Balance, Homogenisation and Encounter Design: The Problem.

[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.