Thread: 3.1 PLD Changes

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Brian has mentioned constantly a lack of content-based balancing in game; the examples that can be given from in-game, therefore, lack overall balance, even if certain parts of those examples point at possible better designs. Individually, these examples, each taken from a small part of existent encounters might imply FotM choices. But if the overall balance of each encounter were improved, such that each tank would have a relatively equal value across (all parts of) the encounter through their various, different advantages, leaving no clear FotM choice. This seems pretty clear. It's just a different way of balancing the jobs (and, frankly, accessory choice) without having to homogenize them. Nor is it mutually exclusive with class changes.

There will always be a superior choice when you take this approach. You can try to create a scenario where different advantages help in leading to the clear in different ways, but once people figure out the best way to do it, that will become the standard. That's just an aspect of human nature that is part of the landscape in ANYTHING that involves more than one player.

And why are we going back to demonizing performance parity? Especially when the lack of performance parity is one of the main culprits behind the problems we're currently seeing (encounter design being another)?

It is simply another avenue for providing balance, and one that SE has actually admitted their faults in with this last tier. True balance will likely still take a bit of tuning on the job side as well. But to design content that actually makes use of their differences, as in entirely unique strengths rather than just difference in strengths in common among all three, increases the ways we have to retain tank identity without leaving one or more behind.

Class identity can still come from mechanics, abilities and aesthetics while still remaining equal to other members of the roster in performance. Are you really that bothered by WAR and DRK dealing the same damage as a PLD?

But can we really say that even if PLD is given as much MT (assuming Grit/Def/Shield) dps as DRK or WAR, and if it somehow gained DRK or WAR-level AoE, it would be taken? It would still ultimately be burdened with abilities that see little to no use in most situations.

Which is not a bad thing. The utility PLD was given is not the type that is or should be needed all the time. This is why I facepalm at the people who complain about Clemency not being a mandatory ability in the rotation (it's situational off-healing, emphasis on situational) and those that expect Divine Veil to be up all the time, every time (because expecting to do so would be like expecting this or this to be used every time it's up instead of during oh-shit moments).

Originally Posted by Reynhart

Clemency is far too long to cast to be an emergency heal, and no healer will really count on you for healing someone else.

There are reasons Clemency is inconvenient to use. Firstly so that raids don't start forcing their tanks to start healing (this is something I absolutely hated in 1.0, so I'm happy it's gone). Secondly because the heal is relatively strong and even when not used on someone else, easy use of Clemency would notably bump PLD survivability. I'm not entirely against changing Clemency, but if you want to make it easy to use then it needs a cooldown or some other limitation (like consuming your entire MP bar and letting you only be able to cast it when your MP is at 50% of your total MP). Turning it into something akin to Lay On Hands would also be an option (provided they keep the cooldown).

Awareness was...useful (I guess) in T11...except than since the ensured critical hit was an AoE, the party had to mitigate the damage anyway, and it was after an add phase, not really damage heavy on the tank.

I got nothing on this. Awareness is a wasted ability slot, but most of us know that already.

Blind ? Most bosses are immune.

Blinding boss mobs would be overpowered.

Pacification ? Same.

This would also be overpowered.

Chain Stun ? Either immune, or only requires one precise Stun less often than 30s, so other tanks are better since they're not delayed by GCD.

This is largely a result of the poor way the developers have implemented interrupts into the game. They also have to space out interrupts where applicable because of stun diminishing returns/immunity (an issue that wouldn't exist if we had real interrupts).

I didn't play PLD on A3, but I wouldn't be surprised if Ferrofluid just plain ignores Tempered Will, like Typhoon does.

Eh, I'm willing to make concessions on mechanics not allowing me to cheese them, so I wouldn't be too heartbroken if that were the case.

Originally Posted by Duelle

There will always be a superior choice when you take this approach. You can try to create a scenario where different advantages help in leading to the clear in different ways, but once people figure out the best way to do it, that will become the standard. That's just an aspect of human nature that is part of the landscape in ANYTHING that involves more than one player.

Does that standard explicitly not include more than one tank, or are we just waxing generalities? What's the alternative? Should I give up on the idea of them being balanced? If you mean that we should be looking less at the cruxes of the fight and more about how the different jobs handle the 'white numbers' or the more arbitrary considerations of the fight, I can understand that, but... what you're saying here... doesn't point anywhere.

And why are we going back to demonizing performance parity? Especially when the lack of performance parity is one of the main culprits behind the problems we're currently seeing (encounter design being another)?

Noting a second method is not the same as demonizing the first. I find two methods less restrictive than just one. I've been suggesting further parity for PLD in terms of dps and less niched mitigation since 3.0... I just think it may also take adjustments on to the raid environment itself, and would have preferred that not just be by reversing the niched situation (e.g. all of Thordan's tankbusters are physical, the dps requirements are relatively lenient aside from wanting to clear the hell out of last phase, most of the intensive dps phases do not simultaneously involve tanking, and there's no AoE dps to be done). Because, for better or worse, tank value comes in context. Just as a tank with zero AoE damage (apart from CoS) loses nothing in a fight without AoEs, a tank with off-healing capabilities gains nothing if there's no point at which he can use it significantly.

Class identity can still come from mechanics, abilities and aesthetics while still remaining equal to other members of the roster in performance. Are you really that bothered by WAR and DRK dealing the same damage as a PLD?

Never said otherwise. I have no issue with PLD doing the same dps as WAR and DRK, but let's face it. WAR and DRK don't even do the "same" damage. Depending on the very particular situation, one will come out ahead of the other. Now, my personal preference (though other outcomes will not bother me) is that PLD would be to tanks much like NIN is to DPS, so to speak, but mostly because I feel like this expands the options available to the tank role, assuming first that each tank has a mostly viable toolset, and is wholly viable in the context of each encounter. I like options.

Which is not a bad thing. The utility PLD was given is not the type that is or should be needed all the time. This is why I facepalm at the people who complain about Clemency not being a mandatory ability in the rotation (it's situational off-healing, emphasis on situational) and those that expect Divine Veil to be up all the time, every time (because expecting to do so would be like expecting this or this to be used every time it's up instead of during oh-shit moments).

Here we'll have to disagree to some extent. I think it is a bad thing, albeit just barely. If you can go an entire fight without using an ability, that's fine. To go an entire fight without having reason to use an ability, is not fine. Granted, this differs depending on the resource cost (be it a CD or mana requirements), but for an ability to be left entirely for "oh shit" moments is like saying that a Bard is balanced against another dps when it has no benefit for its songs unless things go horribly, horribly wrong (luckily Rain of Death makes that rare, since you can always squeeze out more healer dps with Foes even without caster dps) - oh except that, for PLD, it most likely won't go off in time... /shrug.

I've solo-healed the MT through the A4N's 3x Perpetual Ray spam many a time since it lost its weekly lockout while my healers were killing themselves with Nist or bombs or just generally being headless. It's great, relatively speaking, when it's the only healing output your party has. Divine Veil is great when you would have all died by 8% health. The problem is that it depends on either cutting edge progression or failure. It's niched, but not in a way that typically adds options to the encounter. Instead, it simply devalues PLD in most situations, and leaves them (if balanced in all other regards) equal in few. Slight adjustments, however, I feel could change that, leaving it wholly situational, but also much more usable.

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Should I give up on the idea of them being balanced? If you mean that we should be looking less at the cruxes of the fight and more about how the different jobs handle the 'white numbers' or the more arbitrary considerations of the fight, I can understand that, but... what you're saying here... doesn't point anywhere.

The point I was trying to make is that clinging to certain paradigms won't yield anything good. Trying to justify the WAR/PLD/DRK niches by attempting to design content to make all three useful or viable or good in a non-uniform way is a losing proposition in the end because people will still gravitate towards the "best" approach.

To ignore the incongruities in performance between the three and blaming content is doing basically just that. I think that's why people weren't satisfied with what Yoshida said about PLD. Can't speak for others, but I can say it's a combination of tank design AND content, not just one or the other.

Here we'll have to disagree to some extent. I think it is a bad thing, albeit just barely. If you can go an entire fight without using an ability, that's fine. To go an entire fight without having reason to use an ability, is not fine. Granted, this differs depending on the resource cost (be it a CD or mana requirements), but for an ability to be left entirely for "oh shit" moments is like saying that a Bard is balanced against another dps when it has no benefit for its songs unless things go horribly, horribly wrong

Your example is dependent on the nature of the effect/ability. Mitigation cooldowns or anything that increases survivability is generally for oh-shot moments. Hence why I mentioned Rallying Cry and Hand of Protection. There may be fights where they're not used, but when needed come in handy (Rallying Cry in particular may be used to sort of mitigate some raid damage, much like Divine Veil).

The difference lies in constant use. The people that want Divine Veil available for every time Oppressor jumps, for example, don't realize that when you make an ability reusable in short intervals it stops being "a nice help to the healers that comes into play once in a while" and becomes a mandatory thing you have to do to get the clear (because the devs will then tune damage output around the raid having that effect active). That's what separates mitigation cooldowns from things like interrupts. It also increases the value of the ability and may even force the devs to give that to the other members of the roster just to even things out; this isn't even limited only to defensive cooldowns, but all types of abilities and utility (see: Mortal Strike in WoW and the fact it had to be given out like candy because it was so useful that only Arms Warriors having it was making them too powerful/valuable).

oh except that, for PLD, it most likely won't go off in time... /shrug.

This is the one item I wish more people would complain about. I can probably run a test and find that post-fix Mudras activate faster than defensive cooldowns. If I end up being right I'll be really sad.

@Brian: You don't understand PvP balance. PvP is the same game , same world, same rules. We just kill players. Most games do sweeping balances across PvE and PvP, Square just didn't want to see anyone get upset over them balancing PvP so they balanced a few things separately. However, Miasma was nerfed in both areas, Raiton was nerfed due to it's extremely high burst in PvP as well as to bring Ninja dps down.
They haven't changed the PvP systems themselves due to class imbalance very often at all. They changed the class imbalance inside PvP. They've nerfed things in both pve and pvp before just for pvp sake.

As for PvE, "a tank buster where you need a non targeted immunity" is it physical? Then Cover > Hallowed Ground. Is it not? Provoke > Living Dead /Hallowed Ground.

We have two tank slots , wouldn't matter if War couldn't use an immunity, we'd bring DRK/PLD literally just to cover the one thing they can't do. But due to the utility War brings otherwise, as well as the insane tank damage, they'd be useful outside of that one small easy to get around gimmick. Guess which second tank we'll use for the immunity? The one who brings more DPS.

Even in the situation you presented Warrior is guaranteed a spot. Pld and Drk are just to make sure War survives . This is the issue, Warrior isn't fighting anyone for a spot, Drk/Pld fight each other. We'll always take the better one. This is called imbalance. You can change the content as much as you want and throw all these simple gimmicks in you want, it doesn't change the situation with tank balance.