You've played games with auto-heal where this mechanic made the combat less strategic as result?? Eh... Did you read that sentence before you typed it, chief?
Yes. Condescension is not a counter argument.
'because good enough is treated exactly the same as very good, or even perfect' makes no grammatical or logical sense whatsoever, either way.
Here: because 'good enough' is treated exactly the same as 'very good', or even 'perfect'
Now can you figure it out?
Healing after combat has absolutely no impact on strategy during combat
Yes it does. It encourages sloppy strategy, because good strategy is not rewarded.
'god, I hope I can keep everyone at 100% until the battle's end, because if I don't I face the ultimate challenge of repetitively hovering over a heal icon, clicking on a character portrait and waiting for the heal icon to recharge. Again. And again.'
Can you only deal with arguments by distorting and exaggerating them? Should I do the same, and mock you for complaining about sometimes having to hit a single button/hotkey?
The consequence of doing poorly in combat is losing combat.
This discussion is entirely about combat that has been won.
There's so many ways to get back to full HP after a fight at no cost and so many bullshit ways for the game to kill your party even though you'd survive otherwise(like running through fire to get back in formation) that it's simply a case of bad design not to have all the harmful surfaces cleared and damage removed immediately when the fight ends.
No, that's a case for fixing the formation behaviour so that non-lead characters do not ignore surfaces to get back into formation after combat.
