Hennyo wrote: Let me get this right... You are trying to say that DoV is the first expansion in EQ2's history where if you let DoTs tick, or if AEs stack, people can die?!? LOL! Did you just crawl out from under a rock? Or do you look back at history with a pair of rose tinted glasses? I wish I played in that fantastic EQ2 history where a DoTs or stacking AEs never killed tanks! The encounters that have knockbacks can easily be taken care of, with effective use of holy shield, enchanter avoids, and good positioning. If that is too difficult, the problem is not class balance. You can understand why shamans should not be eligible for a second group cure, but think Templars should get one? I am sorry, I laughed. If that's all Templars can present in this discussion, Templar concerns are indeed small.
Latpow wrote: Yes, that is clear evidence of the situation! Someone runs in to link a 1 liner from eq2flames! So if the state of class balance is based purely on me convincing someone to betray, I will go get an Inq to betray to Templar to PROVE that Inqs need to be boosted. Because that is how your logic works, right? Fail.
Avirodar@Oasis wrote: I'm not sure what you are looking for. Go talk to people on flames, on these forums, in the game. Raids are dropping Templars plain and simple. If you need specifics more than what I've provided you are free to ask those guilds or players or even read some of the threads on here as well as on flames where the hardcore of the hardcore live. I'm assuming you don't personally raid with a Templar. Yes this has been an issue since some healers got a 2nd group cure right around the same time SOE started to really emphasize throwing detriments as fail conditions much more often than a single group cure refreshed. As for your laughable suggestion of pots, you have looked at the reuse of pots haven't you, besides the inq group can have pots too. What I'm confused about is I never said templars were weak healers, I never said they were nerfed, please stop adding things I never said. My devils advocate post was that inq have been steadily buffed to become more defensive, but Templars have gained exactly zero offensively. You do realize whenever a Templar casts any heal oe cure they get a temporary 25% penalty to their spell damage regardless of what stance they are in, this is just one example that SOE meant at one time to limit Temps to purely defensive and inq to purely offensive. Once again I don't care as I have always stated temps are strong healers. Once again I'm not arguing the defensive vs offensive debate but I will admit it's interesting to talk about. I just am not understanding why it affects you as an inq if Templars get a 2nd group cure? Are you afraid of losing your 4 raid spots? Inq cures are still superior, you have a control effect breaker and a 2nd group cure that can be cast on the move, for certain encounters you will remain THE choice for a healer over a Templar. If that's not enough then I proposed to make the 2nd group cure an AA heavy choice. Yes I've had this complaint since at least TSO, but in light of the very large pendulum swing this xpac to utilize inq over temps in raids, and the utter lack of need for temps for group content, asking for a 2nd group cure isn't out of the ordinary. There really isn't much more to say and we can let the devs read over both our positions and decide what to do.
Rick777 wrote: Not sure what I am looking for? Was the part I highlighted in green, just above, somehow confusing? Three questions, one of which requested an explanation if you answered yes. I even gave you specific direction to provide examples between point1 (SF, where templars rocked) and point2 (DoV, where you think templars suck) to explain why Templars are suffering. Your comments that Inqs have been buffed to become more defnesive is deceptive. CLERICS were given some stuff in DoV, and those benefits also go to the Templar, meaning the Inq is not catching up to a Templar defensively, just as a Templar is not catching up to an Inq offensively. Balance. Templars do not need, or deserve, a second group cure. Templars are a very powerful, effective class, that enjoy the most defensive tools and utility of the cleric class types, along with the highest capacity to heal and reduce damage of the clerics. Templars are designed to be a paired healer in a tank group on raids. Go out of that element, expect to find yourself in a situation where you need to work a little harder.
Avirodar@Oasis wrote: OK we can get out the coloring books and the crayon, you do realize I've answered your question like 3 times, but let's go for once more. 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? 1) No, 2) No, 3) No With that said, again, most raid forces out there are ditching their templars, or making them betray because they are not needed anymore. Templars ARE stronger healers than inq when it comes to a single target, but that gap has narrowed substantially. Both classes increase group HP and there is not much of an advantage to templars hp buffs over inq. Both classes have death saves, divine guidance, shield ally, sacrifice, etc etc. Glory, mark, mana cure, things like these that are unique to the templar are almost useless in raids. Involuntary gift used to be awesome in SF, in DOV it's just ok. Our arcane ward used to be awesome in SF, in DOV it's completely useless except for a couple of HM fights, other than for the group proc. So it all comes down essentially to 2 spells, Repent and stoneskins. But even those 2 spells serve to make us stronger, as I said so many times templars are very strong healers, but so are inquisitors, not as strong as templars but certainly much closer. But if it were just that I don't think raid forces would be dropping templars. No offense meant to you, but it's clear you don't raid. Maybe you do with an inquisitor, maybe you don't, but you certainly don't have the perspective of a Templar in a raid and what is required of them specifically, what affects them, etc. It's clear to everyone else that there is something wrong when raid leaders are setting up raids and they exclude templars. The crux of the problem is the inq super curing ability, and this is where I don't understand your vehemence in fighting a 2nd group cure for templars. So I'll ask my question again that you didn't answer, what would it hurt you as an inq for templars to get a 2nd group cure? WTF do you care in the end, you don't play a templar? Your raid position is secured because you bring 90% of the templar heals AND you bring a 2nd group cure that can be cast on the run or more importantly CAN BE CAST WHEN KNOCKED UP. Give me my 2nd group cure that's just vanilla and doesn't have that power and I'll be happy and on my way, let me solo heal my groups that's all I'm asking for. In the end, I think you are confusing some of my needs with other posters. Yes I think they have a valid argument on the defensive vs. offensive thing, but personally I really don't care much about that, only about the 2nd group cure, and the group cure isn't so much of that subject but it's more of the changing mechanics such as things DOV brought like group detriments that kill you in one click while you are being knocked up. Lastly: Avirodar@Oasis wrote: "I convinced a hardcore templar fan to betray. I win @ EQ2." Sorry man, but that's pretty telling right there. You will note I've been nothing but respectful to you and your point of view, but I just felt like that quote from you was very insightful. In the end I think it's you that hasn't put up much more than a vague argument of "templars are strong healers" where most of us who want a 2nd group cure have but up valid specific points. You can keep arguing, and I'll tell you what you can feel free to get the last word in as your kind are excited to do, but my points (and other posters points) have been put up and hopefully some dev will stumble along this post and it will get him thinking. I think I'll step aside from this thread as there really is not much more to say.
With the GU61 changes, Inquisitors will get another notch to their belt due to overcapping for DPS mod. I'd just be happy with increased range on our Single or group cure (50m please) and some sort of DPS like ability that people want... increase the values of our weapon skill buffs, add strikethrough to Virtue, etc.
I guess they figure with new expansion on the way, and harder content Templar will be right back to being as needed as normal.
Avirodar@Oasis wrote: Didn't I tell you to stop posting already? Go away. Shoo, moron. Your dribble on these forums is no longer amuses me.
That's why i love Avi, he has knowledge and can explain well=) And he's totaly right about templars and our role in raid. I don't want or need 2nd group cure, more offensive buffs, i don't want solo heal a raid group, i'm near useless in non tank group, but i love it.
Arabani wrote: You hit the nail right on the head. You are saying you can't solo heal a raid group, you are saying you are near useless in a non tank group. Yet most of the tank group cleric healers are inquisitors these days, so where does that leave us to go by your own definition? If you don't want a 2nd group cure, then just delete it off your hotbar. I could never understand why people fight against a class getting something to help them, especially if it's as important as this.
Guess "safety net" healer is good enough for some Templars... more time to skype, do your nails, watch TV, I don't know. I'd prefer a well balanced healer, that can do the things other healers can and be wanted in groups... especially for defensive reasons compared to our "offensive" plate priest archtype.
I feel bad for templars. I see very few guilds running with them, especially in hard mode since everything is such a cure fest. There are even some guilds I know that forced their Templars to switch to Inquisitors or be replaced in raids. Seems like the balanced has been skewed quite a bit. Yeah, they may be slightly more defensive healers, but clearly that isn't enough nowadays. Curing is what's what in this expansion, and Inquisitors can do it way better.
Delimant@Butcherblock wrote: You speak as if curing was not intensive in the prior 2 expansions? TSO and SF required significant volumes of curing. Templars were completely viable, and highly desirable, in both TSO and SF. The difference in healing capacity between a Templar and Inquisitor is not slight. Templars have a substancial advantage. The healing+defensive capacities of a Templar are comparable offsets to an Inquisitors curing+dps capacities. A relative state of balance exists right there. What I see in this thread, is Templars unable to identify the cause of their concern. Curing is not the problem, or Templars would have been rendered obsolete 2 expansions ago. "There is the proof, the number 1634!! The number 1634 means Templars need to be buffed!!" The line above gives as much justification to Templars being "helped", as statements that raid forces are using Inqs in MainTankGroups means Templars need help - none. 1634 is the result. Inqs being used in MTG's is the result. No templar has been able to provide an articulate description of how the problem was caused, what would solve the problem, and why it would solve the problem. As already stated, TSO and SF auto-debunks claims of curing being the problem. So Templars, what is your problem? Knockbacks? Learn to use holy shield, enchanter avoids, and zone geometry. Anything else?
Avirodar@Oasis wrote: In case you were curious about what the difference is between the expansions, I can help you out. Templars have an advantage in cure curse, but can't handle multiple back-to-back elementals. TSO had a lot of curses, and people used potions. SF had very few back-to-back ae's. The current expansion is basically back-to-back elementals.
Enrico@Permafrost wrote: TSO was nothing short of whack-a-mole cure fest while the general AEs rained down, and SF (especially, but not limited to UD_Wing3) pumped out the detrimentals that required standard group cures in bulk. Multiple AEs that require curing is not a new phenomenon that started in DoV, it has been around for years. Mobs had AE trio's in TSO and SF. This is why I challenge what Templars use in a weak attempt to justify buffing their already powerful class. You said people used potions in TSO, and they did. But every time I have brought up potion use in SF, which should be about a 11-12s reuse on raids, people scoff at the concept, especially Templars. The tools already exist for Templars to deal with the problems they complain about. Working in tandum with the groups shaman, usage of holy shield and enchanter avoids, usage of cure potions, Templars can get the job done. If you care about NOTHING at all except group cures, it may be wise to betray to Inquisitor. Templars complaining about an Inq having better group cures, has as much credibility as a warden complaining that a fury can do more ranged spell based dps, none.
Avirodar@Oasis wrote: I'm pretty sure I addressed your question in the very first post of this thread. You might try reading it again. In TSO and SF... when you needed more DPS in that mage group or DPS group, and it kept folding... it was usually a Templar that got put in to single heal it. Inq NEEDED those DPS buffs, cause usually in a progression fight their weak heals would be too much on thier own so they needed to be paired with a Shaman or Druid . A good templar could single heal groups due to their strong heals, Sancuary, Arcane Ward, etc... XYZ was a good example where a single healing Templar just owned for your mage or dps group. So in essence, the ability to not have 2 healers made up for lack of Templar DPS buffs. You just add another melee or mage. Tanks also did not have the death saves and mitigation abilities they do, where they can pretty much block many life threatening AoEs... so Repent, stoneskins, etc., went a long way towards providing extra survivability to tanks. All this, paired with the fact that heals didn't compete heal the group on every aoe hit... so once again the extra power of Templar heals meant much more survivability. Faster curse cures was already mentioned. This was SF / TSO... Now read my first again... all the Pot / CB on items made it so any time the tank or anyone in the group isn't green you can just complete heal them. Tanks (especially with many guilds using Guards and Brawlers as MTs) have their own death saves, which can be timed with the new added cast bars with pin point precision... our stoneskins don't matter as much. Lastly, most fights this expansion have reduced arcane detrimentals to just debuffs... so our arcane ward isn't a huge factor like in the other expansions, were it was our top heal parsing ability. Now I understand Avi is just trolling, he knows this... and Arabani, well bless his or her heart, be very glad you're on very good terms with your guild leader. This has gotten out of hand though and Templars need something (see first post again) to help us become competitive again with other healers.
Latpow wrote: What do you consider trolling? Me asking the questions, and making the statements, that do not suit your agenda? If I planned on trolling, I could get much more colorful than I am. I am here debating the points being made, which IMO, needs to happen based on the misinformation I have seen in this very thread. I have read the first post, and your last, and I do not agree with key elements your proposals. You miss the "good old days". The days where if there was not a Templar in the MT group, raids got called early. The days where (as you stated) if the Inq couldn't solo heal a DPS group, you had to get the big boy templar class in raid to do it. You miss the days where Templars were grossly overpowered, and want those days back. I respectfully disagree. Dealing with knockbacks/knockups has been raised several times by Templars. You claim Inqs have a monopoly on uninterrupted curing, but the reality is, it is BOTH clerics (Inq+Temp) that have the monopoly due to steadfast. I have explained how proper use of holy shield and enchanter AE avoids can allow a Templar to never get knocked back, and remain standing on their feet allowing for the heals to continue uninterrupted. Combined with effective use of zone geometry, if communicating with your enchanter to get every 2nd KB AE avoided is too much work, the problem is not game mechanics, or the Templar class. The priest group heal fully (or almost full) healing a group, is hardly a new evolution. It has been this way for the last few expacs by well geared healers. It is not the problem. Templar stoneskins on a tank add up fast, especially on the auto attacks. Trying to play down the value of the Templars stoneskin is not right, it is a great ability. Most of the death saves available to tanks, were obtained prior to DoV. The casting bar is not a DoV release either. In years gone, most of the dangerous AEs had very notable casting animation by the mob, allowing tanks/players to use pin-point saves and cures. So the reality is, nothing has changed in that regard. The cues to use saves/cures etc are now much easier to see, but the game has become less forgiving if such cues are not promptly acted upon. Much of a muchness really... What is actually hurting Templars, more than anything, is not what you think (the absence of a 2nd group cure is not it). It is how powerful the shaman in the tank group has become, and how a good shaman can making the healing capacity of a paired healer count for very little, even on progression kills. Now this is where a difference of opionion seems to kick in : If Templars get extra stuff to make them more meaningful while in a group with a shaman, I maintain that Wardens, Furies, and Inquisitors are equally deserving of buffing in an area of their choosing. This is because Templars do not deserve to gain an extra advantage over Wardens, Furies and Inqs for general gameplay, as Templars are already an incredibly robust, powerful and effective healer.
Avirodar@Oasis wrote: If you look at my suggestions, I have never mentioned a 2nd group cure as the only answer. Personally, I'd rather have more range on my single or group cure so that my melee can burn on adds away from MT and not tick to death (or I can hit them with my cure reliably on a KB). Your revelation about the strength of Shaman wards... this has already been mentioned in this thread several times. This is why my suggestions are based on abilities that would make us more desireable outside of our pure healing strength. Plus if we get more upgrades to our healing abilities than Wardens (another priest class that needs a unique "must have in raid" ability) are hurt because there would be no reason to 3 healer MT on tougher fights. Other healers have gotten tweaks to be compatible with the current state of the game... Templars (and Defilers argueably, though Wards > all) have not been kept in the loop. Wardens have been kept in the loop, but still don't have much that would make a raid leader choose a Warden / Shaman combo over an Inq / Shaman combo... Our warden sits out most of the time, except for like 3 fights. Devs just need to scrap the whole "defensive" and "offensive" healer concept and go with "Mage", "Scout","Fighter" friendly.... like Defilers / Wardens would have buffs that Fighters would want (strikethrough, MA, Accuracy, +Hate, etc.). Inq / Mystics would have buffs scouts would want (MA, Reuse, Flurry, weapon skills, DPS procs, etc.).. Furies / Templars would have Mage buffage (spell double, spell skills, abil mod, reuse, AoE avoids for pets).
Latpow wrote: I am curious to hear what special tweaks Inqs have been given, since mid RoK? Fanatical Devotion is about the only addition worthy of note that is unique to Inqs... Druids recieved some tweaks, but the plight of druids, which spanned several years of devastated raid desirability, makes the current Templar situation look like a relaxing holiday in comparison. It's good that you recognise the impact of how significant wards are becoming, and how current encounters/mechanics have skilled Shamans at a point where they are rendering the healing output of other class types as trivial padding. Solving the actual problem requires more than buffing Templars, or giving Templars new tricks. Buffing Templars would only create a new problem, while the original problem continues to fester. If reactive heals were calculated before wards, Templars would not be here asking to be buffed up, Templars would "parsing" up in the stratosphere. Instead, the Defilers would be complaining about how they want extra range on their group/single cures, and better offensive utility to compete with the Mystics, etc etc. The difference is, who gets counted first. If you do not get counted first, and left insignificant scraps to heal, your capacity to heal is borderline meaningless. In some ways, as the Devs stated, it is a part of the games design that just is what it is.
Avirodar@Oasis wrote: Simple answer... as CB / Pot ramps up so does DPS and DPS potential of procs. Heals get stronger yes, but as you just stated... the greatest benefactor of this is Shamans with their huge wards. There is no ceiling as to were DPS can ramp up to, BUT there is only so much healing needed to keep tanks and groups alive. With the top gear of SF, I had maybe 110 ish cb / potency? Now with current top gear I can hit 240s in both cb / potency (not to mention capped reuse, 2k+ ability mod)... does my heal parse reflect that? Sure I "can" do 15k - 20k hps, but paired with a good shaman who's consistently hitting 8 - 12k hps... 3k - 4k is the norm on fights where the arcane ward is not a factor, most of this being Repent. An Inq can hit that 3 - 4k mark needed to cover damage that slips through wards easily, while having 2 group cures, while having more range on heals and cures to aid members DPS'ing adds away from the MT (or getting KB'd), while providing sustantial DPS buffs (and 10% passive reuse). There really is no argument here...
