A thought of inviduality to jobs

[Minarisweet]

Making this post was a bad idea I think, people are allergic to different playstyles but at the same time I think SE is kind of guilty for not knowing how to implement the idea.

[Dzian]

You were wasting stats.

Depends how far back you're talking. ARR coils for example if i recall Piety was a decent choice as it meant you could keep your foe reqs up for a decent amount of extra time. Which would have been slightly worse for the bard personally. but it then meant a decent amunt of extra damage came from the party as a whole so it was a net gain.. so worht it or not would depending on whether you were thinking of just your self, or the collective group as a whole.

If i recall it was a solid choice for scholar early on as well as more mp meant more aethorflow meant more miasma2 spam. and as lustrates and stuff didnt scale of int or mind (one of the reasons early cleric scholar was so OP.) piety was a solid option.

been a lifetime since ARR and coil though..

[LittleImp]

Depends how far back you're talking. ARR coils for example if i recall Piety was a decent choice as it meant you could keep your foe reqs up for a decent amount of extra time which then meant a decent amunt of extra damage from the party..

People theory-crafted around it at the time, but ultimately found it wasn't that useful in the fights for a few reasons. Too much boss downtime limiting the impact, double bard being a popular comp, foe's req only really buffing caster damage ect. Allocating all of your bonus attributes to piety netted you only around 9 extra seconds of foe req per usage, at the cost of around 5% of your total personal dps output, which was not considered a worthy tradeoff.

[Ransu]

Depends how far back you're talking. ARR coils for example if i recall Piety was a decent choice as it meant you could keep your foe reqs up for a decent amount of extra time. Which would have been slightly worse for the bard personally. but it then meant a decent amunt of extra damage came from the party as a whole so it was a net gain.. so worht it or not would depending on whether you were thinking of just your self, or the collective group as a whole.

If i recall it was a solid choice for scholar early on as well as more mp meant more aethorflow meant more miasma2 spam. and as lustrates and stuff didnt scale of int or mind (one of the reasons early cleric scholar was so OP.) piety was a solid option.

been a lifetime since ARR and coil though..

He was wasting it by splitting it 25/25. Doing anything other than all 50 into a stat was literally a waste of stat points. Its why they removed it from the game.

Making this post was a bad idea I think, people are allergic to different playstyles but at the same time I think SE is kind of guilty for not knowing how to implement the idea.

No one's allergic to it. Its just that this game has proven its unnecessary and makes balancing easier. People go on about class customization in games, yet 99% of the time the first thing players do is google "best build" and everyone forges themselves into a cookie cutter anyways.

The simplicity of class designs in XIV is fantastic. You have a selection of jobs to play for each role and you can play whichever appeals to you most. End game has a variety of sets with different stat allocations plus materia allocations if you wanna go "against the norm" for your jobs stat build.

We don't need 3 different trees and "hybrid" builds for every job. If we had all that crap we'd still only have like 8 jobs instead of 19.

[Shurrikhan]

There will always be a meta, some way, some how. Even BLU has its own meta depending on the content (group or solo). I mean, can't you tell people to screw it even now? Just maining the Job you want?

Well, yes. The difference, for better worse, is that (due to sheer convenient visibility) it's easier to police jobs than to police one's choice of Additional Skills, and the more a tightest-of-sphincters player cannot easily police, the more they'll likely increase ilvl requirements in order to recoup their chances of success, broadening that exclusion onto everyone.

Personally, I'd agree, though, that customization beyond job and stat choice alone are not uniquely problematic; as such, the question simply turns to enjoyable complexity: Would, say, a DRG be more enjoyable for having access to Death, Petrify, White Wind, or the like? I would have to guess no.

Now, would I take other forms of customization that would allow me to deepen and/or broaden the cohesive thematic space available to a Dragoon (or Lancer)? Absolutely.

I just wouldn't try to get that customization through abilities from a pimp-cane-wielding, haphazard mini-game of a mage.

[LittleImp]

Part of the problem is, every option for customization you introduce is also an opportunity to make the wrong decision. When you compound sub-optimal choices, the margin between meta and non-meta builds grows larger and larger, which in turn tends to lead to even greater emphasis and enforcement of the meta in multiplayer contexts.

There's nothing inherently wrong with creating a game like that, and sub-optimal choices can even be a lot of fun in an rpg setting, but you also have to be ready to deal with the consequences, and I'm not convinced most people who play 14 really are.

[Seera1024]

The more different builds a game can have the more harder the game is to balance.

You can either have well balanced builds or a wide variety of different builds.

No game has figured out how to have both.

Some games go for variety and hope to have a vast majority of builds be viable for content that most players play.

Other games try to have every build relatively balanced so that no one is excluded because they chose to play a specific build.

You want the former. SE has chosen the latter. I highly doubt that that's going to change anytime soon for one main reason:

How they are handling the balancing and build variety is working. You don't make drastic changes to a game's playstyle unless you're already hurting numbers wise. Because players choose to play specific games for specific reasons and drastic changes can mean you've alienated your core game player base.

[Ransu]

This game has added 10 new jobs since ARR launched 9 years ago. WoW in its 18 years of running has added 3 classes. I'd rather this game stick to the formula of unique jobs if it means we keep getting solid new jobs every expansion over them constantly fiddling with each job having this wide variety of specs that would divulge into a complete nightmare of balancing.

How they are handling the balancing and build variety is working. You don't make drastic changes to a game's playstyle unless you're already hurting numbers wise. Because players choose to play specific games for specific reasons and drastic changes can mean you've alienated your core game player base.

Yep. SWTOR has been doing that for a few years now chipping away at what I loved about the game and it keeps losing players every time they make major changes. It's barely alive now a days and the backlash for 7.0 has been massive.

[Minarisweet]

He was wasting it by splitting it 25/25. Doing anything other than all 50 into a stat was literally a waste of stat points. Its why they removed it from the game.



No one's allergic to it. Its just that this game has proven its unnecessary and makes balancing easier. People go on about class customization in games, yet 99% of the time the first thing players do is google "best build" and everyone forges themselves into a cookie cutter anyways.

The simplicity of class designs in XIV is fantastic. You have a selection of jobs to play for each role and you can play whichever appeals to you most. End game has a variety of sets with different stat allocations plus materia allocations if you wanna go "against the norm" for your jobs stat build.

We don't need 3 different trees and "hybrid" builds for every job. If we had all that crap we'd still only have like 8 jobs instead of 19.

I might get a little personal here but this has never been my experience in anything else with neither me or my friends or people I'd know in games like wow, diablo, monster hunter, closers, etc... and im like fairly sure the game benefits WAY MORE of having playstyles for the majority of the game and having to use the best there is for later anyways... you still have something to write home about.

I really feel xiv has switched the view of many gamers about builds and playstyles because historically SE has fucked that up A LOT in xiv so of course they think its bad, but no, SE just sucks at implementing shit.

[MagicalChase]

I wish they brought RPG to this combat and class design we have. Currently it feels more like an preset classes with no customization to choose from

this this this a million times this, i want everyone who disagrees with this to just shut up and build the same way your guides always tell you to.