The 11th hour before PvP: To Templar or not to Templar?

[Maldrick]

<div>Coming back to EQ2 after a half-year break to play PvP.  Cannot for the life of me decide what class to play.  I've got it narrowed down to Monk, Berserker or some type of priest (I will be in Qeynos, btw).</div><div> </div><div>The only priests I have played have been clerics into their 20s...One a Templar and one an Inquisitor.....Enjoyed both....Reactives fit my heal-style perfectly and we look [Removed for Content] in plate <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div><div> </div><div>And while I enjoy playing clerics in pve, I absolutely LOVE playing them in a group PvP setting.....I currently still play a Cleric in DAoC rvr, for example and absolutely love it.  Killing in PvP is fun, but helping a group totally descimate everything in its path by providing excellent support is a total blast for me.</div><div> </div><div>So from the standpoint of a support class (I.E. I'm not particuarly interested in how templars do in solo duels) how do you guys think they will do on the new PvP servers opening tomorrow?  If anyone tested out PvP beta I would be particularly interested in hearing how that went too.</div><div> </div><div>Thanks and cheers!</div>

[Supernova17]

I think the Cleric class will be boring in PvP imo and that healing won't be required. Just bring another high dps class.The only healers I see making headway are Shamans (nearly impossible for most classes to eat through their wards) and the offensive power of a Fury or Warden =/<div></div>

[Maldrick]

<div></div><p>Appreciate the response, so not to seem like I'm arguing, but in my experience in any pvp game I've played healing is ALWAYS necessary.  In fact, quite often the outcome of a fight or siege is usually determined by the healing, which is why assist trains usually go right for the CC classes then the Healers.  Also bear in mind that the gear you get from PvE is what enables you to PvP.  Need healing for that.</p><p>Interesting about wards, though.  I will look more into Mystics.  I'm curious what makes you think reactives won't be a factor in PvP, though?</p>

[nullcodehe]

<div>I think you will enjoy your PvP templar to the fullest.  Congrax on your excellent choice.</div>

[Supernova17]

<span><blockquote><hr>Maldrick wrote:<div></div><p></p><p>Interesting about wards, though.  I will look more into Mystics.  I'm curious what makes you think reactives won't be a factor in PvP, though?</p><hr></blockquote>1. High DPS classes can hit insanely hard. Our Tier6 Master 2 reactive is a whopping heal in the mid to high 300's, and you can add our group reactive to it for another low-mid 300 heal per hit, and that won't make a 4k+ Ice Comet or Sniper Shot flinch.2. Clerics normally wear plate, since the best stat benefits normally can be found easier on such armor. Thus we have low avoidance (even more so since Priests have no parry ability) and will get stunned and interrupted very easily.It looks good on paper, but a Cleric is [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] near helpless and just a moving target for skilled players to take down. Easy to stun, easy to interrupt and if you can keep hitting us over our reactive ammounts we die.Again, for fun factor, the Templar is a very boring PvP class on Live servers. Defiler and Fury/Warden are a much better addition to a PvP team than Templars.You also seem to be under the impression that the EQ2 Templar is the EQ1 Cleric, the uber healer, the only true healer, which is wrong. Templars excel in buffing hitpoints, resists, mitigation, other defensive utility and using heal procs in addition to standard heals. The other healers can manage just as well, but offer more in a PvP scenario. The Templar may make his team harder to kill, but he is a sitting duck even among his own allies.</span><div></div>

[SatinyCh]

<div>I'm making a [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]ing BRUISER for PvP. I'm gonna own.</div>

[Supernova17]

Brusier, Necromancer, Conjuror, Ranger, Defiler would be great PvP builds if played correctly =DI'd either make a Brusier or Ranger, leaning towards Brusier (I have a 60 Monk on Live) as I am more familiar with the playstyle.<div></div>

[Bjerde]

I think a Templar will still be ok, but if you haven't played in a while then you may not know that wards are fixed now and that they are pretty [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] good.The magic and mental resists that a Templar brings could be very good. We do get a 36 sec ward against magic/mental/arcane that will absorb over 1k and buff mitigation vs those about 700. Use that in the beginning when people are nuking hard and it will help (I believe). Sanctuary will be graet in PvP since it is anti-stun, stifle, etc...tell me that won't help. On pull the MT won't get mezzed or stifled, just like on raids and he will get good aggro before Sanctuary wears off (grant it that is a 50+ spell)Yeah, reactives won't take an ice comet, but that is what a shaman is for in the MT group : ) Stack the two reactives and it will eat up all those melee hits. A Templar is great in a group setting, I still believe that. We just aren't so great at the big raid hits, all we can do is heal them after they get hit. We are tied with the biggest heals (with Defiler) so I think a Templar will fit in good in PvP, just as it does in PvE. We just have our certain role....like everyone else.

[Maldrick]

<div></div><div></div><div></div><div>Thanks for the responses, guys.  I think I've got it narrowed down to Templar and Warden.</div><div> </div><div>I have not played EQ2 PvP as I was not in the beta (or I probably wouldnt be posting here) but in my experience in other PvP games, if done right, even though a healer is at the top of the kill list a smart and talented group can take steps to keep their healer alive while killing the other group's.  I won't get into the nuts and bolts of this here as it really isn't important, but suffice it to say that simple DPS on an assist train can be dealth with, particularly when dealing with casters....My previous experience with EQ2 doesn't lead me to suspect otherwise will be the case here.  Let's just say if a melee can be CCed and an offensive caster can be interrupted, healers can be kept alive no matter what DPS is brought forth if your group is properly geared, talented and on the ball.  And make no mistake, healing in the face of these challenges, knowing that you are running around with the words "Kill Me First" above your head, is one of the most rewarding gaming experiences one can have.</div><div> </div><div>Regardless, PvP servers aren't solely about running around and killing other people.  It's not just one big arena fight.  You still have to PvE group and raid for gear, if not exp.  Since my original post I have decided that I will, in fact be rolling a healer as my guild needs healers.  If I were concerned with dps for PvP I'd roll a monk or a ranger (which I will likely be doing as well on the side).  My guild is a Qeynos guild, so Defiler is not an option.</div><div> </div><div>So again, while I appreciate the responses, I would appreciate also keeping this on-topic:  Healers in EQ2 PvP, specificly Templars as they relate to other healers.</div><div> </div><div>I'm under no illusions that the Templar is like the EQ Cleric so I'm not sure where you got that from my earlier post....I'm fully aware of the design goal of all EQ2 healers being equal healers while doing it differently.  And I'm fully aware of the current feeling among many Templars that they are behind in utility when Templar healing was brought into line with the other healing subclasses.  I just happen to prefer clerics over other "earthier" healing-types because I think they are cool....Call it roleplay reasons if you want.....And I like toons that look great in their armor, which EQ2 clerics do.  Which is why the two priests I've played have both been clerics.</div><div> </div><div>Anyway, I'm wondering if anyone has had actual EQ2 PvP Beta experience (not duels) with Templars compared to Wardens (maybe Furies I guess, but I think I prefer Warden over fury) and can shed any light on which is most effective in keeping a group up in a 6 v 6 situation.  PvE raiding?  Grouping?</div><div> </div><div>I looked at the shaman subclasses, but there seems to be (I could be mistaken however) to be a mild consensus that the Mystic is inferior to not only his FP counterpart but the other Qeynos healing subclasses as well.....Is that true?</div><div> </div><div>Also, between Templars and Wardens, which is the most mana efficient healer?  Who can sustain more healing longest?  Faster/larger burst healing?</div><div> </div><div>That kind of thing.  Thanks for the responses. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  I'm posting these questions about the other classes here because, mainly, I'm biased towards going with a Templar and I'm most interested in what other Templars have to say about these things than the other classes/subclasses specificly.</div><div> </div><div>Cheers!</div><p>Message Edited by Maldrick on <span class="date_text">02-21-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:52 PM</span></p><p>Message Edited by Maldrick on <span class="date_text">02-21-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:57 PM</span></p>

[Maldrick]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Bjerde wrote:I think a Templar will still be ok, but if you haven't played in a while then you may not know that wards are fixed now and that they are pretty [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] good.The magic and mental resists that a Templar brings could be very good. We do get a 36 sec ward against magic/mental/arcane that will absorb over 1k and buff mitigation vs those about 700. Use that in the beginning when people are nuking hard and it will help (I believe). Sanctuary will be graet in PvP since it is anti-stun, stifle, etc...tell me that won't help. On pull the MT won't get mezzed or stifled, just like on raids and he will get good aggro before Sanctuary wears off (grant it that is a 50+ spell)Yeah, reactives won't take an ice comet, but that is what a shaman is for in the MT group : ) Stack the two reactives and it will eat up all those melee hits. A Templar is great in a group setting, I still believe that. We just aren't so great at the big raid hits, all we can do is heal them after they get hit. We are tied with the biggest heals (with Defiler) so I think a Templar will fit in good in PvP, just as it does in PvE. We just have our certain role....like everyone else.<hr></blockquote>Great points.  Do we know how well stuns and stifles work in PvP?

[Eriol]

I can't speak to the EQ2 PvP experience, as I didn't play the beta, but I PvP'd extensively in WoW (Laughing Skull, PVP server), and in UO long before that (before eq1 was around even). And in both games, healing existed, and was useful, but one principal trumped all of that: burst DPS is king. And Shamans are the only ones that can deal with it WELL in EQ2, or at the least, they deal with it MUCH better than any others.I won't say healing is useless in the PVP area, as it is far from it, but both druids and clerics are more suited to dealing with over-time damage. We have some abilities to deal with spikes in damage, but really, the more-frequent, lower-amount hits is much more what we can deal with better.But shamans can take out most of the power of the big hits, AND absorb the over-time hits just as well.Basically, if I was going to make a PvP healer, it'd be a shaman, hands-down. I don't know about the mystic/defiler differences, as I've never really looked that hard at the classes, but I've never encountered any big deficiencies in the healing department when grouping with either sub-class. If you guys are Qeynos-based, then of course you will be forced to be a mystic, but I don't see a big issue with that.

[Franpan]

<div>From what many people said today on the chat.. the 3 most favorite classes for PvP are:</div><div> </div><div>-SK's</div><div>-Wizards</div><div>-Templars</div><div> </div><div>So we are on a pretty good position as fasr as it goes now on PvP, even tho it migt take us some few mins to take down a tank hehe.. gl and let us now whats going on on PvP servers <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div>

[Robert2005]

<div></div><div></div>Sanctuary will save you for 36 seconds and that's it.  We can't kill anyone in 36 seconds with low DPS and they can chain mez stifle stun interrupt us while we're waiting for our one and only spell to refresh.  Many many classes can chain mez, stifle, and stun.  All brawlers, all scouts, ...PvP = He Who Deals the Most Damage the Fastest Wins.  Templar = Worst.IF we had some way to put some distance between us and an enemy we would be viable in PvP.  We have no way to keep the melee classes from slaughtering us.on edit: I think the ppl choosing Templar on PvP server are not experienced Templar.  They are under the false impression that plate helps a healer.  Avoidance > Mitigation (i.e. Leather beats Plate) -especially- in PvP.<p>Message Edited by Robert2005 on <span class="date_text">02-22-2006</span><span class="time_text">08:55 AM</span></p>

[Lydiae]

<div></div><div><blockquote><hr>Robert2005 wrote:<div></div><div></div><p>I think the ppl choosing Templar on PvP server are not experienced Templar.  They are under the false impression that plate helps a healer.  Avoidance > Mitigation (i.e. Leather beats Plate) -especially- in PvP.</p><p></p><hr></blockquote>Or they're coming back to EQ2 for PvP after an extended absence and think Templars still heal far better than other priest classes.</div>

[sabrexlan]

<div></div><div></div><p>Be careful what you read in this thread there is alot of misinformation. Best work off your own playing experience or ask someone playing pvp or from the beta. I would be VERY surprised to hear anyone in beta say the best or most popular classes for pvp are SK, Wiz and Temps.  Just look on the isles. At the moment you cant move without tripping over a brigand or assasin. Fury seems the most common healer, then inqusitor then defiler on the evil side.</p><p>Message Edited by sabrexlanys on <span class="date_text">02-22-2006</span><span class="time_text">03:31 PM</span></p>

[Maldrick]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>sabrexlanys wrote:<div></div><div></div><p>Be careful what you read in this thread there is alot of misinformation. Best work off your own playing experience or ask someone playing pvp or from the beta. I would be VERY surprised to hear anyone in beta say the best or most popular classes for pvp are SK, Wiz and Temps.  Just look on the isles. At the moment you cant move without tripping over a brigand or assasin. Fury seems the most common healer, then inqusitor then defiler on the evil side.</p><p>Message Edited by sabrexlanys on <span class="date_text">02-22-2006</span><span class="time_text">03:31 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>That's what I'm doing actually.  I've decided to play both and see which one stands out.....If nothing else I'll get decent vitality stepping them along like that.  I'm also tempted to try out a Mystic too.  Mainly because of a lack of first-hand info and a lot of speculation that's hard to wade thru, and at this point it's no longer just a question of what to play.....I'm actually curious from an academic standpoint as to how each healer compares in real pvp.</p><p>Fortunately, a guildie was in the beta and he tells me that Templars hold their own just fine as group healers, with the caveat that they are best utilized in a group situation because while they are really hard to kill solo vs solo, they don't have the dps that a Warden does.  The warden, on the other hand does fine solo because of his dps, evac, etc.</p><p>He also tells me that the stifles work wonderfully.  Here is where first-hand experience is really needed rather than speculation......True, wards may be superior in a general sense for pvp in theory, but if you have a full group of DPS coming down on you wards alone arent going to do much more than reactives or hots anyway....If it does, more like a speed bump in comparison to no speed bump.  So in essence, an argument could be made (as an earlier poster did) that healing is a moot point.  Maybe so.  But you gotta remember that PvP doesn't always work out in a "logical" extension of PvE.  Best example I can think of is in EQ Pvp with Shadowknights......All those crap debuffs and whatnot that most SKs never even bother wasting a spell slot on in PvE make them absolutely one of the nastiest classes to encounter in PvP.</p><p>So if those healers also have utility (as EQ2 healers do) that can prevent that dps from being brought forth from the onset, or at least in full force and concentration, then healing is no longer moot because the dmg sustained can be made manageable.  Wardens get roots.  A rooted tank isn't going to do much to you if you aren't in his immediate range, but a rooted caster can still wreck your day.  Templars get stifles....A stifled anything isn't going to do much.  Mystics mezz.  Also bear in mind that there are immunity timers on crowdcontrol spells and stifles in EQ2's PvP ruleset.....There is no chain rooting/mezzing or any of that like in the first EQ.  So two healers working together with combinations of their CC/stifles could open the door for an all dps group to be taken apart piecemeal....Even if they have a healer doing the same thing.</p><p>Admittedly, this is speculation on my part as well, so that's why I'll be testing it out.  But I was encouraged to hear from my guildie that Templars were more than viable in the beta and that the stifles did their job.  I do know this, though....In every PvP game I've played group versus group PvP has always come down to who can neutralize the DPS fastest.....Not the DPS itself.</p><p>Thanks for the responses.....I'll keep you guys posted as my toons move along and I learn more.</p><p>Cheers!</p>

[Robert2005]

<div>Your comments on the PvP ruleset interest me.  No chain stifles, stuns, mezzes?  Seruiously?  That's good info there.  But that would mean different rules on the PvP server then in duels?</div><div> </div>

[Maldrick]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Robert2005 wrote:<div>Your comments on the PvP ruleset interest me.  No chain stifles, stuns, mezzes?  Seruiously?  That's good info there.  But that would mean different rules on the PvP server then in duels?</div><div> </div><hr></blockquote><p>Correct.  The PvP servers have an entirely different ruleset.</p><p><a target="_blank" href="http://eq2players.station.sony.com/en/news_ff.vm?FeatureName=pvp_combat&section=development">http://eq2players.station.sony.com/en/news_ff.vm?FeatureName=pvp_combat&section=development</a></p><p>Even if you aren't interested in PvP you should start a toon over there and check out some of what they have done...It's pretty neat....</p><p>Like spells scrolls....They look the same as spell scrolls on normal servers, but if you check a check box marked "PvP" on the side it changes the description to show what the spell does in PvP.</p><p>Mezzes and roots, etc still work on players, but they also place an immunity on the player that lasts twice the duration of the spell....So if you get rooted for 5 seconds you cant get rooted for another 10 seconds after.  This makes it so that those types of spells are still viable but not the entire crux of PvP, as can be the case in EQ PvP.</p><p>Nothing like having a bard catch you off by yourself someplace and putting his mez song on you and going afk <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  That wont be happening in EQ2 PvP.</p><p> </p>

[Robert2005]

<span><blockquote><hr><p></p><p>.....</p><p>Nothing like having a bard catch you off by yourself someplace and putting his mez song on you and going afk <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  That wont be happening in EQ2 PvP.</p><p> </p><hr></blockquote></span><span>That's what happens to me in duels now!!!!! Annoying as hell.  Why on earth don't they use PvP rules in duels on non-PvP servers?  /sighEnd result is I gave in and toggled on my "no duel" flag since it was so pathetic.Thanks for the info; I now have a glimmer of hope for EQ2 PvP.  <span>:smileyhappy:</span></span><div></div>