Known Issues: New Atma Menu "Delayed" again?! /sulk More info if any if you PLEASE!

[Purrs]

I don't know why a lot of people are asking for 2 sets and a "last atma used" option. If you use one of your two sets, it's going to become your "last atma used." So you're just going to have two options to do the same thing, unless it ignores any time you use a programmed set. Even then what if your "last atma used" was an elemental resistance set up that you won't use again for a month? "Last atma used" is fine as a temporary fix, but a longer list defined by the user is the overall most sensible and convenient. Most players probably never use more than 12 atma 98% of the time. We all know what the best ones are (and they are best by considerable margin).

And people are talking like option #2 is SO much work. They want to streamline the game so much into 3 sets. That's just going to create lazy people (like all the Abyssea leeches) who will ignore what atmas are best for a job in favor for what they can access quickly. People will use one universal mage set because that's one of their three quick options, rather than selecting the best choices for individual jobs. Having to go through 12 atma isn't going to kill anyone. Everyone has survived (barely) through longer lists.

[kingfury]

Well, until they give us some mockups of what these menus look like, it's hard to really do much more than speculate at which option will come out on top.

I for one asked for at least 2 sets because, assumingly, the "Atma Sets" would be it's own option to click on then select and quickly choose from the two, separate from the "Last infused" list option that you would click on to choose from the list. If I'm using my staple DD set 90% of the time, then having an option to quickly infuse that set with like three clicks would be far more efficient in my opinion vs scrolling down a list and selecting 3 separate Atmas. Again, depending on how they design it, who knows which will be fastest.

I always cringe when people consider "efficient" solutions to being "lazy" lol. Laziness is of course not the reason this issue is being addressed, but rather better and more efficient menu design for gameplay. It's like saying folks that use touchtone phones are lazy when there's a perfectly good rotary phone over there. ><' lol

[Yugl]

I selection option 1. But really, why not both?

[kingfury]

I selection option 1. But really, why not both?

---------
Iknowright? lol >< Just make'em two separate options, and everyone gets their cake and icecream

[Neisan_Quetz]

If it's one or the other I vote for Option 1. Otherwise what Yugl said.

[Zyeriis]

Votes thus far.

22 for #2, 16 for #1, 1 for Undecided (kingfury). There have been more people to talk about it than that but they didn't specify which one they prefer (and in most cases tried to create a #3, which is fine).

So majority is in favor of #2 (and I can see why).

#2 is the better choice because of tweaking your atmas given the situation is better/easier than having to tweak a set (which would involve searching through all of your atmas like we have to do now when changing job types). Whether or not many situational changes occur when you personally are playing is a different story. You never know when you're going to need something different.

Edit: i know you would have to search occasionally regardless but you'd have to do it far less with #2 because you would have 12 to choose from rather than 3 sets of 3 (9). I believe they gave us the specific numbers of 3 and 12 for a reason. If one option can be increased (to say 4 sets for #1) then chances are that #2 can be increased as well.

[Yarly]

I have a question though. Does it have to be 12? Can we create/edit the list to any size between 0-12?

I'd need 12 options for my main char that does more than one job but I have mule that's basically mage only, no need for 12 atma, maybe like 4-5 to choose from at best.

I'd rather see an implementation of the current system (remembering previously used atma) AND #2, though. That'd be ideal.

Either way, #2 seems like the best so it gets my vote.

[Suirieko]

I use different atmas depending on different situations. I would like the list of '12 recently atmas' as long as it is all on one page, and not multiple pages like the original atma list itself.

Personally I'm a fan of this setup:

Keep the 'Previously infused Atma' but add in 'recently infused atma', with the 12 recently used atma, as long as it's on one page.

[kingfury]

Votes thus far.

22 for #2, 16 for #1, 1 for Undecided (kingfury). There have been more people to talk about it than that but they didn't specify which one they prefer (and in most cases tried to create a #3, which is fine).

So majority is in favor of #2 (and I can see why).

#2 is the better choice because of tweaking your atmas given the situation is better/easier than having to tweak a set (which would involve searching through all of your atmas like we have to do now when changing job types). Whether or not many situational changes occur when you personally are playing is a different story. You never know when you're going to need something different.

Edit: i know you would have to search occasionally regardless but you'd have to do it far less with #2 because you would have 12 to choose from rather than 3 sets of 3 (9). I believe they gave us the specific numbers of 3 and 12 for a reason. If one option can be increased (to say 4 sets for #1) then chances are that #2 can be increased as well.

-----------------
Sorry if I wasn't clear, but my Vote is for #2. I was just saying that I hope list offers quick selection of the 3 Atmas is all.

[Tyrian]

I'd like to toss my vote in for #2, for all the reasons mentioned above. Three pre-selected choices simply wouldn't be enough for my jobs. Even where there is crossover, it's usually one or two shared atma, not all three (where the third is usually shared with a different job).

That said, I'd also like to chime in with "why not both?"

I do have to wonder what kind of back-end tools the dev team has for designing the interface, when something like this is considered a lot of extra manpower (unless, once again, we're facing memory limitations).