#FFXIVHEALERSTRIKE

[Jojoya]

First of all, it isn't Square's game. Yes, I realize that they own the rights to it, however just as I do not own a single pixel, neither does any developer own anything, regardless of how much blood, sweat and tears they put into their work. If people don't sub, all of their work is moot.

Secondly, I don't find it productive to accuse people of hypocrisy. Neither you nor I know who would be happy with future changes, I find those people who make a effort to discuss and propose changes , and invest their time to try to find common ground, to have a much more positive and productive attitude.

I never said don't provide feedback and suggestions.

I said we need to learn acceptance that we're not always going to get what we want.

As for it not being SE's game, sorry but it is. They own the game. They make the game they want to make. They can choose to listen to and implement feedback they receive, or they can choose to ignore it. They're not going to lose all the current subscribers over this because most players don't have a stake in this strike and find it more humorous than convincing.

Some of us originally came into the thread to try to discuss the problems and find common ground but got ridiculed because we didn't agree with everything the strikers said. Most gave up since the strikers were not interested in having that productive conversation you envision. The strikers themselves aren't even unified regarding what change is needed. There may be no common ground in this situation because not even the strikers have managed to find one beyond agreement they don't like the state of healing.

So can the strikers accept that even among themselves not everyone will be pleased by whatever the outcome is? That there's a strong chance that none of them will end up pleased because SE will stick to the status quo if what the posters from the JP forums said earlier in the thread was accurate about JP players being fine with healing how it is?

[BunnyQueen]

I never said don't provide feedback and suggestions.

I said we need to learn acceptance that we're not always going to get what we want.

As for it not being SE's game, sorry but it is. They own the game. They make the game they want to make. They can choose to listen to and implement feedback they receive, or they can choose to ignore it. They're not going to lose all the current subscribers over this because most players don't have a stake in this strike and find it more humorous than convincing.

Some of us originally came into the thread to try to discuss the problems and find common ground but got ridiculed because we didn't agree with everything the strikers said. Most gave up since the strikers were not interested in having that productive conversation you envision. The strikers themselves aren't even unified regarding what change is needed. There may be no common ground in this situation because not even the strikers have managed to find one beyond agreement they don't like the state of healing.

So can the strikers accept that even among themselves not everyone will be pleased by whatever the outcome is? That there's a strong chance that none of them will end up pleased because SE will stick to the status quo if what the posters from the JP forums said earlier in the thread was accurate about JP players being fine with healing how it is?

The strike has 2 fronts, those who want more damage buttons and the one who wants to heal more.

[Asari5]

The strike has 2 fronts, those who want more damage buttons and the one who wants to heal more.

and yet neither of them are wrong. having more to heal is obviously the better solution because we're talking about healers... but we are on lvl 100 now. you cant change all that content. you can change new content AND give a few more dmg buttons... i think thats reasonable

also, there will always be weaker player. groupmitigation and dps healingskills will help them, but you cant just make it unreasonably hard in casual content. a few more dmg skills will give the better players more things to do.

[BunnyQueen]

and yet neither of them are wrong. having more to heal is obvious the better solution... but we are on lvl 100 now. you cant change all that content. you can change new content AND give a few more dmg buttons... i think thats reasonable

I would love for healers to be able to heal me more often, I support both sides of it myself. If they go back and make it so healers can heal more often that would be amazing but it would take a lot of time and effort, but I can hope.

[Galvuu]

The strike has 2 fronts, those who want more damage buttons and the one who wants to heal more.

Fwiw, I don't think this dichotomy exists- the majority seems to want both. People want better healing content, both with more oncoming damage and more reactive healing (crit autos were an easy source of this in older XIV, but this mechanic basically vanished), but they understand that changing the encounter design in that way is both difficult and probably cannot be broadly applied to all content, so they also want more engaging dps tools. The better dps kit is super low hanging fruit, they literally need to undelete some of the 10 missing actions that healers had in HW. It's like, few hours of work and testing, most likely. The former takes more time, although I think it's a necessity to truly bring the healer support fantasy alive.

If you want an example, I mained SCH in HW, when it was at the peak of its dps complexity, and I really enjoyed keeping all the different timed dots rolling perfectly. But the peak of SCH gameplay for me was moments like, for example, in A6S pre-nerf, my team messed up the slow/stuns on the orbs in the Brawler add phase and, if you were a good scholar, using your own slows/Supervirus/Fey Illumination, you could salvage the pull and make it through that mechanic. That was peak Scholar gameplay, a combination of defensive buffs, debuffs and mitigation used tactically making it through a difficult mechanic. I still think back on those moments even more than I do on managing all the dots- I don't think the latter is enough without the former.

[Isala]

Fwiw, I don't think this dichotomy exists- the majority seems to want both. People want better healing content, both with more oncoming damage and more reactive healing (crit autos were an easy source of this in older XIV, but this mechanic basically vanished), but they understand that changing the encounter design in that way is both difficult and probably cannot be broadly applied to all content, so they also want more engaging dps tools. The better dps kit is super low hanging fruit, they literally need to undelete some of the 10 missing actions that healers had in HW. It's like, few hours of work and testing, most likely. The former takes more time, although I think it's a necessity to truly bring the healer support fantasy alive.

If you want an example, I mained SCH in HW, when it was at the peak of its dps complexity, and I really enjoyed keeping all the different timed dots rolling perfectly. But the peak of SCH gameplay for me was moments like, for example, in A6S pre-nerf, my team messed up the slow/stuns on the orbs in the Brawler add phase and, if you were a good scholar, using your own slows/Supervirus/Fey Illumination, you could salvage the pull and make it through that mechanic. That was peak Scholar gameplay, a combination of defensive buffs, debuffs and mitigation used tactically making it through a difficult mechanic. I still think back on those moments even more than I do on managing all the dots- I don't think the latter is enough without the former.

Bingo. XIV is the first MMO I've ever played where a healer is bored both healing, AND DPSing. Every other MMO gives us things to heal, and engaging DPS rotations when there's nothing to heal. I don't know why the current design in XIV is literally braindead, and frankly, I hate it.

[Supersnow845]

I never said don't provide feedback and suggestions.

I said we need to learn acceptance that we're not always going to get what we want.

As for it not being SE's game, sorry but it is. They own the game. They make the game they want to make. They can choose to listen to and implement feedback they receive, or they can choose to ignore it. They're not going to lose all the current subscribers over this because most players don't have a stake in this strike and find it more humorous than convincing.

Some of us originally came into the thread to try to discuss the problems and find common ground but got ridiculed because we didn't agree with everything the strikers said. Most gave up since the strikers were not interested in having that productive conversation you envision. The strikers themselves aren't even unified regarding what change is needed. There may be no common ground in this situation because not even the strikers have managed to find one beyond agreement they don't like the state of healing.

So can the strikers accept that even among themselves not everyone will be pleased by whatever the outcome is? That there's a strong chance that none of them will end up pleased because SE will stick to the status quo if what the posters from the JP forums said earlier in the thread was accurate about JP players being fine with healing how it is?

Two points on this

1) if we have to accept that we may not get everything we want “because it’s squares game” what does you coming in here and saying that add to the discussion. This is the problem I have with people like you and striker (I don’t mean that in a weird way I just can’t phrase it any better)- what does you “policing” other people’s feedback on here actually achieve. When I see feedback I disagree with or am ambivalent on on a topic I haven’t engaged with before I just leave the topic well enough alone

2) you can’t say “we tried to find common ground and the strikers shouted us down” when the vast majority of the posts from new people who oppose the strike amount to “you idiots should be ignored”, when was the last time someone opened a post with “hey Supersnow you said for example you could delete fey blessing to replace it with miasma but fey blessing has a good use in x situation and I don’t believe a non interactive DOT is worth that loss”. Nobody will engage with our arguments. The last 4 people who posted for the first time here spat vitriol in their opening posts then got defensive when we hit back then people like you come in and say “see the strikers are so toxic”

WHY WILL YOU NOT ENGAGE WITH OUR POINTS (general you not you specifically) I’m tired of being called a toxic raider and a pathetic casual, just engage with my arguments

[Jojoya]

2) you can’t say “we tried to find common ground and the strikers shouted us down” when the vast majority of the posts from new people who oppose the strike amount to “you idiots should be ignored”, when was the last time someone opened a post with “hey Supersnow you said for example you could delete fey blessing to replace it with miasma but fey blessing has a good use in x situation and I don’t believe a non interactive DOT is worth that loss”. Nobody will engage with our arguments. The last 4 people who posted for the first time here spat vitriol in their opening posts then got defensive when we hit back then people like you come in and say “see the strikers are so toxic”

WHY WILL YOU NOT ENGAGE WITH OUR POINTS (general you not you specifically) I’m tired of being called a toxic raider and a pathetic casual, just engage with my arguments

I understand the frustration you feel between SE not engaging in direct conversation with the healing community and the idiots who come in shouting insults because they're protected by internet anonymity. I can remember going through that myself in WoW as the game started declining in Cataclysm then nosedived in Warlords of Draenor.

The lessons learned:

Ignore those who are only insulting and make zero attempt at constructive discussion. They're always going to show up but they're never worth the headspace (unless you're bored and want to poke back at them).

Understand that the developers are only going to respond when they feel a need to respond. They do not owe us as paying customers anything other than a product that functions consistently within the standard that has been set for the product. We can make suggestions about the product but they're under no obligation to implement those suggestions. If we're not happy with the product or part of it, we're better off seeking what we want elsewhere.

As an anecdote for why I'm against expanding the DPS kit for healers:
Last night, I was running the level 95 dungeon with friends doing it for the first time. Originally I expected to heal but ended up DPS because the 4th they recruited for the party only had a healer leveled high enough and I haven't started leveling one of my tank jobs yet.

My friends are not good players due to their disabilities so when I'm healing for them, I always pay extra attention to their health because I know they're going to get hit by mechanics on occasion since their reaction time is slow.

The healer did not notice. As they put it about halfway through the dungeon, they were snapping into DPS mode and not paying attention to what was happening to the rest of the party. We wiped way more than we should have because the healer was not paying attention to the rest of the party until it was too late.

That should never be the case with a healer. They should always have at least partial awareness on what is happening to the party so they can react. And yet it happens all too often in roulettes. The healer from last night was by no means the only healer I've come across that ignores the party in favor of their DPS. They can get away with it in a good group of players. They can't in an average or bad group of players.

The problem would get even worse with a more robust damage kit for healers. Healers that already struggle with focus multi-tasking would find it even more difficult especially if others around them start complaining that they aren't using their damage kit effectively enough. SE has to consider those healers when creating the role design. The more presence damage tools have in a kit, the more attention they're going to get from players compared to the tools added for the role's core function of healing. It starts attracting more players who are only looking for fast queues as green DPS and have no interest in healing.

If someone truly enjoys the healing role, they should be looking for the healing to be made more engaging. Damage abilities should only be there to act as filler if there are a couple of GCDs free for a moment. If a healer is capable of using a GCD to cast a Glare or Ruin, they are also capable of using that GCD to cast a heal. There's no reason for SE to have to go light on the quantity of incoming damage attacks to a party. If they're concerned about the ability of less skilled healers to keep up, they can reduce the size of those attacks so missing a GCD won't wipe a group in normal content. Better healers would still use that GCD that others are missing to get off a quick attack before they resume healing.

For those who think "what about solo duties", switch to a DPS job if you want a better DPS toolkit to work with. There's no point doing a solo duty as a healer when there's nothing to be healed other than ourself. Once we hit the first RP duty at the end of the 4.3 MSQ, we're rarely playing as ourselves during those duties so what our damage toolkit is makes no difference. The amount of XP earned in doing the solo duties is tiny; the major XP comes from turning in the completed quest.

[Wildheaven182]

From what I hear, DT dungeons and such are pretty okay in terms of damage output and difficulty, giving healers more to do in general most of the time.

One issue is more about old content being left in the dust even though it's the majority of content that gets ran due to levelling different jobs and new players. Pre shadowbringers, the game is not much more than fighting striking dummies.

This is an issue too, because the game does not teach players how to be good at the game as they play it. Honestly, menphina's earring makes levelling new jobs way too fast. You can't learn the job as fast as you level it, but this is to cater to nolifers, raiders, and also to shift focus away from old content saying hey look at the new rides at the theme park.

That's why there are unskilled players who get to level 50 and don't even understand they need to press buttons in an order they light up in. At level 60 players still don't even understand not to stand in aoe indicators. At level 70 the difficulty suddenly ramps up, and then ramps up more at level 80 and mid 90s, though the endgame lvl 90 content is back to striking dummies like the alliance raids, aetherfront and lunar subterrane.

No one thinks there should be a lot to healer dps additions, just that there should be a little more, and it should never punish or disincentivize returning to casting healing. Adding a stack building mechanic to glare for another attack, a second unique dot like a whirlwind aoe you place on the ground, and maybe cleric stance at a high level like lvl 100 aren't going to break the game, and aren't necessary to optimize or even use to be able to clear casual content. That healer can do nothing but heal and glare and be just fine and no one will care that a dungeon takes one minute longer (except xeno).

Honestly when I heal, I doze off and space out or have to have something to watch on too and I drop tanks and dps I could have saved just because I'm bored, and then someone gets hit by an aoe at full hp, but because they have 1 vuln stack, they take 80% of their hp as damage and then die before I wake back up. The content being too easy breeds a lack of skill AND a lack of reason to try AND a lack of attentiveness.

Everyone agrees, DPS jobs are for if you want to dps. We say many times, we do not want to dps on healers. We want to be casting healing 90% of the time, not glare. But that also doesn't mean we can't have more than 1 button to press for that remaining 10% of the time. Every aspect of the role should be engaging, fun, and meaningful.

[IDontPetLalas]

I never said don't provide feedback and suggestions.

I said we need to learn acceptance that we're not always going to get what we want.

As for it not being SE's game, sorry but it is. They own the game. They make the game they want to make. They can choose to listen to and implement feedback they receive, or they can choose to ignore it. They're not going to lose all the current subscribers over this because most players don't have a stake in this strike and find it more humorous than convincing.

Some of us originally came into the thread to try to discuss the problems and find common ground but got ridiculed because we didn't agree with everything the strikers said. Most gave up since the strikers were not interested in having that productive conversation you envision. The strikers themselves aren't even unified regarding what change is needed. There may be no common ground in this situation because not even the strikers have managed to find one beyond agreement they don't like the state of healing.

So can the strikers accept that even among themselves not everyone will be pleased by whatever the outcome is? That there's a strong chance that none of them will end up pleased because SE will stick to the status quo if what the posters from the JP forums said earlier in the thread was accurate about JP players being fine with healing how it is?

I'll repeat, it doesn't matter if Square "owns the game". I can make a car than runs on square wheels, if no one is interested in it, then who cares? Similarly, Square does not build the game for themselves, they build in features for an end consumer in mind. Yes, they can have a product vision, but if no one likes it, or if enough people start to dislike- that vision is garbage and it is literally scrapped- and sometimes the product manager is as well.

If you don't fid this thread of use, that's fine. That's your viewpoint. That's not shared by everyone. I do not find it necessary to make progress give up because "everyone" needs to be unified, I don't find it necessary to please "everyone", nor do I have any special insight into how Square's internal decision processes so I can definitely say who they listen to.