More Raid content please!

[Roth_Trailfinder]

So I'm seeing group, not seeing groups. So how exactly does Raid get defined as multi-group content? Oh wait, it doesn't, because you're stating opinions as facts.

A raid is a large-scale attack on an area by a group of players. Gee ... LARGE SCALE doesn't mean anything to you, does it?

If it was small scale, it would be one group. Large scale, however, means several groups, possibly many groups. All lumped by that definition into one group.

[Gamma621]

A raid is a large-scale attack on an area by a group of players. Gee ... LARGE SCALE doesn't mean anything to you, does it?

If it was small scale, it would be one group. Large scale, however, means several groups, possibly many groups. All lumped by that definition into one group.

Apparently plurals mean nothing to you either, because it says group, not groups. Saying that 8-player raids are not LARGE SCALE is subjective, and again, your opinion.

[Exstal]

A better question is, why does FF need raids at all? They are either worthless or require people who aren't learning how to play. See - CT.

[Tiggy]

SE decided, after initially saying it was not a raid, to call it a raid.

Until you can find a source stop saying this. As no one else has apparently heard of it as far as anyone knows you're full of it. Anyone can make something up and say square said but damn I just can't seem to find that link. Saying it over and over won't suddenly make us believe it. Although after 18 pages it's obvious to me you'll never get that simple fact.

[blowfin]

"Raid" is a term defined by WoW. In the case of FFXIV, SE have deemed it to be instanced PVE dungeon content with a body count of 8 or more.

Not sure why everyone is insisting on arguing over semantics that were defined by another game.

[Nutz]

This is hilarious, truly. No idea how you can care so much about what word SE used as the category header in the DF. In any case, I'd have to agree with the original point of the thread that more large scale content is needed, though I'd also say that more single group content would be nice. They'd really need to fix itemization first to get people to bother with more than 1 instance though, unless they just shuffled people between different raids (or whatever) with lockouts. Nobody's going to bother doing activity A if activity B has even marginally better rewards across the board.

[Roris]

Pretty much, all OP asked for was for more multi party content, nothing wrong with that. He used the term "raid" because it's the easier to understand and it's the global standard term for 10+ man content, as global standardized as many of the features this game blatantly took from other modern MMOs . Some misguided people misunderstood it as a grave offense implying the game has little content, which it does, and went into full defensive mode arguing about semantics and here we are. More content is always good, both larger scale and smaller scale, the game currently needs both types and it's been acknowledged by the devs and it is being developed for future updates, not sure why a vocal minority decided to make a big deal about a term and derailed the thread.

[SDaemon]

Pretty much, all OP asked for was for more multi party content, nothing wrong with that. He used the term "raid" because it's the easier to understand and it's the global standard term for 10+ man content, as global standardized as many of the features this game blatantly took from other modern MMOs . Some misguided people misunderstood it as a grave offense implying the game has little content, which it does, and went into full defensive mode arguing about semantics and here we are. More content is always good, both larger scale and smaller scale, the game currently needs both types and it's been acknowledged by the devs and it is being developed for future updates, not sure why a vocal minority decided to make a big deal about a term and derailed the thread.

Don't try playing the victim. There was no defensive mode on our part. And sorry but you and Roth happen to be the vocal minority here.

Also just want to point out, that your latest post is bringing this back to an issue of semantics which was discussed several several pages back.

This is hilarious, truly. No idea how you can care so much about what word SE used as the category header in the DF. In any case, I'd have to agree with the original point of the thread that more large scale content is needed, though I'd also say that more single group content would be nice. They'd really need to fix itemization first to get people to bother with more than 1 instance though, unless they just shuffled people between different raids (or whatever) with lockouts. Nobody's going to bother doing activity A if activity B has even marginally better rewards across the board.

The OP post was entirely flawed from the get go because it shoved an entire facet of raiding content out the window. What was there for us to discuss? The bulk of the original post was about disregarding Coil as a raid and citing CT as failed end-game raiding. It didn't offer anything constructive to go off of, so of course the debate would center around Coil being actual raid content and (though it will likely never happen with the OP's mindset) building up from there. If the original post had asked for more large group based raiding like CT but with the difficulty of Coil raiding then we could have gone somewhere.

[Roth_Trailfinder]

Funny how in your view, "NOT top end!" translates to "failed" even though, by design, CT is a step below Coil.

Funny, too, how someone actually goes and finds a definition of "raid" and then refuses to read the whole thing. Large scale event means more than one in-game group or party, and it collectively called the entire raid force "group". That was calling all 24 people in CT "group". That was calling 40 people in one of Wildstar's raid "group". That was calling 72 people in a PoTime raid "group". That, despite the party size in FF14 being 8, not 24, and despite the group size in EQ being 6, not 72.

SE is not adhering to the definition of raid when it calls BCoC and SCoB raids. All I did was recognize this, point it out, and say that FF14 needs more raids. Is it necessary for some reason that BCoB and SCoB be recognized as raids? Does it somehow devalue your accomplishment for beating them when you hear that they are not actually raids, as MMO's have used the term, after all? I don't think so. They're still the hardest, most challenging content in FF14:ARR, whatever they're called.

[Sapphic]

SE is not adhering to the definition of raid when it calls BCoC and SCoB raids. All I did was recognize this, point it out, and say that FF14 needs more raids. Is it necessary for some reason that BCoB and SCoB be recognized as raids? Does it somehow devalue your accomplishment for beating them when you hear that they are not actually raids, as MMO's have used the term, after all? I don't think so. They're still the hardest, most challenging content in FF14:ARR, whatever they're called.

They are adhering to A definition of Raid. a party is 4, two parties combined make 8, and they call it a full party, Full as in you cannot add anymore.
SWTOR call them Operations. So go onto their forums and demand they are raids not operations?

Coil 1 and 2 are raids, irregardless of your solitary opinion. Whether you see Coil 1 and 2 as other than raids is irrelevant, they are still raids.

Get over it.