I'm bored when I heal because I need more complex DPS rotations

[ForsakenRoe]

a complex DPS rotation.

If we're talking Savages (or even Extremes), that's irrelevant, since not doing enough DPS also leads to party wipes due to enrages.

You gotta stop saying 'a complex DPS rotation', nobody is proposing 'a complex DPS rotation', just a 'more complex one than we already have'. Going from 1 inch off the ground to 2 inches is not a massive distance, but it's still an increase in altitude. Saying 'complex DPS rotation' calls to mind, for a lot of people, the likes of BLM, MNK optimizations, NIN's burst window, etc. And what most people suggest for healers, especially WHM, is still much simpler than new-SMN.

As for enrages, if the healer doing their rotation wrong (but still doing damage GCDs, eg just spamming Glare) causes a wipe in an EX trial, there's bigger issues at hand. Like, they're tuned to be clearable with like 6-8 deaths (assuming you don't get body-checked). And in Savage, there's plenty of lenience built into the enrage timer to factor in the fact that the healers will be GCD healing a lot more in week 1. I lost like 30 GCDs to GCD healing in my first clear of P11S, in week 1, and spent all but FOUR of my Aetherflow on healing. Still a clear. This 'people will wipe because they do their healer damage rotation wrong' angle purposely ignores that 'there is lenience to enrages already', or that 'potency difference between filler spell and new additions can be tuned to be low-punishment', etc. Though, given what SE did with Abyssos, I guess I can see why there'd be skepticism regarding SE's ability to balance things. But I am not about to go hamstringing my ideas of what WHM could get, because 'what if SE is really bad at balancing potency numbers'

[Renathras]

You gotta stop saying 'a complex DPS rotation',

Complex is relative. Everything you've proposed I consider complex. I've given you proposals that I consider mildly complex, and you and the others rebuffed those. So yes, "a complex DPS rotation". I gave you what would be a simple one and it was rejected. Most of the proposals people have made are more complex than SMN and WAR and PLD, meaning more complex than an actual DPS Job and than damage adjacent Jobs (Tanks hold agro by performing damage rotations). Again, I've proposed what would NOT be complex.

EDIT:

I'm also not the only one saying this or seeing the arguments from proponents of the DPS changes this way:

Actually, that is what people are saying. Asking for a complex damage rotation is pushing healers further into the role of green dps, especially when players are saying they have nothing to do but spam two damage buttons. If you are a class primarily pushing damage buttons, what are you? It doesn't matter how many healing abilities you have on your toolbar, if you aren't using them.

So, the answer is to increase the number of damage spells healers cast? That makes no sense. Again, it is a tuning problem on the part of Square Enix and not an issue with what abilities healers have at their disposal. Changing the content is the solution to this issue.

The big white elephant in the room is we healers have been spoiled by the ease of the content, the potencies of our heals, the MSQ, and all the other challenges presented to us by Square Enix. That needs to be addressed before anyone starts changing healer damage rotations.

.

I agree, but the color you chose is kinda hard on the eyes to read.

XD

I was thinking of posting that same thing. That light cyan on this background is kind of hard on the eyes.

If you change the tuning such that, say, we spend as much time healing then as we do dealing damage now, that's going to be outright oppressive to your less skilled healers and, by extension, their parties.

We're talking Savage content. Isn't it SUPPOSED to be difficult?

Regarding that statement of "players only stay with a game if it hooks them emotionally" if you are going to apply that specifically to job and/or encounter design I don't see how you can or should treater all players as a monolithic block.

This I agree with, IDPL.

It's the very crux of the "4 Healers Model" argument, in fact.

[ASkellington]

I'm also not the only one saying this or seeing the arguments from proponents of the DPS changes this way:

• They all do need a few extra dps buttons.
• Said dps buttons need to connect with their theme and kit.
• Encounter design needs to change - faster telegraphs, more unavoidable damage.
• Healer kits need to be gutted and redesigned with all four receiving clear healing and as mentioned before damaging identities akin to what they have in PvP (as in diverse and not the same as the other).
• MP sustain should come back and be a focus.

You missed that then.

Also I rebuffed your designs because of reasons different than "they aren't as complexed as I wanted".

The rotation is fine. I don't like the design of it.

[Renathras]

You missed that then.

None of that says "non-complex rotation.

Also I rebuffed your designs because of reasons different than "they aren't as complexed as I wanted".

The rotation is fine. I don't like the design of it.

I mean, you kind of did. You said they weren't interesting or engaging to you, but I pointed out what you find engaging and interesting is what I find complex. Therefore, that would be because they aren't as complex as you wanted. I also noted that you aren't playing all four healer Jobs, meaning some should probably be designed for people who don't like what you do. Imagine if all the Casters were designed like SMN. That would leave the BLM players, in particular, out in the cold. You don't even have to go that far; all the healer Jobs RIGHT NOW are designed mainly for a 2 button damage type of player, and you can see the problem of them all being the same. The problem isn't they're simple/boring. The problem IS they're al IDENTICAL in their level of complexity.

There is no design everyone will like.

The objective should be insuring there is AT LEAST ONE design for every person. So you may like AST and I may like WHM. That's good, we both have something we like. If AST and WHM were both like WHM, that'd be bad because you'd have nothing, and if WHM and AST were both like AST, that'd also be bad because I'd have nothing.

The solution should be to mix and match it up so that everyone has something.

EDIT:

This is a big part of the puzzle for sure. For all it's jank, one thing 2.0 ARR absolutely nailed right out of the gate was it's progressive difficulty curve that steadily ramped up as you progressed through dungeons into the HM Primals and onto Coil. They even used to dungeons to introduce people to key primal mechanics. Genius design IMO.

Agreed.

There's now a massive gap between MSQ and Extremes. There are random bits of content that KIND of fit somewhere in there - deep dungeons, exploration zones, and 24 mans try to fit in there somewhere - but there's still a massive gap between casual content and the "midcore" Extremes. And this isn't just casual content has gotten easier; Extremes now are harder, there are a lot more body checks and tight timing mechanics with precise positioning more akin to Savage fights than there used to be.

Go spend more time on the healer forums then.

Right?

[ASkellington]

I mean, you kind of did. You said they weren't interesting or engaging to you, but I pointed out what you find engaging and interesting is what I find complex. Therefore, that would be because they aren't as complex as you wanted. I also noted that you aren't playing all four healer Jobs, meaning some should probably be designed for people who don't like what you do.

First off at no point have I ever said I wanted WHM to be on the same level as SB AST or SCH. I've gone out of my way to repeatedly say so.

Second they aren't interesting or engaging to me because you aren't adding anything new.

Which would I prefer?

1. Your rotation of WHM where you have Dia stack to 60s and have Glare upgrade the damage of Holy an AOE skill I believe has 0 reason to exist in a single target rotation
   
2. Or the same concept but instead of Holy there's a new single target button, Dia remains 30s but procs said button OR Misery.

Oh gee I'm going to go with latter. It's literally no complex than your rotation.

Would I prefer a WHM with more weaving potential, yes. I'd even prefer WHM to be a healer equivilant of BLM because that sounds fun to play.

Do I want that for the WHM player base? NO. And I've never seriously asked for that.

I've literally asked for 2 more DPS buttons no healing attached to be added to each healer at minimum to break but Glare/Malefic/Broil/Dosis spam.

HOW you make them different across all healers I frankly do not care at this point. I would prefer all of them to mesh with the healer kit and their themes as I mentioned in another post but at this point I'm arguing that 2 dps buttons are not enough.

[Shurrikhan]

We're talking Savage content. Isn't it SUPPOSED to be difficult?

That was not strictly a constraint given in what I was responding to.

But sure, let's consider Savage under that condition you've quoted (flipping optimal %uptime spent DPSing with %uptime spent healing, such that the present scarcity of downtime complexity would actually be properly apportioned to its situation):

We already see a decent size range in GCD usage even under the extremely low healing requirements present right now. If we tuned Savage to require as much %uptime spent healing as is currently optimally spent DPSing (e.g., up to 100%), that leaves little to no room.

Given your complaints that as much as a single extra DoT of middling bonus potency-per-minute could overly stress out healers... that doesn't seem particularly feasible.


It's fine to make the healing requirements tougher. I suggested as much in the very sentence after what you chose to quote.

Increasing healing requirements so far that our current scarcity of downtime actions would actually make sense, though (e.g., Glare would then see only as much use as Cure II does now), would likely be overkill. It'd be better to provide some of that boost to engagement through downtime actions instead.

[Renathras]

Given your complaints that as much as a single extra DoT of middling bonus potency-per-minute could overly stress out healers... that doesn't seem particularly feasible.

Note I don't make this argument, though. Not in the way you are, anyway.

As I frequently point out, different people have different skillsets. Someone may find piano extremely easy to play and be able to play complex pieces on it, but find guitar substantially difficult, and struggle with even simple pieces.

The role is "Healer", meaning "those people with aptitude for healing" are the primary intended audience of the role. People who might have trouble with damage rotations or upkeep DoTs, but have no problem at all with healing. I have no issue selecting correct heals for various situations. So no, I wouldn't have issue with higher healing requirements, personally. Nor do I suspect anyone who is a healer would IF the paradigm WAS shifted to using GCD heals. For example, people trying to only oGCD heal and maximize GCD damage uptime were slammed with P5S. I found it relatively easy to heal since GCDs are extremely effective. Regen - a GCD avoided like the plague by "Green DPS" minded healers - easily solved quite a bit of the problem with the bleeds. It was two button presses (one for each tank when the bleed busters hit them) and the mechanic was easily healed. It was only difficult for the people trying to avoid pressing GCD heals.

EDIT:

Complex is relative. So why do you keep insisting on objectively worded phrasing like 'a complex DPS rotation'

Because I see it as complex?

I've proposed "more complex" and been told it's not complex enough.

"a complex DPS rotation" is how people see it. Again, I'm not the only one wording it that way, despite it seeming I'm the only one you're calling out for saying so.

It's not simple, and it's more complex than more complex. Thus complex seems like the right word to say "more complex than more complex". My rule of thumb is that if it's at or above SMN level complexity, it's a DPS rotation.

I'll note you supported the SCH idea, but the WHM idea you wanted more complexity and/or randomness to it, and I also think that reply was to the pre-edit version that was deployed later, and I also know you opposed the Dia stacking option (which is more complex despite some of the people there insisting the contrary), and that you seemingly rejected the Dia/Assize idea, even though it was essentially identical to your own proposal, just it added one less button and for some reason that was a hard sticking point.

For what it's worth, even when I don't agree with you I like reading what you write here, as you tend to be one of the more reasonable users here. I appreciate that you provide your reasoning, tend to acknowledge and value a diversity of perspectives, and try to stimulate genuine good faith discussion. ^^

Aww, thanks!

Honestly, I feel the same towards you. I've really enjoyed the topics you've posted and the discussions they've started both here in General and the ones I've seen you post in the DPS forum. I see that yellow hat and it makes me smile and want to see what the post/thread is about.

Which is why I think it's good to have an option for those kind of players, something that transparently asks less of them. A diversity of options allows players to pick the level of engagement that works best for them, while allowing other players to get a different level of engagement that works for them. With the energy it takes a player to be a decent BLM, they can be a great SMN, and I think that same approach can work well with other classes.

Very very VERY much agreed! And well said.

To clarify, I'm not actually suggesting anything less than "maintain one DoT and one DPS skill". I'm suggesting that if there are healers who want a more involved DPS rotation, we should at the very least leave one healer's DPS kit the old way so that players who didn't want that additional complexity can continue to play their role at the same level of efficacy without the potential for increased expectations/criticism.

And this is, in absolute terms, the only argument of the "4 Healers Model". It makes no statements on anything other than "We have 4 Healer Jobs, let us make them all distinct, but maintain at least one as it is today for the sake of the players who enjoy the current model".

True, but in the exact same stride it's not fair to the people who want less complexity if their job gains more complexity. The idea with some jobs getting that change and some jobs not getting it is that neither preference is entirely ignored.

One thing in all these discussions that consistently boggles my mind - how people can say leaving one simple "is not fair to those that want things more complex", but don't understand that NOT leaving ANY simple "is not fair to those that want things to remain simple", who are already being asked to give up more if 3 of the Healer Jobs are changed.

I genuinely do not understand how one can use that argument and not see that it applies just as much (if not more) in the reverse direction as an argument against more complexity.

The only solution that doesn't have this problem IS one that leaves at least one simple and has at least one more complex, as that's the only solution that does offer something to both types of player. Do they get everything they want? No, but no compromise gives one side everything it wants. Any such resolution is not, in fact, a compromise as one side gets everything.

[Shurrikhan]

IF the paradigm WAS shifted to using GCD heals

...Again, "far more GCD healing than is currently typically worth using" is still a far less narrow/demanding state than "enough GCD healing for having just 2-3 relevant discrete downtime GCD actions to feel proportionate to opportunity."

I had already, again, suggested the prior, just not to the extreme that we'd be consistently be spending so much of our time GCD healing (e.g., some 80+% of the time) and therefore just having Malefic and Combust for our downtime GCD actions would feel sufficient / fulfilling.

[ForsakenRoe]

It was only difficult for the people trying to avoid pressing GCD heals.


My rule of thumb is that if it's at or above SMN level complexity, it's a DPS rotation.

I'll note you supported the SCH idea, but the WHM idea you wanted more complexity and/or randomness to it

You used GCD heals? But then you didn't do optimal damage! How did you clear, having lost several GCDs worth of damage by using GCD heals? If you were right about people causing wipes due to doing the wrong damage move in their healer DPS rotation (eg, the 310p Glare instead of the 350p Banish), surely you using a 0p Regen instead of a 310p Glare should have meant you hit enrage with the boss being super healthy still, no?


Again, either of us struggling with DOT management does not a DPS rotation make. What metric are you using to decide that 'one more button, and a shorter timer on a DOT' makes WHM suddenly 'at or above SMN level'? I know SMN doesn't have too much going for it, but you can at least swap the order of the primals to better match movement timings, and you have to watch out for the Ifrit Dash being at a potentially awkward time. My WHM would have... uh there'd be times when Dia and Banish are needing to be used on the same GCD, I guess. In which case, Dia's more damage so use that. Problem solved

Lastly, I don't want 'randomness', the 'issue' I would have with your WHM pitch if anything is that it's very 'static', being made of predictable logical 'blocks'. Which is fine, but it just might lack 'staying power', ie people might be back to complaining a lot faster with that design option compared to others. What are you seeing as 'randomness' that I'm not?

[ASkellington]

One thing in all these discussions that consistently boggles my mind - how people can say leaving one simple "is not fair to those that want things more complex", but don't understand that NOT leaving ANY simple "is not fair to those that want things to remain simple", who are already being asked to give up more if 3 of the Healer Jobs are changed.

I genuinely do not understand how one can use that argument and not see that it applies just as much (if not more) in the reverse direction as an argument against more complexity.

Because 2 dps buttons doesn't equal simple to me. You can have a simple rotation and it can be more than 2 buttons. You even made one. With WHM.

SMN is an example of a simple rotation.

WAR is an example of a simple rotation.

2 buttons =/= a simple rotation. Its a lack of one.