Report 437

Report #437
Skillset: Healing Skill: Farcure
 Org: Shadowdancers Status: Completed Sept 2010
Furies' Decision:
Solution 1 - the equilibrium has been lowered (but not to the 1s level).
Problem: As it is, any attempt to seriously be an aide to combatants in actual
combative situations renders a Healer severely hampered considering the fact
that curing or farcuring someone is a solid 5s equilibrium loss per affliction
cured from a target. With the ease by which several classes can pump out 2 or
more afflictions in the span of the 5s it takes a healer to cure an ally of one,
a report is made to address targeted curing (not healing) to either:
[A: 0 R: 0] Solution #1: Bring cure and farcure's equilibrium consumption down
 to 1s to make Healing support a viable role to play
 when used on a target other than the caster.
[A: 0 R: 0] Solution #2: Remove the equilibrium loss from cure and farcure
 when used on another but multiply the cost by three
 or four times to limit its spammability.
[A: 0 R: 0] Solution #3: Enable the targeted Sacrifice ability to be used from
 a long range, much as Farheal and Farcure can be
 used. With the limitation of Sacrifice draining the
 caster down to 33% of their maximum health and 2p of
 their reserves, spamming the ability won't be an
 issue without skirting suicide while still addressing
 any supportive Healing desires.
Player Comments:
---[Viynain on 8/20 @ 03:15 writes]:
Renewed to update with more accurate statistics and to address some concerns
previous comments noted.
---[Raeri on 8/24 @ 00:44 writes]:
Regarding Solution 3, draining the caster *down to 33%* isn't much deterrent
beyond the first cast. Rather have it say *consume 67% of maximum health* to
avoid spam.
---[Viynain on 8/24 @ 06:16 writes]:
...? Isn't much of a deterrent, what? Sacrifice currently hits the caster hard
enough to knock them down to only having 33% of their health left. If they cast
it again without healing, they die, so I don't understand what you're trying to
comment there? There's no change on the actual skill's effect or limit in the
proposal, save for letting it be used long-range.
---[Raeri on 8/26 @ 07:16 writes]:
I originally read it as a suggestion to have the skill only ever take the caster
down to 33% of max. Disregard the above then!
---[Fillin on 9/15 @ 03:44 writes]:
Solution 1, sure.