The broken FFXIV Holy trinity

[Nadirah]

Well alliance is split up later, so this allows each group to have 2 tanks and 2 healers when doing Atomos event.

Encounter design splitting the raid up that much is dumb.

And you really don't want 6 blinking tanks. Holy hell, talk about a good way to make the shortage worse.

[SarcasmMisser]

@SarcasmMisser, 6 tanks and 6 heals in 24 player raid is too damn many to begin with.

No game with that many players in a raid has taken more than 3 tanks(norm is 2) and 5 healers unless your raid is bad and stands in stuff.

Both of my last raid teams 4 healed 24/25 player raids. WoW's lfr is 2 tank 5 heal.

6 and 6 is entirely unnecessary.

As an exercise in how terrible of a healer you have to be to need 6 healers, I just did a WoD as a sch and had no trouble with both healers being in cleric stance all the time and keeping the tank up with non-gcd based healing. I was even in the alliance that was tanking the boss, how on earth do you feel stressed on heals when you have no tank to heal?

Kisa is going to be frustrated for all eternity because 99% of the healers out there have no trouble DPSing in faceroll content and they are never going to change for 1% that struggle to heal content that demands so little.

[Lemuria]

Well alliance is split up later, so this allows each group to have 2 tanks and 2 healers when doing Atomos event.

Labyrinth was a bit of a mess to be honest. It feels like they struggled to find a good use for the extra tanks, but didn't want to change the party makeup to accommodate the fights. Instead they accommodated the fights to suit the party, and as a result it feels so out of place compared to the other two Crystal Tower fights.

Since Labyrinth was their first 'experiment' with 24 player raids, it only made sense that later ones would be more refined. That's why Syrcus Tower and World of Darkness only have 1 tank per party.

[KisaiTenshi]

Labyrinth was a bit of a mess to be honest. It feels like they struggled to find a good use for the extra tanks, but didn't want to change the party makeup to accommodate the fights. Instead they accommodated the fights to suit the party, and as a result it feels so out of place compared to the other two Crystal Tower fights.

Since Labyrinth was their first 'experiment' with 24 player raids, it only made sense that later ones would be more refined. That's why Syrcus Tower and World of Darkness only have 1 tank per party.

I think the intent was to have the parties take on "3 parts" where the MT in each party tanks the attacking boss and the OT picks up the adds. Because all the dungeon designs of Labyrinth save for the last boss reflects this pattern.

With ST, it's all single-boss designs, where the main tank should be tanking the boss, and the adds should be tanked by the OT's. In practice this isn't what happens. The DPS just pick off the adds with no tanking being done at all.

In WoD, they combined the split path element from Labyrinth again, and also added a different mechanic for Cerberus (going inside) that also split the parties up.

But I think the real reason for this change was that there simply aren't enough Tanks to split across 3 raids. Not until there is some roulette mechanism at least.

[Cynfael]

Yoshi-P says the dungeon content was designed without the healer contributing to DPS. There is no other way of interpreting that.

For about the 10th time, he was discussing raids. Dungeons don't have strict DPS requirements; about the closest you get is something like the pre-Ferdiad chamber in Amdapor HM, and if you fail it, you get a free pass.

For the correct "interpretation", refer to my previous posts on this subject and contrast them to what you're claiming he's saying. It's very simple, not particularly biased, and I'm not explaining it all over again. What you have been doing is reading so much more into his comments than what was written that it's become completely ridiculous.

If players are going to continue to take up healer slots on content only to DPS...

I still feel like you are basically fabricating (or at least greatly exaggerating) this argument to serve as your personal platform.

It's generally accepted that you meet many awful players in CT/ST/WoD from all roles. You really need to branch out from this content, because it's skewing your perception of the entire game. Expecting to meet skilled, courteous players in Crystal Tower raids is like expecting to meet the love of your life at 2AM last call in a dive bar; it could happen, but it's pretty damned unlikely.

[AlexSag]

I think what you're asking for is stricter level caps. When a dungeon first comes out or you play it with the minimal item level for it, you can't just burn through it. It requires a lot more time and skill. The thing is, in time, everyone is over geared and we're just running the dungeon to get tombs. We're not really looking for a challenge at the point, we just want to efficiently collect tokens to make our character better. I am in favor of a "Savage" version of a dungeon or just a dungeon that's much harder than the normal ones that you can't burn through, but gives comparable tokens for finishing it. I'd rather do a hard dungeon once than an easier one twice.

[Verdan]

I'm pointing out that the reason people are complaining about housing is for entirely selfish reasons, and not for any perceived broken way of handling how they were sold to players or FC's. RMT's have more money available then players, the would with absolute certainty make sure that any mechanism to increase housing would again be made scarce. This is only resolved by getting rid ofthe demand for housing entirely, which means getting rid of the ability to have a community-oriented house in favor of instances that nobody but you can use. We already saw this in Version 1.0's Market board/Retainer system. It was garbage. If you didn't set your retainer up in the first 10 minutes the servers went live, you were never getting a spot. This is also true in other games that have limited space. Hackers and bots get everything first. The only solution is to get rid of housing altogether. I'm not going to campaign for that. Join a FC if you need a house badly enough, that's the entire point of them. Not for players to create thousands of tiny FC's, but for there to be only a handful of large FC's.

Wow what bad understanding of how things work! For one, Bots would monopolize market board space because they had a reason to. Market Boards were how you sold things. It's vital for how RMT works to be able to sell things to other players, otherwise they have no hook into the economy. While it's true that the RMT networks have massive amounts of money available, they want as much of that liquid as they can. This is why they do things like sell shards and materia, because that requires little investment and is always moving. They'd never buy up a house to sell it later, that's too much of an investment for a non-guaranteed payoff, which is the last thing you want if you're selling in-game money. On top of that, selling that plot requires a lot of interactions, which takes labor because it can't be automated. You could offer it on their website, but that also leaves them open to someone noticing it and reporting it, potentially compromising the whole network because the owner of the plot can't be all that disposable.

Moreover, you don't seem to get that restricting housing access to large FCs makes housing a useless system for the game as a whole. Let's just assume that everyone joins a big FC in order to take part in housing. Well, now furnishings and garden items have little to no market value, because people who want them are in a position to get them, by being in a large and diverse group. Who's gonna buy a clock for their house when they're in an FC with around 200 people, some of whom are sure to be able to make it? As it is now, you only sell furniture after someone's sold a house to someone else, so checking the party finder is the only way to know if someone's gonna buy your stuff. As it stands, housing is just a toy for the very rich that adds little to the average person's enjoyment. Apparently you think that's fine, though, and you call people who want houses selfish.

Holy shit dude! You're like a huge bundle of bad opinions! Not only do you trundle into every thread to complain about cleric stance, but right beneath the surface are just awful ideas about other player's enjoyment of the game. I don't think that's a coincidence, though. They're the same thing: People should do things the way I think they should, and those who don't are selfish and bad people.

[KisaiTenshi]

Wow what bad understanding of how things work! For one...

I stopped reading there. As I said the last 3 times someone brought it up. Not this thread. The design of the game is to have large FC's, not 10,000 FC's (50% of them) with only 1-3 people in it.

For about the 10th time...

You and I are not going to see eye to eye on this, and nitpicking "raids" or "dungeons" is just refusing to acknowledge that Yoshi-P said anything. If anything the design of non-raid dungeons is even more casual and requires no DPS from any healers at any point. Your behavior in this thread is been bordering on harassment, so stop now.

It's generally accepted that you meet many awful players in CT/ST/WoD from all roles.

You don't you see the problem with that statement? People who take up "low queue" slots without wanting to do the job seems like a running theme every Tuesday.

[Musashidon]

snip

well actually last time yoshi p said anything about fc's he said he won't make content small fc's (4-8 people) can't do.

[Sapphic]

Well alliance is split up later, so this allows each group to have 2 tanks and 2 healers when doing Atomos event.

And pretty much only needed for one fight. Everything else can be done with max 2 tanks. aka behemoth and the giant. The other tanks are just pointlessly stood clicking towers. Thus the reduction of needed tanks in CT and WoD as it is easier to design content for 3 tanks rather than 6, and TBH 3 tanks is overneeded for CT and WoD as well.