Just because DRK cleared ultimate first doesn't mean it doesn't need buffs

[Crater]

Considering we have influential players like Xeno who, in the interview posted recently, is shouting from the rooftops that utility should be balanced with damage, I feel this is an up-hill battle. That being said I hope some feeble grasp of these concepts reaches more players.

Yeah but Xeno's an actual no-fooling idiot.

His argument is literally "Damage should be balanced against utility, and therefore Dark Knight [who has the worst utility by a mile] should do more damage than Paladin (with no mention of the fact that by that logic Dark Knight should be handily outdoing Warrior)". He's got nothing of value to say because he's a 100% class-loyalist Warrior fanboy.

I'm pretty sure later on in that same interview he goes on to say that Fell Cleave needs a potency buff because Holy Spirit does "almost as much" damage, which is even more hilarious because that just shows that he's failed to apply 4th grade arithmetic to the comparison (Holy Spirit: 400 potency, buffed to 480 with Requiescat and receives no further modifiers beyond party buffs, and also causes you to lose an average of 2 auto-attacks in a 5-HS sequence, meaning that the effective potency is more like 450. Fell Cleave: 500 potency, buffed 20% by Storm's Eye for 600, then buffed by a further 5% from Deliverance for 630, then buffed by an additional 10% from the Slashing debuff for 696, and then at least 90% of all Fell Cleaves fall under Berserk for an additional 30% bringing it up to an effective ~904 potency. And it has a crit bonus from BG.)
He does a similar thing going all QQ about how Warrior combo potencies are lower than PLD, when Storm's Eye and Deliverance give Heavy Swing an effective potency of 189 to Fast Blade's 160, Maim an effective potency of 239.4 to Riot Blade's 240, and Eye/Path an effective potency of 340 to Royal Authority's 360 - and Warrior still gets the crit bonus from BG.

It's a really good example to point to if people ever wonder why you might get a little annoyed by the WAR-main community. The mental gymnastics you have to do to conclude that a skill is "almost as strong as Fell Cleave" when it's literally like half as powerful is kind of emblematic of the attitude that's gotten us where we are today, where casually throwing off a suggestion for a massive WAR buff is justified "because we're only a little bit better than everyone at everything and we're worse at this one thing that doesn't matter/isn't true", but any suggestion for a buff to DRK or PLD needs to be carefully scrutinized by a team of actuarial scientists to make sure that the net gain of the buff is as close to zero as possible, because it's "ridiculous and overpowered" any time one of those classes is good at anything.

If he's "influential" in the game's community, I don't think you can chalk that up to anything other than people not being diligent enough in calling out the dumb/wrong stuff he says.

[SyzzleSpark]

casually throwing off a suggestion for a massive WAR buff is justified "because we're only a little bit better than everyone at everything and we're worse at this one thing that doesn't matter/isn't true", but any suggestion for a buff to DRK or PLD needs to be carefully scrutinized by a team of actuarial scientists to make sure that the net gain of the buff is as close to zero as possible, because it's "ridiculous and overpowered" any time one of those classes is good at anything.

Yes.

Seriously. I remember in HW I never really participated in these discussions. DRK had problems, but they were balanced out by some very clear (and frankly enjoyable) strengths. But now that we're compelled to ask for some changes, its nothing short of f*cking Sisyphean, even with long rationally written arguments and statistics to back them up, to A) get SE to notice and B) avoid vicious gaslighting by other tanks shouting us down.

And frankly, our suggestions and feedback and how we present them has been going on for so long now without a reply, that you can actually observe the evolution in ideas, and everything slowly getting whittled down to smaller and more modest buffs, and as of recently, not even buff suggestions, but merely threads pointing out problems with no mention of buffs, and even that is proving offensive to some.

[Crater]

And frankly, our suggestions and feedback and how we present them has been going on for so long now without a reply, that you can actually observe the evolution in ideas, and everything slowly getting whittled down to smaller and more modest buffs, and as of recently, not even buff suggestions, but merely threads pointing out problems with no mention of buffs, and even that is proving offensive to some.

Well, to be fair, I think the tone of DRK feedback has changed a lot, particularly since we learned the nature of the Shake it Off buff, because DRK players (other than a few oblivious diehards) have really been forced to re-evaluate what FFXIV class design is supposed to be, and therefore what DRK's actual place in the game is and needs to be.

Throughout 3.x, as you say, DRK's class design was best described as "Some very powerful strengths, balanced out by an equal number of equally powerful weaknesses". If you take the view that proper class design means that strengths should be balanced out by weaknesses, then 3.x DRK is, hands-down, the best-designed tank that FFXIV has ever seen. And I think the DRK community as a whole kind of settled into the idea of being the dutiful middle child, who always did their chores and took their medicine (ie: dealt with their class's drawbacks and limitations) and worked hard to be rewarded; while Paladin was kind of the neglected kid who wasn't given a chance, and Warrior was the spoiled Golden Child who had everything handed to them for free, never had to do chores or take their medicine because they just had no real drawbacks or limitations. It seemed like DRK was in the sweet spot, PLD needed some better advantages to go with their limitations, and WAR needed to be brought down about six pegs to exist in the same world as DRK.

And, honestly? When Stormblood launched, it really seemed as though Square-Enix felt the same way about tank balance. Warrior suddenly had one or two DRK-esque limitations to balance out the crazy amount of power it still had, Paladin got boosted up really considerably but still had to deal with shit like needing two GCDs to swap in and out of tank stance (complete with Gauge penalty and MP consumption) and the fact that every Block cooldown they have has a significant downside built in. DRK was a little underpowered, but at the time, it really did seem like all it needed was "a few small tweaks" to bring it up to par, at least in terms of performance (if not playstyle).

But all of that has just been thrown out the window. Warriors threw a tantrum, and SE said that they don't have to take their medicine anymore. They got a bowl of ice cream when everybody else just got a cookie, and they cried about it until they got a cookie too.

The idea that class balance, at least among the tanks, is supposed to be a system of tradeoffs, with advantages and specializations paired with equal disadvantages and limitations, strengths in one area matched up with weaknesses in another, is just dead. You're not supposed to be the dutiful child, you're not supposed to take your medicine, you're not supposed to do your chores. You're supposed to just get things, and to be buffed over and over, and to see your advantages pile up, one after the other, until you've got a perfect solution to every problem, in every situation. You're supposed to be a fabulous class pick in every party composition, in every encounter in the game.

That's a weird attitude adjustment to have to make, if you've been a DRK since 3.x and you've spent the last 2+ years existing in a world where you're not supposed to have advantages without tradeoffs. And that's why I think the feedback oscillates back and forth between actual 4.0 WAR-esque requests for powerful class buffs, and other threads where DRK mains will actually sit there, do the math, figure out exactly how much a proposed change would give them, how that buff would make them relate to the other classes, and half the time revise their own buff requests downward because they're still in that mindset where it feels like you're supposed to be asking for changes that improve game balance, rather than taking the Warrior route of just asking to get buffs to any skill that isn't useful enough, and to have every inconvenient or underwhelming part of your class kit removed or transformed into something you can't wait to use.

Having the posts with the data is probably useful, because then you can point to it when challenged, and just tell people "There's the fucking proof". But realistically, we all sort of know how this works: SE doesn't do the balance adjustments by meticulously calculating out the per-potency effects of every single change they make; it's based on keeping people happy, and keeping people from abandoning entire classes. Keep asking, keep making noise, keep playing other jobs and contributing to those DRK usage statistics tumbling down a cliff, and that's how you get change.

[whiskeybravo]

But all of that has just been thrown out the window. Warriors threw a tantrum, and SE said that they don't have to take their medicine anymore. They got a bowl of ice cream when everybody else just got a cookie, and they cried about it until they got a cookie too.

That's a pretty unhealthy attitude. I was one of the lone warriors trying to defend SE's initial changes to War (mainly beast gauge fiasco), because I believe in playing a game the way it's made. I chalk it up to being a old-school gamer, even a fairly recent example like Demons Souls: an original, hard af game that's never been updated or nerfed in anyway by the devs. Much respect.

But that being said, in the end I think the changes were good. It was a bad design to end up with 3, 7, 9, 11, etc quantities of gauge. I agree with the intention of the devs to bring tank (specifically war) dps back down to Hydaelyn, but it was a bad implementation in this particular case. As for the change to Shake It Off, honestly it seemed like an easy way out/knee-jerk reaction kind of change, like they didn't know what to do with it so just made it another party shield to stack on top of all the other party shields, which ended up making it borderline OP. But I have no disagreement that the original Shake It Off was a terribly useless high level ability that quite frankly no job should have been given.

DRK had clear advantages before the change to SiO, and SE screwed that up - not the players. They could've changed SiO to be anything else. Yes, the players complained about it and wanted a change, but SE ultimately made the call on how/what to change exactly - Not warrior mains.

So now they are in a position where they must do something with DRK. All the power and more to you DRK mains still sticking it out, still trying to find something to say or do to get SE to hear your cause. I'm sure they know, they can't be entirely oblivious. I think the housing debacle is overshadowing everything else right now, so maybe it's just bad timing to expect a response. Tank balance is important, but housing is important for far more players. So once the dust settles from that I'd expect SE to start working on how to fix DRK.

[Reynhart]

I chalk it up to being a old-school gamer, even a fairly recent example like Demons Souls: an original, hard af game that's never been updated or nerfed in anyway by the devs. Much respect.

Why should they ? Even if you don't like the game, you find it too hard and enrage a lot on forums, you've already paid for it, they don't have to keep you motivated if you decide to give up on your own.
That's not the same with a subscription based MMO.

[whiskeybravo]

Why should they ? Even if you don't like the game, you find it too hard and enrage a lot on forums, you've already paid for it, they don't have to keep you motivated if you decide to give up on your own.
That's not the same with a subscription based MMO.

Was I comparing Demons Souls to subscription based MMO? No. It was just an example (even if a bad one) of respecting a developers creation.

Even still, just because you pay a sub every month to play this game doesn't mean the devs have to pander to your wants/ideas. You don't like it then you don't play. If the devs want more money from more subs then they'd be wise to listen to what the players want, but it doesn't follow that they are required to. Much the same as Demons Souls could've been made for a wider audience for more sales, but it wasn't.

[Reynhart]

Was I comparing Demons Souls to subscription based MMO? No. It was just an example (even if a bad one) of respecting a developers creation.

This vision was destroyed the minute Steps Of Faith was butchered.

Even still, just because you pay a sub every month to play this game doesn't mean the devs have to pander to your wants/ideas. You don't like it then you don't play.

That's not how the dev team can communicate.

If the devs want more money from more subs then they'd be wise to listen to what the players want, but it doesn't follow that they are required to.

Or they find others way to earn money. Cashshop is one of them. Accumulated subscription days is another, clearing putting a twist on "you can play something else while you wait for new content"...that is to say "as long as you keep your subscription running". Doesn't it feel weird to you that, right after Stormblood, the moment where we get a whole lot of new content, a campaign was created that basically enforces you stay sub for 3 months straight ? I see it as "The honeymoon's gone, now we need something so that people don't leave en masse"

Much the same as Demons Souls could've been made for a wider audience for more sales, but it wasn't.

FFXIV has a lot of pression over its shoulder, bringing money for lots of other SE's projects. I doubt it would really achieve that if it was a "niche" MMO.

Call me cynical, but it's becoming harder and harder for me to see FFXIV with benevolent eyes.

[Lyth]

...

The community has changed as well. In 3.x, DRK was generally respected as a high skillcap tank. We were willing to have more punishing conditionals on our abilities because it was generally recognised that this was part of the job's difficulty. Performing well on it made people sit up and take notice. WAR was considered good because of its so-called "superior design". DRK was considered good because of the players.

With 4.x, there was a lot of anxiety surrounding job nerfs, especially for WAR. Instead of openly bragging about the job's power, it became more commonplace to talk about how difficult it was to play, in spite of the fact that the Berserk rotations and resource generation are significantly more streamlined than in HW. At the same time, a few well-known tanks have pushed the agenda that DRK is somehow "braindead easy" to play, despite not even bothering to clear the tier on the job. Move over DRK, WAR is now "harder" to play. Or that's at least what they'd like you to believe.

I suppose it doesn't really matter too much, but as a result, a lot of DRKs have turned around and said, "Well, if we don't have to live up to the expectations of playing a 'difficult' tank, then why do we have so many punishing conditionals on our abilities?" You can't have your cake and eat it too.

The devs do have a responsibility to address the balance issues, but the community is part of the problem. We've created this mindset that DRK is simultaneously easy to play, not fun to play, and less useful to play, despite being paradoxically more punishing to play. Which is why it's refreshing when one of the eight best players in the world comes out and unapologetically acknowledges that they love playing the job, after completing the hardest difficultly content in the game.

It's all the more reason for SE to take action. We care about DRK.