Inevitable Job Simplifications?

[Connor]

I think people here have different definitions on what they mean when they say a job has 'depth', so really, the question I have is, what counts as 'depth'? What quantifies one job having more 'depth' than another?

There is also the flexibility, is that separate to 'depth' or is it a component of 'depth'?

Once this baseline has been established, a proper discussion can be had comparing different jobs because, at the moment, it is going nowhere.

It’s been going nowhere for the past 6 years lol. Yet people still ask for same things they asked for during previous expansions and never got (like BLM white mage, or wanting Scholar to become the Poison God of Plagues and Pestilence, remove all healing gcds and replace with oGCD, ‘skill ceilings’ that scale infinitely, etc ).

Also why is it so bad to like the new Summoner? It’s easy sure but in case people haven’t noticed that’s kind of the aim-of-the-game when it comes to ffxiv designs. Seems a little unfair to say ‘if you like new Summoner you’re just a brainless piece of shit who doesn’t deserve to play this game’. What about people who liked both?

[Mikey_R]

Also why is it so bad to like the new Summoner? It’s easy sure but in case people haven’t noticed that’s kind of the aim-of-the-game when it comes to ffxiv designs. Seems a little unfair to say ‘if you like new Summoner you’re just a brainless piece of shit who doesn’t deserve to play this game’. What about people who liked both?

Coincidentally, this is Renathras's whole point. People don't necessarily hate new summoner for what it is, but for what it took away. Meaning, if the game had both new AND old summoner, nooone would be complaining about new summoner.

[tearagion]

People don't necessarily hate new summoner for what it is, but for what it took away.

Nah I hate it for what it is too. When RDM/RPR run absolute circles around you in nuance and flexibility, and tanks+ast have more involved rotations, maybe the DPS job in question is poorly designed. What it took away is what makes me upset in addition to hating the job.

[IDontPetLalas]

Nah I hate it for what it is too. When RDM/RPR run absolute circles around you in nuance and flexibility, and tanks+ast have more involved rotations, maybe the DPS job in question is poorly designed. What it took away is what makes me upset in addition to hating the job.

I wouldn't say that AST is more involved rotations than the current summoner. You may be thinking of the opener, but after that? No, not at all. With tanks, maybe you could make a case that they're comparable.

[tearagion]

I wouldn't say that AST is more involved rotations than the current summoner. You may be thinking of the opener, but after that? No, not at all. With tanks, maybe you could make a case that they're comparable.

I chose the word involved for a specific reason, cards alone require more consideration than anything in SMN's kit.

[Renathras]

It’s been going nowhere for the past 6 years lol. Yet people still ask for same things they asked for during previous expansions and never got (like BLM white mage, or wanting Scholar to become the Poison God of Plagues and Pestilence, remove all healing gcds and replace with oGCD, ‘skill ceilings’ that scale infinitely, etc ).

Also why is it so bad to like the new Summoner? It’s easy sure but in case people haven’t noticed that’s kind of the aim-of-the-game when it comes to ffxiv designs. Seems a little unfair to say ‘if you like new Summoner you’re just a brainless piece of shit who doesn’t deserve to play this game’. What about people who liked both?

EXACTLY! Hit the nail RIGHT on the head.

I actually DID like Old SMN and wish it was still in the game (it's why I mention Green Mage so much). It was clunky and a Frankenstein monster mess, but it worked and was kind of fun with the frankly ridiculous mobility, damage, and party utility it brought to the table.

I think people here have different definitions on what they mean when they say a job has 'depth', so really, the question I have is, what counts as 'depth'? What quantifies one job having more 'depth' than another?

There is also the flexibility, is that separate to 'depth' or is it a component of 'depth'?

Agreed. But it's also not just that.

We're now discussing whether or not a Job is "fine". "fine" doesn't actually require depth, it only requires the Job to be functional, and is an even lower bar than depth to meet. And what even IS depth and complexity? Nebulous terms that are easy to throw out, but difficult to define, making a kind of "kitchen sink" defense for one's position. It's impossible to counter a point that isn't defined...other than pointing out it isn't defined and so has no meaning in the first place.

Ignorance, hyperbole, and "misrepresentations"

1) Yes, you were. If you were coming up on a DWT and hadn't needed to use your Egi-Assaults for movement, you were forced to blow them now - AND if you were at 4 stacks of Further Ruin, to blow 1 of those first before each Egi-Assault to prevent overcapping on Further Ruin. You needed to use them since they were DPS gains and to get them ticking again while also refreshing to 4 stacks before DWT so that when you rolled into Bahamut you had 4 ready to go but didn't overcap on either Further Ruin (by using Egi-Assaults above 4 stacks) or on Egi-Assaults (by having them sit off CD). I'm not sure you played Old SMN, or if you did, that you remember it well/knew what you were doing if you genuinely believe this. Further, you HAD to go into DWT/FBT on strict timings. "Oh, there's a heavy movement phase in 25 seconds but I'm at the 1 min mark...guess I'm using FBT and all my instants right now anyway!" You absolutely had to use your instants during non-movement periods ALL THE TIME on Old SMN. And there was nothing wrong with that then, either. If the fight didn't demand you use them all for movement, it didn't. If your free movement DWT/FBT came up during low movement phases, well, they did and you had to use them. End of story.

2) Horse hockey. Not only are you dodging because you know your argument is wrong and you CAN'T defend it, now you're lying. I've not said New SMN is some well of depth. I've said New SMN is FINE. I've also said it has less depth and optimization (skill ceiling) than Old SMN. Pretty much everything I've said is either objectively true or is reasonably true. You won't engage on the points because you have no legs to stand on.

3) See 2. Also: This is an ad hominem fallacy.

4) What's clear is you didn't play or didn't know Old SMN at all: See (1). I gave actual EXAMPLES of how Old SMN works - something you've yet to do. I actually understood the Job, and how to maximize what it could pull out as well as the complete rotation cycle, something you've yet to demonstrate any knowledge of. And as I said, Old SMN was a great Job in terms of having a high level of flexibility. A position you hold, so telling me I'm wrong on the one thing I'm agreeing with you on seems very very odd. I'm not comparing their complexity - I've already said Old SMN was more complex - I'm comparing their functionality - an argument you're studiously avoiding because it doesn't fit your narrative. You keep trying to say depth and complexity, two things I haven't contested New SMN has far less of. FAR LESS of, not ZERO. It objectively has greater than zero, so you insisting it doesn't is you denying factual reality. It doesn't have as much as you want, and again, that's fine for you to say. It's fine for you to want more. But stop lying about it.

5) See (4)

6) Stop lying. New SMN is alright. It's not what you want. Just say this:

"New SMN is not what I want."

That's what you should be saying right now. Is that soooooo hard?

.

1) Because it "just works" is what makes it fine, actually. Depth is not required for a Job to be fine. WAR has almost no depth, too, but is fine.

2) Wrong. Even the Balance has noted there are optimizations for the Job. There just aren't many. But you missed the point - it doesn't require theorycrafters just to figure out what it should be doing (base rotation). I didn't mention the words optimize or "improve the rotation".

3) SMN doesn't play at all like BLU, rofl! If it did, you wouldn't be complaining about it... Of all the whoppers you've said so far, that's probably the worst. Final Fantasy games RARELY have "summons on the field". FF3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, Tactics, 9, 15 all had Summons that appeared, fired off a huge attack, and then left. That's actually the norm for how Summons work in the series. The Demi-type summons that come in and stick around for a short time fighting alongside the Summoner, like FF 12, 13, and arguably 10, though 10 could be the one example oh persistent ones since they would stay around until KOed. "summons on field" is actually the single most uncommon form of Summons in all of Final Fantasy lore and history.

Again, all you're spouting off is hyperbole, added with a health dose of lying - both about what I'm arguing (I'm not arguing that New SMN is a bastion of complexity and depth, and never have; I've said it has more than ZERO, which is true, and have said it has less than Old SMN did, which is also true) and about your knowledge. That level of deception is ill suited to having a text argument where the other person can just point to the very words you quoted to show you're lying.

You need to lay off they hyperbole and sweeping false statements. Again, just say this:

"New SMN is not what I want."

That's a true statement, and I'll fault no one for saying it.

...

Assuming you're asking in good faith:

1) My idea of "good/well designed" is if a Job isn't clunky and counterintuitive (Old PLD was clunky and counterintuitive, such as needing to drop Atonements), is understandable to general player bases (a more complex Job can still be well designed, but will be more niche, and it requires a lot to make sure the complexity is good and not clunk), works well within the combat system (e.g. doesn't work like a stationary turret in a game where encounters require lots of movement, or if it does, has tools to account for this), can complete the requirements of the role (agro and surviving hits, healing, and damage dealing, for Tanks/Healers/DPSers, respectively). The abilities should be internally consistent and flow between each other smoothly (no weird stutter step "rotations" or designed/required clipping and so on), and ideally the abilities should have interactions with each other within the kit. OPTIONALLY but generally a good idea, the abilities fit within the class lore and fantasy.

New SMN has the least clunk of just about any Job in the game, isn't at all counterintuitive, is easily understandable, works extremely well within the combat system (having lots of movement, a combat raise, a party buff, and fitting the current 2 min meta system), has satisfactory damage output for the mandatory Caster spot, the abilities make sense within the kit, the GCD system flows smoothly and interlocks perfectly in a full 2 Demi complete cycle, and Gemshine/Astral flow as well as the Primal refreshes on Demi use, which also smoothly slot in the oGCD use of the Aetherflow/Energy Drain system and Enkindle/Astral Flow under Bahamut/Phoenix. It also nails the class fantasy, having both huge Summons that come in and deliver strong attacks, semi-persistent summons that come and fight with you for a short amount of time, and a permanent pet. The only issues at all are that Carby needs SOMETHING else it can do (ideally, it should be separated from the Primal/Demi effects so it's always there) and that the Aetherflow system doesn't fit Summoner's class fantasy and seems entirely vestigial - but since removing it would just make SMN even less, it can stick around for now without bothering me too much, and it's hardly the most jarring "this doesn't make sense on this Job" thing in the game.

Thus New SMN meets the requirements of what makes a job good/well designed, per my perspective.

2) I didn't say it was hard. It wasn't understandable to most people. There was a LOT of nuance. The reason players - and sometimes Devs - were okay with SMN doing more top end damage than BLM despite also having party buffs and a combat Raise...was because it was rare to find anyone who COULD DO IT. Old SMN had arguably the highest skill ceiling in the game of any Job in ShB, and a higher one than BLM did. Proper use of Tri-Disaster, proper stocking of Ruin 4s before Bahamut, BEFORE the ShB changes, blowing even non-damaging oGCDs (like Virus) during Bahamut to maximize Wyrmwave casts, not to mention the danger of ghosting Egi-Assaults at high ping (and when they were oGCDs before made on the GCD in, what, 5.3 or so?) - it was probably the hardest Job in the game. Anyone cay say a Job "isn't/wasn't hard" - "BLM 'isn't hard', you just cast a few fire spells then a few ice spells, right?" - I don't know why people like making that "flex" so often. It was very likely the single hardest Job in the game at the time, it was definitely the hardest Caster. It was also one of the most punishing Jobs for having a KO since you lost all your resources and were completely disjointed from the rest of the party in terms of party buffs and burst resources. Though to be fair...that was even worse in SB, so there's that.

I didn't say "reading tooltips" was an "insurmountable barrier to entry". I'm saying you can read New SMN's tooltips and understand more or less how to play the Job optimally. Old SMN, you could read your tooltips and figure out how to play the Job...at about 50-60% capacity. Further, this doesn't discount my point:

New SMN is fine in this respect, too.

3) You can, but barely. It's still some of the least jank of any Job in the game, and it's not easy to do. I don't think I've ghosted any of them yet. Use them after the 1st and then 2nd Astral Impulse (Ruin III) and it isn't an issue. You want to contrast that to Old SMN's ghosting issues? Really?

3b)The flexibility it offers isn't "a joke". Again, if you stop using ridiculous hyperbole, I'll stop contesting you on it. It's not god tier, but it's still real flexibility, which makes it not "a joke".

3c) "3-4 casts/minute"? Wut? o.O

Do you mean 3-4 less than BLM or RDM? Do you mean less APM? Do you mean hotbar buttons that you press? At minimum, counting Gemshine, Astral Flow, DWT/FBT, Enkindle and Ruin 3 all as single buttons (despite them pulling double duty and Gemshine, Astral Flow, and Ruin 3 all taking on different effects that alter their use and parameters such as cast time and GCD/oGCD function), SMNs still use 11 buttons per minute, 12 if we count Searing Light every 2 mins. AGAIN: Hyperbole. Stop the hyperbole if you want a rational and reasonable discussion.

3c) HOW does it "no longer fit with its own lore"? What part of its lore is it violating? Like...be specific. They bind and summon Primals to smite their foes. They gather the residual Aether of Primals to do this. If you mean summing Louis against his will, Old SMN was already doing that. What is the LORE that it is not fitting?

3d) What are you talking about? Granted, you are probably using a SUPER narrow definition of "meaningful" as an adjective for development - probably because even you realize that the Job is quite open to additional "development" with no qualifiers. But even with such a qualifier, New SMN actually has more room for meaningful development than Old SMN did. Old SMN had basically forced the Devs' backs against a wall since it was the ARR SMN with various disparate pieces grafted on that didn't fit the original theme. Original SMN lore didn't support the idea of corrupted "Dreadwyrm" Aether or Deathflare, either. And there was no where logical for them to go.

Dev meeting on expanding ShB SMN into EW: "So...what do we add? Another DoT? Another Demi?" "We can add Alexander!" "Do we do it with another trance?" "Nah, that's too much like Phoenix." "Okay, we'll make it a stand alone summon that fights beside you but isn't part of a Trance." "No, that's what Bahamut does." "Well, we could make it different from Bahamut where it attacks based on the number of buttons you use, including oGCDs?" "No, we USED to have Bahamut do that, remember? It sucked. That's why we changed it." "Okay...well, I guess we can just give Egi-Assaults another charge each?" "And what, raise the cap on Further Ruin? Then people will just stock up 20 Ruin 4s and spend minutes of encounters spamming it, trivializing them." "Well...we could split Phoenix off of FBT and make FBT like DWT?" "Dude...no. We don't need more copypastes." "Well...maybe we could make you turn into Bahamut to do a big attack?" "That's the Limit Break already." "OOh, right. Okay, yeah, I got nothin'."

There was nothing to add. Old SMN was a Frankenstein of disparate and relatively incompatible things that somehow, against all odds, worked, but barely. Any tinkering with it would cause the whole house of cards to fall, and there was no meaningful room for growth or meaningful development for Old SMN. The irony here is that New SMN both has easy paths of growth to implement and logical within its own system:

Next expansion - add 3 more Primals after Phoenix, Leviathan, Ramuh, and Shiva. This is so easy of a choice it practically writes itself. I even pitched once before an idea for what all three would do I made up on the spot that were distinct from both each other and the three existing ones. It's that easy.

After that - add a 3rd Demi, probably Alexander. Could add in 3 more Primals at this point, but don't have to. If they do, Moogle Mog, Ravana, and Bismark would be my choices. "What about Odin or the Waring Triad?!"

...after THAT, Odin and the Warring Triad. Odin for the Demi would be pretty boss, be like FF13 with a mounted Odin fighting beside you. They could even do a fun little quirk and have him have your name as his subtitle (nodding to the whole killing blow thing from the FATE) and the Triad could be the three Primals for this set. OR, could do a "Sisters" thing and have the Triad be the Demi itself, but I'm not sure how that'd work.

After THAT, obviously the Four Lords. Genbu could work like FFTactics Golem using an AOE party stoneshield in place of Phoenix's Enkindle or Everlasting flight, then you go through the trio of Primals after that.

And at this point, we're talking 12.0, and I've only gone up through SB.

There are PLENTY of options for growth, is the point. The only trick is making them feel different enough from each other, but that's a problem every Job is going to face 4 expansions from now, if not earlier (if not ALREADY). New SMN is actually set up for growth since the system is modular. Expansions can take turns adding a new Primal trio, new Demi, or even both. The core rotation is hyper plug-and-play modular, which makes New SMN possibly the best set up Job in the game for future growth and additions at the moment.

Think about it, what are you going to add to GNB next expansion? A 4th powder gauge and another 2 gauge spender? What are you going to add to RDM, an upgraded visual for your base spells of Jolt 3 and Verfire/aero 3, and a yet another press of the Jolt button at the end of your combo after Resolution? What are you going to add to NIN? WHM? MCH?

There's not really a logical path of expansion for a lot of Jobs in 7.0 right now, which has me thinking 7.0 or 8.0, at some point there's going to be a huge shakeup because there's not a lot of room for a lot of Jobs to keep growing. New SMN, on the other hand, had a modular system that was very likely set up to make expansion easy.

Far from "reeks of being a rush job", it appears to be thoughtfully designed specifically to prevent it being painted into a corner again.

4) "Play like a level cap job then"; that's pretty subjective. Why should a level capped 90 Job NOT play like a level capped 50 Job? What even IS that? That's a horrifically nebulous, undefined term. What makes a "level capped job"? Is it number of abilities? APM? How is that DEFINED? Why is a level 50 ARR endgame rotation now insufficient for the game when it was fine at the time? Many of the same people are playing the game now as did then and enjoyed it then. If a Job plays equivalent to an ARR level 50 Job (or more), it's fine.

5) You may make such an argument - but such an argument is your opinion/subjective, not an objective statement of fact. There are arguments that there should be at least one Job of each role that is super accessible with low depth (again, New SMN has depth above zero) and that such a thing is good for an MMO. WoW Hunters and Paladins were a meme for years, but it were also the most played classes and probably responsible for a lot of "non-gamer friends" joining the community and growing it over time (since people tend to play longer if they have friends to play with, and people sometimes intimidated by complex classes getting their feet wet with simpler ones stick with the game longer, sometimes swapping to a more complex one later and sometimes sticking with the simple ones). One could also make an argument that having such Jobs in the game is actually good for it - provided that it's at least one per role but not ALL Jobs in a given role. At present, this metric is met by WAR (arguably PLD), WHM, and SMN. And there's an equally valid argument to your own that this is a good thing.

6) "I don’t care if there’s a dissenting view as long as it has logically understandable and coherent arguments." - Good, because mine have been.

6b) "popularity" in the sense of "widely played and used" is absolutely an argument for a Job having a place and being fine. It's NOT an argument for depth or complexity - as you say, people often want to play what is easy - but that's also kind of a point against your position that Jobs should be hard. If players actively avoid hard and complex Jobs, that means people don't WANT them. Or, rather, that the majority doesn't want them. THIS DOES NOT MEAN that hard/complex Jobs shouldn't exist. But it is absolutely an argument for Jobs like New SMN to be in the game.

7) They aren't "playing things badly". They're playing it well. The Job is designed to be easy to pick up and be played well. Your argument is that people should be forced to play things COMPLEXLY, and that's a different argument AND a subjective one that there are lots of arguments against. A one word argument against it might be "Wildstar"...though there's a lot of nuance there. Another would be "BLM".

Again: You want SMN to be complex because that's what you prefer. That doesn't make New SMN a bad Job. It makes it a Job you don't enjoy.

But more than that, wanting all Jobs to have a higher level of complexity may not be good for the game, and has a certain wiff of gatekeeping to it. Some Jobs being that way is fine - no one's arguing for BLM to be removed from the game, for example - but it doesn't mean a Job not being so is bad or broken or not fine.

Here's the way you should say it:

"New SMN is fine. I (meaning you) don't enjoy New SMN, though, and wish New SMN was more complex."

That's a valid position for you to hold. I won't fault you for holding it. I only am contesting the points you're wrong about. Specifically, when you state your subjective opinion as objective and agreed upon (or that everyone should agree upon) fact.

It should go without saying that this discussion about what defines a job as 'deep' or 'has depth' is most likely going to be wholly subjective as noone is going to agree 100% with what criteria should be used to give a job their measure of 'depth', which is why you cannot take one person's word on their view on how a job is.

This is also a really important point, and one I'm making, too: People are presenting their subjective opinion as an objective fact that everyone (more or less) agrees with or should agree with.

The problem is, subjective opinions are not facts. They are not universally accepted. Not everyone feels the same way.

Feel IS important - fun is entirely subjective - but it's not going to be the same to everyone. Some people ONLY have fun on BLM. Others ONLY have fun on SMN. Some few have fun on both. So while discussing what one finds fun is valid and important, it's also important to remember that one man's fun may be another's misery, which is why I'm a huge fan of the idea of Job diversity within roles. That way everyone can find one they enjoy playing in a given role.

I wouldn't say that AST is more involved rotations than the current summoner. You may be thinking of the opener, but after that? No, not at all. With tanks, maybe you could make a case that they're comparable.

It probably would defend on how one defines rotation in that sense. AST is an odd choice, but depends largely on if you count Arcana use (super high APM in burst phases before even considering target swapping) or their actual GCD rotation (which is literally only two buttons, one pressed only once every 30 seconds). AST's complexity derives from the oGCD juggling, not the GCD rotation, which...isn't really comparable to any other Job, come to think of it.

WHM is a better reference point because its standard rotation is more well defined and consistent, Dia every 30 sec, 3x Solace/Rapture per minute (GCDs so part of the rotation), 1x Misery per minute (ideally in burst windows), Presence of Mind and Assize as oGCDs used on CD, and Glare filler. (That's 7 routine use buttons, btw, not including things like Divine Benison, Tetragrammaton, or Aquaveil which are all short CDs and frequently weaved into the rotation)

And while one might consider WHM to also be comparable, it's still a bit simpler than SMN, as befits it having a Healing side-game to work into its DPS rotation kadence.

In terms of number of buttons, SMN routinely uses (in a 1 min cycle, single target fight) a comparable amount to WAR. WAR uses 10, I believe (1-2-3, -4, Upheaval, Infuriate, Inner Release, Onslaught, Primal Rend, Fell Cleave), Fell Cleave pulls some double duty (like Gemshine) but is still only one button. So again, SMN is more complex than the "simple" Job of the Tank role, which is again fitting since WAR has those tanking duties to attend to (even if they're much reduced from past expansions), in raw number of buttons, anyway. In terms of interactions, they're still pretty comparable, since SMN's kit is all about interactions as Gemshine and Astral Flow effects are tied to what you're doing on the Primal side of the house.

Depending on how one sees pulling resources or moving around parts of the rotation, WAR, WHM, and SMN are comparable in general use complexity, which is fine for the "baby Tank/Healer/DPS" Jobs of the game.

Nah I hate it for what it is too. When RDM/RPR run absolute circles around you in nuance and flexibility, and tanks+ast have more involved rotations, maybe the DPS job in question is poorly designed. What it took away is what makes me upset in addition to hating the job.

And why EXACTLY is this bad?

Suppose, for the sake of argument, Old SMN was still in the game and they had added some new Job to the game - let's call it "Caller" or "Evoker" (let's go with Evoker because it doesn't sound as lame). EVK was added with exactly the rotation, visual effects, etc that New SMN has, maybe with a few name changes, maybe not, doesn't matter.

You'd still have Old SMN in the game with some random new thing tacked on somewhere to the kit. We can even pretend that it works well and didn't cause the whole thing to collapse in on itself.

What SPECIFICALLY would then be your problem with Evoker being in the game?

.

Anyway, I'm with Connoor and Mikey, and am just saying New SMN is fine as a Job in the game, objectively (insomuch as it is functional). It's not perfect (nothing is), and it's not complex or supremely deep (few things are), but that doesn't mean it's not a good Job and lots of people are having fun with it, which justifies it having a place in the game as it is.

[tearagion]

In terms of number of buttons, SMN routinely uses (in a 1 min cycle, single target fight) a comparable amount to WAR. WAR uses 10, I believe (1-2-3, -4, Upheaval, Infuriate, Inner Release, Onslaught, Primal Rend, Fell Cleave), Fell Cleave pulls some double duty (like Gemshine) but is still only one button. So again, SMN is more complex than the "simple" Job of the Tank role, which is again fitting since WAR has those tanking duties to attend to (even if they're much reduced from past expansions), in raw number of buttons, anyway. In terms of interactions, they're still pretty comparable, since SMN's kit is all about interactions as Gemshine and Astral Flow effects are tied to what you're doing on the Primal side of the house.

WAR has to be in melee range for every GCD except Fell Cleave to do its peak damage, SMN has to be in melee for 1 GCD and has to cast for 3-4 GCDs. Slipstream saturation I would equate to deciding whether it's worth it to use an Onslaught outside of buffs. WAR also has a self-buff to maintain. Other than these factors they both press the buttons that light up, and the other ones on CD. Ergo, WAR is more involved than SMN even before you start to add defensive CDs and tank responsibilities.

Suppose, for the sake of argument, Old SMN was still in the game and they had added some new Job to the game - let's call it "Caller" or "Evoker" (let's go with Evoker because it doesn't sound as lame). EVK was added with exactly the rotation, visual effects, etc that New SMN has, maybe with a few name changes, maybe not, doesn't matter.

You'd still have Old SMN in the game with some random new thing tacked on somewhere to the kit. We can even pretend that it works well and didn't cause the whole thing to collapse in on itself.

What SPECIFICALLY would then be your problem with Evoker being in the game? That "bad players" or something would be able to competently play content?

I would still hate it, because I think it's a half-assed, shit design. Don't really need your false assumptions as to any other reasons why I might not like it.

objectively

lol

[Mikey_R]

I would still hate it, because I think it's a half-assed, shit design. Don't really need your false assumptions as to any other reasons why I might not like it.

That doesn't answer the question of WHY you hate it though. What about it makes it bad design? What about it makes it half assed?

Also, the never made an assumption on your position, mearly asked a question as to whether the statement they made was true or not.

[Mikey_R]

SAM hardcasts more often,

The only thing I want to comment on is this, Whilst SAM has more GCDs with cast times, Summoner does stand still and cast for a longer period of time overall. If SAM has 5 GCDs of casting per minute, that is 6.5 seconds of casting in total. Now, take Summoner, 2 Ruby Rites and a Ruin 3 is already at 7.1 seconds with an extra 3 seconds if you do not swiftcast Slipstream. So really, which one do you put more weight on? Total GCDs that need to cast, or the total cast time.

Paradox doesn't "just replaces a Fire/Ice when you swap elements" because BLM is not using Blizzard I to begin with, before level 90 ...

The thing is though, that was the argument of the poster who originally said it as they were just using button count and not how the buttons interact with the job. Going back to Summoner and Elemental Mastery, yes, it is just 1 button, however, it changes for different summons, an oGCD, a long cast ground DoT and then a 2 GCD melee strike with a gap closer. Baring Titan's oGCDs, the others need to have some thought put into where you use them. Do you swift cast the Slipstream or do you think you will need it for Ifrit, is the boss going to stand still long enough to get all the DoT ticks in, can I safely dash in or do I need to delay it. There are considerations in place that will affect your rotation if you just look at more than surface level.

Note, I am not arguing that Summoner is not a simple job, it is, however, just scratch away at the surface and you can see where the thought lies.

Now, separate from the quoted post, however Monk is an example of a job that takes the 'buttons to do a rotation' to the extreme, getting it's full fleet of GCD actions by level 60 (Six Sided Star really isn't used), the only things it gets are Riddle of Fire, Brotherhood and Riddle of Wind by level 72.

[Dahlinea]

1) Yes, you were. If you were coming up on a DWT and hadn't needed to use your Egi-Assaults for movement, you were forced to blow them now - AND if you were at 4 stacks of Further Ruin, to blow 1 of those first before each Egi-Assault to prevent overcapping on Further Ruin. You needed to use them since they were DPS gains and to get them ticking again while also refreshing to 4 stacks before DWT so that when you rolled into Bahamut you had 4 ready to go but didn't overcap on either Further Ruin (by using Egi-Assaults above 4 stacks) or on Egi-Assaults (by having them sit off CD). I'm not sure you played Old SMN, or if you did, that you remember it well/knew what you were doing if you genuinely believe this. Further, you HAD to go into DWT/FBT on strict timings. "Oh, there's a heavy movement phase in 25 seconds but I'm at the 1 min mark...guess I'm using FBT and all my instants right now anyway!" You absolutely had to use your instants during non-movement periods ALL THE TIME on Old SMN. And there was nothing wrong with that then, either. If the fight didn't demand you use them all for movement, it didn't. If your free movement DWT/FBT came up during low movement phases, well, they did and you had to use them. End of story.

2) Horse hockey. Not only are you dodging because you know your argument is wrong and you CAN'T defend it, now you're lying. I've not said New SMN is some well of depth. I've said New SMN is FINE. I've also said it has less depth and optimization (skill ceiling) than Old SMN. Pretty much everything I've said is either objectively true or is reasonably true. You won't engage on the points because you have no legs to stand on.

3) See 2. Also: This is an ad hominem fallacy.

4) What's clear is you didn't play or didn't know Old SMN at all: See (1). I gave actual EXAMPLES of how Old SMN works - something you've yet to do. I actually understood the Job, and how to maximize what it could pull out as well as the complete rotation cycle, something you've yet to demonstrate any knowledge of. And as I said, Old SMN was a great Job in terms of having a high level of flexibility. A position you hold, so telling me I'm wrong on the one thing I'm agreeing with you on seems very very odd. I'm not comparing their complexity - I've already said Old SMN was more complex - I'm comparing their functionality - an argument you're studiously avoiding because it doesn't fit your narrative. You keep trying to say depth and complexity, two things I haven't contested New SMN has far less of. FAR LESS of, not ZERO. It objectively has greater than zero, so you insisting it doesn't is you denying factual reality. It doesn't have as much as you want, and again, that's fine for you to say. It's fine for you to want more. But stop lying about it.

5) See (4)

6) Stop lying. New SMN is alright. It's not what you want. Just say this:

"New SMN is not what I want."

That's what you should be saying right now. Is that soooooo hard?

.

1) Because it "just works" is what makes it fine, actually. Depth is not required for a Job to be fine. WAR has almost no depth, too, but is fine.

2) Wrong. Even the Balance has noted there are optimizations for the Job. There just aren't many. But you missed the point - it doesn't require theorycrafters just to figure out what it should be doing (base rotation). I didn't mention the words optimize or "improve the rotation".

3) SMN doesn't play at all like BLU, rofl! If it did, you wouldn't be complaining about it... Of all the whoppers you've said so far, that's probably the worst. Final Fantasy games RARELY have "summons on the field". FF3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, Tactics, 9, 15 all had Summons that appeared, fired off a huge attack, and then left. That's actually the norm for how Summons work in the series. The Demi-type summons that come in and stick around for a short time fighting alongside the Summoner, like FF 12, 13, and arguably 10, though 10 could be the one example oh persistent ones since they would stay around until KOed. "summons on field" is actually the single most uncommon form of Summons in all of Final Fantasy lore and history.

Again, all you're spouting off is hyperbole, added with a health dose of lying - both about what I'm arguing (I'm not arguing that New SMN is a bastion of complexity and depth, and never have; I've said it has more than ZERO, which is true, and have said it has less than Old SMN did, which is also true) and about your knowledge. That level of deception is ill suited to having a text argument where the other person can just point to the very words you quoted to show you're lying.

You need to lay off they hyperbole and sweeping false statements. Again, just say this:

"New SMN is not what I want."

That’s my last response to you. It’s quite clear you are dead set on accepting the braindead job no matter how bad it is from a LV90 job perspective and how bad the progress in the lower levels actually is, you see, the job as whole. But let me phrase this one more time with all the letters, maybe it goes through you, although I have no hopes for it: “It’s not fine for a job at max level to play like a job that mechanically works like the same job at LV70.” You literally have one more button to press and that’s what makes it different from it’s LV70 counterpart. This is not fine at all from the perspective of a job that would progress and get more skills as you level up. Coupled with the fact that other jobs are getting streamlined too, SMN being the more dramatic case, and how you see a lot of people complaining about this tendency, this is not fine at all.
Now on to your topics:
1) End of the story for you. It’s easy to say SMN used instacasts all the time, except you forgot to say that every instacast SMN used, if you did the opener right, was done to weave an oGCD that was available. There was Energy Drain at 30 secs mark, Fester, Tri-disaster. Aside from Phoenix that was a combo of instacasts, every single instacast of old SMN was to weave something. The last two Egi-assaults before that DWT that you claim you “have to burn” was used to weave between DWT and Deathflare, which was decoupled from Summon Bahamut, to get the last 2 stacks of Further Ruin and the proceed to summon Bahamut. And even during Bahamut, these 4 insta casts were used to weave oGCDs. There were no wasted opportunities with old SMN unlike this new one, that lacks basic oGCDs and flexibility in the usage of its spells to even feel like a LV90 job.
Also, yes, SMN benefitted from holding Bahamut in certain instances. An example of this is during Fragor Maximus in the fight with Eden Prime on Savage. When Eden Prime was in one corner casting his room wide AoE you generally were in a part of the rotation where you would use DWT, and it was better to hold Bahamut for the adds than using it there because usually the raid buffs would have come from CD.



2,3 and 4) The talk was always about depth of the job and never about functionality. You decided to compare that way on own to change the subject. And on that suject, old SMN was about thinking about the fight and carefully consider your hard casts and insta casts during 70%-80% of your rotation to not incur on instances of having to move and end up losing DPS using Ruin II. Current SMN has only 3 hard casts, that becomes 2 if you Swiftcast one, and on top of that you don’t have freedom with your spells nor oGCDs to fill the gaps and the result is seeing yourself casting insta casts during down time on various occasions. There's a very clear difference functionality here where one require more awareness of the player and the other is "just use the hightlighted skill".

6) Instead, you could just admit that you like the braindead job and want it to stay that way with no depth. Because that’s what it seems to me.
So I’ll say for the last time. New SMN has no depth for a LV90 job and has problems with level progression because of that and that IS NOT ALRIGHT. Case closed.