Isn't it about time for WHM to get an AOE mitigation tool?

[DotsNnots]

Pps, excuse me if some of my responses are a little harsh, please don't take it as me being salty or such. This is a legitimately enjoyable debate, thanks <3

Quite the contrary, you've been perfectly respectable and brought valid points and facts to the debate. On the converse we have overly pedantic, insensitive/borderline insulting, calling out lack of experience without much evidence of their own, and inability to extrapolate complicated meanings, from other posters, so I appreciate having the stark contrast of how to debate in this thread, helps keep me on point.

Anyways I'll just address one of the pedantic comments for the time being:

Calculations for diurnal, because apparently we need to write out that only benefic I vs. cure I are flipped in this stance (vs. noct), [i]while still having much lower mp costs[i/]

Base cure I potency: 450
Base cure II potency: 700
Base medica potency: 300

Base benefic I potency: 400
Base benefic II potency: 650
Base Helios potency: 300

Dir stance's tool tip: increases healing potency by 10%

Actual potency:
Benefic I: 400 * 1.1 = 440
Benefic II: 650 * 1.1 = 715
Helios: 300 * 1.1 = 330


But please, continue to say that these are "negligible differences" to keep forwarding your own agenda while ignoring the facts.



And all I can provide for comments on the recruitment of WHM status is basically a personal anecdote that I work in marketing and view raid recruitment very much like a marketplace with active traceable trends of highs and lows and obvious markers of supply and demand that change at different points of a raid cycle. E.g. pre-launch demand for single players to fill groups is high (LFM), post-launch it tends to show the demand for groups by a single player (LFG) is much higher. Personally I think I'm being unbiased when I track these trends, because it's what I naturally do, and pick up on shortages of classes/roles as they happen. But I'm also aware that has no merit to this conversation other than being an anecdote.


And my point about FFlogs was that you can interpret the data either way. I'm not advancing any narrative I'm simply pointing out that you can't advance any narrative either as the data isn't remotely an accurate representation of the raid cycle as a whole.
(Do people really put EX primals in the same tier as savage raids? Not many actively try to speed run or optimize them).

[Miste]

On the converse we have overly pedantic, insensitive/borderline insulting

You can't be serious. The first post I saw you make in here made a borderline insulting cheap shot at me for simply asking a poster for proof of their claims in a discussion I was having with them that you were not even a part of at the time. You also made fun of anyone who plays Diurnal AST for having an opinion on this just because you don't agree with it.

No I don’t bother to screenshot PF just to service forum justice for situations I haven’t even imagined happening yet. That’s a ridiculous request.

“I’m an dir AST who’s entire skill kit was literally ripped from WHM plus my MAIN GCD heals are more potent than WHM, plus I have the highest potency heal in the game, plus I give everyone various buffs, plus even as dir I can mitigate … but WHM should only raw heal or regen.” lolwut.

I responded to you and yes I was a bit cheeky because of that cheap shot about the exclusion screenshots you aimed at me, but then your second post in a reply to me is full of passive aggressiveness.

Well thank you for proving that you lack awareness of the difference of healers and your inability to read tool tips or confirm with your own tests.

I challenged your claims about diurnal ast and then you tried to pretend you were talking about nocturnal and insinuated I have no awareness and that I cannot read. Ad hominem much?

If you are going to claim anyone else is being insulting then open up your eyes to your own posts. Anything else at that point, well, all bets are off because you may get back what you put out.

Anyways I'll just address one of the pedantic comments for the time being:

Calculations for diurnal, because apparently we need to write out that only benefic I vs. cure I are flipped in this stance (vs. noct), [i]while still having much lower mp costs[i/]

Base cure I potency: 450
Base cure II potency: 700
Base medica potency: 300

Base benefic I potency: 400
Base benefic II potency: 650
Base Helios potency: 300

Dir stance's tool tip: increases healing potency by 10%

Actual potency:
Benefic I: 400 * 1.1 = 440
Benefic II: 650 * 1.1 = 715
Helios: 300 * 1.1 = 330


But please, continue to say that these are "negligible differences" to keep forwarding your own agenda while ignoring the facts.

So you think you thinking I need the math for these instead of just in-game tests isn't pedantic? Riiiighttttt.... alright then pot meet kettle. At least if you are going to call me out on something then don't be hypocritical and do the exact same thing two times as well with your math explanations.

Although I can clarify to you now none of what I have explained in this thread I intended to be pedantic. I was simply having a discussion with people and I mean if you cannot share information just because you'll be ostentatious if you do so then why even have discussions? I never even considered your math pedantic originally, but if you are going to label other people as such then don't expect not to be reminded of your hypocrisy.

I know math I just didn't bother going into the math of WHM vs. AST Benefic and Cure because I have them both leveled and I have a weapon to make my AST same item level as my WHM. In-game average test shows just fine that there is barely any difference.

15 more potency on Benefic II isn't negligible? Even when Benefic I is 10 potency lower so the gap is actually only 5 potency total? Five You do realize that 5 potency difference is on average like 50 HP difference at i339. I would say that is completely negligible.

As for Helios if you are going to add that in there then where is Medica II and Aspected Helios? I am guessing you probably left it out because Medica II is actually 40 more potency than Aspected Helios after you total it. So Medica I lags behind Helios by 30 but Medica II gains ahead of Aspected Helios by 40 so again it makes the gap only 10 potency difference but in favour of WHM this time.

This is why I mentioned before that you cannot simply pick apart each healer's toolkit and compare just single items against other single items or selective parts of the toolkit against other selective parts. All the healers play differently so they have different tools to obtain similar results to the other healers. So sometimes you may have to examine the toolkit on a larger scale and compare multiple items to one item or vice versa.

This is the same problem I mentioned before. People wanting 100% balance and don't understand that it isn't possible to the point where we are arguing about a Five potency difference between Diurnal AST and WHM Benefics and Cures like it is a huge issue that proves WHM is so much weaker than AST and needs help.

PS. Mentioning MP when WHM, AST, and SCH all have well rounded MP management right now is so pointless. All of them are quite balanced.

Do you mind taking moment to explain why you are contrasting three things versus one thing when discussing Earthly Star? I’m not sure I understand why that’s a valid comparison.

She said she had an issue with the range of Cure III so I posted it to help her adjust if she needs to that part wasn't really about specifically comparing Earthly Star just about helping her with the range issue. I mean sometimes people are too spread out for me too or Earthly Star is on cooldown as well so I have to adjust too and cannot use it and so I use other tools I have like maybe Lightspeed + Helios. Also she kind of claimed that WHM has no way to match these heals when they do. They just do it differently. So it was more showing that WHM has the tools to get an AoE heal that has more range on it that actually overtakes Earthly Star.

Like I said above the reason you sometimes cannot compare a single item in a toolkit to another single item in a toolkit is because the healers all play differently to get similar results. I mean if all the healers were carbon copies of each other with the exact same toolkits then yes you could compare in such a way, but they aren't. So sometimes you have to compare multiple things or the entire toolkit.

Simply put strictly comparing potency of 1-3 different spells in order to claim that one healer is weaker than another just doesn't show the entire picture.

[DotsNnots]

So you think you thinking I need the math for these instead of just in-game tests isn't pedantic? Riiiighttttt.... alright then pot meet kettle.

That's ... that's not even what pedantic means, nor was it the detail I was referring to you being pedantic about.

And I'm sorry, if you want to bring up potency comparisons to discuss an offhand comment made about cure3's range (where the actual point of the sentence was that it doesn't feel as powerful compared to high potency oGCDs, and the comment about the range was that it's an extra hindrance) and then don't want to consider the actual mathematical computations of potency comparisons that are the values that literally make up the very foundational elements of the gameplay, and then want to wave the comparisons away like they were misinterpreted (when you don't even mention the range in your quotes, which was apparently the only "reason" you were making the comparison, so why not quote it?) then there's nothing more that can be discussed with you. You're too caught up in your own personal experiences and your own "in-game testing" to use or discuss qualify-able/quantifiable evidence. I can do "in-game testing" too with the same gear and same weapon item level, and I see the heal difference between cure II and benefic II to be anywhere between 800 and 1400 HP. But then it becomes a game of you said / I said arbitrary statements. But the potency values are right there, plain as day, as unarguable quantifiable evidence to compare efficiency, that you're some how denying the validity of.

And if you don't even want to consider mp cost as part of the consideration? Then what are you doing to optimize the gameplay of the role? Healer optimization is ALL about getting the most out of your mp pool.

If you're not going to bring up points based on the actual statistics of the game (aka facts) and are going to keep throwing out "this is why I see when I play" "evidence" then I'll stick to discussing this topic with constructive posters.

[Miste]

snip

Ah, so you can't answer my question on what AST and SCH has to compare GCD + GCD with Cure III + Cure III. That's unfortunate.

I see...so should I complain that AST and SCH are too weak compared to WHM now? Because they lack Cure III and have no GCD heal that can match its power?

Also just because you keep flip flopping between Diurnal and Nocturnal to try to claim I am ignoring your points doesn't make you somehow correct. You are just forcing me into being incorrect by changing the topic back and forth from Diurnal to Nocturnal. You've done this twice now. You mention Diurnal and I reply to it then you are like "lol no, Nocturnal".

Every time you mention Diurnal and then I make comments on it you then you flip flop over to Nocturnal and say "lol no you're wrong cause Nocturnal", even when I wasn't even talking about Nocturnal. My last post I replied to you with I was replying to your Diurnal numbers.

Are you even paying attention at this point? Because I know your in-game tests are comparing WHM Cure II with Nocturnal Benefic II in order to try to flip flop to try to claim I am wrong. The difference between Diurnal Benefic II and Cure II is not 800-1400 HP because it is only a 15 potency difference. 15 potency is not 800-1400 HP.

So you are just taking my post about Diurnal where I claim Diurnal potency difference is negligible and bringing in Nocturnal numbers to artificially twist this in your favour to claim I am wrong and I am simply ignoring your "facts". This is just plain silly. I can't believe you've done this twice and expect me not to call you out on it.

Also I did post facts you just ignore them. You basically ignore any point that you cannot figure out how to challenge. For example, the Cure III thing based on your logic that we have to compare fairly. I followed your rules, now you are claiming that range and MP matters all of a sudden? I thought we just needed to compare equally the oGCD or GCD? MP and range didn't matter in the comparisons that you posted about Earthly Star + GCDs that I quoted so why does it matter for mine? Also your Diurnal math you posted; like I said in my earlier post you conveniently left out the math for Medica II and Aspected Helios and it is well... extremely obvious why you left it out.

These quotes are about Diurnal numbers! Have to make sure I mention it, you know, because you might reply to it and flip flop it back to Nocturnal again

15 more potency on Benefic II isn't negligible? Even when Benefic I is 10 potency lower so the gap is actually only 5 potency total? Five You do realize that 5 potency difference is on average like 50 HP difference at i339. I would say that is completely negligible.

As for Helios if you are going to add that in there then where is Medica II and Aspected Helios? I am guessing you probably left it out because Medica II is actually 40 more potency than Aspected Helios after you total it. So Medica I lags behind Helios by 30 but Medica II gains ahead of Aspected Helios by 40 so again it makes the gap only 10 potency difference but in favour of WHM this time.

So yes, this conversation isn't going anywhere since you selectively ignore anything that doesn't suit your agenda that you feel WHM potency is way lower than AST.

Also I'd like to remind you again that Nocturnal AST is a WHM's healing partner, not their competition. Noct AST and WHM do not compete with each other. They are symbiotic healing partners. So I am still massively confused why you feel the need to compare them. It's not like Noct ASTs are taking your raid spots since if they have a Noct AST the group would WANT your WHM. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It seems to me you are simply using Nocturnal vs WHM as a means to further your agenda even though it makes zero sense to compare them unless there was an insanely large discrepancy where the Noct AST + WHM team was healing for way too much compared to the other compositions, but I don't see you claiming that as being a problem.

So sure, go have "constructive" discussions with people about your "fair and equal" comparisons when you are actively trying to compare WHM to Noct AST when one is a regen healer and the other is a shielder. /shrug