Return of Reckoning

Morf wrote:Bloodi you insult more ppl here then anyone else and always bring negativity, take a back seat for once...

So you are telling me is cool to remove Azarael comment about how no change is going to be made to Am/shaman puddles?

I like this discussion as much as anyone here but if you are telling me i am bringing negativity by pointing out that, i am going to laugh pretty hard.

Sigimund wrote:

Penril wrote:

Sigimund wrote:Arcing Power healing the whole party, with the occasional mechanic dump Gather Round/BoI, would probably solve the AOE healing problem lifetap shamans/AMs have without needing more lifetaps converted to AOE.

It wouldn't heal solo DPS AMs more than it already does and they might seem less selfish too.

Except Shamans don't have Arcing Power

Easy to change. How useful is the silence CD tactic?

Its not really. Unless a Shammy intends to go all out Utility, which isn't really bad, just funky and an awkward fit in parties. I tested it for a time. By all out Utility I mean getting Gorks Barb's (10 points) and Silence in Green line (10 points). Leaves little for else.

OR a Shammy is playing for AOE in the Green line too. This is viable, especially for SCs. But you lose Gorks Barb heal debuff with an all out Green spec. I personally don't like the trade off, but it really comes down to group intention and subsequent composition. If you are running an AOE group, an AOE Shammy can fit.

Penril wrote: i would love to see lifetap healing being as viable as, at least, melee healing. As i mentioned, even melee healers have an easier time keeping their groups alive thanks to AoE lifetaps, which AM/Shaman lack. If the more experienced Shamans/AMs agree with me, then maybe we can start throwing out suggestions. If you guys think lifetap healing is fine, i wont comment on it again.

I don't think Lifetap/ Hybrid healing is in anyway viable for Shamans. I think that a mechanic change might help resolve the problem that Shamans face, maybe even to mitigate the multi-attribute dependency.

As for your healing, life will change in a big way for you when you hit Tier 4. Tier 3 the Shaman's may have some AP issues, but it gets alot worse until you get Sov...the Shaman population radically declines in Tier 4 for much of the reasons I mentioned. Morf beat me to my thoughts on outhealing.

Morf wrote:

Penril wrote: I saw your list. And my premade still runs a Shaman who usually outheals most other doks/zealots in SC's.

As tomato said, the only problem will come in T4 with Destroy Confidence. But that will be changed, i'm sure.

Outhealing a bad healer doesnt make them viable, i often outheal zealots and doks on my shaman in sc's not because im amazing but because the other healers suck.
Any sort of pressure applied to a sham or am means they have to kite for x seconds, use 2 or 3 gcd's to save themselves at which point your group is vulnerable and you find yourself lacking on ap.

Here is the thing, we protect our backlines. So when someone applies pressure to our shaman, we all pull back and kill whoever it was (WL, WH, etc.). The Shaman will most likely make him overextend so it is usually an easy kill. Then we push again, with one less enemy to worry about.

The problem i usually see is that a Shaman gets pressured but his group is still overextending trying to kill a guarded enemy WP. The Shaman will have to use GCDs on detaunt, puddle, AoE punt, etc., and in the meantime his group is still overextending and starting to die (or worse; the Shaman gets killed and they all wipe). This happens because most player's mentality is "healers needs to take care of themselves" since they are used to super tanky Doks/WPs. Sad thing is, when they wipe they say "terrible heals, Shaman so bad" when actually THEY are the baddies for not protecting their backlines.

If the group plays to the strengths of the Shaman/AM, they can perform exceptionally well. At least in T3; we will see in T4.

Penril wrote:...

Yeah but the point is, if the other healers do not need such things as much, doesnt that make Shaman worse in comparison?

I mean, if we instead of using a striker in football, we use a scarecrow we put on the middle of the opposition area, a pretty tall one mind you and we continously cross the ball and hope it hits him and gets into the goal.

We are playing to scarecrow strenghts and winning does that mean immobile, petrified scarecrowss are as good as an human for a striker? Or does it mean a coordinated group can win even with a handicap?

Penril wrote: The problem i usually see is that a Shaman gets pressured but his group is still overextending trying to kill a guarded enemy WP. The Shaman will have to use GCDs on detaunt, puddle, AoE punt, etc., and in the meantime his group is still overextending and starting to die (or worse; the Shaman gets killed and they all wipe). This happens because most player's mentality is "healers needs to take care of themselves" since they are used to super tanky Doks/WPs.

If the group plays to the strengths of the Shaman/AM, they can perform exceptionally well. At least in T3; we will see in T4.

This doesn't counter Morf's point, if the Shaman was playing a zealot and you did the same thing, the zealot would still be better than the Shaman.

Also by peeling off from the front line, you change the where the battle is taking place, now your front lines is where your squishy healers are and Range DPS are freecasting. 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.

I wish that you squishy did more than just debuff tough

For a 40 ability it's really weak

bloodi wrote:

Penril wrote:...

Yeah but the point is, if the other healers do not need such things as much, doesnt that make Shaman worse in comparison?

I mean, if we instead of using a striker in football, we use a scarecrow we put on the middle of the opposition area, a pretty tall one mind you and we continously cross the ball and hope it hits him and gets into the goal.

We are playing to scarecrow strenghts and winning does that mean immobile, petrified scarecrowss are as good as a human as a striker? Or does it mean a coordinated group can win even with a handicap?

Pretty sure Zealot/RP need as much backup when pressured as Shaman/AM (maybe more than Shaman, due to RUN AWAY/detaunt tactic). I don't think it is about "yeah cloth healers need a buff" but more about "Dok/WP backline healing needs to be adjusted". Or in your example, i don't think Shamans are Scarecrows, it's just that Doks/WP are Messi and Ronaldo.

Also as i mentioned, group setup plays a large role in effectiveness. Shaman/AM are, imho, better for rdps-heavy groups.

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.

Does that mean that Shaman/AM/Zealot are bad? Or does that mean that WP/Dok backline healing needs to be toned down?

That is probably the first question we need to answer.

Gobtar wrote:
This doesn't counter Morf's point, if the Shaman was playing a zealot and you did the same thing, the zealot would still be better than the Shaman.

On live at least, I think shaman was better than zealot in orvr in a roaming group and below. No idea how it is here as i have not played my zealot in t3 and good fights in orvr is hard to find for small groups atm.