Eukrasian Toxikon, Dyskrasia, and Phlegma should absolutely be a thing for SGE, but I don't know what their effects would be though.
Eukrasian Toxikon, Dyskrasia, and Phlegma should absolutely be a thing for SGE, but I don't know what their effects would be though.
DPS is secondary, and you do so when you don't have to heal?
Last edited by TBerry; 02-06-2024 at 07:37 PM.
How about we combine those with the 'more interesting kardia effects' idea floating around?
give Eukrasian Toxikon a Regen effect instead of the normal flat heal.
E. Dyskrasia could do an AoE heal centered on the kardia target.
E. Phlegma could give a Shield to the Kardia target instead of a heal.
Give all of them bigger than normal MP cost to offset the extra healing these effects would provide.
I would honestly say that in current healer design, healing is secondary to doing damage at this point.
At 60-80% of your total casts, your damage buttons see far more use than your healing buttons, even in supposedly harder content.
in another thread someone was saying how useless cure 1 is and imo cure 2 also, my quick take for that which is relevant here as well was that they can remove cure 1 and 2 and put 1 or 2 more dps spells and spice up the rotations and playstyles. they can instead have one of the later healing spells available early to compensate or if you will add only one new dps spell, make cure 1 upgrade to 2 and later to the instant lily heal. the same can be applied to the aoe heals and similarly to the other healers with their own versions of cure 1,2 etc. i think this isn't a proper solution, that would be a complete rework of all jobs quite frankly but at least with this suggestion you can get an easy and fast fix.
I guess the problem the devs are having is that some people use 'secondary' to refer to 'where in our list of priorities damage is', that is, 'we keep the party alive first and foremost, and only then do we consider damage', whereas others use it to refer to how often one or the other is used as part of our gameplay, and so it seems that there's not a consensus, due to the misunderstanding
At that point it's just arguing semantics which get neither of us or them anywhere with that.
"Outside obvious jokes/sarcasm, I aim to convey my words to the future readers who may come across mine posts. Can I change -your- mind, somehow? Potentially... but that's not why I'm writing. You and I have wrote our piece(s). We don't necessarily need to change each other's mind. But we can change other's."
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
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.