Jump to content


PC Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation


About ShortCat

Recent Profile Visitors

1,678 profile views
  1. No. Even single player games with 0 human interactions have balance. Every game has a difficulty curve and players power is aligned to his progression. Usually, you start with a club and progress in gear tiers along with the game. As the player grows stronger, he gets confrontet with tougher enemies, so that over the course of the whole game he can repeatedly experience exciting situations. A "Sword of Godslaying+5" found in the very first crate, that OHKO even the final boss, will just make the whole experience moot, if overcomming obstacles was initial design choice. Balance exists to continuously challenge the player. Another issue occures, when presented gear is heavely tilted in one direction, like when magic heavely overshadows archery at every stage of the game. Then you created a placeholder or dead content. If the palyer is presented with only one reasonable option, then there are no options. As a result every subsequent playthrough offers nothing new and reduces replay value. Balance exists to provide several valid options and create variety, which in return increases replay value. Subject of dicussion is not just math and balance in this particular topic is not simply created with equal numerical values.
  2. I do not know since when, but Panthersa is broken. The bounce mechanic is not working most of the time and in case you use punch trough mods, secondary fire will consume ammo for every enemy hit, sooo you can empty your mag in 0.5 seconds.
  3. If there would be an option to choose a weapon, in 95% people would go for meta weapons. Just as you said, if there is a Catchmoon, why even create a Riven for a Stug. This development should be pretty obvious. The "give unpopular weapons a shot" goal is a fairy tale, a successful PR lie.
  4. Yes, I think about making a thread and announcing this "gift event".
  5. Ooh, they don't even have to chase after EA. If DE stays true to their inhouse formula and deliver mediocre or disappointed content again - I am out. Waiting one year for 2 weeks of playtime is just not worth it. There is no goodwill on DE's account anymore. That Ember rework might make it happen even sooner than the "main" update.
  6. I will repeat myself, goal of CC is to support your wellbeing or offense, give you more time or easy execution. What you suggest with the "incapacity" mechanic is nothing more than deleting enemies with a fancy animation, which is the same goal as killing. You suggest to transform CC into damage. On top of that, you admit that you cannot fully imagine how it should work. Your expectations of CC are misguided. Well, points 1-3 describe why CC is not trandy atm, precisely because the game does not require CC due to low difficulty; or that there is no incentive "not to kill" in any of the game modes. Thus, I said and explained how DE designed CC out of the game. CC is dead, because there is no ground for it, not because the base idea is lacking. Should this "isn't true" relate to your suggestion - read above. Furthermore, all the complaints towards nerfs exist, because people focus too much on numbers in the UI, but not their meaning. It gets especially dangerous, when one and the same person asks for "more difficulty" but dismisses any and all nerfs.
  7. When I go into Operator mode, none other Frame runs into enemies to get damaged, runs into spy lasers or disables active abilities. In short, there is a difference. Stop fishing for fallacies with staged questions.
  8. But that is the whole purpose of CC. Crowd Controll is ment to prepare and ease an encounter, by stopping opposition from killing your before you kill them - CC will protect your team and set up the enemies for an easy dispatch. This is no rocket science. One reason why CC is suboptimal today, is because our damage is soo high (thanks power creep), that in most situation enemies do not live long enough to threatem us. If enemies can survive longer -> they get a chance of killing us -> we need CC as protection and set up. If you stay long enough, you will reach a point where CC becomes relevant. The other reason is increased amount of ability immune or dispelling enemies. Direct damage is often dealt in an instant, so that dispell feature is ignored; self buffinging ignores immunity entirely. CC ont he other hand is crippled and limited. The last reason is a shift in Frame desing: today every new Frome or even reworks introduce a cheap DR skill, so that in combination with other mods like Arbitration Frames become durable and can easely manage otherwise dangerous situations. Inaros or Gara do not need CC to survive in a Sortie and can be played half asleep without being punished for sloppy mistakes, lack of movement or slow reaction time. There is no need to reinvent CC, DE just designed its purpuse out of the game. Scale back our damage; revise ability immunity; make Frames less self-efficient and CC will become relvant again.
  9. I don't know? Maybe better base stats, access to Umbra set, specialization against a certain faction, supperior fashion. Because I find an auto-bot running around not particular spicy and the AI does not behave to my liking interrupting my gameflow. I still await an answer on how a toogle option would compromise your sessions.
  10. Umbra is not a sidegrade or a re-skin, so this "solution" is off the mark.I am also curius, what is there for you to lose with an added toogle option?
  11. I do not support this suggestion. This is an attempt to shift utility options from modding into other fields, which leaves us with even more dominant power boosts and streamlines/simplyfies/reduces options. + 4. Don't mix game lore and game mechanics. There already is an option to avoid those CC elements, which is tied to personal skill level. That said, I see issues with above mentioned enemies, which require a fix: Scorpions can hook you even after you took cover, as thier hook has infinite punch through and that is silly. I would speak in favor of properly executed CC mechanics on the enemy's side as well as relevent counter measures on your side.
  12. I would welcome this change. The only way to make Rivens at least bearable. I stand behind this idea, because stat stacking produces more harm than good in every aspect of the game.
  13. Litterally the same argumentation was used back then. Exilus mods did not make Warm Coat or Shock Absorber any better or desirable; it just created a second mod pool with its own ranking. Weapon's Exilus won't reach "official goal", but introduce power creep and another plat sink. This is not hypothetical fearmongering I am describing here - it is written history. There is no slot problem, but a mod problem. There is no balance because... If you ask yourself "Why Warframe is so easy?" look in a mirror, you are likely to see one of the reasons.
  14. I do not like weapon Exilus slot. Obvious cash grap. There is the issue with capacity and whether you can afford one more mod. If you can afford one more mod, reload speed or ammo mutation seem like the obvious choices from the currently known pool. This is blatant power creep. We already have a "utility slot" for Frames and it did not reach initially stated goal - space for underused mods. Now history is repeating itself, as if nobody at DE learned anything. There is no "space problem", but a "mod problem". Fix mods and you will create an environment of choice and build diversity, which in return will enhance gaming experience. Damage mods offer way too much power and should be brought down, while utility should become important, if necessary with clear drawbacks on the weapon's side or incorporate "corrupted mod" design, with a boon and a curse, further into the game.
  • Create New...