[dev1032] PUG skills singled out.

[AlphaDragoon]

Still waiting for a reply on this one. I mean currently Lancer and Archer are better for damage, Marauder and Gladiator are better for tanking. What's the point of Pugilist these days? Adding MP costs to our basic attacks was just kicking us while we're down.

IIRC the devs said something about Pugilist being positioned as more of a DD class, so maybe we'll see something with the next patch. At least, I hope so. It's majorly effed up that we get MP costs on out attacks with no way to restore MP from our own skill set, AND we have one of the lower MP pools in the game. Meanwhile Mr. Lancer has huge DPS and an enormous MP pool with ZERO MP costs on their skills.

[AsterBarnivere]

IIRC the devs said something about Pugilist being positioned as more of a DD class, so maybe we'll see something with the next patch. At least, I hope so. It's majorly effed up that we get MP costs on out attacks with no way to restore MP from our own skill set, AND we have one of the lower MP pools in the game. Meanwhile Mr. Lancer has huge DPS and an enormous MP pool with ZERO MP costs on their skills.

DD!? I refuse to use that word as a pugilist because there are Archers who do twice more Damage than I do, and THAT is something I don't understand.

[leomike35]

DD!? I refuse to use that word as a pugilist because there are Archers who do twice more Damage than I do, and THAT is something I don't understand.

Yeah I think they should lower cool down of light strike and pummel to 4 secs and maybe 10 for pummel either that or speed up pug auto attack. I tried playing PUG after 1.18 and felt very slow. Hopefully they can do that instead of slowing archers down which I think is the popular class because it seems to work the best now that stamina gauge is gone.

[Arcell]

DD!? I refuse to use that word as a pugilist because there are Archers who do twice more Damage than I do, and THAT is something I don't understand.

Not to mention they stand way out of harm's way while doing more damage than you.

[Verecund]

It would be interesting if they tied scaling of some abilities into other stats, like M.Attack, MP pool, etc. to give more tweaking knobs for class styles.

[Arcell]

So.....still waiting on word on this one. I mean I'm bringing my Marauder up so I'll have no need for my Pugilist soon but I'd still love some kind of word on this issue. Why Pugilist? Will per-class point allocation make this better for us? Will we get more MP per Mind stat to make up for it? Is there any kind of logical justification for putting MP cost on the basic attacks? Just looking for a rep to clear this up, I can usually see the good in the changes the dev team makes but this one is completely lost on me.

[AmyRae]

So.....still waiting on word on this one. I mean I'm bringing my Marauder up so I'll have no need for my Pugilist soon but I'd still love some kind of word on this issue. Why Pugilist? Will per-class point allocation make this better for us? Will we get more MP per Mind stat to make up for it? Is there any kind of logical justification for putting MP cost on the basic attacks? Just looking for a rep to clear this up, I can usually see the good in the changes the dev team makes but this one is completely lost on me.

I've played Pugilist as well as Archer, although not all the way to 50, so I may not understand the full extent of the problem. But while archers do seem like premium damage dealers, they can't take a hit worth a darn. At least Pugilists have evasive abilities and strong natural health bars. They could potentially be great at evasion tanking with the right kind of support (if that is indeed the design philosophy behind them).

It's still on the official site here:
http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/#/game.../pugilist/role

Basically, Pugilists should be able to sink deeper into an increasingly evasive or offensive stance depending on what abilities they use. I can't say I've been in a battle that lasted long enough to even notice how this works (or even if it does work), especially now that auto-attack has taken over.

It might not make pugilists the very best damage dealers at short fights, but for long boss fights, they might actually prove quite desirable depending on the potency of those stances.

It would be nice to hear what the future design philosophy is going to be in regards to this, however.

[AlphaDragoon]

IIt's still on the official site here:
http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/#/game.../pugilist/role

Basically, Pugilists should be able to sink deeper into an increasingly evasive or offensive stance depending on what abilities they use. I can't say I've been in a battle that lasted long enough to even notice how this works (or even if it does work), especially now that auto-attack has taken over.

It might not make pugilists the very best damage dealers at short fights, but for long boss fights, they might actually prove quite desirable depending on the potency of those stances.

It would be nice to hear what the future design philosophy is going to be in regards to this, however.

The stances never actually made it into the final game (which sucks, would have been a cool idea). And if I recall correctly, Pugilist is being tooled into a DD class per the new team.

And I agree that Pugilists and Marauders could use some buffing. They need to have the enemy focused on them in order to be able to perform DD at their maximum (and yet Gladiators are the actual tank class), while Lancer and Archer can deal much more damage without needing to have the enemy's attack cause a certain effect (evasion and parrying respectively) to make them able to use their low TP cost DD skills.

[Arcell]

I've played Pugilist as well as Archer, although not all the way to 50, so I may not understand the full extent of the problem. But while archers do seem like premium damage dealers, they can't take a hit worth a darn. At least Pugilists have evasive abilities and strong natural health bars. They could potentially be great at evasion tanking with the right kind of support (if that is indeed the design philosophy behind them).

However aside from soloing Archers should never actually take a hit. Archers have the longest range in the game, they should use it. Pugilist is forced to be up front 100% of the time and does nowhere near the amount of damage an Archer does. From a balance standpoint, why use anything but Archer? I mean when you can do max damage at max range, there's no point in having other damage classes. They're out of harm's reach while doing more damage than all other melee classes.

[AmyRae]

However aside from soloing Archers should never actually take a hit. Archers have the longest range in the game, they should use it. Pugilist is forced to be up front 100% of the time and does nowhere near the amount of damage an Archer does. From a balance standpoint, why use anything but Archer? I mean when you can do max damage at max range, there's no point in having other damage classes. They're out of harm's reach while doing more damage than all other melee classes.

My answer might not fit the actual situation, but I'd expect the reason to be that while archers could breeze through short fights, they might not do too well in long ones (as in not living long enough to do much damage... the "glass cannon" problem).

I would expect (but it might not be the case) that Pugilists could either "warm up" to even higher damage than archers could dream of by increasing their offensive stance, or, if the case warrants it, become increasingly evasive instead if they take a defensive stance so as to tank (or help tank) a hit-like-a-truck mob. So while they might not be so great at sniping, you would want them around for tough, long fights because they can go the distance.

But I'm only reading the pamphlet as to what Pugilist should have been. I realize it may not actually be working out to be that anymore.