Jump to content
[DE]Connor

Dev Workshop: Riven Disposition Changes

Recommended Posts

vor 1 Stunde schrieb (PS4)Herrwann69:

Thank you DE for trying to keep some kind of control over your game and his market.

The madness around Riven is going too far, disposition changes are needed monthly or every 3 month at least. 

Can't wait to see melee 3.0, keep up the good work !

Someone who is saying this has no rivens and don't know the work and effort behind... 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
il y a 1 minute, (PS4)GER_SIGNUM a dit :

Someone who is saying this has no rivens and don't know the work and effort behind... 

I have rivens for my regular weapons, Tenora, Azima, Gram and +/- 10 other. Never bought one though, just got them playing sortie or alert. Done some Kuva farming but not so much. I wasn't playing any of those weapon prior getting their riven, stick to them after trying and liking them so i roll to have a good riven to put on them. 

Azima got nerf, don't care, it's still blasting the way i like. 

I think Gram prime and my riven will be nerf with melee 3.0 but i wait and see, it will still be a killer sword without doubt.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2018-11-08 at 9:24 PM, [DE]Connor said:

On another relevant note separate from these Disposition changes, we have removed Sentinel weapons from the Riven generation pool. Those that own Sentinel weapon Rivens will still own them in their Inventories. Unveiling a Sentinel weapon Riven was simply lackluster compared to more applicable weapons.

This is already insane in the trade chat, Popular sentinel rivens are over 1k Platinum already. And i see WTS trade posts for "Unrolled sentinel riven"  for about 300-400 platinum.
Yes unveiling a sentinel riven was never that great, (except for the one i actually use) but removing them completely from the riven pool is just begging for a price inflation on them.
Any item that is either permanently removed from the game or is only available in rare periods of time in this game inevitably ends up costing a premium in the player economy, there is no way this is a surprise to anyone.
DE either needs to add them back to the pool or completely remove them from the game.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2018-11-08 at 2:14 PM, UniDIrector said:

Riven disposition shouldn't be based on popularity of a weapon, it should be based on the power of the weapon in the grand scheme of things.

Popularity dictates effectiveness. How often do you use a Kraken? Never? That's because it sucks. It doesn't suck because nobody uses it, nobody uses it because it sucks. DE made weapons, players learn how to abuse and make certain weapons usable and overpowered, DE uses that info to learn what is OP even if it has similar stats as another gun "Telos Boltor vs Soma" for example. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, (PS4)GER_SIGNUM said:

Someone who is saying this has no rivens and don't know the work and effort behind... 

Wrong. I have rivens, and I use them as they should be used...to make my decent weapons good. You obviously eidolon hunt and use a Lanka, correct? A meta weapon with overpowered rivens for your meta.

 

The problem with rivens is that they can dictate the current meta, but without DE nerfing them once in a while that meta just gets worse and worse. Lanka, a "bad" weapon in terms of rivens, had a market of trash rivens going for 800-1k, double the cost of any VAULTED prime set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, NerdwiseGamgee said:

Never in my life did I expect to see a lato nerf...

I can agree with several of these adjustments, but at the same time others seem entirely uncalled for.

But at least the lato (prime or vandal) is usable even without a riven. They nerfed the akbronco which is crap even with a riven!!!!

Edited by bibmobello
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While the nerf is bad we should get the option to infuse a riven with kuva to buff its stats by 5-10% but doubles the kuva cost per roll per infusion to equilize the stats by making it harder to roll with double the kuva per roll

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, (PS4)atuarre said:

All these salty people complaining and lying like the guy that says no one uses opticor when I see opticor being used ALL THE TIME.

I think then it should stand to reason that in their particular group or random matches, they do not and you do. Its a bit quick to call someone a liar for having a different experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 44966 said:

Popularity dictates effectiveness. How often do you use a Kraken? Never? That's because it sucks. It doesn't suck because nobody uses it, nobody uses it because it sucks. DE made weapons, players learn how to abuse and make certain weapons usable and overpowered, DE uses that info to learn what is OP even if it has similar stats as another gun "Telos Boltor vs Soma" for example. 

In theory, this is how it is supposed to work. One of the reasons people are unhappy with the change is because in practice the system becomes self-defeating. Let's look at a simple hypothetical example.

 

DE releases rivens with stated goals as you have posted...

--> Slightly underpowered weapons (with rivens) can climb over the "power weapons" (the most powerful meta weapons before rivens come into play, without rivens)...

--> Said weapons become increasingly popular...

--> DE nerfs said rivens due to popularity despite the fact that the power weapons (with rivens) were still outperforming them...

--> Those borderline weapons cease to be as competitive as the power weapons...

--> DE nerfs the rivens on power weapons while the border weapons lose popularity for being less competitive...

--> We're back to where we started before rivens, except that rivens are now an awkward addition to the game that never solved the problem, nor even improved the situation.

--> The only useful change is that some of the weakest weapons in the game can now complete more of the start chart, if invested into via potatos/forma, and will still never be useful in "end-game" content. However, since rivens are arbitrarily locked behind MR, and the MR floor for most rivens is 12+, by the time a player can even use said riven, they can already clear the star chart with ease and could have with better weapons without rivens anyway.

 

This is why I keep saying that "popularity" is a bad metric. It really should be based on actual weapon power, tested extensively in it's most favorable light. For example, how strong can the AFuris really get, when modded correctly for magnetic/toxin damage against the most common Corpus targets? How high in level can these get before it stops being reasonable to bring this weapon? How much higher can you go if buffed with modest damage increases (such as a +80% Rhino Roar)? I would limit the assumption of buffs to perhaps one middle of the road effect, because it's not reasonable to balance under the assumption that players will have Nova + Rhino + Banshee + Ivara (with augment) under all conditions. Using popularity to make ongoing changes to rivens will be an endless and pointless cycle.

 

As a final caveat, I'm not suggesting that they never change rivens--only that they adopt better methodology. Perhaps the method I suggested above isn't the best one, but it's likely to produce more accurate, longer lasting and meaningful changes than the current one.

  • Like 3
  • Applause 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Ragnarok said:

Except it isn't bias, they explain their reasoning very well in the beginning but everyone seems to be ignoring it.

Everyone keeps quoting: 

when they should be reading the entire thing and noticing:

They intentionally moved dispositions at a max of .2 because they wanted to avoid overcorrection and excessively impacting weapons. With the Kohm they specifically state that even a small disposition change would disproportionately affect the kohm compared to other weapons. This is a result of the kohm's popularity rising SPECIFICALLY because of it's ability to reach certain status chance breakpoints, as a result small adjustments that would make it unable to reach this breakpoint would massively drop it's usage. There are only a handful of weapons where if a single stat is changed by a very small amount that it's usage would drop ~90%.

So the option ended up being, does DE nerf it's disposition and people stop using it altogether, only to have to raise it in the future because noone uses it, just to make it very strong again? Or just leave it as is because it's in a stable spot? Stop crying for a nerf because you think fairness is everyone getting hit for the same amount, you have to look at the situation for each weapon and DE seems to have done that.

I'd just like to point out to you, my Arca Plasmor build after the riven nerf requires double the shots it did prior to the change to kill enemies. Mind you, the build I was running was unconventional (running 100% status build) but the impact is drastic and has literally left my Plasmor in the dust compared to my riven built Kohm (also 100% status), riven built Corinth (Crit), and riven built Phantasma (100% status).

If my Plasmor build suffers such an impact, why should the Kohm be exempt?

It's fine, I'm over the fact that my Plasmor will sit in storage for the time being but why not shake things up all around to keep fair play. I'm willing to have my Kohm take an impact too, I'll use my riven built Phage or Phantasma or whatever else instead. Isn't the point of rivens to change up the weapons being used anyways?

Edited by (PS4)Kronos_Slayer001
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My (+status chance) (+multishot) (+damage) (+recoil) Arca Plasmor riven beat out my Plasmor (+Crit chance) (+multi) (+damage) (+recoil) riven and my friends (+multi) (+damage) (+recoil) riven in extensive replicated simulacrum testing btw. I fully understand the logic behind Plasmor being less of a status shotgun due to non-pellet projectiles, but theory fell short while experimenting and testing the actual builds against enemies.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, NerdwiseGamgee said:

Never in my life did I expect to see a lato nerf...

i didnt see a single nerf to my lato riven...stats are still the same...unless this just didnt happen yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, (PS4)Kronos_Slayer001 said:

My (+status chance) (+multishot) (+damage) (+recoil) Arca Plasmor riven beat out my Plasmor (+Crit chance) (+multi) (+damage) (+recoil) riven and my friends (+multi) (+damage) (+recoil) riven in extensive replicated simulacrum testing btw. I fully understand the logic behind Plasmor being less of a status shotgun due to non-pellet projectiles, but theory fell short while experimenting and testing the actual builds against enemies.

  

The math behind damage is really contorted.. Anyway crits suffer more from nerf because they are multiplicative. If you have a weapon with 100 damage and 100 crit chance and 2 multiplier your damage is 200 every time, if the crit chance is 50 then you have half probability to have the crit hit, practically you will have your sustained damage halved ...

Nerfing status is less evident because procs(for slash and toxins) sum themselves and you will have different ticks. On short times and on high fire rate weapon is negligible. You have to consider anyway that procs depend on the base damage of the weapon.

Edited by bibmobello

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see a'lot of posts upset that they spent time and plat maximizing their weapons just to have there stats taken away. Then there's the white knight's saying they should have known that riven's we're always subject to change to bad so sad this is good for the game. My question is just like the stats on little johnny's riven's disappeared why don't the sentinel riven disappear out of peoples inventory. I mean they all knew they we're subject to change RIGHT?

  • Applause 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Raatv said:

I see a'lot of posts upset that they spent time and plat maximizing their weapons just to have there stats taken away. Then there's the white knight's saying they should have known that riven's we're always subject to change to bad so sad this is good for the game. My question is just like the stats on little johnny's riven's disappeared why don't the sentinel riven disappear out of peoples inventory. I mean they all knew they we're subject to change RIGHT?

First off, disagreeing with the entitled whine doesn't make someone a "white knight." If you were going to spend that much time and resources on rivens, you definitely know how they work and what they do. I find it extremely unlikely that such a person never saw the Disposition section of the wiki on the Rivens page that talks about what happens if/when rivens change, and that they already have (and likely would in the future). However, even if someone could honestly say they didn't, that only makes them irresponsible. It doesn't excuse their ignorance. It's not as if these things never get discussed in Region, on the forums, on Youtube, on Steam, etc. In other words, if you chose not to engage your gray matter, that's on you--not DE.

Secondly, DE very rarely removes items from player inventories, and almost exclusively on account of bugs/cheats/exploits, etc. In fact, in the past when something accidentally made it through a patch before they intended to release those items, players were allowed to keep those while the code was corrected, preventing other users from acquiring it until release. There is no comparison between this and the balance changes that are (and should be) fully expected with a game that undergoes continual development (such as most online games).

Thirdly, even if DE did decide to go to that extreme (See what I did there? 😆 ), they have every right to if they believe it's best for the game. They could be wrong, but the onus is on the players to show how they are, and this whole thread has mostly just been temper tantrums and whine. There has been almost no constructive criticism or valid argumentation. This is why I have tried to provide some by showing how flawed the "Popularity = Power" logic actually is. That's not so-called "white knight" behavior. That's rational discourse. If name-calling is all you have to bring, I'm afraid you won't find much support for your sentiment.

Edited by FrostDragoon
  • Applause 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2018-11-08 at 8:24 PM, [DE]Connor said:

EDIT: Wanted to clear up one comment I'm seeing lots of. Many of you have mentioned the Kohm as well as Detron - These weapons were marked for a reduction, but we opted not to change them, because some players depend on these Rivens to achieve 100% status chance. Because of this, small disposition changes had the chance to make a much larger impact on these weapons, so we have left them as is.

So basically you're saying it was getting changed, it deserved a change but because of the main reason you wanted to change them (100% status chance), your not? 

nick-young-confused-face-300x256-nqlyaa.

Also, did you just confirmed they will never get a change unless a new status chance mod is added in the game? 

Edited by (PS4)TONI__RIBEIRO
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

So basically you're saying it was getting changed, it deserved a change but because of the main reason you wanted to change them (100% status chance), your not? 

Yeah, why don't they apply this to rivens that people depend on to reach 100%+ crit? Doesn't seem very consistent.

  • Like 1
  • Applause 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FrostDragoon said:

Yeah, why don't they apply this to rivens that people depend on to reach 100%+ crit? Doesn't seem very consistent.

They opened a can of worms, hold on it's going to  be a bumpy ride DE. 

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, (PS4)Kronos_Slayer001 said:

I'd just like to point out to you, my Arca Plasmor build after the riven nerf requires double the shots it did prior to the change to kill enemies. Mind you, the build I was running was unconventional (running 100% status build) but the impact is drastic and has literally left my Plasmor in the dust compared to my riven built Kohm (also 100% status), riven built Corinth (Crit), and riven built Phantasma (100% status).

If my Plasmor build suffers such an impact, why should the Kohm be exempt?

It's fine, I'm over the fact that my Plasmor will sit in storage for the time being but why not shake things up all around to keep fair play. I'm willing to have my Kohm take an impact too, I'll use my riven built Phage or Phantasma or whatever else instead. Isn't the point of rivens to change up the weapons being used anyways?

I never said other weapons weren't affected nor did some people stop using a weapon because of these changes. My argument was the number affected and ratio would be drastically disproportionate concerning the kohm compared to other weapons. 

You even admit your build is out of the norm meaning a nerf that makes you stop using it is unlikely to affect the majority who use a riven with the arca plasmor. For the kohm, a small change would affect the overwhelming majority who use a riven with it and would cause them to drop it.

Again, fairness isn't an across the board nerf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DE, just set all the Rivens to 4 disposition and just be done with it. The current way of doing things is incredibly inconsistent, arbitrary and manages to displease absolutely everyone in some way, often in ways that are going in two directions at once.

Let me put this in perspective: Arca Plasmor rivens currently sit at 3 stars despite the weapon's awkward stats basically requiring a Riven to get it to scale into high levels due to its crit multiplier being mediocre (no, not in any world will a slow firing single shot 'shotgun' be viable as a status weapon), meanwhile the Javlok shares the same disposition with it despite being functionally a vastly worse Astilla, which in itself I believe also has a 3 star disposition... Which is THEN shared with the Phantasma, a flexible, max status weapon that is arguably superior to everything listed here, especially given how well it synergizes with many, many frame abilities.

This not only violates sensible game design based off the trajectory of your game, but also the balance on just about every level possible. The stated intent of the weapons balance patch earlier in this year (All weapons of similar MR should be comparable) really puts a nail in the coffin for the original intent of Rivens (make weaker weapons more powerful) especially once you start considering weapons with multiple variants that have vastly different stats and sometimes even functionality.

  • Like 3
  • Applause 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DE’s logic for not announcing that the disposition changes were coming was to avoid scams as only certain people would be aware. This same logic can be used against people’s claims that dispositions were ‘always meant to change’. Which was a claim on a forum post in late 2016. So to be aware that dispositions were indeed ‘always meant to change’, people have to do that which DE seems to think is hard, be active on the forums since late 2016. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ConzyFTW said:

DE’s logic for not announcing that the disposition changes were coming was to avoid scams as only certain people would be aware. This same logic can be used against people’s claims that dispositions were ‘always meant to change’. Which was a claim on a forum post in late 2016. So to be aware that dispositions were indeed ‘always meant to change’, people have to do that which DE seems to think is hard, be active on the forums since late 2016. 

Wrong. They only had to read the Rivens page on the wiki. It explains what happens when rivens change (implying they do), gave examples of such changes (proving they do), and only a tiny amount of thought is needed to reach the assumption that they would continue to. Nice try, though.

  • Applause 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...