Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Does anyone on here actually prefer FFXI to XIV?Follow

#77 Aug 11 2014 at 11:38 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,447 posts
Lyrailis wrote:

EDIT: Another good example of group synergy (and how it caused pain in some peoples' in-game lives): THF. You almost never invited a 30+ THF into the group unless you had two people with Provoke, because the whole THF thing revolved around a temporary tank provoking the mob first, then the THF doing SATA onto the real tank (preferrably with a skillchain, Distortion was the favorite back then). But with nobody with a 2nd Provoke... and the THF was nigh-useless. I remember they eventually buffed Trick Attack, but it still didn't feel like it was enough even after they buffed it; it was still weak when compared to SA+TA combined.

Edited, Aug 11th 2014 11:59pm by Lyrailis


Well, technically the buff they did to TA was a level 60 trait they added. It made SA and TA equal, just SA was DEX and TA AGI-based. But again this wasn't until 60, which meant that without a double provoke situation THF was a bit weaker and harder to use to its full capacity from 30-60.
#78 Aug 11 2014 at 11:50 PM Rating: Good
***
3,441 posts
Quote:

Well, technically the buff they did to TA was a level 60 trait they added. It made SA and TA equal, just SA was DEX and TA AGI-based. But again this wasn't until 60, which meant that without a double provoke situation THF was a bit weaker and harder to use to its full capacity from 30-60.


Ahh.

My memories of the specifics are foggy, as this was years ago, so... yeah. Point Still applies to this day 30-60 lol. But then not like anybody actually cares about SATA while leveling these days. I pop it for S&G now and then if I get the chance to with my Trusts or something but otherwise... those are two abilities that never get used because I use my THF almost solely for solo farming.
#79 Aug 12 2014 at 2:48 AM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Lyrailis wrote:
You're automatically assuming it is because of your job, and not because... they were Japanese and won't group with English players, or maybe they know your name and have heard bad things about you, true or untrue (note: I am NOT accusing you of anything!), or maybe they didn't really feel they needed any extra help? Maybe they were just being jerks?

Correlation != Causation.
I wasn't assuming it had anything to do with my job. I was countering your argument that because the fight would be so easy, that they wouldn't care who was in the party. History has proven otherwise. People do care even when it doesn't matter, so therefore your argument that they wouldn't is false. The correct answer is "they were just being jerks". The problem is, that is/was common and wouldn't have changed toward level 30 players.

Lyrailis wrote:
Look at previous Final Fantasy games and tell me how many times you actually died to an average boss battle. A few bosses qualify as ThatOneBoss, but most of them are complete wimps, without any level grinding. When's the last time any FF6 story boss actually killed you, assuming you weren't doing a Low Level Run?
You not dying != auto-attack kill. Bosses are difficult to program because people obviously want to win, but they want to feel somewhat challenged. In any case, that's irrelevant because if the bosses were uncapped and auto-attack easy, a group of 75s wouldn't just do one boss and stop. People would form a group and go through as much of the story as possible at one time. Unless you're also advocating that every boss be an auto-attack push over, at some point the bosses would get more difficult. As a result, no level 75 player would choose a level 30 over a level 50 or a level 50 over a level 75, knowing that the follow on bosses would be more difficult. They would have to stop and shout for a replacement OR they can just invite the 75. The first bosses would be so easy, that the group would essentially be forming for the 3rd or 4th boss.

Lyrailis wrote:
Necessary? No. Foolproof? No.

Greatly increases your chances of success? **** Yes.


Only if people know what they are doing. You're displaying the symptoms of the max/min disease. Throughout time, history has shown us that the "best way" to do things were outdone by the new innovative way that people previously shunned. I recall the time when the average TP party was 1 RDM and 5 DD. Then it went to 1 RDM, 1 BRD and 4 DD. Then it went to 1 RDM, 2 BRD and 3 DD.

Lyrailis wrote:
Let's say you had, oh I don't know, a WHM healer (no special weapon), you had a PLD tank, and three DD classes of any sort, let's say you had a RNG, a WAR, and a SAM. Someone left group. You have two classes that are (or, were at the time) horribly dependent upon MP.

Therefore, there was one......and only one job.... that you WANTED for that last slot in your group. I'm sure you know which job I'm referring to.

If you saw one in the list, you grabbed it and FAST. Why? Because this job has abilities that would GREATLY help the WHM and PLD out. Grabbing anybody else might work, but you'd have to rest after every few mobs because of people going OOM.

Certain jobs work well together, and certain party setups require certain jobs to make them work. A SC+MB group doesn't work without at least two people who have compatible skillchains that is of an element the BLM wants, and it obviously doesn't work very well without the BLM (or at least it didn't at the time). WHM+PLD without RDM? You crazy? etc etc etc.

You could go NINx2 or WAR/NINx2 and a WHM... and you wouldn't need the RDM as much, true. But what if you didn't have a couple WARs or NINs around and all you had was this PLD and WHM? You either got a RDM or your XP sucked.


I have no problem with choosing jobs that best support other jobs. I have a problem with choosing the entire party as a cookie cutter solution, while ignoring other jobs.

Lyrailis wrote:

EDIT: Another good example of group synergy (and how it caused pain in some peoples' in-game lives): THF. You almost never invited a 30+ THF into the group unless you had two people with Provoke, because the whole THF thing revolved around a temporary tank provoking the mob first, then the THF doing SATA onto the real tank (preferrably with a skillchain, Distortion was the favorite back then). But with nobody with a 2nd Provoke... and the THF was nigh-useless. I remember they eventually buffed Trick Attack, but it still didn't feel like it was enough even after they buffed it; it was still weak when compared to SA+TA combined.


That's utterly false. As a RDM, I used to be SATA partners. You don't need another provoke. All you need is someone who can temporarily tank the mob.. Level 75's wouldn't invite level 30's the same way you didn't invite level 30+ THFs. It's the same concept. You can't argue the validity in one sentence, then pretend it wouldn't exist in another sentence.
#80 Aug 12 2014 at 8:00 AM Rating: Good
***
3,441 posts
Quote:
That's utterly false. As a RDM, I used to be SATA partners. You don't need another provoke. All you need is someone who can temporarily tank the mob.. Level 75's wouldn't invite level 30's the same way you didn't invite level 30+ THFs. It's the same concept. You can't argue the validity in one sentence, then pretend it wouldn't exist in another sentence.


WTF? lol, I don't understand just what you're trying to say. Who said anything about a Lv75 inviting a Lv30 to an XP group? lol

And how did you "tank" a mob as a RDM, unless you threw on /WAR or dumped a lot of MP into a Nuke to keep the mob's hate? Sounds like you were blowing extra MP/gimping yourself just to kludge a solution, IMO.

Quote:
I have no problem with choosing jobs that best support other jobs. I have a problem with choosing the entire party as a cookie cutter solution, while ignoring other jobs.


The point I was trying to make above, is that you invited jobs based upon the jobs you already had in your group. When you first start making a group, you took a look at what the LFP list had to offer, and then you started asking people once you had an idea of what was available. Some jobs might not have fit what was available very well at all; one tended to avoid these because... well, like I said, job synergy. Some jobs work well together some combinations........don't.

Quote:
Only if people know what they are doing. You're displaying the symptoms of the max/min disease. Throughout time, history has shown us that the "best way" to do things were outdone by the new innovative way that people previously shunned. I recall the time when the average TP party was 1 RDM and 5 DD. Then it went to 1 RDM, 1 BRD and 4 DD. Then it went to 1 RDM, 2 BRD and 3 DD.


At Lv30, there was very little "Innovation" because you had such a small list of abilities and spells available to you. That's why SMN was so damn popular; at Lv30 it was one of the few jobs who still had their key "kill it FAST!" abilities even at Lv30. Maybe at 75, you could find more ways to make the puzzle pieces fit together, but at Lv30 you really didn't have a lot of options. You might be able to, with a skilled group and lots of farming for enfeeble items, make some weird combination work. Or, you could, go with an Established Setup that people KNOW works more often than not (the SMN thing... you just need your tank to not die and/or have a 2nd tank who can pick it up if he does die and the SMN needs to get out the 3 Astral Flows).

And a lot of times, even if the SMN trips on a banana peel and mistimes the Astral Flow, and only gets 2 of them, well crap. You can try to just burn him down the rest of the way and pray you can last by cure-bombing, using other DDs' 2hr, etc.

Like I said, not Foolproof, but it was an Established Strategy that people knew worked and worked fairly well. If you really want to WIN something, and you don't feel like wasting 3+ hours of your time, what are you going to do? Go with the setup you know gets results, or just mish-mash something together and pray it works, with no real faith that it will?

In XP groups, sure, you can play around and tweak stuff. The worst that happens is that you get sub-par XP/hr. But that's not like a Mission Fight where dying to the boss means wasting 2-3 hours of work.
#81 Aug 12 2014 at 12:35 PM Rating: Excellent
****
9,526 posts
This is way off topic now... but just wanted to say Abyssea proved that if you make things face-roll easy and there is no penalty to bringing extra people, people will bring people just for wins/atma whatever. Frankly I got almost all my mega boss wins by going to the pop and asking to be given the kill.

Also when they uncapped CoP my LS ran everyone through the promies, regardless of level. I think I was level 40ish at the time.

That said, I think it made sense to have the level caps there for the first while... heck even if they had just slowly increased them it would have been pretty cool. Like first year 30, second year 35, third 40 etc...

That could have made it a lot easier to low-man them and eventually, solo them.
#82 Aug 12 2014 at 12:55 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
Avatar
*****
11,159 posts
When it came to Abyssea clears and such, it stood out as a strong example of the less exclusive you make something, the more generous people will be about sharing it. Assuming an alliance wasn't full, inviting someone for a clear or atma took nothing from the others participating. Hell, the fact many drops were on the more reliable side also made PUGing more friendly. Applying the sentiment the content was faceroll is perhaps a bit of a red herring here, as even moderately difficult stuff would still be undertaken regularly if the logistics of it all aren't terrible.

It's kind of sad seeing people pine over wanting more community-building in more recent MMOs, but rail against propositions to better facilitate that. I'm not talking about enforced grouping or server-only activities, but more the premise of making it easier for people to come together and progress doing the things they like doing. Some have perverted the concept of community into all that matters being their guild/linkshell and its successes. That's just secularizing and ultimately excluding others not part of the group. Having different paths to the same destinations, however, will get those who like doing their own thing(s) interacting with like minds while also providing the potential to branch out into other aspects of content more reliably. "Raid or die!" might not have been so much of a thing in XI, but it's there in XIV and has certainly been the misguided focus of other MMOs.
____________________________
Violence good. Sexy bad. Yay America.
#83 Aug 12 2014 at 1:57 PM Rating: Excellent
Sage
****
4,281 posts
That's one reason that the trend toward 6-man content only is troubling. It's far more difficult to be inclusive when you only have 6 PT slots and chances are 2 of them are already BRD and WHM.

Even something like Delve that was alliance content is now essentially PT content where you get penalized for bringing people along. And don't get me started on the drastic capacity point reductions you get from partying up, forcing you to either make a full 6-man gates PT or solo with trusts with no in-between.
____________________________
Philemon on Valefor
Gjallarhorn 4/17/08
Daurdabla 5/9/11
Carnwenhan 5/4/12
Ryunohige 10/29/12
#84 Aug 12 2014 at 3:02 PM Rating: Decent
**
826 posts
One thing I forgot to add in my post a few days ago. I prefer the stream of content updates that XI has as of the past couple of years, versus the trickle that's XIV. Three to four months between content updates is simply too slow. It feels like the lean WoTG XI years.
#85Almalieque, Posted: Aug 12 2014 at 4:31 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) You never addressed the point that a level 75 wouldn't invite a level 30 just to breeze through the first bosses, knowing that the next boss would be much more difficult. Given the fact that they would be auto-attack easy, the group would be essentially forming to fight the harder bosses. People would probably low man/solo the first bosses.
#86 Aug 12 2014 at 4:35 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
I will admit that Abyssea was much more user friendly than the other expansions. At the same time, it also went from "invite everyone!" to "only BLM/BRD, NIN, WHM, WAR" to "who cares".
#87 Aug 12 2014 at 4:50 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,441 posts
Quote:
This is the problem when you're stuck in a max/min mentality. The point of the SATA partner is to simply take the damage temporarily until the tank provokes it off of you. There is no need for provoke, /war or any of that other stuff you say. Just buff up, take the hits and the tank provokes shortly after. If you can't survive getting hit as a RDM for a few seconds, then you suck as a RDM.


Protip: Tanking involves holding hate. How, again, were you holding hate as a RDM? With your lolsword? The first swing by any full DPS class would easily rip the mob off of you. Or were you expecting everybody stands there with their weapons sheathed before SATA goes off? And that would make it impossible to SATA+WS+SC; as someone would have to WS before SATA. I suppose the RDM could do it, but only if you had TP at the start of the fight. That's why SATA partners usually used Provoke; they'd voke the mob to keep it on them even during the first weaponskill. Then the THF used his SATA+WS and closed the skillchain.

I suppose you could have the real tank voke first, but depending on what kinda mobs you were fighting, this was usually a bad idea as some mobs get nasty in the last half of their health. You probably want the real tank doing his job by then, so having the real tank voke first wasn't all that great of a SATA strategy.

Quote:
Actually, it's quite the opposite. Because you're so limited, you had to think outside the box and rely on strategy, not just your abilities. That's what made it so hard. That's why people preferred SMN, because it allowed you to rely on an ability.


Without abilities and spells you have what, again? Auto-attack? lol. What "Strategy" and "Outside the Box" are you implying you used when a BLM only has Thunder, the highest-damage weaponskill around at Lv30 was Sturmwind followed closely by Tachi:Enpi, or maybe SATA+Viper Bite. Outside of that... nobody could do any damage at Lv30 whatsoever.... except RNGs (gee, I wonder if that's why everybody wanted one... that and Widescan for finding the next level portals) and.... you guessed it...SMNs.

Everybody else had to tickle the boss to death because you had no good weaponskills or effective spells, nor job abilities to enhance these things.

Very Few Abilities = Very few choices in what you can actually use other than auto-attack = Little to no "Strategy" involved.

Edited, Aug 12th 2014 6:51pm by Lyrailis
#88 Aug 12 2014 at 6:44 PM Rating: Default
***
1,372 posts
I didn't bother reading a lot of the passed several posts admittedly. But the difficulty served the same purpose as arbitrary wait times and point limits serve: to stretch content. So no, they weren't going to ever consider making it a level 30 mob that level 75s could slaughter if they wanted to. The best you could've hope for is the Assault-like way of doing things and offer multiple potential caps. But then that experiment didn't work out because no one did them but 75s.

I'm not going to bother going into the in-depth pros/cons to each, because I really don't care enough to do so. But my personal preference is difficulty due to varying experiences, as well as just being more rewarding when you finally overcome the challenge. Difficult is really just my taste for games in general though, so yeah.

And just to cherry-pick this quote:
Quote:
Very Few Abilities = Very few choices in what you can actually use other than auto-attack = Little to no "Strategy" involved.

Strategy, in general(not just for MMOs), is about adapting to having things taken away from you(and/or taking things away from the enemy. This part is slightly irrelevant to MMOs. Although the weakening items for Promys would be an example of it), whether due to an advantage for the enemy or a deficit on your part. Without anything being taken away, it's just a "zerg" at that point and thus no/little strategy. Hence why XIV, despite having a **** ton of abilities, every fight pretty much plays out the same. They don't want to take anything away for fear of alienating specific jobs. I believe Yoshida explicitly said this before actually. Even just things like making enemies do attacks in a predictable pattern serve to remove strategy as you no longer need to adapt and instead just need to anticipate.

Now how to overcome that without alienating jobs is actually kind of simple. Design 2(or more) separate battlefields with specific jobs in mind that only drop items for those jobs. For example, for Titan Super Ultra: Arcade Edition Alpha 2014 Edition mode, they might make him do only heavy single-target damage and breath attacks, with maybe only the occasional radial AoE to keep people on their guard. If the game is still like it was a year ago, such a battle would be good for Melees, PLD and maybe SCH. PLD was better at dissipating damage, and SCH can help with that with it's stoneskin cures. So it would drop PLD, SCH, MNK, DRG, and soon NIN gear.

Then for Ifrit SU:AEA2014E, they'd make him low-moderate-ish damage AoE happy. Maybe make him weak to that curing/draining WAR ability so it would cure the WAR for more. BLM, SMN and BRD would be good for their ranged damage, etc. Basically asymmetrical balance, as opposed to trying to create a true balance.

Then they would just need to not be blatant about their intentions, by saying X job should do Y battle. Let the players naturally congregate to their correct BCs as they would, and the feeling of strategy would return to MMOs. As well as difficulty, as fellow masochists could also try to convince their friends to do the 'incorrect' BC for the **** and giggles of it. And in such a case, maybe adding the 'incorrect' jobs drops to the pool would be a good idea. EDIT: By this I mean, running a job check at the start of the battlefield and adding any jobs that are there, but typically don't have their drops from that battlefield, to the potential drop pool.

Mixing things up from those 2 templates would also be important but no need to get into that. lol.

Edited, Aug 12th 2014 8:48pm by valid
#89Almalieque, Posted: Aug 12 2014 at 9:42 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) So I guess you finally admit that a level 75 wouldn't invite a level 30 to auto-attack a boss just to replace them minutes later to fight a stronger boss.
#90 Aug 12 2014 at 10:49 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,339 posts
Almalieque wrote:
And to answer your question, healing yourself while you get hit generates a lot of hate.


Yeah, no.

You *clearly* don't know what you're talking about.

CE decay when getting hit during the pre-Abyssea era would like a word with your "healing yourself while getting face smashed = lots of hate!" theory. It'll meet that theory in a dark alley and grind it into the false pulp it is.

Hint: There's a reason people went NIN/DRK, NIN/WAR, or PLD/NIN to endgame in that era and it wasn't really the "Shadow eats a hit" either.

valid wrote:
I didn't bother reading a lot of the passed several posts admittedly.


Really? I couldn't tell.

You also posted a giant diatribe of meandering lunacy on what constitutes "strategy" in your eyes (which sounds like more of the anti-FFXIV's "I can't do it, therefore it has no strategy and sucks" attitude I see).

And then you want on to state that FFXIV should adopt the same idea that FFXI RoZ/CoP era did where "Must have X jobs to do Y content or GTFO" because that worked so amazingly well before for player retention, didn't it!? Yes, because that's exactly what we need: another MMO with directors that decide to put in random content designed around obscure setups and the difference between "right setup is easy breezy" and "whatever we have results in a massive repair bill/delevels even with sinking tons of money into food and meds" is such a large gap it isn't moronic.

Smiley: rolleyes

No, it doesn't. That's absolutely effing retarded to suggest bringing that back. You may as well re-hire Tanaka at that point and make the stupidity complete.

Edited, Aug 13th 2014 12:58am by Viertel
#91 Aug 12 2014 at 11:38 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Viertel wrote:
Yeah, no.

You *clearly* don't know what you're talking about.

CE decay when getting hit during the pre-Abyssea era would like a word with your "healing yourself while getting face smashed = lots of hate!" theory. It'll meet that theory in a dark alley and grind it into the false pulp it is.


Almalieque in the following sentence wrote:
. None of that matters, because your role is to assist with SATA since the mob is facing the tank.


*clearly* you have no idea what you're talking about. My goal was to never *hold* hate, because that wasn't my job. However, I do know curing yourself while having hate doesn't lessen the hate either. The role of a SATA partner is to temporarily be the punching bag. I apologize if for some reason you thought I was proposing cure bombing to maintain the hate. I stated in the previous sentence that SATA itself, by design, is the hate tool. You throwing in a couple of cures (if necessary) after getting hate will indeed keep the mob on you for additional hit or two. Will it out due an enmity + PLD flash/provoke? Of course not, nor was it intended to, because again that isn't my job.
#92 Aug 13 2014 at 9:44 AM Rating: Excellent
***
3,441 posts
Quote:
If the first attack took hate away, then why bother having a "SATA" Partner? You've created a fantasy scenario. The intended effect of SATA is to transfer the hate, so you have hate by default. You don't need to *hold* hate, because your job is to be the temporary punching bag. And to answer your question, healing yourself while you get hit generates a lot of hate. None of that matters, because your role is to assist with SATA since the mob is facing the tank. If the DRK took hate with a single hit, then I still did my job, because the tank is still there to take hate back.


Quote:
*clearly* you have no idea what you're talking about. My goal was to never *hold* hate, because that wasn't my job. However, I do know curing yourself while having hate doesn't lessen the hate either. The role of a SATA partner is to temporarily be the punching bag. I apologize if for some reason you thought I was proposing cure bombing to maintain the hate. I stated in the previous sentence that SATA itself, by design, is the hate tool. You throwing in a couple of cures (if necessary) after getting hate will indeed keep the mob on you for additional hit or two. Will it out due an enmity + PLD flash/provoke? Of course not, nor was it intended to, because again that isn't my job.


Whaaaaaaaaat?

lol.

Okay, dude, you're off your rocker.

I'm sorry, but you are.

Here's a scenario, that I've actually seen in the past (I actually leveled THF myself, back in the day, before ToAU):

1). I (THF) Pull
2). The "SATA Partner" without Provoke does something to the mob (RDM with Dia, for example since you mentioned RDM).
3). Everybody draws their weapons, the real tank gets behind the mob.
4). The First time any other melee hits the mob, the mob immediately turns to them because back then, lolsword did pathetic damage.
5). Mob turns towards that guy, the tank has to reposition behind the mob again.
6). The opening WS is used, the mob might turn AGAIN. Tank has to reposition again.
7). SATA is used and finally hate stabilizes.

Now, if your SATA partner had provoke...

1). I pull.
2). SATA partner Provokes. Mob stays on him for a little while.
3). Opening WS is used.
4). I SATA+WS to close the skillchain.
5). Real tank Provokes, mob stays on him the rest of the fight.
6). Mob is three-quarters dead by the time the BLM's spell lands assuming we had a BLM.

If the SATA partner cannot hold hate long enough for SATA to go off, then the tank and I were dancing around, and sometimes I'd SATA and hit my WS macro only for the mob to turn at that exact second and mess the whole thing up.

SATA did not work period if the person who's supposed to be the temporary "tank" cannot hold hate until the SATA+WS goes off and RDM had no tools to do this whatsoever beyond Curebombing (which didn't work all that well) or their piddly "nukes", especially at low-level both of which sucked up MP like crazy.

Edited, Aug 13th 2014 11:52am by Lyrailis
#93 Aug 13 2014 at 11:27 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
*****
12,820 posts
Quote:
SATA did not work period if the person who's supposed to be the temporary "tank" cannot hold hate until the SATA+WS goes off and RDM had no tools to do this whatsoever beyond Curebombing (which didn't work all that well) or their piddly "nukes", especially at low-level both of which sucked up MP like crazy.


Depends on the period you played. RDM (and BRD) both were popular 'temporary tanks' because the song and sleep II enmity generation were through the roof until SE fixed it. I'm...thinking you're referring to very early in the 75 cap days because otherwise..RDM had way more ways to gain and keep hate...even then the early days of RDM were generally RDM/DRK, and we all know how much hate stun generated for a time, too.
____________________________

#94 Aug 13 2014 at 12:27 PM Rating: Good
***
3,441 posts
Quote:

Depends on the period you played. RDM (and BRD) both were popular 'temporary tanks' because the song and sleep II enmity generation were through the roof until SE fixed it. I'm...thinking you're referring to very early in the 75 cap days because otherwise..RDM had way more ways to gain and keep hate...even then the early days of RDM were generally RDM/DRK, and we all know how much hate stun generated for a time, too.


Later levels that might be true, but I was talking about my experiences Lv30-50ish.

Once I got around Lv50 on my THF, finding groups was hard as balls because nobody wanted a THF anymore, about the time TPburns started being a thing, when you just found something squishy and pounded it to death with melee.

30-50, RDM didn't have Sleep II (at least until 46) or Stun as /drk, and I think this was after BRD songs were fixed because I don't remember songs ever pulling hate. I eventually got lucky and grabbed a few levels with my linkshell, a couple people grouping up, and then to get to 75, I knew a friend who played a NIN and we leveled together and I eventually got it to the high 60s, and then Level Sync came out, and I wound up finishing it helping family member level low-level jobs.

Edited, Aug 13th 2014 2:28pm by Lyrailis
#95 Aug 13 2014 at 3:11 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Lyrailis wrote:
1). I (THF) Pull


When you live in a bubble and fail to think outside the box, you fail to realize that every scenario isn't the same. Obviously, the scenario that I'm describing is not on a pull. Not every SATA was on pull. Even if it were, let me rephrase the scenario.

1. Thf pull
2. Tank provoke
3. THF positions behind SATA partner
4. THF SATA
5. SATA partner keeps hate? Maybe, it doesn't matter. Worst case scenario, the mob goes back to tank.. wow free provoke. The less you keep hate (as A RDM), the less mp is consumed.
6. Tank provoke.(if timer is up. If not, look at 5)

Seriously dude, it's not that hard. You're living in a bubble where everything has to be the same way. That's why you can't comprehend the differences. In that scenario, I DO NOT NEED TO HOLD HATE. I wouldn't propose doing this on pull because you would have to wait for the tanks timers to refresh, hence why your method has a second provoke. The point being, it's not necessary to accomplish the same result.

Lyrailis wrote:
SATA did not work period if the person who's supposed to be the temporary "tank" cannot hold hate until the SATA+WS goes off
Exactly, read above.

#96 Aug 13 2014 at 4:05 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,372 posts
Quote:
Really? I couldn't tell.

You also posted a giant diatribe of meandering lunacy on what constitutes "strategy" in your eyes (which sounds like more of the anti-FFXIV's "I can't do it, therefore it has no strategy and sucks" attitude I see).

And then you want on to state that FFXIV should adopt the same idea that FFXI RoZ/CoP era did where "Must have X jobs to do Y content or GTFO" because that worked so amazingly well before for player retention, didn't it!? Yes, because that's exactly what we need: another MMO with directors that decide to put in random content designed around obscure setups and the difference between "right setup is easy breezy" and "whatever we have results in a massive repair bill/delevels even with sinking tons of money into food and meds" is such a large gap it isn't moronic.

Smiley: rolleyes

No, it doesn't. That's absolutely effing retarded to suggest bringing that back. You may as well re-hire Tanaka at that point and make the stupidity complete.

Edited, Aug 13th 2014 12:58am by Viertel


Such needless aggression. I'm guessing to compensate for your lack of an argument and more so reading comprehension?

I didn't describe strategy 'in my eyes', I defined it for you. Again, that definition applies not just to MMOs. A real life example off the top of my head: Enemy of the state X was sighted in desolate area Y. Leadership replies: Okay, kill him. Done. The Army(or whoever) just 'zerged' the enemy. Okay, but instead let's say he was spotted in heavily-populated area Z. All the sudden civilian casualties and panic become a risk. They now need to form a strategy around that to prevent those casualties. By being in a heavily populated area, the enemy removed the 'zerg' strategy away from them and that forces them to come up with a strategy of their own to counter it. I could go on and on and on if you need me to. Strategy is about having strengths and weaknesses, exploiting your enemy's weaknesses, compensating for yours, weakening your enemy's strengths, exploiting your strengths and preventing and/or reacting to your enemy trying to do the same. Without strengths or weaknesses, there is no strategy.

You clearly didn't read what I proposed if you're comparing it to Tanaka. Read before replying next time. Hint: I'm proposing 2 separate but equal battlefields designed for jobs specifically in mind that only drop the items for said jobs. So for example a DRG or MNK or other non-ranged DD would have no reason to even do the ranged DD battlefield besides just wanting to. It's effectively alienating no one while still having a semblance of strategy, and difficulty for masochists who choose to do the 'wrong' battlefield.

Edited, Aug 13th 2014 6:19pm by valid
#97 Aug 13 2014 at 6:41 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,441 posts
Quote:
When you live in a bubble and fail to think outside the box, you fail to realize that every scenario isn't the same. Obviously, the scenario that I'm describing is not on a pull. Not every SATA was on pull. Even if it were, let me rephrase the scenario.

1. Thf pull
2. Tank provoke
3. THF positions behind SATA partner
4. THF SATA
5. SATA partner keeps hate? Maybe, it doesn't matter. Worst case scenario, the mob goes back to tank.. wow free provoke. The less you keep hate (as A RDM), the less mp is consumed.
6. Tank provoke.(if timer is up. If not, look at 5)

Seriously dude, it's not that hard. You're living in a bubble where everything has to be the same way. That's why you can't comprehend the differences. In that scenario, I DO NOT NEED TO HOLD HATE. I wouldn't propose doing this on pull because you would have to wait for the tanks timers to refresh, hence why your method has a second provoke. The point being, it's not necessary to accomplish the same result.


Oh, yes, THAT kind of SATA. lol.

Okay, in THAT Scenario, the RDM is gobbling the healers' (and their own) MP like crazy because I don't care how awesome the RDM thinks he is with the scale mail (or whatever armor you got at that point) + wooden round shield, you're not a Paladin and you certainly aren't a Ninja.

I've seen those kinds of groups too, and the WHM was usually kneeling every other battle because of curebombing the SATA partner.

SATA+WS will almost assuredly make the SATA partner get lots of hate, enough to pull the mob for several seconds, even when the tank is a PLD.

God Forbid the tank is a NIN and you tried that, the SATA partner wound up with the mob the rest of the fight. Why do you think that most people wanted to do SATA using the method I mentioned? Quite simple: It involves dumping all the hate on the REAL tank, not the SATA Partner.

And if you're a RDM and you're trying to "tank" a mob, that means your casts are getting interrupted, you're not able to do your actual job that you were invited for if you keep getting interrupted. Also if you're getting hit, that probably means you're not using a staff (which means resisted enfeebles most likely), etc etc etc.

Using a RDM to dump hate on, is not a very good solution, hence why most people didn't do it that often unless they really had no other options. SATA was best with a WAR/NIN, sometimes a SAM/NIN (/WAR worked too; Third Eye was actually useful).

With those jobs... you'd have the first voke, you SATA'd on the pull, and the REAL tank had the mob the whole fight.

It just plain worked, and worked far better than your strategy.
#98 Aug 13 2014 at 8:44 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Lyrailis wrote:
I don't care how awesome the RDM thinks he is with the scale mail (or whatever armor you got at that point) + wooden round shield, you're not a Paladin and you certainly aren't a Ninja.


That's kind of the point. For some reason, you have a hard time grasping the fact that my role is not to hold hate or tank, just assist with the THF. You can't argue on one end that I'm unable to hold hate, then on the other end that I would gobble away all of the mp for having too much hate. Which one is it? It can't be both.

I wont gobble away MP, because the THF would be smart enough to SATA when the PLD's timers are up.

Lyrailis wrote:

I've seen those kinds of groups too, and the WHM was usually kneeling every other battle because of curebombing the SATA partner.

Read above. It can't be both. Either the person is holding hate or not. Can't lose hate and some how magically need to be cure bombed. Besides, if you're in a party with a RDM and WHM, there is absolutely no problem with MP.
Lyrailis wrote:
SATA+WS will almost assuredly make the SATA partner get lots of hate, enough to pull the mob for several seconds, even when the tank is a PLD.
So, you now agree that SATA would transfer the hate.

Lyrailis wrote:
God Forbid the tank is a NIN and you tried that, the SATA partner wound up with the mob the rest of the fight. Why do you think that most people wanted to do SATA using the method I mentioned? Quite simple: It involves dumping all the hate on the REAL tank, not the SATA Partner.
No, it's called adapting the strategy to the party. Something that close minded people have a problem with. If the tank is unable to hold hate, then you should either reconsider the tank or change the execution of SATA. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A ONE SIZE FITS ALL. There is nothing wrong with your method, the point being is that if the dynamics of the party changes, you should adjust your strategy, not decide to not invite 30+ THFs.

Lyrailis wrote:
And if you're a RDM and you're trying to "tank" a mob, that means your casts are getting interrupted, you're not able to do your actual job that you were invited for if you keep getting interrupted. Also if you're getting hit, that probably means you're not using a staff (which means resisted enfeebles most likely), etc etc etc.

Is this 2004? I'm not trying to tank anything. Why is this so hard for you to comprehend? All I'm doing is standing behind a mob and taking damage. Do you forget about stone skin? Chances are that I'm being invited just to cure. What enfeebles? Slow, dia and paralyze? They aren't getting interrupted. There is almost no difference between a RDM slow, dia and paralyze from any other job at level 30. At this point, you're just making up stuff to avoid admitting that you're wrong like with inviting level 30s to uncapped fights.

Lyrailis wrote:
Using a RDM to dump hate on, is not a very good solution, hence why most people didn't do it that often unless they really had no other options. SATA was best with a WAR/NIN, sometimes a SAM/NIN (/WAR worked too; Third Eye was actually useful).

With those jobs... you'd have the first voke, you SATA'd on the pull, and the REAL tank had the mob the whole fight.

It just plain worked, and worked far better than your strategy.


Do you even remember the topic at hand? I never argued that it was better. You said the following

Another good example of group synergy (and how it caused pain in some peoples' in-game lives): THF. You almost never invited a 30+ THF into the group unless you had two people with Provoke

My counter is that there is no reason NOT to invite a 30+ THF just because you don't have a second provoke, because you can get the same result without one. My argument wasn't to charge the RDM to be in that role, but that you could adapt and give the role to the RDM since that job is suited to solo.
#99 Aug 13 2014 at 8:56 PM Rating: Good
***
3,441 posts
Okay, so now you're twisting my words.

When I said "RDM couldn't hold hate", I said that to explain why RDM should not attempt to hold the mob BEFORE SATA. You're trying to take that, and apply it to RDM getting hate AFTER SATA. You can't do that, dude. That's called "twisting words".

Yes, SATA transfers hate, durrrrrrrr.

Where the h*ll did I say it didn't?

When you SATA'd, you wanted to SATA ONTO THE REAL TANK, because if you SATA'd onto somebody else, that person is going to get a can of whup-azz from the mob. Everybody knew this.

"Wait until the PLD's timers are up"? What you mean that 10min Recast on Shield Bash/Sentinel? lol. Here's a clue for you: SATA Viper Bite + Distortion is more hate than a Provoke. True story, in case you forgot. PLD has Cover, but if I remember right.... 5-10min cooldown and it only lasts for what, 10 seconds or some-such? Something like that? There's Flash, and that might help him live a few seconds more, sure. Otherwise it is Cure-Bomb all the way or he dies.

Edited, Aug 13th 2014 10:59pm by Lyrailis
#100 Aug 13 2014 at 9:35 PM Rating: Good
****
4,447 posts
To whoever is claiming that the old SATA using a 2nd provoke target method of play didn't suck up healer mp, you're an idiot. Not only did it suck up healer mana, it would occasionally get the healer hate, messing everything up. It was nearly as counterproductive as it was productive. Which is why the population moved away from thieves.
#101 Aug 13 2014 at 10:02 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,441 posts
SirEaglestrike wrote:
To whoever is claiming that the old SATA using a 2nd provoke target method of play didn't suck up healer mp, you're an idiot. Not only did it suck up healer mana, it would occasionally get the healer hate, messing everything up. It was nearly as counterproductive as it was productive. Which is why the population moved away from thieves.


Depends on who the first voke was.

WAR/NIN? lol. That used Healer MP? Hardly. WAR/NIN vokes, WS is used, then SATA+WS and the mob is on the real tank before the 2nd Utsusemi wears off in most cases. If not, that's what Flash was for.

I've been in a Lot of successful groups as a THF when we had a *proper* first voke. Sometimes we used two NINs, sometimes a NIN+WAR/NIN, and sometimes PLD+WAR/NIN. They all worked pretty well if you actually did it well. Add a BLM, and a Healer, and you got some pretty decent XP/hr (for the standards back then) with very little fuss.

Now.... there were lots of people who didn't have any sort of damage mitigation thinking they could first-voke and "tank" the mob, sure. You had those occasional idiots. I remember when I first got my THF to around 30, people Knew how to First Voke, people had Shihei and carried it with them, but around the time I got to Lv50 or so, the quality of players LFG started to fall and that's about the time THF became less popular. I think it was more the idiots who didn't know how to do it right. You probably ran into a lot of the latter to say that.

I do remember seeing a couple WAR/NINs with either no Shihei or no Utsusemi. lol. They didn't last long; they were soon kicked from the group.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 213 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (213)