How would you solve the boring "damage rotation" of the healers?

[SargeTheSeagull]

The spark notes is change Scholar, Astrologian, and Sage to address healer criticisms, make them each unique with a wider array of DPS tools and interactive healing, but leave White Mage alone. In other words, we have 4 healers, so make 4 distinct healers.

What’s kind of ironic is the alternative suggestions proposed by those who oppose also would result in 4 distinct healers, just one with a different white mage instead of the current white mage remaining unchanged.

... Why leave WHM the way it is??? Surely whatever changes could be made to WHM would be largely ignorable if you want to spam medica 2 and occasionally hit glare like people do currently.

[IDontPetLalas]

... Why leave WHM the way it is??? Surely whatever changes could be made to WHM would be largely ignorable if you want to spam medica 2 and occasionally hit glare like people do currently.

Bingo, you summarized 2 years of back and forth posts.

[TheDustyOne]

... Why leave WHM the way it is??? Surely whatever changes could be made to WHM would be largely ignorable if you want to spam medica 2 and occasionally hit glare like people do currently.

As harsh as it was, there's a reason I described it as "3 healers + 1 lobotomy".

Even when polled with Tys survey, most WHM that responded were more interested in seeing extra damage buttons than anything else by far. As much as Ren says that WHM should stay the same because people currently like it, there's a hell of a lot of people that want to see it expanded upon.

Keeping WHM the same I think also consigns it to the same fate that SB WHM had; no identity apart from "green number be big now" and spamming 1 button most of the time. The lily system may have been fixed since then, but I still remember people complaining back in SB that it was mostly spamming lots of Stones. That has yet to be addressed and the 4 Healer Model™ insists on not fixing it.

It also has another big problem; whenever a new expansion rolls around, what does WHM have to look forward to in the keynotes and action trailers? SCH might be looking forward to a new DoT, SGE more pew-pew lasers, AST throwing stars everywhere (teammates included). What does WHM get? A Glare replacement, oh but sometimes it gets a Dia replacement! How exciting... We have a job stuck at level 4 with a level cap of 100 and beyond.

[Renathras]

He's so clearly not arguing in good faith and the only person who seemingly doesnt realize this is himself. He even thinks the wesk alber thread was made in good faith.

Thurmnmurmn, this is why ignoring hecklers doesn't work. They seem not to get the message what they're doing is bad (unless someone else explicitly tells them). They just do it more if you don't challenge them. Oh, and people upvote and agree with their posts. So that's why it hasn't worked thus far.

Because adding a few DPS spells to the healers will not bother the vast majority of players currently.

1) You don't actually KNOW this, you THINK this.

2) What about the players that it WILL bother?

3) I NEVER talk under the assumption that "most players" feel the way I do. I consistently say that we're a minority, and long have done so. I have frequently estimated it at 15-30%, which is not "most". Enough to justify 1 out of 4 Healer Jobs being built for them, though. Do you not remember when I said if we had 5 healer Jobs, 1 out of 5 being made for folks like me would be about right? Please stop lying.

4) Many players ignored those mechanics at the time. I didn't do any high end content until basically the end of the expansion, where I did some Bismark Ex farming (ironically on SMN because most parties at the time needed more DPSers). And I didn't use Aero 3 except in AOE situations since I didn't think it was a damage gain at the time (I didn't get into theorycrafting or reading stuff about the Jobs outside of the game until SB when I decided to try really understanding SCH), and likewise didn't use Fluid Aura outside of soloing because the knockback made tanks mad. I also only used Cleric Stance for soling and hated the ability even back then - as did enough of the community the Devs removed it. The community has changed since HW. What we do know is there are more healers now than there were in SB. Well, "know" is a strong word, but based on the little data we found before, that was the case. If those HW mechanics were in the game now, we'd likely have a healer shortage. People know a lot more now and care a lot more now. The "no Cleric healer" in 4 mans would be as mocked and derided as the "tank that doesn't wall-to-wall" is today, and that would be very divisive and lead to a lot of "healxiety" players leaving the role, as well as a lot of healer players that don't like DPS leaving to either play Tank or SMN/RDM/DNC (ironically, the same Jobs gravitated to by the people who don't like healers presently but consider themselves healers bored with the current healer DPS kits...), or just quitting the game outright. In any case, we'd likely have a massive healer shortage on our hands, at which point what would the Devs do? Nerf healing again.

5) I can GUARANTEE you it will make some people stop playing healers. What I can't say is how many. But I've already offered you a solution that doesn't carry that risk. That DOES satisfy all groups and everyone OTHER THAN the people who want everything for them and don't want to share, or don't want people who "aren't as gud as me!!" pulling similar numbers "with less effort".

I can't imagine what goes on in your mind.

Mostly every one here is against your idea(s). And apparently you have this same discussion over and over again. Yet you still have balls (stubbornness? stupidity?) to claim your solution is the only one compatible. As if devs don't change their mind, ever.

Most people are even saying "why not both?" to your responses but you're just so set on being right and any added DPS effort is the devil's work!

Get over yourself. You're a lala, you would think that to be easy.

....

You say "ignore the hecklers", then you post something like this. Couple things:

A) Some people do agree with me.

B) I agree with me, and this is relevant to me enjoying the game, so how come everyone else gets to post their ideas but not I mine? I genuinely don't understand this. "You've said this a bunch, you can shut up now and leave this feedback forum to only having feedback supporting the thing you're against". How does that make sense? These other people have made their arguments a hundred times, too. Why do you support everyone else getting to advocate for what they want but not me getting to advocate for what I want?

C) Mine is the only one that addresses the needs of all sides as currently presented. The "solutions" I'm arguing against do not, and I've said why they do not. The Devs DO change their minds, but you have no evidence they are going to here and evidence they intend not to.

D) My response IS the "why not both" response! Mine is literally the only one saying "Why not have some healers with complex DPS kits and some without?". None of the other suggestions ARE doing that. Which other response is saying "Let's have a solution for the people who don't want to engage with complex DPS kits on healers and solutions for those that do". The other "solutions" are "Let's have a solution that works for the people who want more DPS kits and...well...I'm sure it won't harm those that don't TOO much", despite one of said people saying "Yes, I'm one of those people, AND IT WILL." The closest you have are people offering supposedly less complex ones and saying "Surely this isn't too complex", but when offered changes that would make it acceptable say "No, not that". Hell, I made suggestion's to Roe's WHM idea that would mostly incorporate it while making it not too alienating for a person like me and was told off for daring to even make such suggestions (followed by a page or so of insults). Clearly that's not a "why not both" approach.

I'm curious, if you could make a single relatively small change (no, "revert all changes to 'x'" isn't a small change imo) to improve healers, what would it be?

Hm...only one and only a small one?

WHM: All GCD heals nourish the Blood Lily. This would make Misery more common in the rotation and make the 6 GCD heals taking up space in the kit actually staples of the Job again instead of mostly dead buttons no one ever uses.

SCH: SCH is hard because I have several ideas, but they're all marginally bigger changes. I guess the SMALLEST one would be to have give Ruin 2 a small potency DoT but leave its up front damage the same. That way, it's part of the main rotation (breaking up Broilspam) while also still being useful as a movement tool and not contributing to more button bloat.

AST: Oh god, I have no idea. Probably the biggest change I'd make is to cut the CD on Draw to 20 seconds and make Draw and Play GCDs, with Draw doing 2x Malific's damage to the enemy you have targeted (if you have one; if you don't it simply Draws a card like now, allowing pre-pull Draws to still work). This would lower AST's carpel tunnel inducing APM during burst phases while still being damage neutral, and with the shorter CD on Draw, AST would get to engage with their main mechanic more often. This would not only break up their downtime Malific spam, it would make them feel more like an active buffer/support healer instead of one that really only hands out buffs once per 2 mins. Downside is that I think a lot of ASTs enjoy that hectic play, and AST is the healer Job I play the least because I specifically do NOT like it. In line with my general philosophy of "don't take things from people who enjoy them", I apply that standard to my own proposals as well. But if you were asking me what one change I would make to improve AST, where it can only be a small change but would be something I think improves it? That would probably be my proposal.

SGE: Like SCH, there's not a simple fix I can think of that would do much for them. If I was to pick only ONE change, and a simple one, either of "every 20 sec generate 1 Addersgall AND 1 Addersting" or "Every Addersgall consumed generates 1 Addersting". Basically, this would allow for more frequent Toxicon use. Ideally, Toxicon's potency would be increased a bit as this otherwise wouldn't be a huge deal (single target fights it would still be DPS neutral with Dosis if we don't up the potency), so increase its potency by 50% or so to make it worth using outside of movement along with that. Alternatively, double Toxicon's potency with the current system to make it a burst gain, DPS neutral otherwise thing around actively using and breaking barriers. But honestly, my ideals for SGE would require more significant changes. But if I was limited to only a small one, it would be one of those - more consistent Toxicon generation OR double Toxicon's potency allowing breaking up the Dosisspam with GCD barrier healing and Toxicon uses.

How can the dev team emulate this in an encounter though? I believe this is what needs to be explored. We're not getting anywhere discussing skills and rotations.

Good post, and I kind of (mostly) agree.

It's why I think "more DPS buttons" isn't really a solution, it's a band-aid. It covers over the real problem it doesn't solve it, and it even hurts the people specifically who dislike complex DPS rotations in general.

I'll take the bait. Ren, what precisely is the "4 healer model" and why would it be better than anyone else's suggestions? You don't need to go into the nitty gritty details, just a general outline.

Ty really hates the idea and so has kind of a bad way of describing it, but his assessment this time was mostly fair.

In the SIMPLEST terms, "We have 4 Healer Jobs, why not make them each different from each other so players who like different things can find one they enjoy? If they don't enjoy 1 right now, it doesn't matter which they swap to, the others are all mostly the same. So how about a system where they can swap to another and it be distinct and actually address their needs?"

For example, imagine if all three Casters were SMN with a different VFX set. Or were all BLM with a different VFX set. In either cases, three color schemes of the exact same rotation. What's the point of even having different ones? On the other hand, the current Caster roster is great because each one offers a different experience, not just in aesthetics, but in gameplay loop/rotation/complexity/focus for people who enjoy different things.

Breaking it down to more specific cases:

WHM: Leave it more or less as it is, though with whatever additional "new things" you'd typically get from an expansion (a new charge of something, etc), or some more minor changes (like adding a 5% damage reduction to Plenary to give WHM more access to party mitigation - right now, WHM has less party mitigation than BLACK MAGE does. Let that sink in). But on the DPS side, to keep it where it is today for people that enjoy the current healer damage kits and don't want a complex damage rotation on their healer Job. Also because WHM in EW is mostly in the best place it's ever been. SB WHM really really REALLY suckec, which is why most players didn't complain with the ShB changes, since they made the Job cohesive and functional again, though Misery was still a slight DPS loss (only equal to 3 Glares). EW has fixed that issue, and generally speaking people really like WHM now, and it's been in the best overall position it's been among the healers since ARR when there were ONLY TWO. It being the most played now of the healers also indicates it's doing something right. There are people that like current healers, so leaving WHM as it is would give them a home in the new system instead of making them homeless.

SCH: Revert it (mostly) to its SB incarnation. SB seemed to be the height of SCH and when the most people said they enjoyed it, and when its DPS kit was gutted going into ShB, generated massive complaints that have persisted to this day. Some additions from then that would remain, though, would be stuff like the improved AI responsiveness of the Faerie and Expedience, which a lot of people really enjoy using. This would give the players that are bored with current healers and like having a lot more plates and resources to juggle their outlet.

AST: Somewhat revert it to its SB incarnation. Unlike SCH, AST's change into ShB was mostly on the cart front, since it as the OG "nukespam + DoT" healer, and had that gameplay in SB. The difference is there was a lot more going on with its Cards which gave people a lot more engagement. Though this is only a PARTIAL fix. A second thing that has happened to really screw AST is the 2 min meta. More than any of the other healers (in fact, it's the most impacted by this; most of the healers have been pretty insulated from the 2 min meta) because they're forced to blow all their card juggling during that burst window and then...have a really boring downtime otherwise. They're kind of like DRK or NIN who have a similar high APM, "blow all the things" during burst but then have a pretty uneventful downtime until the next burst. That's really hurt AST a lot. Further, the other healers having their spamnuke GCD lowered to 1.5 sec to allow for easier weaving kind of stepped on AST's toes where that used to be an AST only thing. Basically, AST got super hosed by both the ShB changes to the Cards and the EW changes to the 2 min meta just kicked it when it was down even harder. AST still survives based on just being the most overall powerful (it has party buffs, strong heals, better MP economy than WHM, and can be a barrier healer for 30 seconds out of every 2 mins to top that all off, with a 1 min CD party mitigation it can use in between for additional mitigation needs), but it's the least played by most metrics.

SGE: SGE was pitched as a GNB-like "healer for players that like dpsers". The difference is, GNB arguably achieved that fantasy being a tank with a good approximation of a Melee DPSers kit while SGE...basically stole SCH's homework and copied it nearly exactly. It's mostly described as "a smoother, better SCH" by many players, and is the second most played after WHM. I'm a bit torn on this one, because on the one hand, being "a better SCH" means we should change SCH to be something else and leave SGE for the people that like it, but on the other hand, it WAS pitched as a "healer for players that like dpsers", and has tools like Kardia to achieve that, not to mention the Job's lore of being a very intricate, highly skilled discipline. So it could either stay as is to be "the BARRIER healer for people that like current healers", or it could be changed and given an actual DPS rotation leveraging Kardia instead of an oGCD suite to do its actual healing.

... Why leave WHM the way it is??? Surely whatever changes could be made to WHM would be largely ignorable if you want to spam medica 2 and occasionally hit glare like people do currently.

Well, two reasons and a point:

1) There are people that like current healers, so leaving WHM as it is would give them a home in the new system instead of making them homeless people who now hate all the healers.

2) "largely ignorable" is true if the damage difference is truly negligible. Every time I've asked people proposing alternatives if they would make the difference truly negligible (with 1% or so), they insist that is not allowable as people doing "more work" (even though they are literally asking for it) should be "rewarded" with more damage, otherwise it wouldn't be worth it to them - meaning their objective isn't "to not be bored" but "to out damage other people", which would make the entire premise of their argument a lie. I'm working on the premise they AREN'T lying, mind you, and are truthful in saying they just want to not be bored, which is why them being such sticklers to this requirement that the more DPS button users do significantly more (percentage) damage doesn't make sense unless they're lying. IF the difference WAS ignorable/insignificant, I would agree. But every time I've asked for it to be, I've been rebuffed.

3) Even under my argument, there would not be a case of literally nothing changing. It would just be changes for at least one of the healers (WHM, in this case) would not be "more DPS actions/complexity". More healing buttons, effects, streamlining of systems, etc, would all be allowed. For example, adding a party mitigation to Plenary or letting all WHM GCD heals nourish the Blood Lily, or giving them all an "Afflatus" version when you have a Lily that would make them instant cast and consume the Lily instead of MP (Cure 2 and Medica 1 would be replaced with Solace and Rapture, etc); changes like that would be fine since that's already kind of how WHM plays and doesn't alienate the players that like current healer gameplay.

.

Also, a warning to you:

When asking about something, it's best NOT to listen to what ONLY the detractors have to say and make your conclusions based on that. That'd be like asking about adding more dps abilities/complexity to healers and only listening to MY thoughts on the matter (as a detractor), not the people actually proposing and promoting the idea.