Inevitable Job Simplifications?

[Valence]

The problem I have with arguments like yours is the framing.

"Enjoyable" is "asinine". "Not convoluted" is "braindead". "Fun" is "boring".

You realize that literally nothing, in spite of what you like to pretend, is objective in that kind of "discussion", right? Everything you have pointed as "factually objective" was biased as hell. I won't pretend hiding behind such false premises in order to construct an altar of questionable moral superiority. We're literally touching to 110% organic, deeply subjective feelings and tastes, and you constantly gesticulating at trying to split the cake between what's objective and what's not is a losing battle.

Even stating that this job has X or Y buttons, while being objective and a fact, suddenly stops being objective as soon as you emit a critical judgement upon it. If you can't grasp that simple fact, you're only going to continue coming as condescendingly pedantic to everybody and with reason.

Moreover, there's no "ENFORCE simple/easy jobs arbitrarily", especially when your own position is to ENFORCE complex/hard Jobs arbitrarily. This is the part that's really confusing to me. Why is it okay for your desired Job design to be forced on all Jobs and players but not the contra? Moreover, the simple side proponents aren't even arguing for ALL Jobs to be made simple, just a few.

You're fighting against strawmen here. You have been the one in the very first pages of this thread to rail against the notion of skill floor and ceilings and designs including both. You have literally here argued, I remember, for some jobs to be easy, and some to be hard. I'm not making up anything. Where I have always argued to have accessible jobs with some depth in counterpart, no matter the job. You can have both, but you were arguing against that, which I took issue with.

Ergo, yes, you're arguing to enforce easy jobs down the throats of people.

Here's the question that would resolve all of this fairly quickly:

WHY must all Jobs have a skill high skill ceiling?

Case in point.

Not "so people can improve". No WHY? Why is that important? Why is that necessary?

I never argued for anything remotely close to people needing to improve. I actually loathe the literal doctrine that constantly shoves improvement down the throat of every casual player people don't deem "gud enough" to their tastes, like it's high end esports or whatever silly notion they have about having fun on a game. You're preaching to the choir on that specific point. I don't even know what prompted that to come into this argument to be honest, but considering the literal essays like this one, it's possible I missed it in all the noise.

In WoW, you can get a little (not completely, but a little) closer to that because of Talents, but FFXIV doesn't have that. You can't choose talents on SMN to give you some extra DoTs or make Fester into old Fester. Those aren't options. You likewise can't choose Talents on BLM to turn it into an Ice Mage. Those aren't options.

What are you even talking about..?

There's not a way to play BLM that's "easy" right now. You have hard and ultra-hard (if you want to go Infinite Paradox transpose lines and explode your brain with 100% movement uptime). But there's no way to play BLM that is at SMN level.

What the hell are you talking about. I've seen casuals play BLM at a baseline level that is horrifying but functional. They don't get the right amount of F4s in astral, sometimes they don't have umbral stacks, dot uptime is not there... so what? They still play the job and swap between ice and fire, and the results are obviously, not optimal. They still understand how the job clicks, that's literally what a floor is about. Meanwhile the gap between floor and ceiling on new SMN is abyssmal. At best what you can screw up is drop your fire dash continuation, or miss a cast. For the rest you just have to press the buttons that light up. The only floor there is is to understand how all the summoning works at low level, which is actually more obscure than it needs to be because a lot of new players look at the Actions & Traits and get a stroke. BLM suffers from the same problem with the fire/ice mechanics, but every job does. I'm not complaining about floors, but ceilings. Once you understand how to summon, there is literally nothing left with the rotation to optimize or push further.

There's no way to play MNK at WHM level.

I know that people meme a lot about green DPS and whatnot, but still...

So the options are mostly just making a Job complex or making it not-complex. EVERY now and then the Devs stumble onto something that lets a Job be pretty simple but with quite a bit of nuance to optimize for a higher skill ceiling.

So make up your mind? What is it then? No option to make an easy job to approach but with quite a bit of nuance to optimize for higher skill ceiling, or is this possible? Make up your mind?

Ironically, considering how often people call RDM simple, it's the perfect and RARE example of an "easy to play WELL but with a lot of nuance to truly master". The basic concept of how the Job works is very simple to grasp and play, and you can do respectable damage just alternating your short/long casts, then rolling into your melee combo at 50/50, using the opposite Holy/Flare then Scorch, then Resolution, and popping your two oGCD attacks when they come up. On a surface level, it's very simple to play.

...then you start looking into optimization and the opener. "Why do I use Acceleration AND Swiftcast? Wait, there's a priority system between the two? I'm supposed to fit HOW MANY melee combos in the burst phase?? What's the optimal use of Acceleration? How much White/Black should I have at what time? How should I be using Manafication vs Embolden?" It's surprisingly nuanced to play at a 90-100 on it, even if the basic concept of it is far more simple. As much as it's derided, WAR has a similar situation. So does New PLD - also derided. Kinda sensing a trend here... The thing with New PLD is more that the differences are so negligible it doesn't matter and that's probably true of WAR. RDM it's not quite as true of, but relatively so.

So then it is possible, if RDM is one such example? If this is possible, why are you arguing against it?

What is absent from these conversations is WHY no Job may be ALLOWED to have a low skill ceiling.

It's said this is bad, but not WHY. "Boring" is subjective and many people find low skill ceiling Jobs engaging and fun. So that's not an answer. "No room for growth" runs into the same problem, as (a) there's at least SOME room for growth anyway and (b) again, subjective, as both not everyone finds that engaging and enjoyable anyway and different people at different skill levels may not see the growth the same way, meaning the skill ceiling/growth may not even be perceived the same way. Someone may struggle to get RDM down while another may find it child's play to master even BLM.

Again, make up your mind? Is this about low skill ceilings, or is it impossible to determine difficulty because it's very subjective (I tend to agree actually, I've been the first one to complain about the second rate dps jobs being subpar damage because of assumed arbitrary difficulties), therefore making skill ceilings a fantasy?

So WHY is the question. Not "Why should there be a simple Job", since the answer to that is obvious - having a low skill floor and ceiling Job in each role makes roles more accessible to new entrants, be they new players, new gamers, or people just wanting to dabble in a role for the first time.

Ceiling has nothing to do with accessibility.

To me, having multiple levels existing is the no brainer.

SMN is easy
RDM is medium
RDM optimized is hard
BLM normal is hard
BLM transpose infinite Paradox is galaxy brain

In fact, of ALL the roles in the game right now, I think Caster is the one that actually nails this. For Tanks, GNB is a bit harder and DRK CAN be harder depending on how you look at it, but WAR is pretty easy (with a bit of nuance) and PLD is near WAR levels. There's not a galaxy brain option, and there's debatably not a hard option. Healers.......should I go into that one? Most people consider them to have, at best, super easy, easy, and maybe a medium (SCH and/or AST) option. Melee don't really have an EASY option. RPR is the closest, but is probably more of a medium, and all the Melee Jobs other than RPR have pretty high skill ceilings to really master them, with MNK being obvious but SAM also having a pretty high bar for high level play. Ranged is just weird since all three Jobs are pretty simple to pick up but medium-ish to master, with MCH being the worst to do perfect on because of how its CDs drift if not used perfectly.

Caster is the one role that has a Job at easy, medium, and hard levels of play, and BLM has the option of going up to galaxy brain level if desired.

There's nothing really wrong with this other than "hardcore players want more".

And they have BLM and FREQUENTLY avoid playing it when offered any other choice.

You realize that you said just above that it's too subjective to make any rulings about difficulty, yet you just went on a tangent to determine arbitrary difficulty levels to triage and sort every job into their neat little difficulty labels within their respective roles?

It's a question of WHY what you want is actually necessary to the point it must and should be forced on everyone when even hardcore players avoid it if given the choice.

Why what I want, being every job being accessible yet with some mechanical depth, should be "forced" on everyone? I mean, are you arguing to force on everyone your arbitrary levels of complexity and/or intricacy/depth instead? I don't know man, but between the two, I do feel that my model is a lot more inclusive.

And on top of it, your model introduces yet another contradictory statement of yours, which bases itself on the fact that even raiders will often follow the path of least resistance (true!), yet surprisingly you'd advocate for easy jobs to play in the same roles than harder jobs to play. Why is that, if not to double down even more into totally lopsided play ratios even at high level?

And for the love of Hydaelyn and/or Zodiark (whichever cult you ascribe to more, of course ) - stop using the term "braindead". If you can't see how that poisons the well of literally any discussion ever, sit back in your chair, consider how you'd feel if people incessantly called things you actually find fun and enjoyable braindead, and then realize that you should stop doing it.

I agree with this and I apologize for the few times I've used it.

[Renathras]

Okay going to try to make my posts shorter and more direct:

You realize that literally nothing, in spite of what you like to pretend, is objective in that kind of "discussion", right?

That's...
...literally...
...MY...
...point!

You're attacking me for doing the thing that you have been doing. <_<

/sigh

The reason I ask you questions is to try to establish a baseline. Maybe you like sweet things and I like sour things, but it helps to have at least a working definition of what sweet IS, otherwise we can't discuss it.

And stop trying the appeal to bandwagon/group fallacy. You speak for yourself and the 4-5 people that like all your posts, not everyone else. "to everybody" is clearly not so. And how do you think YOU look "to everybody", btw? But that gets into the realm of personal attacks and has no place here (your 5 loyal likers be damned). This is the third time, I believe, you're purported to speak for "everybody" or "we".

You have literally here argued, I remember, for some jobs to be easy, and some to be hard.

Yes, I have.

Easy and hard.

Not braindead. Not "skill floor equal skill ceiling". You made up those parts.

Ergo, yes, you're arguing to enforce easy jobs down the throats of people.

These quotes are all variations on the same theme, so grouping together:

This makes literally no sense if I'm only suggesting - not enforcing - that _A_ simple Job existing is acceptable. It's also very odd that you say this while YOU are proposing forcing complex Jobs on "down the throats of people". Again, you're doing the thing you attack me of doing. You're demanding that NO Job have a low skill ceiling. This means that you are demanding that all Jobs have a NOT low skill ceiling. I'm suggesting ONE Job having a low skill ceiling is acceptable. Which of those is forcing something down people's throats, exactly?

Why what I want, being every job being accessible yet with some mechanical depth, should be "forced" on everyone?

When you're saying any Job that does not have that is not allowed to exist, then yes. You want to force it on everyone.

Unless you've changed your mind and believe that Jobs with no mechanical depth are acceptable and allowed?

I mean, are you arguing to force on everyone your arbitrary levels of complexity and/or intricacy/depth instead?

No.

Because UNLIKE you with demands for greater complexity, I don't insist that the simple end of the spectrum be forced on every Job in the game.

I don't know man, but between the two, I do feel that my model is a lot more inclusive.

You think a model that disallows easy Jobs and only allows medium or above is more inclusive than a model that allows for easy, medium, and hard and above Jobs? How do you figure that, EXACTLY? How do you figure a model (yours) which excludes one category is MORE INCLUSIVE than a model that excludes none?

And on top of it, your model introduces yet another contradictory statement of yours, which bases itself on the fact that even raiders will often follow the path of least resistance (true!), yet surprisingly you'd advocate for easy jobs to play in the same roles than harder jobs to play. Why is that, if not to double down even more into totally lopsided play ratios even at high level?

This is a fascinating leap in logic.

How is saying "one Job being easy is fine" the same as saying "all Jobs should be made easy"? I want to know EXACTLY how you are arriving at that conclusion, because that's the strawman you're arguing against.

Case in point.

No - question you refuse to answer. I'll ask it again:

WHY must all Jobs have a skill high skill ceiling?

I never argued for anything remotely close to people needing to improve.

This is you YET AGAIN dodging direct questions. Moreover, the questions that actually get to the heart of the matter:

Why is that important? Why is that necessary?

If I'm preaching to the choir, great. Choir, please answer the questions.

.

Going to skim through some of this since you guys keep complaining about my post length. If you want me to answer more thoroughly, I can, but then you can't complain about the length.

What the hell are you talking about.

GENERALLY SPEAKING, to make Jobs with highly variable but EQUALLY VIABLE rotations, it requires something of a customization system, like a Talent system or some such. As FFXIV doesn't have this, it doesn't work.

A medium difficulty Job can sometimes be made with variable nuance, but they are not equally viable when played at both ends. The fact that there is only ONE example of it indicates how difficult it is to do successfully. It's not impossible to make a moderate difficulty Job have a scaling to high difficulty, it's just rare to do it where it works. And given RDM's damage, it arguably ISN'T working right now anyway.

Again, make up your mind?

Again I'll present the question so you can dodge it once more:

"What is absent from these conversations is WHY no Job may be ALLOWED to have a low skill ceiling"?

I agree with this and I apologize for the few times I've used it.

Fair enough.

.

There's a lot of "gotcha" attempts in that post I'm going to cut out to try and shorten this, because they're pointless bickering and derailing (what I'm always accused of due to other people doing it...) and are just that. Anyway, hope the shorter version helps. I may just start cutting everything out but the questions and just ask them again and again until you can answer them...since I really DO think that cuts to the heart of the matter:

Why can't there be low skill ceiling Jobs in the game? Why is it necessary that they all not be?

.

EDIT: UGH!!!

Like are you for real?

So...you took a quote, apologized for doing it, then brought it up a second time as an attack?

Like...are you for real?

[Valence]

Hard to decipher, massive thread full of collapsibles within collapsibles

I was about to write an essay on my own but this is just getting out of hand for very little.

The thing you do not seem to get is that I am arguing for inclusivity in all jobs. Inclusivity means high accessibility (low floor) and a decent amount of intricacies/depth, or difficulty of perfect execution (ceiling). You took at some point the example of RDM and acknowledged that this was possible to do earlier, for an example. With that in mind, no matter the jobs that people like, they'll be able to find their own niche there, whether they're casual players, midcore, hardcore, top tier raiders, or handicapped players. If this passes for "forcing inclusivity on all jobs down the throat of players" to you, then I'm legitimately concerned about the twisted logic behind. In opposition, you have been arguing to select a couple of jobs and make them very exclusive to low ceiling models. Who's trying to force what there exactly?

Another clarification: I do not believe the slightest in "easy", "normal" and "hard" job difficulties and categories, for that there are just silly and difficulty is so subjective on such broad scopes that it's just laughable to even consider. I merely used this to demonstrate how self contradictory your arguments are all the time. For instance, if you introduce your easy, normal and hard model to every role, and therefore argue for "easy" jobs living within the same roles alongside harder ones, even though difficulty is hella subjective, with your own reasoning a lot of players will choose the path of least resistance, even raiders. Ergo, you're encouraging a model where job ratios of play get even more lopsided than they already are.

I am not even gonna touch the talents/spec tree considerations seeing how well balanced games that use those are.

I have never been dodging the question, you're just not reading the answers.

EDIT: UGH!!!


So...you took a quote, apologized for doing it, then brought it up a second time as an attack?

Like...are you for real?

Aren't you pushing it a little? First you ask people to stop using "braindead", which I even agreed to and apologized for, and then you casually proceed to use it yourself in your next post. When I point it out, you choose to whine because I'm attacking you with it? Really?


Edit: and after this, you're also one to talk for logical fallacies... What a nice way to assume that all the likes I get are from the same forum users? And what about your argumentum ad populum when you use the amount of play ratios for SMN/etc as proof for whatever you're trying to prove? The gal of some people...