Quote Originally Posted by ASkellington View Post
...
/sigh

If that were the case, I wouldn't be routinely attacked here for being wrong - which I am, let's be honest - since I hold those same positions. I do agree on paper it appears that we all agree, but clearly we do not, so you can't wave it away as "Well, we all are saying that exact same thing", when that isn't the case, as so am I.

Where we differ is in our solutions, and what the wider community thinks.

My position isn't everyone's - I'm not the one claiming my position is the one held by everyone - may not even be the majority. But it's not isolated to me and is, at worst, a sizeable minority.

The most commonly cited answer SO FAR is "More damage like Abyssos is the solution, as long as mitigation is handled by Healers alone and we aren't forced to roll the dice and hope we get DPSers in our parties that will do it". That seems to be the majority position, or the plurality solution, that those threads are showing.

1. Isn't true, as Abyssos DOES require higher amounts of healing and/or mitigation. Ex4 ALSO required more healing than a typical Extreme. So on both points you're wrong on that point. (also, kind of an Either-Or fallacy there, though not QUITE since you do ask the question with there being a potential third solution, you're just expressing doubt it exists)

2. The solution most people seem to be proposing is there shouldn't be downtime with nothing to heal, so the answer there would be healing.

You haven't seen a good one? I've seen others...are you sure you're looking?

.

Again, the main solution now seems to be "More healing required/more Abyssos is good, just move mitigation to Healers instead of giving it to DPS". While you might accept that solution, the posters in this forum have largely been opposed to it.

...because I've proposed it or variations of it QUITE A FEW TIMES up until now, and let's just say "disagreement" occurred.

.

I've said for a while there are bridges for agreement. My attempts to propose them have been rebuffed at every turn, with the position of the majority here being I'm an isolated case with whom no one agrees. I think the data is showing that claim to be false. At best, you could say my position is held by a sizeable minority of the player base. My proposal for 1 simple Healer, 1 moderate Healer, and 2 complex Healers was based on this breakdown, and often rejected based on the belief no one holds my position. But if it turns out 25-50% DO?

It also defeats Ty's statements above that "literally" no one agreed with me. At the very least, we can put that one to bed as debunked. Even if the data isn't great or the majority don't agree with me, that there are some that do means that there are, in fact, people who agree with me, proving false the claim that none do.