Just because that's not your intent doesn't mean that it would be the practical effect of your suggestion (in this instance). False. Your concept of "healbot" and the changes I want to make are flawed. Niche healers are not going to work in this game, given that Sorcerer/Sage can already fill both Single- and Multi-Target healing at the same time. Thus, I want both Operative/Scoundrel & Commando/Mercenary healing to do that as well; anything less than that will still leave both classes as sub-par group choices for high-end PvE, as you can always just bring the class that does both. No, not overpowered, equal. Overpowered is a subjective term requiring a comparison. The Sorcerer/Sage AoE does double the healing in half the time without a target cap. The trade-off is the lack of mobility. Given that there is a AoE heal without a target cap, and that PvE content appears to be specifically designed around this ability, continuing to fail to give Operative/Scoundrel healers a means of healing the entire party will mean they continue to be unused in PvE. While any changes made to RN/KC will need to account for the lack of a mobility cost, 50% is too much,, especially considering how long it takes for RN/KC to heal for its reduced amount. Explain to me how those qualities would make us more desirable in PvE. Explain to me how you're going to convince a group to bring a healer that, to perform to its potential, has to go where they don't otherwise let healers go. In order to achieve your goals, you ARE asking for a complete reworking of the class: Countering incoming damage from short-range AoE effects (someone has to heal the healer!) Countering cast-time interrupts. Countering all the moving which will inevitably put you in harms way of other things. Countering the fact that other healers don't need to move to 10-4m to heal (i.e. why bring a liability to your group). Countering those issues is not insignificant. Operative/Scoundrel healers would need to be able to run around (unless you're giving them a closer move), take damage that doesn't need to be healed, not get interrupted (already a Merc/Commando ability) and still be significantly more powerful healers such that it would be worth bringing them. You need to approach this problem like a group, not from "what you think would be cool". No group would ever want to bring the healer you are describing unless their benefits outweighed the costs. In order to overcome the significant costs of the healer you've described, they would need to be significantly more powerful than the other classes. You're ideas don't solve this problem, they make it worse. An 8-man group needs: 1 tank, 5 DPS, 2 healers. This is a trinity MMO that seeks to minimize hybridization (per the quote in my previous post). That means content is designed around bringing those 3 roles in that representation (thus the need for enrage timers). Groups do not want, nor will they be successful, bringing a heals + DPS hybrid. Given that that the Sorcerer/Sage AoE will remain required for all content (since you wouldn't change any other classes ability to AoE heal), 8-man groups would only have 1 open healer slot. Given the option, high-performing groups will bring the best healer. If you fail to fully correct the flaws of Operative/Scoundrel healers, and instead just tack on some melee range DPS abilities, an 8-man group will always pick one of the other two classes. Except we're not hurting for single target HPS, and the cost/benefit of Kolto Infusion/Kolto Pack would still be too high vs. Kolto Infusion/Underworld Medicine Even more efficient is using a TA/UH generated from KP/SRMP to cast Kolto Infusion/Kolto Pack, but that still doesn't make anyone want to cast it. Why? Because it saves you 5 whole energy from a Kolto Injection, and .5 seconds. That really means it only saves you 2 energy, since you lose half a tick of energy regen from the shorter casting time. In the mean time, you've wasted valuable healing time running up to a mob and shiving it. I don't know what boss fights you've been playing, but the only time I stop healing is to (1) move out of bad or (2) to exit area. I don't know where you're going to find the time to close distance to a mob to shiv - let alone cast all the defensive buffs you want to make melee range survivable - for a TA to cast a heal that heals for the same amount as your slightly more costly "main heal" Or look at it this way - if it takes you more than .5 seconds to close the distance to a mob, shiv it, and start casting Kolto Infusion (this is a mechanical impossibility), then it is in fact less efficient than Kolto Injection.

I agree, and I double agree with the bold.

Fixed that for you :-\

I think this post by RuQu is what you're looking for: source I disagree with your last statement. Even though the target cap goes a long way towards making us unviable in current PvE content, the boring mechanics of Operative/Scoundrel (3 button healing) and lack of flexibility and utility will continue harming the class even after the AoE problems are fixed.

Hey now, you be careful bringing things like reasoning and math into this discussion.

You realize that just because you say "with all due respect" doesn't mean you're actually being respectful, right? As far as I know (and can tell from your post) you don't think I have any respect due. You're probably right, but I just thought I'd point that out since we're having fun. Looking ahead =/= Understanding. (Lol joke about Sorcerer's shocking things here) You clearly are not aware of the "various abilities" that the Sage/Sorcerer has. A Sage/Sorcerer doesn't have to sacrifice HP and regen rate either (see talents Force Surge/Resplendence). Just because you "don't think" things doesn't mean you're correct. A subjective belief that things are fine doesn't trump our objective proof (Logic!?! Math!?! ARRG!) that you are wrong. Hit 50. You will be very far behind. Since you're so confident, I'll offer you the same challenge I've offered every other naysayer: What healing role can an Operative/Scoundrel or Mercenary/Commando healer fill that a Sorcerer/Sage cannot fill better; what can an Operative/Scoundrel or Mercenary/Commando healer do that a Sorcerer/Sage cannot do better. Don't forget to show your work, because we (the healing community) already have.

That's really more because of an imbalance on how long it takes the team the controls the side turret time to get back, not a reason to nerf healers. Add a respawn timer (or some other limit) and it absolutely does matter who has healers.

Careful Mister (Miss? Misses? sorry, I promise I'm not a sexist), I charge by the hour ;-)

I'm pretty sure "limited resources" means something different than "Do whatever costs the least, regardless of impact." A nerf to Sorcerer/Sage healing will ruin the game. Period. It doesn't fix any of the Operative/Scoundrel or Commando/Mercenary issues we've discussed. It would only result in 3/3 underpowered healing classes instead of 2/3. Less people will play healing --> less groups will clear content --> less people will progress through the game --> less people will play the game. Less players = less $. A fix (not a buff because that implies just fixing the numbers, which are not the true issue) to Operative/Scoundrel and Commando/Mercenary improves the game for every single player - healer or not. More groups will be able to run because more healers will be available. More healers = more groups = more content cleared = more progression = more players. More players = more $$$ (= mo' problems of course). That's why Fixing Operative/Scoundrel and Commando/Mercenary healing is the most cost efficient solution, even if it is not the easiest.

No, underpowered. We know the math on these things (RuQu, I SUMMON YOU!). We know that a "BG Merc" is not fine; that player skill is not adequately rewarded behind a Scoundrel/Mercenary/Commando/Operative; that the people you've seen play a Mercenary to such skill that you think they are fine would absolutely dominate if they rerolled Sorcerer/Sage. We know these things are true; that you wish to believe otherwise only demonstrates ignorance of the issue.

I disagree. I think the Bioware coders are perfectly competent and capable. That this game suffers from a lack of coding polish isn't because of talent and quality issues, it's because it is an MMO - that means game systems stack one on top of the other. It's because the game was in development for forever and they constantly changed ideas around. It's because they spent so much time trying to innovate on a bunch of tiny little ways that they missed the chance to polish all of the everyday things we do (GTN being a prime example). I know you're angry and disappointed - I am too, so much so that I've canceled my subscription - but calling names and hurling baseless insults in not helpful. I don't care how much attention every other whiner on these forums gets over us; we must keep this discourse civil, towards each other and the people who will be responsible for fixing these problems (eventually).

Here's hoping we start getting some answers to this problem in today's Q&A.

If they care about their game in the slightest, yes. Nerfing is the easy way out of a problem 99% of the time. This is one of those problems that can't be fixed with a simple nerf. The truth is Sorcerer/Sage healers are not objectively Over-Powered; they just outclass the other healing classes by a significant amount. The truth of it is that they are exceptionally well-designed (you could convince me that Bioware spent most of the dev money on developing Sorcerer/Sage) and that is why they perform so well. But as it is, the Sorcerer/Sage healing class is the only one that is a fully-functioning healer. Nerfing the sole fully-functioning healer would destroy this game. It's the least-played leg of the Trinity (Tank-DPS-Heals) and the most important from a content-design standpoint (the difficulty scaling of encounters typically rests the most weight on healers). If the devs are truly in this game for the longhaul as they've said, then they need to ignore the impulse to take the easy way out, and actually fix the balance issues in the game, as opposed to just nerfing it out.

I guess I'm a little slow to this party. I was trying to map out the combat numbers for you, but sithwarrior.com is down, so I can't get to any of the theorycrafting formulas, and working off tooltips just doesn't cut it.

A little bit of both? It's more important to look at force/energy recovery as function compared to ability cost. So, for example, lets take each class' "main heal": Kolto Injection/Underworld Medicine costs 25 energy. At 5 EPS, the healer recovers the cost of the ability in 5 seconds (at 6 EPS with stim boost, thus regen occurs in ~ 4s). Dark Infusion/Deliverance costs 55 force. At 8 FPS, the healer recovers the cost of the ability in ~ 7 seconds (with talents the cost is 50.05, thus regen occurs in ~ 6 seconds) [yes, if anyone checks my math, I rounded up and down respectively] So you can see, in exchange for having a smaller pool, the Operative/Scoundrel regenerates the energy s/he expends faster than the Sorcerer/Sage. However, this distinction falls flat once Sorcerer/Sage healers get Force Surge/Resplendence, allowing them to use a Force Cost neutral rotation (when done properly). This is where the real issue begins - because the Sorcerer/Sage energy neutral rotation puts out more healing than an Operative/Scoundrel doing the same. The secondary effects just compound the problem: if the Sorcerer/Sage did more healing but the Operative/Scoundrel has all the utility, things would be more balanced; instead Sorcerer/Sage does more healing and has all the utility. Oops.

Regarding Sleep Dart/Tranquilizer Instead of changing it in the way I initially suggested, I came up with the following: Keep all current requirements and restrictions. Keep the current lack of cast time and cooldown. Modify the debuff applied by the talent Sedatives to allow Sleep Dart/Tranquilizer to be recast on the target during the duration of the debuff without the "target out of combat" restrictions (in addition to the current "damage dealt" reduction) Have the debuff apply either (1) when the CC wears off or (2) when the target is attacked and woken up. [For PvP balance concerns, make the debuff fill the target's resolve bar when it is applied, making reapplication of CC impossible] This would make Sedatives a talent worth having while giving Operative/Scoundrel healers the ability to keep 1 target CC'd throughout a fight.

I had a new idea of my own (below), but I wanted to address Melkiaah's idea first. Your second point really cuts to the core of the RN/KC issue in my opinion. the 4 target limit wouldn't be so bad if I could control which for party members it was cast on; restricting it to parties of 4 - as parties still exist inside an Operations Group - and using properly setup groups would solve that. However, for that to work, removing it's cooldown would be a must. It wouldn't be overkill, because casting RN/KC twice would push you to 40 energy (48 with 2-piece PvE) and would be wasted on a group it had been cast on as it has no heal up front. Thus the only utility of casting RN/KC twice in a row would be to put it on multiple groups; this would solve the current issue of RN/KC not scaling in groups like the Sorcerer/Sage AoE. I see two potential issues: Low amount of healing done. If every part of your idea was implemented, do you think that the healing done by the skill needs to be buffed? I'm of two minds: Yes. This would change RN/KC into a more AoE like skill, making us competitive with the Sorcerer/Sage AoE No. This would leave RN/KC as less of an AoE heal and more of an area-applied HoT, preserving some diversity. This issue could be minimized depending on how the KP/SRMP refresh worked (e.g. would RN/KC refresh the probes by X seconds every tick, or would it only refresh when cast?) Which of these is more in-line with your idea? [*]What did you have in mind for the range? Though I agree for the skill to become useful and reliable it needs to be more than 10m, I think 30m would be too far (specifically for PvP concerns). 15 - 20m? Or do you think it needs 30m?

Completely. Well, it would bring the Kolto Pack crit chance ~ 50%, and casting Kolto Pack would lower the GCD (because it has a less than 1.5s cast time), but . . . I still don't think I'd use it (well, I guess I can say that more confidently, I don't, haha) I would obviously increase HPS, but since you're going to have to cast UWM afterwards, you'd have to be above 80 - 85 energy I would think.

Calculator looks pretty good to me. PvP 2: Increase Healing done by Kolto Cloud / Recuperative Nanotech by 15% PvP 4: Max Energy +5 PvE 2: Reduce cost of Kolto Cloud / Recuperative Nanotech by 4 PvE 4: Increase Crit Chance of Kolto Pack / Kolto Infusion by 15%

I already know that you and I are approaching Operative/Scoundrel healing from different design goals; but it's really more important to fully develop all of the ideas. I don't want to change Operative/Scoundrel healing into a support class. I don't see it. I see our melee tools are being what the DPS Operative/Scoundrel need to be effective, and having nothing to do with our healing roles. Honestly, if any class was meant to be a melee healer, it should be the one decked out in heavy armor. You're not actually suggesting generating TA/UH stacks from Shiv are you? Kolto Infusion still doesn't make sense. It's not the difficulty of generating a TA that makes Kolto Infusion worthless, it's the fact that it will still not give any meaningful benefit over Kolto Injection. All of the classes have defensive cooldowns, that doesn't mean they're all intended to be in melee range. The sniper also has shield probe, would you suggest them DPS in melee range? The Commando/Mercenary Shield would actually be more apt at putting them in melee range because it eliminates knockback on skills. First, the bold isn't true - the range differences outside of healing are irrelevant unless you're trying to make the Operative into something different than a main healer. However whether you believe it or not: the devs screwed-up on our class. That's ok, that happens a lot - even the developers have favorites. Changing Operatives into melee healers would make them literally inferior to the other healers in every instance, because they'd be taking damage, trying to attack things, and needing to move into range of targets they want to heal. Healers that aren't healing are wasteful. If you have time to be doing other things, it means someone is covering up your fail (likely a Sorcerer/Sage). The design goal of every class of the game is to minimize hybridization and maximize "main" roles. To me, it sounds like you think Operative healers ought to be inferior in healing because they should be DPSing as well. I don't think that's the goal, nor do I think it should be.

Not in a good group; a good group will stay stacked up as much as possible and let the Sage's AoE do the work (this is also significantly more efficient than the Scoundrel rolling HoTs on everything). This isn't true. In an emergency situation, the Sage puts a bubble on the tank, HoT, 1.5s main heal, Healing Trance . . . Spamming Emergency Medpack isn't going to counter that - without critting, Force Armor is going to absorb more damage than you heal. Also, see this post from the healer forums detailing how a Commando is far more capable at single target healing than a Scoundrel. Yes. I don't believe this, I think Nightmare would effectively murder a 2 Scoundrel heal team; though perhaps under certain RNG and very-well geared teammates . . . still no. I disagree, but I'd wish you'd join us in the healer forums; we could really use you (and the rest of you) to raise the level of dialogue even higher.

You know, this is more than 50% of pages away!! I need it closer to the last page. We deserve a response!

Your secondary statement, that a "good seer is very hard to play" is out and out false; unless you mean instead to say Because Seer is no harder to play than any other class; and in fact, due to its strengths, is the easiest of the healing classes to play effectively.

The CSRs are constantly here. Case in point: try making a spam post and watch how quickly they'll delete it and warn you .

I just can't do it - I'm an advocate and debater, not a whiner. It's just not in me, and I continue to believe that the Devs will at some point read this dialogue that we'e all created, even though that will likely come too late to save the game for me. I got my chance to be terse when I unsubbed, and I told them flat out that I didn't think they were "constantly reviewing" balance like the unsubscribe screen claimed. But I won't grandstand on it here - I won't start throwing a temper tantrum and undo all the work we've done. Don't worry, I'm not going anywhere for a long time, and let's be honest - if the Devs won't start addressing us within 60 days, we should all unsubscribe.