Is Blm gonna be the only accepted range option now? :(

[Akiudo]

To play devil's avocado: Raid buffs are inherently a much more volatile balancing situation because their power can vary wildly based on team composition and coordination. In theoretical execution, yes a Ninja and a Samurai should do exactly the same damage in an ideal scenario catering to both, but because Samurai has zero DPS utility he is infinitely easier to solve. "We'll give him X potencies based on Y rotation, and realistically we can expect Z amount of damage against a training dummy". So the question is, at what level of play do you balance the buff-centric jobs around? If ninja is balanced to play with a team of rock-bottom DPS playing poorly, it's going to look absolutely insane at the top end where you have statics coordinating buff timings and using their burst optimally... but then on the other end of the scale if Ninja is buffed around that level of play it's going to look sad if everyone is playing just averagely.

It definitely gets the noggin' a joggin'. Unfortunately the best way to accomplish this is to release jobs to where you think they'll do okay, and let the players do the legwork in finding out what is performing where and adjust accordingly, which sometimes is less than ideal when starting out the patch cycle because you end up here with obviously inferior jobs.

not saying i disagree but please see my statement in context, that was what was proposed as ideal balance at 99% , mind you that was for personal percentiles and that and groups obviously aren't allways the same, i still think we should generally balance under the assumption that the group is as good as the single player, so if you do 99% the general range of your group should be at least 90+, of course this isn't allways true but at least it is a guideline , and a "not necessary truly happening" guideline is better then none at all in such a case i believe. also i'm gonna be honest here i'm thinking trick is too strong (mind you, weaker trick=more personal dps, not just "nerf trick" and classes will never be perfectly balanced either way, as long as they play even 1% different i'm not even sure what "perfectly balanced" really means). either way, my main argument was that if you propose something as "that is for the 99" percentile than that should be an ideal case, and if you balance so that in an ideal case the weaker personal class just stays weaker than well, it is just that , weaker. it wouldn't work out as clean cut in practice either way, mostly i wanted to second guess the thought process behind it.

Also, mind you that is a different topic but personally at least i believe raiddps (that includes ultimate) should be balanced in a general "these are the groups that kill it, the good, the great, the totally awesome and also the not so good but hey, at least they pulled through" way excluding speedkill "balance". There obviously will allways be a best way no matter what, and as their will allways be an absolute best combination no matter what i am of the opinion it is futile to think about the theoretical "if they perfectly stack classes in this way, than do a ritual where they offer their firstborns, followed by the summoning of one of the archdukes of hell...... " which is exactly why i think buff classes should overtake "pures" at the top, if nin is 100 dps better than samurai 90+, equal to it below 50 and 90 and worse below 50 i don't think it is a problem if its in fact 250 dps the nin has on the samurai if you do some vodoo to make it work to enter the top 10 speedkill rankings, because the people that go to these lengths will only take the perfect combination either way. doesn't matter if nin beats out samurai by 50 or 250, or on the other hand it doesn't matter if the nin is or stays a 100 dps below or 300