Comprehensive Guide to the Kaiten and 6.1 SAM rework

I want to preface that I mostly agree with the general feeling behind the thread.

But bullet point 4 makes me chuckle every time. The closest comparison to kaiten is not a static healer rotation, but would be the old DRK's Dark Arts spamm, that everybody hated with a burning passion. And if anything, it was more intricate than kaiten because it affected many more skills in more varied ways. I find the irony pretty telling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valence

I want to preface that I mostly agree with the general feeling behind the thread.

But bullet point 4 makes me chuckle every time. The closest comparison to kaiten is not a static healer rotation, but would be the old DRK's Dark Arts spamm, that everybody hated with a burning passion. And if anything, it was more intricate than kaiten because it affected many more skills in more varied ways. I find the irony pretty telling.

---

I don't mean it as comparison, it's more of an example of actual bad design. Basically, saying that X before every Y is bad design, when much worse designs like healers rotation are in the same game, seems kind of, I guess off-topic/irrelevant. Fixing these real issues should come before they try to fix these tiny ones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valence

but would be the old DRK's Dark Arts spamm, that everybody hated with a burning passion.

---

And could have been addressed, like Dark Arts, in several ways that were not just 'remove it entirely with no replacement'. Also, Dark Arts is just replaced by Edge spam now, no? We wanted to dump DA in raidbuffs then, and we want to dump Edge in raidbuffs now, so it's not exactly like much changed

As for this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eorzean_username

When you really look at Kenki historically, the spread was really:

• 10 — Gap-closers which were previously self-flagellating to use, and avoided as much as feasible. The Celestial Revolution of Kenki spends.

• 15 — Essentially a gimmick.

• 20 — The actual floor of your gauge, essentially always-available, and relatively-easy to recover from mild misplays due to its low cost, unless you really, truly botched something.

• 25 — The vast majority of your Kenki spends, since the Job's inception.

• 50 — Your big hefty burst, which previously made sense to justify banking and building to this extra cost.

---

The only parts I agree with is 50 and 25. There were times when you'd want to purposely spend yourself under the 'safety net' of 20, knowing you'd get back to 20 before KaitenTime, and that is what we call skill expression. 15 and Seigan was literally the skill ceiling of the class, knowing how to use that effectively was what seperated the good from the great. Merciful Eyes was the 'gimmick'. And the gap closers were useful if they gained you a GCD (in), and could be used to create a 'filler GCD' in the SHB onwards when the 60s loop enforced by Tsubame came around (dash out). Now I'm not good at SAM and haven't been ever since SB ended, but even I can see that Kaiten, Seigan, Gyo/Yaten all had their places

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForsakenRoe

There were times when you'd want to purposely spend yourself under the 'safety net' of 20, knowing you'd get back to 20 before KaitenTime, and that is what we call skill expression.

---

I think that the effect of this is being overexaggerated, as well as the reason to even do it.

I'm assuming you're referring to something like getting an AST card, or burst windows, or openers, where you could push in an extra Shinten or a Seigan if you'd build up enough Kenki before your next Iai (and could guarantee the positional hits to do so).

And sure — but that is, broadly-speaking, fairly niche, and basically irrelevant outside of buff windows (ie, in a hypothetical "cursed comp" with no party support, it would make close-to-zero difference whether you performed Kaiten-budget gymnastics or not).

Meaning that, broadly-speaking, this factor added relatively-little to the Job experience, especially internally; outside burst windows, you would have a small eternity to build back up that pittance of Kenki before your next mandatory Meikyo, especially given the option to slush-up 5-10 Kenki by creeping your combo past a full Sen stack.

——————————————————

You need to understand that I am not assessing this from the perspective of, for example, a Balance Discord Job Mentor — the kind of players who will hunt down and sniff out every possible tiny adjustment, because it just brings them satisfaction to do so.

I'm framing why, to a developer, certain elements seem trivial or unimportant when considering what to preserve and what to weed-out at a broader design level.

——————————————————

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForsakenRoe

And the gap closers were useful if they gained you a GCD (in), and could be used to create a 'filler GCD' in the SHB onwards when the 60s loop enforced by Tsubame came around (dash out).

---

Yes, you've described why gap closers are useful — not why their gauge cost was relevant or interesting.

And that's just a general property of DPS-affecting gap-closers across all Jobs — "if doing something suboptimal with this will increase your uptime and be a larger proportional gain, then do it". The consideration is more-or-less the same, whether the loss is from not spending all charges inside burst, or the loss is from bleeding gauge off suboptimally.

I don't think that this indicates anything interesting in specific about its relation to Kenki as a system, and like Onslaught for WAR, it actually resulted in stubborn and counterintuitive behavior — ie, while everyone else is just using their gap-closers to gap-close, you're technically-pressured to find a way not to (or just eating a loss, in which case the Gauge cost is not particularly-interesting, because it 'just happens').

——————————————————

As for Yatenpi, what makes that interesting is not the Gauge cost, which is essentially neutralised anyway, but rather how it can jigsaw into your loop, or the rare cases like Shadowkeeper where it can allow you to razor-edge a GCD before some obnoxiously-massive AOE (or etc).

If you removed the Gauge cost entirely, ~nothing would change about it in practice.

——————————————————

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForsakenRoe

15 and Seigan was literally the skill ceiling of the class, knowing how to use that effectively was what seperated the good from the great.

---

Unless I am severely-misremembering something, the difference between hitting every possible Seigan and not failed to gain you much beyond what random variance could.

That a very, very small portion of people could make good(?) use of it to try to bank more Kenki going into buffs, and/or squeeze a little more Kenki into buff windows, and/or gain a chunkier boost through a combination of buffstacking and crit variance, was surely satisfying for them — but in terms of what it broadly-added to the Job's Gauge system, I maintain that it was basically a gimmick, and maximising its usage was usually akin to a self-affixed merit-badge rather than any meaningful benefit.

In fact, the removal of Seigan and the shift to raw Kenki from Third Eye actually made proactive awareness of incoming damage both much more significant, and much more rewarding.

——————————————————

My points here are not trying to say, "Ha ha, see, varying Gauge costs are always pointless!"

It's: "The Kenki system and its costs were honestly never very well-explored nor realised, a lot of it is being viewed retroactively with nostalgia, and that's probably why the SE devs went on a tear ripping most of it out".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valence

I want to preface that I mostly agree with the general feeling behind the thread.

But bullet point 4 makes me chuckle every time. The closest comparison to kaiten is not a static healer rotation, but would be the old DRK's Dark Arts spamm, that everybody hated with a burning passion. And if anything, it was more intricate than kaiten because it affected many more skills in more varied ways. I find the irony pretty telling.

---

And it has not reduced ability spam at all. DRK is busier now than ever before. So I have to ask, why was Dark Arts spam so bad when you just Edge spam now? It's literally the same thing with a different name and less interactivity (cuz Dark Arts actually augmented skills while Edge does nothing).

Why is Kaiten spam worse than Shinten spam? This is the same thing where Kaiten interacted with the kit more than Shinten does, but instead of adjusting it they just threw it out the window.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eorzean_username

Gap-closers which were previously self-flagellating to use

---

They cost, at release, 12 potency per use relative to Shinten-spending. Just 12 potency... to have at the time the only gap-closer on a less than a 30s CD outside of Warrior (who then immediately lost that capacity).

Quote:

---

At that time, SAM had very little else going on — it was basically "Black Mage with a Sword"

---

Except for... playing completely differently from BLM, and quite distinctly from even any other melee?

Quote:

---

As Samurai has evolved over time to have a true "rotation", and a more robust and matured system overall...

---

It... already had one, from the start, in old Hagakure -- more frequent but simply faintly less susceptible to latency, than Shadowbringer's single-charge TG rotations.

In what possible way is Endwalker's massive lulls and bloat something that'd form an objectively "more robust and matured system overall"? That's pure opinion on your part.

Quote:

---

...it may well be that the designers feel that the Job no longer needs so much detail involved in, nor devoted to, its Gauge management in-specific — ie, bringing SAM's Gauge more in-line with most other Jobs.

---

Then that'd be idiocy. That other jobs have increasingly come to waste their gauges does not mean that turning that entire gauge into, effectively, two Shinten charges by turning the "self-flagellating" gap-closers into 30s CD and increasing Shinten's cost to 50 would likewise be a more "mature" design.

???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eorzean_username

The Kenki system and its costs were honestly never very well-explored nor realised, a lot of it is being viewed retroactively with nostalgia, and that's probably why the SE devs went on a tear ripping most of it out.

---

Okay, but where does that end? It appealed to most who played it at the time -- certainly far more than its removal or "Do I Shoha... or Shoha II?!" and having action only for 20s per 120s BS that's replaced that gauge management.

At what point can we honestly say, as you suggest here, "X was too shallow, so it needed to be shallowed out further"? And why would Kenki, of all things, be a reasonable choice for that butcher's block?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

They cost, at release, 12 potency per use relative to Shinten-spending. Just 12 potency...

---

I'm trying to recall, but I think Shinten was originally 300 Potency for 25 Kenki? While Gyoten was 100 Potency for 10 Kenki.

Normalising to 12 PPK, that would have put Gyoten's 10 Kenki at ~20 potency loss relative to Shinten, right?

——————————————————

Regardless, the wisdom was still "try not to do it", because it was still a Potency loss — same as "Try to do it" with Seigan, because it was still a Potency gain.

If you (in the collective, not personal, sense) are going to hold up Seigan — a pinhead-sized drop of potency gain — as some sort of epitome of true mastery and skill expression, then you shouldn't dismiss the pinhead-sized drop of potency loss from unnecessary gap-closing.

——————————————————

But anyway, I'm not doing the "scream emoji" and saying, "Gap-closing Samurai RUINS DPS output with this ONE MISTAKE!"

I'm saying that the lossy 10 Kenki cost added very little over not having a cost at all, and in fact contributed to a psychological "guilt" / "pressure" over using it, regardless of how "rational" that feeling might have been when zoomed out.

——————————————————

If anything, I think that Gyoten (and rarely Yaten, when a solar eclipse happens and you need Yaten but can't insert another GCD into your loop with Enpi) becoming potency-neutral to Shinten has done more to make Gyoten/Yaten's Kenki costs interesting than their "lossy" design ever did.

——————————————————

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Except for... playing completely differently from BLM, and quite distinctly from even any other melee?

---

Now come on, this isn't even fair.

You literally (intentionally?) cut my sentence in half, in order to attack an implication that I was not making:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eorzean_username

At that time, SAM had very little else going on — it was basically "Black Mage with a Sword", in the sense of having nearly no real burst window, and most of its damage coming from just pumping out GCDs consistently and steadily.

---

——————————————————

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

It... already had one, from the start, in old Hagakure -- more frequent but simply faintly less susceptible to latency, than Shadowbringer's single-charge TG rotations.

---

In the sense that every single Job inevitably ends up having some sort of "rotation"? Yes.

In the sense of having a complete structure and strict 60s-timing goals like the ShB changes gave it? Absolutely not.

ShB aggressively-sync'd Samurai up with the 60s burst cycle that the game broadly operated under, and in turn, gave Samurai a repeating and identifiable 60s structure to its filler cycles — which was a dramatic change, and revitalised the Job in many ways.

There was a vague feeling of this in SB — things like staying on-track so that Higanbana / Kenki-dumping ended up in Trick, not drifting Guren, etc — but it had far less structure and was, by and large, operating on the "ad hoc" model, compared to the firmed-up "loop" that became established in ShB.

——————————————————

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

In what possible way is Endwalker's massive lulls and bloat something that'd form an objectively "more robust and matured system overall"?

---

I have to be honest, I am really not sure where to begin with this.

The original context that you're responding to was, explicitly, referring to the difference between the SB "just kind of chillin' " Samurai, and the ShB "now I, too, am a 60s burst Job!" Samurai (which EW modestly-expanded upon via Tsubame/Meikyo charges and the addition of Ogi to differentiate 2-minute windows more strongly).

But now you've suddenly leapt into a critique of the Endwalker design.

If you want to do that, could you start by elaborating on what you currently see as "massive lulls and bloat" ?

——————————————————

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

That's pure opinion on your part.

---

I suppose if you want to attack it as "pure opinion", and duel it with your own "pure opinion", that's your prerogative, sure.

In that case, I'll try to lawyer-up more thoroughly, and say:

"I personally think that the ShB design changes significantly-matured and refined the SB Samurai design into a more robust and complete Job, especially within the broader XIV party design that has become established in coordinated content over time, and I suspect that the developers feel similarly, hence their apparent comfort with deemphasising the (ostensible) complexity of the Kenki system, which I see as one of the few 'legs' that was implemented to prop-up the original SB design."

——————————————————

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Then that'd be idiocy. That other jobs have increasingly come to waste their gauges does not mean that turning that entire gauge into, effectively, two Shinten charges by turning the "self-flagellating" gap-closers into 30s CD and increasing Shinten's cost to 50 would likewise be a more "mature" design.

???

---

Okay, now it feels like you're swinging all over the place, gluing things that I've said together seemingly at-random. This is becoming mildly-frustrating.

First of all, I am speculating about why the developers are doing things, not objectively advocating for or against any specific change.

Second of all, you're (intentionally?) taking out-of-context a comment about the fact that lossy gap-closers led to them being considered something to ideally avoid using if possible.

Thirdly, I'm pretty sure that I didn't say anything about increasing gap-closers to 30s — you seem to have just inserted that at random.

Fourth, at no point did I say that "increasing Shinten's cost to 50 would be a more mature design".

——————————————————

Instead, the actual statement was:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eorzean_username

As Samurai has evolved over time to have a true "rotation", a very definite "burst window", and a more robust and matured system overall, it may well be that the designers feel that the Job no longer needs so much detail involved in, nor devoted to, its Gauge management in-specific — ie, bringing SAM's Gauge more in-line with most other Jobs.

From that perspective, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Shinten eventually ends up becoming a 50 Kenki action.

---

This is a cause-effect statement.

A. Because Samurai has matured as a design over time, and added significant additional details and breadth to its rotation,

B. The developers may feel that there is no longer a need to have so much detail or attention focused specifically on its Gauge management,

C. And therefore they may continue to push Kenki towards functioning like other Job Gauges,

D. To the point that I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually normalised Shinten to the generic "50 Gauge cost" that most Gauge-spenders use.

I did not advocate for this happening, nor comment on whether I see it as a good or bad idea, nor state that this change, specifically, would be a cause of a "mature design".

Instead, I identified it as a possible cascading consequence of developer response and perceptions related to how the Samurai design has evolved and expanded over time.

——————————————————

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Okay, but where does that end? It appealed to most who played it at the time --

---

Well, we don't honestly know that, though.

It's extremely-difficult to retroactively go back and razor-out how many players signed up for Samurai because they felt that they could achieve high levels of "skill expression" with Kenki management, or liked how many Kenki-spending decisions the Job gave them...

...versus how many just wanted to play a Samurai, because it's a Samurai, and wields a katana, and looks cool, and is accessible and comfortable to understand at an entry-level.

——————————————————

If anything, I'd say that a contributor to Samurai popularity was possibly (note that I am making a speculation, not an attempt at factual assertion) due to the fact that there was actually so little relevancy to most of the Kenki system.

ie: Seigan could pretty much not exist; the gap-closer costs were basically a formality for most players beyond level 62; and just banking 20 Kenki for Kaiten at all times would rarely cost most players anything noticeable.

So, the fact that the bulk of the Job's Gauge performance could comfortably be boiled down to: "Don't overcap; save enough for Kaiten; spend on Shinten; make sure you can use Guren/Senei on-cooldown"... very likely increased the appeal to a lot of players — ie, it was intuitive, accessible, and quite forgiving outside of stubborn optimisation goals.

——————————————————

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

certainly far more than its removal or "Do I Shoha... or Shoha II?!"

---

I think that Shoha 2 is indeed an utterly-underwhelming addition, right down to its comically-uninspired and frankly-inappropriate name (in the sense of not following the Samurai naming conventions / flavor)...

...but I feel like Shoha 2 is also a bit of a "decoy target" here, being an easy and recognisable "punching-bag".

Shoha 2 changed ~nothing about the rotation, it's just "there". You didn't "trade" anything core to the rotation out in order to get Shoha 2 tacked-on to Expert Dungeon clears.

Likewise, Shoha 2 wasn't a specific attack on Samurai — it's just another in a long line of semi-lazy "AOE versions" that the anxiously-smiling developers keep trying to disguise as birthday-presents each expansion (eg, Orogeny, Energy Siphon, Shadowbite, etc).

——————————————————

As for the "Do I X... or Y" sarcasm, I don't honestly get it — by that same reasoning, you could ask the same sarcastic question about Fuko, Mangetsu, Oka, Kyuten and Guren.

Is the argument here that you feel that there is no need for separate AOE rotations?

——————————————————

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

and having action only for 20s per 120s BS that's replaced that gauge management.

---

I'm honestly struggling to connect this one together.

The Samurai "filler" between 60s bursts since ShB is basically just what it was doing full-time in SB, except structured into more of a definite and recognisably-repeating pattern, with the additional puzzle-piece of how to arrange filler and adapt to disconnects.

Samurai isn't even on a strict 120s cycle, because you have a distinct mini-burst at 60s that you still want to build-to, manage, and then adjust fillers around.

And compared to ShB Samurai, you're still performing ~the same sort of filler loop, with the same considerations for counting fillers, adjusting for speed, and "fixing" with Hagakure.

You've now stripped 1 (one) Kaiten keypress / gauge-spend out of that filler period, and while you've lost Seigan, you've gained a significantly-stronger incentive to weave in Third Eye whenever possible, as well as the option of using Gyoten/Yaten for fine-tuning instead.

——————————————————

If anything, I'd say that the loss of Kaiten has much more drastically-affected the feel of the burst windows — dropping from machine-gunning up to ~4 Kaitens in short succession, to (obviously) zero Kaitens in that same window.

——————————————————

Could you elaborate more specifically on what you feel has been lost during the apparently "actionless" 100s that you're referring to?

——————————————————

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

At what point can we honestly say, as you suggest here, "X was too shallow, so it needed to be shallowed out further"?

---

Once again, that is not what I actually said; that is not what I suggested here.

What I said was, to rephrase yet another way:

"I think that the depth of various components of X is being overexaggerated in hindsight, and on account of that, as well as [other factors], the developers were probably motivated to consider various underwhelming aspects of X to be expendable, when considering the Job more broadly on the whole".

——————————————————

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

And why would Kenki, of all things, be a reasonable choice for that butcher's block?

---

Well, for the reasons I've outlined at length.

In case this is coming across wrong, I am not saying that you — or anyone else — are wrong for having found satisfaction, depth, or enjoyment in any of the previous tools or designs that have been attached to the Kenki gauge.

Saying, "Hey! I liked pressing Seigan!" or "Hey!! I liked pressing Kaiten!" is completely-valid, and you are well within rights — and doing exactly what you should do — by offering this honest feedback to the developers.

And Deo's thread here is a well-formatted, considerate, and legitimate way of trying to express that feedback.

——————————————————

What I am instead trying to say is that, I think, a lot of these experiences were very niche and specific, and more of a manifestation of personal preferences, rather than truly being part of a particularly-deep or meaningful system compared to what Samurai has now — especially considering the mitigating (but not completely-recompensating) factors of the dramatically-increased value of Third Eye, and the new use-cases now available to Gyoten/Yaten.

And that, in turn, is probably why the developers have done things that seem incomprehensible from the perspective of players who were already eyebrows-deep in the system, and finding personal enjoyment in those niche details.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForsakenRoe

And could have been addressed, like Dark Arts, in several ways that were not just 'remove it entirely with no replacement'. Also, Dark Arts is just replaced by Edge spam now, no? We wanted to dump DA in raidbuffs then, and we want to dump Edge in raidbuffs now, so it's not exactly like much changed

---

No, it's not like Edge at all. It was literally like Kaiten and enhanced a lot of different skills of the DRK's arsenal, which technically was more interesting because it went beyond just "increase potency". But it turned out that you needed to use it all the time, much like kaiten for every iajutsu.

Dark Arts is still there as a passive buff mechanic behind TBN when it breaks, giving out a free Edge. That's completely different than what it used to be. They could have called it something entirely different, but decided instead to re-use the name.

But if you mean that you think people would be pleased by Kaiten making a return without the ability and without the awesome flair/visual it provided, but just there as a passive buff coming from someone, I have a big doubt about that... Else, just go play pvp, it's there as a passive buff actually (which is a big troll tbh, pvp has so many lost abilities just being there taunting players, it's silly).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsumdere

And it has not reduced ability spam at all. DRK is busier now than ever before. So I have to ask, why was Dark Arts spam so bad when you just Edge spam now? It's literally the same thing with a different name and less interactivity (cuz Dark Arts actually augmented skills while Edge does nothing).

Why is Kaiten spam worse than Shinten spam? This is the same thing where Kaiten interacted with the kit more than Shinten does, but instead of adjusting it they just threw it out the window.

---

It's not the same thing, but it's definitely a spamm.

You see were I was going in any case. Why were people mad about the dark arts spamm, when they suddenly are mad that they got the kaiten spamm removed? What has changed in the mindset? Or is it just tied to the ability visuals? Something else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eorzean_username

The original context that you're responding to was, explicitly, referring to the difference between the SB "just kind of chillin' " Samurai, and the ShB "now I, too, am a 60s burst Job!" Samurai (which EW modestly-expanded upon via Tsubame/Meikyo charges and the addition of Ogi to differentiate 2-minute windows more strongly).

---

It... wasn't, though? Not a single post you've responded to quoted has made any comparison between Stormblood and Shadowbringer Samurai, only between 6.1 and either 5.x or 6.0 Samurai.

So, yeah, when I see you responding to a critique of Endwalker Samurai with how the kit was "evolved" or "matured", I'm going to think you're talking about the changes brought in Endwalker, not some previous period that's not under critique.

Quote:

---

Now come on, this isn't even fair.

You literally (intentionally?) cut my sentence in half, in order to attack an implication that I was not making:

---

Really? Let's read it again:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eorzean_username

At that time, SAM had very little else going on — it was basically "Black Mage with a Sword", in the sense of having nearly no real burst window, and most of its damage coming from just pumping out GCDs consistently and steadily.

---

Is that not equating a job, or its identity, to solely its damage profile... while completely dismissing its differences in gameplay?

Else, wouldn't this read something like, "Samurai's damage profile was too similar to that of Black Mage," rather than "Samurai... was basically Black Mage..."?

Call me crazy if you like, but that seems the pretty obvious implication. Therefore, the disagreement.

Quote:

---

Normalising to 12 PPK, that would have put Gyoten's 10 Kenki at ~20 potency loss relative to Shinten, right?

---

Sorry, yes, 20. Which would put the cost at 1/3rd of a single positional, and would mean that it'd take less than a 1/10th GCD saved in uptime via that gap-closer to make that a damage increase, etc., etc. It was far from "self-flagellation" unless spamming it from melee range (and technically a still a damage bonus over saving for Shinten if cast at the end of raidbuffs worth 20+% damage and you had a Gekko or Kasha before your next Iaijutsu or Hagakure was coming up).

Yes, you didn't use it often, but any use you'd have for it as a gap-closer, it was plenty worth. It was to Samurai's advantage that Gyoten was 10s CD at 10 Kenki's cost instead of just another 30s CD at no cost.

It's not something that would make more sense to further strip away from the gauge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eorzean_username

And that's just a general property of DPS-affecting gap-closers across all Jobs — "if doing something suboptimal with this will increase your uptime and be a larger proportional gain, then do it". The consideration is more-or-less the same, whether the loss is from not spending all charges inside burst, or the loss is from bleeding gauge off suboptimally.

---

That space "more or less" between a quickly-refunded action a free action, though, is still a shift in time -- the same kind of thing that previously moved the "Am I making sure I won't overcap Kenki?" apart from "Am I synced for a perfect re-Higan?" as to spread the intensity of a 1-minute burst's worth of actions/optimizations across a slightly larger span of time before every other minute was reduced to solely Higan. It's subtle, but it is impactful.

Quote:

---

I don't think that this indicates anything interesting in specific about its relation to Kenki as a system, and like Onslaught for WAR, it actually resulted in stubborn and counterintuitive behavior — ie, while everyone else is just using their gap-closers to gap-close, you're technically-pressured to find a way not to (or just eating a loss, in which case the Gauge cost is not particularly-interesting, because it 'just happens').

---

They, at the time... ALL did that. All of them. But worse. If you didn't use them on CD, you lost potency.

And now? Use more than a single "free" Onslaught per 2-minute as a gap-closer, and you sacrifice your raid buff cycle's portion of 100 potency, commonly exceeding the 20-potency cost of Gyoten.

Quote:

---

Samurai isn't even on a strict 120s cycle, because you have a distinct mini-burst at 60s that you still want to build-to, manage, and then adjust fillers around.

And compared to ShB Samurai, you're still performing ~the same sort of filler loop, with the same considerations for counting fillers, adjusting for speed, and "fixing" with Hagakure.

---

Except your 1-minute is now solely Higan, instead of TG, IS, and Higan together.

TG alignment now has over 100 seconds for you to sync everything up, greatly reducing the frequency and urgency of that interaction, because you just use both per a fixed string of actions at once per two minutes instead of interacting with that mechanic per minute. Add Ikishoten's CD being doubled and Senei/Guren's Kenki costs being standardized down to Shinten's, and no... it's not going to feel the same. Every other burst loop feels at most only half as involved, regardless of whether one uses the same "filler", with the job just generally seeming less interactive now between bursts.

Quote:

---

Could you elaborate more specifically on what you feel has been lost during the apparently "actionless" 100s that you're referring to?

---

Primarily, the number of macrorotational elements per minute. They're less now, and the TGs stacked up just feel like they merge together into seemingly one act per 120s.

Syncing only for a rigid sequence once per two minutes into which to spend both TGs just does not feel as good to me as getting those few different CD-based optimizations to prep for --at nearly the same time though they may be-- every minute.

Would I gladly have taken something that alters, per 90 or 120s, the way I actually perform my burst? Of course.
But, in this case that's come at (to me, seemingly unnecessary) cost to the level of activity between bursts, since now we only have a single mechanic to worry about per non-RaidBuffed-minute.

Quote:

---

This is a cause-effect statement.

A. Because Samurai has matured as a design over time, and added significant additional details and breadth to its rotation,

B. The developers may feel that there is no longer a need to have so much detail or attention focused specifically on its Gauge management,

C. And therefore they may continue to push Kenki towards functioning like other Job Gauges,

D. To the point that I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually normalised Shinten to the generic "50 Gauge cost" that most Gauge-spenders use.

---

I'm not interested in how the devs reach a given decision if the premises they follow to get there are themselves flawed. There's no need to keep the same difficulty ceiling as in prior expansions (nor, therefore, to squish old elements of difficulty in order to make room for new). Nor do the simplifications to gauges seem to have been considered net positives. (Agreement that some elements of gauge spending were lackluster was not an invitation to gut them.) Nor has creating a gauge just to act as second charge for a given ability or ability pair ever gone without critique.

Warrior mains have not seemed particularly happy to have the Beast Gauge reduced to simply a second available charge of Cleave/Decimate, while most DRKs I know considered Blood Gauge somewhere between lackluster and a joke because its interest was propped up almost solely by its CD-based generators instead of any of its spending.

Inb4 'The RDM gauge changes were popular': The 50 cost, relative to the old 80, increased available burst complexity. It is not one of those simplifications.

__________________

Tl;dr: Eorzean, I tend to agree with you on most things, but I do not see any sense in defending a removal that shows no signs of replacement, or even in explaining how the developers would have arrived at a bad decision when the steps leading there would require ignoring the broader picture of feedback or insisting on premises not held by the community.

Making room for Namikiri, for instance, did not require axing the majority of Samurai's gauge interactions (however shallow or otherwise one might may think them to be). Such didn't even require reducing our minute-between to solely Higanbana. Such did not require axing our movement during AoE (via conal AoE -> radial AoE).

None of those things were necessary, and while some were at least asked for (just like removing positionals from all melee is incessantly asked for by those who don't play melee anyways and haven't particularly started to even when a given job loses 67% of their positionals), the ways that the developers have responded to that feedback show a sizeable departure from understanding, or even seemingly an intent to understand those concerns.




Finally, though this is fairly tangential, I don't consider simple functional potency to be an acceptable replacement for gameplay components.

Third Eye is objectively more powerful a tool now than when we had Seigan, but is it necessarily better than, say, having it augment one's next Kenki spender (other than Guren/Senei) to cost 10 less potency, change its animation, and maybe guarantee your next positional?

Both versions would generate/save 10 Kenki and take no additional buttons. The difference (apart from that spitball positional element) is simply flavor, but flavor does matter.

Similarly, having two charges of TG is objectively more powerful than having one, yes, but it then means that we interact with it that much less. I'd far rather just have left TG at a single charge but let it available after Iaijutsu until we next generate Sen as to deal with the complaints of TGs lost to packet loss or latency or otherwise being slightly overly constrained (relative to SB Hagakure, for instance).

Quote:

---

the developers have done things that seem incomprehensible from the perspective of players who were already eyebrows-deep in the system and finding personal enjoyment in those niche details

---

And that's, to me, the crux of the problem. The developers should be getting themselves at least very nearly eyebrows-deep or they're going to continually reduce the personal enjoyment available to those who fully appreciate the details of the job in question.

We've long since known that's an issue; there's little fruit to be born from explaining that again now. And simply lowering our expectations accordingly hasn't born fruit, either. So...?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valence

Why were people mad about the dark arts spamm, when they suddenly are mad that they got the kaiten spamm removed? What has changed in the mindset? Or is it just tied to the ability visuals? Something else?

---

This is what I was trying to get at. I liked SB DRK, once they did some much needed changes to it in 4.3, even if the majority of players thought 'its trash no damage' (they were incorrect). Why were people mad about DA spam, but are seemingly fine with Edge spam? Or as the case is, all the massive OGCD count of current DRK? The only things I can think of is 'pressing one button a lot (DA) Vs pressing like 5 different buttons for burst window (even if total APM is higher)', and the other is 'DA's effect is not instant, so the feedback isn't as pronounced as the instant 500p damage from Edge'. I guess similar applies to Kaiten, where you can't see the effect as much versus an upfront damage number like Senei or Shinten. Which is sad, because it just means that a whole class design paradigm, of 'enchant your weapon to deal additional effects' is potentially lost to us, because people don't like it if there's a skill that 'does nothing on it's own, but enhances the next action in some way'

Oh wait we have that on SGE still. Oh wait we have Continuation, now also on Burst Strike. Oh wait, people pine for the Royal Road days of AST. Oh wait we have Kaiten threads still, 3 patches of radio silence after it's removal. Maybe people DO like that kind of gameplay, and the devs removing it was a mistake they refuse to accept they screwed up on, for whatever reason