#FFXIVHEALERSTRIKE

[Silver-Strider]

Yes.

In other news, I just played through the first two dungeons and the first trial, and this is the most fun I've had playing in general and as a healer since stormblood. 8/10 will continue having fun. Though sage not being able to double dot is lame

My friend and I went thru these as well. He's a SMN main but swapped to SCH just to get thru the story and he said he stopped bothering to Heal in both dungeons. The 1st dungeon didn't do enough damage to proc his Excog with a random GNB as the Tank and the 2nd Dungeon was WAR so that went as expected. For the trial, it's only reasonably fun for now because people don't know the mechanics but most of the mechanics aren't that hard to understand and dodge, so I expect it to be just as dull as any other trial as more people run it and get familiar with it.

[Morgana96]

This doesn't seem vague to me though. Like the demands seem pretty specific. Help us out here, how would you make these more specific?

"Self-sustain and healing abilities given to other roles. The choice/direction to give such abilities to roles outside of healer encroaches on the role."

This point vaguely treats every self-sustain/self-heal as if they're on par with Warriors. They're not.

Dark Knight (Pre-DT) had only two true self-healing abilities. One was tied to Living Dead and its five-minute cooldown. The other, Abyssal Drain, is a 60 second cooldown, which is long as hell compared to Warrior's Bloodwhetting/Nascent Flash. It's common knowledge that DRK has the lowest self-sustain of the tanks. It shouldn't be treated as having the same situation as Warrior.

Second Wind for Melee/Phys. Ranged can only be used every 120s. How is an emergency heal with a two minutes cooldown "encroaching" on a Cure or Benefic? It's not nearly as consistent or reliable as a true heal.

A better manifesto would acknowledge these kinds of crucial differences and analyze/reflect on them separately. Instead, it delivers a weak stance of "all non-healer self-sustain is bad, actually".

"Over simplified DPS rotation. Every job in FFXIV has a 'filler GCD' skill that they press when there are no other requirements. No role in the game pushes this skill more than healer. Not by a long shot. Our offensive capability should still feel dynamic and rewarding. Yes, we are healers, but we are also casters"

The problem here isn't really in the desire, but rather the lack of cohesive and developed vision of what certain healers want to see.

Do they want longer combos? How long? How complex?

Should there be more buttons? Should Glare/Malefic/Broil/Dosis change into different attacks as you use them, like how several of Pictomancer's casts do?

Could more abilities do both damage and healing, like how Assize and Earthly Star do? Or are those part of what's being criticized?

And will that added DPS require overall readjustment of damage/healing outputs on the jobs? After all, if they do too much DPS, it will shorten encounter time and decrease threat level, which is what the manifesto later claims it doesn't want.

These are all factors that need to be considered. But the manifesto fails to do that. Instead of one or a few cohesive ideas developed by the entire group, this thread throws around random ideas that are hard to follow and even contradict each other at times.

[Morgana96]

"Excessive oGCD heals. These are not only abundant, but exceptionally powerful. This in addition to self-sustain on other roles reduces the dynamic of healing comrades."

Again, this point's issue isn't the idea itself, but the lack of convincing argument about what changing oGCDs will impact. It needs to address potential consequences of such significant changes and a more detailed concept of re-balancing.

Do you want those abilities removed? Or just nerfed or reworked?

How will that impact the MP usage of each healer if they're no relying more on normal GCD heals? And considering the manifesto's request for more DPS, would the removal/nerfing of oGCDs potentially lead to excessive MP drain?

"Lack of engaging content outside the most difficult duties (Savage/Ultimate). i.e. the threat level is too low."

This is where the manifesto feels contradictory. It spent several points claiming healers want more DPS and less heals, only to end by saying they want to heal more and for things to hit harder.

If the threat level and damage is vastly increased, won't the oGCDs you were demanding to be rid of be more necessary?

And if the damage output is increased and the bosses more punishing, how does that impact the ability to balance healing through that damage with the potentially longer/more complicated DPS rotation that was asked for earlier?

~~~

All of this is what I mean when I say the manifesto feels too vague to me. Sure, it's making demands and listing complaints, but offers no deeper analysis or argument that would help convince people of the apparent cause. It repeatedly lumps together abilities that aren't similar at all, demands reworks and redesigns without addressing the consequences of such changes, and fails to provide detailed examples of how the changes they want would work for the better.

[Katish]

Those are pretty far from normal dungeon run times... If it was purely a case of heals not being needed, it should be faster than a normal 1t, 1h, 2d run at Min ilvl (dungeons don't have echo) because you're replacing the lower damage healer with a DPS.

No actually, it was faster have you tried min ilvl? Min ilvl is BELOW questing gear, and your level is synced to the minimum for the dungeon, you have to manually queue for it. Another thing is, I had to hold as DRK to prolong the invuln any other tank would have made it go that much faster, and even then it was faster...now with the new sustain I might not even need to wait in LD. Which means, at 90+ drk can satisfy continuous damage like the other tanks. So the point does get it across quite well, as I chose drk for being the squishier tank. Any tank can full pull without a healer...And the more sustain, the less need for a healer obviously, the less need for a healer the quicker the dungeon. This not limited to only dungeons though, I ran some healerless extremes as well. Waiting for those uploads....quickiest extremes ever, right before maintenance.

[Isala]

"Excessive oGCD heals. These are not only abundant, but exceptionally powerful. This in addition to self-sustain on other roles reduces the dynamic of healing comrades."

Again, this point's issue isn't the idea itself, but the lack of convincing argument about what changing oGCDs will impact. It needs to address potential consequences of such significant changes and a more detailed concept of re-balancing.

Do you want those abilities removed? Or just nerfed or reworked?

How will that impact the MP usage of each healer if they're no relying more on normal GCD heals? And considering the manifesto's request for more DPS, would the removal/nerfing of oGCDs potentially lead to excessive MP drain?

"Lack of engaging content outside the most difficult duties (Savage/Ultimate). i.e. the threat level is too low."

This is where the manifesto feels contradictory. It spent several points claiming healers want more DPS and less heals, only to end by saying they want to heal more and for things to hit harder.

If the threat level and damage is vastly increased, won't the oGCDs you were demanding to be rid of be more necessary?

And if the damage output is increased and the bosses more punishing, how does that impact the ability to balance healing through that damage with the potentially longer/more complicated DPS rotation that was asked for earlier?

~~~

All of this is what I mean when I say the manifesto feels too vague to me. Sure, it's making demands and listing complaints, but offers no deeper analysis or argument that would help convince people of the apparent cause. It repeatedly lumps together abilities that aren't similar at all, demands reworks and redesigns without addressing the consequences of such changes, and fails to provide detailed examples of how the changes they want would work for the better.

It's not a contradiction. The issue with the threat level being too low is because we have 100 oGCDs to top everyone off, that are always up (provided good CD management), and there is no actual usage of anything resembling an actual healing SPELL in the vast majority of situations. We spend, as people have shown, WITH DATA, around 60% of our entire time pushing the same single GCD button, and that's just god awful gameplay.

[ty_taurus]

"Over simplified DPS rotation. Every job in FFXIV has a 'filler GCD' skill that they press when there are no other requirements. No role in the game pushes this skill more than healer. Not by a long shot. Our offensive capability should still feel dynamic and rewarding. Yes, we are healers, but we are also casters"

The problem here isn't really in the desire, but rather the lack of cohesive and developed vision of what certain healers want to see.

Do they want longer combos? How long? How complex?

Should there be more buttons? Should Glare/Malefic/Broil/Dosis change into different attacks as you use them, like how several of Pictomancer's casts do?

Could more abilities do both damage and healing, like how Assize and Earthly Star do? Or are those part of what's being criticized?

And will that added DPS require overall readjustment of damage/healing outputs on the jobs? After all, if they do too much DPS, it will shorten encounter time and decrease threat level, which is what the manifesto later claims it doesn't want.

These are all factors that need to be considered. But the manifesto fails to do that. Instead of one or a few cohesive ideas developed by the entire group, it's random ideas thrown around that are hard to follow and even contradict each other at times.

Well, we have four healers, so they shouldn't be approaching DPS the same way anyway. Rather, they should each approach it in their own way just like the other jobs do. There's not a specific right answer here. If anything, it's more an ask of "anything that isn't this," but it should also feel appropriate of a caster.

For scholar, for example, there does seem to be a moderate consensus which is the restoration of DOT gameplay. But the other healers shouldn't just copy that. There should be a range of styles and levels of dedication to DPS that includes one that's more simple to one that's more complex. Sage was given an identity closely associate with DPS, so it should try to be more ambitious about feeling like a caster DPS. On the flip side, having a healer that's still simple is important as well, but I think we could have a simple healer that still is able to have a little more than just glare spam.

At the end of the day, we are not the designers. It isn't our responsibility to create the specific solutions, but whatever happens, I just don't want this, yet we've been stuck with nothing but this for now 5 years. I'm not interested in enduring it for another 2.5 years. If it changes before then or when 8.0 releases, then I'll be there, but until then, I won't be. I think that's a sentiment that's shared by many people at this point.

[WeakestZenosEnjoyer]

This is where the manifesto feels contradictory. It spent several points claiming healers want more DPS and less heals, only to end by saying they want to heal more and for things to hit harder.

Less heal buttons directly means more energy spent actually thinking about healing as you have to properly manage your limited resources,

playing a healer in Stone Vigil and then playing a healer in Vanasparti? makes this really really obvious. Even if there's high incoming damage playing a healer still isn't interesting if our mere presence resolves it.

[Morgana96]

It's not a contradiction. The issue with the threat level being too low is because we have 100 oGCDs to top everyone off, that are always up (provided good CD management), and there is no actual usage of anything resembling an actual healing SPELL in the vast majority of situations. We spend, as people have shown, WITH DATA, around 60% of our entire time pushing the same single GCD button, and that's just god awful gameplay.

Again, that doesn't help anyone understand what you want to see happen.

Do you want more DPS and for the game to take away certain heals? Do you want more reasons to use the heals you have, but also still do more DPS? And would overall DPS output have to be adjusted if that happened, since more DPS causes fights/encounters to feel faster/weaker?

Do you want the enemies to hit harder so those oGCDs feel worth it? Do you want the oGCDs to be less potent or to have longer cool downs so that they don't feel so excessive? Do you want them gone completely and to solely rely on GCD instead for heavy damage? And if you do want just GCD, how will that impact MP levels and a potential addition of a healer DPS rotation that also uses MP?

What is a "fixed" healer to you? And does it actually match up with what a "fixed" healer is to everyone else involved in this strike?

It's a lack of answers to questions like these that causes the manifesto and the overall strike to feel contradictory to many. One person in this thread will demand one thing, only for another to demand the exact opposite. There's not enough organization and collaboration happening in this group to take it seriously as a strike or protest. You want to convince people you're right, but aren't working together in presenting the necessary arguments and answers that will help prove you're right.

[ty_taurus]

How much time you spend on healing has little to do with how many healing actions each healer has access to, because the need for healing is determined by the amount of damage your party sustains, unlike DPS where new GCDs and cooldowns add variety and volume to your gameplay regardless of the state of battle. The only way to influence the amount of time healers spend on healing through their healing actions would be to weaken them so that we aren't capable of restoring the party to full in 1-2 healing actions anytime damage is taken. That's the biggest difference between WoW healing and XIV healing: WoW healers don't have massively powerful AOE heals. It's not generally every player who takes damage at once, but a set amount of players, and the healers more often than not heal up those players one at a time rather than all at once. This is a very generalized summary of WoW healing of course, but it speaks volumes that something like Medica, which is such a weak heal in XIV that it basically is never used anymore, would be utterly broken in WoW.

Removing certain healing actions has more to do with reducing bloat where some healing actions are repetitive or do very little to compliment a particular healer's healing style. I've used the example that Astrologian's Bole and Spire are very redundant when Astro still has access to Exaltation and Celestial Intersection which are both objectively stronger than Bole and Spire, and also have shorter cooldowns individually. Sure you can stack Bole and Spire on top of those, but why do you need that? It's excessive and unnecessary. Trimming down unnecessary healing allows the rest of the healing to have more value, and it also lessens the burden of knowledge on especially new players to remember all of those effects.

[Amity_Roji]

This is where the manifesto feels contradictory. It spent several points claiming healers want more DPS and less heals, only to end by saying they want to heal more and for things to hit harder.

This has been heavily discussed before - including this post here, that outlines why there's a focus on healer DPS additions, what the causes of the healer problem are, and defines what healers should be - but let's simply things:

Healers: "Yo Squeenix, can us healers...uhh...heal more?"

Squeenix: "No."

Healers: "Sigh, ok. But can we at least get some kind of DPS rotation to keep us entertained while we're doing all this not-healing?"

Squeenix: "Also no. Here's some pretty graphics; now go pound sand."

All of this is what I mean when I say the manifesto feels too vague to me. Sure, it's making demands and listing complaints, but offers no deeper analysis or argument that would help convince people of the apparent cause.

Yeah, but that's just one person's take and they just got the ball rolling, so to speak. There's been hundreds - maybe thousands - of posts in this thread analyzing the healer role in excruciating detail from every angle throughout this thread. That said, this shouldn't matter - we do not need to know how to fix the problem in order to know that there is one. The fixing part is Squeenix's job. They're literally game designers. The purpose of the strike and the discussion around it was to draw attention to the fact that the healer role has been devalued for three expansions now and that those of us who play the role expect and deserve better.

EDIT: Let me preempt some things too:

Here's a response to "But your strike is just ruining the game for everyone else/you're intentionally hurting other players' experience!"

The eight questions that illustrate why FFXIV healers are broken compared to other MMOs.