Avirodar@Oasis wrote: No, they need to be fixed, period. No amount of skill can change the fact that they have boosted mystics and wardens to near easy-mode healing over a templar. Templar wasn't easy before, I still had to work for my spot... but now it is often simply impossible, and that's wrong. Its totally borked the game design and balance. Its also a fact of game design, and not skill at all, that the templar AA tree does not match his abilities. The AA tree should either boost spell abilities, or we shoudl have a melee line like mystics. As it currently stands templar is obviously a heavy fighter base type but we can't make use of that.
drakkenshield wrote: Avirodar is a troll..don't feed him. YES! While working up that AA revamp, take a good look at the Templar and take reading on this thread powers to be.
Defilers and Templars are still the go-to healers for tanks in challenging situations, they have the tools and designs to ... heal! It seems the templars in this thread fail to realise, while they lack some offensive buff utility, they have a deep pool of defensive utilities and options at their disposal. Reactive heal boost, repent, stoneskin buff, sanctuary, maintainable stun immunity, magic ward, and the proc boost buff still adds up (just not as OP as before). There is a laundry list of things templars get, that Inqs do not, and they all count. Templars are far from the poor, deprived healer some of you try to make out. Templars are still great, especially in more challenging situations. Claims that templars have been "left behind" is rather weak. Inqs and Templars both got the same Heroic AA tree. The "Shadows" tree for Inqs and Templars is largely the same, with rather minor differences. Comparing the Inq AA tree to the Templar AA tree (from years ago), it was not a problem then, and it is not now. Templars have no legitimate claim to a second group cure. There is a reason Inqs+Wardens+Furies were given a second group cure, and Defilers+Mystics+Templars were not. There is no problem with Templars, just some people playing them are upset that their raid spot is not set in stone anymore, especially for trivial EM content. If anything, that should indicate to the Devs, they have managed to improve class balance between clerics. The response from the Dev about Templars at the FanFaire Q&A panel indicates they may feel the same way I do. Get used to it.
As with any new expansion, the new added abilities and / or game mechanics throws a few classes out of balance and in need of a little tweaking... The added cb / pot to items made Inq and Mystic procs super powerful (usually among the top on DPS parses) and made sure they have more than adequate healing power to single heal groups and keep tanks up. In most HM fights in which no strong Magic AoEs are involved my heal parse is no higher than in the last expansion, due to the strength of Shaman wards. So the role of a Plate priest in groups is not high HPS, but curing and utility... which Inq has over Templars in leaps and bounds. This is the reason Templars need a little tweaking, they need something to compete on a curing and utility level.
Latpow wrote: The added CB/Potency increases all DPS output, so the effectiveness of the procs you speak of have gone up proportionately. Therefore, it is just as balanced now, as it was last expansion. Nice try, but no dice. Shamans have been carving up the heal parses for years now, it is no new phenomenon with DoV. Clerics get the scraps shamans leave behind, and druids get the scraps left behind by shamans/clerics. Nothing new here, it is a balance issues between the 3 healing styles, and gives no aid to Templars crying poor. Good try though. You say Inqs have utility in leaps and bounds over Templars? Are you playing EverQuest2, or something else? Templars get a ton of utility. The difference is, Inq utility is largely designed around adding DPS to a group. Templar utility is largely designed around keeping the tank alive. On a raid level, templars are designed to be paired with another healer in a tank orientated group. The classes are doing what they are made to do. If Templars out there are going all emo, because they can not add as much to a groups DPS as an Inq then, I have one word to say to you all : Betray. But look at things for what they are. Sure, while an Inq may help add some more DPS to easymode content that is on farm status, what about the mobs your guild is yet to kill? What will help you get though and kill them easier? The defiler+templar combo, or the Inq+Mystic combo? And yes, that is a rhetorical question. There may be an encounter or two where there is an exception, but the Templar+Defiler combo has been the top of EQ2 for how many years now? You should all betray. You know you want to.
Latpow wrote: That's what I'm finding also, that my inq has been a better choice for raiding than my templar, it's kinda nice to have both to compare. My templars strong single target stuff has not really been needed so the raid force begins to wonder why would they waste the spot to someone who wouldn't even fill the utility spot with a single group cure. Inq get most of the oh crap spells anyhow, divine guidance, chilling invig, death save, sacrifice, etc., enough for them to stay out of trouble. It's not like either has a lot of death saves, 100% stoneskins, or direct target aoe avoids like some of the other healers do anyhow, if spike damage overwhelms our heals/buffs there is really not much we can do. The other troubling thing is DPS, I still don't understand why when I cast a heal spell I have to lose 25% of my spell damage (smite wraths), this just seems antiquated from the times when templar truly did stand for heal over dps and inq was more dps over heal. Hand in hand with this they also need to really specify the templar as a spell damage dealer and get rid of the melee stuff. In SF my melee was a nice chunk of my damage, close to 40%, but in DOV I'm lucky if it parses 10-15% of my damage, even in dps spec. Let us have the distinction from inq to be spell damage dealers and gear our AA's towards this purpose. But honestly I would sit still and accept the lack of love Templars got this xpac if we got another group cure. It's just a sign of the changing dynamics of the encounters. Make it an AA heavy choice so we have to decide for a group cure or something else important, that's ok I like choices, but at least give us the choice to spec it.
I totally agree with the OP on this one. I talked to the developer in charge of class balance at Fan Faire and got the same answer that the guy at the mechanics panel did...........the Templar is designed to be defensive, which will be needed on progression mobs and during the first part of an expansion. Unfortunately, with the changes to the Defiler, the defensive skills of a Templar are not needed, as the Inquisitor can pick up any heals the Defiler doesn't, which aren't that many, even on progression kills. And the mythical cure is the deciding factor, especially on names such as the first mob in Foundation of Stone HM, where the kickup prevents any other healer from catching the detrimentals that don't get AoE blocked. I understand that the Templar and Inquisitor were designed to be defensive and offensive healers, respectively, but intention and practice are completely different in this case. Two of the top 4 raiding guilds on our server aren't running a templar at all at the moment. Others are running Templars that have been rostered for a long time. One long time Templar (very good) betrayed to an Inquisitor, because of how useful they are in comparison for DOV raids.
<quote> But look at things for what they are. Sure, while an Inq may help add some more DPS to easymode content that is on farm status, what about the mobs your guild is yet to kill? What will help you get though and kill them easier? The defiler+templar combo, or the Inq+Mystic combo? And yes, that is a rhetorical question. </quote> Unfortunately, for many progression fights I am taken out of the MT group... HM Tormax? Taken out cause of the Knockback... HM Valdemar? Taken out because the non healers are far away burning adds and Inq Myth has the range to cure them. Before the nerf, I was taken out of Eirreen the broken as well due to the KB.
Possessive@Permafrost wrote: Possessive, I too talked to that same dev. I was probably standing right next to you at Fan Faire at that discussion. Your statement above is spot on. Templars are viewed by the devs as more defensive and thus more useful during the first part of an expansion, when mobs are hitting the hardest. However, even progression fights are not requiring optimal defensive buffs but rather other factors such as curing that you mentioned. I suspect Inqs (and druids) were given the 2 group cures so they could play a role in raid as a solo group healer, and now that has made Inq more valuable in the MT position because of the emphasis on cures in raids. Top raid guilds on our server (Crushbone) are eliminating templars now as well. I am pretty sure Strike now runs with zero in their raids, even for progression mobs. The problem is not that templars need to heal better. It is that raids with a good shaman in the MT group don't need healers that can heal better.
Lonnlarcen@Antonia Bayle wrote: This is exactly right. The dev answer at the mechanics panel was a bit off, since the offense from Inquisitors was more important than the defense from Templars in the first three zones this expansion (at least for the vast majority of the mobs), even for your first kills. All our Templars betrayed to Inquisitor for that reason. We didn't need Templars - we just wanted more DPS. Drunder looks to be killing tanks much more easily, though (based on an hour or two of pulls on the first HM mob), and one or two of our Inquisitors are already thinking about betraying back to Templar. The Templar/Inquisitor balance is really all about the content. If the content is focused on DPS, then Inquisitors rule. If the content is good at killing tanks, then you want a Templar for each tank.
Sorvex@Oasis wrote: That. Kudos to SOE, the balance between clerics is closer now, than it has been since EQ2 went live. Whether intentional or accidental on the part of SOE, it is good to see that the grip templars held on the throat of tank groups since 2004, has slipped. I would like to offer my condolences to the people playing Templars, who are not accustomed to being sat from a raid. But if SOE does their job right, you will all find that your spot in a raid is no longer set in stone, because you clicked "Templar" during character creation. If Templars truly are being rendered obsolete by the power of a well geared, well played defiler, the answer is not to buff Templars. It is to examine what Defilers are doing that goes beyond the scope of what they should do, and bring it back into line. Otherwise, Inquisitors are just as deserving of any boosts that Templars get to feel useful in a group with a defiler. So if you are all pushing SOE to boost both cleric types (Inq+Templar), go nuts. But Templars on their own right, do not deserve any special attention that is not also granted to Inqs. With <3
Avirodar@Oasis wrote: The problem with that is that inquisitors have always been wanted for offensive non-MT groups, but who wants a Templar for an offensive group in terms of min/max? On the other end of the spectrum what does the Templar bring to a non MT group? I understand what you are saying, but the nice thing about raiding was the strategy involved in placing the specific right class in the specific right group. If any healer can do any job it gets kinda boring IMO, but I do understand your equal opportunities argument, I just would miss the strategy of setting up groups. Healers are becoming homogenized to the point where they are becoming very boring. I personally don't want any buffs for my Templar other than either an additional group cure, or a reduced timer on my group cure. I think if you read thru and gauge the opinions no one is really asking for very much, certainly not a huge boost to your healing potential as we are very very strong healers. I usually either am a MT Templar, or lately I am a solo healer in one of the non MT groups. It's a nightmare to try and keep a group cured with a single long timer group cure, half the time I will have to single cure every single group member, that just doesn't make sense from a fun point of view at all. I've said it before make a 2nd group cure a deep choice in the AA's so we have to make a choice between that and something else important, I have no issue and am not asking for anything free, but at least give us the option. The other thing that really needs to be addressed, which has less to do with raiding, is Templar dps and dps potential for the group. If inquisitors have been brought up in defensive and healing to the point where they are taking over the MT spot, then it makes sense for Templars to be given some offensive capabilities so they would be wanted in the non MT offensive groups. You can't have it both ways, you can't make the inquisitor a better healer but ignore the dps capability of the Templar, it's just not fair. Yes it's homogenizing the clerics, but that seems to be what you are looking for. For the record I'm an advocate of keeping the inquisitor a weaker healer, but more geared to generate their own dps as well as the groups dps, and keep the templar a stronger healer with very weak dps potential. This isn't the way the devs are going though. I have BOTH inquisitor and templar and in normal every day group content there is no reason at all to bring my templar over my inquisitor, and as mentioned before most of the EM raid stuff there is no reason either. It's not a question of inquisitors being equal to templar in content and creating competition, it's a question of the inquisitor being made stronger in more aspects that raids are choosing them simply based on their abilities for both MT group and the non MT offensive groups. This is a case of raids choosing 4 inquisitors and no templars and that doesn't sound balanced to me, even though before this it was 1 templar and 3 inquisitors, still not balanced but I'm more than willing to accept it. Templars aren't asking for much in all honestly, just a little bit to balance what the inquisitors have received.
Rick777 wrote: 1) Not really. It seems like some players want every class to do everything equally, but fortunately (imo), the devs have been pretty good about maintaining strengths and weaknesses for each healer (Mystics being the only possible exception, but at least they don't have a second group cure). 2) Inquisitors are no where even CLOSE to matching what Templars bring defensively. Repent, Shield of Faith, True Faith, and Unyielding Benediction (and more!) are unmatched defensively by any Inquisitor equivalents. There have been many times on my Inquisitor when I know there's nothing at all I can do to save my tank from the next AE or death touch, where, if I had been a Templar at the time, I could have timed Repent (or another ability) to save him. Yes, Inquisitors get the "wild cards" of the super group cure and the extra range, but Templars get a better cure curse and Sanctuary. 3) Yes, normal "every day" content is always going to be easier with Inquisitors than Templars as long as the classes are balanced overall (unless they just make both classes the same, I guess). "Every day" content is about DPS, and Inquisitors are supposed to be the more offensive Cleric. I was a Templar for ~5 months in SF, primarily just to make one mob easier (XYZ in Wing 3). That's basically life as a defensive class in an MMO. You can't balance Templars with Inquisitors for DPS-focused content, or no one would want an Inquisitor, since Templars would still have a huge advantage when their defensive prowess is needed. If you conclude that you should then buff Inquisitor defensive prowess to match that of Templars, then you might as well just merge the classes.
Rick777 wrote: Clerics were given the same AAs in DoV, so neither cleric gained an advantage over the other. Templars still have the defensive and heal/reactive advantage. Inquisitors still have the offensive and curing advantage. Are you trying to make a kind of claim stating otherwise? If so, please elaborate. Sentinels Fate had a lot of cure intensive encounters. Templars only had one group cure, and still enjoyed high desirability (Most raid guilds would have 2-3 templars on the roster). There is a couple of fights in DoV with knockbacks, but a combination of good positioning, holy shield, and enchanter avoids can take due care of it. General curing is no worse in DoV than comparable mobs in SF... Even on encounters were a lot of detriments could land, like Saalax, Theerax and Yael, Templars were desirable. So I ask, what is the problem now, that did not exist back in SF? Otherwise, I will keep referring back to what I said previously. If the problem is not something Inqs were given in DoV, that Templars did not get, then Templars deserve no boost unless Inquisitors are given a comparable boost of similar effective gain. You might try to take a look at what a Templar is generally grouped with, and how current mechanics (in conjunction with what Templars are normally grouped with) impacts on the effectiveness/desirability of the Templar class. The real solution to the actual problem, may very well be adjusting something else, and not giving Templars a second group cure.
Avirodar@Oasis wrote: It's a unique perspective when you raid with both classes as I do. Additionally seeing so many guilds drop or betray their Templars is very informative as to the state of raiding templars and I'll let that speak for itself. If a raid wants 4 inquisitors and 0 Templars, well there isn't much debate that something is wrong at that point. As for the group cure, it's just keeping up with the mechanics, if Templars had a 2nd group cure the inq would still be the best curer. Its as if when SOE merged all 4 cures into one cure, but what if they left one class with the separate 4 cures? That would just make no sense, just like leaving any class without a 2nd group cure does not make sense in light of current mechanics, and this is besides the offensive/defensive debate, its an entirely separate debate but one that still applies to the Templars raid worthiness. Just last night I was solo healing an offensive group on a raid, I use my Templar because he is better geared. There was a TON of curing to do, it just made no sense to me single curing 6 people while waiting for my group cure to refresh, it was just a heck of a lot of not fun minutiae that is just not necessary.
Rick777 wrote: You replied to my post, but did not appear to respond to my first paragraph. With such, I will assume you are in full agreement that Templars have the defensive + healing advantage, and that Inquisitors have the offensive + curing advantage. This is the way the class types are meant to be... So well done to SOE for some half decent cleric balance. With such, I once again put it right to you, if you disagree with the above statement, please elaborate as to exactly why this is so. Your statement that guilds are using Inquisitors is like saying rain is wet, after someone asked you why it is raining (a true statement, but it does not answer the question). If you can not identify the problem, you are in no position to be requesting fixes, as how can you ask for a fix if you do not know the issue? You made mention of "keeping up with mechanics", which I see as an intentionally vague, general statement that is little more than a prayer in the wind. Keeping up with what mechanics? Please explain as to exactly what mechanics Templars are not keeping up with? If you are trying to talk about cure mechanics, they are no different to what we had in Sentinel's Fate, and The Shadow Odyssey, and in both of those expansions, Templars were amazing. If the best you have is a rather weak hypothetical situation from when cures were merged years ago, your argument is rather lacking... In response to your last paragraph : Yes? And? Three healers (fury/inq/warden) in EQ2 are optimal for solo group healing/curing. Three healers (temp/defiler/mystic) in EQ2 are optimal for paired healing/curing. If you are a healer that is designed to be paired, but are given the duty of solo healing a group, have the group use cure potions. Yes, oldschool, cure potions! Otherwise, expect a greater challenge when being in such a situation. The tools are available to your raid, whether or not they are used is not an issue of balance/mechanics, it is an issue of raid level competencies. This leads me to ask some questions, directed to Rick777 : 1) Do you believe Templars were weak two expansions ago, in TSO? 2) Do you believe Templars were weak last expansion, in SF? 3) Do you believe Templars are weak in the current expandion, DoV? If you answer yes to question #3, I would -LOVE- to hear an explanation as to exactly why? Templars were amazing in TSO and SF, that is not up for debate... So if you are saying templars are now weak, what changed? What did Inquisitors get that Templars did not? Did all other healers (Defiler+Mystic+Warden+Fury+Inq) get bunches of cool stuff in DoV, but Templars were given nothing? Were specific mechanics changed that nerfed templars, but made other healers thrive? I am hoping for anything other than vague opinion, or random hypotheticals from things that happened years ago. Looking forward to hearing back from you.
Avirodar@Oasis wrote: While not the person you were replying to, I have a hard time believing you are as truly dumb as you are implying you are. If you seriously believe the curing situation is the same as it was in previous expansions, you are either lying to yourself or have never played any healer besides an Inquisitor and never paid any mind to what happened in other groups. In DoV as MT Defiler, I can tell you that there are detriments that if they tic a single time, they one shot the MT, or if even two of them stack together they one shot anyone that happens to. With knock backs that exist on some AoE detriments that will tick in the air before a non Inquisitor can even get a cure off, will flat out one shot players. Another thing is, you act like ANY of the survivability that a Templar adds healing wise matters at ALL in DoV. In this expansion the only things that matter as non shaman healer in MT group is having two group cures, AoE avoids, and offensive and defensive buffs. My guild uses a warden as a non shaman MT group healer, which honestly has even less healing ability than an Inquisitor. The reason we do this is because we don't have a skilled enough Inquisitor that plays in the guild to fill the spot. Even with this setup, MT group survivability is a very rare issue, and if you can't see that Templars have gotten the shaft this expansion due to a changed balance issues, that are by large part completely gear derived. I will Templars are the most blatant example of the imbalance the lack of a second group cure is in DoV, and I would like to see all healers get one. I can understand why shamans may not be given one, but with non shaman healers, it seriously removes their raid desirablity.
Avirodar is well aware of the current inbalance between Templars and Inq, he's just arguing because he hopes that any Dev that would look over this thread for feedback would be swayed by his reasoning. I mean, if he truly felt the way that he posts here then why would he be bragging about getting Templars to betray to Inq... I mean if they truly are the awesome class they were in the previous expansions why would a "hardcore templar" want to betray? http://www.eq2flames.com/inquisitor...-thread-15.html This is why I'm no longer replying to his posts and I hope any Dev looking at this thread would not be naive enough to believe that Templars are anywhere near balanced with Inquisitors in the current state of the game. The ability to cast while being knocked up in the air with GU61 is a step in the right direction, but we need more than "10% more proc rate on Invol Cure" and an upgraded Wis line for DPS (that we share with Inq).
