Cleric = Druid?

Yaotzi · 10-18-2005, 09:19 PM

So judging by the patch notes druids are now just as effective as clerics? So..what's the point of being a cleric then?

kr8ztwin · 10-18-2005, 09:23 PM

mitigation? buffs? different playstyles? :robottongue:

Shamantukk · 10-18-2005, 09:26 PM

So you, as a Cleric, can moan and groan about not being the only logical healing choice any more? :smileyhappy:

By the way, my main is a Templar.

Daish · 10-18-2005, 09:29 PM

I think the OP's main point was more to the effect of....

[Removed for Content] did SOE come up with that big huge 'this is how the healers are different' list during the combat revamp?

If Druids all cast faster than clerics... but now all heal for as much dmg as clerics... doesnt that now mean that whatever was considered 'balance' during the combat revamp just got thrown out with the trash?

Don't get me wrong, I think that druids needed some more healing power, but once again, SOE is playing with one aspect of the game in complete ignorance with how it will affect the rest of the game. Next they will be giving druids the dps of bruisers.....

Finduillas · 10-18-2005, 09:36 PM

I dont even understand how they mathematically approximated equality, as a regen heals discrete amounts over time and a Reactive heals on a per-hit basis- I dont know how they can say they have "equal" numbers, as there are circumstantial variables involved.

it is really an odd claim to make. Too bad I cant test it until it gets live as all my character slots are full SMILEY

Arielle Nightshade · 10-18-2005, 09:47 PM

I don't think the result is going to have druids healing 'better' than clerics - but will give us a bit more front-end healing 'oomph' than we have now, and is..in the case of Wardens at least...really needed. Faster casting does not mean bigger heals..at this point it just adds up to a different play style.

Gcha · 10-18-2005, 09:52 PM

Finduillas wrote:

I dont even understand how they mathematically approximated equality, as a regen heals discrete amounts over time and a Reactive heals on a per-hit basis- I dont know how they can say they have "equal" numbers, as there are circumstantial variables involved.

Precisely. Druids now are not equal healers, they are clearly superior, since reactives don't heal unless one is being attacked.

AzraelAzgard · 10-18-2005, 09:57 PM

Clerics barely buff mitigation.

Why the hell would a group want a Cleric now, our group reactive can heal the whole group once and the 2 people once more if 2 AEs hit.

Druid group regen now ticks the same amount a heal as much as a Cleric reactive....

So 8 heals of 300 for the group from Cleric.

Or druid 300 heal every 2 seconds on the whole group for ages....

Umm amount healed disparity.

Whats the point in being a Cleric now, we just bring to groups a little thing that Shammy or Druid can do, they bring what we do and so much more.

Formangenavn · 10-18-2005, 09:58 PM

To the Templars here, plz read up on the reasons why Wardens wanted increased healing before flaming it. Warden boards are full of info for you. If you however feel that Clerics should heal better then druids, then I am sorry, we will never agree.

Also, this is not on live and is not the solution we originally wanted (if it is a solution at all)

Gcha · 10-18-2005, 10:02 PM

We don't have to heal better than wardens, but we also don't want wardens to heal better than us, as they will with this update.

And, we'd kind of like to do SOMETHING better than SOMEBODY.

Landiin · 10-18-2005, 10:03 PM

I feel for you guys SMILEY

Welcome to the world of the plate tank.

AzraelAzgard · 10-18-2005, 10:05 PM

We dont want to be superior over everyone else, but Druids have now been given the healing amounts of Clerics but they have the fastest recast times, fastest cast times and their group HoTs hit everyone in the group every 2 seconds for the power of a Cleric reactive. Reactives can only heal when the person is hit... so if a nasty AE hits the group for 1k they all get a 300 heal and then nothing, theres only 3 charges left, so many 3 of the group can get healed again or maybe they will be used up elsewhere, whereas a Druid HoT will now heal the group for 300 every 2 seconds regardless of whether they are attacked... hello Im overpowered now.

So umm why would you want a Cleric now Druids are clearly superior.

Daish · 10-18-2005, 10:20 PM

Whatever process SOE had to come up with the plan to 'balance' healers.....

They just threw that all out the window, mabye this is why SOE is not really posting anything about what thier plans are for the game, because they havent come up with one yet....

What is worrisome... is after this they will probably be 'revamping' tanks... and then revamping mages.... and then, they still need to finish revamping the mobs...

Does this ever end, or am I supposed to pay for beta?

Kyuven · 10-18-2005, 10:30 PM

easy solution would be to make cleric reactive heals duration based rather than charge based

Mogcha · 10-18-2005, 10:39 PM

Ummmm Just fyi, the cleric reactive heal is for 20 seconds. That may sound like alot of time, but it isn't when you get into a real fight.

Maelakai · 10-18-2005, 10:53 PM

I'd ask that you please stop grouping Wardens and Furys in the same 'Druid' pile. The fury class was well built, well structured and in very little need of fixes. The warden class has been gimped since the revamp.

Our minor/arch direct heal lines are on a 50/50 direct/regen split, possibly even lower than that... which means that we can't deliver healing when the tank needs it. It is this disparity that we have been complaining about since LU13.

The 'druid' grouping has been concerned about how HoTs do not scale to incoming damage... this is the issue they seem to be trying to fix by upping the tick amounts on HoTs.

This is all fine and good, but it still doesn't help the wardens deal with spike/burst damage, nor does it offer us any fixes to glaring discrepencies in druid class functionality (Warden vs. Fury buff/utility). This is most evident in not only the lvl 50 fury spell Porcupine, but also in the 52/55/58 spell lines the fury class gets.

As a cleric you can drop a direct heal that hits for 1k +, as a warden our biggest direct heal is the priest spell from the Splitpaw Saga... sure our heals COULD do equal amounts, provided all the ticks hit, and the mob doesn't mind waiting 12s while the remainder of our heal ticks on the tank before he starts hitting again...

As it stands now there is very little reason for a new druid to pick anything other than fury when they hit 20... this is what we want to see fixed more than anything.

Message Edited by Maelakai on 10-18-2005 11:55 AM

AzraelAzgard · 10-18-2005, 10:53 PM

A reactive healing for every hit the person or group takes for 30 seconds would be preferable to 5 or 9 heals they have atm that can be used up instantly but it would be overpowered.

Against loads of mobs stacking 2 reactives on a tank they would be getting healed for 600 - 700 every hit for 30 seconds and by then u can recast.

AzraelAzgard · 10-18-2005, 10:56 PM

You cant deal with spike dmg?

300 every 2 sec group HoT deals with any spike dmg pretty well, pretty well better, faster and more efficently than anyone else.

You can stack these regens too.

So now you get instant heals that have cleric reactives power ticking every 2 sec as a secondary component....

Erurat · 10-18-2005, 11:46 PM

No bashing please, but boy do I miss the days of Everquest 1 when a Cleric was a cleric and a druid was a druid each having there own distinctive strengths.

I'll wait to see how the changes affect my templar before commenting or complaining but it doesn't look too promising having read what I've read in the test server patch notes. Quite frankly I do think Templars/Inquisitors should heal more than any other class because, well they are CLERICS.

I just really am getting bored with my class and this seems to only be prospectively making it worse. Lalalala

Let the flames begin.

Message Edited by Erurat on 10-18-2005 12:47 PM

Daish · 10-19-2005, 12:12 AM

thats a good piont, Erurat...

In EQ1 (and most other games) classes had STRENGTHS... OMG.. what an amazing concept....

What we got in EQ2 is some really odd mismash of stuff that ensures no one really does anything better than anyone, nor do they have any disctinctive roles...

Except, of course the overpowered classes that 'won' the revamp.

SOE needs to remember that people want to play a class with strengths, a class with weaknesses, a class with some type of playstyle... no druid would have asked to heal for as much or more than a cleric, they asked to have a chance to actually keep up when healing, but not to be the best healer, the fast healer, the best dps (fury), and the best buffs....

Now SOE will have to give clerics and shamans uber buffs, and make thier heals faster... and, wait... didnt we just do a big revamp? sigh.

Mor · 10-19-2005, 12:21 AM

Erurat wrote:

No bashing please, but boy do I miss the days of Everquest 1 when a Cleric was a cleric and a druid was a druid each having there own distinctive strengths.

I'll wait to see how the changes affect my templar before commenting or complaining but it doesn't look too promising having read what I've read in the test server patch notes. Quite frankly I do think Templars/Inquisitors should heal more than any other class because, well they are CLERICS.

I just really am getting bored with my class and this seems to only be prospectively making it worse. Lalalala

Let the flames begin.
Message Edited by Erurat on 10-18-2005 12:47 PM

Then why are you plaing a different game if that is what you wanted? We were all promised -- repeatedly -- that any healer could heal approximately the same in EQ2. The Holy Trinity was gone. If you didn't want that, then what are you doing here?

mylin1 · 10-19-2005, 12:23 AM

And I remember from EQ1 how many droods felt gimped as healers at high lvls and wernt wanted in groups. The goal of EQ2 was to have every priest class heal as well as the next - just using a different effect..sure this might not be all balanced etc yet but at least they are tweaking at it with this in mind. Lets not go back to the days of EQ1 requiring a cleric to do anything, it was frustrating for the other healers and frustrating for non healers who always had to play "find the cleric" Mylin 34 templar

Mor · 10-19-2005, 12:25 AM

AzraelAzgard wrote:

You cant deal with spike dmg?

300 every 2 sec group HoT deals with any spike dmg pretty well, pretty well better, faster and more efficently than anyone else.

You can stack these regens too.

So now you get instant heals that have cleric reactives power ticking every 2 sec as a secondary component....

Please take a look at the threads stickied at the top of the warden forum. In particular this thread.

Mor · 10-19-2005, 12:33 AM

AzraelAzgard wrote:
We dont want to be superior over everyone else, but Druids have now been given the healing amounts of Clerics but they have the fastest recast times, Uh, no. You can recast in 6 seconds if the going gets tough. Our regen is still ticking away trying to do it's initial part... Reactives can only heal when the person is hit... so if a nasty AE hits the group for 1k they all get a 300 heal and then nothing, Well, first, if the group never gets hit again it isn't an issue, right? But what we all fear is that next hit. So if it's a really nasty AoE what is the next thing you do? Direct heal. Always.
So umm why would you want a Cleric now Druids are clearly superior. Because in most situations, your group heal is all going to the main tank. All of it. Right now, you can out heal us 600hp just in the first 8 seconds of a fight. And it gets worse from there. The truth is templars out heal wardens by 30% and, ironically, more efficiently. Please view the threads stickied at the top of the warden forum for more info.

Meme · 10-19-2005, 12:34 AM

I have played every healer class in game with the exception of an inquisitor to the mid to late 20's... just long enough to get an early feel of each. However I have spoken to every single healing class since release regularly to better understand each class. Furies and wardens have been hurting since combat revamp to the point of groups turning them down in favor of having a cleric or a shaman. SOE on release of the game said their goal was that this never be an issue, that each class be equally wanted as a healer in a group. This is not currerently the case. They are all supposed to be as capable of being a main healer. Without this test update this will never be a reality. A Fury and a Warden cannot be considered main healers. Changing what they are changing with a Fury and a Warden will hopefully equalize them in this respect. IF the Templar does not have the bells and whistles in your opinion of the Druids, then that should be addressed seperately. A healer should be capable always of being the main healer in a group. The bells and whistles can be made arguably more equal once this is achieved.

Message Edited by Memeep on 10-18-2005 01:36 PM

Fildren_the_Templ · 10-19-2005, 01:26 AM

So, Fury has twice the dps of any other healer and heal like a priest... Hey that's really fair for priest !

Mor · 10-19-2005, 01:50 AM

Fildren_the_Templar wrote:So, Fury has twice the dps of any other healer and heal like a priest... Hey that's really fair for priest !

Look, no one is saying templars don't have issues. But how does keeping wardens (in particular) by far and away the worst healers in the game help you with those issues? Wouldn't a better way to deal with this be to have both templar and warden issues be addressed?

mylin1 · 10-19-2005, 01:52 AM

Once all the priests are doing their primary job as well as each other then it might be better to focus on expanding their secondary roles..damage for furies, buffs for wardens, err looking good in plate armor for templars.. On the role of templars it seems that (harking back to EQ1 days) some more anti-undead and anti-demon spells would be a reasonable inclusion into the templars spell list. I know that a few of our smites do extra damage to undead targets but its not many and its not a lot. I always thought of a templar as a companion to the paladin, both crusading against the undead/demonic forces of the world. Mylin

Fildren_the_Templ · 10-19-2005, 02:05 AM

Wouldn't a better way to deal with this be to have both templar and warden issues be addressed?

Yup that would be great, maybe the next combat change..... just 8 or 10 months to wait

Message Edited by Fildren_the_Templar on 10-18-2005 03:06 PM

Gwide · 10-19-2005, 02:36 AM

mylin1 wrote:
Once all the priests are doing their primary job as well as each other then it might be better to focus on expanding their secondary roles..damage for furies, buffs for wardens, err looking good in plate armor for templars..

On the role of templars it seems that (harking back to EQ1 days) some more anti-undead and anti-demon spells would be a reasonable inclusion into the templars spell list. I know that a few of our smites do extra damage to undead targets but its not many and its not a lot. I always thought of a templar as a companion to the paladin, both crusading against the undead/demonic forces of the world.

Mylin

I don't think mob specific abilities should be the balancing factor because it depends too much on content. When populating an expansion, it is often overlooked to put xx% of this type of mob into a zone. Getting a demon nuke and then having the next expansion be centered around dragons, aliens, or giants would be aggravating.

I'm all for healer balance; I think those who wanted to be primarily a healer, should be interchangable. I can't say if the current patch on test brings it closer or causes new imbalances (no judgement).

10-18-2005, 09:19 PM	#1
Yaotzi Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 31	So judging by the patch notes druids are now just as effective as clerics? So..what's the point of being a cleric then? __________________

10-18-2005, 09:23 PM	#2
kr8ztwin Loremaster Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 132	mitigation? buffs? different playstyles? :robottongue: __________________

10-18-2005, 09:26 PM	#3
Shamantukk Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 16	So you, as a Cleric, can moan and groan about not being the only logical healing choice any more? :smileyhappy: By the way, my main is a Templar. __________________ Tukk Keeper of the Divine Baked Goods Dancemaster and Bon Vivant Advocatus Diaboli Everfrost Server

10-18-2005, 09:52 PM	#7
Gcha Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 175	Finduillas wrote: I dont even understand how they mathematically approximated equality, as a regen heals discrete amounts over time and a Reactive heals on a per-hit basis- I dont know how they can say they have "equal" numbers, as there are circumstantial variables involved. Precisely. Druids now are not equal healers, they are clearly superior, since reactives don't heal unless one is being attacked.

10-18-2005, 10:03 PM	#11
Landiin Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,749	I feel for you guys Welcome to the world of the plate tank. __________________

10-18-2005, 09:29 PM	#4
Daish Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 72	I think the OP's main point was more to the effect of.... [Removed for Content] did SOE come up with that big huge 'this is how the healers are different' list during the combat revamp? If Druids all cast faster than clerics... but now all heal for as much dmg as clerics... doesnt that now mean that whatever was considered 'balance' during the combat revamp just got thrown out with the trash? Don't get me wrong, I think that druids needed some more healing power, but once again, SOE is playing with one aspect of the game in complete ignorance with how it will affect the rest of the game. Next they will be giving druids the dps of bruisers.....

10-18-2005, 09:36 PM	#5
Finduillas Loremaster Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 15	I dont even understand how they mathematically approximated equality, as a regen heals discrete amounts over time and a Reactive heals on a per-hit basis- I dont know how they can say they have "equal" numbers, as there are circumstantial variables involved. it is really an odd claim to make. Too bad I cant test it until it gets live as all my character slots are full

10-18-2005, 09:47 PM	#6
Arielle Nightshade Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 2,727	I don't think the result is going to have druids healing 'better' than clerics - but will give us a bit more front-end healing 'oomph' than we have now, and is..in the case of Wardens at least...really needed. Faster casting does not mean bigger heals..at this point it just adds up to a different play style.

10-18-2005, 09:57 PM	#8
AzraelAzgard Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 511	Clerics barely buff mitigation. Why the hell would a group want a Cleric now, our group reactive can heal the whole group once and the 2 people once more if 2 AEs hit. Druid group regen now ticks the same amount a heal as much as a Cleric reactive.... So 8 heals of 300 for the group from Cleric. Or druid 300 heal every 2 seconds on the whole group for ages.... Umm amount healed disparity. Whats the point in being a Cleric now, we just bring to groups a little thing that Shammy or Druid can do, they bring what we do and so much more.

10-18-2005, 09:58 PM	#9
Formangenavn Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 334	To the Templars here, plz read up on the reasons why Wardens wanted increased healing before flaming it. Warden boards are full of info for you. If you however feel that Clerics should heal better then druids, then I am sorry, we will never agree. Also, this is not on live and is not the solution we originally wanted (if it is a solution at all)

10-18-2005, 10:02 PM	#10
Gcha Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 175	We don't have to heal better than wardens, but we also don't want wardens to heal better than us, as they will with this update. And, we'd kind of like to do SOMETHING better than SOMEBODY.

10-18-2005, 10:05 PM	#12
AzraelAzgard Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 511	We dont want to be superior over everyone else, but Druids have now been given the healing amounts of Clerics but they have the fastest recast times, fastest cast times and their group HoTs hit everyone in the group every 2 seconds for the power of a Cleric reactive. Reactives can only heal when the person is hit... so if a nasty AE hits the group for 1k they all get a 300 heal and then nothing, theres only 3 charges left, so many 3 of the group can get healed again or maybe they will be used up elsewhere, whereas a Druid HoT will now heal the group for 300 every 2 seconds regardless of whether they are attacked... hello Im overpowered now. So umm why would you want a Cleric now Druids are clearly superior.

10-18-2005, 10:20 PM	#13
Daish Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 72	Whatever process SOE had to come up with the plan to 'balance' healers..... They just threw that all out the window, mabye this is why SOE is not really posting anything about what thier plans are for the game, because they havent come up with one yet.... What is worrisome... is after this they will probably be 'revamping' tanks... and then revamping mages.... and then, they still need to finish revamping the mobs... Does this ever end, or am I supposed to pay for beta?

10-18-2005, 10:30 PM	#14
Kyuven Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 69	easy solution would be to make cleric reactive heals duration based rather than charge based __________________ Kurapika Kurata, Inquisitor of Freeport < Legacy > Unrest Server

10-18-2005, 10:39 PM	#15
Mogcha General Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 15	Ummmm Just fyi, the cleric reactive heal is for 20 seconds. That may sound like alot of time, but it isn't when you get into a real fight.

10-18-2005, 10:53 PM	#16
Maelakai Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 124	I'd ask that you please stop grouping Wardens and Furys in the same 'Druid' pile. The fury class was well built, well structured and in very little need of fixes. The warden class has been gimped since the revamp. Our minor/arch direct heal lines are on a 50/50 direct/regen split, possibly even lower than that... which means that we can't deliver healing when the tank needs it. It is this disparity that we have been complaining about since LU13. The 'druid' grouping has been concerned about how HoTs do not scale to incoming damage... this is the issue they seem to be trying to fix by upping the tick amounts on HoTs. This is all fine and good, but it still doesn't help the wardens deal with spike/burst damage, nor does it offer us any fixes to glaring discrepencies in druid class functionality (Warden vs. Fury buff/utility). This is most evident in not only the lvl 50 fury spell Porcupine, but also in the 52/55/58 spell lines the fury class gets. As a cleric you can drop a direct heal that hits for 1k +, as a warden our biggest direct heal is the priest spell from the Splitpaw Saga... sure our heals COULD do equal amounts, provided all the ticks hit, and the mob doesn't mind waiting 12s while the remainder of our heal ticks on the tank before he starts hitting again... As it stands now there is very little reason for a new druid to pick anything other than fury when they hit 20... this is what we want to see fixed more than anything. Message Edited by Maelakai on 10-18-2005 11:55 AM __________________ http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/3746/humper2iy8.gif

10-18-2005, 10:56 PM	#18
AzraelAzgard Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 511	You cant deal with spike dmg? 300 every 2 sec group HoT deals with any spike dmg pretty well, pretty well better, faster and more efficently than anyone else. You can stack these regens too. So now you get instant heals that have cleric reactives power ticking every 2 sec as a secondary component....

10-18-2005, 11:46 PM	#19
Erurat Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 81	No bashing please, but boy do I miss the days of Everquest 1 when a Cleric was a cleric and a druid was a druid each having there own distinctive strengths. I'll wait to see how the changes affect my templar before commenting or complaining but it doesn't look too promising having read what I've read in the test server patch notes. Quite frankly I do think Templars/Inquisitors should heal more than any other class because, well they are CLERICS. I just really am getting bored with my class and this seems to only be prospectively making it worse. Lalalala Let the flames begin. Message Edited by Erurat on 10-18-2005 12:47 PM __________________

10-19-2005, 12:12 AM	#20
Daish Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 72	thats a good piont, Erurat... In EQ1 (and most other games) classes had STRENGTHS... OMG.. what an amazing concept.... What we got in EQ2 is some really odd mismash of stuff that ensures no one really does anything better than anyone, nor do they have any disctinctive roles... Except, of course the overpowered classes that 'won' the revamp. SOE needs to remember that people want to play a class with strengths, a class with weaknesses, a class with some type of playstyle... no druid would have asked to heal for as much or more than a cleric, they asked to have a chance to actually keep up when healing, but not to be the best healer, the fast healer, the best dps (fury), and the best buffs.... Now SOE will have to give clerics and shamans uber buffs, and make thier heals faster... and, wait... didnt we just do a big revamp? sigh.

10-19-2005, 12:21 AM	#21
Mor Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 344	Erurat wrote: No bashing please, but boy do I miss the days of Everquest 1 when a Cleric was a cleric and a druid was a druid each having there own distinctive strengths. I'll wait to see how the changes affect my templar before commenting or complaining but it doesn't look too promising having read what I've read in the test server patch notes. Quite frankly I do think Templars/Inquisitors should heal more than any other class because, well they are CLERICS. I just really am getting bored with my class and this seems to only be prospectively making it worse. Lalalala Let the flames begin. Message Edited by Erurat on 10-18-2005 12:47 PM Then why are you plaing a different game if that is what you wanted? We were all promised -- repeatedly -- that any healer could heal approximately the same in EQ2. The Holy Trinity was gone. If you didn't want that, then what are you doing here?

10-19-2005, 12:23 AM	#22
mylin1 Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: melbourne Posts: 78	And I remember from EQ1 how many droods felt gimped as healers at high lvls and wernt wanted in groups. The goal of EQ2 was to have every priest class heal as well as the next - just using a different effect..sure this might not be all balanced etc yet but at least they are tweaking at it with this in mind. Lets not go back to the days of EQ1 requiring a cleric to do anything, it was frustrating for the other healers and frustrating for non healers who always had to play "find the cleric" Mylin 34 templar

10-19-2005, 12:25 AM	#23
Mor Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 344	AzraelAzgard wrote: You cant deal with spike dmg? 300 every 2 sec group HoT deals with any spike dmg pretty well, pretty well better, faster and more efficently than anyone else. You can stack these regens too. So now you get instant heals that have cleric reactives power ticking every 2 sec as a secondary component.... Please take a look at the threads stickied at the top of the warden forum. In particular this thread.

10-19-2005, 12:33 AM	#24
Mor Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 344	AzraelAzgard wrote: We dont want to be superior over everyone else, but Druids have now been given the healing amounts of Clerics but they have the fastest recast times, Uh, no. You can recast in 6 seconds if the going gets tough. Our regen is still ticking away trying to do it's initial part... Reactives can only heal when the person is hit... so if a nasty AE hits the group for 1k they all get a 300 heal and then nothing, Well, first, if the group never gets hit again it isn't an issue, right? But what we all fear is that next hit. So if it's a really nasty AoE what is the next thing you do? Direct heal. Always. So umm why would you want a Cleric now Druids are clearly superior. Because in most situations, your group heal is all going to the main tank. All of it. Right now, you can out heal us 600hp just in the first 8 seconds of a fight. And it gets worse from there. The truth is templars out heal wardens by 30% and, ironically, more efficiently. Please view the threads stickied at the top of the warden forum for more info.

10-19-2005, 12:34 AM	#25
Meme General Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 13	I have played every healer class in game with the exception of an inquisitor to the mid to late 20's... just long enough to get an early feel of each. However I have spoken to every single healing class since release regularly to better understand each class. Furies and wardens have been hurting since combat revamp to the point of groups turning them down in favor of having a cleric or a shaman. SOE on release of the game said their goal was that this never be an issue, that each class be equally wanted as a healer in a group. This is not currerently the case. They are all supposed to be as capable of being a main healer. Without this test update this will never be a reality. A Fury and a Warden cannot be considered main healers. Changing what they are changing with a Fury and a Warden will hopefully equalize them in this respect. IF the Templar does not have the bells and whistles in your opinion of the Druids, then that should be addressed seperately. A healer should be capable always of being the main healer in a group. The bells and whistles can be made arguably more equal once this is achieved. Message Edited by Memeep on 10-18-2005 01:36 PM

10-19-2005, 01:26 AM	#26
Fildren_the_Templ Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 36	So, Fury has twice the dps of any other healer and heal like a priest... Hey that's really fair for priest !

10-19-2005, 01:50 AM	#27
Mor Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 344	Fildren_the_Templar wrote:So, Fury has twice the dps of any other healer and heal like a priest... Hey that's really fair for priest ! Look, no one is saying templars don't have issues. But how does keeping wardens (in particular) by far and away the worst healers in the game help you with those issues? Wouldn't a better way to deal with this be to have both templar and warden issues be addressed?

10-19-2005, 01:52 AM	#28
mylin1 Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: melbourne Posts: 78	Once all the priests are doing their primary job as well as each other then it might be better to focus on expanding their secondary roles..damage for furies, buffs for wardens, err looking good in plate armor for templars.. On the role of templars it seems that (harking back to EQ1 days) some more anti-undead and anti-demon spells would be a reasonable inclusion into the templars spell list. I know that a few of our smites do extra damage to undead targets but its not many and its not a lot. I always thought of a templar as a companion to the paladin, both crusading against the undead/demonic forces of the world. Mylin

10-19-2005, 02:05 AM	#29
Fildren_the_Templ Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 36	Wouldn't a better way to deal with this be to have both templar and warden issues be addressed? Yup that would be great, maybe the next combat change..... just 8 or 10 months to wait Message Edited by Fildren_the_Templar on 10-18-2005 03:06 PM

10-19-2005, 02:36 AM	#30
Gwide Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 86	mylin1 wrote: Once all the priests are doing their primary job as well as each other then it might be better to focus on expanding their secondary roles..damage for furies, buffs for wardens, err looking good in plate armor for templars.. On the role of templars it seems that (harking back to EQ1 days) some more anti-undead and anti-demon spells would be a reasonable inclusion into the templars spell list. I know that a few of our smites do extra damage to undead targets but its not many and its not a lot. I always thought of a templar as a companion to the paladin, both crusading against the undead/demonic forces of the world. Mylin I don't think mob specific abilities should be the balancing factor because it depends too much on content. When populating an expansion, it is often overlooked to put xx% of this type of mob into a zone. Getting a demon nuke and then having the next expansion be centered around dragons, aliens, or giants would be aggravating. I'm all for healer balance; I think those who wanted to be primarily a healer, should be interchangable. I can't say if the current patch on test brings it closer or causes new imbalances (no judgement).