DrBorris
-
Posts
5,118 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by DrBorris
-
-
1 hour ago, (XB1)GearsMatrix301 said:
-snip-
Lol no absolutely not
Eidolons have no gameplay character, the only character they have is their aesthetic.
Vampires have literally centuries of lore that can be used to build an interesting kit and give a Warframe gameplay character.
Thus, it would lead to a better designed Warframe if Revenant had the gameplay character of a vampire and the aesthetic style of an Eidolon. He should absolutely go back to his original design intent of being a vampire.
-
40 minutes ago, Jarriaga said:
-the part about market value-
Everything you say here goes on the assumption that the game needs to be balanced around market values. Can you at least admit that there was a bit of a leap there? Context, shock an surprise, is very important. Did you take the second to ask why Arcanes are so cheap? Or was it just a straight line of "Arcane cheap, thus it must be easy to get". Arcanes are inexpensive because the nature of Eidolon farming leads to an extremely inflated supply of any Arcane that isn't the most expensive. In additin there are years of stockpile of Arcanes that are now flowing through the market, affecting sale prices. There is no direct correlation between how good an Arcane is and how much it is valued it. The correlation is also not based on the time required, seeing as many rare Arcanes can be gotten for dirt cheap. It is a weird amalgamation of the two.
So asking for DE to balance the reward scheme of an event around such a volatile and inconsistent economy is a far larger leap than you lead it to be. The Market, in my opinion should play no role any balance decisions made by DE. I know they don't always follow this rule
cough*Rivens, but we as players should not be asking for them to dive down that rabbit hole. If the market value of an item is low and you would rather just farm platinum, that is a better option than shifting the balance of the game to fit the Market (which will in turn shift the market).Rewards should be based on their value and where DE sees them fitting in the game's progression. I wouldn't think that would be a hot take.
40 minutes ago, Jarriaga said:-the part about low rank Arcanes being bad-
Can you point to where I said that that unranked Arcanes are great? I'll wait.
What is really funny is that even you say that a rank 2 Arcane is where they start getting good. RANK TWO. This is exactly what I am getting at when I think people are blowing this whole "I need max rank Arcanes" thing out of the water. A rank 2 Arcane takes only 6 Arcanes. Max rank takes 21. If you want to go the extra mile and get the 21 Arcanes you need to max one, that should absolutely be an investment of your time. And if you just want to get some decent Arcanes to fill your slots, you only need 6-10, that is around a quarter to half of the grind of getting this oh-so-necessary max rank. The majority of Arcanes are just as powerful at rank 3 now as they were since they were released, many even have buffed stats at rank 3 compared to before.
-
Why is everyone throwing around "max rank Arcane" like we are entitled to get a MAX RANK Arcane with ease.
A max rank Arcane... like, I'd think it would speak for itself, these are one of the longest grind items in the game. The super long chase that will take you months to complete. Also, Arcanes, the piece of equipment that are explicitly designed to be useful even when NOT at max rank.
Arcanes, the gear that most players don't even use yet are still murder gods. The things that exist only as a minimal bonus progression generally for veteran players. You would think that DE is gating Serration behind 20 hour time gates given how people are responding to this.
But no, I guess that all of those things are irrelevant. The only reward that has value is a MAX rank Arcane. Everything under max is apparently worthless trash. Context is pointless, we need all of the shiny items right now.
Don't assume this to mean that I don't think that the reward structure will likely need changes, I do. However for one we need to actually feel out what the current grind is like (as it has barely even been a day since the bonuses were working properly) and we need to remember that it is MAX RANK Arcanes we are talking about. This event is going to come back, Eidolons will still be there when the event isn't here, let's all just take a step back and look at the entire context.
-
1
-
-
20 minutes ago, Drachnyn said:
Since completed flotillas are useless anyway, instead of colour coding they should just be dropped from the selection.
I'd leave it up to a filter, you should be able to hop on any Flotilla (if it has room) to join your friends. Not just join a squad with your friends, but a Flotilla with your fiends. If the timer is getting low go ahead and let multiple groups hop on the same "completed" Flotilla to prepare for the next cycle.
It would be niche and most people wouldn't use it, but that is the power of filters. Most people can just filter it away and you don't have to take options away from those who want to do something different.
-
It sucks. This whole event is about finding a group of people to work towards a common goal with, but the UI makes find said group blind trial and error. And this has led to trickle down effects where different Flotillas have horrible proportions of each of the two squad types. The basic design of the event SHOULD lead to each Flotilla being innately balanced with Raid and Assault squads. However due to the UI giving us none of the necessary information people are let blindly running into bad situations.
Just... just look at this...
Busy? What does Busy mean? How about Calm? Does that mean nobody is there? Why can't I see what Flotillas I have assisted to get max bonus? How do I know which Flotilla needs help? DE has been pursuing a methodology of "less is more" with UI as to not confuse players. But by having so little, players are more confused. And will be more frustrated.
So using my magical PowerPoint skills, here is a suggestion.
Mmm, useful information. You can get a good idea of where your help is needed. There are filters to let you find Flotillas that you have helped with or just find Flotillas that need your help. The color coding for completed Flotillas may be overkill, but it would sure be nice to tell where you aren't needed at a quick glance. Imagine if there was a way to sort Flotillas by their total members, or by the ratio of Raid to Assault missions.
Right now there are a lot of complaints about how Space Raid missions aren't getting Kill Codes because there aren't Ground Assault squads. Where most people lead to then is "just remove the link", but that would just be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Give us, your players, the tools that we NEED to be able to complete this event to the best of our ability. UI is bottle-necking the whole process and having trickle down effects that are fundamentally breaking the event for many people.
-
2
-
-
7 hours ago, Krankbert said:
Well, after about three hours of grinding and a one-time hotfix that (for some reason almost, but not quite) doubled my credits, I now have enough to buy two thirds of a fully maxed Arcane Phantasm. I have no clue how much of an Arcane Energize that is, and neither have you, but I somehow doubt that the top tier Arcanes are going to be cheaper.
So I'm going to go ahead and say that that will not be my experience.
There were a lot of bugs the first two days. It sucked, DE did a bad and released an extremely unpolished event. However at this point bonuses seem to be working right. You can't base your feedback off of the bugged system because the bugged system literally doesn't exist anymore.
-
If you took Steve' statement to assume that you could max rank every Arcane in one event than... I don't know what to say.
It is a joke to max an Arcane with Scarlet Spear because you get to pick exactly what you get. No Arcane Phantasm getting in your way, just two hours TOPS of grinding to get one fully maxed Arcane from scratch. This is huge, most people will only ever use 3-5 different Arcanes to begin with.
-
2
-
-
I'm not saying that your bullet points are something we should openly accept, but how strong are your rose tinted glasses?
Warframe updates have always been buggy. The first major event Warframe had was basically just a glorified sabotage mission 100 times. Other events were the flipside where you only needed to do the mission once. New content has always been buggy, UI 2.0 still reigns supreme in my mind as the worst because the whole game became basically unplayable. When Frost Prime initially released some of his parts had sub 1% drop chances.
So on to the title, is DE "slowly switching to the dark side?" No, DE is doing DE things. They always mean the best but struggle with implementation. We still need to be critical of new content, but doomsaying that DE is becoming evil is counterproductive to the issues at hand. Take off the tinfoil hat, it doesn't look good on you.
-
12
-
-
1 minute ago, Sitchrea said:
At its best, when it works without any bugs or crashes, it is barely noticeable. I doubt I would have really noticed its implementation without the bugs, because we aren't actually interacting with other players' games.
You know, like how we were promised at Tennocon.
"What we were promised at Tennocon"
Yeah, the thing where you are forced to wait for another squad to do an objective so you can finish yours...
Not going to lie, that sounds a lot like what we ended up with.
Squad Link surely has potential, but the expectations that were built of it seem far disconnected from what DE actually presented to us.
-
1
-
-
I would also like to see more squad link that ties two groups of people together in a more cooperative format.
However, I don't think that is what Scarlet Spear was going for, and I don't think that what it is going for is bad. Scarlet Spear seems to be trying to create a group effort where you can actually feel your input. With big events that need a group effort, like Eyes of Blight for example, no individual squad could ever see the contribution they made. It made a disconnect, made it feel like your contribution did not matter.
What Scarlet Spear does is reduce the size of the "event" to an extent where every mission you do has a notable impact on the effort (of killing 100 Murax). Rather than fighting one big war, we fight hundreds of battles. And while we can't feel our impact on the war effort, we can feel the impact when winning a battle with your fellow Flotilla members.
We have a chance to build a relationship, albeit one of only mutual need, with named Tenno. After spending an hour defending Flotilla 118 I had a vested interested in the success of the Flotilla and everyone on it, not just in my own success.
Squad Link has so much more potential for new gameplay experiences than literally just "linking two squads" . For the sake of PR it may have been better for DE to deliver exactly what they showed off, but to be honest I like the idea of using Squad Link to build small communities far more than just linking two squads (but I want to see that eventually as well).
-
2
-
-
32 minutes ago, protecttheplanet said:
Sure its not the best way to make it more challenging but do u really think it is cooler to have level 200 enemies 10 or 20 times weaker than before the update? I'm not sure if u either think an exponential scaling is not THE BEST way or not a.GOOD way. Because if u think its not a GOOD way then I really cant understand u at all. Id rather fight bullet spongy bombards after 90min than fight bombards that die after 2 hits after 90min.
I would rather be having fun after 90 minutes than... uh... not having fun. Warframe gameplay is supposed to feel a certain way, enemy design fits better when TTK is kept more consistent. If I want to for a longer run against higher level enemies, I don't want them to start behaving completely unlike what they were designed to be. A Lancer is just a Lancer, it shouldn't be a tank or a threat in general.
Enemies do still scale into infinity, but now you aren't being kicked out of a mission because the calculator broke and enemies have thousands of percent more effective health. If you choose to play an endurance mission you shouldn't be thrown into what feels like a completely different game where normal strategies are thrown out the window and you are pigeonholed into a few loadout options. I ran a 90 min Kuva Survival Fissure the other day and it felt great, my gear did not magically stop working and my weird armor-stripping Mag build was still fundamentally working. Enemies did start to push back, but it was gradual, not a brick wall.
I do think that some more "challenging" content should be added to the game, but it should be thoughtfully implemented, not just be a multiplier on base enemy stats. If an enemy is going to be tanky, it should make sense that they are tanky. If an enemy is going to suppress my loadout, I should have counterplay options besides changing my entire loadout.
Request #52 to replace Eximus enemies with Arena enemies. -
8 minutes ago, protecttheplanet said:
At least it would make grinding for good gear feel rewarding because u can overcome even those enemies with it. But now I'm wondering if there will ever be bullet sponge that i wont be able to kill before it kills me..
Again, overcoming insinuates that it is challenging. For me (and I believe many others) doing this content just isn't fun or challenging. We have our tools to beat it, but at the end of the day it is just braindead Lancer #4256, but now is more tedious to kill.
3 minutes ago, protecttheplanet said:Where does it end exactly? I don't think its before level 240 which would explain the littlw challange I had. Making it unrealisticly high enough (think the edge of a Minecraft world) would be fine by me.
I edited in a chart to my first comment that shows pretty well what is going on. If you like I can make one that goes up to a higher level, just ask.
-
1
-
-
I disagree with the premise that more bullet-spongy enemies are more "challenging." The word I would use to describe that is tedious.
Edit: The enemy health, armor, and shield scaling equations were changed with the same update that changed status.
-
7
-
-
30 minutes ago, Birdframe_Prime said:
I wouldn't, except that's all you presented.
This doesn't make sense.
You say you wouldn't, implying that you are willing to look past the details to see an idea for its greater concept. But then you say "except that's all you presented", implying that you are only taking into consideration what was explicitly written.
Also, not sure if you saw, but I am not the person who started this thread. I just came in here, found the idea interesting, then saw some other people strawman the idea apart. So I decided to try and clarify on it myself and give a suggestion on how I think that the OP's idea could better be implemented.
I know it is asking more of the reader, but anytime someone does put forth the effort to go into detail most people either ignore the entire thing because "too long" or only skim the detailed concept, criticizing it based on what they think someone is trying to say (which means the original writer wasted their time with detail). Don't immediately look for what is wrong, look for what is right and judge if that concept is worth exploring further. In addition, it is ridiculous to expect a single person to be able to think through every issue with a concept. There is a reason that it is TEAMS of people that put together new content/reworks. No single suggestion will ever be perfect, if anything it is the responsibility of us as the community to help each other attempt to perfect each of our ideas. If you only ever accept perfection, then no concept will ever be good enough.
Also DE have repeatedly said that they read the entire Forums, even General Discussion. Those "This is in GD, DE doesn't look here" posts are BS. The original post isn't really a feedback on the latest status changes, this "problem" has existed since Damage 2.0. And a change like what the OP suggests, because it i something outside the scope of the recent status changes, should probably see a separate conversation about it more specifically.
... but there will never be a conversation if people say "Well, if you implement this in this way it is a nerf, so this whole idea is bad".
Sorry about ranting, I'm just getting tired of seeing this same pattern over and over and over again.-
1
-
-
On 2020-03-20 at 2:14 PM, Birdframe_Prime said:
-snip-
Okay, but you do know that other changes can be made, right? If DE were to change how elemental status damage calculations were done they would be easily capable of just, you know, changing them a little bit more?
I get that if you take the OP at the most literal then this will be a nerf as you suggest, but give the idea the benefit of the doubt. Don't bash down a concept just because one implementation of said concept is bad.
In the case of all of the elemental (not physical) damage procs, the damage of the proc is divided by two after adding together the modded elemental damage and the base damage. So if DE were to remove that 0.5 multiplier then we would be at a something that would be far more feasible.
SpoilerNow: Status Damage = 0.5 x ( Base Damage + Modded Elemental Damage )
Suggestion: Status Damage = ( Total Elemental Damage )
But let's think about this a bit more, what are the consequences? For one, if the status effect has anything less than +100% modded damage than this would still effectively be a nerf. So throwing on a single heat mod on your Viral/Heat build will have less of a DoT. On the other hand, for any build that has higher than +100% elemental damage (effectively any elemental combo) then this would be a buff. Now things are getting interesting, modding for more elemental damage is now twice as effective at increasing the DoTs of status effects. This could actually shake up modding a bit, maybe you will want to drop some mods to stack a bit more elemental. Your decisions made while modding are more impactful.
This isn't even getting into how this will work with weapons that have an innate element. If anything these weapons may be overbuffed.
As for slash, it wouldn't be that hard to make an exception for IPS given that we have so little say in innate IPS stats. And if something has "forced" status effects those could just use base damage.
Edit: I would go so far to say that ALL status effects, including the debuff effects, should scale with damage instead of stacking. But that is a conversation for another time.
-
1
-
-
27 minutes ago, Nindo73x said:
back when the fastest way to travel around was to run
Someone hasn't seen zoren-copter...
-
10
-
-
The gatekeeping is strong with this one.
-
- That is a chart I made before the patch dropped, some shotguns were given different status chances. Notably Kohm and Kuva Kohm were given a very generous buff.
- With the status changes in general, just looking at the changes to status chance doesn't tell the whole story. Despite some shotguns having a lower chance they still perform quite similarly (Tigris series for example)
- Most shotguns, even on that chart, saw a major buff to status chance. Everything that could not hit 100% before fared very well.
- With the status changes dedicating four mods to status chance is not nearly as necessary. There is room for more raw damage mods or QoL.
- Enemy EHP values were significantly reduced on the high end, where these status shotguns were most valued.
Edit: For any wondering, this is the full comment that chart is from.
On 2020-03-04 at 12:30 AM, DrBorris said:Because I am a loser with no life, I put together a nerf/buff chart that is based on IF DE universally uses the (Old Status) x (3) / (Pellets). If they don't then obviously these charts are off. A positive % is a buff, a negative % is a nerf. Just because the trends are going down that does not mean something is worse, as long as it is above the 0% line then it is a buff.
Note that the status chance on the bottom goes up to 330% despite status chance mods generally caps out at 240% right now. Basically, each status interval on the bottom represents a combination of 60/60 mods and the new/useful 90% status chance mod. This addition also means that looking at any of the trends after 240% status chance is complicated due to those status chances not being obtainable right now (outside Rivens).
These charts show exactly what many have pointed out, this is a nerf to 100% status shotguns and a buff to everything else. However, one shotgun looks like it will benefit very much from the status change, and that is Exergis (due to its low base pellet count). I very much hope DE does not just use the equation they stated in the Devstream, many of these shotguns clearly need a "human touch" to their balancing. The x3/p equation feels far too punishing to shotguns that have high base pellet counts.
Also, funny thing, this chart doesn't show it but if DE uses that equation then Sancti Tigris will have a higher status chance than Tigris Prime.
-
30
-
Because I am a loser with no life, I put together a nerf/buff chart that is based on IF DE universally uses the (Old Status) x (3) / (Pellets). If they don't then obviously these charts are off. A positive % is a buff, a negative % is a nerf. Just because the trends are going down that does not mean something is worse, as long as it is above the 0% line then it is a buff.
Note that the status chance on the bottom goes up to 330% despite status chance mods generally caps out at 240% right now. Basically, each status interval on the bottom represents a combination of 60/60 mods and the new/useful 90% status chance mod. This addition also means that looking at any of the trends after 240% status chance is complicated due to those status chances not being obtainable right now (outside Rivens).
These charts show exactly what many have pointed out, this is a nerf to 100% status shotguns and a buff to everything else. However, one shotgun looks like it will benefit very much from the status change, and that is Exergis (due to its low base pellet count). I very much hope DE does not just use the equation they stated in the Devstream, many of these shotguns clearly need a "human touch" to their balancing. The x3/p equation feels far too punishing to shotguns that have high base pellet counts.
Also, funny thing, this chart doesn't show it but if DE uses that equation then Sancti Tigris will have a higher status chance than Tigris Prime.
-
The flipside of this argument is that you aren't rewarded for doing high level content. It essentially puts a soft cap on how hard you can grind for experience, have fun Focus farming when the most optimal ratio of EHP to Affinity is level 15.
Imagine if doing high level missions meant that you could level weapons more notably faster. If doing 5 waves of Hydron 10 times wasn't basically the same as doing 50 waves of Hydron. And that doesn't even factor in that 50 waves of Hydron is far more difficult than 5 waves 10 times.
Hot Take: Affinity should scale linearly instead of logarithmically.
Edit: I really do get the point you are making, but having a good leveling expierence at low levels doesn't mean that it should scale so poorly. On the last Devstream Scott admitted that all of the scaling equations were balanced around "high level" being level 30. And when you look at how the math comes together, if "high level" was level 30 then I think that ALL of the enemy scaling equations would be great. But this isn't 2013 Warframe, in 2020 we consistently see level 100+ enemies, it is at these levels that stuff falls apart.
-
1
-
-
I got one, this means that DE doesn't have to make up a new reward for the new Operation.
Is that a good reason? No, not really.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, ShortCat said:
There is a fallacy in this thought process, because calculated eHP do not matter if you can bypass or greatly reduce armor scaling with anti-armor loadouts. Slash or Viral/Slash set-ups entirely ignore armor scaling and face only HP scaling; while armor strip set-ups do not fight the combined eHP value, but reduce it in big chuncks. At the content range we are operation right now, neither of those options struggle to achieve reasonable TTKs. Stop looking at raw eHP values in a vacuum.
Armor hardly makes enemies significant more resilient, as new Kosma units show. Their durability comes primarily from increased base HP, not armor.
Check the title again. The point of this thread is that the armor changed barely does anything. Even the last line says "These armor scaling changes may be fine, we already have our ways of killing level 100+ enemies". A lot of people have complained about armor scaling, clearly many see it as an issue, so what I wanted to address is that this new S curve on armor won't do much to the effect of actually reducing armor's effectiveness for most content. Especially when compared to shields that, while having a new gimmick with the shield gate, are pathetically weak when compared to an armored enemy. At most a Corpus unit will take double the shots to kill now, and they still have the massive weakness to toxin (slash damage does not bypass armor), the paradigm of armor being "the only thing in town" is not going to change.
While we do have our means of killing those enemies, weapons/loadouts versus armor are far more limited when compared to what are/will be effective versus shields. If DE wanted to balance the factions a bit more, the armor change will very likely not make a dent.
-
1 hour ago, supernils said:
Sorry? Did I talk bad about your favourite game? Or are you some sort of wanna be forum police hoping to get noticed by DE senpai?
I mean, being rude never helps convince someone of something, but that really isn't the bigger issue with just saying "Balance is garbage."
If you want to convince other people and/or DE you need to explain WHY something is broken and WHY your suggestion will fix it. Not only does this help other people understand better, it also helps yourself pick apart your own ideas to improve them. Also try to think of think of things people will come up with that will go against what you propose. This will make your ideas more convincing and make them more likely to actually have an impact.
-
3 minutes ago, HolySeraphin said:
Although they said they're going to increase health values they also wrote this in the forum post:
"Before: Armor, Shields and Health on an Exponential Curve
After: Armor Shields and Health on an S curve "I'm... I'm not sure how I missed that. However, the points about armor scaling still stand. The third graph I showed, the one that compares Grineer and Corpus EHP, would remain identical even if DE made it so health did not scale at all. So the issue of Grineer units being extraordinarily tanky as compared to Corpus/Infested still stand.
-
1
-
Bring back revenant to original concept he is boring
in Warframes
Posted
Except that it was historically the opposite? Revenant was original leaning far more into Vampire themes, but after the Devstream where he was first shown off the community said "make it more like an Eidolon". Thus DE shoved more Eidolon down the Vampire Warframe's throat.
In addition, Eidolons absolutely do lead into vampires. Eidolons are undead corpses searching to become whole again. Vampires historically control the undead. I know that others have explained this to you even more explicitly and you have always just retorted with "no", so I am not sure why I even try.
And good lord you went all out on the strawmen arguments, I am actually a bit impressed by the degree you were able to misrepresent my point.
In my humble opinion, the problem with his kit and the reason it is so disjointed is because they shoved too much Eidolon into the Vampire.