Request: Adjust Attack Magic AOE

[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.

[Coglin]

Wow...I think we are talking about two separate ideas altogether. From what I am seeing in your posts you are under the impression that the request is for AoE spells to be made as a "ground target" attack. The post is simply askingIfor AoE spells to continue casting on the given target even after the target has died.
I see what your saying, my apologies, someone else mentioned another idea and I applied it to our discussion.
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.

just because I have not completed the content does not mean I have not experienced it. Not to mention, we do not need to adjust game mechanics for every single piece of in game content we add. And so far someone has asked for a game mechanic change for every piece of content.

that being said, I disagree with your idea. If the target I had My AoE on dies, In many situation, I would prefere to retarget to focus the range of my AoE to adjust for dead mobs to maximize its damage value.

Now As far as your comment about

I wouldn't be so inclined to point all this out had you not made an inflammatory statement

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.

[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.

[Yves]

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.

Your said opinion was immediately inflammatory in nature. I don't know if I can possibly give any more "outs" for you to walk away and let it go without having you make yourself look even more obstinate, uneducated, and unreasonable.

I think I see what's going on here, Coglin - you made a snarky remark and it made you feel good about yourself and then it ended up backfiring. Now you're coming back and forth, trying to re-validate yourself. This is pretty entertaining, however, I'm starting to feel like I'm playing dodgeball with a deaf and blind kid.

Good luck, take care.

On-topic: seems like there is more desire for all casting to be AoE-ground. And someone also mentioned the "on/off" function which was one of the few things I liked about the mage classes before the overhaul.

[Coglin]

You may continue to bash me for disagreeing with you all you like. I still disagree and I see no need to make a change to the current AoE mechanic. I like the system as it is, and have no desire to see it changed.

You do not have to like it, or agree with it. Its my opinion.

I think I see what's going on here, You feel like your particularly special, and your opinion is of higher value the anyone disagreeing with you. Proven by your lashing out and exclaiming that anyone who has not completed a single particular dungeon has no right to have an opinion. Just because you misinterprete a comment as "snarky" does not make it inflamitory. Your comment on the other hand was a very specific direct personal attack.

Your hipocrocy is actually rather impressive.

[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

[Leigh]

Yep, I usually try and find the beefiest mob to target, but I agree with this.

[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.