How would you feel if shields had no upfront healing?

[BungleBear]

The problem however is that there is barely anything to do when you don't do the casual content. There is only 1, maybe 2, Ultimates per expansion. That means with the current design you have 1 single piece of content every 2 years that is actually engaging.
Okay, let's be generous and include Savage as well because there may or may not be fights that aren't just spamming Broil 180 times in 9 minutes.

That is still not a lot of content compared to all the casual content in the game, which you will inevitably do even as a hardcore player because you can only run the same 4 (5) fights per raid tier so many times until those become boring as well.

Yes, it would be nice if the game had more challenging content. But my impression is that many of the people complaining about healers being boring are not even doing Savage, let alone Ultimate.

That's just not good enough. Why would it be so unreasonable to ask for atleast somewhat engaging gameplay even in content that isn't mechanically engaging?

I'm just sceptical that you can make gameplay very engaging without mechanical complexity. Take away mechanics and you're just pushing buttons in a sequence. Making the sequence more complicated may increase the level of engagement, but only slightly in comparison with adding more difficulty.

[BungleBear]

If you want to sound fair, use dungeons. Expert roulette to be more convincing, as that's where most people are after running though the leveling dungeons via the MSQ, casual or not.

Okay, so compare these:

1. Playing WHM in an Expert dungeon
2. Playing DNC in an Expert dungeon
3. Playing WHM in an Ultimate

I'd say that the difference in level of engagement between 1 and 2 is much less than that between 1 and 3.

Suppose you're a healer doing Expert Roulette daily and feeling bored, looking enviously at the DPS jobs with their vast array of DPS buttons. I think you'd be better advised to put your energy into encouraging SE to make dungeons harder, rather than advocating for a few more healer DPS buttons, because the former will have a more significant impact on your level of engagement. Also, you might consider trying the harder content that the game currently offers, if you haven't done so already.

[Shurrikhan]

Okay, so compare these:

1. Playing WHM in an Expert dungeon
2. Playing DNC in an Expert dungeon
3. Playing WHM in an Ultimate

I'd say that the difference in level of engagement between 1 and 2 is much less than that between 1 and 3.

The comparison is no fairer than the last, though. Nor did it suddenly grow a point. How does content making a larger difference than one's job in how much one is engaged make the mechanics of the job no longer, in effect, a factor? It can be less (and, depending on the job, I wouldn't necessarily even agree with that) without being insignificant.

I just don't quite get what you're trying to defend here. Sure, go into more engaging content when one wants to be engaged, but... why should that preclude any desire for having more to do, insofar as I want to do, on a given job even in less demanding content?

Even if said content doesn't demand I engage with all those aspects of job design, nor add as much atop it, it's still engagement, and obviously meaningful to many a player.

[BungleBear]

The comparison is no fairer than the last, though. Nor did it suddenly grow a point. How does content making a larger difference than one's job in how much one is engaged make the mechanics of the job no longer, in effect, a factor? It can be less (and, depending on the job, I wouldn't necessarily even agree with that) without being insignificant.

Why is the comparison unfair? The point is that the contribution that a job's DPS rotation makes to a player's level of engagement is minor in comparison with that made by difficulty of content. I'm only speaking from personal experience here. Perhaps others have had different experiences. But if someone told me that they found playing DNC in a dungeon even remotely as engaging as playing WHM in an ultimate, I would be very surprised.

I just don't quite get what you're trying to defend here. Sure, go into more engaging content when one wants to be engaged, but... why should that preclude any desire for having more to do, insofar as I want to do, on a given job even in less demanding content?

Well, doesn't that sound a bit self-contradictory? "I want to have more to do, but I don't want to do the content that requires me to do more."

[Liam_Harper]

Yes, it would be nice if the game had more challenging content. But my impression is that many of the people complaining about healers being boring are not even doing Savage, let alone Ultimate.

I've always found the opposite. Most of the players who complain about healer engagement have learned the class and played it through harder content, while the players who've never stepped foot in endgame are perfectly happy clipping, spamming Medica II and fishing for Freecure procs.

I'll admit, I actually enjoy playing AST at endgame in some ways. The level of planning and mapping right down to timing heals within a set GCD so your oGCD comes back up at exactly the right time later is definitely engaging. What bores and frustrates me is that it hardly matters. Often my co-healer just overheals it and getting a few noodle 250 potency Malefics rarely has any impact on the run. Even in e12s, unless the dps is barely scraping enrage, carefully planning heals for max output just doesn't have much impact compared to adding in 10 safety AspHelios over the fight and throwing out oGCD's as they come. I don't really need to play my class well. It doesn't serve enough purpose.
WHM is even worse in this regard. If I clip Dia to move, throw out a few extra Medica II, clip my oGCD's and spam away on Glare otherwise, I'd probably still log purple and it'd be a smooth clear. Barely any reward if I played perfectly. I dislike that design.

I'd say that the difference in level of engagement between 1 and 2 is much less than that between 1 and 3.

The difference in level of engagement still exists though.

Healers spend up to 60% of their total actions, including oGCD's, just pressing 1 button. No dps does that. Furthermore for the healer this results in half the dps of the actual dps and their healing is barely needed. Sure Experts suck and should be made harder, but if I had to choose between a 1 button spamming wet noodle or a lawnmower that melts mobs with a nice range of dps buttons, it's not a hard choice. It's a larger difference in engagement than you think.

[Kabooa]

The difference in level of engagement still exists though.

Healers spend up to 60% of their total actions, including oGCD's, just pressing 1 button. No dps does that. Furthermore for the healer this results in half the dps of the actual dps and their healing is barely needed. Sure Experts suck and should be made harder, but if I had to choose between a 1 button spamming wet noodle or a lawnmower that melts mobs with a nice range of dps buttons, it's not a hard choice. It's a larger difference in engagement than you think.

And his argument, which I agree with, is this difference stops existing the better you get at the individual jobs.

You keep bringing up the '60%' and I'll tell you again it's not the variety of buttons that matter, it's whether or not you're making choices about them. If you're not making choices, it doesn't matter if you're hitting one button 60% of the time, or twelve.

Further, healers might not have the DPS of actual DPS, but their individual GCDs are among the most beefy. Playing safe and losing those is no less a loss than doing it as, say, melee, and losing GCDs and not trying to greed before the point blank hits you. Also, a healer that can do nothing but spam their DPS spells clocks in just under 60%, not 50%. I don't know why you're trying to distort that.

[Semirhage]

Why is the comparison unfair? The point is that the contribution that a job's DPS rotation makes to a player's level of engagement is minor in comparison with that made by difficulty of content. I'm only speaking from personal experience here. Perhaps others have had different experiences. But if someone told me that they found playing DNC in a dungeon even remotely as engaging as playing WHM in an ultimate, I would be very surprised.

If they changed Red Mage's mana building phase to Jolt Jolt Jolt Jolt Jolt Jolt Jolt Jolt Jolt Jolt Jolt Jolt Jolt in Endwalker, I would likely drop it like a bad habit. Even if the potency were equivalent, or I were taking it into TEA.

it's not the variety of buttons that matter, it's whether or not you're making choices about them.

I agree! At the same time, perhaps it's my lack of imagination, I struggle to think of the amount of choice available in a rotation that involves, 30 second DOT refresh aside, a single button that you press over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. Healers don't need more buttons just for the sake of having more buttons to press. They need more buttons because there's nowhere to go from pressing one. Button.

[ty_taurus]

And his argument, which I agree with, is this difference stops existing the better you get at the individual jobs.

You keep bringing up the '60%' and I'll tell you again it's not the variety of buttons that matter, it's whether or not you're making choices about them. If you're not making choices, it doesn't matter if you're hitting one button 60% of the time, or twelve.

Further, healers might not have the DPS of actual DPS, but their individual GCDs are among the most beefy. Playing safe and losing those is no less a loss than doing it as, say, melee, and losing GCDs and not trying to greed before the point blank hits you. Also, a healer that can do nothing but spam their DPS spells clocks in just under 60%, not 50%. I don't know why you're trying to distort that.

This part right here is correct, but WHM and SCH are very poorly designed for this right now anyway, so what are you even defending? I know that there are a couple players who have suggested 1-2-3 spell combos and you don't like that, but that specific example is not what everyone has been pitching for, and many of the suggestions players have brought up are about adding more DPS and utility GCD actions that are trying to create this aspect of decision making a core aspect of healer design rather than a consequence of challenging content.

AST is the main exception which is why you see virtually every AST threat talking about the card system and not about its DPS actions. No one's really asking for more AST DPS.

[AngeliouxRein]

It’s kind of hilarious healer mains always have to argue with people who don’t even main a healer about making the job more engaging. I myself hope that SCH can get DOT back and WHM get water and aero skills added. The only reason why healers are in this mess is because WHM was the weakest of three healers and all SE needed to do was revamp WHM and continue AST and SCH down the paths they were headed. Even on Twitter I have to keep arguing with people who justify healers being this way by saying it’s ‘optional’ for healers to be fun. The colorful words I have to stop myself from saying to these people is getting harder to do lol.

[Kabooa]

This part right here is correct, but WHM and SCH are very poorly designed for this right now anyway, so what are you even defending? I know that there are a couple players who have suggested 1-2-3 spell combos and you don't like that, but that specific example is not what everyone has been pitching for, and many of the suggestions players have brought up are about adding more DPS and utility GCD actions that are trying to create this aspect of decision making a core aspect of healer design rather than a consequence of challenging content.

Not everyone has the same requests. Most of the time, it's just looking at the end goal, and the proposed steps to reach it, and offering my opinion on why it will fall short, or plain just not result, in the change wanted. There are only a few job designs in this game that don't get tiring to do the non-Savage content with, so rather than retread those, I will instead insist that newer avenues be chased instead.

As far as 'defending' anything goes, I don't see "And that's why the current healers are good" in my blurb there.

Correcting someone (The numbers) and countering a claim with my own (Button Count =/= Fun) isn't defending anything.

The worst (opinion, mine) scenario that can come from feedback like that is getting the second DoT back and it being hailed as some grand display of generosity. No thanks.

I do have blurbs defending certain aspects of the current healers, but this isn't one of them.