
Originally Posted by
ty_taurus
Oh, that explains why you're so wrong.
Translation: "Oh, I see, Ren. You're talking about something different and I misunderstood you. You're actually right about what you're saying. But I don't want to admit it, so I'm going to say
you misunderstood
me, even though you pointed out several times that I was talking about a different thing than you, even though you asked me to tell you what I (Ty) thought you (Ren) were saying since it seemed clear to you I was misunderstanding you, and even though you were right about what you said - I'm going to say you're wrong anyway. Not just 'wrong', but 'so wrong', to save face and try to make you look weaker/bad so you'll cow down deflated."
And you wonder why I get frustrated with you.
You completely misinterpreted what I was saying since the beginning. I never said the design team balanced content around healer DPS. ARR didn't have modern enrages, and while it did feature some DPS checks, it was certainly balanced without healer DPS initially.
This is literally what I've been saying for the last three pages. Welcome to the discussion. You can't say I'm wrong when I've been saying literally this same thing you realize is true. The issue here is you were misunderstanding me this whole time. Remember: This discussion branch started with me saying I'd play Healer as long as they weren't made into mere DPSers, someone asking me if they weren't that already, and someone saying they always had been that way. I was contesting that, using the above as my logic for why it was not always that way.
The discussion wasn't just you stating a position (you weren't even the one who initially said it that I was contesting! I was arguing with someone else and you jumped into
our ongoing conversation) or people misunderstanding you or not. In effect, you jumped into our existing conversation and misunderstood me. The onus was on you, as the newcomer, to understand the conversation ongoing, not for everyone else to stop the conversation they were having and engage in the one you wanted. While you can contribute to steering an active conversation, you cannot claim ownership of it nor that people not talking about specifically what you were thinking (but obviously not stating clearly) makes them wrong (when they were right on the facts of their argument) because you wanted to talk about something different...
I was talking about the general gameplay loop the design team was crafting--something where healers had the freedom to attack, and would do so at times, and this extra damage would be a bonus, not the standard. That was definitely a part of ARR design.
No,
we were talking about the Devs' design intention in ARR and whether they were designing Healers to be "Green DPS" (a term meaning "expected to attack" not "freedom to attack if they want") as part of the encounter design. You're now implicitly saying my position here was correct ("freedom to attack" is not "requirement/expectation/or onus to attack"), so while saying I'm wrong, your on statement is saying I was not.
It's okay though, now that you know why you're wrong
...while you keep saying I'm wrong - almost like you can't admit defeat or let it go - your own statements are literally what I've been saying all this time. Meaning I'm right. You can't reword what I've been saying this whole time and say that makes me wrong. You're literally making the argument I've made this entire time:

Originally Posted by
Renathras
1) For that era, Healers were given a handful of damage spells for soloing content but weren't expected to use them in Raids (this was also largely true of most Healers in WoW during that same timeframe, which was Wrath of the Lich King, I believe, where WoW Healers had likewise very skimpy damage rotations; Paladin famously only had 2 DPS buttons, Judgement and Holy Shock, 3 against Undead since you could add Exorcism once every 30 seconds or so)
2) WHM was never designed to play as a DPS Job. We even saw this as late as SB, and really even as far as 6.0 (Lilies not being DPS neutral because the Devs felt that DPS shouldn't be the focus of the Job). In ARR, the only WHM oGCD heal was Benediction once every 6 minutes or so. There was no way you were healing a raid with one cure every 6 minutes. WHM was very much designed from the ground up for GCD healing. Even moreso if you look at 1.0 as its proto-type. 1.0 WHM was...well, I'll let this video speak for itself:
Note that no where in this premise did I say "healers were designed where they had no freedom to DPS
if they wanted to.
Note the first phrase I bolded, specifically two words: "
expected to".
I didn't say they weren't allowed to.
I didn't say they were only allowed to heal and nothing else.
I didn't say no one very casted any damage spells (and said the opposite on a number of occasions).
My contention has always been they had the
freedom to - a freedom which was chiefly used by SCHs from very early on - but not the
requirement to.
A position you now are stating while insisting I'm wrong, even though you're saying
my argument!
My contention has only ever been the encounters were not designed to
require them to.
...which is literally what you're saying now:
ARR didn't have modern enrages, and while it did feature some DPS checks, it was certainly balanced without healer DPS initially. I was talking about the general gameplay loop the design team was crafting--something where healers had the freedom to attack, and would do so at times, and this extra damage would be a bonus, not the standard.
THIS IS LITERALLY MY ARGUMENT AND HAS BEEN THIS ENTIRE TIME.
You cannot present my argument in different words and then say I'm wrong when you're saying the exact same thing now that IS what I've been saying this ENTIRE TIME.
and you can accept that, I think we could move on to a more fair discussion, yeah?
You need to apologize now before we can "move on to a more fair discussion". Because not only have you lied (as I said previously), now you're lying more, and you're saying I'm wrong while simultaneously (now) making the very argument I've made this entire time and acting like that makes you right and me wrong. Incorrigible...