A Bard Thought

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ty_taurus

That will never work either. All it takes is for Bard Form's support to increase rDPS by even as little as 100 and suddenly no one will ever tolerate any Bard playing in Ranger Form. The same is true in reverse. The Support has an overall decrease in rDPS by as little as 100? Now every Bard that chooses Bard Form will get kicked from statics.

The only way a form system will work is if the rDPS of the group is 100% identical for both forms OR one of the forms is worse, but brings something required for Statics if another job can't bring that. The later just creates a world no one wants: Some aspect of DPS support is required in all forms of content making Bard form Bard or Dancer mandatory, and all Bard players are forced to flex between both styles, not just choose the one that fits for you. Basically, you would want Bard form Bard and Ranger Form Bard to be Selene and Eos.

---

You say that, but it opens the option for both play styles to play as they wish. It's clear, especially now, that people are still taking bards into content even though we are not nearly as support heavy as we used to be and still clearing the content. There will always be a "preferred" method in the game. There is always some kind of "meta" in any game, but the option would be there and that gives the class a lot more flexibility for players to play the class however they wish. Isn't that the overall purpose in having these discussions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suniva

You say that, but it opens the option for both play styles to play as they wish. It's clear, especially now, that people are still taking bards into content even though we are not nearly as support heavy as we used to be and still clearing the content. There will always be a "preferred" method in the game. There is always some kind of "meta" in any game, but the option would be there and that gives the class a lot more flexibility.

---

That's a little different though. You're talking about something ultimately revolving around the job system itself. You don't see a bard and demand they switch to Black Mage because Black Mage will do more damage because that player may not even have Black Mage as an option. The idea of having two stances to switch between is more like spamming 4.0's Straight Shot instead of Heavy Shot. You are blatantly choosing an option that deals less damage after the first use and directly lowering your possible pDPS as a result when you could just be using Heavy Shot instead. You don't need to go and level a new job.

What's more, there are things that Bard brings to a fight that are very helpful. Take E1S for example: There's a part of that fight where 4 players need to distance themselves from the boss to bait a string of AoEs that would otherwise cause havoc for the rest of the party. Bards, Machinists, and Dancers are the only jobs who can do this without dropping their own damage because you're required to be farther away from the boss and in motion for several seconds, which would be significantly harder for Black Mage. That's why it's more important for Bard's rDPS contribution to be on even footing with Machinist and Dancer, because the three of us fill that same niche of being able to perform at 100% for probably the entire duration of the fight.

Machinist is higher, but it's also significantly harder, so player error comes into play. And Dancer is being talked about quite often about needing some DPS increase since we're behind Bard and Machinist even with our buff contribution.

I suppose you could take Bard Form in the direction of 3.0's Caster Bard where you have to play your songs... Your rDPS is higher with support, possibly comparable with Summoner, but you lose your mobility entirely. Of course, we all know how well that concept worked out...

I don't know about the dancer comparison, especially in E1S. From what I've been told, and from what I have seen when it gets to that point in E1S it also lines up with the dancers having to be within melee range for their abilities. So while sure, they CAN move and put their rotation on hold to do that particular mechanic, it isn't very OPTIMAL for them to do so. Plus, there is also no NEED to bait the aoes. It certainty does make things EASIER, but there is no NEED for it. And yes, I am talking about the job system. Hah, I don't think we have to introduce a "ranger" type job into the game IF we can find a way to properly balance the already existing bow and arrow class that already exists that can satisfy both camps.

Back in SB, our songs added a supportive element for singing them, why not bring that back? We also didn't benefit from our own Battle Voice, but we could benefit from Foe's Requiem. Bring Foe's back so that we at least have a supportive element we can benefit from. If the idea of stances where a thing and came to be, I would like for the bard stance to be more in line of how the bard tool kit was back in SB, with the songs giving a buff to the party, of course, this would come at the cost of our own personal dps, as that is the trade off for buffing the party. I don't see them nerfing our overall damage too hard for this trade, however, simply because bards have always been a hybrid type class, so while yes it would come at the cost of personal dps, we would still be in the middle in terms of the numbers (Machinist, bard, dancer, respectfully).

However, vastly changing how our current abilities operate while also introducing the different stances you suggest would be completely reworking our tool kit and at that point it WOULD probably be easier to just introduce a whole new class since we would be adding a whole new level of complexity to one job at that point, a complexity that SE themselves have admitted that they want to step away from.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suniva

I don't know about the dancer comparison, especially in E1S. From what I've been told, and from what I have seen when it gets to that point in E1S it also lines up with the dancers having to be within melee range for their abilities. So while sure, they CAN move and put their rotation on hold to do that particular mechanic, it isn't very OPTIMAL for them to do so. Plus, there is also no NEED to bait the aoes. It certainty does make things EASIER, but there is no NEED for it. And yes, I am talking about the job system. Hah, I don't think we have to introduce a "ranger" type job into the game IF we can find a way to properly balance the already existing bow and arrow class that already exists that can satisfy both camps.

Back in SB, our songs added a supportive element for singing them, why not bring that back? We also didn't benefit from our own Battle Voice, but we could benefit from Foe's Requiem. Bring Foe's back so that we at least have a supportive element we can benefit from. However, vastly changing how our current abilities operate while also introducing the different stances you suggest would be completely reworking our tool kit and at that point it WOULD probably be easier to just introduce a whole new class since we would be adding a whole new level of complexity to one job at that point, a complexity that SE themselves have admitted that they want to step away from.

---

As a dancer main I can tell you that the only abilities that require you to be in melee range are your AoE attacks which you don't use against Eden with the exception of Rising Windmill and Bloodshower which you'll use once each every 60 seconds after using Flourish. These are your proc'd AoE attacks that you ordinarily will never be proc'ing without multiple adds to burn. Even when you activate Flourish, you have 15 seconds to use both Rising Windmill and Bloodshower, not to mention that the AoE baiting phase of the fight doesn't align with your Flourish window if you're doing your rotation properly. Standard and Technical Step are point-blank AoEs, but their range is surprisingly large. I do have to use a Standard Step during that window and can do so comfortably be releasing the attack right by the orb. I also can reach Titania with Standard Step when I'm standing behind the Growth Rune that divides the platform during phases where she uses Growth and Brambles together.

Dancer is definitely a bit more of a mid-ranged than a long-ranged job, but very rarely am I forced to be so far from the boss that I can't do anything, and if I am, it would effect Bards and Machinists the same.

As for whether or not you need to bait those AoEs, I'm not really sure what your alternative is. Are you just having everyone stacking and running in circles around Eden? That makes things easier on the melee, but casters will still hate that and it will slice their pDPS up for a good like 8 seconds, and then I imagine that would make it very disorienting for everyone to position themselves for orb beams. Not impossible for sure, but I can already feel the amount of deaths you'd get from people losing track of where they are and where they need to be. Saying that having ranged bait the AoEs makes things easier feels like an understatement.

As for the SB Bard, that's still nothing more than an Archer in Bard's clothing. Your focal points were Refulgent Arrow and Pitch Perfect. Everything you did as a Bard was to build up for that, not a song. Not some kind of powerful buffing music. More archery. Contrast that with Dancer who's focal point is Technical Step. Everything you build up to is a dance of immense power that enables you to blast through your resources like an epic finale to a dance. Nothing about SB Bard really felt bard-like. It was still just an archer parading as a bard.

Also, I don't believe it's possible to ever satisfy both camps in 1 set. Imagine going into a movie theatre where there are two showings in one room at the same time. You have one audience trying to watch the next Pixar film while the other audience wants to watch a raunchy comedy. Are you just going to alternate between the two films or play them overtop each other? There are two very stark contrasts between the identity of an archer and the identity of a bard. They don't blend well to create something desirable by both camps in all earnestness. You either need 2 different versions of the same class, or two different classes. As I said, I'd rather they introduce Ranger as a new job, have it steal Bard's moves, and let Bard bloom into a full-on musician.

I only ever brought up the sects thing as another maybe idea. Thats typically how game design goes. Sometimes you sit in a room with your coworkers and you spitball random ideas to try and fix a problem and see what comes out of it. Sometimes the idea you toss out not thinking much of it will trigger something in someone else who will then use that in a way you never would've come up with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ty_taurus

As for whether or not you need to bait those AoEs, I'm not really sure what your alternative is. Are you just having everyone stacking and running in circles around Eden? That makes things easier on the melee, but casters will still hate that and it will slice their pDPS up for a good like 8 seconds, and then I imagine that would make it very disorienting for everyone to position themselves for orb beams. Not impossible for sure, but I can already feel the amount of deaths you'd get from people losing track of where they are and where they need to be. Saying that having ranged bait the AoEs makes things easier feels like an understatement.

As for the SB Bard, that's still nothing more than an Archer in Bard's clothing. Your focal points were Refulgent Arrow and Pitch Perfect. Everything you did as a Bard was to build up for that, not a song. Not some kind of powerful buffing music. More archery. Contrast that with Dancer who's focal point is Technical Step. Everything you build up to is a dance of immense power that enables you to blast through your resources like an epic finale to a dance. Nothing about SB Bard really felt bard-like. It was still just an archer parading as a bard.Also, I don't believe it's possible to ever satisfy both camps in 1 set. Imagine going into a movie theatre where there are two showings in one room at the same time. You have one audience trying to watch the next Pixar film while the other audience wants to watch a raunchy comedy. Are you just going to alternate between the two films or play them overtop each other? There are two very stark contrasts between the identity of an archer and the identity of a bard. They don't blend well to create something desirable by both camps in all earnestness. You either need 2 different versions of the same class, or two different classes. As I said, I'd rather they introduce Ranger as a new job, have it steal Bard's moves, and let Bard bloom into a full-on musician.

---

Ahh see, from what I had seen, when Eden uses that ability, it typically lines up with the dancers flourish. And again, there are multiple methods/ strategies a party can use to clear a fight. Who are we to say that one particular method is the do or die method? It's why I don't think there is a NEED for it. (Based on how the word need is defined. Like, I NEED to breathe to live, but I don't NEED a new pair of shoes).

And not to be insulting or anything, but did you even play bard back in SB? We had MUCH more than just refulgent arrow and pitch perfect. After using foe song at the start, we would have to keep an eye on when it came back up to reuse it again, we would help the healers, or any caster reallys by providing them with refresh and giving dps tactician if they died, troubadour also functioned in a way that it would provide a buff to the party dependent on which song we were singing, by either increase magical/physical defenses or increasing HP if I remember correctly. This was all on top of Nature's Minne and Palisade. If you still feel as if SB bard was still an archer despite what we had, then I guess you and I are going to have to agree to disagree at this point since it seems that you want a very heavily supportive type class in and MMO and I am of the opinion that there is really no place for that here.

Also, while I understand you want to bring forth discussion on the topic, if you yourself don't even believe that an introduction to the "stance" is going to satisfy both types of play styles, (which is honestly WHY it would have even BEEN suggested to begin with) then I must ask why you have brought it up to begin with? A different perspective and ideas are only as impactful as the person making said argument or suggestion if they truly believe that it will provide some form of improvement going forward. I say that only because they will have the frame of mind to provide adequate enough examples since they fully believe in their idea and provide convincing arguments to make their point. You suggesting the "stances" and then admitting that it won't even bring satisfaction to the player base is kinda counter productive, but this is my own personal opinion. I don't mean to be insulting in anyway, it's just you bringing up the point and then immediately countering it just really doesn't make sense to me.

To throw it out there i like the stance idea. But perhaps instead of a sect alignment like AST it should just be two phases. Current songs already set up this very thing in point of fact. One of the three could open a few of the current oGCDs that are archer styled. One song could give access to music styled attacks with more magical effect, and the third could give access to buff effects.

Since each song forcibly lasts 30 seconds and all three must be used the only choice comes in choosing which mode to open with.

You could even balance it so certain comps do better with one song as an opener. Buff magic dmg minimally during bard phase. Physical during archer phase minimally, and both during support phase.

Its really quite pheasable, and other than adding a few new music moves the groundwork for it is already in place.

Then combined comps would prefer a support or song opener. Magic heavy comps would prefer a bard opener. Melee or physical heavy comps could prefer archer opener

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vendalwind

Then combined comps would prefer a support or song opener. Magic heavy comps would prefer a bard opener. Melee or physical heavy comps could prefer archer opener

---

This is a very interesting idea! But yes while all our songs to last 30 seconds, we do cut Army's Peon short just because it is more optimal to do so in current form. I don't know what they could introduce to make us want to sing that particular song for a full 30 seconds to be honest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suniva

Ahh see, from what I had seen, when Eden uses that ability, it typically lines up with the dancers flourish. And again, there are multiple methods/ strategies a party can use to clear a fight. Who are we to say that one particular method is the do or die method? It's why I don't think there is a NEED for it. (Based on how the word need is defined. Like, I NEED to breathe to live, but I don't NEED a new pair of shoes).

And not to be insulting or anything, but did you even play bard back in SB? We had MUCH more than just refulgent arrow and pitch perfect. After using foe song at the start, we would have to keep an eye on when it came back up to reuse it again, we would help the healers by providing them with refresh and giving dps tactician if they died, troubadour also functioned in a way that it would provide a buff to the party dependent on which song we were singing, by either increase magical/physical defenses or increasing HP if I remember correctly. If you still feel as if SB bard was still an archer despite what we had, then I guess you and I are going to have to agree to disagree at this point since it seems that you want a very heavily supportive type class in and MMO and there is really no place for that here.

Also, while I understand you want to bring forth discussion on the topic, if you yourself don't even believe that an introduction to the "stance" is going to satisfy both types of play styles, (which is honestly WHY it would have even BEEN suggested to begin with) then I must ask why you have brought it up to begin with? A different perspective and ideas are only as impactful as the person making said argument or suggestion if they truly believe that it will provide some form of improvement going forward. I say that only because they will have the frame of mind to provide adequate enough examples since they fully believe in their idea and provide convincing arguments to make their point. You suggesting the "stances" and then admitting that it won't even bring satisfaction to the player base is kinda counter productive, but this is my own personal opinion. I don't mean to be insulting in anyway, it's just you bringing up the point and then immediately countering it just really doesn't make sense to me.

---

For me on Eden, my Flourish happens just as the phase is starting, and I am able to get both Rising Windmill and Bloodshower off before I need to run out. I meant more as in, Flourish isn't coming off CD as I'm out there running in circles and thus putting a lot of pressure on me to get in melee range.

Yes I have played SB Bard and while you had aspects of support in places, those were not the focal point of the job. What I define as a focal point is essentially what a job builds up too. Here are some examples:
Summoner: Summon Bahamut and Summon Phoenix (Mostly Summon Phoenix atm).
Astrologian: Divination and Neutral Sect
Dancer: Standard Step and Technical Step
Black Mage: Foul and Xenoglossy. Also Flare
Red Mage: Melee Combo + Verflare/Verholy
SB Bard: Refulgent Arrow and Pitch Perfect

With Summoner, your Demi-Primals are the signal of your high damage phases. They thematically and mechanically are the highest points of your kit. Bahamut less so right now, but it still very prominent.

With Astrologian, support-wise you're building up for the effects of Divination. Healing-wise Neutral Sect is the embodiment of your power and has you healing at your strongest.

You get the point. For SB Bard, the support was there in places, but at the end of the day, the pinnacle of your trade was shooting high-powered arrows. I've posted this like twice already, but I'll reference it again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMf6NdM55ws&t=97s

Why can't the build up be for something like Black Requiem at the 2:32 timestamp? Perhaps a channel attack like Machinist's flamethrower where you stand still for x amount of seconds playing black requiem as a lethal burst of music pulses from you?

As for the stance thing and how that works in the first place... Well, if that system was implemented and done correctly, it would be like being in that room from the theater example, except this time there's a door to a second room, so the films are being played simultaneously but in two different rooms that are just connected to one another. Again, that's if it's done perfectly, which I think is unlikely to be done very easily. As I said, I'd prefer just adding Ranger as a job and letting that adopt what Bard is now.