Classes that need some love [Archive] - EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

Ymarik

08-30-2011, 02:59 PM

Looking at all the classes out there and comparing brought me to the conclusion that there are two classes in need of serious "love" from SOE. This is my two cents on why and how to fix the problem.TemplarTemplars have fallen out of favour. Top end raid guilds have told their templars to betray to inquisitor for, as I see it, two primary reasons:The second group cure that inquisitors receive, combined with the fact that it can be cast while moving, is a serious game-changer. SOE still hasn't clued into the fact that curing is just too damned important. We were promised back in TSO days that fights would become less curing intensive, and that just hasn't happened.The inquisitor can put out a lot more DPS while healing than the templar can. The templar's heal stance seriously affects his ability to DPS, and his DPS stance seriously affects his ability to heal.The inquisitor is worse at healing, but not enough so to be a detriment to getting the job done, and with brawler avoidance being so high and uncontested avoidance being such an advantage, the difference is more than tolerable.How to fix it?Here are a number of suggestions that would make the templar a lot more desirable.<ol><li>Remove the DPS and heal stances from the templar entirely. It is extremely difficult for a templar to heal in DPS stance/spec and to DPS in heal stance/spec. No other healer has this impediment built in to the stances.</li><li>Give the templar a proximity (i.e., "blue") auto cure AA line that cures based on proximity to the templar. This would need to be a short-duration ability that has a cooldown. </li><li>Improve the reuse on the templar's group cure, or give templars an AA line that allows them to shorten the recast on the group cure. </li><li>Change the templar's cure curse to be groupwide. This would allow the possibility of recovery in certain fights when curses start spreading.</li><li>Give the templar a group knockback immunity on a two minute reuse timer.</li><li>Allow the templar's death immunity to be cast on any raid member.</li></ol>These are just suggestions, and not all of them need be implemented, but they would make ditching the templar in favour of an inquisitor a less than clear cut decision.How not to fix it.The templar doesn't need a second group cure, or different heals. The templar just needs to bring more unique abilities to the table. They do need to be a more effective curer, but this needs to happen in a unique way and not copy other healers.TroubadourWhile troubadours definitely are not experiencing a decline in usefulness, it seems like many raid forces are constantly recruiting them. The class just is not fun for a couple of reasons.First, it's a primarily melee class but the troubadour is usually stuck with a group of mages and a solo healer who stay a good distance away from the target. This means that the bulk of the troubadour's abilities are not usable for a large portion of the fight.Second, it's a utility class with a lot of important debuffs that have to be kept up and a lot of short-term buffs that have to continually be renewed. That doesn't leave a lot of time for "having fun" (i.e., putting out DPS).How to fix it?Change the troubadour's combat arts to be ranged instead of melee. This allows them to be at their peak DPS effectiveness while not in melee with the mob. Make them a combination of ranger and mage.Change the troubadour's green debuffs to blue debuffs and their green AoEs to blue AoEs.How not to fix itDo not give troubadours a cure or any other ability that is more utility. Troubadours are already 80% utility. The issue is fun - give them something distinctive over dirges.

Rick777

08-30-2011, 04:48 PM

<cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote>Looking at all the classes out there and comparing brought me to the conclusion that there are two classes in need of serious "love" from SOE. This is my two cents on why and how to fix the problem.TemplarTemplars have fallen out of favour. Top end raid guilds have told their templars to betray to inquisitor for, as I see it, two primary reasons:The second group cure that inquisitors receive, combined with the fact that it can be cast while moving, is a serious game-changer. SOE still hasn't clued into the fact that curing is just too damned important. We were promised back in TSO days that fights would become less curing intensive, and that just hasn't happened.The inquisitor can put out a lot more DPS while healing than the templar can. The templar's heal stance seriously affects his ability to DPS, and his DPS stance seriously affects his ability to heal.The inquisitor is worse at healing, but not enough so to be a detriment to getting the job done, and with brawler avoidance being so high and uncontested avoidance being such an advantage, the difference is more than tolerable.How to fix it?Here are a number of suggestions that would make the templar a lot more desirable.<ol><li>Remove the DPS and heal stances from the templar entirely. It is extremely difficult for a templar to heal in DPS stance/spec and to DPS in heal stance/spec. No other healer has this impediment built in to the stances.</li><li>Give the templar a proximity (i.e., "blue") auto cure AA line that cures based on proximity to the templar. This would need to be a short-duration ability that has a cooldown. </li><li>Improve the reuse on the templar's group cure, or give templars an AA line that allows them to shorten the recast on the group cure. </li><li>Change the templar's cure curse to be groupwide. This would allow the possibility of recovery in certain fights when curses start spreading.</li><li>Give the templar a group knockback immunity on a two minute reuse timer.</li><li>Allow the templar's death immunity to be cast on any raid member.</li></ol>These are just suggestions, and not all of them need be implemented, but they would make ditching the templar in favour of an inquisitor a less than clear cut decision.How not to fix it.The templar doesn't need a second group cure, or different heals. The templar just needs to bring more unique abilities to the table. They do need to be a more effective curer, but this needs to happen in a unique way and not copy other healers.</blockquote>Well said. While many will argue whether a 2nd group cure is the answer or not, the real issue is the content. Templars defensive and superior healing ability are simply not needed in this xpac, and with the incredible focus put on curing and having your group cure always up (not to mention the fact of curing while knocked back/up, running back to group, etc). Templars would need nothing at all if the content were fixed to not have such an incredible dependence on curing and required more of the templars defensive skills. But common sense tells us that in observing that every single xpac curing becomes more important than the previous one, it is pure fantasy to expect SOE to backtrack on their deep love for curing.I'd venture to say all of your cure suggestions are still the same as just giving us a 2nd group cure, I don't see why bother to put perfume on feces. It really is the most viable solution short of SOE just fixing the content as they previously promised. Make the 2nd group cure have less range, longer reuse, longer cast time than inquisitors, make it be not useable when moving, make it an AA heavy choice so we have to sacrifice something else for it, I don't mind if any of these are the case just so inquisitors don't feel slighted. The fact of the matter is that even with a 2nd group cure the inquisitor will still remain the choice for dps group healing, and if the content doesn't change will probably still remain the choice for MT healer as they are currently. I'd just be happy if as a Templar I could solo heal a non MT group, or if I didn't have to have the possibility of a raid wipe if coordinating group cures with a shaman didn't work out in the heat of the other 1000 things I have to think about during a fight.As for DPS, I wouldn't petition for the removal of stances, inquisitors need to have something they are far superior to templars at, and dps should be their expertise. Inquisitors have not been made stronger in this xpac, it's simply that raid leaders are opting for them because they can heal both MT and non MT groups better than templars can with their curing ability. For the Templar I'd say the only thing that needs to be done is take away the SILLY disable smite wrath detriment, losing 25% of most of my dps is just silly whenever I cast a cure or heal, other than that possibly focus on giving Templars either melee or spell dps instead of half a$$ing it and giving us a bit of both. Personally I'd prefer all spell damage to differentiate us from inquisitors, but I know a lot of templars love melee damage so I'd be happy with either solution, but it would be nice to know what to concentrate on when getting gear. Which brings me to the next SOE dumb move, their lack of melee priest itemization and now their even greater dumb move in letting spell autoattack cancel melee autoattack, it's just junk like this that makes you scratch your head and wonder who is at the helm.

Brienae

08-30-2011, 04:56 PM

Banditman

08-30-2011, 05:01 PM

You don't want to be Rangers. I swear you don't. You might think you do, but you don't. The annoyance level from having mixed Ranged and Melee skills and the accompanying auto attack problems it creates are enough to drive even the most patient person mad.*IF* SOE can find a way to make Auto Attack changing not [reverse blow], better yet, be (optionally) automatic, it would be a great idea. Rangers would probably faint en masse.

Lethe5683

08-30-2011, 05:08 PM

<cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote>TroubadourHow to fix it?Change the troubadour's combat arts to be ranged instead of melee. This allows them to be at their peak DPS effectiveness while not in melee with the mob. Make them a combination of ranger and mage.Change the troubadour's green debuffs to blue debuffs and their green AoEs to blue AoEs.</blockquote>Although those changes would help a lot I think it will take quite a lot more than that to make up for the incredible DPS gap between troubs and dirges.<cite>Banditman wrote:</cite><blockquote>You don't want to be Rangers. I swear you don't. You might think you do, but you don't. The annoyance level from having mixed Ranged and Melee skills and the accompanying auto attack problems it creates are enough to drive even the most patient person mad.</blockquote>It's not bad when you get used to it.

Mikai

08-31-2011, 03:13 PM

<cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote>TemplarTemplars have fallen out of favour. Top end raid guilds have told their templars to betray to inquisitor for, as I see it, two primary reasons:The second group cure that inquisitors receive, combined with the fact that it can be cast while moving, is a serious game-changer. SOE still hasn't clued into the fact that curing is just too damned important. We were promised back in TSO days that fights would become less curing intensive, and that just hasn't happened.The inquisitor can put out a lot more DPS while healing than the templar can. The templar's heal stance seriously affects his ability to DPS, and his DPS stance seriously affects his ability to heal.The inquisitor is worse at healing, but not enough so to be a detriment to getting the job done, and with brawler avoidance being so high and uncontested avoidance being such an advantage, the difference is more than tolerable.How to fix it?Here are a number of suggestions that would make the templar a lot more desirable.<ol><li>Remove the DPS and heal stances from the templar entirely. It is extremely difficult for a templar to heal in DPS stance/spec and to DPS in heal stance/spec. No other healer has this impediment built in to the stances.</li><li>Give the templar a proximity (i.e., "blue") auto cure AA line that cures based on proximity to the templar. This would need to be a short-duration ability that has a cooldown. </li><li>Improve the reuse on the templar's group cure, or give templars an AA line that allows them to shorten the recast on the group cure. </li><li>Change the templar's cure curse to be groupwide. This would allow the possibility of recovery in certain fights when curses start spreading.</li><li>Give the templar a group knockback immunity on a two minute reuse timer.</li><li>Allow the templar's death immunity to be cast on any raid member.</li></ol>These are just suggestions, and not all of them need be implemented, but they would make ditching the templar in favour of an inquisitor a less than clear cut decision.How not to fix it.The templar doesn't need a second group cure, or different heals. The templar just needs to bring more unique abilities to the table. They do need to be a more effective curer, but this needs to happen in a unique way and not copy other healers.</blockquote>The thing is SOE has forgotten what was supposed to define the individual classes. Right now, the 2 clerics are so similar except that Inqs have more DPS that the once-class-defining abilities that Templars had have been made negligible. Sanctuary is not as critical in this expansion. Almost everything can be minimized with a healer that is skilled at pre-casting cures. Mana Cure is hit and miss and does not nearly make up for the lack of a second group cure. Repent is great, but Inquisitors get along fine without it. But for God's Sake do something with Reverence, PLEASE! I used Healing Fate for a little bit when, in Iceshard Keep, I realized that the mobs would ignore my reactives, but in raiding it was almost useless.I don't want to be an inquisitor. I'm quite happy with my role in healing. My Raid Leader doesn't even weigh healer DPS heavily. Yes, we have healers that do DPS phenomenally, but he couldn't care less if we do or not as long as we do our primary job of healing. Frankly, while I don't mind dpsing when able, I didn't roll a Templar to be a hybrid. I rolled a Templar for kick-butt healage because that's what I am good at.While getting another group cure would make me so happy, I have to kind of agree with the OP. The last thing we really need is something that makes the 2 classes even more similar. What we should have is something class defining that actually matters in this expansion. I like the idea of knockback immunity since SOE is so fond of them this expansion. Add it to Sanctuary and make that skill useful again. Ability to reduce the recast on our group cure would help alleviate the cure issue.How about rather than having Mana Cure proc cures (unreliably) have a chance to give us a single-use group cure "spell" (think the debuff Necros have that gives them additional one-use ability) so when can decide when we want to use it rather than have it hit when we're curing anyway? Do with the group cure what was done with the cure curse: if it doesn't cure anything, it isn't a waste. Cannot count the number of times the defiler and I have mistakenly group cured at the same time leaving us frantic to ST cure the group the next round.I do NOT want to be an Inq. But I do want to be able to handle the obscene number of cures that come our way. For any Inqs that insist "oh well, about time you had some competition for the MT slot", that's not what this is about. I'm not in danger of losing my spot despite not being an Inq because I've proven time and time again how good I am at healing. The point is we sacrificed the DPS so we could have better heals, and this expansion changed all that. We just want the balance back.

Crismorn

08-31-2011, 03:31 PM

Templars dont need anything other than hard content to be hard again.This is the first xpac since eq2 came out that people take Inquis over Templar, just deal with it

Rick777

08-31-2011, 03:36 PM

<cite>Mikai@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>While getting another group cure would make me so happy, I have to kind of agree with the OP. The last thing we really need is something that makes the 2 classes even more similar. What we should have is something class defining that actually matters in this expansion. I like the idea of knockback immunity since SOE is so fond of them this expansion. Add it to Sanctuary and make that skill useful again. Ability to reduce the recast on our group cure would help alleviate the cure issue.How about rather than having Mana Cure proc cures (unreliably) have a chance to give us a single-use group cure "spell" (think the debuff Necros have that gives them additional one-use ability) so when can decide when we want to use it rather than have it hit when we're curing anyway? Do with the group cure what was done with the cure curse: if it doesn't cure anything, it isn't a waste. Cannot count the number of times the defiler and I have mistakenly group cured at the same time leaving us frantic to ST cure the group the next round.I do NOT want to be an Inq. But I do want to be able to handle the obscene number of cures that come our way. For any Inqs that insist "oh well, about time you had some competition for the MT slot", that's not what this is about. I'm not in danger of losing my spot despite not being an Inq because I've proven time and time again how good I am at healing. The point is we sacrificed the DPS so we could have better heals, and this expansion changed all that. We just want the balance back.</blockquote>You guys shouldn't be so contrite, things like reducing reuse on our single group cure, wishing you and the shaman don't trip up your group cure rotation, and the wish to "handle the obscene number or cures that come our way" all boil down to wanting to be able to keep up with the number of group detriments that land on your group. Saying you don't want a 2nd group cure makes no sense if you are just calling the SAME thing by a different name like a lower reuse group cure, it's the same thing. Don't get me wrong I'll take a lower reuse on my group cure, but it's just semantics and really boils down to the same thing.I'm guilty of it myself, trying to step lightly around the inquisitors in fear that they will begin to scream that they are subpar again because templars got a 2nd group cure. But I'm sorry, I've been frustrated this xpac in raid leaders not wanting Templars for any of their groups, not their MT group, not their OT group, and not their DPS groups. Even with a 2nd group cure the Templar will still be the 2nd choice this xpac for MT/non MT groups, but I'm completely OK with that as long as I'm given the tools to do my job in this xpac. I can overheal and overdefense my group all I want, but that's nothing more than wasted heals and wasted defense. The balance of heal versus dps is still there and needs no changes IMO, it's just that the content makes one cleric benefit much more than the other.

Buzzing

08-31-2011, 04:12 PM

I'm guessing the world just hates Paladins...

Bruener

08-31-2011, 04:46 PM

<cite>Crismorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>Templars dont need anything other than hard content to be hard again.This is the first xpac since eq2 came out that people take Inquis over Templar, just deal with it</blockquote>Fix the 2 Fighters making it too easy and problem solved.

Brienae

08-31-2011, 04:52 PM

<cite>Banditman wrote:</cite><blockquote>You don't want to be Rangers. I swear you don't. You might think you do, but you don't. The annoyance level from having mixed Ranged and Melee skills and the accompanying auto attack problems it creates are enough to drive even the most patient person mad.*IF* SOE can find a way to make Auto Attack changing not [reverse blow], better yet, be (optionally) automatic, it would be a great idea. Rangers would probably faint en masse.</blockquote>You're right I don't want to be a Ranger. I want to be a Troubador. Giving us more ranged ability is just one idea but as was said it will most likely take more than that. I'm hoping and fearing that the fact that we have received no attention means our class is recieving a complete revamp. So we will see what happens.

Crismorn

08-31-2011, 04:57 PM

Lethe5683

08-31-2011, 05:01 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Crismorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>Templars dont need anything other than hard content to be hard again.This is the first xpac since eq2 came out that people take Inquis over Templar, just deal with it</blockquote>Fix the 2 Fighters making it too easy and problem solved.</blockquote>It's almost funny to see you calling other fighters OP after you consistantly denied that SKs were ever OP. Anyways, in this case I do actually agree with you; I am not hesitant to admit that my class is OP when it is.

Bruener

08-31-2011, 05:34 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Crismorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>Templars dont need anything other than hard content to be hard again.This is the first xpac since eq2 came out that people take Inquis over Templar, just deal with it</blockquote>Fix the 2 Fighters making it too easy and problem solved.</blockquote>It's almost funny to see you calling other fighters OP after you consistantly denied that SKs were ever OP. Anyways, in this case I do actually agree with you; I am not hesitant to admit that my class is OP when it is.</blockquote>Thats because SKs weren't OP'd in SF like people tried to claim. Fighters were actually balanced in SF but because of massive whining still when DoV launched Crusaders and Zerks got nerfs and Crusaders got junk for new abilities while Brawlers got even more. All it did was destroy the balance SF saw.All you have to do is look at the outcome to easily see how dumb the "general population" was in SF when it came to how they viewed Fighter balance.

Wasuna

08-31-2011, 06:05 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>Thats because SKs weren't OP'd in SF like people tried to claim. Fighters were actually balanced in SF but because of massive whining still when DoV launched Crusaders and Zerks got nerfs and Crusaders got junk for new abilities while Brawlers got even more. All it did was destroy the balance SF saw.All you have to do is look at the outcome to easily see how dumb the "general population" was in SF when it came to how they viewed Fighter balance.</blockquote>When the vasty majority (like 90%) of the population believe it's true then what you have to say basically doesn't matter. So, your opinion of SF fighter balance is irrelevant.Troubadors, yes, give them something. They are just irritating to play. I understand that they buff their group and provide DPS that way. It doesn't matter, very few people play them. I have a 90/300 troubador that I just flat am not going to play until they get some fun added back into them.Templars, I love templars for hard Heroic zones since that stuff hits much harder than EM raid bosses. The EM raiding that I have done an Inquisitor can easily solo heal me while tanking as a Guardian. Templar can heal me much easier but flat can not keep up with the cures that this expansion is all about. What good is defensive healing when it's not needed?

Bruener

08-31-2011, 06:10 PM

<cite>Wasuna wrote:</cite><blockquote>When the vasty majority (like 90%) of the population believe it's true then what you have to say basically doesn't matter. So, your opinion of SF fighter balance is irrelevant.</blockquote>If only these forums had something like the Electorial College to weed out that 90% of the population that have no clue.Just because some people that don't really know how the mechanics are working believe something is true...doesn't make it true.Its like people right now trying to make Templars more into Inq by giving them better curing capabilities, instead of actually fixing the problems...the need for Defensive healers.

Crismorn

08-31-2011, 06:14 PM

If Templars receive a boost it will be the same as it was for 3+ years with them being head and shoulders above Inquisitors.Boosting a class because you changed how raiding works with the whole EM/HM seperation would be stupid.If you cant 5uck it up then roll another FoTM class.

Yimway

08-31-2011, 06:42 PM

<cite></cite><blockquote><cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote>with brawler avoidance being so high and uncontested avoidance being such an advantage, the difference is more than tolerable.How to fix it?</blockquote></blockquote>Apparently we fix it by nerfing brawlers <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Crismorn

08-31-2011, 06:51 PM

Remove their strikethrough immunity for starters

Buzzing

08-31-2011, 07:25 PM

Rick777

08-31-2011, 07:32 PM

<cite>Crismorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>If Templars receive a boost it will be the same as it was for 3+ years with them being head and shoulders above Inquisitors.Boosting a class because you changed how raiding works with the whole EM/HM seperation would be stupid.If you cant 5uck it up then roll another FoTM class.</blockquote>I agree that fixing the content is the answer, but fat chance SOE is going to change the content. Short of changing the content you now have Templars unwanted in any raid group by RL's. If SOE fixed the content that would be acceptable IMO. Just because inquisitors were not wanted for a while does not mean in any way that the pendulum has to swing the other way and templars have to be unwanted for a while as well. So having inquisitors currently head and shoulders above templars is not the answer, regardless of past history, it's not like EQ2 has affirmative action, heck if it did my Templar would get some incredible DPS next xpac to make up for my lack of DPS the past 7 years lol.

Lethe5683

08-31-2011, 07:50 PM

<cite>Crismorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>Remove their strikethrough immunity for starters</blockquote>Remove strikethrough from the game for starters and reduce all uncontested avoidance by a significant amount.

LardLord

08-31-2011, 07:55 PM

<cite>Buzzing@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote>I don't care if you could heal twice as much, if you can't keep the group cured of the aoe's they still die. The only mechanic change that would change the need for a templar would be to make aoe's uncurable.</blockquote>As a raiding Paladin, I'm going to assume you're familiar with AEs that hit tanks for more health than they have, right? Single target effects like death touches can also do that, obviously. Inquisitors have relative few ways to deal with that damage. We can use our death save (every priest gets at least one) on a 5 minute recast, we can hit DG on a 90 second recast, or, if we take an unpopular heroic AA, we can time a 2-trigger stoneskin on the tank (also a 90 second recast). If those abilities are on cooldown, we are helpless against tank 1-shots. In addition to the tools Inquisitors have, Templars also have Repent on a ~15 second cooldown, True Faith on a ~2.5 minute cooldown, Divine Light on a ~2.5 minute cooldown, and Shield of Faith (for arcane damage) on a ~30 second cooldown.It's not just that it's easier to heal a tank as an Templar than an Inquisitor - there are situations where it's literally impossible to succeed as an Inquisitor when a Templar could time Repent (or another save) and win. Unfortunately, Brawlers can handle their own saves for the most part in pre-Drunder DoV content, making those situations much less common.EDIT: Also, it's not like a Templar cannot handle cures. Coordinate with another healer or use potions. Yeah, it's a little bit harder, but it's clearly doable - everyone did it for years. On the other hand, it is literally impossible for an Inquisitor to deal with some 1-shots that a Templar could negate with relative ease.

Buzzing

08-31-2011, 07:59 PM

Cocytus

08-31-2011, 08:11 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Crismorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>Remove their strikethrough immunity for starters</blockquote>Remove strikethrough from the game for starters and reduce all uncontested avoidance by a significant amount.</blockquote>Strikethrough should never have happened in the first place, and these fixes are terrible ideas.

Rick777

08-31-2011, 09:16 PM

<cite>Quabi@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>As a raiding Paladin, I'm going to assume you're familiar with AEs that hit tanks for more health than they have, right? Single target effects like death touches can also do that, obviously. Inquisitors have relative few ways to deal with that damage. We can use our death save (every priest gets at least one) on a 5 minute recast, we can hit DG on a 90 second recast, or, if we take an unpopular heroic AA, we can time a 2-trigger stoneskin on the tank (also a 90 second recast). If those abilities are on cooldown, we are helpless against tank 1-shots. In addition to the tools Inquisitors have, Templars also have Repent on a ~15 second cooldown, True Faith on a ~2.5 minute cooldown, Divine Light on a ~2.5 minute cooldown, and Shield of Faith (for arcane damage) on a ~30 second cooldown.It's not just that it's easier to heal a tank as an Templar than an Inquisitor - there are situations where it's literally impossible to succeed as an Inquisitor when a Templar could time Repent (or another save) and win. Unfortunately, Brawlers can handle their own saves for the most part in pre-Drunder DoV content, making those situations much less common.EDIT: Also, it's not like a Templar cannot handle cures. Coordinate with another healer or use potions. Yeah, it's a little bit harder, but it's clearly doable - everyone did it for years. On the other hand, it is literally impossible for an Inquisitor to deal with some 1-shots that a Templar could negate with relative ease.</blockquote> <cite>Quabi@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>The focus on cures is misplaced. I'm the raid leader of a relatively high end guild, and I betrayed back to Inquisitor for DoV after playing Templar for the last ~5 months of SF. It's simply that the extra survivability from Templars is not needed. If you wanted high survivability and only one healer covering cures, Warden + Templar would actually be superior to Shaman + Inquisitor (yes, shaman-less MT groups are fine, believe it or not).If they don't make it so that defensive healers are needed again, they will have to completely rebalance healers - not just Templars. Hopefully they realize this.</blockquote>Are you saying that there is raid content that HAS to be done by a templar and an inquisitor cannot heal a HM raid MT group (which I disagree with), or are you saying that since the defensive abilities of a Templar are not used to full effect in DOV that you'd rather play an inquisitor?I'm genuinely curious as you guys are well known and I respect your opinion and I'd like to know where I'm making a mistake in reading your responses on Templars in DOV.

dotdotdot

08-31-2011, 09:35 PM

<cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote>How to fix it?Change the troubadour's combat arts to be ranged instead of melee. This allows them to be at their peak DPS effectiveness while not in melee with the mob. Make them a combination of ranger and mage.Change the troubadour's green debuffs to blue debuffs and their green AoEs to blue AoEs.</blockquote>You do realize that these two ideas contradict each other. You want to make troubs fight at range, then give them blue debuffs and AOE dmg which requires them to move back into melee range to hit targets.

Lethe5683

08-31-2011, 09:43 PM

<cite>Cocytus wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Crismorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>Remove their strikethrough immunity for starters</blockquote>Remove strikethrough from the game for starters and reduce all uncontested avoidance by a significant amount.</blockquote>Strikethrough should never have happened in the first place, and these fixes are terrible ideas.</blockquote>How so?<cite>dotdotdot wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote>How to fix it?Change the troubadour's combat arts to be ranged instead of melee. This allows them to be at their peak DPS effectiveness while not in melee with the mob. Make them a combination of ranger and mage.Change the troubadour's green debuffs to blue debuffs and their green AoEs to blue AoEs.</blockquote>You do realize that these two ideas contradict each other. You want to make troubs fight at range, then give them blue debuffs and AOE dmg which requires them to move back into melee range to hit targets.</blockquote>You have no clue what you're talking about.

Crismorn

08-31-2011, 11:38 PM

<cite>Rick777 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Quabi@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>As a raiding Paladin, I'm going to assume you're familiar with AEs that hit tanks for more health than they have, right? Single target effects like death touches can also do that, obviously. Inquisitors have relative few ways to deal with that damage. We can use our death save (every priest gets at least one) on a 5 minute recast, we can hit DG on a 90 second recast, or, if we take an unpopular heroic AA, we can time a 2-trigger stoneskin on the tank (also a 90 second recast). If those abilities are on cooldown, we are helpless against tank 1-shots. In addition to the tools Inquisitors have, Templars also have Repent on a ~15 second cooldown, True Faith on a ~2.5 minute cooldown, Divine Light on a ~2.5 minute cooldown, and Shield of Faith (for arcane damage) on a ~30 second cooldown.It's not just that it's easier to heal a tank as an Templar than an Inquisitor - there are situations where it's literally impossible to succeed as an Inquisitor when a Templar could time Repent (or another save) and win. Unfortunately, Brawlers can handle their own saves for the most part in pre-Drunder DoV content, making those situations much less common.EDIT: Also, it's not like a Templar cannot handle cures. Coordinate with another healer or use potions. Yeah, it's a little bit harder, but it's clearly doable - everyone did it for years. On the other hand, it is literally impossible for an Inquisitor to deal with some 1-shots that a Templar could negate with relative ease.</blockquote> <cite>Quabi@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>The focus on cures is misplaced. I'm the raid leader of a relatively high end guild, and I betrayed back to Inquisitor for DoV after playing Templar for the last ~5 months of SF. It's simply that the extra survivability from Templars is not needed. If you wanted high survivability and only one healer covering cures, Warden + Templar would actually be superior to Shaman + Inquisitor (yes, shaman-less MT groups are fine, believe it or not).If they don't make it so that defensive healers are needed again, they will have to completely rebalance healers - not just Templars. Hopefully they realize this.</blockquote>Are you saying that there is raid content that HAS to be done by a templar and an inquisitor cannot heal a HM raid MT group (which I disagree with), or are you saying that since the defensive abilities of a Templar are not used to full effect in DOV that you'd rather play an inquisitor?I'm genuinely curious as you guys are well known and I respect your opinion and I'd like to know where I'm making a mistake in reading your responses on Templars in DOV.</blockquote>Templars have a much higher heal potential and clutch defensive abilities/utility, unfortunately easymode and launch hardmode do not require enough healing, that is the issue right now and not what Inquisitors have that Templars lack.

Wasuna

09-01-2011, 11:28 AM

<cite>Quabi@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Buzzing@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote>I don't care if you could heal twice as much, if you can't keep the group cured of the aoe's they still die. The only mechanic change that would change the need for a templar would be to make aoe's uncurable.</blockquote>As a raiding Paladin, I'm going to assume you're familiar with AEs that hit tanks for more health than they have, right? Single target effects like death touches can also do that, obviously. Inquisitors have relative few ways to deal with that damage. We can use our death save (every priest gets at least one) on a 5 minute recast, we can hit DG on a 90 second recast, or, if we take an unpopular heroic AA, we can time a 2-trigger stoneskin on the tank (also a 90 second recast). If those abilities are on cooldown, we are helpless against tank 1-shots. In addition to the tools Inquisitors have, Templars also have Repent on a ~15 second cooldown, True Faith on a ~2.5 minute cooldown, Divine Light on a ~2.5 minute cooldown, and Shield of Faith (for arcane damage) on a ~30 second cooldown.It's not just that it's easier to heal a tank as an Templar than an Inquisitor - there are situations where it's literally impossible to succeed as an Inquisitor when a Templar could time Repent (or another save) and win. Unfortunately, Brawlers can handle their own saves for the most part in pre-Drunder DoV content, making those situations much less common.EDIT: Also, it's not like a Templar cannot handle cures. Coordinate with another healer or use potions. Yeah, it's a little bit harder, but it's clearly doable - everyone did it for years. On the other hand, it is literally impossible for an Inquisitor to deal with some 1-shots that a Templar could negate with relative ease.</blockquote>Joust the red texts or get a warden to damage immune or stoneskin you. Or, get another fighter to intercept you, or get a death save put on you or use a god ability death save.. or.... shall I go on?Look, I said I love templars. I really do. I love inquisitors also. It's just that I have had an inquisitor solo heal me on the EM raiding I'm doing. I prefer two healers since it just makes things safer but when we are short, I get a solo inquisitor.The point it that you do not need a templar. You just want one which is great. Doesn't mean that they can't (flat out can't) solo heal some raid encounters due to double AoE dot's being layed down at the same time.

Wasuna

09-01-2011, 11:35 AM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Wasuna wrote:</cite><blockquote>When the vasty majority (like 90%) of the population believe it's true then what you have to say basically doesn't matter. So, your opinion of SF fighter balance is irrelevant.</blockquote>If only these forums had something like the Electorial College to weed out that 90% of the population that have no clue.Just because some people that don't really know how the mechanics are working believe something is true...doesn't make it true.Its like people right now trying to make Templars more into Inq by giving them better curing capabilities, instead of actually fixing the problems...the need for Defensive healers.</blockquote>I'm sure people could accept your opinion... if it wasn't for equally experianced people completley disagreeing with you. Something to the tune of 90% of the equally experianced people disagreeing with you.Like I said, your opinion is irrelevant.Just so you get it:irrelevant - having no bearing on or connection with the subject at issue

Bruener

09-01-2011, 11:50 AM

<cite>Wasuna wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Wasuna wrote:</cite><blockquote>When the vasty majority (like 90%) of the population believe it's true then what you have to say basically doesn't matter. So, your opinion of SF fighter balance is irrelevant.</blockquote>If only these forums had something like the Electorial College to weed out that 90% of the population that have no clue.Just because some people that don't really know how the mechanics are working believe something is true...doesn't make it true.Its like people right now trying to make Templars more into Inq by giving them better curing capabilities, instead of actually fixing the problems...the need for Defensive healers.</blockquote>I'm sure people could accept your opinion... if it wasn't for equally experianced people completley disagreeing with you. Something to the tune of 90% of the equally experianced people disagreeing with you.Like I said, your opinion is irrelevant.Just so you get it:irrelevant - having no bearing on or connection with the subject at issue</blockquote>Odd since the MOST experienced players with the MOST knowledge on how mechanics work post constantly in agreement with me.BTW....Gungo, BChizzle, and you definitely do not fit into that category.There is a difference between opinion and stating an issue on an actual mechanic problem and giving logical suggestions to fix said problems. Try it sometime.For example, turning Templars into Inq is not the answer to solving the need for Templars. Sort of like turning Guards into Zerkers wasn't the answer despite some Guards asking for it in SF.When a tank allows for raids to bypass the need for a defensive healer raid leaders are going to do 2 things. They are going to bring that tank type to tank, and they are going to not bring defensive healers and bring the minimum amount of healers/fighters needed to do the job to squeeze out as much DPS as possible because DPS makes everything easier except Nexona.If all Fighters MT'ing needed the additional saves that Templars/Defilers could provide they would be utilized more. Instead as every progressive guild is finding out you plug in your Brawlers and you load up with 5-6 healers, 4 of which are Inq to push out max DPS because the extra saves aren't needed.

Ymarik

09-01-2011, 12:34 PM

<cite>dotdotdot wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote>How to fix it?Change the troubadour's combat arts to be ranged instead of melee. This allows them to be at their peak DPS effectiveness while not in melee with the mob. Make them a combination of ranger and mage.Change the troubadour's green debuffs to blue debuffs and their green AoEs to blue AoEs.</blockquote>You do realize that these two ideas contradict each other. You want to make troubs fight at range, then give them blue debuffs and AOE dmg which requires them to move back into melee range to hit targets.</blockquote>No, they're not contradictory. You're assuming that all AoEs have to be centered around the source, not the direct target. They're ranged abilities now and should remain so.

Ymarik

09-01-2011, 12:36 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>When a tank allows for raids to bypass the need for a defensive healer raid leaders are going to do 2 things. They are going to bring that tank type to tank, and they are going to not bring defensive healers and bring the minimum amount of healers/fighters needed to do the job to squeeze out as much DPS as possible because DPS makes everything easier except Nexona.</blockquote>Uh, flashback to RoK days.DPS cap on Nexona was removed long ago. With current gear and AA lines, Nexona can be soloed.

Ymarik

09-01-2011, 12:39 PM

<cite>Rick777 wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'd venture to say all of your cure suggestions are still the same as just giving us a 2nd group cure,</blockquote>I'd venture to say you didn't actually read the list, which did include some alternative methods for a group cure (an ability that cures proactively for you for a short period of time, as opposed to just another button you press to react to a dot landing) but also included ideas such as giving the templar a group curse cure and allowing the templar's Death Intervention to work on anyone in raid (an idea in keeping with the templar's ability to use Divine Arbitration outside of group).

Lcneed

09-01-2011, 01:15 PM

<cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>dotdotdot wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote>How to fix it?Change the troubadour's combat arts to be ranged instead of melee. This allows them to be at their peak DPS effectiveness while not in melee with the mob. Make them a combination of ranger and mage.Change the troubadour's green debuffs to blue debuffs and their green AoEs to blue AoEs.</blockquote>You do realize that these two ideas contradict each other. You want to make troubs fight at range, then give them blue debuffs and AOE dmg which requires them to move back into melee range to hit targets.</blockquote>No, they're not contradictory. You're assuming that all AoEs have to be centered around the source, not the direct target. They're ranged abilities now and should remain so.</blockquote>I don't know much about all the classes, but I don't think there are any blue AoE that is target based? Are there?

dotdotdot

09-01-2011, 01:42 PM

<cite>Lcneed wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>dotdotdot wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote>How to fix it?Change the troubadour's combat arts to be ranged instead of melee. This allows them to be at their peak DPS effectiveness while not in melee with the mob. Make them a combination of ranger and mage.Change the troubadour's green debuffs to blue debuffs and their green AoEs to blue AoEs.</blockquote>You do realize that these two ideas contradict each other. You want to make troubs fight at range, then give them blue debuffs and AOE dmg which requires them to move back into melee range to hit targets.</blockquote>No, they're not contradictory. You're assuming that all AoEs have to be centered around the source, not the direct target. They're ranged abilities now and should remain so.</blockquote>I don't know much about all the classes, but I don't think there are any blue AoE that is target based? Are there?</blockquote>Exactly.... blue AE's are centered around the caster, always have been.

Buzzing

09-01-2011, 01:45 PM

<cite>dotdotdot wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lcneed wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>dotdotdot wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote>How to fix it?Change the troubadour's combat arts to be ranged instead of melee. This allows them to be at their peak DPS effectiveness while not in melee with the mob. Make them a combination of ranger and mage.Change the troubadour's green debuffs to blue debuffs and their green AoEs to blue AoEs.</blockquote>You do realize that these two ideas contradict each other. You want to make troubs fight at range, then give them blue debuffs and AOE dmg which requires them to move back into melee range to hit targets.</blockquote>No, they're not contradictory. You're assuming that all AoEs have to be centered around the source, not the direct target. They're ranged abilities now and should remain so.</blockquote>I don't know much about all the classes, but I don't think there are any blue AoE that is target based? Are there?</blockquote>Exactly.... blue AE's are centered around the caster, always have been.</blockquote>Rangers have some centered around the target o.O

Banditman

09-01-2011, 01:50 PM

There are also some blue proc'ed effects that center around the target. They aren't common, but they do exist.

FireDragon

09-01-2011, 01:57 PM

Give troubs a song that automatically casts a groupwide cure every 6 seconds or so. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" />

PeterJohn

09-01-2011, 02:51 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>When a tank allows for raids to bypass the need for a defensive healer raid leaders are going to do 2 things. They are going to bring that tank type to tank, and they are going to not bring defensive healers and bring the minimum amount of healers/fighters needed to do the job to squeeze out as much DPS as possible because DPS makes everything easier except Nexona.If all Fighters MT'ing needed the additional saves that Templars/Defilers could provide they would be utilized more. Instead as every progressive guild is finding out you plug in your Brawlers and you load up with 5-6 healers, 4 of which are Inq to push out max DPS because the extra saves aren't needed.</blockquote>+1 this is the real problem.

Brienae

09-01-2011, 03:45 PM

<cite>FireDragon wrote:</cite><blockquote>Give troubs a song that automatically casts a groupwide cure every 6 seconds or so. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>With in the troubador tree we can add a cure proc component to Elemental's concerto and Arcane Symphony. It has a 25% chance to proc. However I'm not so sure I want an actual cure. My healers do just fine curing the group, so there is no need for this. This also doesn't sound fun for me. I'm all for buffing others it's why I play a troub but do I really need more utility? I don't think so.

Rick777

09-01-2011, 04:04 PM

<cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rick777 wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'd venture to say all of your cure suggestions are still the same as just giving us a 2nd group cure,</blockquote>I'd venture to say you didn't actually read the list, which did include some alternative methods for a group cure (an ability that cures proactively for you for a short period of time, as opposed to just another button you press to react to a dot landing) but also included ideas such as giving the templar a group curse cure and allowing the templar's Death Intervention to work on anyone in raid (an idea in keeping with the templar's ability to use Divine Arbitration outside of group).</blockquote>Squabbling over semantics and Templars will end up with squat.

Rick777

09-01-2011, 04:06 PM

<cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>When a tank allows for raids to bypass the need for a defensive healer raid leaders are going to do 2 things. They are going to bring that tank type to tank, and they are going to not bring defensive healers and bring the minimum amount of healers/fighters needed to do the job to squeeze out as much DPS as possible because DPS makes everything easier except Nexona.</blockquote>Uh, flashback to RoK days.DPS cap on Nexona was removed long ago. With current gear and AA lines, Nexona can be soloed.</blockquote>I don't think he is talking about groups fighting Nexona today, doh? It's a good summary of what is going on in DOV.

Gungo

09-01-2011, 04:46 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Wasuna wrote:</cite><blockquote>When the vasty majority (like 90%) of the population believe it's true then what you have to say basically doesn't matter. So, your opinion of SF fighter balance is irrelevant.</blockquote>If only these forums had something like the Electorial College to weed out that 90% of the population that have no clue.Just because some people that don't really know how the mechanics are working believe something is true...doesn't make it true.Its like people right now trying to make Templars more into Inq by giving them better curing capabilities, instead of actually fixing the problems...the need for Defensive healers.</blockquote>I love how you jump into a thread of a bunch of templars discussing what they need and tell them they dont need anything but to nerf OTHER FIGHTERS But not your class to make them needed. And you honestly beleive that the majoirty of the people beleive in your half baked idea of class balance. A second group cure is NOT soloely a inqusitor ability furies, wardens, mystics and inqusitors ALL have multple raid/group cures. You honestly dont know what you are talking about and should let the classes that DO PLAY the class discuss what they need without trying to subject your own myopic view of fixing eq2 by nerfing every fighter but your own class.If there was a 90% vote you wouldnt even make it anywhere near that mark. There are countless people who have called you out on your lies and your biased opinion of class balance.

Murdy

09-01-2011, 06:32 PM

<cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote><ol><li>Remove the DPS and heal stances from the templar entirely. It is extremely difficult for a templar to heal in DPS stance/spec and to DPS in heal stance/spec. No other healer has this impediment built in to the stances.</li><li>Give the templar a proximity (i.e., "blue") auto cure AA line that cures based on proximity to the templar. This would need to be a short-duration ability that has a cooldown. </li><li>Improve the reuse on the templar's group cure, or give templars an AA line that allows them to shorten the recast on the group cure. </li><li>Change the templar's cure curse to be groupwide. This would allow the possibility of recovery in certain fights when curses start spreading.</li><li>Give the templar a group knockback immunity on a two minute reuse timer.</li><li>Allow the templar's death immunity to be cast on any raid member.</li></ol></blockquote>I really like point 2. This would help alot and would be unique enough imho.I have another idea to add:They could change Mana Cure to proc when the Target has aggro and gets hit by any Spell. So only useable when in MT or OT group on the Tank. And when it procs give an 1 use item clicky with a group cure to the Templar ...Could combine that with Ymarik's AoE Cure Idea. Just to make it unique and not-too good.

Crismorn

09-01-2011, 06:39 PM

<cite>Murdy wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote><ol><li>Remove the DPS and heal stances from the templar entirely. It is extremely difficult for a templar to heal in DPS stance/spec and to DPS in heal stance/spec. No other healer has this impediment built in to the stances.</li><li>Give the templar a proximity (i.e., "blue") auto cure AA line that cures based on proximity to the templar. This would need to be a short-duration ability that has a cooldown.</li><li>Improve the reuse on the templar's group cure, or give templars an AA line that allows them to shorten the recast on the group cure. </li><li>Change the templar's cure curse to be groupwide. This would allow the possibility of recovery in certain fights when curses start spreading.</li><li>Give the templar a group knockback immunity on a two minute reuse timer.</li><li>Allow the templar's death immunity to be cast on any raid member.</li></ol></blockquote>I really like point 2. This would help alot and would be unique enough imho.I have another idea to add:They could change Mana Cure to proc when the Target has aggro and gets hit by any Spell. So only useable when in MT or OT group on the Tank. And when it procs give an 1 use item clicky with a group cure to the Templar ...Could combine that with Ymarik's AoE Cure Idea. Just to make it unique and not-too good.</blockquote>Really?Cause I'm a big fan of solving the actual problem instead of making classes OP'd.The issue being that EM/launch HM do not hit hard enough to warrant the use of a Templar.This problem can be solved by either adressing the rediculousness of brawlers or by adding/fixing avoidance mechanics in a way that would only put brawlers at a disadvantage vs. plate fighters for tanking difficult content.

Murdy

09-01-2011, 07:02 PM

<cite>Crismorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>The issue being that EM/launch HM do not hit hard enough to warrant the use of a Templar.</blockquote>Not going to happen. The trend is in the other direction. Look at the latest Patch notes.<blockquote>This problem can be solved by either adressing the rediculousness of brawlers or by adding/fixing avoidance mechanics in a way that would only put brawlers at a disadvantage vs. plate fighters for tanking difficult content.</blockquote>So you prefer nerfing 2 classes instead of taking the risk to make 1 OP.Lame. But i guess thats a point of view one can have ...

dotdotdot

09-01-2011, 07:07 PM

<cite>Gungo@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>A second group cure is NOT soloely a inqusitor ability furies, wardens, mystics and inqusitors ALL have multple raid/group cures. You honestly dont know what you are talking about and should let the classes that DO PLAY the class discuss what they need without trying to subject your own myopic view of fixing eq2 by nerfing every fighter but your own class.</blockquote>Mystics do not have a second group cure.

Crismorn

09-01-2011, 07:15 PM

<cite>Murdy wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Crismorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>The issue being that EM/launch HM do not hit hard enough to warrant the use of a Templar.</blockquote>Not going to happen. The trend is in the other direction. Look at the latest Patch notes.<blockquote>This problem can be solved by either adressing the rediculousness of brawlers or by adding/fixing avoidance mechanics in a way that would only put brawlers at a disadvantage vs. plate fighters for tanking difficult content.</blockquote>So you prefer nerfing 2 classes instead of taking the risk to make 1 OP.Lame. But i guess thats a point of view one can have ...</blockquote>Yes, brawlers need to be nerfed because they are already OP'd and have been since mid SF.There is no Templar problem other than EM content being too easy and brawlers being in a new elite tier that includes only them.

Bruener

09-01-2011, 08:18 PM

<cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote>The inquisitor is worse at healing, but not enough so to be a detriment to getting the job done, and with brawler avoidance being so high and uncontested avoidance being such an advantage, the difference is more than tolerable.</blockquote><cite>Crismorn wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Crismorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>Templars dont need anything other than hard content to be hard again.This is the first xpac since eq2 came out that people take Inquis over Templar, just deal with it</blockquote>Fix the 2 Fighters making it too easy and problem solved.</blockquote>/agreed</blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Crismorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>Templars dont need anything other than hard content to be hard again.This is the first xpac since eq2 came out that people take Inquis over Templar, just deal with it</blockquote>Fix the 2 Fighters making it too easy and problem solved.</blockquote>It's almost funny to see you calling other fighters OP after you consistantly denied that SKs were ever OP. Anyways, in this case I do actually agree with you; I am not hesitant to admit that my class is OP when it is.</blockquote><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite><blockquote><cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote>with brawler avoidance being so high and uncontested avoidance being such an advantage, the difference is more than tolerable. How to fix it?</blockquote></blockquote>Apparently we fix it by nerfing brawlers <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" /></blockquote><cite>Crismorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>Remove their strikethrough immunity for starters</blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Crismorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>Remove their strikethrough immunity for starters</blockquote>Remove strikethrough from the game for starters and reduce all uncontested avoidance by a significant amount.</blockquote><cite>Quabi@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote> Unfortunately, Brawlers can handle their own saves for the most part in pre-Drunder DoV content, making those situations much less common.</blockquote><cite>PeterJohn wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>When a tank allows for raids to bypass the need for a defensive healer raid leaders are going to do 2 things. They are going to bring that tank type to tank, and they are going to not bring defensive healers and bring the minimum amount of healers/fighters needed to do the job to squeeze out as much DPS as possible because DPS makes everything easier except Nexona.If all Fighters MT'ing needed the additional saves that Templars/Defilers could provide they would be utilized more. Instead as every progressive guild is finding out you plug in your Brawlers and you load up with 5-6 healers, 4 of which are Inq to push out max DPS because the extra saves aren't needed.</blockquote>+1 this is the real problem.</blockquote><cite>Crismorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>This problem can be solved by either adressing the rediculousness of brawlers or by adding/fixing avoidance mechanics in a way that would only put brawlers at a disadvantage vs. plate fighters for tanking difficult content.</blockquote><cite>Crismorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yes, brawlers need to be nerfed because they are already OP'd and have been since mid SF.There is no Templar problem other than EM content being too easy and brawlers being in a new elite tier that includes only them.</blockquote>Yeah, its obviously only me that sees an issue with Brawlers causing mechanic problems on the use of Defensive healers.......And these are just the quotes from this thread. Points have been brought up in the Progression thread, and lots of agreement in the Fighter section.

Rick777

09-01-2011, 08:42 PM

<cite>Murdy wrote:</cite><blockquote>So you prefer nerfing 2 classes instead of taking the risk to make 1 OP.</blockquote>After years of playing this game you get used to this point of view. /yawn

Lethe5683

09-01-2011, 08:50 PM

<cite>dotdotdot wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lcneed wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>dotdotdot wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Ymarik wrote:</cite><blockquote>How to fix it?Change the troubadour's combat arts to be ranged instead of melee. This allows them to be at their peak DPS effectiveness while not in melee with the mob. Make them a combination of ranger and mage.Change the troubadour's green debuffs to blue debuffs and their green AoEs to blue AoEs.</blockquote>You do realize that these two ideas contradict each other. You want to make troubs fight at range, then give them blue debuffs and AOE dmg which requires them to move back into melee range to hit targets.</blockquote>No, they're not contradictory. You're assuming that all AoEs have to be centered around the source, not the direct target. They're ranged abilities now and should remain so.</blockquote>I don't know much about all the classes, but I don't think there are any blue AoE that is target based? Are there?</blockquote>Exactly.... blue AE's are centered around the caster, always have been.</blockquote>No they are not and that has never been the case. Blue AoEs are simply AoEs that hit everything in its area of effect reguardless of encounter.

Griffildur

09-02-2011, 05:26 AM

<cite>dotdotdot wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gungo@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>A second group cure is NOT soloely a inqusitor ability furies, wardens, mystics and inqusitors ALL have multple raid/group cures. You honestly dont know what you are talking about and should let the classes that DO PLAY the class discuss what they need without trying to subject your own myopic view of fixing eq2 by nerfing every fighter but your own class.</blockquote>Shamans do not have a second group cure.</blockquote>Fixed it for you.

Yimway

09-02-2011, 11:26 AM

Truth is, a raid is better off with an inquisitor in each group and no templars.The only thing that is going to change that is moving the focus away from cures and dps buffing and back to keeping a tank alive.To effect that change, you must nerf one fighter archtype, you may as well have to look at rolling back cure requirements slightly, or provide more random proc cures such that 2 defensive healers aren't having to ST cure every 5th aoe.Considering how systemic the problem is and the amount of change required to fix it, I wouldn't hold my breath. Its better to wise up and let your brawlers MT and betray your defensive healers for a few expansions till SoE buys a clue on this.The unfortunate reality for me is, players are too stuborn to do this, so we continue to raid with what isn't an ideal sollution to the content in front of us.

Xalmat

09-02-2011, 12:43 PM

Summoners need some love, but not really in the DPS department.Tank pet aggro is pitiful. It's often better aggro to put the mage pet in defensive than it is to use the Tank pet, even with full Tank pet AAs. It's so bad that I recommend to newbie summoners to not bother using the Tank pet and solo exclusively with the Mage pet (unless they want to take down heroics). Tank Pet melee damage does not scale well at all. Summoners only have two ways of raising the pet's auto-attack damage outside of AAs: Increase our INT, and increase our Crit Bonus. However doing both will also substantially boost the Summoner's personal DPS and offset the tank pet's aggro.Scout pets are still useless. The buffs they provide do not in any way shape or form justify the significantly reduced DPS compared to the mage pets. And the pet melee damage does not scale, in the same way that the tank pet's auto-attack doesn't.Swarm pets for all classes are basically useless. They die rediculously easily and don't scale well in damage, if they scale at all. They need to be made damage immune, scale properly (shared stats is a start, but again the melee damage doesn't scale well), or be completely reworked into different spells altogether.Conjuror pet survivability is a major issue right now. Necro pet survivability can be worked around with Blood Pact relatively easily.