Balance, Homogenisation and Encounter Design: The Problem.

[Nora_of_Mira]

Imagine a different world: in a world with mob kiting, ranged jobs would be mandatory; in a world where healers are needed to separate ways from the rest of the group, RDM heals and actions like raise would be a hundred times more meta definining than DPS numbers.

*skipping 7 pages of discussion to reply to OP*

that sounds like an awful world and I'm glad FFxiv is not that game.

[CapricaLangley]

I'm not against differences, but I'd prefer that those differences are not for the sake of having a difference in fear of "death of job identity," but rather because those differences provide good alternatives.
Hence, homogenization.

What I tried to say with that discussion is that we are stuck in the DPS and homogenisation mindset because the current philosophy behind activity design is pushing towards that direction. If every high-end encounter required a good dose of both physical and magical mitigation (it's just an example) tanks would need a more incisive identity. I like every job being viable, but there are many routes available to achieve that result without going all-in on DPS checks and full homogenisation mode IMHO, and of course they are more time consuming and difficult to design for the devs.

Another thing I think is very important and is not being discussed is the fact that a lot of players in this thread are talking about being locked out of duties and people using the best possible option for a fight. This is true indeed, but it opens up for another problem: if the players are relying so much on party finder and struggle to find groups for high end content, it means that social features built in the game are not doing their job properly.

Also, to Nora, these were just two random examples. I'm just worried for what I think may be just the beginning of a bigger identity loss process. Personally, I fear the day when we'll be just 3 roles with different cosmetics and a couple rotation nuances, but of course there is a lot of people out there who wants just that.

[Nariel]

What I tried to say with that discussion is that we are stuck in the DPS and homogenisation mindset because the current philosophy behind activity design is pushing towards that direction. If every high-end encounter required a good dose of both physical and magical mitigation (it's just an example) tanks would need a more incisive identity. I like every job being viable, but there are many routes available to achieve that result without going all-in on DPS checks and full homogenisation mode IMHO, and of course they are more time consuming and difficult to design for the devs.

Another thing I think is very important and is not being discussed is the fact that a lot of players in this thread are talking about being locked out of duties and people using the best possible option for a fight. This is true indeed, but it opens up for another problem: if the players are relying so much on party finder and struggle to find groups for high end content, it means that social features built in the game are not doing their job properly.

Also, to Nora, these were just two random examples. I'm just worried for what I think may be just the beginning of a bigger identity loss process. Personally, I fear the day when we'll be just 3 roles with different cosmetics and a couple rotation nuances, but of course there is a lot of people out there who wants just that.

Yeah because having to be carried away by your friend or because those randos pity you is such a nice and compleling feelling, nothing like feelling totaly useless and unable to carry your own weight because "well too bad your favorite job don't have the toolkit for those bosses".

[CapricaLangley]

Yeah because having to be carried away by your friend or because those randos pity you is such a nice and compleling felling, nothing like felling totaly useless and unable to carry your own weight because "well too bad your favorite job don't have the toolkit for those bosses"

I seriously don't understand why I keep receiving those kind of passive aggressive answers. I'm not pointing a gun to any job, I don't want anyone to be left behind, never said or even made an allusion to anything like that. I'm just worried because I feel like the homogenisation process is gutting job identity. I don't know which class you do play, here in the forum I see Archer 80, as you can see i'm registered as Bard level 80: wouldn't you like this job even more if it actually felt like an actual Bard?

I mean, of course I want every class to be viable and DPS differences not being an issue, but I'd like it even more if every job had a more unique identity. I remind you that probably the thing that got you into playing your favourite job was identity, because at the beginning nobody knows how does it feel or perform in actual end game content.

edit bc edit: Again, I think (maybe being completely wrong) that there may be a lot of different ways to include job identity in encounter design without making anything mandatory.

[Nora_of_Mira]

Also, to Nora, these were just two random examples. I'm just worried for what I think may be just the beginning of a bigger identity loss process. Personally, I fear the day when we'll be just 3 roles with different cosmetics and a couple rotation nuances, but of course there is a lot of people out there who wants just that.

from my perspective, its because you (collective you) want FFxiv to be a game that it's not, hence why people think its an "identity loss". I think FFxiv is just trying to be FFxiv and if people want these drastic changes to philosophy, they should play GW2.

Also:

I like every job being viable, but there are many routes available to achieve that result without going all-in on DPS checks and full homogenisation mode IMHO, and of course they are more time consuming and difficult to design for the devs.

I believe this to be straight up impossible. to look at GW2 again, every job can basically fill any role, but thats bc the content allows it. FFxiv's content does not allow that, hence the trinity, and hence the homogenization. I dont find the homogenization in FFxiv to be egregious. I love melee DPS but I favor the style of DRG and SAM over NIN and MNK. I also favor DRK/GNB over WAR/PLD. These nuances really only show up when doing high-end content, for SURE, but they exist and are different enough to feel unique, imo.

[linay]

I like every job being viable, but there are many routes available to achieve that result without going all-in on DPS checks and full homogenisation mode IMHO, and of course they are more time consuming and difficult to design for the devs.

And that may factor into which route ends up being taken. People may want different things and the devs also have their own priorities and limitations when deciding who to please and how.

[Saidosha]

I never viewed RDM as a traditional support job, which to me, screams a significant FFXI bias. Could its XIV incarnation be better? I would certainly like it to be, but I would also feel nauseous if that somehow manifested as a resurrection of the FFXI Haste and Refresh cycle while putting WHMs out of a job. Though, just like XI, I feel XIV's melee side needs help, and not just as a gauge spender for a few seconds in a rotation.

That said, if the intent is to push more niche circumstances into the encounter pool, you have to eliminate the time gating on endgame gear acquisition. This is actually why I'm letting my sub lapse next week until a decent amount of new story content hits, as I loathe that we have all these jobs we can play and level, only for current systems to effectively force a "main" choice. And if it turned out my "main" choice happened to be garbage for 6+ months of endgame, and thus never desired or invited by peers, you can definitely bet I'd pack my bags for that reason, too. Something I doubt I'd be alone on, as well.

Something to keep in mind when comparing XIV to XI is that XI was also a slower game, and could further be solely operated via keyboard. To an extent, this is actually something I do miss, but I'm not ignorant of how much variety XI encounters also lacked. There's probably some middle ground to be found here where things aren't so much about optimal rotations and jumping rope, but also not just waiting for your TP to get high enough for a WS or hoping you don't get insta-gibbed by an HNM AoE.

Otherwise, I'd be okay with dungeon randomization more akin to Diablo than PotD here. Creating a tile set, designing enemies for the area, randomizing packs, having patrols, scattering treasure you want to find, chancing upon niche spontaneous objectives that give loot, and encountering bosses in non-sterile locations would go a long way in curbing some of that ennui for me. Sure, I'd probably pick Trusts more than real people if I had the choice because DPS queues will forever suck, but I can only imagine it'd change party habits when you can't outright predict what's ahead.

[Acidblood]

Again, though, hard enrages do not enforce certain metas. Bad balancing does. While it is true that removing hard enrages outright would likely give us a different meta (e.g. defensive and curative utilities above all) when damage is not equally enforced for dps check mechanics specifically, that wouldn't really be any more varied, just dependent upon different imbalances to form said meta -- which would likely only swap one favored set of 4 with a new favored 4. When the jobs are properly balanced, the "meta" is only a vague notion or just a matter of which CDs are most easily aligned in a particular fight.

True, but seeking to eliminate the meta is a fool’s errand; there will always be one, and the ill-informed will always assert its ‘truth’ (I’m not a bad player, class X just ‘sucks’). Which is not to say that reasonable balance should not be strived for, I would just prefer that balance to be less comparable than a single number. I would also prefer that the focus of said ‘balance’ be placed somewhere other than DPS, as DPS will always be naturally valued (i.e. part of the balance) and there is little reason for the game to inflate that value.

Since you mention infinite resources, I have to ask -- What additional depth is specifically gained by having finite healing resources? Is depth increased by no longer being capable of so many Raises? Is depth increased by no longer being able to AoE heal except in the most sparing of ways? I'd imagine those questions are hardly answerable on principle alone; it depends upon exactly what gameplay decisions are brought into what balance of each other, thus creating more or fewer options in a given scenario. Such is contextual. And almost none of it would be unique to making resources more finite.

With a hard enrage you have to finish a fight in X minutes, no ifs, buts, or maybes; and as I’ve said this reduces survival to a binary… unless of course the timer is generous, which would then negate the benefits you have outlined.

With a finite resource system that timer can be variable, as the rate of resource expenditure (and regain) can be variable. This variability adds depth, as it creates a trade-off, a choice if reasonably balanced, between resource expenditure, regain, and the time for which it must last, with individual classes, and even encounter mechanics, contributing to each of these factors in some way.

Note 1: This will not create a perfectly ‘balanced’ system, at least not in the sense that classes can said to be ‘equal’, but that is the whole point; classes should be valued for the individual benefits they bring, not reduced to some number on a line (though I’m sure that will happen anyway; i.e. the meta).

Note 2: Please do not base finite resources on the current healer (or general class) design, it won’t work. The current design is for burst healers able to counter mechanics that drop the party to 1 HP every 30 seconds... finite resource healers, and support classes, need to be a much slower burn in terms of both heal speed and resource usage; similar to how damage is delt by players over the length of an encounter.

To be fair, certain aspects of a job need to be uniform. Otherwise, people prioritize the superior option above all else. I mean, why wouldn't they? Case in point, when Paladin was the physical tank and Dark Knight magical. You saw less and less Paladins because practically the entirety of Alexander was magic heavy.

That was a failure of encounter design; i.e. there should have been a much more even mix, giving both PLD and DRK a chance to shine at appropriate moments, with WAR being a more even middle ground. (The game also needs to make it much more obvious which attack type is which as even now we have ‘magic only’ mitigation).

I do agree though that all tanks should have Provoke, a ranged emnity skill, and a basic cooldown kit (can we get some individual skins please?), but beyond that… there is zero reason for all tanks to have the same AoE for example.

[Dzian]

That was a failure of encounter design; i.e. there should have been a much more even mix, giving both PLD and DRK a chance to shine at appropriate moments, with WAR being a more even middle ground. (The game also needs to make it much more obvious which attack type is which as even now we have ‘magic only’ mitigation).

This is very true.bad encounter design has been a common denominator for many various job issues.

WHM being a pure healer was never a problem, the problem was encounters were designed in such predictable ways that healing was generally just not needed. Hence why so few gcds were ever spent on healing spells.

the same was true for monks, paladins, blms, many of the problems jobs have suffered stem from flaws in the design of encounters more than the jobs themselves.

[Ladon]

You can’t design encounters and job mechanics to high specifics when you are capping party sizes to 8. This is the fundamental reason they have to make sure every job in a role can do the same thing and that no encounter requires specific skills from specific jobs.

The only way you are going to see old style class systems is if the entire game is built non-instanced with non-capped player encounters that allows for loose class compositions.