This whole Meta Party thing is hurting me. x_x

[Kabooa]

Aren't meta comps built up around coordination and team synergy? If so, isn't the average uncoordinated pug going to get less mileage out of a meta comp anyway?

No. An average player is going to perform less no matter what job they're on, but a low damage blackmage is worthless, where a low damage machinist can still manasong and hypercharge.

[zuzu-bq]

No. An average player is going to perform less no matter what job they're on, but a low damage blackmage is worthless, where a low damage machinist can still manasong and hypercharge.

This is what people don't get.

[Levy9]

No. An average player is going to perform less no matter what job they're on, but a low damage blackmage is worthless, where a low damage machinist can still manasong and hypercharge.

You're missing my point. Is the average player going to sync up their raid buffs in coordination with another player's buffs so that they stack consistently in a pug group? Probably not. If they don't coordinate like this, the benefit of having a meta comp decreases from when a coordinated group is using it. I didn't say there was no possible advantage for a pug. Secondly, the Blackmage's job is pure damage. Your point is a little unfair, because it assumes that the blackmage player is bad at their job's designated task while the MCH is at least half aware. Suppose the MCH forgets to hypercharge again after the first or second CD.

I've played with many Bards and MCH's who never use any mana/tp raid buffs in 24 mans while the healers casts multiple raises.

[Neela]

So when the game director says there are no major advantages or disadvantages to any given comp, we should take that as an objective truth.

serious?... SE broke their claims several times the last view years about housing, about pets, about pure raw dds, about skill usages, rotas etc. - anyone who trust them blindly is just totally naiv... sry : /
Maybe you are right, maybe they never intend a Meta, but actually everywhere where you have a choice out of several options there will always be a meta - if you like it or not. Should the com focus that bad on meta comps tho? hell no - imo meta-fans (out of worlds-firsts race) are just lazy lemmings... but thats subjective and doesn't matter for the question if "meta" is real or not. it is real for sure : /

personal opinion about meta...
...meta sucks... and people who rely on meta, suck as well... I lol so hard everytime a "pro" random left a casual byakko farm party because "dbl cls won't reach lb3 mimimi"... fuck you, have u even tried BYAKKO with dbl cls? people read or hear things about meta and praise those infos like the holy grail... without actually knowing why this meta even exist and what its primary was build for. nowadays those meta is adapted to nearly every pf farm grp what sucks hard.... I wonder if people are just fucking lazy as hell looking for to get carried... or if they really believe content can't be cleared without meta nowadays... - im not even talking about the false opinion that meta comp grps =/= use of meta utility syngery – especially in random pfs. people just don't think 2meter further ahead if they set up "meta farm grps" in pf... but well thats maybe just me : /

[Remedi]

where a low damage machinist can still manasong and hypercharge.

While it's true that implies said players using them which isn't usually the case for the mayority of ppl

[Kabooa]

You're missing my point..

Your point is trying to bring in a factor we assume equalized in these discussions because it is a variable that ultimately doesn't have any bearing to the strength of a class.

A white mage can outdps any dps job if the skill disparity is high enough. We set baselines, we set assumptions, to remove these variables because then we can only look at the objective strength of the class, not the wide differential in the players playing them.

A non-meta group with no coordination is still at an disadvantage to a meta one with no coordination. The disparity in damage is not that high, and the amount of tools available are greatly improved. No matter where you set the slider for skill, this doesn't change.

[Chevronone]

The people who lock out roles in pf are in pf for a reason. They're most likely bad and not very fun to play with.

[Bourne_Endeavor]

You're missing my point. Is the average player going to sync up their raid buffs in coordination with another player's buffs so that they stack consistently in a pug group? Probably not.

They don't have to be. A Dragoon can pop Battle Litany willy-nilly and it will still have a significant impact on Bard's overall damage, albeit less of one than if paired with a competent Dragoon. Regardless, it's unfair to compare unskilled meta job players with skilled non-meta ones. All things need to be relatively equal to calculate any worthwhile data. A bad Dragoon will still provide more to the raid than a bad Samurai unless the former is flat out not pushing buttons. Statics that want meta jobs aren't going to settle for a forty percentile Dragoon over a eighty percentile Samurai. They'll hold out for a better Dragoon.

Of course I am aware that ACT calculates from the battle log. Yet that is still not a complete picture of the numbers. Internal testing, raw mathematics (formulas, interactions) on the coding level, those are all things that we do not have. And I'm sorry, but I will believe the creators of the game far more easily than any player. It's nothing personal, but no player knows the game nearly as well as the developers do.

As for the others who quoted me: if you truly, truly believe that the developers are wrong with an objective analysis of data subsets, there is no convincing you. But the meta is a fiction. The sooner we let go of it, the better.

You're essentially claiming the battle log lies to us. Assuming all players are of equal skill, a composition of PLD/WAR/AST/SCH/DRG/NIN/BRD/MCH will outperform one consisting of PLD/DRK/AST/WHM/SAM/NIN/BRD/RDM

There is no internal formula that abruptly balances out the latter group. The Bard alone will suffer a significant damage loss due to how much of its DPS revolves around Crit (Battle Litany; Chain Strategem) and Disembowel. DRK lags behind WAR in overall damage output and has nowhere near the utility.

Yoshida isn't even denying the meta exists. He's merely insisting all jobs are viable, which they are. That does not mean they are all equal. In an interview with MrHappy last year, he outright asked Happy to tell his audience healer DPS doesn't matter and they don't expect it when calculating enrage timers unless people are undergeared. By your logic, people should accept non-DPS healers since Yoshida defended them. You'll be hard pressed to find any worthwhile static allowing their healers to literally do nothing in between healing.

[Eli85]

You're essentially claiming the battle log lies to us.

This is a really bad case of putting words in my mouth. My claim (which really isn't a claim, as it is a fact): the developers have a higher quality of data than the players do. Ergo, when objective data analysis is done, I (and everyone else, quite frankly) should put far, far more weight into the developers claims (since) they are working from a higher quality of data.

Development metrics, internal numbers, more thorough understanding of how skills and abilities interact with each other, better testing environments—all this, combined with far more logs than any player has seen, gives the developers a much higher quality of data.

Yoshida isn't even denying the meta exists. He's merely insisting all jobs are viable, which they are. That does not mean they are all equal.

I fear you are misreading Yoshida. When he says that 'there are no major advantages or disadvantages to any setup,' the suggestion is very clear: the perceived advantages and disadvantages of the "meta" are not as profound as players make them out to be. So why? The higher quality of data the developers are privy to suggest this, which is why he said what he said.

[Kolsykol]

I think that maybe it's a bit of a self-fullfilling prophecy.
People who are better and are trying to get those quickest speedkills are naturally going to be min-maxing as much as possible, hence the meta.
But how big of a difference does it even make for them? And even if it's a noticeable difference then does that difference become noticeable because they're so good that they can elevate the meta to that point or is it just because the meta is actually that much better?

Like how big of a difference does it truly make for the average player that isn't a 1337 ninja warrior deluxe of doom?
Is the meta a '' must have '' because the hardcore players are trying to min-max for the best speedkill where every single second counts, or is it a '' must have '' because it's actually THAT much better than non meta?


I am not too read up on this, it's just my thoughts on it as more of an outsider.
I wonder how much of it is just people obsessing over what people who are trying to save seconds are doing rather than what is good for the average player?
Like is the average player, or even players that are great even going to make the meta work to the extent that it justifies telling people to play something that they don't enjoy rather than their favorite job?
I dunno.
I am not saying that it isn't '' better '', just wondering if perhaps it's way blown out of proportions.