The Fields of Glory (Shatter)

[CyrusBryant]

I would literally pay actual money for them to remove GC restrictions. I'm not kidding. I would happily pay for it at this point. Grand companies are and have been ruining PvP for a long time. Please listen to us devs on the XIV team. Make PVP great again!

[kisada]

tone deaf doesn't even begin to describe what is going on here with SE.

[Zensho]

Player VS Ice! Firaga IV Ftw! oh wait...

[NoelNoel]

Excellent I'm gonna continue doing what I do on BLM ; ignore nodes and fire IV the melees who pop blood for blood to attack it. I hope this makes people play melee more so I can get battle fever even faster.
More seriously, okay what?

[NovaLevossida]

If the issue is casters (but apparently not bow and gun casters) doing damage too safely from range, why not just have a status on the ice that reduces all damage based on range from the target. Closer to the target = more damage. You can sit back safely, but you'll do less damage. You can move in to gain damage.

[KayVonTrarx]

The only thing I can see SE being legitimately afraid of for removing GC requirements is Win Trading in 24 mans. Lore is a stupid excuse IMO when it has such a negative effect on player experience.

Even so, the net benefit of removing GC restrictions should be positive with respect to queue times, skill imbalance and maybe even toxicity.

[kisada]

they have outright said that they keep it in for lore-based reasons. it has literally nothing to do with issues of impropriety.

[Guesswhat]

they have outright said that they keep it in for lore-based reasons. it has literally nothing to do with issues of impropriety.

The last time I heard they spoke about it, GC restrictions are mainly there because they are afraid of match fixing. The lore is a result of that (I guess).

SE's main focus regarding PvP should be to easy the queues. As I see it they haven't done much since FL 1st launched, except making new maps.

[KayVonTrarx]

they have outright said that they keep it in for lore-based reasons. it has literally nothing to do with issues of impropriety.

The last time I heard they spoke about it, GC restrictions are mainly there because they are afraid of match fixing.

This was confirmed in Live Letter 24 last August. This link to the forum digest shows below:

However, it’s not for lore reasons that we haven’t removed these limitations; it’s because we are concerned about PvP being abused in ways such as creating fixed matches resulting in moral degeneration. However, as an attempt to reduce matching times we’re exploring whether we can make a system that places you in content without waiting for 72 players and then fills in the other members as they queue. Naturally, we have not completely ruled out removing the Grand Company restrictions; however, we would like to have some restrictions in place for PvP.

[KayVonTrarx]

So, I'm not too familiar on if they implemented any active methods against win-trading in feast besides punishing egregious traders high on the rankings. In any case, I still think it is a weak excuse to apply to 72-mans especially. Without GC restrictions, who knows which team your win-traders will end up on. Even on opposite teams, getting enough people to truly affect the outcome of a 72-man is very obvious and easy to report.

SE said they're focused on queue times but are ignoring that whatever they do, GC restrictions will always screw over the GC with the most people queueing. But people want to switch the GC winning most that month so they'll go there anyway. So either pick long queues and more wins or short queues and many losses. No one wins.