Pure Breed Healers? [Archive] - EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

steelbadger

06-04-2009, 05:46 PM

I know it's a cliché but it really does depend on what you consider "pure".Most people consider the classes to be split with one subclass being more dps oriented and one being more heal oriented, or offensive and defensive.Templar, Defiler and Warden being defensive and Inquisitor, Mystic and Fury being offensive.In general you could call the defensive healers "purer" healers than the offensive healers as the defensive healers group buffs are survivability oriented (while offensive healers have more dps oriented buffs).But where you go from there is tough:Templar has a massive healing potential and is considered by many to be the most solid and reliable healer of the bunch with fantastic survivability buffs and a myriad of choices when it comes to the healing.Defiler utilises the most efficient type of healing in game with their wards and are a rock-hard nut to crack, but they can be somewhat brittle if they do crack or are being played by people unfamiliar with the warding mentality (very different from other healers).Warden has probably the largest healing potential and power efficiency, but is brought down somewhat by the type of heals they use as they will very often be healing nothing, they require a bit of "spin-up" time to get their hots casted and ticking but once they're all running nothing short of a nuclear blast will unseat the tank.Sooo... it's really down to preference, many consider the Templar to be the best simply because it occupies a very comfortable middle ground between wards and HoTs.(I know some people will be annoyed that I dismissed Inquisitors, Mystics and Furies out of hand but each of those classes simply has a lower healing potential than their "mirror", they may be better for groups or raids when that extra little bit isn't needed but that wasn't the question asked)

Sprin

06-04-2009, 06:07 PM

Thanks for the input..As far as what i mean by "pure" healers, i mean, not spec'd for your own personal DPS, just healing capacity. Everything that you can posibly do in your AA's and gear to maximize your healing capacity.I'm not as concerned with the utility they provide to other group members in the form of DPS improvement... I understand that each class can buff different DPS classes differently. Im trying to get peoples opinions on HP and survivability buffs that are usefull more then one classes... or other benefits that provide survivablility. Thats what i mean when i say "pure" as well. If one healer is mainly used to increase a groups DPS, and their healing capabilities suffer from it, then thats what i would like to point out in this thread. So that people who may be looking to play different classes of healers can have a place to come and compare notes as it were, on the pros and cons of different healers with respect to surviability.So you think Mystics have a lower healing capacity then Defilers? can you explain why you think this?I agree with you on the Druids.. as the druids either have to wait for the group to take damage to maximize their healing potential (which can be dangerous, depending on how MUCH their group is taking) otherwise, if they "pre heal" a vast majority of their heals are going to waste while everyone is in the green, before they take damage...From what i've seen druids, especially wardens have the best sort of "uh oh, the group is going down!" kind of saving graces.. As their group heals are very powerfull if all members of the group are using it all, and they are very fast compared to Shaman or Cleric group heals / wards. Mystics (i havn't played a Defilers, so cant make any assumptions there, but i imagine they arent THAT much better if they are) are the exact opposite.From what I have seen, Mystics seem to be one of the most powerful healer as long as ONE person has aggro and ONE person is taking damage. Their group ward, while very small compared to the potential group capacity of other classes, like the druid group heals... If it is only used by one person, turns into one of the most powerfull solo target heals there is. Once the group starts taking heavy damage that surpases the capacity of the small group ward, the 5 second base time of the group ward or the 3 second base time of the mediocre Group heal is too long for "Emergency group" situations....How does the "Uh oh group is dying, we all need health fast" healing of the inquisy and templar compare to that of the Warden or the Mystic?

BungFoo

06-04-2009, 06:25 PM

<cite>Sprinng@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>How does the "Uh oh group is dying, we all need health fast" healing of the inquisy and templar compare to that of the Warden or the Mystic?</blockquote>I can't speak for templars, wardens or mystics but on my inquis it really depends on what tools are up when the fit hits the shan. If I have divine recovery or my instant cast reactive up I can usually instantly put the tank in a safe enough place that I can get off my group heal and my group reactive or inquisition. As long the agro stays on the tank and the mobs aren't eating through my reactives faster than I can rotate between heals and reactives everything will turn out ok. If those tools are down and / or the mob is tossing stuns/stifles/interrupts then it's a real crap shoot. If the mob is burning the tank down and my reactives are only slowing his death than it's a race to the bottom and if anyone else pulls agro they're generally toast.A while ago I had my inquis's aa spec in a "pure" healing setup. Basically what I did was take all of the faster/better heals, better buffs, emergency tools I could get. In practice what this resulted in was me running at about 70% of what I was capable of in most circumstance with little more than debuffs to add to the groups while their health was never in danger.I am not a raid healer at all so I can't comment on that situation. I'm talking here about TSO instance runs like DF, Najenas, evernight, etc.Den

Ishnar

06-04-2009, 08:58 PM

<cite>Sprinng@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Just sort of wanted to see what people thought of different healers and their "pureness" or their potential for being a "pure healer" class... and how they stand up vs other healers.Some healers seem to be designed more for hybrid, some for healing, and some for ???What would be the "purest" form of healer? and how would you spec them to be that way?I really wouldnt mind having this thread sort of be a "Information on Healer: Go to Guide" for people looking to play a healing class and just cant figure out which one to play.... Maybe people posting how they play their healers, and how they spec their AA for each playstyle...</blockquote>Wha? A "Pure Healer" would have two spells, "Heal" and "Cure" and refuse to use weapons because that might hurt someone. Not many people would want to play one of those.That said, I'd have to say that Defilers and Mystics are about the least pure healers out there since we specialize in damage prevention, not fixing damage. We toss out very fast cures, our wards, and our dps debufs all are about preventing the damage from hapening in the first place. I prefer to avoid situations that force me to use a heal at all.

graewulf

06-04-2009, 10:15 PM

A Warden with their Mythical. Period. Just chain cast heals and NEVER dropping below 95% power. Who cares if the HoTs tick away on a full health tank? It's all free healing and power. Over-powered mythical much? Absolutely.

CuCullain

06-04-2009, 11:36 PM

TemplarLots of heals, healing debuffs, +Hp buffs, Damage negation abilities, pretty much no utility beyond that ;p

Sprin

06-05-2009, 12:09 PM

Anyone who has played more then one type, shaman, cleric, druid, in the same situations, IE: end game raiding, End game instance... maybe solo heal experience... and how hard it was? how easy compared to the others they have personally played.I know one thing , its very difficult to look parses where you are with another healer, especially a different type of healer, and compare the parse and say "my class is better then this class, look at my parse"When things like reactives, wards and such will heal a tank first and if they arent good enough then the regular heals kick in and finish up the stability... so it may seem in a single group that a warden isnt as good as a templar, because the templar would be parsing higher, but the fact is that the templars reactives and wards are preventing the tanks HP from going low enough to need the druid heals usually.... Whereas if you get the same group, in the same zone with a solo healer played by the same person, you should get a far more accurate "picture" as to which one is better... of course gear would play a part.I have a lvl 80 mystic, and am taknig up a lvl 80 cleric. (dunno which one yet, shes an inquisy now, but may change to templar later on for more of the "purist" healing classWhich sorta brings up a personal request... can anyone who has played maybe a templar end game and swapped to an inquisy, and has personal experience with both solo healing instances... maybe chime in and let me know what they thinkI want to be able to focus my gear on just healing stats... IE: casting / reuse speed, Heal crit and eventally Heal Crit bonus and heal procs... DPS? meh, i can do that on my 80 coercer / swashy / bruiser / melee mystic...I want to build the toon to be absolutely crazy healer where i can pretty much solo heal any group anywhere... But dont really know the raw healing capacity of an Inquisy vs a Templar

CuCullain

06-05-2009, 12:20 PM

Let me say this in advance to be clear; Any healing class can heal well with the right amount of skill and gear.Everything else being equal, gear, skill, situation, a Templar heals more than an Inquisitor. That being said, many Templar's recommend that you play an Inquisitor until level 80 as they are easier to level as they can DPS better.Oh and solo healing an instance? Any healer class can if played correctly and spec'd/geared right. Probably more difficult for druids to do so, but they can.

Sprin

06-05-2009, 01:21 PM

<cite>Faush@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Oh and solo healing an instance? Any healer class can if played correctly and spec'd/geared right. Probably more difficult for druids to do so, but they can.</blockquote>See now why is that? Please explain. Just trying to get peoples opinions and experiences on things.. Why do you say its harder for druids to do so? What makes it harder for them / easier for other classes? Wouldnt the TYPE of instance make a difference? IE: lots of ae damage where lots of people are taking damage vs one where 99% of the time the tank is the only one taking damage?

LardLord

06-05-2009, 02:09 PM

<cite>Sprinng@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>See now why is that? Please explain. Just trying to get peoples opinions and experiences on things.. Why do you say its harder for druids to do so? What makes it harder for them / easier for other classes? Wouldnt the TYPE of instance make a difference? IE: lots of ae damage where lots of people are taking damage vs one where 99% of the time the tank is the only one taking damage?</blockquote>Druids lack HP buffs and wards (and, less importantly, debuffs). As a result, their groups are more at risk against 1-shots and spike damage, especially if they're undergeared for the content. An example of a fight a Druid would struggle to solo heal would be the boss of Guk: Outer Stronghold. The damage on that encounter has been reduced since it was released and great gear can make it easier, but the AE on that encounter used to one-shot a good portion of your group if they didn't have HP buffs and/or wards.All healers are capable of putting out decent damage, but Defilers are probably the least capable in that department, so I guess that makes them the most "pure" healer in your opinion? Of course, a significant part of playing a Defiler is debuffing, so I'm not sure if that makes them less "pure" in your opinion or not.

Tehom

06-05-2009, 02:15 PM

The problem with a question like this is that it sort of follows a misconception, the idea that the strongest function of a healer is to repair damage. It's not. Pretty much any healer can full-heal a group within a few seconds, so saying who's the best at that isn't really a significant distinction. What is significant, however, is stopping the group from dying due to wards, debuffs, shield ally, hp buffs, or curing, and those are the areas healers diverge in. In raid content and some heroic content resistance to status effects (sanctuary, steadfast, self-cures, whatever) is very important as well.I'd probably say wardens get the most out-and-out healing capability of any class, but they're pretty much terrible at keeping a group alive compared to a shaman or cleric - they have almost no hp buffing capability by comparison, no real anti-status effect capability, no debuffing, weak curing, and no avoidance lend. Heroic content can be easy enough where their deficiencies don't really matter, but it doesn't mean they don't have problems on anything remotely difficult.

Ishnar

06-05-2009, 02:21 PM

<cite>Sprinng@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>I know one thing , its very difficult to look parses where you are with another healer, especially a different type of healer, and compare the parse and say "my class is better then this class, look at my parse"</blockquote>I've almost no use for parses at all as a healer. Especially when techniques for looking good on a parse are detremental to party survivability. For example. If I just wanted to look great on a parse, all I would do is wards--now that wards parse, they didn't back in the day. I'd actually refuse to use cures and debuffs because that way my group will take more damage, so I can heal more damage, and look even better on a parse. On the other hand, I personally am very proactive on damage debuffs and cures which don't parse at all. I've yet to find a parser that will compute and assign damage that never happened due to player actions. Such as the remaining ticks left on a dot, or reduced damage due to my str and dps debuffs. If it did though, I think the parsers would give a completely different impression of what makes a good healer, but right now, I consider heal parsing totally misleading and effectively useless. Right now, one cleric can heal a group that wipes over and over again, but have an awesome parse. But my party doesn't wipe at all, although I keep on losing a scout that can't bother to watch his aggro. But my parse looks weak. Overall, I'd much rather keep the party alive than look great on a parse. Still, I get idiots that complain that my parse is weaker than the previous healer that kept wiping the party. This was even more true back in the day when wards didn't parse at all and people thought Shaman's just stood there and looked pretty, although wards didn't work as effectively back then either.

EQPrime

06-05-2009, 02:44 PM

<cite>Chath@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'd probably say wardens get the most out-and-out healing capability of any class, but they're pretty much terrible at keeping a group alive compared to a shaman or cleric - they have almost no hp buffing capability by comparison, no real anti-status effect capability, no debuffing, weak curing, and no avoidance lend. Heroic content can be easy enough where their deficiencies don't really matter, but it doesn't mean they don't have problems on anything remotely difficult.</blockquote>It really depends on the situation. I agree with your assessment for the most part. In most cases if you're bringing one healer to do a difficult zone then a cleric or shaman would have an easier time than a druid, but not all the time. If I had to pick one healer to solo heal palace I'd bring a warden because of the types of encounters in there.By the way, wardens do get anti-status effect capabilities via AAs.

Sprin

06-05-2009, 02:59 PM

<cite>Quabi@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sprinng@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>See now why is that? Please explain. Just trying to get peoples opinions and experiences on things.. Why do you say its harder for druids to do so? What makes it harder for them / easier for other classes? Wouldnt the TYPE of instance make a difference? IE: lots of ae damage where lots of people are taking damage vs one where 99% of the time the tank is the only one taking damage?</blockquote>Druids lack HP buffs and wards (and, less importantly, debuffs). As a result, their groups are more at risk against 1-shots and spike damage, especially if they're undergeared for the content. An example of a fight a Druid would struggle to solo heal would be the boss of Guk: Outer Stronghold. The damage on that encounter has been reduced since it was released and great gear can make it easier, but the AE on that encounter used to one-shot a good portion of your group if they didn't have HP buffs and/or wards.All healers are capable of putting out decent damage, but Defilers are probably the least capable in that department, so I guess that makes them the most "pure" healer in your opinion? Of course, a significant part of playing a Defiler is debuffing, so I'm not sure if that makes them less "pure" in your opinion or not.</blockquote>My definition of "pure" does not mean "only heal, nothing else" i mean, "pure" as in overall capacity as a healer to do their job. If you want a DPS, get a DPS class, if you want a spot healer, get a hybrid Fury whos gear is mostly + Crit strike based, who is there for emergencys but is mostly there to DPS (which they can do very well)..If your job as a DPS class is to do damage and make it so you and others can do more damage to the mob, that is your "job"... pure DPS class.... Swashy, assassin, wizzy, etc.. T1 DPS toons...Well Im simply looking for peoples advice on the T1 HPS toons (technically speaking)If we can separate scouts and tanks and mages functions into different Tiers and different "roles"... IE: bards vs predators... bards not being "pure" DPS... why cant we get a similar list of roles for healers? They all have different roles.. some heal / cure better, and some may just provide better buffs to their group to DPS a mob but may not be the best for that solo instance to heal... Thats the kind of issues i wanted to discuss here.As long as Debuffs and Cures arent "parseable" its hard to get an accurate account of what healers are doing besides just raw Heals per second etc numbers... so i would agree ACT is inacurate in that aspect. Which is why i want peoples opinions on things... which we seem to be getting a great response....cures, debuffs, buffs for group that help survivabilty, heals, AA trees, etc etc...Simply speaking, I wanted to start a nice topic that allows people who havn't played any healers, or very limited, who hae a specific frame of mind on what they want to do, to be able to get an overall base of information. Like one would do for scouts...IE: I want to do just massive DPS... well dont pick dirge... or.........I want to just buff my group with insane things that helps us survive and do massive DPS groupwide... well dont pick a ranger... etc etc... that sorta thing, but for healers

LardLord

06-05-2009, 03:11 PM

I'm not sure if Aeralik has continued this philosophy (I hope that he has), but Lockeye attempted to balance all healers in their ability to keep groups alive with LU13. Of course, the balance has never been absolutely perfect, but for heroic content, it's honestly pretty close. As others have said, each healer is capable of solo healing all of heroic content. I would honestly have a difficult time distinguishing between the four non-Druid healers for that task, but I think the general opinion is that Templars are the strongest healer. The balance could shift as soon as this next LU hits, but right now the tiers are probably as shown below:1 - Templar2 - Defiler/Inquisitor/Mystic3 - Fury/Warden

Tehom

06-05-2009, 03:17 PM

<cite>Uguv@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>It really depends on the situation. I agree with your assessment for the most part. In most cases if you're bringing one healer to do a difficult zone then a cleric or shaman would have an easier time than a druid, but not all the time. If I had to pick one healer to solo heal palace I'd bring a warden because of the types of encounters in there.By the way, wardens do get anti-status effect capabilities via AAs.</blockquote>I could see the argument for Varsoon, but overall I'd still say naturewalk and such don't hold a candle to Steadfast, sanctuary, or the ability to self-cure stuns or stifles. And when you factor in their inability to mitigate damage aside from a crit mit buff and their elemental ward, I think they just come up weaker than any shaman or cleric aside from a handful of extremely specific circumstances which are grossly outnumbered by the situations that don't favor them.For druids to at all have anything approaching parity to shamans or clerics, they should have gotten something like 30% crit mit and a 1k or so renewing ward on their resist buff, and probably the ability to negate some of the status effects that currently don't have counters, like disarms, target locks, or anti-beneficial/hostiles. Even then they'd be inadequate against the fights with devastating physical AEs.

Oakum

06-05-2009, 06:21 PM

<cite>Chath@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Uguv@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>It really depends on the situation. I agree with your assessment for the most part. In most cases if you're bringing one healer to do a difficult zone then a cleric or shaman would have an easier time than a druid, but not all the time. If I had to pick one healer to solo heal palace I'd bring a warden because of the types of encounters in there.By the way, wardens do get anti-status effect capabilities via AAs.</blockquote>I could see the argument for Varsoon, but overall I'd still say naturewalk and such don't hold a candle to Steadfast, sanctuary, or the ability to self-cure stuns or stifles. And when you factor in their inability to mitigate damage aside from a crit mit buff and their elemental ward, I think they just come up weaker than any shaman or cleric aside from a handful of extremely specific circumstances which are grossly outnumbered by the situations that don't favor them.For druids to at all have anything approaching parity to shamans or clerics, they should have gotten something like 30% crit mit and a 1k or so renewing ward on their resist buff, and probably the ability to negate some of the status effects that currently don't have counters, like disarms, target locks, or anti-beneficial/hostiles. Even then they'd be inadequate against the fights with devastating physical AEs.</blockquote>Maybe because I am a warden primarlily (although i have a lvl 80 templer I recently lvled) and playing since Dec 04 as a warden, lol I dont think its quite as bad about druids as people think, its definitely, special circumatances aside, not balanced in ,the ability to keep your group alive between healers.The best "pure" healers from that standpoint are clerics and, equally skilled and geared. Followed by the shaman and then druids last.Mainly because of lack of hp, mit, and strong specialty buffs like shield ally, steadfast, wards, and reactives, ect for the non druids. A highly skilled druid can do better then the average skilled cleric or shaman IMO but it takes a whole more effort the the average cleric or shaman is putting into playing their character.Now, for some other interesting information.lBy "design" in a raid, the primary healer of the MT group will always be the shaman with the first back up being the cleric and the druid (if the MT group has 3 healers) the clean up. Wards then reactives then regens being the heal landing order when damage is taken and depending on much healing is needed to get the tank back to full health. This means that in reverse order, the healers have the most time to use their non healer spells depending on circumstances.Now as someone mentioned, their is the defensive and offensive labels some give to the healer subclasses. Its just like was said, with the group buffs (lol wis for a warden) that kind of shade things that way. Templers and defiliers buff the groups survivablility, Inquisitors and mystics buff the groups ability to do damage (not necesarily their own unless they spec for it specially), Wardens are a hair more defensive then furys. We get a group wis buff which might increase resist a hair for the group while the furys buff Int which can help damage for spells if the casters are not already INT capped.What a lot of people do not look at is what the other base spells/abilities that the healers have besides big ST, small ST, group, single and group specialty and the damage spell all are given before aa's are put into the mix.For example:Driuids have DPS spells and one small debuff attached to a cold dot. Nothing else except from aa's.Templers have temperary buffs, heal procs, protective spells, ect.Shaman have temperary debuffs and some buffs.Not sure about inquisitor but I think they have temperary spells which increase their groups dps as well as proc heals ect but havent looked at their spells lately.Now as far as group buffing for survivability or dps, its probably in this order.TemplerInquisitordefilermysticFury/warden.The devs have kept the healing side balanced. the rest has gotten way out of whack with clerics and shaman out dpsing druids, lol.Of course, personal opinion, Druids are more fun but fury's tend to get a bad name because some fury's dont know how to heal well when required due to people making them so they an nuke and heal themselves at the same time and not as a healer who can nuke if healing is not needed.

Orthureon

06-05-2009, 07:56 PM

<cite>Quabi@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'm not sure if Aeralik has continued this philosophy (I hope that he has), but Lockeye attempted to balance all healers in their ability to keep groups alive with LU13. Of course, the balance has never been absolutely perfect, but for heroic content, it's honestly pretty close. As others have said, each healer is capable of solo healing all of heroic content. I would honestly have a difficult time distinguishing between the four non-Druid healers for that task, but I think the general opinion is that Templars are the strongest healer. The balance could shift as soon as this next LU hits, but right now the tiers are probably as shown below:1 - Templar2 - Defiler/Inquisitor/Mystic3 - Fury/Warden</blockquote>Warden below the Inquis? That is usually not the case unless the Warden sucks. Since the inquis will start lacking big time when any AoE damage is present. Most of the direct heals of the Warden heal for the same or more aswell as their HoTs ticking for about the same as an M1 Penance. Then again even if the Inquis can outheal the Warden (on anything meaningful), they easily run out of power now, unless you have a god awful amount of Manawell gear (or avatar loot). Inquest sucks now honestly, barely better than a Phantom adornment. They need to buff it up, that is another story though.

Orthureon

06-05-2009, 08:01 PM

<cite>Oakum wrote:</cite><blockquote>Now as far as group buffing for survivability or dps, its probably in this order.TemplerInquisitordefilermysticFury/warden.The devs have kept the healing side balanced. the rest has gotten way out of whack with clerics and shaman out dpsing druids, lol.Of course, personal opinion, Druids are more fun but fury's tend to get a bad name because some fury's dont know how to heal well when required due to people making them so they an nuke and heal themselves at the same time and not as a healer who can nuke if healing is not needed.</blockquote>Let me fix that for you:TemplerDefilerMysticInquisitorWardenFuryAs for DPS, you have to remember something important there are 3 DPSing priests. Inquisitor, Mystic, Fury. In all equal gear dps will be about the same, the inquis MIGHT have the edge if their flurries hit often and actually hit. That being said Plate healers used to have the edge in survivability wearing plate armor, now all other healers can get the same mitigation as us, ASWELL as more (sometimes far more) avoidance.Btw I am not sure if anyone else is aware, but most people consider Inquisitors to be the worst healer in game. And that is not because of the "DPS syndrome".

BungFoo

06-06-2009, 02:38 AM

<cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Quabi@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'm not sure if Aeralik has continued this philosophy (I hope that he has), but Lockeye attempted to balance all healers in their ability to keep groups alive with LU13. Of course, the balance has never been absolutely perfect, but for heroic content, it's honestly pretty close. As others have said, each healer is capable of solo healing all of heroic content. I would honestly have a difficult time distinguishing between the four non-Druid healers for that task, but I think the general opinion is that Templars are the strongest healer. The balance could shift as soon as this next LU hits, but right now the tiers are probably as shown below:1 - Templar2 - Defiler/Inquisitor/Mystic3 - Fury/Warden</blockquote>Warden below the Inquis? That is usually not the case unless the Warden sucks. Since the inquis will start lacking big time when any AoE damage is present. Most of the direct heals of the Warden heal for the same or more aswell as their HoTs ticking for about the same as an M1 Penance. Then again even if the Inquis can outheal the Warden (on anything meaningful), they easily run out of power now, unless you have a god awful amount of Manawell gear (or avatar loot). Inquest sucks now honestly, barely better than a Phantom adornment. They need to buff it up, that is another story though.</blockquote>Since when do inquis have power problems? LOL

Sprin

06-06-2009, 04:06 AM

<cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote>Btw I am not sure if anyone else is aware, but most people consider Inquisitors to be the worst healer in game. And that is not because of the "DPS syndrome".</blockquote>Oh yeah? why is that?

Orthureon

06-06-2009, 04:23 AM

Grimfang

06-06-2009, 08:17 AM

<cite>Sprinng@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote>Btw I am not sure if anyone else is aware, but most people consider Inquisitors to be the worst healer in game. And that is not because of the "DPS syndrome".</blockquote>Oh yeah? why is that?</blockquote>Umm, how about weak heals? No real (aside from sacrifice) way to handle spike damage, worthless inquisitor aa's (all about dps, none about healing) (only with shadows did we get ways to boost healing). The only thing inquisitors really excells at is curing, and that is only thanks to their mythical!Inquisitors is also extremly gear/proc dependant in terms of healing. But all that aside... imo, inquisitors is still the most fun healer to play <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" />Btw, the least played healer is still defilers 81303 (lvl 1-80 according to eq2players website) then comes inquisitors at 84768 and then mystics at 85882 Although the inquisitor numbers are inflated since many templars actually levels up as inquisitors (faster) and then betray at mid-high 70's.Lets look at lvl 80 shall we? (all healers)(all servers)Fury 6692Warder 6370Templar 5137Mystic 3638Defiler 3460Inquisitor 3207But then again, this wasnt really the topic now was it? <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /> But it should give you some clues as to wich healer classes that are... "good"least played classes in eq2 (as per eq2players website)Coercer 3726Mystic 3638Defiler 3460Troubador 3364Inquisitor 3207

Kari

06-06-2009, 11:35 AM

I really think this thread is selling wardens short. Although I don't play a warden, I group with one on a regular basis. He heals just as well as my defiler, it is just that we shine in different circumstances. He heals better in fights with a lot of mobs doing small hits on the group and I do better in fights where a single boss is hitting hard on one target. Either one of us can solo heal any instance up to Palace; in Palace he made it all the way to Varsoon while I failed on Ferzuls adds.

Tehom

06-06-2009, 12:13 PM

I guess my perspective is just thinking of healers based on how they perform in challenging raid settings, since heroic settings can be handled by anyone if your tank is tough enough. For example, when I group with my raid force's MT and romp through palace of ferzul, she doesn't even need healing to handle the swarm adds for Ferzul's encounter - she could just solo that all with her own procs. Cancelling out little hits is something that's pretty easy to do with raid gear, so it seemed what they've focused on is enormous single hits to one-shot players, status effects, and curing - and I think druids are just pretty weak by comparison in all those areas, particularly with the new number of encounters with hefty physical AEs. I can't think of a class that's had a worse hit to their traditional role than furies, who used to be mage group healers - putting a fury with a mage group on any significant encounter might as well be writing them off as corpses, and they're all capped on int by this point anyway. Even if their set breastplate proc, Reflective Skin, was a constant effect and you tossed a symbol of the faydark effect proc on top of it they'd still increase survivability less than other healers would. And I'm even ignoring the effect of other healers having rune etched helms, which even after the proc nerf will still be pretty overpowered.

Orthureon

06-06-2009, 01:06 PM

<cite>Grimfist@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sprinng@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote>Btw I am not sure if anyone else is aware, but most people consider Inquisitors to be the worst healer in game. And that is not because of the "DPS syndrome".</blockquote>Oh yeah? why is that?</blockquote>Umm, how about weak heals? No real (aside from sacrifice) way to handle spike damage, worthless inquisitor aa's (all about dps, none about healing) (only with shadows did we get ways to boost healing). The only thing inquisitors really excells at is curing, and that is only thanks to their mythical!Inquisitors is also extremly gear/proc dependant in terms of healing. But all that aside... imo, inquisitors is still the most fun healer to play <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" />Btw, the least played healer is still defilers 81303 (lvl 1-80 according to eq2players website) then comes inquisitors at 84768 and then mystics at 85882 Although the inquisitor numbers are inflated since many templars actually levels up as inquisitors (faster) and then betray at mid-high 70's.Lets look at lvl 80 shall we? (all healers)(all servers)Fury 6692Warder 6370Templar 5137Mystic 3638Defiler 3460Inquisitor 3207But then again, this wasnt really the topic now was it? <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /> But it should give you some clues as to wich healer classes that are... "good"least played classes in eq2 (as per eq2players website)Coercer 3726Mystic 3638Defiler 3460Troubador 3364Inquisitor 3207</blockquote>No I know when I posted the same information (minus the actual data) that it was semi OT. But it was used to prove a point. If Inquisitors are so great why such a small population?Also, just curious how many other healers have a heal that can be resisted (70%+ of the time even with an M1) and changes heal amounts depending on range lol?

Sprin

06-06-2009, 03:48 PM

<cite>Chath@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>I can't think of a class that's had a worse hit to their traditional role than furies, who used to be mage group healers - putting a fury with a mage group on any significant encounter might as well be writing them off as corpses, and they're all capped on int by this point anyway. Even if their set breastplate proc, Reflective Skin, was a constant effect and you tossed a symbol of the faydark effect proc on top of it they'd still increase survivability less than other healers would.</blockquote>Well i will have to disagree with you on that one.. A well played and well geared Fury (like our mage group fury... beast fury comes to mind) can handle the mages fine... I think what you have to look at there is the critical mitigation of all your mages, if they arent capped on crit mit, no healer is gonna be able to stop the carnage. Mages taking 0 crit mit is the difference between any healer keeping them up and and no healer able to keep them up.Our Mage Fury is beast at healing and damage.... Might just have to look at your mages armor to put blame in their hands as opposed to the Furys hands.Keep up the discussion guys, good stuff....No info about healers is OT here, this is general healer discussion...I didnt know so few inquisitors existed. There is DEFINATELY something to be said about that. I mean people are definately pack animals on this game.. People will jump on and OFF the bandwagon accordingly. So you get a super duper OP class and there will be a HUGE spike in the number of those classes. Its the nature of the beast.... the opposite is true where you have an underpowered class, less will play. For if they were so UBER great, more people would play them as opposed to their counterparts.

LardLord

06-06-2009, 04:23 PM

Note that I'm posting from the perspective of a raiding Inquisitor, since raid gear (Mythical, ect) has a significant impact on how classes are balanced from my perspective.Inquisitors were pathetically weak healers in early and mid-RoK. Fortunately, towards the end of RoK, we got our mythical fixed and we gained access to the incredibly overpowered Rune Etched Helm and Ethereal Mist Gauntlets. With those three pieces of gear, we were capable raid (and group) healers but, all else equal, Shaman and Templars were both better against the majority of encounters, regardless of whether you were trying to heal an MT, OT, or DPS groups (the only exceptions being fights were Steadfast and our cure clicky where fully utilized and only outside of tank groups).TSO AAs, along with our raid 4-set bonus, went a long way towards balancing us for raid content. Unlike the more heal-oriented classes, every single one of our castable heals was originally buffed by TSO AAs. That, combined with the fact that the Cleric endline provided a boost to healing and the fact that our healing stance was arguably the best of all the healers (certainly much better than Templars' ), allowed us to gain ground on all the other healers in the "how well can you keep your group alive" department. Our TSO raid 4-set, which makes our DPS/HP buff groupwide, closed that gap with Templars (they got a similar focus on their Mythical), and makes our set arguably the most significant upgrade over the VP sets of all the healers. Fanatical Devotion (TSO AA) has also proven to be the group buff to DPS that we really needed with all our other buffs rendered nearly useless by hardcaps and diminishing returns.In summary, while Inquisitors still have lots of bugs/problems (Please fix Inquisition <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" /> ), we've come a very long way since the class was more-or-less unplayable (at end-game) approximately one year ago.If you look at the rosters of top-end raiding guilds, I think you'll find that Defilers, Mystics, Inquisitors, and Templars are all fairly evenly represented at the moment. However, many top guilds don't even have a Fury on their roster at all, and it's rare to find a top guild with more than two Druids. To me, that signals that the Clerics and Shaman are close to balanced for raiding, but Druids are clearly lacking.Note: The next GU is going to hit Clerics, especially Inquisitors, much harder than the other healers, so the balance could change significantly in just a few weeks.

Arielle Nightshade

06-06-2009, 09:56 PM

Oakum

06-07-2009, 01:12 PM

<cite>Arielle Nightshade wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Quabi@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'm not sure if Aeralik has continued this philosophy (I hope that he has), but Lockeye attempted to balance all healers in their ability to keep groups alive with LU13. Of course, the balance has never been absolutely perfect, but for heroic content, it's honestly pretty close. As others have said, each healer is capable of solo healing all of heroic content. I would honestly have a difficult time distinguishing between the four non-Druid healers for that task, but I think the general opinion is that Templars are the strongest healer. The balance could shift as soon as this next LU hits, but right now the tiers are probably as shown below:1 - Templar2 - Defiler/Inquisitor/Mystic3 - Fury/Warden</blockquote>Warden below the Inquis? That is usually not the case unless the Warden sucks. Since the inquis will start lacking big time when any AoE damage is present. Most of the direct heals of the Warden heal for the same or more aswell as their HoTs ticking for about the same as an M1 Penance. Then again even if the Inquis can outheal the Warden (on anything meaningful), they easily run out of power now, unless you have a god awful amount of Manawell gear (or avatar loot). Inquest sucks now honestly, barely better than a Phantom adornment. They need to buff it up, that is another story though.</blockquote>By game mechanics, yes...Warden below Inquis. The game 'reads' reactives before direct heals - and all Warden heals are direct. HoT is still a direct heal. A Warden has nothing else but heals. Inquis has so much more utility - I'd still agree that this is true. The only Wardens have to recommend them in the current state of the game is unlimited power (which is argueably possible for any class with the right adornments and group makeup) and a small critical mitigation buff - which is only useful for a short time in progression.Otherwise, this is completely accurate.</blockquote>I can see that inquis could be equal to shaman even without the SA and steadfast to allow them to cure better through all the stuns/stifles and raid wide debuffs/dots/aoes.The best thing a warden has going for us is the power proc from the fabled version of our epic which is raised some by our myth versions.That is about to be nerfed since the power regen does crit and give back extra power and it will no longer crit with the upcoming proc nerf. How bad will that be? We probably wont be able to tell until it goes live.I will say that wardens are more "fun" to play then other classes. It has to do with challenge and melee spec options in my opinion. After all, what is harder to do while soloing, which most characters are soloed up to the 70's now, taking less damage with plate/chain armor or having your armor take large part of the damage when you get hit and/or root nuke/fear nuking the mobs or going into a melee fight with a handicap of leather and beating the odds most of the time .Plus with quicker casting heals, the druids in general are not waiting on heal spells as much to dps and kill the mobs quicker. Less

Oakum

06-07-2009, 01:36 PM

<cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote>Let me fix that for you:TemplerDefilerMysticInquisitorWardenFuryAs for DPS, you have to remember something important there are 3 DPSing priests. Inquisitor, Mystic, Fury. In all equal gear dps will be about the same, the inquis MIGHT have the edge if their flurries hit often and actually hit. That being said Plate healers used to have the edge in survivability wearing plate armor, now all other healers can get the same mitigation as us, ASWELL as more (sometimes far more) avoidance.Btw I am not sure if anyone else is aware, but most people consider Inquisitors to be the worst healer in game. And that is not because of the "DPS syndrome".</blockquote>I will give you this lineup for raids when raids are learning new content. Power is not much an issue though for any class since preferable raid setup has a bard and a chanter in each group and the inquis epic alone, with the cures needed for higher end raids makes it more wanted then a second or third shaman.As far as dpsing priests?Look at what spells they have besides their primary st small, st big, group, single and group speicalty, ect that all priests have a different version of.Clerics and shaman have temp buffs and debuffs to cast. Druids have dps spells.That pretty much says that BOTH druids should be more dpsers than both clerics and shamans. We dont have temp buffs to cast and we dont have more then the one standard dot/debuff to cast on mobs. Thats okay, clerics are supposed to be the best buffers and shaman the best debuffers. What are druids supposed to do when not casting heals. The only thing we have ever been given the ability to do of course, DPS.By the way, if you havent noticed, the offensive/defensive priest thing (before you bring it up) is mainly just to what the priest buffs, temp or perm, in a group.Both clerics and shamans are overall MORE defensive then both druids are in that respect. Its just that Templers are more defensive then Inquisitors, Defilers more then Mystics, and Wardens more then Furys.Of course I have yet to hear a tank ever say they are waiting for a wardens wis buff prior to a pull and have often heard "I am missing some hitpoints" or "waiting on hitpoints to pull" when the cleric or shaman has not put their buffs on the tank yet.The one good thing that we wardens have over fury's though is the epic not letting us run out of power, thats the fabled epic portion which gets buffed a little by the mythical version with the plus to heal crit helping it proc more.That will be nerfed with the proc changes since the power regen does crit based on heal crit also. How bad we will probably not be able to see until it goes live.

Kigneer

06-07-2009, 01:42 PM

<cite>Faush@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>TemplarLots of heals, healing debuffs, +Hp buffs, Damage negation abilities, pretty much no utility beyond that ;p</blockquote>Have to agree as a tank with heals myself.For a tank healer, I'd also prefer one in plate, just in case feared or stunned and the mob goes a hunting for the next interesting target.Run with a Warden at times, but the heals are mainly slow over time, and I have to fire my own heals to keep from going red in a heated fight. Templar "solo" healing the tank = superb. DD shard run the health bar is completely green -- and not even mythical yet.Give me a Templar and a Dirge anyday! <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Tehom

06-07-2009, 02:18 PM

Pretty much. Shield ally, large hp buffs, shield of faith, the resistance to disruption from steadfast and sanctuary, and divine recovery probably make templars the strongest single group healers overall. The main argument for a shaman instead would be debuffing autoattack damage, but most things die fast enough in heroic settings where that's not much of a consideration for the most part. I mean, an outstanding warden is better than a clueless cleric in terrible gear who doesn't even have shield ally, but still.

Orthureon

06-07-2009, 08:37 PM

<cite>Oakum wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote>Let me fix that for you:TemplerDefilerMysticInquisitorWardenFuryAs for DPS, you have to remember something important there are 3 DPSing priests. Inquisitor, Mystic, Fury. In all equal gear dps will be about the same, the inquis MIGHT have the edge if their flurries hit often and actually hit. That being said Plate healers used to have the edge in survivability wearing plate armor, now all other healers can get the same mitigation as us, ASWELL as more (sometimes far more) avoidance.Btw I am not sure if anyone else is aware, but most people consider Inquisitors to be the worst healer in game. And that is not because of the "DPS syndrome".</blockquote>I will give you this lineup for raids when raids are learning new content. Power is not much an issue though for any class since preferable raid setup has a bard and a chanter in each group and the inquis epic alone, with the cures needed for higher end raids makes it more wanted then a second or third shaman.As far as dpsing priests?Look at what spells they have besides their primary st small, st big, group, single and group speicalty, ect that all priests have a different version of.Clerics and shaman have temp buffs and debuffs to cast. Druids have dps spells.That pretty much says that BOTH druids should be more dpsers than both clerics and shamans. We dont have temp buffs to cast and we dont have more then the one standard dot/debuff to cast on mobs. Thats okay, clerics are supposed to be the best buffers and shaman the best debuffers. What are druids supposed to do when not casting heals. The only thing we have ever been given the ability to do of course, DPS.By the way, if you havent noticed, the offensive/defensive priest thing (before you bring it up) is mainly just to what the priest buffs, temp or perm, in a group.Both clerics and shamans are overall MORE defensive then both druids are in that respect. Its just that Templers are more defensive then Inquisitors, Defilers more then Mystics, and Wardens more then Furys.Of course I have yet to hear a tank ever say they are waiting for a wardens wis buff prior to a pull and have often heard "I am missing some hitpoints" or "waiting on hitpoints to pull" when the cleric or shaman has not put their buffs on the tank yet.The one good thing that we wardens have over fury's though is the epic not letting us run out of power, thats the fabled epic portion which gets buffed a little by the mythical version with the plus to heal crit helping it proc more.That will be nerfed with the proc changes since the power regen does crit based on heal crit also. How bad we will probably not be able to see until it goes live.</blockquote>You must not be too familiar with classes. My wife has a Warden and looking at her AA AND playing it at 80 mind you, they have more utility than an Inquisitor. What huge defensive buffs do Inquisitors get, I would LOVE to know. We get 2 groupwide buffs, just like EVERY OTHER healer. Then we get Tenacity, which gives around 1k HP and 36 DPS (M1). Each cast takes one concentration to use thus nearly always requiring us to cancel another buff in its place to give people more health. Our damage proc Act of War, has a 0.9 to 1 time per minute proc rate (nearly always very bottom of the parse), with pretty low damage, about half or less of the Templars heal proc based buff, which has a higher proc rate. Shield Ally is no comparision to Tortoise Shell aswell.Please people before giving your opinion REALLY look at the classes. The only huge thing we (Inquisitors) get over all other healers is Steadfast and that is really only ever useful soloing, which I mean what good content can you solo now with any class? You realize our mythical clicky cure was based off the Wardens cure Purity? Wardens regen far more power than an Inquisitor, when it used to be the other way around. Might I add you get your power back by doing the thing that consumes the most power, healing. Which also happens to be all healers primary role, while the Inquisitor must rely on this proc that only triggers off of hostile actions. Might I add it barely ever procs anymore, I find myself running OOP quite often, not sure what happened there.As for temp buffs an Inquisitor gets that could only really be Divine Recovery and that requires 24 points of AA to get, thus sacrificing something else in turn. If you think Devotion is a temp buff you could be considered correct, however not being able to heal unless you want to run OOP REALLY fast. If you don't have the Enhanced AA line, not being able to cast ANYTHING while it is active is a pretty big drawback aswell only making it useful when you can keep the group up with a group reactive, single target reactive and Inquisition. The Enhanced ability itself costs 5 points, nevermind the other points you must spend to actually get it.Survivability wise, you realize Wardens and Shamans can get the same EXACT mit as Clerics, aswell as having more avoidance. Warden can no longer use the Plate vs Leather argument as a crutch anymore. Especially since the developers themselves feel that they should only have to design leather armor since all Priests can use it."That will be nerfed with the proc changes since the power regen does crit based on heal crit also. How bad we will probably not be able to see until it goes live." I am glad you brought this up, you realize Inquisitors rely on proc healing more than ANY other healer to do their job, which will really hurt their heal parse.

Tehom

06-08-2009, 03:08 AM

<cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote>You must not be too familiar with classes. My wife has a Warden and looking at her AA AND playing it at 80 mind you, they have more utility than an Inquisitor. What huge defensive buffs do Inquisitors get, I would LOVE to know. We get 2 groupwide buffs, just like EVERY OTHER healer. Then we get Tenacity, which gives around 1k HP and 36 DPS (M1). Each cast takes one concentration to use thus nearly always requiring us to cancel another buff in its place to give people more health. Our damage proc Act of War, has a 0.9 to 1 time per minute proc rate (nearly always very bottom of the parse), with pretty low damage, about half or less of the Templars heal proc based buff, which has a higher proc rate. Shield Ally is no comparision to Tortoise Shell aswell.Please people before giving your opinion REALLY look at the classes. The only huge thing we (Inquisitors) get over all other healers is Steadfast and that is really only ever useful soloing, which I mean what good content can you solo now with any class? You realize our mythical clicky cure was based off the Wardens cure Purity? Wardens regen far more power than an Inquisitor, when it used to be the other way around. Might I add you get your power back by doing the thing that consumes the most power, healing. Which also happens to be all healers primary role, while the Inquisitor must rely on this proc that only triggers off of hostile actions. Might I add it barely ever procs anymore, I find myself running OOP quite often, not sure what happened there.As for temp buffs an Inquisitor gets that could only really be Divine Recovery and that requires 24 points of AA to get, thus sacrificing something else in turn. If you think Devotion is a temp buff you could be considered correct, however not being able to heal unless you want to run OOP REALLY fast. If you don't have the Enhanced AA line, not being able to cast ANYTHING while it is active is a pretty big drawback aswell only making it useful when you can keep the group up with a group reactive, single target reactive and Inquisition. The Enhanced ability itself costs 5 points, nevermind the other points you must spend to actually get it.Survivability wise, you realize Wardens and Shamans can get the same EXACT mit as Clerics, aswell as having more avoidance. Warden can no longer use the Plate vs Leather argument as a crutch anymore. Especially since the developers themselves feel that they should only have to design leather armor since all Priests can use it."That will be nerfed with the proc changes since the power regen does crit based on heal crit also. How bad we will probably not be able to see until it goes live." I am glad you brought this up, you realize Inquisitors rely on proc healing more than ANY other healer to do their job, which will really hurt their heal parse.</blockquote>This post is a good example of how your perspective can radically change based on where you are in the game. For example, the reason myself and a lot of other people say steadfast is overpowered is because a lot of high-end fights in the game utilize interrupts as disruption, such as 'interrupt curses' that will permanently interrupt a cast that any player will attempt. Steadfast is basically broken in that it totally circumvents mechanics on a lot of raid encounters, in addition to allowing you to ignore the main drawback of items such as mortal coil which causes tons of interrupts for anyone but a steadfast cleric.Comparing tortoiseshell to shield ally is another example. Shield ally is arguably the most overpowered priest ability in the game due to the amount of damage it can negate. Clerics who boost up their avoidance with wrist parry adornments, a good shield, and parry/dodge food negate an enormous amount of damage, and it's more or less indispensible for anything difficult. Tortoiseshell, on the other hand, is of pretty limited and specific use, and really doesn't compensate for having a druid in the raid to begin with.Like the strongest utility ability inquisitors get all by themselves is fanatical devotion, which I'm assuming you didn't mention because you might not have it yet. On trash clears it's pretty impressive from a raid dps standpoint, and helps to make up for your old stifling haste buff becoming pointless due to people hitting caps.Plate vs leather isn't a good argument either, though the number of physical AEs makes it more significant than you think. But the nature of group hp buffs, which inquisitors do get if you have your 4-set from TSO, is incredibly important. You can increase the survivability of squishies in a group by an enormous degree that druids can't hope to duplicate. But this is only true if you do have group-wide tenacity, so I could understand your perspective if you don't have access to that yet.

Grimfang

06-08-2009, 08:19 AM

<cite>Chath@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote>You must not be too familiar with classes. My wife has a Warden and looking at her AA AND playing it at 80 mind you, they have more utility than an Inquisitor. What huge defensive buffs do Inquisitors get, I would LOVE to know. We get 2 groupwide buffs, just like EVERY OTHER healer. Then we get Tenacity, which gives around 1k HP and 36 DPS (M1). Each cast takes one concentration to use thus nearly always requiring us to cancel another buff in its place to give people more health. Our damage proc Act of War, has a 0.9 to 1 time per minute proc rate (nearly always very bottom of the parse), with pretty low damage, about half or less of the Templars heal proc based buff, which has a higher proc rate. Shield Ally is no comparision to Tortoise Shell aswell.Please people before giving your opinion REALLY look at the classes. The only huge thing we (Inquisitors) get over all other healers is Steadfast and that is really only ever useful soloing, which I mean what good content can you solo now with any class? You realize our mythical clicky cure was based off the Wardens cure Purity? Wardens regen far more power than an Inquisitor, when it used to be the other way around. Might I add you get your power back by doing the thing that consumes the most power, healing. Which also happens to be all healers primary role, while the Inquisitor must rely on this proc that only triggers off of hostile actions. Might I add it barely ever procs anymore, I find myself running OOP quite often, not sure what happened there.As for temp buffs an Inquisitor gets that could only really be Divine Recovery and that requires 24 points of AA to get, thus sacrificing something else in turn. If you think Devotion is a temp buff you could be considered correct, however not being able to heal unless you want to run OOP REALLY fast. If you don't have the Enhanced AA line, not being able to cast ANYTHING while it is active is a pretty big drawback aswell only making it useful when you can keep the group up with a group reactive, single target reactive and Inquisition. The Enhanced ability itself costs 5 points, nevermind the other points you must spend to actually get it.Survivability wise, you realize Wardens and Shamans can get the same EXACT mit as Clerics, aswell as having more avoidance. Warden can no longer use the Plate vs Leather argument as a crutch anymore. Especially since the developers themselves feel that they should only have to design leather armor since all Priests can use it."That will be nerfed with the proc changes since the power regen does crit based on heal crit also. How bad we will probably not be able to see until it goes live." I am glad you brought this up, you realize Inquisitors rely on proc healing more than ANY other healer to do their job, which will really hurt their heal parse.</blockquote>This post is a good example of how your perspective can radically change based on where you are in the game. For example, the reason myself and a lot of other people say steadfast is overpowered is because a lot of high-end fights in the game utilize interrupts as disruption, such as 'interrupt curses' that will permanently interrupt a cast that any player will attempt. Steadfast is basically broken in that it totally circumvents mechanics on a lot of raid encounters, in addition to allowing you to ignore the main drawback of items such as mortal coil which causes tons of interrupts for anyone but a steadfast cleric.Comparing tortoiseshell to shield ally is another example. Shield ally is arguably the most overpowered priest ability in the game due to the amount of damage it can negate. Clerics who boost up their avoidance with wrist parry adornments, a good shield, and parry/dodge food negate an enormous amount of damage, and it's more or less indispensible for anything difficult. Tortoiseshell, on the other hand, is of pretty limited and specific use, and really doesn't compensate for having a druid in the raid to begin with.Like the strongest utility ability inquisitors get all by themselves is fanatical devotion, which I'm assuming you didn't mention because you might not have it yet. On trash clears it's pretty impressive from a raid dps standpoint, and helps to make up for your old stifling haste buff becoming pointless due to people hitting caps.Plate vs leather isn't a good argument either, though the number of physical AEs makes it more significant than you think. But the nature of group hp buffs, which inquisitors do get if you have your 4-set from TSO, is incredibly important. You can increase the survivability of squishies in a group by an enormous degree that druids can't hope to duplicate. But this is only true if you do have group-wide tenacity, so I could understand your perspective if you don't have access to that yet.</blockquote>Fanatical devotion? You call that a strong ability? You know what, I dont know about other inquisitors, but I am actually enhancing my HEALS in the shadow line, not my dps. Why I do that? That is the only way we can actually get slightly better healing capability. (besides, the damage proc from fanatical devotion is... well, laughable)

Tehom

06-08-2009, 12:04 PM

<cite>Grimfist@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>Fanatical devotion? You call that a strong ability? You know what, I dont know about other inquisitors, but I am actually enhancing my HEALS in the shadow line, not my dps. Why I do that? That is the only way we can actually get slightly better healing capability. (besides, the damage proc from fanatical devotion is... well, laughable)</blockquote>I encourage you to try it out. The first time I parsed it after our inquisitor got it near the start of TSO, I sort of did a double-take when I saw exactly how well it did. For a single dps group it wasn't all that far off from the damage output of raidwide precision of the maestro. It'll vary based on how you're specced and what you're doing, of course, but it's very good for situations where you can melee to proc it, so it at least has a place in a alternate/mirror dps spec for any raid or group that involves a lot of trash.

flowercivicsi

06-08-2009, 12:20 PM

The pure healer would be the templar hands down... and I see no mentions of blessings which is very nice, and shield ally pawns face. This class is versitile enough to be in any group combo MT/OT/caster/meele groups all benefit from templars. Shamans may show up on the HPS parse more since the benefits from Shield Ally (Avoidance) does not appear on the HPS parses, but on the avoidance reports. They buff the most HP out of all six healer classes.The healing balance between Mystics/Defilers is pretty much equal. If you don't have a defiler there are no worries as a mystic can do just as well in the main tank group. Defilers bonus for the MT group are two spells (tendrils of horror - a buff on the tank that is a debuffing damage shield, and a group unlock for stuns) Mystics have some great bonuses for DPS classes making then very versitile in any group situatation you place them in. Defilers are far more limited, and really only offer benefit to one group only, and pretty much the tank themself are the only ones benefiting from a defiler. Inquisitors are very gear centric to become an exceptional healer, and have some horrible power regen management. As an inquisitor full all out healing, you are going to eat up some power and fast! This class in my opinion is one of the more difficult and challenging healers to play in a raiding situation as you need to find balance between healing, dps, debuffing, as well as managing power. You always will have to make split second decisions on what to change for the overall so you can maintain. They can be used in the OT/caster/meele, but are more preferred for the melee/caster groups as the templar can still work their magic better in the OT group than an inquisitor. I still remember the change to the Inquisitor mythical... some people were angry about it saying it was OP, but really they deserved it and still need more. They also can obtain shield ally & steadfast since it's a cleric AA choice. Druids contrary to most peoples perception actually have awesome healing power, but it does not "always" show up on a raid parse since wards/reacts count first. Druids have some great spike damage control, are the best to heal a lifeburning necro, soulwarding defiler, or a sacrificing cleric. The main complaint that most people have from a raiding perspective is the buffs and debuffs from these two classes which is the main component that hurts their chances to score spots on raids. A good druid fight is one with a ton of AE effects as wards will get knocked off like candy so their regens will make the difference on those specific types of fights. They need some luvin in the buffs/debuffs department. Maybe even make one of each of the classes buffies raid wide? On another note, I agree the changes that are coming with new LU will have a serious impact to healers as a whole. There is no base stat (WIS/STA/STR/INT/AGI) that increases heal amounts as it does for damage (int/str) on procs so we will have no way to better the odds for us once this is live. How bad the affect will be? No clue, until it hits live as you can't really get a clear picture of the actual impact until you can get into the same situations we are dealing with on Live. I wish that they would introduce this no crit, +ca/spell/heal, or base bonuses until the expansion... however; that's not going to happen. I am hoping for the best, but preparing for the worst. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" />

Sprin

06-08-2009, 12:26 PM

<cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote> The only huge thing we (Inquisitors) get over all other healers is Steadfast and that is really only ever useful soloing, which I mean what good content can you solo now with any class? </blockquote>Templars get that too, do they not? Thats Cleric STR Tree if i recall...

Orthureon

06-08-2009, 07:00 PM

<cite>Chath@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote>You must not be too familiar with classes. My wife has a Warden and looking at her AA AND playing it at 80 mind you, they have more utility than an Inquisitor. What huge defensive buffs do Inquisitors get, I would LOVE to know. We get 2 groupwide buffs, just like EVERY OTHER healer. Then we get Tenacity, which gives around 1k HP and 36 DPS (M1). Each cast takes one concentration to use thus nearly always requiring us to cancel another buff in its place to give people more health. Our damage proc Act of War, has a 0.9 to 1 time per minute proc rate (nearly always very bottom of the parse), with pretty low damage, about half or less of the Templars heal proc based buff, which has a higher proc rate. Shield Ally is no comparision to Tortoise Shell aswell.Please people before giving your opinion REALLY look at the classes. The only huge thing we (Inquisitors) get over all other healers is Steadfast and that is really only ever useful soloing, which I mean what good content can you solo now with any class? You realize our mythical clicky cure was based off the Wardens cure Purity? Wardens regen far more power than an Inquisitor, when it used to be the other way around. Might I add you get your power back by doing the thing that consumes the most power, healing. Which also happens to be all healers primary role, while the Inquisitor must rely on this proc that only triggers off of hostile actions. Might I add it barely ever procs anymore, I find myself running OOP quite often, not sure what happened there.As for temp buffs an Inquisitor gets that could only really be Divine Recovery and that requires 24 points of AA to get, thus sacrificing something else in turn. If you think Devotion is a temp buff you could be considered correct, however not being able to heal unless you want to run OOP REALLY fast. If you don't have the Enhanced AA line, not being able to cast ANYTHING while it is active is a pretty big drawback aswell only making it useful when you can keep the group up with a group reactive, single target reactive and Inquisition. The Enhanced ability itself costs 5 points, nevermind the other points you must spend to actually get it.Survivability wise, you realize Wardens and Shamans can get the same EXACT mit as Clerics, aswell as having more avoidance. Warden can no longer use the Plate vs Leather argument as a crutch anymore. Especially since the developers themselves feel that they should only have to design leather armor since all Priests can use it."That will be nerfed with the proc changes since the power regen does crit based on heal crit also. How bad we will probably not be able to see until it goes live." I am glad you brought this up, you realize Inquisitors rely on proc healing more than ANY other healer to do their job, which will really hurt their heal parse.</blockquote>This post is a good example of how your perspective can radically change based on where you are in the game. For example, the reason myself and a lot of other people say steadfast is overpowered is because a lot of high-end fights in the game utilize interrupts as disruption, such as 'interrupt curses' that will permanently interrupt a cast that any player will attempt. Steadfast is basically broken in that it totally circumvents mechanics on a lot of raid encounters, in addition to allowing you to ignore the main drawback of items such as mortal coil which causes tons of interrupts for anyone but a steadfast cleric.Comparing tortoiseshell to shield ally is another example. Shield ally is arguably the most overpowered priest ability in the game due to the amount of damage it can negate. Clerics who boost up their avoidance with wrist parry adornments, a good shield, and parry/dodge food negate an enormous amount of damage, and it's more or less indispensible for anything difficult. Tortoiseshell, on the other hand, is of pretty limited and specific use, and really doesn't compensate for having a druid in the raid to begin with.Like the strongest utility ability inquisitors get all by themselves is fanatical devotion, which I'm assuming you didn't mention because you might not have it yet. On trash clears it's pretty impressive from a raid dps standpoint, and helps to make up for your old stifling haste buff becoming pointless due to people hitting caps.Plate vs leather isn't a good argument either, though the number of physical AEs makes it more significant than you think. But the nature of group hp buffs, which inquisitors do get if you have your 4-set from TSO, is incredibly important. You can increase the survivability of squishies in a group by an enormous degree that druids can't hope to duplicate. But this is only true if you do have group-wide tenacity, so I could understand your perspective if you don't have access to that yet.</blockquote>I have both of my endline stances aswell as FD. Which ONLY parses high if the Inquisitor procs it, then the group gets the proc. As you know some fights you cannot get close enough or you will get hit with an AoE that has the potential of killing you. Interrupt DoTs huh, I have never seen them myself but it is well known that DoTs themselves cause interrupts.As for group wide tenacity, yeah it is good IF you have the gear, and then what happens when that gear is outdated? Never use gear as an argument, except for maybe forseeable upgrades such as Mythical 2.0.Also, I got my Agility up to around 600 aswell as a bunch of +defense, aswell as using the Shield of Rainbow Hues (highest protection shield that I know of that we can use). My avoidance sat at a weak 30%. If anyone has any suggestions on how to get this higher, except via adornments I know of those.

Orthureon

06-08-2009, 07:02 PM

<cite>Sprinng@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote> The only huge thing we (Inquisitors) get over all other healers is Steadfast and that is really only ever useful soloing, which I mean what good content can you solo now with any class? </blockquote>Templars get that too, do they not? Thats Cleric STR Tree if i recall...</blockquote>Yes both Clerics get it from Str line, I was speaking about the Inquisitor. Templar gets many nice things over other healers.

Tehom

06-08-2009, 07:43 PM

<cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote>I have both of my endline stances aswell as FD. Which ONLY parses high if the Inquisitor procs it, then the group gets the proc. As you know some fights you cannot get close enough or you will get hit with an AoE that has the potential of killing you. Interrupt DoTs huh, I have never seen them myself but it is well known that DoTs themselves cause interrupts.As for group wide tenacity, yeah it is good IF you have the gear, and then what happens when that gear is outdated? Never use gear as an argument, except for maybe forseeable upgrades such as Mythical 2.0.Also, I got my Agility up to around 600 aswell as a bunch of +defense, aswell as using the Shield of Rainbow Hues (highest protection shield that I know of that we can use). My avoidance sat at a weak 30%. If anyone has any suggestions on how to get this higher, except via adornments I know of those.</blockquote>There's infusions/reductions (the expensive 30 minute food) that gives uncontested parry/dodge percentages, and those are pretty standard for clerics to use. Other things are like the wrist with parry that's a heart reward from the Sisters in Hate, or even the mastercrafted necklace with riposte on it. One thing you may not know is that +defense doesn't matter for shield ally - it just checks for avoidance checks from shield block, dodge, parry, riposte, or deflect for brawlers. Before +shield block was nerfed, a lot of clerics used to run the mastercrafted armor with small bits of shield block on em too, but not much point to doing that anymore.I think gear is a legitimate argument, because all game balance changes. I don't think it's necessarily invalid to argue how things are balanced now, even when things change radically next expansion. I would agree that it's not fair to generalize things like saying because class X is better than class Y at the avatar-geared/full-tso-set gear level that it necessarily follows that they are at the VP-level or heroic gear level, but it doesn't change imbalances from existing even if they're only for a year or two before the gear is made obsolescent.As far as interrupts go, a few examples off the top of my head - a curse from trakanon he puts on random people, hateful intercession on Byzola, trying to heal groups on adds from Zarrakon is prevented by interrupts, mandate on Anashti, and most avatars.

Ralniv

06-09-2009, 03:12 AM

In my opinion Warden, Templar, and Defiler can all be considered "pure" healers. Druids seem to get smacked around a lot in this thread but I don't see the issue from a group or raid standpoint. Their HoT's are extremely fast casting compared to Shamans and Clerics wards, reactives, and direct heals, and the Druids can stack those HoT's to the point of insanity. I think that the fast casting ability makes up for their lesser ability to completely prevent the damage. Except, as someone mentioned, in a situation where the tank may be one-shotted by a powerful mob.I'm certainly not saying Wardens are the best healers, but in my opinion it's pretty balanced among Wardens, Defilers, and Templars.

Tehom

06-09-2009, 03:03 PM

<cite>Ralniv@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote>In my opinion Warden, Templar, and Defiler can all be considered "pure" healers. Druids seem to get smacked around a lot in this thread but I don't see the issue from a group or raid standpoint. Their HoT's are extremely fast casting compared to Shamans and Clerics wards, reactives, and direct heals, and the Druids can stack those HoT's to the point of insanity. I think that the fast casting ability makes up for their lesser ability to completely prevent the damage. Except, as someone mentioned, in a situation where the tank may be one-shotted by a powerful mob.</blockquote>The problem is that the tank isn't the one you're worried about on harder stuff - with the exception of really a handful of fights that have curses designed specifically to kill the tank, your MT should never be in danger until the team that supports him or her (healers, avoidance lend, debuffers) are all dead or otherwise neutralized (banished, stifles, whatever). Which means what you're really worried about is everyone else dying - and the rest of the raid being one-shotted on a lot of newer and tougher encounters is a very real concern, which druids aren't nearly as well designed to handle.

Sprin

06-09-2009, 04:42 PM

<cite>Alaocia@Guk wrote:</cite><blockquote>Druids contrary to most peoples perception actually have awesome healing power, but it does not "always" show up on a raid parse since wards/reacts count first. </blockquote>I have seen this and heard this alot, mostly from druids..... And while i understand everyones "concept" it really is just the fact that druid heals didnt heal for as much...Say someone takes a 1,000 point attack... There is a ward up for 500 of that (counts for 500 on the mystics parse) and also a reactive from templar for 300 (300 for the cleric)...500 of that attack is absorbed by the Ward... the other 500 left over instantly triggers the 300 reactive... so that leaves a total of 200 that is left to even heal.. so say the druid popped their heal over time that ticked for 300 each tick right before the attack... the 500 ward, followed by the 300 reactive have chewed up all but 200... so that initial heal from the druid or the tick... only 200 of it "heals" the tank...So the initial 500 blast heal and the rest of the 3 ticks of 300 (including 100 from the first tick) from the druid are just wasted on 100 percent HP... so it really actually didnt do anything, thus didnt show up on parse...So there is no "my heal didnt show up" its that your heal didnt do the healing. Reactives are instant heal, wards are damage prevents... so the druid heals are just healing what those 2 didnt cover... so to say "its just reading it last" is true and false... yes its reading it last in the fact that it was the last thing to heal... if there was nothing left to heal after the ward and the reactive, then there is nothing to read... so its not "last" its just not there at all..Its the nature of the the types of heals...There is no error in the amount of healing that ACT reads, its just the fact the other classes healed it BEFORE the druids did. Now if reactives and wards arent up initially, that 500 initial heal plus the ticks of 300 are going to show up on the druids parse as the full 1k heal, as even if the wards and the reactives go up after that hit, 0 of them will show up on the heal parse, as the tank isnt taking any more damage (were assuming just a 1k hit and nothing else)That being said, if shamans and clerics are spaming their wards and reactives then the druids heals have a very low likelyhood of showing up on the parse.. not becase the parse is inaccurate, just because of the above reasons...Thus leading druids to say "Well ACT reads our heals last so its not accurate" which is false

LardLord

06-09-2009, 05:19 PM

The problem Druids face has nothing to do with the heal parse. And they, in fact, are capable of healing a lot more AE damage than Clerics and Shaman, but in 100% of raid encounters I can think of, the AE damage either 1-shots people who are not buffed/warded, can be largely prevented with quick cures, and/or is easily healed by a Shaman/Cleric. There's literally no need at all for the AE healing Druids bring. It's all about control effects, cures, and preventing 1-shots (and double-taps). When you look at the strengths and weaknesses of each non-Druid healer, you can kinda see how they are balanced for those three critical tasks, and like I wrote earlier in the thread, that balance shows in the rosters of high-end guilds. On the other hand, the only tool Druids have to help with any of those three things is Shell, which has too severe of penalty (being unable to heal with it up) and is on too long of recast to even come close to balancing with the abilities Shaman/Clerics get.

Sprin

06-09-2009, 05:28 PM

<cite>Quabi@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>There's literally no need at all for the AE healing Druids bring. </blockquote>/cough Chokers on for everyone!!!!!!!!!!! /cough

LardLord

06-09-2009, 05:45 PM

<cite>Sprinng@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Quabi@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>There's literally no need at all for the AE healing Druids bring. </blockquote>/cough Chokers on for everyone!!!!!!!!!!! /cough</blockquote>I assume you're joking, but choker damage is pretty meaningless. My entire group can be using chokers on Palace trash, and just the heal procs from the Zarrakon wrist alone completely heal it...never even have to cast a heal.

Aneova

06-09-2009, 08:08 PM

Reliance on proc items leads to sloppiness if something happens to the item.

Sprin

06-09-2009, 09:00 PM

<cite>Quabi@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sprinng@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Quabi@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>There's literally no need at all for the AE healing Druids bring. </blockquote>/cough Chokers on for everyone!!!!!!!!!!! /cough</blockquote>I assume you're joking, but choker damage is pretty meaningless. My entire group can be using chokers on Palace trash, and just the heal procs from the Zarrakon wrist alone completely heal it...never even have to cast a heal.</blockquote>I assume your joking in assuming that every healer in the entire game that raids has the Zarrakon wrists...And dont bet on that after the proc nerf.....

LardLord

06-09-2009, 09:47 PM

<cite>Sprinng@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>I assume your joking in assuming that every healer in the entire game that raids has the Zarrakon wrists...And dont bet on that after the proc nerf.....</blockquote>The proc changes won't have much effect on the Zarrakon wrist proc since the people who use that item don't have much heal crit or base heal amount. It's a scout/fighter item ( aITEM 2014317121 -1144399735:Bangle of the Blood Symphony/a ).I know not every guild has many of those, but my point was simply that choker damage isn't very significant. When you have RoK raid instance-geared Shaman/Clerics capable of AE healing 6K+ HPS, the few hundred DPS groupwide from the choker doesn't matter much.(I actually thought you were joking, by the way...guess not, heh. Sorry if I offended you.)

Tehom

06-09-2009, 10:58 PM

Actually, even though choker damage is 'focus', all focus damage has an underlying type which matters for what damage-specific wards cover against it. In this case, choker damage is focus-but-magic, which means that shield of faith from templars, the ward to arcane tempo that troubadors can attach, and the anti-magic ward that defilers attach to their mitigation buff all absorb it. With arcane tempo up and in my group (I play a defiler), I never really notice chokers at all unless there's other magic-based damage people are taking.People really get misled by thinking that just because something is focus that means it doesn't have a damage type. You may not be able to mitigate it, but it still can matter for wards.

Kendayar

06-10-2009, 12:50 PM

<cite>Oakum wrote:</cite><blockquote>The best thing a warden has going for us is the power proc from the fabled version of our epic which is raised some by our myth versions.That is about to be nerfed since the power regen does crit and give back extra power and it will no longer crit with the upcoming proc nerf. How bad will that be? We probably wont be able to tell until it goes live.</blockquote>I predict this will punish those wardens who do not have a very high heal crit to make up for the procs not critting anymore.Fabled Epic Warden with no raid gear = most likely not infinite power. pretty much hit and miss. some fights power will have infinite power, some the warden will run out, others just a super slow drain.Mythical Epic Warden with fabled gear = every heal is pretty much a crit. basically the RNG just has to give you that 50% chance you need.

Oakum

06-10-2009, 01:57 PM

<cite>Vanand@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Oakum wrote:</cite><blockquote>The best thing a warden has going for us is the power proc from the fabled version of our epic which is raised some by our myth versions.That is about to be nerfed since the power regen does crit and give back extra power and it will no longer crit with the upcoming proc nerf. How bad will that be? We probably wont be able to tell until it goes live.</blockquote>I predict this will punish those wardens who do not have a very high heal crit to make up for the procs not critting anymore.Fabled Epic Warden with no raid gear = most likely not infinite power. pretty much hit and miss. some fights power will have infinite power, some the warden will run out, others just a super slow drain.Mythical Epic Warden with fabled gear = every heal is pretty much a crit. basically the RNG just has to give you that 50% chance you need.</blockquote>I agree, How bad actually we will wait to see like I said. The newer lvl 80's/non raid geared with lower heal crit wardens will of course take the brunt of the nerf.Its okay, every once in a while there have been periods where you see "LF for solo healer for blank instance, cleric or shaman only please" since LU-13. Why should it change now, lol.Furys and wardens, except for special fights, do have the worst buffs for groups and tanks though. It wouldnt be such a bad thing if we were like chanters that could dps really high when not using their utility but we cant.Maybe SoE just loves chanters more then druids. lol. I havent looked at Fury parses compared to chanters parses to see if they are close or not. Even if wardens are no where near close fury's might be so I am putting a disclaimer in there, lol.Oh, yeah, the Warden's myth (who can melee spec and actually use it for dps) is a crappy dps weapon compared to either the Hammer of Hard Knocks from WoE or the one from the HQ and most warden "DPS" gear does not have wis/heal crit on it so if doing the secondary side of the druid class the warden gets no benefit from the EPIC at all.I still say wardens should be allowed to duel weild through aa's if nothing else. Then a warden might actually be able to use it for proccing power while dpsing where the occasional backup heal is needed when the wards and reactives get blown away or an add gets on the group or raid and healing is suddenly required.

Kendayar

06-10-2009, 03:42 PM

I don't even DPS spec using my myth. I use a 2hander (Thex Mallet atm) and put on dps gear (got a heal set and a dps set on macro hotkeys so it's just 1 click) I'm just starting on the gear and I can push 2k when i'm out solo questing. In exchange for dps though, I lose heal power. Fair enough. But understand that enchanters are still mages, and mages are dps classes, so it makes sense that if they aren't using their utility, they are dpsing. And please understand that Furies were made for offense. They can put out dps without having to strip so much of their healing ability. Heck, even their myth will let someone be a stronger healer so they can get more dps in. Wardens would be fine just being a defensive healer but here's the problem: where's the defense? where's the utility? And as for the solo healer part: Stacked groups only need maybe a cleric or a shaman to solo heal it. And some instances they are better at solo healing because they can focus all the healing to one person. Not that a warden can't do it - it's just a min/max thing.

MadLuna

06-13-2009, 06:40 AM

I am just comparing inquisitors and templars here since I have most experience with clerics. My Ogre main was a templar after betraying back in the days when you could only do it before level 18 and played as a templar until level 60, Betrayed back and became an inquisitor since I wanted to test that class and the raiding I did at that time needed one.My experience was that in raw healing power a templar was better, but I soon discovered that you cannot always compare healing power, since the goal is keeping the group alive, using any means necessary.For that purpose I dps whenever I can, using my pure debuffs, the attacks that also contains debuffing elements and above all I always try to use my attacks that have interrupts or any kind of stun/daze/stifle, including racial attacks that knockback and stuns for a few seconds.This helps the group/raid kill faster and in case of heroics anything that stops or reduces the mob(s) from doing damage helps me both in keeping the tank in the green and lowers the amount of pure healing I have to do.Of course there are mobs that you must stay ranged or cannot use dps or wehre your interrupting attacks does not work, mostly raid encounters but a few heroic mobs also exists. In those cases inquisitors may have trouble, but in raids there are other healers that may take up the slack.Before getting my myth, power could be a issue if having to cure alot and having Dogma active, since whenever the inquisitor casts a beneficial spell on an ally, that ally receives additional health replenishment. A smallamount of power is drained from the inquisitor each time this effect triggers. In those cases I had to lower my healing capability a bit by removing Dogma.However, Inquest that feeds me power have many times in raids/group kept me well supplied with power if kept on a fast hitting dps:er and thus I have rarely if ever run out of power in a proper group setup.So yeah, inqusitiors are definately oriented more toward dps and must be more pro-active. I could lean back as a templar but am forced as an inqusitor to stay more alert.

Oakum

07-08-2009, 07:51 PM

<cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Oakum wrote:</cite><blockquote>As for DPS, you have to remember something important there are 3 DPSing priests. Inquisitor, Mystic, Fury. In all equal gear dps will be about the same, the inquis MIGHT have the edge if their flurries hit often and actually hit. That being said Plate healers used to have the edge in survivability wearing plate armor, now all other healers can get the same mitigation as us, ASWELL as more (sometimes far more) avoidance.</blockquote>Btw I am not sure if anyone else is aware, but most people consider Inquisitors to be the worst healer in game. And that is not because of the "DPS syndrome".</blockquote>I know some inquisitors that can out heal me in a group and I know some that cant which generally have worse gear then I do.As far as dpsing, you forget that DRUIDS, not just fury's trade heavier armor in order to do more DPS then both cleric and shaman. I have no problem with Furys out dpsing wardens by a small margin, just like most fury's dont have aproblem with wardens outhealing them by a small margin (myths not involved). But cleric and shaman outdpsing druids should not happen. It does but thats SoE's lack of balancing with the expansions after LU-13. Wardens are a fun class to play when leveling. But a lot get shelved as the unplayed alt unless no other healers are available at max lvl and they are a "decent" soloing class so when people are not playing their mains or just want to hide from people that dont know them well, they get played to harvest or farm trash or whatever.Its funny that all the plate and chain healers I geared up to lower lvl tso before personal issues made me see I was spending too much time playing so I scaled it back a good deal now, all had better mit and could take a hit better then I could, even with wearing the leather BP from SoH that had the "almost" chain mit on it as described by chain wearers.

Orthureon

07-08-2009, 09:14 PM

<cite>Oakum wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Oakum wrote:</cite><blockquote>As for DPS, you have to remember something important there are 3 DPSing priests. Inquisitor, Mystic, Fury. In all equal gear dps will be about the same, the inquis MIGHT have the edge if their flurries hit often and actually hit. That being said Plate healers used to have the edge in survivability wearing plate armor, now all other healers can get the same mitigation as us, ASWELL as more (sometimes far more) avoidance.</blockquote>Btw I am not sure if anyone else is aware, but most people consider Inquisitors to be the worst healer in game. And that is not because of the "DPS syndrome".</blockquote>I know some inquisitors that can out heal me in a group and I know some that cant which generally have worse gear then I do.As far as dpsing, you forget that DRUIDS, not just fury's trade heavier armor in order to do more DPS then both cleric and shaman. I have no problem with Furys out dpsing wardens by a small margin, just like most fury's dont have aproblem with wardens outhealing them by a small margin (myths not involved). But cleric and shaman outdpsing druids should not happen. It does but thats SoE's lack of balancing with the expansions after LU-13. Wardens are a fun class to play when leveling. But a lot get shelved as the unplayed alt unless no other healers are available at max lvl and they are a "decent" soloing class so when people are not playing their mains or just want to hide from people that dont know them well, they get played to harvest or farm trash or whatever.Its funny that all the plate and chain healers I geared up to lower lvl tso before personal issues made me see I was spending too much time playing so I scaled it back a good deal now, all had better mit and could take a hit better then I could, even with wearing the leather BP from SoH that had the "almost" chain mit on it as described by chain wearers.</blockquote>Hmm you must be forgeting to use some of your buffs, or get some pieces of gear with better mit. Wardens have nearly the same mit if not the same, AND better avoidance than an Inquisitor. My wife has a warden in crap gear with her buffs her mit is at 55%+. The highest I have seen another Inquisitor at is 63%.

Odys

07-10-2009, 05:00 AM

<cite>Uguv@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Chath@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'd probably say wardens get the most out-and-out healing capability of any class, but they're pretty much terrible at keeping a group alive compared to a shaman or cleric - they have almost no hp buffing capability by comparison, no real anti-status effect capability, no debuffing, weak curing, and no avoidance lend. Heroic content can be easy enough where their deficiencies don't really matter, but it doesn't mean they don't have problems on anything remotely difficult.</blockquote>It really depends on the situation. I agree with your assessment for the most part. In most cases if you're bringing one healer to do a difficult zone then a cleric or shaman would have an easier time than a druid, but not all the time. If I had to pick one healer to solo heal palace I'd bring a warden because of the types of encounters in there.By the way, wardens do get anti-status effect capabilities via AAs.</blockquote>It very much depend on gear, with T2 i feel more confortable with my warden than with my mystic. Take as example Mira3 were my groups used to take 10-12k aoe damage (was it one or two books i will never know) pushing the group back to green is hard then with a mystic.Now it also depends on the group composition, with a coercer/enchanter or bard the mystic will be better ...In the high end a mystic may outclass a warden, due to heal haste, reuse reduction, mythical and hel amount.

G'ville

07-17-2009, 02:10 AM

<cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Oakum wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Orthureon wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Oakum wrote:</cite><blockquote>As for DPS, you have to remember something important there are 3 DPSing priests. Inquisitor, Mystic, Fury. In all equal gear dps will be about the same, the inquis MIGHT have the edge if their flurries hit often and actually hit. That being said Plate healers used to have the edge in survivability wearing plate armor, now all other healers can get the same mitigation as us, ASWELL as more (sometimes far more) avoidance.</blockquote>Btw I am not sure if anyone else is aware, but most people consider Inquisitors to be the worst healer in game. And that is not because of the "DPS syndrome".</blockquote>I know some inquisitors that can out heal me in a group and I know some that cant which generally have worse gear then I do.As far as dpsing, you forget that DRUIDS, not just fury's trade heavier armor in order to do more DPS then both cleric and shaman. I have no problem with Furys out dpsing wardens by a small margin, just like most fury's dont have aproblem with wardens outhealing them by a small margin (myths not involved). But cleric and shaman outdpsing druids should not happen. It does but thats SoE's lack of balancing with the expansions after LU-13. Wardens are a fun class to play when leveling. But a lot get shelved as the unplayed alt unless no other healers are available at max lvl and they are a "decent" soloing class so when people are not playing their mains or just want to hide from people that dont know them well, they get played to harvest or farm trash or whatever.Its funny that all the plate and chain healers I geared up to lower lvl tso before personal issues made me see I was spending too much time playing so I scaled it back a good deal now, all had better mit and could take a hit better then I could, even with wearing the leather BP from SoH that had the "almost" chain mit on it as described by chain wearers.</blockquote>Hmm you must be forgeting to use some of your buffs, or get some pieces of gear with better mit. Wardens have nearly the same mit if not the same, AND better avoidance than an Inquisitor. My wife has a warden in crap gear with her buffs her mit is at 55%+. The highest I have seen another Inquisitor at is 63%.</blockquote>That seems strange all things being considered I almost always out live the softer healers. I know I forgo DPS or heals to keep that but I have taken a shot or two from raid named and kept on going.In my experience Wardens are the best all around healers for everything except for maybe the MT of a raid.

Tehom

07-17-2009, 06:59 PM

Well hp and crit mit tends to dwarf any difference in physical mitigation the different healers might have by a pretty huge margin. Druids have the same survivability problems that their groups do due to lack of hp buffs.

Carthr

09-04-2009, 11:41 AM

Once an inquisitor gets a few key pieces of gear, they really rise closer to the top of the food chain.. TSO 4 piece(as stated above) is pretty key.. 65DPS mod and 1643HP grp wide(for 2 conc slots) is pretty awesome. Zarrakon ear, and REH give them the ability to proc some decent wards, as their short fall is the inability to effectively keep mages from being one shot'd until those mages have adequate crit mit. The Inquisitor mythical(like most myth's) is class defining. Both aftershock(to a smaller extent) and the ability to cure all det effects every 12 seconds(with a heal component) is HUGE. If there is a fight that, due to unfortunant circumstances, has to be solo healed; most of the times an Inquisitor will be healing it. Tyrannus is a great example... He's still a pain to solo heal as an inquisitor, since his 3 AE dot's are relatively close, but with alittle team work, he can be solo healed by an inquis without a ton of issues. Tythus is a cake walk.. The ability to self cure with Fervant Faith, and then cure the entire grp in less than a second of any effects is pretty uber.. Another encounter where Inquis's really shine is Gozak.. His spray procs dot's of all different types.. The only healer that can effectively wipe all those dots is; you guessed it; an inquisitor...So while out right healing power might go to some other class, TSO is about cures... And inquisitors more than any other class in the game, excel at cures.