Cleric stance needs change just for melding sake as healer

[Nektulos-Tuor]

Well, I would agree with most posters here. However, the problem with accuracy is if you don't have it for some of the new content you pretty much lose half of your skills. Which is actually quite a problem. Healers in this game, especially via how the new thing is telling healers how to play says if you don't have any down time you should DPS. The number of DPS skills in the game that healers have also suggests this as well. Accuracy in my opinion is a bad stat and needs removed from the game entirely and replaced with something fun, cool and nice.

[Ghishlain]

Reason why having forced to choose is considered a bad thing when no one else is that when you can choose one good choice, you are equally forced to take the bad choise. This would be awesome if healer could go just totally damage dealer, or totally healer but as we all know that is not the case expect maybe in very limited static situations.

Whatever the healer has chosen they have shot them on their leg for the other half of their job. While both, dmg and tank can benefit from their melds 100% of the time, a healer who goes all accuracy only benefits from their melds when they damage, which is not whole fight. Or healer who goes with stats that benefit their healing hardly hit anything when it's their time to do damage. Also only benefitting from their choise only part of the time. Or if they meld half and half, they still only benefit o ly partially on both accounts.

That is why dmg and tanks have it better. They are not required to gimp other half of their job (since dmg don't have other half of their job, and even OT tanks benefit from dmg stats) which is the case for every healer since that role has dual expectations that require different stats. As soon as tanks start requiring wildly different stats for their dual expectation, and dmg actually get dual expectations, we can start seeing it fair that choise has to be made.

I will disagree with your train of thought on the premise that our expectations are different and therefore we see the melding situation differently.

Based on your post above, I'm reading your expectations as follows:

1. Healers are expected to maintain party health
2. Healers are expected to provide party DPS

Ergo, I believe you feel that because of the above expectations, melding for #1 would decrease your ability to perform #2 and vice versa.

Counter to your expectations, my expectations of a healer are as follows:

1. Healers are expected to maintain party health

Healer DPS is a luxury they can provide their party but is not expected of them to actually perform this work. My logic is based on the few times Yoshi-P has been quoted to state that healer DPS is not included in their raid tier DPS checks multiple times.

Game Watch Interview Translation - May 19th, 2015

Yoshida: Yes. Since all DPS jobs will be increasing up through level 60, it makes sense to have the white mage's DPS extend by a proportional amount as well. For development, such as with Bahamut's Coils, the development team assumes what the item level should be for general equipment on players when they clear a raid. They sum up the basic DPS for four DPS and tanks at that assumed item level and cut that by about 10-15% for the minimum clear DPS. Healer DPS is not taken into account when this is set.

Certainly for people who are at world's first level, their goal is to clear it at as low an item level as possible, lower than the one assumed during development. So if you look at the fight and figure out that if it's not numerically possible to clear with four DPS and tanks, you'll need to make up the gap with DPS from healers. Then when those publish clear videos and other people see the healers DPSing, they might think that healers need to be DPSing even though its a situation that only arose because their clear would have otherwise been impossible. While we could take this into account, and assume a different item level in the next update which would then make it impossible to clear even with the healer DPS, we'd eliminate this type of play for highly skilled players who use communication, items, and a high level of understanding to come up with those last second clears. That would be a tough decision to make, so I still think it should be up to each party's own plans.

This is also one of the reasons we decided to implement both a normal and savage version of Alexander. Once again, healer DPS was not included in the development team's calculation as it was for other jobs, so you should just think of healer DPS as a last way to get your overall party's DPS up to where it needs to be.

And 4Gamer Interview Translation - December 29th, 2015.

Let's get right into it - we've seen many posts from readers relating to end-game content. When you go through development, how do you decide how to set the difficulty? For example, the amount of DPS required for each particular content.

Yoshida: When we make battle content, first we determine a minimum assumed item level required to clear. Then, we determine the total amount of party damage required to clear, taking a minimal amount of damage from tanks and healers into account during this calculation.

What do you mean by minimal?

Yoshida: Basically it's the damage from tank auto-attacks and the basic skill rotation used in order to maintain hate. We add this to the party damage needed. However, we often use zero in the calculation for damage required from healers. In other words, we only take into account the amount of damage necessary to perform as a tank or a healer and we don't take them into account as actively participating in attacking. For the clear assumption on DPS, we calculate the 100% value for the item level and we reduce that by 10 to 15 percent for the amount required to clear.

Based on the above and until potentially corrected at a future date, I feel the logic for my expectations are sound.

Ergo, this means my interpretation of the Materia Melding is as follows:

1. Healers can meld for healing and increase their performance in their primary (and expected) function
2. Healers can meld Accuracy and thus reducing their overall healing capacity to allow them to perform an optional role at a higher capacity

We have two different expectations and therefore two different perspectives of the Materia situation based on these perspectives.

So, at this point in time, I think we're going to have to agree to disagree because I feel your expectations about what a healer brings to the table are incorrect and I imagine you feel the same about my own.

Disclaimer: While it is true I believe healers are first and foremost there to complete their role in a party dynamic, I also do not believe that a healer that only heals or a healer that DPS until they hit 0 MP and/or let their tank die is optimal play. I encourage all healers to play optimally and that optimal play usually revolves around reducing ones idle time. Any benefit they add to the party beyond their expected role is a luxury to that party and should not actually be expected unless you're progressing through savage tier content under geared.

========

This is not me implying anything. If you need a wall of text to explain an implication, its a good indication you've interpreted something incorrectly.

I've said directly that "healers need accuracy" but am in no way trying to suggest that the game forces you into it. 'need' is not synonymous with 'force'.

Example:
I need to use the restroom
Someone forced me to use the restroom
^ very different things lol

To be honest, after I re-read my own wall of text this morning my first thought was like "Wow, you're such a damn idiot". lol. Sooooo, let me try again by discussing my stance with your other points below.

Could you elaborate on that because accuracy during the leveling process isnt really much an issue either. Why is it okay have little to no accuracy/int issues while leveling, then create the need for accuracy but not int once you've leveled?

Perhaps you can explain yourself here because I'm not quite sure what your point is about the MND/INT transposition dynamic. I will say this and reiterate my previous point regarding Cleric Stance and Accuracy.

It hasn't been directly spoken to by the Development Team but I believe that Cleric Stance was originally intended as a tool to assist healers through MSQ content. The game is littered with story and story-related battle fields that are solo with little help (it's better now in HW versus what it was like in AAR). To facilitate progression of a healer through MSQ content, they made Cleric Stance. It just happens Cleric Stance is one of the most interesting and healer-dynamic changing tools I've personally ever had the pleasure of playing with and can see why it has come to this point in the cycle (and how its spawned so many arguments and debates at the same time).

In general, it's not easy to see how much accuracy players (not just healers) have while progressing through MSQ. If I would take a guess, the dev team decided to implement a fairly low accuracy requirement overall while leveling and MSQing just so they can get around these possible roadblocks to player progression (especially new players who may not understand the important of accuracy yet).

I am on the side of giving healers an acc bonus

===
You argued, quote:
Basically, what you're implying is

Capable of only performing your Primary Function > Choice between 2 Functions
===

I am asking for clarification on how giving healers an acc bonus would in any way make healers "capabable of only performing [their] primary function".

I believed we might not be viewing this segment of the discussion in the same context, so I wanted to give you the opportunity to elaborate in an attempt to avoid making knee-jerking assumptions about your stance.

To be honest, you're probably right about the view segment. As I stated above with my comment to Sida, melding Accuracy doesn't prevent a healer from performing their primary function (I can kinda see how my comment can be interpreted in this way). Instead, melding Accuracy just lowers the amount of healing potential a healer can output.

To go back to the tank, DPS, and healer comparison, consider the following (and very arbitrary) ratios:

• Tanks get 90% of their primary role stats through their gear. The remaining 10% comes from their melds. Regardless of their melds (assuming no trash melds like SpS, INT, etc), they're melding to get the remaining 10% of their primary role stats.
• Likewise, DPS get 90% of their primary role stats through their gear. The remaining 10% comes from their melds (again, assuming no trash melds like Parry). Once again, regardless of how they meld, those melds will eventually get them the remaining 10% of their primary role stats.
• Healers on the other hand, if we use the same example, get 90% of their primary role stats through their gear. The remaining 10% they have a choice. A healer can choose to meld Accuracy and thus keep their potential healing capacity at 90% or they can choose to meld the remaining 10% with their healing. The healer makes a conscious decision at this point. If they believe they can actually continue to perform their primary role at that 90% level and contribute their non-primary role more readily, they will meld Accuracy.

The above Healer choice is something I like because it encourages healer to think and decide what they feel is optimal for themselves and the group they're participating in. To reiterate my point that I made to Sida above, I have no expectations of a healer being able to DPS. But I do expect them to be able to heal me and if they can contribute to the party DPS, even better.

Healer's have a flexibility that DPS and Tanks do not - the ability to meld Accuracy to augment their DPS.

Upon re-reading this blurb I just typed up, however, I'm still not sure where you think I stated that providing free accuracy to a healer isolates them to one role. Unless you're going back to a point where I said that I feel if they removed accuracy requirements entirely, that they would remove Cleric Stance and thus force healers to just, well heal. But I made that justification for my thoughts back at that particular comment.

I do dislike the idea of giving free accuracy bonuses to Healer's as well because that opens a door for other classes that do require accuracy to perform their role to complain. There was actually a thread fairly recently in the DPS forum asking why DPS don't get a free 5% accuracy that Tanks get while in Tank Stance. Could you imagine the outcry from tanks and DPS would have if S-E gave healer's a free nod to DPS to their hearts content? Even a small bonus to healer Accuracy could be twisted by DPS and Tanks to be "Gimmie more accuracy too, plz".

This is why I'd rather push lower accuracy requirements in casual content because~~~ *Points to below*

To be clear, can we assume 'causal content' includes expert roulette?

"1 choice > 2 choices which I vehemently disagree with."
Using your own words, you strongly/intensely disagree with this.

If you truely feel so strongly about it, why do you support changes to causal content?

I feel casual content should be a good stepping stone for healers to test the water. Healers can make an active effort to contribute DPS as they are leveling and through these dungeons. Level 60 dungeons and EX dungeons are the first real dungeons Healers get to test with a full healer's kit and I'd rather they keep the accuracy requirements low to help healer's get acclimatized to the thought of DPS with the entirety of their kit.

I realize I'm treading a fine line here too because I'm arguing for lower accuracy requirements while stating I'd rather not see free accuracy given. I do feel there is potential to turn off healers entirely from the DPS spectrum if they make the barrier of entry too high due to accuracy requirements (thus leading to healer frustration as one can already see in the forums) and though I have no problems with the current EX accuracy requirements, I can see how when 3.4 is released the accuracy requirement might hit a threshold that causes a mass exodus of healers from casual content.

Something has to be done about the current accuracy requirements in casual content but free accuracy (in my own opinion) isn't the way to go.

The reason I'm speaking specifically to casual content is because people who challenge mid tier content (EX Primals) and Savage tier content will most likely have a more acute understanding of the game mechanics and expectations and thus should not be touched.

[AngelicSence]

Lets be honest, it's SE fault for keep changing things all the time, obviously people would freak out. We had a system in place.. they nerf a job once, then their spells, then an entire role followed by couple more changes. Players are simply don't appreciate that.. Yes, some people are selfish. But I think our job here is to come up with constructive idea for developers to read. But in order for us to understand this, some people need to realize that this is a final fantasy game.. and healers can DPS too. It was already said multiple times that healer performing DPS is a personal choice. Those healers that multi task are considered the best healers. Same with DPS who play to fullest and tanks. I don't want to criticize people, but I been running with both, vet and noob players for years. And only about 5% of them play serious. That gives us an idea why people always argue.

[AngelicSence]

In order words.. Not all! But many people don't understand what they are talking about. Just how many times we encounter with people who play however they want and don't care about others. We are all different in terms of how we think and play. But ultimately speaking, it doesn't matter what we all think about how healers should play. If they can DPS, you take that chance and do what you can with your current skills. But don't take away anything. It only make things worse... so I disagree about CS changes, 10% additional damageincreade is good. SE already said, they adjust healer accuracy in 4 man and raids are all about melding and how you want your healer to perform.

[Llynd]

Well for these Who keep saying that " Healers main role is to heal nanananananana ", i'll answer that this is not as simple as that. As you May know, Just as tanks, us, healers, got a main healer and an off healer. Indeed, melding accuracy when you're the main Will probably not be worth it, since you'll rarely provide dps BUT, the off healer will. ( and to be honest, he will more often dps than heal). So yes this healer needs some accuracy to help perform his primary role.
However, i dont think a bonus on cleric stance will be worth it or anything, but some acc on gear will be welcomed ( Just like they once did).

[Sida]

<snip>

You misunderstood my post to mean my own expectations, while I was simply saying that is the expectations directed at healers. You actually got it right in your disclaimer. Healer who only heals, or healer who only dps is seen a bad by about everyone. If it was me, I'd be more than happy if the game offered most content to be such that the healer need only heal. However as of the moment, the common expectation to healers is to be able to fill in both roles, often in the same fight. However much I want to specialise in one aspect or the other it doesnt chance that in whole picture, I only benefit partially of the choise whichever it is. That in itself is not the issue. What makes this problematic is that no other role is required the same, creating the unfair environment.

Let me restate. If all roles had to make hard choises where they need to pick between stuff that gimps part of their play, then having that choise can be seen good, you can specialise. (I still wouldn't like it but that's personal taste)

When only one role is required to make hard choises that gimp part of their play, while other roles only have good option they can pick, that is what makes it bad. The choice in itself is not bad. Only healers having it is what makes it bad.

Very brief recap:
Taking I to accord people make sensible melds (and don't out gathering on battle gear or somehing)
Dmg benefits their melds 100% of time
Tanks benefit their melds 100% of time
Healer benefits their melds 30%-80% of the time, debending of the choise and playstyle and groups they end up with.

That there is the problem, and reason why people see the choise as a forced thing as it only takes from their efficiency in any way.

[Ghishlain]

You misunderstood my post to mean my own expectations, while I was simply saying that is the expectations directed at healers. You actually got it right in your disclaimer. Healer who only heals, or healer who only dps is seen a bad by about everyone. If it was me, I'd be more than happy if the game offered most content to be such that the healer need only heal. However as of the moment, the common expectation to healers is to be able to fill in both roles, often in the same fight. However much I want to specialise in one aspect or the other it doesnt chance that in whole picture, I only benefit partially of the choise whichever it is. That in itself is not the issue. What makes this problematic is that no other role is required the same, creating the unfair environment.

Let me restate. If all roles had to make hard choises where they need to pick between stuff that gimps part of their play, then having that choise can be seen good, you can specialise. (I still wouldn't like it but that's personal taste)

When only one role is required to make hard choises that gimp part of their play, while other roles only have good option they can pick, that is what makes it bad. The choice in itself is not bad. Only healers having it is what makes it bad.

Very brief recap:
Taking I to accord people make sensible melds (and don't out gathering on battle gear or somehing)
Dmg benefits their melds 100% of time
Tanks benefit their melds 100% of time
Healer benefits their melds 30%-80% of the time, debending of the choise and playstyle and groups they end up with.

That there is the problem, and reason why people see the choise as a forced thing as it only takes from their efficiency in any way.

Please do not mistake my disagreement with your arguement as misunderstanding you point. While I do disagree with you expectations and rationale, I can appreciate and respect them at the same time as its a view point is shared with a few others.

I know our views differ due to our expectations of the healer role and I still stand by the position that I believe your expectations and by extension your thoughts behind Materia selection are an incorrect view. I've already stated my argument to my thoughts above to my response to both you and Winsock, including my thoughts behind the Materia dynamic. You have done the same.

I am firm in my stance and I believe you to be the same. Hence my comment about agreeing to disagree in my previous post. I shall leave it at that.

[Sida]

My expectation of the healer role is that healer should only be required to heal. And by extension, the content should be such that it is feasible. From what you have said it is the same as yours. Please don't try to paint me having expectation that is not mine, when I'm explaining the reality of the situation healers are in now, not my expectation.

What I have said about materia selection is based on maths and as such, should be objectively the case of it, without opinions. I admit the math might be wrong in which case I welcome you to show me how the healers can, the whole situation considered, get as much benefit from their meld choise (or even more since the choise is supposed to be better) as their dmg or tank counterpart.

[Dante_V]

My personal opinion on this is that if accuracy is to be a thing for healers then some of it should be included on their gear to ease the melding requirement. The gear should be like the previous FCOB set were in regards to accuracy inclusion. Accuracy on a healer should also not be relevant outside of ex primal and savage. There is no reason that a healer shouldn't be able to dps in a dungeon regardless of their gear or ilvl if they have met the minimum criteria for entering that dungeon. For raiding I can understand but for casual play it seems a bit much and there isn't really any point to having such a high accuracy cap in a dungeon.

[Ghishlain]

My expectation of the healer role is that healer should only be required to heal. And by extension, the content should be such that it is feasible. From what you have said it is the same as yours. Please don't try to paint me having expectation that is not mine, when I'm explaining the reality of the situation healers are in now, not my expectation.

What I have said about materia selection is based on maths and as such, should be objectively the case of it, without opinions. I admit the math might be wrong in which case I welcome you to show me how the healers can, the whole situation considered, get as much benefit from their meld choise (or even more since the choise is supposed to be better) as their dmg or tank counterpart.

Well, then let me see if I can present the Materia dynamic in a different light.

DPS has an infinite ceiling. It doesn't matter how hard one DPS', there's no such thing as having too much DPS. The faster a mob dies, the shorter the encounter is, the less resources the group have to consume to complete the content.

Healing has a finite ceiling. If the encounter requires 4,500 HPS, and the healers are capable of healing 5,500 to 6,500 HPS without melds - do they need healing melds then? Anything you do over that 4,500 HPS is overhealing and thus a waste of resources. But if Accuracy

It doesn't change the choice aspect selecting Materia, but it does make one side of the coin more desirable than the other. In this case, if melding Accuracy for the healer allows them to boost their DPS contribution for the fight from 400 to 600, would you say they've made full use of the melds without hampering their ability to heal the content?

Despite the above example (and yes, anyone may call me an foolish optimist for the following), I believe there is an "optimal choice" but not a "wrong choice" and thus one cannot shoot themselves in the foot.

I also understand the reality of the situation. Despite the reality of the situation, I still formulate my own opinions and thoughts about what I believe is right. But that is my opinion an if a convincing enough argument is put forward, can be swayed.