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

[ForsakenRoe]

Complex is relative.

Complex is relative. So why do you keep insisting on objectively worded phrasing like 'a complex DPS rotation' instead of subjective like 'more complex than current' or 'a rotation I would find too complex to be comfortable with'

I said I'd be agreeable to your WHM, and your SCH. Why am I getting flak for being 'opposed to your ideas' when I've literally said 'yeh this sounds alright'. For example, here for SCH, and here for WHM.

See, quite often I don't just say 'I like this idea' or 'I don't like this idea', I'll also add why I like/dislike it, and if I dislike the idea but I see some merit in it, I'll suggest what I believe to be an alternative way to implement the idea, intended in the spirit of collaboration. Maybe my 'this idea is interesting, wouldn't function too well in the game's design but if we do X, it could work' is getting interpreted as 'your idea is bad, let me just steal it, rewrite one line of the wording and claim it's my own idea' but I can assure you I have enough ideas of my own that I do not need to resort to such behavior

[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.

[IDontPetLalas]

With respect, could you re-read my question? I think you may have misunderstood it. Because the question was about choosing between two less than ideal situations, in an effort to better see from a different perspective.

I re-read it, (I'm not at all offended by that) however I really don't believe I misunderstood what you propose. If I paraphrase your choices, in (2), if my main was AST, in theory I could get BrandNewMacrocosmos, BrandNewNeutralSect, and BrandNewED added but my overall game flow would not change- I'd have the same opener, cards would work the same, I would have some new heals to choose from that may have an additional effect (maybe a shield, maybe a speed buff, who knows). ONE other healer is also affected, but two are not. Not viable to me if this is correct.


In choice 1 all healers are affected as explained above using the example of AST. If I understood correctly, not viable to me.

[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.

[AmiableApkallu]

I mean, this goes both ways: Where's my non-complicated SCH, AST, or SGE? Where's my SCH, AST, or SGE with simple DPS and focus on GCD healing? Where's my healer Job that is focused on healing instead of damage dealing? Where's my healer that doesn't have an annoying, tedious DPS "rotation"? (I find DPS rotations boring, that's why I don't play DPSers as I don't find their "gameplay" engaging).

All righty:

• "non-complicated SCH, AST, or SGE": Literally every proposal I've seen for these jobs. Also, literally the jobs as they exist currently.
• "healer that doesn't have an annoying, tedious DPS 'rotation'": Again, literally every proposal I've seen for these jobs. Also, literally the jobs as they exist currently.
• "SCH, AST, or SGE with simple DPS and focus on GCD healing": You yourself have proposed more of a focus on GCD healing, and I don't recall anyone rejecting that, merely pointing out that switching the focus to the GCD healing is, by itself, not enough.

In my comment that you're responding to, "direct HP restoration and regen" and "DPS kit based on direct damage" are key descriptors and phrases. People can differ on what counts as "simple" (or "non-complicated") or "godawful boring", but the characteristics I just quoted as having mentioned are a bit more objective and more amenable to building "job aesthetics" and "job identity" around.

[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.

[Aravell]

You mean the expansion where one healer was completely benched, one spec of the one healer with specs (AST) was mostly benched, and people who didn't enjoy DPSing on healers were sidelined from content?

Benched? Sidelined from content?

Look, you said yourself that you occasionally dabble in just the first 2 floors of savage, so this is probably second-hand information (I assume this pertains to hard content because no one is locking jobs out of casual content no matter how bad they are). Take it from someone that cleared every SB tier on 2 characters and joined an extensive amount of PFs during that expansion, there were a multitude of WHMs, Noct ASTs and also healers that do 20-40% of their theoretical damage output, all of these healers cleared on the patch of release (the lower output healers cleared on patch as well, just later in the patch), that doesn't sound like anyone was being sidelined, and that's in the hardest content the game has to offer at the time.

[ForsakenRoe]

I'm just gonna summarize my desires for the healers, and people can decide if they pass into 'whoa nelly that's too complicated sounding for me' or not for themselves

WHM

Dia rescaled to 12s, 150p plus 70 per tick, 430 total
Water/Banish as 15s CD GCD, is about 40p more than current Stone/Glare (in current game, it'd be 350p)
A new gauge that builds by using GCD damage or heals (not Lilies), spend 50 on new skill on next line
New heal AOE I've been calling Blessing of the Elementals, 500p AOE heal, can call it Cure 4 if you prefer
Quake Tornado and Flood, replacing Glare Dia and Banish for one cast of each (like Fell Cleave > Inner Chaos) after casting BOTE/Cure4. Functions as damage refund for the heal

In total, two new buttons, and one's a heal

SCH

Assuming Broil 5 is 300p:
Bio: 350p over 30s
Miasma: 240p over 24s, plus 100p on cast (total 340)
Shadowflare: 100p AOE centered on enemy, plus drops a puddle there which deals 250p over 15s (total 350). Thanks to this puddle, this also makes this move worth using in AOE

Energy Drain: Still exists I guess but knowing SE it's nerfed to 50p

AST

Major and Minor cards now auto-draw when they're ready. You can hold up to two of each (to prevent overcap issues). Major once per minute, Minor once per 15s.
Cards now have unique effects, all dealing damage balanced against each other properly, with the 'utility' being a nice bonus on top. I had balanced them all such that in current BIS they'd all provide roughly 30000 damage to the raid.
Using the cards is no longer about physical vs magical, but instead based on roles, eg Balance is flat damage % best used on DPS, Ewer gives MP restore and if used on a healer it allows that healer to doublestrike with their spells for X casts, Bole reflects damage and provides mit so best used on a Tank, etc

Minor Arcana now draws from the full deck of sixty, and each card deals a total of 300p via it's effect (Malefic is 250), plus a tiny bonus based on the card's face value (scaling from 5-45 bonus potency)

SGE

Hilariously, the 'most thought out' idea I had for SGE doesn't even really see it getting more damage buttons, instead focusing on realizing the 'damage>healing' identity of the class, and making it's gameplay be all about 'augmenting' your Kardia heals in various ways to reduce GCD healing required. Addersting got changed to a 0-100 bar, spending Augment stacks generates Addersting, Toxicon buffs your next 4 attacks by a potency value equal to the Addersting Gauge's value at the time

Guess I was partaking in the '4 healer model' without realizing it? JK, SGE'd also be gaining in complexity, just that it's complexity would come from it's 'optimal healing' being more technical to master and execute

I can agree that my idea for AST is more complex than SMN at least, given that you'd have to memorize what the cards do, but I just don't see how the WHM would be...