Scholar: Returning to Roots

[ty_taurus]

A bit of an overreaction. It's not that; it's that stances just don't work in this game, and that's why they have been eliminated. When you say switch based on needs, the need is and always has been to kill the enemy quickly. This means you will be spending as little time as possible in any stance that does not do this optimally. And while the effects of each stance you proposed I wouldn't call bad or detrimental, but the number crunchers out there will tell you which stance you HAVE to be in, or you are failing at your job. Mind that these are words out of the echo chamber; not my own. However if there is anything I want to avoid like the plague with SCH, is giving it the illusion of choice that once and still does belong to AST.

It was mostly an overreaction because your statement came across so selfishly. That's not to say "my way is right and if you disagree, you're wrong" case and point my reactions to other's suggestions. Coming out though and saying "well that's not what I want..." Okay, well the game isn't designed for you specifically. The point is to create something that could hopefully make as many players happy as possible, not just make you happy.

But besides that factor, This example of DT and ET wouldn't have a DPS impact in the way that you're implying. This DT does impact DPS spells--Halving their potencies but making them AoE, so yes you would swap into it probably for groups of 3 or more to spread your DoTs and use Broil in the way Art of War is. The original concept for ET wasn't as developed and would only essentially make your Physick a "Physick II" while making Epiphany heal for a hefty 1400 Potency once per 45 seconds. There's also that concept of making your Aetherflow and/or Fey Gauge actions GCD actions that do not consume any resources, but turn into OGCD actions that do consume Aetherflow and/or Fey Gauge respectively while under ET, which would give the player the ability to control when they want to turn those tools into OGCDs which would be DPS optimal while you have resources, but there could still be times where you'd rather save your resources for an upcoming mechanic.

There are many stances that have not been utilized well but that doesn't mean stances cannot work and until you can actually back up why ideas like this cannot work with at least theorycrafted examples rather than vague ones, you haven't convinced me. Another thing that could help your case is rather than just yell about ideas you don't like, why not come up with alternate concepts to counter mine? You don't like my version of DT? What would you prefer be down with it? Do you think it should stay as is? If so, why?

[Gemina]

It was mostly an overreaction because your statement came across so selfishly. That's not to say "my way is right and if you disagree, you're wrong" case and point my reactions to other's suggestions. Coming out though and saying "well that's not what I want..." Okay, well the game isn't designed for you specifically. The point is to create something that could hopefully make as many players happy as possible, not just make you happy.

Well, then you don't know me very well. I am probably one of the least selfish healers you could have in your group. I say this because I am well acquainted with healers both in game and out, and witness firsthand how selfishly they play and communicate with others in a game that's supposed to be about teamwork and unity. I would flip the coin on you sir, and say that singling out my post as selfish and overreacting simply because I do not agree with your take on the job in fact makes you look that way. If you took offense to anything I have said, it was not my intention to do so. Being a supporter of old Cleric Stance or stance switching in general isn't a bad thing at all. It's just unfortunate that those of this mind were punished so greatly over the years.

It's difficult to have everyone's best interest in mind when the healer community is as divided as it is. That being said, many of the ideas I hand out on the forums are formulated from the responses and suggestions from the other posters. Most of what I previously suggested has at one point or another been mentioned already, while other things are aspects about the job that are indisputably flawed. The fact I mention any DPS capability at all shows my willingness to see the other side as I am of the 'pure healer' mindset. I DPS on heals because I have to, and I know it's right; not because I like it or want to be doing it.

There are many stances that have not been utilized well but that doesn't mean stances cannot work and until you can actually back up why ideas like this cannot work with at least theorycrafted examples rather than vague ones, you haven't convinced me. Another thing that could help your case is rather than just yell about ideas you don't like, why not come up with alternate concepts to counter mine? You don't like my version of DT? What would you prefer be down with it? Do you think it should stay as is? If so, why?

Actually, considering that stances have pretty much been eliminated completely from the game (MNK still has theirs, but likely to also be gone after 4.4 rework), it is you that has to theorycraft how putting them back will work. You tell me how you will implement a stance where you are not defaulted to the one that causes to most damage or provides the most rDPS? From my observation throughout the years playing this game and mmos in general, stances effectively cut a community in half. Then you have one side in favor of using it how the player sees fit, and another side who tells you to be using it as the meta sees fit. The latter will post numbers, fflogs, and bring up the current raid tier all day to prove than playing any other way is wrong.

So good sir, trust me when I tell you that my statements does have the community in mind, and not just myself. I am selfish in the sense that a desire to unite the healer community would make me happy.