What If Every Attack Type Actually Mattered?

[BabyYoda]

One thing I think FFXIV is missing is not necessarily more buttons, more complexity, or even harder rotations.

It is missing more meaningful choices during combat.

Right now, most jobs eventually solve themselves into a fixed rotation. The challenge becomes executing that rotation correctly while handling mechanics.

But what if enemies evolved alongside jobs?

Imagine if every job had access to different categories of actions:

Heavy Attacks
Multi-Hit Attacks
Magic Attacks
Utility Actions

Not as completely separate job identities, but as tools within each job’s existing kit.

A Dragoon might lean more toward Heavy Attacks.
A Viper might lean more toward Multi-Hit Attacks.
A Red Mage might naturally have stronger Magic options.
A Bard or Dancer might bring more Utility interactions.

The point is not that one job only does one thing.

The point is that every job would have a different balance of these tools based on its identity.

Then enemies could have different states that react to those attack types.

For example:

Armor State
Multi-hit attacks are better at breaking armor.

Exposed State
Once the armor is broken, heavy attacks become much more valuable.

Arcane Barrier
Magic attacks become the better answer.

Frenzy State
Pure damage may make the enemy more dangerous, while utility actions can help control or suppress the state.

This would create a different kind of combat decision.

Not just:

“What is the next button in my rotation?”

But:

“What is the correct type of action for the enemy’s current state?”

And I want to be clear: I am not suggesting that rotations should be removed.

From what we have seen so far, Evolved Jobs seem to still be built around combos and rotations, but in a more dynamic way. I actually think that is a positive direction.

What I would like to see is this idea applied within that same system.

Instead of having only one correct rotation, jobs could have multiple rotation paths depending on the situation.

Maybe one combo path focuses on Heavy Attacks.
Another path focuses on Multi-Hit Attacks.
Another path applies Utility effects.
Another path interacts with Magic.

The enemy state would then influence which rotation path is the best choice at that moment.

So the goal is not to replace rotations.

The goal is to make rotation selection matter.

Combat would become less about memorizing one sequence and more about reading the battlefield, understanding the enemy state, and choosing the right path.

In other words:

Instead of only Rotation Management,

we could have State Management.

That, to me, would feel like a real RPG element inside FFXIV’s combat system.

[RaionKansen]

You'd still just do whatever is optimal either way.

We used to have different physical damage types, and that led to entire jobs not being desired for higher end content.
I don't think we need to re-learn this.

Bosses already have "frenzied" states, but its just the mechanics of the encounter. Something that you don't really get to experience that much in duty roulette content. They could add more things like that to that kind of content.

[BabyYoda]

You'd still just do whatever is optimal either way.

We used to have different physical damage types, and that led to entire jobs not being desired for higher end content.
I don't think we need to re-learn this.

Bosses already have "frenzied" states, but its just the mechanics of the encounter. Something that you don't really get to experience that much in duty roulette content. They could add more things like that to that kind of content.

That is a fair concern, but I think the context is a bit different now than it was in the past.

With the shift toward weekly objectives and multiple progression paths, players are no longer as dependent on roulettes as they once were. If someone wants rewards, they may choose FATEs, exploration content, field operations, or whatever content ends up being most efficient. Roulettes will still exist, but they no longer have to dictate the design of the entire combat system.

I also do not see learning a new system as a negative. Every combat system has a learning period. Positionals had one. Job gauges had one. Raid mechanics still do. Even current rotations require learning.

As long as enemy states are communicated clearly through visual effects, UI indicators, or job feedback, I think most players would adapt fairly quickly.

I also want to clarify that I am not advocating for bringing back permanent damage-type weaknesses where certain jobs become undesirable for specific encounters. The focus is on temporary enemy states that change throughout the fight.

The question would not be:

"Which job should I bring?"

It would be:

"Which part of my job should I use right now?"

To me, that creates a more interesting form of optimization. Instead of solving a single rotation from pull to kill, players would be making situational decisions based on the current state of the encounter.

[BabyYoda]

Another layer that could work alongside this idea is giving certain actions bonus effectiveness based on the current percentage of an enemy state.

Not tied to Heavy Attacks, Multi-Hit Attacks, Magic, or Utility specifically, but to individual actions themselves.

For example, imagine a Dragoon during an Armor State:

* Jump might be strongest when current enemy status is above 80%.
* Geirskogul might be strongest when current enemy status is below 20%.
* Stardiver might reach maximum effectiveness somewhere around 50%.

Or for Samurai:

* Hissatsu: Senei could be strongest when the current enemy status is near its maximum.
* Shoha could be strongest when the current enemy status is nearly depleted.
* Ogi Namikiri could perform best somewhere in the middle.

The interesting part is that this creates another decision beyond simply choosing the correct attack type.

The player is not only asking:

"What type of action should I use for this state?"

They are also asking:

"When is the best moment to use this action during that state?"

This could create more active decision-making without necessarily adding more buttons or making jobs significantly more complex.

It would simply make enemy states matter not only for rotation selection, but also for timing decisions.

[Haventale]

I like this idea but it would require another thing I’ve always wanted the devs to do — make all boss attacks random, not in a set rotation. If all they did was put your idea onto the current boss design, it would just result in another different rotation because the boss would always enter A state at X time, so you’d still just always be using the same skills throughout the fight since there would always be the same correct time to use certain skills.

More than anything, what I want out of a combat overhaul is dynamic fights. No more static job rotations and no more static boss rotations. This is a huge reason why pvp is infinitely more engaging than the current pve, because every moment is different from the next and you are in a state of actively deciding which button to press in that exact moment, 100% of the time. In pvp EVERY button press matters, and there’s active choice behind EVERY button press.

In pve, tanks and healers are the worst offenders for this problem. For tanks I have like 7 defensive cooldowns and in 99% of content, it doesn’t actually matter WHICH ones I push as long as I’m pushing something throughout the fight. For healers, I have like 10 aoe and 10 single target healing spells, and in 99% of content it doesn’t matter at all WHICH ones I push as long as I push something throughout the fight. Is there an optimal rotation for tanks using cooldowns and healers using healing skills? Sure. But the that’s the exact problem with the pve combat design right now. I want to completely eradicate the notion of “optimization.”

You hear all the time about people “falling alseep” during pve content, and removing static rotations from bosses and jobs would go a long way to solving the repetition and monotony of gameplay. If bosses can use any of their mechanics/attacks at any time, then players actually have to be paying attention. And if the jobs have dynamic skills that aren’t set in stone, which evolved mode seems to be doing, THEN they’d be able to start adding mechanics to jobs like you’re suggesting. And I would love it if jobs got more systems and mechanics to differentiate their gameplay from each other.

[BabyYoda]

I like this idea but it would require another thing I’ve always wanted the devs to do — make all boss attacks random, not in a set rotation. If all they did was put your idea onto the current boss design, it would just result in another different rotation because the boss would always enter A state at X time, so you’d still just always be using the same skills throughout the fight since there would always be the same correct time to use certain skills.

More than anything, what I want out of a combat overhaul is dynamic fights. No more static job rotations and no more static boss rotations. This is a huge reason why pvp is infinitely more engaging than the current pve, because every moment is different from the next and you are in a state of actively deciding which button to press in that exact moment, 100% of the time. In pvp EVERY button press matters, and there’s active choice behind EVERY button press.

You hear all the time about people “falling alseep” during pve content, and removing static rotations from bosses and jobs would go a long way to solving the repetition and monotony of gameplay. If bosses can use any of their mechanics/attacks at any time, then players actually have to be paying attention. And if the jobs have dynamic skills that aren’t set in stone, which evolved mode seems to be doing, THEN they’d be able to start adding mechanics to jobs like you’re suggesting. And I would love it if jobs got more systems and mechanics to differentiate their gameplay from each other.

I think there may be a small misunderstanding of what I had in mind.

My idea is not that players are waiting for the boss to enter State A at minute X and then simply pressing the correct skill for that state.

For example, imagine the boss enters an Armor State. During that state, Heavy attacks are more effective at breaking the armor. If the party breaks it successfully, they might be rewarded with something like a temporary damage vulnerability, a burst of damage, or another combat advantage before the boss transitions into a different state.

The important part is that the decision is not "what do I press at minute X?"

The decision is "what do I press while the boss is in this state?"

A group that continues following their normal rotation might break the armor slowly. A group that recognizes the state and prioritizes Heavy attacks could break it much faster and earn the reward sooner.

I also imagine these attack types existing at the skill level rather than the job level. For example, a job could have Heavy, Multi-Hit, and Utility actions within its own kit. The player would then decide which tools are most valuable for the boss's current state rather than always following the exact same priority list.

So while I agree that static encounters can make systems feel solved, my goal is to create more moment-to-moment decision making by making the boss's current state matter. Instead of asking "what is the next button in my rotation?", the player is asking "what is the most effective action for the current situation?"
I also agree with your broader point about dynamic encounters. I don't think attack types alone would solve the problem if fights remain completely static.

What interests me is creating more active decision-making within encounters. Whether that comes from more dynamic boss behavior, attack types, enemy states, or evolved job systems, the goal is ultimately the same: making players think about the current situation rather than simply executing a memorized sequence.

[BabyYoda]

In pve, tanks and healers are the worst offenders for this problem. For tanks I have like 7 defensive cooldowns and in 99% of content, it doesn’t actually matter WHICH ones I push as long as I’m pushing something throughout the fight. For healers, I have like 10 aoe and 10 single target healing spells, and in 99% of content it doesn’t matter at all WHICH ones I push as long as I push something throughout the fight. Is there an optimal rotation for tanks using cooldowns and healers using healing skills? Sure. But the that’s the exact problem with the pve combat design right now. I want to completely eradicate the notion of “optimization.”

Your tank example is actually one of the reasons I started thinking about systems like this in the first place.

In the past, I suggested giving tankbusters different attack types rather than treating all incoming damage as effectively the same thing.

For example:

* Heavy Attacks
* Multi-Hit Attacks
* Magic Attacks
* Damage-over-Time Tankbusters

All tanks would still be capable of handling every type, but each tank could specialize in one category.

A Dark Knight might be rewarded for properly mitigating a Magic Attack with a bonus finisher or combo extension.

A Paladin could specialize in Heavy Attacks.

A Warrior could excel against Multi-Hit attacks.

A Gunbreaker could be strongest against DoT-based tankbusters.

The important part is that the reward isn't just surviving. The reward is gaining access to additional offensive value when you respond correctly.

That changes the question from "Did I press a mitigation?" to "Did I use the right mitigation for this attack?"

Of course, a system like this would require several things to work:

1. Every tank would need opportunities to shine against their preferred attack type rather than being locked into a permanent main tank/off tank role.

2. Bosses would need a healthy mix of Heavy, Multi-Hit, Magic, and DoT attacks rather than focusing entirely on one category.

3. The order of tankbusters should not always be identical every pull. Some variation would help create active decision making instead of turning it into another memorized timeline.

That is also why I find your point about dynamic encounters interesting. I think encounter design and combat systems need to support each other.

As for healers, I honestly haven't thought about them as much yet.

Most of my ideas so far have focused on tanks and DPS because I think it is easier to build encounter interactions around damage types and enemy states.

I do think a similar philosophy could eventually be applied to healers, where different healing or utility tools become more valuable depending on the situation, but I don't have a fully developed idea for that yet.

In fact, I would argue that healers have an even bigger design problem than tanks right now, so I think solving healer gameplay would require a much broader discussion than simply adding attack types or encounter states.