Job Complexity and Difficulty

[Aravell]

I wonder why is it that people who enjoy current high-end content design always deflect arguments by telling people to go do savage/ultimate?

Anyway, if your job can only be engaging by doing hard content then it's the content that engages you, meaning the job has failed to engage the player in most of the content in the game.

[AngelCheese77]

Jobs did have more complexity and diversity before SE took the axe to lots of skills. Why healers feel more boring.

[Mikey_R]

I'm really struggling to put into words my thoughts on this, but the starting point is, what do you mean by complexity? This is going to mean different things to different people and can muddy the water in getting across what you want. You then drop the word 'depth'. Is this the same as complexity? What makes a job deep? etc.

Just looking at the Bard post you made, from the bullet points, had making DoTs/songs 45 seconds really increased complexity/depth as you see it? The choice between Straight Shot/Refulgent was probably Refulgent 90% of the time with that last 10% being when you get close to the end of the Straight Shot buff then double Repertoire stacks is out of your control anyway, so you just deal with what you are dealt. You see, to me, none of that strikes me as 'complexity', it is just you wanting to move through the rotation quicker and press more buttons.

If I were to now say that EW Monk was more complex than HW Monk, how would you react? Whilst EW Monk doesn't have many positionals, Touch of Death or GL upkeep, it does have Masterful Blitz as a system now, which is something HW Monk doesn't have. Also, let's not pretend GL was any show of skill, you didn't need to think about it when you had full uptime and, when you did have to disengage for longer periods of time, it was luck as to whether GL lasted long enough for you to refresh it when you re-engaged, even when taking into account Form Shift. Why do you think they kept adding ways to try and upkeep it every expansion after all.

How about Dragoon? Blood of the Dragon was a punishing mechanic in HW, made easier coming into SB, did that add complexity? Or was it more of a hinderance to the gameplay? How about HW Enochian? Similar concept to Blood of the Dragon, but even more punishing. We know the community at large didn't like these 2 as they were much easier to manage in SB.

I'm hoping this is getting across what I am trying to articulate. Just saying 'complexity' doesn't help. What exactly are you after and what is it specifically about previous jobs that you do like, what about things you didn't like. Talk about what you enjoyed about your job from the past, what you didn't like, what you think could be improved but the important thing is say why you feel the way you do. Going back to your Bard example I am going to talk about the points again.


Straight Shot buff, you said, it is a 30 second crit rate buff, ok. How about coming from the angle of, it is a crit buff that synergises with the core idea behind Bard, that being getting benefits from your Songs via the crits from the DoTs. We have now talked about why you want to keep this buff up beyond just having a buff to upkeep.

30 second DoT duration, which you said required more maintenance. I mean, all you are doing is pressing Iron Jaws every 30 seconds, which aligns with your song windows. Saying more maintenance doesn't really say much either because, at the extreme, pressing it every other GCD is 'more maintenance' by what you have provided. It makes no sense.

30 second song durations, faster cycling. I know where you are coming from, Army's Paeon is an unexciting period and Mage's Ballard and Wanderer's Minuet also do not feel as good without the double repertoire procs I think the question here then does bring out that last bullet point. Would double repertoire procs help in alleviating this boredom from the 45 seconds songs? Would you want songs to be shorter as well? Would you want Army's Paeon to change to have another effect? These are all things that you can talk about when speaking of the feel of the job.

The choice with the Straighter Shot proc. Was it fine as it was, could there be something to make it better? I know many Bards who were annoyed when Straighter Shot didn't proc in the opener, meaning Barrage had to be used on Empyreal Arrow. Is this something you would want addressed? etc.

By properly stating why you liked or disliked certain aspects, it can influence the devs more in the direction you might want jobs to go in, especially if they see people agreeing with your ideas. I have said this several times in the past, but just posting some vague notion of what you want improved, without explaining exactly what the issues are, doesn't help.

[Raikai]

IDK why it's so hard to design jobs with a rather accessible skill floor but a 'goals-to' hard skill ceiling.

BLM was exactly that (well not as easy floor, but point remains)... the 'Alternative Lines' of rotations were a really nice goal to achieve, even though it didn't provide a whole lot of extra DPS.

I raise the question again: if they are simplifying jobs so much to cater to their new doubled-down faster DDR encounter design in high-end duties, what's even to expect for the job rework in 8.0?

[Daralii]

I raise the question again: if they are simplifying jobs so much to cater to their new doubled-down faster DDR encounter design in high-end duties, what's even to expect for the job rework in 8.0?

More hollow marketing, everyone's favorite thing.

[Valence]

All I hear coming from you is "I renewed my sub.", How is CoD treating you lately?

What is CoD? Cloud of Darkness? Chaotic? I've been done with this long ago?
As for my sub, what's your problem with my sub exactly? Does my sub offend you?

[Striker44]

I wonder why is it that people who enjoy current high-end content design always deflect arguments by telling people to go do savage/ultimate?

Anyway, if your job can only be engaging by doing hard content then it's the content that engages you, meaning the job has failed to engage the player in most of the content in the game.

Going to disagree there. I think back to my WoW days, when I was actually interested in doing the more "challenging" content. Mage was easily my favorite class to play, yet it was only when doing content like later raids or M+ (or PvP) that there was actually a need to use the full Mage toolkit. If I was just doing world quests, normal dungeons, etc., I only used a small subset of abilities. So the content was definitely important.

If, however, that meant the "content" is what engaged me, then it would logically follow that I would enjoy that content on any class. Yet this of course wasn't at all the case. I tried practically all of the classes at some point, and there were only a few I really enjoyed playing, especially in that more challenging content. (Same goes for healing - I had a lot of fun healing end-game content on Holy Priest, but couldn't get into other classes like Resto Shaman, Druid, etc.).

The very fact that the class does matter in the enjoyment says the class itself is in fact engaging the player. It's just a simple reality that doing simpler content doesn't give any class the true opportunity to shine. Ultimately, it's a mix of both the class and the content that fully engages the player.

[Daralii]

And then of course there's the old nugget of "if one job gets to be hard and another job stays easy, which one gets to be which"? Again I point to healers where a lot of WHM mains DON'T want to be the "derpy one" while SCH, AST, SGE get all the fun new stuff. Nor would I want NIN or RDM to become the "hard" melee DPS and caster thus forcing me to pick up different ones because I can't manage their hypothetical new complexity, but I also know full-well there's people who don't want them becoming any easier than they are because then THEY are out of a job.

NIN and RDM are already the "hard" jobs in their roles because of how low the bar has gotten. Even with changes like Ten Chi Jin having its movement restriction removed, simply needing to remember mudras automatically puts NIN over most of the other melees.

[Quuoooote]

I'm really struggling to put into words my thoughts on this, but the starting point is, what do you mean by complexity? This is going to mean different things to different people and can muddy the water in getting across what you want. You then drop the word 'depth'. Is this the same as complexity? What makes a job deep? etc.

I'm glad you asked, actually, because between posting the OP and now I've been cooking the idea in my head some more and wanted to write either a follow-up or edit to clarify exactly this point.

When I say 'complexity' I am mostly speaking in terms of mechanical depth, and not mechanical difficulty. If simplicity and complexity are two ends of the design spectrum, so to speak, then depth is the goal that exists outside of that boundary.

Sekiro, for example, is one of my favorite games of all time. It's often jokingly reduced down to "parry at the correct timing, win game". But despite the mechanical simplicity at play, the game offers significant depth and complexity in how your limited, simple toolset interacts with enemies, bosses, etc. to create a satisfying core gameplay loop. In FFXIV terms, I think White Mage is a solid parallel — White Mage has always been a staple of simplicity relative to its peers, but it's still capable of having greater depth and has previously had a more complex, dynamic toolset without breaking its 'simple' design intent.

To dig back into the Bard discussion, you mention that 30 second DoT duration is "just pressing Iron Jaws every 30 seconds". That's true! And that's exactly the type of interaction I'm aiming for and hope the development team adopts. In a vacuum, just like the Sekiro example, it can be reduced to a very simple action that you perform in a rote fashion, buts is depth lies in how other mechanics interact and interfere with the simple mechanic to force decision making and encourage engagement. Even though you "just press Refulgent 90% of the time", or "you just cycle the songs faster", eventually these goals might overlap or conflict and create tension, or depth (and this will happen with greater frequency if more upkeep is needed). If your hypothetical Straight Shot buff and DoTs are both going to fall off on your next GCD, which should you prioritize? Is managing double procs causing distraction and rotational mistakes like this in the first place? How can you be more mindful of this in the future, to make sure it doesn't happen again? How much raw Bard gameplay will the average player need to iron out all of these rotational nuances?

Questions like these can't exist within the current system because there just isn't enough depth in most jobs' general gameplay. To create that depth, we need more complex systems that will create engagement through player decision making — even if the systems, at their core, are highly simple. Wanting increased complexity doesn't mean jobs need to be difficult (although I believe the two will inevitably correlate to at least some small degree), because simplicity isn't a bad thing as long as there is enough design room for depth to exist across all levels of play. Jobs are how players interact with and play the game at a fundamental level, so it's critical that they are engaging and fun for as many players as possible.

When I express that I'd like for the developers to look into HW or SB-era job design/complexity/depth/etc., I'm also not calling for a 1:1 return to HW or SB systems. Your points about HW vs. EW MNK complexity, HW job mechanics being punishing, and the lack of guaranteed Straight Shot procs within Bard openers aren't entirely relevant because the end goal of looking ahead for future improvements is to hopefully marry the best of both systems to create something greater than the sum of its parts. Meaningful QoL improvements or successful job systems should obviously stay, ideally with more complexity and/or depth added onto them to follow a design paradigm that's more aligned with older expansions. Older systems weren't perfect by any stretch, but at the same time I don't find it unreasonable to think we've strayed too far from one end of the extreme to the other, and could benefit from adopting some older design principles to improve what we have now. If I had to choose, I think Stormblood job design was overall the most 'balanced' between complexity/depth and accessibility, but I wouldn't want White Mage to be reverted back to having 4.0 Lilies for instance because the modern iteration of the system is clearly superior. Could it stand to have more under the hood like Aero, Cleric Stance, etc.? Judging by how healers are clearly unsatisfied with current healer gameplay, I'd say yes.

[Kohashi]

I'm really struggling to put into words my thoughts on this, but the starting point is, what do you mean by complexity?

Let me make everything clear. They are just venting, for the sake of it.

Also, let me summarize the forums " Mi mi mi, DDR, I would rather stare at the Glamour dresser, then log off and type in the forums angrily because there is no game for me, SE never listened to me, WoW is so great, sad meow meows".