Jump to content


PC Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation



About DiabolusUrsus

  • Rank
    Gold Eagle

Recent Profile Visitors

10,256 profile views
  1. What I'm saying is that the problem is anything being cheeseable in the first place. Which is inevitably a stupid decision. If players could think rationally instead of having an allergic reaction to the concept of subtraction, they should be able to see that even a 50% reduction in damage is less severe than a 100% reduction due to DE randomly making something completely immune. Players are still getting nerfed into the ground whenever the newest flavor of the month boss is given blanket immunity, but don't reap any of the rewards (engagement/challenge) due to DE leaving a few cheese strategies intact. Status builds should always work. Caster builds should always work. Crit builds should always work. Variable effectiveness in different scenarios is fine, but those tools should always work. So reduce ability damage; if we can overkill a 90% damage reduction throughout most of the game's balanced content, then ability damage is OP by an order of magnitude. Simple as that. And this is precisely the problem. A Saryn should be able to casually delete mooks meant to be slaughtered en masse, but NOT more specialized enemies meant to provide a stand-up fight. It's possible to do this without immunity given proper balance. Obviously this is just my opinion, but when enemies can selectively ignore my power in a power fantasy (be it status, abilities, whatever) that immediately trashes the fantasy. I mean seriously, what would the Tenno do if the Queens just threw a regiment of Kuva Guardians at them before finishing TSD? What would they do if the Ropalolyst opted to retreat outside the area with the fixed arena cannon? What if Vay Hek stopped opening his mask? How the frick did we manage to beat the Sentients with our Warframes in the Old War when mere fragments of their corpses (Eidolons) can't even be scratched by conventional weaponry? We'd be utterly screwed. IMO it doesn't matter one bit that we can roflstomp entire armies of mooks when our power is so cheaply-made that it craps out into complete unreliability whenever we need it most. Yep, and what I'm saying is that this is a direct symptom of DE's approach to avoiding straight nerfs. You'll never see a meaningful boss without status immunity as long as Corrosive and Viral procs exist in their current form. If it's not there on release, it's only a matter of time before DE remembers Shattering Impact and blocks that, too (which is exactly what happened with Eidolons and the WOSS).
  2. Holy crap this was a long time ago. Anyway, simple typo on my part - I meant to switch the places of the 10x and 20x. The gist of my point is that it's really annoying to me that DE decides to fully shut-off portions of the player's arsenal rather than tone down the arsenal as a whole to let all the different tools at our disposal play nicely with one another. Enemies that are tougher to kill with powers than guns, or vice-versa? Fine. Enemies that favor melee over gunplay, or vice-versa? Fine. But where I draw the line is when resistances turn into lazy immunities, and the mechanics consequently boil down into a simple color-by-numbers jump-through-the-flaming-hoop puzzles. I don't particularly enjoy having the game dictate when I can or cannot use specific tools to my advantage; it cheapens the power fantasy IMO. All that needs to happen is that particularly powerful tools (take your Peacemaker example) need to be suitably limited. Nullifiers, etc. are one thing, but when you have major foes like the WOSS and Eidolons catering to a very specific subset of builds due to outright ignoring everything else the player can throw at them I find that decreases variety rather than sustains it.
  3. Well, tells in the sense that they have behavior leading up to the use of an attack. They normally play a little wind-up animation before extending their arm to throw the hook, but a) the animation is so short it isn't really a fair "tell," and b) they can trigger it regardless half the time when stunned, staggered, etc. It's a tell the same way a Heavy Gunner raising its arm to ground-pound is a tell, and Gunners/Bombards appear to have the same inconsistency where they can still pull off the attack if interrupted. It's an odd setup. I was really just trying to say that things like Shockwave MOAs are a bit too long whereas Scorpions, etc. are ridiculously short. You can see it coming if you look for it, but it's too fast to be of any real use to you. I'm all for letting players split up control; I was just saying that I would prefer to require them to be controlling the operator to field both at the same time. I... Am suddenly not 100% sure. He shows up again in Octavia's Anthem, and I remember through a combination of discussion and reading I ended up with that unexpected conclusion, but I had originally made the exact assumption you did: Link broken, plan over, that's it. But reading through the transcripts and wiki profiles again I can't seem to find the material that got me there. Maybe I was just figuratively smoking something.
  4. Don't me wrong; it's simple enough to just shoot things or jump away. But when things have such extended tells it always compels me to see what I can "get away with" so to speak, and it's always kind of jarring to switch between things like Shockwave MOAS and things like Scorpions where their tells are so short they can often still trigger their grapple while stunned or staggered. I understand how storytelling works, and I am aware not every story needs to involve danger. However, that's literally what the concept pitch was for the game, and DE explicitly said that they were going to try to go back toward that direction starting with TSD. One Punch Man works because it is a deconstruction of a genre and its tropes. Saitama is definitely the protagonist, but his powers aren't the focus. His personal motivations, beliefs, and effects on the people around him are. Warframe is not exactly in a good spot to mirror that type of storytelling, and while I mean no offense to Dragon Ball fans I'm really not interested in that kind of reliance on 11th-hour superpowers and 1-upmanship. Point being, it's possible to tell good stories without putting the protagonists at-risk but Warframe does not have the foundations needed to tell such a story IMO. Our Operators are too shallow and their relationships with other characters in the setting are too ambiguous to set up an effective narrative. Remember that this is a game, and not a book or manga; DE needs to account for the player's choices and the fact that they may not have interfaced with the narrative the same way. Take, for example, some players not even knowing who Teshin was while their player character apparently trusted him enough to ignore common-sense hostile cues deep in enemy territory. These things accumulatively lead me to see Hunhow's fall as more clumsiness in the writing rather than insight into his character. I mean, seriously. Show of hands who even realized that breaking War was so damaging to Hunhow that he needed to recover? I, for one, thought all we did was break his link with the Stalker. Yet the next time we see him we're effectively finishing him off in a weakened state. DE spent time building up a villain, decided "whelp, that didn't work out" and threw him in the trash bin through a side quest. I don't really see that as humanizing or particularly interesting.
  5. Sounds good to me, and we definitely need to move away from "every telegraph looks like a Ballista." Rather than feeling patronized they just plain throw me off. It's really awkward to get the timing down. I think a better approach would be for CC-capable enemies to be relatively rare and limited to those the player are explicitly made aware of. Dime-a-dozen cannon fodder really has no reason to be capable of knocking players around to such an extreme degree. I understand the rationalizations for it, but it still bugs me. It's not that it couldn't make some degree of sense; it's that I find the new direction for operators to be a lot less compelling story and gameplay-wise. Their amps and movesets bring nothing especially interesting or unique to the table, and operators are a stark aesthetic downgrade from any Warframe. Now that we are functionally immortal, I doubt that the New War will be able to plausibly create any sense of urgency or suspense (unless the Sentient get some way to cancel out our plot armor, at which point the developments in TWW are fairly redundant and it would have been better to keep our vulnerability while enhancing our Void powers further). Therefore, given the choice I would much prefer to keep the operator's presence on the battlefield to a minimum and even work toward reducing it. I recognize that your suggestion is mechanically sound, so take this as me griping over the handling of the lore and setting rather than a direct criticism of the "stowed" vs. "left" concept. It would work fine; I would just resent it on principle.
  6. Thanks for the support. Isn't there already an option available to support binding melee to LMB? I use E, so I haven't checked it, but I could have sworn it was there. In any case, while I would support a manual cosmetic option for "drawing" a melee weapon (people paid plat for some of those animations) I don't think that a return to full "melee mode" would be appropriate. One thing I really disliked about Melee 2.0 was that it required players to commit entirely to melee to get proper performance out of it (due to the combo meter and related mods). Keep in mind that I am referring to the default keys only; these would not be the only options. I'm not entirely sure what kind of southpaw support the game has, but that sounds like something that would have to be handled through customizable bindings. Yep, I firmly believe that many attacks are over-telegraphed to the point of being counter-productive. Shockwave stomps take about a half-second too long to trigger, and eximus fire blasts are just plain off relative to the cast animation. Bombards need about 10% of the fire rate they have now, and something resembling a plausible magazine capacity. I would prefer faster missiles with significantly reduced tracking, but I'd settle for better projectile visibility to start. This is honestly where parries come in, as well as the mentioned "blocked shots build combo meter." If every reflected bullet stored a "hit" of combo, spending the time to redirect that Grakata volley could actually be fairly useful if your goal is smashing that nearby Heavy Gunner with a heavy attack. Parrying would be more niche, but it could be very useful against bosses that would otherwise be effectively melee immune, like Lephantis. Rest assured that these would be one of several options, and there's no need for particularly hardcore timings in a game like Warframe. As a reference point, Dark Souls uses ~0.1s as its standard parry window with "extended" windows up to 0.13s on specialized parry gear. The difference is easily palpable. Something a lot more relaxed, like 0.3 to 0.5s depending on mods would work just fine in WF's case IMO. Largely agreed, though I really don't like the thought of leaving the operator idle on the battlefield. I recognize that they would be invulnerable for all intents and purposes, but it bugs me enough that they physically step onto the battlefield at all. Here they are introduced as potentially our biggest weakness and used to create dramatic tension (oh noez, you might die for realz!) and yet they are immediately functionally immortal with even less consequence for dying than their Warframes. I'm okay with leaving an empty Warframe sitting around, but having an operator turtling indefinitely would just be a bit on-the-nose IMO. Simpler more efficient movement? Great. 2-piece puzzles between the operator and frame? Great. Leaving the Tenno around like a discarded K-drive? HISSSSSSS. While we're at it, I'd really like to see some spoiler-masking features for transference. Make operators invisible or unrecognizable to players who haven't finished TSD; it's really awkward and annoying to need to hide tools I've earned to avoid spoiling newer friends I play with. *Devil Triggered* To be perfectly honest the game probably would have been fine and given a good critical reception if they hadn't tried to shoehorn it into the DMC franchise. Mechanically it was reasonably sound; most of the hate it got was for its bastardization of beloved characters and complete disrespect for critical fans (the infamous 'not in a million years').
  7. And I would agree with this as we mentioned previously. However, I don't want to be stuck with 1 combo when there are 2 available. If DE wants to cut their workload down significantly and do one EEE combo per stance and scrap W+E entirely, I'm happy. Agreed. To be clear I am not against simplifying stances at all. I disagree with this summation. The only reason ADS switches to guns is that players may need to aim before firing. However, by simply always applying the zoom it can function as a fully transitional state (with a use for both sides of the equation). In fact, having the switching can actually cause problems. For example, if you unequip a secondary (e.g., to level a primary faster) then attempting to aim-glide will force you to drop any datamass or powercell you are carrying. Players also can't glide + block, which is why the auto-block currently triggers glide and causes control issues. Ah, so now you're admitting they're made up. If you have to add such uncertain qualifiers to these "possible" issues depending on the "implementation," you have to recognize on some level that unwanted rolling and sprinting are completely bogus. My implementation would be entirely identical to the existing default controls. Players aren't sprinting and rolling by accident now (or else you'd see a lot more complaint threads about crappy unpredictable controls), so they aren't going to magically start when holding shift changes from combo A to combo B while pressing E. That's called a nirvana fallacy. DE doesn't even do what you are demanding with their official releases; hence this thread. Accounting for every possible issue is an impossible standard, which is why I proposed the binding customization as a safety net. However, I reject your grounds for claiming that my bindings would be bad or inappropriate defaults - the issues you raise aren't realistic, and my proposed bindings match the default scheme exactly. Slide attacks came up because you were complaining about extra inputs - my "extra input." I was pointing out that it's not anymore complex than slide attacks, which players manage fine. The 4th input is, depending on circumstance, sprint. While W+Crouch+E is fine for things like Galatine, Guandao, or Atterax, the shorter weapons I use need the extra speed and slide distance to get where I need to go. Thus, 3-4 inputs where players using toggle sprint are going to only need 3 in most cases. Even if you're not willing to count that, though, if you can manage 3 inputs for slide attacks I think you can manage 3 inputs for a combo. Especially when you really only need to hold 2 and mash 1. Nonsense. You were the one who brought up unwanted rolling and said that while you could manage it while just sprinting, it could be a problem while fighting. If the player has a roll key, it will not be involved in the combo. If the player is using a combined sprint/roll key, they will not roll accidentally because they would need to HOLD the key, not tap it. Any players who use hold-to-sprint will already be used to releasing sprint before executing a roll. Those who aren't will be using different bindings already (like a separate roll key, or toggle sprint). My system wouldn't change anything about that, though. Ok, see, now it's clear that you're not really arguing in good faith. My suggestions are bad because they limit players in nonexistent ways, but it's fine for you to limit me to slide attacks or picking weapons with longer reach? GTFO. The current system of repositioning with WASD during combos works just fine for me. Why should I have to give that up under the new system? I've got no problem with you disagreeing with my proposed bindings. I'm not trying to force you to like them, and I'm not trying to "downplay" anything. I am questioning your criticisms of my ideas, because so far you have provided no rational basis for why they would actually be a problem. It adds an extra input? Big deal; it's not any more complicated than the existing control scheme. It can cause accidental rolls or sprinting? Simply untrue. If it were, the existing system would cause these issues. But it doesn't, or else players would be complaining about it. When was the last time you saw a player complain about rolling accidentally because they started a melee combo while holding sprint? ... That's what I thought. It just doesn't happen. +1.
  8. Very nicely said; I agree completely with all of this. Not sure I understand what you mean by the "second bullet jump." Do you mean simply swapping out the midair hop with a second bullet jump spin? I'm not really seeing where the controversy would be coming out of that. One thing I have to appreciate about the new Jupiter tiles is how many little "snags" DE has edited out to make moving around smoother. No more getting stuck on little lips above doorframes, huzzah! It would definitely be pretty neat to be able to build Ventkids standing by boarding through standard missions, and with newer more spacious tiles it would certainly be a viable method of getting from point A to point B. However, I still can't get behind fully replacing sprint with something like this. Something just feels wrong about humanoid supersuits not having the potential to run fast. DE can't accelerate default movespeed too much, or else players will lose out on fine control (we see complaints about this already with Volt and Speed in team environments). How would the new Mach speed Warframe fit into this new sprint-less environment? Wouldn't K-Drives be a bit overkill for something like a Galleon or Cruiser? I think it would also drive me a little crazy to constantly leave my K-drive sitting around random tiles after dismounting. Not that any of this would be entirely unsolvable; I just can't quite get comfortable with the concept.
  9. And this is all a terrible idea if true. Rooting is not misleading, because it does have immobility. Broken Bull is rooting, and while it does technically have forward mobility, that degree of mobility is not adequate for melee weapons with shorter reaches than heavy blades. It works okay on things like Galatine and Paracesis. It will not work well on something like Heat Sword. Forced movement is not fun. It is clunky and obtrusive, and absolutely should not become more widespread. You've already had a dose of this given your experience with lunges, and the use other posters have mentioned (using the "stationary" combo to attack meatier targets) will be directly sabotaged by innate forward movement. It's not enough to have only one combo with that degree of mobility. If only one combo has it, the stance may as well only have one combo. Mobility is needed for most weapons to be effective. I see what you're saying, and that has me legitimately worried now. If true, then Melee 3.0 will be a direct downgrade from 2.0 in terms of combo flexibility for the weapons I use. These would be absolutely terrible ideas and fly in the face of everything the community at large has been saying with regards to melee and what we want to see out of it. I'm sure we could hammer out the details of something that would work better than what we have now, but I'm too exhausted at the thought of previous developments to continue this train of thought. I said that the problems you raised (unwanted sprinting and unwanted rolls) were made up. They simply don't happen. Are you freakin' serious right now? Is it that hard to keep track of the distinction between "Shift" as a key and "Sprint" as a binding? If the user has sprint/roll bound to separate keys and roll is bound to shift, they would not accidentally trigger a roll by pressing shift... because they would be pressing whichever key they have bound to sprint instead. If the player uses toggle sprint, they can toggle sprint on/off to switch combos. If the player doesn't want to do that, they have the option of adding a custom binding based on their preferences. The default binding, where sprint/roll are both tied to Shift, should be fine for any players not using toggle sprint. Players using the default bindings will already be used to using those keys in combination. Players who aren't happy with the default configuration (like you, based on our discussion) will have rather strong opinions regarding what suitable bindings are so it would be best to let them pick their own bindings. I am not proposing anything more complex than things WF players are already accustomed to (e.g., slide attacks requiring 4 combined inputs). If you can't wrap your head around that, that's your problem. You've got no basis for calling it a "cumbersome mess." Sounds like a pretty niche set of preferences, and certainly not appropriate as default bindings. If you're prone to rolling while distracted during combat, I'm afraid that's on you. You wouldn't use a glide or bullet jump to move < 3m between individual enemies, would you? That is the degree of mobility I'm talking about. Movement between individual swings in the combo, not movement between complete combos used to move between discrete groups of enemies. If you don't want those extra meters... let go of W. Like I said previously, that's just plain user error.
  10. I see the disconnect now. You are coming from the perspective of using primarily heavy blades, where rooting combos are indeed the norm and there is no reason to use W while executing a combo that doesn't actually let you move forward. Given the extra range heavy blades have, this doesn't bother you because you're still able to effectively connect with multiple targets. In that scenario, the official bindings make plenty of sense. I am coming from the perspective of using primarily nikanas, longswords, dual swords, etc., where rooting combos are not the norm. If I hold W while executing most combos, I can freely move forward at normal speed and doing so is essential to closing smaller gaps between individual targets in all but the most tightly-packed crowds. This means that using the standard combo requires input that is actively detrimental to my weapons' efficacy, and if it truly is a "rooting" combo that prevents faster forward movement it is effectively a wasted combo on my stance. You are correct that Broken Bull doesn't allow backward movement during the combo, and you've got enough range that it doesn't matter one way or the other. However, I need full mobility during attacks in order to be effective, and I certainly don't want to be reduced to slide attacks and fixed lunges for controlling my positioning. Rooting attacks are useless to me (which makes me sad because the last two swings of "Silent Acumen" on Decisive Judgment are some of my favorites... but they just suck to use because I can't freakin' move). Yep, it now makes perfect sense that we would see different things when looking at the same footage. You see a rooting combo because that's what you've come to expect as the norm. I see a combo that isn't necessarily rooted and could be moving forward at a faster pace if not for the fact that W now overrides it and triggers an entirely different combo. If you are correct and DE truly is moving towards universal "rooting" combos for standard E inputs, I have to wonder what they are smoking to think that is a good idea. A quick glance at the feedback for the current iteration of melee (2.5, 2.75, 2.999, whatever) shows an overwhelmingly negative response to the loss of quick melee and its associated mobility. Most players don't appreciate being forcibly rooted in place. I know that you prefer rooting combos because they generate a sense of heft for your weapons, and I agree that they are fine on things like heavy blades because the player can still fight effectively. However, rooting combos are pure poison to shorter, faster weapons, and if DE is planning anything of the sort they are making an even bigger mistake than I originally suspected in the OP. I would personally rather we just get a faster sprint with additional practical benefits (e.g., if it truly doesn't penalize enemy accuracy, perhaps it should), but to each their own. I actually agree 100% with simplifying crouch into a dash, with slide attacks being triggered during the dash, though. I'd also love to have an air-dash instead of midair roll (which just looks plain weird). +1.
  11. There are no issues at hand. Your issues are quite literally made-up: Doesn't matter. I have already accounted for this: Holding sprint doesn't actually force sprinting - it just triggers a different combo. Sprint is not such a significant difference that players would be harmed by a split second of sprinting between combos either. If sprint isn't bound to Shift, the player wouldn't be pressing Shift to trigger the combo now, would they? That's why I suggested the custom bindings. The neutrality of that input is precisely the problem with it. It bleeds over into situations where players may not actually want to trigger that particular combo, but also don't want to stop moving in order to do a different combo. This effectively removes an entire combo for players who simply forward a lot during melee. And you are BSing here. Accidental rolls don't happen. Unwanted sprinting makes no significant difference. Yes, as I originally suggested. You mean to tell me that you can't comfortably transition from a sprint to a roll, or vice versa? I don't mean that as throwing shade or anything, it's just that the dilemmas you have been describing are completely alien to me. Releasing Shift to tap it and trigger a roll is absolutely standard practice for anyone who isn't using toggle sprint. And if you're using toggle sprint, you can just tap your roll key.
  12. I had heard talk of this, but not any confirmation that it was happening for certain. Do we have any dates on this? If nothing else it just means that the "Sprint" binding is now a free key usable for different purposes. Like melee. I don't use spin-2-win, and I absolutely agree that it needs to be scrapped, so I'm not really sure where you meant to go with this. Spin-2-win is hardly the only build that OHKOs or near-OHKOs enemies. Ah, so that's what you meant. In that case, you must hate slide attacks eating up 3-4 inputs (depending on toggle sprint), yeah? Yeah, no. I mix sprinting into combos all the time and this just plain doesn't happen. I sprint when I press Shift. I roll when I tap shift. Standard combo: just mash E. Crowd combo: press Shift, mash E. Done. When I am sprinting, whether I let go of shift or interrupt with E I don't randomly get a roll out of it. Why are you pressing E first if you want to use crowd clear and the combo modifier is Shift? Press Shift first, or that's just plain user error. Not unless you tap Shift, which is another example of user error. Which is immediately interrupted as soon as you press E. It's not like sprinting occurs in short uncontrollable bursts when you trigger it. You're nit-picking control differences in the order of milliseconds, and that's ridiculous. And neither does Shift, realistically. Are you tapping W repeatedly to move every step while melee-attacking? No. You're holding it down. Just do the same with Shift and it will work exactly the same. To be clear, I'm not trying to force you to use my binding. I'm just calling out the BS specter of "unwanted movement" tied to using it. The situations you describe simply don't happen if you use the controls as they are currently implemented. Don't tap Shift if you don't want to roll. Nope. I constantly hold down W and Shift intermittently while mashing E, and this just plain doesn't happen. That's complete BS. Changing a default binding is hardly a "fundamental change to a mechanic." The combo still works the same. And I am perfectly happy to accept a different default as long as I can rebind... But all your criticisms thus far are total BS scaremongering. You're relying on hypothetical scenarios that simply don't happen; I can tell you with certainty from direct experience. My bindings should work fine for anyone who uses the default Warframe keyboard controls. If you don't use those, you've had to rebind your keys anyway. Is rebinding one key really worth mucking up the existing defaults?
  13. Finally tried this fight out today, and I have to say that despite some huge, glaring flaws, I was pleasantly surprised. The Bad Bosses built on jumping through hoops are, IMO, never fun in games requiring players to grind them repeatedly. They quickly become a matter of going through the motions, and what may have been novel the first few runs is inevitably reduced to tedium that makes players not want to go back. Ever. Using parkour cables to navigate the boss arena? Neat. Cables that run in the most unimaginative directions possible? Snore. Timed jumping puzzles while running on said cables? Groan. I am against OHKO attacks as a matter of principle. The infrequent use and reasonable telegraph help prevent it from being a complete dealbreaker on this fight, but I don't think "you messed up once, you are dead" is ever particularly compelling to the player in a game like Warframe. I Wanna be the Guy? Super Meat Boy? Okay fine, because the game is built around those and pretty much everything is OHKO. But in Warframe? Nah. It's not "challenge," it's just "difficulty." And by itself, that only causes annoyance/frustration rather than fulfillment. This might just be me, but I absolutely detest boss fights where the player must use the environment directly to damage the boss. It is a recipe for instant destruction of the power fantasy Warframe sells itself on. One thought instantly sticks in my mind: how would we beat it if we fought it somewhere else? I dislike Kuva Guardians and Eidolons for the same reason. These things would have absolutely destroyed us before finishing TSD/TWW, so how the heck are we supposed to believe we won the Old War... and why didn't the Grineer just crush us early on with a few dedicated shock troops? We would have been helpless! Big 'ol Natah transmissions, but other posters have covered those in-depth already. It can be really awkward to get in range of grabbing the damn thing on occasion. The Good I appreciated that the staple "homing missile spam" of what seems like every damn Warframe boss is toned down somewhat. I was delighted to see that the Sentient shields were nowhere near as spongy as those of its POE siblings. Smashing it into the charged towers is honestly pretty funny. I don't actually see that getting old (though perhaps shorten the delay before it actually becomes steerable), though I would prefer this as one optional strategy of many (tying back into my point about power fantasy). The Amazing My absolute favorite part of this fight is that the boss becomes vulnerable to melee during stage 3 and that it's big enough for me to climb on top of and commence the slice-and-dice. The most efficient method? Nah. But more fun than just wiping the thing with guns for the nth time, IMO. More bosses that support both gunplay and melee, please. EDIT: THE DISAPPOINTING Welp, went back and tried it solo... and at that point the OHKO lasers were just bleeding annoying. Easy enough to avoid on their own, but the damn thing fires them off so fast that once your pet goes down you can't pick it back up again without it getting nuked immediately after. Void Mode is the only safe way to revive, and that means the boss is just constantly targeting your pet. Can I take a sentinel? Sure, Carrier Prime works fine. But c'mon.
  14. Having reviewed that footage several more times while responding to another poster, I can comment on this with better certainty: Yes, there is a degree of advancing movement while executing the basic combo, which is to be expected. We have that now, and it can be countered by moving backward. We didn't see Reb's inputs and it was a narrow-scope demo, so I see no reason to believe that such capability would be removed. The "crowd clear" combo is very obviously moving forward at a normal pace (practically identical to the combos I use in-game every time I play). Again, I'm not taking issue with the degree of movement permitted in the combos. My grievance with the official inputs is that I am moving forward 90+% of the time in melee combat... which means I essentially won't get to use the standard combo much because I am moving forward. I don't expect or need the sprint binding to make me move forward FASTER than is already possible; I just want a binding that allows me to switch between combos independently of moving forward. That way I can use both. Okay, so what I'm getting from this is that you prefer to use only minimal combo movement because you run into issues when moving around at higher speeds. As far as I can tell, being able to trigger both the standard and crowd-clear combos without needing to use any movement inputs at all could actually be beneficial to you provided you have the option of binding it to something you don't find obtrusive. However, while using weapons with shorter range (daggers, dual daggers, swords, nikanas, etc.) players need the extra mobility from moving around to still hit enemies consistently. For that reason I can only see the proposed W+E combo input as annoying at best and pure poison to my playstyle at worst. Okay, but what does this have to do with a melee discussion? Even if you prefer to stand still to shoot the Lanka or Paris, you can still damage enemies (mostly) regardless of their relative position. The same does not hold true of, say, my Prisma Skana. I need to move forward to bring enemies into range, and I really don't want to have to close distances of a few meters with bullet jumps before coming to a full stop in order to initiate the basic E combo. I think this is a bit off the mark. Not needing mobility isn't exactly the same thing as not benefiting from it. Atlas' on-ground requirement has no significant difference from executing a melee combo. In my experience he gets around very quickly simply by virtue of Landslide being a dash-to-target cast. Frost does just fine with mobility except for Snow Globe, which is only 1/4 of his kit (with Freeze, Ice Wave, and Avalanche doing just fine with mobility). Nidus' only prolonged rooting power is his 4, and even that is only insofar as players needing the carpet's health regen. Inaros is even less restricted than any of those three. I'll agree that it's not entirely necessary, and I certainly agree that high mobility should be forced, but I am not asking for any such thing. I am asking to be given continued access to a standard of mobility I already have while getting the option of using both of the new combos as-desired. Er... what I meant by a heavy attack combo is a sequence of different charged attacks constituting a full combo string instead of just the 2 we have now. You could still have that with your sustained hold input (each attack separated by the charge delay). I agree that players should have access to features to reduce clicking/mashing, but I don't think they should be forced. You know where I stand on this with regards to manual block, though I hope we've reached a reasonable compromise with implementing it back in while preserving an unobtrusive auto-block (and with the understanding that manual-block related features should never be fully mandatory or the only viable option). To put it simply, I want manual blocking as a means of expanding melee's presence alongside gunplay (especially with regards to bosses) but not as a means of taking over the space guns currently occupy. In fact, I am staunchly against the melee-only enemies they announced as planned in one of the recent streams... As a player who favors melee I know how frustrating and annoying it is to be barred from using it, and I wouldn't want players who prefer gunplay to experience the same. I typically try to strictly follow post order because I've had past discussions derail as people lose track of their points, but if you can handle mixing things up based on relevance I'm game. Fully agreed to all of this. Give me an out, and I'm happy. I just really don't want to see W+E invade ALL of my remaining stances, even if I see the immediate benefit to a universal control scheme and simplified combo inputs. I always find myself needlessly limited in terms of combo execution on any stance which includes such a combo.
  15. Agreed. I prefer hold-to-aim in most cases, but toggle is fine for scopes. I also agree that we shouldn't need more than 1 level of zoom and that scope bonuses should not be tied to zoom level. I hated that change from the moment they announced it. Yes, agreed. Though this would need to be accompanied with a "remove binding" option to fully clear keybinds (for example, I unbound toggle crouch completely to free up V). Absolutely, let's not leave controllers in the dust.
  • Create New...