Sylonus

I miss CC too but, I don't want to kill anything... why not just let us all have our fun in our power fantasy game and the like 3 people and the developers who want darksoulsframe go play another game :( edit: I could be wrong, but, I strongly feel like the overwhelming majority of players prefer the feeling of "I'm overpowered and it's fun" feeling in this game, if we perhaps got some general consensus on this via polls or something like that, and that's not the case, that would shut me, and a lot of us up, frankly. But if that is the case...then why not let us have our fun.

"Fine" is subjective, but as to playing "the same" I'm 100% sure weapon playrates tell the actual story that they don't. Whether or not outrage is "warranted" is also subjective, but I'm still mad about them, and I'm certainly not alone.

Except those changes didn't blow over, people keep referencing all the awful past nerfs as those while they're complaining about these as well.

Given the fact that it's more versatile, and now is reliable in any mission/situation, I think this is a pretty reasonable solution, I'd like to see the value higher than roar, due to Roar's bane benefits and being innately AoE, but, this is at least a step in the right direction.

Honestly I didn't even enjoy the nuking builds I tried, but was quite enjoying the the Noctua build that Aznvasionplays put out, tried it again. (With now one blank spot because of the ridiculous nerf to Archon Intensify and me being unwilling to put more forma into him now after him being nerfed, so running Umbral Intensify instead and a blank spot instead of more range) and I wasn't prepared for just how much having to cast Triumph twice as often would kill the fun for me.... the book still killed stuff fine but... energy went from pretty easy to manage to quite annoying to keep up along with a dps cost from all the extra casting.. While I think the LOS check should be reverted, I care personally far more about the overguard values/light verse nerf for my own playstyle, I figured he'd still feel okay to play given the partial unnerfs but... yeah, I just don't find him enjoyable anymore compared to other options.

The vex armor change seems like a good idea, depending on numbers, that's long been an issue, providing an alternate way to buff it seems great. The rage solution seems strange, plenty of frames have minimal shields but still can happily rely on rage for energy generation (Grendel, Nekros, Wukong, Valkyr, Wisp, Atlas, Baruuk, Voruna, etc, any tanky enough frame). And this fix does not allow for them, I understand why one might not want some frames running Rage with Overguard to generate energy, but this solution only fixes two frames, and leaves the matter unresolved for most. I personally would just allow rage to generate energy whenever damage is taken regardless of whether the damage is done to health, shields, or overguard, whatever, perhaps with reduced values for damage to overguard/shields. But if it's believed the balance implications would be too great, perhaps another solution is called for. I still don't think Dante needed to get nerfed at all, was happy with him on release but not to the point of not wanting to play other frames, honestly, in probably 90% of cases, the nerfs that happen are completely unwarranted for the health of the game, and the damage they do to the community trust far outweighs any playrate normalization (which I'm still convinced the ways nerfs are done in such an overboard fashion the majority of the time, it doesn't actually balance out playrates long term anyway). If after all these years, LOS checks never feel good, reliable and predictable for any warframe ability at all, it seems unlikely that suddenly it'll be gotten right now. Honestly, they need to just be done away with in my opinion, balance things based on range, and honestly, let people have their fun, there was no reason to gut Nezha's augment, or Dante's abilities.

That isn't the case here, Megan and Rebecca and several others put plenty of hours into the game, even if their playtime is limited to what they play on streams, which, (who knows if that's the case), it's still probably quite a bit more playtime than their average user. Listen, I'm with you on disliking the nerf mentality they have in an effort to balance playrates, I think it hurts the game and the playerbase far more overall than it helps, I think the majority of the time, the way they handle balance ends up making fewer viable options and skewing playrates to be even more onesided, until they nerf that thing, and the cycle continues. But hyperbolic and just demonstrably untrue statements like this aren't helpful, I can't say with confidence how many DE members play their own game with any regularity, but at the very least Megan, the community manager you replied to, definitely puts in plenty of hours, on stream, Rebecca the creative director has certainly in the past, as do a few others we see on streams, at the very least, just because they have a different view of what's the best strategy to handle balance, does not mean they don't play it. There are definitely community members who want nerfs, and cheer when they happen, though I would argue they're likely in the minority, and that it lowers fun and engagement overall, especially the way they're often handled so hamfistedly such as this case, a 60% nerf to one ability, a 50% to another, a LOS nerf which is pretty monstrous, as well as the quiet 'fix/nerf', all right after release, to me, that's just wild and awful. But that said they're not out to ruin your fun intentionally, and at the very least the one you're directing your comment at certainly plays the game. I'm sure plenty who work there do, and I'm sure some at DE even dislike the way balance is handled and the general nerf mentality, it's just unfortunate that however the decisions get made, so many of these choices are what goes live.

Running anything but Amesha is already pretty pointless in Railjack as the tiny movespeed difference Itzal offers is not worth giving up the only Archwing with decent survivability, the only reason to run Itzal these days that I can think of is quick loot collection during Eidolon hunts. Course that's still better than Odonata which is basically only useful for Fomorian and Jordas Golem, and Elytron, which is, well, I guess it's the fastest at clearing a few nodes on the starchart? Really since they changed Itzal's 1, there's almost no reason to use it, as they often do, they tried to increase diversity by nerfing the popular choice, which actually leads to less diversity a lot of the time. I could be wrong, but I'd bet if we could see Archwing usage stats in those yearly usage statistics they share, they'd have been something like, 75% Itzal, 20% Amesha, 5% everything else, and after the Itzal/teleport changes, it's probably 85% Amesha, 10% Itzal, 5% everything else, or something to that effect.

People think the skins look cool. Most people disapprove of them being limited time. Many people wish they'd offered smaller packs that targeted the skin they wanted more specifically without paying for the extras. Seems like a decent summary to me.

I'm sure they meant no further response... this seemed.. obvious.

"Unethical" is a bit of a soup, one could argue, assuming percentages were made available explicitly that one could know the exact chances of what they're getting. To some extent, any purchase is somewhat inexact as we don't know the game's lifespan, but even DE likely doesn't know that exactly. What we can say with a bit more confidence though, is that most people consider the practice of selling of "limited time" things to take advantage of the fear of missing them (FOMO), feels consumer unfriendly, people have different bones to pick here, but at the very least, this is mine.

I agree, but some people complain about it in the hopes that the practice will change, which is also completely fine.

I can't speak for everyone, but I personally am worried that if this is successful, there will be more "limited time" offers, specifically, non-cosmetic limited time things again, such as Excal Prime/Lato Prime/Skana Prime. And I never want things like that again. This feels like they could be testing the waters, and that's the last thing I want.

I definitely agree that they're better than the vast majority of studios out there. (Though certainly not all, there are a few gems like Larian for example really having their time in the light at the moment.) But, this is a bad move, I think it's reasonable for there to be community backlash about it.

"evil" Is subjective, but what most people can agree on is that it's a consumer unfriendly tactic. Basically noone is asking them not to monetize their game at all. Most people simply want things monetized in a consumer friendly fashion, frankly, Warframe does a better job than most, in general. This however, is a big backwards step in the worst way.