A non utility class with crap dps. compared to classes that brings more and do close to the same dps if not more. I\\'m starting to think square enix hates this class. Mch needs more.
Everyone's talking about smn buffs. But what about mch
Printable View
-
11-09-2019, 03:28 AMzonolEveryone's talking about smn buffs. But what about mch
-
11-09-2019, 06:19 AMRika007Quote:
Originally Posted by zonol
Well currently it's easily the strongest of the three ranged. Which unfortunately means nothing as all 3 ranged are very weak right now. As a whole they all need to be brought either up, or be given more utility to offset the 'mobility tax'. -
11-09-2019, 07:34 PMValence
Ranged physical jobs have had garbage DPS since early Stormblood. Stormblood only managed to hide that fact with the piercing debuff that brought those jobs up on par with other jobs.
Now, piercing is gone, and we can plainly see the sad state of it. ShB manages to lessen the problem by introducing the new party boni system that offers a buffer allowing some roles to deal less damage but still being taken for the party bonus. That buffer however was completely broken by how far behind ranged physical got until 5.1.
But yeah, we're still behind and it sucks. I have a problem with that mobility tax crap, especially when SE clearly stated that they stopped balancing jobs around difficulty in the early liveletters of Stormblood (LL 36 or 37). -
11-09-2019, 08:30 PMLambdafishMy biggest issue with the mobility tax is that parses take it into account. Ranged are going to have much higher uptime than melee, which will bring their average DPS up. If the community can see that even with mobility tax that ranged are far lower than anything else, then so must SE.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valence
Honestly I think SEs whole design philosophy for ranged physical is wrong. All 3 should be equal support jobs, dishing out similar amounts of rDPS as other jobs, but in a more supportive way. -
11-09-2019, 09:26 PMAkiudoi would actually disagree with that, gotta admit its hard without the correct data but if you take a look at the site that shall not be named brd/mch indeed were behind as far blm as they are now even though these ones allready got the 5% piercing buff so even with the change in metrics it looks like there dps actually sucked if you account for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valence
HOWEVER, you have to see that this change in metrics goes both ways, brd and mch DPS support still was way stronger in stormblood than it is right now (mch actually having some and the bard passive being 2% crit all they way [with end of expansion crit values]) aswell as having foes, you have to remember that when you compare bard to blm for example (as that one is top dps at 95% in alphascape) one thing you lack is the dps the bard/mch buffed, say that one goes out as zero by current metrics after you take of the piercing buff, the other thing however is that you in fact are shown this dps on the blackmage which wouldn't happen by the current metric.
mind you without hard numbers its hard to really determine, but having to take a shot in the dark here it is a fair assumption that the difference between the top and the bottom if these things were accounted for indeed would have been a lot closer even if fflogs used their current metrics to show dps, furthermore there was A LOT more support on brd/mch back than, dismantle was awesome, and refresh probably was the most universally usefull utility in the game, think about how many classes got buffs to their mana generation after they took it out. Sadly i lack the numbers and am not a theorycrafter to go through all this, but i would take every bet the dps difference back than between phys/ranged and the top was actually a lot closer even without the piercing debuff, and even if it was in fact not that would still leave us at "they took out nearly all usefull utility, especially the most universally usefull utility the game had to offer and compensated out us with literally nothing" -
11-09-2019, 10:37 PMValence
It was by necessity bad back then since ranged physical weren't at the level of the selfish jobs (SAM, BLM...) or jobs with limited buffs (SMN, MNK, etc). In there they were more or less balanced, but with the piercing debuff padding the numbers.
Remove it and they were actually 5% lower. And in Heavensward, where the piercing buff was so strong that the creator meta was BRD/MCH, the buff was 10%. Let that sink for a minute. 10% is insane. Remove that and they were actually pretty low as well, even when they were actually part of the godlike double ranged meta. -
11-09-2019, 10:54 PMAkiudosee the part i underlined ? thats exactly my point, right now they aren't 5% lower, they are anywhere from 8-13% lower AND have lost usefull things like dismantle, palisade and refresh, if anything they would need to be closer than back when they had these things, yet they are in fact lower, and by quite a lot at thatQuote:
Originally Posted by Valence
edit:
at 95% bard literally is 13% below the top dogs, like even if mch was balanced (which it isn't) the difference between mch and bard alone is bigger than the difference between monk and the other melees was before the patch, and these were acting like the sky was falling even though melees generally get 2 spots and their difference at least was difference to the top, not "difference to the class that sucks the least out of the weakest role"Quote:
Originally Posted by Valence
-
11-10-2019, 02:11 AMValence
Yes I agree. We were around 13-15% behind before 5.1, we're now (for MCH) around 8-9% behind the top dogs. Probably a tad higher for BRD.
-
11-10-2019, 06:24 AMBloodRubyXII
MCH is decent, but it's got this horrendous power spike in gear where it suddenly becomes really good.
-
11-10-2019, 07:41 AMSora_OathkeeperOther jobs also have that same spike in damage. That's why it's better to compare the upper parses from people who have best in slot gear so that the gear discrepancy is at a minimum.Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodRubyXII
Either way, the facts right now are that ranged are still miles behind despite their buffs. They needed around 8-10% before 5.1 to be within 500dps of the melee. Which is a good spot i think. The devs slacked on the buffs though and i'm unsure exactly why they are so scared to buff them higher. Maybe at the lower percentiles having mobility is a benefit but at the top end everyone's mobility and uptime is near enough the same and planned around. Regardless however, ranged (and rdm) still need to be brought up more. A small mobility tax is warranted yes, but it shouldn't be as detrimental as it. I'm still unsure how SMN escaped the rez tax and gained nearly 1.5k from buffs in 5.1 but all they could offer to the others low parsing jobs were between 500-800 dps. The balancing these devs do in this game is so inconsistent at times. -
11-10-2019, 08:10 AMAkiudo*moves his bard into the corner and silently weeps looking at levi parses...*Quote:
Originally Posted by Sora_Oathkeeper
edit: bard (all bosses) at 95 percentile gained 137 dps---
https://i.ibb.co/6RLn764/zzz.png -
11-14-2019, 01:19 AMAiscenceBecause mobility tax shouldn't exist. I'll take an example: the ranged will do mechanics to allow the melee or caster to keep their uptime, leading to us doing more mechanics than any of them. Ifrit nails/eruption bait in uwu is an example. While we bait the eruptions (or liquid fire on ucob etc), they are not doing anything different, and -we- lose dps because we do more than them to allow them to keep their uptime?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sora_Oathkeeper
i'm pretty sure making a melee or a caster do the same bait, they will still have more dps than a ranged.
The same way a rez tax is pointless, the "tax" is already in the rez, you basically fuck 3 GCD, misalign your rotation, and if you use swiftcast as a smn it kind of sh*t on your bahamut rotation or you have to ruin II in it.
All jobs should have the same rdps, and the choice of job should just depend of the person's preference -
11-14-2019, 07:19 AMGrimoire-M
Ranged shouldn’t have the same rDPS as melee or casters without a sufficiently complex rotation that requires proper execution to compensate. Being support and burst window oriented is fine. Being easy and free is not. I’m more concerned about SE’s overall dumbing down of jobs than the ranged tax. Numbers are easy to fix, but simplifying things does no one any favours long term.
-
11-14-2019, 09:09 AMSkye_
Could be worse. You could be a dancer and have your DPS nerfed by group, partner or RNG. Nothing like going 2 full min without a feather or snail esprit fill
-
11-14-2019, 08:37 PMSora_OathkeeperWhen i'm talking a small mobility tax i'm talking like maybe 100dps if that, that's about what a melee would lose from missing 2-3 gcds in times of forced missed gcds. Overall I do agree with you though, regarding smn specifically however, I was unsure how exactly they 'escaped' it when clearly RDM did not. Both should be equal, well all jobs should ideally be equal, even more-so for ultimate, SMN shits on RDM and BLM in there due to almost all the phases currently seen allowing SMN to spread dots for most of the fight. It's insane. Rez tax in ultimate is pointless as a death basically means a wipe anyway. Rez is nice in basically anything that doesn't have strict DPS checks or content which is outgeared (which is now basically anything that isn't ultimate).Quote:
Originally Posted by Aiscence
-
11-14-2019, 09:53 PMDortharl
The mobility tax is rubbish, rdps should not be balanced around perceived complexity, especially when it is not universally applied.
-
11-15-2019, 03:39 AMKarshanNo. You do not understand rDPS metric.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimoire-M
Currently, BLM, SMN, MNK, SAM are doing 1k more damage than range IN ACTUAL FIGHT. Not only on paper. Not only on dummy. In actual fights.
It means that, if because of their "complex rotations" or "melee requirements", they lose uptime in those fights, they still manage to do 1k more. It's not paper craft here, it's real measure. In most fights in the game, ALL classes can manage almost 100% uptime. Even the "not free".
(btw dealing with mechanics means diverting attention from rotation while BLM stays comfy in his leylines but shh, let's not talk about that and say range are free).
There shouldn't be any "range tax". What about middle tier players like me ? We don't care about them, there I said it. Balance is not about us, we don't push classes to their limits, balance is around orange parses and those guys have more uptime in BLM than a green MCH ever will in any fight. Range tax is a mistake and an unwelcomed compensation for a priviledge that is actually non existent at higher tiers.
A bad BLM will lose uptime sometimes to big extents, but a bad mch will mess up his rotation / buff windows and do crap DPS AS WELL.
On real measure, once again, rDPS should not differ by more than 300 on average between all classes. On the graph posted by Akiudo, the 4 last should be at drg / ninja height. So that choosing a class really is only a matter of personal taste and efficiency matters don't start bugging you (so that you don't feel like a weight on a class you like). -
11-15-2019, 05:48 AMKabooaOh, look.Quote:
Originally Posted by Karshan
More arbitrary numbers.
Put it this way - If there was no difference at all between the job's numbers, you take Bard, Dancer, Summoner, and a token Melee for the limit break. -
11-15-2019, 06:19 AMAkiudocare to tell why taking a token melee for the limit break(+1% buff) is any worse than taking a token phys ranged for the 1% buff alone ? especially as "uptime strats" you will allready have to do for taking a single melee, so may as well take a second one if thats whats available ? i also fail to see why you should necessarely take a summoner over a redmage if numbers were "equal" ?(which even for the poster you quoted did not mean "exactly 100% the same)Quote:
Originally Posted by Kabooa
-
11-15-2019, 06:31 AMKabooaYou take the summoner because it's more mobile, and brings a raise that's basically comparable in all but the most niche scenarios.Quote:
Originally Posted by Akiudo
It is the all around better choice.
A 300 dps difference at the numbers we have now, depending on who you set that baseline around, is 2-3%. Which is about the variance you see on good/bad crit strings, or even just getting selected by an unfavorable mechanic.
You know which jobs don't really care if they get targeted by unfavorable mechanics?
Bard, Machinist, Dancer.
And of the remaining jobs, the Summoner is the easiest one to adjust to.
As for why token melee vs token ranged, there is no difference in how 'bad' the scenario is. Ideally all the jobs should be desirable, but the fault here lies that the only thing valued is a chart while ignoring everything else about the job that doesn't contribute to it. -
11-15-2019, 06:46 AMAkiudothe variance of good/bad crit strings is still that, variance. if for examples sake blm is 300 dps ahead of smn/redmage (do to their factual utility, i.e the rezz) on average than thats that. yes, on a good run the summoner may get 300 dps more , the blm may get 300 dps less, but over 10000 trys, which is what this graphs show it averages out, crit variance is completly irrelevant looking at 95% percentile parses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kabooa
and if you think the summoner is better than redmage cause the rez is basically as good aside from some extreme fringe cases than great, put redmages baseline slightly higher than summoners so when redmage loses the equivalent to 200 dps do to movement and smn only loses 100 the average out at the same number and in a low movement fight redmage wins by 50-100, in a high movement fight it loses by 50-100, of course it will never work out that perfectly, but "perfect" balance being impossible doesnt mean it shouldn't be the goal.
also about your comment of only looking at the chart and ignoring what other things a job offer, what else DO mch/brd/dancer offer aside from whats on the chart ? dps buffs obviously are included in the chart allready, uptime strats are accounted for aswell unless you want to run with 0 melee, which would cost you both the melee lb+1% buff (which would end up at an actual 1% buff to the group, not the current "we may end up with 0,2% more group dps if we take a dancer instead of a redmage...maybe...") so again, unless you want to lose out on a literal very real 1% group buff+the lb you will take at least one melee, so what does a third ranged offer the group that a second melee wouldn't ? -
11-15-2019, 06:56 AMKabooaNow stop and think about this for a moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Akiudo
The Summoner is better in every scenario but 2 - Fights that cater to the Red Mage, and in "I need 8 raises right the !@#% now".
Why would you ever bring the Red Mage for a theoretical increase of .3% in fights that line up perfectly for Red Mage instead of just bringing the Summoner? Speedrunning? Woopty do.
The Ranged offer much more consistency in play. They offer a group much more flexibility. They bring the best party defensive buff.
And just so we can get this on record - They do need a damage buff, but if people want something along the lines of "Black Mage -1", they need a reality check. -
11-15-2019, 09:46 AMPayotz
I just want Refresh, Palisade and Dismantle back.
I know TP is gone and all, but it feels great popping Tactician and/or Refresh when people drop or if it's a massive healcheck and healers need all the mana during prog. -
11-17-2019, 08:18 AMRasikko2900 x 8 = 23,200 mp. (Verraise + Vercure for Dual cast), a little less with lucid runningQuote:
Originally Posted by Kabooa
I wanna meet the single RDM that can do that in 1 mp pool, so I can call hax. -
11-17-2019, 06:09 PMKarshan300 was just to account for variance and give a number, but my idea is closer to 0. There shouldn't be any notable difference so that, well yeah we could take a comp like the one you suggest and not affect efficiency : what's wrong with what ? Why should there be always 2 melees ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kabooa
Without a difference, there could be any comp, no one would feel left behind. You're a BRD ? welcome, a SAM ? welcome, a BLM ? welcome !
Our team wanna run MNK SAM SMN MCH : sure ! and my friend, DRG BLM RDM DNC, sure as well ! You're only doing 1% less than the "best meta comps" so there's no issue and welcome !
Also. Not to be picky. But nice strawman, you focused on the 300 and not on any of the arguments I put in there. You develop your idea further in you 2nd answer , but you misread that I adressed that already, for mobility and unfavorable mechanics at least : it is ALREADY in the chart. Sinc it's what happened IN FIGHT, not on a dummy. rDPS is what has been managed in fight, so despite less mobility, BLM still absolutely trumps a BRD (also a reminder, mobility is the best it's ever been for BLM, if you play it right the turret image is a meme by now)
What I didn't adress is indeed raise, that is not taken into account in charts and is a decision factor : and I think it should be gone if all rDPS come close.
What I think, is that you don't like the idea of not garanteeing 2 spots for melees ; this idea that 2 melee is mandatory has to die too.
People won't cast them out "yay we don't have to do melee uptime strats !" > wrong, your tanks thank you for forgetting them already, plus there is a lot of time where melee uptime strat is just smoother so it will be kept even if 4 range are in the fight. -
11-18-2019, 03:18 AMKabooaAs you have stated in your reply, if there is no difference, there should be no differences through the job as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Karshan
In other words, if Black Mage and Bard are the same, then the Black Mage should be freely mobile or the Bard should be rooted in the same fashion. Why would anyone play a job that can only be screwed by encounter design opposed to one that by its implementation doesn't care at all what the encounter does?
What I don't care for is the required reworking of non-potency based job adjustments that would have to come to make this fantasy a reality. There are two scenarios.
Every encounter is the same or every job is the same, and both of these scenarios are terrible. -
11-18-2019, 04:18 AMAkiudothe underlined is the important part, because half the people, you including others act like people say "bard and blm should do the same dps on a training dummy" , of course not all fights are the same, which also means certain jobs will have an easier time compared to others depending on the fight, there will be fights like voidwalker where a job like blackmage can shine and fights like titan where mobility issues while in fact cost dps, this however is exactly the point, certain fights.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kabooa
no one looks at voidwalker and says bard should be up there with blm on that fight, no one says that even if you take the titan parse where every single mechanic magically evaded the blackmage and made him move just one single time during the 12 minute encounter should have the phys ranged equal to the blm, people argue that if you take an average movement fight (however you define that, i would say levi/titan is a fair level for that but feel free to disagree) these classes should at a reasonable high percentile , lets say somewhere in the 90-95 range deal equal dps. This still leaves potential for the blm to be stronger if there is literally zero reason to move aswell as being equal if whats generally assumed will be the level of mechanics involved do in fact effect it.
Yes, This does leave open the chance for the blm in our example getting screwed over by mechanics just going of in a way a lot worse than expected, this however works both ways and may just aswell mean mechanics work out more favorable than is generally expected which would indeed see the blackmage pull ahead. saying "classes dealing equal damage at a high percentile can only mean one class gets screwed over more than the other" completly ignores that "bards and blackmages being equal at 95%" may very well mean perfect play and a little bit of bad rng (something which bard/dancer have quite a bit higher chance of happening on behalf of their procc based gameplay on top of the general crit/dh luck everyone has to deal with) on the bard part compared to 3-4 small dps loses the blackmage had to take do to movement.
putting this into practical numbers, the dps difference for titan between mch and blackmage at 95% is 790 dps~. at the 99 percentile it is 1200 , blm going from 95-99% gained another 400 dps on mch, the reason for that is simple, the 99% parses are those where rng worked out completly in favor of blackmage and maybe the group even went to some extra lengths to make it happen, the 95% parse in turn is more of a "general fight where the blackmage had to cut some slight losses for uptime reasons. now the blackmage most definitely needs to be higher at 99, cause thats the "hey, this fight went like a training dummy" try, but saying "if they would deal equal dps at 95% the less mobile class could only lose out" ignores completly that the 95% is the try where the less mobile class allready had some loses, and while its true there may be trys where these loses are even bigger there may aswell be trys where these loses are smaller -
11-18-2019, 04:28 AMKabooaQuote:
Originally Posted by Akiudo
It is very important, yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Karshan
-
11-18-2019, 04:37 AMAkiudodid this person say 0 dps difference on a max "training dummy" fight ? cause i don't see it, if anything what was originally used for the whole argument before your whole back and forth was "the graph akiudo linked" that was a 95% all eden savage parse. if you can find a person saying a physical ranged at a 100% parse in a fight thats nothing more than a gloryfied training dummy should be equal to a 100% blackmage feel free to tell him off, but what people generally argue even if they don't specify it every single post (and this person very much took the graph i posted at the start of their argument and went from there) is that there is no reason for any inherit dps difference in a general fight, this does in no way mean or even imply that a more restricted class should not come out ahead at the absolute top where its more about simply not having to deal with the given restriction do to the fight simply working out lucky or whatever, "phys ranged being equal to other dps at 95%" and "physical ranged being equal to blackmage at 100% are two entirely different arguments, and no one on here ever flat out stated the latter, if anything the former is at least implied by saying things like "these are real fights, downtimes and all included etc..."Quote:
Originally Posted by Kabooa
-
11-18-2019, 04:42 AMKabooaIf people aren't saying what they mean, fine, that's on me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Akiudo
Variance generally doesn't apply to fight design. It attributes to personal performance, due to bad crits (One can have 20% crit in two fights, but crit different actions), no crits, higher than average damage rolls, etc. Variance rarely applies to the fights themselves - That's encounter design.
So to have a minimal number to account for variance, with the aim to be closer to 0, means that "in real fights" there should be as close to 0 difference over a large data set, and that's bad for the current state of the game. -
11-18-2019, 05:05 AMAkiudoof course there is variance in fights, did eden prime jump into your corner or the one farthest away ? do you have to move to do panto puddles or can you just stay on the other side from the group (literally zero skill required to do that) and get lucky/dont get the puddles under your feet?, which phase did titan start with ? which marker did you get on uplift and how much movement do they require ? the difference between a 95% and a 99% try for classes that indeed got movement restrictions is that the 99% try is the one where the small things that can add up to your favor did, the 95% try is the one where they didn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kabooa
and people not saying what they mean ? show me one post where someone literally pulled a 100% max parse and went "see ? bard is not just 1500 but 2500 dps below blackmage, it should say 0!" anyone thats ever used parses to argue in favor of physical ranged (and you are every bit as aware as i am that this is but one of like 10 threads on the issue) took something in the 90-95% range, the only time someone ever pulls 100% parses or even 99% is to show that summoner isn't overpowered because the top 1% of blm parses are still higher. stating things like "the graphic posted (graphic clearly shows 95% percentile over a multitude of fights, aside from me stating as much in my original post containing the graphic)" and "in a real fight, movement allready accounted for" at the very least imply anything but "100% parses where there simply was zero reason for movement due to dumb luck" , if you take statements like these and from that arrive at the conclusion a person that has not flat out stated so is talking about absolute maximum potential a class can ever squeez out than yes, i would say making that assumption is on you -
11-18-2019, 05:15 AMKabooaAlright.Quote:
Originally Posted by Akiudo
So what should Bard's 100% be if the 95% should be a difference of nearly 0 'in a real fight'.
Let me add some more here so it just doesn't feel like bait.
The main issue I have is that it's not just "no difference in a 'real fight'" or any other quantifier someone wants to add.
Whatever arbitrary percentile you want to set for where the jobs are, basically, equal in just one area just serves as a cut off point, that at every point before then, the jobs who bring more "other" stuff are just better.
Without some absurd difference in the 95-99 range, you essentially remove any incentive to be any other job before hand. It also ignores that, again, the Ranged DPS are completely uninhibited when it comes to this "Fight variance". The Black Mage's max is absurd - when the fight allows it and the team plays around them and Despair and Xenoglossy are where all the DCrits happen, but if everyone's baseline is more or less the same, why wouldn't the Bard's Max be equally absurd?
The Dancer? The Machinist?
How are you going to set them all more or less the same, across a wide variety of encounters, but magically also allow Samurai or Black Mage to somehow have this absurd max potential that ultimately doesn't matter? -
11-18-2019, 05:39 AMAkiudoshould be i would say is way to relative a statement, lets simply take what we got, titan 95%Quote:
Originally Posted by Kabooa
right now at 95% comparing bard to blackmage we got
bard 13.259
blm 14.764
difference 1505 dps in favor of redmage
at 99% we got
bard 13.462
blackmage 15.252
1790 dps in favor of blackmage
so blackmage gained 285 dps at the top range on bard, if both had started out at the same dps breakpoint at 95% slightly better scaling than we have now would mean blackmage would probably only have gotten like 250 dps on bard.
taking into account that this allready is an "average movement fight" meaning a high movement fight would actually see the bard stronger/at the least closing the gap whereas a low movement fight like voidwalker would see a bigger gap i would say this 250 dps difference at the top (for the "average movement" fight) does the trick, i would throw in another 100 dps for the fact this would actually see bard pull ahead at lower percentiles, on the other hand i would argue having raidbuffs actually needs to result in somewhat higher dps at the absolute top otherwise offering raidbuffs is allways overtaxed but this is a different discussion so with that being said
250-350 dps at the top for an average movement fight depending on if you believe raidbuffs should actually offer at least some value aside from making numbers on the parser look prettier.
with this we would end up with bard at the 99% percentile at 16450-16550 depending on your stance on raidbuffs leaving it around 100 dps lower at 95% compared to a blackmage and probably like 200 higher at the 50% range.
mind you in this case it would be higher than half the melees right now, but we are only discussing design goals here of course, in the same vein as i believe bard should be "equal" in the 90-95% range i do believe the same goes for sam/nin/redmage (rezz tax is another discussion entirely) etc.) so in this theoretical scenario these classes would be closer aswell, nin is 430 below blackmage at 95% and 500 at 99%, in this perfect world obviously their dps would be "equal" at the top aswell -
11-18-2019, 05:46 AMKabooaKeep in mind that Black Mage titan's tend to be padded with Gaol cleaving opportunities. It seems a minor thing, but if Bard is only 200 DPS away from Black Mage on this, that's effectively the bonus they gain from using Foul on Gaol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Akiudo
I severely doubt Bards have the same opportunity to dump potency into secondary, mandatory targets that don't last the duration of their dots. -
11-18-2019, 05:47 AMAkiudothan you are severely underestimating the power of bard dots, also apex arrow says hiQuote:
Originally Posted by Kabooa
-
11-18-2019, 05:57 AMKabooaHey, maybe you're right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Akiudo
https://www.fflogs.com/reports/bAMZy...ty=1&source=22
Nope, it was limit break. Are we counting that? I'm mostly fine with that, except if we do, then that means New-Bard would have a DPS of +2700 over the Black Mage.
Edit: Looking at others. One apex Arrow in this one. Half the damage of a foul.
No, I think I'm estimating them pretty well. -
11-18-2019, 07:05 AMAkiudosee, this is not just completly unnessecary but also not helping cant really tell you why these guys all have this low apex arrows, or why foul for that matter hits for twice as much given a extra 50 potency, (yea, potentially there where some half power apex arrows here or there, but surely not allways especially as you could delay it for a little bit if you know gaols will come up soon. but it still underestimates what the dots actually do for bard, its not just the dot damage, 2 ticks even are a lot of extra potency given the reportoire procc chance and there are a lot where we are talking more like 10 dot ticks total which in wanderers averages out to 450 potency which while not earth shattering very much is a reason to use dots on the gaols, also its not automatically padding just because it raises your numbers, its very well possible for a foul to actually be usefull to the damage in total if you don't just ranged lb them which leads back to "actual fights" the actual fights given what we have in titan end up in these numbers, i could aswell have send you over to voidwalker and went all "see, even 400 dps more on bard than it has right now"Quote:
Originally Posted by Kabooa
or we can talk leviathan and i tell you that bard on leviathan sucks even harder than on titan because a quarter of the time people outrange the group buff the bard passively offers. what i offered where practical realistically happening numbers, if for god knows what reason 200 dps of what blackmage generally does on titan is padding than so be it, shall we call the fact bard multidots in e1 and actually uses its aoe rotation instead of single target padding aswell ? cause it does actually have a purpose but it still very much artificially inflates numbers, i told you flat out several times that i generally take "all fight" measurements and also that i would say from taking a glance titan is a "fair" fight to those classes given and that i use it simply to give practical numbers instead of a theoretical "well if that and that and...."
you were absolutely free to offer insight on why titan may not be as fair as i would have thought (blm can pad with foul, fair) while still giving off an opinion what you generally think about if my numbers where bad/good even if in that particular fight there may indeed be something missed, which i would still call debateble because even in the 99% range there are at least some parses without foul, like yes you can push blm dps by 200 or so by foul but the range from max to 99% alone is 400 dps
all you would really have needed to do was say "on a general level i dis/agree, but in this fight in particular please keep in mind that...." but no, you had to turn it into this great "gotcha" moment, to top it off with telling me "200 dps is not enough" after i flat out said 350 from a 99% parse would be a good range, potentially 250 depending on your view what raidbuffs should contribute at the top -
11-18-2019, 08:00 AMKabooaWell, the thing is, 350DPS is also covered by the Foul advantage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Akiudo
Let me try this again. I didn't mean to have it come off as a gotcha.
The main contention is "How big the gap should be", and it's almost entirely based on how much value one puts on the advantages and disadvantages of a given job.
So to spare both our post counts - I think anything in the range of 1-2% (which is what 200-350dps works out to) is too small. Much too small. And there will be nothing that changes my mind on this matter unless you're willing to start taking some restrictions on the Job.
Edit: Did more homework. My mistake was going by speedkilling, without checking the patch.
This means even though the tooltip on the site is updated, it was data from 5.0 Bard. Much more comparable. Arrow looks like it's only about 10-20% weaker, so individual max use should be equivalent even though you can't stock uses like Foul. 48k Dcrits, much more respectable. Still well below Fouls, but paints it more favorably.
Edit 2: Also editing since I'm fairly certain I'll be post capped in the next reply.
Padding was probably not the best term. Padding implies the damage is ultimately fluff and doesn't matter, like anything on Hades P2 below 30%. So my mistake there. -
11-18-2019, 08:40 AMAkiudosee, and this is the point people in general argue about, not some "physical ranged at the very top need to do exactly what a perfect blm does" you of course are entitled to your opinion that this is not enough, just as i'm about to a differing opinion on the matter, still, humor me on this one at least, i'll spare you any further inquiry but i would at least like to know how you view this. if you say 2% too small than lets just say 4% (and you make it sound more like 5+ but lets say 4)Quote:
Originally Posted by Kabooa
just 4%, which by the way you worded it would be the absolute minimum one could think of.
4% at the 99 percentile of titan is a good 600 dps if you go from any of the top 5 jobs, call it cheating but for once lets take blm out of the equation because it has by far the steepest dropoff of any class and if we balance with that in mind than indeed every class would need to fall behind by a good 300 dps, even things like samurai or summoner (which probably should do so, but for actual utility and not "just because"). yes, this is also an opinion one can have, but again a totally different discussion. if we take 600 dps off the top than every single class sans blackmage (which again, is the complete outlier as far as damage range goes, if anything that would need some normalizing) is not just better than the physical ranged at the top or close to it, but also at the very bottom, samurai is 1800 dps above bard at the top, but also still 1300 above it at the 25 percentile. the moment you give the top group "just" 4% on the physical ranged at the top they flat out beat them in dps down to the 20% percentile.
the general argument that gets thrown around is "restrictions make it harder on the group and harder to optimize the class" the second one is a fact even if an overblown one, but i'm pretty sure the group doesn't give a a rats .... if a phys ranged or any caster does black smokers or runs away with a flare marker, just how much dps the class offers after its done, with that being said, if even at the 20% percentile the "harder" class is equal than where is the drawback of being "harder" ? you argue there needs to be some advantage, otherwise no one would take them, but where is the drawback to counteract that advantage? after all for "balance" to happen advantages also need drawbacks. ´ you may argue that the drawback is that they don't have free movement, but if even at the very bottom, the place really everyone can reach by not being dead no matter how sucky s/he plays this drawback does NOT translate into a damage loss than this drawback is only a drawback on paper, again, the group doesn't care who does black smokers, only that they get done and how much dps the class does afterwards, as long as at least 2 ranged classes are a given this will be done, the mechanic will be handled even if you have 2 caster doing it so WHAT, unless you want to run tripple melee is the drawback of being "hard" ? -
11-18-2019, 09:15 AMKabooaI have a variation to this one personally.Quote:
Originally Posted by Akiudo
I generally do not favor the argument "It's harder so it should do more". Difficulty is subjective and difficulty is surmountable. I do however think classes that are more flexible need to be less potent, to an extent.
Long form in another thread. Let me also say this is not necessarily the numbers I would pick. I'll get more into that later.
When it comes to balancing classes in a Trinity game, the hard math that comes from theorcrafting and practical application comes down to the right tool for the right job. The 'strongest' jobs aren't necessarily those with the most damage, but those who deal with the most mechanics / reduce the overall strength and difficulty of the encounter.
The reason that FF14 values damage so much is that the player's ability to influence the encounter is generally limited to some hard binaries, with DPS being the only scaling adjustment. ("Skip soar or disband"). The hard binaries are generally tank busters and healing requirements via the raid busters. The hard enrage, while adding a suitable layer of tension, also removes some ability to compensate. Being 'less efficient, more consistent' is generally the motto when it comes to encounter puzzles in other games, and really only applies in FF14 as gear scales the player up, allowing the 'less efficient' to clear the same hurdle.
"DPS is king" because it's the only real agency the player has in influencing the encounter.
So who gets the most DPS?
Generally speaking, it's usually those who bring the least supplemental tools.
One would expect this means Black Mage, Samurai, and Machinist.
As a secondary property, it's also those who have the most constraints. The Samurai must be in melee and must hit positionals to maximize damage. The Black mage must complete a cast in order to deal damage, but does so from any range. The Machinist has none of those constraints.
So your expectation is that these three jobs deal the most damage, but the order of their ranking should be Samurai >= Black Mage > Machinist. The thresh hold and difference between them is generally where the contest is, but the idea is that encounter design varies enough, and player capability matters enough, that the three can leap frog around these on-paper rankings.
Almost done.
But we also run into the problem where each of those jobs also have 2-3 other jobs who fall into the same category, who bring a variety of non-damage oriented tools along with varying effective raid damage increases.
So we have some things we have to consider.
1. The jobs who bring extras cannot deal equal or greater damage. That is immutable, or the jobs who bring nothing else are obsolete. "Extras" are non-damage oriented tools or capabilities.
2. There are four slots for them. At a bare minimum the value of a given role must at least be the equivalent of going from 105% stats to 104%.
3. A job's given strength should be assumed over a variety of encounters, not just ones tailored for it. A tailored encounter should be its chance to excel, not its chance to be passable.
With this in mind, lets start with 1.
The Samurai cannot be outclassed by Monk or Dragoon. The Ninja's supplemental tools have largely been removed, with Trick Attack mostly just being lip service. That said, compared to the other jobs, Ninjutsu affords it more robust capability from out of melee range, so in fights without 100% uptime, the ninja maintains some capability of maintaining meaningful uptime if disengaging from the boss for a few gcds. Mantra has been mostly rendered a moot point, though it still has use. The melee's current design (not tuning) would lead one to assume the following hierarchy.
Ranking
1. Samurai
2. Monk, Dragoon
3. Ninja
With that in mind, Black Mage would slot in at 2x or 3 spot - They have a fair amount of tools to deal with forced movement and mainly suffer in heavily extended periods, but they aren't too dissimilar from Red Mages in that regard. The current patch makes VerScathe less awful but likely still undesirable. Summoners maintain the most on demand mobility, though improper play leverages a tax for each step.
And the problem comes back again to Raise, as without them, Red Mage and Summoner are perfectly fine on the same rung of 2 / 3. The value Raise has fluctuates, but the end result comes back to consideration 1: The jobs who bring extras cannot deal equal or greater damage.
1. Samurai
2. Monk, Dragoon, Ninja
2/3. Ninja, Black Mage
4. Red Mage, Summoner
Ranged plain and simple have to come in last in their current iteration. The gap is what's debatable. This comes into consideration 3: A job's given strength should be assumed over a variety of encounters, not just ones tailored for it. A tailored encounter should be its chance to excel, not its chance to be passable.
What encounter 'tailors' to the Ranged? Effectively any encounter that doesn't tailor to Melee or Casters. Machinist has nothing that the other ranged do not, and therefore it is relatively easy to place this. The Machinist should do less damage than a Black mage, but more damage than any equally mobile jobs who bring extras.
Our final ranking looks like this.
1. Samurai
2. Monk, Dragoon, Ninja
2/3. Black Mage
4. Red Mage, Machinist
5. Summoner, Bard, Dancer
Now that brings consideration 2 into play. Why not just bring 4 melee if you can? While in an ideal world, encounter design would A) Potentially allow this at times but also B) It's still way better to bring a variety of jobs, for the sake of our concerns, it effectively means that the Highest performing of one role and the lowest performing of another role do not differ by more than about .96-1% of a raid's total damage at equal skill levels.
This means if your team clocks in at 90,000, the Samurai is not higher than 900 over a Summoner, or Bard/Dancer. Using some arbitrary numbers...
1. Samurai - 16,000
2. Monk, Dragoon, Ninja
2/3. Ninja, Black Mage
4. Red Mage, Machinist
5. Summoner, Bard, Dancer - 15,100
Ok I lied, we weren't almost done back there.
Now I doubt that's a universally accepted list (I often jest on the ones that do show up), but it's worth noting that this is assuming jobs in their tailored encounters.
The Samurai / melee fluctuate down as melee uptime is denied. The casters fluctuate down as more movement is demanded.
As an after thought, I didn't clarify that the reason Dragoon isn't considered pure damage is because Critical rating isn't only for damage. It also affects healing and shielding, which is why it's not on the same step as Samurai.
When it comes to numbers though, I don't care much for those ones. Those weight all non-damage oriented capabilities the same, in a "You have them or you don't" hierarchy and then assigns them a value total that cannot be more than the 1% stat bonus. You can be certain I value the free mobility of the Ranged Role more than I value Vercure, and I sure as hell value Raise much more than the average individual, but what matters in terms of that hierarchy is that they exist.
But they're satisfactory enough.
Personally, I'd rank the free mobility alone around 5%, but as someone who constantly spends their time rooted, I might just be valuing it too much, but it's also possible others might be valuing it too little.
I also consider the Ranged defense buff better, but that's more of a "I would want them because of this" instead of "I take off 200 dps because of this", primarily because the situations in which it is far superior are not enough to make it universally superior. There's just enough scenarios where it is, on average, the better tool.