Job design mindset need to change

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shougun

Imo, one in-between option is to add finisher moves that can't be buffed unless otherwise stated. Although when I was suggesting support job / skills in the past I suggested associating it to a max / casting player. For example Enfire enhances the next 5 weapon skills for 100 potency, or curse which increases enemy damage by 10% up to 1000 potency, or haste increases skill speed and spell speed by 100% up 800 TIME calculated potency and while Astrologian casts spells they add another 200 potency to the haste (time calculated means how much potency was gained by acceleration, because an 800 potency black mage spell is always 800 potency you didn't gain 800).

---

This currently exist in PvP,

As from my understanding you ask to define a best case scenario and worst case scenario for X skill/spell.

If that the case I agree, this exactly what will make skill sceling higher 1000 hours of playtime will have a value

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ovIm

I'm not against bursts either, truly. Bursts are good. I'm merely saying that currently, there is a very big emphasis on the bursts that does influence job design, and vice versa.

---

It is pretty much the only determining factor in a world where all the damage modifiers are concentrated into a single time window and every fight in the last 3 years has been designed around it.


Burst and sustain damage used to have their own benefits and downsides.

It used to be the case that burst jobs did well on shorter fights or fights with more frequent transitions where nobody could attack the boss.
But put them in a long fight with high uptime and the sustain jobs would, albeit slowly, overtake them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mallleable

And that's the crux of it, burst damage in games is really good at reducing HP bars to 0 -- like really really good at that. And that's why game designers gate burst damage behind things like low fire rates, limited ammo capacity, skill shots, charge up meters, cast times, cooldowns, etc. XIV isn't special in this regard. To me, the toothpaste is kind of out of the tube on this one.

---

It isn't any better or worse, it would depend on the fight.
The 2-min homogenization of raid buffs however completely skewed that impression to one side.

It made it so burst jobs played directly into them by blowing 90% of their damage into the 30+% damage modifier windows.
While sustain dps jobs on the other hand, who previously could take advantage of the lower but more frequent damage buffs over the entire course of the fight, were left eating dirt.

There are five people on the FFXIV job design team. The lead has been present since at least ARR (possibly 1.x, although I'm not sure if there's a romanization issue in the credits), and there was one new designer added for each expansion from Stormblood onwards. What do you think the odds of the 'job design mindset' changing are when you have a small, relatively fixed group of job designers under the same leadership across multiple expansions? What do you think the odds are that they don't play favorites, have lots of fresh ideas, and are receptive to player feedback?

The chances are about as high as mine are for winning a single item from M2S (I had to buy helmet, gloves and all but one glaze with books).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BabyYoda

So you think people who are saying that jobs are homonigized are overreacting?

---

To an extent, yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BabyYoda

but if that is true why Yoshi P raise the point that jobs require an identity agreeing on what people are asking same as this post?
Maybe Yoshi P is seeing things that you didn't.

---

Is job identity and homogenisation the same thing? If I were to guess, they are different concepts, however, they do overlap. You could in theory give jobs an 'identity', but have them still be homogenised.

But then the question that needs to be asked is, what do you mean by identity? If it is just that they play differently, then jobs already do. To me, that statement Yoshi made was more using a word the community is using to show their displeasure with jobs. 7.0 is the encounter reworks and 8.0 is the job reworks, or 'job idfentity'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BabyYoda

What about tanks kit? how much are they homonigized? DRK and WAR? how they are different in gameplay perspective? if there is a difference how much? 10%? 90%? how much % is not homonigized?

What about healers homonigization? is that a thing?

---

When we talk about defensive kits and by extension healing kits, we also have to talk about encounter design as well. Going with the philosophy that every tank combination and at minimum 1 'pure' and 1 'shield' healer, you now need to design an encounter, including damage profiles that still allow the kits of the jobs to be effective. To give a basic example, if I have 2 tanks, one their defensive is on a 1 minute cooldown, and the other their defensive is on a 2 minute cooldown, you cannot make a boss that tank busters you every minute, otherwise you necessarily prevent that second tank from clearing. By this, tanks need to have similar defensive kits. Now, except Rampart, all defensives are different. Damnation is different to Shadowed Vigil (Regen over Excog). TBN has different considerations to Bloodwhetting, Dark Mind and Thrill of Battle, different. Each pair has the same purpose, but different effects. I would say this is a necessary evil.

As for rotation wise, WAR has 2 combos, DRK only has 1, they have different methods of keeping their damage buff up, Inner Release and Delirium have different considerations before use, DRK has to manage MP during burst whereas WAR has nothing.

For healers, I'm not a healer main and it is by far my weakest role to play. However, they have the same considerations that tanks do. They need a minimal kit in order to heal. This doesn't necessarily mean they have to be the same and they are more free to mess around with healing patterns as they are less rigid in what they have to do. As I have stated, tying healing kits and DPS kits together to make the job feel more tied together, rather than being separate sides, reducing the range of some actions, like Sacred Soil and Kerachole, so that their individual ranges and where they originate from actually matter (imagine a mechanic where you have to spread, a Sage can use Kerachole, the party can spread and still have the effect, whilst SCH cannot do the same with Sacred Soil, as you would be outside of its range). I'm sure there are healers with their own idea who would be far better suited to talk about this though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BabyYoda

so how you think Yoshi P and his team can make them unique?

---

I don't know, that's why I asked the question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BabyYoda

While I agree 2MIN meta is worst idea when it comes to job design but your suggestion will kill an entire job identity,
so you are asking clearly to kill buff jobs like DNC and BRD, which has already a playerbase that they enjoys this type of gameplay.
This is already bad and not only that you are missing a core concept in any MMORPG which is support class, and removing this kit will make these jobs have less identity.

---

I said you can have raid buffs, as long as you can keep them up permanently. Bard can have a permanent damage buff for the whole raid, Dancer can keep it on the one person (there might be issues where you could theoretically swap the dance partner between DPS as they burst. Might be too much which would mean it is a choose at the start and you cannot change it mid combat), and MCH can debuff the boss so the party can do more damage. This might cause groups to take a BRD and MCH as the raid buff and debuff would stack, but just throwing ideas out here.

So no, I don't think it would kill an entire job identity. If you want to be someone who buffs jobs, you play a job that buffs the raid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aravell

Hi, I'm the one that made the comparison between MNK and NIN, except you're misrepresenting my entire argument as "MNK and NIN are the exact same", what did you say about broad strokes again?

Anyway, my actual argument is that the damage profile is the same. Both jobs have a 60s and 120s which they dump all their resources into and they both have a 90s to juggle. DT only made them even more similar by making them both have build/drain gauges instead of MNK being timer management. This leads to both jobs feeling very similar to play, and the gameplay feel is what I consider to be homogenised.

---

You quite literally proved my point. You focused on the 60 seconds and 120 second buffs/debuffs and simplified the burst, all whilst ignoring everything else, including the differences in filler and how the rotation operates, how you approach the burst windows and how you actually perform the burst windows. As for the 90 second action, Ninja can take Phantom Kamaitachi into the next burst window whereas Monk cannot bring Wind's Reply into the next burst window. Then you have the actual actions themselves. 30 seconds to use 5 GCDs, which still allows you to disengage, reengage and still ge the full benefit from it as opposed to Monk where, if they disengage, they lose potential from it.

I think I stated this is the last topic, but I will state it again. Your issue is not that they jobs are/play the same. Your issue is that they all have the same framework. Having the same framework does not mean the jobs are the same, but it does limit the creative space they can use. Your issue is the 2 minute meta and that all jobs are focused around that and not the jobs themselves.

I do agree with your general point. I don't have an issue with the 2 Min Meta, because it allows them to design exciting fights. What I want is for the filler inbetween that to feel different from job to job. Look at DNC with its feathers, or how MCH executes it hypercharge vs DRG. I want to see more distinction on that end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mallleable

So, do you think the entire caster, both DPS, and healer gameplay style is not interesting, and has no value, do you-? Would you say Black Mage is not interesting, and has no value?

---

Yes, absolutely. I don't find damage-based gameplay in FFXIV to be interesting, in the slightest. Either an encounter has no DPS check(s) worth an iota, in which case, the only person cares how well you can deal damage is you yourself. Or else, there's a hard-enrage DPS check, in which case, because the encounter design is inevitably on a tight-and-fixed script, either you cosplay at being a robot who can do the optimal sequence of actions, or else you're just a hindrance to the party.