SneakyErvin

Matching to faction? No. Matching to individual frames? Yes. For my frames that are built with nourish or have access to viral elsewhere and/or defense/armor strip I tend to go either gas+cold+HM or toxin+HM these days. Works great on frames like Hydroid and Saryn, but is also solid on frames like Frost. Both Toxin and Cold are also nice elements to build arcane stacks on your promary, so no need to kill, which makes them work on nearly everything.

No one is arguing for overkill. I'm also fairly often advocating we could use some serious nerfs in the game. I'm saying there is no reason to not cover all grounds when in a PuG, since some people may not be at a point where they can handle it, so being ready to pick up their slack is a considerate thing to do, since in a PuG everything goes. Your problem is that everyone is out to get you and ruin your day when you willingly join a PuG. You find it inconsiderate that others do not "respect" your fun as you join literal chaos. And where do you get the idea from that I think it is linear progression? Also, no game, be it linear or not, is designed around the highest builds. The few games that are are the fake progression games like Destiny 2 and other power level based piles of S#&$ that hard cap you based on the zone levels no matter what gear you carry. So you end up with everything always being the same no matter what new things you get. It will suck all the same. Like dude, I already answered you on that. It would need to kill effectively to start with in order to kill more effectively. It might kill less ineffectively, but still ineffectively none the less. You wasting more time of others, being inconsiderate to them by experimenting in their game. That may be true, but that does not result in you having been less inconsiderate getting to that point of performance. No one argued that you wouldnt get to a point eventually where the gun performs acceptably. The problem is you getting there, combined with your own view on consideration towards others. It isnt about what you find fun or not, it is about your own double standards. I as in I I do not care if you or anyone else experiments around me. I do however care that you call others inconsiderate while being just as if not more inconsiderate towards others by experimenting in public while throwing around your massive "knowledge" claims at the same time. Why are you even experimenting? You should know what you need to hit a mark you find fun already simply through your "experience". You straight up said you know what you build for, which clearly you dont if you need to test it, and test it in such a poor way at that. No WF does not scale things according to the amount of players. The game just adds the spawns and health of an additional player. Scaling would imply it does like in other games, where things get harder the more players you add. Here they are the same as if you were solo, since it is the same amount of enemies per player and the same amount of enemy health per player for prio targets and the same amount of damage dealt by enemies. What we have is certain content that doesnt scale down, where we enter a mission at the max for a group no matter if grouped or solo. And of course there are missions where we can avoid fail states, but that does not apply to all missions, it doesnt apply to most missions even. In the majority you need sufficient damage in order to kill effectively or cheese with CC so the mission doesnt fail through objective destruction, or the timer simply running out. No, consideration is very much trying to pull your weight. If you cant, that is one thing, if you chose not to, that is another. One is acceptable, the other isnt. And nowhere have I said using something else is wrong. The only one here saying anything is wrong is in fact you, since you've straight up called the majority of players stupid for playing the way we do instead of following your specific idea of fun. You are practically claiming that even DE are playing their game the wrong way, and that they are inconsiderate in their streams when they play with the public. Since they are running around and 1HK alot of stuff even if they arent using the most efficient builds to clear full acres of of mobs with a single sneeze. Out of all my years playing different types of arpgs, looter shooters and mmorpgs you are a unique specimen, since you are the first I've ran into since back in the 90's that want to play a game centered on farming and mass slaughter as slow as you possibly can. While also calling out everyone else as playing it the wrong way.

It's not semantics. There is a vast difference between a game designed with co-op in focus and a game with co-op as an optional choice. In a game where co-op is accounted for in design, a solo player will mostly just scrape by compared to playing co-op. But they wouldnt share the spot. If what you want is done, then there will be no distinct use for AoE, since it will only be as good as single target at handling crowds of mobs while not sharing the current distinct use of single target i.e killing... single... targets. Everyone already gets to play. And I'm not arguing that we couldnt use balance in the game. Your current vague ideas are just not the way, since they would do nothing but slow down the game and create other problems. What we really need are nerfs in order for future content to be easier to design without needing to add bad mechanics like Exploiter or Nihil for instance. That doesnt mean the current game needs to change aswell and just get slower. They'd need to rethink the whole concept at that point so rewards end up roughly the same over time etc. And changing weapon damage or mob health isnt the solution. Changing density while increasing health along with loot would be one solution, adding specific priority mobs with good loot would be another, SO/ESO setups regarding rewards but without the need for high KPM in the mission would work too. And the part you quoted can refer to anything and not just AoE damage. There are plenty of non-damaging or low damaging abilities in the game that are far more disruptive to gameplay flow. And last I checked, none of our AoE weapons deal damage in a bigger circle than 10-ish meters. So why is everyone in a 4 man group competing over the same 10m of a map? Enemies tend to pour in from all directions. And not all missions are about killing, or killing many enemies. So your "fix" to make single target stronger wouldnt do anything to solve what you quoted from DE, since you'd still have weapons that 1HK bosses, demos etc. leaving the other 3 with nothing to do for the main objective of those types of missions. While you are at it you should ask for spy to have a 4th vault added aswell and a limit to 1 vault opened per player in a group, just so no one feels "ineffective" or "disrupted" in those missions either. That you even try to argue that AoE is not intended in a game that spawned the number of mobs it does is hilarious! More so when we constantly also get missions and bounty types that effectively punish low KPM, and not only in the mids of the player because of "less lewt" but to point where they actually fail if you dont kill fast enough. You also dodged to answer the simple question I asked. Why should single target be equal for killing groups when AoE isnt equal to single target for killing bosses and other specific encounters?

Burston Incarnon is probably one of the best incarnons/primes atm. The shear ammo size of the incarnon form along with the insane fire rate and innate punch through (if armor is high enough) makes it a lovely weapon. Strun is solid too if you want big AoE and a reliable shotty at the same time. Boar is also cool, but it has some beam issues when facing eximus with shield dome abilities, same applies to nullifiers.

Just another little melee tip since the auto-melee addition. With the use of Toggle Sprint you can make seamless slide attacks by tapping your slide button as E is held. Likely works by holding down your sprint+E and tapping slide aswell.

Well said! I'd also like to weigh in on the mission completion loot. Adding too much of that in the shape of Archon hunts or assassinates in general would not be a good approach to increase incentive for single target, since it would just be a skippety-tip-hop past all enemies for the deluxe loot pinata of the mission. However, it could be added in other potential ways where AoE wouldnt matter as much. Like timed defense sections or similar throughout the missions, where killing is beneficial but can be done just aswell with a single target weapon for the most part. Or the disruption approach, which is probably the finest mode ever introduced. AoE is useful, but it isnt needed to be efficient at all in the mode. All you need to do is kill the right mobs for keys to drop, then kill enough to stay alive while focusing on finding the big baddie. It is probably the perfect game mode setup imo since it adds the idea of assassination and capture without bringing all the bagage with it from those modes. It also manage to promote a diverse kit so you can wipe out trash and engage the demo effectively.

Only happends when someone carries? Nope. No one said that. I'm saying you are talking about people being inconsiderate to you while at the same time having no problem being inconsiderate to others. That is all that is being said. Considerate players can happen at all points in progression, it is simply about making sure they bring their best to increase mission success no matter where they are at when it comes to options tied to their progression. So someone might lack mod options to be effective in arbis when it comes to killing. Well he might bring a frame then that makes sure he wont go down, which is considerate since he doesnt know if the other 3 he'll end up with are much further in progress or not, so dont want to rely on them getting him up. Or he has access to a frame that would benefit the group with some debuff or something. Which is also considerate since he brought something beneficial out of what he had access to to increase the success for the group as much as he can within what he has access to. Your alternate builds are not considerate. Since they arent bringing the potential to make up for someone else less fortunate in their progress. Especially when you underbuild so severly as you've shown, which ends up with others having to pick up your slack even though they shouldnt have to at that point. You arent a new player unlocking access to a new mode heading in there as Bambi. You are a veteran in the game effectively doing less than the content requires, less than the content is designed for. And this is when looking only at the most simple of modes that dont really have a fail state. When we look at disruption it gets even worse, since you not carrying your weight there means failure for the rest if they are just barely scraping by. Since at that point you must carry your weight to help remove that extra health you just slapped onto each and every demo. No one here said there arent co-op aspects. That isnt the same as a game designed as co-op as main focus. It doesnt even have the most basic features of such games, like increased rewards, actual scaled difficulty or other mechanics designed to keep a group engaged. Everything is WF is a solo experience, you can simply enjoy it with others as an option. A game with co-op desgined with intent are things like D3, where a group means higher difficulty which also comes with a higher reward, a quite significantly higher reward as opposed to playing solo. Or MMOs that provide dedicated group activities that simply cannot be done solo (unless you are several expansions beyond the difficulty).

But it isnt a co-op online multiplayer game, it is an online game with optional co-op multiplayer. You mention the wording of uhm Netracells iirc, which are not at all tuned for a full group. I havent used an optimal setup for that mode a single time in order to carry all debuffs, stay alive and kill efficiently solo. Second one regarding sorties... funny you bold the last 4 words while conveniently ignore to include the the primary "alone" i.e the word prior to "or". As I said "with optional multiplayer". And the last quote, nothing there to indicate co-op is anything but optional. It is also straight up inaccurate, since it also refers to bonus loot for being grouped. The last part you bolded also implies it is there to help people if they need it, not that it is required or something the game is centered around. Buffing enemies wouldnt help a bit either. Since it would end up with the sponge issue which isnt fitting for the game. It would still also require single target weapons to get further buffed beyond the damage of AoE, which would as I said screw up all current single target encounters in the game. Encounters where single target already serves their purpose very well, like it should be in a game about slaughtering hordes of enemies. So then you'd need to buff those encounters too, all in order to end up where you were already at in the encounters that single target weapons are naturally already designed for. All so that single target can also take the spot of AoE for everything else. Now all of a sudden you've made single taget weapons the weapons of choice, since their kill speed is now equal to AoE for clearing groups, since you just sponged up everything, and it is miles ahead of AoE for heavy units, since not only did you buff enemy health overall, you also increased single target damage and so had to further increase the health of the enemies that were already there to incentivice single target, which made them even more durable towards AoE, which was already a damage approach not really suited for those encounters. But why should single target be equal for killing groups when AoE isnt equal to single target for killing bosses and other specific encounters? You end up with a just as uneven system while you try to solve one that doesnt really need solving. AoE is intended for the gameplay. All you would really do is slow down the game for absolutely no reason whatsoever. You wont be able to make single target equal to AoE while keeping the current speed of things. So Netracells for instance, will not stay at the intended difficulty, which is what we have now, it would only every get slower and slower as you push single target to clear as fast as AoE. This doesnt matter if you increase health while buffing single target, or if you reduce AoE damage. The end result will be the same, a slower game and nothing else. And at the same time AoE wont get a benefit to encounters where single target is already promoted and shines. You'd also need to arrive to a point in AoE and single target damage along with enemy health that results in an avarage. That point would determine the cut off between AoE and single target for killing groups. And since this is something that according to you should affect all content, single target would be the go to for most content at all times unless it has SP specific density scaling while solo. Since no other content would realistically have a desnity high enough to promote actual AoE weapons, since they'd deal too little damage per mob, so would need X amount in order to pull even with single target at that point, and single target would need to be effective enough so high density doesnt become a massive slog for them too quickly. The point is, whole game would need to be gone over no matter where you place the change. Like ffs, please think a bit outside of the box before answering. Like I've said, it seems like everything needs to be put into words in an exact manner for you to grasp it. Are you unable to form a picture yourself? Sure weapons wont need fixing, if you go with changing mobs, but then mobs need to be looked over instead, which will also require work. But they'd also need to go over the weapons still, so they see what is needed. You are oversimplyfying things without giving any concrete ideas on how things can change. You also dont look at possible downsides of anything you mention, things that will butt heads as one is implemented for one thing as another at that point wont be intact or keep up. Since you seem to have opinions, you should likely also have a pretty clear picture of the benefits and drawbacks, aswell as a plan on how to achieve what you want. But you are just vague, as if you just complain to complain. Hence why asking for a descriptive idea is what I do, since it would help alot with seeing your goal and intentions and how you plan to solve it. Your whole buff this, buff that doesnt work or give any view on what you actually want. You also earlier claimed here that you have described what you wanted but that I had missed it. Then when I confronted you on that you said you didnt want to be specific. So which is it, did I miss something or did you lie about me missing it? It isnt a problem when the game is designed that way. MR is by DE designed and intended to have a power gap tied to it through weapons. Hence why they've gone back to adjust weapon stats to fit their MR requirement already for the most part. And you just recently said usage stats dont matter, but now here you are again picking at usage stats. And you've also said that the meta isnt a problem, but uoi are not here again pointing at the meta being a problem. Is it only a problem when weapons you dont want to use are meta, and then not a problem if those weapons enter that meta? We have a pretty wide top weapon usage. The real problem is that we just have too many weapons overall in the game. In reality we have more top tier weapons in use than most games have as weapons in total. Personally I probably have 60 or so weapons I could swap into a loadout and still feel very powerful no matter the content I'd do. Which is 15-20 per category along with my handful or so of Archguns. Not really seeing the ironical part. What you ask wouldnt be the same as skins, it would be pointless work that would end up as if it was just a skin. You would still be tied to that semi-auto if you want that semi-auto "skin" as opposed to an actual skin that you could add to any single handed pistol with regular bullets/pellets, no matter if burst, semi-auto or full-auto. Like, you know, the protocol skins.

Can chime in and say this is my exact experience aswell. Fog at high makes my computer sound like a jet taking off, fog at medium makes my computer go back to ninja mode. And there are clearly alot of lighting issues in the new tiles. Some segments are completely unlit, certain open areas show difference light sources when you stand in the same spot based on which direction your camera is facing. Really annoying since I kinda have OCD regarding such things, it's one of my major OCD things in addition to clipping in games. Hopefully they have some work in the pipe to fix the bigger issues. But until then I'll just scream on the inside and die a little when I lay my eyes on those things.

You had no points. You keep trying to claim you have some form of knowledge going etc. when you've proven that you dont. And what is it you dont do? We've already covered that you would be fine jumping into a mission to experiment, which leads to you either potentially leaving and forcing a host mig if you are host, or staying and making harder than it needs to be for the rest. Even if you do not always end up as a host, you dont actually consider the case if you end up in that position, since there is a risk that happens the moment you sign up for a group. That means, everytime you do sign up to experiment in a group, you dont consider the outcome, and so do not consider how you may impact the others. Which you previously was so concerned about in relation to "us" the others and out "inconsiderate" behavior when using builds that the majority already expect to be there as they sign up for that pug. Your frequency of getting downed or how often you end up useless due to your "build" doesnt matter. That you enter missions in the first place is the problem since you yourself speak of consideration towards other players when clearly not following your own advice. That is the whole point and the whole problem. And if you think we play the game in the wrong way, and that your vision of fun is the real way, then you are also saying that DE are playing their own game the wrong way, same as most of the people that join them to have fun. You can just look at their streams to see how exaggerated the core subject of this thread is, and how even more exaggerated you see the problem and just how very narrow your views on fun and engagement is. edit: Also to be clear. I'm not saying undergeared players shouldnt sign up and take a chance etc. since if you can enter, well you can enter. I'm saying dont call others inconsiderate when you are inconsiderate yourself. We the "SP builds" cannot sabotage the progress of a mission, you however can and willingly take that risk among others, even though you claim consideration towards others is important to you.

But it would do something for exsisting content if done correctly. Like the mentioned ways to actually do things like the eximus rework instead of what we got etc. And people that prefer AoE would still be able to use it in that content. There would just be reasons to use single target aswell, and also through that use your whole loadout. I mean, it was in the bloody sentence right after the one you isolated in the quote you decided to go with. You have this thing for taking things out of context completely. There it is again for you to read. Again out of context reading. Again the next sentence would have described what the problem with people refers to. No it isnt about people facerolling, it is about people thinking they are actually playing a game that is designed as a co-op first and foremost, when it isnt. There is nothing to fix, since the game is already what it is supposed to be in that regard. And what they cant do? What I've already said, add content that promotes actual single target, or straight up requires it. Again, like a proper implementation of eximus and other heavy units that cannot just be killed with cleaves passively as you rain death on the trash. Those are things that can be added even with our absurd damage, since it would require pinpoint accuracy at that point and change the pace of missions. And the game has never promoted co-op outside of arbitrary mechanics that really add nothing in the end. It has been based on "friend door" deluxe setups and nothing else. Combat itself has never been based and scaled around co-op. It has always been "more mobs" where each person simply handles the mobs they add, it doesnt get harder, it is just 4 people fighting 4 pools of enemies on the same map instead of 4 players fighting 4 pools of enemies across 4 maps. The one place were we actually had co-op promoted was RJ, since it wasnt just about friend door mechanics, because it was scaled to a 4 player setup from the start, where fewer players made it harder. Also with added objective setups to promote organized groups in order to be more effective. Then they added crew NPCs that 1HK everything. But as the game is set up, anything that results in forced co-op is bad, since we are at the mercy of peer-to-peer. Nope. Since it looks like you dont get at all what I mean. The point was that if AoE currently 1HKs, adding more damage to single target beyond that would still result in those weapons 1HKing, since even if you buff them beyond AoE they cant kill something in less than 1 hit per shot. You would at that point need to nerf AoE severly, but you would need to do it to a point where it deals several times less damage than a single target weapon so the two will be fairly even for killing a group of X enemies. If you reduce AoE by say 50% so it cannot 1HK anymore, it would still only take AoE 2 shots to wipe out whatever amount of mobs can fit in the circle that previously pulled off a 1HK. So even if the single target then gets buffed so it 1HKs each mob due to not having AoE available, it would still take that gun so much more time to wipe out the same amount of enemies. And if you further reduce AoE so they both get roughly the same KPM, AoE will be in a state where it feels like just hitting sponges, which I went over already in the first quote where you only decided to provide one single sentence from me out of total context. This would also #*!% up current content, whch you were concerned above in an earlier paragraph here in relation to the out of context quote. This would do less for current content since it would completely annihilate bosses and other encounters that are already requiring single target. And it would also do what you worried my idea of "content" would do, alienate those that already like AoE. I dont know about you, but I enjoy trash being trash and killed in droves, even if it means there are enemies I need to pull out my precision gun for. I far rather have that than a setting where my AoE gun hits like a noodle that needs to be spammed. And you seriously think going over the several hundreds of weapons wouldnt take time heh? Like, what #*!%ing magical place do you live in? Changing the weapons would also not be isolated to just changing those weapons, because they'd also go over content etc. if bigger changes happen, like if they go with nerfed AoE and not just buffed weapons etc. They'd already have to reconsider the MR setup, since what would be the reason for a weapon to be locked to MR15 when it no longer is more powerful than the one at MR2? That you now also start to mention frames and pets just borderlines to silly. As in having no concept of reality. First off, pets will never get to a state where they are living blenders, since DE just recently nerfed a frame for that exact reason while also nerfing specters that are even less powerful. Second off, frames would need wide reworks to change so they are all able to be equal enough to have a piece of the killing cake in a mission. Banshee for instance will never be a frame that will keep up due to her abilities, she will always rely on weapons, same deal with Chroma, Rhino and others. We have few frames that dont actually have good kits, but even if those kits improve it wont do anything for them if they enter a group, it will not help them keep up with frames designed around dealing damage and killing through their abilities. And that will likely never chance, since it would kill diversity and the whole point of the game and its "right tool for the job" approach. Some frame will be slower with their kite or have lower utilization of it in some missions, then shine in others when some other frame lags behind. It just isnt a game of mains, so not everything needs to work evenly everywhere. But the specifics are important, otherwise it looks like you complain for the sake of complaining with no real idea regarding what can actually be done. And the playing field is leveled enough quite honestly, since it seems to be you and a select few others that run into these problems to a point where you think it is common. You should probably look at a few PrimeTimes or so and see what the avarage outcome tends to be. They never run any top tier builds, sign up for regular mid level missions, with random people, without any preset rules etc. and it looks like everyone is part of the missions they run while having something to do. Which is also the avarage experience I have when I sign up for something public, unless it is the lowest of the lowest maps, at which point there is honestly nothing DE or anyone else can do about it aside from standing around and doing literally nothing with whatever they bring to the mission. I helped a friend that had been on a lengthy break. He had no Bramma, Zarr or anything else heavy back then while I had access to and used those options. Never once did he find himself without things to do. All he did was stay slightly away from where I was killing, which wasnt a problem, since mobs came from that area too. I guess if you need to squat ontop of a guy with AoE you'll run out of things to do, but if you actually engage enemies where they come from you shouldnt have an issue being productive. It isnt like the game isnt designed for people to spread out when we have buffs that can reach up to 50m or so and heals that affect everything in affinity range etc. Because it isnt something realistic to change. I cant ask to have mods changed based on my taste, since as I said others may enjoy them. And if they change to cater to another taste, then suddenly the other person might suddenly be unable to enjoy it. Which is also why most games where people desire to use low level items add cosmetics so you can just skin them the way you want, so a sword can look like any sword you've ever collected etc. Which would really be the best way for WF aswell, getting the look we want together with the mechanic we like within a given weapon class. Crunching numbers only leads to homogenization and a lack further lack of a sense of progression, which is already limited in WF as it is since most items we obtain are side grades.

It really isnt low usage considering when he was released. In reality, perfect usage for a frame at this point would be slightly under 2% per frame. edit: And if you dont count prime (and umbra) and normals as sperates Kullervo ends up pretty much in the middle of usage in just 6 months.

I wish that was true, but in this day and age... In the end I think the features of the Drifter should be in the hands of each individual player as much as the rigging can support it. If someone wants to turn their drifter into themselves it should be up to them, just as if someone wants to turn it into someone imaginary. That some might take offense with pronounced body features should be of no concern, since it is just how people can look naturally irl aswell. edit: One thing I always think when people claim something is over sexulization these days is "imagine if the ancient greeks and romans could see this!".

You should likely look up good faith. It'd be the essence of good faith the way I approached it, since I gave it every possible benefit to make it work. Constant uptime, a large chunk of extra damage ontop of your modding, a better baseline gun etc. and the build still didnt perform even remotely decent for the content you labeled it as. How you think that isnt in good faith is very very odd. It also had all the time in the world to make the CC from radiation work its magic, since it did that poorly in damage. Hence why I said that if you ran with Gas to increase damage slightly you instead have to run constantly due to not having any rad procs. Basic simple concepts. The problem isnt "little concern as possible", in this case it is about destroying anything at all with that "build". You arent even close to acceptable performance on the lower side. You need to stop bringing up SP because you arent even presenting a build that can do SC content comfortably at slightly higher levels. It is practically 100% worthless at any mission type that doesnt give you all the time in the world you need. And no, your "build" straight up struggles versus all factions, since every faction has higher eHP than the infested versus your gun, since the only units you really have a bonus against are units that are already heavy within those other factions, so take have even more eHP anyways. I dont care if you show no consideration to me and players like me. That is of no interest at all. My point is you speak of people not being considerate to you while you are less considerate to the players that may end up with you, players that arent in the situation where I and others are, players that dont have the option to not care what you bring to a mission. Players that actually might need players of atleast their progression level to get through the content you suddenly make harder while not being able to pull your own weight. I wouldnt notice what "build" you use, or if you go fully modless or not, I wouldnt care since I'd carry the slack, because I expect to end up with a new player at some point if I do run a PuG. So I have no intent going with a build that might make it harder for them to progress, I'll run a build so I know I can pick them up if needed so they can get the loot they came for, so they can stay longer and get most out of their arbi hour and so on. You on the otherhand run a "build" that cannot pull its weight, will likely have the frame downed due to it, needs to quit early and cant really pick others up if they fall. And how many trial and error run does your "knowledgable" self need before arriving at a point where you arent a dead weight to your team? The whole foundation that allows you to experiment in pugs is due to players like me and dark that go there ready to help others with less options and progress, and people like you. But at the same time you dont want us there, so that implies you want others to suffer and fail as you experiment. Something you shouldnt even need to do in the first place since you claim to already know what you build for. Which apparently isnt the case since you need to test it in steps in live environments, unless of course all you is just BS to argue. And your bolded part itsnt true, you clearly have no clue what the content asks for, hence why you live experiement as opposed to going in ready to pull your weight (which you arent even remotely close to with your "build"). Just that you start at the bottom to experiment instead of starting at the top (less impact for other players during your experimentation) is baffling, and that you do it in public is even worse since you have no sense of control in such an environment. It would be just as misleading if refered to as a level 50 build since it is only a 10 level difference. And normal content doesnt have drone crutches to rely on to help wipe out normal mobs you'll already struggle with. Yes, it just makes me even more set on using a very efficient build so the majority that play this game for that reason have the best experience they can while also being able to help new players stay longer and get more out of their runs.

And the best way (which will touch on paragraph 1 and 2 here) is to simply introduce content that promotes using single target instead of AoE. Since at that point both will see use and be incentiviced at the same time. Just buffing and nerfing wont solve anything when the incentive is the same. And adding sponge content wont help either, since it will just be slow and overall uninteresting, because it comes down to either slowly cleaving things to death with AoE or killing targets 1 by 1 slowly with an overbuffed single target gun. Which would kill the fast paced nature of WF overall. What you describe here is an issue with the game itself, it's an issue with people also. Since DE and people live under an illusion that WF is a co-op multiplayer game and not a game with optional co-op multiplayer. DE have practically done nothing at any point that caters to a co-op multiplayer game if that is their actual intent with the game. They also most often fail at adding things to counter the AoE, they also often fail to add things that engage you. Just the changes to eximus were spotted from afar to be DoA since it was just more standard health, with no incentives to pick anything specific to deal with it. Sure they added some void vulnerability gimmick to it all, but that was just a joke in the end. Then as a contrast they release mechanics elsewhere that would serve very well on units intended to be far tougher and to shake up mission flow. I'm still baffled by the fact they didnt add weakpoints to eximus enemies, the most simple solution to both make them durable and incentivice us to use single target options within our loadout. Buffing them beyond AoE would be pointless, since AoE already hits hard enough now to 1HK things unless we go very very far into endless. Buffing single target beyond that would be a blanket buff since we cant kill things in less than one hit. It would at the same time throw every encounter that currently incentivices single target weapons into chaos and imbalance, or well further chaos and imbalance. People are already avoiding single target options that can 1HK the content they run, because they just arent very effective in a game designed around killing large hordes of enemies. It's better that people accept that they play an ARPG, where the single target gun is like that dedicated single target dps ability you bring soley for the purpose of killing the boss while the rest of your spec/build is made up of AoE damage and buffs. We arent playing some tactical shooter or an rpg with small group encounters, we're playing a horde looter shooter similar in setup to an isometric arpg, where we turn things into pulp and red mist at the speed of light. Doesnt matter. It is still there and an incentive to use it over a gun that doesnt have that extra mechanic. I'm fully with you that it is fun to use weapons you like, even for aestethic reasons, but there is a point in games where you just have to give up those things in order to progress. I love basic looking weapons in games, and I'm sad sad sad whenever I need to go from random low-level-viking-longsword look over to berserk-had-a-threesome-with-sephiroth-and-cloud look due to progress. Just as it saddens me when I cant use a weapon I want for other reasons. But I dont expect a game to throw away they progress or design to cater to me. There are plenty of things I want to use in WF due to their aestethics but I simply cant due to their mechanics. Melee weapons make up most of that due to the stances available, but I wont demand stances to weapon class X be changed to fit me, since someone else may enjoy the stance. So asking DE to go over low level weapons so you can use them since you like who they look isnt realistic either, since it is alot of work for very very little return, because there are enough options already that does practically the same thing while looking different. It would just be work that could be better spent on other things that more people can enjoy. I covered that already when I said you should really ask to get incarnon made for more weapons. That way you'd have increased stats/more damage for those that just want to use the vanilla, then other mechanics to give other players a reason to use the thing that currently got reworked. More damage in itself would also not be a perk, since it isnt a unique mechanics, it's just more stats. Just as I said regarding Torid and Burston, they wouldnt see much increased use if they didnt have an actual incarnon form. And regarding the L4 thing. I should have touched on that yesterday but forgot. You are missing some vital things in your "analysis" of it. That the lower version is used doesnt mean that it is an actual choice between variants, not when we look at the weapon you used as an example i.e Lato. You ignore that something like the Vandal could have been obtained very long ago and then sold by those that are now L4 players, and the reason that the normal Lato sees use on those L4 is because they just wanted to try out the Incarnon that arrived during 2023. Which is far less of a hassle to re-obtain over the Vandal. Or maybe you are under the assumption that every player saves every single item they obtain throughout their mastery trip? Only reason I have the Lato Vandal Incarnon instead on Lato Incarnon is because I had nothing to do leading up to Duviri, so I ran ESO since I knew the Lato would come with an Incarnon and I still had to master the Vandal. If it hadnt dropped prior to the Duviri release I would have likely just picked up the Lato to try the incarnon and then ignore the Vandal since I didnt particularly enjoy the incarnon form. If I had obtained the Lato Vandal early on after the ESO release I would have also sold it off after mastering it, since it would have just been another generic single target semi auto pistol out of an ocean of others. No it is simply about what you are saying, which is balance through normalization and homogenization, which leads to reduced reasons for individual choice since things are more similar and less diverse. I've gone through the posts again and there is not a place where you actually go into what you actually want. You do however shift back to stats quite constantly throughout the posts. There are also few approaches that can be made in order to "balance" things, since it is practically either about stats or adding unique mechanics to other weapons. You also repeat in several posts that you arent talking about stats (no only to me) but you never mention what you want to do instead. Then you are here again talking about increasing single target damage beyond that of AoE, which again means you want to change stats, since more damage comes from increasing stats, meaning you want to crunch stats of weapons. So if you changing stats isnt what your plan involves, then dont mention things that involves changing stats. So you want to leave Rivens as they are even after a change where weapons come closer in stats? So you want to wait an absurd amount of time in order for rivens to normalize, leaving some weapons at that point absurdly overpowered for a long time. So you want a Gram Prime 2.0 situation for over a year?

Oh yeah! <holds up a jar of Kuva> - Kool Aid Murmur

It likely depends on the peer-to-peer setup and how the back end of your progress is saved. Warframe uses something called listen servers, which is a type of peer-to-peer, but with issues such as host migrations specifically tied to that type iirc. And everything is saved on their end aswell when it comes to progress. So it's bound to have other fail states than a peer-to-peer game where progress is saved locally. Not sure how it works in MH, if it's local or data-center based "account" saves and updates. It's like in Valheim, where I can play with my friend in peer-to-peer. If something happens and I get dropped while he's hosting, all personal progress (skills, equipped items etc.) are intact and up to date for me if I jump into his game again, or if I jump into one of my own. That is because everything is constantly saved to the cloud, or locally depending on the setting. WF seems to only really access the account on mission start and then update as you exit, with minimal tracking and contact with the server during mission. Things like number of relics cracked does track, but things like items obtained from them does not. Since if you get dropped and recieve the relics rewards, it will always be the reward that was rolled in your own relic, never the ones from other players if you picked one. That said. While dedicated servers would be a nice improvement, given the very optional co-op nature of WF it isnt needed, since solo play doesnt need it and everything can be soloed. However, if DE decides to add forced group content, then yeah, they should really consider dedicated servers, atleast for that specific content. Otherwise they may aswell not bother with forced group content, since it will just be a horrible mess with the current peer-to-peer system. edit: Or they should atleast add hybrid peer-to-peer like Destiny 2, where a server kicks in during host migrations in order to allow a transition to be made with barely any impact at all.

Yeah that was... uhm... a shocking era in the life of the forums/game. Those people should imo have been dragged out back and beaten with a dead horse. While I dislike the infested fish stick of Yareli, the thought of having a horse instead gives me shivers and a deep feeling of wanting to throw up. I mean sure it's fun in Red Dead Duviri, but it is also open and slow paced. So it is possible to put up with the horse and it's clunky handling. I really wouldnt want to see that in a mode or map that cant even make a Necramech playable there. Then add the amount of enemies intop of that and you have a recipe for utter total disaster.

Well yeah of course, that is how smash works. I'm refering to if you dont want to raise alarms. You can roll as much as you like, you will still trigger alarms from lasers unless you are Ivara, Wukong or uhm Limbo(?).

Yeah stomp should definently stay as its own mod. I'm just saying it would be nice it they buff it to be more inline with Frost and Sty instead of being hard tied to the capacity of the Iron Skin skill. Iron Skin indeed has no trouble getting reapplied as it pops off, it is just an outdated mechanic, just as Chroma and Elemental Ward not being able to be reapplied while active. When at the same time we have frames like Revenant and Kullervo that can reapply their defenses whenever they want. And not only is Iron Skin outdated in the rebuff case, but even with the mod it's horribly outdated, since you need to deactivate it and reactivate it manually. Something that was changed for revenant quite a while ago with Mesmer Skin, so it only take a single interaction to remove and reapply it. I mean, both Iron Skin and Roar are horribly outdated at the baseline since they have the recast restrictions without modding for it. I think both of those skills should get the recast as part of the skill with the mods keeping the additional effects tied to them.

It was fully in good faith, since I gave the build every possible benefit it could get. I guess I could have scewed it horribly positively with a max strength Rhino or Chroma instead of going with a subsumed Roar. Not in good faith would be using less mods and claiming it didnt work, but I did the opposite, added more and it still didnt perform even decently. However that isnt the issue at hand with your "build". The issue is you calling it a build made for a specific activity while throwing around how good your knowledge is regarding building properly and considerate towards other players. Yet it doesnt perform at all in the mode you specifically claim it is designed for, so your self proclaimed knowledge is a lie. You also show zero consideration for other players with how you talk, while also claiming others are inconsiderate to you. In the post quoted here you are perfectly fine with being the most inconsiderate out of the bunch by jumping in and experiement with others. Werent we supposed to be considerate towards even PuGers according to you in this very thread? Oh why yes, indeed that is what you said. But yet you are fine with jumping into a mode with a weapon so horribly underbuilt that all you end up doing is wasting the time for the players there, while also providing less that a new player would that hits up the mode for the first time. This all while raging on people that jump in "over-built", even though those players could actually help those new players when they end up with someone as inconsiderate as you by dealing with the extra targets you add to the mess while also pulling their own weight and filling whatever gaps the new player might have. But nah! You instead decide to leave, likely not giving a rats ass if you are a host or not either. And if you do indeed care if you are the host, and dont wanna cause a migration, well then the rest of those players are #*!%ed if they are too new to have enough options to build to handle your slack. So it's picking between famine or plague at that point as you twiddle your thumbs doing jack squat. And then when you are done there, you do the same #*!%ing thing all over again to a new group as you slightly "improve" your already dedicated "arbitration build". Shouldnt be needed when you've already provided a build labeled as a build for a specific mode type. When it is labeled, it should work, otherwise stop claiming it is a build. I guess you confuse the Hel out of your friends irl when you come to their newly planned construction project, see a doorframe on a foundation of concrete and go "nice building man!".

That is what I ment considering the context of the part I quoted. So nothing will really change since AoE will still kaboom things instantly. Because we already have plenty of weapons with similar output to AoE but without the AoE function. So we can see what some simple buffs would achieve, or lack to achieve. Which is a weapon with a special mechanic. Do we always need to spell out every single option in order for you to grasp the simple example made? My point is, the stats getting more similar wont matter to actual usage, since a gun with only 1 fire mode with still just be another gun with 1 fire mode. Hence the example of Tenet Tetra. I'm also fairly sure if I had said Quellor instead as the example you would have gone "For the exact same reason I prefer to use the X and not the Quellor..." since you have a hard time seeing things not 100% explained to you. Because those guns are still significantly different from eachother in their specifc "perks". My point is, the weapons without "perks" wont be helped by improved stats since they are still just another vanilla gun. So for those weapons it will in reality come down to how they look or if they have a vastly superior stat distribution over the rest depending how even you want guns to be. But it isnt about balance in itself. What you talk about isnt balance, it's normalization and homogenization removing practically all reasons for options, and it wont do anything when "perks" are still part of some weapons, like dealing AoE damage or comming with innate damage types and so on. So what you want will just be a rework that in the end solves nothing. Because those are again fundamentally different weapons. The choice rests in how they deal damage, how they work etc. not their sheet damage. Which is all a buff to most of the less used weapons would be since they lack the unique mechanics that differentiate weapons. I'd understand your desire if you were saying something like "all weapons need an incarnon form" since it would let people that like the classic weapon use it that way due to increased stats of their prefered choice while also adding new mechanics to further increase the incentive to use them for other people that are more "meta" in their mindset. And just buffing or changing the stats would be wasted work. None that I can recall. It has everything to do with what you talk about unless you have a hard time picking up on what I refer to as "perks" in WF. The perks in Outriders is practically the WF mechanics of a weapon tied to a perk on the weapon, while the rest of the weapon is just a regular weapon. So if you want say "Bramma" in Outriders, then you pick the gun that has that perk and either use it if your build makes use of that type of gun or you subsume it so you can add it to the weapon your class uses that has the other perk you need. In WF if you want Bramma, well then you use Bramma. So since that "perk" is static in WF, buffing other weapon stats wont make them more used if people are after the specific mechanic that comes with Bramma or any other weapon that has a specific mechanic. Buffing stats will really only increase or shift the usage between weapons that dont have any specific additional mechanics. Which is why if you want to see buffs, ask for incarnon, since they also bring mechanics. Like how the mechanics on the incarnons we have were enough to push many away from regular AoE weapons. If something like Torid or Burston just got the +stats passive perks and not the specific incarnon modes, their use would be as low as before for the most part, since you'd have a decent AoE "cloud" gun and Burston would still just be an avarage burst rifle in a game that promotes AoE. Exactly you didnt say that, I did. No one claimed you said it. I said it because it is the only realistic approach that would actually shift things. That or as I said adding incarnon to more weapons in order for them to also get new and useful perks/modes. Of course it isnt true today. But it wouldnt matter if they were just skins when they are just generic gun 1, 2 and 3 eitherway. And it is like you are complete void to grasping what I'm trying to point out when you bring up 3 distinct weapons. What is so hard to understand with me saying that weapons with unique mechanics set them apart from the rest? Veldt, Acrid and Velox all have something that makes them unique in their choice. We have plenty of weapons were that is not the case, those generic weapons is what I'm talking about. That in order to increase there usage through increased or more narrow stat overall, the perks of other weapons would need to be removed aswell, or all those S#&amp;&#036;e weapons would need perks added to them to make them unique and give them a reason to be picked up instead of one with a perk that has the same damage and mechanics otherwise. For instance, giving the Penta stats more close to Tonkor, Zarr or Bramma would still see it go unused since it has bad mechanics tied to it in comparison to those 3. And just that you claim rivens are innaccessible outside of trading is laughable. Sounds more like you want things handed to you on a platter. Also, how would your supposed buffs impact rivens? If all items turn out nearly equal from the start it would require every riven to be adjusted aswell since there would no longer be any actual power difference to justify 0 to 00000 dispos. And those players dont suck while using the Tonbo. I think you missed my point. Tonbo is already strong enough to use if you have a riven for it, so there is no problem with the game atm for a low weapon such as that one. I moved to other weapons since they provide me more options. So unless you plan on changing Tonbo on a fundamental level, it will still have less options than those other weapons, even if it would be a good weapon, just as it is now. And as I asked, how would you deal with rivens. If Tonbo gets buffed to be more inline with other weapons, then the riven would need a degrade aswell to account for that. Which really would leave it in the same spot it is now in comparison to those other weapons atm. So it ends up being alot of work to practically circle around to where we are now, the difference is that rivens would be needed less, but also offer far less since the massive dispo difference between weapons would no longer be needed.

Even though Loki works and only need a couple of fixes, like merging of skills and given a new one instead of one of those, I'd still like to see him reworked into more of a Loki of the myths and less "Puny god!" Loki of Marvel. He would really have been more fitting it they skipped decoy and teleport and gave him something similar to Enthrall, since that is more how he is. He whispers in the ears and spreads mistrust and deceit, he doesnt create illusions. He could also use some form of either a melee buff or a melee exalted/pseudo, since he is a master swordsman going toe to toe with Heimdal ending up both victorious and losing as they both die. Stealth should be replaced with some illusion buff instead that makes the frame look like the enemy faction, giving him evasion or something similar to Xaku. Disarm can stay since it fits the master swordsman he is, plus it fits the whole story about Mjölner, where he tries to sabotage the craft by giving it a handle too short for it to be handled properly. Guess he ran into a nullifier there since it apparently didnt turn out as he planned with that Disarm...

That just shows Rhino is an outdated frame. Kullervo simply uses his OG skill as part of his natural play, which means he always tops of the OG, he needs no augments for it either. Bulky OG mechanics should stay with frames like Frost and Styanax, where the mechanics are an addition outside of their kit. Both doing a better and smoother job at applying and maintaining OG than poor Rhino. What they should do for Rhino is to remove his recast from the augment and place it on the skill as baseline. Keep the nuke/puncture on the augment with potentially increased range, or a buff to the next IS cast based on number of enemies hit. Change Reinforcing Stomp to a mechanic that provides Over-Overguard, let it add a further amount roughly inline with the augment of Frost or Styanax, let it build this even if IS isnt active. That would give him many options to build around the skill he is most known for, Iron Skin, without needing augments for the most trivial QoL improvements his old ass needs.

Oh and another one. If you dont positively wanna run a stealth frame for spy and feel comfy getting through lasers, using Roar with Piercing Roar augment is a great alternative since it 1HKs cameras.