#FFXIVHEALERSTRIKE

[YarnMage48]

snip

So what you are really saying is that Scholar is better because it came first. And look mate, you don't need to be condescending by using all caps. The issue is that you weren't being clear. Addersgall lacks nuance? No. If they are copies then they have the same amount of nuance. You don't like addersgall because it is a copy of aetherflow. OK. We can go from there.

The idea that Aetherflow is better because it came first is simply weak. The best airplane isn't first one to ever be made. You can hate Sage because so much is based off Scholar. That's fine for a personal grievance. But Sage being based off of a good system doesn't mean that it's worse than scholar. They can go different directions with the same base model and end with two different classes. In fact, that's exactly how we ended up with Scholar and Summoner. They both start as Arcanists, and the model branches off from there.

As you said, it took time for them to fill out Scholar and figure out how all of its skills needed to work. They then took a model that they knew worked, and started working on morphing it into a new model. It's not all the way there yet but if they work a little at a time, they'll get there. I'd much prefer that to when they reinvented the wheel, and have since spent every future expansion trying to bring AST into a good, balanced state.

Regarding one of the major deviations from Scholar, namely, the regeneration of mana through the use of Addersgall stacks, I think I understand your points. The lack of proper punctuation has made things a little hard to parse, but I think I follow. It seems that you dislike that, with both WHM and SGE, you might end up using healing skills not for the healing, but for the accumulation of a resource. Rather than making mana regen based on the accumulation of addersgall, we could instead fix this by having something to use it on other than healing. I'd like that a lot. But at the end of the day, I'm not overly hung up on having to burn a stack of addersgall for mana, if that even happens. It can only happen where I'm in an encounter long enough for Lucid Dreaming to not cover DPS mana usage while also somehow not encountering any need to heal that entire time. That's few and far between.

Rather than your initial claim that you just transferred the heal plan 1 to 1 and it worked exactly the same, you had to work out a combination of skills from Scholar to make the same effect that Sage has. it still worked but what we've learned is that the reality was different from your initial claim. You can make them work they same if you like, but they don't actually work exactly the same.

[Supersnow845]

(Side note I’m not being condescending using Caps, it’s because it’s annoying to embolden text on mobile)

I never mentioned SGE being weaker than SCH in this particular comment. You asked me why addersgall lacks nuance compared to aetherflow and why I didn’t like addersgall and I told you. They didn’t “go in different directions” with the two classes they dumped the same skills on the new healer that you use in the same situation and left it at that. Old SMN and old SCH worked because they while they shared the core aspects of their damage kit they were diversified by the fact that SMN had its Bahamut magic forming the core of its burst while SCH had fairy control. You might say “well SCH and SGE are like that because the aetherflow/addersgall are the same and then they branch from there. Except kardia and the fairy are the same, the GCD healing options are the same, panhaima and seraph are the same, physis and whispering dawn are the same. There is no diversity there, SGE just copied SCH and in my eyes it’s a very valid complaint that the “new class” didn’t do anything unique and just copied SCH. Would it be okay if the new physical ranged next expansion was a 3 part combo with a reverse 3 part combo and a freeform burst builder but the burst was 3% instead of 5% and the “big nuke” gave a shield instead of a heal because “PCT is a good design and they wanted to use it as a foundation”

SCH doesn’t “win” because it was first. SCH wins because its kit was organically designed around its needs as the game developed and retains depth induced by choice. SGE copies SCH without understand why SCH is the way it is and with all of SCH’s nuance ripped out of it to make it “flow” better and then with additions made in DT seems to have no idea what to do with SGE. Like I despise seraphism but I can at least point to the fact that Seraphism covers SCH’s two age old weaknesses- namely healing on the move and sustained pure healing. WHAT does philosophia add to SGE? Like genuinely I cannot think of a niche philosophia fills. If they wanted “pankardia” for flavour then 1) they failed at making it actually pankardia and 2) in a world pankardia exists in physis is useless as a separate skill but since physis exists philosophia just comes off as a second charge of physis on 3 times the CD. What gives anyone confidence in the design of a class that don’t its first expansion copying SCH and its second introducing a skill that doesn’t have a niche

And the way you’ve responded to my point about the mit plan just seems to show you are desperate to sell pointless “difference” as meaningful difference. Physis and whispering dawn fill exactly the same niche, same as expedience and holos. Savage doesn’t ask for you to draw out the sort of use that makes holos heal actually meaningfully useful (not saying it’s useless but if you are pressing it you are pressing it for the mitigation) so the plans function the same. You can’t do this with AST and WHM. If your heal plan on WHM says rapture what do you press on AST? You don’t have an equivalent because their heal kits are different. On SGE/SCH I know exactly what heal/mitigation maps to what and so I can use the same mitigation plan. I went from SCH to SGE and when I pressed expedient I pressed holos, so I was blatantly wasting holos’s heal and had zero problems. On week 2. I also went from critdom to pnuema so I never used Zoe on pnuema, again I had no problems. Week 2. Nothing in 14’s healing design asks enough of the healers to make these tiny differences meaningful AND even if it did as I’ve shown the two have skills that fill those tiny differences anyway just by pressing a different button. So even if you want to argue that the mitigation of holos and expedience is m mindfully different in a mit plan because holos also has a heal which you’ll waste 99% of the time anyway I can just use blessing to cover that heal achieving the same thing anyway. Which AST and WHM don’t have

[Rein_eon_Osborne]

[...]Ah but you are completely incorrect.

... its actually 60p/min, Dosis is 370p nowadays. Over the course of a 12min enocunter, that's (slightly less than) two whole Dosis casts you'd lose! /s

On the topic of it though, if they really had to make the two DOTs not stack for whatever reason, wouldn't it feel so much better if, instead of 40p for 30s, E.Dyskrasia applied the regular E.Dosis DOT (75p per tick), but for 15s? You wouldn't ever use it in single target, still (due to it overwriting), but it'd at least be worth pressing it in more AOE pulls, as it stands I find it hard to find a trash pack that actually lives for 30s

T-That's a checkmate... how will I ever recover from this...?! /j

Jokes aside, regardless whether it's a gain, loss, or neutral in ST situations, I still think the nail on the coffin is the inability to stack both DoTs. If it's a gain, people can try to optimize it they want to. The gain is so miniscule that ignoring the optimization probably ain't going to be comparable to placing 1 extra Phlegma charge outside buff window. If it's a neutral, people can use it as a potential movement tool so long target remains within 5y radius from the SGE. Same if it's a loss except it'll be on priority above 4th Toxikons. It will still shine the best in trash pulls because people wouldn't have to worry to overwrite their E.Dosis IIIs. It's not much. But it's way better than current iteration.

They had 1 expansion to develop SGE into something greater, and they squandered it. HMMMMMMM I wonder what else in the role that suffers similarly? Ah yes, Lily gauge. The last time it was developed any meaningfully was in ShB. People were asking for any semblance of utilities, preferably attached to the lily system. What do we get instead? EW changes neutered the nuance and didn't even gave the system anything new while at the same time adding Lily insignia to Holy III and Lilybell... the two actions that have absolutely no bearing toward Lily Gauge itself... for what exactly (ngl I felt insulted)? Is that the most they're willing to put effort into the job? What a surprise, fast forward to DT SGE is treated similarly. Lily gauge, who? Idk her.

Will they get better? I don't know, I can't cast Divination IRL. But based on their track record, I'm pessimistic.

[Azurarok]

I'd much prefer that to when they reinvented the wheel, and have since spent every future expansion trying to bring AST into a good, balanced state.

The thing they keep reinventing are the cards, which are primarily dps tools. The healing kit design's been pretty static since ShB, maybe earlier than that.

In fact, it was so good in their eyes they bent the other healers to its oGCD healing design in EW, which has been one of the biggest offenders in the role's homogenization.

[BunnyQueen]

Healers need to be able to heal 60% of the time in dungeons, rn they heal less then 5%, even less when i am on warrior. They need to fix dungeons.

[YarnMage48]

(Side note I’m not being condescending using Caps, it’s because it’s annoying to embolden text on mobile)

SCH doesn’t “win” because it was first. SCH wins because its kit was organically designed around its needs as the game developed and retains depth induced by choice. SGE copies SCH without understand why SCH is the way it is and with all of SCH’s nuance ripped out of it to make it “flow” better and then with additions made in DT seems to have no idea what to do with SGE. Like I despise seraphism but I can at least point to the fact that Seraphism covers SCH’s two age old weaknesses- namely healing on the move and sustained pure healing. WHAT does philosophia add to SGE? Like genuinely I cannot think of a niche philosophia fills. If they wanted “pankardia” for flavour then 1) they failed at making it actually pankardia and 2) in a world pankardia exists in physis is useless as a separate skill but since physis exists philosophia just comes off as a second charge of physis on 3 times the CD.

You could have just left the emphasis out. Let me remind you what you originally said.

"Aetherflow was designed as it is and is balanced well against energy drain and dissipation, the skills aetherflow offers are diverse and have good niches (sacred soil is too strong but that’s a different argument) but my problem with addersgall is that it’s just aetherflow with none of aetherflow’s nuance"

But then you say that:

"They are lacking in nuance because they are COPIES, I don’t know how to make this any clearer."

You could have made it clearer by saying what you really thought in the first place. No need to add emphasis when really all you did was clearly communicate your position.

But here you are again claiming that Scholar has "more nuance", without explaining what you mean by that. When it comes to Philosophia, it can either boost your healing magic or give you a "pankardia" effect. This is a skill that can be used in different situations, based on whether you need another regen or some boosted GCD heals. Boosted GCD shield/heals are good for managing unscripted damage and recovery, or just a lot of damage and not a lot of time to respond to it. As far as applicability for the additional regen, there's the Beat 1 Phase in M2S, in which players have a DoT that grows in potency throughout the 1 minute and 50 second phase. There is a lot of use for additional regen time during that phase. So there's a good potential for use.

Physis has both effects at a lower potency and has a shorter cooldown. Philopsohia effectively only lets you use one of the two effects in any given GCD, but the effect is more powerful, and the cooldown is longer. So I'm going to place Philosophia where I need the stronger effect (such as having the stronger regen further into Beat 1), and use Physis for when I need a smaller regen.

[YarnMage48]

And the way you’ve responded to my point about the mit plan just seems to show you are desperate to sell pointless “difference” as meaningful difference.

As far as your baseless accusation that I'm "desparate to sell pointless difference as meaningful difference", I think this is best addressed with a specific example.

M2S starts off with a Raid Wide, either a partner stack or spread, a second partner stack or spread, and then a raid wide as its goes into Beat 1. There's 23 seconds, then 29 seconds, then 23 seconds, respectively, between these hits. So I can't just use Kerachole for everything. But if I use Kerachole for the phase transition, that HoT also helps with the aforementioned long DoT. So here's what I did. After using Kerachole on the first raid wide, I used Panhaima to shield (shield equivalent to a heal of 200 potency) the first drop of love/spread love. This provided an additional heal of 400 potency once the effect wore off. I timed this in such a way that the heal popped right away after the damage. Then I used Holos to add an additional 300 potency heal and provide the mitigation for the 2nd drop of love/spread love. Only using these two skills, I added 700 potency of healing to the recovery between hits. How would this work swapping in Seraph for Panhaima and Expedience for Holos? Well, since Seraph isn't going to cast Seraphic Veil until damage happens, you'd need to summon Seraph for the first raid wide so that the Seraphic Veil mitigaion (equivalent to a heal of 180) would be up for the first "love". However, this means that Seraph will no longer be on the field to recast Seraphic Veil, which would provide healing, after the first "love". Then, if you use Expedience to mit the 2nd "love", you don't have any healing added. So, in this case, the Sage mit plan adds 700 potency of healing. Spam casting Eukrasion Prognosis, with a direct heal potency of 100, heals me for about 5300-5450 each time (not including crits). So that 700 potency amounts to around 37,000 - 38,000 hp of healing, which is over a quarter of my total HP. Using blessing, as you suggest, provides 320 potency of healing. Not even half of the 700 Sage can get, without having to use the additional skill.

So in this scenario, using the Sage skills will both mitigate and heal a significant amount of HP, while the Scholar "equivalent" will only shield. I have every confidence that you could devise a heal plan for Scholar that would be able to handle this round of mechanics just as well, but the point I'm making here is that swapping the skills 1 for 1 the way you describe would have a significantly different result in the scenario I've described.

So yes, they are different skills that can be applied to different situations in unique ways, with a significant difference in the end result.

[Shurrikhan]

So what you are really saying is that Scholar is better because it came first.

No, Aetherflow has more it can leverage. It has a CD that comes at cost and actually adds some intensity to the situations in which you'd want to use it. Its use cases are more distinct from each other and there is greater versatility in healing/sustain options. There is an opportunity cost to heals. You have a manual generator allowing for effectively 6 charges.

SGE was left with essentially a copy-pasted version of the same system pared down of most of its skill expression and interesting levers. It's the post-Kaiten-Kenki of healer gimmicks.

Be it through Addersgall or elsewhere, SGE deserves more to make it unique.

[Shurrikhan]

As a side note, I hear more often than I need to from someone I know who does Fencing, that some of RDM's actions have nonsensical names. For example, a Fleche is more akin to the animation we see for Corps-A-Corps (the dash in), and Zwerchau is a longsword technique, not a rapier one. Guess they just wanted a word that began with Z, that is sorta kinda sword related, so they could have the Zorro slashes as an animation

Aye, a zwerchau is just a "transverse cut". That said, the term feels a bit... odd, to say the least, for a blade not especially capable of quickly rotating around the opponent's blade for a thrust or an attack in the opposite arc, as is far more the case for a longsword or other two-handed blade than for a rapier or other one-handed blades. That's not to say that the latter can't do these, too, but terminology systems built around the rapier, for instance, opt for different taxonomies better fit to the affordances of their blade, and will therefore vary from that of the longsword, let alone the german tradition thereof.

Zwerks are handy because they can guard from downward or diagonal cuts from the side into which you're cutting, acting easily as a threat-presenting guard (something you can instantly follow up on with a thrust or opposite strike) even if you have to extend it past the ideal point around which to rotate for a strong cut, or --better still-- guarding oneself even as one attacks.

And a fleche, unsurprising from the term fletcher, is... "an arrow". Just launch yourself, point first, at the enemy... "like an arrow". I mean, I guess it's at least throwing little aetherial swords as if they were ranged weapons? Still makes me think they were thinking of "big flechettes" instead and just figured they could reverse-engineer a fencing term of sorts from that? Idek.

[Supersnow845]

snip

This is what I’m saying, your explanation of what you do with philosophia is basically just rewording the tooltip. “Oh you can use it to boost GCD healing or you can use it when you need a regen”, yes thank you I can read that from the tooltip what I’m saying is what does this achieve for SGE that it didn’t already have? SGE doesn’t struggle with regen output and by and large GCD amplification on SGE is weak unless it’s Zoe so what is this skill actually doing for the class? I can point out in one sentence what seraphism does for SCH without rewording its tooltip just as I can point out what sunsign and divine caress do for WHM and AST. But I can’t point out what philosophia does for SGE

It fills no niche, it’s just a physis equivalent where they could have retooled physis to do exactly the same thing. This seems to be the core of our disagreement, you see difference where it exists in the tooltips, I see it where it affects gameplay. This also extends to your second quote about how you picked a very specific situation and said that “this adds 500 potency or so to my healing that SCH can’t replicate with the equivalent skills”, yes sure but do you need that 500 potency? In your specific example the answer is no, if you did substitute the equivalent SCH skills you wouldn’t get that 500 potency but you wouldn’t be in any danger of dying and the next damage is ages away. So differences exist as per the tooltips but they don’t exist as per gameplay

Now I’m sorry if I came off as rude, I genuinely don’t mean to be, sometimes my phrasing can be a bit abrasive but your opinion of seeing difference in the tooltips isn’t necessarily wrong, I just personally disagree with it