I hope, against all odds, that we get two Magitek classes in 5.0.

[Jandor]

Sure, general DPS players do. But if I wanted to play specifically a caster I have three choices. Specifically a ranger I only have machinist and bard. Melee DPS are the most oversaturated role currently at having four choices.

Not saying we shouldn't get a new tank or a new healer. I am saying that there's a reason DPS are split into subroles and this "Well DPS have like, 9 choices" is not a point of view I agree with.

I can agree with splitting DPS somewhat, but caster and physical ranged are just different flavours of ranged DPS. You have 5 ranged and 4 melee, which is still more than the 3 tanks and 3 healers.

I was kind of hoping BLU would be (if not a tank) a melee DPS, for that sweet 4/4 and 5/5 symmetry.

[Dualgunner]

I can agree with splitting DPS somewhat, but caster and physical ranged are just different flavours of ranged DPS. You have 5 ranged and 4 melee, which is still more than the 3 tanks and 3 healers.

I was kind of hoping BLU would be (if not a tank) a melee DPS, for that sweet 4/4 and 5/5 symmetry.

With that line of thinking, tanks are just a different flavor of melee dps. The roles are separated entirely by cross-role and theme, as well as what's expected of them in the group. Going without a ranger is felt in the group because of the lack of the tools they bring that casters don't.

[Ottkins]

Hmmm, I'll have to agree with the penalty to firing point blank for us physical RDPS.
We get away with being instant cast ranged damagers, but often our damage seems... lacking?
If such a handicap is implemented, perhaps a slight boost to the damage output at the expected rage is in order?

In regards to the new weapons though? We are due a new Ranged Physical DPS Job or two. There are only two now for the four melee and three mages.
I would be quite frankly boggled if Enix widen the gap even more...

[Grimoire-M]

If we get another melee DPS, it would be best if it was a Maiming DPS. A third Ranged DPS or a Dex Melee DPS make more sense than it, but it's the third best option. A gunblade in XIV's Garlean style would fit under that criteria, albeit not 'feel' the same. Most 'gunblade' classes to me feel Dex melee based, not Strength, but that's a tradition I don't mind seeing broken if it's done properly.

[Lyth]

Ranged dps is a very nebulous role. BRD has historically been very nearly a role unto itself, and MCH more often seems like a oddball caster slot alternative that can be played alongside BRD, rather than as a replacement "BRD with guns". The distinctions between melee/ranged/caster are more out of necessity due to the role action system. At the end of the day, you're there to either do damage, or buff other players' ability to do damage.

Tanks generally don't replace a melee dps unless the melee player in question is severely underperforming, and melee dps don't replace tanks unless the content can be solo tanked or is trivial.

The main reason why we need another tank and another healer is because we only started out with two. A lot of the balance and identity issues within these roles come from the fact that there isn't enough pressure to differentiate between them. So AST ends up being "WHM with cards" and DRK ends up existing in a space between WAR as the best offensive tank and PLD as the best defensive/utility tank. With more jobs in a role, you're can't afford to have such broad niches.

[Grimoire-M]

I can agree that the healers may need a 4th one to balance them out, but WAR/DRK/PLD do not need a 4th tank. In a lot of ways they're even more homogeneous than healers, and the reason DRK specifically is getting abandoned is its utility and DPS are worse than PLD/WAR in most cases. WAR needs nerfs, and fights need to make TBN/Intervention more useful than Passage/Veil/Shake It Off. That's a lot better than what healers have to contend with at the moment.

[Lyth]

The problem with tanks and healers is actually in the homogeneity. Paradoxically, the more similar you make two jobs, the more you accentuate their differences. If AST is a "WHM with cards", then why do you need to bring a WHM? If DRK offers nothing unique over its very similar counterparts, then why bother playing DRK? When you deliberately push jobs in different directions, however, the comparison points become much more complex. What we should be aiming for is maximising diversity, and maximising variety in comps.

Aesthetics is important as well. I ended up maining WAR in ARR because I like tanks, but even back in 2.1, what I really wanted to play was a greatsword wielding DRK. But not everyone considers themselves as a "tank" or "healer" first and foremost. Some people won't touch the role unless you provide them with an aesthetic that tickles their fancy. So if you want more tanks and more healers, providing more options to choose from is of vital importance. Otherwise, they'll just play dps.

This last point is particularly important. There are a lot of things in this game that are specifically catered towards dps, because that's what the average player plays. For all the elaborate and creative mechanics that we see each tier, fight designs are wholly uninspired from a tank perspective. Decisions regarding tank attribute and gear scaling have been almost an afterthought. You will always be the devs design priority over us.

But you also need us. As long as tanks and healers populations sit below the standard 1:1:2 content ratios, we need occasional concessions to be made to draw players towards these respective roles. Failing that, best of luck with your queue times.

[Shurrikhan]

With that line of thinking, tanks are just a different flavor of melee dps.

Well, you're not wrong. (Sarcasm noted, but I'm not sure it's quite... warranted.)

The roles are separated entirely by cross-role and theme, as well as what's expected of them in the group. Going without a ranger is felt in the group because of the lack of the tools they bring that casters don't.

So, Bard and MCH are literally Refresh/Minne_and_it's_lesser_LB-costing_cousin,_Dismantle?

Again... not wrong. Scary admitting that, though.

[Dualgunner]

Well, you're not wrong. (Sarcasm noted, but I'm not sure it's quite... warranted.)

It wasn't meant to be sarcasm. More just a statement that we can draw lines and pull lines out wherever we want to. Admittedly, I presented my original post in this thread as a fact; I apologize and will amend:

It is my opinion that this game is split into five roles: Tanks, Healers, Melee, Rangers, and Casters.

EDIT: To add,

I'm not saying we shouldn't get a new tank and healer. The only reason I even bring this up is, from my perspective, there is actually almost no disparity right now in selecting a role you could want to play.

So, Bard and MCH are literally Refresh/Minne_and_it's_lesser_LB-costing_cousin,_Dismantle?

Again... not wrong. Scary admitting that, though.

I'm drifting into opinion, but also interpretation of the mechanics we've been presented thus far, but...sort of? It's always seemed, at least to me, that Bard (and by extension Machinist which was introduced to be the same role as Bard) was meant to be the closest this game got to having a Synergist role. And for its part right now, Bard is an amazing synergist: 2% constant crit buffs, unparalleled resource regeneration, Battle Voice facilitating increased DHit rate and Foe's being a straight damage increase.

In contrast, the Caster role is a different game of risk/reward. It's a game of finding where to stand still in a system that punishes idling in one spot, with Black Mage being the apex of this role. Personally speaking, it feels weird to try and categorize Casters and Rangers into the same role, because not only do they play incredibly differently, their primary gameloop to achieving DPS is entirely different. I could just as well say, in this focus, that a tank is just a beefier melee dps, trading its focus on positionals into focus on directing and mitigating outgoing damage.

[Jandor]

With that line of thinking, tanks are just a different flavor of melee dps. The roles are separated entirely by cross-role and theme, as well as what's expected of them in the group. Going without a ranger is felt in the group because of the lack of the tools they bring that casters don't.

I mean, you say originally that you don't really agree with "Well DPS have like, 9 choices" but at the end of the day, with maybe the exception of Ultimate, a group can pick any 4 of the 9 and clear.

They'll be making things more difficult for themselves by ignoring the sub-roles with the group, but they won't be making it impossible like they would be by trying to drop tanks for more melee DPS.

Not that I'm against getting another ranger, or making the sub roles within the DPS group more distinct. I just want my new tank (and healer) first.