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

[Kacho_Nacho]

I feel weird.

I've never simultaneously disagreed AND agreed with a post as much as I simultaneously disagree AND agree with this one, lol

Not sure how to say that, but it's a funny feeling of "This part is completely wrong" and "But THIS part I couldn't agree with more".

You're not the only one.

[ty_taurus]

You're not the only one.

About what I said?

[Kacho_Nacho]

About what I said?

Yes. But, it really needed to be said. It's the sort of radical idea I would not expect to occur to Square Enix.

[Renathras]

About what I said?

For my part, I'm far more accommodating. I want there to be something for everyone, rather than just making everyone angry with the hope/faith that they'll all end up enjoying it more somehow. Sometimes, it is very true that people would like an endpoint but not the process to get to that end point (e.g. dieting and working out to get in shape; people would like the endpoint of feeling better and looking better, but the intermediate stage of being achy and grumpy all the time until their body and mind adjusts is decidedly an unpleasant hurdle which makes the current state of being lazy and stuffing one's face with potato chips on the couch seem preferable. In chemistry, it's like how some reactions need a catalyst since the final state is more energy stable [and thus preferable], but the initial energy that must be expended before the reaction takes place to release a net amount [nature prefers ending in a lower energy state, hence boulders rolling down hills] means that it won't happen spontaneously without some initial energy input.)

So in a way, just saying "tough, we're going to do it" might be necessary and could end in a better state...

...but the trouble is that upending all the healers and completely disregarding what current enjoyers of the Jobs do enjoy about them is a certainty (that is, it WILL upset people) while the outcome isn't certain (you're banking on all healers that don't enjoy DPS liking your final state of AST and people that currently enjoy AST either liking that or, if they don't, liking one of the other healers to swap to them), which is a gamble. It could pay off, or it could end even worse than today.

So you're right, if your end result is right, but completely wrong if not, and in either case, would be harming a lot of people in the process; but, if it WAS something that was decided as the correct course of action (the endpoint), then that WOULD be the most effective way to get there and "rip the band-aid off" potentially less overall painful.

.

So I both highly disagree with it and agree with it at the same time.

...I'd also note the "4 Healers Model" would also "end the eternal feud", but for the people that aren't content unless they get literally everything they want.

[Kacho_Nacho]

For my part, I'm far more accommodating. I want there to be something for everyone, rather than just making everyone angry with the hope/faith that they'll all end up enjoying it more somehow. Sometimes, it is very true that people would like an endpoint but not the process to get to that end point (e.g. dieting and working out to get in shape; people would like the endpoint of feeling better and looking better, but the intermediate stage of being achy and grumpy all the time until their body and mind adjusts is decidedly an unpleasant hurdle which makes the current state of being lazy and stuffing one's face with potato chips on the couch seem preferable. In chemistry, it's like how some reactions need a catalyst since the final state is more energy stable [and thus preferable], but the initial energy that must be expended before the reaction takes place to release a net amount [nature prefers ending in a lower energy state, hence boulders rolling down hills] means that it won't happen spontaneously without some initial energy input.)

So in a way, just saying "tough, we're going to do it" might be necessary and could end in a better state...

...but the trouble is that upending all the healers and completely disregarding what current enjoyers of the Jobs do enjoy about them is a certainty (that is, it WILL upset people) while the outcome isn't certain (you're banking on all healers that don't enjoy DPS liking your final state of AST and people that currently enjoy AST either liking that or, if they don't, liking one of the other healers to swap to them), which is a gamble. It could pay off, or it could end even worse than today.

So you're right, if your end result is right, but completely wrong if not, and in either case, would be harming a lot of people in the process; but, if it WAS something that was decided as the correct course of action (the endpoint), then that WOULD be the most effective way to get there and "rip the band-aid off" potentially less overall painful.

.

So I both highly disagree with it and agree with it at the same time.

...I'd also note the "4 Healers Model" would also "end the eternal feud", but for the people that aren't content unless they get literally everything they want.

Square Enix has been fiddling with healers every expansion, making them more homogenesis, and destroying job identities. In addition, the skill floor for healers has been set too low. Veteran healers are bored.

There's a saying. "You can't polish shite." In other words, sometimes you mess up on a project, and no matter what you do, the end result is crap. So, it's better to pitch the whole thing and start anew.

As I said earlier, I don't expect this to occur to Square Enix. At least, not with regards to healers.

If they did rip the bandage off, a lot of players would be upset, and there would be a huge uproar about it. I might even be upset about it myself.

BUT, if the end result will be much improved healing jobs and a more engaging game, then it'll be better to do it all at once; rather than keep polishing the lump of manure.

[Renathras]

Square Enix has been fiddling with healers every expansion, making them more homogenesis, and destroying job identities. In addition, the skill floor for healers has been set too low. Veteran healers are bored.
...
BUT, if the end result will be much improved healing jobs and a more engaging game, then it'll be better to do it all at once; rather than keep polishing the lump of manure.

I don't disagree. I just disagree that it absolutely needs changing (lots of players seem to be content and/or happy with things as they are now), and while some people have the position that change is good, I've found in life that not ALL change IS good. There are cases that you can be in a situation that seems bad, but then change happens and you realize it could actually be worse.

SE: "We've ended healer's simplistic 1 button spam damage kits."
Players: "Yay!"
SE: "All healers now have a damage pet, and it does damage automatically once per 3 seconds with its nukespam. Healers' own damage spells have been removed. Please look forward to it."
Players: <surprised Pikachu face>

Though I personally think they should just roll SCH and AST back to their SB forms (with some of their added stuff since getting carried over, like SCH keeping Expedience) while leaving WHM and SGE alone (SGE has only ever been this way and WHM is probably in the best state it's ever been in terms of general usability other than it needs a 60 sec mitigation button if SE's going to keep insisting making mitigation checks instead of healing checks), and then players have the option of picking what they want to play (and, in that case of the world, all four would play pretty differently).

I also don't see SE being open to, or up to the task even if they were, of completely revamping healers and making it GOOD. Tanks, healers, and even DPSers endlessly complain that every rework makes things worse, so I don't trust their capacity to reverse that in this one case of healing, which is the role they're ALREADY the worst at getting right.

Given that, I feel a more measured approach is in order. The SCH/AST reversion, WHM/SGE not, is probably the best solution. If SCH and AST works, then they could branch it out, but if they worked miserably in the encounter design, then players could still functionally use WHM and SGE. And if both worked, then great, as players can just pick the one that is most their tastes. Everyone (or as many as can practically be pleased - SEE: "You can please most of the people most of the time...") wins.

[ForsakenRoe]

Though I personally think they should just roll SCH and AST back to their SB forms (with some of their added stuff since getting carried over, like SCH keeping Expedience) while leaving WHM and SGE alone (SGE has only ever been this way and WHM is probably in the best state it's ever been in terms of general usability other than it needs a 60 sec mitigation button if SE's going to keep insisting making mitigation checks instead of healing checks), and then players have the option of picking what they want to play (and, in that case of the world, all four would play pretty differently).

Does it not stand to reason that, should this happen, many people would ask 'why did WHM, who did have a previous incarnation, not get the same treatment as AST/SCH' (eg, rolled back to SB design, with 'added stuff getting carried over' (so, Lily rework, Temperance, probably Lilybell))? That if SCH got it's DOTs and AST it's cards back, would there not be a large outcry of 'well what about Aero 3???'

[ASkellington]

Does it not stand to reason that, should this happen, many people would ask 'why did WHM, who did have a previous incarnation, not get the same treatment as AST/SCH' (eg, rolled back to SB design, with 'added stuff getting carried over' (so, Lily rework, Temperance, probably Lilybell))? That if SCH got it's DOTs and AST it's cards back, would there not be a large outcry of 'well what about Aero 3???'

I would wager there would be.

I would also wager the response would be "ok, SCH and AST got some depth to make their down time less boring (old SB designs) why can't WHM and SGE have that?"