Hi everyone,
I wanted to make a suggestion; can we keep our PVP ranks when we switch between different Grand Companies?
I don't see the point/incentive to reset our PVP ranks, as they are not easily gained, and it prevents anyone (who are high in rank) from wanting to join my friends or FC.
side Q: And another questions if I gain rank 40 in one GC, switch GC to play with a friend and am now rank 1, am I not able to equip the gear anymore?
ps. did a search and couldn't find this mentioned, and don't think it was asked in the latest QA.
PVP ranks and changing Grand Companies
Printable View
-
07-24-2014, 10:37 AMZanctusPVP ranks and changing Grand Companies
-
07-25-2014, 08:39 AMMaluber
As much as I would like that to happen, it isn't. Just take a look at the class PvP achievements and you'll see each of the GC achievements for leveling up with them.
As to the gear, you'll be locked from it until you meet the required level stated on it. -
07-25-2014, 09:03 AMChiramu
OP you just want to change GC with no repercussions. That's why it is made the way it is. Company loyalty...
-
07-25-2014, 02:38 PMVandrilThey should apply the Rule of Fun to this feature.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiramu
Is it fun to be locked out of your PvP Level just because you want to play with a friend in another company? No? Then it shouldn't be.
This is a game. Games should be fun. There should never be anything in a game that is not fun in some way. This is not fun. It should not be in the game.
There are other costs to changing GCs that don't cripple gameplay for a time. This cost doesn't need to be there to help stop players from changing GCs on a whim.
I remember hearing something about them maybe eventually adding GC-specific PvP abilities, so I can see it for that, but, even then, it's still not fun, so it shouldn't be. -
07-25-2014, 02:44 PMPhenidate
GC loyalty didn't mean we'd be kept from playing with friends until this patch. Most of my FC can group together for frontlines now, but it cost half a million gill and hundreds of pvp levels.
-
07-26-2014, 06:04 AMDivinemightFun and Friendship, this is pretty common argument from mordern days gamers. Lore is not important in front of Fun and Freindship. System is not important in front of Fun and Friendship. Nothing is important in front of fun and friendship.... vice versa and goes on........Quote:
Originally Posted by Vandril
Let's take WoW for example, my friend plays Human for the Alliance, but I myself is a Blood Elf for the Horde. In the name of Fun and Friendship, why the hell we cant not play together? Why? This is a game. Games should be fun. There should never be anything in a game that is not fun in some way. This is not fun. It should not be in the game.
If you are weighting Friendship and Fun so much, you need another important element: the sacrfice. You guys do not want to sacrfice for each other. This comes back to one intersting issue, are you guys really friends? I would do anything for a friend, but that is just me. -
07-26-2014, 03:25 PMTralaix
I would like to see a one time only free change. You keep your level and rank when you switch. One and done. That would allow FCs, friends, etc, to all be able to play together.
-
07-26-2014, 05:14 PMVandrilLore can be slightly altered in minimal ways to make it work with less unfun systems. And of course the system is not more important than fun, since the system exists for the sake of fun. This is a game. It's entire purpose is to be entertaining. No one can truly argue against this fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinemight
And don't you even try to pull the whole "do it for your friends" business. That's entirely beside the point. The mechanic in the game is not fun. In fact, it is explicitly unfun. The "sacrifice" you're mentioning is entirely arbitrary and unnecessary. It should not exist in its current form. Make it fun, or at least not unfun, or scrap it. No one likes being forced to reset progression for no reason other than "because it's designed that way".
Also note that the Rule of Fun, as I call it, is not just some sort of recent gamer's fad. It's actually a game design concept that's been sweeping the video game industry since the industry came to be. -
07-26-2014, 06:18 PMLiselsia
Am I really reading posts of people trying to make a argument that Lore is somehow more important then Family and Community. [/sigh]
-
07-26-2014, 09:48 PMRemilia_Nightfall
While some people might be willing to switch GC to play with friends, I am sure that most people would just try and jump on the winning bandwagon.
So, no. -
07-27-2014, 06:23 PMVandrilThat wouldn't be a problem because of one hilarious reason: a vast majority of the people who would switch over to the winning GC are also the same people who aren't all too great at PvP and are looking for carries, which means that that always winning GC would... stop winning all the time. So, in the end, free switching would actually help balance PvP. XDQuote:
Originally Posted by Remilia_Nightfall
Of course, it's not like people would switch willy-nilly even if they did keep their PvP levels, as there are other costs and requirements. -
07-27-2014, 09:54 PMDivinemightNo it won't, you will just end up with no Frontline at all. You will just end up with one GC is lacking of enough players and everyone will be getting horrible long que. By the way, Twin Adder is already have issue because their much smaller population on the Primal. Your arguments is short sighed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vandril
-
07-28-2014, 04:37 AMmcgoo94
Sounds like you want everything handed to you. I have friends that switched over GCs, rank 40 pvp and had no problem switching and reranking back to 40. If you want to play with friends switch over, shows more about your character doing it for your friends than not doing it because of a video game rank.
-
07-28-2014, 07:17 AMVandrilIf this were true, then we'd already have that problem due to the fact that players already have to choose one of 3 GCs. Many people personally like their GCs and take pride in them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinemight
You're right. I (and the OP, too, I'd imagine) want my PvP ranks that I already earned handed to me. I don't want them taken away; that's not fun. Earning the ranks the first time is fun as a progression mechanic, but having to re-earn them due to them being arbitrarily linked to individual GCs is unfun and bad game design. Expecting and receiving a certain level of comfort/entitlement in a game is a good thing. Refer to the Rule of Fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by mcgoo94
Also, don't confuse "wanting everything handed" and "wanting what was already earned". -
07-28-2014, 07:54 AMDivinemightExactly the opposite, restriction is what have been preventing a mass jump to the winning wagon (Malestorm). Rule of fun, it is merely a laughable joke. It's logic has holes everywhere. Modern games is not linear, it is made up by the choices, and these choices will alter course the game. Like it or not, your so called rule of fun is just a sugarcoated excuses for you to get second chance, by sacrificing game system for your own good. You apparently forgot that the game on purposely send you all tour for three cities before you choose your GC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vandril
-
07-28-2014, 11:44 AMmcgoo94No, you didn't earn rank 40 or whatever your rank is currently in the other two GC so you DO want it handed to you hunny :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Vandril
-
07-28-2014, 03:52 PMYaHiKoDrG
Lets go with the old FFXI route to keep the batle in but a new storyline to allow different GC members to fight together. So in 2.4 we put an end to evil plots and instead of GC fighting over the land in frontlines we now practice combat in skirmishes with the Crystal Braves.
-
07-28-2014, 04:53 PMVandrilTechnically, you're correct. But that's what I'm arguing against. The fact that PvP Ranks are restricted by GC is just a bad way to design it. It makes players feel like they're being punished for the sake of doing what they want to do and playing with who they want to play with. You don't want to make your players feel like they're being punished when using a mechanic of your game. It's self-defeating.Quote:
Originally Posted by mcgoo94
Come on, Divine. You know very well that it wouldn't turn out like that in the end. Yes, people would mass transfer over the Maelstrom. However, most of these people will also be people who are not good at PvP and/or want to be carried. This, in turn, would make Maelstrom not always win anymore, which would cause those same people to jump to the GC that wins every game now that Maelstrom doesn't, which would make that GC lose more often, and so on. Eventually, the GCs would reach a balance when those GC-hoppers realize that hopping isn't helping them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinemight
First off, I'd like you to avoid ad hominem attacks toward me. My memory is fine, and even if I was using the Rule of Fun as an excuse for my own personal gain - which I'm not, as I have no intention of leaving The Immortal Flames - the fact still wouldn't be relevant to whether or not the Rule of Fun applied here and is the right way to go. The condescending tone you're taking toward me is not appreciated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinemight
Second, I think you're misunderstanding the point of the Rule of Fun, because what you just said implies that you believe that the Rule of Fun requires that a game be linear, without choice, and without depth, when that's not the case at all. What the Rule of Fun essentially states is that as many aspects of a game as possible should be designed to be fun for the player and that aspects of a game's design that are unfun or inhibit fun should not be kept. This does not mean that a game must be linear, lack choice, and lack depth. What it means is that the game's non-linearity must be fun, its choices must be fun, and its depth must be fun. It's really a very strait forward game design philosophy - if it isn't fun or even restricts fun, then don't put it into your game. There are no holes in the logic of the Rule of Fun, as it embodies the entire purpose of games to begin with: entertainment.
The fact that PvP Ranks are tied to GCs and that they reset when you change GCs is in no way necessary, nor is it fun. If it was necessary for the game to function properly, then it would be an exception to the Rule of Fun. However, it is in no way necessary for the game's function, balance, or anything else. It is an entirely arbitrary restriction added to the game. It doesn't even effect most players, since only a handful actually PvP seriously enough to notice the loss in PvP Ranks, which means that, on top of being a useless, arbitrary, and unfun restriction, it's also an uneven and unfair restriction.
Ignoring for a moment whether or not you feel that PvP Ranks being tied to GCs is important for GC population balance, let me ask: do you honestly feel like having your PvP Ranks reset when you change GCs is fun? -
07-29-2014, 12:37 AMDivinemightFirst of all, out of respect, do not take this personal, this is not about you. I am merely agaisnt the idea of using Fun and Friendship as sugarcoated excuses to destroy a game's lore and mechanic. The best illustration for this would be WoW. (Yeah, WoW again.) In the past two expanions, Blizzard has been bend over for player's subscription. To make it a long story short, you can see imblanace between population Horde and Alliance on all WoW servers. The ratio can be as bad as 8:2.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vandril
Use friendship as excause is evern worst. The outlines for Frontline has been released very early. If you are friends that want to play together, you would be open the bridge communication to determine which GC you want to play together..
No offense, but you seems to got it all wrong. The penalty for GC switch is minor, it will never put you in a postion of being useless. Let's take a look, shall we?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vandril
First of all, you do lost your PvP rank with yous own GC, but impact is very minor because there is no morale involve (thanks god). There is no worry about not being able to equip previously earned PvP gear when switching to other GC. No one would wear them at first place because morale has no role in the Frontline. Everyone will be sync to ilvl 80.
Secondly, PvP action system has been tweaked. All players now have access to the primary PvP actions (besides those attribute ones). It doesnt really put you in a devastating akward position after you switch, you will never end up as an easy prey. Not sure why people think it is a world end scenario.
From my opinion on this matter, the truth is people want to keep their superiority perforamnce when they are switching to new GC: shorter pvp action cd, longer duartion, and a little damage boost. It really has nothing to do with Fun and Friendship. Again, this is not a personal attack against you, but NO, NO, and NO. (It is important, so I have to repeat it for three times.) I dont want to see a game to sacrifice its lore and game mechanic for such stupid intention.
If people want to hop on the winning wagon (Malestorm). It is fine, pay the minor penalty. If people want to play with your friends, that is definitely a yes, but this penalty is merely a small price to pay. -
07-29-2014, 06:56 AMVandrilAlright, thank you. I can sympathize with that, for sure. The Rule of Fun is often used as an excuse by some, when, really, it's a general philosophy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinemight
I somewhat agree, but also hold reservations as to this being used as an example.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinemight
On one hand, I agree that Blizzard had gone too far with bending over backwards to appease their players. Players often complain and make "demands"/suggestions without realizing the implications of the changes they want, and Blizzard was fairly bad in that they often followed along these suggestions blindly, not even trying to mitigate the negative repercussions that spawned from these suggested changes. I have fairly high hopes for the new WoW expansion due to their "take it or leave it, but let me explain why we're doing it this way" take on it so far, or, at least, I have higher hopes for WoD than I had for Cata or MoP. Their stance is strong, firm, and opinionated, but they're also talking with players and still considering what they're saying that they want. But all this is another conversation entirely.
On the other hand, WoW is a pretty terrible example to make a comparison to when talking factions, faction pride, and faction changing. The reasons for this are that WoW's faction choices are larger and more all-encompassing than just who you can play with. Both factions have their own set of unique, exclusive races, each with their own sets of stories, lore, and unique feel, as well as unique abilities (racial abilities) that can greatly effect gameplay. As well, the entire game is split in two. Depending on which faction you choose, nearly every quest in the game changes, with some only existing in any form to only one faction. Even the zones you quest in from start to finish are entirely different. My point is that there's a lot of exclusivity to the factions. Each faction has many things that the other faction does not have, which adds an extreme depth to the split of the factions. While that's not a bad thing in and of itself, FFXIV does not have such complex faction depth.
In FFXIV, every race can choose any of the three "factions" (GCs). No race has racials, aside from some very minor passive Attribute and Elemental Resistance bonuses, making race choice entirely aesthetic, and not a gameplay choice like it is in many MMOs and, even if it were, since races are not GC restricted, it wouldn't matter. No GC has any big-time exclusive content - the biggest exclusive content I've seen between GCs is the occasional GC Seal gear piece, where some of them have different Secondary Stats on them depending on which GC you're in. The quests are all the same, minus some dialogue differences, so not even that is exclusive to any particular GC.
In summary, there are a lot of factors in WoW's faction system which increase complexity and influence faction choice that make it an ineligible comparator to FFXIV's GC system, which lacks said complexity.
Oh, actually, I think you might have misunderstood me, there. I wasn't saying that it makes the player useless in what you quoted, I was calling the PvP Rank GC-restriction useless, as in it doesn't serve any real function. I doubt it even really helps keep the people who want to mass exodus over to Maelstrom from doing so, because those people will probably do it anyway. Given that, I don't see what purpose this restriction serves that makes up for how it feels so negative.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinemight
Which brings me to my next point. I agree that the difference is fairly minor (at least until they fix PvP gear in Frontlines, however they decide to do so), not to mention temporary (since you can just re-earn the lost ranks), but that's not my problem with the restriction. My problem with it is that it doesn't feel good. When you change GCs, as a PvPer, you feel like you're being punished for doing so. You don't feel restricted from doing so, you just feel like you're taking a punishment to do so. There should definitely be restrictions to GC switching, and they should definitely be felt in some way (such as that loss of 50,000 Gil and inability to use the old GC's seals - it's not much, but most players will feel it), but the PvP Rank restriction is almost depressing. It's the only restriction that directly effects your ability to compete in content, however minor an effect it does have, and that makes it feel like a terrible thing rather than just part of the process.
As someone who really only plays MMOs to PvP, this particular restriction hits a sore spot. Sure, I'll never feel the effects of it myself, since I don't intend to join the Adders or Maelstrom unless I just want to grind GC Ranks (not PvP Ranks) in them, but I can understand why it would bother other people. As such, I'm wary of how such a restriction could actually be bad for overall PvP health, in the fairly long term. -
08-04-2014, 10:13 PMSir_HermesHonestly, I'm in Maelstrom and want to change to Immortal Flames, the only thing holding me back is being rank 35. I like the way the immortal flame's gear looks, as well as the fact that everybody and their mothers want to be on Maelstrom. Its frustrating when my entire server is Maelstrom and on the Data Server Flames are constantly held back. You're probably right about a lot of people wanting to hop, but I think the ONE TIME CHANGE will really limit people's desire, because if they decide to go back it will be rank 0.Quote:
Originally Posted by Remilia_Nightfall
-
08-05-2014, 07:06 AMDivinemightSame old rank excuse again? You were getting 20 points for losing and 40 to 60 points for winning. What are you getting now? 600 400 200? Excuse is an excuse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir_Hermes
-
08-06-2014, 10:55 AMA_Lost_Time_MageParty Leader Function
Why not have it set that the party leader conforms the rest of the party to that party leaders GC temporarily?
Ex:
One Drg for Maelstrom invites 2 friends. One Flames Whm. One Adders Blm. Since he is party leader, the queue system syncs them to the party leaders GC. So in this case, they would all play for Maelstrom once they joined the match.
No restrictions.
No Rank/GC standing losses.
No permanent changes.
Promotes playing for various reasons, to keep ppl on the FL battlefield.
This allows you to make a choice in fun or loyalty.
You care a lot about your GC winning, then make the choice to queue alone or with others in your GC.
You care about playing with friends? Queue up with them and you won't care which GC you play for. -
08-07-2014, 02:27 AMSkeetChange that probably to definitely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir_Hermes
As a Flame, I've had to sit through many losing battles as well as sit through immature arguments between kids and trolls doing whatever they want. But to the point, I've seen somewhere between 10-20 people cry about how bad the Flames were and then proceed to saying how they were leaving for Maelstrom. Thankfully, these are mostly the scrubs who do under 20k dps as a dps class or have over 5 deaths with no kills. Sad. Recently, I've seen familiar names from these same scrubs in the Maelstrom roster. Explains why Maelstrom seems to be losing a lot more than compared to the first 2 weeks of FL's. -
08-07-2014, 03:02 AMGorYep, which is why I've actually considered going to Flames at one point just to get away from them. I've seen some names flip-flop from both Adders and Flames sides, over here to Maelstrom. They don't listen. They don't follow instructions. They don't coordinate when told to. They tell the team to do the wrong things such as regrouping to go BACK to Temple where they have wiped 3 times already at. They try to be cool kids, 1v1'ing in the middle of nowhere and get smashed. They come in as tanks and stack vit and in level 40 crafted gray gear lookin for a carry. And when you do tell them what to do, all you get is a bunch of biching from them telling "you" to shutup and at the end of the match you will see them consistently at a whopping 10-8k damage done and topping KO meters. They have been causing us to lose alot. They come to Maelstrom for a carry but little do they realize that the fail is within themselves and they take it with them wherever they go.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skeet
-
08-07-2014, 03:20 AMLogo
Why does everyone decide to overlook the fact that they have added a serious consequence to a decision you already made that had no consequence at all at first.
I chose my GC because I happen to be in Limsa at the time.
Now it decides if I can play with my friends.
Thats just poor game play planning.
As for the Lore aspect, yeah we are already buying in to riding a giant chicken,
I'm sure they can figure some intrigue of why a mixed group of bandits would be fighting each other.
They have people they pay for that. -
08-07-2014, 03:56 AMDivinemightI love the ignorance. During June or July 2013, there is already an inforamtion in regard to FF14's large scale Player vs Player, the Frontline:Quote:
Originally Posted by Logo
You are already informed in 2013 that the Frontline is going to be Immortal Flame vs Twin Adders vs Malestrom. The only difference right now is instead of being an open world PvP zone, we are getting the instance battleground. This information is released long before Wolf's Den installation. Is this your own ignorance or is it a bad design? I ponder.Quote:
Frontlines.
Frontlines is designed for large scale PvP battles and will feature epic battles between the three city-states of Gridania, Limsa Lominsa and Ul'dah as they battle for control over some newly discovered ancient ruins and the secrets within. Unlike Coliseum you will be open to attack as long as you are in the zone; if you are in it then you are part of the battle.
-
08-07-2014, 06:09 AMLogoQuote:
Originally Posted by Divinemight
September 22, 2010 is before "June or July 2013" -
08-07-2014, 06:20 AMDivinemightFF14 1.0? All you get is just a concent art that looks like a Gate Siege. If you are really taking this approach, then I would be really annoyed right now because of this concept art:Quote:
Originally Posted by Logo
http://www.freeffxivguide.com/wp-con...3-10-10_29.jpg
Archery should have longer attack distance than casters according to this concept art, but why all the shots are same as spells at 25 yards?
The more precise information is released after (or around) 2.0 launch in 2013. I am very careful when I choose Twin Adder as my GC. I also had a discussion with my friends on which GC we should be because we already know we will be agaisnt each other if we dont.
What is your point? The information is given to you but now you blame everything on bad design? It is fair to say that you dont like it because everyone owe to voice their opinion, but blame everything on design is different thing.
The peanlty? It is a joke right now. I have seeing you complaining since day one. According to your profile, you have Rank 4 achivements, it is fair to estimate you have played about 150 to 200 games by now. You would be around Rank 20+ by now if you switched already. The amount of PvP expereince you are getting right now is about 100% more. -
08-07-2014, 06:25 AMTitor
Bolding and underlining words really gets my point across better.
I think PvP Rank should stay for changing GCs. IDC if people jump around GCs, they are already doing it. Baddies are always going to flood the winning team anyway. -
08-07-2014, 09:35 AMLogook this makes any sense how?Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinemight
I don't see why your getting so butt hurt, its just bad design.