I suppose I can give my two cents.
As a Scholar, this was the percentage of my actions on average in each fight in this savage tier that were purely DPS. This includes Broil, Ruin II, Biolysis, Energy Drain, and Chain Stratagem. It discludes embrace and seraphic veil, which are automatic actions.
e: I would like to note that this is NOT from a particularly intricately optimized standpoint. The percentages can be even higher than this.
Cloud of Darkness: 76.68%
Shadowkeeper 81.38%
Fatebreaker: 74.17%
Promise: 71.92%
Oracle: 69.90%
If you asked me, I *would* be satisfied if over 50% of my actions within those percentages were not entirely Broil III. However, because that actually *is* the case, it's unsatisfactory. I would be more satisfied if one of two things happened;
plan A: Raise the encounter damage frequency [as opposed to intensity]
plan B: Increase the amount of actions that are unrelated to healing, thereby reducing the amount of actions that are Broil III
plan C: Reduce healing throughput significantly, while also significantly reducing MP costs for healing actions.
Out of these plans, plan C is the most reliable but most unwanted.
Plan B seems to be the most feasible while not making players angry.
Plan A would be the most satisfactory for players who actually play healers to, you know, heal.
My issue with the interview comment is that the *intensity* of damage- that is, requiring shields and mitigation to survive- is not the issue, but the *frequency* of damage that is the issue as long as they have no intention of reducing the power of healing actions further. I want to play a healer to heal, but if there is only one thing to heal every 25 seconds and the GCD is 2.5, it's way too boring to stand around and wait for it. This doesn't have much to do with player skill at all.
I am of the opinion that we need to urge the developers to play Healers for a while so that they can see why we want to take more damage or to have more DPS related buttons.


Reply With Quote

