I'm bored when I heal because I need more complex DPS rotations

[Renathras]

Your example doesn't really match though. You're talking about a playstyle: melee vs magic. Not wanting actions is not a playstyle. If someone does not want to have more than 5 or 6 actions in PVE, that's not something that should be supported, because that's now how this game is structured.

No, I'm talking about the type of actions.

Right now, all four healers have basically an identical playstle of dot, spamable nuke filler, 1-3 other Job gimmick damage actions, lots of oGCDs that the bulk of healing is through, and some backup GCDs used mostly in low level content before you get the oGCDs. They're different, but very similar at the same time. And there's complete opposition to making them distinct if that doesn't involve making them all equally more dps focused and complex. All the healers use more than 5 or 6 actions in PvE (oGCDs count).

I agree that we should have less oGCD/GCD overlap. I disagree that every healer Job should be made to appeal to one type of player (which is bad design) or to everyone (which is impossible). This was more a reaction to other comments, though, it just bleeds over here.

I agree all the actions should be useful - I don't like a lot of the PvP kits, but one thing they have going for them is nothing feels useless other than the filler nukes...those feel pretty useless most of the time. Unless someone's AFK, you'll never get a kill with your filler nuke, and other than SGE, which HAS to use it for healing, it doesn't really do anything useful. Like WHM I'd get WAY more use out of a filler Cure 1 than a filler Glare, but that's neither here nor there. The point, though, is that they are very slimmed down kits with very few buttons, forcing the buttons they have to all be pretty useful. There's not a lot of overlap or redundancy, but the gametype also has a very different pace. For example, imagine PvE with 20 second Deployment Tactics. Instead of having lots of buttons, they make the buttons pull more double duty because of it.

We could do that. Slash half the kits out and make abilities double up a lot more. I'm not sure if that would be well received or not, since whenever people suggest it in the healer forum, they tend to get...disagreement.

[AnotherPerson]

You're conflating two issues here, I think. Storm's Crown also had heavy movement during the damage phases, meaning players trying to use hardcast spells weren't able to. You can have that level of damage with less movement and resolve that issue, which is what we had more of back in ARR fights, so it's not like the game hasn't done it before.

By saying heavy moment phases prevent players from healing well, you are confirming that a larger playerbase doesn't know how to heal efficiently. Even with more heavy movement phases, there are healers with 100% DPS uptime, implying that heavy movement and healing is not an issue to players who became efficient at using their healing skills (including instant cast healing to not break their DPS uptime). For these players, heavy movement and does not prevent someone from utilizing their oGCD heals and instant cast heals. It's part of the parcel in managing efficient healing when needed to DPS, something that players who only heal never have to consider since they can have plenty of time to respond to outgoing damage to heal in what another player can take 2-5 seconds to handle. Not to mention, DPS skills also have a cast time. Storm's Crown EX is nowhere near movement heavy enough to prevent players from being unable to hardcast 2 second heal if players can have up to 100% DPS uptime.

If just more movement makes them unable to heal well, that means players who can't handle movement and manage their instant cast healing skills are the ones who struggle juggling multiple activities from both healing and movement - their cognitive load can't do both things simultaneously. The mindset "I must pause and stop healing to do mechanics" only exist with this category of players who doesn't possess the cognitive load to handle both things simultaneously because they have to swap between "healing mode" and "mechanics mode". For players who are accustomed to DPSing, there is no "healing mode" and "mechanics mode" because they're always on "standby mode", ready to use whatever skill is most efficient at the time. DPSing is the byproduct of waiting for active healing phases with spare cognitive load. The same applies by extension to tanks and DPS. There are DPS who just stop attacking altogether to do mechanics, and there are DPS who can attack while doing mechanics, but DPS is especially encouraged to constantly do their rotation regardless of mechanics to ensure they gain proper amount of resources for their burst rotation and meet enrage checks. It's only a player issue if they can't handle both when the game gives you a plethora of instant healing tools and there are still people with 100% DPS uptime for those fights at that point.

Even if you were to exclude these players as Sylphies and double down that Slyphies don't exist, these players do. That's why I'm reiterating right now -- there are so many players who can't manage efficient healing, not to any degree that requires them anywhere close to having 60% healer uptime. Reducing required movement and increasing outgoing damage to the point healer uptime is required also reduces complexity on all jobs, not just healers alone. It would require a drastic redesign of fights that require stacking, clockspots, etc. It's just another reduction and simplification, repackaged in a different form.

[Jirah]

Id say buff dungeon/trial damage. Tanks sometimes dont even need a healer if the DPS is fast enough WAR itself doesnt need healers. And they need stronger hitting attacks and more complex than “Designated Raid wide” that does shy of 100 damage or less. Savage is fine as is I guess but the core content is miserable.

They need to invent HEALER BUSTER mechs. Which can go in multitude of ways with multiple raid wides or the living dead thing

[ForsakenRoe]

Id say buff dungeon/trial damage. Tanks sometimes dont even need a healer if the DPS is fast enough WAR itself doesnt need healers. And they need stronger hitting attacks and more complex than “Designated Raid wide” that does shy of 100 damage or less. Savage is fine as is I guess but the core content is miserable.

They need to invent HEALER BUSTER mechs. Which can go in multitude of ways with multiple raid wides or the living dead thing

Yes, this would be nice, but the issue with it (and the reason they haven't done it for lower content like EX roulettes and such, I think) is that they fear that casual players will not be able to keep up. It's a lot of extra potential ways for things to go wrong if they increase required healing, healer mismanaged CDs, healer ran OOM from spamming, healer forgot to use their mit so stuff hit too hard, etc.

If anything with healing required, I'd at least hope they take a look at how Barb EX was received (very well), and how Abyssos' healing was received (not so well), and correlate that 'healing smaller instances of raidwide damage but they come in way more often/faster' is more well received than 'the raidwides that used to deal 110% of your HP bar now deal 120% and also have a bleed attached, but are still the same 1min apart from one another'

[ty_taurus]

Yes, this would be nice, but the issue with it (and the reason they haven't done it for lower content like EX roulettes and such, I think) is that they fear that casual players will not be able to keep up. It's a lot of extra potential ways for things to go wrong if they increase required healing, healer mismanaged CDs, healer ran OOM from spamming, healer forgot to use their mit so stuff hit too hard, etc.

If anything with healing required, I'd at least hope they take a look at how Barb EX was received (very well), and how Abyssos' healing was received (not so well), and correlate that 'healing smaller instances of raidwide damage but they come in way more often/faster' is more well received than 'the raidwides that used to deal 110% of your HP bar now deal 120% and also have a bleed attached, but are still the same 1min apart from one another'

You recall how LotA's Behemoth fight has a perpetual electrified ground that deals damage over time? A part of me honestly wonders if they should just toss that into every fight, but make it hurt a little more. Is it lazy? Absolutely. But I'll take whatever breadcrumbs I can get at this point.

[IDontPetLalas]

Change happens, yes sometimes it may not work out due to someone's perception as being "for the better" , the scope of those changes may be small or large - but it will happen at some point , jobs are not static . It is a fact of life, just as resistance to change is a real thing that factors into product management . This is something that Square should already be aware of (change management is not a new concept by any means), they already have Live Letters and other forums - they don't just throw job changes into an expansion and say "have at it", which would understandably get some people upset at dealing with unexpected changes. ( whether they do enough beforehand is a valid question)

[Renathras]

Does it not stand to reason that...

If the previous incarnation was bad, only people who surgically attached rose tinted goggles to their eyes would ask that. Think about it, if we took WHM back to SB but kept the modern better things it has, Lily, Temperance, and Lilybell, it basically would be EW WHM with Aero 3. That's it. The Lily change for WHM was huge and was what effectively redeemed/fixed/saved the Job, Temperance is what Divine Seal would upgrade to, and if you aren't re-instituting SB's Lily system, then you get current WHM's Benison and etc that used to interact with it instead. That is, if we're NOT restoring their SB interactions, we're just left with the EW versions anyway.

"SB WHM but with all the better things from EW" is just EW WHM with Aero 3.

I also doubt there would be a "large outcry" at that point; people that wanted more complex healer damage gameplay would be all over SCH (and AST if they preferred the cards) like butter on toast, and the people uninterested in that would be on WHM and to a lesser extent SGE. For all the people insisting all the healer Jobs would have to be changed for them to be satisfied, it's very likely the ones who super want a more DPS focused healer would stay with WHM complaining the whole time instead of just shifting to SCH and having a blast with the very thing they constantly say they want. The only people refusing at that point would be die-hard aesthetics lovers (in which case they kinda made their choice) or people willfully spiting themselves.

I'm CERTAIN there would be people complaining - because there are literally always people complaining - but you'd get people complaining if you did it, too. "Why do I have to track a second DoT now?" "Why do I have to use what's obviously an AOE ability in single target?" (It's kind of funny to me ASkellington below you made that comment considering when I suggested making Holy part of the single-target rotation, he opposed it as "No, that's for AOE", yet wants an AOE ability that would be part of the single target rotation, Aero 3, readded. How weird's that?)

For the record, btw, I'm fine with re-adding Aero 3, though I think something needs to be pruned to free up space for it. The Cure 1/Esuna combination would work fine as part of that. The GCD neutral Afflatus thing under assault would be a second, but if done would tidy things up nicely. That'd be fine with me.

I would wager...

As noted above: I remember a week or so ago when I suggested adding Holy to the single-target rotation and you insisted against it, pointing out Holy is an AOE ability and is for AOE, and how you dislike that Misery, an AOE ability, is used in single-target rotations.

...Aero 3 is AOE. To show consistency with your stated viewpoint, shouldn't you be arguing against it's addition OR insisting it be a DPS loss over Glare so that it won't be used in single-target, considering you dislike Misery being part of the single-target rotation and oppose Holy being part of it? I'm not asking this as a gotcha, more just noting an inconsistency.

I also find it odd how anyone would see Aero 3 and go "man, that's some depth right there!"

Change happens...

While SOMETHING changing is inevitable, SPECIFIC changes are not. For example, it's inevitable that the healers will get new abilities - either fully separate and new things, or upgrades changing the functionality of existing things. But specific changes like more damage buttons are not. Something being inevitable - e.g. us all aging - does not mean other specific things are inevitable - e.g. all of us coming down with the exact same ailment or metabolic crash and weight problems, etc. There are things that are inevitable, but many that are not, and while the general category of "change" is inevitable, specific changes are not.

This is why literally no one is asking for Jobs to not have any changes at all. The arguments are more nuanced and specific than that (and generally specific to damage actions).

Moreover, as we learned with SMN (for those that liked the old version), SAM (for those that liked Kaiten), and some others depending on who you ask (PLD, WAR, DRK, BRD, MCH, MNK, NIN, and AST multiple times and SCH in 5.0 come to mind, offhand), change can very often NOT be good, with people after the fact demanding it be reverted rather than embracing it, and the situation being worse than it was before, not better, to the point of players rejecting the changes, sometimes the Jobs, sometimes the role entirely, and occasionally the game.

Besides, one could point out here - and thus I shall - that one form of change management is to offer some changes but keep some things "comfy" the same. This way, you expand your product/consumer base with new and exciting things for the people that love and embrace change in all its forms while having a comfy safe haven for those that do not. That is, in fact, one of the best methods of change management; not alienating your existing base of customers while expanding to a wider new base or better serving the needs of some of the existing base that wasn't satisfied with the status quo.

Going to offer "New Coke"? If you don't want to be forced into reverting to "Coke-a-cola Classic", the better option is to offer a new product on the side. If it's embraced, you make the new line permanent, if it's not, you end it. But by doing a parallel line, you don't alienate the customers you had before, some of which do not return.

Heck, you know this - this same argument is used by people that oppose the 5.0 change to healers all the time. Back then, if they'd only changed WHM and left SCH and AST alone, people would generally have been happier.

It's yet another reason the 4 Healers Model is such a good idea.

EDIT:

Don't want to burn another post just to say this:

@Renathras, when you wonder why people refuse to engage with you, and why terms like "condescending" have been used fairly recently, I'll cite this as an example:

" While SOMETHING changing is inevitable, SPECIFIC changes are not. This is why literally no one is asking for Jobs to not have any changes at all. The arguments are more nuanced and specific than that (and generally specific to damage actions)."

I would agree that not all change is seen by positive, that isn't exactly news to most people, that should not and typically must not stop future development changes- instead a successful team learns and adapts.

That wasn't "condescending". (Not to mention I've been hit with far more and blatant condescension than that, and people like you have not spoken against the people using it...)

Hell, it's condescending of you to suggest that I'm not aware change is generally inevitable in the first place.

.

TOO often, people use the claim that change is inevitable to justify changes they want, even if those changes may be negative. This is why it's always worth pointing out that while change itself is inevitable, specific changes are not. Yes, it should be obvious. But it's to counter an illogical argument. I think it's the fallacy of generalization, but I'm not certain. "Since change is inevitable, you can't rightly argue against this particular change".

Pointing out that change - in general - being inevitable is not the same thing as the specific change being requested being inevitable is not condescension. It's countering an argument with an argument. The only way it could be condescending is if the initial argument - yours - was condescending in the first place.

[ForsakenRoe]

"SB WHM but with all the better things from EW" is just EW WHM with Aero 3.

(It's kind of funny to me ASkellington below you made that comment considering when I suggested making Holy part of the single-target rotation, he opposed it as "No, that's for AOE", yet wants an AOE ability that would be part of the single target rotation, Aero 3, readded. How weird's that?)

For the record, btw, I'm fine with re-adding Aero 3

- So the sum of the changes is 'readd Aero3 as either an AOE 24s DOT, or a 24s burst CD ala Phlegma (probably the former is better, to differentiate the two skills)', and everything else is just 'what we have now'? SO I'm not really sure why the suggestion of 'leave WHM alone' was made, when it's literally just one change between what others said, and what you said.

- Aero 3 is one of those skills that was designed to be used for both ST and AOE. It's potency was high enough that you'd use it in ST as well. Holy has never had potency remotely close to being able to use it in ST, and at this point, even a proc that says 'next Holy does double damage' is not enough (150x2 is not greater than 310 from Glare). Retrofitting it to be 'better than Glare in certain conditions for ST' seems like more effort than just not, and having another button for the purpose instead. Or changing Holy into a new skill ala Inner Chaos/Fell Cleave, maybe.

- So you're okay with adding a 24s DOT back to the job that does (as of SB's potencies from wikis) 150ish% of the damage of a Glare over it's duration, but not, for example, a 15s burst damage button that does 110% of Glare, and has interactivity with other parts of the job? I thought you were against DOTs, and against 'adding more keybinds', but this would do both, all while having less interplay with other parts of the kit, instead being just 'a random standalone button'. ????

instead a successful team learns and adapts.

Wish they'd adapt to the fact that the biggest hype WHM gets in job action trailers is for the new ranks of Stone/Glare, Misery's reveal, and I remember a lot of people getting very giddy about Purgation (though it turned out to be PVP). Additionally, the amount of attacks SGE threw out in the EW actions trailer (all of them lol) compared to SCH, in conjunction with the Expedience fiasco, had plenty of people on Reddit claiming SCH was going to be DOA, and that SGE looks like the hype cool 'Disc Priest Damage healer the game needs' etc., because it used Dosis, E.Dosis, Phlegma, Dyskrasia, Toxikon AND Pnuema. And an Icarus for good measure.

There's a consistent pattern of people getting very excited about any new 'do big damage' buttons. And it's kinda odd to me that SE keeps avoiding adding new ones. I invite anyone to go back and watch WHM sections of those job action trailers. Can you tell if they're casting Cure 1 or Cure 2 in the demo? Me either. Because most healing actions look very similar to one another, they all blend together. If SE randomly swapped the animations on Medica 1 and Medica 2 one day without telling anyone, how many people would even notice?

[ty_taurus]

Holy has never had potency remotely close to being able to use it in ST

You know, it's funny you should say that...



This was from ARR White Mage, not that this invalidates anything you're saying of course, I just think it's really interesting and kinda funny. Not that using Holy for single target DPS was a great idea generally because Holy's MP cost was very unsustainable. Which for the record, does anyone remember that Shroud of Saints, White Mage's original Lucid Dreaming, had a 3 minute cooldown and lasted only 15 seconds instead of 21? The MP refresh potency was higher at 80 compared to Lucid Dreaming's 55, but the fact that it had a 3 minute cooldown blows my mind. Especially when you look at Scholar who's Aetherflow was still 60 seconds, restored their MP by a flat 20%, and they still had Energy Drain, which was 150 potency compared to Ruin's 80, and therefore better to use for damage and heal with Adloquium/Succor rather than heal with Lustrate or block with Sacred Soil.

[Silver-Strider]

You know, it's funny you should say that...



This was from ARR White Mage, not that this invalidates anything you're saying of course, I just think it's really interesting and kinda funny. Not that using Holy for single target DPS was a great idea generally because Holy's MP cost was very unsustainable. Which for the record, does anyone remember that Shroud of Saints, White Mage's original Lucid Dreaming, had a 3 minute cooldown and lasted only 15 seconds instead of 21? The MP refresh potency was higher at 80 compared to Lucid Dreaming's 55, but the fact that it had a 3 minute cooldown blows my mind. Especially when you look at Scholar who's Aetherflow was still 60 seconds, restored their MP by a flat 20%, and they still had Energy Drain, which was 150 potency compared to Ruin's 80, and therefore better to use for damage and heal with Adloquium/Succor rather than heal with Lustrate or block with Sacred Soil.

The pain of Coils as a WHM, STARVING for MP because of Lucid's ridiculous CD.

I miss those days lol