagination.



    So Noradin, tell me here, that while Discipline's "actual" heals were completely untouched, all of its cooldowns and other effects were completely untouched in every way, that it can still handle itself in every situation it wants to be in except when emulating a mage by spamming direct damage spells on a boss for the majority of the fight and having the game heal for you for that duration of time, tell me what picture I'm trying to paint here?

    Would love to hear what I'm missing here.
    ~Former Priest/Guild Wars 2 Moderator~
    Now TESTING: ArcheAge (Alpha)
    Now PLAYING: MonoRed Burn (MtG Standard)
    Twitter: @KelestiMMO come say hi!
    ~When you speak, I hear silence. Every word a defiance~

  4. #164
    Mechagnome Bizerk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bulgaria
    Posts
    630
    I don't see why you keep arguing that having holy fire and penance added to the mix make things that much more complicated. At the end of the day this 20% nerf will be negated by the increased item level while still giving you an amount of dps no other healer can even dream of.

    Most likely blizzard decided the massive amount of spirit with future gear will make it possible to focus on throughput stats and increase the amount of atonement with no loss in mana regeneration.
    Last edited by Bizerk; 2013-04-07 at 11:05 AM.

  5. #165
    I'm not argueing that they make it "that much more" complicated, I'm just asking how many spells and mechanics it would take to satisfy you in terms of complexity. Because, if you claim three spells is no better than one, then how many would be ok? And yes I understand that there are other issues, like targeting, I just dislike the mindset that it is ok to heap a lot of imprecise agruments on top of each other and then claim the picture you get at the end is anywhere near accurate. It might be, but you have no way of knowing how accurate. If everyone includes two more spells and states that would be not really more complex than one spell then if enough people do so you can include all spells priests have in 'spamming one spell'.

    The issue is not the number of spells alone, the issue is with spending all your time on smart heals without having to choose targets. That is a totally different kind of problem with different countermeasures. You could for example make something like FDCL part of the atenement healing style, thus introducing more targeted spells, you could make IF better (more like it was before) to make us use it or bring ToF more to the forefront and make us pick targets. Combine those options disc priests would actually do more targeting than other healers and on a larger group of possible targets as well, and we already have to watch for rapture as well and put shields and Spirit Shell our there, which should make us switch back and forth in healing styles constantly.

    I'm not against adjusting numbers to keep our healing styles from getting monotone, I'm against imprecise generalisations, gross misrepresentations, and biased comparisations between specs and classes, they make weak points and hurt the argument you/we are trying to make. If we just call the problem 'mindlessly spamming smite' therefore obscuring the real problem of casting smart heals for too big a part of our time, then the 'solution' will be mindlessly nerfing smite, making the problem worse by reducing the options we have to choose from by one, instead of making us consider more of them.
    Last edited by Noradin; 2013-04-07 at 03:46 PM. Reason: bettering bad spelling xD

  6. #166
    Quote Originally Posted by Noradin View Post
    I'm not argueing that they make it "that much more" complicated, I'm just asking how many spells and mechanics it would take to satisfy you in terms of complexity. Because, if you claim three spells is no better than one, then how many would be ok? And yes I understand that there are other issues, like targeting, I just dislike the mindset that it is ok to heap a lot of imprecise agruments on top of each other and then claim the picture you get at the end is anywhere accurate. It might be, but you have no way of knowing how accurate. If everyone includes two more spells and states that would be not really more complex than one spell then if enough people do so you can include all spells priests have in 'spamming one spell'.

    The issue is not the number of spells alone, the issue is with spending all your time on smart heals without having to choose targets. That is a totally differend kind of problem with different countermeasures. You could for example make something like FDCL part of the atenement healing style, thus introducing more targeted spells, you could make IF better (more like it was before) to make us use it or bring ToF more to the forefront and make us pick targets. Combine those options disc priests would actually do more targeting than other healers and on a larger group of possible targets as well, and we already have to watch for rapture as well and put shields and Spirit Shell our there, which should make us switch back and forth in healing styles constantly.

    I'm not against adjusting numbers to keep our healing styles from getting monotone, I'm against imprecise generalisations, gross misrepresentations, and biased comparisations between specs and classes, they make weak points and hurt the argument you/we are trying to make. If we just call the problem 'mindlessly spamming smite' therefore obscuring the real problem of casting smart heals for to big a part of our time, then the 'solution' will be mindlessly nerfing smite, making the problem worse by reducing the options we have to choose from by one, instead of making us consider more of them.
    I agree with you in that adding more or less spells to the atonement 'rotation' is not exactly the issue. It's more the mind-numbing smart heal mechanic, which removes a lot of choice, thereby more involved game play and that feeling of personal reward for making good choices versus bad ones. Atonement worked via a smart heal before but the point is more that due to the buff to atonement (and significant nerfs to ss and poh specifically), proccing atonement has come more to the fore as a spell of choice. As a consequence, the smart heal mechanic is put that much more into question, because it's boring and unrewarding in equal measure.

  7. #167
    @Kelesti: That was not acutally adressed to you, I'm not actually against adjusting the atonement usage and I'm not about to dismiss all arguments made for or against that depending on my point of view anyway. I'm just trying to point out agruments that I think might be easily misunderstood or misleading (and some that are intended to mislead, which always happens in any discussion). Like the point about the percentage of healing atonement does. 30% of our healing done by three spells, one a talent choice and one our signature spell which was also supported by a very strong set bonus this tier is not what I would call 'too much', if you include the DA that healing also causes it becomes apparent that it is most likely boderline - but no one ever mentioned that, thus one would have to assume it would be heaped on top of the argument at a later date to make another point. Stating that other healers have no similarly large portion of their healing done by spells with minimal targeting requirements is also misleading/untrue, as is omitting that the offensive penance part of atonement is basically our smart AoE heal equivalent. Shamans have chain heal, Druids their nice little multi target smart heal hot and paladin and monks have nice new group heals as well - no comparison to PoH at all, which is static (long casttime you have to keep standing around) and a pain in the ass to target (unless you are currently stacking Spirit Shell which makes it a little more forgiving).

    I would like to have some more single target healing with actual choosing of targets, but thats a general problem of WoW right now, and the outdated PoH mechanic on top of that and we get too much atonement healing as that is currently the answer to both. Maybe they could experiment some with Holy Nova (leaving PoH alone for now) and if that would become a bit viable (and maybe targetable like mindsear) they could cut back on atonement. Making FDCL and ToF a bigger factor would also help with the complexity of atonement healing. Or they could make us stack a buff on ourself with atonement which we could then unload with Holy Nova for AoE and a special targeted heal thus taking away the smart heal part (other than the Holy Nova part which we wouldn't be able to spam though).
    Last edited by Noradin; 2013-04-07 at 04:59 PM.

  8. #168
    Bloodsail Admiral nobodysbaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,005
    PoH works perfect as they designed raid dmg for it since forever. I don't have a problem with targeting since I use a addon (would be silly not to rly) and the range on PoH is nice to.

    If they want to climb out of the "even raiddmg hitting everyone equally box" then they must redesign PoH, and it feels that time is very soon, cause the evenly spread raiddmg is getting a lil old.

  9. #169
    I play different healing classes, and I must say PoH feels very clunky to me. Its group targeting and range makes the delta in healing done larger than I find comfortable, thus requiring more maximal possible hps to still be sufficient for suboptimal cases. Its long casttime and interaction with Spirit Shell which makes us try to chain them requires us to stay at one place for a long time, making us very static healers when using it and encounters with frequent effects that force us to move more frustrating than necessary.

  10. #170
    Quote Originally Posted by Noradin View Post
    @Kelesti: That was not acutally adressed to you, I'm not actually against adjusting the atonement usage and I'm not about to dismiss all arguments made for or against that depending on my point of view anyway. I'm just trying to point out agruments that I think might be easily misunderstood or misleading (and some that are intended to mislead, which always happens in any discussion). Like the point about the percentage of healing atonement does. 30% of our healing done by three spells, one a talent choice and one our signature spell which was also supported by a very strong set bonus this tier is not what I would call 'too much', if you include the DA that healing also causes it becomes apparent that it is most likely boderline - but no one ever mentioned that, thus one would have to assume it would be heaped on top of the argument at a later date to make another point. Stating that other healers have no similarly large portion of their healing done by spells with minimal targeting requirements is also misleading/untrue, as is omitting that the offensive penance part of atonement is basically our smart AoE heal equivalent. Shamans have chain heal, Druids their nice little multi target smart heal hot and paladin and monks have nice new group heals as well - no comparison to PoH at all, which is static (long casttime you have to keep standing around) and a pain in the ass to target (unless you are currently stacking Spirit Shell which makes it a little more forgiving).

    I would like to have some more single target healing with actual choosing of targets, but thats a general problem of WoW right now, we get and the outdated PoH mechanic on top of that and thus too much atonement healing as that is currently the answer to both. Maybe they could experiment some with Holy Nova (leaving PoH alone for now) and if that would become a bit viable (and maybe targetable like mindsear) they could cut back on atonement. Making FDCL and ToF a bigger factor would also help with the complexity of atonement healing. Or they could make us stack a buff on ourself with atonement which we could then unload with Holy Nova for AoE and a special targeted heal thus taking away the smart heal part (other than the Holy Nova part which we wouldn't be able to spam though).
    Love your POV on the subject.

  11. #171
    His PoV is sadly unconvincing until he links some actual citation for his numbers
    Video Game Blog - Now with 100% less World of Warcraft!

  12. #172
    Quote Originally Posted by Noradin View Post
    snip
    uhhh you are almost wanting a healer class with a healing rotation???? the ramp up of that would be pretty dumb....(we have things called cd)

    just give disc COH and holy another awsome healing tool

    back on topic!!

    i cant believe people are sooo upset about this change zzzzzz it will be barely noticeable with valor upgrade
    http://oce.op.gg/summoner/userName=soulstrikes in oceanic now Lol

    5172-1206-0622 pokemon FC Lets Battle!!

  13. #173
    No, not an actual rotation, my example would amount to just a proc and a secondary resource, kind of like Holy power for paladins. It would even be less than what they have for an rotation since it wouldn't involve stacking points but the actual numbers you transfere later, leaving you more freedom to adjust the size of the resulting heal. It was just an example anyway, to demonstrate the difference between solutions for the problem of too much smart heals and solutions for too big numbers caused by an effect/spell/mechanic.

    @Reglitch: Which numbers? I don't need to cite numbers for my opinion that three spells should be allowed to amount for 30% of our healing, that would be impossible anyway, since it is purely my opinion. You are free to disagree with it and give another number that would suit you, this is a discussion after all and I would like to read your point of view.
    Concering the part where I implied disc priests and other healers cause an amount of healing somewhere in that range with smart heals or at least heals with minimal targeting requirements, yes, if this was a scientific work I would have to cite numbers for that, since this isn't and I have only anecdotal evidence readily available to me right now, I decides not to make a study just for that and simply accept it if someone states it doesn't fit his experience at all. (And maybe gives us some non-anecdotal numbers for that? Maybe even based on 2000+ logs for each class and each encounter? I don't have that sort of time right now and since just posting one or two random logs would be no proof at all, I have just forgone it, it was not about the exact numbers anyway.)
    For those who ask what I mean with 'smart heal or minimal trageting requirements', well I think 'smart heal' is clear, minimal targeting requirements means choosing an area on the ground or just one target and hitting a couple of others in a smart way. I choose to put those in a category together as all of them reduce the time healers need to spent serching targets in their unit frames. This would include spells like healing rain, chainheal, wild growth, those two paladin AoE heals I always forget the english names for, and the monk one, too, I believe. I didn't ever play monk much. Please remember the numbers for those spells should include secondary effects caused by those spells for every spec (things like masteries, shaman weapon enchant procs, etc.). If you play one of those specs and disagree with me, please say so. (And please be specific, just saying 'you are potentially wrong somewhere' and leave it at that wont help with the discussion even if it is most likely the case. I already know I'm human and make mistakes, I'd just like to know where they are.)

  14. #174
    High Overlord Vilbu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    138
    I wouldnt cry about this nerf. I dont really see the problem in atonement itself, but more like in the mechanics and encounters themselves.

    Just the design on an encounter makes atonement around 30~40% of our healing since in most scenarios it is enough. With modifiers even more than enough. If they didnt want us to lol smite so much they should bring the healing requirements up.

    Atonement is my first choice always because it is almost manafree, smart and easy, but it wont be the first thing I have in mind if somebody is in the danger of dying. I just dont see the amount of atonement healing a problem, while the real problem is in the design favoring the tool over everything else.

  15. #175
    It will still be a decent heal for low damage times & will allow a healer to dps and heal AT The SAME TIME & is a brainless smart heal so will probably still be better to use than other heals during low dmg times. Disc priests DO NOT need a buff to other heals to make up for this. Any non childish player with real knowledge knows priests will still be one of the two strongest healers & still being more versatility than most other healers. You may actually have to actually pay attention , occasionally pick targets and actually use non damage dealing spells.

    This is a much needed nerf and good for priests and the overall healing community.
    Last edited by Tricksterjim; 2013-04-09 at 01:02 AM.

  16. #176
    Quote Originally Posted by Altarion View Post
    I agree with you in that adding more or less spells to the atonement 'rotation' is not exactly the issue. It's more the mind-numbing smart heal mechanic, which removes a lot of choice, thereby more involved game play and that feeling of personal reward for making good choices versus bad ones. Atonement worked via a smart heal before but the point is more that due to the buff to atonement (and significant nerfs to ss and poh specifically), proccing atonement has come more to the fore as a spell of choice. As a consequence, the smart heal mechanic is put that much more into question, because it's boring and unrewarding in equal measure.
    I understand how atonement can be perceived to be "too easy." But what atonement is, is disc's "efficient AoE heal," since the DA nerf.

    You're not going to tell me that healing with PoH is somehow harder and more refined and precise than atonement? Except in 25 man groups, where PoH has a huge skill cap, or is just ineffective, depending.

    Also, there really isn't much play value, in my opinion, in creating situations like "I couldn't heal the group because I had too many keybinds and cooldowns and it's too damn complicated." That is to say, making it mechanically complex to play a healing class is not great for group morale, and it certainly doesn't solve the chronic healer shortage.

    That said, a 20% nerf to Atonement (which might not be that much by the time it goes live, or might be implemented in a different way) will barely be noticed.

  17. #177
    Quote Originally Posted by Vilbu View Post
    I wouldnt cry about this nerf. I dont really see the problem in atonement itself, but more like in the mechanics and encounters themselves.

    Just the design on an encounter makes atonement around 30~40% of our healing since in most scenarios it is enough. With modifiers even more than enough. If they didnt want us to lol smite so much they should bring the healing requirements up.
    This is 100% on the mark. The actual throughput on atonement is nothing spectacular, but healing requirements are so incredibly low this tier that atonement's mediocre output is plenty to handle 95% of whatever is going out. Most of T14 required more healing than this tier does, and between gear scaling and penance buffs, atonement heals for far more now. If more fights actually had large amounts of damage going out, people would actually have to press buttons besides atonement...

  18. #178
    The whole premise of atonement healing was that you sacrificed healing to do damage. The problem is that atonement currently doesn't work that way, it is a core part of disc healing. Something has to change - it is just unfair to the other healers as it is. Doing 40-50k DPS in a 10m raid is huge.

    IMO just nurf atonement healing by 50% or so and give disc priests something to compensate their standard healing rotation. The choice needs to be there - can I get away with atonement healing to help with damage, or do I need to go full throughput? Ideally I would like to see them take atonement out of the regular healing rotation altogether, but having a toggleable ability to go between a "low dps, high healing" atonement state and a "high dps, low healing" state would be a simple fix to solve a lot of problems.

  19. #179
    I just wish they'd give Disc a real smart heal if they're going to nerf Atonement. I don't even care how they implement it, I just want some sort of smart heal that doesn't require Atonement.

  20. #180
    Bloodsail Admiral nobodysbaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,005
    Atonment will still be awfully powerful giving it's low manacost, the good extra dps, spammability and smartness. They didn't nerf the dps part at all, and Atonment I could imagine scales best in game giving + to both dms and healing and giving Crit double dipping both to dmg, heal and absorb. Disc benefit a lot from secondary stats, they don't give only 1 bonus, they give several increases on spells and effects. Even Spirit gives more mana back than it does to a Holy Priest via Rapture.


    So Disc, as usual, you have nothing at all to worry about.

    Holy on the other hand... You can keep worrying and keep hoping. This is a class who don't scale too good.
    Last edited by nobodysbaby; 2013-04-09 at 10:42 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •