Is anyone surprised at this point?

[Lyth]

WAR didn't need any damage buffs. It needs a gameplay rework. The only reason to hope for freebies would be if you need it to mask gameplay deficiencies as a player.

...

Yes. I think that uptime should always be rewarded. I think handing out freebies because it makes everyone feel better about themselves devalues this.

Like I said in my last post, the difficulty with balancing burst that operates off of cooldown timers is that you benefit from downtime. That's not a deserved advantage. It's just an advantage. Other jobs have to compensate by just being better than you during the uptime phases. The workaround to this is to make burst resource gated, and have those resources come from uptime. In other words, you'd have to have abilities like IR and Delirium come off of a resource system that builds from actually hitting the boss, instead of standing around watching pretty cutscenes.

If you improve a job's skill ceiling and force good play, by all means, reward that.

[Argyle_Darkheart]

WAR didn't need any damage buffs.

Define "need."

It needs a gameplay rework.

If you say so, but that's not going to happen any time soon for multiple reasons, so why even mention it?

The only reason to hope for freebies would be if you need it to mask gameplay deficiencies as a player.

True; all those WARs who couldn't out-DPS their counterparts at equivalent percentile just suck.

Look, some jobs are not going to perform as well as others, as a matter of course. I get that, but nobody likes that their job is being outperformed (well, maybe underdogs do, but you get my point).

Implying that people who wanted damage buffs for WAR just suck is a bad faith take and, frankly, reeks of bitterness.

[Absurdity]

Look, some jobs are not going to perform as well as others, as a matter of course. I get that, but nobody likes that their job is being outperformed (well, maybe underdogs do, but you get my point).

Implying that people who wanted damage buffs for WAR just suck is a bad faith take and, frankly, reeks of bitterness.

This might not be aimed at me and I can make no statement about whether or not they're bitter but just because a job is being outperformed by other jobs within the same role does not automatically justify damage buffs, even if it might "feel bad".


You'd have to look at warrior's toolkit.

It has the same base mitigation tools as all the other tanks, 20% on a 90sec cooldown and 30% on a 120sec cooldown.

On top of these it has ToB, a 20% HP increase and 20% selfheal, and Equilibrium, a 1200 potency selfheal, which I'd argue are the cooldowns competing with cooldowns like Dark Mind, Camouflage, Aurora and...well, nothing from Paladin really since I can not count Clemency as a regular mitigation tool. Dark Mind, unlike ToB, only works on magic damage and Camouflage can basically only be counted as 10% mitigation since the parry is too inconsistent and ToB adds a 20% heal on top of 20% more HP. Equilibrium has the exact same potency as Aurora and Clemency, but unlike those it heals instantly, doesn't cost resources, does not need to be cast and does not cost you any dps nor does it disrupt your rotation.
And then for short term mitigation we have the choice between Raw Intuition, which is stronger than Heart of Stone and equal to Shelltron (arguably even better since Shelltron is inconsistent against enemies that can crit), or Nascent Flash, which on average heals for more than you could mitigate with The Blackest Night, neither of which cost you resources or can lead to a dps loss.

So all in all I would say that warrior has the most reliable, most consistent and strongest defensive kit out of all the tanks and with that in mind I would say it is justified that you do less dps than other tanks. This is why you normally only compare logs with other warriors, to see how skilled you are compared to other players of your chosen job.

Now we could argue whether or not we really need those strong defensives when all other tanks can survive every mechanic just as well and deal better dps on top of that but looking at the entire warrior kit then I can't agree that warrior really needed or deserved potency buffs. If doing less damage than other tanks makes you feel bad then sorry but just deal with it, you are the beefier, tankier tank and you can't have both top damage and top mitigation, and this coming from a warrior main.

[Lyth]

...

At the end of the day, it comes down to value.

Clearing content isn't the issue. Gear makes content easier over time. So how do you define what makes a player good or not? Damage output is a measure of this, but only if you can correlate higher skill with higher damage output. If you're just doing more damage because you picked a particular job and rolled your face across the keyboard, then it has no value whatsoever as a measure of skill.

Game developers think that if you make the average player feel good about themselves, they'll stick around and make more purchases. That's true in the short-term, as evidenced by countless F2P cashgrabs, but shortsighted. You only value the the things that you really worked for. You need differences in skill to correlate to differences in performance. Otherwise, the average player has nothing to look up to, and nothing to aspire to. There's no reason to stick around and get better.

Alarm bells should ring in your head any time somebody buffs your base combo without doing anything else to raise the difficulty of your job. Congratulations, you paid your subscription. You won the game, you are the best of the best. Please buy more mogstation glamours. Is there any surprise why tanking and healing ennui is so prevalent? I don't know about you, but I would feel embarrassed to be handed a win without putting any work into it. I wouldn't feel good about that at all, but apparently some people do.

My stance always has, and always will be this: skill differences should translate into performance differences. I want to play a job that is recognized by the playerbase as high skill, with a low performance floor and a high performance ceiling. Ideally a tank, given that I've spent the better part of 15 years playing tanks. Ideally something with a cool aesthetic, like big greatswords swung at high speeds. That's why I liked DRK in Heavensward.

But my biggest requirement is that skill correlate with performance, across all tanks.

[Danelo]

But my biggest requirement is that skill correlate with performance, across all tanks.

Yes. High skill ceiling and low floor is what’s missing. I will admit I could see the difficulty in tuning all the jobs so that player effort=Job performance on a sliding scale. I would be willing to show grace if the kinks are worked out quickly and not left toward the end of the expansion like DRK in sb.

I wish SE would put as much effort into job adjustments/reworks as they do on the story.

[whiskeybravo]

snip

I'm sorry but it sounds to me like you're missing the forest for the trees. Like, there's never been or can ever be numbers adjustments to balance out a jobs damage with it's supposed complexity or proper "tier"? It's all just stuffing your face with cake? Nom nom nom...

There are far too many dimensions by which one could calculate any given player's level of skill. Damage needs to be looked at relatively not comparatively. GNB to GNB, WAR to WAR, PLD to PLD, DRK to DRK, etc. If knowing that GNB deals more damage at base than a WAR, then seeing them do more damage in a fight doesn't necessarily mean they are more skilled, they are "just doing more damage because (they) picked a particular job". It's at least a heavy consideration. In this instance the only way I can judge my skill level is against another WAR.

Consider too that there is a difference in skill at a job vs skill at content/game mechanics in general. Knowing how to dodge an aoe at the last moment to get an extra GCD in translates to all jobs, not any specific one. Cheesing a mechanic with an invuln to get more attacks in is likewise transferable across tank jobs. These have nothing to do with the complexity of a job itself but certainly contribute to what might be considered in determining if a player is "good" or not.

Among other things, complexity of the job is not really all that good of a metric imo. Any "good" player that spends enough time on a job will become comfortably proficient at it, likely to a level above average if we're just looking at numbers. All that's required is time and practice. Some people are naturally more adept at learning or muscle memorizing, others need more time. At the end of the day it's all the same, great players will still be great.