Why can't we sign multiple classes to duty finder?

So so sorry for my teribul spelling misstakes im in a rush to get to work and whanted to ask this question before i get going. FYI i have dyslexia.

This question might already be posted but i cant find it when i search for it(probebly due to my dyslexia). So if somone cold either point me to the right post or maybe explain it to me that wold be gratefull.

As the titel sais, Why can't we sign multiple classes to duty finder? I love to tank, heal and to dps and when i sign for duty finder i first pop dps then whidraw then tank then healer and see wich is fastes and hope for the best really that a quick dungeon will pop. it feals so much more sufisent if i cold just tick a box saying wich classes i whant to play and then just signup and let it be wichever one hapens to be best for the rest of the players signing. I think the duty finder que wold go down dramaticly or am i wrong?

Again sorry about the messy spelling and thanks!

Small indie company please understand.

Likely tied to the current job you have locked in when signing up.
Also, item level differences between different jobs can affect the queue, that's a additional technical hurdle they have to overcome.

We still can't move something in inventory while talking with npc or talk with NPC on mount. It's too difficult for them to implement, they made this game in a rush and from corpse of older game.

Sounds like a nightmare to prioritise people.
Do you put a player that has selected healer or dps in one group as dps filling it or put it in the other forming group that needs a healer and a dps potentially saving it a lot of time waiting for another healer.

Well I think one way to go about this is to randomnize the roles you selected.

However...pretty sure tank and healer will come up 95% of the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VenKitsune

Small indie company please understand.

---

Its almost like some things aren't related to how much money a company has, and are tied to either manpower deficiencies, backend problems from a darker time, or simply not enough interest.

But keep using your silly meme thing or w/e it is at this point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caitlinzulu

Sounds like a nightmare to prioritise people.
Do you put a player that has selected healer or dps in one group as dps filling it or put it in the other forming group that needs a healer and a dps potentially saving it a lot of time waiting for another healer.

---

It's really not that hard to solve or design.

Implement a queue for each role. The first entry in each queue (first two dps) are assembled into a party. Each entry contains a player ID, class, and list of available duties. Each roulette would have its own trio of queues. All duties fall under one of the roulettes, so if you use DF to queue for a specific duty then you are entered in the role-specific queue for the roulette that that duty falls under. If you queue for multiple instances that fall under multiple roulettes then you are entered in multiple queues and the extra entries are removed when you are placed in a party.

Supposing a PLD who queues for Sastasha, Halitali, and Titania normal, an entry would be added to the leveling roulette tank queue (available instances: Sastahsa, Halitali) and the trials roulette tank queue (available instances: Titania). When one of those two entries reaches the front of their respective queue a party is formed using the first entries from the like-roulette healer and dps queues. Parties are formed around the entry in the shortest queue.

When the duty is accepted all additional entries for those players are removed from their queues.

The current system almost certainly works very similarly to what I just outlined.

Adding the ability to queue for multiple jobs is as simple as adding additional entries for the extra jobs when queuing and implementing a check to ensure that character ID for multiple members of the party do not match. Testing for character ID matches would be fairly simple. If two character IDs match, increment through the longest queue (most likely to have an entry for a different character) until a mismatch is found. If no one is found, increment through the other queue. This is very similar to solving for matching available duties. If both queues are somehow empty, then either assign the player as which ever role has the lowest throughput or wait until another person joins to assign them. If each roulette forms a single party at a time, then the current resolution method for deciding between two available parties (probably based on median queue times for the participants) can remain unchanged.


Unless I'm overlooking something this is all phenomenally simple programming. A first year computer science student would be able to create a program that does the same thing.

One of the hardest things would be assembling the list of available duties. That is based on item level when a players queues. One solution would be to use saved gear sets as options for queueing because those have an attached item level. The game would need to verify that the player has that set's gear in their armoury chest when they queue. This would work really well if they added an "equip this gearset" button to the duty acceptance window. A less appealing alternative would be to use a "save current class" option in the DF menu and to force the player to cycle through the classes they wish to queue as, though it's terrible UX.

I've wanted this for the longest time, not just to quicken my queue times, but everyone's.

I don't think you can create proper queues if everybody is registering as multiple jobs. We would have 0 visibility on timer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caitlinzulu

Sounds like a nightmare to prioritise people.

---

Other MMOs do it. Not all of them but some.

In WoW for example, if I have Druid, I can queue for all 3 roles. The first one needed pops.

In ESO, I think I can also do that, but need to reconfirm. And ESO was also rebuilt after launch in a super rush by a team even more budget constrained than SE...

At the least... it should queue by role and not by job.

Ideally it should let us switch jobs within role out of combat even in an instance.

- it should also let us accept and then do a job switch for us.
- and any cutscene you were in when accepting, should be restarted when you leave (or you just drop back to right before that scene).

I would be happy just to be able to queue for multiple roulettes at the same time

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

Its almost like some things aren't related to how much money a company has, and are tied to either manpower deficiencies, backend problems from a darker time, or simply not enough interest.

But keep using your silly meme thing or w/e it is at this point.

---

Your examples are either something that could have been fixed with money given the amount of time this game has been out. Or they just don't care about QoL improvements. Man I hope they are just greedy and not that they just don't care. Both are bad but one feels so much worse to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnimaAnimus

I would be happy just to be able to queue for multiple roulettes at the same time

---

THIS.

Why its not a thing yet idk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

Its almost like some things aren't related to how much money a company has, and are tied to either manpower deficiencies, backend problems from a darker time, or simply not enough interest.

But keep using your silly meme thing or w/e it is at this point.

---

If they really had no money, then it would be harder to blame them. There's little a company can do to force itself to grow.

But if they have a lot of money and are refusing to hire more manpower to treat manpower deficiencies, then that's completely on them.
(In which case, they deserve the criticism!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Makeda

At the least... it should queue by role and not by job.

Ideally it should let us switch jobs within role out of combat even in an instance.

- it should also let us accept and then do a job switch for us.
- and any cutscene you were in when accepting, should be restarted when you leave (or you just drop back to right before that scene).

---

When you queue, your level and ilvl are also taken into consideration, so queueing by role would make no sense as each of your jobs in that role is different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DumdogsWorld

If they really had no money, then it would be harder to blame them. There's little a company can do to force itself to grow.

But if they have a lot of money and are refusing to hire more manpower to treat manpower deficiencies, then that's completely on them.
(In which case, they deserve the criticism!)

---

They aren't refusing to hire more people though, they are struggling to find people.

Also, in response to the earlier response, backend stuff is incredibly hard to change once it's been implemented at this level. They had to make the game compatible with old 1.x assets and that probably led to a lot of messed up Jerry rigged code to make systems talk to each other.

They'd likely have to halt patches for awhile to fix all the issues, but we already get complaint threads and backlash if stuff is delayed by a week or 2. There's no real feasible way to do this currently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

They aren't refusing to hire more people though, they are struggling to find people.

---

Worldwide, there are programmers and people in other IT-related fields of work just sitting around twiddling their thumbs because it's difficult to find good work. Now people are saying that major game companies can't find enough people to work on their projects.

That's a big disconnect, no matter how you look at it. Somewhere out there, somebody just isn't trying. Whether it's just Square Enix or some worldwide problem, I can't say.

But if I'm expected to give sympathy to a company as big as Square Enix for using an engine infested with spaghetti code and unstaffing its development team, then sorry. No can do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tlamila

When you queue, your level and ilvl are also taken into consideration, so queueing by role would make no sense as each of your jobs in that role is different.

---

Why?

Let's say someone has

WAR 31
DRK 53
PLD 47
GNB 80

They queue for 'tank' in the leveling roulette

2 DPS and a healer queue - let's just assume they're similar in levels

- the system looks at it all, finds that DPS #2 has the lowest 'queable level' as 'Archer 28'.
So we get thrown into Haukke Manor.

Everybody zones in, picks a job, and we go.

Conversely...

Queue for 'highest possible role leveling'

Turns out the healer has no healing job above level 71. But this was "leveling"... and it turns out that since the tank's GNB was 80, the system instead reads their highest non-max... DRK at 53. We get "Sohm Al".
Everybody zones in, picks a job, and we go. If the tank decides to use their GNB anyway - they get reward tokens for an 80, otherwise they get the leveling bonuses of a leveling toon.

IF we add a system to switch jobs out of combat - if the tank ever uses any non-80, the tokens are rewarded as a non-80... and the 'dungeon completion XP' / gil bonus could be spread out across the bosses but only given at the end.

This kind of simple math is what computers do really well at... :P

If you don't think they have the data to add all this up, read through your combat log sometime... it's insane how much is tracked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

They aren't refusing to hire more people though, they are struggling to find people.

Also, in response to the earlier response, backend stuff is incredibly hard to change once it's been implemented at this level. They had to make the game compatible with old 1.x assets and that probably led to a lot of messed up Jerry rigged code to make systems talk to each other.

They'd likely have to halt patches for awhile to fix all the issues, but we already get complaint threads and backlash if stuff is delayed by a week or 2. There's no real feasible way to do this currently.

---

In 2.0 I agreed with you, in 3.0 I wondered, in 4.0 I questioned, and in 5.0 it is obvious. You can honestly not believe by 5.0 they are struggling for staff. The team may be short staffed. They could have trained or poached enough staff by now. Some sort of disconnect between the company and the future employee's is happening. Money, workload, lack of ability to train, or whatever reason. The issue is clearly SE's fault and not the future workforce that you claim. I can not believe that this far into the games lifecycle. You honestly can't think it is the lack of employee's in the work pool by now?



The backend stuff is probably a mess from some 1.X stuff. I agree with you a 100%. Retainers and MB's are on my list of 1.X things that need to be fixed but the way they probably put them in over the course of 1.X it ain't happening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moonlite

In 2.0 I agreed with you, in 3.0 I wondered, in 4.0 I questioned, and in 5.0 it is obvious. You can honestly not believe by 5.0 they are struggling for staff. The team may be short staffed. They could have trained or poached enough staff by now. Some sort of disconnect between the company and the future employee's is happening. Money, workload, lack of ability to train, or whatever reason. The issue is clearly SE's fault and not the future workforce that you claim. I can not believe that this far into the games lifecycle. You honestly can't think it is the lack of employee's in the work pool by now?

---

I think a lot of ppl are on the FFVII remake, plus FFXI has something "big" coming and there is another major FF project that will be announced after the VII remake hits shelves, so it's likely they are putting most ppl on other projects. XIV made its money back and with every patch basically being a repeat of the previous in the cycle and the plethora of issues we have that has nothing to do with coding, just a lack of initiative, you can tell they are not putting their all into this game, whether that be people, money or effort.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Makeda

[snip]

---

In order for this to work, all jobs that are unlocked and meet the minimal level for Satasha will be considered when measuring for dungeon queues for a specific role. It will always measure to the lowest level since you are queuing by role and not by a specific job.

That's great for people who have multiple jobs close to each other, it isn't great when you have a huge disparity in level.

Your example with the tank player is a good example of a player with level disparity. That player will never be able to do any dungeon above Haukke Manor since their WAR is level 31. In order to expand that player's choice of dungeons, that player has to level WAR... even if they hate the job and never wanted to touch it ever again.

The system cannot select a dungeon higher than Haukke Manor unless you (as the idea provider) wants to be with OK with a player not being able to choose a job they want to play. If that tank player gets Mt. Gulg, for example, they can only choose GNB. They cannot chose PLD nor DRK, system won't let them. Which negates the whole reason to queue role; that player basically ended up queuing as a job rather than as a role.

If you start excluding jobs you don't want to be considered in the algorithm, just to increase your chances of not getting dungeons you are capped at, you might as well have never bothered making queues by role in the first place.

Being able to multi-class queue would probably mean you'll be the healer 98% of the time.

However it would be nice to role-queue, because sometimes I queue up as a bard, for example, but mid-queue I might want to play machinist instead and it sucks to leave the queue just to wait another 15 minutes. If I could just role-queue as ranged DPS and only be allowed to pick between the three options before accepting the duty, it would be nice.

Right now, some people are asking for minimum item level restriction for queuing. They want more restriction, not less, due to duty finder manipulation. I think one reason not to have this is because it's one more way to manipulate the duty finder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by linay

Right now, some people are asking for minimum item level restriction for queuing. They want more restriction, not less, due to duty finder manipulation. I think one reason not to have this is because it's one more way to manipulate the duty finder.

---

Make the bonus scale on itemlevel milestones, based on the ilvl requirement of the last dungeon of older expansions, (90, 230, 360) and 440 for Shadowbringers.

Also, I wouldn't mind harsher penalties on dropping out in a dungeon on start, up to straight locking you out for performing another queue for it for the rest of the day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arrius

Also, I wouldn't mind harsher penalties on dropping out in a dungeon on start, up to straight locking you out for performing another queue for it for the rest of the day.

---

So if i lose internet for an hour I can't play an entire day right? Chances of this being implemented are next to nil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaylaTsarra

So if i lose internet for an hour I can't play an entire day right? Chances of this being implemented are next to nil.

---

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/...40/283/350.png

I said up to a possible lockout for a day.
Can't just queue up and then say no when you get a role you rather not want to play, even if tanks and healers are the usual first on this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arrius

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/...40/283/350.png

I said up to a possible lockout for a day.

---

http://memecrunch.com/meme/R79K/you-....jpg?w=553&c=1

See i can post pics too but be that as it may your suggestion will never come to pass. The developers aren't that silly. The current 30 minute lockout is sufficient.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaylaTsarra

See i can post pics too but be that as it may your suggestion will never come to pass. The developers aren't that silly.

---

Neither aren't they silly enough to accommodate all those half-arsed requests here that seemingly pop up in GD just because the players have too much time on their hands and have issues with everything.

Same reason you can't sign up for multiple roulettes at once. It would apparently cause the servers to go into full self-destruct mode.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arrius

Neither aren't they silly enough to accommodate all those half-arsed requests here that seemingly pop up in GD just because the players have too much time on their hands and have issues with everything.

---

I don't know... I get the idea around here that most people have like 30min-1hr to play a day, which frankly is bad, because this game is too much of a time sink even for folks like me that can play 5hrs a day.

Quote:

---

See i can post pics too but be that as it may your suggestion will never come to pass. The developers aren't that silly. The current 30 minute lockout is sufficient.

---

It clearly isn't because I still see loads of people bailing on roulettes.

Pretty sure someone will have mentioned this by now, but this won't actually change anything. If we made it so you could tick which roles you want to queue as, and you ticked all 3 (tank, healer, and DPS), you would NEVER get in as a DPS. EVER! It just wouldn't happen. Unless perhaps you're on queue for old content, which nobody queues for. So it really just becomes a toss between tank or healer. Which ones fastest? It doesn't really matter. Both are in pretty equal demand, and in fact that Duty Finder actually tells you when it comes to roulettes, which one is in more demand at the time. So you can just use that to your advantage.

So in the end, it's quite simple - if you want to queue as fast as possible, just queue as a tank or healer. Tank tends to be faster than healer, but if you can't tell then just look at what the Duty Finder says is most needed.

I wouldn't mind doing this if I had multiple things I want to queue as. Queue this dps for leveling, queue that dps for expert, and just take whichever one pops first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fynlar

It clearly isn't because I still see loads of people bailing on roulettes.

---

The only roulette i see people bailing on are Castrum (primarily) and Praetorium and they are dong that because the rewards are too unbalanced in my view and are going to try and requeue for the longer one.. I rarely see people bail from the others. And I'll add those that generally bail from main story roulette are tanks and healers given they aren't waiting a half hour of more for it to pop.

I've actually seen more bails from Aurum Vale than anything else. Granted, I don't run MSQ roulette anymore nearly as much as I did with leveling roulette.

Steps of Faith used to give it a run for its money, but thankfully by now it seems to have finally sunk in after idek how many years that the duty has been nerfed to oblivion and is pretty piss easy now. Don't remember the last time I've had a bail from that one by now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rasikko

Well I think one way to go about this is to randomnize the roles you selected.

However...pretty sure tank and healer will come up 95% of the time.

---

I'd say 99% of the time. The only time not (the 1%) is maybe for raids.