It's on both, maybe your settings are different, but it's always been like this for me.
![]()
Yes, each hit is calculated separately, that's why there's damage variance and why you can get only 1 or 2 hits that crit. I can't get a picture though, because it refuses to crit for me, so I gave up.
Here you go.
Checked the battle log to make sure it wasn't a regular attack that does it. Here's 2 different instances where critical hit is involved on the Battle Log. The red and green arrows indicate the effects of the used skill. In this case, Dream within a dream attacks thrice and there's different critical hit variance for each attack. Bloodbath calculates based on damage and has a maximum scale based on enemy's HP. The first battle log screenshot was against a Lv 1 training dummy so bloodbath all stayed the same because it can't heal more than a certain amount of the enemy's HP. The second one was against a lv 50 training dummy. Kardia has its own healing potency so it doesn't have a finnicky scaling based on enemy's remaining HP and damage.
Img 1:
Img 2:
![]()
Last edited by AnotherPerson; 08-25-2023 at 04:05 AM.
Nice. That quite thoroughly demonstrates all the technical aspects.
Broader question, though: Is it feel better/necessary for Kardia's interactions to exploit multi-hits specifically, or just that it should be able to exploit variances in its triggering GCDs?
I feel like literally doubling/tripling/quadrupling its value via multi-hits would mean, in accordant balance, that the single-hit version would hardly be noticeable, so I'm a little worried about attempting to give it such a range.
Simply having it scale with damage, though, would already fit its bigger GCD hits quite nicely, I would think.
Which had very little to do with the position so much as that said poster was very, very obviously using a strawman (that the current discourse had supposed that any increased offensive agency on healers would necessarily be mere a 123 combo) just to smirch a far broader position (that the current Broil spam gameplay can be favorably replaced/augmented through additions to healers' downtime depth)....while TRUE, I've noticed that people will often carry a grudge against some people so hard they legitimately WON'T agree with them even if they're saying the same things. Sabezy just said she's "done with me" for agreeing with someone who literally said something I've said many times, and then stated her position, which is in agreement (on several of the major bullet points and to a degree overall) with my own position. Ty and I actually agreed on a number of things, but he would attack me for it or refuse to admit when we did. Some people here have outright accused me of being disingenuous when I agreed with them...on positions I'd already been on the record holding, even accusing me of trying to pull something by being too nice.
Sebazy, myself, and others gave the benefit of the doubt at first that he had simply seen the healer 123 combos idea elsewhere and assumed it was far more popular than it actually was and contextualized it for him, only to be repeatedly ignored in favor of a red herring and blatant misinformation. By the point of your agreeing with the poster, his behavior had clearly gone the way of trolling/purposefully derailing, and given the timing of your previous responses around his own, it probably seemed likely you were aware of that.
Sebazy herself had already concurred with that poster. The difference would be the when (before he purposely ignored all factual correction and repeatedly pretended that no one had already and again contested the idea) and why (providing context, rather than coming in after the fact to join the guy in beating down a strawman to celebrate a moment of "Eyy! We agree!").
If I get time to read prior posts, I tend to cite those who beat to a given point that I felt needed to be made, regardless of who made it. That's almost as often yours as, say, Roe's, Ty's, or Aravell's.I'm a bit shocked you of all people are saying that considering...
Again, we've agreed on a lot of shit. We just approach certain things rather differently, wherein I like to find a means to make all parties happy first (by resolving unnecessary bottlenecks / removing unnecessary constraints) and compromise only if necessary, whereas it's felt like you tend to jump straight towards that compromise, trying to resolve who should get what portions of time on the 8-lane intersection while I'd have just installed a roundabout.
I would replace already existing Sage oGCDs with those multi-hit abilities, so the normal single-hit version would still be noticeable as your passive healing (like Eos) since all of your big Kardia heals are still restricted by cooldowns.Broader question, though: Is it feel better/necessary for Kardia's interactions to exploit multi-hits specifically, or just that it should be able to exploit variances in its triggering GCDs?
I feel like literally doubling/tripling/quadrupling its value via multi-hits would mean, in accordant balance, that the single-hit version would hardly be noticeable, so I'm a little worried about attempting to give it such a range.
I think the plan isn't really to just staple high potency Kardia healing on top of the already strong oGCD heals that Sage has, but replace the fire and forget abilities with something that interacts with your core job mechanic.
Last edited by Absurdity; 08-25-2023 at 03:35 PM.
I mean, feel free to bind/siphon additional healing potency-per-minute specifically to attacks as you wish, but that seems a separate issue.I would replace already existing Sage oGCDs with those multi-hit abilities, so the normal single-hit version would still be noticeable as your passive healing (like Eos) since all of your big Kardia heals are still restricted by cooldowns.
I think the plan isn't really to just staple high potency Kardia healing on top of the already strong oGCD heals that Sage has, but replace the fire and forget abilities with something that interacts with your core job mechanic.
Which seems like the better fit for what should heal more on Sage: Greater total damage in the given spell, or solely the numbers of hits it has? Effects being arbitrary, should the big lazer animation Pnuema heal for less than a bunch of wispy little muted shots via, say, Smínos Melissón ("swarm of bees")?
Is there something you specifically want from a dichotomy where some skills may deal more damage (via fewer hits) but others heal for more (via a lower total damage but more hits)? EDIT: And does that seem like a healing/damage priority lever that you want to create specifically in that way?
Last edited by Shurrikhan; 08-25-2023 at 04:26 PM.
Yeh, rather than having Physis as a standard HOT, it could have been stacks of 'everyone gets healed by AOEKardia'. Druochole could have, instead of being Lustrate 2, been 'you trigger Kardia healing 4 times with this one move', stuff like that, that incentivizes thinking about who Kardia's applied to, not just 'is it on the MT'
Trying to do an EX roulette run with no OGCDs except Krasis and Soteria is actually quite interesting, dare I say fun, because of how fast you can hot-swap Kardia from one player to another. If they shortened the CD on it from 5 down to 2s so you could swap after every GCD if needed, that'd be nice
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Cookie Policy
This website uses cookies. If you do not wish us to set cookies on your device, please do not use the website. Please read the Square Enix cookies policy for more information. Your use of the website is also subject to the terms in the Square Enix website terms of use and privacy policy and by using the website you are accepting those terms. The Square Enix terms of use, privacy policy and cookies policy can also be found through links at the bottom of the page.