High Materia: A concept to allow for some player agency, without destroying balance

[VentVanitas]

it's very unproductive to constantly worry about the minmaxing boogieman and let that affect balance and gameplay decisions. there are always going to be people that will optimize no matter what, let them.

[Sparkthor]

Even so this kind of idea will probably end like action role introduced in SB :
- Everybody would chose roughtly the same(s)
- People will wonder why it's not in the base skill.
- Eventually, this fonctionality would be remove or integrated as new skill baseline/trait.

No offense, but FFXIV has never been a game when you choose whatever you like to improve your gameplay or small area, but a game when you stick with the job you're more confortable with (or the most potent if you want).

Don't get me wrong, it's a cool idea, but i don't think the player base or the game can be balanced around theses kinds of options.

it's very unproductive to constantly worry about the minmaxing boogieman and let that affect balance and gameplay decisions. there are always going to be people that will optimize no matter what, let them.

Considering SE put a lot of value to reduce overall complexity about understanding how the game works, make mistakes easier to handle and prevent player to do bad/trap choices, i would to the contrary consider productive to worry about thoses "boogieman" has they more than SE decide what needs to be played and what shouldn't. We can take tank stance on SB era as instance.

[Burmecia]

Just read it

Embarrassing editing mistake on my post. Meant to sat: "It doesnt matter if the DPS gain would be just indirect."
Makes more sense, yes? Any/many of the defensive ideas can be used in offensive way, if DPS/Tank/anyone can use them to not lose uptime.
I have no interest in beginning to think op's idea very deeply. It seems fun, it would make lot of people rage, it would be deleted eventually because of it would make balancing hell.
Many of the presented ideas in OP would make more sense as traits if we absolutely would need to have any of them.

[Absurdity]

I do enjoy how people confidently claim that people would get kicked out of PFs for picking the non-optimal choice and losing out on 1% dps value. Like how every single PF right now is kicking out any caster that isn't a BLM? Oh wait....

Every time these people jump out of the bushes to complain about the imaginary elitist boogieman I have to assume they've never even touched party finder to raid.

You get people in savage pugs that can barely do their rotation, somehow manage to desync their buffs even in Endwalker and have a 1 in 3 chance to run around like headless chicken for any movement mechanic...and you can often still brute force the fight to completion.
Ain't nobody getting kicked for picking a passive that is 2% worse than another one.

[Burmecia]

I do enjoy how people confidently claim that people would get kicked out of PFs for picking the non-optimal choice and losing out on 1% dps value. Like how every single PF right now is kicking out any caster that isn't a BLM? Oh wait....

Of course non-optimal picks won't necessarily be kicked from PFs.
We would just see threads here like: "BIS pick HM, why so many don't use them??"

[ForsakenRoe]

Many of the presented ideas in OP would make more sense as traits if we absolutely would need to have any of them.

Again, they are just examples of what SE could do to 'add an effect to an existing skill', they are not intended to be balanced against one another in any way. But again, I don't care, and neither should devs of any game, if someone finds a way to use X effect instead of Y and gain a tiny amount of damage somewhere through highly skilled play. That is not a reason to naysay a system's addition. If we were to take that as true, that we shouldn't add something 'because someone might find a way to use it to squeeze more damage out compared to someone else' then we can just write off any new jobs, because they're either going to be stronger than current choices, or weaker than current choices.

Consider the traits we got in recent years, they include such bangers as 'Shield healers have a 100p regen with 50% uptime attached to their 30s mit bubble, thereby immediately scuffing the division between Pure and Barrier', or 'Living Shadow can now do your level 90 move (which is only a gain of 100p per LS used), or god forbid, 'Enhanced Unmend'. And that Cover one I listed, we DID have in SB, then they removed it going into SHB.

I have no idea how people who are claiming it'd be balance hell are coming to the conclusion that it'd be balance hell, except for 'kneejerk reaction to the idea of having a choice about something for your job'. I can understand wanting to just be told 'get this gear, use these melds, do this rotation', and if that's the case, surely the issue of 'people will just look up the best one' is perfect for that? Just look what effect is 'the best' (again, extremely situational/probably subjective), use that, and let people who want to experiment, experiment, and potentially prove the 'this one is the best' thing wrong, because they find a way to make a 'not the best' option work just as well, by doing something useful to a different part of the fight.

I'm trying to stay away from turning into a rant machine, but I have to say, it's quite infuriating to see how quickly people jump to 'we must keep things balanced' as a reason to not add something people could enjoy into the game. We've never had perfect balance, we never will. Why do we keep trying to preserve that which we cannot, and will not, attain, at the cost of design potential? Not just this idea, but any idea could be shot down because 'the balance between jobs', it's quite disheartening. Because the end of that path is a bland morass where every job has no fun, no soul, no life, but hey, at least they do the same numbers right? Oh right, they don't, because one got more Crits in their burst window than the other.

Tell you what, here's a question. Say we had two effects, both of which have a direct effect on my damage (again, unlike the pitch) one that provides me with 20 extra damage per second on average, and one that provides me an opportunity, if I'm incredibly competent at the game and have optimized my healing plan with my cohealer to the GCD, to get an extra 35 damage per second on average. Which one is 'better'? Is that answer the same for you, as it is for me? Can you ascribe the title of 'Best in Slot' to only one, with that statement holding true for every player, of any skill level, in the game, or is there far more nuance and conditionals that determine which is 'best'? And in such a system, with so many variables in flux, how can we name only one specific option superior to the rest with such certainty?

Of course non-optimal picks won't necessarily be kicked from PFs.
We would just see threads here like: "BIS pick HM, why so many don't use them??"

Again, I would suggest that you re-read or re-think about the idea. It would be difficult to pin down which effect is 'BIS' as you call it, because of how many variables are in motion in content. Take one healer, say, WHM. Is it 4man or 8man content? Is it casual or more hardcore (eg Criterion/Savage)? Who is your Cohealer? Is it a Barrier healer, or a WHM/AST situation? If it IS an AST, are they going to use the Nocturnal Sect effect and become a pseudo-Barrier healer themselves (meaning they have less healing strength and more mit)? Is there a lot of Tank damage? Party damage? Who are your DPS and do they have utilities to help with healing or mitigation (Magick Barrier, Physranged stuff, Mantra)? Are the tanks taking more selfsustain, party mitigation or self-mitigation effects? When are the big mechanics in the fight, do they line up with your CDs quite well currently? If you took a certain effect, does that allow your CDs to line up better with the fight timeline? Do you gain extra uses of your big power moves on key mechanic moments? Is there another part of the fight where a different effect also helps in a different way? Is that effect going to help your team more, based on your composition?

Is it possible to answer all of that, for any given encounter/content in the game, and have one unanimous answer? Simply, no. There's too many variables at play to make an assertion like 'This effect is BIS'. Even between two players, in the same content, you'd likely end up with different answers, because of varying skill levels. Were the effects remotely balanced, and 'not direct damage gains' as I keep stressing, then it would not be possible to make such an assertion for any of the effects, they'd all have their use cases.

PS: as mentioned previously, we don't see threads here saying 'BIS pick is BLM for caster slot, why so many play SMN/RDM??', and until such a time as we do (in a copious volume befitting the fact there's a 10% damage differential between them at the moment), I don't feel like anyone with the 'no support, we need to maintain perfect balance between the jobs' angle has a leg to stand on

[AmiableApkallu]

I do enjoy how people confidently claim that people would get kicked out of PFs for picking the non-optimal choice and losing out on 1% dps value. Like how every single PF right now is kicking out any caster that isn't a BLM? Oh wait....

I'm trying to stay away from turning into a rant machine, but I have to say, it's quite infuriating to see how quickly people jump to 'we must keep things balanced' as a reason to not add something people could enjoy into the game. We've never had perfect balance, we never will. Why do we keep trying to preserve that which we cannot, and will not, attain, at the cost of design potential?

It's easier to pontificate about the optimal rotation versus a striking dummy while ignoring all sources of variance than it is to worry about attacking a real mob while taking into account gear, 5% damage variance, random direct and critical hits, and those imperfect creatures holding the keyboard/mouse/controller.

[4clubbedace]

I do enjoy how people confidently claim that people would get kicked out of PFs for picking the non-optimal choice and losing out on 1% dps value. Like how every single PF right now is kicking out any caster that isn't a BLM? Oh wait....

i actually bared blm from promise and asphodelos since so many blm just couldnt play their class and griefed the hell out of me

[Burmecia]

Not-the-best options absolutely work already in the game. My Anabaseios gear is picked/melded with tenacity and crit as number one and number two of the substats. I don't think savages or even ultimates need the best options only and the rest is useless. Player skill, job choice and RNG shenanigans are already a thing which have an effect on gameplay. FF14 is developed in a way that there is a leeway.

I'd even say that illusion of choice like this or that is a bad thing, it has its place in videogames, absolutely.
I can't speak for anyone else, but at least I am not opposing or endorsing this idea. I am just observing this from what-if perspective: What would follow the introduction of a feature like this?
Would it become our unquestionable darling feature, where no one would find any flaws, or advantages, because no one could because it was inherently so balanced? Or then it would not be balanced at all, but somehow that wouldn't ruin anything from anyone. No one knows. I just happen to think it's likely that it'd have its fans and haters, just like everything else. People who test and calculate to find the most potential picks would not swallow this without chewing. Rather, if finding "the meta" choice would prove to be tricky that would likely just fan the flame for theorycrafters and one percent of one percent players, not discourage them.

And yeah, most of us are in fact one top one percent. But people like to copy what those people use, because it's seen as a good choice. And safe choice if you want to succeed in raiding. That's not a good or bad thing either, it's just something that simply is as it is.

[Jojoya]

I am just observing this from what-if perspective: What would follow the introduction of a feature like this?
Would it become our unquestionable darling feature, where no one would find any flaws, or advantages, because no one could because it was inherently so balanced? Or then it would not be balanced at all, but somehow that wouldn't ruin anything from anyone. No one knows. I just happen to think it's likely that it'd have its fans and haters, just like everything else. People who test and calculate to find the most potential picks would not swallow this without chewing. Rather, if finding "the meta" choice would prove to be tricky that would likely just fan the flame for theorycrafters and one percent of one percent players, not discourage them.

And yeah, most of us are in fact one top one percent. But people like to copy what those people use, because it's seen as a good choice. And safe choice if you want to succeed in raiding. That's not a good or bad thing either, it's just something that simply is as it is.

As nice as it is to think that they could be balanced so there would be no superior choice, there always will be one. You can't balance them when not every fight is the same.

That means there will be players who expect other players to change their "high materia" constantly to match what calculated to be best for the specific boss. That's going to lead to players complaining that its even more expensive to raid and do EX trials because they would have to purchase stacks of these materia to switch out boss after boss, week after week.

Limit the player to a single permanent choice and everyone will pick the one that offers some benefit in every type of fight at the same time they complain about not being allowed any real choice since they can't change when they want.

Even effects that aren't damage increases directly can result in increased damage. Melee DPS has an effect that allows them to move more quickly on proc? Damage increases if the proc coincidence with a "get away from the boss" mechanic because they're able to get out then back in faster. Tank has an effect that reduces damage taken by a party member? Healer has that much less to heal and so can deal more damage. Healer has a CD reduction on Rescue? Party can plan more times for the healer to use Rescue to get a party member back in attack range sooner (or allow them to stay in the danger zone for an extra GCD before pulling them out).

You're absolutely correct saying you don't have to be optimal to clear content. You're going to have a very hard time convincing the general player base of that. Most would rather stick to optimal hoping that will make up for any deficiency rather than take a chance on an unknown player using sub-optimal choices.