The alternative to removing menders

[Ryan.9387]

Nerf healing power scaling for specs that you don't want running menders.

I really don't see how this amulet nonsense is even under consideration. At launch we had clerics amulet, settlers, and others in a meta that was still more balanced and fun than it is now.

You need to make some decisions on how you want the game to be played, and balance to that ideal rather than this whack a mole system that just takes us from one op fotm class to the next. You remove menders and what will you get? Another meta comp and a smaller playerbase.

[aymnad.9023]

What do you mean?They are saying that they do not want healers to feel too tanky and you say let’s just rescale. Can you give an example? I have 2 possible interpretations

1) Rescaling the values so you need to invest into healing power to do the same healing -> this does not change anything since, well, you reach the same values. You have to remember that most “aoe healing skills” heal you the same amount they do heal allies.2) Nerfing the overall healing -> it means you also nerf the ability to support which is a bad idea. This is why they want to have less healing power and add a sigil that will increase outgoing healing.

I do not agree with it for a few reasons (mainly because it will require a lot of work to not have other supports end up like druid + it nerfs some builds [even if only a few]) but the goal sounds perfectly clear to me. (and if they are ready to go hard on it I think it can work)

[Fueki.4753]

@aymnad.9023 said:What do you mean?They are saying that they do not want healers to feel too tanky and you say let’s just rescale. Can you give an example? I have 2 possible interpretations

1) Rescaling the values so you need to invest into healing power to do the same healing -> this does not change anything since, well, you reach the same values. You have to remember that most “aoe healing skills” heal you the same amount they do heal allies.2) Nerfing the overall healing -> it means you also nerf the ability to support which is a bad idea. This is why they want to have less healing power and add a sigil that will increase outgoing healing.

I do not agree with it for a few reasons (mainly because it will require a lot of work to not have other supports end up like druid + it nerfs some builds [even if only a few]) but the goal sounds perfectly clear to me. (and if they are ready to go hard on it I think it can work)

They probably meant lowering the Healing Power scaling of individual skills, so that said skills benefit less from Healing Power.If done properly, Healing skills and Barrier skills that currently over-perform wouldn't be as strong anymore, even without removing the amulet.

[Ryan.9387]

@"aymnad.9023" said:What do you mean?They are saying that they do not want healers to feel too tanky and you say let’s just rescale. Can you give an example? I have 2 possible interpretations

1) Rescaling the values so you need to invest into healing power to do the same healing -> this does not change anything since, well, you reach the same values. You have to remember that most “aoe healing skills” heal you the same amount they do heal allies.2) Nerfing the overall healing -> it means you also nerf the ability to support which is a bad idea. This is why they want to have less healing power and add a sigil that will increase outgoing healing.

I do not agree with it for a few reasons (mainly because it will require a lot of work to not have other supports end up like druid + it nerfs some builds [even if only a few]) but the goal sounds perfectly clear to me. (and if they are ready to go hard on it I think it can work)

If you don't want scourge running menders, make all barrier for scourge have a zero scaling coefficient. Then running menders is just wasting 1000 stats.

This is what I mean by making decisions. Decide "I don't want scourge to run mender". Make it so they can't. Don't ruin every mender build because you don't like one spec that coincidentally uses the same amulet.

Look at permeating wrath. Was it strong on dh? Yes. Strong on core or fb? No. But because of these poorly thought through balance decisions, sagebrand was deleted from pvp. It was not op, it was borderline weak. But now it is completely removed from play for no justifiable reason.

This happens over and over, and shows anet isn't thinking things through.

[aymnad.9023]

@Ryan.9387 said:

@"aymnad.9023" said:What do you mean?They are saying that they do not want healers to feel too tanky and you say let’s just rescale. Can you give an example? I have 2 possible interpretations

1) Rescaling the values so you need to invest into healing power to do the same healing -> this does not change anything since, well, you reach the same values. You have to remember that most “aoe healing skills” heal you the same amount they do heal allies.2) Nerfing the overall healing -> it means you also nerf the ability to support which is a bad idea. This is why they want to have less healing power and add a sigil that will increase outgoing healing.

I do not agree with it for a few reasons (mainly because it will require a lot of work to not have other supports end up like druid + it nerfs some builds [even if only a few]) but the goal sounds perfectly clear to me. (and if they are ready to go hard on it I think it can work)

If you don't want scourge running menders, make all barrier for scourge have a zero scaling coefficient. Then running menders is just wasting 1000 stats.

This is what I mean by making decisions. Decide "I don't want scourge to run mender". Make it so they can't. Don't ruin every mender build because you don't like one spec that coincidentally uses the same amulet.

Look at permeating wrath. Was it strong on dh? Yes. Strong on core or fb? No. But because of these poorly thought through balance decisions, sagebrand was deleted from pvp. It was not op, it was borderline weak. But now it is completely removed from play for no justifiable reason.

This happens over and over, and shows anet isn't thinking things through.

If I do understand correctly it would be more of a functional change rather than a scaling change. A different healing value for the person using it and for the allies? Like druid healing glyph?

[Sigmoid.7082]

@Ryan.9387 said:

@"aymnad.9023" said:What do you mean?They are saying that they do not want healers to feel too tanky and you say let’s just rescale. Can you give an example? I have 2 possible interpretations

1) Rescaling the values so you need to invest into healing power to do the same healing -> this does not change anything since, well, you reach the same values. You have to remember that most “aoe healing skills” heal you the same amount they do heal allies.2) Nerfing the overall healing -> it means you also nerf the ability to support which is a bad idea. This is why they want to have less healing power and add a sigil that will increase outgoing healing.

I do not agree with it for a few reasons (mainly because it will require a lot of work to not have other supports end up like druid + it nerfs some builds [even if only a few]) but the goal sounds perfectly clear to me. (and if they are ready to go hard on it I think it can work)

If you don't want scourge running menders, make all barrier for scourge have a zero scaling coefficient. Then running menders is just wasting 1000 stats.

This is what I mean by making decisions. Decide "I don't want scourge to run mender". Make it so they can't. Don't ruin every mender build because you don't like one spec that coincidentally uses the same amulet.

Look at permeating wrath. Was it strong on dh? Yes. Strong on core or fb? No. But because of these poorly thought through balance decisions, sagebrand was deleted from pvp. It was not op, it was borderline weak. But now it is completely removed from play for no justifiable reason.

This happens over and over, and shows anet isn't thinking things through.

If they were targeting one build on one class then sure.

[Fueki.4753]

@Sigmoid.7082 said:If they were targeting one build on one class then sure.

Given that Scourge is the only thing they are watching for now (as far as we were told), it is indeed just one type of build on one profession.

[Sigmoid.7082]

@Fueki.4753 said:

@"Sigmoid.7082" said:If they were targeting one build on one class then sure.

Given that Scourge is the only thing they are watching for now (as far as we were told), it is indeed just one type of build on one profession.

What they are targeting is in the second paragraph and they give examples that have nothing to do with scourge:

Something else that we’ve been evaluating is the state of Mender Amulet. The general pace of the game right now is slower than we’d like to see. Mender plays a big part in this, both through the strength of the bulkier support builds that have been meta recently (both Spellbreaker and now Core Guardian, compared to previous metas with Tempest) as well as the more sustain-oriented side node builds that tend to stalemate fights. The other main component of combat pacing is the amount of damage available. Looking back at something like pre-nerf grenade Holosmith, for all of the problems it had, it was very good at pushing damage and combating bunker play. We’re wary of bringing damage back up to that level and want to start with some adjustments to sustain before re-evaluating damage.

and even some mentions in the third paragraph:

This would also include a few adjustments for healing sources that are most heavily impacted by this shift (notable among those are Selfless Daring and Elemental Bastion, as well as Call of Valor which does not benefit from transference).

So no it really isnt. People need to be less hung up on the mention of "we are watching scourge because we pre-emptively nerf it due to it not being super popular at the time and we didnt know the full scope of it issues it may have caused" and read the second and third paragraph in the looking ahead section. The amount of people who don't know marshal is going with menders is astounding.