They listen to us!! (Eureka)

"We also have gear which we received requests to remove role restrictions from."
source http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...e-Thread/page3

I can't wait thank you!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghastly

"We also have gear which we received requests to remove role restrictions from."
source http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...e-Thread/page3

I can't wait thank you!!!

---

You mean this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mahrze

You mean this?

---

That's the exact link I sourced, yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghastly

That's the exact link I sourced, yes.

---

it's not the exact same link^^

you linked to the page, Mahrze to the post on that page (to get such a link you have to press on the "#0" in the upper right corner of the post).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tint

it's not the exact same link^^

you linked to the page, Mahrze to the post on that page (to get such a link you have to press on the "#0" in the upper right corner of the post).

---

I quoted what the topic was to be about. You don't cite a paragraph in a book when citing. Moreover, I already quoted what was sourced. Though we can turn this into a linking 101 class if that's the agenda/priority of this thread now. I notice and know you're trying to help and don't mean it in bad faith but do we have to make it about nuance differences instead of adding to the topic at hand?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghastly

I quoted what the topic was to be about. You don't cite a paragraph in a book when citing. Moreover, I already quoted what was sourced. Though we can turn this into a linking 101 class if that's the agenda/priority of this thread now. I notice and know you're trying to help and don't mean it in bad faith but do we have to make it about nuance differences instead of adding to the topic at hand?

---

Your link took me to a page I don't have, since I have more posts per page. If you link the specific post, that alleviates this problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

Your link took me to a page I don't have, since I have more posts per page. If you link the specific post, that alleviates this problem.

---

But isn't that your problem? If we bought the same book on Amazon and I cited it as Universities require it then it's up to you to adjust your Amazon app to work as it normally does/should. If believing the source is that hard in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghastly

... adding to the topic at hand?

---

Well, I don't think there's anything to say much about certain pieces having their role restriction lifted unless we can see which of these pieces will see this happening. Maybe it sounds like a gain, but if they focus on gear that is not appealing to me, I'll say "no..." /2cents

In the matter of your quote and adding a link: adding a link prompts someone to double check the context of your quote simply saying "certain pieces will lose role restrictions" can mean many things to many people. Also, links that sends you to a pages won't work the same way for other users; your link sends me to page 2 because I have 40 posts per page, which makes the LLP summary only 2 pages long. So, what I did was add a link for those who might stumble on an issue like mine and would like context to your quote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghastly

But isn't that your problem? If we bought the same book on Amazon and I cited it as Universities require it then it's up to you to adjust your Amazon app to work as it normally does/should. If believing the source is that hard in the first place.

---

Oh, sweetcheeks... you just don't do that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghastly

But isn't that your problem? If we bought the same book on Amazon and I cited it as Universities require it then it's up to you to adjust your Amazon app to work as it normally does/should. If believing the source is that hard in the first place.

---

Except you didn't link a specific article. What you did is like pointing to the front page of a website and wondering why no one can see yesterdays article. Also, the Kindle will give you actual pages as well as kindle locations, so if you cited a page in a book, I could find it :P The kindle doesn't adjust how many pages there are, just how many words are displayed. That's why they have location, and page.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

Except you didn't link a specific article. What you did is like pointing to the front page of a website and wondering why no one can see yesterdays article. Also, the Kindle will give you actual pages as well as kindle locations, so if you cited a page in a book, I could find it :P The kindle doesn't adjust how many pages there are, just how many words are displayed. That's why they have location, and page.

---

1. It wasn't the front page
2. You're once again going into nuances when the sourcing was correct and uses the universal guidelines of citing websites (minus the listing of page)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mahrze

Well, I don't think there's anything to say much about certain pieces having their role restriction lifted unless we can see which of these pieces will see this happening. Maybe it sounds like a gain, but if they focus on gear that is not appealing to me, I'll say "no..." /2cents

In the matter of your quote and adding a link: adding a link prompts someone to double check the context of your quote simply saying "certain pieces will lose role restrictions" can mean many things to many people. Also, links that sends you to a pages won't work the same way for other users; your link sends me to page 2 because I have 40 posts per page, which makes the LLP summary only 2 pages long. So, what I did was add a link for those who might stumble on an issue like mine and would like context to your quote.

Oh, sweetcheeks... you just don't do that.

---

So you have nothing to say and just reply to something you can use ctrl + f for?

...What even are these arguments.

D; Anyways I wonder what pieces they're gonna be unlocking restrictions from. I can't remember when they last did that. Kirimu coat/Uraeus coat and that all the stuff that was released that patch?

Maybe we can roll mages in armour? Battlemages, so to speak, and in example. That would be nice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anarnee

...What even are these arguments.

D; Anyways I wonder what pieces they're gonna be unlocking restrictions from. I can't remember when they last did that. Kirimu coat/Uraeus coat and that all the stuff that was released that patch?

---

Not every day you see someone derail their own thread huh? smh

maybe they remove the restrictions from the 4.0+ gatherer and crafter gear - doesn't make sense anyway that they have these restrictions, binding gatherer / crafterer materia through killing monsters isn't a thing anymore since 3.0.

To be honest, I'm not sure the quote means what you think it might mean.

The context is talking about Eureka. Which my thinking is most likely "new" gear especially from Eureka will have no job restrictions (minus our Relic/AF3). Again that just seems to be my understanding on the matter. I don't think they're going to go back and redo like a lot of stuff just no longer having role/job restrictions. Though I wish they would on some stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yamimarik

To be honest, I'm not sure the quote means what you think it might mean.

The context is talking about Eureka. Which my thinking is most likely "new" gear especially from Eureka will have no job restrictions (minus our Relic/AF3). Again that just seems to be my understanding on the matter. I don't think they're going to go back and redo like a lot of stuff just no longer having role/job restrictions. Though I wish they would on some stuff.

---

now when you say that... i remember the diadem gear had a random glamour on them. maybe it's similar, you will get a new piece of gear wich is basically a random reskin wich ignores the role restrictions. so you get for example a new monk gear wich looks like the white mage AF gear?

@yami
If it's random like diadem that could be a way to add longetivity to the glamour hunting there instead of unlocking the regular restricted gear.
Who knows how many they unlock but it seemed they were taking notes about the ones we requested removed so maybe we'll get really good ones at first, I hope they start with DOH gear first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alistaire

Not every day you see someone derail their own thread huh? smh

---

It's not every day someone skips the 2 derailing posts not made by the author and accuses the author of derailing the thread. Nice try scapegoating trying to equalize and dissolve.

You know, if someone helps me to link a more accurate source to help me prove my point, I'd thank them instead of griping about them. I could even learn how to link specific posts instead of the entire page.

I have no idea why you were being unnecessarily rude and defensive when everyone else was polite in pointing out the more accurate source. It's ok to be corrected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tint

now when you say that... i remember the diadem gear had a random glamour on them. maybe it's similar, you will get a new piece of gear wich is basically a random reskin wich ignores the role restrictions. so you get for example a new monk gear wich looks like the white mage AF gear?

---

While I think you're probably correct in how the system will work, the example you use probably will never happen.
I can't see them ever allowing AF gear to be used off the specific job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghastly

@yami
If it's random like diadem that could be a way to add longetivity to the glamour hunting there instead of unlocking the regular restricted gear.
Who knows how many they unlock but it seemed they were taking notes about the ones we requested removed so maybe we'll get really good ones at first, I hope they start with DOH gear first.

It's not every day someone skips the 2 derailing posts not made by the author and accuses the author of derailing the thread. Nice try scapegoating trying to equalize and dissolve.

---

No, I read the whole thing. I'm just siding with them over you. Funny how people can make judgment calls like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SecretCrowds

You know, if someone helps me to link a more accurate source to help me prove my point, I'd thank them instead of griping about them. I could even learn how to link specific posts instead of the entire page.

I have no idea why you were being unnecessarily rude and defensive when everyone else was polite in pointing out the more accurate source. It's ok to be corrected.

---

First of all you have no merit to your accusations, I wasn't being defensive, I was pointing out that the quote was cited correctly. They contributed nothing to the topic at hand for something they can use ctrl f to find.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alistaire

No, I read the whole thing. I'm just siding with them over you. Funny how people can make judgment calls like that.

---

You're free to make your call as am I to make mine; the difference is I can back up my calls unlike you, when you start backing up your statements we'll get somewhere.

This thread (barring the OP) is a whole new level of petty I didn't know existed.

I'm pretty hyped for the dyeable AF3 and wondering what gear has had restrictions lifted.

Ghastly, let me explain what they mean, and the only reason I know of it is because I got comments like this on other forums (You think this day and age this wouuldn't be an issue)

If person a has say 30 posts displayed, while person B has 10 posts displayed, and they are on a thread 30 posts long. Person B will link something from "page 2" (even your first post has a "page 3" extension shown) But for person A who has 30 posts displayed, will not see the link person B gave because a page 2 does not exist for them. What they are saying if you click the post number in the upper right hand of the post, you get the direct post link and everyone will be able see it, regardless of settings.

How come people can't explain this in detail? It is clear Ghastly has no clue what people are talking about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vstarstruck

text

---

even when i get linked to the exact page, i then have to go through all the posts on that page to find the one the OP mentioned. sure, the source may be correct, but linking to the specific post is a great qol thing.

especially since the quote is incomplete and to fully understand, that the lifted glamour restriction is tied to gear drops from eureka, you have to read that source.

Nice, i've learned how to precisely link specific posts. Thanks.

Back to Topic:
It may be that they will introduce the jobless darksteal gear, like they mentioned some time back.
Don't ask me for a source because it's just something stuck in my head and i remember.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vstarstruck

Ghastly, let me explain what they mean, and the only reason I know of it is because I got comments like this on other forums (You think this day and age this wouuldn't be an issue)

If person a has say 30 posts displayed, while person B has 10 posts displayed, and they are on a thread 30 posts long. Person B will link something from "page 2" (even your first post has a "page 3" extension shown) But for person A who has 30 posts displayed, will not see the link person B gave because a page 2 does not exist for them. What they are saying if you click the post number in the upper right hand of the post, you get the direct post link and everyone will be able see it, regardless of settings.

How come people can't explain this in detail? It is clear Ghastly has no clue what people are talking about.

---

Oh. People have explained and the OP knew and understood. See the last quote here. The OP insists that the people she is trying to relate information to should fit her style, instead of the other way round.

And I don't see how people trying to get her to be more accurate when relaying information she knows and others do not know as being petty either, as claimed by Kohdo. Put it this way. A new poster posts multiple times because they do not know how to bypass the 1000 character limit. Another poster tells them how to. Nothing wrong, am I right? In fact, most would be thankful to learn something better and they would edit their post to help others read it better. In this situation, the OP reacted differently instead and insists people should sift through multiple posts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mahrze

You mean this?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghastly

That's the exact link I sourced, yes.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tint

it's not the exact same link^^

you linked to the page, Mahrze to the post on that page (to get such a link you have to press on the "#0" in the upper right corner of the post).

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghastly

I quoted what the topic was to be about. You don't cite a paragraph in a book when citing. Moreover, I already quoted what was sourced. Though we can turn this into a linking 101 class if that's the agenda/priority of this thread now. I notice and know you're trying to help and don't mean it in bad faith but do we have to make it about nuance differences instead of adding to the topic at hand?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

Your link took me to a page I don't have, since I have more posts per page. If you link the specific post, that alleviates this problem.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghastly

But isn't that your problem? If we bought the same book on Amazon and I cited it as Universities require it then it's up to you to adjust your Amazon app to work as it normally does/should. If believing the source is that hard in the first place.

---

Anyway, whatever. This is no longer worth it. I won't be making any more posts regarding this.

Did they clarify whether or not NM are necessary for Relic progression? Couldn’t care less about anything else dropping off of them item wise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vstarstruck

text

---

It is clear you didn't read the thread at all. Anyone changing their posts per page settings are at fault here. If you bought a digital book which you could arrange differently it's up to you to change back to default. Instead some people here are getting into petty nuances just for the sake of argument

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SecretCrowds

"more accurate information"

---

Good, about time you took your petty/disrespectful "argument" elsewhere.
Your whole agenda was basically a petty argument about you wanting "more accurate information" looking for a petty argument regardless of what the topic was about; your quotes prove that fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anarnee

...What even are these arguments.

D; Anyways I wonder what pieces they're gonna be unlocking restrictions from. I can't remember when they last did that. Kirimu coat/Uraeus coat and that all the stuff that was released that patch?

---

Last I recall, someone requested the Darklight (i70) stuff be unrestricted, so I imagine really old armor sets are just going to gradually become unrestricted, but who knows.

I'd kill for a good number of favorites to be available to my Aiming role. I've leveled Healer/Tank just for glamour.

I don’t know which relic to level first!!!! With Heavensward relic I levelled so many relics only to find out the final relic is ugly and had to start to over!!!! The gamble begins Tuesday!!!

I love how a good chunk of this thread, no one was able to stay on topic because they were too busy arguing on who was right on what link.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SicariusSeven

I love how a good chunk of this thread, no one was able to stay on topic because they were too busy arguing on who was right on what link.

---

To be fair, what the OP did was essentially link to page 3 of the US Constitution instead of a specific Article.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicKirby

Last I recall, someone requested the Darklight (i70) stuff be unrestricted, so I imagine really old armor sets are just going to gradually become unrestricted, but who knows.

I'd kill for a good number of favorites to be available to my Aiming role. I've leveled Healer/Tank just for glamour.

---

And its likely that there will not be many unlocked sets that people actually want. If it is Darklight gear though, I better see healers in tin cans, or the whole effort will be pointless :P

The content looks fantastic. The only thing I don't like about it is if you die you lose EXP or a level. I can see a lot of issues with this. What if you have a nasty latency spike and you get hit by an aoe and die and nobody raises you.... not cool and not your fault. I think they need to rethink that and let it go. Its just a bad idea. Also, I don't like losing progression because you made a mistake. I think losing progression because you die will make a lot of players very unhappy especially if its grindy content.

Devs please rethink this and remove it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

To be fair, what the OP did was essentially link to page 3 of the US Constitution instead of a specific Article.

---

To be fair, you proved her right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Astral145

The content looks fantastic. The only thing I don't like about it is if you die you lose EXP or a level. I can see a lot of issues with this. What if you have a nasty latency spike and you get hit by an aoe and die and nobody raises you.... not cool and not your fault. I think they need to rethink that and let it go. Its just a bad idea. Also, I don't like losing progression because you made a mistake. I think losing progression because you die will make a lot of players very unhappy especially if its grindy content.

Devs please rethink this and remove it.

---

People wanted "the XI way" Maybe if this bombs SE will stop listening to people who want "the XI way"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

People wanted "the XI way" Maybe if this bombs SE will stop listening to people who want "the XI way"

---

I'd rather have "the XI way" then pretty much anything else. We need some danger in our content.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SonKevin

I'd rather have "the XI way" then pretty much anything else. We need some danger in our content.

---

And yet, everything similar to the XI way is not all that liked by the XIV community.

Diadem 1.0 RNG grinds, bombed. Hunts, everyone complains if they don't make it in time, people who do them in small groups are vilified. People are already complaining about Eureka even though it hasnt been released yet, and it takes several of the more base ideas from XI.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

snip

---

Diadem 1.0 was just a hot terrible mess. There was no reason to go there. Even if you were to get lucky and get something BiS, the raid community freaked out at the possibility of getting something stronger than the end game weapon. Not to mention they locked you into rolls to do those FATE-type missions and then let people split up so if you wanted to actually fight things, you couldn't cause two or three people wanted to farm DoL stuff. If you wanted to go with the less than 8, you need to have a FC workshop otherwise you were out of luck. There was just nothing to do. There was no structure and nothing to give us at the end.

Hunts are not like anything in XI. NM don't even come close.

People complain about everything. They're figuring it's already going to be too hard. That's too bad. Normal play in this game is too easy. Outside of end game savage there's no real challenge from dungeons, end game, the game field itself. What exactly do you want?