Healers Were Never Directly Buffed — DPS Was Systematically Nerfed Around Them

Healers Were Not Buffed — DPS Was Nerfed Around Them

TL;DR

Blast Medic and Heal Shaman became dominant not because of one direct buff, but because Heal and Shield Power (HSP) was never nerfed proportionally, while practically every important DPS stat was reduced.

At the same time:

• Players became tankier.
• PvE enemies became weaker.
• Anti-Heal lost half of its original strength.
• Healing talents remained stronger and less conditional than damage talents.

The result is a steadily growing gap between healer and DPS effectiveness.

DPS Lost Every Major Source of Scaling

Over time, DPS lost power from almost every offensive stat:

• Attack Power: base value removed in June 2025.
• Spell Power: artifact values reduced by 25% in September 2025.
• Critical Power: reduced by 50% in June 2025.
• Penetration: nerfed twice—in June 2025 and February 2026.

Meanwhile, the healer equivalent—Heal and Shield Power—was left largely untouched.

HSP already has a higher base value and directly improves the healer’s main function. DPS scaling is divided between AP/SP, Critical Chance, Critical Power, Penetration, and conditional bonuses.

This was not one isolated balance change. It was a series of changes that repeatedly weakened damage while leaving healing scaling intact.

Increased Defenses Were Another Indirect Healer Buff

In February 2026, base HP, Armor, and Resistance were increased.

For DPS, this was another indirect nerf:

• Targets gained more effective HP.
• Physical and magical damage became less effective.
• More damage and time are now required to secure a kill.

For healers, the same change had the opposite effect:

• Allies became harder to kill.
• Healers gained more time to react.
• Every heal and shield became safer and more valuable.
• Healing output remained unchanged.

Damage was reduced while healing gained more time to operate.

PvE Nerfs Also Increased Healer Efficiency

Over approximately 14 months, mobs were nerfed at least five times across multiple areas:

• Health
• Damage
• Defenses
• Abilities
• Overall encounter pressure

Every reduction in incoming damage means healers have less work to do. Their output, however, was not reduced alongside these changes.

Healers now face less pressure while retaining the same healing power. That is another indirect increase in their real effectiveness.

Compare the Talent Investment

A Medic can receive a universal 35% increase to healing and shielding from one talent at 5/5.

That bonus:

• Works on healing and shields.
• Works across different targets.
• Does not require complicated stacking.
• Has no single-target restriction.

Now ask the same question for DPS:

How many talents are required to gain a universal 35% damage increase?

Most popular damage talents are conditional, stacking, or dynamic. Many provide around 17.5%, while even Multistrike reaches only around 25%.

The closest comparison may be Focused Assault, but it requires attacking one target. Even then, Focus Healing is stronger:

• Focus Healing: 10% per stack at 5/5
• Damage equivalent: 9% per stack at 5/5

The healing version is stronger even before considering the single-target restriction placed on DPS.

So Let Me Get This Straight

• Healers need fewer talents.
• Healers need less primary-stat investment.
• Healing bonuses are often stronger.
• Healing bonuses have fewer conditions.
• Damage is reduced by Armor and Resistance.
• DPS scaling depends on several separate stats.
• Targets now have more HP and defenses.
• Healers still outperform DPS in group content.

How is that balanced?

Anti-Heal Was Supposed to Be the Counter

Anti-Heal was reduced from 75% to 37.5%—exactly half of its original strength.

Even when it was at 50%, healers could still come out ahead in group scenarios because healing does not exist in a vacuum. It is supported by:

• Shields
• Increased defensive stats
• Bounces and area healing
• Cleanses
• Defensive cooldowns
• Multiple allied targets
• The increased time DPS needs to secure a kill

Anti-Heal is not an automatic answer to overtuned healing. If a healer remains highly efficient through the mechanic specifically designed to counter healing, then either the counter is insufficient or the underlying healing output is too high.

Look at the Most-Used Runes

Look at the screenshots showing the most commonly used healing and damage runes.

Compare:

• How much value each rune provides.
• How many conditions must be satisfied.
• How reliably it can be activated.
• How many targets benefit from it.
• How much counterplay exists.
• How much talent and stat investment it requires.

Do the math and ask yourself:

Which one is easier to use, and which one provides more real value?

Popularity alone does not prove imbalance. But when the popular option is also easier to activate, less conditional, and more numerically efficient, it reveals a clear design problem.

For Those Who Want to Argue With Numbers

If we want to use numbers, the comparison must be systematic.

A serious calculation should account for all major variables:

1. Primary Stats

• Heal and Shield Power
• Spell Power
• Attack Power

2. Talent Efficiency

• Percentage increase
• Number of talent points required
• Conditions required to maintain the bonus

3. Critical Scaling

• Critical Chance
• Critical Power
• Healing crits compared with damage crits

4. Ability Mechanics

• Bounces
• Area effects
• Reduction or falloff per target
• Shields
• Overhealing

5. Countermeasures

• Anti-Heal
• Armor
• Resistance
• Penetration

6. Real Combat Conditions

• Number of targets
• Duration of the fight
• Cooldowns
• Cast frequency
• Resource limitations
• Realistic uptime

The comparison should not be between two isolated abilities or two specific classes in a vacuum.

It should compare healers and DPS as complete roles under realistic group-content conditions.

Only after accounting for these factors can we draw a meaningful conclusion.

Saying:

“A Rogue can burst, so the healer cannot keep up.”

is not an argument. It is one cherry-picked scenario, not a complete balance analysis.

If you believe this argument is wrong, provide your own calculation using the same inputs. I am open to a real discussion.

But a real discussion requires evidence, consistent inputs, and actual calculations—not empty objections.