Enemy Sign Functionality

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rukkirii

For those asking specifically about limiting the ability to place signs by the leader -- our plan is to start out with this limitation in place. The main reason being that there is a concern that parties might get confused if signs are placed randomly on multiple enemies. However, we're considering opening this up to other members but would like to base this decision off of feedback after you try it out.

---

How about allowing party leaders to flag other party members with certain rights?
Give others the ability to invite new members, mark maps, etc.

EDIT : And then I see Rex's post above mine. The flagging ability could be extended to more than just map marking though.

I think it is also important to give PT members a command to move their target to signed mob.
(In FFXI, we use /assist <PT_member_name> to target his target. I hope there will be a more smart implementation for XIV).

Agreed with all above. If you are unsure, give the leader an option in the party settings to "allow ally/enemy signs from party members". They will most commonly be used by people during a Free Company event, and most Free Companies will be in voice chat anyway.

The final alternative is give the party members the ability is to make the leader's signs a larger or more obvious appearance (different colour or a larger sign), that way there will be no confusion when 2 targets are specified.

Three things:
1. If we actually need "I NEED A HEAL" signals, etc, they should not be the same type of sign we're talking about; they should be pop-ups that disappear within seconds, as opposed to the "THIS IS THE TANK" or "DO NOT HELP ME, I AM KITING" kind of ally signs I'm imagining, which would have to be toggled on/off. On the other hand, the XI elitist inside of me just wants to say, "If you have to ask, someone's not doing their job."

2. If only one person in a huge group (i.e. Free Company) can control markings, that will be a mess--practically a job in itself (and a wasted party slot). That said, I'm in favor of restricted access over just opening access to enemy signals to everyone. If we really do see 30+ people working together, having more than one person with access seems logical, but having 30+ people marking makes them meaningless. Allowing leaders to allot rights per person seems to make the most sense.

3. I think the functionality of signals could be improved. Rather than simply pictures floating around, make them useful. Examples:

• If a mob is asleep and you don't want anyone to attack it, put a "DO NOT ATTACK" symbol on it; in addition to the icon, party members cannot attack it until the signal is removed.
  • Players should be able to disable/enable the effects of these "functional" symbols, i.e. if the party leader is a jerk/idiot and signals a mob that's attacking as do not attack, you could just type /sign (or something) and signals would just be pictures again. This is self-limiting, kind of--if a player frequently ignores real signals, they'll become undesirable, fast.
• For enemy targets, go with the numbered target idea. Then, allow /target <t1>,<t2>, etc. Allow mobs to be marked more than once. Then, half of a group can macro t1, the rest t2, and BLMs use t3, and the leader(s) can assign those groups to different targets or have them all on one.
• A kiter could be marked as no-help, so that no one could cure them while they build hate. Again, if a leader is being a jerk, just disable the effects of signals.

Also, there should be a failsafe in case of death or d/c. If no members are able to mark a target, all party members should temporarily gain access to add/remove the aforementioned marks.

Still, you know the best alternative to all of this? Everyone knowing what they're doing. >.>;

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcell

3. Give us a macro command for targeting specific marks. This would help increase their effectiveness in battle. When their is a group of monsters, especially when they converge on a single target, it can be difficult to pick a specific one out of the group.

---

Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeease yes. Why do we not have this?!