Classes vs Jobs status?

[Paladinleeds]

Neutered is a bit of an over exaggeration. I play a SCH and the difference between having the MND and not with points is a low amount (added maybe 100-200 to my heals at 50). I figured out the problem around my 40s and decided to just put all the points into PIE and the mana boost wasn't great, but to me was better than the MND and it helps both jobs.

In Savage content, let's just say those 100-200 extra HP healing matters, especially over the course of the fight. Plus the extra mind means that when you step into Cleric Stance (something a SCH often has to do), you can pump out more damage (again, which matters in Savage, those enrage timers are harsh) since the extra mind then becomes extra int.

[dinnertime]

Honestly I think SCH didn't fail, it did pretty damn great at 50. It was a job much preferred in every static because it can easily do good DPS without wasting too much MP so I believe it wasn't a failure. It became even more powerful at 60, too powerful I think.
SMN's side however had left a bad impression to players because of how weak it is...not until Heavensward however.

EDIT: I understand that ACN branches to two jobs, meaning both share the AP of ACN. I guess the only way SE could fix this is by making the AP of SCH and SMN separate (which I think they mentioned they're planning or not?)

[Kabzy]

Also about the comment about smn/sch, did it fail? I thought it did great 0.o how did it fail?

There was the stats thing that people have mentioned, but that wasn't the biggest cause. The problem was that back in late 2.x, SCH was extremely good and SMN was not, compared to BLM. And the problem was that SE could not really buff any of SMNs main DPS tools, because that would also buff SCHs too. And so SMN was pretty much behind BLM towards the end because they didn't want to make SCHs even more powerful. Introducing new classes at this point would be unnecessary, but there wouldn't be any issue with them, providing they remain lv30 and below and don't split into two jobs.

Honestly I think SCH didn't fail, it did pretty damn great at 50.

I don't think anyone's saying that SMN or SCH failed, just the concept of having a class being split into two. For reasons I mentioned above, as well as the bonus attributes thing.

Edit: And no, I highly doubt they would change the ACN roots of SMN or SCH at this point. If it were to happen, it would be taken away from SCH and that would ruin the job and role balance completely. I could go into a lot more depth, but that's for the healer forums. ;p

[dinnertime]

I don't think anyone's saying that SMN or SCH failed, just the concept of having a class being split into two. For reasons I mentioned above, as well as the bonus attributes thing.

Yeah, edited to add that at the same time you posted. Still, SCH didn't really fail as a job but SMN actually did and the other points you made with buffing ACN skills being a problem that would make SCH even more powerful, which I think was the biggest issue about it as well.

[Kabzy]

Yeah, edited to add that at the same time you posted. Still, SCH didn't really fail as a job but SMN actually did which I think was the biggest issue about it as well.

That could be seen as subjective though. It wasn't ideal but good SMNs could still complete FCoB without being a hinderance to their teams. Not to mention the extra utilities they brought via Resurrection / SuperVirus. It was a safer option to bring a BLM, but I wouldn't say SMNs failed by any means. It was just the concept of not being able to buff one job without it affecting the other which failed, in my opinion.

[Khalithar]

Snip

At this point I honestly feel they should just fold those base stat bonuses in to the jobs themselves and ditch the bonus stat as you level system. Each class has only one stat worth putting points in to anyway, there is no meaningful choice or gameplay behind it. Especially now with tanks getting fixed so that full vit builds are the go to route, they may as well just get rid of it.

[dinnertime]

That could be seen as subjective though. It wasn't ideal but good SMNs could still complete FCoB without being a hinderance to their teams. Not to mention the extra utilities they brought via Resurrection / SuperVirus. It was a safer option to bring a BLM, but I wouldn't say SMNs failed by any means. It was just the concept of not being able to buff one job without it affecting the other which failed, in my opinion.

I just really believe it was a weak job in 2.x. While they have more room for mistakes and mobility than BLM and the utilities, I still think BLM is a much better option because of their high DPS and infinite MP. I suppose saying that SMN failing in 2.x is quite harsh but I guess I'd call it as a weak job at the time...but not anymore.

[Kaiser-Ace]

Personally, I don't have that much of a problem with the way Heavensward did the 3 new Jobs, as a response to Enkidoh. It was *extremely* awkward the first day trying to get the hang of everything for each class, but spending a little bit of time with them, none of them were quite as alien as they first felt. DRK had something very akin to a Rage of Halone combo, AST has the basic heals and esuna equivalent, etc.

My main learning curve was rearranging Ast and Drk's default hot bars to resemble my Whm and Pld's. FInding the base heal, AoE Heal, ect. Putting the HATE grabber, base 1>2>3, stun, etc together.

After that it was business as usual. And all I needed was the training dummy (and a few guildmates to test the AoE Heals) to figure out what skills were what. Mechanist didn't have nearly the learning curve for skills but to this day (Like with Bard) the rotation is still largely unknown to me.

[Ashkendor]

Honestly I think SCH didn't fail, it did pretty damn great at 50. It was a job much preferred in every static because it can easily do good DPS without wasting too much MP so I believe it wasn't a failure. It became even more powerful at 60, too powerful I think.
SMN's side however had left a bad impression to players because of how weak it is...not until Heavensward however.

EDIT: I understand that ACN branches to two jobs, meaning both share the AP of ACN. I guess the only way SE could fix this is by making the AP of SCH and SMN separate (which I think they mentioned they're planning or not?)

Neither job is a failure in and of themselves. What's a failure is how difficult it made balancing them because they share so many skills, not to mention the fact that they share those stat points despite each using a different stat.

[Kaurie]

SCH/SMN didn't turn out so well, so I don't see them repeating that. I don't know whether or not classes will actually get taken out or if it's just too much of a hassle to do at this point. Classes will fall further and further behind though, as we get more job skills.

Issue for me is, SCH and SMN are the best jobs in the game (again to be clear in my opinion). The only issue with them being the same class is having to constantly swap your attribute points between them. That said, the attribute allocations are pretty useless and I'd rather they just remove it completely. With them gone, I'd have no problem having more job paths from base classes.

Neither job is a failure in and of themselves. What's a failure is how difficult it made balancing them because they share so many skills, not to mention the fact that they share those stat points despite each using a different stat.

Indeed, as mentioned above, I'd remove the attribute allocations. Also, if I were to add new jobs, I'd probably either have them share a base stat/role, or not have the ability to share a stat with a stance. i.e...

ROG gets a tank job. They would need VIT, and I'd just have VIT work the way for that job the way VIT will work for STR tanks in 3.2 - in that VIT will increase damage for that job as well as HP in some combination with DEX. Conversely, this Rogue could have evasion skills that are based off DEX.

Ranger/Bard from Archer (both DPS, bard more support DPS ranger more straight DPS).