Jump to content

Teridax68

PC Member
  • Posts

    3,970
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Teridax68

  1. I can agree much more with this. While some of our tools are definitely far too strong, a huge part of that excess power also comes from secondary systems such as our modding, such that nerfing weapons and frames directly wouldn't always be the most effective solution (though it does still need to happen in some cases). Furthermore, while some options are for sure overpowered, there's also a vast number of frames and weapons who underperform or just aren't as fun as they could be, and so who could certainly use buffs or power-neutral reworks. Ideally, all of this should be done through comprehensive, system-wide reworks, so that DE doesn't feel as much pressure to implement knee-jerk nerfs or power creep to enemies when that does happen. I also do agree that one of the problems behind this is that there is a distinct lack of a benchmark for what constitutes adequate power among weapons of the same type: not only is it difficult to even calculate a weapon's average damage output due to how many multiplicative mods there are to factor in, there is no reference for what counts as an "okay" amount of damage output, ammo economy, other useful features, etc., which is why DE accidentally releases weapons that are grossly over the mark without properly realizing just how excessively strong they are. It's all seemingly up to whoever's in charge of the numbers, and that's not a system that's worked out well thus far. It would help to define explicitly what would count as an "average" weapon for each given class, and bring every weapon to roughly around the same power level, mods included.
  2. So obviously the OP is wrong, but I think it's worth digging a little into why. The post makes three common assumptions that are often brought up in this sort of discussion: More raw numerical power means more coolness and more fun. A game being a power fantasy means there should be no upper limit to our power. Nobody gets hurt in a co-op game when some builds are capable of cheesing the game. Point 1 is wrong because it fundamentally misunderstands where fun comes from in a video game, which isn't simply power, but the delicate balance of player agency versus the game's challenge. Even in in a "power fantasy" game, the game throws challenges at us that aren't necessarily threatening, but that still incentivize us to change things up so that our gameplay isn't completely monotonous and automatic. Warframe does not do this, because in the near-totality of situations, an overpowered build will have us cruise through missions without really having us switch up our playstyle, or even pay much attention to what we're doing. This makes gameplay less interesting, rather than more interesting, and so because we have so much excess power that a whole lot of gameplay tied to surviving, maneuvering, or even just aiming is lost. It makes doing really cool things, like blowing up entire roomfuls of enemies, mundane, and anything less than that is considered bad, which is why so many frames feel uncool just because they can't do the same ridiculous things as others. Point 2 is wrong because it fundamentally misunderstands what a power fantasy is, where it comes from, and the difference between feeling and being powerful. Power fantasies in games come from two main things: player agency, and narrative. Games with a power fantasy (which are most games) tend to make sure to have us feel like we're the deadliest thing around, which can still involve challenging gameplay, as is the case in the Halo and Doom series. Some add to that by giving the player a lot of freedom to play in exactly the way they like, and do cool things. In general, all of this is geared towards making the player feel powerful, whether or not there is a real chance of failing. None of these require the game to be so trivially easy as to cease to even be a game at all. Comparisons are often made to Dynasty Warriors, except the games have a difficulty setting where, at higher levels, the game gets really hard, and the player gets killed in only a few hits. Power fantasy does not equal trivial gameplay, and past a certain point, if we have too much power we can't even feel all that powerful, because anything that doesn't do the most overpowered thing we can do all the time ends up feeling weak. In this respect, overpoweredness can damage, rather than enhance a game's power fantasy, and so if we're designing in service of a power fantasy, there is reason to implement nerfs, if only sparingly. Finally, point 3 is wrong because overpoweredness has plenty of damaging effects in a co-op game: because Warframe is balanced around a grind loop, that grind loop ends up having to be balanced around our strongest builds, which means it becomes excessively grindy and unpleasant for anything else. We can see this with the new balancing of Kuva Liches, who have such absurd amounts of damage reduction at higher levels that one essentially needs our cheesiest options to go through them without the fight being a total slog. The Steel Path is also a massive gear check that turns most weapons into pea-shooters, and makes many frames too weak to properly compete. Extreme differences in power thus end up reducing our range of viable options, even if we choose not to partake in the cheese, and gameplay suffers for it all around. TL;DR: Excessive amounts of raw power tends to make gameplay more boring, rather than more interesting, power fantasies work best when the game isn't suffering from runaway power creep, and even if one chooses not to pick the most overpowered options, one will still suffer in a game that inevitably ends up being balanced around our strongest builds. Balance and nerfing are therefore for PvE just as well as for PvP, and while nerfs should only be applied sparingly, they still need to be applied, especially when we are so above the game's ability to challenge us that it can't hope to power creep itself to match us in the arms race.
  3. I think Hanlon's Razor applies in full force here, for better or worse. I do think the devs at DE are still passionate, it's just that the company has always had a problem of poor management, lack of follow-through, and inept pipelining of content updates, problems that have all been allowed to fester over the years. The problem with DE's approach to addressing bugs, design issues, and the like is that, unless it causes a huge fuss in the immediate or harms their grind loop, the devs prefer to bunch issues together and release them in one update as if it were new content, as was the case with the latest major updates. Outside of that, DE routinely has the approach of devoting all of their resources towards rushing a single big project out as soon as possible each time, which starves smaller projects of resources (sometimes to the point where they stagnate for years), and frequently leads to those big content updates coming out half-baked as well. This then creates more fires that DE vows to put out eventually, but rarely if ever properly does because by then they're focused on the Next Big ThingTM, and so the cycle begins anew. This is a problem that's been pointed out for quite some time (I remember this being mentioned as far back as in 2018). What DE likely needs to fix these issues is a comprehensive reform to its organizational structure, accountability process, and development pipeline, but that would likely require treading on a lot of people's toes, which is why it hasn't happened thus far. However, I also believe that the only way for things to change is to speak up about these things and not simply settle for a suboptimal status quo. I think it is still worth asking for DE to change how they interact with their community even if they're not currently listening, and who knows, if enough people make enough noise that could perhaps start something productive, no matter how incremental, as has happened on certain occasions before.
  4. As per the very comment you are replying to, the nomenclature makes a difference. DE has reacted in the past to exploits by punishing the players involved, and so in response to the optimization being called an exploit. You may call any unintended way of optimizing gameplay an "exploit", but the term is used specifically by developers to designate abusive behavior that they don't want to have around, which they address by fixing the exploit and/or punishing not just the people who took part in it, but even those who disseminated knowledge of it. "Counter-uproars" would not prevent players from being harmed by such a developer response, even if their punishments were to be reversed. Throwing around words with consequences willy-nilly like this is as reckless as it is stupid, and even if you're just trying to be pedantic rather than outright malicious, your definition would still not match up to how it is employed.
  5. If you truly consider this behavior an exploit and have done any of the following: Avoided walking into Grineer camps during Eidolon hunts in order to ensure Vomvalysts spawn near the entrance. Stuck together in a room with few entry points in a Survival mission to maximize spawns and the flow of enemies. Rushed past Vay Hek to his final boss room in order to trigger all of his escapes in one go. Then congratulations, you are an exploiter. Just like the thing mentioned in the OP, all of these rely on knowledge and proper triggering of the game's spawn system in order to optimize gameplay. None of them have caused issues, none of them have been addressed by DE, and certainly none of them are worth punishment, as is the case with actual exploits. But seriously, though, how miserable does one have to be to label any sort of optimization an "exploit"? What is it with this desire to punish other players for enjoying themselves? How does it hurt you when a few players use a spawning trick to shave a couple minutes off their grinding time? If the intent isn't to get anyone punished, then avoid using the term "exploit", because DE has punished people for exploits before, including with lifetime bans. Given that there is little consistency to their actions in this regard and that they are prone to knee-jerk reactions, I wouldn't so loosely use a term that, to the developers, is a sign that a player is engaging in genuinely abusive behavior.
  6. So what was that about Trinity's specter being better than Wisp's? It also seems you think Wisp's specter is also somehow better than any other, which begs the question as to why this is Trinity's problem in particular. Which "most situations"? Had I experienced the same frequency of Wisp specters as you claimed, or something at least a little closer to it, I would have agreed with you, but because my experience differs from the claim so significantly, and because there appears to be no evidence anywhere else to support that claim, I asked for some way to confirm that there was in fact this frequent usage of Wisp specters that I was somehow missing. Apparently, there is no supporting evidence, and even now you are contradicting yourself by stating that you too rarely see specters at all, which is much closer to my own experience as well. True damage does not trigger Sentient adaptation, and Sentient adaptation only applies to the damage types that trigger it. These are a very small minority of enemies even within their own factions (Treasurers in particular spawn in a mission only once). I fail to see how these explain Trinity's poor damage output, so much as her own poor damage output. If this is a thing no warframe can bypass... why is it a problem for Trinity, who possesses the only damage type capable of ignoring the most common source of damage reduction in the game? Again, EV being affected by some forms of DR (and far fewer than most other damage types) is not what's holding Trinity back from being a damage-dealer, so much as her notoriously low innate damage output. Okay, sure, tell me at which level EV starts to count as significant damage. Worth noting that Octavia's Mallet is by no means the only ability that scales, as plenty more also go into numbers more than high enough to deal with the enemies we face at most levels (Vauban's Flechette Orb scales with enemy level, for example, and Saryn's Spores damage goes up to 70,000 per second). It's always been the case? Link's max rank base duration has always been 12 seconds compared to Blessing's 10, and its cast time is only 0.1 seconds longer. Nekros is not a damage-dealing beast either, and when the change was effected, Trinity was still strong. While she was certainly one of the biggest culprits for abusing self-damage, she was by no means singled out. Get some sleep. You'll thank me in the morning, and this conversation will be better for it.
  7. So in the few situations where you've used a specter, you've found Trinity better than Wisp? What? I agree fully that Wisp is a great support, what you're saying just points out that her specter isn't a credible replacement for Trinity. That's interesting, because I've seen Wisp specters about twice in my gameplay. "Trust me bro" is not a credible source for a claim. Sure, from which sources? Because armor is the most common source of damage reduction, and is ignored by true damage. The existence of other DR is not what's holding Trinity back from being a DPS monster, so much as just a general lack of powerful damage effects (nuking single-target enemies with EV isn't that impressive anymore when most frames can kill crowds at a time). Link's duration is greater than Blessing's. Please, for the sake of intelligent discussion, actually read what you are presenting. The very text you are quoting states that damage link abilities, including Trinity's Link but also Nekros's Parasitic Link and Nekros's Shield of Shadows, all had their self-damage transmission turned off at the same time. Self-damage was removed only years later. Then stay off internet forums until you get sleep when you can, and come back to this conversation with a clear head. Confused, half-formed responses only waste your time and mine, and clog up the thread they're on.
  8. Right here: It doesn't make much sense to bring a Wisp specter to every mission, or even every defense mission, which is why that isn't done either. The whole notion that one brings a Wisp specter in case one wants a Trinity in a Defense mission is complete fiction. Who and where are these "most players"? EV deals true damage, which ignores armor. The DR you get from Blessing stacks with the DR from Link, giving you 93.75% damage reduction. This is equivalent to multiplying your effective health by a factor of 16, as opposed to the usual multiplier of 10 from 90% DR. Self-damage was taken out of every other damage-transmitting ability at the same time as Link. Trinity was not the only one affected. They did once, for good reason, because during those times Trinity was godlike. She was far too strong, and was turning missions into their current state back when resource replenishment and personal durability weren't quite where they are now. Her nerfs were well-deserved, and to this day I still think her Energy restoration is excessive, not that it's an issue now that everyone can get all the Energy they need. More pertinently, I think the biggest problem was that she was too good at offering power that just made the game less interesting, which is why she needs changes even now. You could have perhaps read a little further ahead before reflexively coming up with an answer, because your knee-jerk response is in fact exactly the point I was making. It's not just the existence of healing and Energy restoration in our options that made Trinity obsolete, it's the fact that our options cover essentially all of our needs, not just because they've become stronger, but also because we've become strong enough in so many other respects (through shield gating, for example) that we don't depend on what Trinity provides as much either. Merely chalking it down to a few mods or arcanes doesn't paint an accurate picture.
  9. Not enough apparently to know that she can heal defense objectives, a fact I told you that you could have verified independently, yet still chose to deny. Look at my statistics and come back to me with that question again. Biased as I may be, I don't think most people go through the trouble of constantly carrying around and using Wisp specters for the express purpose of making Trinity obsolete, not even during Defense missions. To be clear: I do in fact believe Trinity, other support frames, and the game all need to change. Trinity in particular is really clunky, and many other support frames have the problem of not working very well in pubs (Harrow especially can't use one of his abilities at all). I do agree that there's not enough interaction between players, and would like to move towards a game state where there'd be more of that. I do not, however, believe returning to a state of dependency on supports is what will improve the game or even the experience of playing supports, nor do I feel making harebrained comparisons to Wisp specters or the like is really going to set grounds for any discussion that would accurately describe the issue with Trinity, let alone any other support frame. Even with Vazarin's Energy dash, Magus Repair, and a Wisp specter, you are still not going to be able to play Trinity without actually playing Trinity, nor quite do all of the things she can do. The trouble with Trinity's popularity isn't simply that healing or Energy options exist (those were around while she was still dominant), but that we have become so powerful and self-reliant that we don't need a frame based entirely around supplementing our resources anymore. Some part of this could be improved with changes to the game, but I also think some part of it needs to be addressed by changing Trinity herself, as being a walking dispenser was never the most fun way to play her.
  10. You are most welcome to play Trinity and see for yourself. Yes, she can do this, and from what I'm seeing there appears to be an awful lot of people commenting on Trinity without actually knowing what she does. If you want to argue that a frame's contributions aren't unique because you can literally spawn that frame as a specter, then I guess no frame is unique, nor has any chance to be. Seriously, though, that is a pretty terrible argument when discussing the unique contributions and viability of any warframe.
  11. Funny you mentioned that, because I did. You see, I can post constructive feedback and call you out on your BS at the same time! Funny how that works. That's nice, good for you. Meanwhile, I and others can continue trying to push for positive change so that we can enjoy even more things about the game. If you're so unbothered by Warframe's issues, feel free to stay in your lane and stop ragging on other people for daring to suggest that it could use some improvements. Thanks!
  12. Which can be said just the same for DPS or tankiness, so you are simply repeating yourself here. As also pointed out, not only does this not prevent some frames from being able to support (again with the example of Wisp), it is also not a truly accurate representation of the problem given that, as also pointed out, support frames can still contribute things our customization options cannot. When the argument is that a frame's strengths are worthless if they can be accessed through customization options, that same argument can be applied to literally any aspect of any frame, as our customization options let us access most things, including damage increases and durability. The problem is not exclusive to support, and does not fully describe the problem with support frames in the game right now. It does have some relevance to some of Trinity's problems, because she was once great for providing constant top-ups to Energy and health, which are no longer needed as much due to our recovery options, but it neither describes them in their entirety (she's also a really clunky frame that's not very fun for most to play), nor accurately describes the problem of most supports (neither Harrow nor Titania specialize all that much in resource recovery, for example, but are still not especially popular, for different reasons). Framing the problem of supports in Warframe as one of customization options is making an excessive generalization that neither describes the problem effectively nor I think has much of a chance to offer useful solutions. Read what I posted again. Those specific examples I listed were of things that Trinity can do that are not provided by our customization options. No customization option will let you heal 100% of your entire team's health and shields from Affinity range (and provide 75% damage reduction to boot). No customization option will let you heal a defense objective. These are not necessarily game-changers in today's state of Warframe, but they are clear evidence that customization options don't completely swallow up all of Trinity's contributions. What we need isn't a return to a game with roles set in stone where dedicated support frames are once more necessary, what we need IMO is to drop the notion of dedicated supports in Warframe, or any sort of class with a single exclusive role: sure, we can and certainly should tone down some of our customization options so that we can't just trivialize every bit of gameplay we participate in, but we also need to make sure that even frames designated as support frames can do just fine on their own, and not need a premade group to be able to support their team. Trinity can do this already, and she should have those aspects amped up and updated to fit modern quality-of-life standards, rather than be forever relegated to being the game's resource battery.
  13. That's a nice little bit of generic nonsense, except we're talking about allowing for continuous sawing and riding with the ghoulsaw, neither of which problems are solved by the tools at our disposal. Those are design issues with the Butcher's Revelry stance and its animations. If you want to talk about damage, though, it's worth pointing out that all of these tools can be applied to every melee weapon, which means that they make the strong weapons stronger too. Even with a full complement of mods and arcanes, the Ghoulsaw is still going to be drastically inferior to other melee weapons, because once again, the multipliers on Butcher's Revelry are the problem. This would be fine if the Ghoulsaw were fun to use, but currently it's not, again due to its stance's animations. You can try blaming the players for the game's problems, as you always do, but ultimately none of that addresses the problems at hand, much less moves discussion forward. Judging by your inept assessment of the situation and the lack of relevance to your comments, it doesn't even seem like you've even used the weapon; you just saw an opportunity to rag on the playerbase once again and leapt at the chance.
  14. By this inane logic, there's no point in frames with high potential for DPS or tanking because our customization options give us that in spades too. As per my reply to Voltage, I do agree that it is too easy to recover certain resources, but that does not mean that support frames have no place in the game, particularly as Voltage themselves listed Wisp as an example of a viable support. I would also encourage you to actually play Trinity, and see that she is still to this day capable of doing things that are not provided by our customization options, such as fully healing allies from large distances or healing defense objectives. This isn't to say Trinity is in no need of changes (I think she could do with quite a few), it's just to point out that there's no sense in claiming that it's impossible to support effectively in Warframe, and that pretending that that's the case leads to no productive discussion whatsoever.
  15. Infinite spinning isn't a mobility move, though, it's a powerful radial damage move. Riding on the ghoulsaw, by contrast, is crap for damage but okay for mobility, which is why an infinite riding combo would be firmly within "just for fun" territory. Comparing the two just because there's some sort of spinning involved there somewhere makes about as much sense as calling a skyscraper a beach just because it contains some form of sand. Not entirely, if you chose to buff her in an aspect that didn't make her even more of a DPS monster (which would make her less fun for most people involved, as is already the case). Again, this is why nuance is important, and why you should probably learn to actually talk with people, instead of mocking everything and everyone without exercising any actual critical thinking.
  16. This is a rather disingenuous reading of what I'd written, which was: "support frames can fit in Warframe, so long as their literal entire function isn't just to support other players". If you want to play a game where every character functions under a strict role classification and has to remain within the boundaries of that role at all times, feel free to play any of the hundreds of other games that do just that. League of Legends is a free game too, and it could certainly do with more support players, because as it turns out, playing a dedicated support who does nothing except support isn't actually very popular. Meanwhile, I can continue to play Warframe, and can continue to play Trinity as a tanky, independent frame capable of healing and buffing teammates, rather than whichever sort of team servant you feel she should be.
  17. You did decide to make your problem though when you chose to make absurd generalizations based on the moronic assumption that the playerbase is some sort of hive mind, rather than the collection of people with different opinions that it truly is. Whining against some imaginary enemy may sure be good for farming easy upvotes from people who also thrive on negativity, but it certainly doesn't make for intelligent discourse. I'm actually curious as to what you find so overpowered with the idea. I've played this game for thousands of hours, and it only took me a few seconds to observe that I could get anywhere I wanted far more easily by just bullet jumping, compared to riding around on that saw even if it were always-on. What would be so bad with an infinite riding combo, pray tell?
  18. I don't fully agree with this: while it is true that Trinity has fallen off over time in large part because the game has made players more self-sufficient, and while I do agree that players are a bit too good at recovering from anything, I do think there's still a place for her and other support frames, so long as their usefulness doesn't revolve around being walking resource batteries for other players (which is arguably the most boring way to play any support), and so long as supporting their team isn't literally all they're meant to do. Wisp is a good example of this because she can help her team while still doing well on her own, and even Trinity's decently good at this given that she's a really strong tank. If her 1 were changed to let her do something new, ideally that didn't revolve around replenishing her team's resources, she'd likely do a lot better already, though she'd still have the clunk of early warframe design.
  19. Because apparently, wanting a single melee weapon to be usable equates to wanting the entirety of melee weapons to be able to casually one-shot enemies on the Steel Path. Nuance? Never heard of her. Personally, my issue with the Ghoulsaw is that its stance is clunky: the combos have awful damage multipliers when compared to other stances, but that could be fixed easily enough by speeding up the animations, as suggested by the OP, or just increasing the numbers. The bigger issue, in my opinion, and one not entirely based on balance, is that the weapon's biggest selling points are held back by awfully contrived animations: the weapon would normally lend itself perfectly to holding down the attack button to saw enemies continuously, but instead we have to basically whack enemies repeatedly with it. The riding animation on the gapcloser looks really cool... for about half a second, after which point we're forced to get off the ride and end in an underwhelming slam attack. These animations should not be finite; we should be able to saw enemies for as long as we want, and ride the saw as long as we feel like it as well. Neither would make the weapon overpowered by any stretch either, it'd just make it more fun.
  20. Happy fourth anniversary! It is good to see the thread alive and well, and congratulations on the newest addition! I very much like the idea of a pistol with ricocheting headshots: it's a niche that's not properly explored in-game yet, and it would reward accuracy with multi-target murder as well, which is particularly important these days now that AoE is so dominant. The stats look good (I would add a percentage mark after the status chance number though), and the silhouette on the revolver is both distinct and elegant. Job well done!
  21. The problem is that Sentients were designed to be challenging on their release, which was six years ago. Since then, runaway power creep has meant that even 95% damage reduction isn't nearly enough to make them durable. More generally, pretty much nothing in Warframe holds up to our strongest current builds, so if DE wants to give us a challenge, they're going to have to revamp many systems tied to our damage output (unlikely in the space between now and The New War), or find a way to strip us of our power (which will happen during the quest bits where we control non-Tenno characters).
  22. After seeing the weapon showcased on stream, I was looking forward to trying the Ghoulsaw, but so far it's been severely disappointing. The main culprit I think is the stance: Every single move in Butcher's Revelry is incredibly clunky and oddly framed. It's not possible to continually attack enemies as per the devstream, and one has to instead saw at enemies for a few seconds at a time. Even more damning is the saw ride, which stops after only a short period of time to end in a crappy slam attack. The damage multipliers on the stance are awful. They may look okay at a glance, until one realizes they take several times longer to trigger compared to okay stances that can land equal or greater multipliers, plus guaranteed procs, in far shorter order. So effectively, what I wanted (and what it seems most people wanted) was a saw that one could continuously press down to rip enemies apart, or ride into the sunset, and what I got was this awkward, janky weapon that almost feels like it's hitting with blunt force due to the attempts at standardizing its moveset relative to other stances. It makes me feel like stances themselves are not a great idea if they prevent melee weapons from doing what they're supposed to do. My suggestion would be to rework the stance entirely: one should be able to hold down the melee attack button for the saw to attack continuously, only stopping if one releases the attack button, and the same should apply during the gapcloser (one should only stop riding the saw when one releases the attack button). I do not care for any other move in the stance, these are the only two that would matter to me for the weapon to feel like it's doing what it's supposed to. It'd be good for the continuous attack to have a suitable damage multiplier as well.
  23. I personally play Trinity in the near-totality of content just so that I can feel like I'm helping other players directly by topping up their health and Energy. I also swapped out Well of Life for Roar with a similar intent, so that I can also apply damage and DR buffs. When I hear the telltale healing sound and see there's another Trinity on my team, it makes me happy to see her, even if she's not necessarily going to turn the game around, as it feels good IMO to feel like someone on your team's helping you. I do very much agree with the assessment as well: Trinity is known for being a support (not that players these days need her utility, necessarily), but it's less well known that she's also one of the most self-reliant frames in the game if built right, as she can become incredibly tanky while constantly replenishing her own resources. Well of Life is her biggest weak point, however, as it's redundant next to her 4. I would support reworking the ability into something else, along with some other modifications to her kit to make her flow better: Trinity's an old frame, and while I personally like playing her and have built her to not be too stressful to play, her kit has low durations and can lend itself to boring, spammy gameplay, which I suspect is partly why she's such a rare sight in missions.
  24. A warframe with no abilities or passive and the same stats as Ember can do "most content". That's not a testament to the power of any individual warframe, that just shows the high baseline amount of power we have even when not using our abilities, thanks to our weapons and mods. If Yareli's kit doesn't boost her much beyond that baseline, it's not very good, and to this day that is still the case. There is an entire spectrum of power between useless and Mesa/Saryn levels of excessive, and she could stand to benefit from a few more changes without turning into the latter. Moreover, I'd argue her problems right now aren't just with her power (though there's that), but with her usability, as Merulina still remains an incredibly clunky ability despite being the crux of her entire playstyle, and her 4 still lacks synergy with the rest of her kit.
  25. I wasn't aware of this, but I do agree that the issue of AFK leeching should be addressed at the source, by identifying leeching behavior and punishing it. The problem with imposing range restrictions on the gains of certain currencies is that to some players, they don't matter at all: a player with a maxed-out frame and weapons, a full Focus tree, and past their daily Standing cap will have no use for Affinity, and past a certain point there is equally little reason to care about other drops such as resources and mods. If the only intent is to simply complete the mission and gain what comes from that, Affinity range and the like isn't going to discourage leechers one bit, and even in situations where leechers do want to accrue Affinity, the system as it exists fails to protect against that when all the leecher has to do is sit themselves on top of the objective in Hydron and rake in the gains from their teammates doing the work from only a few meters away. Not only should it be made easier to report leechers, there ought to be better tools to dedicate behavior that is clearly not coming from a human participating in the mission.
×
×
  • Create New...