I'm One Of The Filthiests Of Casuals And Even I Can See How Dumbdown FF14 Has Become!

[Shurrikhan]

Though I think they will probably want to keep SMN simple going forward, since that seems to be "what the people want" (at least by numbers of how many play it...)

Is not that conflated, though? You may as well call being overpowered an "identity".

Without having other jobs of similar theme/gameplay and/or relative output-per-effort within that same role, we have little way of knowing whether people play the given job because for its overpowered-ness/advantages or for its theme/gameplay.

[Renathras]

are they really different in a practical sense,

Yes.

Setting aside one is abjectly false while the other is abjectly true...

...the former notes that there is a possibility for it to be used. This is the first iteration, and we don't know what they'll do going forward yet, meaning we cannot use it t draw that trend line. I very much suspect they will use the flexibility of this design going forward since it makes for easy additions. It's super modular, and that makes it very easy to make some VFX swaps or minor variations on the theme using what other types of cast spells exist in the game (short stacking buffs like BLU's Ravana, long casts, short casts, instant casts, oGCDs, GCDs...), and as certain people are fond of pointing out, no Job remains unchanged in expansions as they get at the least some potency upgrades and VFX changes for spells.

Now, whether what they do will satisfy you personal or not is another question entirely. I suspect it will not. But that's not what potential or possibilities is defined by.

I think this is more a case of what you don't like vs what word you're using to describe it. I absolutely suspect they won't do things you like with it...but that's not what possibilities or potential means. There are a lot of things they could do that you personally may not enjoy, but those are all valid topics under the header of possibility.

Is not that conflated, though? You may as well call being overpowered an "identity".

Without having other jobs of similar theme/gameplay and/or relative output-per-effort within that same role, we have little way of knowing whether people play the given job because for its overpowered-ness/advantages or for its theme/gameplay.

SMN isn't overpowered by any definition of the term, though.

Here's the thing, as much as people who dislike SMN want to come up with any reason for it to be popular other than it being simple to play...the reality is it had the same basic aesthetics (summoning magical entities to fight with you) before as it does now, similar utility (combat raise, party buff, and rotation dependent party healing; it had Phoenix in ShB) before. It also did MORE damage than then it does now - in several of the ShB patches, SMN did comparable damage to BLM, and I think in one patch (or maybe two) it actually did more. The only thing that changed is that it's far easier to play now, and its damage reduced to around RDM levels. And 5.5 SMN also shared a Job with SCH, meaning the "people only play it so much because it levels with SCH" argument is clearly incorrect.

So we can compare 5.5 SMN to EW SMN and see that the former, despite having similar aesthetic, similar utility (raise, party buff, healing), also sharing leveling with SCH, and actually doing more damage...was less played than current SMN.

So what is the explanation for this that isn't "because it's straightforward to play now, and people like that"? If people are only rushing to it now for its utility, why weren't they in ShB when it had the same utility? If people like more complex Jobs, why wasn't it one of the most played in ShB? If it's only because it levels with SCH, why wasn't it leveled with SCH in ShB?

All the arguments for SMN numbers being higher now other than people enjoy/prize simpler things don't hold up when you realize ShB SMN had those things (and even better damage), yet it was played less then. The most logical answer seems to be: People do, indeed, prefer simpler things.

[Shurrikhan]

SMN isn't overpowered by any definition of the term, though.

Has "overpowered" ceased to refer to producing the same output at lesser risk and effort, or greater output at the same risk/effort?

All the arguments for SMN numbers being higher now other than people enjoy/prize simpler things don't hold up when you realize ShB SMN had those things (and even better damage), yet it was played less then. The most logical answer seems to be: People do, indeed, prefer simpler things.

Shadowbringer's vs. Endwalker's SMN's 95th+ percentile damage is relevant... to those vying for the outputs of a 95th+ percentile caster in that era. Which is not the majority of players.

And when a player can put out a good 10%+ more playing a middling SMN than playing RDM to the same degree of effort, especially while doing more complex of fight mechanics, yes, differing ease of output becomes a relevant factor that does have to be accounted for.

Which makes the player numbers not nearly so cut and dry to analyze as just 'the simpler, the more enjoyable'.

[Renathras]

Has "overpowered" ceased to refer to producing the same output at lesser risk and effort, or greater output at the same risk/effort?

No.

It can't cease to have that definition since it's never had that definition.

Overpowered is defined as being too powerful for a given type of content or experience. For example, if BLM Flare did 999,999 damage, that would be overpowered since it would clearly make encounters easier than intended. Overpowered has never been defined as "relative to effort". Ever. I'm starting to wonder if our conflicts are less because we disagree on things and more because you have definitions of words that no one else shares...

What you're talking about is risk/reward or feeling something is more rewarded than it should be. Neither are related to the concept of being too powerful for content.

Shadowbringer's vs. Endwalker's SMN's 95th+ percentile damage is relevant... to those vying for the outputs of a 95th+ percentile caster in that era. Which is not the majority of players.

Agreed. And those are the only people that care SMN does more damage than RDM. Casual players literally don't care. RDM and SMN are both highly played (and far higher) than BLM in casual content. Point being: This isn't why people are picking SMN, exactly the point I was making. People aren't picking SMN because "it's easy to do high damage" except for a very small portion of the playerbase, who would have been picking SMN for that reason before in ShB, meaning it cannot be the driver of the difference now.

And when a player can put out a good 10%+ more playing a middling SMN than playing RDM to the same degree of effort, especially while doing more complex of fight mechanics, yes, differing ease of output becomes a relevant factor that does have to be accounted for.

Again, this isn't relevant for the majority of the playerbase. AT BEST, it's relevant for a sliver of the midcore.

Which makes the player numbers not nearly so cut and dry to analyze as just 'the simpler, the more enjoyable'.

I agree it's not 100% "simpler = more enjoyable". But that's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying the people saying "simpler = LESS enjoyable" are wrong. That is, simpler is at least part of the calculation, and for lots or even a majority of players, the lion's share. You have zero evidence to oppose this other than you don't like simple (and you're part of that "Which is not the majority of players" group), and seem not to want it to be true since it makes arguments for changing SMN far more difficult if the bulk of players actually DO enjoy it because it's simpler. In other words, it's an attempt to defuse an opposition to your position, but a very poor one.

[AmiableApkallu]

Has "overpowered" ceased to refer to producing the same output at lesser risk and effort, or greater output at the same risk/effort?

Overpowered is defined as being too powerful for a given type of content or experience. For example, if BLM Flare did 999,999 damage, that would be overpowered since it would clearly make encounters easier than intended. Overpowered has never been defined as "relative to effort". Ever. I'm starting to wonder if our conflicts are less because we disagree on things and more because you have definitions of words that no one else shares...

These two definitions are compatible with each other.

For example: BLM Flare doing 999,999 damage compared to what it does now is obviously "greater output at the same risk/effort." It's also obviously "too powerful for [FFXIV's encounter design and job design]."

If we have job A, and job B "[produces] the same output at lesser risk and effort," at some point, a sufficient amount of "lesser risk and effort" becomes "too powerful for a given type of content" because it would "make encounters easier than intended."[1]

If we have job A, and job B "[produces] greater output at the same risk/effort," at some point, a sufficient amount of "greater output" becomes "too powerful for a given type of content" because it would "make encounters easier than intended."

And I can say something similar for all the points on that output vs. risk/effort spectrum.

[1] In the concrete case where job B is SMN, the obvious counter here is that maybe SE intended the current situation. Fair enough, given that I don't think we know SE's mind one way or another. But I think it's also fair to consider here what players desire. It's not hard to imagine that there are extremes, e.g., BLM Flare @ 999,999, that would not be desired by everyone. It's also not hard to imagine less extreme designs that would engender some amount of debate...

[Renathras]

These two definitions are compatible with each other.

Compatible? Hm... one is a far bigger judgement call than the other.

Godmode is obviously overpowered, but "this Job is too easy for the damage output it gets" is far less obvious. The concept of something "breaking the game" is very easy to see and identify. Most people would agree that, for example, PLD Cover in PvP covering an ally while they take an objective making it impossible to prevent the objective being captured is likely not an intended feature and, with no actual counter, overpowered. But "SMN does too little effort for the amount of damage it does" is not so clear cut. How much is too much? How much is too little? Of the range that's just right, why does SMN fall outside of it? How do you specifically define easy, and how do you define TOO easy? Alternatively, how do you define TOO much damage? Can you define acceptable risk/reward damage output in terms of potency? How do you quantify (not qualify) a Job's rotational complexity to make an objective measure of effort vs reward? How much effort SHOULD be required for a unit of potency?

The other issue is that they aren't the same thing. That is, one requires something to be broken or make encounters not have the intended difficulty. SE clearly thinks that SMN (and other similarly non-complex Jobs like WAR, DNC, etc) have the adequate experience they want for the end user. That would mean they aren't overpowered.

They clearly aren't broken.

So no, I don't think the definitions are the same or really compatible with one another. Overpowered isn't "relative to effort". It's "this thing breaks the game". That isn't compatible with a definition of overpowered that IS relative to effort. Thus the two definitions are not compatible.