Shield Smite & Chain Strategem: Remove or Severely Cut

Just before 7.4 dropped, a thread on /r/ffxivdiscussion was posted going over the current state of PvP balance and feedback engagement, along with a video within from Tal'ke Rainare.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ffxivdiscus...f_balance_and/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D67lXxC8cm4

A major focus of the discussion was around guard crack (the effect of Shield Smite and Chain Strategem reducing the effectiveness of Guard by 50%) and how it's pretty universally agreed to be extremely detrimental to the gamestate. Please review the thread and video if you would like more insight.


Now, 7.4 dropped with a very minor change to this, citing "Additionally, we found that Chain Stratagem was too effective against Guard, so we have made adjustments to ensure that targets under the effect of Guard cannot accrue status ailments that increase damage taken."

While this is an appreciated step, this is way too minor of a solution that has done absolutely nothing to change the gamestate.

The mechanic of cracking guard needs outright removal or the impact needs to be severely cut. Guard is a tool for dealing with burst damage, takes awareness and timing to use, and becomes invalidated through the instant-use nature of Chain Strategem (again I recommend checking the reddit thread and video for a breakdown of this interaction).



***If we insist on keeping the mechanic, then the cut to Guard efficiency needs to lessened significantly (20%-30% may suffice as a starting point the players can test out). This will still allow players to punish late Guards while allowing well-timed Guards to still feel rewarding. Otherwise, remove it.***



If you remove the mechanic, then what about PLD and SCH's job identity?

Both of these jobs had identities that existed in Endwalker, before the mechanic was introduced with these jobs chosen as the "pilot jobs". You have the option of restoring those identities.


This design philosophy of approaching changes reeeaaalllllllly slowly and incrementally is not sufficient. If this isn't dealt with within the 7.4 patches, then I fear NA CCRC is going to be disappointing.

I mean yeah I'm fully on board with it.

Shield Smite & Chain Stratagem wouldn't even need the guard crack, just their +10% vulnerability is GENERALLY great to have.

Guard crack & Guard pierce has honestly become a bit too commonplace, with alternative mitigation options not exactly being evenly distributed or viable enough.

Guard cracks need to go. We've already guard piercing abilities to add pressure to Guarded targets and it's worked fine so far.

Shield smite instead of cracking guard shoudl apply a debuff on their next guard "reduce guard effectiveness by 15%" instead of jsut yeah yoru guard is now weak at 30%

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mercury_Grey

Shield smite instead of cracking guard shoudl apply a debuff on their next guard "reduce guard effectiveness by 15%" instead of jsut yeah yoru guard is now weak at 30%

---

I fundamentally do not agree with being able to proactively reduce an upcoming Guard. That removes all (little remaining) skill it takes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mercury_Grey

Shield smite instead of cracking guard shoudl apply a debuff on their next guard "reduce guard effectiveness by 15%" instead of jsut yeah yoru guard is now weak at 30%

---

Unfortunately punishment curses/hexes/whathaveyou like that doesn't have a place in FFXIV pvp; past, present, and likely the future as well. There'd need to be way more skill/build variety than what is on offer to feature something like that. Chiten + LB interaction is as edgy as it gets there, and look at how divisive it's made some folks. Even mere damage reflection in some cases! It's not something I wouldn't like to see more developments in, it just can't be in the game right now, mayhap never at the going trajectory.

As for the main topic I'd rather go no comment on it at this time. Only wanted to slip in those sentiments towards that.

Do you think guard cracking would be more bearable if it were on offensive jobs instead? Part of the problem, imo, is that two of the most defensive classes in the game (Paladin and Scholar) also have the best answer to the universal defensive option.

Paladin/Scholar slow the pace of the game down to a crawl and turn it into a war of attrition, while also having the "screw you" button.
Dragoon, Ninja, and Monk can all have their burst damage negated by guard and then just kinda flounder around. If they had a "guard crack" option, they'd be way more relevant in the meta.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gidsonBrand

Do you think guard cracking would be more bearable if it were on offensive jobs instead? Part of the problem, imo, is that two of the most defensive classes in the game (Paladin and Scholar) also have the best answer to the universal defensive option.

---

Not really, no. We already have guard pierce and there is no shortage of follow-through burst ever since Dawntrail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gidsonBrand

Paladin/Scholar slow the pace of the game down to a crawl and turn it into a war of attrition, while also having the "screw you" button.
Dragoon, Ninja, and Monk can all have their burst damage negated by guard and then just kinda flounder around. If they had a "guard crack" option, they'd be way more relevant in the meta.

---

I mean that's the point of Guard, isn't it? Don't burst into it. Why do we need to find every way we can to punish good Guard usage? All of those jobs can followthrough out of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gidsonBrand

Do you think guard cracking would be more bearable if it were on offensive jobs instead? Part of the problem, imo, is that two of the most defensive classes in the game (Paladin and Scholar) also have the best answer to the universal defensive option.

---

I think so yes, but it wouldn't solve the problem that Guard cracks break the basics of the game (defending well) and therefore tend to nullify skill play.

I am less miffed by Shield Smite. For those who play at a top level-- which they should balance the game around-- you get more value out of it. As a learning player, however, it's a GCD. It's easy to get guarded just as you start a GCD, and because Shield Smite is a GCD in of itself with a delay to the guard crack application, it's very possible for it to apply with just a second of guard remaining. More experienced players on the other hand are able to better read this person is being pressured, they are going to guard, and either input it in advance, or delay to punish. The PLD job just so happens to also have been one of the most toxic jobs in the history of PvP, especially since EW and the addition of the elixir. I really think, way back in EW, we should have made Cover just absorb 99% of damage taken, then balanced the job around the limitations this would provide. As it stands, it makes it hard to approach Shield Smite in isolation, because I think the kit as a whole is problematic.

Chain Stratagem on the other hand is a point-and-click oGCD that couldn't be easier to use or get value out of. The same job also rather generously applies a healing debuff. When it becomes blue/green meta, and sustain is a big part of the game, the queen of attrition just creates an overall less fun game to play as, or play against. Unlike with PLD I think the job has issues with direction as a whole. This isn't the first expansion when healing debuffs defined a meta. DRK + SCH train during Shadowbringers wasn't fun in Feast, either. The mechanic could be fine if it was put on less obnoxious buttons and involved more expensive cooldowns or opportunity cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Esmoire

I am less miffed by Shield Smite. For those who play at a top level-- which they should balance the game around-- you get more value out of it. As a learning player, however, it's a GCD. It's easy to get guarded just as you start a GCD, and because Shield Smite is a GCD in of itself with a delay to the guard crack application, it's very possible for it to apply with just a second of guard remaining. More experienced players on the other hand are able to better read this person is being pressured, they are going to guard, and either input it in advance, or delay to punish. The PLD job just so happens to also have been one of the most toxic jobs in the history of PvP, especially since EW and the addition of the elixir. I really think, way back in EW, we should have made Cover just absorb 99% of damage taken, then balanced the job around the limitations this would provide. As it stands, it makes it hard to approach Shield Smite in isolation, because I think the kit as a whole is problematic.

---

I unironically agree. Shield Smite being the lesser of evils being GCD and 8 yalm range. I also agree that PLD could use a new identity, because if this is truly what brought about crack to function as a counter, then I'd rather rewind and rework.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Esmoire

Chain Stratagem on the other hand is a point-and-click oGCD that couldn't be easier to use or get value out of. The same job also rather generously applies a healing debuff. When it becomes blue/green meta, and sustain is a big part of the game, the queen of attrition just creates an overall less fun game to play as, or play against. Unlike with PLD I think the job has issues with direction as a whole. This isn't the first expansion when healing debuffs defined a meta. DRK + SCH train during Shadowbringers wasn't fun in Feast, either. The mechanic could be fine if it was put on less obnoxious buttons and involved more expensive cooldowns or opportunity cost.

---

1000%, we should have learned our lesson with stacking heal down from the Feast. In isolation, heal down is not as bad now because you would conceivably be able to use Guard to manage burst. Now, with instant 25yalm Chain Strategem, you put someone below 50% HP even after a well-timed Guard and they're literally drowning afterwards from the heal down.

It's been a month and I feel I have enough matches and scrims under my belt post the 7.4 adjustment to express that I do not think they solved the fundamental issue, just palliated it. I continue to agree with Atreus that shield break is not healthy for the game at any level, that it takes one of the most fundamental defensive moves in the mode and makes its well timed impact negligible, and that at the higher end of gameplay, it forces two jobs to always exist in lobbies and scrims. Surely Square Enix has some way of gathering not only win rate but also pick rate data on SCH, PLD and DRK. In JP and NA crystal/omega brackets, some of these jobs dominate the lobbies to such an insane degree that sometimes you know you made the wrong pick if you're the sole red job in your game.

For a clearer example, imagine you're playing a Fromsoft game, specially from a melee perspective. You've polished your dodges, you know how to read the boss' moveset, most importantly you've learned to time your parries really well. You're in the middle of an intense boss fight, see that window of opportunity, and land that beautifully well timed parry that ought to buy you a nice little riposte... and then the boss looks at you, grins, says "no", nullifies the effect of your defensive move and sends you and your foolish ambitions flying off anyway. Anyone would wonder "well why would I bother to learn to use this mechanic if it can be negated at any point? I'll just never be in reach instead".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gidsonBrand

Dragoon, Ninja, and Monk can all have their burst damage negated by guard and then just kinda flounder around. If they had a "guard crack" option, they'd be way more relevant in the meta.

---

I think it's interesting you'd bring two jobs that have spicy shield piece moves and a third that is infamous for having the form of shield break that is hardest to play around. As already mentioned, the entire point of their gameplay is not to burst into guard, but they also ALREADY have moves that punish guard anyway, and I think that's a better and healthier form of pressure than shield crack is.