Jump to content

Fortuna Enemy Inconsistency


Kaxx1256
 Share

Recommended Posts

While farming for Toroids, I noticed that the Kyta Raknoids are immune to magnetic procs. I thought it was an overshield thing so I tried to get a process on a fresh one and nada. Checked the wiki and codex for any indication of such a resistant and none was found. I have no clue if this is a bug or it's intentional like toxic eximus being immune to toxin damage (because they have the copter magnetic beam attack).

 

Later I found that Terra Jailers reduce ability duration on my mag's magnetize by 50%(from 18 to 9) and when I recast the duration was reduced by 90% (from 18 to 2). Also, Terra Hyenas (I can't remember the specific name) reduce magnetize's duration by 90%. Again I have no idea if this is a bug or intentional.

 

If this is intentional then I can't fathom the reason why. I can't think of a single non-eximis enemy that is status immune/elemental resistant other than the Kyta nor has there been an enemy that eliminates your ability to effect then with abilitys on such a severe level before the Terra units. Yes Nullifiers and Scrambus exist but both of them are manageable. Nullifiers can have their drones eliminated and Scrambus units can have their helmets removes nullifying their effect. From what I can tell, these Terra units don't have any such mechanic and Kyta Raknoids don't have any indication of magnetic elemental immunity or a weakpoint to nullifying their shields.

 

This feels so inconsistent to the rest of the game that it's beginning to be off putting. I want to do long "survival" runs at the Temple of Profit. It's exciting. But if I'm going to be faced with this artifical difficulty then I'm not going to do/enjoy the content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But thats just it. Juggernaut isn't status immune nor are G3 or Zanuka. Another thing they all have in common is that they only appear once per stage. Even sentients follow a spawn schedule. Kyta's just start spawning. I had 3 alive at the same time outside Temple of Profit within a 5 minutes window. They are just status immune but total magnetic elemental immunity. It is infuriating to see so many zeros pop up when you fire off both barrels of your Tigris Prime and see the slash procs you did score just go straight to the shield that, at this point, you metaphorically scratched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kyta Raknoids (Big Spiders) and Jackals also are immune to slash/toxin proc damage until you take down their shields (at least at higher levels) I noticed.  They have countermeasures against our usual anti-shield counter-play it seems.

For that matter Kyta Raknoid seems immune to Oberon's Reckoning armor strip (until its shields are taken down) and Smite (90% of the time).  Jackals cannot be targeted by Smite half of the time either.  So its likely they are trying to block out as many cheese strategies as they can on the 'boss' mobs.

Edit:

Oh yeah, and Kyta Raknoids are immune to corrosive procs which is kind of unusual as well.

Edited by Ailyene
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, -AoN-CanoLathra- said:

Most of the Field Bosses are proc/CC resistant. I guess they consider Raknoids and Terra Jailers to be field bosses (which doesn't make sense for the jailers, but does for the raknoids)

But thats just it. Juggernaut isn't status immune nor are G3 or Zanuka. Another thing they all have in common is that they only appear once per stage. Even sentients follow a spawn schedule. Kyta's just start spawning. I had 3 alive at the same time outside Temple of Profit within a 5 minutes window. They are just status immune but total magnetic elemental immunity. It is infuriating to see so many zeros pop up when you fire off both barrels of your Tigris Prime and see the slash procs you did score just go straight to the shield that, at this point, you metaphorically scratched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ailyene said:

Kyta Raknoids (Bigger ones) and Jackals also are immune to slash/toxin proc damage until you take down their shields (at least at higher levels) I noticed.  They have countermeasures against our usual anti-shield counter-play it seems.

For that matter Kyta Raknoid seems immune to Oberon's Reckoning armor strip (until its shields are taken down) and Smite (90% of the time).  Jackals cannot be targeted by Smite half of the time either.  So its likely they are trying to block out as many cheese strategies as they can on the 'boss' mobs.

Edit:

Oh yeah, and Kyta Raknoids are immune to corrosive procs which is kind of unusual as well.

This is honestly disappointing.

Here, have this status proc system to build your weapons around! Now watch as all the enemies you most need it for are immune, because we accidentally made status too OP and don't know how to nerf it correctly!

When every significant enemy has to break the rules to stay relevant, DE should recognize that there's a problem... >_>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

This is honestly disappointing.

Here, have this status proc system to build your weapons around! Now watch as all the enemies you most need it for are immune, because we accidentally made status too OP and don't know how to nerf it correctly!

When every significant enemy has to break the rules to stay relevant, DE should recognize that there's a problem... >_>

Remove mods like Shattering Impact. No matter how useful it is, it's an easily exploited mod. 2-3 volleys from a Sarpa removes Kyta's armor. Why strip armor in that way when corrosive exists? Make robotic enemies immune to Viral because they are robots. They don't get virus' like that. Why can fully armored enemies bleed from being slashed? Simple logic questions that I wish the devs would have asked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Kaxx1256 said:

Remove mods like Shattering Impact. No matter how useful it is, it's an easily exploited mod. 2-3 volleys from a Sarpa removes Kyta's armor.

Of course there's always cheese that they overlook... sigh...

45 minutes ago, Kaxx1256 said:

Why strip armor in that way when corrosive exists? Make robotic enemies immune to Viral because they are robots. They don't get virus' like that.

I always looked at it as more of a cyborg-type mix between biological and computer virus. I don't really support full immunity, and I would prefer for all elements to be potentially useful in different ways.

45 minutes ago, Kaxx1256 said:

Why can fully armored enemies bleed from being slashed? Simple logic questions that I wish the devs would have asked.

I think a slightly more detailed system would be useful.

  • Give armor a density (rating) and durability (health).
  • Give weapons a penetration (armor pierce) and mass (stagger) rating.
  • Make shields like armor, but with much less durability in exchange for better density and regeneration.
  • Density protects against penetration (health damage) and mass (stagger).

If a weapons penetration does not surpass defense density, it deals 0 damage to health and instead damages the defenses (armor/shields). If the penetration is marginally higher (example: 1-20% higher), it deals most of its damage to the defenses and a smaller portion of its damage to health. If the penetration is noticeably higher (20+% higher) it deals 100% damage to health and bonus damage to defenses.

Effects like Slash or Toxin which ostensibly require physical contact with a bloodstream or sensitive electronics would require damage to health, and be fully negated if stopped by defenses like shields or armor. This is a simplistic explanation of what I have in mind, but hopefully you have a general idea of what I'm getting at. Instead of only penetrating armor, players have the option of building to destroy it quickly (e.g., corrosive) or work around it entirely (e.g., freeze an enemy solid with cold damage, making them vulnerable to impact/blast).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

I think a slightly more detailed system would be useful.

  • Give armor a density (rating) and durability (health).
  • Give weapons a penetration (armor pierce) and mass (stagger) rating.
  • Make shields like armor, but with much less durability in exchange for better density and regeneration.
  • Density protects against penetration (health damage) and mass (stagger).

Instead of only penetrating armor, players have the option of building to destroy it quickly (e.g., corrosive) or work around it entirely (e.g., freeze an enemy solid with cold damage, making them vulnerable to impact/blast).

I agree that this would be a better system but it would require a alot of stat rebalancing and the implementation of a new system. That requires time and money that businesses want to save by reinforcing the demon that you know. To improve the current system, I would agree that freezing an enemy should be a damage multiplier for impact but not blast. Elementals should be a choice to gain an advantage not a Swiss army knife. Completely remove elemantal damage. Remove elemental status chance. Have them always apply with some form of utility/damage bonus with a transitional effect a certain amount of hits. Cold is a slow that transitions into a freeze. Toxin causes a portion of IPS shields then transitions into increased status chance. Electricity causes an intermittent stun the turns into a chain stun. Can't think of a unique effect for heat atm but same deal. Turn elemental combos into bonus with higher effect like corrosive stripping flat armor, magnetic removeing shields, or gas causing aoe toxin effect. Then there is only the question of utility not bloated damage values.

 

Specifically, I think that corrosive should be changed from percentage strip on and exponential system to a flat strip of 3-6 and get rid of Shattering Impact all together. Also, to lessen the necessity of corrosive weapons, add an additional armor strip modifier of 1-3 to IPS status procs. That way using raw IPS weapons can still strip low armor values but corrosive weaponry would be better against larger enemies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Kaxx1256 said:

I agree that this would be a better system but it would require a alot of stat rebalancing and the implementation of a new system. That requires time and money that businesses want to save by reinforcing the demon that you know.

I understand, but if they can overhaul Melee twice I think a Damage 3.0 shouldn't be out of the question.

Quote

To improve the current system, I would agree that freezing an enemy should be a damage multiplier for impact but not blast. Elementals should be a choice to gain an advantage not a Swiss army knife.

Under my system, elements would be much more limited. For example, players could have Rad or Viral, but not Rad/Viral.

Blast would also be more focused on AOE and inheriting some elemental effects rather than damage on its own.

Quote

Completely remove elemantal damage. Remove elemental status chance. Have them always apply with some form of utility/damage bonus with a transitional effect a certain amount of hits.

This is exactly what I have in mind, except for the "remove elemental damage" bit. Instead, elemental damage would "convert" a portion of raw damage instead of adding bonus damage. This way we can still have elemental weapons like the Ignis and Glaxion.

Still, we agree 100% that elements should have an auxiliary effect on every hit,

Quote

Cold is a slow that transitions into a freeze.

^ Just like this!

Quote

Toxin causes a portion of IPS shields then transitions into increased status chance.

I thought status chance was gone? Anyway, I certainly support reducing the redundant and unimaginative DOTs we have.

Quote

Electricity causes an intermittent stun the turns into a chain stun.

I was thinking of a chain on every hit with a periodic shock that scales with the number of chained targets. I had been envisioning damage, but a stun could work nicely in place of that.

Quote

Can't think of a unique effect for heat atm but same deal.

Stacking short DOT that procs into a panic should be fine.

Quote

Turn elemental combos into bonus with higher effect like corrosive stripping flat armor,

If we use my armor system, corrosive would be great for melting armor durability per hit with a proc that periodically lowers density (making it easier to pierce) but doesn't have many bonuses against health.

Quote

magnetic removeing shields, or gas causing aoe toxin effect.

Gas should create short-lived gas clouds which progressively weaken enemies which stay inside them, and explode if hit with heat/electric damage.

Quote

Then there is only the question of utility not bloated damage values.

Making elements convert rather than add should address the bloated values.

Quote

Specifically, I think that corrosive should be changed from percentage strip on and exponential system to a flat strip of 3-6 and get rid of Shattering Impact all together. Also, to lessen the necessity of corrosive weapons, add an additional armor strip modifier of 1-3 to IPS status procs. That way using raw IPS weapons can still strip low armor values but corrosive weaponry would be better against larger enemies.

The nice thing about my system is that it already accounts for this. If a player isn't prepared to counter enemy armor, the armor really only amounts to extra health. They can break it regardless of their weapon choice or build.

As they progress, they can build to strip armor, pierce armor, or indirectly bypass armor (e.g., freeze + shatter).

Ideally small vs. large enemies could be handled simply through modifying armor density and durability values.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

I thought status chance was gone? 

I should clarify that I mean status chance increase for IPS. Turns toxin into a more supportive element through vulnerability than outright damage.

 

I agree with the idea of conversion rather than simple auxiliary elements. It works with the current system better.

 

The overhaul for melee was and is necessary. The system sucks. It's not fluid, combos are near impossible to execute with extremely high attack speeds, and charge/channel/slam mechanics are useless, boring, and counterproductive. The current damage system is just flawed not fundamentaly broken and can be fixed without adding complexity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Kaxx1256 said:

The overhaul for melee was and is necessary. The system sucks. It's not fluid, combos are near impossible to execute with extremely high attack speeds, and charge/channel/slam mechanics are useless, boring, and counterproductive. The current damage system is just flawed not fundamentaly broken and can be fixed without adding complexity.

I agree that melee 3.0 is needed, but I consider the 2.0 system to have just as much - if not more - baseline functionality than Damage 2.0.

IMO, Damage 2.0 IS fundamentally broken. Slash damage flat-out ignores its intended drawbacks and there are no significant functional differences between builds (i.e., a Corrosive build is used against Grineer the exact same way as a Gas build is used against Corpus).

Damage 2.0 offers only a veneer of variety, when in reality its various effects are mostly palette-swaps of one another with token differences.

I don't think I am really asking for any extra complexity; the available types of damage remain mostly the same, and proposed interactions would follow conventional video-game wisdom (making them fairly intuitive). What it WOULD add is some actual depth (thereby making the complexity meaningful rather than completely arbitrary).

While I would agree that the damage system has the required minimum degree of functionality, I strongly believe that renovating it is essential to developing compelling enemy content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

IMO, Damage 2.0 IS fundamentally broken. Slash damage flat-out ignores its intended drawbacks and there are no significant functional differences between builds.

 

Damage 2.0 offers only a veneer of variety, when in reality its various effects are mostly palette-swaps of one another with token differences.

 

I don't think I am really asking for any extra complexity.

 

While I would agree that the damage system has the required minimum degree of functionality, I strongly believe that renovating it is essential to developing compelling enemy content.

Changing slash procs from true damage to physical fixes that problem. Grineer can be dealt with at low to mid level with gas, viral/slash, viral/radiation, and corrosive effectively while corpus dispatched by toxin, gas, or radiation/viral. There are many variations in the builds you can use whether you want to rely on status procs or not. The reason builds tend to pack diversity stems from mandatory mods. At the same time, Bane mods are wholy ignores because they are "bad" when that's just not true. If they buffed all weapons by the amount given by Serration mods then you'd see a different experience. Even with changes to damage, Toxin will always be the top stat against corpus and corrosive weapons will always be taken again Grineer because they are the most efficient killers. Giving armor a defense rating and a health pool doesn't matter if corrosive will always be the best at mid to high level. Just because you CAN strip armor with IPS and other elements doesn't mean it's the BEST.

 

Compelling enemy content does stem from how you can damage then but how you interact with their mechanics. Grineer are terrible. It's shoot kill shoot. Corpus are interactive. You have to watch for Scrambus units and Nullifiers. Infested adds multipler layers of pressure through Ancients and Parasitic emenies. And the corrupted put that all together. My only complaint about the enemies is that they are inconsistent not that they aren't engaging.

 

We've gone from being able to manage Nullifiers and Scrambus' to proc immunity and near ability immunity.

Edited by Kaxx1256
Clarity
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kaxx1256 said:

Changing slash procs from true damage to physical fixes that problem. Grineer can be dealt with at low to mid level with gas, viral/slash, viral/radiation, and corrosive effectively while corpus dispatched by toxin, gas, or radiation/viral. There are many variations in the builds you can use whether you want to rely on status procs or not. The reason builds tend to pack diversity stems from mandatory mods. At the same time, Bane mods are wholy ignores because they are "bad" when that's just not true. If they buffed all weapons by the amount given by Serration mods then you'd see a different experience. Even with changes to damage, Toxin will always be the top stat against corpus and corrosive weapons will always be taken again Grineer because they are the most efficient killers. Giving armor a defense rating and a health pool doesn't matter if corrosive will always be the best at mid to high level. Just because you CAN strip armor with IPS and other elements doesn't mean it's the BEST.

I think you misunderstood my point, which is that at the mechanical level there is no real difference between using Viral to kill Grineer or Toxin to kill Corpus or Heat to kill Infested.

Sure, the status "procs" are different, but that doesn't make much or a difference in most content and you "fight" them all exactly the same way. As you said; shoot kill shoot.

The only thing that changes is if you accidentally bring the wrong A/B/C template, at which point you are arbitrarily punished with reduced damage.

1 hour ago, Kaxx1256 said:

Compelling enemy content does stem from how you can damage then but how you interact with their mechanics. Grineer are terrible. It's shoot kill shoot. Corpus are interactive. You have to watch for Scrambus units and Nullifiers. Infested adds multipler layers of pressure through Ancients and Parasitic emenies. And the corrupted put that all together. My only complaint about the enemies is that they are inconsistent not that they aren't engaging.

I both agree and disagree with this. Yes, enemy interactions are a factor in compelling content. However, means of damaging them very much dictates HOW you interact with them.

What I'm saying is that instead of arbitrary +75% or -25% multipliers attached to every element, elements should offer different methods of overcoming the same enemies (though small fluff-based bonuses like Heat vs. Infested can stay).

What I'm saying is that, for example, Magnetic should not be irreparably "bad" against Grineer or Infested. Instead, it should force different tactics to capitalize on different weaknesses (e.g., Magnetic might block extra effects like Volatile Runner explosions, Brood Mother maggot-spawning, Boiler Pod spawning, or Mutalist MOA spit due to disrupting the constituent Technocyte nanites).

This would require players to craft diverse and complementary builds, while allowing them to apply these builds across factions through changing strategies.

1 hour ago, Kaxx1256 said:

We've gone from being able to manage Nullifiers and Scrambus' to proc immunity and near ability immunity.

I question how compelling Nullifiers and Comba/Scrambi really are, because with any automatic weapon and some punch-through they can be dealt with via simply mowing them down.

Sure, you CAN counter them with precision (i.e., shooting off helmets), but it is rarely particularly beneficial to do so. Not only that, but in the situations where it is useful (higher levels or cramped areas) it is often worsened by increased spawns and overcrowding of targets. Unless, of course, you have punch-through... At which point they are once again reduced to point-and-click rathr easily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

At which point they are once again reduced to point-and-click rathr easily.

Everything in a shooter is going to become point and click. My point really is just that there is a mechanic that you have to be aware of which can be managed. No they aren't the best or most compelling enemies but they force you to be aware of them and act upon their arrival much like Ancients and Eximus'. They are present and take priority. Their existence is punishment and that's ok. There is a managable layer of pressure. If DE wants to introduce more units like this then they need to follow their own implemented mechanics rather than giving immunites. There is already variety in the game. In all games there is a best option and useless/near useless options. Can you kill Grineer with magnetic damage? Yes. Can you kill Corpus with corrosive? Yes. They are just suboptimal. Even with a mechanical change, this won't change as long as corrosive strips/penetrates armor faster/better. Likewise for magnetic. DE would be making marginal improvements. That's a waste of valuable time and money. If you want to talk a whole damage rework that's fine but you're missing the point. DE has a creativity problem. Introducing these lazy enemy designs is proof. Instead of finding ways to make the horde of enemies interact with you differently, they would rather implement enemies that you can't interact with at all. A damage rework won't change that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kaxx1256 said:

Everything in a shooter is going to become point and click. My point really is just that there is a mechanic that you have to be aware of which can be managed. No they aren't the best or most compelling enemies but they force you to be aware of them and act upon their arrival much like Ancients and Eximus'.

Let me rephrase for clarity: they are easily reduced back to thoughtless pointing and clicking.

I'll concede that players must maintain an awareness of their presence, but there are no significant requirements for interacting with them differently in most cases. (i.e., in most situations it is easier to just shoot a Comba instead of trying to disable it via helmet).

3 minutes ago, Kaxx1256 said:

They are present and take priority. Their existence is punishment and that's ok. There is a managable layer of pressure. If DE wants to introduce more units like this then they need to follow their own implemented mechanics rather than giving immunites.

Yes, agreed. Unfortunately they are railroaded into immunities because they have given players tools which otherwise allow them to shut off the AI at will... Indefinitely.

3 minutes ago, Kaxx1256 said:

There is already variety in the game. In all games there is a best option and useless/near useless options. Can you kill Grineer with magnetic damage? Yes. Can you kill Corpus with corrosive? Yes. They are just suboptimal. Even with a mechanical change, this won't change as long as corrosive strips/penetrates armor faster/better. Likewise for magnetic. DE would be making marginal improvements. That's a waste of valuable time and money. If you want to talk a whole damage rework that's fine but you're missing the point.

Based on the next section of your post, I think I have a better idea of the point you're making, and I agree with it.

However, I think you are also missing my point, which is that there is no value to diversity in a damage system if it's all functionally identical.

Is there any gameplay value to having corrosive and magnetic as opposed to having a single damage type? Not really; they behave almost exactly the same. The same way DE implements ENEMIES players can't interact with, I'd argue that they've implemented damage players can't really interact with at all.

3 minutes ago, Kaxx1256 said:

DE has a creativity problem. Introducing these lazy enemy designs is proof. Instead of finding ways to make the horde of enemies interact with you differently, they would rather implement enemies that you can't interact with at all. A damage rework won't change that.

I agree 100% with this, and I should be clear that I wouldn't want just a damage overhaul in isolation.

Our enemy factions are artistically diverse but, setting aside the simplistic "melee/not melee" dynamics, they are fairly homogeneous.

Fighting Grineer is mostly the same as fighting Corpus, which is mostly the same as fighting Infested/Corrupted. The factions need to branch out in terms of identity and strategy, such that they become properly distinct.

I think it would be best to retool Warframe's deprecated damage mechanics at the same time.

Time consuming? Yeah. Costly? Definitely.

But also absolutely necessary if DE wants to develop any semblance of gameplay depth (which they SHOULD want for the continued longevity of the game).

The lack of depth is what makes "content droughts" so significant, because players have run out of items on their to-do lists which normally serve as anesthesia with regards to the flat gameplay loop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

However, I think you are also missing my point, which is that there is no value to diversity in a damage system if it's all functionally identical.

In the end all elemental damage is stripping some form of protection. The major forms of damage lack real identities.

 

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Our enemy factions are artistically diverse but, setting aside the simplistic "melee/not melee" dynamics, they are fairly homogeneous.

Not true. Corpus use mostly projectile weapons while Grineer use hit-scan. This is a major change in visual mechanics and gameplay. You can dodge corpus but not Grineer. Grineer melee is way different from Corpus. Grineer are all offense with only one unit the pulls. Corpus employ MoAs and Ospreys for utility which can become quite a handful especially at high levels.

 

Both of us agree that elements should have auxiliary functions to damage while converting base damage to said elements. But then you said 

9 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

instead of arbitrary +75% or -25% multipliers attached to every element, elements should offer different methods of overcoming the same enemies

which makes conversion totally worthless. I'm looking for clarity on what you would want from a damage rework.

 

58 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

The lack of depth is what makes "content droughts" so significant

No the lack of content in the updates is what makes them short. Tenno reinforcements are judged and shelved in a week and events are sparse. They haven't introduced anything really new into the game. Newest content (prior to Fortuna) is Arbitration which is boring to me. It's rehashed relics which is a system i already hate Sanctuary Onslaught and Kuva Survival came before that and it offers a lot of replayability if you're into fast endless game modes. There is content but players are getting everything at incredible speeds. Even with more ways to kill things, the replay value of a game with the goal of collecting things isn't going to change. The problem is the lack of objective after collecting everything or collecting everything you want. Doing so to face harder enemies but there aren't any. Yeah you can do an Endless mission but the ramp up is boring. Arbitration gives the higher level enemies but with crappy arbiter drones and a crap reward table. Why isn't Nitain a reward there? Why isn't Rivens available in arbitration at a 1% drop rate? Why aren't forma or forma bps available at a 2% drop rate? These are things that players want and will always want so long as they are necessary high level resources.

TLDR: New game modes are rehashes of old modes and aren't rewarding enough to be interesting nor hard enough to be a challenge.

 

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Everytime you caps lock for emphasis

Please stop doing this. I can understand what you're saying without it. If the extra emphasis is necessary then please re-evaluate you're statement for clarity. Its condescending.

11 hours ago, Kaxx1256 said:

Just because you CAN strip armor with IPS and other elements doesn't mean it's the BEST.

This was satire

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Kaxx1256 said:

In the end all elemental damage is stripping some form of protection. The major forms of damage lack real identities.

Not necessarily; effects like Radiation, Cold, Heat, Blast, etc. have more to do with CC than protection counterplay.

46 minutes ago, Kaxx1256 said:

Not true. Corpus use mostly projectile weapons while Grineer use hit-scan. This is a major change in visual mechanics and gameplay.

No, it really isn't. The major differences between Grineer and Corpus are the existence of Nullifier-type units and relative proportional prevalence of Slash procs. Aside from assigned target priority, there is no difference between how the average player will approach each faction and succeed: bullet-jump a lot and shoot/melee stuff to death. I agree that projectiles mesh with the extant evasion/deflection mechanics better than hitscan weaponry, but...

46 minutes ago, Kaxx1256 said:

You can dodge corpus but not Grineer. Grineer melee is way different from Corpus. Grineer are all offense with only one unit the pulls. Corpus employ MoAs and Ospreys for utility which can become quite a handful especially at high levels.

Patently false.

You simply cannot go through a Corpus mission and dodge all projectiles, and there is no significant variation between damage taken during Corpus missions and damage taken during Grineer missions. This is entirely placebo effect due to the increased prevalence of shots which visibly miss. You can easily test this yourself; go bullet-jump and parkour like crazy in any Grineer mission while solo and you will take fewer hits.

Of course, hitscan weapons quickly start to outpace projectile weapons once the AI's aiming starts scaling into true aimbot territory... but at that point the game is well outside the normal bounds of play and it's not really worth considering. The Corpus also close the gap at comparable levels through bullet-hell amounts of gunfire.

46 minutes ago, Kaxx1256 said:

Both of us agree that elements should have auxiliary functions to damage while converting base damage to said elements. But then you said 

which makes conversion totally worthless. I'm looking for clarity on what you would want from a damage rework.

Not if the proportion of elemental damage is directly tied to the magnitude of its status effects and rate at which its status procs occur. This is, of course, assuming that status "chance" is fully removed as a random stat, and I don't mean to say that damage bonuses/penalties can't exist. They just shouldn't be the defining characteristics.

46 minutes ago, Kaxx1256 said:

No the lack of content in the updates is what makes them short. Tenno reinforcements are judged and shelved in a week and events are sparse. They haven't introduced anything really new into the game. Newest content (prior to Fortuna) is Arbitration which is boring to me. It's rehashed relics which is a system i already hate Sanctuary Onslaught and Kuva Survival came before that and it offers a lot of replayability if you're into fast endless game modes. There is content but players are getting everything at incredible speeds. Even with more ways to kill things, the replay value of a game with the goal of collecting things isn't going to change. The problem is the lack of objective after collecting everything or collecting everything you want. Doing so to face harder enemies but there aren't any. Yeah you can do an Endless mission but the ramp up is boring. Arbitration gives the higher level enemies but with crappy arbiter drones and a crap reward table. Why isn't Nitain a reward there? Why isn't Rivens available in arbitration at a 1% drop rate? Why aren't forma or forma bps available at a 2% drop rate? These are things that players want and will always want so long as they are necessary high level resources.

TLDR: New game modes are rehashes of old modes and aren't rewarding enough to be interesting nor hard enough to be a challenge.

I think you completely missed the point of what I was saying, and then basically said the exact same thing.

To put it another way: Warframe's lack of combat depth means that it depends entirely on goal-oriented reward structures to keep players engaged. When players run out of goals (i.e., content), they quickly burn out because when you get into the nitty gritty of it the game isn't actually all that great on a technical level. It's very flat and repetitive - not just because of the objectives but because of the unimaginative enemy behavior and lack of true customization when it comes to weapons and powers.

I will continually play games like the Dark Souls series, Devil May Cry series, Magicka series, etc. for effectively no reward (at least in the sense of a Warframe-style loot reward) simply because they are mechanically fun to play. If Warframe could develop the sort of mechanical depth that other games have, its gameplay loop would stay fresher and "content droughts" would affect players less severely.

This same lack of depth also ties back into lack of challenging enemies (they can't really do anything interesting if they only survive 0.1 seconds) and lackluster rewards (drop rates have to be really bad to compensate for how quickly and simplistically players can complete content).

46 minutes ago, Kaxx1256 said:

Please stop doing this. I can understand what you're saying without it. If the extra emphasis is necessary then please re-evaluate you're statement for clarity. Its condescending.

This was satire

C'mon dude, this is just petty. I'm sorry you feel I'm being condescending to you, but my emphasis is purely stylistic; there is no condescension intended. I caps if I'm using my phone because it's easier than scrolling back up to hit the bold button.

And it's seriously hypocritical of you to complain about this right after using a bolded TL;DR not 2 lines prior. Should I assume you are implying that I lack the attention span to read through what you've written? Let's just not go down that road, okay?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

I think you completely missed the point of what I was saying, and then basically said the exact same thing.

We were talking about combat mechanics prior to. If you feel that gameplay modes are an issues the I don't believe you conveyed that in the following.

23 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

The lack of depth is what makes "content droughts" so significant, because players have run out of items on their to-do lists which normally serve as anesthesia with regards to the flat gameplay loop.

 

20 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Warframe's lack of combat depth means that it depends entirely on goal-oriented reward structures to keep players engaged. When players run out of goals (i.e., content), they quickly burn out because when you get into the nitty gritty of it the game isn't actually all that great on a technical level. It's very flat and repetitive - not just because of the objectives but because of the unimaginative enemy behavior and lack of true customization when it comes to weapons and powers.

I will continually play games like the Dark Souls series, Devil May Cry series, Magicka series, etc. for effectively no reward (at least in the sense of a Warframe-style loot reward) simply because they are mechanically fun to play. If Warframe could develop the sort of mechanical depth that other games have, its gameplay loop would stay fresher and "content droughts" would affect players less severely.

Agreed but the mediocre rewards is the key point I'm making. Where there is difficulty there isn't a significant reward. With mechanical improvement to the game it can certainly be better but without proper reward it won't change much. Lighten the boredom by being able to change things up but the feelings like theres something better to do with your time wouldn't change.

20 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

there is no condescension intended. I caps if I'm using my phone because it's easier than scrolling back up to hit the bold button.

I understand

 

20 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

this right after using a bolded TL;DR 

I was only acknowledging my rambling and attempting to be considerate. The whole paragraph could be surmized into one sentence and I realized that after rereading it.

 

21 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Should I assume you are implying that I lack the attention span to read through what you've written? Let's just not go down that road, okay?

TLDRs aren't for the inattentive. They are for the impatient. I assume you'd rather read a concise point that long winded rambling like anyone else. I dont mean this as an insult because I myself appreciate TLDR notes on forums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Kaxx1256 said:

We were talking about combat mechanics prior to. If you feel that gameplay modes are an issues the I don't believe you conveyed that in the following.

The combat mechanics (including enemy behavior and damage) are at the forefront of the issue. I think that the objectives are contributing factors, but secondary in this case. Rather, the issue with the objectives is not the objectives themselves but their lack of consequence or meaning. For example, intelligence objectives like Spy or Capture could be tied more directly to revealing special opportunity alerts instead of "this will help our cause," with no concrete evidence that they actually do.

4 hours ago, Kaxx1256 said:

Agreed but the mediocre rewards is the key point I'm making. Where there is difficulty there isn't a significant reward. With mechanical improvement to the game it can certainly be better but without proper reward it won't change much. Lighten the boredom by being able to change things up but the feelings like theres something better to do with your time wouldn't change.

Mediocre rewards are the direct consequence of flat gameplay, which is itself a direct consequence of poor game balance (in part due to bad implementation of damage). DE drives their monetization through convenience, which means they are forced to balance rewards against maximum player efficiency (i.e., players finishing missions in 2-3 minutes with minimal engagement, or killing hundreds upon hundreds of loot-dropping enemies).

Building an engaging combat system would by default require slowing players down a bit: putting reasonable limitations on map-nuking, preventing true CC locks, and raising the TTK for at least some (not necessarily all) enemies to a few seconds instead of fractions of seconds to permit more complicated behaviors. Although this will necessarily slow players down somewhat, it should ideally make them more inclined to engage with the game rather than arrange their arsenal such that the game effectively plays itself while they watch something else.

With the rate of acquisition lowered, the quality/rate of rewards could presumably be increased. That said, I certainly agree that establishing good "evergreen" type rewards will be critically important. None of these discussed changes can really solve the entirety of the problem in isolation.

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...