Bruiser/Defiler Combo - Why?

[Tren]

I recently created a Brawler > Bruiser alt to play with my girlfriend who is a Shaman > Defiler. We are currently level 15 and are gaining xp FAST. Ive noticed that we make a great combo but i really dont know why. I just assumed it was because any duo with a healer would kick [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]. I recently read on here that Shamans suit brawlers the best because Clerics dont work well with Brawlers ... why is that .. why is the Brawler/Shaman combo so effective?

[Drexel]

<DIV>Brawlers are the worst at damage mitigation when it comes to being hit by mobs.  We have fewer hit points, and our AC sux compared to plate classes.   That said...we avoid being hit way better than any other class...its just that when we get hit, it ussually hits us alot harder than a plate class. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Cleric type healers heal on demand...meaning they heal after the damage has been done.  The problem with this type of healer and a bruiser is, the bruiser can sometimes get hit so hard, so fast, the Cleric type healer can't keep up with the reactive heals...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Druid type healers have excellent heal over time spells...so they work better with bruisers, but they can still have difficulty keeping up if the bruiser is in a tough spot with multiple mobs.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Shaman type healers are proactive by using wards.  They put up an HP sponge on the bruiser so that, combined with the bruisers ability to doge hits in the first place, can be a very lethal combo indeed.  Plate tanks don't like wards as much because they actually act like a lower AC, so even though they still work, the Plate tank takes more damage (like a bruiser does normally) becuase his true AC does not apply while the ward it up.  Basically making a 300 HP hit more like a 500 HP hit...For A Bruiser, this doesn't matter, as we get crappy AC and mitigation anyway.   Add to that  the smaller reactive heals that shamans get, plus haste, and debuffs...its just a mean combo.</DIV>

[littleman17]

<DIV>that makes my brain hurt, but yeah its makes much sense..... thx for the advice. *goes to get a shaman for a partner*</DIV>

[Windy]

<DIV>Basiclly it works like this.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>All priest types have "direct heals" that instantly restore heal, at the cost of power.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Each priest type also has a better power/healing ratio heal spell, that is class specific.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Cleric types get reactive heals.  It's a short buff, that proc's a heal everytime the tank is struck.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Shaman types get protective wards.  Another short buff, that prevents a set amount of damage whenever the tank is struck.  These wards have an effective armor class of ZERO.  Less than a mage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Druid types get regenerations.  Once again, another buff that heals over time.  It's like a free heal each tick.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Each of these types is best suited to be partners with one of the other tank classes.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Clerics work best with warriors.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Warriors have high AC, low evasion.  This means that each time the warrior gets hit, he takes less damage, and the reactive heal procs a heal to even further reduce the effective damage taken.  Crusader self wards prevent reactive heals from going off, as does the high avoidance of a bruiser.  This is where they myth of "they can't tank" comes from.  People assume that clerics are the best, and if they can't heal them, then they suck.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Druids work best with crusaders.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Crusaders have good AC, low evasion, and have self wards.  The means they get hit as often as a warrior, but don't take any damage until the ward is depleted, after which they take slightly more damage.  The wards are short, but can be used after any damage is taken by the crusader, to buy time for the regen to actively replenish their health.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Shamans work best with brawlers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Brawlers have low AC, high evasion.  Since wards have no armor class, and are uneffected by the tank armor class, the tank is basicly invincable for a set duration, either time or number of hits.  Because brawlers dodge more, they extend the period of time the ward lasts, letting them be invincable for a longer period of time.  The warrior gets hit far more, so the wards get torn apart too fast, as does the crusader.  The crusader has self wards, but only one ward a time will absorb damage, while the other ward just burns through it's duration.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Make no mistake, these are not in any way accidental.  The EQ2 dev staff wanted to give an assortment of classes, in each of the primary roles.  In order to keep the classes from being the same, they altered the way they did things.  They tailored each tank and healer combo to work well with each other.  Over all they did a good job.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>We just need to debunk the myths that have carried over from EQ1 about which class is which.  Warriors and Clerics were the ultimate in EQ1, and now everybody just naturally assumes they still are.  They two are the no-skill classes, very simple and easy, even a beginner can play it decently.  So people see this combo work well, and work well consistently.  They assume it's the best.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The other combos are equally good, if not better, in my opinion.  They just take more skill, and thus, more people screw them up and make the classes look bad.</DIV>

[Sla]

<DIV></FONT>Thats the first explanation I've seen that actually makes sense logically. I never thought of the cleric heal proc spell, I was always thinking of just straight up direct heals as clerics domain, not heal proc. Thinking of that though makes it all make much more sense logically. Also the 0 AC or whatever from wards, I never checked but if they do that that also makes a lot of sense.</DIV>

[Windy]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Slade wrote:<BR> <DIV></FONT>Thats the first explanation I've seen that actually makes sense logically. I never thought of the cleric heal proc spell, I was always thinking of just straight up direct heals as clerics domain, not heal proc. Thinking of that though makes it all make much more sense logically. Also the 0 AC or whatever from wards, I never checked but if they do that that also makes a lot of sense.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P>Yep, wards do indeed have no AC.  I group with a shaman as my companion, so trust me on this.</P> <P>Also it's important to understand that direct heals aren't a clerics domain any longer, they are the domain of all priests.  To my knowledge all priests are roughly equal in terms of direct healing effectiveness.  Direct heals use alot more power then wards, regens and reactives, so healers use them only as needed, and attempt to use their primary specialties whenever possible.</P>

[Tren]

Drexell, Windy ...Thank you both for such an elaborate explanation! ... Great Info from both of you and for once i finally understand the roles of each fighter / priest class. Windy, youre absolutley right about a brawler being invincible when a shaman cast a ward. My girl and 1 were killing every Orc in site heading west from Ohgrahn Foulgore and we were unstoppable. Combined with executing our HOs (Cripplun Shroud i believe it was), FUHGHEDABOUDIT! Im starting to regret starting a Necro on launch day instead of a Brawler class. Oh and that myth about Brawlers not beign able to tank .. is just that .. a myth.