Do people saying the riven nerfs aren't a big deal realize DE seems to have the intention of nerfing them repeatedly?

[(XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA]

"We will be revisiting Riven dispositions periodically, using the same rules laid out above, to further uphold our stated intentions."

That seems to imply some weapons will be adjusted by more than .2, but not all at once.

There are a lot of people saying "well it's not a big deal because the stats didnt change much" but what about after 2-3 more nerf waves?

 

So much for respecting player investment.

[mikakor]

It was said from the beginning. People litterally have no right to complain. 

[peterc3]

51 minutes ago, (XB1)ECCHO SIERRA said:

So much for respecting player investment.

In a more or less player run market? Rivens were made to fit usage numbers, just because it hasn't happened til now is irrelevant. You invested in something that could change at literally any moment. Caveat emptor.

[(XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA]

58 minutes ago, peterc3 said:

In a more or less player run market? Rivens were made to fit usage numbers, just because it hasn't happened til now is irrelevant. You invested in something that could change at literally any moment. Caveat emptor.

>just because it hasn't happened until now is irrelevant.

 

No, it isnt. And this isnt about me personally. Hell, I've sold more than enough rivens. I'll live regardless but what DE has done, is code into existence very rare, powerful, and at least to a point unique items into existance with no in game explanation whatsoever for how dispo is supposed to work and then taken money off of this system for over 600 days without any changes.

Then they want to start ruining the items people were "foolish" enough to pay for, for no other reason than creating psuedo balance with extra steps.

 

If anything, I think that's predatory. Disagree if you want.

[(XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA]

1 hour ago, mikakor said:

It was said from the beginning. People litterally have no right to complain. 

Show me where in game disposition is explained.

And ask me if people do or dont buy/trade/sell rivens on a daily basis regardless.

[mikakor]

2 minutes ago, (XB1)ECCHO SIERRA said:

Show me where in game disposition is explained.

And ask me if people do or dont buy/trade/sell rivens on a daily basis regardless.

It was said on stream and on forums multiple times. But yes,DE did a bad job as explaining it. 

As for people trading rivens, they don't matter. They had to inform themselves, too. It's their fault. And I'm glad that there will now be more often rebalance. Now maybe people will learn how to not sell stupid """godly""" riven 10K when they should not even be 500, or people crazy enough to buy ( litterally ) a gamble. They lost, too bad. Better luck next time. 

[Fire2box]

2 hours ago, (XB1)ECCHO SIERRA said:

"We will be revisiting Riven dispositions periodically, using the same rules laid out above, to further uphold our stated intentions."

That seems to imply some weapons will be adjusted by more than .2, but not all at once.

There are a lot of people saying "well it's not a big deal because the stats didnt change much" but what about after 2-3 more nerf waves?

 

So much for respecting player investment.

 

I think it's good. Rivens only existed to buff lesser used weapons without having to change their stats and promote wider variety of usage. I'm at 90 rivens, one sort of the maximum you can carry and when at 91 you can't do sorties. I'm 100% fine with the changes and they are so minor. 

riven's aren't about plat profiting. That's just arguably abusive players making it that. like 5k for a Rubico riven freaking lol. 

[Fire2box]

9 minutes ago, (XB1)ECCHO SIERRA said:

Show me where in game disposition is explained.

And ask me if people do or dont buy/trade/sell rivens on a daily basis regardless.

it was sadly ever explained in game for newer players. But you know what's not publicly stated as well? Laws. I can't go to a judge and say " Well, I didn't know so the law doesn't apply to me. You didn't tell me your fault not mine."

Edited November 12, 2018 by Fire2box

[DiabolusUrsus]

Disposition changes do not only include nerfs. For example, my Braton and Penta Rivens were buffed slightly by the recent update.

If people branch out more from the existing meta, fewer nerfs will occur. DE says Rivens exist to make less popular weapons more popular (setting aside the profit-based side of things). Obviously, if you only buy Rivens to power-creep meta weapons you are effectively shooting yourself in the foot.

IMO, Rivens should be balanced using weapon base stats, and only changed when the weapon in question is buffed/nerfed. Disposition should be balanced using the base weapon variant, with bow-style stat multipliers applied for stronger variants.

For example, Tiberon Prime might get 0.5x the listed stats on a Tiberon Riven.

DE should also consider making Rivens modify base stats, as this could better create new modding opportunities instead of simply exaggerating the existing meta stats.

9 minutes ago, (XB1)ECCHO SIERRA said:

Show me where in game disposition is explained.

Warframe is infamous for its poor in-game documentation. I agree that it SHOULD be in-game, but making any sort of plat-purchase via trading without doing research first is... Ill-advised.

9 minutes ago, (XB1)ECCHO SIERRA said:

And ask me if people do or dont buy/trade/sell rivens on a daily basis regardless.

People also do things like text while driving, neglect turn signals, weave through traffic, and tailgate.

Riven commerce being commonplace doesn't make it a good idea. Players should consider that what they are buying might not always have the same value.

[IggySnow]

people have been complaining about riven balance and prices for over a year. It's about time they started changing dispositions, especially when you look at things like the Gram having a 5 disposition, while the Gram Prime is arguably the best melee weapon in the game.

Personally I hope they look at riven dispositions at least once every 3 months, and do things like make a drastic change to a weapon disposition if a new powerful variant of it is going to be released.

[Rayden_Tenno]

It was said from the start

There were many rivens OP af

I really dont know what this has to do with fortuna

Its players fault that rivens cost so much, not DE. Don't invest so much in rivens and voila, problem solved.

You don't need rivens for whatever you consider endgame.

[wargthewarg]

43 minutes ago, Rayden_Tenno said:

 

Its players fault that rivens cost so much, not DE. 

 

You mean DE the company that can patch out unintended things with lightning speed if players find ways to get items too efficiently?

DE, the company that did a huge weapon balance pass earlier this year but didn't touch Rivens at that time? Knew about the Riven prices, made Kuva survival for Riven market and made sure it was grindy enough because the Riven market is profitable enough that players will spend hours farming it as well as plat on boosters to make it a little more efficient?

DE, the company that released Gram Prime and Tiberon Prime after acknowledging that Rivens haven't been addressed for too long?

[DrBorris]

It is funny to watch people try to justify why it is okay to have mods that break weapon balance and progression, they always fall back on that thing... oh, what's it called...

Oh now I remember, "pride and accomplishment."

[Lisztomaniac]

wait a second, i thougt riven disposition was changed to be retroactive, so DE its manually dealing with every single disposition? thats horrible news 😞

i dont mind that some of my rivens are lamer now, i dindnt mind because it made sense riven wise, weapon gets more popular disposition adjusts automatically, no big deal, little did i know theyre not automatic...

cant see the logic in not making them adjust accordingly to playerbase use.

[Rayden_Tenno]

8 hours ago, wargthewarg said:

You mean DE the company that can patch out unintended things with lightning speed if players find ways to get items too efficiently?

DE, the company that did a huge weapon balance pass earlier this year but didn't touch Rivens at that time? Knew about the Riven prices, made Kuva survival for Riven market and made sure it was grindy enough because the Riven market is profitable enough that players will spend hours farming it as well as plat on boosters to make it a little more efficient?

DE, the company that released Gram Prime and Tiberon Prime after acknowledging that Rivens haven't been addressed for too long?

Yes. They even said they were not going to address riven orices since those are player driven. So yes. Its our fault, not theirs.

[ArbitUHM]

11 hours ago, mikakor said:

It was said from the beginning. People litterally have no right to complain. 

Just because DE warned people that they were going to do it doesn't mean people can't complain if they think it was a bad thing to do. 

[ArbitUHM]

9 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Disposition changes do not only include nerfs. For example, my Braton and Penta Rivens were buffed slightly by the recent update.

If people branch out more from the existing meta, fewer nerfs will occur. DE says Rivens exist to make less popular weapons more popular (setting aside the profit-based side of things). Obviously, if you only buy Rivens to power-creep meta weapons you are effectively shooting yourself in the foot.

The issue is that most people haven't been keeping Rivens for mediocre weapons with moderate dispositions. People do invest a lot of Kuva into Rivens for good weapons with good dispositions. So yeah, people are going to be complaining about the nerfs to the weapons they care about and not celebrating the buffs for, like, the Javlok Riven that they dissolved two months ago. And that pattern will probably repeat itself as further changes are made. The system really seems to be set up to repeatedly create feels-bad-man moments.

Like you were saying, having disposition based on raw weapon stats makes more sense, especially since under the current system DE is intent on somewhat arbitrarily putting their finger on the scales (e.g. Kohm).

[DiabolusUrsus]

5 minutes ago, ArbitUHM said:

The issue is that most people haven't been keeping Rivens for mediocre weapons with moderate dispositions.

True, and I really don't understand how DE could have possibly imagined things playing out otherwise. Obviously the community will seek out the "optimal" balance between weapon stats and Disposition for maximum power creep. Popularity-based Dispositions were a mistake from inception for that very reason; weapons with good to great base stats should never have been given the opportunity to have great Dispositions.

5 minutes ago, ArbitUHM said:

People do invest a lot of Kuva into Rivens for good weapons with good dispositions. So yeah, people are going to be complaining about the nerfs to the weapons they care about and not celebrating the buffs for, like, the Javlok Riven that they dissolved two months ago. And that pattern will probably repeat itself as further changes are made.

And as I said earlier, people do all sorts of silly - even potentially suicidal - things as though they are perfectly normal. I feel sympathy for the players who had no idea Disposition changes were a thing, but I am fairly confident that it was fairly common knowledge within the Riven-using community even before the update that they were at least in concept subject to change. Honestly, I was shocked that the community did not voice more complaints when Rivens were first announced about the possibility of their invested efforts (farming Kuva, rolling, etc.) potentially being damaged by the activities and choices of other players.

Most players simply got accustomed to DE procrastinating the updates, and I feel absolutely no sympathy for that population.

5 minutes ago, ArbitUHM said:

The system really seems to be set up to repeatedly create feels-bad-man moments.

This I absolutely agree with, and I think it's something that really needs to change about Rivens for them to really grow into a solid "game" feature rather than a "money" feature. The concept of popularity-based Disposition alone potentially punishes players for acquiring and enjoying Rivens for their weapons. IMO that is antithetical to the idea of a reward.

5 minutes ago, ArbitUHM said:

Like you were saying, having disposition based on raw weapon stats makes more sense, especially since under the current system DE is intent on somewhat arbitrarily putting their finger on the scales (e.g. Kohm).

It seems we agree on a potential first step towards a solution. 😄

[catalyst22]

35 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

This I absolutely agree with, and I think it's something that really needs to change about Rivens for them to really grow into a solid "game" feature rather than a "money" feature. The concept of popularity-based Disposition alone potentially punishes players for acquiring and enjoying Rivens for their weapons. IMO that is antithetical to the idea of a reward.

I think the least DE should do is show a "disposition trend" somewhere in the UI that indicates how the disposition is likely to change once the next adjustment is made. Not knowing anything about what will happen to my rivens sucks.

Edited November 13, 2018 by catalyst22

[Makunogo]

as far as was mentioned. the only other disposition change is going to be for the melee weapons they didn't touch on since they tweaking Melee 3.0. i'd say its safe to assume an other dispo change wont happen for the other weapons for quite some time.

[Ventura_Highway]

10 minutes ago, catalyst22 said:

I think the least DE should do is show a "disposition trend" somewhere in the UI that indicates how the disposition is likely to change once the next adjustment is made. Not knowing anything about what will happen to my rivens sucks.

It's possible this might lead to an "I know that you know that I know" scenario where say, traders start advertising "Rising Rivens" or something like that on the market with weapons that are marked as having increased disposition. The base idea is not bad though.

[catalyst22]

3 minutes ago, Ventura_Highway said:

traders start advertising "Rising Rivens" or something like that on the market with weapons that are marked as having increased disposition.

I'm sorry but i don't understand how that is problem? Unless you just hate trade-chat, which totally agree with;)

I imagine a trend arrow that can point up right or down next to the disposition. That way no one has perfect information and people can't math out the changes. I think after the initial panic period it will have a stabilizing effect on the market and at the same time reduce the feelsbadmans because the nature of dispositions will be so visible and upfront. 

[Ventura_Highway]

2 minutes ago, catalyst22 said:

I'm sorry but i don't understand how that is problem? Unless you just hate trade-chat, which totally agree with;)

I imagine a trend arrow that can point up right or down next to the disposition. That way no one has perfect information and people can't math out the changes. I think after the initial panic period it will have a stabilizing effect on the market and at the same time reduce the feelsbadmans because the nature of dispositions will be so visible and upfront. 

Yeah I could be a little paranoid here. I'm a little worried about the human mind's tendency to generalize inaccurately and how that can affect the riven market if this measure is introduced.

As a Founder I was a little amused about the clamour for Excalibur Prime before Umbra was released. The shiny warframe stirred up so much crap on here but absolutely no one complains about the fact I have a 10% more power strength on Volt and 10% more power efficiency(!) on Banshee because of Arcane Helmets that can't be released ever anymore. I tend to think this is because Warframe leads people to generalize the assertion that if there's a Prime warframe and a normal one, the Prime one is meaningfully better. The damage reduction from the extra armor on Excalibur Prime is minimal.

[Fallen_Echo]

11 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

people branch out more from the existing meta, fewer nerfs will occur. DE says Rivens exist to make less popular weapons more popular (setting aside the profit-based side of things). Obviously, if you only buy Rivens to power-creep meta weapons you are effectively shooting yourself in the foot.

Take a look at the miter, buzlok or the panthera what got their disposition nerfed. They were never meta weapons or highly popular, i dont think i ever seen a miter user apart from me in any mission since summer.

DE's popularity based system is a failure because a weapon what only gets popular because of riven will gets it disposition nerfed and falls out of relevance once again like some vicious circle they will never get popular.

Rivens should have been an augmentation system what makes all weapons equally good regardless of their rank and stats but insteads its some bad lottery where if you see your scrap becoming really good you already know that your fun is limited because the dp shift looms over the game.

[DiabolusUrsus]

9 hours ago, catalyst22 said:

I think the least DE should do is show a "disposition trend" somewhere in the UI that indicates how the disposition is likely to change once the next adjustment is made. Not knowing anything about what will happen to my rivens sucks.

This would be a decent first step, but IMO it would be better to simply stabilize them ASAP. I don't see any value in making dispositions so volatile.

8 hours ago, Fallen_Echo said:

Take a look at the miter, buzlok or the panthera what got their disposition nerfed. They were never meta weapons or highly popular, i dont think i ever seen a miter user apart from me in any mission since summer.

DE's popularity based system is a failure because a weapon what only gets popular because of riven will gets it disposition nerfed and falls out of relevance once again like some vicious circle they will never get popular.

Rivens should have been an augmentation system what makes all weapons equally good regardless of their rank and stats but insteads its some bad lottery where if you see your scrap becoming really good you already know that your fun is limited because the dp shift looms over the game.

I agree, and for those reasons I feel that DE absolutely needs more transparency if they are going to continually update dispositions.

They should release the statistics they use to change dispositions with each update (e.g., show how much of an increase in usage the miter saw) to prove that they aren't just making arbitrary decisions while using the smokescreen of "popularity."