The Problem with Healer Feedback, and requested changes

[ForsakenRoe]

Everyone has to sacrifice to reach a compromise. Changing all four forces a ton of players to sacrifice either their playstyle or content (or both) for no gain at all to them. Changing 3 is the give and take where everyone sacrifices something but also gains something. Which is what a compromise should be.

SAM's aren't being blacklisted from parties.

On Druids: So Feral is even less played as a subspect? Well, guess that makes my point for me, then. I thought it at least had a niche it was better in.
Looking at the two builds, though, Balance seemed more simple to me when I read about it in Shadowlands. But it's hard to say without playing it, I suppose.

Where did I suggest we truncate healers? I suggested we expand three healers and leave one alone. How is that truncation?

I can't be dealing with this I'm going to bed once I post this, but: Again, if people want to play Glarespam, they could if they had 2 or 20 dots to manage. It's up to SE to balance how much punishment is inflicted on their damage from not using those DOTs.

SAM was locked out of PFs in SB, due to the negative stigma surrounding the average player of the class. Perception matters, and if a class is perceived to be 'super simple', it's likely going to be perceived as 'only people who are bad would play this'. It's not like SB SAM was 'hard' by any measure, but it got locked out all the same.

Feral being played despite having no real niche at certain times, or being behind on damage, or whatever, I don't see how that 'proves your point'. Some people play something because of whatever reason. WHM was not good in SB and everyone knew this, people still played it. DRK was 'griefing' in SB, still went on to get world first in both ultimates. Feral doesn't need to have some specific quantifiable advantage that makes it preferable to Balance. It could literally just be as simple as the player saying 'I don't like casters, I like melee'.

As for 'expand 3', they say a picture is worth a thousand words, so:

healers currently

healers if Ren

healers if me

Red is 'how much skill it requires to keep party alive through content like EX roulette or Treasure Map', Blue is 'how much skill it requires to maximise DPS, such that you'd get rank 1 parse'. See how the red bars, the skill floor, are identical in all 3 pictures, because I don't actually mind Jimmy EXroulette spamming Medica for his 90 tomes each day. What I do mind, is how close the blue bar is to the red, and how close you're insisting on keeping WHM's blue to it's red, for whatever reason

[Renathras]

ForesakenRoe - I was talking about EW.

SAMs are not being blacklisted from parties in EW despite them having a different level of complexity from NINs and MNKs. CLEARLY Jobs do not need to be equally complex in order to earn party spots. That was the point I was making. They just need to do comparable damage OR have some ridiculously good utility that makes up for reduced damage.

And yeah, I'm kinda done with this discussion as we've all said what we're going to and reached a stalemate of not convincing anyone of anything, so this will probably be my last post for a bit.

But so you know, I don't care a whit about parses. There are reasons I don't run a parser. The TOS is one, but another is I genuinely don't care about them. So it's not relevant to our conversation.

ALSO: If you're going to make arguments for me, then I see no reason to post. This is like the 5th time you've outright ignored me replying to you saying "You're saying X" with "No, I'm not saying X", and I'm tired of telling you you're lying about what I'm saying. When you say "So you're saying..." and someone outright tells you "No, that's not what I'm saying", it's very rude to say "No, that's totally what you're saying, even though you're saying it's not and you've explained why it's not."

VERY rude.

.

Allow me to simplify further. Which of the jobs would be the " I really only want a basic simple healer job"? Now, how would you explain your choice to someone if that was their main, how would explain why one of the other healers wasn't selected? What would you tell them to do- pick of the other healers? What if they didn't want to switch?
This is the type of potential issues that you open up and I don't see a good or necessary reason to do so.

Well...

1) ...I'd point out the alternative was no Jobs being changed at all so they'd all still have the EW rotations. That is the alternative. You guys seem to think the default position is the change you're proposing. It's not. The default position is for the game to stay as it is today. THAT is the default.

2) ...I'd note that any one of the healers could have been the one left alone, but the one that ends up being left alone would likely be the logical choice. For example, if it's WHM, it makes sense for it to be the simple one. It's always been the simple one, so that's the existing precedent. It's the one that starts at the lowest level, so it makes sense that most players' first healer would be the one easy to play. It's also the one that has a working GCD heal model right now (with Lilies; the other three actively avoid pressing any GCD heal unless they're forced to do so). Collectively, these make it the logical choice. An alternative would be SGE. A bit less logical (Kardia existing means that SGE having an actual damage rotation makes logical sense since said rotation results in healing), but probably the second best option for the simple healer. Starting at a higher level would mean players who don't have a healer but want to pick one up would logically reach for it, meaning it being a simple model does have some merit. And the other two options, AST with Cards and buffs and SCH with pet management and even more oGCDs, make less sense. SGE would need to be redesigned so its GCD heals were more powerful, though, but we could do that.

3) ...I'd ask them which they find more important, the aesthetic or the playstyle. And then I'd say pick the one that has that. Understand, I'd be doing the same thing. The healer I like the aesthetic of the most is SCH, but under this change, I'd likely end up playing the other three instead (right now I play all three other than AST). So this is a case of "I'm not asking you to do something I wouldn't be doing myself". Right now I play WHM, SCH, and SGE. Under this change, I'd probably end up just playing WHM and SGE, or possibly just one of those, losing one (or two) of my own healers.

4) ...then no one's forcing them to. They can keep playing the Job they play today. Remember that the 1 being left alone is the 1 being left alone, meaning if they are playing it right now, they'd be no worse off than they are right now other than being jealous of other people, I guess.

5) ...yes, these are potential issues you open up. What you're ignoring is all the issues you would open up by changing all four healers.

.



What do YOU tell the people who want a basic healer that their main isn't basic anymore?

How do you explain to them that none of the healers are so they have no way to enjoy the game anymore?

What do you tell them to do - quit healing? Quit the game?

What if they don't want to quit? What if they don't want to do the damage? Now you're going to tell them they don't get to clear content and they don't, in your mind, deserve to clear the content?

What happens when PF can't find healers anymore? What happens when healers aren't in DF because so many people quit healing?

Those are all potential issues you open up that I don't see a good or necessary reason to do so.

.

You seem to argue your idea to change all 4 healers wouldn't alienate anyone (or would only alienate a small amount of people that's irrelevant) when there's zero support for that position. You also seem to argue that this wouldn't have huge ramifications and that this is the default position that anyone who doesn't like it has to argue against and compromise with, rather than your proposal being the new thing and the current situation being the default you must compromise with.

I'm even offering you a compromise that would do so and give you 3 out of 4 things that you're asking for. Which, in the real world, is a pretty good compromise in your favor...

.

At the end of the day...none of us are going to convince the other of anything.

All I'm saying is my proposal is the one that would make the most people happy, require the least unhappy people, require the least change, the least alienation, and would allow everyone to be at least somewhat happy. Kinda like ranked choice voting where you get your second pick and I get my third pick. No one's perfectly happy, but everyone has something they can be content they got from the bargain.

Given the alternative is for healers to remain exactly as they are today, it's a deal that people should be jumping on rather than attacking. Considering the alternative is you get 0/nothing, NOT that you get 4/everything.

[Shurrikhan]

Reason I mentioned Feral and Balance was not as the actual specs, but as skillsets that Resto can dip into and 'do damage as a healer'. Though, in several parts of the past Feral has been horrendously ignored/forgotten about, lacking cohesiveness, throughput, and general care for the design. Despite these dark times, some players stuck with it, because they loved the class, despite Rogue being easier or having more DPS or whatever.

Ahhh, gotcha. Sorry, I hadn't realized it'd jumped to a whole new page when I refreshed.

No, I'm not.

I'm advocating for the 4 healers to be normal sized backyard swimming pool (the 3 foot ones), large backyard swimming pool (the 4-5 foot ones), in-ground pool/city pool, and Olympic pool, where 2 and 3 are largely side-grades to each other.

Gutting 3 out of 4 healers instead of just the 1 out of 4 isn't any better...

You can have the goddamned ocean and keep it accessible through a metaphorical shallow-sloping, fine-sand beach.

None of them to somehow purposely truncate an intuitive entry to their kits. None of them need to purposely truncate any and all significant skill ceiling.

Note that the official forums make up a tiny fraction of the playerbase, and the independent posters in this thread is/are around 30, which is the absolute minimum N to even try to do something with statistics, and tends to generate poor results. That's also ignoring that not everyone in this thread is in agreement.

Mate, I am summarizing objectively what we've been seeing thus far across the warrants and claims made in this thread. Look at where the likes are. Look at what positions they have in common. I'm not conflating that with the whole playerbase (who you do not speak for either), but if you're not talking to the people in this thread, then why are you even here?

I suggested we expand three healers and leave one alone. How is that truncation?

You suggested that only one should have a significant skill ceiling, that only one should have anything approaching offensive rotation, that only one should have any significant buff gameplay, etc.

You can play semantics on the basis that right now, in a largely disdained state of the role, no healer has those anyways so it wouldn't yet be truncation, but you are asking that those future expansions fall under those constraints. Why? Why would there need to be --or would anyone even want there to be-- only one job that runs a full gamut, let alone a job that's singled out to be cut down to knee-height?

[Renathras]

Okay, what are you even talking about now?

Who are you arguing against?

Gutting 3 out of 4 healers

Who's arguing to gut healers? Leaving a thing as it is is not gutting it. I'm not sure how to explain this concept. How is leaving a thing alone changing it? Leaving it alone is, by definition, not changing it. "gutting" is a change. Therefore, leaving a thing alone cannot be "gutting" by definition.

...to somehow purposely truncate...

Who is arguing to truncate? I'm arguing to expand 3 healers and leave one alone. Leaving a thing alone is not truncating it. Again, this is true by definition. What are you arguing? Who are you arguing against? Who is arguing to truncate Jobs? Do you know what the word truncate means?

Mate, I am summarizing objectively what we've been seeing thus far across the warrants and claims made in this thread

Where did I say you weren't?

I said this thread doesn't represent the player base.

You have less than 30 players, and posts that have 8-17 likes, yes?

Is 17 people a majority of the 3-5 million playing the game?

I'm talking to the people in this thread. The problems are (a) you guys seem not to be listening given the number of times you've collectively either misrepresented my statements even with me outright saying those aren't my statements (if I'm being charitable - lying if I'm not being charitable) and (b) are so set on your solution that you aren't interested in any other possible solutions, even ones that would be better for the game or more acceptable to the playerbase.

You suggested that only one should have a significant skill ceiling, that only one should have anything approaching offensive rotation, that only one should have any significant buff gameplay, etc.

I've not done any of those things at any time.

I've argued three should have high skill ceilings. I've argued at least two and probably three should have offensive rotations - not "anything approaching"; full on dps rotations. I've argued at least two should have buff gameplay.

Here I must ask if you're intentionally lying about what I'm saying or if you just aren't reading my posts? I countered that third one outright by pointing out SCH has Chain Strategem now and would retain it. (Note here that SGE and WHM don't have buffs right now. Are you proposing a future design where all four healers have a dozen buffs they juggle across the party? Surely you aren't...) I've argued against the second when I proposed SCH have its complete SB rotation back (which is on par with DPS Jobs in the game now; 4 DoTs [Bio, Miasma, Miasma 2, Shadow Flare], a spam nuke, a movement nuke, a resource burner in Energy Drain, and a cleave in Bane as well as Miasma 2 itself), and proposed that SGE have a combat rotation akin to RDM (which is a DPS Job). And even that AST could get another DoT as well. I've argued against the first in almost every post that I've mentioned skill gaps.

.

Again, who are you arguing against?

Either you're arguing against a phantom strawman in this thread that isn't me, whose posts I can't see, and with you quoting me instead of him/her...

...or you're outright lying about my points...

...or you just aren't reading my posts (despite quoting from them) and are just replying without reading.

I'm curious: Which is it?

Can you tell me the name of the person you're arguing against and quote their posts instead of my posts that aren't saying the things you're arguing against and have even outright said those weren't the things I was saying?

.

...although...never mind.

As I said, we aren't going to convince each other. Part of that is you ignoring what I'm saying and inserting strawman arguments in place of mine, despite me pointing out I'm not saying those things. I can't have a debate with a person who is lying about everything I say and arguing against a phantom, sorry.

As I said, my proposal would do the most good for the most people, cause the least disruption, and make the most people happy. That's all there is to it. If you don't want that, you need some really good arguments, and thus far, haven't had any. That's my peace and I've said it. o/

[ASkellington]

I've argued three should have high skill ceilings. I've argued at least two and probably three should have offensive rotations - not "anything approaching"; full on dps rotations. I've argued at least two should have buff gameplay.

Here is the simple problem with your idea. If 1 nuke 1 dot is a problem on all four healers leaving one with that same simple rotation leaves it still as a problem. It isn't good enough for 4. There for it isn't good enough for 1.

It is objectively boring to have 2 dps buttons on a job for 86 levels in this game when there is solo content to be done. All healers can have one or two more buttons. WHM shouldn't be the exception just because it is "easy" when it isn't acceptable for the other 3.

[ty_taurus]

Here's the reality of the general reception of the healers in this game: most players that actually play healers are unbothered by the state of them, but would respond positively to more offensive spells or other forms of consistent actions that can be used regardless of whether healing is required or not. For most players, a job is good when it looks cool and its animations feel exciting, and a job is bad when it feels clunky or mechanically frustrating to play.

The only players who could possibly be unhappy with this are those that would be unhappy that maintaining 1 button spam no longer would mean you'd parse high, but actual optimization-focused players would be happy to have a greater challenge and more depth for them to reach those high numbers. Only people who want a free ride or like that they can stealth their way into savage while doing a fraction of the work every other role has to put in to get the clear would genuinely be upset.

There is also the group of players that want recovery-focused gameplay, but the thing is, FFXIV has NEVER been the game for that style of healer. This is not WoW. No fight has ever been designed to output damage every few seconds to demand constant healing. The only time that happens is extremely rarely do you get a phase like Brute Justice who spams an AoE for the last small chunk of his HP, which is not only a phase and not a representation of the entire fight, but also something that has almost never been done since. In all honesty, if that's the type of gameplay you want, and the idea of the effectively combat medic role that FFXIV healers are designed for is not, then go play WoW. Stop biting your tongue and enduring a game you do not enjoy if this is not the type of healer you want to play. Or jump in for the story and go to WoW for the raiding once you're caught up. Stop punishing yourself.

[NobleWinter]

Farming Fates as a healer always puts me to sleep. I really want to play a healer but it ruined both Eureka and Bozja for me. I just couldn't find any joy in content where my non-existent DPS rotation was placed center stage. I really hope they find a better design philosophy because the Shadowbringer changes were awful for healer dps

[Magikazam]

Turn out Healer ain't that good when other class can rez and most mechanic one shot DPS. Plus tanks get sustain. The problem is deeper than healer being weirdly designed.

[Renathras]

Okay...one more:

Here is the simple problem with your idea. If 1 nuke 1 dot is a problem on all four healers leaving one with that same simple rotation leaves it still as a problem.

Disagree. The problem as I see it isn't 1 nuke 1 DoT being a problem - some people enjoy that gameplay - it's that there's no alternative for people that don't like that gameplay. Changing it to 1 instead of 4 is the solution, as it allows people who enjoy that gameplay to keep enjoying it while allowing people who do not enjoy it a shot at having gameplay they do enjoy with one of the other 3 healers. If every tank played like WAR, that would be a problem. Not because WAR is simple or boring, but because while some people obviously enjoy it (many people play WAR, we have to assume at least some like it), other people who don't wouldn't have another option. But if every tank played like GNB, that would be no better. Now you'd just have different people being happy and different people being upset, but the same problem - people who didn't like it wouldn't have the option to play a different Job in the same role.

Swapping all 4 healers isn't a solution, because it just substitutes the problem - now people who DO like 1 Nuke/1 DoT rotations have nothing to play - as opposed to solving the problem - ensuring all players have something they at least can moderately enjoy playing within a given role.

Here's the reality of the general reception of the healers in this game: most players that actually play healers are unbothered by the state of them, but would respond positively to more offensive spells or other forms of consistent actions that can be used regardless of whether healing is required or not.

Can you cite evidence proving or strongly supporting this? I think it IS true many players are unbothered by the current state of healers. I'm not sure how many would respond positively to more offensive spells. Especially if they had no opt out other than "you now can't clear content or have to be carried".

The only players...

...is a really bad way to start a statement. "the only", as if there are only two options, people who love it and people who are unhappy for the exact reason you state and no other possible reason. Is that a fair assessment? No, it is not.

...who could possibly be unhappy with this are those that would be unhappy that maintaining 1 button spam no longer would mean you'd parse high,

I would be unhappy with the change.

As I already pointed out to you, I don't care about parses.

Your position that only players who care about easy parses would be unhappy has now been proven false.

Only people who want a free ride or like that they can stealth their way into savage while doing a fraction of the work every other role has to put in to get the clear would genuinely be upset.

So you go from one insult to a worse insult.

I neither want a free ride nor stealth into savage doing a fraction of the work of other roles.

I've now proven you wrong TWICE.

(To clarify this: I've also cleared Savage fights on tanks and Extremes as all roles. Clearly I'm not looking for carries or easy runs.)

Stop biting your tongue and enduring a game you do not enjoy if this is not the type of healer you want to play. Or jump in for the story and go to WoW for the raiding once you're caught up. Stop punishing yourself.

What if - just pretend for a minute - they actually ENJOY FFXIV's story, aesthetic, and gameplay and CAN play it the way they like and enjoy it, despite you insisting to them that they cannot? What if quitting FFXIV would be them punishing themselves? What if playing WoW would be them punishing themselves? What if you're wrong?

.

I think this is the reason that you guys don't see more dissenting views here.

You either lie about them, misrepresent them, or insult them until they fall silent.

...then you claim your positions are the majority with likes and not being contested by many dissenting voices. When you ran those dissenting voices off or you lie about what those dissenting voices are saying.

I honestly don't get it, but I'm trying to be rational and reasonable and fair, so... /shrug

[ty_taurus]

Can you cite evidence proving or strongly supporting this? I think it IS true many players are unbothered by the current state of healers. I'm not sure how many would respond positively to more offensive spells. Especially if they had no opt out other than "you now can't clear content or have to be carried".

During the 6.1 trailer, Crystalline Conflict was revealed, and there was a clip of WHM using Afflatus Purgation, a giant laser attack. My FC includes quite a few healers, including many who are perfectly content with WHM right now. ALL of them drooling over that and wishing they could have it in PVE. Anecdotal? Maybe, but I'm also just going off the logic of gamers in general. Most gamers are not hardcore numbers gamers. Most games are casual gamers, and you need to really make a game unplayable for casual gamers from within that market to be upset. Just look at Pokemon for example. The newest games are held together by silly string and are some of the ugliest games on the Switch, but most people don't care, because it's not broken enough to disrupt the experience. Inversely, so long as a game isn't intentionally challenging or frustrating to play, casual players are pretty happy with improvements as well. Look at Super Smash Bros for example. Did Nintendo ever need to release a single patch ever? No. Did any casual players complain about a character getting stronger? I've never seen it. The only ones that commented were the hardcore players.

This is just how gamers are, and it's something you come to understand the more you expose yourself to gaming audiences.

I neither want a free ride nor stealth into savage doing a fraction of the work of other roles.

I've now proven you wrong TWICE

First and foremost, how have you "proven" anything if my statement wasn't considered "proof" and required evidence to support it? Isn't that hypocritical?

Regardless, if you don't care about getting a free ride then just don't use whatever new offensive spells get added. No one is going to force you to use your healer rotation if all you want to do is spam your filler spell. If you don't care about stealthing your way into savage and are content proving your skill, then what's the issue? People who seek savage level difficulty are looking for challenges and ways to prove their skill. You should be elated at the idea of having a higher skill ceiling that allows you to further support your party by playing better. If you aren't looking for challenges, then you aren't playing savage, then that's all the more reason to just spam 1 button if you want to. Behind the extremely generous enrages of EX, there's no other enrage mechanics in content below savage, so there's no pressure for you to optimize your gameplay.

If you're not looking for a free ride, nor are trying to stealth your way into savage, then you have no reason to be bothered by optimized gameplay expecting more from you than thoughtless button mashing, because you'd either rise to the challenge, or continue playing the way that satisfies you. It could only upset you if you're appalled by the idea that the lack of gameplay that's currently expected for top performing healers is now the skill floor and no longer the skill ceiling, which means you would be upset with either not performing as well playing the way you want to play, or that you'd be forced to try harder to perform at the current level you're performing at, which equates to wanting a free ride or wanting to stealth your way into savage.

But as you said, this isn't you, so logically, you'd be content either continuing to play with 1 button DPS or simply rising to the higher expectations of the skill ceiling. The talk of free riders is not referencing you in this case. If you're in the camp of not wanting offensive healer gameplay, then it begs the question of why you're playing FFXIV where you're objectively expected to be attacking with 80%-100% of your GCD casts in all forms of content instead of a game where you can just focus on the healing like WoW. Regardless of whether you have 1 button, 20 buttons, or 100 buttons to DPS with, the frequency that you spend attacking is the same because we don't take damage every few seconds in this game.

What if - just pretend for a minute - they actually ENJOY FFXIV's story, aesthetic, and gameplay and CAN play it the way they like and enjoy it, despite you insisting to them that they cannot? What if quitting FFXIV would be them punishing themselves? What if playing WoW would be them punishing themselves? What if you're wrong?

Healer gameplay is a lack of gameplay. You are objectively not engaging with the systems of FFXIV for the majority of your gameplay. Players who aren't seeking to optimize can be far more content with the game because they can overheal like crazy, not use their OGCD heals and focus on their GCD heals instead, and break up that offensive monotony through suboptimal gameplay choices, which ultimately don't matter in the content they play in because there are no enrage timers. So if you're not looking to optimize, then go ahead and just use the tools you want to use. No one is going to care. I certainly won't, but at least the apex of each job's gameplay can offer something to the players that want engagement. If you're seeking optimal play and enjoy what we have its because there is no gameplay and thus there are no expectations other than just use your cooldowns, which is half the work every other job in this game has to put into raiding if not less.

You can't "like" a lack of gameplay. You can be unbothered by it if you are a reward-focused player who just likes getting your dailies complete, or seeing what you get from treasure maps, but if you're that type of player, then you won't care what's added to the healers as long as it doesn't make them mechanically difficult to play, like ASTs constant single target focused buffs. Having to constantly swap targets in a game that doesn't support that very well is why most players don't like AST. Everyone LOVES the aesthetic but can't bring themselves to play the job because it's not fun to constantly be swapping between party members for cards. Giving AST a subtle rotation is not mechanically difficult. You can ONLY be upset if you're focused on performance and the expectation, because if you're not focused on either of those aspects, then you'd have no issues, or your issues are things that aren't resolved with the current healer design either.