FFXIV Job Design Feedback

[ty_taurus]

For the record, I've taken this approach currently. I'm not finished with setting things up yet so it's not official, but a sneak peak at what I'm thinking...

[Aravell]

For the record, I've taken this approach currently. I'm not finished with setting things up yet so it's not official, but a sneak peak at what I'm thinking...

As one the people who play every job to try and get good at them, there's really no option here that would fit for me. Should people like me answer yes to every "Do you currently consider yourself a(n) X player?" question? Would that cause problems with the data in any way?

[ty_taurus]

As one the people who play every job to try and get good at them, there's really no option here that would fit for me. Should people like me answer yes to every "Do you currently consider yourself a(n) X player?" question? Would that cause problems with the data in any way?

I haven't finished or started collecting anything, so there's room to make adjustments if you think 'one who plays all jobs' doesn't have a strong response here. The first question is not "Do you consider yourself an x job main" with "main" being the key word I was avoiding. In my mind, I imagine anyone who plays the job regularly might consider themselves "an x job player" as I phrased it. But I say this as someone who does not play every job actively. There's a few that I would say Yes to and the rest I'd say No to. Do you think you'd feel uncomfortable answering "Yes" to the first question? What about option 4 in the second question? Do you have any thoughts on what might be better?

[Aravell]

I haven't finished or started collecting anything, so there's room to make adjustments if you think 'one who plays all jobs' doesn't have a strong response here. The first question is not "Do you consider yourself an x job main" with "main" being the key word I was avoiding. In my mind, I imagine anyone who plays the job regularly might consider themselves "an x job player" as I phrased it. But I say this as someone who does not play every job actively. There's a few that I would say Yes to and the rest I'd say No to. Do you think you'd feel uncomfortable answering "Yes" to the first question? What about option 4 in the second question? Do you have any thoughts on what might be better?

I would answer Yes to the first question on every job if it doesn't affect the data badly. As for the 4th option in the 2nd question, it doesn't seem a good fit, I don't just like seeing changes to every job, I like trying them out and getting good at them. Maybe adding another option to the 2nd question could work, something like "I play this job sometimes and like to keep up with changes".

[ty_taurus]

I would answer Yes to the first question on every job if it doesn't affect the data badly. As for the 4th option in the 2nd question, it doesn't seem a good fit, I don't just like seeing changes to every job, I like trying them out and getting good at them. Maybe adding another option to the 2nd question could work, something like "I play this job sometimes and like to keep up with changes".

I don't really think it would be bad to select "Yes." The poll I'm planning is really just about identifying what you want to see from the job actions trailer and media tour for Dawntrail. So in my mind, the jobs you'd fill out the form for are the ones where you feel like you understand enough about the job to have an opinion on what you think the job does or doesn't need. Or you're someone who does play a job a lot but don't feel like there's anything specific that it needs and are thus not sure what you really want to see it get, which there is an option for "Unsure" on what you want to see.

Basically, I imagine if someone doesn't really know a lot about a job to really have any sort of expectations on what new changes it will see in the next expansion, they probably wouldn't fill out the poll for that job. But someone who's maybe interested in the general balance of their role, or who used to play a job but no longer does, may still have certain expectations they're looking for.

[Renathras]

...

Nice. I think that is not a bad way to go about it.

...

For my part, it's because I'd like to see the data as All, Players, Non-Players. That is, able to tab through each result to see what the differences are.

Suppose, for example, BLM had a 5.0 overall. But breaking it out, you might see it has a 9.0 among BLM players and a 1.0 among non-players. All of them would be counted in the "All" category, and all their comments would be recorded, so no one is being excluded. But you could also look deeper to see if the Job is "overall meh" or "just very polarizing", and who likes it more and less and by how much. That's very useful information.

It also would help a LITTLE bit with the people vote-bombing Jobs they dislike to make them look bad, or making some overall statement about their dissatisfaction with certain playstyles.

Why would being able to break out the data this way be bad?

And, again, I just don't want a repeat of the SMN rework situation where a lot of people didn't like it, but they were people who didn't play it, and it was changed to suit other people (via SE's internal metrics), but left the people who enjoyed it homeless. I personally think that's bad and that data should be looked at as all three of aggregate, people who play it, and people who don't play it. I think it's relevant to ask the question "Is this satisfying the people who find it appealing right now or not?" and separately "Why do people who don't like it not like it?" instead of treating them as the same people and the same question.

Granted, the whole thing is bound by the honor system from the get-go - anyone could just say they main everything - but at least it MIGHT help a little to do it.

(As for the "I HATE BLM IT IS HORRIBLE"; that goes back to what I've pointed out before that the survey had a selection bias towards people that don't like simple Jobs and enjoy complex ones, such that even people that don't like BLM may have given it positive marks, and SMN low ones. The poll results themselves somewhat support that view that the overall sample was biased, as you can see DNC, despite also being a very simple Job, got very very high marks in a very contrary way. But that's neither here nor there for this.)

Also: Perhaps you should assume a bit less about me? I don't mind forgiving you, but it seems to happen a lot that you assume things that I didn't say and didn't imply were said and implied. If you'd stop doing that, that would be lovely, yes.

EDIT:

Crap, sorry for the edit, just wanted to say:

I happen to like option 4. Even Jobs I don't play I like seeing what the changes are. So it very much seems like an option I'd pick for all the Jobs I don't play that I'm not interested in. Definitely a good option to keep.

[Kaliesto]

I think the ideas and skills presented in JOB PVP and especially with limit breaks should be transferred over to the PVE version of our Jobs.

Having that DRG Jumping LB as a lvl2 LB would be so awesome to have for PVE.

[ty_taurus]

The general feel of PVP job design is excellent, but it doesn't necessarily transfer well to PVE. For example, DRG's limit break might seem really cool to have and not inherently game breaking, but SGE's is a party-wide Hallowed Ground unless the enemy is touching the field, in which case it's just Shadow Flare.

[AnotherPerson]

The general feel of PVP job design is excellent, but it doesn't necessarily transfer well to PVE. For example, DRG's limit break might seem really cool to have and not inherently game breaking, but SGE's is a party-wide Hallowed Ground unless the enemy is touching the field, in which case it's just Shadow Flare.

DRG LB in PvP basically makes them immune to be targeted, so it's pretty much an invuln in itself. Personally, I'd say it does transfer over well. The strong highlight of this skill also makes it weak in other areas - namely the inability to weave abilities or use other attacks while executing DRG LB. Give jobs unique mechanics and unique abilities to truly make it feel like a different class / fantasy and a RPG. Remove too much unique skills and you get what the current problem with healers is like - looks nice but plays nearly identical to each other, everyone only chasing rDPS and nothing else because the game starts to feel like it's only meant to be played like a parser.

[Denji]

i think pali needs a slight strength boost and a small defensive nerf or needs to have something that allows them to generate a tiny bit more threat than the rest of us tanks.

i'm a tank main; i play all the tanks and the amount of times i see palis absolutely struggle to keep pull because every other tank can just very casually (and without really being perfect at their rotation) pull off them without even trying. they already are the tank that can survive the most (as much as people like to say war is, war can just recover their health once every little while) and their job bar enables them to have an instant-on, unlimited defense boost in addition to unlimited stunning and like two dots.

they need a bit of beef but they need a slight nerf to how many hits they can take to accommodate. that or their abilities need to naturally generate like 1-2% more threat than the other tanks and then that way you don't have to nerf them to accommodate.

either way it's way too easy to pull off a pali without even trying and i always feel bad watching them sweat and work so hard to keep enmity.