1 Job per person

It's simple, make "1 job pre person" in alliance raid, normal raid, and trial. give me this option.
I've come to the point that I am instantly leaving any duty that mimics my job with buffs which is all of them cause my luck sucks. I cannot enjoy bard, ninja, even scholar when all my buffs/song get deleted the moment i use them. Bad design SE

You could offset your timers to match your group comp.

Y'know, the thing we've all been asking for SE to implement.

Correct me if I am wrong but wouldn't this significantly increase queue times for no other reason that it makes you feel uncomfortable?

I think you can set this setting for your Party Finder groups.

Have you tried using that feature?

I understand what you're asking for, but it's ultimately a non-issue.

For content which can be done in the Duty Finder it simply isn't difficult enough for this to matter. Having multiple people playing the same class is not optimal, but it affects Duty Finder content so minimally that it just isn't a problem worth considering.

In harder content any party worth a damn isn't doubling up on any job anyway.

If you're simply putting this forward as a personal annoyance your feelings are valid, but you have to understand that's what it is. A personal problem. It's not worth increasing queue times while the Duty Finder tries wait for a unique job. It's not worth the dev time to look into a way to separate players who have it enabled with players who don't and deal with the alternate problems it would cause.

As someone already said if it really bothers you that much then the option to fix it already exists. Create your own parties in the PF.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by koko-on-da-forumz

You could offset your timers to match your group comp.

Y'know, the thing we've all been asking for SE to implement.

---

Imagine trying to offset bard songs

It’s a bit annoying but I don’t see it being a major issue. I mean, it’s not like there are strict dps checks in DF content anyway, so it’s not like you’re going to missing out on much if someone bursts at the same time as you.

Plus isn’t it a bigger loss to try and offsets buffs but then end up having to do burst and 120-second follow up ability without full raid buffs? I guess that’d maybe depend on party composition too.
I.E if there were two Bards a Viper and a Samurai I don’t think they’d lose anything from offsetting because the only buffs are the ones the Bards have anyway. If the Samurai changed to Dragoon though, wouldn’t whichever Bard was offsetting have to risk not getting Finale out under Battle Litany? I mean, it’s probably minor, but it’s worth considering.

As for healers, again it does annoy me when I’m paired with Sage as a Scholar. Because literally every single time they won’t touch shields once, but the literal moment I start casting Adloquium or Concitation suddenly they start shooting out Eukrasian Prognosis/Diagnosis like some spiked their energy drink with crack. I swear it’s on purpose lol. If I see a Sage in the party I literally will not bother touching a single shield. Not using Deployment is a tragedy, but watching a Sage overwrite your beautiful giant shields with their filthy little Prognosis shields is soul-destroying. Like; they seriously couldn’t wait the 10 or so seconds for my shield to break before they spam the living daylights out of shields? For what? DPS-loss Toxicon? lol

Joke’s on them anyway *laughs in Emergency Tactics + Recitation’s hilariously high direct healing values*

That would only make it longer to find a group.
Ok, it is annoying, to have a second drg, nin or bard in the group (dont remember, if there are other classes, who overwrite the own buffs). But in overall would this wish only create more problems.
Its esspecialy bad in times, where one class is overused. Like, new DD classes (at the start of each expansion, where nearlyneveryone are using the new stuff).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connor

Plus isn’t it a bigger loss to try and offsets buffs but then end up having to do burst and 120-second follow up ability without full raid buffs?

---

I haven't done the math, but man.

If that's not a striking indictment of combat design, I don't know what is.

I've always thought duplicate effects should stack for a small bonus. They don't have to be doubled, 10-20% increase could work. That way if they end up overlapping it's not a total loss.

The "one job per player" thing is not a big enough deal to matter outside really anything except savage and ultimates. Not even EX trials is this something that should matter. The content is designed to be clearable even if jobs overlap. You get a penalty to limit break build up if you have repeated jobs, but any mechanics in casual content that require the limit break, the game gives it to you.

Stagger your buffs. It takes just a couple lines of chat to ask the other person if they or you should put your big buffs on the 60 second burst instead of the 120.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valence

Imagine trying to offset bard songs

---

Play them in a different order. Problem solved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wereotter

Play them in a different order. Problem solved.

---

‘Just tank your rotation and dps output bro. Problem solved’

Also wouldn’t putting your ‘big buffs’ on the 60s window still be a party rDPS loss? Nobody’s going to have access to their ‘big attacks’ at 60s because the majority of them are tied to the 120s marker. You’re either going to buff lower potency attacks and ultimately lose out or you’re going to have to use your 120s follow up without full buffs.

You can argue that ‘but it’s just normal content who cares’, but I’m pretty sure quite a lot of people care about the fact that in these situations is practically impossible for someone not to have to ‘lose’

God I love EWs shitty CD changes, really made the game sooooo much better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connor

Also wouldn’t putting your ‘big buffs’ on the 60s window still be a party rDPS loss?

---

If two players have "2min" buffs that overwrite each other, the best thing is for the first player to buff the usual 2min window and for the second player to find some other time to use their buff. That's strictly better than the second player overwriting the first player (or not using their buff at all, which is effectively the same thing).

This assumes that the rest of the party bothers to play to the whole 2min burst thing and doesn't drift horribly or get creative with their button pushes, etc. etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AmiableApkallu

This assumes that the rest of the party bothers to play to the whole 2min burst thing and doesn't drift horribly or get creative with their button pushes, etc. etc.

---

It’s funny that despite them doubling down so hard on the ‘120s meta’ that they locked pretty much every job’s highest potency abilities behind it…and people still just completely regard it lol.

In the situation you mentioned doesn’t that still mean the second one has to take a loss because their 120s follow up attack won’t have full buffs? Which, may not be a party loss I guess, but still feels bad. Especially when as I said above they’ve doubled down so much on having every happen at 120s.

I mean, I don’t know what they can do about it, but it is a pain. It feels like anytime I’m on a job with a raid buff it’s a race to see who can overwrite who, then if you try to play them at their own game nobody gets anything lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connor

In the situation you mentioned doesn’t that still mean the second one has to take a loss because their 120s follow up attack won’t have full buffs?

---

It's a loss only when you compare to some situation that they aren't actually in and can't engineer without finding a new party.

It's an irrelevant comparison when you realize that the goal is to maximize the party's total output. Anyone that concerned with their personal score isn't queueing up in Duty Finder as it currently stands and taking their chance with randoms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wereotter

Play them in a different order. Problem solved.

---

Hmm I wonder what would happen if I do this..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connor

Also wouldn’t putting your ‘big buffs’ on the 60s window still be a party rDPS loss? Nobody’s going to have access to their ‘big attacks’ at 60s because the majority of them are tied to the 120s marker. You’re either going to buff lower potency attacks and ultimately lose out or you’re going to have to use your 120s follow up without full buffs.

---

No. Most melee jobs have a 60 second burst as well as a 120. You'll still be buffing ninja's persona trick attack window, monk's riddle of fire (and actually this is where phantom rush goes, which is their hardest hitting move), summoner's bahamut/phoenix, dragoon's Gierskogul and related moves... It's better to buff the 60 second window than fight over who gets to buff the 120 and override each other. It's a net DPS increase for one person to adjust for buffs that don't stack.

If you're just focused on your own personal numbers, perhaps you'd be better suited to not playing a job that buffs the party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valence

Hmm I wonder what would happen if I do this..

---

What would happen is you don't fight for overriding buffs on the party so everyone does more damage. It's not that difficult to imagine

I actually think we should just let damage buffs be able to be stacked, guess this would further make the game easier lol. LB generation is already slower if you bring more then one of the same jobs as punishment.

But it is frustrating when you even try to delay your buffs but someone still manages to overwrite your buffs and it becomes a mess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keichi

That would only make it longer to find a group.
Ok, it is annoying, to have a second drg, nin or bard in the group (dont remember, if there are other classes, who overwrite the own buffs). But in overall would this wish only create more problems.
Its esspecialy bad in times, where one class is overused. Like, new DD classes (at the start of each expansion, where nearlyneveryone are using the new stuff).

---

Add Reaper to that list.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wereotter

Play them in a different order. Problem solved.

---

Nope. Each songs are refreshed upon using them and not stacking, this means that playing in different order than an other bard would do will give the same result as playing in the same order: overwriting.

Double BRD sucks in DF.

dont see it as a big issue, since roulettes are very casual content anyway, but I do like the option in criterion to be able to change jobs on the fly. Maybe limit it in roulettes for the first couple of seconds

You probably could put in an overriding buff on DF roulettes that allows buffs to stack, because you don't have any choice about who you are matched up with.

PF, on the other hand, absolutely should punish job duplication. If those Ex-SMN mains want to run double PCT, let one of them actually learn how to play BLM instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wereotter

What would happen is you don't fight for overriding buffs on the party so everyone does more damage. It's not that difficult to imagine

---

So, out of curiosity, do you know how bard songs work, do you? Asking academically here.

Ah someone explained above already

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by koko-on-da-forumz

I haven't done the math, but man.

If that's not a striking indictment of combat design, I don't know what is.

---

I agree with you that you don't know what is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wereotter

*someone who doesn't play bard*

---

Here's a little plot twist for you, if you change the bards song rotation from wander>mage>army it actually makes the entire parties damage way worse during 2 min burst and 1 minute as well as bards damage because CBU3 designed it to be like this. So in reality you want bard to be reworked.

Yes, the occasional double buff class is what's keeping the damage in roulette content so low. Suuuuuure.

Been getting queued with a SGE, now I couldn't even use Seraphism, Deployment Tactics or even Succor when I need to on raids (unless they died). I'm stuck with casting Fey spells on cooldown it's annoying. Also imagine having 3-4 Scholars in an alliance raid and each one of them race who gets to cast Chain Stratagem first. SMH.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xenoviastar

It's simple, make "1 job pre person" in alliance raid, normal raid, and trial. give me this option.
I've come to the point that I am instantly leaving any duty that mimics my job with buffs which is all of them cause my luck sucks. I cannot enjoy bard, ninja, even scholar when all my buffs/song get deleted the moment i use them. Bad design SE

---

You'd increase the time to find a group by an hour, give or take 15 minutes.

If the group finder could throw anyone together regardless of role, it would always be near instant. If you tell it "I want 1 tank, 2 healers, and 5 DPS" it'll slow down as it needs to match up a group to fit that criteria.

If you tell it "I want 1 tank, 2 healers, 5 DPS, and no role can overlap" then you've made the job of the group finder way harder. Players aren't utilizing all the classes equally, far from it. Even during peak it would take longer to create groups, much longer. For off-peak times you'd make it impossible to create an alliance group.

To determine if that's a good idea we need to examine the purpose of group finder. Group finder's purpose is to group you up with randoms so you can start playing the game together quickly. That's it. If you add more criteria to consider, then you're slowing it down which negatively impacts the purpose behind it to begin with. Meaning, they won't do it. Your average player would much rather have low queue times and play with people utilizing identical jobs instead of playing with unique jobs and a longer wait time.

The best solution to your problem is to allow people to change class within the role they went in as before the instance begins. So a tank could switch to another tank class, healers and dps could do the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morphiana

You'd increase the time to find a group by an hour, give or take 15 minutes.

If the group finder could throw anyone together regardless of role, it would always be near instant. If you tell it "I want 1 tank, 2 healers, and 5 DPS" it'll slow down as it needs to match up a group to fit that criteria.

If you tell it "I want 1 tank, 2 healers, 5 DPS, and no role can overlap" then you've made the job of the group finder way harder. Players aren't utilizing all the classes equally, far from it. Even during peak it would take longer to create groups, much longer. For off-peak times you'd make it impossible to create an alliance group.

To determine if that's a good idea we need to examine the purpose of group finder. Group finder's purpose is to group you up with randoms so you can start playing the game together quickly. That's it. If you add more criteria to consider, then you're slowing it down which negatively impacts the purpose behind it to begin with. Meaning, they won't do it. Your average player would much rather have low queue times and play with people utilizing identical jobs instead of playing with unique jobs and a longer wait time.

The best solution to your problem is to allow people to change class within the role they went in as before the instance begins. So a tank could switch to another tank class, healers and dps could do the same.

---

This isn't even a problem, Ive gotten into so many alliance raids to find my group has 2 bards and another group has 2 dancers... why did the system not separate them? it's so simple yet everyone is making it out to destroy queue timers.
If it is an opt in system then the person that is opting into it is the one that suffers and it's their own fault. other people get priority to queues. otherwise after a certain time it will just queue you in with a viable group just like how the language option works.