Inevitable Job Simplifications?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

Yeah, I don't think you can accuse me of "gloss over what want to read and discard the rest" when you have exactly 4 words (with a "the" in the middle) in 24 pages of posts that you think I "discarded", which were in the middle of you saying it was bad and you saying again it was bad.

---

You like to be so pedantic about words and meaning and now is discarding it as if I said nothing. It's there, I said it, I didn't say just bad things about this new SMN like you claimed it. Deal with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dahlinea

The job is braindead and need more flexibility and things to actually decide during fights, not that fake decision making legos. The execution is terrible but has the tools to be good if changes to the rotation are made and the visual are cool.

---

I realize that everyone mostly wants to fight about semantics surrounding whether or not this was said and/or when that may have happened and like... okay, sure, that's fine I suppose, but the real issue is that this quote is entirely correct.
SMN is utterly braindead, and while jokes can be made about how interesting it was in past iterations there's no way to say it got more interesting in it's current form. RDM on introduction was also violently simple, as is (and has remained) DNC. This trend of introducing new jobs and/or reworking old jobs (deleting them and giving another job their name and soul crystal, in SMN's case) into mindless nonsense is really troubling for DRG and AST mains right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dspguy

Good points. Simply put, we are pigeon-holed into 3 roles and SE has backed themselves into a corner. This is why we wind up seeing limited jobs like BLU. That's how they can allow these jobs to exist, but not allowing them to do any current content.

Warden was an example of what LOTRO would consider a fairly complicated job. I'd love to see something similar in FFXIV, but it would have to set into one of the three roles and would probably lose all its flavor.

---

Agreed. BLU is able to do so much because it breaks with the otherwise rigid system FFXIV uses. But because it does so, it isn't allowed to compete in current content because...I guess people clearing content is bad or something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by moroarda

This trend of ... reworking old jobs (deleting them and giving another job their name and soul crystal, in SMN's case) ... is really troubling.

---

I disagree with your post on the whole, but specifically the words above, I agree with.

I feel like at this point they should be adding these as new Jobs, not reworking/replacing existing Jobs. If a Job sucks, then let it continue to suck. If the Devs thought Old SMN was in a corner, they could just give them a new animation for Miasma and Egi Assault and then call it a day. Make no additional changes to the rotation in future expansions, just an occasional graphic upgrade to a spell. Then people can't complain the Job was changed, and if it sucks...well, then it just sucks and they want it to suck, so...let it suck. They can't complain it's not being changed, since they are on the record not wanting it reworked. They can't complain the Devs are just being lazy or vindictive since we know they would complain if the Devs seriously looked at and changed the Job. So the Job could exist as a more or less time capsule with some pretty window dressing. And that would be fine. The people that would love it would continue to love it. After all, if people loved ShB SMN, they can't well complain that it isn't changed since they already LOVE IT as it was.

I think if people want some Jobs to be terrible and unfun to play, because they somehow find that fun, that's fine, and they should absolutely be allowed to keep that. I don't think they should force it on everyone else/change other Jobs to be like that, but it's fine if some Jobs are like BLM and suck. Some few people will find them fun, everyone else will avoid them like the plague, and everyone can be vaguely happy together.

I honestly have no idea why this isn't allowed - or is allowed for BLM and nothing else.

New SMN is way better than Old SMN. It could have just been a new Job. It's not like FF lore doesn't have more than one name for the Summoner archetype. Evoker or Caller (probably Evoker) would have worked fine. Have it share the Class Arcanist and be done with it. Would some people complain about that being weird? Sure. But who cares?

As for these, they're not arguing the points and are just rampant ad hominem attempts to avoid the actual discussion going on. As such, I won't be giving them anything other than a HB text so they will stop distracting and attempting to derail the thread. If those of you quoted wish to continue derailing the thread, that's on you. If those of you who are liking their posts which have no substance, no point to the discussion, and are just derailing attempts want to continue liking their posts because they're somehow your paragons...you have questionable taste, but that's on you, too. I won't continue giving it any kind of top billing, and may honestly just ignore them as what they are - harassment and derailing attempts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tearagion

...

---

I see your posts.
I read your posts.
I reply to your posts - often point by point, often quoting your own words.

Saying people are bad at reading comprehension doesn't work well when they're using your own statements.

As for what is good faith - good faith means a person is making an honest attempt. (That means the "or no" doesn't count, even if that is what's happening). If I seem to be misunderstanding what you're saying, it might be worth you asking questions to see why I'm not understanding something, or restating it. I would like to know, as you asked me the question, what have I misrepresented of your position? What have I misunderstood of it?

As for mine, you've consistently ignored my posts (as you admit) and even flaunted that you were doing so. But you've also misrepresented them as favoring "braindead" (when I've clearly said I don't see SMN as "braindead"), and you seem to misunderstand when I talk about things being fun or not or discussing specific terms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dahlinea

You like to be so pedantic about words and meaning and now is discarding it as if I said nothing. It's there, I said it, I didn't say just bad things about this new SMN like you claimed it. Deal with it.

---

Stop.
With.
The.
Attempted.
Gotcha.
Ad.
Hominem.
Fallacy.

As I noted, you're being antagonistic, and if you weren't aware, ad hominem (what you're doing right now - attacking/addressing me directly, not my argument) is a logical fallacy. "attack on the person" or "addressing the person" rather than their argument. It's an attempt to sidestep arguments that are difficult to overcome.

If I was going to be PEDANTIC, I'd note I said:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

What did I say in that quote that is wrong?

...

You've resisted saying good things about it? Also true.

---

...and point out that you saying, in only one post in the entire thread, while also saying "but it still sucks" that the graphics were pretty could be considered "resisting" saying good things about it and only doing so grudgingly. So if I was going to be pedantic, I'd point out my statement was still true.

Also, it's not "discarding it as if (you) said nothing". It's pointing out you've said exactly ONE good thing, couched in a compound statement of negativity, and that I did not "gloss over" or "discard" it, I didn't consider it you being positive when you were couching it in "and it still sucks".

You said one thing that MAY not have been bad, and seemed to do so grudgingly.

And now you're engaging in rampant ad hominem because you don't want to actually deal with arguments which you can't overcome, so you'd rather attack the person saying them.

Meanwhile, do you know what you've done?

You that aren't reading all my posts if you say that. I already said that, but clearly you just gloss over what want to read and discard the rest.

...because I said this in my prior post, and you clearly just glossed over it and discarded the rest.

Deal with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

Whinning

---

What? You said I didn't admit anything good about new SMN and I showed I did. You were expecting a parade with throwing flowers and shouting praises about it? lol

And you do gloss over people posts indeed. I noted that when for some stupid reason you started spouting things along the lines "New SMN is not braindead, the problem is that was removed from the old SMN and people are mad" and started believing in this crap, when people been saying that the rework is braindead and need more complexity, which is true. From this point on all I saw on you was someone with a mentality of "they want complexity on my braindead job and I need to defend it!". Coming with talks about "I hope they release Green Mage with old SMN rotation" to support that stupid belief of yours and ignoring the fact people are complaining about new SMN for it actually being a no effort job that needs help because obviously you don't want to lose the job that don't require player skill to perform good. I even said in that post I talked about something good on new SMN aesthetics that "no Colourful Mage the devs introduce will stop people that play SMN to complain about its no effort state" signalling that it doesn't matter that the old job was removed as long as they fix the braindead state of the current one. But did you get it? Of course not! You then insisted on using old SMN, the job you "liked" (clearly a blatant lie), as being something disjointed, a mix of various systems, having a braindead baseline and other things trying to stablish a supposed point that "proves" that the new SMN is better than the old one. When what were people were pointing is that SMN is braindead and need more to go on and feel like a job that actually provides something to work with and don't simply handhold the player through the entire rotation.
That's why you gloss over people's posts, especially the ones that criticize the new SMN for its braindead state and only grab the parts that feed on your "objective arguments" about how new SMN is good as it is, which clearly is not good, and at the same time try to use old SMN, "the job you liked", as example of how it is bad in comparison. Finally, that's also why I stopped taking you seriously from page 20 onwards and just had some fun from there. Btw I can't attack you, it's against the forum rules you dummy! :D

So yeah, I said something good about new SMN. You're the one just being picky! ;P

My fears with the current trend of job simplification is on AST, tbh.
I have a fear they might make all cards apply party buffs with reduced effects and increased CD, which at the same time draw a Lord or Lady, and remove the seals making Astrodyne something standalone or just outright remove it with a lot of other buttons...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

I would like to know, as you asked me the question, what have I misrepresented of your position? What have I misunderstood of it?

---

I don't know why I bother when you don't but here you go:

"Also, you keep doing the stupid thing. It's not a failure as the kit works fine and the Job is the most popular with players of all the Casters. The word you're looking for there is success. It's okay to say "I don't like something". That's fine. you can say that."
- I clearly imply it's a "success" if your only metric is accessibility, and that popularity is too nebulous a metric for us non-SE employees to accurately comment on. Too bad one of their stated goals was addressing the "system bloat" and starting from fresh, uh oh the old systems are still there, they're just sanded down to absolute simplicity!

"What I'm annoyed with is you lying."
- I'm not lying lol.

I clearly define what I mean by "disjointed", and you just...ignore it? Instead you supplant it with your own interpretation that it is presumably "easy to play"? Or perhaps "has a nice flow" (disagree)? Entirely irrelevant when I've defined my interpretation and you instead vaguely gesticulate at a different one and don't engage with mine at all.

If your idea of engaging with my definition is:
"New SMN - Demis feed into Primals, Primals feed into their sub-phase, Ruin 4 exists as a movement tool during two of the phases if needed, and that's the Job. The only thing "off to the side" (another way of saying "disjointed") is Energy Drain, Energy Siphon (though those prep Ruin 4, so they have a reason to exist, they just make less thematic sense), and Fester. Painflare, technically coming from Bahamut, thematically makes sense for SMN to have. The only part of the kit that doesn't thematically make sense is the Aetherflow part, but it IS connected to the Job as a whole as driving its burst as weaves between Bahamut GCDs."
Cool, oldSMN had all that absolute barebones shit as well, and then it also had defined synergies between systems with numbers and restrictive elements. So it's more cohesive, and less disjointed.

"Old SMN was very much more disjointed, if we're using the definition of "not connected, coherent, or continuous"."
- I clearly stated how the disparate systems were more connected and coherent (I even included the definition of 'coherent' I intended incase the context was too hard to read), oops guess that doesn't count and the fact that newSMN is all instant casts that you slam out with 2 buttons is way more uhhh "continuous" I guess (disagree)?

"(Note: Not having DoTs to interact with isn't part of a definition of connected or coherent.)"
- Says you? Even when they're a clearly demonstrated mechanical connection between two different job mechanics?

And that's just a couple posts back. I don't really have the free time to go further.

I get what you're trying to do, you're trying to exhaust under the false pretense of "good faith discussion" where you're just intentionally obtuse, or skirting the actual argument. Timeless-classic online argumentative strategy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

...you seem to misunderstand when I talk about things being fun or not or discussing specific terms.

---

where

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dahlinea

accuses someone of glossing over other people's posts while summarizing that person's post as "Whinning" and glossing over the post...

---

Come now, don't be upset you were called out for ad hominems and an attempt to derail the thread by attacking the person rather than their arguments. :) Just...don't do it going forward. Simple solution. Or do it again to the same result, it matters not. ANYway...moving on to the actual topic (sorta)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dahlinea

...the rest of the post, the part not in HB...

---

I kind of agree with AST. But I've honestly never liked AST, so I don't know what people that DO like AST would want the changes to be in the first place (other than I suspect everyone would like Nocturnal back, even some of the other Healer mains).

I saw a suggestion in the Healer forum to make two branches of Cards, with one being the damage buff (because Balance >>>>> all), and the other be the situational buffs (Bole, Ewer type stuff), this way, the two wouldn't be stepping on each other's toes in competition. I could see that being a possible solution. The problem with Bole and Ewer is that they probably weren't up when you needed them (e.g. Bole before a tankbuster), but you didn't want to hold onto them since that meant sacrificing a potential Balance. The combination of "competing with DPS boost instead" and "RNG means it's not likely to be there when you need it" made it not work well. Imagine, for example, if WHM had a single "Curin" spell. But it randomly would pick between Cure 1, Cure 2, or Cure 3 if you cast it. Or if BLM had a "Firin" spell which would randomly pick between Fire 1, Fire 2, Fire 3, and Fire 4 (and maybe Flare) if you cast it. That level of RNG isn't useful.

AST had that problem with Bole being a card that COULD be useful, but you had no control of it it was up when you needed it or not. So the suggested split (I think that person proposed the Minor Arcana be those buff type cards) with some Redraw RNG security might help. But honestly...it might also be hard to pull off. But the point is that buffs which are unreliable make poor mechanics unless they're more or less equal OR so broad in effect they are still worth having in almost any situation. Which also tends to mean "more boring".

And AST's biggest problem is the having to hot swap targeting during the buff/burst windows...making Cards AOE could solve that, but would cause other issues - for example, what's the point in having charges to Draw/Play if you can only use one at a time and it buffs the whole party (they probably wouldn't stack)? And if they're as bland as "AOE Balance" (which is what PvP Balance is anyway), they'd feel - somehow - even less interesting than now. At least now you can play the pseudo game of "Do I give this card to the Melee...or to the Melee but it's not quite as good?"

Yeah, honestly, I have no idea what they're going to do with AST. They may not even know, which might be why they pushed it. Even if they tried to make a SMN-like redesign, I'm not even sure what THAT would look like. Hard to say...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tearagion

...

---

I don't know why I bother when you don't but here you go:

Disjointed is a semantics argument at this point. If we're fighting over definitions, it's irrelevant as a metric, since for a metric to work, it must be something people can agree on. Your definition isn't inherently more powerful than anyone else's, though we're honestly using a similar definition, just differently worded, so that's not even the issue. I actually WAS using your definition. I'll even say how in just a sec.

"I clearly imply it's a "success" if your only metric is accessibility," - That's silly, there are several metrics by which it is a success. Thematically, it fits the class fantasy of a summoner of powerful minions to fight on the caster's behalf. In terms of rotational smoothness of flow, it has that going for it, too. By this I mean no weird "drop 2 Attonements per minute" or "use an Ether to get an additional Flare in", or the like. The rotation is a closed loop that doesn't have hanging threads and if you do it correctly, the total flow is Demi, 3x Primals, a Ruin 4 somewhere in there, and (depending on ping and spell speed) a Ruin 3. The rotation closes its loop and smoothly moves from each subphase to the next without any clunky mechanics or counter-intuitive "record skips" in the rotation. In terms of utility, it has that going for it between its party buff and combat raise. In terms of damage, it's well balanced in the sense it doesn't do so much to be an auto-lock for parties, but not so little that it's actively avoided.

There are additional ways it could be considered arguably a success, such as removing bloat from the Job (it succeeded in THAT, I think we can all agree - some might argue it went too far, but it definitely hit that checkbox), simplifying the Job, removing clunk from the Job (by essentially...removing the Job outright...), and so on. But we can ignore these and still note the successes above.

This does not make it perfect, and it does not mean one cannot dislike it as a whole or dislike components of it, but there are many ways that it can be seen as a success, even if we set aside accessibility as a measure of success (I would disagree it should be set aside and NOT counted as a mark of a successful Job; RDM has long been praised for its intuitive nature) and ignore that all the metrics we have suggest it is quite popular, and likely more played than Old SMN was.

As for the "system bloat", that's kind of a nebulous term we'd have to hammer down to before we could discuss it, but it's definitely far less bloated than Old SMN, it doesn't have DoTs (which are...somehow?...a drain on server side computational resources), nor is the AI doing weird things like Bahamut prioritizing movement over attacking or the AI having to run targeting routines for the Egis. Again, not saying this is a good thing or a bad thing, but it was a success by the metric of reducing system bloat as well.

"I clearly ..." - This is what I mean about lying. (a) "easy to play" isn't the definition I used. Nor is "has a nice flow". I WAS using your definition. I disagreed with you on the application and, perhaps?, the subdefinitions. For example, Old SMN's mechanics were all over the place. They weren't "coherent" (part of your definition). Many were infrequently used or stutter-stepped. They weren't "continuous" (part of your definition). And many were unrelated or only tangentially related. They weren't "connected" (part of your definition). Or rather, a lot of parts of it were not, and just kind of did their own thing. At best, Old SMN only half-way met one of your three criteria. That is: (b) I probably didn't word it as direct/simply enough to make it clear, but I was using the same definition you presented. I didn't ignore it while substituting it with another. (Though it wouldn't have been a crime to have done so, as this is a discussion, I didn't even do that!)

I said that we can ALSO consider thematic continuity, of which New SMN has more and Old SMN had less. But you seem to want to just discard any argument that doesn't agree with yours and are willing to entertain such considerations or definitions. You and I may disagree on what we consider coherent, continuous, or connected, but I didn't ignore them. I was using those same metrics in my evaluation!

(c) I was not "vaguely gesticulate at a different one and don't engage with mine at all". God DAUM if you can't see how wording it like that makes you insufferable you need new glasses! I was using your own definition with my interpretation of your terms. You know, what people do in a debate or discussion when they have a disagreement on how to apply or view something?

And this is just Grade A disgusting: "I get what you're trying to do, you're trying to exhaust under the false pretense of "good faith discussion" where you're just intentionally obtuse, or skirting the actual argument. Timeless-classic online argumentative strategy."

STOP.
LYING.

I was honestly content with just hitting post as I read through and typed this up until I got to that disgusting display.

UNLIKE you, I'm just interested in exchanging points of view with people and presenting my case while offering rebuttals to what I see as incorrect or hyperbolic. The one with the false pretense here, trying to be obtuse and avoid the argument while exhausting their opponent...is you.

I'm not the one that started engaging in personal attacks to distract from the topic. I'm the one who refrained from doing so. You started well before this, as I pointed out, with your "taking the piss" comment pages and pages ago, before I said anything at all that could be interpreted even loosely as an attack on you. A post you still haven't admitted to nor apologized for, even when presented with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

Disjointed is a semantics argument at this point. If we're fighting over definitions, it's irrelevant as a metric, since for a metric to work, it must be something people can agree on.

---

I said exactly what I mean so no it's not "semantics" the semantics are already crystallized in my argument. You could choose to argue about semantics anyway, sure, but at that point you're either just sidestepping the actual argument in favor of something you can address ineffectually, or reframing the argument entirely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

Thematically, it fits the class fantasy of a summoner of powerful minions to fight on the caster's behalf...

---

Thematic success can be debated. Ultimately SMN does the same thing thematically as before: summon simulacrum of 5 different primals, 2 of them more powerful Demi-summons. It even summons the same Egis as before for 59-44 of its 90 levels. I don't consider importing boss models from ARR trials particularly strong theming when it's backed by such vapid gameplay (that is to say: they cast one skill and then leave with no gameplay presence at all. They feel like spells not summons. You even use the words "Fight on the caster's behalf" for what? 1 GCD?) People in FFXIV seem to get wrapped up in a definition of theme that only includes visuals. If I entertain that mentality then I suppose if their goal was to make something that looked like a Rydia-esque "classic ff summoner" imported into FFXIV then sure they succeeded. I don't know what you mean by "thematic continuity" or how it's significantly improved over oldSMN.

I don't feel like entertaining the rotation as a point of success in any capacity. Balance is a separate concern from design, and oldSMN was pretty balanced when it was deleted anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

As for the "system bloat", that's kind of a nebulous term we'd have to hammer down to before we could discuss it

---

Seems simple to me "system" as in individual gameplay systems within a job (Aetherflow, Demis, etc.) and "bloat" as in "excess of". Replacing DoTs with Gems is the same number of systems, so system bloat remains consistent. Bloat within the systems could be articulated as having been pruned, but it came at the expense of gameplay so I would consider it non-productive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

accessibility as a measure of success...ignore that all the metrics we have suggest it is quite popular, and likely more played than Old SMN was.

---

Addressed previously. Popularity is a shit metric even if we did have access to accurate numbers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

"easy to play" isn't the definition I used. Nor is "has a nice flow".

---

You didn't use any definition, so I attempt to interpret based on your statements. In fact you seem to strengthen that interpretation in the second paragraph where you prioritize not needing to make any meaningful rotational decisions, that the rotation should simply happen without disruption. You've not been shy about enjoying the easier rotation. You even say it succeeded in creating a "smoothness of flow", so I don't know what your problem is here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

I WAS using your definition....I was using your own definition

---

Where did I say you weren't using the definition I quoted? Perhaps using "defined" here to articulate that I explained my position was confusing.

Aside, I think your interpretation is simplistic and subjective, whereas I point to mechanical elements of oldSMN that are quite clearly more interconnected than newSMN. Your idea of connected and coherent was Demis give you Gems, and that Gems give you Gemshine/Astral Flow. I don't consider these great examples of interconnected systems because they're 1-way and inconsequential. What are you going to do, not hit the better (situationally and potency) of two damage GCDs available at the time? How does it REALLY impact the rotation and the decisions a player makes beyond just being a gate to keep you on the rotation the devs intend? It doesn't. (Astral Flow is ultimately a pretty badly realized mechanic. I've posted before about my fondness for this particular ability in a vacuum because it's cool that you can technically bank them, except the rotation and implementation prohibits you from banking them so it ends up being random bullshit you just press when it lights up.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

For example, Old SMN's mechanics were all over the place. They weren't "coherent" (part of your definition).

---

I said exactly the definition of coherent I intended to avoid confusion, and have previously stated how oldSMN qualified. This is just misinterpreting or misrepresenting again lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

Many were infrequently used or stutter-stepped. They weren't "continuous" (part of your definition).

---

They were continuous in the sense that the individual systems fed into each other, not that they happened without pause or disruption, or whatever you mean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

They weren't "connected" (part of your definition).

---

Yes they were, I feel as though I've gone over why pretty thoroughly at this point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

UNLIKE you, I'm just interested in exchanging points of view with people and presenting my case while offering rebuttals to what I see as incorrect or hyperbolic.

---

You don't seem interested in other people's views at all, unless they're non-critical of newSMN.


2x dodging direct question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

Ignoring reality ;D

---

Nah bro, I'm fine... you're the one angry about people rightfully complaining about the sorry state of new SMN and uses "arguments" here and there about things not even pertaining to the matter at hand to try to "prove" that new SMN is good.
You can keep believing new SMN is fine, but at the end of the day a lot of people knows that it's lacking and need changes to be able to feel like a true job. Right now it's just an unbalanced joke that do way too much damage for what it requires from its players to perform and should rightfully be at bottom of the DPS scale in this state.
But we can keep going on with this pointless arguments of yours all you want. I know how people like you go on about them, we'll just run in circles forever. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

I kind of agree with AST. But I've honestly never liked AST, so I don't know what people that DO like AST would want the changes to be in the first place (other than I suspect everyone would like Nocturnal back, even some of the other Healer mains).

---

They'll never return Noct Sect back the way it was (at least not in next expansion) now that they added a new shield Healer unless they repurpose it to something completely different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

for example, what's the point in having charges to Draw/Play if you can only use one at a time and it buffs the whole party (they probably wouldn't stack)?

---

That's what I was saying. If they decide to go this way (I hope not) they will need to start removing things here and there because of the card system simplification.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

Even if they tried to make a SMN-like redesign, I'm not even sure what THAT would look like. Hard to say...

---

Hopefully not. I expect the devs have learned their lesson and never do something like what they did to SMN to any job ever again. No jobs deserve to be become like that.

The concern of the current summoner is that the gameplay is much too slow and rigid, the filler phases are filled with dead time because of the very unpleasant long gcd having 2.5 gcd when summoning Garuda, Titan,Ifrit seems exaggerated and it only amplifies the feeling of slowness,
they should reduce summon gcd to 1.5s and damage should be instant.

regarding the etherflow system, they should remove it and recreate a new ressource system generate by the carbuncle and somes news gcd-ogcds spells, removed fester and give II stack to painflare with 30s cooldown per stack
because the carbuncle he's just a very useless mascot.

For the use of Demi-phoenix and Demi-bahamut they should be inspired by what they did for pvp, personally I think it's a great idea, because the phoenix is ​​only a bahamut reskin without flavor,
they said they wanted to remove summoner ressurection for 7.0 and that's absolutely not a good idea, i think they should allow players to have 1 stacks of instant ressurection when using phoenix replacing the spell of physick which is actually ultra useless.


Regarding ifrit I think they should drastically increase his firepower, because he is supposed to be the strongest of the 3, but it turns out that is not the case on the potency/second, hopefully they will also allow the ranged melee combo to be used as in pvp because a mandatory gapcloser seems totally clunky and inappropriate to the summoner a mandatory gapcloser does not add difficulty but constraints whereas a gapcloser is supposed to be a choice and not an obligation, so if they add some difficulty it should be implemented differently.

I know it's completely personal expectations, but I hope that for 7.0 they will complete the kit by removing the negative points of the current kit as much as possible and adding spells, even if they tend to do nothing after doing a rework.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by remiff

The concern of the current summoner is that the gameplay is much too slow and rigid,

---

I think this really depends on the player. Old PLD was slow and rigid, and people liked it. BLM is slow and fairly rigid, and it also has dedicated fans. The filler phase of New SMN is basically a single Ruin 3 cast once per minute (the Primals are not "filler" phase using most traditional definitions).

I do agree they should remove the Aetherflow system. It's vestigial and just around likely because they felt they needed SOMETHING there and decided to recycle the names and abilities instead of not doing so, but if Ruin 4 was just a 60 sec CD GCD and Painflare a 30 sec 2 charge oGCD, the rotation would be unchanged and not have the weirdness of a system that is now completely dead to SMN anyway.

So I agree with you there for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tearagion

...

---

What I mean is, you're arguing over a definition. You're insisting your definition is the correct and only one. And even when someone else is using the terms your definition used, you insist they aren't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tearagion

If I entertain that mentality then I suppose if their goal was to make something that looked like a Rydia-esque "classic ff summoner" imported into FFXIV then sure they succeeded.

---

That's exactly what I mean, yes. The only thing that sucks is it doesn't get there until level 90, but the Primal summons themselves thematically feel like what Summoners are in most of the older Final Fantasy games, or FF3 through FF9 and including FFTactics, with the DWT/FBT being the newer incarnations of summoners like FF10, 12, and 13 where they are temporary companions that join you on the battlefield briefly before departing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tearagion

Popularity is a shit metric even if we did have access to accurate numbers.

---

I disagree. Suppose 90% of Healers right now were playing SMN and only 1% were playing WHM. That would be a pretty good indication players probably want more complexity in the Healer roles, and would indicate that SE should make more complex ones. If they did so, and those were the popular/most played ones, it would reinforce that position. While popularity doesn't necessarily mean the GOAT, it does mean "thing people like". And I'm generally a fan of giving people what they like within reason. Or, at the very least, not taking away what seems to be well liked. If the complex Jobs were the ones being most played, it would indicate the Devs should add more complex Jobs since that's what the people want.

I'm not saying people are always right about things like domestic and foreign policy, but people are generally good judges of what things they personally enjoy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tearagion

In fact you seem to strengthen that interpretation in the second paragraph where you prioritize not needing to make any meaningful rotational decisions, that the rotation should simply happen without disruption. You've not been shy about enjoying the easier rotation. You even say it succeeded in creating a "smoothness of flow", so I don't know what your problem is here.

---

I think you don't understand the point. SAM has a somewhat complex rotation, but it closes its loop. You have something that's basically 1-2-3-1-4-1-5-6 (however you want to arrange it), and then 7. You also will occasionally 1-2-7. But the rotation is more or less closed. SAM I don't play as much, so I'll use MNK, as I'm more familiar with it. MNK's rotation is 18 buttons long, but it moves between abilities and the loop closes at the end to get back to the beginning. 1-2-3-4-5-6-1-2-6-4-5-3-1-2-6-4-5-6-back to start. It's satisfying because it is a nicely closed loop that cycles. You don't end it with 4-5-clip to 1-2-3. You finish off the loop and then it begins again. It's smooth and requires thinking about what you're doing, but there's a correct way to do it, and that's it. It's not simple (in the sense of complex or braindead), yet it's smooth and deterministic.

I don't like rotations where you have to do stupid stuff like "You have a buff and can use Atonement 3 times, but every other time...yeah, you just use two of those". And MNK's, for all that it's static, has hiccups in it when you do use the Nadi finishers, but the core rotation is nice and and I like it. I prefer the "choice" being in things like when to use oGCDs or when to use movement tools that don't disrupt your rotation (things like Ruin 4), but I like rotations that are closed loops IF they're rotations.

RDM gets a pass since it doesn't have a set rotation, though it has "micro-rotations/phases" of shortcast-longcast sets. Of which there are a total of 6 and if you ever build a decision tree for using them, it's actually pretty crazy what your mind is doing on the fly when you play the Job, evaluating conditions (is White > Black, White < Black, White = Black), what procs are up (is Verfire ready = True, Verstone ready = true, Both = true - if so, which has the shorter duration remaining?), and other contingent variables (is Acceleration sitting at 2 charges or about to reach 2 charges? Is there a heavy movement phase coming up? How close are you to your melee combo-ready? Is the phase one which allows melee range engagement? Is the next burst window close enough you want to save pooled resources for it? Is Manification up or about to be up?). But since all of this is broken into "shortcast-longcast", it's a far less daunting task than if you sit down and try to think out and math out what is actually going on.

Anyway, point is: Rotation that smoothly interlocks at the end and start of the next loop is not simple or bad.

Hell, OLD SMN did this. The rotation was a perfect(ish) 2 min full cycle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tearagion

Where did I say you weren't using the definition I quoted? Perhaps using "defined" here to articulate that I explained my position was confusing.

---

"I clearly define what I mean by "disjointed", and you just...ignore it?" - If I'm ignoring it, I can't be using it, right? Can a person be using a thing while ignoring the thing? But I'm willing to let you off the hook on this one. But when you say I'm ignoring things, that kinda means I'm not using them, hence why I thought you said I wasn't.

In any case, the other stuff...we're going to disagree on, but I would say that "continuous" is not a word that fit Old SMN. Connected I'll give you in the sense that individual strands connected to others like a spider web. I don't feel it was as coherent as something like RDM where all the systems seem more or less connected, and Old SMN's were, as I said, tangentially connected or connected in individual elements to other individual elements. But sure, we can call that connected. Not "continuous", though. Old SMN, as I've said, was ALL OVER THE PLACE. It lacked coherence, which was one of the things people complained about even back then. "Why is Phoenix attached to FBT but DWT and Bahamut are separate things?" and so on are arguments of how Old SMN wasn't coherent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tearagion

You don't seem interested in other people's views at all, unless they're non-critical of newSMN.

---

Since we're otherwise having a decent conversation...I'm going to ignore this. Please stop doing it.[/hb]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dahlinea

...

---

New SMN is fine.

New SMN is not what you like, enjoy, or think is good for the game. Those are different arguments.

It is on the low end of DPSers. The only things lower than it are RDM (for reasons that make no sense and even I've said RDM shouldn't be doing less than SMN) and the three party buff Jobs, though I think MCH is also able to output numbers higher than SMN. BRD and DNC doing less makes sense given their party buffing and that DNC is well known for NOT being a difficult Job itself.

I'm going to ignore that last quip, because it's yet again you trying to derail the thread with personal attacks and I'm trying not to respond in kind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dahlinea

They'll never return Noct Sect back the way it was (at least not in next expansion) now that they added a new shield Healer unless they repurpose it to something completely different.

---

Misshapen Chair pointed out that this makes no sense. Suppose they ever DO add another Healer. Then what? Will there be 3 Pure 2 Barrier or 2 Pure 3 Barrier? Will they only add Healer Jobs in pairs from now on? Even if we assume the Pure/Barrier split survives where the Main Tank/Off Tank split did not (and it's dubious if it will), there's no real NEED for there to be exactly the same number of each. We have 5 Melee, 3 Ranged, and 3 Casters. Melee not having 3 or 6 (depending on if you math for 1 or 2 party slots) isn't throwing everything in the world off. There not being 6 Tanks and 6 Healers (2 party slots...!) isn't destroying things, either. So they very easily could have 2 Pure/3 Barrier (with AST being one of each) without an issue.

It would probably BE BETTER FOR HEALER BALANCE because right now, AST is a Pure + Barrier-lite Healer given it has a 60 sec party mitigation and a 2 min party AOE barrier while WHM has just a single 2 min party mitigation and no party barrier. AST as it is is already half-Nocturnal and so it's getting the benefits of being a Pure and a Barrier Healer at the same time, which is making it stomp all over WHM in the meta. WHM's saving grace is...it's just so damn easy to play by comparison that people bring it anyway since it's easier to get good performance out of. If WHM was as APM heavy crazy as AST is, AST would be wiping the floor with WHM (or people would be running SCH/SGE comps for everything), one of the two.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dahlinea

Hopefully not. I expect the devs have learned their lesson and never do something like what they did to SMN to any job ever again. No jobs deserve to be become like that.

---

Again - agree to disagree - there's nothing wrong with SMN.

But I do agree that no Job should be changed that way. I've already said extensively why and how I don't think Jobs should be completely changed out from under players. WHM going from SB to ShB to EW didn't change that much (contrary to some people's claims), so it's fine. SHM, on the other hand, had a completely massive change in both mechanics and complexity and gameplay. That isn't fine. The Job's mechanics and systems THEMSELVES are fine, but it should have just been made into a separate Job, like Evoker that unlocks from Arcanist at level 30 and call it a day from there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by moroarda

RDM on introduction was also violently simple, as is (and has remained) DNC.

---

I agree with the rest of your post, but that part is factually not true. DNC has gone through rather severe drops in complexity, which I evoked earlier (loss of AoE melee in the single target flourish, loss of proc overwriting with the need to safeguard against procs just before flourishes, and loss of standard step weight in priority), the two latter ones that I agree with the changes overall but they still lowered one of the only complexities the job had for itself. DNC is NOT the same as it used to be at all, even how deceptive its overall structure looks like.

RDM if anything has become simpler in mobility due to elongated melee phases with the new finishers, and the addition of reprise. RDM has always been violently simple only in accessibility, not in terms of skill ceiling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

If a Job sucks, then let it continue to suck. If the Devs thought Old SMN was in a corner, they could just give them a new animation for Miasma and Egi Assault and then call it a day. Make no additional changes to the rotation in future expansions, just an occasional graphic upgrade to a spell. Then people can't complain the Job was changed, and if it sucks...well, then it just sucks and they want it to suck, so...let it suck. They can't complain it's not being changed, since they are on the record not wanting it reworked. They can't complain the Devs are just being lazy or vindictive since we know they would complain if the Devs seriously looked at and changed the Job. So the Job could exist as a more or less time capsule with some pretty window dressing. And that would be fine. The people that would love it would continue to love it. After all, if people loved ShB SMN, they can't well complain that it isn't changed since they already LOVE IT as it was.

I think if people want some Jobs to be terrible and unfun to play, because they somehow find that fun, that's fine, and they should absolutely be allowed to keep that. I don't think they should force it on everyone else/change other Jobs to be like that, but it's fine if some Jobs are like BLM and suck. Some few people will find them fun, everyone else will avoid them like the plague, and everyone can be vaguely happy together.

---

I nominate this post for being a pristine, prime example of objectivity and non hyperbolic statements, from someone that went on multiple endless rants about that since the beginning. Bonus points for the absolute condescension and the utter hypocrisy.

Honestly, it's all well and good to lecture people on logical fallacies, but it sure would look better if the posts that went with it were also immaculate in that regard.


Edit: because why the hell not, I feel like you're on a rampage to make people lose neurons at this point.

Quote:

---

Stop.
With.
The.
Attempted.
Gotcha.
Ad.
Hominem.
Fallacy.

As I noted, you're being antagonistic, and if you weren't aware, ad hominem (what you're doing right now - attacking/addressing me directly, not my argument) is a logical fallacy. "attack on the person" or "addressing the person" rather than their argument. It's an attempt to sidestep arguments that are difficult to overcome.

---

This has nothing to with an ad-hominem or attack to your person or dodging your argument. You argued that the other party was never saying anything good about current SMN. They went back and dug an example where they actually did, debunking your argument by counter example. This is by all definitions, everything but an ad-hominem, this is literally a mathematical proof of invalidity of your statement (therefore, the content and the argument, and not the person).

If anything, you're the one guilty of a moving the goalposts fallacy here, trying to dodge the nullification of your previous argument, which has, in fact, been addressed, but you are ignoring it on purpose (like almost everything anyway). On top of it, you're definitely guilty of ad hominem to boot since you're the one dodging the rebuttal of your earlier statement by directly going for the form of the message of your opponent instead of actually addressing its contents.

Honestly, don't try playing games with logical fallacies. I don't think you're even as good as mastering them as you think you are, and you're probably not gonna win on that front, especially since every single one of your posts is littered with them (argumentum ad populum being your absolute winner).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

I think you don't understand the point. SAM has a somewhat complex rotation, but it closes its loop. You have something that's basically 1-2-3-1-4-1-5-6 (however you want to arrange it), and then 7. You also will occasionally 1-2-7. But the rotation is more or less closed. SAM I don't play as much, so I'll use MNK, as I'm more familiar with it. MNK's rotation is 18 buttons long, but it moves between abilities and the loop closes at the end to get back to the beginning. 1-2-3-4-5-6-1-2-6-4-5-3-1-2-6-4-5-6-back to start. It's satisfying because it is a nicely closed loop that cycles. You don't end it with 4-5-clip to 1-2-3. You finish off the loop and then it begins again. It's smooth and requires thinking about what you're doing, but there's a correct way to do it, and that's it. It's not simple (in the sense of complex or braindead), yet it's smooth and deterministic.

I don't like rotations where you have to do stupid stuff like "You have a buff and can use Atonement 3 times, but every other time...yeah, you just use two of those". And MNK's, for all that it's static, has hiccups in it when you do use the Nadi finishers, but the core rotation is nice and and I like it. I prefer the "choice" being in things like when to use oGCDs or when to use movement tools that don't disrupt your rotation (things like Ruin 4), but I like rotations that are closed loops IF they're rotations.

---

This hurts to read. Go look up a guide for MNK and SAM before posting such enormities. It doesn't do you any credit, for whatever is even left anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valence

This hurts to read. Go look up a guide for MNK and SAM before posting such enormities. It doesn't do you any credit, for whatever is even left anyway.

---

I pretty much stopped bothering once I read this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

Old PLD...lacked consistent self-sustain healing in its rotation

---

Holy Spirit/Circle has been providing sustain since expansion launch, and the Confiteor combo has been as well since 6.1, and in both old and new PLD were timed incredibly consistently at around the same points in each rotation respectively. That isn't even counting the regen from Holy Sheltron since we are strictly mentioning rotational sustain. The problem was not with the sustain, PLD fell behind defensively, which is what was remedied in the rework when they Brought bulwark back and made [Holy]Sheltron give a flat damage reduction instead of blocking.

There still is the issue of button bloat for Paladin though..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

New SMN is fine.

---

No. YOU think SMN is fine. Pretty much everyone knows it can't stay the way it is right now. I already said it before: because it just works doesn't mean the job is fine.
A quick inspection in SMN rotation and you can see that even being as simple as it is there are elements that works against each other there. For instance, your main abilities (the 3 summons) that you use between your bursts are locked behind the burst phases. In a scenario you want to hold your bursts for whatever reason you simply can't because otherwise you'll be left with only Ruin III, which is just a filler spell to wait for Bahamut/Phoenix come from CD if you're using the miminum amount of SS (that gerenally amounts to one cast only). This needs to be adressed because it not only works against the SMN rotation in a backwards way but also put severe restraints to your options in the job, being one of the main reasons the job is so braindead.
But I mean, believe what you want to believe. You like the job and will the defend no matter how bad it is anyways, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. We want current SMN to be better and engaging, not the old one back(since the job is already reworked anyways...), like you've been implying throughout the whole thread.

Also, just to address your "personal attack" claim. It's not personal attack, it's what I've gathered from you by reading all posts up until now.

Oh is this where they went after the healer section chewed him out? I thought I saw him in the tank section too, I guess his 'break from the forums' was just a break from the healer section. Shame he's still up to his old tricks (using logical fallacies, claiming others are, or claiming people are 'attacking him', and if all else fails, just saying 'clearly you didn't even read my post'), I guess a leopard really doesn't change its spots

I find it ironic that an advocate for the devs to 'not change anything' also doesn't engage with the parts of the game that actually makes you use every bit of a job's kit!

Go figure. Dude is not an elaborate troll, by the way.

Just wanna say I love your signature!

As someone who played SMN in ShB and EW.

( I was not in any way the best player )

I love and hate the new SMN.

The main thing I wanted in EW for SMN was a change to the Demis. Mainly I wanted DWT to augment our ruins like Firebird did to add bahamut aesthetic and for the demis to remain in place after being summoned (and have hard casts be our movement limiting factor). And Hey! we got that in EW! (( I would also have liked if we got the ability to choose what Demi we summon but hey, we got it in PVP so ill take it))

But... I liked the DOTs, I liked Bane and such. I like building up to the Demi Summons,
((And why did we lose firebird trance at 72? why??? now we just WOOHOO summon Phoenix, (I know the lore reason but I like FBT, felt like a nice buildup))

I don't hate new SMN, but I miss aspects of old.

And I liked the auto attacking pet. Had its uses!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

I think you don't understand the point. SAM has a somewhat complex rotation

---

I play Samurai 24/7... it's not Complex. We also received like 6+ Simplifications. Be it some were necessary QOL's due to fight designs like...

• Iaijutsu - Increased range
• Third Eye - Increased duration by 1 second
• Enpi - Cast no longer breaks Combo

Others really just make the Job easier and dumber...

• Tenka Goken - Changed from Cone to Circle
• Senei - Kenki cost cut in half less thinking
• Seigan - Third Eye no longer procs Seigan and Seigan removed

The biggest perpetrator for many Samurai players has been " Kaiten removal " bar none.

Some of the above mentioned changes were indeed QOL, but collectively made Samurai easier, hollower and dumber to play. Samurai does still have nuances, and requiring to know how to do more then face-rolling our braindead 2 minute loop is set at " Go play Ultimate ".

What you call Complex? is me performing it in P8S while watching Netflix, while type weaving in-game callouts... it's made literally Braindead. You have Samurai players turning off their Hud's and Hotbars to perform their rotations blindfolded just to make it exciting... that's actually depressing...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

asdf

---

I'm not saying my definition is the only one, just fully clarifying my position. Otherwise words like "coherent" can be interpreted differently.

Then their goal was to make a bad minion/summon class lol. From a gameplay perspective you don't really feel like you summon much: you have almost no control over the summons (you get 1 Enkindle a minute), and your summons don't have a great impact on your gameplay either (no, I don't consider changing your "Ruin II" button to a different colour is particularly impactful, and Astral Flow has problems imo).

Popularity doesn't necessarily mean "thing people like", there are so many more factors that influence popularity. Big one in FF is ease of use, and nothing is easier than SMN.

I guess I would contest with I like jobs that can float a resource to better deal with downtime or alignment, and that too closed a loop just gets really annoying in harder content (like a certain reworked job). Atonement wasn't an elegant example at all, but it's the one thing Bard's Songs do decently at the moment (even if it maxes out at 9s). I don't really remember why this was important if I'm being honest, I think you just wanted to make what yourself clearer?

It wasn't any more or less continuous from how I interpret than newSMN is; it went from Egi resource generation+Filler to DWT to Egi resource generation+Filler to FBT repeat. Just replace one filler with a flashier, but less consequential one. RDM is pretty coherent, but my assertion is that newSMN is less coherent than oldSMN. Old FBT and DWT being different wasn't "incoherent", it was inconsistent. This is why I specified what I meant by coherent. Even using the arguably more applicable definition of coherent, there's no significant rationale for the assertion that it was incoherent other than they should work the same...just because. It's not illogical for the two to work differently, and failing half of that definition it's inaccurate to not just reduce to inconsistent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zairava

Holy Spirit/Circle has been providing sustain since expansion launch, and the Confiteor combo has been as well since 6.1, and in both old and new PLD were timed incredibly consistently at around the same points in each rotation respectively. That isn't even counting the regen from Holy Sheltron since we are strictly mentioning rotational sustain. The problem was not with the sustain, PLD fell behind defensively, which is what was remedied in the rework when they Brought bulwark back and made [Holy]Sheltron give a flat damage reduction instead of blocking.

---

Let me clarify:

Old PLD's self-healing was crunched together in the form of 4x Holy Spirits under Requiescat once per Requiescat CD.

There was no consistent healing during the rest of your rotation; Royal, Goring, and Atonement combos didn't have healing components in them. Contrast WAR (Storm's Path), DRK (Souleater), and GNB (Brutal Shell). Old PLD would have to go through 7 three hit combos (Goring, Royal, Atonement, Goring, Royal, Atonement, Goring), dropping an Atonement somewhere in there, THEN use Requiescat before it got to its rotation self-sustain. And it was all in one big burst of 4x Holy Spirits at once.

You could, of course, break you rotation at any time to cast Clemency...but that was a DPS loss (especially when it actually BROKE your combos to do so), while the other three Tanks had their sustain baked into their core single target rotations.

That's what "consistent self-sustain" meant. As in "consistent across its rotation".

Monthly please don't rework DRG post.
I don't want to end up like that limited job that stole SMN's name.

Since you asked in another thread, I will say I agree. This is the one thing BLM has above any other class, allegedly because it's "the boss's favorite". But job gameplay being fun should be a standard feature of the game and not counted as job bonus, or more specifically as an incentive to play the class.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZiraZ

Monthly please don't rework DRG post.
I don't want to end up like that limited job that stole SMN's name.

---

You guys are getting a lobotomy and there's nothing you can do about it. Better jump ship to Reaper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iedarus

You guys are getting a lobotomy and there's nothing you can do about it. Better jump ship to Reaper.

---

Should link your Thread from the General discussion as well

Reaper came pre-lobotomised though, it doesn’t really come across as a sincere solution

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iedarus

You guys are getting a lobotomy and there's nothing you can do about it. Better jump ship to Reaper.

---

I rather jump off the game at that point
at that rate I would know that jobs are on a permanent decline and it's better to just give it up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZiraZ

I rather jump off the game at that point
at that rate I would know that jobs are on a permanent decline and it's better to just give it up.

---

pretty much, AST was so much fun when it came out ( yes they gave it buffs to healing and some cards)

but I loved it so much, been a decline since then, and WHM ( miss it's AoE aero ) just been a bit boring too, need more than to spam glare. I wish they added support magics to make it more Interesting like FFXI WHM but FFXI WHM keeps me busy, FFXIV WHM puts me to sleep

Shadowbringers was hell for me because they took away so many of my favourite job mechanics. I mained Bard and Dark Knight in Stormblood. I really like the idea of Bard casting and using MP, i will forever miss Foe Requiem because of that. Especially now that PvP has introduced Mobile Casting, it really should be a thing for at least one physical job and Bard works the best for it in my opinion (In moderation of course. i know a lot of people don't want to return to bow mage). As for Dark Knight... Where do i even begin? Alright i don't. Just know that i loved Stormblood Dark Knight for how cohesive everything was and how everything made sense and felt good to use. Now Dark Knight feels like a trash heap for discarded ideas.

Oh yes, and Summoner/Scholar too. Seriously, Rip DoT's and rip Shadow Flare, Aero 3, Dark Arts, Foe Requiem, etc.

The real problem with FF14s job design is that the player has absolutely ZERO agency as to how they play a job, my mind is blown at how so many players will argue against having choices for their job. This is not the hot sweaty try hard fest that WoW is, and the competitiveness just isn't anywhere near as high as a game like WoW, so cookie cutter is not so important. With that being said, why not add talents to slightly change up how some jobs can play and give players some choice so they are not restricted to one rotation for years on end. I honestly am miffed how people play this game for longer than a couple of weeks. I get there are things to do, but the combat gets stale fast to me, and different PvE encounters hardly changes the samey combat for years.

Just my two cents btw. If you love the game, continue loving it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kazamaiya

....

---

The thing that got me swearing DNC off for the entire SHB expansion was the result of what seemed like bard being stripped of its utilities and then those utilities being given to dancer; meanwhile it just seemed like SE was up in your face like "We took Bard's buffs and gave them to Dancer. Don't you want to play Dancer? Please play Dancer. Please."
Some simple action combos of "1, 2, 3" being jammed together like what you see in solo instances if you're playing as a different character I could see in the future as a way to reduce some bloat. However, I've seen some input on how lowering that skill ceiling and making everything more and more homogenized also incidentally makes encounters and gameplay alot more stringent with less room for error (i.e. the 2 minute burst meta).

Not only does it create less room for people to experiment and be flexible, but it also creates more stress and frustration if someone doesn't hit their timing perfectly. Boredom aside, a job so watered down with any lack of identity will also have more of the thought process of "this is so easy, how could you screw this up?"

And I've already beat the dead horse enough about my thoughts of lobotomizing/removing the pet system and essence of synergistic tag-team wombo combo gameplay that I'll stop there.

Instead, removing healer's DOT aoe moves were stupid. Just plainly stupid

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Navnav

The real problem with FF14s job design is that the player has absolutely ZERO agency as to how they play a job, my mind is blown at how so many players will argue against having choices for their job. This is not the hot sweaty try hard fest that WoW is, and the competitiveness just isn't anywhere near as high as a game like WoW, so cookie cutter is not so important. With that being said, why not add talents to slightly change up how some jobs can play and give players some choice so they are not restricted to one rotation for years on end. I honestly am miffed how people play this game for longer than a couple of weeks. I get there are things to do, but the combat gets stale fast to me, and different PvE encounters hardly changes the samey combat for years.

Just my two cents btw. If you love the game, continue loving it.

---

Nah I agree. I think it's actually Endwalker that has brought us to this place where we are now-- we see this also in streamers imo. There's some FFXIV exhaustion happening as this 10 year story has concluded, leaving us highly focused on the rest of the game. There are so many other MMO or MMO types of games that are amping up combat that is fast paced, challenging, and full of choices as well. Then you have XIV which is seemingly going in the opposite direction catering to about 10% of people who are very loud and only concerned with protecting metas that benefit them and don't necessarily make any sense outside of that, leaving many jobs steamrolled (as I like to call it) and casual content as stale as can be.