Quote Originally Posted by Seraphor View Post
Then I guess my question is: How much of the player share is required for a job to be 'at it's prime'?
33%? 50%?
Is it a mutually exclusive state which means only one job of any role is ever currently 'at it's prime', and that's the most played job?
And if the player share of a job is proportional to it's dps in a raid setting, does that mean 'prime' is proportional to dps output?

Or, is 'at it's prime' a condition that's entirely isolated to the job in question, and does not factor in the situation of any other jobs?
Surely 'at it's prime' relates to the functionality of the job, it's ease of skill use, rotation flow, utility/performance, and job identity, all being adequately fulfilled.
I think everything should be factored. Think of this way, a job could be perfectly designed in its rotation and ease of use but if the other jobs in said role offer more. It's all rendered pointless since people aren't going to care from a balance perspective. Dismissing the meta entirely seems silly when content below EX and Savage are so poorly undertuned, it really doesn't matter. With that said, focusing exclusively on their meta position is equally flawed for the precise reason SpeckledBurd pointed out. Monk was technically strong in 5.05 meta wise, albeit largely because Ninja and Samurai were in such a bad state. Regardless, it's actually gameplay was atrocious.

I guess a better way to put it, at least, in my opinion, it sort of a review where each category weighs into the overhaul average.