Concerns about " Getting rid of unused and ineffective actions"

[Dzian]

: why i saw flash is because it only benefits warrior in niche situations and we all know theyre trying to reduce war's power without crippling it completely was my reasoning its excessively useless on drk

Flash is very useful on paladin though. It's there primary enmity generator for groups pulls. It's far for being a useless skill so it's unlikely to be one they'll get rid of.

[Pondera]

Flash is very useful on paladin though. It's there primary enmity generator for groups pulls. It's far for being a useless skill so it's unlikely to be one they'll get rid of.

I think Flash, Unleash, and whatever the WAR class has AoE enmity generation would be classified as a vital tanking skill, so it'd qualify for the tanking role cross-class skill pool. But, I think it should be characterized for each class, sort of like how the Tank's limit Break 3 all do roughly the same thing, but the graphics and appearance are different.

[Morningstar1337]

I think Flash, Unleash, and whatever the WAR class has AoE enmity generation would be classified as a vital tanking skill, so it'd qualify for the tanking role cross-class skill pool. But, I think it should be characterized for each class, sort of like how the Tank's limit Break 3 all do roughly the same thing, but the graphics and appearance are different.

Overpower. And this is already the case (Flash not being a Damage spell aside). They are already learned at the same level, have the same effect and are already different for each Job (Overpower is a Cleave and a Weaponskill, Flash does no Damage and Unleash has a trait that alows another spell to proc it likr Fire II the Thunder SPells, Cire II, Cure III and Benefic II)

[Shurrikhan]

Flash is very useful on paladin though. It's there primary enmity generator for groups pulls. It's far from being a useless skill so it's unlikely to be one they'll get rid of.

I think what he meant was that it would be removed from the cross-class pool, not that it'd be removed from Warrior. But, I don't see the point in doing that either, as it's still a few free pacification-proof Overpowers' worth of enmity, and therefore has at least as much use as Provoke in your typical dungeon run (and both of those potentially less than Internal Release, Featherfoot, or Awareness). What's the harm in having another option when the same space is taken regardless and it really is situationally viable?

Seriously though, what would be the point in trimming what you're allowed to cross-class? As long as you still get 5 slots of cross-class ability, it's not adding any bloat. And as soon as you rip out those slots, rather than improving their options, you just end up with even more clearly flat and unvaried gameplay choices. If anything, I feel like the classes should have their traits revamped to be actually interesting, like a "Sword and Board" trait on a Gladiator or "Blade Turning" on Dark Knight, many of which could then be cross-classed for interesting synergy with other classes (though no more powerful necessarily than any of the other slot options). Improve drastically on the cross-class abilities we have now, and only after removing the redundant binds (by way of ability revision or smarter hotbar systems), see if slots need to be further trimmed.

Just going to throw this bit out there again, too (based on Kalithar's post / @ Kalithar):
You don't always need to axe one of two AoE abilities to consolidate them into a single bind. Quick Nock / Wide Volley for instance can be a single bind that flips between the two according to distance from the target. At level 50, you get up to 100% more range on your AoE, but it comes at the cost of 20 more TP. Easy.

Ring of Thorns vs. Doomspike are less obviously combineable, as they actually have two completely different shapes, procs, and priorities, but they can (1) be made more distinct from each other or (2) better synergize with each other to create interesting gameplay in using both. The same is true of Split Shot and Grendado Shot.

snip

Unless SE intends to do something more with Stone II and Stone III to reintroduce Stone II into the rotations, I'd imagine an "evolution" trait is exactly how they'd (re)introduce Stone III. Thunder II-III on the other hand seems like they could as easily be done instead by optional binds, such as having the option to bind a single "Thunder" charging spell, wherein the cast duration (paced in tiers) determines which Thunder I - III you use, and Thundercloud always defaults to III (the full charge length).