Female Hrothgar as a playable race. Show your support!

[Pip_Chick]

Endgame is the metric we should be using, as it means it's a look at the players who stayed long enough to hit endgame. All characters include characters that were dropped and never played again, which can skew things.

That and the male Hyur bots. This sadly excludes the new players, but it's for the better to get a more accurate representation.

[Midareyukki]

if you are going to use statistics you should be consistent across the numbers you are pulling. the full numbers paint a picture that you do not get if you pick total pop for some and active pop for others.

...ok so you're literally saying an image that is pulled from the primary page to show that Hrothgars are listed overall as outnumbering Male Viera, and at endgame outnumbering Roegadyn and male Elezen, and thus NOT the 2% people insist we are to the point of irrelevancy isn't consistent?

I don't think that's an issue with me being inconsistent, it's an issue with you not getting the point of the image.

I'm not comparing the races.

I'm stating that we outnumber others in specific aspects of the game, and thus should not be denied attention simply because "Oh you're the least played race in the game". When we clearly are not.

Because on the first post I posted that image, I even conceded: "On overall numbers of active accounts, we outnumber male Viera but do not outnumber them in the amount of players at Endgame. Instead, we outnumber other races. In total, however, on both accounts we are not the rock bottom people insist we are, thus we are not irrelevant and content SHOULD be made with quality for us."

Does this satisfy your criteria? Or are you going to twist the purpose of the image once again?

I do apologize if it wasn't clear when posted, but personally I feel like calling me "inconsistent" is the same as "twisting the data to serve my narrative". At no point have I done that. The whole point was to, as Reivaxe said, show that we're not as unpopular as other choices, and thus arguments that are based on that notion are false.

"You should have added the other values", irrelevant to the point, it's implied they're higher.
"You're comparing among the only races you selected", first, not races, options, and secondly, even if I did, that's the point: to prove the statement that "Hrothgars are not the lowest used option". Anything else is fluff. It's not an image used to prove superiority against other races in any way. Collectively, Roegadyn, Elezen or Viera would still outnumber us. The issue is that we're a race of only one option, and if we go by that standard, we're not the least played one.

There's absolutely zero difference between me doing that, you doing that just with more data, or either of us saying "Go see the Census for yourself". The result will still be the same: there is one option as of 6.1 that's lower than Hrothgar. Meaning the argument that "we're the lowest used" is, again, false and should not be used to discredit us nor the content and quality we ask for. If all those other options can have good quality stuff made for them, why can't we?

[Rokke]

post was too long to quote, sorry

And I quote: "while Hrothgar are still low on the total, they outnumber other races."
pictured: total hroths vs total M viera, EW hroths vs EW F Elezen/M Roe

I did not mention any 2%'s because I still don't know where 2% came from outside seeing it posted here on the forums. Was it from Lucky Bancho? A Famitsu or Reddit poll? Official forums shitposting that became accepted as fact? Who knows. I have also not mentioned any population of being deserving/non deserving of anything solely due to population size, because using that a metric of what we get would end in F miqo'te/au ra exclusive everything. But picking 2 charts and pointing at aspects that suit "outnumbering" in and only in said aspects is quite literally cherry picking.

[RyuDragnier]

And I quote: "while Hrothgar are still low on the total, they outnumber other races."
pictured: total hroths vs total M viera, EW hroths vs EW F Elezen/M Roe

I did not mention any 2%'s because I still don't know where 2% came from outside seeing it posted here on the forums. Was it from Lucky Bancho? A Famitsu or Reddit poll? Official forums shitposting that became accepted as fact? Who knows. I have also not mentioned any population of being deserving/non deserving of anything solely due to population size, because using that a metric of what we get would end in F miqo'te/au ra exclusive everything. But picking 2 charts and pointing at aspects that suit "outnumbering" in and only in said aspects is quite literally cherry picking.

You cannot use across all players because of bots existing, skewing the numbers in one direction, and all characters includes players who don't play anymore, untouched alts, etc, because all of those characters still exist on the servers. You have to use the endgame metric numbers for a more accurate count. And yes, we can compare individual male hrothgar vs the individual genders of other races because those numbers under endgame prove that Hrothgar isn't the least popular of the sex/race combinations. Not when female Elezen, male Roe, and female Roe are lower in number.

[Rokke]

You cannot use across all players because of bots existing, skewing the numbers in one direction, and all characters includes players who don't play anymore, untouched alts, etc, because all of those characters still exist on the servers. You have to use the endgame metric numbers for an accurate count. And yes, we can compare individual male hrothgar vs the individual genders of other races because those numbers under endgame prove that Hrothgar isn't the least popular of the sex/race combinations. Not when female Elezen, male Roe, and female Roe are lower in number.

Oh, I totally agree that using the endgame numbers is way better than total pops (and on that note, I wish that Lucky Bancho data was still summarized and translated with every update, it was more accurate than the eng census because it broke things down by expansions, levels, population shifts both by race and sever transfers/unsubs/new players, etc). I was pointing out that you shouldn't use metric 1 sometimes and metric 2 otherwise when trying to prove the same point. Hroths are more active than several of the OG races.

[Pip_Chick]

You cannot use across all players because of bots existing, skewing the numbers in one direction, and all characters includes players who don't play anymore, untouched alts, etc, because all of those characters still exist on the servers. You have to use the endgame metric numbers for a more accurate count. And yes, we can compare individual male hrothgar vs the individual genders of other races because those numbers under endgame prove that Hrothgar isn't the least popular of the sex/race combinations. Not when female Elezen, male Roe, and female Roe are lower in number.

I am actually glad about this. If I remember correctly before 6.0 Hrothgar was under male Roe in terms of numbers at Endgame, but after they started to give them hairs and make the change not cost IRL money, people started to come back and now they surpass female Elezen, and both Roe. I personally know a few people who changed back because of this!
It's not a lot, but those are some happy news. Now we can just hope they will perfect their technique and introduce the hairs for both Viera and Hrothgar into the pipeline.

[reivaxe]

Now that shared hairs are being made available and new ones too, I definitely just don't see them going the route of male hrothgar and making them so incompatible. Even if they would somehow come out quite bestial, I'm sure compromises will be made to allow for the easier addition of hairs in the future. Those compromises most likely involving the reduction of pronounced racial features, different head sizes, etc..

Agreed.

A demon girl concept is a popular idea, but them being monstrous isn't so much, for sure.

"Demon/ reptilian girl" is already on the monster scale, regardless of if they just have "cute horns and maybe a tail ;3" or if they look like some 4 armed, bat winged she devil thing with fangs and scales, they would both under that title of "demonic". How visually appealing they look is a matter of execution, which was my point. Talking about Bless, there's no doubt in my mind that if SE made something like this (Which looks like a lala/ Lop faced furry child) a race that looked closer to Lala or middie body wise (as to not look like actual children) ... it would be popular. Because it leans heavily on cute. Making tiger headed beef backed buffed out women wouldn't be as popular, even though both are clearly animal/ non-human looking.
So the concept of an animal like race is never an auto-unpopular concept to me, in character design you can always make some basic concept like "animal/ Demonic/ Monster people" look cute/ sexy/ appealing enough if you know what you're doing and try to set them up for success.

boom

I will agree that devs tend to view "Animal people" as stereotyped proud warriors tropes. Really, if anyone's interested in animal people, I'd suggest waiting to see wtf Riot games MMO does.

[reivaxe]

This is incredibly disingenuous. I never even mentioned Dulia-Chai in any of my posts. How do you even get to this conclusion? I said I would like them to fit the warrior archetype and gave some examples like Wonder Woman, The female Hun warrior, Valkyrie, etc.

I didn't say YOU said anything about Dulia-Chai. "Animal headed Dulia-Chai" is what pops into MY head when someone claims "They're gonna be niche anyway!" as an excuse for why they should be beefed out brick houses. I assume you approve of those Korean Hrothgals given your praise of them and the long fight you had with someone who pointed out that they basically look like the dudes-but-with-boobs. If you like that, that's cool. You can like what you like, I'm not the "like" police.

But thinking that "The race will be niche anyway/ they're not TRYING to make them popular anyway!" is a good reason to make them look objectively "ultra unpopular by conventional standards" by tripling down on the traits that make Femroe the least played thing in this game by a mile and a half? Yeah, nah ... why not have them be Dulia-Chais with animal faces then? I mean, I can't even point to an obese female PC race in an MMO so I can't even say I know for sure what would happen. Perhaps there's tons of people who can't wait to be an obese cat woman, spinning around on a dragoon pole in the middle of LL?

[Zanarkand-Ronso]

I will agree that devs tend to view "Animal people" as stereotyped proud warriors tropes. Really, if anyone's interested in animal people, I'd suggest waiting to see wtf Riot games MMO does.

So basically we should all just shove it and look for a new game....great attitude lol
So we just shouldn't get Hrothgar Females that look like sensible Female Counterparts to the males, they should be adorable and humanlike just cause 'popular'
Please SE do the right thing....cater to and give your Hrothgar Players what they want, and not do some lazy BS For 'Popularity'
If you really cared about that, you wouldn't have made Hrothgar in the 1st place. If you make a Beastrace, then make a Beastrace.

[Zanarkand-Ronso]

Talking about Bless, there's no doubt in my mind that if SE made something like this (Which looks like a lala/ Lop faced furry child) a race that looked closer to Lala or middie body wise (as to not look like actual children) ... it would be popular.

But in all honesty, sure, if they can make a NEW race and give us a 2nd Small option...Im all in.
Id prefer Ivalice Moogles



...but hey, another small option would just be great regardless.