Thread: Battle Reform: Auto-Attack (06/30/2011)

[DakAttack]

Re: Thread: Battle Reform: Auto-Attack (06/30/2011)

What?

[Takelli]

Re: Thread: Battle Reform: Auto-Attack (06/30/2011)

to make risky changes to the programming because kids want an easy mode.

How exactly is giving ranger a melee ability to get away from their target making it "easy mode". All that they need is a dodge ability or some such and it wont make it easy mode. Hell, GW has those abilities, and that game is far from easy mode.

[Firewind]

Re: Thread: Battle Reform: Auto-Attack (06/30/2011)

Because Blizzard's Game Development team saw a good idea used in games before WoW, thought it was worth implementing, and made it a reality.

Now apparently, pointing out that crowd control abilities outdate WoW and are readily available in FFXI means that I suddenly want FFXIV, a game released two years early and probably needs longer than that, to be not only WoW 2.0, but the least challenging game ever; even though WoW has it's fair share of challenging fights that anyone who has actually played WoW would know of. yes they are not has hard as the fights in the MMO aimed at the hardcore crowd but pointing them out is just beating the bones of the horse that died nearly half a decade ago. I dunno, trolls are confusing.

[DakAttack]

Re: Thread: Battle Reform: Auto-Attack (06/30/2011)

No, Blizzard's design team was/is a bunch of idiots and decided Hunters should have all tools necessary to own you at a distance and keep you there. They're called Huntards because the class requires no thought, forethought, planning, or thinking whatsoever. Plus, the people who play them tend to be idiots. Takelli wants Archers to be the exact same thing: ranged with a suite of abilities to lock down anybody who gets too close.

You, on the other hand, seem to like jumping on bandwagons and echoing bad ideas or tantrums. And the only way WoW could ever be challenging is if you're playing on a laptop with a track pad. That entire game is easy-mode.

[Takelli]

Re: Thread: Battle Reform: Auto-Attack (06/30/2011)

Takelli wants Archers to be the exact same thing: ranged with a suite of abilities to lock down anybody who gets too close

I don't want the same exact thing. I just want rangers to be able to bind some one or do SOMETHING rather than just punch if they get caught in a melee brawl or something like that.

Also, hunters now require more thought than before. The class has become harder to play as well. And even before then, you needed to think about what you where going to do. Couldn't just attack a random target. Hell, When I played hunter, I had the highest DPS until they nerfed it horribly. It does require forethought.

Have you even played WoW?

[Raydeus]

Re: Thread: Battle Reform: Auto-Attack (06/30/2011)

So much hate and bitterness.

[Malacite]

Re: Thread: Battle Reform: Auto-Attack (06/30/2011)

Dak's being a troll, what do you expect?

[Etra]

Re: Thread: Battle Reform: Auto-Attack (06/30/2011)

Dak's being a troll, what do you expect?

No. He's just saying that Archers don't need attacks to keep things at a distance 100% of the time like Hunters do in WoW. I really don't understand how any of you are not comprehending what he's getting at.

Also, I do and don't agree. I agree on the fact that Archers do not need all the crap Hunters get, but I do think that for XIV, Archers should get ONE snare that breaks on damage for solo play. Otherwise, everyone else here seems to be asking for the Huntard class.

PS. I doubt you'll quit the game because Archer does not get ranged auto attack (Which is funny, since Ranger didn't have ranged auto in XI. So I don't really see what the problem is here and why you didn't seem to bitch about it for XI.)

[Firewind]

Re: Thread: Battle Reform: Auto-Attack (06/30/2011)

No, Blizzard's design team was/is a bunch of idiots and decided Hunters should have all tools necessary to own you at a distance and keep you there. They're called Huntards because the class requires no thought, forethought, planning, or thinking whatsoever. Plus, the people who play them tend to be idiots. Takelli wants Archers to be the exact same thing: ranged with a suite of abilities to lock down anybody who gets too close.

You, on the other hand, seem to like jumping on bandwagons and echoing bad ideas or tantrums. And the only way WoW could ever be challenging is if you're playing on a laptop with a track pad. That entire game is easy-mode.

FFXIV isn''t a PvP game, a game that has PvP or a game even remotely balanced for PvP.

[Etra]

Re: Thread: Battle Reform: Auto-Attack (06/30/2011)

FFXIV isn''t a PvP game, a game that has PvP or a game even remotely balanced for PvP.

XIV will include PvP, as per previous statements by SE. Unless the new direction the game is being taken does not allow for it, but it was to be a linkshell vs. linkshell (or company vs. company) thing.

[Malacite]

Re: Thread: Battle Reform: Auto-Attack (06/30/2011)

No. He's just saying that Archers don't need attacks to keep things at a distance 100% of the time like Hunters do in WoW. I really don't understand how any of you are not comprehending what he's getting at.

It's not that we don't get it, it's what this is ultimately going to do in the long run - kill the job for all intents and purposes just it in XI. And why are ARC and mages not exempted from 111111111111111111 ?

PS. I doubt you'll quit the game because Archer does not get ranged auto attack (Which is funny, since Ranger didn't have ranged auto in XI. So I don't really see what the problem is here and why you didn't seem to bitch about it for XI.)

Oh, I did a lot of bitching on that subject back in the day. It still pisses me off to this day, but I really enjoy SAM & the other jobs now. Besides, there weren't any good alternatives back then anyway. But now SE's gone and once again killed my preferred playstyle yet again and I'm not going to tolerate this bullshit from the old XI devs a 2nd time around.

I refuse to spend gil to do subpar damage compared to other DD's that get to abuse the shit out of haste for free, all the while having adequate tools to deal with the inevitable shitstorm that's coming their way. God forbid that the game actually be unique and not FFXI 2.0


Never mind the guild leve changes - Yeah, real cool SE, making them mostly solo-oriented all the while killing Archer's close range ability. Guild marks are just gonna be so much fun to quest for now.

[Balfree]

Re: Thread: Battle Reform: Auto-Attack (06/30/2011)

Yes, because realistically, smashing things with your bare fists as an Archer is just oh so wonderful an idea.


This is beyond bullshit. So everyone else gets auto-attack to make things simpler, but RNG & Mages get shafted. OK then. So we're right back to /ra spam, awesome SE.


I'm done with 14 now. Fuck it. One of the few things I really liked about it was the ranged class was actually GOOD this time around. They just went and killed that completely and don't none of you even fucking try to argue otherwise because we all know how lopsided things are for RNG in XI because of how overpowered Haste is.

See ya laterz brah. Out with the old, in with the new.

---------- Post added at 10:15 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:09 AM ----------

And why are ARC and mages not exempted from 111111111111111111 ?

Weren't you against auto-attack? What are you complaining about?

All this because archers don't get speed surge benefits? They're powerful enough as it is.

You got nerfed, it wont stop here trust me. Better quit soon or your head might explode.

[Armando]

Re: Thread: Battle Reform: Auto-Attack (06/30/2011)

You know, they could just let you buffer the next shot. Then you get the same consistent performance as with auto-attack while still forcing the player to make the decision to shoot each and every time.

But I may just be saying something stupid. I don't play this game, I just like to read you guys fight about it.

[Firewind]

Re: Thread: Battle Reform: Auto-Attack (06/30/2011)

No. He's just saying that Archers don't need attacks to keep things at a distance 100% of the time like Hunters do in WoW. I really don't understand how any of you are not comprehending what he's getting at.

Also, I do and don't agree. I agree on the fact that Archers do not need all the crap Hunters get, but I do think that for XIV, Archers should get ONE snare that breaks on damage for solo play. Otherwise, everyone else here seems to be asking for the Huntard class.

PS. I doubt you'll quit the game because Archer does not get ranged auto attack (Which is funny, since Ranger didn't have ranged auto in XI. So I don't really see what the problem is here and why you didn't seem to bitch about it for XI.)

And I really don't understand how everyone seems to think that I want that when not one of my posts even makes any sort of mention that I want Archer turned into Hunter from WoW.

Takeli mentioned hypothetical stuff like Arhcers being able to use an emergency attack in melee, Dak went "lul this not wowz!11one", I said that archers getting a melee attack for emergencies is sensible, Dak went on about WoW again, I listed the crowd control abilities that a Ranger could have access to in FFXI as he seemed to claim that WoW invented crowd control abilities, Dak trolled a bit more then went on about PvP in a PvE game. I pointed out that FFXIV is not a PvP game and even if they introduce it, the game won't be balanced for it.

Did I at any point say that I want Archer to be Hunter?

[DakAttack]

Re: Thread: Battle Reform: Auto-Attack (06/30/2011)

Maybe we can all restate our initial points to clear everything up? Takelli, this doesn't include you.