Can we insert negative consequences for stacking jobs in FL?

Title. Ever since the 6.1 rework, the nature of FL has been to find the most meta job and stack as many of those as possible. This is typically a job with an AoE ability that is easy to use in consort with others to wipe entire teams and build Battle High quicker. We have seen this in many variations. SMN, DRK, DRG, WHM, SCH, AST have all been known to job stack.

While this is not technically cheating - these players are simply playing the jobs available for them - it points to the number one issue with Frontlines. It takes what is supposed to be a form of casual content in which you are allowed and encouraged to play with friends on whatever job you prefer, but makes it open to abuses such as job stacking. While I agree that friends should be able to queue together, I do not think 4-man job stacks should be rewarded for playing all four of the same job to gain an unfair advantage on the enemy teams.

The consequences of this are far reaching. It discourages solo players, people with schedules that don't allow them to play FL frequently, or people without friends to team up with. It prevents players from reaching achievements in game when they are unknowingly teamed up against a pre-made job stack. It destroys the casual nature of Frontlines, compelling players to play meta jobs instead of what they enjoy. And it unjustly rewards players who are able to transform their higher-than-average win-rates due to job-stacking into Gil making.

The solution, unlike the blanket nerf to Summoners following 6.1, is we need a dynamic system in place that discourages job stacking when it takes place. We should not disallow it completely, nor should we prevent friends from queuing together. After all, this is meant to be casual content. However, if duplicate jobs are not allowed in Crystal Conflict, and duplicate jobs slow LB generation in PvE content, then an equivalent consequence should be added to Frontlines.

My proposal: if 3 or more of the same job is present on the same team, then all three take a massive dmg reduction represented by a Damage Down debuff on their bar that remains until one of them changes to a separate job. This Damage Down debuff escalates in severity as more people stack the same job within the same alliance. Between 19 jobs and 24 slots, this will encourage a far more diverse array of jobs in FL to avoid the Damage Reduction. Players will be actively encouraged to play their favorite job even if it isn't considered meta and will arguably have a better effect on job-stacking teams rather than blanket damage nerfs to whole jobs. This proposal is designed to be dynamic, changing to each unique match as team comps change. And perhaps, also, players will be encouraged to try out new jobs in Frontlines that they normally would not have considered playing.

What all of those jobs have in common, and arguably why they're so often used for stacking in FLs, is that they all have powerful AOE burst damage, with the exception of SCH but they more than make up for it with insane sustained damage.

I think a better case could be made that AoE abilities need some kind of diminishing returns for Frontlines, because they just plain stack too well together and can lead to team wide wipes with only a handful of opposing players coordinating their AOE burst damage together.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xylira

What all of those jobs have in common, and arguably why they're so often used for stacking in FLs, is that they all have powerful AOE burst damage, with the exception of SCH but they more than make up for it with insane sustained damage.

I think a better case could be made that AoE abilities need some kind of diminishing returns for Frontlines, because they just plain stack too well together and can lead to team wide wipes with only a handful of opposing players coordinating their AOE burst damage together.

---

Right, given the skills are allegedly balanced for CC, one might limit AoEs in FL to five nearest enemies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mawlzy

Right, given the skills are allegedly balanced for CC, one might limit AoEs in FL to five nearest enemies.

---

Or reducing the damage by 35-50% after 5 targets, any of em could work but the problem is that priority of targets assuming it goes off closest can be really wonky I'm sure due to how the netcode works.

I think this is an over-complication of the issue. The issue is Dark Knight because Salted Earth puts you into a blender where it all aoe can hit at the same time, it doesn't matter as much which jobs or how many of the same, since it all gets put in the blender.
Otherwise, I'd say damage in frontlines is way too low due to melee and tank damage reduction and recuperate.

I like the idea of debuff for using the same job in a party for FL(or Rival Wings), it will make more dynamic game play and requires more strategy.

The introduction of damage reduction what made the Melee and Tank preference over others. Alongside with additional potency buffs, additional range potency buff, additional damage received reduction skills & self healing, and wider area-of-effect, upfront lethal damage LB's. Don't forget these can be double weave with one another! Put that against a caster or range, it is hardly a choice.

Anyway, I hope the devs will take a note of your suggestion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SalamanderIX

I think this is an over-complication of the issue. The issue is Dark Knight because Salted Earth puts you into a blender where it all aoe can hit at the same time, it doesn't matter as much which jobs or how many of the same, since it all gets put in the blender.

---

I agree that this is the bigger issue. Lots of AoEs can be walked out of or Guarded, meanwhile every time I'm in FL the enemy teams are 50% DRK + DRG and my team has none and we always lose in that situation.

Are you complaining about premades (le sigh), or just about stacking jobs? That's two very different kinds of topics...

Either way, I think your solution is the wrong one for many reasons: the queue of the duty finder doesn't discriminate between jobs for FLs, and it has always been so. In the past when the number of healers you had literally decided whether you won or lost games before the introduction of medkits and elixirs, people had to fight for who would sacrifice themselves to heal, every time. Every time, you had people fighting each other because the game asked them indirectly to field certain comps or not play the job they wanted and eat the bullet instead. What you are suggesting is not that different. You praise the ability to play the jobs people want (and I agree), yet you introduce factors that directly get into conflict with that specific idea. It is essentially unfair and scummy to let people queue up freely with the job they desire, and then have them be pressured to change their job once inside because the system allows you to do it.

If you want people to flock less to meta jobs, and limit AoE stacking, then I do believe there is other, way easier solutions that would make sense as well and wouldn't encroach into that principle. Else better to just have the matchmaker have role filters for each party like in pve... And I'm not sure if we want to get into that rabbit hole.

Reduce AoE stacking with diminishing falloff like in PvE past the first 3-4 targets or whatever works, really. That kind of nerf would be so drastically nasty already that it would shift the whole meta immensely.

Rework DRK limit break and problem solved, now they won't jump 1vs 48 drag everyone in / cc and survive because their limit break has no counterplay.

Square enix doesn't care

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Celtazar

My proposal: if 3 or more of the same job is present on the same team, then all three take a massive dmg reduction represented by a Damage Down debuff on their bar that remains until one of them changes to a separate job.

---

Strange proposal. I'm a solo player and I like to play, say, as a MCH. I find myself in a group where I see another 3 MCH. Either they or I will have to change jobs. And most likely it will be me. And how can I play my favorite job in this situation, if every time I jump into random group and system will force me to switch to a class that I don’t know or don’t like? Expecting people to switch for increased damage or a buff is very ridiculous. Expecting premades to do this is doubly absurd. The entire burden of changing jobs will fall on the shoulders of solo players.

Skill Issue + L Bozo

While I don't actually think this is a problem there is an easy solution. Pre match you can swap jobs and also at the base you can swap. Just have a pop up that offers a bonus reward for playing a job to increase team diversity. I still don't see this as a problem though.

I wish swapping job halfway during a frontline game didn't remove all your battle high rating... I don't know why it's a thing, it's annoying and prevents adjustments to the needs of the moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valence

I wish swapping job halfway during a frontline game didn't remove all your battle high rating... I don't know why it's a thing, it's annoying and prevents adjustments to the needs of the moment.

---

In before someone starts the "just remove battle high" chant. xD

Make it so that DRK's invulnerability is pierced by other Limit Breaks. Now we don't have to deal with the meatgrinder of Triple Sky Shatter anymore because Marksman's Spite says hi.
Also make it so that AoEs have falloff like they used to.
For example, Gravity used to be: "Deals unaspected damage to a target and all enemies nearby it with a potency of 200 for the first enemy, 10% less for the second, 20% less for the third, 30% less for the fourth, 40% less for the fifth, and 50% less for all remaining enemies."
Now make that apply to almost everything in PvP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elfidan

In before someone starts the "just remove battle high" chant. xD

---

I'm not fond how battle high helps snowball even more but on the other hand it rewards good play and generates a build up you can work on at the start of games. I think it could be better to actually give drawbacks to it, like reduced DR, and/or a lot more penalty tactical points when you die with a BH, and the higher the more points the team loses. I'm especially fonder of the later because it directly plays into giving the loser an advantage to catch up, and would make anti BH5 jobs even more valued.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Astrahime

Make it so that DRK's invulnerability is pierced by other Limit Breaks. Now we don't have to deal with the meatgrinder of Triple Sky Shatter anymore because Marksman's Spite says hi.

---

So as soon as you pop LD, you have a MCH, or a NIN, or a SAM, or a SMN, or another DRK, or a DRG, or a WhM, or a GNB, or a MNK, or a RDM just insta kill you.

Battle high may be the last, best hope to actually encourage people to engage in fights. Although that'll likely never happen on Shatter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mawlzy

Battle high may be the last, best hope to actually encourage people to engage in fights. Although that'll likely never happen on Shatter.

---

Increase point gain from actually PvPing in the PvP mode, and then delete Battle High.
Battle High should have been deleted long ago and is probably a compounding factor for every Frontline complaint.
How do you balance anything when you have players who are already good at the game doing 50% more damage and healing than a new player?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kayll

How do you balance anything when you have players who are already good at the game doing 50% more damage and healing than a new player?

---

You forgot that they also have 50% more health, so they can survive burst damage a lot easier as well.

But yeah, Battle High really does not work well with the PvP rework. Burst damage is so much more important now, which battle high gives a massive advantage to in both dealing and surviving. High BH players can easily two shot low BH players in many circumstances, and also survive retaliation a lot more easily such as DRK being able to quickly heal themselves up by a significantly larger amount, Dragoons getting an even bigger damage shield with skyshatter, etc.

In many cases it's downright futile for a low BH player to even attack a high BH player because the high BH player can easily keep themselves near full health with recuperate. The only chance to take them down is to dogpile them and stunlock them with CC. Which good luck doing that if they're all together in a death ball with most of them BH4-5.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xylira

You forgot that they also have 50% more health, so they can survive burst damage a lot easier as well.

---

Pretty sure BH doesn't give any increase to HP or Defense, only Damage and Healing including Recuperate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kayll

Pretty sure BH doesn't give any increase to HP or Defense, only Damage and Healing including Recuperate.

---

I could have sworn it did, it always feels like an uphill battle trying to take out high BH players compared to lower BH players. Might just be that shields and healing scale so significantly with it, which again is an issue with recuperate and how many more classes get shields.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xylira

I could have sworn it did, it always feels like an uphill battle trying to take out high BH players compared to lower BH players. Might just be that shields and healing scale so significantly with it, which again is an issue with recuperate and how many more classes get shields.

---

Its probably cause melee have an innate 50% less damage taken so they tend to die less and keep BH, while ranged only have 25% less damage taken, and RDM and DNC have 35%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kayll

Its probably cause melee have an innate 50% less damage taken so they tend to die less and keep BH, while ranged only have 25% less damage taken, and RDM and DNC have 35%.

---

That I knew. It's likely that in combination with the buff to healing scales so much with BH that it makes it significantly harder to kill high BH players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valence

I think it could be better to actually give drawbacks to it, like reduced DR, and/or a lot more penalty tactical points when you die with a BH, and the higher the more points the team loses.

---

Yeah, I'm not sure how it's survived so long with no drawbacks. It's kind of a weird break from traditional SE design.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mawlzy

Battle high may be the last, best hope to actually encourage people to engage in fights. Although that'll likely never happen on Shatter.

---

I've been doing a bit of testing and I found it easier to encourage pvp by playing tank jobs and ccing targets and groups for people to scoot in and burst on. It's something at least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xylira

I could have sworn it did, it always feels like an uphill battle trying to take out high BH players compared to lower BH players. Might just be that shields and healing scale so significantly with it, which again is an issue with recuperate and how many more classes get shields.

---

It's just the skill difference, and I'm not even trying to be edgy or elitist about it. They're hard to kill because they use their defensive toolkit correctly at the proper time, as well as positioning with a lot more care and thought, especially since the pvp rework they can't just bring their pocket healer with Rescue, or Fetter Ward their way out of any trap. It is however possible that recuperate gets buffed by it though, haven't really paid attention.

Just give salted earth and other aoes a cap of 5, excluding limit breaks.
These aoes are balanced around CC not frontlines

The devs should prevent Battle High for multiple jobs in the same party lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wilford111

The devs should prevent Battle High for multiple jobs in the same party lol

---

How would that work when you have two people who queue up separately but are on the same job? You can't just punish a player because someone choose to play the same job as you.

Make it so that once you are KO'd, you cannot respawn into the same job and must change to another to trigger the respawn for your next frontlines 'life'. Existing abusers won't quick-throw that 2nd job life to then respawn back into the first, because they would lose battle high (perhaps make it so you lose ALL battle high from now on too). To make this fair, limit break bar no longer gets reset when changing jobs. Players must now have at least 2 jobs unlocked in order to use frontlines etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zofian

Make it so that once you are KO'd, you cannot respawn into the same job and must change to another to trigger the respawn for your next frontlines 'life'. Existing abusers won't quick-throw that 2nd job life to then respawn back into the first, because they would lose battle high (perhaps make it so you lose ALL battle high from now on too). To make this fair, limit break bar no longer gets reset when changing jobs. Players must now have at least 2 jobs unlocked in order to use frontlines etc.

---

What if a player has only one job unlocked?

Edit: I missed the part at the end where it said "you must have 2 jobs unlocked". Forcing players to unlock and play another job when they might not want to do it, just to be able to play the game is just really bad and not fun at all.

Can you people stop crying and get good thanks!