PLD, WAR, & DRK balancing ideas

[Reynhart]

My supporting reasoning is "equity".

What do you mean by equity ?

White

No, but it's tricky

depends on the game

In most SF game, even the top-tier character usually have a disadvantageous match-up, and then you have players who specifically master that character for when they face the top-tier. (On a sidenote, that's a meta choice)

google LoL tier lists

Same as SF, no champion is better than all the others on every situation

And the last two points are the most important. In FFXIV there is no content where bringing a PLD is more effective than bringing a WAR (If your other tank is a DRK) or a DRK (If your other tank is a WAR).

Look at the most commonly banned champions and you will see that there is in fact an imbalance

There is a ban when a champion is clearly better than all others in most situation. Considering that a party without a WAR is always handicaped compared to a party with a WAR...

LoL also has so many champions that a meta is more difficult to form as the choices make for extremely varied setups.

We have 14 jobs, soon 16 or 17, twelve 8-man instances, three 24-man instances, and 7 Extreme trials, yet none of them managed to create a situation where not having a WAR is a clear benefit...this is not "difficult design", it's "we don't care"...

[Chronons]

I have played PLD since 2.0 launch and in 3.0 I almost quit the job because of a reputation is had gained from its imbalance. I was literally being rejected from PFs in favour of DRKs because of how much better DRKs were in raiding and ex primals, and it was a very demoralising feeling. This is not how the game is supposed to work, and the devs should be working to make party composition MORE accessible, not more limiting, and while they have done an ok patch up job with PLD over the course of the expansion (it is far better than it was now), the core of the job still needs love.

You weren't being rejected from PFs because SE made content impossible to do as PLD though, it was from the community's incessant need to adhere to a meta that is utterly not required for 99% of play. Its just a lose/lose for SE. People who play PLD because its the only tank they can manage need it to stay the way it is, great PLDs want it to be revamped so they can push it like other jobs - who do they cater to? Unfortunately most people who play dont even know what rotations look like and are content to stay that way. SE will likely, and from a business perspective unfortunately probably should, cater to them.

snip

lol I'm glad those are what you took from what I said. I really shouldn't have expected much else.

[Reynhart]

lol I'm glad those are what you took from what I said. I really shouldn't have expected much else.

"I'll quote you without even typing what I quote and make a purposedly vague sentence so that I don't have to develop my answer".
Yeah, sure...

You weren't being rejected from PFs because SE made content impossible to do as PLD though

Who said anything about "content impossible to do" ?

SE will likely, and from a business perspective unfortunately probably should, cater to them.

Content that require perfect mastery like Savage are already not catered to those people.

I'll leave you to your unexplained "equity"...

[Chronons]

"I'll quote you without even typing what I quote and make a purposedly vague sentence so that I don't have to develop my answer".
Yeah, sure...

I'll leave you to your unexplained "equity"...

I guess my sarcasm went over your head. Apologies, ill explain for you. I found it funny that despite for the third time laying out the argument in detail you not only failed to engage it, but instead nitpicked musings about what "games" have or don't have a meta.(You are wrong about those by the way. White does have an accepted first turn advantage in chess theory and your responses to SF and LoL are that they have a more balanced meta, therefore they are examples of games without metas that favor some picks over others. That is a stupid argument.) Its not rocket science, other posters have engaged the idea and we had a parlay about their response. I know you read those posts because you keep copying my responses to them and attempting to weigh in, although even there you seem to lack an understanding of context.

I'm not explaining what I mean by "equity" any further, go reread, google things you don't understand. Again, others haven't had an issue understanding. Its not a failure of the message its a failure of the receiver at play here.

[Reynhart]

I found it funny that despite for the third time laying out the argument in detail you not only failed to engage

You're right, it's funny...because on top of not arguing anything apart "That's how it should be because I say so", you also fail to understand other's point, up to considering an opposite argument as "your point', and mocking the irony...It's also not my fault if you don't understand the fundamental concept of what a meta is and why it exists in games...and especially how it does not really apply to FFXIV, despite the term being pasted all over it.

I'm not explaining what I mean by "equity" any further, go reread, google things you don't understand.

I don't need to google it, I'm just pretty sure you're not using the word properly.

Again, others haven't had an issue understanding.

Funny how "not agreeing with you" is considered not understanding...

So, let me say it once again. This game should not have easier but weaker jobs, because it makes those who play those jobs away from the top team, even they have the personal skill to compete. And for those that can't compete ? Their lesser mastery will still be fully enough for the easier content.

[Chronons]

snip

Equity - the quality of being fair or impartial; fairness; impartiality. As expresses by the notion that playing a harder class, should come with some sort of award. DPS, in the examples we have been discussing. As you can see, that is a proper use of the word. Or maybe you don't, idk anymore.

Its "not agreeing with me" that displays a lack of understanding. Its the unwillingness or inability to develop a complete argument. Its the absurdness of claiming that FFXIV doesn't have a meta when concerning jobs, and a misrepresentation of what a meta is to fit your narrative.

So, let me say it once again. This game should not have easier but weaker jobs, because it makes those who play those jobs away from the top team, even they have the personal skill to compete. And for those that can't compete ? Their lesser mastery will still be fully enough for the easier content.

Broken grammar aside, this is the closest thing you have posited that resembles an argument in favor of your premise. I think you are saying that if SE made PLD harder to play and increased its DPS, that competitive players would be happy and that it wouldn't be so difficult that low skill players couldn't still play it? Im not really sure though, your phrasing is very difficult to confer meaning from.

[Reynhart]

Equity - the quality of being fair or impartial

Ok you're using the word properly, but aren't targeting to the proper concern...we want "equity" for players. How is it fair that players who likes some jobs are inherently less competitive, even if their skill is clearly on par (or even better) than players who chose more competitive jobs ?

I think you are saying that if SE made PLD harder to play and increased its DPS, that competitive players would be happy and that it wouldn't be so difficult that low skill players couldn't still play it?

Wow, just wow...glad that you finally understand that after the fifth time I said that.

If you want "easy gameplay", the first 59 (soon 69) are there to practice.

Every job (in the same role) should be able to do contribute the same DPS wise (personal of by party utility) at the same mastery.

Saying PLD is supposed to be the "entry level tank" is just stupid. You know what "entry level tank" is ? The 59 first levels.

There shouldn't be "mechanically easier but weaker jobs, only easier content".