Ranged DPS role is about to be excluded from all content

[Vendalwind]

Actually if you'd read my posts then you'd know that my entire point is exactly what you said here. The only reason why I even brought up proc-based jobs was in response to the other poster attempting to talk as if pressing the same rotation in the same order every single time is somehow harder than proc-based jobs. But I guess coming in here acting high-and-mighty is more important than actually knowing what the conversation you're forcing yourself into is actually about.

You manage to insult so many people at the same time while still spouting incorrect statements AND pretending your previous posts somehow had a highground inherant point that no one is getting.

Have you ever considered no one gets your point because you are abyssmally terrible at making any points? Coherant or valid?

You prove yourself again and again incapable of a rational thought when it comes to the difficulty and adaptations melee have to make.

[Nedkel]

Stuff

The main reason why we assume melees are "harder" to play is because their mistakes cost them much more dps than ranged who could mess up a rotation.
On a ranged you may do a little less dps, but if you mess up your timings or rotation it wont hurt you as much as it does melees. If melee wont execute their rotation within certain amount of time or if he doesnt know the run and just mess up everything then no matter his little dps advantage he wont catch up to good bard or mch.

Everyone is basing their opinion on a savage content statistic, while its a statistic that has been taken primarly from organized static groups who are playing meta builds and who finish those savage raids successfully. In those static groups there is no rng element, people know what to do basically, they make a big part of the savage content statistics.
Now look at this


The differences are no longer as big as they are in savage content, you could clearly see the ceilling for melees jobs is bigger than other jobs, but median is not far away from median for ranged with few exceptions.

Now apparently BLM is no longer the best dps, also his performance is super vulnerable to the player made mistakes, just look at the minimum and size of the the middle bar. Now look at the minimum performance of machinist, its higher than all the other jobs despite this job having really high APM.
I dont argue against buff for bottom dps jobs, but against a buff that will put them at the same level as melee jobs because that will basically take us back to the past with stormblood melees jobs being borderline useless.

[Akiudo]

The main reason why we assume melees are "harder" to play is because their mistakes cost them much more dps than ranged who could mess up a rotation.
On a ranged you may do a little less dps, but if you mess up your timings or rotation it wont hurt you as much as it does melees. If melee wont execute their rotation within certain amount of time or if he doesnt know the run and just mess up everything then no matter his little dps advantage he wont catch up to good bard or mch.

Everyone is basing their opinion on a savage content statistic, while its a statistic that has been taken primarly from organized static groups who are playing meta builds and who finish those savage raids successfully. In those static groups there is no rng element, people know what to do basically, they make a big part of the savage content statistics.
Now look at this


The differences are no longer as big as they are in savage content, you could clearly see the ceilling for melees jobs is bigger than other jobs, but median is not far away from median for ranged with few exceptions.

Now apparently BLM is no longer the best dps, also his performance is super vulnerable to the player made mistakes, just look at the minimum and size of the the middle bar. Now look at the minimum performance of machinist, its higher than all the other jobs despite this job having really high APM.
I dont argue bottom dps jobs are indeed in need of a small buff, but nothing that would make them better than melees because that will basically take us back to the past with stormblood melees jobs being borderline useless.

problem with that kind of statistic is that you are taking the floor and the ceiling and arguing in a way as if both are of equal worth aswell as necessarely saying the same thing. taking your own picture just look at bard compared to samurai/dragoon, all three of these classes have their floor at nearly the same point,being a terrible bard you will do basically as bad as a terrible dragoon/samurai, yet their ceiling is about twice as much ahead of bard then even the median range, now what does that tell us ? yes, you could argue melees are harder to optimise, but as it stands, even with the normal mode statistics you linked, where there is done jack shit for optimization they are still ahead even at the bottom, and optimization obviously is allways possible.

the fact that the ceiling is so far ahead while the floor is nearly equal can mean three things,

A) it is harder to be a good melee/Bad ranged
B) it is easier to be a bad melee/good ranged
C)a combination of these two.

the important part here is that A) and B) are not the same. it being easier to be "decent as a physical ranged" does not prove in itself that it is easier to be good at it compared to a melee, without in depth class knowledge, which most people lack.
So yes, it is possible to mean having high uptime and hitting positionals is harder than basically being glued to your hotbars watching for proccs 24/7 without forgetting the next mechanics but it may just aswell mean that fucking up completly if you are just plain bad is easier on melee while if you are even decent it is actually equally hard.

look at the median range for monk, not the dps but the actual range of it, its basically equal to bard in length only very slightly longer , as you yourself pointed out that the extremely long "median range" for blackmage implies it is hard to optimize and prone to error this would in return mean an "equal" median range implies about equal error proneness, it would also mean redmage is about as hard as any melee sans ninja, yet people hail it as the easiest caster by far, how come ?

the fact of the matter is that skill floor does not necessarely corrolate 1:1 to skill ceiling, a class may be easy to be decent at, yet hard as nails to bring to perfection, and for all this "people *cough* crazys *cough* want the easy phys ranges to deal as much as the hard melees" the whole "melees need to have 500~ dps up on them to be worthwhile" is the exact same thing in reverse, its "give them enough of a leg up so even the total fuck up melees are equal to the total fuck up ranges".

[Nedkel]

problem with that kind of statistic is that you are taking the floor and the ceiling and arguing in a way as if both are of equal worth aswell as necessarely saying the same thing. taking your own picture just look at bard compared to samurai/dragoon, all three of these classes have their floor at nearly the same point,being a terrible bard you will do basically as bad as a terrible dragoon/samurai, yet their ceiling is about twice as much ahead of bard then even the median range, now what does that tell us ? yes, you could argue melees are harder to optimise, but as it stands, even with the normal mode statistics you linked, where there is done jack shit for optimization they are still ahead even at the bottom, and optimization obviously is allways possible.

Thats what i am trying to tell, this is my point.
Melees has higher ceiling so they should do more damage, its harder to optimize melee job and its less forgiving and range proc based jobs should not be at the same level, because it would be absurd.

the fact that the ceiling is so far ahead while the floor is nearly equal can mean three things,

A) it is harder to be a good melee/Bad ranged
B) it is easier to be a bad melee/good ranged
C)a combination of these two.

Its C

the important part here is that A) and B) are not the same. it being easier to be "decent as a physical ranged" does not prove in itself that it is easier to be good at it compared to a melee, without in depth class knowledge, which most people lack.
So yes, it is possible to mean having high uptime and hitting positionals is harder than basically being glued to your hotbars watching for proccs 24/7 without forgetting the next mechanics but it may just aswell mean that fucking up completly if you are just plain bad is easier on melee while if you are even decent it is actually equally hard.

We basically speak the same language here.

the fact of the matter is that skill floor does not necessarely corrolate 1:1 to skill ceiling, a class may be easy to be decent at, yet hard as nails to bring to perfection, and for all this "people *cough* crazys *cough* want the easy phys ranges to deal as much as the hard melees" the whole "melees need to have 500~ dps up on them to be worthwhile" is the exact same thing in reverse, its "give them enough of a leg up so even the total fuck up melees are equal to the total fuck up ranges".

Melees need an absolute knowledge about every single skill used by the raid boss in order to reach this perfection state. Just look at samurai 99% and max and compare them the difference between both is huge, and it requires not only knowledge but a good friendly team that will let him to do so, while for example bard will do it regardless of tank positioning.
1-2% damage advantage for melees is a fair deal for a much higher ceiling, if you think its not then wait for melee players complains of why their job is F up like there were complains in stormblood.

[Akiudo]

Thats what i am trying to tell, this is my point.
Melees has higher ceiling so they should do more damage, its harder to optimize melee job and its less forgiving and range proc based jobs should not be at the same level, because it would be absurd.

Melees need an absolute knowledge about every single skill used by the raid boss in order to reach this perfection state. Just look at samurai 99% and max and compare them the difference between both is huge, and it requires not only knowledge but a good friendly team that will let him to do so, while for example bard will do it regardless of tank positioning.

looking at the max percentile for any job is a bad idea, not because of any special variables but because you can never perfectly optimize a fight for every class at once, like yes you can get a raid going were everyone is 98-99, but you will hardly get a raid with 2x100% dps let alone more, also define huge. yes its a shitton but looking at the whole tier even for bard the range is 500 dps from 99-100, the range going from 99-100 is actually smaller on nin than it is on bard and bigger on dancer than on samurai so by your logic that would cement dancer as the hardest class and nin as easier than bard.

1-2% damage advantage for melees is a fair deal for a much higher ceiling, if you think its not then wait for melee players complains of why their job is F up like there were complains in stormblood.

and 2% at the absolute top end would be 300 dps (thats at 99%, again max is stupid), at the absolute top end 99% (as you yourself used) buffing bard by a whopping 10% would put bard still at around 350 dps below monk, and yes monk is the nail that sticks out slightly higher than the rest, but as we argue theoretical perfect balance the other melees should reach the same point or monk would need to come down and drag blackmage along and squares track record shows that they rather buff then nerf so theres that. People advocate for a melee advantage in the range of 500 dps/a ranged buff in the range of 5-6% dps as perfectly balanced, in either of these cases the melee advantage would be closer to 5% then to 2%.

So no, nearly all the people here that gave numbers how much extra dps they want the melees to deal or how much they think ranges need to be buffed advocate for a much higher discreptancy than 1-2%, also thats comparing to monk, lets do it the other way around, if nin deals 2% more than the best ranged monk would still do 5% more



Also, about the higher ceiling, why should a higher skill ceiling, if we say thats what it is be rewarded if at the same time the floor and median is identical ? Say we only got 2 classes for this thought experiment, we got

A) MELEE
B) PHYSICAL RANGED

these are our classes. Now both these classes if Played like complete crap are perfectly equal. Both of these classes if played semi decently are perfectly equal. Both of these classes played to perfection and with a group that goes the extra mile to make it happen melee wins by lets say just 400 dps. NOW the group had to go the extra mile, they had to develop a strat for this damage and maybe move around players a bit to get it down to this level of perfection, and it may well be fair to say the group should be rewarded for this, but where in this equation is the drawback for not doing it ?

its a bit like the redmage/Summoner rezz, these things are nearly useless 95% of the time, but they do offer some value for the trys where they might save the day so they should be somewhat taxed (not nearly as much as they are, but of course there needs some tax to it, otherwise the question would be "you want to take a blackmage with or without rezz?"). Advocating for anything above 300 dps (and that has to be taken from the top, if anything argue that the other melees need to be closer to monk) at the absolute top end simply leaves us with "a bad melee is equal a bad ranged, a decent melee is equal to a decent ranged, a great melee smokes a great ranged" and thats as balanced as giving redmages the same dps as blackmages while letting them keep the rezz because at this point it moves away from "the group has to optimize for the melee to deal his full potential" onwards to "taking a melee allows the group to optimize to get extra dps, but they may aswell not optimize any further than giving the 2 melees the spots closes to the boss and still do exactly the same as taking a ranged" Basically saying "the group has to optimize with and for the melee" only works out balanced if theirs drawback to not doing so, being equally good if doing nothing, better if doing something is not a drawback

[Madoka]

How about when the bosses rear is about to explode, in a zone that nobody else is in so your share-damage-or-die mechanic will kill you on bad timing, judging whether or not your GCD will roll in time to make the movement worthwhile, and whether or not you can make it back to safety to make the extra bit of potency for the bonus not result in dying?

Nothing in a vacuum is big brained.

True north and dont go into the dangerzone

[Madoka]

Also since everyone's bitching about their job being harder and how much dps they'll lose I'll just point out that if you miss a gcd on a melee because you moved out too far you can get it off as soon as you are back in range, it will cause you to drift eventually away from a dummy rotation setting but it's not that big a deal unless you were waiting for the very last second on some sort of combo timer/buff. If you miss a positional you won't miss a whole lot of potency. If you miss a GCD as a caster because you had to move and cancel a spell that GCD is never coming back. Yeah you can ruin 2 or xeno or something to fill the gap while you move, but the 2 seconds you already spent casting are gone and that's purely lost potency.

Missing GCDs entirely as a melee seems almost impossible to even do in current savage to me with all the melee uptime strats. Except for the tank with the big boy splosion in e3s i guess, poor guy.

[Katie_Kitty]

You manage to insult so many people at the same time while still spouting incorrect statements AND pretending your previous posts somehow had a highground inherant point that no one is getting.

Have you ever considered no one gets your point because you are abyssmally terrible at making any points? Coherant or valid?

You prove yourself again and again incapable of a rational thought when it comes to the difficulty and adaptations melee have to make.

Nothing I've said is inaccurate. Unlike you, I actually read the posts I respond to, and then reply in a focused way to the meat of the argument I'm replying to. On the other hand, you have the annoying tendency of going on long-winded rants about irrelevant crap, and it's really annoying to process and filter all that garbage.

Here's the bottom line: Melee is not in any way more difficult than casters, and physical ranged are expected to take on additional responsibility in return for their general ease of play. I hope that's concise enough for you to finally wrap your head around.

[Vendalwind]

Nothing I've said is inaccurate. Unlike you, I actually read the posts I respond to, and then reply in a focused way to the meat of the argument I'm replying to. On the other hand, you have the annoying tendency of going on long-winded rants about irrelevant crap, and it's really annoying to process and filter all that garbage.

Here's the bottom line: Melee is not in any way more difficult than casters, and physical ranged are expected to take on additional responsibility in return for their general ease of play. I hope that's concise enough for you to finally wrap your head around.

Many things you've said were in fact very inaccurate. I even proved it so a couple times.

Still so insulting! My god you dont have the monopoly on intellect you ingrate. My detailed responses show i do in fact read very carefully every word written i respond to.

Your responses just prove you are an intentionally demeaning @$$hat.

But for once your conclusion i can actually agree with. Btw if you thought i was arguing melee were more inherantly difficult than casters you really werent paying attention.

[Rasikko]

Man, Im waiting, just waiting, for that sweet potency buff to DNC but big nerf to both steps, so I can hate all of you for the rest of your days on this board.