Recover HP/MP while standing still, out of battle, and enmity zeroed

[Neptune]

Either way it is unsatisfactory to "solve" the problem by reverting to pre-1.18 style heal-bombing when the MP is not the core issue.

You bring up a worthwhile point. Should the encounter require more DPS? Unfortunately this point is buried under another, more dominant issue. Did you notice in your playing that of the 4-5 mages in a group most were healing.. 1 person? To solve the problem of DPS not getting invited, they could have not raised MP costs. The result of that would have been 1 or 2 healers instead of 4 to 5. I'll stop there because we were discussing the problem of party composition, not the problem of a challenging encounter.

A bad supporting argument? Why, because it's not something you agree with?

Look around you, many players have adapted to the changes just fine.

You must not have read my post, or surely you would not have concluded that I called your supporting argument bad because I disagreed with you.

Actually I did read them. I read them quite well, and multiple times.



Perhaps you should read the patch notes before making a thread based on a misunderstanding?

Go back and read about the changes to HP/MP regen and come back in here when you're done. Or, ask nicely and I'll explain it in greater detail.

Forgive me for using a generic "you." Would you (you, you this time) prefer I go edit my post to say "one," where appropriate? As for getting through to. . . whoever it is you think I'm trying to get through to. . . Actually, no, I have no idea wth you're talking about at this point.

People shouldn't stick with shitty LSs. People whose LS won't let them run should 1) find a new LS, and 2) find/make a different group to run with. . .

Rhetorical question. I lost you? I agree with you about people and crappy linkshells, but my point is it doesn't matter to these people what I think or what you think about what they should do differently. I'm asking you to try to understand these people and imagine how game design affects their decisions and their opportunities.

[Viridiana]

You bring up a worthwhile point. Should the encounter require more DPS? Unfortunately this point is buried under another, more dominant issue. Did you notice in your playing that of the 4-5 mages in a group most were healing.. 1 person? To solve the problem of DPS not getting invited, they could have not raised MP costs. The result of that would have been 1 or 2 healers instead of 4 to 5. I'll stop there because we were discussing the problem of party composition, not the problem of a challenging encounter.



You must not have read my post, or surely you would not have concluded that I called your supporting argument bad because I disagreed with you.



Go back and read about the changes to HP/MP regen and come back in here when you're done. Or, ask nicely and I'll explain it in greater detail.

Except for, y'know, the groups already running 1-2 healers. . .

[Neptune]

Except for, y'know, the groups already running 1-2 healers. . .

It's of no consequence if it CAN be done with 1 healer.. it WASN'T when it mattered!

[NoctisUmbra]

Go back and read about the changes to HP/MP regen and come back in here when you're done. Or, ask nicely and I'll explain it in greater detail.

That sort of arrogant, condescending tone isn't helping your credibility, Neptune. I urge you to read my post again, perhaps you missed the ninja edit. I attempted to explain it to you.

[Raikki]

Did you notice in your playing that of the 4-5 mages in a group most were healing.. 1 person? To solve the problem of DPS not getting invited, they could have not raised MP costs. The result of that would have been 1 or 2 healers instead of 4 to 5.

I've not run Darkhold with more than 3 healers, and the third is only for speed. I can hardly fathom needing a 4th (let alone 5th??) mage to tank heal. It is clear that whatever is going on these groups are doing something seriously, seriously wrong, and should not be succeeding at all. That's why this is an encounter design issue. You should not be able to do everything wrong and still win; that's poor design. The solution is to prevent people from winning this way by removing the "stack a ton of healing" loophole in the encounter design. You suggest doing exactly the opposite by making it vastly more convenient for them to win this way, while at the same time trivializing this and future content for everyone else.

[Neptune]

I've not run Darkhold with more than 3 healers, and the third is only for speed. I can hardly fathom needing a 4th (let alone 5th??) mage to tank heal. It is clear that whatever is going on these groups are doing something seriously, seriously wrong, and should not be succeeding at all. That's why this is an encounter design issue. You should not be able to do everything wrong and still win; that's poor design. The solution is to prevent people from winning this way by removing the "stack a ton of healing" loophole in the encounter design. You suggest doing exactly the opposite by making it vastly more convenient for them to win this way, while at the same time trivializing this and future content for everyone else.

Well, before we go there, allow me to suggest.. the quality of your tank had something to do with your healer group size? Your character is fairly well maxed. If you or a character comparable to you were tanking you would have more abilities at your disposal than say someone with only Gladiator ranked. That has a lot to do with how many healers you need.

I'm all for super difficult gameplay. But I don't want it to seem like it's some kind of thing where people weren't paying attention that caused the influx of healers - it was due to how much MP it cost to cast Cure. They tripled to quadrupled the MP cost.. and parties tripled to quadrupled the amount of healers. It's really just as simple as that. Doesn't matter how legit it was.. it was caused by the game design.

You could argue that the community should dig in its heels and tighten up its game and respond to quadruple MP costs by REDUCING the amount of healers it first wants to take.. but what is the point of doing so? Unless you can counsel each and every party leader the second a new patch goes up.. why not leave it to the dev team to set the conditions that determine predictable community responses?

[Viridiana]

Well, before we go there, allow me to suggest.. the quality of your tank had something to do with your healer group size? Your character is fairly well maxed. If you or a character comparable to you were tanking you would have more abilities at your disposal than say someone with only Gladiator ranked. That has a lot to do with how many healers you need.

I'm sorry, I stopped reading right there. I don't think there's a set of healers out there willing to pull a tank that's only leveled GLA.

[Neptune]

I'm sorry, I stopped reading right there. I don't think there's a set of healers out there willing to pull a tank that's only leveled GLA.

Who are you kidding? This game is not comprised totally of elitists. Many healers have no clue what I even said about the difference between a Gladiator who has many classes leveled and otherwise. Do you think only elitists have a right to HAVE A SLOT in a raid party?

[Viridiana]

No, I don't know the difference. Can you explain it to me?

Did you read my explanation of how complicated it is to assume what's going on behind the scenes in the game if incurrED is to be liberally read into? I think that's beyond the scope of the patch notes. Has it occurred to you that if the enmity system was that complicated they might have explained it in detail?

Okay, I'm going to use WoW as an example. In WoW, you can't (by default, unless it's changed since I quit) regain MP while casting. However, once you stop casting for five seconds, your natural regeneration kicks in again. Note that at this point you have cast (past tense), but are no longer casting (progressive tense).

To apply this to the patch notes, the notes say that you may regenerate MP while standing still, but may not regenerate while incurring enmity. Note that those are both progressive tenses. Meaning that once you've stopped (for however much time) regeneration will begin. If the amount of enmity you have is not changing, then you are not incurring enmity, you merely have incurred it.

Who are you kidding? This game is not comprised totally of elitists. Many healers have no clue what I even said about the difference between a Gladiator who has many classes leveled and otherwise. Do you think only elitists have a right to HAVE A SLOT in a raid party?

Has nothing to do with elitism, but that's a nice red herring. If a tank doesn't have Warmonger, Disorient, Taunt, Accomplice, Prime Conditioning, etc., I very seriously doubt he'd ever be able to tank effectively, no matter how many mages you throw at him.

[Neptune]

Okay, I'm going to use WoW as an example. In WoW, you can't (by default, unless it's changed since I quit) regain MP while casting. However, once you stop casting for five seconds, your natural regeneration kicks in again. Note that at this point you have cast (past tense), but are no longer casting (progressive tense).

To apply this to the patch notes, the notes say that you may regenerate MP while standing still, but may not regenerate while incurring enmity. Note that those are both progressive tenses. Meaning that once you've stopped (for however much time) regeneration will begin. If the amount of enmity you have is not changing, then you are not incurring enmity, you merely have incurred it.



Has nothing to do with elitism, but that's a nice red herring. If a tank doesn't have Warmonger, Disorient, Taunt, Accomplice, Prime Conditioning, etc., I very seriously doubt he'd ever be able to tank effectively, no matter how many mages you throw at him.

I was being sarcastic but I'm glad you posted that. Actually in WoW there is now "in-combat" regen, which is something like 1/3 of your other mana regen rate. You can adjust it with equipment and talents.

I'm guessing you didn't notice my response to NoctisUmbra. You're proposing that there is programming in the new patch to determine when you have been idle in incurring enmity. This is quite a leap. What we know of the enmity system is that it is accumulative, meaning values don't drop off and continue to accumulate for the duration of the fight. When you incur a high level of enmity the only way for it to go "down" is for someone else to go higher than you. So if you understand what I am saying there you will understand why I don't think there is a basis for thinking the game "keeps track" of how long it's been since you accumulated enmity during a fight.

In that last case, most healers don't even know what those abilities are. There are a lot of players that are very casual, especially considering the state of the game.

Bull****. Our LS regularly runs with 2-3 healers, and I still have to tell them to stop healing me (DPS) instead of the tank. Obviously you're exaggerating the hell out of the MP costs.

I'm really not exaggerating! Do you not believe that parties were formed with 5 healers based on healing 1 tank? Do a forum search for GLA CON ARC Darkhold and read what you find. I know it can be done with less healers and skilled players.. but we are not discussing that are we?