Very Upset at Obsolete Android's Aiming/Scouting

[D3VNT]

I've mained MCH almost as long as I've been playing FF14. Most glams for MCH are already kind of awful - there are so many Aiming sets/tops that clip the MCH aetherotransformer, or are made with DNC/BRD in mind with total disregard toward the aesthetic of MCH. So when I saw this, I was extremely excited. The exact kind of top I've wanted since Heavensward for MCH, absolutely perfect for a gunner:



I was so thrilled. That's the exact kind of top I've wanted for MCH since Heavensward; a tactical load-bearing armor carrier. Pouches on the chest, nothing to clip the aether lunchbox - which can't be hidden without hiding the gun as well, only to reappear when drawing your weapon - absolutely perfect for MCH. Unless your character has boobs.



Why? For what purpose? Aiming finally gets a decent top for a gunner, unless your character is female. I cannot stress enough how badly and for how long I've wanted a tactical chest piece for MCH - Scouting already gets most of the gear that would match well with MCH, and the job lockout of glamours is already completely asinine and without purpose. I get that SE seems to hate MCH for whatever reason, but this made me disappointed enough to post on the forums for the first time in a long time. There's absolutely no reason for this save that SE didn't want to, or couldn't figure out how to - the latter of which being highly doubtful - cover up a chest.

Anemos only has the belt line and a machete the size of a lalefell for some reason. Filibuster clips awfully with the MCH brick that can't be turned off or hidden, and looks like a comical/cartoonish haphazard attempt at DIY gear. MCH finally gets a good looking armor top, and it's a completely different item from male to female. This is extremely disappointing, especially when we finally got a gun that isn't completely ridiculous in the form of the Cryptlurker pistol, which I love. It was more work on SE's part to make two completely different items with different textures than to make one to adapt to both models. Someone made an active decision that MCH ladies didn't need armor or ammo, and then committed resources to it. MCH already feels like it gets the red headed step child treatment, this just feels insulting.

[Bright-Flower]

The reason is the set is based off of this character I think.

[Raikai]

The reason is the set is based off of this character I think.

I know that's the reference point, but they should've gone with making Jackass both the f and m Aiming and Anemone's the Striking/Scouting for both genders too... This way you would have access to one or the other regardless.

It's funny because the difference is not like... a skirt that turns into pants. Instead they feature differences that makes no sense for the usual gendering of gear. A pocket vest? The male version looking like rags and the female looking pristine? Camo pants for males but not for females?

[BunniEclair]

It’s because they were cramming two characters into one piece. The male top is Jackass, and the female top is Anemone. Both characters are female, but I guess they probably tried to figure out which would be more appealing to which players and came to that conclusion. In good faith, I think it was less about making sure the goods are on display than “what kind of aesthetic would female characters enjoy more”. I’m sorry that it wasn’t the conclusion you wanted. It really sucks when the thing you desperately want is just out of your reach. :/

[D3VNT]

It’s because they were cramming two characters into one piece. The male top is Jackass, and the female top is Anemone. Both characters are female, but I guess they probably tried to figure out which would be more appealing to which players and came to that conclusion. In good faith, I think it was less about making sure the goods are on display than “what kind of aesthetic would female characters enjoy more”. I’m sorry that it wasn’t the conclusion you wanted. It really sucks when the thing you desperately want is just out of your reach. :/

This does make sense, and I appreciate the explanation. It'd be easier to assume SE acted in good faith if they didn't seem to routinely disregard MCH in aesthetics, lore, and mechanics, but that's a completely different issue.

[Kaoru_Nagisa]

Yeah, admittedly some of the gender differences between male and female for this tier of gear is... weird. Puppet's Bunker gear was - for the most part - fairly unisex in how it appeared on male and female avatars, and while I know two of the designs for Tower were originally based on female characters (Anemone, Devola/Popola), seems odd that they couldn't just... keep the designs the same. Why put a tactical vest on the male set if Anemone's original set doesn't have it? Or otherwise, why not add it to Anemone's set? Why are Devola/Popola's tops showing skin on female characters but they slapped a shirt under the slit for males? Why does the Fending/Maiming top turn into a mini-dress on girls but guys get pants - or vice versa, why can't guys have the mini-dress version?

I don't know. Looking at it as both a Nier fan and as a player, the weird additions or readjustments to male gear from the original female version seems unnecessary to me.

Granted, we could also just make an argument here for MCHs to have the ability to hide only the dumb lunchbox, I guess.

The male top is Jackass,

Ohhh. That actually explains it better. Still kind of silly to have made that distinction though, rather than just... make the gear look the same on male and female avatars.

[Penthea]

I really like both outfits but I'm with OP on this one. It's very disappointing when something you love is out of reach solely because of the gender of your character. Genderlocking only limits what we can do and I strongly feel it has no place in a modern game.

Granted, we could also just make an argument here for MCHs to have the ability to hide only the dumb lunchbox, I guess.

I know it's silly but that lunchbox is hugely why I still haven't touched mch yet. I know it would irritate me so much to be stuck with such an obvious piece of gear that I cannot glam. It often doesn't even vaguely match the guns they're paired with.

[Bright-Flower]

I really like both outfits but I'm with OP on this one. It's very disappointing when something you love is out of reach solely because of the gender of your character. Genderlocking only limits what we can do and I strongly feel it has no place in a modern game.



I know it's silly but that lunchbox is hugely why I still haven't touched mch yet. I know it would irritate me so much to be stuck with such an obvious piece of gear that I cannot glam. It often doesn't even vaguely match the guns they're paired with.

I get it. It's ugly IMO and it'd be nice if they had an option to hide it, kind of like paladins having an invisible shield option though maybe not as easy to implement since I don't think the box is affected by glamor is it?

It's not the reason I don't play mch but it is a bit of an eyesore, and for people more interested in just having a gun for a weapon than the full MCH flavor I can see it especially being annoying for.

[Iscah]

I get it. It's ugly IMO and it'd be nice if they had an option to hide it, kind of like paladins having an invisible shield option though maybe not as easy to implement since I don't think the box is affected by glamor is it?

Paladins can glamour the shield because it's a separate piece. The box is part of the gun item and could only be glamoured over if you have a specific gun that doesn't include the box - but you won't get that because lore-wise it's a separate item that we need to make the guns function in the first place.

[Bright-Flower]

Paladins can glamour the shield because it's a separate piece. The box is part of the gun item and could only be glamoured over if you have a specific gun that doesn't include the box - but you won't get that because lore-wise it's a separate item that we need to make the guns function in the first place.

Yeah you're probably not going to get a separate glamour option. Though they 'could' potentially include a gun that doesn't show it. I mean lore wise paladins have shields and they still have that option.

But even then that would just limit people who don't want to box to show to that one item anyway so it wouldn't really be much of a solution.