The Alliance roulette is unbearable

[Rinhi]

I think it's pretty hilarious how the people who are skewing the roulette odds heavily in their favour, read: only make it possible to get 3 possible raids, whine and froth at their mouths at the mere suggestions that their entitled behaviour doesn't get rewarded

[Driavna]

I think it's pretty hilarious how the people who are skewing the roulette odds heavily in their favour, read: only make it possible to get 3 possible raids, whine and froth at their mouths at the mere suggestions that their entitled behaviour doesn't get rewarded

All of that is pointless at the end of the day. Roulettes are there to throw bodies were needed in return for a reward. How it works now prevent this, players are going to be players and do whatever benefit them the most. SE is the one that need to fix it by putting requirements that ensure you can't manipulate a roulette. Even if a new roulette is created for every raid series without solving the current situation at it's core we will probably be stuck to the first entry of each one since is the easiest one.

Probably "join in progress" should also be forced on by default when using roulettes.

[Menriq]

So for those thinking this is a bug or not intended, I'm putting it to the test. I created a bug report (https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...94#post5819594) and SE reviews these and puts them in a category. We'll see where this report ends up and we can go from there.

[kaynide]

So for those thinking this is a bug or not intended, I'm putting it to the test. I created a bug report (https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...94#post5819594) and SE reviews these and puts them in a category. We'll see where this report ends up and we can go from there.

That's a good call, maybe to get closure.

edit: The case you've put is happening, but it's a very slippery slope there, with difficulty to prove intent. It also only covers gear cheesing - which is a good start. I do think they need to consider edge cases though.

Example case:
I have leveled Samurai up to 80, and as I've leveled it up, I have gotten rid of all other Samurai gear.
On monk, I keep a set of AF2 at iLVL 90.
I now want to level up Monk, and can currently do CT with my Monk AF2.
I will only level up monk in the alliance raid roulette (or other solo means).

Am I required to purchase or otherwise acquire gear as my monk levels up?

This is actually more in line with what I actually do, not flipping upon entering.

[Packetdancer]

So, leaving aside the question of whether or not ilevel cheesing is skewing the alliance raid roulette -- because realistically we have no way to know one way or the other, as I noted before -- let's instead break down a few problems.

1. People say that they don't want to run the higher-level raids because they are a) more difficult, and b) give the same reward as the Crystal Tower raids.
2. Other people are just sick of Crystal Tower and really never want to see those raids again.
3. Because the roulette is so open-ended, there's no reasonable, rational way you can enforce a minimum ilevel that doesn't have loopholes, caveats, or create new problems. (Whether those problems are more or less trouble than the current situation is immaterial.)

Point 1a, that the non-Crystal-Tower raids both take longer and, in many cases, are measurably more difficult for players to clear who want to just blast through their roulettes quickly and without risk, is difficult to address. (The way I think would honestly be easiest would not be nerfing the other raids, but buffing the Crystal Tower ones so that you had to do the original mechanics properly again. Which, actually, I would love, because it would make them less tedious, and also because I know a lot of players who get to that point in the storyline, expect some big epic fight, and are disappointed by a faceroll.)

But we can maybe address the others. So, as a thought exercise, I give you...

Genuine Packetdancer-Brand Hypothetical Limited Alliance Roulette

What if the alliance roulette let you specifically pick which raids you were willing to be put into, but required you to have a sufficient ilevel for whatever the highest-level one you have picked is? And the rewards would be scaled to what you selected.

I.e., you could pick that you only will run the Crystal Tower raids, and you'll be guaranteed to only get the Crystal Tower raids. But you would also only get XP/rewards scaled for level 50, because you've explicitly said you only want level 50 content. (You could, however, still get the daily tomestones this way; you'd just get a lot less XP.)

You could pick that you're willing to run the Crystal Tower, Mhach, and YoRHa raids (and unselect the Ivalice ones, because maybe you don't like them specifically); you must queue in gear of sufficient ilevel to queue into the YoRHa raids when going into queue this way, otherwise it would deny you with the typical red message you get when someone hasn't unlocked a duty or is under the ilevel or whatnot.

And then, regardless of what alliance raid you got, you'd get XP and rewards scaled for level 80 (the highest level alliance raid you put yourself in as eligible for). Even if it put you into Crystal Tower, the fact that you were willing to be put into the YoRHa raids (and geared yourself appropriately) would guarantee you got the appropriate level-80 rewards.

You could even have the reward further scaled by how many alliance raids you were willing to do. If you put yourself in as eligible for only the YoRHa raids, you would get some set of rewards suitable for level 80, but if you put yourself in for all the raids -- Crystal Tower, Mhach, Ivalice, and YoRHa -- you would get a larger reward, because you're enabling the roulette to more easily match parties by making yourself available for more of them.

I feel like this is a win-win situation, as a design.

• Folks who want specifically Crystal Tower can opt into only being willing to run that (with the understanding that by telling the roulette system they don't want to be put in these other raids, they're reducing how well it can match people up for raids and thus not getting the maximum possible reward).
• People willing to be placed in all of the alliance raids will be eligible for a greater reward (since they're allowing the system more freedom to place them in a given raid), thus incentivizing being willing to run the longer and higher-level ones, even if they might easily still be put in Crystal Tower anyway.
• And people who want never to see Crystal Tower again could literally leave every other raid checked and just uncheck those three, and they'd be happy, too.

I'm curious whether folks who prefer only the Crystal Tower raids would be hypothetically content with a system along those lines, where you have a legitimate, unquestionably above-board and dev-team-approved way to tell the game you don't want to do raids beyond Crystal Tower. Whether because you find they take too long, or you find the mechanics intimidating, or -- heck, I dunno, you just really dislike the music. (Though I can't imagine how...)

[Colt47]

The actual problem with the Crystal Tower raid series and a lesser extent, void ark, is that the mechanics are so simple that someone could sleep walk through most of it. Only WoD has challenge to it in the original. Heck, I don't think people who do Ivalice realize this yet but those raids are also nerfed versions of the originals. The original TG Cid had bubble mechanics that required them not to touch one another or the raid would get a massive bleed. Not to mention there were other mechanical changes.

And yet, people doing these roulettes are often times so stuck in CT, the second they finally get exposed to something like Ivalice, they are dying left and right to Hashmal and anything that actually requires players to do something. I mean, many people are going to die to Hashmal, but when the content was current people were dying trying to dodge the blade and being positioned badly. This time people are sitting around expecting the mechanic to not even cause damage or something.

[Caurcas]

24 mans are pain. Might as make them as short as possible.

[Sindele]

So for those thinking this is a bug or not intended, I'm putting it to the test. I created a bug report (https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...94#post5819594) and SE reviews these and puts them in a category. We'll see where this report ends up and we can go from there.

To be clear, all the results of this will tell you is if it's considered a bug or not, which is far less conclusory than you might like - it will not tell you whether or not it is truly intended by design. QA at this level rarely has the latitude to even recommend something like that up the rope to design for review. Don't know how SE works internally, of course, but this wouldn't tell you anything at any studio of similar scale that I've ever worked at.

[HeyMcFly]

I wish we could opt out of doing crystal tower raids- I don't even fully participate anymore when I see Syrcus tower, lab or WoD.
I've always found it funny buying a new expansion just to go back & play old content so you don't even get to experience your class fully due to ilvl sync for most of the roulettes. It diminishes the experience of new content atleast for me.

I'd rather have a choice & do Ivalice raids & up.

[Menriq]

To be clear, all the results of this will tell you is if it's considered a bug or not, which is far less conclusory than you might like - it will not tell you whether or not it is truly intended by design. QA at this level rarely has the latitude to even recommend something like that up the rope to design for review. Don't know how SE works internally, of course, but this wouldn't tell you anything at any studio of similar scale that I've ever worked at.

No, but if it's not flagged as a bug, and it's been around for this long with absolutely zero comment from SE, it would indicate that at the least it's working as intended as of now.