ok here a question simple, we are all human, if you have two road for reach your goal, one is hard and take more time to reach it, while one is shorter and easier to use, which one you will use? human per nature will choose the easier path.
some reminder about stuff people tend to forget, while the 2.x period we did get some really massive trouble people tend to forget when people was saying no melee for raid because it's harder for them? or people saying no monk because no party buff?
finally, i will change your sentence into this: being easy mustn't give the same reward. because right now a looooooot of people tend to say we don't want difficulty to reward a better dps, but is that because you play a "easier" class? and i say easier but it's subjective, something easier for me, will be difficult for another one.
however, a job that ask to keep more buff up, that have more complicate mechanic must be rewarding to play. or people will simply switch onto the "easier" job for get instant reward is in human nature.
naturally we can say all of this is pointless talk since it's true you can technically complete every challenge with every jobs... but will recquire more "work".
on the jobs change, i did seen it coming that the change of the sam will be not enough and it's proved with the logs. don't get me wrong, for me SAM is not that hard, but that because i did train a lot a new player will not find it simple. but without that, for a jobs that have 0 party buff and only his damage for him... why bring a sam when you can bring a reaper or a monk... or ninja and dragoon with them party buff.
balance is something complicate, true, but people must'nt forget the human nature, and this one is always to take the easier way and the fastest. in this case the change of the sam was clumsy, why i say this? with Meikyô Shisui we don't use most of the skill that was buffed and namikiri is something used every 2 minutes. in a sense this change is... almost useless. but well... i guess sam will have a time where it will be the new monk 2.0



Reply With Quote

