Nerfing Sage healers is NOT a solution

[Semiskimmed]

so by your own account, its more of a struggle with anything healing but sorc's. which i can believe.

but what i cant work out is why are people wanting all healers to be equally bad and then everyone struggles. rather than the other healers being bought up to an equal level and then each healer is just as attractive as the next?

[RuQu]

im only going off my own experiences when in ops with other healers. to say sorc's arent in a good position is idiotic but surely we should be wanting the other healers to be bought up to a similar level as sorc's but whilst maintaining there pro's and con's of each?

having said all i have, it may be i am playing with people who cant play very well but if anything happens to our sorc healers during a fight at a critical point you can forget about getting anywhere. and im just thinking that if sorc's werent the way they were then it'd be even harder to get through these fights.

 

I don't disagree with that either. The Request Compilation at the top of this forum is just requests for buffs, with no nerf calls listed. Some of it is obvious stuff, like the power difference, some is more about mechanics and utility.

 

I know in my guild, if my Sage partner dies, we have to wipe it up most of the time. If I was a Sage or Scoundrel, I would battle-rez them, but as a Commando with no DPS Sages or Scoundrels in our group...nothing we can do. It is frustrating to lack such obvious utility, and the answer there is clearly not to remove Sage/Scoundrel battle-rez, but to give one to the other healer as well. When it comes to AoE...nerfing Sage AoE alone will make the content far more difficult, but, on the other hand, Sage AoE can trivialize content (by stacking 3 circles and ignoring fire, for instance). So the answer there might actually be a balanced approach of raising the other two while also nerfing Safe AoE so they can meet somewhere in the middle.

[RuQu]

so by your own account, its more of a struggle with anything healing but sorc's. which i can believe.

but what i cant work out is why are people wanting all healers to be equally bad and then everyone struggles. rather than the other healers being bought up to an equal level and then each healer is just as attractive as the next?

 

I'm pretty sure no one is asking for that, because yes, it would be hard to understand.

[Eroex]

Force Bending

Your Resurgence has a [50 / 100]% chance to grant Force Bending, which increases the effect of your next healing ability:

Dark Heal: Force cost reduced by 50%.

Dark Infusion: Activation time reduced by 1 second.

Innervate: Critical chance increased by 25%.

Revivification: Force cost reduced by 30%.

 

 

Any one that has played a sorc healer can figure this one out.

 

 

You could get the crit bonus from innervate for 1-2 ticks of the channel then cast any other spell in that list and have it get full benefit.

 

It was a bug they are fixing it. The problem with the bug was you could get more force surge procs while getting the benefit of reduced force costs on other things.

 

If you weren't aware of the bug it wont change a thing.

 

How hard is it to do a little research on your class to find out why they are doing things? 6 pages and not a single person laid out why it was a problem.

Edited March 5, 2012 by Eroex

[Semiskimmed]

bug fixes are fine by me, but callign for nerfs because other healers arent as good is just illogical to me. others should be buffed to sorc's level Edited March 5, 2012 by Semiskimmed

[RuQu]

bug fixes are fine by me, but callign for nerfs because other healers arent as good is just illogical to me.

 

I think you are over-generalizing and grouping different groups together.

 

Group 1: People calling for buffs non-Sages because of imbalance.

 

Group 2: People calling for nerfs to Sages because they can break encounters.

 

Group 3: People calling for nerfs to Sages because they are also in Group 2, but they honestly don't think the other classes are in need of any buffs.

 

Groups 1 and 3 are mutually exclusive. Groups 1 and 2 are not.

[Semiskimmed]

I don't disagree with that either. The Request Compilation at the top of this forum is just requests for buffs, with no nerf calls listed. Some of it is obvious stuff, like the power difference, some is more about mechanics and utility.

 

I know in my guild, if my Sage partner dies, we have to wipe it up most of the time. If I was a Sage or Scoundrel, I would battle-rez them, but as a Commando with no DPS Sages or Scoundrels in our group...nothing we can do. It is frustrating to lack such obvious utility, and the answer there is clearly not to remove Sage/Scoundrel battle-rez, but to give one to the other healer as well. When it comes to AoE...nerfing Sage AoE alone will make the content far more difficult, but, on the other hand, Sage AoE can trivialize content (by stacking 3 circles and ignoring fire, for instance). So the answer there might actually be a balanced approach of raising the other two while also nerfing Safe AoE so they can meet somewhere in the middle.

 

see, thats exactly the view im trying to get across. all healers should be equal really but its going to be tricky getting it exactly right as each one has pro's and con's. i agree all healers should get a brez and i see your point about how the aoe heals can trivialize fights, we've never been lucky enough to have more than one sorc healer

all the healers should have the ability to heal in any given situation and cope well enough if need be.

what will probably happen though is soc's will get toned right down and nothing done for other healing classes which is counter-productive imho.

[RuQu]

see, thats exactly the view im trying to get across. all healers should be equal really but its going to be tricky getting it exactly right as each one has pro's and con's. i agree all healers should get a brez and i see your point about how the aoe heals can trivialize fights, we've never been lucky enough to have more than one sorc healer

all the healers should have the ability to heal in any given situation and cope well enough if need be.

what will probably happen though is soc's will get toned right down and nothing done for other healing classes which is counter-productive imho.

 

In the Dev Q&A a couple of weeks ago GZ said KB is getting its capped raised (didnt say to what), the mechanics of KC is getting changed, and a "sizable chunk" of changes are coming for Scoundrel healers.

[Sinemetu]

I think you missed the key point of Sinemetu's post.

 

Can the content be cleared without a Sage/Sorc? Yes.

 

Are Sages/Sorcs so good that they make any content far easier if run with them? Yes.

 

Therefore, since non-Sages can do it, the problem lies in the huge advantage that comes from a Sage, not the disadvantages that come with the others...therefore nerf Sages.

 

Sinemetu's argument is sound, even if you are anti-nerf.

 

Thanks for clarifying what I said.

 

so by your own account, its more of a struggle with anything healing but sorc's. which i can believe.

but what i cant work out is why are people wanting all healers to be equally bad and then everyone struggles. rather than the other healers being bought up to an equal level and then each healer is just as attractive as the next?

 

Because some of us enjoy a struggle--we call it "a challenge." I don't want massive nerfs to sorcs, but I also don't want to be buffed to where sorcs are now. I honestly think that they're too good and that if all healers get buffed to that level, content will become more trivial than it already is.

[Haemans]

Because some of us enjoy a struggle--we call it "a challenge." I don't want massive nerfs to sorcs, but I also don't want to be buffed to where sorcs are now. I honestly think that they're too good and that if all healers get buffed to that level, content will become more trivial than it already is.

 

This is the crux of the argument.

 

People who think that the content borders on easy are more inclined to want Sages nerfed, as that may correct problems of certain classes being excluded, etc. without trivializing content.

 

Others believe that the difficulty level is appropriate, so they naturally prefer to buff the other healers rather than nerf the Sage/Sorc.

 

Both positions are logical, but the solution is a matter of preference dictated by how "challenging" you believe the content should be.

 

From a strictly PvE perspective, I don't really think it's that important which solution is chosen, as the content should be appropriately "tuned" for the chosen solution.

[RuQu]

This is the crux of the argument.

 

People who think that the content borders on easy are more inclined to want Sages nerfed, as that may correct problems of certain classes being excluded, etc. without trivializing content.

 

Others believe that the difficulty level is appropriate, so they naturally prefer to buff the other healers rather than nerf the Sage/Sorc.

 

Both positions are logical, but the solution is a matter of preference dictated by how "challenging" you believe the content should be.

 

From a strictly PvE perspective, I don't really think it's that important which solution is chosen, as the content should be appropriately "tuned" for the chosen solution.

 

Very good point.

 

My personal preference is to buff the other two and then tune the 1.2 content to be harder.

 

It's worth pointing out that there are some real capability differences that a nerf alone would not resolve for future content. Yes, we can heal current content on the other classes, but do they really intend to try and balance future content with a 2-Commando setup compared to a 2-Sage or Sage/Commando while adding in fights with real AoE healing needs? Right now a heavy AoE fight would be impossible to balance between those two classes, and making Salvation 50% as strong won't change that.

[Haemans]

It's worth pointing out that there are some real capability differences that a nerf alone would not resolve for future content. Yes, we can heal current content on the other classes, but do they really intend to try and balance future content with a 2-Commando setup compared to a 2-Sage or Sage/Commando while adding in fights with real AoE healing needs? Right now a heavy AoE fight would be impossible to balance between those two classes, and making Salvation 50% as strong won't change that.

 

Meaning a greater than 50% Salvation nerf would be necessary to balance this scenario? Or a 2-Commando setup cannot succeed in this proposed AOE heavy encounter?

 

I guess this gets back to the whole design philosophy question. Are there healing niches? Or are all of the Advanced Classes supposed to be roughly interchangeable?

 

I like the concept of niches, but in practice developers don't seem to do a great job of evenly balancing encounters around these niches. Also I've never liked how it seems to lead to subbing out classes for particular encounters.

 

Ultimately, I think the path of least resistance will lead them to buffing the other 2 classes and tuning content accordingly. The enormous nerf necessary to balance AOE healing would cause all kinds of dissatisfaction. It's much less controversial to buff the other two and keep introducing more challenging content.

 

Once again, PvP throws a huge wrench into the equation, which I prefer to ignore (I don't PvP). I agree with you when you posted elsewhere that PvP and PvE almost need to be broken out as separate games.

[wrotruck]

The "balance game" has to be played in both PvE and PvP. IMHO, the healing sage feels about right compared to the other healing classes in a PvP environment. So, if we start to look at this from a "whole game" perspective, where are the nerfs or buffs that are going to even things in PvE without creating an unbalance in PvP? And, vice versa.

 

If any change made creates an unbalance in another area than you have not fixed the problem you have simply moved it. And as a result there will be a diffrent segment of the player base screaming for a nerf/buff.

[dmanlong]

If you want to make niches, then make them utilitarian.

e.g. class A provides speed boost after bubble or class B can slow boss to make kiting easier.

 

With only 3 healing specs in the entire game, you need to make all healers perform at the same level or you create further class imbalances to a already scarce role.

[RuQu]

Meaning a greater than 50% Salvation nerf would be necessary to balance this scenario? Or a 2-Commando setup cannot succeed in this proposed AOE heavy encounter?

 

The latter. It isn't just about the healing number. Honestly, it doesn't bother me much that KB only heals, per person, for 52% of Salvation. The problem is in delivering that healing.

 

If you design an AoE heavy encounter, players will need to group up for AoE healing. Once you are clustered, AoE healing that lacks smart healing becomes worthless as you cannot target the critical people in the cluster.

 

Now, a Commando/Commando team could split the group into two clusters, and throw their bombs into separate groups to ensure their group always got the heals when needed. The problem here is that overcoming the limitations of dumb-healing imposes a new limitation. Now, the two Commandos cannot work together to heal the same people.

 

Say 4 people take damage. A Sage simply drops a circle. The Commando/Commando team might toss a KB into one group if all of them were there, but if they split up to get around the smart healing problem, now they might only have 1 or 2 of the 4 in their group, and they are relying on single target heals. If, instead, there was smart healing, they could remain clustered and both toss a KB, and both KBs would heal the same 4 people and lift them up.

 

The lack of synergy actually gets worse if you do a Sage/Commando team, especially after the Sage nerf some people want. Without smart-healing, your Commando will want people separated into groups, but the Sage wants them grouped up. Right now you just do it the Sage's way because it is so powerful, and you might toss a KB into the mix or you might just deal with other things or save the Ammo, since the Sage easily has it covered without you. If you nerf the Safe AoE down, they might not have it without help anymore, but their mechanic requires clustering while yours works best if they spread out more so you can try and land a bomb where it will have a center between 3 people who actually need it.

 

This is why I say the single greatest problem with AoE balance is the existence of caps without the existence of smart-healing. If everyone healed 8, smart-healing wouldn't matter. If you are going to cap it, though, you need to add smart healing as well. AoE balance can't exist without one of those two changing.

[Haemans]

This is why I say the single greatest problem with AoE balance is the existence of caps without the existence of smart-healing. If everyone healed 8, smart-healing wouldn't matter. If you are going to cap it, though, you need to add smart healing as well. AoE balance can't exist without one of those two changing.

 

I see what you are getting at now.

 

I agree. I think that if BW wants to provide some distinction between Classes with regard to AOE heals this is best achieved with differences in magnitude, and type (HoT, instant, channeled, etc.). It would be much simpler and would avoid the unfortunate situation where mechanical differences combined with effectiveness completely obviate the need for the Commando/Scoundrel AOE.

 

It is puzzling that they seem to be committed to having different cap numbers.

[Haemans]

The "balance game" has to be played in both PvE and PvP. IMHO, the healing sage feels about right compared to the other healing classes in a PvP environment. So, if we start to look at this from a "whole game" perspective, where are the nerfs or buffs that are going to even things in PvE without creating an unbalance in PvP? And, vice versa.

 

If any change made creates an unbalance in another area than you have not fixed the problem you have simply moved it. And as a result there will be a diffrent segment of the player base screaming for a nerf/buff.

 

I agree with this in principle. Except, I'm not sure it has ever been successfully achieved.

 

I am skeptical that it can be. I think all that is ever done in this area is to "move" the problem patch by patch so as to spread the misery around.

[EthicsGradient]

The "balance game" has to be played in both PvE and PvP. IMHO, the healing sage feels about right compared to the other healing classes in a PvP environment. So, if we start to look at this from a "whole game" perspective, where are the nerfs or buffs that are going to even things in PvE without creating an unbalance in PvP? And, vice versa.

 

If any change made creates an unbalance in another area than you have not fixed the problem you have simply moved it. And as a result there will be a diffrent segment of the player base screaming for a nerf/buff.

 

Sorcs/Sages already have the advantage that their shield is the only 'heal' not being reduced by 30% in PvP, which is pretty huge considering it already has a very generous coefficient and can be used while fully mobile.

A downward tweak of their massive aoe isn't going to break them.

Edited March 6, 2012 by EthicsGradient

[Soshla]

The "balance game" has to be played in both PvE and PvP. IMHO, the healing sage feels about right compared to the other healing classes in a PvP environment. So, if we start to look at this from a "whole game" perspective, where are the nerfs or buffs that are going to even things in PvE without creating an unbalance in PvP? And, vice versa.

 

If any change made creates an unbalance in another area than you have not fixed the problem you have simply moved it. And as a result there will be a diffrent segment of the player base screaming for a nerf/buff.

Scoundrels are entirely too reliant on their long heal to generate Upper Hand, it completely nukes their ability to heal if they get interrupted.

 

I would say that Troopers and Sages are probably equal for PvP healing, definitely close enough to not warrant any major changes (maybe some utility changes). Smugglers on the other hand are way behind in both categories. Their utilities spells are greatly hampered by melee range (not where a healer wants to be, especially a medium armor healer). The healing is, as mentioned, too tied to one casted ability.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Soshla

[wrotruck]

Sorcs/Sages already have the advantage that their shield is the only 'heal' not being reduced by 30% in PvP, which is pretty huge considering it already has a very generous coefficient and can be used while fully mobile.

A downward tweak of their massive aoe isn't going to break them.

 

Sage/Sorc Healer is also wearing light armor and has no stealth ability. It's a trade off and I don't see many people screaming that Sages/Sorc Healers are OP in PvP. But, that is not my point.

 

The point is that you have to make these "balances" in a thoughtful way that takes the whole community into consideration (PvP and PvE). I still have yet to read a thoughtful discussion that includes the effects on all aspects of the game. Even this thread centers primarily on issues with healers in the end game PvE environment.

 

I don't have an answer that takes into account all aspects of the game. And, it would seem that Bioware doesn't either or else they would have implemented a change by now. I don't think 1 or 2 quick buffs or nerfs is the answer. Nor do I think that homogenizing all healers and all abilities is the answer either. It may take a thoughtful overhall of all healers and healing as it stands now to find the right solution. But that is not something I would expect to see happen within 6 months release.

 

IMHO, any change that doesn't take into account the WHOLE game is not a fix. It simply moves the problem. I'd rather see Bioware make a fix than pass problems around.

 

Just my 2 cents...

[RuQu]

Sage/Sorc Healer is also wearing light armor and has no stealth ability. It's a trade off and I don't see many people screaming that Sages/Sorc Healers are OP in PvP. But, that is not my point.

 

The point is that you have to make these "balances" in a thoughtful way that takes the whole community into consideration (PvP and PvE). I still have yet to read a thoughtful discussion that includes the effects on all aspects of the game. Even this thread centers primarily on issues with healers in the end game PvE environment.

 

I don't have an answer that takes into account all aspects of the game. And, it would seem that Bioware doesn't either or else they would have implemented a change by now. I don't think 1 or 2 quick buffs or nerfs is the answer. Nor do I think that homogenizing all healers and all abilities is the answer either. It may take a thoughtful overhall of all healers and healing as it stands now to find the right solution. But that is not something I would expect to see happen within 6 months release.

 

IMHO, any change that doesn't take into account the WHOLE game is not a fix. It simply moves the problem. I'd rather see Bioware make a fix than pass problems around.

 

Just my 2 cents...

 

The problem is that most people focus on one or the other. They might dabble on the other side, but they have expertise in only one. This applies to the Devs as well. They have a separate team dedicated to PvP.

 

Some things appear to be discussed between those teams, like the Legacy changes to Heroic Moment abilities. Others, like the supposed Scoundrel mobility healing advantage...not so much. Perhaps in PvP a Scoundrel can focus on keeping up lots of HoTs and using all the TAs it generates (I don't know) to enable high mobility, but that throughput just won't cut it in PvE, yet they face a mobility tax in PvE content despite its lack of benefit there.

 

You are right, balance should mean balanced in both, but that has never before been witnessed.

 

The only idea that comes to mind is giving abilities dual-use, by which I mean it does different things in different contexts. Ability X hits for Y damage in PvE, but Z damage in PvP. Ability B has a C% reduced crit change in PvP. Etc. If something is OP in PvP....nerf it in PvP, don't nerf it across the board.

[dcgregorya]

I don't have an answer that takes into account all aspects of the game. And, it would seem that Bioware doesn't either or else they would have implemented a change by now. I don't think 1 or 2 quick buffs or nerfs is the answer. Nor do I think that homogenizing all healers and all abilities is the answer either.

 

Healing and tanking need to be relatively homogenous between different classes filling the same role. A DPS can work using DoTs, turreting, etc and people will prefer one style over another but ultimately damage per second is the most important. There are the most spots in a raid group for DPS. As a healer or tank though, if one class is clearly superior to other classes, those classes will be the only ones allowed to participate in 'firsts' and other important content runs at end game.

 

Sorry, if you want to have say, scoundrel have *slightly better* hots while sage has a *slightly better* channeled 'heal nuke' - fine. Having them work different, like making one viable for entire ops raid AOE healing and another not viable - that's ridiculous and a silly and stupid idea.

 

Right now at end game it's generally "scoundrel/commando healers need not apply".

Edited March 6, 2012 by dcgregorya

[Sinemetu]

Sage/Sorc Healer is also wearing light armor and has no stealth ability. It's a trade off and I don't see many people screaming that Sages/Sorc Healers are OP in PvP. But, that is not my point.

 

Sorc healers, no, but I'm sure you've seen plenty of threads complaining about sorcs in general being OP in PvP. I can compete in healing in PvP--I regularly heal in the 300-400k range and have broken 600k in Voidstar--and I've heard some Operatives have gotten up around 800k. I think the numbers work out in PvP for a variety of reasons, not least that our AOE and HoTs work pretty well for padding numbers.

 

The problem, IMO, is utility and upfront healing. If I'm running to support someone in Alderaan, I don't have a really good way to stabilize them quickly when I arrive since my hot doesn't tick immediately and I won't be able to use my instant without having hard-casted KI first. Probably I'm going to cast KI+SP (my main heal plus my instant) for about 4k healing over 3.2s. A sorc, by contrast, can bubble, hot, and have a 1.5s heal on the way in the same time period, the important difference being the upfront healing of the bubble, not to mention the sorc could have used his crit buff to (nearly) guarantee that his biggest heal--on a sub 1.5s cast--is going to crit. Or that the Sorc could use sprint to get there even sooner, or pull that person away from a melee train.

 

That scenario isn't very important in PvE (although it's there), but it makes a big difference in PvP.

 

The point is that you have to make these "balances" in a thoughtful way that takes the whole community into consideration (PvP and PvE). I still have yet to read a thoughtful discussion that includes the effects on all aspects of the game. Even this thread centers primarily on issues with healers in the end game PvE environment.

 

I don't have an answer that takes into account all aspects of the game. And, it would seem that Bioware doesn't either or else they would have implemented a change by now. I don't think 1 or 2 quick buffs or nerfs is the answer. Nor do I think that homogenizing all healers and all abilities is the answer either. It may take a thoughtful overhall of all healers and healing as it stands now to find the right solution. But that is not something I would expect to see happen within 6 months release.

 

Granted.

 

Honestly, even more than a buff to my aoe healing, I wish my healing tree had the same synergies as mercs and sorcs. I love the way Adv. Med Probe and KB and Combat Support Cell work with the other trooper heals. My sage thinks the way her HoT interacts with all her other heals is pretty awesome. My operative wishes she didn't have to spend 4 points on Diagnostic Scan to make it worth using--sometimes. I like the fact that the healers all feel very different, but I really don't think they did a good job on the operative healing tree.