How would you solve the boring "damage rotation" of the healers?

[Saraide]

You are looking for an absolute answer here where you should know it makes no sense. Compared to whm warrior absolutely is effort. Compared to blackmage it's braindead easy. Going from current white mage levels to current warrior levels would be an improvement. Would it be enough? Who knows, we'll just have to see from there.

[Renathras]

Ok, now let me ask you this question.

How does giving others who care about damage optimisation a 10-20% ceiling to reach for hurt your fun in any way?

Well, I've already answered this question before, it was the 2nd of your 4. I'll give you a two part answer this time:

a) Because - as I said before - it's relevant when it comes to getting clears.
b) I also don't mind that existing on SOME of the healers, which is why I advocate for the 4HM, so that some healer Jobs can work that way and the people driven to that kind of epeen contest can play it. We have a similar situation in the Caster role now where the tryhards have BLM and everyone else has SMN.

But what do other people who do not have the same tastes as you have to enjoy?

Four.
Healers.
Model.

Have a Healer Job (or 2 or even 3) for those people. Have I not said this over and over again? It's like you aren't listening.

How does denying them their enjoyment make things better for you?

Four.
Healers.
Model.

That wouldn't be "denying their enjoyment". However, to answer your question in the reverse - if they got what they wanted on ALL FOUR HEALERS, then that would deny me MY enjoyment of the role. How does denying me my enjoyment make things better for them? How does allowing me my enjoyment make things worse for them? Especially when I'm locked to only one Job while they have 3?

How does that not make sense to you? What doesn't make sense to me is you refusing to accept that giving them what they want on all four Healer Jobs would deny me and people like me enjoyment. Do you not care about us? Why must we be sacrificed totally for your sake when we're already offering you 75% of the healer Jobs? Why must you have them all? How does having ONE not conforming to your desired playstyle hurt you EXACTLY?

Surely there are some Jobs in this game, across all the roles, that you dislike. Why is it okay for those other Jobs to not be what you like but NOT for even a single Healer Job to be?

.

I do appreciate you asking these questions. But I feel like I've answered them before and they're all asked from only one side.

Basically, they're asked from a premise that doing the more damage thing hurts no one, and since it hurts no one, there's no cost-benefit. It's just all benefit, so there's no reason to disagree.

This is the problem, there's a definite cost. If there wasn't, people wouldn't be arguing against it. So you can't premise it that way. If you ask "Why would giving them what they want hurt you?" you also have to ask "Why would giving you what you want hurt them?", and so on for all the questions.

You are looking for an absolute answer here where you should know it makes no sense.

Wait what?

No, there has to be an absolute answer. You can't use "no effort" as a metric of bad and "effort" as a metric of good (you can't have the one without the other) if you can't define "no effort" and "effort".

That is, you can't use something for an argument/to support a position if you not only can't define it but refuse to do so.

And no, "we'll just have to see" is not a valid answer. What if it's not enough? Then you ask for more? And those of us who were only going along with you begrudgingly this far are asked to bend even more, give up even more while you take and take and take? No, that's not an answer. "We have to pass the bill to find out what's in it" is a dangerous position, not one that can be sustained and not one anyone should agree to. The famous saying applies: "Only an idiot signs a contract without reading it first". The boundaries must be clearly established.

There's a big problem with discussions when you are asking for things but can't even clearly define it. "I'll know it when I see it" sorts of things, which you can't use to build compromises or agreements with. Imagine two nations at war trying to work out a peace agreement and one saying "So where will our new boundary be?", thinking both sides make their proposals then haggle to end somewhere in between, and the other nation says "Well, if you're looking for an absolute answer, I don't have one, and that makes no sense anyway. How about we just give me some of the disputed land and I'll tell you if it's enough later?"

[Aravell]

Snip

Ok, are you aware that what you propose would be harming WHM players who want for engagement? How many of them are there? Would you allow WHM to gain complexity if it's provable that they outnumber those who want it to remain as it is?

You are also approaching the question from the position that your 4 Healers Model would be unmitigated good, it's not. I already told you that it solves none of my issues, so I don't benefit from it, why would I then support it?

You are also not actually answering the root question of why having more damage complexity harms your enjoyment. Let me go back through the facts:

1) You don't care for parse
2) It's been proven that healer damage contribution is minimal in terms of beating enrage
3) You love seeing a good healing plan come together and do not care for damage optimisation
4) It's normal for bad parties to exist, some parties just cannot clear a fight
5) The community does not care to scrutinise and make a big issue out of any minor mistake

If your only actual argument against it is "It harms me because on very rare occasions my Glares are helpful in barely beating the dps check", then I'm sorry, but that's not a very compelling argument for blocking WHM's growth. "I don't enjoy it" is not a compelling argument either, I take the same issue with you leaving WHM as is, I don't enjoy that either.

EDIT: Meant to write this also, but queue popped. You accused me of not letting you enjoy something because I want to enjoy every healer, but you don't actually know what I enjoy. I don't care if WHM evolved in a way I don't personally enjoy, I just want to see WHM evolve, not stagnate. My main concern is the stagnation of the healer role, which would be more harmful in the long run than rounding out the kit with some more damage spells and interactivity at the cost of some people not being happy.

[Saraide]

Wait what?

No, there has to be an absolute answer. You can't use "no effort" as a metric of bad and "effort" as a metric of good (you can't have the one without the other) if you can't define "no effort" and "effort".

That is, you can't use something for an argument/to support a position if you not only can't define it but refuse to do so.

And no, "we'll just have to see" is not a valid answer. What if it's not enough? Then you ask for more? And those of us who were only going along with you begrudgingly this far are asked to bend even more, give up even more while you take and take and take? No, that's not an answer. "We have to pass the bill to find out what's in it" is a dangerous position, not one that can be sustained and not one anyone should agree to. The famous saying applies: "Only an idiot signs a contract without reading it first". The boundaries must be clearly established.

There's a big problem with discussions when you are asking for things but can't even clearly define it. "I'll know it when I see it" sorts of things, which you can't use to build compromises or agreements with. Imagine two nations at war trying to work out a peace agreement and one saying "So where will our new boundary be?", thinking both sides make their proposals then haggle to end somewhere in between, and the other nation says "Well, if you're looking for an absolute answer, I don't have one, and that makes no sense anyway. How about we just give me some of the disputed land and I'll tell you if it's enough later?"

Again showing you cant argue in good faith. Talking about levels of effort for a dps rotation absolutely has to take into account of where we are currently. Absolutes here are just an intentional distraction because you feel the arguement finally slipping from you so you engage in the most basic debate lord tactics.

What if it's not enough? Yea then we'll have to go further although I doubt that it isnt enough. Weirdest gotcha attempt I have ever seen.

Two nations at war? You good buddy? Absolutely unhinged comparison. The only one at war is you with reality. Any content you do right now will still easily be clearable with a more complex damage rotation just because how math works.