The Problem with Healer Feedback, and requested changes

[Shurrikhan]

Sorry for the late responses. Been busy and the parser thread ate up most of what time I had to spare.

I get that is a unique example, and yes, that's the lore for it, I concur. But it's not the only case. Again, Warlocks can't tank.

Not... officially, but... traditionally they have been viable tanks for quite a few magic-heavy encounters, much like non-tank DKs, Arms Warriors (while Fury were instead good soakers due to self-healing), etc.

The thing is, DPS, already have sub-roles (and are the only role that really does)

A large part of which are already contradictory / unnecessary / mere balance cop-outs. There's no real difference between Striking, Scouting, and Maiming outside of "Hah! This full role should take more than twice as long to gear per job!" nor between Aiming (Physical Ranged) and Casting (Magical DPS) at this point except to say, "We, the devs like the aesthetic of when you have at least one member with a bow/gun/chakram, at least one with a staff/book/focus, and one with no range, and so we'll reward (punish) you for (not) doing that in place of balancing whichever of those groups might otherwise underperform too badly to be taken."

I was referring to healers, but we did have most parties bringing one of each tank to take advantage of their individual pros and cons.

In the perhaps those individual pros and cons were more varied than just "has more damage" but even then, when there were only two tanks and more fights had both tank LB3 checks and DPS checks that'd require a damage LB, it was as much to do with the LB penalty of having repeat jobs... and only two tanks in the game.

I guess what I meant by the asking is that you would probably like (or at least prefer to present) that kind of healing gameplay? Is that an accurate assessment?

That'd depend on what aspects of ARR SCH you're referring to.

Overall, yes, I definitely prefer it to today's SCH. Stormblood, though, if with slight changes to Dissipation, Fey Blessing, and Selene, would probably be the peak to me.

I think this depends on the player. You say [the "CD metronome" can act as a rotational] anchor, but that's only true if there's no drift, no boss mechanics causing you to miss or delay things, no untargetable phases, and you consistently use all CDs on CD.

I would have to say the opposite. The only time "CD metronome" adds to gameplay is when there is drift that one then has active and diverse means to compensate for based on expected further drift before that next occurrence of that "CD metronome". Hence the examples of ShB Tsubame-Gaeshi or Stormblood Hagakure. And if it can't add gameplay in that process of rotational compensation to still optimize it and that's not merely due to a particular fight being pitifully dull in its effortless 100% melee uptime, I would consider that tool to be bloat (like Lucid Dreaming, etc.).

[Renathras]

Sorry for the late responses.

All good.

1 - Other than Twin Emperors in Vanilla, I'm not sure Warlock has ever had a fight where they were SUPPOSED to be a tank. I'm not even sure if they were EXACTLY supposed to be for that fight so much as their kit just worked for it, so it was a lucky coincidence. But there was a point before Warlords, I think, where for a patch there was a glyph for Demonology where they could basically use their transformation as a tanking stance and legitimately tank 5 man dungeons, and some people played around with them doing harder stuff. Sorta like Enhance tanking (which worked up to level 40-45 or so in Vanilla and which someone tanked Uldar with in Wrath...but with the entire raid party supporting that). Unfortunately, it was yet another case where Blizzard decided fun was unacceptable and had to be nerfed. Then they made Demon Hunter as basically the same thing... <_<

2 - Maybe, but I don't mean armor types. Melee vs Ranged vs Caster. Arguably within each there is a further subdivision with each having a selfish Job (SAM, MCH even now, BLM), and then ranges of utility. Ranged (even MCH) are pretty clearly designed for a shoehorned Support Role in a game that refuses to have a Support Role. Each of the other sub-roles have support leaning members, though it's most obvious with Casters having RDM and SMN falling somewhere in the middle. It's not flawless, but it's far more noticeable and impactful than "Pure/Barrier" (which has been an utter failure to the point SCH/SGE is downright common) or "Main Tank/Off Tank" from ShB, which worked so poorly they dropped it. The only "real" Healer sub-role right now is "buffs the party" or "isn't meta outside of niche cases", with WHM getting the shortest end of that stick.

3 - Yeah, I figured SB would be your peak. I was just wondering if you disliked ARR SCH or just liked it...less, I suppose?

4 - I feel like an anchor that moves isn't...really an anchor. Maybe we mean something different with that term. Like on WHM, PoM is an anchor to me. On SCH, Chains Strategem. On RDM, Embolden. NOT Manification. Manification has a 110 sec CD and should not generally be held (optimally) for Embolden because this can cost you a use over the fight, meaning you intentionally drift it to the left out of buff windows. It can't be an anchor because it moves. Embolden, on the other hand, is optimally used on CD (whether or not it lines up with your melee/burst combo) instead of being used selfishly. Embolden is an anchor because it stays in the same place and, as long as you're using it on CD (which you should) gives you a static point of reference and you can use its CD or coming off CD as a metric to know about where you should be in your rotation, where the party is in theirs, if you have a potion window coming up, and can use it for those "Okay, so in about 20 seconds, the Boss should start using X mechanic..." reference points. SOOOO...perhaps we just mean different things by this term, I guess? (Also agree Lucid is dreaming - just bake the MP regen into our base stats at this point, SE... <_< "Oh, you can use it for recovery after you've been Raised!", yeah, but not if it's on CD because of you keeping it relatively on CD if you died at all recently after using it.)

[Shurrikhan]

I'm not even sure if they were EXACTLY supposed to be for that fight so much as their kit just worked for it, so it was a lucky coincidence.

Hard to tell back then. Which was maybe even a little charming in its own right.

But there was a point before Warlords, I think, where for a patch there was a glyph for Demonology where they could basically use their transformation as a tanking stance and legitimately tank 5 man dungeons, and some people played around with them doing harder stuff.

There was. Granted, one could also tank 5-man dungeons as a Beastmastery Hunter even go 5-DPS some 3 or more among Ret/Feral/Arms/Enhance/Frost (DK) back in the day, so long as the team was skilled enough. I suppose things managed to be more free back then even without necessarily increasing lenience, just due to there being less passive eHP bloat or such absurd active eHP peaks on tanks for that content to necessarily be tuned around.

Arguably within each there is a further subdivision with each having a selfish Job (SAM, MCH even now, BLM), and then ranges of utility.

Kinda, but that's only relevant to single-target buffs. Without a DNC or AST, there's really no difference between having a pure exploiter (SAM, MCH, BLM) or just taking yet another buffer.

Ranged (even MCH) are pretty clearly designed for a shoehorned Support Role in a game that refuses to have a Support Role.

Agreed, and it's a mess. I feel like that mostly comes down to their failure to ever actually make meaningful management out of MP (or even get close to that outside of maybe a couple fights within very particular eras) or, even more obviously, TP, instead leaving it solely as an unlikeable starvation for TP and MP users just to give BRD/MCH something to weave into their periods of low throughput. MP/TP were a decent Phys. Ranged mechanic, but they've never been a game mechanic, only a poorly implemented constraint.

It's not flawless, but it's far more noticeable and impactful than "Pure/Barrier" (which has been an utter failure to the point SCH/SGE is downright common) or "Main Tank/Off Tank" from ShB, which worked so poorly they dropped it. The only "real" Healer sub-role right now is "buffs the party" or "isn't meta outside of niche cases", with WHM getting the shortest end of that stick.

On a broader point, I feel like the game simply needs to decide whether they want (A), effectively, a few shades each of 4 jobs, or if they want (B) as many jobs as appear separately in their list.

If the latter, they may have to facilitate multileveling and simply accept that, depending on one's state of progression and what all others can bring to the table, some jobs may be advantaged over others within a given fight and that may be okay as long as, across the whole of time spent in these various fights, there's still a decent parity in value.

At that point, btw, something like your thought-experiment Support/Pure Healer distinction wouldn't be so bad. (I'd just still prefer to stay away from any such sub-role templating for the same reason I'd prefer to stay away from virtually any and all templating, and would have preferred, even, that we had kept WAR and PLD distinct and simply instead worked out the obvious balance oversights that plagued Warrior at the time.)

[ASkellington]

I'd rather see healing archetypes (regen healer/burst healer/shield healer/heal by damage) than this asinine dichonomy they stubbornly cling to. It clearly isn't working with how much all four borrow from each other (see SGE being a near copy pasted SCH).

It won't get rid of the overlap entirely, but it would make the healers feel more distinct than they do now.

[ForsakenRoe]

Agreed with Skel, there's no 'split' in the 7 healers in WOW like Pure/Barrier. The closest there is, is whether they're flagged internally as 'melee or ranged' healer for deciding mechanics. EG on Sludgefist, people are chained together. Snap the chain with distance, die instantly. Melee healers are linked to melee players, ranged healers to ranged players. Other than that, you've got 'cleric style club you with mace' Holy Paladin, 'Vanilla throughput' Holy Priest, 'Do damage to heal premiere' Disc Priest, 'weave between applying HOTs and extending them with physical violence' Mistweaver Monk, 'you have one direct heal, everything else is HOTs' Resto Druid, 'Totems and healing rain and chain heal, oh my' Resto Shaman, and the new kid on the block 'Time magic done really well surprisingly (plus some boring Green spells, they're boring though)' Preservation Evoker. They all work regardless of comp, you don't go 'Ah we have 2 throughput healers, we need a Disc for the shields' because that's not how WOW raid design works. There's no 'you mit this or you die instantly' kind of thing really, it's more 'you take 30% of your HP every second, pump like your life depends on it'. Because it does. Maybe you take certain healers for Mythic, because of their CDs like Aura Mastery or Spirit Link, but that's utility talk, and not to do with the way they deploy their HPS.

Maybe SE could do with less reliance on oneshot raidwides, that you have to Feint Addle Tactician Soil Succor and it STILL drops you to 20% week 1. This tier showed that people aren't so hot at dealing with them...

[Renathras]

I agree that WoW was far more charming back when there was more variation. Though it was more "casual" than Everquest (remembering that EQ had world boss fights that had to be fought in shifts because of how many hours it would take to beat them - like potentially multiple DAYS worth of HP bar...and I mean irl days with 70 people beating on them or whatever it was), it was still unpolished and unrefined. It eventually became a "themepark" probably late Wrath and into Cata, where the Devs wanted a far more curated experience, and that's when it started to lose its charm and eventually lost me. Like pre-Cata, Holy Priests would have many versions of the Heal Spell on their bar. This is because Heal Rank 3 would do less healing, but have a lower mana cost and maybe lower cast time. In fact, Lesser Heal, Heal, and Greater Heal were three names for the same thing. Lesser Heal had 3 ranks, I believe, with the last one at level 15 or so, and Heal rank 1 was basically a slight improvement on the same spell and picked up the track for 7 or 8 ranks before Greater Heal took over. But HPriests basically used the quirk of this system to make their own heals that they could tailor to the situation, using the right heal for the situation at hand.

...then Cata came and the Devs decided they new better, so there were no ranks, and there were just three kinds of basic heal every healer had - a medium cost, slow as Christmas cast big heal; a high cost, really fast, little heal; and a low cost, nearly as slow as Christmas, slightly larger heal. In addition to making healers heal like crap since the encounter designers forgot they were supposed to be going for a triage model, it also made healers samey, but perhaps worse, it took away player agency and all those little quirks. They eventually just did away with talent trees with that not really 100% true argument everyone used the cookie-cutter build, and then you were just hard-locked into a spec to do anything, which removed almost all of the quirks. The last ones were removed later, like when they split Feral and the new Guardian Druids.

WoW still had healer subroles - mainly tank healer vs party healer - but in trying to break that, they really just broke healers and never quite got them fixed to a way I liked before I quit playing.
.

Shurrikhan - Honestly, I don't DISagree with you on all that. We've kinda got designed into a corner at this point.

.

ForsakenRoe - That said, in WoW, this was once the case as well. Every 10 man in Wrath and Cata had either a Paladin or Disc Priest in a guaranteed slot as the tank healer. The other slot was taken by any one of the others as the raid/party healer. In 25 mans, it was GENERALLY expected that a raid team would have one of each healer. There was a little wiggle room on this, but having 5 healer slots tended to mean you did - Holy Paladin for tank healing, Disc Priest for kind of support healing, Resto Shaman for raid sustain with HoT rolling, Resto Shaman for raid burst healing, and Holy Priest for kind of "fill in" healing as it could do a little of all types. A lot of raid groups would carry 6 healers, and so when Fistweaving was added, they just had that as their 6th. You HAD to have them for the longest time because of their individual dispells, then they made it where 5 and 10 man content debuffs were all just the "Magic" type and they gave all the dispells the trait of dispelling their type (Paladin was Disease, Druid was Poison or Curse, I can't remember, Shaman the other, and Priest was...maybe Disease too, I don't remember, and there were some that had two types), and made them where they were for their one type + for magic, so they could all do the job in smaller group content (Priest had a slight advantage from AOE Dispell Magic), but in big raids, you were expected to have one of each and the Devs made debuffs of each type in encounters so if you didn't have one of each, you were kind of screwed.

.

There were a lot of things they did differently back then.

.

ASkellington - I've heard it said that the Pure/Barrier dichotomy doesn't work because Barrier Healers have to be able to heal (non-coordinated group content) even if there are 2x Barrier Healers. This ultimately makes Pure Healers redundant. Add to that the community's hyperfocus on damage > all and it means the community will largely pick Healers that do "enough" healing (all of them) and then pick the ones that buff damage after that. Leading to the AST/SCH meta.

Oddly, SCH/SGE was quite popular (mostly because they both heal by oGCDs and together they have a massive mitigation suit that they can chain to provide consistent mitigation for the party, which in turn can lead to safer prog runs and more consistent and reliable damage for farm runs) as an alternative. So this gives every healer a place other than WHM, because it has neither the buffs of AST nor the mitigation suit of SGE that clicks together like perfectly interlocking puzzle pieces with SCH.

So even now we don't have a system that's working. I hope the Pure/Barrier thing goes the way of the Main Tank/Off Tank thing. Either lean fully into it to make it work or abandon it. Half-assing stuff like that results in the system just entirely breaking down. And that's even if we ignore AST solo healing Ultimates. XD

[Shurrikhan]

I'd rather see healing archetypes (regen healer/burst healer/shield healer/heal by damage) than...

I guess my concern is that the pure/shield distinction is meant to be a distinction in result, or in what is uniquely provided, but what you're aiming to replace it with is only necessarily distinction in process.

For instance, a barrier healer theoretically provides {not dying from one-shot heal checks or to a further degree of vulnerability stacks} and a pure healer provides {not dying from repeated heavy damage}, but what does "heal via damage dealt" actually provide?

Healing through damage dealt is, in itself, only a constraint, so what's the reasonable compensation? Would it, as per examples from other MMOs, just be "slightly higher combined damage and healing if/when everything's going right"? Or would it simply be some other utility feature of the job that has nothing necessarily to do with that constraint anyways?

So even now we don't have a system that's working. I hope the Pure/Barrier thing goes the way of the Main Tank/Off Tank thing. Either lean fully into it to make it work or abandon it. Half-assing stuff like that results in the system just entirely breaking down. And that's even if we ignore AST solo healing Ultimates. XD

I don't feel like the present failings in how (un)equally attractive different jobs are for raiding are even because of that Pure/Barrier distinction, though. It's more a matter of their just not being enough (especially, GCD) healing to do for something like WHM to present any advantage outside of its single arbitrary bonus -- Afflatus Misery for multi-target burst.

I've heard it said that the Pure/Barrier dichotomy doesn't work because Barrier Healers have to be able to heal (non-coordinated group content) even if there are 2x Barrier Healers. This ultimately makes Pure Healers redundant.

I've heard the same, but... it doesn't really make any more sense than the idea that Pure Healers should be able to meet every mitigation check.

If either one brings something wholly unnecessary, they start to seem redundant, but, perhaps worse, if both are required then you have a very high chance of "Death by composition check," which would ruin any matchmade content unless it badly worsened an already bottlenecking queue by truly splitting it into those sub-roles.

Personally, I feel like the distinction, if it's to be drawn up roughly as it already is now, should simply come down to different particulars of ease. Pure Healers should be better able to salvage stepping in fire when you step in the fire. Barrier healers should be better able to keep you from dying (to unavoidable damage) because of having stepped in the fire almost a minute ago (via vuln stacks) and occasionally sacrifice their own would-be damage for others' uptime.

[ForsakenRoe]

Healing through damage dealt is, in itself, only a constraint, so what's the reasonable compensation? Would it, as per examples from other MMOs, just be "slightly higher combined damage and healing if/when everything's going right"? Or would it simply be some other utility feature of the job that has nothing necessarily to do with that constraint anyways?

I guess the answer to that I'd give is 'when you're playing good, your healing occurs naturally as you're doing your damage, you don't need to think about it because it's happening semi-automatically'. I say semi, because eg: with my SGE rework ideas, you'd have to press augments like Krasis or Zoe still. But they're OGCD, they don't cost damage to use, they just slot in as a weave and you carry on. In WOW terms again though, they're more akin to old Warrior's Heroic Strike, you can weave the button press OGCD, but it doesn't take effect until the next autoattack. So there's a difference in feel between it and something like Hamstring, which was a true OGCD.

One major thing is that, similarly to barrier healers atm to an extent, playing from behind on a 'damage to healing' healer can be rough. It's really hellish to try and stabilize as a Disc in current WOW, or a Holy Paladin. Which is why I tried to keep the lifeline of 'Prognosis/Diagnosis are MP free', so you have a reliable fallback if you need it. Playing well means you shouldn't need it, but if it all goes tits up, you're not up the proverbial creek without a paddle.

But one other reason to have it is just 'its a different style of healing', I guess. Why does Resto Druid layer loads of HOTs, when the sheer burst healing power of a GCD from a Holy Priest or a MW Monk do similar output, but without the 'wait for the ticks' thing? Different gameplay styles, more player choice, more engaging. Healing as a Resto Druid is very different to healing as a Holy Priest, is very different to Disc. Heck, just the fact that Holy and Disc are SO different, means swapping between the two can be nice just to spice up the gameplay

A phrase like 'heal by doing damage' can help be a vehicle for class identity. Like imagine the new healer had been Necromancer instead of Sage, with a heavy focus on keeping up debuffs on the enemy that cause HP drain effects, stealing enemy HP to fuel the job gauge, spending that stolen life force to heal allies. Now imagine that it played like 'WHM, but it holds a scythe instead of a staff', down to carbon copies of Lilies, Medica2, Asylum, Tetra, etc. We'd (rightly) be asking 'why is this WHM but with an edgy coat of paint', as we do re: Sage being conspicuously SCH shaped

[Shurrikhan]

I guess the answer to that I'd give is 'when you're playing good, your healing occurs naturally as you're doing your damage, you don't need to think about it because it's happening semi-automatically'.

But is that really an advantage, to let the job essentially "play itself" when things are going good?

That kind of seems like a worst of both worlds, especially given that a healer that cannot choose to purely heal or purely damage, but instead will always have their burst healing held back by the strength of their combined overall damage+healing output, will be far harder pressed whenever things don't go perfectly right?

Output, at least, I could see as being a feature, but being semi-automatic? Moreover, to even be that way, it'd need to have very little control over the timing of its damage, either, which would make it even worse off (and more akin to a DPS with the likes of a permanent Vampiric Embrace than akin to a Healer).

Why does Resto Druid layer loads of HOTs, when the sheer burst healing power of a GCD from a Holy Priest or a MW Monk do similar output, but without the 'wait for the ticks' thing?

They don't quite, though, at least for so long as I've been playing them (~8 years).

A Resto druid preemptively layering HoTs before its burst will certainly exceed the HPS of a Holy Priest or Mistweaver, especially in repeated cycles (since the Holy Priest will depend in large part on CDs), else there'd be no reason to take the HoTs (themselves a weakness, as the healing is less responsive). After all, the concern over in that game isn't just the total healing a HoT will do, but also how much HPS it can add. Because HoTs can be laid out before their HPS is actually needed and Resto Druids can layer their more direct healing and/or HoT-consumption atop that, they can leverage the compensation for that weakness into very high near-burst HPS.

And that, the high potential HPS that can't be easily exhausted through CD depletion, is the advantage they actually bring to the party, not the fact that they use HoTs.

A phrase like 'heal by doing damage' can help be a vehicle for class identity.

It can, absolutely. And I think it's essential that the means differ. Heavily. The jobs feel far too similar at present.

But again, if we're looking to keep each job competitive, which then has to do with the advantage each brings to a party, then that's a matter of the result, not just the means or vehicle it comes by.

I would like, therefore, to see also what intended advantages come from/with each job under these alignments/categorizations.



For instance, something like (though overly wordy and including undermechanics not in the game)...

• WHM - highest depth and breadth of indirect, non-rDPS utility (leading Cleanse efficiency and good Purge capacity via Water; Levitation, Downforce, and Swift via Wind; point-mitigation and knockbacks via Earth) and leading near-burst capacity (more sustained than a mere few seconds of healing, but far from constant HPS/DPS); best armor-buster; comparatively high survivability if not pinned down.
  
  
• SCH - greatest ability to turn combat in a directed way atop mitigating and/or predicting specific threats (forewarning on random targeting, more quickly exposed weaknesses, etc); can fire Leeched debuffs into enemies via Energy Spike; high accuracy, pinpoint attacks excel against breachable armor and fliers.
  
  
• AST - greatest point-support power and versatility, especially useful for supporting parties of unequal performance levels, atop considerable planned ally and enemy movement assistance through gravity manipulation (generally highly useful against especially heavy or light enemies; useful for Launching enemies otherwise two heavy or Grounding fliers).
  
  
• SGE - greatest combined healing and damage when things are going well, and especially well-suited for substituting the position of a physical combatant in terms of damage suppression or baiting mechanics; hypermobile, with excellent mild multi-tasking useful for mitigating the uptime costs of using certain forms of minor utility.

[ForsakenRoe]

But is that really an advantage, to let the job essentially "play itself" when things are going good?

That kind of seems like a worst of both worlds, especially given that a healer that cannot choose to purely heal or purely damage, but instead will always have their burst healing held back by the strength of their combined overall damage+healing output, will be far harder pressed whenever things don't go perfectly right?

Output, at least, I could see as being a feature, but being semi-automatic? Moreover, to even be that way, it'd need to have very little control over the timing of its damage, either, which would make it even worse off (and more akin to a DPS with the likes of a permanent Vampiric Embrace than akin to a Healer).

So, like Resto Druid or Disc Priest, the reason it'd be 'an advantage' is the gameplay feel. Setting up your HOTs on Resto for the big raidwide damage HPS check thing, then hitting that Flourish to double their output and watching the HPS bars just shoot up (especially with how HOTs tick way more often in WOW anyway) is satisfying to see. Likewise, other people might find the instant jump from 10% to 70% because of a well timed Power Word: Life on Holy Priest. The reason I think 'do damage causes heal' would be 'an advantage' is because, atm, we have a very large disconnect between our healing and our damage, when it comes to GCDs. It's jarring to swap from our damage kit to our 'pump HPS for JWaves' kit. With a proper 'do damage, causes healing' kit, the two would be much more intertwined, and feel a lot more fluid.

Vampiric Embrace is interesting-ish, but not quite what I'm thinking of. Like, I was playing Guardian Druid in DF, and we now have a talent called 'After the Wildfire'. Every time I spend 200 Rage, I explode a burst of healing (about 60k in my gear) to all around me. Which is nice, but that is what I'd call semi-autonomous. I can't control when it goes off, it's happening at times pretty much out of my control, and I'd have to purposely play bad to get it to be timed right (not using Ironfur just to get it timed right). No, maybe I worded it wrong and that's MB. When I said 'semi-autonomously' re: SGE, I meant more like 'when you're playing correctly, it's happening alongside the damage'. You're still having to do Disc/Resto style 'set up' windows before the damage comes in. There's still 'choice' about what to use, and when. But when you are 'optimized', it's something you're not thinking about per se, as you're doing it instinctively. And since the effects I went for in my suggestion last only 4 hits (but can be used as much as you want, as long as you have the MP to fund it), VE's not exactly the most accurate comparison. It's more akin to setting up Atonements on Disc, I guess. But instead of lasting X seconds, I made them last X attacks.

And yeh, I guess theoretically, the SGE doing their healing via damage isn't covering everything in the raid, just as they don't now. They'd still have to rely on the cohealer for some things. As an example, let's take a raidwide, idk Hemitheos' Dark IV in P6S. Big damage, no bleed. As it stands, one Ixochole and one PI Rapture, and it's sorted. So, what if instead, we had the SGE able to PanKardia/Krasis/Soteria to cause some healing when they do damage? This way, we instead can go Ixochole, 'maybe' a Rapture (the SGE damage-heal might cover it if there's enough augments used) and therefore the WHM can keep their PI for something else. Or we could go Asylum/SGE damage-healing, and the Kardia heals are all buffed by the Asylum, meaning the burst healing of Ixochole and PI Rapture are still available for something else (in prog, very handy). The 'reward' is that your combat flow isn't going to get interrupted by having to press Eukrasian Prognosis, if you're skilled enough to cover it via the 'damage causes healing, which causes shielding' augment (I forgot which one I assigned that to, maybe it's Zoe)