Shush! Templars still rock!

[Wildi]

Why does every single gosh darned post here have to be "o m g !! I cant heal my group and the nerfed me whaa whaa whaa"?If you cant keep a group healed as a templar you need to get your head checked. Its not that hard. We have awesome reactives, large heals, and we're just down right the pimps of healing, mmkay? I suggest anyone having trouble healing with their templar go back to Super Mario Brothers.Good day.

[Analviper]

<P>Hardly any1 is sayingtemplars cant heal, we can and do reactives rock. period what people are complaing about is the fact that wardens and furys now heal for the same... and yet teplars do nowhere near their dps</P>

[Analviper]

Hardly any1 is saying templars cant heal, we can and do reactives rock. period what people are complaing about is the fact that wardens and furys now heal for the same... and yet teplars do nowhere near their dps

[SnowKnight]

Yeah read the posts were whining about our crappy soloing not our healing ability <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Wildi]

You rolled a templar to solo?

[Blast2hell]

ditto, we rock as healers....healing, definately not templar weak point.  Granted a few tweaks could be done.

[SnowKnight]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Wildill wrote:<BR>You rolled a templar to solo?<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I rolled a templar to have fun, and I cant get a group all the time. When I solo I dont want to take 5 mins to kill a mob.

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Analviper wrote:<BR> <P>Hardly any1 is sayingtemplars cant heal, we can and do reactives rock. period what people are complaing about is the fact that wardens and furys now heal for the same... and yet teplars do nowhere near their dps<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>They don't heal for the same.  Yes, the spells were upped to be inline with cleric reactives, but I'll guarantee you that I'm still able to outshine them in most group situations.  I intend to parse out several instances this week against Furies and Wardens to see the facts of the matter, rather than rushing to a conclusion before so much as seeing the result.</P> <P>There's a world of difference between belief and actuality. </P> <P> </P>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SnowKnight wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Wildill wrote:<BR>You rolled a templar to solo?<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I rolled a templar to have fun, and I cant get a group all the time. When I solo I dont want to take 5 mins to kill a mob. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Out of curiousity, what are you soloing that takes 5 minutes to kill?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[SnowKnight]

49^^ skeletons up the back of ss. I should add thats with skeleton master smite, and ad3 nukes. <p>Message Edited by SnowKnight on <span class=date_text>10-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:16 AM</span>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SnowKnight wrote:<BR> 49^^ skeletons up the back of ss. I should add thats with skeleton master smite, and ad3 nukes. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I'm 6 levels below you...in worse gear and spells...but I'll give them a go tonight.  Maybe I'll have better luck.<BR>

[dwor]

<DIV>**PLEASE POST CONSTRUCTIVELY**</FONT></DIV><p>Message Edited by Raijinn Thunderguard on <span class=date_text>10-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:25 PM</span>

[cadrach]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>They don't heal for the same.  Yes, the spells were upped to be inline with cleric reactives, but I'll guarantee you that I'm still able to outshine them in most group situations.  I intend to parse out several instances this week against Furies and Wardens to see the facts of the matter, rather than rushing to a conclusion before so much as seeing the result.</BLOCKQUOTE> <P>There's a world of difference between belief and actuality. </P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Wow did not think you would go this route.  Anyways the numbers will be nice I would like to see them, but let me throw something out there..."Yes, the spells were upped to be inline with cleric reactives"</P> <P>Then why not make our nukes "inline" with the Warden and Furies Nukes?  Why would you balance one class and leave the other out.    Am I wrong in saying that it was their intention all along to make us all heal just as good and it would just take differnt routes to get there.(reactive, ward, etc)  Heck that is what drew me to this game!  I thought they were working for a balance.  Kendricke I would also not like just the post on heals by the way I would like to see a post on how much damage output.  Because one without the other is not balanced.  If I do 1000 pts of healing in a fight and a fury does 850 pts in a fight and a warden 900 then I would think the nukes would be similar.  1000 fury, 850 Templar, and 900 warden.  <--this is just an example mind you. </P> <P>I hope you realize I am not talking for the sake of talking.  If they balance one then balance it across the board dont pick and choose.  That is all we are trying to get across today.  I dont care if it comes out to be 1000 templar 600 fury in healing as long as the same descrepency is on the damage output as well.  1000 fury 600 templar. </P> <P>Can you at least see what I and some of the others are getting at?</P>

[OlaeviaTraisharan]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Analviper wrote:<BR> <P>Hardly any1 is sayingtemplars cant heal, we can and do reactives rock. period what people are complaing about is the fact that wardens and furys now heal for the same... and yet teplars do nowhere near their dps</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Allow me to add on to what this player is trying to say:</P> <P>Basically you have these updates to the other priest classes that bring their heals in line with the Templar's heals. On a healing front, we're all pretty even now... so what's the point of playing a Templar for healing when you can play a different priest class and deal more damage for your soloability.</P> <P>Can I solo? Yes... but it literally takes me several minutes to kill a mob. So if I rolled a Fury, I could do more damage AND heal like my Templar. Which means *maybe* I could actually get some quests done instead of asking guildmates to help me with them.</P> <P>I can't even get down to Sundered Splitpaw, because it takes me 2-3 hours to fight through the Upper Tunnels. The mobs' health bars naturally regenerate while I'm fighting them... that's how bad my damage is.</P> <P>Now I personally love my Templar, but if these changes make it so I can't get a group and our damage dealing capabilities on at least the smite line aren't evaluated, then I am going to be forced to play a different class just to enjoy the game. </P>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> cadrach wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>They don't heal for the same.  Yes, the spells were upped to be inline with cleric reactives, but I'll guarantee you that I'm still able to outshine them in most group situations.  I intend to parse out several instances this week against Furies and Wardens to see the facts of the matter, rather than rushing to a conclusion before so much as seeing the result.</BLOCKQUOTE> <P>There's a world of difference between belief and actuality. </P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Wow did not think you would go this route.  Anyways the numbers will be nice I would like to see them, but let me throw something out there..."Yes, the spells were upped to be inline with cleric reactives"</P> <P>Then why not make our nukes "inline" with the Warden and Furies Nukes?  Why would you balance one class and leave the other out.    Am I wrong in saying that it was their intention all along to make us all heal just as good and it would just take differnt routes to get there.(reactive, ward, etc)  Heck that is what drew me to this game!  I thought they were working for a balance.  Kendricke I would also not like just the post on heals by the way I would like to see a post on how much damage output.  Because one without the other is not balanced.  If I do 1000 pts of healing in a fight and a fury does 850 pts in a fight and a warden 900 then I would think the nukes would be similar.  1000 fury, 850 Templar, and 900 warden.  <--this is just an example mind you. </P> <P>I hope you realize I am not talking for the sake of talking.  If they balance one then balance it across the board dont pick and choose.  That is all we are trying to get across today.  I dont care if it comes out to be 1000 templar 600 fury in healing as long as the same descrepency is on the damage output as well.  1000 fury 600 templar. </P> <P>Can you at least see what I and some of the others are getting at?</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>My hypothesis is that Templars still far outshine other priests in most healing situations.  I know that pre-release, it was stated by the developers quite a bit that the primary function of a priest was to keep a group alive.  How each priest would go about doing that would differ dramatically, but not even resurrection was considered a "core" concept or priests.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm guessing that DPS isn't even considered a secondary concern of priests, and that so long as a minimum standard is met by which all priests can realistically expect to keep a group active and standing, there'd be likely little need to balance out all other aspects equally.  Frankly, I'm still under the impression that Templars have much, much more healing potential to keep groups standing than other classes, but I feel many Templars do not see this or wish to see this. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm hoping the numbers support my belief.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Jida]

<DIV>Totem of the chamleon.</DIV> <DIV><BR>That will get u through to splitpaw. they dont see invis.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Elder</DIV>

[OlaeviaTraisharan]

<DIV>I shouldn't *have* to spend gold to get invisibility so I can avoid hunting my way down to Sundered Splitpaw though.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>That's my point right there is that even after I *DO* get down there, it takes me FOREVER to get anything done. I have to plan an entire evening around doing Harclave's, because it's impossible for me to do it quickly enough before I have to jet off to bed for work the next day.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now, against undead I have no complaints. If they would come out with an adventure pack equivalent of Splitpaw but full of undead, I'd be as happy as could be <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV>

[Gcha]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote: <P><BR>They don't heal for the same.  Yes, the spells were upped to be inline with cleric reactives, but I'll guarantee you that I'm still able to outshine them in most group situations.  I intend to parse out several instances this week against Furies and Wardens to see the facts of the matter, rather than rushing to a conclusion before so much as seeing the result.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Each class is supposed to have their primary ability PLUS utility. We’ve been told that cleric utility is additional healing, so any meaningful comparison parse would have to leave out all of our heals which constitute our "utility".   Be sure you remember to do that. Let’s just evaluate how our primary healing ability stacks up against other classes primary healing ability then separately evaluate how our utility stacks up against other classes utility. It’s pointless to evaluate how our primary ability PLUS utility balances against their primary ability alone. Proving that 2/3 of what a cleric can do balances against 1/3 of what another class can do would only underscore the problem being discussed ...... unless you then want to talk about how the remaining 1/3 of what a cleric can do compares to the remaining 2/3 of what other classes can do =)<BR>

[SenorPhrog]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gchang wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote: <P><BR>They don't heal for the same.  Yes, the spells were upped to be inline with cleric reactives, but I'll guarantee you that I'm still able to outshine them in most group situations.  I intend to parse out several instances this week against Furies and Wardens to see the facts of the matter, rather than rushing to a conclusion before so much as seeing the result.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Each class is supposed to have their primary ability PLUS utility. We’ve been told that cleric utility is additional healing, so any meaningful comparison parse would have to leave out all of our heals which constitute our "utility".   Be sure you remember to do that. Let’s just evaluate how our primary healing ability stacks up against other classes primary healing ability then separately evaluate how our utility stacks up against other classes utility. It’s pointless to evaluate how our primary ability PLUS utility balances against their primary ability alone. Proving that 2/3 of what a cleric can do balances against 1/3 of what another class can do would only underscore the problem being discussed ...... unless you then want to talk about how the remaining 1/3 of what a cleric can do compares to the remaining 2/3 of what other classes can do =)<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>You're right about that.   The healing ability of all the classes should be gauged differently than the utility even if it intertwines with overall healing.   The real question is though where do you draw the line?   How do you weigh "healing" against something like "SOW" or "Nukes?"

[jbacks]

<P>i have just noticed that anytime anyone tries to make a constructive comment that possibly templars need to be fixed in some way, the same few very vocal templars jump down their throats with tons of shut up we are fine posts. or learn how to play your class posts, which i find demeaning, especially coming from some of the posters who are what, level 38?, and have so many posts i think they post more than play. </P> <P>simple conjecture: IF all healers heal equally now, then shouldnt we also have the same dps and utility? do templars now think that we already have dps and/or utility?</P> <P>i dont think templars should be the best healers! (ok i really do, but i know that isnt fair.) but please if we arent then throw us a bone! personally i think it was really screwed up before how much better templars were as healers and am very glad that the other healers can now actually heal, and the last thing i want is a nerf of any kind. but now that all the other healing classes have been raised up (at least) to our level why would anyone want to play a templar? if it is because we can heal the best i would like soe to just say that. show me some numbers. simply say "templars heal grps the best and that is why they have the worst dps and utility of any class in the game." i dont know if we do now. i know that my guild now THINKS that inquisitors and defilers heal better than templars. can some raid leaders post something telling me dont worry templars, you are still the best healers, then i will be completely satisfied with being the worst soloer in the game and having no utility.</P> <P>2 things i think will help templars- 1)quicker casting times on any of our healing spells. i hate watching people die because my spell is only 3 quarters of the way done. they get mad at me because they think i just let them die. it hurts me when people in my grp die. i </P>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gchang wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote: <P><BR>They don't heal for the same.  Yes, the spells were upped to be inline with cleric reactives, but I'll guarantee you that I'm still able to outshine them in most group situations.  I intend to parse out several instances this week against Furies and Wardens to see the facts of the matter, rather than rushing to a conclusion before so much as seeing the result.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Each class is supposed to have their primary ability PLUS utility. We’ve been told that cleric utility is additional healing, so any meaningful comparison parse would have to leave out all of our heals which constitute our "utility".   Be sure you remember to do that. Let’s just evaluate how our primary healing ability stacks up against other classes primary healing ability then separately evaluate how our utility stacks up against other classes utility. It’s pointless to evaluate how our primary ability PLUS utility balances against their primary ability alone. Proving that 2/3 of what a cleric can do balances against 1/3 of what another class can do would only underscore the problem being discussed ...... unless you then want to talk about how the remaining 1/3 of what a cleric can do compares to the remaining 2/3 of what other classes can do =)<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I don't know about you, but I intend on using every tool in the box to show how much healing I can produce.  The purpose isn't to see whether or not I'm equal to other priests without this spell or that.  The purpose I'm going for is to show that I can keep a group alive with less effort and more effectively than other priests.  You may feel our utility is best left out of the equation, but I intend to do no such thing. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Those spells are part of who we are and what we are.  You can't just leave them out because you feel it will skew the numbers.  I use those spells every night, in every fight.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Gcha]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Radar-X wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gchang wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote: <P><BR>They don't heal for the same.  Yes, the spells were upped to be inline with cleric reactives, but I'll guarantee you that I'm still able to outshine them in most group situations.  I intend to parse out several instances this week against Furies and Wardens to see the facts of the matter, rather than rushing to a conclusion before so much as seeing the result.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Each class is supposed to have their primary ability PLUS utility. We’ve been told that cleric utility is additional healing, so any meaningful comparison parse would have to leave out all of our heals which constitute our "utility".   Be sure you remember to do that. Let’s just evaluate how our primary healing ability stacks up against other classes primary healing ability then separately evaluate how our utility stacks up against other classes utility. It’s pointless to evaluate how our primary ability PLUS utility balances against their primary ability alone. Proving that 2/3 of what a cleric can do balances against 1/3 of what another class can do would only underscore the problem being discussed ...... unless you then want to talk about how the remaining 1/3 of what a cleric can do compares to the remaining 2/3 of what other classes can do =)<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>You're right about that.   The healing ability of all the classes should be gauged differently than the utility even if it intertwines with overall healing.   The real question is though where do you draw the line?   How do you weigh "healing" against something like "SOW" or "Nukes?" <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I grant you that is a tough issue ... one which makes this situation impossible to analyze objectively with numbers. I honestly don’t have a good answer. It’s impossible to even determine which of our heals are "primary" and which are "utility". This could well be one reason why SOE is having such a difficult time with it.  It seems we are left with the need to make subjective comparisons, of which, of course, you now see a lot.

[Gcha]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gchang wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote: <P><BR>They don't heal for the same.  Yes, the spells were upped to be inline with cleric reactives, but I'll guarantee you that I'm still able to outshine them in most group situations.  I intend to parse out several instances this week against Furies and Wardens to see the facts of the matter, rather than rushing to a conclusion before so much as seeing the result.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Each class is supposed to have their primary ability PLUS utility. We’ve been told that cleric utility is additional healing, so any meaningful comparison parse would have to leave out all of our heals which constitute our "utility".   Be sure you remember to do that. Let’s just evaluate how our primary healing ability stacks up against other classes primary healing ability then separately evaluate how our utility stacks up against other classes utility. It’s pointless to evaluate how our primary ability PLUS utility balances against their primary ability alone. Proving that 2/3 of what a cleric can do balances against 1/3 of what another class can do would only underscore the problem being discussed ...... unless you then want to talk about how the remaining 1/3 of what a cleric can do compares to the remaining 2/3 of what other classes can do =)<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I don't know about you, but I intend on using every tool in the box to show how much healing I can produce.  The purpose isn't to see whether or not I'm equal to other priests without this spell or that.  The purpose I'm going for is to show that I can keep a group alive with less effort and more effectively than other priests.  You may feel our utility is best left out of the equation, but I intend to do no such thing. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Those spells are part of who we are and what we are.  You can't just leave them out because you feel it will skew the numbers.  I use those spells every night, in every fight.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Then your analysis is meaningless. <P>Each healing class gets:</P> <P>(A) Healing</P> <P>(B) DPS</P> <P>(C) Utility</P> <P> </P> <P>If all you do is analyze how cleric (A) plus (C) equals other classes’ (A), it’s a waste of time.</P>

[SenorPhrog]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> jbackstr wrote:<BR> <P>i have just noticed that anytime anyone tries to make a constructive comment that possibly templars need to be fixed in some way, the same few very vocal templars jump down their throats with tons of shut up we are fine posts. or learn how to play your class posts, which i find demeaning, especially coming from some of the posters who are what, level 38?, and have so many posts i think they post more than play. </P> <P>simple conjecture: IF all healers heal equally now, then shouldnt we also have the same dps and utility? do templars now think that we already have dps and/or utility?</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I'm going to assume you are tossing that my way and this really isn't the place for sparring.  However I'm level 48 (insults work better when well researched) and have been playing a Templar as long as most people around here.  That really isn't relevant however as everyone here should have a voice no matter what level.  I don't "jump down peoples throats"  I ask them to either argue why they want something or stop repeating over and over "Where is our Utility?" and "What about DPS?"  If people are going to bother posting "I'm really unhappy with Templar" why can't it be done on the blethora of exsisting threads instead of starting a new one?</P> <P>The DPS thing is really hard for me to argue and I'll admit that.   I can see the lack of DPS being them wanting to focus us more on healing than damage in a group but soloing is brutally painful.  That what you want to hear?   As for utility almost nobody can agree with what the Devs say our utility is.  Its like them saying "You are a Ford car" and us saying "We don't want to be a Ford we want to be a Nissan."</P> <P>The majority of upset people I've found around here are originally from EQ1 or people that are just completely unwilling to bend towards the new system.   Flexibility would save people a lot of time and stress but thats just my worthless opinion.  I appreciate you taking the time to put up your opinion though and I respect that you took the time to try and argue it.<BR></P>

[jbacks]

<P>dont know how to post very well i guess, just hit something that posted when i wasnt finished.</P> <P>2) what about giving us back ability to block and parry, or fixing mit/ low avoidance issue? one of the best things i liked about being a templar before was that in my heavy armor and with that shield if mobs popped on me i could live a while till the tank got aggro. now with my 12% avoidance i just get rocked REAL fast. and i cant get off a spell i just keep getting interrupted, especially since we have no fast spells. our spells, which have got to be the slowest of any class (dont know if this is true) just give more time to be interrupted. and would being able to block with our shields make us too uber? it also seems now that guardians taunts are being resisted alot more which means that we will get more aggro which i have been having a real hard time dealing with.</P>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gchang wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gchang wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote: <P><BR>They don't heal for the same.  Yes, the spells were upped to be inline with cleric reactives, but I'll guarantee you that I'm still able to outshine them in most group situations.  I intend to parse out several instances this week against Furies and Wardens to see the facts of the matter, rather than rushing to a conclusion before so much as seeing the result.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Each class is supposed to have their primary ability PLUS utility. We’ve been told that cleric utility is additional healing, so any meaningful comparison parse would have to leave out all of our heals which constitute our "utility".   Be sure you remember to do that. Let’s just evaluate how our primary healing ability stacks up against other classes primary healing ability then separately evaluate how our utility stacks up against other classes utility. It’s pointless to evaluate how our primary ability PLUS utility balances against their primary ability alone. Proving that 2/3 of what a cleric can do balances against 1/3 of what another class can do would only underscore the problem being discussed ...... unless you then want to talk about how the remaining 1/3 of what a cleric can do compares to the remaining 2/3 of what other classes can do =)<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I don't know about you, but I intend on using every tool in the box to show how much healing I can produce.  The purpose isn't to see whether or not I'm equal to other priests without this spell or that.  The purpose I'm going for is to show that I can keep a group alive with less effort and more effectively than other priests.  You may feel our utility is best left out of the equation, but I intend to do no such thing. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Those spells are part of who we are and what we are.  You can't just leave them out because you feel it will skew the numbers.  I use those spells every night, in every fight.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Then your analysis is meaningless. <P>Each healing class gets:</P> <P>(A) Healing</P> <P>(B) DPS</P> <P>(C) Utility</P> <P> </P> <P>If all you do is analyze how cleric (A) plus (C) equals other classes’ (A), it’s a waste of time.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Shamans use slow to cut down damage coming into a group in the first place, thus negating a great deal of required healing.  Furies perform the same function by adding to a group's DPS.  Should I tell groups that for one night, they're to turn off all buffs, blessings, and enchantments and utilize ONLY direct heals and specialty heals to perform their tasks?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>One can't concentrate on one tree alone to determine the health of a forest.  I don't see any one change as existing in a vaccuum.  I see priests as entire packages - not as summations of individual parts.  There's more here than just straight line healing, and since a great deal of our healing ability overall comes from our utility, I'm going to use those abilities - just as I'd expect the Shamans I track will use slow and the druids I track will use damage shields. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>We're more than just a combination of direct heals and reactives.  That's been my point all along.  I'm not looking to guage our A and C to other priests A.  I'm looking to guage our A+B+C against other priests A+B+C in regards to our primary function, which is healing.  I don't care how the group's stay standing, or what specific tactics are utilized...so long as the priest does his or her job in the process.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Isn't that what we should all be concentrating on? </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[jbacks]

<P>hahaha no sorry, i regret posting that already. that was mean spirited of me and unbecoming of our class, because most people who play templars arent mean spirited people i think, they be a scout or something hee.</P> <P>i was just angry because i notice all of the other classes sticking together and lobbying for changes and help, but on the templar boards alot of we are fine and stop saying there is something wrong with our class.</P>

[Gcha]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gchang wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gchang wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote: <P><BR>They don't heal for the same.  Yes, the spells were upped to be inline with cleric reactives, but I'll guarantee you that I'm still able to outshine them in most group situations.  I intend to parse out several instances this week against Furies and Wardens to see the facts of the matter, rather than rushing to a conclusion before so much as seeing the result.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Each class is supposed to have their primary ability PLUS utility. We’ve been told that cleric utility is additional healing, so any meaningful comparison parse would have to leave out all of our heals which constitute our "utility".   Be sure you remember to do that. Let’s just evaluate how our primary healing ability stacks up against other classes primary healing ability then separately evaluate how our utility stacks up against other classes utility. It’s pointless to evaluate how our primary ability PLUS utility balances against their primary ability alone. Proving that 2/3 of what a cleric can do balances against 1/3 of what another class can do would only underscore the problem being discussed ...... unless you then want to talk about how the remaining 1/3 of what a cleric can do compares to the remaining 2/3 of what other classes can do =)<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I don't know about you, but I intend on using every tool in the box to show how much healing I can produce.  The purpose isn't to see whether or not I'm equal to other priests without this spell or that.  The purpose I'm going for is to show that I can keep a group alive with less effort and more effectively than other priests.  You may feel our utility is best left out of the equation, but I intend to do no such thing. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Those spells are part of who we are and what we are.  You can't just leave them out because you feel it will skew the numbers.  I use those spells every night, in every fight.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Then your analysis is meaningless. <P>Each healing class gets:</P> <P>(A) Healing</P> <P>(B) DPS</P> <P>(C) Utility</P> <P> </P> <P>If all you do is analyze how cleric (A) plus (C) equals other classes’ (A), it’s a waste of time.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Shamans use slow to cut down damage coming into a group in the first place, thus negating a great deal of required healing.  Furies perform the same function by adding to a group's DPS.  Should I tell groups that for one night, they're to turn off all buffs, blessings, and enchantments and utilize ONLY direct heals and specialty heals to perform their tasks?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>One can't concentrate on one tree alone to determine the health of a forest.  I don't see any one change as existing in a vaccuum.  I see priests as entire packages - not as summations of individual parts.  There's more here than just straight line healing, and since a great deal of our healing ability overall comes from our utility, I'm going to use those abilities - just as I'd expect the Shamans I track will use slow and the druids I track will use damage shields. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>We're more than just a combination of direct heals and reactives.  That's been my point all along.  I'm not looking to guage our A and C to other priests A.  I'm looking to guage our A+B+C against other priests A+B+C in regards to our primary function, which is healing.  I don't care how the group's stay standing, or what specific tactics are utilized...so long as the priest does his or her job in the process.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Isn't that what we should all be concentrating on? </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Of course we should try to look at the overall picture but that’s difficult to do when some of it is subjective and some of it is difficult or impossible to quantify. <P>And yes, if you want to do theoretically accurate testing then you should eliminate as many variables as possible.</P> <P>No matter how you cut the cake we do have to look at (A) healing, (B) DPS, and (C) Utility. BUT, the constant problem is that we’re told that our (C) is additional healing. In other words, we get additional healing INSTEAD of other utility. </P> <P>Now you propose to go do the cleric (A) plus (C) vs. other classes’ (A) analysis to show WHAT?</P> <P>If you want to evaluate cleric primary plus utility abilities against druid and shammy primary plus utility abilities, then you must factor in how much healing and/or fight time the druid and shammy utilities AVOID because the mobs go down faster or do less damage due to shammy slow or fury added DPS (or whatever).</P> <P>Go do your cleric tests, but then do this. Test some fights where the only variable is fury-added DPS. Get a number on the effect of that. Then go do a test where the only variable is shammy slow. Get the numbers on that. Do the same thing with any other variables. Then add it all up and get back to us on how cleric (A) plus (C) balances out against other healers (A) plus (C). That would not be absolutely thorough, because there are some subjective areas, but it would be a lot closer to something meaningful than what you propose.</P> <P>In the meantime, many of us are going to stick with our admittedly subjective but probably fairly accurate assessment that healing is now roughly equal BUT WE DON’T HAVE NEARLY AS MUCH UTILITY AS OTHER CLASSES. That is not balance.  As you note, you cannot claim that balance in the forest exists by looking at one tree.</P> <P>Now, I AM going to do some work. Later =)</P> <p>Message Edited by Gchang on <span class=date_text>10-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:27 PM</span>

[Owlbe]

<P>Get Kendricke in the winners circle!</P> <P> So far he is the only Templar I've read about that "gets" what the devs are doing or what they are trying to do imo.</P> <P>Its like Guardian syndrome.....  Guardians do alot less damage then they did before and the other tanks tank just as good as them or better even is some situations and they are crying about that (perhaps rightfully so).  Then you go read Moorguard's posts and he explains that the Guardian has more taunts and more aggro grabbing options than the other tanks and that is their "advantage" over the other tanks (in Kendrickes' example all priests B or C do not have to equal all other priests B & C, ,just A+B+C most some how all equal out in the over all).  Now just insert Templar for Guardian and tanking for healing and I hope that sheds some light on things.  You may not like it but thats the way the devs think (imo).</P> <P>Kendricke is on the right track.  If you can some how prove your point that Templars has less tools and heals less and in general is a worse healer than the other priests then you might have a case other than that you're sol probably.</P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <p>Message Edited by Omegarhino on <span class=date_text>10-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:32 PM</span>

[Kendricke]

<DIV>Here's an idea:  Instead of telling me which tests you want me to run, you could perhaps choose to run such tests yourself.  I know what I'm looking for and if that test doesn't fit in with your own agenda, then I'm afraid that's going to have to be the reality of the situation.  I believe we still heal <EM>much</EM> better than any other class.  I believe that many Templars overlook our indirect spells.  I believe that's a mistake.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm out to show that Templars are the best combat healers.  I'm out to see what the numbers show on that.  I intend on using Involuntary Curate, Glory of Combat, Atoning Fate, Mark of Kings...and, oh yeah, our primrary direct and reactive heals.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Gcha]

<P>That’s the point Kendricke - not to have an agenda. The point is accurate testing.  But it doesn’t really surprise me since you’re not really interested in the result - merely debate fodder.</P> <P>Nope, I am not running any tests. Don’t have the time, and you’re the test nut here. I trust my subjective assessment. But if you want to offer your test results as meaning something, then you should make the effort to do it fairly and thoroughly ... something you obviously are unwilling to do. So go ahead and just structure the tests so that they show what you want to show ... it’s a time-honored tradition in the world I guess.</P> <P>Actually, I take part of that back ... I do run some tests. I have been timing fights to determine whether this Mark of Whatever or Symbol of Corruption garbage does anything to speed up solo fights. So far, I’d have to say not. The benefit they provide, if any, appears to be more than offset by the casting and recovery time. Fabulous "utility" there. But I do need a some more numbers to reach a firm conclusion. </P> <P>Any druid out there want to trade me root and invis for Mark of Whatever and Symbol of Corruption?</P>

[Naithik]

<DIV>well druids dont get both roots and inviz, they get roots if they are warden and inviz if they are fury, but sure i'll trade. could we have a dev to make that official? ^-^</DIV>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gchang wrote:<BR> <P>That’s the point Kendricke - not to have an agenda. The point is accurate testing.  But it doesn’t really surprise me since you’re not really interested in the result - merely debate fodder.</P> <P>Nope, I am not running any tests. Don’t have the time, and you’re the test nut here. I trust my subjective assessment. But if you want to offer your test results as meaning something, then you should make the effort to do it fairly and thoroughly ... something you obviously are unwilling to do. So go ahead and just structure the tests so that they show what you want to show ... it’s a time-honored tradition in the world I guess.</P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I'm quite interested in the result.  I'm also willing to go beyond the verbal debate to actually find the result.  Are you?  You accuse me of only being interested in debate fodder, but yet you're unwilling to leave the debate yourself.  I wish you would.  I wish you would go run some of the very tests you state you want me to spend time running, in the way you want me to spend time running them.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gchang wrote:<BR> <P>Actually, I take part of that back ... I do run some tests. I have been timing fights to determine whether this Mark of Whatever or Symbol of Corruption garbage does anything to speed up solo fights. So far, I’d have to say not. The benefit they provide, if any, appears to be more than offset by the casting and recovery time. Fabulous "utility" there. But I do need a some more numbers to reach a firm conclusion.</P> <P>Any druid out there want to trade me root and invis for Mark of Whatever and Symbol of Corruption?</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Do you find that root or invisibility speeds up solo fights?  Do either of them increase damage in any way?  Why then would you compare them to spells which are designed around lowering mitigation and resistances?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><BR> </DIV>

[Gcha]

<P>{To Naithik - I forgot to hit quote].  Dang, don't you wish, lol.  That kind of thing would really make things fun ... and people could structure their toons more to their personal preferences.</P> <p>Message Edited by Gchang on <span class=date_text>10-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:13 PM</span>

[Gcha]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Do you find that root or invisibility speeds up solo fights?  Do either of them increase damage in any way?  Why then would you compare them to spells which are designed around lowering mitigation and resistances?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><BR>  <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Erm, No Kendricke ... it was a joke =)  I guess I'd better label jokes from now on.   </P> <P>As far as the testing, no, sorry, I don’t conceivably have the time to run all these tests. Honestly, in a way I wish I did. Testing can be fun. But, truthfully, I am getting a bit worn with this game in general. It just isn’t living up to my hopes in too many ways. Not to mention, my friends have all but disappeared.. I don’t find this cleric very interesting anymore, and I don’t seem to be able to find the motivation to level my other toons up.</P> <p>Message Edited by Gchang on <span class=date_text>10-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:23 PM</span>

[Alxandra]

<P>Kendricke, I hope you will be able to get good data that you can post because templars need to see it.</P> <P>I, however, started parsing awhile ago because I was feeling that I was an awful healer.  I've learned alot from those parses.  The biggest thing I learned is that they become enormously complicated extremely fast, and Im not brave enough to post healing parses in an attempt to prove anything because I do not have a parse that objectively proves anything.  </P> <P>Now, subjectively, that's a different matter because from parsing I learned lots of tricks and have become a better healer.  Currently, subjectively, templars are still the best healage out there, I think.  Because just trying to figure out what shamans can do gives me a head ache.  But, from grouping with shamans I have learned that templars and shamans complement each other very well.  It seems to me that if the shammy is the better healer for a particular situation.  In the opposite situation, the templar will be the better healer.  For example, typically, i see myself doing better on the multiple mobs while the shammy handles things easier with a single mob that hits very very hard.</P> <DIV>For example, to show how complicated things can get, I have a different strategy for when I group with an inquisitor.  My understanding is that they have a buff that procs divine for everyone in the group.  Therefore, I try to get my Mark of Kings line up as fast as I can to enhance his buff.  Basically, it means that a spell that i typically see as a utility heal becomes a dps buff when Im paired with an inquisitor.  Now, just try to separate out how my increasing the dps of the group enhanced my healing because I had less healing to do.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>On the whole, I typically do 10-25% more heals than anyone else, I am parsed against, except for a fury, I know.  The fury when she's healing has a habit of out-healing me.  When the fury is dpsing, she's typically on the top of the dps list.  This fury, in my understanding, has been convinced that she's a horrible and useless healer, and I just shake my head in dismay.  Personally, Im currently attributing my ability to heal, to a large part, skill on my part as a healer, and only a small part is due to being a templar.  I still think that templars are the best healers out there, but it is only by the slightest of margins.  So, I am very concerned to hear that other healers are still being tweaked to "being in line with templars."</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I do not want DPS.  I am a healer.  If I wanted to beat down a mob, I would have been a paladin or a fury.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As a raiding templar, I am very concerned about our raid utility.  We still make an awesome contribution to the main tank group.  I, however, am a secondary healer in my guild, and I have doubts about my role.  Because in the role of patch healer, a warden and a fury are quite powerful.   However, I am finding that we are using more varied strats, and that agro pings more often, so oddly enough I am using more reactives as a secondary healer than i did prior to DOF.  It's just that if we continue to use a healer group in which the healers are sucking mana off the enchanter and/or bard, I dont see how that uses a templar effectively, as in those groups, i become restricted to directs and buffs.</DIV>

[BenEm]

Great post Alexandra !!! Your my vote for Templar representitive !!!!