For those who main/semi-main a DPS (e.g. DNC, RDM) but like Healers...

[Renathras]

Mate, you were acting like any narrowing of ideas could only come from a narrowing of interests, seemingly to then dismiss ideas coming from these forums (unless in agreement with you) as a result of interests too narrow to be worth considering remotely representative.

/sigh

Good god, but we could have such good discussions if you people didn't lie. Though I think it's less lying and more you just imagine/interpret me saying things I didn't, then instead of asking for clarification, run with that.

Where - show me one place - I "dismissed" what these forums say?

I've said it doesn't represent the majority.
I've said it's an echo chamber.
I've said it doesn't allow for dissenting voices.

But where did I say it has nothing of value to consider and/or dismissed it outright? If I dismissed it outright, I wouldn't support the 4 Healers Model!

While the nature of the participants is a possible reason for narrowed ideas, the nature of that participation in the given venue is just as likely a reason for why discourse may vary between two locations.

It's also likely the participants. Again, find a more general audience and you see more varied views. That was literally the only point I was making.

Which is exactly what one will see, too, in perusing r/ffxiv and r/ffxivdiscussion. Both tend to show the same base opinions as here.

Except they ALSO show OTHER opinions than here. Opinions not represented here. I represent some, but there are people there outright "healers are supposed to heal, not dps", and even I don't hold that position.

Which mattered oh so much... in P9 Normal? ???

MOVING THE GOAL POSTS AGAIN??

I was making a point. I made that specific point clear. The point was that casuals and DoTs do not mix well. If you want to address my point, address MY POINT. My point was not "DoT upkeep in normals is relevant". I DID NOT MAKE THAT POINT.

My point WAS that casuals are not good with DoT upkeep. And it was in opposition to the idea that putting more of our damage in our DoTs would help casuals, and was trying to show by example how this forum's ideas of "I'm proposing a compromise to help casuals" do not, in fact, achieve the goal of helping casuals. Good GOD!

And you're going to claim, what, that it'd be utterly abhorrent/unfair/devastating if a healer should have to hit more than a single button to get 90% of its damage potential?

GOAL POST MOVE AGAIN!@!?!?!

WHEN I have I EVER claimed that a healer should not be allowed to get more than 10% damage from buttons aside from their nukespam?

Even RIGHT NOW, if we LEFT HEALERS ENTIRELY ALONE, they get more than 10% of their damage from more than one button. Top party clear for P9S right now on the abacus has a SCH and AST. The SCH has 6,340 DPS from Broil IV and 1,271.6 from Biolysis, 462.1 from Energy Drain, 44 from Ruin 2, and even 39.5 from freakin' autoattack. Total DPS: 8,157.2 Broil IV = 6,340/8,157.2*100% = 77.7%. 77.7% << 90%.

AST: 5,538.6/7041.1*100% = 78.7%.

SGE (19th clear from the top): 5,979.9/8,478*1000% = 70.5%

WHM (27th clear, the WHM is a 91, not even 99): 5,360/8,061.4*100% = 66.5%.

NONE of the Healers RIGHT NOW get 90+% damage from one button. If we DIDN'T CHANGE THEM AT ALL, they would continue to have to press more than one button for their damage.

No one. LITERALLY no one, is making the argument "it'd be utterly abhorrent/unfair/devastating if a healer should have to hit more than a single button to get 90% of its damage potential". NO ONE IS MAKING THAT ARGUMENT, so your "rebuttal" of it or accusation I am are not only completely irrelevant, it's an outright lying straw man.

It's even WORSE since I (a) have proposed changing 3 of the healers and (b) even proposed changing ALL FOUR while making the most complex one right now the least changed.

I can't even with the rest of this post... Maybe I can come back later, but &$^# man. That's garbage.

Balancing around people's mistakes is bad.

....

You're a generally good faith person, so I suspect this was unintentional, Sebazy, but:

Goal post move.

My point was that DoTs are not the vehicle to use to improve casual player performance. Misery is a far better tool. If your goal was to devalue lost GCD Glares, upping Misery would be the solution there, since casual WHM's love the heck out of that thing and don't tend to skimp on using it.

Also, I don't think "didn't keep a DoT up or even apply it" is in the category of "mistake". Letting a DoT fall off isn't a "mistake". A mistake is when you hot a button that's not optimal, not when you lose track of something because the native UI of the game does

not present it to you well. I do agree some other fixes might help with this problem, but I again will point out to you that upkeep for DoTs is probably the biggest thing casual players (ones who DO understand ABC and oGCD > GCD) still have a problem with. If the goal is to help casual players, putting more on the DoT is the wrong call unless you make the DoT's idiot proof. It's a lot easier to fill dead GCDs with Glare or use Misery when the big pink flower opens up with a chime than it is to upkeep a DoT. I'm not sure how this is a difficult concept to comprehend and I'm not sure how to explain it better.

But the point is, if you are proposing something to help casuals (and you were), and to help people who more rely on/use GCD heals (which...are going to be casuals, so same group/lots of overlap at least), then the answer cannot be to use the DoT to do so.

Yes and no, I feel. If a job is, to the vast majority of players, more difficult to optimize than other jobs and you give it nothing compensatory for that fact... then you basically just put it on most players' avoid lists.

To me, it's fine that a given job has a bit of an advantage among your "95th percentile" and up kind of players... so long as it also is likely to underperform among your 25th and under or so. It'd just mean you couldn't balance the tiers of difficulty/optimizations among each job quite evenly which... yeah, would be nearly impossible to do and isn't worth pursuing over job identity.

Something we agree on.

Not withstanding my prior annoyance above: I agree with you on this 100%.

(To be clear, that reward doesn't always have to be total direct throughput. It could be flexibility or the like... so long as that flexibility were actually relevance.)

This is why I think things like Expedience are good options. It's why I thought ShB SMN doing comparable damage to BLM while also having a Raise was a good option. Things that are harder can offer side-grade perks without destroying balance or blacklisting/blackballing other Jobs. The issue is that they need to be things that are nice to have but not strictly necessary. A bonus but not a game changing one that makes it a must have party member for that slot.