I find that groomer-oriented skiing is best done on skis in the mid-70's to mid-80's waist width. That gives you enough width to smooth out the variations that inevitably form and still narrow enough to produce edge hold on typical New England conditions.
The good news is every manufacturer makes something that fits into that range. The bad news is that (most) manufacturers make two completely different skis that fit into that range.
Take, for example, Rossignol. They make the well-reviewed "experience" series -- skis that are capable of going just about anywhere. You (generally) don't have to bring your "A game" all the time. If you want to take it easy, they work. If you want to charge down the hill, they work. Bumps, groomers, spring slush, light powder, they will most likely handle anything you throw at them. Think of them as the SUV's of the skiing world. The catch is that they don't do anything spectacularly well. Jack of all trades, master of none.
The other side of the coin are skis that are designed to make groomers fun. Again, staying in the Rossignol line, we're looking at things like the "Pursuit" series. They are designed to rail on groomers. Carve a turn and get launched into the next one; repeat the whole way down the hill. They can positively suck in anything not groomed. Versatility and high-end groomer performance tend to be at opposite ends of the ski-design spectrum. But if you have no intention of ever leaving the groomers...
One "kind" isn't necessarily any better than the other "kind". It's a question of "how do you approach skiing"? Is skiing a leisurely fun activity for you? Or do you see a groomer and you just think "race track"? Are you intrigued by the technical end of skiing and you want to really feel a carved turn? Are you interested in someday leaving groomers and exploring the whole mountain?
Give us an idea of your mindset regarding skiing and then we can give you a better recommendation as to what would "fit".