DPS and their Utilities

No matter what game you play, balance will ALWAYS be a source for debate. "Who does more damage here? Why? Why doesnt x-class do just as much?" Often time a class is often broken for you (the one who plays it, See: Maining) and OP to some (who "play" it, see: alt class).... or OP to people who have to deal with you in pvp (though pve and pvp is sperate here)

In this game there aeems to be debate about how classes are balanced based around their utility, and honestly, balancing around that is rather difficult. Sometimes utility can be too strong, sometimes not strong enough, this has to do with the TYPE of utility it is. So before anyone goes "Aww, NIN isnt meta anymore, but its now more in line" lets see exactly how in line it really is.

First lets knock out the ranged vs melee bit. Personally, i have never seen an mmo lower the dps of a class just because of "higher mobility" before this one. And personally, i dont think it should be. Also, the only reason why ppl compare classes "in a vacuum" is because for things like titania ex, you are not gonna run 4 melee dps. This means there are two slots for ranged, and nin isnt gonna be competeing with you for them.

Now utility:
1. Heal support utility (healing, heal buffing.)
2. Defense support utility (damage mitigation type)
3. Dps utility
(I would count a raise as heal support, because this way a healer doesnt have to use a CD or mana to do the raise)

It goes without saying that the more utility you have, you should do less dps. But the dps differenfe needs to be small enough that it is worth taking you for the utility, otherwise, it will default to top dps. If the only utility you have is heal/defensive, you should do less, but not so much the utility isnt worth it.

Dps utility is the HARDEST to balance around. By definition, it is supposed yo increase someones dps (individual or group) but this only works if it ACTUALLY provides this benefit.

This means, that a group will understand you doing less dps, because with your utility (provided they work with it) they should end up doing more. If you include pdps + contribution to = less than your other counterparts... the utility is useless. It may increase their pdps, but the raids over all dps is now less. It makes sense for having utility pdps is lower, but the dps utility if properly used should do MORE thab make up for it. This is why its hard, unlike other utility types, this one is meant to increase dps despite the fact that as a utility it should personally do less.

Unlike non dps utility, that can just do less and thats the end (rn i think things like smn and rdm need some buffing despite the raise and healing capabilities) dps ones need more work done with them. They should not provide so much rdps that it over shadows the pure pdps or other high rdps, but should still have a benefit. If it breaks even, why would anyone bring a class to take a dps loss, for the chance (if they work with it, making everyones job harder) of just doing the same or less?

Ok you explained utility vs selfish so what's the purpose of the thread?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TaiyouSeishin

Unlike non dps utility, that can just do less and thats the end (rn i think things like smn and rdm need some buffing despite the raise and healing capabilities) dps ones need more work done with them. They should not provide so much rdps that it over shadows the pure pdps or other high rdps, but should still have a benefit. If it breaks even, why would anyone bring a class to take a dps loss, for the chance (if they work with it, making everyones job harder) of just doing the same or less?

---

Because by doing so you're letting that player actually play a job they like. I know that some people have been pushy at times about wanting Melee to turn reroll into MNK/DRG when they've taken a lot of time in SAM, but the general realization needs to be that people shouldn't focus so heavily on numbers alone as long as the person can play their class to the best of its ability. That's what Savage will show if people are capable.

The bad thing about balancing DPS jobs in general is that you have to be careful to not make things too close. If you really wanted perfect balance, then the rDPS of one job would be accounted with the pDPS of the same job based on what it provides.

DRG is an example of this, though currently they are overtuned with how much damage they do vs. a job that doesn't provide any rDPS at all(SAM). Same goes for NIN and it's very low potencies on its attacks and abilities that don't make up for the rDPS they bring. SE has some gaps to fill, but we'll have to just keep feeding them feedback til' they do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marc-Vigar

Ok you explained utility vs selfish so what's the purpose of the thread?

---

There are a number of times when people go "but utility so its fine" and ppl complain that ppl complain.

"I think smn should at least be a little closer in damage than what they are" "better lose or share that raise then"

^dislike when ppl do those. And rn there is a dislike for some classes even HAVING utility.

And purpose of any thread is to inform, discuss, debate. So if anyone disagrees, agrees, has their own opinion...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HyperiusUltima

Because by doing so you're letting that player actually play a job they like. I know that some people have been pushy at times about wanting Melee to turn reroll into MNK/DRG when they've taken a lot of time in SAM, but the general realization needs to be that people shouldn't focus so heavily on numbers alone as long as the person can play their class to the best of its ability. That's what Savage will show if people are capable.

The bad thing about balancing DPS jobs in general is that you have to be careful to not make things too close. If you really wanted perfect balance, then the rDPS of one job would be accounted with the pDPS of the same job based on what it provides.

DRG is an example of this, though currently they are overtuned with how much damage they do vs. a job that doesn't provide any rDPS at all(SAM). Same goes for NIN and it's very low potencies on its attacks and abilities that don't make up for the rDPS they bring. SE has some gaps to fill, but we'll have to just keep feeding them feedback til' they do.

---

But thats not how it works. Why should everyone else, work MORE, just so you can bring what you want. Sure your friends wont mind and if thats all you play with then you have no issies. But you are still making their job harder, without pay off. At this point if you REALLY want people to play what class they want, then we can get rid of all utility, normallize all dps and attack speed values so all melee do the exact same as each other. Boom, you can play what you want.

Do the same for ranged/casters

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TaiyouSeishin

There are a number of times when people go "but utility so its fine" and ppl complain that ppl complain.

"I think smn should at least be a little closer in damage than what they are" "better lose or share that raise then"

^dislike when ppl do those. And rn there is a dislike for some classes even HAVING utility.

And purpose of any thread is to inform, discuss, debate. So if anyone disagrees, agrees, has their own opinion...

---

Well it's really simple, if all classes had high damage and no utility then they would be the same and the game would be boring. Variety is healthy.

When people complain about having utility it's not because they don't like it, it's because numerically or mechanically they feel like their class is not performing well. For example you have NIN, which was a more support oriented DPS but SE removed the entire toolkit except for Trick Attack, so NIN players feel their utility is weaker (which actually is) and their damage hasn't been upgraded accordingly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marc-Vigar

Well it's really simple, if all classes had high damage and no utility then they would be the same and the game would be boring. Variety is healthy.

When people complain about having utility it's not because they don't like it, it's because numerically or mechanically they feel like their class is not performing well. For example you have NIN, which was a more support oriented DPS but SE removed the entire toolkit except for Trick Attack, so NIN players feel their utility is weaker (which actually is) and their damage hasn't been upgraded accordingly.

---

Precisely. the only purpose of this thread is to show that "having utility" doesnt make it ok. (Most go "nah its fine")
I am by no means on the "get rid of utility" bandwagon. I dont even want TA gone off nin. But aime dont understand why NINs are unhappy thinking "you just arent meta anymore"

Honestly, id like to see some utilities come back... like for brd... it feels like ranger now...

I think people should play what they want. This is why PF was created. Make your own party and do it that way or play with an FC. When BLM was being shafted in HW/SB(beginning) I just made my own party in the PF and played with FC mates. I got to experience the raids but never had the chance to finish like I wanted as a result. But for me, it was enough to at least give it a go. I’m not hardcore player. I say all this too say that SE needs to either make the utility more potent or make it so some jobs have the correct potency buffs across the board to compensate for what was taken. In the case of SMN, it has three different utility spells and so does RDM. Buffing then too much would make BLM pointless to bring. They need to be brought up but SE seems to have a heavy-handed track record of overdoing it. However, the take away is that SMN/RDM should not be close to BLM due to their utility spells but their utilities should be a bit more potent with minor CD reduction usage to compensate. After all that then look to minor potency buffs.

Hi. I'm the guy that says "lose or share" the raise.

If you have one DPS that does 12,000 DPS and -can't raise- and you have another DPS that does 12,000 DPS -and can raise-, which DPS is objectively better?

Lets say Dragoon could raise.

Lets say Bard could raise (lol 2.X limit break).

Lets say Paladin could raise.

What is an acceptable DPS margin to justify -not having it- while others -do-?

I'll give you a hint. It's pretty close to the one we have now with Black mage.

I just want them to remove TA.

I feel like having variety in DPS is a good thing. It would be boring if every DPS was just the same thing in a different flavour. Having stuff like a pure DPS job, a support oriented job, ones with high mobility but lower DPS, jobs that can support other roles like Summoner/Red Mage. It means that’s there’s a playstyle for ever type of player, which I don’t think can ever be a bad thing. Even if it does make balancing more difficult

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

Hi. I'm the guy that says "lose or share" the raise.

---

In which i agree with a smn not being EQUAL to blm. But more often than not the gap is way higher than it should be. A smn raise is not worth the loss of dps by sheer number.

If a smn/rdm was a bit more useful WITH its utility. Like being able to heal like it means something, raise not chunking its ability to dps, etc. There has to be a give and take. Be less than blm? Of course.. most just want the gap to be less... not do the EXACT same... cuz that wouldnt make sense, its not like the o ly utility they have is a dps one.

Edited... because mobile is dumb and deleting half the reply

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TaiyouSeishin

A smn raise is not worth the loss of dps by sheer number.

---

Wrong. Do you really not understand how insanely useful a dps that can raise is? For progression, for trucking through party finder groups full of horrible players? The damage gap currently is exactly where it should be for once.

Utility has a price. If it didn't have a price, then jobs that have it would be overpowered by comparison to those that don't. As they were last expansion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TaiyouSeishin

They should not provide so much rdps that it over shadows the pure pdps or other high rdps, but should still have a benefit.

---

At present there is a sort of tier's worth of contribution difference between the more "selfish" dps and the more rDPS-heavy. Guess which is providing far more value to their parties on average. (Hint: It's not the rDPS-heavy ones.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

Hi. I'm the guy that says "lose or share" the raise.

If you have one DPS that does 12,000 DPS and -can't raise- and you have another DPS that does 12,000 DPS -and can raise-, which DPS is objectively better?

What is an acceptable DPS margin to justify -not having it- while others -do-?

I'll give you a hint. It's pretty close to the one we have now with Black mage.

---

But that your example is far from realistic outside of early SB in movement-heavy fights. That's just not the case anymore. That or your example is purposely ignoring the gap we have now, which you mention only in your last line to the effect of it being somehow fine for a SMN to do almost 11% less tDPS (12% less pDPS) -- roughly 750k less damage over a 10-minute fight, at current gear levels in Savage content -- than BLM, so long as the SMN has Raise, which requires that the team has already suffered a massive loss to its damage rate potential to see any use at all?

I don't think that's the case. And I don't think the devs think that's the case, either. SMN and BLM were neck-and-neck for rDPS after the balance adjustments of Stormblood -- BLM faintly outperforming SMN except when said SMN was paired with a BLM from which to milk extra Contagion rDPS, at which point SMN took the faint lead. That was when balance had been finally put into a good place, with most jobs' rDPS at max performance each performing within a scant couple percent of each other in their ideal compositions. Now we vary by over 15%. Which do you think is the better indicator of the balance philosophy -- generally tight balance after having smoothed everything as much as reasonable over the expansion, or the first week of progression?

Raise is painfully overrated, imo, "useful" for progression except where progression should include building up muscle memory for ideal play, relying on loose DPS checks and less intuitive mechanics to see any significant value. And while I don't want to see resurrection made ubiquitous nor purge it from casters as a whole, I do not see the point in hitting jobs with nearly so hefty a "Rez tax" as we have now.

Demanding that Rez have such a huge performance burden -- rather than, say, just compensating BLM utility through such forms as its old Apocatastasis or Mana Wall, etc., with the numbers within a more reasonable 3% rDPS -- just builds towards a "Banned from Prog | Banned from Farm" schism. We don't need that.

This game has already lost so much complexity and so many things have been removed in the name of perceived fairness and ease of access and now we have people calling for more harmonisation I genuinely hope ninjas don’t loose TA and become Samurai’s with different weapons. I would understand more if this wasn’t something that hasn’t been with the job since their earliest iterations, but many chose these support style DPS jobs and now want support removed.

Yes the tax needs to be reworked so that the rDps is more balanced but removing utility is a terrible solution and robs the game of what little complexity remains.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

Hi. I'm the guy that says "lose or share" the raise.

If you have one DPS that does 12,000 DPS and -can't raise- and you have another DPS that does 12,000 DPS -and can raise-, which DPS is objectively better?

Lets say Dragoon could raise.

Lets say Bard could raise (lol 2.X limit break).

Lets say Paladin could raise.

What is an acceptable DPS margin to justify -not having it- while others -do-?

I'll give you a hint. It's pretty close to the one we have now with Black mage.

---

I'll gladly delete Raise off of Casters! When does it hit the road?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dortharl

This game has already lost so much complexity and so many things have been removed in the name of perceived fairness and ease of access and now we have people calling for more harmonisation I genuinely hope ninjas don’t loose TA and become Samurai’s with different weapons. I would understand more if this wasn’t something that hasn’t been with the job since their earliest iterations, but many chose these support style DPS jobs and now want support removed.

Yes the tax needs to be reworked so that the rDps is more balanced but removing utility is a terrible solution and robs the game of what little complexity remains.

---

Honestly i dont want it removed either, just needs to be worth the lack of damage. The playstyle is complex which i like, but its like now nin has the worst of both worlds, complexity without pay off, and utility that essentially has no effect, cept the utility tax.

Edit: cuz mobile

The only problem I have with a “rez tax” is when your group progresses to the point it no longer needs many raises but is falling short of the dps check. Paying for something that’s not needed kinda sucks. Maybe if it was like an optional role action that could be exchanged with a heal or buff or something else useful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

At present there is a sort of tier's worth of contribution difference between the more "selfish" dps and the more rDPS-heavy. Guess which is providing far more value to their parties on average. (Hint: It's not the rDPS-heavy ones.)



But that your example is far from realistic outside of early SB in movement-heavy fights. That's just not the case anymore. That or your example is purposely ignoring the gap we have now, which you mention only in your last line to the effect of it being somehow fine for a SMN to do almost 11% less tDPS (12% less pDPS) -- roughly 750k less damage over a 10-minute fight, at current gear levels in Savage content -- than BLM, so long as the SMN has Raise, which requires that the team has already suffered a massive loss to its damage rate potential to see any use at all?

I don't think that's the case. And I don't think the devs think that's the case, either. SMN and BLM were neck-and-neck for rDPS after the balance adjustments of Stormblood -- BLM faintly outperforming SMN except when said SMN was paired with a BLM from which to milk extra Contagion rDPS, at which point SMN took the faint lead. That was when balance had been finally put into a good place, with most jobs' rDPS at max performance each performing within a scant couple percent of each other in their ideal compositions. Now we vary by over 15%. Which do you think is the better indicator of the balance philosophy -- generally tight balance after having smoothed everything as much as reasonable over the expansion, or the first week of progression?

Raise is painfully overrated, imo, "useful" for progression except where progression should include building up muscle memory for ideal play, relying on loose DPS checks and less intuitive mechanics to see any significant value. And while I don't want to see resurrection made ubiquitous nor purge it from casters as a whole, I do not see the point in hitting jobs with nearly so hefty a "Rez tax" as we have now.

Demanding that Rez have such a huge performance burden -- rather than, say, just compensating BLM utility through such forms as its old Apocatastasis or Mana Wall, etc., with the numbers within a more reasonable 3% rDPS -- just builds towards a "Banned from Prog | Banned from Farm" schism. We don't need that.

---

So either put Raise in the role action menu, -or get rid of it entirely-.

My stance on this hasn't changed. It's that polarizing of a utility, because you either don't need it, -or you do-. If the difference between Summoner and Black Mage is 5%, you're back to just grabbing the Summoner full time.

Why not?

You literally have lost nothing worthwhile for the extra safety and consistency another source of Raise provides you.

Give sam a 5% raid dmg buff so we'll be viable. Thank you very much square enix.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

So either put Raise in the role action menu, -or get rid of it entirely-.

My stance on this hasn't changed. It's that polarizing of a utility, because you either don't need it, -or you do-. If the difference between Summoner and Black Mage is 5%, you're back to just grabbing the Summoner full time.

Why not?

You literally have lost nothing worthwhile for the extra safety and consistency another source of Raise provides you.

---

Then -again- simply stop taking things that were previously BLM only and either putting them on Role Actions or outright removing them, like 100% mitigation to the next hit once every 30 seconds for increased turreting and LB gauge (Manawall), or 20% antimagic mitigation on a target (Apocatastasis, which you could buff or adjust to make valuable for saving non-tanks, as well).

I don't want to all utility removed or made ubiquitous. Rez is simply one among an already dwindling breed of such utility. Bring back utility and rez is just a splash in the bucket, albeit a larger one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Then -again- simply stop taking things that were previously BLM only and either putting them on Role Actions or outright removing them, like 100% mitigation to the next hit once every 30 seconds for increased turreting and LB gauge (Manawall), or 20% antimagic mitigation on a target (Apocatastasis, which you could buff or adjust to make valuable for saving non-tanks, as well).

I don't want to all utility removed or made ubiquitous. Rez is simply one among an already dwindling breed of such utility. Bring back utility and rez is just a splash in the bucket, albeit a larger one.

---

And give back Bard utility >.> its attacking may feel good now, but it lost its flavor to me... kinda why i havent been leveling it...