Talk:Cure Formula

This page is confusing, and fails to properly explain certain key aspects of the formula. For example, how is Power Floor determined (i.e. My power is 400, I am casting Cure I. Do I use a power floor of 200 resulting in a base of 55?)? If my interpretation of power floor is correct, why is this not explained? The reader is instead left to look at the numbers and hope whatever they feel would make the most sense is the appropriate answer. What is the rate at "Hard Cap" (i.e. Cure I, 600 Power Floor) and is hard cap meant to imply that power above the number on the left is simply ignored? Why does the summary state "Where:" and then go on to define variables that are not used in the formulas that precede the where (MND, VIT, SKILL, RATE, CONST... technically EQUIP)? If it's meant to explain the variables used in the article, then the labeling fails to convey that. It also fails to explain Power Floor and improperly defines rate as a value related to the cure spell, as opposed to a scaling value in relation to your current power and the cure spell being used.

Rereading parts of the article alongside parts of the related links, I can see where some of the mistakes came about. A lot of the summary is copy pasted from the first reference, with values changed to mix in the results of the final reference. After browsing the references I can see that this is just a messy adaptation of the post containing mainly numbers explaining the new formula, mixed with the fancier wording of the blog post that, I assume, goes in depth about the old healing formula. Most of the issues with the article is just mixing terminology. Power Floor = Soft Cap, Const = HP Floor. And of course a new term being added in the middle of a table without any explanation beyond its wording (which makes it a bit obvious, but it still leaves some ambiguities that should not be present while dealing with formulas). I'd take a crack at fixing it, but I don't know the cure formula, and this article has too much ambiguity for me to edit it with confidence. As I'm new to this wiki, and editing in general, consider this a plea for a "needs clarification" / "needs cleaning up" sort of tag? Orcao (talk) 09:37, 3 February 2015 (EST)

Shouldn't the in bold "additive" words be "multiplicative", additive means it adds like addition. The formula clearly shows that it is not additive but multiplicative. So either the formula or the words are wrong we should change it but I wanna make sure I have backup, because it was put in bold so clearly someone is very passionate about those words! Verda (talk)