Jump to content

Lakais

PC Member
  • Content Count

    1,505
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,554

About Lakais

  • Rank
    Gold Hunter

Recent Profile Visitors

845 profile views
  1. Well, the easiest way to "tether" them would be to have a hard-cap limit to how much force is applied to enemies in their ragdolled state in that strike. So when you do hit them hard enough with a ground slam, for example, they sort of pop up off the ground to about chest height and then plop down at most 2m away. Essentially being a knockback with the new "airtime" mechanic we apparently have, but to a lesser extent. The main issue is that ragdolls and knockbacks (are they even different things?) are in a weird way, one of those "more harm then good" features because those two are always second to the best CC which is death. And people get a bit miffy when you inconvenience them by forcing them to adjust their aim, usually unexpectedly.
  2. I wouldn't say I miss it. it had a charm to it. But the only problem I had with ragdolling was the same Team-Rocket orbital launch. If instead enemies ragdolled but were sort of tethered to where they stood so they only drop at most a meter or two away, then the issue wouldn't of been this massive. Though the loss of comedy might of been a price too high to pay.
  3. The main problem I have is that it is nigh impossible for a Pilot in the heat of combat to know if that Crewship is boarded and how many Tenno are there. So: A far clearer indication of Crewships that have been boarded. This helps both the pilot and others players so we don't accidentally double up or use the Artillery on a boarded ship. Also Cephalon Cy should mention when you are shooting at a Crewship with a Tenno on board. Slingshot target indicator for the Pilot when a Tenno is in the barrel. Then they too will know what is being boarded.
  4. Railjack drift boost movement ends wonky. It just snaps to forward movement when the shift key is let go and that just completely does not work with the very concept of momentum and more often then not is counter-productive to what I want to achieve. I.E. when I drift boost sideways or backwards it's because I want to get distance or out of line of fire from something, not suddenly snap forwards towards whatever it is I am trying to avoid.
  5. Ahhh, so refreshing to see a Prime variant NOT being a blatant double-damage variant of their normal version. I do not fetishize over large damage numbers (i don't even see them as they are turned off) but for the sake of keeping up with the rest of my squad, I have to upgrade to prime versions that have some inexplicable boost to performance while looking decidedly… meh, most of the times. I abhore the nonsense Rivens have turned into and I have been non-plussed about primes so many times that this above is what I think all primes should be. I wouldn't consider getting primes difficult. Just tedious.
  6. I just noticed this too. What I noticed is that basically their hitbox becomes non-existent at any point when they are not immediately taking off or landing. So your chances of catching them is getting the timing just right to hit them right at some weird animation moment when they land or take off. I found this out by trying to scan them with my Synthesis Scanner. Basically they become un-scannable when landed and stationary and when flying around. But when they go VTOL is about when it's possible.
  7. I have to apologize for a bit, I forgot that the deployable ones in the star chart were a thing. I was thinking about the Excavators. So as I understand it, you propose that the Titan and Distilled Extractors have a chance to become a sort of "alert" to give you an alternative but semi-active source for resources. I don't see why not.
  8. This is still an issue. As soon as I try to mimic the response, the tracking marker warps to a new point, meaning i have no idea what the pace is or if I'm even moving the cursor in the right direction. Me thinks it's maybe an error in the timing value of the icon's movement and registration. Basically someone forgot to put in the numbers so the transition time is zero.
  9. If I read your post right (paragraphs are a thing, hint), then there is merrit in this. It actually makes a lot of sense if you consider that maybe those Extractors can be deployed by a properly modded Railjack and then you get a sort of self-made mission for resources. A mining venture in space. I like this. But what do you have in mind for a "rework"? Do you mean that they will just mine other resources? That's not really a rework, more like a tweak. Mechanically, they are just a stationary defense target with an eating disorder.
  10. I have said it many times, the only way to really "fix" this levelscaling issue is to get rid of levelscaling enemies, period. When enemies are clearly defined in their capabilities, WE can be clearly be defined in our capabilities. This means that rather then the difficulty/challenge (depending on your definitions of those terms) coming from some multiplier of the enemies' stats, it comes from the enemy population density and composition. Where heavy and specialist units are a greater threat on their own and the threat rises as they become more and more numerous. This means, however, a blanket, wide and DEEP nerf to our capabilities. A shift more towards utility and variety then just big numbers. And that is also the truth about player perception: we are addicted to big numbers. Most players don't care about WHAT they are using, as long as they get big numbers floating up in the screen. I have a quick fix for that, a challenge, if you will. Go to your UI settings and turn off Damage and Affinity numbers. Extra points if you also turn off enemy names. I have found that my enjoyment of the game has drastically improved because I am not distracted and bothered by colored numbers enticing me to have the biggest and reddest, but instead I notice the weapons themselves and the enemies. Then again, that's just me, personally. Your mileage may vary.
  11. Has any thought been put into repurposing our standard landers into sort of "one-man railjacks"?
  12. Depends entirely on what you mean "powerful" In-game practical stat wise? Not very. Though not as weak as many make them out to be. A tank build operator is right up there with some of the better frames but lack of shields and easier to use health-gain options hampers Operators. Not to mention if you aren't a mad dervish of spinning rubberball nonsense armed with a "weapon" that half the times breaks the math involved in its function, you'll get hit more often and by more enemies and thus you die more. In-universe, Operators are not much more tanky then baseline human but their void power lets them become nigh-immortal genocide demons. But the details are hazy because the entire Operator system is still very barebones. I'm very interested and curious about the Duviri thing that showed older Operators using weapons. Seeing how Teshin can move and some other non-Tenno characters, letting us "build up" operators to be more viable in direct combat is not a stretch. Use some Fieldtron to modify our operator armor to have shields, hit the gym with a nice protein shake and bulk up, follow that with a training montage and you got a combat-operator. Personally, I am somewhat intrigued by the concept that maybe using your operator would make them more capable. Meaning, they start to move faster and be more agile and at some point being able to pick up enemy weapons or even bring sidearms into battle. But only if the player chooses to use the operator. Granted, this idea is bad on a practical level because then players would be forced to "grind" the operators but then again, that's nothing new to a warframe player.
  13. They have the option for it. landers have that as a built-in base functionality. On Railjacks you're going to have to turn off other functions for that to work. And the main point is still that some people (me included) are not into large, multi-crew ships. The designs don't really "speak to me". What exactly would we lose by having pilotable landers for solo missions?
  14. I am all for this concept. Though to be more accurate, I would like to see the Lander rather then the Orbiter implemented as a one-man version of the Railjack. It's an honest mistake to confuse the Lander we see in our loading screens for the Orbiter that houses all our stuff. Archwings are souped up jetpacks in space and while they are surprisingly lethal and tanky, they are ultimately very short range and likely do not have punch travel capability with the rails or Void-masking. Them being more specialized for interdiction and boarding actions. Useful in large ship to ship combat mainly because they are too small by the capital ship weaponry to effectively engage in knife-fight close range. But AW's would need some other, larger ships to first get them that close. A pilotable Lander, however, gives players the option to further Star Citizen their experience by sacrificing the potential power and versatility of a Railjack for more specialized Lander craft that is still more capable then the archwing in those large ship battles. Something for those solo players who don't really like large "multi-crew ship" concept and would much prefer a long-range stealth fighter concept. There is also a precedent for our Landers to come armed. The Schimitar is a stealth "bomber" of sorts with it's special ability being a bombing run. It wouldn't be that bloody hard to strap two or more AW weapons onto a lander and they'd work just as good, if not better. Logically speaking but this is Warframe we are talking about so... eh. And since we already have different versions of landers, those are already the basis for different capabilities. Some, like the Schimitar being more offense oriented while the Xiphos is built to tank damage with powerful shields and boosting abilities and the Lisette's thing being stealth and Mantis a sort of agile speedster. So technically there is no reason to not have our landers be one-man long-range recon and combat ships. While AW's are capable, they are limited by operational range and firepower and while Railjacks can apparently do damn near everything, they are large, easy to spot and require a crew (even if AI). A middle-ground option is always welcome.
  15. As many have noted, the purpose of archguns in ground combat is to provide a "heavy super weapon" for when you need overwhelming and indiscriminate firepower. A sort of short term weapon that you are not meant to use for extended periods but periodically against particular enemies or in specific situations. A literal BFG. Now, the issue of performance in relation to "standard" Tenno "small arms" is that of design principle. Archgun weapon stats and mods are built and based with lessons learned from implementations of normal mod loadouts. DE learned that the insane degree of power-boosting out normal mods allow simply break any and all attempts at balance and reasonable damage progression, so all Archwing mods have, in general, far more reserved power progression. This has the theoretical benefit of making the content of AW more sustainable because out own damage output is not as extreme. This leads to the fact that when archweapon damage could and is surpassed by great many standard firearms, that is not a problem with archwings or archguns. That is a problem inherent in our standard weapon mods and how needlessly extreme in power they are.
×
×
  • Create New...