≪Jul. 21, 2009 (JST) Update Details≫

[Raydeus]

Re: ≪Jul. 21, 2009 (JST) Update Details≫

But Campaign by it's very nature forces you to deal with other people's screw ups. But the problem is, when people do Campaign, all they care about is themselves. Which is all fine and dandy, people are selfish pricks, I get it. But in the long run, the rest of the server will suffer due to lost zones, fewer ANNM areas and a general ass raping in the past. If SE could just add benefits to actually winning Campaign instead of just soloing a single mob for 20 minutes that everyone who helped to achieve XX goal could gain from, I feel it would be a much better event for everyone.

In the end, once the initial craze wears down and people have all their AN gear, it most likely will be better to skip out on Unions. Because if you're alone, you won't get much in drops, but at least you can max out your Exp per hour by exchanging tags.

Maybe if SE implemented field officials who could assign objectives for troops (and win a good bonus for participating on it) then people would have a better change of organizing.

Because as already demostrated no one will ever listen to other players trying to give orders (even if they make sense).

Although it would probably be more trouble for SE to implement than it's worth.

[Ketaru]

Re: ≪Jul. 21, 2009 (JST) Update Details≫

But the problem is nobody is actually invested in actually winning campaign or holding or getting influence in areas. We keep talking about Campaign battles, but if we were really invested in winning, we would be doing appropriate Campaign Ops. Not just the same old ones that you can do by just running around town. Bitching about how the fort has no items? Why don't you (or anybody else) do an Ops to replenish them then? But people, they just do the ones that are most accessible to them to get freebie EXP. That's understandable considering some Ops in some areas are really an unnecessary hassle.

But until I start seeing shouts to group up for the party Campaign Ops which involve strenghtening your NPCs or healers, or regular supply runs being done in large, inconvenient places like Sauromugue Champaign [s], I'm going to remain convinced that people, regardless of their espouses for teamwork and the good of the Allied Forces, are not really interested in winning.

[Mhurron]

Re: ≪Jul. 21, 2009 (JST) Update Details≫

Because as already demostrated no one will ever listen to other players trying to give orders (even if they make sense).

You aren't the boss of me.

[Ziero]

Re: ≪Jul. 21, 2009 (JST) Update Details≫

But the problem is nobody is actually invested in actually winning campaign or holding or getting influence in areas. We keep talking about Campaign battles, but if we were really invested in winning, we would be doing appropriate Campaign Ops. Not just the same old ones that you can do by just running around town. Bitching about how the fort has no items? Why don't you (or anybody else) do an Ops to replenish them then? But people, they just do the ones that are most accessible to them to get freebie EXP. That's understandable considering some Ops in some areas are really an unnecessary hassle.

But until I start seeing shouts to group up for the party Campaign Ops which involve strenghtening your NPCs or healers, or regular supply runs being done in large, inconvenient places like Sauromugue Champaign [s], I'm going to remain convinced that people, regardless of their espouses for teamwork and the good of the Allied Forces, are not really interested in winning.

I personally stick to 2-3 different Ops myself, but that's because I feel those are the ones I'm best suited for. Bomb runs on enemy forts(intel), ganking convoys and swiping their gear(resources) and helping rebuild forts in the fields(security) are my favorite ops, whether or not they get me the most Exp or are potentially dangerous, because they're things that suit me best. If I had healing jobs and two free friends, I would do the party Ops. But as is, the very idea of Ops rewards solo players more then teams. And in that situation, people will stick to the Ops they're best at. Until the three person Ops actually give out decent amounts of Exp (i remember the crab battle one giving out about 100exp for all the time involved) most people will skip them.

[Raydeus]

Re: ≪Jul. 21, 2009 (JST) Update Details≫

I've been trying to get some of those 3 player Ops going but so far I have been unable to do a single one.

If I can't get people for that I don't expect much sucess trying to organize anything on the field.

Other than that I do the usual Defense/Offense stuff because I'm more suited for battles, fetch quests just don't seem to like me.



PS >

You aren't the boss of me.

Ray Di. Britannia commands you. Bring me some NYC pizza and give me all your Allied Notes!

/geass

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: ≪Jul. 21, 2009 (JST) Update Details≫

So, what you guys are saying about Unions is that the problem isn't the game so much as it is the players.

All FFXI players have ever cared about is finding safe, effective ways to meet their own personal ends. There are many other ways to be effective that aren't as safe as others, that's true, but if they're scared to die and take a tiny sliver of EXP loss on the chin what can you expect them to do.

"OMG, please R3 me in Dynamis, I'll lose my level!!!"

And when missions aren't won on the first try without being prepared, they get depressed over it, some even drop out. Its like dealing with overgrown children. This is why I tend to have to do missions just with people I know or I'll never get them done.

So am I surprised they'd take to Campaign the way they do. Not really, SE had to make NPCs that could raise you because WHMs and RDMs were useless for that. Union sounds to me like yet another thing to static if you want to do it effectively.

The development teams can only do so much to influence an online game, but these games are ultimately shaped by the community and the development teams end up being a scapegoat for all the game's problems.

Northlands (S) don't even have Aegis Scream missions, so I doubt players will ever touch them until they do. All I saw people doing was killing off the local wildlife for BLU spells and doing the new missions. I didn't see campaign ops being done at all.

The only thing I was disappointed about in the new zones was the fact that they could have been very epic BST merit camps had they had a few EMs here and there... and more charmable mobs. But on the upside, BLUs now have another place they can go to wail on skeletons and imps.

[Armando]

Re: ≪Jul. 21, 2009 (JST) Update Details≫

So am I surprised they'd take to Campaign the way they do. Not really, SE had to make NPCs that could raise you because WHMs and RDMs were useless for that. Union sounds to me like yet another thing to static if you want to do it effectively.

In their defense, they did NOT provide a system that rewards EXP based on playing logically. If they did, taking a big hit to your MP just to revive someone that's doing a major contribution to the effort would've rewarded a fat amount of EXP/AN. That and it's too easy to die a random NM death in Campaign.

Obviously players need incentives. There's nothing selfish about that. I wouldn't, for example, waste my time in Campaign purely out of the kindness of my heart, just to make sure my nation of allegiance doesn't lose its zones, when I could be working towards my own goals. If there's a good reason for me to participate, I'll participate. Otherwise, why should I care? Advancement is where the "fun" in this game is.

[Aksannyi]

Re: ≪Jul. 21, 2009 (JST) Update Details≫

Yeah, in theory it sounds nice on paper. Adventurers working together to win the war against the Beastmen.

Reality, however, is far from altruistic.

[Yellow Mage]

Re: ≪Jul. 21, 2009 (JST) Update Details≫

Yay SE for making stuff that's dependent on YOUR CRAPPY CODE NOT CRASHING to get anything out of it. And making it so the crashes come from effects spam that can't be turned off with the effects filters.

I foresaw this coming when I read the thing about not being able to refresh allied tags.

Don't know, don't care. I just like the Union name Coyote. d(^^d)

I actually like the name Dhole. Such an awesomely rarely-mentioned canine that Firefox spell-checker doesn't even recognize it!

[Aksannyi]

Re: ≪Jul. 21, 2009 (JST) Update Details≫

Dhole

Is it bad that I'm sitting here trying to figure out what the D stands for? Dick hole? Dumb hole? Dork hole? etc.

[ShepardG]

Re: ≪Jul. 21, 2009 (JST) Update Details≫

Yeah, in theory it sounds nice on paper. Adventurers working together to win the war against the Beastmen.

Reality, however, is far from altruistic.

ROFL

Sounds a whole fucking lot like real life war!

[Mhurron]

Re: ≪Jul. 21, 2009 (JST) Update Details≫

Is it bad that I'm sitting here trying to figure out what the D stands for? Dick hole? Dumb hole? Dork hole? etc.

Since YM actually already told you, yes it's very sad.

[Aksannyi]

Re: ≪Jul. 21, 2009 (JST) Update Details≫

I knew that it was an actual word. But my mind is so perverse that I saw it as two, where hole must have some complimentary word preceding it.

[Yellow Mage]

Re: ≪Jul. 21, 2009 (JST) Update Details≫

Is it bad that I'm sitting here trying to figure out what the D stands for?

Such an awesomely rarely-mentioned canine that Firefox spell-checker doesn't even recognize it!

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhole]Dhole - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: ≪Jul. 21, 2009 (JST) Update Details≫

Obviously players need incentives. There's nothing selfish about that. I wouldn't, for example, waste my time in Campaign purely out of the kindness of my heart, just to make sure my nation of allegiance doesn't lose its zones, when I could be working towards my own goals. If there's a good reason for me to participate, I'll participate. Otherwise, why should I care? Advancement is where the "fun" in this game is.

Endgame linkshells seem to offer plenty of incentives to do sky, but we don't see people EXPing on Aura Status, do we? Being rewarded with points toward gear is advancement, but part of the advancement is helping others get gear, too. If you just seek good gear for yourself, your LS cannot strengthen with you.

And I should note that these incentives are laid out by the players themselves and just like the incentives SE create, the community still leans toward greed rather than teamwork. How many linkshells fall apart because people just constantly get what they need and then leave? Why are Dynamis shells forced to resort to not telling you where they're scheduled to go? I mean, that right there is reverse psychology - we could be doing northlands, but we're not telling you. If you don't show up, you might miss Northlands. Works better than telling you, "Hey, Dynamis Windurst tonight, feel free to not help our new members get northlands access!"