#NerfBRD

[Ilan]

"Next tier" happens in the next expansion, where, again, moderate to major reworks can actually happen without disrupting the game, as the level cap raise, the new zones, and introduction of new actions and traits will disrupt on their own. Making Bard less Crit dependent, and giving Machinist a facelift would happen there.

Dragoon is already considered 100% mandatory so that's kind of moot.

A 7k bard dipping to 6700 is still going to be taken, outside a world first / rank 1 speed run team.

And of what use is it if the bard gets nerfed and the machinist will stay the mess that it is? Stop screaming for nerfs for a class if the other class is just bad because of the gameplay and not because of the dps of the other class...

[Grimoire-M]

And of what use is it if the bard gets nerfed and the machinist will stay the mess that it is? Stop screaming for nerfs for a class if the other class is just bad because of the gameplay and not because of the dps of the other class...

Personally, I believe both need to happen. There's nothing stopping both from being a valid option. And (hopefully) we all agree that leaving it alone isn't the best idea either.

[Kabooa]

And of what use is it if the bard gets nerfed and the machinist will stay the mess that it is? Stop screaming for nerfs for a class if the other class is just bad because of the gameplay and not because of the dps of the other class...

Have you even played Machinist to any extent?

The job actually plays pretty well when it's as intended (RE: low latency). About the only downside is that wildfire interludes don't have much going on, but given the frenzy of the Wildfire Overheat segment, the calmer segment isn't unwelcome.

The "Clunk" generally refers to two scenarios.

A) Latency
B) Player error

There are more minute ones that are experienced by players better than you and me.

Bard brings more. The general consensus is those that bring more do less themselves. Given the current state of the game, the only reasonable requisition is that Bard do less themselves.

A gameplay adjustment to Machinist is unlikely, and even then doesn't address the issue. A buff is out of the question because then you're just displacing Casters yet again, and it's a band aid fix at best. A full on face lifting rework is out of the question until the expansion, which will likely be -7 months- from now, unless they've been working on it since Sigma, which I somehow doubt.

I suppose you could do nothing, but that's not really the context of the thread, and that's hardly any fun to discuss.

[Ilan]

Personally, I believe both need to happen. There's nothing stopping both from being a valid option. And (hopefully) we all agree that leaving it alone isn't the best idea either.

I don't think so because we all know how good SE is with nerfing things without destroying a class completly.

Have you even played Machinist to any extent?

The job actually plays pretty well when it's as intended (RE: low latency). About the only downside is that wildfire interludes don't have much going on, but given the frenzy of the Wildfire Overheat segment, the calmer segment isn't unwelcome.

The "Clunk" generally refers to two scenarios.

A) Latency
B) Player error

There are more minute ones that are experienced by players better than you and me.

Bard brings more. The general consensus is those that bring more do less themselves. Given the current state of the game, the only reasonable requisition is that Bard do less themselves.

A gameplay adjustment to Machinist is unlikely, and even then doesn't address the issue. A buff is out of the question because then you're just displacing Casters yet again, and it's a band aid fix at best. A full on face lifting rework is out of the question until the expansion, which will likely be -7 months- from now, unless they've been working on it since Sigma, which I somehow doubt.

I suppose you could do nothing, but that's not really the context of the thread, and that's hardly any fun to discuss.

So then tell me why there are not more MCH's if there is nothing wrong with it. Oh right probably because most people don't have a low ping or the gameplay of a MCH feels just bad for them. Don't try to tell me its because people don't want them because people will always want you in your static if you are good on your class, no matter what you play.
And no i don't play MCH because i dislike the whole concept.

[Kabooa]

So then tell me why there are not more MCH's if there is nothing wrong with it. Oh right probably because most people don't have a low ping or the gameplay of a MCH feels just bad for them. Don't try to tell me its because people don't want them because people will always want you in your static if you are good on your class, no matter what you play.
And no i don't play MCH because i dislike the whole concept.

1. There are not more Machinists because their direct analogue is unambiguously better in almost every case. Just looking at data alone, Machinist maintains a slight lead, like less than 1%, that steadily falls as player skill rises, until it's eclipsed in the 95-100th range.
2. Combine this with the lower latency thresh hold (Bard feels just as bad when you slap on another 150 ping) and Rapid Fire, and it's more difficult to effectively achieve the same DPS - But with less party support.
3. People are more likely to take a machinist over a Black Mage or Samurai even if a Bard is already in their party.
4. Developers obviously test stuff in house on a private server with, guess what, low / nonexistent ping.