Protesting Frontlines

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pibz

I wasn't referring to you, unless you also think it's fair to say that because they're removing morale frontlines going in naked is the same as going in with gear.

---

My mistake, I mistook "the defenders of having morale" to imply anyone defending Morale, myself included.

The thing with Morale being taken out as a temporary measure, is that it doesn't work in the long run (without changes similar to what I've suggested). If they just go "OK, everyone has enough Wolf Marks for i90, we can put Morale back in and there wouldn't be a difference", then anyone who comes in new at that point is screwed in the same way we're against currently.

if pvp gear is useless in frontlines they are the making new gear? ( which is totally stupid) coz Accuracy is totally useless in pvp and Pve gear is full of accuracy or atleast most of it, so u will have to make ur own set in between non Acc coil gear and Non accuracy Crafted gear.... they had months to think about the front line... im not sure if its true that morale wont work or if Accuracy will be 100% useless in front lines also but if they making frontlines like that where accuracy and morale are useless they are not worth my money, coz i thoguht about better ideas in 5 minuts.i STILL trust them, all we can do is continue speculating and wait till erything is comfirmed 100%.


PD:if both stats Accuracy and morale are uselses in front lines SE team would show a lack of intelligence and of ideas, would be a huge mistake.

Anyway you only need between 363 and 372 Accuracy in pvp (except if you are blind by a smn/sch).
Almost every pve gear got accuracy, and pvp got morale, it's hard to find a "BIS" for frontline actually. There is only 3-4 sets "available" and they are almost all useless at some point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pibz

Yes gear stats capped to i80 and going into PvP naked is totally the same, dat logic and fair point.

---

It's an extreme statement to show the point that I want to use my pvp gear in Frontlines. Obviously I don't realistically think that being naked is the same as level synced pve gear.

Also I main PvP with DRG, main PvE WHM. Since obtaining pvp gear i have thrown away all pve gear that my DRG had minus it's original AF set. So in reality I don't even have PvE for DRG. Not that i can't spend time in Levi or run the ex modes again to grab a wep, and grind for dungeon gear. It's still a kick in the face. Even if I'm for morale, I'll accept a compromise that allows pvp gear an advantage and useable in frontlines. Technically you can use it, but if it offers a disadvantage then it's a problem. That's why removing morale sucks, because right now there's no mentioning of tweaking pvp gear to make them viable.

Regarding accuracy caps, I'd imagine with ilvl sync it won't matter with accuracy.

If it works, it works. PvP expands, then more changes come later.

The past three months we had to slug through countless posts of how win traders cheated us by getting the status symbols before us! Now it is SE cheating us by taking our status symbols.

Both of which, also affected me as a player. Even being affected by the changes, I rather have a PvP mode that doesn't punish new players by gear melting them and giving them 1/3rd of the winners reward also deters the ones who get left behind from continuing to exp, because the gear melting only gets worse.

All in all, it punishes everyone. Bottlers, cheaters, and legit players.

Most of the suggested fixes here, end up with same result SE already intends to implement. Only harder to explain to the ones who don't PvP.

Both SE's and "Morale boost" negate 6 months of work for the community. It irked me for two days, then I noticed a lot of new names in Wolves Den. When I saw people from my server, I of course asked if they wanted to join a PvP shell, they said Yes.

When I am asked them why they are starting to PvP. The response was front lines. Picked up 12 new members yesterday with a handful of shouts in Mor Dhona, Mist Ward 1, and Wolves Den pier.

All in all, it looks like I need to make a third PvP shell if the trend continues.

This conversation isn't very constructive, and just shows us how pissed most are that they are making PvP less about dress up, and more about teamwork.

This isn't me saying you shouldn't be angry, but lashing out against people who agree with your words, but are against the intent, reason or cause that is making you say those words, isn't going to win anyone over.

Either way, I took the time to read this whole thread. I took what was said, versus what has been said in the past. Looked at the reason why these things are being said now all of a sudden. All in all, it was a huge waste of time.

My involvement in this thread, I consider it a loss lol. Why? Because some how I set Zulu_Kulu off again. Which is a shame, I normally agree with what he means to say, but argue against how he said it. I.E. starts his posts off with "Your wrong", quotes specific lines, and focuses on the one line versus the whole message.

Either way, in PvP, I focus on the people around me. Not the armor and items. I'm not into pathetic positions of power nor faulty status symbols. I'm into the fight itself, and the people I am fighting with/against..

I had fun collecting my i100 pieces with my friends, cross-server rivals, and linkshell mates. Them taking away my armors advantage in a new mode, doesn't negate the fun I had O.o

Either way, this is the entire communities fault. Our toxic lashing out at each other in wolves den, telling people to grind out for 300 hours in 30/40's before they can play with the big boys in 50's.

With this new mode, I don't have to tell newer members of my shell "You can legit 50's PvP with us a few months from now.....when you've earned false progress(morale gear)."

Now I get to say, "Cool come along, there are no needless obstacles to fear in this mode, just focus on learning how to read the flow of battle."

When someone bitches about losing, I flat out get to look at them and say "the other team beat you with skill/knowledge" not "Ohh they had better gear"

The past few pages had people saying the exact same things, but with various people splitting hair A,B, or C. And calling each other wrong over focusing on the smallest matter in the subjects.

If need to know why SE put the kid gloves on for this mode, review this thread and see how our community interacts with each other. Blame SE, then blame botters, then win traders, and then yourself lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kantei

If need to know why SE put the kid gloves on for this mode, review this thread and see how our community interacts with each other.

---

Pretty much this. Hopefully the community expands and the majority weeds out the toxicity plaguing the PvP forums.

I'm hopeful. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elmoria

Bonjour Edenlys, :)

Malheureusement, je ne suis pas porteuse de bonnes nouvelles.

• Les mirages ne seront pas affichés.
• Il sera nécessaire d’être de la même grande compagnie.

---

A french mod say on forum we need to have the same company to play together

Ridiculous

Well thats pretty dumb

Not being able to play with a friend who belongs to a different GC? Come on now.

Yeah, you can change your GC's affiliation. However, doesn't it reset your PVP rank to 0? Sigh.

I hope SE changes it, really. I was enjoying every little piece of information about Frontlines until this "same GC or screw you" thing...

Well to be completely fair, it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Before wolves den even came out they talked about Grand Company vs Grand Company vs Grand Company combat, which was a big clue that the one your in matters, and the pvp system itself shows it matters which one your in. I cant see a ton of people being surprised by this if they even read patch notes and never look on forums, it was all spelled out months ago. Arena pvp has generally always worked where its teams, so the fact you can work with other GC people makes sense there.

Now is it a good idea? I dont know, they probably could have just done 3 teams or took a page from guild wars and did server vs server vs server but the fact there are 3 GC's in the game and 3 sided pvp just kinda makes sense.

Maybe they will make it so your rank carries over if you change if enough people want it. Its not really a big deal to swap them PVE wise, so that might all work out ok.

That was my biggest fear. It will totally kill frontlines and also kill the variety of players you face..... I can also only play with one of my friends because of this now.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tandy

Maybe they will make it so your rank carries over if you change if enough people want it. Its not really a big deal to swap them PVE wise, so that might all work out ok.

---

Perhaps they should change it so the grind isn't so ridiculous such that switching Grand Company and resetting your Rank isn't such a big deal. The level of grind for PvP is already something which causes pretty much all the problems with PvP; it puts people off, it makes win trading so much more appealing, etc.

With PvE they went with "The game starts at 50, so 1-50 is easy", they really should have done the same with PvP. Except they couldn't. Because they put nothing into PvP except exactly what you get at Rank 1, so instead we have a massive grind to disguise the fact that there is absolutely nothing there. Sigh....

Guess I'm glad I never did any Wolves' Den stuff in the event I want to change my GC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blaon

Not being able to play with a friend who belongs to a different GC? Come on now.

Yeah, you can change your GC's affiliation. However, doesn't it reset your PVP rank to 0? Sigh.

I hope SE changes it, really. I was enjoying every little piece of information about Frontlines until this "same GC or screw you" thing...

---

You would also have to fully rank up again to be able to trade in gear for seals and do all GV leves for atma books.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tandy

Now is it a good idea? I dont know, they probably could have just done 3 teams or took a page from guild wars and did server vs server vs server but the fact there are 3 GC's in the game and 3 sided pvp just kinda makes sense.

Maybe they will make it so your rank carries over if you change if enough people want it. Its not really a big deal to swap them PVE wise, so that might all work out ok.

---

They could have done what FFXI did and have it be GC vs GC but still let you queue for whatever one you wanted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rose-Wild

That was my biggest fear. It will totally kill frontlines and also kill the variety of players you face..... I can also only play with one of my friends because of this now.....

---

Doomsayers. Lingering since alpha.

Most of my FC is the same GC(we talked about it early on saying there would probably be some benefit... lucky guess) I personally started Serpents and have been through flame and storm and back to serpents for the minions.

The change is not that bad. Granted, if i had stayed in 1 GC i would have had all the achievements by now. The PVP rank loss strikes me as the biggest issue. They should drop that if they can.

The idea that you can not party with your entire FC for Frontlines is a bit ridiculous, but on an up spin you can try to match up against people from your FC for fun. Have 3 divisions and have fun going at it with your friends.


I bet you can still find threads where people wished GC choice mattered more... can't please everyone.

I protest this protest.

Frontlines is going to be fun, looking forward to it.
Devs made the right choice to remove moral.

I don't mind it being GC vs GC vs GC in a perfect world where are GCs have roughly the same amount of people. But on my server, everyone is Immortal Flames and Twin Adder (my gc), and no one is maelstrom. I know like two maelstrom people, they are going to have lots of fun queueing up :/.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rin23

A french mod say on forum we need to have the same company to play together

Ridiculous

---

Oh god, please no..

Wtf were they thinking. It brings nothing to the table and just screws up party play and possibly creates imbalance among the gcs(specially in queue times) and just overall unnecessary mess . Just... why?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pibz

Oh god, please no..

Wtf were they thinking. It brings nothing to the table and just screws up party play and possibly creates imbalance among the gcs(specially in queue times) and just overall unnecessary mess . Just... why?!

---

to add variety.
you might have forgotten that they have access to more information than you. statistics on GC preferences, activity with seal accumulation and what not. If they have the data on the average stats and completion rate of those attempting coil1/2, prettry sure they have a more informed perspective on how to introduce something like Frontlines.
XI had a similar thing with their PvP. City-states determined your team and each team played for control of a zone.

TL;DR - dev understand of the game > your understanding

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geracia2

to add variety.
you might have forgotten that they have access to more information than you. statistics on GC preferences, activity with seal accumulation and what not. If they have the data on the average stats and completion rate of those attempting coil1/2, prettry sure they have a more informed perspective on how to introduce something like Frontlines.
XI had a similar thing with their PvP. City-states determined your team and each team played for control of a zone.

TL;DR - dev understand of the game > your understanding

---

To be fair, this is the same team that said less than 100 people would beat T5 before it was nerfed, and we see how that turned out. They also got wrong how many subscriptions would be around at the beginning (not that this is a bad thing). I could understand there being skepticism on their understanding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geracia2

to add variety.
you might have forgotten that they have access to more information than you. statistics on GC preferences, activity with seal accumulation and what not. If they have the data on the average stats and completion rate of those attempting coil1/2, prettry sure they have a more informed perspective on how to introduce something like Frontlines.
XI had a similar thing with their PvP. City-states determined your team and each team played for control of a zone.

TL;DR - dev understand of the game > your understanding

---

What does this have to do with perspective?!
And variety? It's the exact opposite, it'll restrict people into not being able to play with whoever they want, and it may cause who knows how many unnecessary hurdles to the system, and for what?!
There's 0 to be gained from it vs unrestricted team building, it's just *possible* losses all over for everyone. It has nothing to do with population distribution, although that could play a factor in worsening certain factions queues, again for no reason.
You should never gimp a PvP system unnecessarily because it's more immersive for roleplayers or whatever.
Also, do you really see the devs as some kind of infallible gods? oO

Grand Company v Grand Company v Grand Company was one of the main reasons I figured Frontlines would be semi-open world and not something you use the Duty Finder for.

In the sense of an open world, single server kind of thing, it makes sense; Maelstrom wins, everyone in the Maelstrom gets a small bonus outside Frontlines. Sort of like Conquest in XI, but not shit. Plenty of reason to participate on that alone.

With it being Duty Finder content, the three way is just there because plot.

I rerolled two days ago of GC because of this, cos i read the frontline preview and it says you fight for your respective GC... :/

Well, Look what we have here SS of French Forum; Frontlines are bound to your GC. Makes sense Lore wise, yet for entertainment and being able to play with your friends, SE says NOPE. Once again you have shattered the dreams of your people.. You have tainted combination pvp in wolves den. You do not promote group play within PvP but shun it. You wish to not see your subscribers play with friends because of a decision made early in the game to choose their GC and had actively put much work into leveling up their rank to only now say you may switch but you will lose your PvP rank entirely. Good job SE- for 2.3 you might want to fix the rank system so that people may convert to play with friends..

Thanks.

Did some people seriously not read anything in game or notice how your pvp abilities/Xp/rank/titles were all set up by GC? Did them saying before wolves den that GCvGCvGC pvp was coming not register before ranking up?

While it is annoying, and I agree it's probably worth making rank transfer....I still wonder how it's surprising to anyone?

I just want to say that I really think this is a bad idea.

I want to play with my friends, but they chose different GCs at launch. This is supposed to be an MMO; we're supposed to play together. We can't do that with this system. It just makes this feel like another solo experience...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geracia2

to add variety.
you might have forgotten that they have access to more information than you. statistics on GC preferences, activity with seal accumulation and what not. If they have the data on the average stats and completion rate of those attempting coil1/2, prettry sure they have a more informed perspective on how to introduce something like Frontlines.
XI had a similar thing with their PvP. City-states determined your team and each team played for control of a zone.

TL;DR - dev understand of the game > your understanding

---

Rofl more variety = always face the same people??? And lol at devs knowing their games. If the devs played the game and pvp they wouldn't come up with all this absurd ideas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tandy

Did some people seriously not read anything in game or notice how your pvp abilities/Xp/rank/titles were all set up by GC? Did them saying before wolves den that GCvGCvGC pvp was coming not register before ranking up?

While it is annoying, and I agree it's probably worth making rank transfer....I still wonder how it's surprising to anyone?

---

Do you even pvp? You know how long it takes to rank up the legit way? Have you considered that maybe people made new friends since they choosed GC? Please stop being silly.

I thought there were no consequences to choosing a GC. Now the consequence is you can't play with friends.

Well with this all said; When you switch Gc's do you lose the pvp ranks all together when you switch or do you keep them but they are tied only to the Gc you earned them on so when you switch back they are there again? I'm sure someone had to of tested this before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lum

Well with this all said; When you switch Gc's do you lose the pvp ranks all together when you switch or do you keep them but they are tied only to the Gc you earned them on so when you switch back they are there again? I'm sure someone had to of tested this before.

---

I have tested this and can confirm you don't lose them. Same goes for GC seals. I'm Rank 19 with the Flames and 14 with Gridania.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lum

Well with this all said; When you switch Gc's do you lose the pvp ranks all together when you switch or do you keep them but they are tied only to the Gc you earned them on so when you switch back they are there again? I'm sure someone had to of tested this before.

---

Yup, you dont lost rank, I've went switch to maelstrom to grinding again when i got rank 30 adder awhile ago, and went back when they released rank 40, my rank 30 was still there.

saw this coming, don't really know how you couldnt have seen this coming. the whole idea of this thing since day one was grand companies fighting it out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rose-Wild

Do you even pvp? You know how long it takes to rank up the legit way? Have you considered that maybe people made new friends since they choosed GC? Please stop being silly.

---

Of course I understand how long it takes to rank up, which is why I stated swapping ranks when you swap GC's would make sense. I also understand people making new friends and wanting them to be in the same GC and all that. I am not being silly. What I dont understand is people being suprised by this finding at THIS POINT. Its been clear it would be this way since beta, its NOT A SURPRISE.

I think its something that will get changed and maybe give you one swap every X amount of time where your PVP rank goes with you. I sadly cant suggest anything other than people be more aware of things in game to prevent surprises to themselves like this in the future. If they tell you over and over again something, maybe start believing its true???

Can't see them letting Rank carry over, since that would mess with Achievements.

Honestly, they should just kill the grind. Rank 1 to Rank 40 should be no harder than Level 1 to Level 50.

It does suck that they only reason they're doing this is for a plot point, though. Would have been nice if there were some mechanics to back it up. Kind of hard with it being an instance though, could always throw in some Grand Company specific PvP actions, always bothered me that PvP actions are split into 3 tabs for each Grand Company, yet they're all identical... Oh wait, we have to have a level play field... Meh...

I guess they could always turn Carteneau into a Conquest style feature, even if it is instanced... Would probably have to be done in a fairly round about sort of way, but they could work it so each servers Grand Companies vie for control of the region, and the winners just transfer that victory to their server when they exit the instance, and then it just gets tallied weekly. That would at least give some sense that there is a reason for them working it like this, though I imagine most will still be displeased with it.

Sorry for quoting back a day but I couldn't let this slide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Menriq

To be fair, this is the same team that said less than 100 people would beat T5 before it was nerfed, and we see how that turned out. They also got wrong how many subscriptions would be around at the beginning (not that this is a bad thing). I could understand there being skepticism on their understanding.

---

Lets not re-write game history so quickly. They were correct. 8 People beat T5 before it was nerfed. T5 wasn't cleared for a long time and people were insisting some of the mechanics were simply broken. The devs left the content at the very hard setting untill BluGarter cleared it the first time. After they cleared it a patch was released along-side a post from YoshiP where they made it easier. http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/113486 It's only been 8 months, lets not start making silly strawman arguments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SeraphimXI

Sorry for quoting back a day but I couldn't let this slide.

Lets not re-write game history so quickly. They were correct. 8 People beat T5 before it was nerfed. T5 wasn't cleared for a long time and people were insisting some of the mechanics were simply broken. The devs left the content at the very hard setting untill BluGarter cleared it the first time. After they cleared it a patch was released along-side a post from YoshiP where they made it easier. http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/113486 It's only been 8 months, lets not start making silly strawman arguments.

---

I'm not making strawman arguments. Yes, people were working on T5 for a while. They fixed bugs, which I don't consider nerf. You could certainly argue the twisters were a nerf, and I would probably concede that. However, once you know something can be killed legitimately, then it just becomes a matter of execution. We'll never know if more people would have cleared it before that patch because the time between BG's kill and the patch happened relatively quickly. I would be more than happy to discuss this further, but this isn't the forum for that since we've gotten off topic from this thread.