NovaLP

But its not the same. Zariman and Deimos: You get tokens that represent the ammount of standing you would've gotten for from that mission (also it is possible to get an additional token from the bountie reward pool aswell as additional tokens scattered around the mission for you to find). While in the Sanctum you don't get the main reward standing from the bountie as tokens but as straight standing -> aka you can't save it up for busy days and you waste a ton of standing. I don't rly understand what you mean by that, maby you can only spend a max ammount of tokens? But how would that work with MR increases? I agree with that, but Zariman solved that Problem If they didn't want that, why did they implement it 2 times before? And why didn't they change Zariman and Deimos to the straight standing system that they desire because they don't want players to stockpile rep?

Sanctum is still a step backwards tho 100% agree, Grineer Proxima was fine'ish but Corpus Proxima was completely backwards.

Actually, canisters and other weakpoints do count towards charging up Incarnons, but they do not count towards everything else you described for some obscure reason.

Since I started playing Warframe it has been crazy how often DE managed to get rewards wrong for either new regions or new systems. There have been exceptions to this rule over the years but some outliers like WITW and Dante Unbound recently have made me question DE's decision making in "rewards". The most memorable experiences thus far have been: 1) Kuva Fortress Release 2) Infested Salvage Release 3) PoE Release 4) SO and ESO Release (still valid) 5) Orbs (mostly still valid) ...) And I can just go on and on about this, there are soo many examples of where rewards have been mishandeled that I start to suspect that these decisions haven't been overlooked but where deliberatly made. Just to recap recent examples: - Enemies in the new tileset missing evergreen rewards completely - Standing is not rewarded in form of tokens -> You can waste Standing again if you are farming for Bountie drops - SP having no increase in valuable Drops whatsoever - The complete mishandling of rewarding players with Melee Arcane Adapters (They are still awarded even by Deep Archimedeas), when they should've been rewarded for SE by Teshin ... And the worst of all is, we don't even know how decisions like these came to be. Every decision has a goal and I can't fathom what the goals were with these decisions. If I could at least understand the why and how because DE actually managed to get rewards right in the last 2 years. Zariman, Veilbreaker and Duviri have stood out as positive examples how to get rewards loops right, each with their own little problems but overall they have been good and very well received. And now that DE had the chance to just copy the Zariman, they didn't?

Definitly Tigris, Galatine and Akstiletto Incarnon. I also would like to see what DE would do with a Sniper Incarnon since we don't have one yet and I love snipers.

I feel like especially the enemies need more evergreen rewards since the entire sanctum is missing them, especially if i check for omnia fissures i log on and if the only omnia fissures available are murmur fissures i log off. In the Zariman you can at least farm arcanes and thus vosfor (for Lua, you can spend Lua Thrax plasm on arcanes -> vosfor) but the Sanctum is missing that completely. Rogue Necramechs (that would also include demolishers) would be the perfect place to those evergreen rewards imo. But I've already made a huge post about this:

These bugs still haven't been fixed even after 10 months? Even after the large Duviri bug fix pass? Mesa is still unplayable after the Orowyrm fight, and Vorunas bug is just annoying but man... 10 Months? I don't even want to know what bugs that i've encountered and haven't had a chance to see again are also still present.

Currently helping a friend to farm Tome Mods and spoiler, it's an absolute pain to do since there is no way you can speed up the mission. Also Omnia Fissures are not allowed to spawn in this mirror defense so there is additionally no way to at least farm for something else in the meanwhile, just like how you can do if you want to farm for tennokai mods. Gruzzlings, Voca and Whispers cannot spawn in that tileset so you can't farm for arcanes and / or standing either. -> aka you are limiting yourself to just farming tome mods all day, while that nice neat little pack lingers in the market for 160 plat just waiting to be bought. I bought it for plat in the first few seconds when it released because when I saw the drop rates I knew this is going to be pain and I'd rather spend my time elsewhere. But I know of alot of people who would rather quit the game then be forced to buy gameplay / power for plat. Since Stela is a ressource that you get from collecting all vosphene glyphs aswell as a occasional reward from MITW enemies, why not give either Bird 3, Loid, or Tagfer a shop where you can trade in Stela for Tome Mods, Tennokai Mods and Mandonell (and maby even throw in the arcanes or the weekly archon shard in there so Standing Grind is focused on the more important rewards from the shop like melee arcane adaperts) Example prices: Tome mods: 200 Stela each Tennokai mods (uncommon): 100 Stela each Tennokai mods (rare): 200 Stela each Mandonell parts: 75 Stela each Melee Arcanes (uncommon): 25 Stela each Melee Arcanes (rare): 50 Stela each Melee Arcanes (legendary): 250 Stela each Weekly Archon Shard: 200 Stela each I just don't want to know what kind of a pain Tome mod grind is going to be for new players in 3 years down the line, looking down the drain of a dozen weeklies + daily standing you can't prefarm + all the other pain they added in Whispers in the Walls.

They could've at least made it 200 vosfor so you can pull once, but please don't change the order or reward type. As it's made to be a "something" reward if you do go for it but as an easy skip for people who want leave 1 modifier out (either a frame or weapon of choice or one of the negative mods)

Ah thats mb on the wording, with forma invested I meant at least one. Not forma dumping for the sake of getting the stuff you want all the time, but even then Even if you succeed in manipulating the system to your own ends, it will only benefit you once in a while. It's actually not about other players it's more about me and I admit that, If I do not benefit from getting creative, playing something not meta or creating a new meta, I would feel stupid to try. It's like the Labs on SP atm, they literally have no reason to be played on SP unlike the Zariman. If I do need to farm something from there, I play a round on normal -> get bored from normal diff -> quit the game -> play Path of Exile or anything else. I would like to hear in what other ways you think the system is abusable, thats actually valuable and if there is something where I cannot think of a fix I admit defeat. Additionally, I thought about this comment a reroll would be really bad idea or at least without a weighting system, since there is a very good chance that you rolled something usable away and got even worse.

I never said its based around hoarding, I said its based around collecting gear. These are different concepts. The highest MR barriers in the game are MR 16 -> MR aquisition is linked to collecting gear. Also the game is 100% around getting different tools to dominate different situations. you know, not investing into weapons you don't like doesn't mean you only invest into and play with 1 primary, 1 secondary and 1 melee. The issue does go away when you remove the rng system but it justs gets plagued by another issue: DA and EDA will be dominated by a meta that gets boring and stale after a little while just like Eidolons, Orbs and Archons. We've seen it multiple times at this point. Also you've never given me an example in what way my weighting system is flawed, you are just insisting on "rng loadout bad" without considering anything else.

You could also take this to the extreme and my proposed system should still work. Let's say you don't like the Tenet Arca Plasmor altho it is a powerfull weapon. so it has inherent high weighting, but you deleted it after leveling. Not having a weapon could feed into my algorithm by reducing the weighting to the highest weighting that gets reduced by weapon quantity: 0,999. In this example replace the Stug with Tenet Arca Plasmor: if you keep only weapons that you like and lets say you like 40 weapons in total in the game. That would decrease the weighting of the Tenet Arca Plasmor from 0,999 to 0,714 thus reducing the chance of it appearing altho it is a powerfull weapon. And if you don't like weapons that are bad and remove them from your inventory while expanding your inventory with weapons that you do like and invest in them. This system should work even better in your favor

If you do exactly that you prob like using it, I don't invest to much into weapons I don't like again: If you like a weapon you can increase the chance of it appearing drasticly with all those modifiers

The system I proposed should solve that problem by reducing the chance of a bad weapon appearing to near 0 if not invested Thats another problem that needs to be fixed by matchmaking rules. In case of playing with premade groups they need to limit the system to: they can only play together if research value gained is equal in squad. Actually not true, they aren't the best but they get the job done if needed. And this time it was needed

I wanted to also adress that point from a programming perspective individual weapon weighting could be a value from from 0,001 to 2,000 The minimum of weapons you can own is 1 primary, 1 secondary and 1 melee -> 3 weapons so with 3 weapons the multiplication number would be 1 for each weapon. Let's call that number weaponQuantWeighting each additonal weapon would increase the multiplication number by a small ammount for example with 34 weapons owned: weaponQuant = 34; weaponQuantWeighting+=(0.01*weaponQuant); This would result in a weaponQuantWeighting of 1,34 A weapon with an inherent weighting (determined by all other variables in the OP) between 0,001 and 0,999 would be divided by the weaponQuantWeighting thus lowering. Lets calculate an example on the Stug that is certain to have a weighting in between those values (the Stugs weighting would be in this example after all other calcs: 0,024): if(stugWeighting<=0.999){ stugWeighting/=weaponQuantWeighting; } this would result in the 34 weapons owned example in a reduction of the stugWeighting from 0,024 to 0,018 On the other hand if a weapon has an inherent weighting between 1 and 2 it would get multiplied with the weaponQuantWeighting multiplier. But the total Weighting is not allowed to exceed 2 in actual weighting used to determine the pool while the total weighting is saved but hidden from the pool. This should result in the most powerfull and most invested weapons to have equal weighting while the hidden value remains saved for calculations sake. Let's calculate on the example of a Baza (Prime) with MR10 (we will always use the highest MR variant on weapons with multiple variants), Let's take an arbitrary ammount of weighting for now its a weapon that gets the job done but isn't too good in the current days, so I feel like a weighting of 1,123 would be fine. It would obviously get calculated by all the other variables but lets put that aside from now: if(bazaWeighting<=0.999){ ... }else if(bazaWeighting>0,999){ bazaWeighting*=weaponQuantWeighting; } This would increase the weighting from 1,123 to 1,505.