6.0 Red Mage speculation

[SkyCake]

I want "VerEsuna" or whatever. Healers really hate pressing Esuna and I don't mind doing it for them. I'm like half-joking. Ha.

Wouldn't mind upgraded versions of Veraero II and Verthunder II in the same way Verholy and Verflare work. Maybe a new sword AoE for a one-two combo into it. The idea would be to Veraero II/Verthunder II > Impact > maybe until like 60 mana > Enchanted Moulinet > Enchanted [new combo finisher] > VerHoly II / VerFlare II. Maybe that's a bit too samey relative to the single-target rotation. I personally don't like spamming Enchanted Moulinet to spend mana and would welcome any change to that.

I think it would make make Manafication more interesting/fun for me, too. I dislike using Manafication in AoE situations because the end result of that is really just more Enchanted Moulinets. With an actual AoE combo, its function in AoE would be similar in that you would use it to either get to the "enchanted" part of the AoE more quickly or to keep the chain going. Similar end results, just more fun since it wouldn't mean more Enchanted Moulinets but rather an extra VerHoly II or VerFlare II.

I would also like Acceleration to be useful in AoE. I'm not sure how without making it kind of boring. But, just a slight increase to mana gain on Veraero II and Verthunder II would be fine. I don't want AoE versions of Verstone or Verfire. I'm sure there is a more creative answer to this.

So! One new ability in the new AoE sword combo, upgraded versions of Veraero II and Verthunder II that don't take up space on the hotbar, and some tweaks to numbers and existing abilities to accommodate. And, maybe VerEsuna...

Edit: I just want anything besides "Spam Enchanted Moulinet 5 times". The joke towards healers aside, I really like RDM's non-DPS abilities. VerEsuna would just be a minor increase to that and be in the same vein as Vercure. Something you pretty much never use, but feels nice when it works.

[Raikai]

I want "VerEsuna" or whatever. Healers really hate pressing Esuna and I don't mind doing it for them. I'm like half-joking. Ha.

Wouldn't mind upgraded versions of Veraero II and Verthunder II in the same way Verholy and Verflare work. Maybe a new sword AoE for a one-two combo into it. The idea would be to Veraero II/Verthunder II > Impact > maybe until like 60 mana > Enchanted Moulinet > Enchanted [new combo finisher] > VerHoly II / VerFlare II. Maybe that's a bit too samey relative to the single-target rotation. I personally don't like spamming Enchanted Moulinet to spend mana and would welcome any change to that.

I think it would make make Manafication more interesting/fun for me, too. I dislike using Manafication in AoE situations because the end result of that is really just more Enchanted Moulinets. With an actual AoE combo, its function in AoE would be similar in that you would use it to either get to the "enchanted" part of the AoE more quickly or to keep the chain going. Similar end results, just more fun since it wouldn't mean more Enchanted Moulinets but rather an extra VerHoly II or VerFlare II.

I would also like Acceleration to be useful in AoE. I'm not sure how without making it kind of boring. But, just a slight increase to mana gain on Veraero II and Verthunder II would be fine. I don't want AoE versions of Verstone or Verfire. I'm sure there is a more creative answer to this.

So! One new ability in the new AoE sword combo, upgraded versions of Veraero II and Verthunder II that don't take up space on the hotbar, and some tweaks to numbers and existing abilities to accommodate. And, maybe VerEsuna...

Edit: I just want anything besides "Spam Enchanted Moulinet 5 times". The joke towards healers aside, I really like RDM's non-DPS abilities. VerEsuna would just be a minor increase to that and be in the same vein as Vercure. Something you pretty much never use, but feels nice when it works.

The thing with everything you suggested also fall into one separate thing to be addressed: game mechanics;

VerEsuna sounds cool... but then, why bother with it when we rarely have something to dispel as healers to begin with? Bard already got an Esuna of their own but it's a button that I rarely press in regular content.

Complexity to the AoE rotation is something I vouched before... but then a player's comment made me realize something: What exactly we'll be using complex AoE rotations for? An upgrade - as in an Endwalker feature - is due to levels 81-90, but then 4-man content is already a joke as it is. 8-mans rarely see any meaningful usage of aoe... Maybe the Deep Dungeon will count?

Right now, I suppose Save the Queen instances is a good place for AoE, but then there are always stronger options with Lost Actions and other gimmicks.

[SkyCake]

The thing with everything you suggested also fall into one separate thing to be addressed: game mechanics;

VerEsuna sounds cool... but then, why bother with it when we rarely have something to dispel as healers to begin with? Bard already got an Esuna of their own but it's a button that I rarely press in regular content.

Like I mentioned with Vercure. It's almost never useful, but I enjoy when it is. Would be the same for VerEsuna. It's also why I said I was "half-joking".

Complexity to the AoE rotation is something I vouched before... but then a player's comment made me realize something: What exactly we'll be using complex AoE rotations for? An upgrade - as in an Endwalker feature - is due to levels 81-90, but then 4-man content is already a joke as it is. 8-mans rarely see any meaningful usage of aoe... Maybe the Deep Dungeon will count?

Right now, I suppose Save the Queen instances is a good place for AoE, but then there are always stronger options with Lost Actions and other gimmicks.

Because I thought it would be more fun than spamming Enchanted Moulinet. My bad.

[Gruntler]

I can get behind this tbh. Remove the dumb RNG, make our melee combo a 30-second cooldown or whatever (the actual numbers matter less right now than the concept anyway), and give us something new and interesting to do with the job gauge. I think I'd be happy with that but we'd have to see how the actual implementation turns out.

Or, play one of the millions of jobs without RNG if you want a job without RNG. Some of us actually like proc-based casting and the variance that it lends to a kit and the play. Making a simple class even more dumbed down is not a path to making it better for everyone.

Like I mentioned with Vercure. It's almost never useful, but I enjoy when it is. Would be the same for VerEsuna. It's also why I said I was "half-joking".

How many times did you use Erase in SB? Be honest.

[Katie_Kitty]

Or, play one of the millions of jobs without RNG if you want a job without RNG. Some of us actually like proc-based casting and the variance that it lends to a kit and the play. Making a simple class even more dumbed down is not a path to making it better for everyone.

RNG procs for verfire and verstone do not add anything worthy of note to the job, and in any case, I was a RDM fan before FFXIV was even a concept in anyone's mind so no thank you I will play the job I like while advocating for changes I want. You're welcome to deal with it however you like, but that's not changing.

[Gruntler]

RNG procs for verfire and verstone do not add anything worthy of note to the job, and in any case, I was a RDM fan before FFXIV was even a concept in anyone's mind so no thank you I will play the job I like while advocating for changes I want. You're welcome to deal with it however you like, but that's not changing.

Verfire and Verstone procs give you variance on when exactly your melee phases can occur in a fight, which actually add depth to high-end play, as while you can plan to have your melee phase 'around' certain points in a given fight, you still have to adjust on the fly, especially given the game's high reliance on positional play.

As well, it's too integral to the job to simply remove. The Balance Gauge is based entirely around procs existing--if you remove the procs, you no longer need the gauge to track two different numbers or manage that. So you reduce that down to one resource instead. So Verstone and Verfire have no reason to exist any more. Just Jolt.

And you don't really need Verthunder and Veraero, you can just replace them both with on spell--Big Jolt.

So now your rotation is just Jolt>Big Jolt/Jolt>Big Jolt.

But yeah, procs 'add nothing.'

[Katie_Kitty]

Verfire and Verstone procs give you variance on when exactly your melee phases can occur in a fight, which actually add depth to high-end play, as while you can plan to have your melee phase 'around' certain points in a given fight, you still have to adjust on the fly, especially given the game's high reliance on positional play.

What you're describing is not really depth, or anything, really. What you're describing is purely a consequence of the decision the devs actively made to inject RNG into the rotation in order to arbitrarily force the player to use jolt sometimes. Heck, you still need to do much of the same stuff with or without the 50% proc chance on fire/stone. Plus there are so many ways around it that it's just silly and pointless to even try to defend the RNG at all at this point.

As well, it's too integral to the job to simply remove. The Balance Gauge is based entirely around procs existing--if you remove the procs, you no longer need the gauge to track two different numbers or manage that. So you reduce that down to one resource instead. So Verstone and Verfire have no reason to exist any more. Just Jolt. And you don't really need Verthunder and Veraero, you can just replace them both with on spell--Big Jolt.

So now your rotation is just Jolt>Big Jolt/Jolt>Big Jolt.

But yeah, procs 'add nothing.'

Well this is simply not true. I mean, the procs have absolutely nothing to do with the existence of the job gauge, and the job gauge would operate just fine without the RNG. Furthermore, it's not fire and stone that would be left out of an RNG-less rotation, it is jolt.

I think it's pretty disingenuous of you to suggest that the only option upon removing the pointless RNG is to just have jolt and big jolt. Disingenuous, and also kind of dumb. Fire is for one side of the gauge, stone is for the other. That's how the gauge works, it has nothing to do with RNG. You could remove the RNG and buff Jolt to match the potency of fire/stone and then you would have fire for one, stone for the other, and jolt for smaller amounts of both. Nothing about this setup requires the use of RNG.

[Shurrikhan]

I mean, the procs have absolutely nothing to do with the existence of the job gauge, and the job gauge would operate just fine without the RNG.

To borrow your words...

Well this is simply not true.

Yes, removing the RNG would remove Jolt as a button-press, but it would also remove Black and White mana as anything more than remembering whether you hit most recently hit Button Type A or Button Type B.

[Katie_Kitty]

Yes, removing the RNG would remove Jolt as a button-press, but it would also remove Black and White mana as anything more than remembering whether you hit most recently hit Button Type A or Button Type B.

Black and White Mana essentially are not much more than that already. Some of you seem to believe the modest amounts of RNG in this job's toolkit are more significant than they actually are.

Here's the bottom line: The Job gauge operates just fine with or without RNG. Removing RNG won't suddenly change the fact that fire gives you one side and stone gives you the other. That is the foundation of the balance gauge, not RNG. I am very confused why there are soooo many people here who mistakenly believe RNG is necessary for the balance gauge.

[Shurrikhan]

Black and White Mana essentially are not much more than that already.

"Well, a half a real mechanic isn't much, so let's remove it altogether. Surely there are no options whatsoever in the opposite direction."

Some of you seem to believe the modest amounts of RNG in this job's toolkit are more significant than they actually are.

I believe it doesn't amount to much. I also don't think RNG is the godsend some others may imply. But I disagree that the job gauge, which has only faint backing mechanics at present, would do as well with absolutely no (or only a pretense of) backing mechanics.

If you give me an a better alternative by which to instill depth into RDM, I'd be quick to follow up on it and likely promote it. If your only suggested change is to sweep away what little is present, I will of course challenge that.