TGDM

So... What about revisiting Arbitration mission design so that they are all relatively equal in regards to time spent vs reward? Personally I won't bother going into one unless: Faction: Infested (or to a lesser extent, Grineer) Mission: Excavation or Interception Defense and Survival feel awful for time spent. Corpus feels like just extra layers of tedium. Corrupted kind of have the same problem as Corpus, though mostly only because of Nullifiers. Even when it's a pretty easy Infested Excavation arbitration I still find it taxing to stay longer because of how long you go between rewards. While accruing more Endo than I can ever use is nice, it does start to wear down on me when the drops I'm after never show up :V

Could you please clarify what you mean by "outside of the percentage" for the other invasions? The phrasing makes it sound as if The Wolf can appear in the same mission as those other targets which makes the sentence after a bit confusing. Does each invasion have an individual % chance to occur and then the first of the bunch to roll positive shows up? Is there a roll order players should be aware of to more effectively farm for these very rare items? In that case it would technically be easier to "farm" The Wolf by losing all assassin marks and not ranking any syndicates (or somehow staying out of aggro territory). I understand if the specifics can't be shared in order to maintain a level of mystery and rarity (and to avoid abuse). I just have a habit of pursuing information on stuff like this :V

Could we please get some clarification on how assassin spawns work in general? It feels really unclear how this "roll" is made when there's also the Stalker, G3/Zanuka, Syndicates, and then squad member conditions to account for. Are you saying there is an overall 4%/6% chance for The Wolf to spawn or are you saying that out of the x% chance of any assassin spawn, The Wolf has a 4/6% chance to spawn? What is the x% for general assassin spawns? It's not possible for multiple assassins to spawn in the same mission, right? There's a very distinct lack of information and anyone who could pull that data would be ill-advised to share it because these calculations are made server side iirc and that very much steps out of the gray area data mining on client side files is at.

I should have phrased it a bit better, but this is what I was referring to. It at the very least implies that this workshop is incomplete in regards to all of the changes.

I guess we'll have to wait until Part II to get a better understanding of the scope of these changes, but it doesn't really feel like these frames are being revisited/reworked in mind of how the game has shifted in the past few years. The Part I changes seem like they're just reinforcing the old and outdated aspects of their abilities.

So if the purpose is to balance power through Riven dispositions (which is still many layers of RNG to acquire and roll), why are all variants of a weapon sharing the same disposition? i.e. Braton has four variants: MK1, Base, Vandal, and Prime. The base version is by all means the "baseline" model. The MK1 is objectively inferior and the Vandal and Prime are objectively superior, albeit the latter two being more of sidegrades to each other. Yet they all share the same disposition which results in only ever making the Prime and Vandal viable whilst the MK1 and base versions are objectively inferior. As things are right now, dispositions only make strong weapons stronger and weak weapons more acceptably meh.