Positionals

[Valence]

You keep posting this fallacy of equivocation when I've already explained there is a difference between consistency and homogeny. Maintaining a set of jobs with the same traits is not homogeny. No one is homogenizing melee jobs.

However what you are doing, adding another notch into all jobs being the same, is in fact homogeny at work.

I do agree with the idea you're been trying to insert here, but my inherent problem with your statements is that you bring them up like if they were based on factual, objective values, which they certainly ain't.

For example, I do believe that when I argue for jobs of a same role to output the same (total cdps) damage and differentiate themselves through more intricacies elsewhere when it comes to job identity, I'm expecting the identical damage output to be a consistency trait shared by the role, defining the role and not the jobs. But some players would rather have it defining the jobs rather than the role, which is 1) subjective, and 2) completely reliant on where one puts the threshold.

Within the context of positionals, some assume it should be a role trait, while some do think it should be job dependent, much like procs are those days, etc.

Arguing that bringing or keeping consistency prevents homogeny is a fallacy on its own, see the new pvp job sets and identities. There is actually very little consistency within each role to a point where it becomes (half) role agnostic, yet this opened for so much more in terms of creativity by having each jobs not beholden to follow an excruciatingly long list of role traits and made sure to satisfy them, that ironically enough, pvp jobs are ten times more interesting than pve jobs with thrice less buttons. Don't get me wrong though, I'm not advocating for pve to destroy the trinity like that, quite the opposite, and that's definitely where one can put some consistency.

[Arkdra]

Arguing that bringing or keeping consistency prevents homogeny is a fallacy on its own, see the new pvp job sets and identities. There is actually very little consistency within each role to a point where it becomes (half) role agnostic, yet this opened for so much more in terms of creativity by having each jobs not beholden to follow an excruciatingly long list of role traits and made sure to satisfy them, that ironically enough, pvp jobs are ten times more interesting than pve jobs with thrice less buttons. Don't get me wrong though, I'm not advocating for pve to destroy the trinity like that, quite the opposite, and that's definitely where one can put some consistency.

Literally 0 of the pvp jobs are more interesting than their pve versions.

Edit: PvP jobs are interesting in that they made a bunch of tiny kits feel distinct and true to their base jobs. They are not interesting in the sense that if you stuck them in PvE, they would be fun at all. They would be super boring in fact.

Edit: Also pvp is ultra imbalanced and the only reason it isn't a problem is that such a minor portion of the playerbase engages with it. So this is a terrible sell.

[Turtledeluxe]

I do agree with the idea you're been trying to insert here, but my inherent problem with your statements is that you bring them up like if they were based on factual, objective values, which they certainly ain't.

For example, I do believe that when I argue for jobs of a same role to output the same (total cdps) damage and differentiate themselves through more intricacies elsewhere when it comes to job identity, I'm expecting the identical damage output to be a consistency trait shared by the role, defining the role and not the jobs. But some players would rather have it defining the jobs rather than the role, which is 1) subjective, and 2) completely reliant on where one puts the threshold.

Within the context of positionals, some assume it should be a role trait, while some do think it should be job dependent, much like procs are those days, etc.

Arguing that bringing or keeping consistency prevents homogeny is a fallacy on its own, see the new pvp job sets and identities. There is actually very little consistency within each role to a point where it becomes (half) role agnostic, yet this opened for so much more in terms of creativity by having each jobs not beholden to follow an excruciatingly long list of role traits and made sure to satisfy them, that ironically enough, pvp jobs are ten times more interesting than pve jobs with thrice less buttons. Don't get me wrong though, I'm not advocating for pve to destroy the trinity like that, quite the opposite, and that's definitely where one can put some consistency.

I've never once said that maintaining consistency prevents homogeny-- I said that they are two different things. I am basing my thoughts on something objective-- the devs made the melee class. The devs decided they would have positionals as part of their role.

Which again, if all melee had identical positionals that would be the best case use of the word. They don't, though. That's why I said you can kind of get away with "this feels homogeneous", but really it's not the best descriptor beyond that. If you select against positionals and remove them from melee, that makes them non positional in nature and literally the same across any other job that lacks positionals. So their quality of being non positional based is quite literally homogeneous (between all of those jobs, it's a homogeneous trait at that point). The actual problem here, is that players are reverse engineering it to seem like melee is a victim of homogenization while pushing homogenization. I conceded in earlier post, someone might say "well it only makes melee 20% more like other jobs", yet homogenization is homogenization and I think the game has suffered enough of that.

[RinaB]

I wasn't specific enough in my original post. When I said EW in particular feels anti melee is because there's way too many moments in bosses or even trash where you're just constantly forced to stand out of range until a mechanic is over or you have to run out of point blank aoes as soon as you try to do some damage. It's frustrating and just feels like bad game design. It's been mentioned many times in this thread but it's pretty pathetic when people are defending positionals as some engaging form of gameplay. If we had better Job design and more interesting rotations Noone would bat an eye at the removal of positionals. Outside of a couple of rogue abilities, wow never had positionals on anything and it's never been an issue. People Def don't play melee to do flank and rear attacks either Lol and as mentioned in the thread there's no indicator showing you actually landed it. If they want to keep them in the game, give indicators they landed and make them more important.

[WaxSw]

I wasn't specific enough in my original post. When I said EW in particular feels anti melee is because there's way too many moments in bosses or even trash where you're just constantly forced to stand out of range until a mechanic is over or you have to run out of point blank aoes as soon as you try to do some damage.

There were more in the past, if anything EW is too melee friendly. Almost every raid has mechanics that can be solved in melee range or at best require minimal disconect, there was barely any necessity for melee uptime strats and the hitbox is so large compared to previous expansions it has become comical:


Sb wall boss hitbox

EW wall boss hitbox

In fact you can also look at parses and see melees having the same uptime as the physical rangeds which dont have to care about that.

It's frustrating and just feels like bad game design.

Its called a challenge, something that the game should offer more often and its not even a hard one. If you want the high melee dps WORK FOR IT, if you want perfect uptime and no positionals you already have a role for that in physical rangeds. Sorry but this points sounds like skill issue and wanting to change an entire role to compensate for that.

It's been mentioned many times in this thread but it's pretty pathetic when people are defending positionals as some engaging form of gameplay. If we had better Job design and more interesting rotations Noone would bat an eye at the removal of positionals.

But we don't have that design so its pretty normal and reasonable that people fight for one of the few bits of job challenge remaining to stay. It's also something that has characterized melees since ARR and some people like it, in fact we used to have jobs with much more positionals than now with better design too.

Outside of a couple of rogue abilities, wow never had positionals on anything and it's never been an issue.

WOW is not FFXIV

People Def don't play melee to do flank and rear attacks either Lol

There are plenty of those in the MNK playerbase, also even if their reason to play melee is not positionals that doesn't mean they can't enjoy those bits of extra work they can put to get a better output, there are plenty of people like that in this thread.

Indicators

I agree with that tho

[HikariKurosawa]

There are people who use scripts to automate their rotations and addons to resolve every mechanic in each encounter for them. This enables them to focus entirely on standing in flank or rear which makes their parse look better than 99% of the playerbase.

These are the people who really want positionals to stay.

[CelestiCer]

There are people who use scripts to automate their rotations and addons to resolve every mechanic in each encounter for them. This enables them to focus entirely on standing in flank or rear which makes their parse look better than 99% of the playerbase.

These are the people who really want positionals to stay.

I needed that laugh today, this is good xD !!

[Asari5]

so, we positional enjoyers are pathetic and cheater? really levelheaded of you. i guess that says a lot about some people here.

other than that im really not sure what people mean with the fights arent made for positionals. other than like one or two bosses where the jumping around really gets annoying its fine.
i remember people complaing about barbarizia but with true north there were barely any issues in doing positionals. its really hard to take people serious.
do you expect the bosses to turn around to align perfectly for your positionals? would that be a fight made for positionals?
doesnt the joy in a game with different classes come from using your skillset (including positionals) as good as possible for whatever the bosses throw at you? that needs flexibility but it means you actually play a game. i know we lost many of these aspects in the name of streamlining everything to the point of it becoming bland.
but i still want to figure out myself when its better to reposition myself and when i better use true north. and when there is a mistake from the tank or the boss turning suddenly around then i have to adapt.... its an mmo there should be stuff in there which need at least some decision making and flexibility.
uptime management falls pretty much in the same category but due to giant hitboxes that aspect is gone.
what is wrong about wanting to keep the last remaing bits of this aspect?

i started back in HW and the thing making me fall in love with this game was the final boss in the lvl 57 dungeon as monk. dancing around the boss avoiding his many aoe attacks while keeping uptime and also trying to hit my positionals on EVERY global cooldown... it was amazing

[Turtledeluxe]

what is wrong about wanting to keep the last remaing bits of this aspect?

The same as much of the other job feedback since STB**, which is to reduce all jobs to non thought.

And yes, I said it.

[ZiraZ]

so, we positional enjoyers are pathetic and cheater? really levelheaded of you. i guess that says a lot about some people here.

other than that im really not sure what people mean with the fights arent made for positionals. other than like one or two bosses where the jumping around really gets annoying its fine.
i remember people complaing about barbarizia but with true north there were barely any issues in doing positionals. its really hard to take people serious.
do you expect the bosses to turn around to aöign perfectly for your positionals? would that be a fight made for positionals?
doesnt the joy in a game with different classes come from using your skillset (including positionals) as good as possible for whatever the bosses throw at you? that needs flexibility but it means you actually play a game. i know we lost many of these aspects in the name of streamlining everything to the point of it becoming bland.
but i still want to figure out myself when its better to reposition myself and when i better use true north. and when there is a mistake from the tank than i have to adapt.... its an mmo there should be stuff in there which need at least some decision making and flexibility.
uptime management falls pretty much in the same category but due to giant hitboxes that aspect is gone.
what is wrong about wanting to keep the last remaing bits of this aspect?

He's just our local remove everything brainlet that won't stop shitposting until every job plays like lvl 1 ROG, but also doesn't even play the game so anything difficult must be cheating. did you know that using Kaiten properly required 3rd party tools? no human brain could keep up.