Quote Originally Posted by Kabooa View Post
[The value of non-damage utility is not constant.]
How much is mobility worth? How much -should- it be worth? What about a raise? Job specific boons? This problem will still persist but it is grossly apparent when jobs exist in a role who have nothing unique to offer.

Cross role examination creates some glaring examples where some jobs have the boon tax and others don't. There's no reason Summoner, Bard, and Dancer shouldn't be equivalent in damage output. Their supplementary kits are all comparable. There's no reason Red Mage and Summoner shouldn't be similar for the same reason.

Machinist and Red mage should have comparable damage - the free mobility vs the value of verraise.
This is honestly the only issue I feel is inevitable, no matter what changes elsewhere, between jobs which include and do not include indirect contribution (especially of a damage vs. non-damage variety). The rest mostly balances itself out with only the sad requirement on a highly indirect contributor must have an entire party of skilled players to contribute its full rDPS while a wholly direct contributor needs only itself to provide its full rDPS (and can offer indirect contributors more in turn).

In all other cases, I'd honestly be happier with removing Role-based stat bonuses altogether and having a tighter balance for individual jobs relative to all other jobs than adding more sub-types of Roles.

That said, I now feel like I need to remember what a friend told me about another MMO he was playing. If I recall correctly, mobs and bosses there had defense and most classes all had about the same damage calculations based on their stats; the difference was that the direct damage jobs had higher raw stats to work with. And because Defense worked against raw stat to a degree (I don't know how), they'd be less affected by Defense, making up for the disadvantage they'd otherwise face in larger parties for having no party-based damage contribution without overpowering them in your typical smaller-party content (where party-based contribution wasn't as hefty anyways).

As weird as all that sounds, I'd honestly rather go that route, looking at how damage itself works in order to better allow for balance between the varying levels of (in)directness in contribution as to be balanced across various party sizes, rather than just thrusting A, B, C, and D upon any and all parties (all too likely in place of actual balance).