[Any good kit guns?]

I have fully built and formad Tombfinger, Gaze, and Catchmoon, and have rivens for all 3 of them.

Gaze seems the weakest of the 3 since it's just an ordinary beam weapon like Synoid Gammacor or Cycron, and dps difference between them isn't huge. Gaze might be great however with a max ranked Pax Seeker arcane since it's easy to headshot with. A single projectile from the arcane does 80k damage with my Gaze.

Catchmoon is like a mini Arca Plasmor; it's higher dps with smaller aoe but the projectile gets stuck easily. It's sort of an downgrade to Staticor since Staticor has larger aoe and projectiles don't get stuck as easily. 

Tombfinger is my favorite of the three. It has very high damage per shot, a small aoe effect, and very good ammo economy if you're using Haymaker. Downside is that it's a projectile so it can be harder to land shots from far away. But if it does hit it'll oneshot most things. Best combination is probably Tombfinger Haymaker and Killstream. The loader can be whatever capacity as long as it has high crit and low status; mostly up to personal preference. 

[Garuda is weak or is just me?]

1 hour ago, (XB1)Knight Raime said:

A perceived problem.  Not an actual problem for the frame.  As I mentioned in my prior post optimal play isnt warrented realistically anywhere.  So it's perfectly fine if you want to say that you can't think of a reason to play her because you care about optimal behavior.  But I don't think DE should be actively designing warframes to replace any frame that might be meta at the time.  We already have issues with power creep.  We don't need to add more onto that.  DE imo should be designing frames for the fun/interesting factor.  Titania does absolutely nothing that's meta defining.  But I like her for her concept.  She's fun to play.

I don't care for memeing strike because it's boring.  Volt is a fun melee with his augment that stuns near by targets while he speed.  But he's not self sustain enough for my tastes for a melee frame.  Valkyr is my baby.  But her playstyle is boring because you sit in warcry the entire time soaking damage and using a basic melee.  Only using her 3 to deal with thing like bombards or nox.  Popping into 4 if you're going to die.  Nah I wouldn't user her like that because her dps is awful.  She can nuke but I wouldn't consider her a nuke frame.

Octavia is best overall.  But it requires her team to play around her.  Which if your solo que means only on small tile sets like hydron.  And while I like octavia I don't enjoy her gameplay of having to constantly crouch to refresh invis and letting the game kill itself.  So I wouldn't pick her over garuda for team DPS.  Rhino's buff is the easiest of the 3 frames in question to give.  But I think giving true damage to all damage sources is more valuable in a vacuum compared to just straight boosting damage.  So I'd pick rhino if I wanted to do buff and cc as stomp is still an insanely strong cc these days.  Banshee's boosts probably out shine garuda's but imo I think they'ed actually make a good parring.

And that's exactly why I don't run with the same mindset you do.  Because if I do then i'm forced to 8ish odd frames for everything.  Even if there are comparable options there is still the best.  And with that mindset there is no reason to not run the best.  I want to play Garuda for several reasons.  I like her thematically and visually.  I like that she's a bit of a melee frame, a bit of a support frame, and I love the gameplay loop built into her kit of health=energy=health or energy=health=energy.  Interplay like that is why I also really like Harrow (and imo harrow is the only frame that's comparable to her in terms of gameplay.)  And the fact that she has scaling with her and the ability to nuke.  She's an all rounder in my eyes.  Not good at any one thing but decent at a handful of things.  I prefer that now compared to back then when I liked singular roles.  The game just doesn't suit roles.

I can't answer that for you.  Because the reasons you play the game the way you do don't align with my views or ideals with this game.  I pick frames purely on what sounds fun to play/looks interesting gameplay wise.  and Garuda ticks all of my boxes.

So basically it boils down to this: I think she's a comparatively weak frame, and you don't care because you enjoy playing her. A parallel can be drawn to bows in this game. They're weak weapons overall and mostly straight downgrades to sniper rifles. While they are fun weapons an not totally useless, and some people don't enjoy using sniper rifles, would it hurt if we as a community acknowledge that they're weak weapons and ask DE to buff them? Wouldn't it be good if they were fun weapons but also great weapons at the same time?

The same can be said for Garuda. She's a perfectly viable frame for most of the content that Warframe throws at us, but she's not quite up to par with the good frames. Some people enjoy her playstyle even though she's not the best, and that's perfectly fine. But would it hurt anyone if we acknowledge that she's not great and could use some changes so that she can compete with the good frames? I don't think you can say in good conscience that she's so good that buffing her would be poor balance choice.

It probably wouldn't even take much to make her good: perhaps something like making her 4 less clunky so it's more synergistic with her frantic playstyle, and making her heal pylon provide some sort of additional utility beyond healing? 

[Garuda is weak or is just me?]

7 hours ago, (XB1)Knight Raime said:

Nope it is absurd.  But that's fine.  I was an arse and worded it in a loaded way in attempts to show how ridiculous your talk about heals was.

I don't have to justify anything.  Why?  Because no shred of content in this game needs optimal gameplay and 90% of the frames in the game with some combination of gear can solo carry a team in any content.  If you prefer playing the most optimal way possible more power to you.  That's irrelevant for any content anyone is realistically playing on a consistent basis.  It's free health for anyone in it's area.  That's justification enough for most who play.

Thanks for the explanation on how it works.  But I wasn't claiming her heal was better.  My point was that people will typically stack health/energy gains if possible and not detrimental to their build.  Because there's no reason not to.

The fact that you think she's best played at a distance either means you don't know how to play her or you don't get her kit.  There is nothing anti synergetic about her.  Distance means nothing to her because of her absurd range on her 1 and 2.  And squishy ish frames like her are encouraged to be moving around a lot.  So her going from one spot to another is normal.  And you're over compensating with that safety comment.  Her 4 doesn't require LoS and 90% of warframe is a hallway simulator.  Chances are where ever you are there is a wall or some box that you can safely move behind if your shield isn't up to proc people through it.

The damage bonus she gets from her passive is not an integral part of her kit.  None of her abilities are damage skills really.  The utility of her 1 and 4 out weigh the meger damage they do on their own.  And the shield's mechanic plus her 4's proc is where a majority of her damage comes from anyway.  not the damage buff in her passive.  The only reason you'd even bother trying to min max her passive (which hey that's the reason why your view on her is borked to begin with) is to boost your weapon damage even further.  And as i've already stated if you REALLY wanted to play that way a quick thinking build with primed flow fits that.

And as i've already explained beforehand her kit is about giving and taking both health and energy constantly.  You don't see that flow despite me explaining.  Not my problem.  She's not meant to be low health.  She just gets bonuses for missing health.  It's that simple.

 The playstyle you're describing is fine but it has one big problem: it doesn't do anything special that warrants picking her over the meta frames.

Do you want to zip around the map meleeing everything to death? A Maiming Strike Volt or Valkyr will do that better and faster.

Do you want to be a general dps and utilize her abilities frequently to top team damage/kill? Too bad because the Mesa or Equinox already wiped the room while you were charging up your 4. Oh and if you have a Saryn in your team you may as well never press 4 because it's not going to hit anything. 

So you realized that Garuda is actually a bad dps frame and want to focus on boosting the team's damage with her 4? Well like I said this is the best playstyle because this is where she can actually potentially compete with other similar frames. Rhino and Octavia are still going to be far better in the vast majority of cases since they keep their damage-amplifying effect up constantly. Octavia also has the added benefit of granting team invisibility and insane damage/cc, but perhaps there are scenarios where Garuda's 4 adds more damage than Rhino Roar? Maybe you're doing level 300+ enemies and your team isn't running 100% armor strip with Corrosive Projection + Coaction Drift for some reason? Also Banshee is on a league of her own in terms of damage buffing, and Garuda isn't going to get anywhere close if you're talking big numbers against endurance run enemies. 

In a vacuum, every frame is viable in Warframe. You can solo sorties and Tridolons with any frame. But comparing frames against each other, not all frames are good. When I say Garuda is weak, I'm not saying that she can't clear content. I'm looking for reasons to use her over other frames. Mesa is pretty much the undisputed queen of bounty missions. Saryn is the standard ESO map-wiper, but Equinox or Volt can still be as good if not better in some cases. A support crew of Rhino and Trinity is usually welcome in premade ESO teams too. Frost is great for Defense and Excavation, but excellent cases can be made for Limbo or Gara. There's also speed runner frames such as Octavia, Nova and Volt for Sabotage and Rescue. Loki, Octavia, and Ivara for spy. Foreseeing yourself taking heavy fire and want to play a tanks frame, perhaps for surviving a long time in arbitration? Inaros Nidus Gara etc. Just want some good loot? Hydroid Nekros and Speedva. Chroma isn't commonly seen as a great frame but he's the de facto Eidolon killer. Support frames aren't all that necessary in normal content, but Trinity and Harrow both see a lot of play time in Eidolon hunts. Even the much-ridiculed Ember has a niche in speeding through low level Fissures and Exterminates. Oberon is probably the easiest Tridolon solo alongside Trinity, if that's your thing. Umbra is useful for afk index farming lmao. Mag is often talked of as underpowered but a small group of Mag enthusiasts know that she's an insane frame and her ability of holding chokepoints is unparalleled. I haven't even mentioned Staticor Mirage which is just bonkers and is a top pick in most things that involve killing.

Having said all that, where does Garuda come in? She suffers from the same problems as frames like Atlas and Revenant. What's her niche that she does better than everyone else? What reasons do I have to actually pick her, outside of preference and fashion?

[Garuda is weak or is just me?]

6 hours ago, (XB1)Knight Raime said:

Woosh.

Health and energy are both valuable resources that one always needs.  If you can get one from one thing that doesn't make all other sources irrelevant.  Like people who play with pizzas don't forgo arcane energize (so long as their build isn't dependent on specific arcanes) just because they already have pizzas.  Just as with operators.  Just because they can do something for you doesn't mean you shouldn't grab more of the same thing.  being able to heal with garuda without needing to carry life strike or an arcane is a benefit to have.

Yes all things should be considered when making a build.  But that doesn't make things as black and white as you make it.  As I explained above having more than one healing source/energy source is never a bad thing.

I don't have the arcane for the operator (MR 17) because i've not really cared to grind out for it so I can't speak on how effective it is.  But Garuda's heal is not bad at all.  it heals you based on missing health.  the first tick can heal 50% of your health if you were low enough.  And it's stackable with other altars.  Meaning it's good for  a quick burst heal.  Not something you sit in for an extended period of time.  Which is fine because nothing in her kit really encourages her to sit in place for extended periods of time.

You're no more or less in danger for turning an enemy into a blood altar than you are for using most abilities.  You can pounce an enemy and turn that enemy into an altar.  If there is still too much burst turn another dude into an altar on that one.  And both her 1&4 do have cc to them.  So if you really needed to you could tap either in the enemies direction and then heal up and pounce away.

No bad synergy here.  Her passive is in play whenever you're not at max health.  Her kit doesn't encourage you to play in low health either.  Her kit is a loop of energy=health=energy or health=energy=health.  she's always supposed to be expending one to get another.  and so because of this she never stays at full health.  But she never stays at low health.  And her passive gives you a little bit of damage boost for your weapons/abilities as a nice little thank you for playing this way.  I will give you that the radius is small.  But most people have range on anyway so it's not a big deal.

I'd say she's already a meta frame due to her ability to nuke anything in the game and give out slash procs like they're candy.  And you can easily pair a forced slash proc build with a high energy pool and quick thinking to fit any survival needs you need for much harder content.  Using her heal whenever you feel QT is popping too much.  She is a good frame.  Is she a great frame like rhino or nova?  Time will tell.  But the only bad aspects of her kit (bugs withstanding) is her 1 and 4's cast time and the base range of her 2.  She has scaling potential and decent enough survivability.  People are going waaaaay overboard with how harsh she's being judged.

There was no wooosh. I know you weren't being serious with your remark but I'm telling you that it's  not as absurd as you think it is. 

I don't see how you can justify Garuda's healing against Harrow, Trinity, or Oberon's heal. All 3 of them heal in a far larger area that doesn't require your teammates to do anything specific to receive the healing. More importantly, their healing skills also do something useful outside of just healing. Trinity's 4 gives damage resistance; Harrow's 2 massively boost his damage output; Oberon's 3 revives teammates with augment. Garuda... crowd controls a target that should just be killed instead? It's literally a worse Trinity 1, and I haven't seen anyone justify that skill. 

Like I said before, there is no trade-off for using Magus Elevate. No other operator arcane is worth using. You either have it or you don't have an optimal build. Here's how Magus Elevate works: a single max rank Elevate has a 75% chance to heal your warframe for 200 when you press 5 and go into Operator mode. With a double set, this is on average 300 heal for simply pressing 5 twice. Also VERY importantly, you're completely immune to damage during the process of switching to operator and back. If you're at 2 health, you simply press 5 four times and you'll on average be restored to 602 health while being completely immune for the duration. It doesn't require you to jump into danger or to see an enemy in the first place to make use of it. Tell me how an on demand heal with built-in invincibility frame doesn't make Garuda's 2 obsolete?

Garuda is actually pretty anti-synergy when you actually consider your main role. Let's not pretend she provides anything to her team other than her 4, which requires her to be in a safe position to cast due to its long casting time. But her 1 and 2 encourage her to be in the fray. This leads to a very disjointed gameplay where one moment you're jumping into danger to cast your skills, and soon after you need to retreat into safety to cast you're 4. The most optimal way to play Garuda is to always stay at minimal health using your 3, and casting 4 as often as possible. Her healing is detrimental to that since it just gimps your damage. If you're in danger and need healing for some reason, would you want to put yourself in further danger by jumping into enemies to make an altar? Or just press 5 a couple times?

[Garuda is weak or is just me?]

20 hours ago, (XB1)Knight Raime said:

"since everyone should already have Magus Elevate or something else that heals to sustain themselves."

Welp I guess support frames are useless then.  Why have a frame do anything when you can do everything you need on your own?  (between your melee, consumables, operator, and warframe.)

No seriously.  This is a stupid argument.  Warframe is not, has not, and never will be a team based game.  We've been able to self sustain on everything we need for a long time now.  The "x is pointless because I have this" argument needs to go away.  If you want to say Garuda's heal ability is bad give an actual reason.  Not a cop out.  Compare her heal to others.  how effective it is, what's the setup, are their any quirks to it compared to others, etc.

If you think saying her heal ability is bad because you can heal yourself is a valid argument then I can easily say who cares about damage abilities when I can instant kill with guns.  Also your point about it stalling objective waves is moot.  The most you're going to run into is a 25 second duration altar.  And considering Garuda's nature she's not going to stick around and hover in that one heal.  she'll make more.  Meaning the prior will be released.  It doesn't stall an objective in any actual meaningful length of time compared to something like inaro's devouring an armored target.

You're actually absolutely right about dps skills being useless because of guns. Some frames do have skills that simply do a bit of damage, such as Volt 1 or Ember 3. These skills are actually made obsolete by weapons because their damage scales badly and they don't do anything else besides damage. Other damage skills such as Saryn 1 or Mesa 4 do far higher damage for the time it takes to cast them; they're a dps increase over even great weapons which makes them good damage skills. 

Support frames aren't useless because they provide things other than healing. Trinity gives infinite energy and 75% damage reduction. Harrow gives energy and red crits. Oberon give status immunity and automatic revives  

Im not sure what you don't understand about my argument about Magus Elevate. Currently there are no other operator arcanes worth using, so when discussing frames and builds Elevate should always be a point of consideration. Why should gear not be part of the discussion? Should Saryn be judged without Overextended or Mesa be judged without Streamline or Fleeting Expertise? Should Mirage be reviewed without any weapons and Harrow be rated without taking into consideration his 4 augment? Any holistic judgement of a warframe should consider the wide range of weapons, mods, and arcanes available to us. 

Garuda's 2 is a bad skill because it puts you in danger and heals slower than Magus Elevate. It also has bad synergy with the frame and warframe in general since the area of effect is such a small area, whereas the game requires you to be very mobile for most game modes. It's not a completely useless skill, but wouldn't you agree that's replacing it with something better that isn't redundant could help propel her into competing with the meta frames? As it stands she's an alright frame for beginners without Elevate since she's self-sufficient and hard to kill. That, however, doesn't make her a good frame all things considered. 

[Garuda is weak or is just me?]

5 hours ago, CoolDudeMcCool said:

Then that means it's a problem with Operator arcanes, not Garuda. There should be more of them that are worth using, so you have to decide between Magus Elevate and something else - except when you use Garuda, for example.

Also, a frame should be made to be self-sufficient. DE shouldn't make frames that rely on Magus Elevate, or energy pizzas, or anything like that, because people who don't have them will think the frame is incomplete and just garbage to play. Frames should be good on their own(or their base stats should be decent enough to mod around in some way, I don't expect unmodded frames to work at high levels). Maybe a frame only works best with these things, but they should not be designed with those things in mind.

I don't think that's true at all. Most frames do not have ways to regenerate energy, but they aren't useless because Energizing Dash exists. It wouldn't be fair to rate Mesa or Equinox as bad frames because they have no innate way of restoring energy and would therefore run out. It's actually a good thing that's these frames don't have redundant healing or energy restoration skills, because that leaves room for other interesting skills while the player can use other options outside of Warframe skills to fill the gap. 

Frames are not judged on a vacuum, we take into consideration a variety of factors such as mods, arcanes, focus trees, and content. 

[Garuda is weak or is just me?]

1 hour ago, CoolDudeMcCool said:

I don't have it, don't feel like getting it, and even if I did have it, I would be able to replace it with something else.

Not really. The other operator arcanes are useful for Eidolon hunts only so there's no reason not to equip Magus Elevate unless you're a beginner and can't get it. Garuda's 2 is a decent skill for beginners but that's it. 

[Garuda is weak or is just me?]

1 hour ago, CoolDudeMcCool said:

Enemies take full damage while in Garuda's 2 once it goes down, still requires the timer to run out/her to remove it, but you can make them die as soon as that happens.

I don't think this is fair. I don't use Life Strike and I don't rely on my Charger for health on Garuda because she can heal, therefore I have an open mod slot in my melee or pet. A frame doing something that something else can do means that you don't need that something else. You have room for a different arcane/mod, or you don't have to waste a pizza, etc. 

Look at the Dread, it's a silent bow. That doesn't make the mod that silences your weapon redundant, you can use it on different weapons. The mod doesn't make the Dread redundant, you have an open slot to use for something other than that mod.

Like I said, Magus Elevate. It doesn't take any precious slots; it's simply a heal on demand ability for every single frame after you get it. There's no reason why anyone shouldn't have that, unless they simply can't get it. I guess Garuda's 2 isnt absolutely useless if you want to help newbies along? At least Oberon Trinity or Harrow doesn't require you you to be inside a bloody 6m radius circle to heal you. 

[Garuda is weak or is just me?]

10 minutes ago, Toran said:

She is not game-breaking overpowered.
For standard content including Sorties and Elite Onslaught 1-8 other Warframes are faster and more efficient.

 

I wouldn't call her weak, exactly. She's an excellent point defense support with a mix of very strong offense/defense skills. I agree, that the charge on 4 has to go though. The skill is limited enough already with the 180° attack cone and the fixed max range (range mods don't work with it).

I don't believe in the "support" thing since everyone should already have Magus Elevate or something else that heals to sustain themselves. Abilities that do nothing other than healing are completely redundant in Warframe. I would compare Garuda's 2 to Trinity's 1 since both make the enemies unkillable/tougher and provide nothing other than healing. At least you can still kill Trinity's heal pylons, but Garuda's are invincible and just stay there to interfere with mob spawns and defense waves until Garuda remembers to deactivate it. 

To me Garuda is basically a budget Rhino. Her 4 serves as a team damage buff like Rhino Roar, but it's slow and inconsistent. Her 3 is a way to activate her passive to buff her damage, like Rhino Roar but weaker. Her 1 is basically a budget Iron Skin that offers some survivability, but not nearly as reliable as Iron Skin. If Garuda wants to have good uptime of her 4 debuff on all enemies, she needs to be spamming 4 and doing little else. But why not just play Rhino and Roar and be done with it then? The only thing Garuda has that Rhino doesn't is... a 6 meter range heal pylon? Garuda's 4 does have good synergy with Equinox Maim though, I'll give her that. 

[Garuda is weak or is just me?]

Yes she is weak. Her 4 is the only reason to use her over other frames, but it casts slow and requires additional follow-up damage. Other frames would've killed the enemies way before that happens. If her 4 casts much faster than it does now, then she might be decent. 

[Garuda is little game breaking.]

Hmm I wonder if there are frames that can kill 140 CHGs fast but also aren't a pain in the ass to play.

https://gyazo.com/d77d5a98ffec39505e7d12c84783f865

That's a thread boys.

[My concern once Orbs can be fought]

If team performance and efficiency matters at all in the fight, then it will be optimized and there will be a meta. If you can do something faster and get more rewards, people are going to want to do it faster. The only way to stop a firm meta from developing is to make it so it doesn't really matter how well you perform; the rewards per time spent has to be roughly equal. That would probably require something dumb like timegating. It's just not possible to create content in Warframe where every frame can excel equally, since all the frames do such different things. Any given role is going to have one frame that does it better than anyone else. 

[How is Garuda]

She is good against very high level enemies, at least level 150+, because her 4 makes enemies take massively increased damage and scales well.  Against normal content she's useless because by the time you take your time to charge up your 4 and kill the enemies, frames like Saryn or Equinox will have already nuked the map. So nope she's not a good frame unless you plan on going a few hours in endless, in which case there would still be many better options. 

[Is there something wrong with Tridolon dmg calculation?]

To be fair, 5k is pretty low. If you charge often enough you should regularly be hitting 10k+ crits in between energy spikes. Also your teammates might be complaining about you being slow at placing shields?

[About the unchanged Kohm disposition: read this and think about it]

The reasoning for not nerfing Kohm is perfectly fine. The disposition change was not intended to bring about very drastic changes in the values of the affected rivens; that's why they limit the change to a maximum of 0.2 in the first place. DE does not wish to upset the market and owners of said rivens too much, so the changes were mostly not that significant. None of the rivens were gutted; Rubico Lanka and Tiberon were hit hard but they'll still perform similarly to before. Their prices will drop but not drastically.

Taking this in account, it was perfectly reasonable to leave Kohm rivens as they are. Nerfs to its disposition will disproportionately affect its performance and value, and in effect lead to a much larger change than a simple 0.2 adjustment. It would cause a significant drop in Kohm rivens' values and a market upset that DE did not intend for with this update. If, however, there is to be a disposition adjustment without a limit, then I fully expect DE to include Kohm in their list of nerfs. 

Also @OP that's a pretty weak showcase of the Kohm's power. A good 120% status chance riven should be significantly better.

[piff who need harrow invincibility in eidolon hunts]

But how do you charge Void Strike on Amesha?

[Garuda Feedback and Discussion]

Lol just use Quick Thinking and then stack some shields??

[Lanka Riven Price]

Lanka's primary use is in Eidolon hunting for taking down limbs. Chroma is the usual limb-killer people will be running in Eidolon hunts, and +damage on riven isn't a great stat for Chroma because of how Vex Armor works. Multishot is great but damage is worse than crit chance, crit damage, electric, and heat. For non-Chroma frames this riven is really good, but the meta limb-breaker is Chroma as I said before. All in all a pretty mediocre riven, but even mediocre Lanka rivens sell for a lot. I would try to sell it for around 1600 for now and then slowly go down in price over days or a week if there are no buyers. 

[The misconception of Enemy radar]

It's not about more enemies spawning, it's about putting the enemies in a detected "alert" state which makes them run toward you faster, allowing you to kill them faster and increasing spawn rate that way. I've never actually seen this tested though so I've no idea if it's true. 

[The core gameplay flaw: healing, health, shields and general "staying alive" gameplay]

Literally just get an Arcane Elevate or two and all your healing problems are gone forever. You're effectively immune to damage while spamming 5. As soon as your hp is low just spam 5 for a couple seconds and you're good to go again. It's one of the most broken things in this game and makes surviving completely trivial, outside of oneshots. 

[Why are some (types of) weapons blatantly better than others?]

14 minutes ago, Graves21 said:

@Saturmorn_Carvilli   @420-chan

Saturmorn your comment is exactly what i was looking for,i dont think there's anything more to be added,the fact is that something like plains would be better suited for auto/semi/sniper rifles but the majority of the gameplay is in tightly packed spaces where AOE weapons shine more,also the fact that you mentioned that some weapons are just in the sweet spot where most of the game's content revolves around,like Arca Plasmor being effective at lvl 70-100 making it look far more superior than it really is ,which was demonstarted to me by 420-Chan thanks for that too.

But the fact remains that weapons with AOE or punchtrough are just better suited for MOST of the games content,now my question remains why do some weapons come with innate punch trough while others have to sacrifice damage to get it? Like @420-chan you showed me, Tiberon can rip trough high level enemies,but a Vectis prime does it just as well or better just because of the fact that it has innate punch trough.

Maybe i should rephrase my question,should all auto/semi weapons have innate punch through or should something like blast damage be reworked so it deals AOE damage so the sweet spot that most of the game revolves around or even high level content can include more weapons?

It sounds crazy but adding innate puncthrough, even if just a little, to assault rifles might actually push it into the same tier as shotguns and beam weapons. 

[Improvement to riven mods system]

Most Zaws are pretty good if not great right now, and you probably got rivens for a few other good weapons that you think are trash because you didn't do enough research. Maybe tell us what you got and we can tell you if any are good. Otherwise you can sell them in bulk as trash rivens and make a little bit of plat. 

I agree riven transmutes shouldn't be locked behind Eidolons though. 

[Why are some (types of) weapons blatantly better than others?]

1 hour ago, Graves21 said:

Sure,that means a lot when it still takes 30 shots to kill one enemy compared to one shot from a shotgun.
Also what about Amprex or Phantasma,they apply the status as quickly as Auto rifles while dealing more damage,having aoe/punch through and a better ammo economy? What point are you even arguing? That Braton P is op? I don't understand why are you even commenting

You're actually correct about beam weapons. Assault rifles are currently underpowered and beam weapons are better in pretty much every regard except range. If your post is about why every weapon type seems to be better than assault rifles, you would be correct tbh. But even then Tiberon exists and it's good with a riven. 

36 minutes ago, Saturmorn_Carvilli said:

Conceptually, innately modded weapons like those that have punch through, silence, etc.  Are giving up flexibility for that trait.  The Arca Plasmor only does Radiation damage making it a poor choice for enemies resistant to that damage. It also has low ammon, a lowest fire rate, projectile travel time, no bonus to headshots (anymore), and limited range.  All-in-all a fairly niche weapon.  It just so happens that most of warframe's content falls within that niche making it seem better than it is.  The Arca Plasmor is not a very good weapon in PoE where enemies are a little more spread out and engage at range.  The Argonak, Sybaris and Tiberon work better there where their range, increased zoom and low ammo consumption are benefits.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Different weapons are good for different things. Even assault rifles have areas where they shine more than beam weapons (medium-long range dps), but that scenario is very rare in Warframe. 

[Why are some (types of) weapons blatantly better than others?]

2 minutes ago, Graves21 said:

Did you read my post? Honest question

I'm not talking about fighting lvl 2 enemies with Plasmor or Braton P neither am i comparing solely the two,im talking about high level content. Also if a gun deals 30x more damage per single shot,while firing 10x slower,calculate which has a higher dps and then tell me im out of my mind? And thats not even taking into consideration innate aoe and punch through that im talking about

Arca Plasmor for high level content? Are you joking? Feel free to add me and we can head to the simulacrum and I can show you what actual endgame weapons look like. I have a pretty good riven for Arca Plasmor, if case you're worried that I just never tried the weapon or something  

And yes the Braton will have higher single target dps than Arca Plasmor, because it can headshot and apply status effects. But is it a good weapon? Most definitely not. Arca Plasmor is a better weapon than Braton, but that doesn't mean Braton is worse in every regard.   

 

[Why are some (types of) weapons blatantly better than others?]

13 minutes ago, Graves21 said:

How often do you fight lvl 100 enemies in the Plains? And the damage drop off that all guns have compared to the speed of your warframe,especially the ones with some mobility means it would be many times faster to just bullet jump into range of a shotgun than to try and shoot them down with the Braton from afar,in which case a sniper rifle would be more usefull anyway

Um yeah in Plains you fight low level enemies. Braton kills them in a few shots from any distance and you can move on to your next target. Arca Plasmor requires you to be close and then kill the enemies one shot at a time, with a slow fire rate. 

Also if you actually think Arca Plasmor has higher dps than Braton Prime, then you're either out of your mind or just can't aim. And Braton isn't even a good weapon.