Paired Threads: What would it take to make Heaker kits "complex/interesting"?

[ASkellington]

2. I'm talking about all levels of content.

3. This is exactly the reason why we ask for more dps buttons. Adding in extra DPS buttons means dungeon content does not need to change its design while offering players who want more to do and not affecting healers who have enough on their plate already. What part of that do you not understand. I'm genuninely curious.

If a healer is struggling, they are not going to be pressing those extra dps buttons. They're there for the more experienced players so they don't get bored with excessive down time.

The only place it would be required to do high amounts of dps is in EX and Savage, meaning MSQ content can stay the same. And if players have a problem with that (extra dps needed) you signed up for savage. Its expected of you at that point. It is literally no different then expecting a healer or tank or dps in savage to properly heal, know how to mitigate or do their rotation properly.

So I'm going to ask this again since you seem so horribly against the topic of extra dps:

SE is not going to address down time with extra healing requirements, what is your solution to fixing down time other than healing that SE is not going to give?

Also, Criterion dungeons are too little too late. We got ONE. If SE wanted to fix the need for midcore content, I'm sorry but they should've scrapped Island Sanctuary if they couldn't even be bothered to give us 2 different dungeons. And I wouldn't even call them good because they STILL don't address the lack of healing.

And it comes off as tone deaf as YoshiP saying to "Go Play Ultimate" intended or no. I shouldn't have to go to Ultimate to get engagement on a role, or savage or EX or criterion. It should be fun at all levels of play which includes MSQ and healers in this game are not.

And its not a problem with me as you so clearly pointed out that SE's current design of dungeons to raids to trials to savage is a problem. And it is a problem they need to fix. At all levels of play.

[Renathras]

...

2) Good. That's the point.

3) It may be, but it doesn't seem to be that everyone agrees with that position. Moreover, people honestly seem more open to having a bit more healing in dungeons. But it won't satisfy players like you, most likely. But to be fair, an extra DoT probably would not, either. The problem is that it DOES affect "healers who have enough on their plate already". One of the big concerns - and almost universal rejection of question 4 (the DPS Job rotations) - is players saying they fear that it will put pressure on the Healers in other content, since they'd have to engage with those rotations alongside healing and whether or not they wanted to to meet enrage checks. A concern that should sound familiar, as I've expressed it here many times in the past. The only way to fix that is if those extra buttons only do a really minor amount of additional damage to the point of being negligible.

4) SE may address downtime with extra healing requirements. They already did so in Abyssos. So suggesting it won't happen is a faulty position since it's already happened. And a lot of the survey responses seem to say that people LIKED IT, they just want full control of it - Healers having the full mitigation suite instead of having to share it with DPSers. So the problem with this question is it's a loaded one, assuming something that turns out not to be set in stone true. The Devs seem to be being very CAREFUL, and judging what they do off of community reaction. A lot of those same survey responses were terrified that, after all the complaints, SE would make the next raid have less damage and make Healers DPS bots again instead of doing what would fix it by giving Healers all the mitigation abilities. I other words, they're terrified a vocal minority whining about it is going to have SE go back to DPS spam, which the Healing community seems to NOT want. They want a healing direction, not a damage direction, to be taken.

I'm being an adult. I'm being direct. You're reading too much into what I'm saying.

And yet, you're neither owning up to a mistake or contesting the point with an explanation that could potentially be challenged, likely because you realize it could be, and so think as long as you don't give one, it can maintain an air of truth that it does not possess. You won't make a specific statement. You ignored the point, then when I made that impossible, you did an "/innocent Who, wittle ol' me? /deereyes", then when I pressed the point, did a "What exactly did I say?", then when presented with THAT...ignored it again, instead focusing on the one part of my post you thought you could somewhat contest.

You do this ALL the time. When I have you dead to rights on something, you just...pretend that isn't happening and that if you ignore it it'll go away.

I quoted you saying things that weren't true. And I responded with why they weren't true. AND why you must have known they weren't true.

I've now done it, what, four times? And you have, despite making MULTIPLE replies to me, not actually addressed it once other than ONE time with a "What did I say?" (as if you can't go back a page and read your own posts and the places I directly quoted you), and when I answered with direct quotes and why you're wrong and knew you were wrong AGAIN...you made this last post just to once more play innocent and pretend if you don't address it, it'll go away.

And this is AFTER I said I'm more than willing to let it go if you just stop posting about it.

Not only can you not admit you were wrong and apologize, you're desperate enough to save face that you can't let it go, either.

The adult thing to do would be to AT THE VERY LEAST admit you might be mistaken. The really adult thing to do would be admit you were wrong and that you should have (or did) know it and apologize. The at least adolescent thing to do would be to stop talking and hope it goes away - which it would because I'm only posting about it each time you reply about it to hammer the point home. And you're doing the worst of all worlds instead, keeping the tangent that makes you look bad going while neither letting it go and hoping everyone forgets it nor apologizing and owning up to it nor offering a cogent rebuttal to the claim if you had one - which you seem not to, because you've had 5 chances to offer it if you did.

I just don't want to bother with that nonsense of yours.

You're a smart guy, you have a rational mind, when you aren't trying to antagonize me, we have very productive and good conversations. But your inability to admit if you're ever wrong and your unwillingness to be concrete in statements so you can manufacture some "well, I'm still TECHNICALLY maybe right..." out of them - those are your worst attributes when it comes to discussions.

I'm over it if you are. Are you? We'll find out, I suppose...

Hell, I'm even putting them in HB so they won't be publicly shaming or whatever while you...don't ever do that. Because I don't want to derail a thread while you want to engage in ad hominem and hope you get some likes in the process to feel justified.

I'm so over that nonsense. I got through highschool and then college plenty of years ago. Putting up with HS shenanigans now is well beneath me, and it should be beneath you. Maybe it's not. But that's on you.

[Aravell]

What they did in Abyssos isn't the shining solution that some people think it is. So they added some DoTs to the raidwides, that means you have to replace about 10 casts of your filler nuke with your GCD heals (and this is mostly on low gear runs only). That does nothing much to reduce the massive amount of downtime that still exists. Simply look at P6S and P7S. The biggest complaint about those fights is the massive amount of nothing happening.

[ASkellington]

4) SE may address downtime with extra healing requirements. They already did so in Abyssos. So suggesting it won't happen is a faulty position since it's already happened.

No they aren't. You keep mentioning Abyssos. Abyssos is not a dungeon. Which is where I am asking for down time to be fixed.

Name one dungeon where they've made good on their promise to add more healing in the past 2 expansions. They haven't. Just because they made SAVAGE interesting doesn't mean they're going to touch the rest of the game. My point still stands.

And you still haven't answered the question.

What is your fix to down time in dungeons outside of dps?

[AnotherPerson]

4x DPS - Any all DPS party that did not have a RDM likely could not clear the dungeon. Party was DRG, RPR, SMN, RDM - I was the RDM. (I started to go NIN but realized my gear was a bit dated; had I done so, we would not have been able to clear.)

For all the talk of Healers being unneeded, it seems that DPS are actually the role that's unneeded.

I think DPS is actually the role that's unneeded in normal content, not Healers. When people say "1 Tank + 3 DPS" what they're really saying is "The party requires something that isn't a DPS otherwise the run won't work". If it wasn't that I formed a PF group specifically to do the three runs in a row, a normal dungeon run would probably have disbanded after that many wipes.

It's great you can clear the fight with 4 DPS (albeit requiring RDM to vercure). That's a quite an accomplishment! ... but I think you missed what the point of the challenge means entirely lol. The original point of this challenge was to see if dungeon content has gotten easier with each expansion enough where you don't need a healer in a traditional party as you did require one in the past (aka the holy trinity further collapsing when DF requires 1 tank, 1 healer, and 2 DPS) and doing the standard wall to wall pull. Tanks traditionally have mitigation, but they could not self-sustain through everything in wall-to-wall pulls and in bosses, and will eventually die along with the rest of the team if there's no healer healing, causing you to fail the clear. Nowadays, that's no longer applicable. It might be hard to do higher level dungeons with a healer that isn't healing, but not impossible to clear without them. With the addition of a healer that originally wasn't needed in the first place, it is now as clear as day the dungeon's relative difficulty to a traditional party has gotten easier.

If you were to compare it with tanks being unneeded, it would be equivalent with a tank not turning on tank stance and not using mitigations/healing at all in a traditional party of 1 tank, 1 healer, and 2 DPS doing wall-to-wall pulls. If the tank at any point ends up being main aggro again, it means tanks are still needed as the DPS failed their job at doing DPS/died and/or the healer died, resulting in tanks being the ones who can still soak damage or TB for the rest of the party (thereby re-engaging their main role) unless they also happen to drop their ILVL to have the same HP & defensive stats to become gimped DPS. That would honestly be an interesting test to see if every healer can do this with different party compositions to tell if it's just the holy trinity that's collapsing or the entirety of the dungeons becoming too lenient where requiring both in a party isn't needed.

On the other hand, if 4 DPS can clear what the original intent was for a traditional party is required (1 tank + 1 healer + 2 DPS) and still do wall-to-wall, then we have a bigger problem on our hands than just 1 tank or 1 healer not being needed. It means you can just throw the trinity right out the window at that point and a bigger class redesign is needed since the only metric that would really matter at that point is just DPS. RDM being gimped healer using vercure continuously implies the idea that you aren't being a DPS if you're constantly using vercure, so ultimately the clear still required 1 dedicated healer so to speak (so while the holy trinity is still cracking with only 2/3 roles, it's not gone yet). Unfortunately, that doesn't address the issue of how the trinity is so bad right now though where you can either replace 1 tank or 1 healer. The trinity, at the moment, is already on the verge of collapse, just purely because you can exclude one of the 3 roles in the party in level-synced content at higher levels.

[Renathras]

...

I guess we'd have to get a time machine to do past dungeons with past skills. There have been some in the past that needed Tanks and Healers together (Ala Mhigo enemies hit like trucks, even single pulling), we'd need to do it in period gear AND with period abilities. Not all Tanks CAN sustain themselves in wall to wall pulls. I think people vastly overapply WAR's insanity to all the Tanks. PLD had no self-sustain outside of Requiescat before 6.3 unless they were spamming Clemency, for example, and GNB's self-sustain is limited to its single target combo's -2, a slow burn longish CD HoT that can't be stacked but has 2 charges, and a once every 25 sec decent heal that can't be stocked (doesn't hold charges).

It may be true that dungeon difficulty for a general party has gotten easier, but that doesn't mean Healers aren't needed. It means you must have either a Tank OR a Healer. This could be interpreted as "Tanks are unneeded" just as easily. And it seems that dungeons don't require DPS at all.

Keep in mind that, as I noted, the ONLY way to clear with 4x DPS was to have one that acted almost exclusively as a Healer, do single pulls, and use Crowd Control. Without RDM, it would have been impossible, and even with RDM it was impossible to wall to wall pull. Your last paragraph seems to have you reflecting this same point, so we seem to agree that it still requires a "Healer" in that situation.

I would argue you can drop any one of the three roles, but two are still REQUIRED, it's just a choice of one or the other - either Tanks or Healers are REQUIRED. You must have a Tank OR a Healer to clear the dungeon. RDM was kind of cheating since it was acting as a Healer, just a barely making it one, lol

The only role you seem to be able to safely (and easily, I might add) drop in Lapis, is the DPSers.

Which, given how often people use the 1 Tank + 3 DPS example, was a somewhat surprising result. I was honestly thinking we'd be able to melt enemies as DPS, but that wasn't at all the case. It turns out, it's the DPS role that's extraneous. Tanks and Healers are, in effect, two flavors of the same thing - Support - of which you need at least one in the party to succeed.

...

Your question is tainted. And I answered it: More healing.

You can't say "I'm not going to allow your answer, NOW ANSWER THE QUESTION!!" I've given you an answer, you don't want/won't accept it. That isn't me not giving you an answer, nor is it me not answering/refusing to answer.

I've ALREADY answered the question. You just refuse the answer.

As far as Abyssos not being a dungeon, they're trying it there to see if it could be done elsewhere. The more endless complaining about it, the less likely they'll do it elsewhere. But while some people are doing this intentionally - thinking they'll give them more damage then - the likely result is that they'll give them nothing at all. Hell, they tried it in Criterion as well, just went stupid with the Criterion Actions making role irrelevant (sorta), as well as Ex4 being much more healing heavy (especially on release). So they're clearly trying to do higher damage in content besides just Savage.

[ForsakenRoe]

I reckon a 4x DPS run is possible if you use the right DPSs, the reason the 'trinity breakdown' has happened is because the tanks now have so much access to healing, so if you did 4x SMN for a similar level of selfsustain, and offset who had phoenix out so the regen had more uptime I bet it's easily doable

also lmao at the idea that you're forced to GCD heal your way through ARR dungeons cos 'you dont have as many OGCDs', if you play SGE or SCH you don't need GCDs OR OGCDs, the incidental heal of Embrace/Kardia is more than enough to keep up. Real fun being a SCH, getting anything below Stone Vigil, and being able to literally /follow on the tank and afk every trash pull. Or maybe that's 'peak healer gameplay' for some people? After all, if the healing is entirely automated, it's not the healer player's 'fault' if a wipe occurs, so they don't need to worry about that crushing weight of 'responsibility'

And Abyssos was good and bad. Good in that it made healing a bit more interesting, bad in that it A: scared the 'less skilled healers' away, B: wasn't actually 'more healing' but 'more mit', and that meant we were reliant on hoping that the melee, who had so little reason to use feint in previous raids that some did not have it on their bars, would use feint or we all die (and then the healer is asked 'where shield idot'), and C: it only lasted as long as we didn't have gear, as soon as ILVL rolled in, the healing became a lot easier to deal with because it's not solved the real issue. We don't need 'more healing' as in it hits harder, we need 'more healing' as in it hits more often, so that we actually do run out of OGCDs to use.

However, due to SE's not-great implementation of Abyssos healing paradigm, the idea of 'more healing' is likely now tainted in the playerbase's mind, as they have seen what SE's idea of 'more healing' actually is. Everyone keeps asking for 'more damage' because it is the most obvious, most casual friendly (don't have time to do these extra buttons? then dont, and focus on healing), most old-content-friendly (doesn't require changing old content at all, whereas a new healing paradigm might require changing eg old ultimate healing patterns), and tbh, most devtime friendly as half of the stuff we're asking for is literally just 'can we have back 'old tool X' like we had in 'previous expansion'', so the code's already still in the game

[Aravell]

If the argument is whether or not 4x DPS expert runs are doable, they are, even back in HW. I did a 4x DPS expert roulette run with some friends and we cleared. It required us to trade aggro on big pulls by swapping between single target and AoE, then we had to sac 1 dps per boss, but it's entirely doable. If, however, you want to say the run has to be deathless, then that requires a very specific composition of dps jobs.

Also, regarding the increasing of healing requirements, hasn't Yoshi P already gone on record saying that he will not increase healing requirements of any of the regular dungeon content? Can't really say "Just increase healing" when the producer himself says he won't entertain that idea.

[Renathras]

I reckon a 4x DPS run is possible if you use the right DPSs, the reason the 'trinity breakdown' has happened is because the tanks now have so much access to healing

Arguably agreed.

The issue isn't "Healers aren't needed".

The issue is "everyone's a Healer".

Tanks are Healers (for themselves, and often have some ability to be so for the party). This is the biggest offender.

SOME DPSers are Healers (RDM with Vercure, SMN with Phoenix, DNC with Curing Waltz, Melee with Bloodbath and Second Wind, and quite a few Jobs with some version of self-mitigation shielding like Third Eye or Radiant Aegis).

Provided you have enough of these, and the right mix of them, any 4 man group is capable of clearing dungeons...to a point. There are some that have healing, but the healing may be insufficient ALONE to do the job. Normally, only Healers have the ability to do the job alone, but of late, Tanks are not only able to heal themselves, but the party outright. This not only means they don't need healing from a designated Healer, but that they can replace the Healer to the rest of the party. Conversely, if you drop the Tank from the party, the enemies do low enough damage that most DPSers can survive the hits and be healed for the damage by any of the four Healer Jobs due to their greater Healing potency. And, of course, a party without either needs a stand in Healer substitute.

.

It seems that the general response from the Healer community actually IS that they want more Abyssos.

.

More damage isn't more casual friendly. It seems truely casual people don't agree that it's to their benefit. It's also almost exclusively proposed and supported by higher end players, suggesting it's more what they want, something hardcore friendly, not something casual friendly. More damage is going to be more difficult for casual Healers than is Cure/Medica spamming. And "old content friendly" is completely irrelevant, since SE......we've had this exact conversation before, so I'm not going to retread the ground.

.

Anyway, I agree with the "Trinity Breakdown" issue. It's less that it's outright breaking and more that when you give the abilities of one branch of the Trinity to both the others, it defeats the purpose and function of the Trinity.

[ForsakenRoe]

More damage isn't more casual friendly. It seems truely casual people don't agree that it's to their benefit. It's also almost exclusively proposed and supported by higher end players, suggesting it's more what they want, something hardcore friendly, not something casual friendly. More damage is going to be more difficult for casual Healers than is Cure/Medica spamming. And "old content friendly" is completely irrelevant, since SE......we've had this exact conversation before, so I'm not going to retread the ground.

Imagine a situation where a casual player is struggling to keep up with the incoming damage of the fight. Now imagine we have two universes, and in each one, one of the two suggestions was put in place. In the 'healers now have more tools to do damage with' universe, the casual player feels no difference between the 'Source universe' as it were, that we have now, and their hypothetical universe, because they're busy fighting for their lives to GCD heal through the pain. In the other hypothetical universe, the healing requirements were increased, and as such the casual who was already struggling to stay afloat versus the oncoming damage, now is unable to keep up and the party wipes. When I say 'casual friendly', I mean that 'in an emergency, this change can be ignored for the sake of keeping the party alive'. You can't ignore an extra 20% (or however much) HPS requirement, or people drop dead.

And if we were to change the healers so that they have less OGCDs, but their GCDs cost less mana and have half as much of a GCD (so, say a 1s GCD), that'd definitely have an effect on how old ultimates and savages would work re: healing patterns. Just the fact that you would have to stand still to hardcast things would be a massive change, the difference between WHM and AST mobility in UCOB frankly feels like I'm griefing if I go WHM. They can solve that by moving Rapture to 70 and PI to 76 though

oh, and if you had asked people 'which would you rather SE design fights like more, regular design where things hit like wet noodle, Abyssos with harder hitting raidwides and bleeds after to emphasize mitigation, or Barbariccia where it's not the damage that's the challenge, but the frequency it comes out at', I'd put real money on most people saying Barb, because, again, there's no difference to me if we have a raidwide every 2mins, or every 1 min, I can pretty much kitchen sink it with whatever combo of Physis, Kera, Holos, a shield, Panhaima, Pneuma after, bla bla. If the raidwides hit less hard, but came out every 20 seconds, we'd have to ration stuff out more. You can look at P6S and P7S for great examples of 'the boss hits you hard, once, then you can AFK for like a whole minute', its the same for tanks too, I'm pretty sure the first two tankbusters in P7S are EXACTLY one minute apart but I've not been in there in yonks.