Templar vs Fury Parsing Data

[Timaarit]

---

Sokolov wrote: Also, are you saying that Defilers and Templars ARE balanced?  Thus the odd one out is Fury and not the Templar? And words aren't facts based on what you believe - so stop pretending only you can present them.

---

I didn't say templars and defilers are balanced, YOU did. I assumed you had looked into facts. I guess you weren't. Well with fury/templar, I have looked into facts. That is one reason why one certain poster is silent most of the time.

[Aleph]

I have a few comments here.

---

Timaarit wrote:

---

My defensive utility gives about 1,2k health to mt and 653 to all group members. Then I have also the 8% proc that will block next incoming hit. The first in fact does not affect my healing, it just gives me one more hit to cast my heals. But since my heals are as slow as they are, if the target does not die soon after this, mt will. I have a 7s stun which is usable each 30 + 3s. So in all my defensive utility will block about 20 to 25% of incoming damage if I am lucky with the proc.

---

The value of hit points are in the buffer they give you.  1.2k hit points is a nice buffer to handle an unexpected spike.  This is enough time to recover ground some if you are caught off guard, and if you are steadily losing ground in a high-damage situation, 1.2k may give you enough time to finish the mob before it finishes you.

 

---

As for the heals. On average templar single target reactive will heal 378 per tick, the spell can be cast once per 8s and for 5 ticks. On average this is 7,5 times per minute = 37,5 =  14k healed per minute on average. Fury HoTs will tick for 30 times per minute = 11k healed. Group reactive has 27 tics for 275 on average = 7,3k while group HoT is 24 tics = 6,5k. So reactives heal 21,3k per minute and HoT's heal 17,5k per minute. Now the difference comes with direct heals. Templar direct heals are 12,7k per minute on average while fury direct heals are 12,1k. This does not include BitF, this will give furies 8 x 694 = 5,5k  per minute more healing power, and it can be doubled when it really matters. Now this will bring templar total healing power per minute to 34k and fury total to 35,6k to 41,1k. Difference in healing power is from 1,6k to 7,1k.

---

Assuming these series of casts are even possible, which I doubt, they will cost a fury about 5,900 power and a templar 4,600 power.  Neither caster wants to be in this situation.  Luckily, templars have alternatives to prevent them, as you discuss below.

---

Now if we pick up a single mob, templars can reduce DPS by 25% by using the stun every time it is up. This means templars can deal with about the same damage as furies when the target does not resist and templar has time to stun. On the other hand, while the target is stunned, on average, 5 single target and 4 group reactive procs are wasted, this means templars will heal 3k less. So templars are at 37k and furies at 35,6 to 41k. Now templars still have Mark line, involuntary curate and GoC. Involuntary will heal 140 per minute on average (5% proc = 1 proc per minute) and Mark line will proc about 1,5 times and heal for 180 per minute. GoC will also proc 1,5 times per person, so on average I get 3 procs per minute healing for 1,1k. This brings templars up to 38,4k. So with all our defensive utility in use, furies can still heal more when it really matters.

---

Reactive procs are not wasted during stuns, they are merely put off.  They are only wasted if too few hits land during the 30 seconds to use them up.  While the mob is stunned, the templar doesn't have to refresh reactives or spam heals, because the mob is not attacking.  Damage prevented is better than damage healed, and the power savings is huge because you don't have to cast to keep up 21% of the time. 

For what it's worth, involuntary procs 20% of the time now.  Both lotto heals go off more than 1 or 2 times per minute in my experience, but even with higher proc rates, they are a small part of the whole equation and can probably be neglected. 

---

With a multiple encounter mob, templars reduce more of mob dps with mez and stun if the group plays along, those two combined will effectively reduce one targets DPS by about 75%.

Also when group gets hit by AE, furies healing power is a lot more while templars really cannot get any more healing from themselves exept with GoC proc.

So it is pure mathematics, even our defensive utility is not always enough to compensate.

---

I agree that druids in general will shine during AE encounters, although the 30 second group magic damage ward/mitigation buff for templars helps out quite a bit in some cases.

In the end, you may well be right about fury and templar healing balance, but your analysis here is far too simplistic to make your case well. 

Alephin

[Wossname]

Previous poster: Utility is balanced imo as in sow/invis/potc vs. soothe/odyssey/full rez sow all fury cept for potc can be bought for some silver. Balanced? You are kidding me, right? I almost never use Soothe in any situation, Odyssey I have cast maybe 10 times in 49 levels. SoW I would use all the time (my Bard alt has pathfinding permanently up - nearest comparison I have), Invisibility I would use incredibly frequently (my Wizard alt uses Gather Shadows very frequently, it is a wonderful spell). A Templar gets two junk spells and a Fury gets two that are used very frequently or all the time? Yeah, really balanced

[ParlMoebius]

Thanks for the great information Caethre, I do appreciate others effort into garnering facts.  I'd love to see further research!

I do however think it is quite possible to focus too hard on the details.  Numbers and math do not lie, but that does not mean the formulae are used accurately reflect a wholistic view on the problem.  I have not played a fury, so I cannot compare with any authority.  I would say that in terms of utility, SoW and invis would be great, and I would pick them over Oddysey and Soothe... but as a templar, if you dont use either of those, then you arent trying to.  I use both fairly regulary to fine result.

The only thing I can say, after watching all the debate here, is this;  As with any statistical analysis, the key is not with the results, but with the scenario they were aquired from.  Yes, the initial tests on solo ^^^ encounters seem entirely accurate.  And from the perspective of wanting to level up as a solo player, it is a good guideline of what to expect.  But I would be curious to see the two classes go up against the same mobs, with no nuking at all, where you are relying on only physical damage.  The fury undoubtedly still far outclasses the templar with damage... But pit them against a tougher mob now.  Say one that is much tougher, or even certain to kill you.  You are now going to be in a state of power conservation, every heal is vital, one may be the one you need to escape or land that last critical blow.  Who lasts longer?  Who is able to do more overall damage before they die?  Who is able to get the mob closer to death?  Now, rinse and dry.  Duplicate with a group, identical with a templar in one and a fury in the other... against easier mobs, then against group, then against tougher, then an epic say...  Who heals more overall damage?  Who has better power conservation?  Who does better against group, who better against solo, who does better against high damaging mobs, etc.

I'll say it again, for all you quoting numbers and 'facts'... numbers and math do not lie.  But rarely do they ever tell the whole story.  If you want to quote numbers, then methodically run through every scenario as a healer... from solo, to duo to small group to full to raid, from easy to equal to heroic to epic.  Then take all those numbers, come back, and you may just be a little closer to accurate.  Remember too that there is some flexibility in this game with regards to how you play your character, though people often behave like there is not... like there is a "right" way to play your class.  There are certainly more effective ways than other to play with certain ends in mind, but there is no clear cut right way.  Much of it depends on the make up of the group and how you make your judgement calls and decisions while you are playing, and what your goals are.

Well, Im not arguing one way or the other.  I dont care to anyhow.  At no point in my mind have I ever thought Templars were a solo class, or did I expect soloing to be fun or fast.  I knew that when I picked him.  But of course, I am also someone who does not play to level, I play to enjoy.  And I enjoy playing my Templar

Message Edited by ParlMoebius on 12-21-2005 04:12 PM

[DarkxLordxBu]

I don't know what you guys are smoking but a temp and fury are balnced just fine. Yes, furys nuke harder and solo better but a temp heals better then a fury hands down. I am not even gonna post any data on this becuase everyone knows it. Everytime i am in a grp and a temp joins everyone is like, "all right we got some pwnerer heals now".  Why the heck would you pick a healer to solo anyways?

 

FYI sow is worthless now anyways since everyone can get a carpet now in 2 hrs anyways.

Message Edited by DarkxLordxBurn on 12-21-2005 01:35 PM

[Sokolov]

---

Timaarit wrote:

---

Sokolov wrote:So you believe Furies actually heal better with just basic heal lines?  Thus your defensive utility are needed to compensate?  Does anyone else agree with this?

---

Well at least I dont heal the group any better despite that defensive utility. My defensive utility gives about 1,2k health to mt and 653 to all group members. Then I have also the 8% proc that will block next incoming hit. The first in fact does not affect my healing, it just gives me one more hit to cast my heals. But since my heals are as slow as they are, if the target does not die soon after this, mt will. I have a 7s stun which is usable each 30 + 3s. So in all my defensive utility will block about 20 to 25% of incoming damage if I am lucky with the proc. As for the heals. On average templar single target reactive will heal 378 per tick, the spell can be cast once per 8s and for 5 ticks. On average this is 7,5 times per minute = 37,5 =  14k healed per minute on average. Fury HoTs will tick for 30 times per minute = 11k healed. Group reactive has 27 tics for 275 on average = 7,3k while group HoT is 24 tics = 6,5k. So reactives heal 21,3k per minute and HoT's heal 17,5k per minute. Now the difference comes with direct heals. Templar direct heals are 12,7k per minute on average while fury direct heals are 12,1k. This does not include BitF, this will give furies 8 x 694 = 5,5k  per minute more healing power, and it can be doubled when it really matters. Now this will bring templar total healing power per minute to 34k and fury total to 35,6k to 41,1k. Difference in healing power is from 1,6k to 7,1k. Now if we pick up a single mob, templars can reduce DPS by 25% by using the stun every time it is up. This means templars can deal with about the same damage as furies when the target does not resist and templar has time to stun. On the other hand, while the target is stunned, on average, 5 single target and 4 group reactive procs are wasted, this means templars will heal 3k less. So templars are at 37k and furies at 35,6 to 41k. Now templars still have Mark line, involuntary curate and GoC. Involuntary will heal 140 per minute on average (5% proc = 1 proc per minute) and Mark line will proc about 1,5 times and heal for 180 per minute. GoC will also proc 1,5 times per person, so on average I get 3 procs per minute healing for 1,1k. This brings templars up to 38,4k. So with all our defensive utility in use, furies can still heal more when it really matters. With a multiple encounter mob, templars reduce more of mob dps with mez and stun if the group plays along, those two combined will effectively reduce one targets DPS by about 75%. Also when group gets hit by AE, furies healing power is a lot more while templars really cannot get any more healing from themselves exept with GoC proc. So it is pure mathematics, even our defensive utility is not always enough to compensate.

---

I am going to approach this much like the way we do at work when we are presented with a report for a peer review.  The point is to look at what has been presented critically and determine if we agree with the method by which data was gathered and the conclusions drawn from said data.

• We note that the nature of Group Reactives and Group Regens are fundamentally different, lending to significant advantage in the use of a Group Reactive over the Regen in a limited aggro situation.  Group Reactives do not lose efficiency at the same rate as Regens when presented with less targets being damaged.  We note that there are other significant differences that can be debated between the two healing methods, such as Reactives scaling to increased damage, but not Regens, but the aforementioned is the most revelant to the issue being discussed.
• We note that even ignoring #1, Templar have higher healing per time unit until the Fury Ancient spell is discussed.  We propose that the sets of special ancient spells are balanced as a bonus to all classes outside of core skill lines and thus has no bearing on current discussion.  The Templar lines of Ancient spells are arguably just as valuable.
• We note the discrepancy in total power use of favors the Templar.
• We note that a Templar typically has more power at his/her disposal as well.
• We disagree with the assessment that stuns "waste" healing and thus its benefit should not be augmented.  We propose that such a spell's benefit is hard to measure as it depends entirely on the mob's DPS.  It also has the side benefit of allowing other debuffs/buffs to be casted, or for heals to "catch up."
• We note in AE encounters outside of raiding or high end encounters, it is rarely the case that AEs can actually kill any member of the group who does not currently have aggro.  Thus there is no inherent advantage in these cases to be able to "top off" members who are no in danger of dying.

Message Edited by Sokolov on 12-21-2005 01:40 PM

[MadisonPark]

---

DarkxLordxBurn wrote:

 

FYI sow is worthless now anyways since everyone can get a carpet now in 2 hrs anyways.

 

---

Not that its the point, but carpets cant be used in starting cities, or more importantly indoor dungeons.

[MadisonPark]

---

Sokolov wrote:

• We note the discrepancy in total power use of favors the Templar.
• We note that a Templar typically has more power at his/her disposal as well.

 

Message Edited by Sokolov on 12-21-2005 01:40 PM

---

Most likely the reason for templars having no direct power buffs, where as (if i remember correctly) a fury as 3.

[ParlMoebius]

Very well laid out Sokolov.

I still refrain from taking sides on which class is "better".

I for one, generally give SOE and the developers of the game more credit than many people do.  Regardless of what some people do think, there are usually valid reasons for the way many things are.  The trick is finding those reasons, and being able to appreciate them.

 

That being said, nobody's perfect, and sometimes, things do need to be changed.  I'm just not

[ParlMoebius]

My browsers gone wacky!!!

Message Edited by ParlMoebius on 12-21-2005 04:52 PM

[Sokolov]

---

MadisonPark wrote:

---

Sokolov wrote:

• We note the discrepancy in total power use of favors the Templar.
• We note that a Templar typically has more power at his/her disposal as well.

Message Edited by Sokolov on 12-21-2005 01:40 PM

---

Most likely the reason for templars having no direct power buffs, where as (if i remember correctly) a fury as 3.

---

Thanks for pointing that out.  Just glanced at the spells.  Looks like there's the Int + power line.  Which uses a Conc slot.  Spirit of the Bat (level 35Bloodlines spell) which is a small in-combat power regen, and a group int/wis buff.  I might've missed something.

[MadisonPark]

---

Sokolov wrote:

---

MadisonPark wrote:

---

Sokolov wrote:

• We note the discrepancy in total power use of favors the Templar.
• We note that a Templar typically has more power at his/her disposal as well.

 

Message Edited by Sokolov on 12-21-2005 01:40 PM

---

Most likely the reason for templars having no direct power buffs, where as (if i remember correctly) a fury as 3.

---

Thanks for pointing that out.  Just glanced at the spells.  Looks like there's the Int + power line.  Which uses a Conc slot.  Spirit of the Bat (level 35Bloodlines spell) which is a small in-combat power regen, and a group int/wis buff.  I might've missed something.

---

For the record, i was merely point out a fact, not arguing.

[Timaarit]

Sokolov, yes, both templar and a fury can trivially heal most situations. This is where defensive buffs are not needed but offensive buffs are useful. When defensive buffs are needed, furies are compensated with better healing. As for reactives scaling, they scale for 2 or 3s spike damage that is due to multiple hits. They dont scale to spike damage that is from one or two big hits, with these, HoT's are better. As for better scaling, in the end, HoT's will heal only 20% less. I have never been in a situation where mt has stopped taking that spike damage after my reactives are down, I always need to resort to my direct heals in these situations just like a fury needs to. So while in the beginning templars can keep mt health at higher level, in the end, furies will get it back to full faster.

[kenji]

i miss the defiler's self hp regen, and the way they can dot themselves for more power.

what i feel is, defiler doesnt have worse defensive type buffs than templar, but way more useful debuffs.
similar HP buffs (~200 diff) , abit worse AC buffs (~100 diff), wraith form (self regen), Canny (power regen, hurt self), reactive ward, regening ward.
debuffs..forget it, templar got AC / Divine, only, when Defiler got alot.

DPS / Heal : Same.
balance

[Caethre]

OOC.

I notice my data presentation thread has gone somewhat seriously off-topic. Nevermind, I will continue to post data here.

I took Felishanna to Pillars of Flame tonight, and parsed her fighting yellow con mobs. The three target types (parsed and summed seperately) were:- Petulant Crocuta (single mob encounters, level 54-55), Desert Lunatic/Prophet (single mob encounter, level 54-55) and Desert Lunatic/Prophet (2-3 mob encounters, level 56-57). I have already correlated all the data, and I will put it on my guild board as a series of 3 half-posts at some time before I sleep or early tomorrow evening, but it is 1am my local time, and so I will have to measure Annaelisa's damage on the same mobs tomorrow evening, if I am not otherwise distracted.

Felishanna [54 Templar] ... yes, seems I got a level at the end of this ...
Annaelisa [53 Fury]

 

[Aleph]

---

Timaarit wrote:
Sokolov, yes, both templar and a fury can trivially heal most situations. This is where defensive buffs are not needed but offensive buffs are useful. When defensive buffs are needed, furies are compensated with better healing.

---

On the contrary, when defensive buffs are needed, a templar has a tank that has about 15% more hit points, only has to heal for 72% of the damage (because of stun and benediction), and has a basic specialty/direct heal line-up that heals 90% of everything a fury has to offer for 80% of the power cost, even if lotto heals are neglected.  This looks like a clear templar advantage.

Alephin

[Chog]

Caethre, glad to see you got a parser and started to compare the 2 classes.  Was wondering if you could run a group of fights without any buffs on either healer, this will allow people to compare how much the offensive buffs help the Fury in the DPS department.  While I understand you want to show everybody that Fury DPS is more then Templar DPS, I beleive we all know this already, the question is how much of the DPS is from the buffs and how much is from the direct damage spells.

[Nelin]

I know this topic is Templar vs Fury, but I wanted to know how much a difference is inquisitor to templar.

[kenji]

On the contrary, when defensive buffs are needed, a templar has a tank that has about 15% more hit points, only has to heal for 72% of the damage (because of stun and benediction), and has a basic specialty/direct heal line-up that heals 90% of everything a fury has to offer for 80% of the power cost, even if lotto heals are neglected.  This looks like a clear templar advantage.

Alephin

the tank has 1000 less hit points (compare to temp), but group has 200 more resist overall and actual more power for the healer (fury grp wis/int +65, pure power buff) . Druid regen has more healing power than Cleric reactive (6 : 5).  vs AoE dmg,  grp regen work better than grp reactive. not to mention 2 grp heal vs 1. The wonder of BiTF that can do 9+ ratio direct heal which doesnt share timer. With the help of spirit of the bat (10 power regen per tick), and having imbued grp regen,not really a difference.

Kenji.

 

[kenji]

Nelinia, if u want , u can make both templar and inquisitor. and do the work =)

[Timaarit]

---

Alephin wrote:

---

Timaarit wrote:Sokolov, yes, both templar and a fury can trivially heal most situations. This is where defensive buffs are not needed but offensive buffs are useful. When defensive buffs are needed, furies are compensated with better healing.

---

On the contrary, when defensive buffs are needed, a templar has a tank that has about 15% more hit points, only has to heal for 72% of the damage (because of stun and benediction), and has a basic specialty/direct heal line-up that heals 90% of everything a fury has to offer for 80% of the power cost, even if lotto heals are neglected.  This looks like a clear templar advantage.

Alephin

---

Heh, you seem to have missed a clear english text. That difference in what needs to be healed is really necessary since furies have better healing power. Yes, at lvl 55 furies really can heal 20% more than templars. So my point is proven, templar defensive utility is needed to enable templars to be as good healers as furies, it is not compensation for fury offensive utility. Thus templar DPS needs to be multiplied by 2,5 to 3 in order to make things balanced (yes, it is no longer 2 since I didn't realize the healing gap was that big, I though templar and fyry were balanced). Also from yesterday, I was sole healer in a guild group. In the fights I actually needed to heal, I rarely had time to use my stun nor Mark or involuntary lines. On the bright side, Reverence (adept III, 210% health from power) was once again useful and I think on average I got about 3k healing from it per minute (cost me 520 power per minute to keep it up though, so not a good ratio, but it did help me heal). So this brings me to another point. Furies can do healing easier than templars. They have just 5 heals in use while templars really have to use all our heals and utility to get even close to the same result.

[Timaarit]

---

Nelinia wrote:

I know this topic is Templar vs Fury, but I wanted to know how much a difference is inquisitor to templar.

---

Healing or DPS? Inquisitors have more DPS and about the same healing power. In optimal and lucky situations templars can heal more with the lotto heals.

[kenji]

bah, tim...Inquisitor has Convert, it heals extra ~200 everytime the inquisitor cast a heal =P

[Timaarit]

---

kenjiso wrote:bah, tim...Inquisitor has Convert, it heals extra ~200 everytime the inquisitor cast a heal =P

---

I know, they heal easier. Templars still have GoC and fate lines as well as the now improved Reverence. So we have slightly more healing potential that Inquisitors. But the main thing is that our basic heals are below average due to our utility. I don't fury basic DPS being lower than priest average because of their utility. So templars are punished for needing to cast more spells to get to same result as furies. Same applies to templar vs. inquisitor, inquisitors have less healing spells but they still are near equal in healing power.

[kenji]

5% chance to heal 300 and 100% chance to heal 200 cant say really better. and their proc heal is 10% ~130 power heal to self... hardly worse than templar. =)

[Zabumt]

Some of the things that parsers don't catch:

 

Mit Debuff

Stun Effects (how much damage is prevented by our stuns?)

Templar Mez (aka sign line)

Divine Debuff (Didn't think this was a big deal until a Paladin in my guild noted today that he was getting really high divine hits on epic mobs)

Defensive Buffs

 

I was in Poets the other night for the first time.  We went in with another Templar and I.  Yes, I know, crappy stacking but they insisted everything would be okay.  Later on, a ranger went through a door that nobody was prepared to go through.  The ranger went through and died.  The other Templar and I waited for the door (the rest of the group was stuck behind yet another door) we went through when it was opened and all holy hell was unleashed upon us when we got to the other side.

 

We had 4 mobs on us to start with.  All 60+ heroics.  She mezzed a mob, I mezzed another.  So we were down to 2 mobs.  I stun one.  She stuns the other.  She then proceeds to combat rez the ranger.  Ranger stands back a few to regen some power and me and the other Templar just keep ourselves healed with level 60+ mobs beating on us.  Ranger gets some power and we proceed to take down all the aggro and a bit more before the rest of the group gets to us.

 

While this isn't your typical encounter it provides some insight to why Templars are so powerful. We can take a few hits, keep ourselves healed and make things work in a situation where I don't think other healers could do the same job.  Did we dps?  Nope.  Did we keep from wiping?  Absolutely with a big [Removed for Content] gold star! 

 

[Timaarit]

Zab, with other healers, they might not have gone through that door like you did. Thus they wouldn't have been in any danger to begin with. Also in my posting, I did take that stun into account. I also took the mez into account. They can help us to be in even ground with druids when it comes to keep group alive. But the fact remains, we need to use the stun and the mez to reduce mob DPS to a level we can heal, druids can heal that damage without the mez and stun. Thus druids heal easier and can spend time nuking while we are casting all our spells to match the heals.

[Dalchar]

I wouldn't say I have tons of time to cast nukes etc, small heals make for lots of spam.  Namely if in a 10s timeframe (regen cycle) takes 2s to cast regen, 2s for each DH and clicking (Due to human intervention, not like everything's going to always be queued, esp with fast casts) 6/10s are already used up, if another heal is required BITF, 8s are gone.  Solo healer in poet's... I very rarely nuke,  Trivial encounters where generally my tank is geared extremely nicely to boot, I could drop a regen and blast away.  Preventing the need to heal  > having to heal.  As a fury on difficult stuff, I fight to keep up.  There's no bigger hp buffer, no debuffs, there's no stuns, there's no pacifies/mez, it's heal or die.  I may have a bigger power pool to toss heals, but that power doesn't mean much of anything if fight is over before the last 600 extra power I have is left unused or you didn't have an opportunity to get the heals in.  Just because you have more healing potential directly doesn't mean it's the best route.  Groups notice the difference between templars and furies when they heal, in my experience, most still prefer templar even though any priest will generally do.

[Timaarit]

---

Dalcharis wrote:I wouldn't say I have tons of time to cast nukes etc, small heals make for lots of spam.  Namely if in a 10s timeframe (regen cycle) takes 2s to cast regen, 2s for each DH and clicking (Due to human intervention, not like everything's going to always be queued, esp with fast casts) 6/10s are already used up, if another heal is required BITF, 8s are gone.  Solo healer in poet's... I very rarely nuke,  Trivial encounters where generally my tank is geared extremely nicely to boot, I could drop a regen and blast away.  Preventing the need to heal  > having to heal.  As a fury on difficult stuff, I fight to keep up.  There's no bigger hp buffer, no debuffs, there's no stuns, there's no pacifies/mez, it's heal or die.  I may have a bigger power pool to toss heals, but that power doesn't mean much of anything if fight is over before the last 600 extra power I have is left unused or you didn't have an opportunity to get the heals in.  Just because you have more healing potential directly doesn't mean it's the best route.  Groups notice the difference between templars and furies when they heal, in my experience, most still prefer templar even though any priest will generally do.

---

In a heal or die situation, a templar really cannot start mezzing nor stunning. Also these situations mean the we are fighting mobs that will most likely resist the stun or mez. So trying to use these can mean a wipe. I would gladly trade these spells for equivalent amount of heals (= 7000 points healed per minute). So lets trade BitF for these mezzes and stuns? btw. in 10 seconds I can cast both reactives and my biggest heal. As it is, the first will heal damage taken after 2s and the second after 5s combat. The big heal is needed to heal whatever was taken before I got my reactives up. That was the full 10s. In a hard fight my reactive will be consumed by this time and I can recast my single target reactive and use my lesser heal. Then I can cast one of my proc heals. 17s is now gone and group reactive is down for 3 more seconds as is single target reactive. they are both castable at the same time. So I can use one of my nukes and do 400 damage or I can use the mitigation debuff. 20s in battle and both my reactives are up, rinse and repeat. So in a hard fight, I cannot even fully utilize my heals nor my utility. Which in fact makes things even worse from templars point of view. My calculation earlier was based on assumption that all heals can be used immediately and everything can be cast as soon as they are up. But the long cast times of our heals mean that something is always wasted. Now I have no doubt that this is the case with furies also, but due to shorter casting, the effect is smaller.

[Sokolov]

I love how the contention is basically over one level 55 spell.