Fury - Wow

[Thumatos]

I am an admitted altaholic.  Been  wandering around these boards long time.  But fury - Wow.  tried most other and even a warden before. Somehow though a fury seems far more capable ( given im only 38 )  than any of the others did.  Omce i hit the 20's and got my big nukes,  got my aa's set right,  i can take down stuff on fury none of my other alts were able, including my wizzy. Now given wizzy kills faster,  but on fury i dont worry about a resist to a root. If anyone is searching looking for a great soloer, groups wanted, Go fury.  You wont regret it, i didnt.

[Jynnan]

<p>People on the boards have lately been referring to Furies as "10 a penny" or "fotm (Flavour of the month)" etc. in a sneering kind of way; but it is because of the reasons that you've cited here that they are so popular - their versatility and "completeness".</p><p>Practically every other class in the game whines about their class lacking in some department or other, but you very rarely see posts from Furies complaining about lacking a particular ability or whatever. Recently, there was a "nerf" to Fury's AA ability "Energy Vortex", where the damage output was reduced to 40% from 50%, but even then furies said "Oh, well, kind of expected really" or "It was a bit overpowered" or something along those lines; furies are really a contented bunch! <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>You'll also notice a few posts down, there's a post titled "Fury = happiest class in game?". That kinda says it all! <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

[Goozman]

<cite>Jynnan wrote:</cite> <blockquote><p>you very rarely see posts from Furies complaining about lacking a particular ability or whatever.</p></blockquote><p>That's because the really good ones don't use these forums for that kind of information.</p><p>There are plenty of Fury deficiencies, especially when comparing them to the other priests in the end game.</p>

[Siclone]

<cite>Goozman wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Jynnan wrote:</cite> <blockquote><p>you very rarely see posts from Furies complaining about lacking a particular ability or whatever.</p></blockquote><p>That's because the really good ones don't use these forums for that kind of information.</p><p>There are plenty of Fury deficiencies, especially when comparing them to the other priests in the end game.</p></blockquote>oh care to list them? the deficiencies?  there is a reason half the toons in eq are furies you know.class balancing FTW

[Caethre]

<cite>Siclone wrote:</cite><blockquote>there is a reason half the toons in eq are furies you know.</blockquote><p><span style="color: #ff6600;">OOC.</span></p><p><span style="color: #ff6600;">There is indeed.</span></p><p><span style="color: #ff6600;">Putting <u>hardcore</u> raiding to one side (the domain of much less than 5% of the playerbase), and concentrating on the casual player game and the core gamer game, which is soloing, small groups and some full groups and the occasional easy raid - to most players, the Fury class certainly appears the most well-rounded, balanced and powerful priest class. Furies are a great class to play alongside as well, and they stack fairly well in groups due to the class versatility.</span></p><p><span style="color: #ff6600;">It is lovely. Fury Annaelisa is fantastic in every setting I play her.</span></p><p><span style="color: #ff6600;">As you say, people vote with their feet when they see a powerful and easy-to-play class. Hence Furies seem to be everywhere we look. </span></p><p><span style="color: #ff6600;">What SOE need to try to do (almost impossible to make everyone happy, mind) is make the other priest classes equally appealing in the casual game. Some good steps have been taken, but it still isn't there yet. </span></p><p><span style="color: #ff6600;">The KEY point though, is I hope that SOE leave the Fury class alone. They got it right, so don't "fix" it, rather, adjust the classes that are not quite so well rounded. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src=" width="15" height="15" /></span></p>

[Livius]

<cite>Felishanna@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Siclone wrote:</cite><blockquote>there is a reason half the toons in eq are furies you know.</blockquote><p><span style="color: #ff6600;">OOC.</span></p><p><span style="color: #ff6600;">There is indeed.</span></p><p><span style="color: #ff6600;">Putting <u>hardcore</u> raiding to one side (the domain of much less than 5% of the playerbase), and concentrating on the casual player game and the core gamer game, which is soloing, small groups and some full groups and the occasional easy raid - to most players, the Fury class certainly appears the most well-rounded, balanced and powerful priest class. Furies are a great class to play alongside as well, and they stack fairly well in groups due to the class versatility.</span></p><p><span style="color: #ff6600;">It is lovely. Fury Annaelisa is fantastic in every setting I play her.</span></p><p><span style="color: #ff6600;">As you say, people vote with their feet when they see a powerful and easy-to-play class. Hence Furies seem to be everywhere we look. </span></p><p><span style="color: #ff6600;">What SOE need to try to do (almost impossible to make everyone happy, mind) is make the other priest classes equally appealing in the casual game. Some good steps have been taken, but it still isn't there yet. </span></p><p><span style="color: #ff6600;">The KEY point though, is I hope that SOE leave the Fury class alone. They got it right, so don't "fix" it, rather, adjust the classes that are not quite so well rounded. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src=" width="15" height="15" /></span></p></blockquote><p>" </p><p>Perhaps I misunderstand. Isn't what you describe part of the class balancing?</p><p> The way it was described to me is that in each archetype there was one set that was *more* suitable for soloing (i.e. more completenesss) but was, perhaps, not quite as ideal in grouping/raiding?</p><p>I was told for fighters it was monk/bruiser, priests were warden/fury, scouts were...brigand/swashbucker?, and casters were conjuror/necromancer.</p><p> If that's the case then bringing up all the other classes to Fury "levels" will break that balance.</p>