hi,

Wow took the decision to nerf healer dps to oblivion, now they deal less damage than a dps heals, so a 20% hp damage dealer will beat a 100% healer.
This removes all skill from game, stats arent equal => healing is mundane.Why should i become a healer, if i only am a burden to carry ? if my ally dies in arena, it will be 1vs1 = instant loss.

Suggestion : Healers do the exact same damage as damage dealers but have less max mana. Lets say both have 10 mana regen per sec.
1) Damage dealers reduce max hp when they attack, (stamina counters this). Lets say that a damage dealer has 500 mana.
2) Healers start will less mana pool in battle, e.g only 100 mana, but as time passes their mana regen allows them to go past max mana pool. They can outheal the enemy damage but doing so will reduce their current mana = lose the ability to gain mana to dps.

Outcome :
1) a healer can defeat a 30% enemy with his 100 mana but now he is oom, thus cant heal, it will take 10 sec to regen.
2) a healer can wait until he has 300 mana and go pew pew killing an 100% enemy at 10 sec.
3) a healer can use high mana cost spells to cure the "max hp reduction debuff", (but he is low mana = useless).
4) healer + tank wont outheal boss. Boss will eventually kill the tank.

What do you think is this fair system ? Maybe the damage dealers have talents that grant more mana regen when they dps so that they dont go out of mana fast.

Damage dealers = steady raid dps.
Healers = burst dps.

in group pvp healers wont even bother using damage spells because they need mana to heal their allies.

Possible specs:
1) Hybrid priest 100% heal : has mana issues but deals 100% damage.
2) healbot 50% heal 50% spirit : heals 50% less, damages less, no mana issues.

I've always thought it to be a mistake to try to balance a game for both group play and single player play, which is why I was glad that WoW introduced the dual-spec system. If you are balancing for group play, then I'd say to not worry about giving healers high DPS; otherwise, you'll get the pure DPS screaming that they are "obsolete". And if you're balancing for single play, then of course the tank/heal/dps roles shouldn't be in place, since all characters will need aspects of each to be effective.

Yeah I don't necessarily think that a healer should be stomping out enemies... It's definitely a support role. You shouldn't be mad that you can't solo or do a lot of damage. Healing is quite possibly one of the strongest skills in most games... to add good DPS on top of that makes that class godly. You get situations where even though the healer deals less damage, they can still win fights against stronger opponents merely by outliving them. If you have one player who can heal and do weak damage, and one player who can't heal and does good damage... unless the stronger player is dealing enough damage to counter the healing, then the stronger player is doomed.

There isn't any really decent way to balance stuff like that when you're dealing with not only class restrictions but also gear and various stats... WoW isn't exactly a game that I would think requires much skill. It's basically whoever has the best gear/setup and can spam their skills fastest. Is there skill involved in that? Maybe... But not in the same sense as something like a real action game where you actually have to aim at your opponent and not rely on stats to win battles.

DPS screaming that they are "obsolete"
Equal = obsolete ?

You shouldn't be mad that you can't solo or do a lot of damage
Yes i should be mad, why should i play a "healbot" playstyle healer ? How is a healer a support when the only thing he can do is heal.

merely by outliving them
Dps can outmana the priests and win, i dont see why they shouldnt be equal ?

a) healing costs mana it isnt free. mana runs out in 20 seconds, and then healer dies. And because of this may happen, i may have the an extra bar "rage", so they use that bar for damage, so now its 1vs1 both damage dealers and priest has no mana but full rage bar.

healer = "you wont be able to dps all the time, but you deal same damage"
Dps = "you deal damage, and dont have to worry about mana".

Healing does not have to outweigh DPS in any situation. Imagine the trifecta of tank, DPS and healer. A DPS can, often enough, kill an unsupported tank before the tank can kill the DPS. If a healer is added to the team of the tank, then the DPS's damage is effectively reduced, giving the tank enough time to kill the DPS before the tank dies. Even though the tank will still take damage from the DPS, the tank will survive because the total amount of damage was reduced to below their hp.

Example: 100 hp + 12 dmg/s tank vs 25 dmg/s 45 hp DPS. The tank requires 5 seconds (5*12 = 60) to kill the DPS. The DPS requires only 4 seconds (4*25 = 100). Thus, the DPS will win this engagement (assuming their only options are "stand and hit each other repeatedly", which is bad design).

Example 2: Same tank, same DPS, but now add a 10hp/s healer on the side of the tank. Suddenly, it takes the DPS 7 seconds( 7*(25-10) = 105 ) to kill the tank. The tank still only needs 5 seconds. The tank will win this engagement. And that assumes that all the healer can do is "stand and heal repeatedly" as well. No buffs, debuff dispells, aggressive spells, ect.

Throwing in a healer changes the formula around, and does not place a burden on the tank (who would die without the healer). Naturally you can argue "well, the DPS might have a healer too!" (which usually isn't true to mobs, only pvp) or that "more tanks are better then" but again this is a simplified model where there are not alternative options. Adding in supportive abilities, giving the DPS the option to target the healer, giving the tank abilities to taunt or stun the DPS all changes the equation around. There is most certainly a place for healers in a typical RPG style game (be it an MMO, MOBA, or even some FPS [TF2 has medics for a reason!]).

Healers with dmg/s equivalent to a DPS is bad design though, because it's double stuffing a role. That's a recipe for an OP damage dealing+mitigating monstrosity that may well be unkillable if it's heals can also negate incoming dps. It's far too easy to fall into a slew of pitfalls with double stuffed roles. Tank+DPS, Healer+DPS, and Healer+Tank (the unkillable god) usually result in difficult to balance archetypes that leave players frustrated and the design crew exhausted.

1) in your example you used 1vs2 pvp, so you consider it fair for a dps to 1shot both the tank and the healer, its "balance" !!!
2) its also balance for a 1hp glasscannon to kill tanks in 4 sec, before tank even has the ability to reach the glasscannon. Maybe make it so a glasscannon kills him in 0.1 sec? he will die anyway in your design so why delay it ? /irony.
3) you are right it is bad design for a healer to heal only 100% damage, he needs to heal 150%-200% damage, because a healer cant crowd control, on the other hand a dps will easily kill the healer because he can outdamage him with his crowd control spells in 2vs1 pvp.
3) if healers healed only 100% there would be no reason for healer classes to exist.
a) why focus the healer ? he doesnt exist, just use the 2 dps on the tank. the tank dies in 4 secs in your example. this is without use of "cc", then they switch to the healer.

Any pvp composition that loses against another every time means that the system is unbalanced, e.g a double healer team should be able to defeat double tank or a double dps team or a healer + dps team.

1) in your example you used 1vs2 pvp, so you consider it fair for a dps to 1shot both the tank and the healer, its "balance" !!!
2) its also balance for a 1hp glasscannon to kill tanks in 4 sec, before tank even has the ability to reach the glasscannon. Maybe make it so a glasscannon kills him in 0.1 sec? he will die anyway in your design so why delay it ? /irony.
3) you are right it is bad design for a healer to heal only 100% damage, he needs to heal 150%-200% damage, because a healer cant crowd control, on the other hand a dps will easily kill the healer because he can outdamage him with his crowd control spells in 2vs1 pvp.
3) if healers healed only 100% there would be no reason for healer classes to exist.
a) why focus the healer ? he doesnt exist, just use the 2 dps on the tank. the tank dies in 4 secs in your example. this is without use of "cc", then they switch to the healer.

Any pvp composition that loses against another every time means that the system is unbalanced, e.g a double healer team should be able to defeat double tank or a double dps team or a healer + dps team.

n00b0dy, relax, take a step back and break the stereotypes. Not every caster in every game is a "glass cannon". Necromancer in Dark Age of Camelot was a tough bugger because the player was immune to damage until their pet died, but when the pet died they were stuck with a small amount of health remaining. Bards(support healer) and Healers(primary healer) in Dark Age of Camelot had Crowd Control abilities. Healers should not be able to do as much damage as a class built to do damage. There is no logic to say anything else is as far as I am aware. If you played Dark Age of Camelot you would have experienced first hand how powerful a mage can be, but then see how weak and fragile they are as well. Warlocks in WoW were tough buggers as far as I am concerned while a Frost Mage had some survivability over that of a Fire Mage with a supposed sacrifice of damage.

Not every encounter is I beat on you as you beat on me. That is bad design if that is the only thing happening. There is more than just damage in an MMORPG to be concerned with.

See, you keep mixing play modes again. In your OP you mention raid damage and bosses, now you're talking about PvP. If you are trying to balance for both of these at the same time, you are going to fail. How many times have Blizzard or others broken their games by trying to do this?

equal = obsolete ?
[/quote]

How are they equal? If the DPS can do DPS, and the healer can heal and do DPS, then why in the world would anyone ever play a pure DPS? Under what circumstances would a pure DPS not be considered broken? Unless you give them the ability to heal, at which point they're just another hybrid.

Your main gripe from what I see is that you don't want people to have to be "just a tank" or "just a healer" or "just a dps" because it's boring. So maybe, eliminate all pure classes and make them all hybrid, and make their tank/DPS/heal roles situational, so that all members of the team can perform all roles as their situations require, or as they prefer.

In the end, though, this is all about trying to balance the un-balanceable, IMO. In seven years, Blizzard hasn't ever gotten it right. There has always been someone pissed off because they're ineffective, and someone who thinks they're extraordinarily skilled because their class is a face-rolling god-like machine of destruction. It's trying to solve a system of equations in which there are literally thousands of variables, and in which many of those variables are non-deterministic... ie, the skills and mindsets that individual players bring to the table. I think the only thing you can do is take your best guess, and always continue to tweak the system to at least give the players the illusion that you are trying to balance it, then repeat for seven or ten or how ever many years the project will go, until the players move on to another game and you can let out a sigh of relief that nobody ever called "bullshit" too loudly.

The true problem in my opinion is that virtually all RPG-esque computer games are indiscriminately based on a pen-and-pencil game design by Gary Gygax from the early 1970s. Few people seemed to wonder, ever, whether a system that was designed to work with tossing dice and taking notes on paper is suited for an immersive computer simulation at all. This includes the concept of "classes".

There is really no reason why there needs to be any such thing as classes at all. A character could in principle advance in whatever it is doing. If you fight more, you get more melee DPS and a higher attack rating, the more often you are hit, the higher your health will become over time, the more you heal the better your healing gets.

Admittedly, classes give the uncanny player a valuable hint ("I'm supposed to stand here and press F5 whenever the tank's health bar is low"), and they may (arguably) help somewhat balance a few things. However, those are in my opinion mostly poor excuses for being lazy to think of a profoundly different (and presumably better) design.

I swear I've seen this exact same thread before. Ah, right, it's the other thread that no one agrees with you in, and has in fact proven you pretty much entirely off base, yet you refuse to listen to factual information (you even state in your other thread you're not listening.)

However, let me talk to a wall anyway. I'm going to address this thread and your other.

First, almost every single argument in your other thread is based off your interpretation of League of Legends. Which I happen to play pretty regularly, and honestly, for you to feel the way you feel about builds, you must be really low ELO (or only play unranked games). LoL is actually very well balanced, and I have no idea why you think DPS > *. You're watering everything down to only two stats, HP and Damage. Since you seem to be (vaguely) familiar with LoL, let's use it as an example. Do you forget that you can modify your ability to do damage (AP or AD) with items, you can add lifesteal to gain health back from your physical attacks, or spell vamp to gain it back from magic based attacks, you can increase your attack speed, your attack damage, you can buy items that cause on-hit slows, all to increase or change the way your damage is done. You can also buy armor, armor which HURTS THE OTHER PERSON ATTACKING YOU, items which negate spell effects, reduce magic or damage, items which regenerate health at different rates, regenerate man, et cetera.

It's not DPS beats HP flat out. Why do you think there are champs who are KNOWN AS HARD COUNTERS for other champs? Rammus (a tank, for anyone not familiar with LoL) is a hard counter for almost any AD carry (that's a physical damage character, again for you non-LoLers). Rammus hard counters Yi, Ashe, Miss Fortune, Caitlyn, and so forth.

You seem super focused on how awesome LeBlanc is with her combo-nuke. I destroy LeBlanc's (however, you won't see them in ranked play at high ELO, probably not even at low ELO, because LeBlanc is SUPER EASY TO COUNTER, which further enforces my opinion that you don't play ranked, or you're super low ELO). LeBlanc can only do one nuke before her CDs force her to retreat, that's exactly what the point of a nuke is. If you play LeBlanc, I'll play Caitlyn, I'd build a banshee's veil (nullify's entirely the first attack of your combo, and if you open with your sigil, you've just lost a serious amount of damage from your nuke), and I'm going to build a blood thirster (lifesteal), and a Frozen Mallet (health and slow on-hit) and attack speed/damage. You pop in to nuke me, I'm going t othrow you back out of range with a net (50 caliber shot, if you've never played Caitlyn, look it up), now you can't damage me. Now, Cailtyn has incredible range, you are pushed back beyond your range to nuke me, but I have you slowed (heavily with 50 cal net), you're going to die before you get away.

Okay, so that's DPS vs Nuke. How about Nuke VS Tank? Okay, I'll play Sion. You jump onto me with leblanc, I'm going to immediately flash onto you, hit you with a stun, and pop my ult (which is 100% lifesteal, if you aren't familiar), you'll be dead before you know it, killed by a tank.

You're approaching the problem entirely wrong, and you're basing it off a game you're (sorry) bad at.