Please stop inserting unbranching combos in new jobs

[UkcsAlias]

Really I’m not getting the point how condensing a simple 123 into a 111 could be better.

If its only condensing and no extra branching its worse. But condensing makes 2 more buttons in easy reach for potential additional branches:
For example using just 3 buttons these can still be diffirent combos while keeping the same initiator.

Thats where condensing can be powerful. Here a simplistic example while not going for full variety:
123 is the default as we know it. Nothing even changes here. But as alternative combos you can have 132, 122 and 133. The 2nd button you pressed decides what the 2 and 3 button will be at the final step. Giving 4 potential branches to pick from.
But we can take it further, as we can also make double pressing the 1 cause a diffirent branch, and this then means a combo like 113 can exist. This is obviously a bit less clean, but effective.

But why stop at 3 button combos in this case? what if 1233 and 1322 are both the 4 button combos (where 1232 will have broken the combo and perform the weak 2)? And maybe other abilities can even branch into this? For example button 4 is a boost modifier button that at a variety of steps can boost the effects. 123, 1243, 132, 1432 can all become a combo then.

Ninja already shows such condensing system. Its not new in the game. And for ninja while the buttons are quickly to select an ability, for other jobs it doesnt have to.

And even then, it doesnt have to be a full set of combos. Even just 123 and 132 can be more than enough for branching. With the advantage of not requiring new buttons.

[CelestiCer]

DRG would be 11111 22222
MCH would be 111 111 1111
And so on…

Really I’m not getting the point how condensing a simple 123 into a 111 could be better. .

If anything? it showcases how much more dumber and boring our Jobs gameplay can become... If I oversimplify SAM of what it is now, vs what people believe they are suggesting, vs what I think could possibly happen by encouraging this route of Job design...

- Present 6.1
TN - M 368 (Iai) M 3 (Iai->Ogi) 3678 (Iai) end opener
123-456-78 (Iai) 123-456-78 M 3 (Iai) 3678 (Iai)

- vs Suggestion of compression
TN - M 123 (Iai) M 1 (Iai->Ogi) 1233 (Iai) end opener
111-222-33 (Iai) 111-222-33 (Iai) M 1 (Iai) 1233 (Iai)

- Worst case I can imagine happening...
No TN - M 111 (Iai) M 1 (Iai->Ogi) 1111 (Iai) end opener
111-111-11 (Iai) 111-111-11 (Iai) M 1 (Iai) 1111 (Iai)

There's No promise Square will give us any depth/improvement/nuance - just anything after we suggest to remove anything from our Jobs. As they continue to homogenize our Jobs? they have not really added any depth of any kind in Endwalker, all they done is simplify and streamline everything. And when they smack the concept of fully un-branching combo's on say a new Job? it wouldn't surprise me to transfer a testing concept that functionally works onto others, even if the gameplay is worse.

I can't recall the last added layer of depth they implemented after they removed two layers off of each Job. I'm still waiting for something that supposedly was supposed to replace my " Kaiten ", mhm

[Yasminou]

No, it cannot be extended to branching combos. You can definitely combine some buttons, but you still have a choice of "path" to make depending on the branch you need to use at any given time, which the unbranching ones do not offer. This is what prompted that post originally.

It definitely can and the first time condensed combo was introduced to PvP, it was done like that.

You had one combo (I) doing 1-2-3 and the other (II) doing 1-2-4 for instance. Their icons were the next WS to do with I or II on the top right. The first time you were pressing either combo (so WS 1), both combos were updated to ready WS 2. Then, next time you were pressing either of them, they would update to WS 3 for the first combo and WS 4 for the second combo. Finishing either combo would reset both of them.

In case the combos were 1-2-3 and 1-4-5, after the second WS, the unchosen combo would reset while the chosen one would continue to the last WS.

[Mikey_R]

Thats where condensing can be powerful. Here a simplistic example while not going for full variety:
123 is the default as we know it. Nothing even changes here. But as alternative combos you can have 132, 122 and 133. The 2nd button you pressed decides what the 2 and 3 button will be at the final step. Giving 4 potential branches to pick from.
But we can take it further, as we can also make double pressing the 1 cause a diffirent branch, and this then means a combo like 113 can exist. This is obviously a bit less clean, but effective.

Whilst the hypothetical is fine, what you then have to do is give each one a reason to exist. Why should I do 123 over 132 for example. Without duplicating, you have 6 possibilities (123, 132, 213, 231, 312, 321) and each one needs to have a reason to exist. So, let's try. One is going to be a pure damage, one a DoT, one a damage buff, maybe a debuff...maybe an oGCD makes one stronger, maybe go the Monk route and have one combo make the damage one stronger (in the same way DK makes BS stronger).

But now we have the issue of fitting it into a clean rotational loop. You have 18 GCDs, at 2.5 seconds, you get 24. Hm, maybe we have it so the combos proc a 4th GCD that changes based on what comes before. That gives an extra 6 GCDs making a clean 1 minute loop. Add some oGCDs here and there and voila, here is the baseline for every job if you want to do away with combos and have something more free flowing. But, wouldn't that make every job feel the same? Why yes it would.

And therein lies the problem. It would be fine for a single job, but you couldn't make all jobs do it, in the same way Monk has something different (you 'combo' your forms, you just choose which GCD to use in said form) but you wouldn't make EVERY job follow that framework otherwise, every job would be the same.

As to the topic at hand, I have no problems if they want to condense the buttons, just make it an option for people to turn on if they want to and no, just because they combine the buttons doesn't necessarily mean they will add something else to replace it.

[undull1]

I understand that some people would like 1-2-3 combos to be 1 button, but I prefer having 3 different buttons for them. I'd be very sad if it were changed. To make everyone happy, let us choose how combos work at the control settings!

This!, I'm surprised how little the idea of OPTIONAL PvP combo buttons are mentioned.

Like given the action system it could just be a button that says 1.skill, 2.skill, 3.skill in the same way PvP already exists.
It already exists in game and would be a great QOL addition.

[Shurrikhan]

This... idiotic concept... of suggesting to remove something to make room for something better in the foreseeable future? is imbecilic.

Putting aside that Taranok was referring specifically to combos like that of modern DRK and PLD (no more CD-less Goring Blade) and had already suggested the exact same kinds of consolidations that you later did...

getting rid of redundant buttons like Shoha/Shoha 2, Foul/Xenoglossy. Basically mutually exclusive skills that have a single target and AoE version of what is otherwise an identical skill. But button bloat is another problem unto itself.

...you can still have button-mobile gameplay even in consolidated combos... if we just stopped fetishizing (clear/obvious/forcibly) non-choices as if they were actual depth.

For instance, to take an old concept floating around from Stormblood, imagine if Dragoon simply had 3 buttons around which to "combo" in any of varying paths. At any given GCD step, until you complete the combo, you have access to...
A. a Surge skill,
B. a Flurry skill,
C. and a Stream skill.

First GCD / "Opener":
A - True Thrust (+% Potency Bonus, lingering for the whole combo or fixed duration)
B - Impulse Drive (+Potency per hit, flat, lingering for the whole combo or fixed duration)
C - Doom Spike (+Applies flat Armor reduction)

Second GCD / "Bridge":
A - Vorpal Thrust (Has bonus Suppression; multi-hits)
B - Disembowel (Has Armor reduction)
C - Sonic Thrust (Separate hits, therefore scaling well with flat potency bonuses)

Third GCD / "Finisher":
A - Full Thrust (Just a single big damn hit)
B - Chaos Thrust (DoT, with individual ticks therefore scaling about evenly with % or flat bonuses, in total; multi-hits)
C - [Coerthan Torment] (Magic damage, not affected by Armor)

Wheeling Thrust [two-strikes, the latter being a radial AoE] and Fang and Claw [now two strikes, with short, narrow linear AoEs with falloff] could then be held and would duplicate a portion of the prior finisher (CT duration stacking up to 30s). WT's the AoE portion of which then scales better with flat potency increases after CT.

Yes, Full Thrust will scale best off True Thrust and Sonic Thrust better off Impulse or Doom Spike, such that you ultimately just have 5-6 combos with best in-practice use cases, especially in sustained rotation... but that's still a lot better than 6 out of 7 GCD skills being effectively greyed out for 9 out of 10 GCDs in single-target combat.

And you could build off that base, too, to eventually have the individual skills influence what skills follow for fully conditional branching paths instead of paths based on synergies, etc., etc.
__________

Having fewer buttons doesn't have to mean any significant amount less button-movement, and very often forces greater total nuance. Of course, we wouldn't have ended up in a situation where consolidation would even look feasible if the devs hadn't mistaken button count (and its non-choice bloat tools like AoE|ST pairs) for our actual moment-to-moment gameplay or decision-making.

While I don't think there's any added gameplay value to be had in mere XIVCombo or PvP-style consolidation (though I wouldn't begrudge that becoming an option just for QoL, given slight accordant adjustments to those using redundant keys for parity), a rework of the game's "combos" (which are... not remotely combinations, but instead merely inflexible multi-button sequences for singular actions, akin to more constrained/bloated mudras) seems a very lucrative design space.

[Valence]

It definitely can and the first time condensed combo was introduced to PvP, it was done like that.

You had one combo (I) doing 1-2-3 and the other (II) doing 1-2-4 for instance. Their icons were the next WS to do with I or II on the top right. The first time you were pressing either combo (so WS 1), both combos were updated to ready WS 2. Then, next time you were pressing either of them, they would update to WS 3 for the first combo and WS 4 for the second combo. Finishing either combo would reset both of them.

In case the combos were 1-2-3 and 1-4-5, after the second WS, the unchosen combo would reset while the chosen one would continue to the last WS.

I said the argument that it would be the same cannot be extended to branching combos, not that the system couldn't be extended to them.

Of course you can combine buttons to most branching combos we have right now, some more than others.

[UkcsAlias]

Whilst the hypothetical is fine, what you then have to do is give each one a reason to exist. Why should I do 123 over 132 for example. Without duplicating, you have 6 possibilities (123, 132, 213, 231, 312, 321) and each one needs to have a reason to exist. So, let's try. One is going to be a pure damage, one a DoT, one a damage buff, maybe a debuff...maybe an oGCD makes one stronger, maybe go the Monk route and have one combo make the damage one stronger (in the same way DK makes BS stronger).

Not all need to exist. And as you already imagined, chains dont have to start at 1 either.
But for example this is possible:
123 is just the normal damage
But after pressing 1, 3 becomes a button that applies a self buff (+5% dps for 30s?), and allows 2 to be chained afterward, this 2 is then just the basic 2 again, so after this its a 3 again.
this gives 123 and 1323 as combos.

Now we dont have to stop here, as we can have all 1,2 and 3 as initiators for certain chains. But they arent required to exist.

We can for example also introduce a 11 chain where each consecutive 1 adds stack that allows a faster cast of for example 3, creating as combo: 113. And sure, the example i gave here is bad since it makes 113 compete with 123, but its to show a potential chaining system in a condensed situation.

Its up to the devs what they will use. But i generaly would focus on the case of: if a button is ment to be chained, but has no feature outside of that chain, its generaly worth to condense (make it the initiator for a diffirent chain).

[Shurrikhan]

Whilst the hypothetical is fine, what you then have to do is give each one a reason to exist. Why should I do 123 over 132 for example. Without duplicating, you have 6 possibilities (123, 132, 213, 231, 312, 321) and each one needs to have a reason to exist. So, let's try. One is going to be a pure damage, one a DoT, one a damage buff, maybe a debuff...maybe an oGCD makes one stronger, maybe go the Monk route and have one combo make the damage one stronger (in the same way DK makes BS stronger).

Ideally, this. Every key should ideally have a reason to exist at every step.

Though, that's also so far above what we have now that it's asking for divine quality while living in eradiated fecal waste. I'd therefore be content with every key having a reason to exist at almost every step, and at least a majority of steps giving every key a reason to exist.



Interesting to note, too, though, is that we can also differentiate even that ideal state with more dynamic combos.

At the moment, difference in "combos" is just how many forks they have and how often one can actually engage in them. SAM ST has 3 forks, available every 2-3 GCDs. DRG has 2, effectively available only 1 in 10 GCDs (though instead 1 in 5 GCDs in two-target combat). WAR and NIN ST have 2, available per 3 GCDs. GNB, DRK, and PLD each have just 1, which is effectively none / no decision-making around/regarding combo choice.

That's effectively just... a competition in how wasteful they can be.

By comparison, more dynamic combos could instead feature differences like:

• Synergies (Skill A has synergies with multiple follow-ups, perhaps at multiple steps, allowing for a differently advantaged combo from the paths leading through them) vs. Replacements (using Skill A vs. B for the opener literally changes what options come thereafter).
  
  
• Discrete Finisher[s] (you have a discrete key to fast-burst from the opener at resource cost, stop your combo short, or finish off an empowered combo) vs. Prepped Finishers (skill becomes a finisher once its prior use has already been performed -- open rune -> burst rune, so to speak) vs. Fixed Length (the combo always uses its nth GCD as a finisher, so you don't need any key).
  
  
• Repeatable Actions (you can, during at least one combo step / Form, repeat a certain action that keeps you from moving to the next step yet -- useful for GCD sync), Cumulative Actions (repeatable, but ramping in intensity of its own throughput or buff provided -- also useful for situational burst), or Neither.
  
  
• Unidirectional combos (only proceed in a single direction of options opened up) vs. Bidirectional (can move back towards previous steps, which then wouldn't necessarily be any less powerful, but only by one step at a time) vs. Freeform (capable of jumping even to non-adjacent steps, akin to Monk during PB).
  
  
• Etc., etc.

[Deo14]

What do you guys think you will get:


What will you really get: