Thread: REVERT SAM TO 6.08

Originally Posted by Yandere-chan

People prefer different levels of complexity in their rotation. It's literally impossible for them to please everyone equally at the same time in regards to this. There is not an objectively better route. While some people have expressed their grievances with this iteration of the Samurai kit, you have to keep in mind, those who like the changes are not going to make threads about it. You can't just base how well a change is being received due to complaints on forums with this being so.

You are literally explaining the exact problem. They cut off the top part of the Samurai's skill expression and the much loved identity skills. The only thing this change did was make it so everyone plays at the skill floor and make the job play like level 50. The only accomplishment this change did was remove the job from most groups. You are ignoring that there is worldwide unanimous feedback stating these changes are horrendous. There are over 2500 posts combined wordwide explaining this, you can count almost half from JP alone. I'm not going to even start going into heavy details, if you are going to join the conversation I'd like to direct you to CelestiCer's compiled threads and you'll see the many well thought out arguments against every single reasoning SE has given. Oh and, many casual players are also against this change, it's not just people who play at a higher skill level. The job's feel and fun factor have been stripped for a large majority. This isn't exclusive to the Official Forums and there are also videos and discussions elsewhere.

Originally Posted by Jeeqbit

Before the changes, there were a lot of posts about it in the General forum. After the changes, I've hardly seen any in the General forum except references in replies and this is the first post about it I've seen in a long while. If everyone is still upset about it, I suggest making the amount of posts we saw before it changed.

All those posts are in the DPS forums. You don't need to search very far for them.

And I'm going to add that yes, Samurai has other problems but removing Kaiten was not a solution and neither was singling out their damage profile while leaving every other job untouched. They created this problem themselves when they added Meikyo and Tsubame's second charges and forcing everything into 2 minute windows. Then the developers are concerned about damage variance. Ogi Namikiri, Kenki homogenization in 6.0, all of this has been discussed to death while we've been waiting for that promised reply from YoshiP to explain their reasoning on the changes.

Originally Posted by Roxus

Ah yes, yet another person with the hyperbole argument. The fact that there are this many people posting, and many for the first time, is a clear indicator that there is something not quite right with the changes. If you argue against this you are just arguing in bad faith. The opinions are also not varied, it's all the same. We were asked specifically to write the feedback, and are doing so. There is a direct comparison to activity before the changes and after the changes regarding Samurai feedback and there is an absurdly large increase after 6.1. The actual post detailing and posting it in a format with before and after are in my feedback thread, one of the more recent pages.

Damage isn't everything. If you've even read even one of the threads detailing arguments against the changes, you'd know this. Groups will kick Samurais because most people don't want to play with a handicap unless it literally doesn't matter, and if it didn't matter these changes were useless in the first place. Does that mean every group will do that? No, but there is an incentive. I am not going to parrot what has already been written, if you actually care, go read the feedback. I see you keep repeating the same words thinking it will somehow push your own argument, but you're literally speaking on a subject without being informed.

Yes, if you look at a certain third party website, you will see the play rate has drastically decreased from one of the most played to one of the least. You'd also know this if you read any of the feedback.

I won't respond to anything else you have to say because it isn't worth my time. If you decide to read any of the well constructed posts, please by all means I am open to having the discussion at that point.

It's hardly an argument. It's very clearly hyperbole. You are trying to stipulate what millions of people think based off what seems to be a micro minority of organized complainers with an agenda to try to push for a change that is in line with their own biases. You are the one in bad faith if you are suggesting it's in bad faith to be skeptical of extremely over the top claims by such a small group of players advocating for their own interests at the expense of those who may actually prefer the changes. You further make yourself look to be arguing in bad faith by suggesting people would kick a samurai from their group because their class was made easier to play, lol. No one but your own ingroup is going to buy into that even a little. It's beyond absurd to anyone not in that bubble and only further hurts your credibility for your already over the top claims that you lack actual evidence for, which the burden of evidence is on you since you are the ones making these extreme claims that just so happen serve your own interests. To say it's sketchy would be an understatement. Arguments that appeal to your own biases may seem good to you, but they are poor to those who don't share them with you and your in-group.

The number of players isn't what matters, nor is what was said. The relative number of players is what matters. E.g. If 80,000 of a million active players were playing samurai on avg. over a month long period prior to the changes, that would be a relative percent of 8. If that would change to say 70,000 players out of 800,000 avg. players for the avg. for a month post the changes, that would be a relative percent of 8.75. Even though the total number of samurai players would go down in this example, the relative percent would be going up. This is more important to consider since if less or more people play in general at a later window of date, that should be accounted for. Granted, there should be a margin of error to account for other factors that may lead to an increase or decrease as well. If the relative % ends up within 20% or so of one another, it would be fair to say that people balanced out between those who liked or disliked the changes. If there was a difference of say, 40% or greater, then depending on the direction, it would show that people were pushed away from the changes or attracted to them respectively. Granted, this wouldn't be conclusive, but it would be better evidence to indicate overall player feelings than a very small number of posters on the forums which for this game is especially known for being rather disjointed from what general players who don't visit the forums feel.

It is also worth stating that influencers with their own bias preferences often have them parroted by their followers, which could easily lead to poor representation of what players overall think. E.g. A creator like misshapen chair's views hardly represent the whole of FFXIV. Far from it. Yet, if their followers were to advocate for their views on the forums, it would further obscure the objective truth of how players feel overall, which is almost always going to be rather varied for subjects like class design. The reality is, many people do prefer simplifications to rotation, even on high levels of gameplay. Just because people aren't making threads celebrating such changes, doesn't mean they don't exist, as historically, as stated before, people don't tend to make threads celebrating changes of that nature on the forums. People typically only come to the forums to complain about what they don't like. In turn, it's completely bias to just presume one's distaste for the changes is true for the majority, especially when the ones making that claim have that bias themselves.

It's essentially a relatively small number of people with similar biases patting each other on the back in a forum thread and trying to play it off as it representing the worldwide community as a whole. It's a completely disingenuous over the top claim which is self serving to that in-group and thus is hyperbole.