Request: Ability to re-assign class levels after 1.20

[Rentahamster]

I'm really surprised at the amount of vitriol this suggestion has generated.

Most people don't like it when someone complains about a "problem" that is generally considered to not be a big deal. You're making a mountain out of a molehill, so to speak.

What is the downside of allowing players to reassign levels when major class roles are completely reworked?

Implementing this feature takes away time and resources away from tackling other, more important issues. The "benefit" that a minority of players would gain from this feature is miniscule compared to the effort it would take.

Whom does this hurt?

This hurts the timetable for implementing actual reforms that make the game better.

You're acting like I'm asking for a perpetually available reassignment ability.

I think that most, if not all the responders in this thread know that you only wanted a one-time deal. We understand what you are saying. Don't try to dismiss our arguments because you think that we don't understand what you are asking for.

If they radically changed crafting so that WVR and LTW no longer made any finished gear (which was all made by ARM), I would be saying the same thing.

That's because changing WVR and LTW like that makes no logical sense and is not in line with the future aims and goals of the class system.

Changing THM and CNJ in the ways they have laid out DOES make logical sense and IS in line with the future aims and goals of the class system.

[Tsuga]

snip

Agree with all of your points.

I do think you should add that bending to a request like this sends a dangerous message - that being: "If you don't like the changes that we are making, we will compensate you!".

The dev team should not be held to allocate resources to giving special treatment to people who aren't happy with their changes. MMOs are games that are constantly evolving, and players are going to love and hate every change that comes with that. The Devs do not have to answer for said changes, and they certainly do not have to compensate the players for them. I feel like SE has been so generous with responding to player feedback, and implementing ideas as a result of said feedback into the game that the players here feel that they're entitled to service from the developers that no company would ever even consider. The reason no company would seriously consider such a request is that if they bend to one request like this, they will receive a flood of requests from people who feel like they've been cheated by any little thing from every update. It's a slippery slope that I would rather the devs not go down.

[Spider-Dan]

I do think you should add that bending to a request like this sends a dangerous message - that being: "If you don't like the changes that we are making, we will compensate you!".

It amazes me that you consider this a problem to be avoided.

If they compensate players every time they completely change the roles of classes in the game, I think that would be a good thing.

[Tsuga]

It amazes me that you consider this a problem to be avoided.

If they compensate players every time they completely change the roles of classes in the game, I think that would be a good thing.

Compensating for things that are broken - good. The reason being that it is a development problem that inconveniences everybody, and was essentially a mistake on the development side.

Compensating because you don't like a change - bad. The reason being that there are things that EVERYONE dislikes about the game. If one person's dislike is compensated for, then EVERYONE's dislikes should be compensated for. The Dev team cannot possibly please every single person, so this is a completely unrealistic expectation. You are not entitled to compensation for this any more than I'm entitled to compensation for the change to CNJ mechanics that I loathed three months ago. Or the year of grinding that I went through now that grinding from 1 - 50 takes a week.

[Spider-Dan]

Compensating because you don't like a change - bad. The reason being that there are things that EVERYONE dislikes about the game.

There is a significant difference between "ARC is now a worse DD" (something that I accepted without complaint) and "ARC's role is no longer that of a DD, but that of a tank."

A complete revamping of a class's role is not in the same league as patch-to-patch pecking order changes.

If one person's dislike is compensated for, then EVERYONE's dislikes should be compensated for. The Dev team cannot possibly please every single person, so this is a completely unrealistic expectation.

Under this logic, why would they ever make any changes at all?

If what you are saying is true, then since other people's dislikes have obviously been accommodated (e.g. classes are more unique), then all dislikes must be accommodated, right? Obviously, that's not even possible.

[Tsuga]

Under this logic, why would they ever make any changes at all?

If what you are saying is true, then since other people's dislikes have obviously been accommodated (e.g. classes are more unique), then all dislikes must be accommodated, right? Obviously, that's not even possible.

Apples and oranges.

Asking for handouts and special treatment as a result of class changes and rebalancing =/= requesting changes because of imbalances and flaws with the game design.

Again, you're asking SE to create a slippery slope for themselves, and I sure as hell hope that they are not stupid enough to oblige you.

[Spider-Dan]

I think that most, if not all the responders in this thread know that you only wanted a one-time deal. We understand what you are saying. Don't try to dismiss our arguments because you think that we don't understand what you are asking for.

Then why are people complaining about "potential for abuse"? That doesn't make sense in the context of a one-time event.

That's because changing WVR and LTW like that makes no logical sense and is not in line with the future aims and goals of the class system.

Changing THM and CNJ in the ways they have laid out DOES make logical sense and IS in line with the future aims and goals of the class system.

That's a completely arbitrary statement. Such a change would increase class uniqueness (a stated goal) and makes logical sense (Armorer makes all types of armor).

But to speak to my point: if such an "illogical" change were implemented, would players then be justified in asking for level reassignment?

[Rentahamster]

Then why are people complaining about "potential for abuse"? That doesn't make sense in the context of a one-time event.

A one-time even can still be abused. There are a lot of unforeseen consequences to anything that involves something as basic as a mass reallocation of player levels, even if it seems simple and inconsequential to you.

That's a completely arbitrary statement. Such a change would increase class uniqueness (a stated goal) and makes logical sense (Armorer makes all types of armor).

It's not arbitrary.

Their stated goals is to increase the class uniqueness of the battle classes, not the crafting classes.

It does not make any logical sense at all. Weavers make gear made out of cloth that they weave and sew. Leatherworkers make gear out of leather that they tan and cure. Armorers make gear out of metal that they smelt and refine.

But to speak to my point: if such an "illogical" change were implemented, would players then be justified in asking for level reassignment?

First of all, they wouldn't do anything that stupid, nor do they plan to. Second of all, given the hypothetical case that they did do something as drastic as merging TAN and WVR into ARM, then some sort or reallocation would be necessary.

However, the THM changes as laid out so far are neither illogical, nor are they unfair. They follow the plan that was laid out months in advance. Therefore, you (in my opinion) are not justified in asking for a level reassignment since it would also be a big waste of time for very little benefit that would "fix" a non-existent problem.

[Spider-Dan]

Their stated goals is to increase the class uniqueness of the battle classes, not the crafting classes.

Do you have a quote to support this assertion?

[Rentahamster]

Do you have a quote to support this assertion?

Um, everything that they've said so far?

They're obviously emphasizing class uniqueness by streamlining skills and giving many unique and class exclusive skills to battle classes. They are further emphasizing uniqueness with the introduction of the job system that makes those exclusive traits and abilities even more profound.

The crafting classes are already unique. Each one specializes in a different type of base material and end product. The future goals of crafting classes are to give them more stuff to do and to help them play their support role in the economy. They are being further differentiated from the battle and gathering classes, not from each other.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...l=1#post439683