So my question still stands: if they upped healing requirements to focus more on that rather than popping a sustain on the tank for most content and DPSing a lot, would you still find the role enjoyable? Adire mentioned that they wouldn't because they are a DPS main at heart, which is valid, but what do you think?
It really depends on how it would work in practice. If healing was made more demanding, but there would be still be room for DPS for skillful players, then I believe I would still enjoy it as a challenge. Although it's really hard to balance it by simply adding to the damage, since that would mean gaining new gear would again just leave more room for DPS, just like now. The other option would be to make damage taken more random - both in amounts and target, which would mean playing a healer would mean standing by to see who takes damage and how much and then reacting to that, which I doubt I would find enjoyable. I personally enjoy hybrid jobs and strategic, pre-emptive play, which is exactly why I found healer jobs in XIV so enjoyable.![]()
Thanks for the perspective; I threw both you and Adire a Like. I prefer just healing, but appreciate different perspectives on how other people would be affected if the playstyle were changed. Heck, even if Yoshi came out and said he thought XIV's healer designs were super awesome and they wanted to start factoring in healer DPS when designing all tiers of content I wouldn't like it, but it's not like I'd be freaking out on the forums over it. I doubt I'd keep playing, but that's my prerogative as a consumer, and not necessarily a reflection of the quality of healer design as a whole.
Well, I think people are blowing his entire statement out of proportion anyway. YoshiP not liking how something is designed doesn't translate to dictation on how everyone should play. He can work on adjusting it if he wants but it's not like everyone has to suddenly take Gravity or Broil off their bars just yet.
Well it also depends on when you started attempting Gordias. My group was aiming for semi-hardcore and was attempting week one of release with minimum entry gear and we also had tanks using slaying accessories (cause back then it was the raid meta before they fixed VIT) and also tanks tanking in DPS stance for parts of the fight. If gear wasn't a factor at all and everyone had max item level gear at release then AST healing for less might not be as big of a deal, but for groups starting out when the raid tiers first release being minimum item level compounds upon a healer with weaker heals...and like the last post I showed all the abilities that we had back then also attributing to our weaker heals.
In the end all groups outside of the top tier groups will go for the more reliable heals. Buffs don't matter if you can't survive.
No it doesn't, because healing is their primary function. If one of them is weaker at their primary function then it will cause lesser skilled players to be unable to heal on it properly and SE would have to design fights around AST's lower healing potency so most fights will be way easier to heal on WHM and SCH because of that.
If the fights are way easier to heal on WHM and SCH then people will stop playing AST (including me; I'd just go to back to WHM because it's not worth it to go back to how it was in 3.0 where I would ask groups and no one would take me because I was an AST and they would say "we tried taking ASTs but we find they cannot keep up with the healing/sorry but ASTs healing numbers are too low") and even the ones who continue to try to play it will notice groups locking the healing spots to WHM/SCH only like back at 3.0 launch. You think that is equal footing? It's not.
You keep thinking the reasons AST were locked out at 3.0 launch was due to their healing AND buffs, but it wasn't. The only issue I saw myself was their healing and the only issue I saw others have with AST was their healing; and this is because...HEALing is the most important part of a HEALer which you just don't seem to understand.
You seem to crusade for WHM equality but honestly they don't have it that bad. (In my experience) They've never been locked out of groups (like AST was in the past) except for the top tier speedrun groups which is only <1% of the player base (and even if you lower ASTs healing they are skilled enough to keep using ASTs anyway) or if the party had WHM already since stacking same jobs is bad (but that is true for any healer type).
You can dream about them nerfing AST healing potency back down to original, but highly likely it isn't going to happen. They don't want to bring the situation back like in 3.0 launch where one healer role was often ostracized out of groups. They want the community to take any of the 3 healers and right now, even though AST cards could be considered too powerful, all healers are accepted into 99% of groups. I see WHMs all the time in savage content. I play WHM in savage content too because I enjoy WHM and AST so I interchange them. I've joined savage pugs on WHM no issues, never been locked out of the spot unless the group already had a WHM.
For raiding most group compositions are SCH + AST or SCH + WHM. Do you notice which healer seems to more often have a spot? SCH. So legit question but why do you only think AST needs to be nerfed? You do savage raids right? So you should know what the usual group compositions are like; so I am confused why you think only AST needs nerfing.
You'd be wrong about that because SE made a statement about AST later on when they started buffing it. They said they ended up making it too weak because they were being "too careful" while trying to balance it and so AST ended up too weak compared to WHM and SCH.
WHM is easier to heal on since they don't have oGCD cards to weave, but they were never supposed to be the safer choice. That's why the community didn't take ASTs; the safer route is what 95% of the player base prefers. You can easily see that with the Zurvan EX skip soar and LB second soar meta. It is the safer/easier path to a clear and it will always be taken by most players. Only the top tier speed run/world first groups take the riskier path because they are skilled enough to climb the steeper path to a clear.
Your idea isn't true balance and you won't ever change my mind.
Also just because all healers have around the same healing potential does not mean they are or have to be homogenized.
Last edited by Miste; 03-14-2017 at 02:49 AM.
I like to play scholar, so I get to dps a lot, and thus use CS. If the tank can not survive for a few seconds in the beginning of the fight while I get my dots out, they should learn to use their CDs. I shall have my dots out, health be damned. Now, if you see me DPSing without CS on, it is because said tank/dpsers suck and I need to be able to heal them at a moments notice. So if anyone feels the need to yell at me for not having CS on, they should yell at themselves/teammates for sucking so bad that I can not risk it. I have played WHM for a bit, and found it risky to dps. I can not shield the idiots, so they die before I can dps.
So tl;dr I will gladly dps, just stop dying while I am![]()
I don't get you people, you make it looks so complicated oO
You wanna DPS ? Fine DPS as long as everyone is alive
You don't want to DPS and /chicken during the fight ? Fine, /chiken
Why is everyone so concerned about how the others play their role as long as the job is done* ? oO
(*trash / boss down)
And thus began the Second War of the Magi... those who wanted to dps vs those who wanted to heal only.
In other news, Noble Knight Haurchefant dies while healer looks on, stuck in Cleric Stance and unable to heal him. Film at 11...
I agree.
SCH is my main and I enjoy helping out full-time during battle which includes a lot of DPS'ing. In addition to be baffled by the "I only heal" crowd, I'm also highly concerned that so many people actually feel comfortable bringing that type philosophy to a party setting. I would feel super uncomfortable being that lazy and expecting others to deal.
Last edited by BCRD; 03-14-2017 at 04:09 AM. Reason: grammar
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|