FINAL FANTASY XI Job Adjustments Manifesto: Paladin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greatguardian

ITT: Assessments of Paladin's performance based in Abyssea.

Paladin is fine. Outside Abyssea. I don't care if you don't do Voidwatch, that doesn't mean Paladin isn't awesome at it. Limiting the scope of the discussion to the mid-game bridge event that's already over and caters specifically to casual players is fallacious at best, malicious at worst. People with half a modicum of foresight neither need nor want adjustments based on Abyssean balance.

---

ITT I wasn't tanking Tyger on MNK at 75.

Paladin has been useless for years. Abyssea just compounds the issue.

Edit: And lowering mainhand delay is a bad idea, as it nerfs TP gain and Paladin's white damage is pathetic with or without Almace aftermath.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rorrick

ITT I wasn't tanking Tyger on MNK at 75.

Paladin has been useless for years. Abyssea just compounds the issue.

Edit: And lowering mainhand delay is a bad idea, as it nerfs TP gain and Paladin's white damage is pathetic with or without Almace aftermath.

---

Direct yourself to the last page where I specifically addressed this point. Paladin's usefulness is directly correlated to the difficulty of content. When content became easier because everyone had killed Khimaira a billion times, even Corsair could tank it =/

I have to agree that a PLD's usefulness can be connected to how difficult the current content is viewed to be. Just the other day I walked out as PLD/RDM to play around with Turul and found him to be rather easy to solo and would've done so if I wasn't already waiting for another NM. I don't even have Almace, Aegis or Ochain and this was the same Turul that scared people when Abyssea first came out.

On another subject, do you guys think it would be game-breaking to give PLDs native Fencer? From what was mentioned, it seems S-E sees it as too powerful for a PLD? Would it be that bad on a PLD with Almace and make us more powerful than other DDs?

I think Paladin is the only job in the game aside from BST that might actually use Fencer, but it already has a fairly solid amount going for it in the damage department. It's not so much a matter of out-damaging real DDs as it is being acceptably good at DD while simultaneously being able to tank everything.

Now, don't get me wrong, most DDs are in the exact same position right now from the other side. However, their ability to tank sharply descends when you venture into newer content. WAR and MNK can't stand up to T4 Voidwalker NMs for crap.

It becomes easier by virtue of familiarity, which creates an environment in which Paladin will eventually have no place in. At some point, content will stop flowing, and everyone will be familiar with endgame. There will be no reason to use Paladin at all, and I think it's just unacceptable that nothing is being done to give Paladin a legitimate role to play; especially when the reasons for inaction fly in the face of prior statements and actions.

I actually don't mind that other jobs are able to tank and yes, I saw firsthand what a T4 VWNM could do to anyone that wasn't me or the other PLD. I was happy and sad at the same time and I'm not sure why...

I was just thinking Fencer might add a bit of oomph that might appease the casual masses without being something too powerful. And it might allow PLDs to stay slightly more relevant when Voidwatch gets easy as well.

Also, for those PLDs that have top-shelf gear I still don't see it being too powerful. Maybe just tier 1 or 2 at most by 99 if not the same as WARs. Again, would be nice when things change and everything seems easy again.

Its not something I'm demanding in any case. More like I'm wanting to better understand the reasoning behind S-E's vision for PLD because the language they use seems too much like the same old song and dance. You know, the one that has us hanging on the line between relevancy and mediocrity...

A role to play, yes, but making it a requirement, that would be unacceptable.

Since i start playing several years back, i still see the same debate: "the best setup is ..."
That's not because it's the best, that another setup will not being able to do it.

That's why it's difficult to design things, where for example, if you have a PLD it's easier, things go steady, but if you don't have one, you can still do it, but it will be harder. (You can have a SCH instead of a WHM in abyssea for main heal for example, harder but not impossible).

And yes, when you know well how combat works, which tactic to use against particular NM, the skill enhance the survivability of the party, and then the PLD survivability is excessive.

So when survivability is not as much required, PLD still needs to have something to do, the easiest thing would be to boost his damage, but then loosing some survivability.
A stance maybe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yukichibi

A role to play, yes, but making it a requirement, that would be unacceptable.

---

Not that I disagree, but why is it unacceptable? They've essentially done the same thing to White Mage. It's the healer. Scholar and Red Mage are impotent in comparison. You can get by with either of them, but it makes things much more difficult, both inside and outside Abyssea. Yet, both Red Mage and Scholar can still contribute to the party in other ways, through enhancements, enfeeblements, and elemental magic.

In fact, I would argue that White Mage's dominance over healing is exactly the type of situation Paladin should be in, if SE refuses to expand on its duality. It should be the tank, and without one your life becomes much more difficult, but still manageable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rorrick

ITT I wasn't tanking Tyger on MNK at 75.

---

Not sure what level they are but judging by the gear options on them and the post date of Feb 2010 looks like these MNKs were tanking Tyger at 75

As has been said and SE refuses to acknowledge it, PLD isn't needed and in the events it is needed for the moment it doesn't last because groups find ways to use more efficient tanks.

SE In other words unless you do something about PLD it will be a useless job, new hard content just delays this reality and if you honestly believe SCH spell, BRD song, THF Trick Attack will fix PLD's issue you have some naive (nicest word I could think of) game designers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zagen

Not sure what level they are but judging by the gear options on them and the post date of Feb 2010 looks like these MNKs were tanking Tyger at 75

---

The last time I did it we only had two (me on MNK and a SAM co-tank) tanks, and a total of nine people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rorrick

The last time I did it we only had two (me on MNK and a SAM co-tank) tanks, and a total of nine people.

---

Oh I don't doubt it I posted the video for those who believe PLD is perfectly fine, fixable by Enmity spells, Trick Attack, Provoke etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greatguardian

The trend with Paladin is fairly apparent. The easier the content is, the less useful Paladin is. The harder the content is, the more useful Paladin is. It's not so much that Paladin was getting weaker before Abyssea, it was simply that the content that we've all been doing for years and years was getting easier to the players.

Paladin still excels to the point of necessity whenever the content is difficult, and it will always suffer whenever the content is easy. I don't think this will ever change.

---

No matter the difficulty of the content, every job should be efficient and equal at doing it when in their given role.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Linh

No matter the difficulty of the content, every job should be efficient and equal at doing it when in their given role.

---

That is not how FFXI works. How it was designed to work. How it will be designed to work. How it has ever worked.

No one job will ever be useful for their role in every context in the game, period.

The Job system was designed to foster Context-sensitive content. If Paladin isn't a good job to bring to Charybdis, change to Ninja. If Red Mage is a shoddy healer in Abyssea, change to White Mage. If Monk isn't a good job to solo BCNM20s on, change to Beastmaster/Summoner.

The Devs never intended for people to stick to one job like glue and entreat the game to change to fit within that job's mold. The entire idea was to give the players the ability to change to fit within the game's mold. Versatility is the name of the game. Not within one job, but among them all.

The Devs' job is to ensure that there is sufficient content where Paladin is a viable choice in the game, not to ensure that Paladin is a viable choice in all of the game's content.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greatguardian

The Devs' job is to ensure that there is sufficient content where Paladin is a viable choice in the game, not to ensure that Paladin is a viable choice in all of the game's content.

---

Well, that's how it is now, which is why I'm suggesting they change it.

So that a job will have more of an equal chance to play than they do now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Linh

Well, that's how it is now, which is why I'm suggesting they change it.

So that a job will have more of an equal chance to play than they do now.

---

What you are asking for is a fundamental shift in what makes Final Fantasy XI, Final Fantasy XI. This is the premise of the job system. This is what the game has been built and designed around for over a decade. It's not just how it is now, it's how it's been for 10 years.

Frankly, if I wanted my one class to be good at everything, I'd go play a different game. Being able to change classes and roles at will to fit the situation is the prime appeal of FFXI's gameplay in the MMO market.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greatguardian

Frankly, if I wanted my one class to be good at everything, I'd go play a different game. Being able to change classes and roles at will to fit the situation is the prime appeal of FFXI's gameplay in the MMO market.

---

A Warrior won't be good at healing. A White Mage won't be good at tanking. One class won't be good at everything, only the roles they were designed for. If I'm bored of fighting as Samurai, I want to be able to switch to Monk without having a profound impact on difficulty.

Pre/Non-Abyssea: "I'm sorry, your base damage is too low, Monk. Chi Blast only plz."

This doesn't mean to stifle player creativity. The Ninja was not designed by SE to tank, but because the players wanted them to be, SE now supports them tanking.

If a Samurai/Ninja can tank it efficiently, then by Altana let him do it. But a Paladin should also be able to tank it just as well, but merely through a vastly different play style.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greatguardian

That is not how FFXI works. How it was designed to work. How it will be designed to work. How it has ever worked.

---

That is not how periods work, how they were designed to work, how they will be designed to work, or how they have ever worked.

actually GG, there's a 2005-2006 quote somewhere by sage sundi saying they never imagined there would be more than 2-3 relic holders of each type of weapon across all servers, and that the first time they saw someone level their 2nd 75 they were pleasantly surprised. They didn't intend for people to level several jobs in the earlier days of this game. They didn't even expect pre-RoZ jobs (BASIC JOBS) to go beyond 50 when the "advanced jobs" came out.

Well, Sundi is a retard so that kind of ignorance regarding your playerbase is expected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rearden

Well, Sundi is a retard so that kind of ignorance regarding your playerbase is expected.

---

You do realize those comments were made because SE didn't initially intend FFXI to go past 2-3 year life span right? And back then the game was in a state those comments made sense.

No, seriously, we (almost apparently not you) all already know Sage Sundi has made some pretty retarded statements about game mechanics, bringing them up now doesn't really mean anything. You might as well bring up the fact they were surprised a spell that lets you completely negate damage was being used for tanking.

Here's a question for Camate that epitomizes Paladin's plight;

Why does Perfect Defense negate all damage for nearly two minutes for all party members in range while Paladin's Invincible only negates physical damage directed at him/herself for thirty seconds?

Umm.. That comment about Charybdis. PLD can tank that no problem. Just a different play style but, it is tank-able by PLD. Lv75 too. MNK/NIN, NIN/WAR, THF/NIN does it better though..(when shadows are up and hasted)

I'm going to pretend the difficulty to tank chary remark didn't happen, and for your sanity you should too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rorrick

Here's a question for Camate that epitomizes Paladin's plight;

Why does Perfect Defense negate all damage for nearly two minutes for all party members in range while Paladin's Invincible only negates physical damage directed at him/herself for thirty seconds?

---

Perfect Dodge doesn't even block ranged attacks as well, probably old coding or.. something. It doesn't say it protects from magic either. Compared to Wow's it lasts longer, but doesn't actually make you invincible, which is kinda funny.

It also makes for epic lulz when someone has a horrible Invincible macro about they shall not fall then die to Ancient Magic.

Most of the 2hours need updating. Maybe a job trait at 91 or some level could boost the effectiveness of all of them.

Paladin could be more Invincible, or Invincible for longer for example. If you guys can convince SE to adjust your two hour, just make sure to get SE to fix Benediction to do what it says and adjust some of the pet job 2hours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neisan_Quetz

I'm going to pretend the difficulty to tank chary remark didn't happen, and for your sanity you should too.

---

Oh I've done it on Paladin at 75 without issues =/. I just don't see your average Pld/War "please give us native voke" Paladin doing it, though, and felt the reference would be more relevant to them than talking about HNMs that half the forums have probably never even seen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neisan_Quetz

No, seriously, we (almost apparently not you) all already know Sage Sundi has made some pretty retarded statements about game mechanics, bringing them up now doesn't really mean anything. You might as well bring up the fact they were surprised a spell that lets you completely negate damage was being used for tanking.

---

How tarded Sundi is, is not relevant. Statements were made in the past by Sundi and others. Some have held water to date, some/majority have not. I paraphrased Sundi's comments to highlight this point. It must have gone over your head.
If anything I agree that what ANY SE spokesperson says can't be considered fact and must be taken with a fair dose of skepticism.
"We will never raise the Lv.cap beyond 75".

And tanking Charby as PLD/anything with little support used to be noteworthy. I'm not saying it was epic, but as GG said it wasn't done on a daily basis by every earth staff wielding full 5/5 gallant outfitted PLD.

Oh wow, I saw Cursed's post and thought that was you, my bad.

PLD just doesn't get any love. The PLD forums have had more views, more player replies, more complaints/suggestions/moaning than any other job forum/thread and much less replies from the Devs.
I just hope they're working on something....anything...and can't respond now because they recognize the depth of this problem.

Colour me wrong but I'm fairly certain 1-2 of the most viewed threads not in Gen discussion is over on the Rdm forums.

This bothers me. Specifically, this portion:

Quote:

---

Currently, balance wise, it’s pretty difficult to add defensive properties to warrior as they have a huge arsenal of attack abilities. It might be possible to look into some sort of attack/defense trade-off, but we do not have any concrete adjustment plans for defense only.

---

This is a slap in the face.

If you give Warrior a defensive buff, you can most certainly give Paladin an offensive one. If it requires a trade off, give Paladin an offensive stance that sacrifices its defense (perhaps akin to Hasso, enhancing our two-handed skills to make use of our Greatsword and Staff proficiencies).

The fact that you're even considering enhancing Warrior's defensive capabilities while simultaneously telling Paladins that giving us any sort of offensive enhancement would make us broken is incredibly frustrating.

Why is that frustrating? They don't want to give pld an offensive stance that sacrifices defense but they want to give war a defensive stance that sacrifices offense. Why don't you just play warrior if you want to do damage?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DebbieGibson

Why is that frustrating? They don't want to give pld an offensive stance that sacrifices defense but they want to give war a defensive stance that sacrifices offense. Why don't you just play warrior if you want to do damage?

---

Why give Warrior a defensive stance? If you want to survive, play Paladin.

It's frustrating because buffing Paladin in any way apparently makes it broken, but buffing the strongest job in the game is A-Okay. Paladin and Warrior are at the two extremes in this game; raw offense and raw defense. If something is acceptable for one, the inverse should be acceptable for the other.

Gotta say i agree with Rorrick here, I'm not a fan of double Standards.

They're hesitant to buff WAR Def, so it might never happen, but if it did, i feel PLD should get a small offensive buff. An Offensive buff to PLD will only help it tank/hold hate better, i cannot fathom a negative.

Edit; Then again I'd be lying if i said i wasn't just jaded at the fact THF got some BS about Aura Steal being too powerful to adjust while DRK gets Aura Steal 2.0 with ability to steal 2 buffs at once. I mean, I'm not angry at DRK, I'm angry at double standards. DRK can get all the buffs it wants.

Edit; Think of it more this way, You're a kid and you want Ice Cream, But your parents tell you "no, its too expensive", and then they go buy ice cream for your brother. You're going to be like "Wth?" you probably wont be angry at your brother, its not his fault, but your parents just played favorites/double standards, and that shit isn't cool.

This is where he's coming from.

But the point is why does what war gets affect pld at all? If se wants pld to have balls-to-the-wall defense and crappy offense and they want war to have balls-to-the-wall offense and some moderate defense then that's just how it is.
SE values defensive capability as more useful than offensive capability, and therefore considers a very defensive job having offensive capability to be overpowered, while the reverse case not overpowered.

Perhaps even SE wants some jobs to be better than others? Maybe they don't give 2 shits about balancing the love and attention they give to pld and war. The SE gods dribbled their joy juice on war, if you don't like that pld isn't getting any joy juice go play war instead.

Rather i agree or disagree is beyond my grasp atm.

I just dislike the idea of Double standards, regardless of the reasons or intentions behind them.

Do you think the developers have a special place in their heart for war and pld is the bastard child? It seems like comparing pld and war saying if one gets x the other should get x is just silly. I understand having the various DD jobs balanced(poor thf), but balancing a tank and a DD? And not even game balance, this is a complaint about how much attention SE is giving each job, it is stupid.

Again, your point would stand scrutiny from me, If not for the double standards at play. If they were like "We understand WAR is paper we might give them some defense" it'd be no problem to me.

But its not, its "PLD can't have offensive abilities because they're a defense job" and then "WAR is an offensive job, but defense is doable".

Its a double standard. Again, Its really not that big of a deal to me personally, but I'm assuming this is Rorrick's beef.

Create your own job class, you have 10 points to spend, and you can choose one of each from both of these categories:

Defensive category:

High Defense costs 10 points.
Medium Defense costs 7 points.
Low Defense costs 5 points.

Offensive category:

High Offense costs 5 points.
Medium Offense costs 3 points.
Low Offense costs 1 points.



SE apparently thinks that defense is worth more than offense in FFXI

edit: listed wrong point cost

New update notes reply, no i didn't read the intervening 15 pages of posts, but i want to reply to this, also i agree with all the posts on my page 20 that state that the dev's saying no pld can't have offensive capabilities to help them keep hate but war's can have defensive ones so when they inevitably pull hate doing dmg that we're not gonna let the pld do to keep hate they can survive.... is utter nonsense, like i said in a previous post, just delete pld if you're gonna do that, i will lvl war to tank with and have all the pld gear space availble for war stuff. Anyway, i would like to mention....

Quote:

---

Paladin

Palisade (Lv. 95)
Increases chance of blocking with shield, and eliminates enmity loss.

---

Quote:

---

Ninja

Issekigan (Lv. 95)
Increases chance of parrying, and gives an enmity bonus upon a successful parry attempt

---

I am REALLY tired of this, instead of not losing enmity we don't HAVE, make it so our shield blocking GIVES us enmity. Also... pld gets one new thing this update MOST of the other jobs got new spells or at least higher tiers of old ones.... pld got Palisade, which if pld's history is anything to go by, is going to be a 30 second (or thereabouts) duration and a 5 min recast with does NOTHING.