Player Veto of Foreign Buffs Still Needed

[TheLexiConArtist]

1 hour ago, Fallen_Echo said:

I believe DE uses some horribly complicated system for the rift mechanic based on a bug what was active before his latest revork.

Long story short the rift mechanics were changed to work like the following:

1. Projectiles fired inside cataclysm could leave it and damage enemies outside of it but were unable to deal any damage to enemies inside the rift.
2. Hitscan weapons fired inside cataclysm were unable to leave the bubble but could damage everything inside it.
3. Projectile weapons from outside couldnt enter the rift bubble as the bubble acted like a wall.
4. Hitscan weapons from the outside could enter the rift bubble but couldnt deal any damage.
5. A player in the rift can damage enemies from the outside of the bubble with melee or projectile weapons when they were in the bubble but not with hitscan weapons.
6. Banished enemies could damage enemies from the inside of the bubble but projectiles were unable to deal damage to them.

This paints a pretty scary image of just how rules were set up to make the rift state work.

The problem here is the IF statement. As you stated the matchmake could not work at all and soo on but these problems arise when it works and you want to use up your skills on your teammates but they are vetoed your buffs.

Im pretty sure this is a confirmed bug because i remember my glavies turning my bubbles into blenders.

That's a pretty bleak picture, but I'm not convinced those are accurate. I might try to verify some later if I'm able to on my own in the Simulacrum.

Sensible applications should allow a backreference to the source of a hitscan call or projectile object so that things like faction relationships can be checked (you could think of the "no interaction" as if differing Rift states are equivalent to friendly factions - not a 0-damage hit, but as if no impact was made at all). Radiation/Confusion, Crossfire missions and enemy vs. player are all faction relationships causing a need to know about the state of the attack's source unit.

Another good check we players could try for this being possible is whether a projectile in the air inherits stat changes that occurred between trigger pull and impact (negative flight speed rivens would make this easier on timing). If it does, then there's certainly a reference back to the source, which could extend to a player's opt-out.

 

For the 'IF' - yes, the problems also exist if your team has opted out of your buffs, the point is that there is already no guarantee that you will affect anyone due to range/matchmaking server shenanigans/etc. Also, in reality it isn't likely that most options that could be available would be used consistently enough to worry about. 99% of the time, someone will want a damage/defense buff, for instance, but that might decrease to ~75% of people for the types of influence DE already identifies as possibly undesirable enough to provide 'undo' movements for (e.g. Speed/Rift).

Many of those come with additional functions - Rift energy regen could be considered separate to the hit detections, and there's the obvious Attack Speed aspect for Volt - which are in the probably-desirable categories, so if the opt-out functions by individual effect, there would be merit in using the abilities for your allies still.

Sure, if they're opted out, you might be down some mod capacity, but from your perspective it's only ever bringing you back to the effectiveness you can guarantee - how it applies to yourself.

 

I'll check glaives in Attractors too - I may have extrapolated from Gunblades too much and gotten mixed up with the way both pierced Nullifier bubbles once upon a time.

 

EDIT: Checks made, results are in:

- Glaives do ignore Mag's Bullet Attraction.

- As long as enemies outside a Cataclysm are Banished (In Rift), both projectiles and hitscan successfully hit from a player standing inside Cataclysm shooting out at enemies beyond Cataclysm

- As long as player was Banished/In Rift, both projectiles and hitscan successfully hit enemies within Cataclysm from player standing outside Cataclysm.

BONUS TEST:

- Gunblades and Glaives (tested separately) also pass all checks (instead of operating differently as they do with Bullet Attractors).

 

Seems like the game operates close enough to my assumption, at least by now.

Edited October 22, 2018 by EDYinnit
Tested rift-states and glaives v. attractor

[ArcKnight9202]

The biggest issue with the Volt speed is that the duration is comically short. With super-high power strength, the buff has to be reapplied constantly. I'm not sure how having to backflip repeatedly isn't considered problematic gameplay. If they bumped it up to 20 minutes I wouldn't have any more issues with it.

The best solution to the current Volt problem is soloing. Volt is used everywhere by almost everyone. It's unavoidable. It's hardly a good solution, though.

Plus, that sound effect makes me wish I was born deaf.

Limbo has his moments but it's nowhere the same level for me. I actually preferred the old Stasis to this new one.

It's a complicated issue for sure.

[Fallen_Echo]

1 hour ago, EDYinnit said:

That's a pretty bleak picture, but I'm not convinced those are accurate. I might try to verify some later if I'm able to on my own in the Simulacrum.

Sensible applications should allow a backreference to the source of a hitscan call or projectile object so that things like faction relationships can be checked (you could think of the "no interaction" as if differing Rift states are equivalent to friendly factions - not a 0-damage hit, but as if no impact was made at all). Radiation/Confusion, Crossfire missions and enemy vs. player are all faction relationships causing a need to know about the state of the attack's source unit.

Another good check we players could try for this being possible is whether a projectile in the air inherits stat changes that occurred between trigger pull and impact (negative flight speed rivens would make this easier on timing). If it does, then there's certainly a reference back to the source, which could extend to a player's opt-out.

1 hour ago, EDYinnit said:

As long as enemies outside a Cataclysm are Banished (In Rift), both projectiles and hitscan successfully hit from a player standing inside Cataclysm shooting out at enemies beyond Cataclysm

- As long as player was Banished/In Rift, both projectiles and hitscan successfully hit enemies within Cataclysm from player standing outside Cataclysm.

I doubt you could actually

check this in any way since this bug was patched before the latests changes was made to stasis, so unless you have a time machine somewhere i dont think you could test it.

This bug was live for a week if i remember right but it created an overpowered maximum defense system for limbo, so it was not suprising they fixed it.

The problem is that the bug highlighted some pretty strange system on how could DE made the rift work.

1 hour ago, EDYinnit said:

- Glaives do ignore Mag's Bullet Attraction.

Im not sure when it was a thing but i remember i had some fun throwing a glaive into the bullet mincing up dudes, it might have been patched i dont know.

[TheLexiConArtist]

15 minutes ago, Fallen_Echo said:

I doubt you could actually check this in any way since this bug was patched before the latests changes was made to stasis, so unless you have a time machine somewhere i dont think you could test it.

This bug was live for a week if i remember right but it created an overpowered maximum defense system for limbo, so it was not suprising they fixed it.

The problem is that the bug highlighted some pretty strange system on how could DE made the rift work.

Im not sure when it was a thing but i remember i had some fun throwing a glaive into the bullet mincing up dudes, it might have been patched i dont know.

My mistake, I thought you were saying that the Rift and Cataclysm in general still worked in all those ways. Still, perhaps they rewrote it to be more streamlined and remove all such bugginess with an approach more along what I imagined (or perhaps not, we can't say).

 

I don't recall glaives being any different before, since I'm certain (from testing the rework when it was fresh) the Magnetise hit logic was derived from Nullifier shields, and at that point you could toss Glaives through Nullifier shields with impunity.

[Dabnician]

On 2018-10-20 at 6:45 AM, EDYinnit said:

You obviously were adversely affected by the mentioned Limbo player if that mission, among however many others, became memorable. You even checked his profile to validate your negative experience. Why then do you disagree with nipping these things in the bud?

Because I accepted the things that come with pugging.

How about filters on match making, so some one that is "finding squad" can instead do that with a filter menu that allows them to select which frames they want to group with.

Maybe a pre launch screen so I can see what my team is going to be before going full launch. So I can drop out or invite others. With a ready to launch confirmation.

 

I think it would be better to allow some one to uncheck "limbo" from a filter because that type of mechanic could also allow people to say they want to group with  only a specific class or set of classes. This would be way easier to implement then mechanics that have to happen in the mission

Heck add MR too 

Edited October 25, 2018 by Dabnician

[TheLexiConArtist]

On 2018-10-21 at 6:34 AM, UseNet said:

I'm going to snip the rest of your comment and focus on this part. You have just stated you want no influences from teammates whatsoever. This is a teamplay based game, you can solo a lot but that doesn't change the fact that Warframe is a team game at its core.

So you hate Warframes core mechanic of teamplay and want it changed? Good luck with that. You can play solo, or you can play with teammates who are willing to let you be in control of their warframe choices. Good luck with that too.

I'm sad to see this post didn't get duly removed.

For absolute unequivocal clarity to any readers (and especially those two upvoters on that post):

I never actually claimed what this individual quoted.

It was a libellous misquote of me giving an example of what I am EXPLICITLY NOT trying to claim as the reasoning for this suggestion.

Flamebait, nothing more. Mods should have caught it.

 

18 hours ago, Dabnician said:

Because I accepted the things that come with pugging.

How about filters on match making, so some one that is "finding squad" can instead do that with a filter menu that allows them to select which frames they want to group with.

Maybe a pre launch screen so I can see what my team is going to be before going full launch. So I can drop out or invite others. With a ready to launch confirmation.

I think it would be better to allow some one to uncheck "limbo" from a filter because that type of mechanic could also allow people to say they want to group with  only a specific class or set of classes. This would be way easier to implement then mechanics that have to happen in the mission

Heck add MR too 

Are you fresh to the thread and jumped to the last page? I actually addressed that sort of idea already.

It isn't appropriate to segregate users, diluting the playerbase with ever-more-specific matchmaking filtration is the last thing we need.

This 'pre-vetting' would also prevent joining missions-in-progress, so good luck getting anyone when populations get lower.

It's more anti-cooperation to matchmake away entirely than it is to have a seamless opt-out of specific unwanted effects that still allows taking advantage of the rest of a given kit.

It would also be much more complex to implement, actually - every potential matchmaking candidate needs checking against every current squad member's avoidance list. How would public matchmaking reconcile a Host (A) who successfully matches with a client (B), then successfully matches with a third player (C) but this player is within the opt-outs of (B) that (A) does not share? In this situation either (A) is unknowingly restricted further, or (B) is still forced to play with unwanted matches.

If you precise-matched every potential candidate you'd probably get no squadmates at all. Or, if a player is supposed to vet between squad forming and mission launch, you get a constant "Oh, no thanks" dropping-out of players, and the system has to go comparing all those lists all over again.

It's not viable.

[Dabnician]

That already occurs when players start to change the match settings to friends only and solo.

[TheLexiConArtist]

37 minutes ago, Dabnician said:

That already occurs when players start to change the match settings to friends only and solo.

Some reasoning for doing so I seek to solve with this solution - making pub matchmaking a more reliably non-negative experience by reducing how much randoms can step on each other's proverbial toes.

That's improvement.

[Cephalycion]

Sounds like a great idea initially, but I can already see some problems with it.

One of them is that you might not know what you want. For example, say you opted out of Limbo's banish. You turn a corner and a nox appears. The limbo tries to put you in rift but can't, and you die.

Doesn't really sound too great anymore.

Anyhow, I think the core of this issue lies more with lack of communication/uncooperative teammates more than the game itself.

Edit: It's pretty difficult to find a game like Warframe where the actions of a player can affect another player in such a powerful way, and I think that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Makes Warframe stand out from the rest imo.

Edited October 27, 2018 by Cephalycion

[TheLexiConArtist]

5 hours ago, Cephalycion said:

Sounds like a great idea initially, but I can already see some problems with it.

One of them is that you might not know what you want. For example, say you opted out of Limbo's banish. You turn a corner and a nox appears. The limbo tries to put you in rift but can't, and you die.

Doesn't really sound too great anymore.

Anyhow, I think the core of this issue lies more with lack of communication/uncooperative teammates more than the game itself.

I dunno, that sounds more like grasping for straws in terms of looking for a negative outcome. It's not like you'd go relying on a random matchmade squaddie intervening to save your bacon. I don't see a problem.You opted out and you got the expected result of what would happen if there wasn't the unwanted foreign influence. That's just a gameplay problem at that point.

It's not really a case of communicating/cooperating if 1/4 of the squad wants a certain ability not used but the other 3 want it. The only way to have everyone get the desirable result is to let it seamlessly not apply to someone who's identified it as unwanted. They go in expecting certain functions to be sacrosanct, and this way, they can be. Others go in with no expectation, and they can have it affect them as and when cast.

[Cephalycion]

4 hours ago, EDYinnit said:

I dunno, that sounds more like grasping for straws in terms of looking for a negative outcome. It's not like you'd go relying on a random matchmade squaddie intervening to save your bacon. I don't see a problem.You opted out and you got the expected result of what would happen if there wasn't the unwanted foreign influence. That's just a gameplay problem at that point.

It's not really a case of communicating/cooperating if 1/4 of the squad wants a certain ability not used but the other 3 want it. The only way to have everyone get the desirable result is to let it seamlessly not apply to someone who's identified it as unwanted. They go in expecting certain functions to be sacrosanct, and this way, they can be. Others go in with no expectation, and they can have it affect them as and when cast.

You make pretty good points here, and I agree with you.

However, I don't know what it is about this that makes me feel uneasy inside.

One of the points of having an ability that can affect your teammates is that you will be able to affect them even when they don't expect it, right? An Oberon wants to be able to heal you when you don't expect to get into a bad situation, an Ivara should be able to stick her invis arrow onto you whether or not you expect it, so on. It's what makes Warframe such a unique experience compared to other games.

[Paidari]

My current solution is total Stop of moving Till the speedfection ist gone. 

I want to play Warframe - not doing constant backflips Like a trained animal.

Sometimes that ends in an endless Loop of reinfecting and more wait. Quite annoying for both sides. Especially If the Chat is ignored or my unwillingness to crash into Walls is uncomprehendable by the Volt Player.

A big thanks to the understanding Volt Players Here and now!

[TheLexiConArtist]

15 minutes ago, Cephalycion said:

You make pretty good points here, and I agree with you.

However, I don't know what it is about this that makes me feel uneasy inside.

One of the points of having an ability that can affect your teammates is that you will be able to affect them even when they don't expect it, right? An Oberon wants to be able to heal you when you don't expect to get into a bad situation, an Ivara should be able to stick her invis arrow onto you whether or not you expect it, so on. It's what makes Warframe such a unique experience compared to other games.

Abstracting to extend the function to any number of effects aside, I just draw the line under the two primary cases (Speed and Banish) where the presence of a cleanse indicates a possible negative being acknowledged by the devteam. Then there's a specific unaddressed case of undeniable bad influence - speed-Novas being given Strength by allies and thus ruining their core build function _{though you can blame 'bug turned feature' for that one.}

Any situation where you allow an outside influence from an unpredictable source carries with it caveat emptor - 'buyer beware'. There's no guarantee that those unpredictable influences will always relate the same way (beneficial, neutral or detrimental) to your current situation (playstyle or preference alike).

In this context of receiving supposedly-positive effects that can be reconciled by making sure the recipient has the final say - this removes 'detrimental' and leaves 'neutral or beneficial' as the outcomes.

[Solarsyphon]

Any system like this is going to be really complicated. A toggle for every single effect or even just every single ability is just not reasonable. I can't even begin to imagine the length of that ever growing menu.  You might get one specifically for 1 or 2  or a blanket block but not the ludicrously long list  tailoring that's been suggested through this thread. 

If you have such a problem with volt's speed maybe it needs to be changed. I don't think it does but its not hard to think of things that would help your problems. 

• They could smooth out the ability by giving it a ramp up and or ramp down time. So it's not an instant boost but builds to be less jarring.
• They could reduce or cap the speed given for movement.
• They could make it self only. It would suck to loose team support but I would still use the ability. 
• It could be changed to sprint speed only so it only applies when holding the sprint button.

Now I'm going to go mourn volt because your being so mean to him...

[Cephalycion]

7 hours ago, EDYinnit said:

Abstracting to extend the function to any number of effects aside, I just draw the line under the two primary cases (Speed and Banish) where the presence of a cleanse indicates a possible negative being acknowledged by the devteam. Then there's a specific unaddressed case of undeniable bad influence - speed-Novas being given Strength by allies and thus ruining their core build function _{though you can blame 'bug turned feature' for that one.}

Any situation where you allow an outside influence from an unpredictable source carries with it caveat emptor - 'buyer beware'. There's no guarantee that those unpredictable influences will always relate the same way (beneficial, neutral or detrimental) to your current situation (playstyle or preference alike).

In this context of receiving supposedly-positive effects that can be reconciled by making sure the recipient has the final say - this removes 'detrimental' and leaves 'neutral or beneficial' as the outcomes.

But instead of the three (beneficial, neutral, detrimental), it is more like (expected, neutral, unexpected). If you know what I mean.

A player's judgement on what is beneficial is not always correct.

 

[TheLexiConArtist]

3 hours ago, Cephalycion said:

But instead of the three (beneficial, neutral, detrimental), it is more like (expected, neutral, unexpected). If you know what I mean.

A player's judgement on what is beneficial is not always correct.

Those could be considered different axes on which to plot the effects received - spectrum of expectedness (e.g. I fully expect radiation procs in the respective Sortie modifier) against spectrum of benefit.

But the point is that the game's code is not always correct in its 'judgement' either. The player's judgement might not be correct, but it's their call to make, isn't it?

Just because there's that one instance where a Banish might have saved the player in your example case, doesn't mean that every Banish is going to be beneficial. If they'd rather risk that one incidental death than have to mess around managing their Rift state to deal with whatever unpredictable playstyle any given rando-Limbo might bring into a squad, that's their rightful choice - to sacrifice the potential benefits to avoid the potential drawbacks.

[Mach25]

On 2018-10-12 at 10:46 PM, EDYinnit said:

I am flipping sick of flipping during relic runs.

 

Read the previous thread if you need the long story, but here's the summary:

• Effects from other squad members may interfere with your gameplay (examples: Speed-altering effects, Rift Plane, Bullet attractor effects, Power Strength gains for speed-Novas etc)
• It is not acceptable to force mission-abort or non-public sessions due to what is ostensibly intended to be a positive impact (see: Limbo reworking... and again to stop antisocial Stasis)
• Players require the ultimate agency in what gameplay-altering effects apply to them from allied sources.
• It is also not acceptable for a player's personal opinions and preferences to dictate the gameplay of others ("Stop casting <ability> or riot") where the conflict can arise completely at random through public matchmaking.
• Therefore, an alternative source of seamless opting-out is necessary that is agnostic to any other individual in the game session.

 

I don't want to backflip every 5 seconds when there's a Volt in the squad. That's a band-aid, but its existence proves there can be a valid desire to not have that buff. Limbo may not be the troll-frame he used to be, but I'm sure lots of players would be happier if they didn't have to worry about tripping into and out of the Rift Plane at all.

Just give us the ability to say no to things before they're forced down our throats.

Yep, again, another call for players to opt out of specific warframe buffs as evidenced above. There is no right way to alter players' gameplay like this anymore than you'd grab the controller out of their hands or press keys for them - same thing, a disregard for their autonomy as people. This is setting up conflict for players and unnecessarily provokes negative interactions, as evidenced by the dislike of many for Limbo players - this is a sign that you're doing something wrong.

Edited October 31, 2018 by Mach25

[Teridax68]

I feel this is one of those issues that's easy to conceptualize, but potentially more difficult to implement, because players generally have a good idea of what counts as a "controversial" ally interaction, e.g. Volt's Speed or Limbo's Stasis, but then implementing the option to have immunity to those in-game raises some questions: do we want the option to be either-or for all ally interactions at once, or do we only want to opt out of some effects? If so, how exactly does that get implemented in terms of in-game options, and how will that scale with new warframes? What about effects like Speed Nova's Molecular Prime, which are disruptive to allies but affect enemies only?

I think what may help better may be simply to try to address the problem at the source: as it stands, most ally interactions in Warframe are considered acceptable, e.g. Mesa's Shooting Gallery damage bonus, Chroma's Elemental Ward, Trinity's Blessing, and so on, because these effects are purely beneficial to everyone involved. It's only a small number of abilities, namely Speed, Snow Globe, Banish/Cataclysm, and Molecular Prime (perhaps also Wormhole), that force some sort of drawback upon the recipient. Speed worsens control over one's movement, and reacts particularly poorly to jagged level architecture, e.g. on the Corpus Ice Planet or Corpus Infested Ship tilesets. Snow Globe prevents shooting through it from the outside, for whichever reason. Limbo's abilities eliminate interaction between different units and parts of the environment, such that players end up having their normal gameplay disrupted. Wormhole can block player access to some locations, and while Molecular Prime doesn't affect allies, it affects the pace at which allies play the game. It may be worth simply establishing a design rule that warframe effects can only have potential drawbacks if those drawbacks exclusively affect the warframe itself, and no other allies. Following from this, the above problem effects should likely be reworked, however that'd look, so that they don't impose drawbacks upon players (which could involve having players opt in, rather than opt out, of some of these effects, though it didn't turn out quite so well for Speed).

I think what could also help a lot in the meantime could simply be to make the game more functional in singleplayer. While multiplayer is obviously fun, not everyone wants to play with others all the time, yet despite the existence of a solo mode, the balance of many missions is such that solo play is essentially impossible (e.g. in Excavation missions, due to the excessively low number of power cell carriers). Adjusting the per-player scaling of missions so that players can play solo as much as they want, without affecting balance at the level of four players, could help significantly with issues like these, as players wouldn't be forced to do missions with frames they don't enjoy being with.

[BlackCoMerc]

Remo Speed. Replace it with an actual, useful ability.

[Spectre-8]

TL;DR : Lazy people don't want to spend time creating their own squads , so they come here to QQ .

[Cephalycion]

On 2018-10-29 at 2:05 AM, EDYinnit said:

Those could be considered different axes on which to plot the effects received - spectrum of expectedness (e.g. I fully expect radiation procs in the respective Sortie modifier) against spectrum of benefit.

But the point is that the game's code is not always correct in its 'judgement' either. The player's judgement might not be correct, but it's their call to make, isn't it?

Just because there's that one instance where a Banish might have saved the player in your example case, doesn't mean that every Banish is going to be beneficial. If they'd rather risk that one incidental death than have to mess around managing their Rift state to deal with whatever unpredictable playstyle any given rando-Limbo might bring into a squad, that's their rightful choice - to sacrifice the potential benefits to avoid the potential drawbacks.

This is where the argument breaks down. The potential benefits that you sacrifice there could be game breaking. When someone dies or messes up because they opted out of a certain buff, "they brought this upon themselves" is not a valid excuse. Warframe at its core is team-based. If an oberon casts renewal, it means he wants all his teammates topped off. When a volt casts his speed, it means he wants all his teammates to be faster. When a limbo puts his high range bubble, it means he wants all his teammates to stay in the rift.

Opting out of a buff is a sweeping statement to say "no" to anyone who is playing a warframe that gives said buff. Meaning you could meet a pro limbo and a trash limbo and it wouldn't make a difference because you simply ignored their efforts.

Allowing players to veto foreign buffs is basically telling players that it is ok to play however you want and teammates to not matter. You are removing one layer or more of player to player interactions and at the same time makes for a lot of inconsistency and confusion.

I see this post as inherently dangerous to the core gameplay revolving around team interactions and such an idea should not be allowed to bud in the community.

[Cephalycion]

5 hours ago, BlackCoMerc said:

Remo Speed. Replace it with an actual, useful ability.

Volt's speed is part of his core identity as the "Speed frame". Without speed, Volt would not be Volt.

The idea of removing speed is horrible and should be utterly crushed.