The Current Status of FFXIV Patch 3.1 and How to Address it Moving Forward

[RiceisNice]

To be fair, the question mentions them being common, not the developer's answer.

I'm actually looking at the video right now. There actually have no specific mention of it being too common or easy in the live letter itself (only that there would be changes), while the bullet statements are usually a summary. Not to mention they usually pick out and reword the question anyway (they give answers to questions they want to be asked)

Take it in good faith that they do mean what they say--they have no good reasons to mislead the player base about their intentions and the reasons for the various design decisions that they make, so why not provide feedback that can work assuming that what they're saying is true..

Nowadays it's a lot easier said than done for a lot of people because they've blatantly went opposite of what they've said a handful of times. Housing, 2.0 warrior, 3.0 GB/WM, and "dps tax" on BRD/MCH just to name a few.

[Alahra]

Nowadays it's a lot easier said than done for a lot of people because they've blatantly went opposite of what they've said a handful of times. Housing, 2.0 warrior, 3.0 GB/WM, and "dps tax" on BRD/MCH just to name a few.

I'm not sure those cases are really the same, though. The housing thing always did sort of confuse me, but in terms of the various class issues, they've later determined that their initial stance was incorrect or something, based on further feedback/analysis of whatever metrics they use, presumably. Just because the data looks a certain way to them and they later decide to change something based on a new interpretation or based on player feedback doesn't mean they were outright lying or anything. They've usually been nothing but transparent (except regarding housing--and I'll agree that was one of their biggest blunders since relaunch).

When it comes to changes, SE has always had a very resistant/conservative design ethos, dating back all the way to the beginning of FFXI. They're more responsive now than they ever were but, to be honest--I would rather they're a bit resistant. I hated the constant rollercoaster of changes in WoW, so it's fine by me if SE takes a bit longer to gather feedback and data and the like before making more careful adjustments.

[RiceisNice]

Just because the data looks a certain way to them and they later decide to change something based on a new interpretation or based on player feedback doesn't mean they were outright lying or anything. They've usually been nothing but transparent (except regarding housing--and I'll agree that was one of their biggest blunders since relaunch).

It's also their wording though that makes it problematic. It comes off as condescending when they come out to say "We think it's fine, the players probably don't know how to play their job", only to immdeiately turn tail on it within weeks (in the case of GB/WM anyway). And I don't necessarily mean lying, but rather their (in)competence and outlook in general. Like another example is, how do you not foresee WM/GB being a damage loss (or barely breaking above) if it only boosts your damage by 20%, when auto attacks make up for roughly 22-24% at the time

[Alahra]

It's also their wording though that makes it problematic. It comes off as condescending when they come out to say "We think it's fine, the players probably don't know how to play their job", only to immdeiately turn tail on it within weeks (in the case of GB/WM anyway). And I don't necessarily mean lying, but rather their (in)competence and outlook in general. Like another example is, how do you not foresee WM/GB being a damage loss (or barely breaking above) if it only boosts your damage by 20%, when auto attacks make up for roughly 22-24% at the time

Yeah, I think it's an issue of culture/translation in a lot of cases. I can't imagine Yoshi's original statements come off that way in Japanese given all the varying ways to express things with politeness--but there's often not a good way to render any of that in English, and so I can see why a lot of it would come across as disparaging to our ears. Personally I've never really felt bothered by any of it but I get why people might be.

Regarding WM/GB...I'll definitely give you the incompetence bit here. Both classes feel like they received a last minute restructuring (I know you talk about the previews for MCH a lot), and were thus very rushed, not receiving the testing they probably should have. I also suspect that on some level, they gauge class capability in ways that are different from the playerbase, and when it comes to raid content especially, I think they balance around item levels that are too high--but players care about balance most when item levels are lower. That's really one area of their testing in general that probably needs to be changed (and I suspect that it also had a lot to do with the overall tuning problems in Savage right now).

[RiceisNice]

I think they balance around item levels that are too high--but players care about balance most when item levels are lower. That's really one area of their testing in general that probably needs to be changed (and I suspect that it also had a lot to do with the overall tuning problems in Savage right now).

Imo, even at relative Ilvl the dps checks on A3S are still pretty damn insane if you don't have healers pitching in.

[Alahra]

Imo, even at relative Ilvl the dps checks on A3S are still pretty damn insane if you don't have healers pitching in.

They are, yeah, at least from what I've heard. Even at i210, AS4 requires significant tank/healer DPS. I don't like the stress, though, so I just bowed out of Savage this go round, so I don't know from personal experience. The whole thing just seems completely overtuned.