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

[Fallen_Echo]

11 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

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."

I would really like to see that because the simulor family got buffed from 05 to 0.7 what means that still a fair amount of people use that weapon and honestly i find that BS.

[catalyst22]

44 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

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.

The idea was to avoid having to balance weapons by using a sort of shortcut.

 

44 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

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."

Why would they? They could just say it's a balance pass and be done with it.

32 minutes ago, Fallen_Echo said:

I would really like to see that because the simulor family got buffed from 05 to 0.7 what means that still a fair amount of people use that weapon and honestly i find that BS.

 

It doesn't 0.2 is the max it could increase.

 

 

Edited November 13, 2018 by catalyst22

[catalyst22]

.

Edited November 13, 2018 by catalyst22

[catalyst22]

No idea what happened here... Am i blind or is there no option to delete?

Edited November 13, 2018 by catalyst22

[Infirito]

They aren't nerfs to begin with, some got higher dispo, some lower, and I would love for this revisions to happen every 3-6 months.

[Lone_Dude]

Ah, I love Riven Economy. And Riven balancing in general. It's so EAvil, but no one cares until they get their toys taken away.

[DiabolusUrsus]

4 minutes ago, catalyst22 said:

The idea was to avoid having to balance weapons by using a sort of shortcut.

Sure, the reasoning is obvious. It's just bad reasoning, because rarity and mechanical implementation are also factors in usage.

Hate is a really solid scythe, and only has a good Disposition because

a) Stalker rarely drops the print, and

b) Reaping Spiral is horrible and Stalking Fan is very rare.

They've had to do mass balance passes ANYWAY, so trying to use Dispositions as a balancing factor is really just creating more busywork for themselves.

Consequently, I see no value in popularity-based dispositions.

The editor did something weird with your quote that I can't fix from mobile, so in answer to the below:

Because it makes the community accountable for the changes, rather than DE. That makes it a bit different from a balance pass, as it has very little to do with actual balance and it absolves them from addressing specific glaring imbalances as well.

Seriously, how do you think the community would respond to Miter/Panthera balancing nerfs, of all things?

Quote

Why would they? They could just say it's a balance pass and be done with it.

34 minutes ago, Fallen_Echo said:

I would really like to see that because the simulor family got buffed from 05 to 0.7 what means that still a fair amount of people use that weapon and honestly i find that BS.

Actually, I wonder about that. IMO it is possible that DE decide to enforce a limit on how much Disposition can change at once (e.g., +/- 0.2) to prevent wild see-saws back and forth.

There are probably very few people using the Simulor, and the Disposition may continue to increase with each new iteration until that changes.

What doesn't make sense is the weapons you listed getting a decrease of all things, though this could be explained by released statistics.

[catalyst22]

2 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Seriously, how do you think the community would respond to Miter/Panthera balancing nerfs, of all things?

Memes? I see your point, but i'm not really willing to believe that they thought a Miter nerf was actually necessary. They used the real statistics and this is the result.

 

7 minutes ago, Lone_Dude said:

Ah, I love Riven Economy. And Riven balancing in general. It's so EAvil, but no one cares until they get their toys taken away.

Well ... yeah the entire thing is one giant problem and at the same time it limits their future options.

[DiabolusUrsus]

12 minutes ago, catalyst22 said:

Memes? I see your point, but i'm not really willing to believe that they thought a Miter nerf was actually necessary. They used the real statistics and this is the result.

I agree, but my point applies less to the Miter and more to other changes down the road.

People are going to be suspicious after DE neglected updating Dispositions for such a long time, only to start now with some rather implausible changes. Maybe Miter usage really did justify the nerf.

But did it really? What were the criteria? Where are the cutoff points? Is it a simple increase in usage, or is it a matter of proportion?

The Miter is far from a commonplace weapon, so it's hard to believe that enough people are using it to warrant a Disposition nerf.

DE needs to build up trust in what was previously a deprecated mechanic, and the best way for them to do this is through increased transparency. If they won't do that, it begs the question as to why simple usage statistics need to be concealed.

They might get a pass for the Miter as an outlier, but it will become more polarizing as it continues to affect more popular weapons.

Edited November 13, 2018 by DiabolusUrsus

[Fire2box]

31 minutes ago, Lone_Dude said:

Ah, I love Riven Economy. And Riven balancing in general. It's so EAvil, but no one cares until they get their toys taken away.

the riven market is diablo 3 auction house before Blizzard shut it down. The only reason players are okay with it is they dream of selling a single mod for like 2k plat. Few would buy the plat to buy a riven I think. After all the plat a rubico riven costs is three figures USD. 

[Fallen_Echo]

49 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

But did it really? What were the criteria? Where are the cutoff points? Is it a simple increase in usage, or is it a matter of proportion?

I want to believe that they have some actual criterias or build points and they not just blow into the dark hoping its a hit. 

[DiabolusUrsus]

1 minute ago, Fallen_Echo said:

I want to believe that they have some actual criterias or build points and they not just blow into the dark hoping its a hit. 

We all want to believe that, but show of hands for who believes it with complete faith and no inklings of doubt.

😛

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

On 2018-11-12 at 2:20 PM, (XB1)ECCHO SIERRA said:

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

Uhh you realise that you spelled "rebalancing" wrong?

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

6 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

I don't see any value in making dispositions so volatile. 

6 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

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

The wheel turns, you have a weaker weapon, and find yourself with a ridiculously good riven. Your weaker weapon is now on par with one of the stronger weapons with a weaker riven. Congratulations, people now have a reason to use the lesser used assets in the game. As each gets used more and nerfed, the cycle will continue, and people will spend time with There's the value in it. 

 

And realistically if you understand the above, then it doesn't matter if they randomly pull weapons out of a hat while praying to RNGsus so long as they do change them every once in a while. The long term results will be the same. 

[motorfirebox]

On 2018-11-12 at 3:17 PM, (XB1)ECCHO SIERRA said:

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

Yep. DE is out to get us. You've figured it out.

[DiabolusUrsus]

13 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

The wheel turns, you have a weaker weapon, and find yourself with a ridiculously good riven. Your weaker weapon is now on par with one of the stronger weapons with a weaker riven. Congratulations, people now have a reason to use the lesser used assets in the game. As each gets used more and nerfed, the cycle will continue, and people will spend time with There's the value in it. 

How is this anything but a more roundabout way of simply balancing around base stats to start with?

13 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

And realistically if you understand the above, then it doesn't matter if they randomly pull weapons out of a hat while praying to RNGsus so long as they do change them every once in a while. The long term results will be the same. 

Or you could have short-term and more stable results immediately by actually designing Rivens to fulfill their intended purpose instead of weaker weapons getting screwed over by Prime variants down the road.

Braton and Nikana are great examples of what's in store for Tiberon/Pyrana/Gram as Dispositions normalize. In that sense Dispositions are 100% counter-productive.

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

13 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Or you could have short-term and more stable results immediately by actually designing Rivens to fulfill their intended purpose instead of weaker weapons getting screwed over by Prime variants down the road.

The intended purpose of getting people to use different, lesser used weapons, instead of falling into the "this is the current meta build so it's going to be used by every person capable of figuring out how Google works"? 

Because that's apparently the intended purpose. It's a way to combat people being stuck in the same rut. 

 

If it was about permanently balancing base stats then that would not have the same effect. 

[ArbitUHM]

47 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

The intended purpose of getting people to use different, lesser used weapons, instead of falling into the "this is the current meta build so it's going to be used by every person capable of figuring out how Google works"? 

Because that's apparently the intended purpose. It's a way to combat people being stuck in the same rut. 

As I said up thread, this is just a terrible way of achieving this goal. The system encourages putting a lot of time and Kuva into a Riven in order to get a good roll, then for reasons that are completely out of the players control, their Riven becomes worse and worse as time goes on. Then, if the player wants a fresh weapon with good Riven disposition, the player has to go out and acquire a new Riven either by unveiling it (i.e. the pray to RNGesus method) or go to the market (where Rivens for the newly buffed dispositions now have newly bloated plat costs). Yes, there is a chance that a Riven that they have been holding on to will get buffed but most people are not going to hold on to crappy Rivens hoping that they will gradually get buffed over who knows how much time.

Or, DE could just adjust dispositions according to base weapon power and just let them be static. That way, when the player unveils a new Riven, it's probably going to be good if they invest some effort into getting a good roll, and stuff that is completely out of their control doesn't make their Riven worse.

Edited November 14, 2018 by ArbitUHM

[DiabolusUrsus]

37 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

The intended purpose of getting people to use different, lesser used weapons, instead of falling into the "this is the current meta build so it's going to be used by every person capable of figuring out how Google works"? 

Because that's apparently the intended purpose. It's a way to combat people being stuck in the same rut. 

Pure fantasy.

The narrowly limited inventory space available for Rivens combined with the difficulty of acquiring good Rivens for specific weapons will prevent the sort of flexibility in the meta you are envisioning. Not only that, but compatibility between variants means significant variations will only occur between the strongest variants - in many cases, the Primes.

Defining Disposition with usage statistics simply means that players are constantly at the mercy of the meta. Why? Because the meta always has a bottom line in base weapon stats.

37 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

If it was about permanently balancing base stats then that would not have the same effect. 

Correct; it would have a better effect.

Weapon usage is affected by many different factors, including but not limited to:

• Weapon statistics
• Mechanical implementation (i.e., trigger type, class, etc.)
• Aesthetics
• Rarity and/or exclusivity

Rivens can only have a tangible effect on statistics, and perhaps to a lesser extent exclusivity. As a result, Rivens cannot effectively normalize weapon use on their own. It's a fool's errand to try. However, if Disposition were weapon-specific and determined by base stats, players with a soft-spot for weapons arbitrarily placed lower on the progression totem pole would have an easier time of enjoying their favorites.

If DE wants players to use a variety of different weapons, the best way for them to accomplish that goal is to give the players tools for nudging weaker weapons into higher tiers. Attempting to force variety through statistics alone is a completely backwards and self-destructive method at best.

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

4 minutes ago, ArbitUHM said:

As I said up thread, this is just a terrible way of achieving this goal. The system encourages putting a lot of time and Kuva into a Riven in order to get a good roll, then for reasons that are completely out of the players control, their Riven becomes worse and worse as time goes on. Then, if the player wants a fresh weapon with good Riven disposition, the player has to go out and acquire a new Riven either by unveiling it (i.e. the pray to RNGesus method) or go to the market (where Rivens for the newly buffed dispositions now have newly bloated plat costs). Yes, there is a chance that a Riven that they have been holding on to will get buffed but most people are not going to hold on to crappy Rivens hoping that they will gradually get buffed over who knows how much time.

Or, DE could just adjust dispositions according to base weapon power and just let them be static. That way, when the player unveils a new Riven, it's probably going to be good if they invest some effort into getting a good roll, and stuff that is completely out of their control doesn't make their Riven worse.

And you totally missed the fact that your riven would still be good relative to all the other possible rivens for the weapon. You'd still be amongst the top whatever percentile of those rivens no matter how the dispositions change. You just wouldn't have the same stats. 

And I'm sorry, but I don't understand where the issue is with you trying to get other good rivens for any of your other weapons. Are you just upset that you might find yourself changing your weapon loadouts over time? 

Because that's the main difference between what you have proposed and what DE is doing would be. You wouldn't be able to stagnate permanently with whatever god-roll you got. 

 

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

7 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Pure fantasy.

The narrowly limited inventory space available for Rivens combined with the difficulty of acquiring good Rivens for specific weapons will prevent the sort of flexibility in the meta you are envisioning. Not only that, but compatibility between variants means significant variations will only occur between the strongest variants - in many cases, the Primes.

Again you're missing the point, by trying to shoehorn what the rivens to work like into what you think they should do. 

The rivens aren't meant to be a permanent fixture. They never were. You get new ones, try for a nice roll, and find that some lesser used, weaker weapon is now on par with a stronger weapon, so you use it for a change. It's not ever going to turn all of your weapons into auper-weapons, and they're not meant to. 

They're meant to encourage you to try using other lesser used weapons. Try to hang on to that concept. 

13 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Correct; it would have a better effect.

If that was the effect they wanted to produce it might be. Unfortunately you still missed the point of the system they introduced. 

 

15 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

If DE wants players to use a variety of different weapons, the best way for them to accomplish that goal is to give the players tools for nudging weaker weapons into higher tiers. 

Yeah they're called "rivens". You should check them out sometime. 

 

16 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Attempting to force variety through statistics alone is a completely backwards and self-destructive method at best.

Oh... You never know, it's even better when you get people to want to do it. Just ask Tom Sawyer what the best way to whitewash a fence is. Or any given "groll rivens" seller. 

[MirageKnight]

7 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

DE needs to build up trust in what was previously a deprecated mechanic, and the best way for them to do this is through increased transparency. If they won't do that, it begs the question as to why simple usage statistics need to be concealed.

This is so true...and it applies to all the systems and items that DE's introduced over the years.

6 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

but show of hands for who believes it with complete faith and no inklings of doubt.

In before the usual white knights and forum warriors find out about this thread and decide to grace it with their "constructive criticisms".

[DiabolusUrsus]

20 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Again you're missing the point, by trying to shoehorn what the rivens to work like into what you think they should do.

No, I see the point clearly. It's just unrealistic.

Quote

The rivens aren't meant to be a permanent fixture. They never were. You get new ones, try for a nice roll, and find that some lesser used, weaker weapon is now on par with a stronger weapon, so you use it for a change.

Oh, please. This interpretation of what a "reward" is appears to be completely incompatible with average human psychology.

If Rivens were easy to grind and easy to roll you might have a point because they'd be relatively disposable. But as it is Rivens are hard to grind and hard to roll, which means most players will only be willing to acquire a select few through their own efforts and will be strongly inclined to hang onto the good ones they do happen across. Even assuming you are completely correct about the intent of the design, its implementation is completely unrealistic.

DE has by their own hand made Rivens a commodity, not a consumable.

Quote

It's not ever going to turn all of your weapons into auper-weapons, and they're not meant to.

Where did I say otherwise?

Quote

They're meant to encourage you to try using other lesser used weapons. Try to hang on to that concept.

There's no need for me to try. I am already fully supportive of that concept; my entire point is that the current implementation is a terrible and ineffective way to do it.

DE's stated purpose is to get lesser-used weapons to be used more often. That quite clearly and obviously applies across the community as a whole. However, you seem to be conflating usage statistics with personal usage. If that were the case, Dispositions would be player-specific. DE doesn't care if one individual player uses the Tigris Prime 99% of the time; they only care if 99% of players are using Tigris Prime 99% of the time.

Quote

Yeah they're called "rivens". You should check them out sometime. 

Spare me the theatrics. What I was saying is that players would need a reliable and personally-driven means of upgrading weaker weapons to perform on-par with stronger ones. For example, investing significant amounts of resources into improving a MR0 weapon's base stats to be on-par with say, an MR8 or MR12 weapon.

Rivens in their current form are decisively not what I am talking about there.

Quote

Oh... You never know, it's even better when you get people to want to do it. Just ask Tom Sawyer what the best way to whitewash a fence is. Or any given "groll rivens" seller. 

Uh, no.

First, there's no need to "trick" players into wanting to use different weapons. They already have an affinity for variety, as evidenced by the fact that most of them will buy weapon slots to hold on to weapons they like for future use.

Second, implementing a system that allows a player's grinding to be undone at the whimsy of other players is not how you go about convincing them that they want to try something new. It is, however, a good way to breed resentment and cause fixation on the perceived slight. Players are naturally going to resist conforming to any pressure they see in a negative light, and nerfing their stuff based on what other people do with it is most definitely going to be seen in a negative light. It always is.

Edited November 14, 2018 by DiabolusUrsus
Typos

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

3 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

No, I see the point clearly. It's just unrealistic.

Oh, please. This interpretation of what a "reward" is appears to be completely incompatible with average human psychology.

If Rivens were easy to grind, easy to roll you might have a point because they'd be relatively disposable. But as it is Rivens are hard to grind, hard to roll, which means most players will only be willing to acquire a select few through their own efforts and will be strongly inclined to hang onto the good ones they do happen across. Even assuming you are completely correct about the intent of the design, its implementation is completely unrealistic.

Where did I say otherwise?

There's no need for me to try. I am already fully supportive of that concept; my entire point is that the current implementation is a terrible and ineffective way to do it.

DE's stated purpose is to get lesser-used weapons to be used more often. That quite clearly and obviously applies across the community as a whole. However, you seem to be conflating usage statistics with personal usage. If that were the case, Dispositions would be player-specific. DE doesn't care if one individual player uses the Tigris Prime 99% of the time; they only care if 99% of players are using Tigris Prime 99% of the time.

Spare me the theatrics. What I was saying is that players would need a reliable and personally-driven means of upgrading weaker weapons to perform on-par with stronger ones. For example, investing significant amounts of resources into improving a MR0 weapon's base stats to be on-par with say, an MR8 or MR12 weapon.

Rivens in their current form are decisively not what I am talking about there.

Uh, no.

First, there's no need to "trick" players into wanting to use different weapons. They already have an affinity for variety, as evidenced by the fact that most of them will buy weapon slots to hold on to weapons they like for future use.

Second, implementing a system that allows a player's grinding to be undone at the whimsy of other players is not how you go about convincing them that they want to try something new. It is, however, a good way to breed resentment and cause fixation on the perceived slight. Players are naturally going to resist conforming to any pressure they see in a negative light, and nerfing their stuff based on what other people do with it is most definitely going to be seen in a negative light. It always is.

Yeah, you're just going to keep sitting there and demanding that your way is the way that DE should use. DE obviously disagrees with you. And that's fine. Because the system they have implemented is getting flak because it's doing exactly what you think it won't. 

 

It's encouraging people to use other weapons, and discouraging the use of some that seem to have been over used. That's exactly what all the "omfg my groll riven that I paid 6k plat for doesn't do what it used to, this fkin sucks, now I have to get something else this is fkin rediculus!!!1!11"

So, unfortunately, as much as you'd like to rail about how it won't work, that's all just a bit of a silly fantasy you're hanging on to. The sooner you can grasp that, the better. 

[motorfirebox]

I think what DE needs to do is to update dispositions on a schedule—every six months, say. In addition, usage stats should be publicly available. That way everybody gets what they want: the dispositions get updated to reflect actual usage, and riven traders can track trends and make predictions based on hard data.