How could you do this to AST?

[Recon1o6]

Which is why I took like 8-9 months off of the game (would've been more but, house is hostage once more). I played AST/some SCH in Stb, and DRK. The expansion was almost ruined for me if not for Viera (even though I swapped off due to no new hairs etc) and the story being good.

The job changes was the biggest gut punch to my enjoyment of the expansion. I'm not even healing right now anymore unless I absolutely have to (which I've gone weeks without). Sad since I used to be a healer main.

I'd also like to point out that every Heavensward job has been reworked at some point, be it good or bad. Just something I've noticed.

Same, this expansion's job changes basically made it so the only reason I logged in was my house and the story, and once I was done with the story in 5.1, I've been putting the game down until it came to 5.4 and I been slowly levelling monk again since it has turned into 2.0 monk.

I stopped healing barely a couple of weeks after 5.1- whm was interesting for a little bit then I got bored of it and thus stopped healing. I didn't even switch to astro until I needed a dress for an eternal bonding.


Its easier to find a job that has been reworked from its old and usually preferred gameplay style than one that hasnt. There's pretty much only blm and samurai left that haven't undergone an overhaul and its certainly doubtful the former ever will being yoshida's pet.

Oh and yoshida is also the reason we dont have damage types visible without 3rd party tools.

[Equitable_Remedy]

Its easier to find a job that has been reworked from its old and usually preferred gameplay style than one that hasnt.

I know that this is going to be an unpopular opinion around here, but classes are generally changed in response to feedback—in almost all cases, reverting them would just recreate the problems that changes were implemented to address.

I'm not saying that you or anyone on this forum wouldn't prefer some previous version of whatever class, but recognize that forum/Reddit opinions do not in any way reflect the majority of players. Similarly, class changes are often in response to much broader feedback and/or observation of game data.

"Things were better back in the day" is a very common refrain on MMO forums (look at WoW), but then you look at posts/surveys from back in the day, and you start to remember that things really weren't better.

[Semirhage]

"Things were better back in the day" is a very common refrain on MMO forums (look at WoW), but then you look at posts/surveys from back in the day, and you start to remember that things really weren't better.

I'm willing to be that several previous versions of the healer jobs were better designed than 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

[ItMe]

I'm willing to be that several previous versions of the healer jobs were better designed than 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Better in some ways, worse in others.
They seem to have largely traded one set of flaws for another.

[Saefinn]

I know that this is going to be an unpopular opinion around here, but classes are generally changed in response to feedback—in almost all cases, reverting them would just recreate the problems that changes were implemented to address.

I'm not saying that you or anyone on this forum wouldn't prefer some previous version of whatever class, but recognize that forum/Reddit opinions do not in any way reflect the majority of players. Similarly, class changes are often in response to much broader feedback and/or observation of game data.

"Things were better back in the day" is a very common refrain on MMO forums (look at WoW), but then you look at posts/surveys from back in the day, and you start to remember that things really weren't better.

Feedback is often from people who're not happy, people who were happy with how things were don't tend to make forum posts about it. Case in point, I've not been active on the healer forums until the healer issues got to a point where I felt the need to complain about them as there were no signs of improvement and instead a sharp turn in things getting worse. So prior to this I've given no feedback on healing what-so-ever and I never expected it to be changed for the worst.

Whilst I get "rose tinted glasses" can be a thing. What I do know is:
- I used to enjoy healing but I don't anymore except in niche cases
- I know what I enjoy about healing in this game
- I know what has changed about healing design that makes me no longer enjoy it
- I know what we used to have that made me enjoy healing more.
- I know that I didn't used to have 70% healing downtime and 1 or 2 buttons to spam for DPS, which let's face it, is dull.
- I know what I praised about my original healing job, SCH, and I know much of what I've praised is either gone or made redundant


I feel like the people who weren't happy before these changes could have been accommodated in a 4th healer job instead of making people who were already happy unhappy by screwing with existing ones.

There were flaws, especially in terms of balance. WHM was left in the dirt, SCH was OP. In ARR it wasn't the case, but in HW it was.

Balance is better, but it feels like a lot was sacrificed to achieve it. But my main feedback now, with SE emphasising the difference between "pure" and "shield" healers harder for 6.0, is it's something that really only worked in 2.0 I feel we need to look at what about it worked in 2.0 and how can that be adapted.



Balance I feel was mainly thrown out of whack by two things: SCH being made OP and the introduction of AST. And they designed AST to try and fit both niches because they couldn't create a third niche. Balance in 2.0 was good because it had only 2 healers that complemented each other and did so because of this pure/shield healer distinction. If they achieve that, I don't think it's so bad AST loses Noct Sect because I can see it as an opportunity for them to develop AST into its own unique space instead of trying to fill another's place...at the same time, my fear is that it turns into WHM with cards, which isn't worth the trade off.

I think SCH was made OP because of this myth that 2.0 SCH was weak, it felt and looked weak, but when played well it wasn't, this is because of the shield healing concept. They patched up its perceived weakness and suddenly playing it well meant SCH was too good. Speaking as somebody who used SCH to raid back in ARR.

So them taking this step in 6.0 feels logical when you look at it like that. If done well it means they only need to balance AST against WHM and SGE against SCH. If not well done, it means bigger problems.

[ForteNightshade]

I know that this is going to be an unpopular opinion around here, but classes are generally changed in response to feedback—in almost all cases, reverting them would just recreate the problems that changes were implemented to address.

This is not necessarily the case. Often times the devs seem to overreact or remain incredibly stubborn. Bard and Monk are two shining examples of this, with the former having been unanimously the most popular DPS throughout Stormblood while the latter was heavily criticised. What happened? They completely gutted all nuance from Bard, making it a Ranger with songs. Meanwhile, they praised their apparent rework of Monk... except it literally kept every single aspect people's feedback said they hated. As of 5.4, Bard is among the least played DPS now and Monk went through a panic buff and a full tear down recently.

Dark Knight is another job people have routinely criticised, particularly Living Dead. Before it was Dark Arts spam, which resulted in them just deleting Dark Arts entirely and turning it into a uninspired Warrior clone while LD still remains the bane of tank invulns.

[Saefinn]

This is not necessarily the case. Often times the devs seem to overreact or remain incredibly stubborn. Bard and Monk are two shining examples of this, with the former having been unanimously the most popular DPS throughout Stormblood while the latter was heavily criticised. What happened? They completely gutted all nuance from Bard, making it a Ranger with songs. Meanwhile, they praised their apparent rework of Monk... except it literally keeping every single aspect people's feedback said they hated. As of 5.4, Bard is among the least played DPS now and Monk went through a panic buff and a full tear down recently.

Dark Knight is another job people have routinely criticised, particularly Living Dead. Before it was Dark Arts spam, which resulted in them just deleting Dark Arts entirely and turning it into a uninspired Warrior clone while LD still remains the bane of tank invulns.

This is why I don't like some of the kinds of complaints people make, people who don't play certain jobs disliking how at its core plays complaining about it so that SE addresses it. I feel like the advantage of multiple jobs was to suit multiple playstyles and preferences. Like with DRK, I loved DRK when it was technical and had MP management, it was a part of the appeal, before HW I used to tank with WAR, if I wanted to stay with WAR, I'd have stayed playing WAR but I didn't because I liked the technical aspect of DRK and that interested me more. If people didn't like DRK from conception, then you had WAR instead.
If you didn't like SCH's DPS management or its shield focus, you had WHM instead. And I'm seeing another thread with a non-MNK player complaining that MNK has too many positionals, when it's one of the things that's appealing about MNK, when you have SAM, NIN or DRG who have fewer of them, it's better to play those. Why appeal to people who don't like the job from conception at the cost of those who love it at conception? If people are finding no job meets their needs and are complaining, then try to make something that appeals to them or to accommodate it in an existing design if it fits.

[ForteNightshade]

This is why I don't like some of the kinds of complaints people make, people who don't play certain jobs disliking how at its core plays complaining about it so that SE addresses it. I feel like the advantage of multiple jobs was to suit multiple playstyles and preferences. Like with DRK, I loved DRK when it was technical and had MP management, it was a part of the appeal, before HW I used to tank with WAR, if I wanted to stay with WAR, I'd have stayed playing WAR but I didn't because I liked the technical aspect of DRK and that interested me more. If people didn't like DRK from conception, then you had WAR instead.
If you didn't like SCH's DPS management or its shield focus, you had WHM instead. And I'm seeing another thread with a non-MNK player complaining that MNK has too many positionals, when it's one of the things that's appealing about MNK, when you have SAM, NIN or DRG who have fewer of them, it's better to play those. Why appeal to people who don't like the job from conception at the cost of those who love it at conception? If people are finding no job meets their needs and are complaining, then try to make something that appeals to them or to accommodate it in an existing design if it fits.

It definitely feels like Shadowbringers' philosophy geared more towards trying to entice players who otherwise disliked/haven't tried job x before instead of enhancing aspects of that job for those who already enjoyed it. Which is a fool's errand because now those same players who once enjoyed the job are the ones complaining. I can appreciate wanting to expend each jobs' appeal, but it should never come at the expense of those who already enjoyed it unless the feedback is widely one-sided. Bowmage comes to mind where nearly everyone seemed to despise it, though there were some who actually liked having cast bars.

What it comes down to, and it may be something the dev team dislikes hearing, is you neither can nor should please everyone. Some players simply won't like job x. So... let them play something else. Yes, they'll complain because they want "Ranger". I'm sorry, but... too bad. That isn't how Bard operates, or at least how it didn't. You mention DRK, which has always been a sore spot for me since I adored HW Dark Knight. Instead of telling people who insisted it was "too hard" to simply play PLD or WAR, they've continued to dumb it down into the uninspired husk it is now.

I really hope the sheer amount of vitriol they've received over healers, how poorly received Monk was and how Bard has all but crashed and burn will make them rethink this design philosophy going forward.

[Saefinn]

It definitely feels like Shadowbringers' philosophy geared more towards trying to entice players who otherwise disliked/haven't tried job x before instead of enhancing aspects of that job for those who already enjoyed it. Which is a fool's errand because now those same players who once enjoyed the job are the ones complaining. I can appreciate wanting to expend each jobs' appeal, but it should never come at the expense of those who already enjoyed it unless the feedback is widely one-sided. Bowmage comes to mind where nearly everyone seemed to despise it, though there were some who actually liked having cast bars.

What it comes down to, and it may be something the dev team dislikes hearing, is you neither can nor should please everyone. Some players simply won't like job x. So... let them play something else. Yes, they'll complain because they want "Ranger". I'm sorry, but... too bad. That isn't how Bard operates, or at least how it didn't. You mention DRK, which has always been a sore spot for me since I adored HW Dark Knight. Instead of telling people who insisted it was "too hard" to simply play PLD or WAR, they've continued to dumb it down into the uninspired husk it is now.

I really hope the sheer amount of vitriol they've received over healers, how poorly received Monk was and how Bard has all but crashed and burn will make them rethink this design philosophy going forward.

I know one person who preferred bowmage, but all other BRD's I know hated it, but then one of those Bards still hates BRD and misses 2.0 BRD. I'm somebody who always hated BRD design but it's the SB and ShB version I enjoy playing. Buuuut my ranged DPS choice is DNC but I totally get why old school BRD's don't like it, heck, I've never asked or expected any BRD design to accommodate what I like, so if they rework BRD again and I hate it, c'est la vie, but I hope people who main it like it, as long as they don't step on MCH's toes of course, I play with 2 MCH's and they're finally happy, don't make them sad again. But mess with my DNC, then I'll write my strongly worded forum posts. :P

With MNK and healers, I hope they do something about it. I play with a MNK and have been using mine lately but, yeah, it needs addressing. And obviously healers I've talked about ad infinitum here. They fix MNK and healers and not break anything else for Endwalker, I think nobody I run content with will complain about their preferred jobs, it'd be a first since ARR. Fortunately, we know both are on their radar...well, I say fortunately...I've not forgotten what YoshiP said at the ShB media tour about MNK...

[Marxam]

It definitely feels like Shadowbringers' philosophy geared more towards trying to entice players who otherwise disliked/haven't tried job x before instead of enhancing aspects of that job for those who already enjoyed it. Which is a fool's errand because now those same players who once enjoyed the job are the ones complaining. I can appreciate wanting to expend each jobs' appeal, but it should never come at the expense of those who already enjoyed it unless the feedback is widely one-sided. Bowmage comes to mind where nearly everyone seemed to despise it, though there were some who actually liked having cast bars.

It was sadly predictable the path would lead to this. I knew everything would get simplified once they removed "niche" utility skills rather than improve its benefits and designing content to utilize said skills more frequently. Its the old adage of "lets make our unique concept appeal to others by copying someone else" but failing to see the irony. Bowmage could have worked if Gauss Barrel wasn't so ugly and didn't fit on the gun models (should have just been a silencer imo). It was also not rewarding to play. If you are going to give up mobility you need to increase a jobs damage to necessitate it, i.e. BLM, but even in ShB BLM is pretty mobile so maybe its a design philosophy that's dying.

I hope that they shift back towards the idea of a job's "lacking" features can be compensated by another. However, they seem pretty adamant on that old adage I stated earlier. I just hope AST cards don't get nerfed even farther but I wouldn't even be surprised if they removed the damage dealt and replaced it with critical hit rate all for the sake of "balance". They did it with WAR so why not AST.