#FFXIVHEALERSTRIKE

[Alice_Rivers]

Would healer mains be happy if you gave healers the same damage output as tanks?

My "wild" take is give healers and tanks the same damage (though give healers more dps buttons), while increasing their mitigation skills while reducing tanks stacked mitigations and even nerfing the passive mitigation on tanks if possible.

Maybe then healers can clear with no tanks and we go full circle to a tank strike! But I like tanks and healers both having strong support options, I don't really just want to nerf tank support abilities and call it a day personally.

I think some healers might be happy if we did the same damage as tanks. However, as was eventually agreed (by most) in the tank forum thread 1 and thread 2, just nerfing tank sustain is not the answer. I hold, per statements in those threads, that reducing tank sustain is part of the solution in that tanks should die when unsupported by a healer but that a bigger part of the solution is to make NPC damage output actually valid. I've done enough duties to see tanks steamroll everything in their path, in EW I've actively challenged a WAR main friend of mine to heal the entire party for me and they can which is insane and completely beyond the purview of tanks in my view. I've also had the reverse, where tanks pull W2W with no mits and sometimes missing entire gear slots and I have to tank by proxy, is that satisfying? Does it come with a sense of achievement? Hell yes! Should it be a thing? No. Content should put out enough damage to justify both tank and healer kits, we were told that in DT that was going to be a thing, alas, we have been lied to again.

Some of the most fun I have in this game is in Stone Vigil and Pharos Sirius, Bardam's mettle and Doma Castle also have their moments, because they do allow tanks to pull more than their kits alone can handle and healers then actually have to heal and it's great. I want to see NPCs actually be a threat to tanks, I wanna see trash mobs have vulns and stuff again so tanks (and healers) can't just stand in the middle of the pack and shrug everything off, I wanna see tank busters have another 50-100% damage on top of what they do now, maybe up to 200% make tanks mit for them or die and make them a real concern for healers in the process. I know some people will say "Oh WoW healing" I don't know if I want WoW healing, I've never played it, but I do want my dps filler to be a filler and a reward again for being good at healing, not for healing to be my reward for the tank being incompetent.

[Rithy255]

Snip

I'll give my view on where I want tanks and healers which maybe vastly different from the norm, because I unironically play tanks because I enjoy supporting my team in more ways that aren't just "press mitigation button and aggro boss" (though I'll admit its fun to have aggro and feel like the "main character" its not why I in particular play tank), I do know the common response will be "so why not play healer then?" this is mostly because none of the healers are melee and don't really appeal to me, with ff14's design I doubt they will ever make a healer role that appeals to me.

But the way I see it is I want Tanks and healers largely to fill that "Support" role, Not to say tanks or healers should just replace one another but I think some cross over in mitigation, healing ect. Is healthy, I just think currently tanks are too good at mitigation that they don't really need any help from healers, I'd honestly remove skills like Rampart, weaken guardian ect. In trade for strong mitigative abilities for skills like aquaveil ect, giving healers more to do in terms of damage and having a pretty much equal damage level to tanks.

Theirs some cases where self healing tools need to be toned down, I'll point out warrior takes this too far pretty much every cooldown it has, has a heal attached to it, which is fine if its one or two skills but not when its warriors entire defensive kit, even holy blades healing on paladin could be removed/weaker, but at the same time when I'm tank i really enjoy contributing to my team by using cooldowns such as passage, veil, intervention to save a ally or give the MT a regen and mit, I think it would be a shame to remove these aspects I like about tanks.

I guess I'm unironically advocating for Tanks and healers to be more closer in design, but I think actually making tanks more weaker at tanking and self survivability but still decent at supporting would give healers more to heal and mitigate in all forms of content.

Last thing is I don't think healers would be as upset about this clear 4 tanks 4 dps, if healers could also do it with 4 healers 4 dps. Maybe I'm wrong on that though.

[ForsakenRoe]

Would healer mains be happy if you gave healers the same damage output as tanks?

There's a world of difference between 'make Healers do the same damage output as Tanks' and 'make Healers have a damage kit that has more buttons'. We don't need to deal Tank damage, and in fact, I'd argue that such a request would be detrimental to the role, not a benefit. When WHM was able to compete (and occasionally outdo) Tank damage in SHB, the Tank players were not happy. It was the reason we have the term 'Glare Mage', because people focused so much on doing their damage instead of their role's objective (heal party members), mainly due to Lilies being a 'damage loss' at the time. And it wouldn't actually fix the issue. Sure, you can boost Glare's potency from 330 to 360, and now WHM does the same damage as a Tank. But the problem is that 75% of your GCDs are Glare, and that hasn't changed. If anything, the problem's now worse, because missing a cast of Glare is now even more of an impact on your damage (compared to the current values)

Instead, we can look at 'more damage buttons, to deal the same damage', and it could be argued that 'what's the point of pressing 5 buttons in the rotation, to do the damage we do now with 1 button?' I find that to be a disingenuous take, however, as I'd be able to follow it up with 'you are correct, so let's remove every damage button from WAR, except for Storm's Eye (applies buff for 30s, akin to the DOT on Healers) and Fell Cleave (spam action)'. It'd feel awful to play, and Fell Cleave would lose all of its impact 'feeling' because of how often it's used. We can instead look at a solution where, while the Healer has more buttons, those 'more buttons' are not necessarily mandatory to use in the rotation.

Let's take a SCH. Broil is 310p, Biolysis is 750p over its duration. So, 2 Biolysis and 22 Broils per minute gives us a total damage output of 8320p per minute. So, if we tune the potencies such that 'spam Broil and nothing else' is roughly 8320p per minute, then we can add however much extra buttons to press, so long as their potencies are tuned such that they're close to Broil's output. Here's some example maths to illustrate what I mean:

Broil: 340p
Biolysis (30s): 70p on cast, 30p per tick, 370p total
Miasmalysis (24s): 280p on cast, 10p per tick, 360p total (this is a replacement/upgrade for Ruin 2)
Shadowflare (15s): 100p on cast, 50p per tick, 350p total (this is an AOE puddle)

With these potencies, simply spamming Broil for 24 out of the 24 GCDs per minute would be 99% of the effectiveness of the current Dawntrail SCH's GCD output (and that includes DT SCH having to use Biolysis). The difference between '24/24 Broils' and 'using the DOTs perfectly and not missing a single tick of any of them' would be about 2%. The DOTs would be effectively 'ignoreable' for players who aren't seeking to do parse runs, and because of that 'ignoreable'-ness, they can be used instead as mobility actions to keep your damage rolling while running around, since they're instantcast.

The above example would take a SCH from using 22 Broils per minute, to 15.5 Broils per minute (the decimal is due to getting 5 Miasmalysis per 2min) if they want to interact with all of the DOTs. But for a player who does not want to DOT, they can simply ignore the DOTs entirely and still clear literally every DPS check currently in the game. In fact, they'd potentially find it easier to clear those checks, because if they use Miasmalysis only at the times they'd currently use Ruin2, the on-hit potency of Miasmalysis listed here is higher than Ruin2 (which is currently at 220p).

Lastly, damage actions, and how we deal damage, are a great way to differentiate the Healers from one another in terms of gameplay. When our role is so one-note (or two-note, more accurately, 1: heal HP bar and 2: mitigate damage to prevent instant die), it can make the Healer tools feel very samey, which is a large aspect to the criticism of the current design philosophy. There's very little difference between Dia, Combust, Biolysis and Eukrasian Dosis, they're all DOTs that last 30s. None of them have any interplay with the rest of the kit. Then we have a filler action (Glare/Malefic/Dosis/Broil) and they all have 1.5s cast times, 2.5s recast times, cost 400mp. SCH/SGE are especially egregious for this, with so many actions having not only similar functions, but even occasionally identical potencies, CDs and even learn levels (Ixochole/Indom, Physis/Whispering Dawn, Pepsis/Emergency Tactics). With more variety in the damage kit, we could instead differentiate the way that the healers feel to play via their damage contribution methods, rather than 'how they heal' (since that design space seems all tapped out).

As examples, here's what I'd do for each:

WHM: Banks damage via GCD healing actions like Rapture/Solace (and another system I'd add). Unleash banked damage for a cataclysmic burst in 2min window with Misery, Quake, Flood, Tornado.
SCH: Outmaneuvers enemies with strategies, and debilitates them with multiple DOT effects. Exploits weaknesses via Chain Stratagem, which can be spread (along with the DOTs) via Bane returning to us.
AST: Has the current simple 'one nuke, one DOT' gameplay, but supplements it with a much more interactive Card system. A heavier focus on buffing allies and manipulating card effects, rather than direct damage.
SGE: Reworks to several actions to make Kardia a bigger part of our gameplay (making it AOE, converting the healing into barrier, etc). Spending Kardia Augments allows you to access a RPR/MCH-esque 'fast attack' burst phase.

With this, it doesn't matter that SCH and SGE have so much overlap in their healing kits. Becuase SCH's gameplay (when trying to optimize, remember the extra damage buttons are optional!) would be DOT focused, and SGE's would be more about overwhelming enemies with a much faster rate of attack. WHM and AST would feel more different, not just because WHM has direct healing and AST has to worry about 'delayed healing' (eg Star growing after 10s), but because WHM (when optimizing, optional) is focused on trying to have all of their 'damage refund abilities' prepared when they go into the 2min window, and AST is focused on playing Cards, manipulating them to be favourable, empowering them with a reworked/returned Royal Road (eg replace the 'AOE' effect cos it's OP), etc. It'd have a lot more chance to appeal to somebody's gameplay preferences. If someone's a big fan of DOT gameplay, they currently don't have anything that really scratches that itch (BRD DOTs being 'press IJ once per 45s' doesn't count, SMN got reworked, every Healer has only 1 DOT), but with this, they'd have SCH as an option, and any SCHs who don't want DOT gameplay, could just... not press the DOTs and still clear everything in the game just fine. A player who 'doesn't want to do damage, they want to focus on healing', can get a more satisfying experience from the AST, as it has far more gameplay centred around buffing allies, which reduces how often they have to use Malefic.

If SE wants to attract a DPS player to the role, having a second SCH with SGE might work a little bit, due to aesthetics, or 'you don't have to fight the faerie clunk', etc. But, I'd argue that 'this Healer has an APM that rivals even RPR and MNK' would be a much bigger draw for a DPS player to try. It might get some players spooked that it's 'too fast', but then there's other Healer options that are slower-paced like WHM. With the current setup, there's nowhere in the Healer role for an APM enjoyer to go, they're all slow (especially now that AST has been reworked again). Diversify the playstyles of the Healers and how they deal their damage, and we'd have a wider net cast to attract players to pick up the role. And it'd make reclearing content feel a lot more different between each, thereby extending the lifespan of said content somewhat.



Long post, yes, but TLDR: having our damage increased to be equal to Tanks doesn't solve anything, increasing variety in our damage rotation opens up a lot of design space, space that lets the healers feel more distinct/different from one another in their gameplay

[Alice_Rivers]

Snip

I think we're broadly in agreement. I too think it would be a waste to remove the party support elements of tank kits, there are times after all where the healer is preoccupied and someone's near death experience goes unnoticed, having a tank able to step in with cover/TBN/aurora/nascent flash (not healing the WAR as well because that's just stupid, SE) is good party design. Similarly having partywide mit OR shield OR heal (looking at you PLD/WAR) is also good party design and helpful to a healer without replacing them, I like good party interactions and if the tank wants to save me an oGCD or better a GCD then great, thank you.

My main problem with tanks though, as I said above is their self sustain more than their party sustain, and I don't want to remove that feeling of power or the agency that a tank has. I would be okay with Rampart being 30% mit plus 20% additional healing received if the content did enough damage to justify that, same thing with Guardian, I don't mind 40% mit plus some shield if there is some tank buster or something that validates it. So for me, weakening some things, particularly in the WAR healing department (someone suggested making things like Bloodwhetting's heal add shield HP instead and I think that could work, especially if it used a buff slot and had limited stacks similar to how Haima works) but more importantly increasing incoming damage by orders of magnitude to actually make the power that tanks and healers already have justifiable.

Further to the "it's not just tanks that are unduly powerful" argument, how often in 8-man content do you see a SCH or a SGE make their AST/WHM co-healer unnecessary? I see it all the time, I don't see it as a job design problem per se, I see it more as an encounter design problem, if you're going to have two tanks and two healers, all four of those players should be active participants, not two of them active and two on the bench waiting for their counterpart to screw up.

[ForsakenRoe]

Last thing is I don't think healers would be as upset about this clear 4 tanks 4 dps, if healers could also do it with 4 healers 4 dps. Maybe I'm wrong on that though.

Personally, I would be upset about such a thing occuring. Tanks should be required to survive the Tankbusters. Healers should be required to keep the party's HP above zero. DPS should be required to have enough damage contribution from the party to beat the fight in time. All three roles should be as required as one another IMO

As for the Tank stuff, I've been thinking for a while about Critical Hits vs Tanks. Back in HW/SB, attacks could crit us. In fact, in those older contents, they still can. You can see this with certain 'guaranteed to Crit' attacks like Diabolos Hollow, or TBs like Shinryu EX's Tera Slash. We had a tool to prevent Crits from getting us, Awareness, but it had a pretty long CD. It especially harmed PLD, because the game checks to see if the attack is a Crit before it checks if it's Blocked, so a Crit would pierce Sheltron. It also wasn't great for WAR with their Raw Intuition (guaranteed parry from front), but that was a much longer CD

So I thought a while back, what if we had an additional effect added to Barriers, wherein 'if you have a Barrier applied, the attack cannot Crit'? The more I think about it, the more interesting the idea seems to me. SCH and SGE would be able to negate the crit using Adloquium/E.Diagnosis, and WHM/AST have Benison/Celestial Intersection on pretty short CDs, giving all of the Healers a way to quickly handle negating the Crit. Additionally, because WHM/AST's tool is not only 'available pretty often' but also an OGCD, it makes their 'Crit Negation' tool more valuable compared to using an Adlo/E.Diag, thereby giving Pure Healers a niche where they excel over Barrier Healers (a bit ironic, since it's Barrier related), which helps to prevent SCH/SGE being so strong a comp

IDK, I think that 'removing problem entirely' isn't always the best solution. Rather than removing the problem entirely (Crit autoattacks hurt), I think it feels better sometimes to have the problem, but give the players the tools to overcome the problem. Crit Autoattacks hurt, and Crit Tankbusters do a ton of damage. But if the player can use something to 'outplay the developers', eg by using a Benison to block and negate the Critical aspect of the hit, it feels much more satisfying to the player, than the developers simply saying 'ok it's not a Crit anymore'

[Rithy255]

Snip

I definitely agree with most things you're saying at least I want both tanks and healers to take a broader approach to both supporting each other and the party, rather then stuff like one tank soloing the responsibility of the party, funnily enough I enjoy being a team player in a team based game ^^

It's odd that warrior in particular gets some extra bonuses to their healing in general, nascent flash healing both you and ally and shake it off regen are the most odd to me, we could do without warrior regen (still keep the base heal, or remove base heal for regen), theirs certainly cases that point to tank sustain being a little bit too much.

I'd argue back a little bit that self sustain isn't as big as a issue as Mitigation levels, though both work together to create a state where tanks can keep themselves alive with no real help, I think broader changes like general adjusting tanks selfish survivability (which can be mitigative and sustain values on war) to a lower extent I feel is the way to go without obviously just removing all forms of sustain which seems to be a common argument.

I also agree that SCH/SGE take up WHM/AST niche too much, I think the barrier/pure split wasn't the best idea and it's funny that they're giving the pure healers more shielding/mit abilities in DT while giving sage/sch more pure healing utility... almost to sort of try to fix things? I personally would want both healers and both tanks to fill a important part in the party, I also think theirs a point that white mage is entirely already outclassed by AST when shield healers are also.

I think it comes down to a encounter and job design issue, healers and tanks should be designed better, though I think encounter design is actually the main issue at least 70% of the issue we have with how current healers aren't really that needed.

[CKNovel]

I think we're broadly in agreement. I too think it would be a waste to remove the party support elements of tank kits, there are times after all where the healer is preoccupied and someone's near death experience goes unnoticed, having a tank able to step in with cover/TBN/aurora/nascent flash (not healing the WAR as well because that's just stupid, SE) is good party design. Similarly having partywide mit OR shield OR heal (looking at you PLD/WAR) is also good party design and helpful to a healer without replacing them, I like good party interactions and if the tank wants to save me an oGCD or better a GCD then great, thank you.

I would absolutely trade self sustain for better mitigation, shield/reduction instead of raw healing, that's a compromise I can happily accept.
I doubt WAR will complain if you trade their healing for shields, especially in raiding where self healing becomes less valuable.
The current content also doesn't do enough damage, if you check the FRU clear it survives the LB tank check with an LB2.

Paladin is also a straight up superior healer thanks to Clemency & Divine Veil, especially when you have 4 of them.
Removing Clemency or not, sacrificing the job identity for stopping the 4 paladin clear is a debate I leave to you, it's a healer GCD after all.

[Rithy255]

I would absolutely trade self sustain for better mitigation, shield/reduction instead of raw healing, that's a compromise I can happily accept.
I doubt WAR will complain if you trade their healing for shields, especially in raiding where self healing becomes less valuable.
The current content also doesn't do enough damage, if you check the FRU clear it survives the LB tank check with an LB2.

Paladin is also a straight up superior healer thanks to Clemency & Divine Veil, especially when you have 4 of them.
Removing Clemency or not, sacrificing the job identity for stopping the 4 paladin clear is a debate I leave to you, it's a healer GCD after all.

If 4 divine veils and clemency (which is cure 2 that you can't spam as much but heals you 50%) can replace the entire healer role, it's a issue with how fights are designed and not the roles itself.

Clemency also funnily enough wouldn't be a issue if tanks and healers had similar damage outputs because having 4 paladins spamming it 40+ times should make hard fights pretty much impossible to clear.

[Alice_Rivers]

Clemency is an interesting point, as you rightly point out it is both a healer GCD matter and an archetypal PLD ability across most of fiction. I'd suggest that there is room for both with several possible compromises; it could be weaker and/or have a longer cooldown and/or be weighed against new/higher MP costs for other PLD abilities. Personally I favour extending the cooldown a bit so that it's not spam-able anymore, maybe 20s? I don't know, let it be a valuable party tool to cover for a mistake by a party member without being too much.

[Shurrikhan]

Clemency is an interesting point, as you rightly point out it is both a healer GCD matter and an archetypal PLD ability across most of fiction. I'd suggest that there is room for both with several possible compromises; it could be weaker and/or have a longer cooldown and/or be weighed against new/higher MP costs for other PLD abilities. Personally I favour extending the cooldown a bit so that it's not spam-able anymore, maybe 20s? I don't know, let it be a valuable party tool to cover for a mistake by a party member without being too much.

The flexibility of the cast seems pretty essential to its flavor, tbh, though I don't see why it'd need quite so low a cost as it does now when PLD regens 3200 MP per full combo's time (apart from during Req GCDs).

I'd rather just have more to heal and, perhaps more importantly, both greater healer damage possible and/or more of an offensive cost to tank sustain, such that a healer-less pair or mass of tanks is just not nearly so able to go ham, adding further rDPS cost to fully opting out of an entire role.

Food for thought, though: What could the dynamics of a tank-less comp even look like? Would there even be any way to salvage that into something fun? Dropping a healer, of all roles, does make sense, as it's essentially removing one's safety margin (albeit less so with PLD-stacking). But you'd have to have far less passive tank mit (and scale TBs around that) and greater power in healer mit and DPS personals, etc., for it to offer enough control between rezzes to not just feel like a cluster****, I'd imagine.

Full transparency: I like being able to shuffle around role allocations. I feel like it helps keep the inter-role economy of outputs more in check in ways that tend, however incidentally, to maintain job distinction over mere role-fixtures/-templates. That said, I'd hate if a role or job were consistently dispensable -- say, if RDM could only ever be a Rez Mage or a healer a wet wipe, or for one's tasks to seemingly boil down to just voking once and then being a DPS with extra buttons to hit when cued by giant red construction warning VFX.