How do you define (meaningful) choice?

[ForsakenRoe]

Why boost the damage of a gimped DPSer when you could get more value from the actual DPS jobs?

If you want six cards with unique effects, you need to segregate them. Offensive buff cards cannot share a resource system with utility cards, or the utility cards will never see the light of day unless they're made aggressively busted. Hybridizing them is just another flavor of what we have now, just with the off chance that maybe the card utility will do something.

That first part makes the assumption that every card boosts the damage of it's target in the same way, via their attacks. It doesn't have to be like that, though. For example, if a hypothetical Bole were to give 3 stacks of 'reflects damage equal to 10% of the target's max HP each time they are struck' (and the mit effect for utility/flavor), then it's not better to put on the DPS, but on the tank, since they have more max HP. Ewer could be given an effect that makes it more incentivized to use on a healer over every other class. The option would remain to prioritize using the utility creatively over the 'correct damage choice'. For example, saving a DPS with a well placed Bole would still be possible. And yes, this would cost damage in a way that current AST does not. However, unlike SB AST, which many seem to agree was good and also cool, doing so here would cost only some of the damage. If the stacks were to have no duration for example, lasting until a new card overwrote them or were all spent, then you could recoup over 50% of that 'lost damage' by just waiting for enough raidwides to hit the party to eat those stacks.

I can see why we'd want to segregate the cards into say 3 'only utility' and 3 'only damage'. But then we have the issue we do now: those utility cards potentially won't see much of the light of day outside of Savage. Then we've taken the deck from 6 down to 3

That... doesn't actually fully explain Balance fishing

I should clarify, when I say 'Balancefishing', I don't literally mean fishing for the card called 'the Balance', it's more like a phrase I was using to convey the concept of what you described: Get Expand, then fish for the best damage card to spread with that RR effect. Not necessarily Balance, depending on comp, tuning, etc. But in that moment, it was Balance. If the Balance was nerfed, we'd just do the same 'Balancefishing', but with Spear. Or Arrow, whichever was better damage for the group. If the Expand effect was removed, however, then we'd have to completely change up our priorities. Extend was good on some classes, and not so much on others. Empower or whatever it was called (burning a Bole) was better for bursty classes, not so much for sustained classes. We'd have to adapt the RR more based on who we planned to give the card to. But, Extend was so much of a gain for everyone, that it was just 'the best one' in every situation except 'pad the one guy who's going for a 99 log'

If the aim is to remove the 'concept' of Balancefishing, ie redrawing cards you get because you're in search of 'the highest damage card', then every card has to give roughly equal value in damage. It's either that, or some cards are worse but some external factor makes up the difference (eg playing Ewer is bad for your damage, but empowers Div to be stronger, which totals more than 2 Balances would have), which then causes a 'this feels bad' feeling for the player in the moment, when they play the 'bad card'. I just think that the main factor in why AOE Balance was so busted, was the AOE part, not the card, so that's what I'd use to solve the problem: keeping the cards single target.

I feel like this muddles the intent and available utility value of those other cards, though. Especially if still including Seals (which I like for the variance it can add) and Divination, both, it seems unnecessary, given that you could just have a bit more of that total rDPS value end up within Divination and re-tie Divination to one's Seals to ensure that the other cards are mixed in for at least half of one's Play casts.

It does a little, yes. But we're looking at it from a perspective of 'today', rather than in contrast to 'what people want from the past'. As above, compared to the past this would be a godsend. Losing only half a (singletarget) Balance damage from playing a player-saving Bole instead of a whole one? I'd assume people would be a lot more open to that if they were asked back then. The issue with Div being tied to Seals (as it was in 5.X) was that it felt exceptionally bad if you did not get 3 Seals, because it was a punishment that is multiplied by the size of the party. I don't see how it's too bad a problem for people to have the 'meaningful choice' between using the utility more creatively, or just full-send the damage as intended. If we say 'oh we can't have MP on the Ewer because people won't use it for MP, it'll just go on whoever gives the most damage (under my tyranny, that'd be a healer)' then we end up where we are now: every card is exactly the same, because we didn't allow for any potential for 'it does less damage'

Actually, I take that back: using a Bole on a DPS and only getting half effectiveness (as described above) is possible now: Play a Bole on a melee. It's 3% instead of 6%, halved effectiveness. Sometimes you get screwed by RNG, and draw a ton of ranged cards in a melee heavy team, or vice versa, and have to decide to either play a scuffed half-card, or hold it until after the first cards fall off and it's no longer bursting time. So if people were able to make the choice to play a card for it's utility in this hypothetical, and still reap half (or more) of it's effect despite 'playing it wrong' (eg a Ewer on a res'd caster to help their MP til next Lucid), I'm not sure I see how that's a bad thing. Especially when they are choosing to do so for the additional effect like Mit or MP or movespeed or whatever, whereas at the minute we do it because 'well there's no other player to put it on, and the 2min meta means that most of every class's damage is now in that bursty 15-20s window, so I have to even though it feels awful'

[Shurrikhan]

It does a little, yes. But we're looking at it from a perspective of 'today', rather than in contrast to 'what people want from the past'. As above, compared to the past this would be a godsend.

Even looking at it from a perspective of 'today', though, you don't need to mix AST's rDPS and utlity capacities in that way.

You'd still have limited opportunities to replace cards (so it's not as if one even could constantly Balance-fish or 'balance-fish') and you'd still want the Seals from those non-damage cards for a greater rDPS gain than solely using damage cards.

Outside of your very best targets' densest potency window coming up, whenever you'd see an opportunity to actually make use of that utility, that utility would have priority, because those utility cards are your bottleneck regardless, much like wanting to keep your (G)CDs rolling within any other kit.

[ty_taurus]

That first part makes the assumption that every card boosts the damage of it's target in the same way, via their attacks.

I think that tactic would get messy very quickly and also would make the card system's burden of knowledge higher than it's ever been. I also don't think the cards are going to stay single target because the constant single target swapping is one of the jobs' biggest pain points for many players who try the job.

I can see why we'd want to segregate the cards into say 3 'only utility' and 3 'only damage'. But then we have the issue we do now: those utility cards potentially won't see much of the light of day outside of Savage. Then we've taken the deck from 6 down to 3

That assumes the utility cards and damage cards share the same resource. In any attempt I've ever brought up of adjusting Astrologian where I've separated the cards that way, I made it a point to clarify that those separate Draws do not share a cooldown and are played independently so that utility isn't fighting against damage.

[ForsakenRoe]

I think that tactic would get messy very quickly and also would make the card system's burden of knowledge higher than it's ever been. I also don't think the cards are going to stay single target because the constant single target swapping is one of the jobs' biggest pain points for many players who try the job.

The APM is an issue because we swap targets constantly in a 15s burst window. If the CD/charge limit were rescaled on the cards so that we're not incentivized/'forced' to hoard three cards, which have to be manually drawn, for that window (instead playing one per 30s, or 2 per 60s but they auto-draw, for example), the APM wouldn't be as bad a problem. We had similar APM overall back in SB, with Draw/Play/Redraw/RoyalRoad, but because we messed with the cards each 30s, instead of all at once in the 2min, it was less strain on the wrists. Would be nice if SE could create a new targeting system for allies, though. Like, holding the keybind for the button brings up a radial menu, and each of the 8 cardinal/inter directions is mapped to a certain party member. So you'd press, hold, drag mouse down (or some gamepad equivalent), let go of keybind to complete. I'm thinking a bit like Monster Hunter's quick-bind items, but IDK how possible that'd be in this game

I'd argue the burden of knowledge would remain roughly equal, maybe a little less. As it is, we have to learn what each card's Seal and Melee/Ranged typing is, two attributes per card. Previously, it was two still, it's 'effect' and it's 'Royal Road boost'. The suggestion would have two: the way the damage is applied (basically, which role is it best on) and it's unique effect if it has one (eg the Bole having Mit). But, having one card attached to each role (with Balance as the 'wildcard') would, I'd hope, create a 'mnemonic effect' of sorts that allows players to remember the role-card pairings easier. Bole protects, it goes on tank. Arrow used with a bow, it goes on Ranged. Spire struck by lightning, it goes on Caster, etc.

That assumes the utility cards and damage cards share the same resource. In any attempt I've ever brought up of adjusting Astrologian where I've separated the cards that way, I made it a point to clarify that those separate Draws do not share a cooldown and are played independently so that utility isn't fighting against damage.

Yes, that's a potential solution. But if the Utility of Movespeed and Mit is a separate CD from the Balance's flat damage and the Spear's Crit, you're not going to care for the utility in most content because it's surplus to requirements. And if you attach a seal to it so you've got to play a Utility card, even in lower content like EX roulette for the sake of boosting Divination's power or some such, then you're where I'm at: ignoring what the utility effect does, and only using it 'because the damage is gated behind it'. Same 'problem' (of the player being able to choose to deal less damage to make run-saving play), different situation by which it arises. If there's a way you know of that would incentivize someone who's competent at healing to use one of those 'utility draws' on the regular, in a low content like EX roulette, that isn't damage related, I'm all ears

[Shurrikhan]

I think that tactic would get messy very quickly and also would make the card system's burden of knowledge higher than it's ever been. I also don't think the cards are going to stay single target because the constant single target swapping is one of the jobs' biggest pain points for many players who try the job.

Given that we need to future-proof rapid target selection even just to allow for responsive healing requirements, this doesn't seem a reasonable warrant for precluding a design.

Instead, it should just mark a need to select allies even on controller through something more responsive than just left/right arrows. (There are, happily, 8 directions available to the DPad, and only 8 party members, so it's not as if we need to go for particularly sophisticated solutions to make at least noticeable improvements.)

I can see why we'd want to segregate the cards into say 3 'only utility' and 3 'only damage'. But then we have the issue we do now: those utility cards potentially won't see much of the light of day outside of Savage. Then we've taken the deck from 6 down to 3

Even this isn't necessarily the case, either. The diminished value from use comes not only from lower damage intake but also from the type of sustain provided, i.e., whether it be flat or scaled. Aquaveil, for instance, might mean little in a dungeon where Exaltation will still be useful simply because the latter provides significant flat value, too, therefore being useful even when damage intake is low.

That assumes the utility cards and damage cards share the same resource. In any attempt I've ever brought up of adjusting Astrologian where I've separated the cards that way, I made it a point to clarify that those separate Draws do not share a cooldown and are played independently so that utility isn't fighting against damage.

That said, I don't think you remotely need to do this, either, as long as you make use of your Seals.

The control added by having the second, separate Draw pile still wouldn't be worth much (far less than, say, a Spread), after all, seeing as even among your three utility skills, you've got a 67% chance to get bonus healing received or bonus movement speed, for example, by which to prevent... an immediately incoming one-shot (such that you wanted mitigation instead).

[ForsakenRoe]

The control added by having the second, separate Draw pile still wouldn't be worth much (far less than, say, a Spread), after all, seeing as even among your three utility skills, you've got a 67% chance to get bonus healing received or bonus movement speed, for example, by which to prevent... an immediately incoming one-shot (such that you wanted mitigation instead).

I think we can use SHB BRD as a good example of why that might not be a great idea, what with Troubadour's mitigation effect type being based on which song you were in at the time

[Shurrikhan]

I think we can use SHB BRD as a good example of why that might not be a great idea, what with Troubadour's mitigation effect type being based on which song you were in at the time

Those are still pretty different, though, in that you could vary song order, and potentially skip ahead at cost only to personal DPS back then, to have exactly what you wanted at a precise moment, while Cards would remain RNG and you wouldn't want to blow your all Redraws on them just to get something functional before its' too late.

(Food for thought: Though, at the same time, had that Troubadour design been added during an earlier approach to songs without CDs... it would have been basically fine. Still not interesting enough to be worth the annoyance to many players, but basically alright.)