Mathir said:Cancelling spells just to recast on a different target is tedium.
How is it tedious? You shouldn't be doing it often because then you'd be wasting most of your time casting spells that get cancelled. Maybe explain what you mean, because it's not at all obvious what you are talking about.
Is there strategy as well, sure. Does that strategy go away with the ability to hop heals? No. Now you have another layer. Maybe the heal you wanted to use for the tank isn't the right heal for the situation, so you still do everything you've always done. Interrupt, recast something else. Strategy intact.
In the vast majority of situations, a heal that would be good to cast on the tank is going to work for whomever you are switching it to. Maybe you can find a rare example where the type of heal is such a mismatch that it would be worth actually cancelling and recasting something different compared to just swapping targets. But ultimately I don't find practically eliminating that strategic choice except in rare cases to be all that much better than outright eliminating that strategic choice.
However, maybe you can re-direct that heal somewhere else, though the odds are you'll like cast it on the target 90% of the time, but it does give additional options and strategy to do so if needed. It also does not diminish insta-heals since you're probably changing targets most of the time in a situation that the group is suffering from AoEs or adds, thus you'll be burning all your instant heals as well. In the singular situation that a rogue pulls aggro or an Enchanter has charm break and you're mid cast with a heal on the tank, yes, the spell could replace an instant heal, but you could also just finish the heal and then use your instant heal. Otherwise, you switch to the rogue/Enchanter, but now you have to make a quick decision on what to do with the tank who didn't get his heal. This increases flexibility and strategy. There's no way to argue around that.
You're right that it increases flexibility, but it's at the expense of strategy. Changing your target on the fly is the opposite of strategy. Strategy means planning things out, evaluating risk/reward, and making difficult decisions. If every piece could move in every direction, chess would be a terrible game.
Venjenz said:Zyellinia said:Planning ahead and choosing the "right" spell for the encounter situation is part of being a good healer.
This.
No need to change the healing paradigm, and tactical situatons are why there are different lines of heals: big and small heals, HoTs, AE heals, mana efficient long casts, mana inefficient short/emergency casts, etc.
And none of that is impacted by being able to switch a heal to a different target. Not at all.
@Mathir - Thank you for the break down post. I hear your thoughts just don't agree with them which is ok, but wanted to help explain myself on a few things. Talking is my strong suit, but typing not so much :).
Complete heal is a good example, but not one I was actually thinking of. Instead even a 4-6 second cast time from a large Direct heal is able to take advantage of this over any other type of healing.
As for Mana efficiency and Risk vs. Reward. As I understand it while you casting your Mana is used throughout the cast. Stopping the cast early would result in loss of Mana as well as loss of the Heal. Stopping a cast knowing you will loose mana and the heal you were casting is very much Risk vs Reward as it may be much better to loose the mana then finish the cast and loose a player. Being able to switch targets during the cast negates this completely. Also means you no longer risk loosing mana and therefore increases mana efficiently greatly.
Edit: Meant to add - Also I'm not assuming Large Direct Heals will be on a short GC (Global Cooldown) Instead I'm assuming they will be a 4-10 sec cooldown. Making switching targets mid cast even more powerful.
IE - If I cast a 6 sec Large Direct Heal on a Tank then switch to and Enchanter at the end of the cast I save the Enchanter from certain death and then use other heals on tank for 10seconds while Large Heal in on Cool Down. No Mana Lost, No Heals Lost, No Risk, Much Reward, Little stratgery needed. However... Let's say I'm casting on the Tank and the Enchanters Mez Breaks. I now how to decide if I want to loose the mana, stop the cast, and then cast on the Enchanter immediately to keep him up. Or if I want to finish the cast and then switch the Enchanter with shorter faster heals to keep him up and hope he doesn't go down before I get the first cast off on the tank and then get his cast off to heal him.
Saicred said:
Downsides as mentioned:
- You mention Healers challenge and skill cap lowered, or as you said it makes them easier. This is a pretty major downside to me.
- Also switching targets last minute really only impacts Direct Heals in a major way. HoT or AoE abilities aren't really impacted as much which means you reduce dynamic healing styles. Instead you need each healer to have a direct heal equal to the other to balance the ability to switch and negate cast time. Shamans still have to predict damage incoming so they ensure HoTs are active, and Druids I assume will have more AoE abilities or such as well meaning it doesn't impact them as much either.
Dynamic and Fun:
- I guess I understand why some think making healing easier for Healers with Direct Heals (Clerics) would make healing more fun, however I personally love what Pantheon is doing because of the challenge they are bringing back to MMO's. Seems this would actually remove some of the Dynamic Healing styles in the game or at least make this a lot least viable which isn't exactly what I'm hoping for as I'd love to see all Healers able to find a group and have fun playing.
"They always talk about how the goal is unexpected things popping up and players running with it, well here you go, talk the talk and walk the walk. Keep it in."
I'm not sure what this last sentence means could you please explain it to me. Thank you.
I see some of this was responded to before I went through your earlier post, so I addressed some of these issues there. But, will summarize here as well. I think your opinion is fine, and I agree with a lot of it, but I don't see this positive and common sense change as hurting the healing classes, only benefiting them.
1. It makes healing easier in the sense that you have more flexibility and an uneccessary tedium is removed (cancelling and then restarting the same spell on a different target). I don't think it makes the game easier by any stretch, but it can make dealing with unexpected spike damage easier. That's not a bad thing. It doesn't trivilaize anything. People made the same arguments any time new concepts were introduced to healing classes in MMOs, instant heals being the biggest one, but now that's an accepted strategy that made healing more dynamic, though it did make dealing with difficult moments easier. Same thing heal hopping would do. The benefits and strategy would greatly outweigh the degree to which it makes healing easier.
2. I agree it probably will impact the Cleric the most. I disagree that it's any type of major advantage. It just removes the tedium of cancelling and restarting the same spell on a different target, which makes zero sense if you think about why you can't just channel the energy in a different direction. It seems like it would make the Cleric more responsive and enjoyable. My main toon I raided with on Phinegal was a Cleric and they could use more flexibility for sure. I hope to never see a complete heal chain again though. But you are right about the Cleric, they are a reactive healer with wards. Shaman's can HoT or group heal. Druid will heal through damage or however they're going to do it, but seems like they will heal while doing something else. Cleric has to heal after damage is taken, and I agree you can guess and pre-load a heal to go off when you assume damage might happen, but that's not skill, that's just pre-loading and half the time you jump to cancel. Shorter heals that you can control where they go up until they cast are reactive direct healing and it seems right in line with how the Cleric is being built.
3. I like challenge as much as the next guy. I helped with the design of the Blood Mage in Vanguard, I led the largest guild (Voodoo) all through beta (of which Cohh was a member), and I've done a lot of server and world firsts in MMOs, especially EQ2, Vanguard, KOTOR, and Rift. I'm a good player, I'm as hardcore as it can possibly get, and I play to consume all content. I'm not trying to make the game easy or dumb it down by any stretch. I want more options and strategy. I feel being able to hop heals keeps things fresh. And I'm not the only one, the Hive Leader, another hardcore healer, shares the opinion, and I imagine a great many more will as well.
4. My last sentence refers to how many of the great elements of EQ1, my favorite game, were accidents or emergent game play by players (Fear Kiting, Snare Kiting, Feign Death splitting, Song Twisting, etc..). VR has talked about trying to hopefully reharness that magic and see what accidents and emergent game play comes out as the game develops. This is an example of an unforeseen "bug" that actually makes the game more fun and flexible for the healing classes. EQ1 embraced this type of stuff even when it wasn't planned. They've talked about doing the same. Here is their first chance.
Saicred said:@Mathir - Thank you for the break down post. I hear your thoughts just don't agree with them which is ok, but wanted to help explain myself on a few things. Talking is my strong suit, but typing not so much :).
Complete heal is a good example, but not one I was actually thinking of. Instead even a 4-6 second cast time from a large Direct heal is able to take advantage of this over any other type of healing.
As for Mana efficiency and Risk vs. Reward. As I understand it while you casting your Mana is used throughout the cast. Stopping the cast early would result in loss of Mana as well as loss of the Heal. Stopping a cast knowing you will loose mana and the heal you were casting is very much Risk vs Reward as it may be much better to loose the mana then finish the cast and loose a player. Being able to switch targets during the cast negates this completely. Also means you no longer risk loosing mana and therefore increases mana efficiently greatly.
In EQ1, you were only charged mana when the cast went off. You lost nothing but time when self-interrupting. How does that change your argument since I would agree that "starting" a cast consuming mana would be a game changer in terms of re-directing heals, but that's not what they have done or seem to be doing.
I still think the idea of self interrupting to restart the same spell on a different target is moronic. I know it's been around awhile, but it makes no sense. We had quality of life improvements with offensive/defensive targets and a great many other things. This is simply a quality of ilfe improvement.
Mathir said:Cancelling spells just to recast on a different target is tedium.
zoltar said:How is it tedious? You shouldn't be doing it often because then you'd be wasting most of your time casting spells that get cancelled. Maybe explain what you mean, because it's not at all obvious what you are talking about.
EQ1, Complete Heal rotations or just spamming heals on the main tank for hard fights. You cast Complete Heal, even if the tank is full, and you either let it go off after 10 seconds or you sit/jump to interrupt and cast again, but you always need to have it going in case of spike damage. You can also interrupt during the spell to cast any of the other spells as the situation required. The EQ Cleric was designed badly only in the sense that once you got Complete Heal and people had enough hps, that became the only spell that was efficient to use. That entire concept and playstyle was pretty crappy. I prefer the more modern healing systems where the healer has a variety of options, most of which have been talked about in this thread. I think if you go to cast a spell, or buff, or anything really (even nukes for wizards), that you sould have the flexibility to change the target of your spell before it goes off. It's common sense and can easily be done, probably has been done, in modern MMOs.
Mathir said:Is there strategy as well, sure. Does that strategy go away with the ability to hop heals? No. Now you have another layer. Maybe the heal you wanted to use for the tank isn't the right heal for the situation, so you still do everything you've always done. Interrupt, recast something else. Strategy intact.
zoltar said:In the vast majority of situations, a heal that would be good to cast on the tank is going to work for whomever you are switching it to. Maybe you can find a rare example where the type of heal is such a mismatch that it would be worth actually cancelling and recasting something different compared to just swapping targets. But ultimately I don't find practically eliminating that strategic choice except in rare cases to be all that much better than outright eliminating that strategic choice.
Maybe. Sometimes you might have to cancel and do a group heal if an AoE went off. Sometimes the DPS and support don't have the HPs a tank does, so it's inefficient mana-wise to use certain heals on them. Sometimes, a regen might be more useful and all that is required than a big direct heal. Really, in my view, the only time you would swap targets on a big heal meant for the tank is if an "oh crap" moment hit the fan (Bard's charm broke, Enchanter's mez broke) and they're about to die. Heal swapping allows you to save them potentially. A long cooldown instant cast heal could do that as well, but you'd have to interrupt your current spell first, which is an unneccessary step. Strategy also remains and is increased because now you have to decide if letting the longer heal finish is good enough and saving the instant heal for another player, or if you still have to cancel because you don't have time to wait even while swapping, and then burn your instant heal now. I see no strategy being eliminated, only added.
zoltar said:Mathir said:However, maybe you can re-direct that heal somewhere else, though the odds are you'll like cast it on the target 90% of the time, but it does give additional options and strategy to do so if needed. It also does not diminish insta-heals since you're probably changing targets most of the time in a situation that the group is suffering from AoEs or adds, thus you'll be burning all your instant heals as well. In the singular situation that a rogue pulls aggro or an Enchanter has charm break and you're mid cast with a heal on the tank, yes, the spell could replace an instant heal, but you could also just finish the heal and then use your instant heal. Otherwise, you switch to the rogue/Enchanter, but now you have to make a quick decision on what to do with the tank who didn't get his heal. This increases flexibility and strategy. There's no way to argue around that.
You're right that it increases flexibility, but it's at the expense of strategy. Changing your target on the fly is the opposite of strategy. Strategy means planning things out, evaluating risk/reward, and making difficult decisions. If every piece could move in every direction, chess would be a terrible game.
It really isn't. It increases strategy. I don't think strategy is limited to pre-planning, I think strategy is an instant concept in the heat of the moment that has to be developed as well. I'm able to think things through in that split second and decide what to do, I think a lot of folks are capable of doing that. The ability to change target on the fly is literally thinking on your feet and adapting to the newest set of paramenters and challenges. I agree with your chess analogy, but that's not what is happening here. It's a common sense, quality of life change, and I don't think it dumbs down the game at all, just makes it easier for the healers, in the sense they have more flexibility, to handle crisis situations. Again, same reason you can interrupt spells in the first place is to adapt to changing circumstance. Same reason that insta-heals and the entire heal dynamic has evolved is to give healers more options. This is just the next logical step. And I do agree that it's not even something that will be used all the time, but there are times it will make all the difference, and that's a good thing.
Mathir said:In EQ1, you were only charged mana when the cast went off. You lost nothing but time when self-interrupting. How does that change your argument since I would agree that "starting" a cast consuming mana would be a game changer in terms of re-directing heals, but that's not what they have done or seem to be doing.
Please Review June 2016 Stream. Mention of Mana being lost if you spot casting or its interrupted is also mentioned. You can also see the Mana being lost during a cast when in the last streams. As the cast is being cast the mana is deplented. If its interrupted it won't use all the mana cost of that spell, but will use the amount you used so far during the cast as I understand it.
Love the idea behind this and hope it remains this way going forward. The thought of loosing this to a silly bug seen in Pre-alpha is beyond me. Certainly if the bug favors one healer/heal style over the rest.
Edit: Sorry forget link for you. https://youtu.be/5oNVecHjiJI?t=2294
Saicred said: ... Please Review June 2016 Stream. Mention of Mana being lost if you spot casting or its interrupted is also mentioned. You can also see the Mana being lost during a cast when in the last streams. As the cast is being cast the mana is deplented. If its interrupted it won't use all the mana cost of that spell, but will use the amount you used so far during the cast as I understand it. ...
Hm, that is going to be problematic, if that's the actual implementation they end up with. Consuming mana only when the spell lands (at the end of the casting time, as in EQ1) was done that way for a variety of very good reasons.
The problem here is... this... yeah, this is going to, right from the word "Go" create a disparity in efficacy between long-cast-time spell classes and short-cast-time spell classes. (and bards)
To say nothing of instant-cast versus non-instant-cast. There are many cases in EQ1, even today, where latency causes interruption. If latency causes interruption AND mana loss? At least in EQ1 you simply lost the cast time. To lose the cast time and mana? Playing a caster will be an ever increasing exercise in frustration, as casting times increase as you level up. If there are ever fights or situations where you have to move and cast, you won't be able to rely on it. You'll have to move, wait one round-trip TTL, then cast. Every time. Or risk an interruption and mana loss.
Nope, not liking that. Not liking that at all.
I like it [mana drain during casting]. Seems like you're blowing issues out of proportion vjek. First off, I'm not sure what you mean about latency causing spells to be interrupted. Don't think i've experienced that. And it would only cause issues if players are constantly interrupting their spell casts. If for some reason it did end up affecting one class more than another, the devs could simply adjust the overall mana usage of the spells for that class. EZ PZ.
vjek said:Saicred said: ... Please Review June 2016 Stream. Mention of Mana being lost if you spot casting or its interrupted is also mentioned. You can also see the Mana being lost during a cast when in the last streams. As the cast is being cast the mana is deplented. If its interrupted it won't use all the mana cost of that spell, but will use the amount you used so far during the cast as I understand it. ...Hm, that is going to be problematic, if that's the actual implementation they end up with. Consuming mana only when the spell lands (at the end of the casting time, as in EQ1) was done that way for a variety of very good reasons.
The problem here is... this... yeah, this is going to, right from the word "Go" create a disparity in efficacy between long-cast-time spell classes and short-cast-time spell classes. (and bards)To say nothing of instant-cast versus non-instant-cast. There are many cases in EQ1, even today, where latency causes interruption. If latency causes interruption AND mana loss? At least in EQ1 you simply lost the cast time. To lose the cast time and mana? Playing a caster will be an ever increasing exercise in frustration, as casting times increase as you level up. If there are ever fights or situations where you have to move and cast, you won't be able to rely on it. You'll have to move, wait one round-trip TTL, then cast. Every time. Or risk an interruption and mana loss.
Nope, not liking that. Not liking that at all.
Wait, so you think that changing target mid cast is good, but loosing mana before reaching the end of the cast is not ?
Thinking positively about these two things is not necessarily mutually exclusive or inclusive, but together, they create some problems. Or said another way, they're not related. EQ1 had mana consumed at the end of the spell.
I had no issue playing with that mechanic for many years. If that's the way Pantheon ends up, I will be fine with that.
However, the possibility of being able to change your cast target has some potential for innovative mechanics. If they choose to explore them, great. If they don't, ok, that's a lost opportunity, but fine. Separate topic.
Now, however, if you have BOTH consuming mana after being interrupted, and the potentially for trivial interruptions, being able to change your target seems like a really nice compensatory feature, rather than a bug, to me.
Having mana consumed during casting time is not how it is/was in EQ1, EQ2, VG or honestly, any other MMO I've ever played, outside of channeled spells. Of course, channeled spells are different in that they have a mana cost for their duration/per pulse/tick/whatever, however long you channel them.
But this? This is not a good way to make your product unique, in my opinion. First off, it negatively affects every spell with a casting time. If you have to move and then stop, and then wait for the server to recognize that, THEN cast? That's how it was in EQ1, without the mana loss potential. If you didn't wait long enough, you were interrupted, but you just recast and suffered the recast time. Now, wait, there's more punitive! With Punitive Pantheon, you get to: move. stop. wait. cast. get interrupted, suffer the recast AND lose mana! boooo.
Honestly, if I were a designer, I would be so incredibly happy, because now? Want to make an encounter difficult? AE interrupt every player within LoS. And even better? Make it an effect so that it happens 50% of the time at 75% casting time, for all casters.
Or no, wait, hold up. Make it so every ranged NPC in the encounter fires an arrow, throwing knife, or spits at every caster once they reach 75% through casting a spell. Awesome right? Yeah, no. Oh oh, even better, INTERRUPTING ATMOSPHERES. Yes! The holy grail of difficulty knobs.
I've played those MMOs where every mob has a ranged interrupt (I'm looking at you, AC2) and holy balls they were annoying. This core design decision (to proactively consume mana while casting any spell with a casting time) is... surprising and disappointing to me. I hope they reconsider this decision, if this is really intended. Otherwise you're going to have a whole bucketload of ticked off casters, and that doesn't make for happy paying customers. At least in all other mmo's I've played, you didn't have the addition of losing mana as well. At least there, it was just annoying and not rage-inducing.
On the other hand, if they do go ahead with this, without percentage based out of combat mana regen? Say hello to sitting on the floor, 'cause that's all you're gonna be doing, as a caster. :) Stand. Cast. Interrupted. Lost mana. Can't cast. Sit. Med. Repeat forever.
I think you're going mad. However :
But this? This is not a good way to make your product unique, in my opinion. First off, it negatively affects every spell with a casting time. If you have to move and then stop, and then wait for the server to recognize that, THEN cast? That's how it was in EQ1, without the mana loss potential. If you didn't wait long enough, you were interrupted, but you just recast and suffered the recast time. Now, wait, there's more punitive! With Punitive Pantheon, you get to: move. stop. wait. cast. get interrupted, suffer the recast AND lose mana! boooo.
This is no longer P99 with low ping, low responsiveness. I do not know an mmo late of 2010 where you need to wait a few miliseconds before casting again or you had a fizzle (like EQ classic was). That's purely infrastructure related. What will be the mana loss of cancelling cast ? no one said it was 100% of the spell, but is there logic about starting a cast with all glowing hands, and just interrupting it with no loss ? I don't think so. Cast began, some mana is used. Now how much ? Not for me to say ?
Saicred said:Mathir said:In EQ1, you were only charged mana when the cast went off. You lost nothing but time when self-interrupting. How does that change your argument since I would agree that "starting" a cast consuming mana would be a game changer in terms of re-directing heals, but that's not what they have done or seem to be doing.
Please Review June 2016 Stream. Mention of Mana being lost if you spot casting or its interrupted is also mentioned. You can also see the Mana being lost during a cast when in the last streams. As the cast is being cast the mana is deplented. If its interrupted it won't use all the mana cost of that spell, but will use the amount you used so far during the cast as I understand it.
Love the idea behind this and hope it remains this way going forward. The thought of loosing this to a silly bug seen in Pre-alpha is beyond me. Certainly if the bug favors one healer/heal style over the rest.
Edit: Sorry forget link for you. https://youtu.be/5oNVecHjiJI?t=2294
You're correct. They've essentially turned every spell into a quasi-channel ability. I think that is extremely questionable, and I agree with the guy concerned with server latency. If it's looking for interrupt for every player (and mob?), that's a lot of extra work for the server to be reading at all times. Maybe modern technology can handle it. If it turns into a slide show under heavy load like Vanguard did, this might be reason numero uno.
I would also actually argue that since you are being charged for queueing up a spell, it's even MORE important to give you more options on how to utilitze it or it's a sunk cost in an unforgiving game. As of right now, self-interrupting, a legit strategy, penalizes you on top of the time lost. If they want to penalize you early for choosing to cast a spell regardless of if you use it, they have to give you all the tools thatt enable you to actually use that spell as circumstances change midcast.
If the channel all the time thing doesn't cause server lag, I think it actually adds some strategy, and I agree with you that it could be an interesting new idea. I think you're absolutely nuts for not seeing how important it is to be able to change heal targets since you are now being charged a mana cost just to start a spell. I think they'll end up keeping all of this, as it is, for launch. It just makes too much sense. But, I'll test it all out on the hardest content in the beta and give feedback.
What I am willing to pound the table for now, or at any point, is more flexibility and diversity as a healer, especially as a Cleric. Healers are going to be everything in this game, just like they were/are in EQ. They need as many tools to succeed as they can get. Don't limit them, open them up to more strategic options.
What I am willing to pound the table for now, or at any point, is more flexibility and diversity as a healer, especially as a Cleric. Healers are going to be everything in this game, just like they were/are in EQ. They need as many tools to succeed as they can get. Don't limit them, open them up to more strategic options.
So, are you basically saying the healers are more important than anything else ? I'm sorry to highlight that, but it's really a shortsighted point of view, and the argument of giving them more tools because they deserve it is flawed as hell. Healers are as much important as anything else, and need to be properly played to enhance their party's effectiveness. Giving them cheap tools to avoid thinking too much is not helping the game, or helping anyone.
I'm really amazed that a few pro "target change midcast" are 100% to get that new "toy" that is a pure benefit with no drawback, but firmly against any mana loss for cancelling casts. It's like saying I want an easier gameplay, but I refuse anymore difficulty.
Sorry but that's really obvious as hell. I won't heal as a main, but I will surely heal at some point, and I don't want smarttargetchange, but I want to be punished If I cancel cast to get smart heals out of a single spell spam associated with an interrupt of some sort. That's what makes you think twice before casting, and makes you consider using lower healing spells to avoid overhealing and dampen the mana usage.
Very valid arguments from both sides on this issue. I did not see mention of 1 major problem (for me at least, maybe others) is the new playstyle it would introduce. I have healed a lot throughtout many mmos and the way i play is this... pick a target to cast on, as that spell is being cast I preselect my next target (or stay on the same target) but assume im changing targets in this scenerio. I do this to check for debuffs, hots or dots on other members, buff timers remaining, or just to have a small or instant heal to top off another member ect.. and i do most of this while casting my heal on my original target.
Another thing i would like to point out is this, if you were in a raid or a group with more than 1 healer and used something like WoWs raidwatch or healbot (or whatever pantheon has in place) i would think nearly every healer would target swap to the lowest hp player constantly, not sure how that would play out in an actual setting. I would really have to play it to give it the final stamp of approval or disapproval.
MauvaisOeil said:What I am willing to pound the table for now, or at any point, is more flexibility and diversity as a healer, especially as a Cleric. Healers are going to be everything in this game, just like they were/are in EQ. They need as many tools to succeed as they can get. Don't limit them, open them up to more strategic options.
So, are you basically saying the healers are more important than anything else ? I'm sorry to highlight that, but it's really a shortsighted point of view, and the argument of giving them more tools because they deserve it is flawed as hell. Healers are as much important as anything else, and need to be properly played to enhance their party's effectiveness. Giving them cheap tools to avoid thinking too much is not helping the game, or helping anyone.
I'm really amazed that a few pro "target change midcast" are 100% to get that new "toy" that is a pure benefit with no drawback, but firmly against any mana loss for cancelling casts. It's like saying I want an easier gameplay, but I refuse anymore difficulty.
Sorry but that's really obvious as hell. I won't heal as a main, but I will surely heal at some point, and I don't want smarttargetchange, but I want to be punished If I cancel cast to get smart heals out of a single spell spam associated with an interrupt of some sort. That's what makes you think twice before casting, and makes you consider using lower healing spells to avoid overhealing and dampen the mana usage.
Yes, healers are more important than anything else. I've never seen an MMO to date where that wasn't the case. Not that other classes and roles aren't important, but the healer is the God (sometimes literally) of any xp group, raid, or other event. Sometimes you can survive with a monk tanking, you just need a healer. Sometimes you can survive without a control class, you just need a healer to heal through the extra damage. DPS are...well....DPS and as long as you have heals, you'll eventually get the mob down. But unless you are kiting in some form or fashion, you generally aren't doing a darn thing without a healer. Healers have always been able to run the group, ask for extra loot, and pretty much act like entitled babies if we want because you need us, there aren't a lot of us, we know both of those facts, and so we take advantage of it.
You completely mis-understand me though if you think I'm trying to make the class or role easier. I want more flexibility and options for when I'm doing the hardest content in the game. I also would argue that if you have the ability to heal dance, it makes you think more because you now have an increased option. That's the thing. You can do whatever it is you want to do plus add this option in. It provides more flexibility and more strategy. It's probably only useful in certain situations, but it is an ace in the hole if things get dicey mid-cast.
I'm also perfectly fine keeping the channeling upfront mana cost AND having the ability to swap heal targets. Both add more strategy, and as long as it doesn't lag the server, I'm on board. It also decreases the desireabiliy of chaining long heal spells since you can't just interrupt for free, and I am definitely a fan of limiting that cheese, though some people apparently enjoy pre-loading heals in the event you need it. However, that option is still available, just at a cost, so seems fair to me.
Any healer that has ever healed challenging content should want more flexibility. Did you hate regen spells? Those provided flexibility. What about instant cast heals? Those provided flexibility. What about being able to interrupt your spell in the first place? Older games forced you to finish casting, so that concept provides flexibility. And again, common freaking sense says that if you cast a heal you should be able to decide where it goes up to the point the spell goes off. Same thing with a DPS caster. That fireball should be able to be aimed whereever you want until it leaves your hands. Common sense.
Alazia said:Very valid arguments from both sides on this issue. I did not see mention of 1 major problem (for me at least, maybe others) is the new playstyle it would introduce. I have healed a lot throughtout many mmos and the way i play is this... pick a target to cast on, as that spell is being cast I preselect my next target (or stay on the same target) but assume im changing targets in this scenerio. I do this to check for debuffs, hots or dots on other members, buff timers remaining, or just to have a small or instant heal to top off another member ect.. and i do most of this while casting my heal on my original target.
Another thing i would like to point out is this, if you were in a raid or a group with more than 1 healer and used something like WoWs raidwatch or healbot (or whatever pantheon has in place) i would think nearly every healer would target swap to the lowest hp player constantly, not sure how that would play out in an actual setting. I would really have to play it to give it the final stamp of approval or disapproval.
How long is this heal you are casting? You can still click through people, just make sure you hit your hotkey before the spell goes off to target who you want. If they do the icons correctly, hopefully you can tell all that information just from the HUD as well (Generally they just need to make icons flash if the buffs are running out or have green or red trim if a debuff or DoT). Can't cast an insta-heal while channeling a normal heal, so that isn't really impacted in the traditional sense, but being able to swap heal targets allows you the ability to heal another group member without burning your insta-heal, if you think the longer heal will cast in time. Otherwise, you're back to interrupt, target, and use the instant heal.
There would definitely be a learning curve, but there's learning curves for anything new. I imagine in the end, most people will be happy with the increased flexibility and strategy. However, we definitely need to test it out ourselves. We do know that one solid healer with a lot of experience healing in games, especially EQ1, really likes it though (Hive Leader).
As for raids, if all the healers just switch to the guy with the least hit points, that raid is going to fail. There will be strategy in place ahead of time, the healer will have his own group or a specific target to worry about. The WoW raid nonsense and add-ons hopefully will not be in this game.
Gyldervane said:I wonder if Thehiveleader realized his simple comment in the stream would lead to four pages and counting of spirited debate in the forums? :)
Lol, I'm enjoying it. Nobody is getting crazy so I really love seeing the arguments for and against back and forth. I'm glad this community is able to state their opinion without getting offensive. I understand both sides to the argument, and i do disagree with this actually being a thing. But again, I love seeing the passion without the flame lol.
Mathir said:
Mathir said:Cancelling spells just to recast on a different target is tedium.
zoltar said:How is it tedious? You shouldn't be doing it often because then you'd be wasting most of your time casting spells that get cancelled. Maybe explain what you mean, because it's not at all obvious what you are talking about.EQ1, Complete Heal rotations or just spamming heals on the main tank for hard fights. You cast Complete Heal, even if the tank is full, and you either let it go off after 10 seconds or you sit/jump to interrupt and cast again, but you always need to have it going in case of spike damage. You can also interrupt during the spell to cast any of the other spells as the situation required. The EQ Cleric was designed badly only in the sense that once you got Complete Heal and people had enough hps, that became the only spell that was efficient to use. That entire concept and playstyle was pretty crappy. I prefer the more modern healing systems where the healer has a variety of options, most of which have been talked about in this thread. I think if you go to cast a spell, or buff, or anything really (even nukes for wizards), that you sould have the flexibility to change the target of your spell before it goes off. It's common sense and can easily be done, probably has been done, in modern MMOs.
Mathir said:Is there strategy as well, sure. Does that strategy go away with the ability to hop heals? No. Now you have another layer. Maybe the heal you wanted to use for the tank isn't the right heal for the situation, so you still do everything you've always done. Interrupt, recast something else. Strategy intact.zoltar said:In the vast majority of situations, a heal that would be good to cast on the tank is going to work for whomever you are switching it to. Maybe you can find a rare example where the type of heal is such a mismatch that it would be worth actually cancelling and recasting something different compared to just swapping targets. But ultimately I don't find practically eliminating that strategic choice except in rare cases to be all that much better than outright eliminating that strategic choice.
Maybe. Sometimes you might have to cancel and do a group heal if an AoE went off. Sometimes the DPS and support don't have the HPs a tank does, so it's inefficient mana-wise to use certain heals on them. Sometimes, a regen might be more useful and all that is required than a big direct heal. Really, in my view, the only time you would swap targets on a big heal meant for the tank is if an "oh crap" moment hit the fan (Bard's charm broke, Enchanter's mez broke) and they're about to die. Heal swapping allows you to save them potentially. A long cooldown instant cast heal could do that as well, but you'd have to interrupt your current spell first, which is an unneccessary step. Strategy also remains and is increased because now you have to decide if letting the longer heal finish is good enough and saving the instant heal for another player, or if you still have to cancel because you don't have time to wait even while swapping, and then burn your instant heal now. I see no strategy being eliminated, only added.
zoltar said:Mathir said:However, maybe you can re-direct that heal somewhere else, though the odds are you'll like cast it on the target 90% of the time, but it does give additional options and strategy to do so if needed. It also does not diminish insta-heals since you're probably changing targets most of the time in a situation that the group is suffering from AoEs or adds, thus you'll be burning all your instant heals as well. In the singular situation that a rogue pulls aggro or an Enchanter has charm break and you're mid cast with a heal on the tank, yes, the spell could replace an instant heal, but you could also just finish the heal and then use your instant heal. Otherwise, you switch to the rogue/Enchanter, but now you have to make a quick decision on what to do with the tank who didn't get his heal. This increases flexibility and strategy. There's no way to argue around that.
You're right that it increases flexibility, but it's at the expense of strategy. Changing your target on the fly is the opposite of strategy. Strategy means planning things out, evaluating risk/reward, and making difficult decisions. If every piece could move in every direction, chess would be a terrible game.
It really isn't. It increases strategy. I don't think strategy is limited to pre-planning, I think strategy is an instant concept in the heat of the moment that has to be developed as well. I'm able to think things through in that split second and decide what to do, I think a lot of folks are capable of doing that. The ability to change target on the fly is literally thinking on your feet and adapting to the newest set of paramenters and challenges. I agree with your chess analogy, but that's not what is happening here. It's a common sense, quality of life change, and I don't think it dumbs down the game at all, just makes it easier for the healers, in the sense they have more flexibility, to handle crisis situations. Again, same reason you can interrupt spells in the first place is to adapt to changing circumstance. Same reason that insta-heals and the entire heal dynamic has evolved is to give healers more options. This is just the next logical step. And I do agree that it's not even something that will be used all the time, but there are times it will make all the difference, and that's a good thing.
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.
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.
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".