How we determine balance and its flaws.

[Gruntler]

Imagine pulling numbers out of your ass for stuff when we have access to actual data.

What a timeline.

Okay, so, while the dataset's small, it's actually looking like an interesting tier. Casters are absolutely dominating some fights, but on another, melee are absolutely wrecking house. Which job is the best is actually -fight dependant- in terms of raid dps contribution.

THIS, right here, is a desirable situation for casters and melee; a properly balanced mmo won't have one class consistantly on top on all fights, then another, then another, in lockstep order. You should expect to see variation where one class will be strong at one fight, but another will be strong at another. This makes class choice simultaneously meaningful, while also maximizing viability. Make it that there's one fight where ranged DPS destroy the house and you'll have dps balance pretty much nailed down perfectly--we're very close to, but not quite at, the ideal.

Another thing to consider is that in today's world, raid dps contribution isn't theoretical, it's now measured. We know how much contribution each job's buffs are, on a case by case basis. In past expansions, it was not measured, and so we literally guessed at it. Having access to this information has changed what the meta looks like because we no longer relegate buff strength to the theoretical; we know selfish DPS are strong and by exactly how much; we know how strong healer duos can be and we can analyse this a lot better than before.

So, we've gone past talking about theoretical raid dps contributions; we can actually directly compare buff strengths with data, not theorycraft.

[Vendalwind]

...

Physical data is still very hard to analyze. I've presented this exact same argument before with actual data last tier. And I calculated it specifically 4 different percentile gaps so it took a TON of work. Unfortunately i presented that information on the 14th page of a thread already in progress and although some people agreed with me the result was nearly exactly the same as Kalise's outcry where tangential arguments were created based on outlying data points. Once again as you can see above Kalise is inserting her own meaning into the original things i said and changing the core subject i created this thread to discuss. It's nice to see her use some math, but like i said in my post one scenario presented doesn't give the whole picture and Excel spreadsheets calculations are necessary to find the percent wise balance point that lends itself to proposed balanced team proportion of 1 selfish 3 utility.

So there is still absolutely value in theoretical or baseline analysis. First because baseline analysis allows you to develop a fair plan before looking at the variations in extensive datapoints, AND allows you to make judgements before and after utility and what makes classes unique is taken into consideration.

My post isn't trying to combat or change the meta. Its a critique on how we think about the meta. Currently many people see Class A is underperforming or overperforming and ask for a Buff or Nerf and usually its also tied to how players imagine that class should do in. For Example i can't remember the last time i met anyone who didn't think BLM should be the end all best RDS at 95th percentile and up. If you ask them why a whole can of worms, lack of mobility, rng, no raise, cast bars, memorization crops up and you can't target any core reasoning even tho in essence when all those reasons are stacked on top of eachother its because the class is difficult. But then in the same breath people say "The game shouldn't be balanced on difficulty" This is a problem. So we need to have a core reason for these statements.

And in the melee role, caster role, and ranged role it is still commonly accepted that NIN, DNC, and RDM should have the lowest RDPS for whatever reason. They should have the lowest Pdps for sure. but in actuality for the game to be balanced they should have the Highest AND the lowest RDPS (highest at 90th percentile up, lowest IMO percentile 50 ish and down) Those lines however are opinion and could be moved up or down the spectrum. But my point being I can't tell you how many times someone has told me that SAM should have the best RDPS in ANY percentile among the melee because it has no utility.

The only way to effectively have that conversation is to show people why that underlying thinking is wrong. And it's wrong because if selfish dps within each role are in fact the best it entirely disenfranchises all 7 utility roles. Those roles may still be viable tho of course. With a proper balance all 10 roles will be desirable, and with proper tweaks to the baseline a solution set can be found where a 1 selfish and 3 utility and at a distribution generally of 30% selfish and 70% utility thats the best match.

Which is exactly why i titled my thread like I did. Im not here to analyze the numbers as they stand nor make a statement of who should be on top where and why. I dont want people to just look at the numbers and say "muh this class needs to be stronger cause it has no utility" because its not that simple.

Im here cause i want people to think about the theory behind proper game balance and break the current accepted for a long time justification that selfish dps should just simply be the best. Not everyone thinks that way, but in my perusal of the forums over the years that trend is the most common.

[kajv95]

The only way to effectively have that conversation is to show people why that underlying thinking is wrong. And it's wrong because if selfish dps within each role are in fact the best it entirely disenfranchises all 7 utility roles. Those roles may still be viable tho of course. With a proper balance all 10 roles will be desirable, and with proper tweaks to the baseline a solution set can be found where a 1 selfish and 3 utility and at a distribution generally of 30% selfish and 70% utility thats the best match.

Basically, why have utility at all if it's not going to be useful in any way whatsoever. I've always agreed-defensive utility is overvalued by the devs and offensive utility is essentially non-existent if the jobs who don't have it perform better even after their adps is adjusted to rdps. And if we, as a community, are holding on to the saying that class balance isn't based on difficulty, then most of the points given as to why they should be are invalid.