No other tank attack is spammed THAT much. Go ahead and tell me what other tank has you press the same attack button 3 times in a row after every single combo.
Printable View
I mean, bloodspiller spam is three times in a row, used to be 5 or more in ShB, fell cleave is three times in a row also used to be 5 or more in ShB, gnashing combo is same button spammed in a row, every tank spams buttons in consecutive order, Confiteor and Blades combo is spammed also... and you definitely exaggerate how much it's spammed I'll be completely honest, and while it has lost the bulk of it's optimisation value from when it was first added, it still allows for a certain degree of flexibility to time HS usages for disengagements, or after downtime can be used as a buffer if any stacks remain to help realign with raid buffs. Definitely more pros to the ability than cons I'll be honest.
Aside from 3 times in a row though, aren't PLD using Atonement 8 times per minute? That's...a lot of the same attack.
The Gnashing Fang "combo" is the same button now, but GNB is only pushing it 6 times per minute, they get to pop Continuation after each use, the potency escalates, and each attack has a unique animation.
Bloodspiller spam only happens once a minute - same with Fell Cleave - as part of the 1m burst that spam correlates with PLD's bladeworks spam - Atonement spam is above and beyond.
imo bladeworks feels fine - hits hard (feels impactful), unique animations per use (isn't visually redundant), and you only use it 4 times a minute.
imo BLM Fire IV spam feels fine too even though doesn't have unique animations and is part of the normal rotation as well just because it hits hard - it's something you WANT to spam.
Atonement doesn't hit hard, is visually redundant, and you use it 8 times a minute - almost as much BLMs spam Fire IV.
I don't mind hitting the same button 3 times in a row as long as it feels good to use, but Atonement doesn't - it needs some animation treatment and/or a potency motive imo.
Nope, still hate the new PLD 6 months later.
On the contrary, I don't really hate or love PLD in particular. Its usability/accessibility is especially good given the stringent oGCD bloat of DRK/GNB, though WAR fills this void particularly well.
If anything, I think they need to think carefully with how they handle PLD next expansion. Main reason being how screwed up things were with Fight Design this expansion as well as PLD's kit conflicting with the "meta" 2m Burst Window they perceived. All of that could've simply been avoided if they took more time in the RnD department to hammer out fight inconsistencies using the weakest and strongest compositions in the game to see if it can be done.
I actually really like it. I like that I don’t have to rely on anyone for Divine veil, have Bulwark back is nice, getting to use Holy Spirit and Holy Circle more frequently is super nice, and the rotation itself just feels a bit “faster” if that makes sense. That being said there’s still a bit to be improved on I.e. Goring Blade, Atonement, Cover and Shield Bash mainly.
Goring Blade should be a ranged magic attack like Holy Spirit and the two should combo together. I think having a 5-part combo would serve us a lot better then having a 1 min GCD.
Atonement should be a 2 stack oGCD. I would honestly like it if this was made a ranged magic skill too, really lean into that PLD ranged uptime. Just making the skill an oGCD would be enough for now though.
Cover and Shield Bash should just be merged with Intervention. If you dash to an enemy it should stun them and if you dash to an ally it should apply cover.
I think the above would make it better. The changes are good overall, they just need to improve it now.
It's still really mixed, I would say I'm surprised there wasn't a lot of changes for 6.4 considering it's design feeling off and the amount of buttons the job has, but I'm not really.
I guess the recent atonement changes were decent, again I loved the defensive changes personally they weren't perfect but a good step in the right direction
I think if I was going to Design Paladin for 7.0 I'd make some changes such as:
1. Making Goring blade actually have a reason to be apart of the kit (not Ogcd, it really doesn't "fix" the issue with it being a bloat ability)
2. Change up how many times you're pressing atonement, right now it feels unfun to just spam that ability.
3. Do more with PLD's "utility" skills such as making Clemency a OCGD MP management skill, Such giving more use cases to Cover and just in general buffing its utility, make shield bash a Cone OCGD that replaces damage on PLD's gap closer while stunning in a aoe cone, Let plds gap closer do no damage and charge to party members too.
I'm Fine with hallowed ground being the longest Invul and PLD having lowest DPS, but give PLD some significant upsides and make sure it isn't behind so much.
I still hate the loss of rotational Goring Blade, but mostly like the rest of the changes.
Ideally, I would have preferred to replace the Divine Might procs with Clemency, Holy Shock, and Holy Circle having variable --based on %MP-- potency, cast times (0 seconds at full MP), and MP costs (e.g., 1k to 4k), with Req making them free-casts that count as if casted from 100% MP.
Perhaps also have Fight or Flight grant 3 stacks of Sword Oath if it'd accelerate and smooth out the rotation sufficiently, but I think the main thing would just be to be okay with occasionally clipping our DoT some and not to (effectively) require the 4 Holy Shock casts before the Confiteor Combo.
Heck, I'd have been fine with BoV and GB being able to afflict a target simultaneously, if it came down to it.
I feel like the magic healing on Paladin is kind of ugh, theirs so much of it and the sustain is really strong but at the same time it feels useless when you don't need it and out of your hands, Removing Pld's self healing from magic and reducing/changing Shelltrons sustain up for more controlled sustain on Something like Clemency (that's also ocgd) would be really nice for MT/OT PLD.
Right now (In terms of "healing") it feels like PLD's more selfish then warrior? with it's healing which is kind of weird.. Not to say paladin lacks group/target healing I just think the Self sustain could be toned down alot for targetable sustain such as getting a free clemency here and there every minute, Warrior should also stop having teammate healing personally, also reduce its aoe sustain capabilities even if that's not important for savage ect. Healers shouldn't expect to afk because they got funny infinite self healing axe tank.
Aye. I'd always thought Warrior's self-healing should be more akin to just its party-support in XI -- as a sort of strikeleader / warleader / bannerlord. Instead it's just had this insane amount of single-target ally-targetable healing available to it for the last couple expansions...
(Copying over that one post from the other thread real quick.)
Imagine trying to feel relevant by commenting to a 6 month old post when written at a point in time there was still about 3 rotation that were under consideration, while there was nothing but miserable people like yourself moaning incessantly but contributing nothing of value.
He's right, though. This forum's most prolific posters and posts are complaining about the status quo and demanding changes, and then attacking any changes made, sometimes even changes that they more or less asked for. While you can argue they're different people, sometimes they actually aren't.
And he's right about this being an echo chamber, too. PLD and SMN reworks have both been pretty well received everywhere but the forums dedicated to the game. People in game seem to like them, it's just the people that want to inflate egos by talking down "brain-dead" things to prove they're cool/etc that have a problem with it.
EDIT:
And in game, in different discussion groups, in different various XIV Discords, and in actual census data, etc., they have been pretty well received. Hell, in the "everyone hates new PLD now" thread here of all places, the result has been mixed rather than completely negative, with a lot saying they like it and many saying that they're neutral and/or don't see it as worse than PLD before.
But let's ignore those since we wouldn't then be able to dismiss any population with an opinion not replaceable with unrequested spokespeople as a "vocal minority".
Largely, yes.
Not ALL, but a significant amount of changes were in response to community requests. Why do we have a Tomestone Relic? Because a significant amount of people complained about Eureka and Bozja (which was itself an attempt to address the complaints about Eureka). People wished on the Monkey's Paw for something different, and they got it - not what they wanted; they wanted HW again.
People on one Job complain about something another has that seems like good QOL for them, but that's what homogenization looks like. Even seeing how close DRK is to WAR, a lot of DRK players are asking for it to be more like WAR - not using those words. They want more self-sustain, especially in dungeons - kinda like what WAR has - they want less oGCD spam and more big, meaty, hard feeling hitting abilities to reflect their big slow sword - kinda like what WAR has. No one sees that as what they're asking for...but it's what they're asking for. They think it's different, not homogenization, can be done where it "feels" different, etc, to be fair to them...but the end result is generally the same. Hell, the Dev solution to Living Dead was to slap Bloodwhetting onto it.
The 2 min meta is from people complaining about how it was annoying trying to line up buffs and how some comps didn't work well in ShB because the buffs didn't line up. The crit meta and boosted damage (playing even more into the burst meta) of autocrit abilities was also the result of complaints.
Obviously, the complainers didn't want THOSE solutions, but the "solutions" are mostly due to complaints.
Not all, no. But quite a few. That's what a Monkey's Paw is and how it works - you make a wish, and it corrupts it. But it starts with a wish.
And, well, in-game, on Reddit, in various XIV Discords, across most polls, etc.
But let's ignore those since we wouldn't then be able to dismiss any population with an opinion not replaceable with unrequested spokespeople as a "vocal minority".
Ahh, yes, the community (alone) is to blame for most Monkey's Paw changes.Quote:
This forum's most prolific posters and posts are complaining about the status quo and demanding changes, and then attacking any changes made
/sigh
Except any response for which the requester can be blamed, Monkey's Paw or no, has to be to the actual request, not a conveniently cherry-picked portion thereof that ignores all context and purposely misconstrues the message.
An actual Monkey's Paw outcome starts with the wish, not 'the wish, if most of it were removed and the rest played backward.'
We still call the disliked outcomes "Monkey's Paw" as shorthand because the wish was perverted, but in this case it's because the wish was never really listened to in the first place, not because of some demonic intent.
If we had been painfully ambiguous leading up to the given unsatifying outcome, I would agree -- we would be at fault. But those aren't the cases that get "attacked", as you put it.
What was the most common complaint when Ninjas were complaining about the impact of latency on Mudras/Ninjutsu? The uptime cost due to ping.
There was no community push to make them into GCDs. There was, however, a hugely unified push to remove the way our clients reset their truly global internal cooldowns (the period of time after any action for which no further action can be made), to the benefit of every job in the game.
While the TCJ change was borrowed wholesale from the community, there was zero push to further simplify NIN's GCD rotation by turning a combo into Sonic Break-lite.
If the changes were made per the actual requests given, we'd simply have seen the roundtrip-ping uptime cost per action removed from the game (currently done by a large portion of PC players via a plugin that just toggles off that unnecessary self-sabotage), DWD-Assassination turned into a single button, TCJ possibly swiftened, and Meisui buffed or rehauled. That was it. The requests were very clear, and no part of them asked for the removal of combos.
Shake it Off? Warriors asked for it to actually work (i.e., cleanse at least what all Esuna could), and to be potentially buffed to actually have effect in that same vein worth putting on one's bar. What did they get? A simplified copy of Veil with the Intervention gimmick in place of Veil's pre-cooling capacity.
Inner Release? Warriors asked for it not to take so long to wind up and to be of better use in emergencies, such as by doubling Beast Gauge generated, and for small Unchained buffs opposite it. What did they get? A complete simplification that removed 2 abilities.
Delirium? Dark Knights asked for it to be more, in itself, than just a bit of extra buff duration and a bit of MP, ideally in a way that makes them feel like they're tapping into that Blood/Void-based 'delirium'. What did they get? A later-day Inner Release clone.
Summoner's whole EW rework? The community asked for its depth to be quickly appreciable / intuitive and for it to build more around summons-as-pets and their elements. The results, most depth was simply outright removed, pets were removed in favor of variably delayed spells (chicken nugget walks in; chicken nugget go boom -> big chicken nugget drops in; big chicken nugget go boom), and the actual number of useful offensive actions for any given point in time were halved. Only a quarter of the result at most followed the community's requests ('their elements'); the rest fell outside the requests or were directly contradictory to them.
Tl;dr:
You would have to go well out of your way to blind yourself to the comments, and then purposely misconstrue what little remains, for those changes that have since been so criticized to have been 'based on' what the community requested. They wouldn't be so heavily criticized if they were actually in keeping with what was asked for.
Speaking of monkeys, I still wonder what monkey asked for removing Kaiten. After all it must have been monkey, there is no way real human can be entertained by spamming on average 1 Shinten every 7.5 - 8 seconds. Can't wait for the devs to "fix" SAM in 7.0 by adding instacasts and more.
We give: "Endwalker Samurai has a bloated number of actions. Examples: Shoha II not being simply an upgrade or conditional effect of Shoha, Ogi Namikiri being separate from Ikishoten. Additionally, the removal of varied Kenki costs (and the lesser frequency of burst Kenki generation) has made SAM's gauge expenditure feel increasingly like Shinten-spam."
We get: *Kaiten removed. All gauge use outside of movement skills is now effectively Shinten-spam.*
...: "But hey, the community said there was action bloat! And you all mentioned Shinten spam!"
Best part is that because Shinten is 25 kenki and Kaiten was 20, it made it so now you would leave burst with 10 kenki, so you want to use that last kenki for gap closer to get extra 100p under pot. So not only there is exact same amount of actions you use in burst, but you also use same amount of buttons, and on top of that, you use gap closer for its damage (which imo is much worse design that using X before every Y). Burst barely changed, and you get very, very slightly less actions in filler, which is really not the problematic part. All it did was to make freestyle SAM even more viable.
https://i.imgur.com/gc44m7E.png
Tbf, I'm not going to give them crap over the ~4 rppm difference of the gap closer under pot, and I don't mind "Freestyle" SAM being less punishing.
I just think the gauge should have a goddamn point and worry that they'll now, instead of returning Kaiten or reverting Guren/Senei to 50 gauge, probably just remove Yaten/Guren from the gauge, too and replace them with 3 shared charges on a 30s CD.*
* (Not that I'd hate 2-3 shared charges for Yaten/Gyoten each on a 10s CD or shorter, on the gauge, to be clear.)
Maybe it'd be op but why not change cover into an ability like sages kardion?
You can heal your other tank instead as an off tank or swap it on to people to give them heals with your burst
cover is already so incredibly situational when intervention generally saves the player too without you taking full damage
I mean, it still doesn't really fix the simple fact that untimeable cure-ppgcd is, well, kinda boring. The only optimization available to it is to try to take sufficient damage before it starts going that it doesn't overheal. Remove half of even that component, though, and it's arguably even duller.
That is to say, if anything, the fact that our Req actions only heals us makes it more interesting than otherwise, since it gives us some added complexity to our swapping in and out of MT position, at least.
I would honestly prefer if they made Cover a role skill that all tanks can access. The utility and creativity you can have when both tanks can use Cover far outweighs its exclusivity to PLD. On that note, they really need to rework blocking in this game so you don't get situations like in DSR. I also feel like blocking is heavily underused as another form of ehp mitigation that is exclusive to PLD similar to how WAR has ToB and DRK has TBN. They had an interesting idea back in ARR with different shields offering different mitigations that paired well with Bulwark (which we ironically got back).
I'm not saying go back to that but the synergy of your equipment affecting your cds is something only WAR has taken full advantage of. I still feel like WAR is the best designed job in the game because of its interaction with its cds, in relation to its gameplay loop. You only need to go back to HW when STR accessories pushed WAR over the top to see my point. Maybe one day the devs will realize that blocking can be as strong as TBN or stronger if they decide to make blocking additive instead of multiplicative. Hypothetically in that scenario, if you pair Bulwark with Sentinel and blocking is a 20-30% mitigation, suddenly the value of healing decreases when you are literally taking 50-60% less dmg. Though I'm sure the glory days of busted defensives are long behind us.
There are both positives and negatives to the rework. Sad to lose the Damage-over-time skill. But the backend clashes with requiscat and other skills were fixed. Overall a clear net gain in playability in my eyes though. I do hope that Fated Circle becomes level 70 someday (currently 72), and have Holy Circle now apply the DoT we lost, even if it were just 10 potency for 30 seconds (Holy Circle is an AoE so it would apply a dot to multiple enemies at once, which would make things interesting).
the major plus sides is that the current foundations can be built upon for 7.0 and later and that there is more active forms of thinking about keeping uptime in fights.
comparatively this rework isn't near as bad as the SMN rework in 6.0 which removed quite a lot things the class had previously for a rotation where you literally press 1 button 80% of the time, 6.3 PLD is solid in its simplicity, and the atonement change allowing for pulled atonements for FoF (atonement shifting in a way when you think about it)
it also addressed 2 of the core issues the class had going for it since 6.0 came out, that being how incompatible with how it is in the 2 min burst windows and how few self mitigations the class had. (it had one less self mitigation tools than other tanks)
cover still being dead since the mit was removed from it is still a weird choice.
i've done DSR on PLD pre rework and the class was a literal nightmare to prog though with, so perhaps that defs changed my perspective on how i didn't really care about the rework overall despite playing PLD since late Stormblood.