January Version Update Schedule Revealed! (12/15/2014)

[NynJa]

My inner asshole would like to see it impossible to run multiple instances of the game from the same PC/IP, but some would still work around that, I'm sure.

I'd be willing to bet atleast half of the people who play the game are all multiboxers.

[Sechs]

Nah, half seems an overestimation bias due to the fact that people who multibox are tipically "advanced" players, and it's this kind of players who usually lurk around places like BG etc.
In reality I'm sure there's a consistent number of players who never even bothered to go to places like those, or people who just would consider unreasonable paying twice the monthly fee (I know people who refuse to pay even a single one and only play FTP MMOs because of that, it's not just a couple of stupid scrooges, it's full of people like that out there).

If we're talking about people who come here or other boards then I'll totally quote your "at least half".

[NynJa]

Your server may be different from mine, but its pretty common to see people running with trains of the same 2-3 characters, sometimes more.

[dasva]

You look on the OF and half the people over there consider multi boxing cheating that must be banned

[Damane]

You look on the OF and half the people over there consider multi boxing cheating that must be banned

they also consider playing more then one job blasphemy so fuck them

[dasva]

Just saying not multiboxing isn't uncommon at all.

[arus2001]

Yeah, I'm not going to sit here and call it cheating or whatever. I bring it up more under the premise some assume everyone else does it, thus skewing the perception of what is or isn't possible when truly solo. For those who don't, getting shit done CAN be hard since it all falls back to logistics and luck.

[Capuchin]

Just saying not multiboxing isn't uncommon at all.

It's not uncommon, but I'd certainly take Nynja's bet that "at least half of the people who play the game are all multiboxers".

No way it's even close to that high a level, and if you think so it HAS to be because you're running in very different circles than the average players (people who discuss this kind of thing on forums must be like a single digit percentage of the total community).

To put it in perspective, I do most stuff with an LS of quality long time players - we're not an "elite shell", but certainly above average in experience and sophistication. And we only have like 2-3 multiboxers out of 15-20 regulars. The true average players who you might only run into in shout groups, WKRs, messing around with Trusts... those people very, very rarely multi-box.

[NynJa]

your server must be different then, like I said

My current LS is mainly 4 people: we all 3 box. We have one person, who has a bunch of accounts, but never plays really unless we ask her to. In my old shell we had a bunch of people who would multibox. Even the not-hardcore people had multiple accounts. We had a ps2 player (who prefered the ps2 cause his pc was shit), who would multibox. It was a common thing. And like I said, its pretty common to see people running around Gilga/Carby with mule trains.

[Viar]

Half the problem isnt just alliance content, its people doing VD content 4 DD 1 WHM 1 GEO with 5 bard/cor mules, who get chaos fighter rogue hunter march march minuet minuet minuet madridal madridal, and then rape the shit out of it going "WE SO HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOODDDDD, GIVE US HARDER CONTENT LOLZ"

They Should wipe buff after event start tbh.

[Bukadan]

Tapatalk sucks I can't delete this

[larrymc]

The "fix" to the buff overstacking before BC fights would be much easier than the "buffs drop when player who cast them drops", which I don't even know if it would be feasible technically.
For the former simply make so ALL buffs wear whenever you enter a BC, any BC, and you're done, people won't be able to overstack external buffs anymore.

It's pretty stupid they allowed that stuff happening for so long honestly.

A few updates ago, SE stated on the official forum that their plan was to do exactly this. But then they backed off implementation - presumably due to complaints.

[Bukadan]

It wouldn't change anything in the end though

[Sechs]

Atm? No.
Before the skillchain reform, before the age of Rudra, Fudo and 60k Skillchain it would have changed a bit, altough probably not much but certainly more than now.
Even in light of this, I still wish they'd go that route regardless of the little current consequences.

[Sechs]

Anyway, something I was thinking about.
They previously announced jobs adjustments for january patch.
They did post a thread yesterday using plural, but then only PUP stuff was inside.
Should we assume from this that there won't be other job adjustments at all?

Correct me if I'm wrong but over the last months they always announced jobs adjustments together under the same post, is that not it?
Assuming I'm not wrong, this is yet another thing to rejoice about the awesome incoming january patch.
Possible candidate for worst patch over the past 2 years?

[Hitou]

From the first page:

The next version update is scheduled for Thursday, January 15, 2015 (JST).

Sink your teeth into the lore of Adoulin with quests featuring unexplored aspects of the main scenario, the addition of more Unity Wanted battles, and puppetmaster adjustments.

Also scheduled is the long-awaited ability to equip two linkpearls at once, along with other content that had been pushed back from December.

Steel yourself for an action-packed January!

Technically it's multiple adjustments for one job so "job adjustments" makes sense grammatically if not practically. I believe they said they're going to focus on pet jobs mostly in the foreseeable future and that they'd be adjusting them individually rather than doing blanket adjustments like the acc etc buffs in the past. So I'm not really surprised all they're touching is pup this update. These adjustments fall in the category of "should have been this way from the start" for me, but are still welcome none the less. Still waiting for BP's past 70~ for Cait Sith but I get the feeling that's still a long ways off.

[Sechs]

I dunno.
The attachments adjustments are welcome (but where are the new ones they promised?) but the changes to Protectra/Shellra leave me to wonder.
If SE intends to balance pet survivability over the fact of "Hey! Those pets can get Shell and Protect on! Their survivability is perfectly balanced now" it's likely a bad sign then.
Relying on a buff that only 2 pets out of 6 can use, that requires to be successfully cast and that can be dispelled is... I dunno, not the most reassuring of adjustment concerning pet survivability.

If instead it's just "part" of their plans then it's totally welcome of course.

[Damane]

I dunno.
The attachments adjustments are welcome (but where are the new ones they promised?) but the changes to Protectra/Shellra leave me to wonder.
If SE intends to balance pet survivability over the fact of "Hey! Those pets can get Shell and Protect on! Their survivability is perfectly balanced now" it's likely a bad sign then.
Relying on a buff that only 2 pets out of 6 can use, that requires to be successfully cast and that can be dispelled is... I dunno, not the most reassuring of adjustment concerning pet survivability.

If instead it's just "part" of their plans then it's totally welcome of course.

Pro V and Shell V are very potent buffs, even for pets. You can see on players a significant difference in damage taken with and without them.

[Sechs]

Duh, of course they're powerful Damane, that's not the point.
The point is: what is the role SE is thinking for this new addition?

1) A nice bonus for some pets
2) The answer to all "pet survivability" woes


Those are the two possible scenarios I see. If it's 1) it's all good, it will be just icing on the cake.
If it's 2) then it's quite trobulesome because you can't realistically rely on that to "balance" pet survivability because a) only 2 automatons out of 6 can use it, b) it has to be cast before it can take effect, and that might not always be possible, c) it can be dispelled.

I seriously hope it's not 2), because that's not what people have been asking for so far, and it's not the right answer to the pet survivability issues.

[arus2001]

I'd just look at it as QoL. Less time/MP for the puppet buffing. The end.