#FFXIVHEALERSTRIKE

[Graveyardprincess]

Probably going to make the rest of the players resent you though, especially if you mess up their play experience somehow.

I was honestly making a joke lol mostly cuz having fun in limsa with blue puddle to lightning things up, if im going to be honest with my true feeling dt ast seems about as close as will ever get to stormblood ast with the cards that were so fun, and if i can with my fc leader i want to do the raids and savage of them so my opinion may change... But since it will be the first time for me getting into that since i been working on things .. i think i can handle the social aspect of it now and im going to try so it may change my feelings on this entire topic. I am hoping doing it will change my views on alot of things, so idc what I have to do im going to try... in game ive been doing alot better, i been able to laugh and have fun with dumbest stuff lately..

[aiqa]

I mean this:

Understood.

I read that as "healers should totally strike". And if enough healers strike, that means queues don't move as fast which hamstrings (probably to strong a word really) the enjoyment people get out of the game. I agree that the intent of a strike shouldn't be to inconvenience other players, the intent should to raise concerns. Almost any strike or protest will inconvenience someone, but that should be a sideeffect not a goal in itself.

But to call that horribly toxic goes a bit to far. We'll just have to agree to disagree on that then.

[UnconfirmedCat]

I wonder if all the healers on strike even do savage or ultimate content?

I mean you can literally check. But you don't have to do savage or ultimate content to have an opinion on this issue. Gatekeeping does not negate the points a person makes, their reasoning, or their experience (regardless of what it may be). Just imagine how silly that would be. "Uhhh, you can't comment on this because you haven't done Utimate!" "Okay, let me get my friend who does Ultimate to say the same thing, now what are you going to do?" You're just setting yourself up to get dunked on, 2bh.

[TheDustyOne]

If that was the reason (wanting to try something new) I'd have no problem with it.

But when the stated reason is "ruin others' enjoyment," that's a toxic position.

While their language might be a little extreme, having many dissatisfied healers swap to a new role still leads to queue times being worse and ultimately does "ruin others' enjoyment" in the process. It's only toxic I think if people revel and enjoy it for that reason alone.

I just want Square to notice how much of a problem their healer design is that their metrics are now screaming to have it fixed.

[Loggos]

If that was the reason (wanting to try something new) I'd have no problem with it.

But when the stated reason is "ruin others' enjoyment," that's a toxic position.

But not playing healer is really everything this entails. Nobody is advocating to be actively malicious and ruin other people's runs (by idk queueing and then refusing to heal or something).
The point of this thread is that the people who post here do not have fun with healers in their current form, so they plan to abandon them (and play something they enjoy instead). They just want to make it known publicly and in a concentrated manner to show the devs the state healers are in.
No other "strike" measure or action to actively disrupt other people's gaming experience has ever been discussed or promoted in here if I recall it correctly.

[EinherjarLucian]

So what's the alternative? Keeping up the status quo for another 3+ years? Because peaceful feedback has done squash all and tank/DPS actions, upgrades and additions have been encroaching on the healer identity ever since and despite my initial liking of all the upgrades, the overall incoming damage has NOT changed at all.

Explain to me how it is only ruining for tanks and dps if healers actually are fed up and refuse to play healer, but it is probably A-OK if the tanks and dps continue having fun at the cost of healers having fun.

In case this is lost on anyone, I am NOT maining healer, I'd be part of the roles AFFECTED by this strike and I am STILL for it.

But tanks and DPS aren't having fun "at the cost of healers having fun." Now you're trying to sound like it's other players' faults trying to ruin healer enjoyment, when it's not. You're suggesting that they must be punished for healers to be satisfied.

And sure, some healers really don't feel that way. There's "I'll just do something else until healers improve, maybe CBU3 will notice a drop in role membership," and then there's "SCREW THE DAMN TANKS AND DPS, THEY ARE MAKING US NOT HAVE FUN."

Wanting tanks and DPS to "pay for" changes to healers is, again, incredibly toxic. That attitude isn't just bad for tanks and DPS, but it's damaging for the rest of the healers that just want to play their damn role.

[EinherjarLucian]

While their language might be a little extreme, having many dissatisfied healers swap to a new role still leads to queue times being worse and ultimately does "ruin others' enjoyment" in the process. It's only toxic I think if people revel and enjoy it for that reason alone.

I just want Square to notice how much of a problem their healer design is that their metrics are now screaming to have it fixed.

The difference is intent. It's attitudes like: "tanks and dps continue having fun at the cost of healers having fun"

I get it, not everyone doing this has that kind of attitude. But it certainly is off-putting.

[Loggos]

But tanks and DPS aren't having fun "at the cost of healers having fun." Now you're trying to sound like it's other players' faults trying to ruin healer enjoyment, when it's not.

I think this is not about individual players actively doing something to ruin healers' fun but rather that the class design of those jobs takes healers' fun away. No player is at fault for that. It's a systematic criticism of the role designs.

For example, if War is inherently able to tank (and heal others) without needing a healer because it's part of its skill set/role actions then this design decision makes healers a lot less needed (if the War is in the hands of a capable player) and thus limits their fun.
That is not the player doing it (they shouldn't be faulted for playing their job as it is intended) but the job itself.

[Supersnow845]

But tanks and DPS aren't having fun "at the cost of healers having fun." Now you're trying to sound like it's other players' faults trying to ruin healer enjoyment, when it's not. You're suggesting that they must be punished for healers to be satisfied.

And sure, some healers really don't feel that way. There's "I'll just do something else until healers improve, maybe CBU3 will notice a drop in role membership," and then there's "SCREW THE DAMN TANKS AND DPS, THEY ARE MAKING US NOT HAVE FUN."

Wanting tanks and DPS to "pay for" changes to healers is, again, incredibly toxic. That attitude isn't just bad for tanks and DPS, but it's damaging for the rest of the healers that just want to play their damn role.

I mean it also wasn’t the healers fault that they designed tanks and DPS to intentionally encroach on the healer role

Something has to give somewhere with design and healers have nothing left to give up

[Naple]

Consider there are many healer mains (and non-healer mains) that enjoy playing healer the way it is currently designed. Their opinions on the game hold equal weight too. I do not believe major healer changes should be applied to all healers. At most, half of them. The new Astro would've been a good time to test a more complicated dps rotation while also reducing its healing OGCDs. To incentivize playing that new type of healer, perhaps increase their relative dps output under good play and/or optimal conditions.