Wanderer’s Minuet, Gauss Barrel and Positive Gameplay Additions

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Welsper59

It's such a weird situation, one that I've never experienced with the other casting jobs.

---

Best I can tell, it has to do with the fact that the cast time isn't equal to the GCD for BRD and MCH. The timing and queueing of spells on BLM and SMN (and healers, for that matter) tends to feel similar to GCD Weaponskills because they're all about the same length. MCH and BRD have a 1.5 second cast-time, though, with about 1 second to use oGCD stuff. That one second is actually about a quarter of a second less than they have without WM/GB active, which makes them "flow" differently from everybody else. (Casters and healers also have instant-cast tools they can use to use oGCDs comfortably and BRD doesn't have anything like that--MCH at least can use them during procs with ammunition).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alahra

Best I can tell, it has to do with the fact that the cast time isn't equal to the GCD for BRD and MCH. The timing and queueing of spells on BLM and SMN (and healers, for that matter) tends to feel similar to GCD Weaponskills because they're all about the same length. MCH and BRD have a 1.5 second cast-time, though, with about 1 second to use oGCD stuff. That one second is actually about a quarter of a second less than they have without WM/GB active, which makes them "flow" differently from everybody else. (Casters and healers also have instant-cast tools they can use to use oGCDs comfortably and BRD doesn't have anything like that--MCH at least can use them during procs with ammunition).

---

Yeah, that's honestly the best assumption to run with on the matter. I'm guessing devs do their testing on local machines offline/LAN, rather than based on server data disparities. Just like how it is with mudra lag, I'm quite sure BRD/MCH rotations work perfectly when done without needing to worry about data sent to and from the servers.

Casting is a lost of dps because you can only enter one ogcd.

For one gcd
With WM: straight shot, bloodletter.
Without WM: straight shot, bloodletter, blunt arrow.

Also the casting time prevent a bloodletter spam since the proc will happen after you already press a cast using skill.
Straight shot, bloodletter, (gcd over but still no proc so using another skill) then bloodletter proc while casting, another proc of bloodletter but still casting...

WM is a choker who is preventing bard to fully use his potential.
I really miss those 6-7 bloodletters in a row because for me, it was the Wow! of bard.

I only recently got my bard to 54 and realized what they were doing with this wm song. I just don't understand what the purpose of is besides making bard less interesting. This is a change to the "soul" of the class. I played bard because I loved throwing in all those off gc abilities while running around like a madman. It was fun to me because it was a ranged class built around having no cast times. Why change that? It doesn't add anything, all it does is change the soul of the class. Before I was a graceful archer/musician dancing around the battlefield playing my songs, now I'm just a clunky caster. I hate it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cherie

...

---

Can't necessarily post numbers, but I can sum it up like this; BRD's dps got increased by WM the same way that other jobs have increased their dps through their new skills.. Bard is not the only job that has their dps increased, but other jobs as well. And because of that, the overall damage is still relatively the same as it was in 2.0 (BRD/MCH is still behind other dps jobs by default).

It's not an issue per say (their damage is fine the way it is), but it really throws into the air what they really want BRD/MCH to fill. Are we nerfing their dps because of their mobility (which WM/GB tones down abit, but the damage discrepdency is still the same) or is it because of their support abilities? If it's the latter, why even slam both jobs with the exact same skill to limit mobility (aside from the fact that mobiltiy in itself wasn't that huge of a boon when it came to dps, considering that BLMs and melee were still consistently doing more than BRDs in 2.0).

The way it is right now, BRD and MCH both have the exact same mobility that limits their mobility, and they still play with the same general foundation (keeping DoTs up, re-acting to procs, keeping buffs up). Compared to a SMN/BLM, both have completely different dynamics to their rotation/dps, on top of that SMN is arguably more mobile than BLM, but the two jobs are still fairly close together in dps despite that and players still opt out for whichever is preferble to their playstyle. To me, I don't get that luxury when I chose between MCH or BRD. Instead I'm defaulting to MCH simply because their playstyle, while it's incredibly similar to BRD, actually works when it comes to the procs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alahra

SNIP.

---

You sir/ma'am have summed up in a few posts EXACTLY why I gave up on maining Bard. It's not just about the numbers. Its about the feels! I loved Bard, but it just "feels" so clunky and not right now. Ive been all over the spectrum leveling other jobs in an effort to replace a love I still cant bear to part with (aka Bard).

Sure, I've gotten used to using WM. I still cant say that I like it. And while it bugs me when other bards refuse to use it (because like it or not it does add to Bard's overall dmg albeit not as much as we'd like), I still sympathize with those who refuse to turn it on. Heck, I agree with them its just.. not right. Something always feels off about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RiceisNice

To me, I don't get that luxury when I chose between MCH or BRD. Instead I'm defaulting to MCH simply because their playstyle, while it's incredibly similar to BRD, actually works when it comes to the procs.

---

Ive always felt that the only real major difference between the two is their ESO gear designs lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alahra

This isn't true, though. BRD/MCH are about 20% behind the melee DPS *with* Minuet/Gauss, and they were about 20% behind them at 50 *without* Minuet/Gauss. Therefore, they *don't* do the same proportional damage. That's why in some sense it "feels" like a nerf--their overall damage is about the same relative to everyone else and they now are less mobile (and somewhat "clunkier") than before.

---

You should examine BRD dps from skilled players @ fflogs.com

Fights outside of being single boss tank + spank, BRD/MCN is nearly on par with melee DPS.
If BRD/MCN ST was boosted higher they could outperform melee due to the increased versatility from WM/GB in AOE/Multi Dotting.

You can't compare them directly dummy parse VS dummy parse due to this, because the moment you add 2+ Mobs then BRD/MCN DPS raises so much, and the Potency/second Ratio with WM/GB On VS Off skyrockets.

Like I said previously..Gauss barrel sucks..Wanderer's does too..I like the fact of being able to move around..now you add those into and boom cast times and having to cancel to dodge which still costs DPS anyway...people say this was done for balancing issues..but what does it really balance? Melee DPS don't have cast times and still would do more damage anyway...seems like more of a setback if you ask me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judge_Xero

...

---

Unless I'm looking at it wrong, they're still behind the true dps jobs (even for the occasional ninja, but they in general are incredibly under-represented due to the current meta like MCH/PLD) by a good amount on all the fights. And even with FFlogs, it shows the incredible outliers on all jobs, and even with that it still has BRD/MCH still being a bit under other jobs on average even under ideal circumstances of multi-dotting or dealing with no mechanics. While it's not directly 20% (because I've used this as a broad example, it's closer to around 10-15%) it's still lower overall damage on average given the best circumstances (assuming every group runs this log).

I wanted a ranged DPS class as a secondary so I tried BLM. While I enjoyed the mechanics of the tug of war between Astral and Umbral, I couldn't stand being rooted in place so much of the time. I then tried ARC and really enjoyed it largely because of the fact that I could move if I wanted to. I know I don't need to run around much, especially in a group scenario where a tank is holding aggro, but the freedom to do so if/when I want is a major part of my enjoyment of the class. I recently hit 50 on BRD and knowing that what I can look forward to in the next 10+ levels is a loss of what I've actually enjoyed in the class for 50 levels is, quite frankly, a bit of a kick in the teeth. If something like this were introduced at, say, level 20 it wouldn't be as big of a deal. Late introduced mechanics should absolutely make a class feel more diverse and more powerful, but they should never change the way a class actually plays.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judge_Xero

You can't compare them directly dummy parse VS dummy parse due to this, because the moment you add 2+ Mobs then BRD/MCN DPS raises so much, and the Potency/second Ratio with WM/GB On VS Off skyrockets.

---

Umm...you can do AOE tests with the dummies too. The point is to be doing your comparisons in a controlled environment...or at least with as much control as you can. The dummies make it really easy too since you don't need third party parsers. They all start at 100%, and you compare how many you take down and then how low the last cycle is when the time is up.

Pre-58 it can be a tight comparison...and even after completig things to 60 it almost requires you to be slamming everything you've got in the kit in the right rotation to keep a double digit lead percentage wise. Slip up, and you may find yourself in the 6% range...a little more out of synch and you cross into a difference more akin to making better choices in gear or food.


Alternatively, SE could have given us Valor Minuet as a flat boost to attack for self and members in range and given us the extra skills and basically not forced a different (and less forgiving) play style after nearly two years and 50+ levels of gameplay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RiceisNice

Unless I'm looking at it wrong, they're still behind the true dps jobs (even for the occasional ninja, but they in general are incredibly under-represented due to the current meta like MCH/PLD) by a good amount on all the fights. And even with FFlogs, it shows the incredible outliers on all jobs, and even with that it still has BRD/MCH still being a bit under other jobs on average even under ideal circumstances of multi-dotting or dealing with no mechanics. While it's not directly 20% (because I've used this as a broad example, it's closer to around 10-15%) it's still lower overall damage on average given the best circumstances (assuming every group runs this log).

---

I think some of the issue though is that people are comparing FCOB Bard to 1st Alexander Bard. Because of the level cap and new gear, BRD is starting back at that lower Crit Tier, which would be similar to a First Coil comparison. People do not give Crit on BRD enough credit, but it lessened the gap between BRD and Melee DPS by ~ 10-15% between First Coil and Final Coil, with gear progression.

So with the level cap, BRD went from ~50%+ Crit Rating, to ~25% @ i210.

First Coil had BRD at ~20% on average, lower than Melee. First Alexander has BRD @ as you correctly stated 10-15%. For most fights it is closer to 10% other than A3S. So you can imagine the trend we will see with further Crit on gear.

Most of the best players seem to use fflogs, which is probably the best representation of job performance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raist

Umm...you can do AOE tests with the dummies too. The point is to be doing your comparisons in a controlled environment...or at least with as much control as you can. The dummies make it really easy too since you don't need third party parsers. They all start at 100%, and you compare how many you take down and then how low the last cycle is when the time is up.

Pre-58 it can be a tight comparison...and even after completig things to 60 it almost requires you to be slamming everything you've got in the kit in the right rotation to keep a double digit lead percentage wise. Slip up, and you may find yourself in the 6% range...a little more out of synch and you cross into a difference more akin to making better choices in gear or food.


Alternatively, SE could have given us Valor Minuet as a flat boost to attack for self and members in range and given us the extra skills and basically not forced a different (and less forgiving) play style after nearly two years and 50+ levels of gameplay.

---

Of course you could do AOE Dummy tests, but that still is not representative of actual fights. The only environment where class performance really matters is endgame. So there is no need for a tightly controlled environment when you can look at the DPS values of endgame Raiders to see how much closer things are. The rest of what you are saying I can't really understand, the point you are trying to get across.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Welsper59

Or if you're spamming an ability while waiting for GCD, on some occasions, it will clip the GCD, forcing you to recast it (a loss of .5sec or so). Sometimes, this mishap will cause you to lose out on timing IJ, meaning you'll have to reapply your DoTs one by one. It's such a weird situation, one that I've never experienced with the other casting jobs.

---

If I understood this correctly, then it does happen to me on sch/blm when lagging. About 25% into a cast it'll say something like "can't use this skill right now" and cancel it. I think I've also had it happen on melee combos. Thankfully, my connection is rarely that bad, but yeah.. Odd GCD handling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judge_Xero

...

---

I think it's because we both trying to get points across that's missing the mark or context. On my end, I'm seeing you say "BRD dps isn't that far off and it's really close to melee". I'm personally fine with our DPS the way it is, but I don't see your point being made when I look through the logs and still see that BRDs on average are still behind true-dps in relative sense that's the same as FCoB days.

The gear thing, you have to keep in perspective of the itemization of everything. Whether its because they have no crit or not, that comes down to what the gear itself carries (and whether or not crit is even feasible if it keeps getting paired with say, too much or not enough accuracy). If a job becomes so contingent on secondary stats for their dps to be optimal and the itemization doesn't allow for it, it becomes a bad design at a specific point when we get gear that does not cater to those stats. And even then, it's also a huge assumption to think that our stats will the same as it did in 2.0 as our ilvl goes up at cap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judge_Xero

Of course you could do AOE Dummy tests, but that still is not representative of actual fights. The only environment where class performance really matters is endgame. So there is no need for a tightly controlled environment when you can look at the DPS values of endgame Raiders to see how much closer things are. The rest of what you are saying I can't really understand, the point you are trying to get across.

---

For a proper comparison you need to make sure your are testing in a controlled environment. You want to be comparing results against a consistent target...one that is only being affected by your job. When you get into a party environment against an active foe, you are up against inconsistent variables...things like buffs and debuffs that go up and down from actions out of your control. Such things have potential to dramatically skew results.

By using something like a test dummy you have a static target with static stats until you put up your job/class specific buffs/debuffs. Trying to do a comparison otherwise is risking corruption of the data because of how another job's kit (or the target itself) may be augmenting the target's state.

You want an objective comparison of just your job based on it's own merits or shortcomings. What you proposed is open to a lot of outside influence and thus prone to inconsistency.

The rest is echoing what has been stated before. Until you unlock most (if not all) of the kit, it is hard to perceive a direct positive impact on performance. The fact that rotations in WM are far less forgiving than without just compounds the matter further. So it isn't just about WM causing the problem, but the difficulty in properly integrating everything else with it up. The flow is considerably more difficult to manage under WM than without, and that is causing more harm than good for the perception of the job at this point in it's evolution. This was not the case with most of the other jobs.

If SE had opted to boost BRD like they did other jobs by simply giving them a song/ability that boosted the job on a timer or other limited resource (or more of what the job already does like positionals) , it would have played out far better over all. And if it was an AOE (a la a traditional song of valor to boost party members), it could have shifted a little more focus to BRD utility in the support category...something that has been lacking for a while now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alahra

If, instead, BRDs and MCHs were at 85% or 90% of a melee's damage at level 60 with WM/GB active, they'd feel like they had *gained* something for giving up their mobility. Since their relative DPS hasn't increased, they feel as though they gave up something and got nothing in return except a different playstyle that they probably don't enjoy (if they were the sort of players that enjoyed cast time mechanics for DPS, they'd probably already be focusing on BLM or SMN)

---

And honestly. If they had outright come and said it, if they had just said, "We're giving BRDs/MCHs Cast times because we don't like your mobility." I would have felt way better about the whole thing. I mean, a nerf is a nerf is a nerf, and I'd disagree with them on the issue, but I'd take it and move on.

The problem for me is, that this was supposed to be a new toy to play with. This is a new ability that carries drastic and persistent downsides with it, contrary to virtually every other ability in the game. Much less, it feels like Square just completely scrapped cool ideas for MCH, they went on at length about how cool "attachments" were supposed to be, just for them to amount into a nerf. (An identical in every single way ability for both classes)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judge_Xero

Fights outside of being single boss tank + spank, BRD/MCN is nearly on par with melee DPS.

---

I decided to take a look. Percentages below are based on the average DPS for the top 30 of each class listed. Taking averages is helpful for direct comparisons especially because of BRD’s reliance on random procs for DPS spikes, which can lead to some outliers. NIN is not included below because direct comparisons are difficult for them since Trick Attack counts for “their” damage in a sense, which means we can’t see a NIN’s “true” DPS. (The same is arguably true for DRG because of Battle Litany, but their DPS is generally still on par with MNK so they’re useful as a second data point). I stopped at 30 samples because that’s as many samples for MCH as there are available on Manipulator. These are just rough figures, don't take them as the gospel truth.

Alexander numbers are from the Savage versions of the fight.

Oppressor

• BRD: ~1319 DPS
• MCH: ~1215 DPS
• MNK: ~1369 DPS
• DRG: ~1361 DPS
• SMN: ~1349 DPS*

As suggested, multidotting does a lot to help BRD here. They’re only about 5% behind DRG and MNK. MCH doesn’t do as well (because their single DoT is less useful for multidotting) and is about 10% behind them.

SMN is included here just for point of reference, as they’re fairly capable of multidotting as well, and we can see that Oppressor is *very* friendly to BRD as a result.

Cuff of the Father

• BRD: ~1773 DPS
• MCH: ~1621 DPS
• MNK: ~1938 DPS
• DRG: ~1742 DPS

BRD slightly surpasses DRG here (which is to be expected on an AoE heavy fight), and they’re about 10% behind MNK. As with Oppressor, MCH doesn’t fare as well, coming in below DRG and almost 20% below MNK.

Living Liquid

• BRD: ~1170 DPS
• MCH: ~1123 DPS
• MNK: ~1339 DPS
• DRG: ~1296 DPS

There’s still some potential for multi-dotting here, but not to the degree available in AS1 and AS2. Both BRD and MCH are about 10% behind the two main melee classes, which isn’t near as extreme as the 20% I was assuming.

The Manipulator

• BRD: ~1102 DPS
• MCH: ~1021 DPS
• MNK: ~1424 DPS
• DRG: ~1359 DPS

The differences here are more pronounced, as should probably be expected, since Manipulator is primarily a single-target fight. BRD is just about 20% below DRG and almost 25% below MNK here. Far fewer MCHs are clearing the fight than BRDs so their average is likely lower as a result of that. With more samples, we could probably safely assume that MCH would be at about the same position as BRD, though probably a little lower based on other fights.

Ravana EX

• BRD: ~813 DPS
• MCH: ~687 DPS
• MNK: ~982 DPS
• DRG: ~933 DPS

Samples for Ravana are spread out over a longer period of time for the top 30 (some of which are prior to the MNK damage increase, I believe), so these numbers aren’t as useful as the ones from Savage. However, I consider them relevant because a much larger portion of the playerbase has done Ravana than is attempting Savage Alexander. BRD is on average almost 20% behind MNK and a bit over 10% behind DRG. As with Manipulator, there are fewer samples for MCH here, so their number is probably somewhat low.

This post is already overlong, so I won’t also go into numbers from Alexander Normal (though a cursory glance suggests the breakdowns are about the same).

With varied fights taken into account, the general difference between BRD/MCH and DRG/MNK tends to hover around 10%, rather than the 20% ballpark I gave and have used prior to now in the thread. That does mean they’ve gained some, at least at the highest echelons of play, relative to their assumed position at level 50. I wanted to include numbers from FCOB for comparison, but it seems that FFLogs no longer tracks them. They may have been further behind than 20% or closer than 20% to the other physical DPS in FCOB, but unfortunately, I’m not aware of any substantial databases for FCOB that would be of use here.

For single target fights, BRD and MCH are further behind, and this has probably contributed to the perception that the gap is farther than it is in reality, as the community tends to look at single-target DPS and dummy DPS more often than they do multi-target scenarios, which results in an overly narrow viewpoint.

That being said, I’m glad to be proven wrong on the number—they’re higher than I’d believed them to be (though MCH seems to be doing notably a bit worse than BRD). My overall feeling that Wanderer’s Minuet and Gauss Barrel could stand to be better in and of themselves in terms of design still remains, but the “numbers” part of my argument (at least at 60) was based on incorrect assumptions, for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicKirby

And honestly. If they had outright come and said it, if they had just said, "We're giving BRDs/MCHs Cast times because we don't like your mobility." I would have felt way better about the whole thing. I mean, a nerf is a nerf is a nerf, and I'd disagree with them on the issue, but I'd take it and move on.

---

I agree--I think if the developers had said they felt BRD was too mobile and wanted to change that, the overall sentiment would be quite different. Then we would know that WM and GB weren't *intended* to be new toys, but rather a tool by which to balance an area of the classes that were too strong in the developers' minds. We don't know if that's what they intended them for, of course, so at the moment, it's probably safer that they intended for us to be excited about them. If that is in fact true, there are still some issues with implementation, as there's not much that's very exciting about a 5-10% relative DPS increase in return for the acceptance of mobility-limiting and "flow-inhibiting" mechanical changes that the two stances provide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raist

If SE had opted to boost BRD like they did other jobs by simply giving them a song/ability that boosted the job on a timer or other limited resource (or more of what the job already does like positionals) , it would have played out far better over all. And if it was an AOE (a la a traditional song of valor to boost party members), it could have shifted a little more focus to BRD utility in the support category...something that has been lacking for a while now.

---

Numbers aside, this is my primary ache with BRD/MCH as it's what the topic is trying to encompass. I'd be fine with cast times (although putting it on both jobs is pushing it a bit) if that was not all there is to it. Like the attachment thing I brought up a w hile back, it could have been tuned to significantly increase TP cost and cast times but your dps as well, turning BRD into a job that has to actively manage their TP (and then they'd gain skills that give them a net-gain in TP regen, something to replace paeon for example). Having to actively manage your resources is a hell lot more exciting than slapping cast times ( a concept that already exists on casters) on a job that doens't have it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alahra

I agree--I think if the developers had said they felt BRD was too mobile and wanted to change that, the overall sentiment would be quite different. Then we would know that WM and GB weren't *intended* to be new toys, but rather a tool by which to balance an area of the classes that were too strong in the developers' minds. We don't know if that's what they intended them for, of course, so at the moment, it's probably safer that they intended for us to be excited about them. If that is in fact true, there are still some issues with implementation, as there's not much that's very exciting about a 5-10% relative DPS increase in return for the acceptance of mobility-limiting and "flow-inhibiting" mechanical changes that the two stances provide.

---

If you try to sum up everything the jobs gained in 3.0...

Warrior - We got a DPS stance, a 500 potency hit and a 1300 potency self-cure.
Paladin - We got damage shields, guaranteed block and non-enmity combos
Black Mages - We got enochian to buff our damage, the means to keep it up 100% of the time, and a mechanic that requires us to add an extra layer of complexity to astral/umbral (refreshing enochian and maintain astral since IV doesn't refresh it)
Dragoon - We got BotD to buff our jump damage, the means to maximize uptime, and a skill to lower the duration since we don't waste uptime.
Ninja - We got enmity reducing skills and a skill to extension our huton, allowing us to use an extra damage ninjitsu. We also gained positionals so we cannot stay on the rear the entire time.
Monk - We got better means to maintain, build and use up GL3 for the times that bosses decide to bugger off, as well as ways to minimize our downtime due to the loss of GL3.
BRD - We got cast times and a couple of oGCDs. The cast time also interfere with our 2.0 traits.

Taking that for face value, BRD really did not get much added that improved their gameflow or otherwise "evolved" their character, but instead their implementation actually works against their 2.0 counterpart due to the nature of oGCD weaving and BL resets. The other job that arguably "lost" something was NIN not being able sit on the rear the entire time and still maintain full dps, but even then if they hadn't added a positional to aeolin, AC would still have a positional on top of extending hueton timer. I can't make an example for MCH, DRK and AST because they had no 2.0 counterpart, but they, for the most part, come with their own niche that may or may not work (specifically AST's overall lower healing potency and debatable support, and DRK if they were to up PLD's dps and make encounters cater to physical mitigation), while others just don't do much except get mirrored by an existing job by having the same functional abilties (MCH and BRD)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RiceisNice

Taking that for face value, BRD really did not get much added that improved their gameflow or otherwise "evolved" their character, but instead their implementation actually works against their 2.0 counterpart due to the nature of oGCD weaving and BL resets.

---

Pretty much, yes. MCH is, honestly, in a similar boat. It has a similar load of oGCD use (especially now with Quick Reload on a 15-second cooldown) to that of BRD, and the difference between playing MCH at 50 and with GB at 60 is comparable to that between BRD at 50 and BRD at 60 with WM. MCH tends to "flow" a little better, as their proc system for the main combos seems to update client side better than Straighter Shot does for BRD, and they don't have something like Bloodletter that constantly resets, but a lot of the oGCD awkwardness is still there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alahra

Pretty much, yes. MCH is, honestly, in a similar boat. It has a similar load of oGCD use (especially now with Quick Reload on a 15-second cooldown) to that of BRD, and the difference between playing MCH at 50 and with GB at 60 is comparable to that between BRD at 50 and BRD at 60 with WM. MCH tends to "flow" a little better, as their proc system for the main combos seems to update client side better than Straighter Shot does for BRD, and they don't have something like Bloodletter that constantly resets, but a lot of the oGCD awkwardness is still there.

---

Honestly there is no oGCD awkwardness for MCH imo because you don't have an oGCD that resets it's cooldown, or otherwise an oGCD that has a cast time. Any time you double up or otherwise clip into your weaponskill, it boils down to your fault for hitting two oGCDs in one weaponskill. BRD can't help it when they have an oGCD that resets it's cooldown and a oGCD cast time that's also 1.5 seconds (which will clip no matter what when you have a weapon skill that has a 1.5 second cast time in a 2.5 GCD)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RiceisNice

Honestly there is no oGCD awkwardness for MCH imo

---

Even outside of oGCD resets for BRD, oGCDs are akward in terms of timing with WM/GB up. Without them up (and for other classes), you have a larger window of time in which to hit them than you do because of the length of the cast time, which is longer than the "animation" lock for most GCD abilities. If you don't queue your oGCDs exactly perfectly with WM/GB up, they clip into the next GCD, whereas you have a little bit more room for them under normal (non-cast-time) functionality.

That's the awkwardness I was referring to. The "rhythm" is off from every other class in the game and off from the rhythm MCH/BRD have without WM/GB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alahra

Even outside of oGCD resets for BRD, oGCDs are akward in terms of timing with WM/GB up. Without them up (and for other classes), you have a larger window of time in which to hit them than you do because of the length of the cast time, which is longer than the "animation" lock for most GCD abilities. If you don't queue your oGCDs exactly perfectly with WM/GB up, they clip into the next GCD, whereas you have a little bit more room for them under normal (non-cast-time) functionality.

That's the awkwardness I was referring to. The "rhythm" is off from every other class in the game and off from the rhythm MCH/BRD have without WM/GB.

---

You can queue up a oGCD as your cast time finishes up, it's not that overly difficult. You can still do one oGCD inbetween each weaponskill with a 1.5 second casttime. The problem comes when you try to do two oGCDs inbetween weaponskills with cast times (or otherwise, a 1 second opportunity, which is given with the [GCD 2.5] - [cast time 1.5]. A machinist with rapid fire can still weave oGCDs just fine inbetween each weapon skill (which at that point has no cast time and the GCD is 1 second) without ever clipping into another weaponskill unless you doubled dipped.

The only exception to above (which is practically a bug) is if you use a straight shot right after a HS that gave you the proc; the proc doesn't get used up and you still have cast times on SS, but for some reason it still delays your oGCD use when it otherwise doesn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RiceisNice

You can queue up a oGCD as your cast time finishes up, it's not that overly difficult.

---

I didn't say it was difficult. I said it was awkward with the respect to the timing for the other classes in the game. There is enough time for one oGCD but there is less time than the other classes get because the 1.5 cast time is a bit longer than the point at which, during the normal GCD, oGCDs become available for use. That change in flow makes WM and GB "feel" awkward even before you consider Bloodletter, Flaming Arrow, etc. BRD is more awkward than MCH because of those things (though MCH still has the same awkwardness present with Flaming Arrow from its turrets, which do need to be moved mid-fight sometimes), but the fundamental awkwardness with oGCDs from GB/WM is present in both.

Edit: This is mainly of note because of latency, as even slight latency can make ability queuing less reliable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RiceisNice

Warrior - We got a DPS stance, a 500 potency hit and a 1300 potency self-cure.
Paladin - We got damage shields, guaranteed block and non-enmity combos
Black Mages - We got enochian to buff our damage, the means to keep it up 100% of the time, and a mechanic that requires us to add an extra layer of complexity to astral/umbral (refreshing enochian and maintain astral since IV doesn't refresh it)
Dragoon - We got BotD to buff our jump damage, the means to maximize uptime, and a skill to lower the duration since we don't waste uptime.
Ninja - We got enmity reducing skills and a skill to extension our huton, allowing us to use an extra damage ninjitsu. We also gained positionals so we cannot stay on the rear the entire time.
Monk - We got better means to maintain, build and use up GL3 for the times that bosses decide to bugger off, as well as ways to minimize our downtime due to the loss of GL3.
BRD - We got cast times and a couple of oGCDs. The cast time also interfere with our 2.0 traits.

---

you forgot drg battle litany buff , whm now have more dmg and instant healing spells , SCH have better aoe healing and more support skills , even a CD for more raw healing + 3 aetherflow , and some support spells...

in the end all the jobs got improvements in the areas that were more needed. Brd on the other hand....ugh...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alahra

I didn't say it was difficult. I said it was awkward with the respect to the timing for the other classes in the game. There is enough time for one oGCD but there is less time than the other classes get because the 1.5 cast time is a bit longer than the point at which, during the normal GCD, oGCDs become available for use. That change in flow makes WM and GB "feel" awkward even before you consider Bloodletter, Flaming Arrow, etc. BRD is more awkward than MCH because of those things (though MCH still has the same awkwardness present with Flaming Arrow from its turrets, which do need to be moved mid-fight sometimes), but the fundamental awkwardness with oGCDs from GB/WM is present in both.

---

We have different perspectives of whats awkward then. If you're not actively trying to fit two oGCDs into one weapon skill cycle, theres no break of flow or clipping of oGCDs. You're able to use an oGCD as soon as the cast time finishes, animation or not (except again in that scenario with SS I mentioned earlier). A way to put it into perspective is to see it as this; "You cannot queue a skill within .5 seconds of using another skill, cast time or not". Which holds true for all jobs, including melee and casters like blm (they can start channeling fire I right after it finishes casting, as well as use a fire III right after a hardcasted fire I, but they cannot start a cast or even use a instant cast right after using an oGCD such as manawall, or use an oGCD right after an instant cast).

As for the flame arrow/turret thing ,you can't bring up the targetting recetitle while casting, but it's still the same principle; you can place it down immediately after the cast time ends with no pause inbetween. And honestly, I've gotten used to it at least as far as turrets is concerned (not so much flame arrow because you have to actually aim it, but even then you can usually eyeball it.

Quote:

---

Edit: This is mainly of note because of latency, as even slight latency can make ability queuing less reliable.

---

Alot of my perspectives comes from without latency (which honestly makes this a legit issue). With latency though, every job gets affected to some degree (esp DRG when it comes to getting theit WT or FnC buff), it's not exclusive to BRD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warlyx

you forgot drg battle litany buff , whm now have more dmg and instant healing spells , SCH have better aoe healing and more support skills , even a CD for more raw healing + 3 aetherflow , and some support spells...

in the end all the jobs got improvements in the areas that were more needed. Brd on the other hand....ugh...

---

Giving a party buff isn't exciting or changing to their gameplay, and certainly would not be the first thing I'd mention to someone I wanted to tell a former 2.0 DRG player what they gained.. When you're looking at a expansion of all things, you want the existing jobs to evolve on top of what they are already doing before, whether it's filling in their downfalls (MNK's damage plummeting on down time for example, they gave them more tools to minimize the detriments of that) or building upon their role and existing playstyle (which is easily all the jobs, debatable with the likes of NIN and especially BRD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RiceisNice

We have different perspectives of whats awkward then.

---

We probably do, though I'm not the first person to bring up the issue of the timing with GB/WM compared to the timing without them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alahra

We probably do, though I'm not the first person to bring up the issue of the timing with GB/WM compared to the timing without them.

---

It's not so much the timing directly, but it's the interaction of skills that makes the timing the problem (specifically BRD). To me, not being able to use 2 oGCDs in one weaponskill was not the end of the world provided my job was not designed to do so (such as encouraging you to keep oGCDs off cooldown so it can refresh from a proc)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RiceisNice

It's not so much the timing directly, but it's the interaction of skills that makes the timing the problem (specifically BRD). To me, not being able to use 2 oGCDs in one weaponskill was not the end of the world provided my job was not designed to do so (such as encouraging you to keep oGCDs off cooldown so it can refresh from a proc)

---

The problem's definitely worse for BRD than it is for MCH, but I've mostly given up playing MCH because the difference in the rhythm means I can't just pick it up again after primarily focusing on another job for awhile. There's just too much muscle memory with regard to oGCD for other jobs for me, and I have to retrain it every time I decide to play MCH for some reason (whether for a change of pace or because some FC group already has two melee). I'll probably be even less likely to play BRD than MCH since they have even *more* oGCD stuff to worry about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RiceisNice

theres no break of flow or clipping of oGCDs. You're able to use an oGCD as soon as the cast time finishes, animation or not (except again in that scenario with SS I mentioned earlier).

---

I'm not sure if you're playing the same job as I am, but I've noticed a TON of clipping due to the animations for things like barrage, Blood for Blood and Raging Strikes being used after a weaponskill in Minuet. This only becomes even more pronounced when you're using bloodletter regularly.

So, just for the sake of clarity, please don't pretend that an issue doesn't exist just because you're one the exceptions.

@Alahra - Great write up and thorough investigation of the endgame DPS values. I like how you took an average of various players.

With your various examples of single boss vs multi target fights you can see where SE attempted to use the stances to play on the ranged classes strengths in order to make them more competitive DPS wise, without making them OP. So we can agree there was a decent trade-off for lesser mobility despite the feeling that BRD/MCN got shafted.

I am really hoping for them to make adjustments to the fluidity of BRD and to create a more distinct identity between BRD/MCN.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judge_Xero

So we can agree there was a decent trade-off for lesser mobility despite the feeling that BRD/MCN got shafted.

---

It's actually pretty interesting that most of the classes are relatively close on AoE damage now (BLM does about the same as MNK on AS2). SMN's a bit of an exception (they're 400-500 DPS higher than anyone else on AS2, lol), but BLM, BRD, MCH, MNK, and DRG are all somewhat comparable in AoE damage. NIN is really the only noticeably low one (which they should probably do something about).

Especially given that most everyone else has competitive AoE damage, I do still think BRD and MCH probably need some help in the single-target department, as I'd be very surprised if the next raid tier is as friendly to multi-dotting and AoE as this one is. Historically, at least, we've usually gotten one fight per tier that favors multidotting to some extent, sometimes two, and AS2 is only the second raid fight that's had a heavy AoE focus since launch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemuria

I'm not sure if you're playing the same job as I am, but I've noticed a TON of clipping due to the animations for things like barrage, Blood for Blood and Raging Strikes being used after a weaponskill in Minuet. This only becomes even more pronounced when you're using bloodletter regularly.

So, just for the sake of clarity, please don't pretend that an issue doesn't exist just because you're one the exceptions.

---

It shouldn't clip each other after a weaponskill is what I'm getting at. I have a video uploaded of me using oGCD right after a weaponskill to demonstrate what's wrong with straighter shot, but I can't link it atm on phone.

The one time that your skills clip each other even with a cast time is when you're doing SS right after a HS that gave you a proc, which is a bug because it shouldn't happen


Edit: the wonders of YouTube app.
https://youtu.be/EbqbjJq6-lg

I'm using oGCDs immediately after a weaponskill just fine.

i would have been ok with cast times for brd/mch had it been part of the original design starting at level 1, the dev's would have properly designed the whole kit around a cast time.

Right now its as follows, level 1-51 you are learning that brd/mch are mobile ranged dps. Come 52 you get slapped in the face and are encouraged, then eventually forced to relearn the core of the class. This is bad class design.

The best compromise would have allowed mobility on top of the cast time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KaedrianLiang

i would have been ok with cast times for brd/mch had it been part of the original design starting at level 1, the dev's would have properly designed the whole kit around a cast time.

Right now its as follows, level 1-51 you are learning that brd/mch are mobile ranged dps. Come 52 you get slapped in the face and are encouraged, then eventually forced to relearn the core of the class. This is bad class design.

The best compromise would have allowed mobility on top of the cast time.

---

Or the extra damage without the cast time entirely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UnstablePersonality

Or the extra damage without the cast time entirely.

---

Personally, I wish BRD/MCH DPS was higher without the stance (enough that you don't need to use the stance all the time) and then turning on the stance would be thought of as a bonus in situations where you can afford to sit still. I also feel like the stance-only skills should be usable outside of them. Obviously, numbers might have to be adjusted for something like this, but in terms of gameplay, I think something along those lines would feel a lot better.

I'm curious how a 1 second Cast would work with Bard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judge_Xero

I'm curious how a 1 second Cast would work with Bard.

---

I've thought about that too, actually. A 1-second cast would line up more or less with the point at which you can use oGCDs on a normal GCD, which might do something to fix some of the latency/awkward timing issues that are currently present. That's tricky too, though, because I'm pretty sure 1 second is short enough that you could stutter step with a great deal of freedom, almost defeating the purpose of cast times in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judge_Xero

I'm curious how a 1 second Cast would work with Bard.

---

It'd just be a more mobile person of what we have now, more window for stepping inbertween. It might resolve SS's proc not occuring in time, buit they'd still only be able to use 1 oGCD (which I feel is still very cumbersome with bloodletter)/

On a side thought, one way they could have differentiated GB/WM was making one reduce your GCD to 1.5 seconds with a .5 second cast time (meaning they still can't move freely) and reducing TP costs of your skills. That could have been given to MCH and make them play a little bit more differently than BRD (whom could have stayed motile, because really the aspect of mobility is overrated from a balance standpoint, player-preference aside, or reworkin river of blood to give a stacking buff that increases BL damage or something.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RiceisNice

the aspect of mobility is overrated from a balance standpoint

---

If mobility is in fact over-rated, why do you think the developers decided to move BRD and MCH to a cast time playstyle? I'm not asking that to be snarky, I'd like to know your thoughts on why they would add cast times to them if mobility isn't an issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alahra

If mobility is in fact over-rated, why do you think the developers decided to move BRD and MCH to a cast time playstyle? I'm not asking that to be snarky, I'd like to know your thoughts on why they would add cast times to them if mobility isn't an issue.

---

Because not everything the developers do are honestly well thought out at times, nor would this be the first example of it (the other times making DRG so prone to dying to magical damage and designing an entire raid instance behind it, and the absurdly low 20% buff from WM/GB even making to the final release build). I mean you really can't get any worse than making two skills that are functionally the same. Even if they have to have cast times, why do they still function more-or-less the same around it (which also dips into the design of MCH, who is supposed to be an entirely new job)? BLM and SMN both have cast times, but the fundamental basis of their damage is greatly differentiated (hard hitting casts vs DoTs and oGCDs).

The other thought is that even though mobility is supposed to be the tradeoff for their naturally low damage, they were still consistently behind of the likes of BLM and SMN (which means the offset is either not doing enough or doing anything at all in that given fight.) And while between the two casters, itemization aside, both are fairly even in what they can pull off, even though SMN is arguably more motile.

Put it in perspective like this. BRD and MCH are both more-or-less in equal terms of dps, but one is more motile than the other. Is that not the same context when it was SMN/BLM in 2.0 where SMN was arguably more motile than the other, granted the two still had entirely different fundamentals. Of course people will typically flock to whatever is the "easier" to grasp, but I honestly don't think that's a problem if they're still equal in performance with similar rikes. A lot of people say that "MCH is a lot more work for the same damage as BRD", and while it's true to an extent (being extremely reactive to procs and bathooven simulator for wildfire), I still find it fun and much more enjoyable than the current state of BRD (whom, despite all it's kinks, has less to worry about since they can't react to procs and still performs relatively well). Imo, its a valid reason for a job to be under-represented if it's because it's considered more "difficult" for valid reasons (again, BLM and SMN being a prime example since using DWT effectively is much more loose than trying to maintain enochian, especially in the admist of mechanics) , not because it's underperforming.