Jump to content

Hmm...interesting.

PC Member
  • Content Count

    152
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

154

About Hmm...interesting.

  • Rank
    Gold Novice

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The idea is that the numbers should be balanced so that it will take you just as long to get the reward by struggling to do the mission skillfully as it would for you to do the mission many more times without playing to that higher level. I haven't done any testing with times, so the example numbers were just that, examples.
  2. I definitely agree. That was part of my thought process, but I realize now that I forgot to include that in my previous comments. My intention was to have a "better rewards for better play" system, and the difficulty tiers would simply be a benchmark to measure "better play." My example wasn't the best, but there are other benchmarks that you could come up with.
  3. First off, I'll say that (since I'm bored) I have played spy missions without being seen and without using abilities. It's really hard, and the mission takes a while, but it's a good challenge. So it is possible. Secondly, how do you expect to have a challenge if we can play a game mode 50-90% of all the ways possible while being as overpowered as we are? Killing is part of the game, but it shouldn't be all of the game. Otherwise the difference between the game modes continues to get smaller and smaller. Also, just the fact that Ivara, Loki, Ash, and Octavia have long duration invisibility is god-tier broken for spy missions, among a few other game modes. And the limitations are simply the way they are because I haven't thought of a way to incorporate them into the missions. I guess that instead of no abilities, we could have an amalgam enemy or something that's sensitive to warframe abilities that could sense when you activate one and set off alarms or something, but there are better ways to include that. But seriously, how do you expect a challenge when we have warframe abilities that can completely trivialize any inherent challenge of a mission.
  4. Yes there are. We'll use a spy mission as an example since that's my favorite game mode. Keep in mind, completing a mission to a 3-star difficulty will require you to achieve the 3-star challenge, as well as the challenges for 2 and 1 star difficulties. 1-star difficulty: Don't let any vault alarms go off 2-star difficulty: Don't let enemies set off the general alarms 3-star difficulty: You can't be seen by any enemies 4-star difficulty: You can't use abilities
  5. The points that I see you making: Mission objectives may be compromised by the composition of your team. Mission objectives can be interrupted by things like the Stalker, Wolf of Saturn, Zanuka, etc. The secondary mission objective could interfere with the primary mission objective This could screw up the warframe economy You seem to have misunderstood what the role of a 5-star reward is. A 5-star reward shouldn't be the standard reward. It should be a reward that you work toward or struggle to achieve. A standard run that you might do would probably be a 1-2.5 stars on a scale of 1-5 stars. I also want to clarify that there doesn't have to be difficulty tiers. That was just an example number. There could be 3 tiers, 7 tiers, or whatever you want (or DE wants I guess). I'll answer the points in the order that I wrote them. This gives a reason to optimize builds, sharpen your skills, and get a good team together in order to achieve a high rating. We can already see that people don't have a big problem with that. They already have specific groups to do eidolon hunting and stuff. The assassins are there to mess your mission up. I can't think of a good reason that you can't just try the mission again. Like I mentioned before, the 5-star reward isn't something that just comes with every mission run, so doing a kuva siphon and going for a 5-star reward should be two separate endeavors. The numbers for the rewards can be tuned so that it's still worth it to trade for stuff in order to skip the mission. The numbers in my example were just place holders. I would like to add another note here as well. This system doesn't have to be present in every single part of the game. It was more for normal missions. For example, the relic system is already pretty decent. It isn't perfect of course, but it doesn't need very much changing. It can pretty much stay the way it is. Boss fights on the other hand, could very much benefit from this new system.
  6. It would be hard for them to, but which system would you personally rather play with? Are you opposed to my proposal, or are you just playing devil's advocate?
  7. I suppose it could work, but at the same time, I feel like if we're going to go through the trouble of curving drop tables like that, we might as well go all the way and make a completely reliable, predictable system that is fair to the players.
  8. I disagree. With a change like this, they can also add a star rating for each mission that you do that shows what level you've gotten up to. That will drive some players to get to complete the levels more thoroughly (rather than just playing it once) but it could also be a great opportunity for DE to add interesting rewards to many of the levels. For example, they could add weapon blueprints to some of the lower levels, exposing newer players to weapons that they might not otherwise see, and it could give them more stuff to do in the beginning of the game.
  9. Just get rid of rivens. Replace them with a thing that you can slot in (like a catalyst) that would just give you an amount of points (based on riven disposition) that you could invest in the base stats of the weapon (base damage, CC, reload speed, mag size, etc.). Rivens now don't solve the problem that they were meant to solve, but this could easily achieve that.
  10. I think that mission rewards should be redesigned to be achievement based. If you complete the mission to a certain standard, you get a reward. If you don't complete the mission to that standard, you get a point on a reward meter. If you get enough points in the meter for a reward, you get the reward, despite not having completed the mission to the standard that would initially earn you the reward. This way, you can obtain a reward by either putting in the time to farm, or putting in the skill. Additionally, we could assume that there are multiple reward tiers based on difficulty (which there should be of course). Let's assume that there are 5 reward tiers (and that there is a single reward for each tier, ranked 1-star reward through 5-star reward) and the 5-star reward requires 100 points. Complete mission at 1-star level, I get 1-star reward and I get 1 point toward my 5-star reward (as well as 1 point toward my 2-star, 3-star, and 4-star rewards) Complete at 2-star level, I get 2-star reward and 5 points toward my 3, 4, and 5-star rewards. Complete at 3-star level, I get 3-star reward and 15 points toward my 4 and 5-star rewards. Complete at 4-star level, I get 4-star reward and 35 points toward my 5-star reward. Complete at 5-star level, I get 5-star reward. These numbers are of course just brainstormed numbers, and of course there would be a different amount of achievement levels depending on difficulty and other stuff.
  11. I was actually about to put up a post about this, but I'll leave it here as well. What I would rather do is design mission rewards to be achievement based. If you complete the mission to a certain standard, you get a reward. If you don't complete the mission to that standard, you get a point on a reward meter. If you get enough points in a meter for a reward, you get the reward, despite not having completed the mission to the standard that would initially earn you the reward. This way, you can obtain a reward by either putting in the time to farm, or putting in the skill. Additionally, we could assume that there are multiple reward tiers (which there should be of course). Let's assume that there are 5 reward tiers (and that there is a single reward for each tier, ranked 1-star reward through 5-star reward) and the 5-star reward requires 100 points. Complete mission at 1-star level, I get 1-star reward and I get 1 point toward my 5-star reward (as well as 1 point toward my 2-star, 3-star, and 4-star rewards) Complete at 2-star level, I get 2-star reward and 5 points toward my 3, 4, and 5-star rewards. Complete at 3-star level, I get 3-star reward and 15 points toward my 4 and 5-star rewards. Complete at 4-star level, I get 4-star reward and 35 points toward my 5-star reward. Complete at 5-star level, I get 5-star reward. These numbers are of course just brainstormed numbers, and of course there would be a different amount of achievement levels depending on difficulty and other stuff.
  12. How about we just acknowledge that warframes and weapons are way too overpowered and need to be nerfed. Then the star chart becomes more difficult as a result of nerfing things a bit.
  13. When I try to use forma, the initial pop up when I click the actions button says that I have 4 forma, but when I click it "use forma" (or whatever it says) and the inventory screen pops up where I choose which kind of forma I'm going to put in, it says that I have 1 less. Please fix this. Thanks.
  14. Disclaimer: I don't think that dev streams are a bad idea. They are a great way to connect and communicate with the community, and I really appreciate that DE cares enough to do them. I also want to clarify (even though I feel that this should be obvious) that this is not a personal attack on any members of DE. Here we go. Dev streams can often be too revealing. I don't know how much @[DE]Rebecca takes this into account when she plans the dev streams, but I believe that they should not reveal brand new content as much as they do. Let's take the new Jupiter: Gas City tile set as an example. In the beginning, they just showed off two or three pictures, and that was more than enough to get me excited to play it. However, the second that they opened it in the dev build with Wisp, it started to kill my excitement for it. Just by watching them play it, I already got a feeling what it felt like to play on that map. You've ruined the surprise. I also think the Nyx deluxe could have been presented way better. Instead of just showing us all of it, it should be presented in a teaser way. Show us pictures of small areas of the warframe to give us an idea of the style that the artist is embracing, but make us guess and speculate. Also, saying something like, "We're currently redoing the Jupiter tile set. Our goal is to release it by [x date]. I've gotten a sneak peak, and it looks amazing." is not an issue. In fact, I think we would all appreciate being updated on what's going on at DE. However, playing on the tile set in the dev stream and showing off all of the enemies is a total spoiler and is not appreciated. One way I like to think about it is that it's similar to playing a new game for the first time. It's much more fun to learn and explore the game than it is to have somebody hold your hand throughout the entire beginning of the game, telling you the best ways to do things, and giving you the best gear right at the start. Similarly, I don't want to be completely exposed to the new stuff before I even get to explore it myself. I think the dev streams should be focused on things like changes to reward systems, changes to warframe abilities, and discussion about future plans. As exciting as it is to reveal new content, I think the developers should also be aware that expectations are lower if you don't show people as much.
×
×
  • Create New...