Best Healer

[bigmak20]

I've griped about my share of stuff in this game particularly things SOE did for the revamp that defied logic.  But by and large; I thought they were striving for balance among healers and we merely had to talk them into letting us do something in addtion to healing equally because.. well.. that was only fair.

 

After revamp and in the low 50s we could look at our healing ability (still ok) and our healing lotto utilities (debatable but ok) and say despite having no offense we still had this little corner carved out where we could hold our heads up as Templars and heal maybe a few percent better if the lotto worked out.  But let's be honest... that's a stretch.  We love our toons so we'll make the stretch.

 

DPS.. pfft.

 

I've gutted it out.  I've played through to 59.  I've received and tried my ancient spells scrolls; I've grouped with and observed other healers.

 

Furies are the best healers.  By far.

 

Take a look at their ancient spells scrolls.  Two of them are significant direct heal spells on seperate timers.  This increases their core healing arsenal from the 4 standard core heals we all have to 6.  Their ancient spells scrolls DIRECT HEALS are on recast timers less then 12 seconds compared to ours 15 minutes.  LOL

 

Take a look at FURIES UTILITY HEALS. 

 

INSTANT HEALS

INSTANT NON INTERRUPTIBL E ZERO POWER heal and agi buff

....

umm.. Templar's utility is our utility heals?  Apparently whoever sold us that line of BS never read the Furies utility lineup.

 

Take a look.

 

There is a BEST HEALER in this game by leaps and bounds.

 

Oh.. but wait.. let's throw in some top tier DPS....

[Caethre]

OOC.

 

Annaelisa made 40 the night before last, and I upgraded her new big regen to Adept III, it's pretty nice. I've not had the chance to really put it through it's paces yet on a tank fighting in an XP group however, as I've only soloed since then so far. However, I will comment on the top tier DPS remark.

 

Last night, at 40, I went into Lavastorm, and thought, what the heck, I'll try these level 45 single down arrow goblins that Felishanna kills for writs sometimes. They are orange con, so I'm expecting this to be *hard*. Her spells are all Adept III however, so that helps, but of course her gear is all just handcrafted tier 5 basic tradeskilled leather/jewelry, the kind you can get a full set of for under 50g on the broker.

 

It wasn't difficult. Yes, Anna got a *lot* of resists on some of them. However, her DPS is sufficient that she could pretty much mow through them even so. At level 40 they as orange cons, but she can kill them at about the rate Felishanna can kill the same mobs as a level 53 (when they are low greens). Naturally, the XP was, shall we say, pretty good.

 

Hands up, all those Templars in handcrafted armour who are chain-killing level 45 mobs at level 40? I think even a Warden or Mystic would struggle to manage that efficiently, but a Templar, no waaaaaaay (or if they tried, even if they lived, it would be many minutes per fight).

 

So why am I posting yet again on how powerful she is? Simple ... to demonstrate the huge imbalance that remains within the priest classes on DPS/killing capability. Sure, this was solo, but it would affect her contribution in any group where she was able to spend some power nuking as well as healing - ie - any normal non-superchallenging XP group.

 

Which is why ... more and more groups are sending tells to me when Im /roleplay and not LFG, asking me to group. Happens every night, several times. Not a "problem" I get on the Templar. But that's no surprise - if I as a Templar player would not invite a Templar to an XP group who wasn't a good friend, why would anyone else?

 

Ho hum ... SoE will get the message ... eventually.

 

Felishanna [60 Sage .. and 53 Templar for what that is worth]

Annaelisa [40 Fury,, and still rising fast]

 

[Danter]

Despite all the facts that are out there, there will always be some who refuse to believe their all-mighty Templar isn't all-mighty.

 

Then you'll have the Furies running over here saying that Templars are "better healers" because they'll do anything they can to protect their current god-like status from being nerfed.

 

Also, Adept 3 has nothing to do with the hit rate of nukes landing on higher con mobs (Unless it's a mez/stun type spell).  It's totally dependant on your disruption skill, so I'm sure you probably could have had the same results with Adept 1 spells.

[Dalchar]

Something interesting we did last night on the warden board, actually 2-3 of us did the math all at once, it was kinda funny, everyone was just bored it seems and someone requested a mathematical comparison, so we all went and got a calculator it seemed LOL.

http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=16&message.id=10861&page=3

Furies actually heal (single target-wise) for about 33% less than Templars and Wardens *without the ancient spells* throughout the course of a minute (if you asume for most general purposes reactive = regen throughout the course which wouldn't be too far off the mark and just assume it a constant for wardens our regens are actually equal).  The math is posted and we came up with the same results... not sure why we never really did it as it's easier to try and compare and add them up than dps is.

 Only upon reaching 52 can furies begin to close the gap... with a situational heal on the third timer...which is harder to quantify, as you're not going to cast it when the tank isn't orange or red if you can avoid it (power cost prohibitive and would be considered a waste) and you may not always land it when the tank is in the orange (you go to click... regen ticks... you click... it's casting... before casting ends, regen ticks and hp went above 50%... BITF lands and you say "GRRRRR!!!!"  as you healed for half potential and with only a 280 hp buff the orange range is smaller).  If you assume you cast BITF 4x in the course of the minute (about 66% of the time that it's up) and assume it lands 2x in good range 2x in bad range, furies are about 11% behind in healing (this would also be equal to casting 3x and all 3 landing in good range).  One more cast and then it'd be approximately equal I suppose.

 

Edit: my bad, I got to remembering BITF is same timer as elixir... 4 casts is 66% of the time it's up.

Message Edited by Dalcharis on 11-18-2005 05:10 AM

Message Edited by Dalcharis on 11-18-2005 05:28 AM

[Nindor2]

---

Caethre wrote:

Ho hum ... SoE will get the message ... eventually.

 

---

What message? There is no message. As long as even we templars cannot agree whether we even have a problem, there is absolutely no pressure or message there for the devs. Zero. Nada. I would bet some money (if i had any to spare) that we see major upgrades to shaman/druid classes or nerfs for clerics before we see any cleric improvements. These guys know how to make a case for themselves. We seem to be glutton for punishment. We will likely never unite, not even if they nurf us to the healing and dps of a L20 druid. There will still be people applauding the changes, welcoming the changes, and claiming they still get groups and all is fine.

[SenorPhrog]

---

Nindor2 wrote:

---

Caethre wrote:

Ho hum ... SoE will get the message ... eventually.

 

---

What message? There is no message. As long as even we templars cannot agree whether we even have a problem, there is absolutely no pressure or message there for the devs. Zero. Nada.

I would bet some money (if i had any to spare) that we see major upgrades to shaman/druid classes or nerfs for clerics before we see any cleric improvements. These guys know how to make a case for themselves. We seem to be glutton for punishment. We will likely never unite, not even if they nurf us to the healing and dps of a L20 druid. There will still be people applauding the changes, welcoming the changes, and claiming they still get groups and all is fine.

---

You started off strong but didn't quite cross the finish line.   First of all, with the addition of more Fury drama let me give a warm "YAAARRRRRRRGH."   I'll expect this thread engulfed in flames by the end of the day or locked. 

You're absolutely right on your first part.   Nobody will agree, and we spend so much time sparring with each other (even the people who don't even play Templars anymore) that who exactly ARE the Devs going to listen to?   The posters on these forums make up a marginal percentage of the playerbase, and to be honest, SOE would be insane to just take our words for it. 

You don't see the anger and resentment on the other Priest boards so yeah I can see why the Devs would look at their issues but I bet you they have been looking at ours as well.   The part you fell short on was "welcoming the changes, and applauding the changes."   Perhaps first of all you can be more specific about which "changes" you're talking about.  If you're still talking about LU#13 its not going anywhere so I'd hope you'd try and let it go.  I enjoy that I'm more challenged after those particular changes but I don't ever remember applauding them.   I think you are exaggerating this part of your post.   I see a majority of complaints up here not praise.

[Caethre]

OOC.

---

Nindor2 wrote:

---

Caethre wrote:

Ho hum ... SoE will get the message ... eventually.

 

---

What message? There is no message. As long as even we templars cannot agree whether we even have a problem, there is absolutely no pressure or message there for the devs. Zero. Nada.

I would bet some money (if i had any to spare) that we see major upgrades to shaman/druid classes or nerfs for clerics before we see any cleric improvements. These guys know how to make a case for themselves. We seem to be glutton for punishment. We will likely never unite, not even if they nurf us to the healing and dps of a L20 druid. There will still be people applauding the changes, welcoming the changes, and claiming they still get groups and all is fine.

---

Well, maybe.

You are correct, we will never all 'unite'.

There will always be a small number of the raiding templars (and I mean only a few of them) who truely do not care if we are not balanced for soloing and normal grouping, becuase they are only interested in their own playstyle, not in the good of the class as a whole in the context of wider game balance - indeed, some of them actually WANT non-hardcore raiders to be nerfed in general. This group will fall in line more when raiding Templars are starting to become prejudiced against in raids the same way normal Templars are already being prejudiced against in solo and group settings, of course.

And we will still always have those same two or three fanboys, with many thousands of posts, who will praise our class no matter how 'gimped' we become, and launch personal attacks on any who disagree, successfully bullying some of us off the boards, you are correct again.

And finally, we will still have a few non-Templars without the knowledge of our class that we have, coming here telling us to "stop whining", for their own self-oriented purposes.

Yes, these groups all hurt our case, because they obfuscate the situation with pure noise. And yes, some of them even then describe the observations from the hundreds of us all making the same observations as the "noise". So be it, we cannot change it.

But ....

SOE are not, whatever anyone says, stupid. They do care about game balance issues, I really believe that.

Once they look, they will see what is blindingly obvious to those of us who play every day. I suspect, they are already looking at it, to be honest. I just WISH they would post something, somewhere, to tell us.

Felishanna / Annaelisa

[quetzaqotl]

Id  recommend you look up the thread ( http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=16&message.id=10861&page=3 ) Dal posted.

Instead of windmilling your arms around with your eyes closed screaming furies roxxxorrrzzz we so [Removed for Content]!

Templars do heal better by quite a stretch also furies arent in tier 1 or 2 for dps thats a blatant lie in ideal situations (in some raids) with LOADS of mobs and short kill time yes we do dmg hard but thats really situational.

Why do I bother posting on this thread (again /sigh)?

Its because I love my class and if you think its unbalanced sure go for it but please dont lose the view of the facts please (pls stop running around without stopping and thinking what you are exactly following).

(Yeah yeah another stupid post from me the fury fanboi from hell :smileywink: )

Message Edited by quetzaqotl on 11-18-2005 06:51 AM

[Badfeeling]

Hi Guys!

I normally just read this forum but I never comment but today I thought I would throw in my pennoes worth. I have a lvl 40 Templar on Blackburrow. She is a Barbarian...so starts at a slight disadvantage on WIS and INT...not AdeptIIIs and Silvril Plate.

I admit that before the CU she was AWESOME in soloing and I really enjoyed playing her. But now I tend to group all the time and I enjoy keeping the group alive and I wont be the first person to say she does a GOOD job.

My comments are that I have played in groups where there have been two other types of healers at the same level (including Fury) and always in a crunch my Templar has been the last Healer standing and healing. So

[Dalchar]

Actually guys, ignore *my* thread above, I'm doing something different as I think it needs to be looked at, chances are furies may not actually be 33% like those theoretical numbers show, as I realized a few things... while chaincasting even in optimal timeframes, you end up with overlaping cast/recast... you can't cast something else while you're casting another spell already...  SOOO lemmie finish plugging numbers into a pretty spreadsheet Edit: When I said ignore the thread above, I meant *MY* thread, not the person directly above me.

Message Edited by Dalcharis on 11-21-2005 01:27 PM

[bigmak20]

1) IMO it's the ancient spells scrolls that push the Fury several steps ahead to "Best Healer".  Comparing our standard spell lines we're all reasonably close.  Furies getting two direct heals on seperate timers to add to their arsenal?  It's very biased compared to our 15 min recast tricks.  Sanctuary is really nice but I'd trade it in a second for a direct heal on a seperate timer.  But why should I have to?

 

2) When you look at a Furies healing utilities you realize it's pathetic for people to tell Templar's their utility is healing.  So is other priests.  They get other stuff in addition to their utility healing but we aren't allowed to talk about that.  I'm actually quite mad I didn't look at other priests utility before this.  I took some peoples word for it that a Templar's utility was healing.   Other priests get plenty of healing utility also -- it isn't a Templar thing.

 

3) We all know DPS is ridiculous but we aren't allowed to talk about that either.

 

SO... shoot down one of those 3 points based on some little trick you can think of that looks uber enough to make up for it.  You're still left with the other 2. 

 

It isn't balanced at all.  Not even close.

[SenorPhrog]

---

bigmak2010 wrote:

1) IMO it's the ancient spells scrolls that push the Fury several steps ahead to "Best Healer".  Comparing our standard spell lines we're all reasonably close.  Furies getting two direct heals on seperate timers to add to their arsenal?  It's very biased compared to our 15 min recast tricks.  Sanctuary is really nice but I'd trade it in a second for a direct heal on a seperate timer.  But why should I have to?

 

2) When you look at a Furies healing utilities you realize it's pathetic for people to tell Templar's their utility is healing.  So is other priests.  They get other stuff in addition to their utility healing but we aren't allowed to talk about that.  I'm actually quite mad I didn't look at other priests utility before this.  I took some peoples word for it that a Templar's utility was healing.   Other priests get plenty of healing utility also -- it isn't a Templar thing.

 

3) We all know DPS is ridiculous but we aren't allowed to talk about that either.

 

SO... shoot down one of those 3 points based on some little trick you can think of that looks uber enough to make up for it.  You're still left with the other 2. 

 

It isn't balanced at all.  Not even close.

---

Now don't get the idea I'm defending Furies because I'm not.  Your first arguement is difficult to look at over the whole class because you are only talking the last 16 % of the game.   You can't really base an entire classes balance over the end game.   I'm not saying you are wrong about your assesment though.

Your second arguement, I'd love to see a little more work done defining where our healing utlitity lies because I'll admit thats hard to gauge.   If any work is going to be done with Templars thats probably where it needs to be done.

DPS arguement we can talk about all day but like they (not me) stated our utlitiy should lie in healing not in DPS.   Maybe I'm a pessimist but I can't seeing that getting very far.

[bigmak20]

Responses in Yellow

---

Radar-X wrote:

---

bigmak2010 wrote:

1) IMO it's the ancient spells scrolls that push the Fury several steps ahead to "Best Healer".  Comparing our standard spell lines we're all reasonably close.  Furies getting two direct heals on seperate timers to add to their arsenal?  It's very biased compared to our 15 min recast tricks.  Sanctuary is really nice but I'd trade it in a second for a direct heal on a seperate timer.  But why should I have to?

 

2) When you look at a Furies healing utilities you realize it's pathetic for people to tell Templar's their utility is healing.  So is other priests.  They get other stuff in addition to their utility healing but we aren't allowed to talk about that.  I'm actually quite mad I didn't look at other priests utility before this.  I took some peoples word for it that a Templar's utility was healing.   Other priests get plenty of healing utility also -- it isn't a Templar thing.

 

3) We all know DPS is ridiculous but we aren't allowed to talk about that either.

 

SO... shoot down one of those 3 points based on some little trick you can think of that looks uber enough to make up for it.  You're still left with the other 2. 

 

It isn't balanced at all.  Not even close.

---

Now don't get the idea I'm defending Furies because I'm not.  Your first arguement is difficult to look at over the whole class because you are only talking the last 16 % of the game.   You can't really base an entire classes balance over the end game.   I'm not saying you are wrong about your assesment though.

However... SOE balanced healing.  It looks to me like they forgot to consider healing balance when they were handing out ancient spell scrolls.  Those two direct heals on seperate timers with short recasts need to be added to every single chart comparing priests core healing.  It's very unbalanced.

Your second arguement, I'd love to see a little more work done defining where our healing utlitity lies because I'll admit thats hard to gauge.   If any work is going to be done with Templars thats probably where it needs to be done.

Agreed.  My point is other priests have very nice utility healing not just us.  So I can't accept the arguement that our utility is healing any longer -- unless it gets dialed up a lot.

DPS arguement we can talk about all day but like they (not me) stated our utlitiy should lie in healing not in DPS.   Maybe I'm a pessimist but I can't seeing that getting very far.

Yeah.  Ouch.  Where it hurts is the healing comparison that throw the DPS salt on the wound. .... grrr

---

[Danter]

---

Radar-X wrote:

Now don't get the idea I'm defending Furies because I'm not.  Your first arguement is difficult to look at over the whole class because you are only talking the last 16 % of the game.   You can't really base an entire classes balance over the end game.   I'm not saying you are wrong about your assesment though.

---

Generally the end game spells scale the same way as the lower ones do, they just do more damage or in priest's case, heal for more.  Right now, Templars are not balanced compared to Furies in soloing and grouping.  Templars are balanced (or slightly superrior) to Furies in raiding.

 

Like I said before, you can easily compare a Templar to a Guardian in terms of the class problems.  They have the same problems where they are not balanced in terms of grouping and soloing, but they are balanced (for the most part) in terms of raiding.

 

So you basically have a class that is balanced for 5% of the content that 75% of the class will never take advantage of.  Right now, when you choose the Templar or Guardian class, the trainer's message should have an asterik next to it because these classes only really work in raids.

[Kendricke]

---

Danterus wrote:

Then you'll have the Furies running over here saying that Templars are "better healers" because they'll do anything they can to protect their current god-like status from being nerfed.

---

Since we're on the subject of conspiracies now, one could also argue that:

...Templars could creature Furies to claim their Furies are better, thus getting Furies lessened and/or Templars boosted in the process.

...Templars could exaggerate claims that we're no longer the best healers in order to try to "do anything they can to protect their current" best healer status from being "nerfed".

It's a fun game to play.  I recommend everyone pick up a copy of "Slippery Slope" today.  You'll find it in the "Fallacies are Fun" aisle of your local Debates R Us store.

 

...

 

Seriously, these type of arguments only create more animosity between the Templar and Fury communities.  Do we not have enough already?

 

 

Message Edited by Kendricke on 11-18-2005 08:15 AM

[SenorPhrog]

---

Danterus wrote:

---

Radar-X wrote:

Now don't get the idea I'm defending Furies because I'm not.  Your first arguement is difficult to look at over the whole class because you are only talking the last 16 % of the game.   You can't really base an entire classes balance over the end game.   I'm not saying you are wrong about your assesment though.

---

Generally the end game spells scale the same way as the lower ones do, they just do more damage or in priest's case, heal for more.  Right now, Templars are not balanced compared to Furies in soloing and grouping.  Templars are balanced (or slightly superrior) to Furies in raiding.

 

Like I said before, you can easily compare a Templar to a Guardian in terms of the class problems.  They have the same problems where they are not balanced in terms of grouping and soloing, but they are balanced (for the most part) in terms of raiding.

 

So you basically have a class that is balanced for 5% of the content that 75% of the class will never take advantage of.  Right now, when you choose the Templar or Guardian class, the trainer's message should have an asterik next to it because these classes only really work in raids.

---

I think you're first statement is a little skewed.   Generally you're right they do scale but the late T5/T6 spells add a little bit of "flavor" to the different classes.   You can look at things like Reverence and Glory of Combat and those are nothing like you'd see in the earlier forms of Templar.   I disagree with you about Furies being better than Templars in grouping.   Maybe if you are speaking in terms of "additional utility" yes but from a healing standpoint I think they match up pretty darn well if not giving a Templar a slight edge.

[Caethre]

OOC.

Right now, after putting time and effort into Annaelisa, I would be very angry if SoE's "solution" to these issues were simply to "nerf" the Fury class. The Fury class is fun, interesting and feels balanced. It is what an EQII class should be, and doesn't need any major alterations. Most Furies I've spoken to are quite happy with their class now in general. It would be really unfair, to say that those of us playing Furies since LU15 are quietly are hoping for a nerf of that class, because it would be so untrue. I cannot *prove* that is not my motive, but it would really make no sense to destroy a lot of people's fun (including my own) to wish for such a horrid thing. In the end, you will decide for yourself, what the motives of others are.

Besides, this is not a Fury-specific issue. We could compare Templars and Wardens, and find Templars wanting in area of DPS and Utility as well, just by not quite so large a margin. And the same across all six priest classes. This is an archetype issue, caused by rebalancing one factor without also rebalancing the others. It needs looking at carefully, so I can understand SoE taking their time over it, to be honest.

But really, what it seems most of us want, is for Templars to not be the red-headed step children, but rather, to feel worthwhile. This can be achieved with some targetted changes to several priest classes, including Templar, and this is what most of us are calling for.

Whilst I can solo more than twice, sometimes more than three times as fast, with my Fury priest than my Templar priest, I will post that as a problem to be addressed.

Whilst I can join a group of 2 or 3 people, and contribute less to that group as a Templar than as a Fury, so much so that the XP gained by that group is so much lower that I feel I am penalizing my groupmates by them grouping with me because of my class, I will post that as a problem to be addressed.

And whilst I see Templar after Templar posting the same unhappy posts, quitting, retiring, or making alts, all because of both real and perceived major weakness in the Templar class compared to Furies and, indeed, all other priest classes, I will post that as a problem to be addressed.

This all feels wrong. Even the hardest fanatical 'we are fine' adherent must have detected it by now, and it is not hysteria, it is empirical fact.

But don't ascribe nasty motives to us about other classes, speaking in riddles about fallacies and slippery slopes - that is all just semantic wordplay. Underneath all this is genuine concern about a class we feel passionate about, and want to see fixed. Yes, it is broken for some styles of play, even if a few players can't see it, it is no less true because they can't.

BUT ... I would hate anyone to touch the Fury class. Just balance the others against where Fury is now, for damage and utility, and we will have to accept equal healing and get on with playing (and we can then stop posting the same points here).

Felishanna [53 Templar]
Annaelisa [40 Fury]

 

[Danter]

---

Radar-X wrote:

I disagree with you about Furies being better than Templars in grouping.   Maybe if you are speaking in terms of "additional utility" yes but from a healing standpoint I think they match up pretty darn well if not giving a Templar a slight edge.

---

 

 

Ok, so if Templars have a slight edge in healing.  Furies have a major edge in DPS and overall fluff utility like group invis and SoW.

 

Explain to me and the rest of the posters in this thread how this is "balanced"?

 

And the reason why Templars are in the MT group in raids isn't because of their healing.  It's because of spells that are generally useful only in raids like Sanctuary along with their buffs like Redoubt, Benediction, and Valor.

Message Edited by Danterus on 11-18-2005 08:53 AM

[Timaarit]

---

Dalcharis wrote:Something interesting we did last night on the warden board, actually 2-3 of us did the math all at once, it was kinda funny, everyone was just bored it seems and someone requested a mathematical comparison, so we all went and got a calculator it seemed LOL.http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=16&message.id=10861&page=3

---

Just have to answer this, following is quoted from the link

---

Dalcharis wrote:

Please correct my math if you find anything wrong.Salve 583.5 * 10 = 5835 hp in 60sElixir = 6216 hp in 60s.Streams... 899* 10 = 8990 in 60sBliss.... 1660.5* 5 = 8300 + 1 more cast with just one more tick on it (2.5s were left in the minute... I don't know if the first tick is immediate or waits the 1s.) so add 93.5 + 725... 8300 + 93.5 + 725 = 9118.5hp in 60sSo... Grand total using just the main line direct heals at 60...Fury = 12051 hp in 1 minuteWarden = 18108.5 hp in 1 minute.

---

Here is the deal for mighty templars:Greater Amelioration lvl 57, Adept IIIHeals for 757-926 (average 841), 2s cast, 6s recast = 6300 hitpoints per minuteGreater restoration lvl 60, Adept IIIHeals for 1399-1709 (average 1113), 3s cast, 11,5s recast = 6400 hp per minuteThis equals 12700 hp per minute for templar direct healsSo templar direct heals are actually equal to fury heals. Or were if there weren't any other direct heals for furies.So next time you claim templars heal better, do the math first to the end. Furies are equal from the start and far better after lvl 52. Wardens are better to begin with. But maybe this is why you didn't include templars to your calculations.

Message Edited by Timaarit on 11-18-2005 06:59 PM

[SenorPhrog]

---

Danterus wrote:

---

Radar-X wrote:

I disagree with you about Furies being better than Templars in grouping.   Maybe if you are speaking in terms of "additional utility" yes but from a healing standpoint I think they match up pretty darn well if not giving a Templar a slight edge.

---

 

 

Ok, so if Templars have a slight edge in healing.  Furies have a major edge in DPS and overall fluff utility like group invis and SoW.

 

Explain to me and the rest of the posters in this thread how this is "balanced"?

 

And the reason why Templars are in the MT group in raids isn't because of their healing.  It's because of spells that are generally only useful only in raids like Sanctuary and for Redoubt and Valor.

---

I'll explain to the posters in this thread how this is "balanced" as soon as you can show me where I said it was.   I think its problematic at best to compare Furies and Templars especially at the higher end game because of the variance in the spells.   I didn't at any point in here say it was right as things are.  In fact I said up front to the OP that I wasn't defending Furies.

As for raiding?  I can't speak to it.   I don't do it very often.

[OlaeviaTraisharan]

---

Caethre wrote:

OOC.

Right now, after putting time and effort into Annaelisa, I would be very angry if SoE's "solution" to these issues were simply to "nerf" the Fury class. The Fury class is fun, interesting and feels balanced. It is what an EQII class should be, and doesn't need any major alterations. Most Furies I've spoken to are quite happy with their class now in general.

---

Oh I BET they're happy... they got bumped when Warden's were bumped and only because it was a change applied to druid spells and not Warden-specific spells.

So now you have a class that can:

A) Heal as well as a Templar

B) Have the utility of a druid (sow, invis, group invis, etc.)

C) Nuke for three times as much as a Templar

What's going to give? Because right now something is going to have to, which is the TRUE nature of class balance.

I can see why you don't want them nerfed... you're playing one

[Andu]

Caethra has defended herself more than well enough.  However, can I just say Kendricke that your latest suggestion that we are now all playing other classes in an attempt to get them nerfed is probably the stupidest thing Ive heard from you in a long time and that's saying something.

I've started a Defiler alt, not to see it be nerfed after putting a lot of time into it, but to try and enjoy the game again after SOE ripped the heart out of the Templar class. So far Im enjoying it a lot. Im still far too low in level to make any meaningful comparison so I won't attempt to.

You just managed to make me so angry that I am now risking getting the sack at work just to log in to this god awful board and vent a little.

[Lego]

---

OlaeviaTraisharan wrote:

---

Caethre wrote:

OOC.

Right now, after putting time and effort into Annaelisa, I would be very angry if SoE's "solution" to these issues were simply to "nerf" the Fury class. The Fury class is fun, interesting and feels balanced. It is what an EQII class should be, and doesn't need any major alterations. Most Furies I've spoken to are quite happy with their class now in general.

---

Oh I BET they're happy... they got bumped when Warden's were bumped and only because it was a change applied to druid spells and not Warden-specific spells.

So now you have a class that can:

A) Heal as well as a Templar

B) Have the utility of a druid (sow, invis, group invis, etc.)

C) Nuke for three times as much as a Templar

What's going to give? Because right now something is going to have to, which is the TRUE nature of class balance.

I can see why you don't want them nerfed... you're playing one

---

That's not entirely correct actually, the entire Warden healing line had a much needed increase.  A Fury only received an upgrade to their regens.   

 

   

Message Edited by Lego23 on 11-18-2005 09:18 AM

Message Edited by Lego23 on 11-18-2005 09:50 AM

[Stjarna Kvar]

I couldn't do the gobbies in lavastorm at lvl 45 with a lvl 46 guardian in front of me... I must be a loser.

Message Edited by Stjarna Kvarco on 11-18-2005 11:34 AM

[Dalchar]

---

Timaarit wrote:

---

Dalcharis wrote:Something interesting we did last night on the warden board, actually 2-3 of us did the math all at once, it was kinda funny, everyone was just bored it seems and someone requested a mathematical comparison, so we all went and got a calculator it seemed LOL.http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=16&message.id=10861&page=3

---

Just have to answer this, following is quoted from the link

---

Dalcharis wrote:

Please correct my math if you find anything wrong.Salve 583.5 * 10 = 5835 hp in 60sElixir = 6216 hp in 60s.Streams... 899* 10 = 8990 in 60sBliss.... 1660.5* 5 = 8300 + 1 more cast with just one more tick on it (2.5s were left in the minute... I don't know if the first tick is immediate or waits the 1s.) so add 93.5 + 725... 8300 + 93.5 + 725 = 9118.5hp in 60sSo... Grand total using just the main line direct heals at 60...Fury = 12051 hp in 1 minuteWarden = 18108.5 hp in 1 minute.

---

Here is the deal for mighty templars:Greater Amelioration lvl 57, Adept IIIHeals for 757-926 (average 841), 2s cast, 6s recast = 6300 hitpoints per minuteGreater restoration lvl 60, Adept IIIHeals for 1399-1709 (average 1113), 3s cast, 11,5s recast = 6400 hp per minuteThis equals 12700 hp per minute for templar direct healsSo templar direct heals are actually equal to fury heals. Or were if there weren't any other direct heals for furies.So next time you claim templars heal better, do the math first to the end. Furies are equal from the start and far better after lvl 52. Wardens are better to begin with. But maybe this is why you didn't include templars to your calculations.

Message Edited by Timaarit on 11-18-2005 06:59 PM

---

 This is why I asked later in this thread to ignore the previous thread... I should have edited it out until I could have done this.  And no I hadn't planned on doing templar... Spagma posted templars but I don't think we really delved into it as it was mainly a warden and I read somewhere warden = templar and completley forgot about the odds and ends of recast times on yours being different, honest mistake on my part actually, then I thought about it later, and bring you this!! I was at work and plotted this stuff into an excel spreadsheet out of sheer boredom.  Templars seem caught be this issue:  Recast time... not so much the time itself, but when things pop back up for reuse. Theoretically, if you could chaincast without regard to what's up... a T5 Templar would heal 8561 at 60s and 10261 at 61s. Theoretically, if furies could do the same, a T5 fury would heal for 8532 at 60s. Theoretically, if wardens could do the same, a T5 warden would heal for 11605 at 60s.   (and I tell you plotting out warden heals in a spreadsheet sucks). When you line everything up for the classes, so that they're not casting a heal at the same time as another heal... casting small DH and then large DH... it lines up like this: Templar: 9148 at 60s and at 61s. Fury: 8522 at 60s and 8929 at 61s Warden: 11912.5 at 60s, and 12335 at 61s. So... The original thread was partly correct--with furies in relation to warden, furies are about 33% behind warden, but are about 7% behind Templar once you start digging farther in. ---------- Course, then this makes us all have to wonder about the dispairity too between say temp and warden, as it's around 20% for temps and 33% for furies..  I'm thinking it's not really intentional really.  shave off 1s of each templar heal and it'd probably help with the screwball cast time pop-- (if I remember right, there was twice where templars are casting one while another popped like half a second or one second into the cast... for druids that's not a big deal as we cast fast, for templars it slows you down.) ----------- I'm sure people think I'm out to thwart the Templar or something but that's honestly not the case.  I realized the error and got to thinking it wouln't be simple as just dividing cast times/recast times etc due to the longer casts, so felt to do it right. Chances are best solution-- unlink BOVirtuous for everyone.  Furies aren't likely to use it post 52, at least not much.  And most of the other classes would definately find a use for it throughout their entire career...

[Gcha]

---

Kendricke wrote:

---

Danterus wrote:

Then you'll have the Furies running over here saying that Templars are "better healers" because they'll do anything they can to protect their current god-like status from being nerfed.

---

Since we're on the subject of conspiracies now, one could also argue that:

...Templars could creature Furies to claim their Furies are better, thus getting Furies lessened and/or Templars boosted in the process.

...Templars could exaggerate claims that we're no longer the best healers in order to try to "do anything they can to protect their current" best healer status from being "nerfed".

It's a fun game to play.  I recommend everyone pick up a copy of "Slippery Slope" today.  You'll find it in the "Fallacies are Fun" aisle of your local Debates R Us store.

 

...

 

Seriously, these type of arguments only create more animosity between the Templar and Fury communities.  Do we not have enough already?

 

 

Message Edited by Kendricke on 11-18-2005 08:15 AM

---

Good lord Kendricke.  That borders on disturbing.  You're scaring me here =)  You may really want to think about editing this.

I have a Fury now (only 20) ... yes, last minute I decided to make him a Fury instead of of a Warden. Anyway, I will guaran-dang-tee you that I didn't make him as part of some grand conspiracy to get Furies nerfed and Templars buffed (and I don't believe for a second that anyone else around here did that either).  Wow, I am almost speehless at this theory ... and that's saying something, lol.

I made him for fun, and to compare.  And you know what, he's a ton of fun so far.  That's why I play the game.  Heck, I am going to be really [Removed for Content] if they nerf Furies now, lol.  And if they give templars some love, well, it's all good, then I will have a better choice, because lately I can't wait to get online to play my druid. which, incidentally, feels a lot more like a cleric should feel **IMO** than the clerics do.

Olaevia, I really think you should stop lobbying for Furies to be nerfed.  That isn't going to help templars one bit.

And as for the other posters above, I have INT gear on my templar for soloing =)  Works darn good =)

[Nindor2]

---

Radar-X wrote:

You don't see the anger and resentment on the other Priest boards so yeah I can see why the Devs would look at their issues but I bet you they have been looking at ours as well.   The part you fell short on was "welcoming the changes, and applauding the changes."   Perhaps first of all you can be more specific about which "changes" you're talking about.  If you're still talking about LU#13 its not going anywhere so I'd hope you'd try and let it go.  I enjoy that I'm more challenged after those particular changes but I don't ever remember applauding them.   I think you are exaggerating this part of your post.   I see a majority of complaints up here not praise.

---

Maybe i should have expanded on some points, but it would have substracted from the total statement. In my personal opinion clerics are a lot better off than a lot of people claim, but on the other hand they are off a lot worse than some people claim. My argumentation is just from experience from EQ1. There druids argued on the healing front and got to be a serious competition for all but the hardest content for templars there. They argued the DPS front, and managed to get close to the pure DPS classes. The proofs that templars are still 30% in front of furies in healing will more than likely lead to furies getting that gap closed (without taking the ancients into calculation). Also if any priests get DPS upgrades, it will be more than likely all 6 classes equally (or the "damage priests" more than any? Why you ask? Because they want it, and they know that they want it, and they articulate that they need it. I have worked all my life after university in software development and software/hardware support. Nobody gets anything because they need it, or its fair or even because they paid for it. You get support or features because you complain loud enough, you know how to complain and whom to complain to. Any development team on any given software is understaffed. You cannot worry about everything that is amiss. So you work on what makes the highest impact. That is usally what you get the loudest complaints about. As for applauding good changes, where are they? The only templar specific change i can remember since LU#13 is the nerf to Reverence (which i bought an Adpet 3 for a few days before the nerf). Again, i don't think templars are really bad off atm. But i am very sure it will get worse in time.

[KingOfF00LS]

---

Dalcharis wrote: When you line everything up for the classes, so that they're not casting a heal at the same time as another heal... casting small DH and then large DH... it lines up like this: Templar: 9148 at 60s and at 61s. Fury: 8522 at 60s and 8929 at 61s Warden: 11912.5 at 60s, and 12335 at 61s.

---

This is seemingly pretty damning evidence at first glance. The healing difference between Templar and Fury is so slight as to be unnoticable in anything other than a "laboratory" type environment.  And yet the huge discrepancy in DPS between the two classes remains.  At the same time look at Warden heals obliterating the competition, but at the same time having more DPS and utility in my experience than a Templar does by far.  These would seem to be pretty important numbers for higher ups to be looking at and indicative of what a lot of us have been saying, no?

[OlaeviaTraisharan]

---

Gchang wrote:

Olaevia, I really think you should stop lobbying for Furies to be nerfed.  That isn't going to help templars one bit.

---

I'm not lobbying for anything. I could care less. I pay for the game to worry about my own characters, not other peoples'.

[Mor]

---

KingOfF00LS wrote:

---

---

This is seemingly pretty damning evidence at first glance. The healing difference between Templar and Fury is so slight as to be unnoticable in anything other than a "laboratory" type environment.  And yet the huge discrepancy in DPS between the two classes remains.  At the same time look at Warden heals obliterating the competition, but at the same time having more DPS and utility in my experience than a Templar does by far.  These would seem to be pretty important numbers for higher ups to be looking at and indicative of what a lot of us have been saying, no?

---

Looking at the numbers doesn't tell you the whole story.  In reality, true direct heals are far more powerful and efficient than a 40% heal with a HoT component.    Although we're far better off than we were before the recent changes, wardens still can't deal with spike damage the way that the other priests can (which is really the whole point of using a direct heal).   The larger heal amount is designed to compensate for the lack of instant delivery, although it really doesn't.