+Heal Cap on Reactive - Page 2

quasigenx · 02-27-2008, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EQAditu

So you think his reworking of calculations to gimp our +healing progression is perfect?

Read it again. His change would push the cap from 16% of the reactive total to 25%. IMO, 50% would be nice.

I don't see why our reactives going from 500-700 to 750-1050 is a big deal. As others have pointed out, the full amount rarely gets used in raids.

EQAditu · 02-27-2008, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fungie

I was told by defilers that wards crit for 15% instead of 30%, so if they're right, then wards suffer a penalty, but yep... it's better to suffer from a crit penalty than a +heal penalty.

It depends on if critical heals follow max+1 to max*1.3 or they follow a straight 130% to all values.

If the former is true:

Take a ward for 1000hp. Take a reactive that triggers for 750-1250. Both with an average heal of 1000hp.

The ward critical heals for 1000*1.15 = 1150hp.
The reactive heals for max+1 to max*1.30... 751 to 1625... 1188hp average.

So the 15% vs 30% equates to 1150hp vs 1188hp. Certainly not the big difference that twice the amount suggests.

If the latter is true, then they have an argument.

Someone have some offhand proof of which it is? I haven't run a study on it myself, that I can recall. And please don't just say, I heard it was this way. Well, it depends on who you are... some of you are credible and I can just take what you say as fact.

Quote:

Originally Posted by quasigenx

Read it again. His change would push the cap from 16% of the reactive total to 25%. IMO, 50% would be nice.

I don't see why our reactives going from 500-700 to 750-1050 is a big deal. As others have pointed out, the full amount rarely gets used in raids.

You read mine again... I said the PROGRESSION is being gimped by his method. Meaning I need 1.7x what I'm capped at already to get what I have already. So I need twice what I have now to be better than what I have now.

As for the second paragraph... it might have to do with raid vs group mechanics. In a group, reactives are great. In a raid with 12k hitting mobs, reactives are horrible. SoE has to keep priests in line for grouping more than raiding.

Fungie · 02-27-2008, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hennyo

While I do understand what your saying, your comprehension of the effectivness of heals in comparsion of why + healing works like it does, simply is not there at all. If there is ANY healing type of which has absolutly abysmal practical effectivness its reactives. Quite honestly even dividing the effect by a total of 3 reactives is very harsh compared to wards or even regens.

In pratice, wards always benefit from 100% of + healing, granted theres anything to be healed. Regens benefit from all of their + healing as long as there is health to be healed when the regens tic. To be realistic, if there is damage done to the target when the regen goes off it will heal everything that is there, but will still be wasted tics and the increased effecieny of the + healing is warrented. But on the other hand, we have reactives. With reactives they only trigger on damage recieved, no matter how small or large it is. So those 10k+ hits, one reactive trigger, and 4 point leaked thru ward hits, reactive trigger.

Statisticly a VERY small number of reactives EVER heal for their full amount and the few that do see a very large joke of a bonus because of the way the system works. Clerics are double fucked by this mechanic in both they can use LESS +healing, and it does LESS than the other types of heals in pratice.

If we were going to make it fair for all heal types it would work like this;
reactives and regens would do all their + healing in the first tic or trigger that could use it, or spread it out however many tics or triggers is needed until it is used up or the spell expires. With this method all healers would get the SAME benefit from +healing every time. So if you have +700 healing and the first trigger is a 5000 point hit, than it uses up all your +healing on the first hit.

If someone needs an advanced example or explanation as to why this is the fair way, im more than happy to write one up.

Can't complain too much about a reactive going off if 4 hp get through ward... cause if the tank isnt' full hp, just like a regen, that reactive will actually raise his hp.

Templar is a good class (buffs, shield ally, stoneskin), so let's not get too down on ourselves. :P I like reactives, but they can't be coordinated like wards, so I don't think they should suffer from a more severe penalty. If you run the math, +heal is a *LOT* better than heal crit (if a heal crit is just 130% of the rand, then for a 2500 spot heal, 1 heal crit = +7.5 heal), so the penalty on a templar's reactives ends up being pretty devastating whereas the 15% crit on wards is rather negligible.

If any change is going to be made, though, I'd expect it to not be anything along the lines of raising the cap to 50% instead of 25%. That would make way too many fights much easier than intended, so I think 25% & (+heal/5) is a pretty good compromise... won't break the game, won't get other healers bitching, etc.

Fungie · 02-27-2008, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EQAditu

It depends on if critical heals follow max+1 to max*1.3 or they follow a straight 130% to all values.

If the former is true:

Take a ward for 1000hp. Take a reactive that triggers for 750-1250. Both with an average heal of 1000hp.

The ward critical heals for 1000*1.15 = 1150hp.

The reactive heals for max+1 to max*1.30... 751 to 1625... 1188hp average.

So the 15% vs 30% equates to 1150hp vs 1188hp. Certainly not the big difference that twice the amount suggests.

If the latter is true, then they have an argument.

Someone have some offhand proof of which it is? I haven't run a study on it myself, that I can recall. And please don't just say, I heard it was this way. Well, it depends on who you are... some of you are credible and I can just take what you say as fact.

Just looked them up on broker... defiler wards do not have a range. They're just a set amount of hp. I'd expected them to have a small range though... to not benefit much from max+1, even if that's how they work. Take Vital Intercession for example... 460-562. 562/1.3 = 432 < 460. No benefit from max+1 there, since 130% of the minimum will never be less than the max.

At any rate, like I said in my last post, for a 2500 spot heal, 1% heal crit = 7.5 +heal: 2500 * .01 * .3 = 7.5. +heal is incredibly underrated. Unfortunately, templars are getting jipped out of using it.

Istaril · 02-27-2008, 07:30 PM

From memory - It's 130%, not max+1 to 130.

From a brief test;

Base Repent = 2,912 (AIII, No Gear)
Crit Repent = 3,348 (AIII, Crit)

Dead-on 115%

Base Mark = 63 (MII, No Gear)
Crit Mark = 81 (MII, Crit)

Dead on 130%

Bestowal of Vitae = Bestowal of Vitae was seeing crits from 81 up (and NOT 77, max+1), impying 130%, but not confirming, sample = too small.

RedHawk · 02-27-2008, 10:26 PM

One argument that pisses me off faster than just about every other is:

"Our +healing is divided by 3 and applied to each tick, therefore we get more out of our plus healing, therefore we should have our +healing capped early to compensate"

That's bullshit. Assuming even the best thing that could possibly happen, every tick healing for the full amount, on our T8 single reactive we get 5 ticks at 1/3 of our +healing total. So we get 5/3 times our +healing total. So far so good. However when you cap us at 1/3 of everyone else, we get 5/9 times our +healing total. That's what is bullshit. At what should cap our +healing on reactives, we get to use just over half of it.

So basically they hook you up if you have shitty gear, but then shaft you to make up for it if you have remotely descent gear. Anyone else like having half the gear available to you rendered shitty because of a retarded mechanic?

RedHawk · 02-27-2008, 10:45 PM

Basically, all I am arguing for here is that for every class it should be possible for every heal they have to use all of their +healing mod up to 150% the base amount of their heals.

Forget about fucking with one aspect of a mechanic to try to compensate for some other fucked up aspect of a mechanic. The sum total of every heal should be base + +healing up to 150% base. Simple. Someone explain why it shouldn't be that way.

Edit: While I can see that there may be a valid argument for regens and reactives to have some sort of boost beyond a 50% cap, there sure isn't a reason to gimp reactives.

Shinzul · 02-28-2008, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedHawk

The sum total of every heal should be base + +healing up to 150% base. Simple. Someone explain why it shouldn't be that way.

Most likely, it's due to this:

If you have a reactive that base heals for 500-700 (guesstimate), and you have +1000 healing (that's reasonable with good gear, yes?), per your suggestion, reactives would heal for 1000-1200, and would crit for 1200-1560.

Combine your group and single target reactives, and on the max, you're sitting at a 3k heal.

Like Aditu said, in groups, clerics are complete ownage, and on raids, they're gimped, simply because of how much mobs are hitting for.

My feeling is that the problem is they can't separate out how much clerics can heal for on a raid from how much they can heal for in groups, and having what you suggested would make clerics so overpowered for grouping that every other non-raiding, non-cleric priest would bitch up a storm.

EQAditu · 02-28-2008, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shinzul

Most likely, it's due to this:

If you have a reactive that base heals for 500-700 (guesstimate), and you have +1000 healing (that's reasonable with good gear, yes?), per your suggestion, reactives would heal for 1000-1200, and would crit for 1200-1560.

Combine your group and single target reactives, and on the max, you're sitting at a 3k heal.

Like Aditu said, in groups, clerics are complete ownage, and on raids, they're gimped, simply because of how much mobs are hitting for.

My feeling is that the problem is they can't separate out how much clerics can heal for on a raid from how much they can heal for in groups, and having what you suggested would make clerics so overpowered for grouping that every other non-raiding, non-cleric priest would bitch up a storm.

You obviously have higher expectations of reactives than reality.

Your "guesstimate" is not what our base reactive is... it is what we are currently capped at.

The base value for the T8 Adept III single Target reactive is “460-562”
The maximum value for the T8 Adept III single Target reactive is “575-702”

I would have to actually log in to see what Master I is.

I wouldn't really know what a "reasonable" about of +healing is either, because I don't wear gear that I'm capped with... but theoretically, using the best +healing items for every single slot, I could only come up with +1025 offhand. So it doesn't seem all that reasonable at all. People like their power procs and Overloaded Healing items... so you're probably not going to see that much +healing.

If you were to say that 600 is more reasonable, then you would be seeing a 711 average reactive hit. Which criticals for 924. Stack two of them and you have 1848, not 3k.

Shinzul · 02-28-2008, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EQAditu

You obviously have higher expectations of reactives than reality.

Your "guesstimate" is not what our base reactive is... it is what we are currently capped at.

The base value for the T8 Adept III single Target reactive is “460-562”
The maximum value for the T8 Adept III single Target reactive is “575-702”

I would have to actually log in to see what Master I is.

I wouldn't really know what a "reasonable" about of +healing is either, because I don't wear gear that I'm capped with... but theoretically, using the best +healing items for every single slot, I could only come up with +1025 offhand. So it doesn't seem all that reasonable at all. People like their power procs and Overloaded Healing items... so you're probably not going to see that much +healing.

If you were to say that 600 is more reasonable, then you would be seeing a 711 average reactive hit. Which criticals for 924. Stack two of them and you have 1848, not 3k.

Yeah that doesn't seem that unreasonable to me... But then again, it's not that far from what they currently hit for...