Or make those casts based on intel, strength or willpower, whatever is higher. Same goes for all CC skills.
A problem all healspec healers face, while rp/zeal mitigate the problem with their toggle buff.
Shaman Discussion, more
Forum rules
Before posting in this forum, please read the Terms of Use.
Optional: Start your topic title with your class in brackets (e.g., [Shaman]). It helps others find your post faster.
Before posting in this forum, please read the Terms of Use.
Optional: Start your topic title with your class in brackets (e.g., [Shaman]). It helps others find your post faster.
Ads
Re: Shaman Discussion, more
Changing the mechanic to mitgate the Multi Attribute Dependancy might help as well.Sulorie wrote:Or make those casts based on intel, strength or willpower, whatever is higher. Same goes for all CC skills.
A problem all healspec healers face, while rp/zeal mitigate the problem with their toggle buff.

Re: Shaman Discussion, more
Penril wrote:Does that mean that Shaman/AM/Zealot are bad? Or does that mean that WP/Dok backline healing needs to be toned down?Gobtar wrote: This is all theoryhammer at this point, but point of the matter is that you need to make concessions for Shaman/AMs/Zealots where you dont have to as much for RPs/WPs/DoKs.
That is probably the first question we need to answer.
This is definitely a Top-Down design question that needs to be addressed. In considering the overall health of the game, its very important that the population of healers do not decline after balances are released. I do not play WP/DoK so I have no bias for them, but I think its important to NOT nerf them. It would better for the entire game to buff Cloth healers rather than lower WP/DoKs and potentially increase the healer population rather than alienate the present armored healers.
From a coding point of view it would be much easier to buff Cloth healers rather than nerf WP/DoKs AND raise Cloth healers AND try to balance it all. Being a very long time coder myself (even working on gaming projects in the late 80's, can you say old fart?) I am very keen on keeping any coding efforts to a minimum while getting the most out of few changes.
Destro: [Agony] Qwack Shammy 80+, Krakkenn Chosen 79 and Mincer Choppa 70+
Order: [Kill Team] Krakken Knight 80+
Order: [Kill Team] Krakken Knight 80+
- Shadowgurke
- Posts: 618
Re: Shaman Discussion, more
iirc changing AP cost is not possible so far.Qwack wrote:
The quickest fix would be to reduce its cost. I could see 20-25 AP being reasonable. Changing the nature of what can defend it might involve more coding.

Re: Shaman Discussion, more
Interesting and surprising. Without reviewing the source code I can only go on how a typical programming structure would look like. One would typically find Formats and hard values assigned to a global variable in a callable library. That global variable would then be used throughout the environment for equations, labels and such. But hey, who would suspect Mythic of coding something efficiently? I am speaking in terms of total scratch coding and not just manipulating an engine.Shadowgurke wrote:iirc changing AP cost is not possible so far.Qwack wrote:
The quickest fix would be to reduce its cost. I could see 20-25 AP being reasonable. Changing the nature of what can defend it might involve more coding.
Destro: [Agony] Qwack Shammy 80+, Krakkenn Chosen 79 and Mincer Choppa 70+
Order: [Kill Team] Krakken Knight 80+
Order: [Kill Team] Krakken Knight 80+
- TenTonHammer
- Posts: 3806
Re: Shaman Discussion, more
One way to pseudo give it a smaller ap cost is that it immediatly gives back some ap (not drained from offensive target) so that the over all cost of cast is smaller followed by the amount drained from target
A potential work around fix till the client can be modified ?
A potential work around fix till the client can be modified ?

Re: Shaman Discussion, more
That would be a good solution. Or first tick at 0 seconds, whichever is more workable for the devs.
Re: Shaman Discussion, more
Why are RPs better than zealots?Gobtar wrote:you need to make concessions for Shaman/AMs/Zealots where you dont have to as much for RPs/WPs/DoKs.
DOK 8x
Zealot 8x
Shaman 8x
BO 7x
WP 8x
RP 8x
AM 8x
Zealot 8x
Shaman 8x
BO 7x
WP 8x
RP 8x
AM 8x
Ads
- magter3001
- Posts: 1284
Re: Shaman Discussion, more
Due to Slayers being the meta game and zealots not being able to cleanse anything of theirs while Runies can cleanse ailments which are meta for many destro classes.Kurama wrote:Why are RPs better than zealots?Gobtar wrote:you need to make concessions for Shaman/AMs/Zealots where you dont have to as much for RPs/WPs/DoKs.

Agrot 35/40 Aggychopp 32/40
Grelin of Magnus/Badlands
Grelin of Magnus/Badlands

Re: Shaman Discussion, more
They are more survivable; they can cleanse more relevant debuffs (Marauders, SHs, BWs, WEs, Choppas) While the Zealot cannot cleanse their mirrors. SWs, WLs, Slayers, and WHs have extremely potent 'ailements' making the Zealot Dok combo much more stressful than the WP+RP synergy.Kurama wrote:Why are RPs better than zealots?Gobtar wrote:you need to make concessions for Shaman/AMs/Zealots where you dont have to as much for RPs/WPs/DoKs.
-Notably spammable heal debuff (SW), armour debuff (WL), Shattered Limbs + ID (Slayer), Double Heal-debuff + BAL (WH). The Runepriest only has to worry about BGs, which they can kite alot easier than the above DPS.
Also BGs are widely considered the worst Destro tank, and thus not as common, much of the ime in order to apply the heal-debuff the BG has to overextend to apply the heal debuff.
Rune Priests have access to a racial armour tactic that adds to their durability.
Rune Priests benefit from their AP "Ritual" while zealots do not, meaning a RP with Restroative Burst and AP Master Rune can actually gain AP from spamming flash heal.

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest