Last straw

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corrderio

This right here sums up endgame very well.

---

THere's always going to be something that is stronger than other. The issue is enough content to take advantage and give everyone a strengthness and weakness. Being purely balanced isn't very fun, that means anyone can replace anything.

Any melee can be second tank.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nasomi

THere's always going to be something that is stronger than other. The issue is enough content to take advantage and give everyone a strengthness and weakness. Being purely balanced isn't very fun, that means anyone can replace anything.

---

Please say this is some kind of joke. SE should be trying to discourage class stacking, not encourage it. We already got 3 endgame events that have that.

Moogle uses 2 gladiators... At least you can!

This battle does not require class stacking at all.

Class stacking is something the community will come up with. If one class has but a slight edge over the others, some LS' will always chose to stack it.

All the DDs are quite balanced at the moment. They are all more than viable for Ifrit. However, a lot of players can't combo and when you're forming a PUG and you're gonna invite a stranger you won't want to put your faith in their ability to do positional combos.

In summary, class stacking in Moogle is nothing like what it was for Ifrit, or even DH. It's a path of least resistance taken by the community.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NoctisUmbra

This battle does not require class stacking at all.

Class stacking is something the community will come up with. If one class has but a slight edge over the others, some LS' will always chose to stack it.

All the DDs are quite balanced at the moment. They are all more than viable for Ifrit. However, a lot of players can't combo and when you're forming a PUG and you're gonna invite a stranger you won't want to put your faith in their ability to do positional combos.

In summary, class stacking in Moogle is nothing like what it was for Ifrit, or even DH. It's a path of least resistance taken by the community.

---

I agree with your point, BUT

this isnt for example, a lancer doing more damage than a pugilist or something like that.. in a pinch people would still be quite happy to take pugs or mrds or whatever was considered "lesser" DD

the point here is that archers are invulnerable to AOE attacks (because of their range obviously) something which SE is very well aware of yet STILL give mobs huge circular AOE attacks..

to sum up, SE could have made those circular AOE attacks single target and there might be a pug/mrd/lnc in the party instead of an archer.. the mob would still be getting hit the same amount of times..

or they could use some imagination like say have donut shaped AOE AND circular AOE so the archers wouldnt have an advantage over close range. OR making the mob do single target attacks on random party members... IE there is no benefit to stacking archers

SE allways seem to include needless elements in fights that encourage class stacking, in the case of ifrit people took lancers because they could attack out of range of seer but archers have animations lock... solution- get rid of/replace seer and dont give disadvantages to inbuilt game mechanics like.. "animation lock"

conclusion it isnt the players its the developers, sorry.

in FFXI, it took me 3 years to get Nidhogg, first kill (the other LS wiped) and got the server first NA koeing body. been riding on that high for years lol *sadface*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rogue

I agree with your point, BUT

this isnt for example, a lancer doing more damage than a pugilist or something like that.. in a pinch people would still be quite happy to take pugs or mrds or whatever was considered "lesser" DD

the point here is that archers are invulnerable to AOE attacks (because of their range obviously) something which SE is very well aware of yet STILL give mobs huge circular AOE attacks..

to sum up, SE could have made those circular AOE attacks single target and there might be a pug/mrd/lnc in the party instead of an archer.. the mob would still be getting hit the same amount of times..

or they could use some imagination like say have donut shaped AOE AND circular AOE so the archers wouldnt have an advantage over close range. OR making the mob do single target attacks on random party members... IE there is no benefit to stacking archers

SE allways seem to include needless elements in fights that encourage class stacking, in the case of ifrit people took lancers because they could attack out of range of seer but archers have animations lock... solution- get rid of/replace seer and dont give disadvantages to inbuilt game mechanics like.. "animation lock"

conclusion it isnt the players its the developers, sorry.

---

I do agree to this statement in particular in a way. Both ourselves and the developers are equal to blame. Dev's fault for adding in elements that cause stack parties (Lancer on Ifrit for Seer), and ourselves for not willing to make a diverse setup. It is kind of a balance issue there itself. We should learn to be diverse in parties, while Dev's need to give less incentive for stack partying. I don't know what they are thinking when they know this is an issue.

MRD, King, and BLM AoE are hurtful to the point you don't want a close range melee in there. If that was simply toned down a bit, it would still be challenging and ARC wouldn't be as high in demand. ARC still overall does more DPS however, but that is a different issue on balance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Velhart

ARC still overall does more DPS however, but that is a different issue on balance.

---

This is another thing that really bothers me about the current system. I don't see any reason why a ranged DD should be able to put up similar or greater numbers than a close ranged DD. If they have the ability to attack from a safe distance, they should do weaker damage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rogue

I agree with your point, BUT

this isnt for example, a lancer doing more damage than a pugilist or something like that.. in a pinch people would still be quite happy to take pugs or mrds or whatever was considered "lesser" DD

the point here is that archers are invulnerable to AOE attacks (because of their range obviously) something which SE is very well aware of yet STILL give mobs huge circular AOE attacks..

to sum up, SE could have made those circular AOE attacks single target and there might be a pug/mrd/lnc in the party instead of an archer.. the mob would still be getting hit the same amount of times..

or they could use some imagination like say have donut shaped AOE AND circular AOE so the archers wouldnt have an advantage over close range. OR making the mob do single target attacks on random party members... IE there is no benefit to stacking archers

SE allways seem to include needless elements in fights that encourage class stacking, in the case of ifrit people took lancers because they could attack out of range of seer but archers have animations lock... solution- get rid of/replace seer and dont give disadvantages to inbuilt game mechanics like.. "animation lock"

conclusion it isnt the players its the developers, sorry.

---

That's why ARCs and THMs are squishy, but close range DDs can take hits.

Point is the classes are balanced. Stacking can never fully be solved, however it can be made so that it isn't obviously encouraged.

They'd have to make bosses more or less inconsequential or entirely scripted to hope to get around it. Imagine the Moogle fight without the AoE attacks. Cake walk.

Point is Moogle has been beaten - smoothly and easily without feeling handicapped - with the presence of all DDs. I'm sorry but, in this case, it's 80%+ the players.

Also keep in mind this type of Full Party content is being made with the release of Jobs in mind. Jobs will be what everyone will be on for endgame content, and they will make a considerable difference.