Lower enemy count , tougher enemy

[Volinus7]

Which one do you prefer to pop? 

 

[GPrime96]

16 hours ago, boysenbeary said:

This is how you kill survival missions, which depend on you killing a high amount of enemies to keep lifesupport up

Arbitration Survivals would love to be a Victim of this. The severe lack of Enemy Spawns and Arbitrator Drones makes Survivals in those Alerts horrible. You are better off going to Mot or Axi Fissure Selkie if you want Endurance runs because the Survivals in Arbitration is limiting for Solo and Public Runs.

[Lancars]

Look if you want bullet sponge enemies there are dozens of other games out there. Could play the division and they are having a sequel.

I myself like the horde style of fighting. o.o

[Serafinia]

I like both side but this game is supposed to be a horde shooter which means a tons of enemies trying to gank you and you just slice and mice. Those whom want extra hard challenges needs to find an other game. I think the challenge seekers could be pleased if the devs add more puzzles, hack variations, increase the AI of the mobs and give them some extra tactic and item to try prevent us to finish our objective. There are already ways to prevent us and if you play endless missions with not proper builds you can be challenged pretty easily.

I like this game because no need to be ultra high skilled to progress and be efficient. I like to make my challenges and goals and that's far enough for me.

[Sahansral]

There was s bug on the plains that led to massive enemy spawns (quite shy showed it one of her clips).

I want more of that. Not less enemies...

[Ryim_Drykeon]

17 hours ago, PopGligor said:

More than half of the warframes cannot compete at all in ESO. Most are objectively useless in arbitrations. Weapons that don't AoE are complete trash now. If you want to use a rifle, you better hope it has 2,5+m punch through. Otherwise it's trash. This is also why melee is king, especially the big weapons - big weapons cleave in a huge range, making them objectively the best weapons in the game. They can hit more enemies per second than any other weapon.

This is the problem. Not that the Frames and weapons are "useless", but that people think they are.

There are no Frames than can not do ESO. Each and every Frame is viable once you learn to use them properly. Some are easier to learn than others, and these are the ones people take. Since most people are lazy. Arbitrations are only challenging to some right now because they are new. Once players settle into the tactics and make the small adjustments to their play, they'll be decimated right along with the rest of the missions. What Arbitrations are doing is moving people more toward Squad style play instead of Solo (In an Online Co-Op game? *gasp* What a concept 😎) You still can solo them if you have the skill, but they're designed to push you even harder. So people need to step it up, or step back.

Weapons are the same. Yes, not all weapons are useful at higher levels. We have to have some low level weapons for people to work up through or they'd be even more OP at the start of the game, heh. As for weapon types, of course you don't take just a single shot, high damage weapon into a mission. This is why you have Primary and Secondary weapons as well as Melee. Knowing when to use what where and how is what makes a better player.

So I prefer to keep the high enemy density. If the numbers would drop, I'd be bored as hell. What good would single target enemies be when I can pump out 2.1 million damage a shot?

[Serafinia]

29 minutes ago, Sahansral said:

There was s bug on the plains that led to massive enemy spawns (quite shy showed it one of her clips).

I want more of that. Not less enemies...

I would like 10-20 times more.

like

 

it begins at 1:10 - this is the minimum what I want to see.

Edited October 21, 2018 by Serafinia

[Mahna]

I personally want a horde style of shooter where there is actually enemies to shoot. I'm not blaming any specific frames or weapons as it is a combination of both plus network issues but far too often you end up being the third or fourth frame in an elimination mission and there is just nothing there as the first two frames have left everything dead in their wake.

For me this is especially true in fissure missions where I don't want to play solo because I want a better shot at failing to actually get useful prime parts by doing it in a group but because my work network is rather crap I always end up getting into the mission a second or two behind the rest and spend the entire mission just trying to collect all the reactant.

[Ada_Wong_SG]

Keep the enemies as it is, just introduce more special units that would appear and give you bonuses.

Like stalker being a good Santa Claus delivering Dread blueprints and other parts.

put grineer executioners in random missions, they jump into the mission just to deliver weapons part and make the game more interesting.

[MokutoBunshi]

21 hours ago, MarbleRyedogg said:

This is a horde style shooter so I think that is not the style of gameplay it is designed around.  I do think there is more that could be done to give some variety and that includes some of the ideas that you presented.  Possibly certain rounds could be more focused around a boss type enemy coming in that all players need to work together to kill.  This could also help to get players to stick together rather than running off to their own corner of the map and no longer sharing affinity.

Actually, I think that all the variety of weapons we have allow us to adapt to horde style, if the enemies changed, we'd adapt and the meta would shift.

[Saturmorn_Carvilli]

I am not for a lower enemy count (I would actually like to see more mobs or even swarms small, super weak enemies), but I would like to see a few more 'tough' enemy types more like nox.  I like the idea of weak point enemies that are bullet sponges if you don't target their weak point but go down like a sack of potatoes if you do.  It always kinda saddens me to have triple the headshot kills of the next player (and sometimes more headshot kills the total kills of the next highest total kills) because our weapons are so powerful it is a waste of time to even properly aim.  I am at best a mediocre shot (controller player), so I know it those numbers are more due to the squad not trying for headshots that not able to aim.  Still, I think among the throngs of enemies we slay there should be the occasionally actually need to aim to take them down fast types.

I think adding more weak point enemies would be the best of both worlds, there would still be mobs for AoE/high RoF weapons to sweep through while weak point enemies allow more precise targeting to be useful.  I even think there should be more enemies resistant (not immune) to ranged attacks but weak to melee and exalted melee attacks.  I am all about forcing us to make use of our entire loadout during a mission for maximum effectiveness.

[PopGligor]

4 hours ago, Ryim_Drykeon said:

This is the problem. Not that the Frames and weapons are "useless", but that people think they are.

I disagree. There are clearly dominant warframes that outclass others. There's this idea of dominant strategy, where a player would always pick the most efficient, useful way of doing things over the fun way of doing them. It's the job of game designers then to ensure that dominant strategies don't disrupt the game too much, and that they're fun. You don't argue with nature, you play with it, and nature here means the majority will stick to the most efficient play they have.

It's not about being lazy, it's about being efficient. DE can't have the players have to go out of their way to make Warframe fun. That's DE's job. Fun in games is all about proper freedom and restriction. I shouldn't have to lower my efficiency in order to make the game more interesting. 

DE constantly does this - they give us something challenging, and at the same time, they give us the tools to trivialize it. Remember spy missions? Here, have an Ivara with the augment. Now you don't have to consider their challenges ever again. You can, if you choose, but in doing so, you lower your efficiency, increase your risk of failure and you gain nothing out of it. 

[Bouldershoulder]

23 hours ago, ScottLin said:

2. lower enemy count but make them tougher. my suggestion would be 50%less and 200% tougher for basic enemy, 75% less and 125%tougher for stronger enemy. 

I-i-it's FLASHBACK time!

_{That's Tyle Regor, btw.}

Some time ago, enemies were exactly like you ask.

Spoiler

 

They were less numerous, but tough as hell. From the video - tower 3 was like the current Neo fissure, and lvl 80 mobs were like current lvl 40 damage-wise, but like 120 or higher hitpoints-wise. You could unload all your ammo into an ancient toxic of a regular for that time's defense lvl 200-240 and spend all your revives in the process without killing it.

Edited October 21, 2018 by Bouldershoulder

[Lost_Cartographer]

On 2018-10-20 at 11:58 AM, boysenbeary said:

This is how you kill survival missions, which depend on you killing a high amount of enemies to keep lifesupport up

Drop rates for oxygen can be adjusted.

But generally speaking, tougher enemies doesn't matter in a game where our primary form of defense is denying them the ability to harm us in the first place.  That's part of why we have a horde shooter that emphasizes quantity over quality.  When it comes to power fantasies (and loot tables,) you want to overwhelm players with sheer numbers, as opposed to putting them up against a baddie that's more BA than they are.

Now someone's going to argue those last few words in my previous sentence, but they're forgetting that endless missions are intended to kick your ass eventually.  Little reason for enemies to constantly scale upwards if that weren't the intent.

Edited October 21, 2018 by Littleman88

[Aeron216]

No, this is a horde based game. If anything we need more spawns. 

Edited October 21, 2018 by Aeron216

[(PSN)Zero_029]

Oy vey...

I mean this wholeheartedly fyi. Not a sting. But perhaps the OP & those with a similar mindset should take a break and play Destiny 2.

That games enemies (post Forsaken update) are more akin to what the OP desires.

The biggest a horde gets there is maybe 6 or 8 enemies. With Escalaion Protocal & swarms of Thrall/Cabal Dogs/Shanks being the only enemies to hit the double digits (not more than 15 though)

Enemies are literally what the OP & others desire.

There is NO harm in playing more than 1 game folks.

[ArcKnight9202]

Power-spam is the most compelling reason for me to play solo. This game is single player at all levels, truly. 3 people often get carried whether they want it or not.

The power balance between enemies and players in this game is goofy. I enjoy the game but it doesn't work well currently.

The rebalance needed to repair the game at this point might not even be realistic.

Edited October 22, 2018 by ArcKnight9202

[(PSN)big_eviljak]

I disagree... Not enough spawns in most places tbh. Need more spawns and harder enemies. Need both tbh.

[iuki.]

The game already suffers from not enough spawns.

I would like more, not less.

[DissentWomble]

Maintain the spawn rate and difficulty but introduce bosses midway like juggernauts, ambulas, or mini hyena packs which drops more life support or buff every 5 minutes or something. 

[Hypernaut1]

For people asking for "better a.i."

Name me something that a.i. should do to either survive or damage us, that wouldn't be considered cheesy, unfair and complained about?

Edited October 22, 2018 by Hypernaut1

[Darkuhn]

Am ‎20‎.‎10‎.‎2018 um 18:07 schrieb Kyoresh:

Thats the main problem survival mode has: not enough enemies

exactly, if you have a decent team there are only enough Enemies to keep 1-2 Players entertained, the others will be bore to the Point where they Alt-Tab to watch a movie.

[Veridian]

I say the opposite, double the spawn rate. Then add more enemy types like Manics, buff them and have them pop often.

Result: Manics pressure and require focus, the swarming enemy builds up in threat, there's actually tention.

 

If you halve enemies but buff their stats, you'll wait two more seconds with Saryn, do 1 more hit with Valkyr...nothing really changes but slowing the pace for some frames. Or perhaps we'd have to use cover, for every enemy? Is this CoD?

 

I mean, you're basically asking for a tactical shooter. You can just play R6

[Tsardova]

8 hours ago, Hypernaut1 said:

For people asking for "better a.i."

Name me something that a.i. should do to either survive or damage us, that wouldn't be considered cheesy, unfair and complained about?

Better pathfinding for one.....

Can't recall how many times I've seen enemies literally just hop up and down a balcony when I'm literally just standing in the middle of a huge emtpy space.

Otherwise, have enemies coordinate to gain temporary passives of sorts, etc.

 

Lets say;

 

If 2 or more shield grineer spawn, have them group together to build a "wall and give them reduced damage intake to where they can tank/ deflect direct explosive impact to make us shoot behind them or near their feet instead, knocking them back if it's from the front of their vision cone. In case of weapons like Lenz; have them ragdoll with 1 hp if they would otherwise die from a direct shot and break formation for finishers (them ragdolling knocking other enemies away as a "reward" for good shots"). 

If any one of these huddled up "wall grineer" gets offed by a headshot, give the surviving "wall" a slight "speed rush" or so to close in the gap better. This'll make us mobilize more to avoid them and make combat feel as fluid still while possibly punishing inattentive players knocked down for a bit and so on.

Or make enemies help an eximi up after being knocked down; knocking you a safe distance away from it or the like so both you and the enemies have a fair range to retaliate.

 

At worst, these sort of changes would make for minor inconveniences. At best, these can make enemies at least feel less robotic and make us prioritize enemy take downs. Least... on starchart missions anyways.

 

"Tougher" enemies that is lower in density = RE:Operation Racoon City all over again.... That game is the prime example of why bullet sponge enemies are not fun.

[Aazhyd]

Don't forget that not everyone is a veteran player.