Jump to content

Backseat Dev: Cleaner Solar Map and tileset distribution


Zoretor
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've loved this latest iteration of the Solar Map since it was implemented, but for one huge detail that bugs me every time I look at it: Planets' horrible, messy, overloaded lines that connect the many nodes that pockmark the planets/areas that result in a non-intuitive jumble that feels like a 2-year-old was let loose with the mouse in MS Paint...

How about if instead we double down on the identity of each planet by using one and only one tileset that defines them? To translate this into the Solar Map itself, we go with a "single node per planet" system. This single node is actually just an icon of the faction the tileset represents. Click on the node, and a menu (similar to bounties menu) opens with all the planet's respective "regular missions". This allows for players to select mission types, rather than the added information of what node holds what mission type.

And best of all: no more random lines on planets! Actually, let's be clear: We keep the lines that go from planet to planet (or area). No lines to relays, archwing missions, or any other planet/area orbiting icons. Only lines are from Junctions or the "to: insert_planet_here" icons.

Pictures speak better than words, so I've slapped together a rough example of how this single-node system could look/work:

Earth with single "regular missions" icon

Mechanics and other details:

  • Icons and text are clickable.
  • Clicking the "Grineer Forest Complex" icon opens the missions menu shown on the link below.
  • Temporary missions (Alerts, Sorties, etc.) would manifest as added temporary icons only if they are on a Grineer Galleon or Corpus Ship. Otherwise the temporary mission just uses the main planet's icon to pulse or whatever.
  • Nevermind the placement of things, or the presence of Maroo's Bazaar🤨. It's just an example.


Earth missions menu (after clicking on "Grineer Forest Complex" icon)

Mechanics and other details:

  • Each slot here represents the regular missions in a given planet/area (Capture, Mobile Defense, Sabotage, etc.)
  • Other tilesets unique to other planets won't be used. So, in this example of Earth, no Grineer Sealab tileset (Mariana node). Nope. Uh-uh. That tileset belongs to Uranus, and only Uranus! Seriously, I feel it sucks the uniqueness out of Uranus' proprietary tileset... (yeah, can never actually be serious in a sentece including the words "suck" and "Uranus" in them, I guess...)
  • The small symbol seen in each mission type is a "nightmare mode on/off" button. Of course this button would only be present when applicable.
  • The menu could be wider, or taller, whatever sizes are needed. This is just an example. It would of course have a scroll bar if there are more mission types than it's size allows. Preferably, the regular missions would all be seen without the need for scrolling, as long as there aren't added mission slots (see below).
  • Dark Sectors would be in this menu, preferably at the bottom. For now. Who knows what the fate of Dark Sectors will eventually be?...
  • Kuva missions would be added to this menu when applicable (when Kuva Fortress is in range). Preferably in the top slots, for better exposure.
  • All other missions (Alerts, Invasions, Syndicate missions, Void Fissures, Sorties) would be selected directly from the world state menu only. Selecting a mission, be it an Invasion, a Sortie or a Void Fissure, takes you to the respective planet that mission is taking place on, with the respective tileset icon being what puses during the countdown.
  • Assassination missions would be present in this menu. They would be locked. In order to unlock the Assassination mission there would be a requirement such as: "Successfully complete 3 different missions (in this planet/area)." This would complement Junction requirements.


Planet/Tileset relationship, and Mission Icons distribution

In order for this system to be fluid and offer a clear, concise experience to the player there would have to be a strict defining of which tileset is affixed to a planet. That is, no more tilesets in planets that don't make sense, or that are unique to another planet.
In many cases, for now, if a planet doesn't yet have it's own unique tileset, we use Grineer Galleons and Corpus Ships as placeholder.
Keep in mind: Each planet has one and only one defining tileset, with some rare exceptions (see list below).
Here's a list of what tilesets would go best with what planets:

(in parenthesis is the text I would place under each icon and/or my suggestion/idea for future tileset design)

  • Earth => Grineer Forest tileset (Grineer Forest Complex); Cetus/Plains of Eidolon
  • Lua => Orokin Moon tileset (Orokin Halls, or Orokin Palace)
  • Venus => Corpus Ship tileset (Corpus Fleet); eventually also Fortuna/Orb Vallis
  • Mercury => Grineer Asteroid tileset (Grineer Mines)
  • Mars => Grineer Settlement tileset (Grineer Settlements... yes, just clarifiying the plural distinction)
  • Phobos => Corpus Ship tileset (Corpus Fleet)eventually would be great to have something like "Corpus Asteroid Mine" tileset here
  • Ceres => Grineer Shipyard tileset (Grineer Shipyards)
  • Jupiter => Corpus Gas City tileset (Corpus Gas Refineries)
  • Europa => Corpus Ice Planet tileset (Corpus Shipwreck)
  • Saturn => Grineer Galleon tileset (Grineer Blockade)
  • Uranus => Grineer Sealab tileset (Grineer Sealabs)
  • Neptune => Corpus Ship tileset (Corpus Fleet); eventually a modified, re-lit, effects-passed Corpus Gas City tileset could be tweaked to represent the infamous Corpus Indoctrination Temples, or simply Corpus Proxy Factories; The Index would have it's own separate single icon
  • Pluto => Corpus Outpost tileset (Corpus Outposts); I believe this classic tileset fits Pluto best... just have mobs be 90% robotic, 10% crewmen for lore consistency
  • Sedna => Grineer Galleon tileset (Grineer Expeditionary Fleet); Rathuum would be a separate single icon that opens a menu of the 3 tiers; Kela De Thaym Assassination mission would remain a Grineer Asteroid tileset
  • Eris => Infested Ship tileset (Infested Fleet); would be interesting to add infested Grineer Galleons to the mix
    Non-planets/Areas:
  • Kuva Fortress => Grineer Asteroid Fortress tileset (Kuva Fortress or Grineer Queens' Fortress)
  • The Void => Orokin Tower tileset (Orokin Tower); There would be 4 tower graphic icons, with their respective mission menus containing what missions are currently in each "path"
  • Orokin Derelict => Orokin Derelict tileset (Orokin Derelict); missions in menu are locked unless you have the key; Jordas Golem mission would be it's own separate icon, as is now
     

This system is compatible and would actually be very much enhanced by this other suggestion I made a few weeks back: CLEEECK

As a curious side-note, I want to shout out this old vine from DE_Steve back when the last Solar Map rework was coming together, which actually implanted this whole "single-mission-icon-per-planet" idea in my brain: https://vine.co/v/inbKMMFdhuF

In general I think the work for DE to implement this would be minor. One can only hope...
I think that coveres all the bases. I might have forgotten something, but I'm interested in what you WF community folk have to say to this, let's call it "Solar Map n.n" ...

Edited by Zoretor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate that you've put together graphics to illustrate your proposal, but it just seems like it would add an extra click into the process of getting the mission you want. Nested menus may look nice, but it's often the case that all they do is add more steps between you and where you want to be.

I also disagree with the whole "One planet per tileset" thing. Having a bit of variety to the environments early on keeps the game from being too monotonous when you don't have many planets unlocked.

Edited by Corvid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Corvid said:

..., but it just seems like it would add an extra click into the process of getting the mission you want. Nested menus may look nice, but it's often the case that all they do is add more steps between you and where you want to be.

I also disagree with the whole "One planet per tileset" thing. Having a bit of variety to the environments early on keeps the game from being too monotonous when you don't have many planets unlocked.

Think about the whole process when choosing bounties: You have to walk/fast travel over to Konzu, select "Bounties" dialogue, and then select your desired bounty, and then waltz on over to the Big Door. Did that ever feel so cumbersome? Not to me. It's practically an uncoscious reflex. Well, same here, except this system is waaaaaaaay less time-consuming.
You're sacrificing one more click of your mouse (woe is you!) for a cleaner, more consistent, efficient, clear experience. I'll take it, thank you. Besides, no one would ever notice one more click. It's a slight change in the way of thinking, in the way we select missions. Same goes for the "one tileset per planet" restriction.

New players would simply choose what misisons they want to do to progress, and not be forced down an arbitrary path that has no rime or reason to it whatsoever.

You wouldn't think "Weeeeell I wanna level this so I'll do a few waves of Hydron.", but rather "Weeeell, I wanna level this so I'll do the Defense mission on Sedna.". It's a different concept, and I can only see the benefits of it.

8 hours ago, WindigoTG said:

I love the lines and nodes. Feels like a board game.

You'd still have lines between planets/areas... you could still believe it feels like a board game. just that instead of the horrible nodes being the play spaces, the planets/areas are. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's just the thing! It wouldn't change that much. I also like the current Solar Map.

I just think the nodes+lines sensory overload is horrible and unintuitive. And the fact that you have random mixed tilesets thrown around here and there dilute and confuse the planet's lore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Zoretor said:

That's just the thing! It wouldn't change that much. I also like the current Solar Map.

I just think the nodes+lines sensory overload is horrible and unintuitive. And the fact that you have random mixed tilesets thrown around here and there dilute and confuse the planet's lore.

What exactly is so confusing about the nodes we have? It clearly shows which missions need to be completed to progress in a given direction.

Also, how exactly does "The Grineer have a seabase on Earth" dilute the planet's lore? If anything some of the different tilesets on a given planet add a bit of extra lore to the game in the form of environmental storytelling (things like a Corpus ship having been shot down above Mars' polar cap, or infested hive ships drifting toward europa). Your suggestion would homogenise the experience and take away these details.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Zoretor said:

Planets' horrible, messy, overloaded lines that connect the many nodes that pockmark the planets/areas that result in a non-intuitive jumble that feels like a 2-year-old was let loose with the mouse in MS Paint...

I honestly don't understand how someone can have this opinion of the lines. They're smooth, curving lines. What's non-intuitive about them? I find them very aesthetically pleasing, and there aren't even that many of them. It's not like every node on a planet is connected to each other. But the aesthetics is really the least important thing here.

15 hours ago, Zoretor said:

"single node per planet" system

Why? What is gained? I feel like a lot would be lost. The nodes signify specific locations: the Grineer have an outpost on Mount Everest, in the Mariana Trench, a Galleon over the Pacific (Earth being a bad example, as neither the Mariana nor Pacific node are in the proper location). This gives you the sense of scale that the Grineer have domination over the entire planet. If I started playing a game and each of the regions only had one node, I'd think the developer was being super lazy not to flesh out the extent and completeness of those regions.

It also plays a role in progression. If you've played through Earth and have gotten to Venus, you now have to play your way to Mercury. To get there, you have to play through E Gate, then Tessera/Unda, then Venera, then Fossa (assassination), then Aphrodite to get to the Junction. This gives you a sense of progression and that you're fighting your way across the planet to get to your goal. The lines also define paths, but give some leeway. Unda is a Spy mission – if you're bad at those, you can take the Tessera route and still get to Mercury, but you still need to pass through the Venera Capture node to get to the Jackal either way.

You lose all of this with your system. Sure, you can try to create progression by saying "you must complete three of these missions to get to the boss", but that doesn't feel nearly as good. It's not as structured – players could avoid doing Defence missions for the whole game, for example. Current Starchart progression forces you to experience almost every game mode and situation, and I don't think that's a bad thing.

15 hours ago, Zoretor said:

Each planet has one and only one defining tileset

I also don't think this is as big a problem as you apparently do. I think the Corpus need some more diversity on their tilesets, but it looks like DE might be shifting their focus to the Corpus over the next couple years, so I'm optimistic. But I don't see it as a problem that some of the Earth missions are on the Grineer Sealab and Grineer Galleon tilesets. As @Corvid said, this doesn't really dilute the lore all that much, and instead makes it feel like a more complete location. Sure, there are forests, but there are also plains, and there are ships in orbit. This makes sense.

Overall, I think this topic is solving problems that don't exist, at best, and removing immersive progression (something Warframe needs more of, IMO) at worst.

Edited by GrayArchon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oooph. So much to unwrap with your comments, sir. But make no mistake, I have a firm and determined response for each and every point, because the more I think of it, the more I'm convinced that the "one tileset/area per planet" and "mission type select menu" are waaaaaay more intuitive, immersive and streamlined systems then what we have currently. I've got all the bases covered, baby! Bring it! I shall defend my OP until I've grinded up all my fingers into fine dust! (I am backseat devving, after all...)

Here we go:

First of all, you've got the concept all wrong. The concept I'm trying to convey is not that of "nodes". Forget nodes. Cleanse the thought of it from your mind. Think of it more like an abstract discription of planet wide installations. Another part of the concept is to think of the Solar Map as a whole. Like, from the full zoomed out Solar Map zooming in by stages: The Solar Map shows you the planets. The planets are controlled by this or that faction. That faction has spread itself on said planet in these or those planet-wide bases/outposts/complexes/refineries, etc. Who cares about the Mariana trench or Mars' polar ice-cap anymore? The factions have set up where they are most confortable or where it's more resource-profitable, or where it makes sense for whatever lore-reason, and that is represented by the tilesets. Don't put a Europa tileset on Mars because frikkin Mars' polar ice cap! C'mon! That, is extremely lazy implementation. And it's confusing! Am I on Europa? Oh, no, I'm on Mars, which until now was all reddish but now there's ice and Corpus and aAaAaaAAaagh. Conversely, PoE and the upcoming Orb Vallis on Venus (and hopefully more of those on other planets), being very specific areas of their respective planets, are fine being arbitrarily placed in their own sections.
Then take a moment to think about this: Why, with the ability to zoom in to wherever on the planet from space with the Liset, do players have to follow a senseless, arbitrarily pre-laid path to progress? Wouldn't it make more sense that, being stuck in a planet's area, locked off by the Junctions, you are free to do any available mission type you want, until you unlock the Junction to move on to the next planet/area?

That all said then, gameplay/UI-wise, the single icon exists because, well, ya gotta click on something to get to 'dem missions!... but also it effortlessly immediately and intuitively shows players what environment the missions will take place in, and what faction controls it. No confusion. 0. Confusion has been eradicated, yaaaay!
These "planet-tileset-mission" icons represent the whole planet/area. The icon doesn't need to be placed specifically marking a specific spot on a planet. It's abstract. It's just an all-encompassing description.  "Grineer Forest Complex" (Earth), "Corpus Outposts" (Pluto), "Infested Fleet" (Eris), etc. They represent the huge, planet-wide (even orbit-wide) installations or campaigns of a given faction on a given planet. For example the "Grineer Blockade" icon on Saturn, with missions taking place on the Grineer Galleons of the fleet parked there, representing the lore as laid out in the Saturn Cephalon Fragment Codex entry. The icon is there to inform "what's up with this planet/area", but then also to click on for access to available missions.

So you click on the "planet-tileset-mission" icon that represents that planet's "area of activity", and there you have what missions are available (according to planet/area, of course). Here we go into the technical gameplay/UI benefits: Again, you're not grasping the concept I'm trying to express: You're choosing the mission type you want/need to play on a given planet/area, and not squnting and going cross-eyed while searching for that microscopic Capture node on Jupiter or whatever.
In response to your concern about new players never learning Defense, Interception, or whatever missions: That would be controlled and determined by each planet's Junction nd Assassination mission requirements. Just add the requirement to complete at least 1 Defense mission. Same goes for any other new player experience tutorial-ish progression.

You asked "what would we gain?" A simpler, easier to use and understand, objectively more elegant "regular" mission select system, that is also more immersive in that it defines planets or areas, defines what's up with the place. It complements what's in the Codex Cephalon Fragment descriptions. It is also a more flexible system for DE to modify when needed, like adding or removing missions types, or whatever, without having to add another node and such.

You say you "feel like you'd be losing a lot". Nah. Just some clusterbuck lines and diamonds that are meaningless. Them node names sure are fancy, and those lines do look smooth, 'doe...
Yeah... no. The lines and nodes covering planets is objectively visually noisy, unintuitive and cumbersome. Players are just used to it, the way they're used to eating cancerous food without a second thought. They cover up the planets in a way that your attention only goes to the frikkin' lines and nodes. This is just one of many ways the planets begin to lack importance and presence. Another is of course that, once you've completed the Solar Map, 90% of nodes are never used again (making those fancy node names are more of a waste). Sure, they might get re-used in a Sortie or Void Fissure, but that's a redundancy that is side-stepped with the "World-State menu" for choosing missions. WHAT!?!? Did you say there's ALREADY a system where missions are selected from a menu? Oh My Gaaaawwwwddd!!! Yes, and it works perfectly. You speak of "structure". The world-state menu is a good one of those. Senseless, microscopic nodes and arbitrary scribbles-as-paths are not.

I'll give you one thing: The nodes and lines are definately not a problem, but my suggestion is an improvement to planet/mission selection in every way, of that I've no doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Zoretor said:

because the more I think of it, the more I'm convinced that the "one tileset/area per planet" and "mission type select menu" are waaaaaay more intuitive, immersive and streamlined systems then what we have currently.

In other words, there's no point in discussing this, because no arguments we make will convince you. How exactly can you expect us to come around to your way of thinking if you're not willing to do the same?

I've frequented these forums for at least 5 years. You are the only person I've seen who's disliked the way the starmap handles environments and progression.

Edited by Corvid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, that's just the thing: I don't need convincing. We have the current Solar Map, and it's fine. It's functional. It functions. It gets the job done. It's what I have to use every time I play Warframe and it's fine. And it's a hell of a lot better than previous solar maps.
Doesn't mean it couldn't be better though. As in "waaaaaaaay better". Ever since it first got implemented I was sad they went with the lines thing instead of the "icon-in-the-middle-representing-the-planet's-environment" that DE_Steve showed in that vine I linked in OP, but oh well.

Yes I'm the only one who's written posts about the Star Map. People conform. Also people resist change (even for the better in many cases). The last iteration of the Solar Map, as I said, was an improvement, so why improve it further? It's "good enough". Well, not to me.

I'm not the one who needs convincing. I'm the one who wants to try to convince players and DE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, in a time where DE's attention is split between big-ticket new content (Fortuna, Railjack) and reworking old content that is in serious need of a touch-up (melee 3.0, Archwing, pets, bringing Trials back LOL), do you really think their time is well-spent on improving something that you admit is "good enough" and "functional"? Especially with the current emotional climate regarding the "content drought".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, no. One tileset per planet is garbage and compromises lore, demolishes any sense of scale or environmental storytelling, and makes every planet aesthetically boring.

Furthermore, I like the lines. They’re nice, flowy, and tell us exactly what we need to complete to unlock various areas. Making the mission select screen literally be a drop-down menu would take away the unique aesthetic flavor that the Star Chart currently has and turn it into Microsoft Excel But With Gun’s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One tileset per planet? No.

I fell in love with this game for all the different things I could see and find in different maps, right from the start. If I was new, stuck on one planet seeing the same thing every mission? Ugh boring.

The lines to nodes make it really easy to see everything, it's connect the dots. You'd have to be really dim-witted not to work it out just by looking at it.

There used to be just a bunch of boxes and no clear indication of how to open other planets, the current layout is way more new player friendly and doesnt need changing.

As for any changes needing to be "waaaaaaay better".. an icon slapped in the middle of a planet? This method is boring (1 tileset, really no), ugly, adds more clicks to an already functional and streamlined node map, therefore, it's worse not better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Zoretor said:

I'm not the one who needs convincing. I'm the one who wants to try to convince players and DE.

And by being unwilling to compromise or explain why your way is better (other than just saying "It is, I swear!"), or even respond properly to points raised, you are failing.

The people aren't disagreeing with you to conform. Don't insult our intelligence like that. They're disagreeing because either you haven't adequately extolled the merits of your idea, or it wasn't a particularly good one to begin with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it's not a particularly "necessary" one to begin with, I'll give you that.

But I think I have already over-explained the merits, and have responded properly to all (valid) points raised.

Are you a forum delegate that you speak for "the people" (of this forum)? People conform. I conform too. You do too. And you resist change. So do I. It happens. It's natural.
Doesn't mean the change could be for the better, which I'm convinced it is.

I've taken the time, ever since this latest iteration of the Solar Map came out and I was satisfied but slightly dissapointed with the nodes/lines, to try to cater to all players, and possible gameplay situations. It's just a cleaner, more efficient and even immersive system. There's just no doubt in my mind about it.
I'm just trying to convey this conviction. It'll probably never happen but hey, I gave it a shot. I "got it out there". No one cares, or wants? That's fine, but I am gong to insist, because I'm convinced.

Also most folks simply don't read long posts. Whaddyagonnado?.... *shrug*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so your wanting a super simplified star chart map removing a vast quantity of missions so there are just drop down menu of each mission type.

lets see you lose various small bits of mastery
lose the sense of clearing the map as blue icons show are missions you havent done
no point in clearing missions as you will already have a planet fully unlocked after a junction

in the hidden messages quest you have to go to certain missions that the name of them is the answer in the riddle so your forcing DE to rework a quest to do this change. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, (XB1)ShadowBlood89 said:

lets see you lose various small bits of mastery

Matery is now given by completing Junctions. That number would stay the same.
Why would you assume I'd want to gimp Mastery? No no, Mastery should untouched, whatever the case.

3 minutes ago, (XB1)ShadowBlood89 said:

lose the sense of clearing the map as blue icons show are missions you havent done

There's value in pulsing blue dots? I don't see it.
You'd still have a sense of progression. Heck the mission-tileset-icon could pulse blue until you've completed the planet's requirements (which are the Junction requirements). Or the Junctions themselves could pulse blue. Whatever. These small details I would leave to DE to best decide, but that's how I'd do it.
The idea is that this way Junctions are a clear indicator and a main component of planet completion and otherwise general progression.

8 minutes ago, (XB1)ShadowBlood89 said:

no point in clearing missions as you will already have a planet fully unlocked after a junction

Of course you'd have the planet fully unlocked after a Junction, that's the idea!
For one, it's more new-player friendly because it's a clear cut sign that you're progressing, rather than leaving behind nodes that they didn't want to play, and now that Arbitrations exist, those players could have the Star Map complete without having to go back and complete unfinished nodes that were placed arbitrarily to begin with...
For two, I mean, do you ever go back to play a regular mission just because? You may do it to gather a resource or some other specific reason, but just for the heck of it?

17 minutes ago, (XB1)ShadowBlood89 said:

in the hidden messages quest you have to go to certain missions that the name of them is the answer in the riddle so your forcing DE to rework a quest to do this change. 

Yeah, this and a few other quests/situations that mention node names would require tweaking. It's doable, though. For example, tweaking the riddles to reference a planet, and not necessarily a node, and then having to search through the mission types. Or, the mission types on the planet in question's drop down menu could have the node names temporarily thrown in there for these instances.
I've considered this problem, but I would leave it to DE to figure out. The icon system is worth it, in my opinion.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Zoretor said:

Matery is now given by completing Junctions. That number would stay the same.
Why would you assume I'd want to gimp Mastery? No no, Mastery should untouched, whatever the case.

There's value in pulsing blue dots? I don't see it.
You'd still have a sense of progression. Heck the mission-tileset-icon could pulse blue until you've completed the planet's requirements (which are the Junction requirements). Or the Junctions themselves could pulse blue. Whatever. These small details I would leave to DE to best decide, but that's how I'd do it.
The idea is that this way Junctions are a clear indicator and a main component of planet completion and otherwise general progression.

Of course you'd have the planet fully unlocked after a Junction, that's the idea!
For one, it's more new-player friendly because it's a clear cut sign that you're progressing, rather than leaving behind nodes that they didn't want to play, and now that Arbitrations exist, those players could have the Star Map complete without having to go back and complete unfinished nodes that were placed arbitrarily to begin with...
For two, I mean, do you ever go back to play a regular mission just because? You may do it to gather a resource or some other specific reason, but just for the heck of it?

Yeah, this and a few other quests/situations that mention node names would require tweaking. It's doable, though. For example, tweaking the riddles to reference a planet, and not necessarily a node, and then having to search through the mission types. Or, the mission types on the planet in question's drop down menu could have the node names temporarily thrown in there for these instances.
I've considered this problem, but I would leave it to DE to figure out. The icon system is worth it, in my opinion.

 

Mastery Ranking is a method of tracking how much of the game's total content a player has experienced, with points earned by ranking up Warframes, Weapons, Companions or Archwings to Rank 30 through Affinity and also successfully completing Junctions and nodes on the Sol system.

Clearing the main objective of any Mission node for the first time and extracting will grant a predetermined number of mastery points (Map progress can be viewed in the general stats in the profile menu).Victory against the opponent frame in a Junction grants 1,000 mastery points.

making a planet fully unlocked when you have the junction unlocked dulls the experience of progression along with destroying the requirements of other junctions that you need to do to get others opened. as you will not be needing to fight the bosses on the planets as 😮 oh look the assassination node is cleared so the game registers that they must have beaten the boss already.
 
honestly your seeming to have not put alot of thought into your idea as your only reason is to dumb down progression to super simplified means.
while current progression has a player learn the ins an outs of missions an get a sense of how the missions go an how there frames fit into each mission.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, you just want to try to deconstruct and tear down this greatest of great QoL ideas for the betterment of Warframe. That's fine. You won't be able to, but you can go ahead and bang your head on my wall for as long as you want.

Based on your wiki copy+paste, I guess I'm not sure how planet mastery works. I thought the Junctions gave each planet's mastery. But this is besides the point. Here, have this nugget:
- Junctions provide each planet's Mastery (equal to the sum total of nodes+junctions in current Solar Map)
- Where there are no Junctions (Void, Derelict, etc.), each mission type provides the Mastery, equal to the sum total of the nodes in a given area current Solar Map.
Badda-bing badda-boom. There you go. Anything else?

Like I said in OP, I probably missed a lot of things. Thank you for your help indicating one of the things I missed.
Just remember I have a suggestion for a fix or tweak or adjustment for any needed situation.

40 minutes ago, (XB1)ShadowBlood89 said:

making a planet fully unlocked when you have the junction unlocked dulls the experience of progression along with destroying the requirements of other junctions that you need to do to get others opened. as you will not be needing to fight the bosses on the planets as 😮 oh look the assassination node is cleared so the game registers that they must have beaten the boss already.

What? No. Seems you didn't read the entire OP. Assassinations missions would act like Junctions, in that they have requirements to unlock before you can do them. In turn Junctions would require you to have killed the boss of the planet in question.  You would have to do them. Ass missions'd are as inescapable as is currently.

You don't seem to understand that this system is really mostly just a UI QoL rework. It's much more than that, but basically that's what this is... We're not really changing much, except instead of following an arbitrary path through arbitrarily and senselessly laid out mission nodes, you're choosing what missions to do, always under the regulations of the Assassination mission unlock requirement or Junction requirements...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Zoretor said:

Ok, you just want to try to deconstruct and tear down this greatest of great QoL ideas for the betterment of Warframe.

And there goes the lack of humility again. Trust me, you don't have anywhere near the level of clout to portray your ideas in such absolute terms.

Edited by Corvid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...