Why do the devs hate MCH so much?

[Raven2014]

Two jobs with pretty good mobility already?

Doesn't matter how good you think those 2 jobs' mobility are, the point is MCH is still better. And they also bring support/ultility, that's why you have to make MCH to at least have less mobility then them.

[ForteNightshade]

Doesn't matter how good you think those 2 jobs' mobility are, the point is MCH is still better. And they also bring support/ultility, that's why you have to make MCH to at least have less mobility then them.

Except that mobility simply doesn't matter. This has been the long standing issue for years with the Phys Range. Their mobility has virtually zero impact yet is continuously treated as a massive balancing component. Between the ten fights of Pandemonium, and Dragonsong, we have only two, two fights where Phys Range movement is widely superior to Casters. And those two fights (P7 and P8p1) are both hilariously simple for Melee. In other words, the Melee have the same "advantage" Phys Range are supposed to have: mobility. Now you can argue Casters have to plan ahead in P4 or Dragonsong but that mild amount of planning doesn't justify pigeonholing an entire role with lackluster damage. Especially not when they've essentially dragged down the Casters to their level.

On the subject of Machinist and Summoner, specifically. It's absurd to even try arguing Machinist needs to be hindered when Summoner has two bloody casts in a minute long rotation; three if you don't Swift Garuda. Samurai "casts" more than Summoner but we aren't seeing its damage penalized. At this point, mobility tax is a dated concept that simply isn't justifiable. At least not to the present extent.

[Raven2014]

Except that mobility simply doesn't matter. This has been the long standing issue for years with the Phys Range.

Uhm, no. It has only become an issue this tier because the massive hitbox the raid boss have, something that are widely acknowledge both by community and developers. And they already said moving forward this will be recetify. There are a reason the community have always come up with "melee uptime" strat that usually carry more risk to the party. Even this tier, certain mechanic still have optional uptime strat (Ruby 5 in P5S, Exchange 1,2, 4 in P6S), but they're often deemed too risky to be adapted in PF.

I'm playing both DRG and a BRD, if you can convince me mobility simply doesn't matter, than you can also try to sell me a bridge.

[ForteNightshade]

Uhm, no. It has only become an issue this tier because the massive hitbox the raid boss have, something that are widely acknowledge both by community and developers. And they already said moving forward this will be recetify. There are a reason the community have always come up with "melee uptime" strat that usually carry more risk to the party. Even this tier, certain mechanic still have optional uptime strat (Ruby 5 in P5S, Exchange 1,2, 4 in P6S), but they're often deemed too risky to be adapted in PF.

I'm playing both DRG and a BRD, if you can convince me mobility simply doesn't matter, than you can also try to sell me a bridge.

You do realize the role bonus was introduced because the dev team literally couldn't balance the Phys Range, yes? In fact, in 5.0, they were so weak it was actually better to drop them entirely and just suffer the 1% loss. They had to panic buff them prior to TEA's release due to have hilariously undertuned all three jobs were. Bard, in particular, has been an absolute mess since Dancer's introduction. And I really don't know what else can be said about the disastrous state of Machinist over the last four years. All because they've been desperately trying to balance a role within arbitrary limitation. Whether it be mobility, ease of rotation or utility. It had repeatedly led to near constant imbalances.

And we've already seen their "rectification" when 6.25 dropped. They slapped on baby buffs after Dancer once again completely dwarfed its counterparts. Now Bard exists while Machinist continues to rot for another patch as they've already said 6.3 will only have the Paladin rework. In other words, they did absolutely nothing about the mobility tax and are hoping people forget about it.

[Raven2014]

All because they've been desperately trying to balance a role within arbitrary limitation. Whether it be mobility, ease of rotation or utility. It had repeatedly led to near constant imbalances.

You're citing a completely different issue and slap it on as a problem for a different issue. SE doing a bad job at balancing them doesn't mean there isn't a reason for doing them. The reality of the majority of the fight is melee has a set of constrain that range never have to worry about.


If mobility is arbitrary then explain:

- Why there exist melee uptime strat in literally every single tier, including this one. While there is never a range up time strat? 'Cause range don't need it.
- It's common to see a party of 3 range and 1 melee with a 1 range faking melee. Have you ever seen party with 3 melee and 1 range with a melee faking range? I personally never. Now there are have been a few fights where you can bring 3 melee without impacting personal performance, but that's because those fights don't have range mechanic, and they are rare. (Like P2S)

Also, you can't say SMN only have 2 casts and dismiss it as not important. The point is how many cast MCH has? None. Also SMN has 2 attack that requires them to be in melee range, how many attack does MCH has that requires MCH to be in melee range? None. There are time I misjudge the EGI order and end up with Irift when the mech require I'm away from the boss, so I either have to use a few ruin or forgo the 2 melee abilities altogether. Does MCH ever have to make such choice? Never

Sure, we can see them as no difference, but only if you just arbitrary dismiss every difference that's not convenience of your argument.

If Complexity of rotation considered arbitrarily, explain why BLM has constantly been the top DPS despite being a range? And even a good black mage still need some accommodation from the parties to perform optimistically. BLM does pay a range tax, the currency used is their mobility and rotation, rather than potency. This is simply the argument I'm making, MCH, as it is now can not just have a cake and eat it too.

If we disregard both mobility and rotation, are you gonna argue a BRD or DNC should do the same damage as a BLM?

And we've already seen their "rectification" when 6.25 dropped. They slapped on baby buffs after Dancer once again completely dwarfed its counterparts.

No, that's not what they said as rectification. They said making the hitbox as big as they are this tier was a mistake, and that's not something they gonna do again. The problem they're referring to is a fight design issue, not a class balancing issue.

[ForteNightshade]

You're citing a completely different issue and slap it on as a problem for a different issue. SE doing a bad job at balancing them doesn't mean there isn't a reason for doing them. The reality of the majority of the fight is melee has a set of constrain that range never have to worry about.

They aren't completely different issues because they overlap with another another. That poor balancing is a direct result of SE desperately trying to force a limitation that doesn't need to exist. At least not to the degree it does now.

- Why there exist melee uptime strat in literally every single tier, including this one. While there is never a range up time strat? 'Cause range don't need it.

First and foremost, you need to understand people have a terrible propensity of slapping "uptime" on something when nothing really changes. Secondly, the "uptime" strats are often better strats for a variety of reasons. Take Ruby 5, for example. This supposed "big change" has the Melee move up and hug next to the poison. It literally requires no real thought and is actually safer as you don't have three people all clumped relatively close to one another. So why didn't people change strats for reclears? Because PF sticks to week 1 strats and screams bloody murder about change. Ayatori was a downright better strat both in ease and uptime than Ilya. People simply refused to learn it because "why should I? I already know this other strat."

Even in fights where uptime is a concern and adjustments are made in favor of the Melee. That doesn't justify 600+ more rDPS. You openly admit Black Mage is among the most complex jobs in the game. Guess what? A 85% Dragoon matches it. This means a player actively making mistakes in their rotation or outright missing GCDs can still match a high tier Black Mage. It gets even more comical with the Phys Range. All five Melee could go the entire fight missing every single positional and still beat all three. Think about that for a moment. You play at the top of your game, putting in all the work necessary to reach peak performance. Meanwhile, the Monk who's missed 90% of their Snapshot or Demolish positionals does more damage than you.

Is it a small wonder why people aren't playing the Phys Range right now? You're punished for a "utility" which isn't highlight in any noteworthy way while Melee players can drop GCDs and easily surpass your damage.

- It's common to see a party of 3 range and 1 melee with a 1 range faking melee. Have you ever seen party with 3 melee and 1 range with a melee faking range? I personally never. Now there are have been a few fights where you can bring 3 melee without impacting personal performance, but that's because those fights don't have range mechanic, and they are rare. (Like P2S)

If it weren't for the arbitrary party bonus, every single fight in Endwalker, perhaps only excluding Ultimate, would have three Melee. As illustrate above, the damage discrepancy is absolutely massive, and was even worse back in Shadowbringers. A Dragoon losing ten GCDs would still widely outpace a Dancer. The Phys Range literally exist because of the 1%.

Also, you can't say SMN only have 2 casts and dismiss it as not important. The point is how many cast MCH has? None. Also SMN has 2 attack that requires them to be in melee range, how many attack does MCH has that requires MCH to be in melee range? None. There are time I misjudge the EGI order and end up with Irift when the mech require I'm away from the boss, so I either have to use a few ruin or forgo the 2 melee abilities altogether. Does MCH ever have to make such choice? Never

This is a terrible argument because you're trying to justify a massive mobility tax over two casts Summoner is never once hindered by. It can freely change the order of its Legos making it a non-issue. I should know, I played it in P4S. You know what jobs had a hell of a time optimizing? Dancer and Bard. They're actually hard jobs to play well on, especially Bard, due to how rigid the rotation is. And yet they deal paltry damage because oh boy, that mobility lets them get two GCDs during Act II and Curtain Call over the Melee.

It isn't a dismissal but a rebuttal highlighting those differences have very little actual impact. When a Melee can play objectively worse and be rewarded with higher damage for no other reason than existing, tt's a poor design choice. Going back to larger hit boxes won't change that. E6S and E8S were two of the worst Melee fights in the whole expansion. Dragoon and Monk, despite being the weakest Melee, still dwarfed all three Phys Range,

If Complexity of rotation considered arbitrarily, explain why BLM has constantly been the top DPS despite being a range? And even a good black mage still need some accommodation from the parties to perform optimistically. BLM does pay a range tax, the currency used is their mobility and rotation, rather than potency. This is simply the argument I'm making, MCH, as it is now can not just have a cake and eat it too.

Correction: Black Mage was the top DPS... until Endwalker where they were forced to reduce its contributions because they decided to more heavily tax Red Mage and Summoner for their ease of play, ability to raise and mobility. The hilarious irony is Red Mage has the least mobility this tier. The end result has been several panic buffs and having to nerf the last Savage fight because all six Range jobs were too weak. Black Mage was passable relative to the other five but that alone speaks volumes.

If we disregard both mobility and rotation, are you gonna argue a BRD or DNC should do the same damage as a BLM?

... this doesn't even make sense to what I'm saying and is little more than a strawman. If the mobility tax is removed, then jobs would be balanced around their contribution and nothing else. Bard and Dancer would still be the lowest because they have more utility. Machinist would actually get to exist since it wouldn't be weighed down in a role they can't balance. And no, it doesn't need to do Samurai damage. Just maybe enough so if that Samurai forgets what positionals are it can pull ahead.

No, that's not what they said as rectification. They said making the hitbox as big as they are this tier was a mistake, and that's not something they gonna do again. The problem they're referring to is a fight design issue, not a class balancing issue.

Citation needed. They've never said this. Don't take my word for it though.



Above is Omega from Stormblood while below is Omega in Ultimate. Notice how the hit box isn't the same.

Now they may go back on this due to the massive amount of criticism but digging through every interview Yoshida has done since Abyssos released, they have never once said they're reverting hitboxes in the future. The only acknowledgement they've made is the imbalance it caused for Phys Range and Casters. Hence the buffs in 6.25. That was their fix.

[Ranaku]

snip

Not to mention that almost all melee jobs have some sort of ranged attack nowdays with which they can mitigate dps loss cause of getting out of range. Especially monk with his 500 potency dodge attack.

And the funny thing about this is that MCH never was decent dps wise not even when the hitboxes were smaller back then and MCH could attack when melees couldn't. MCH was still at the bottom of the list then so that ranged tax was always just an excuse.

[Raven2014]

First and foremost, you need to understand people have a terrible propensity of slapping "uptime" on something when nothing really changes.

First, a few thing:

As someone who raid on 4 char:

- A healer since 2.0.
- A SMN from the start of this Expansion, in PF
- A BRD since HW (I cleared Omega as a BRD)
- A DRG since SB.

Only the healer char is a static, all others are PF char.

So why am I mentioning all this? Because it feels half of your post seem to assume I'm "ignorant" of what the terms and reality of the game, or that I'm making my points based of 2nd-handed information. And my "real experience" in game say that your approach to this argument seem to fudge over a lot of detail, or try to assert a warp-ed view by inserting just a small grain of truth. Starting with the above. I have seen (and do) enough melee uptime strat that knowing they're a real thing and not simply just a label. I also think you hold too much of a prejudice against PF adaption strategy.


Sometime the strat is a result of solving a puzzle and with it come out a simply better strat to accommodate melee with no down side. In my experience PF has no issue to eventually adopt it. Literally half of the PF I'm in these day are using the Ruby 5 uptime strat. But also there are time where a melee uptime strat will introduce a significant risk to the party (like the uptime for P6S), this is what PF tend to reject. In my experience, which strat adapted in PF as mainstream only come down to safety-ease of execution, aka a smooth brain experience.

Even in fights where uptime is a concern and adjustments are made in favor of the Melee. That doesn't justify 600+ more rDPS. You openly admit Black Mage is among the most complex jobs in the game. Guess what?

And guess why that has become an issue this tier in particular? While range still have to pay a range tax, the hitbox size of this tier basically nullify any levelarge range have over melee. Range class has always been behind melee, that itself is not a problem. The issue this is the margin and also how consistent across the board it is this tier. This is the first time I see it happen so I will see if the situation get fixed next tier. The dev already they would, and I will defer my judgment instead of making an uninformed conclusion atm.

This is a terrible argument because you're trying to justify a massive mobility tax over two casts Summoner is never once hindered by.

Not my experience as playing SMN. Maybe I'm not just that good as SMN, I'm only a mid 80th percentile SMN. What I can say though, out of the 3 DPS class that I play often, DRG took the cake in term of difficulty.

But before I move on I would have to ask, what statistic we're using as the base line of the argument here. As a statistician by trade I know it when someone fudging and switching around different stat to make the argument more convenience, and that's exactly what are you doing here.

Are we talking about percentile rank, which I consider a metric for class mastery.
Are we talking about raw damage output, which I consider a metric for class prowness.

Yes, they are related in someway, but the context they're used and compared must be clear to present a fair argument.

In my own experience, range has a much lower mastery level. As long as I have knowledge of the fight, I have no problem coming in on a range class and do well with it. In fact, I usually tell people I know that whenever I play BRD/SMN, it's so chill and relax that I feel like I'm missing something or doing something wrong. Again, not that I play amazing or anything, but I can still casually mid 80th on SMN and low 90th on BRD, but the point stand.

When I play DRG though? Hustle up and burst your ass, and even then I still gonna suck ... most of the time. Not only in term of output, but it usually take me while to not messing up the fight mechanic itself due to putting too much focus on my own rotation, an issue I never have playing a range class.

The last few years I had also play with a very competitive melee. He's the type who can regularly be in the 95th+ percentile with a few 99, 100 here andthere just doing weekly clear and not even optimize run. And seeing the shit he pulls to play at that level, I don't have the nerve to attempt as a melee, and not even an option I have to consider while playing a range class.

... this doesn't even make sense to what I'm saying and is little more than a strawman. If the mobility tax is removed, then jobs would be balanced around their contribution and nothing else. Bard and Dancer would still be the lowest because they have more utility. Machinist would actually get to exist since it wouldn't be weighed down in a role they can't balance. And no, it doesn't need to do Samurai damage. Just maybe enough so if that Samurai forgets what positionals are it can pull ahead.

And this is the crutch of the problem. You're lumping BRD/DNC/BLM/MCH into one single package. But for me:

- BLM losing their crown is a fight design problem. They still pay tax but their main competitor (melee) are now tax free.
- MCH has always been shit, but they have an identity problem, until SE decide settle into what they want MCH to be, it still gonna shit. The range tax is something that exaggerate its issue, but that's not the main cause.
- BRD/DNC has a "SUPPORT" issue. They don't suck because they are range, they suck because they're the designated "support" classes in a game where the design have forgo such role all but in name.

[Shurrikhan]

Doesn't matter how good you think those 2 jobs' mobility are, the point is MCH is still better. And they also bring support/ultility, that's why you have to make MCH to at least have less mobility then them.

Shouldn't that be the opposite? If, say, MCH, SMN, and RDM were to all have equal mobility and rDPS (MCH gets a new mobility-constraining way of increasing its damage), SMN and RDM (as jobs that bring support/utility atop their reliability/mobility and rDPS) would still be at an advantage over MCH.

To compare the relative advantages of just RDM and MCH briefly:

• Mobility -> MCH (small difference, varied by encounter).
• Ease of Optimization -> MCH (very small difference, varied by player).
  
  
• Utility -> RDM (relatively large difference; RDM has some of the highest levels of utility*, while MCH has only a single raid miti CD held also by all other physical ranged).
• Damage -> RDM (large enough difference that you almost always get 2 casters or melee instead of 2 physical ranged).

MCH is slightly underfunded either way, but if we were to add damage opportunities that would ultimately constrain their mobility, which would likely also bring its skill ceiling of to (reduce ease of optimization down to) RDM's level, MCH would have more than enough budget to match both utility RDM's utility and damage, too, or faintly exceed its damage while offering less utility, etc.

[Raikai]

Shouldn't that be the opposite? If, say, MCH, SMN, and RDM were to all have equal mobility and rDPS (MCH gets a new mobility-constraining way of increasing its damage), SMN and RDM (as jobs that bring support/utility atop their reliability/mobility and rDPS) would still be at an advantage over MCH.

To compare the relative advantages of just RDM and MCH briefly:

• Mobility -> MCH (small difference, varied by encounter).
• Ease of Optimization -> MCH (very small difference, varied by player).
  
  
• Utility -> RDM (relatively large difference; RDM has some of the highest levels of utility*, while MCH has none).
• Damage -> RDM (large enough difference that you almost always get 2 casters or melee instead of 2 physical ranged).

MCH is slightly underfunded either way, but if we were to add elements that constrain their mobility, which would likely also bring its skill ceiling of to (reduce ease of optimization down to) RDM's level, MCH would have more than enough budget to match both utility RDM's utility and damage, too, or faintly exceed its damage while offering less utility, etc.

Machinist could have two extra actions to buff up its utility:
- A physical counterpart of Magic Barrier
- Palisade back

I've seen people toying with a rez concept for MCH as a battery spender, but a rez would probably create more issues than before.