#FFXIVHEALERSTRIKE

[Aravell]

I'm a bit confused about your bottom paragraph, Aravell. For the safety net reasoning, I won't yell at the player for using it just in case of uncertainty of unfamiliar mechanics and / or party gear strength towards the dungeon at hand.

I was discussing what healing tools end up being most efficient to use. When it comes down to it, Medica 2 / 3 and Regen along with the equivalents for AST usually end up being middle of the road. Not just because it uses GCDs that DPS tools use, but also because of the mana usage. Apologies if the mana usage intent reason wasn't clear enough from me. There was even a time on SGE I used Haima on the tank for extra safety on a final boss so I could hard cast a raise (Egeiro?) on the dead DPS with no worries. I believe the boss wasn't doing any AoE damage at the time, so the Eukrasian Prognosis wasn't needed yet. We gotta remember that raising players is thirsty on mana, so teaching the new players to be mana efficient can also help with this. I understand WHM may have a little less issue with this due to Thin Air again, but we don't always have one with us.

I have no issue with teaching a new player about MP/GCD efficiency, that's fine and it's a good habit to have.

What I'm against is calling things "a trap", because that kind of wording would encourage people to fully avoid something, which could lead to bad habits forming. Especially with so many people holding damage output in a disproportionately high level of importance.

Call Medica II inefficient in most cases. It is.
Call Medica II an MP hog. It is
But a trap it is not. It has general uses.

[Tigore]

If we do get a healer who does let a DPS die because they queued as another DPS, I'll try to let them know they made a mistake with their MP if they ask. The 2400 mana cost and the 15% stat debuff inflicted on the other player should be sufficient reasons to explain why the fight is taking longer instead of clearing faster. Although I think the trap wording was just used to describe how the Medica 2/3 was used. Admittedly, it may be the wrong word to use with inefficient being better. There's probably many different things a new player thinks about that would be logical to understand for us.

Rein pointed out some of them do not usually notice the HoT buff they place, so they might spam cast it. The reasoning they may give may be "easier range" and less mana usage than Cure 3 with the notion that Medica 2 ought to replace Medica 1 completely. Since they don't know what a HoT is, it may be construed as too slow or ineffective to them without seeing immediate results. It may even be possible that oGCD vs. GCD usage is not known to them either, so they just use what was familiar at the start of their experience. Since most single player RPG games usually do not have anything that compares to an oGCD other than just raw Speed / Agility.

Some players may have played a game where you could stack some things longer or with a stronger potency if you spam the same spell and figured the same would apply here (Disgaea buffs essentially). In which case, we should let them know they can stack HoTs , but through the usage of Regen and Asylum together with Medica 2/3.

Then we have the Warcraft healers like I was who were used to the constant stream of damage that happened. Even casting Holy stun confetti is scary to think of because tanks have sometimes died within 5 seconds if we clog up our GCDs with any DPS at all. The auto attacks from bosses were that high in the second classic expansion Wrath of the Lich King. This one may be hard to simply tell the player that we only have about a quarter to half the healing compared to that. That might still be too generous of an estimate, sometimes. Overtime, they should be able to notice the very high overhealing being done with the 100% HoT uptime and nobody ever reducing below 100% HP for more than 3 - 5 seconds.