#FFXIVHEALERSTRIKE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Molex

Man reading this thread, as a healer main, I'm happy SE completely ignore your feedback. You guys would kill the entire role in a single patch.

---

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/83/74/44/8...b80d8aef16.jpg

I just learned how to do this recently lol

guys it’s beating me!

Ok nothing to see here just a guy posting a meme with absolutely no difficulty whatsoever…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Molex

Man reading this thread, as a healer main, I'm happy SE completely ignore your feedback. You guys would kill the entire role in a single patch.

---

What’s that old quote about not being able to kill something that’s already dead

(Why am I even replying this person won’t explain their thoughts anyway)

tbf I have wondered if nuking the trinity might be better for this game's health at this point

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

I would say that the SGE is just a worse SCH argument is arguing in favour of wanting more job diversity simply because SGE really doesn’t actually do anything better than SCH

Complaining that two classes are functionally identical but one is just better on pretty much every front I think is a perfectly valid complaint to have against the position of SGE in terms of its identity

---

But why do you think that Scholar is better? They have similarities but they play very differently.

SCH has Chain Stratagem and Energy Drain, it's probably the best designed healer currently in the game as it has both a buff and will always be able to use their Job Gauge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tint

Kardia requires dps uptime because it does nothing more than mirroring the fairy casting Embrace while the ajoining SCH is dpsing.

When the SCH stops dpsing and casts heals instead, then the fairy will contine to heal alongside the SCH, that's why the fairy is "better". The healing kit of SCH is spread over himself and the fairy.

Sage on the other hand doesn't need Kardia to heal alongside himself when he stops dpsing. He does everything Kardia (the fairy) would do by himself.


Kardia is just a lazy solution to the problem that they never could balance Noct AST and SCH.

---

I'm genuinely not understanding how having the fairy heals along with GCD heals makes the scholar a better healer. And don't you lose the fairy heals if you use the fairy to fill your aetherflow gauge? So SCH also has times where you set the passive heal aside. Only with Sage, you get Kardia heals back as soon as you start DPSing again. Sch has to wait 30 seconds to get their fairy back. That's 30 seconds where you have to make up for the lost Embrace heals. Being able to immediately pick up the Kardia effect is a lot more adaptable. In general, that's the advantage that Sage has over Scholar. For example, Scholar can use Emergency Tactics to turn their next Adloquium into a big pure heal. Sage can use Pepsis to turn existing shields into a heal. BUT. On Sage, those shields are instant cast so I an pull that off while running, and I can make that decision after I've put the shield out. Scholar still needs to get the cast out, unless they use Recitation, and they have to decide on that plan beforehand. Sage has adaptability that Scholar doesn't.

If the Sage can do everything themselves that a Scholar can do with a Fairy, then doesn't that mean that the Sage is the better healer? We don't need fairies to "pick up our slack" after all. We can do it all ourselves without some silly fairy! That being said, I'm thoroughly opposed to the idea that one healer is "better" than the other. I like Scholar and I think the integration of fairy skills is great. Scholar and Sage have different play styles and different strengths. And that's perfectly fine. We're gonna have to appreciate and enjoy differences without playing games about classes being "better" or "worse" if we want more class differentiation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YarnMage48

snip

---

I think its because it’s assuming an optimised party, at which point any additional ‘adaptability’ from Sage becomes null and void (since you should know what’s coming before hand anyway in an optimised raiding party, healing timelines and whatnot). And given the way encounters are designed I’d imagine most people would say it’s not a particularly high bar to reach ‘optimisation’ anyway.

I mean, as the poster above mentioned Chain Stratagem (and Deployment Tactics) alone pushes Scholar pretty far ahead of Sages. Assuming every party member is playing optimally Stratagem can equal a sizeable (rDPS? Cdps? ABCDPS? lol) dps contribution, and Deployment is both mechanic-breaking-ly powerful, on a fairly short cool-down, and has no real parallel on Sage besides like Zoe+Physis II+Eukrasian Prognosis or something. Aka temu Deployment lol.

Naturally everyone’s going to find their own preferences that have them lean towards a certain job. For many people Sage probably is a ‘better healer’ than Scholar, simply due to being the one they prefer for whatever reason. But when you take that preference out of the equation and assume an equal skill level for every party member, suddenly Sage starts to struggle to keep up with Scholar’s capabilities. I’d argue Expedient is also a pretty huge advantage for Scholars too (I mean, they did have to nerf it lol!).

And of course I get that it seems contradictory to say ‘Scholar is the better healer because it ultimately outputs a higher party dps value’ lol, but unfortunately with healing mechanics being how they are, (oops all Harrowing Hell!’ lol)it would take a lot for the ‘best healer’ to ever be ‘the healer that heals the best’ sadly.

Addendum: the writings here are solely based on my own opinion and understanding and not being sold as objective fact. I.E idk I’m probably wrong lol

It's not like people don't want to appreciate and enjoy the 'differences'. The issue is, SE doesn't want those.

You can say Kardia and Embrace are different on paper and maybe down to 0.0001 potency but at the end of the day they are both passively generated heals that you mostly don't (need to) think about. In fact, if you're having trouble, then you most likely have much bigger problem on hand that deserves more attention than laser focusing these two.

Another fairy benefit (that they keep trying to diminish by giving everybody and their mom 30y radius) is totem healing: the ability to heal your target without having to place yourself closer. Try to reach that one BRD standing in Narnia with your Panhaima, and you'll tilt your head when you see they're the only one that's missing your mitigation while that SCH can sit still while their Seraph churning out Consolation cozily at the middle of battlefield, and actually have better agency to capitalize all HPS value that comes from their two charges.

Instant shield? Sure, that's what SCH doesn't have on the fly. But when do we actually benefit that? You have millions other heals before you even think about pressing E.Diag/Prognosis, so you will also be spamming Dosis III/Broil IV regardless. Now unless your party is a clown fiesta, that could be a different story... but wait. Recently they just gave SCH Seraphism, which essentially deletes every single weakness the job had up to this point. The only time I believe SGE outclasses SCH was at lv80 as the existence of Holos sort of tipped that balance just slightly, only for it to return to the other way when SCH receives Expedient at lv90.

tl;dr SGE trades higher potential for simplicity, ease of use, and foolproofness. SCH could rival SGE's ridiculous HPS potential, if they're not being kept on check by Energy Drains... except they can absolutely play SCH like they're playing a SGE: ignore energy drains.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connor

snip

---

No you make some very valid points. In fact "optimized vs non-optimized parties" is a whole lot of what's causing a lot of the disagreement in this discussion. In an optimized party, you will be using your DPS skills more often than not. In an non-optimized party... things can get very challenging very quickly and DPS might not be happening. But a lot of the arguments being made are assuming a fully optimized party, and only a small fraction of the player base is at that level.

As far as unique Scholar skills, Sage has some cool ones too. Its almost like they were designed to have unique abilities or something. I think Chain Strat helps to balance the lower DPS output on SCH. Its kinda like a "selfish vs non-selfish DPS" situation. But Chain Strat is very very cool. When it comes to Harrowing Hell, that's exactly the kind of mechanic Panhaima is build for. And Holos is amazing there too, having both a heal and a mit in one skill. In short. Both have some cool unique skills.

In terms of cold hard numbers though... well, I'm not going to downright reference any particular websites, but I will say that there is data to support the idea that Sage can outperform Scholar in both healing and DPS. Of course, it all comes down to individual player skill. I've long held that being good at pushing your buttons is far more important choosing classes based off of higher DPS potential.

At the end of the day, I am pretty sure its supposed to come down to player preference. We are supposed to pick the jobs we enjoy playing, and that goes for DPS and Tanks too. Classes and encounters are designed around the idea that any standard party comp can clear them. We're supposed to pick classes we enjoy, not follow some mega-optimized meta. Is Scholar the "better" class for you? Play Scholar! Do you like Sage more? Play Sage! Have fun! That is what a video game is supposed to be about. Not making fun of certain classes because you think yours is superior.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rein_eon_Osborne

It's not like people don't want to appreciate and enjoy the 'differences'. The issue is, SE doesn't want those.

Instant shield? Sure, that's what SCH doesn't have on the fly. But when do we actually benefit that? You have millions other heals before you even think about pressing E.Diag/Prognosis, so you will also be spamming Dosis III/Broil IV regardless. Now unless your party is a clown fiesta, that could be a different story... but wait. Recently they just gave SCH Seraphism, which essentially deletes every single weakness the job had up to this point. The only time I believe SGE outclasses SCH was at lv80 as the existence of Holos sort of tipped that balance just slightly, only for it to return to the other way when SCH receives Expedient at lv90.

tl;dr SGE trades higher potential for simplicity, ease of use, and foolproofness. SCH could rival SGE's ridiculous HPS potential, if they're not being kept on check by Energy Drains... except they can absolutely play SCH like they're playing a SGE: ignore energy drains.

---

I definitely benefited from being able to run and shield at the same time last tier. If my party was more "optimal" would that have been needed? No, probably not. But hey, I don't need my party to be optimal.

I gotta ask though, do you think Sage has higher potential or not? Because you seem to be saying both.

At any rate, I can't really get behind the idea that its SE that doesn't want differences, given the amount of complaining about differences that happens. If we liked differences, we wouldn't be getting into whether certain classes are better. And, when you want to make sure that content is clearable by any standard party comp, there's going to be some similarities in how the classes operate. If there wasn't, you would get people insisting on having certain classes or class combinations in parties. Well, more than this already happens - just look at how many PF parties insist that they MUST have TWO melees. If individual classes were too different, players would bully other players into fitting into the calculated ideal party composition. Again, that already happens to an extent. And that wouldn't be fun for everyone. So again. The lack of differences is a community issue. We need to let players play the classes they enjoy without getting petty about which classes are "better" or "worse", or complaining that certain classes are "too easy", or "too hard", or "too complicated". As long as that goes on, SE is going to get the message that the community thinks that "different is bad". And no amount of complaining on the forum about a lack of differences is going to counteract that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YarnMage48

[...]I gotta ask though, do you think Sage has higher potential or not? Because you seem to be saying both[...]

---

Apologies if I seem to be saying both, but no. When I implied that SCH having better potential, I was speaking of their HPS, mitigative, and design front. This can be seen from the numbers they given to both healers. Such as:

1. Kerachole lasts 15s with 500p HoT, more flexible and easier to use. Sacred Soil lasts for 17-18s with 600p HoT and is arguably clunkier due to the nature of ground targeting actions + requiring allies to be within the bound of the AoE.
2. E.Prog II is 460 effective potency, 1s faster, and instant AoE heal. Succor is 560 effective potency, 1s slower, and needs to be cast.
3. Panhaima is potentially 1,200 effective potency that goes out within a single weave window (so press and forget) and does not require you think of your position (ever since they gave it 30y radius) but has a very limited time period of which you need to be taking damage in order to capitalize them which usually ends up being overheal. As opposed to Seraph-Consolation whose potencies from 2 charges amounts up to 1,000 effective potency, but you have the agency to decide which instance of damage you want to deal with per charges within 20s, and has effective duration up to 49s seconds.
4. Energy Drain and its implication to SCH's gameplay. This one niche damage optimization option allows SCH to indirectly controls their HPS output. Don't need that stack? ED away. What does SGE have? Uhh.. yeah, just throw that Druochole to keep mana happy (lol).
5. Addersgall vs Aetherflow. One does not require to be managed actively to keep it rolling but you are capped to 4-5 burst uses... if you need it somehow. The other requires SCH to consciously hit Aetherflow to keep them rolling but they can potentially do 'aetherflow superdump' up to 6 stacks (or 9 if you include dissipation) if that's even needed.

Before they expand the radiuses, Physis II (used to be 20y centered on the SGE) vs Whispering Dawn also demonstrated the same "trading potential for ease of use"-syndrome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YarnMage48

[...]At any rate, I can't really get behind the idea that its SE that doesn't want differences, given the amount of complaining about differences that happens[...]

---

I probably shouldn't have worded it "SE doesn't want difference". For that I apologize for the confusion. What I should be saying instead was "SE is afraid to create that difference". They have demonstrated over the course of several years that they're unable to parse why XYZ feedbacks are happening from the first place.

I.e. People complain about -that one SCH- who spent their AF stacks for ED for whatever reason (playing skillfully, chasing funny numbers, or just bad at making correct decision). Their response? Creates a proto-SGE that was SCH 5.0 only for them to give us back ED after a massive backlash and... what a surprise, necro'd that variant of SCH in 6.0 but gave them a different coat of paint & call them "SGE". What a waste of design space, IMHO.

What else? Oh right, AST! It's an RNG'y job at its inception but then people start complaining about RNG... in an RNG'y job. Their response? ShB, EW, and finally DT AST. As the icing on the top, people also mentioned wanting varied cards to play and manipulate. Their response? Here you go 4th Essential Dignity, 2nd Exaltation, 3rd Celestial Intersection. Oh don't worry, they're all card VFX! Have fun!

EDIT: Heck, even that one media tour build where SGE was shown been able to stack their E.Dosis III and E.Dyskrasia? I'm willing to bet that's what they actually wanted to implement. It's only because certain somebody made a comment how they will feel 'pressured' to be keeping both DoT up in raids due to being a gain for... what, 80p per minute? Even single AF stack spent for Energy Drain would immediately outclasses that and they worry about that? But alas, SE caved in and effectively made E.Dyskrasia totally useless button outside nichest of the niche case of uses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rein_eon_Osborne

snip [/I]

---

Sure, I see what you mean in terms of raw heal output from single abilities. And getting to use, ah, what's it called? You guarantee the single target crit shield and then give that shield to everyone. That's OP. Brilliant. I love that scholars can do that. Very scholarly. Panhaima is one of those skills that's great for multi-hit stacks or a multiple instances of damage in a short period, but can be hard to use otherwise. Although, baring any better options, I will often utilize the heal. So like, in Wicked Thunder, I'd pop it for Witch Hunt 2, and if it times out right, everyone would get 1 shield for their witch hunt damage, and then 4 stacks worth of heal. Was that the most optimal way to use Panhaima? Not really. Was it more optimal than just not using it? For sure for sure. But at any rate, even its hard to find a good use for it sometimes, I really like having that unique skill. Oh but, getting to use AF stacks for damage? definitely a plus. I mean I'm probably not hurting for the MP if I'm not healing anyways, but man, leaving addersgall capped for a while just feels bad. I do like the way it "forces" you to engage with that system, rather than SCH having the option to ignore their AF heals and just use ED. But. Leaving it capped is no fun.

But its discussions like these that prevent me from comprehending the idea that "they're basically the same class", you know? When you really dig into it, they're so different in how you manage resources and utilize skills. And they have different skills that are great in different situations. So again, the idea that Sage is just worse Scholar is... just not true. They're so different and both so great. At least from my perspective.

I think you might be right on the money with saying the SE is afraid to create more differences. I haven't followed the healer lore long enough to know what specific scholar incident you're referring to, nor can I really track with the class changes throughout patches, but I think we are largely saying the same things as far as "SE gives us differences and we complain". I think the hardest issue they face is that even if they make changes to please one group of players, in doing so they are going to massively upset other players. So then they get stuck playing whack-a-mole trying to placate different groups of players. Try to please all, please none. But of course every single one of us is 100% correct on what is wrong and what needs to be done to fix it... I don't envy SE, trying to navigate this.

Fyi, SCH at the beginning of 5.0 had their Energy Drain removed alongside many other healers (mostly dps) actions. This is usually the point where a lot people refer to when they speak of great lobotomization of healers. But depending on the person you've talked to, some may even think StB being the start of all (hello stormblood lilies lol). That being said, removal of ED on SCH 'broke' the job. You've mentioned that it sucks to leave addersgall capped? SCH's AF too in that short period. Their reasoning was to allow SCH to focus more onto their healing duties... well look what they actually cooked up: not actually enough damage to heal, AF overcapped. Either ignore the stacks or dump all those overhealing Lustrates. Wow, great design choice (it's not). They eventually gave ED back.

I know you said you have different opinion about SGE/SCH differences which is totally fair, but to players like myself, the decision to necro 5.0 SCH into 6.0 SGE... just why? If you want to play today's SGE without actually being SGE, you can already do the same as a SCH since ShB: remove Energy Drain from your hotbar. That's it. Why waste an entire design space to create a brand new job that is more of a carbon copy of already existing job? They said it will be a healer that heals through DPS'ing and what they cooked up is Kardia that barely matters and is a shadow of SCH's old Embrace targeting plus clunkier? The only iteration of SGE that comes close to their vision ironically appears in the game 1 major patch later: 6.1 PvP SGE, and has been keeping to that vision closely to even today better than PvE's iteration.

EDIT: Also just sayin', SCHs who ignores their AF heals under all circumstances are straight up bad SCHs.

You know, I'm really enjoying this discussion about Scholars and Sages. It gets right into the heart of the homogenization issue and...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YarnMage48

Try to please all, please none. But of course every single one of us is 100% correct on what is wrong and what needs to be done to fix it... I don't envy SE, trying to navigate this.

---

*emphasis mine* Truer words were never typed. All of us here have experience playing a healer, regardless what that stoopid spreadsheet implied.

Hell, if you total all the time I have played a healer across various MMOs, I've been healing for approximately 20 years. I'm sure I'm not alone in this.

The fact is, we all know what it feels like when healers are designed right and when they are not. We feel it in our gut.

Of course, gamers* all have different ideas on how to fix the current state of healers in FFXIV. Some of them better than others but each has some merit.

Personally, I feel suggestions should be explored via a playtest server where Square Enix/Creative Studio III can obtain real data about the impact of these ideas. They'll be able to see what works and doesn't work quickly.

In addition, we're paying them to play the game. So, it's cheaper than hiring employees to do their playtesting for them.

But would Square Enix be open to the idea of a test server? Would they be open to the idea of allow more player input in the development process?

I hope they would be. It would be a win-win.

They get their data, save money, and their subscribers are more likely to continue playing a game in which they have input. We get a better game.

*Getting gamers to agree on anything is like herding a bunch of hyperactive kittens. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YarnMage48

I think the hardest issue they face is that even if they make changes to please one group of players, in doing so they are going to massively upset other players. So then they get stuck playing whack-a-mole trying to placate different groups of players. Try to please all, please none. But of course every single one of us is 100% correct on what is wrong and what needs to be done to fix it... I don't envy SE, trying to navigate this.

---

It's a hard line to balance, but I think it's possible by following a few specific prinicples:

1: Additional complexity should mostly be 'optional'. That is, when the job is updated, if someone wants to play the same way they did previously, their performance should be 'viable enough that they can still clear content'. This can be done by, for example, adding new damage actions that are stronger than the filler spell, but are only a small DPS gain, with the DPS checks of things like Savage being tuned such that 'ignoring the new buttons' does not cause enrages. Example: I'd give WHM a new button with a 15s CD - Water, later evolving into Banish. It would be 40p stronger than the Stone/Glare you have learned, so, ignoring it entirely would lose you just 160p per minute. Half a Glare. There's room in Savage DPS checks (and I'm looking at previous Savages since this one was an anomaly) to drop like... 30 Glares worth of damage, and still clear week 1. So, losing 1600p, or '5 and a bit Glares' (over the course of a 10min fight), is inconsequential to the check.

2: Additional actions should feed into the identity/lore of the job, not contradict it. Lore should bend to gameplay, if the gameplay requires it (and the gameplay is good), but the lore can also be used to guide the design for the gameplay. Something like Seraphism is strong. Very strong. But, it's also a very divisive action, due to the 'forced transformation' effect that gives us a white robe and angel wings (which blurs the line between SCH and WHM aesthetically), and it completely flies in the face of everything that made SCH, SCH previously (to the point where JP asked Y-P about it in an interview). AST Cards are an especially sore point IMO in their current form, as we have The Spear (a melee weapon) giving bonus damage to Ranged players, while The Arrow (a ranged projectile) is 'Healing received increased'. Very clearly, the gameplay was thought of first, and the lore was not considered at all.

3: Additional actions, when shown in the Job Action Trailer, should have 'cool' and 'eyecatching' VFX. Nothing sells the changes to players quite like the VFX of the action. People went nuts when SGE was shown because of 'how many attacks it had compared to SCH'. It showed Dosis (we use in ST), E.Dosis (we use in ST once per 30s), Phlegma (we use in ST once per 40s on average), Dyskrasia (we don't use in ST), Toxikon 2 (we use for mobility and only have 3 charges) and Pneuma (once per 2min and we use it for the healing). But because it showed 6 attacks, it gave the impression that it was some hyper-offense focused 'constant barrage of attacks' healer. But, look at previous Job Action Trailers, the most memorable things that people discuss after is usually the attacks. Misery, all of SGE's attacks, the new 92 attacks like Oracle and Psyche.

So now imagine a trailer that goes like this (based on the reworks I came up with):

WHM uses a few attacking and healing actions (ones we're used to seeing) to build a new gauge. They apply a barrier using Stoneskin, a returning action that now costs a Lily (thereby preparing Misery in the process).
At 50 gauge, they use a big healing move that modifies the gauge to have 3 'charges'. The clip ends with them firing off Misery, Quake, Tornado and Flood.

While multiple targets are being attacked (eg there's a tank on either side with a mob attacking them), SCH uses a bunch of tactical stuff, combining healing actions as we've come to expect (eg Recitation > Excogitation, Adloquium > Deployment) to manage both tanks' HP bars. While the SCH is putting up their DOTs (3 of them in total, Biolysis, Miasmalysis, Shadowflare) on one of the mobs, more enemies join the fray on that side. The SCH hits Chain Stratagem, and Baneful Impaction, not only applying the AOE DOT to the group, but spreading the original DOTs (And Chain) to the whole pack of enemies. They then use a new action, Synchronization Tactics (replacing Dissipation), to empower the Faerie, putting Fey Union on the tank handling one enemy, while the SCH and Faerie work together via Sync to focus heal the one with more enemies attacking.

AST throws up Divination and Oracle, but then follows up with playing a total of three different arcana (2 Major, one Minor) on the party. Additionally, in the midst of playing the cards, they burn up one Minor Arcana to the Royal Road, and empower the second Major Arcana they play. As the clip continues, the gauge shows that the cards are not just 'once per minute', but available far more often (eg Minor Arcana being every 15s), and are far more easy to manipulate via Redraw and Royal Road, making setting up for burst windows far more accessible. It also reveals that, rather than using just two cards from the Minor Arcana (there's 54 in total), we can use all 6 suits (Cups, Irons, Crowns, Rings, Staves and Knives), and that the gauge indicates that each Arcana has a 'favoured role' (EG The Bole is best used on a Tank, and the game indicates as such on the gauge)

SGE fires off two new attacks, one a line AOE and one a Cone AOE. They relentlessly attack the target, weaving in actions that augment Kardia (adding the stacks to the Job Gauge), and generate a purple gauge as the stacks are consumed via attacking. This purple gauge is later revealed to grant a pseudo-Enshroud, or Hypercharge from MCH, allowing the SGE to attack even faster (and thereby heal faster via Kardia). As the clip plays out, they use a 'Eukrasian Phlegma', Psyche, a regular Phlegma, augment themselves with the Purple Gauge, then rapid fire the Line, Cone, Line, Cone, and finally finish off with Pneuma, now reworked to be a strong finishing attack.

Having a Healer WOL for the poster job for an expansion would also be nice to see

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rein_eon_Osborne

Fyi, SCH at the beginning of 5.0 had their Energy Drain removed alongside many other healers (mostly dps) actions. This is usually the point where a lot people refer to when they speak of great lobotomization of healers. But depending on the person you've talked to, some may even think StB being the start of all (hello stormblood lilies lol). That being said, removal of ED on SCH 'broke' the job. You've mentioned that it sucks to leave addersgall capped? SCH's AF too in that short period. Their reasoning was to allow SCH to focus more onto their healing duties... well look what they actually cooked up: not actually enough damage to heal, AF overcapped. Either ignore the stacks or dump all those overhealing Lustrates. Wow, great design choice (it's not). They eventually gave ED back.

I know you said you have different opinion about SGE/SCH differences which is totally fair, but to players like myself, the decision to necro 5.0 SCH into 6.0 SGE... just why? If you want to play today's SGE without actually being SGE, you can already do the same as a SCH since ShB: remove Energy Drain from your hotbar. That's it. Why waste an entire design space to create a brand new job that is more of a carbon copy of already existing job? They said it will be a healer that heals through DPS'ing and what they cooked up is Kardia that barely matters and is a shadow of SCH's old Embrace targeting plus clunkier? The only iteration of SGE that comes close to their vision ironically appears in the game 1 major patch later: 6.1 PvP SGE, and has been keeping to that vision closely to even today better than PvE's iteration.

EDIT: Also just sayin', SCHs who ignores their AF heals under all circumstances are straight up bad SCHs.

---

I mean if nothing else, this goes to show that they tried something, it didn't work, and so they reversed it and then tried something else. That is, any way you slice it, a good thing. They are trying to make improvements.

And oh boy. I am pretty sure that Kardia matters. I feel the absence of Kardia when I play other healers. It would be fun if Kardia did more, but we did get some of that with Philosophia.

And I still feel like there are enough unique differences in skills and playstyle that its not accurate to say that SCH without ED is the same as SGE. But, I don't think we're going to agree on that one. And that's ok! Just don't make fun of me for playing "scholar for babies" and I'll be a happy little Sage.

I don't care about raiding, SE needs to un-nerf dungeons, strengthen the sync down so that people stop coasting the dungeons, and buff GCD heals so they are used more. Make healers have to heal more in dungeons. This is coming from a tank main.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kacho_Nacho

*Getting gamers to agree on anything is like herding a bunch of hyperactive kittens. ;)

---

Those words might be truer than mine, honestly.

So many years of healing! But to your point, I do think that's why I like Sage so much, and why I like the other classes that I like. They just feel right to me.

Getting players involved in playtesting changes in a fascinating idea. I'm not sure how they could implement it, but if they could, that could be really interesting. But I'm also not sure how that might overcome the general issue of none of us actually agreeing on anything. But for players to at least be more involved in the changes, that would be something.

I agree entirely on all points. There's not enough much else for me to say in response. All excellent ideas. And as a Sage main, the idea that Kardia can build contribute to the job gauge... that sounds fantastic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForsakenRoe

Having a Healer WOL for the poster job for an expansion would also be nice to see

---

Ah that would be lovely.

It will never happen since SE hates healers for no reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YarnMage48

I mean if nothing else, this goes to show that they tried something, it didn't work, and so they reversed it and then tried something else. That is, any way you slice it, a good thing. They are trying to make improvements[...]

---

Wait until you know at the dawn of 6.0 launch when they openly says "We don't know what to do with Scholars" in a Live Letter while also accounting the immense number of feedbacks they've received up to that point. Just another disappointment that this team has demonstrated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YarnMage48

[...]And I still feel like there are enough unique differences in skills and playstyle that its not accurate to say that SCH without ED is the same as SGE. But, I don't think we're going to agree on that one. And that's ok! Just don't make fun of me for playing "scholar for babies" and I'll be a happy little Sage.

---

That we are. I also don't think anybody was making fun of people who likes current SGE as it is. At the end of the day, my greatest issue with SGE as a whole is they weren't what we were promised to get & it didn't have enough distinction to make me feel like I'm playing a different barrier healer. A lot my SCH/SGE hotkeys are mapped very similarly:

• Physis - Whispering Dawn
• Kerachole - Sacred Soil
• Ixochole - Indomitability
• Taurochole - Excogitation
• Rhizomata - Recitation
• Krasis - Protraction
• Druochole - Lustrate
• Panhaima - Summon Seraph/Consolation
• Philosophia - Seraphism
• Phlegma I/II/III - Ruin II
• Psyche - Aetherflow

That's a lot 'bread and butter' buttons covered already, not incl. their fillers and role actions but I'm not going to look at them for the moment. My personal expectation when they introduced the job in their 5.4 teaser was more like today's SGE but without the entire addersgall gauge with more robustly designed Kardia system. PvP SGE is one step ahead in that front: Dosis III kardia triggers the maintenance regen HoT. E.Dosis III triggers E.Diag shield on Kardion partner, which can be broken to give Toxikon II that deals 2 times (at its inception) the amount of regular Dosis III casts.

Now what would I kill to have E.Pneuma, E.Phlegma, with all differing Kardion effect... hahahahah fat wish, lmao.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BunnyQueen

I don't care about raiding, SE needs to un-nerf dungeons, strengthen the sync down so that people stop coasting the dungeons, and buff GCD heals so they are used more. Make healers have to heal more in dungeons. This is coming from a tank main.

---

:confused:
If an oGCD gets the job done, I'm using an oGCD.

I mean, as a WHM, there is no single-target GCD heal that's going to compete with Benediction, so if you want me to dip into my (non-lily/FFLogs-damage-neutral) GCD heals, you, as the tank, are going to have to start taking more damage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BunnyQueen

I don't care about raiding, SE needs to un-nerf dungeons, strengthen the sync down so that people stop coasting the dungeons, and buff GCD heals so they are used more. Make healers have to heal more in dungeons. This is coming from a tank main.

---

Using an old example of 'BIS geared SCH in Aetherfont, back in EW', some quick maths I did implied that for the first boss (the weird axolotl thing) to pressure us enough to not only burn through all of the SCH's OGCDs, but to also force them to use even a single GCD action (eg a Deploy Adlo) per minute, that boss would have to deal a blast of 20k raidwide damage, every 15 seconds, on top of everything it already was doing. But that's BIS (660 at the time), and the dungeon allows you in at an item level as low as 605.

The sheer amount of extra pressure that would be required, to make 'GCD heals used more', is A: far too high for casuals to surmount (especially if the increase is 'sudden', since it's very unlikely SE would go back and change old content), and also B: scales horrendously inversely with gear. What was a 'hard healing challenge that forces GCD healing' at I690 in Tender Valley (the pots at the end) or Strayborough (the dolls that spam raidwides at the end), became 'this needs only your OGCD kit to handle' at i700, and then later became 'this needs only parts of your OGCD kit to handle' with the crafted i710. Each of these jumps in how much less GCD healing was needed, was just 10 item levels. Our power, our output, scales far too fast for there to be an 'increase to healing required' that feels good at all gear levels, and the massive difference in output that those 55 ILVLs give in the Aetherfont are what make it impossible. Either the challenge is tuned to feel good at 605 in Aetherfont, and 660 crushes it (which is how it currently seems to be designed), or it's tuned for an item level higher than 605, and 605 is soulcrushingly hard to clear with (or even inpossible, if the player is not of sufficient skill).

So, I think the solution can use 'healing required is increased' as a factor, sure. But it can't be the only factor

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BunnyQueen

and buff GCD heals so they are used more.

---

This is pointless; GCD heals aren't avoided because they're underpowered, they're avoided because that's a Glaroilificosis lost. If we want GCD heals to be used, you need to cull the oGCDs and increase the frequency of unavoidable damage.

It wouldn't matter if Cure II was 300 potency or a full Benediction, the fact it's on the GCD is what will make people avoid it. Besides, the heals are already plenty potent, we just lack the required damage to have us actually need it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rein_eon_Osborne

....not incl. their fillers and role actions but I'm not going to look at them for the moment. [/SIZE]

---

Ah I see you aren't going to look at the things that make them different, so naturally, you don't see the differences. Yeah that checks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YarnMage48

Ah I see you aren't going to look at the things that make them different, so naturally, you don't see the differences. Yeah that checks.

---

The fillers are even less unique compared to the healers than what Rein has talked about; there's a reason I refer to all of them as Glaroilificosis. The only difference they have is the name and slight potency variations, there's no gameplay difference between spamming Broil and spamming Dosis and refreshing Bio and Eukrasian Dosis.

And Role actions live up to their name, every healer has the exact same ones.

SGE really is just SCH without the Fairy. There is nuance in their differences, but the decision making is 95% similar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YarnMage48

Ah I see you aren't going to look at the things that make them different, so naturally, you don't see the differences. Yeah that checks.

---

Its not that we're ignoring the differences. The differences are not enough doubly so because SGE isn't what was advertised nor promised.

If Kardia was an actual mechanic instead of a set and forget buff to heal the tank, if SGE actually had to heal through doing DPS and had limited healing options where it could heal without doing damage then I will accept it being different from SCH enough to be its own healing class. Until then, its a SCH clone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YarnMage48

Ah I see you aren't going to look at the things that make them different, so naturally, you don't see the differences. Yeah that checks.

---

Genuinely asking, what makes their filler different?

1. Dosis - Broil
2. Eukrasia Dosis - Bios
3. Dyskrasia - Art of War

Is it Eukrasia..? Is it because I need to press an extra button to use GCD shield or something? If you mean the 'extra step' of having to press Eukrasia to apply DoT...well I will not presume to know of you. But in my perspective, it just turns 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 into 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (one extra press of [1] hotkey per half a minute). I will still look at the DoT timer to judge when I should be refreshing my DoT. Same exact number. This isn't just for SGE/SCH btw, as the regen healer are also equally in the rut on this front.

Is it the actual healing GCD spells? On that front, I also don't feel different enough, even until my last high end experience from last tier. Taking the infamous p10s example, my worst run still had me cast a total of 19 GCDs for heals out of 199 GCD casts. Now if I were a SGE in that run, I'd get to press Eukrasia 19 extra times, meaning I'll have 38/219 GCD spent on non-Dosis...? Yaayyy...??? What if this is a smoother encounter or non-high ends? Perish the thought, I will probably not even touching Eukrasia outside to refresh DoT thanks to how abundant their HPS is.

Or is it two target gain to use AoE on SCH while it's three target gain to use AoE on 3 other healers?

What about role action? Depending on how much piety you have, 7000-7800 MP are usually the sweet spot to start using Lucid... there is no difference between healers. Surecast? Same. Swiftcast? Again, same; either save for raise or play it risky by swiftcasting Glaroilficosis? Rescue? Lol.

I genuinely can't think anything else.

TheDustyOne nailed it though. Simply put, it's the decision making, they are too similar to one another.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YarnMage48

Ah I see you aren't going to look at the things that make them different, so naturally, you don't see the differences. Yeah that checks.

---

The problem is the things you are selling as “differences” aren’t MEANINGFULLY different

Is kardia being a buff you can pass around that works off of your damage GCD different to the fairy casting embrace on the lowest HP party member……..yes

Is it meaningfully different in that it induces you to make different decisions………no

And that’s where the problems arise with comparisons of SCH and SGE. Their skills are just different enough to warrant different tooltips but aren’t different enough to actually induce you to make meaningfully different decisions. Like sure panhaima is 5 stacks of shields and only pure heals you for unused stacks while seraph is 2 stacks of a shield and heal but in practice where the SGE uses panhaima the SCH will use seraph which makes the skills not really have a meaningful difference. The only skills that stand out are the unique skills of which SCH is the only one that doesn’t have analogues in SGE’s kit; namely illumination, the sprint part of expedient and deployment

Compare this to say AST and WHM. AST doesn’t have a “rapture” equivalent where it can dump out on demand AOE healing functionally whenever it wants, but in exchange WHM doesn’t really have a collective or an opposition equivalent as WHM isn’t great at sustained regens

Looking for minute differences that don’t meaningfully alter gameplay is rather pointless in the grand scheme of things

There seems to be a miscommunication here. I don't consider Dosis to be "filler". Well, if you're saying that the primary single target damage button for each healer is functionally the same across classes, then yes, they are indeed quite similar. Though I do have to say that I find the "Eukrasion" gimmick to be neat. Yes, in practice, all it really changes is the amount of space needed on my hotbar for GCD skills. But I still think it's neat, nonetheless. Regardless, that's not the point I was making. The point is that if you ignore differences, you will only see similarities.

I've already discussed several differences between SGE and SCH. I've also already discussed some barriers for further differentiation between healer classes.

If you only want to see the similarities, then I can't stop you. No matter what you choose, I will continue enjoying the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YarnMage48

There seems to be a miscommunication here. I don't consider Dosis to be "filler". Well, if you're saying that the primary single target damage button for each healer is functionally the same across classes, then yes, they are indeed quite similar. Though I do have to say that I find the "Eukrasion" gimmick to be neat. Yes, in practice, all it really changes is the amount of space needed on my hotbar for GCD skills. But I still think it's neat, nonetheless. Regardless, that's not the point I was making. The point is that if you ignore differences, you will only see similarities.

I've already discussed several differences between SGE and SCH. I've also already discussed some barriers for further differentiation between healer classes.

If you only want to see the similarities, then I can't stop you. No matter what you choose, I will continue enjoying the game.

---

What do you consider dosis to be if you don’t consider it filler. I mean that’s literally what it is in the most literal sense of the word. It’s what you press when you don’t have anything else to press. I don’t get how that can be up for debate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YarnMage48

There seems to be a miscommunication here. I don't consider Dosis to be "filler". Well, if you're saying that the primary single target damage button for each healer is functionally the same across classes, then yes, they are indeed quite similar. Though I do have to say that I find the "Eukrasion" gimmick to be neat. Yes, in practice, all it really changes is the amount of space needed on my hotbar for GCD skills.

---

To be fair, though, Eukrasian Dosis is no more Dosis than Dia, Afflatus Solace, Glare IV, is Glare, Biolysis is Broil, or Combust is Malefic.

Nor does Eukrasian Dosis even change the number of skills you need on your bar relative to the other 30s-duration DoTs. You're still using another key to then replace an GCD of the functionally identical attack, up to once per 30s (20s, in Afflatus's case; thrice per 120s in G4's case).

The difference is just that you hit the filler attack's button once more per DoT; that's it.

There were so many more differences between healers (or all the jobs in general) in the past of course we're focusing on the similarities to be an issue. That's kind of the point of the thread.

Eukrasia has the potential to be a really, really cool skill, much like Dark Arts used to be. Extra attack spells can mean different Eukrasian spells, different Eukrasian spells mean different effects. While we're at it, maybe we could make a Eukrasian Toxikon that has a 21s DoT, finally allowing it to be damage neutral without being overly spammable.

We could go a step further and offer different Kardia effects from these different attack spells, like giving extra barriers, mitigations, regens, stronger heals, cleanses, etc. Eukrasian Toxikon could apply another barrier, maybe we could have a new gauge to spend on attacks that provide the Kardia target with buffs and shields.

Instead Eukrasia is just our DoT behind an extra button press and turns not-Physick into not-Adloquium. While Kardia is just not-Embrace. Such a massive missed opportunity.

Seraphism also deleted arguably one of current eukrasia’s greatest strengths; in that SGE had a way to perform limitless AOE pure healing with prognosis

Sure prognosis wasn’t strong but the augmentation effect was a noticeable advantage over SCH who’s only GCD AOE healing option is succor (I’ll never call it concitation)

Important bits have been said at this point. If you don't think Glaroilficosis and the DoTs are filler, it's clear we've been talking semantics in circle. I'll stop pushing for clarification and agree to disagree then move on.

Also not gonna lie. If the effect of Seraphism didn't turn their GCD healing into instant casts, maybe that oughta be fairer. At the very least they would still retain SCH's weakness that is raw heal output on the move.

While I'm not a good shield healer, for all I've tried recently, I can't help but hate Eukrasia. I wouldn't have a problem with it if it were an oGCD but in my experience my entire flow just stops dead whenever I have to press it, rather than Dosis, Dosis, Dosis, Eukrasia, Something; It feels like Dosis, Dosis, Dosis, pause, Eukrasia, Something. There's nothing stopping them making it an oGCD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rein_eon_Osborne

Important bits have been said at this point. If you don't think Glaroilficosis and the DoTs are filler, it's clear we've been talking semantics in circle. I'll stop pushing for clarification and agree to disagree then move on.

Also not gonna lie. If the effect of Seraphism didn't turn their GCD healing into instant casts, maybe that oughta be fairer. At the very least they would still retain SCH's weakness that is raw heal output on the move.

---

It's funny to me that they introduced SGE with the advantage of being able to shield on the move, then they gave SCH Seraphism the very next expansion which completely deletes SGE's advantage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alice_Rivers

[…]There's nothing stopping them making it an oGCD.

---

I could immediately imagine myself ghosting my Eukrasia procs just like how I ghost my dualcasts occasionally on RDM because my high ping :cries:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aravell

It's funny to me that they introduced SGE with the advantage of being able to shield on the move, then they gave SCH Seraphism the very next expansion which completely deletes SGE's advantage.

---

Adding salt to the injury, is the fact that SGE’s Philosophia gives no way to capitalize the healing value beyond first pepsis on the move should they actually need it. Want to spam Cure III? Now you have to be a literal, immobile WHM to cast those Prognosis once E.Prog shields are up & Pepsis on cooldown while the SCH hopping around in circle stealing E.Prognosis’ gil with their Emergency Tactic ad infinitum within the same duration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alice_Rivers

While I'm not a good shield healer, for all I've tried recently, I can't help but hate Eukrasia. I wouldn't have a problem with it if it were an oGCD but in my experience my entire flow just stops dead whenever I have to press it, rather than Dosis, Dosis, Dosis, Eukrasia, Something; It feels like Dosis, Dosis, Dosis, pause, Eukrasia, Something. There's nothing stopping them making it an oGCD.

---

Changing it to an oGCD would change the timing it'd be pressed to one of the weave windows and I think it'd throw me off by a lot.

It's also why I wonder if Dosis was a full 2.5s cast during EW's development. In that case it would've served to give the Sage the mobility of an instant cast but only one weave window, which then would've given toxicon and phlegma more value as proper instant casts