Make healers DPS with four or five healing actions

[Shurrikhan]

Then you have a spell that puts the symbols of the Twelve on the ground, and whichever one you stand on, your buff enhances the damage dealt by any players who's patron deity matches that symbol. So if for example, two players have the patron deity of Rhalgr in your party, standing on the symbol of Rhalgr will make your spell stronger on those two characters.

...I'm guessing this isn't a serious suggestion, for the simple fact that who tf knows the patron deity of each player in their party...

But, if it is... why would you want a job mechanic that entices statics to have identical role-play choices?

[ty_taurus]

...I'm guessing this isn't a serious suggestion, for the simple fact that who tf knows the patron deity of each player in their party...

But, if it is... why would you want a job mechanic that entices statics to have identical role-play choices?

You could have it appear above characters when the spell is active.

But I'm just throwing stuff at the board. How would you go about improving the concept?

[Shurrikhan]

I saw it more as a core mechanic than being the actual ‘rotation’ itself. But using the same scenario there could be things like buffs that only affect the ‘Astrologian-dancer-partner’ targets, mitigation/shields/regens associated with the ‘ast/dance-partner’ buffs to balance out spamming it on dps, increased or adjusted card effects based on who has the buff. Plus they could do things like having each consumed ‘star’ give a stacking buff to the Astrologian for ‘big potency attack’, and possibly a competing ‘big potency heal’ (not that we need any more lol).

I'm fine with AST doing more with a sort of Synastry-esque general mechanic. That's fine by me. I just don't see anything more interesting in "I reload my turret-buff that makes me auto-Ruin when YOU punch (but I can't use this on hybrids)" than just using my attacks myself.

It’s not much so that simple buff/debuff/utility skills themselves can make healers enjoyable, it’s the way in which they could be utilised to create a healer contribution that ends up more ‘support’ oriented than the ‘direct personal damage’ we have now.

Again, I'm all for for buffs/debuffs. I just don't get why we're treating things like %Damage buff as if they had no skill ceiling or were super basic/banal... only to then suggest flat, unscaling potency with shallower, if any, available optimizations. We have low-hanging fruit dangling in front of us already. We needn't search a refuse pile for oddball novelty, especially if we're not going to be interested in its effect in practice.

The hype of complexity that is purely on paper only lasts for a few uses, while complexity in practice has actual longevity despite typically being the more intuitive. We want a gaming exercise, I would imagine, not merely a reading (tooltip-deciphering) exercise.

[Shurrikhan]

You could have it appear above characters when the spell is active.

But I'm just throwing stuff at the board. How would you go about improving the concept?

If it had to be an ally-based self-buffing mechanic (generate buff stacks + link aura that triggers the expense of personal buff stacks), as per that original idea, then I'd at least want it to be more timing-sensitive, and ideally to offer further agency. That model definitely constrains that goal, though.

Now, if the AST itself could tap into the benefits of that "buff engine" and the AST had the ability to release up to n stars at once (where n is the number granted by the GCD, but the max might increase higher) via an oGCD action, for potency varied by some sort of match-up in the workings of that "buff engine" or from the target ally's actions, then I'd probably dig it.

By itself, fail-conditions aside, optimization for the earlier proposed mechanic would just be...

• "Use during downtime (including as early pre-pull as allow all to be spent before duration ends, or just 2 GCDs pre-pull as necessary for later raid-buff sync)",
• "Hit on CD (if any)",
• "Use just before raid window" (though this can generally be accomplished via the two above), and
• "Track MCH Heat (if there is a MCH)", "Influence party finder to ensure the presence of a MCH and/or MNK"

None of that, though, is unique to it; most would be found even on a GCD Earthly Star. And it includes far less consideration than a GCD Card, even of the current variety.

I would need it to outpace the optimizations available to a GCD ~12% Damage for ~20 seconds buff for me to feel any hype for that design direction.

I suspect it's possible, but I also wouldn't spend mechanics on it over a reworked Card system, if there'd be room/opportunity only to place them on the one or the other.

[Connor]

I'm fine with AST doing more with a sort of Synastry-esque general mechanic. That's fine by me. I just don't see anything more interesting in "I reload my turret-buff that makes me auto-Ruin when YOU punch (but I can't use this on hybrids)" than just using my attacks myself.

Of course, I meant that the ‘turret-buff’ in that situation could act as a vehicle for further interactions, synergies and interesting effects that can be leveraged in some way. Extra dps, buffs, debuffs, whatever. Not that it would work by itself in a vacuum.

Again, I'm all for for buffs/debuffs. I just don't get why we're treating things like %Damage buff as if they had no skill ceiling or were super basic/banal... only to then suggest flat, unscaling potency with shallower, if any, available optimizations. We have low-hanging fruit dangling in front of us already. We needn't search a refuse pile for oddball novelty, especially if we're not going to be interested in its effect in practice.

I’m a bit confused on what you’re saying here. Who is treating %damage buffs as banal or boring? I thought the point was about moving healer dps from being so heavily personal focused to more rDPS oriented (i.e % damage boosts, fundamentally).

I don’t think it’s fair to call support effects ‘low-dangling fruit’ or ‘oddball novelty’ when nobody is actually asking for such things (besides maybe me lol). I always assumed when 90% of people say ‘support’ in ffxiv they’re specifically referring to rDPS type % buffs. I find using mitigation buffs fun too personally, but they’re not exactly the most needed thing right now, so I wouldn’t imagine anyone would want healers to be full of defensive oriented buffs either.

The hype of complexity that is purely on paper only lasts for a few uses, while complexity in practice has actual longevity despite typically being the more intuitive. We want a gaming exercise, I would imagine, not merely a reading (tooltip-deciphering) exercise.

Right, but isn’t that why different jobs offer different playstyle? (or at least they’re meant to). Personally I’d prefer a playstyle that revolves more around understanding of how to tactically leverage a toolkit contextually as opposed to simply maximising personal dps relative to party performance. But I don’t see why that has to preclude another healer from being more about a consistently aggressive and/or reactionary playstyle that revolves around maximising dps rather than pre-planning and managing things like buffs or debuffs

[Jatoi]

hahaha


no. lol lmao

there should be ways to make healing fun that should be considered by the devs. admittedly DPS jobs put me to sleep. especially brainless ones like RPR and SAM. at least healer keeps me awake for the most part. maybe add one more damage spell to make it less monotonous and a couple of other things for WHM as an example, but there are ways people have suggested to make healing more fun.

...have you tried Black Mage?

[ty_taurus]

hahaha


no. lol lmao

there should be ways to make healing fun that should be considered by the devs. admittedly DPS jobs put me to sleep. especially brainless ones like RPR and SAM. at least healer keeps me awake for the most part. maybe add one more damage spell to make it less monotonous and a couple of other things for WHM as an example, but there are ways people have suggested to make healing more fun.

...have you tried Black Mage?

There are many reasons why it's difficult to resolve this issue by trying to replace DPS spam with more healing instead.

1. There has been no notable change in the frequency of outgoing damage between ARR content and current content, or if anything, damage is sometimes less frequent than in ARR/HW content. Meanwhile, every expansion has not only added more healing resources to the healers, but every new resource added has been DPS neutral--either OGCD and thus weave-able, meaning it gives healers more DPS uptime, or GCDs that also deal the same damage as the healer's basic spell, or refund that damage via the blood lily. Meanwhile every healer attack spell has been streamlined to a 1.5 second cast time, meaning every GCD gives you room to weave any of these resources. We have more DPS uptime than ever before because of all these reasons.

2. Other roles have received increased levels of sustain, particularly Paladin and Warrior who are able to answer to the already diminished instances of necessary healing. As has been discovered, there's enough non-healer sustain that a healerless party was capable of clearing Ultimate. While that is not a normal expected playthrough, it speaks to the above points about how little healing is needed vs how much healing is available to use.

3. Consider that a player has the ability to cast a new spell every 2.5 seconds. If your goal is to rework healers to heal with their GCD more often than they attack with their GCD, how often do you think damage needs to be delivered to the party in order to sway healer gameplay away from DPS and toward healing? Consider points 1 and 2 as well. You would probably need raidwide damage every 3-7 seconds in all forms of content, even dungeons, to demand healers stop attacking and heal given our current resources.

4. FFXIV healing has vastly more accessible forms of AoE healing than WoW does. Generally, party damage can almost always be resolved in 1-2 GCDs ignoring all of the OGCD healing resources at our disposal. WoW does have AoE healing, but far more often has to rely on single target healing because their AoE healing doesn't have the same power and availability as FFXIV AoE heals.

5. If you want to change the the environment for healers to prioritize healing over damage, you're going to need to make some drastic changes to a combination of both healer kits and fight design. This would inevitably require reworking every single fight in the game to ensure the new model for healing encourages healing over DPS, and is also doable with whatever changes the healers receive to their resources, even if that's just rebalancing HP to account for considerably less healer DPS. It should go without saying that this is a truly monolithic task and would be incredibly time consuming and expensive to accomplish.

The truth is that FFXIV has always been an environment that promoted a very offensive healer playstyle--more combat medic if you will. Whether intentional or not, it has also only ever continued to feed into that environment with every expansion. Constantly providing more and more free healing, incredibly powerful AoE healing, faster DPS cast times that enable weaving, and more non-healer sustain than the game has ever had before. All things that lend themselves to maximizing the time healers get to spend DPSing instead of healing.

Just something I shared earlier.

[Jatoi]

It's a combination of factors, really.

1- The mechanics are pretty easy and aren't that punishing for the most part. Just get out of the glowy orange and you're fine. It's why in Anabaseios, I was happy to see a roomwide bleed. I don't even play savage by the way and I don't see myself as some expert elite whatever. Healing being as boring as it is just a symptom of another, larger issue.

2- DPS also have been going through another problem themselves that is also a symptom. There has been an obsession with balance and I swear things are feeling homogenized. I feel like I am playing SAM while I play most other melee.

It's also not just bad balancing but also the design. Covering the issue up with having a healer get more damage spells won't solve that. It's imperative that healers do damage as I am of the camp that if there's no healing to be done, you better be slinging damage out. It's why I think healing should be more interesting and why I think it's a combination of iffy balancing and very meh mechanics. Mechanics that won't chase off casuals but will keep the healers engaged isn't impossible.

Oh god the tanks. Help.

edit: I thought I quoted you but I didn't. Sorry about that!

[ForsakenRoe]

It's why I think healing should be more interesting and why I think it's a combination of iffy balancing and very meh mechanics. Mechanics that won't chase off casuals but will keep the healers engaged isn't impossible.

I've previously suggested that, since we have Misery acting as 'use healing to charge a damage move', what if we had 'use damage to charge a healing move'? It'd be great if SGE fully leaned into 'Augment Kardia to have extra effects/strength' gameplay, as I really do think that balanced correctly (potencywise), THAT could be the 'skillcap' of the class: trying to get to zero GCD heals used via the Kardia system.

But the idea also works for other healers. I've suggested a gauge for WHM that is charged by casting Glare, Dia or one new damage button on a 15s CD (or by healing, for the 'healers should focus on healing not damage' players). And using that gauge lets you cast a powerful instantcast AOE heal, which also has it's own 'Misery style' damage refund, so it's damage neutral. It's a very simple gameplay loop that fits well (imo) with the level of simplicity that WHM currently holds, like look at the gauge we currently have, you could just have Solace/Rapture share a charge time of 20s and give them a shared pool of 3 charges. That's the current WHM gauge. It's so empty right now that I don't feel remotely bad about suggesting an extra element for it.

Then I'd add 2 DOTs to SCH and rework AST cards to have unique effects again, all dealing damage but with different ways to deal that damage such that you'd want to play certain cards on certain roles, not this melee/ranged split rubbish. The problem is, I went about my ideas with the specific idea in mind, make something 'that won't chase off casuals but will keep the healers engaged'. But even what I came up with, while aiming for that goal, is 'too much complexity' for you-know-who. It's shouldn't be impossible, but some people are so galvanized in their opinions of 'we MUST make the solution be that healers heal more!' that they get caught up in their own fervor, and don't actually consider the butterfly effect of things. Like how much extra healing would be required to pressure more skilled players, how much we'd have to kneecap OGCDs to make GCD healing be 'actually required', or my favorite from catching up on this thread:

And it's not necessary to adjust all encounters. Just do the ones going forward.

Which would damn every 90 or lower piece of content to being 'just as boring as it is now' for me and players who have the same opinion on current healers as me. Requiring 500% as much healing from the player in the level 100 EX roulette means dick if the 70-90 dungeons are all still asking for the current amount. We've seen what happens, from Abyssos, when the 'healing demanded of the player' suddenly spikes: players quit. And I've said many times: if we only have one chance to make a solution that creates a noticeable impact, to get SE to think 'okay we might be on the right track here', it's gotta be a solution that affects every level of content, because 'people who have some degree of skill at the game are finding EX roulette kinda boring' is the issue at hand and all the suggestions to make 'more healing needed' either makes casuals more likely to fail (SE won't want that), or is not enough of a jump up to pressure veteran healers. There's no overlap on the Venn Diagram here, it is two distinctly separate circles.

There is no magical amount where 'casuals won't be affected too much' AND 'veterans will find it challenging' for a solution like this, I fear. As it stands, I can heal a pack of trash in EX roulette on SGE with Krasis, Physis, Kerachole (Taurochole when it falls off), and potentially one of my other four skills as a 'top up', from Holos, Haima, Panhaima and Soteria. Increasing required healing in a pull to, what I perceive as, the theoretical maximum increase before you hit 'casuals are going to struggle now', will ask me to use two 'top up' skills. Okay, so one pack I'll add with Haima and Soteria, the next I'll Panhaima and Holos. What changes? For me, basically nothing, I can still OGCD the pack comfortably. It's not a 'solution' if it doesn't solve anything

[Shurrikhan]

I’m a bit confused on what you’re saying here. Who is treating %damage buffs as banal or boring?

Sorry, I should have been clearer that this doesn't refer just to this one thread.

There's been a trend across the healer forums of considering how we could replace percentile damage buffs (and buffs that are essentially percentile damage buffs) on the basis of their being dull or difficult to balance with other options... usually only to suggest options that have far simpler and less contextual of optimization and for which the difference between their categorically best and worst targets would be significantly larger.

I don’t think it’s fair to call support effects ‘low-dangling fruit’ or ‘oddball novelty’ when nobody is actually asking for such things (besides maybe me lol).

Low-hanging fruit is generally a remark that something is an obvious choice to go for. Again, I think they're a good idea, and an obvious way to deepen downtime actions without necessarily focusing just But at any rate, neither was commenting on support-effects as a type of action. I meant only to point out that there are more obvious choices that are more intuitive yet have higher (more contextual, more awareness/knowledge-rewarding) optimization ceilings.

Personally I’d prefer a playstyle that revolves more around understanding of how to tactically leverage a toolkit contextually as opposed to simply maximising personal dps relative to party performance.

Same. I say all this largely in interest of that.

But I don’t see why that has to preclude another healer from being more about a consistently aggressive and/or reactionary playstyle that revolves around maximising dps rather than pre-planning and managing things like buffs or debuffs

Likewise, same. I do think, though, if any healer were to be a bit more focused around team-dynamics-aware buffing, it would be AST. (Well, maybe SCH instead if those two jobs had been introduced differently and SCH more based around its "tactics" flavor, but you get what I mean.)