Auto-attack

[Betelgeuzah]

I have seen the evolution of VOIP used for games what I see right now is a dichotomy in most games which splits up the players in thoes that do and thoes that don't

I think the threshold to use voice chat instead of normal chat is a bit higher, especially if you are unsure about your English speaking skills. But the benefits are clear, so it's a small prize to pay in my opinion. And of course nobody would be forced to use it even if it were a bit like a requirement for some things.

Like I said before, what is wrong with automating a portion of the battle which is less enjoyable?

Why do 20 things when you only need 12?

Instead of making the portion of the battle which is less enjoyable... more enjoyable? Instead of reducing "things" from 20 to 12 because you only need 12... why not make it so you need all 20 "things"? It is all backwards.

I think it is quite a cheap way to fix the issue. It is not only about ADD kids either, the gamers these days are probably in their 20's or even 30's and they would most likely play this kind of game for "ADD kids" rather than a game where battles are more automated. Why is this kind of game somehow "inferior" that you need to use an insulting term like that? I don't think most people would agree with that.

Remember WoW also has an AA and still allows for 30 ish commands a min, AA does not mean you need an automated battle system.

Yes... and if the end result is still 30ish commands a minute with or without AA, the change is like turning the game from green to red. Except every other company has a red game so they will have a lot more competition to deal with.

AA doesn't mean simplified battle or even more automated battle or fewer button input

But for this game, it does. That's what ultimately should matter the most.. And if they change the game even more, so that AA works like in other games, and the end result is the same as if they had just improved on the existing feature.. it's pretty much a waste of resources.

I don't think XIV can compete with WoW, or EQ2 simply becuase the people who like that style of gameplay are going to stick with thoes games in the long run.

XIV doesn't really have that different gameplay from these games, and SE seems to be taking it toward them even more. I don't think SE should compete with them, but unfortunately I doubt the game is different enough that it would get the privilege of not competing for the same audience.

Button mashing does not mean strategy or "thoughtful" gameplay goes out of the window. The gameplay SE has provided in XIV does not really work well for other kind of gameplay than what MMO's offer. They haven't really shown any indication that they would try to do anything differently with the changes so far either- in fact it seems Yoshida is not really the type that tries out new ideas, but goes with the existing, proven to work systems. I mean, we can hope for this to not be the case but so far there really isn't anything that would make the game stand out.

(AA bulid or focus on abilities, Haste>str or w/e depending on what your fighting, Amnesia mobs or high defence mobs, etc)

You could already do everything listed here if S-E released stats to modify these values (yes, Haste and stamina can work together. Yes, weapon speed and stamina can exist together).

just tell me why AA is bad for FF?

It is a 'cheap' and lackluster solution to fix the problems of the game. You could fix the game better if you took those 5 things and implemented them, instead of one so-so feature with a noticeable downside to it (and you would still have to implement few of those 5 things anyway if you wanted to fix the game).

Why should we be satisfied with the inferior solution? Why aren't we encouraging the developers to fix their game properly and discourage them to take the cheap route?

[MauiWaui]

Instead of making the portion of the battle which is less enjoyable... more enjoyable? Instead of reducing "things" from 20 to 12 because you only need 12... why not make it so you need all 20 "things"? It is all backwards.

Can you honestly say that you enjoy having to hit one button multiple times to get to your planned ultimate action?

Every class has a base attack, making all classes have to sit there and hit the base attack button multiple times to get to the part of things that makes your class unique (and ultimately the reason you chose to play it), which seems a bit redundant.

Adding AA allows the gamer to do what is unique to their class and focus on those abilities.

[Kaedan]

Can you honestly say that you enjoy having to hit one button multiple times to get to your planned ultimate action?

Yes, I can honestly say that. It gives me more control over the battle and also keeps me involved and immersed. And really, people are exaggerating how much they have to "spam" their light attack.

[Demacia]

Yes, I can honestly say that. It gives me more control over the battle and also keeps me involved and immersed. And really, people are exaggerating how much they have to "spam" their light attack.

No they aren't. "Involved and immersed" sounds like an exaggeration to me.

[ESAR]

No they aren't. "Involved and immersed" sounds like an exaggeration to me.

Clearly you don't have any consideration as to how others feel... you should try it some time.

If many people feel this way, it's possible it's true..

Betal I already said that they need to make the inputs better, that is part of the argument for AA, less bad commands for more good ones. I am part of this older generation of gamers out there (28) and I have seen my fair share of good games and good game ideas. FFXIV has nothing revolutionary about it, all they have is a needlessly busy combat system. AA can either allow for fewer inputs for the same results, or for the same volume of inputs with more interesting mechanics. and you stil ahve not said why AA is an "inferior soulution" or "lack luster" just saying so is not an arguement. If you want me to understand, someone is going to have to explain why AA is inferior.

With these two comments I've come to the conclusion that those that want an auto-attack don't really give a crap about all those that enjoy battle the way it is.

Linnear,
I asked you a simple question in one of my last posts that you ignored me and didn't bother to answer.

Why do you feel we "need" an auto-attack?

I took a guess and judging by this comment I was right? (your ignoring me leads me to believe that as well)

Seems that you want to input fewer commands for the same result, no?

I explained an auto-attack that could do this without ruining battle for others.

If you want a more interesting battle Auto-attack is not the way to go..

Here's a better solution for yeah.
-Extend the queue,
-Rather then using TP to use weaponskills basic attacks would be used to open up for weaponsklls (weaponskills could now be used at any time).
-depending on the length of the combo, latter abilites in the chain would get bonuses such as increased ACC, ATT and CRT rate.

There, a richer more rewarding battle.
If you set actions to macros you can launch full strings of commands with just a quick macro selection. (you'll actually be able to press less buttons then an auto-attack.)
No more TP building (since mundane TP building seems to be a major arguement for wanting AA).

Really I just hope the devs see that adding a traditional AA is going to do more harm then good. I'm not investing in that, it's 2011 there are better solutions.

And one more time for the class....

Every action is important...

[kukurumei]

Clearly you don't have any consideration as to how others feel... you should try it some time.

If many people feel this way, it's possible it's true..



With these two comments I've come to the conclusion that those that want an auto-attack don't really give a crap about all those that enjoy battle the way it is.

Every action is important...

Don't slander people because they don't agree with you. In fact I would say it's been clear that a lot of people don't agree with you, considering how often this topic gets proposed, not just in official boards but every FF14 oriented boards.

Secondly, yes, every action is important. Like... attack, attack again, attack some more, and even more attack. Feels kinda automatic doesn't it.

111356 is auto attacking with 1 skill+WS. you button skills are but a pawn of overriding strategy of hacking something till it dies. And given the stamina bar, hacking something with the lowest/highest animation time is even more shallow.

[Linnear]

Linnear,
I asked you a simple question in one of my last posts that you ignored me and didn't bother to answer.

Why do you feel we "need" an auto-attack?

I took a guess and judging by this comment I was right? (your ignoring me leads me to believe that as well)

Seems that you want to input fewer commands for the same result, no?

As usual you are making wrong conclusions with no evidence to back you up. I ignored your statement becasue I have given 4 (mabey more) in previous posts about why I want AA.

Reduce the need of useless attacks,

Integrate weapon speed, (status weapon diversity and more interesting choices of weapons as a result)

Allow for more room for what I consider more interesting attaks

Class uniqueness though weapon delays, styles of battle and various levels of busy, (15 or 30 actions per second)
remember the brd vs war point, No? Guess you missed this like every other point I made.

Give the controler people a break from going nuts and quiting this game for ever.


None of these statements claim we NEED an AA but they are all arguements for the implementation, and I have already acknowledged that these things can be done in other ways. Claiming there are other ways is not an arguement for why these ways are bad. Claiming they are lack luster does say WHY they are lack luster. If I say your MOM is fat, I can't quantify that. If I say your mom is 400 pounds therefore she is fat is better.

Here is another example.
Dude 1:
Man Chuck Norris is awsome,

Dude 2: Really? I think Bruce Lee is awsome

Dude 1: Well, Chucky does like roundhouses and doesnt' need to shave, and wears cowboy boots, thoes are all awsome.

Dude 2: Pshhh BS Chuck is Old and cowboy boots are out of style, besides I don't like shaving.

Dude 1: Ok so what is so Amazing about Bruce?


Dude 2: well he is awsome, much cooler then that old Norris guy.

Dude 1: are you kidding me Chuck has been awsome for like 30 years and he is still alive, and kicking asses, where is Lee O yea thats right he is dead, how awsome can you be if you dead.

Dude 2: Please Noriss is a has been, nothing cool there, besides there are at least 10 other guys that can kick his ass.

Dude 1: Meh, perhaps, he is still cooler then Lee.

Dude 2: yea but how can you say Norris.....

I think you can see where this is going.


Granted this a silly example but this is what the forums feel like.

someone says we want AA
someone else says STFU I like this system
someone explains why AA would be a good idea
someone else say, your reasons can not be validaded
General arguement about the various things AA can provide
AA promoters list a few ideas
AA denyers argue thoes ideas opposed to introducing their own
General Flamewar

A new thread appears.....

The first 4-5 steps are unavoidable in forums (people tend to not argue details initially sadly)
This is the step in the forums where the AA denyers NEED to give an arguement for their ideas, unless you do SE will not have enough understanding of your side to give you any real weight or credibility.

The AA denyers have yet to provide a SINGLE arguement that can be supported by a truthfull arguement or evidence againts AA other than you don't like it.(your allowed to think this and your even allowed to say so, but that is not an arguement) So unless you have a good reason why SE should keep this system your going to lose this debate. You can scream as loud as you want but just saying I DON"T WANNA will not convice someone to change something, you need to give reasons. Right now a change (or series if changes) NEED to happen, I am not convinced that AA is the best solution to fixing the combat system, but it is the only one that has any arguements for it's implementation. You can argue thoes points all day long but until you present your own AA promoters will likly win.

[Dreamer]

As usual you are making wrong conclusions with no evidence to back you up. I ignored your statement becasue I have given 4 (mabey more) in previous posts about why I want AA.

Reduce the need of useless attacks,

Integrate weapon speed, (status weapon diversity and more interesting choices of weapons as a result)

Allow for more room for what I consider more interesting attaks

Class uniqueness though weapon delays, styles of battle and various levels of busy, (15 or 30 actions per second)
remember the brd vs war point, No? Guess you missed this like every other point I made.

Give the controler people a break from going nuts and quiting this game for ever.


None of these statements claim we NEED an AA but they are all arguements for the implementation, and I have already acknowledged that these things can be done in other ways. Claiming there are other ways is not an arguement for why these ways are bad. Claiming they are lack luster does say WHY they are lack luster. If I say your MOM is fat, I can't quantify that. If I say your mom is 400 pounds therefore she is fat is better.

someone says we want AA
someone else says STFU I like this system
someone explains why AA would be a good idea
someone else say, your reasons can not be validaded
General arguement about the various things AA can provide
AA promoters list a few ideas
AA denyers argue thoes ideas opposed to introducing their own
General Flamewar

A new thread appears.....

The first 4-5 steps are unavoidable in forums (people tend to not argue details initially sadly)
This is the step in the forums where the AA denyers NEED to give an arguement for their ideas, unless you do SE will not have enough understanding of your side to give you any real weight or credibility.

The AA denyers have yet to provide a SINGLE arguement that can be supported by a truthfull arguement or evidence againts AA other than you don't like it.(your allowed to think this and your even allowed to say so, but that is not an arguement) So unless you have a good reason why SE should keep this system your going to lose this debate. You can scream as loud as you want but just saying I DON"T WANNA will not convice someone to change something, you need to give reasons. Right now a change (or series if changes) NEED to happen, I am not convinced that AA is the best solution to fixing the combat system, but it is the only one that has any arguements for it's implementation. You can argue thoes points all day long but until you present your own AA promoters will likly win.

There hasn't been a single argument levied in favor of AA that has any merit. Every reason that people have listed in any of these threads is something that has an underlying cause irrelevant of the presence of AA.

Argument: I don't like having to spam the same attack often and over to build TP.
Counter: All AA will do is do it for you. The real problem is TP generation. There are too many 1000-2000 TP skills and not enough 0 and 250 TP skills). Rebalancing of TP generation and usage is what's needed, not a half-arsed measure like AA.

Argument: I shouldn't need to chain together a bunch of useless attacks before I can do the cool ones.
Counter: When every single attack is 'cool', they all quickly become mediocre.

Argument: Supplements to AA like weapon speed will make the combat more interesting.
Counter: No, it won't. All weapon speed does force you into a certain combat pace, and it's an annoyance that detracts more than it helps. LotRO actually normalized all weapon speeds due to this - it was just funneling characters to certain weapon types while doing nothing to the combat system except giving the devs something else to balance.

In case you've missed the actual arguments against AA, here they are:
1. No auto-attack means you are in control of your character. You character attacks when you tell it to. Enemy charging a retaliation counter, mobs CC'd, or Reflect up on your target? Not a problem.
2. No auto-attack means you set the pace of the battle. Should you keep yourself steady and fight a battle of finesse and attrition, or gut your stamina bar trying to take down that imp before it has a chance to cast and rock your world? It's up to you.
3. No auto-attack means you're involved. I'm not sure how Satohiko Matsui can claim AA doesn't make battles easier with a straight face. Plenty of posters have mentioned plainly on these same forums that they prefer to be able watch TV while battling. If not having to even pay attention to a battle isn't an indication of what AA does for a battle system, I'm not sure what is.

[Kaedan]

Clearly you don't have any consideration as to how others feel... you should try it some time.

If many people feel this way, it's possible it's true..



With these two comments I've come to the conclusion that those that want an auto-attack don't really give a crap about all those that enjoy battle the way it is.

Yeah, that's how it's been going on these boards, and it's getting extremely ridiculous. Here's how it goes with almost every topic:

-Hardcore player says they want something
-Casual player says they want the exact opposite
-Hardcore player suggests a compromise, trying to meet halfway
-Casual player screams "hell no" and/or gets sarcastic, unwilling to budge from their idea... unwilling to compromise at all

Now, I'm not going to deny that there aren't insults thrown about and stupidity from both sides that complicate this process, but this is what most of the "discussions" boil down to. Hardcores are generally willing to meet halfway on a topic, while Casuals are generally completely unwilling to budge on their stance.

[Grit]

Now, I'm not going to deny that there aren't insults thrown about and stupidity from both sides that complicate this process, but this is what most of the "discussions" boil down to. Hardcores are generally willing to meet halfway on a topic, while Casuals are generally completely unwilling to budge on their stance.

How do you suggest we meet in the middle on the subject of auto-attack?

I propose that everyone try to see things from one-another's perspective, and wait to see the plan that SE lays out for us.