CH nerf?

[Noktar]

So in effect yes with enough clerics (and now padders) any 7k+ ish tank can still tank any mob. If mana is too low, just add more clerics to the chain. If fights get too long add more rogues or wizards to add DPS. Perhaps just add necros to pump mana to clerics, maybe have an equal number of necros as clerics and assign each to his own.

Effectivly you say every mob is possible if you have enough people. (cause by now you are almost adding every class in game)
But that is the whole idee about strong mobs if you cant take it come back when you are stronger. This can be with more people or more experience better gear.



PS. CoH does not clear agro we once send a 65 warrior out on a red mob to him just to see how hard he hits and i CoHed him. So we thought man that guy is pretty good. thinking CoH cleared agro. then one said: "uhhh guys look we have that guy incomming"

 

[Wiz]

Re: CH questions

1) If you have a time limit on Complete Heal and 2 seconds max is the duration period until the tank can receive another CH, what happens if the tank gets any lag? The cleric lags - they all die. If lag is an issue on the tank would it register it hit at the appropriate time?

2) If it does *not* register at the correct second, then everyone else's button will be wrong, potentially killing the warrior and guild. I know you tested this; did you test it with a huge amount of people in the same zone?

Answering both of these: Yes. It was tested quite a bit. Lag doesn't go reversely, so no, the cleric lagging doesn't lead to his CH failing.

3) I can understand you not wanting to have a "cleric zerg" fight, but is that even a real concern? If it is, how come people haven't beaten everything on the server with ease?

Yes. And because there isn't enough clerics yet.

4) I see only where it will encourage twice as many clerics, (1 chain heal on main tank, 1 on secondary - and if Main dies then clerics are added to pad healing on tank number 2. (Now Main tank) Cleric will not be able to just complete heal new main tank from switchover because everyone's buttons would be off. I understand that the MoBS can be adjusted for this CH situation so they do not have 100,000,000 hit points or hit for upper 1000's. The question I have is "Are the MoBs currently adjusted'?

That makes no sense. Why not just gear up the tank so he can tank with the 2 sec chain or have spam healers use remedy if the MT drops low instead?

5) I do not think it is good tactics putting all shamans, druids and healers on cleric duty. Sure they heal, but on really long raids, every group was assigned a shaman or druid if possible and part of their job is keep their group alive. Now the group will not get pad heals. Shamans and Druids won’t be able to DoT stuff because their mana will run out. I can Ethereal Light apx 12 times before I go oom, and 1600 hit points isn’t a lot. That is at 4.8 seconds per cast. Everyone that pad heals will need a lot of mana - remember CH is the most efficient heal in the game. Pad healing is cast at the same time as other pad heals, thus everyone runs out apx at the same time. Does anyone even have enough mana to keep up with pad heals in a long fight?

All shamans, druids and healers do not need to be put on cleric duty. This is a pretty stupid assumption.

6) I would like a test raid, with everyone (Wizzy) to kill a mob, and I think the mob we should try is the one in Umbrel Plains. That mob *should* be easy if done right. Can we test it out there?

No. I've already tested this.

 

[Wiz]

About "with enough clerics. you can still..., this changes nothing!" a few points.

Raids are size limited.

AND

20 spammers can't heal as efficently as 5 chain CHing clerics.

 

[Fjodor]

fjo the only way I can think to save this first cleric and potentially others from an 8 sec into ch engage is to target FD him.

Nope, there are other ways, I won't tell you how tho, figure it out for yourself

 

[mwh]

"Nope, there are other ways, I won't tell you how tho, figure it out for yourself "

When people make comments like this, ive found 90% of the time they are talking out of their arse and have no idea how to do it. But Ill leave you to figure out if he really is.

 

[Fjodor]

"Nope, there are other ways, I won't tell you how tho, figure it out for yourself "

When people make comments like this, ive found 90% of the time they are talking out of their arse and have no idea how to do it. But Ill leave you to figure out if he really is.

I'm not, I can say that it involvs atleast 2 people to do the pull.

 

[mwh]

See, we are talking about ways that this change effects things, and you want to keep some secret supermethod of pulling to yourself. It doesnt help the discussion at all. So if you really have some secret method thats being done, then put it here so we see WHY a Ch of .5 seconds could be possible. Midn you, that means that coltaine or I would have to gain enough aggro to make up for 6000-7000 heal every half a second, not just the original pull. I find that hard to believe.

If you are talking about just a method to make up for the original heal, like having a tank use a discpline to tank while the MT builds up aggro, well, that only works for the first CH, and probably wont help over the long term of a pull

 

[Wiz]

He's talking about pulling with a SK that builds up aggro quickly and then having the Warrior taunt to give the Warrior a large chunk of start aggro.

Gasp, I spoiled the secret.

 

[mwh]

From the pacify thread, you said " said that yes, this will increase the gap in the sense that Warriors will be better tanks for boss mobs that your guild is struggling to take, but that wasn't the intention, just an unavoidable side effect. "

Then if paladins were tanking fine before, and we are getting unavoidably hurt more than warriors, then excuse me for feeling that by you saying that, maybe you really thought deep in your heart that paladins were tanking too well, since you seem to not mind too much if something makes warriors better tanks by comparison. Knights are supposed to be able to build more aggro(at least, thats what I think), so theoretically I could run a slightly tighter Ch than warriors to make up for my having less hitpoints, but in penalty Id need more clerics and more chances for mistakes. Here, it sets a artificial limit, you can run tighter Chs up to 2.0 seconds, but after that, any advantage to your aggro doesnt matter at all.


Anyway, I know you love when people bring up Eqlive*snicker*, but on Live there is no limit on CH and I was in several large raid guilds, and I can say for a certainty that(at least in the guilds I was in) we had limits to the point of which we could not just keep making the cycle quicker and quicker. For one, lets say we had 12 clerics doing a cycle of 1.1 seconds. Now every second the tank is getting hit by a heal of 5.5k. Now that means the tank has to somehow generate enough hate to keep up against 5.5k heal aggro every second. Thats um, extremely hard to say the least. Now lets pretend that he has UberFreakinAggroweapon 1 and 2 in each of his hands so can keep up with this. Then you now have to have 12 clerics with great manapools, since of course a CH cycle is only as good as the least manapool in the lot. You also have 12 people that could go LD, have their dogs unplug their computer, etc. Its just that more likely to break down and get ugly.


So, regardless, my guild(RUIN) isnt going to have enoughc lerics to drop a 1.1 second CH cycle anytime in this millenium, so why am I against this change? My main reason is I dont like how it makes yet anothe rpossible mistake in a CH cycle, and if we do get more clerics, Id like to take advantage of it to be safer in a fight(for example, to do 2.0 against librarian instead of 2.1 once our clerics have more mana). Before, you had to worry about people waiting too long or losing aggro. Now if someone jumps the gun by half a second, its as if they didnt heal at all. Of course, you can say, dont do that mob then, wait. I guess thats a argument, but since I really dont see anyone running 1second CH cycles anytime soon, why was the change put in? RUIN has never ran a cycle under 2 seconds, and we rarely have the clerics to do that. Was GOTW running 1.5 ones or something? Or was this to fix a problem in the future?

 

[Fjodor]

From the pacify thread, you said " said that yes, this will increase the gap in the sense that Warriors will be better tanks for boss mobs that your guild is struggling to take, but that wasn't the intention, just an unavoidable side effect. "

Then if paladins were tanking fine before, and we are getting unavoidably hurt more than warriors, then excuse me for feeling that by you saying that, maybe you really thought deep in your heart that paladins were tanking too well, since you seem to not mind too much if something makes warriors better tanks by comparison. Knights are supposed to be able to build more aggro(at least, thats what I think), so theoretically I could run a slightly tighter Ch than warriors to make up for my having less hitpoints, but in penalty Id need more clerics and more chances for mistakes. Here, it sets a artificial limit, you can run tighter Chs up to 2.0 seconds, but after that, any advantage to your aggro doesnt matter at all.


Anyway, I know you love when people bring up Eqlive*snicker*, but on Live there is no limit on CH and I was in several large raid guilds, and I can say for a certainty that(at least in the guilds I was in) we had limits to the point of which we could not just keep making the cycle quicker and quicker. For one, lets say we had 12 clerics doing a cycle of 1.1 seconds. Now every second the tank is getting hit by a heal of 5.5k. Now that means the tank has to somehow generate enough hate to keep up against 5.5k heal aggro every second. Thats um, extremely hard to say the least. Now lets pretend that he has UberFreakinAggroweapon 1 and 2 in each of his hands so can keep up with this. Then you now have to have 12 clerics with great manapools, since of course a CH cycle is only as good as the least manapool in the lot. You also have 12 people that could go LD, have their dogs unplug their computer, etc. Its just that more likely to break down and get ugly.


So, regardless, my guild(RUIN) isnt going to have enoughc lerics to drop a 1.1 second CH cycle anytime in this millenium, so why am I against this change? My main reason is I dont like how it makes yet anothe rpossible mistake in a CH cycle, and if we do get more clerics, Id like to take advantage of it to be safer in a fight(for example, to do 2.0 against librarian instead of 2.1 once our clerics have more mana). Before, you had to worry about people waiting too long or losing aggro. Now if someone jumps the gun by half a second, its as if they didnt heal at all. Of course, you can say, dont do that mob then, wait. I guess thats a argument, but since I really dont see anyone running 1second CH cycles anytime soon, why was the change put in? RUIN has never ran a cycle under 2 seconds, and we rarely have the clerics to do that. Was GOTW running 1.5 ones or something? Or was this to fix a problem in the future?

Yes GotW has been running CH chains on under 2 seconds to make encounters nice and safe. And like Wiz said earlier, Melwin would have been able to take down GODS if the CH rot wasn't changed, that is, have 20+ clerics run a ch rot on .5 sec, that way clr don't run out of mana and the GOD will die. This change was put in to make things harder but allso to be able to balance mob DPS, now instad of makeing mobs hit for more DPS just to cover that large guilds (GOTW/Ruin) gets more clerics we instead have to come up with better tactics and WR don't have to go down the road that live went with PoP+ expantions, where mobs hit for 10k+ dmg every round and tanks have 20k+ hp unbuffed.

 

[Wiz]

See what Fjodor said, really. You think your tanking abilities are getting hurt -- fine. In the sense that you have an artificial limit for what you can tank based on your mitigation and hit points.

I don't really see a problem with that. Knights are way better exp/trash tankers than warriors in the sense of instant aggro, warriors should somewhat be ahead in tanking big mobs, but the IMPORTANT thing isn't class balance, it's mob vs player balance and equipment balance. More HP/AC should have an advantage beyond "one cleric less needed".

 

[Gwendelyn]

I think i may have gotten confused along the way reading this topic but here goes. If one of the problems with warriors is not getting enough aggro and Cheal doesnt have a problem getting aggro, what about implementing Hate weapons or even aa skills that increase hate given by warriors? If this is not one of the arguements i apologize I wish i knew more about the higher end content on this server to reply further but will have to research it further. Also if some one could recap this and bring all of the arguements to a list i would love to see and reply to it, as i have been playing for a while and have done ch rotations myself, just want to help nothing more

 

[Duma]

Only reason we used a 21 on the Librarian is to prevent the server from rejecting a early CH. You tanked it comfortably other than one lucky round where I guess AA slow wore off and it drained on the same round. The big problem isnt with the mobs hits or your tanking ability it is with its HP. Even if you didnt fall at about 57% we would not of dropped it because some of our (six) clerics were already going oom by the time the mob was at 50%. I don't think we are going to have any problems. Your hp still has room for improvment with a few higher level items we can easily get, and you still have those unactivated aa's.

The only mob we have failed "miserably" at is Dblash and that would happen to anyone who tries to fight him a tthe moment. Other than that we have failed only to coincidence, server hiccups, and mobs doing stupid things during the middle of engage and after they die which = wipes to people who don't have previous knowledge.


--------


On the Knight Vs. Warrior debate, I have aways suscribed to the belief that "the perfect tank" should always be a luxery and not a requirement and that a warrior, paladin, and shadow knight should, eventually with different amounts of work invested, beable to be servicable against ANYTHING. The only thing I fear is with stamina styles going in that a warriors unyielding will last long enough to get through the longer high hp mob fights without the guild finding they need a 2nd L65 with 100 aa's to take his place 3/4 through the fight. Then again since we don't currently use a warrior to tank it isnt really our problem...

 

[Duma]

I think i may have gotten confused along the way reading this topic but here goes. If one of the problems with warriors is not getting enough aggro and Cheal doesnt have a problem getting aggro, what about implementing Hate weapons or even aa skills that increase hate given by warriors? If this is not one of the arguements i apologize I wish i knew more about the higher end content on this server to reply further but will have to research it further. Also if some one could recap this and bring all of the arguements to a list i would love to see and reply to it, as i have been playing for a while and have done ch rotations myself, just want to help nothing more

There are "hate weapons". They are called Nightjaunt and Ytrazliarch and only 1 toon on the server has both of them.

Unless you are talking about weapons that generate more aggro per point of damage and not through proc. I don't know if that is possible though.

 

[Wiz]

Only reason we used a 21 on the Librarian is to prevent the server from rejecting a early CH. You tanked it comfortably other than one lucky round where I guess AA slow wore off and it drained on the same round. The big problem isnt with the mobs hits or your tanking ability it is with its HP. Even if you didnt fall at about 57% we would not of dropped it because some of our (six) clerics were already going oom by the time the mob was at 50%. I don't think we are going to have any problems. Your hp still has room for improvment with a few higher level items we can easily get, and you still have those unactivated aa's.

The only mob we have failed "miserably" at is Dblash and that would happen to anyone who tries to fight him a tthe moment. Other than that we have failed only to coincidence, server hiccups, and mobs doing stupid things during the middle of engage and after they die which = wipes to people who don't have previous knowledge.


--------


On the Knight Vs. Warrior debate, I have aways suscribed to the belief that "the perfect tank" should always be a luxery and not a requirement and that a warrior, paladin, and shadow knight should, eventually with different amounts of work invested, beable to be servicable against ANYTHING. The only thing I fear is with stamina styles going in that a warriors unyielding will last long enough to get through the longer high hp mob fights without the guild finding they need a 2nd L65 with 100 aa's to take his place 3/4 through the fight. Then again since we don't currently use a warrior to tank it isnt really our problem...

Thank you. What you said is quite correct. As for Knight vs Warrior, if anything, stamina styles will close the cap in tanking style dispersity since both Paladins and SKs get tanking styles of their own.

A paladin CAN tank any mob in the game, with the right gear. I just don't want any paladin tanking any mob.

 

[muurian]

Thank you. What you said is quite correct. As for Knight vs Warrior, if anything, stamina styles will close the cap in tanking style dispersity since both Paladins and SKs get tanking styles of their own.

A paladin CAN tank any mob in the game, with the right gear. I just don't want any paladin tanking any mob.

As long as you concede that Khalid would be an example for the type of paladin that CAN tank the mobs, there shouldnt be a problem with regards to raid mob balance.

 

[Wiz]

Thank you. What you said is quite correct. As for Knight vs Warrior, if anything, stamina styles will close the cap in tanking style dispersity since both Paladins and SKs get tanking styles of their own.

A paladin CAN tank any mob in the game, with the right gear. I just don't want any paladin tanking any mob.

As long as you concede that Khalid would be an example for the type of paladin that CAN tank the mobs, there shouldnt be a problem with regards to raid mob balance.

Should Khalid be able to tank AD? Definitely.
Should Khalid be able to tank Ghan? Yes.
Should Khalid be able to tank Gandolas? Probably not yet, needs better gear.
Should Khalid be able to tank Tarhyl? Sometime in the far off future, once he has REALLY good gear.

 

[zodium]

I think i may have gotten confused along the way reading this topic but here goes. If one of the problems with warriors is not getting enough aggro and Cheal doesnt have a problem getting aggro, what about implementing Hate weapons or even aa skills that increase hate given by warriors? If this is not one of the arguements i apologize I wish i knew more about the higher end content on this server to reply further but will have to research it further. Also if some one could recap this and bring all of the arguements to a list i would love to see and reply to it, as i have been playing for a while and have done ch rotations myself, just want to help nothing more

There are "hate weapons". They are called Nightjaunt and Ytrazliarch and only 1 toon on the server has both of them.

Unless you are talking about weapons that generate more aggro per point of damage and not through proc. I don't know if that is possible though.

Ytrazliarch is not a hate weapon. The proc is damage/mana tap, making it no different aggro-wise from any other proccing weapon.

 

[maddctr]

Name me a main hand proccing weapon with a similar high dps ratio and a non negative proc to self. I have currently just about every weapn feasable to us and have nearly completed the ytraz quest. Surely you jest about playing off ytraz's aggro and worth.

 

[zodium]

Name me a main hand proccing weapon with a similar high dps ratio and a non negative proc to self. I have currently just about every weapn feasable to us and have nearly completed the ytraz quest. Surely you jest about playing off ytraz's aggro and worth.

I'm just correcting him. Ytraz generates a lot of hate, but that doesn't make it a hate weapon.