Break the Trinity System Please

[Delily]

^yeah, a Bard does that.

Where is this idea of Bard++ coming from if I didn't suggest buffs to Bards which you admit now.

Buffs to Bards aren't even implied in my posting.

Your whole premise of Bard++ & me suggesting it is so ridiculous.

I also love how it's 2 +'s now... rofl.

Don't get too overworked by a simple change. It's a "programmer's joke" referencing C and C++.

^because past designs are fallible and just because that 'was' the case doesn't mean it 'has' to be the case in the future.

So, rather than admit something was a mistake, we should just keep refining it. We'll get ir right this time, I swear!

It all comes down to balancing, if a Support didn't 'necessarily' bring "more" to the table than a DPS then a majority of players wouldn't pay any mind since they aren't typically your min-max elitists (which' what I was getting at in my "1%").

Do you NOT understand MMO players? The casual vs. hardcore, the claim of the "min-max elistist", they're nothing but fake drama created by the community. We all "want teh purplez" in the end, we all want to see content, we all want our characters to perform to the best of their ability, because in a raiding based themepark MMO, that's all there is. If the support class doesn't offer anything compelling over a damage class, and there is no requirement to play one, people will not play it. Do you not understand why tanks are always in demand?

[Toodles]

So, rather than admit something was a mistake, we should just keep refining it. We'll get ir right this time, I swear!...

...If the support class doesn't offer anything compelling over a damage class, and there is no requirement to play one, people will not play it. Do you not understand why tanks are always in demand?

1) faulty/poor design was the mistake, not the premise... there's a difference between recreation & refinement. I'm not saying we mimic 100% models of the past that didn't work, that would be insanity.

2) people will play it who want to play Supports... just like how people play MNK over DRG because they prefer Monks & vice versa.

That second argument of yours is a terrible one that has no feet to stand on.

People will play it who like the Job/Role, just because it isn't for you or certain others, doesn't mean people won't play it.

You're acting like it's not possible whatsoever to get Supports to work within the current framework and that clearly isn't the case.

Also, not saying Supports should have 'nothing compelling' about them... just like the current model, every Job has something they can bring to the table (or should from their design-philosophy).

Any Job, Support or not, is intended to be designed with usefulness/viability in mind... compelling reasons they deserve a spot in party construction.

[Delily]

1) faulty/poor design was the mistake, not the premise... there's a difference between recreation & refinement. I'm not saying we mimic 100% models of the past that didn't work, that would be insanity.

2) people will play it who want to play Supports... just like how people play MNK over DRG because they prefer Monks & vice versa.

That second argument of yours is a terrible one that has no feet to stand on.
People will play it who like the Job/Role, just because it isn't for you or certain others, doesn't mean people won't play it.

You're acting like it's not possible whatsoever to get Supports to work within the current framework and that clearly isn't the case.

Also, not saying Supports should have 'nothing compelling' about them... just like the current model, every Job has something they can bring to the table (or should from their design-philosophy).

Any Job, Support or not, is intended to be designed with usefulness/viability in mind... compelling reasons they deserve a spot in party construction.

So, all of those games that had tank/healer/DD/{support,CC}, just had it wrong then?

I'm not saying it's not possible, I'm saying it's not necessary. Right now, all classes bring some form of buffs and/or CC to the table in addition to the differences in how they fulfill their primary roles. They are short lived on long cooldowns (or tied to a resource) so that while they help people complete encounters, they aren't required. What possible value could a support class add to that, outside of fulfilling a few players' desire to play support? SE could go ahead and implement a full on support role, sure thing. But then we'd be back to bards and red mages in FFXI.

[Toodles]

^because past designs are fallible and just because that 'was' the case doesn't mean it 'has' to be the case in the future.

The problem is past faults (some purposeful) in design making Supports' party-contribution too great (if displacing/sharing a DPS slot)... like you mentioned, "if they are strong enough".

Well yeah, duh, that goes without saying (hence, why I didn't say it).

Also, the 1% was meant as an obvious hyperbole. Utopic & blatant exaggeration aren't the same.

It all comes down to balancing, if a Support didn't 'necessarily' bring "more" to the table than a DPS then a majority of players wouldn't pay any mind since they aren't typically your min-max elitists (which' what I was getting at in my "1%").

Of course, it would need to not bring any less of a contribution either to be designed right.

Let me chart it out like this...

Tanks - 30% enmity gain 30% defense-buffs 40% dps.
Healers - 20% party-buffs 20% dps 60% healing.
DPS - 10% utility 20% self-buffs 70% dps.
Bard - 10% utility 10% self-buffs 10% party-buffs 70% dps.
Support - 15% utility 25% self/party-buffs 60% dps.

Keep in mind, those figures are VERY ROUGH & ONLY INTENDED FOR ILLUSTRATION.

Also, they're meant to demonstrate inputs & not contributions (in other words, 70% of a DPS' button-clicks are strict damage-dealing actions).

Looking at these figures, it's not that Bard needs buffs to better fulfill a Supportive Role... it's that Bard in its current iteration is very "Support-Lite" by design.

It's Support Capabilities don't take an extremely 'active' approach. Your literal actions are more primarily focused on DPS'ing your opponent, periodically toggling a Supportive Ability that applies to the entire party... which' essentially a "passive" method of supporting allies.

Functionally, I would consider that "Support-Lite". More of a "True DPS-Support" Hybrid's literal actions/efforts would be focused on augmentation/detriment of allies/opponents... it's approach would be more "active" in supporting parties.

Does that make sense?

I think the "feel" of a Support could be plausibly achieved via design whilst retaining balance.

[Ehayte]

Its really a content balancing issue. You can't have any support class' group-wide buffs be too powerful for 8-man content or too weak for 4-man content.

For instance, if you send support_01 into Sashtasha HM and they can buff your DPS and Tank's output by 80% to make up for missing the other DPS, that ability would be ridiculously overpowered in 8 man content, buffing 3-4 other DPS and 1-2 other tanks! It would have to be time-restricted buffs to single players with weak non-tangible group buffs.

[Zarzak]

Its really a content balancing issue. You can't have any support class' group-wide buffs be too powerful for 8-man content or too weak for 4-man content.

For instance, if you send support_01 into Sashtasha HM and they can buff your DPS and Tank's output by 80% to make up for missing the other DPS, that ability would be ridiculously overpowered in 8 man content, buffing 3-4 other DPS and 1-2 other tanks! It would have to be time-restricted buffs to single players with weak non-tangible group buffs.

problem with this is the idea that raid content should be balanced around group content in FFXIV.

I'm sorry but when available gear to non raiders is 40-50 ilvls above the dungeons requirements. They should not be considered when balancing. So what is their spells are broken as fuck in group content. Having ilvl 120 gear is broken as fk in group content.

Not attacking you but you're just restating what they have said. But the simple fact is they suck at balancing their game anyway so who cares.

[ApolloGenX]

There are other kinds of utility besides just buffing damage.

Of course, things like crowd control, mp management, haste, slow, silence, meaningful AE stuns, and resist debuffs all went the way of the dodo after gaming was watered down.

However, if these things are made useful as they used to be - the new trinity becomes what the old trinity was - Heal/Tank/Utility... then fill in dps.

Either utility is critical or it's a waste of space. EQ always started with Tank/Healer/CC,Haste,Slow... You could use a shaman and cleric (haste/slows)... cleric and enchanter (haste/slows/CC/MP)... druid and enchanter(haste/slows/CC/MPx2)... Shaman and chanter (Haste,Slows,CC,MP)... or bard was ghetto haste/slows and mp.

[Toodles]

^no, contextually was speaking on the examples of ones people were saying broke the game or ruined it... not saying 100% of past examples were bad design.

Games are meant for enjoyment, if implementing Supports meant more people had more fun playing the game, it's worth a look.

Necessary doesn't really factor in.

PVP isn't 'necessary', more than 8-man's isn't 'necessary', Card Game isn't 'necessary'.

Surely enough people would love to play a Support-archetype in this game to merit its consideration.

[Delily]

^no, contextually was speaking on the examples of ones people were saying broke the game or ruined it... not saying 100% of past examples were bad design.

Games are meant for enjoyment, if implementing Supports meant more people had more fun playing the game, it's worth a look.

Necessary doesn't really factor in.

PVP isn't 'necessary', more than 8-man's isn't 'necessary', Card Game isn't 'necessary'.

Surely enough people would love to play a Support-archetype in this game to merit its consideration.

I don't think I've read a comment as wrong as "Necessary doesn't factor in". Simply because a portion of the player base thinks an idea should be fun isn't enough reason to warrant the addition of an idea, especially when that idea adds unneeded complexity to a core design element of the game. A good game is one that lays out a core design, and then sticks that as close as possible.

I'm not going to go into why adding in a support role adds complexity, there's a myriad of reasons that have been presented on this post. Your examples, do not support your claim.

FFXIV is a PvE raiding game. All other activities asides, players will spend the majority of their time in groups of varying size defeating trash mobs and running encounters. Therefore, 8 mans groups are a necessary aspect of that, since offering people different groups sizes offers people differing degrees of challenge. PvP and the card game (Triple Triad?) may not be necessary to that specific goal, but they do add something else people can do when they don't want to do dungeon dives. They are necessary in that they do not impact the core raiding game, and they do offer people some diversity because not everyone wants to run dungeons (or craft) all the time.

When don't stick to your design and don't care that much about balance, you get games like Everquest and FFXI, where's there's lot of jobs whose utility is situational. I think the designers are trying to avoid that.

[ApolloGenX]

When don't stick to your design and don't care that much about balance, you get games like Everquest and FFXI, where's there's lot of jobs whose utility is situational. I think the designers are trying to avoid that.

Can I just say as a retired bleeding edge world first raiding enchanter from EQ, that the situational usefulness was what made it so effing amazing! Some raids, I just buffed and tried to throw in my damage (which was a bit subpar, but my buffs made up for it)... and some raids, crowd control was a critical aspect of the encounter and I and my ENC comrads shined like the sun.

The difference between a good and not so good ENC was HUGE and obvious. You were CCing mobs that would destroy you in one hit and then wipe your raid. That game had something that this game didn't- variety in encounter mechanics that were based on class based skills -and- encounter mechanics that utilized support class skills. That game let everyone shine at some point... it wasn't a keyboard mashing jumprope mess.

You had pulling teams, you had tanks, you had healer teams, you had CC teams. You even had some dps teams (casters/melee). Everyone here is the same- just mashing their buttons while the entire group "jumps"!! at the same time.