Yoshi-P: "If you want more engaging content, go play Ultimate"

[grinkdaboy]

did u just get rejected from a week 1 static

kekw

the best part is that you know i'm right. why else would everything be homogenized to where almost every buff is 2min now? all of the sniveling little piglets squealed that 45/90/180s didn't "feel good" (read: didn't let them parse good as easily) so now here we are at the 2min buff meta.

[GaiusDrakon]

the best part is that you know i'm right. why else would everything be homogenized to where almost every buff is 2min now? all of the sniveling little piglets squealed that 45/90/180s didn't "feel good" (read: didn't let them parse good as easily) so now here we are at the 2min buff meta.

u realize the reason we're in this mess is not because of the "1%". it's the people who aren't in the 1% complaining that they can't be in the 1% and now everything is dumbed down and anyone who crit farms 300 runs can.

but ok lol clearly the top 1% just cheat and that's all they do.

plus every change they've been making recently is from midcore JP raiders screeching, so now we have 30y buffs

[grinkdaboy]

u realize the reason we're in this mess is not because of the "1%". it's the people who aren't in the 1% complaining that they can't be in the 1% and now everything is dumbed down and anyone who crit farms 300 runs can.

but ok lol clearly the top 1% just cheat and that's all they do.

if there's anything worth taking away from TOP w1 race it's that it's all rotten to the core with cheaters. absolutely 0 integrity from anybody involved from na, eu, or jp. all cheaters. and if they aren't directly, they are complicit in it. they don't care about fair competition, it's all about the """prestige""" whether it be among their peers or in the community at large.

[Renathras]

the best part is that you know i'm right. why else would everything be homogenized to where almost every buff is 2min now? all of the sniveling little piglets squealed that 45/90/180s didn't "feel good" (read: didn't let them parse good as easily) so now here we are at the 2min buff meta.

I'm kind of jealous I have to share my stalker...but not that jealous.

This seems to be his response to someone who makes good points "You CLEARLY don't know what you're talking about!"

Not a rebuttal, not an argument.

That.. wouldn't really do anything no?
...
...

I...don't think you understand what I'm saying.

I'm not proposing a stat squish.

I'm saying they already showed - when they DID the stat squish - that they have a method of quickly changing past content all at once to accommodate the altered healing numbers.

That was all that argument was about. It was proving that they can and HAVE done this in the past already, something you seemed to be under the impression they never did or could do, or that would be too difficult and time-consuming to implement.

You'd have to change every spiky damage raidwide to smaller hits of smaller damage in every piece of content in the game, and that's simply not feasible logistics wise.

No, you wouldn't - because those can be covered by GCD heals as they already exist in game at those levels. Like let's say they do this from 7.0 on. oGCDs heal for less, Tanks/DPS have less healing. Let's say that's all they change (for the sake of ease of illustration).

So now you jump into P5S synced.

Can you still clear it?

Well...yes. An Emergency Tactics Succor + Medica II can heal your party pretty well. A Cure 3 if you can stack. Nothing at all needed to change. Your DPSers might have to be slightly more on point to make up for lost Broil/Glare casts, but even synced you'd be running the content in functional 640 (or whatever the sync will be to) gear, so that should be more than sufficient to clear the content.

That was my point in pointing out how little healing is actually needed. If a party can clear TOP without a Healer at all, then surely two Healers using GCDs can clear it as well, yes? No retuning required!

.

EDIT:

Idea for little changes: First remove the rez from non-healers. Then have hard fighs insta-kill a random or specific player. Killed with these attacks the player will not get a weakness debuff. I know raiders will hate it because it will be bad for the holy logs! Secondly add more ailments that need to be cured with esuna. If you want healers devs and cant construct a rise to use heal over mit than use the other healer tools. Or make healers into supports and give them buffs. Maybe even mit

Honestly, I'm not even sure WHY Healers don't have more of the party mits. I could understand Tanks having some (since their role IS to protect their party members), but why so many DPSers?

OG Healers had mit, like Addle used to be something SMN but also SCH and WHM carried as Cross-Class actions back in ARR and HW, and SCH was a master of mitigation back in the day as far as what mitigation was in the game at the time.

[BRVV]

*snip*

About the numbers crunching. Simply dividing or multipling everything with the same number would keep the balance the same. With larger single hits that means short powerful mit is better than heal. So still no need to heal.

Let's hope for healer mit in 7.0

[Payotz]

I'm saying they already showed - when they DID the stat squish - that they have a method of quickly changing past content all at once to accommodate the altered healing numbers.

And again it won't really change anything. The numbers aren't the problem, it's the design.
The healing numbers itself aren't the problem. It's the instances of healing damage. It's how the damage goes out.

They can tune Ancient Quaga to have 4x damage right now and it wouldn't change anything. It's still spiky damage.
They can tune Ancient Quaga to have less damage right now, and it wouldn't solve the problem. It would make things worse, since now you don't need to top up the pary as much.

What they can do is change it so that Thordin just casts Ancient Quaga 4 times, to fit the new healer design, but that require reworking the fight, because now the fight takes too long and the cooldowns don't line up, so now they'd have to adjust everything else. That's what I meant by "not feasible".

No, you wouldn't - because those can be covered by GCD heals as they already exist in game at those levels. Like let's say they do this from 7.0 on. oGCDs heal for less, Tanks/DPS have less healing. Let's say that's all they change (for the sake of ease of illustration).

So now you jump into P5S synced.

Can you still clear it?

Well...yes. An Emergency Tactics Succor + Medica II can heal your party pretty well. A Cure 3 if you can stack. Nothing at all needed to change. Your DPSers might have to be slightly more on point to make up for lost Broil/Glare casts, but even synced you'd be running the content in functional 640 (or whatever the sync will be to) gear, so that should be more than sufficient to clear the content.

That was my point in pointing out how little healing is actually needed. If a party can clear TOP without a Healer at all, then surely two Healers using GCDs can clear it as well, yes? No retuning required!

I'm sorry I have trouble understanding what your argument is.
Are you arguing that they don't need to overhaul content to fit the healer design because a single GCD heal can cover most of the healing?
"Nothing at all needs to be changed" is not the goal for an overhaul. If anything, I'm arguing that the "overhaul" that the game needs requires breaking the healer design that the game has relied on for a very long time.

[Renathras]

I'm sorry I have trouble understanding what your argument is.

That's kind of my point, I don't think you are.

I'm saying we can change healing ENCOUNTER DESIGN going forward (less spikes of damage, more frequent damage, oGCDs weaker and more for augmenting your GCD heals than replacing them). This fixes the problem in 7.0+ content.

Your argument is that wouldn't work, because they'd HAVE to change EVERY encounter from 2.0-6.55. Not that the change WOULDN'T work, but that the change WOULD work at the top, but make lower level content unplayable/unclearable.

My counter-argument to that is that you don't need all this healing IN current content, meaning the 5.0-6.55 content we already know would still be clearable without them needing to make any changes at all. This counters your argument that they would need to change EVERY encounter from 2.0-6.55, negating it. You might bring up 2.0-4.55, except 2.0-3.55 was already built in an era where Healers had less oGCDs/less powerful oGCDs AND could clear content using GCD heals...and can do so now. Nothing needs to change there, either. This is also true of 4.0-4.55 content.

In other words, the downside/prohibition against changing things like this GOING FORWARD is "It would be too much work as they'd need to update all past content". The point is, if they DON'T have to update past content, they can make this change and there won't be any problems.

My arguments are centered around explaining why they wouldn't have to touch/update past content, thus negating the one downside argument you insist.

This clears the way for the change going forward of having future fights have more consistent but weaker damage and oGCD heals being weaker in 7.0+ content.

Meaning it can work just fine without any issue in older content.

.

EDIT:

In the absolute worst case scenario, they can lower boss health across the game by 5-10% to make up for the lost Healer damage (which would also be extremely easy since it would be done with an algorithm and is a really simple change). But this is still basically the same end result of "this would work just fine".

.

A priori, this isn't obviously true, especially if we replace TOP with <other encounter>. One might suppose that replacing the healers with jobs that deal greater damage would allow the party to skip troublesome mechanics that would otherwise require healers to be present and on their S-rank game, etc. etc. (In the specific case of TOP, I guess not, but I think my point still stands.)

This generates a Shrodinger's problem: Either healers aren't needed right now (so we can nerf heals and content is still clearble) or healers are needed right now (in which case there's no problem and no changes needed). It can't be both at once.

.

EDIT2:

Oh I addressed this in my first post. I wouldn't want this to happen cause it would alienate a lot of the healers that do like the healing right now, and is the new core. I know how much it sucks to have something you love taken away from you, so I wouldn't really want that for anyone.

Then how is that any different than the alternative?

It.. doesn't really counter it?

It...completely and directly counters it.

.

You're arguing for EXTENSIVE changes, which I'm not. I think that may be the issue. You think I'm arguing for the changes you're proposing, which I'm not.

I'm arguing for nerfing oGCD heals on Healers, for nerfing DPS and Tank healing/mitigation, and for shifting the combat model GOING FORWARD (7.0+) into having reduced damage spikes but more frequent damage and be designed around the new Healer kits, knowing that the past content can still be cleared even in that case with minimal or even no modification.

...though, ngl, I like the idea of 1.5 sec GCD for heals...

[Payotz]

That's kind of my point, I don't think you are.

I'm saying we can change healing ENCOUNTER DESIGN going forward (less spikes of damage, more frequent damage, oGCDs weaker and more for augmenting your GCD heals than replacing them). This fixes the problem in 7.0+ content.

Oh I addressed this in my first post. I wouldn't want this to happen cause it would alienate a lot of the healers that do like the healing right now, and is the new core. I know how much it sucks to have something you love taken away from you, so I wouldn't really want that for anyone.

My counter-argument to that is that you don't need all this healing IN current content, meaning the 5.0-6.55 content we already know would still be clearable without them needing to make any changes at all. This counters your argument that they would need to change EVERY encounter from 2.0-6.55, negating it.

It.. doesn't really counter it? Yeah sure, it's more than enough healing right now. It's probably more than enough healing with a 20% nerf.
I'm arguing that there needs to be a fundamental redesign with how healing works.

I'm not talking about just numbers. I'm talking about how the healing abilites would function.

I'm talking forcing Succor to not heal and just do very weak barriers. I'm talking making Medica and Medica II type skill only function with the 3 nearest players around the healer. I would make the highest potency heal to just be 200 potency. I'm talking deleting 80% of the OGCD healing abilities in the game.

I'm also thinking about deleting the 2.5 GCD lock for GCDs for healers and turning the recast time and cast times to 1.5 seconds. I'm talking the fact that healing gcds are so few and precious that you have to figure out who to heal first.

I'm talking every 30% mitigation skill in the game to be deleted. I'm talking the Tank passives not having built-in mitigation, rather they HAVE to do their rotation perfectly to keep their 10% mitigation up. I'm talking Tenacity actually being needed in your gear cause the auto attacks of every boss in the game actually putting a physical vuln up on you. I'm talking deleting every invuln in the game.

When I say overhaul, I really meant overhaul. Like actual breaking the bones type of stuff that is never gonna happen in FFXIV.

And a LOT of old content needs to be reworked to fit that design, and that's not gonna happen in FFXIV either.

[AmiableApkallu]

That was my point in pointing out how little healing is actually needed. If a party can clear TOP without a Healer at all, then surely two Healers using GCDs can clear it as well, yes? No retuning required!

A priori, this isn't obviously true, especially if we replace TOP with <other encounter>. One might suppose that replacing the healers with jobs that deal greater damage would allow the party to skip troublesome mechanics that would otherwise require healers to be present and on their S-rank game, etc. etc. (In the specific case of TOP, I guess not, but I think my point still stands.)