Physical range dps damage?

[hynaku]

I think range class should have same or close to the same dps damage that the close range dps has. I'm pretty sure the close range dps even has way higher defense than we do. So why does the physical range dps get the short end of the stick.

[dinnertime]

It made the enemies take 3% more damage. So it was applied for every source of damage the enemy took. It was good but, I don't think it was so overpowered to warrant a removal of it. I think the issue was you had that mp regen at the time to. You would pop Foe and mana regen and it would last a bit longer than it would normally. I think removing the mana regen was more than enough honestly. Removing Foe wasn't really warranted. If we would have kept Foe and lost mana regen we could have had another use for Ewer from AST. That way you could regen mana slowy during a fight instead of like 10% instantly every second. That's just my opinion though.

Or they could've kept everything as is. The optimization involved to increase the uptime of Requiem, and how other party members can be involved to help is something the game just lacks now, and that's boring. Sure, It might've been *too* strong before but they didn't have to outright ruin everyone's fun by removing everything.

[Dfess]

Or they could've kept everything as is. The optimization involved to increase the uptime of Requiem, and how other party members can be involved to help is something the game just lacks now, and that's boring. Sure, It might've been *too* strong before but they didn't have to outright ruin everyone's fun by removing everything.

I'm not disagreeing. I'm with you 100%.

[Dfess]

I think range class should have same or close to the same dps damage that the close range dps has. I\\'m pretty sure the close range dps even has way higher defense than we do. So why does the physical range dps get the short end of the stick.

I agree. /10char

[RyuDragnier]

I think range class should have same or close to the same dps damage that the close range dps has. I'm pretty sure the close range dps even has way higher defense than we do. So why does the physical range dps get the short end of the stick.

Because we can dodge everything with no real danger involved. Melee is in constant danger of being hit, ranged isn't.

[TheMightyMollusk]

Because we can dodge everything with no real danger involved. Melee is in constant danger of being hit, ranged isn't.

In most fights, there's just as much going on at range as there is in melee. Ranged is in constant danger of being hit, too. The difference is that they can keep attacking while melee can't.

I mean, unless you're a DPS standing in front of the boss and eating tankbusters, but then that's entirely your own fault.

[Fhaerron]

A good DNC and brd can get better numbers the melee who don't care or don't do positional.

A good melee can get better numbers then DNC and BRD who can't play.

I don't really understand the point here.

[Connor]

I can understand ranged having ‘rDPS’ that brings them close to what melee can do. And then because of the nature of rDPS, it’s limited by the strength of the melee/casters it’s affecting (better pDPS for the ones being supported means better rDPS for the supporter).

Surely it would be fairly unbalanced for ranged to be dealing equivalent pDPS to melee though? Unless they removed every kind of utility from the ranged I guess. But then wouldn’t they all be really boring?

Obviously in terms of numbers I’m not suggesting they should jump up all the buffs ranged have, but maybe like a 3% rise from what they’re at now? Like if a certain song that increases damage taken for nearby enemies returned? (lol).

Maybe dancer could get something to indirectly increase their damage by a very small amount, like a slight increase to fan dance proc rate or Espirit generation?

For Machinist maybe they could extend the Wildfire timer? Could help with the whole ‘pushing 1 million attacks into a 10 second window’ thing it has going for it currently too

Idk I mean I totally get that devs have to be super careful with ranged because of their history as the op meta kings, but surely it’s not fair for them to be relegated to ‘taken for the 1% stat boost and nothing else’ either? Every role/sub role should have its own value outside of just having to be there because of the way the party bonus system works

[Rasikko]

DNC has been my main job since the start of this expansion. What I like is that all the skills line up well with each other, and the pretty well choreographed animations. My like for it ends there. DNC damage is moderate at best, and this is taking Standard and Technical Step in account. Considering I can boost stronger players damage by 5%, I think if I personally did more damage, that would make DNC is a big target for nerfs, and there's people already wanting that. As a result of this state of the job, I desire there to be no major changes to the job. The small buff it got to some skills was enough and no more. DNC is also only as good as its partner is.

So this thread has gone on for some time and I think it really boils down to this:

If you could run around an arena with reckless abandon, doing SAM-like damage all the time to mobs/bosses without getting nailed by any mechanics, wouldn't that be broken as all hell?

[SaitoHikari]

I’m pretty most people in this thread are arguing for either more personal damage, or more raid DPS contribution. Not both at once, or else you get what Stormblood Bard was, where I consistently topped the damage charts as a 90+ percentile Bard and offered ridiculous utility everywhere.

Simply more raid contribution via utility skills is vastly preferable, but all signs point to the devs giving up on that for the rest of the expansion. The one class that did get a minor party utility buff paid for it by an across the board nerf to their most consistent means of damage, something that hit them much harder than whatever the hell the Summoner nerf was supposed to be about. And it was to the point where it was only a slight benefit at endgame, and a brutal unnecessary hit to their personal damage in all content before that (to the level of doing 8-10% less personal damage in Stormblood ultimate raids today compared to pre-expansion, while everyone else saw significant buffs in older content).

So yeah, it’s not really surprising that ranged mains are a bit miffed at the devs, and are defaulting to just asking for more personal damage. They justify our low contribution because of our utility, but... Exactly what utility do they actually mean, when they already took so much of it away from everyone in the first place? Troubadour/Samba/Tactician? Then what does Addle and Feint mean to the devs on the balancing chalkboard? Does free movement really matter so much that it’s somehow acceptable that a 90+ percentile Bard will still provide less raid contribution than the Monk or Summoner that dies once during the fight?

(Oh, and speaking as someone who is on E8S prog, the ‘ranged uptime’ is highly overblown. There aren’t any mechanics in 5-7S that force melee and casters to disengage for any longer than a single GCD with the correct timing. Anything that could tends to affect everyone at once, with parties adjusting positioning to cater for maximum uptime, and melee/casters have enough tools to keep uptime for longer mechanics when played properly. Only 8S might present problems, but people are shifting to double caster comps for that rather than double ranged. That tells us that the issue there is melee are in exceptional danger for that fight, while casters don’t see much difference.

People tend to forget that double or more ranged party comps were only ever a response to stacking party buffs for maximum damage. The past meta was NEVER ever in response to mechanics or boss design, so to suddenly argue that it’s okay for ranged contribution today to be that far behind because lol uptime from anywhere is highly disingenuous. If uptime mattered that much to the point where party composition revolved around it, the consistent standard nowadays wouldn’t be two melee.)