Request: Adjust Attack Magic AOE

[Peptaru]

I think it is fine the way it is, they have some of the handy self-target spells and spells that you know can fizzle if the target dies. This is one of the few "in-depth type" actions in the game. One of the very few things you need to pay attention to in it. Changing this would make things even simpler, easier, and baser than they are now.

A UI issue it might be, but it is nothing that can't be overcome with the simplest implementation of strategy/tactics. It's rare I agree with certain people (you know who you are), but the set up is fine as it is IMO.

[RinMorikaze]

I understand where you're coming from Pepper, but it is a bit difficult to pay attention to things you can't see. Such as who your fellow players are casting on in a jumble of mobs. Also difficult to see how many or what mobs their spell or ability are going to hit and how much it's going to hit for.

I don't mind if they don't change it, but I'd like them to.

[Yves]

I don't mind if they don't change it, but I'd like them to.

This might be the most intelligent post I have ever seen on Lodestone. I am with Rin - I would love to see this fixed but I won't lose sleep if they don't get around to it.

[Kimem]

I don't mind if they don't change it, but I'd like them to.

+1
/10chars

[darkstarpoet1]

i think it would help alot in many situations if they did make the change. when doing mass crowd control aoe spells the black mages work together to aoe the mobs down together so that no single blm takes all of the hate and it is distributed among all of the mages. when your targeted mob dies it just means that another mage has taken all of the hate from the rest of the mobs in the group and that leads to a dead mage quickly. at least if it continued you would help kill additional mobs instead of standing there while your party member gets killed because your spell canceled.

i agree with others that stated that i won't lose sleep if it's not taken care of, but it would make it more fun and strategic along with help organize attacks better. organization can only go so far when it also relies on luck of which mob gets crit and dies early and the chance that mob was targeted by another player causing them not to follow through with their part of the attack.

[Quatre]

Coglin, I don't think he mistook the comment as inflammatory, but you may have written an inflammatory comment without MEANING to.

It appears from the outside that you took the entire debate personal immediately with no provocation and Yves never insulted you but laid out a factual argument... That made sense without being harsh.


For your own sake i'd sit back and re-read all the response and see where Yves is coming from, cause to everyone else you're just coming off as an angry troll :3

[Coglin]

It appears from the outside that you took the entire debate personal immediately with no provocation and Yves never insulted you but laid out a factual argument... That made sense without being harsh.

How so? I disagreed, which I still do. Then pointed out that with practice, anyone can adjust to it. I know I did, in leveling my casters up in AoE nuking parties, and I dealt with it in my expereince with the exact content he pointed out, only I had not completed it. Which he then claimed made my opinion invalid. He did so specifically by name and reference. I made a general comment. Yet you assume to tell me I am the the troll who misinterpreted.

What I do find interesting, is that you will make post that are 100% off topic to state your opinion of one of two people debating here, by picking sides, and assistince on targeting an individual, while making absolutely no comments that are related to the subject topic. Yet claim it others are comming off trollish.

[Yves]

How so? I disagreed, which I still do. Then pointed out that with practice, anyone can adjust to it. I know I did, in leveling my casters up in AoE nuking parties, and I dealt with it in my expereince with the exact content he pointed out, only I had not completed it. Which he then claimed made my opinion invalid. He did so specifically by name and reference. I made a general comment. Yet you assume to tell me I am the the troll who misinterpreted.

What I do find interesting, is that you will make post that are 100% off topic to state your opinion of one of two people debating here, by picking sides, and assistince on targeting an individual, while making absolutely no comments that are related to the subject topic. Yet claim it others are comming off trollish.

Actually, go back and read it: I never said it invalidated you. I merely stated (quite accurately) that it devalued your opinion because you had yet to complete it - possibly even because of what we are talking about. I even explained that not completing content specifically does not invalidate, rather that it lends itself to being less weighty than the opinion of those who have. Coglin, I think you are skimming and not actually reading what's been said which is entirely the problem here. In fact, you actually indicated this just a couple posts ago.

I am entirely too lazy to cut and paste every part of the conversation to illustrate this.

And nobody has said that your opinion is wrong - it is an opinion about a subjective topic. It's the great thing about these boards - people can post and agree/disagree, etc.. But you really have swung and missed a handful of times now. Nobody is targeting you - they're just trying to redirect you to the parts that you keep missing over or misinterpreting.

[Coglin]

Nobody is targeting you.

you haven't completed Cutter's (per Lodestone achievements.) I am referencing an issue that is particularly problematic in the two new instances.

Look, You very specifically targeted me. How do you quote someone, specifically look them by name and point it out. Then claim you never targeted them?

You do not have to like my opinion, but I am sternly against changing content to suit every Tom, Dick, and Harry, who complains about a mechanic in specific situations. DH comes out, 3 threads of posters wanting game mechanics changed for the battle. Ifrit comes out, 3 threads of posters wanting game mechanics changed for the battle. Moogle comes out, 3 threads of posters wanting game mechanics changed for the battle.

[Yves]

Look, You very specifically targeted me. How do you quote someone, specifically look them by name and point it out. Then claim you never targeted them?

You should cut and paste the rest of the statements so they don't seem so one-sided. Here, I will help and place them in chronological order.

They are both great as it is. We have o need for a circle on the ground. It workdsoff you or an enemy taget. If your incapable of learning to adjust to that, perhaps you need more practice.

Insinuation and inflammatory comment...

You can't practice to work against chance...

...This is a function of UI/mechanics - not player ability or practice. Sorry if there was some confusion.

Polite reply pointing out that we are talking about mechanics...

Thank you captain obvious. My point is that the system works fine as it is. I see no need to justify changing an entie game mechanic over such a limited problem in a situation issue.

Directly inflammatory reply in response to a very civil and non-inflammatory statement...

I just realized the problem here: you haven't completed Cutter's (per Lodestone achievements.) I am referencing an issue that is particularly problematic in the two new instances (and end-game content like SH bosses.) Your frame of reference is missing those experiences.

Now pointing out that someone is arguing a point without the experience necessary to speak on it - THAT'S Captain Obvious material!

Reply giving you an "out" and maybe a way to see the other perspective...

Your logic is that because someone hasn't completed content that they havenever experienced it? Thats Brilliant, with intuitive thinking like that, you should get a government job.

Good point, my wording is off. Either way, directly inflammatory comment #3...

On the contrary, my logic is that those who are addressing tasks specified that they have not successfully completed ought not to comment the in a matter-of-fact manner...

...Regardless of all that, I understand and respect your position (despite disagreeing with it.) What I don't respect or accept is the insinuation that "If your incapable of learning to adjust to that, perhaps you need more practice."

Again, clearly not confrontational. However, this is assertive so maybe you can fly by on that...

Also, I love your eletist mentality about it. Nothing says please work with me ans see my point like telling others ther opition has no value compared to yours because you completed 1 dungeon they have not. Nor does it qualify you to be more familiar with AoE mechanics or make you more qualfied to deem how they need to be changed.

Good reply with reasonable statements, also not bitter...

And no, I am not devaluing you as a person for having not completed the dungeon - I am devaluing your opinion because the request has been to accommodate situations which you have not completed successfully, therefore, your actual first-hand experience with the topic may be limited.

...Believe me, results are a fairly reasonable (although not the most important) indicator of whether or not something is being done "right."

Explanation of logic with an emphasis that ideas should not be invalidated but rather devalued in comparison to those who have succeeded...

Now As far as your comment about is a load of crap. You dont make a thread, then when someone disagrees, post that they are not permitted to have an opinion even if they have experienced the comment, because you did not complete it. Then attempt to accuse them of being the one to initiate inflamitory comments.

...and Coglin is back to being confrontational again and missing the previous point where I clearly state that opinions should not invalidated...

I think this about sums it up, Coglin. Maybe you will see what happened and hopefully let it slide. If not, it's your energy to waste from here on out.