Positionals

[Isurith]

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.

I'm actually feeling the opposite. Like, I'm an action game player. All type of action game, be it DMC, MGR, Bayo, or souls-like.
And I pretty much hate positionnals. Because that doesn't bring anything "action-y" to the gameplay, this is just clunky, forcing me to do small side step from times to times if I want to parse correctly.

Maybe some others answers are right. Positionnals in itself could be something valuable, but their implementation just suck tbh. No skill required, little to no thinking ahead, and mild annoyance when boss decide to turn without tank input for whatever reason.

I really don't think it would water down the gameplay to remove them. Maybe on Monk, to be fair I hate Monk (for other reasons) so I'm not the best to talk about it. But on the others jobs it's clearly not needed. SAM, DRG and RPR would be better without it. Nothing of value would be lost.

[Sjol]

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.

I definitely think the positional information could be better indicated. I really hate the ability tool tips.

[Lyth]

It's important to ask yourself why you want to specifically play a melee job in contrast to a ranged one. The main reason is to add extra depth and challenge to fights by introducing a spatial constraint to your gameplay. That's why there was pushback against the hitbox sizes in the raid content that we've been seeing as of late. If the hitbox fills the arena, then you're removing that constraint, and you might as well be playing a ranged job at that point.

Positionals are another such constraint, in that they reduce the acceptable target area even further. So it's no longer enough to just know where a boss is going to be positioned in the arena, you also need to know how they orientate themselves on a GCD by GCD basis. And it can be very satisfying when you gain that additional layer of knowledge about a fight's 'choreography' and can translate that into a performance gain.

If none of this rings true with you, then melee isn't going to offer any appeal over a ranged one. If we remove all spatial constraints on melee, then you're left with a ranged job. And we have lots of those already (more than melee). We've seen a steady simplification around melee gameplay in the name of making the role more accessible, in terms of reducing positional counts and making missed postionals less punishing (potency loss rather than breaking combos). I think if you erode it further, the category might as well not exist.

[Sjol]

If none of this rings true with you, then melee isn't going to offer any appeal over a ranged one. If we remove all spatial constraints on melee, then you're left with a ranged job. And we have lots of those already (more than melee). We've seen a steady simplification around melee gameplay in the name of making the role more accessible, in terms of reducing positional counts and making missed postionals less punishing (potency loss rather than breaking combos). I think if you erode it further, the category might as well not exist.

I'll admit rphys is a weird play style where most ranged jobs in other MMOs have cast bars. And I'm not against rphys having "cast" bars, so that's an option for me in terms of distinguishing roles. I'm also for smaller hit boxes as part of the difference is tracking the boss more closely.

All that said, I find I have to move more as a ranged attacker due to being further away from the boss so much so that tend to stay pretty close to melee range regardless. Another difference that I've seen in various games is that ranged classes get hit with specific kinds of mechanics to force movement. I'm not sure how much that happens here, but it's definitely a possibility to build into the encounters.

[Turtledeluxe]

I'm actually feeling the opposite. Like, I'm an action game player. All type of action game, be it DMC, MGR, Bayo, or souls-like.
And I pretty much hate positionnals. Because that doesn't bring anything "action-y" to the gameplay, this is just clunky, forcing me to do small side step from times to times if I want to parse correctly.

Maybe some others answers are right. Positionnals in itself could be something valuable, but their implementation just suck tbh. No skill required, little to no thinking ahead, and mild annoyance when boss decide to turn without tank input for whatever reason.

I really don't think it would water down the gameplay to remove them. Maybe on Monk, to be fair I hate Monk (for other reasons) so I'm not the best to talk about it. But on the others jobs it's clearly not needed. SAM, DRG and RPR would be better without it. Nothing of value would be lost.

Your criticism doesn't make any sense. It doesn't take any skill, it doesn't take any brain power, but it challenges you when the boss moves. Conclusion: remove it.

Please help us understand what you're trying to say aside from deleting yet another thing from the game in the name of homogeny/getting better parses with no effort.

[Isurith]

Your criticism doesn't make any sense. It doesn't take any skill, it doesn't take any brain power, but it challenges you when the boss moves. Conclusion: remove it.

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.

[Sjol]

Please help us understand what you're trying to say aside from deleting yet another thing from the game in the name of homogeny/getting better parses with no effort.

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. The more I think about it the more I like NIN with backstrikes and MNK with multi-positionals. SAM could even get front positionals and armor, though the chaos that would cause during multi-tank busters seems high. Also, I like the DRG PVP ability that does more damage the further away you are. I guess there's more design space to positionals than flank/rear with slight DPS loss and I wish they would use it.

[Valence]

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.

I'm also wondering why certain skills are arbitrarily flank or rear, and some are none on most melees tbh.

Trick attack being rear made a huge sense, and rewarded proper positioning. Iajutsu would make sense to be positioned as well, but perhaps too punishing with the cast times. On the other hand, would reward tank-target positioning a lot more. MNK having positionals on every GCD made sense for the job. etc

On the other hand they could remove positionals on RPR and make the job more rotationally demanding in exchange since the job positionals are a total joke. But, perhaps this would annoy RPR mains so idk.

If none of this rings true with you, then melee isn't going to offer any appeal over a ranged one. If we remove all spatial constraints on melee, then you're left with a ranged job. And we have lots of those already (more than melee). We've seen a steady simplification around melee gameplay in the name of making the role more accessible, in terms of reducing positional counts and making missed postionals less punishing (potency loss rather than breaking combos). I think if you erode it further, the category might as well not exist.

I can't believe you're actually making this fallacy. If melee was a ranged job, it would have ranges over 5 yalms on its weaponskills, and yet it doesn't. If we removed all spatial constraints on melee, then every weaponskill range would go over 5y long.

However yes, removing positionals by definition expands the amount of space accessible for maximum output, while keeping them makes part of that space smaller in damage output. But if they were ranged, the whole arena would be valid to land shots, yet it's not the case. You're only saying that because of giant hitboxes, and they're apparently going away next expansion anyway.

Another difference that I've seen in various games is that ranged classes get hit with specific kinds of mechanics to force movement. I'm not sure how much that happens here, but it's definitely a possibility to build into the encounters.

It used to happen more in the past (yet not enough, but it did happen more than today). Today in fact, what puts range and melee apart in terms of mechanics is which mechanics force you to stand away from the boss hitbox, especially in EW (with those gigantic hitboxes). But even before EW's hitboxes, fights were already designed with melees in mind, the difference is that they sometimes had to disconnect a bit and work to keep their uptime, but any competent melee player hit 99% uptime regardless.

The real issue is having mechanics that actually force long and arduous movement from specific targets (like Pantokrator baits, etc), which would actually give rphys some meaning, but I guess you could also just bring a SMN and it would be the same anyway.

[Isurith]

On the other hand they could remove positionals on RPR and make the job more rotationally demanding in exchange since the job positionals are a total joke. But, perhaps this would annoy RPR mains so idk.

I would gladly take that. Remove Shadow of death (or make it being refreshed by the end of a combo) and positionnals, and give me a more complexe rotation instead.

[Ardeth]

My sentient has been the same since I started playing 11 years ago.

I don't like them. I don't generally play Jobs that have them. Over time, they have been stripped away more and more. Just rip the bandage off.

But I don't like them because they're awkward. They don't add anything to me as a player. And I honestly wish I had the confidence of the people who blatantly ignore them. I know my positionals, but in standard gameplay, I don't like them. They just add more things to get toxic about in groups. Tanks spinning bosses, etc. It just muddys the waters. I don't feel good doing them. Just get rid of them.