Have a little empathy for those whose jobs got crushed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ToasterMan

No. There are nerfs that need to happen. The question is if SE can do it without nerfing the job into Oblivion like they did with SCH. I always said SCH needed some adjustments, not completely gut the job.

---

This is the exact reason nerfs need to be avoided. Bring other classes up.

They need to change riddle of fire, Monk feel so clunky

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Core1019

Don't forget blm. We don't deal enough damage to make up for our lack of utility, especially when compared with rdm

---

What? BLM is the 2nd highest dps by far from the rest, after SAM. I think you might not be doing the correct rotations to pull highest damage.

OT:

All MCHs I've seen so far are completely disappointed and it's understandable. SE needs to give them some love or a mini job rework. They're not a support role anymore except a couple of role actions, but does damage as one with annoying gameplay.

SCH felt poor after reaching lv70 compared to other healers. Not as broken as MCH though. They already had some useless spells before SB, but not they have even more and it feels like they barely gained anything from 60 to 70 to compensate for what they lost, with the exception of Broil II for a bit more potency and Chain Stratagem for a really nice crit buff for the party on target. For the job that is suposed to mitigate instead of strong healing, their mitigation seems a bit off, specially with how they increased the MP cost. Excogitation from 62 feels pointless. Heals in this game are already scripted and you just need to time it right, auto regen at 50% hp is just a lazy heal (not even that high) and a waste of aetherflow stack. Quickened Aetherflow's 20% chance feels really low when you only have 3 chances to proc it, and it barely does. And finally, Aetherpact, I haven't found a single use for this spell yet other than just a tank pulling an entire dungeon and running out of cooldowns. The heal potency it has doesn't compensate the amount of time it takes to charge it up and the amount of time it lasts, nor the range it has. 1 Aetherflow stack only gives 30 fairy gauge points, thats like a couple of seconds and like 15k heal over time, the same as 2 normal heals and embraces inbetween. It takes 4 minutes to charge full fairy gauge for it to be somewhat useful, assuming you use all your aetherflow stacks right as you use aetherflow, and that would mean you're doing bad as SCH and not managing your stacks properly for other spells needed.

I would nerf a bit SAM and PLD. Just a tiny bit less damage.

I would buff MCH, DRG and SCH.

And maybe monks.


I think that BLM will stay relevant thanks to being the only caster with unlimited mana, which can be helpfull...


WHM is great for 4 man instances, but I don't really like lilies, so I woud also like some changes on it... But it's unlikely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rinuko

They need to change riddle of fire, Monk feel so clunky

---

I don't think the question is if it's clunky, but is it a proper damage boost. I'd love to see the theorycrafter numbers on that. As for the other jobs, well....

Scholar just needs its Galvanize effects buffed so that they either match or just surpass levels of Astrologian's Aspected spells under Nocturnal Sect (~170% or so from Adloquium and ~150% or so for Succor) and maybe give Succor the same critical absorption treatment.

Machinist I think is in a state where Bard was in 3.0 in that devs have absolutely no idea what to do with it. Sure, they could give it the Samurai treatment and just buff its numbers to greater amounts, or they could tout a general support theme to be implemented for all physical ranged and give it greater group buffs. The major obstacle right now I fear is that I think at this point in the expansion, there may still be the preconceived notion by devs that Machinist players still don't know how it works now.

For White Mage, it may be the pure healer, but it's also the periodic healer, and that looks like something that got completely overlooked when it comes to Plenary Indulgence. This could be made far more practical by having stacks from it get generated not by Cure or Cure II, but instead by ticks from Regen or Medica II (either by critical tick or just a simple proc chance on tick).

Tanks in general, bonus enmity generation based off of VIT, either as baseline or only from tank stances, would offer a longer-lasting fix the issue of enmity generation while adhering to the wishes of the devs of keeping tank damage to a more limited standard compared to standard damage dealing jobs.

Summoner....doesn't seem as bad as any Summoner thread would suggest. The only real thing would be to either bring Sustain back or convert Physick (at least for Summoners) to heal based off of INT rather than MND. If that adjustment has to apply to Scholar as well, then a passive trait could bring that to a reasonable level to compensate. If it needs more support, then have Bahamut apply a vulnerability debuff on a target whenever it attacks or something along those lines.

I still do believe though that Astrologian should have its Balance card brought back down from 20% baseline to 10% baseline. That way, it won't seem so mandatory and we won't wind up with bonkers statistics like we had from Gordias Savage, where 98% of all groups that cleared it had a Scholar.

Some things that would be nice for MCH:

Make heat gauge not activate till you have access to cooldown as it has no flow and looks broken when all the mechanics of the heatgauge are locked to 62+ when you get gauss barrel at 52 so thats 10 levels of heat gauge doing damn near nothing.

Boost flamethrower potency to 150, this is supposed to be our grand finale attack but it has no oomph to give that feel.

Make gauss barrel boost the 50% procs for the 1,2,3 combo to 100% since gambling to do something so basic is dumb as hell and this would make gauss barrel feel like something more than just a 5% buff at 52.

This would be a great start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elvin

I would nerf a bit SAM and PLD. Just a tiny bit less damage.

I would buff MCH, DRG and SCH.

And maybe monks.

---

All for buffing, but I would say I'm against nerfing SAM too much, if at all. It's damage is the only thing it brings to the table, that's the important thing to remember. :)

Funny how the wheel turns...

3.x WAR: "Hahahaha! Silly Paladin! You think you could be viable in raids compositions when you can't defend against magic attacks and your DPS is pitiful!? You'll never be as good as I am!"

4.0 WAR: "Don't make fun of my DPS! D': I used to be the best! It hurts and stings!"

(Points to anyone that gets the reference in the second quote.)

I really can't stand Bard's RNG factor. To hide their two strongest GCDs behind chance procs is infuriating, and our general consistency in damage is non existent now. I love the new changes (as I liked 3.0 bowmage, as I also liked 2.0 Bard) I just wish our damage wasn't locked behind RNG.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vexander

Nerf nothing. Buff other classes to be on par with those currently excelling.

---

Out of curiosity, what's the reasoning behind this viewpoint other than "feels"? Of course nobody likes having supposed power taken away, but outside of "I'll feel bad if I get nerfed" is there any actual logical reason to come to this conclusion? For the most part I'd imagine the developers have a target area for class performance, and it's likely ATM that there are some high outliers, and some low outliers. Why would you suggest buffing everyone to the high outliers, who might be above the developer's target area of performance? Besides "how I feel"?