What even is the purpose of all those non melee/blm jobs?

[CelestiCer]

The Complexity argument is flawed in many ways.

Players brush the existing complexity as non-existing when players skills and interests in difficult may vary, while Dev's overstate the complexity. With Square's intention to remove as much nuance from each Job, simplifying both gameplay and the Dev's job to balance it all? will eventually just anger some players.

This all isn't even about " Viability ", every job is now viable even if the second tier in Week 1 showed flaws. It's about " Fairness " between Job performances, of which will remain lacking if they do not address it, since Square's main argument point is Complexity for DPS performances. Yet they are showing to do quite the opposite.

• Simplifying Jobs for both players and Devs
• Angry feedback from player-base
• Square throws potency buffs left and right

I much rather have liked to see Square have designed Jobs to have a friendly barrier of entry skill-floor appealing to most players, with nuances that warrant the damage jobs have without having players require to master it to clear most content in the game? but enough complexity to pursue as a necessity for high-end raiding.

It just looks they are simplifying more and more and like to be wrong on this. I really do.

[FireMage]

complex why? Do they have extra stuff to do? no, do they have extra stuff to think about during the mechanics? no, do they have less movement? currently not. So how are they more complex?

They do have extra stuff. Like do we really need to go over the differences in button amounts? And yes, they absolutely have less movement. Like do we really need to go over how SMN is mostly two buttons? How MCH is mostly 3 of them? Like are you blind?

[Quor]

I summarised it when he posted it before. It pretty much agrees with the 35% tapering off to 15% in raids beginning to end. About 35% of players raid current savage and 15% of players complete the raid series, basically.

It also points out thay EW has slightly higher engagement than normal and that casuals do engage with the content, allbeit in a much softer manner.

Appreciate that. Was there any mention of demographic range? "All players" can mean a lot of things. It can mean "all players" in the literal sense, or it can mean something entirely different, like "all players with at least one level 90 character that were active some time in the last 30 days."

Not my fault you're lazy. Suffice to say it proves you wrong

You are less than useless, and rude to boot.

[Ggwppino]

That is your opinion. Just do not base it on faulty logic.

I would not consider as extra the fact that melee has to position itself, because it is something it has to do because it is inherent in its rotation, like a caster has to cast and a phys ranged has to be careful of random procs (excluding mch), but I would consider them class features and none are simpler than the other currently.
For the second point actually the phys ranged have no reasoning to do, but this reasoning is based on: shooting or not shooting true north / swiftcast, stuff you understand at the first wipe / lose damage / interrupt, I would not consider it a worthy reasoning of note. For the third point the melee run wherever they like, let's not joke, the hitboxes are ridiculously big af, you always hit the boss and if you don't hit him it's because you got the mechanics wrong, not because the game doesn't allow you to hit him. There are no risky greeds or downtime, there is nothing, the game lulls you and takes you by the hand to beat the boss. Clearly there are distant places where melee can't hit, but why would it be there? there is no reason other than to troll. But not even for any ranged actually, if not to do a "favor" to the melee.

They do have extra stuff. Like do we really need to go over the differences in button amounts? And yes, they absolutely have less movement. Like do we really need to go over how SMN is mostly two buttons? How MCH is mostly 3 of them? Like are you blind?

Where are all these keys of the melee that you praise? for all jobs there are 5/6 to press. Melee rotations are 1234+ burst and buff if you have it. I repeat, I also agree that there are classes with a steeper learning curve than others, I do not question it, and I want to repeat that a smn (which is currently the most monotonous class in the game) should not have the same damage as a blm, but why do you insist that melee are more difficult than ranged! what does a rdm not have compared to a drg that you think is simpler? what doesn't a blm have that you think is simpler than a mnk? what doesn't a dnc have that you think is simpler than a nin? what doesn't have a brd that you think is simpler than a sam? Enlighten me, because I do not get there and apparently other people too, and frankly to say that they are more complex is not enough to convince me.

[FireMage]

You are less than useless, and rude to boot.

Says the person that can't even check a source given to them. Imagine trying to come for others when you're acting in bad faith

I would not consider as extra the fact that melee has to position itself, because it is something it has to do because it is inherent in its rotation, like a caster has to cast and a phys ranged has to be careful of random procs (excluding mch), but I would consider them class features and none are simpler than the other currently.
For the second point actually the phys ranged have no reasoning to do, but this reasoning is based on: shooting or not shooting true north / swiftcast, stuff you understand at the first wipe / lose damage / interrupt, I would not consider it a worthy reasoning of note. For the third point the melee run wherever they like, let's not joke, the hitboxes are ridiculously big af, you always hit the boss and if you don't hit him it's because you got the mechanics wrong, not because the game doesn't allow you to hit him. There are no risky greeds or downtime, there is nothing, the game lulls you and takes you by the hand to beat the boss. Clearly there are distant places where melee can't hit, but why would it be there? there is no reason other than to troll. But not even for any ranged actually, if not to do a "favor" to the melee.



Where are all these keys of the melee that you praise? for all jobs there are 5/6 to press. Melee rotations are 1234+ burst and buff if you have it. I repeat, I also agree that there are classes with a steeper learning curve than others, I do not question it, and I want to repeat that a smn (which is currently the most monotonous class in the game) should not have the same damage as a blm, but why do you insist that melee are more difficult than ranged! what does a rdm not have compared to a drg that you think is simpler? what doesn't a blm have that you think is simpler than a mnk? what doesn't a dnc have that you think is simpler than a nin? what doesn't have a brd that you think is simpler than a sam? Enlighten me, because I do not get there and apparently other people too, and frankly to say that they are more complex is not enough to convince me.

Whether you're convinced or not is entirely irrelevant as it's something that simply is. Rotational complexity is higher, the role is less safe, etc etc

[Lyth]

It's really quite unusual to see a caster main so committed to defending melee as being a supposedly 'higher skill' role, especially one that prides themselves as being a more skilled player. I suppose if you've developed a reputation of being contrarian, you have to say the opposite of what you really want in order to convince people to support your preferences.

Either way, a design philosophy aiming for a tight rdps balance across all dps subroles is in everyone's best interest in the long run, irrespective of anecdotal claims of difficulty. Because sooner or later you'll find your own preferred job in a disadvantaged position, and that can last for entire expansions if you're unlucky. It's not a fun position to be in.

[Ggwppino]

Whether you're convinced or not is entirely irrelevant as it's something that simply is. Rotational complexity is higher, the role is less safe, etc etc

uhmm no, that's not an axiom, not in endwalker at least. Before it was like this, now it is not at all clear how you want us to believe. There are classes that are a bit more messed up than others, but they are not at all melee -> difficult, ranged -> simple. There are slightly simpler classes in both ranged and melee, and there are slightly more complicated classes in both ranged and melee. Never in life are all ranged simpler than all melee today.
Come on, you can't say that currently a sam is harder than a rdm, (just to wink at you) because otherwise you are lying knowing that you are lying. Before being misunderstood, I'm not claiming that 10% less rdps should have sam, what I'm saying currently values ​​have no head or tail. And I don't even expect it to be fixed in the next patches.

[Tiramu]

Appreciate that. Was there any mention of demographic range? "All players" can mean a lot of things. It can mean "all players" in the literal sense, or it can mean something entirely different, like "all players with at least one level 90 character that were active some time in the last 30 days."



You are less than useless, and rude to boot.

It doesnt give any context. I believe he is referring to the active playerbase. The closest thing he gives to a demographic breakdown is that half of the playerbase is super casual, the other half more what you might describe as "mid-core" and hardcore.

[FireMage]

It's really quite unusual to see a caster main so committed to defending melee as being a supposedly 'higher skill' role, especially one that prides themselves as being a more skilled player. I suppose if you've developed a reputation of being contrarian, you have to say the opposite of what you really want in order to convince people to support your preferences.

Nothing contrarian about me. And a higher skill ceiling is still a higher skill ceiling even if it's not by much. Also, not a caster main, a RDM main. Job could deserve to be and be the worst and I'd play it, I mean have you seen the hat?

[Quor]

It doesnt give any context. I believe he is referring to the active playerbase. The closest thing he gives to a demographic breakdown is that half of the playerbase is super casual, the other half more what you might describe as "mid-core" and hardcore.

Hmm, good to know, thanks. I asked because I've seen a few different definitions of "player" when it comes to this kind of thing. If we just take the 25 million number that's been thrown out by SE recently, then half of that is 12.5 million. While I don't think it's impossible for that many players to have at least dipped their toes into a savage fight, I also don't think that's at all an accurate number due to the context it's viewed through. That is to say, 25 million registered players can mean anything from 25 million registered accounts paying a monthly sub or only 5 million paying a monthly sub with another million on free trial and 19 million functionally "dead" accounts that are, technically, registered to play FF14.

Like I said before, I've seen a few different definitions of "player," such as people only meeting certain achievement milestones (i.e. having the savage 4/8/12 clear achievement) or players who have only been active within the past 30/60/90 days, so that's where my question stems from. Of course it's useless to sit here and provide criticism without also proposing some kind of improvement on the system, so to that end, what I'd personally like to see would be a detailed breakdown of the demographics and the context surrounding them. The only entity that can accurately say who does what is SE themselves, so anything done by the players and fans will necessarily be hamstrung due to missing the whole picture. Even the term "active playerbase" is quite vague. What constitutes active? Login once a day to do roulettes and other dailies? Regular hours-long progs in savage/ultimate? 10-hour daily gathering/fishing/crafting expeditions? People who only get on 1-2 times a week to do a bit of MSQ and/or side quests? Anyone who has logged in within the past 7/14/30/etc. days?

Not an easy thing to get, yes, but important nonetheless. Hence my skepticism towards these kinds of surveys. On the one hand they're better than nothing, and they give us a general idea of how things stand, but as someone who has studied statistics more than I'd care to admit, I always look askance at these things. Even for someone with years of experience in statistics, it's very easy to take a result and extrapolate way beyond the scope of the data.