The two are somewhat related. If you can include the quote you're reference, it'd help. Whenever you snip, I don't know what context you're referring to
I'm saying that from my viewpoint as a dps, the healers running back in to heal while having the respawn invincibility isn't too big of a problem because a healer death usually means another dps (generally the ranged one) is going to die in the span that it takes for a healer to respawn and get within the range of doing something (which generally includes having 1-3 seconds of invincibility). Unless it's concerning the tank, a healer coming back in with 1-3 of invincbility isn't long enough to be influential, because at that point, you've either regrouped (though this is usually because the other team didn't capitalize on the healer's death) or died.
It's at the point that I don't feel it's a good change to remove/lower the invincibility duration, which would in turn have lower anti-spawn camping deterrance. I've never had a game turn around or go south because of it, not unless my team was uncoordinated on a follow up. If we're talking about the concept (which might be what you're getting) that a healer can run into a fight and be invincbility, then I can agree that it's kind of a silly concept, but it still stems from their anti-camp measures; you can't influence one without the other.
For example, if we were to remove invulnerability on cast, it'd wreck scholars more than any other healers because they need to get their fairy up and aetherflow. If you lower the duration, you lower the effectiveness of fighting back when they are truly spawn camping you, and the layout of the team's base doesn't help in this regard. In a perfect world, where SE could design anything and not have bugs scome up as a result (let alone do this at all, since they have a nasty track record of doing small, bandage fixes that sometimes don't even address the problem), they'd remove the invulnerability after stepping onto the bridge.




Reply With Quote

