Suggesting a rotational or defensive change to Paladin isn't equivalent to making the job "ez" Sure Paladin doesn't need any changes outside of Potency buffs, The general rotation is fun and flexible,. I think generally people are just afraid of any change now because a lot of the recent ones haven't been really good in the communities eyes.
Paladin could use some minor changes especially to things like cover, removing useless abilities like shield bash or reworking them, changing Hallowed ground to be more inline with other invuls (Still should be the longest), Holy shelltron should be able to block dots ect.
I don't think Paladin Needs any massive rotation changes, I guess if you changed spell speed to synch skill speed it may fix some alignments but also ruin some complexity? I won't argue which is better result neither really are, It's more of a problem with only fitting bursts into 2minutes, it's easy to design but ruins complexity and skill expression, It's also going to be hard to balance the reward for bringing a Paladin and doing your rotation perfectly for that fight.
I believe the core of the Issue is actual design around burst and Paladin being a job that wasn't really changed for EW's burst changes, Changing Paladins rotation will upset people keeping it the same will upset people, at the end of the day the best change would be looking at potency buffs, but trying to adjust Paladin and suggesting changes isn't the Issue, I dislike the Idea that any change is going to be bad, but I can see why people really dislike any changes that aren't "lol buff x potency" because the fear of changing PLD into another burst job makes sense.
I guess I'll just say I don't think personally just buffing plds potency to be on par with Dark Knight or Gunbreaker would 100% fix the job, You still have to put in way more effort for lacking defensives, while the job would be pretty "viable" It wouldn't make it a great choice over drk or gnb especially in the current raids, but it would be good enough which some people are fine with.


Reply With Quote

