Positionals

[mallleable]

Another annoying thing about positionals is the lack of feedback for when you execute them correctly. If they stay there should be better audio, and visual cues for when you land them correctly. Just trusting that the damage number will be a little higher is not enough.

[Isurith]

They're going to make hitboxes smaller so positional skill expression is going to be back.

That being said, I am not against the idea of removing positionals provided SE compensates the reduction in job difficulty with an increase in another area.

Skill expression will still mean being able to do small side step from left to right every so often.
That being called "skill" is a bit too much innit.

But yeah, I'm fine with it being replaced by something more interesting instead of just being deleted.

[Aco505]

Another annoying thing about positionals is the lack of feedback for when you execute them correctly. If they stay there should be better audio, and visual cues for when you land them correctly. Just trusting that the damage number will be a little higher is not enough.

There should be an audio cue that pops when you miss them. Can enable or disable it in the options if it's annoying for some.

[dwodmots]

Guys, imagine if they added positionals to tanks. Finally I'd have plausible deniability when aiming a tank buster at the party.

[rawker]

Guys, imagine if they added positionals to tanks. Finally I'd have plausible deniability when aiming a tank buster at the party.

Fun fact: PLDs in 1.x had positionals.

[Amvin]

As a DRG main, I don't hate positionals - but I don't love them either. It doesn't make me feel particularly skilled to do a sidestep to hit a positional, it's easy enough, just ... boring. So sometimes, depending on the mood of the day, I don't even bother or just true north when I can.

That said, I love the idea of an audio cue for hitting or not hitting them!

Thinking about it, that might actually be a fun minigame. Hit 3 (or 5) back to back, get something extra? I'm just being silly, but some people might seriously like that. xD

[Evergrey]

There should be an audio cue that pops when you miss them. Can enable or disable it in the options if it's annoying for some.

yeah I was just thinking about that, that an audio cue could get annoying pretty fast.
"Ding!.. Ding!.. Ding!.. Ding!

Having it as a toggle in the sound options would save this idea.
Also, just to add a little extra, maybe not just a toggle, but a slider.
So one can set it to 0% all the way up to 100%.
Some might want a quieter cue.

[Valence]

This age old debate tends to divide players between the ones that are more attached or have roots into action games, while it just annoys the ones with more classical rpg or tactical rpg affinities. It's cool to have jobs with demanding positionals, some with mild positionals, and some with no positionals.

1) Removing something without replacing is what SE is a champ at and only results in watering down the job system at the profit of fully focused encounter design.
2) Removing them is not a solution, and would alienate half of the melee dedicated population, even if they get replaced by something else.
3) Introducing new melee DPS jobs without positionals (new, therefore not alienating other job mains) should only come as an exchange for more intricate and complex rotations.
4) Focusing on melee DPS intricacies and complexity should come with the insurance that they also double down on ranged complexity because otherwise we're gone again for another expansion with huge debates with ranged proponents and melee proponents tearing each other apart on job difficulty and damage balance.

[Sjol]

This age old debate tends to divide players between the ones that are more attached or have roots into action games, while it just annoys the ones with more classical rpg or tactical rpg affinities. It's cool to have jobs with demanding positionals, some with mild positionals, and some with no positionals.

1) Removing something without replacing is what SE is a champ at and only results in watering down the job system at the profit of fully focused encounter design.
2) Removing them is not a solution, and would alienate half of the melee dedicated population, even if they get replaced by something else.
3) Introducing new melee DPS jobs without positionals (new, therefore not alienating other job mains) should only come as an exchange for more intricate and complex rotations.
4) Focusing on melee DPS intricacies and complexity should come with the insurance that they also double down on ranged complexity because otherwise we're gone again for another expansion with huge debates with ranged proponents and melee proponents tearing each other apart on job difficulty and damage balance.

I agree with most of your points here and was glad to see this.

My personal frustration is that the current design of positionals feels bad. They feel tacked on with little rhyme or reason as if to exist to add some minor complexity to the job. Some of what I've heard is a sub set of players who don't mind positionals, but don't like how they're implemented now.

I hear you about not wanting the jobs made even simpler. There are certainly jobs that I go to when I'm brain dead and jobs I go to when I want a challenge.

I also would be okay with some jobs having positionals that only work in specific positions if they were designed better. *cough* backstab.

The frustrations outlined by a bunch of people are good ones both in favor and against. I think it's a difficult problem and little trust that SE will get it right.

[Aidorouge]

I honestly forget which abilities even have positional requirements most of the time, and when I do remember, it's usually in a fight where trying to land it would be suicide so I'm better off not trying it/using True North instead. I'm not gonna complain if positionals get removed, but I'm also not going to find their continued existence engaging and if it becomes more demanding, I just won't bother or continue to rely on True North.