Dear SE, I am a Healer

[Physic]

If healer only has just ONE playstyle by your logic, and DPS have 4-5 different playstyles/themes, then even based on your opinion on this... healers deserve more.

So, yes they should have added a new healer in 5.0.




That is your opinion.

I disagree with your opinion.

Not much else to say since I've already stated a lot of times what my opinion is about this.

The opinion of people who play what you consider to dps matters in this case, because it clarifies why people end up waiting a long time for something up their alley. Listen to what players are saying. Iam telling you, my favorite class is monk, black mage is not a suitable alternative to monk. I am more likely to play gladiator than black mage. Many players share this idea when it comes to jobs.

So in your opinion are Pure/Regen (WHM/Diurnal AST) and Shielder/Mitigation (SCH/Noct AST) considered different playstyles? Certain healer regens and shields don't stack which means there is an implied division or does this playstyle thing only apply when we are justifying dps additions?

in my opinion all healers currently out are remixes of the same archetype/fantasy, its basically like picking a flavor rather than a playstyle. just my opinion

This just seems like a lazy excuse. If you don't like one dps, you have 10 others to pick from. If you don't like one healer you have 2. WHM and SCH have been there since 2.0. Five years and only one shake up for the healers. Soon to be 7 years.

no, i do not, i am not picking my job because it is a dps, i am picking it because it is melee and has intricate combos, and martial theme.

[rachcouture]

no, i do not, i am not picking my job because it is a dps, i am picking it because it is melee and has intricate combos, and martial theme.

Then why not also play WAR, since it has a fairly complex, DPS-style rotation?

For most people, role comes first, then flavor second. Why should the DPS role have 10 options, while tanks have 4, and healers bottom out at 3? Even with 2x the DPS required per duty, that still doesn't come out as anything other than unfairly biased.

The person's original point is that DPS don't all play the same and that's why they differentiate between them all. And I just proved that the devs do differentiate between them all. The point of him adding dps to each role equally is because they all play differently and therefore gain equal consideration. Apparently the devs don't think the same about healer "subtypes" if there are any, and therefore you can't compare "healer" to "dps".

Healers and tanks also all play differently, but they're not differentiated any other way. Neither are DPSes in party comp. This argument just isn't valid.

[cicatriz313]

Healers and tanks also all play differently, but they're not differentiated any other way. Neither are DPSes in party comp. This argument just isn't valid.

Except it is, because the game is literally designed around it. So... not sure what you think valid means.

[rachcouture]

Except it is, because the game is literally designed around it. So... not sure what you think valid means.

'Designed around' is a bold claim when the character class list used to not be split at all outside of DoW, DoM, and DoH/L.

[cicatriz313]

'Designed around' is a bold claim when the character class list used to not be split at all outside of DoW, DoM, and DoH/L.

It doesn't matter what the character class list USED TO say. Like that means nothing. What matters is we have the director of the game literally stating he wants to equalize subroles with giving them jobs (designing the game around it), therefore he gives them equal importance because he knows that players do not equate all dps the same. Since we have the director giving his actual opinion, it's not a bold statement.

They don't divide the healers into sub-type (yet) because there isn't yet enough variety for them to do so.

Yeah, that doesn't change the fact that currently dps have that variety. And therefore, like you just said, DPS as a role is different than HEALER as a role and therefore it's not a good comparison to say that DPS have 10 options to choose from because DPS is all similar while healers only have 3. It's, like Yoshi laid out, 3-4 per type.

[Sesera]

'Designed around' is a bold claim when the character class list used to not be split at all outside of DoW, DoM, and DoH/L.

keyword here "used to".

[rachcouture]

If dps aren't differentiated, why is it that people who are recruiting for their raid team or pug ask for specific dps classes to join? Why recruit a specific class if any old dps is fine?

Or...could it be...that there are differences between being a melee and ranged? Differences between being a caster and ranged phys dps? That some classes have certain buffs while others do not? That certain types of classes are better suited to certain types of fights?

Dps have sub-types, as mentioned by cicatriz31, the SE devs clearly look upon it this way. They don't lump all dps together. They consider melee, caster and ranged phys to be distinct.

Also healers have sub-types as well. They mainly fall into two types; raw healing and mitigation (shields). But the difference is all healers bring the exact same role actions to a fight. This is not the case with dps.

Currently there are only two ranged phys dps in the game. Among the selection of role actions, theirs has the smallest number of classes that have it. Every other group of role actions has at least three classes. This needed to change. So we got dancer.

I'm not happy we are not getting a new healer but I'm not going to pretend that the addition of a ranged phys dps makes no sense. It makes a lot of sense.

They recruit specific DPSes because of what skills they bring to the table, not because of where they fall under the melee/range/caster separations. For instance: NIN is a common pick for its support even though it's melee, not a ranged DPS. MCH, comparatively, has rarely been considered for anything.

There didn't need to be two DPSes in Stormblood, and there definitely doesn't need to be a new one now. All this does is further the role disparity.

keyword here "used to".

We're talking about what the game is 'designed around'. I think how it existed at launch is incredibly relevant in that case.

[cicatriz313]

They recruit specific DPSes because of what skills they bring to the table, not because of where they fall under the melee/range/caster separations. For instance: NIN is a common pick for its support even though it's melee, not a ranged DPS. MCH, comparatively, has rarely been considered for anything.

There didn't need to be two DPSes in Stormblood, and there definitely doesn't need to be a new one now. All this does is further the role disparity.



We're talking about what the game is 'designed around'. I think how it existed at launch is incredibly relevant in that case.

First off, that's because bard is the better job in that subtype, and EVERY group wants a bard for refresh/tactician which oh, wait, you mean only ranged physical bring those? Amazing. It's almost like that's part of game design. Also most people want a ninja for trick attack because it's a good skill sure, but they also don't want 4 melee because fights are designed around having less melee usually. Second, no how the game was launched has little bearing on anything because the game has been out for over 5 years and it's changed since then with the types of jobs and the abilities of jobs. (Remember cross class skills? And how bard used to have a healing LB3?)

[Physic]

They recruit specific DPSes because of what skills they bring to the table, not because of where they fall under the melee/range/caster separations. For instance: NIN is a common pick for its support even though it's melee, not a ranged DPS. MCH, comparatively, has rarely been considered for anything.

There didn't need to be two DPSes in Stormblood, and there definitely doesn't need to be a new one now. All this does is further the role disparity.



We're talking about what the game is 'designed around'. I think how it existed at launch is incredibly relevant in that case.

your basic background believes in a role disparity, what others are saying is classes are not released based on role, and players are not predominately choosing based on role.

i will say many people dont want to play a tank or healer, because of the specific type of stress those jobs bring, but outside of that, the other group is pretty varied in what they are looking for in a class.

[Penthea]

They recruit specific DPSes because of what skills they bring to the table, not because of where they fall under the melee/range/caster separations.

Yea tell that to any raid teams who want a bard or mch but refuse to take on a second caster dps. Bard and mch don't have much class related skills in common, but they do both have refresh as a role action. Caster dps don't have refresh.

Maybe also tell that to any raid team who don't want too much melee because it could mean a dps loss due to lack of uptime on the boss. Any assignments you would normally give to a ranged due to the positioning being far away from the boss is a guaranteed dps loss if a melee class does it instead.

Or a team who don't want to too much caster dps because on high movement fights their numbers are likely to fall whereas melee dps and ranged phys dps aren't shackled by cast times, thus making them very well suited to high movement.

Even if no class in the game had any buffs of any kind, this still wouldn't change the fact that in some situations some types of dps are stronger where others are weaker. No one in their right mind would ever take only melee dps or only casters. You would doom yourself to some serious dps loss on some fights. No one would take only ranged phys either because while they can dps in any situation, their numbers tend to not be as strong as melee or casters.

Most people want variety in their teams and it's not just about the buttons the dps classes have to press. It's also about the conditions that allow them to be pressed.