Can we talk about how mnk, drg, and blm are blatantly overpowered right now?

[Yandere-chan]

As much as I want to see the gap between all dps get closer.
I have to disagree strongly for taking job difficulty into balance. Not only difficult is very subjective, even if there is a measure of job difficulty, it vary from fight to fight and player to player. All job balance should be consider at the class is being use at it maximum optimisation.

Then I have to disagree strongly with you. There are some things that are just obviously more skillful to do vs. other things. Saying it's subjective is an hollow observation. Yes, everyone is skilled differently at the game to some extent, and some people are more gifted at doing things most people find very tedious than others, and to that, they will be advantaged in life by it. Life isn't fair, some people's experiences/genetics are going to make them succeed better at certain difficult things. That doesn't mean you discard the importance of taking in consideration the difficulty a class possesses when determining balance.

Requiring say one class to do 20 extra button presses with very unforgiving restrictions on half of them compared to another of the same role and balancing them around only ever being played at 100% optimization is not balanced at all. You can't just make a class clearly more tedious and complicated and vulnerable to error, especially under pressure, and not consider their balance vs. a class which has extremely less to do with less restrictions to have optimal output. The argument of subjectivity in difficulty only goes so far when you are talking about how many actual buttons and restrictions a player has to play around vs. another. It's illogical to suggest that a class that has more red tape to get over and more buttons to sequence in perfect execution without dying to end game mechanics is of negligible difference to one that doesn't. That there is someone out there who can potentially do all those things without error most of the time doesn't change that. Good for that person, they deserve to do a bit better by taking on a more challenging class regardless if it's due to innate abilities or not. Even among the skilled though, humans aren't computers, sometimes they just make honest mistakes, and classes with more to do are by nature more prone to such human errors, however seldom.

So, yeah, if you just aren't as good at the game but want to still do all the content in the game, there should be classes that trade a bit of ceiling for a much higher intermediate floor in what they have to offer in performance. Or, perhaps you just want the consistency of a less complicated class. It's a fairly common preference.

Bottomline though, demand vs. performance ratios vs. ceilings vs. floors are valid considerations in class balance for ffxiv. Lower demand high performance kits are going to be more appealing than high demand, higher performance kits for most people in heavy mechanic fights or just casual players. Even for very skilled players, maybe you want to trade the potential to do 3% or so extra dmg over your rivals to just make sure you experience less potential wipes with a particular group via a less complicated class. Such options existing is a good thing for the game in my opinion.

[Numenor1379]

Difficulty is largely (if not entirely) subjective. Balancing around the subjective is bad design.

[Yandere-chan]

Difficulty is largely (if not entirely) subjective. Balancing around the subjective is bad design.

The idea that having more buttons to press with greater restrictions being a subjective increase in difficulty as a means to disregard it is an absurd denial of the objective. Ignoring the analysis and application of a matter due to a small factor of subjectivity is a folly to intelligent design itself. By that practice, all considerations would have no meaning because life is innately subjective to human beings on a fundamental level. Clearly, one can simultaneously agree that a certain factor's impact will have a degree of subjectivity while also objectively having a general trend in outcome. Such is the case when you increase the number of buttons and restrictions on a class vs. another.

I'll make a grossly exaggerated example to point this out. Class A vs. Class B. Class A has to push one button for one skill. Class B has to sequence 50 skills in 40+ buttons with range and positional restrictions. They both have the same output under 100% optimal execution. Sure, a person could claim that the difference is subjective, that it's entirely possible that they play both without error. But that would be meaningless when you instead take results from a large sample size and see a trend that shows that Class A is absurdly overpowered and improperly balanced (or vise versa) through sheer ease of play. You don't disregard recognized patterns in outcome due to the potential of some exception via unusual subjective aptitude.

[Wayfinder3]

Then I have to disagree strongly with you. There are some things that are just obviously more skillful to do vs. other things. Saying it's subjective is an hollow observation. Yes, everyone is skilled differently at the game to some extent, and some people are more gifted at doing things most people find very tedious than others, and to that, they will be advantaged in life by it. Life isn't fair, some people's experiences/genetics are going to make them succeed better at certain difficult things. That doesn't mean you discard the importance of taking in consideration the difficulty a class possesses when determining balance.

Requiring say one class to do 20 extra button presses with very unforgiving restrictions on half of them compared to another of the same role and balancing them around only ever being played at 100% optimization is not balanced at all. You can't just make a class clearly more tedious and complicated and vulnerable to error, especially under pressure, and not consider their balance vs. a class which has extremely less to do with less restrictions to have optimal output. The argument of subjectivity in difficulty only goes so far when you are talking about how many actual buttons and restrictions a player has to play around vs. another. It's illogical to suggest that a class that has more red tape to get over and more buttons to sequence in perfect execution without dying to end game mechanics is of negligible difference to one that doesn't. That there is someone out there who can potentially do all those things without error most of the time doesn't change that. Good for that person, they deserve to do a bit better by taking on a more challenging class regardless if it's due to innate abilities or not. Even among the skilled though, humans aren't computers, sometimes they just make honest mistakes, and classes with more to do are by nature more prone to such human errors, however seldom.

So, yeah, if you just aren't as good at the game but want to still do all the content in the game, there should be classes that trade a bit of ceiling for a much higher intermediate floor in what they have to offer in performance. Or, perhaps you just want the consistency of a less complicated class. It's a fairly common preference.

Bottomline though, demand vs. performance ratios vs. ceilings vs. floors are valid considerations in class balance for ffxiv. Lower demand high performance kits are going to be more appealing than high demand, higher performance kits for most people in heavy mechanic fights or just casual players. Even for very skilled players, maybe you want to trade the potential to do 3% or so extra dmg over your rivals to just make sure you experience less potential wipes with a particular group via a less complicated class. Such options existing is a good thing for the game in my opinion.

I agree with this 100%

It's like WHM and AST are analogy for running and walking. if you walk, you get to your destination slower but safer, and with less exertion or fatigue. When you run, you get to your destination faster, but you risk injury, exertion, fatigue, and possible filthiness as the trade off. however, WHM is walking and getting there faster than AST who is running and putting in more effort. there is nothing subjective about walking and running as running inherently requires more of you than walking. in this case, the job with more targetted abilities and a rng defined rotation in it's horrendous card system and a weaker healing kit as well as, a weaker Mp contraints is OBJECTIVELY harder than a job with the best healer MP management, strongest healing kit, no targetted rng mechanics and whos sole optimization stems from hitting Glare, or giving up 3 of them to use Afflatus Misery. we can sit here and act like just because most of the jobs are close in difficulty, difficulty shouldn't matter. But the difficulty between AST and WHM isn't a small one and those who don't play them both will hold this half hearted stance that difficulty is 100% subjective for all jobs.

Difficulty is largely (if not entirely) subjective. Balancing around the subjective is bad design.

You're partially correct, it is largely subjective, but not completely subjective. the idea that some jobs are more complex than others is just as true as the idea that difficulty is subjective and as a result, you have to be objective when looking at the kit of both jobs while paying attention to the communities discussion regarding said kits. jobs that are difficult usually seem outcry which we see with AST and it's card system as opposed to WHM, where we don't see this. there aren't any post with someone complaining about the difficulty of the job in any part of it's kit.

[Arale]

a weaker healing kit

Can you elaborate here? As someone who omniheals, I am a bit confused on this one.