lukaself
-
Posts
400 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by lukaself
-
-
1 minute ago, Rogunz said:
Adding travel time to all the archwing weapons combined with the new fighter enemies did a great job of showing just how much worse the new flight system is. It's extremely difficult to stay behind enemies without either overshooting them because you are forced into constant forward movement or falling behind them without sprinting. The pitch lock and inability to roll are huge restrictions when you're fighting enemies that are constantly moving.
A lot of the archweapons need to be tweaked to be usable in railjack missions since changing them to projectile weapons made them pretty worthless. It's also extremely difficult to mod them when the arsenal doesn't show any of the new damage types they are getting converted to.
- Corvas needs a range increase and it's speed massively increased, 100-200 meters is absolutely nothing with the speeds enemy fighters move.
- Fluctus has the same problem of short range and it's projectiles being way too slow to actually hit enemies.
- Larkspur has the same problem of short range which makes it difficult to keep the beam on enemy craft.
- Velocitus is lackluster too and would benefit from being changed back to hitscan or at least having the projectile speed increased. Without that there really isn't any reason to use it since you really can't use it for sniping like you used to.
- The Kuva Ayanga and Imperator are the 2 weapons I have tried that I feel are usable but it's still difficult to hit enemies even with them. Archweapon damage is also probably going to be a problem in the more difficult railjack missions since it's already not keeping up when you hit Saturn.
Archmelee is completely unusable since the autolock is still broken and you can't stick close to things.
It would also be nice to be able to pick up avionics/parts with archwings so you don't have to constantly mark them and wait for the slower railjack to pick them up. Collecting loot in general is extremely tedious since the archwing vacuum is so terrible and the railjack doesn't even have one. They really need huge increases so you don't have to spend a ton of time after the mission is over running around collecting all the drops.
Your post is way more concise and exhaustive than mine (Also, less emotional) Mind if I link people to it on occasion?
-
*Downloads the Empyrean update*
*Launches Archwing*
*Throws hands up and leaves the game*
This shouldn't have been a hovers vs flyers debate. There was constructive ways to make it work for everyone. #*!%!
-
1
-
-
Sorry to insist but, of all the flight models you had to chose from for Archwing, you chose...
...the one I found the most boring.
Sorry if I don't feel constructive but you can't expect people that have been playing having complete control and freedom in flight for two years in this game, to simply gracefully accept being forced suddenly and with no prior communication whatsoever about it, having to fly according to a plane again and with 180° locks on the pitch controls. This is the one of the most ambitious game modes ever developed in Warframe and you chose, consciously, despite being the game mode which features actual space the most, to have a flat field of reference. It doesn't feel right and it even does not make sense in space, where you don't have visual indication of orientation to anticipate the gimbal lock, not unless you consciously ever navigate around asteroids only ever going left or right and keep the planet in sight at all times to have a point of reference as to where "down" is. It's not flying anymore, it's hovering fast.
Not having complete free-flight feels flat and boring. Even if I seem angry, it's not really because of the change but because it has been decided so suddenly and forcibly to remove something people enjoyed with no time to prepare to it, compared to your usual openness to feedback. There's no reason we couldn't have discussed constructively about it if we had any indication this was in the works. If some people can't deal with being upside down sometimes, just give them an auto-roll setting just like the railjack has (even if we would like it to be actually optional for the Railjack too) instead of breaking the legs of everyone just so we all limp the same.
Please don't break our wings.
Sincerely.
-
Hi , everyone! Crossposting from the megathread if anyone's interested, feel free to just ignore it if not. ^^
__
Sorry to insist but, of all the flight models you had to chose from for Archwing, you chose...
...the one I found the most boring.
Sorry if I don't feel constructive but you can't expect people that have been playing having complete control and freedom in flight for two years in this game, to simply gracefully accept being forced suddenly and with no prior communication whatsoever about it, having to fly according to a plane again and with 180° locks on the pitch controls. This is the one of the most ambitious game modes ever developed in Warframe and you chose, consciously, despite being the game mode which features actual space the most, to have a flat field of reference. It doesn't feel right and it even does not make sense in space, where you don't have visual indication of orientation to anticipate the gimbal lock, not unless you consciously navigate around asteroids only ever going left or right and keep the planet in sight at all times to have a point of reference as to where "down" is. It's not flying anymore, it's hovering fast.
Not having complete free-flight feels flat and boring. Even if I seem angry, it's not really because of the change but because it has been decided so suddenly and forcibly to remove something people enjoyed with no time to prepare to it, compared to your usual openness to feedback. There's no reason we couldn't have discussed constructively about it if we had any indication this was in the works. If some people can't deal with being upside down sometimes, just give them an auto-roll setting just like the railjack has (even if we would like it to be actually optional for the Railjack too) instead of breaking the legs of everyone just so we all limp the same.
Please don't break our wings.
Sincerely.
-
Sorry to insist but, of all the flight models you had to chose from for Archwing, you chose...
...the one I found the most boring.
Sorry if I don't feel constructive but you can't expect people that have been playing having complete control and freedom in flight for two years in this game, to simply gracefully accept being forced suddenly and with no prior communication whatsoever about it, having to fly according to a plane again and with 180° locks on the pitch controls. This is the one of the most ambitious game modes ever developed in Warframe and you chose, consciously, despite being the game mode which features actual space the most, to have a flat field of reference. It doesn't feel right and it even does not make sense in space, where you don't have visual indication of orientation to anticipate the gimbal lock, not unless you consciously ever navigate around asteroids only ever going left or right and keep the planet in sight at all times to have a point of reference as to where "down" is. It's not flying anymore, it's hovering fast.
Not having complete free-flight feels flat and boring. Even if I seem angry, it's not really because of the change but because it has been decided so suddenly and forcibly to remove something people enjoyed with no time to prepare to it, compared to your usual openness to feedback. There's no reason we couldn't have discussed constructively about it if we had any indication this was in the works. If some people can't deal with being upside down sometimes, just give them an auto-roll setting just like the railjack has (even if we would like it to be actually optional for the Railjack too) instead of breaking the legs of everyone just so we all limp the same.
Please don't break our wings.
Sincerely.
-
*Gets super excited the update is finally there*
*Launches archwing*
Why is archwing vertical pitch limited to 180° degree? If has to be a mistake! It's space, it doesn't make any sense as we don't have any visual indicator of how far pitched we are there's no way to tell where the down or up limit is and when you will bump against that invisible, arbitrary wall. I thought it was obvious Gimbal locks were something to avoid when designing video game flight models? This is hurting target tracking badly
Give us free-flight back and give the ones who can't cope with being upside down sometimes an option to auto-center! I have been using free-flight for years, the sensation of freedom was uparalleled. Seriously, I very seldom swear but this is bullS#&$ from my standpoint.
There's no reason we can't find a constructive method to please everyone there.
-
2 hours ago, Firetempest said:
The astroid tile is the only one that felt good with freeflight because there was no structures or tunneling pushing you through the map. But again, the astroid areas were built in flat clusters, there was elevation changes between them but nothing directly above or below.
Enemies come to meet you and orbit you around the maps horizon line. They don't stay directly over or under you for long.
Their map structure don't require freeflight and they have never attempted otherwise.
1 hour ago, Steel_Rook said:Even asteroid field maps are laid out largely flat, with relatively little verticality beyond placing props on different levels. And while enemies CAN pass overhead, their pathing rarely seems to do that.
Flat? I beg your pardon? Guys, we can't possibly have been playing the same game:
All the game modes outside of trenches have been designed spherical and with an orientation pointing towards the center of the map, not according to a plane. All the defense objectives in Archwing are spheres and the enemy spawns are all around except in the obvious cases where a tile have only one exit and one entry point. The pursuit game mode even goes as far as requiring free-flight because some of those targets under and below the ship are almost impossible to track properly while keeping your speed up because of the 90° pitch limit up and down. In the coming Empyrean update, even the Railjack has free-flight and I did not see anyone complaining about that being confusing or disorientating, because everyone was too busy having their mouth hanging at how awesome it looked. As I said in another thread, if the archwing's purpose was only to hover safely on a fixed plane, the devs wouldn't have designed them as giant thrusters of doom rigged directly to your back.
And do I seriously have to point out the absurdity of requesting the devs to fix the inability of some players to learn how to fly 3D by designing an implementing and artificial horizon UI... in space? An optional auto-center setting instead would hopefully satisfy those of us who have a hard time finding their bearings in a three-dimensional space, not clutter an already very busy UI, be way more cost and time efficient for the devs, would not impair controller users by requiring more buttons and less limiting for those of us who do not like arbitrary limitations in a game that wasn't designed for them in the first place.
We can all get what we want, if we stay constructive instead of thinking someone necessarily has to lose something to gain something.
-
1
-
-
22 hours ago, Firetempest said:
6 degrees of freedom aka, upside down and rolling would have some real merit if they ever designed a map that wasn't fixed to a specific horizontal orientation
Afaik, on the contrary none of the original archwing game modes have been designed with a fixed orientation in mind. Even most trenches style tiles don't have visually identifiable up and down. Best instance of this is Caelus which looks very similar to the maps from the railjack streams: there's absolutely no way to tell up from down which is a problem now that the current flight model features a gimbal lock at the extreme sides of that 180 degrees pitch limitation.
Because of the absence of visual point of reference you can't possibly tell where the limit currently is without bumping against it. This, in turn, will make target tracking difficult, especially as they can still shoot you from angles you can't reach without navigating around the pivot. Hovering parallel to the ground makes sense in low orbit and on planets but nothing short of complete free-flight will work in deep space and asteroid fields, where most of Railjack's gameplay seems to be taking place. Not unless you consciously forego an axis and always circle around asteroids through either the left or right sides and never up or down.
-
1
-
-
Not having complete freedom of movement works in atmospheric flight because you have a visual point of reference. Since you flat out refuse to develop your denials, not allowing me to know if you actually have read my posts with the same care I gave yours and will persist in saying "you're wrong" without even having the courtesy to acknowledge my 400 words long explanation, let's make it visual:
Let's be honest for a second and tell me if you would have any means of knowing that you were looking "down" in this picture without me adding the lower pitch limit on screen?
Whatever the flight model, be it fixed or free-flight, the players don't have the tools to give each other directions verbally because there isn't any plane of reference to refer to so as I told you earlier, having a vertical pitch limit of 180° not only do not fix what you think is the main issue of being able to coordinate with your team but it makes it worse because you have to navigate around it. In a free flight model you could just point towards the enemies shooting at you below and deal with them. In the current model you have to bump through this invisible limit you had no means of keeping track for, do a roll anyway, since you're gimbal-locked and any yaw becomes effectively a roll(left and right on your mouse) then pitch up again to align with the target. There's no way to still think it's more convenient without being outright dishonest.
The best means to coordinate your actions and give directions to your teammates is already in the game through the marker system, since it accounts for 3D way better than any clumsy attempts at giving spoken instructions in an environment that doesn't allow absolute directions like up and down, whatever the flight model. As we saw in the stream, the waypoint marker system is already way ahead of this since it has been been upgraded with the ability to give specific orders.
In short, your problem is actually not coming from the flight model but your insistence on relying on absolute positioning in a field of reference that doesn't account for it.
-
1 hour ago, DrakeWurrum said:
They're not compromising, and they know damn well how important it is. You're over-reacting. Hold judgment until launch. They even explicitly told you in the devstream NOT to judge what you see too harshly, (any of it), because it's not done.
It seems to me you're saying this because you took my post in a vacuum for missing the beginning of the conversation. Maybe I am a bit too eager but I'm not judging what we saw in the devstream: I was simply replying to the people trying to argue with me that Arch-flight should have a fixed orientation and that having what feels as arbitrary limitations is the intended rework, but so far, I believe just as you that none have given us a convincing point as to why it should.
-
41 minutes ago, DrakeWurrum said:
You actually shouldn't.
Steve mentions in the Devstream that they have 3 or 4 different Archwing systems that they are currently testing, and that they will pick one specific one out of the bunch to stick with for ALL Archwing content on the Empyrean launch. What we've seen isn't finalized.
You may have misunderstood what my first paragraph was about. It was not about the flight model, but the current level design, which is not thought with a fixed orientation in mind, this is apparent on stream as well as what we have in the game right now. I don't see how you could think I was stating that the current model was the final one.
With that said, I certainly hope it's not final but they just updated it in the game so it's not completely unreasonable thinking a fixed orientation is what they're going for Arch-flight. Steve said they want a single flight-model, but what about shark-wing then? Will it handle like it's in space too with 500 meters blink on maps that are not even 200 meters long in total? It's already an issue in the older Archwing levels. (Again, Caelus) We can see that there are mixed messaging about this and we can't really blame people for thinking that the current in-game flight model is a prototype of the final one. I really hope this is not and I believe I have given enough reasons why. I'm hopeful the devs are aware of this but the lack of actual info on what they think is good enough is concerning.
-
20 hours ago, GruntBlender said:
Or if you're in low orbit, the actual planet being below you.
I enjoin you to have a good look at those empyrean streams again: not only the fixed plan orientation or the current Arch-flight model is not always relative to the planet, so there is no ecliptic and as such, no visual "down" point of reference, there never was any either in the past Archwing tiles (not even most trenches-style tiles) and a good chunk of the Railjack tiles actually happen in the space between the planets, like Asteroid fields and unknown sectors, not around them. (Seriously, just go do a few rounds of Caelus for a practical example of a map which is absolutely not designed with UP and DOWN as absolutes) Also, there is a lot leading me to believe that a good chunk of the upcoming New War will feature in deep space, which is the perfect example why the current archwing flight model in game and the one we saw on stream can't be the final ones as you seem to believe.
Furthermore, I have geometrically demonstrated my point, simply replying "you really don't" came off as disrespectful to me in this regard, please don't handwave the arguments. Additionally, you seem to have the concept of Gimbal Lock wrong: during a gimbal lock, none of the axis are actually locked into position, this is a popular misconception due to the presence of the word "lock" in the name. Gimbal lock actually means you're losing an axis due to two axis aligning. When the archwing is pitched to the extreme sides of the 180° Yaw and Roll controls do the same thing, becoming the same axis: you are now short an axis, hence what we have in the current Arch-fligh model is indeed a gimbal lock which forces you to use a workaround requiring three maneuvers to overcome that limitation instead of just the one which is the most intuitive. In a 6DOF field of reference, if you need to go somewhere, you just point towards the destination and go, you don't have to get used to bizarre workarounds. When you need to shoot something you just orient yourself towards the target and shoot and there is no more intuitive way of doing it short of designing new hardware beyond a keyboard and mouse or going into VR territory. in the current system, what's problematic is that you have to constantly keep the 180° limit in mind and compensate for it or risk dying because you just can't reach that critical target which is at an angle you can't go without maneuvering around the lock. I didn't want to enter into technical arguments because it's but a simple video game and I felt that a popular science explanation would be enough to understand the issue but obviously it didn't cut it. I even proposed solutions for people that had issues finding their bearing in open space which are time and cost effective.
I would have preferred if I was simply biased towards liking the experimental flight more and this was a matter of getting used to a new flight model but it has been changed so many times, probably due to the same internal struggle in the devteam than the one we have on the forums. It's clear the idea still has not crystallized into the devs' mind and none of the flight models we had in the past actually felt completely right, in my opinion, because of too many compromises, even after all the changes it went through. Now it's not only not feeling right, it's also functionally insufficient for the task they're setting themselves to. This is really important, if the devs finally get flying right, most Tennos may actually start using the archwing to fly instead of a means to skip travel time and just blink everywhere.
That complaint that the field or reference would be changing constantly and be confusing is beside the point, since the Railjack itself is using a free-flight model and by the latest devstream we saw [DE]Rebecca herself, constantly changing stations as the situation demanded, going from a fixed orientation to a free flying mode with great ease, entering and leaving the pilot seat at will and doing evasive loops, tracking targets beyond 360° of movement as easily as she popped off Grineer heads when back on the solid ground of the enemy frigates. I saw nobody complaining about how impressive and intuitive that looked and at no moment she looked like she was disoriented or confused. What I DID find confusing though, is the fact that due the the current Arch-flight model, the archwing always exits the Railjack on a fixed orentation, however the Railjack itself is oriented.
In the end, If the devs wanted people to feel safe and comfy while flying through hordes of enemies, they wouldn't have designed the archwing like giant thrusters of death rigged directly to your back.
They're doing something openly admitted as the most ambitious thing they ever developed into the game, compromise is clearly not going to cut it. I don't think it would be an exaggeration saying that a good chunk of the future success of Warframe as a whole is riding on getting the archwing flight right in time for Empyrean.
Sorry for the long post everyone: TL, DR: anything short of 360° freedom of movement is insufficient for space flight. If anyone is interested I can make a video on request illustrating the issue.
-
Really hope the Arch-melee homing dash makes it back into the final version of Arch-flight for Empyrean. I have been using melee almost exclusively for two years and as it is now, it's barely usable.
Beyond that, go up little post ^^
-
Pretty please with sugar on top?
-
Ok, It's even worse than I initially thought and I think I'll need to develop further:
Just did a mission in Uranus Caelus today because a friend needed Tellurium. On the one hand the inertia is a matter of preference, either you like it or you don't. On the other hand, not only the gameplay and level is clearly designed with 6DOF in mind, navigating it has simply become awkward because nothing is made with a fixed orientation, which is relevant because it's designed very closely to the maps we saw in the Empyrean demo. Just try navigating around an asteroid upwards or downwards and you'll understand why. At some point your archwing will run out of pitch controls because it's suddenly locked at 180° but you still haven't finished your maneuver. And since you're in space there are no clue as to how much pitch you have left or in which orientation you are to begin with, you will just be blocked by an arbitrary limitation. One workaround would be to have an artificial horizon to know how far pitched your archwing is, however do I really have point out how absurd if would be to be forced to keep track of your horizon in space?
For this reason 6DOF is not only the most logical method of control in space, it's also the only one that makes sense. It's not a matter of having unrealistic expectations as it's geometrically demonstrable because space flight is not absolute, it's relative to what's around you: if you're not starting from exactly either one of the extreme limits of your ability to pitch, you WILL need more than 180° of freedom of movement to go around large obstacles unless you consciously forego an axis of movement and only ever go left or right. What's the point to even have space flight in these conditions? And as other posters have noted, not only enemies can do it, but also your own railjack... but somehow not the Archwing, the lightest, supposedly most maneuverable flying object there is in the whole solar system. What worries me the worst is the fact that the level designers may be currently creating Railjack map tiles based on this fixed orientation limitation and that, friends, will make roaming space mind numbingly boring really fast.
Some people may have issues navigating a 6DOF environment, and I can respect that. Implement either a key to reset your orientation at will or if gamepad controls have become this much a concern to the development team now, a setting for auto-roll centering to not clutter it. Do not break the legs of all your players because one of them has a limp though.
Before any rando comes out to say I don't know what I'm talking about, I have hundreds of hours on archwing missions alone, have all the weapons and frames maxed and formaed several times. I suspect people advocating for 180° locks on Archwing (which doesn't even fix the issue of people having trouble finding their bearings in space) are actually not regular users and maybe even the ones who wanted it removed in the first place.
-
1
-
-
As an added note, I believe not having 6DOf movement in space is something that may come to bite the devteam back in the ass when the creative team will realize they'll have to build the space levels according to a fixed orientation which will severely hamper the future artistic possibilities. This is not at all like the "no compromise" experience the devteam got me used to all these years and which lead to Warframe's universal recognition and success.
Again, what's the point to even go to space, if creatively and gameplay-wise, it feels, looks and plays the same as staying on the ground?
I mean, you can fly but can't do loops? Epic space battle with constrained movement feels like sand in my peanut butter toast.
-
In today's stream they said the current flight model is not final and that they're actively trying to make a unified flight model while removing the broken ones completely.
All I want is the ability to fly 6dof back. Being stuck on a pivot feels unintuitive in space and seems completely absurd to me gameplay-wise when even the enemies can do it and shoot you in angles you can't reach without having to clumsily navigate around the pivot. Seriously 180° of vertical movement feels seriously constricted and not at all like the freedom of flying.
What's even the point of adding flying in a video game actually to have constraints such as these in the final version? What's the point of going to space if it's gonna feel the same as staying on the ground? I'm frustrated by this change because it seems like an attempt to shoehorn console technical limitations (lack of buttons, especially) onto the PC users.
-
2 hours ago, dwqrf said:
Regurgitate could have two fire mode : a single enemy spat out with a single press, or the full belly with a longer press (including the new aoe damage)
What do you think ?
Nice idea. That or a full auto mode. Spamming regurgitate isn't very fun as it is now.
-
The sentinel hogs the camera when rolling at high speeds masking the upper part of the screen. This is unfortunately where the eyes are focused when you roll:
Also what other people here have already said, it's very hard to tell which nourish buff is ready or triggered unless your eyes are fixed onto the buff section and only after the fact, since the icons are hidden under the duration and power numbers (And to be honest, Warframe has a buff icon issue). It could use a different aural cue when switching to and using each different buff or a visual one on or around Grendel so we can keep our eyes on the action.
Other than that, it's a fun frame, if weirdly squishy at levels past 60 for such a slow & heavy one, even with its belly full, an armor mod and the Armor Nourish buff. I fare way better with Baruuk for instance or even Gauss. Probably because their defensive abilities scale better.
-
Prior to update, Opticor could buffer inputs in order to charge the next shot as soon as ready just like on bows. Bows like the Daikyu are still working fine.
Expected behaviour: Hold to charge a shot, release when ready or let the Opticor shoot by itself when full, release left click and hold again immediately, shot charging begins as soon as cooldown is over.
Current behaviour: Hold to charge a shot, release when ready, release left click and hold again immediately won't charge the next shot when it's ready. You have to wait until the cooldown is over to press left click again (which is not a displayed state by the UI).
It makes the Opticor a bit cumbersome to use. Please fix!
-
-
Visual indicators on the frame that you've hit 100% battery and 100% redline would be nice so I can stop checking the gauge so often and keep my eyes on the game.
Maybe even a damaging radial explosion when you hit 100% redline (not 100% battery) to make it feel more rewarding than just removing the battery cost of some abilities.
-
A few tennos already mentioned the weirdness in the noble animation set so I'll just add my two cents from this thread:
-
1
-
-
I won't lie, I'm a speed junkie. I like Gauss a lot.
However...
...after having played a few hours with him I feel like that Redline should also give a boost to sprint speed according to the battery level, even if it's just a flat increase unaffected by mods. As a few Tennos pointed out, having the ability to go faster the more and better I play would feel so much more exhilarating and rewarding than just having max speed from the get go, especially considering how power hungry it is!
Redline really makes it look like it's supposed to break every speed limiter, not just those of the weapons. The first time I activated it I really thought I was going faster. Alas, it was only the effect of the adrenalin. It would improve every aspect of the speed frame to awesome levels, I just know it!
-
1
-
Galvarc stopped working after the last patch. (+ a few more Railjack issues)
in Mission Specific
Posted
Up & thanks @AdvisorZ for reporting this.
I can't Railjack without my Galvarc.