Quote Originally Posted by Renathras 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.
Which I have said already.


[QUOTE]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)

No. I said consistently. EX1 and 2 of this expansion have been piss poor as have been a good chunk of the first tier of Savage. After ShB we should have had this difficulty already. But the devs said "well, we usually make the first tiers easy". Excuse me? After healers were asking for higher healing in the previous expansion you were going to make these easier to heal than the previous savage tier? Yeah, no. That's the part that I take issue with. SE needs to continuously give higher healing requirements and not back track after a tier (which we suspect they may do the for the next set of savages) or just going forward period.

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?
Yeah that's the part where I've said I haven't seen anything. There is always going to be down time. So unless you and everyone else are on board with making MSQ more difficult for healers so there isn't going to be any there as well...

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.
And the reason why is above. SE isn't going to make dungeon content harder. Meaning down time is going to be there for experienced healers. I don't agree with their stance on it at all. By 90 you should know how to heal, but that's where SE stands and they don't seem to be budging. Which is fine, but again, if I am going to have excessive amounts of down time, then make the down time more interesting.

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?
My rejection of your proposal was never under the belief no one held your position. My reject is because you're going to be leaving 1 healer behind in fixing their down time when there's no reason to other than "well people like it to be simple". Ok. You can give the simple healer a simple set of DPS skills. SGE has Phlegma after all. That is why I don't understand your position. I'm not asking for all healers to be at the same level of complexity.

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.
Eh. This is between you and him.