What Classes Do You Want to See Next?

[SeverianLyonesse]

Believe me, it's not for a lack of sympathy I'm answering you twice (regarding BLU etc). But when you see people wishing for their dream job and don't go into detail, it's probably not because they perpetually can't do it. People lack the time and motivation to advance their ideas that won't get heard. If this thread was 100 successive posts of pure 'BST' spam, it'd probably have more impact than lenghty explanations. So it's still viable feedback.

Take BST. Above I noted down how the job could work. Ofc it's not perfect, but it's also not impossible either. Egi/Pet attacks could change with your pet, much like SMN nowadays, especially in regards to Titan Egi. Egi glamour system is already there, they just need to copy the model, maybe add some animations.

I think FF14 has a rather obvious formular for the jobs, which people refer to as homogenization. Within that frame, literally every job is possible to create. It's not like the combat system has seen major deviation since it's creation.

W

BST is probably the most spammy of the ideas, in this thread and in other forums generally over the years. And it is rarely put forth in a thought out manner. So all it is telling the developers is that a BST job, no matter how poorly implemented, will sell expacks better than spending those resources on other aspects of the game.

Again, I am not saying that a BST job is impossible. I'm not even saying it is unlikely. But what I am saying is that many people are not thinking through whether what they want is actually going to provide them and others with a gratifying experience. I would venture to guess that most of them have maybe one or three enemies that they think would be cool to control, and don't think at all about all of the boring enemies and mechanics they *won't* use but will still need to be developed to keep up the appearance of a full job. They see Behemoth but don't think about all the BLU that will proceed it.

(And that doesn't just extend to BST. I see many job proposals centered around maybe one flashy move players want to perform. I don't know why anyone of us need to take those demands as seriously as ideas that posters actually lay out as proof of concept. A weak idea is a weak idea, and I call them like I see them.)

I think the Chocobo Companion is a much better system to flesh out. It already exists. It already works quite well. It might require more development resources per pet, but they would at least have the personality and depth deserving of a pet class, rather than some 2-4 abilities per species. I'd rather have a small handful of quality pets than a system that feels both thin and bloated at the same time.

[Hoehenflug]

Sure, but the less detail they provide, the greater chance that the idea they advance will have little in common with what they actually desired and the less discourse develops to put forth more concrete (or, less "spinnable") feedback in terms of the actual gameplay loops, presence, attractors, etc.

And that's exactly the reason I reappeared. There won't be any meaningful discourse if people's ideas just get shot down by 'it's to similiar to X'. I'm the sort of person that reads almost every comment in threads like these because I love some innocent brain storming and frankly, people being creative. Anyway..

...

Well, I'd rather prefer a thinned out version with 3 'new egis' to another Limited disaster, but I feel like we are yelling at clouds at this point.

[Shurrikhan]

And that's exactly the reason I reappeared. There won't be any meaningful discourse if people's ideas just get shot down by 'it's to similiar to X'. I'm the sort of person that reads almost every comment in threads like these because I love some innocent brain storming and frankly, people being creative. Anyway..

I think that goes both ways, though. If everyone wants B and B does in fact happen to be too similar existing job A and future possible job C, A is historically likely to get shafted and C will probably therefore never arrive.

It won't matter that C was actually a better use of the thematic space and could have avoided shafting A, so long as B gets enough retweets, so to speak.

That can then be plenty infuriating, too.



Or... we actually parse these things through. For that reason, I'd rather have the occasional downer to reorient discussion, sometimes towards a moratorium on this or that idea if no one has the energy to deal with them for the moment, than have little to no involved discussion at all... so long said as downers are still arguing on practice rather than merely on principle (as seen through decontextualized or dishonestly extreme extensions of the ideas being discussed, etc.).

[SeverianLyonesse]

Well, I'd rather prefer a thinned out version with 3 'new egis' to another Limited disaster, but I feel like we are yelling at clouds at this point.

Or yelling into clouds, perhaps haha.

I'd be happy with a three-pet BST too, even say a single-pet BST with glamour options. Or at least, even if it weren't my personal fantasy and would just be SMN 2.0, it wouldn't leave a sour taste in my mouth like another BLU would. I think that's even less likely than a fleshed-out Companion system, though. If we get BST, we are in all probability going to get the most prototypical conception of BST any of us can conceive of, totally in line with SE's general approach to things: a million aesthetic options with nothing really of depth to choose between. And I am not looking forward to it. :P

[Hoehenflug]

...

I totally agree, and it also has to do with communication from the developers side as well. If we as customers ( or state citizens) have to resort to pragmatic reductions in order to be heard, it is a systematic problem. But I feel like based from what I vaguely remember, I'm running in open doors here.

Let's say A Dragoon A2 Paladin B FFTA2 Templar C Holy Reaper.

Nobody wanted Sage or MNK having a Phoenix AoE, and yet here we are. Not that it is a bad thing, objectively. At the end of the day, they will do what they seem fit.

totally in line with SE's general approach to things: a million aesthetic options with nothing really of depth to choose between. And I am not looking forward to it. :P

Not gonna argue here, fellow downer.

[ChazNatlo]

For the record, I'd totally be cool with a Beastmaster with instant in instant out abilities. The Beast is the ability, and no mucking about over powerscaling the pets.

Alternatively, You get a crowd of Queen drones or the Shadow thing from Darkknight like pets, each pops onto the field for a few seconds, does it's thing as a script, leaves. You cycle between them and whatever weapon skills you have. (Obviously each individually wouldn't be as big a commitment as Queen or whatever, but you'd be flipping between them as you go.)

[Jettinson]

You do realize that we are more likely to get a beastmaster class that can only summon common enemies like dodos and opo-opos?

I don't understand why people want beastmaster. It would be 99% boring model recycling.

Summoner is recycling, hell i could be the most unfun person and say they decided to look at HoH with the magicite and said "why not just put the primals attacks in SMN".
It's al about how they want to use. BST is still feasible just like other classes that still could be put
II want beast master because there's a big appeal on using beasts\enemy as a way to fight.

People gets egi\primals, people get fairies, get a freaking mecha summon (Machinist) and now you get the freaking void from Reaper class. There are probably better ideas on how to implement BST but won't stop me from putting mine.
BST can be much more exciting from the amount of monsters you can pick (coeurl, griffins, insects and so many more).

They can also try and create actual named monsters that you tame, explain origins etc. There are many thoughts on the matter.

[Shurrikhan]

BST is probably the most spammy of the ideas, in this thread and in other forums generally over the years. And it is rarely put forth in a thought out manner.

I don't have anything precisely developed as of yet—I had an old write-up from back in ARR, but its harddrive has since been lost to me—but if you are willing to also put into discussion a few changes that I feel would in any case be better for the game and would give precedent for some BST ideas, I can give something of a framework.

I'll try to be brief for now:

Three Background Premises:

• We should not be as role-locked as we are, nor job design so ruled by role templates. Kits should have more versatility than they will necessarily use within any particular role, albeit at competing use of time and other resources when crossing between roles so to speak, and casual matchmaking should look at these capacities more directly rather than the mere primary color of a given job.
  
  
• It is okay for a kit to be complex. Imagine, for instance, a Summoner with the rotational complexity of, say, a RDM (which is to say, not much, but not quite the least) for each Summon it might have active (though such would still be mutually exclusive).
  
  
• It is okay for jobs to have to go out of their way, including in unique ways, for related skills. If need be, it is also fine for matchmaking to account for skill acquisition in much the same way it does gear, so long as the related minimum amounts can be averaged across a premade group. Yes, this means DRGs potentially having to hunt or fight alongside particular Dragons or complete similarly thematic activities (whether one-and-done or a mere small added challenge atop typical combat, etc.), Machinists actually making things per their own designs, Bards learning songs, BLUs taking monster skills, etc. etc.

• That's not to say we have to go whole hog with this, but there is no reason necessarily to deny that, either, especially for "advanced" jobs that can only be reached after already having leveled a perfectly viable alternative (which would pretty well deplete any excuse for not doing BLU things on a BLU, even if it may take more time commensurate to the exceptional versatility available to that job).

I realize those ideas can seem a bit far-fetched, but I also feel that each job added should (and perhaps even must) be a means of setting healthy (or, healthier) precedents for the game. Lately, I've felt that job design has gone in the opposite direction. While some things have gotten further polish (though, imo, such is more a matter of obvious issues seeing correction only 1 to 3 expansions late than a 'pro' to offset the 'cons' of shallowed kits and homogeneity), they've also become increasingly rutted and constrained. I would hope our future jobs could attempt to lead out of that somewhat.


The BST Idea Itself:
Personally, I could see two ways of approaching BST.

The first would be the more standard, whereby you have 4 iconic pets (let's say... a panther, a bear, a hawk, and a spirit beast) acquired through the job questline. That approach in turn has two sub-types:

In sub-type A, there is a long cooldown on or other means of limiting swaps and your pet essentially becomes your "sub-role", between one leaned more towards offensive sabotage (Panther), much like Ninja, vanguard and survivability (Bear), or supportive utility and less direct means of mitigation (Hawk). The final pet, the spirit beast, would be any and all of the other three, but to a lesser degree.

For sub-type B, you instead weave pet-swaps into your rotation insofar as you are able to capitalize on their utilities. For instance, you might spend the majority of your time, at least in PvE, alongside your Panther, but would swap to Hawk for burst mobility or a helpful mob-displacement or -disarm, etc., or Bear if/when the mitigation afforded or used to cover another could save a life or allow for further uptime for yourself or another melee.

The second approach would be more like that of a BLU, if BLU hadn't been relegated to a half-assed minigame. For Blue, imagine a grand pool of 100 or so abilities, with maybe a dozen or more different "decks" that high-ranking BLUs (be that in Player vs. Player combat or Player vs. Parse) have popularized and a few among which which will tend to be optimal in a given serious (e.g., Extreme, Savage, or Ultimate) fight depending on one's party-mates. BST would be similar, except in that your pet choice would do roughly half your deck-building in and of itself (both from related player skills that combo with the pet's non-exchangeable skills and those pet skills themselves); the remainder would be a bit like "Cross-class" or "Additional" Skills, where you could teach techniques still applicable to the pet's aspect and physique and in turn allow for further player skills related to those in which you trained your pet.

That second approach is obviously the more expensive, though it could at least build off the backs of a successful BLU framework, as many of the skills you'd be copying would be the basic or most iconic skill of a given tameable beast. While BST would obviously have a smaller selection of usable mobs (only the "beasts" among the general class of "monsters"), many of the beasts could easily borrow corollary skills (those with effect or aesthetic that'd naturally fit around a given iconic and BLU-acquirable skill) from the BLU set, leaving the development largely just a process of art rather than developing effects, too.

Put simply, if BLU were left in its current muddled state, the first approach would be our only real option, but if we were resolved to make BLU a complete and compelling job, then it'd be a waste not to tie BST into that via the second approach.



I'll let this much settle for the time being; I'm typing between shifts and may not be back until late, but the framework should already give a bit to discuss. And, if it doesn't, I'll just edit this post as I flesh it out further, finally moving towards the more often covered aesthetics and capacities of the job.

[Hoehenflug]

lot of text

Your ideas are/were really ambitious. I feel like my approach of mashing Melee+EGI is a bit more likely, but aside from option B (which is SMN now I guess) I'd play this.

It's a bit like that time when HS devs told us over multiple years that player avatars would be too confusing. Or when SE killed Astro (and NIN) for me, because 'muh TP'. Oh well.

[SeverianLyonesse]

Your ideas are/were really ambitious. I feel like my approach of mashing Melee+EGI is a bit more likely, but aside from option B (which is SMN now I guess) I'd play this.

It's a bit like that time when HS devs told us over multiple years that player avatars would be too confusing. Or when SE killed Astro (and NIN) for me, because 'muh TP'. Oh well.

I am in agreement on this. While I think Shurrikhan's idea of having a small cast of pets is probably the best way they could implement a BST, it would still be a pet class with all the pet bugs. And if we take out the pets and make them a casting rotation, it's just like every other class (you compare it to SMN but I'm actually getting more MNK vibes with Couerl/Raptor forms).

I do have to say though it's a valiant effort and much better than what I've generally seen on here. Certainly hits on something that feels achievable and meaningful, as opposed to just another empty collect-a-thon.

Again, there is only one working pet in the game and that is your Companion Chocobo. I think that is probably the best jumping off point for this concept (and indeed, the Companion feature feels like it wants to naturally balloon out and flourish into a quasi-BST feature anyway).