Duty Support has now killed every required ARR to SB dungeon

[Mikey_R]

Hell, make it so you retain your abilities and just get potency downscaled along with ilevel so I don't feel like deleting the game after every roulette run I do.

This has been talked about to death in the past and is something that is just not feasible.

I think it's just more reasons for SE to have much tighter ilvl requirements I guess. In DF I really missed the old mechanics.

I mean, just having an ilevel cap would be a start in general. It is weird the only content that has a cap is dungeons after all.

[Payadopa]

I'm curious, why do you 'need' difficulty before reaching cap?

Cap is now like a few months away. I've quit games for way, way less if they bored me. Do you think I relish pressing AoE#1 and 2 for weeks till I'm allowed to have fun? People are so lazy even pressing a button more or having to say more than o/ is this insurmountable thing.

[Aldath]

Well, the "hallway" approach is largely because of us (the players). They made dungeons with various branches, side paths, etc., and what did we do? Ignore all of the side paths and choose whichever branch was fastest.

Remember that the dungeons we're talking about here are now introductory ones, too. Having "significant use of Duty Actions" in one of the very first dungeons a new player will ever encounter probably ends up being very bad design. Low-level dungeons should be simple and about getting people used to playing in a party. It felt strange seeing what used to be a sensible progression of difficulty become odd ebbs and flows between expansions now that we go from 1-90 instead of just 1-50. Things that were designed as "endgame" before with more mechanics in mind are now very much "early game" instead and were adjusted accordingly.

This. It's usually the people who complain about this the ones who want WtW tanking and usually seek to skip. I come from Gw2 where dungeons have a more open design, and even there people devise ways to not do mechanics and skip adds, and it's become the expected way to play a dungeon.

[Heavenchild]

I think they could have made 2 dungeons options. The one with duty support and the easier mechanics, and the normal version when you run with other players.

[AurumEnjoyer]

This has been talked about to death in the past and is something that is just not feasible.

Says who? Other games have done it just fine. The difficulty is turning potency scaling for levelling brackets, but that's it. Newbies get better potency on less abilities and vets get downscales accordingly, esp considering how homogenised classes have gotten it should be more easily transferrable.

[Payadopa]

This. It's usually the people who complain about this the ones who want WtW tanking and usually seek to skip. I come from Gw2 where dungeons have a more open design, and even there people devise ways to not do mechanics and skip adds, and it's become the expected way to play a dungeon.

It's the expected way because otherwise the vocal minority bitches and moans. Look no further than W2W. The reason people do that in the first place is because they are boring hallways and you have boring abilities you don't even need most of the time.


Aurum Vale at least has the possibility of being fun. Most other dungeons don't. An actual single player game with XIV's design philosophy would instantly flop.

Also, level 1 to 50 had a learning curve and it was fine. Now it goes from 1 to 90 and takes months and people are still like, nah, that one mechanic where you need to open your eyes is at level 48 too much. Remove it and put it in current savage or something. lol Like how patronising can you be?

[Mikey_R]

Says who? Other games have done it just fine. The difficulty is turning potency scaling for levelling brackets, but that's it. Newbies get better potency on less abilities and vets get downscales accordingly, esp considering how homogenised classes have gotten it should be more easily transferrable.

Other games have fewer actions and add onto the the vast amount of oGCDs you pick up. This is before talking about healing and defensive potential.

However, here are a few topics covering this, have a read if you want.:
https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...-be-greyed-out
https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...-level-content.
https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...ontent-scaling

Aurum Vale at least has the possibility of being fun. Most other dungeons don't. An actual single player game with XIV's design philosophy would instantly flop.

How so? The only thing AV does different to most dungeons is that it has a big room with lots of mobs in where you skip most of it. If this design decision was put into other dungeons, then, again, you will skip most of the mobs. Brayflox also has a similar room, guess what? Mobs skipped.

If you had a different idea as to what makes AV different to other dungeons to give it the possibility of being fun, then do enlighten me.

[Aldath]

It's the expected way because otherwise the vocal minority bitches and moans. Look no further than W2W. The reason people do that in the first place is because they are boring hallways and you have boring abilities you don't even need most of the time.


Aurum Vale at least has the possibility of being fun. Most other dungeons don't. An actual single player game with XIV's design philosophy would instantly flop.

Also, level 1 to 50 had a learning curve and it was fine. Now it goes from 1 to 90 and takes months and people are still like, nah, that one mechanic where you need to open your eyes is at level 48 too much. Remove it and put it in current savage or something. lol Like how patronising can you be?

Yes, I would also like variety in dungeon mechanics. It'd rather have shorter dungeons with less trash and more interesting mechanics and locales than FFXIII style corridors.

But sadly I haven't seen a single MMO so far where people aren't willing to skip stuff to the detriment of newer or less experienced players, creating bad habits in the process, unless forced to do so. I mean, Lost Ark has dungeons leaps and bounds better than ours, but it's Lost Ark and for every good feature there's an even bigger pay wall.

I do agree partially with OP though, that DS has helped dumb down the natural progression of difficulty in MSQ dungeons. I understand their approach; this is future proofing, the older the game becomes the harder it will be too get good queues for older MSQ content, but instead of removing and changing stuff so their basic FFXII Gambit AI doesn't crumble with anything harder than "don't step on orange".

[Shurrikhan]

What reward would keep the optional route favourable to do? Bear in mind, this is a dungeon setting, so you have 4 people to satisfy, all of which could have different wants and needs.

What I was replying to was the variety/explorability in earlier dungeons that Striker claimed the community wanted dead and gone as if out of dislike for variety / explorability (rather than, say, their exact implementation which tended to be especially low-effort and disproportionately low-reward, with the devs conflating the latter with the prior per their iconic way of twisting around data and selectively hearing criticism to suit whatever conclusion demands the least thought, effort, nuance, etc.).

But for a roulette that offers a new form of content, the answer is the same as for any other roulette that offers only a single type of content: Give it reward at least roughly balanced for per-minute efficiency. That much isn't complicated.

Call the more varied alternate option to dungeon settings whatever you will. Delves? Forrays? Expeditions? It matters not. Call it, "<Content Type Name> Roulette". Give it actual, proportionate rewards. With that, you're 98% of the way there.

Finer details: You may wish to initially tune it around taking greater than your theoretically or dev-tested expected time as players will still be figuring out the new content type and a small degree of bribery is useful to new content; later, rein it back faintly as needed once you have more data on the average actual clear times. Use proportionate, rather than flat, rewards if you want the lengths to vary significantly within that same content type.

[Mikey_R]

What I was replying to was the variety/explorability in earlier dungeons that Striker claimed the community wanted dead and gone as if out of dislike for variety / explorability (rather than, say, their exact implementation which tended to be especially low-effort and disproportionately low-reward, with the devs conflating the latter with the prior per their iconic way of twisting around data and selectively hearing criticism to suit whatever conclusion demands the least thought, effort, nuance, etc.).

But for a roulette that offers a new form of content, the answer is the same as for any other roulette that offers only a single type of content: Give it reward at least roughly balanced for per-minute efficiency. That much isn't complicated.

Call the more varied alternate option to dungeon settings whatever you will. Delves? Forrays? Expeditions? It matters not. Call it, "<Content Type Name> Roulette". Give it actual, proportionate rewards. With that, you're 98% of the way there.

Finer details: You may wish to initially tune it around taking greater than your theoretically or dev-tested expected time as players will still be figuring out the new content type and a small degree of bribery is useful to new content; later, rein it back faintly as needed once you have more data on the average actual clear times. Use proportionate, rather than flat, rewards if you want the lengths to vary significantly within that same content type.

Yes, people do not care for it, noone runs through those optional areas for the rewards that they give. If noone explores that part, what is the point of adding it in the first place? This is why, whenever someone says, just add a reward, the question needs to be asked what reward do you think would entice people over there? For an added question, when was the last time you went to get the treasure chest at the start of AK that contains a minion just before the first boss? Or do you skip it every time? This is the sort of thing that is being mentioned. Noone wants to do the optional route because the reward is not there. So, what reward would entice everyone there when everyone has different wants and needs?

As for extra content, that wasn't in the initial quote train, that was posted as a separate post so it is likely no comment was made on it, however, if you want to add content into a roulette that is more exploratory based, it will still be speed ran. It might take a while, but eventually the most optimal route will be found. There is also the case of proportional rewards based on time create a conflict between someone wanting to go fast and someone wanting to go slower, especially if it is more time more (proportional) reward (assuming by this you mean, it doesn't matter if it takes 20 minutes or 40 minutes, it is the same tome per minute average). However, really, you have just made a non linear dungeon, where, once the ideal route has been mapped out, just becomes a linear dungeon and don't pretend that that isn't what is going to happen either. Which, again, negates all side areas you might have added, unless there is a reward in those side areas, of which the question is again, what is the reward that will keep players going to that side area.