Final Fantasy XIV and a Culture of Enabling

[Seera1024]

Well let's speak in "hypotheticals" here to illustrate my point. Is it acceptable for a single dps player to be contributing 30-40% of overall damage in any given 8 man fight? Or a tank to be the highest damage player in an 8 man or dungeon? These things are the norm in DF.

Would depend on the reasons the data is showing up that way. The data doesn't give me those reasons. I also don't use mods so I just go based on the feel of a run on if it's a bad run or a good run. And I don't feel that half or more of my runs are bad.

And please answer my question: why are you so focused on getting everyone to agree on the severity of the problem instead of focusing on possible solutions to the problem?

[Seera1024]

I am willing to bet if I count how many dungeons I do where as a tank or healer I am doing more damage then a DPS in the group, it probably would amount to 50%. I get for many that metric is moot, but for another using ACT data for dungeons and trials can account for a 50% of their encounters having someone that is playing subpar.

The 50% metric can be supported, but it just depends if you as a person care that a player is doing less damage then they should on avg for someone of their ilvl and job.

But again, the raw data doesn't make a run bad.

The data would show a run where a player is new to the game and tanking and is having problems and is being open to criticism and suggestions and is in general improving as a bad run. But that to me is a good run. Because a player increased their skill level. Yes, the run may have been longer than average, but a player was learning their roll.

It just strikes me as odd as why the OP is so focused on getting people to agree to the severity of the problem rather than getting people to focus on finding possible solutions.

[Awha]

But again, the raw data doesn't make a run bad.

The data would show a run where a player is new to the game and tanking and is having problems and is being open to criticism and suggestions and is in general improving as a bad run. But that to me is a good run. Because a player increased their skill level. Yes, the run may have been longer than average, but a player was learning their roll.

It just strikes me as odd as why the OP is so focused on getting people to agree to the severity of the problem rather than getting people to focus on finding possible solutions.

Depends on the person, what makes a bad run is subjective. If someone finds playing with a subpar player as an inconvenience then that is enough for them to personally view the run as a bad run. As you that info alone is not enough to call it a bad run, but for someone like myself to me it makes it a bad run.

I do agree that the focusing on the severity is moot, but I could see where they are getting their 50% metric from it just depends on what one as a person finds as problematic.

As a data driven player I am in the camp that numbers are the only thing I care about, I just go by the numbers I really do not care about the reason as to why the numbers are a certain way. I do the same with my own numbers, I beat myself up over what others would view as little mistakes.

[Seera1024]

Depends on the person, what makes a bad run is subjective. If someone finds playing with a subpar player as an inconvenience then that is enough for them to personally view the run as a bad run.

Exactly.

Hence the data by itself not making a run bad or not.

And since it is so subjective, arguing on the severity of the problem is not going to end with people agreeing on the severity of it.

Again pointing to my confusion over why OP so interested in arguing severity of problem rather than discussing solutions and workarounds until solutions can be implemented and have time to work.

[Awha]

Exactly.

Hence the data by itself not making a run bad or not.

And since it is so subjective, arguing on the severity of the problem is not going to end with people agreeing on the severity of it.

Again pointing to my confusion over why OP so interested in arguing severity of problem rather than discussing solutions and workarounds until solutions can be implemented and have time to work.

The data is not subjective, how one uses it can be seen as subjective. For me as mentioned in my edit, the data alone is enough for me to make a judgement call on whether a run is good or bad. I do not care about the personality of the player I just care about how they perform.

I agree that it is moot, but I understand where they are coming from, and I understand the new to focus on severity because it is easier to try to get another party to take responsibility in this case SE instead of just being viewed as an asshole and removing the players in question from ones DF when they see them.

[Seera1024]

The data is not subjective, how one uses it can be seen as subjective.

I had some bad wording.

It refers to whether a run is bad or not. Not the data.

[Awha]

I had some bad wording.

It refers to whether a run is bad or not. Not the data.

Nah I got what you meant, what I am saying for someone the data alone can be what is used to determine the quality of a run. It just does not seem the case for your personally. Which is far, but data alone can be used to make the judgement on whether a run is good or bad. Though I agree we should focus on solutions, but the reality is we all know SE will not be doing anything regarding the issue all we can do is try take control over our own parties this is why I say people should remove players they view as problematic for any reason.

[Caurcas]

Solutions have been proffered time and time again in thos thread. The two most common, and best, would be to raise the bar of challenge in normal content or baking in more hard checks when leveling or learning a job.

[Seera1024]

Solutions have been proffered time and time again in thos thread. The two most common, and best, would be to raise the bar of challenge in normal content or baking in more hard checks when leveling or learning a job.

I never said solutions weren't being offered in the thread.

Just that you seemed more focused on arguing about the severity of the problem.

Class quests could probably do more about making sure players know how to use their skills in relation to the role they have in group content. Can't really say for sure as I've yet to level up a healer or a tank. And the DPS ones do have mechanics to do sometimes, though I've rarely seen a DPS check in them if at all.

Could probably pretty easily add in a check to require players to have their job stone equipped past say level 35 (giving players some room for putting the class quest into where they want to take a break from the MSQ).

MSQ and other such quests can't do that as well due to the content needing to be made so that all roles can complete it.

As for difficulty increases, they would have to be careful as to how steep they made the learning curve. Guild Wars 2 suffered greatly when they made the jump in difficulty between base game and their first expansion pack too great. When a player base is used to things being at a specific difficulty level, the difficulty level is hard to change without changing slowly or alienating players. And if you alienate too many at one time, that can spell disaster.

A good start would be to update the Hall of the Novice and maybe add in a Hall of the Intermediate.

[Nethereal]

Go into forum Settings (top right corner), then on the left, under My Settings, click General Settings. Change Number of Posts to Show Per Page. So I always find it amusing when someone states the number of pages, when there are 5 different settings on the number of posts per page. So, yes, for me, 19 pages.




Edit: And the second reason why I made that first post (*cough*) is because it fits into the overall thread. You see 75. Someone else can say "You are crazy and exaggerating! There are only 19!" Two people see two different things. But I didn't want to draw that parallel in the first post outright, thus the little cough instead of a picture drawing it out.

Not a very good parallel because at that point the focus of the question shifts, how many people actually know such an option exists and do you know how many people know said option existed when you referenced it in your first post?
Do you know if you're the norm or the outlier in this situation, how do you know everyone else just doesn't use the base settings of the forums? If something is more commonly true than not true then that is the norm until otherwise.
I would bet you're the irregular, and operating under rules that have a fairly large chance of being outside the norm while expecting people to read between the lines is fairly disingenuous.

Probably an unpopular opinion, but to me it's not an issue as long as we still win.


I mean yeah I probably could talk to them about it or try to get them kicked, but a) I can't see these numbers anyway (not gonna install unofficial addons) and b) I'm not up for a potential drama that it may cause, so I just stay silent, shrug it off and move on.

With such an extreme hypothetical you wouldn't need to see the numbers you would feel them. People would either have to be dying to every mechanic left and right if not afk and if they weren't dead they would be playing so bad you would wonder if they were stroking out.