"balancing" some jobs

[Ransu]

Did you even read what I wrote before you tried to make a cheap point? I wrote that that you cannot provide feedback on one job based upon that CC takes place in coordinated play, then turn around and state that another job should not be considered in the context of coordinated play.

You either compare all jobs in the context of coordinated play or you do not- you don't mix it up. Is that any clearer?

You absolutely can because how those LB's functions are completely different. One is just a stun that is absolutely 100% reliant on teammates utilizing it. The other is a stun but it also does damage and has other buffs/debuffs tied to them while also healing the team.

This isn't a one size fits all shoe scenario. All jobs CANNOT be compared in the same context because they all have their own quirks.

[IDontPetLalas]

You absolutely can because how those LB's functions are completely different. One is just a stun that is absolutely 100% reliant on teammates utilizing it. The other is a stun but it also does damage and has other buffs/debuffs tied to them while also healing the team.

This isn't a one size fits all shoe scenario. All jobs CANNOT be compared in the same context because they all have their own quirks.

The point is not whether the skills are different i.e. whether the LBs function differently, or even whether they would act differently in a coordinated context. those are completely different discussions.

The point is that you simply cannot start to make an argument and balance in light of coordination existing for one job, then turn around and act that coordination does not exist and balance another job completely acting what is a completely different hypothesis. You make your hypothesis, or design decision, however you would like to call it, and apply that to all of you consequent job discussions.