Consolidated White Mage 4.0 Feedback Thread

I didn't even mention RNG. Stop tilting at windmills.

I said a "PROC GATE". You have to proc a lily. It doesn't -matter- if it's 100% on Cure 2. It adds an unnecessary step where there wasn't one before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jxnibbles

Why do people constantly bring up Whm being the "Casual Healer.." It is not a valid reponse. Whm needs tools as well and should have a equal chance of being looked at by raiders progressing as well.

Seriously stop acting like Sch and Astro requires a Masters in Science.

Also Paladin is consider to be an easy Tank and look at it now. It seems to be in a very good spot going into SB.

Every job is easy when you take the time to learn it stop putting other classes on a pedastal because more players prefer Whm.

---

Whm isn't a Causal healer per say, but it is the most causal friendly. It has the least number of utilities (the word utility means--something you can use so that means ogcds + gcds). All WHM CDs are 60 sec or longer (low action per minute requirement). And All of WHM toolset is straightforward and easy to manage (regen, cures, medicas, & 7 cds that's it)! Very simple healer.

Meanwhile the number of short CDs SCH has (90 sec or less) combined with managing personal cds and pet cds and pet placement... makes sch JUST tiny-winy less causal than WHM.

Lastly AST, though not a SCH in terms of APM (actions per minute) still has a card system that is on a 30 sec timer and a decent amount of CD that are 90 sec or less.


To put it more plainly. WHM is the only healer that has a GCD answer to just about any migitation in game (retroactive mitigation....and not in a vacuum......) while the other two healer have to at times resort to combinations of ogcd's + gcd to answer the same mitigation that WHM does. This makes WHM EZZZ by comparison.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IttyBitty

I didn't even mention RNG. Stop tilting at windmills.

I said a "PROC GATE". You have to proc a lily. It doesn't -matter- if it's 100% on Cure 2. It adds an unnecessary step where there wasn't one before.

---

If what i said is tilting...... how is your concern about a 100% ogcd proc not even worst?????

If you wanted to be UTMOST TECHINCAL
Casting cure II for a lily then executing a Divine Benison would take longer to execute than just casting a Stoneskin by the amount of time it takes to execute a cd (typically 0.5 sec)

If that wasn't your concern then there is no legitimacy to your grip that you have to depend on a 100% proc that does the exact same thing, and has the potential to be faster then casting Stoneskin. And the potential to save you MP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jxnibbles

Last I checked Divine Bension required 3 lillies. Am I wrong?
You know you got to cast 3 Cure II's which takes up 3 gcds + 1 ogcd for 1 Bension.
3 gcds + 1 ogcd is much longer than 1 gcd. Also correct me if I am wrong but you are now using 3x the Mp for that 1 Stoneskin.

---

From my understanding it requires a single Lily to execute but it consume all Lilies you have in the gauge. Which is really silly unless there is the intent to gain a bonus for having more Lilies in the release version that they didn't have time to implement in the April beta build.

https://gamerescape.com/wp-content/u...on-300x158.png

Alternatively, I'd be happy if it just consumed a single Lily at time of application, keep the remaining in your bank.

Fine I remembered incorrectly I was wrong.
But still 60s Recast timer for 5% more mitigation with the chance of eating up all our lilies, And yes "CDR but who cares"
At one point we had a 18% gcd Shield, and we have a gcd 10% shield right now. I doubt the extra 5% is worth that recast timer.

Edit: Maybe if it you could eat up all 3 Lillies to get a stronger shield, and maybe if our Aslyum would give some mitigation inside of it to the party. I would be fine with trading my SS for that. I would be fine if Aslyum eating up a Lily or two for that heck even giving it a longer recast.. But I am still worried about the level gap from 8-40 for new players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghishlain

From my understanding it requires a single Lily to execute but it consume all Lilies you have in the gauge. Which is really silly unless there is the intent to gain a bonus for having more Lilies in the release version that they didn't have time to implement in the April beta build.

https://gamerescape.com/wp-content/u...on-300x158.png

Alternatively, I'd be happy if it just consumed a single Lily at time of application, keep the remaining in your bank.

---

THAT WOULD BE F#$ing broken!! LOOL.....but I'd like it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jxnibbles

Fine I remembered incorrectly I was wrong.
But still 60s Recast timer for 5% more mitigation with the chance of eating up all our lilies, And yes "CDR but who cares"
At one point we had a 18% gcd Shield, and we have a gcd 10% shield right now. I doubt the extra 5% is worth that recast timer.

---

It's still "free" for the most part, and instant cast so I won't complain too much about it.

It's really strange, because just like Plenary Indulgence should be treated more as a mini Tetra and not an AoE heal; I'd treat Divine Benison less as a mitigation tool and more as a hateless cure. Current tanks i270 tanks have 35,000 HP so a free 5,250 HP buffer using current HP pools. My thought process with the skill is to basically use it on CD while I only have a single Lily on deck to optimize the usage and open up either healing buffer or DPS windows for myself and my healing partner in 8-mans. If it happens to line up well with a tank buster, even better. If not, ah well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jxnibbles

At one point we had a 18% gcd Shield, and we have a gcd 10% shield right now. I doubt the extra 5% is worth that recast timer.

---

18% was OP!!! But at the same time it led to inefficient healing. B/c stoneskin was 18% healers would often shield players/tanks after being topped, however that 18% shield was still less potent than 650 potency cure II...meaning if that Stoneskin was NOT REQUIRED for the incoming dmg, a healer could have done a better job at potency management and mp management.

I remember specifically running lvl 41 dung (Stone Vigil) with a whm and inbtween each of his cure spams he'd apply a stoneskin?? I don't remember what I said to him....but knowing me.....I had to say something...... Then came heavenward and they nerfed it (maybe hoping ppl would use it more efficiently??) and STILL we got healers weaving in Stoneskin for nonessential dmg mitigation??? I'm happy its GONE, now WHM will be more selective with that utility!

Quote:

---

This thread never sleeps....

---

It's not that we don't ever use Cure I/II, but if it can be healed through with regens, that's more dps up-time for us. If I'm ever casting cure, its because I have to. This isn't necessarily the way we're supposed to play white mage, but this is how many people do.
I would also point out, the required increase of cure usage isn't the only complaint people have about this new system. Read some of the other complaints people have, there are 200 pages of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aegidus

snip

---

I was using hyperbole when referencing the "regen/medica II exclusive" healer. Of course they too use cures or the party will die.....

But your respond demonstrate you missed the finer points to my original post. this game dictates at what rate you need to cast cures. Or more plainly Content dictates where in the middle you'll end up between casting exclusive regens and spamming cures!

The easier the healing content the more you can depend on regen alone; as the healing content becomes SAVAGE, you can no longer rely on regens alone; and those videos....if u wanted them.....where would you place the healers in terms of (regens alone vs Cures spam)? You'd put them in the middle!! but muccccch closer to the Cure spam than the regen alone side.