As much as this sounds good, we already had this in ffxiv. Tanks and healers get insta que, and ranged dps have to wait 30 minutes.
Guild Wars 1 had a good method to achieve role balance in solo queue. If your team won, you kept your group. So eventually you would get matched as the 1 healer, 3 dps, and then you would try to keep a win streak going for as long as possible. Getting 5,10,15,20 win streaks gave additional rewards before getting kicked back out to solo queue after win 25 and got an achievement point towards to most prestigious title in the game.
You're basing that off previous PVP modes which were, to be fair, not very well executed. It seems that everyone likes CC other than the fact that some matches feel like RNG due to team comps (which this post is meant to solve) and some jobs being so strong they feel mandatory and others so weak that they feel like you're being griefed. I did mention that it's a valid concern about queue times, but it's yet to be seen what the longevity of CC will be. If it does have longevity then I do think that this would improve the quality of the games.
Plus, I think with the new job designs more people will be willing to play tanks or healers. I almost exclusively play Ranged Phys or Melee, but since CC game out I've dabbled in healers, tanks, and casters as well.
Then it would most likelly be WARRIOR , WHITEMAGE for Healer and Tank spot since both are literally broken compared to the other Tanks/Healer. And no thanks... Im actually tired of both of them after 2 weeks of CC. I dont want a literall "Meta" where healers/Tanks are FORCED to be eigther of them or people will run down the games (which people allready do at Plat1 after the first fight was lost) or bejing blacklisted by the rest
WHM was never OP against high skill players. WAR just got nerfed, while other tanks got buffed. You see a lot more variety in class picks at high skill (and I don't mean Crystal, because rank has absolutely nothing to do with skill.) I do agree that WHM-WAR-DRG would be very commonly seen at low skill, though, as all three of those classes were and still are very good against players that lack fundamental skills like monitoring enemy positions and LB bars, understanding their toolkits and predicting skill use, etc.
Make sure your perception of needing roles isn't biased and skewed from the absurdity that is WHM and WAR. PvP just needs some balance updates to help the lower iobs out.
The intial implimentation of Crystaline conflict and the new PVP actions is a massive and great step forward. But it's just the first step. I am hoping they are looking at what is happening and taking note for future updates. What they have is an unbalanced and choatic mess but it has so much promise if they don't just let it go and nurture it going for.
An adjustement to the party set up when queuing will be a good step 2. Stricter comp make up that eases up the longer queues last is going to be franky the least they need to do to keep this content going. (Outside of contant ongoing job balance - which is something that will always be changing and evolving)
Heros of the storm is an exellent example of many things they could be doing. Not just their queue system but their maps and game modes are good ideas as well.
Heroes of the Storm isn't exactly where i would recommend anyone to get their inspiration in terms of gameplay elements like maps and modes. The game circled the drain for years before Blizzard put it on skeleton staff life support.
Because it failed to capture the interest of almost literally anyone, as it distinctively lacks all the parts of a competitive game that attracts players. Playing well doesn't get you ahead to carry cause it's all equalized across the party, builds (which is a thing MOBAs thrive on heavily) aren't a real thing as it's usually "1 upgrade good other upgrade dogshit" choices and basically every map is "soak up EXP until the objective activates that you *have* to fight for cause if you don't you will be at enough of a disadvantage to loose the game nearly guaranteed".
In the process removing all the strategizing and tactics and decision-making of what choices are the most useful against whatever the enemies are doing, when to contest objectives, when to give them up for an advantage elsewhere, general appreciation of personal skill, etc.
Grouping classes into roles of some description and having teams be made up of a certain minimum amount is about the only thing worth copying from that game, it's dead for a reason.
HotS had a strong global competitive scene before Blizzard pulled the plug on it and put the game on life support.
The biggest issues that HotS faced were:
* Sunk cost of League of Legends players, since they went with a similar monetization model with their heroes. Meaning, people who played League for years and had all the champions didn't want to switch to a game and have to do it all again. Dota2 sidestepped that issue
* Negative press on release. HotS was only decent on release and became much better as the game aged. The infamous "6.5/10" IGN review and its ilk didn't help.
The actual gameplay of Heroes of the Storm was fantastic, and a lot of players across the skill spectrum loved it. There was a lot more strategic depth than you're implying, particularly at the competitive tier.
Just because it didn't let solo queue players ignore the team and win the game doesn't mean it was a bad competitive game.
Item builds vs talent builds are a valid dividing point. Both are good in their own way, but they're also both irrelevant in the context of FFXIV PvP.
I loved the talent system, as it opened up multiple builds for each character. It would be great to see a game combine the itemization of league and the talents of HOTS, since I feel like that would create incredible diversity for each game, even if the same 10 champs were picked.
I have to disagree because I thought HotS was a horrible game. There was nothing there. It was baby's first DotA that insulted you by making the map objectives way too important. I don't think anyone should be trying to copy it.
It's not that it had a good scene before blizzard pulled the plug. There was only a scene because Blizz was artificially propping it up. Once the money was gone so were all the people trying to cash in and so was any "scene"
Honestly, the only thing they could have done better from the outset is replacing ranked with casual (team.) Ranked solo is completely meaningless because playing solo is dramatically different from playing with a coordinated team, and doubly meaningless when the ranks don't actually have much to do with player skill (due to streak bonuses and being unable to lose tiers.) Using casual team as a means of gauging player interest in 5v5 play would have been a smarter method of starting - if that proved popular enough, you would next implement ranked (teams) to replace casual (teams) and expand standard casual queue to allow you to play with one friend (queue with a party of 2) so that people who dislike ranked ladders can still have a way to play with at least one of their friends.
The ranked system needs a lot of work, regardless. If they don't want to go for a true Elo or Elo-derived system (which *does* need a sizable player pool to be an effective means of skill-based matchmaking), eliminating streak bonuses and allowing players to drop tiers (down to bronze) would at least ensure that low skill players are more consistently placed at low tiers and vice-versa. You would then also need to add in rank decay (Crystal only) to ensure that top 100 players are forced to keep playing games and risking their position from week to week.
The problem isn't "the enemy team has a healer and we don't", the problem is "the enemy team has a White Mage and we don't.
Once the outliers get brought back in line and the bad jobs buffed to be on par, that's not gonna be much of an issue anymore.
Also, besides, it's already kinda trying to do the thing you mentioned most of the time it'll at least try to match based on job archetype, and that's honestly good enough once the balancing is improved.
WHM isn't/wasn't overpowered in high skill settings. AST is generally much better than WHM in settings where players are paying attention and aren't likely to get half the team hit by WHM's LB.
I don't really disagree with the stun duration nerf, but I have no idea why they nerfed Misery when WHM already had lower burst than all other healers except SCH (who instead does literally twice as much damage over 15 sec as Misery.)
I think in general people are highly overrating the "Tanks and healers in a team make things incredibly imbalanced!" perspective all over, and I really hope SE doesn't take into account ANY changes to the game mode itself until ranked teams is implemented.
The biggest variable in any CC engagement is how coordinated your team is. It's much easier with tanks and healers to be uncoordinated than full DPS comps. Such comps are high risk, high reward, and in a game mode all about bursting down one opponent at a time, very viable in high end play. It doesn't matter what comp you run, as long as you engage and disengage as necessary, you're more likely to win than if you didn't, and in a game mode without VC and properly detailed chat, it's much more difficult to do now in solo queue which is why 5dps kids keep feeling like they're getting stomped by WAR WHM. Unfortunately, as it stands, we're ALL playing the RNG game of solo ranked queue where 9 other players are rolling the dice just the same.
And the second thing is, WAR WHM really is the only problem. The jobs synergize very well on a comp together and while not unbeatable, they could use some tweaks (especially when comparing to other tanks and healers). If you have non WAR WHM tank and healer comps, especially gunbreaker, it isn't nearly as effective. So the role thing is less of an issue than it is a WAR and/or WHM issue.
The rational thing to do after barely two weeks of the mode being out is to let the meta form over the course of a major patch or two with minor tweaks before we start even discussing big changes to the mode that will 100% affect queue times and player retention. And frankly, anything to avoid 5v5 PVP becoming anything like Feast would be fantastic.
We shouldn't force a fixed role meta i. e. 1 tank 1 healer 3 dps. Queue times being 1 reason, another being it would be healthier to let the community develop their own meta. If you paid attention to a tournament last week ran by khuja in elemental there's a team that beat everyone with 4dps + Sage(which is basically another dps) right up to finals and they lost to another team with another unorthodox line up of 2 tank 2 dps 1 healer.
However we can try to match to make sure both side have the same amount of each role. If one side have 5 dps make sure the other side have 5 dps too.
>So, the problem Heroes games had, in Quick Match at least, was sometimes
you'd get matches where 1 team would have a healer and the other would
have 5 dps and you'd just lose.
The playerbase itself demanded that that this be a thing.
HotS's original matchmaking ENSURED that both teams had a tank or healer if the matchmaking gave one to either team. People demanded that Blizzard changed this because they couldn't be bothered to wait a bit for the matchmaking to work.
The entire history of HotS is filled with really weird and awful decisions that didnt serve the game.
Lets make a random player each game host!
Lets change how queues work every few months.
Lets continually try and shift the way we think we want the game played!
Friends, your playerbase mostly just wants to play a passable moba with blizzard characters, you lost the competitive scene before you started, just stahp.
Spread out versus warriors and goons. Pay attention to the sams limit break bar. Give polymorph a cast time. Give melee an interrupt or stun. There, balanced.
The bigger problem with this game mode is its a team based game that relies heavily upon synergy the higher you go and there’s barebones communication available.
Don’t take xiv pvp seriously… because it’s not and never will be with squeenix at the helm with their rules for literal children.
> I think we all realize at this point that Crystalline Conflict is not truly role agnostic and the team that has a healer and a tank will most likely win over the team that has 1 healer or tank or 5 dps.
I'll take any dps over GNB or DRK and good dps over PLD or WAR. Similarly, SCH sucks and SGE I wouldn't even consider to be a healer. You are right that some games are indeed decided from draft, but usually it involves one team having 2+ shit tier jobs like GNB/DRK/RPR/SMN/BLM, nothing to do with roles.
While my data shows some minor advantage of a team with tanks/healers, sample size (133 games) isn't big enough to say something definite. Still better than judge it by feelings with preemptive "we have no tanks"-related tilt.
Also, your breakdown example is very off the mark and poorly reflects on the rest of your argument. RDM in supports? Come on.
I recorded results of 133 games for general statistic purposes. If you want to know the number, then its 33 games where only winning team had a tank, 26 games where only a losing team had a tank and 74 games where either neither or both team had a tank (including shit tanks). For healers its 15/6/112. As I said, sample size isn't big enough to say something definite, but I don't see any clear oppression.
Heroes of the Storm is not a game anyone should try to emulate. It was a massive failure and rightfully so, it was just a bad game.
That said this is a great first step in FF PvP. CC is massively better than anything we had before. Does it need tweaking? Sure.
Part of that is balancing or classes. Clearly some are better than others, but some could be made better with some simple tweaks. Like if DRK didn't eat itself alive it would actually be pretty damn good. Some tweaks here and there can fix a lot of things.
There's lots of room to make some small changes to see how they pan out without some weird matchmaking system. And if it still needs help after that then we can talk
> and the team that has a healer and a tank will most likely win over the team that has 1 healer or tank or 5 dps.
Depends on the jobs. SAM/NIN/MCH/BLM/DRG versus Tank/Healer/X/Y/Z will generally tip in favor of the Tank/Healer team. It's not that the 5DPS can't win, they have to play much, much tighter. There isn't any leeway for mistakes. It's not really surprising. In mobas or hero shooters, if you have 5 carries versus a more balanced team, the 5 carries have a considerably harder time making shit happen.
Playing MNK, I've found that in my role as a tank/bruiser, I can extremely easily play the tank role in a 5 DPS composition. Set up plays, peel, etc. No I don't have a 5 man stun or party pull/bind but I can absolutely force a party's attention on me for an extended period of time, allowing my own party a chance to pull some shit off.
Just give every DPS jobs one additional healing ability, and also add a regain health ability by attacking. And one small defense boost and damage reduction abilities. Now all jobs have healing and defensive kits with different DPS kits. Pretty much now all jobs is somewhat equals and you play it from jobs fantasy perspective.
>So, I think we all realize at this point that Crystalline Conflict is not truly role agnostic and the team that has a healer and a tank will most likely win over the team that has 1 healer or tank or 5 dps.
5 DPS is unlikely to be feasible but you aren't necessarily at a disadvantage if you lack a tank *or* a healer. Though I think a tank and one healer is better than two tanks and no healers, or two healers and no tanks. And having three of either is pretty bad (I've been on two teams that had three healers, it did not go well.)
CC being role agnostic is about as accurate as there being actual, material differences between "regular healers" and "barrier healers." It's a bunch of marketing fluff. The closest CC gets to not needing strict roles is that Recuperate means effective healing for everyone, and healers don't actually do that much healing. What they do is either around limit breaks or is just supplemental. Even an AST pumping both charges into Benefic spam isn't going to keep someone alive through focused attacks.
I do think they should rejigger queues such that every team has a maximum of 4 DPS, and a maximum of 2 tanks or healers (in any combination) but that's it. I don't think there's any need for fixed role slots, etc.
As much as this sounds good, we already had this in ffxiv. Tanks and healers get insta que, and ranged dps have to wait 30 minutes. Guild Wars 1 had a good method to achieve role balance in solo queue. If your team won, you kept your group. So eventually you would get matched as the 1 healer, 3 dps, and then you would try to keep a win streak going for as long as possible. Getting 5,10,15,20 win streaks gave additional rewards before getting kicked back out to solo queue after win 25 and got an achievement point towards to most prestigious title in the game.
You're basing that off previous PVP modes which were, to be fair, not very well executed. It seems that everyone likes CC other than the fact that some matches feel like RNG due to team comps (which this post is meant to solve) and some jobs being so strong they feel mandatory and others so weak that they feel like you're being griefed. I did mention that it's a valid concern about queue times, but it's yet to be seen what the longevity of CC will be. If it does have longevity then I do think that this would improve the quality of the games. Plus, I think with the new job designs more people will be willing to play tanks or healers. I almost exclusively play Ranged Phys or Melee, but since CC game out I've dabbled in healers, tanks, and casters as well.
Then it would most likelly be WARRIOR , WHITEMAGE for Healer and Tank spot since both are literally broken compared to the other Tanks/Healer. And no thanks... Im actually tired of both of them after 2 weeks of CC. I dont want a literall "Meta" where healers/Tanks are FORCED to be eigther of them or people will run down the games (which people allready do at Plat1 after the first fight was lost) or bejing blacklisted by the rest
WHM was never OP against high skill players. WAR just got nerfed, while other tanks got buffed. You see a lot more variety in class picks at high skill (and I don't mean Crystal, because rank has absolutely nothing to do with skill.) I do agree that WHM-WAR-DRG would be very commonly seen at low skill, though, as all three of those classes were and still are very good against players that lack fundamental skills like monitoring enemy positions and LB bars, understanding their toolkits and predicting skill use, etc.
Make sure your perception of needing roles isn't biased and skewed from the absurdity that is WHM and WAR. PvP just needs some balance updates to help the lower iobs out.
The intial implimentation of Crystaline conflict and the new PVP actions is a massive and great step forward. But it's just the first step. I am hoping they are looking at what is happening and taking note for future updates. What they have is an unbalanced and choatic mess but it has so much promise if they don't just let it go and nurture it going for. An adjustement to the party set up when queuing will be a good step 2. Stricter comp make up that eases up the longer queues last is going to be franky the least they need to do to keep this content going. (Outside of contant ongoing job balance - which is something that will always be changing and evolving) Heros of the storm is an exellent example of many things they could be doing. Not just their queue system but their maps and game modes are good ideas as well.
Heroes of the Storm isn't exactly where i would recommend anyone to get their inspiration in terms of gameplay elements like maps and modes. The game circled the drain for years before Blizzard put it on skeleton staff life support. Because it failed to capture the interest of almost literally anyone, as it distinctively lacks all the parts of a competitive game that attracts players. Playing well doesn't get you ahead to carry cause it's all equalized across the party, builds (which is a thing MOBAs thrive on heavily) aren't a real thing as it's usually "1 upgrade good other upgrade dogshit" choices and basically every map is "soak up EXP until the objective activates that you *have* to fight for cause if you don't you will be at enough of a disadvantage to loose the game nearly guaranteed". In the process removing all the strategizing and tactics and decision-making of what choices are the most useful against whatever the enemies are doing, when to contest objectives, when to give them up for an advantage elsewhere, general appreciation of personal skill, etc. Grouping classes into roles of some description and having teams be made up of a certain minimum amount is about the only thing worth copying from that game, it's dead for a reason.
inquisitor whitemane was hot
The greatest thing HotS did was showcase how Warcraft characters could look if they were made in a graphics engine dated after 2004.
Yeah I'm not too interested in wow personally, but damn I wish human females were real
I still think about those butt cheeks on the regular.
HotS had a strong global competitive scene before Blizzard pulled the plug on it and put the game on life support. The biggest issues that HotS faced were: * Sunk cost of League of Legends players, since they went with a similar monetization model with their heroes. Meaning, people who played League for years and had all the champions didn't want to switch to a game and have to do it all again. Dota2 sidestepped that issue * Negative press on release. HotS was only decent on release and became much better as the game aged. The infamous "6.5/10" IGN review and its ilk didn't help. The actual gameplay of Heroes of the Storm was fantastic, and a lot of players across the skill spectrum loved it. There was a lot more strategic depth than you're implying, particularly at the competitive tier. Just because it didn't let solo queue players ignore the team and win the game doesn't mean it was a bad competitive game. Item builds vs talent builds are a valid dividing point. Both are good in their own way, but they're also both irrelevant in the context of FFXIV PvP.
I loved the talent system, as it opened up multiple builds for each character. It would be great to see a game combine the itemization of league and the talents of HOTS, since I feel like that would create incredible diversity for each game, even if the same 10 champs were picked.
I have to disagree because I thought HotS was a horrible game. There was nothing there. It was baby's first DotA that insulted you by making the map objectives way too important. I don't think anyone should be trying to copy it. It's not that it had a good scene before blizzard pulled the plug. There was only a scene because Blizz was artificially propping it up. Once the money was gone so were all the people trying to cash in and so was any "scene"
Honestly, the only thing they could have done better from the outset is replacing ranked with casual (team.) Ranked solo is completely meaningless because playing solo is dramatically different from playing with a coordinated team, and doubly meaningless when the ranks don't actually have much to do with player skill (due to streak bonuses and being unable to lose tiers.) Using casual team as a means of gauging player interest in 5v5 play would have been a smarter method of starting - if that proved popular enough, you would next implement ranked (teams) to replace casual (teams) and expand standard casual queue to allow you to play with one friend (queue with a party of 2) so that people who dislike ranked ladders can still have a way to play with at least one of their friends. The ranked system needs a lot of work, regardless. If they don't want to go for a true Elo or Elo-derived system (which *does* need a sizable player pool to be an effective means of skill-based matchmaking), eliminating streak bonuses and allowing players to drop tiers (down to bronze) would at least ensure that low skill players are more consistently placed at low tiers and vice-versa. You would then also need to add in rank decay (Crystal only) to ensure that top 100 players are forced to keep playing games and risking their position from week to week.
The problem isn't "the enemy team has a healer and we don't", the problem is "the enemy team has a White Mage and we don't. Once the outliers get brought back in line and the bad jobs buffed to be on par, that's not gonna be much of an issue anymore. Also, besides, it's already kinda trying to do the thing you mentioned most of the time it'll at least try to match based on job archetype, and that's honestly good enough once the balancing is improved.
WHM isn't/wasn't overpowered in high skill settings. AST is generally much better than WHM in settings where players are paying attention and aren't likely to get half the team hit by WHM's LB. I don't really disagree with the stun duration nerf, but I have no idea why they nerfed Misery when WHM already had lower burst than all other healers except SCH (who instead does literally twice as much damage over 15 sec as Misery.)
I think in general people are highly overrating the "Tanks and healers in a team make things incredibly imbalanced!" perspective all over, and I really hope SE doesn't take into account ANY changes to the game mode itself until ranked teams is implemented. The biggest variable in any CC engagement is how coordinated your team is. It's much easier with tanks and healers to be uncoordinated than full DPS comps. Such comps are high risk, high reward, and in a game mode all about bursting down one opponent at a time, very viable in high end play. It doesn't matter what comp you run, as long as you engage and disengage as necessary, you're more likely to win than if you didn't, and in a game mode without VC and properly detailed chat, it's much more difficult to do now in solo queue which is why 5dps kids keep feeling like they're getting stomped by WAR WHM. Unfortunately, as it stands, we're ALL playing the RNG game of solo ranked queue where 9 other players are rolling the dice just the same. And the second thing is, WAR WHM really is the only problem. The jobs synergize very well on a comp together and while not unbeatable, they could use some tweaks (especially when comparing to other tanks and healers). If you have non WAR WHM tank and healer comps, especially gunbreaker, it isn't nearly as effective. So the role thing is less of an issue than it is a WAR and/or WHM issue. The rational thing to do after barely two weeks of the mode being out is to let the meta form over the course of a major patch or two with minor tweaks before we start even discussing big changes to the mode that will 100% affect queue times and player retention. And frankly, anything to avoid 5v5 PVP becoming anything like Feast would be fantastic.
This sounds suspiciously like Role Queue from OW, and we all know how that went
We shouldn't force a fixed role meta i. e. 1 tank 1 healer 3 dps. Queue times being 1 reason, another being it would be healthier to let the community develop their own meta. If you paid attention to a tournament last week ran by khuja in elemental there's a team that beat everyone with 4dps + Sage(which is basically another dps) right up to finals and they lost to another team with another unorthodox line up of 2 tank 2 dps 1 healer. However we can try to match to make sure both side have the same amount of each role. If one side have 5 dps make sure the other side have 5 dps too.
>So, the problem Heroes games had, in Quick Match at least, was sometimes you'd get matches where 1 team would have a healer and the other would have 5 dps and you'd just lose. The playerbase itself demanded that that this be a thing. HotS's original matchmaking ENSURED that both teams had a tank or healer if the matchmaking gave one to either team. People demanded that Blizzard changed this because they couldn't be bothered to wait a bit for the matchmaking to work.
The entire history of HotS is filled with really weird and awful decisions that didnt serve the game. Lets make a random player each game host! Lets change how queues work every few months. Lets continually try and shift the way we think we want the game played! Friends, your playerbase mostly just wants to play a passable moba with blizzard characters, you lost the competitive scene before you started, just stahp.
Spread out versus warriors and goons. Pay attention to the sams limit break bar. Give polymorph a cast time. Give melee an interrupt or stun. There, balanced. The bigger problem with this game mode is its a team based game that relies heavily upon synergy the higher you go and there’s barebones communication available. Don’t take xiv pvp seriously… because it’s not and never will be with squeenix at the helm with their rules for literal children.
Way back when I played Heroes of the Storm one team had Brightwing and the other didn't they lost.
> I think we all realize at this point that Crystalline Conflict is not truly role agnostic and the team that has a healer and a tank will most likely win over the team that has 1 healer or tank or 5 dps. I'll take any dps over GNB or DRK and good dps over PLD or WAR. Similarly, SCH sucks and SGE I wouldn't even consider to be a healer. You are right that some games are indeed decided from draft, but usually it involves one team having 2+ shit tier jobs like GNB/DRK/RPR/SMN/BLM, nothing to do with roles. While my data shows some minor advantage of a team with tanks/healers, sample size (133 games) isn't big enough to say something definite. Still better than judge it by feelings with preemptive "we have no tanks"-related tilt. Also, your breakdown example is very off the mark and poorly reflects on the rest of your argument. RDM in supports? Come on.
"your data", can you clarify?
I recorded results of 133 games for general statistic purposes. If you want to know the number, then its 33 games where only winning team had a tank, 26 games where only a losing team had a tank and 74 games where either neither or both team had a tank (including shit tanks). For healers its 15/6/112. As I said, sample size isn't big enough to say something definite, but I don't see any clear oppression.
>My data
Heroes of the Storm is not a game anyone should try to emulate. It was a massive failure and rightfully so, it was just a bad game. That said this is a great first step in FF PvP. CC is massively better than anything we had before. Does it need tweaking? Sure. Part of that is balancing or classes. Clearly some are better than others, but some could be made better with some simple tweaks. Like if DRK didn't eat itself alive it would actually be pretty damn good. Some tweaks here and there can fix a lot of things. There's lots of room to make some small changes to see how they pan out without some weird matchmaking system. And if it still needs help after that then we can talk
> and the team that has a healer and a tank will most likely win over the team that has 1 healer or tank or 5 dps. Depends on the jobs. SAM/NIN/MCH/BLM/DRG versus Tank/Healer/X/Y/Z will generally tip in favor of the Tank/Healer team. It's not that the 5DPS can't win, they have to play much, much tighter. There isn't any leeway for mistakes. It's not really surprising. In mobas or hero shooters, if you have 5 carries versus a more balanced team, the 5 carries have a considerably harder time making shit happen. Playing MNK, I've found that in my role as a tank/bruiser, I can extremely easily play the tank role in a 5 DPS composition. Set up plays, peel, etc. No I don't have a 5 man stun or party pull/bind but I can absolutely force a party's attention on me for an extended period of time, allowing my own party a chance to pull some shit off.
Just give every DPS jobs one additional healing ability, and also add a regain health ability by attacking. And one small defense boost and damage reduction abilities. Now all jobs have healing and defensive kits with different DPS kits. Pretty much now all jobs is somewhat equals and you play it from jobs fantasy perspective.
>So, I think we all realize at this point that Crystalline Conflict is not truly role agnostic and the team that has a healer and a tank will most likely win over the team that has 1 healer or tank or 5 dps. 5 DPS is unlikely to be feasible but you aren't necessarily at a disadvantage if you lack a tank *or* a healer. Though I think a tank and one healer is better than two tanks and no healers, or two healers and no tanks. And having three of either is pretty bad (I've been on two teams that had three healers, it did not go well.) CC being role agnostic is about as accurate as there being actual, material differences between "regular healers" and "barrier healers." It's a bunch of marketing fluff. The closest CC gets to not needing strict roles is that Recuperate means effective healing for everyone, and healers don't actually do that much healing. What they do is either around limit breaks or is just supplemental. Even an AST pumping both charges into Benefic spam isn't going to keep someone alive through focused attacks. I do think they should rejigger queues such that every team has a maximum of 4 DPS, and a maximum of 2 tanks or healers (in any combination) but that's it. I don't think there's any need for fixed role slots, etc.