(PSN)slightconfuzzled

So I don't disagree with anything you wrote necessarily. Like i think you make valid points, make sense, and a lot of points, I also generally agree with, but I also have a slightly different take and perspective. As in, I don't personally feel the need to defend the randomiser aspects, but I also think many only frame it in the context of challenge/difficulty, which overlooks an idea and concept I believe DE intends. Which is variance in experience. Have you ever watched how some of the Devs play the game on Prime Time? Its usually pretty casual and chill, its not optimal, hijinks often ensue. Do you ever play the game just with friends? Do you ever laugh when one of them gets killed by Malice's bubble, especially if they were acting over confident about the game? You ever clutch out a Tridolon, because you were carrying friends, and they all died, and you all spent about 5 minutes reviving multiple friends, as they tried to revive each other, but kept dying, and then someone mentioned Night was almost over so you had to basically let them die and Capture the Eidolon before day, whilst your friends are still laughing in the background? You ever fight a new boss on day 1 of update, and get destroyed because you didn't know what to expect or how to build for it, and online forums are abuzz because of this new secret 60 eyed enemy? Sometimes being super optimal leads to pretty predictable outcomes and gameplay experiences. Which does relate a little bit to difficulty and challenge, but not necessarily exclusively so. Things can also be randomised and easier, potentially much easier, but variety can set the conditions for novel, new, relatively unique, interesting and unusual results. Which in turn can be very fun, memorable and exciting, and makes you keen for playing again and getting a new set of results/experiences. I understand and acknowledge that this isn't necessarily true or positive for many people. Just for some it can be. Like I talked about this recently elsewhere, I remember one Duviri Circuit run in Steel Path, where Daikyu was my best Primary choice, investment wise, even though I thought it might struggle KPM wise, since well its a single shot bow, and some modes like Survival require mob clearing... I do happen to use the Daikyu a lot though and I really like it and am proficient getting headshots with it. Then as luck would have it, I pretty much got a lot of Decrees that allowed me to nuke and mob clear with the Daikyu. The Decrees around spreading status in an AOE, and the Toxin headshot Decree, a few with fire rate and Crit Damage. I could shot an enemy in the head and everything near it would die in explosions of numbers. Felt like I was using a Daikyu Prime Incarnon or something. Wasn't necessarily easy or hard (was mostly easy given my familiarity with the weapon and the combination of Decrees), but was a unique experience that will be hard to replicate, and importantly it was really fun. Last weeks Elite Deep Archimedea, I couldn't hard carry. With my selection and the other modifiers, even if I gave up one reward, I couldn't really think of a strategy that I thought could hard carry necessarily. Not without potentially some testing, and I did have some ideas... So I actually had to rely on team mates pulling their own weight as well... I might not be able to carry, but I knew I could contribute. As it turns out, whilst none of us had especially strong load outs, our team synergy, team work and communication was stellar, and so the mode was relatively quite easy, a few people were downed, but we revived fast, stayed as a team, coordinated to make Mirror Defence go faster. Challenge/difficulty wasn't necessarily a factor for why it was so memorable, satisfying or fun. At least for me, it was the fact we did have to rely on each other and work well as a team. Something I personally rarely have to do. Mostly because I am OP and use to soloing stuff, with multiple different Warframes and weapon classes. I personally don't think the modes (EDA, Duviri, etc) are designed with difficulty/challenge as a primary or driving force, as far as intent. I think thats an aspect but I think variety in experience, incentivising experimenting and team work, and also force mixing up the game play variety, including potentially some awful horrible runs, but some really interesting and fun runs too... I think people overlook that, as an idea and concept. Again, not everyone will play a game with friends, looking for silly hijinks, and to be destroyed and trying to retry, and have fun in failure, some prefer a more optimal, refined, predictable, experience, including some of those same people, but I often think that some people struggle to put themselves in the position of others as far as those gameplay differences and styles. Like sometimes its not necessarily about too easy or too hard, but how much chaos can erupt at a given moment, why did player 3 put in a second Disruption Key when player 2 already started one, and why is player 4 chasing the Gruzzling and... did Malice just spawn? Sometimes when a game goes like that, its just... funny and fun. Sometimes disorganised teams that struggle, are also fun. Maybe more so if you are in team chat, but yeah. Randomiser doesn't completely invalidate preparation, its more of a limiter, and so in this sense, some players are given advantages, if you happen to have so many tools prepared in advance, or practice with suboptimal gear regularly, but ehhh. I take suboptimal selection choices all the time, and just use game knowledge, in game skill, and energy with tools to make them work, pretty much every single time i have encountered it in Warframe, save for host migrations, or bugs. So for some, spending money could help alleviate some issues, I don't think its a hard necessity that can't be overcome other ways.

If you want a really easy time in Hive, Equinox's 4 in Day Form can eliminate them pretty handily. Just find the main tumour, pop your 4, which eliminates the smaller variants, then destroy the main one. I can't really share an easy way to find the Caches though, aside from good ol practice and memorisation.

I personally think its a few competing reasons, but one of them is going to be abundance of choice. Which in a game like Warframe, is going to be a growing issue anyway, that will and has influenced perceptions around Warframes in general. Like I have seen a lot of different sentiments over the years, some which always seemed a bit odd to me. There have been times I saw people think "new" Warframes at the time, like Gauss, Wisp, Protea, were underwhelming and pointless, and nothing compared to their old favourites. It might me question whether it was just the persons highly subjective preferences and a bias for their long time favourites rather than anything more objective as far as neutral honest assessments. Which is also totally fair, you know, as far as peoples preferences and opinions... Either way, with larger rosters, a lot of people are going to have quite a few favourites already, and unless they are the type to be very open and excited about new potential, or they are the type that will attempt to actually have like 40 favourites, and mean that sincerely, or a new Warframe comes along and does something really special and unique... Then it kind of makes sense that a lot of them will fade into the background for many. Also when I say special and unique, I mean in both a general consensus sort of way, or a more specific and personal sense. Personally I really like Dagath, but I am also the types to be excited about new releases and also I am the type to have like 40 favourites I often try to play (usually unsuccessfully). That being said, I have been neglecting Dagath a bit lately. Since recently I have only been playing Netracells, and Archimeda, and I am not sure how her death/spirit abilities works there, and my build is kind of squishy anyway, relatively speaking. I think in the coming months I will use her a bit more, since I think I would enjoy her a lot in Omni Fissures, and Lua Disruption (when Protea Prime drops), I think she is underrated in general. Don't really like the skirt/dress thing though. Sort of prefer sleeker designs. Default helmet is pretty dope design though too. I also really like Qorvex as well, mind you.

The extra 10? They were killed/died on the way to War, as is often the case in such things. Maybe your horse trips over a pothole and rolls over you killing you, before you even get a chance to participate. Pre war casualties and all that.

Eh, its tricky, because I do sympathise. Also RNG aspects, so you won't always get to experience what I describe next, but I have personally hard carried with the Daikyu in SP Circuit. It was my the Primary option I thought was best going in, and was going to rely more on the rest of my kit, since year, the Daikyu as it is, isn't necessarily going to have a high KPM or group clear, and yet... I ended up with the Decree that spreads toxin on headshot, the status spread decree and a few other Decrees that leaned into my build. Since I use Daikyu a lot, I am great at getting headshots, and with the Decrees I had, it was like a nuke. It would one shot mobs of enemies. I wouldn't say thats going to be a common experience, as far as getting that weapon and then those exact Decrees to unleash its potential like that, but it was a very fun and satisfying experience I was glad I had.

Yeah as mentioned above, you want to shoot upwards with Operator. In that room. If it doesn't work, try again. If it doesn't work and you are definitely sure you shot the right area... Could be some other issue potentially, but I have done that room over a dozen times, and works each time for me (though I am usually host as well). As for the "first room" secret area, with the red orb, I usually do a ground slam with Warframe to get it to activate. Not sure what the exact mechanism is, to shoot at, since ground slam always activates it, so I do that. Elevator always descends after.

That is odd. I am not sure what the reason could be. I did experience something slightly similar a few weeks ago, where I did get notifications, but they were for comments that I had already been notified for weeks prior. I'll try and tag your name at the end manually to alert you, just in case that helps. I don't think reality can ever be that neat or clean as far as mutual agreement about most things. Its often why in certain context they go off different percentages or majorities or certain majorities. Its also where evaluating such numbers and viewpoints also becomes important, and why I kept mentioning anecdote when talking about my perception on others reactions. Since I am all too aware that maybe my perception was mislead, warped by potential biases, liable to various conformity type biases, plus websites/forums can often have users with alt accounts/sock puppets. Maybe a lot of the positive sentiment were actually from less people than actual, who knows, but... since its in their best interest, its something I believe that DE can look into and get better objective data over in this regard. Better than either of our capacity to make conclusions over. To me, if their conclusion is that a larger majority would welcome and embrace such a decision, and a small enough minority would take issues, its something to seriously consider when making future plans. Fairness/fair can be both, it just depends on the context and criteria being applied. Hah, I was a little bit salty, but only in the sense, I felt the changes were too soon, or should have been implemented before release. A lot of people didn't even get a chance to play Dante pre-nerf, and you could argue, even if the changes were necessarily or even if they hypothetically buffed him again, a lot of people will feel a bit bitter because they never got to experience the Warframe when they were "OP". I also felt like he was fun, and a bit less fun. Still ultimately fun, and effective, but ehh... Also I think the consequences over Dante will be far reaching, even though they did readjust him post nerf. Why? Similar to above, sometimes perception and sense is as important. Lots of people won't know what Dante pre-nerf was like, so they can easily build up this idea that may not reflect reality. Then be preemptively disappointed by that. Even if they buff him later. Even though I personally have liked 9 out of 10 of the last Warframes released these past years, Qorvex and Dagath included, I thought it was nice, some of the more jaded, and skeptical "why should I play this new Warframe" types were actually hyped about a new Warframe release, and I was hype for them (even though I think a lot of those types under appreciate and sleep on Dagath, Kullervo, Citrine, etc). Its a type of resentment that may kill future hype for Jade and Warframes after, warranted or not. Which is a bit of a shame. I agree that dealing with real money and cosmetics would be inherently more tricky, but still worth it, depending on the context. Like I haven't seen too many people try to argue seriously about some of the console exclusive skins. Seen a few questions, but I think most people know, that sort of thing is out of DE's hand. Oh I still like law, and am fascinated by it from a studying perspective. Plus think its obviously important. I just think it would personally frustrate me too much, specifically the human element and trying to navigate the human element side. The papers side would be fun to me, but having to deal with power imbalances and how wealth can influence justice, and warp ideas of fairness... Phew, that would get to me. Anything where I can just indulge in the more neutral and sincere aspects of research I find more fun. That also being said, obviously important to have people trying to fight back against the waves of unfairness that can come with human nature, wealth imbalances, greed, corruption, manipulation, so on, hence I think its admirable for people such as yourself to potentially have to deal with that sort of thing (depending on what sort of specific career path you go down). Like there is a big difference between say bird law and memes and defending peoples lives or representing victims of assault etc. Thanks. You didn't come across as argumentative either, but I am also pretty familiar of how you post, and your sense of humour, which I enjoy and appreciate, and I have a pretty high opinion of you. This topic actually tends to attract a few different people who I have a pretty high opinion of generally, and I think its to do with what you mention actually, as far as passion ha. What I know of empathy and behaviour, is that people are often more willing to engage with it, if they see it demonstrated often, so I find its really important in forums, that its not just people disagreeing with each other harshly or being passive aggressive or arguing in bad faith. Having some well intentioned constructive conversations can have a positive influence on the flow of a thread, especially around tense subjects, so I like to think we both did a decent enough job in that regard. Sure beats seeing a thread get locked due to hostility. Cheers! Oh and @Aruquae Just in case you don't get a notification.

I like the mode so far. Done all the weeks, had some different experiences, all mostly positive except for one attempt where people progressively quit, leading to multiple host migrations, in the first round. Sort of understandable since team wasn't working well together, someone died far away, I wanted to revive them via Angel, succeeded, but one of the others alive died, and was host and they left annoyed at the other player... Anyway, regardless I think the mode is great. You can get lucky with your RNG, or alternatively may have to lean a little more on team work and team synergy. So far my "hardest load out" had Mag, and Paris as my only decent weapon. Hard in the sense while I use Mag a lot, my Mag build is really squishy. Also the weeks conditions weren't great for my load out either, and I consider the Paris Incarnon really strong, its less effective with the set up I was using and the KPM needed against the enemies and how I had to use it in regards to the rest of my loadout. It was also the where above happened with the people leaving. The next attempt went way smoother, since I wasn't trying to carry a disorganised team who were spread out. This time our team work was much tighter and people were even communicating in chat, and we had to coordinate a little, and use team synergy and rely on each other, which isn't something I usually have to do in Warframe, but I had fun and enjoyed the three quests. That all being said, I really do think its fine if people complain, criticise and expression dislike or frustration with the mode. I can't see the mode changing too dramatically, but I am not against adjustments either, and just expressing ones thoughts, preferences, likes and dislikes is just really basic and important. You never really want to deny peoples options to do so, otherwise that can be used against you as well. Its fine to have more nuanced and interesting takes, views, opinions and preferences than just liking and agreeing with everything or being critical and against everything. Personally I think the randomised load outs is an important and necessary aspect in the mode, because the way Warframe is set up... Like subjective some could find it artificial, boring, forced, tedious, sure, but the way Warframe is set up with so many tools, is that challenge can often by bypassed and trivialises just by a player being willing to flex and select tools that are strong against the scenario, situation, quest etc. Which also means, those that do not want to flex, either because they can't or don't want to, may struggle in ways they may dislike. Thing is, it would be hard for DE to so specifically tailor make challenge/difficulty for a Protea player who likes using the Cedo, compared to a Xaku player who likes using the Boar Incarnon, compared to a Saryn player who likes using the Hate to a Vauban player who likes using the Daikyu. A lot of their strengths and weaknesses are so different that it makes that sort of balancing tricky, and thats before we even include Operator tools, Arcanes, gear wheel, so on. Even for some players, the ability to forgo one reward and getting to choose to exclude one variable, can make EDA, pretty comfortable, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but sometimes it can be a nice experience when a player experiences good cohesive team work, and the feelings it can result in. Regardless of all that though, good to express when you enjoy and like something, but don't feel too distressed or annoyed if people have different takes, preferences and so on. Its fine. You can even have friendly and chill conversations with people even if you disagree about stuff too.

There have already been time limited in game items which have been changed and modified and altered to be more accessible or available beyond their original scope. Regardless limited time and exclusive are similarities they both have, but you can't just compare and think of similarities when looking at context, differences also can matter. Hulk and Kermit the Frog are both green, and have an unusual way of talking, to an extent that they can often be recognised by their speech. Doesn't mean that Kermit can lift mountains. I just listed their similarities, but not their differences. It wouldn't be fair for those that brought something because of FOMO, I totally agree with that, but its also not fair for people to be lured in by FOMO as well, in the first place. Or that FOMO exists in the first place, and that people brought stuff because of FOMO. Or fair to the people who didn't buy because of FOMO and would be happy to have others also get the cool items, and who are also against FOMO, but had competing reasons for buying (support or wanting the cool thing), but who get lumped in with others, as arguments as to why its "not fair". Anecdotally, but I have seen far more people who brought Heirlooms who have expressed that they would prefer and rather others could still get the Heirlooms, than I have seen people who want Heirlooms to stay exclusive. I have even seen more people who wish things were different but believe that DE is legally liable, than people who strictly want their exclusivity upheld. Which to be clear, isn't myself trying to invalidate or judge such people, I just don't see it very often. It would be interesting to know. Anyway there are a lot of levels of unfairness that exist regardless. Attributing ideas and evaluations like "what would be despicable" or not, without establishing a tight relatively objective criteria is thus always going to be a bit flawed. It doesn't even need to be considered a "FOMO strat", because people can know and understand this. Then be transparent about it. FOMO style tactics and strategy can be extremely lucrative, but their are pros and cons. Switching to a weekly subscription plan could also have pros and cons, and potentially be lucrative, but DE probably won't entertain that, because thats just... not their style or model. They aren't FF Online, and that model works well for that game, and its general fanbase. Like some of this is obviously complicated, when talking about businesses and continually finding ways to make more money, because there can be different ways, and some of the ways can be more lucrative, but some can be predatory and exploitive. Its a balancing act, in many different ways. Many people often over simplify such situations as well. They don't understand the internal structure of a company like DE. Or that they aren't a monolith. There are likely disagreements and clashes over pricing strategies, with compromises and bargaining. There are people even a CEO as to answer to/address. Which also probably means, there are people within DE who are fine with community backlash, if it helps them explain or justify or preemptively shoot down monetisation plans they think won't work with Warframe. Like I myself was personally fine with a pay to skip option Reb floated, but broader community shut that down pretty hard. There was also that accidental Nightwave boost leak, that still hasn't actually shown up, maybe because it was considered a bad idea to monetise NW that way. My main point here is that sure, they should stick to their word... unless their wording was bad for consumers/fans, and changes would benefit us, which often also benefits them as well, long term. Lets say that Heirloom skins next bundle isn't limited time exclusive, and they explain it will eventually come back in a few years. Hypothetically it might not make as much money, because many who only buy because of FOMO might not, so... failure right? Well yes and no, because some long term benefits may end up outweighing the initial loss/difference. I totally understand it can be frustrating if a company/business doesn't stick to their word, but no one should be so inflexible as to accept a negative situation/scenario that negatively affects others, because of a stubborn adherence to conceptually sticking by such words. It removes the potential for things to improve and be refined by misguided notions. It is a bit of a weakness, because you were addressing peoples different attitudes and behaviour and hypocrisy, and not taking into account important distinctive differences. If you would rather talk specifically about contracts, thats fine too, but very different. It also looks scummy when they make such plans, You could say it would look scummy if they do rerelease them, but to many it looks scummy if they don't. The only real way to avoid looking scummy to some, is to avoid such practices in the first place. Except of course thats a risk involved with such ventures, and they are likely external pressures within DE's structure to look for ways to gain profit injections, especially in the context of video games as a whole. So its not necessarily a surprise such ventures happen, because sometimes the perception of seeming scummy is worth it, but other times... Also, when Supporter Packs were made available again, via Plat, anecdotal, but way more people seemed happy and fine with it. There were some individuals who were unhappy about it, and vocal. This forum had a few, but to my perception, most people on these Forums, most people on Reddit welcomed and celebrated the move. For all we know, that might have been a soft decision to gauge the fan reaction over such decisions to see how we might react if something like Heirlooms (specifically Frost and Mag) were made available again. Would you personally care if in 2 years, we have Mesa, Ember, Excalibur and Volt Heirloom skins, and we know changes are being made and Rebecca mentioned the future will be different, would you personally care if the future they decided it was weird that all other Heirlooms rotated and returned eventually and just decided to adjust their stance? How many people who brought Prime Access 6 years ago, are upset that people can just buy Regal Aya for cheaper and get Prime Noggles through Resurgance, even though when they purchased PA, that was the only way to get Prime Noggles? Doesn't necessarily have to be selfish. It cab also be okay to be selfish, but many others would also benefit, and iyts fine to advocate changes for yourself and them. If DE were an individual, or friend, i might agree and care about them and their word. DE is an organisation, business and game development team though, i much much prefer them being consumer friendly and conscious, and ethical in business and in regards to consumers, as much as possible under Capitalism and their countries laws. Laws which are also often refined, adjusted and improved. It can also often be a bit obvious when their word isn't intended to be taken as the final or ultimate high authority. Since they are a business, they often need to have a unified front. Internally they can be a mess and disagree over pricing policies or monetisation plans, but ultimately they needed to give a unified front for fans, consumers, investors, etc Company wide stances are probably written by multiple people with the assistance of multiple people, under direction by other people, who are the ones with more authority, but such stances need to be written in a PR friendly and more accessible "simple for players" way, with all that that entails. Which os also why, and many people don't understand this, we can't just have Megan randomly change DE's stance on something after a day of back lash. It also leads to scenarios like with Regal Aya, where they adjusted the value of the pricing but said they couldn't change or budge on other variables, because of "fairness to those already buying the packs" but then a little while after they did actually "go back on their word" and make changes, and ran a script to compensate people who already made purchases. So to some, you should always take their word with a grain of salt regardless, because they aren't an individual, they are a company and all that that entails. Which is also why this isn't a charity issue, because there can be pros and cons involved with such changes. A reasonable and knowledgable consumer wouldn't want DE to bankrupt themselves, so they can understand that some monetisation techniques are necessary. Like how you can't just have access to all Primed Warframes every day... There are rotations, and windows of availability. So there is a bit of light FOMO with that. Except its more check in routinely than worrying about never returning. Context and all. By default you/we all should be a bit weary when business is involved and many involved with business, chef aim is to make money. Just that there are different ways to do that. So instead of valuing that a business "keep to their word" some would rather that the business prioritise its consumers and fanbase as best they can.. even if that may occasionally conflict with their "word" because if those two ideas compete, one is better and one is worse for consumers. Which also arguably can become bad for the business itself (imagine if DE just implemented all predatory practices from all other video games, all at once? The backlash would probably sink the game over the course of a few weeks, with a massive negative stain it may not recover from, even if they course corrected a day later) Do you think its possible that you could be too overly cautious about the negative feedback and backlash to DE's image if they did implement a way for Heirlooms to return? Like do you think its possible you could be overstating concern? Also for clarity and transparency, its entirely possible that I could be understating and underestimating how much could happen as well. I do personally think that DE would lose a little face, and that quite a few people would be negative over it, but I also think they would offset that much more with gaining face, gaining goodwill, and more people overall would be positive and welcome to such a change. Anecdotal, but there were so many nice and positive comments when the Supporter Packs were made available again. People enjoying the Universal Zobev and Caspian Pistol skin (may have misspelled those), people who could get some of the colour palettes, and the Infested Domestik Drone etc Lots of people surprised and happy, much more than people who were annoyed because they implied such items were limited time. Could also show that they are capable of course correction, and reflecting on some of their decisions that resulted in feedback, listened and then make adjustments and changes for the future to try and do better by most of their fans overall. Some promises can be bad, and do more harm than good. Ideally bad promises shouldn't be made to start with, but thats sort of the point as well, and benefit and positive of course correction, for when mistakes/errors happen, having ways to fix and resolve them. Agreed, but I think that should be okay, and overall more consumer friendly and ethical. I think its a bad path to go down, when you have to rely on playing to consumers fears over FOMO to make money, because whilst short term, there can be obvious advantages, the longer term consequences may not be as fruitful. A lot of people often talk about how and why they support DE expressively because they seem better, more ethical, more consumer friendly than most other video games, game devs/producers. DE also knows this and has talked about it before. For an ongoing game, that uses a FTP model, having a small but loyal fanbase who will often just want to give you money, even though the game is "free" is a powerful and beneficial to business incentive. Which can be really hard to quantify and measure... Which often creates a lot of conflict and tension in video games, when it comes to people in the games industry who are involved because games, creativity, art, and story telling are their passion, as well as their career, and they play games themselves... and people who are in video games industry, because of business, making and earning profit, and generating wealth for themselves so they can retire early, and who don't really play video games, but they help with the business side, and its not like they need to play games to make money and... stuff... So there would likely be long term benefits for DE as well, even if there the short term gains aren't as steep. Again though, of course risk is implicit, and its way easier to talk about these things when I don't have to personally face repercussions or worry about my livelihood or career at stake. Oh nice! Forgive me if I misunderstood you, but you are considering a career in law (or video games?). Very admirable. I did at one point as well, but not really my thing I think. Thats really cool though and I wish you well in that (if I interpreted that correctly). In our discussions you always came across as pretty fair, friendly and articulate. I am sure you would do great! Oh my bad, I have a bad habit of addressing some points without reading the whole text. I still maintain what I said above though, just swap in forensic psychology heh. Which between you and me, and please don't tell any lawyers this, but I consider more interesting. I am sure you will nail it. Also I hope I didn't come across as too argumentative or aggressive. Like i have said in our earlier discussions in the past, I think you raise and make great points, and you also seem to separate ideas from ego, which makes you a pleasant person to engage in discussion, even if we might have different takes on matters. I also apologise about the length of my reply, but I pretty much covered most things i would want to, so if you do decide to reply to any points I made, I can at least say that any of my future replies won't be anyway as long. Good day to you (and good luck on your internship, that sounds super cool).

No, not necessarily. Context always matters, and for some specific context is significant. For example some will be more tolerant and accepting of a small company having being rejected from various different larger publishers for their game idea, deciding to take a big risk and pressing forward with their game without that level and size of assistance, and going for a more kick starter like route and asking for support from potential fans and a player base ahead of time, with a Founders/Supporters package, compared to a game that does have an active player base, 10 years of success, is made by a developer that is now much larger, backed by much larger companies, with a more secure financial stability and less risk as far as working on the game. Is such context not relevant or important to you? Sure for some people, they might want Excalibur Prime to also come back, but there will also be some that are more willing to let that slide or distinguish it as different, due to context or some other reason. Then also there might actually still be some people who just arbitrarily want one but not the other, potentially for hypocritical reasons. Not all those people are the same, or necessarily hypocrites though. Then false advertising aspect has already been addressed many many times, by various people. Would you stake your livelihood and well being on being absolutely correct on that being the case? Or is it more just your subjective opinion, based on notions you might have? Do you have relevant legal expertise? Or is it more the idea that others also don't either and the consequence for being wrong or inaccurate isn't much. To be clear, I am obviously not asking you to stake your livelihood or wellbeing on the case lol, its just what i personally do to myself sometimes as a rhetorical technique. Like I have actually studied a bit of the law, not enough that I would claim to be a lawyer, more so enough to know I don't know as much as I could, and enough to know not to pretend online like i can say for certain one way or another, so that informs my framing. I wouldn't bet my livelihood or well being on knowing one way or another if DE would run afoul of false advertising laws. My best current understanding which I would be happy to elaborate on, and have before, but would come with heavy disclaimers that I am not a lawyer, and don't know with absolute confidence, would be no, they wouldn't (depending on the country), but being an online anonymous random person on the forums? i have no accountability for such claims. Regardless, I value transparency and expertise over subjective personal beliefs and bad arguments, so I would still not claim authority over the matter and be willing to defer to those whose actual expertise and understanding around such laws would be. Especially if I got to ask them questions, so they could clarify a few points. There was a user in one thread a while back who did mention they were a lawyer, but they were transparent enough to also explain it was complicated and out of their direct field of expertise, but to their best understanding DE would generally be fine over such matters (then explained why). Again though, its not like they gave their real name or details, so they could have been lying, but they seemed competent enough and they went off explaining their though process as opposed to just insisting and telling people what to think. For me personally thats one general way to distinguish people who think their opinion is self sufficient evidence, and those that actually know a bit more and are sincere and happy to inform in an objective manner.

This is a change I would personally like to see. I understand why some people don't want this... Warframe uses a free to play model. lots of cool things like skins are locked behind premium currency, many people don't want to pay real money or they can't afford to, but they can grind, and thus grind for high value Plat items. Like Arcanes from Eidolons. Which they can in turn sell high, to get currency, to buy the cool thing. You make the high value item easier to get, its value decreases, and people who grind, aren't as rewarded as much as prior. So they either have to grind more or just not get the cool thing. On the other hand, personally, I prefer helping newer players learn the ropes, enjoy the team work and fun of actually just hunting Eidolons, just for that. Value around Arcanes not being relevant The fun and joy of the hunt and team work and getting better/stronger the main incentive. Which is a bit harder with the night cycles limitations, and for organising randoms, and also the tension around peoples playtimes and schedules, when the reward is for many, the more valuable part. Being "stuck with inexperience" becomes a factor and well yeah... I don't see it changing anytime soon, but would be nice and welcome by myself.

I actually sort of prefer it as is. Like I don't think it needs to be more relevant, the minor and small incentives should remain minor and small. I am not really fond of the idea that people feel like they have to keep grinding MR to get such incentives. Like I understand the thinking? I am also LR4 and the type of player that will almost always be at max LR, but thats just the kind of player I am. I would benefit but I wouldn't really want others to feel more reasons/pressure to grinding/levelling. Also regarding boosters and scaling, well there is already a limit to that regarding boosters and logins, so the scaling isn't likely to add much, and the type from special containers.. boosting those would be nice, but the are kind of designed to be short, likely to not cut into peoples purchasing habits (my assumption). Also tying it to mastery could potentially create situations where people try to exploit that. Some people were already trying to sell their blessing boosts which is lame, but now lower MR's may be told that a higher MR player will play with them, in order to help them get boosts, yadda yadda. I think as is is fine. I appreciate the creative thinking though.

Others have already explained the nature of toxin proccs versus toxin damage. With Hildryn specifically, you could potentially try using Rolling Guard. That should give you a good window of survivability. You could also try the Arcane that gives you health on kill (I forget its name, (Arcane Blessing?!?). Yes, I know, you are Hildryn, so like... whats health, but against Infested, and if you are struggling, and since Hildryn usually has more options for Arcanes, and you are already running Adapation, a larger health bar can be a nice buffer, specifically against toxin attacks that bypass your shields. Since you are already using the augment, and its Infested you should also be killing a lot of them pretty fast to stack the Arcane, and in combination with Rolling Guard should give you a bigger breathing space.

I want to address a few different ideas and views brought up. More generally though, nothing so personal (thread can get a bit tense aye?). Criticism, and disagreeing welcome. "Voting with your wallet" whilst nice in a vacuum, isn't contextually relevant as in it doesn't really apply in such contexts as modern day gaming with FTP models, micro transactions, the idea the goods are digital and not of limited scarcity (well, different kind of limited), or address certain other issues. Even such ideas in their original and more traditional usages have flaws and criticisms involved with class, power dynamics involved with larger and powerful corporations, it also doesn't address how consequences can differ (think of examples where a product you liked, rapidly declined harder, because the solutions to downward trends, was to double down harder on the issues that caused the descent. Something similar sort of happened to comics when they "collapsed" in the 90's. Likewise people having conflicting desires. I am not privy to DE's internal data on such things, but based on what I do generally know, they already know most people who play Warframe, the majority already don't buy higher priced packages/bundles, like PA, let alone Heirlooms, but thats okay. This isn't a DE/Warframe thing, its a games thing. There are lots of articles/data about how much the business sides of games, loves stuff like micro transactions, loot boxes, GAAS, and just ways to squeeze money out of people, but not all people. Its a dated reference and not to be held as magically applying to all games, but a few years ago, there was a report by Swrve on how something like 0.15% account for 50% of mobile games business. I think a few places like Forbes covered it, and again, a lot can change in the mean time, thats mobile games, what was their methodology, all important to understand, but usually the majority already isn't "voting with their wallets", but they don't need to, if the goal is capitalise on smaller groups of people who are willing to spend larger to compensate. Importantly though you don't want to necessarily neglect or frustrate the other players either, so complications, and balance, and different strategies. Like some games strategy is to go pretty hard on the wealthier minority, some devs or publishers are pretty egregious... Others significantly less so. Also complicates the options consumers have as well. Just speaking for myself. Do Heirlooms issue, or Regal Aya, or a few other issues I view as negative, is that enough to make me want to quit Warframe outright? No, not really, I still enjoy the game overall more. I've actually really enjoyed the direction the game has been going the last few years significantly, especially outside of monetisation issues like Regal Aya (initial plan), and Heirlooms (especially initial design). Would I enjoy and appreciate if all those that were critical of such decisions all declared to DE that we would abstain from the game for a week, to send a message, to please avoid such anti consumer practices? I mean... sure, but thats only really nice in theory. For some people they can be critical, but also work is tough, and they look forward to weekends where they can play their fav game. What about people with other issues and life struggles who are a bit more apathetic. Like those kind of actions require organisation and effort and planning... There is also a pretty obvious alternative as well. Complaining and criticising, expressing ones self on Forums, Reddit, Social media, Twitch, Youtube etc That also all being said, some people also won't be happy with an either or situation, where its one or the other, bad monetisation practices? Or the game dying and not existing. Many people may not be happy with decisions, but they will still want to play the game, but also, since different peoples thresholds are different, people do actually also often just leave the game regardless, which is why games like Warframe already often have a retention problem. Its a complicated issue. Like there is short term and long term planning and ideas... Something like Heirlooms, is probably pretty good for short term, but they may have more negative long term consequences. DE though to their credit are pretty good as far as changes they make, as far as consumer friendliness (even if often the more obvious consumer friendly action, would have to just not have done the thing). Secondly. "Losing trust" in DE. its already something that happens, anyway. For different people already, to different degrees. Individuals perceptions about what entails "going back on their word", in a game, that is using a FTP model, the type that regularly updates and plans to regularly update, and often adjusts values, introduces new systems, makes acts/claims, changes or modifies acts/claims. For many people DE already went back on their words for older Deluxe skins, for certain Supporter packs, for certain item rewards, even Regal Aya and Heirlooms, had moments where they expressed "we can't change these" to "we can now change these". Which as far as ethics goes? Its not black or white, variables matter, and then there is ethics, and then there are ethics... Their are words and then there is legalese. Add in consumer friendliness, consumer rights, power dynamics of a business versus individuals... Personally I am more familiar with how breaking science, can take a while to become more widely understood in the science community, and then why/how long it can take to start to permeate through mainstream normal culture and society, before perceptions are such that people start to demand policy in leaderships, Governments acknowledge and address (and this in itself can be complicated, because politics), I am more familiar with that process than the law catching up to games. There was a clip that went viral a few years back, demonstrating how many legal systems are just ill equipped to deal with several video game issues regarding consumers, when an older lawmaker and I think judge was interviewed/questioned by a younger professional over some video game terms, and it was... the older individual just had no context for any of the terms being used. Video games were just a huge blind spot, and its those types of oversights that can be exploited and can take time to patch up. I am talking generally here, the main point I want to make though, is that a lot of individuals "trust" is subjective and flawed, and using their own discretion. "Oh those Supporter packs, Deluxe skins, that heavily implied and worded to be limited and gone, that many people interpreted as such, well they didn't say in bold letters, literally never going to return, so I wouldn't lose trust in DE over that... Only Heirlooms". Not to imply thats invalid, its very valid and fair enough for an individual, just not necessarily more valid or fair that other takes. There is some overlap with consumer friendliness and ethics, but also dynamic between two individuals and an individual as a consumer and a business , eh... Applying ethics there can be done, but.. This isn't my neighbour making a promise to try and not cut into my flower garden and using more care in the future and learning from their mistake. For many, Heirlooms were a type of going back on their word as well, if any of you are familiar with Steve's idea of player parity was, at a base level. For consumer friendliness company's should go back on their words, if those terms weren't good for their consumers. Its also pretty easy to test this, just insert any example where they would say something silly and bad, have them articulate they wont change their mind on it. Then question whether they actually should, because the thing was bad. DE: "We are going to make Warframe a subscription service now. 10k a month. You can't change our minds on this. This is final." Community: "Thats really dumb though. Then again, they said we can't change their mind and its final, and I would lose respect for them if they did so..." Also yes, its a silly absurd example on purpose, to make the point clear. Context matters. Even though I think Warframe is at its best and strongest overall right now. I don't blame people who have already lost trust in them already, or who leave. Even though I think DE is one of the most consumer friendly and relatively ethical game devs, around, I don't think its something they should take for granted, or rest on. Rather something they should strive to maintain and upkeep, especially over time. I don't blame those that reject that they are, because of Regal Aya (initial), and Heirlooms (ongoing). Thirdly, I wanted to address some peoples belief in law around DE being legally bound. I am not a lawyer. That being said, I probably know a tiny bit more than the average person on such matters, and have already made posts on this, and PublikDomain already made an excellent post about this recently. DE can't offer Heirloom skins again, because if they do, the Moon will destroy the Earth. I state this with 100% confidence and sincerity. Its common sense. If you quote me, and reject this factual truth, I will just repeat myself, but maybe adjust the words around slightly, so I am essentially saying the same thing. People stating your belief may reassure your own existing beliefs about a situation, but in no way do they offer explanative power or insight to give what you say credibility or persuasive power. In various countries legal systems, and relevant legal text, there is a lot of legalese that can play important roles in such situations. So much so I am personally hesitant to say anything with conviction or confidence one way or another, but enough for me to also think, that if you aren't a lawyer who specialises in such, you random anonymous person, probably shouldn't either and expect to be viewed as credible or accurate. Not only that but much of the legalese is often there to be favourable to some over others, but the way and how... well again its complicated. My main point is, I don't think this situation is as legally binding as some of you think it is. Just by reading up on relevant points in advertising law, across different countries, you can see how and why, if not disputable. Which to be clear, isn't necessarily a good thing, that such companies can be so "misleading" but there is a whole lot more than still needs to be done as far as regulation, and responsibilities and accountabilities. The stronger and more robust the laws are for consumers, the better, but also in such situations, companies like DE would probably be more hesitant to roll out Heirlooms as they were originally, as opposed to creating scenarios where they are legally obliged to commit to something which may be bad for business overall/long term.

Personally, i am a big Unairu fan. Its armour strip and shield strip aren't the best in the game, compared to some other tools, and I also personally tend to think armour stripping isn't as vital in most of the game, even Steel Path as some might, but there are certain single enemies that become way more convenient to face, if you do at least have one sort of armour strip available, like Steel Path Void Angels, Acolytes, so on. Means if you want, you don't have to care about armour stripping with the rest of your builds, if you are so inclined. Along those lines though, I think your playstyle and preferences matter too. Like if you main a Warframe that already has an armour strip, Unairu's will be less relevant. That being said I also think Last Gasp is great, especially for longer Endurance runs, especially if you are solo, especially since a lot of new content like Netracells punishes death big time and won't allow normal self revives. Having the armour strip and shield strip will also allow that as well. The other waybound makes you pretty tanky as well. Then again so are the Madurai Waybounds. In hindsight I might also not be the best person to answer, since I went pretty hard on all my focus schools, with lens (I played a lot of Disruption), Eidolons, and unlocked all my waybounds and focus schools nodes years and years ago. In general though I would say tailoring around your own play styles is a pretty good idea (if you are a big melee person, Naramon, if you want to have more offensive powers, especially some of your Operator tools, Madurai. Vazarin for some defensive healing options, Unairu for utility/defensiveness. Good luck. Plus remember to check you are using your lens on your favourite Incarnons or nukes (Lens seem to have become pretty common rewards in a lot of newer content. I have like so many, but since I am maxed out, I have nothing to slot them in).