Concerns over frontlines(aka please don't do it like this)

So there's always been the idea circling around that frontlines would be gc vs gc vs gc, and from the latest(2.28) patch notes it appears that's where it's headed.

"Players can no longer change Grand Company allegiance while queuing for a duty.
* This adjustment is in preparation for the new Frontline system scheduled to be implemented in patch 2.3."

I always suspected(and kind of feared) this but i was waiting for concrete confirmation that this would happen(and this looks like a pretty huge hint).

Unless something is drastically changed about gcs and pvp allegiance this is going to make for one big mess.
Now here's what worries me:
1. Class distribution among GCs is pretty much non existent because players tend(not always) to choose their starting city gc as their own. So you would have no healers in the immortal flames(easiest example).. this is terrifying for the future of pvp.
2. If they reduce the waiting period when changing GCs some balance could come out of it, or people would just stack in the one that has the best classes/chance of winning(they probably will even with the 1 month restriction) or simply to be able to play with their friends, leading to unpredictable populations in grand companies.
3. It would hamper group play to a great extent, as you would be able to queue up with your friends easily(and you should be).

I think this 3 are enough to make the point.

If you are going to do it, make sure balance is chosen over immersion,it sure is a nice concept to have people fight for their company but useless if it's not properly thought out and balanced.

Now why would i make this thread? - We have no concrete info on it, it's still moderately far away.
Well we had no info about wolves den and as such could not give any feedback before it was released, and look how alive that part of the game is.
So this is simply to start the discussion, i may be totally wrong and this will perfectly balanced if someone could explain how. Or i'm jumping the gun too much and reading too much into it, please discuss.

Ps: Sorry for the long post

Edit: There are other points that could be made, but the main one is that this seems like something that will only potentially get in the way of a better pvp experience while offering nothing in exchange for the added unnecessary complexity it brings to the system.
Forgot to add, a way to simplify this greatly would be, (like you do in leves) to be able to play for x gc regardless of which one you are tied to, this seems to me a far better and simpler way of going around the whole gc vs gc vs gc concept.

You don't seem to realize that you can level more than one class, so even if you choose the flames because you started as a gladiator, you can still level up both conjurer and arcanist to heal.

Healer from Limsa here, Twin Adders da bes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mcshiggs

You don't seem to realize that you can level more than one class, so even if you choose the flames because you started as a gladiator, you can still level up both conjurer and arcanist to heal.

---

True enough, but people tend to stick to one class and master it(not to mention gearing up isn't particularly easy in pvp, unless you wintrade), plus unless they provide some kind of tool that says, hey x gc is lacking in this y role for pvp, class distribution will still be uneven as a lot of people don't level, much less play all classes.

Either way doesn't change the fact that people can just stack in one gc and completely break any semblance of good distribution(as it is currently). Perhaps the class thing shouldn't be the main point i agree, guess that would be the fact that for playing with anyone at any given time you would have to be in the same gc.

Edit: Furthermore the system shouldn't be built to center around people who have multiple classes and are willing to switch to whatever role is necessary for the sake of class balance(yeah, right).
You are also underestimating the number of people that just have 1 or 2 classes, and again this people are likely to have chosen their starting city company as their own.

The healer stacking on the 2 gcs was just the easiest example, any type of class stacking is bad as imbalances are prone to happen in pvp.

Healer allied to Immortal Flames reporting for duty

/salute


I think that they will likely have a system in place like in the duty roulette and the current PvP system, where it will take some balance of classes to form the instance (Maybe 2 tanks, 2 healers, 4 dps, or something). I do not think and REALLY HOPE THAT IT IS NOT completely random whoever-queues-gets-in classes. This is horrible in other games (Getting all tanks, no healers, all healers, etc)

I agree with the OP, I don't mind the Grand Companies playing a role (perhaps a unique GC action or trait, gear, or story), but I would be disappointed if Frontlines ended up being divided up by grand companies. Mostly because of your point number three, it would hurt group play, which will hurt PvP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Titor

Healer allied to Immortal Flames reporting for duty

/salute


I think that they will likely have a system in place like in the duty roulette and the current PvP system, where it will take some balance of classes to form the instance (Maybe 2 tanks, 2 healers, 4 dps, or something). I do not think and REALLY HOPE THAT IT IS NOT completely random whoever-queues-gets-in classes. This is horrible in other games (Getting all tanks, no healers, all healers, etc)

---

Yes, but note the increased waiting times we get in wolves den from having this restrictions, so if the class distribution was to be imbalanced and role restrictions were to be in place then waiting times would suffer also.
But yes i am hoping they do implement some role restriction(maybe remove melee and ranged differentiation if they are able to balance them out).

I agree with OP and understand why you posted it so early without information BUT
to start a discussion you still need some grounds and hypothesis are just that hypothesis which we adjust according to our believes, desires and needs, in absence of any indication of where it will go.

The reality, IF (even this is still and hypothesis) something truely happens, may be totally different then the so many hypothesis that we could formulate. It can be a total new concept with totally new ways and so forth. We dont know yet. and in my opinion is too early.

Your post is meant as a pre-warning but the interest of a game is to work, if there is too much unbalance it will create raging posts and complains and this isnt something a company wants, so I strongly believe that it is already planed and accurate. How do I know ? the same you know it wont be...Speculations...

It is too early to discuss this, maybe we should wait and then complain, in the end though neither ways will do something, once a decision is taken, is hard to come back and IF (yep again this word) if a turn back is to be made is never done right asap.

I agree but still too early

Mei

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeiUshu

snip

Mei

---

While indeed it is too early, we have known that frontlines would be a 3-way battle between gcs for a while now, what i always feared is that they would implement restrictions on which side you'd play based on your own gc, we'll know more from the E3 live letters i just don't really like where this seems to be headed.

Currently swapping GC's resets PVP rank, right? You'd lose access to all the fancy armor, I think. Also, I refuse to betray Mommy Merlwyb. TEAR THE SULTANA LIMB FROM LIMB! EULALIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA. Oh wait...

Also, I agree with #3 completely, but I disagree with your other points. I don't think many people would want to risk losing progression in pvp unless it was to play with friends. But that's just how I think.