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

[Renathras]

Why are you asking again what I literally just answered.
Why would I assume we do more damage? Because I'm doing more than before.
Also let's not forget we want the keep the skill floor where it is. If our damage stays the same, then it's those who don't adapt who suffer since they won't optimize.

What?

1) Because you answered it with a bunch of extra stuff and I'm trying to get to the answer, not the extra.

2) But you didn't want to do more damage, right? So you don't need to do more damage, regardless of "doing more". The goal was TO do more, for the sake of...doing more. Not to do more for the sake of doing more DAMAGE...right?

3) Well, no, that's actually based on encounter design. If Enrages are based on the new higher level of max damage, then the skill floor will be raised because people can't clear not doing it. On the other hand, if it's based on the lower damage, then people doing the max will complain the content is too easy and bosses are falling over left and right. Depending on how big the gap is - 20% would be pretty significant since healers already do more than half a DPSers worth of damage. Considering a healer doing ~60% of a DPSers damage, 20% of that would be an additional 12% of a DPSer worth of damage for the party as a whole. That's pretty significant when you consider you have 2 healers, since it'd be like having an extra 24% (or about 1/4th) of another DPSer in the party, or all your DPSers doing 6% more damage. A 10% gap would be like if all your DPSers were doing 3% more damage. Those are pretty significant amounts when it comes to meeting enrages.

so I've had runs where we had 3 DNCs and 1 MCH

Great.

I've had clear parties with SAM, NIN, DNC, BLM that failed enrage. So yay, we both have anecdotes. The thing is, it happens, so it's still relevant. I know you don't want it to be, since it throws a wrench into your position, but it is.

Seriously, how hard is it to just admit that some people WILL be hurt by what you propose? Almost nothing in life has zero cost. Pretty much everything has some costs. Refusing to admit that is irrational, especially when the costs can be readily pointed out. Now, you can say "Okay, I acknowledge that happens, so..." and either say you don't care (of course, that makes you appear selfish and your goals not altruistic) or you can offer something that would prevent or mitigate the negative (a 4 Healers Model, perhaps) or recompense for the people affected (healers now get to bypass the "duty completion" requirement - I think this is a bad idea, mind you, but who knows, maybe it would work).

But continuing to refuse to admit to reality isn't an argument.

And so we can have no agreement.

Why?

THAT IT HAS HAPPENED means my fears are not misplaced.

Your numbers do not prove my fears are misplaced, your numbers suggest that statistically, it shouldn't happen often (it still does, mind you). But that's a very different argument.

I think the problem here is you believe your position is ironclad when it is not. You seem to think it has no costs, does not harm anyone, and that your numbers are absolute and true of every party composition and group - now you'll say you know they are not, because you ARE a rational enough person to admit to that, but you'll then still insist it doesn't matter when we both know it happens and will happen under your proposal.

And keep in mind, we're fighting over a 10% DPS difference. That's the sticking point right this second. Not whether healers should have more damage actions, not what encounters should be like, not some high minded design philosophy - this entire argument is you thinking you need to do 10% more damage than other people or something is wrong with the game.

You're asking me a completely different question to the things I've been saying. I don't know what everyone else is arguing but my concern is the lack of the skill ceiling, not people being bored.

Alright, that's different.

So your fight isn't what those other people who are saying they just don't want to be bored is.

Your position is that you want to do more damage than other people.

Fair enough.

In that case, I have no pity for your position, since it's not one of being mistreated by past game design choices robbing you of something, it's that you want bigger parse numbers than other people. I don't care to entertain that, so I won't other than to say that's pretty selfish and elitist and, in that case, you ARE right about one thing:

We can have no agreement.

Actually lmao. Really? Okay Ren. How ‘bout this? Every single ability on every healer now heals everyone to 100% HP. All of them. You can set down your earthly star, you can use opposition and collective unconscious correctly, you can plan out your heal kit to the millisecond if you want. That’s fun right? Or you can just press benefic and get the exact same result. It doesn’t matter that benefic does the exact same thing as the rest of your kit, the point is to have fun! So you can have fun busting your proverbial butt tryharding by planing your heals and I can do every bit as good as you by hitting benefic. If you have a problem with that, then surely you’re just an egomaniac who wants to be better than everyone else /s

Actually lmao? Really?

I didn't say to do that. I showed you how it's entirely possible to have something more engaging with NO damage gap. So a 1% gap should be just fine.

And you know what? Screw it. Fine. Sure, I'll take that bet:

Make our healer kits that. Consider your bluff called. "Boring conversation anyway". Make the difference between healing flawlessly under the new system and healing what would be considered optimal right now a 1% gap. I'm fine with that.

If you think like Aravell does, then please stop lying and start being honest. I think that's the reason for all the confusion and argument. People aren't being honest about what they want. If you just said from the start "I'm an elitist and I want to do more damage than other players and look down at them", then I wouldn't be offering compromises or suggestions. I'd go "Okay, fair enough. That's a jerk thing to do, but if that's who you are, then so be it. Advocate for what you want, I'll advocate for what I do, and we'll see who the Devs side with."

[Aravell]

In that case, I have no pity for your position, since it's not one of being mistreated by past game design choices robbing you of something, it's that you want bigger parse numbers than other people. I don't care to entertain that, so I won't other than to say that's pretty selfish and elitist

If that's all you got from what I'm saying, then I'm starting to suspect that you're misreading me on purpose to stir things up, or you're a troll. But either way, you're not worth engaging with anymore, other people have provided me with better discussion than you.

You have this weird twisted concept of evil, elitist people who want to trod you into the ground, and you're trying very hard to cram me into that box, so go ahead and do as you please, I'm just going to instead talk to people who are more open to ideas and are less likely to throw a tantrum and try and make me out to be pure evil whenever I say something they don't like. Have a good day.