Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

How will SE address hunts in this coming maintenance?Follow

#127 Jul 31 2014 at 9:10 PM Rating: Good
****
4,175 posts
Susanoh wrote:
Tacking on grouping requirements to content that doesn't call for it is the laziest form of grouping design that I can think of. Can you imagine if they decided to tack this on to other activities just because it enforces grouping?


I agree, but only partially. You can't have open world content without grouping unless you provide an alternate way to obtain the rewards. FFXI allowed players to solo NMs for drops or find those drops in BCNM chests. A good example of how content could be made for both solo and group play. I already mentioned WoW and RIFT systems for scaling open world content and facilitating grouping. XIV could do any of the three and this even would be well received. It's just a matter of them actually realizing that there is a problem, identifying it and implementing adjustments and/or additions to make the necessary changes.

Hunts aren't a complete waste. It's just a potentially good idea that was poorly executed.
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#128 Jul 31 2014 at 10:17 PM Rating: Good
**
342 posts
I'm glad some people get it. Some great points have been made here.

Thayos wrote:
Quote:
Because it's not real party content, it's just restrictions to try and mold it into party content.


That's part of what design is.

The A and S ranks were designed from the ground-up to be party content. While it may seem arbitrary to you, SE clearly wants us forming parties and being a community out in the open world. That, too, is part of the hunt system's design.

Edited, Jul 31st 2014 5:27pm by Thayos


Hmm. I could've swore that A ranks were designed from the ground up to be killed by you and one other companion, not a party of 8.

Even taken the HP update into account, it's still not designed for party play. Take a Little Ladybug and multiply it's HP by a million - does that instantly make it designed to be tackled by parties? No. Making something survive longer =/= making something equipped to deal with parties.

Edited, Aug 1st 2014 12:21am by Raylo
#129 Jul 31 2014 at 10:22 PM Rating: Good
**
342 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:

Hunts aren't a complete waste. It's just a potentially good idea that was poorly executed.


I agree with this statement 100%. I don't hate the idea, I hate the horrible implementation of that idea.

Edited, Aug 1st 2014 12:22am by Raylo
#130 Jul 31 2014 at 11:38 PM Rating: Excellent
Just to clear up potential misinformation: http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/71744-NA-FINAL-FANTASY-XIV-A-Realm-Reborn-Hotfixes-%28Jul.-15%29?p=2267548&viewfull=1#post2267548
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#131 Aug 01 2014 at 12:46 AM Rating: Excellent
Jack of All Trades
******
29,633 posts
Quote:
Tacking on grouping requirements to content that doesn't call for it is the laziest form of grouping design that I can think of. Can you imagine if they decided to tack this on to other activities just because it enforces grouping?

You no longer receive drops from open world mobs unless you're in a party.
You can no longer craft HQ items unless you're in a party.
You barely receive any items from gathering in the open world unless you're in a party.

All of these would force people to group together, but it wouldn't make any sense why it's required. It would just be tacked on to get people grouping with no valid reasoning as to why it's there (unless you count "you have to group up because you have to group up" as reasoning). Real party content doesn't need mechanics forcing you into grouping by stripping you of rewards if you don't conform, because real party content will kick your butt if you decide to just charge in and go it alone. I wouldn't mind if hunts actually required a party. In fact, I'd prefer it. A somewhat challenging and rewarding fight for a couple friends and I to go and track down and defeat, that would be just fine. What hunts actually are (an open world zerg that a horde can blast through in seconds by mashing buttons, but you can only get rewards if you're in a group even though you can mash buttons just as easily whether you're solo or in a group) is just silly. It's a mess, and I'm not the only one who thinks so.


Hallelujah, someone that gets it
#132 Aug 01 2014 at 6:36 AM Rating: Excellent
This is a funny discussion. I like to find a party because more people looking for mobs and more people with Hunt Linkshells means finding more mobs. Also it's more fun to have people to goof around with and I get more satisfaction when I find a mob because I just helped my party as well.

You know what I don't need? Participation on every mob that pops in Eorzea. I get about 90% of the A and S mobs with an active party and those rewards are worth the time.

Now when the population is so large the mob is blinking in and out, that needs to be addressed still.
#133 Aug 01 2014 at 7:06 AM Rating: Good
***
1,079 posts
Ya'll so silly.

Arguing back and forth about something that just is. Clearly the solo part is not in the big name hunts. It's from the hunting board.

They need to improve the rewards from the hunting board to be a little less rewarding than the big parties. (Ex. complete all dailies and challenge log rewards you 50 allied seals.) Rather than it being 1% of what you can possibly do in a party.

Obviously, there needs to be adjustments to suit everyone. But I think this type of content is here to stay. It's like arguing that dungeons don't let you solo them. Or bring 5 people. But we have leves and etc to gain exp elsewhere.

Edited, Aug 1st 2014 9:06am by Stilivan
____________________________
FFXIV
Articus Vladmir
PLD WHM BRD DRG BLM
#134 Aug 01 2014 at 9:21 AM Rating: Decent
**
972 posts
Thayos wrote:
Quote:
I'm still waiting to here some explanation of why being in a party as opposed to being solo is how it's meant to played outside of the fact it magically gives you 10-20x more credit for it, but whatever, it's not coming.


I've already answered this, but I will again.

The content is designed for party play. The logical assumption about greater rewards for parties is that, because the content was designed for parties, the developers wanted to encourage people to form parties. Seems to be a pretty simple assumption, don't you think?

The problem that we can all agree on is there are too many parties participating in the content, making the NMs too easy.

That said, this content is not designed for solo play. Even if there were fewer parties participating, it would still not be designed for solo play, unless SE reverted B ranks back to how they were at the patch... at which point, only B ranks would be designed for solo play.

No matter what you think or what you're hoping for, the likelihood is that A and S rank NMs will never be designed for solo play.

EDIT: Raylo, what you should be arguing for is an entirely new system that's just meant for soloing. Sometimes, that sounds like that's what you want... but other times, you sound as if you're expecting to be able to brute-force full-credit rewards from content that's not meant for soloing, and that's where the problem is.

Edited, Jul 31st 2014 3:29pm by Thayos

Rather than just a hotfix, hunts could also get additions. The problem here is open world content with no claiming system and no monster scaling. There is no way to control how many players attack a certain monster. This is evident in this thread by players still saying hunts are a joke difficulty wise.

Want hunts to offer something for soloers or light party?
1.Add regular monsters all over the world to kill and earn hunt points.
2.Make the monsters only offer points to light parties or less.
3.The monster target list comes in sets similar to a hunting log, when the set is killed a properly tuned specific B or A rank notorious monster is spawnable, claimed. It can drop a sand.

But it's not fair to people who like forming zerg legions? Well the current form isn't fair to other groups of play styles. And the current form isn't satisfying some anyways.





Want sands or hunt seals to drop in other game areas like frontlines?
1.Add a monster rancher feature to frontlines where groups can use one notorious monster each against the opposing faction.
2.Killing the notorious monster can award a sand.

Want to make it even cooler? Allow one member to play as that notorious monster per team. To keep the action/reaction pvp-esque or unpredictable.

#135 Aug 01 2014 at 9:39 AM Rating: Excellent
Gah, I keep getting pulled into this!

Sandpark, just wanted to say you make great points. Only thing I want to contribute is about this:

Quote:
But it's not fair to people who like forming zerg legions? Well the current form isn't fair to other groups of play styles. And the current form isn't satisfying some anyways.


I don't think anyone wants to form zerg legions. The many hunt parties that form "the horde" are just as bothered by disappearing mobs, way-too-early pulls and how quickly the mobs die.

I really like your suggestions of adding content for soloers and small groups while the hunt NMs we have now remain for full parties and multiple parties. I still think the system needs a cap on weekly seals, but your suggestion would ease the tension between soloers vs. people who prefer parties.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#136 Aug 01 2014 at 9:55 AM Rating: Good
**
972 posts
You keep getting pulled into it because you love your job here, it inspires you! Smiley: yippee

You are right. No one wants to form zerg legions. I think they just want more challenge and thought to be required when engaging stuff. Whether it's solo, light party, full party, alliance, or server fight.

Edited, Aug 1st 2014 11:55am by sandpark
#137 Aug 01 2014 at 9:56 AM Rating: Excellent
**
342 posts
Thayos wrote:
Just to clear up potential misinformation: http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/71744-NA-FINAL-FANTASY-XIV-A-Realm-Reborn-Hotfixes-%28Jul.-15%29?p=2267548&viewfull=1#post2267548


That's not really the same as something being designed from the ground up, is it? That's putting a band-aid on the problem. The mobs were designed from the ground up to face individuals (B ranks) pairs (A ranks) or parties of 8 (S Ranks). Increasing their HP doesn't change that at all.

Edited, Aug 1st 2014 11:57am by Raylo
#138 Aug 01 2014 at 10:10 AM Rating: Excellent
**
972 posts
Raylo wrote:
Thayos wrote:
Just to clear up potential misinformation: http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/71744-NA-FINAL-FANTASY-XIV-A-Realm-Reborn-Hotfixes-%28Jul.-15%29?p=2267548&viewfull=1#post2267548


That's not really the same as something being designed from the ground up, is it? That's putting a band-aid on the problem. The mobs were designed from the ground up to face individuals (B ranks) pairs (A ranks) or parties of 8 (S Ranks). Increasing their HP doesn't change that at all.

Edited, Aug 1st 2014 11:57am by Raylo

I agree with much of the points you are trying to make. Imo Thayos isn't necessarily in disagreement with you. He was just stating that the current build's intention is parties and it needed work. It's Square's job to tune it properly or ignore it.
#139 Aug 01 2014 at 11:18 AM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
I agree with much of the points you are trying to make. Imo Thayos isn't necessarily in disagreement with you. He was just stating that the current build's intention is parties and it needed work. It's Square's job to tune it properly or ignore it.


Yep.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#140 Aug 01 2014 at 11:58 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
****
4,780 posts
The problem is, while it's built for parties, the interest completely floods out the intended target participation by at least a factor of eight even for S ranks.

The hunt bills (Elite ones), had they functioned like Leves and provided better rewards would really stemmed a lot of this flooding problem, leaving those who wanted to push hunts continually with less pressure upon them.

But again, the base dichotomy between uncapped sands and oils vs the loot lock on CT and outright Participation lock on Coil, really is a very stark, very awkward difference that presents little balance. Preferably, I'd ask for them to remove the loot/participation lock and let players play at their own pacing, but I know from a development standpoint that causes quick burnout of content.

Which is why uncapped Sands and Oils confuses me.
#141 Aug 01 2014 at 11:10 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
Avatar
*****
11,159 posts
Hyrist wrote:
Which is why uncapped Sands and Oils confuses me.

Maybe we could consider it an experiment to see if capping everything really is the best approach. I don't think it is, as the average player's pacing isn't going to be the breakneck speed that's commonly brought up in arguing against it. I'm also more inclined to claim that denying people of content is more likely to burn them out in knowing they can't do what they'd like to. Even in the niche case where someone might finish everything they want to do and unsub for a month or two, I also believe it's better for someone to leave a game on a positive note instead of a negative one.
____________________________
Violence good. Sexy bad. Yay America.
#142 Aug 02 2014 at 5:39 AM Rating: Excellent
****
4,175 posts
My gut read on this is that it's a 'catch-up' mechanic. This seems like the type of event that was installed so that players who quit prior to finishing up raid content can come back and quickly get back into the next content patch. It could also be for newer players wanting to get geared up enough to participate in endgame.

At some point in the update cycle the content becomes harder to participate in(based solely on player motivation). Interest in content always spikes when it's new and if enough people have run a raid enough times, the supply of players willing to run that content will start to drop off. Hunts are a way that players can catch up to similar gear levels without having to suffer due to lack of interest in aging raids.
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#143 Aug 02 2014 at 5:54 AM Rating: Excellent
***
1,079 posts
Progression is still at the pacing SE wants. In fact, it's probably quicker (theoretically) to gear someone through second coil than this. Remember oils and sands are for weathered gear which you buy with tomes. You really only get 1 piece each week. It's just by the time this patch came out a lot of us already had a full set. Perhaps when these people get 'caught up' there will be a potential drawback of interest as people won't be going to 110 9 slots.

Edited, Aug 2nd 2014 7:57am by Stilivan
____________________________
FFXIV
Articus Vladmir
PLD WHM BRD DRG BLM
#144 Aug 02 2014 at 3:01 PM Rating: Excellent
**
542 posts
Seriha wrote:
Maybe we could consider it an experiment to see if capping everything really is the best approach. I don't think it is, as the average player's pacing isn't going to be the breakneck speed that's commonly brought up in arguing against it. I'm also more inclined to claim that denying people of content is more likely to burn them out in knowing they can't do what they'd like to. Even in the niche case where someone might finish everything they want to do and unsub for a month or two, I also believe it's better for someone to leave a game on a positive note instead of a negative one.


I agree that there's a lot of merit to the concept of giving people methods of uncapped progress so that they can play how they like and enjoy the game without hitting a brick wall. But for that to happen, I think they'd need to have multiple forms of similar progress. Uncapped sands and oils in one form of content and either capped or non-existent in other content doesn't make it so you can keep doing the content that they enjoy doing and progressing your character. All that does is funnel players who want to keep progressing into that one uncapped source of progress.

I think extreme primals are a perfect example of content that remains uncapped but doesn't go ridiculously overboard by outclassing everything else. The reason being that they typically reward players with some nice stuff but you can't go maxing out your character by doing nothing but spamming that one piece of content. For example, Thornmarch dropped a very nice i100 neck piece, but it didn't drop i100 everything which would allow players to hit that level by doing nothing but Thornmarch. Add in some decently rare items and vanity stuff and you've got a proper reward setup that keeps people coming back without removing the incentive to do other content. Hunts are the complete opposite. Considering the time of its release as people have had months to collect nearly two full sets of tome gear, players can easily max out all their equipment doing hunts. It just seems like an odd balance when SE seems to take careful measure to ensure that players hit a wall in every other form of content but this one. If SE wants players to just catch up and have fun this patch, why are there so many restrictions on everything else in the game? On the other hand, if SE is trying to limit how quickly players can gear up to draw out content, then why are hunts so ridiculously rewarding and uncapped? The whole thing just seems poorly thought out, unless the plan was always to try and coax massive amounts of players into doing this one piece of content by handing out excessive and unlimited rewards, but I think there's a lot of people who'd agree that this does more harm to the game than good.

Edited, Aug 2nd 2014 5:06pm by Susanoh
#145 Aug 02 2014 at 10:20 PM Rating: Excellent
**
342 posts
Thought I'd share an experience I had tonight on here since it ties so closely to what we've been discussing. I was doing a treasure chest on the Isles of Umbra when I came across a hunt mark (Dark Helmet). Now I never actively seek out hunts and normally I'd just ignore it and go on my way, but I figured I'd give a /shout to alert everyone since it's so far out of the way. I /shouted the mark's name and position, then stood around because I figured I'd give it a shot since I was already there. A group of 6 or so players showed up, and in /say I asked for an invite to their party if they had room (and it sure looked like they did). I was met with silence, then their tank pulled. I went ahead, jumped in, and fought the mob until it's death all by my lonesome and was rewarded with... 1 allied seal. So much for the whole "it's so easy to just join in a party, people throw out invites like crazy" idea, and too bad I couldn't get full credit all by my lonesome despite trying my damnedest.

Does this mean all players in hunt parties are like this? No, but I don't think we should go to the other extreme and just assume that it's soooooo easy to always get an invite, either.

This system stinks.
#146 Aug 03 2014 at 2:41 AM Rating: Excellent
Guru
Avatar
*****
11,159 posts
Unfortunately, even if you only saw 6 there, it doesn't mean 2 weren't sitting elsewhere grabbing a sandwich or whatever.

I still say FATEs, and now Hunts, need a public party system implemented. Basically, if you're within range of that specific content, you can click a button to join up with others either solo or in incomplete public parties. No shouting involved, no waiting for someone to send you an invite, just a silent understanding that you're all there for a specific purpose and if you disband after the fact, so be it. Some might argue such isn't "community building" but I'm going to disagree. Sometimes said groups will stick together and people will randomly chatter. The content its available in also usually isn't so specific in its role requirements that you'd have people flipping out over a lack of healers, tanks, or general elitism.
____________________________
Violence good. Sexy bad. Yay America.
#147 Aug 03 2014 at 4:00 AM Rating: Excellent
****
4,175 posts
Seriha wrote:
I still say FATEs, and now Hunts, need a public party system implemented. Basically, if you're within range of that specific content, you can click a button to join up with others either solo or in incomplete public parties. No shouting involved, no waiting for someone to send you an invite, just a silent understanding that you're all there for a specific purpose and if you disband after the fact, so be it. Some might argue such isn't "community building" but I'm going to disagree.


I agree with your disagree.

XIV needs to make their rifts more like RIFT's rifts. Say what you want about that game, but there are reasons why(despite being tagged WoW clone) it's received awards for it's innovation in the MMO industry. SE needs to straight up hijack their auto-group feature.

There are ample opportunities for XIV to try to facilitate community, but open world content is not the place for it. Let everyone who wants to participate do so without feeling like they're a burden if they don't have an entire party of adventurers to bring to the picnic.
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#148 Aug 03 2014 at 9:05 AM Rating: Decent
Jack of All Trades
******
29,633 posts
Quote:
Thought I'd share an experience I had tonight on here since it ties so closely to what we've been discussing. I was doing a treasure chest on the Isles of Umbra when I came across a hunt mark (Dark Helmet). Now I never actively seek out hunts and normally I'd just ignore it and go on my way, but I figured I'd give a /shout to alert everyone since it's so far out of the way. I /shouted the mark's name and position, then stood around because I figured I'd give it a shot since I was already there. A group of 6 or so players showed up, and in /say I asked for an invite to their party if they had room (and it sure looked like they did). I was met with silence, then their tank pulled. I went ahead, jumped in, and fought the mob until it's death all by my lonesome and was rewarded with... 1 allied seal. So much for the whole "it's so easy to just join in a party, people throw out invites like crazy" idea, and too bad I couldn't get full credit all by my lonesome despite trying my damnedest.


Sounds like you were surrounded by ***holes

Edited, Aug 3rd 2014 11:06am by Fynlar
#149 Aug 03 2014 at 9:59 AM Rating: Default
**
972 posts
Seriha wrote:
Unfortunately, even if you only saw 6 there, it doesn't mean 2 weren't sitting elsewhere grabbing a sandwich or whatever.

I still say FATEs, and now Hunts, need a public party system implemented. Basically, if you're within range of that specific content, you can click a button to join up with others either solo or in incomplete public parties. No shouting involved, no waiting for someone to send you an invite, just a silent understanding that you're all there for a specific purpose and if you disband after the fact, so be it. Some might argue such isn't "community building" but I'm going to disagree. Sometimes said groups will stick together and people will randomly chatter. The content its available in also usually isn't so specific in its role requirements that you'd have people flipping out over a lack of healers, tanks, or general elitism.

Sounds good. Question: What makes a party public or private? Does this mean there is an option to block auto group? If that is the case. I don't know if Raylo would have got his full credit or party anyways. Fates are better implemented as far as rewards go because it doesn't care if you're in a party or not. While Hunts let you fight solo or in party. Hunts don't give you full credit when not grouped up. It's like a pseudo claim system. It might feel disheartening to not be able to fight something that is already claimed. It is downright mean to put effort into defeating something and not be reciprocated though.

Yes a public party system should be in game. Does it help build community? Yes and there is no argument about this. Whether they talk or not is not community. It's about people being in the same situation, doing their personal part, contributing to the greater whole. My only thought is that I don't think content should be trivially easy just because it's open world. Leave the most difficult fights that require split second reflexes to instances though. I find my attention wandering to other games in most of the open world stuff I have done so far. I want to be fully engaged but the game doesn't make me or help me to want to.
#150 Aug 03 2014 at 2:10 PM Rating: Excellent
**
542 posts
sandpark wrote:
Fates are better implemented as far as rewards go because it doesn't care if you're in a party or not. While Hunts let you fight solo or in party. Hunts don't give you full credit when not grouped up. It's like a pseudo claim system. It might feel disheartening to not be able to fight something that is already claimed. It is downright mean to put effort into defeating something and not be reciprocated though.


Actually, FATEs and hunts work off the same basic contribution system. For example, if I'm in a party that's doing a FATE boss and I manage to get there just before the end and tag the mob, I'll get gold. With world bosses like Odin and Behemoth, you pretty much need to be in a party to get gold. Just like hunts, contribution is shared so it is much easier to receive credit if you have multiple players in the group.

Other than Odin and Behemoth, this usually isn't that big of a deal for FATEs, and hasn't been since the game came out and everyone was leveling at the same time from my experience. Even then, it wasn't nearly as overcrowded or difficult to accomplish while solo as hunts, where we have players coming from all corners of Eorzea to zerg rush a single weak mob.
#151 Aug 03 2014 at 3:43 PM Rating: Good
**
972 posts
Susanoh wrote:
sandpark wrote:
Fates are better implemented as far as rewards go because it doesn't care if you're in a party or not. While Hunts let you fight solo or in party. Hunts don't give you full credit when not grouped up. It's like a pseudo claim system. It might feel disheartening to not be able to fight something that is already claimed. It is downright mean to put effort into defeating something and not be reciprocated though.


Actually, FATEs and hunts work off the same basic contribution system. For example, if I'm in a party that's doing a FATE boss and I manage to get there just before the end and tag the mob, I'll get gold. With world bosses like Odin and Behemoth, you pretty much need to be in a party to get gold. Just like hunts, contribution is shared so it is much easier to receive credit if you have multiple players in the group.

Other than Odin and Behemoth, this usually isn't that big of a deal for FATEs, and hasn't been since the game came out and everyone was leveling at the same time from my experience. Even then, it wasn't nearly as overcrowded or difficult to accomplish while solo as hunts, where we have players coming from all corners of Eorzea to zerg rush a single weak mob.

I was referring to how Raylo fought a hunt the entire time solo and got 1 seal. If I fight a fate out of party the entire time I typically get 10k xp and 200 or so company seals, versus just one seal. I haven't done Odin or Behemoth so I don't quite know how it works there.

As far as the overcrowding and such. I think Fates don't have that problem because most spawn really frequently and do not drop a deeply coveted drop. How long does it take to spawn new Odin and Behemoths? What do those two drop?
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 299 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (299)