Positionals

[Reinha]

You keep posting this fallacy of equivocation when I've already explained there is a difference between consistency and homogeny. Maintaining a set of jobs with the same traits is not homogeny. No one is homogenizing melee jobs.

However what you are doing, adding another notch into all jobs being the same, is in fact homogeny at work.

If you don't want positionals, simply don't play melee. It's just that simple. If they're so negligible and so irrelevant, don't use them and stop making threads.

And if Viper doesn't have them, then great, play that. Your dps is probably going to be lower so don't bother us about parsing. Although everyone ITT has claimed this isn't motivated by effortless dps, so I'm sure you would be more than ok with Viper having inherently lower DPS.

I will keep posting what I please and it does not matter to me one bit if anyone who thinks themself a Melee Spokesperson loses sleep over the fact that people who don't like positionals would like to play melee without them and keep giving feedback. If such a melee job is released, you can take your own advice and just not play it. Speaking of fallacies, hopefully my commentary on Lyth's post has debunked the fallacy that people hate the melee role if they dislike positionals, which keeps getting repeated in this thread.

If viper doesn't have positionals, I will play that, that's the whole point. And "don't bother us about parsing" lol, you realise you are talking to a RPR main? Reaper dps is already the lowest of melee (and barely above bard according to some sources) despite having positionals, so it's kind of weird to try and justify the existence of positionals with the promise of a higher dps potential when my job is barely rewarded for having to be in melee range let alone having positionals.

[Turtledeluxe]

I will keep posting what I please and it does not matter to me one bit if anyone who thinks themself a Melee Spokesperson loses sleep over the fact that people who don't like positionals would like to play melee without them and keep giving feedback. If such a melee job is released, you can take your own advice and just not play it. Speaking of fallacies, hopefully my commentary on Lyth's post has debunked the fallacy that people hate the melee role if they dislike positionals, which keeps getting repeated in this thread.

If viper doesn't have positionals, I will play that, that's the whole point. And "don't bother us about parsing" lol, you realise you are talking to a RPR main? Reaper dps is already the lowest of melee (and barely above bard according to some sources) despite having positionals, so it's kind of weird to try and justify the existence of positionals with the promise of a higher dps potential when my job is barely rewarded for having to be in melee range let alone having positionals.

It has nothing to do with being a "Melee Spokesperson"-- I am commenting on job homogeny in general and explaining the actual definition/application of homogeny. Removing positionals to produce a new set of melee that don't have positionals is exactly that. Maintaining positionals that exist across all melee is not homogeny. You can keep posting, you're still going to be using the term incorrectly.

And I also do not need to be a melee spokesperson to say that, if Viper has no positionals, you'll likely be looking at aDPS closer to MCH than RPR, i.e. a bigger disparity than what currently exists (not much of one) between the current melee classes.

Regarding BRD, the current state of its rDPS vs RPR makes complete sense and doesn't pose any contradiction. The aDPS of BRD is significantly lower.

I would also say that if it's true Xenosys mentioned this and is the source of this discontent, then he is unknowingly a job homogenist.

[Sjol]

It has nothing to do with being a "Melee Spokesperson"-- I am commenting on job homogeny in general and explaining the actual definition/application of homogeny. Removing positionals to produce a new set of melee that don't have positionals is exactly that. Maintaining positionals that exist across all melee is not homogeny. You can keep posting, you're still going to be using the term incorrectly.

And I also do not need to be a melee spokesperson to say that, if Viper has no positionals, you'll likely be looking at aDPS closer to MCH than RPR, i.e. a bigger disparity than what currently exists (not much of one) between the current melee classes.

Regarding BRD, the current state of its rDPS vs RPR makes complete sense and doesn't pose any contradiction. The aDPS of BRD is significantly lower.

I would also say that if it's true Xenosys mentioned this and is the source of this discontent, then he is unknowingly a job homogenist.

You made the argument that this is about homogeneity as opposed to consistency. I meant to respond earlier, but I still don't understand your distinction other than one has a good connotation and the other has a bad one.

That said, I do understand and feel for you in that you LIKE positionals and don't want to see them gone. Other people don't. Both are valid wants. People who don't like positionals have mentioned how they think they could be changed to be more likeable to them. You even agreed that feedback when you hit and miss them would be a nice addition.

I don't think there's an objective argument to liking or not liking positionals. It is just preference built on other forms of likes and dislikes. It sounds like you want more buttons while others want less. And, sadly, it's unlikely any set of changes will please everyone.

I do think there are some changes they could make to positionals that would make them more generally popular though:

1) Update the tooltips from:
"Delivers an attack with a potency of 300. 400 when execute from a target's rear." to:
"Delivers at attack of potency 300 (400 from target's rear)."

2) Add additional signals that you hit them (per many people's request).

3) Make it more intuitive if an attack is from behind or the flank. Right now, it's difficult to remember which attacks are flank and which are rear, especially if you change jobs a lot.

4) Reduce random boss turns. In a 2.5 second window, it feels bad to miss because you're on the wrong side of a boss turn.

5) Grant positional bonuses if you have threat or using some other mechanism when you're soloing.

[Turtledeluxe]

You made the argument that this is about homogeneity as opposed to consistency. I meant to respond earlier, but I still don't understand your distinction other than one has a good connotation and the other has a bad one.

That said, I do understand and feel for you in that you LIKE positionals and don't want to see them gone. Other people don't. Both are valid wants. People who don't like positionals have mentioned how they think they could be changed to be more likeable to them. You even agreed that feedback when you hit and miss them would be a nice addition.

I don't think there's an objective argument to liking or not liking positionals. It is just preference built on other forms of likes and dislikes. It sounds like you want more buttons while others want less. And, sadly, it's unlikely any set of changes will please everyone.

I do think there are some changes they could make to positionals that would make them more generally popular though:

1) Update the tooltips from:
"Delivers an attack with a potency of 300. 400 when execute from a target's rear." to:
"Delivers at attack of potency 300 (400 from target's rear)."

2) Add additional signals that you hit them (per many people's request).

3) Make it more intuitive if an attack is from behind or the flank. Right now, it's difficult to remember which attacks are flank and which are rear, especially if you change jobs a lot.

4) Reduce random boss turns. In a 2.5 second window, it feels bad to miss because you're on the wrong side of a boss turn.

5) Grant positional bonuses if you have threat or using some other mechanism when you're soloing.

These are all augmentations that I am not opposed to. Regarding homogeneity-- I am unsure if you aware that it is typically use to refer to the process of homogenization or uniform structures from a biological, chemical, etc perspective. FFXIV commonly throw around these terms to describe things that have similarity, which is technically ok, but misleading in this specific case. Melee, tanks, healers being designed with specific traits that define their roles may "feel homogeneous" in a casual sense, but are not a process of homogenization.

It's actually the act of selecting against positionals that leads to homogenization. Maybe not with the other melee, but all other jobs.