Evolved mode concerns

Maybe it's a good idea to categorize the evo tanks as CT: Counter Tank and DT: Debuff Tanks based off their new abilities on evercold and they can still switch between off tanks and main tanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pimsan20

Maybe it's a good idea to categorize the evo tanks as CT: Counter Tank and DT: Debuff Tanks based off their new abilities on evercold and they can still switch between off tanks and main tanks.

---

Heck, if they can give healer a stance to switch form full heal and shield heal it could be better for the gameplay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hanzz96

I don't really care if the "average player" doesn't want complexity despite what some people think its up to SE to find a middle ground because both high end and casual players keep the game going and Evo mode isn't a middle ground, its for toddlers smashing their face on the keyboard for glowing buttons.

---

It's entirely possible for SE to make a Job kit that has room for optimization, to keep high end players interested (and make lower-end content like Roulettes more interesting to said players, since the encounter mechanics can't carry), while also keeping the base performance of the job when doing a suboptimal rotation within a respectable range of the skill ceiling.

For example, take SGE. If you use a barrier currently, you get a Toxikon. Toxikon is equal potency to Dosis, and so each barrier cast is 'one Dosis' of lost damage, which currently is 380p. Instead, it could grant a buff that works like Dark Arts, granting a free use of Phlegma. Then, the potency loss of the barrier, with current potency values, would be (380*2)-690, or just 70p lost. An optimization minded player would want to minimize barriers cast still, as it is still a damage loss to use them, but a casual player would be far less punished by using them compared to currently.

Then, combine that with a Job design that actually incentivizes 'deal damage to trigger healing', and the optimization of the Job changes to be less about 'how many times can you press Dosis', and more about how to interweave between Kardia and Addersgall spenders, to cover the HPS requirements of the fight, while trying to avoid both running out, OR overcapping, on either of the two resources

In the thread in my signature, I had a rework for SGE, and with it some example potency numbers. With those potencies, the difference between an optimization-minded player who used zero Barrier GCDS, and a more casual player who used about 5 Barriers per 2min and spent all the bonus Phlegmas they were given, the difference in potency per 2min was around 600p. So, less than two Dosis casts. So long as you know what buttons are going to be pressed in each of the rotations you're comparing with one another, working out the total potency of each, and the difference between them, is just a regular maths problem to solve, because of the Potency system

It's incredibly bizarre to me that SE keeps wanting things to be 'casual friendly', and removes complexity from Jobs to alleviate pressures on casual players, but then has ways for MASSIVE potency swings to occur. The difference between a player who has 100% uptime on Biolysis on SCH, versus one who doesn't use Biolysis at all, it's like 20% damage difference. Why are the DOTs so boring (once per 30s like clockwork, only one DOT per Job), so uninteractive (they only do damage, no other effects), and yet so important for your damage? Does Biolysis or Dia really need to be 85p per tick? Why not have them be lower, and split part of that damage off into a second DOT, or a burst action like Banish, to reduce how critically important it is for the player to use their DOT, reducing the punishment for forgetting/being too busy healing to refresh it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pimsan20

Heck, if they can give healer a stance to switch form full heal and shield heal it could be better for the gameplay.

---

Oh yes. They could even give that a thematic name for each class.
Like say nocturnal and diurnal AST.

But that had to go because they needed to hard divide healers into two groups of two in EW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Argantaelle

I was quite confused when they said a few times that PLD is "an easy tank." Right now PLD and GNB have the most interesting rotations, flexible enough to provide means to optimization and not make you fall asleep when pressing 1-2-3 and then 1-1-1 each minute. I'd even say that PLD is meta right now. It certainly isn't hard (neither of the tank jobs are), but it's fun to play.

What also bothers me a lot is that SE doesn't understand what playing support is (neither a healer nor a tank). Some of the examples of the Evo PLD kit contradict the main tank responsibilities and make me doubt that the devs understand what they are doing. (The artificial division between MT and OT makes use of some tank abilities questionable and/or obsolete.)

---

The thing is, as time goes on they seem to regress in their design from somewhat unique support skills (old AST cards, old BRD Songs, Selene's cleanse) to just 'more dmg' or 'more healing/mits'.

Just look at the BRD showcase for evolved. Where they sold us aoe heals and mit as the new supportive songs. Right after going into how healers should heal more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sani2341

Oh yes. They could even give that a thematic name for each class.
Like say nocturnal and diurnal AST.

But that had to go because they needed to hard divide healers into two groups of two in EW.



The thing is, as time goes on they seem to regress in their design from somewhat unique support skills (old AST cards, old BRD Songs, Selene's cleanse) to just 'more dmg' or 'more healing/mits'.

Just look at the BRD showcase for evolved. Where they sold us aoe heals and mit as the new supportive songs. Right after going into how healers should heal more.

---

Yup why did Bard lose Wardens Paeon a unique cleanse ability that is actually better than esuna in some cases because it provides a shield from the coming status effect for healing songs.

Make it make sense