Improvement proposal.

We all know that pvp isn't as balanced as it could be at the moment, what I personally believe to be the single most annoying thing is how spell cast is interrupted every time the caster is hit. I do agree that casters are incredibly strong in pvp, but I don't believe that they should be interrupted EVERY HIT (especially from bards.) The focus should be on how to make the game play more smooth, it just feels clunky when your can't actually cast anything. Some sort of spell shield, or some sort of buff is a much more appropriate way of dealing with those pesky casters. Perhaps give the healers a type of reflect spell to be placed on an ally, or maybe a pvp specific way of cc'ing.

Check out the thread (up to 13 pages of replies so far) under this forum category called Spellcasting in PVP where you can enjoy reading a friendly, lighthearted discussion on the matter amongst users who clearly respect each others' differences in perspective.

There are a few tangents, but the posts worth reading in my opinion are the ones debating auto-attacks interrupting casts, vs GCD/instant abilities which require input on behalf of a user to be able to do the same.

The biggest improvements to PvP IMHO would be the devs altering ability, trait, and passive mechanics depending on the type of "Frontline."

Healer stacking is a huge problem in Secure that could easily be dissuaded by nerfs to HP-restoring spells should a party go over 2 or 3 healers. Such an implementation in Slaughter really isn't deemed necessary (yet).

Slaughter really needs to be polished in general, due to Adrenaline and Kill streak bonuses, not to mention the whole thing about middle being the most desired location to be in over half of the match, and having no real incentive to disperse after those 3 ADS mobs. Stacking casters in Slaughter really could use the same nerfing treatment that a stacked healer team in Secure needs. Maybe, should a party have over 2 caster DPS, their Cometeor's cast-time takes 1.25x times longer to complete.


One can dream.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cidel

Healer stacking is a huge problem in Secure that could easily be dissuaded by nerfs to HP-restoring spells should a party go over 2 or 3 healers. Such an implementation in Slaughter really isn't deemed necessary (yet).

---

They already tackled this. They removed Cleric Stance and stopped Regen and Medica II from stacking. All parties need 2-3 healers. Any more than that is a detriment.

So 1WHM and 7SCHs for the ultimate flag baby sitting in secure /o/.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Houston009

So 1WHM and 7SCHs for the ultimate flag baby sitting in secure /o/.

---

Here comes the Starstorm!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atreus

Here comes the "[PK] Starstorm!"

---

I wonder how inflated the damage would be if it hit all targets including schs' fairies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Houston009

So 1WHM and 7SCHs for the ultimate flag baby sitting in secure /o/.

---

Hold it? Sure. Take it? Fat chance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ultimatecalibur

Hold it? Sure. Take it? Fat chance.

---

7 Aura Blast which can be combo'd with Blizzard II -> Aura Blast for an AOE Fluid Aura

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atreus

They already tackled this. They removed Cleric Stance and stopped Regen and Medica II from stacking. All parties need 2-3 healers. Any more than that is a detriment.

---

Actually, no.

The removal of Cleric's stance does nothing in situations where getting and holding a flag is concerned. Only the Regen and Medica II adjustment was the real attempt to solve the problem. Take a party of two healers to go up against a party of 4+ healers. It won't end well for the former. There's even a thread somewhere here showing how much of a concentrated effort it is for a premade group on voice chat to take out a heavily healer-fortified flag. Stacked healers make it an uphill struggle to kill more than a healer or two, much less keep them from raising each other with Divine Breath.

The only thing detrimental about 4 or more healers is if they're in the B party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cidel

snip

---

Uh.. yeah.

Cleric Stance gone means the healer stacked team isn't going to bring another team to its knees with Holy spam and everything Scholar has in its arsenal. And I know, I was in the video.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ultimatecalibur

Hold it? Sure. Take it? Fat chance.

---

^ This

rest in peace Dusty Slippers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atreus

They already tackled this. They removed Cleric Stance and stopped Regen and Medica II from stacking. All parties need 2-3 healers. Any more than that is a detriment.

---

Unfortunately it isn't enough :/
if there are 4 or 5 healers in a party it is almost impossible to take down that party, you will just continue to fight a lot and Caster LB1 won't do anything in that case, LB2 will oneshot them, but man, you know that it need a lot of time to be charged and a huge cohordination to odn't waste it.
It isn't balanced if you can only kill them with a perfect LB2.

Remove the Regene stacking up to me was another lazy attempt to fix it, as Cidel said a progressive Mind reduction depending on the healer amount in the party woulded be perfect up tp me, and maybe lower the Regene stacking, making them unstackable :/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ultimatecalibur

Hold it? Sure. Take it? Fat chance.

---

You are right, but if B team help them once to take the flag...
Hem, after it will be really easy to mantain for the rest of the match :/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geologo

Unfortunately it isn't enough :/
if there are 4 or 5 healers in a party it is almost impossible to take down that party, you will just continue to fight a lot and Caster LB1 won't do anything in that case, LB2 will oneshot them, but man, you know that it need a lot of time to be charged and a huge cohordination to odn't waste it.
It isn't balanced if you can only kill them with a perfect LB2.

Remove the Regene stacking up to me was another lazy attempt to fix it, as Cidel said a progressive Mind reduction depending on the healer amount in the party woulded be perfect up tp me, and maybe lower the Regene stacking, making them unstackable :/

---

Running into a team with that many healers is less common than running into a premade (though most groups attempting this are in fact premade, just saying even premades were unlikely to do it). Correct that it does take a good LB2 to take them down, but it doesn't take a coordinated premade to deadlock the team. All you need are 4 players on a flag to keep it from changing any and a team with enough sense to survive (reason #47 that three healers in Secure was a magic number). Healer stacking relies on snatching the flag first and turtling it. Deprive them of taking the flag (even if you keep it neutral) and you effectively render their time wasteful to their GC. Even better if you do get the flag and turtle it on them.

The solution in Secure wasn't always killing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atreus

Uh.. yeah.

Cleric Stance gone means the healer stacked team isn't going to bring another team to its knees with Holy spam and everything Scholar has in its arsenal. And I know, I was in the video.

---

It isn't hard to have the remaining 4 DPS focus the much fewer enemy healers while the 4 healers play hot potato heals on the flag. I've seen it happen many times. Even 3 healers often out-performs just 2. Healers spamming Holy is irrelevant because they still have better flag-holding presence; which is the main objective.

I think maybe you and I have different definitions of healer stacking. Three is just about necessary, with two being "acceptable" in many but not all cases. Four you can say is knocking right on the door but isn't beyond control. Five or more I would consider stacking, as at that point you only have 1-3 spots for people who can actually bring any real damage or interrupting power. As you said, more healers brings better holding presence. As I said, however, there isn't a whole lot of capturing power, which is the other half of the main objective.

Regardless of how I feel towards the tactic (it being absolutely stupid and time-wasting), I'm not so sure it needs to be shut out altogether as there ARE ways to deal with it. Maybe I still feel bad about what happened with Cleric Stance and don't wanna see healers take another hit in any fashion.

Maybe. For me, I also feel like 3 is necessary @ flag groups, but for some reason (at least in Maelstrom), 2 is generally accepted and then people start to lose their s*** when an opposing party uses 3 or more healers. Majority of the time if I decide to be a 3rd healer pre-match's start, for some reason a lot of the time one of the other healers decides that's one too many and swaps to tank or DPS. But anyway, that's going on off on a tangent. I consider a 4th healer to be "stacking."

There are ways to "deal" with healer stacking, but they are not feasible for most randoms queueing with each other or without fairly specific set-ups or voice chat. The difference between the removal of Cleric Stance and Medica II + Regen losing stacking ability from different WHMs (in additions to something like a MND nerf for too many healers) is that the latter doesn't affect WHMs and SCHs as a job, but rather, certain set-ups. The "nerf" is pretty much nonexistent for parties who don't engage in those specific party compositions; much like parties that get slower LBs with too many of the same jobs.