[Suggestion] - Revise Party buffs (Strength in numbers) & (Comradery)

[Reynhart]

If you change Garuda to specifically resist BLM spells, people will start refusing BLM in PT cause they won't be effective enough. Generally speaking, adjusting content is a lazy solution "You can't get an invite to Garuda ?" "Just go kill Ifrit more and more if you want to play your BLM".

If jobs are made equally usefull strictly speaking, people will always stack the easier ones to play. If they change them to be equally easy to play, all the jobs will be the same, and so what's the point of having seven jobs.

As I said, for each content, one setup will always be the best. And any "best" setup favoring a job will see less invites for the others.

Basically, if devs announce a new job ability for PLD that reduces damage for all party members, like an "enhanced sentinel stance", i'm sure all people will say "Wow, what a great idea". After all, it will be a huge boost to PLD's effectiveness. Such ability is no different from having a party boost for including a PLD in the PT.

[Roaran]

If you change Garuda to specifically resist BLM spells, people will start refusing BLM in PT cause they won't be effective enough. Generally speaking, adjusting content is a lazy solution "You can't get an invite to Garuda ?" "Just go kill Ifrit more and more if you want to play your BLM".

If jobs are made equally usefull strictly speaking, people will always stack the easier ones to play. If they change them to be equally easy to play, all the jobs will be the same, and so what's the point of having seven jobs.

As I said, for each content, one setup will always be the best. And any "best" setup favoring a job will see less invites for the others.

Basically, if devs announce a new job ability for PLD that reduces damage for all party members, like an "enhanced sentinel stance", i'm sure all people will say "Wow, what a great idea". After all, it will be a huge boost to PLD's effectiveness. Such ability is no different from having a party boost for including a PLD in the PT.

My statement was, IF BLM are really awesome against Garuda, have Garuda resist magic spells or more specifically BLM spells. Maybe I wasn't being clear enough, but I meant that the developers would tone down BLM's effectiveness, by increasing Garuda's magic defense. The goal being to bring them in line with one another.

People are like electricity when considering options; they always follow the path that is easiest to travel. When one option is clearly superior, people always choose the obviously superior path.

The objective in balancing classes, is to make all those different possibilities as close to the median effectiveness as possible. In doing so, player preference will play a more considerable role.

Once again. If we implement the OP's idea, the new best thing to do, will either be stack all the classes with the good buffs, while ignoring all the other classes, or simply force groups to have 1 of each class.

SO, let's say your core group of 8 players loves playing PLD PLD WHM BRD MNK MNK WAR DRG. Let's say the game is balanced, and every person in the group has a defined and purposeful role in the party. Now, imagine if they felt like not having 1 of every class was detrimental? So one of the PLDs and one of the MNKs would have to switch. Maybe they're fine capitulating... maybe theyre good at it... But do you see how some people will view your "Party Buffs" in the EXACT SAME light as being forced to stack BLM.

Look, I'm not saying it's a bad idea. I'm saying it's one of the worst ideas. It's a step in the wrong direction, and it demonstrates the EXACT opposite type of fixes that are necessary. And I'm sorry if that hurts your feelings or whatever...? But I don't want to risk the Battle team picking this up and trying it out.