Data Collection Point: Templar Soloing and Light Grouping

[Kendricke]

<DIV>This thread is intended as a data collection point for issues related to Templars in a soloing or light grouping enviornment.  Please post any and all related facts that support any opinions stated within.  For example, instead of posting "<EM>soloing takes too long</EM>", try to post what specific targets in what specific zones at what specific level you feel take too long.  If possible, include relevant facts such as log parses or simple timers to state what it is you're looking for.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <DIV>Examples of parsers which can assist in data collection include:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Combat Stats - <A href="http://combatstats.com/" target=_blank>http://combatstats.com/</A></DIV> <DIV>Everquest Companion - <A href="http://home.inreach.com/kai/EQCompanion/" target=_blank>http://home.inreach.com/kai/EQCompanion/</A> (switch to EQ2 mode)</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It's important not only to note feelings or perceptions of a problem, but also to attempt to show exactly what the problem is, as well as possible suggested solutions.  Whether complimentary or critical, try to maintain a constructive attitude and utilize facts to support claims. </DIV><p>Message Edited by Kendricke on <span class=date_text>10-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:28 PM</span>

[Kendricke]

<DIV>Went through part of Haunted House tonight (before camping for bed):</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Here's some examples from my logs tonight (all targets were level 51 - white con):</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Started                           End                               Duration      Group Damage Inflicted    Group Damage Taken   My DPS   Group Roster    Hostile Targets <BR>10/20/05 12:07:00 AM   10/20/05 12:07:32 AM   00:00:32       3,240                                 920                                 98.18        kendricke          a rat <BR></DIV> <DIV>Started                           End                               Duration       G roup Damage Inflicted    Group Damage Taken   My DPS   Group Roster    Hostile Targets <BR>10/20/05 12:54:55 AM   10/20/05 12:58:04 AM    00:03:09       8,733                                6,868                               45.96        kendricke         a black spider, a large black spider <BR></DIV> <DIV>Started                           End                                Duration       Group Damage Inflicted    Group Damage Taken   My DPS   Group Roster     Hostile Targets <BR>10/20/05 12:45:51 AM    10/20/05 12:46:41 AM    00:00:50       3,272                                 2,058                             64.16        kendricke             a black spider <BR><BR>Overall, my nightly average was around 45-50 seconds per fight, at around 65-70 DPS.  No spells higher than Adept I, using Heirophant's Crook.  To be fair, fights seemed easier than their con suggested they should be.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Timaarit]

<span><blockquote><hr>Kendricke wrote:<div>Went through part of Haunted House tonight (before camping for bed):</div> <> <font color="#ffff00"><clips></font> Overall, my nightly average was around 45-50 seconds per fight, at around 65-70 DPS.  No spells higher than Adept I, using Heirophant's Crook.  To be fair, fights seemed easier than their con suggested they should be. <> <hr></blockquote>Well most of those do have two down arrows. Exept for the large black spider. Your DPS seems pretty much like mine was before I upgraded my attacks to adept III and gained 100 intelligence for soloing purpose. Now my templars dps is 100 to 140 depending on whether I get to start the fight and how many interruptions I get. If I get to start and get no interruptions, my record has been 145 dps and if I got stunned, the lowest dps was around 80. An ad: So for about 13p, a lvl 52 templar can raise his DPS by 40 to 50 <span>:smileymad:</span> (= 40 to 50% also...). 2x int doll, imbued pearl ring if int, 3 x adept III and an ironwood club (there was some other stuff too, just cant remember). The club was unnecessary as without screaming mace, I was constantly on very low power after each fight. Using SM shortened my downtime more than what the few int shortened the fights. But for me, healing was a priority, I wouldn't have done that addition if I didn't have proper healing spells already. Another thing that keeps us down in dps is the lack of nukes. This added to ability cap bug/feature which actually scales skills down when you level if you dont get more ability means that as lvl 53 templar, my DPS is at its peak. As I level, my nukes will do less and less damage due to the cap. Unless I get more and more int each level. I think this bug/feature has been explained in the abilities forum. It hurts all classes as they level unless they have capped the stat that is responsible for their damage. So one way to help templars would be to let us use wisdom to define the spell damage.</span><div></div>

[Kendricke]

I still think part of the issue is perception.  Many Templars want it all - they want to be best healers in a group AND to be able to solo alongside Furies.  I think that when trait and training options came up, many of these Templars choose all Master II's in heals and boosted WIS, and all but ignored their damage spells and INT.  <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I do think that some manner of summoned pet (i.e. "hammer" or "divine presence", etc.) or self-only "holy aura" damage shield could help dramatically without terribly unbalancing the game.  At the same time, I'm having a hard time finding green or blue solo targets that I can't kill within 90 seconds to either confirm or refute the myriad claims of "5 minute" fights.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Mor]

<span><blockquote><hr>Timaarit wrote:<span><blockquote><hr></blockquote>This added to ability cap bug/feature which actually scales skills down when you level if you dont get more ability means that as lvl 53 templar, my DPS is at its peak. As I level, my nukes will do less and less damage due to the cap. Unless I get more and more int each level. I think this bug/feature has been explained in the abilities forum. It hurts all classes as they level unless they have capped the stat that is responsible for their damage. <font color="#ff99ff"> </font></span><font color="#ff99ff">Yes, Moorgard did comment on this </font><font color="#ff99ff"><a href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=spellart&message.id=64066#M64066" target=_blank>here</a></font><font color="#ff99ff">.  They are going to fix it.</font><font color="#ff99ff"> </font><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[cadrach]

I think the log is about average as to what ANY Templar can expect to get.  I could run the numbers as well but I already know the answer and that is I will get the same results as you.  What I would like to see is a similary equiped Fury (or any other healing class for that matter) and what they get.  My argument all along has <b>never been</b> that we can not solo but how we solo vs other classes.  If our heals are to be inline then I want our damage to be inline as well.  I am not asking for the best of both, or even the best at one, only equality if that is what it is supposed to be.  I will see if I can get the logs of a fury in my guild tonight though i can not promise anything.   If I can I will make sure to post it here with my results as well. P.S. Thanks for the links Kendricke

[cadrach]

Wow had a big long post writen up and I guess I timed out.  Ok no biggie, but now I am tired so just a summary. 1. Dervin thief 47th level 75 DPS 2-4.  An Excited Gambler level range was 50-51 86dps, 90, and 80.  Average time to kill was 65 seconds longest was 80 seconds.  My stats Weapon Imbued Ebon Greatmace and 46 Inteligence as a 52nd level Templar.  Could not get a hold of another healer class to see what his or hers DPS was.  I guess I will have to keep looking.  Or maybe someone would like to post their numbers here.  Any level is fine I will find a way to mentor down to your level to get (somewhat) comparable stats.  So to anyone saying 5 minutes for a battle please post your results.  I dont think that is the issue though.  I think the real issue is the disparity between classes in regards to DPS.  <div></div>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> cadrach wrote:<BR><BR>So to anyone saying 5 minutes for a battle please post your results.  I dont think that is the issue though.  I think the real issue is the disparity between classes in regards to DPS.  <BR><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I'll agree with that statement.  <BR>

[xxFlukexx]

<DIV>Mind if I tag this post and later post my dps numbers? I'm a 41 Warden and not very good eq and pretty low int and adept I's but I use my spells very effectively, should be good for comparison.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Also when posting a parse or results from a parse, please state the mobs name, mobs level, your level, and how many arrows up/down.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thanks for the links. EqCompanion last updated in 2003? huh? isn't that for EQ1, should we really be using that?</DIV>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> xxFlukexx wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thanks for the links. EqCompanion last updated in 2003? huh? isn't that for EQ1, should we really be using that?</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Use the EQ2 mode.  <BR>

[Suite]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote:<BR>I still think part of the issue is perception.  Many Templars want it all - they want to be best healers in a group AND to be able to solo alongside Furies.  I think that when trait and training options came up, many of these Templars choose all Master II's in heals and boosted WIS, and all but ignored their damage spells and INT.  <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2>Well, duh. Could it be that many of "these templars" just want to be healers?</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2>Imagine that.</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2>/shakes head,</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2>Suite</FONT></P> <P><BR> </P>

[Gcha]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Suite wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote:<BR>I still think part of the issue is perception.  Many Templars want it all - they want to be best healers in a group AND to be able to solo alongside Furies.  I think that when trait and training options came up, many of these Templars choose all Master II's in heals and boosted WIS, and all but ignored their damage spells and INT.  <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2>Well, duh. Could it be that many of "these templars" just want to be healers?</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2>Imagine that.</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2>/shakes head,</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2>Suite</FONT></P> <P><BR> </P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Bah, who would make a cleric to be a healer .... you silly goose you  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV>

[cadrach]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote:<BR>I still think part of the issue is perception.  Many Templars want it all - they want to be best healers in a group AND to be able to solo alongside Furies. <STRONG> I think that when trait and training options came up, many of these Templars choose all Master II's in heals and boosted WIS, and all but ignored their damage spells and INT</STRONG>.  <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Adressing both parts of this post.  First I think that you have two sides of the story in regards to the first part of your post.  I think you have the naysayers where they shout that everything is wrong with us and that we stink.  On the other hand you have thoes that refuse to believe anything is wrong.  They are perfectly happy with the way things are and we should just shut it up.  Both sides are wrong but, like allignments, without them it would be imbalanced.(at least that is what I tell myeself)  I dont want to point out one group and not point out the other.  </P> <P>On the secnond part, it is in direct relation to what is bolded above, I am begining to wonder if you are right, but am not sure if that is "Ok". I asked all the other subclasses for some data and it seems that on average the  Intelligence numbers are startlingly differnt, (at least from mine).  I do pick heals for my master II and my INT is pretty low.  (just broke 50)  from the very few post I have recieved thus far INT numbers for Furies and Wardens at least seem to be 150 to 200+.  Now for giggles I went on the broker and look for heavy armor INT items and found them to be there, but without any wisdom at all an little boost in INT as well.  Their DPS numbers seems to be about double (which is what I expected) of what ours is.  I guess what we need to find out is how much INT numbers matter.  If they are drastic per point of INT then I guess we have our reason as to why there is such a huge disparity in DPS.  I am not going to be on tonight, but tomorrow I will grab me a couple of INT items and how much of a difference it makes.</P> <P>edit:  Even if there is I still dont want to make it seem like I dont want them to look at our DPS numbers.  They boosted their healing power significantly (debatable I guess but that is my opinion) and they did not have to go out and revamp their characters armor or choices to get there.  All they had to do what sit back and let it be changed.  If wisdom was directly linked to how much healing you did then I could see this, but since it is not , even if INT is a huge factor I still think we need to be looked at.  But that is my opinion.  <BR></P> <p>Message Edited by cadrach on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:37 AM</span>

[Formangenavn]

<DIV>I would be supprised if Wardens had the same int as Furys, since they boost int by about 100 and we dont (mostly just wis and some agi). Of the top of my head 50-100 int would be more inline for Wardens, depending on gear of course.</DIV>

[Mor]

<span><blockquote><hr>Formangenavn wrote:<div>I would be supprised if Wardens had the same int as Furys, since they boost int by about 100 and we dont (mostly just wis and some agi). Of the top of my head 50-100 int would be more inline for Wardens, depending on gear of course.</div><hr></blockquote>I have to agree.  62 here for INT.  A brief check of other 50+ wardens on my server:  all between 49 and 90, with one exception (167).  I suspect the one exception I found was a very smart player who has 2 sets of gear because her WIS at 55 was only 156.    </span><div></div>

[Caethre]

OOC.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote:<BR>I still think part of the issue is perception.  Many Templars want it all - they want to be best healers in a group AND to be able to solo alongside Furies.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>You post much that is questionable at best, but this takes the trophy for misdirection and misrepresentation. Yes, I am sure you might find one or two people saying that, but what almost all of the rest of us want is (as evidenced by hundreds of threads and thousands of posts by hundreds of Templars on these boards, pretty much all I bet you have read) :-</DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>EITHER</FONT> <FONT color=#ff0000>to be the clearly head-and-shoulder-above best healers under all circumstances (and accept lower DPS/Utility/soloing than Furies under all circumstances) </FONT><FONT color=#ffffcc><== the classic balance trade-of, which is what we had prior to LU13, and for which many of us created our Templars in the first place!</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>OR</FONT> <FONT color=#ff0000>to accept parity in healing and then also get parity in DPS/Utility/Soloing. </FONT><FONT color=#ffffcc><== the former of which we have now as far as small groups are concerned, the latter which we most certainly do not have even close to now.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffffcc></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>WHAT WE HAVE NOW</FONT> - <FONT color=#ff0000>parity in healing and lower DPS/Utility/soloing than Furies under all circumstances. </FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffffcc>You will ask for evidence as you always do. I will direct you to many hundreds of posts on these boards. You are entitled to your opinion, no matter what the rest of us may feel about it. But </FONT><FONT color=#ffffcc>it is unacceptable for you to sum of the views of others so inaccurately, in an attempt to make those others look in some way greedy. </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffffcc></FONT><FONT color=#ffffcc></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffffcc>What most of us want is <FONT color=#ffff00 size=5><STRONG>balance</STRONG></FONT>. We want a reason why any casual (non-raiding) player who wants to play a healer and has the option of Templar, Warden, Fury, etc ... who wants to solo a lot, duo/trio a lot, and XP with friends in groups of 2-6 against normal (not super-challenging, just normal) content, </FONT><FONT color=#ffffcc>*might* (just *might*) look at the options and choose Templar. Because right now, given equal healing and massively higher DPS, anyone with sense would choose Fury.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffffcc></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffffcc>The solution we want is NOT nerfing Furies, leave them alone, they are fun. The solution we want is our own beloved class once more being made viable in this domain of play.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffffcc></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffffcc>Felishanna / Annaelisa</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffffcc></FONT> </DIV>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Caethre wrote:<BR> <DIV><FONT color=#ffffcc>We want a reason why any casual (non-raiding) player who wants to play a healer and has the option of Templar, Warden, Fury, etc ... who wants to solo a lot, duo/trio a lot, and XP with friends in groups of 2-6 against normal (not super-challenging, just normal) content, </FONT><FONT color=#ffffcc>*might* (just *might*) look at the options and choose Templar. Because right now, given equal healing and massively higher DPS, anyone with sense would choose Fury.</FONT><BR> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>That's quite the assumption there if I'm reading you correctly, because you just stated that anyone with sense would choose a Fury over a Templar.  Does this mean that you feel anyone who does choose a Templar over a Fury has no sense?  I would disagree with that statement.</P> <DIV>You also apparantly claim that Furies heal equally to Templars.  You state this when you say that "given equal healing" when comparing Templars and Furies.  Again, I'd disagree.  I'm simply not showing that Furies can heal anything close to the numbers Templars put out in most situations.  My passive heals alone are enough to keep my group standing most of the time.  Just using Atoning Fate and Glory of Combat is enough to keep my group standing in most typical situations, with a Crucial Intercession tossed in from time to time.  Yes, Furies can typically heal a group well enough in those situations also, but where the real differences tend to shine are in those "super challenging" instances where you want to take on a named or perhaps just start trying out some orange heroics. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>For any average, run of the mill grouping situation, I believe any priest will do.  This is no different than Classic Everquest, though.  Yet, in a truly challenging situation, it's my experience that Templars still shine heads and tails above the rest. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thanks for the differing opinions once more.  None of this really has to do with Templar soloing issues, but it's always nice to hear a Fury's perspective. </DIV>

[bigmak20]

<div></div><div></div>edited to include quote below<p>Message Edited by bigmak2010 on <span class=date_text>10-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:45 PM</span>

[bigmak20]

<span><blockquote><hr>Kendricke wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Caethre wrote: <div><font color="#ffffcc">We want a reason why any casual (non-raiding) player who wants to play a healer and has the option of Templar, Warden, Fury, etc ... who wants to solo a lot, duo/trio a lot, and XP with friends in groups of 2-6 against normal (not super-challenging, just normal) content, </font><font color="#ffffcc">*might* (just *might*) look at the options and choose Templar. Because right now, given equal healing and massively higher DPS, anyone with sense would choose Fury.</font> <hr> </div></blockquote> <p>That's quite the assumption there if I'm reading you correctly, because you just stated that anyone with sense would choose a Fury over a Templar.  Does this mean that you feel anyone who does choose a Templar over a Fury has no sense?  I would disagree with that statement.</p> <div>You also apparantly claim that Furies heal equally to Templars.  You state this when you say that "given equal healing" when comparing Templars and Furies.  Again, I'd disagree.  I'm simply not showing that Furies can heal anything close to the numbers Templars put out in most situations.  My passive heals alone are enough to keep my group standing most of the time.  Just using Atoning Fate and Glory of Combat is enough to keep my group standing in most typical situations, with a Crucial Intercession tossed in from time to time.  Yes, Furies can typically heal a group well enough in those situations also, but where the real differences tend to shine are in those "super challenging" instances where you want to take on a named or perhaps just start trying out some orange heroics. </div> <div> </div> <div>For any average, run of the mill grouping situation, I believe any priest will do.  This is no different than Classic Everquest, though.  Yet, in a truly challenging situation, it's my experience that Templars still shine heads and tails above the rest. </div> <div> </div> <div>...</div> <div> </div> <div>Thanks for the differing opinions once more.  None of this really has to do with Templar soloing issues, but it's always nice to hear a Fury's perspective. </div><hr></blockquote></span>I'd like to see some parses that show GoC and Atoning Fate keeping a group standing in a fight that's worthy of a group to begin with. Your passive heals are enough to keep a group standing most of the time?   You must do some amazingly simple encounters.  You ever fight anything other then a solo encounter?  Oh yeah.. you don't raid... apparently you don't do heroic instances either?  No way in heck will passive heals keep the group standing. <div></div>

[Donte]

<DIV>I am actually building an INT suit for soloing.  I also took INT as trait choices a couple times.  self buffed at lvl51 (normal suit)  255wis 128INT  sitting with just a tick over 3K pwr pool</DIV> <DIV>My goal is 200 INT for my solo suit.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>No special gear as I feel my templar is not fun enough to justify.  I just keep an eye on the broker for deals.</DIV>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> bigmak2010 wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Caethre wrote:<BR> <DIV><FONT color=#ffffcc>We want a reason why any casual (non-raiding) player who wants to play a healer and has the option of Templar, Warden, Fury, etc ... who wants to solo a lot, duo/trio a lot, and XP with friends in groups of 2-6 against normal (not super-challenging, just normal) content, </FONT><FONT color=#ffffcc>*might* (just *might*) look at the options and choose Templar. Because right now, given equal healing and massively higher DPS, anyone with sense would choose Fury.</FONT><BR> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>That's quite the assumption there if I'm reading you correctly, because you just stated that anyone with sense would choose a Fury over a Templar.  Does this mean that you feel anyone who does choose a Templar over a Fury has no sense?  I would disagree with that statement.</P> <DIV>You also apparantly claim that Furies heal equally to Templars.  You state this when you say that "given equal healing" when comparing Templars and Furies.  Again, I'd disagree.  I'm simply not showing that Furies can heal anything close to the numbers Templars put out in most situations.  My passive heals alone are enough to keep my group standing most of the time.  Just using Atoning Fate and Glory of Combat is enough to keep my group standing in most typical situations, with a Crucial Intercession tossed in from time to time.  Yes, Furies can typically heal a group well enough in those situations also, but where the real differences tend to shine are in those "super challenging" instances where you want to take on a named or perhaps just start trying out some orange heroics. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>For any average, run of the mill grouping situation, I believe any priest will do.  This is no different than Classic Everquest, though.  Yet, in a truly challenging situation, it's my experience that Templars still shine heads and tails above the rest. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thanks for the differing opinions once more.  None of this really has to do with Templar soloing issues, but it's always nice to hear a Fury's perspective. </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></SPAN>I'd like to see some parses that show GoC and Atoning Fate keeping a group standing in a fight that's worthy of a group to begin with.<BR><BR>Your passive heals are enough to keep a group standing most of the time?   You must do some amazingly simple encounters.  You ever fight anything other then a solo encounter?  Oh yeah.. you don't raid... apparently you don't do heroic instances either?  No way in heck will passive heals keep the group standing.<BR><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Hit Anvil Splitpaw last night.  During the puzzle runs I was only using Atoning Fate as my only heal about 80% of the lead up fights and ring events.  If I had time between fights I'd cast Crucial Intercession.  Virtually every pull was white or yellow to me, and the tank was only one level higher.  Only for those other 20% of the fights was anything more involved required.  I wasn't running a parse, but I'll be happy to when we hit it again next week.  I kept Glory of Combat on the group's offensive monk and on a swashbuckler (because they were the highest levels in the group).  I was the only healer in group 1.  We put the Mystic and Warden together in group 2.<BR><BR>We were quite DPS heavy in my group already, so major healing simply wasn't needed on the vast majority of the fights, and what was needed was handled by and large by Atoning Fate and passive heals.  </P> <P>During the final fight, I was considerably more taxed, having to handle multiple heals firing off at the same time.  I used a combination of all of my heals and debuffs during the final waves and Skoam himself, including all three emergency heals and harmony.    </P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <P> </P>

[bigmak20]

That's not the scenario implied in the first post re: passive healing. 1) Two other healers that are dropping Wards and HoTs on MT at the start of every fight and spot healing when they get the urge or the need. 2) Tend to multi MoB encounters so Atoning Fate fires often. Atoning fate in situations where many MoBs is awesome.  GoC is also quite nice if I have multiple melee types in a group I'll put GoC on as many as possible and don't even bother with redoubt if I can use the conc slot on a melee type for GoC.  Templar's are very good priests... just super painful to play outside a good group!  This is very problematic since most small and exp groups will prefer a Fury for speed of kills.  In raid situations Templars are worthwhile.

[Kendricke]

<P>I've started to put Glory of Combat on those higher level melees I think will use autoattack more often, to increase chances of procs.  </P> <P> </P>

[Caethre]

OOC.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote:<BR><BR> <DIV>You also apparantly claim that Furies heal equally to Templars.  You state this when you say that "given equal healing" when comparing Templars and Furies.  Again, I'd disagree.  I'm simply not showing that Furies can heal anything close to the numbers Templars put out in most situations.  My passive heals alone are enough to keep my group standing most of the time.  Just using Atoning Fate and Glory of Combat is enough to keep my group standing in most typical situations, with a Crucial Intercession tossed in from time to time.  Yes, Furies can typically heal a group well enough in those situations also, but where the real differences tend to shine are in those "super challenging" instances where you want to take on a named or perhaps just start trying out some orange heroics. <BR> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>And again, you make the same mistake you always make. Those proc heals are almost useless under the circumstances I am talking about. You, Radar, Kiara - never hear this message, because you do not want to. Why? They are not needed, they have practically no effect, and in most cases, are a waste of mana.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Want proof? Last night I was in a three person group, Fury-27, Conjuror-26, Conjuror-26. We were killing heroic level 25-27^^^ giants for several hours. Apart from some hair-raising messes when we got adds, this went like clockwork. The Fury heals are more than enough to deal with this. But I was *still* nuking for those 600s+ as well! Had it been Felishanna at that level there instead, she would not have been using the proc heals, they would have been wasted power, she would just have been using nukes 1/3 the strength.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>"Super-challenging" oranges? Get this - noone fights those. No, not quite no-one I'm sure, but no-one I know. We fight blues. We might fight whites. But oranges? Hell no thank you. Real normal players, thats us 99% of players ytou know, we grind on blues and whites. Sure, my Fury can solo orange cons in TS (if I want to show off), but it is a lot less efficient in terms of XP per time spent than killing white cons.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But it all comes round again to the fact that, in solo and small group setups, in situations where most players ACTUALLY PLAY, templars are far weaker than furies.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm playing both every day. It is ... night and day.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Felishanna / Annaelisa</DIV>

[Kendricke]

<P>I'm not sure where you think that Fate is a waste of mana, but in a group encounter situation (Living Tombs undead, Splitpaw instances, Feerrott/Cazic Thule lizardmen, Zek orcs, Rivervale nymphs, Runnyeye goblins, Sinking Sands gnolls/lizardmen at the Twin Tears, so on and so forth), then it's incredibly efficient for healing - quite possibly THE most efficient healing spell in our arsenal, when comparing cost to effect.  </P> <P>At a 235 wisdom, my App IV (that's right, just App IV) Atoning Fate heals a full group for 500 for only 66 power.  That's 7.75 health to power ratio <EM>per person in the group</EM>.  It has a potential of hitting 45.5 health to power ratio.  That ratio actually gets better as the quality of your Atoning Fate increases.  By way of contrast, an Adept I Greater Restoration has a 4.4 potential health to power ratio, and it can only be cast on one target.  In fact, most of our heals* can't come close to the healing efficiency of our Fate line.  I'd say that's far from a "waste of power". </P> <P>Glory of Combat can't be a waste of power, since it doesn't cost any.  Put it on the highest level melees in your group and forget about it.  I don't rely on Glory of Combat, but neither do I ignore its effects.  </P> <P>As far as fighting yellows or oranges, I know quite a few groups that will take those on, particularly if it's a named.  In fact, I'd wager that the overwhelming majority of groups would want to take on an orange named if it spawned nearby while they were fighting those blue and whites during grind sessions.  That's where I'd personally prefer to have a Templar in my group than a Fury.  </P> <P>You may feel you represent 99% of "real, normal players", but I disagree.  You may feel I'm not a "real, normal player", but again, I disagree.  I appreciate that you feel it's a fact that Templars are "weaker" than Furies.  That's not a fact, even though you've stated that it is, but rather your opinion.  It's not even a completely unpopular opinion...but it's still just an opinion.  I happen to hold a differing opinion on the subject.  My opinion is also not even a completely unpopular opinion.  So which opinion is the "right" opinion?  Both.  If you think you're right, then you're right.  The problem with that situation, from your perspective at least, is that the developers also apparantly have an opinion...and they've got the authority and power to implement that opinion into fact - something that neither you or I can do.  </P> <P>Right now, the FACT is that Templars have changed.  Whether you choose to believe it's a good change or not is up to each of us.  However, if all we can do is present opinions, we have to take into account that the developers have an opinion.  Whether or not they are sharing that opinion publically is irrelevant.  They have an opinion on what Templars should be and they've acted upon that opinion.  </P> <P>So therefore, it is my opinion that we present the developers with facts to back up our opinions, since facts are the only real differentiation between all of our "right" opinions on the subject.  This thread is/was an attempt at presenting such facts.  I recognize that you're not required to participate in the discussion as originally intended, but I, for one, would appreciate it if you did.  I think there's a lot of merit in the numbers...and I believe that the developers feel the same way.  I may be wrong, but that's certainly my right to believe otherwise - right?</P> <P> </P> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=1>*Emergency heals such as Focused Benefaction, Beneficience, Radiance, and Salvation are the only heals with a better health/power ratio than the Fate line.</FONT></DIV>

[Caethre]

<P>OOC.</P> <P>The Fate line is useful, that I will grant you. But I suspect you knew the lines I was referring to.</P> <P>However, the "opinion" that Furies are more powerful than Templars pretty much across the board at this point is pretty much fact. This is not down to popularity, it is down to basic observation skills and common sense playing both characters. The implication of that statement on your judgement (and that of about 3 other posters to this board) is clear.</P> <P>The proof remains the same. I have levelled Annaelisa-the-Fury hard since I decided to play a Fury as well as a Templar.</P> <P>She can solo at three times the rate (read: mobs killed per time period, XP rate gain per time period, whatever measure you choose), it is not a debate, I know it for fact.</P> <P>I can duo with other classes at 2-3x the rate. This goes for trios too. The healing is *good enough* (regardless of whether it is 95% or 98% or whatever of a Templar's, it is good enough) to do the job, AND the nuking power is 2-4 X as strong (depending on whether fighting solo mobs or heroics).</P> <P>And what is also a fact is that, everyone I group with (friends and pickup) are saying the same thing to me - wow, Fury is so much better than Templar! Think this message is going to get back to SoE? I think so, sooner or later.</P> <DIV>Yes, so far I am only talking Tiers 2 and 3, watch this space. And yes, I will not pretend the Fury has some interesting other issues (adjusting my playstyle so as NOT to try to tank has been ... amusing ... Anna certainly can't take the punishment that Feli can, even with the interrupts issue, plate is MUCH better of course in this regard).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But overall, in the tiers I am playing with her at the moment, my "opinion", based on actually playing every day, is so clearly the case of fact, it is beyond debate (to all but a few with their heads in the sand).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Felishanna / Annaelisa</DIV>

[bigmak20]

<span><blockquote><hr>Kendricke wrote:<p>I'm not sure where you think that Fate is a waste of mana, but in a group encounter situation (Living Tombs undead, Splitpaw instances, Feerrott/Cazic Thule lizardmen, Zek orcs, Rivervale nymphs, Runnyeye goblins, Sinking Sands gnolls/lizardmen at the Twin Tears, so on and so forth), then it's incredibly efficient for healing - quite possibly THE most efficient healing spell in our arsenal, when comparing cost to effect.  </p> <p>At a 235 wisdom, my App IV (that's right, just App IV) Atoning Fate heals a full group for 500 for only 66 power.  That's 7.75 health to power ratio <em>per person in the group</em>.  It has a potential of hitting 45.5 health to power ratio.  That ratio actually gets better as the quality of your Atoning Fate increases.  By way of contrast, an Adept I Greater Restoration has a 4.4 potential health to power ratio, and it can only be cast on one target.  In fact, most of our heals* can't come close to the healing efficiency of our Fate line.  I'd say that's far from a "waste of power". </p> <p>Glory of Combat can't be a waste of power, since it doesn't cost any.  Put it on the highest level melees in your group and forget about it.  I don't rely on Glory of Combat, but neither do I ignore its effects.  </p> <p>As far as fighting yellows or oranges, I know quite a few groups that will take those on, particularly if it's a named.  In fact, I'd wager that the overwhelming majority of groups would want to take on an orange named if it spawned nearby while they were fighting those blue and whites during grind sessions.  That's where I'd personally prefer to have a Templar in my group than a Fury.  </p> <p>You may feel you represent 99% of "real, normal players", but I disagree.  You may feel I'm not a "real, normal player", but again, I disagree.  I appreciate that you feel it's a fact that Templars are "weaker" than Furies.  That's not a fact, even though you've stated that it is, but rather your opinion.  It's not even a completely unpopular opinion...but it's still just an opinion.  I happen to hold a differing opinion on the subject.  My opinion is also not even a completely unpopular opinion.  So which opinion is the "right" opinion?  Both.  If you think you're right, then you're right.  The problem with that situation, from your perspective at least, is that the developers also apparantly have an opinion...and they've got the authority and power to implement that opinion into fact - something that neither you or I can do.  </p> <p>Right now, the FACT is that Templars have changed.  Whether you choose to believe it's a good change or not is up to each of us.  However, if all we can do is present opinions, we have to take into account that the developers have an opinion.  Whether or not they are sharing that opinion publically is irrelevant.  They have an opinion on what Templars should be and they've acted upon that opinion.  </p> <p>So therefore, it is my opinion that we present the developers with facts to back up our opinions, since facts are the only real differentiation between all of our "right" opinions on the subject.  This thread is/was an attempt at presenting such facts.  I recognize that you're not required to participate in the discussion as originally intended, but I, for one, would appreciate it if you did.  I think there's a lot of merit in the numbers...and I believe that the developers feel the same way.  I may be wrong, but that's certainly my right to believe otherwise - right?</p> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div><font size="1">*Emergency heals such as Focused Benefaction, Beneficience, Radiance, and Salvation are the only heals with a better health/power ratio than the Fate line.</font></div><hr></blockquote>I think everything said in that post is true.  That post is a really good illustration of a debate technique-- state a bunch of truths as if you're refuting the person you've targetted  while you completely ignore the persons point. Caethre's point has always been the amount of play time you are engaging nameds, etc, is considerably less then the amount of play time you are doing normal quests, grinding, etc.  The truth is the Templar is a bad choice in normal play settings since we bring the least to the table and nearly equal healing.  This isn't balance. You're saying Templars are only useful.. what... 1 or 2% of the time when you decide to target named mobs that pop up nearby... and calling that a good change?  Templar's situation is very well documented all over on this board -- you've documented some of the significant DPS disparity yourself.  You documented 50-100dps for Templars and 300-400dps for Furies. </span><div></div>

[rtoub]

<P>What I get out of it is the group is safer with a Templar in the group.  We don't add much other than the ability to keep people alive and we do it better than other classes.  If you want to grind fast, group or solo Templar is not the class.  If you want to die less, Templar is the class.  This is the way it was before the update and it is still true.  What changed is the other classes can now keep groups alive under normal conditions, and they kept most of their other abilities.</P> <P>In general if you have a Templar in the group you will die less and be able to take on tougher mobs.  The downside is it will take longer to kill stuff.</P> <P>This is of course a broad generalization not backed up by any facts other than general observation.  </P>