Balance, Homogenisation and Encounter Design: The Problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ladon

You can’t design encounters and job mechanics to high specifics when you are capping party sizes to 8. This is the fundamental reason they have to make sure every job in a role can do the same thing and that no encounter requires specific skills from specific jobs.

The only way you are going to see old style class systems is if the entire game is built non-instanced with non-capped player encounters that allows for loose class compositions.

---

Surely they can have homogenised gameplay whilst still having unique things for each job though? There’s already good examples of jobs that have a lot of homogenised elements but whose unique traits are just as satisfying (putting aside any balancing issues for now. Dancer has all the standard trimmings of the ranged DPS role but still feels fun to play as a job and not just as a role because of the unique elements it has (like Steps / Improvisation / Curing Waltz).

Surely they can homogenise gameplay without it coming at the cost of job uniqueness. I mean, there’s more than enough room for them to have both the ‘standard role’ kit and stuff that differentiates the job from others in terms of the number of abilities we have now. I feel like they should try to find some kind of happy medium between the two at the very least

You’re right that stuff loose class compositions can’t work in FFXIV because of the party design. But at the same time, even if every party is limited to the 2 melee 1 ranged 1 caster paradigm (if that’s what it even is), I feel like they can still make jobs feel different from each other within that restricted paradigm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connor

Surely they can have homogenised gameplay whilst still having unique things for each job though? There’s already good examples of jobs that have a lot of homogenised elements but whose unique traits are just as satisfying (putting aside any balancing issues for now. Dancer has all the standard trimmings of the ranged DPS role but still feels fun to play as a job and not just as a role because of the unique elements it has (like Steps / Improvisation / Curing Waltz).

Surely they can homogenise gameplay without it coming at the cost of job uniqueness. I mean, there’s more than enough room for them to have both the ‘standard role’ kit and stuff that differentiates the job from others in terms of the number of abilities we have now. I feel like they should try to find some kind of happy medium between the two at the very least

You’re right that stuff loose class compositions can’t work in FFXIV because of the party design. But at the same time, even if every party is limited to the 2 melee 1 ranged 1 caster paradigm (if that’s what it even is), I feel like they can still make jobs feel different from each other within that restricted paradigm

---

One could argue that being the case now. drk plays different than gun, whm plays different than a ast, ect ect.

Usually whenever I see people bring up homogenization, they are saying want x class to do something y cannot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connor

Surely they can have homogenised gameplay whilst still having unique things for each job though? There’s already good examples of jobs that have a lot of homogenised elements but whose unique traits are just as satisfying (putting aside any balancing issues for now. Dancer has all the standard trimmings of the ranged DPS role but still feels fun to play as a job and not just as a role because of the unique elements it has (like Steps / Improvisation / Curing Waltz).

Surely they can homogenise gameplay without it coming at the cost of job uniqueness. I mean, there’s more than enough room for them to have both the ‘standard role’ kit and stuff that differentiates the job from others in terms of the number of abilities we have now. I feel like they should try to find some kind of happy medium between the two at the very least

You’re right that stuff loose class compositions can’t work in FFXIV because of the party design. But at the same time, even if every party is limited to the 2 melee 1 ranged 1 caster paradigm (if that’s what it even is), I feel like they can still make jobs feel different from each other within that restricted paradigm

---

I’m not sure I am seeing the level of homogenization you are describing. Yes tank defense is very homogenized now for basically the reason I described, all tanks have to be able to tank with the same effectiveness. There are basically two types of tanking: mitigation and avoidance and everyone should be well aware you can’t balance the two...so every tank in this game is a mitigation tank with the same tools. But offensively the four tanks are very different in mechanics.

Let’s look at the other jobs: RDM, SMN and BLM all play very different. Same with MNK, NIN, DRG and SAM. DNC, BRD, MCH? Yup all unique play styles.

What about healers? Well just like with tanks, healer offense has been mostly homogenized. This is likely so they can make the healing style unique but effective for each job without having to factor how healing downtime is spent for each healer.

Now if you are thinking about them introducing stuff like reverse damage shield healers, or pure buffer or pure debuffer jobs than it can never happen with the 8 person compositions because it’s impossible to also design encounters that account for those types of jobs being or not being present without the diminishing impact 40-50 player compositions offers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Acidblood

True, but seeking to eliminate the meta is a fool’s errand; there will always be one, and the ill-informed will always assert its ‘truth’ (I’m not a bad player, class X just ‘sucks’). Which is not to say that reasonable balance should not be strived for, I would just prefer that balance to be less comparable than a single number.

---

Oh, same. Absolutely. I hate that "Which job is best?" for so many people will boil down purely to that job's fflogs page for a given fight. I miss the little advantages of frequent extra stuns or bonus healing or added range or restoration or free cleanse, and wish they had gone further in that direction by more frequently including mechanics which could make use of these things, rather than taking them out back and putting these utilities 'out of their misery' (especially given that these utilities were only disempowered by the dev's specifically making most mobs immune to them).

I don't mind that one comp is meta for one strategy for dealing with a fight. I just mind when there's only one strategy and therefore one meta. And I especially mind when that meta is propped up only by differences rDPS. (And, no, I don't believe we'd still see metas enforced by rDPS differences if jobs performed within a couple % of each other, rather than up to some 15%+ difference between 'god' jobs and 'tier 2' jobs)

Quote:

---

With a hard enrage you have to finish a fight in X minutes, no ifs, buts, or maybes; and as I’ve said this reduces survival to a binary… unless of course the timer is generous, which would then negate the benefits you have outlined.

---

Again, it does the exact opposite of that.

Fight design without hard enrage:
Mechanic 1: Must perform at 75% or higher.
Mechanic 2: Must perform at 70% or higher.
Mechanic 3: Must perform at 80% or higher.
Total: Irrelevant. You already either failed at Mechanic 1, 2, or 3 individually, and each had no further consequence on the rest of the fight.

Fight design with hard enrage:
Mechanic 1: Must perform at 55% or higher.
Mechanic 2: Must perform at 50% or higher.
Mechanic 3: Must perform at 70% or higher.
Total: Must perform at a combined 225% or higher. The combined difficulty is still the same as without enrages, but the mechanics are no longer binary. The excess performance on one can be applied towards another after its minimum performance.

Hard enrages are one of many ways to make individual mechanics non-binary. Using none of those ways, as per any modern fight if denied its hard enrage, would make each mechanic binary and grant absolutely no reward for performing a mechanic better on one run than another or better than another group so long as no wipe occurred in either case.

Finite resource systems are another way to make, effectively, a hard enrage, but it involves exactly the same risk-reward structure as what we have now except denies players ready access to information. I can tell by the duty clock and the boss's %HP if I'm likely to make it or not, but there are just too many variables between healer MP and success to be sure of anything in regards to the imminent wipe provided by finite resources, muddies player-by-player risk reward, as one person taking excess damage will just as likely lead to someone else's (or everyone's) death, and generally just makes for a more convoluted experience despite having the same pressures and priority on dps. (Unless, again, you want healers not to deal damage at all and to retune bosses around that change, because whether you like it or not, the way we clear content now absolutely, undeniably, takes healer damage into account.)

The issue with homogenization and balance is that homogenization is how theyre achieving balance.

What I mean is that the argument for balance ends up being "Well, they should all function the same," which is wrong. In reality, all classes should help meet the 'end goal' in equal parts but how they get there should differ. So how this is handled is whether you play monk or drg, you pull the same dps give or take a 100 when you are min/maxed. Beyond that, they should be free to bring anything or perform in any fashion.

Thats simple on paper, of course, but not in practice. A Good example of this is the tanks. They got homogenized in such a fashion where its essentially all the same primary CDs, basic damage and resource management, and a spam phase. BloodSpiller = Fell Cleave = Holy Spirit. GNB breaks the mold I believe by having a bit more complexity (which might be why its more popular. It feels like its own thing.) The issue is that the Devs took DRK which was a bit more unique (but thats not necessarily for the better mind you) and pretty much gave them an oGCD to spam when you were over flowing on mana and something akin to IR. PLD has a similar thing where you switch to a spammo phase of HL. This did end up making them all more balanced damage wise, but they lost their unique nature. This was the wrong way to balance.

Instead, they shouldve reworked the classes so they have unique skill identities. They end up having the same dps output overall (which is a matter of tweaking numbers) and same overall survivability, but different aspects of how thats achieved. Paladin shouldnt have Holy Spirit. It should have more robust shield skills instead. Its a huge missed opportunity there. Warrior should be the brawliest of tanks. A "Hulk Smash" tank, where they dont spam FC 5 times, but instead build up to do massively devastating hits compared to the others. Perhaps itll function like a chain attack they have to pull off for a mighty finisher and theyll have a slower AA speed as an offset. DRK should be pushing the Magic angle a lot harder, possibly reworking skills like LD to make it a specialty invuln that does damage. I.E: When you pop LD, you become invuln for 10 seconds and cant drop below 1 HP, and the damage you take gets converted into a huge attack when LD finishes that scales. So using LD when you only lost 10% or even 50% Hp wouldnt do a whole lot. Its when youve been hit for fatal damage that it does a heavy hit. That or if you get put down to 1 hp, you get a massive ASPD or damage buff for 10 seconds. Etc. Having ranged magic strikes, or a more robust version of Esteem that can act like a commanded pet to a limited extent (Like send it to attack or tank other mobs itself)

Balance at the end of the day should only matter in the numbers aspect, but the classes themselves need to be set apart that there is a core mechanic that makes them 100% unique. The caveat to this approach, however, is youll likely see less classes over time. If your DRK is gonna be your magic tank, then that kind of eats up that roll. Having another one becomes redundant and ends up eating into the others core identity. This also means a lot of time spent by the devs doing these reworks. I am under the impression that due to the scope of ShB as a project, that balance and reworkings were not a main feature. As a point, DRK feels uninspired. Lastly, it also means that some classes will be harder to play. This should be ok as long as its not so ridiculously more difficult to be functional compared to other classes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ladon

I’m not sure I am seeing the level of homogenization you are describing. Yes tank defense is very homogenized now for basically the reason I described, all tanks have to be able to tank with the same effectiveness. There are basically two types of tanking: mitigation and avoidance and everyone should be well aware you can’t balance the two...so every tank in this game is a mitigation tank with the same tools. But offensively the four tanks are very different in mechanics.

Let’s look at the other jobs: RDM, SMN and BLM all play very different. Same with MNK, NIN, DRG and SAM. DNC, BRD, MCH? Yup all unique play styles.

What about healers? Well just like with tanks, healer offense has been mostly homogenized. This is likely so they can make the healing style unique but effective for each job without having to factor how healing downtime is spent for each healer.

Now if you are thinking about them introducing stuff like reverse damage shield healers, or pure buffer or pure debuffer jobs than it can never happen with the 8 person compositions because it’s impossible to also design encounters that account for those types of jobs being or not being present without the diminishing impact 40-50 player compositions offers.

---

Why should tank defence get homogenised, and healer offence? If tanks’ defense is homogenised because defence is their main job and they all need the same tools to get it done, isn’t that also an argument for homogenising healer defensive kits? If healers’ offence is homogenised because healing is the main part of their job and that’s where the complexity should be, isn’t that also an argument for homogenising tank damage?

Healers show that you can have (fairly) distinct offensive options while still being (fairly) balanced, and tanks do the same for offence. Both classes should benefit from both.

And I can’t comment too much on the tank stuff, since I’ve only been tanking for a few weeks, but I’ve healed for years and I can say that what you have as an offensive kit doesn’t affect how much time you spend doing downtime stuff (and therefore how your healing kit needs to be balanced). Encounter design and healing kit affects it. Ergo, that doesn’t fly as a reason for homogenising healer offensive kits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

…

Instead, they shouldve reworked the classes so they have unique skill identities. They end up having the same dps output overall (which is a matter of tweaking numbers) and same overall survivability, but different aspects of how thats achieved.

...

Lastly, it also means that some classes will be harder to play. This should be ok as long as its not so ridiculously more difficult to be functional compared to other classes.

---

I think that would be the potential issue. If a more complex job outputs the same DPS as a simpler job (and this might be subjective as different people work differently and may find different things to be complex, though some things can be universal as well), either people would see no point in taking the more complex job as it would mean higher chance of failure with no extra benefit or it would feel unrewarding to play unless the player is looking for that exact complexity in gameplay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by linay

I think that would be the potential issue. If a more complex job outputs the same DPS as a simpler job (and this might be subjective as different people work differently and may find different things to be complex, though some things can be universal as well), either people would see no point in taking the more complex job as it would mean higher chance of failure with no extra benefit or it would feel unrewarding to play unless the player is looking for that exact complexity in gameplay.

---

Higher potential damage could work so long as there is significant difficulty and penalty for failure. We can already see that happening with BLM. They have huge damage potential, but bad positioning/messing up their rotation/etc can cost them severely. Sure, the top parsers who can attract the best players would probably stick to the high risk high reward jobs, but for your average run a, say, RDM who can reliably bring x damage would be as desirable as a BLM who could bring y>x damage if played perfectly, or z<x damage if they stuff up, but will probably on average bring x damage. It’d be harder to balance, but I think it’d be worth it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheUltimate3

One could argue that being the case now. drk plays different than gun, whm plays different than a ast, ect ect.

Usually whenever I see people bring up homogenization, they are saying want x class to do something y cannot.

---

Dark Knight may play differently from a Gunbreaker, but it’s now also a carbon copy of Warrior.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ladon

I’m not sure I am seeing the level of homogenization you are describing. Yes tank defense is very homogenized now for basically the reason I described, all tanks have to be able to tank with the same effectiveness. There are basically two types of tanking: mitigation and avoidance and everyone should be well aware you can’t balance the two...so every tank in this game is a mitigation tank with the same tools. But offensively the four tanks are very different in mechanics.

---

Dark Knight is now a carbon copy of Warrior with some very very minor differences. Build gage to use a high damaging move, then spam said move for free for 10 seconds every 80 seconds. TBN is sadly the only move we have at this point that actually feels unique to us at this point.