#FFXIVHEALERSTRIKE

[Azurarok]

Honestly, I do believe that if players who joined after ShB had the opportunity to try the HW/SB kits, most of them would probably realise it's not as bad as they thought.

I see so many people bash the old systems like TP and Cleric Stance or even tank stances without ever experiencing them. But I'd wager that the majority of the playerbase simply doesn't care how easy or hard a job plays and will play it regardless because they like the aesthetics/design.

I'd love to try it if I had the chance. The older card systems and time dilation, all of the dots, stance dancing, actual pet management, mage BRD, gauss barrel MCH. The whole Award Winning Heavensward Expansion

[Kes13a]

Well look at what happened with WoW. They released a classic version after saying for so long that we don't actually want it. It exponentially increases the sub count, and now there are more people with a reference point for what's wrong with the current game.
And did they listen to the feedback? I don't know, I gave up on WoW before I gave them the chance.

not sure, I never played on one of them. I had no interested in losing many appreciated QoL that released after the classic server game states. yes, it did increase sub counts because at that point, WoW was where SE is heading with 14. the expansions were trash, their direction was trash... and as we found out recently.. so was the company.

I would rather see FFXIV, the game play for all as well as development saved BEFORE it gets to the state where people leave and never.. ever... look back

[Tigore]

The TP system had its weaknesses too back then. All the physical DPS had an ability or two to regen TP, but it was only enough to maintain single target. AoE was quite thirsty on TP and you would eventually run out mid pull if your DPS partner still insisted on using single target. Sprint also emptied the TP bar too >.>

[Kacho_Nacho]

Honestly, I do believe that if players who joined after ShB had the opportunity to try the HW/SB kits, most of them would probably realise it's not as bad as they thought.

I see so many people bash the old systems like TP and Cleric Stance or even tank stances without ever experiencing them. But I'd wager that the majority of the playerbase simply doesn't care how easy or hard a job plays and will play it regardless because they like the aesthetics/design.

I agree. Honestly, I felt more like a healer back then than I do now, in spite of White Mages having more healing abilities/spells in Dawn Trail.

Not sure if I agree with you about the majority of the playerbase not caring about how hard or easy a job is to play. It's definitely part of the reason.

Personally, I'd like to see players rewarded for playing a complex job well more than someone playing a simpler job. So, a White Mage would perform adequately; but, a well played Scholar would do better than a White Mage's best.

not sure, I never played on one of them. I had no interested in losing many appreciated QoL that released after the classic server game states. yes, it did increase sub counts because at that point, WoW was where SE is heading with 14. the expansions were trash, their direction was trash... and as we found out recently.. so was the company.

I would rather see FFXIV, the game play for all as well as development saved BEFORE it gets to the state where people leave and never.. ever... look back

^^^^^^^^^^^^^
A thousand times this. I played WoW for 8 years. In the end, I couldn't bring myself to even to log on even when someone offered to buy me a year subscription to WoW Classic. The attitude and actions of Blizzard drove such a wedge between the company and its subscribers that I refuse to ever go back.

While the situation isn't quite so bad in FFXIV yet, Square Enix is in danger of falling into the same pitfalls and patterns which killed Everquest and almost killed WoW. I really don't want to see that happen.

[Shurrikhan]

I see so many people bash the old systems like TP and Cleric Stance or even tank stances without ever experiencing them. But I'd wager that the majority of the playerbase simply doesn't care how easy or hard a job plays and will play it regardless because they like the aesthetics/design.

I can't think of any time I've heard complaints about those systems from those who've used them. Usually, instead, it's blind optimism. I have heard dozens of well-justified complaints by those who did use/optimize around them, though...

And I think what often gets lost in the discussion is how badly matters are conflated, i.e., the singular good part of a past system element vs. its holistic merit.

Take TP for instance. We may associate it with things like Paladin wanting to alternate between Total Eclipse spam and self-healing in large pulls in Stormblood as not to run out of TP or MP, with Warrior having an opportunity cost for its self-heal (if and only if it was somehow the sole physical damage-dealer in its group), with casters having additional mobility through an effectively-no-cost Sprint to make up for not having the likes of Spineshatter, Shukuchi, or Shoulder Tackle, or physical jobs having a sharp limit to how much AoE they could put out and therefore what was nearly a doom timer double-physical-DPS dungeon pulls, etc., but those are more coincidence than part-and-parcel of TP, the main effect of which was simply to give physical damage dealers a less-leveraged, less-choiceful, less-relevant, and more-constrictive MP analog. Each benefit could be better achieved separate from putting physical jobs on a very limited, Attack Speed-punishing battery life.

Now, we could look at what was successful among iterations of MP, such as Ruin III on HW Summoner and how it created a much more substantial opportunity cost for SMN raises, reducing how much they'd have to pre-pay for their utility and therefore its burden on output in situations that did not need that raise. Perhaps something similar could have been done with TP, whereby one would have both net-negative and net-positive phases, the timings and lengths of which would depend on fight length. But that, too, would cost button-slots to then each be applicable to certain situations that could otherwise be spent on rotational depth usable in a far greater breadth of situations. SSS for mitigating the losses of melee-downtime? Spent instead on your high-TP-cost nuke that you use before first Invigorate and not again until the last expected minute of the fight. Etc., etc. Such "additions" from those lost systems or their reimaginings need to be seen in/through net value, not in isolation.

Or, take Enmity manipulation as it was implemented.

Start with the tanks. Up to 6 tank skills (7 if including ranged enmity attacks, 8 if considering that the "dps stance" could otherwise have been the default / a passive), 1 of which was used on CD in a circle-shirk, another used before the other's longer CD, and 4-6 more used only for the fight's opener and never again. It was bloated, to say the least. Again, we could revitalize this, but consider: to what end? What did we want to achieve by using discrete combos and oGCD CDs (over, say, fewer, more dynamic skills)? Or, if the point was just discrete actions in any form, why use discrete actions over, say, the timing of generic, more bankable oGCDs, the positioning from which to throw them out, etc.?

Or, far worse, consider its place on non-tanks. A CD to hit on CD. And if a single player lacks this CD or fails to hit it, all other players' hitting their CDs is wasted since the tank needs to waste their would-be rDPS to keep Enmity off the outlier.

:: Granted, we should probably also consider "Enmity" itself as implemented still to this day. Did we really want a single-metric nondecaying threat table over, say, impermanent targeting weights? Certainly, having some way to manipulate targeting is good, but Enmity as implemented so far has not only replaced opportunities for far greater net depth (via kiting, CC, directly blocking) but has done shockingly little to leverage itself. (Not that XIV's threat system is unique in that regard. Just worth pointing out for fairness to earlier attempts.)

Etc., etc.

[IDontPetLalas]

sorry to derail the nostalgia train, but please try and stay on the thread topic.

as much as people like their rose coloured glasses.. I dont want an earlier version of the game, I want a current version of the game with proper healers.

This is on topic, as a number of people have pointed out, it can be useful to review what we liked or didn't like about past versions of a game, and there's really no need to assume that we all look through our memories through "rose-coloured glasses"

By the way, the current version of the game with "proper" healers is likely an oxymoron, by the time that healers get significant changes, we likely wouldn't be in the current version, and if you can provide the "proper" definition of a healer that would satisfy everyone, well, if you can provide that definition, there have been some very good attempts here in the past. It would be great if Square would reply to those posts.

[Rolder50]

I’d love to see some HW/SB type healer gameplay, whether it’s a private server or just the devs finally fixing the current state of healers. Sadly both options are exceptionally unlikely.

[Psycofang]

On Zaleria at least. I haven't noticed a single thing the strike is allegedly trying to change.
I was just wondering, dont mind me.

[LynxDubh]

On Zaleria at least. I haven't noticed a single thing the strike is allegedly trying to change.
I was just wondering, dont mind me.

You say "don't mind me", but you're the one posting here multiple times and bumping the thread.

Edit: Also, "Zaleria"?

[Supersnow845]

On Zaleria at least. I haven't noticed a single thing the strike is allegedly trying to change.
I was just wondering, dont mind me.

I just swapped to Crystal to check and in like 50 parties i dont think i saw more than maybe 4 healers