So does every hate new PLD now?

[Renathras]

Having gotten a chance now to sit down and really dig into it...I don't hate it, no.

It feels smoother and more polished to play than before. There's still some weirdness with dropping an Atonement, but I feel like the right way to view that is Atonement as sort of a "filler" "cast this when nothing else is up" kind of a thing. It's not exactly lower priority than your standard 1-2-3 combo, but a SINGLE Atonement is lower priority than a 1-2-3 combo. I'm not sure a good way to say it, but basically, if you have to drop ONE GCD, dropping any part of your 1-2-3 or dropping Divine Might boosted Holy Spirit or dropping Goring Blade or dropping any part of Swords combo are all more detrimental. So when freeing up a SINGLE GCD slot, Atonement is the lowest SINGLE GCD ability in priority worth dropping. (Like if you've played SMN, think of Atonement like Ruin 3 - the thing you press when you don't have better things to press, and the thing you drop if you have to give up a GCD during a rotation for any reason to ensure your higher priority moves get used instead.)

It also feels a bit more dynamic and flexible now. Though your free movement phase is a bit shorter as you can't add in several Holy Spirits to it in a block, you get more single-GCD pockets of movement, such as needing to disengage for a point blank AOE that allows you to greed one GCD, run out and use HS for a second one, then Intervene back into melee to use Atonement or your 1-2-3. And HS can be moved around quite a bit to accommodate this, since it can be used any time after Royal Authority, which is 5 weaponskill slots during your normal rotation (you can use it right after Royal or after the 1st Atonement, 2nd Atonement, 3rd Atonement, Fast Blade, or Riot Blade), and it can be used during your burst phase either at the start (preferably still after Goring so you can prevent it from drifting, but in a pinch before), or during any point of Confettie/Faith/Truth/Valor or right after the combo, after the 1st Atonement, or after the 2nd Atonement (after the 3rd would push it out of the burst window, which you should avoid unless absolutely necessary)

That's a lot of flexibility there.

And base, unbuffed Holy Spirit has 350 potency, which is greater than your 1-2-3 average (287), and only 30 weaker than Atonement (380), meaning if you have a long movement/disengage phase (e.g. 2-3 GCDs worth), you can use Divine Might buffed Holy Spirit for the first GCD and then the 2nd (and 3rd if needed) GCDs can be Holy Spirits as well, at a relatively negligible 30/60 potency damage loss, respectively. It's not nothing, but if you have to use a couple HS for movement like that, you can cut out that same number of Atonements during that 60 second filler phase for a minor DPS loss that allows maintaining uptime. Unbuffed HS's cast time is 1.5 sec, which allows slidecasting (as Healers are very used to) for additional movement, or obviously, for extended disengages.

That is, you have 5 Atonements per 60 second period, and you can replace up to all of them with Holy Spirits if the fight demanded such. Note that you can avoid or minimize this by properly moving your buffed HS around, as I said above. Meaning the only time you have to actually make this 30 potency tradeoff is if you need to move for 2 or more GCDs of disengagement. Considering the alternative is Shield Lob, at potency 100 a SUBSTANTIAL DPS loss from Atonement's 380 (280 loss vs 30 for substituting a HS for an Atonement), that's a pretty good deal.

My only real complaint at the moment is what it was before anyway (so no worse), which is PLD has too many buttons still, and just got one more. At the risk of dumbing things down, there's no reason for Fight or Flight and Requiescat to be two buttons at this point. Baking FoF's effect into Requiescat (or more likely, making Requi a Trait upgrade to Fight or Flight) would fix that problem and make a slot for that old-new defensive CD we got. Well, that and making Requi not REQUIRE MELEE RANGE STILL. It still doesn't ENTIRELY fix the problem of PLD's button bloat, but it helps. Other options include removing Goring and baking that damage into Swords instead (same argument - you don't use Goring outside of FoF anyway, which is where you're going to use Requi/Swords), which would also make Atonement drops an option for trading HSs (disengage) rather than an unintuitively expected part of the nominal rotation. Another option would be taking Circle of Scorn and Expaciation and combining those into one ability (likewise Spirits Within) rather than two. Each of these would free up one hotbar slot, respectively, and as they're all cases of abilities being used together anyway, it just reduces redundancy.

Another alternative would be providing players a toggle (would need to be optional since some people don't like it) to combine the 1-2-3 single target and 1-2 AOE rotations into single buttons. This would free up 3 slots as well. Though some people like extra buttons, so I'm not pressing the issue, some do like the combinations in PvP, so it probably wouldn't be horrible to allow these as toggles for people that wanted them, as each would require different muscle memory to do correctly anyway.

And, of course, having a more usable Divine Veil [that FINALLY affects the PLD, too!] and PLD's "missing" CD in having Bulwark back, paired with Shelltron now being a flat damage reduction, are all nice buffs that should make the Job better off overall.

.

Summary:

I don't dislike it at all. It's very flexible with disengages and forgiving with the general rotation (allowing some substitutions here and there), and largely seems to be a more polished and better working version of what we had before that allows some actual tactical choices in one's rotation.

It's not perfect as it retains a bit of the old PLD clunk, and Goring Blade (in particular), FoF as a distinct button from Requiescat, and Circle of Scorn/Expaciation being separate buttons all seem to be a bit redundant and "filler-y"; but it seems to be an improvement that will work well enough overall.

[Rithy255]

Here's some Things I think that will make the job more fun, the Job isn't bad it's just highly clunky by its design, I feel like they need to go with something more coherent
>Remove some "bloat" Circle of scorn could just be removed, FOF could be reworked (removed from button), Holy Spirit can upgrade into Holy circle which is a cleaving holy spirit, Some adjustments to holy shelltron/intervention could be made into one ability, under req Holy circle/spirit can turn into the blades combo or req can turn into Confiteor (if possible). Some people may not have space issues but I think removing some bloat 1. helps people out with space 2. Allows for future abilities rather then just "upgrade traits"
>Reworking certain parts of the rotation, I'd personally love to see a separate goring blade combo that gives you the "fight or flight" buff, for 30 seconds stacked to 60 yeah similar to warrior but it gives PLD something extra to manage during non-burst, Goring blade as it is, is pointless, I'd like to see Atonement reduced (2 stacks sound good), while giving you a stack of holy spirit (maybe you could have two stacks of divine might). Having less atonement spam, having more flexible opportunities with holy spirit, while also having another thing to consider about your combo.
>Changing Utility to be more Inline with how the game works currently, Cover needs to be reworked, Clemency should be apart of your MP management, right now theirs no point to PLD having MP costs, I feel like clemency could be something we actively use as a PLD (if its too strong, don't look at warrior though! just nerf the sustain on magic attacks or most sustain in your gcd attacks), I'd personally rework passage to be apart of your Oath gauge instead of cover and likely change how it works.
>Make Oath gauge more interactive with the Job, I don't know? just 1. Make it based on gcd attacks or a timer 2. Give a benefit (like 10 oath) or something for mitigating attacks with holy Shelton properly.
>Make the Job Fun at early levels, Holy spirit, Divine might and even req could be moved down if we rework FOF, Holy circle can be the upgraded Cleave version of holy spirit, with a 50% fall off or something, Give PLD some sustain (Idk maybe earlier ocgd clemency or something, maybe weaker to reflect that level), Give pld a gap closer as well around 50-60? right now PLD doesn't feel fun at all at lower levels.

Are these change ideas realistic? not at all, I'm hoping realistically that PLD still gets a few changes before 7.0. But I can dream of a paladin that fills the Job and fantasy of a paladin, while being fun and balanced, I think even if the job stands out defensively it's fine it also has some weaknesses, Hallowed ground and slightly, very slightly lower DPS (should even be better then it is currently with all those changes) would make up for some strong upsides I just want PLD to personally feel like its job fantasy more, that both be in how its DPS rotation is and how its Defensives/utility plays out.

[Shurrikhan]

>Make the Job Fun at early levels, Holy spirit, Divine might and even req could be moved down.

This is one thing I'd really like to see. PLD used to be "gets okay at 54." Now, it's "gets maybe okayish at 64."

Personal accordant pipedream wishlist (still fairly spitball):

• Revert Goring Blade. No, DoTs aren't especially interesting in themselves outside of cleave situations and syncing to other means of providing the same DoT, but at least it has those two aspects by endgame (still more than any other buff or CD-based combo) atop the usual variety created by having multiple combo finishers.
• Make Circle of Scorn a bit more interesting. I particularly don't care how. Desync it from Spirit's Within, such as by putting it on a 20s CD. Maybe go the DoT route and have it refresh Goring Blade. Maybe have it spread Goring Blade from any targets thus afflicted, splitting its duration across all enemies afflicted. Or maybe it just reduces their damage dealt per attack, by a flat amount (as per "Scorn," -- begone peasant, with your peasant blows). Just, something.
  
  
• Remove the gauge cost of Cover. Reduce its CD. Eventually grant it a second charge.
  
  
• Nerf Divine Magic Mastery II, or even remove it. It's almost wholly rigid in its timing, which leaves the player very little agency for/in optimizing it. Use other means of providing that sustain value per minute.
  
  
• By all means, bring back the %HP dependence on Sword Oath, but have it heal for cure potency equal to twice the potency lost when using it at lower %HP.
  
  
• Have filler/situational spells not cancel combos. That means Clemency, Holy Spirit, Holy Circle, Shield Bash, and Atonement.
  
  
• Change the resource granted by Royal Authority from "Sword Oath" to "Holy Oath," and have it additionally offer some vastly empowered use for Shield Bash (e.g., dealing additional damage based on damage mitigated by Shelltron or Bulwark within the last 4 seconds, with fall-off AoE). OR: Allow Shelltron to generate Shield Oath, perhaps usable for an oGCD Clemency or an empowered Shield Bash, while Sword Oath would offer a second combo-finisher replacement (e.g., for Goring Blade, with Atonement and that new skill [Redemption?] replacing their accordant finishers while available and while Goring/Royal themselves are not combo-readied).
  
  
• Have Confiteor replace Requiescat while the latter is on cooldown. OR: Have all PLD spells spend up to 100% more MP to have 50% additional potency and up to 100% reduced cast time based on the PLD's current %MP, reduce MP generation slightly, and simply have Requiescat cause the next 4 spells to be cast as if at 100% MP.
  
  
• Either consolidate Shelltron and Intervention (e.g., into just "Aegis Boon"), or differentiate those on-demands and allow both to be used on both self and allies (with one perhaps being more of a flat eHP increase and the other percentile).
  
  
• Ideally, have Oath Gauge also incur some benefit from mitigation, healing, and/or the like, to make its generation feel at least a bit more interactive.

Now, is that an awful lot of benefit for PLD? Sure. But the same could be simultaneously done for the other tanks, too.

[Rithy255]

This is one thing I'd really like to see. PLD used to be "gets okay at 54." Now, it's "gets maybe okayish at 64."

I don't know about a full revert on goring blade (if thats what you mean) but a soft revert into making it a seperate combo action for PLD, is something I would really want, mind you i wouldn't really mind a full revert over just pressing it once per minute, personally I don't even think it would have been that hard to make goring blade somewhat interesting, I'd like to see circle of scorn changed it just seems like a really odd weak OGCD button that takes up space right now.

Agree with Cover, Things not cancelling combos atonement currently can be annoying to use as it breaks your 1, 2, 3, I generally agree with making the Oath system more interactive, right now its just this weird auto attack timer for your short CD's, I'd like PLD's gauge to have something to stand out defensively. (Clemency idea is pretty interesting, as I like its niche case uses but overall I'd like to see it be brought up a bit so its used more in serious content, not just emergencies).

To me I don't dislike the PLD rework, but at the same time it's more like I feel like PLD could be so much better, I feel like it has similar problems as Dark knight in my opinion while it's not weak/bad (though PLD isn't meta in terms of dps currently but could be boosted slightly more), I just think the design of both feels a bit lacking and messy, where I find DRK too heavily focuses on OGCD's (I think gunbreaker generally feels way more rewarding then how DRK handles OGCDS) and not an actual rotation, they're good defensively but also have really weird weaknesses like dark mind being super strong but magic only? TBN being neat but really punishing instead of rewarding Job feels like it could do with a redesign personally, PLD has more problems with a lot of odd choices in how it's using atonement spam a lot, how it buffs its magic with fof and req, how goring blade just doesn't fit, a lot of its abilities are a bit more niche, how oath gauge just feels weird and tacked on the job.

Edit: Also magic healing, I feel like should be removed, give a small amount to atonement and give then we could have a way of using clemency for personal sustain or targetable sustain to make up for big amount of potency loss, I personally don't think we need that much self healing tied to Burst really, it's still wasting around 2000 potency of healing in your burst if you don't make use of it and another 1200 only really useful if you time in correctly when you're taking damage, I rather that sustain go somewhere else in your kit.

[Shurrikhan]

I don't know about a full revert on goring blade (if thats what you mean) but a soft revert into making it a seperate combo action for PLD, is something I would really want, mind you i wouldn't really mind a full revert over just pressing it once per minute, personally I don't even think it would have been that hard to make goring blade somewhat interesting, I'd like to see circle of scorn changed it just seems like a really odd weak OGCD button that takes up space right now.

I don't need have to go back to exactly what it was, but just as single extra button that roughly doubles our physical combo count (depending on how one considers Atonement, as part of RA combo or no) with time enough to be used every 3 combos, preferably as a DoT (because a buff combo is already more interesting to me than a fixed CD combo, since it has at least a couple extra opportunities there to optimize it, and a DoT combo is more interesting still than a buff combo because it will have a span of enemies over which it can be repeated).

(Ideally, I'd want it to be competitive with dropping RA-Atonement combo completely across 3 targets. So, a tiny bit more potency relative to the AoE combo, now including Holy Circle, at 3 targets. But it really doesn't matter that much so long as it isn't just wonkily out there as a disjointed 60s GCD a la Sonic Break.)

To me I don't dislike the PLD rework, but at the same time it's more like I feel like PLD could be so much better...

Edit: Also magic healing, I feel like should be removed, give a small amount to atonement and give then we could have a way of using clemency for personal sustain or targetable sustain to make up for big amount of potency loss, I personally don't think we need that much self healing tied to Burst really, it's still wasting around 2000 potency of healing in your burst if you don't make use of it and another 1200 only really useful if you time in correctly when you're taking damage, I rather that sustain go somewhere else in your kit.

My thoughts exactly.

[Lyth]

Let's keep this simple. We're talking about tanks, so you can take the term 'non-buffer' as implicit.

Let's say that we have two tank players with identical dps(t) curves prior to raid buffs. We already agree that they both have the same rDPS regardless of team composition, and the proof of this is trivial from the formula itself. Let's say that I come along with Arcane Circle and I apply it with the same timing to each of these curves. I get the same personal benefit from each of these players being on my team, which is the quantity that I'm actually interested in as a buff provider. In fact, you can do this with any buff, be it single target or raidwide, and always get the same result. That's really what we're talking about with dps parity on tanks.

Their aDPS could be anything, because that depends on the party's composition. And the aDPS benefit of having a BRD present doesn't even correlate with two minute burst.

[Shurrikhan]

Let's say that we have two tank players with identical dps(t) curves prior to raid buffs. We already agree that they both have the same rDPS regardless of team composition, and the proof of this is trivial from the formula itself.

Again, though, rDPS parity =/= same damage curves. You cannot simply look at rDPS parity and say two jobs would therefore perform identically under the same raid buffs.

Let's say that I come along with Arcane Circle and I apply it with the same timing to each of these curves. I get the same personal benefit from each of these players being on my team, which is the quantity that I'm actually interested in as a buff provider.

But you don't, because they don't have the same damage curves relevant to an average coverage of raid buffs; else they'd have the same ratio of aDPS to rDPS. Your hypothetical doesn't exist except between two of the same job. That was the whole point of these changes.

I'm not sure why you're still trying to pass off DRK's massive aDPS lead as a non-advantage on the mere basis that it's rDPS isn't that high. To look only at rDPS is specifically to hide its group contribution behind the buffers -- to purposely leave out ~5% of its contribution (if one were to split credit evenly between buffer and exploiter).

Their aDPS could be anything, because that depends on the party's composition.

Tank 1's Composition: The average of ~100,000 parses, with no significant skew in composition based on job selection.
Tank 2's Composition: The average of ~100,000 parses, with no significant skew in composition based on job selection.

They are, for all intents and purposes, the same composition.

[Lyth]

If two tanks have the same dps(t) curves, they have the same average rDPS. You obviously cannot assume the reverse, but that's not the point here. This is also a composition independent property for tanks, because rDPS = nDPS for them.

As a player who actually supplies raid buffs, if you have two tanks with the same dps(t) curves, they're also going to provide me with exact the same benefit. They both burst with the same intensity at the same time. I can take any buff application window buff(t) and reap numerically identical rDPS benefits from both tanks. This is the actual quantity of interest.

In short, if two tanks have the same dps(t) profiles, not only do they provide buff providers like myself with identical rDPS gains, but their own rDPS values will be identical. So no, improving a job's alignment with buffs doesn't have to come at the expense of rDPS parity.

[Shurrikhan]

If two tanks have the same dps(t) curves, they have the same average rDPS. You obviously cannot assume the reverse, but that's not the point here.

It damn well should be the point as long as you're still pointing at rDPS and going "rDPS parity? Then I guess they contribute equally." You keep pointing at similar average rDPS and trying to infer equivalent damage profiles from it. It doesn't mean that. At all.

If they have the same rDPS in the same fight length, they same personal damage dealt within the same length of time, but that says nothing for when, precisely, they dealt damage, nor how much of that would therefore fall under raid buffs.

if you have two tanks with the same dps(t) curves

Why do you keep shifting this to a hypothetical that is far from reality? Even GNB and DRK have rather distant dps(t) curves.

So no, improving a job's alignment with buffs doesn't have to come at the expense of rDPS parity.

If two jobs have different dps(t) curves that cause them to benefit differently from raid buffs, they cannot simultaneously have parity in settings with raid buffs (as noted by average aDPS) and in settings without raid buffs (as noted by rDPS).

Which brings us back to the point long since already established: If you want PLD to have parity in its actual, total contribution in 8-mans (as noted by aDPS) without having changed its damage profile, then it needs to have excessive rDPS.

Personally, I think that'd have been fine, as we don't have any meaningful 4-man content anyways, but perhaps they're future-proofing for later variations of Criterion Dungeons or the like.

There will always be some differences in jobs' ratios between their rDPS and aDPS so long as each job has a different profile/dynamics/curve to its damage, but you can shrink the most egregious examples to future-proof for balance across multiple settings (e.g., both light and full parties).

[Lyth]

?????

This is such a bizarre post.

I specifically told you that two tank jobs with the same dps(t) curve have the same rDPS by definition, but not necessarily the reverse. And yet your reply is 'Because you want rDPS parity, you think that this implies identical dps(t) curves.' What are you even on about? Perhaps you should actually take the time to read what you're quoting.

You then proceed to argue that two jobs couldn't possibly be designed the same burst profiles, which is even more bizarre, given that it's at the center of this discussion. How else do you expect two jobs to offer equivalent contributions under buffs without changing their burst profiles to match? And then you proceed to claim that PLD should have an rDPS advantage over other tanks because of this, which actually flies in the face of job balance in the first place. No, we don't want to return to Stormblood era PLD dominance, thank you very much.

I am a buff provider. I'm the type of person who should care most about this 'hidden rDPS effect', much moreso than the people demanding buffs in compensation. Because when you do less damage under buffs, it directly affects my gameplay. You do realize that you can specifically analyze how much damage under a buff can be attributed to individual players, right? Arcane Circle might account for about 500-600 dps over the course of 6-7 minutes in P8S part 1. Have you seen how much of that Arcane Circle damage actually comes from an individual tank in a good group? 75-100 dps. Equivalent percentile PLD and GNB actually have identical numbers on this, with DRK being at most about 20 dps higher. The differences are even smaller on Mug. Do you really think that I'm going to push for a DRK over a PLD over a 20 dps difference that could arise just as easily if someone sneezes mid-pull, and that I can compensate for myself by working harder?

And if it's such a big deal, then just improve PLD's burst profile. That's a much better decision than giving it a flat out rDPS advantage over everyone else, when I've already shown you how these two concepts can co-exist. Don't be greedy.