I've seen innumerable terrible and numberable decent threads about fixing PLD lol.
I'm bored so I'll take a stab at it. I figure, if RFN actually turns out to be any kind of decent tank, that's just more reason to avoid PLDs or use them only for Diaga+Kiting in turtle gear.
Here are my suggestions for fixing PLD, enmity and job balance as they pertain to enmity:
Increase both enmity caps.
--------------------------------
Reason: Larger enmity pool makes it more dangerous for everyone at the cap.
Change the enmity polling from instant to 15 second intervals.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Reason: Makes it a "big deal" to pull hate off of tank, as the new target will be targetted for a quarter of a minute, forcing additional resources to be used to keep them alive.
Make Fealty/Chivalry normal job abilities at their maximum merited potency.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reason: These don't even seem like they should be merits. They should come with the job.
Fill that merit ability slot with an ability that raises PDT/MDT by 2%/1% per merit, for a cap of 10%/5%.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Reason: Allows PLD to utilize more gear slots for offense.
Increase the CE/VE of all cure spells.
------------------------------------------
Reason: Hate tool for PLD. Makes it more dangerous for healers and forces them to stack -enmity once again. Makes throwing normal melee jobs at mobs more dangerous and eliminates a bit of duo/trio boxing.
Addition of more "Flail" type moves. Make changes to mob AI so they are more likely to use "Flail" type moves when shifting targets.
---------------------------------------------------------
Reason: Makes it more dangerous to pull hate.
Remove the majority of enmity reset behavior/abilities from enemies.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reason: This type of behavior contributed to the erosion of the dev team's vision for battle strategy and job utilization. Plus with the addition of more flail type moves, constantly shifting hate becomes very unbalanced.
While Cover is active, shield block rate is increased.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Reason: Less enmity loss for mitigating damage to party members.
Increase enmity loss per % of HP loss sustained.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Reason: More likely for mob to revert attention back to tank when another member pulls hate, and makes the tank need to work harder to maintain the mob's attention. Somewhat negated by the Cover enhancement above.
And of course, for all of this to work: remove lethal AOEs or have their AOE radius greatly reduced, as has been beaten to death.
-----------------------------------------------------
Reason: Programmatic laziness =/= difficulty, only simulated difficulty.
There. Completely fixed the game. Sharper penalties for cure bombing and zerking. Increased survivability for PLD. Fixed the flow of battle to something more rhythmic.
And PLD doesn't become OP.
*Dousing myself in kerosene*
Flame me. My body is ready.
Why not? My PLD fix-it thread
Printable View
-
02-02-2013, 01:52 PMChocobitsWhy not? My PLD fix-it thread
-
02-02-2013, 09:37 PMSarick
I have a suggestion you might want to think about.
Fix cover!!
Why, Just having the PLD in the party mitigates damage with abilities active. Since the PLD has the rule of taking the brunt of the damage (PROTECTING OTHERS) by not being a damage dealer then they should be able to mitigate damage by actively interfering with attacks. Creating enmity is only one half what PLD could be. Think about how other FF games that used cover. It would auto cover people who where attacked it didn't matter who was targeted. Right now the job is mostly trying to get the enemy to COME to them (warrior style) as an offensive tank instead of a defensive one.
The role of PLD should also be able to shield others by intercepting attacks sent to them. The cover ability is way to limited to be very useful. It's recast is to long, it's duration isn't log enough and it only protects one targeted person even if there is only one attacker. If this PLD person was protecting my family I'd feel better off protecting myself by running away. If someone wants me dead and they're set on killing me or someone in my family. A bodyguard trying to hold the attention of the attacker shouldn't be the only method of protection.
Priorities.
1st. Cover & protect
2nd. Redirect attention.
3rd. Disable or eliminate threat.
Instead of only: (You need more hate then others provoking the enemy somehow)
"COME TO ME MONSTER I'M MAKING YOU ANGRY!"
It should be: (I'll move to protect my allies. I'm going to COVER them with my life)
"TO GET TO THESE ALLIES YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH ME FIRST!"
Think of it like this.
If there was an important group that a guard (lets say secret service bodyguard) was protecting a few high level officials. If someone started shooting at one of them they wouldn't just stand there yelling obscenities at the shooter. No they'd automatically run to cover that person with their body to PROTECT/SHIELD them. This would redirect the attackers attention to getting past the bodyguards cover attempts. Last the bodyguard would attempt to eliminate the threat while keeping the targets safe or giving them time to move to safety.
Currently for the most part when in FFXI combat the role of tank is to YELL at the target or hurt it enough to redirect the attacks towards the PLD tank. The tank should also have a high level of skill to protect allies (to a degree not perfect) REGARDLESS of who the enemy is angry at by intercepting its attacks. PLDs by the games design are stupid. The job is mostly designed hold the attention of the attacker. It should also mitigate damage to others by taking a more aggressive role in actively covering them and making them feel protected. :rolleyes:
On a side note:
If the developers reduced the recast to 30 seconds for a single target that last 15-20 seconds. They could make cover based tanking an advanced gaming skill. This would allow the PLD to protect someone every time the ability is used but still require holding hate to an extent. If modified this way the job would be changed in ways where it would be a more useful tank but the player would still need skills to preform well. This would definitely change the tanking tactics for this job.
Enmity would still need fixed and the issue you stated with instant attention updates would still be a a problem but, at least the job would be more likely to get a slot for tanking. Also with covers the tank would have no evasion and counter capabilities. Shadows and flash blindness could be an exceptions because technically they are creating fake clones or blinding the enemy.
Also, Since cover is a sub job ability it would be capable of making other jobs more effective at tanking when using the modified cover. They still wouldn't be as defensive or successful though as native PLD. -
02-03-2013, 02:15 AMChocobitsNo. That won't fix anything. Enmity and battle mechanics need to be fixed. I proposed a change to Cover: Increase shield block rate while it's active. Cover =/= fix. Penalties and rewards for pacing battle, phasing out zerging and the need to zerg, and a slight increase in offensive capability are what will fix PLD. It's not that PLD is even particularly broken, it's that fighting in general is broken. That is why most of the changes I suggest are not even geared toward PLD. Fix fighting mechanics and PLD will more or less fix itself, with a couple of slight enhancements.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarick
-
02-03-2013, 02:49 AMSarickI agree that the enimity system is broken It was listed in my post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
What good is that fix if you can only use it once every 3-5 minutes. Cover should be more useful then once every five minutes. It's rarely used in comparison to the warriors provoke because the ability has such an awful recast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
The developers most likely won't do this directly to the job because it's not supposed to be a high damage job. There is hope though when they mentioned changing the way one handed weapons work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
I'd still like cover to be extensively more useful with a lower recast just increasing block rate is kind of sad for something that doesn't last long and has an abysmal recast rate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
-
02-03-2013, 05:27 PMChocobits
Now I know, despite there having been at least 5 dozen threads of the same nature, people are literally dying to post here and applaud me for fixing the game single-handedly. But most of you are busy, and with this threads burial imminent, most of you unfortunately won't have the chance to pat me on the back.
So I will bring this back up to the top briefly so that you and the devs and I can all rejoice in knowing how much ass I kick and how I am keeping the game relevant in the new decade. Go me! -
02-03-2013, 08:41 PMsaevel
Better idea
The NM does 2,000 damage aoes so that only the PLD can survive. With only the PLD there tanking is *fixed*.
You have a very limited understanding of the current enmity system which is why you didn't realize that none of that would actually work. It would do the exact opposite and push even harder for "zerging". -
02-03-2013, 09:21 PMChocobitsI have a very limited understanding of the current enmity system? That would be the first I have heard of it. Putting aside exact numerical references for CE/VE values per specific action, currently there IS no enmity system, and not understanding that makes one unqualified to respond.Quote:
Originally Posted by saevel
Enmity is supposed to be a cumulative, ever shifting value that we are supposed to attempt to keep within certain ranges based on our role(s). However, because the values for certain actions are poorly quantified by SE, combined with the fact that in a lot of instances, putting aside high AOE damage, having a DD tank and spam cure them in a duo/trio setup is sufficient for most current "end game" content.
My proposed changes will see a revisiting of CE/VE values, impose a minimal amount of time any player shifting hate will have a mob's attention, slightly increase DD output for PLD without losing any -damage gear, create once again, penalties for "spinning" a mob, and finally get rid of the random hate reset/switching SE implemented as a (baffling) means of depriving us of controlled battlefields. As well as getting rid of every recent mob's decision to look at their watch randomly and say "Oh.. look at the time. It's rape-o-clock."
But hey, I gave suggestions and not rhetoric. Did you have any counter suggestions, or was I being awesome too loudly to hear them? -
02-03-2013, 10:04 PMChocobits
And yes, I know imposing a forced wait on enmity polling is something none of us really want. Dynamic enmity is probably one of the things that drew all of us in. I'm just saying, with the current structure (of which I'm told I know little about), dynamic enmity is what breaks enmity, because the enmity favors melee damage most greatly (by a landslide), given the changes over the last several years with the level increase and gear that throws so much DA/TA/Crit/STR at players without sacrificing any gear haste.
Reducing the enmity generation from damage would allow effective tanking.. but break the game in a way that only zerging would be rewarded.. which is why I suggested increasing enmity generation from cures instead. -
02-04-2013, 12:05 AMSarickI agree with the TARU but also want to point something out that a lot of hardcore people reading need to realize. This is a freken game not rocket science project. It's supposed to be pick up and play entertainment. Skill and strategy plays a large part of being good at GAMES but it shouldn't need to be analyzed with microscopic precision to play. When you throw in all these mathematical equations and quantify every single aspect of the games mechanics your not really playing the game anymore. Got it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
The design is broken if the system is complex for basic gaming. When people undermined others because they revolve around the raw core mechanics it just shows how shallow their priorities in life are. I'm saying if players need to macro manage the raw mathematical concepts to play the game something is wrong with the system. The battle system should be geared so that it runs fluidly around basic concepts that don't need a PHD to understand.
The changes I mentioned bypass some of the complexity of protecting others. It's an outside the box SKILL based change that needs no math formula to understand. If the poling of enmity was increased to 15 seconds (as chocobits stated) and the cover change I mentioned was in place the job could effectively protect others to an extent even with total loss of hate. The class should've had this installed into its core design by default allowing it more control outside the enmity system. It should've been a basic part of the jobs ability to protect people regardless of hate. This would shift some of the poorly designed enmity problems to a manageable player skill that even a two year old could understand how it works.
It's really pathetic when people talk about how broken things are and they start throwing numbers around instead of concepts. They lose track of reality and become immersed to deep into the raw code. The reality is they should be playing a game for entertainment. Simple concepts that work in general without complexity are the way to go.
All this garbage talk I see trying to make people look stupid doesn't make the game better it just shows some players have a hypercritical obsession with a game. It's supposed to be entertaining not synthesizing complex protein chains for serious research. What makes the game better is simple adjustments so that things flow correctly in an understandable pattern, not more "I know more then you do now shut up." It's simple minded, stubborn, and conceited attitudes like this that make things more complex then they need to be. It doesn't allow new things to move forward.
I know from experience players who are to enthralled with the raw mathematical complexities can't seem to grasp simple concepts because they're to convoluted with details to understand simple things. It's like the complex knowledge gets in the way of the ability to understand the basic concepts. They simply can't deal with equations that use wild cards or hidden values when everything they understand is overly complex.
If the developers changed cover this would be an improvement even if it didn't fix the job. -
02-04-2013, 02:19 AMAlhanelemWe don't need more flail moves- in fact flail type moves are actually preferred over many mob's other TP moves these days, so I guess you'd be doing us all a favor.Quote:
Addition of more "Flail" type moves. Make changes to mob AI so they are more likely to use "Flail" type moves when shifting targets.
---------------------------------------------------------
Reason: Makes it more dangerous to pull hate.
Flail moves only make it dangerous to pull hate if you don't understand that it's a flail move and you shouldn't be standing behind the mob in the first place. -
02-04-2013, 03:53 AMChocobitsI didn't directly state that the flail moves would be triggered via positioning, which is why I encapsulated it. Omnidirectional flails that occur when hate shifts was more where I was going with it. And although I didn't clarify, by flail I mean the currently overpowered AOE damage we've already seen - except that instead of mobs doing it whenever they have a fancy, there would be a trigger for it that could be avoided. Melee have been in zerg only mode and healers have been in curebot mode long enough. Adding penalties once again for overzealous damage output or curing is how to make tanking relevant again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alhanelem
At 75 cap, did you have 8-10 idiots with BRD buffs smacking away at Tiamat's face? I'm sure a few elite groups managed Wyrm zergs but for anything less than 5 melee + BRD having relics, it would be laughably stupid to try zerging a CoP Wyrm. And by zerging I mean anything that didn't start with "D" and end with "RK" using multi hit weapons, because that's not zerging in the context we are talking about or in line with what we use today.
What I'm trying to accomplish is to make enmity MATTER once again. The only way PLD tanking or any kind of real tanking that doesn't focus on 3-4 people spam curing whatever high HP DD has been designated "tank" for that session will work is by making it impossible for other jobs to do it. And that means instituting steep penalties for overzealous damage/curing. -
02-04-2013, 04:50 AMRyce
Choco, I like a lot of your suggestions, but I think your overall goal here is to restore the balance of battle to something like it once was. I'm not entirely opposed to that, but I don't think SE has any desire to take the game "backwards".
The new direction of FFXI seem to be all about "zerging" or at least more active battles. As a DD, should I really have to hold myself back from doing the one job I'm here to do? It's much more fun to get my Job Abilities into rhythm and Weapon Skill to my heart's content. SE wanted it that way. A lot of players like it that way.
Now, if this is the reality of the game moving forward, which I argue is true, the solution is not changing the game to make PLD fit - it's changing PLD to make PLD fit. How can we insert a PLD tank into the zergfest while making it fun for the PLD and beneficial to the party? I can think of a few ways.
Cover. This is the signature PLD ability, yet in XI it's situational. Make Cover a job trait with a high proc rate (80% before gear/merit enhancement). Increase the shield block rate when Cover procs (as you suggested). Perhaps add an "enmity lock" effect on a Cover-Shield block, boosting the PLD to max enmity +1 momentarily. This allows the PLD to protect an ally and grab hate, mitigating damage and healer resources.
The PLD's job is now to move around, coming between the mob and the ally with hate. PLD holds hate for a few hits before another DD inevitably steals it - and the process continues. I think this adjustment would work well with your proposed adjustment to cure-generated enmity. With mages reluctant to cure bomb, PLD would be a welcome addition to the front lines.
I'm eager to see any fix to PLD. It's really a shame that PLD is only useful for certain fights and only when a Relic AND Empy shield are in hand. -
02-04-2013, 05:41 AMSarickThis is how I feel, the tank job should be capable of tanking to an extent outside the bounds of hate control.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryce
Agreed but, how would they do that? I think a few changes to cover would be a good start.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryce
Woah! wait a minute here and think about what your saying. A TRAIT! That's just breaking the class. What if they have a backup tank or want to let a DD behind them do extra damage with say counter. The changes to cover would be nice but, by making them a trait you take active management control and skill opportunities from the player.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryce
More on cover.
If it's a job ability it can be used frequently at the command of the player. As a trait is ALWAYS active and doesn't allow direct player management of the covering. In some situations this is a bad thing. The player should be in command of the cover stance not an automatic easy mode trait that activates without their control.
It's like a player making a tank with enmity plus max merited playing a WHM or BLM. The same could be said for a player having max merited negative enmity on a NIN or PLD. It's stuff like this that by design should be user oriented and maintained. The backwards thinking of the person who made these merits should've designed them so the player could switch merited enmity on demand without penalty or never added them at all.
This was the entire point of reducing the recast on cover and changing the poling, but your point about locking the covered target for covers duration would be useful.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryce
I agree, you don't see people asking for a PLD in the tough fights where a good DD can deal damage and tank. A PLD is a turtle that can't protect the people around them because the class doesn't have the resources to function if other jobs can create more hate. This makes them almost useless for their role.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryce
-
02-04-2013, 07:43 AMSarickEnmity does matter but it's broken. If the job isn't capable of mitigating damage through player skill then the enmity system is doing its job well by making it hard to control the battlefield. PLD if left only to the broken enmity system isn't going to enable it's protective properties. I don't care how high you get hate there WILL be resets and situations where hate will shift quickly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
The PLD job needs another form of battle management that makes it excel even when people are zerging. This way it makes up for it's offensive weakness by allowing DD's the opportunity to do more more damage while making it easier on mages to heal. PLD is obviously tough enough to take the hits but they can't utilize that if the enemy walks right past them in favor of other soft targets.
I'm not saying make it an automatic easy button either. Just give PLD a better allowance to to it's job and tank. If cover recast was reduced today to 30 second it'd be an alternative to provoke flash and cure bombing. It'd still need a lot skill to use because the tank would need to be very aware of who is being attacked. They would also still need to try and maintain hate for the few seconds when the enemy shifts targets. -
02-04-2013, 12:09 PMChocobits
And that's all I was trying to draw out, was some discussion.
Nobody wants to go back to 2007 tanking because it sucked just as bad back then lol. I actually enjoy the faster paced combat and I think the game was never really designed to work with the slower paced combat to begin with - we and the devs both clung to that fallacy for too long. That is the real reason PLD has fallen behind.
It all comes down to this, in my eyes:
PLD has enough self-survival tools per se. They don't have hardly shit that mitigates damage to other players, and it was our mistaken assumptions so many years ago that it was "the tank's job" to hold hate so that other players couldn't receive damage. That isn't and shouldn't be PLDs job.
And yet SE has refused for years to do anything about that or give PLD any kind of damage increase or alliance damage mitigation tools. That's really all PLD needs to be relevant. Even if PLD COULD mitigate some damage, and even hold some hate, would you use that for anything other than the most difficult battles? You wouldn't use them for Legion still, because that would cost you a valuable Jesus wielding a 2h relic slot. They're still great for gathering mobs and doing the 'ol Kirin kite.
So PLD needs, simply, some new traits/abilities that enhance cover, cure enmity raised, recast reductions for existing abilities, and for F*** sake can they get a 200-250% damage increase on Atonement?
None of that fixes RDM, which I was also taking into consideration when I was toying with the idea of artificially slowing the pace of battle. RDM.. I don't even know what to do there. Make debuffs more potent and longer lasting - and fix silence so that it works for a set duration like it does on players. And stop making every mob in the game immune to.... everything? -
02-04-2013, 09:30 PMsaevel
You don't understand how the current mechanics of enmity are implemented, specifically the relationship between CE and VE. Bumping the hate "cap" up does absolutely nothing, it just takes one more WS to cap it and I ws once every ~7s with full buffs. What's breaking the system is the sheer amount of hate that damage generates, the number is so large that it instantly dwarfs all other "tools". A PLD wearing full DD gear spamming resolution would hold hate infinitely better then one turtled up with sword + board. During the last few years before abysesa PLD's had started to learn that more damage = more hate and would use hybrid gear sets focused on haste.
Now after your at the hate cap the monster attacks whomever hit it last, a melee under full buffs is swinging so fast that the probability of the PLD being the last to hit the monster when it's enmity value is checked again is very low. Thus even implementing ALL those changes you would accomplish absolutely nothing, the core problem isn't solved and we're still zerging. In fact because the healers are now generating a sh!t ton more hate your now having them cap out CE insanely fast and once their capped they'll be eligible to be "it" when the monster's enmity is recalculated. When the monster does an area of effect move it will reduce the CE value of everyone within range, the NM will then momentarily target the healer who was out of range and had capped TE.
To give you an idea of the vast different between "hate tools" and a single Weaponskill.
Cap is 20000 TE divided into two categories. VE goes down at the rate of 60 per second, CE only goes down when your hit or a THF use's hate JA.
Individual caps are
10000 VE
10000 CE
Provoke: 1 CE 1800 VE
Flash: 180 CE 1280 VE
Shield Bash: 1 CE 900 VE
Sentinel: 1 CE 1800 VE
Invincible: 1 CE 7200 VE
Cure enmity actually goes down as the target's level goes up.
Level 50: CE = Cure * 1.0, VE = Cure * 6.0
Level 75: CE = Cure * 0.727, VE = Cure * 4.36
Level 99: CE = Cure * 0.59, VE = Cure * 3.58 (extrapolated from Kanican's chart)
So a 700 Cure IV will generate 508 CE and 3052 VE
Now for damage, the multiplier goes down as the target's level goes up.
Level 50: CE = Damage * 2.162, VE = Damage * 6.49
Level 75: CE = Damage * 1.538, VE = Damage * 4.62
Level 99: CE = Damage * 1.07, VE = Damage * 3.5
Now how much has our damage gone up since level 50, then again since level 75? It's gone up by a value much greater then the reduction in CE/VE multiplier
A 3000 point WS (very conservative) will give you
3210 CE, 10500 VE (capped at 10000)
A super buffed DD can do that every 7~9s (if their not they need to turn off the TV and pay attention) which gives you 3~4 WS's within a single 30s period of time, once melee damage is added your capping CE / TE within two WS's.
Heck just smacking the monster (absolutely no WS's) gives you capped hate. At 200 damage per swing (again very conservative) your getting 214 CE and 700 VE for every swing. With capped haste I'm at once swing per 87 delay or 1.45s. That's 20.7s to cap VE and 67.7s to cap CE. Slightly over one minute of only melee is capped hate, and that's not counting things like goading belt or QA,TA,DA procs.
Are you now clear on the sheer magnitude of difference between damage and "everything else" for hate generation. Nothing short of a taunt mechanic or a dramatic nerfing of damage hate (and corresponding nerf to cure hate) will ever allow a non-damage oriented tank to tank.
So yes you know nearly nothing about the current hate system other then the ignorant cry of "ITS BROKE HERE IS MY UNINFORMED IDEA!!!" -
02-05-2013, 01:07 AMChocobitsI did specifically mention that hate values for damage dealt need to be revisited.. it was right alongside the raising the hate cap, and the raising the values for cure enmity.... so yes, I have a very healthy understanding of everything you just said... but it's ok, nobody is good at everything, and reading is not everyone's forte. Raising the enmity caps by themselves would do absolutely nothing.. but in conjunction with adjusting values for specific actions, it goes a long way. Job abilities and cures need a much higher value and damage needs a much lower value. Thank you for reaffirming what I said twice in this very thread!!!!!!!! You're agreeing with me at the same time that you're taunting me... lame!Quote:
Originally Posted by saevel
*Edit* I could have summarized my "limited" understanding of enmity in a couple sentences, and much more concisely than your somewhat long winded tirade:
Damage values > JA and Cure values
CE is static enmity, VE decays
CE is only lost from taking damage or from enmity transfer (THF isn't the only job that can do this, shock!)
I don't think your cure hate values are taking into consideration.. things like enmity reduction gear and traits...? WHM has them. PLD doesn't. Because of these, and the fact that WHM are using Cure V and topping off with Cure III.. they aren't using Cure IV hardly at all except as a backup because of enmity/MP inefficiency. So they aren't capping out enmity at nearly the pace you suggest.. And as you eloquently pointed out, THF has enmity transfer tools.. and you have them in for TH if nothing else on anything that isn't a loot box drop :)
I didn't mention specific values or go into explanation about any of the above because.. I figured we're all big kids now and all of this goes without saying...?
So yes, by way of this post, we see who is the student and who is the master. Come back some time and get schooled again! I have enjoyed it. -
02-05-2013, 01:49 AMChocobits
Also, I did retract my suggestions for artificially extending battle by way of hate shift adjustments. BUT I do have suggestions for mob TP spam, to account for the faster pace of combat:
1) Remove Subtle Blow and do away with TP generation through receiving damage completely. We don't need it any more.
2) Increase the charge time on mobs' "Readies".
Now we have dynamic real time battles that don't rely on stun, but on coordination. Player skill vs stats on paper.
If I rocked any harder I would need a Stona. -
02-05-2013, 02:27 AMEconomizer
Quoting an entire comment and then complaining about a wall of text seems painfully out of place with each other.
You either don't play White Mage or you don't know the numbers behind curing on White Mage. Now at least you didn't suggest White Mages are spamming Cure VI, but Cure IV is the go to cure spell currently.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
Go take a gander at the Cure Formula Changes thread. Now, even despite not adjusting for the WHM AF3+2 pants (if you're not casting in these you're doing it wrong), you could just plug in some basic numbers into Furen's Cure Calculator (which has been updated thanks to the testing done in the Cure Formula Changes thread), you will be able to see that Cure III/IV are way more efficient then Cure V, and cure for enough to primarily spam between Cure III/IV in most situations. The numbers grow even further apart when you calculate for the AF3+2 pants.
Granted, if enmity changed in a fashion that casting Cure III/IV is hazardous, we could see a situation where White Mages will no longer be using just their sufficient and MP efficient spells, but these situations would also favor against White Mage's current advantages it holds now in curing, which is the huge margin of MP efficiency, the inclusion of AoE cures, and even to some extent the cureskin effect (Cure VI doesn't get the full effects, so if it is regularly forced for the reduced enmity, the benefits of cureskin will be diminished).
Getting back to the point here however, Cure IV can cure for ~850+ and Cure III heals for ~450+ from any decent White Mage, with numbers very close from any Red Mage, and higher numbers from any Scholar (Aurorastorm). In the vast majority of situations you'll be able to go between Cure III/IV, and most situations not covered by this are covered by busting out even more efficient Curaga spells.
All THF can do is move enmity onto itself with Accomplice/Collaborator. Trick Attack doesn't transfer any enmity, just the enmity from the damage spike it creates.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
-
02-05-2013, 02:50 AMChocobitsFair enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Economizer
As to the rest - sigh... we're obviously talking post-adjustment on the Cure IV... and obviously we aren't talking about Trick Attack for THF regarding WHM.... we're still dealing in "it goes with saying but I'm saying it anyways in the possibility you're somehow wrong" isms. I like contributions, I really do.. but really...? Do I need to state after every post that the scenarios I type out are obviously post-whatever-adjustments-I've-just-suggested...? And the need to attack me with comments like "u ubvoosly dun play gaem as heelrar" based on me not stating the obvious for every post?
Sheesh. Please also tell me to include a cure potency staff while I am at it! I obviously need to have my hand held!
I do acknowledge you could misinterpret my remark about Cure IV.. It goes through phases and in the past it was numerically not an efficient or wise spell to repeatedly cast due to the ridiculously low amount of cure potency we were given. That is no longer the case.. but a simple "You meant post-whatever-suggestions-you-just-mentioned right?" Instead of another small novel that only serves to reaffirm what I am already saying! Also, take into consideration that with the adjustments I suggested.. some cure potency might need to be sacrificed in order to get a decent -enmity value on our gear... So yes, Cure IV would go out of style with cure enmity values adjusted per my suggestions...! And it's not like we don't have refresh up the wazoo.. I didn't have a difficult time using Cure V back at 75 cap.. I don't see it being a problem at 99 cap..?
I know I am a genius but I feel like I am teaching the English alphabet to handicapped immigrants here. Am I really thinking at such a higher level that my meagerest afterthoughts are so profound they need clarification/reiteration at every phase?! -
02-05-2013, 03:06 AMZagenThis reminds me of a saying "There's a fine line between genius and insanity." I don't think you're on the side you think you are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
-
02-05-2013, 03:15 AMhikolet me check....Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
I don't see anything related to lower damage dealt enmity hereQuote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
+
we agree that damage enmity need to be lowered and other enmity raised but you lied when you said you " did specifically mention that hate values for damage dealt need to be revisited."Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
-
02-05-2013, 04:25 AMChocobitsI did, on page 2 when I backpedaled, but it didn't survive an edit I made. My apologies. Looking back now, I can see why, with that missing, it looked like I was arguing with myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by hiko
On page 1 I was against decreasing damage enmity - but only because it would interfere with the unnecessary enmity shift suggestions I was making at the time. On page 2, I scrapped all that, simplified it, and there was supposed to be a 3 1/2 sentence bit about that.
Oh well. I won't ninja edit it now, but it's there - in spirit.
Let me summarize up to this point what the most current form of my "cure" consists of, and drop the snarky attitude while I do it, so that I stop coming off as a cocky mad scientist douchehat:
General Battle Mechanics
-Reduce enmity generation from damage dealt
-Increase enmity generation from cures
-Increase enmity loss from damage received
-Adjust the damage and/or radius of lethal AOE
OR
-Adjust mob AI/behavior regarding the use of lethal AOE so that it has a logical pattern
-With above, increase NM "Readies" delay on their powerful signature moves
-Stop making mobs cause multiple status effects with 1 move or that are immune to most debuffs
-Not yet mentioned in this thread, but I don't think quite so many NMs/bosses need Dispelga spells/TP moves..
PLD Specific
-Addition of Job Abilities/Traits to enhance cover in a meaningful way (something along the lines of meat blocking everyone in alliance behind him while increasing his shield block rate)
-Remove Fealty/Chivalry as merit abilities and make them normal job abilities, with their recast and the recast of Cover reduced
-For the first freed up empty merit slot, use as a trait or ability that increase the effectiveness of Cover, or gives a -damage taken trait
-For the second freed up empty merit slot, allow to increase the damage multiplier of Atonement (in very small increments per upgrade obviously)
-Allow Shield and Cover a chance to block Physical AOE TP moves (was going to get to this but got caught up in gaming 101)
-Give PLD an aura that increases MDB (not -MDT) (was also going to cover this before I let myself get derailed)
That is the most current version of what I am proposing. Again, apologies for my blunder on page 2, which kinda caused the whole thread to move southward.. although Saevel seemed to be chomping at the bit looking for an argument! -
02-05-2013, 07:58 AMEconomizer
Numbers are everything in this game. You don't get the numbers right and you're trying to chip your enemy to death with a massive amount of TP feed while you have your Bards using useless Minne songs on you instead of Haste or Attack.
You don't get away with misrepresenting how the game works when trying to adjust it. If you're trying to adjust the game you have to know how it works at least on a level of basic competency or you'll just make it worse.
There is no misinterpreting here unless you failed to say something. You said White Mages use Cure III and Cure V. We cannot have a good discussion on changes if we don't accurately portray the way people play, especially optimally.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
Before the formula changes, if you were at just at level 70 with your Light Staff and Noble's Tunic, Cure IV was always MP efficient compared to the other cures, with the exception of Cure V's slight benefit, even before nice things like Afflatus Solace and Light Arts.
Even then, overcuring was a bad idea, especially since White Mage got maybe 1MP/tic Refresh unless you had support, and healing without a Red Mage or Bard breathing down your neck wasn't exactly going to be working out for you.
There is no reaffirmation or agreement stated. Please don't misrepresent others like you are misrepresenting the things you're trying to adjust.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
Any cure potency that would be sacrificed would merely drag down Cure V/VI further, due to the way cure potency works.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
Any minute amounts of Healing Magic skill that would be removed would have the same effects, although it wouldn't impact main healers with significant skill, but instead mostly harm /WHM and /RDM that are trying to provide healing support without drawing enmity under any changes that increase cure enmity.
That said, no cure potency itself would be needed to be cut, although if you had read the Cure Formula Changes thread you'd have noted this from the suggested item sets given near the end. They themselves are even outdated, so you can actually get even more -enmity gear then listed. Considering that, it isn't that hard to have a decent cure set and -enmity at cap, although you'd have to expressly build for it.
But -enmity from gear and Tranquil Heart only go so far.
Healers shouldn't be penalized for healing any more then they already are, and healing more at a single time should be more MP efficient then healing less. Really, directly affecting the enmity output of cures would cause too many problems for healers as is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
SE has already clearly stated that regarding cure enmity that they were looking into a job trait that would be the opposite of Tranquil Heart.
Stating things as fact which are counter to what actually happens in the game tends to make players contradict you with horrible things known as facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobits
-
You want to fix Paladin? Keep the changes simple.
- Fix Enmity
Don't screw over mages by directly increasing Cure enmity generation and don't expect damage dealers to have to hold back damage to let the tank keep being the main target. - Fix Cover
Turn Cover into a stanced ability that works on any party members behind the Paladin targeted by single target attacks. Increase duration to at least be half of the cast time, if not more. Adjust the merit category or remove it. If desired, have some buffs to cure spells cast on players behind the Paladin while under this effect, such as increased healing and enmity generation.
There are more ways someone could adjust Paladin but this would be by far the easiest to do. If Cover could be used about half the time or more pending the defense changes, Paladin would be useful enough until the enmity changes come into effect that it would be fairly okay.
With any adjustment you have to be weary of the consequences, wide reworks of how everything works, or every job ability and adding gimmicky abilities take forever to implement and are full of problems down the road, whereas smaller tweaks can make big differences. - Fix Enmity
-
02-05-2013, 08:01 PMsaevel
I posted those numbers so he could easily do his own math and come to his own conclusions, looks like he just ignored them entirely.
I specifically used a common cure value without any enmity adjustment as a method to show how much more hate cure generates then other "Hate Tools". It's seconded only by damage dealt. A "tank" who is only building hate via "hate tools" aka Voke / Flash spam circa 2005 is going to be building slower then the healer healing them. Also those "tools" only generate large quantities of VE, CE isn't built up. A tank ~needs~ to be doing damage to generate large quantities of CE (VE will come naturally), this is why so many DD's now "tank" with PDT sets. They use initial damage to generate large amounts of CE then switch into turtle gear during TP moves or dangerous phases and back into full DD gear for more hate.
Something I didn't mention though hoped Choco would catch on is the raw enmity from WHM's best heal, Curaga IV. I assumed he was a healer as he lacked any knowledge of the enmity system, obviously he's not a healer from his lack of understanding how WHMs heal.
Curaga IV allows a WHM to heal three to four melee's for large amounts of damage (after dangerous aoe) at nearly no MP cost. Healing for 800~900 is not unheard of and results in a total cure value of 2400~3600. Healing three people for 800 results in a refund of 120MP, healing four people for 900 is a refund of 180MP. Now I know the experienced healers already know this, just stating for Choco's edification. The key issue is the enmity generated, it's based on the cumulative amount of HP cured. So three melees @800 would be 2400 for 1416 CE, 8592 VE. WHM's can already experience hate issues if the fight lasts longer then a few minutes and the NM is forcing the melee to stay in turtle mode a little too long. Raising the hate from healing is a death sentence to any healer in prolonged fights, thus it forces you to zerg the NM dead before your healer inevitably caps CE.
After running numbers I've concluded that hate generated from damage needs to be reduced to 25~30% and hate from healing to 10~15% of it's current value. PLD needs to have a "Enmity Bonus" trait at levels 10/30/50/70/90 at +10/5/5/5/5. Additionally "Flash" needs to have a much higher CE value, something on the order of ~1000. That or introduce another ability / spell that is cheap, fast and has a lowish recast timer that PLD could spam to build CE. Cover needs to be adjusted into a forced hate mechanic with a 20~30s duration that could be enhanced a little further, or could use Econ's idea above of making it a 90 degree backwards arc, though honestly that's dangerous as in front of a monster tends to be the death zone. Sentinel needs to have a 3min recast instead of a 5min one.
Those changes would actually allow tanking to coexist in today's content. Melee's would still get hit and take damage but the PLD would be able to keep the majority of the NM's attention on themselves and mitigate total damage taken. Melee's could then disengage from the fight should it get too dangerous for them, something that's not possible now due to hate mechanics. It also opens up /PLD as a sub for other jobs wanting to "tank", namely NIN. NIN used to /DRK for the plethora of CE hate tools that it offered, until SE nerfed RDM tanking and as a side effect nerfed NIN/DRK tanking.
Bottom line, as long as the current quantities of CE generated from damage exist then absolutely no defensive tanking is possible. It would be like trying to race a Matiz against a Lamborghini. -
02-06-2013, 06:00 AMYinnyth
(Directed at OP): Larger enmity caps does not fix the problem of healers eventually reaching the enmity cap. If you also increase the amount of enmity that a cure pulls and make it so that pulling hate once means pulling hate for at least 15 seconds, the trickiest part of your enmity system will be keeping your healers alive. Add on to that the fact that you wish to increase the enmity loss sustained based on how much damage you take, and you're looking at a system that is even more chaotic than our current system.
-
02-06-2013, 09:16 AMSarickI agree with this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Economizer
No one can explain a simple fix to enimity that I've seen. If we need complex math to show how it works then it's not simple.Quote:
Originally Posted by Economizer
This was my original thought concept. After thought about it I choose a weaker version because it would create an opportunity for more player skill. I think protecting players behind them as in (You have to get past me first if you want to get to them) would work well. A problem is this type of tanking doesn't limit tanking to only enmity. It would be simple and very effective, maybe too effective if everyone behind the tank is automatically covered by the ability.Quote:
Originally Posted by Economizer
The reason I changed it slightly was because people think it's an easy button approach. It would allow the tank to protect well without maintaining enmity at all. All they would need to do is use cover and have everyone stand behind them. With this cover anyone who has hate that's behind the tank would be free to generate as much hate as they wanted and the tank would always be the one taking the hits most of the time for them.
In the case of multiple tanks using cover the enemy would need to make checks to get past each tank before running for or attacking a target that has hate behind the tank.