Results 1 to 10 of 411

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Player
    Renathras's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,747
    Character
    Ren Thras
    World
    Famfrit
    Main Class
    White Mage Lv 100
    Quote Originally Posted by Shurrikhan View Post
    Look, Reddit is no nicer to healers.
    ...
    Opposition to how healers play right now... is not abnormal,
    Actually, Reddit IS nicer to healers. There is a far more diverse view there than here. Probably because there are far more posters there, and there seems to be a more general audience. Oh, there are a LOT of people there, too, that hate current Healer design and want it changed (like the people here), but also a lot that are more neutral to it, and some that actually prefer it as it is. So it seems that the view here is not universal.

    NOTE: I didn't use the word "majority" in that paragraph.

    Opposition to healers is not abnormal. Where did I say it was?

    I'm pointing out that NOT being opposed to healers as they are right now is ALSO not abnormal. That it is here is one of the reasons to point to this place being an echo chamber.

    .

    WHM:

    Right...? But that's what I'm saying, no heal costs less than Glare. Casting Cure 1 (or Esuna, depending on how and if we Trait it to Esuna or Cure 2 or not) or Regen would be the same MP cost as Glares. So you're only saving MP based specifically on how many Miseries you cast per minute. The maximum savings, assuming you still get one Misery from 3 Solace/Raptures (so that changes nothing and still takes 4 GCDs per minute) is that you are left with 20 - 2 (for Dias) GCDs per minute (24 total, 3 Solace/Rapture, 1 Misery associated with those, 2 Dias; leaves 18). For every 3 of those you fill with a GCD heal, you get 1 Misery. 18 / 4 = 4.5, meaning you get, on average, 4.5 extra Misery casts per minute. Given foregoing Glares to get there, that's the equivalent of 400 x 4.5 or 1800 (funny, that) MP in savings. (This is casting 12 Cure 1s + 4 Misery and the extras are split over every 2 minutes, 2 Cure 1s in the first minute and the other Cure 1 plus the Misery in the second minute.)

    But, how do you generate those Miseries? Well, you can cast Cure 1/Cursuna/Regen over and over. That results in a 1800 MP gain per minute. Which, for reference, is not even enough to cast a Raise. Not sure that's "gamebreaking". But that's if you cast your cheapest healing spell over and over. If you cast Cure 2, you're now losing MP per minute. Each Cure 2 cast is 1000 MP, or 600 more than Glare/Cure 1/Regen. And you're casting 12 of those per minute, meaning -600 x 12 = -7,200. -7,200 + 1,800 = -5,400. That's a MP deficit, not an MP gain. Medica 1 is slightly better (900 MP so -500 per cast), Medica 2 slightly worse and Cure 3 significantly worse.

    Point is, at best, you're generating enough MP for 3/4ths of a Raise, which is hardly gamebreaking, and at the worst, you're just refunding a small portion of your much higher MP burn from casting your higher expense heals. The reality, of course, is that people would mix it up a bit, and that MP management RIGHT NOW isn't a thing. So there's no logical way that this would be broken or overpowered. The only argument is if you're having to cast lots of Raises, but WHM is already the Job that has 2 Thin Air charges, and most Healers can easily sit around 90-100% MP all the time in the game at present. Overcapping MP isn't helping you, so often that MP "savings" is just going to be wasted, not powerful.

    Again, the main issue with it I can see is that it would make Glare entirely pointless to cast unless you just feel like it. A solution could be to slightly increase Glare's damage so it's a slight DPS gain, but meh.

    Personally, if "heal by doing damage" is something we're doing under this proposed system - which we are, with SGE - then "damage by doing healing" under this same system seems like the proper inverse so both playstyles are represented. The only issue comes down to tuning so they do similar levels of damage and healing to each other, but no, that's not broken in any way.

    Think about it, in the WORST case scenario - that you never touch Glare and exclusively keep Regen rolling on all party members, maintain Dia uptime, and fill dead GCDs with Cure 1 spot healing, you probably wouldn't even be touching Cure 1 much since you'd be rolling HoTs on people like a WoW Druid in raids (which is a playstyle I always enjoyed, so not seeing the problem there) - isn't that WAY more active than WHM is now? You're actively rolling through party member targets, through the boss, and you're using at least three GCDs for the majority of your casts unlike the complaint right now you're using just Glare. Casting more than 1 Medica 2 per minute would be an MP loss: 2400 - 1800 = 600 MP net loss.

    Moreover, did you read SGE? It's going to be doing the opposite of this. The only issue here comes from proper numbers tuning and, again, encounters actually requiring consistent healing, something you agreed was a needed change.

    So no. That's not broken. It's a good idea. Hard go. Yes.

    (Another alternative I once saw presented is make Glare nourish the Blood Lily, so you have a semi-combo of Glare Glare Glare Misery, which was proposed to break up the Glare spam. Not sure if that one's good or bad, but it and this would conflict so...)

    .

    SCH/AST:

    Are you missing the part where every healer Job works differently? Because that's the point of the entire proposal and I've said it over and over again...

    .

    WoW: Yes, something FFXIV USED to have back in ARR. MP costs of spells were, once upon a time, RELEVANT. We did, in fact, swap from one design paradigm to another, roughly around SB. It's also why WHM sucked so much in SB, because it wasn't given the oGCD healing tools to make the transition. The only reason ShB/EW worked is because they shoehorned Solace/Rapture/Misery in as a "pseudo-oGCD GCD" to try and merge the two systems.

    EDIT:

    Quote Originally Posted by ty_taurus View Post
    ...
    Answer the damned question or shut the hell up about it. I'm tired of you derailing and wafting over this stupidity and trying to use it in some weird technicality to "win".

    If a Support role was added to the game: Would you at all be interested in playing it?

    It's a yes or no question. And if you won't answer it, as I said in the post before, I'm done beating the dead animal.


    Actually? You know what? Duck it. I don't give a damn anymore. You can answer or not, I legitimately don't care and won't respond any more to you on this derail.

    .

    You. Are. Wrong. Say it with me.

    Quote Originally Posted by ASkellington View Post
    The supposed support role is P.Ranged.
    They were.

    For some reason, when ShB hit, the Devs decided Support was bad, so stripped BRD and MCH of their support. Then they promptly introduced DNC as a Support. Then BRDs were mad so they gave them some of theirs back, but it's all basically the same type of thing. And then nerfed AST cards into being just another form of the same thing. It's all "+X% damage" just through different proxies.

    As to your points:

    1: That's why I think the 4 Healers Model is the answer.
    2: Agreed, it's also why I encourage changes to encounter design.
    3: Also agreed, it's why I think non-Healer HEALING should be nerfed.
    4: See 2.
    5: See 1, and to an extent, 2 and 3 both.
    6: See 1; if the Healers actually were different, there would also be different levels of damage tools between them (e.g. the SGE proposal would play like RDM without melee attacks, the SCH one would be the same damage profile it had in SB), meaning players who find something like current WHM boring but still want to play a Healer, just with more damage abilities for solo or downtime would have those options.

    Quote Originally Posted by ty_taurus View Post
    This has been said before as well. The conversation has spiraled (because of course it did), but the original post was about what if we had a 4th role, "Support," that was more support-y than the current physical ranged, offering more buffs and more utility. I'm not sure what other context would apply to this role, but I assume it would have less damage than even Bards and Dancers have now in exchange for that higher support potential while still having things like a rotation and active gameplay. I presume the intent of the entire thread was to try and get people in favor of expanding supports so that we'd leave the real healers alone.
    You assume...incorrectly (a surprise to no one).

    Note I wasn't even the one that brought up Support as a fourth role:

    Quote Originally Posted by vetch View Post
    Aye Square, give us healer RDM specs and support DPS Astrologian specs. Shake it up a bit, hahah.
    Vetch brought up the concept, which I agreed with later (in one of the few posts I make around here that gets a lot of Likes, btw), and then it was third-ed by someone else:

    Quote Originally Posted by Zairava View Post
    I will die on the hill of my stance.

    Support could, and should, be its own role. Rift had this, and it to this day baffles me that no other mmo replicates it.
    Meaning it can't have been my intention with the thread, because I wasn't the one that even brought it up.

    Maybe, Ty, you should be more careful about assuming other people's intentions...

    Not that I suspect you care at this point, but if you do:


    What would make a Support role different than PRanged is that it would actually be...well, Support. PRanged isn't even consistently supportive (MCH doesn't have anything itself other than Dismantle; TrubaticianSamba is just the Ranged's version of Feint/Addle, so no more "support" than Casters and Melee, it's just more generalized. It's like comparing AST ShB/EW cards to AST HW/SB cards. Clearly they're different - everyone complaints about them being different all the time here, so I don't think I need to hash that one out - and then you have DNC and BRD being ShB/EW card-like.

    While the Devs COULD make them into an actual Support role, they've thus far declined to really do so. Nothing like Bole or CC (lol?) or TP/MP regen (lol..?). Hell, look at ARR BRD. Even ARR NIN. Even SB BLM with that MP transfer ability had more of a support capability than modern BRD does. DNC's only unique thing is Curing Waltz. Otherwise it's a targeted BRD song that's up 100% of the time. Hell, look at PvP AST's cards.

    Damage buffing might be considered support more if, as Askellington said, it wasn't something that so many Jobs do to the point it's more a combat mechanic than support (and is done on a rote timer, not in reaction or preaction to any encounter abilities themselves).

    .

    Anyway, I didn't start this thread with any intent of discussing Support as a role or subrole or half-role or people moving roles or anything else.

    I was actually trying to see what people like about specific DPS Jobs SPECIFICALLY so I could consider how to add that in a more robust way to my Healer Job design proposals. Knowing what people find enjoyable is part of making a design that people would find enjoyable. Everyone knows what THEY like. What they need to do to be good designers is to see what OTHER people like, and then make proposals that incorporate those things.

    It's why echo chambers are so bad for good design, because all they do is tell you over and over something you already think is true, but they aren't telling you what everyone else who isn't part of the echo chamber thinks.

    And it's why I actually ask questions like this. Because instead of having decided how everyone should enjoy playing (and berating them if they do not), I actually want to see how everyone enjoys playing and then propose a set of healer Job designs where at least one appeals to each type. It's really that simple.
    (0)
    Last edited by Renathras; 08-01-2023 at 12:47 PM. Reason: Marked with EDIT

  2. #2
    Player
    ForsakenRoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    2,340
    Character
    Samantha Redgrayve
    World
    Zodiark
    Main Class
    Sage Lv 100
    Quote Originally Posted by Renathras View Post
    WHM MP
    The changes to WHM after 6.0 and it's horrid MP economy, was to make Misery damage neutral, and reduce the Lily charge time to 20s, incentivizing us to use 4 MP-free GCDs per minute, which saves us 1600 MP. This change singlehandedly moved WHM from 'it needs like 800+ Piety to not feel like ass' to 'it can run base Piety comfortably (340)'. To say '1800 MP per min won't make or break anything' is a fundamental misunderstanding of what 'a gamebreaking amount of MP economy' is. A change like this, and you'd put WHM into the AST world of 'I prefer to meld SpellSpeed even over Crit, because I have so much excess MP in my economy I literally cannot spend it fast enough!' Admittedly, it'd be pretty funny, but the fact it'd cause such a shift in gearing should be giving pause for thought about how 'small' the change really is (or isn't, as the case happens to be). For reference, AST's Astrodyne gives 1500MP over it's duration, and is available after 90s worth of cards. And the fact AST has that extra MP source is enough to cause the 'I'd rather meld Spellspeed' effect. In fact, it's possible that given your change gives 1800 per 60s instead of AST's current 1500 per 90s (or 1000 per 60s for easier comparison), not only would WHM be melding Spellspeed, it'd likely be looking for it on gear too!

    And no, I don't think I'd personally find 'use Regen on every raid member, one at a time, with a GCD gap every 3 placed to fire a Misery' fun. This would incentivize just spamming out Regens on people who don't need them/won't need them, literal 100% overheal, and being told 'its okay, you still get to do the same damage as someone who's putting thought into who to heal and when'. I struggle to believe it, but I think you have just tried to make 'Cure1 spammer' not only viable at endgame, but also equally optimal, that's almost an accomplishment in it's own right (but not one to be proud of)
    (0)
    Last edited by ForsakenRoe; 08-01-2023 at 12:46 PM.

  3. #3
    Player
    Renathras's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,747
    Character
    Ren Thras
    World
    Famfrit
    Main Class
    White Mage Lv 100
    Quote Originally Posted by ForsakenRoe View Post
    ...
    Wait, you're melding Piety right now?

    I don't run out of MP on WHM right now as it is. I press Lucid on CD once per minute and have infinite MP. I'm not sure how this changes it. "You can meld more spellspeed to increase your cast rate since your MP pool can support it" - wait, so this would lead to GEARING OPTIONS instead of just the Crit >>>> all meta we've had for 3 years now?

    ...isn't that good?

    And, further, that AST already is in this state? So...how's that gamebreaking, exactly? And if AST is already broken to that level, and AST and WHM are supposed to be peer competitors, shouldn't WHM share that trait? (Astrodyne is worth less MP, but also recall that AST's GCD heals other than Benefic/Aspected Benefic also cost less MP than WHM's equivalents, in some cases, by quite a lot, like Benefic 2 being 30% less MP than Cure 2...)

    As to the last, considering Cure 1 won't exist anymore, Cure 1 spammer won't be possible anyway...

    EDIT:

    Quote Originally Posted by ASkellington View Post
    ...
    Yeah, the Devs being lazy is part of the problem, though.

    1: I'll get to that.
    2 + 5: Possible.
    3: Lol, fair.
    6: Disagree. This is the exact OPPOSITE of SMN.

    In the case of SMN, the Job was changed, leaving people who played it and liked it homeless. Here, WHM would be remaining the same. If anything, your argument would be one against changing ANY of the Healers, not an argument against leaving one the same. You say "deserve to be given something" because you and I disagree on what that is. To me, the changes you guys want are a punishment, not a reward. A penalty, not a gift. To my way of thinking, WHM in this idea is the only one not being hurt.

    .

    Quote Originally Posted by ASkellington View Post
    Post said that, not me.
    Oh, sorry. I do agree with it, though.
    (0)
    Last edited by Renathras; 08-01-2023 at 01:20 PM. Reason: EDIT for post limit, see you tomorrow o/

  4. #4
    Player
    ASkellington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    980
    Character
    Xynnel Valeroyant
    World
    Balmung
    Main Class
    Astrologian Lv 100
    Quote Originally Posted by Renathras View Post
    In the case of SMN, the Job was changed, leaving people who played it and liked it homeless. Here, WHM would be remaining the same. If anything, your argument would be one against changing ANY of the Healers, not an argument against leaving one the same. You say "deserve to be given something" because you and I disagree on what that is. To me, the changes you guys want are a punishment, not a reward. A penalty, not a gift. To my way of thinking, WHM in this idea is the only one not being hurt.
    You don't even know I want. Because you don't read nor do you care to read. You keep asserting ideas you think I want, without even asking and getting a clearer picture of it.

    I say I want more damage options for healers - you automatically assume I mean 1-2-3 combo. Which you have done, twice.
    You never asked specifically what I mean by more damage options, if I want them to be more flavored to the class, how many or even if I wanted it to be a combo.

    I say I want all four healers including WHM to have more complexity - you think I want WHM to be played at the tier of SB SCH and AST.

    I don't even think you know what my stance is other than I want to see all 4 healers changed and be more complexed. You don't know how complex I want each healer to be, if its the same across all of them, if some are easier or harder or even what I personally want vs what I think is better for WHM targeted audience which isn't ME.

    As for the rest of your comment, SMN and WHM I compared simply because people who like a class design are being alienated. They differ how as you pointed out. We all know about SMN. So why do I say WHM vets are being alienated by "leaving WHM alone"? Because they are. You are unwilling to compromise and give them anything. You're literally telling them "your class can't see improvements for your engagement despite any and all attempts to keep the core idea of WHM (that being a simple/easy to use healer for clarification) while also giving the veterans something.

    Your stance has pretty much been "leave one healer alone 0 changes" - that healer pretty much being WHM. That entails:
    • You don't want to give them Aero III or an equivilent.
    • You don't want to give them a dps kit rotational or not that may perhaps play into the Lily System more, no matter how basic it could be.
    • I'm even going to tack on that you don't want to give them more Lilies and/or more things to spend Lilies on.

    Why? Because that's what "0 changes" means.

    So are you truly about no changes? Or minor changes or about a WHM who still plays on the GCD, who still has an ease of access kit including their dps or what? Because if you want 0 changes to the class at all outside of what SE textbook gives all healers, then yeah, we're going to disagree.
    (3)
    I'm tired of being told to wait for post-patches and expansions for fixes and increased healing requirements that are never coming. Healers are not fun in all forms of content like all jobs should be, they're replaced by tanks and dps due to low healing requirements and their dps kit is small for 0 reason, when in the past we had more options and handled things just fine. I refuse to play healer in roulette come DT. I refuse to heal EXs, I refuse to go into Savage, and I am boycotting Ultimate.

    #FFXIVHEALERSTRIKE

  5. #5
    Player
    Shurrikhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    12,856
    Character
    Tani Shirai
    World
    Cactuar
    Main Class
    Monk Lv 100
    Quote Originally Posted by ASkellington View Post
    [@Renathras] So are you truly about no changes? Or minor changes or about a WHM who still plays on the GCD, who still has an ease of access kit including their dps or what? Because if you want 0 changes to the class at all outside of what SE textbook gives all healers, then yeah, we're going to disagree.
    Admittedly, I have trouble telling which parts are hypothetical/compromises and which are Ren's actual preferences sometimes, just due to the length and piecework of discourse, but he summarizes here, if you'd like to take a look. It's something I regret not better remembering and being mindful of since, as not to misread hyperbole or things otherwise left ambiguous. (Expand Below.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Renathras View Post
    In a nutshell, though, my proposed changes would amount to:

    1) Encounters that require more consistent healing. Low difficulties would still have this, but the values would be so low that novice players could cover it with GCD heal fallbacks. Harder fights would actually make this threatening where the healing has to be addressed in a consistent manner. No more fights with lots of damage and then 45 seconds of nothing at all happening. This change would reduce the ability to address all healing with oGCDs, while still allowing oGCDs to be somewhat powerful for the Jobs that would continue to rely on them.

    2) More somewhat randomized damage, like boss random targeting of players or continued auto-attacks of Tanks while prepping mechanics/casting. This was done in HW and was also generally well received for what that's worth. Again, this wouldn't hurt Jonny Casual as casual content would have the damage low enough they could handle it with their fallbacks if necessary.

    3) A general reduction in oGCD power for Healers...but with caveats. Specifically, some Healer Jobs would be designed to work with their oGCDs being a source of their healing, and so they would be tuned to that end.

    After those changes were made, since they're kind of essential:

    1) WHM would largely play as it does today, with a few minor changes. First, a Protect spell (that Traits up to Pro-Shell and then Plenary with the Pro-Shell effect as a mitigation tool - WHM presently has less frequent mitigation than BLM. Yes, BLM. Addle has a lower CD than Temperance [lower reduction, true, but the point is, BLM can engage with party mitigation more frequently than WHM, and that's just silly]). Second, I'd honestly make it where all GCD heals nourish the Blood Lily. The point of this is to make WHM the GCD Healer...that actually USES its GCD heals. The Lily system has been admirable at trying to give this feel, but it's like saying SMN is just as much a Caster as BLM. While true in terms of the way the servers treat the Jobs, sure, but players routinely call SMN a Ranged that has the Caster icon because of all its instant (GCD, but instant) casts. WHM should be encouraged to engage with its GCD heals, not slapped with a big damage nerf for using them. It would also allow use of interesting abilities. WHM's GCD kit has redundancies, but with some tweaks (and looking back on its spell history...), they're more diverse than "Rapture vs Solace". Cure 3 vs Medica 3 vs Medica (when its MP cost was lower and it was actually what you used after Medica 2 while the HoT was still ticking) was a choice for how to deal with a problem based on the situation at hand. We no longer have that. Rapture is always the correct answer. Regen is a nice and pretty powerful heal...that we only use pre-pull because Solace is the DPS gain and Regen the DPS loss. Same with Cure 2. By making the GCD heals damage neutral, it means min/max damage optimization - which people here insist is the only thing that matters - isn't part of the decision on which heals to use. Instead, which heal is best for the situation is the decision on which heals to use...which it should be. MP management actually mattering would also be a consequence of this, though again, for casual healers in casual content, this wouldn't be something limiting them too harshly. But for skilled healers in high end content, this would be a serious consideration. For example, there could be a world where Medica 1 has lower range than Medica 2 and lower total healing, but has half the MP cost making it far more efficient when low on MP vs Medica 2 or Cure 3. Medica 2 could have some trait that has it work like Criterion regen where the power is boosted if the HoT is on the target, but with it having a higher MP cost than Medica 1. Cure 3 would have its higher MP cost, but apply its healing instantly in a big chunk, useful for stacked mechanics where the party also needs to be topped off quickly. Now each is actually a meaningful choice based on the situation, the party's positioning, the Healer's resources, and the encounter mechanics.

    2) SCH I would mostly revert to the SB version. As I discussed in the Then and Now thread, SCH was the most harmed and is, today, the most "filler-spamy" of the Healers; the meme should be "Broil-spam", not "Glare-spam" (funny irony; WHM is about tied with SGE as the LEAST filler-spammy of the Healers). Specifically, with Broil being a 2.5 sec cast, it gave Ruin 2 (and Miasma 2 if you were in close to the boss and had ample MP) reasons to exist. Ruin 2 was both a movement tool and a weave tool that was optimal to use for weaving (even non-ED oGCDs), even though it was a damage loss vs Broil, since Broil oGCD use would be clipping and Ruin 2 allowed for more distance movement. Miasma 2 was actually a DPS gain, but at the cost of more MP, adding MP management into the mix here as well. The changes from SB I would want added would be the improved pet AI, and the capstones added since SB (Seraph/Consolation and Expedience), since those have been useful and interesting additions to the kit. We would also be reverting to (I believe it was ShB when we lost it) the changes where pet abilites were triggered by the player but didn't count against the player's ability use, allowing more effective weaving and allowing players to create macros for them if they wish. Aetherpact can remain as a boosted Embrace, but...I dunno if we want to just dump Faerie Gauge or try to salvage it into something useful. The goal here is to return SCH into its last "good" state, SB, while not taking away the actual improvements that would have made it better, such as better pet AI and utility like Expedience.

    3) AST I'm not entirely sure what to do with. I play it enough now that I can speak more authoritatively on it than I used too, but I don't at all main it, and I know people that main it tend to like the opposite of what I like in terms of rotation and encounter approach. Where I enjoy reactive healing, AST is all about pre-planning. And where I like low APM Jobs, AST is all about bursts of high activity. Since its inception, it's had a higher APM. It was long the only Healer whose spam-nuke had a low cast time to facilitate frequent weaving, and every iteration of it has had a lot of them. So where if I was making AST for people like me, I'd make the card effects into GCDs (that boost the next Malific by 100% stacking to 5 or some such to facilitate a Draw/Play series of actions if needed), I also recognize that a lot of AST players would hate that because they like getting carpel-tunnel. So instead, I'd propose returning towards SB, but with a few modifications. The first would be to have two sets of Draw and Play, probably Major and Minor Arcana. One set would be damage increasing abilities, the other utility. The first might be X% flat damage, Y% added crit, or Z% added direct hit, with the ratio being 1:2:3 like BRD songs are. The utility set would be a damage reduction ability, a movement speed increasing ability, and a haste (spell and skill speed) ability. Next, I'd massage RNG a bit by allowing stocking of any card the AST chooses. This would allow, say, the damage reduction ability, if not needed now but needed in the future, to be "stocked" for later use at the time it matters, instead of pre-SB where it was just wasted or Royal Road fodder. I'd...also bring back Royal Road, because while I personally hated half of AST buttons being both oGCDs and card related...some people loved the hell out of that, and liked being able to modify cards to increase effectiveness, duration, or give them an AOE effect. AST's damage kit and healing kit don't directly need to be changed, since they're more or less what they were. Some more recent effects could be added to existing ones - for example, Exaltation or Intersection's damage reduction/shield could be a trait addition to the Bole card (there's no reason Cards can't get improvements with Traits at higher levels, now is there?). Oh, and one more little change that I'm sure (sarcasm) no one would really care about or notice - return Diurnal and Nocturnal stances. No, not hot swapping in battle. Pick one or the other, but the option is now there again. I feel that would be a pretty welcome change.

    4) SGE there are two possible ways to go with it. One is to leave it exactly like it is today. The reasoning being it's always been this way, so there aren't any complaints from people about it having some core part of what they liked about its identity or function changed. That is, possibly even moreso than WHM, there's a strong argument to leave SGE as it is, since this is all its ever been, and this is what all players of SGE knew they were getting (more or less) when picking it up any time after the first month or so of EW, if not before. The OTHER argument, however, is that SGE was billed as effectively a DPS that heals by doing damage. In an ideal world, we'd add a new Healer and split the apple that way. But for the sake of argument (since the first of those is already known; we know how SGE operates now, so "leave it as it is" is self-explantory), the second version would be to really double down on the Kardia system. Kardia healing would now be variable based on the attack used to generate it. Most of SGE's oGCD heals would be removed. SGE's purpose is to heal by doing damage, not to heal by casting heals, oGCD or GCD. Correct performance of the rotation would lead to consistent and large Kardia heals, and SGE would have abilities that would amplify Kardia. One would be an oGCD that makes Kardia AOE for a short duration (say 10 sec) on a 1 min CD. This is the "Whispering Dawn/Fey Blessing" type of thing that Physis 2 and Kerochole are used for now. Another would be a short duration (10 sec) second Kardia that can be placed on a second target (e.g. the OT after a shared tank buster). Think Synastry, just in this case, Kardia procs. SGE would retain mitigation effects from Kerochole, Ixochole, and Holos, as well as Holos' shield, but would lose the healing associated with them. Again, its healing should mostly be happening via Kardia. I haven't quite worked out the damage rotation (or specifically, how to do it), but something on the order of RDM's Caster rotation, with the big finisher being Pneuma instead of a Melee combo with spell stingers on the end. Properly executing the damage rotation would build resources that could be used on Pneuma casts, which would lead to big healing. Where WHM is the GCD Healer in this system, SGE is the opposite take, being a GCD damage dealer that provides healing to the party by properly performing a damage rotation (peppered with some mitigation and Kardia modifier use) instead. Where WHM would be focused on GCD heals and do damage as more of an afterthought, SGE would focus on GCD damage spells and its healing would be the almost afterthought instead.

    ...of course (laughable given the length of this post), this is more an overview. Though at least the first three of these are pretty self-explanatory. The SGE rework is really the only one that would require more in-depth explanation, but the point of it is to make it heal by doing damage and appeal to people that prefer dealing damage and like their heals to be something they throw on the side as a result of performing their damage rotation correctly. A Healer analogue to GNB for Tanks who like a more (Melee) DPS playstyle, this SGE would be the Caster equivalent, playing more like a RIFT Chloromancer + a WoW Disc Priest or something.

    Each one would appeal to a different type of player, and each would be balanced around providing a similar amount of healing and damage, but with the method they use being what distinguishes them.

    Oh, and one more random addition to all of them: Each one's basic cure spell Traits up to become a spell that has the same MP cost and cast time, but also the Esuna effect of removing one status ailment. For WHM Cure 1 -> Esuna, SCH Physic -> Leeches, AST Benific 1 -> Exalted Detriment. SGE's can just stay Diagnosis but with the added effect. (The name already calls to mind a visit to the doctor, so it kind of just works.) At the same cost, cast time, and healing as the base Cure 1 equivalent spell, in low level content, nothing changes. In high level content, for the healers based around MP management, it would still serve the Cure 1 slot of "if you have nothing else left, you can keep healing with this". And for the rare content with a status ailment you can cleanse, it does the job of Esuna now without costing an obligatory additional hotbar spot that you have to have Esuna slotted in "just in case" as is the situation now.

    Overall, minor QoL change, that, but I think a lot of people would like to see it, or at least be neutral towards it.

    So, there's an obviously horribly imbalanced suggestion in there in giving every GCD heal a filler attack's worth of damage and 100 MP via Misery's refund (so that Glare is literally pointless, since you can just Cure or Regen for equal damage at lesser cost), but without that you're left with... WHM pretty much exactly as it is now, but with the balance of GCD heals' MP costs relative to each other improved and a GCD defensive buff whose intended tuning (and therefore usage) I'm uncertain of.

    Granted, that was a spitball example, and even if it weren't, people can change their mind / improve upon their past ideas.
    (2)
    Last edited by Shurrikhan; 08-04-2023 at 06:18 PM.

  6. #6
    Player
    ASkellington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    980
    Character
    Xynnel Valeroyant
    World
    Balmung
    Main Class
    Astrologian Lv 100
    Quote Originally Posted by Renathras View Post
    They were.

    For some reason, when ShB hit, the Devs decided Support was bad, so stripped BRD and MCH of their support. Then they promptly introduced DNC as a Support. Then BRDs were mad so they gave them some of theirs back, but it's all basically the same type of thing. And then nerfed AST cards into being just another form of the same thing. It's all "+X% damage" just through different proxies.
    The devs decided Support was bad because they don't want to deal with the balancing nightmare. I understand the work load, but they lost any and all sympathy the moment they thought "removing it all" was the best course of action. It wasn't for anyone BUT them. Doubly so because they gave nothing as an alternative.

    1. No its not. See 6.
    2 + 5. I don't see it happening because SE doesn't know how to design encounters that promote proper healing checks or unscripted damage or are afraid of scaring away healer mains as if the vast majority of us who have this issue aren't prepared for them.
    3. Good luck convincing WAR.
    6. And the reason why your 4 healers model doesn't work is because you do nothing to address WHM Veterans other than "go play another job". That's not fair. SMN had that happen to them, and so did AST. TWICE. No. WHM mains deserve to be given something too.

    Now I'll agree that all 4 healers should be different from one another. And WHM should remain an ease of access healer in comparison to the other 3. That does not mean, however it shouldn't get something for WHM mains and veteran healers something extra other than boring game play.

    Damage buffing might be considered support more if, as Askellington said, it wasn't something that so many Jobs do to the point it's more a combat mechanic than support (and is done on a rote timer, not in reaction or preaction to any encounter abilities themselves).
    @Post said that, not me.
    (2)
    I'm tired of being told to wait for post-patches and expansions for fixes and increased healing requirements that are never coming. Healers are not fun in all forms of content like all jobs should be, they're replaced by tanks and dps due to low healing requirements and their dps kit is small for 0 reason, when in the past we had more options and handled things just fine. I refuse to play healer in roulette come DT. I refuse to heal EXs, I refuse to go into Savage, and I am boycotting Ultimate.

    #FFXIVHEALERSTRIKE

  7. #7
    Player
    Sebazy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Gridania
    Posts
    3,468
    Character
    Sebazy Spiritwalker
    World
    Ragnarok
    Main Class
    White Mage Lv 90
    Quote Originally Posted by Renathras View Post
    Actually, Reddit IS nicer to healers. There is a far more diverse view there than here.
    You mean like when I got downvoted to oblivion and shadow banned from the reddit for suggesting that Eos was actually a group damage gain over Selene back in late ARR / early HW?

    The FFXIV Reddit is notorious for burying viewpoints that don't fit the mind think, it's more that people outside of that have figured out how to work around it now. If this was reddit and we were all posting there, your threads would be long hidden and gone by now because that's just how it works when you disagree with people.

    This place isn't perfect (General is basically unusable now) but at least it provides a fair platform for counter points and debate. Sure people can argue back but your posts aren't going to get wiped once people start disagreeing with them.
    (2)
    ~ WHM / badSCH / Snob ~ http://eu.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/character/871132/ ~