Jump to content


PC Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation



About Teridax68

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

10,582 profile views
  1. Well they did, because we're no longer in 2018. My entire point is that the nerf to her Absorb drain wasn't what affected her, so much as the shift in metagame, as she can currently operate without any Energy problems and still performs horribly. Not only are you deliberately misinterpreting KaijuKraid's own point, it is you here who seem to be operating on some chronology of Nyx's viability that never existed. I'm gonna call a [citation needed] on this one, as you are doing nothing but using your own opinion to deny a statement when consensus in fact supports what I am saying regarding Nyx generally being regarded as Chaos-, rather than Absorb-centric. Having one ability of hers nerfed does not mean that ability was central to her playstyle, and that nutty reasoning breaks down rather easily when applied to any other frame (e.g. post-Sanctuary Onslaught nerfs to how Trinity's Link handles self-damage, despite Link not generally being acknowledged as Trinity's central ability). For all your desperate attempts to insist upon how wrong I am, you can't seem to ever really make a convincing case: are you trying to convince me here, or yourself? You seem to be under the impression that Chaos does virtually nothing outside of its short stun, which is humorous on a number of levels as you attempt to feign expertise on Nyx. I hope you take a look at the ability and notice that it makes enemies attack each other, and so across a rather large radius, hence why she's so good at stalling enemies with CC. The fact that you seem to be under the impression that Molecular Prime stops enemies from attacking (???), or that Prism comes even close to Chaos or Bastille in CC effectiveness given its unwieldy casting and LoS restrictions, adds to the humor even more. The icing on the cake, though, is you calling me a snowflake even as you demonstrate disproportionate and undue amounts of personal offense in reaction to merely being contradicted. Please, take some time aside to think about what you're posting.
  2. It contradicts my previous point... how? Notice how the other person ended up realizing we were disagreeing, rather than running on different update chronologies, a fact you're conveniently avoiding to further your desperate attempts at catching me on ... something. Do try to keep up. The fact that you're seriously trying to argue Nyx was Absorb-centric in her heyday, and that "chaos was never an amazing ability", says enough about how much you actually know about her. You visibly do not understand the difference between hard and soft CC, how CC works in Warframe, or why it was powerful back when frames like Vauban or Nyx could stall enemies indefinitely. The fact that you try to draw the line at CC being "non-extendable", whatever that means in a game where virtually all abilities can be recast on-demand, including Chaos, further demonstrates your ignorance on the matter, and your ineptitude at arguing a cogent point, let alone a relevant one.
  3. I question this assumption, as I don't think this is actually what Warframe does for most of its content. To take a few recent examples, the Pennant and Quellor are both weapons being sold on the Market, yet neither is top-of-the-line by any stretch, and instead they offer unique mechanics and aesthetics. While some warframes have in fact power crept the game (Nidus and Octavia come to mind), most new warframe designs aren't inherently stronger than that of older frames, and their appeal comes from their theme, gameplay, etc., rather than any prospective increase in power. For sure, there is some content being sold with power creep as an incentive, namely Primes, and the game has definitely experienced power creep across the board, but I don't think that power creep has really been a factor in getting players back into the game (in fact, it may turn some off if their favorite frame or weapons become unviable as a result). Thus, I'd say the solution here should simply to establish a hard upper limit to power and prevent new weapons from exceeding that. Outside of that, though, I'd go with Option 1, not really for reasons of power creep, but because I think exalted weapons are just that: weapons. With virtually every exalted weapon, the net result in gameplay is that said weapon completely overrides the player's regular arsenal when good (because those abilities are weapon replacements as well), or else never gets picked when not good enough. In general, I think pretty much every frame has the design potential for one or even two "exalted" weapons innate to them, and that specific implementation also has the unique potential to offer deep synergy with the frame, which regular weapons can't really have due to having to work with every possible frame out there. Thus, the choice shouldn't be between power and more power, but between whichever kinds of mechanics the player wants to add to their damage source. This would require giving affected frames more abilities, but I don't think that's too bad in the grand scheme of things, given that exalted weapons tend to be added as filler anyway.
  4. Uh, no, that is precisely why I made that comment, as your second comment also shows. Are you deliberately trying to confuse yourself? Power creep, as I pointed out. It is you who complained that she was "ruined by excessive nerfs", and I who contested that by pointing out that it was the shift in metagame, not excessive nerfs, that made her truly suffer. It seems that in your haste to accuse me of contradicting myself, you forgot what you said a mere two days ago. A stun is in fact hard CC, so that is in fact a good example of what soft CC isn't. Additionally, the fact that it turns enemies against each other makes it even better than a stun when an ally isn't being targeted, hence why it was so good at stalling. By all means, ask them. Perhaps they'll be able to tell you how your behavior compares.
  5. Actually no, I specifically responded in the context of her being "ruined by excessive nerfs", which fails to factor in her most recent rework. KaijuKraid misinterpreted this statement out of a disagreement we both ended up bringing to light, whereas you deliberately tried to reframe the context in yet another sad attempt to play gotcha with my quotes. Once again, you show yourself incapable of arguing anything of substance or remaining on topic, and instead prefer to try to trap people on your shoddy interpretations of what's been said.
  6. Indeed, it was specifically mentioned... by me. As pointed out already in my previous response to you. As can be seen from the discussion with KaijuKraid, the disagreement stems not from the chronology of Nyx's changes, but the chronology of her viability in relation to her changes, as I'm pointing out Nyx only started falling out of viability long after the change to her Absorb drain got added. Once again, you obsess over the letter of the argument rather than its substance, an issue worsened by your inability to adequately comprehend said letter. I'm well aware it was a solution to a problem, but considering we're both aware it was a terribly implemented solution, I don't see how you can possibly try to turn this into grounds for disagreement. This isn't even a mistake on my part, this is just you desperately thirsting for conflict.
  7. It was and still is massively disruptive CC that can halt an entire room, which is why it was picked and worked so well back when CC was strong. There was certainly the issue of Nyx randomly getting hit, but that was also a time when enemy damage was much lower, as you should well know if you played back then. She did not become unviable at the time, and it is only once the shift in metagame happened that she fell from grace.
  8. But my entire point is that Warframe has changed, and it's that, not her changes, that sank her popularity. The disagreement here is that I don't think that change "killed" Nyx, because back when stalling CC was still in demand, she could still apply Chaos just fine, and that was enough.
  9. But this has nothing to do with correcting me, then, this is you simply jumping on the occasion to have a soapbox moment on how Nyx was made unviable at some point in time, which I disagree with as well given that Nyx is still heavily unpopular in spite of her Assimilate augment, which doesn't have the drain per damage received mechanic. She currently has no real problems with absorbing damage, her core contributions are simply not that desirable, certainly not relative to frames that can apply better CC and have better survival and kill potential to boot. That's not a product of her own changes, that's a problem with the game shifting away from focusing on CC, and onto focusing on damage and durability.
  10. I don't think the grind itself is being questioned here, because the grind would still exist whether it'd be the pursuit of upgrades or sidegrades, and we're already grinding for both currently. On top of that, I would argue that the core gameplay is a lot more important than you think: the key reason why Warframe is such a successful looter shooter where so many others have failed, for example, is because its core gameplay loop of shooting, ability use, and parkour is remarkably solid -- it does break down in the ways mentioned above, but the fact that the parkour especially is so well-implemented is what has made the game popular, and made the grind feel less grindy (up to a limit). Pretty much. Warframe I think has the problem of being mostly big-picture design: it's full of really cool ideas, but when it comes to the nitty-gritty of the implementation, including bugfixing, QoL, fine-tuning, and so on, that's not something the developers have put all that much work into getting right. It's generally not a problem until the player puts their nose to the grindstone, at which point all of these (generally) small flaws become magnified from repetition, to the point where one wonders why the devs haven't picked up on these issues and addressed them long ago. When it comes to more systemic problems like that of scaling, DE have generally avoided addressing the issue, and focused instead on continuing to release content on top of it, despite how that simply makes things worse in that respect. I mean, the OP did in fact support my own proposal in that thread too, but that aside, I am in fact talking about the augment system specifically: augments are inherently more horizontal than vertical, as they exist to modify an ability's gameplay, rather than just add power as would a stat increase mod. You are right that switching over completely to that system is my proposal, as opposed to the OP's more moderate suggestion to have a hybrid of the two, but then that also gets to what I talked about earlier in this thread, where modifying our mechanics, rather than giving ourselves more power, would likely be a more sound basis for a customization system. I recommend you read my post again: I am not sure why there is a need for a correction when it seems we are all well aware that Nyx's drain per damage received was an addition after her release.
  11. This is true, but also demonstrates how vertical progression is not actually all that well-suited for a game like Warframe: instead of having a stable benchmark of power like in, say, a single-player FPS, where player damage and enemy health are perfectly calibrated together, the power increases and enemy scaling in Warframe mean that we get only a Goldilocks zone of "ideal" balance, as opposed to an entire game's worth of balanced content. At that point, it's a matter of deciding which of the two is more important: do we want a game where the player feels themselves getting stronger, or do we want a game whose content is balanced to be as engaging as possible? I can agree with this, Operator mode in particular is a direct increase in power that also needs to be kept secret until The Second Dream for plot reasons, and I agree the player should likely not start the game with the whole kitchen sink of customization options foisted upon them. With that said, I do think it's possible to break down these things and see what can be done to make sure the game remains interesting: the game's early quests already function as a tutorial to introduce the player to new mechanics (whether the tutorial does a good job of teaching those mechanics is another matter though), and so making the player go through those should be a good way to present them with self-contained content that doesn't expect them to have the whole suite of options at their disposal just yet. Because this is a discussion that talks about either nerfing or reworking ability mods, I think it's also worth discussing how existing systems can be reworked to provide more horizontal, rather than vertical progression. The system proposed in that other thread, for example, offers a mode of customization that would be a lot flatter than what we have now in terms of power increases, but potentially significantly more diverse in the options it can provide. So on one hand: perhaps I am, but I think it's more that I'm keenly aware of Skinner boxes and how they're very good at stimulating the player's reward systems in the short-term without providing long-term satisfaction. Ranking up a mod to provide more power feels rewarding, as does reaching that next rank on a Focus node, and so on, but once that's done... what then? If these things meaningfully add more power, the player is left with a game that has become less challenging, and thus permanently less interesting. Secondly, I think there's a conflation here between unlocking the ability to do something really cool, and unlocking the ability to do something overpowered: I do think it's possible to design stuff that sounds really amazing to be able to do, and probably feels it too, without actually being overpowered (we're seeing this now with Protea's rewind ability, given the positive reception of its look and sound, but doubts on its actual usefulness). Even if Magus Repair weren't so completely off the scale in power, it would still be interesting to have as a new healing option. However, if the drive to get it is simply to break the game, that brings us back to the above: so you've just unlocked this ridiculously OP thing that turns the game into easy mode... now what? You're still going to be playing this game, possibly for thousands of hours more, except now the OP thing you've got is going to trivialize the content you run, or at least more so than before. It's a short-term gain with a permanent cost in quality of play attached to it. I actually did remark this as well: So, to use your own words: Also: See above. Reading comprehension, my dude. ... who cares?
  12. The Energy drain from allied shots actually existed long before the rework, DE just forgot to remove that horrendous mechanic every time they changed her after adding a drain component per damage received. They did accidentally add it to Assimilate in the latest rework, though I think they reverted that. In any case, it goes to show just how much care and attention to detail went into reworking poor Nyx, or lack thereof...
  13. I mean, horizontal vs. linear progression is also the discussion I'd like to have: my point here is that I do think power creep itself is inherently bad in that it damages diversity when options get power crept out of viability, without the creep presenting any benefits. Vertical progression, on the other hand, does have the distinct benefit of making the player feel like they've progressed, because they're better at the same thing they used to do. Problem is, this basically means the game becomes easier, and in a game that expects the player to redo even starter content many times, and so long after they've explored the entire Star Chart, this itself contributes to boredom when the player is made to run missions that have become trivial. Horizontal progression, on the other hand, does get to contribute to a feeling of progression (one gets to add a tool to one's arsenal), but assuming generally okay-ish balance that avoids power creep, also contributes positively to diversity of play without making the game easier, since the player would have more options, but wouldn't be made strictly more powerful than before with any given loadout. I also agree that ultimately numbers on either side are a means to an end, though that also should invite us to examine what it actually means to increase our numbers: our ability ranges, for example, are measured against a static environment, and in many cases increasing range can be the difference between covering a portion of a room, and several rooms at once. Similarly, duration can make the difference between twenty seconds and a minute on an ability, which is a major difference in time. This creates breaking points past which increasing our range, duration, etc. becomes unhealthy to gameplay, which is why I think it's worth questioning the entire stat-based modding system we have, and not just pushing for nerfs. Efficiency is a stranger subject, as I think the core problem stems from the fact that our abilities should ideally be designed on the assumption that the player will try to spam them all the time (and should thus discourage mindless spam without forcing downtime), but are currently mostly designed as if their Energy cost were meaningful, which is rarely the case. Indeed, typically vertical or linear progression is where the player gets statistically stronger than before, though doesn't necessarily have their gameplay altered (e.g. more health, more damage). Horizontal progression is about sidegrades, i.e. having more options that aren't more powerful than the ones you have, though do represent different gameplay: you might get a new sniper rifle that you can choose instead of your flame thrower, and in a perfect world, both should be equally balanced, yet both should also play differently and have different strengths and weaknesses. I mean, even if the difference were 0 damage increase at all, the difference would still be reflected in the size of the respective players' arsenals. A player who's just getting started might have a handful of frames and weapons, but a veteran is going to have the entire suite of warframes at their disposal, plus hundreds of available weapons. That's clearly a lot more choice, or at least it should in an ideal world, rather than the game's current state where most of those options aren't worth picking for more than the MR. This is nothing but blanket denial, with the accidental admission that the builds aren't even the ones you use. +1 to lying indeed. Oh, and the reason I'm pointing out that the builds are awful is because Seeking Fury works significantly better on the Tigris Prime, and you're building the Exergis for some bizarre combination of Viral and Radiation, without also trying to make proper use of its status chance, which is higher than the Tigris Prime's. The only thing you've proven here is that you are ready to argue any sort of nonsense on even the most stilted of points in a desperate attempt to claim victory over something. You just admitted that DE updates older content to stay relevant, and performs balance changes to equalize weapons. I rest my case. Because... ? Behind all these hysterics, you don't seem to have anything of substance to say. Warframe, for one, precisely because once again its progression is mostly focused around the unlocking of more options, rather than always increasing one's own power. It's actually not very difficult to cap out in power in Warframe, and we do so long before we stop progressing at all. The fact that you cannot establish a difference between progression and vertical progression betrays your inability to comprehensively view the point at hand. Incidentally, I gave an answer to the person who was asking a genuine question, which you've just unsuccessfully attempted to twist into a statement to suit your own ends. Yeah, this pretty much confirms what I've said. You're establishing a deliberate confusion between all progression and vertical progression, ignoring the fact that horizontal progression is a thing. This is deliberate, because previously you acknowledged the existence of sidegrades and your interest in them irrespective of whether they were stronger than the strongest option. So, by your own admission, you fabricated the quote entirely, yet still you think you can make any sure statement on the matter. Yikes. Literally none of this is relevant to my point either, though, which suggests you have lost the plot on what we've actually been discussing (hint: it's not the existence of power creep, because we both know it exists). You are also merely repeating yourself, when it's been established that the existence of power creep does not itself imply that power creep is desirable, and in fact the fact that it was used since the game's beta as an incentive scheme suggests that it's time we moved on to more sustainable incentives: if the Braton Vandal makes us no longer use the Braton, that's adding a weapon reskin at the expense of the old version, so there is at best no change to our range of options. It thus stands to reason that the game would be a lot more interesting if the Braton and the Vandal did different, equally desirable things, as could be said for any weapon and its upgrade variant(s). It's also not a game where one customizes characters at all beyond their appearance, and its gameplay and progression systems are nothing like Warframe. It's not even the same genre. You really just picked some random example with only tangential relevance at best to the point. I mean, I don't have to, because most of those weapons are outclassed. Once again, you yourself are admitting that your point is false, so I don't really see why you insist upon arguing it. MR requirements are clearly not an accurate reflection of a weapon's power level, certainly not relative to others at different MR locks. This is, once again, pure projection, as your responses to me were clearly "Thanos snapped into oblivion", and so to the extent where one of my posts has found itself responding to a response of yours that is now gone. Your lies here are, as you put it "easily and readily available to be proven wrong", something that you by the way have utterly failed to do, given that your posts list no actual evidence. You continue to argue lazily by treating your opinion as absolute fact, somehow believing this makes you seem correct, when in reality it does nothing but pile more ridicule onto your position on this thread. The fact that your replies continue to not carry even an ounce of relevance to this thread is icing on the cake. "Concede" would imply I differed on the matter at some prior stage, which I never did. But if that makes you feel like you've managed to ever be convincing, sure, go ahead, I'll "concede" to you here. Poor reading comprehension is indeed the order of the day, as I never accused you of saying diversity was bad either; I simply pointed out you heavily undervalue it and dismiss it in the face of power creep, which you are praising for... which reason, exactly? Why exactly are you so attached to the idea of getting stronger, and why do you enjoy making weapons unviable through power creep? Agreed, which is why I see no reason for weapons to have a fraction of the damage they'd need to be viable. Numbers are ultimately relative, which means that it wouldn't be harmful if weapons were all rebalanced around some stable benchmark that could make them about equally powerful, and so when factoring differences in damage, crit, status, utility, and so on. Nyx was buffed, actually, and fell out of favor because her niche of stalling games with pure CC is no longer desirable, and is done better by frames that do more. You don't get to lament the loss of her viability due to power creep when you have done nothing but advocate power creep at all costs.
  14. Your builds are both crap, though, and done purely with the intent of maxing out the paper DPS values on the Warframe Builder app. You are also ignoring the fact that the Tigris Prime's status is raw damage too, as its status is mainly Slash. Also, where did I ever state that the player base doesn't interact with the modding or Focus systems? That too is a blatant lie. I mean, they clearly don't, otherwise they wouldn't be updating it with buffs. ... in almost every regard? Please, name a few. I suggest you learn to read properly, as I stated that power isn't the key driving point to our progression. It's in the quote I gave, too, so you really have no excuse for this. You rather visibly snipped my quotes completely out of context, given that I was talking about Flawed mods, subsequently corrected myself by pointing out I was running by outdated information on Excal Umbra, and the last quote clearly shows I acknowledge the existence of Primed and Riven mods, even though I question the hype around Riven mods when used on certain weapons. Your quotes do not support the things you are insisting I said, which I am telling you I have never said and clearly do not believe in. Your obsession with putting words in my mouth is embarrassing, to say nothing of how pointless and harmful it is to productive discussion. They aren't, and have been challenged already by other users that you, once again, conveniently ignored. Also, how does "the entire basis of [my] argument" depend on the existence of recent power creep? Whether or not that is the case, the fact remains that the game does have power creep, that this is harmful to its diversity of choices, and that it is entirely possible to reconfigure our progression to focus entirely on options, rather than increases in power. You are clearly parroting back expressions you've read without actually understanding them. ... where did I say the game isn't tied to progression? Progression is essential to the game, and I don't see why I would ever disagree with this when I am advocating a purely horizontal means of progression. What you call "shifting my argument" is rather visibly simply you accusing me of things I've never said, then accusing me of "shifting the argument" when I point out that I not only never said the things you accused me of, but that your accusations make no sense. Notice how I am continually restating the points you are accusing of denying, for example, and how I've pointed out that you've ended up agreeing with me despite your best efforts. Or, rather, I pointed out that enemy scaling did not represent difficulty, and that your attempts to brag about how you had no problems dealing with such "difficulty" where thus shallow and irrelevant to conversation. You visibly took great offense to this, to the point where you decided to make this argument personal, and piled on lie after lie in order to slander me, all the while entirely missing the point of the conversation. One can clearly retrace the posts that remain and see this. Care to elaborate on this? Sure, and the Lato Prime, locked at MR 14, is vastly inferior to both. Similarly, the Ferrox is inferior to the Acceltra, and there are many more examples of weapons with higher MR locks being inferior to lower-MR weapons. What you fail to realize here is that your statement would only be true not simply if it had examples, but if it lacked enough counterexamples. Thus, the fact that there are numerous counterexamples, to the point where the actual examples are in the minority, proves you wrong. Your response carries no relevance to the quote it answers. It's time to stop obsessing over the Tigris Prime and start talking about horizontal progression. ... Overwatch? How does that relate to the subject of progression? Your response makes no sense, given that the progression I speak of is already how it largely works in Warframe, as described already, to say nothing of how stupid it generally is to shoot something down just because it hasn't been done before, particularly when discussing Warframe. But once again, the new weapons we get are rarely stronger than the ones we already own, and the same goes for new frames and mods, yet as you accidentally admitted, people don't only pick the strongest thing around, they also go for diversity. The only garbage here is the false narrative you insist on spouting against all evidence. People like diversity, which is different from being incentivized to accumulate power, and Warframe is already largely a game with a diverse array of gameplay, even if that gameplay is being mitigated by power creep. Deal with it. I mean, the Kuva weapons do offer different mechanics over the regular versions, but that aside, once again, you are confusing incentives with desires. DE sells Primes are pure upgrades over their base versions to sell them, for sure, but the fact that people do this even for weak frames, e.g. Nyx Prime, shows that even then, power is not the core driving factor so much as completionism, to say nothing of how the power increases on primed frames are typically marginal. The fact that cosmetics in general sell well is a sign that Primes themselves would likely not even need to be separate frames to sell, though the latter certainly helps prevent the worse-looking ones from performing poorly. And this is bad... why? This also completely ignores the benefit diversity presents to replay value, as it is an obvious fact that having more valid playstyles to play means one is constrained to less repetition. This is critical in a game like Warframe, which makes players play for thousands of hours, and has routinely induced burnout in its playerbase when its gameplay has been too repetitive and samey. Wrong... about what? About how diversity is good to the game? You first. The fact that you also had even more posts removed than I did, as noted by my double response on page 7, should itself be sufficient indication that you are perhaps the least well-suited among any user to make the above kind of comment. As can be seen two posts above, I am also trying to stay on-topic by discussing ability mods and alternatives to our current system, whereas you've done nothing wholly confine yourself to your sad, obsessive vendetta. So tell me: what are your opinions on ability modding? What do you think of the model proposed in that fan concept thread?
  15. Please point to even a single example of people bringing the Exergis to an Eidolon hunt. A slight increase in base damage and punch-through does not compensate for an entire shot, which is what the Exergis is routinely built for anyway, to the detriment of all else. I also plainly explained that whether or not the Kuva Bramma is above or below in power relative to the Lenz is irrelevant, as it clearly has not supplanted the Tigris Prime, and you are only establishing an arbitrary distinction between weapon types in stark ignorance of the fact that anyone can pick whichever weapon type they want. Another user also made the case against the Bramma, which you conveniently ignored, just as you ignored the fact that entire pages' worth of your responses were removed. You would be wise not to repeat your mistakes. Such as? Please, once again, point to even a single example, as it is clear you are being entirely delusional, given that my literal first post in this thread clearly acknowledges and criticizes power creep. Why do I have to explain anything? Primes are clearly direct upgrades to their non-prime versions, a fact I have never denied, so I fail to see what you are expecting me to "explain" on the matter. The fact that these primes typically have higher MR requirements than their base versions does not prevent the fact that MR requirements do not usually correlate to the weapon's actual power. But you are projecting once again, and in fact here you are stating my own argument. The entire point to my argumentation is that, even in the current state of Warframe that is rife with vertical progression and power creep, players still progress well after the point where they've acquired the strongest weapon, or the mandatory mods, or the like, because the real mode of progression in the game is diversity, and not power. I in fact stated exactly this already: Not only is it you, not me, trying to shift the goalposts in this argument, you're attempting to reverse our positions entirely, despite the fact that we're ultimately agreeing on the matter. The Tigris Prime may be the game's strongest weapon, but people pick more than just the Tigris Prime, because people like variety. This can apply to whichever extended subset of weapons cover all possible scenarios, and even you yourself admitted in a now-deleted response that you pick weapons for fun, and not simply for power. Thus, a progression and customization system that focuses on diversity, rather than power, would make sense in Warframe, because players in general crave a greater variety of play, and only go for raw increases in power when the game incentivizes them to do so.
  • Create New...