Quote Originally Posted by Cynric View Post
@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.
I've never read in any live letter that they've changed overall class balance in any significant way solely because of PvP imbalances. It was either a situation where the change in PvP had little to no influence on other aspects of the game, or they restricted the change to PvP.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...22#post2622222

This is Yoshida's original post on why Ninja was getting nerfed. No mention of PvP. He mentions how they originally tuned Mudras and Ninjutsus under the assumption that rotations would be different from what they ended up being. They didn't think people would cram Mudras and Ninjutsus into such tight timings. So, the resulting DPS was higher than they intended. So, they nerfed abilities as not to mess with rotations but still lower general DPS output. The overall design concern was that they wanted the 3 melee DPS to be balanced. Seems pretty obvious PvP was an afterthought.

So, where exactly is your evidence that they balanced classes overall based solely on PvP? In your words, they changed class balance within PvP. Like I said, that's no different from changing class balance within Savage. How do you change class balance within something specific? You make changes exclusive to that content. If you adjust PLD skills overall then that bleeds over into all content. If you just adjust savage raid design and tuning, then PLD is made stronger for Savage only.

Yea, in my example, you need 2 non-targeted immunities. You can cover/provoke and HG/LD one. Then, what about the other? The tank just dies.

I don't get why people are even nit-picking (and incorrectly nit-picking) the example. The intent is clear. There can be content designed to gate a class out of relevancy entirely. You could have fights with constant prolonged-downtime to force MNKs to drop greased lightning constantly and suddenly MNK DPS would be horrible. You could have a fight that constantly forces you to 0 TP and any TP-based class would suffer immensely. How is it that people have such a hard time understanding that content is the context that dictates class balance? If the next time you woke up reality changed so that everything is underwater, you would drown to death and fish would be OP. If you wanted to, you could definitely remove a tank from a raid tier through raid design. If a tank is not viable in the content, that changes the situation with tank balance.