Ceadeus
-
Posts
378 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Ceadeus
-
-
8 minutes ago, 0_The_F00l said:
I will reiterate with clarity, as you seem to keep misrepresenting my statement "he cannot do much damage above lvl 60 using his tentacles or puddle alone but can still finish the mission fine"
I have managed my sorties, arbitrations and floods with him just fine (solo, pre made squad as well as public) with a decent strength and moderate duration build employing either the healing or corrosive augment depe ding on the mission.
And I could get through an Eris Akkad mission with Vauban and be the primary damage dealer and take the least damage, doesn't mean the kit is good or can't be made better. Literally Vauban even has better potential scaling even pre-rework than Hydroid does now. You can pick any random piece of gear in the game and "get through" the mission, but that's not the same as being viable.
8 minutes ago, 0_The_F00l said:In agreement, tedious and lacking in certain aspects which loses its charm after the 5th cast. Hence would need either mechanical or stat based changes.
Hence why I made a post detailing changes because raw stats aren't a very flexible thing to play with for balance.
8 minutes ago, 0_The_F00l said:Your opinion, I don't agree with it.
Then why does every single frame with poor damage potential get reworked or buffed even if they had arguably great CC or other aspects?
8 minutes ago, 0_The_F00l said:Boring, not how I play, but you do you, and play the lazy way if you want nothing inherently wrong with it.
This isn't a discussion of preferences, obviously not many (if any) people WANT to sit in the puddle all match, but that's the only part of his kit that's actually viable to do anything with. So if we're going to talk about his potential as a frame, then we throw preference out the window and talk about the hard facts, and the hard facts are that his kit is overall bad and/or underpowered, and his synergies are fragmented, awkward, and only in play as another DE Bandaid FixTM
-
1 minute ago, kapn655321 said:
Trinity. Her kit makes up for it in other ways.
Hydroid has some stealth in his kit, decent CC, but that does limit him in missions that are all about quick kills people can control.
That is a surprising amount of missions, so we see his balance cause him to fall a bit flat in those common instances.
...unless he's tentacle spamming for his augment. The loot makes up for the lack of other functions there.
That's why we only ever see him doing that.
I agree his not quite in the best spot. Not to say he's not enjoyable or Super useful for Many other mission types.
For exterminate and survival style, he has a very narrow scope of function.
I can see where both of you guys are coming from on this one.
-
Just now, 0_The_F00l said:
And he is perfectly viable for that. He is just not good in any specific role without his augments.
Besides defeating enemies is best left to weapons unless you are asking for a dps frame.
Which you say you aren't? I am not sure.
He isn't though. You said yourself he can't compete with level 60+ enemies. He doesn't have the damage for it, and all of his CC is more tedious than actually helpful due to bad design choices.
And as we've seen with Vauban, there's no such thing as a non-DPS frame. If your frame doesn't have some kind of way to deal big damage relatively easily, it's bad. That's just how it is anymore. Sitting around in a puddle for 20 minutes being unable to affect anything outside a 15m radius on top of needing extra time to ramp up your damage on every single new enemy you try to attack isn't "relatively easy".
-
Just now, 0_The_F00l said:
Just reducing you statement to the crux of what you want to say.
You just want everything to be like Saryn I suppose,
I personally enjoy playing with vauban, slow night Equinox, range and Nyx, it's a personal preference where everyone else
Not everything needs to be a one hit killing machine, the fact that that's how the game has become is something for a different discussion to consider.
No. Not everything needs to be a one-hit kill and not everything needs to be Saryn, but if we're talking about effectiveness, then everything DOES need to be able to reliably defeat at minimum level 60 content in a timely manner to be considered even "viable".
-
13 minutes ago, 0_The_F00l said:
Nope, I said he can't damage em.
Taking an enemy out of the picture for a few seconds (or entire rounds) is still a viable option,
That's why I am saying a stats boost to his abilities would be just as good for making him viable past that point.
It's not though. That's precisely why Vauban is getting his rework was that's ALL he did was "take enemies out of the picture" but nobody cares about a permanently CC'd enemy blocking their progress, in every scenario it would be better to take one of the infinitely better scaling frames and just kill them.
6 minutes ago, (XB1)ShadowBlood89 said:hydriod had abit of a rework to have synergy with all of his abiliies
He did. And he "technically" does, though most of those synergies are pretty useless due to other limitations that hold them back from doing what you'd expect them to do. So you're not wrong, but that doesn't make him "good".
-
9 minutes ago, 0_The_F00l said:
You do know that the tentacle damage is true damage that bypasses all resistance of armor and shields.
His undertow also does scaling damage based on enemies maximum health (the type is impact so its kinda meh) ,
It is already scalable, enough , just that the damage itself is very minor in the beginning.
He will not be able to manage enemies above lvl 60 cause the base damage values are barely going to scratch them and the rate of scaling is also small.
And as I mentioned, heavily dependent on augments and very mediocre without it.
You just said yourself that he can't compete with stuff past level 60. That's REALLY bad. That's like trash tier kind of bad.
1 minute ago, TheGrimCorsair said:He's fine as is.
How? What does he do well besides Pilfering Swarm?-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, (XB1)GearsMatrix301 said:
For the record. Hydroid was in a really good spot after his rework. But then ESO came in and completely shifted the meta to a DPS focus.
No he wasn't? He was better than he was and people were going nuts about his puddle damage potential, but that's about it. His 1 is still a gamble on whether it'll even hit and does next to no damage itself, his 2 is just a bullet jump on steroids (Super Jump 2.0), the puddle even with its crazy damage potential still takes a long time relative to other frames to even get that high not to mention it's a smaller potential range than basically every other "DPS" focused frame's goto ability, and his 4 has both the same problems as his 1 as well as still being annoyingly spastic with how it moves enemies around.
Even content creators with great clickbait titles like "INFINITE DAMAGE PUDDLE!?" still agreed that he was ultimately lackluster and that the rework definitely could've had a lot more to it. Basically all Hydroid received in his rework was the puddle meta and QoL tweaks.-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, 0_The_F00l said:
Hydroid is acceptably OK at the moment,
Only issue is he is heavily dependent on his augments, if he has no augments he is mediocre at best.
I believe he needs either mechanical or statical changes that make him useable without augments, not both.
Hydroid is far from ok. That's not to say he's 100% helpless but he's basically like pre-rework Saryn where all of his power really only comes from one ability, only he's even worse because not only does he need an augment for that ability to keep up, but it also affects a smaller area and is significantly slower and more energy costly. The only other thing he's semi-good for is his Pilfering Swarm augment, which is obviously more of a farming tool than an actual helpful combat tool.
The raw stat increases he would need to make him "good" would be pretty crazy when stacked up against the new era of "scaling" damage Warframes we've been getting that can do the exact same stuff Hydroid does but quicker, more efficiently, and with more mobility and flexibility.
-
3
-
-
So we've seen that there's a new Hydroid deluxe coming, but Hydroid is still in a pretty bad spot after his last rework flop. I'm wondering if we're going to see another rework and/or expanding on the changes that we've already gotten as an accurate description of Hydroid's old rework was "Wide as the ocean, but deep as a puddle". What this description is trying to say is that, just because Hydroid got a lot of really small tweaks pretty much all across his kit, doesn't make it good. Hydroid is obviously better than he was with the scaling damage for his puddle and his tentacles being a touch less spastic, but overall he's still the same Pilfering Swarm Bot that he was before the rework, only now he can sit in a puddle all match to maybe kill a couple things that happen by too. I think we can all agree that being forced into a small, slow paced, restrictive ability to get any kind of real damage is a pretty bad way to be, especially when that damage only really keeps up if you run an augment for a DIFFERENT ability.
Since this is the second time Hydroid's come up for potential changes, I'm just gonna revitalize an old post I'd already made since it's still relevant.
QuoteHydroid - Yes, wett boi is back again, hopefully for a proper rework this time. That is not to say that Hydroid's last touch up wasn't a good step in the right direction, but rather just that it didn't really address any of the actual PROBLEMS with Hydroid. (Speaking as someone who played Hydroid constantly after his release, I know.)
Deep Tendril: Just let this be 100%. The tentacles already struggle to actually grab anything meaningful, why force Hydroid players to sit there hopping around over and over hoping to proc this passive?
Tempest Barrage: This ability was marketed to us as a simulation of Hydroid "calling his ship and firing the cannons on his enemies", so simply teach whatever crewmen are firing those cannons to aim. Rather than having the ability just randomly cover the shown area the whole time, make it so that it fires randomly until an enemy enters that zone and then all shots are focused on them. This will greatly improve its damage, CC, and the utility of his augment without the need for the puddle meta first.
Tidal Surge: First and foremost I'd like to see a function for this ability where it changes size based on elevation. A surge on the ground will just be the normal bump of a wave that knocks people over, a surge from high up in the air will make a tsunami that sweeps up the room. Secondly, I'd like to see some more synergy with the following puddle changes, which I'll outline under that ability to avoid making people read back and forth.
Undertow: Undertow saw some really great improvements to its viability in the last batch of changes, but it still remains one of the most polarizing abilities in the game. Personally I would like to see it get the "stack" treatment that we've been seeing a lot of successful frames/reworks use lately. For every enemy damaged/killed in Undertow, Hydroid gains a stack. With every stack Hydroid gains, Undertow grows larger (also increasing the grab radius). This allows Hydroid to truly become a terror of the deep oceans, rather than a kinda dangerous puddle. As for the synergy with Tidal Surge I mentioned, the movement in Undertow would stay, but would now consume half of your stacks when you do it so that you can't simply maintain this massive puddle and move it all across the map without any drawback. Stacks would also decay when not in the puddle.
Tentacle Swarm: Tentacle Swarm used to be a perfectly viable damage dealer back when Hydroid first came out, but over the years it's fallen off into being pretty weak as far as DPS goes. A nice addition that would also make use of that Kraken head we got would be to make it so that the tentacles periodically would bring an enemy over to the head and pull it under the map to simulate them being eaten, doing massive damage to that enemy. Beyond that all I think this ability really needs is a simple rework of the tentacle animations so that rather than swinging the enemies around, they simply coil around them and "crush" them for their damage, making them easier to hit for players as well.
-
6
-
-
8 hours ago, FireSegment said:
One simple counter argument is the difference between this current version of Ember's World on Fire and the previous version - the one that don't scale in damage and doesn't shrink over time. The previous version deal less damage but have consistent AoE of CC. Many players prefer CC effect of the old version over the higher damage potential (rightfully so, because the damage still shet), albeit DE intention with the change was simply make ppl work more for the CC.
When the damage aspect of a skill can no longer effective at killing the enemy at a pace you rely on them to be, the CC aspect of it is the grave saving point. I still stand that the "fix you not dying" to enemies which can easily oneshot you will always have value.
The problem with this is that the "scaling damage" that Ember received both wasn't actual scaling damage (It scaled up to a set % not based on enemy difficulty) and it also was so small that it was just a flat out nerf compared to her previous version because the damage she received wasn't proportional to the effect that the CC provided. I'm not sitting here saying CC is always garbage and can never be used for any purpose, but if all it is is a setup for a DPS ability then the CC becomes pointless and you might as well just throw on better DPS like most of the "nuke frames" that are popular right now have.
9 hours ago, FireSegment said:And what exactly is your point for crying out loud...
I read your original post for like 5 times before concluded that either your concept of CC or the context you using the word CC in is just non sense, which is why i suggested the distinction between debuff and CC in my reply. Go read u post again dude.
My point here is to find a way to make CC ALONE viable. Not using CC to keep yourself alive or using CC to make damaging enemies easier or whatever other garbage. I'm not proposing some tweaking of the numbers of the existing CC to make them all as strong as nuke frames, I'm trying to expose a concept of a redesign of how CC is used and valued by the game. The idea of this whole thing is that, if you want to, you should be able to take a full CC only build or "pacifist build" into a mission and not only complete it but receive similar rewards and benefits to if you had played the mission by killing everything and getting all the kill loot. A decent example (of the concept not necessarily of CC) might be something like Ivara's Prowl, where she doesn't kill the enemy, she doesn't even engage it, but she still gets loot for her efforts, that's what I want to make CC do, make it a beneficial alternative to killing for no greater reason than it would make CC gameplay in general more interesting and return us to a bit of that "ninja" narrative that the game has all but lost.
-
8 hours ago, ShortCat said:
I will repeat myself, goal of CC is to support your wellbeing or offense, give you more time or easy execution. What you suggest with the "incapacity" mechanic is nothing more than deleting enemies with a fancy animation, which is the same goal as killing. You suggest to transform CC into damage. On top of that, you admit that you cannot fully imagine how it should work. Your expectations of CC are misguided.
No, you're speaking strictly in the terms of CC as we know it in Warframe's current state, which entirely defeats the point of the whole discussion. Yes, it is an alternate way to deal with enemies, yes it is effectively like killing them without the need to actually kill them. I don't know if you've ever played a videogame but a lot of times there are choices simply for the sake of choices. Also, I never said I "couldn't" imagine it, I simply didn't make any presumptions about the specifics of what the best way to completely overhaul a mechanic of the game would be.
8 hours ago, ShortCat said:Well, points 1-3 describe why CC is not trandy atm, precisely because the game does not require CC due to low difficulty; or that there is no incentive "not to kill" in any of the game modes. Thus, I said and explained how DE designed CC out of the game. CC is dead, because there is no ground for it, not because the base idea is lacking.
Should this "isn't true" relate to your suggestion - read above.
Furthermore, all the complaints towards nerfs exist, because people focus too much on numbers in the UI, but not their meaning. It gets especially dangerous, when one and the same person asks for "more difficulty" but dismisses any and all nerfs.CC is designed out of the game, precisely why I'm here proposing this hypothetical way to bring it back into the game and yet you keep trying to throw back what we already have in the game as if that's some definitive proof of anything.
2 hours ago, Cubewano said:I think you're the only one not doing any actual reading/understanding, but if you want to speak otherwise please do feel free explain what I've missed or failed to understand to get such a judgmental response, which is the proper way to move forward such a conversation, not this dramatic how dare thy have a different opinion drivel.
Well let's firstly point out that absolutely nowhere in any single letter of any of my posts did I suggest that this idea would amount to "more nukes" and that was entirely just something you made up out of thin air, then let's go to how your first priority was to insult the idea as a whole before you start with the "I'm so rational, you're the one getting mad at other peoples' opinions!" BS.
1 hour ago, FireSegment said:Buddy ... you wasn't around back when Torid is king, and Vauban+Nova is a must have in any T4 Survival, or any endurance runs that encounter lvl 60+ enemies. Scaling damage wasn't always an option (also a melee strike that deal 1k damage for melee used to be consider imba)
... Literally been playing the game longer than you have on this account alone. (2nd account btw) So let's relax with the "You weren't around!" talk. I was, I saw it all. CC still wasn't "king". CC did the same thing it did now; bandaid fix the garbage scaling, that's it.
1 hour ago, FireSegment said:I think you would be benefit from distinguish these two:
1 - Crowd Control (CC) - aka stop enemies from killing you.
2 - Debuff - make enemy easier to kill.
To make it a bit easier to imagine, think of Viral prod effect on enemy as debuff and Radiation, Blast/Heat/Electric prod effect as CC. Viral prod make enemy much easier to kill but they are completely free to kill you, Blast prod stop them from doing anything, while radiation and cold prod make it less likely that they would target you, or effectively land a shot. (toxin and slash prod is just bonus damage, and Conditional Overload add a layer of debuff to every status effect)
Typically, most waframe's skills have both aspects and usually emphasis one over the other, exclude the raw damage output type of skill. All the decoys skill are CC in nature, Mesa's Shooting Gallery is CC with damage buff, Saryn's skin ... thing skill is also CC, and Khora's dome is basically a CC skill with an big AoE. almost all the skill that you think of as outright killing enemies have some aspect of CC in it.
Now, back to the topic, if you can just outright kill the enemy, may be with some debuff to make it faster like viral prod, then sure, do that, no argument here. But when the mission got harder, much much harder, being one-shot without any chance to react is a common thing with frames don't have option to tank it. So
On 2019-10-12 at 12:34 PM, Ceadeus said:crowd control still doesn't fix anything since the enemy is still alive and well
On 2019-10-12 at 12:34 PM, Ceadeus said:a CC'd enemy becomes even less valuable than his dead counterpart because you get no loot and no experience to help your grind
On 2019-10-12 at 12:34 PM, Ceadeus said:tl;dr CC probably won't ever be good.
duh ... it fix you not dying in the process of killing them. In any context that enemy can kill you before your damage output is enough to kill everything , CC will always have it use. (and you better kill everything before they even noticed you without CC, oh wait ... that call steath...)
(also, off topic but the main point of Vauban rework is that DE adding scaling damage to his kits while smooth out his existed CC, they are not trying to CC meta again)
You're completely missing the point here. CC is not "valuable" if it still requires damage to follow it up. If you replace the proportional value of any CC ability in the game with damage potential, it immediately becomes an objectively better ability. And also, this post has absolutely nothing to do with what DE is "trying" to do with Vauban, this post is just here as part of the "CC king" discussion as a whole.
-
12 hours ago, Cubewano said:
This would be such a thoughtless afk'able solution to the balance problems in this game, we don't need more alternate methods of nukes, we need to disperse the overwhelming power factor the current ones have and bring them down to a manageable level that allows for a range of playstyle options, especially within a group setting since this game still seems to believe itself co-op oriented.
AKA you haven't actually read or understood any of the comments in this thread. Thanks for your benevolent input oh all knowing great one, now please leave so people who can actually read can talk.
9 hours ago, clxrffdman said:Personally the only way I think most of the game could be kept the same while incentivizing CC is this.
1. More enemies have specific "weak points" preferably on the back or side of enemies. (Ex: Ambulas armor plates, etc) that must be broken to prevent high levels of damage resistance. (To avoid nuking)
2. Specific forms of CC apply specific damage buffs to different weapon types. (Kind of like Vauban's passive but in an alternate way)
3. Enemies with more energized animations, and AI, such as faster movement, rolling, etc. (But nothing too crazy to avoid it being too much dev work)
4. The removal of mass range AOE melee, nerfing of the stealth multiplier, rework of certain status types. (Current changes to heat proc, melee 3.0 changes potentially)
5. Simply higher level content. I wish they didn't change the initial Arbitration starting level from 80 to 60. We need enemies with high enough level (start around level 100-150). Create endless nodes of this level that reward players with randomly generated kitgun/zaw parts (riven rng levels) with unique attributes (not just elemental types).
That *might* work?
None of this incentivizes CC. The goal here is not "Make the content so obnoxious people are forced to use CC all the time" and that's all these suggestions do. Not only that, but you're still ignoring the fact that all of this is just a lead-up to DPS, you're not making CC more valuable you're just making the game more tedious and grindy than it already is.
5 hours ago, ShortCat said:But that is the whole purpose of CC. Crowd Controll is ment to prepare and ease an encounter, by stopping opposition from killing your before you kill them - CC will protect your team and set up the enemies for an easy dispatch. This is no rocket science.
No that's only one use of CC. Thanks for not reading any of the posts.
5 hours ago, ShortCat said:- One reason why CC is suboptimal today, is because our damage is soo high (thanks power creep), that in most situation enemies do not live long enough to threatem us. If enemies can survive longer -> they get a chance of killing us -> we need CC as protection and set up. If you stay long enough, you will reach a point where CC becomes relevant.
- The other reason is increased amount of ability immune or dispelling enemies. Direct damage is often dealt in an instant, so that dispell feature is ignored; self buffinging ignores immunity entirely. CC ont he other hand is crippled and limited.
- The last reason is a shift in Frame desing: today every new Frome or even reworks introduce a cheap DR skill, so that in combination with other mods like Arbitration Frames become durable and can easely manage otherwise dangerous situations. Inaros or Gara do not need CC to survive in a Sortie and can be played half asleep without being punished for sloppy mistakes, lack of movement or slow reaction time.
There is no need to reinvent CC, DE just designed its purpuse out of the game. Scale back our damage; revise ability immunity; make Frames less self-efficient and CC will become relvant again.
All of this again just amounts to "CC is useful when enemies are harder" which still isn't true. Nerfing the crap out of damage will not make for interesting gameplay and will in fact only annoy a MASSIVE chunk of the playerbase. You would need such an overarching rebalance of not only the difficulty of the game but all of the rewards and gametypes in it too for these kinds of solutions to ever be even close to enjoyable.
-
3 minutes ago, birdobash said:
Let's face it, the only reason damage is so much more relevant than CC nowadays is because more potent damage has been added to the game in recent years, while CC has stayed almost relatively the same. Even just 3 years ago, the strongest form of reliable AOE damage in the game was a resonating quake Banshee which nowadays barely does anything in comparison to meta damage dealers like Saryn or equinox. Even equinox was not as strong back then, not because she had any significant changes, but because with so many other damage dealers on the team and better aoe weapons/mods it is a lot easier to stack damage onto equinox's maim.
Does this entail nerfing of damage overall? Perhaps, but I feel like there are better solutions than just "nerf it". Currently the only reason damage is so relevant is because every single game mode incentivizes killing enemies rapidly and dis incentivizes stopping enemies, such as defense for time, survival for life support, disruption for keys, etc. It also does not help is that all the things that stop damage like nullifiers or ability immune enemies normally are also immune to CC, think of the demolysts in particular where CC straight up doesn't work at all on them yet damage does.
That then begs the question, if damage steals the role of CC, then CC should fill the gap where damage does not work, this might be a stretch, but I think CC should be able to effect enemies such as nullifiers or demolysts, maybe even bosses, as damage straight up gets ignored by these units that are so dangerous, CC should fill the role to lock down these more dangerous units to give you time to do your "lesser" damage to them.
I agree with a lot of this. While we both have different avenues we'd like to go with it, it's pretty easy to see that the game has problems and it definitely suffers from a lack of "creative difficulty" in favor of just bigger numbers and invincibility stages.
-
Just now, Diavoros said:
CC used to matter since if you think about it, most of the mission modes in Warframe involve defending an objective, defense, mobile defense, rescue, hijack, excavation, some sabotages and arguably interception as well, you don't want the enemy to take back those towers. But then came a shift on how to deal with defending objectives and that is "if enemy is dead there is no need to defend anything, duh!" which makes some missions faster. CC still holds merit but dead enemies just seem more comfortable for most players.
Exactly. This is a prime example of what I was talking about with the game being 95% kill and 5% filler plot. The actual objectives aren't very important in pretty much every gamemode except maybe spy, other than that, you will need a way to deal with enemies, and being as killing is often both faster and rewards loot and XP whereas just CC'ing does not, CC quickly loses value.
-
1 minute ago, (XB1)COA Altair said:
There's a reason you don't see endurance runs going into the thousands with just DPS frames. CC is a way to increase your DPS in some situations because remember you can't deal damage effectively if you're dead outside saryn's spore ability still spreading and ember WoF still continuing. People also like to have their own playstyles, because if everyone was just in it for the best dps it would be quite tiresome seeing 4 saryn squads everywhere.
This is true. However this is more a problem with ridiculous scaling than an actual indicator that CC alone has good value (another problem with the game). That's what I'd like to fix is making CC itself a better game mechanic and playstyle rather than CC just being the bandaid fix to poor scaling or the stepping stone to a DPS alternative.
-
1 minute ago, 3rdpig said:
I like CC as an option. When the enemy is blind, stunned or, even better, laying flat on their back they're not attacking me, which opens up more options than just killing them. I can perform a finisher, take out minions, perform a warframe ability, reload, or just leave them for another teammate to kill while I unass the area. Your method of "just doing more damage faster" offers none of those things.
Don't waste your time replying to this post. I'm right, you're wrong and you know it. 😉
Literally everything about this post was wrong from the implied effect of CC to what my stance on the subject was but okay, go ahead and think that buddy
👌Ignorance is bliss I guess
-
Just now, NekroArts said:
Why would anyone would use a small CC with DO even with an opening of some sort when they could just *snap* and they're just gone? This is literally the reason why CC is so dead. I agree you never suggested every cc to be a complete neutralizer, but my concern is that your idea doesn't actually help or it goes into a different direction from what you want it.
Small CCs generally WOULD be more just for setting up some kind of DPS abilities, similar to some of the smaller CC abilities we have now like blinds and ragdolls and stuff of that nature. My idea (with a little explanation help from @Marine027) is more along the lines of CC abilities that are intended as a kill alternative being able to "weather" an enemy down until they can be fully CC'd or outright fully CC them if they're weak enough, same way that damage abilities work now. So while yes, it would still effectively be the same as taking a damage frame just with a different "healthbar" to fight so to speak, it would also mean that CC focused frames like Vauban could actually compete and get comparable rewards to damage frames without needing them to follow up on his abilities.
That's really all the intent of this is, is 'How can we make playing a CC frame solo still just as engaging and rewarding as playing a room clearing frame?'4 minutes ago, NekroArts said:It's like Dog Days. Everyone could afk with no points and the missions defaults to the players winning. DE implemented bonus pearls via kills to encourage being active; however, it didn't go the way they had hope. You still had people afking and players that would kill had to compete with others for kills, resulting in those players to go solo. So not only did it not fix the issue, but it created another. Whatever your "CC is your alternative choice to killing them" is, it either still remains behind or it gets onto nukes level.
There will always be AFK leechers who try to get rewards for doing nothing. There's nothing you can do about that that will ever fully solve that problem because what is considered "AFK" is ambiguous; is it being completely immobile and unresponsive? Is it just not getting kills? Is it pressing 1 button over and over? The list goes on. There's nothing I can really do to prevent that, but hopefully the accompanying "rework" of certain abilities that would follow with this revamp would eliminate any ability for people to just 1-tap an entire mission, at least in any capacity that you couldn't already do with a damage frame.
However, I do think my option would "solve" the problem of players having to compete for kills, as I envision the rewards for "neutralized" enemies being totaled at the end of a mission and thus being granted to the whole squad.8 minutes ago, NekroArts said:Exactly, we don't actually have something that is remotely harder than what we can handle. It's always been us finding extreme ways that brush offs DE attempt for harder enemies. For something to be hard that we can't kill without CC, yet will still be a problem because it has reduced CC duration and is a threat, it would have to exist beyond what's current. And my fear of that is that it gets into new higher-meta territory or we get content that is unreasonable.
Precisely. That's why I'm not proposing to simply make CC stronger or weaker until it can compete with whatever piece of content, and instead make it both scale and end in a similar result to what damaging abilities do now. Enemies may not suffer the "full effects" of an ability off of one cast from a CC ability just like they might not die from one cast of a damage ability, but if you stack enough of them, they should eventually both be "taken care of" without you then needing to switch from your CC to a DPS alternative.
-
Just now, HugintheCrow said:
CC IS a stepping stone for DPS. That ISN'T bad. You think it is, and that's where your arguments fall, because you're wrong.
I never said that was "bad". Nice job making stuff up to try and save your completely empty argument though.
1 minute ago, HugintheCrow said:Your problem is that you seem to have forgotten we're playing a shooter.
The game is also marketed as "space ninjas" so tell me what is "ninja" about running in with a machine gun and spraying down everything that moves without a hint of stealth? Clearly we aren't fitting all the stereotypes here. More worthless BS'ing.
2 minutes ago, HugintheCrow said:We shoot people dead to win. CC makes shooting people easier, that's what it is for.
Which is fine, except if that CC doesn't make shooting people as easy as just pressing a button to kill them, then it's not that good, and if you have a CC based frame that doesn't do that, it tends to spark discussion about how you can make CC more valuable on its own, crazy how that works, it's almost like if you'd actually put even one nanosecond of rational thought into it you could see that you're arguing a point that absolutely nobody here is even talking about because you refuse to actually read and understand a post before making some asinine comment thinking you know anything about anything.
4 minutes ago, HugintheCrow said:There is no need nor reason for CC to be some sort of "alternative to DPS".
To better fit the "ninja" narrative? To make CC focused frames more valuable without needing someone else to follow up? For diversity and interesting gameplay mechanics and choices? For funsies? There was no "need or reason" for the game to ever switch from Melee 1.0, but we did. Why? Because it's more fun and more interesting. That's it.
6 minutes ago, HugintheCrow said:And if you really think "moar damage" is always better even in a game based around killing stuff, you have NO idea about game design, and you have no qualifications to be trying to come up with "fixes" for any game whatsoever.
6 minutes ago, HugintheCrow said:a game based around killing stuff
Don't even need a comment to show why this was stupid and wrong.
6 minutes ago, HugintheCrow said:Come back after you do your homework.
??? You say that like you cited something but all you did was reiterate that you quite literally don't know what anybody here is talking about.
-
11 minutes ago, Marine027 said:
The best thing i see we could do is use what Guild Wars 2 has as example i say, a resistance bar you can break with CC, that stuns them after wards or apply the CC, if it breaks the enemy gets a damage resitance debuff and takes more damage, so CC is still useful on stronger enemys, bosses should have such as example and minor mini bosses.
Normal enemies still normaly affected of course, jsut special enemies to maek CC frames not feel useless like against abiltiy immune enemies. This way makign them more useful and maybe even more useful if combined since the CC Debuff could do more damage then raw damage could ever do.
Just a mere example of my side.
That is what most people value CC for is just as an opening to damage, which is fine. My proposition here was trying to find a way to make CC itself more valuable without the need to follow it up with damage and/or a kill. So while I like your resistance bar idea, I'd probably have a different end for it than just more damage. Thanks for sharing though!
-
On 2019-10-12 at 8:29 PM, HugintheCrow said:
Except literally everyone going for super long survivals takes at least some form of cc or defense, making you completely wrong.
Because they take massive damage if left unchecked. And we return to the fact that a CC'd enemy still isn't valuable to you. They only gain any value once they're dead, either for the sake of progressing the objective or for actually getting not garbage rewards for your mission completion. Yes, you could take a full CC squad into a survival and lock down the entire map and never have to kill anything, but the rewards you get once the mission are over would be utterly abysmal and not at all worth the time, devaluing any idea that CC alone is useful. CC in the current gamestate is always just a stepping stone to DPS.
On 2019-10-12 at 8:29 PM, HugintheCrow said:Lmao, I'm talking way before trials, I'm talking old void.
Even in old void we really didn't have a CC meta?
On 2019-10-12 at 8:29 PM, HugintheCrow said:Ok, so you literally have no idea what you're talking about, good you clarified that. CC is specifically a way for DPS to be safe, that's what it exists for.
Next time you try discussing game design, try actually learning about it.
That's exactly the problem you can't seem to get through your thick skull. We know CC is a way for DPS to be safe, that's PRECISELY WHY people are talking about it and frames like Vauban being "CC king", because the CC itself would not be important if you instead just took the proportional power of the CC and dumped more damage into the frame instead. Imagine if instead of Ember's fire proc's immobilizing enemies, she did % health damage because fire. Immediately vastly more useful than what the CC offered.
-
4 minutes ago, HugintheCrow said:
On the contrary, we established it's 100% true. In the first comment of this thread, lol.
If you would actually read any of it you would see it isn't. CC is not more or less valuable based on the difficulty of the enemy if the requirement is still just to deal damage anyway. Obviously the better choice will still just be to take frames with better damage outputs even if they have little to no CC capability and cut out the middleman.
4 minutes ago, HugintheCrow said:We had a CC meta.
It was a CC meta SPECIFICALLY because enemies were harder (relative to our power back then).
This literally proves that if enemies were harder we would need CC, in turn disproving you.
No, we had a CC meta because Trials had their own set of rewards unrelated to killing the NPCs that people actually wanted, so rather than beat their heads against mind-numbingly overtuned enemies they didn't need to fight, people just CC locked them because it didn't matter. On the other side of this, normal missions typically have very mediocre rewards and are only supplemented by the rewards you get from killing the enemies. Again, if all the CC is, is a setup into DPS, then the value is not in the CC itself.
So no, you've proved nothing except the fact that you haven't been following along.-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, NekroArts said:
That means turn all CC into killing abilities, no openings, no disablings, just kill. And this is not me putting my words in your mouth, it's me telling you what will really happen if it goes through.
Not true. You can still have smaller CC's like we have now that DO just provide openings for things like finishers or at least finisher damage and you can also have more large-scale permanent type CC's if that's supposed to be the frame's focus. So yes you are quite literally putting words in my mouth, I never suggested EVERY CC in the game should be made to be a complete neutralizer. And while you could technically consider it a "kill", I think that's just picking at pointless semantics for the sake of it, obviously CC can't have any real value over DPS if you ALWAYS need to use a DPS ability to actually finish the fight, so it would be asinine to think that in attempting to create world where CC actually has real value on its own that you should STILL need to use a DPS ability afterwards.
5 minutes ago, NekroArts said:As of right now, all of our content/gameplay are within realm of getting killed really fast; for CC to be consider as alternative they must do damage close to what our nukes/guns can do if not equal. In the perspective of our typical gameplay, it'll be seen as unbalanced as the frame has both good CC and reliable damage. Basically a version of Saryn/Equiniox but have CC of that of Vauban's 3 and 4. The only place for this to not be seen as unbalanced is if we have content that exist outside of our typical gameplay i.e. where enemy scaling gets out of hand.
Except again you've taken it to the complete extreme. Not once did I say that all frames should have room nuking capabilities AND amazing CC or anything even reminiscent of that idea (not that it would matter in this case being as you're effectively making CC and killing two alternative paths to the same end). CC doesn't have to deal any damage at all to be considered alternative to DPS, it simply has to neutralize the enemy and receive value for neutralization instead of elimination, which is what Warframe is currently missing. Warframe currently offers you absolutely nothing for CC'ing an enemy and not killing them. If you were to CC an entire mission so expertly that any enemy in sight never even got to move, you'd still only receive rewards as if there were never even enemies in the mission to begin with, and THAT is the problem with trying to find value in CC based Warframes/abilities (the ones that don't then just set up DPS combos obviously).
9 minutes ago, NekroArts said:But then this will lead into the problem that those nuke will be left behind because we would have frames that can do that with reliable CC. For pure/ mostly CC abilities to be reliable now, we need situations where having CC is ideal. DE tried to this with Noxs and Juggernaut and it kinda worked.
This just returns to the "CC is valuable when the enemies are harder" argument which we've already established isn't true. I have multiple setups that can tear both a Nox and a Juggernaut to shreds in seconds and they have absolutely nothing to do with CC, just like how CC'ing them alone won't actually bring any value since they'll still be alive and you won't get any rewards from it, at best you get a chance to run away and hope they don't follow you, so again returning to the "they might as well have never existed" comment.
-
1 hour ago, VentiGlondi said:
Do you know why CC used to be meta back in like Update 8 or so?
It's not because enemies were harder. In fact they used to be weaker back then.
It was because the players dealt way less damage giving enemies more time to fight back. So since they had enough time to kill you, the best way to counter that was disabling them.
So let's fix this quote
Your idea is basically "Let's make CC another damage type"
No. Because we can break what you're saying down back into "CC is important when enemies are harder".
"Surviving longer" in Warframe is just equivalent to "being harder" they have more health or more armor, or something to that effect. That's all it is. So no, we're still back to scaling damage outclassing CC in all cases simply because of the way Warframe's gameplay loop is designed.
19 minutes ago, Voltage said:DPS is a form of CC. At this point anything that does not kill is weak and impractical (hi Nyx and Vauban!). You control a crowd by completely obliterating them. See the comment from @VentiGlondi. CC only mattered when enemies had time to react and fight back, or the objective was completely irrelevant to damage (Trials/Interception/etc). The best form of CC will always be DPS in these times until mission dynamics, objectives, and enemy behavior is completely changed. The CC meta is long gone, and giving players more rewards for not killing will promote perma CC and sitting around with less engaging gameplay. This was a common complaint of Trials.
We have scaling melee damage, scaling sniper rifle damage, scaling Warframe powers, and more at our disposal in the arsenal. Operation: Hostile Mergers, a Corpus event, proved that you can take setups to deal with billions of health.
This is exactly my point. I acknowledge that CC would likely need to be reworked and not simply have the duration of every CC in the game be extended and call it good. And yes, DPS is technically a form of CC, but if we're talking in the distinct separations of pure CC and DPS abilities, then CC will continue to never see any value as anything other than extra steps to get to the DPS. Like I already told Venti, CC doesn't suddenly gain a place when enemies are weaker or stronger and it never will with the game's current design, CC will always be a flashy way to present or set up DPS.
The one part of this comment I disagree with is...19 minutes ago, Voltage said:giving players more rewards for not killing will promote perma CC and sitting around with less engaging gameplay.
I addressed this in the original post that yes, just tacking on rewards for not killing enemies would be broken, but if the system were revamped to check "Was this enemy CC'd and properly neutralized?" then you can begin to add rewards for THAT instead of killing because that still requires the player to be engaged and interacting with the enemy just like they would if they were using damage abilities. The trick of the matter is figuring out how to gauge when an enemy is "completely" CC'd. Obviously players shouldn't be able to just 1-tap immobilize the entire mission if a revamp of this scale were to take place, but at the same time the CC shouldn't be so tedious and weak that it has almost no use rather than just killing them sort of like what we have right now.
Some abilities might need to be completely reworked or replaced, some might just need a "threshold" of either enough damage done to the enemy or enough consecutive CC's applied before they're fully "neutralized". But you can definitely have engaging gameplay with CC if it's actually done correctly.
-
I see a lot of people saying "Crowd control matters when the enemies are harder" but I really don't agree with that. The idea that crowd control is needed when enemies are harder is subverted by 2 things; 1. If the enemies are harder, that typically just means you turn to scaling damage instead of raw damage (IE: armor stripping), crowd control still doesn't fix anything since the enemy is still alive and well and blocking your progress in most mission types that people regularly play. 2. There really isn't any value in a CC'd enemy except as a window to damage them, which obviously means that it'd be better if you could just do the damage outright in the first place and remove the extra step from the equation. In an objective based context CC is helpful as long as it removes things that block you from your objective, but Warframe is only loosely objective based, about 95% of the game is just frantic slaughtering of everything in sight and that 5% objective time is basically just there as a filler plot to tell you WHY you're slaughtering them. When you factor in that loot and grind is the lifeblood of the larger gameloop, a CC'd enemy becomes even less valuable than his dead counterpart because you get no loot and no experience to help your grind, so even in objective based game modes, it's still better overall to kill than to CC.
I really don't think that a "CC king" will ever have any value in Warframe unless they radically revalue the way their game is set up, which honestly Warframe is one of few games primed to do that (even if it would be a potentially large undertaking). Warframe is a game about space NINJAS, yet it constantly forgets the "ninja" part in favor of just throwing in a shock & awe cannon room clearer. There's very little value in Warframe for any kind of actual "ninja" like playstyle that doesn't just loop back to extra damage potential. In my opinion, for CC to be valuable in Warframe, Digital Extremes would have to revamp CC gameplay at its core from less of a "This is just giving you an opening to kill them." into a "CC is your alternative choice to killing them". CC would have to become a much more potent option to even begin to scratch the benefits that nuke frames bring.
For example, in my envisionment of this, CC for Vauban might mean that instead of tesla's that try to damage and kill, they maybe just lock an enemy to a surface and prevent them from fighting or moving at all. Now, "you still wouldn't get any loot," you might say, and to that I expand that there would be an additional change to the endscreen of the mission where you gain either the same or maybe even more rewards than you would have for killing them for every enemy you incapacitated (in that much more "ninja" style than just mass murder); a system similar to this one would both value CC as opposed to killing, as well as prevent any "exploits" of just not killing anything in the mission as you wouldn't get credit for anything not properly CC'd.
Now there are 2 issues that would come with this implementation; 1. Hardlocked enemies are obviously also much easier for damage frames to kill and you could argue that any combination of a CC and a damage frame would be "OP", but to this I simply say that when the alternative is that both frames need to be strong enough to simply outright kill the enemy anyway to be viable, is it really any more OP? 2. CC could obviously need a complete revisit of how it functions in many cases so that it still has value against things like bosses or nullifiers without completely opening them up to cheese as well. So far this is the only big fault that I've been able to come up with for this kind of revamp, but I assume that like everything else it would eventually settle into its own kind of balance over time.
tl;dr CC probably won't ever be good.-
1
-
Hydroid Rework 2.0?
in General Discussion
Posted · Edited by Ceadeus
No. Viable means handling the content in a reasonable timeframe. In a mass mob shooter, that is a fairly short amount of time. Hydroid can't do that.
All had bad damage potential. Hence why they were disliked.
Nerfed. The word you're looking for is nerfed.
Stealth modifiers are a massive potential damage source.
Like who?
Hence why any frame that can't at least compete at level 60 (the bottom of Sorties), is not good.
No. Those are facts. Supported by popular opinion, repeated analysis, and hard numbers. There are objective standards we can set based on the expectations of the game loop and the time spent to achieve those expectations. Hydroid can meet those expectations very slowly with the expense of two ability casts + ramp up time + energy drain over time, all of which needs to be repeated for every enemy or cluster of enemies that Hydroid takes on at a time, thus he falls short of the qualifications, making him "bad".