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

[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.