5.08 Patch - DPS still not balanced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crushnight

That is alarmingly different to a point where the top 4 DPS are outputting more than a 9th person playing an AST at 50th percentile level, That is too high a difference and does need to be corrected because that shouldn't be allowed to be that high. at most the top 4 DPS combined should be no higher than 1k DPS ahead of the combined 4 lowest DPS right now any one playing the lower DPS jobs are truly hurting their team through no fault of their own this should be corrected fast.

---

So to you, the difference should be something like

1. 14,000
2. 13,975
3. 13,950
4. 13,925
5. 13,900
6. 13,875
7. 13,850
8. 13,825
9. 13,800
10. 13,775

Who would you like to assign to each?

Further, how would you achieve this?

Are you primarily buffing potency (personal DPS)?

Are you primarily buffing their buffs? ("RDPS")

Do any of the jobs gain something?

Do any of the jobs lose something?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

So to you, the difference should be something like

1. 14,000
2. 13,975
3. 13,950
4. 13,925
5. 13,900
6. 13,875
7. 13,850
8. 13,825
9. 13,800
10. 13,775

Who would you like to assign to each?

Further, how would you achieve this?

Are you primarily buffing potency (personal DPS)?

Are you primarily buffing their buffs? ("RDPS")

Do any of the jobs gain something?

Do any of the jobs lose something?

---

It's even easier thant that. Set a benchmark for a role and balance jobs belonging to that role to be as close to that benchmark possible. A reasonable benchmark would be, in my opinion, the following (in terms of rdps):
Melee: 14k
Casters: 13.5k
Ranged: 13k.

This ensures that a standard comp with 2 melee, 1 caster and 1 ranged is the optimal one.
The absurd thing is that right now they're talking about how sam can make the most out of party buffs (we're talking about a 200-300 dps advantage here) when we have jobs with almost 2k rdps difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lastelli

This ensures that a standard comp with 2 melee, 1 caster and 1 ranged is the optimal one.

---

this is one thing i allways find interesting, obviously it is like that right now, and actually has been since like forever, but realistically, why SHOULD double melee be encouraged ? i get why you should encourage at least one of every role, and while i personally think (for easier balancing in a diversity sense) they should just throw caster and physical ranged together at least for now thats obviously not the intent with the different role bonus and all, but...

Why, if square allready gives you incentive to have 1/1/1 should they actually encouraged people to fill the last slot with one of 3 classes (the remaining melee) while leaving 4 other classes (the remaining ranged/casters) to their own devices ? every statement about raidbuffs and utility and what not from them is basically "we want to move away from the meta" so why actively encourage that a minority of classes gets the majority of spots ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crushnight

going to use 95th percentile for Titan(E4S):
A team using Blm/Mnk/Drg/Sam, 14763/14611/14347/14354 - DPS total = 58,075
B team using Smn/Rdm/Brd/Dnc, 13279/13182/13087/12883 - DPS total = 52,431

Difference in Dps = 5,644

That is alarmingly different to a point where the top 4 DPS are outputting more than a 9th person playing an AST at 50th percentile level, That is too high a difference and does need to be corrected because that shouldn't be allowed to be that high. at most the top 4 DPS combined should be no higher than 1k DPS ahead of the combined 4 lowest DPS right now any one playing the lower DPS jobs are truly hurting their team through no fault of their own this should be corrected fast.

---

It’s worth mentioning the latter comp won’t happen in most situations since people will always want at least one melee to LB3.

Even with one of the second party swapped out for a melee though, the gap is still several thousands too wide.

This thread seems to have devolved into some kind of strange concern trolling about how the worst DPS imbalance in the last 3-4 years is actually perfectly fine, which makes me wonder how the poster proposing this in question feels about Alphascape era balance. Maybe the game being better balanced was actually a bad thing? Should we aspire to have a level of class balance comparable to that of Classic World of Warcraft? Who knows, but this thread surely has taken a strange turn in the last few pages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RadicalPesto

This thread seems to have devolved into some kind of strange concern trolling about how the worst DPS imbalance in the last 3-4 years is actually perfectly fine, which makes me wonder how the poster proposing this in question feels about Alphascape era balance. Maybe the game being better balanced was actually a bad thing? Should we aspire to have a level of class balance comparable to that of Classic World of Warcraft? Who knows, but this thread surely has taken a strange turn in the last few pages.

---

to me it looks more like the same 2 or 3 people that will defend terrible balance just keep doing this, like "person A" posts "classes cant be perfectly balanced either way so it doesn't matter if they are even remotely balanced" ->3 or 4 different people tell person a why that argument is a terrible one , "person A" than just repeats "but you guys will never be happy so why change anything?" while making a ridiculous strawman out of things no one ever said until people stop trying to convince him/her. you don't need this to be a majority opinion or anything, just need a few extra zaelous people to repeat it until everyone else leaves the discussion

From what i gathered those saying it's fine aren't talking about balance, but replying to people insisting it's impossible to clear with any job. Which is very confusing for reasons that it's a thread about balance and nobody is insisting that you cant ^^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akiudo

this is one thing i allways find interesting, obviously it is like that right now, and actually has been since like forever, but realistically, why SHOULD double melee be encouraged ? i get why you should encourage at least one of every role, and while i personally think (for easier balancing in a diversity sense) they should just throw caster and physical ranged together at least for now thats obviously not the intent with the different role bonus and all, but...

Why, if square allready gives you incentive to have 1/1/1 should they actually encouraged people to fill the last slot with one of 3 classes (the remaining melee) while leaving 4 other classes (the remaining ranged/casters) to their own devices ? every statement about raidbuffs and utility and what not from them is basically "we want to move away from the meta" so why actively encourage that a minority of classes gets the majority of spots ?

---

Couple simple reasons.

1st fight design. Ranged physical can fill amy role, but the game definately began with 2 melee 2 ranged as the ideal comp, this is particularily evident when you look at diagrams from before release.

2nd was how the game was originally intended. (MNK, DRG, BRD BLM) SMN and NIN were released later.

3rd class role distribution. As time went on ranged split into 2 class roles, magical and physical. This was in part because thw ranged role was inflated, and in part because of the distinctive differences that developed post hw casting time wise.

4th again role distribution. Currently there is two tank slots:4 tanks, 2 healer slots:3 healers, 2 melee slots 4 melee. 1 rng phys: 3 ranged and 1rng caster: 3 casters.

This is in part why many people guess that the next big expansion will add another healer and maybe a new melee will follow later (side note my money is on a melee beastmaster hinted by ranjits combat style. Could be totally wrong tho). Currently melee needs the second spot more than either ranged by a small margin of class choice value options.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AikenDrum

From what i gathered those saying it's fine aren't talking about balance, but replying to people insisting it's impossible to clear with any job. Which is very confusing for reasons that it's a thread about balance and nobody is insisting that you cant ^^

---

Is it impossible to clear with X jobs or X comps?
No, you can clear with every 2 Tank / 2 Healers / 4 DPS comp

The problem is that some comps using BLM, MNK, DRG, NIN and/or SAM will have a much easier time clearing content.
Ranged DPS, SMN and RDM are taxed for utility/mobility that doesn't lives up to the cost.

The other problem is that a bad MNK, BLM, DRG will do as much DPS as a ranged DPS/RDM/SMN, not rewarding their skill and job optimisation.

You have the argument that since all jobs can clear so nobody should care, that the tax is deserved.
And you have the argument that ranged/SMN/RDM's effort should be rewarded as much as any melee effort.

For example about a "random" (One of the worst, I have to admit) FFLog Report on E4S:
Machinist - 71th percentile - 12.678 rDPS
Black Mage - 21th Percentile - 12.325 rDPS
Monk - 13th Percentile - 12.510 rDPS
Dragoon - 13th Percentile - 12.256 rDPS

In other words, if their Black mage was a SMN/RDM or their MNK/DRG was a SAM/NIN they wouldn't have cleared E4S.
Jobs DPS disparity is so big that if you can't do the mechanics right, shifting your comp to the highest DPS job becomes a pass for the clear.

Yes, i know that :) Balance and ability to clear are mostly unrelated, i.e. all jobs could be able to clear and be balanced, all jobs could be able to clear and be unbalanced, neither jobs could be able to clear and be balanced/unbalanced (though i guess content difficulty would be unbalanced in this case), and there could be a case where only some jobs would be able to clear and not other, but with current dps requirements for SE to screw up that badly there'd need to be a dps job doing literally 0 dps, thought i think it could still be able to clear?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vendalwind

1st fight design. Ranged physical can fill amy role, but the game definately began with 2 melee 2 ranged as the ideal comp, this is particularily evident when you look at diagrams from before release.

2nd was how the game was originally intended. (MNK, DRG, BRD BLM) SMN and NIN were released later.

---

the game also originally intended for you to have one healer with strong shields but piss poor direct healing and one with basically no shielding options at all, that is the reason why ast originally was nothing but either a bad whitemage or a bad scholar, and what is still keeping them back as far as adding healers are concerned, "it was originally designed that way" is a non argument, monk was originally designed without any group buffs, Bard was originally designed being able to support others, fights 5 years ago being designed around having 1 of every of the original mustn't be an argument against change

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vendalwind

3rd class role distribution. As time went on ranged split into 2 class roles, magical and physical. This was in part because thw ranged role was inflated, and in part because of the distinctive differences that developed post hw casting time wise.

---

i'm really not sure what the ranged role being inflated should have to do with that, gonna let the cast time argument stand as a reason for the distinction because arguing that wouldn't lead to a satisfoctry result i believe, but "we have to many "ranged/casters" compared to melee, lets split them up into seperate groups" solves exactly nothing ? having 2 groups of 3 competing for 1 spot each if anything is worse than having a big group of 6 competing for 2 spots as far as enabling different class compositions, which was squares goal time and time again when "the meta" got brought up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vendalwind

4th again role distribution. Currently there is two tank slots:4 tanks, 2 healer slots:3 healers, 2 melee slots 4 melee. 1 rng phys: 3 ranged and 1rng caster: 3 casters.
This is in part why many people guess that the next big expansion will add another healer and maybe a new melee will follow later (side note my money is on a melee beastmaster hinted by ranjits combat style. Could be totally wrong tho). Currently melee needs the second spot more than either ranged by a small margin of class choice value options.

---

which if the 4th slot would be free and classes were equal would sort itself out by itself, you would allways want 1 melee for a)the 1% buff and b)the melee lb, the by far most universally usefull dps lb. yes, you might not need that in every fight but you also might not need a physical ranged to kite some shitty mechanic in every fight. IF the 3 options would be equally viable, with no extra push from square to "take class x" , all classes were perfectly balanced, 2 ranged were a given (1 physical+1caster, you yourself said they were their own groups, which is actually exactly why i think they should be one group, than you could balance around 2/2 and would "only" need to keep the numbers of classes equal"ish") you would take 1 melee for the 1%+lb at least (remember, classes are really really well balanced in this scenario so no reason not to take a "free 1%buff+at least the option to single target lb") so why cant the 4th slot sort itself out ? you scared all these bards are gonna take away your ninja slot with their "free movement" which they won't use on any mechanic as there are allready 2 ranged doing them ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AikenDrum

Yes, i know that :) Balance and ability to clear are mostly unrelated, i.e. all jobs could be able to clear and be balanced, all jobs could be able to clear and be unbalanced, neither jobs could be able to clear and be balanced/unbalanced (though i guess content difficulty would be unbalanced in this case), and there could be a case where only some jobs would be able to clear and not other, but with current dps requirements for SE to screw up that badly there'd need to be a dps job doing literally 0 dps, thought i think it could still be able to clear?

---

It's already screwed up.
If you have a ranged in your composition, the 1% bonus to all stats is applied to the group.
But this 1% is not even enough to justify the poor rDPS from the ranged, it's actually better to build a MNK/DRG/BLM/BLM group, the BLM replacing the ranged could miss many casts it would still bring a better rDPS.

Remember that Ultimate is coming, SE can either set a tight DPS check or not in both cases:

Relaxed DPS Check:
-Comp without 1+ DPS Pantheon will be able to clear
-Comp with DPS Pantheon will have a easy time


Tight DPS Check:
-Comp without 1+ DPS Pantheon might not be able to clear
-Comp with 2+ DPS Pantheon will have a hard time

If our comp replaced RDM with BLM and DNC with DRG we would have 4k additionnal DPS, for example.

Yep, current state is every job can clear and they're very unbalanced, i'm not the one saying it's fine ^_^

-All dps difference between role should be within (party dps × 1%)
-All dps difference inside the role should be between 3% to 8%
-Pure dps pdps AND rdps should be higner on normal level play
However synergy job should have higher rdps at optimal playing (where you need to alligned 8 people buff and burst) this should only be able to accomplice by having more pure dps than synergy in the party, since pure benefit from synergy more

Just my opinion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

Is it impossible to clear with X jobs or X comps?
No, you can clear with every 2 Tank / 2 Healers / 4 DPS comp

The problem is that some comps using BLM, MNK, DRG, NIN and/or SAM will have a much easier time clearing content.
Ranged DPS, SMN and RDM are taxed for utility/mobility that doesn't lives up to the cost.

The other problem is that a bad MNK, BLM, DRG will do as much DPS as a ranged DPS/RDM/SMN, not rewarding their skill and job optimisation.

You have the argument that since all jobs can clear so nobody should care, that the tax is deserved.
And you have the argument that ranged/SMN/RDM's effort should be rewarded as much as any melee effort.

For example about a "random" (One of the worst, I have to admit) FFLog Report on E4S:
Machinist - 71th percentile - 12.678 rDPS
Black Mage - 21th Percentile - 12.325 rDPS
Monk - 13th Percentile - 12.510 rDPS
Dragoon - 13th Percentile - 12.256 rDPS

In other words, if their Black mage was a SMN/RDM or their MNK/DRG was a SAM/NIN they wouldn't have cleared E4S.
Jobs DPS disparity is so big that if you can't do the mechanics right, shifting your comp to the highest DPS job becomes a pass for the clear.

---

It's still crazy to me that 21st percentile on BLM and 13th on drg/nin are 12.3, 12.5, and 12.2k rDPS. Each fight is different of course but man those top 3 can put up some numbers no matter how poorly you play them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katie_Kitty

It's still crazy to me that 21st percentile on BLM and 13th on drg/nin are 12.3, 12.5, and 12.2k rDPS. Each fight is different of course but man those top 3 can put up some numbers no matter how poorly you play them.

---

Meanwhile, DNC has to be around 90th percentile to hit 12.3k rDPS (when looking at averages for All Bosses - on mobile so didn’t dig deeper into separate fight values for it). It’s mind-boggling how far behind it it compared to the top dogs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HyoMinPark

Meanwhile, DNC has to be around 90th percentile to hit 12.3k rDPS (when looking at averages for All Bosses - on mobile so didn’t dig deeper into separate fight values for it). It’s mind-boggling how far behind it it compared to the top dogs.

---

Yeah there's no doubt that clearing savage on meta jobs right now is definitely raiding on easy mode. The level of mastery required for the fight and the job you play is just significantly lower. Can you imagine if that 71st percentile MCH was grey and the other three were nearly purple? That log would've looked like a hard carry and they would've cleared so much more easily.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lastelli

It's even easier thant that. Set a benchmark for a role and balance jobs belonging to that role to be as close to that benchmark possible. A reasonable benchmark would be, in my opinion, the following (in terms of rdps):
Melee: 14k
Casters: 13.5k
Ranged: 13k.

This ensures that a standard comp with 2 melee, 1 caster and 1 ranged is the optimal one.
The absurd thing is that right now they're talking about how sam can make the most out of party buffs (we're talking about a 200-300 dps advantage here) when we have jobs with almost 2k rdps difference.

---

A whole 1k penalty for the Ranged DPS huh?

I don't think everyone's going to agree with that one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lastelli

It's even easier thant that. Set a benchmark for a role and balance jobs belonging to that role to be as close to that benchmark possible. A reasonable benchmark would be, in my opinion, the following (in terms of rdps):
Melee: 14k
Casters: 13.5k
Ranged: 13k.

This ensures that a standard comp with 2 melee, 1 caster and 1 ranged is the optimal one.
The absurd thing is that right now they're talking about how sam can make the most out of party buffs (we're talking about a 200-300 dps advantage here) when we have jobs with almost 2k rdps difference.

---

Why does 2 melee need to be apart of the optimal comp, being in melee range isn’t that much more risky than having cast times especially with 2 true north charges on a 45sec CD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vendalwind

Couple simple reasons.

1st fight design. Ranged physical can fill amy role, but the game definately began with 2 melee 2 ranged as the ideal comp, this is particularily evident when you look at diagrams from before release.

2nd was how the game was originally intended. (MNK, DRG, BRD BLM) SMN and NIN were released later.

3rd class role distribution. As time went on ranged split into 2 class roles, magical and physical. This was in part because thw ranged role was inflated, and in part because of the distinctive differences that developed post hw casting time wise.

4th again role distribution. Currently there is two tank slots:4 tanks, 2 healer slots:3 healers, 2 melee slots 4 melee. 1 rng phys: 3 ranged and 1rng caster: 3 casters.

This is in part why many people guess that the next big expansion will add another healer and maybe a new melee will follow later (side note my money is on a melee beastmaster hinted by ranjits combat style. Could be totally wrong tho). Currently melee needs the second spot more than either ranged by a small margin of class choice value options.

---

These points are all silly, this game is vastly different than it once was and, we don’t need to look back at what was to determine how things should be. (Remember casting ranged physical dps) if we go back to HW, majority of that expansion had Caster Dps stronger than any other role until creator came where ranged got over buffed which they didn’t like, than Caster Dps returned to being the strongest role on average for majority of SB with RDM being the outlier until alphascape where it was closer to DRG and SMN and BLM were at the top.

If anything, the past tells me that Casting DPS should in theory be the groups source of full damage but that’s not how balancing works and we can’t look at past metas in a vacuum. 2 range 2 melee was how it was in arr because that’s how many there were at the time. Those jobs were also strong too for their time as well. Limit break also existed and groups valued it a lot then too

I look forward to 6.0's all-caster meta. BLM, RDM, SMN, and the strongest job in the game.... BLU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayfinder3

Why does 2 melee need to be apart of the optimal comp, being in melee range isn’t that much more risky than having cast times especially with 2 true north charges on a 45sec CD

---

Because the alternative is much worse. If you don't give double melee comp a slight advantage in terms of rDPS, triple ranged comp automatically becomes better in any possible scenario. This means 3 out of 6 jobs (1/2) would be guaranteed a spot, while 4 jobs would be left fighting for the last spot. Not even mentioning the fact that the 6 ranged dps jobs only have 2 different gear sets (casting and aiming), allowing a player maining one of those to freely switch to a different one. This would just make melee jobs redundant and not desirable at all and investing resources into gearing them a very risky choice. Finally, I like symmetry so a like having 4 melee jobs and 4 ranged jobs in a full party :P (and you can bet that 6.0 will give us a new melee dps)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akiudo

you scared all these bards are gonna take away your ninja slot with their "free movement" which they won't use on any mechanic as there are allready 2 ranged doing them ?

---

Nope not scared. Wouldnt even mind it if ranged or casters occasionally took the spot. But i do care about fight design, and you asked for reasons so i gave you reasons. NIN doesnt even have a specific slot right now. Were still arguably the worst melee atm rdps. You didnt ask for arguments. You asked why. I gave you legit reason that you tried to turn into an arguments.

Also original design is clear and originql developer intent is absolutely still a factor. Its similar to the line: it it aint broke dont fix it. And the original design has created the fight design we have now with often 4 melee slots for mechanics being optimal and two of them taken for tanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

A whole 1k penalty for the Ranged DPS huh?

I don't think everyone's going to agree with that one.

---

The whole concept of ranged tax still humors me. Everyones like : "you cant balance around class difficulty" but then immediatly points out ranged tax because of how much it trivializes the DIFFICULTY of dealing with mechanics @_@

1k sounds about right to me as an upper bound. IE more than 1k difference is still unacceptable and goal line should be around 700 less than the top for ranged. Perfect balance isnt possible of course but trying to everything up within 1k gap would be literally 50% better than the almost 2k gap we have now.

Personally tho i think casters should basically be on par with melee as blm is and ranged should sit around 500 less dps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vendalwind

Also original design is clear and originql developer intent is absolutely still a factor. Its similar to the line: it it aint broke dont fix it. And the original design has created the fight design we have now with often 4 melee slots for mechanics being optimal and two of them taken for tanks.

---

doesn't change that original design was made with exactly 8 classes in mind, gave us things like the healer situation that still haunts them till today does in no way account for changed class distributions, allready has changed in many different aspects concerning the game and just because a system is running it doesn't mean it can't be improved, this isn't about fixing what aint broke, its about adapting to a changed situation, something mmo's do all the time.

edit:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lastelli

Because the alternative is much worse. If you don't give double melee comp a slight advantage in terms of rDPS, triple ranged comp automatically becomes better in any possible scenario. This means 3 out of 6 jobs (1/2) would be guaranteed a spot, while 4 jobs would be left fighting for the last spot.

---

the current raid design only gives work for 2 ranges, a third range would stand in melee range and do exactly what a melee does, while that would indeed not hurt it would also not help in the slightest, if you think having 3 ranges would be superior for things like moving away with flares than thats the kind of mechanik where melees in fact allready do some dps extra to compensate them for, but with "some" i mean like 100, not 1000. Only situation where a 3rd range would be better were if one of the ranged died and the third could take his part, but in that case one may just aswell argue that a melee is better when raidwide aoe goes out as they have more hp and def and so are less likely to die do to missing a heal or failing a mechanic that does damage in the "that can definately kill you but maybe you'll get lucky and survive" range

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lastelli

Not even mentioning the fact that the 6 ranged dps jobs only have 2 different gear sets (casting and aiming), allowing a player maining one of those to freely switch to a different one. This would just make melee jobs redundant and not desirable at all and investing resources into gearing them a very risky choice.

---

great, so your advice is to simply level multiple casting an aiming classes and learning how to play all of them so you can freely switch, doesn't matter what you want to play ? cause in that case i've got a great idea for you, level yourself one of these oh so great ranged dps and just play them all the time and be happy, i mean theres no reason anyone should be able to play a certain job as we can all just change jobs to solve being undesired

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lastelli

Because the alternative is much worse. If you don't give double melee comp a slight advantage in terms of rDPS, triple ranged comp automatically becomes better in any possible scenario. This means 3 out of 6 jobs (1/2) would be guaranteed a spot, while 4 jobs would be left fighting for the last spot. Not even mentioning the fact that the 6 ranged dps jobs only have 2 different gear sets (casting and aiming), allowing a player maining one of those to freely switch to a different one. This would just make melee jobs redundant and not desirable at all and investing resources into gearing them a very risky choice. Finally, I like symmetry so a like having 4 melee jobs and 4 ranged jobs in a full party :P (and you can bet that 6.0 will give us a new melee dps)

---

I'd much prefer if that 4th job spot didn't really matter much.

Leaving a 1k dps difference between a melee job and a ranged job doesn't address the current issue with ranged jobs at the moment.

That issue being that a crappy melee player is worth more than an amazing ranged dps player, and that to me is utter BS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lastelli

Because the alternative is much worse. If you don't give double melee comp a slight advantage in terms of rDPS, triple ranged comp automatically becomes better in any possible scenario. This means 3 out of 6 jobs (1/2) would be guaranteed a spot, while 4 jobs would be left fighting for the last spot. Not even mentioning the fact that the 6 ranged dps jobs only have 2 different gear sets (casting and aiming), allowing a player maining one of those to freely switch to a different one. This would just make melee jobs redundant and not desirable at all and investing resources into gearing them a very risky choice. Finally, I like symmetry so a like having 4 melee jobs and 4 ranged jobs in a full party :P (and you can bet that 6.0 will give us a new melee dps)

---

Melee Bias is real, Melee don't do anything more than casters, there are mechanics that are hard for melee to keep uptime on, but there the same can be said about all 3 casters (Pantokrator in o11s and Stormy Horizons) while ranged physical shouldn't ever have these issues, realistically speaking you're more likely to get fights that cater to melee than casters. Melee don't need 2 slots, they get 1, just like the other roles and the last slot should be determined by a situational need on a per job basis. the era of 2 melee is over as soon as this overbuffed role gets addressed and the other roles are properly represented.

Akuido you are taking opinions way to seriously. Your statements dont disprove any of ours. They are just a different perspective.

Heres an additional one. If range could do as much dps as melee why take melee? Why not have the whole team run physical ranged so everyone could mechanic dance however they want?

Again to me the answer lies in the fact that playing a melee is more difficult, albeit slightly, because you are dealing with positionals and mechanics interrupting your rotation, thus having to improvise to make the best of specific moments in fight sequences.

Casters have a similar difficulty cause mwchanics directly interrupt/alter their rotations.

Without incentive to play melee or caster(ie higher dps) they will become underplayed. And with melee: gear is a very concerning part. A melee savant needs 3 sets of gear to play his 4 classes. Casters and ranged have 1 each. This means job flexibility in those roles is slightly higher.

Tbh mechanics less so this current savage tier, but these things are generally true and enable the developers to create more interesting fight mechanics with that in mind.

And to finish ill say it again. Most of the above statements are perspective opinions. Please dont try to combat them as if they are facts like you've done to my comments in the past. Feel free to provide your own perspectives but trying to combat opinion, Is literally pointless.

If anything caster is doing more gimmick than any other role, its doing the ranged gimmick + casting bar gimmick, melee on the other hand always have the excuse of uptime uptime that the strat alwats allow them to do the less gimmick...

Why take a melee over a ranged in the case of them being balanced? Because you actually enjoy playing that job, that's the whole point of the balancing we want. At the moment, playing a ranged just feel like we are dragging our team down because we like the job we play.

Those 1% stats buff are just bullshit too, in a perfect world, dps player should take the job they actually enjoy and raid with it without feeling like they should play something else, like for the tanks, atm they are mostly equivalent and you can take any of them without feeling like a weight.

And being a ranged doesnt make the mechanics easy, it makes them easy for the melees and casters. it's the same thing as using your positionals, those ranged mechanics have to be considered like healer or tank mechanics, it's our job, we do it, that's it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aiscence

And being a ranged doesnt make the mechanics easy, it makes them easy for the melees and casters..

---

Don't disagree with anything you said except part of this right here. Casters, especially as a Red Mage player, are frequently asked and expected to do many of the same mechanics that they ask of physical ranged. The only caster who ever gets excluded from that is black mage. "for the melees and black mage" would be a more accurate statement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vendalwind

Akuido you are taking opinions way to seriously. Your statements dont disprove any of ours. They are just a different perspective.

Heres an additional one. If range could do as much dps as melee why take melee? Why not have the whole team run physical ranged so everyone could mechanic dance however they want?

Again to me the answer lies in the fact that playing a melee is more difficult, albeit slightly, because you are dealing with positionals and mechanics interrupting your rotation, thus having to improvise to make the best of specific moments in fight sequences.

Casters have a similar difficulty cause mwchanics directly interrupt/alter their rotations.

Without incentive to play melee or caster(ie higher dps) they will become underplayed. And with melee: gear is a very concerning part. A melee savant needs 3 sets of gear to play his 4 classes. Casters and ranged have 1 each. This means job flexibility in those roles is slightly higher.

Tbh mechanics less so this current savage tier, but these things are generally true and enable the developers to create more interesting fight mechanics with that in mind.

And to finish ill say it again. Most of the above statements are perspective opinions. Please dont try to combat them as if they are facts like you've done to my comments in the past. Feel free to provide your own perspectives but trying to combat opinion, Is literally pointless.

---

BLM BiS is far away from SMN and RDM BiS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katie_Kitty

Don't disagree with anything you said except part of this right here. Casters, especially as a Red Mage player, are frequently asked and expected to do many of the same mechanics that they ask of physical ranged. The only caster who ever gets excluded from that is black mage. "for the melees and black mage" would be a more accurate statement.

---

It's sad, because RDM's movement is probably the less usable of the three, for more than 1GCD :/

At the launch of 2.0, Bard did more damage than melee DD's while having buffs and freedom to do mechanics with minimal uptime loss. As a result, many groups chose to bring a 2nd Bard and only took the minimum amount of melee DD (1) if they even took one.

Many of FFXIV development team's balance decisions have drastically favored melee DD buffs so that 2 melee or 3 melee DD compositions were desired. Melee DD's are pretty much worthless if they did not do more damage as they take a lot more time to optimize and create strategies to accommodate melee DD's. Melee DD's are generally terrible to do mechanics with and lose a lot of damage if they were not catered to.

Traditionally in MMOs, ranged DD's are just better in every way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lulunami

At the launch of 2.0, Bard did more damage than melee DD's while having buffs and freedom to do mechanics with minimal uptime loss. As a result, many groups chose to bring a 2nd Bard and only took the minimum amount of melee DD (1) if they even took one.

Many of FFXIV development team's balance decisions have drastically favored melee DD buffs so that 2 melee or 3 melee DD compositions were desired. Melee DD's are pretty much worthless if they did not do more damage as they take a lot more time to optimize and create strategies to accommodate melee DD's. Melee DD's are generally terrible to do mechanics with and lose a lot of damage if they were not catered to.

Traditionally in MMOs, ranged DD's are just better in every way.

---

Let's just remember that the two two meta melee job were the lowest dps ones last expansion. If their dps is the same as ranged, the only difference is that you are free of playing what you enjoy playing without dragging your team down, and that's what matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aiscence

Let's just remember that the two two meta melee job were the lowest dps ones last expansion. If their dps is the same as ranged, the only difference is that you are free of playing what you enjoy playing without dragging your team down, and that's what matter.

---

If you factored in Dragoon's RDPS values, with a double Ranged comp they were probably the highest job in the game, bar none.

If you do the same for Ninja and consider that threat manipulation added unseen bonuses, Ninja was not the bottom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lulunami

At the launch of 2.0, Bard did more damage than melee DD's while having buffs and freedom to do mechanics with minimal uptime loss. As a result, many groups chose to bring a 2nd Bard and only took the minimum amount of melee DD (1) if they even took one.

---

that is both true and completly missing the point, or rather you spell it out yourself, you just don't seem to see it. Bard did the same or MORE damage than melee while giving damage buffs melee, specifically monk didn't (don't forget dragoon had piercing damage up back then) aswell as resource buffs and that was in a time were mechanics often were way less "lets two people handle it, the rest can stand still" than they are now, of course bard would reign supreme in that situation. Just that bard lost ALL of that, theres no monopoly on damage buffs, resource buffs don't exist anymore and of course bard shouldn't do the same damage as say a monk on a puppet fight like faust, just that in the very beginning the developers actually missed that aspect,, but for that you give the melee like 100-150 dps extra in case of perfect uptime so they can lose 2 or 3 global cooldowns do to unavoidable mechanics like flares but thats a number that should put them at equal footing in a "normal" fight, slightly above in a fight like e2s and slightly below in some heavy movement fight, theres no reason why they need to be clearly in the lead even in the most heaviest of movement fights.

doesn't change the fact that in current fights having more than 2 ranged (phys or casters) is functionally worthless because there simply aren't mechanics to deal for 3 ranged dps, you can do every single turn with 3 ranged if so desired and the players are good enough, but the third will simply take the melee spot, there is no accomandating melee dd's you put them in the spot closes to the boss and let the ranged (of which you should allways have 1 phys 1 caster at least) do some stupid dance around mechanics the melee probably wouldn't know exist if they didn't wipe cause the ranged messed up, that takes neither skill nor some noteworthy amount of time, a third ranged offers you nothing you didn't get out of the first two.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katie_Kitty

Don't disagree with anything you said except part of this right here. Casters, especially as a Red Mage player, are frequently asked and expected to do many of the same mechanics that they ask of physical ranged. The only caster who ever gets excluded from that is black mage. "for the melees and black mage" would be a more accurate statement.

---

this! Lol was afk in PF for a weekly E4s clear and was reading the chat argument, about how the fight was hard on BLM cause of the movement but RDM and SMN completely excel, and I’m just like that’s not even remotely true, because we have ruin 2 doesn’t make us a mobile machine and because RDM has a gap closer and jump back doesn’t make it a mobile machine either. I don’t understand the preferential treatment for casters that are only BLM but the rest of us are just a BRD clone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akiudo

doesn't change the fact that in current fights having more than 2 ranged (phys or casters) is functionally worthless because there simply aren't mechanics to deal for 3 ranged dps, you can do every single turn with 3 ranged if so desired and the players are good enough, but the third will simply take the melee spot, there is no accomandating melee dd's you put them in the spot closes to the boss and let the ranged (of which you should allways have 1 phys 1 caster at least) do some stupid dance around mechanics the melee probably wouldn't know exist if they didn't wipe cause the ranged messed up, that takes neither skill nor some noteworthy amount of time, a third ranged offers you nothing you didn't get out of the first two.

---

Eden Savage mechanics is relatively simple compared to previous raid tiers. There are many situations in previous raid tiers (such as Midas/Ultimate) where being a melee DD was a disadvantage and you just lost damage up-time. That is why some group only took 1 melee (Dragoon) and brought other ranged/magical DD's.

There are accommodations to melee DD's if you do not believe it. There are many melee up-time strats in previous raid tiers for that reason. In Eden (Savage) Titan fight, it is more optimal to give certain squares to melee DD's and tanks, otherwise you lose damage. Ranged DD's basically do not have to care much about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lulunami

Eden Savage mechanics is relatively simple compared to previous raid tiers. There are many situations in previous raid tiers (such as Midas/Ultimate) where being a melee DD was a disadvantage and you just lost damage up-time. That is why some group only took 1 melee (Dragoon) and brought other ranged/magical DD's.

There are accommodations to melee DD's if you do not believe it. There are many melee up-time strats in previous raid tiers for that reason. In Eden (Savage) Titan fight, it is more optimal to give certain squares to melee DD's and tanks, otherwise you lose damage. Ranged DD's basically do not have to care much about that.

---

funny you cite midas, i mean there are just 4 raid tiers and a whole addon between midas and the current raid, and to take your eden example, yes it is more optimal to give certain squares to melees and tank, ranged don't have to care about that, so ? you make it sound like running farther away is somehow easier than staying close.

Even with 4 ranged (which would be stupid for reasons like losing the 1% aswell as melee lb) you would most likely still have 2 extra people stay close to the boss, just not the melees you don't have because guess what ? its more convenient for everybody, even for a bard it is more convenient to stay closer as that raises the chance s/he will still get a preemptive heal if the healer was a second slow or whatever. also i specified my argument about not accomandating melees in that handing out 2 designated "melee" (or "stay close") spots takes no noteworthy amount of time or skill, if you really think the 5 seconds it takes people to figure out that if everyone needs to sit in his own square you should give the ones closest to the boss to the melees and tank or for melees to actually take these spots closest to the boss when the mechanic calls for it warrants melees to just be superior to everyone else than i will have to disagree.

And yes, there were times in the past were this was different, there may again come times in the future where this will be different, but what even the most "well meaning" advocates for some kind of ranged tax advertise for is basically "make melee so much stronger than everyone else that even in the absolute worst case they will still be number one" and that one is bull, no one's lost 1000 dps (or whatever the addon in questions equivalent may have been) do to having to move out of melee range for some mechanic, yet people want to give them anywhere from 500-1000 dps just because they have to stay in range, classes AND fights being different actually should favor different classes, melee should indeed not be allways worse, but theres zero reason for them to be allways better all the same