Would this compromise for positionals work?

[Kolsykol]

Yeah, I hear you. However, one is far more tedious than the other. I do them, but I abhor them. IMO, it also limits the design they can do on rads, because they have to take into account how much uptime TN has for maximum output. I find it highly suspect that people actually "enjoy" the positional game play. They enjoy the extra damage given. That's about it.

People want auto-combos too, I think this is just concern trolling people just want things to be easier because they're lazy and don't want to put any effort into learning anything they just want to login and spam a couple of buttons without any thought and win.
The fact that so many don't even seem to understand how positionals actually works/ worked in practice and why they added actual depth and enjoyment proves that.

[HappyHubris]

People want auto-combos too, I think this is just concern trolling people just want things to be easier because they're lazy and don't want to put any effort into learning anything they just want to login and spam a couple of buttons without any thought and win.
The fact that so many don't even seem to understand how positionals actually works/ worked in practice and why they added actual depth and enjoyment proves that.

Eh, combos take up a ton of UI space and restrict what else can be done with the class. If a class's difficulty comes from poor UI accommodation instead of deep resource systems and priority systems, I consider that janky masochism not challenging design.