How is SMN a good example of this. If anything SMN is an example of this design philosophy being a futile circle. Square saw that old SMN was unpopular and they changed it fundamentally to satisfy the idea that jobs shouldn’t have significant skill gaps. And its playerbase rose………until a new option came around in PCT and SMN’s playerbase collapsed again. Now that BLM got a massive increase to its power vs its complexity SMN has gotten even less popular. So what was the point of the rework? Because SMN’s popularity collapsed back to where it was before the rework and you can argue that it wasn’t even actually SMN’s fault, rather the caster balance moving around it. RDM’s current meta position is basically the same, it did nothing and suddenly became the most popular caster as SMN and PCT crashed and burned around it because of balancing changes.
How long till BLM’s playerbase collapses again because they buff SMN because SMN is the current red hooded step child? Balancing on player numbers is a futile circle that just destroys job design for the benefit of people who don’t care about job design, they just chase the meta
And let’s say that a 7.3 buff to either SMN or PCT or both changes the play meta of the 4 casters again then what? Do we change BLM again, do we buff it again and destroy RDM’s playerbase? Like genuinely where does this type of balancing end


Reply With Quote

