Alienation of Dedicated and Skilled players

[Bourne_Endeavor]

No, it absolutely would not "basically be the 4.0 expansion." As I've explained already god knows how many times, there are very easy ways to implement these things that would not require a massive overhaul of anything. And not to mention the fact that there will likely be room for a new stat to be added in 4.0 anyway, due to the devs openly considering the removal of accuracy from gear due to not being a fun stat, so there's no reason to not fill that open slot with a stat players might get some enjoyment from the existence of. We've had stat reworks in the past, both in patches such as the 3.2 VIT adjustment for tanks and in the 3.0 expansion where Skill/Spell Speed, Crit, and Determination all had adjustments made to how they fundamentally work. So no, this claim is completely wrong.

As for your "people will always gravitate towards the best" comment, which I've already dealt with a number of times, there are a number of factors that could be used to mitigate this effect, such as exclusivity by locking it behind some other type of content, scaling which could cause the "best" stat to change based on how much is available to you (we already see hints of this in certain jobs that can change their rotations based on different Skill Speed amounts), or in the case of my Mastery idea it being readily available to everyone anyway and people just wanting to play the job slightly differently, which would have the potential to be allowed in such a system and with proper balancing wouldn't cause any rifts outside of the top end of the raid scene, as in server/world first raiding.

What you're asking for is not a simple stat adjustment, but a whole new stat itself. Such entails redesigning the entire game's structure to accommodate for these changes. Old content needs to be rebalanced, new content has to add in this extra variable to "keep stats interesting" as you've so eloquently implied. A better example would them adding Rogue, which the devs have said became such an enormous drain on both their resources and the team itself, they will never do classes again outside of an expansion.

Furthermore, traits, buffs and etc have been mentioned throughout this thread. Those are not "very easy" implementations either. You're presuming they need change a few bits of code, some numbers and voila. Now if it code were ever so simple.

Okay, first off, I find it hilarious how you quoted the phrase textbook definition without any understanding whatsoever of how I used it. What the phrase meant there is that you are being obtuse exactly as it is defined in the dictionary, in that you're not actually listening to anything anyone is saying against you and are instead just repeating the same arguments that people have defeated throughout this thread. Plenty of people refers to the variety of people who have expressed interest in not just this thread, but every thread of a similar topic that has ever appeared (which there are tons of) and the countless times Yoshi-p has been asked about it. Say what you will, but there is very clearly a demand for this.

The irony here is astounding. Your entire post presumes to ignore people will not follow along with an established norm despite them doing precisely that even when provided with some degree of customization. We can choose our attributes-- both personal and in the latest Anima step. No one does. Instead, they ask "what stats should I allocate?" And are told which scales best. You cannot ignore this variable because it doesn't suit your argument.

Next you go on to effectively argue that since casual players exist as the largest demographic that SE should not put any extra resources into pleasing other demographics. I shouldn't need to explain why this is wrong, but I'll do it anyway. First off, the hardcore playerbase is an important demographic to keep happy. These people by their nature are the most dedicated to your game, and as such are the most likely to be trying to get others interested in the game as well. If they go, and you lose your most dedicated players, the best word of mouth advertising you had available is gone. Players who remain at that point are by definition not as likely to care about trying to spread the word about the game, because they aren't as dedicated to it. This would, clearly, cause harm to the game as the number of incoming players would decrease. Now, I know what you're thinking. Not all players who are hardcore would be in the demographic of players who want additional depth in some areas. While this is true to some extent, I'm sure there are some players who would consider themselves hardcore RPers, it's also the case that there are players outside of the hardcore demographic that would be interested in this as well. So your argument fails in its relevance, as well as in the point it tries to make. Also of note, my original post never implied any sort of numbers. I'm fully aware that there are a lot of people who play for RP or glamour or other things that in my mind have no depth to them nor do they need depth to them. It doesn't take away from these things to consider my suggestions though.

I do love how you completely gloss over the notion "casual" players may actually invest more time into this game than their "hardcore" counterparts, yet then presume they would have any interest in the system that ultimately serves little purpose to them. People who are not dedicated raiders will not care about stat allocation for the most part. They want actual new content like Deep Dungeon, The Aquapolis, an improved Diadem, more things to craft, and yes, glamour.

And even amongst the raid community itself, people do not unanimously agree horizontal progression is worthwhile. Most want the fights themselves to be more interesting.

You don't see how this fact defeats your argument about how everyone will only ever go for what's the most optimal in all situations? You can't see how you yourself are a counterexample to your own argument as someone who is not currently building your BiS set? And as I've already mentioned in numerous other replies, there are plenty of other factors working against this idea as well, and the exact number of factors varies depending on the way that you're talking about having this implemented.

I don't even know where to begin with this. You've... completely ignored any form of context. I explicitly said my intent was BiS once I reached 60 on MNK. And the only reason I haven't done so yet is because the gear I already have outpaces all of the content I am currently participating in. Upgrading now wouldn't benefit me. That is not a counter example, but a direct adherence to the norm. I have worked out what is "best" relevant to where I am in the story. Anything more is overkill, and a gil loss.

There are so many ways to mitigate this effect to being completely negligible that I almost don't want to address it. Put the new stats/effects at endgame where new inexperienced players won't even be able to worry about it until they have a grasp on all the more fundamental concepts they need to learn, and of course balancing it better both from the content side and the side of the stats/effects themselves does a lot to mitigate this as well. STR vs VIT wasn't well balanced at all from either side, as content did need the extra damage of STR tanking as shown by the fact that many groups were unable to clear A4S at 3.2 launch despite having multiple clears in 3.1 and STR had too many benefits over the minimal benefit having extra HP gave you in general.

But the takeaway remains people chose the most optimal approach and expected that of others. That has remained the crux of my point. STR vs VIT is merely an example of it. At the end of the day once people discover the most efficent way to do something, most will.

First off, no content in the game currently requires healer DPS. This distinction is important because Gordias did exist as relevant content and in there it was an absolute necessity. Anecdotal evidence doesn't prove general cases either. You may encounter more forgiveness for mechanical uselessness than healers not doing damage, but that doesn't mean that this is necessarily the general case. The fact that some tanks will literally not play with healers who do damage is a good counterexample, and most of the time you'll get nothing more than a small groan if a healer isn't dpsing in their spare time unless you're doing the high end content. It's almost ironic that you even make this argument, as it's mainly you listening to the small minority that you're telling us SE shouldn't listen to and treating that as though it's true in general.

Operative word: did. Gordias has since been nerfed, and therefore no longer requires healer DPS. To be fair, I should amend this to "most". Brute Justice isn't exactly forgiving. Nevertheless, the devs have expressly stated they do not take healer DPS into their damage calculations.

How odd. You discredit anecdotal evidence with... anecdotal evidence. If you look over at Youtube, you won't find any videos of difficult content clears where Healers aren't DPSing. In fact, you'll be hard-pressed to find pure healers period. What you will find is plenty of complaining whenever healers refuse to DPS. There's even a thread now about it. And it isn't a small groan. Almost... because it isn't. Most players expect healers to DPS. Which falls in line with my point; people find the most efficient way to complete an objective... and expect everyone to do it. You'll get some leeway in leveling content, but relevant stuff? Not so much.

In any case, we've come to an impasse. So I'll leave it at that.

[HeavenlyArmed]

What you're asking for is not a simple stat adjustment, but a whole new stat itself. Such entails redesigning the entire game's structure to accommodate for these changes. Old content needs to be rebalanced, new content has to add in this extra variable to "keep stats interesting" as you've so eloquently implied. A better example would them adding Rogue, which the devs have said became such an enormous drain on both their resources and the team itself, they will never do classes again outside of an expansion.

Furthermore, traits, buffs and etc have been mentioned throughout this thread. Those are not "very easy" implementations either. You're presuming they need change a few bits of code, some numbers and voila. Now if it code were ever so simple.

Try reading the examples. Older content needs readjusting if you add a stat at endgame of 4.0? Because that makes complete sense, and they totally care about how stat adjustments fit old content, right? That's why A4S became unclearable to some players after the VIT adjustments? Now, as for your argument that these aren't, as I claim, very easy adjustments, no they aren't. But you know what? Neither is most of the other coding that goes into this game. My point is that this is not nearly the amount of work that you assume, where it would take this extremely exaggerated amount of time to implement for an expansion. They've done adjustments before, even widescale ones, and never delayed anything as a result. But you think adding a new stat to endgame would do that because... Rogue was a massive drain to implement? Jeez, I wonder why you have to go with an example that actually did involve adjustments to gear and required a lot of work from a number of different teams rather than something that is entirely back-end in how it would need to be implemented. I guess it's because it's the only example you can give, and guess what, 2.4 wasn't delayed, so it still doesn't prove your argument anyway.

The irony here is astounding. Your entire post presumes to ignore people will not follow along with an established norm despite them doing precisely that even when provided with some degree of customization. We can choose our attributes-- both personal and in the latest Anima step. No one does. Instead, they ask "what stats should I allocate?" And are told which scales best. You cannot ignore this variable because it doesn't suit your argument.

Not relevant to the part you quoted, and I already explained how there are ways this can be countered. Not that you ever read them, but they are there.

I do love how you completely gloss over the notion "casual" players may actually invest more time into this game than their "hardcore" counterparts, yet then presume they would have any interest in the system that ultimately serves little purpose to them. People who are not dedicated raiders will not care about stat allocation for the most part. They want actual new content like Deep Dungeon, The Aquapolis, an improved Diadem, more things to craft, and yes, glamour.

And this takes away from none of that. In the same way that we didn't lose content in Heavensward despite all of our secondary stats being reworked nor did we lose content in 3.2 because of the VIT changes. You can try to claim that because this is a new stat it'd be entirely different and more similar to something that requires multiple different teams working on it like implementing Rogue did, but you won't get very far doing so. And while a lot of them might not have any desire for a new stat or anything like that, it wouldn't have any harmful effects for them either. Toxicity? Already exists, this wouldn't make it any worse. Confusion? Minimized by putting it at endgame, and then you can't argue this anyway if you're going to say that players won't care regardless or will follow whatever other people suggest them to.

And even amongst the raid community itself, people do not unanimously agree horizontal progression is worthwhile. Most want the fights themselves to be more interesting.

Hey, guys? Apparently we don't find the fights in Midas to be interesting enough. Huh, this is the most mechanically praised tier so far and most people wouldn't want mechanical complexity of fights to get any higher because it'd be overly daunting? But that can't be right, this guy on the forums who hasn't even touched the content told me so! Don't make raid arguments when you haven't done the content. And once again, I doubt you'll find many raiders who are against the idea of gear that's at least superficially more interesting from a gameplay perspective.

I don't even know where to begin with this. You've... completely ignored any form of context. I explicitly said my intent was BiS once I reached 60 on MNK. And the only reason I haven't done so yet is because the gear I already have outpaces all of the content I am currently participating in. Upgrading now wouldn't benefit me. That is not a counter example, but a direct adherence to the norm. I have worked out what is "best" relevant to where I am in the story. Anything more is overkill, and a gil loss.

So you worked out what was the best for what you're currently doing. You figured out on your own where you want your gear to be right now. You don't feel like going further because you don't see a need for it. And in a world where BiS is becoming an increasingly not cared about topic, you're still going to try and argue that this isn't an example of not caring about what the absolute best is and settling for something else because of reasons that I already explained as part of why the everyone will just go for the best argument fails?

But the takeaway remains people chose the most optimal approach and expected that of others. That has remained the crux of my point. STR vs VIT is merely an example of it. At the end of the day once people discover the most efficent way to do something, most will.

The expectation you claim was there was vastly overstated. In reality, most groups outside of the raid scene didn't care, and within the raid scene the content mandated it, so the choice actually didn't even exist. Yes, most people will work towards what is considered best to the best of their abilities. But to argue this as a reason for not even trying to give players who want a little something different something to try out falls flat. If this is how you really feel, then would you rather see secondary stats removed entirely as well? I mean, what's the difference, right? Everyone just goes for what's "best", why even have secondary stats at all? Except that idea sounds absurd.

Operative word: did. Gordias has since been nerfed, and therefore no longer requires healer DPS. To be fair, I should amend this to "most". Brute Justice isn't exactly forgiving. Nevertheless, the devs have expressly stated they do not take healer DPS into their damage calculations.

The devs also expressly stated that players who were having trouble with Machinist, Bard and Black Mage at the start of Heavensward just needed to practice more with those jobs at 60 to see their performance improve, before eventually buffing all of them to either make the damage floor higher or make the damage ceiling easier to hit. And they expressly stated that Warrior in 2.0 was just fine before completely reworking the job in 2.1. And they expressly stated that Savage SCoB was the original untuned versions of those encounters despite there very clearly being a trend towards preventing the "cheese strats" that appeared in the regular versions of the fights which would imply they were adjusted after watching players in the normal versions. So I'd take most comments about tuning with a grain of salt. Not that this is relevant to the argument anyway.

How odd. You discredit anecdotal evidence with... anecdotal evidence.

No, I pointed out that it's just as easy to point out how since there is no absolute, the anecdotal evidence can be used for either side and not actually prove anything.

If you look over at Youtube, you won't find any videos of difficult content clears where Healers aren't DPSing.

Well, nothing recent, anyway. If you look back far enough it's there, though.

In fact, you'll be hard-pressed to find pure healers period. What you will find is plenty of complaining whenever healers refuse to DPS. There's even a thread now about it. And it isn't a small groan. Almost... because it isn't. Most players expect healers to DPS. Which falls in line with my point; people find the most efficient way to complete an objective... and expect everyone to do it. You'll get some leeway in leveling content, but relevant stuff? Not so much.

Hmm, most players, you say? Weird how you keep asserting this in the exact same way you assume I think most players want horizontal progression. You can't argue that forum thread posters are a minority that doesn't represent most players and then proceed to argue that because a forum thread exists about something that it must be the general case. You bounce back and forth between most players won't care and you'll be forced into playing the way that people consider optimal and trying to use both as arguments for your side. And neither works. Not caring isn't an argument against because there is nothing that suggests that doing this will take away from anything else (and something like this is likely to happen anyway, again, considering removing accuracy), and being forced into just doing whatever is best isn't an argument because there will always be reasons people don't fall perfectly into line with that as you yourself act as an example of. Want to hear how many people I've seen break 1k dps in Final Steps of Faith? Not many, even though it was something I could do at the minimum item level on an off job. Want to know how many of them I've kicked? One, and it was because they weren't even trying to dodge basic mechanics, not because they were underperforming in damage. Not relevant enough content for you? Because that's the type of content most of the people who play this game do. Wanna know how many healers I've seen dps in there? Not many. Have I kicked any of them or even heard complaints about it? Nope. Obviously my sample size isn't massive, but if it were the issue you claimed it was I'd probably be seeing a lot more of it than I am.

In any case, we've come to an impasse. So I'll leave it at that.

We were at an impasse before you even spoke. You've not actually considered one argument leveled from the other side, and have proven that you're not willing to do so due to your own misguided fears about how it may happen if the other side were to get what it wants. I've shown you examples of why every fear you hold isn't reasonable, and explained why I don't see how there could possibly be downsides that are even close to what you claim, and your arguments against those are so flawed that I can't help but feel as though you're just determined to be against this no matter what.

1.23 had a perfect balance of vertical + horizontal stuff. There was no ilvl, interesting stats and diversity. If they did it then they can do it again.

Also what's this about healers not needing to dps, is there any videos of raids where healers do not have to dps?

Yes, though most of them are from SCoB and earlier. Also, healer dps isn't entirely required with higher gear levels in the highest content now, though it certainly helps.

[Bourne_Endeavor]

Try reading the examples. Older content needs readjusting if you add a stat at endgame of 4.0? Because that makes complete sense, and they totally care about how stat adjustments fit old content, right? That's why A4S became unclearable to some players after the VIT adjustments? Now, as for your argument that these aren't, as I claim, very easy adjustments, no they aren't. But you know what? Neither is most of the other coding that goes into this game. My point is that this is not nearly the amount of work that you assume, where it would take this extremely exaggerated amount of time to implement for an expansion. They've done adjustments before, even widescale ones, and never delayed anything as a result. But you think adding a new stat to endgame would do that because... Rogue was a massive drain to implement? Jeez, I wonder why you have to go with an example that actually did involve adjustments to gear and required a lot of work from a number of different teams rather than something that is entirely back-end in how it would need to be implemented. I guess it's because it's the only example you can give, and guess what, 2.4 wasn't delayed, so it still doesn't prove your argument anyway.

You should take your own advice. You are asking they include an entirely new stat(s), plus the possibility of various effects on the gear itself. This will impact old content and necessitate changing the current system-- none of which is remotely comparable to scaling down an existing stat. If you had any code experience, you would know that is no simple feat. And I'm not necessarily saying they couldn't, but that their majority audience won't care about these changes.

Because that example directly references how changes that required a full rebalance resulted in the devs outright saying they would never do it again outside an expansion. That statement alone demonstrates the amount of time needed.

Not relevant to the part you quoted, and I already explained how there are ways this can be countered. Not that you ever read them, but they are there.

No. It doesn't suit your narrative because if you accept people, on average, graviate to whatever the established norm is: i.e. ask veteran players what the best stat compolation is, it diminishes your whole argument.

And this takes away from none of that. In the same way that we didn't lose content in Heavensward despite all of our secondary stats being reworked nor did we lose content in 3.2 because of the VIT changes. You can try to claim that because this is a new stat it'd be entirely different and more similar to something that requires multiple different teams working on it like implementing Rogue did, but you won't get very far doing so. And while a lot of them might not have any desire for a new stat or anything like that, it wouldn't have any harmful effects for them either. Toxicity? Already exists, this wouldn't make it any worse. Confusion? Minimized by putting it at endgame, and then you can't argue this anyway if you're going to say that players won't care regardless or will follow whatever other people suggest them to.

How many times does it need to be repeated? This is not a stat adjustment. You want a new, non-existing, stat added to the game. You want non-existing status effects on gear. The game now how to calculate a new variable into the damage equation; new buffs the player might have; new effects the player could inflict. All on equipment that has never had it before. You presume this is a simple flick of the switch implementation. It wouldn't be. And due to budget, it would impact other bits of content in the game.

Hey, guys? Apparently we don't find the fights in Midas to be interesting enough. Huh, this is the most mechanically praised tier so far and most people wouldn't want mechanical complexity of fights to get any higher because it'd be overly daunting? But that can't be right, this guy on the forums who hasn't even touched the content told me so! Don't make raid arguments when you haven't done the content. And once again, I doubt you'll find many raiders who are against the idea of gear that's at least superficially more interesting from a gameplay perspective.

Uh... what? That isn't even remotely what I said. In fact, I said the precise opposite-- you literally quoted. "Most want the fights themselves to be more interesting." Mechanics are why Midas and Nidhogg have garnered praise not horizontal progression. The two are not synoymous. You perceive horizontal progression the solution to a problem you believe exists.

This entire paragraph is one massive strawman.

So you worked out what was the best for what you're currently doing. You figured out on your own where you want your gear to be right now. You don't feel like going further because you don't see a need for it. And in a world where BiS is becoming an increasingly not cared about topic, you're still going to try and argue that this isn't an example of not caring about what the absolute best is and settling for something else because of reasons that I already explained as part of why the everyone will just go for the best argument fails?

The expectation you claim was there was vastly overstated. In reality, most groups outside of the raid scene didn't care, and within the raid scene the content mandated it, so the choice actually didn't even exist. Yes, most people will work towards what is considered best to the best of their abilities. But to argue this as a reason for not even trying to give players who want a little something different something to try out falls flat. If this is how you really feel, then would you rather see secondary stats removed entirely as well? I mean, what's the difference, right? Everyone just goes for what's "best", why even have secondary stats at all? Except that idea sounds absurd.

You neglected one coveat here-- one I even mentioned previously. People not interested in raiding are the ones not worried over BiS, or the near equivalent (weekly lockouts). Therefore, they won't care about new stats either. The very system you want Square Enix to implement only applies to people who raid on a given average.

To quote from the video itself, "Most of the time you are running into these people, tt's a completely irrelevant factor to what you are doing."

Remember your mention of a buff that maybe allows for an early Geirskogul proc? I will only be relevant to a small percentage of what you're doing-- 1% if we pull from the very video you linked. And that has been my entire argument. If it isn't going to impact a larger enough portion of the FFXIV community, SE has little incentive to focus on it.

Hmm, most players, you say? Weird how you keep asserting this in the exact same way you assume I think most players want horizontal progression. You can't argue that forum thread posters are a minority that doesn't represent most players and then proceed to argue that because a forum thread exists about something that it must be the general case. You bounce back and forth between most players won't care and you'll be forced into playing the way that people consider optimal and trying to use both as arguments for your side. And neither works. Not caring isn't an argument against because there is nothing that suggests that doing this will take away from anything else (and something like this is likely to happen anyway, again, considering removing accuracy), and being forced into just doing whatever is best isn't an argument because there will always be reasons people don't fall perfectly into line with that as you yourself act as an example of. Want to hear how many people I've seen break 1k dps in Final Steps of Faith? Not many, even though it was something I could do at the minimum item level on an off job. Want to know how many of them I've kicked? One, and it was because they weren't even trying to dodge basic mechanics, not because they were underperforming in damage. Not relevant enough content for you? Because that's the type of content most of the people who play this game do. Wanna know how many healers I've seen dps in there? Not many. Have I kicked any of them or even heard complaints about it? Nope. Obviously my sample size isn't massive, but if it were the issue you claimed it was I'd probably be seeing a lot more of it than I am.

No. You continuously ignore context. Healers are expected to DPS whenever possible, and those who refuse are criticised. That doesn't mean in-chat or through a vote kick nor does it mean players overgeared for non-relevant content won't grudgingly deal with it the same way they do poor DPS. But once you step into current tier content, you're expected to contribute even as a healer... if you can.

Your example is a group where a healer couldn't DPS, not through their own refusal, but due to the content and/or group demanding enough healing to keep them occupied. Complaints arise when healers actively choose not to DPS and simply stand around doing nothing.

These aren't the same scenario despite you trying to make them one.

[zosia]

You should take your own advice. You are asking they include an entirely new stat(s), plus the possibility of various effects on the gear itself. This will impact old content and necessitate changing the current system-- none of which is remotely comparable to scaling down an existing stat. If you had any code experience, you would know that is no simple feat. And I'm not necessarily saying they couldn't, but that their majority audience won't care about these changes.

You should stop making arguments that have no merit. We already have gear sets. We already have ways to turn off gear effects in instances. Problem solved.

Because that example directly references how changes that required a full rebalance resulted in the devs outright saying they would never do it again outside an expansion. That statement alone demonstrates the amount of time needed. No. It doesn't suit your narrative because if you accept people, on average, graviate to whatever the established norm is: i.e. ask veteran players what the best stat compolation is, it diminishes your whole argument.

You're focused on one aspect of gear complexity. There is no reason we can't have weapon procs, trinkets, and set bonuses within the concept of optimization. You are assuming that adding stuff like this would require large amounts of work. Stop predicating your entire argument off of an assumption.

How many times does it need to be repeated? This is not a stat adjustment. You want a new, non-existing, stat added to the game. You want non-existing status effects on gear. The game now how to calculate a new variable into the damage equation; new buffs the player might have; new effects the player could inflict. All on equipment that has never had it before. You presume this is a simple flick of the switch implementation. It wouldn't be. And due to budget, it would impact other bits of content in the game.

The majority of active NA forum users want that change. It's worth investing in despite what the minority (you) want.

You neglected one coveat here-- one I even mentioned previously. People not interested in raiding are the ones not worried over BiS, or the near equivalent (weekly lockouts). Therefore, they won't care about new stats either. The very system you want Square Enix to implement only applies to people who raid on a given average.

To quote from the video itself, "Most of the time you are running into these people, tt's a completely irrelevant factor to what you are doing."

Remember your mention of a buff that maybe allows for an early Geirskogul proc? I will only be relevant to a small percentage of what you're doing-- 1% if we pull from the very video you linked. And that has been my entire argument. If it isn't going to impact a larger enough portion of the FFXIV community, SE has little incentive to focus on it.

Wrong again. Check the poll thread on this topic. Casual and hardcore players alike want these changes. A majority of players want these changes.
The minority opinion of "stay the course" does not matter and is not worth considering.

[HeavenlyArmed]

You should take your own advice. You are asking they include an entirely new stat(s), plus the possibility of various effects on the gear itself. This will impact old content and necessitate changing the current system-- none of which is remotely comparable to scaling down an existing stat. If you had any code experience, you would know that is no simple feat. And I'm not necessarily saying they couldn't, but that their majority audience won't care about these changes.

Because that example directly references how changes that required a full rebalance resulted in the devs outright saying they would never do it again outside an expansion. That statement alone demonstrates the amount of time needed.

I've already explained why this is wrong. No rebalance of old content is necessary with my suggestions as none of them would exist in old content areas. Stats in the ways I explained were not just scaled down, they had fundamental changes in function such as Skill/Spell Speed affecting dots, Crit also affecting the bonus damage crits give, and Det no longer affecting certain aspects of certain jobs. You assume (incorrectly) that I have no code experience. No old content was rebalanced to adjust for Ninja, and Ninja had dozens of other aspects that made it difficult to implement alongside other things. No part of your argument here actually applies the way you think it does.

No. It doesn't suit your narrative because if you accept people, on average, graviate to whatever the established norm is: i.e. ask veteran players what the best stat compolation is, it diminishes your whole argument.

This is literally not addressing my argument, you're just saying you disagree because you disagree. I've explained this to you countless times as to why your complaint here doesn't work the way you think.

How many times does it need to be repeated? This is not a stat adjustment. You want a new, non-existing, stat added to the game. You want non-existing status effects on gear. The game now how to calculate a new variable into the damage equation; new buffs the player might have; new effects the player could inflict. All on equipment that has never had it before. You presume this is a simple flick of the switch implementation. It wouldn't be. And due to budget, it would impact other bits of content in the game.

And your evidence for this constraint doesn't exist. Did I ever say to replace all current instances of accuracy with a new stat? No. Do I think that even if they did they'd bother to rebalance older content? Totally, the same way they did when tank damage was changed in 3.2, wait, they adjusted literally nothing for that. So no. Are these changes even something that would play into damage formulas? Not actually, what they would play a part in is content balancing, but that's only for future content anyway.

Uh... what? That isn't even remotely what I said. In fact, I said the precise opposite-- you literally quoted. "Most want the fights themselves to be more interesting." Mechanics are why Midas and Nidhogg have garnered praise not horizontal progression. The two are not synoymous. You perceive horizontal progression the solution to a problem you believe exists.

This entire paragraph is one massive strawman.

It was a joke, but my point is that we've reached a level of mechanical intricacy that most players are happy with now. This means it's not something that most people feel the dev team needs to put extra work into now. Obviously horizontal progression isn't why things that aren't related to horizontal progression are praised. I perceive more interesting things besides just the battle content itself that are still related to the battle content will help solve the widely-perceived problem of the game stagnating into a boring formula when it comes to this content. Not that I think you're even capable of understanding my argument, again, we were at an impasse before you even spoke.

You neglected one coveat here-- one I even mentioned previously. People not interested in raiding are the ones not worried over BiS, or the near equivalent (weekly lockouts). Therefore, they won't care about new stats either. The very system you want Square Enix to implement only applies to people who raid on a given average.

False equivalency. Just because a player doesn't want to spend the time min-maxing their stats, doesn't mean adding a new stat would be completely worthless to them. Go ask a BLM who doesn't raid but still plays content at endgame if they think a chance to proc a Firestarter off of a Fire IV would be worthless to them. Go on, I'll wait. Adding a little more depth like this doesn't have the drawbacks you claim.

To quote from the video itself, "Most of the time you are running into these people, tt's a completely irrelevant factor to what you are doing."

Remember your mention of a buff that maybe allows for an early Geirskogul proc? I will only be relevant to a small percentage of what you're doing-- 1% if we pull from the very video you linked. And that has been my entire argument. If it isn't going to impact a larger enough portion of the FFXIV community, SE has little incentive to focus on it.

Continuing off of what I just said, there's already a basis for this being incorrect. If the stat is interesting to the players, they will want it. They may not be willing or able to min-max with it the way that raiders tend to, but that does not mean that it will be worthless to them, and it certainly wouldn't be enough of a drain on resources to implement that it should draw the level of concern from you that it does. On top of that, the fact that since 2.0 this question has been presented to them so many times people have stopped counting clearly does indicate enough of a demand to at least consider.

No. You continuously ignore context. Healers are expected to DPS whenever possible, and those who refuse are criticised. That doesn't mean in-chat or through a vote kick nor does it mean players overgeared for non-relevant content won't grudgingly deal with it the same way they do poor DPS. But once you step into current tier content, you're expected to contribute even as a healer... if you can.

Your example is a group where a healer couldn't DPS, not through their own refusal, but due to the content and/or group demanding enough healing to keep them occupied. Complaints arise when healers actively choose not to DPS and simply stand around doing nothing.

These aren't the same scenario despite you trying to make them one.

And your evidence to the healers in my runs that you haven't participated in being in the situation you describe is...? Wait, you have none? Yeah, if you honestly think people pay enough attention to whether or not their healer is doing damage that they care even in basic level 60 content, you're delusional. Even if they come right out and make it clear that they will not be contributing damage, as long as they're not actively preventing you from clearing whatever content you're doing, people do not and will not care in 99% of the content in this game. But of course this is where your mind goes, because you don't read my arguments with any intention of considering my side and only try to take down the things I say by repeating arguments that have long since been defeated. I understand clearly what concerns you have and why you have them. But when I examine those concerns I don't have them myself, because the reasons that you have them don't appear reasonable to me.

[zosia]

What you're asking for is not a simple stat adjustment, but a whole new stat itself. Such entails redesigning the entire game'sstructure to accommodate for these changes. Old content needs to be rebalanced, new content has to add in this extra variable to "keep stats interesting" as you've so eloquently implied. A better example would them adding Rogue, which the devs have said became such an enormous drain on both their resources and the team itself, they will never do classes again outside of an expansion.

We already have gear effects on GC gear, the game structure does not need heavy modification to add interesting gear effects.

We already have game structures that allow the dev team to synch your gear, ignore certain stats, and ignore melds. All the old content simply needs the same switch applied to any new gear stats that might break any old content.

This drain on resources is not as huge of a problem as you make it out to be. It's also a terrible excuse to not change anything when the formula is getting stale and you only need to look to that strawpoll thread that the majority here on these forums want change. If the majority of the players want change, the minority, such as your self, need to suck it up and unserstand your unpopular opinion about the stale state of the game is just that, unpopular.

Furthermore, traits, buffs and etc have been mentioned throughout this thread. Those are not "very easy" implementations either. You're presuming they need change a few bits of code, some numbers and voila. Now if it code were ever so simple.

Just use the features from PvP and other synced dungeons to turn off gear bonuses, a tool already in-game, to avoid the 'complex' web of coding.

The irony here is astounding. Your entire post presumes to ignore people will not follow along with an established norm despite them doing precisely that even when provided with some degree of customization. We can choose our attributes-- both personal and in the latest Anima step. No one does. Instead, they ask "what stats should I allocate?" And are told which scales best. You cannot ignore this variable because it doesn't suit your argument.

Ofc people do that. But what if the relic had a proc effect? You know, some special effect that the zeta was supposed to have when we finished it? Man, every topic on these forums just reminds me of another thing the dev team back peddled on.

I do love how you completely gloss over the notion "casual" players may actually invest more time into this game than their "hardcore" counterparts, yet then presume they would have any interest in the system that ultimately serves little purpose to them. People who are not dedicated raiders will not care about stat allocation for the most part. They want actual new content like Deep Dungeon, The Aquapolis, an improved Diadem, more things to craft, and yes, glamour.

You are making brash assumptions that casual players don't care at all about optimization and gear effects. Based off of the poll thread in this forums, you're wrong so far. 75% of the votes so far want change. You are in the minority and your opinions don't matter anymore.

And even amongst the raid community itself, people do not unanimously agree horizontal progression is worthwhile. Most want the fights themselves to be more interesting.

See the strawpoll thread, The majority on these forums want change. You're the minority and your opinions are worth investing in on this topic.

I don't even know where to begin with this. You've... completely ignored any form of context. I explicitly said my intent was BiS once I reached 60 on MNK. And the only reason I haven't done so yet is because the gear I already have outpaces all of the content I am currently participating in. Upgrading now wouldn't benefit me. That is not a counter example, but a direct adherence to the norm. I have worked out what is "best" relevant to where I am in the story. Anything more is overkill, and a gil loss.

except most gear is free? How is that even a gil loss? Stop making excuses.

But the takeaway remains people chose the most optimal approach and expected that of others. That has remained the crux of my point. STR vs VIT is merely an example of it. At the end of the day once people discover the most efficent way to do something, most will.

That point does not mean we can't have set bonuses, more ring choices, a trinket slot, etc etc. There are so many improvements that could be implemented into the gear system and the only refute you can seem to come up with is "people won't want/like it!" Strawpoll says otherwise.

[DPZ2]

Strawpoll says otherwise.

A straw poll can gauge sentiment among a particular group of people at a particular point in time. If it is an internet-related straw poll, the results are only as good as the total number of people with opposing opinions who actually encounter it at the time.

The comment quoted is equivalent to saying "We held a vote while you weren't around. Too bad for you."

A recent 'straw poll' result that was meaningless: Michelle Bachman and Ron Paul were the top 'winners' in the 2011 Iowa Presidential straw poll.

[zosia]

A straw poll can gauge sentiment among a particular group of people at a particular point in time. If it is an internet-related straw poll, the results are only as good as the total number of people with opposing opinions who actually encounter it at the time. The comment quoted is equivalent to saying "We held a vote while you weren't around. Too bad for you."

A recent 'straw poll' result that was meaningless: Michelle Bachman and Ron Paul were the top 'winners' in the 2011 Iowa Presidential straw poll.

It's representative as a sample of Forum opinions. It shows that its very likely that the general forum opinion is such that at least more than 50% of the active players on the forum want a change. Right now the poll shows 3/4 players want change. I am giving you a +/-25% margin to work with there, waaaaaay generous. It's pretty obvious the majority of active forum users are tired of the stale formula and anyone who wants to keep the current state of things for years to come is the minority opinion.

As we all know here on these forums from how raiders are treated, minorities and their opinions don't matter. Suck it up, the majority of players on these forums, a place where SE gathers player feedback, want a more complex gear system than we have now.

Really at this point, it's just time to /popcorn as we watch what was once an active player base of 1M subscribers drop to 900k, 800k, 700k, 600k, etc. As this game careen's down the pipes, I can at least take satisfaction in watching bad decision after bad decision unfold doing more and more damage to this game.

Yeah, lets change nothing, lets see how many players we have a year out from now. LOLOLOL there is going to be like 3 people playing this game.

[RobbieH]

It's representative as a sample of Forum opinions. It shows that its very likely that the general forum opinion is such that at least more than 50% of the active players on the forum want a change. Right now the poll shows 3/4 players want change. I am giving you a +/-25% margin to work with there, waaaaaay generous. It's pretty obvious the majority of active forum users are tired of the stale formula and anyone who wants to keep the current state of things for years to come is the minority opinion.

As we all know here on these forums from how raiders are treated, minorities and their opinions don't matter. Suck it up, the majority of players on these forums, a place where SE gathers player feedback, want a more complex gear system than we have now.

Really at this point, it's just time to /popcorn as we watch what was once an active player base of 1M subscribers drop to 900k, 800k, 700k, 600k, etc. As this game careen's down the pipes, I can at least take satisfaction in watching bad decision after bad decision unfold doing more and more damage to this game.

Yeah, lets change nothing, lets see how many players we have a year out from now. LOLOLOL there is going to be like 3 people playing this game.

I watched 2 games i loved dying and went F2P (won't happen with this game but it won't be in good shoes either), one was Aion, i went to the forums warn, they laughed a few months later it went F2P, then it was TERA, they laughed, 1 Year later was F2P when they said it would take a minimum of 2 Years if that was to happen.

Casuals don't seem to understand a lot of things, to them from what i see is that if there's content everything's fine, which in this game for them there's a ton of content, but for raiders there's only Savage, hurray!

[Bourne_Endeavor]

We already have gear effects on GC gear, the game structure does not need heavy modification to add interesting gear effects.

Those are negligible boosts that I wouldn't qualify as "interesting stats," but sure, you could do that. Adding a whole new stat or procs to gear isn't the same thing. And even if it were, we're back to why the overall community would care? And how these new features wouldn't simply get broken down into "what is the best potency increase?" Look at the Anima weapon. We can customize the stats of our weapon. What does everyone do? Crit/Det.

As for the strawpoll. A sample size that small is not an accurate representation of the community. You're extrapolating a poll with roughly 150 votes to a population of 800,000+. An equivalent would be to use Steam's active game tracker to argue FFXIV is dying because it only shows 6-7,000 players on average when the overwhelming majority don't use Steam to play this game.

Another issue is by taking this poll, we have to consider others.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ffxiv/comme...unity_discuss/

That was an in-depth study on active subs, player progression and Gordias clears. The latter scored less than 1%. Which suggests the devs should just scrap Savage entirely because it's content virtually no one can clear. Now I'm not saying they should, but only why you cannot grab a strawpoll and claim it proof of a majority opinion.