Concerns about " Getting rid of unused and ineffective actions"

[Lokier]

snip

Stone 2 is great in raids and parties... I can buff everyone at once, not one person at a time. It's a time saver, for me anyway. Stone 2... I dunno that might be okay to get rid of.
Thunder 2 is useful for me because I do a lot of leveling roulette, and if I'm nerfed down to a certain level that I can't use thunder 3, but I'm able to use thunder 2, I'm using thunder 2...

[Norleas]

Thunder 2 is useful for me because I do a lot of leveling roulette, and if I'm nerfed down to a certain level that I can't use thunder 3, but I'm able to use thunder 2, I'm using thunder 2...

Thunder 2 should just be converted into a trait instead for thunder 1, and thunder 3 should just be called thunder 2.

[Talraen]

Instead of removing sleep, I'd like to see them make it a cross-class spell for the healer role. That way, you can guarantee every dungeon party has access to it, which would let them actually make it relevant.

[Lambdafish]

Haymaker and featherfoot are useful, though haymaker I think should be similar to DRK's ability after parrying and be off GCD.

Can I ask how they are useful??

Also featherfoot was shown as a specific example in the keynote, so the devs agree with me

Stone 2 is great in raids and parties... I can buff everyone at once, not one person at a time. It's a time saver, for me anyway. Stone 2... I dunno that might be okay to get rid of.
Thunder 2 is useful for me because I do a lot of leveling roulette, and if I'm nerfed down to a certain level that I can't use thunder 3, but I'm able to use thunder 2, I'm using thunder 2...

Stone 2, not Stoneskin 2, Stone 2 is the DPS skill. As for Thunder 2, the reason that you give is exactly the reason that it is useless. Why is Thunder 3 not a trait for thunder 2? why does it need to be another skill? Having both makes one irrelevant.

[Lokier]

snip.

Honestly, BLM sucks for combat space in general anyway, if they combined thunder 1 and 2, or thunder 2 and 3 together I could fit Transpose onto my front bar. So I'm all for them removing something from them.

I think the reason there's 3 thunders is just because of what I mentioned about level restrictions, but, as you said, what they should have done is just make it that it just adds a buff into your spell book improving the ability at a certain level.

Trying to think what spells I think are useless... Featherfoot is okay, sometimes it saves my ass in solo-combat or in POTD, but I doubt I'd miss it if it were removed.

My main is a ninja so I can only comment on her class there;

I never use Hyoton, they should make that a specifically pvp-nin spell. Mug is useful, it gives you a protection buff as long as you have Viper Venom, but I think it would be better if they combined it into a different spell instead.
I dunno if I can consider Sneak Attack of any use to me because it activates my Trick Attack CD, as they're linked, and I'm obviously going to use TA over SA because of that sexy 10% damage decrease to enemies.

[Norleas]

Can I ask how they are useful??

Also featherfoot was shown as a specific example in the keynote, so the devs agree with me

Featherfoot if anything could use a buff, maybe 20% base skill and 30%+ with monk trait. It may not be guaranteed damage mitigation but you also have a good chance of completely stopping damage. Also haymaker, like I said before, would be very good for solo play if it was an ability instead.

[Rikku1987]

Stone 2, not Stoneskin 2, Stone 2 is the DPS skill. As for Thunder 2, the reason that you give is exactly the reason that it is useless. Why is Thunder 3 not a trait for thunder 2? why does it need to be another skill? Having both makes one irrelevant.

I use thunder2(instead of thunder1) on my BLM because damage from procs is definied by what dot is currently on boss and not what cast you use after it proc'd, so proc from it has a higher potency.
thunder3 even more but cost too much mana and cast time is too high (i only swiftcast that)

Also duration is longer than thunder1. I like it more than thunder1 after ice3 for mana to fill up.. also, useing ice3+thunder1+ice4+fire3 isnt always enough time for your mana to fill up(but with T2 it is cause slightly longer cast, but not as long as T3), so for me as BLM main i DO need all 3 of them..

[Kaurie]

I use thunder2(instead of thunder1) on my BLM because damage from procs is definied by what dot is currently on boss and not what cast you use after it proc'd, so proc from it has a higher potency.
thunder3 even more but cost too much mana and cast time is too high (i only swiftcast that)

Also duration is longer than thunder1. I like it more than thunder1 after ice3 for mana to fill up.. also, useing ice3+thunder1+ice4+fire3 isnt always enough time for your mana to fill up, so for me as BLM main i DO need all 3 of them

Thunder and Thunder II have the same per tick potency. The length of the DoT is defined by which Thunder you use on Thundercloud (i.e. you cast Thunder, proc's cast Thunder III, you get the dot duration of Thunder III with the potency of Thunder I - except all 3 Thunder's have the same potency per tick, so that point is moot).