Caster Changes in 4.2 (RIP Casters)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shiroe

blm and sam will never and should never be part of the prog or speedkill meta

---

A little confused by this statement. I didn't realize certain jobs shouldn't be part of the meta...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EllieShadeflare

It's sort of a buff versus Heavensward, since you don't realize Enochian and the fact we get two more Fire IVs per rotation vs HW and it was originally nerfed because the dev team thought more Fire IVs and Foul would make up the difference.

---

Are you trolling?

A nerf was given, a nerf was taken away. It's not a buff.

Yeah, you're trolling.

prog and speedkill meta, should those be the same? (same dps in both?)

should a class with personal low dps be in neither, when a dps with the personal highest dps be in both?

(just want blm to get in 95% of all PFs again... , eventhough a "parallel caster meta", parallel to the old physical meta, would be nice / fun..; though running 2x smn garuda & blm before 4.2 might have been close?? but double svcks)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elix_Moarbase

Are you trolling?

A nerf was given, a nerf was taken away. It's not a buff.

Yeah, you're trolling.

---

I'm sorry, but... You're still so wrong it's honestly painful. This time, I can fully explain!

Yes, Black Mage was nerfed in its potency of Fire IV (260) but we had gained a tool that was designed to work with it, replacing potency per cast of Fire IVs for quantity of Fire IVs. This was supposed to be (and currently is) the purpose of Umbral Hearts, and essentially turned our rotation into our old HW opener, but expanded our opener by two more casts of 494 potency. Only reason it felt absolutely terrible in 4.0 was because the cast time wasn't changed to accomodate our new Enochian, forcing us to use only the 2IV Fire 2IV rotation like in HW, and saving the 6-8 Fire IV potential for the opener to get Foul to reliably line up with Umbral Ice. So you are TECHNICALLY right in this front. Sort of.

But then 4.05 happened. Fire IV was now casting at 2.8, and on top of Spell Speed being easier to get, was now able to fit 3x Fire IVs before Fire as intended.

And now this happened, and we're at our old base potency of 280.

In addition, let me also prove you have no idea what you're talking about by discussing numbers. But we're not gonna talk how 6-8 casts of 260 potency is better than 4-6 casts of 280. (by the way that's a comparison of 1560 and 1120, so our rotation hits much harder now even without HW). I'm not gonna talk about how Enochian is now permanent and no longer degenerates (making the Fire IV rotation of HW rather inconsistent).

Let's talk Enochian's buff.

You are right about one thing. They're the same, base. 280 potency that turns into 504 potency, due to the 1.8x modifier of Astral Fire III. But you forget that in order to use Fire IV, you need Enochian, and that's a 5% buff in HW and 10% in SB.

So HW Fire IV is 518, and SB Fire IV is 532. On top of the cast time boost, that's objectively a 5 potency per second higher, in favor for Heavensward, with more leeway and an easier rotation. Add to this the fact that you can now fit in 6 Fire IVs per rotation and 8 per opener rather than 4 per rotation and 6 per opener, and you have yourself an objectively better version of Fire IV than in Heavensward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EllieShadeflare

I'm now going to make a nonsensical argument in reference to an argument that wasn't being made

---

If I could reach into the monitor and somehow slap you, I would.

You made a wall of text to state what everyone already knows and is common sense. What you're trying to do is conflate past changes with these in this patch. What is actually at play in this patch, with all other actions remaining constant, is that they are removing a nerf. What they think, which is what you think, is that the un-nerf, plus the other changes they have made, over time, to the class will fix the class.

This is incorrect. The buff isn't a buff. It's a de-nerf. The change to our base damage is an un-nerf.

You're just sprattling off, without even realizing that you're not making an argument against an argument that is actually being made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elix_Moarbase

If I could reach into the monitor and somehow slap you, I would.

You made a wall of text to state what everyone already knows and is common sense. What you're trying to do is conflate past changes with these in this patch. What is actually at play in this patch, with all other actions remaining constant, is that they are removing a nerf. What they think, which is what you think, is that the un-nerf, plus the other changes they have made, over time, to the class will fix the class.

This is incorrect. The buff isn't a buff. It's a de-nerf. The change to our base damage is an un-nerf.

You're just sprattling off, without even realizing that you're not making an argument against an argument that is actually being made.

---

I know someone who's like that. Explaining things to them is about as futile as breathing in outer space. Let them be, natural selection will do its job eventually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HaroldSaxon

Tell that to Monk mains. Or warrior mains. Or Ranged Physical DPS classes in HW. Or Ast mains in HW.

---

What you refer is small changes on the numbers of their Cds/potency, we need more than that to be optimal, which is not happening during an expansion.

And quite frankly until I can test them for myself WAR changes to me are a nerf for the moment, won't comment on mnk because I don't play it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elix_Moarbase

If I could reach into the monitor and somehow slap you, I would.

You made a wall of text to state what everyone already knows and is common sense. What you're trying to do is conflate past changes with these in this patch. What is actually at play in this patch, with all other actions remaining constant, is that they are removing a nerf. What they think, which is what you think, is that the un-nerf, plus the other changes they have made, over time, to the class will fix the class.

This is incorrect. The buff isn't a buff. It's a de-nerf. The change to our base damage is an un-nerf.

You're just sprattling off, without even realizing that you're not making an argument against an argument that is actually being made.

---

So you didn't read anything. Not even the fact that we have that we have Umbral Hearts to give more Fire IVs to throw around, thereby increasing the total damage vs. our Fire rotation vs the 4x Fire IV rotation from HW tells you anything?

Not even the 2.8s cast is a buff?

Not even realizing that we have a bigger spell, Foul, that was designed to offset the potency per cast?

Heck, just put in the numbers now. Enochian's current 10%, which has existed since 4.0, objectively makes the return of 280 base potency all that much stronger versus the HW numbers.

What looks like a de-nerf is a buff, when you include the other changes that are about that ability

but sure we can just cherry pick what we want to make our own conclusions, context is deeeeeeeeeeead

TL;DR, you'd be right but only in a vacuum.

Obviously patch notes were also not read were some think blm actually DID get a buff even worthwhile mentioning.
A screenshot of the changes were posted by OP....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EllieShadeflare

I will continue to argue with myself about how removing a nerf is actually a buff, because they made other changes to the class. So, you know, even though the potency change is what we had in 3x-- because other changes were made-- the class is now fixed. Because, you know, things were changed over time making this removal of a previous nerf, a buff. You can keep saying that this patch simply and literally removes a nerf from 3x, but I will continually argue about how this patch is actually a buff.

---

I really don't know what else to say here, except 'smh.'


Oh, there's a vacuum. You just haven't realized where it's located.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elix_Moarbase

I'm gonna pretend all buffs and nerfs are in a vacuum and will only compare everything to the most exact and comparable form. I will pretend that nothing but the pure potency matters while everything surrounding the spell has no effect on the spell's usefulness or end result, even if in the end it turns out to be better than the original base form. I will also do this in a passive aggressive manner and pretend to be the intellectually superior individual for I am skilled at creating strawmen and I am skilled at destroying them. This is how I debate.

---

This is why I generally avoid the forums.

And yes, that was crass, but... perhaps you shouldn't have resorted to that as your response. I'm just gonna back out.

Can SE just STOP with the balancing and step back and ask if these changes will make the "job" fun or not
SMN 4.1 was fun
This SMN 4.2 garbage does not look fun
Why is SE being fun kryptonite?
In what universe does making a "job" less fun considered a good idea?

Balancing Casters against each other only works if that slot is reserved for Casters only. Because we live in a world (thankfully) where groups are open to pick their own compositions, each and every caster falls behind to each and every ranged physical dps class and each Melee dps class with the only exception being Samurai.

It's because of this fact that it has never been optimal to run a Caster since 3.3

Personally, I wish we'd have the personal dps or group utility to make us feel desired. However, knowing SE's tendency for bandaid fixes it wouldn't surprise me if in the future at some point they nerf LB acquisition further for not having a specified group comp or just hard lock that slot for Casters only because it'd take a radical tuning pass to balance things out at this point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tommyhawk

Can SE just STOP with the balancing and step back and ask if these changes will make the "job" fun or not
SMN 4.1 was fun
This SMN 4.2 garbage does not look fun
Why is SE being fun kryptonite?
In what universe does making a "job" less fun considered a good idea?

---

Summoner's only change was potency reductions that, frankly, are warranted. Look at the DPS parsing for the top 75th percentile in Omega savage, and the top performing job on literally every floor is summoner. Add to those numbers that summoner adds raid utility in the form of Devotion and raises, and their mobility of play compared to jobs its outperforming, and the job was in need of a nerf in power. They can't simply just make other jobs stronger, sometimes balance means an already powerful job needs to be tweaked down too.

SMN isn't seeing any gameplay change from 4.1 it's simple potency nerf. So I don't understand what "fun" has to do with it : it will be the same just a little less powerful (2%). Oh but maybe that's what you mean by fun : OP ?
If big numbers or shonen kinda powers are what you seek for fun, you will end up disappointed on a mmo, where everything has to be balanced (or trying to and failing as of here) and changes happen within % or hundreth.
It's no offense, just advice on your choice of words.

For War you could say the new gameplay can affect fun. SMN and BLM are not changing, just adjusting potencies.

Fun on mmos lies not in how powerful you are, cause at max skill in a given role you're supposed to achieve similar results regardless of the class, as opposed to solo games. Fun on mmos lies within "how you achieve max skill" ie gameplay and "flow" of the classes.

After having an afternoon to stew on it all, I'm rather indifferent to the changes to the casters.

It does feel like their attempt at balancing was menial at best. Black Mages did not get a particularly useful buff, nor did Summoner's get a particularly strict nerf - both attempts seem like they will fail to balance the casters much. As for Red Mage, I thought they were fine where they were, and continue to be. However, I admit I'm not a raider, so I'm not taking that particular aspect of the game in mind, so I suppose my opinion isn't worth much considering.

Besides, people seem to be forgetting that these are preliminary notes, and changes to classes have been made at the last minute, and there is nothing preventing a change again come 4.21 or 4.25. Everyone really needs to calm down a bit and see how these changes play out before being too up-in-arms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leukka

Now take those parses and plug them into http://xivrdps.herokuapp.com

I think every SMN would love to take a hit to personal dps if it meant a raid dps contribution equal to Ninjas, Dragoons, Bards and Machinists.

---

The original statement from the devs not only mentioned utility, which SMN has in the form of devotion and raises, but also in mobility and how impacted the job is by mechanics. Considering DOTs and pet damage continue through most mechanics and movement phases, added with general summoner mobility, and the job outperforms on personal DPS and ought to be sitting just above RDM, not at the top.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Remedi

What you refer is small changes on the numbers of their Cds/potency, we need more than that to be optimal, which is not happening during an expansion.

And quite frankly until I can test them for myself WAR changes to me are a nerf for the moment, won't comment on mnk because I don't play it

---

If you buffed BLM's F4 to a large enough value, that would be optimal. Sure there are QoL changes and reworks I would like to see and I agree that those won't be seen, but it is entirely possible for SE to make BLM optimal.

They just choose not to.

Remember they released BLM in 4.0 in an unplayable state and remember the large scale changes that were made in 4.05. And we're still bottom of the pack. Hell, the changes they made today SHOULD have happened in 4.1 - but nothing was done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wereotter

Summoner's only change was potency reductions that, frankly, are warranted. Look at the DPS parsing for the top 75th percentile in Omega savage, and the top performing job on literally every floor is summoner. Add to those numbers that summoner adds raid utility in the form of Devotion and raises, and their mobility of play compared to jobs its outperforming, and the job was in need of a nerf in power. They can't simply just make other jobs stronger, sometimes balance means an already powerful job needs to be tweaked down too.

---

FFlogs overestimates SMN'er damage in a number of ways. It was absolutely not overpowered - Bard, Ninja, Dragoon and Machinist were all better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HaroldSaxon

If you buffed BLM's F4 to a large enough value, that would be optimal. Sure there are QoL changes and reworks I would like to see and I agree that those won't be seen, but it is entirely possible for SE to make BLM optimal.

They just choose not to.

Remember they released BLM in 4.0 in an unplayable state and remember the large scale changes that were made in 4.05. And we're still bottom of the pack. Hell, the changes they made today SHOULD have happened in 4.1 - but nothing was done.

---

Maybe we have a different opinion of what unplayable means, but no jobs in this game is/was unplayable, there are different grades of optimal, but not unplayable.

That said, you know as much as me that the only way to bandaid fix us to be somewhat relevant in a meta composition without ANY synergy is by overbuffing our dmg which as you have stated in another topic it was not going to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HaroldSaxon

FFlogs overestimates SMN'er damage in a number of ways. It was absolutely not overpowered - Bard, Ninja, Dragoon and Machinist were all better.

---

Is it only Summoner? If it's an issue with Dots, then I imagine everyone goes down a notch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Remedi

Maybe we have a different opinion of what unplayable means, but no jobs in this game is/was unplayable, there are different grades of optimal, but not unplayable.

That said, you know as much as me that the only way to bandaid fix us to be somewhat relevant in a meta composition without ANY synergy is by overbuffing our dmg which as you have stated in another topic it was not going to happen.

---

To (slightly uncharacteristically) side with Harold, BLM was basically unplayable and objectively worse than HW BLM at launch. Sure, it wasn't "crash the game instantly" but you may as well have crippled your static by playing it. Our rotation was made absolutely worse than our HW counterpart, Blizzard IV was now a hindrance, and we dealt far less damage than we should have.

Now we're on the right track.

As I said maybe I have a different experience on what unplayable really means

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Remedi

As I said maybe I have a different experience on what unplayable really means

---

Apparently a literal definition. And that's okay. I find it amusing and concerning (which it is depends on my mood that day I guess) that the guy in charge of this game mains BLM and released it for 4.0 in the state it was in. It also kind of blows my mind that we were given new tools in the expansion like Umbral Hearts and the big debate was whether it was a DPS gain or not to ignore the new tool.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NovaLevossida

Apparently a literal definition. And that's okay. I find it amusing and concerning (which it is depends on my mood that day I guess) that the guy in charge of this game mains BLM and released it for 4.0 in the state it was in. It also kind of blows my mind that we were given new tools in the expansion like Umbral Hearts and the big debate was whether it was a DPS gain or not to ignore the new tool.

---

Umbral hearts fill 2 roles. A filler spell (B4) in ice while waiting on Mana ticks, and trading time in Ice for time in Fire (A tit for tat GCD trade)

The 'tool' is directly related to dealing damage, so the merits of the tool will be based solely on whether you're doing more or less damage with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

Umbral hearts fill 2 roles. A filler spell (B4) in ice while waiting on Mana ticks, and trading time in Ice for time in Fire (A tit for tat GCD trade)

The 'tool' is directly related to dealing damage, so the merits of the tool will be based solely on whether you're doing more or less damage with it.

---

I'm aware of how the 'tool' works. If it was unclear, my use of past tense there referred to expansion launch, not any current debate about the merits of Bliz 4.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leukka

However, knowing SE's tendency for bandaid fixes it wouldn't surprise me if in the future at some point they nerf LB acquisition further for not having a specified group comp or just hard lock that slot for Casters only because it'd take a radical tuning pass to balance things out at this point.

---

They sorta already tried that, actually. Back in... 3.1, I think it was? There was a change to LB generation to add a penalty if you have more than 2 of any single role (tank/healer/melee/ranged/caster). It lasted all of 1 patch before they changed it to the current penalty for duplicate jobs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NovaLevossida

Apparently a literal definition. And that's okay. I find it amusing and concerning (which it is depends on my mood that day I guess) that the guy in charge of this game mains BLM and released it for 4.0 in the state it was in. It also kind of blows my mind that we were given new tools in the expansion like Umbral Hearts and the big debate was whether it was a DPS gain or not to ignore the new tool.

---

The guy in charge of this game wanted to get rid of protect, the dev team outvoted him, so while I understand that ppl tend to accuse him of everything since he's pretty much the face of this game, the truth is another which is that the dev team has enough power to make decisions by itself

So, I'm not saying I'm especially glad with the change. I was really hoping for 300 (but still expecting 280) and perhaps a bit more (like Ley Line adjusted to 60sec)

Anyway, BLM will most likely not be part of the dps meta yadiyada but, beside those group aiming for the top fflogs, for let say 50 to 80 percentils, will that buff makes BLM fine in itself?

Like, by going in a pf where no buffs will ever be sync (beside on pull) and it's pretty much free for all until the boss is down, will BLM contribute a good rdps compared to others?



Trick Attack and other similar buffs loose a lot of value when it done randomly and doesn't align with any Wild Fire, Libra, Bahamoo etc etc, making the NIN tdps much lower than what you would have in a meta run. (or just the same run where people actually align everything properly).
Since BLM brings no buff, the less organised a group is, the more valuable his selfish dps is.

What do you think?

I'm not interested in fflogs as I only BLM casually (healmain) but I still would like to know if my overall raid contribution will be fine when I join a pf.

I must say, I've been disappointed big time by the changes because and I'm on the edge of simply quitting the game. There's so many points that I think are too overwhelming, I mean by that : The over-simplification of the gameplay, the terrible choices in terms of balance, the lack of transparency.

Most of you guys think that META has no implication on the majority of the players while it has in facts big time impact on the "perceived value". You have to accept that, it is a mechanism that is present at any layer/level of the endgame, both in pugs and in formed groups.

Casters as many others classes are currently fighting for the "4th slot", while some of them are literally locked-out from it because of the perceived value of the jobs. I mean by lock-out, not even being able to enter in a lot of PF's.

As it is for 4.2. The balances have adjust some 4th slots jobs with each other while not even trying to balance them with the "holy trinity" of NIN,BRD and DRG.

At the current state, You've to first accept that your role is nowhere near to be as useful as other classes. Hence, you don't play caster, you play "4th slot" : MCH, RDM, SMN and now MNK according to the balances.

"SMN Looking for a static, can play RDM or MCH if needed".
"BLM looking for a static, can play whatever if needed".

Now, you may say it's not relevant if you don't go world prog or speedkills but again I repeat, perceived value. Also, there's a "progression value" which is a basic component in an MMO, find a way to explain that you're role is not near to be optimal, that your progression value to the team is not that good, just try.

I know that there's always going to be META and balances issue, but the difference existing at the moment is so big that it gives little to no room to justify the use of some classes and 4.2 won't change that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Remedi

Maybe we have a different opinion of what unplayable means, but no jobs in this game is/was unplayable, there are different grades of optimal, but not unplayable.

---

Did you actually play BLM in 4.0? It was absolutely awful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Remedi

That said, you know as much as me that the only way to bandaid fix us to be somewhat relevant in a meta composition without ANY synergy is by overbuffing our dmg which as you have stated in another topic it was not going to happen.

---

Wrong. Our damage doesn't need to be overbuffed. It needs to be buffed to a level that makes it worth taking over utility. That isn't called overbuffing.

The reason SE won't do it is because they hate casters and they hate selfish DPS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

Is it only Summoner? If it's an issue with Dots, then I imagine everyone goes down a notch.

---

Dot's are one thing, Radient shield is another that is being fixed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NovaLevossida

I'm aware of how the 'tool' works. If it was unclear, my use of past tense there referred to expansion launch, not any current debate about the merits of Bliz 4.

---

Blizzard IV skipping was not viable in 4.0 - it is viable with current BLM after the 4.05 changes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sylvain

but I still would like to know if my overall raid contribution will be fine when I join a pf.

---

No, it won't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HaroldSaxon

Did you actually play BLM in 4.0? It was absolutely awful.



Wrong. Our damage doesn't need to be overbuffed. It needs to be buffed to a level that makes it worth taking over utility. That isn't called overbuffing.

The reason SE won't do it is because they hate casters and they hate selfish DPS.

---

I did play it at the start and I also played in the past worse jobs that were legit unplayable, while the 4.0 rotation was not good it was far from beign considered unplayable at least from my standards.
For it's dmg to overtake utility jobs they need to overbuff the dmg compared to what it currently does and what they usually do hence why I say overbuff

Also now you are beign unreasonable, I understand you are unhappy about the patch but beign spiteful in that way is juvenile at best

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HaroldSaxon

Blizzard IV skipping was not viable in 4.0 - it is viable with current BLM after the 4.05 changes

---

That's not even the point I was making. Those discussions about Blizzard IV were taking place prior to 4.05, and they were taking place because of the state of the job / design of it at launch which was what my original comment was about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Remedi

I did play it at the start and I also played in the past worse jobs that were legit unplayable, while the 4.0 rotation was not good it was far from beign considered unplayable at least from my standards.

---

You are absolutely incorrect. The class was absolutely awful at 4.0, and that sentiment is echoed by pretty much every top BLM player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Remedi

For it's dmg to overtake utility jobs they need to overbuff the dmg compared to what it currently does and what they usually do hence why I say overbuff

---

If you give Black Mages enough raw damage to be equal to utility jobs, its not overbuffing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Remedi

Also now you are beign unreasonable, I understand you are unhappy about the patch but beign spiteful in that way is juvenile at best

---

Personally i'd say the one being unreasonable is the one using personal insults as a point of debate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NovaLevossida

That's not even the point I was making. Those discussions about Blizzard IV were taking place prior to 4.05, and they were taking place because of the state of the job / design of it at launch which was what my original comment was about.

---

Thanks for the clarification

blm 3.0 and 4.0 were both broken.... 4.0 not quite as much as 3.0, but still broken

smn 4.2 could have used a nerf, but why so major??..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HaroldSaxon

You are absolutely incorrect. The class was absolutely awful at 4.0, and that sentiment is echoed by pretty much every top BLM player.


If you give Black Mages enough raw damage to be equal to utility jobs, its not overbuffing.



Personally i'd say the one being unreasonable is the one using personal insults as a point of debate.

---

It was a critique, because there's no debate to be had over the point that because the casters are not optimal for meta therefore the devs must hate casters.
I don't understand why you feel like I'm your enemy to the point you had to think I was offending you there just like I don't understand how you can deny a personal opinion on the unplayability matter, it was bad yes but I've seen worse tbf and quite frankly WAR imho before 2.1 was worse than 4.0 BLM.

I understand your point that they should give enough dmg to offset the utility of the other jobs and I agree, actually I would be quite happy with it myself, but I also know that BLM needs ALOT of that dmg to make the difference that's why I say overbuffing, it needs to be above the rdps of sinergy jobs by a good margin to be considered worthwhile

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shiroe

blm 3.0 and 4.0 were both broken.... 4.0 not quite as much as 3.0, but still broken

smn 4.2 could have used a nerf, but why so major??..

---

It's not major, granted the sources of damage it's a 2% overall nerf. At current DPS standards it's a 100 DPS loss max. Should still be above SAM or in the neibourghood (checked on O1-O4 average fights 95% performance)

SMN needed a nerf. Plain and simple. It was doing more damage than SAMURAI in the 95 percentiles, being top dps. And it brought radiant shield/contagion & devotion. The BLM buff is going to add around 220 dps based on 95 percentile again. This will even out casters as is should be BLM > SMN > RDM, but will also most likely destroy SMN's already fragile place in any sort of meta.

On the other end they buffed MNK so much that it could replace MCH in the meta in triple melee friendly fights.