In 12 years the game hasn't innovated

**Shurrikhan** · 02-03-2026 03:01 AM

The afore-promised $0.02:

1. Increasing the Reward-Viability of Optional Difficulty

Content now increases relative drop chances based on relative stat loss for within one's expansion and based on item level loss outside of the expansion (as not to be quite so drastic). For instance, a level 50 Extreme with an ilvl cap of 130 and a minimum item level of 80 run by a player with ilvl 700 gear would have an 8.75x drop rate at minimum item level and 5.38x drop rate if synced down to 130.

Similarly, a player losing 25% total stat value in syncing down to minimum item level roulette would have a [100/(1-0.25)]% --> 33.3% increase in drop rates.

This effect is split among those you are queued with. If solo queued, the bonus loot is apportioned and becomes a % chance of spawning a unique item visible only to you unless you pass on it. If queued with others, that pool is shared for everyone in that premade party to need or greed among.

Note that this has no impact on weekly-capped rewards, only spammable content.

2. Further Leveraging Duty Finder for Optional Difficulty

Create a second checkmark column for Variant (e.g., Minimum Item Level mode, Explorer Mode, etc.) Duties and Roulettes. A long press will allow you to set a variant specific to that duty; a short press will apply your default set of variants. You will now be able to match with others searching for that combination of duty/roulette and type without needing to use Party Finder.

3. Further Leveraging Party Finder and its Adjacent Capacities: Adventurer Board

Extend the Adventurer Card concept to create an Adventurer Board. This allows one to submit themselves preemptively to any Party Finder listing within matching conditions, allowing Party Finder leaders to quickly invite others. Additional precise sorting of [Active] quality, down to seconds since last player input, and of whether players are willing to see invites when there are already invites out for the same position (without which Party Leads would have to cancel previous invites or those invites would have to be declined before they could send another to such a player).

4. Improving High-End Duty Pug-Friendliness

Have First time bonuses include checkpoints (about half of final clear bonus) and contributed per player to reach that checkpoint for the first time (though at diminishing value per additional player to reach it within the duty's time). "Break" fights into a greater number of phases and mechanical exposure, each such "phase" carrying its own checkpoint and accordant reward, and track players through these for a more granular accounting of their progress. High End Duty Finder may now allow players to queue for and Party Finders to open themselves to each of these points of progress (up to 5 specific points or 4 points plus a default setting [of all, within X steps, current progress or up to Y steps earlier]). Players' later 'until reliably reclearing checkpoint' bonus is partially refreshed when entering a new party based on the number of less progressed players or those not partied with within the last few hours within their new party.

5. Increasing Alt-Friendliness (unlikely because the game is monetarily incentivized to remain designed in a player-unfriendly manner)

You may now mail items to your other characters. You may now use the "Resonant Echo" to set your Main Scenario progress to that of any of your more progressed characters; if you do so, a save point will be left for you to return to if you wish to return to your previous progress point.

Once a given gear piece has been purchased with weekly cap currency, all other items of that tier of that gear piece may then be purchased with uncapped endgame currency. This includes weapons.

6. Improving Glamour Systems (unlikely because the game is monetarily incentivized to remain designed in a player-unfriendly manner)

Glamours are now applied to the character, superseded by Job, not to one's gear. In this way, upgrading one's gear does not temporarily ruin one's glamour and all items can shed three pieces of data (Appearance, Dye 1, and Dye 2).

This allows enough space for a bimodal (0/1 or 1/1) hidden achievement for spiritbinding each piece of gear, after which its appearance is unlocked forever, freely applicable to any glamour via the Glamour Dresser or anywhere else at the cost of one Glamour Prism per item changed, as before. Replacing a dyed Glamour with another will allow one to keep or replace the Dye already in that slot.

7. Debloating Inventory Requirements (unlikely because the game is monetarily incentivized to remain designed in a player-unfriendly manner)

Materia are no longer items, but instead a granular currency (alike to Gil) of different types, while the amount of Materia in total an item may bind is determined by broad class of item level (just as now), forgoing the need for slots. For each additional point of Materia after that normal limit, the chance of acceptance (for "Overmelding") as decreases, with the amount of Materia simply being consistently channeled, slowing as each point's chance of acceptance decreases, replicating almost exactly the risk from before but without the item requirement. Ornate gear accepts 50% more materia than other forms of gear. Fees for using an NPC to meld Materia is applied on a per-point basis, making melding the already high value to its max (now that there is no waste of Materia or one's paid for service, only space for more secondary stat) a real enough option for players less interested in min-maxing but still wanting some Materia. To save data space per item, only two Materia types may be applied to the same item.

All items which are mere recolors of another have been collapsed into a single, now-always-dyable type. For instance, if a given dungeon really only drops Fending/Maiming, Casting/Healing, and Scouting/Striking/Aiming, or Fending, Maiming/Aiming, Scouting/Striking, and Casting/Healing, then that's just how many item sets that dungeon will have, with the stats of all. This also greatly eases alt gear-preparation.

As in 1.x, gear now has a level required to get its full value, rather than to be able to use it at all. Below the required level, it will have a relative stat value 2 levels' worth lower than that of an item of the same quality (be that NQ or HQ/non-crafted) for the player's current level. This forgoes the need to horde old items.

Weapons are now unlocked via achievements, from having won a consumable from Savage or upon defeating the tier-4 boss for X weeks in a row, instead of via special items.

Pages are now generalized by tier instead of specific to each floor, with the highest level of purchase on which to spend those now-generalized Pages determined by one's progress in the Savage tier.

8. Improving Content Choice

FATEs again (as in early ARR) now grant completion experience even to players not present in zone at the FATE's end, granted upon rejoining the open world (exiting any instances) if away during that time.

Variant Dungeons now give gear and tome rewards comparable to dungeons of their tier. Savage/Criterion Dungeons now uses a lower maximum item level and give gear (though likely of mostly recycled appearance) just 5 ilvl below Savage Raids from the tier of their release.

The permissible level ranged for entry into Diadem, Eureka, Bozja, Occult Crescent, Palace of the Dead, Heaven on High, Eureka Orthos, and each Variant/Criterion Dungeon expanded slightly, and all now give player experience.

The difference in player strength relative to mobs has been compressed in all older Expeditionary Missions by nerfing both mob growth and player growth, chance of missing or suffering a crushing blow due to level disparity has been removed altogether, and reward penalties for a higher-level player contributing have been made a granular curve with the full penalty not suffered until 4 times as large a gap in level.

One may now choose to opt out of Poetics in exchange for more EXP. When doing so, dungeons for/from previous level caps and a few other content forms end up giving EXP at near-identical efficiency to leveling dungeons.

9. General UI Improvements

Besides all the obvious already included in the likes of SimpleTweaks...

Armory Chests removed, and with it the need to shuffle items between it and one's inventory to auto-equip one's best gear (instead drawing directly from one's inventory). Inventory expanded to 255, with temporarily permitted overflow up to 400 at time of change (the remainder eventually ending up in permanent mail storage).

One's Inventory Pane is now additionally scrollable at a given height and width shown at a time and includes default and custom filters, including a default filter and the ability to set keybinds specifically for any of those. (For instance, one could open the inventory directly to all gear for the given expansion, or the best gear for each gear type, or the best gear for each gear type possessed plus (thereafter) the best for each gear type for one's current job levels (wherein something at-level would be better for now than something higher level). Search terms can be entered directly, filtering the inventory to just that. The scrolling inventory now also supports text-only or text-and-icon modes. This ultimately allows for faster searching and reduces the total data storage required, especially for players who opt out of setting grid positions in the inventory for each item (instead having everything just auto-sort).

Similarly, simplify NPC menus, instead allowing for quick filtration from a singular main tomestone vendor menu, for instance, by which to select tier, armor class, and/or Items (as opposed to gear).

10. Improving Player Rotational Understanding and Readiness

A personal relative potency parser has been added to SSS and a new assistive side-content, the Arcanists' Lab. Unlike the likes of ACT, this does not look at the actual damage or healing done but simply the relative potency, with the option either to spread the potential effects of critical hits and direct hits across all actions (Default) or to account for those only during actual critical hits or direct hits, and to ignore or include (Default) the effects of external [de]buffs.

The Arcanist's Lab is a turn-by-turn potency analyzer built for different fight lengths, wherein each turn can support one Weaponskill or Spell and up to two Abilities. This begins solo but later includes up to 3 others for various combat scenarios, offering increasingly stringent challenges by which to defeat the enemy pack in record time through careful target selection, understanding of their TTD time-til-death, and later also compositional choice (wherein killing a given enemy before it can overwhelm the tank or, opposite, use of CC may become essential).

SSS now also includes a new training system called, in a throwback to 1.x, Battle Regimen. This allows you to script out an opener or rotation to follow, allowing you to practice it carefully. To better support this, SSS now also allows for immediate resets, rather than needing to exit and port back in via the NPC.

11. Providing Options for Debloating and Easing the Setup of Hotbars

Actions whose engagement could be achieved virtually identically without their buttons have been pruned. This includes actions like Lucid Dreaming, Meditation, and Form Shift, in the latter cases in favor of, respectively, continuous progress towards one's next point of Chakra while the global cooldown is refreshed but unused (i.e., when a weaponskill could be used but is not being used) and Forms no longer being locked but simply losing up to 40% damage if used within 2 rounds' (global cooldowns'), maintaining identical effect without the need for Meditation and Form Shift before each pull.

All macros now queue properly up to their first actionable command per button-press. Within the Actions and Traits menu, players may now toggle on/off the ability to use unprepared combo skills, allowing players who prefer to use separate buttons for each step of a singular combo decision parity with those who would prefer to consolidate those decisions into one button per real choice.

Action Stacks can now be made by players and provide a more player-friendly alternative to macros. New default Action Stacks are now provided, such as for Tsubame-Gaeshi over Iaijutsu when the first is available, and for the various combos.

Players may now export/import their HUD Layouts and hotbar setups (with or without their related keybinds), individually or together, directly to/from each other in-game or via a string. Space for an additional two Keybind Layouts and an additional 6 HUD Layouts each has been added for client-side saving to ease experimentation, though as before, only the first Keybind layout and the first 4 HUD Layouts are saved online via the Backup tool.

12. Simplifying / Accelerating Tooltips

The game now supports options for compressed tooltips. Examples in the Spoiler box below.

Dia
Deals unaspected damage with a potency of 90.
Additional effect: Unaspected damage over time
Potency: 90
Duration 30s

->

Dia
(Unaspected) 90p + 900p over 30s

____________

Living Shadow
Conjure a simulacrum of your darkside to fight alongside you.
Duration: 22s
Additional Effect: Grants Scorn
Duration: 30s
Simulacrum Attack Potency: 420
Additional Effect: Simulacrum is able to execute Shadowbringer and Disesteem
Shadowbringer Potency: 570 for the first enemy, and 25% less for all remaining enemies
Disesteem Potency: 620 for the first enemy, and 25% less for all remaining enemies

->

Living Shadow
Animate your darkside to fight alongside you, dealing a total of 3300p over 22s. 2nd and 5th attacks cleave for 428 and 465p, respectively. Unlocks Disteem.

____________

Holy Shelltron
Reduces damage taken by 15%.
Duration: 8s
Additional Effect: Grants Knight's Resolve
Knight's Resolve Effect: Reduces damage taken by 15%
Duration: 4s
Additional Effect: Grants Knight's Benediction
Knight's Benediction Effect: Gradually restores HP
Cure Potency: 250
Duration: 12s
Oath Gauge Cost: 50

->

Holy Shelltron
Costs 50 Gauge. 30% mitigation for 4s, then 15% for 4s more. Heals for 1250p over 12s.

{Work in Progress}

13. Further Combat UI Improvements
{WIP}

14. Further Control System Improvements
{WIP}

15. Revitalizing the Open World Through Bands and Dynamic Spawns
{WIP}

16. Related Zone Augmentations and Expansions (+ Sub-Zones, Delves, Caravans, Hamlets, Dynamic Quests, and Leve Integration)
{WIP}

17. Allowing for Enjoyable Open World Grinding (+ Non-Aetheryte Homepoints / Return Points, and Shard-able "Niches")
{WIP}

**Gaiinahat** · 02-03-2026 03:18 AM

You know what's not innovative? Having octagon shaped arms and legs in 2026. They made the faces look so smooth with fantastic curvature. Why stick such nice looking heads on top of Roblox bodies? Come on, SE! We demand innovation!

**MsQi** · 02-03-2026 04:05 AM

Originally Posted by Valence

Edit: I'll add squadron AI in SB, that was new, and was extended into Duty Support.

Duty support is a regression. Instead of trying to make them play the content, they altered old content and created new content so they can just follow a script.

**Aidorouge** · 02-03-2026 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

All this is true, but I feel like it's also not... quite entirely relevant to the thread at hand, if only in that "innovation" tends to be more about efficiency of experience-creation (i.e., X hours of development time being able to satisfy a broader span of needs or expand the "zone of attraction" beyond what it normally find for a given [type of] player), not specific to a given difficulty or type. Now, of course, what tends to get the most credit or attention from a given player will depend on what that player most enjoys, but just as we can find a tool well made even if it's of no use to us, I suspect "innovation" would likewise stand out (or fail to stand out) regardless of how much we are dissatisfied with (or satisfied with) those overarching ways of connecting or making greater use of the given content, or with said pieces of content itself.

Variable systems to account for people's personal challenge and engagement are fine and all, but the developers are quite adamant about trying to keep everything "one size fits all" per expansion and somebody always ends up feeling squeezed out by it. They've tried to give us "bridge" content in the form of Chaotic Raids and Forked Tower, but not only were they still Discord-only modes, but one could argue that they weren't entirely innovative either in the sense that one was "just another boss room but more body checks" and the other was just repeating what had been done with previous Field Operation raids, and not even the "best part" given how some people felt about Phantom Jobs.

I don't really know how much more they can change mechanics under the hood though given the game's supposed code limitations, which might be why a lot of stuff feels like it's more of the same but it just hits harder or faster. They claim Quantum will be the solution, but so far it only lets you make the fights harder (not also easier and some suspected) and the reward for even doing it at max wasn't worth some people's time and effort (I think it was just a title?)

I couldn't tell you what to do in order to say, make Field Operations and Deep Dungeons more palatable to me personally without someone screaming in my face that I'm trying to "ruin" the content for them, or even with just suggesting something new entirely, it would likely get shot down as "brain dead" if it's not riddled with hair-pulling difficulty. So I see no reason to even try to make suggestions about changes anywhere across any mode most of the time and just settle for the content being what it is, even that leaves a lot of it untouched or unfinished.
+++

Originally Posted by Kaurhz

Perhaps because for the most part they feel like it is speaking to a brick wall.

That's another thing too, it doesn't matter how well-thought out and polite a person's suggestion or feedback is if the developers will just routinely ignore it for years anyway.

**Gurgeh** · 02-03-2026 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

The afore-promised $0.02:

1. Increasing the Reward-Viability of Optional Difficulty

2. Further Leveraging Duty Finder for Optional Difficulty

3. Further Leveraging Party Finder and its Adjacent Capacities: Adventurer Board

4. Improving High-End Duty Pug-Friendliness

5. Increasing Alt-Friendliness (unlikely because the game is monetarily incentivized to remain designed in a player-unfriendly manner)

6. Improving Glamour Systems

7. Debloating Inventory Requirements (unlikely because the game is monetarily incentivized to remain designed in a player-unfriendly manner)

8. Improving Content Choice

1. Its hard to know if I've understood this correctly because I've no idea what "loss" is in this sense, I've never encountered that term before. If I've got the shape of it right I don't think I like it, especially not if it's open to current high-end was well. It would further incentivise players to gatekeep eachother from content and lean on tomestone.gg to bring home the wins. It is not going you reward difficulty in a gradient, it's just going to incentivise optimizing party makeup in an exclusionary way.

2. If the intention is to remove the need for pf this is probably a good idea as long as it doesn't fracture existing mixed queus as there isn't the foot fall to fill 1 party never mind three different ones. Its not casual content that needs better DF support it's high-end.

3. Honestly this is why I'm posting. I'm not saying it's a bad idea but I personally hate it. This is a tomestone.gg user's wet-dream. Now you've got no chance of getting a place if your not logging your play and making it findable. The only way I like this is to watch from afar on YouTube and morbidy read these forums as the game continues to tear itself apart from the spectacle of awe inspiringly stupid self-interest.

4. Yes. Anything at this point. High end is unplayable if you also want to have fun at the same time unless you can commit to a static. Just change it. Couldn't get worse.

7. Do not increase inventory space but all these currencies that aren't currencies is just unbearable. Its so much unfun to have to do 30 min of weekend clearout. It also leads to me ignoring a lot of content, i just don't know what any of these things are for. Their tool tips are just useless, just lore, instead of 'trade with x for y'. If it can't be sold or desythned it just gets thrown, Im not googling every egg or whatever that I din't realise dropped from some hunt mark I happened to bump into by chance. I'm never going to have enough to cache in anyway. Hunts are so tedious. Fishing, no. Not if I've got to go and buy bait to have to throw it away at the end. I've got this bait box that doesn't actually hold my bait. F stupid. Materia. Have to sell it. Then i have to buy it back. F nuisance. So much of interacting with this game was such a nuisance.

**Shurrikhan** · 02-03-2026 05:58 PM

Originally Posted by Gurgeh

1. Its hard to know if I've understood this correctly because I've no idea what "loss" is in this sense, I've never encountered that term before.

The amount a value goes down.

If you had 500, and it goes down to 300, you lost 200 (40%).

If your effective primary stat value (primary x secondary stat total if it were all Determination) goes down from 9000 to 8000 due to sync, that's an 11.1% loss. So, you'd get proportionately more reward to compensate.

It would further incentivise players to gatekeep

It has nothing whatsoever to do with gatekeeping, only giving optional content that can increase the longevity of content's enjoyability equal reward-efficiency to the more "toxic optimal farming" patterns, as you put it earlier, thereby allowing one to avoid playing the content in what they may see as a degenerative way.

No one is gatekeeping old content or Expert Roulette. Weekly drop caps are still weekly-capped, so this would have zero impact on current Savage tiers.

**Valence** · 02-03-2026 09:05 PM

Originally Posted by ovIm

Plus I'd argue that it is not the place of the customer to always provide constructive criticism. We are customers of a product. If a group loudly enough yells "we are dissatisfied", and the game developers really want to know why, they can send out feedback questionnaires en masse to paint themselves a more objective and streamlined picture without sifting through loads and loads of text. They could also just properly design the exit survey for when people do quit to properly understand why they do instead of assuming its because players don't have enough time to play anymore.

Like, even this thread I made sure not to just say "the game doesn't innovate therefore it sucks", but more "the game doesn't seem to like innovating much with brand new features", which already gives a clear direction of what the criticism is about, and immediately after some people move the goalposts and ask me to come up with the second coming of the mozart's requiem and brand new ideas that have never been in any other MMOs.

In retrospect I don't even know why I bothered replying to those trolls.

Originally Posted by MsQi

Duty support is a regression. Instead of trying to make them play the content, they altered old content and created new content so they can just follow a script.

It is a complicated issue. I only mentioned it precisely because it qualifies for the very few handful of fully new features they have added to the game, much like island sanctuary that was also probably more of a failure than a success.

In principle I have nothing against Duty Support and NPC AIs because not only the players using those do not harm the rest of the game in any way shape or form, but also because it can actually allow players having difficulties with storymodes to overcome them while the devs can't be held responsible for storymodes that literally wall players: in theory, having a NPC solo player mode should provide NPCs able to "carry" players that do get walled, while players using the MMO/multiplayer aspect of the content could enjoy content that's not constantly dragged down by this. On top of it, if it brings more solo player profiles to the game that just want to play for the story and bring more money and resources to the game (provided they don't get refunneled into other stupid projects...), I'm all for it. Those player profiles aren't a problem, they'll play the story in their corner without bothering anybody.

In reality we've seen how this has been executed, and I feel it's been a constant with CBU3 for a long time: it's "good enough" so they won't bother by upping the quality requirements. Duty Support has been suspected to be at the origin of the butchering of old dungeons and I do agree it leans itself pretty well into it - even though I remain staunchly convinced that it's just convenient for the devs because what they have done is just massive streamlining and watering down in order to "modernize" said content to "current standards", which is a very homogenized (some would say "consistent") encounter models. Everything that didn't satisfy to the modern formula, it's being changed to fit the mold.

**Mikey_R** · 02-04-2026 10:33 PM

Originally Posted by Kaurhz

Perhaps because for the most part they feel like it is speaking to a brick wall.

Like, people HATED the BA way of queueing up to the large scale... What did they do? Solve it with Delubrum where it's a normal instanced duty... What did they do after that? Repeat the exact same mistake as what they did 7 years ago...

The reality is, that they ask us to put feedback on here, then they routinely ignore it or don't actually engage with it at all, then we have people, like yourself wondering why people are not being more constructive with their discussion... Beyond a certain point it is quite literally just a brick wall situation.

It's funny that some people spend so much time completely blaming the player, as if this problem would be even half as bad as it currently is if they actually elected to engage with the feedback properly beyond just platitudes.

Except DR had it's own issues, mainly from the fact that, since it was separate from instances, if you wanted to do it, you had to queue for it outside the zones, so you couldn't do something else on the side. This created bottlenecks where the queue didn't pop, halting all progress. Even now, when it sticks you in after a certain amount of time, if you have a small group of people, you are going to struggle as, last I heard, it doesn't scale well for lower party sizes, just in terms of boss HP. CLL and Zadnor were better in that regard, as they were done via the zone, but if you wanted to do them, you had to wait for it to spawn, then you were lucky if you got in or not.

Forked Tower tried to address these things and it likely would have been more successful if the difficulty was actually closer to CLL and Zadnor. However, since it requires specific phantom job actions to get through, then people made parties to guarantee these things were present. It isn't just the queuing up that was necessarily the problem, but the type of content it was as well. They just were not compatible. Which is why you can force a Forked Tower run with a full pre-made to alleviate those issues.

So, they did listen to feedback, but they went about the implementation wrong. Which is why there also needs to be some community input as to how they would like things to work, so the devs can use that in their decision making.

Originally Posted by Valence

I actually made some. Notably one on itemization with some inspiration from the diadem, also indulged at some point in the past in trying to offer a couple of ideas for what certain jobs like RDM could play like in threads about job identity.
I have also suggested a lot of changes and adjustment notably on the MCH job over the years, of which a lot were shared by the community as a whole, and some were brand new ideas of my own.
I do think I have been rather prolific and constructive on what should be changed, improved, or made better in the pvp sub section as well (and not just on job balance, for example UI, etc).
I just made two days ago another thread in this very general discussion on how I'd improve on the dronebits feature from CE.

You see, this confuses me. You say you are willing to give feedback and how things can be improved in some areas, but why are you now resisting giving that feedback in this area.

Originally Posted by Valence

I really don't understand how everything you said here even applies to that thread in particular.

This whole things started when hydralus said 'I'd love to see some innovation from the people who complain about the same thing all the time.' Of which you responded by insulting him, then saying he didn't provide a constructive contribution, the implication behind that being that you yourself have. I double checked the topic and it was all just you complaining, but nothing constructive about the complaints. It was a pure pot calling the kettle black scenario, so I called you out on it, even telling you why nothing you have done was constructive.

Now you could have responded by providing said constructive feedback on the topic, but you didn't. Even something as simple as defining what you meant by innovation in the sense of this topic would have been a good start, but instead, you claim you don't want to make a 'multipage long full game design document with detailed features and gameplay brick', which is nowhere near what has been suggested. As has been said, you have provided feedback on other areas of the game, they likely aren't full game design documents either, so why are you assuming this is the case here? It is just inconsistent.

As for cherry picking, I don't read everything on the forums, but the vast majority of the posts you make that I see are just negative, often throwing around the good old 'DDR mechanics' which, in my opinion, means nothing. If you don't want that stigma, you have to be more consistent in how you approach things and yes, I am fully aware I am likely seen as the prick that comes along and just criticises ideas. But, as you yourself has said 'I'm ready to hear your ideas so we can discuss it and bounce over it then.' and that is all I am doing. You might not like the fact I want concrete definitions to work off of, but to me it is important to make sure we are working off of the same concepts. With that said, to get this topic back on track, how are we defining innovation as there has been several ideas floating around in this topic and what would you like to see that would make you think, oh, this exploration zone isn't just hunts and fates, or whatever piece of content you want to provide feedback on. The devs might or might not listen, but unless ideas are floated around, then there is no chance they will listen.

Originally Posted by Kaurhz

Tone aside, if someone handed this to me I would have a bit to work with... It's really up to the developers to determine what to infer from the feedback.

But this is where proper feedback is needed. If you can influence the direction the devs go in, by providing a basic system that could be built upon, especially if it gets feedback from many members of the forum, you are more likely to get something that you might enjoy, rather than just leaving it up to the devs and it turns into the roll of the dice whether it is something you want or not.

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Haven't you been on threads where Valance has given break-downs of the problem and even spit-balled particular solutions?

Either you're leaving out your specification of 'in this thread' or this seems an ill-warranted claim.

If I have, I have forgotten. If there are ideas I like, I tend to just like the post and not comment further, however, it does come down to the point of, if they do it in other posts, then why not here?

**Valence** · 02-05-2026 04:36 AM