A video showcasing all of Paladin's removed job actions. Thoughts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

Cross-Class COULD have been a neat system, but it wasn't. And FORCING players to do things is generally NOT a good thing. I hated my time on THM so bad I didn't touch the class again until ShB, and only did so then to get the "all DoM" achievement since I had leveled all the others.

Horrible, horrible system. It was removed for very good reason, rose-tinted goggles aside.

Something like FF11's sub-Job system is a good system. Cross-Class wasn't that.

---

And that's the thing, instead of trying to improve the cross class system to make it good, because it clearly had the potential to be good, they just removed it...as they do with so many systems.
But then they never replace them with anything, so instead of a clunky system there is just a big lot of nothing, slowly drilling more and more holes into the game's combat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Absurdity

And that's the thing, instead of trying to improve the cross class system to make it good, because it clearly had the potential to be good, they just removed it...as they do with so many systems.
But then they never replace them with anything, so instead of a clunky system there is just a big lot of nothing, slowly drilling more and more holes into the game's combat.

---

How do you fix the main issue people had with it? Which was having to level a job you didn't want to play just to get actions you needed for your main job. It doesn't matter how good you make this hypothetical system, if people don't like the initial premise, that is, levelling jobs they do not want to level, then it isn't going to be well received.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikey_R

How do you fix the main issue people had with it? Which was having to level a job you didn't want to play just to get actions you needed for your main job. It doesn't matter how good you make this hypothetical system, if people don't like the initial premise, that is, levelling jobs they do not want to level, then it isn't going to be well received.

---

You fix it by making sure the actions you can get aren't needed for your main job. The cross-class skills should be useful but not mandatory.
At least that would work if players weren't quite so keen on deciding on a "meta" and insisting that everybody stick to that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistakeNot

You fix it by making sure the actions you can get aren't needed for your main job. The cross-class skills should be useful but not mandatory.
At least that would work if players weren't quite so keen on deciding on a "meta" and insisting that everybody stick to that.

---

Which is what we have now, except you have to level another job arbitrarily to get access to everything.

There is also the grey area of you class as 'needed'.

On the previously mentioned Topic of cross class system I do genuinely think theirs some neat ideas but issues that could have been fixed instead of the approach we got

I think some skills we clearly need such as Swift Casts, Provokes ect. But at the same time I like the idea of having options the main issue is at least from what i heard mostly you'd just choose the useful skills on that class. :/

I wouldn't mind certain "cross class skills" such as cure 1, so they could make solo duties / open world, mobs actually hit somewhat harder then they currently do. It would also kinda be neat to have more selectable role actions such as choosing 1 of 3 defensives that have different timers but would have stronger vs weaker mit depending on during and how long the CD was. Just some more varity and customization options would be nice for jobs, even if it's "Illusion of choice" I rather have that illusion and options that might not be meta, then to not have them at all.

This actually got me thinking, was "fighting" for enmity that complicated back then? Would two tanks juggle between the same enemy non-stop? For example, there's a Paladin and a Gunbreaker, both with their stances on. The Gunbreaker gets the Monster's attention first and unless the Paladin uses Provoke, it seems like the Monster will never let go of the Gunbreaker. At least, that's how it is from personal experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maulclaw

This actually got me thinking, was "fighting" for enmity that complicated back then? Would two tanks juggle between the same enemy non-stop? For example, there's a Paladin and a Gunbreaker, both with their stances on. The Gunbreaker gets the Monster's attention first and unless the Paladin uses Provoke, it seems like the Monster will never let go of the Gunbreaker. At least, that's how it is from personal experience.

---

If both tanks have tank stance on and are fighting for enmity, they are doing it wrong. Only 1 tank should have their tank stance up when pulling and then the second can put it on after a bit (after the opener or a bit after is always good) to ensure the first tank always stays ahead (assuming equally skilled/geared tanks). If both tanks have stank stance, one should drop it and just let the other one have it. No point fighting over it and it generally shows who the better tank players are if they recognise the other player are constantly trying to fight for aggro (I've even seen it where they provoke) and drop their tank stance for the betterment of the party.

Also, to comment on the 'back then' point, I assume you mean back in Stormblood when tanks had a tank stance and a DPS stance (of which Gunbreaker was never a part of), in that instance, one tank had tank stance, one had DPS stance, so there was no enmity battle, until the first tank goes into DPS stance and the DPS crept up on them because they didn't use Diversion etc. (but that is a whole different subject).

If I have completely misunderstood what you are trying to get at then you are going to need to explain what you mean a bit better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maulclaw

This actually got me thinking, was "fighting" for enmity that complicated back then? Would two tanks juggle between the same enemy non-stop? For example, there's a Paladin and a Gunbreaker, both with their stances on. The Gunbreaker gets the Monster's attention first and unless the Paladin uses Provoke, it seems like the Monster will never let go of the Gunbreaker. At least, that's how it is from personal experience.

---

Tanks weren’t fighting for enmity in expansions prior to shadowbringers. In fact, in an optimised party you were trying to minimise your enmity lead in favour of damage. Tanks tried to stay in dps stance as much as possible using their enmity combo as little as possible, this meant the party had to keep their enmity down and help keep the MT’s enmity up, there was a tank trick in stormblood when there was no tank swaps for a while where the OT would provoke (max enmity + a little extra), the MT would shirk them (place 25% of their enmity onto the OT), then the MT would provoke back (new much higher max enmity) and the OT would shirk them back (place 25% of their very high enmity on MT and drop a huge chunk of their own enmity securing the MT’s lead).

Other jobs had tools like diversion that lowered their enmity generation by 80%, some had tools that cut their current enmity in half like lucid dreaming and ninja in particular had extremely powerful enmity control tools called shadewalker (diverted 80% of their own enmity generation to the target party member which was the MT) and smokescreen which was essentially diversion for other party members (usually put on a high dps job with no personal enmity control like SAM or MNK). That along with trick attack made NIN a must have party member in any comp.

In most cases you’d have your more powerful dps nipping at the heels of the MT while the OT would sit comfortably in some of the last places on enmity until they needed to swap to MT at which point you’d just provoke/shirk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cabalabob

Tanks weren’t fighting for enmity in expansions prior to shadowbringers. In fact, in an optimised party you were trying to minimise your enmity lead in favour of damage.

---

While this was generally the case with competent tanks you still had the usual enmity fights in alliance raids. But tank stance modifiers weren't as strong so it often still came down to which tank did the most damage.
I remember taking the boss off of a paladin in Ridorana by just doing my dps rotation in Deliverance, because all they did was spam their Rage of Halone combo in Shield Oath.

YOu all are forgetting the tanks had an aoe called Ultimatum the AOE Provoke. The issue with that was it only provided temp enmity so for example it would add 50 to whatever the mobs had in the range of it and then a few seconds its goes back to zero. Instead of fixing Ultimatum hey created the spin to win to replace 3 skills they removed in 5.0.

I do miss shield bash because it had the added benefit of pacify. I also miss Butchers Block for Warrior it was a nicely animated skill XD