Jump to content

Tyreaus

PC Member
  • Content Count

    369
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

262

About Tyreaus

  • Rank
    Silver Disciple

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. If the goal is to remove the damage boost, you could make multishot split the damage between the pellets—the same way shotguns do. Mind, as far as the UI goes, I do feel status chance being per pellet would be a more useful indicator anyway. If we have per-pellet status chance and pellet counts listed, it's easy enough to multiply the two and figure out the chance per shot, even just by approximation.
  2. The funny thing is... Traditionally, only Tenno weapons get the Prime treatment. If they want to keep to that idea, they'll have to make more Tenno weapons. Void-based weaponry would be really nice and possibly necessary to explain how Tenno fought the Sentients back in the old war when the only weapons and abilities we have now don't use void anything, but it's unlikely since that'd undo the Eidolon's focus on promoting Operator stuff.
  3. Like was said earlier, this is functionally identical to if you were to work out the math for status and multishot chances (on modded multishot specifically). If you have 100% multishot, you end up with 30% status chance on each pellet. The 0.9 multiplier on the second pellet's chance is equivalent to the proc chance multiplied by the chance to procure a second shot. If you made it such that multishot generated additional pellets inside the initial pellet, you'd have an identical effect. I do think multishot does need a change, but...this doesn't seem to do it.
  4. The point isn't to remove the disparity entirely but lessen it, at least in particular dimensions. There's a difference between having to move the mouse up and down to compensate for an enemy's jumping, and having to swing it in a circle, loop it around your wrist, and stuff it up your nose to track your target. As far as following goes, I've mentioned how that tends to favour the retreater (or at best leaves it neutral) because of how bullet jumping positions the head hitbox before much of the body hitbox.
  5. So how does this look for a rifle with 30% status chance, for example? Does each pellet still have 30% chance? Or is it like shotguns where the listed chance is divided among the pellets? (Rinse and repeat for, say, 50% and 80% - so we have a clearer picture of what multishot actually does)
  6. I don't see why not. It'd make the Energy Surge stage more prominent, at least. Though whether that's a good thing or not would have to be tested... It's mostly around aiming. A lot of aiming for a lot of shooters isn't mouse movement but character positioning: you remove a lot of the evasion of a target by walking with the target. But because Warframes walk and run so slowly yet evade so quickly, it shifts the aiming task to the mouse a lot (and, specifically, minimizes the amount you can compensate with your own movement). Too much, as far as I'm concerned. Plus, at least in PvE, sprinting without Volt is pretty much worthless even with a ton of sprint mods. Dodging gives DR, bullet jumping adds verticality, wall-running maintains verticality, sprinting...exists and makes you into Tokyo Drift. It really should have a better niche closer in line to everything else. As far as I see, it wouldn't hurt PvP either.
  7. IMO having natural energy regen be the only way to get energy would be okay - optimal, even, with the mod that gives killed players energy on respawn, since it becomes a sort of "noob tube" for those not as skilled yet still lowers the prevalence of abilities and the strategy surrounding "run and grab energy orbs". Plus all the mods that affect energy regen... As far as player mobility goes, the idea was to boost regular movement up close to parkour movement, not take parkour movement downward. It's more about the monopoly around parkour movements than "parkour is too fast".
  8. Have to emphasize this. Parkour makes players harder to hit. In principle, that's fine* if it's equivalent to taking cover in a cover-based shooter. What you wouldn't do, from a design standpoint, is make taking cover charge up an offensive ult ability. Yet that's, effectively, what we have. That doesn't even get into other problems with the energy pickup mechanic, like the fact that whether a particular ult is actually good depends on what the player brings in (contrast Quake / Doom where everything's on the literal table for anyone to pick up). *Personally I would set speeds of manoeuvres and general movement much closer to each other. Putting "why" in simple terms of PvP (though it'd help PvE too): continuing an attack is often disadvantageous to the attacker, who has to pursue a target with parkour. Why? Bullet jumping at someone presents the head hitbox foremost and, since the retreater can fire backwards, they actually have an offensive boost while retreating. It's energy orbs all over again. I will say that, while the team has done well balancing the weapons in Conclave, the constant influx of tweaks and changes to PvE (which can bleed over to PvP, cf. the Plasmor changes) makes keeping that a nightmare. They've done good overall, but the Staticor, for example, sure seems pretty popular in PvP now after its radius changes.
  9. Probably better for another topic but: What I'm not following is how the status chance graph looks with and without multishot on a per-pellet (i.e. a pellet, e.g. from a shotgun or multishot) and per-bullet (i.e. a round from the clip) basis. For example, if a weapon has 30% status chance (per bullet), does that mean throwing multishot on it doesn't change that 30% per-bullet chance? That would mean the per-pellet chance goes down to compensate, since that 30% is now spread across multiple pellets (particularly important with shotguns or weapons with high spread that give a decent chance for the extra pellet to miss at certain ranges, lowering the effective status chance). Or does it just increase the status chance cap over 100% so it can guarantee one proc and have a chance for another? Or is this some way of saying "make the damage split across each pellet but keep the effects to status chance the same"? IIRC multiple pellets already can proc multiple status effects if they land, after all.
  10. The toughness DR would apply to everything: armour + health + shields. Armour DR would apply only to armour points. Not sure where you're getting the idea that shields would become some kind of god-tier HP pool just because they're nudged closer to par (not even on par) with armour...
  11. Kind of. The idea I had was that armour would be in addition to health, as shields are, but whereas shields have the ability to recharge, armour has damage reduction based on its current amount. E.g., if a target has 600 armour, it would have ~66% DR against the first shot. If the first shot does 300 damage post-reduction, then the armour drops to 300 and the DR on the second shot drops to 50%. The DR on armour would be capped at, say, 80%, so anything above 1200 armour would only increase the health pool instead of further increasing the damage resistance. Or whatever maximum DR is ideal - numbers are just for example. Then the "toughness" stat would do largely what armour does now, except: It would be non-scaling, i.e. static, for enemies that have it at all It would apply to all forms of HP, not just baseline health It would decrease from Puncture procs into negative values, up to -150% (i.e. at max, it removes innate damage reduction and adds a 1.5x damage multiplier)
  12. What I proposed was to make armour a depletable health class, like overshields for health, that has self-damage reduction up to a % cap. That two-part EHP pool should create a similar kind of breadth and focus on damage as exists in the Corpus, albeit not necessarily to the same degree. The main point was more that the static armour solution doesn't address other things surrounding armour, like how players' EHP skews toward armour and health for the same reason scaling armour and health are such pains.
  13. Oh, don't get me wrong, I understand that and agree with it. I just think the specific solution of "just make armour non-scaling", though it works for handling the problem of insane enemy armour scaling, doesn't attack a few closely related issues like how health + armour are the go-to health types for maximum EHP on players. Armour might not scale for enemies, but for players... There's a couple of other nitpicky things too. E.g., health-only scaling on Grineer basically turns their health pools into Infested units. Slash proc efficacy would drop faster as every point increase in EHP is an increase in HP (compare Corpus where, approximately, it's 2EHP for 1HP, the other going to shields). It's not the end of the world but the homogeneity feels kinda lame, and I wouldn't be surprised if builds for Grineer and Infested started looking a little bit similar.
  14. Admittedly I haven't been able to read the entire thread so IDK if this has been mentioned, but while static armour values would technically work and be lower on the work required scale, I think it's a bit of a bandaid fix. It doesn't really solve the prevalence of armour (i.e. the uselessness of shields) in Warframe EHP, for example. Personally, I think making armour a self-DR overhealth-esque mechanic (maybe with the DR capped at 70-80%, or whatever is deemed appropriate given other changes) and coupling that with a non-scaling / static "toughness" DR attribute wherever it might be desired or necessary would be more effective. It's not much harder to do, either, since the mechanics behind that sort of non-armour DR already exist in things like the Nox and WF abilities. As an aside: it could give the "Weaken" effect on Puncture a different use: Toughness reduction, up to inverting it into a damage multiplier.
  15. Her 1 needs an "energy-free" option that doesn't give buffs and an "energy-cost" option (on hold) that gives the buffs (and Duality spectre), which could be boosted like Chewarette suggests (or just buffed numerically). I don't think just "more buffs" would be enough to encourage using 1 for what it should be used: changing forms and accessing the full breadth of her abilities. Energy Transfer should be built-in and count for Peaceful Provocation too. Duh. Want a replacement augment? Hold to cast the aura, tap to activate it at a target location like Rest & Rage, drains only the amount needed to kill enemies or heal allies in that small area. Maximum efficiency, much less AoE. Tada~ Rage can inflict a radiation proc. That alone makes the enemy buff useful rather than detrimental. Also fits with the name. Mend on deactivation can just be a HoT aura while in Night form, where the drain from the ability's pool increases over time (maybe doubling every second). More charge = more duration. Opinion time: IMO, her 3 should be consistent in what it affects (her 4 isn't, but that's her ult). Her 2 is enemy-targeting so her 3 should affect allies through and through: increase their ability strength, increase their damage reduction (cost can be per instance, i.e. per ally - it's how Day 3 drains energy). In line with that, Peaceful Provocation could affect enemies (slow debuff in Pacify, HP reduction in Provoke - just adding to the base ability numbers feels lazy). I think the range drawback to her abilities is a great tradeoff for her superb versatility. I'd only suggest it be completely consistent across her kit, instead of Night 4 (I think) having no falloff where Day 4 does.
×
×
  • Create New...