Jump to content

Abekrie

PC Member
  • Posts

    55
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Abekrie

  1. 2 minutes ago, Dracknos01 said:

    what?

    From what I've seen so far, Etzu has been trying to impersonate what he says as actual directions from The Business like when we were told to go to V Prime on the ARG Discord.

    Just trying to throw people off and waste time.

  2. 48 minutes ago, (PS4)Cargan2016 said:

    from what im getting from all the back and forth here you are wanting shield to get a rework so that some of the lower armor higher shield frames like trinity just example can stand out in open and take a beating as if they where rhino.  those frames are not ment to be the focus of attention the way frames like rhino are thats why they are lighter in armor.  even way things stand now I have zero problem with survivability running even Trinity who has tissue paper for armor on the high level sorte.  only times ive run into with insta killing from anything seems to be more than likely a glitch or bug(well outside the times I make mistake with explosive weapons like phantasma or lenz)

    I wouldn't be against the idea of shield-based tanks in the game, but shields in general need actual defense capability. Being in the center of attention or not, they offer little to no survival capability in the late game where the only real viable way to play is to be a tank to soak up damage.

    I can play the best I can, but it won't stop level 100+ enemies from just one-shotting me.

  3. 5 hours ago, Sahansral said:

    Therefore to make adaption get going you need 

    * really high shields (overshields)

    * already active damage reduction that affects shields (e. g. splinter storm)

    * block

    At that point, Adaptation isn't solving anything without a bunch of hurdles that makes it unenjoyable to simply have proper defenses. At high levels, even 4k shields get blown away with a single shot, and damage reduction abilities like splinter storm makes this an even more limiting factor. How blocking will do to upkeep and maintain stacks I do not know, but I do know that this mod being put behind some tight RNG in end game content is rather bad for anyone wanting to use shield-based warframes prior to even obtaining it.

    Granted, it's not as bad in lower levels, but it's still at a massive disadvantage compared to how health and armour is.

  4. Was going to make a thread pushing for this, but I'm glad I saw this first.

    As it currently stands, I need two wiki pages and a little notepad document up just so I can keep track of what is and isn't vaulted in the game. That's pretty bad.

    With all of the vaulted stuff getting marked, I could get so much done in quicker time. Going to a ducat booth or relic table will be such a lesser hassle by then.

    • Like 1
  5. 12 hours ago, Sahansral said:

    Perhaps the Adaption mod is already the solution for many shield based and/or 90% damage reduction based frames.

     

    If I understand it correctly, Adaptation won't stop the first shot from dealing full damage which is the most important for any shield-based frame since it could very well just take out all of them entirely. Stacking resistance won't do any squishy frame good if they die before they can even reach full defense potential.

  6. How good operators can be just can't help motivate me past how awful they feel early in. You can't start getting actually decent amps without fighting Eidolons with that water gun you start off with. I can't bring myself to hunt those things when gameplay consists of pumping countless strings of beams into an Eidolon shield after constant intervals of waiting for it to recharge with void water.

  7. 4 minutes ago, krc473 said:

    Positive. Its situation dependent. If you have a decent team, it is easy to avoid damage. I was not trying to suggest that you could avoid damage in all situations, just some. I have played many games with competent teams and taken little to no damage as a shield frame. If everything is dead, how do you take damage?

    Certainly. Competent teammates and careful play was how I managed to get Harrow past the one hour mark in Arbitrations Survival, but it can't stop everything unfortunately.

    6 minutes ago, krc473 said:

    I was more concerned with it being explained as a "percentage of max shields".

    I may have been a bit confusing in my wording, but I do fully agree with you on that. Higher shield values should net larger defense value alongside overshields possibly granting proc resistance on the side for upkeeping it since those types of frames would usually have a much lower health pool that can be quickly breached by toxin and slash.

    Though, even if it was just percentage based, a lower shield value would then mean a rapid decline in percent value.

    (This next segment is just sample numbers for if damage reduction is about equal to shield percentage values)

    1,000 shield taking 200 damage at 80% reduction would leave it at 960 and maintain the 80%. Even another shot would just leave it at 920. This would be effective against single target damage and rapid bursts to a degree.

    However

    100 shield taking 200 damage at 80% reduction would leave it at 60 with 60% reduction. Leaving just another shot to take out the shields completely. While still being a moderate buffer against what could be a heavy first hit, the shield would quickly buckle and break under even the heavier hits where a frame focused on shields would be able to tank better should they manage to keep the shield strength closer to max capacity. Something where a Valkyr can value her shields as an initiative buffer while not being near as good a defense as it would for those with higher focus and stats put into shielding.

    There's still a lot that could be gone over, but that's how I got to see it being presented. The numbers I gave won't be like 100% what I expect it to be like should they go down that route, but it's just one way to think of it I guess.

  8. I'm just going to post this up whenever I get into a talk on shields because it really shows the weakness behind them especially in high-level play.

    Whatever it needs, it just needs something at all to make shield-based defenses relevant for end game.

  9. 13 minutes ago, krc473 said:

    I used Mag in one of the Arbitrations, I took such a low amount of damage I had "0% damage taken". My shields were perfectly sufficient for the mission. So, your "not working for endgame" is clearly dependent on the situation. I had no issues what-so-ever with using a shield based frame for Arbitration. 

    Are you sure you weren't, say, shielded on top of that by something like Nezha's group bubble? Damage taken to your shield should also be counted for damage taken iirc, but, regardless, the video I've posted shows that not even near 4k shielding was perfectly sufficient for end game Arbitration.

    13 minutes ago, krc473 said:

    I do not recall saying it was pointless for balance. I see no benefit in it at all. But that does not mean nothing should be done in terms of balance. The OP's suggestion is in serious need of refinement. As it stands, I do not know if it would favour high shield frames. Frames with less shields would hit the cap faster, meaning a more consistent resistance. High shield frames would spend more time with a lower shield, meaning less resistance. I would imagine that lower shield cap frames would see more benefit than high shield frames. If you use a percentage of the frames respective shield cap, less is better (the resistances are narrower). Mag would suffer far more than Valkyr. The concept needs to be reworked. It should be a percentage of X value (the max achievable shields). If my Mag has 2k shields (with overshields), that is say 45% of what I could get on Harrow, but both have the same resistance at max. Which frame is better off? This concept simply will not work. If it was changed a little it could work, but currently it just doesn't. The idea might be fine, but the explanation given is poor.

    I said it in regards to your statement being that even a 60% reduction would not be significant enough to make much of a difference for shield users. Some more info on how this would work for high shield amounts compared to lower ones would be a good thing for us to discuss over though as I do think more than just something that is "alright enough" would be good to have.

    I imagine shield-based frames with higher amounts would make for much larger bonuses than, say, a frame with maybe a few hundred or less. That would make the investment and focus of such defenses pay off and be equally capable of high level content than frames that have ability or health based defenses.

  10. Just now, krc473 said:

    Example of a situation with high level (100+) enemies?

     

    I suggest it is pointless as this proposed change would not change my opinion of high shield frames. I would not use say Mag (shields) over Valkyr (armour). The durability is fairly insignificant to me, I would rather use a frame I like the appearance of than a durable frame. [I use Valkyr Prime because I like the appearance, no other reason]

    Being pointless in your taste should not make it pointless for balance IMO. Shield-based frames could use attention to where it's just as viable to use shields as it is health even in high levels. With how the Arbitrations encourage diversity than just a meta in high level play, and unfortunately is happening anyways, it also shows how quickly these type of frames can be simply made irrelevant.

    I imagine even just a 60% damage reduction could have saved my 3,690 shield/420 health Harrow from being one-shotted by just a Ballista (That was in the middle of being stunned, but that's just another issue yet to be fixed).

    They simply do not work for endgame which is incredibly saddening for a person like me who like these type of frames.

  11. 1 minute ago, krc473 said:

    How will this be affected by overshields? You can exceed 100% shields, but your idea appears to be based around 100% being max.

     

    From what I have seen so far, it seems fairly pointless. The reduction is unlikely to be significant enough to matter at higher levers. So, your proposal will likely turn out to be fairly pointless.

    60% damage reduction compared to the current 0% hardly seems "pointless" as it could prevent you from being one-shotted in certain instances.

    Frames that favour energy shields would have higher amounts for more immediate reduction, and overshields could help raise the reduction even further or possibly help shield from status effects as well.

  12. 25 minutes ago, Callandor361 said:

    Respecting that the Prime accessories have always come at a premium, and wanting that maintained in respect to the people that bought them in the past, I don't think an extremely cheap price is "fair" (not that I'd complain).  Accessory packs have also usually come with boosters, and plat on consoles.  So, at least to me, these would be fair bundles:

    $20-25 - Separate packs for Ember's, Loki's, and Frost's accessories and such, with 400 plat and/or 7-day boosters.

    $50-60 - Combined pack of all three accessory sets, with 1000 plat and/or 30-day boosters.

    This is sort of how I was thinking it should go. This and what ShoulderCliff66 have said so far are pretty good options so far.

  13. 9 hours ago, (PS4)BLOOD-LINE-01 said:

    Well what do you know....

    Looks like all the naysayers and “entitlement” screamers weren’t so correct after all. 

    Thank you DE, for proving that you continue listen to your community regarding sensitive subjects like microtransactions.

    Indeed! This is a pretty great time for DE and the community.

    Now we can forget about all the bickering and put all our heads together to try and work out how they should form up these accessory-only packs.

  14. 7 hours ago, (PS4)abbacephas said:

    What a truly profound and insightful contribution.

    Oh the irony

    It's rather on point though. People want to give DE money, and they're somehow just these entitled children that should just take anything given to them without criticism or suggestions.

    8 hours ago, Corvid said:

    They're already selling it for less money than it went for the first time around, and you're getting other useful items along with them. Sell the frames and weapons, use the plat.

    I really don't see the issue.

    Overlaps with bundles in Warframe is money wasted. It doesn't matter if it's for less money than when it was first introduced. What matters is that a person who wants just the cosmetics got their value decreased with it being bundled with stuff they don't want. If DE sees it fit to make them cost this much with all the other items, then they should see it no problem to add in a cosmetics-only bundle that's appropriately priced to how DE sees fit.

    That way consumers get an offer they want, and DE gets more money.

×
×
  • Create New...