The Problem with Healer Feedback, and requested changes

[ty_taurus]

We don't "need to accept that DPS is a major part(y) of healer gameplay". Again, at the risk of before, that's what you need me to accept for your position to be the default and have precedence. (In other words, for your position to win "by default".) But there's no actual reason or necessity to do so. Current encounter design and healer gameplay shows we do not, in fact, need to accept that.

Accepting that DPS is a part of healing in this game doesn't necessarily translate to DPS rotations like what gets discussed. It just means accepting that DPS will always be the metric that is used to determine what actions a healer takes. What action either directly or indirectly yields the most damage? Even when you heal, you're making this decision either intentionally or unintentionally. Reviving a DPS? That's more damage than hitting Glare. Esuna-ing the Slow off the BLM? That damage the BLM is losing is probably worth more than your Glares. Using Medica II? Ideally, it's because the regen gained will result in less Glares lost than perhaps Cure III. This is even true of old Final Fantasies. There's not a prize for topping off the party. You're trying to not lose people so you can continue the battle and win the fight. Many players actually try not to heal in battle and instead heal after battle in older turn based RPGs, because all healing in battle does is slow everything down unless it's preventing KOs. An example of where this is accepted was in the buff to Afflatus Misery. It means accepting that players would not use lily healing for any other reason than being forced to as the reward of misery was not a reward, but a consolation prize.

[Renathras]

Accepting that DPS is a part of healing in this game doesn't necessarily translate to DPS rotations like what gets discussed. It just means accepting that DPS will always be the metric that is used to determine what actions a healer takes. What action either directly or indirectly yields the most damage? Even when you heal, you're making this decision either intentionally or unintentionally. Reviving a DPS? That's more damage than hitting Glare. Esuna-ing the Slow off the BLM? That damage the BLM is losing is probably worth more than your Glares. Using Medica II? Ideally, it's because the regen gained will result in less Glares lost than perhaps Cure III. This is even true of old Final Fantasies. There's not a prize for topping off the party. You're trying to not lose people so you can continue the battle and win the fight. Many players actually try not to heal in battle and instead heal after battle in older turn based RPGs, because all healing in battle does is slow everything down unless it's preventing KOs. An example of where this is accepted was in the buff to Afflatus Misery. It means accepting that players would not use lily healing for any other reason than being forced to as the reward of misery was not a reward, but a consolation prize.

I don't disagree that many people play this way. However, many do not.

Ask Jonny Casual if he's thinking about the difference between a lost Glare or a dead DPS doing more damage than him when he casts Cure 2 or Raise and he will look at you in utter confusion. "When someone's dead, I Raise them. That's what healers do. When someone's damaged, I heal them so their health bar isn't as empty and they aren't as likely to die. That's what healers do."

A midcore player (who isn't REALLY trying to optimize or parse) will probably mention the DPS difference, but it's more an aside than anything. They aren't actively thinking, when choosing to Raise or not "Would my Glare potency be more or less than this dead player's?" It's not a part of their active decision making process. (It probably isn't for most hardcore players, either, they've just internalized the decision.)

The buff to Misery wasn't "players would not use lily healing for any other reason". It was "high end raiders trying to maximize their parse or clear tight Enrages would not use lily healing for any other reason". And it wasn't even true of all high end raiders. People were using Lilies before the change. Some where just complaining about it. A lot.

I think part of the problem with the language barrier here is you are accurately describing a portion of the player base and gamers in a more general sense. The problem isn't that you aren't accurately describing that part (Double negative, but the point is, the part you're describing you are describing correctly). The problem is you aren't accurately describing them/us all as a whole. You're describing a part and then extrapolating that part's view onto the whole, leading to confusion and a difficulty to understand and reconcile the disconnect when you run into someone that is from the part you aren't accurately describing. It also seems to cause you to believe the part you're describing is either the whole or at least such an overwhelming majority as to be functionally equivalent (in terms of how the game should be designed), when we don't actually have evidence to support that and, at the very least (again, the Lucky Bancho numbers: https://i.imgur.com/t6eJLaj.png ) have evidence showing a significant portion of the player base (at the very least a large minority) doesn't fit into that.

[ty_taurus]

I don't disagree that many people play this way. However, many do not.

Ask Jonny Casual if he's thinking about the difference between a lost Glare or a dead DPS doing more damage than him when he casts Cure 2 or Raise and he will look at you in utter confusion. "When someone's dead, I Raise them. That's what healers do. When someone's damaged, I heal them so their health bar isn't as empty and they aren't as likely to die. That's what healers do."

The buff to Misery wasn't "players would not use lily healing for any other reason". It was "high end raiders trying to maximize their parse or clear tight Enrages would not use lily healing for any other reason". And it wasn't even true of all high end raiders. People were using Lilies before the change. Some where just complaining about it. A lot.

I think part of the problem with the language barrier here is you are accurately describing a portion of the player base and gamers in a more general sense. The problem isn't that you aren't accurately describing that part. The problem is you aren't accurately describing them/us all as a whole. You're describing a part and then extrapolating that part's view onto the whole, leading to confusion and a difficulty to understand and reconcile the disconnect when you run into someone that is from the part you aren't accurately describing. It also seems to cause you to believe the part you're describing is either the whole or at least such an overwhelming majority as to be functionally equivalent (in terms of how the game should be designed), when we don't actually have evidence to support that and, at the very least (again, the Lucky Bancho numbers: https://i.imgur.com/t6eJLaj.png ) have evidence showing a significant portion of the player base (at the very least a large minority) doesn't fit into that.

There are 3 realities about gamers that game designers need to understand and recognize:

1. There will always be a community of gamers that will discover the fasted road to victory, or the most efficient way to play. This community will seek out and attain "perfection."
2. There will always be many more who follow that community of gamers to reach the highest level of play; a few will reach that, but most will fall short somewhere along that road.
3. There will always be some gamers who are unaware of or who do not care about seeking "perfection" and will play whatever way feels most natural to them.

Good game design seeks to create an environment where all players who are interested in the particular genre can feel satisfied with the provided experience. Not all decisions that can be made in respects to how DPS determines healer gameplay along that road to max efficiency are inherently harmful to those in the group that are unaware or do not care, such as the example of Afflatus Misery. Making Misery DPS neutral may not have mattered at all to Jonny Casual, but what it did do is provide a QoL improvement to the WHM experience for those who seek perfection and those who obtain perfection both from a raiding perspective as well as a casual perspective, because now instances of afflatus healing and misery can be used in easier content comfortably.

And even if someone is not consciously thinking about the choices that yield the most damage as a healer, their actions are still supporting that regardless. Not every choice will be the "right" choice per say, but people are not healing their allies because every time you restore their HP, a star is obtained, and whomever has the most stars at the end of the fight wins.