Make gear less boring

[KitingGenbu]

That's the thing, though: If you already start out with a kit that has both breadth and depth, and then you choose to specialize your power in some part of it over another, you haven't necessarily or even likely added any depth, but you have reduced that kit's breadth, and thereby its ability to adapt to content, in turn reducing its skill ceiling.

Borrowed power, therefore, is almost always a bad thing if the kit was already great, because if it has any impact, it breaks what was already finely tuned to work as well as it did.

And if your kit isn't already great... which would you honestly prefer? To purposely leave it crap just so that borrowed powers can fix rotating parts of it to something approaching a good kit... or to just fix the kit, and then not drop the slurry of borrowed powers over it (breaking its fine internal balances)?

Personally, I'd much rather have both breadth and depth in the base kit, and end up optimizing that kit differently in different fights as needed than just to have a set bonus constrain what I can and can't be good at. I already have my choice of job to apply those outermost parameters for my playstyle; I don't need a seasonal rotation constraining my play atop that.


_______________



In the end, that doesn't matter too much, as most kits in XIV aren't all that well designed anyways. The few that feel pretty damn complete still have their little potency imbalances that limit rotational options and give insufficient reward for the risks otherwise worth situationally taking.

But, to my mind, there's only so much customization possible before it essentially just replaces gameplay with menu-play -- where it exists only to limit the options a player is allowed to interface with in a given fight. And I'd rather see XIV kits have more breadth, if able to be introduced synergistically, not less, so gameplay options is something I'd much rather see in the base kits, not gated behind tier sets or the like.

I'll be honest, your argument would make sense if there was variety in terms of how you play a particular job. As it stands, most things are pretty static in this game, which some people are fine with. The problem is, as things stand now, you're only going to get the same numbers involved in that particular content. Going back to my original post, Yoshida said this would be exclusive to Savage if he were to do it, so it might incentive more people to at least attempt the content and walk away with a couple of pieces. Personally, more stats to do the same rotation I've been doing for nearly 2 years with the only change coming during an expansion is kind of lame and that's how a majority of jobs play. It doesn't keep me from playing the game as a whole but it also doesn't motivate me past the bare minimum to advance the story either.

[Shurrikhan]

Just for a temperature check, how do you feel about Hades or Diablo 3 like systems?

Worlds apart, as they only support 5-6 actions, instead of... 30+.

There, menu-play is important because it allows you to shuffle around your stiflingly few abilities.

Here, there's no need to rotate out the few actions. Heck, you could happily leave a few as situational.

Then- GW2? Which also has builds, still farther away than FFXIV but closer.

Again, 10 abilities (5 rotational; 5 CDs) vs. 30+.

or WoW

There we get into the same ballpark, finally. I don't dislike WoW's customization per se, but it's a matter of where you set the baseline. Remember, just because certain actions are locked behind talents doesn't mean it'd have been impossible to have given them baseline; it's not an ultimatum only between having them only as a pick of a few among many and having nothing.

Moreover, deciding between two branching paths of actions doesn't have to come from decisions made outside of combat (or, "menu-play"); it can equally come from gameplay itself, especially when higher button-counts are permitted.

Hell, you could have it so that an XIV Monk could, say, play as a Tank, Striker, or Support and simply keep those from being overly muddled together through the bonuses on certain actions leading towards others, so the branches don't cross overly often. You don't need to restrict big decisions to outside of combat.

As such, for my part, I'd rather each job have --by the standards of (imo, overly narrow) "role-template" design-- a slightly outsized toolkit, but where that excess can function also in role-shifting manner (such that a "situational" action could actually take the helm, rather than being solely a rare emergency tool), so that I feel always like I'm playing a Monk, not a "Tank (Monk)," rather than locking those choices behind menus, let alone gear.

Is it that you're okay for specialization differences but that each specialization is essentially crafted to be perfect?

At this point we're getting into pipedream territory, but...

I prefer when a single menu choice has multiple diverse gameplay choices. I like when a job's skills are balanced so that their APL (action priority list) is almost never static, and even one's sense of role or responsibilities may shift at certain key points in a given fight. I like when the capacities of a given class/job/profession can't just be easily assumed from their role, or better yet, that they can simply act as/per multiple roles, with no descriptor necessarily being perfectly fit to them. I can enjoy playing a class (which may fill multiple roles or shades between) and I can enjoy playing a role (where I multi-class and consider what to use for what fight in what composition), but I dislike when class and role are one and the same.

I wouldn't go so far as to say I like ever class/job/profession to be generalists, for fear of that being confused with the DPS+maybe_some_gimmick mush of GW2, etc. But, it's kind of the opposite of what having a Trinity too often does to the "Tank" role, for instance, in causing that role to exist just so that everyone else can interact with fewer mechanics (while the "Tank" itself just plays like a DPS with a handful of additional abilities to use in scripted fashion, since its differences have mostly been made passive, reducing all other aspects of "tanking" to just DPSing while possessing a blue border).

I like versatility. I like having many layers and spans (short-term, mid-term, long-term) and considerations of decision making available in combat. I prefer when player familiarity/experience with the capacity/task in question is the primary factor behind their ability to do X, Y, or Z, rather than just what jobs they happened to have leveled.

/shrug

[Raikai]

I'll be honest, your argument would make sense if there was variety in terms of how you play a particular job. As it stands, most things are pretty static in this game, which some people are fine with. The problem is, as things stand now, you're only going to get the same numbers involved in that particular content. Going back to my original post, Yoshida said this would be exclusive to Savage if he were to do it, so it might incentive more people to at least attempt the content and walk away with a couple of pieces. Personally, more stats to do the same rotation I've been doing for nearly 2 years with the only change coming during an expansion is kind of lame and that's how a majority of jobs play. It doesn't keep me from playing the game as a whole but it also doesn't motivate me past the bare minimum to advance the story either.

I would certainly love if jobs had different play mode paths within themselves. "Specs" as I lack a better term, because I didn't want to do a direct comparison to WoW, but it's a good example regardless.

I know the specs we get in XIV equals having access to all jobs, but getting into a more sensible field of 'rpg fantasy', Dancer is my favorite job, and there's one way only to express its gameplay. If I want a different thing (not even role, still a dpser) I need to choose a different job, which means a different fantasy.

In WoW, my favorite gets to be the Mage, and there's 3 ways (and some sub-ways) to play it through the different specs. You're wielding a different element, but still inside the mage fantasy. That's probably the only thing I miss from my WoW days. I know having this kind of thing will certainly generate more balancing issues to be sorted out, but I'd rather have that than the cemented one way style we play jobs.

[Shougun]

I'll be honest, your argument would make sense if there was variety in terms of how you play a particular job. As it stands, most things are pretty static in this game, which some people are fine with. The problem is, as things stand now, you're only going to get the same numbers involved in that particular content. Going back to my original post, Yoshida said this would be exclusive to Savage if he were to do it, so it might incentive more people to at least attempt the content and walk away with a couple of pieces. Personally, more stats to do the same rotation I've been doing for nearly 2 years with the only change coming during an expansion is kind of lame and that's how a majority of jobs play. It doesn't keep me from playing the game as a whole but it also doesn't motivate me past the bare minimum to advance the story either.

I would say he makes sense but at the same time it's just so much fun to have 'change' and especially when that change is both good and due to your captainship.. When you make that tweak that feels different, and is good, ooooh.. nice.

But of course they (Shurrikhan) is right that usually these elements feel good because they fix the jigsaw puzzle. Personally if there are enough jigsaw pieces, that work, it's still okay- but I understand what they're saying.

Worlds apart, as they only support 5-6 actions, instead of... 30+.

There, menu-play is important because it allows you to shuffle around your stiflingly few abilities.

Here, there's no need to rotate out the few actions. Heck, you could happily leave a few as situational.

Again, 10 abilities (5 rotational; 5 CDs) vs. 30+.

Personally my favorite kits in FFXIV right now are the PvP ones lol. I've seen Paladin with... unmentionable tweaks that give it essentially a PvP twist, and I'm like 'hey that's neat'.

I really don't care for a bunch of different buttons (talking about some of the jobs that are like 24 buttons lol). Naturally I don't want exclusively 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1, but say a good MOBA has only 4-5 abilities and it feels great (minus all the hate if you do good, or all the hate if you do bad, or all the hate cause.. yeah.. lol).

There we get into the same ballpark, finally. I don't dislike WoW's customization per se, but it's a matter of where you set the baseline. Remember, just because certain actions are locked behind talents doesn't mean it'd have been impossible to have given them baseline; it's not an ultimatum only between having them only as a pick of a few among many and having nothing.

Moreover, deciding between two branching paths of actions doesn't have to come from decisions made outside of combat (or, "menu-play"); it can equally come from gameplay itself, especially when higher button-counts are permitted.

Hell, you could have it so that an XIV Monk could, say, play as a Tank, Striker, or Support and simply keep those from being overly muddled together through the bonuses on certain actions leading towards others, so the branches don't cross overly often. You don't need to restrict big decisions to outside of combat.

As such, for my part, I'd rather each job have --by the standards of (imo, overly narrow) "role-template" design-- a slightly outsized toolkit, but where that excess can function also in role-shifting manner (such that a "situational" action could actually take the helm, rather than being solely a rare emergency tool), so that I feel always like I'm playing a Monk, not a "Tank (Monk)," rather than locking those choices behind menus, let alone gear.

Before Blue Mage came out I had tried to suggest something akin to that for tank / DD, where you worked with Azure Eye and Immortal Lion stances... so I can see what you're getting at, though I would add that is harder to balance multiple times over lol. In a role-less game, perhaps more GW2 like (sans menu-play part if attempting to go with your idea below), with horizontal progression, I imagine it would be easier though- especially if you just stood ground that some jobs wont be as good as others at certain content and did something that made it easier to multi-class as a high end player.

I would say that it might be a bit complicated for a regular player if you have X many jobs with Y different and unique styles of shifting lol.

At this point we're getting into pipedream territory, but...

I prefer when a single menu choice has multiple diverse gameplay choices. I like when a job's skills are balanced so that their APL (action priority list) is almost never static, and even one's sense of role or responsibilities may shift at certain key points in a given fight. I like when the capacities of a given class/job/profession can't just be easily assumed from their role, or better yet, that they can simply act as/per multiple roles, with no descriptor necessarily being perfectly fit to them. I can enjoy playing a class (which may fill multiple roles or shades between) and I can enjoy playing a role (where I multi-class and consider what to use for what fight in what composition), but I dislike when class and role are one and the same.

I wouldn't go so far as to say I like ever class/job/profession to be generalists, for fear of that being confused with the DPS+maybe_some_gimmick mush of GW2, etc. But, it's kind of the opposite of what having a Trinity too often does to the "Tank" role, for instance, in causing that role to exist just so that everyone else can interact with fewer mechanics (while the "Tank" itself just plays like a DPS with a handful of additional abilities to use in scripted fashion, since its differences have mostly been made passive, reducing all other aspects of "tanking" to just DPSing while possessing a blue border).

I like versatility. I like having many layers and spans (short-term, mid-term, long-term) and considerations of decision making available in combat. I prefer when player familiarity/experience with the capacity/task in question is the primary factor behind their ability to do X, Y, or Z, rather than just what jobs they happened to have leveled.

/shrug

Personally I am okay with menu-play assuming it's not soul binding and allows for things that are 'fun'. I also personally like to have change or adjustments over time and feel it is best represented by menu-play / itemization, as levels can create their own issues if drawn too far, especially love the change vibe of gear when it comes from cool milestones. Again to me is probably why I was partially so frustrated with blue mage (in the aspect of acquiring spells) as I was like "THIS JOB COULD HAVE BEEN NORMAL OR AT LEAST IS SCREAMING AWESOME MILESTONES, THIS IS WHAT YOU DID!??!?! WHAT THE THAL DID YOU DO??????".. I was very first world upset (in so much that's just a game, no one needs punished, etc, but emotionally upset at the decisions- I also recognize they have made a lot of changes since, is in a better place, and I feel many were based on feedback.. hope to see more though).

I would certainly love if jobs had different play mode paths within themselves. "Specs" as I lack a better term, because I didn't want to do a direct comparison to WoW, but it's a good example regardless.

I know the specs we get in XIV equals having access to all jobs, but getting into a more sensible field of 'rpg fantasy', Dancer is my favorite job, and there's one way only to express its gameplay. If I want a different thing (not even role, still a dpser) I need to choose a different job, which means a different fantasy.

In WoW, my favorite gets to be the Mage, and there's 3 ways (and some sub-ways) to play it through the different specs. You're wielding a different element, but still inside the mage fantasy. That's probably the only thing I miss from my WoW days. I know having this kind of thing will certainly generate more balancing issues to be sorted out, but I'd rather have that than the cemented one way style we play jobs.

Certainly a cool aspect of WoW is being able to have a theme and style choice- bet many would love to be a Dark Knight DD or a Samurai Tank.. Though WoW's classes + specs does roughly equal our jobs, and so you do then have to wonder how many jobs we'd have / have not if we did that. Though I suppose that was one of the interesting elements of the subjob system was essentially allowing that to happen within development constrains. So hard to balance but did give you things like Dragoon Healer lol.

[Shurrikhan]

I'll be honest, your argument would make sense if there was variety in terms of how you play a particular job. As it stands, most things are pretty static in this game, which some people are fine with. The problem is, as things stand now, you're only going to get the same numbers involved in that particular content. Going back to my original post, Yoshida said this would be exclusive to Savage if he were to do it, so it might incentive more people to at least attempt the content and walk away with a couple of pieces. Personally, more stats to do the same rotation I've been doing for nearly 2 years with the only change coming during an expansion is kind of lame and that's how a majority of jobs play. It doesn't keep me from playing the game as a whole but it also doesn't motivate me past the bare minimum to advance the story either.

You're applying a specifically XIV context to what was a reply to a general hypothetical question (literally ranging from MOBAs to games like XIV).

To put it another way, though, would you rather...

A. ...have a kit that has nuance enough that you effectively have 6 intersecting, situationally varied rotations that together produce a very high skill ceiling if engaging with the whole span of potential optimizations,
-or-
B. ...your choice, set out of combat, of 1 of 6 static rotations, to which you must stick to for the whole fight, and which ultimately leaves the job with a lower skill ceiling?

That's essentially the difference between gameplay and menu-play.

You have X number of puzzle pieces either way. Do you give the players all of them, and let them learn to the extent they care to, or do you give them only half and then force them to pick just one or two from the remaining half?

I generally prefer the former.

Personally my favorite kits in FFXIV right now are the PvP ones lol. I've seen Paladin with... unmentionable tweaks that give it essentially a PvP twist, and I'm like 'hey that's neat'.

I really don't care for a bunch of different buttons (talking about some of the jobs that are like 24 buttons lol). Naturally I don't want exclusively 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1, but say a good MOBA has only 4-5 abilities and it feels great (minus all the hate if you do good, or all the hate if you do bad, or all the hate cause.. yeah.. lol).

Around 16 buttons --including auxiliaries like Sprint, Stat Pot, HP Pot, and LB-- (not necessarily just 16 actions) is generally my sweet spot, but we could easily have twice the depth of any XIV job, with room to spare for additional breadth, off just those 16 buttons if they were just used more effectively.

I'm cool with up to around 24, though. Past there, though, button counts have highly diminishing returns, imo. (Again, though, 24 well-utilized buttons would probably have the density of actions that ~40 buttons would provide here.)