Interview with xenosys-vex

[whiskeybravo]

Here however, he conveniently says that DRK should have more DPS than PLD ONLY. He mysteriously neglects to mention WAR. So, essentially he is saying DRK and PLD should be balanced with eachother, but WAR should bring more DPS than both, while also having more utility than DRK. Does this sound familiar to anyone else? I'm getting severe deja vu here. Oh, right, this is what we had in Heavensward. Isn't that interesting.

Selective quotes are selective.

So Paladin has a lot more utility than Warrior, yet they still do just as much damage as a Warrior. Paladin’s DPS potential is actually a little bit less than Warrior, but if you fuck up even one time on Warrior, then a Paladin will out DPS you, at least in my experience, because Paladins do a lot of damage.

Of the three tanks, I think Paladin should do the least damage, because they have the best utility. Paladin is really fun, and I don’t think it needs a nerf. It’s in a perfect spot right now. I just think that Dark Knight and Warrior should do more damage than Paladin. I know that Warrior can do more, but that’s only if you have a perfect run. A Paladin should not rival a Warrior in damage, not when they have all that utility, as well.

I think that Warrior and Dark Knight both need some potency buffs, especially Dark Knight.

He doesn't outright say it, but if we are going to imply anything it should be that since he thinks drk only needs potency buffs and that's it, that he'd be OK with it doing more dps than war because it has less utility.

Essentially the interview can be boiled down to "PLD has good DPS now and brings good utility, buff Fell Cleave ... oh and DRK sucks ... WAR needs moar deeps!".

Again, not really. He's suggesting that there be less emphasis on Fell Cleave damage:

A way to adjust Warrior damage without buffing Fell Cleave would be to actually lower the potency of Fell Cleave and buff the three core combos, instead. That would distribute the damage output more evenly across the entire rotation, and Warrior DPS would no longer be so dependant on Fell Cleave crit RNG, because that one move would no longer be responsible for such a huge portion of your total damage.

The only real inconsistency is that prior to this statement he also says he thinks fell cleave should do more damage, which is kind of opposite of his more detailed suggestion here. While it could be interpreted as lop-sided logic, I'd lean more toward fell cleave buff comment being more of a reactionary/headline grabbing type statement which he's known for, while the more detailed suggestion is something that actually required a fair amount of thought or discussion.

- High burst lets you push phases and skip mechanics, which not only makes fights easier from a mechanical standpoint, but has a tendency to cascade into increased party damage, as your healers no longer have to heal the mechanic you skipped, DPS don't need to accrue downtime to dodge the mechanic, etc.

I'd also like to just add, phase pushes aren't always a good thing. T7 and T7 savage say "Hi"

[TouchandFeel]

Again, not really. He's suggesting that there be less emphasis on Fell Cleave damage:

The only real inconsistency is that prior to this statement he also says he thinks fell cleave should do more damage, which is kind of opposite of his more detailed suggestion here. While it could be interpreted as lop-sided logic, I'd lean more toward fell cleave buff comment more of a reactionary/headline grabbing type statement which he's known for, while the more detailed suggestion is something that actually required a fair amount of thought or discussion.

This is what he said, copy/pasted straight from the article. It is a direct argument for a buff to Fell Cleave damage with the logic that because other classes got big hard hitting abilities, Fell Cleave is no longer "Fell Cleavey" enough and other abilities are stealing it's thunder.

I think that Fell Cleave should do more damage. Five hundred potency is not a lot anymore. It’s just not. People call me a fucking retard, and say “why would you buff Fell Cleave, it’s so powerful” and it’s kind of not. Not when fucking AST has a five hundred potency ability. Every job in the game has a five hundred potency ability, it seems. It was crazy in Heavensward, but not anymore. Paladins have a ranged ability that hits almost as hard as a Fell Cleave now. That means that they can move away to do mechanics and still get their Fell Cleaves in. I wish I could do a fucking Inner Release window from halfway across the room!

Yes, he then argues that WAR is too burst dependent and says that an alternative to Fell Cleave buffs is to boost combo ability potencies.

He provided contradicting arguments that only agree on one thing, "WAR needs moar deeps!", which lines up with my satirical summation of the interview.

Really I feel his position is actually based less on objective concerns over balance and more about wanting to not feel diminished in WAR feeling like, as Xeno himself likes to put it, the "big dick" job.

[Aana]

This is what he said, copy/pasted straight from the article. It is a direct argument for a buff to Fell Cleave damage with the logic that because other classes got big hard hitting abilities, Fell Cleave is no longer "Fell Cleavey" enough and other abilities are stealing it's thunder.



Yes, he then argues that WAR is too burst dependent and says that an alternative to Fell Cleave buffs is to boost combo ability potencies.

He provided contradicting arguments that only agree on one thing, "WAR needs moar deeps!", which lines up with my satirical summation of the interview.

Really I feel his position is actually based less on objective concerns over balance and more about wanting to not feel challenged in WAR feeling like, as Xeno himself likes to put it, the "big dick" job.

What I got out of the interview was a few things regarding the "fell cleavyness" of war.

Its 2 separate ideas.

Idea1: FC used to have more individual 'impact' because 500 pot was unheard of in HW. To maintain that 'fell cleavyness' impact it would need to be increased because there has been potency creep across the board and FC did not participate in that. (Newer skills have high pot, like ast, old skills have power creeped significantly across all classes, etc)
Idea 2: War is very reliant on its burst window every 2 min and should be rebalanced to be less 'all in'. This is where he talks about increasing rotation potency and lowering FC.

A quick glance seems to say he wants to buff FC, buff the rotation, separate IR, buff buff buff moar damage.

But these are not mutually exclusive ideas. I think the core of his thing is that instead of giving FC power creep to keep up, we got IR and infuriate recast buffs. This lets us do MORE FCs, but each FC is less impactful and moved our damage to small windows. He wants to reverse that trend make FC more powerful to bring back the OOMPH it used to have and TRADE that extra power by lessening the burst windows. He even suggests just that. Make IR buff the next 3 FCs and put it on 1 min timer. Instead of 6 weak FCs every 2 min, do 3 stronger ones more regularly. This brings back the FC 'impact' while also changing the jobs focus on itty bitty bust windows. In addition to weakening the burst windows bump up the basic rotation to power creep it like most other jobs.

I don't see this as a BUFF WAR MOAR DAMAGE RAWR! Idea. I see it more as a reimagining of how war could PLAY.

I don't particularly agree with his view in all respects. Its essentially a rework of how war plays and that's not really a balance fix. Just a dream of playing his fantasy of war. You even see it in his discussion of why he played war. He always plays big 2handed weapon jobs. He wants that fantasy of cracking a mountain in half with 1 blow. Not being a ninja striking with 100 weak attacks. Instead of lots of 'little' FCs, he wants big, fewer, manly ones. Just his idea of fun.