Joy_Division wrote: »Before people try to sound smarter than everyone else in the room, let's be specific.
This ultimate is only good if you pick the Panacea morph and:
- You are *not* a healer, rather a solo player
- The heal actually lands on you. Someone asked why they dont see this often in Cyrodiil. The third time a PUG steals your heal will make you want to throw your computer out the window. An actual dual is something very different from open world Cyrodiil
- This is incredibly inefficient for an actual healer: it overheals a single target for 100 ultimate and does nothing for your group.
- There is no guarantee the user will even survive with this ultimate: I got killed in vMA with it active where the heal is not cut in half by Battlesprit. If anything, I would argue the sword and shield in noticeably better because it actually lands on you (most important), reflects all enemy projectiles, prevents most stuns, and the amount mitigated is not reduced by Battlespirt whereas Panacea's heal is.
This is a poorly designed ultimate: not offering much for the people most apt to use a restoration staff in group play (healers) and unreliable in the one specific instance where it can potentially shine (solo) because there is no guarantee some PUG wont steal your ultimate. It is way too situational and very disappointing for healers looking to use something else besides Warhorn.
lolo_01b16_ESO wrote: »@Strider_Roshin In which situation? 1vX pvp?
Strider_Roshin wrote: »It's actually kind of OP right now. I think it needs a cost increase if anything. I use it on my templar, and it's just stupid powerful.
Thealteregoroman wrote: »Strider_Roshin wrote: »It's actually kind of OP right now. I think it needs a cost increase if anything. I use it on my templar, and it's just stupid powerful.
How examples please........
Strider_Roshin wrote: »Thealteregoroman wrote: »Strider_Roshin wrote: »It's actually kind of OP right now. I think it needs a cost increase if anything. I use it on my templar, and it's just stupid powerful.
How examples please........
Just did
Yeah, in that situation it sounds good. So far I was only looking at it from a group pov (as alternative for warhorn / barrier) and was quite disappointed when I saw, that it targets only one player.Strider_Roshin wrote: »lolo_01b16_ESO wrote: »@Strider_Roshin In which situation? 1vX pvp?
I use it in dueling with my templar. I keep it on my back bar, and I DW with my front. What I typically do is wait for my opponent to use their ultimate, then I use the resto ult. The reason I do those is because people typically make themselves more vulnerable after using their ult because they're going on the offensive. Therefore use your resto ult at that time to make yourself un-killable while at the same time giving you a huge boost in damage. Definitely recommend keeping your opponent DoTed with Vampires bane for the extra crit chance, and spell damage. The only thing that makes this move OP is it's cost. Other than that it's fine.
lolo_01b16_ESO wrote: »Yeah, in that situation it sounds good. So far I was only looking at it from a group pov (as alternative for warhorn / barrier) and was quite disappointed when I saw, that it targets only one player.Strider_Roshin wrote: »lolo_01b16_ESO wrote: »@Strider_Roshin In which situation? 1vX pvp?
I use it in dueling with my templar. I keep it on my back bar, and I DW with my front. What I typically do is wait for my opponent to use their ultimate, then I use the resto ult. The reason I do those is because people typically make themselves more vulnerable after using their ult because they're going on the offensive. Therefore use your resto ult at that time to make yourself un-killable while at the same time giving you a huge boost in damage. Definitely recommend keeping your opponent DoTed with Vampires bane for the extra crit chance, and spell damage. The only thing that makes this move OP is it's cost. Other than that it's fine.
Good point. The lag prevents many animations from showing too so that might be whyStrider_Roshin wrote: »
lolo_01b16_ESO wrote: »Yeah, in that situation it sounds good. So far I was only looking at it from a group pov (as alternative for warhorn / barrier) and was quite disappointed when I saw, that it targets only one player.Strider_Roshin wrote: »lolo_01b16_ESO wrote: »@Strider_Roshin In which situation? 1vX pvp?
I use it in dueling with my templar. I keep it on my back bar, and I DW with my front. What I typically do is wait for my opponent to use their ultimate, then I use the resto ult. The reason I do those is because people typically make themselves more vulnerable after using their ult because they're going on the offensive. Therefore use your resto ult at that time to make yourself un-killable while at the same time giving you a huge boost in damage. Definitely recommend keeping your opponent DoTed with Vampires bane for the extra crit chance, and spell damage. The only thing that makes this move OP is it's cost. Other than that it's fine.
Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »lolo_01b16_ESO wrote: »Yeah, in that situation it sounds good. So far I was only looking at it from a group pov (as alternative for warhorn / barrier) and was quite disappointed when I saw, that it targets only one player.Strider_Roshin wrote: »lolo_01b16_ESO wrote: »@Strider_Roshin In which situation? 1vX pvp?
I use it in dueling with my templar. I keep it on my back bar, and I DW with my front. What I typically do is wait for my opponent to use their ultimate, then I use the resto ult. The reason I do those is because people typically make themselves more vulnerable after using their ult because they're going on the offensive. Therefore use your resto ult at that time to make yourself un-killable while at the same time giving you a huge boost in damage. Definitely recommend keeping your opponent DoTed with Vampires bane for the extra crit chance, and spell damage. The only thing that makes this move OP is it's cost. Other than that it's fine.
It targets one player at a time but every tick can hit a different player, so you can hit everyone in a 4 player group. it has its uses, I think. Good for non temps.
silky_soft wrote: »Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »lolo_01b16_ESO wrote: »Yeah, in that situation it sounds good. So far I was only looking at it from a group pov (as alternative for warhorn / barrier) and was quite disappointed when I saw, that it targets only one player.Strider_Roshin wrote: »lolo_01b16_ESO wrote: »@Strider_Roshin In which situation? 1vX pvp?
I use it in dueling with my templar. I keep it on my back bar, and I DW with my front. What I typically do is wait for my opponent to use their ultimate, then I use the resto ult. The reason I do those is because people typically make themselves more vulnerable after using their ult because they're going on the offensive. Therefore use your resto ult at that time to make yourself un-killable while at the same time giving you a huge boost in damage. Definitely recommend keeping your opponent DoTed with Vampires bane for the extra crit chance, and spell damage. The only thing that makes this move OP is it's cost. Other than that it's fine.
It targets one player at a time but every tick can hit a different player, so you can hit everyone in a 4 player group. it has its uses, I think. Good for non temps.
Can hit the same player or npc twice. Why not just have a radius. That heals 5 people.
Strider_Roshin wrote: »lolo_01b16_ESO wrote: »@Strider_Roshin In which situation? 1vX pvp?
I use it in dueling with my templar. I keep it on my back bar, and I DW with my front. What I typically do is wait for my opponent to use their ultimate, then I use the resto ult. The reason I do those is because people typically make themselves more vulnerable after using their ult because they're going on the offensive. Therefore use your resto ult at that time to make yourself un-killable while at the same time giving you a huge boost in damage. Definitely recommend keeping your opponent DoTed with Vampires bane for the extra crit chance, and spell damage. The only thing that makes this move OP is it's cost. Other than that it's fine.
silky_soft wrote: »