Sincere Request: Please Define/Redefine/Confirm Vision for Healer Role for PvE

quadraxis666

peacenote wrote: »

quadraxis666 wrote: »

I feel sorry for all the time you wasted writing up such a well informed and articulate post that zos is going to ignore.

It may be ignored, but sometimes feedback does make it back and have an impact. I have made an effort to keep the discussion about the healing changes logical, intelligent, and in the forefront so that as different members of the community visit the forum they are aware of the potential changes and can weigh in.

Some initial proposals have been reverted or adapted, like the recent shield changes, but the problem with massive changes to the healing role are twofold: 1) there aren't as many people who primarily focus on PvE healing as there are folks whose focus is on DPS, and there even less people out there who heal with a non meta class that are knowledgable and also frequent the forums and 2) it is more difficult to directly measure the impact of healing changes, *especially* when the potential issue has to do with complex issues such as mobility, flexibility in a variety of situations, and enjoyment of the role. We can measure HPS but that only gets us so far.

Therefore, I'm trying to do my part to gather feedback I have seen and heard, as well as share my perspective as a longtime healer, since it is my primary role. If it falls on deaf ears, well.... at least I made an effort.

Sorry if I came off too cynical, it comes from experience- I've been right where you are now as a tank, first with the removal of stam regen while blocking, then the removal of heavy armor bracing passive forcing us into sturdy traited gear, and every little tweak, nerf and butchering in between. No amount of logical counter-argument or impassioned plea ever made an iota of difference.

The one takeaway I have is that at least tanks HAVE been able to adapt and stay relevant, for all the things zos has done to us over the years, they are nothing to what's being done to healers now, and it's a crying shame that the game has been brought to this state by its own developers.

MehrunesFlagon

Agenericname wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Agenericname wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

MyKillv2.0 wrote: »

Lisutaris wrote: »

mairwen85 wrote: »

Nothing to say that hasn't been said in 1st post.

Yup. Very good.

I am going to repeat myself alot but they went "full queen ayrenn mode" this time. It's like they are playing a different game than us. (PoV - PvE Healer)

Your quote isn't completely off track.

I love the game but it is not without flaws. In my opinion, this game has put too much emphasis on the needs of PvP combat balance. The problem is that most of the devs in this game come from a PvP background... so naturally, that is the aspect of the game they care more about than in reality, they should. PvE population is as large as in the game's history and growing, while PvP is as small as it has ever been in the game's history and growing smaller by the day. So in a way, you are correct. The game you play is not the same as the game they play, since they tend to play more PvP than PvE. I remember Miss Bizz once had a perfect quote, when she said that "her ESO game is much different than the ESO game that Fengrush plays". And your quote is accurate. The game that most people play... which is strickly PvE with only a small tabble of PvP IS MUCH DIFFERENT than the game that devs play, in which is dominated by PvP play time.

I thought Morrowind was a clear sign that the community did not want to be a "PvP focused" game anymore. The devs seemed to get the message and it has been a long time since we had a patch like this.... but this patch makes me wonder if the lessons began to fade from memory. Oh well, the sky isn't falling. The community will adapt. PvE will continue to grow and PvP will continue to skrink. Six weeks from now, everything will be the same.

I think its simplistic to talk about the PVP community shrinking without acknowledging the primary reason why:

PVP performance sucks.
In fact, PVP performance has sucked for years.
The longer we go without fixes, the more people get fed up and quit. Its not because the community doesnt like PVP - its mostly because those of us who do are sick and tired of terrible performance that ZOS hasnt fixed for years.


Its also very simplistic to call Morrowind just a PVP centered patch...as if ZOS had absolutely no PVE reason to gut PVE sustain. Its not like trial runners were blazing through ESO's hardest content and calling it easy-peasy, lemon squeezy or anything...(they were).


Its important to keep in mind that PVP is not less worthy than PVE - if its smaller than it has been, that is a direct result of years of neglect by the Devs.

Its also important to keep in mind that the Devs nerf PVE because of power creep that the Devs see, while PVE players often don't see the same power creep because its not like Molag Kena has a forum account to complain. Rather, when PVEers say content is too easy, PVEers ought to batten down the hatches for a storm of incoming nerfs (precisely what happened before Morrowind and to a lesser degree, Murkmire).

It's also simplistic to say that "PVE players" say content is "too easy." Some players do, more do not. There are more threads asking to remove the DLC dungeons from the RDF. If however Molag Kena ever finds herself with a forum account to start a nerf thread, I would remind her that the Devs nerfed her to this state.

Yeah, its simplistic, because why there are tiers of PVE players is a different topic entirely from "Hey, not all nerfs are 100% PVP related" which was more where I was going with the original comment.

But hey, I like talking about PVE too!

Yeah, its not true that ALL PVEers find the end-game content too easy. That's obvious, since progression groups exist! And its progression groups who suffer the most when ZOS nerfs PVE because those groups do not have the experience to compensate for the nerfs.

Example: Its like nerfing a first-timer in vMA vs an experienced vMA runner. The newbie is going to have a much harder time because he lacks experience. The experienced player will adjust quickly. (This, incidently, is why the top-tier PVEers rebound so quickly after nerfs while progression groups suffer more from nerfs.)



So in my original point about why ZOS nerfs PVE for PVE reasons, I'm looking at both Morrowind and Murkmire, the last two big nerf patches. Neither one of those patches was wholly a PVE OR a PVP patch, to be perfectly clear. Rather, ZOS had both PVE and PVP reasons for the nerfs, contrary to the presentation of the person I was responding to. Nevertheless, since you and I are talking about PVE, I'd like to focus on the PVE reasons for those nerfs: Power Creep.

Pre-Morrowind, we had end game PVEers ripping through ZOS' hardest content with high DPS and calling it easy. ZOS massively nerfed sustain.
Pre-Murkmire, we had dungeon groups calling Tank + 3DDs an ideal strategy. ZOS specifically called out the treatment of healers and thus nerfed magicka and stamina survivability.
We've still got lots of changes going on because ZOS is scrambling to make healers useful (in ZOS' own special way.)

Why does ZOS not want power creep?
The last thing ZOS wants is to make new end-game PVE content that is so challenging for the very top-tier that few other PVEers have a chance. That's bad for business (we see this with ZOS nerfing some DLC dungeons to improve completion rates). But having top-tier end-game PVEers get bored with easy content and leave the game is also bad for business (ZOS has to sell those 4 DLC dungeons to someone, after all, and its bad marketing for players to leave because your end-game content is too easy). So it doesn't matter that not ALL players find it easy. It matters that the players ZOS is balancing for find it too easy (thus get bored and leave) or too hard (give up and leave). ZOS has to keep the ceiling high enough to be challenging...but not ever too high.

So what does ZOS do about power creep? What they always do - hit some aspect of gameplay with a nerfhammer - we've seen that strategy employed patch after patch. This means that A) old content stays somewhat relevant, B.) new content stays challenging, C) making players work harder to complete the same old content because they got nerfed is a lot cheaper than designing enough new content to keep them occupied.

But...I just said that nerfs don't hit the top tier PVEers (the ones who find content "easy") as hard, right? Yep. As stated above, the nerfhammer hits the progression tier a lot harder than it does the top tier of PVEers. It doesn't quite accomplish ZOS' goals, thus leading to yet more PVE nerfs. Gotta love it.

I found it mostly humorous because you used Molag Kena as an example and the reason why we can blast through there without a healer is at least partially due to ZOS nerfing it.

PvEers definitely call for nerfs as well, there are a few active at the moment I believe. PvPers are louder though. I'm also quite sure that the nerfs aren't as one-sided as some on the forums make them out to be, but in truth I'm also not sure that ZOS knows either. Altmer with stamina recovery? There was tequila involved in that.

Tequila? More like pcp or meth.

CAB_Life

peacenote wrote: »

(This will be a long post. It aligns with my style. Ty in advance for your consideration and participation in the discussion.)

PTS 5.1.4 patch notes were released. While short, they are possibly the most disappointing patch notes I have ever read because, by many accounts, this means that the proposed healing changes will go live and, as an additional, ridiculously misguided attempt to pretend to "listen to feedback," includes a new adjustment to Mutagen that is extremely disheartening for the direction of the game, imo.

CURRENT AND FUTURE STATE SUMMARY

Current, Pre-Patch Situation as I See It:

- PvP Healing is extremely OP and requires significant change
- Server performance, especially EU, is very bad and may require changes to the core game mechanics in order to remediate
- PvE healing is teetering on the edge of extinction re: questionable necessity for all but the hardest content; complaints about fake tanks and healers in PvE abound

Potential, Post-Patch Situation as I See it:

- PvP Healing issues addressed due to extreme limitation of Springs and Orbs, on the heels of the Earthgore Nerf, and in addition to the Pet Sorc nerf
- Server performance related/improved? TBD "at best;" never acknowledged as a driving factor "more likely"
- Solidifies PvE healing necessary only for Trial content; even when needed it will be less dynamic, more boring, and cause many current longtime healers to move on to other roles or (even worse) other games

********************************************

PvP participation has never required a role designation. The introduction of battlegrounds re-inforced this.
PvE organized content was designed around the "holy trinity" of tank/healer/dps. The Group Finder roles (and the later removal of multiple role designations) re-inforced this.

********************************************

Hands-down the best summary I've seen regarding these latest attempts at balance changes and specifically the healing changes:

code65536 wrote: »

The more I think about it, the more it's clear to me why the changes were made.

It's a part of their standardization, where they see healing as a direct counterpart to damage.

So if ground DoTs can't be stacked, then ground HoTs shouldn't be stackable either.

If ground DoTs do 1K DPS, then ground HoTs should do 1K HPS.

Simple, right? And if you're balancing for a 1v1 duel, then this would be perfect. But, well, that's not how most of the game works.

It's a childishly naive approach to balance that eschews all nuance and consideration to how the game is actually played.

And no, I don't believe for one second that they did it for performance. Or because they think healers should change things up for funsies. Or anything other than this child-like vision of how things should be balanced. They'd rather shoehorn everything into this model (adapting playstyles, eliminating roles, nerfing content), regardless of whether it makes sense, regardless of whether there are far-reaching and unexpected consequences. Rather than tailoring a combat model around engaging gameplay that have meaningful role distinctions.

That's what I mean by this being childishly naive. It's the kind of balance you get from a spreadsheet than from a gameplay designer.

********************************************

We've had many active PvE healers voice their concerns against the changes, only to be blatantly ignored. (Sad state of affairs).
We've had some PvP players voice their support for these changes. (To be expected and I respect this).
We've had some PvE healers voice their support for some of the changes, focusing on one aspect or a few, but not all, aspects of PvE healing today. (Depending on the reasoning, I also very much respect this... it is good to keep an open mind).
We've gone down the road of debating whether PvE healers will be able to put out enough healing for current content. We've spent our time focusing on red herrings like whether healers know how to "adapt" or "git gud" or whether they understand their role at all. (Inevitable but unfair and disappointing).
We've finally seen a real, PTS raid with proof that the concerns of active PvE healers were valid. (Missed it? READ THIS THREAD AND WATCH THIS VIDEO!!)

********************************************

The result? Almost everyone acknowledges that most content will be able to handled as the community adapts. Whether we bring a stam healer to raids, eliminate them altogether in most content, or evolve to a meta of "hybrid" roles, most people admit, in one way or another, that we can adapt if need be. (Sarcasm: Keep exchanging the "adapt" and "git gud" threads, guys. That will most certainly result in a lack of attention to the underlying, massive change that's occurring, which doubtless is your intent by your absolute reluctance to address and discuss the larger issue.)

The criticisms and concerns that continue to be ignored are threefold:

1) PvE healing will now be EXTREMELY BORING. (Unfortunate for a game which, by definition, should be FUN.)
2) PvE healing role will not be necessary except for, at best, difficult raid content. (Unfortunate for a game which, by its current standards, supports a dedicated healing role).
3) Some of us gravitate towards a healing role because we enjoy it and/or have injuries don't allow us to compete in the light attack, click-heavy DPS meta. Either way, a percentage of the community would like to see healing in PvE remain a distinct and necessary role. Some of us have remained in the ESO community since 2014, and been strong supporters of the game, primarily due to the uniqueness of the healing role which is now at risk due to these changes. We are hoping that healing can be adjusted, which we acknowledge is necessary especially for our PvP friends, without completely gutting what we love about the game.

********************************************

Some of us have wondered whether the the intent of ZOS is to eliminate the healing role. I did some searching and found this article, which personally makes me think ZOS is trying to get ahead of the MMO meta, which might very well be to eliminate a dedicated support role. However this is being done without transparency to the community that's being asked to vet the changes on PTS. Many longtime healers and supporters of the game are making a concerted effort to provide sincere feedback about how our roles are being marginalized, while simultaneously ZOS may be using healer testing to help eliminate the role.

I understand creative license, and the fact that none of us who spend our time helping in the community are being paid, whether it be a class representative or someone simply defending their hobby, like me... but the lack of acknowledgement that healing as a distinct role isn't a priority (if that is the intent) is irresponsible and disingenuous to people who have given their time to support the game based on current understandings that may no longer be true. Maybe the company/gaming community relationship doesn't require a WHY, but common decency kinda does.

********************************************

After all of the testing, the latest and last patch notes do not address or tweak ANY of our comments about the relevance and enjoyment of the healing role in general. Rather, they introduce a mutagen change which seems only aimed at addressing the complaint that "stam healing" might outperform "magicka healing."

OK, so you are READING our comments. Great. But giving magicka healers a brainless spam heal that hits more people than it did before, while ignoring our concerns about Springs and Orbs, is insulting and missing the point for multiple reasons:

1. Hitting mutagen multiple times does not require positioning or skill and COMPLETELY ignores all of the feedback about how skilled healers used the multi-cast features of Springs and Orbs to proactively place heals in multiple areas throughout raids and more challenging dungeons and how we'll be unable to apply those skills with the proposed changes. Both Springs and Orbs allowed us to CHOOSE who was covered by our heals, which also required us to be aware of where people were and how to position our heals.
2. This does nothing to address the feedback that the current changes promote stacking strategies and discourage alternate creative strategies for handling content differently amongst different raid progression groups
3. It reinforces and worsens a complaint that is coming from healers both for and against the changes on the table before 5.1.4, which is that spamming healing abilities doesn't lead to intelligent healing and results in over-healing.
4. Worst of all, imo, as a longtime Templar healer, it re-introduces a style of play that was nerfed to the ground due to issues in PvP. So you aren't learning from your "mistakes" AND are band-aiding band-aids with band-aids to the point that you've gone full circle and are introducing a change that's destined to be reverted if you consider that history tends to repeat itself. HUH? I will explain. The Templar heal, Breath of Life, has been nerfed repeatedly due to unfairness in PvP. It originally healed multiple people without requiring line of sight. It was deemed unfair because healers could come to the rescue without having to even "see" the person receiving the heal and gave Templars an unfair advantage and caused unfair "saves" in PvP without skill or direct awareness of battle. As this post is too long already, I won't look up the specifics, but the nerfing went something like "heal less number of people, then heal via a cone instead of ignoring LOS, then reduce the additional second heal that was left to be even less effective." Healers have stated that they won't be able to have the flexibility they had previously with multiple springs and orbs available to them, so instead of addressing this, you've now reintroduced/buffed a heal that chooses people at random, without requiring positioning, to be applicable to more people and, depending on who is analyzing the situation, will be more effective than either of its previous versions.

Does this potentially help stave off the criticisms that "stam healers" will be more effective or that healers don't have enough tools in their arsenal to heal through difficult content? Yes.

Does this address some of the more nuanced complaints about how healers spam abilities, will have less flexibility, and have an unimportant, boring role that for most PvE content won't be relevant? Nope. Makes it worse. Reinforces that healers should be healbots maintaining a boring rotation vs. intelligently triggering and placing heals based on group strategy and anticipated damage.

I have played since 2014, have "adapted" through massive changes, have three different healers, and am, for the first time, considering whether retiring my healers or taking a break from the game makes the most sense, since clearly the devs do not have an understanding of why PvE healing has been fun, the types of skills and activities we like to participate in, or what drives many of us to stick with the role. This simplistic balancing of abilities has gutted an enjoyable role that required adaptation and skill to play, which is adding insult to injury after the forced "Orbs" meta which falsely perpetuated the idea that all healers do is spam one or two abilities due to the visibility of Orbs and the fact that for many classes Springs was the only viable stackable heal.

********************************************

TLDR: The proposed healing changes for the next patch seem aimed at minimizing the dedicated PvE healer role more than ever before in ESO; comments and concerns about this direction have been completely ignored. Some community members are intrigued and/or in support of the eliminate of the dedicated healer role. While we are "owed" nothing, the community can give better feedback if we are given acknowledgement of the vision of the PvE healer role, and what was the intent of these proposed changes. Most of us wish the game well and are genuinely trying to help, but the silence regarding the vision for the PvE healer role is frustrating. Can ZOS define whether or not they see PvE healing as a dedicated role in the future, and why or why not? ZOS can do whatever they please with their game, so this is not a demand, but a request so that those of us who are trying to help can better understand the direction, and then better give our support or cut our losses and leave, as opposed to the current scenario where we are left to debate and guess as to the intent of these changes, even in the face of video evidence on PTS that our predictions for the role, should these changes go live, are right on the money.

Dear OP, thank you for the extensive, coherent (that’s not always the case!) writeup. I’m hoping to get a definitive explanation on their vision for class roles in the next class rep meeting, and this is something I will inquire about if given the opportunity.

My personal, completely unfounded and unverified belief is that the intent is to have an even softer trinity, where roles are less important than skills and gear changes on the fly as situations demand (ala GW2). I get this impression from how self-sustaining classes are and how arcadey the combat is.

peacenote

I much would have preferred if they left springs as is but played with the values.[/quote]

quadraxis666 wrote: »

peacenote wrote: »

quadraxis666 wrote: »

I feel sorry for all the time you wasted writing up such a well informed and articulate post that zos is going to ignore.

It may be ignored, but sometimes feedback does make it back and have an impact. I have made an effort to keep the discussion about the healing changes logical, intelligent, and in the forefront so that as different members of the community visit the forum they are aware of the potential changes and can weigh in.

Some initial proposals have been reverted or adapted, like the recent shield changes, but the problem with massive changes to the healing role are twofold: 1) there aren't as many people who primarily focus on PvE healing as there are folks whose focus is on DPS, and there even less people out there who heal with a non meta class that are knowledgable and also frequent the forums and 2) it is more difficult to directly measure the impact of healing changes, *especially* when the potential issue has to do with complex issues such as mobility, flexibility in a variety of situations, and enjoyment of the role. We can measure HPS but that only gets us so far.

Therefore, I'm trying to do my part to gather feedback I have seen and heard, as well as share my perspective as a longtime healer, since it is my primary role. If it falls on deaf ears, well.... at least I made an effort.

Sorry if I came off too cynical, it comes from experience- I've been right where you are now as a tank, first with the removal of stam regen while blocking, then the removal of heavy armor bracing passive forcing us into sturdy traited gear, and every little tweak, nerf and butchering in between. No amount of logical counter-argument or impassioned plea ever made an iota of difference.

The one takeaway I have is that at least tanks HAVE been able to adapt and stay relevant, for all the things zos has done to us over the years, they are nothing to what's being done to healers now, and it's a crying shame that the game has been brought to this state by its own developers.

I hear you 100%. Similar situation too in that there are less tanks in the game to advocate and it is harder to prove if changes impact "fun" and "flexibility" in that role.

peacenote

yodased wrote: »

Really feels like they are trying to move towards the original design documents which is really tje anti-mmo.

The game evolved into a bastardization of ideas. You still have people clamoring for "play as you want" and these changes move the ball in that direction.

Dedicated support only classes and roles never were the intention i don't think. I think they always had these visions but didn't have the team for it.

Well I actually agree, mostly, except for the comment about these changes moving us back in that direction. When the game first launched as a healer I could also add a fair amount of DPS and even had room for the Templar execute on my bars. As the game evolved and power creep increased the gap between what pure DPS *could* pull and what a healer could pull, so more and more "meta" rules for healers evolved, leading up to the sustain nerfs in Morrowwind and the "synergy" meta where it's now "critical" for us to provide sustain and orbs.

The mistake here is if anyone thinks reducing the amount of effective casts we can make with our skills will remedy any of this. It won't. To get us back, if that's the intent, group healing effectiveness would need to be increased and self heals need to be better balanced (maybe reduced but certainly not eliminated) so that heals are needed but healers can have more space for DPS skills on their bars. At least in PvE.

In other words, if they want healers to not just heal/be support, the heals we do have to be MORE effective and flexible and the DPS (or whatever else is envisioned) we bring have to be more effective and necessary.
These changes kinda do the opposite of that. No raid group is going to gimp their progress and damage by bringing three healers when the floor for damage required in new content keeps rising.

Also, unlike at launch, there has to be awareness and knowledge of the wide variety of experience across the new vs. seasoned players in the community, which is the natural evolution of any MMO. But what that means from a PvE standpoint is that healers have to be able to have tools in their arsenal to heal people that are learning mechanics and running around, as opposed to just a well-coordinated, stacked group.

I suppose the one argument here is that resto staves are less necessary but... why even have the weapon then?

At any rate, I think it's very unclear if these changes were made to enhance a specific vision on the PvE side, which is why I'm requesting clarification on the PvE healing role. But I agree that strict dedicated roles were not the vision of this game originally and that the game in many ways seems to have evolved inconsistently trying to accommodate conflicting ideas and (yes I'll say it) trying too hard to avoid a split and balancing differently between PvE vs PvP. Battle Spirit isn't leveraged enough. I fully support the fact that healing needed a change because of PvP. Just not sure where that leaves the PvE healers.