A question: What makes a Healer "easy/simple" or "hard/complex"?

[Renathras]

Perhaps it would be useful to approach from the opposite direction: take a kit widely considered "good", and play evil job designer with it. Make one change that would absolutely slaughter the kit's fun, and you've probably discovered some key magic that makes the sausage machine work.

I think this is largely subjective. For example, removing Lilies on WHM (6.0 showed us how poorly that works) everyone probably agrees on, but some people might say "adding a DPS rotation to it" would break it while others think that would save it. That may be more an argument of kit functionality than difficulty.

Meaningful choice is a good thing to shoot for for fun, I agree...but that's not always a matter of difficulty or challenge or complexity. Indeed, some Jobs could have choice added that actually makes them simpler. To use your RDM example, suppose Jolt was removed and Stone/Fire were always up, not needing a proc. This would give the kit greater flexibility and choice (as you'd always have the option to use them where 50%ish of the time you do not currently), but reduce difficulty.

Don't overlook the impact of APM as well as well as how punishing it is for falling out of the 2 minute buff window. At least in my case, it's the core reason I absolutely hate playing AST in it's current form.

Fair points, although MCH is one of the higher APM Jobs in the game and considered one of the easier ones. So we'll add APM as another axis of challenge.

Simple and Complex are ultimately subjective but the issue with Healers stems more from what Semirhage says, a lack of meaningful interaction within the toolkit. Healer toolkits are hugely disjointed messes, with the most interaction between any job being "press this to heal more"; Temperance, PI, Protaction, Horoscope, Synastry, etc, all just make you heal more, with maybe some extra mitigation or something else tacked on for good measure but they don't really do anything other than that. The shallow DPS toolkit also doesn't help healers in any meaningful ways since it's spam 1 while using 2 every 30s, with minute differences here and there.

There either needs to be more DPS skills, interactions between Healing/DPS or both for Healers to be in a better spot. Something as simple as the Diacloud proc idea that's been thrown around occasionally would be a refreshing start to say the least.

I don't think they're "disjointed", but I do think that there are a lot of overlaps that make decision making less meaningful outside of optimization scenarios. This is probably because the community/players are so collectively focused on optimization/meta that the Devs have kind of had their hand forced since the alternative was putting their foot down hard. For example, when they removed Energy Drain, the message was clear - "We don't want you using healing resources to optimize damage!" The community response was a revolt. So the Devs went the opposite direction, giving Healers a lot of overlapping abilities - Medica, Rapture, Indominability, Holos, Celestial Opposition, Prognosis, and Ixochole all do basically the same thing (Sacred Soil does not, btw...) - so that players could optimize damage, since the message players collectively have told the Devs over and over is that they want healers to be about optimizing damage with healing as a mere aside. Though this problem extends well beyond Healers; it's the reason Tank stances were removed (players tried to actively avoid agro stance as much as possible, defeating the purpose of it even existing - no, it wasn't a challenging dance; people would actively just NEVER USE IT outside of the first 5 seconds of combat) and has wreaked havoc with the game when DPSers complained about things like positionals, boss hitboxes, downtime, disengages, and difficulty of aligning disparate CD buffs.

Though I'm a bit curious what you think heals should do other than...heal/mitigate/shield...?

I don't think that we need more DPS skills across the board (or healing/DPS interactions, whatever that may boil down to), but I do think the Healers need to not be carbon copies of each other.

The best example of the 'press whatever, itll probably work' is AST. CO is 700p, CU is 600p, Star is 540 (720 if charged). So if a raidwide occurs, which do you press? Uhh, turns out, any of them really, they're all kinda interchangeable in most situations. And if one of them isn't enough to deal with the damage? No matter, just use another. They're all 1min CDs anyway so it feels like they're always up

As for 'what is complexity', that's entirely subjective. I find SAM complex because of the 'filler GCD' thing. I found HW/SB DRK 'easy to understand' despite supposedly being 'complex' with Darkside management etc (implying Darkside management was hard in HW). So the thread's kinda pointless for asking 'what is complex' unless you're aiming to find out what we, each person specifically, finds complex.

Arguably yes.

It's constantly brought up how Healers aren't complex enough and how they need to be more complex. As that IS subjective, it's completely useless to the Devs - or, indeed, to our own non-Dev discussions.

Not until we actual quantify what that IS.

What makes healer easy? Its simple really. We have too many healing tools that the game doesn't make use of and lack of interactions with them all. Someone already pointed out AST, but I'm going to use it since I know the class so well.

One of the things I've said before (and gotten various levels of pushback against, though more on Reddit than here) is that we have too many oGCDs and they're too powerful. We need less of them and they need to be weaker such that people actually have a reason to use GCD heals. PART of the reason for this is how mobile fights are now, PART is the playerbase deciding damage optimization is the only thing that matters ("Green DPS" aside, "The only HP that matters is the last 1", "Killing the boss is damage mitigation/healing", and "The only utility that matters is damage" all are reflections of this), and PART of it is that MMOs just add more abilities over time. But it's clearly too much, though some Healer Jobs are worse offenders than others.

The pushback is generally from people that want more damage spells (yet complain about healing being trivial) and not wanting the solution to be "make healing non-trivial". People even have insisted it can't be done because it would require all past fights to be backdate changed...which is odd since (a) they've never had an issue with that before and (b) that's the way the game originally worked.

But I agree that too many oGCDs that are too powerful and up basically all the time have made Healers trivial/easy.

[Sebazy]

Fair points, although MCH is one of the higher APM Jobs in the game and considered one of the easier ones. So we'll add APM as another axis of challenge.

I think the AST issue with APM is that it's a lot of buttons and retargeting all dogpiled into each 2 minute burst window. Outside of that burst it's barely any different to SCH or WHM. I think MCH is more akin to DNC still no? The APM still rockets through oGCDs, but it's more of a pattern with no need to constantly change targets? Couple that with how punishing missing a burst window and falling out of sync with the group is and it's honestly a completely different problem IMO.

[Renathras]

I think the AST issue with APM is that it's a lot of buttons and retargeting all dogpiled into each 2 minute burst window. Outside of that burst it's barely any different to SCH or WHM. I think MCH is more akin to DNC still no? The APM still rockets through oGCDs, but it's more of a pattern with no need to constantly change targets? Couple that with how punishing missing a burst window and falling out of sync with the group is and it's honestly a completely different problem IMO.

Yeah. I think AST is the ONLY Job in the game that has to hyper-target-swap. Offhand, I can't think of any other one. MCH, NIN, and DRK all have the "high APM burst, lower APM filler", and MNK, NIN, and MCH under Hypercharge all have a reduced GCD (so much faster ability use compared to other Jobs) that give them higher APM both inside and outside of burst. In a strict sense, they have higher APMs than AST does, but ASTs is paired with target swapping, which isn't counted as an "action" but clearly IS one.

[ASkellington]

The pushback is generally from people that want more damage spells (yet complain about healing being trivial) and not wanting the solution to be "make healing non-trivial". People even have insisted it can't be done because it would require all past fights to be backdate changed...which is odd since (a) they've never had an issue with that before and (b) that's the way the game originally worked.

Yes the push back is more damage spells because

1 - Some fights would have to remade because even with less oGCDs, good healers are bored. Just because I'm more engaged at 70 than 90 doesn't mean I'm still PROPERLY engaged at 70. Bosses have too long of wind ups, not many of them target someone that ISN'T the tank, too much of their damage is avoidable and so most dungeons I'm STILL only healing with oGCDs in the 60-70 range. If you want more healing, the fights are going to have to change. Why is this a problem? Have you seen how long it took for SE to actually change them? If reducing the healing spells, and supplementing more damage spells is faster, then yes, I would rather add more damage spells.

2 - SE doesn't want to give the alternative: support tools. AST cards and BRD's change from SB to Shb speaks to this. They don't want to take the time to make impactful spells for healers to use outside of mitigation. Caster's are allowed to have an AOE sleep, but healers are stuck with Repose and NEITHER even work on the bosses. We can't even use either like a form of Head Graze/Interject. We don't even have an AOE Esuna! So if SE isn't going to give us any supportive tools, rather takes them away because if we don't use them then we're going to fail apparently, then all we're going to get is damage so we may as well ask for damage.

3 - EVEN IF SE decided to do the above, we will STILL have instances to where our dps rotation is monotonous. Especially in solo content where it is highlighted front and center. Support tools? Don't need them. Healing? Don't need them. What are we left with then? Broil/Dosis/Glare/Malefic and our DoT and w/e extra healing tools we use as damage because, while we don't need the healing at all we can still use the damage to kill the sponge (ES, Lord of Crowns, Toxicon, Misery, Assize). In group content, you're still going to have down time where you aren't going to be buffing or healing, so what is the excuse to not make all healer's dps tools a bit more engaging?

I replay plenty of fights I still find fun due to either wipefests if I'm lucky (Dun Scaith, Orbonne) or just because I don't have access to as many tools (60-70 fights), or even ones that are still relatively challenging (Amaurot, Dead Ends) at the "level cap", and I'm STILL pressing 1 way too much. And Amaurot actually hits hard.

All of this to say, SE doesn't design fights for engaging healing. DoTs are either Esuna'd and Esuna doesn't have a CD so if it is automatically reapplied who cares? OR hit like a ray of sun through a window glass and either don't need to be healed at all, or can easily be healing through with a simple HoT. Boss mechanics, as I've said, are way too spaced out (want a good example? Smileton is ridiculous with it) and again, don't usually hit random party members so you don't even have to do spot healing which would break it up. AoEs are too avoidable. Which usually leaves unavoidable raid wides and tank busters. Well tanks mitigate tank busters and they don't really hurt. And raid wides also, don't hurt. And both always come on a long enough cool down to where you have something up, even in lower levels.

We need more bosses like Diabolos or Ra La. The former has tank busters frequent enough in the second phase to where the tank CAN'T mitigate them all at 60 and the latter actually makes me cycle through all my oGCDs like a proper boss should.

That requires a major rework of too many fights for it to be feasible (and in some cases it doesn't need to be that drastic but you get the point) and I don't see SE even MAKING fights in the upcoming expansion like this let alone fixing older ones, which is why we ask for damage.

[ForsakenRoe]

Y
That requires a major rework of too many fights for it to be feasible (and in some cases it doesn't need to be that drastic but you get the point) and I don't see SE even MAKING fights in the upcoming expansion like this let alone fixing older ones, which is why we ask for damage.

Clearly what they should do is this: add damage tools (the quicker fix), under the pretense of 'oh yeh we're doing this so healers have something to do in 7.0, so that by 8.0 we'll have had a bigger time window to work out a better solution (eg, making fights actually do damage)'

Then if/when it turns out that actually, more damage tools WAS the solution all along, just nix the last part and say 'well we WERE going to look into alternatives, but the extra damage options were so well received we figured 'why rock the boat', so we'll be going ahead with adding even more damage options in 8.0'

[Silver-Strider]

Revolt

This occurred because of a combination of reasons.

They removed Energy Drain without reallocating the MP restore from it.
They increased the cost of Addlo/Succor to ridiculous levels that made them unsustainable.
Both Quickened Aetherflow and the Fairy Gauge required burning thru excess stacks to make the most out of them but with nothing but Lustrate there was very few ways to utilize either of them without overhealing.
Couple this with the butchering of WHM and the Revolt was inevitable. Viva la revolución.

As for what I would like for heals to do, being a part of a cohesive toolkit would be a nice start. There's too much overlap in terms of what skills do and no real justification for it. Why would I ever hit Cure 2 before Afflatus Solace or Tetra? Medica over Rapture or Assize when it lines up? There simply isn't any reason to do so because the former all have cast times and MP costs associated with them on top of being a DPS loss to utilize whereas the latter don't. I would like there to be a reason other than "shit has hit the fan". If Healers could also differentiate themselves from one another that would be a great bonus on top.

So, keeping with WHM for a moment, here's what I would do.

1. Turn Solace/Rapture into traits for Cure 2/Medica. If you have a Lily up, they turn into the corresponding skill. Throw in an Afflatus version of Cure 3 as well for good measure.
2. Return Aero 3 but have it and Dia function similarly to BLM's Thunder Spells so they don't overlap and include the Thundercloud proc into the mix, going off of Regen/Medica 2, so that good Regen uptime is actually rewarding to accomplish. With them frontloading their DoT damage on the initial hit, not only would they do slightly more damage than the 2 Glares that would be lost from Regens->Aeros but you also have short timers to maintain again, much like what people miss with the removal of DoT playstyles.
3. I would have Tetra grant a Lily upon usage as to justify why it has the longest CD and lowest potency of all the ST healing CDs.
4. I'd lower the CD of Temperance down to 60s and just flat out remove PI. Between Regens actually being worth a damn to keep up frequently, Afflatus skills now including Cure 3 in the mix and Temperance being a 60s CD, there's no real need for PI anymore. Only other option would be to turn it into an AoE Shield Effect and I wouldn't argue if that was the case but the current form of PI wouldn't be needed with the rest of the changes.

That pretty much leaves the oGCDs like Asylum, Assize, etc unaccounted for but that's the gist of what I would do with WHM. I might be more inclined to revert the 1.5s cast time on Glare back to 2.5 and give it Water/Flood as a Ruin 2 equivalent skill just to further differentiate it from the other healers but that just trades the 1.5s cast time for a Ruin 2 skill so its not that much of a difference.

[Renathras]

It's interesting how frequently that you respond with rebuttal such as "Solo content isn't tedious to a lot of people. There's zero reason all Healers NEED those. I think the problem here is that you think that all Healer players want what you do and feel the way you do. Many players find WHM, for example, fun and engaging"

You are backing up your opinion, and based upon likely empirical evidence and claiming it as fact- when you aren't providing any factual evidence (independently sourced metrics) to back it up.

Yet another attempt to derail a thread. Where to even begin? I'll stick this in an HB so it doesn't derail the thread itself.

1) There is not "zero reason" for any Healer to stay as it is now. There are several, which I've articulated before and some here. In brief:

- Some people like Healers as they are right now and wouldn't like the changes. This is AT THE VERY LEAST a reason to keep AT LEAST ONE Healer as it exists presently.
- Some of the Healer kits right now actually work very well, both in the game system/mechanics terms and in the kit's identity. WHM and SGE, as I've discussed previously, both do. There's a risk to "fixing what isn't broken".
- The Devs don't exactly have a track record of "fixing" Jobs that ends up with more people happy with them than there were before their changes. PLD, Kaiten, and SMN are the shortlist (though I contend they probably got it right with SMN, but still alienated a lot of people by removing Green Mage)
- Changing some but not all Healer kits reduces the risk of Healer role collapse if the changes aren't well received. Say for the sake of argument we add more DPS kits to all the Healers, but it turns out it was only a small minority that wanted them and, in fact, the majority of Healers in the game very much did not, to the point they quit the role or quit the game. Perhaps there are additional new Healers from the other roles, but not enough to make up the difference and we have the worst Healer shortage in the game's history, far worse than SB or 6.2. That problem wouldn't materialize if one or two of the Healer Jobs were not changed, since many of those players would migrate to those Jobs instead of leaving the role/game, either minimizing or preventing the collapse and allowing the changed Jobs to attract new members to the role without causing the high level of losses that changing all of the Healer Jobs would result in.

There are more, but there are three reasons. And as we know from math, 3 does not equal 0. So there are not zero reasons, there are several, for not changing all the Healer kits.

2) Note that I use "a lot" or "some" while other people use absolute terms, such as "to make solo content less tedious" (implicitly assuming that solo content is tedious to everyone when it is not); interesting that you have no issue with false absolute statements - which are opinions presenting themselves as facts - while my own positions are more limited and measured - because I recognize that they are not universal. "a lot" is not a majority. 1000 is a lot. In a game of 4-5 million players and 500,000-1 million healers, 10 thousand would still be a lot. Do you really believe there are NOT a lot of players who are fine with Healers as they are? Really? Likewise "many". Note I'm not the one claiming total or majority support of my positions. I'm also the one that holds that even if you guys WERE a minority, I'd still want you to have something you enjoy; a consideration none of you, over months of threads, have extended to those who don't think like you do, I might add...

3) I'm basing my opinion on the fact that we have a diverse playerbase and it is HIGHLY probable that a not insignificant percentage of them think like I do. I base this on the fact that I think like a more traditional MMO healer and that many players do not frequent the forums and seem not to have the complaints that you do. Again, I make no statements on the SIZE of this population other than it is non-zero and consists of a not-insignificant amount of people. I've estimated before it could be anywhere from 15-70%, where even at the lowest end, it would still comprise around 1/6th to 1/5th of all Healers - an entirely reasonable position given MMO populations, the relatively few Healers that come to the forums to voice complaints, etc. An entirely reasonable position that, again, none of you seem willing to admit to (since it would likely justify an argument to leave at least one Healer alone...)

4) I claimed nothing "as fact", though what I said very likely IS true - "a lot of people" likely do not find Healer solo content tedious, and "Many players" likely do find WHM fun and engaging. A not insignificant, non-zero number of Healer players do not think as you do (note that one isn't a likely; that one IS true, though it's impossible to say what that non-zero number is)

5) None of you have provided factual evidence or independently sourced metrics to back up your position that even a majority of Healers want the changes you propose, nor a commanding enough majority to have them all changed, nor that there are no minorities of any size that would disagree and be deserving of at least one left for them, nor that there are NO such people (a statement you'd know is a lie because I'm one such person, proving it's a non-zero number). Contrasting that, I have, in various threads, provided census numbers, clear rates, and ability analysis across the game's history - which is far more than any of you have done. The closest is an anecdotal statement (with no actual statistical support or data presented) that Healer numbers have collapsed post P5-8 release. Yet you attack me for my position which is far more sourced and supported than your own, which hasn't been by you or any of the posters agreeing with your position...

6)

Given that- it remains an argument of one person's preference versus another person's preference.

You mean the very thing I have stated numerous times up to this point?? That we all have different preferences and that the Healer/playerbase likely has a spread of preferences such that the Healers should NOT be made all the same (simple OR complex) as that would be denying many people a Healer Job that appeals to their preferences? THANK YOU for agreeing with me. Though it's rather untoward of you to do so only by acting like I didn't already hold that very selfsame position before you here. Indeed, I hold it now and you do not - your post indicates that you still think my position is not held by others, or at least, not by enough to matter.

7)

You are "being a contrarian" , you have held to some positions- one for example being "It's explicitly WHY I think we should change SOME Healers but not ALL of them, so that both types of player have at least one they enjoy playing on. There's only one Healer in the game that has 1 DoT + 1 Nuke, and that's AST."

I hope you realize "stating a fact" is not "being a contrarian". Unless you thought I meant the other Healers don't have 1 DoT + 1 Nuke? My statement was that only one Healer has that AND NOTHING ELSE. Though it's not MUCH else, WHM has Misery, SCH has Ruin 2 (ED isn't a GCD), and SCH has Plegma/Toxicon/Pneuma. Stating a fact isn't stating an opinion. And even if it were; stating an opinion isn't being a contrarian. Being a contrarian is choosing to hold or present a position opposite everyone else's for no other reason than that you want to hold/present an opposed position. In my case, I present my position as I said above - because I genuinely believe it.

8)

you are absolutely entitled to your opinion, however that isn't one that everyone holds.

Irony, thy name is...

You realize that I'm the only one here who HASN'T stated my position is universal and that everyone holds it, or some statement close enough to that to make no difference? I'm the one here who couches my statements with "many", "some", "a lot", "a not-insignificant amount", and so on; implicitly if not explicitly NOT saying my position is majority, much less universal. While you guys describe your opinions as universal truths, what I do is call your attention to the fact they are not universal.

When I many people don't think or feel as you do, that's not me saying NO ONE does or that EVERYONE agrees with me.

It's me saying a not-insignificant, non-zero amount of people disagree with you. It could be a minority, it could be a plurality, it could be a majority. I don't know, so I don't say. But it's not zero, and it's not insignificant. You're the one supporting posters arguing that your position is absolute, or near enough to not matter.

You are absolutely entitled to your opinion (something I've said many times), however that isn't one that everyone holds. And no, I'm not turning your words against you - these are literally the same words I've said many times before now, and in threads you've been an active part in. You can't not know that I hold this position. Especially as you often act as if you do not...

This occurred because of a combination of reasons.

I agree, but the point still remains: The Devs tried to say something about what they wanted Healer design to be and the community refused to accept it. Set aside Energy Drain (for the MP issue) and note that the community also largely (or, if a minority, a vocal one that is still of significant size) has rejected the push towards Healers dealing less damage or having less involved damage kits. You can list any number of reasons for this, but the end result is the same - the Devs took actions in one direction and the community refused to accept it.

I also am confused: What "butchering of WHM"?

WHM was only "butchered" in SB, it was made whole in ShB, not "butchered". And arguably HW. Removing Aero 3 to add Misery and the fantastic ShB Lily system that made WHM not suck anymore like it did in SB - there's no rational person I've ever seen argue that SB WHM was actually good when pressed - was not a "butchering". WHM in ShB was better than WHM in SB, full stop. AT WORST it was a side grade, but it wasn't a side grade, it was an improvement. WHM in EW is, as this very thread has pointed out, more developed, engaging, and WORKS than ShB or SB. And yes, that's all that was changed for WHM from SB to ShB. Aero 3 was removed (Aero 1 had been removed in 4.0), Presence of Mind 2 (the redundant non-toggle Cleric Stance) was removed (Cleric Stance 1.0 was removed in 4.0), the terribad 4.0 Lily system was removed, the generally considered pointless Fluid Aura was removed and replaced with the actually good Divine Benison (Fluid Aura was made worthless in 4.0, not 5.0), and the actually good Lilies (which at the time weren't damage neutral but were arguably close to it) were added and WHM was actually considered a worthwhile healer in ShB where it was considered bad in SB. WHM also got a 1.5 sec Glare in 6.0 to use for weaving (something it, unlike SCH who had Ruin 2, arguably actually needs; recasting Dia over and over during the Bozja Wraith miniboss fight because I had NOTHING ELSE on WHM to use while moving and Glare's cast was too long to slidecast at all with felt terrible) which was also an improvement.

I think the ONE thing I might consider reverting from EW would be Thin Air, though this targeted one is kind of growing on me, I did like the 15 seconds of free casting...

I'm trying to think of anything else of value changed from SB to ShB, and I can't think of anything. The only thing lost of any worth was Aero 3. The other stuff was either already made worthless/pointless in 4.0 or already removed outright in 4.0.

Anyway, getting to it:

Why would I ever hit Cure 2 before Afflatus Solace or Tetra? Medica over Rapture or Assize when it lines up? There simply isn't any reason to do so because the former all have cast times and MP costs associated with them on top of being a DPS loss to utilize whereas the latter don't. I would like there to be a reason other than "shit has hit the fan". If Healers could also differentiate themselves from one another that would be a great bonus on top.

I literally just proposed a solution for this:

1) Make Cure 1 upgrade to Cure 2 (direct upgrade, so Cure 2's MP cost would be 400 and cast time 1.5 sec base; AST nearly has this already and WHM is the one that's supposed to be the strong throughput Healer)

2) Make all WHM GCDs generate 1/3rd Blood Lily on use (that is, they're now all damage neutral). This makes all GCD heals for WHM be a choice - "Do I want to stand still and expend MP on this, or do I want to expend a limited resource that I might rather save for movement later?", as the damage being neutral between Cure 2 and Solace or Medica and Rapture makes it an actual choice rather than one being objectively better. You only have one Lily and expect a movement heavy mechanic coming within the next 10-15 seconds before you have another Lily up? In such cases, Medica/Cure 2 or even Medica 2 for the HoT might be better to cast now so you have that Lily for the upcoming movement phase. It provides an actual choice because there are actual use case differences and trade-offs, even if they heal for the same potency. Right now, that choice doesn't exist because Medica/Cure 2 incur an MP, movement, and damage penalty, and the last one of those is too damning to make them usable. (Also the 400 MP Cure 2 cost - hell, even 500 - would make it MP neutral vs a Glare cast)

3) PROBABLY have Medica 1 upgrade to Medica 2. It's a flat upgrade, it just needs its tooltip adjusted. Medica 1 can read "250 potency heal, Regen 150 potency for 3 sec" (one tick, maybe two ticks). Medica 2 has its MP cost reduced by 100 and is now a straight upgrade, problem solved.

Now the basic healing kit is:

Cure 2 / Solace / Tetra for single target healing. Solace has higher priority if you have Lilies to spare and/or no movement coming up, Cure 2 if you have 1 or less Lilies and/or expect movement to be coming up, Tetra if you need an immediate spot heal regardless of whatever else you're doing (if you're mid-cast on a Glare, Solace will be too slow). They now have distinct use cases and Cure 2 and Solace have trade-offs to make using one or the other both justifiable choices (actual choice!) based on the situation, with Tetra being more of a backup item in case of emergencies.

Medica 2 / Rapture for AOE healing, with the same Cure 2/Solace argument of MP and cast time vs movement and a limited resource. Assize is still used on CD as long as it has the damage component (which no one is arguing to remove), so is only part of the equation if it's about to come off CD or has JUST come off CD and you don't mind a few seconds drift on it. There's an argument to make Assize have 2 charges, but that would upend this, so better not. Again, this is actual choice rather than one option always being better by default.

My goal in any changes is to increase player choice and remove "this one is always better" situations. At least, for stuff like this. Doing things like having Cure 2/Medica replaced with Solace/Rapture if a Lily is up removes choice.

4) Making Plenary a minor (5% or 10% on a shorter duration) party mitigation would patch the hole WHM presently has. Temparance down to 60 seconds helps, but WHM would still be one short vs the other Healers and most encounters. If you're actually trying in 4 mans (where you have no other Healer), you start to notice really quickly that the other three have 3 mitigations per 2 mins but WHM does not. For example, Ra La's raidwides or the final boss from Alzadaal's Legacy have either a party-wide every 30 second or a bit more often than 60 sec (I for get which), and where even AST has a CD for that, WHM does not and its noticeable. While in more serious content you SHOULD always have a second Healer, even AST has tools for that. So unless we're removing mitigations from the other Healers (something I oppose), WHM needs to gain ~2 per 120 sec over what it has now.

.

I personally oppose the "if you have a Lily up" idea - yours isn't the first time I've seen it - because there ARE cases where I want to hold a Lily for something, and removing that choice is not an improvement. It's akin to arguing that Tanks/Melee/MCH should have their 1-2-3 condensed into a single button. Note that if all the GCDs were instant cast base, that WOULDN'T be an issue, but the only one that is is Regen. Also note this isn't an issue with Cure 1 (which I see no reason not to remove) because it doesn't really have a distinct use case. The use case for Cure 1 is EXTREMELY narrow - you have less than 1000 MP but greater than 400 MP and/or you need a heal in less than 2 seconds but greater than 1.5 sec. This is not true of Medica/Cure 2, which have distinct use cases. It'd be like telling a BLM that Xenoglossy and Fire 4 were basically the same thing and to turn the Fire 4 button into Xenoglossy whenever a Polyglot stack is up. While both have the effect of "does damage", and you DO want to use Polyglot stacks before overcapping, the use cases are still distinct. And if Medica/Cure 2/etc all generated 1/3rd Blood Lily, there would actually be a viable trade-off there that presently does not exist - there are cases where you wish to conserve limited resources and where MP would not be your most limiting resource.

I'm a bit confused about your Aero 3. By "similarly to BLM's Thunder Spells", do you mean the way Thunder 2/4 are AOE only and Thunder 1/3 are single target only? I'm not sure that's worth justifying another Hotbar slot, honestly. I'm also a bit confused on your Thundercloud proc. Wouldn't that end up with people complaining they have to overheal with Regen/Medica 2? And by "proc" you mean "not guaranteed", right? Meaning if it doesn't proc, using them would be a DPS loss? Where if we just make them contribute to the Blood Lily, they're guaranteed damage neutral...

Also: Not everyone likes having "short timers to maintain". Especially if we change the other Healers to where they all DO have them...

Making Water/Flood a Ruin 2 equivalent wouldn't differentiate it, it would make it look more like SCH while contributing to button bloat with no gain; even if we just look at your model (not mine), Regen would be the preferred instant cast GCD weave, not Water/Ruin 2. Making Water a low level AOE that upgrades into Holy would actually make it more distinct...

.

But, allow me to veer to a different question:

What would you do with SCH and AST?

EVERYONE seems to want to change WHM - the one Healer that needs changing the least - but we don't all even agree on that.

But EVERYONE agrees that SCH and AST need to be changed...so instead of proposals for WHM, what would you propose for the Healers we all agree should be changed?

Or do we all agree so much you just agree with my own stated positions on both, such as bringing back all of SCH's SB abilities and making AST Cards on the GCD?

[Silver-Strider]

WHM butchering

I was referring to SB WHM, which happened alongside the 1st attempt to remove Energy Drain.

We'll have to agree to disagree about the proposed changes to WHM.

What would you do with SCH and AST?

I'm just gonna copy over some ideas I had for SCH from another thread. Although it's somewhat more controversial than my WHM suggestions.

Just bear with me as it's far from being complete given that SCH has a vast array of gameplay elements to it, from the pet, to Aetherflow, to Energy Drain, etc. that I needed to consider and for all of my theorycrafting, I am still not 100% on some of the suggestions myself as of yet nor do I have ideas for some skills. The overall Goal was to reduce the need for our oGCD heals by both expending the DPS toolkit to provide some level of utility and to make the GCD healing toolkit work in a way that would benefit DPS but not handicap the healing side of things. There are some buffs to the oGCD healing side of things but there is also some skills that I want to remove.

GCD healing:
Addlo could be given a damage reflection element to it.
Succor could be used for both healing and to refresh/extend SCH's DoTs.

Physick I am at a loss. Upgrading it to Addlo at level 30 is an obvious solution but then there's also the option of just making every healer's Cure 1 equivalent skill have an Esuna effect added to them. You remove 1 skill either way so they both work.

DPS:
Broil and Ruin 2 now offer 5 Fairy Gauge.
Miasma returns and stacks with Bio with both having a 50% proc to grant 5 gauge per tic.
Shadowflare returns as an oGCD DoT that lasts 15s on a 60s CD but instead of a Slow effect, it grants the Protraction effect to any ally that enters the Dome for 10s. This way, it can remain useful for all content since most bosses are immune to the Slow effect and it would normally be centered on the Tank since that's where the enemies generally are so that they can still receive the benefits of Protraction.
Bane is added as a 15s DoT on a 60s CD that doesn't build Fairy Gauge but turns the ability into Fester. Using Fester causes Bane's DoT to expire but reduces the damage the Target does by 5% for the remaining duration of Bane's DoT timer upon use.

Aetherflow: I am honestly completely stumped here.
Indom is in contention with Fey Blessing and Succor now so would we really need it? Either Indom or Blessing would need to go but I'm more invested in keeping Blessing than Indom since otherwise it becomes harder to balance the Fairy Gauge unless I add a new Fairy Ability, which defeats the purpose of reducing the over abundance of oGCD healing tools.
The can of worms that is Energy Drain is also something that I can't really think of what to do with. SCH should have plenty of DPS tools now that it wouldn't really need it and if we're reducing oGCD healing tools, we might need to use more Aetherflow abilities more often.

Fairies:
Eos
Whispering Dawn now lasts for 15s with a cure potency of 120. 60s CD remains unchanged.
Fey Blessing CD reduced to 30s
Fey Illumination now provides a 15% Healing buff with 8% mitigation on a 60s CD
Selene
Whispering Dawn now lasts for 24s with a cure potency of 75. 60s CD remains unchanged.
Fey Blessing CD reduced to 30s. Provides a 380 potency Shield instead of a heal.
Fey Covenant provides a 15% mitigation effect with a 8% Healing Buff on a 60s CD.

Fairy Gauge:
Starts off at 100 upon entering an instance.
Whispering Dawn, Fey Blessing and Fey Covenant/Illumination cost 25 gauge.
Aetherpact costs 50 gauge and summons your unused fairy to the target to provide healing for 15s. This way you can use your other fairy skills without needing to worry about the tether turning off.
Seraph costs 50 gauge but Angel's Whisper, Consolation and Seraph Illumination can be cast without cost.

Misc:
Dissipation no longer dispels your fairy nor grants Aetherflow but instead allows the use of 1 fairy ability with no cost.
Alternatively, Dissipation and Recitation could be reworked to allow 1 free Aetherflow or Fairy ability usage with 2 charges, Recitation just allowing the skill to Crit over Dissipation.
Expendant is also something I hesitate to touch since it's still useful, even after the nerf but with the buff to Covenant/Illumination, do we need it?

Like I said, it's a work in progress and it might not provide the full picture of anything either but hopefully, it can at least give some context to my thought process.

As for AST, I've never really given it as much thought as WHM or SCH, which are my preferred jobs, so I'm not really sure on how to improve on it much.
I suppose the main thing I would do would be to separate cards into 2 categories, Major/Minor Arcana.
Major Arcana would provide the generic DPS card buffs. Whether they remain just flat damage buffs or focus more on stat buffs can go either way for me really.
Minor Arcana would be support cards that grant mitigation, extra healing, or shielding.
I'd change Undraw to Hand of Fate, that turns the currently drawn card into Lord/Lady of Crown instead of being a meaningless button.
While I hesitate to change their healing skills since they work fine, something that I would like to see would be an emphasis on Regens. Similar to how old CO would extend the duration of buffs that the AST gave, I would like to see that mechanic return as well as an inverse of it where they could trade away a Regen to turn it into a burst heal instead.
I don't really see a reason to keep the Seal system either. Astrodyne is a weak skill, even at 3 seals, that they could probably just turn it into a 2 minute buff with all 3 bonuses without it really impacting AST all that much.

Not really sure what else to do with AST though so take that with a grain of salt.

Edit: This is what happens when you post at 2am lol. I'll edit this to clarify some things.

[Renathras]

I read all the other posts since this one I'm quoting but I have to ask about this specifically. Emphasis mine, just want to find out how you square this assertion with the data you posted in that other thread a while back, which says:



At least, if I'm reading it right, that HW was the highest level of healer playerbase we've ever had and while there's currently an uptick of sorts, we've never been close to what we had back then? People quit in SB, I'll agree on that, the data says that too. But HW? It seems that, if these numbers are to be believed, HW was the peak of 'people want to play healer' and we've never had it anywhere close to as high as back then ever since, even with a new healer class being released

I would say the most likely answer is that Healers then were diverse (we had a pure/simple Healer - as discussed, WHM was largely played then as it is now, just with more GCD cast heals; a damage focused support Healer in SCH; and a pretty crazy hybrid buffer/support Healer with AST). Everyone had an option available to them.

SB was when the simple/easy option (WHM) was at its absolute worst, so we saw a large exodus. ShB was when all of them were made simple, so we lost the complex lovers but regained the simple lovers that had abandoned the role.

This would suggest the answer is a hybrid approach.

The caveat to this is that we don't know what the numebers were BEFORE that because the data wasn't available. What if the number in ARR was 30%? What if it was 20%? Each would lead us to a different conclusion about HW, the second that HW was a peak but the first that HW was the beginning of a downward trend. Unfortunately, we don't have that data, so we don't know.

But what we know is that when Healer Jobs were more diverse across both playstyle and complexity, and that both were viable, the role was more popular.

All I'm gonna say is, if SE had a PTR where we could test 'SB WHM, with current Lilies and skills added', I would put actual money on the vast majority saying 'this is great'. Maybe I'm wrong, and I'd lose my money on the bet, but I'm confident enough in my assertions to make it. We only have to have these 'nuh uh my way would be better' because we're unable to put them to the test. It's all well and good insisting that 'no if we had all the healers have actual skill ceilings (skill floor remains as is) then EVERYONE would quit and the servers would explode and Blizzard would buy out SE and turn the game into a glorified Hearthstone lobby' when there's no way to disprove that statement. But if we had a seperate client for 'testing' stuff, we could put some of these false assertions in the grave where they belong

It wouldn't even need to necessarily take server space. Could make a 'lab room' of just plain white nothing forever, with a training dummy in the center, and have the game client look at localhost instead of the server IP, and essentially 'host' the 'server' on the player's own machine. We've got the benchmark program, something similar with a 'playtest these moves for us and give feedback on the forums' should be doable. At least, if the 'spaghetti code' issue is as solved as they claim

I actually somewhat agree with this. FFXIV's Dev team is pretty tight on stuff, though - they don't even release potency changes in patch notes before maintenance anymore - so it'll never happen. But it would be one way to see which change are popular and which are not.

But given we DON'T have one of those, I think the next best solution is what I've proposed - change 2-3, leave 1-2, see which one players play the most.

I could be wrong, but if people are still playing Healers, they likely wouldn't quit over that. Those that like it the way it is would continue doing it, those who don't would try out the new/changed Healers and, if they enjoyed one, stay with the role, and people that left the role for that reason would likely do the same, increasing the role's population. Everyone tried out SGE. Even jaded Healers who were considering quitting the role (and probably those who did) to see if it could appeal to them. Imagine if it HAD. Imagine if it WAS the DPS focused Healer everyone - and this is one of the few universal statements I'll make; probably EVERYone - thought it was going to be when they heard "heals by doing damage".

Suppose, Einstein thought experiment, that it HAD been that. It had some galaxy brain gameplay, high skill ceiling, and whatever you'd consider a fun rotation - be that DNC, RDM, BLM, GNB, MNK, NIN; whatever it is you think would be fun - and had actually DONE THAT.

Then people like you would have tried it out, and absolutely loved it. Would you still wish that WHM would change? Of course you would. Would you be making threads all the time asking that WHM be more like SGE? Maybe so. But you'd be playing SGE and actually having fun with its mega-complex hyper-active gameplay style where every encounter was as exciting as the most exciting thing to you.

And we would have actual data, because we could look at which Healer Jobs were being played and which were not. If no one liked simple Jobs, WHM would be dead last and everyone would have flocked to SGE, and that would be apparent. That could then be used as a solid argument for changing the other Healers, because it would be an example of it working.

But maybe it would be middlingly popular. Maybe many people would like it...but many wouldn't, just as many people like BLM but many do not and prefer SMN. Well, then that'd be an argument for holding onto that new status quo - one which appeals to both camps.

You might not like that - because it's WHM you'd want to get the SGE treatment - but you'd be running content on SGE and actually enjoying it, and everyone playing Healers in FFXIV would have a Job that appeals to them, and the Healer shortage would abate as people come to the role, either back to or for the first time, playing the awesome playstyle you propose.

I think that's the next best thing we can hope for, given there is no PTR.

Yet you attack me for my position which is far more sourced and supported than your own, which hasn't been by you or any of the posters agreeing with your position...

Again, HB time:

What in this:

It's interesting how frequently that you respond with rebuttal such as "Solo content isn't tedious to a lot of people. There's zero reason all Healers NEED those. I think the problem here is that you think that all Healer players want what you do and feel the way you do. Many players find WHM, for example, fun and engaging"

You are backing up your opinion, and based upon likely empirical evidence and claiming it as fact- when you aren't providing any factual evidence (independently sourced metrics) to back it up.

Given that- it remains an argument of one person's preference versus another person's preference. You are "being a contrarian" , you have held to some positions- one for example being "It's explicitly WHY I think we should change SOME Healers but not ALL of them, so that both types of player have at least one they enjoy playing on. There's only one Healer in the game that has 1 DoT + 1 Nuke, and that's AST." - you are absolutely entitled to your opinion, however that isn't one that everyone holds.

...was "sourced and supported"?

You provided no sources, so literally nothing you said there (which was mostly attacks on me) was "sourced", and you didn't offer supporting arguments, only your opinionated statements as if they were facts. Can you provide a source for...honestly, you didn't even make any position other than that you said I didn't source things (I've referred to FFlogs, FFXIV census, and Lucky Bancho census; all of which are actual things - you, on the other hand, have not provided any sources at all) and that I'm entitled to my opinion, which is a statement everyone agrees with.

As to the few points you've now made - which were not points you raised, they are you trying to counter me after your broadside...

No one knows how many people agree with them. But it is, as I've said, a not-insignificant, non-zero number. "a lot" is not "extremely subjective". Things like "X is boring" is extremely subjective. I notice you do not feel like you need to call out "extremely subjective" statements when literally anyone else here makes one, and are attacking my measured statements which do NOT assume universal or near-universal agreement. Very interesting...

For 4, it's not "you just don't know". It's reasonable to infer based on both census data and how the majority of the playerbase behaves. Is it absolute fact? No. But it's actually MORE SUPPORTED than the position Healers are boring. Funny how that works. 1%? No, it's more than that. You can believe it's not, but show me your evidence. Likewise, show me what % of people believe Healers are boring and in need of changing. You speak of sources, time to show yours: Prove that the vast majority of Healer players in FFXIV think Healer Jobs are boring and need to be changed. Can you? We both know the answer is you cannot, but I would LOVE to see you try. Show us that EVERYONE agrees. Can you?

...no. You can't. Maybe 1% agree with you. Maybe 5%. Maybe 20%. WHO KNOWS?! And yet, you support complete changes to all Healer Jobs, all Healer players, and the entire Healing system of the game as it exists, based on...WHAT?

Meanwhile, my position is a modified status quo that actually GIVE YOU some of what YOU WANT. But it doesn't give you EVERYTHING you want. My position is measured so that no matter what those %s are, be they in favor of my position or yours, everyone is served in some way. What if my position was the majority? Your fixes would destroy the game. What if your position was the majority? My position would appeal to them with a majority of the Healer Jobs and arguably could see the Healer role fixed, and maybe even the remaining Healer Jobs changed if your position was popular. Also, the status quo is not the position that requires defending - proposed changes do. And as mine's the half-way solution, it requires less than yours. But if you want to push me back to just saying hold the status quo from the top down...

(5) So when did you stop beating your wife? WHERE did I say they were MEANINGLESS?

HOW MANY TIMES across ALL of these threads do I have to say that I recognize there are people that think like you do and think we should change several of the Healer Jobs to exclusively appeal to you before you get it?

HOW MANY?

One more? Will one more do?

Clearly not.

So how many times must I say it?

And when will you say the converse - that there are many Healers that would not like your proposed changes?

Yes, any change will have minorities disagree - some will have majorities disagree. Can you prove which your change would cause to disagree? Moreover, do you know what the solution to that is?

...to have measured change that offers an opt out for people that don't want the larger change. Indeed, my proposal IS what "managed change" would look like.

(6) I took nothing out of context. But by all means, say what and how I took it out of context. Either you believe we have different preferences or you do not.

(7) Well...at least we have that. A rare oasis of understanding. I'd love to stop with that, but...

(8) - no, don't leave it at that. HOW am I incorrect in THIS statement:

You realize that I'm the only one here who HASN'T stated my position is universal and that everyone holds it, or some statement close enough to that to make no difference? I'm the one here who couches my statements with "many", "some", "a lot", "a not-insignificant amount", and so on; implicitly if not explicitly NOT saying my position is majority, much less universal. While you guys describe your opinions as universal truths, what I do is call your attention to the fact they are not universal.

When I many people don't think or feel as you do, that's not me saying NO ONE does or that EVERYONE agrees with me.

It's me saying a not-insignificant, non-zero amount of people disagree with you. It could be a minority, it could be a plurality, it could be a majority. I don't know, so I don't say. But it's not zero, and it's not insignificant. You're the one supporting posters arguing that your position is absolute, or near enough to not matter.

Be specific now!

...or perhaps don't say "you're wrong" in the future when someone isn't...

You didn't attack my argument. You restated one of my statements (not my argument) as if it was implicitly wrong, didn't bother actually arguing that, and then attacked me for stating an opinion without source or support, when I've presented both sources and supporting arguments. You didn't even present an argument that my statement WAS WRONG. At best, you were attacking me for not having absolute proof on how many "a lot" or "many" are, while you have no problem with people making arguments on your side do worse.

My disagreement stems from approaching it in the opposite direction; "SB WHM with current lilies and skills" is the logical equivalent to "Endwalker WHM plus Aero 3". I think "lol just add Aero 3 it'd make WHM good again" is...not something I see panning out, and in fact would slot into the folder of opinions I have labeled "Endwalker healer design is terrible, samey, and embarrassing...oh except WHM, suddenly when the white egg job stone is involved this horrible job design I spent the last two paragraphs lambasting is *chef's kiss* near pinnacle".

Huh.

I'm not saying it's good or bad, but your take is...unusual. Most people that want WHM changes essentially want Aero 3 (and possibly Aero 1 and Fluid Aura) back, and often times...that's it.

Interesting to see you disagree.

Not bad, just...I dunno, different.

[Sebazy]

What would you do with SCH and AST?

https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...-revamp-theory.

Note that this was a few weeks after patch 4.1 early on in Stormblood. SCH had been course corrected after it's initial murder at the hands of 4.0.

If was to rewrite it today, I'd definitely take advantage of newer additions such as charges to add additional utility to abilities whilst avoiding bloat such as Fey Antithesis to swap fairies without the additional buffs whilst it was on cooldown to save likely needing to pocket Swiftcast after a Selene burst cycle.

Other than that I think it still holds up pretty well as a concept. It would fit in pretty well with the focus on burst windows that we have now whilst offering some flexibility if you fall out of sync removing the need to skip an entire 2 minute burst to get back in alignment with the group. IMHO it'd offer a little more potential for engagement with how powerful 'throwing' fairy abilities would be. Lastly, it'd give the illusion of being a very pet centric healer once again, despite the pet really being nothing more than a minion/crosshair. It'd reward aggressive play in a more meaningful manner than the speedy aetherflow IMO somewhat similar to how Misery rewards good usage of Lilies.