Incentives for healers in PVP

[Zojha]

Everyone needs a healer, yet no one wants to run a healer.

If everyone needs a healer, healers are broken and need to be nerfed, as the need implies that no other job or role is equal to one.

So if your premise is true, the course of action that needs to happen is to nerf healers. If your premise is not true, there is no need to create incentives for healers. Pick one.

[daedalusAI]

If everyone needs a healer, healers are broken and need to be nerfed, as the need implies that no other job or role is equal to one.

So if your premise is true, the course of action that needs to happen is to nerf healers. If your premise is not true, there is no need to create incentives for healers. Pick one.

Weird reasoning: "If everyone needs dps, dps are broken and need to be nerfed".
When was the last time you did a dungeon/trial/whatever without a healer?

[Zojha]

When was the last time you did a dungeon/trial/whatever without a healer?

PvP and PvE function quite a bit differently, missy. Do I really need to explain that?

The whole point of PvP is to kill each other. In PvE, the point is to kill the scripted enemy. Healers and tanks exist to delay death caused by damage, DPS exist to create death by causing damage. As such, healers and tanks rely on damage to exist in the first place and your attempt to try and turn the logic around is doubly stupid - once because you neglected the different premises, twice because tanking and healing are roles derived from damage. In PvP, the damage comes from other players, in PvE, it comes from the scripted AI.

What does that mean? It means that PvP works perfectly well without healers and tanks. You are supposed to kill each other and die anyway, so the function of delaying that is counterproductive. It only slows down the pace of the match. PvE doesn't, because PvE demands tanks and healers, as you are unable to kill the enemy before he kills you without them by design. That isn't the case in PvP. It would be broken if it were. Can you imagine playing as Alexander Prime in Frontlines? That'd be dumb, as whoever plays it would have a hugely higher impact than any other player who doesn't. And because that's dumb, players are supposed to be balanced against each other in the impact they have on the match. And thus, any job or role being required or shunned implies an imbalance, as it implies a difference in impact.

And the course of action when such an imbalance in impact exists is not to incentivize people to play that job/role/whatever, but to balance it so that the impact is equal to that of other jobs/roles/whatever. In PvE, we simply live with that imbalance, because it cannot be used against players. In PvP, it can.

[MomomiMomi]

What does that mean? It means that PvP works perfectly well without healers and tanks. You are supposed to kill each other and die anyway, so the function of delaying that is counterproductive. It only slows down the pace of the match.

This is silly. The point of PvP isn't to kill each other and die anyway, it's to win.

In Frontline that doesn't necessarily mean killing other players.

[TeddyXIV]

I agree there needs to be something. Especially since "Hand of Mercy" is a title for killing 5k players. That's not easy to get as a healer...

[Odstarva]

If everyone needs a healer, healers are broken and need to be nerfed, as the need implies that no other job or role is equal to one.

So if your premise is true, the course of action that needs to happen is to nerf healers. If your premise is not true, there is no need to create incentives for healers. Pick one.

Interesting logic. So, how often do you run dungeons without tanks or healers?