Proposed Crystal Tower Changes (+Dungeon)

[synaesthetic]

CT is a copy of WoW's LFR, but in LFR, it's one piece per boss per week. Not one piece per week period. If CT used the per-boss system, then far less loot would fall to the floor.

Also SE needs to make itemization and the gearing metagame a bit more complex. "Higher numbers" is bland and dull. Where are the weaponskill and spell bonuses? Why does only GC gear have set bonuses? Why do we have to make no hard choices in terms of gearing? I would really love to have to choose between the lower base stats on Crimson Vest vs. BLM AF+ if the Crimson Vest had a special bonus like "Fire III/Fester: Increases damage by 5%," or if the Royal Vest had something along the lines of "Cure II/Adloquium: Reduces MP cost by 10%."

Wouldn't these kind of things make endgame more interesting?

[Transmit]

Where are the weaponskill and spell bonuses? Why does only GC gear have set bonuses? Why do we have to make no hard choices in terms of gearing? I would really love to have to choose between the lower base stats on Crimson Vest vs. BLM AF+ if the Crimson Vest had a special bonus like "Fire III/Fester: Increases damage by 5%," or if the Royal Vest had something along the lines of "Cure II/Adloquium: Reduces MP cost by 10%."

This so much! Even in FFXI it was more interesting, double attack, triple attack, "Enhances" <Job ability here>, "Augments" <Job Ability here>, increased critical hit damage (not rate), Store TP, Save TP, Conserve MP etc. People would see the new gear and come up with endless combinations of good gear set ups, and from it there would be so many different play styles. Right now the progression path in gear is so brutally obvious that it takes the excitement out of trying new things.

[Tlamila]

This so much! Even in FFXI it was more interesting, double attack, triple attack, "Enhances" <Job ability here>, "Augments" <Job Ability here>, increased critical hit damage (not rate), Store TP, Save TP, Conserve MP etc. People would see the new gear and come up with endless combinations of good gear set ups, and from it there would be so many different play styles. Right now the progression path in gear is so brutally obvious that it takes the excitement out of trying new things.

Apparently they said for now they only want to give us vertical progression of gear so that we don't ahve to put thought in gear choices...uh. =| Well at least it means we don't have to farm a billion sets one for each activity.

[Kevee]

This so much! Even in FFXI it was more interesting, double attack, triple attack, "Enhances" <Job ability here>, "Augments" <Job Ability here>, increased critical hit damage (not rate), Store TP, Save TP, Conserve MP etc. People would see the new gear and come up with endless combinations of good gear set ups, and from it there would be so many different play styles. Right now the progression path in gear is so brutally obvious that it takes the excitement out of trying new things.

That never existed in FFXI. There were specific gear sets to accomplish specific things, and that was it. It was an illusion of choice simply because there was always a best for any given situation.

They have stated they don't want mandatory equipment that is weaker than the current "best" equipment. FFXI was a horrible system, anyways. Why should I still be using the elemental staves at 75? A 50 weapon should not be anywhere near a 75 weapon, but that was sadly not the case. Unique passives end up being a mandatory, or never use, and they don't want that.

I'm fine with the current system, rather than a system where "weaker" gear is a must-have, or must-use, or you're bad. Even non-passive items were a problem. Scorpion Harness, Hauby, Leaping Boots, Emperor's Hairpin, etc. Items like this should not exist.

[ApolloGenX]

I'm fine with the current system, rather than a system where "weaker" gear is a must-have, or must-use, or you're bad. Even non-passive items were a problem. Scorpion Harness, Hauby, Leaping Boots, Emperor's Hairpin, etc. Items like this should not exist.

EQ had tons of gear and there weren't "must haves". This gear had effects on it as well. You also had choices of what slot you got effects and what effects you prioritized.

I was in a high end guild in EQ, and while there were minimums we had for fights (hps, mana pool size, etc)... it wasn't as boring and strict. There was huge variety within raiding tiers of gear to get.

[Kevee]

EQ had tons of gear and there weren't "must haves". This gear had effects on it as well. You also had choices of what slot you got effects and what effects you prioritized.

I was in a high end guild in EQ, and while there were minimums we had for fights (hps, mana pool size, etc)... it wasn't as boring and strict. There was huge variety within raiding tiers of gear to get.

EQ had tons of horizontal progression and not much vertical, that's why. You can't mix the 2 to the extent the poster above was stating.

You can't have must-have procs/augments because that diminishes vertical progression, and if you have too strong of a vertical progression then procs/augments mean nothing.

You have to pick one, and with the way FFXIV works it's better to be vertical. There's no gear-swapping, abilities are limited with jobs, and there's a finite amount of stats needed for every encounter. The rest is execution(which both FFXI and EQ lacked, which is also where a horizontal system works better).

Now, you CAN pair vertical and horizontal, but it needs to be at every tier. Not just specific, lower, ones. The augments would have to be balanced around all gear levels so that higher level gear is always stronger.
If that's the case..Why do it?

[ApolloGenX]

EQ had tons of horizontal progression and not much vertical, that's why. You can't mix the 2 to the extent the poster above was stating.

I agree, there was less vertical progression.. although it was certainly there and meaningful.

Not to mention character progression via AAs.

IMO this is a superior strategy since it decreases power creep and inflation. WoW has already had to squish stats - what? Twice? At least?