A detailed Reaction to Warrior in SB

[YitharV2]

But since we're ok the topic of paladins, pretty unfair that wars lose half gauge on switching to dps stance when a paladins lose half of a guage used for defensive skills. Right?

How about SE make it fair and halve paladin mana on stance swap too?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsC8...utu.be&t=4m55s

Glad to see we're all still taking the reductive road, though. It's surely far better that everyone just gets QoL and sensible-design nerfs rather than others being raised to or above a currently leading standard in the role.

^

[SpookyGhost]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsC8...utu.be&t=4m55s

There's truth in this, but it's a bit misleading. If you, say, introduce an OP job that you had no idea was OP and everyone was like "buff us up to that so it's fair" then you're going to end up in a situation where all those jobs are super duper strong relative to the content. Now you need to go back and re-tune all the expansion content as well as all the new content in patches. It is much more simple to buff and nerf classes to a specific point you want them at relative to the content.

e: Also, as much as I like Core-A, I believe he's more focused on fighting game related stuff which is one character balanced against all the other characters since they're all doing the same thing (fighting the other dude til he's dead, albeit in different ways). In fighting games it's fine to do a bunch of buffs since everyone just needs to be equal to eachother since there's no boss to kill or whatever. However, even that can go too far and you end up with MvC3 which, although a fun game, has a meta around avoiding being touched even once or your character is dead and now you need to block a crazy mixup or just get unblockable'd.

[YitharV2]

There's truth in this, but it's a bit misleading. If you, say, introduce an OP job that you had no idea was OP and everyone was like "buff us up to that so it's fair" then you're going to end up in a situation where all those jobs are super duper strong relative to the content. Now you need to go back and re-tune all the expansion content as well as all the new content in patches. It is much more simple to buff and nerf classes to a specific point you want them at relative to the content.

e: Also, as much as I like Core-A, I believe he's more focused on fighting game related stuff which is one character balanced against all the other characters since they're all doing the same thing (fighting the other dude til he's dead, albeit in different ways). In fighting games it's fine to do a bunch of buffs since everyone just needs to be equal to eachother since there's no boss to kill or whatever. However, even that can go too far and you end up with MvC3 which, although a fun game, has a meta around avoiding being touched even once or your character is dead and now you need to block a crazy mixup or just get unblockable'd.

I don't necessarily disagree that it's simpler. But in relation to FFXIV, I feel SB content is tuned fairly well to PLD, even though PLD is relatively strong compared to the other two. Even though it's simpler, I feel that nerfing shouldn't be done unless it's truly necessary due to how nerfs feel compared to buffs (and if it needs to be done, as Core-A stated, "there are creative ways to do this rather than making everyone depressed"). I also feel there are ways they could have made stance dancing more fluid for PLD/DRK, such as making them oGCD and gaining the enmity effect immediately but gaining the damage reduction a GCD later (but I suppose maybe that would be too complicated).

It's also true that this isn't a fighting game, but I think what he says about fighting games has relevance to games in general. He also posted another video on reducing the skill gap, which I also believe has relevance.