Auto-attack

[ESAR]

No they aren't. "Involved and immersed" sounds like an exaggeration to me.

Clearly you don't have any consideration as to how others feel... you should try it some time.

If many people feel this way, it's possible it's true..

Betal I already said that they need to make the inputs better, that is part of the argument for AA, less bad commands for more good ones. I am part of this older generation of gamers out there (28) and I have seen my fair share of good games and good game ideas. FFXIV has nothing revolutionary about it, all they have is a needlessly busy combat system. AA can either allow for fewer inputs for the same results, or for the same volume of inputs with more interesting mechanics. and you stil ahve not said why AA is an "inferior soulution" or "lack luster" just saying so is not an arguement. If you want me to understand, someone is going to have to explain why AA is inferior.

With these two comments I've come to the conclusion that those that want an auto-attack don't really give a crap about all those that enjoy battle the way it is.

Linnear,
I asked you a simple question in one of my last posts that you ignored me and didn't bother to answer.

Why do you feel we "need" an auto-attack?

I took a guess and judging by this comment I was right? (your ignoring me leads me to believe that as well)

Seems that you want to input fewer commands for the same result, no?

I explained an auto-attack that could do this without ruining battle for others.

If you want a more interesting battle Auto-attack is not the way to go..

Here's a better solution for yeah.
-Extend the queue,
-Rather then using TP to use weaponskills basic attacks would be used to open up for weaponsklls (weaponskills could now be used at any time).
-depending on the length of the combo, latter abilites in the chain would get bonuses such as increased ACC, ATT and CRT rate.

There, a richer more rewarding battle.
If you set actions to macros you can launch full strings of commands with just a quick macro selection. (you'll actually be able to press less buttons then an auto-attack.)
No more TP building (since mundane TP building seems to be a major arguement for wanting AA).

Really I just hope the devs see that adding a traditional AA is going to do more harm then good. I'm not investing in that, it's 2011 there are better solutions.

And one more time for the class....

Every action is important...

[kukurumei]

Clearly you don't have any consideration as to how others feel... you should try it some time.

If many people feel this way, it's possible it's true..



With these two comments I've come to the conclusion that those that want an auto-attack don't really give a crap about all those that enjoy battle the way it is.

Every action is important...

Don't slander people because they don't agree with you. In fact I would say it's been clear that a lot of people don't agree with you, considering how often this topic gets proposed, not just in official boards but every FF14 oriented boards.

Secondly, yes, every action is important. Like... attack, attack again, attack some more, and even more attack. Feels kinda automatic doesn't it.

111356 is auto attacking with 1 skill+WS. you button skills are but a pawn of overriding strategy of hacking something till it dies. And given the stamina bar, hacking something with the lowest/highest animation time is even more shallow.

[Linnear]

Linnear,
I asked you a simple question in one of my last posts that you ignored me and didn't bother to answer.

Why do you feel we "need" an auto-attack?

I took a guess and judging by this comment I was right? (your ignoring me leads me to believe that as well)

Seems that you want to input fewer commands for the same result, no?

As usual you are making wrong conclusions with no evidence to back you up. I ignored your statement becasue I have given 4 (mabey more) in previous posts about why I want AA.

Reduce the need of useless attacks,

Integrate weapon speed, (status weapon diversity and more interesting choices of weapons as a result)

Allow for more room for what I consider more interesting attaks

Class uniqueness though weapon delays, styles of battle and various levels of busy, (15 or 30 actions per second)
remember the brd vs war point, No? Guess you missed this like every other point I made.

Give the controler people a break from going nuts and quiting this game for ever.


None of these statements claim we NEED an AA but they are all arguements for the implementation, and I have already acknowledged that these things can be done in other ways. Claiming there are other ways is not an arguement for why these ways are bad. Claiming they are lack luster does say WHY they are lack luster. If I say your MOM is fat, I can't quantify that. If I say your mom is 400 pounds therefore she is fat is better.

Here is another example.
Dude 1:
Man Chuck Norris is awsome,

Dude 2: Really? I think Bruce Lee is awsome

Dude 1: Well, Chucky does like roundhouses and doesnt' need to shave, and wears cowboy boots, thoes are all awsome.

Dude 2: Pshhh BS Chuck is Old and cowboy boots are out of style, besides I don't like shaving.

Dude 1: Ok so what is so Amazing about Bruce?


Dude 2: well he is awsome, much cooler then that old Norris guy.

Dude 1: are you kidding me Chuck has been awsome for like 30 years and he is still alive, and kicking asses, where is Lee O yea thats right he is dead, how awsome can you be if you dead.

Dude 2: Please Noriss is a has been, nothing cool there, besides there are at least 10 other guys that can kick his ass.

Dude 1: Meh, perhaps, he is still cooler then Lee.

Dude 2: yea but how can you say Norris.....

I think you can see where this is going.


Granted this a silly example but this is what the forums feel like.

someone says we want AA
someone else says STFU I like this system
someone explains why AA would be a good idea
someone else say, your reasons can not be validaded
General arguement about the various things AA can provide
AA promoters list a few ideas
AA denyers argue thoes ideas opposed to introducing their own
General Flamewar

A new thread appears.....

The first 4-5 steps are unavoidable in forums (people tend to not argue details initially sadly)
This is the step in the forums where the AA denyers NEED to give an arguement for their ideas, unless you do SE will not have enough understanding of your side to give you any real weight or credibility.

The AA denyers have yet to provide a SINGLE arguement that can be supported by a truthfull arguement or evidence againts AA other than you don't like it.(your allowed to think this and your even allowed to say so, but that is not an arguement) So unless you have a good reason why SE should keep this system your going to lose this debate. You can scream as loud as you want but just saying I DON"T WANNA will not convice someone to change something, you need to give reasons. Right now a change (or series if changes) NEED to happen, I am not convinced that AA is the best solution to fixing the combat system, but it is the only one that has any arguements for it's implementation. You can argue thoes points all day long but until you present your own AA promoters will likly win.

[Dreamer]

As usual you are making wrong conclusions with no evidence to back you up. I ignored your statement becasue I have given 4 (mabey more) in previous posts about why I want AA.

Reduce the need of useless attacks,

Integrate weapon speed, (status weapon diversity and more interesting choices of weapons as a result)

Allow for more room for what I consider more interesting attaks

Class uniqueness though weapon delays, styles of battle and various levels of busy, (15 or 30 actions per second)
remember the brd vs war point, No? Guess you missed this like every other point I made.

Give the controler people a break from going nuts and quiting this game for ever.


None of these statements claim we NEED an AA but they are all arguements for the implementation, and I have already acknowledged that these things can be done in other ways. Claiming there are other ways is not an arguement for why these ways are bad. Claiming they are lack luster does say WHY they are lack luster. If I say your MOM is fat, I can't quantify that. If I say your mom is 400 pounds therefore she is fat is better.

someone says we want AA
someone else says STFU I like this system
someone explains why AA would be a good idea
someone else say, your reasons can not be validaded
General arguement about the various things AA can provide
AA promoters list a few ideas
AA denyers argue thoes ideas opposed to introducing their own
General Flamewar

A new thread appears.....

The first 4-5 steps are unavoidable in forums (people tend to not argue details initially sadly)
This is the step in the forums where the AA denyers NEED to give an arguement for their ideas, unless you do SE will not have enough understanding of your side to give you any real weight or credibility.

The AA denyers have yet to provide a SINGLE arguement that can be supported by a truthfull arguement or evidence againts AA other than you don't like it.(your allowed to think this and your even allowed to say so, but that is not an arguement) So unless you have a good reason why SE should keep this system your going to lose this debate. You can scream as loud as you want but just saying I DON"T WANNA will not convice someone to change something, you need to give reasons. Right now a change (or series if changes) NEED to happen, I am not convinced that AA is the best solution to fixing the combat system, but it is the only one that has any arguements for it's implementation. You can argue thoes points all day long but until you present your own AA promoters will likly win.

There hasn't been a single argument levied in favor of AA that has any merit. Every reason that people have listed in any of these threads is something that has an underlying cause irrelevant of the presence of AA.

Argument: I don't like having to spam the same attack often and over to build TP.
Counter: All AA will do is do it for you. The real problem is TP generation. There are too many 1000-2000 TP skills and not enough 0 and 250 TP skills). Rebalancing of TP generation and usage is what's needed, not a half-arsed measure like AA.

Argument: I shouldn't need to chain together a bunch of useless attacks before I can do the cool ones.
Counter: When every single attack is 'cool', they all quickly become mediocre.

Argument: Supplements to AA like weapon speed will make the combat more interesting.
Counter: No, it won't. All weapon speed does force you into a certain combat pace, and it's an annoyance that detracts more than it helps. LotRO actually normalized all weapon speeds due to this - it was just funneling characters to certain weapon types while doing nothing to the combat system except giving the devs something else to balance.

In case you've missed the actual arguments against AA, here they are:
1. No auto-attack means you are in control of your character. You character attacks when you tell it to. Enemy charging a retaliation counter, mobs CC'd, or Reflect up on your target? Not a problem.
2. No auto-attack means you set the pace of the battle. Should you keep yourself steady and fight a battle of finesse and attrition, or gut your stamina bar trying to take down that imp before it has a chance to cast and rock your world? It's up to you.
3. No auto-attack means you're involved. I'm not sure how Satohiko Matsui can claim AA doesn't make battles easier with a straight face. Plenty of posters have mentioned plainly on these same forums that they prefer to be able watch TV while battling. If not having to even pay attention to a battle isn't an indication of what AA does for a battle system, I'm not sure what is.

[Kaedan]

There hasn't been a single argument levied in favor of AA that has any merit. Every reason that people have listed in any of these threads is something that has an underlying cause irrelevant of the presence of AA.

Argument: I don't like having to spam the same attack often and over to build TP.
Counter: All AA will do is do it for you. The real problem is TP generation. There are too many 1000-2000 TP skills and not enough 0 and 250 TP skills). Rebalancing of TP generation and usage is what's needed, not a half-arsed measure like AA.

Argument: I shouldn't need to chain together a bunch of useless attacks before I can do the cool ones.
Counter: When every single attack is 'cool', they all quickly become mediocre.

Argument: Supplements to AA like weapon speed will make the combat more interesting.
Counter: No, it won't. All weapon speed does force you into a certain combat pace, and it's an annoyance that detracts more than it helps. LotRO actually normalized all weapon speeds due to this - it was just funneling characters to certain weapon types while doing nothing to the combat system except giving the devs something else to balance.

In case you've missed the actual arguments against AA, here they are:
1. No auto-attack means you are in control of your character. You character attacks when you tell it to. Enemy charging a retaliation counter, mobs CC'd, or Reflect up on your target? Not a problem.
2. No auto-attack means you set the pace of the battle. Should you keep yourself steady and fight a battle of finesse and attrition, or gut your stamina bar trying to take down that imp before it has a chance to cast and rock your world? It's up to you.
3. No auto-attack means you're involved. I'm not sure how Satohiko Matsui can claim AA doesn't make battles easier with a straight face. Plenty of posters have mentioned plainly on these same forums that they prefer to be able watch TV while battling. If not having to even pay attention to a battle isn't an indication of what AA does for a battle system, I'm not sure what is.

Very nice response and very true.

Unfortunately, it's coming and there's nothing we can do about it. Let's just hope we can trust Matsui when he says that AA was necessary for the new battle system he says "requires it".

[Aldarin]

Today is a wonderful day!

The developers just announced the new upcoming patches, 1.17, 1.17a, and 1.17b.
Apparently auto-attack will be finished just in time to be implemented in patch 1.17b.

Happy, Glorious Day!

[Enthy]

Today is a wonderful day!

The developers just announced the new upcoming patches, 1.17, 1.17a, and 1.17b.
Apparently auto-attack will be finished just in time to be implemented in patch 1.17b.

Happy, Glorious Day!

auto attack so soon? yaaaay~<3

[Kaedan]

Clearly you don't have any consideration as to how others feel... you should try it some time.

If many people feel this way, it's possible it's true..



With these two comments I've come to the conclusion that those that want an auto-attack don't really give a crap about all those that enjoy battle the way it is.

Yeah, that's how it's been going on these boards, and it's getting extremely ridiculous. Here's how it goes with almost every topic:

-Hardcore player says they want something
-Casual player says they want the exact opposite
-Hardcore player suggests a compromise, trying to meet halfway
-Casual player screams "hell no" and/or gets sarcastic, unwilling to budge from their idea... unwilling to compromise at all

Now, I'm not going to deny that there aren't insults thrown about and stupidity from both sides that complicate this process, but this is what most of the "discussions" boil down to. Hardcores are generally willing to meet halfway on a topic, while Casuals are generally completely unwilling to budge on their stance.

[Grit]

Now, I'm not going to deny that there aren't insults thrown about and stupidity from both sides that complicate this process, but this is what most of the "discussions" boil down to. Hardcores are generally willing to meet halfway on a topic, while Casuals are generally completely unwilling to budge on their stance.

How do you suggest we meet in the middle on the subject of auto-attack?

I propose that everyone try to see things from one-another's perspective, and wait to see the plan that SE lays out for us.

[kukurumei]

Yeah, that's how it's been going on these boards, and it's getting extremely ridiculous. Here's how it goes with almost every topic:

-Hardcore player says they want something
-Casual player says they want the exact opposite
-Hardcore player suggests a compromise, trying to meet halfway
-Casual player screams "hell no" and/or gets sarcastic, unwilling to budge from their idea... unwilling to compromise at all

Now, I'm not going to deny that there aren't insults thrown about and stupidity from both sides that complicate this process, but this is what most of the "discussions" boil down to. Hardcores are generally willing to meet halfway on a topic, while Casuals are generally completely unwilling to budge on their stance.

Actually it's the opposite.

hardcore are usually the one that don't compromise or compromise with a "90/10" and call it a compromise.

Casuals by definition, don't care much, as long as something is to their liking. Casuals don't sweat the small stuff and generally leave if they get bored with the game or the direction of the game.

That's why they're call casuals.

And I highly doubt there are many who would even care to give an opinion. They're probably on the next MMO or video game by this point. Or rather rant about it on their blog/Facebook and never speak of it again.