So you're telling me..

[Tobias_Azuryon]

Yeah it's super great as a NIn to watch my potencies be nerfed into oblivion and feel bad to play while RPR and MNK are sitting up there with one button tricks and other utility lol. Feelsbadman.

[Ransu]

In the first paragraph you day that Monk may need a nerf, then in the second paragraph you say only Reaper needs to be nerfed .... again.

Have you not seen that Monk and Reaper have pretty much the same rDPS?

Did you even read my post?

It seems more like you just want Reaper to be nerfed and don't care about actual balance.

Everything you say is suspect with ulterior motives.

Both RPR and MNK need to be nerfed. Everyone who has been talking about RPR in this thread has also agree that MNK is also overtuned. Buffing the other jobs instead of nerfing the two that are over performing is the wrong way to go about things.

[MagiusNecros]

Other jobs should be buffed. Do you want to piss people off or make them happy.

So uh make them happy. Simple.

[Stasya]

Left week 1 with 1% enrage in p1 p4s in party finder.
As SAM main my jaw dropped when i saw no reaper/monk nerfs nor other underperfoming jobs buff (that drg buff didnt bring him back in pf). This is just depressing to play a game for me, why play SAM if according to SE i should go main reaper?
Considering my pf had no reaper monk bard i highly doubt last boss was playtested with anything than reaper+monk+bard+rdm comp.....

[Kolsykol]

Other jobs should be buffed. Do you want to piss people off or make them happy.

So uh make them happy. Simple.

With my horrible pf experience in the Second Circle - Savage I have to say that I've actually changed my mind at least a little bit.
I'd rather have others buffed than RPR nerfed at this point but I still have the same view in effect about the balance tier ( RPR is too high, others too low ).

I don't think that buffing too much is good still, and there are times where the devs have gone too far with the buffing.
But if it makes meeting enrage timers in pf a little more bearable then okay.

In the first paragraph you day that Monk may need a nerf, then in the second paragraph you say only Reaper needs to be nerfed .... again.

Have you not seen that Monk and Reaper have pretty much the same rDPS?

Did you even read my post?

It seems more like you just want Reaper to be nerfed and don't care about actual balance.

Everything you say is suspect with ulterior motives.

Wat, I can think that both RPR and MNK are too strong currently at the same time.

Yes I want RPR to get nerfed AND MNK.
At this point I don't rly care how if it's them getting nerfed, others getting buffed or a combination because like I've said it can be achieved in different ways.

Why would I say that MNK is too strong if I had ulterior motives?
I've mained MNK since ARR lol including when it was bad.
Granted I've moved away from it in EW because I just don't think it has changed enough fundamentally and is still too similar and kinda boring.
But I am still a MNK at heart.

Edit: You need to read what I said again too, I said that you *could* achieve it by nerfing RPR.
It was two different scenarios I am not sure exactly how you can think that's what I was saying because I wasn't at all.
I dunno why you'd assume I think only RPR should get nerfed just because I didn't mention MNK too in the second example.
Do I really have to say RPR and MNK when this discussion is mostly about RPR?
I don't think that I should have to clarify that every time when I've already said that I think MNK is too strong too.

[Kazimere]

If they buff MNK's damage it's the same situation regardless.
I think MNK's damage is perhaps a bit too strong too atm, SAM and BLM should be the top dogs.

My point was that you could accomplish the same balance tier by nerfing RPR or buffing SAM and BLM.
Is RPR too strong or are others too weak?
That's more of a pov and opinion on how high the damage should actually be overall.

The FFXIV devs tend to go the safer route by buffing instead of nerfing because it upsets people less, even if the balance tiering ends up being the same in practice people don't like seeing their numbers go down.
I don't think that's necessarily always a good thing, in the past overbuffing has lead to numbers getting too crazy, it happened with physical ranged DPS in Heavensward.

No one here is talking about blindly nerfing or buffing, the data already exists we already have the facts on our plate.

Samurai are top dogs, in aDPS. I wonder if you were saying the same thing in StB when samurai wasn’t topping the rDPS either. It was beaten by ninja, and by dragoon when at max. No aDPS job should beat out a job with buffs in rDPS.

[Scuoll]

Other jobs should be buffed. Do you want to piss people off or make them happy.

So uh make them happy. Simple.

At the end of the day the thing that matters is the hierarchy of the classes between themselves, i personally disagree that they should only buff, it can work but it needs to be done properly. the savage patch tightened the margins which is good but didnt really change anything meaningful. I saw some classes excluded from savage pf which i think is probably the worst case scenario when it comes to balance, if "any job can clear" but the community doesnt want you to play it, it really does feel bad, and coming from wow i hoped this would not happen, since there are several specs in that game which will get you kicked from most groups if players figure out you are playing them (survival hunter and feral druid to name a couple). Even if its not something that has affected me personally, i hope the devs try to change the public opinion.

Regarding square's balancing philosophy, i have read a translation of a yoship interview which said they were looking into buffing complex/busy jobs, which goes against what quite a few people have said. I guess it may not have been translated 100% accurately since the original is on japanese radio, but i assume the gist of it is correct. Curious to see what people in this thread that were adamant about square not balancing around complexity think about it, is it something new? Not looking to be inflammatory, it just seems to directly go against what several people pointed out as pretty much matter of fact. I kinda understand not wanting to balance too much around ease of use, but also think having the top performer be also easy to play is pretty frustrating for the others, since getting outperformed by someone putting in less effort always feels bad, so it should probably be weighted somewhat.

Link to a summary/translation of the interview https://www.fanbyte.com/news/ffxiv-y...fs-patch-6-08/
Also he talks about buffing monk which doesnt seem like it should happen when looking at fflogs, so yeah idk whats up with that

[Kazimere]

At the end of the day the thing that matters is the hierarchy of the classes between themselves, i personally disagree that they should only buff, it can work but it needs to be done properly. the savage patch tightened the margins which is good but didnt really change anything meaningful. I saw some classes excluded from savage pf which i think is probably the worst case scenario when it comes to balance, if "any job can clear" but the community doesnt want you to play it, it really does feel bad, and coming from wow i hoped this would not happen, since there are several specs in that game which will get you kicked from most groups if players figure out you are playing them (survival hunter and feral druid to name a couple). Even if its not something that has affected me personally, i hope the devs try to change the public opinion.

Regarding square's balancing philosophy, i have read a translation of a yoship interview which said they were looking into buffing complex/busy jobs, which goes against what quite a few people have said. I guess it may not have been translated 100% accurately since the original is on japanese radio, but i assume the gist of it is correct. Curious to see what people in this thread that were adamant about square not balancing around complexity think about it, is it something new? Not looking to be inflammatory, it just seems to directly go against what several people pointed out as pretty much matter of fact. I kinda understand not wanting to balance too much around ease of use, but also think having the top performer be also easy to play is pretty frustrating for the others, since getting outperformed by someone putting in less effort always feels bad, so it should probably be weighted somewhat.

Link to a summary/translation of the interview https://www.fanbyte.com/news/ffxiv-y...fs-patch-6-08/
Also he talks about buffing monk which doesnt seem like it should happen when looking at fflogs, so yeah idk whats up with that

He didn't specify buffs to "busy" classes. He just said they were getting looked at.

To you point about people being locked out of PF. I haven't seen it on Primal. The only thing I've seen is locking slots to roles: 2x melee; 1x range, and 1x caster for the buff. That is not to say that Ninja, Dancer, and Machinist don't need some love, but the rest are all pretty close within their roles.

[Scuoll]

He didn't specify buffs to "busy" classes. He just said they were getting looked at.

This is the translation in the article i linked:
"Complex DPS Jobs Will Get Buffed
He pointed out the DPS output for busy Jobs may not reflect the effort it takes to play optimally, and the team is looking into ways to increase their DPS."

He then specified in particular sam, blm and monk.
Again its a translation but i think its hard to read that and think that they don't care about ease of use when balancing, what else could "dps output does not reflect the effort it takes to play optimally" mean?