Templar Class Issues - What do we need? (Now updated Post-GU51)

[Timaarit]

---

Bad_Mojo wrote:

---

kenjiso wrote:

due to the overpower of group regen, the hibernation spell isnt consider to be useful at all.best comment i have seen.

---

Due to group regens only really being useful after an AoE attack (or to top off someone that happened to gain aggro for a hit or two without changing your target from the MT), what good are they in 90%+ of most battles?

 

best comment i have seen.

---

Consider this: Group reactive has 5s cast and 15s recast. At optimal situation it can proc 27 times in a minute. Group regeneration will tick in any case for that same 27 times on a single target. In effect, they will heal exactly the same amount if the situation is optimal for the group reactive. So group regeneration is at its worst as good as group reactive is at its best. So if you dont want to use group regeneration, why the hell does anyone think templars would like to cast group reactive? Ah, I forgot, you have even better spells to heal. Well, templars dont. best comment i have seen.

[kenji]

A 350 hp per 2 second tick doesn't keep anyone alive, 9 hits of 350 hp per trigger in 20 sec doesnt keep anyone alive.

[kenji]

to OP,any chance to add to Templar wishlist :

Wis should affect the amount of heal range. even not the max number, the min number should raised.

e.g 500-600 heal with 200 wis, 550-600 with 300 or so

[Caethre]

OOC.

Updated to here.

[Bad_Mojo]

---

kenjiso wrote:

Group Regen on single person Still better than Direct Heal ratio, unless u think direct heal is completely useless.

or unless u mean Warden direct heal the worst. the 2nd tick of group regen > small direct heal + 2 sec tick.

 

Indeed, Group Regen is only really being OVERPOWER after an AoE attack , and always useful on stable dmg and use with Manastone, Mage/pet HP>Power, using of Conj/Necro HP > Power items.

overpower or not? 288 power healing 12006 hp, it's not only being useful at This situation, it's freaking overpower

Message Edited by kenjiso on 12-06-2005 10:35 PM

---

You do realize that group regen doesn't stack the 'unused' portion on the single damaged guy right?  Let's say the MT has taken 900 damage, and everyone else is full health... Now you are looking at 288 power for 900 points of SLOW healing.  Overpowered? hardly.  Situational and useful in cases of AoE to heal without switching targets? Sure thing.  In order of use off my hotbar, direct heals get spammed constantly, I try to keep a single target regen up if I have time between the spamming... Group regens rarely get used.

[kenji]

if the tank taken 900 dmg and stop taking anymore. yes the heal is wasted.
it happens as the tank taken 900 dmg and avoided all the hits after casting (such as avoidance tank, and Stuns), so whole GRH is wasted.
if the tank is taking less than 350 dmg per hit, the extra heal is wasted, assuming u cast it at 100% of MT hp.

if the mob is stunned, GRH isnt proc`ing at all. while Regen still 2 sec per tick.
if the mob is slowed, GRH will also proc slower, due to the mob slowed and dont hit as fast. while Regen still 2 sec per tick.

GRH best 95% of the time, hardly.

[Bad_Mojo]

---

kenjiso wrote:

if the tank taken 900 dmg and stop taking anymore. yes the heal is wasted.
it happens as the tank taken 900 dmg and avoided all the hits after casting (such as avoidance tank, and Stuns), so whole GRH is wasted.
if the tank is taking less than 350 dmg per hit, the extra heal is wasted, assuming u cast it at 100% of MT hp.

if the mob is stunned, GRH isnt proc`ing at all. while Regen still 2 sec per tick.
if the mob is slowed, GRH will also proc slower, due to the mob slowed and dont hit as fast. while Regen still 2 sec per tick.

GRH best 95% of the time, hardly.

---

I never said it was better 95% of the time.  In fact, it sounds as if it's just as situational as group regens.  Do you have to rely on direct heals to keep a tank alive? I'm guessing yes, and so do I.  Your GRH doesn't actually 'heal', and my regens heal too slowly.  :shrug:

[Timaarit]

Bad_Mojo wrote:

I never said it was better 95% of the time.  In fact, it sounds as if it's just as situational as group regens.  Do you have to rely on direct heals to keep a tank alive? I'm guessing yes, and so do I.  Your GRH doesn't actually 'heal', and my regens heal too slowly.  :shrug:

---

Reactives are far more situational that HoT's. HoT's will heal the amount stated on it in the time given. With reactives everything depends on how fast and how hard someone is hit. Sometimes a single target reactive is totally wasted when some mob hits a close to full health MT with 5 autoattack hits just before it hits that target for 1k with a single hit. HoT's that were cast at the same time, will heal that 1k while reactives will not.

[Bad_Mojo]

---

Timaarit wrote:

Bad_Mojo wrote:

I never said it was better 95% of the time.  In fact, it sounds as if it's just as situational as group regens.  Do you have to rely on direct heals to keep a tank alive? I'm guessing yes, and so do I.  Your GRH doesn't actually 'heal', and my regens heal too slowly.  :shrug:

---

Reactives are far more situational that HoT's. HoT's will heal the amount stated on it in the time given. With reactives everything depends on how fast and how hard someone is hit. Sometimes a single target reactive is totally wasted when some mob hits a close to full health MT with 5 autoattack hits just before it hits that target for 1k with a single hit. HoT's that were cast at the same time, will heal that 1k while reactives will not.

---

True, but in that same scenario I'd be mashing direct heals during that 5 auto attack/1000 point hit... But it sounds as if you need to hit directs after the barrage (ie. Doh! reactive dropped, direct heal, direct heal as opposed to regen taking a little of the bite off, direct heal, direct heal).  I can see where both are limited, and I can see where both have perks.  Regens heal, reactives prevent damage... Regens are slow, reactives are instantaneous.  There are pros and cons to each I think.

[Timaarit]

Bad_Mojo wrote:True, but in that same scenario I'd be mashing direct heals during that 5 auto attack/1000 point hit... But it sounds as if you need to hit directs after the barrage (ie. Doh! reactive dropped, direct heal, direct heal as opposed to regen taking a little of the bite off, direct heal, direct heal).  I can see where both are limited, and I can see where both have perks.  Regens heal, reactives prevent damage... Regens are slow, reactives are instantaneous.  There are pros and cons to each I think.

---

Yes there are. But as it is, HoT's are given compensation for their cons, clerics have gotten none. And note that this is especially true after lvl 58 when druids can heal with direct heals about 40% more than clerics. Yes, templars have biggest heals, but other priests can still heal at least the same or more per time unit. Someone complained that group HoT has so 'long' (= 3 seconds) cast time that it is not worth casting. Heh, group reactive has 5 second cast time. Templars are slow healers, on paper we even have the biggest heals. Even on paper we do not however heal the most (or prevent damage) over a longer than 15 second time period.

[quetzaqotl]

---

kenjiso wrote:
so lack of imagination as a fury, way to heal 2k in 10 sec?
cast grp regen, 3th sec instant, 5th, 7th, 9th. 4 ticks for a total of 1334 ((300+367)/2 x 4)

cast group heal 653 (588-71/2)
buff AC with group regen for ok, 1 tick, 62 grp regen (Ferine Mask - Increases in-combat health regen Per-tick of Group member(AE) by 62. )
a total of 2049 heal , in 9th sec

is thats why Fury doesnt Think Hibernation useful? is that they are just freaking uber? Mr. Furygod?
if your math is right, i assume Hibernation is a Self Stun till the effect end and heal. am i right? 22 sec, dont get me laugh.
/ooc lack of sleep?

 

o btw, the Spell Data i copy mainly from Your Own Post. except the group heal adept 3, yours is Master 1, i afraid i use it will get flamed. link below.
http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=17&message.id=9363

thanks for your time.

[edit] having too much fun, forgot another part of your post. yes, Templar can heal over 1k with casting 1 group heal, here is the adept 3 number, Heals group member (AE) for 847-1036 .

if a Fury lacking of single target heal SoE given extra uber single target direct heal, why isnt Templar weaken in Group Heal given another 1? instead, we have given a spell that hurt whole grp 20% hp for sharing HP.

Balance.

Message Edited by kenjiso on 12-06-2005 04:59 PM

---

The lack of imagination is all yours kenji I just did the math with the spells YOU yourself provided of course could I heal for more in that timeframe but you went and said I could heal 2k in 10 secs with only hibernation and group regen am I not correct?

 

[Unmask]

---

Timmarit wrote:Yes there are. But as it is, HoT's are given compensation for their cons, clerics have gotten none. And note that this is especially true after lvl 58 when druids can heal with direct heals about 40% more than clerics. Yes, templars have biggest heals, but other priests can still heal at least the same or more per time unit.

---

What compensation are you referring to?  And what happened at level 58 that allows my direct heals to be 40% better than a cleric's?  I get a tree that dies when the mob sneezes.

[quetzaqotl]

no hes referring to furies Im sure we get hibernation which on paper could heal a lot well if you can predict an ae 10 secs in advance which hits you groups for 1k+ (which never happens outside of raids and i thought everyone here agreed that raids are just 1% of the game not that I agree btw im a hardcore raider) thats our lvl 58 spell (which big refers to as a furies' 4th direct heal on a seperate timer btw Big you said furies have 2 extra heals over templars thats should be 1 as we dont have a spell like FB/HG and even that one is situationally used).

Adding up numbers w/o real live in game experience is hollow as for instance Ill never have to use bitf (or maybe once if its a very big challenging encounter) in a normal group if I go full out spamming heals.

And thats the main prob imo (again) theres not enough challenging content, some groups dont even need a healer (on the xp grind), or only as a "backup patcher," and thats not where a templar will shine or maybe they would if they chain pull as kendricke said could be...

Message Edited by quetzaqotl on 12-07-2005 07:05 AM

[Timaarit]

---

quetzaqotl wrote:

no hes referring to furies Im sure we get hibernation which on paper could heal a lot well if you can predict an ae 10 secs in advance which hits you groups for 1k+ (which never happens outside of raids and i thought everyone here agreed that raids are just 1% of the game not that I agree btw im a hardcore raider) thats our lvl 58 spell (which big refers to as a furies' 4th direct heal on a seperate timer btw Big you said furies have 2 extra heals over templars thats should be 1 as we dont have a spell like FB/HG and even that one is situationally used).

Adding up numbers w/o real live in game experience is hollow as for instance Ill never have to use bitf (or maybe once if its a very big challenging encounter) in a normal group if I go full out spamming heals.

And thats the main prob imo (again) theres not enough challenging content, some groups dont even need a healer (on the xp grind), or only as a "backup patcher," and thats not where a templar will shine or maybe they would if they chain pull as kendricke said could be...

Message Edited by quetzaqotl on 12-07-2005 07:05 AM

---

Yes yes, Hibernation is useless to a fury since you use HoT to heal that damage. Here is the news: Templars DO NOT HAVE anything to compare with neither group HoT nor Hibernation. Would you like to trade Reverence to Hibernation? Or to BitF? I know that as a templar I would. I might even trade Divine arbitration for either one and furies at least could heal the group from damage it causes.

[quetzaqotl]

furies dont have anything to compare to your group reactive omg another single target reactive for the mt in disguise.

Group reactives OWN group regens in you usual group experience.

Omg if you dont agree we disagree! [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] can you imagine that?

Tim you and I will never ever agree on this.

Message Edited by quetzaqotl on 12-07-2005 07:18 AM

[Timaarit]

quetzaqotl wrote:

furies dont have anything to compare to your group reactive omg another single target reactive for the mt in disguise.

Group reactives OWN group regens in you usual group experience.

Omg if you dont agree we disagree! [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] can you imagine that?

Tim you and I will never ever agree on this.

Message Edited by quetzaqotl on 12-07-2005 07:18 AM

---

**REMOVED INAPPROPRIATE COMMENTS**

Group regeneration is better even with single target than group reactive. Within one minute period, group HoT heals for 27 ticks no matter what while group reactive will heal up to 27 times (no more) only if target is hit for 27 times while this spell is up (5s cast, 15 recast means it will be up for 40s each minute, this means target needs to be hit about once per 1,8 seconds).

So group HoT owns group reactive. Unless that special condition applies. But you are free to disagree if you really dont understand what you read.

Message Edited by Raijinn Thunderguard on 12-07-2005 10:51 AM

[quetzaqotl]

Fateful Intercession Master 1 group reactive, heals 367-419 up to 9x, cast 5sec/recast 15sec duration 30sec

Owls grace heals adept 3 group for 300-367 insta and every 2 seconds 6x on single, cast 3 sec /recast 12 sec duration 10 seconds (pwr cost 28

 

 

In 1 minute I can cast this spell 4 times (4x 3sec+10+2sec=60 secs) (duration is 10 secs recast is 12 seconds so that leaves out 2 seconds of no group heal)

In 1 minute templars cast fateful intercess 3 times (3x15+5 seconds)

 

on single target per minute  that is:

 

owls: 333.5 (avg)x6= 2001   2001x4= 8004 per minute single target

fateful: 393 (avg)x9=  3537   3537x3= 10611 per minute single target

 

And yes thats of course if the tank gets hit often but then again if the tank is near full health a group regen is wasted while the reactive waits on a hit also I dont what the power cost diff is between these spells but I can see when the mt takes slow hvy dmg the regen moves in more, but thats the nature of regens.

 

Message Edited by quetzaqotl on 12-07-2005 08:19 AM

[Mayl]

---

quetzaqotl wrote:

Fateful Intercession Master 1 group reactive, heals 367-419 up to 9x, cast 5sec/recast 15sec duration 30sec

Owls grace heals adept 3 group for 300-367 insta and every 2 seconds 6x on single, cast 3 sec /recast 12 sec duration 10 seconds

  You just compaired a Master I to an Adept III. Try again please.

 

In 1 minute I can cast this spell 4 times (4x 3sec+10+2sec=60 secs) (duration is 10 secs recast is 12 seconds so that leaves out 2 seconds of no group heal)

In 1 minute templars cast fateful intercess 3 times (3x15+5 seconds)

 

on single target per minute  that is:

 

owls: 333.5 (avg)x6= 2001   2001x4= 8004 per minute single target

fateful: 393 (avg)x9=  3537   3537x3= 10611 per minute single target

 

 These numbers are not valid until the spells are compaired on the same footing.

---

[bigmak20]

You're distorting the number a bit in your favor comparing a Master to an Adept 3 but I think the point was the person being healed has to get hit that much for the reactive heals to trigger.  That only happens in extreme cases such as fast hitting raid MoBs.  So the vast majority of the time the HoT is a better healing tool against a single target.  /shrug I don't have a problem with either of those myself.  Both heals have their place and I think it's a bit silly to argue which is better overall when comparing our core healing.  IMO that is one thing SOE got about right  assuming their premise all healers are to be about the same with respect to their core healing abilties. As you all know I take issue with lotto utility heals we get and additional direct heals some classes get as ancient scrolls -- that destroys the balance supposedly introduced by LU13.  DPS in a 30 second fight is also a big problem (sadly) if we are all to be equal healers then we all need equal secondary and tertiary abilities.  No logical person can deny that. But debating which class has better core healing... go for it I guess.  But I think everyone agrees it's situational and nearly equal.

[quetzaqotl]

srry double post

Message Edited by quetzaqotl on 12-07-2005 08:39 AM

[quetzaqotl]

Well I am not distorting the numbers that master 1 was the only spell I had acces to and the diff between an adep vs master1 isnt that huge.

And yes I can see that mobs in most cases wont hit the mt every  second or two always but theres a difference there.

(btw group regen in 1 minutes ticks 24 times and reactive in 1 min 27 times under the ideal circumstances of course)

But then again those same ideal circumstances are what makes people foam about hibernation/bitf and how often do clerics use their gro reactives compared druids you think?

 

sorry for the derailment but it wasnt all my doing back to the op.

Message Edited by quetzaqotl on 12-07-2005 09:00 AM

[bigmak20]

Hiberation and BITF are not "ideal circumstances" -- they are simply seperate direct heals on seperate timers.  When you need them you have them.  That is a significant healing advantage over other priests.

[quetzaqotl]

going into this further would derail this even more i dont agree with you on that also saying hibernation is a direct heals can be deceptive to people as it takes 10 secs and bitf needs a person in the orange is that situational yes I think so and everyone getting hit for 1k+ situational? yes imo.

 

 

[Raijinn]

I know there has been a little off topic chatter here and there in this thread but could we please stick to a suggestion thread for this one. Thanks!

[Kardde]

I do not post here a lot, but I do read this forum often, especially looking for little tips that others do and some good equipment that somebody has found. After reading this post I thought that I would toss in my two cents worth.

Soloing - I do not have a problem soloing. It justs takes awhile, especially with green ^^^, but I can live with that since I do not solo that much, unless I am doing a quest or something along those lines. I am more than willing to accept the fact that I can't do the dps that other healer types can do because I do not view dps as my job. This opinion is expressed based upon my being in groups and raids all the time and that is the direction that I like to go and I am glad that I created a Templar for those two reasons and not to solo.

Group - More often than not I group for Poets, Cazel, Tables and Roost most nights and I am the only healer and we rarely have a plate tank type in the group. Half the time we do not have a full group and we do not have much of a problem in these zones, but there can be deaths because of a resist here and there or a fizzle. Generally the groups are pretty consistent from week to week. At one point in time I asked the group if they could tell a difference with a Templar when compared to other healing classes and the response was "yes" in a positive tone.

Raid - Most of the time I am in the main tank group. If I was not doing my job then I would not be there. Usually we raid six nights per week.

 

Overall, I am happy with my Templar and I feel that I have a good reputation as a healer in groups and in raids. I am not made to level by soloing.

 

With that all being said I have noticed that Templars do lack utility when compared to other healer types, especially when it helps to define classes. I am not looking for more dps or an uber utility that makes everybody want us, but I was disappointed when SOE wanted to make all healers about equal in healing but did not really give Templars anything new, nor did SOE really take away from the other healing classes from an utility perspective or debuff but added some stuff instead, like the original Templar group cures.

 

Perhaps a few simple things would help define our class a little more without throwing things out of balance (I know that some of these suggestions have been made before):

 

Reverence - give it a longer duration by about 10 seconds but keep the same power useage.

 

Sanctuary - shorter recast time, like 2 minutes, but keep the same power usage as well.

 

Unyiedling benediction - make this a group buff and takes up a concentration slot (but don't drop the percentage chance to work because if the MT is doing their job then other group members are not getting hit anyway).

 

Divine proetorate - have this not take up a concentration slot, but still only be a one person buff ( the reason for this change is the Unyielding benedition).

 

Overall, have Unyielding benediction be our utility spell. I think that this falls in-line with being a Templar. Possible protection in a pinch, but not always a given and gives us added value in a group setting that some feel that value is missing. Reverence and Santuary ups our value in a raid setting, but not by much because some raids you do not need Sanctuary (there is still a chance that this not 100%) and when a tank is low on power or not using much power (which does happen) then Reverence is not that important.

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Message Edited by Kardde on 12-07-2005 11:33 AM

[Bad_Mojo]

---

Raijinn Thunderguard wrote:

I know there has been a little off topic chatter here and there in this thread but could we please stick to a suggestion thread for this one. Thanks!

---

Sure thing.

Templars need their damage spells looked at.  Either increased in damage for better effeciency or reduced in power cost for the same result.  They actually have a line that is actually the least damaging and least efficient when compared to like lines of other priests.

Apparently their 'ancient scrolls' spells are also subpar, and could use a tweak or something to bring them up to snuff.

And this is coming from a Fury.

[Timaarit]

---

quetzaqotl wrote:

Fateful Intercession Master 1 group reactive, heals 367-419 up to 9x, cast 5sec/recast 15sec duration 30sec

Owls grace heals adept 3 group for 300-367 insta and every 2 seconds 6x on single, cast 3 sec /recast 12 sec duration 10 seconds (pwr cost 28

 

well, the same intercession at adept III heals 300 to 367 per proc.

In 1 minute I can cast this spell 4 times (4x 3sec+10+2sec=60 secs) (duration is 10 secs recast is 12 seconds so that leaves out 2 seconds of no group heal)

In 1 minute templars cast fateful intercess 3 times (3x15+5 seconds)

 

on single target per minute  that is:

 

owls: 333.5 (avg)x6= 2001   2001x4= 8004 per minute single target

fateful: 393 (avg)x9=  3537   3537x3= 10611 per minute single target Adept III fateful heals 9005 per minute. Yes, I admit I forgot it (HoT) has 3s cast time.

 

And yes thats of course if the tank gets hit often but then again if the tank is near full health a group regen is wasted while the reactive waits on a hit also I dont what the power cost diff is between these spells but I can see when the mt takes slow hvy dmg the regen moves in more, but thats the nature of regens. And yes, of course only you could be... erm ...  you enough to compare adept III to a master one and not see anything wrong there. As for difference between reactive and HoT, if you can read, you know them. You really dont need to cast a HoT if tank is near full health. If you actually knew how to play, you would have known that too.

Message Edited by quetzaqotl on 12-07-2005 08:19 AM

---

Message Edited by Timaarit on 12-08-2005 12:01 AM

[quetzaqotl]

-removed my post dont need rajjin to clean up for me like hes gonna clean up your little ignorant flame-

Message Edited by quetzaqotl on 12-07-2005 02:58 PM

[Dalchar]

---

bigmak2010 wrote: But debating which class has better core healing... go for it I guess.  But I think everyone agrees it's situational and nearly equal.

---

That's what I was thinking.  If you have to come up with a situation where advantages are found... and those are maybe 5% of any situation that you may encounter... net result is people just bouncing back and forth when they're both right.  Time to get back on track though. Kenj suggested when I did earlier, increasing minimums on heals with higher wis.  Question... templar heals have the greatest variance on their heals probably do if not through just directs but the combination of the most heals in general between lottos etc.?    That would be a great boon to all priests though.

[kenji]

well...Dalcharis, i knew u suggested earlier, but it wasnt up to date, so, repeated that 1 again so hopefully it will get updated.

-------------

to Furygod, actually...1 min HoT proc 24 times, GRH proc 27 times (they heal the same, u read the patchnote which your regen got upgraded)... the use of HoT will be up`d when someone in grp use manastone, Heart/Crack from Conj/Necro etc, i couldnt say which 1 is more useful, but GRH clearly created for Burst heal, and HoT is created for stable healing. but definitely not 5% and 95% of better case. if Fury becomes best burst direct healer and best stable special healer, hardly called them balance, since all other 5 priest is either do best burst , or do best stable healing.

Reverence need a look again (there is no reason to ask a tank to burnt 1k power but only 1400 heal - 140% at adept 3), and BiTF need to be same as other Ancient Heal that can be casted on Raid(but since here isnt Fury , i doubt any fix will get here.)

58 ancient - DA need to actually heal, i dont care it work like Hibernation, but we definitely shouldnt hurt our grp to cast a spell. important note : expecially Templar lack of Group Healing compare with Warden, Fury, Mystic.

DPS issue, Armor issue, makes Solo...forget it.

Message Edited by kenjiso on 12-07-2005 04:52 PM