I'm bored when I heal because I need more complex DPS rotations

[ForsakenRoe]

Sorry if I spoke a bit too passively, Roe. The reason I was brainstorming on Medica 1 and Cure 3 is more so to design a spammable mana AoE heal while the Medica 2 HoT is present. Having both Cure 3 and Medica 1 is admittedly redundant with slight differences in healing power, mana usage and range. I was suggesting Cure 3 essentially become the new spammable AoE heal for casuals to use if Medica 1 will be replaced with Medica 2. Cure 3 might need to be to have around a 30 yalm radius for everyone getting the heals just like how Medica 1 works. If necessary, the range of the target you can select could be nerfed to compensate to about 10 yalms? This could mean that Cure 3 might need to be bumped to around level 30 or under to match with the same suggested time Medica upgrades to Medica 2.

Ah I see, yes, I also believe similar (Cure3 should be the 'spam once you've got the Medica HOT ticking' skill). To that end, I actually have a potential solution for that too, a trait which makes Cure 3's MP cost halved to 750 when you are under the effect of Medica 2's HOT. If you need the range, Medica2 spam is 20y and would have the upfront healing power of current Medica1. If you can stack a bit closer together, however, and the hits are harder (Harrowing Hell etc), then Cure3 is 50% stronger, and actually costs less if you have the HOT ticking

As an aside, I will never not be irked by the use of “Medica” as WHM’s AOE instead of Cure II being your AOE, like how it generally works for your caster DPS (Fire II, Veraero/Verthunder II, Miasma II…) It would look and feel so much cleaner if Cure was your single target, Cure II your AOE, with Cure III and Cure IV being your single target and AOE (respectively) for heals with some sort of additional element, be that regens atop your heals or maybe even something else.

It almost feels like a quiet insult. “DPS players will be able to recognize the difference between spells with the same name but different ranks and effects, but healers aren’t skilled enough to recognize the difference.”

IDK why they didn't do it FF11 style (especially given how they stuck so rigidly to the FF11 style of BLU), where the number denotes the strength (Stone 1 2 3 4), and the suffix of -aga denotes it's AOE instead of single target (thus, Curaga 1 is a weak AOE heal, Curaga 3 is a strong AOE heal, Cure 3 is a strong ST heal). This would have also solved their problem with having to come up with 'High Fire/Blizzard' on BLM, because they could have had Fire 1 as Fire 1, Fire 2 as Firaga, Fire 3 as Fire 2, Fire 4 as Fire 3, and High Fire as Firaga 2. They would never have to come up with new suffixes, as numbers are the scaling factor in the naming, and they can go as far as they like. FF2 had spells go up to 16 after all

Oh well