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

[Renathras]

Increase the dps options and a casual player can keep playing the same because dps is optional there

Genuine question:

Are we talking about Savage content or normal Dungeons?

If we're talking about normal dungeons, then the healing requirement could be doubled and still be doable with Medica 2 spam. So that wouldn't hurt the casual healer at all.

If we're talking about Savage content, then the DPS contribution isn't optional.

So no, you can't use this deflection.

(That is, if we're talking casual content, then increasing EITHER is in the same boat of not mattering, so that doesn't support increasing damage and not healing; if we're talking hardcore content, then increasing EITHER is in the same both of very much mattering, so that doesn't support increasing damage and not healing, either.)

By, as we've been through hundreds of times, making the potency difference between 'optimal' and 'suboptimal' low such that 'doing it wrong' is not enough to cause an enrage,

Yes, it would basically have to be negligible. But as we've said when we've gone over this the hundreds of times before, "more work" has to be rewarded otherwise it is unacceptable to the very people demanding "more work".

Healing requirement, in a VERY technical sense, is a sliding scale from 0% needed healing to 99.99% of health damage provided damage waves have enough spacing to get people back up to 100%. More than that if we include mitigation, but we're just talking about healing.

Damage is also a sliding scale, but also has a lower bound of "fails Enrage", and the more difficult it is to access damage, the more difficult it is to clear Enrage.

I admit that there's a loss of parallelism in changing "need" to "able" in that first bullet point, but I think it better preserves the whole "healers should be required to heal more" versus "healers should have more interesting DPS options".

I feel like this is is the point of contention and people aren't quite getting it.

IF the damage output is different, it isn't an "option" anymore. It's only an option when it's functionally identical. No one wants a Stone-Aero-Water rotation that does the same exact damage and effects as a Glare-Glare-Glare rotation, but that's the only thing that would be absolutely optional.

This whole thing is why I pitch the 4 Healers Model idea all the time, since it addresses this by letting players who want to have to press more DPS buttons to pick the hhealer Job(s) that have them, and those who do not want to press them to choose the healer Job(s) that do not.

Because...

You're lumping a bunch of people in a group and saying they all suck. "You can't upkeep Dia? Well, obviously you wouldn't be able to cast Cure 2," which is a nonsensical argument. "They can't handle more DPS buttons because..." NO! It's because they don't have a mind for (or any interest/fun factor from) DPS, not because they don't have "awareness" or "oversight".

Look at all the DPS players in the game who can handle complex DPS rotations and clear high end content so clearly have awareness and such, but you throw them on a healer and they freak out and can't do it. It turns out, "awareness" to healer health bars and "awareness" to DPS CDs aren't identical skills.

You really seem to have a problem grasping this concept and I have no idea why. What you're doing is essentially saying anyone bad at playing piano will also be bad at harmonica and sculpting, but anyone good at piano is also able to play literally any instrument on the planet or perform any kind of art that exists with equal proficiency.

There are TONS of people that fail at DPSing but not at healing and mechanics. There are TONS of people that fail at healing but not DPSing and mechanics. This view is not only insulting, it's outright wrong.

It's hard for me to comprehend how you can come to the conclusion that the healbot/sylphies would stay when my time in DF experience observing the pug healers are telling me the otherwise.

To be fair, you have no way of knowing those aren't the "Green DPS healers", not the Sylphies. If healing became literally Medica 2 spam, the "Sylphies" would be the only ones that would do it.

While that sounds like a great thing, we have to remember that the dev team's idea of increasing healing requirements is to make raidwides that kill you without mitigation and to tack bleeds onto everything. I much prefer BarbEX over the entire Abyssos tier in terms of healing requirements. I personally prefer hectic healing scenarios like p2 BarbEX or Living Liquid in TEA over heavy damage+bleed like P8S, but I don't think we'll get any of that unless the dev team understands what healing requirements mean and not mix it up with mitigation requirements.

Yeah, this is the ultimate problem. But I continue to contend this is due to the oGCDs. Healing needs a total top-down revamp. As much as some people like "healing plans", those are as detrimental to good design as the 2 min meta is. Both hamstring design.

Think about it, we don't have MP management because of powerful oGCDs. We don't have breakup in the Nukespam because of the oGCDs. And "weaving" probably wasn't even some high minded design objective so much as an accident between janky netcode and workarounds for responsiveness. It's influenced the expectations for healing and has limited how "healchecks" can work since oGCDs provide so much healing that it generates the Roe/Sebazy/etc noted problem of how high healing demands would need to be to actually stress the healer kits.

At the core, the oGCD healing model is a pretty massive problem, and any solution has to at least acknowledge that being part of the issue.

[Aravell]

Yeah, this is the ultimate problem. But I continue to contend this is due to the oGCDs. Healing needs a total top-down revamp. As much as some people like "healing plans", those are as detrimental to good design as the 2 min meta is. Both hamstring design.

The biggest problem in healer design right now is, if you take the easy route and cut out the large amount of OGCD bloat......what do you fill the void with? Healer kits would be very, very barebones without all that bloat, what's the plan after that?

Do they strip mitigation and debuffs off the DPS and tanks and hand them back to the healers? I don't think the tanks will be too happy about that.
Do they give us more damage buttons? You probably won't be happy about that.
Do they replace it with other equally as pointless GCD heal buttons? That doesn't really solve the issue here.

If they seriously want to solve the stagnation of the healer role, cutting out the OGCD bloat is only one part of the solution. I'd want to see a complete revamp of healer kits to have the damage portion and the healing portion interact with each other, you don't need a bloated kit to have engaging gameplay, you just need a good kit with decent interplay within it.

Alternatively, they can keep most of the OGCDs, but add an MP cost to them. The basic AoE and ST GCD heals can be free or cost very little, but every OGCD should come at a cost depending on how strong it is. That would at least make average healers have to dip into GCD heals to conserve MP, while high-tier groups can still optimise to eliminate GCD healing as much as possible.

[Rein_eon_Osborne]

[...]To be fair, you have no way of knowing those aren't the "Green DPS healers", not the Sylphies. If healing became literally Medica 2 spam, the "Sylphies" would be the only ones that would do it.[...]

Cast bar exist. Sound effects exist (hiding VFX will not mute this). Status bar exist. Mini-map for general party member positioning exist. Although one of the biggest giveaway are usually their first line of defense when something (un)expected happens. Or if you're one of those 'maybe evil minmaxer', there's also the 'funky website' to tell the stories we need to discern. If one plays and actually put effort into bettering themselves on a role, they will gain this perceptive knowledge of said role gradually one way or another. So, I have to disagree on 'not having ways to know', that's on the borderline copium IMHO.

"Sylphies" being the one enthusiastic and capable to do the job is certainly not a scenario I'd find believable when there has not been any single encounter of these "Sylphies" that I witnessed where they did not crumble when the first sign of stress/pressure starts to happen in normal content. They straight up don't possess the mental capacity to process all of that at the heat of moment---something that most of these 'Green DPS' tend to have to some respectable degree (excluding Bad Green DPS, they're as bad, if not worse than Sylphies but less common in my experience). I can say this because believe or not, I spend majority of my times in normal contents.

[Renathras]

The biggest problem in healer design right now is, if you take the easy route and cut out the large amount of OGCD bloat......what do you fill the void with? Healer kits would be very, very barebones without all that bloat, what's the plan after that?

This is actually a pretty good question.

I think part of the answer is looking at how other games have handled this. For example, in WoW, Burning Crusade, what all abilities did Holy Priests have? Sure, downranking was still a thing back then, but that aside, they had different heals with different cast times, mana costs, and effects; and didn't have any "oGCDs" since oGCDs didn't exist in that game.

For a start, not being oGCD doesn't mean things have to be completely removed. For example, Earthly Star could be an instant cast GCD spell useful for movement or planning out future healing needs. Divine Benison could be Stoneskin, which was a cast time GCD barrier spell with no CD in ARR and HW. Protect also had a cast time, so something like Temperance as a short duration mitigation could exist. Something with enough of an MP cost that spamming it when you don't need it is detrimental, but using it sparingly in advance of big attacks is wise. And as we know from Pneuma, spells can be GCDs with MP costs that still have CDs to limit excessive use.

Point is, we have to first remove the idea that "oGCD or nothing" is the choice. There are very few abilities that work that way. For example, Tetra is(well, was) Cure 2 in oGCD form. But Assize isn't Medica. Ixochole isn't Prognosis. We can work out how similar is too similar, but Earthly Star is an oGCD that doesn't really have an overlap with any of the GCDs in AST's kit, for an example. And oGCDs that function in tandem with GCDs (Deploy, Plenary, etc) probably aren't a problem THEMSELVES.

That said:

Mitigation from DPS and Tanks: Arguably some of that does make sense (more DPSers than Tanks, though).
Damage buttons: For some healers; I've literally been arguing this for over a year with the 4 Healers Model.
GCD heal buttons: Other than converting oGCDs into GCDs where it makes sense to do so (again, Earthly Star as an example), this is only part of an overall healer design and encounter design thing.

"cutting out the OGCD bloat is only one part of the solution": Isn't this literally what I said? "Healing needs a total top-down revamp" for example, but that's hardly the only thing I've said on this topic.

.

I think a big part of the problem is that people don't see oGCDs as "real" buttons. You cast Glare than Tetra than Glare than Assize than Glare than Glare than Benison than Glare than Temperance. What did you just do? "11111, that's so boring!". It's partly this player perception that, if it's not a GCD, it doesn't count, that has to be addressed. Either the playerbase can debase themselves of that (unlikely) or we can force oGCDs into being GCDs to do it for them. Though I do agree - and have said many times - that oGCDs should have a higher cost than GCDs unless they're weaker. Cure 2 should cost less than Tetra in terms of MP, because it has a cast time and triggers the GCD. Those are costs that it has, so Tetra needs a cost equivalent to that. "But it has a CD" isn't a cost, since that just means you can't use it a second time, it doesn't diminish its effect or functionality.

Cast bar...

I can't be sure, but I feel like you aren't telling the truth.

You guys call me a Sylphie all the time, but I don't "crumble when the first sign of stress/pressure starts to happen in normal content". "They straight up don't possess the mental capacity"; who are "they"? "Sylphies!" Who? "Them!" WHO?

"TOP men..."

You make all these statements about people that I'm sure you think exist, but seriously, why do you think people who only cast Medica 2 now would quit if healing became a game of "You just press Medica 2 over and over again"? That makes no sense. Even if you assume all the worst possible things you can about people who want to heal and not DPS - as you pretty much have - you're literally saying if healing was made to be what they basically DO ALREADY they'd quit. That...makes no sense.

EDIT:

I would like to reiterate once again for the people who think a healer not being optimal will lead to an enrage in any content other than week 1 savage/current ultimates. If a SCH does not have Biolysis up for the entirety of an average P9S kill, a single direct crit Hyosho Ranryu (or equivalent potency skills from other dps) under raid buffs can completely make up for that lost damage.

Is healer DPS significant or is it not?

All the time:

1) "Healers do 60% of a DPSers damage! Healers in this game are green DPS and always have been! Encounters are balanced around healer DPS! Healers are absolutely designed in this game to do DPS!"

"So...then making their DPS harder is bad."

2) "Nonononon, healer DPS is negligible and not doing it really doesn't affect anyone."

(1) and (2) are contradictions. Saying "Well, (1) is only true in some very specific situations"...is still a contradiction with (2). Either healer DPS is relevant, in which case making it more involved affects everyone, or it's irrelevant, in which case it doesn't matter. It can't be simultaneously true AND false that healer DPS is relevant.

.

In any case, the reality is, changing up the DPS affects everyone. Anyone saying it doesn't isn't being truthful. So then the onus is on them to argue why it's still okay to do so. There arguments to be made for that, but they very much depend on HOW the DPS is changed and balanced. The bigger the gap, the more relevant it becomes and the more it affects people.

Also: People shouldn't be going around insisting to others that things don't affect them in the first place when those people are saying it does. When you're telling people what matters TO THEM instead of listening to them tell you what matters to them, you're probably in the wrong.

[ForsakenRoe]

For a start, not being oGCD doesn't mean things have to be completely removed. For example, Earthly Star could be an instant cast GCD spell useful for movement or planning out future healing needs. Divine Benison could be Stoneskin, which was a cast time GCD barrier spell with no CD in ARR and HW. Protect also had a cast time, so something like Temperance as a short duration mitigation could exist. Something with enough of an MP cost that spamming it when you don't need it is detrimental, but using it sparingly in advance of big attacks is wise. And as we know from Pneuma, spells can be GCDs with MP costs that still have CDs to limit excessive use.

Point is, we have to first remove the idea that "oGCD or nothing" is the choice. There are very few abilities that work that way. For example, Tetra is(well, was) Cure 2 in oGCD form. But Assize isn't Medica. Ixochole isn't Prognosis. We can work out how similar is too similar, but Earthly Star is an oGCD that doesn't really have an overlap with any of the GCDs in AST's kit, for an example. And oGCDs that function in tandem with GCDs (Deploy, Plenary, etc) probably aren't a problem THEMSELVES.

Well, unfortunately, we can't remove the idea that 'OGCD or nothing' is the choice, because we as a playerbase are used to OGCDs now. We've had them for so long, they're grandfathered in to the design of the game. You can look at WOW for how the playerbase there reacted when Blizzard moved all the 'OGCD' skills, damage buffs, selfheals, some tank mits (if you can believe that) to the GCD. Prot Paladin's selfheal proc is now a GCD, so you can die because of your GCD lockout preventing you from clutch healing yourself. It was a HUGE outcry. People STILL complain about the change, it happened four bloody years ago now. That and the AOE cap. If SE tried to move heals to the GCD, then people would complain so hard, it'd get changed back within 2 weeks. How are you gonna 'clutch emergency heal' when you're GCD locked, for example? Benison takes 3 months to apply the shield, Benediction takes 4 to actually apply it's heal effect, you want to have it even further delayed because of your GCD spinning? Moving things to the GCD would slow the healing game down to a crawl. Go back and look at some ARR healer POVs, you cannot play like that in the current game, there's too much movement required for mechanics. Identify your shape, move to intercept the tether, move across the arena cos it's gonna spin, move to bait the protean, move to dodge the shapes exploding, move middle for raidwide, make sure to heal in between all of that too! I don't see how it's feasible without completely upending how fights are designed, in which case, once again we're at the result of 'this is a solution that requires a solution that requires a solution'

Besides, as loath as I am to suggest the idea, it is only fair that you consider that if healers have to have their OGCDs removed, then Tanks do too. And I cannot see any tanks being happy about the idea of, eg, Continuation or Edge of Darkness being a GCD. Or Mitigations, god forbid

edit

(1) and (2) are contradictions. Saying "Well, (1) is only true in some very specific situations"...is still a contradiction with (2). Either healer DPS is relevant, in which case making it more involved affects everyone, or it's irrelevant, in which case it doesn't matter. It can't be simultaneously true AND false that healer DPS is relevant.

Also: People shouldn't be going around insisting to others that things don't affect them in the first place when those people are saying it does. When you're telling people what matters TO THEM instead of listening to them tell you what matters to them, you're probably in the wrong.

Healer DPS matters in that you need to do some damage as a healer to clear content with enrages. The harder the content, the more is expected of the healer/the less the healer is allowed to slack (the DPS can pick up the slack in Extremes for example). The suggestions for Healer DPS that make it 'not as big a deal as you think' is that rather than demanding 'more damage' from the healer, we are demanding 'the same amount'. The enrage timers are not going to be changed because of changes like are being suggested. So the 'Healer DPS is mandatory' angle is only as true as it currently is, just that instead of 'the game expects you to have 80% DOT uptime and cast 100 out of a possible 120 Glares', it becomes '80% DOT uptime, and use 100 out of 120 Damage GCDs, either Glare or Banish or Luminaire or whatever you like', and provided that those additional tools are equal to or more damage than Glare, you'll still meet the DPS check. In fact, if they're higher, you would have the lenience to miss some Glares elsewhere. Maybe because of Banish being a bit higher potency, you make up the damage for a Glare elsewhere that you lost because you needed to GCD heal to save the Tank.

And we do listen to people telling us what matters to them. But as with many things in life, you can't just give them what they think they want directly, because often they've not thought things through. People ask for 'more healing required', but have they thought about how it'd affect MP economy? How much would it need to increase by? If the increase is not enough to fix the problem for the people most complaining about it (savage raiders), then what else has to be done to create a functional 'solution', and how much additional dev time does that take? Are there any alternative solutions that would not take as much dev time?

[ty_taurus]

Is healer DPS significant or is it not?

You can find the answer to your question in your own post:

Point is, we have to first remove the idea that "oGCD or nothing" is the choice.

Just as you ask others to open their mind to the potential of more varied healing existing on the GCD, you should also open your mind up to healer DPS contributions as being more than either 100% or 0% and nothing in between. Yes, healer DPS does matter, but that doesn't mean you miss one Biolysis and suddenly the party hits enrage. That's Aravell's point. It's confusing a minor misstep with a total face plant, and that's not realistic. While players will always strive to output 100% of their jobs total potential damage output, almost no one will ever actually achieve that in actual play. In fact, I've been doing some math recently that I want to share over on the healer forums that not only will help explain that falling short of perfection is not failure, but that having a wider variety of DPS actions can actually make your DPS contributions more forgiving, not less.

[Renathras]

Well, unfortunately...

Yes, but this is true of one-button DPS as well. This is an argument against all change. I think MOST OF US recognize that healing in this game has to have a complete revamp from the foundation to the rafters. I mean, maybe I'm wrong about that, but I think that's what all sober-minded appraisals have come down to. The problems are so fundamental, they require a complete shift to work. "We've had them for so long/grandfathered in" works just as well for one-button DPS rotations as well.

Most of your arguments in that paragraph were kind of opposing the idea of healing plans or preemptive - not just reactive - healing. That is, you're opposing the thing a lot of people like about the healing game. This is something that seems common with the "no more healing, more DPS" paradigm in general, but an opposition to actual HEALING gameplay. Healing shouldn't be "what can you weave in to immediately resolve damage and then get back to DPSing".

As for Tanks: Tanks aren't asking for more damage buttons right now, so trying to rope them in is a canard.

And we do listen...

I get that, really, but also:

1) This goes both ways for what you want, too,
2) You SAY they haven't thought things through, but many have.

Say what you will, you should know by now I've thought a lot of this through. Ad nauseam.

You can find...

Legitimately: Welcome back. I've honestly missed you, Ty. I know it doesn't always come across, but I do like hearing/seeing your thoughts and opinions on things. I'm glad you're back. /hugs

Your second point is in the right ballpark. It's why I propose and support and promote the 4 Healers Model all the time. I think it's a legitimate solution to that issue. But as to your specific point - it's why I note that if the change is so minor to be negligible, then the same people promoting it now will be the voices asking for it to not be negligible later. The whole "I do so much more work, I should be rewarded with greater output" starts to creep up. We already see it in some cases like SMN vs RDM, and some people in these very discussions have argued against that in the past.

As for if it makes it more forgiving, three notes:

1) That depends entirely on HOW it's implemented (e.g. I've proposed some before where the difference is negligible, and generally, been told the difference was too small and not enough "reward" for the "more work"),
2) This is a very mechanical view - many people like how their Jobs feel to play, so a mechanical argument of "you're only losing out on 0.001% damage" isn't going to help if they FEEL the Job feels bad to play post-change,
3) This doesn't actually require more buttons - like my WHM pitches didn't add a single button but all made for more involved rotations.

EDIT:

"Medica II Mage" refers to healers who doesn't know the correct answer to X mechanic---they only toss out Medica II/Succor/Asp Helios/E.Prog/whatever their comfort button are, then hope for the best. Literally only you who's so focused on this semantic & refuse to read between the line for whatever reason.

Because it's a caricature.

No serious person is going to bring up "Medica II Mage/Sylphie" in a conversation, just like no one should seriously bring up "DPS healer that never presses a single heal". Do these things both exist? Yes. But they aren't prevalent, and we shouldn't balance the game or make decisions based on these unicorns. Sylphies are in FAR shorter supply than people like you make them out to be.

All I was telling you was that people that spam only Medica II now would NOT be the people leaving the role if the role became spamming Media II. This is so obvious, I'm not sure why you're even arguing the point. It's like saying people that play BLM as "Ice Mages" would be the first to quit the Job if BLM was legitimately turned into Blizard-spam Mage. They'd be the LAST people leaving it.

Your argument is nonsensical.

If you mean they'd quit Savage raiding, maybe? But that's also inane; Medica 2 mages aren't doing Savage raiding RIGHT NOW. They can't quit a thing they aren't doing in the first place. Especially if the content was changed to literally accommodate their play style.

But this is a stupid side-show conversation.

You're literally arguing "If they change healing to where it is the way they already play, they'll all quit! But if we change healing to something they don't already do - more DPS buttons - they'll all totally keep doing it". I'm not even sure how to argue against something so divorced from...basic logic.

.

As to the last sentence: Because I've been called a Sylphie by people here - I think even you - more than once. Thus using myself as example disproves your argument. Granted, I'm not really a Sylphie, but that doesn't seem to matter to the people calling me one.

[ForsakenRoe]

Yes, but this is true of one-button DPS as well. This is an argument against all change. I think MOST OF US recognize that healing in this game has to have a complete revamp from the foundation to the rafters. I mean, maybe I'm wrong about that, but I think that's what all sober-minded appraisals have come down to. The problems are so fundamental, they require a complete shift to work. "We've had them for so long/grandfathered in" works just as well for one-button DPS rotations as well.

Does it? Because as far as I can see, we've had the 'current DPS rotation' design since SHB (so, 3 years, 4 by the time 7.0 launches). By comparison, we've had OGCD healing tools to support our healing output since... ARR's relaunch, 10 years ago? Granted, we had less of them back then, but what we have now, where healing is almost entirely handled via OGCDs, is a natural evolution of that, because it's not very easy to add a new GCD healing tool with a niche that makes it feel good to use, compared to an OGCD one. Look how hard it is for the devs to work out how to add a new Kenki spender in place of Kaiten

If anything is 'grandfathered in' about the damage side of things, surely it's the ARR-SB era design?

1) That depends entirely on HOW it's implemented (e.g. I've proposed some before where the difference is negligible, and generally, been told the difference was too small and not enough "reward" for the "more work"),
2) This is a very mechanical view - many people like how their Jobs feel to play, so a mechanical argument of "you're only losing out on 0.001% damage" isn't going to help if they FEEL the Job feels bad to play post-change,

1: Was this 'not enough reward (potency)' or 'not enough reward (difference in gameplay from current design)' because the two are very different things. Energy Drain's continued existence and defense by some players should prove that it doesn't matter how small a potency gain 'optimization tricks' give us, the fact there's a difference is what motivates those optimizers to do what they do. You can stand on the boss's ass the whole fight and miss two positionals a minute as NIN (the Armor Crushes) totaling 80p loss per min. You'll still see NINs go for the side positional, because it's more damage.

2: I am not entirely sure you can judge 'how a job feels' if the design hasn't even been implemented. Just seeing a DOT in the kit and going 'ew a DOT' is not really a good reason to naysay the whole design. I can just as easily posit that the average player would be ecstatic to play my design, that after just one EX roulette with it, the increased mobility the instantcasts afford them, the more powerful feeling AOE burst, the 'exhilarating heal work' they can do using not only the new gaugespending heal tool but also the new shield-applying Lily spells, they will flock to the forums to say 'thank you Yoshida WHM is so good now' and all buy the Cruise Chaser on the Mogstation to show their appreciation

[Renathras]

If we want a real solution it has to work regardless of difficulty.

Yes but also no?

Question I've not seen an answer to - Roe may have offered one that I missed, but no one else has that I can tell - what level of DPS rotation WOULD IT TAKE for you to NEVER get bored with current MSQ difficulty content?

At the end of the day, nothing is going to work for all difficulties. Jonny Casual isn't going to be healing Ultimates and Leroy Ultimate isn't going to ever NOT be bored running MSQ content. There are some truths of our reality, and those are foundational ones.

This is false.

Nope, it's true.

It's something YOU don't care about, but other people DO care about. If we take a REALLY wide view, we could just say everything in the game is optional, but that isn't useful to have discussions. For it to be optional to me, the gap would have to be really small. Otherwise it's not optional, and I'm not the only person who feels that way. You saying it's optional doesn't alter that. And again, note my argument here:

One CAN argue that the benefits outweigh the costs. That's a valid line of discussion. One CANNOT insist that there are NO COSTS.

The point of this rhetorical "it doesn't matter/it's optional" trick is to shift the onus onto those resisting the change when the onus for change is on those arguing for it.

This is also true of the 4 Healers Model opposition. And the irony is, if people would give on that, they'd likely get most of what they want otherwise. But the insistence that no provision may be allowed for those who don't want what you're selling is why you get nothing.

Also, keep in mind that several people (who aren't me and oppose me on most arguments) have said the 4 Healers Model COULD work (just they want to be very specific about it), though most go back on that later. Generally it's a "Well, how about this?!" And then I say yes and they're like "Waitwait, no, that isn't...!", meaning they didn't think I'd say yes so it wasn't a serious compromise proposal, they just didn't realize how expansive the idea is.

The point I'm making here is twofold.

Honestly, I didn't find this post too disagreeable. (2) is a position I've held for a while. I've been attacked every time I've said it here, though. You won't be, fortunately, since you have the "right views".

Personally, I think a different solution is in order.

Does it?

Yes.

I mean, simple answer: Yes. Not trying to be snarky, that's just...the answer.

Or did you mean that a complete rework of healing in this game isn't necessary?

As for oGCD healing - in ARR, WHM had only one oGCD heal, and it was an emergency button/one with very specific planning requirements. SCH had 3 (realistically) oGCD heals per minute. [Caveat: You could shoehorn Embrace via Macros back then, though...but lots of people didn't actually do that. Still, this is a valid SCH argument, not a valid "we've all done this since ARR" argument; and we've had this conversation enough times before that you know this already.] So no, it wasn't really a thing we've used since ARR's relaunch 10 years ago. oGCD healing became really prevalent into SB after it being picked up by tip end raiders in HW. WHM didn't get in on the act until Lilies in ShB as shoehorned "oGCD" heals.

(SB era it had only Tetra since even then people were using Assize for the damage, not healing, and it didn't really have outright oGCD heal options since things like Plenary worked off of...ugh...CURE spells. Seriously, ANYONE who thinks WHM was better in SB, you're just wrong... <_< The second Lily incarnation a patch or three in was an improvement, but it was still not great, but the original "20% chance of getting a Lily when you cast CURE ONE"? Even back then, that was terrible.)

What we have NOW (and have since ShB for WHM, since SB for SCH and AST, and only since EW for SGE given it's only existed since EW) is the oGCD healing model. Making it a mere 2 years older, in practice, than the one button DPS rotation.

...also note AST had the "1111" spam since SB (if not HW; it never had a robust DPS suite) and WHM has had it since SB Aero was normalized. So the "one button" DPS "rotation" is as old (or older) than oGCD healing for WHM, and arguably as old as it for AST.

For SCH, your argument holds water. But even I advocate for SCH to have its SB state restored, so...

.

1) Then no change at all works, right? Or something so minimal as to be irrelevant. The problem, of course, is that it's pretty normal for people to say that to get what they want at first (camel nose in the tent), then say later "Well, now that we have this thing and are doing more work..." to demand more. And the problem is, it's not like we can sign some kind of contract or something to prevent that. And we have SCH with that system in the game RIGHT NOW and are being told it's not enough...so that kind of defeats your argument in that specific case, doesn't it?

2) Well, in some specific cases we can if the proposals are things we had before. For example "Make Dia 18/12 sec duration and re-add Aero 3" is a thing we've had before. I remember playing that in SB. So I can judge how it feels since I remember how it felt before. I can also say that I enjoyed PvP (this is relevant, hold on) before the EW changes in some cases. WHM specifically; I don't like not having a filler cure spell. So the "more burst but more limited heals; do more dps" doesn't feel as good to me. The more bursty DAMAGE spells with short CDs is nice (Misery and Purgation both feel good to use, Seraph not so much since it forces melee engagement), but Cure 2 being heavily limited to 2 charges and Cure 3 locked behind Seraph and Medica 2 being locked behind Purgation all feel really bad. I find so many times I need to heal ONE MORE person but Cure 2 is on CD and Cure 3 is either not up yet (since Seraph isn't) or isn't viable (since Seraph in that situation would result in death). It's then I wish for the old Cure 1 that PvP had before.

Further, it lends to an encounter design (which PvP is) of bursting people down rapidly and there being nothing people can do about it outside of VERY clutch maneuvers. So if we made PvE like this, it would mean even more massive spikes of damage that have to be rapidly healed, which leads to bad encounter design. How do I know this? Wrath of the Lich King into Cataclysm. WoW had this same problem, and in trying to "fix" it, they actually made it worse. It was the least fun healing in that game's history. No thank you. Making healing more like that would be less fun.

See? I DO speak from experience from time to time.

...since when are you most of us ? You're still not any authority after the last few books you wrote. Healing doesn't need a complete revamp, it needs simple changes within the game's confines that would drastically improve gameplay, no need to reinvent the wheel.

I'm not?

I'm referring to the conversations in the healer forum for months. Go read them. The majority of players there, if not everyone, seems to think that healing needs a total rework. That's not a Ren position. Roe, Sebazy, Semi, etc have all also advocated for it. This is the one thing you can't make me an island about, friend.

And who are you, new person to the conversation? I mean, everyone's view is valid, but coming on kind of jerkish with the "last few books you wrote" quip. Either make a point or don't, insults don't help your case.

Read again from Zeastria's post.

You can't reference something that hasn't happened yet.

It is accurate to say that people that enjoy DPSing on healers wouldn't like it if healing became only casting heals. That's a pretty fair argument, regardless of what you think. "You like X, so we're removing X" "Well, then I won't like it anymore" makes sense. "You like X so we're making it only X" "Great! I love X!" makes sense. "Those who like X won't like us giving them more X, but those who dislike X will be totally cool with more X" does not.

But this is, as I said before, a dumb side argument, so I'm not going to keep going on with trying to convince you to see reality.

(Oh, at first I thought you meant the dungeons one. Then I got to thinking about it. For my part, I've got close to 4,000, which is more than adequate "credentials" for a sample size. But yes, I wanted to be technically accurate.)

Also, I'm not the one saying that people can't adjust, amirite, or making caricatures about entire groups of people, lmao. That's what you're doing.

All I was saying is that people who only heal now wouldn't be upset at healers being converted to only healing, while people who like DPSing on healers would be upset by such a change. There's no rational counter argument there, since that's literally what the two sets of people want and what they'd be upset by. It'd be like if Tanks were told "You don't have agro anymore and you don't control the boss". The people that enjoy that would be upset while the people who don't mind being a budget DPS Job would be perfectly fine with it.

But again, dumb side argument, have whatever last word you want, I don't care to keep back and forth brick walling you on something so irrelevant and there's nothing else to really argue.

[Teno]

Yes, but this is true of one-button DPS as well. This is an argument against all change. I think MOST OF US recognize that healing in this game has to have a complete revamp from the foundation to the rafters. I mean, maybe I'm wrong about that, but I think that's what all sober-minded appraisals have come down to. The problems are so fundamental, they require a complete shift to work. "We've had them for so long/grandfathered in" works just as well for one-button DPS rotations as well.[/hb]

...since when are you most of us ? You're still not any authority after the last few books you wrote. Healing doesn't need a complete revamp, it needs simple changes within the game's confines that would drastically improve gameplay, no need to reinvent the wheel.