Why can't Dungeons be longer/harder, but more... piecework?

SE seem to not have wanted to add extreme versions of dungeons. They thought about it but never really committed to it. I wouldn't mind instead of that getting special achievements with rewards to make the content more challenging. Things like:

- complete in under x minutes
- complete without a tank or healer or both
- complete without using x/y/z skills (like the tank not being able to use provoke or aoe skills)

Etc. etc. Or any combination of the above. These could be challenging enough while remaining optional enough to keep some entertained.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

So, hear me out. As much as most anyone else, I want to be done with my tome-grinding for the week in, well, as little time as it takes now, and I like having content that I can do in under 30 minutes.

---

So, dungeons in FF14 are used in a different way than in EQ2 or WoW, which are more side diversions to break up questing than with a story like FF14. You can get to top level in EQ2 and WoW without ever visiting a dungeon.

Also, by the first sentence in your main post, it seems you want stuff fast and easy, which FF14 doesn't do very ... well. You got to work for what you want. You can see the changes of dungeons from the beginning ones that have multiple paths and side areas to get PoIs from and chests, to linear ones with no deviations. I think that was a good idea as people get to a point they just go from point A to B in the quickest time.

Maybe I don't see the dungeon issues like you do right now, so to me they are fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by linay

There is always a most efficient way of achieving a goal. Flexibility means you can sacrifice that efficiency if you value other things and it won't be such a detriment to your goal. If you want the most efficient method, then of course you've limited yourself to whatever is the most efficient method available.

---

If there is a most efficient method to do something, there is at least one. There is nothing limiting the number of solutions to one though. FF14 leveling is a good example. Leveling through roulettes is only efficient because of the "artificial" daily bonus. If that didn't exist, leveling a little every day would be as efficient as leveling in chunks every few days. A player aiming for efficiency would have a choice to make. Right now we don't. This is what makes roulettes restrictive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Again, the reason I posed the question about roulettes, and how much systems should condition their players towards particular choices in the duration and locations of their playtime, is that as the game is increasingly streamlined, efficiency increasingly takes priority over engagement. We see this in the developers' designs and that does trickle down into player and community perceptions as to the shape and therefore intent of the game. (They then make requests for efficiency over engagement in ways that are easier for the devs to meet than requests for engagement over efficiency, and the feedback loop spirals on.)

---

This is a very good point, I feel the same at times. Requesting improved QoL is valid, but some suggestions just seem to be about streamlining the process of logging in, doing your allotted tasks, and then logging out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngelCheese77

Also, by the first sentence in your main post, it seems you want stuff fast and easy, which FF14 doesn't do very ... well. You got to work for what you want. You can see the changes of dungeons from the beginning ones that have multiple paths and side areas to get PoIs from and chests, to linear ones with no deviations. I think that was a good idea as people get to a point they just go from point A to B in the quickest time.

---

The two sentences after the two you quoted may help you to understand my intent, but they still leave much to guesswork, so I'll summarize briefly.

I think XIV does fast and easy fine, so long as one doesn't also want choice as to how they are engaged nor variation in what content is allowed them while still being fast and easy.

Personally, I don't care much about doing content fast nor, especially, it being easy, but I would like to see more choices of what can be done quickly while also being efficient relative to other content types, since all would benefit from such changes, instead of just the few like myself. This can be provided by changing the value and/or distribution of reward structures, and/or by diversifying the content that fits within the reward structure.

As reward structures constraint content and content constrains reward, however, our best bet is to do both at once. The spitball idea was an example of that: by making the reward less frequent, one is less encouraged to do as many counts of the affected content per week; that in turn allows for longer stretches of content when still limited in time per week. This allows for that bonus to affect a wider variety of content or, more generally, for the player to be directed towards a larger number of, or more distinct, choices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

...

---

Ok, I think I understand more about your position, though I still disagree with it. For one, all the things that you say make the dungeons more relevant (relic quest/wondrous tail), I would still prefer to do them in the current dungeon structure rather than what ARR had. For another, experiences may vary, but for me, the current roulette system is sufficient to bring life to old content and add variety (though I won't necessarily oppose for making even more use of them). But I also look at it from a story perspective. Yes, running the same dungeon again is fine (I do it every day with roulette), but I'm also not opposed to content being just a stepping stone because that's how it works in the narrative. (That's why I do appreciate it when we do get to revisit a fight/location in the narrative that differentiates between the two encounters, such as normal vs hard mode trials/dungeons in ARR).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PyurBlue

If there is a most efficient method to do something, there is at least one. There is nothing limiting the number of solutions to one though. FF14 leveling is a good example. Leveling through roulettes is only efficient because of the "artificial" daily bonus. If that didn't exist, leveling a little every day would be as efficient as leveling in chunks every few days. A player aiming for efficiency would have a choice to make. Right now we don't. This is what makes roulettes restrictive.

---

The choice is entirely your own. You don't have to choose the most efficient method if it's not how you want to spend your time. It may be efficient in exp/time, but there are other criteria by which you can value your time. For example, many people suggest deep dungeon as a fast way of leveling, especially for DPS like me. I am ok with running deep dungeon, but it's not my type of content, so I choose not to do it for leveling and only do it if I want something from it (other than exp) or if I am joining other people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by linay

The choice is entirely your own. You don't have to choose the most efficient method if it's not how you want to spend your time.

---

Unless what you want to spend time on has leveling as a prerequisite. One of the goals for me is to have more end game content (more capped jobs to play). This involves leveling. I could choose to not level efficiently, but then that just pushes the end goal further away. If running content directly provided the same XP as daily roulettes I'd have more ways of reaching the same level of efficiency, which I'd prefer.

Quote:

---

It may be efficient in exp/time, but there are other criteria by which you can value your time. For example, many people suggest deep dungeon as a fast way of leveling, especially for DPS like me. I am ok with running deep dungeon, but it's not my type of content, so I choose not to do it for leveling and only do it if I want something from it (other than exp) or if I am joining other people.

---

That's true, XP/time isn't the only metric of value but you do have to take it into account if you want to do anything that has a level requirement. Most of the game has such requirements. While I don't have to level, there wouldn't be any point to playing if I didn't because I wouldn't be able to do anything I enjoyed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PyurBlue

Unless what you want to spend time on has leveling as a prerequisite. One of the goals for me is to have more end game content (more capped jobs to play). This involves leveling. I could choose to not level efficiently, but then that just pushes the end goal further away. If running content directly provided the same XP as daily roulettes I'd have more ways of reaching the same level of efficiency, which I'd prefer.


That's true, XP/time isn't the only metric of value but you do have to take it into account if you want to do anything that has a level requirement. Most of the game has such requirements. While I don't have to level, there wouldn't be any point to playing if I didn't because I wouldn't be able to do anything I enjoyed.

---

And that's why end game content is time gated, so choosing the most efficient method isn't necessary unless you're just behind. And once you're caught up, you can remain that way without having to choose the most efficient way. But again, that's your choice to want to get to endgame faster.

EDIT: You know, maybe I'm going at this the wrong way. If you just want to get to endgame, then go do the roulette and spam the highest dungeon or do deep dungeon and run fate/hunt while queueing or do MSQ if you have it. You can get to max level in a day. Don't complain about the method since you're not time gated at all from leveling.

So i have a few (slightly mean-spirited) ideas.

At the very start, in order to even get into the dungeon proper you have to solve a puzzle.

So you zoom into the instance, and right away there is a huge door barring your way, and the wall is lined with statues of voidsent with numbers on them.

To open the door you must interact with the correct statue.

To find out which statue is the right one you must answer a math question and interact with the statue with the number that corresponds to the correct answer.

Quick, what's 3+2?

Picking the wrong statue results in the player getting the message "There was a black hole in the statue's mouth" and then taking 9,999,999 damage.
The battle log goes "Player X was affected by Spaghettification, Player X has been defeated"


Then, one section of the dungeon is full of bottomless pits you have to navigate around while fighting mobs, if you fall into a pit you die.
In the middle of this area where there are very few safe places to stand a very special pack of mobs will spawn in.
The mobs?
"Mecha-Titan" robotic replicas of our favorite Primal.
And then you see the castbars.
"So"
"I"
"Heard"
"You"
"Like"
"Landslides"

Hilarity ensues.

You can't invent new dungeon systems if you don't understand why the current dungeons are the way they are. And I know you don't understand that, because your replacement causes a lot of problems that the current design addresses.

You may not like the "fast food" approach to dungeons in XIV, but they are built for efficiency on the service end--to get as many players participating in and completing content as possible. To do this, they're relatively short and relatively similar to one another, with a few exciting but simple variations, so that by learning one, you have a good idea of how to do the next, even if you've never done it.

Edit: I'd go for a big crazy dungeon you can do all at once, or in shorter segments, saving your progress like Palace of the Dead, 1000%, but I wouldn't want that to replace the regular dungeon grind or tomestone farming method. Supplement it? Sure.

The answer is already in the game. It's been mentioned several times.

Most of the regular dungeons are part of the game's main story arc. Because they're being used to tell a story, they need to be experienced in a linear fashion so everyone experiences the same story. Because everyone has to do them to progress, they need to be suitable for the players who are limited in how long they can play in a single session and for varying skill levels.

If you want the variable layouts, the increasing difficulty, the longer time commitment, the ability to stop and go back to where you left off without starting over again... PotD/HoH are there for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Floortank

You can't invent new dungeon systems if you don't understand why the current dungeons are the way they are.

---

I would generally agree, but perhaps you can quote the parts that evidence a lack of understanding, while being clear of whom you're responding to? As the OP, I'll assume that's me for now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Floortank

And I know you don't understand that, because your replacement causes a lot of problems that the current design addresses.

---

Again, without any indication of whom you're responding to or indicating what portion of their ideas you've read, you prevent any honest discussion with you or about your concerns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Floortank

You may not like the "fast food" approach to dungeons in XIV, but they are built for efficiency on the service end--to get as many players participating in and completing content as possible. To do this, they're relatively short and relatively similar to one another, with a few exciting but simple variations, so that by learning one, you have a good idea of how to do the next, even if you've never done it.

---

As someone who can be misread as disliking outright the "fast food approach to dungeons in XIV", let me offer some balancing logic.

One need look no further than WoW to see where prioritizing breadth of engagement (as measured by players' time played and the percentage of players to complete a given piece of content) can reach a lower product than when prioritizing both breadth and depth of engagement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Floortank

Edit: I'd go for a big crazy dungeon you can do all at once, or in shorter segments, saving your progress like Palace of the Dead, 1000%, but I wouldn't want that to replace the regular dungeon grind or tomestone farming method. Supplement it? Sure.

---

I'm looking for where anyone beside perhaps myself has suggested outright that we replace even the MSQ dungeons (the only ones thus constrained) with more experimental varieties, but I'm not seeing it.

So, let me clarify my own part, since I was not especially clear when spitballing this thread with just a random idea on reward systems. (My interest was primarily on seeing whether players would even like experimental dungeons at all and would be willing to see arbitrary reward systems adjusted slightly if it meant more player freedom.) My intent was to only suggest that reward systems don't have to be left exactly as they've been if it would otherwise mean that different, more experimental takes on dungeons could qualify as the sort of experimental content that can be afforded by making fewer standard dungeons.

That's only relevant, of course, if anyone wants to see more experimental dungeons in the first place. Judging by the likes on either side across this thread, many do, but not enough to compete with Eureka, Aquapolis-like, and PotD-like content*. (*Some here have argued that PotD and HoH effectively are the experimental dungeons that others' have been asking for and that those posters' desires are therefore redundant, but I have trouble seeing why that would be the case; to me, at least, PotD/HoH has as more in common, even, with being a small party on its own in Eureka or doing Aquapolis-like content than it has with a dungeon, however experimental, especially if going by the ideas posted thus far.)

You know. We have what you're looking for. It's called deep dungeon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by linay

And that's why end game content is time gated, so choosing the most efficient method isn't necessary unless you're just behind. And once you're caught up, you can remain that way without having to choose the most efficient way. But again, that's your choice to want to get to endgame faster.

EDIT: You know, maybe I'm going at this the wrong way. If you just want to get to endgame, then go do the roulette and spam the highest dungeon or do deep dungeon and run fate/hunt while queueing or do MSQ if you have it. You can get to max level in a day. Don't complain about the method since you're not time gated at all from leveling.

---

The concern isn't the absolute time spent to reach the level cap. I know that it's possible to run dungeons after the roulette to continue leveling, but that requires the willingness to do nothing but leveling during my play session and to have enough free time to level from X to 80, if I'm going to do it in a day or two.

You've given quite a few suggestions on how I might better manage my time leveling, but I've actually taken the the points that you've brought up into consideration already. Given the way I work and given the way the game works, I end up having to do leveling roulettes daily if I want to get anywhere level-wise. I'd rather not keep up the daily schedule though since leveling isn't what makes me want to play. It would be even better if the game offered more interesting content like what's being asked for in this thread that I could focus on playing through instead of roulettes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monk-dps

You know. We have what you're looking for. It's called deep dungeon.

---

Deep Dungeons are a potentially good concept that aren't well executed in my opinion. They're not the same as difficult dungeons. I don't like that their difficulty ramps up slowly (and that you have to relevel, even if it's accelerated). Early on they are way too easy. Dungeons on the other hand are set to be a particular difficulty. Ideally this difficulty should be raised compared to now but players participating should be challenged right from their first run. The random status effects at the beginning of floors in Deep Dungeons do more harm than good in my opinion. I don't really want the way my character works to change constantly for no real reason, especially stuff like taking away your skills.

PotD and HoH do some stuff right, like randomized layouts and enemies. This keeps things from getting too stale and makes it so you can't just memorize your way past difficulty. If I were creating content from scratch though, I would definitely use regular dungeons as a base rather than deep dungeons. Set difficulty designed to challenge players, consistent gameplay, variable environment and enemies.

I would rather see branching dungeons, which lead to different rewards and or mechanics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monk-dps

You know. We have what you're looking for. It's called deep dungeon.

---

You mean that content that doesn't remotely get hard until floor 80 out of 100? BA is probably the closest they've ever come to "harder" dungeons. And wouldn't you know it, that was widely praised alongside Ultimate as the best features that came out of Stormblood.

That isn't to say Deep Dungeon is bad. I actually rather enjoy it. But HoH suffered from the same issue dungeons have for years now: repetition. Virtually nothing changed or was innovated on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForteNightshade

You mean that content that doesn't remotely get hard until floor 80 out of 100? BA is probably the closest they've ever come to "harder" dungeons. And wouldn't you know it, that was widely praised alongside Ultimate as the best features that came out of Stormblood.

That isn't to say Deep Dungeon is bad. I actually rather enjoy it. But HoH suffered from the same issue dungeons have for years now: repetition. Virtually nothing changed or was innovated on.

---

Sadly you're going to get that no matter what tho. Gamers here have proven that most of the things asked for in practice they do not want. Noone actually wants random stuff in dungeons, or harder content cause when we did get it people all over the forums cried for nerfs. I will never forget Rath. That alone had people crying when it gave people what they asked for. As for a defense for deep dungeon. Solo it. The fact that VERY few people have proves people dont actually want this stuff. It literally has everything people claim to want. If more people actually did this instead of cry for nerfs when a boss yawns bigger -mist dragon- I think we would have harder dungeons. Until then..... the 2k page thread gets bigger and people stay bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monk-dps

Sadly you're going to get that no matter what tho. Gamers here have proven that most of the things asked for in practice they do not want.

---

This is the wrong way to look at it. What actually happened was that many were happy, but others were not. Those who weren't were vocal, perhaps because they were the majority. The fix is simple, let them avoid the duty. This is why Savage works. It doesn't exist in roulettes, it's up to the player to take part.

Quote:

---

Noone actually wants random stuff in dungeons, or harder content cause when we did get it people all over the forums cried for nerfs.

---

Constant threads like this show the opposite. There is a clear demand for harder content. It just needs to be added in a way that doesn't interfere with players who are looking for a more casual experience.

Quote:

---

I will never forget Rath. That alone had people crying when it gave people what they asked for.

---

The trial also received praise for those very same things.

Quote:

---

As for a defense for deep dungeon. Solo it.

---

This does help with the challenge aspect, although your ability to solo will vary drastically based on what class you play (or can play). It also means you're not playing in a group setting, which is one of the appeals of a MMO.

Quote:

---

The fact that VERY few people have proves people dont actually want this stuff.

---

Or that there are issues with it, like excluding cooperative play and limiting class viability.

Quote:

---

It literally has everything people claim to want. If more people actually did this instead of cry for nerfs when a boss yawns bigger -mist dragon- I think we would have harder dungeons. Until then..... the 2k page thread gets bigger and people stay bad.

---

If deep dungeons were the answer, this thread wouldn't exist. You're oversimplifying things way too much, maybe because the type of content being asked for doesn't interest you. That's completely fine, but if you think one piece of difficulty content is equivalent to any other and the details don't matter, you can't really tell me that what I want is already in the game. It's not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PyurBlue

This is the wrong way to look at it. What actually happened was that many were happy, but others were not. Those who weren't were vocal, perhaps because they were the majority. The fix is simple, let them avoid the duty. This is why Savage works. It doesn't exist in roulettes, it's up to the player to take part.


Constant threads like this show the opposite. There is a clear demand for harder content. It just needs to be added in a way that doesn't interfere with players who are looking for a more casual experience.


The trial also received praise for those very same things.


This does help with the challenge aspect, although your ability to solo will vary drastically based on what class you play (or can play). It also means you're not playing in a group setting, which is one of the appeals of a MMO.


Or that there are issues with it, like excluding cooperative play and limiting class viability.


If deep dungeons were the answer, this thread wouldn't exist. You're oversimplifying things way too much, maybe because the type of content being asked for doesn't interest you. That's completely fine, but if you think one piece of difficulty content is equivalent to any other and the details don't matter, you can't really tell me that what I want is already in the game. It's not.

---

Rath was shunned by an overly large bit of the playerbase for being - unfair- and other things when Rath was literally everything people apparently have been asking for. And yet hardly anyone did it and those that did it was like pulling teeth. Hell more people do it now siply because they can unsync it. Making the point of it pointless. And while you may want this stuff, the fact we have a very easy mode in the easiest part of the game - cause apparently people couldn't beat THOSE and yes... complained about it here - proves my point. Maybe I am oversimplifying it.. but I don't see why I shouldn't. Time and time again people ask for things to be harder and when SE DOES give us something the overall playerbase cries and complains until it's nerf. Have SE gotten better about not doing this .. yes. but the damage is already done. Hell asking for more dungeons when we only get 1 dungeon per patch now is funny.. they aren't making more.. they are making less.


What should be being asked isn't harder dungeons... but fixes and systems to make the over all playerbase BETTER so we can get harder content in the mainline of the game. Because as long as the playerbase sucks it'll never be a gain to make things harder. Ultimate doesn't count cause that is using old assets and if they had to make new ones it wouldn't be here. The reaosn we have it is because it's not extra work. - Even tho even THAT was limited once upon a time. go firgure....-

I just can't see challenging dungeons happening (again) any time soon. SE would have to redo (buff) older dungeons so that future dungeons can be challenging from the get go. Otherwise, like I said before, we just get Pharos Sirius 2.1 situation again.

If it's too hard and there are easier options available, then people will leave ASAP, or not use Roulette at all and just queue for the fastest clears (Brayflox HM style).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PyurBlue

The concern isn't the absolute time spent to reach the level cap. I know that it's possible to run dungeons after the roulette to continue leveling, but that requires the willingness to do nothing but leveling during my play session and to have enough free time to level from X to 80, if I'm going to do it in a day or two.

You've given quite a few suggestions on how I might better manage my time leveling, but I've actually taken the the points that you've brought up into consideration already. Given the way I work and given the way the game works, I end up having to do leveling roulettes daily if I want to get anywhere level-wise. I'd rather not keep up the daily schedule though since leveling isn't what makes me want to play. It would be even better if the game offered more interesting content like what's being asked for in this thread that I could focus on playing through instead of roulettes.

---

I kind of get the feeling that what's been asked for in this thread is more suited for end game content than leveling. Regardless, it is your choice to make whether to prioritize leveling or something else. I think they've made leveling easy and fast enough for most people, though obviously they can't please everyone. I also think that what's been asked in this thread (even if it's for leveling content) might cause more problem for more people than it might "solve" for others.

Rather than optional sections that people will ignore unless something inside is absolutely valuable, I'd rather they set dungeons up so that each leg has two or three different possible paths, and which ones make up your current run are decided randomly. Some could be more mechanic and gimmick-heavy, some with more mobs, but all geared towards the intention of taking the same completion time. I'd also like to see something along the lines of personal optional rewards, where something the player can do individually nets them something useful. Say you avoid certain mechanics perfectly during a boss, you personally get an extra VIII materia, or extra such-and-such weapon light, etc. Incentives to be more than an auto-pilot derp.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Limecat

Rather than optional sections that people will ignore unless something inside is absolutely valuable, I'd rather they set dungeons up so that each leg has two or three different possible paths, and which ones make up your current run are decided randomly. Some could be more mechanic and gimmick-heavy, some with more mobs, but all geared towards the intention of taking the same completion time. I'd also like to see something along the lines of personal optional rewards, where something the player can do individually nets them something useful. Say you avoid certain mechanics perfectly during a boss, you personally get an extra VIII materia, or extra such-and-such weapon light, etc. Incentives to be more than an auto-pilot derp.

---

I like these ideas, and they were sort of what I was hoping for in the procedurally generated dungeons we've had but that fell quite short.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monk-dps

Rath was shunned by an overly large bit of the playerbase for being - unfair- and other things when Rath was literally everything people apparently have been asking for.

---

...Which people? I don't remember anyone saying they wanted healing to be literally prohibited, or even more early-snapshotted, poorly-telegraphed stun AoEs that can potentially chain into each other. I don't remember anyone asking for another literally circular space with a boss whose position cannot be controlled.

It didn't rely on AoE indicators, wasn't quite as scripted, and healers couldn't fully make up for player mistakes, so those are potential wins, but... they were each done in a way that didn't really seem to answer even those relatively niche requests. And there are whole threads of requests besides that saw nothing from Rathalos. So how it could possibly be everything people have been asking for?



There's a vast difference between giving something vaguely in the direction requested and giving something as requested. It takes many layers of over-generalization to conflate the two.

Yes, the playerbase could do far more to make its preferences specific, but when the playerbase says "throw me the ball," and the devs, being blind to their precise position, throw it way the heck past them or painfully short of them, no amount of insisting that the players should be happy with that poor throw will make them so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monk-dps

What should be being asked isn't harder dungeons... but fixes and systems to make the over all playerbase BETTER so we can get harder content in the mainline of the game.

---

The two aren't mutually exclusive; in fact, they're probably best discussed together, but that would leave us with a thread too sprawling for players to easily contribute to it or anyone to make sense of it.

I've been largely focused on improvements to scaffolding, UI intuitiveness, control schemes to allow for more responsive healing (especially on controller), and in-game learning systems since late ARR. Sadly, most of those were met with similar criticisms of "We already have that" while pointing at something at only remotely reminiscent of the suggestions or "What point is there in making players better when content is so easy?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monk-dps

Rath was shunned by an overly large bit of the playerbase for being - unfair- and other things when Rath was literally everything people apparently have been asking for. And yet hardly anyone did it and those that did it was like pulling teeth.

---

Rath was terrible, not because it was unfair (it was pretty easy) but because it was a mechanical mess given this game structure: healers were basically useless, the hitbox was extremely imprecise, there was virtually no reason to bring a dps when it released and finally it was the same few telegraphed mechanics throughout the fight. When did people ask for something like this? It was something relatively new, sure, bad it wasn't good content. It was just fanservice for mh fans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lastelli

Rath was terrible, not because it was unfair (it was pretty easy) but because it was a mechanical mess given this game structure: healers were basically useless, the hitbox was extremely imprecise, there was virtually no reason to bring a dps when it released and finally it was the same few telegraphed mechanics throughout the fight. When did people ask for something like this? It was something relatively new, sure, bad it wasn't good content. It was just fanservice for mh fans.

---

It wasn't terrible, It literally gave people a start of a 4 man extreme which people asked for, it gave random mechs within the fight, it had a different structure and a few other things in there. It was a start. The bigger issue here is people wanting everything handed to them instead of learning things and growing. It's why we have a very easy mode in solo msq fights, which people apparently couldn't do. I know you remember those threads of people dying in solo msq fights. This thread is asking for harder dungeons but they aren't adding more dungeons we're getting less. I feel like the bigger issue is not the dungeons, but the playerbase as a whole not wanting to get better at anything so we have to deal with baby dungeons. Long of the short of it, I still say we need to ask for better systems first to make the playerbase better otherwise it'll just be a waste. Look at everything that was nerfed or the 2k thread if you don't believe me.

Rath was a mess because they tried to take what was in another game and transplant it into THIS game without also adding in the mechanics of that game, the dodging. Saying it was 'giving us what we wanted' is completely disingenuous and wrong. I don't know where you're coming from on that... at all? The Rath fight was literally an event fight and they did a better job taking the FFXIV monster and transplanting that into MHW than Rath into FFXIV simply because of the mechanics issues. FFXIV doesn't have the dodge-roll and that makes Rath a MESS. Point blank. So people found a way round it in CHEESING him with four tanks. Healers are almost useless outside of being around to cleanse. Outside of that, everyone else is just asking for cart-bait.

So no, Rath was not 'giving us what we asked for'... it was trading monsters in an event.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monk-dps

It wasn't terrible, It literally gave people a start of a 4 man extreme which people asked for, it gave random mechs within the fight, it had a different structure and a few other things in there. It was a start. The bigger issue here is people wanting everything handed to them instead of learning things and growing. It's why we have a very easy mode in solo msq fights, which people apparently couldn't do. I know you remember those threads of people dying in solo msq fights. This thread is asking for harder dungeons but they aren't adding more dungeons we're getting less. I feel like the bigger issue is not the dungeons, but the playerbase as a whole not wanting to get better at anything so we have to deal with baby dungeons. Long of the short of it, I still say we need to ask for better systems first to make the playerbase better otherwise it'll just be a waste. Look at everything that was nerfed or the 2k thread if you don't believe me.

---

How is any "start" going to be "everything"? How are those who wanted a 4-man extreme trial... everyone? How are just a few AoEs repeated in mostly random order so different from a few AoEs repeated in non-random, but nonetheless varied, order? How is the perfectly circular structure in which we fight Rathalos different from the perfectly circular structure in which we fight so many others? How is the phase-structure of the fight itself so different from other trials, save in that it is simpler (having fewer distinct phases overall)? How is not understanding the objectives of the fight (such as needing to kite Zenos until having survived for a sufficient, not-listed, time) or underestimating its dependence on gimmicks (such as in the Thancred vs. Ranjit) the same thing as needing as few mechanics, distinct phases, or party play as possible? You've badly conflated each of these.

And, again, if the bottleneck is the playerbase, then perhaps you could make suggestions towards the game's improving said playerbase? Without allowing for those suggestions, let alone providing any of your own, you're not just insisting that improvements to the playerbase are needed first, but that improvements to the playerbase are not feasible and therefore anything more than "baby" content is not feasible. They don't need to be wholly detailed or concrete, but there should at least be a span of improvements you think, given the right implementations, are possible and a smaller set you think are likely. Yours and others' opinions on which improvements are even remotely possible, and which are likely, can then guide discussion here and in any other thread that dares to suggest or care about anything beyond the lowest common denominator.

Simply precluding whatever you are not particularly fond of as not currently viable does nothing to aid discussion unless those suggestions are meant to be thrown into the game in the near future. There is no such implication here. This thread is equal parts discussion on future-proofing via reward systems, which gameplay loops we enjoy or at least chuckle kindly at, and what we want to see from experimental content. None of that is immediately deployable. Little of that is even concrete and/or packaged. There are suggestions that may threaten your preferences in the game, but this is about as far from that as possible.

I apologize if I come off as hostile to you; that is not my intent. But, just as much as the playerbase could make use of steady reasons to improve, so perhaps can how we communicate on the forums. There is an important place for determining useful scope on any thread, but to insist that a bottleneck not only be addressed, but dealt with, before we even discuss what we might want to use those fixes for, denies anyone the ability to progress topics in which they have the most to contribute. It's like purposely refusing to switch between tasks even when one hits a bog and could be helped by another's progress.

Throw us a rope here. Let's address the issue of the playerbase, sure, but let's also make some allowance for how those fixes might play out and how we can make use of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsalmaveth

Rath was a mess because they tried to take what was in another game and transplant it into THIS game without also adding in the mechanics of that game, the dodging. Saying it was 'giving us what we wanted' is completely disingenuous and wrong. I don't know where you're coming from on that... at all? The Rath fight was literally an event fight and they did a better job taking the FFXIV monster and transplanting that into MHW than Rath into FFXIV simply because of the mechanics issues. FFXIV doesn't have the dodge-roll and that makes Rath a MESS. Point blank. So people found a way round it in CHEESING him with four tanks. Healers are almost useless outside of being around to cleanse. Outside of that, everyone else is just asking for cart-bait.

So no, Rath was not 'giving us what we asked for'... it was trading monsters in an event.

---

So people didn't ask for 4 man extremes? People didn't ask for random mechs in things? I seem to remember those things being asked.. so yes they actually did. And like I said it was a start. People cheesed it because they couldn't do it normally cause of a lack of skill. I ran into so many people who couldn't understand simple things like moving out the way. It was a mess. That fight showed just how bad the playerbase is at this game. It's pretty bad. I'm not saying it was perfect.. but it did give people things they wanted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monk-dps

So people didn't ask for 4 man extremes? People didn't ask for random mechs in things? I seem to remember those things being asked.. so yes they actually did. And like I said it was a start. People cheesed it because they couldn't do it normally cause of a lack of skill. I ran into so many people who couldn't understand simple things like moving out the way. It was a mess. That fight showed just how bad the playerbase is at this game. It's pretty bad. I'm not saying it was perfect.. but it did give people things they wanted.

---

No, it wasn't a lack of skill... It was MISSING A KEY MECHANIC that the other game HAD. DODGE-ROLL. Have you PLAYED Monster-Hunter World?? That's a KEY mechanic that is used in that game. They literally changed up how this game works for a single fight and expected it to 'just work'. Of course it caused issues. Give me a break.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsalmaveth

No, it wasn't a lack of skill... It was MISSING A KEY MECHANIC that the other game HAD. DODGE-ROLL. Have you PLAYED Monster-Hunter World?? That's a KEY mechanic that is used in that game. They literally changed up how this game works for a single fight and expected it to 'just work'. Of course it caused issues. Give me a break.

---

When people can't move out the way when Rath takes 3 moves to turn to look at you charge up his move and then fire. You have penty of time to move, but people not moving is a lack of skill. You going to tell me people don't suck? If they don't then explain the biggest thread on this forum where people don't move, don't heal, don't tank, and don't press buttons. Rath while not perfect showed to me how bad most people are in this game.