Quote Originally Posted by Lumis View Post
You are so biased to WHM its funny. Lustrate pales in comparison to cure 2? Panic heals? Its CLUTCH. While a white mage sits there waiting for their GCD to come up, the scholar has already saved whoever might have taken damage with lustrate, and saved the player for what might have been a fatal mistake. Have you ever weaved Adlo + Embrace + a Lustrate all together? Huge mitigation and healing done there. Both healers are great, but please don't act like sch pales in comparison to healing.
I have done as you said more times then I'd care to count but I have also done the same with DS+Cure 2. Lastly Lustrate is a waste of an Aetherflow stack. If anything Lustrates make SCH a lot more reactive healers then WHM.

I never said SCH pale incomparison to WHM but I did say Lustrate pale in comparison to Cure 2. My reason behind it is that it ONLY heals 25%. If the SCH is weak then yes Lustrate will shine as it will hide the players poor healing but if damage is dealt with correctly then Lustrate is not necessary. Only scenarios where it is useful is when someone screws up.

WHM are really are IMO the better healers. When played correctly and heals are timed correctly it shows how great it is. The same goes for SCH but the lack of raw healing power does hold the Job back. Best example I can give is when a lot of heal needs to go out, both single target and AoE. Something a WHM can handles with ease but a SCH must use up their stacks burn through a bunch of MP and when done their efficiency drops until their next Aetherflow.

Agree or not, I have played both class to the best of my ability and I enjoy healing. I still think WHM to be the stronger healer of the two. And yes I am biased in favour of WHM but that doesn't mean I don't know the benefits of having a SCH in the team.

Quote Originally Posted by tjw View Post
firstsin would love to have a talk with Vlady, I'm sure.
Who's that?

And I love to debate regardless of weather I win or loose.