Healer role design change?

[ForsakenRoe]

I'm still casually progging P12S so I can't speak for healing in phase 2, but the healing requirement in phase 1 is looking rather lacking so far, since I can soloheal through Superchain Theory I when my cohealer died at the start of it.

The only bits I'd consider 'hard to heal' are paradeigma 3 (platforms) and Limit Cut, and both are because of range. I actually use Medica 2 in LC specifically because of it's 5y extra range compared to Medica 1, hilariously. Rapture is also 20, so that's handy. But yeh Para3 can be a little wonky on healing if you end up with the 'bugger off to Narnia' debuff

phase 2's healing issues are kinda the same thing really, just 'people are out of range, get mid to heal up before the next Ultima cast goes off'. That and certain named raidwides hit pretty hard so again, mit check rather than actual heal check (sadly)

[ASkellington]

My opinion is that they need to change both. Cut out the redundancies in our kit, add more options to support the party or debuff the enemy. Also change fight design, bring back random targetted damage, bring back crit autos, give healers a reason to exist again, make it so tanks and DPS cannot keep up with the incoming damage.

Oh they certainly need to change both the problem is the dev team is so stubborn and against it for no reason.

I can quite literally pull up Bosses in EW that are perfect for what healers and tanks are asking for - instances where you can't always use the same CD because things come too fast and too often. Bosses that I praise the design for and wish the whole damn expansion has but for every one good designed boss, even if it doesn't hit that hard for vets, they shoe horn 7+ lack luster PoS.

Hell in Shb I point out the Gulg and Amaurot required story dungeons that a person can run with the AI if they can't be bothered to do so with players should have been the base line of Shb 80 dungeons and then we got Hero's Gauntlet which was trash on arrival and good for nothing but visuals.

And that's not even getting into redundant parts of a Healer kit that they think we need oh so badly. If we need 4 oGCDs that basically do the same thing and can cycle through, please do explain to me what the hells our GCD heals are for? Aren't they supposed to be something we fall back on? Unless my tank is bad or a DRK you can bet your arse I barely touch Benefic 2 (forget 1 lol and trait upgrade it). I use ASPECTED Benefic before I touch that.

[Aravell]

Oh they certainly need to change both the problem is the dev team is so stubborn and against it for no reason.

They gave the reasons that they're opposed to changing anything, it's just a very stupid reason. The main problem right now is that they're opposing both suggestions with the same reasoning.

- They refuse to add more complexity to healer gameplay because they don't want to stress out the new healers.
- They refuse to add higher healing requirements to encounters so we have to use our full kit because they don't want to stress out the new healers.

So what's left? The healer role is just going to decay and bleed out veterans until they actually move forward in either direction.

[ForsakenRoe]

they don't want to stress out the new healers.

Then they need to accept that, at a certain point, the 'new healer' is not new to healing anymore, preferably by gradually increasing the healing requirements as the story goes on. Everyone always gushes about how it 'looks like more healing is needed' when a Media Tour goes on. I can still close my eyes and remember the first pull of Bardam's Mettle when SB was current. Inferno, I think it's name was, the last boss of Castrum Abania, had a Bleed-TB which you'd definitely want to Esuna or powerheal through, because a crit autoattack combined with a bleed tick, on one of those 'I'm gonna drop tankstance' tanks, could do massive damage. More recently, Tower of Zot looked like a good step up at first, the final boss was chaotic and a lot of AOE healing was used because we weren't prepared for it.

But that's where the problem lies, once you ARE prepared for something it's suddenly so much easier. Knowing the fight removes so much of the healing required, and higher ILVL removes even more. Because you increase your effective 'don't need to heal' power in two ways, your heals heal for more (so you cast less heals when you do), and defense stat means you take less damage in the first place (which turns 'this needs a regen' into 'this is fine with just a Benison'

If a healer has got WHM to 85 and is in Vanaspati, they're not 'new to healing' anymore, so SE can afford to make things a little more challenging. If they ARE still new to healing at that point (ie they bought a boost), that's on the player for boosting. I don't think it's good design to make the difficulty curve be based on the assumption that the healer playerbase are all boostybois. It'd go some way to explaining why healer design is the way it is, if that WAS the design principle they're following though. But yeh, look at like, any other game. World 8 in SMB1 has harder platforming because it's assumed that the player has learned by that point how to play the game better than when they first started in World 1. The fact that a player can skip to world 8 in less than 10 minutes via WarpZones is not a factor in the design of World 8's challenge.

..But of course, SE can't do any of that, because some people wouldn't be able to keep up for various reasons, so instead the path I suggest is to make the damage side of healing have more nuance. You can't keep up with healing, that's fine. Focus on healing, and drop damage. If anyone complains about your damage being low on a healer, you can calmly explain that you were focused on keeping the team alive. And then BL them, and report them for using 3rd party tools to parse damage. If you CAN keep up with the healing, you can throw more and more parts of the damage 'rotation' into the fight. At first you just start out with sparing one GCD to put up your DOT, maybe. Then a couple of Glare/Broil/the other ones here and there. And then, since we're apparently not getting any extra healing requirements in this assumption, you get to the point where we are now: clearing the dungeon run with zero GCD heals used. It can be satisfying in it's own way to get to that point, and I'm sure a lot of players would love it (assuming they had an actual rotation as the 'reward' for their improving), as it stands the satisfaction for me is a lot lower because I know my reward is Dosis spam and lots of it

[Aravell]

Then they need to accept that, at a certain point, the 'new healer' is not new to healing anymore, preferably by gradually increasing the healing requirements as the story goes on.

The main problem is that SE is immensely stubborn. They've been presented 2 solutions by EN and JP.

EN wants more complexity in the damage kit, more to do in the downtime. It wouldn't hurt anyone if they designed the dps checks to be more akin to HW where healer dps is less emphasised if they go with a more complex kit, but if they go with the SB style of kit, that's also way better than what we have right now.

JP wants more to heal, they want to use their entire kit to the fullest and feel like an actual healer. But SE doesn't want to give them that either, they just add more and more mitigation checks instead of healing checks to the point that AST absolutely would be obsolete if they didn't have party buffs.

I think SE also designs regular content in such a way that any regular Medica spammer can clear it, this is not that great as there is no difficulty curve, but it's a bigger problem because it's also affecting extremes and savage fights. So many fights where bosses do nothing but cast, some bosses can go several seconds doing absolutely no damage. They've gotten a bit better with this in Anabaseios, but you can still see it in some parts (like Kokytos spitting out a soul, teleporting to the center, then casting Ravening, that's quite a long time of absolutely nothing happening).

In the end, SE really needs to pick a road, the current design is not making many happy. I'm sure some people will say that there's happy healers, so I'll say that, yes, there absolutely are people happy with healers right now, but we also know that people who leave the healer role aren't coming back as long as it stays the way that it is.

[ty_taurus]

I think "Content" is a more accurate way that I feel the player base has with healing as it currently exists. Most players aren't necessarily trying to break down the state of job design or anything, but I think most people, even if they aren't dissatisfied with the state of healing, feel that there's improvement that could be had. Spending too much time DPSing, too much time on mainly 1 DPS action, not getting to use most of your healing actions most of the time, are all things that I've seen normal people acknowledge. It's not as big a deal for them, but they would certainly enjoy certain changes be made, (and which changes may depend on who you ask). From the surveys we did before, and even from Ren's Reddit Q&A, most people who have appeared on either feel that healers could use a few more damage tools at least, or wouldn't be bothered by it at least, and that checks out with conversations I've had with players in game. Healers in my FC that were excited to see PVP Afflatus Purgation and wanted to see that in PVE. My static healer who thought the idea of ARR SCH's potentially 6-7 DoTs (7 if AoE) was too much, but feels like healers do need more damage tools anyway just to make things less spammy.

I think most players, if asked what healers could improve on, would say that they want to see more healing needed first, but a fair amount of those players would also say having more DPS gameplay instead if more healing can't happen, or a little of both is also fine.

[ForsakenRoe]

I'm sure some people will say that there's happy healers, so I'll say that, yes, there absolutely are people happy with healers right now, but we also know that people who leave the healer role aren't coming back as long as it stays the way that it is.

This one's going in the tags, way too 'stream of consciousness'

This is the part that is important to me. We know that there are players who like healers as they are now. But what we don't know is how many of those players would change their opinion on healers, if they made changes like those I and others have written up. How many would quit AST for example, if my card changes ramble were implemented? We cannot say for sure until the change is live in the game. People can say 'I want this/I don't want this' to a theorycraft, but when it gets into the hands of the user and they can play it, their opinion can completely flip. Many thought Expedient would be a meme. It had to be nerfed, one of the very few times in FFXIV history where a skill was flat nerfed, instead of just 'the potency was redistributed' or 'the other jobs in the same role were brought up'.

Classic WOW was born of 'you think you want it but you don't', a line that has been memed to death now. But the guy was kinda right, the players thought they wanted to stand in Stormwind for an hour looking for a group, and all these romanticized memories of how they played back in the day. But when actual Classic released, we got MageBoost runs for dungeons, Zybez/RestedXP guides for 'most efficient levelling', etc. The 'wonder and exploration' they wanted back was never going to come back because the playerbase has gotten older, and now they prioritize getting things done with their limited time, not standing in Stormwind for an hour looking for a UBRS group.

Point is, when I ask for 'hey could we have some small damage changes for WHM' (like Dia being shorter, and a 15s CD GCD) and someone is like no this will kill healer as a role, I do wonder: out of those people who like healer right now, how many would actually dislike it, to the point where they quit the game or change role? Because I believe that the majority of players in this game are actually of the opinion of... hard to word what I'm thinking, but basically like, if SE removed the DOT from healers next expansion, they'd be like 'oh ok, anyway' and carry on playing healer. So by that logic, adding a new button to do damage with, I assume they'd be like 'oh ok, anyway' and carry on. They'd use it if it's safe to, and not use if if it's too stressful. And that's fine.

There has to be a line in the sand somewhere for each player, mentally, of 'this is too much complexity in the damage side of the healer kit'. For example, some people cannot jump from WHM to AST because the cards add too much complexity. The delayed heals of Star are too much to work around, etc. So my question would be, where is the line for each player, and how do we make the biggest impact on the gameplay without crossing that line? What causes the line to be crossed, is it 'number of additional buttons', 'number of times new button is used per min', something else? If we added, say, Banish as a 15s CD GCD as I've suggested, that adds complexity. If we added Purgation as a skill that Holy turns into after 3 casts of Assize, that adds complexity. But which of the two adds more complexity? Stuff like that, I think about a lot when I write my rambling crap about making healers more fun, but at the end of the day, I do try to keep from going over too many people's lines. I want to keep the designs as accessible to new players as possible, while opening up potential 'optimization' at the higher end. And I think that'd be the most 'agreeable' rework for SE: Accessible and powerful-feeling to lowend players, room to master for highend players. They don't want to scare away the less hardcore players, I get that, that's why I make sure to add stuff like making Cure3 feel more useful

The issue I (and the devs) face is simple: Some people are already standing ON their mental lines of what is acceptable, and are maybe a little blinkered in what they'd be willing to accept. They're so insistent that any change at all will ruin the role, they aren't willing to give any changes a chance. I try to keep openminded to alternative solutions for the issue. I'd be willing to try 'the healing required has been increased across all content', I don't think it'd go down well but if SE wants to try it I'll try it. I just push for 'make damage rotation more interesting' because it has a key aspect that the alternative doesn't have: it's entirely ignoreable for most players. Like, the Minor Arcana rubbish I posted recently. over the course of one minute, using just Malefics in place of those cards would lose you between 60 and 100 potency per card, or 240-400 per minute. of that, 200 is within the player's control directly, as it's the 50p difference between the base effect of the card, and the Malefic. The other potency is because of the RNG of the 'face value' thing, which can be mitigated with Sleeve Draw. Even then, across a 10 minute fight, 4000 potency is... in my gear, 160k damage (Malefic 250p, hits for 10kish)? I've seen Hyosho's hit for more than that. Even then, this difference is not enough to be an issue in anything except like, week 1 Savage, and Ultimate. Even in the earlier fights of Savage, we're outgearing it because of Crafted being 10 ILVL higher than the recommendation, so really, it's just '3rd/4th fight Savage, week 1'

But yeh, it's like this meme to me. How many players would say 'I don't want this, this sounds bad and will kill healers' if my WHM changes were to get in, only to have the bird's moment of enlightenment when they throw that first Quake/Tornado/Flood triple play, and it feels good because it hits hard and looks cool? Same logic that leads to why people like Misery, because it looks cool, and it hits like a truck!

edit:

Healers in my FC that were excited to see PVP Afflatus Purgation and wanted to see that in PVE. My static healer who thought the idea of ARR SCH's potentially 6-7 DoTs (7 if AoE) was too much, but feels like healers do need more damage tools anyway just to make things less spammy.

See, lines in the sand. 6-7 DOTs is too much for this player, and I'd be on their side. Bio, Bio2, Miasma, Miasma2, Shadowflare, Thunder, Aero, Potent Poisoning Potion (lol), it's all a bit much. So I'd suggest, in this SCH example, we merge Bio/Bio2, we have Biolysis now, keep that. Miasma returns. Miasma2/Shadowflare can be merged to an instantcast that drops a puddle under the enemy (which makes it useful in AOE too), the rest are crossclass and an item so they can stay gone. It's not ARR SCH, but with this we go from 1 DOT up to 3, one of which also happens to make the AOE rotation more interesting than just 'spam Art of Snore'. And with careful tuning of the potencies, the 'effective lost potency' from not being optimal with these DOTs can be minimized. If Broil is 300p, we can make the DOTs be say, 350, 320 and 350 total respectively (as I did iirc), instead of now where the DOT is well over 2x the damage of the nuke. Hardcores have something to optimize, casuals actually get punished less than currently, win win for everyone (except people who don't like DOTs as a design, I guess)

[Aravell]

Point is, when I ask for 'hey could we have some small damage changes for WHM' (like Dia being shorter, and a 15s CD GCD) and someone is like no this will kill healer as a role, I do wonder: out of those people who like healer right now, how many would actually dislike it, to the point where they quit the game or change role? Because I believe that the majority of players in this game are actually of the opinion of... hard to word what I'm thinking, but basically like, if SE removed the DOT from healers next expansion, they'd be like 'oh ok, anyway' and carry on playing healer. So by that logic, adding a new button to do damage with, I assume they'd be like 'oh ok, anyway' and carry on. They'd use it if it's safe to, and not use if if it's too stressful. And that's fine.

I think the word is "apathetic". I do believe that the majority of players don't care one way or another, only people who are dissatisfied one way or another will come to these forums to make their voices heard. Some are here to ask for changes to what we have now, some are here to ask that what we have now be preserved, and that's fine. But for the majority of the playerbase, I assume they'll just go along with whatever happens, maybe some minor grumbling if it's not what they want, but the majority will eventually settle, whether that be on the healer role or leaving the role entirely.

I think "Content" is a more accurate way that I feel the player base has with healing as it currently exists. Most players aren't necessarily trying to break down the state of job design or anything, but I think most people, even if they aren't dissatisfied with the state of healing, feel that there's improvement that could be had.

Didn't see this when I made my post. "Content" is probably a better way to describe what people are feeling. It's like most people who play SAM and SMN probably, content with a job that functions but not really enjoying themselves.

[SenahPanipahr]

I think SE also designs regular content in such a way that any regular Medica spammer can clear it, this is not that great as there is no difficulty curve

"Medica spammer-friendly" is unfortunately an apt way to summarise a lot of duties. It's really painful to see them be so stubborn about this when, as you pointed out, everyone is telling them "this needs to change". While I don't expect gamedevs to adhere strictly to suggestions from players, I do expect them to treat identified problem areas seriously. Personally I'd love for healing itself to become the focus, for Healer to 'live up to its name', but I'd accept them receiving an actual DPS rotation if only because I don't have confidence that they'd also go back to tweak older content such that healing wouldn't still be irrelevant for 90% of the game. (Some rotation improvements would also be good regardless if they're insistent on continuing in the direction of FFXIV being a single-player JRPG with a ton of online elements more than a straight-up MMO; I can't imagine how painful going through the MSQ as AST would be, at least WHM can spam Holy.)

Though to be honest if they'd only just reduce the absurdly high ilevel sync on older duties it'd go a long way in starting to address the issue, it's super dumb how many old raids aren't even remotely challenging -- looking at you Crystal Tower, who at SE thought it was a good idea for a roulette to be 90% the same three raids -- Healers shouldn't be praying for disasters just for their role to be remotely interesting because the item level is too high for most mechanics to even matter.

Most of the Healers I run into are tired veterans that stick with the role for whatever reason, or newer players who are either mechanically weak, or just unduly anxious about underperforming in a party context. (As we all know, healing adequately is far easier than non-Healers seem to think.) I can't help but wondering if SE's stubbornness around this is due to some corporate focus-testing/survey nonsense, where they think they've identified a "type" of player that chooses Healer, rather than realising how they've shaped the current demographic by making it unappealing outside progression to anyone other than noobs.

It's just so sad and silly for them to base entire role designs around a temporal issue (in this case, an influx of new players) rather than trying to improve the experience of learning new jobs/roles as a whole. Utterly self-defeating in the long term, unless they really just want healing to be an awkward support role for people less interested in the game so much as hanging out with their friends and going to social events. (Nothing innately wrong with wanting to do that, but they shouldn't sacrifice what should be one of the most interesting aspects of the game for it.)

[Renathras]

I threw one on each of the purpleboys in High Concept in like, week 1 prog, but once people had some gear the threat of the DOT fell off a cliff.

This brings up an interesting point:

Could part of the problem be gear exponential growth/ilevel inflation?

Not all, but part?

I don't agree that this is what you're doing.

Then you're wrong and a troll.

Maybe YOU THINK I'm not doing that. That just makes you wrong. That you're using your misperception as if it were fact to attack someone and doing so continuously even after they've stated their intent to clear up your mistake is what makes you a troll.

I, and everyone else on every internet discussion forum that exists or ever will exist, reserve the right to stop talking and refuse engagement with someone who becomes annoying and pushy, regardless of whether they do so in good faith.

Yeah, and I have that same right, which is why I am stopping talking with and refusing to engage WITH YOU.

I will give people a chance who truly wish to talk in good faith. But you just want to attack and are continuing to try derailing the thread while I and others are trying to keep it on track.

.

EDIT:

Ren says no one will defend him here, but I don't think I've ever seen him conflate all of those points together to form the conclusion you pointed out. He has said he prefers the new PLD, he has said he dislikes DoTs and he has said he likes the new SMN. But I don't think I've ever seen him add all this together and say new SMN is unmitigated good.

Thank you. I appreciate that.

I'll note you're the only one, and the behavior in question hasn't stopped, but I thank you for being one person that actually is principled here.