Isn't it about time for WHM to get an AOE mitigation tool?

[loreleidiangelo]

FFlogs will only show the last two weeks of parses on this page (https://www.fflogs.com/statistics/17...&class=Healers), which could very well mean WHMs are getting ready for progging ultimate. It's not really accurate of the whole raid tier. If you're looking at a different page of stats, please share!

Also I frequently get pressured into switching off WHM. Hi, I exist. Also of the groups I've encounter, a lot more push for me to switch than support my staying.

If you're without a group already it's MUCH harder to find one if you're trying to find one as a WHM. I don't get why people are invalidating the experiences of others who are clearly saying it's happened to them?

What's the point of providing data if you're just going to handwave it away with whatever reason you can think of to push your narrative? I showed that for the past two weeks, during a time when O4S is comfortably on farm and SCH has been buffed considerably, that groups STILL prefer taking a WHM weekly into their O4S clears, and you pooh-pooh it with some weak reason about "prepping for Baha Ultimate" lmao. You're clearly not interested in facts, you're interested in an agenda. I'm not invalidating your crap experience with bad meta slave pugs any more than you're invalidating the actual information I'm providing. It goes both ways.

Here's Shinryu uploads, too. WHMs are NOT being pushed out of groups en masse, for god's sake. They don't have a speed run kit, boo hoo. Neither do casters, neither do SAM or MNK or DRK. My buddy, who has been a raid SCH since ARR, had to swap to WHM because O4S was more difficult than it was worth during prog without one. Are we going to start a campaign about how SCHs or ASTs are being asked to swap their jobs around so they can do stuff? Or do WHMs have the monopoly on complaining here?

[Kacho_Nacho]

I mean yeah Cure III has a smaller range but add up the potency for Medica I if people are too spread out and a massive AoE hits like Charybdis.

Assize (300 potency) + Medica I (300 potency) + 1 Plenary (150 potency) = 750 potency AoE. Stronger than Indom by 250 potency and stronger than a powered Earthly Star by 30 potency and all you had to do was weave oGCDs.

Keep in mind the radius of Cure III is as large as Asylum. If you were standing in the middle of the Asylum you could hit every person inside the Asylum with Cure III if you used yourself as the target.

Miste, I’ve been trying to follow along in an attempt to learn what you raiding white mages face.

Do you mind taking moment to explain why you are contrasting three things versus one thing when discussing Earthly Star? I’m not sure I understand why that’s a valid comparison.

Nice tip about the radius of Cure III. I’m seeing the power of stacking multiple abilities.

PS. you should always post on your lalafell...she is really cute D:

Uh-huh! Sharl is adorable!

[Kabzy]

To anyone watching Ultimate live streams right now, have you guys noticed that pretty much every group is running WHM and then SCH/AST? I've not checked literally every stream, but all the top viewed ones have a WHM in them.

/endThread ???

[Sebazy]

Ironically here I am pugging it as Noct AST because all the decent groups already have a WHM =(

30% on Twin with randoms and it's a fun fight so far <3

Do you mind taking moment to explain why you are contrasting three things versus one thing when discussing Earthly Star? I’m not sure I understand why that’s a valid comparison.

It's a means to burst AoE HPS without radius issues as well as a similar CD to ES.

[Exiled_Tonberry]

To anyone watching Ultimate live streams right now, have you guys noticed that pretty much every group is running WHM and then SCH/AST? I've not checked literally every stream, but all the top viewed ones have a WHM in them.

/endThread ???

I think we pretty much all agreed that for progression, WHM does shine and is taken rather often? And the disagreement happened over some of us thinking WHM isn't the "mandatory progression slot healer" some people seem to think it is.

Though let's not refer to Ultimate savage data for balance discussion.

[DotsNnots]

Pps, excuse me if some of my responses are a little harsh, please don't take it as me being salty or such. This is a legitimately enjoyable debate, thanks <3

Quite the contrary, you've been perfectly respectable and brought valid points and facts to the debate. On the converse we have overly pedantic, insensitive/borderline insulting, calling out lack of experience without much evidence of their own, and inability to extrapolate complicated meanings, from other posters, so I appreciate having the stark contrast of how to debate in this thread, helps keep me on point.

Anyways I'll just address one of the pedantic comments for the time being:

Calculations for diurnal, because apparently we need to write out that only benefic I vs. cure I are flipped in this stance (vs. noct), [i]while still having much lower mp costs[i/]

Base cure I potency: 450
Base cure II potency: 700
Base medica potency: 300

Base benefic I potency: 400
Base benefic II potency: 650
Base Helios potency: 300

Dir stance's tool tip: increases healing potency by 10%

Actual potency:
Benefic I: 400 * 1.1 = 440
Benefic II: 650 * 1.1 = 715
Helios: 300 * 1.1 = 330


But please, continue to say that these are "negligible differences" to keep forwarding your own agenda while ignoring the facts.



And all I can provide for comments on the recruitment of WHM status is basically a personal anecdote that I work in marketing and view raid recruitment very much like a marketplace with active traceable trends of highs and lows and obvious markers of supply and demand that change at different points of a raid cycle. E.g. pre-launch demand for single players to fill groups is high (LFM), post-launch it tends to show the demand for groups by a single player (LFG) is much higher. Personally I think I'm being unbiased when I track these trends, because it's what I naturally do, and pick up on shortages of classes/roles as they happen. But I'm also aware that has no merit to this conversation other than being an anecdote.


And my point about FFlogs was that you can interpret the data either way. I'm not advancing any narrative I'm simply pointing out that you can't advance any narrative either as the data isn't remotely an accurate representation of the raid cycle as a whole.
(Do people really put EX primals in the same tier as savage raids? Not many actively try to speed run or optimize them).

[Miste]

On the converse we have overly pedantic, insensitive/borderline insulting

You can't be serious. The first post I saw you make in here made a borderline insulting cheap shot at me for simply asking a poster for proof of their claims in a discussion I was having with them that you were not even a part of at the time. You also made fun of anyone who plays Diurnal AST for having an opinion on this just because you don't agree with it.

No I don’t bother to screenshot PF just to service forum justice for situations I haven’t even imagined happening yet. That’s a ridiculous request.

“I’m an dir AST who’s entire skill kit was literally ripped from WHM plus my MAIN GCD heals are more potent than WHM, plus I have the highest potency heal in the game, plus I give everyone various buffs, plus even as dir I can mitigate … but WHM should only raw heal or regen.” lolwut.

I responded to you and yes I was a bit cheeky because of that cheap shot about the exclusion screenshots you aimed at me, but then your second post in a reply to me is full of passive aggressiveness.

Well thank you for proving that you lack awareness of the difference of healers and your inability to read tool tips or confirm with your own tests.

I challenged your claims about diurnal ast and then you tried to pretend you were talking about nocturnal and insinuated I have no awareness and that I cannot read. Ad hominem much?

If you are going to claim anyone else is being insulting then open up your eyes to your own posts. Anything else at that point, well, all bets are off because you may get back what you put out.

Anyways I'll just address one of the pedantic comments for the time being:

Calculations for diurnal, because apparently we need to write out that only benefic I vs. cure I are flipped in this stance (vs. noct), [i]while still having much lower mp costs[i/]

Base cure I potency: 450
Base cure II potency: 700
Base medica potency: 300

Base benefic I potency: 400
Base benefic II potency: 650
Base Helios potency: 300

Dir stance's tool tip: increases healing potency by 10%

Actual potency:
Benefic I: 400 * 1.1 = 440
Benefic II: 650 * 1.1 = 715
Helios: 300 * 1.1 = 330


But please, continue to say that these are "negligible differences" to keep forwarding your own agenda while ignoring the facts.

So you think you thinking I need the math for these instead of just in-game tests isn't pedantic? Riiiighttttt.... alright then pot meet kettle. At least if you are going to call me out on something then don't be hypocritical and do the exact same thing two times as well with your math explanations.

Although I can clarify to you now none of what I have explained in this thread I intended to be pedantic. I was simply having a discussion with people and I mean if you cannot share information just because you'll be ostentatious if you do so then why even have discussions? I never even considered your math pedantic originally, but if you are going to label other people as such then don't expect not to be reminded of your hypocrisy.

I know math I just didn't bother going into the math of WHM vs. AST Benefic and Cure because I have them both leveled and I have a weapon to make my AST same item level as my WHM. In-game average test shows just fine that there is barely any difference.

15 more potency on Benefic II isn't negligible? Even when Benefic I is 10 potency lower so the gap is actually only 5 potency total? Five You do realize that 5 potency difference is on average like 50 HP difference at i339. I would say that is completely negligible.

As for Helios if you are going to add that in there then where is Medica II and Aspected Helios? I am guessing you probably left it out because Medica II is actually 40 more potency than Aspected Helios after you total it. So Medica I lags behind Helios by 30 but Medica II gains ahead of Aspected Helios by 40 so again it makes the gap only 10 potency difference but in favour of WHM this time.

This is why I mentioned before that you cannot simply pick apart each healer's toolkit and compare just single items against other single items or selective parts of the toolkit against other selective parts. All the healers play differently so they have different tools to obtain similar results to the other healers. So sometimes you may have to examine the toolkit on a larger scale and compare multiple items to one item or vice versa.

This is the same problem I mentioned before. People wanting 100% balance and don't understand that it isn't possible to the point where we are arguing about a Five potency difference between Diurnal AST and WHM Benefics and Cures like it is a huge issue that proves WHM is so much weaker than AST and needs help.

PS. Mentioning MP when WHM, AST, and SCH all have well rounded MP management right now is so pointless. All of them are quite balanced.

Do you mind taking moment to explain why you are contrasting three things versus one thing when discussing Earthly Star? I’m not sure I understand why that’s a valid comparison.

She said she had an issue with the range of Cure III so I posted it to help her adjust if she needs to that part wasn't really about specifically comparing Earthly Star just about helping her with the range issue. I mean sometimes people are too spread out for me too or Earthly Star is on cooldown as well so I have to adjust too and cannot use it and so I use other tools I have like maybe Lightspeed + Helios. Also she kind of claimed that WHM has no way to match these heals when they do. They just do it differently. So it was more showing that WHM has the tools to get an AoE heal that has more range on it that actually overtakes Earthly Star.

Like I said above the reason you sometimes cannot compare a single item in a toolkit to another single item in a toolkit is because the healers all play differently to get similar results. I mean if all the healers were carbon copies of each other with the exact same toolkits then yes you could compare in such a way, but they aren't. So sometimes you have to compare multiple things or the entire toolkit.

Simply put strictly comparing potency of 1-3 different spells in order to claim that one healer is weaker than another just doesn't show the entire picture.

[DotsNnots]

It's a means to burst AoE HPS without radius issues as well as a similar CD to ES.

I think the question was stemming more from why the comparison is of an oGCD + GCD + oGCD to just a single oGCD from AST/SCH.

If you wanted a more similar comparison it should be Assize + Medica + PI to Succor + indom or helios/aspected heilos (either, not both) + earthly star. I don't mind not comparing an equivalent to PI because it's dependent on the GCD before it, but to not include a GCD from the other two healers is just silly, why compare a single instant cast skill to a GCD plus to oGCDs that either have to be weaved, or will clip the GCD? And if you want to fairly compare the "what if" of 2 or 3 PI stacks, then you'd have to add 2 or 3 respective GCD heals from the other two healers for the comparison to work (in which case WHM still comes out the lowest) i.e., if I need to pop 3 medicas to use PI with 3 stacks, then the comparison should show 3 succors or 3 helios.

Assize (300 potency) + Medica I (300 potency) + 1 Plenary (150 potency) = 750 potency

Indom (500 potency) + Succor (375 potency) = 875 potency

Earthly Star (540 potency | 720 potency) + Helios (330 dir potency | 345 noct potency) =
Instant Earthly + Dir Helios = 870 potency
Instant Earthly + Noct Helios = 885 potency
Giant Earthly + Dir Helios = 1050 potency
Giant Earthly + Noct Helios = 1065 potency


I said I didn't want to apples to apples compare, but if we're going to talk about it, at least do it fairly.

[Miste]

I think the question was stemming more from why the comparison is of an oGCD + GCD + oGCD to just a single oGCD from AST/SCH.

Assize (300 potency) + Medica I (300 potency) + 1 Plenary (150 potency) = 750 potency

Indom (500 potency) + Succor (375 potency) = 875 potency

Earthly Star (540 potency | 720 potency) + Helios (330 dir potency | 345 noct potency) =
Instant Earthly + Dir Helios = 870 potency
Instant Earthly + Noct Helios = 885 potency
Giant Earthly + Dir Helios = 1050 potency
Giant Earthly + Noct Helios = 1065 potency

I said I didn't want to apples to apples compare, but if we're going to talk about it, at least do it fairly.

My formula you copy and pasted was simply to help Exiled adjust due to her saying she has issues with Cure III's range. So I posted it to assist her and the only reason I mentioned it was better than Earthly Star was to show her that she can get a really nice AoE heal that is actually just as powerful (even a little bit more). WHM has an option to increase the range by a lot, but by having to use extra spells/abilities, but then it also overtakes Earthly Star's healing and range as well. You use more yes, but you also gain advantages lol

Cure III + Cure III = 1100 potency and it is not limited by any cooldowns and beats all of your above comparisons in potency.

So AST and SCH do not have the spell Cure III, so what is your answer for SCH and AST for Cure III + Cure III then?

I mean you claim you cannot compare unless you compare fairly by using the same number of oGCD/GCD equally. So then what is AST and SCH's answer to Cure III + Cure III?

What GCD + GCD heal do AST and SCH have that matches Cure III + Cure III?

Again you are comparing this as if all jobs play exactly the same to complain WHM is weaker than AST and SCH. I said over and over all the healers play differently so they obtain similar results in different ways.

[DotsNnots]

So you think you thinking I need the math for these instead of just in-game tests isn't pedantic? Riiiighttttt.... alright then pot meet kettle.

That's ... that's not even what pedantic means, nor was it the detail I was referring to you being pedantic about.

And I'm sorry, if you want to bring up potency comparisons to discuss an offhand comment made about cure3's range (where the actual point of the sentence was that it doesn't feel as powerful compared to high potency oGCDs, and the comment about the range was that it's an extra hindrance) and then don't want to consider the actual mathematical computations of potency comparisons that are the values that literally make up the very foundational elements of the gameplay, and then want to wave the comparisons away like they were misinterpreted (when you don't even mention the range in your quotes, which was apparently the only "reason" you were making the comparison, so why not quote it?) then there's nothing more that can be discussed with you. You're too caught up in your own personal experiences and your own "in-game testing" to use or discuss qualify-able/quantifiable evidence. I can do "in-game testing" too with the same gear and same weapon item level, and I see the heal difference between cure II and benefic II to be anywhere between 800 and 1400 HP. But then it becomes a game of you said / I said arbitrary statements. But the potency values are right there, plain as day, as unarguable quantifiable evidence to compare efficiency, that you're some how denying the validity of.

And if you don't even want to consider mp cost as part of the consideration? Then what are you doing to optimize the gameplay of the role? Healer optimization is ALL about getting the most out of your mp pool.

If you're not going to bring up points based on the actual statistics of the game (aka facts) and are going to keep throwing out "this is why I see when I play" "evidence" then I'll stick to discussing this topic with constructive posters.