Positionals

[Turtledeluxe]

Making it so that specific jobs get positionals based on their class fantasy would be less homogeneity to me, not more. Right now all melee DPS get it. That's homogenous within the role.

There's a difference between consistency and homogeneity. Player feedback (particularly that which subversively shapes jobs into similarly feeling gameplay) and the desire to delete systems from the game are what make this a case of homogeneity. Now, I'm not against augmenting it. I just think if people are talking about reducing buttons, making gameplay more streamlined, etc. that all just sounds like said parse driven feedback to me.

There's just no functional argument for divorcing positionals from melee imo, disregarding evolving combat design. Inherently for melee oriented combat, position actually does matter which is why I'm simply saying that removing it altogether seems nonsensical. Moreover, having it on one class but not others creates a gameplay disadvantage in the melee subclass. If there was a pure spam melee class, it would have be nerfed into the ground most likely.

I see no contradiction. It doesn't require any skill, but it just sometimes a mild annoyance when boss decide to reposition itself out of the blue because tank pulled it 1 pixel too much to the north. That doesn't change my previous fact.

And by no mean I'm aiming for homogeny/getting better parses with no effort. I already said in a previous post that yes, melee (and jobs as a whole) are getting easier everytime. That's not a positive to me (tho it can be argued but that's another debate).

But defending positionnals as a something that add difficulty is ridiculous to me. It's nothing more than a checkbox every once in a while. And just not a fun one.

I'm not willing to die on a hill against them because I don't mind in the grand scheme of things. But defending it seems very silly to me.

Bosses moving around is not "an annoyance", it's gameplay. So on the one hand you are arguing it requires no thought or skill, on the other hand you're acknowleding that your problem with it is that it requires some effort when it's not convenient for you. I don't think that makes any sense, personally. And I would not think it is motivated by parses if you did not plainly lay it out in your first post.

[Isurith]

Boss repositionning themselves between almost each mechanics in savage is an annoyance and you won't change my mind on that shit.

[SDaemon]

If SE wants to keep positionals then positionals needs to be worth performing and be better designed into the kit, instead of just tacked onto the melee role, in a combat system that has been increasingly designed to disparage positionals. At present, I'd prefer SE throw away the tattered remains of positionals and work more on making intricate and complex rotations.

[ZiraZ]

If SE wants to keep positionals then positionals needs to be worth performing and be better designed into the kit, instead of just tacked onto the melee role, in a combat system that has been increasingly designed to disparage positionals. At present, I'd prefer SE throw away the tattered remains of positionals and work more on making intricate and complex rotations.

Problem is they are not gonna work on anything, all they do recently is remove and I don't want them to remove positional just to be given an IOU a mechanic or complex rotations 3 expansions later pinky promise from YP.
If they're gonna remove my positionals then I also want them to hand me that new complex rotation or new mechanic in the same patch, and with plenty of info ahead of time for feedback.
So right now I would rather play it safe and just keep my fun positionals.

[Isurith]

Problem is they are not gonna work on anything, all they do recently is remove and I don't want them to remove positional just to be given an IOU mechanic or complex rotations 3 expansions later pinky promise from YP.
If they're gonna remove my positionals then I also want them to hand me that new complex rotation or new mechanic in the same patch, and with plenty of info ahead of time for feedback.
So right now I would rather play it safe and just keep my fun positionals.

That's sadly the only decent argument for keeping them in my eyes, ahah. I'd really like for them to disappear but that would alienate a lot of people and yeah, we clearly can't be sure that we will gain something, or something better, in return.

[SDaemon]

Problem is they are not gonna work on anything, all they do recently is remove and I don't want them to remove positional just to be given an IOU a mechanic or complex rotations 3 expansions later pinky promise from YP.
If they're gonna remove my positionals then I also want them to hand me that new complex rotation or new mechanic in the same patch, and with plenty of info ahead of time for feedback.
So right now I would rather play it safe and just keep my fun positionals.

Personally, I just don't see any fun or value in positionals in the current game state. I can live if they stay as is, it doesn't overly detract from my fun. It just adds zero meaningful contribution to my engagement with the game in their current state and would rather their slow death just be finalized and replaced already. I agree that given SE's track record on combat design and iteration it is unlikely we'll see anything meaningful in regard to positionals for the foreseeable future.

[Aco505]

Personally, I just don't see any fun or value in positionals in the current game state. I can live if they stay as is, it doesn't overly detract from my fun. It just adds zero meaningful contribution to my engagement with the game in their current state and would rather their slow death just be finalized and replaced already. I agree that given SE's track record on combat design and iteration it is unlikely we'll see anything meaningful in regard to positionals for the foreseeable future.

Trying to get all positionals in fights where it's more of a challenge in high end content is quite fun and engaging on DRG.

[Sjol]

There's a difference between consistency and homogeneity. Player feedback (particularly that which subversively shapes jobs into similarly feeling gameplay) and the desire to delete systems from the game are what make this a case of homogeneity. Now, I'm not against augmenting it. I just think if people are talking about reducing buttons, making gameplay more streamlined, etc. that all just sounds like said parse driven feedback to me.

Finding the difference between consistency and homogeneity here feels very much like hair-splitting. Please elaborate as both heavily imply sameness between different items.

I can't speak for others, but I don't use or look at my parses. My issues are with the unneeded consistency in giving all melee jobs positionals regardless to whether it aligns with their class fantasy or not. I would actually be okay with positionals being an all or nothing thing if they aligned with class fantasy.

There's just no functional argument for divorcing positionals from melee imo, disregarding evolving combat design. Inherently for melee oriented combat, position actually does matter which is why I'm simply saying that removing it altogether seems nonsensical. Moreover, having it on one class but not others creates a gameplay disadvantage in the melee subclass. If there was a pure spam melee class, it would have be nerfed into the ground most likely.

What would make something a functional argument, here? What makes something a non-functional one? Is there a reason that the disadvantage of positionals couldn't be accommodated for since they're already accommodated for with RPhys?

Also, I don't know what you mean by pure spam melee class.

[Turtledeluxe]

Finding the difference between consistency and homogeneity here feels very much like hair-splitting. Please elaborate as both heavily imply sameness between different items.

I can't speak for others, but I don't use or look at my parses. My issues are with the unneeded consistency in giving all melee jobs positionals regardless to whether it aligns with their class fantasy or not. I would actually be okay with positionals being an all or nothing thing if they aligned with class fantasy.



What would make something a functional argument, here? What makes something a non-functional one? Is there a reason that the disadvantage of positionals couldn't be accommodated for since they're already accommodated for with RPhys?

Also, I don't know what you mean by pure spam melee class.

I'm saying that this mechanic exists in melee because it just makes sense. No, not everything in the game is based on realism, but thereorerically someone attacking another person or thing at melee range does have to consider their positioning to some degree. So it just feels natural as an idea. That's probably why it's inherent to the class.

Suggesting that we make it like rphys btw, is homogeny at work. So far positionals are consistent because (with the very tiny exception of early NIN) they're just inherent to the role. It is intentional. Subtracting that away might differentiate it from some melee, but then it makes them functionally like other jobs in the game. Hence, homogeny.

What do I mean by spam? I mean that a melee that does not have to consider positionals is basically a spam attacker in comparison to one that does, rotations notwithstanding. It's a very similar concept between SMN and BLM. There's a reason their DPS is distinct (well, a few reasons, to be fair).