View Poll Results: Well..... are ya?

Voters
465. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    386 83.01%
  • No

    79 16.99%
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
LastLast
  1. #61

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    I'm looking forward to the change of pace. When the whole fight is "omg spam 2", there's not a lot of room left for exciting moments. I hope cata fights have moments where burst healing is required, and those'll be the moments that get my adrenaline going. It's a lot more fun to have small periods of intense output than having to maintain your max output for 5-10 minutes.

    I think I'm starting to repeat myself here, so I hope I got my point across.

  2. #62

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    cataclysm this, cataclysm that. Oh for the love of the game
    ! People just shut up and let the blizzard team finish,so we can then talk about it.



  3. #63

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    I'm really hoping this will change the disturbing trend of healing classes being boiled down to 1 or 2 spells.

  4. #64

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    Quote Originally Posted by alostrael444
    I'm really hoping this will change the disturbing trend of healing classes being boiled down to 1 or 2 spells.
    Try the holypriest, we use them all
    Non-discipline since 2006. Also: fails. "Chakra, when the walls fell"

  5. #65

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    Eh, people over-simplify a lot of things. They think because you have 60% or more from one thing that you're just mashing that one button, or something. The only class right now that should really be using a single healing spell is Paladin, but they have the most cooldowns to manage of any healer. They're actually the only class that uses less than 4 heals.

    Druid (raid): Rejuv, Wild Growth, Swiftmend, Nourish
    Druid (tank): Nourish, Regrowth, Rejuv, Lifebloom, Swiftmend
    Shaman: Chain Heal, Riptide, Earth Shield, LHW
    Disc (raid): PW:S, PoM, Penance, PoH, BH, FH
    Disc (tank): PW:S, PoM, Penance, BH, GH, FH
    Holy: Renew, PoH, PoM, CoH, BH, FH

    Shaman use HW and Holy uses GH, but not very often at all.

    You can get by with 1-2 buttons, but you won't be doing a good job. You'll just be proving that content is under-tuned.

  6. #66
    I am Murloc! Nienniora's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Quebec
    Posts
    5,161

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dizzie
    I've been playing a priest in vanilla and bc. I quit is in wotlk because it didn't seem nearly as fun.

    Shortly, I'm sure many priests will share the excitement
    i did exactly the same.. tbc healing was so much better then what we got in wrath
    my priest was just an alt but i took her on 30% of my raid :P

  7. #67

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    Quote Originally Posted by harky
    So let me get this straight, Bozwell... If you were using all that fire resist gear on all fights in MC/BWL then you had a lot bigger issues than worrying about how to heal. People really went overboard on Fire Resist, that's true, but it wasn't needed for most fights, so half decent players had a Fire Resist set for Rag and then a normal set for basically everything else. Kind of goes right back to the thought that while you were there, you didn't really know what you were doing. And yes, MC and BWL were mostly about logistics. Getting 40 people who weren't horrible together was the primary issue that held people back in early 40 mans. Later on it became easier to recruit based on who was already in full T1/2. As far as the other healing classes? Paladin sucked until the blessing change and Druid sucked throughout Vanilla (couldn't tank until the end of Vanilla, bad healing, bad DPS). Shaman wasn't as bad as you're implying though and once the blessings were change Paladin was good as well.
    First the original quote, so just in case you change anything later, now onto replying:

    More confirmation that you didn't play. Nice?

    Harky... If you were NOT using all that fire resist gear on all fights in MC/BWL then you had a lot bigger issues than worrying about how to heal.

    I mean, yea, useless remarks. Let's do those more often. :

    People really went overboard on Fire Resist, that's true, but it wasn't needed for most fights, so half decent players had a Fire Resist set for Rag and then a normal set for basically everything else.
    This is plain wrong. There are alot of places you need FR. Do detail which / where you will swap out resist gear for your so call SP set. And do detail what was your sets.

    Kind of goes right back to the thought that while you were there, you didn't really know what you were doing. And yes, MC and BWL were mostly about logistics. Getting 40 people who weren't horrible together was the primary issue that held people back in early 40 mans.
    Believe it or not, logistic, was not one of biggest issues. As in the beginning, alot of the *raiding* players are from other games, like UO / EQ. Which has an upward of 90+ players for a raid in those games. 40 is .... easy. (remember furor? yeah FoH and the like, those people starting from beta are from EQ)
    (it's a bigger problem later on in vanilla, due to burn outs, loot drama...)

    Besides, you never back up your point much, only with silly remarks such as:
    Yea, if you don't do "what harky said", you have problems.

    And your posts shown your basically non-existent knowledge of the content back then.

    Not sure why you insisted on pretending you have done those. Not like you get a medal something? I don't think it's super cool that someone went through MC from start. Really, let it go, it's ok to have start playing later. I just don't get why you so keen on pretending you played back then. To prove you are old?

  8. #68

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    Quote Originally Posted by wyll
    just as a starter i've healed on every class in game, priest at 60, druid at 70, and pally, druid, shammy at 80.

    i'll admit i did use holy nova in vanilla....but only on vael when i was in the melee group. course that was just for fun not really for practicality. infinite mana ftw!!! Despite being the infamous guild killer i still think that was one of the most fun fights in the game, especially when i got to go on my mage, instant cast fireballs before blowing up ftw.
    hee hee, you need to experience stealth hunters with aim shot. That was fun hiding around SS to kill hordes.

    And holy nova, I found only in 1 occasion that really helps besides vael. But most other times, it's gimick more than anything. (ok.. some use in AQ for the bug tunnel too.... hm..)

  9. #69

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    Honestly, I have no problem with you thinking anything you want about me. If you'd like to question if I did something, or not, that's fine. You're basically assuming that because that's the way you did things that you were doing them properly, which just isn't the case. I've gone over why certain spells were used a few times now. Look up the old spell values if you want more proof. Go ahead and look up mechanics in MC fights as well, even if I hadn't been there that's something easy to look up, so trying to 'fake it' while using incorrect data would be silly.

    As far as your contentions?

    1. Fire Resist gear. Lots of guilds required you to have a set with at least 150 FR. Some required you have a set with 200. So people believed they actually needed to wear that gear on most fights, which is false. I used my Fire Resist set for Ragnaros and Lava Elemental pulls. That's it. When first starting I ran my FR gear on all trash and on all but a few bosses like Shaz, Mag, Luci and Sulfuron. Ranged and healers did not have the same FR needs as Melee (which were extremely high) and certainly not the requirements tanks had.

    2. Logistics. 40 man raid problems is exactly why raid size was reduced in BC. Yes, the big guilds could throw together 2 raids, but many servers only had 1, or 2 guilds that were doing MC. There simply were not enough good players able to schedule in that manner and Blizz reduced raid size to aid with the logistical challenges. My guild typically had 60 people show up on raid nights and of the 40 in at a time we usually had to carry 5-10 people. That's just the way raiding was back then. The fact that all PVE content was redesigned to make raiding less challenging logistically should show how much of an issue it really was.

    I really didn't care at all about MC because MC was fun, but it was also farm content before BWL came out in 1.6. BWL was farm content for so long that by the time of AQ release I also had my Hunter and Warrior both in full T2. If you want to pretend healing MC/BWL was some huge epic achievement, cool beans. Doesn't change that it was the worse half of Vanilla raiding and even if Blizz wanted to bring back Vanilla healing, which they don't, they wouldn't be bringing back the bland early Vanilla healing. They'd be bringing back how healing Naxx went, which was very demanding and very fun. Either way, I'm done feeding the trolls.

  10. #70

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    Quote Originally Posted by harky
    Honestly, I have no problem with you thinking anything you want about me. If you'd like to question if I did something, or not, that's fine. You're basically assuming that because that's the way you did things that you were doing them properly, which just isn't the case.
    /shrug ... right, i'll just return what you said to you.

    I've gone over why certain spells were used a few times now. Look up the old spell values if you want more proof. Go ahead and look up mechanics in MC fights as well, even if I hadn't been there that's something easy to look up, so trying to 'fake it' while using incorrect data would be silly.
    which comes to the question why? I've said many times, not like it's super duper that you played back then. I still don't quite get why people insisted they did when they did not?

    I guess lying for the sake of lying is "cool beans"?

    As far as your contentions?

    1. Fire Resist gear. Lots of guilds required you to have a set with at least 150 FR. Some required you have a set with 200. So people believed they actually needed to wear that gear on most fights, which is false. I used my Fire Resist set for Ragnaros and Lava Elemental pulls. That's it. When first starting I ran my FR gear on all trash and on all but a few bosses like Shaz, Mag, Luci and Sulfuron. Ranged and healers did not have the same FR needs as Melee (which were extremely high) and certainly not the requirements tanks had.
    So, you did ran with FR gear. ok. Until you get full / outgeared the content a bit? Great to hear. Like that's what i've said?

    2. Logistics. 40 man raid problems is exactly why raid size was reduced in BC. Yes, the big guilds could throw together 2 raids, but many servers only had 1, or 2 guilds that were doing MC. There simply were not enough good players able to schedule in that manner and Blizz reduced raid size to aid with the logistical challenges. My guild typically had 60 people show up on raid nights and of the 40 in at a time we usually had to carry 5-10 people. That's just the way raiding was back then. The fact that all PVE content was redesigned to make raiding less challenging logistically should show how much of an issue it really was.
    There are multitude of problems. Logistic isn't exactly what I'd call it, more like guild management, as in who sits on bench. 2nd raids. But that's like toward the end of vanilla.

    I really didn't care at all about MC because MC was fun, but it was also farm content before BWL came out in 1.6. BWL was farm content for so long that by the time of AQ release I also had my Hunter and Warrior both in full T2. If you want to pretend healing MC/BWL was some huge epic achievement, cool beans. Doesn't change that it was the worse half of Vanilla raiding and even if Blizz wanted to bring back Vanilla healing, which they don't, they wouldn't be bringing back the bland early Vanilla healing. They'd be bringing back how healing Naxx went, which was very demanding and very fun. Either way, I'm done feeding the trolls.
    Guess you can't read. I specifically said multiple times that have done MC / BWL back then wasn't something ultra cool, just that people shouldn't pretend they did, if they didn't.

    Is that concept really so hard to grasp? Good to see trolls done feed trolls though. Does that make a troll captain something? :

  11. #71

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    Quote Originally Posted by harky
    Shaman use HW and Holy uses GH, but not very often at all.
    Shaman can use HW a lot more often than holy or disc use GH, on my shammy with riptide just cast HW is down to about 1sec, the only reason to cast LHW instead is mana efficiency. Of course there are plenty of fights where I'd use that haste to cast a CH, but plenty where HW is the better option.


  12. #72

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    I didn't include anything on that list that's usually cast less than once a minute, which is why I left HW off. I could have included GH and HW both for tank healing for Holy/Shammies, but eh. Not really that important. Was just trying to argue against the whole 'you cast 1-2 heals' idea that people fling around, which currently only true of people who outgear content... or bad Druids/Disc Priests in general. There's a lot that think mashing '1' is how they're meant to heal.

    Anyway, Bozwell, you have no idea what my experience is, but insist on calling me a liar. If you really need to play tough guy that much on an internet forum there isn't much I can do for you. You want to claim that people are lying simply because they played differently than you and that's fine, it really isn't my problem. You've shown a complete disregard for logic and history simply to prove some sort of point, which honestly I don't care about. You want to claim that 'vanilla' only applies to being under-geared, or just starting MC/BWL, that's fine. That means that you can only claim to have healed in Vanilla for about 2 months in Vanilla then, because it didn't take more than that to be decently geared. Finally, I'm very sorry that you don't understand what logistics means. Perhaps you should look it up? That might help. Just to help out though, "guild management" is just a layman's term for one component of logistics. See, the reason people get offended by what you're saying is simple. You've repeatedly and with no evidence accused someone of lying. If it was a political debate what you're doing would be slander. That is what is offensive.

  13. #73

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    I am excited about these changes. ;D I started raiding in Wrath, and I am now exasperated with the spam=win healing system. Yay for actual healing challenges!
    Thanks Drael

    Marcus Human Warrior
    Tyran Human Priest

  14. #74

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    I would like to see more of a challenge added to healing unlike what we see now. Currently I play a Disc Priest and go Holy for 1 or 2 fights in ICC10 and mana is never an issue unless your second healer goes down and your 1 healing for 1/4th of the fight. Healing during WotLK is almost as easy as a Frost Mage Rotation (when it was a viable raiding spec)..... Bubble-PoM(waiting....waiting... waiting...) Bubble-PoM-Flash Heal(waiting....waiting...) Flash Heal - Bubble. You get the point, and I'm sure many of you experience this every week in ICC 10 and 25. It would be nice if they made it so that healing did require more thought that it currently does. But of course the healers that are baddies currently will only be worse if it gets tougher, which either means A:There will be alot of terrible healers pugging. or B:Bad healers will hardly be around because they will quit because its too much of a hassel.

    And as for it not being fun to watch and manage your mana..... Well staring at heal bot look for weakened soul cds and people who are not quite topped off isnt exactly a rollercoaster..... more like a ferris wheel.
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectro
    And what the mods are trying to say is not that every music is full of unicorns and sparkles and flying chewbaccas... they are trying to tell you that no matter what someone listens to you should respect their tastes
    Quote Originally Posted by Naux
    you're retarded...seriously I don't even think you're trolling it's that bad.

  15. #75
    Dreadlord Kaga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Aberdeen, Scotland
    Posts
    981

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    nowai! i wanna chain spam!!!

    CHAAAAIIIN SPAAAAAAMMMM!!!!
    Kaga, raid leader of Shafted, Ragnaros-EU.

  16. #76

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    Spec holy and then in addition to healing people you can do a Holy Fire -> SW:P -> Devouring Plague rotation so you get 3% increased critical heals!


    :-\

  17. #77

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    Quote Originally Posted by harky

    Anyway, Bozwell, you have no idea what my experience is, but insist on calling me a liar. If you really need to play tough guy that much on an internet forum there isn't much I can do for you. You want to claim that people are lying simply because they played differently than you and that's fine, it really isn't my problem.
    na, I didn't care if you play naked, just you didn't possess some key knowledge. LIke the *norm*, back then.

    E.G.: guilds want 150-200FR. But you said you like with like under that. Gee, I wonder which is the norm?
    You, or the horde of raiding guilds back then? Hard to decide.

    Besides, you were just called on stuff and then more or less "bandaid" your earlier posts.

    You've shown a complete disregard for logic and history simply to prove some sort of point
    right, ok, Let's play this senseless accusation game.
    You've shown a complete disregard for logic and history simply to prove some sort of point, Harky.

    Your lack of mental capacity to even notice that I mentioned multiple times that it's nothing special to prove you(or me, or anyone) that have played back then is just astonishing.
    Perhaps you should take your own advise to like read and try to comprehend the posts you are replying to?

    , which honestly I don't care about.
    Interestingly, that you claim you are *done* and then comes back to reply to my post specifically replying to my posts meaning .... wait for it..... wait for it....... YOU DO CARE.

    Surprise, surprise! But yeah, whatever, I really dont' care if you play back then or not, just I really like to pick on obvious lies. Bad habit of mine I guess.

    You want to claim that 'vanilla' only applies to being under-geared, or just starting MC/BWL, that's fine.
    well, you did read my post, I was specifically talking about that part of vanilla. (or replying to that part of vanilla)

    Just cos' that happened to the topic I was replying to. I never said, "rawr, BWL and MC was the only thing in vanilla, rawr, my name is Harky, so I must be right".

    Your reply was like, "yeah I was walking with 300+ Sp with MC gear dude". Of course, then I challenge you, you later said, and I paraphase, "yea, when i get more geared, I take some FR away and swap in SP gears.".

    Well, Einstein, that's not in MC gear then is it?

    My assertion, if you have problem grasping. Is that if you didn't do the raid in the gear level it was intended for, you never really get the feel of the difficulty and how it was actually designed to be played in the beginning. Which of course, you should refrain from making comments on that.
    And please pay attention to this, because you missed this like 5-10 times already, I really don't care if you did went through it (or not), it's not a big accomplishment of any kind. Just please, refrain from commenting on it, if you didn't experienced it.

    Hopefully, this time it sinks in for you. Since you missed the last half dozen times when I said this.

    That means that you can only claim to have healed in Vanilla for about 2 months in Vanilla then, because it didn't take more than that to be decently geared.
    hahaha..... hahaha.... hahhahaha..... BWL / MC is only 2 months?
    Let's not even count BWL.

    MC is 2 months? hahahahahahaha.. Did you know how long to get everyone to geared up in MC? When people couldn't clear it in 1 day? (like after some months of farming and learning for most raiding guilds?)

    Thanks for another confirmation that you didn't play back then. Let me emphasis my position on that again.

    I really don't care if you did went through it (or not), it's not a big accomplishment of any kind. Just please, refrain from commenting on it, if you didn't experienced it.

    Finally, I'm very sorry that you don't understand what logistics means. Perhaps you should look it up? That might help. Just to help out though, "guild management" is just a layman's term for one component of logistics. See, the reason people get offended by what you're saying is simple. You've repeatedly and with no evidence accused someone of lying. If it was a political debate what you're doing would be slander. That is what is offensive.
    On the contrary, I understand logic fine. I just don't understand why you keep insisting you played back then, when you didn't. And talking about ability to understand, this is from the poster that missed I've said:
    I really don't care if you did went through it (or not), it's not a big accomplishment of any kind. Just please, refrain from commenting on it, if you didn't experienced it.

    half dozen times, but stuck on false accusation and repetition? Good lord, you trying to kill me with comical relief?

    "Guild management" and definition of "logistic". Whatever, that's just semantics. If you would like to use logistic better, ok, you keep calling it that. Not a big deal there. I'll keep calling it guild management.

    Without evidence? yeah, at least my posts weren't the ones filled with counter evidence.

    Oh, political debate. Yes, let's get into lies, propaganda and empty promises.
    No wonder your post are constructed the way they are.

  18. #78

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    So, does bright red text and modifying the size of text mean something to you, or do you just like making your posts harder to read for the heck of it? Honestly, here's where I stand:

    You've yet to show any evidence against what I've said. That is that GH1 was higher efficiency than H4. That FH was inefficient and low throughput. That you need high FR on most fights in MC. And so on. If it's so easy to disprove, then disprove it. Claiming that guilds know better than I do is fine, but please back it up with more than hearsay. You've ignored that 'better gear' was actually T1 gear, which was MC gear. Full T1 + SP gears and 300 SP wasn't difficult in the least. You'll also note that my original comment noted 'T2+' as being when SP was easy to obtain. The thing here is that you keep stating that something is not a big accomplishment, then making a very large deal out of the difficulty as a way to claim that the content was hard. It's nice that you can use big red text to make statements, but when the text following is contradictory all it amounts to is posturing.

    No, high FR was not required for most of MC. Guilds required higher FR because there were places you would die instantly without it, not because you needed to wear it most of the time.
    No, SP was not hard to obtain pre-AQ, or even pre-BWL. If you didn't have a good non-resist set I can understand you not being aware of this, but don't mistake that for SP sets being useless, or hard to build.
    No, things like Heal-4, Lesser Heal of any rank, etc were not efficient, or needed. Look up the spell details yourself as well as old down-ranking mechanics, such as the level 20 rule if you want evidence.
    No, Flash Heal was not something that you should have been using. It lost in terms of throughput and efficiency to GH1.

    As far as 'semantics', people often get confused, or just misguided into thinking bringing up semantics, or grammar is bad. So, to argue semantics some more... Semantics is the study of meaning. If semantics are brought up because someone does not understand a term being used, then it's completely valid. Logistics was the main concern when raiding in Vanilla and to some extent BC. That's been greatly toned down and in Cata they're planning to tone it down more (10 mans drop 25 man loot, among other things). If you know what logistics means and implies, then why would you argue that 'logistics' wasn't a problem, but 'guild management' was? I wasn't arguing semantics at all, you were. My point in bringing that up was to show how hypocritical your argument was. Though, the fact that you missed that shouldn't be surprising too me when combined with the rest of your posts.

    Oh and for being 'done', well, I have trouble keeping my mouth shut when people don't understand how to properly make an argument. It's a pet peeve, I suppose.

  19. #79

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    Harky, just to bring up Heal4 again, wasn't the level 20 rule more of an afterthought? I could've swore that came later.
    ~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~

  20. #80

    Re: Are you excited about the return of 'Triage' style healing?

    No, the original level 20 rule was in from the beginning. It's been changed... 4 times, now? That was the original one though. Heal 4 was not what was affected, but Lesser Heal ranks would all be affected. You wouldn't notice this at all until you have some SP, though. So when you were completely under-geared people would often resort to very low ranks and then just spam those. The original level 20 rule was in effect from Beta and onward. Later that got redefined, but still called a level 20 rule. The original level 20 rule was designed to prevent high level players from using skills under level 20. This is why FoL-1 was used instead of low ranks of HL. Since FoL-1 was a level 20 spell it wasn't hampered.

    2.0 modified that rule. It was still called a 'level 20 rule', but it was actually called that in reference to the old rule. It was actually based on 11 levels beneath your current level. 2.2 then modified that further and made it very, very complicated. Spells were given a 'range' of use based on when you got the next spell. This meant that you could use lower level spells as long as there wasn't a high level one without penalty (previously there was). Both the 2.0 and 2.2 system kept the old level 20 rule as well, only being additions onto it. 2.0 was what most remember as the massive nerf to down-ranking as it hit spells that people commonly used.

Posting Permissions

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