#FFXIVHEALERSTRIKE

[Supersnow845]

Man reading this thread, as a healer main, I'm happy SE completely ignore your feedback. You guys would kill the entire role in a single patch.

What’s that old quote about not being able to kill something that’s already dead

(Why am I even replying this person won’t explain their thoughts anyway)

[Azurarok]

tbf I have wondered if nuking the trinity might be better for this game's health at this point

[YarnMage48]

I would say that the SGE is just a worse SCH argument is arguing in favour of wanting more job diversity simply because SGE really doesn’t actually do anything better than SCH

Complaining that two classes are functionally identical but one is just better on pretty much every front I think is a perfectly valid complaint to have against the position of SGE in terms of its identity

But why do you think that Scholar is better? They have similarities but they play very differently.

[CaptainLagbeard]

SCH has Chain Stratagem and Energy Drain, it's probably the best designed healer currently in the game as it has both a buff and will always be able to use their Job Gauge.

[YarnMage48]

Kardia requires dps uptime because it does nothing more than mirroring the fairy casting Embrace while the ajoining SCH is dpsing.

When the SCH stops dpsing and casts heals instead, then the fairy will contine to heal alongside the SCH, that's why the fairy is "better". The healing kit of SCH is spread over himself and the fairy.

Sage on the other hand doesn't need Kardia to heal alongside himself when he stops dpsing. He does everything Kardia (the fairy) would do by himself.


Kardia is just a lazy solution to the problem that they never could balance Noct AST and SCH.

I'm genuinely not understanding how having the fairy heals along with GCD heals makes the scholar a better healer. And don't you lose the fairy heals if you use the fairy to fill your aetherflow gauge? So SCH also has times where you set the passive heal aside. Only with Sage, you get Kardia heals back as soon as you start DPSing again. Sch has to wait 30 seconds to get their fairy back. That's 30 seconds where you have to make up for the lost Embrace heals. Being able to immediately pick up the Kardia effect is a lot more adaptable. In general, that's the advantage that Sage has over Scholar. For example, Scholar can use Emergency Tactics to turn their next Adloquium into a big pure heal. Sage can use Pepsis to turn existing shields into a heal. BUT. On Sage, those shields are instant cast so I an pull that off while running, and I can make that decision after I've put the shield out. Scholar still needs to get the cast out, unless they use Recitation, and they have to decide on that plan beforehand. Sage has adaptability that Scholar doesn't.

If the Sage can do everything themselves that a Scholar can do with a Fairy, then doesn't that mean that the Sage is the better healer? We don't need fairies to "pick up our slack" after all. We can do it all ourselves without some silly fairy! That being said, I'm thoroughly opposed to the idea that one healer is "better" than the other. I like Scholar and I think the integration of fairy skills is great. Scholar and Sage have different play styles and different strengths. And that's perfectly fine. We're gonna have to appreciate and enjoy differences without playing games about classes being "better" or "worse" if we want more class differentiation.

[Connor]

snip

I think its because it’s assuming an optimised party, at which point any additional ‘adaptability’ from Sage becomes null and void (since you should know what’s coming before hand anyway in an optimised raiding party, healing timelines and whatnot). And given the way encounters are designed I’d imagine most people would say it’s not a particularly high bar to reach ‘optimisation’ anyway.

I mean, as the poster above mentioned Chain Stratagem (and Deployment Tactics) alone pushes Scholar pretty far ahead of Sages. Assuming every party member is playing optimally Stratagem can equal a sizeable (rDPS? Cdps? ABCDPS? lol) dps contribution, and Deployment is both mechanic-breaking-ly powerful, on a fairly short cool-down, and has no real parallel on Sage besides like Zoe+Physis II+Eukrasian Prognosis or something. Aka temu Deployment lol.

Naturally everyone’s going to find their own preferences that have them lean towards a certain job. For many people Sage probably is a ‘better healer’ than Scholar, simply due to being the one they prefer for whatever reason. But when you take that preference out of the equation and assume an equal skill level for every party member, suddenly Sage starts to struggle to keep up with Scholar’s capabilities. I’d argue Expedient is also a pretty huge advantage for Scholars too (I mean, they did have to nerf it lol!).

And of course I get that it seems contradictory to say ‘Scholar is the better healer because it ultimately outputs a higher party dps value’ lol, but unfortunately with healing mechanics being how they are, (oops all Harrowing Hell!’ lol)it would take a lot for the ‘best healer’ to ever be ‘the healer that heals the best’ sadly.

Addendum: the writings here are solely based on my own opinion and understanding and not being sold as objective fact. I.E idk I’m probably wrong lol

[Rein_eon_Osborne]

It's not like people don't want to appreciate and enjoy the 'differences'. The issue is, SE doesn't want those.

You can say Kardia and Embrace are different on paper and maybe down to 0.0001 potency but at the end of the day they are both passively generated heals that you mostly don't (need to) think about. In fact, if you're having trouble, then you most likely have much bigger problem on hand that deserves more attention than laser focusing these two.

Another fairy benefit (that they keep trying to diminish by giving everybody and their mom 30y radius) is totem healing: the ability to heal your target without having to place yourself closer. Try to reach that one BRD standing in Narnia with your Panhaima, and you'll tilt your head when you see they're the only one that's missing your mitigation while that SCH can sit still while their Seraph churning out Consolation cozily at the middle of battlefield, and actually have better agency to capitalize all HPS value that comes from their two charges.

Instant shield? Sure, that's what SCH doesn't have on the fly. But when do we actually benefit that? You have millions other heals before you even think about pressing E.Diag/Prognosis, so you will also be spamming Dosis III/Broil IV regardless. Now unless your party is a clown fiesta, that could be a different story... but wait. Recently they just gave SCH Seraphism, which essentially deletes every single weakness the job had up to this point. The only time I believe SGE outclasses SCH was at lv80 as the existence of Holos sort of tipped that balance just slightly, only for it to return to the other way when SCH receives Expedient at lv90.

tl;dr SGE trades higher potential for simplicity, ease of use, and foolproofness. SCH could rival SGE's ridiculous HPS potential, if they're not being kept on check by Energy Drains... except they can absolutely play SCH like they're playing a SGE: ignore energy drains.

[YarnMage48]

snip

No you make some very valid points. In fact "optimized vs non-optimized parties" is a whole lot of what's causing a lot of the disagreement in this discussion. In an optimized party, you will be using your DPS skills more often than not. In an non-optimized party... things can get very challenging very quickly and DPS might not be happening. But a lot of the arguments being made are assuming a fully optimized party, and only a small fraction of the player base is at that level.

As far as unique Scholar skills, Sage has some cool ones too. Its almost like they were designed to have unique abilities or something. I think Chain Strat helps to balance the lower DPS output on SCH. Its kinda like a "selfish vs non-selfish DPS" situation. But Chain Strat is very very cool. When it comes to Harrowing Hell, that's exactly the kind of mechanic Panhaima is build for. And Holos is amazing there too, having both a heal and a mit in one skill. In short. Both have some cool unique skills.

In terms of cold hard numbers though... well, I'm not going to downright reference any particular websites, but I will say that there is data to support the idea that Sage can outperform Scholar in both healing and DPS. Of course, it all comes down to individual player skill. I've long held that being good at pushing your buttons is far more important choosing classes based off of higher DPS potential.

At the end of the day, I am pretty sure its supposed to come down to player preference. We are supposed to pick the jobs we enjoy playing, and that goes for DPS and Tanks too. Classes and encounters are designed around the idea that any standard party comp can clear them. We're supposed to pick classes we enjoy, not follow some mega-optimized meta. Is Scholar the "better" class for you? Play Scholar! Do you like Sage more? Play Sage! Have fun! That is what a video game is supposed to be about. Not making fun of certain classes because you think yours is superior.

[YarnMage48]

It's not like people don't want to appreciate and enjoy the 'differences'. The issue is, SE doesn't want those.

Instant shield? Sure, that's what SCH doesn't have on the fly. But when do we actually benefit that? You have millions other heals before you even think about pressing E.Diag/Prognosis, so you will also be spamming Dosis III/Broil IV regardless. Now unless your party is a clown fiesta, that could be a different story... but wait. Recently they just gave SCH Seraphism, which essentially deletes every single weakness the job had up to this point. The only time I believe SGE outclasses SCH was at lv80 as the existence of Holos sort of tipped that balance just slightly, only for it to return to the other way when SCH receives Expedient at lv90.

tl;dr SGE trades higher potential for simplicity, ease of use, and foolproofness. SCH could rival SGE's ridiculous HPS potential, if they're not being kept on check by Energy Drains... except they can absolutely play SCH like they're playing a SGE: ignore energy drains.

I definitely benefited from being able to run and shield at the same time last tier. If my party was more "optimal" would that have been needed? No, probably not. But hey, I don't need my party to be optimal.

I gotta ask though, do you think Sage has higher potential or not? Because you seem to be saying both.

At any rate, I can't really get behind the idea that its SE that doesn't want differences, given the amount of complaining about differences that happens. If we liked differences, we wouldn't be getting into whether certain classes are better. And, when you want to make sure that content is clearable by any standard party comp, there's going to be some similarities in how the classes operate. If there wasn't, you would get people insisting on having certain classes or class combinations in parties. Well, more than this already happens - just look at how many PF parties insist that they MUST have TWO melees. If individual classes were too different, players would bully other players into fitting into the calculated ideal party composition. Again, that already happens to an extent. And that wouldn't be fun for everyone. So again. The lack of differences is a community issue. We need to let players play the classes they enjoy without getting petty about which classes are "better" or "worse", or complaining that certain classes are "too easy", or "too hard", or "too complicated". As long as that goes on, SE is going to get the message that the community thinks that "different is bad". And no amount of complaining on the forum about a lack of differences is going to counteract that.

[Rein_eon_Osborne]

[...]I gotta ask though, do you think Sage has higher potential or not? Because you seem to be saying both[...]

Apologies if I seem to be saying both, but no. When I implied that SCH having better potential, I was speaking of their HPS, mitigative, and design front. This can be seen from the numbers they given to both healers. Such as:

1. Kerachole lasts 15s with 500p HoT, more flexible and easier to use. Sacred Soil lasts for 17-18s with 600p HoT and is arguably clunkier due to the nature of ground targeting actions + requiring allies to be within the bound of the AoE.
2. E.Prog II is 460 effective potency, 1s faster, and instant AoE heal. Succor is 560 effective potency, 1s slower, and needs to be cast.
3. Panhaima is potentially 1,200 effective potency that goes out within a single weave window (so press and forget) and does not require you think of your position (ever since they gave it 30y radius) but has a very limited time period of which you need to be taking damage in order to capitalize them which usually ends up being overheal. As opposed to Seraph-Consolation whose potencies from 2 charges amounts up to 1,000 effective potency, but you have the agency to decide which instance of damage you want to deal with per charges within 20s, and has effective duration up to 49s seconds.
4. Energy Drain and its implication to SCH's gameplay. This one niche damage optimization option allows SCH to indirectly controls their HPS output. Don't need that stack? ED away. What does SGE have? Uhh.. yeah, just throw that Druochole to keep mana happy (lol).
5. Addersgall vs Aetherflow. One does not require to be managed actively to keep it rolling but you are capped to 4-5 burst uses... if you need it somehow. The other requires SCH to consciously hit Aetherflow to keep them rolling but they can potentially do 'aetherflow superdump' up to 6 stacks (or 9 if you include dissipation) if that's even needed.

Before they expand the radiuses, Physis II (used to be 20y centered on the SGE) vs Whispering Dawn also demonstrated the same "trading potential for ease of use"-syndrome.

[...]At any rate, I can't really get behind the idea that its SE that doesn't want differences, given the amount of complaining about differences that happens[...]

I probably shouldn't have worded it "SE doesn't want difference". For that I apologize for the confusion. What I should be saying instead was "SE is afraid to create that difference". They have demonstrated over the course of several years that they're unable to parse why XYZ feedbacks are happening from the first place.

I.e. People complain about -that one SCH- who spent their AF stacks for ED for whatever reason (playing skillfully, chasing funny numbers, or just bad at making correct decision). Their response? Creates a proto-SGE that was SCH 5.0 only for them to give us back ED after a massive backlash and... what a surprise, necro'd that variant of SCH in 6.0 but gave them a different coat of paint & call them "SGE". What a waste of design space, IMHO.

What else? Oh right, AST! It's an RNG'y job at its inception but then people start complaining about RNG... in an RNG'y job. Their response? ShB, EW, and finally DT AST. As the icing on the top, people also mentioned wanting varied cards to play and manipulate. Their response? Here you go 4th Essential Dignity, 2nd Exaltation, 3rd Celestial Intersection. Oh don't worry, they're all card VFX! Have fun!

EDIT: Heck, even that one media tour build where SGE was shown been able to stack their E.Dosis III and E.Dyskrasia? I'm willing to bet that's what they actually wanted to implement. It's only because certain somebody made a comment how they will feel 'pressured' to be keeping both DoT up in raids due to being a gain for... what, 80p per minute? Even single AF stack spent for Energy Drain would immediately outclasses that and they worry about that? But alas, SE caved in and effectively made E.Dyskrasia totally useless button outside nichest of the niche case of uses.