Astrologian Speculations! How will it fit in?

[Aurelinaus]

Your example seems flawed it purely relys on the tank, if you holys are going to shave off an entire 25 seconds of TTK, the pack will be dealing a whole lot more than 760dps, so for the sake of simplicity lets say that is after mitigation by the tank and falloff. To net you 6 holys you need 18s(15s w/ PoM), that translates to 13680 (11400) minus the 5320 from stun mitigation that's 8360 (6080) damage to the tank in that timeframe.

[KisaiTenshi]

Your example seems flawed it purely relys on the tank, if you holys are going to shave off an entire 25 seconds of TTK, the pack will be dealing a whole lot more than 760dps, so for the sake of simplicity lets say that is after mitigation by the tank and falloff. To net you 6 holys you need 18s(15s w/ PoM), that translates to 13680 (11400) minus the 5320 from stun mitigation that's 8360 (6080) damage to the tank in that timeframe.

It's flawed because Holy only gives 4 seconds of Stun and then is reduced by 50% for each consecutive Holy. So 4+2+1, so you get a maximum of 7 seconds, but the cast time is 3 seconds, so you only benefit from the initial stun.

[Cynfael]

It's flawed because Holy only gives 4 seconds of Stun and then is reduced by 50% for each consecutive Holy. So 4+2+1, so you get a maximum of 7 seconds, but the cast time is 3 seconds, so you only benefit from the initial stun.

7 seconds is a very long time.

Stoneskin and Regen are for safely setting up the initial Holy. Failing that, there's Swiftcast.

[Spoekes]

Ugh, I'll go over this again but broken records...

funny that this is coming especially from you.
Everything you repeated in this answer you wrote like 10 times in 5 different threads and has been derailed with actual facts by many others. I'm gonna leave it by that, go on repeating your tales.

It's flawed because Holy only gives 4 seconds of Stun and then is reduced by 50% for each consecutive Holy. So 4+2+1, so you get a maximum of 7 seconds, but the cast time is 3 seconds, so you only benefit from the initial stun.

Thats wrong again.
If you time it right, you benefit of full 7 secs stun, because holy triggers with a delay. Why am I even answering this....

[Aurelinaus]

It's flawed because Holy only gives 4 seconds of Stun and then is reduced by 50% for each consecutive Holy. So 4+2+1, so you get a maximum of 7 seconds, but the cast time is 3 seconds, so you only benefit from the initial stun.

and the 3rd and 4th holys remember there are 6 of them being cast

[Ghishlain]

Your example seems flawed it purely relys on the tank, if you holys are going to shave off an entire 25 seconds of TTK, the pack will be dealing a whole lot more than 760dps, so for the sake of simplicity lets say that is after mitigation by the tank and falloff. To net you 6 holys you need 18s(15s w/ PoM), that translates to 13680 (11400) minus the 5320 from stun mitigation that's 8360 (6080) damage to the tank in that timeframe.

It's flawed in the sense that I've intentionally skewed that scenario where it shows about equivalent HP/MP balance comparing DPS mitigation versus raw healing output and omitted a few more assumptions. For the majority of the time, the HP/MP efficiency should favour outright healing versus DPSing as a healer - though it is kinda hard to beat 0 MP consumed on SCH when Fairy and Lustrate can heal an entire instance.

Additional, to maintain that kind of damage output in the above scenario from a WHM, you will most likely need a Divine Seal'd Medica II and Regen. This HoTs would partially counter balance the oncoming damage since you would get something in the realm of 700hp/tick with my above scenario, so around 4,200 HP back in the 18 seconds. Then you'd have Benediction to fall back on as well if that was up, so you would build your chain-Holy around that scenario.

Shaving 25 seconds off total kill time isn't unreasonable, though might be a high end estimate depending on the group tier. For example, here's the final two packs of trash in Keeper of the Lake.

Total DPS is 1,382.22 over 90 seconds is 124,399.8 damage. If you remove the WHM from the equation, the total DPS is 909.1. To meet the same damage, your group would need about 137 seconds, which is 47 more seconds (23.5 second per pack).

Overall, healing will net a higher HP/MP efficiency. However, if you're sitting on so much MP anyway, why not go burn some to help the group along? Just know how not to overextend.

That's the beauty of healing - adapting to the scenarios given to you and building yourself around them.

-Snip-

Man, if you are CONSTANTLY (which I highly doubt) running into these kinds of healers, I'm glad I'm not on your data cluster.

These are bad healers:
- The healer that switches to cleric stance and never switches out of it*
* It's easier for the SCH to pull this off without being a detriment, but a WHM who does it, is playing inefficiently on purpose.

Agreed after one adds a bit that "the Healer is only DPSing." It's possible to maintain high Cleric's Stance up time at little detriment to the party, but that's both dependent on the skill of the healer and tank.

- The healer that constantly casts healbombs (eg Medica II) and then Holy's**
** I've yet to see anyone do this and not immediately attract all the aggro. Any healer that opens with Medica II without there being party-wide damage, is playing poorly on purpose.

There are a few variables to attest to this. I can personally do this with little repercussion to this with my party or myself and not get any hate as the tanks tend to know "OVERPOWER/FLASH SPAM TO HOLD HATE". Of course if you're doing this for single targets... well, yes, you are terrible.

- The healer that stands around doing nothing, jumping, dancing, or otherwise being obnoxious when there are healable targets.

Agreed.

By all accounts if a healer has enough time to be a clown, they should be doing something more productive.

Such as DPSing when no one is immediately in need of healing arts.

From what I'm reading the AST's stances will alternate between something similar to WHM and something similar to SCH, and speculation suggests it will be "healer mode" where the cards will cast spells that work like Cure I/Cure II/Cure III, and "support healer mode" which would be like casting Protect/Shell/Stoneskin/Regen/Medica II and other Heal-over-Time, and perhaps other time-based support magic that hasn't been shown yet. We don't know enough yet, so let's speculate back on what would make the AST preferable to WHM/SCH

I feel the cards will provide a buff will be independent from the restorative spells. These restorative spells, I feel, should be affected by the stances that Yoshi-P seems to be touting. I expect spells to be similar to Cure, Cure II, Medica, Succor, Adlo, Esuna, and Raise and the buffs to be more unique. It would be interesting if the card buffs themselves would be affected by stance, but I get the feeling they won't. Would like to be proven wrong in this regard, however.

[KisaiTenshi]

funny that this is coming especially from you.

Whatever, I'm not the one parading "WHM's are LAZY" nonsense that keeps fueling those threads.

Man, if you are CONSTANTLY (which I highly doubt) running into these kinds of healers, I'm glad I'm not on your data cluster.

I find it bizarre how certain people on the forum are insistent that there is enough time for a healer to DPS during any of the dungeon instances, because it seems like they're in bizzaro land. I've yet to run into an PUG DF instance where the Randoms played well enough from the start that they actually avoid taking damage. Like 2 in maybe 100, and they're usually tank+dps pairs from the same server/FC. The perfect random party is PLD/BLM/BRD with appropriate gear. Maybe people have just been facerolling through the dungeons too long with no new content and rely on powercreep over actual strategy. When was the last time I saw someone use Repose/Sleep? The nightmare combo is MNK/MNK, DRK/DRK, or NIN/NIN, since these combos require party healing frequently instead of single target healing.

As for AST...

I do wonder what will be done to keep it balanced versus WHM/SCH. It seems like anyone who starts the game and picks AST will have a horrible experience playing with other players who have already beaten all the 2.x content and just want to faceroll/speedpull through content.

[Kuwagami]

As for AST...

I do wonder what will be done to keep it balanced versus WHM/SCH. It seems like anyone who starts the game and picks AST will have a horrible experience playing with other players who have already beaten all the 2.x content and just want to faceroll/speedpull through content.

can't play AST if you haven't finished 2.55 main scenario quest. this issue will NOT exist at all. Also, from what it seems, AST is just the "you'll always have a WHM and a SCH in your party" type of healer. Probably less efficient than the 2 others in their specialty, but able to do both to fill in the empty spots.

[LycorisSelunis]

[QUOTE=Kuwagami;2877061]can't play AST if you haven't finished 2.55 main scenario quest. this issue will NOT exist at all. [QUOTE]

How do you figure this? Everything I have seen only says that you must own the expansion and only be level 30 to be any of the new jobs. Completing story is only for accessing the post level 50 content.

If I am wrong though i'd love to know the source @_@ I thought I was as on top of the info I could get as possible.

Interesting. Going to assume they'll have lowest DPS to compensate? Hate to see Dual Astrologians being optimal.

I doubt that would be the case. Without either WHM or SCH you are going to be missing significant buffs, though we don't yet know how the card buffs will work. Those may be able to cover some of the differences but seemingly random, not so sure how that would be reliable for raids. And as many have said, with the power to switch between the two stances it is likely they will not be the BEST at either.

[Kuwagami]

can't play AST if you haven't finished 2.55 main scenario quest. this issue will NOT exist at all.

How do you figure this? Everything I have seen only says that you must own the expansion and only be level 30 to be any of the new jobs. Completing story is only for accessing the post level 50 content.

If I am wrong though i'd love to know the source @_@ I thought I was as on top of the info I could get as possible.

The info about being able to access Ishgard without 2.55 MSQ was a mistranslation, clarified a bit after by SE

http://blog.us.playstation.com/2015/...d-new-details/

@PlayStation Will we have to finish the main campaign or reach a certain level to access Heavensward's main content?

Editor’s Note: After publishing this story, we received clarification from Square Enix for this question. The updated answer follows, but we’ve left the original answer in the story for transparency’s sake.

Naoki Yoshida: You will have to already own A Realm Reborn, plus complete all of the main story quests up through Patch 2.55. After that, an introductory quest for Heavensward will become available; accepting that quest will then guide you through the gates of Ishgard. All of the job quests related to the new jobs will be in Ishgard as well, so the condition to access those will be the same. If a player had stopped playing around Patch 2.2 or 2.3, it would be best to revisit the A Realm Reborn main story quests to get back into the groove as you head towards Heavensward!

Original Answer: If you already own A Realm Reborn and you get Heavensward, you’ll be able to at least enter Ishgard. The new jobs added in Heavensward are not tied to the main story, so those are accessible as well. In terms of the story, if you want to enjoy the Heavensward story arc, since it’s tied to the upcoming 2.55 patch, it’s a prerequisite to have finished that content. If a player had stopped playing around patch 2.2 or 2.3, I’d recommend choosing one of the new jobs and leveling that up while catching up on the story, then transitioning into Heavensward.