What happened to job inter-play? Was it any good?

Congrat's your genuine curiosity brought me out of lurking!

Anywho, As other have put it, there used to be a pretty in depth aggro system in the game with lots of moving parts. It was a effectively this whole mini game where the group assisted managing the main tanks agro utilizing their tools so the main tank could spend as little time as possible in tank stance as it was a MASSIVE DPS increase to do so. Everyone popping their diversions and such, the ninja Shifting their aggro to the tank and reducing the healer/BLM's aggro, all of this at no cost to them as everything is a oGCD. All with the goal of letting the tank stay in DPS stance for damage. It was honestly really fun and engaging....

In Organized High end content

Outside of that, it was infuriating. The main issue with the whole system was that basically as a tank, your DPS was ENTIRELY reliant on your DPS's ability to use their buttons, and if you think people would just use them when asked BOY did people take offense to it. The thing is, alot of the enmity reduction skills were VERY powerful, you didn't even really need to time them in most cases, but in PUGs this was often too much to ask. If they weren't hitting their enmity reduction buttons all they really had to do was out DPS a tank to pull aggro, which they SHOULD be doing, even if they were sub par. Weirdly enough it this led to alot of very bad players getting very big egos, because they thought their DPS was too much for the tank to handle, when in reality they were just not hitting their "make the tank do more damage" buttons. You would end up having to constantly nerf your own damage as a tank (and in WAR case lose access to your defining abilities AKA Fell Cleave) Just because people couldn't be bothered to hit some extra buttons. On the flip side of this, as others have mentioned, you would get players who, if tanking, would be in tank stance ALWAYS, and it was NOT a small DPS loss being in tank stance. It varies from class to class but it was like 30-40% DPS loss, and the players who did this usually weren't very good in the first place, leading to some tanks doing ABYSMAL dps. You could hardly blame them for this conclusion since the game basically told you to do this, however in most situations it was entirely unnecessary and just caused things to get drawn out. If you see arguments these days about healer DPS vs just healing (please do not start this up here) it was basically the same thing, but with tanks. Long story short, the issue with enmity management is that it just divided the player base and got players mad at each other. Ideally from a tank perspective, you would do a single enmity combo (or less if a WAR in SB) and then play in DPS stance the rest of the fight. After the changes tanks now all play like they used to play in DPS stance all the time now, but also have the extra mit like they are in tank stance now as well.

Other issue some classes, like the mages also just had bad tools for handling it, mages only got access to lucid dreaming, which cut their enmity by 50%, this issue being that BLM and RDM tended to start off with a bursty opener, meaning if you didn't have a ninja, the tank needed to gain extra aggro. This caused a effect where most groups were basically locked in a specific DPS set up. you had DRG/BRD (or MCH if you were feeling like being different) because that combo was basically mandatory, the DPS was nutty, then you had a ninja because 60 second trick attack was absolutely silly and they came with aggro management tools that you effectively needed so your tank could deal more DPS. Classes like Monk tended to struggle in these days because it brought basically no synergy buffs to party, and that was the name of the game back then. Basically if a class couldn't nicely slot into a meta comp, it was considered bad back then, much worse then classes are these days, as it wasn't just raw DPS the group would be missing.

While I do miss the system I think it's for the best that it was removed, though I would like to peak into a game where they figured out how to make it work without it being frustrating. It was the cause of so much balancing issues, and and was the center ALOT of points of frustration.

I remember when all the healers loved having a bard around just for Mage's Ballad, which used to just be refunded mana. Mana management used to be a lot more of a thing, and healer classes each had their own flavored MP return with much longer cooldowns, and they were also a threat drop. WHM had Shroud of Saints and AST had Luminiferous Aether. SCH was the only one that got to keep theirs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Local_Custard

Oh that's an interesting angle for MP management to take- I think I like that. how often was this used?

---

It was effectively a 1:1 mana transferal. If someone was struggling with MP, you could give them the MP, but that MP deficit was effectively pushed onto someone else (as IIRC, in SB, you couldn't be MP positive). The exception to this is BLM, as they have, what is effectively infinite MP, just due to how the job works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Local_Custard

in what situations would dps run low on TP? Do you think anyone would have changed if TP could run out in more ways?

---

TP was used for all weaponskills, which boils down to all physical GCDs. AoE actions and ranged attacks used ~2 times the amount of TP your single target actions used. This is where problems with TP in dungeons come from. You didn't want to go full into AoE, as you would drain your TP very quickly, which meant you swapped to single target, so that you could at least keep attacking. Jobs did have Invigorate to recover TP, but it was on a long cooldown (2 mins IIRC) and even with optimal use, was TP negative, even in single target scenarios. This does mean longer encounters with a single enemy, ie. trials and raids, could see you run out of TP and be prevented from attacking.

Now, whilst there were jobs that could grant TP (and MP), you couldn't guarantee they were in your party, unless it was premade and even if they did show up, it was a coin toss as to whether that actually used the TP/MP refreshes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Local_Custard

What was the optimal tank stance strat? How were players intended to use their stance dancing?
I know the first question can seem kind of vague depending on what you are measuring. I think for this question measure for a balance of emnity generation + damage.
How well would tank dancing work into the current version of ffxiv?

---

I don't think anyone knows 100% what the devs intended for tank stances, however it would be a safe bet that you would be in tank stance whilst you were top of the enmity list and in DPS stance when you were supporting. What actually happened was tank stance + enmity combos for a bit, then swap to full DPS.

As for enmity generation, this is how things tended to flow. Tank stance and enmity combos was the most enmity, followed by Tank Stance and DPS combos, then DPS stance and enmity combos then DPS stance with DPS combos. The issue here is the enmity combos provided no resources (MP/Beast Gauge/Blood), which put you behind in other areas.

If they were to re-introduce tank stances as they used to be, it wouldn't really work out. With so much emphasis on damage output, you would still aim to be in DPS stance as much as possible. It then start getting complicated about how to balance an enmity system, especially with so many variables, like ilevel, which can play havoc with balancing.

If you want to read more about tank stances and different perspectives, you could try reading this topic. However, it is long with a lot of different points of view, so I don't blame you if you want to skip reading it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Local_Custard

Has Esuna replaced Erase? Drain sounds a bit like energy drain for some reason.

---

Esuna has always been there, erase was only for SB but I also believe it was only for caster DPS and a DPS losing out on 1 GCD of their damage rotation is much more costly than a healer using Esuna. The same for Drain. You could argue usefulness for solo content though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Local_Custard

How do interplay abilities for tanks stack up now (numbers for each tank) compared to before?

---

Basically the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Local_Custard

I do enjoy my blm shield. I like to press it when I feel threatened and unsure if the healer will get to me

---

BLM used to have 2 shields, one for physical damage and one for magical, they have since been combined. I also do not believe you could Apoctastasis yourself either, so it wasn't anything extra you could use on yourself (same with Pallisade).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RiotSiren

While I do miss the system I think it's for the best that it was removed, though I would like to peak into a game where they figured out how to make it work without it being frustrating. It was the cause of so much balancing issues, and and was the center ALOT of points of frustration.

---

If you want my honest opinion, I don't think a game like that can exist.

it would have been a great system up to the point where....it involved other players.

even now, with how braindead and samey they have made jobs it isnt rare to find someone that doesnt have a clue what they are doing other than spamming their DPS buttons. add anything else on to that, something that another job needs to perform better, is too much to handle for the average player. the reality is, these days, a majority dont care if they are helping another player perform well or not, parse is king... and if something interferes with that, then it wouldnt be used.

do I miss it? yes. but these days most want to be the damage hero, king of the world... support isnt a consideration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RiotSiren

Congrat's your genuine curiosity brought me out of lurking!

Anywho, As other have put it, there used to be a pretty in depth aggro system in the game with lots of moving parts. It was a effectively this whole mini game where the group assisted managing the main tanks agro utilizing their tools so the main tank could spend as little time as possible in DPS stance as it was a MASSIVE DPS increase[/B]

---

I would disagree that the goal was to make tanks go on dps stance though; it was just one of the choices. With warrior's unchained going on dps stance wasn't even that necessary outside of the edgy "min maxers," and as you stated not that fun in raiding. The goal of enmity reducing skills was so that dps could increase their damage output without pulling off of tank regardless of tank's dps stance or not.

The whole tank dps stance wasn't even that fun for healers, unless healers enjoyed pressing cure 2, or the equivalent of it, all the time. Yes, I know there was bloodbath but that usually didn't cover a tank beyond the initial few seconds.

Most non-raiding healers that I met preferred a tank stance tank because it allowed them to actually dps (and go on cleric stance if they chose to).
Overall, XIV just had more choices; everyone could pick and choose what they excelled at.

I don't think I've read this short response yet so I'll post it.

Because once you get to having more than double the amount of classes than available raid slots it gets to be a headache in a half to balance. Hence the slow but unavoidable homogenization of classes.

It's been so long now, I hardly even remember those times. The inter-play you speak of was more challenging then that is for sure. I remember when a mistimed use of Cleric stance as a healer would either put your tank in a heap of trouble, or even kill them. It actually would make more sense to have Cleric Stance now opposed to back then because most tanks can take care of themselves.

I leveled my DRK and WAR during those times as well, and a lot of what made those two tanks fun to play for me are now gone. DRK used to have to manage their MP to retain enmity and deal out damage. I really do miss the days of Blood Price, when DRKs were like, "Hurt me more!!" WAR was always a kind of catch-all kind of job, but it used to require more skill to do what it does now. A lot of their gameplay then was doing everything necessary to remain in deliverance, and it was rewarding to do so.

I really didn't get heavy into playing DPS jobs until late SB when I picked up SAM. That job has always been a selfish DPS with the biggest change being their kenki management which is kind of redundant now. All other DPS jobs I play heavily now such as MNK, NIN, and DNC were all picked up during the era we are currently playing in. I won't go too much into healing despite the role being my main because I'll just piss off everybody. To make it short, I have been one of few who have supported most of the changes regarding this role. It's not healing I take issue with so much as all the encroachment from the other two roles, especially tanks that upsets me.

Enmity, MP, and TP management are things that have been stripped away little by little. The first two still exist in a limited fashion, but are completely self-reliant and no longer supported by other party members. The fact of the matter is that at any given time I have played this game, what really mattered boiled down to two things: Minimizing incoming damage, and maximizing outgoing damage. Management of resources and support skills were all driven by those two factors. In order to increase accessibility and decrease forced comps the dev team reduced synergy, homogenized job roles, and cut a lot of fat. There have been mixed receptions of these changes ever since.

It look like DT is going to be more of the same, so we'll have to see what changes they make, if any come 8.0. But I know this game will never return to the days of HW/SB, much to the chagrin of many here.

Quote:

---

I keep hearing paladin was particularly messy back then, can you tell me a bit of how paladin was messy under that system?

---

It was mainly that in Heavensward it had physical mitigation when many bosses dealt magic damage, so to solve this problem all the mitigation was homogenized to just reduce all damage by a %. Paladin also never had self-heals except Clemency, which required you to stop dealing damage, which makes it "invalid" to use in the eyes of many MMO players. It wasn't until Endwalker that it got more self-heals, so it was extremely squishy until Endwalker compared to other tanks. It also had Divine Veil, but this had to be triggered by a heal unlike on other tanks, which was seen as unusual.

Quote:

---

I would have enjoyed a bard and machinist with more supportive skills added to their existing kit. given tht TP no longer exists, I'm contemplating what it would maybe be instead

---

It would be nothing, tbh. They'd only be able to have the MP regen, damage down and damage increase buffs.

Quote:

---

what did Holy Spirit look like before the nerf?

---

Same as it is now, but higher relative potency. It's actually pretty good now, last I checked, because the way it works now you wouldn't want to spam it and this makes the potency at range decent. But back then, if you could spam it, it became better than your combo due to its potency. You normally couldn't spam it, because you only had enough MP to use it 5 times without the help of Bards/Machinists, whereas now MP is sort of unlimited on Paladin.

Quote:

---

It is something small that could be done back then though I wasn't around so I'll trust your judgement.

---

Yes, Astrologian's cards were about buffing different things depending on RNG - MP, TP, Skill Speed, Spell Speed, Mitigation, Damage, Crit. But the only ones seen as valuable by many players were Damage and Crit. So SE changed them all to be damage cards, where 3 means melee and 3 mean ranged, and the goal is to get 3 unique symbols. Which I think is a good alternative.

If we looked at it today, TP would be useless, MP would be useless except for healers, Skill Speed at least wouldn't result in TP depletion like it used to, Spell Speed may be useful, Mitigation is useless in this game mostly because we have so much of it already, Damage and Crit would be the most sought. So that's really why it ended up this way.

Casual players would value the mitigation over damage, and use it all the time, similar to the "tank stance vs DPS stance" thing on tanks. Yet you knew as someone that understands the game that the mitigation just wasn't valuable because the game isn't that damage intense normally.

Quote:

---

Oh that's an interesting angle for MP management to take- I think I like that. how often was this used?

---

Mana Shift got used a lot, particularly in 8-person duties. People would request it, especially healers, when they needed more MP. Often casters just volunteered their MP to help the healers resurrect. I remember seeing it used a lot in A12 just because people died a lot there.

Quote:

---

in what situations would dps run low on TP?

---

They would run out of TP if they took an extraordinarily long time to kill mob packs in dungeons. An amount of time that just wasn't the case when I was a DPS ie. the party was undergeared or not playing properly. This was unfortunately quite common in Stormblood. They would also run out of TP if Astrologians gave them a Skill Speed card, which was essentially trolling. Bards once had a ranged AoE attack called Wide Volley which also would use a lot of TP, so the melee version was used instead (as a result, SE removed Wide Volley).

Quote:

---

Do you think anyone would have changed if TP could run out in more ways?

---

Maybe, but the way it worked, you rarely noticed TP existed (pretty much like now). So on very rare occasions, you noticed it existed because you couldn't attack at all! And this was just an annoyance, especially when it was due to things like low DPS.

Quote:

---

So this kind of problem of party uncertainty seems to have existed since the beginning.

---

Yes, and SE has slowly tried to remove this uncertainty over time. I don't necessarily think the uncertainty should be there if it's avoidable. For example, if someone is about to be hit by an attack and is low on HP, there is no uncertainty on whether I should use The Blackest Night on them. So if it can be done in a way where we have the information we need to be more certain, I think that's good. SE making the same jobs overwrite eachother's buff is probably not a good thing or they could just prevent matching duplicate classes in DF.

To a degree we had a lot of information with the enmity because you can see the enmity difference between you and the healer/DPS, so usually your judgement was going to be correct. But if they did generate a lot of enmity, you just had to figure out "is this a good player? will they use Diversion/Lucid?"

Quote:

---

What was the optimal tank stance strat?

---

Depended on the tank, really. Many Warriors just flat out never used their stance, or used it while a buff was up which nullified the effects of tank stance temporarily.

For PLD, the optimal thing was probably just to have people use Diversion, but personally, I needed to: tank stance+enmity combo 1 time in Heavensward, and tank stance+enmity combo 3 times in Stormblood. I also just used tank stance the entire time for mob packs so I could hold them and do damage (instead of using my damageless enmity generator called Flash). PLD suffered from the stance switch being a GCD, unlike the other tanks.

DRK could use both tank and DPS stance at once, and had a lot of strong enmity tools that didn't require their tank stance, but turning on their tank stance was an option if it was needed, and didn't use the GCD. So for DRK it was really just use the damage stance and use tank stance if needed, but also an option was using Dark Arts on certain attacks. Dark Arts was an ability that transformed the effects of most abilities ie. to increase mitigation, add enmity, significantly boost damage, depending on what it was buffing.

In raids, at least in Stormblood, I'd often just have a Warrior pull since they generated enmity better and had a buff to nullify the downsides of tank stance, then they could shirk me so I didn't need to stance on PLD.

Quote:

---

How were players intended to use their stance dancing?

---

My impression is SE just wanted us to stay in tank stance the entire time lol. But MMO players aren't like that. Except the ones that are and that's why SE had to decide for us by removing the decision.

Quote:

---

How well would tank dancing work into the current version of ffxiv?

---

Tank stance now generates a lot more enmity than it used to (and it already generated a lot). Virtually 1 hit secures enmity for the rest of the fight or a long period of time now. So the dancing now might be 1 hit then switch. Then again, I tanked an entire dungeon on GNB in Shadowbringers without tank stance and held aggro the whole time. So it depends on if the party is even good enough to out-DPS the tank...

Quote:

---

I really wish there was a way to play with old systems so that I could form opinions on this properly.

---

You can watch videos on youtube. I'd say the stance dancing was fun and made old dungeons fun for me, but I also understand why it had to change. Maybe they could have just reduced the damage penalty of tank stance to 1% and the increase of damage stance to 1%, so that there isn't as large a gap between people who do it right/wrong. You can see this mechanic being used in Thordan Unreal currently, where adds switch between Shield/Sword Oath.

Quote:

---

Has Esuna replaced Erase?

---

Esuna was always there for healers. Erase was just an additional (role) action for caster DPS.

Quote:

---

You mention the large population of casual players and I am curious if that has always been a fact of this game or has the proportions of casual to less causal players has shifted over time?

---

The game has always been mostly casual/new/returning players that don't really optimize. That's actually the case for all healthy MMORPGs generally. If it only has the hardcore players that know everything, then it's probably a dying MMO that isn't attracting new players.

Quote:

---

How do interplay abilities for tanks stack up now (numbers for each tank) compared to before?

---

To be honest, tanks had a lot of depth in the past, but it was selfish depth (except on PLD due to Cover, Clemency and Divine Veil). Whereas now they, jobs lost a lot of their selfish depth, but tanks were given selfless depth parity with PLD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Local_Custard

read your post just now. I find the better I get at the game the more I enjoy unexpected chaos. This is why I enjoy alliance raids, especially ones full of people who do not remember anything from it but I know the raid well (I should really practice alliance raids I suck at minus that one that has quick math. I for the life of me cannot do quick math in my head and will undoubtedly fail at the mechanic. I could get 1 answer right, sometimes 2, though I rarely get them all right. I do enjoy math sometimes tho, just not when asked to perform it in the heat of battle with a short timer without something to write on). I have gotten into MINE content recently (Minimum ilvl, no echo) because older content has mechanics that are sometimes skipped over due to the sheer amount of damage output from potency increases and increases to stats that make things far less punishing when they hit. The entire party may end up on the floor but man, nothing beats a tram that would go again and again. I also like MINE content because it has been giving me a small taste test on what some harder fights look like when not outdone by item level.

I think I agree with much of of your post though I don't have all my thoughts gathered. I do wonder what a balance of collectivistic and individualistic design would look like in the game. Maybe interplay can be a fail state but also not always (maybe it makes life easier which could be enough) what causes it. Could be some fights ask for it more than other fights. I'm not experienced with anything outside of casual content so maybe this already exists to an extent (or in decent amounts) in harder content.

---

Reading a lot of the replies, all I can say is welcome to how schizophrenic this community can be. They keep raging against the current blandness we're getting, but immediately revert into saying that everything was bad or frustrating back then as well.

Either way, what we had had some kind of balance between collective and individual. It's never been a fully team synergistic game at all, let's not kid ourselves. And the amount of scripted things was still staggering, even if a lot less so since the whole had a lot more moving parts that could go wrong beyond just fight mechanics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valence

Reading a lot of the replies, all I can say is welcome to how schizophrenic this community can be. They keep raging against the current blandness we're getting, but immediately revert into saying that everything was bad or frustrating back then as well.

Either way, what we had had some kind of balance between collective and individual. It's never been a fully team synergistic game at all, let's not kid ourselves. And the amount of scripted things was still staggering, even if a lot less so since the whole had a lot more moving parts that could go wrong beyond just fight mechanics.

---

Very much this. I'm here reading these replies as well going "so they love Shb/Ew now?"
No wonder yoship closed his ears/eyes to anything we have to say.

And a lot of these people are the same ones who were saying they're tired of homogezation and bland job designs.
Unfortunate that devs look at numbers instead of at logic. There are a few consistent people like you and I who keep it straight from A to Z.