Jump to content

Damage 2.5 Ideas


WuceBrillis
 Share

Recommended Posts

As we all know, Impact and Puncture currently have very underwhelming status effects, and DE went back to the drawing board on their previous ideas to rectify the issue. My solution is rather simple, and although I doubt it'll end up in the game, I'd still like to share it with you all just in case. If you have any input, or ideas of your own, feel free to post them.

IMPACT

The current impact proc is nothing more than a nuisance. My idea here is simple. You know that mod Shattering Impact? Thats it. Just give us that effect, and adjust the values as needed.

PUNCTURE

When I think of puncture, you know what comes to mind? Punching through things. You know what doesn't come to mind? Reducing the damage the target can dish out. I don't know why, where, or how they landed on that effect but it's pretty darn lackluster. My idea is simple, pellets that proc puncture puncture their target and do additional damage to targets hit behind the original. How much extra damage? I have no idea, but 30% comes to mind.

SLASH

No changes. Why fix what's not broken?

Any thoughts?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep. The general direction of your post is spot on. Anything that doesnt help in damage dealing is pretty much trash in the game, just look at how most players treat blast damage. Steering the IPS towards dealing more damage is a good change.

The puncture proc you mentioned does seem abit OP though. How about creating a weakspot on the target instead, something like Helios's detect vulnerability or banshee's sonar, instead of the 30% direct boost. The punch through can stay.

Hope you find my input useful.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Currently corrosive has a design mechanic around lowering armor, and DE seemed to be highly resistant to overlap in that field. Their idea for Status 2.5, was impact would stagger, as now to progressively knockdown, and at sniper level or more pure impact damage rag doll effected forces - players or enemies. Mind, it was suggested with fast firing weapons which by DE's own example wouldn't do much more than a stumble as they do now but sniper level damage would cause the long range marksman to have to scramble for where the target that received a powerful impact would end up and stop repeated impact sniper shots to a given region if the foe could be affected to start with. Slash was going to be nerfed to only apply to the base slash of the weapon; thus making anything that didn't have high slash innately do little to no damage; this would have had an added effect of making mods like Hunter Munitions not work on anything but high slash base weapons. Puncture would build up to a higher damage reduction on the affected target, but start lower missing the point somewhat but would have been somewhat problematic on players, as all these changes have to be planned working both ways.

 I am all for improvements to physical damage in general, but I don't think its as easy as just making the damage types use favored aspects of existing mods, the puncture leaving weak-spots was suggested quite a bit back in the original thread though, so I could see it easily being accepted by players and against players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Urlan said:

Currently corrosive has a design mechanic around lowering armor, and DE seemed to be highly resistant to overlap in that field...

They both work in different ways, with shattering impact reducing base armour by a flat amount, and corrosive removing a percentage of current armour. I think it's enough of a change to rectify the similar role. Why can't we have more ways to deal with armour? It's so common that I feel there should be more ways to get around it.

 

19 minutes ago, Cephalycion said:

The puncture proc you mentioned does seem abit OP though. How about creating a weakspot on the target instead, something like Helios's detect vulnerability or banshee's sonar, instead of the 30% direct boost. The punch through can stay.

The values can be adjusted, and the boost is only applied to targets behind the first one in my idea. Of course I'm open to literally anything else other than what we have now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, WuceBrillis said:

They both work in different ways, with shattering impact reducing base armour by a flat amount, and corrosive removing a percentage of current armour. I think it's enough of a change to rectify the similar role. Why can't we have more ways to deal with armour? It's so common that I feel there should be more ways to get around it.

 

The values can be adjusted, and the boost is only applied to targets behind the first one in my idea. Of course I'm open to literally anything else other than what we have now.

I know how the Shattering Impact mod works, its a mod I have and use from time to time, it is also already that mod working off of impact procs, which DE has responded before they didn't like the idea of just giving the physical statuses effects that would creatively step on other status as that would be bad design mechanically and creatively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, WuceBrillis said:

SLASH

No changes. Why fix what's not broken?

Any thoughts?

Slash and its status proc is one of the reasons damage system right now does not work. Slash is just too good, because it deals true damage and ignores all defenses enemies can have. What is the point in armor strip status procs, when you can just ignore it. Same relationship can be observed between Toxin and Magnetic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ShortCat said:

Slash and its status proc is one of the reasons damage system right now does not work. Slash is just too good, because it deals true damage and ignores all defenses enemies can have. What is the point in armor strip status procs, when you can just ignore it. Same relationship can be observed between Toxin and Magnetic.

I'm going to stop you right there buddy. DE has proposed nerfing slash before and let's just say it upset a large amount of very vocal internet warriors.

Buff everything else for all I care, but slash shouldn't be touched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cephalycion said:

I'm going to stop you right there buddy. DE has proposed nerfing slash before and let's just say it upset a large amount of very vocal internet warriors.

Their suggestion was actually a buff to slash, only the majority did not realize this. How was it a buff you ask? They wanted to make slash procs scale with +slash mods, not only +base damage mods like it is right now. In this context, slash weapons would become even stronger. Impact or puncture weapons with forced slash procs via melee stances or Hunters Munitions would take a hit, but at the same time, it would have buffed pure elemental weapons.

It was the right move not to implement suggested Damage 2.5, certainly not because slash would be nerfed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ShortCat said:

Their suggestion was actually a buff to slash, only the majority did not realize this. How was it a buff you ask? They wanted to make slash procs scale with +slash mods, not only +base damage mods like it is right now. In this context, slash weapons would become even stronger. Impact or puncture weapons with forced slash procs via melee stances or Hunters Munitions would take a hit, but at the same time, it would have buffed pure elemental weapons.

It was the right move not to implement suggested Damage 2.5, certainly not because slash would be nerfed.

I guess that is another way to look at things, but my opinion about slash not being touched stands, too many people have invested too much time perfecting their slash builds and I admit I am one of them. Nerfing slash would still cause outrage and I'm not gonna look forward to that.

Also, DE proposed removing the slash scaling with base damage mods, and wanted them to scale only with slash damage.

Here is a quote directly from the thread itself:

"We are also making a change in how a proc’s associated damage output is calculated - before, a Slash proc would scale based on the weapon’s total base damage output. Now, all procs will be calculated using ONLY the damage type of the proc that is being inflicted."

Edited by Cephalycion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cephalycion said:

I guess that is another way to look at things, but my opinion about slash not being touched stands, too many people have invested too much time perfecting their slash builds and I admit I am one of them. Nerfing slash would still cause outrage and I'm not gonna look forward to that.

Invested into what exactly? Buids are not set in stone. Your favourite youtuber will make a new build for you later on. Slash is a problem, because it has too much potential compared to other types; and because it ignores enemy's defence. I already mentioned it: look at Magnetic, that deals huge damage to shields, and then look at Toxin, that igrnores shields entirely. Same problem, only more apparent.

If the only reason you argue against slash nerf, is that you or other people will be upset, I say stop being ignorant or you will never fix anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, ShortCat said:

Invested into what exactly? Buids are not set in stone. Your favourite youtuber will make a new build for you later on. Slash is a problem, because it has too much potential compared to other types; and because it ignores enemy's defence. I already mentioned it: look at Magnetic, that deals huge damage to shields, and then look at Toxin, that igrnores shields entirely. Same problem, only more apparent.

If the only reason you argue against slash nerf, is that you or other people will be upset, I say stop being ignorant or you will never fix anything.

Why nerf something when you can rework or buff another thing to compete with what's already competitive? Is what I'm trying to push for here.

Slash is by no means too strong. It scales well but the damage ticks still take time to kill and often times direct shots have even less ttk. Against high levels, corrosive direct damage build will almost always have lower ttk than slash. A nerf can't really be justified when something isn't broken in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Cephalycion said:

Why nerf something when you can rework or buff another thing to compete with what's already competitive? Is what I'm trying to push for here.

Because even a PVE game has a power curve for enemies and players. Staying on this power curve correlates to the appropriate stage you are in the game, or simply put - challange & available options. If something operates above this curve, it is an outlier and outshines everything else: game mechanincs (like damage types), gear (weapons) or enemies (lvl X enemies opose no challange, because Y is too strong). Usually, there are some overperformers, some underperformes and the strong middle.

Now what happans if, like you suggest, only buffs are there to regulate. Every piece of gear and every game mechanic will require a rework to create a new power curve for the player. Or with simple words - 95% of our arsenal will get a buff, because 5% are overperforming.
Now we created a new power curve for the player, which is way above the enemy power curve. As a result, enemies need a rework. In the end 2 curves, which are in balance to each are created. Everything performes well and there are a lot of options.

Or you take one curve as a baseline and apply nerfs & buffs to the outliers. In the end we also get 2 curves, which are in balance to each other with the difference, that we deal 100 damage vs. enemies with 1000 HP, and not 100 000 damage vs. enemies with 1 000 000 HP. In addition to this number bloat, the second approach will require less work, because only the outliers are changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ShortCat said:

Because even a PVE game has a power curve for enemies and players. Staying on this power curve correlates to the appropriate stage you are in the game, or simply put - challange & available options. If something operates above this curve, it is an outlier and outshines everything else: game mechanincs (like damage types), gear (weapons) or enemies (lvl X enemies opose no challange, because Y is too strong). Usually, there are some overperformers, some underperformes and the strong middle.

Now what happans if, like you suggest, only buffs are there to regulate. Every piece of gear and every game mechanic will require a rework to create a new power curve for the player. Or with simple words - 95% of our arsenal will get a buff, because 5% are overperforming.
Now we created a new power curve for the player, which is way above the enemy power curve. As a result, enemies need a rework. In the end 2 curves, which are in balance to each are created. Everything performes well and there are a lot of options.

Or you take one curve as a baseline and apply nerfs & buffs to the outliers. In the end we also get 2 curves, which are in balance to each other with the difference, that we deal 100 damage vs. enemies with 1000 HP, and not 100 000 damage vs. enemies with 1 000 000 HP. In addition to this number bloat, the second approach will require less work, because only the outliers are changed.

Slash is by no means too strong. It scales well but the damage ticks still take time to kill and often times direct shots have even less ttk. Against high levels, corrosive direct damage build will almost always have lower ttk than slash. A nerf can't really be justified when something isn't broken in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, WuceBrillis said:

SLASH

No changes. Why fix what's not broken?

Slash is broken. Your idea is inherently flawed because of this. Impact being a terrible version of Corrosive and Puncture being made completely useless outside lines of enemies are terrible ideas.

11 hours ago, Cephalycion said:

Slash is by no means too strong. It scales well but the damage ticks still take time to kill and often times direct shots have even less ttk. Against high levels, corrosive direct damage build will almost always have lower ttk than slash. A nerf can't really be justified when something isn't broken in the first place.

Just because you don't see it as broken, doesn't mean it isn't broken. That the players threw such a fit at the discussed Damage 2.5 changes solely because of the existence of changes to Slash proves it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, peterc3 said:

Slash is broken. Your idea is inherently flawed because of this...

Just because you don't see it as broken, doesn't mean it isn't broken. That the players threw such a fit at the discussed Damage 2.5 changes solely because of the existence of changes to Slash proves it.

Explain to me why you think slash is broken, and how this discredits everything else I've pitched. I personally think Gas is much stronger, but we never see people vouching for a Gas nerf.

4 hours ago, peterc3 said:

...Impact being a terrible version of Corrosive...

Terrible how? Base armour doesn't scale, and even if they made the value removed 1 you'd still see significant armour stripping with weapons that fire fast/shoot a lot of pellets, like Boar prime. Just because you can't see the potential of these proposed changes doesn't make them "terrible"

 

5 hours ago, peterc3 said:

...Puncture being made completely useless outside lines of enemies...

Are we playing the same game here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, peterc3 said:

Slash is broken. Your idea is inherently flawed because of this. Impact being a terrible version of Corrosive and Puncture being made completely useless outside lines of enemies are terrible ideas.

Just because you don't see it as broken, doesn't mean it isn't broken. That the players threw such a fit at the discussed Damage 2.5 changes solely because of the existence of changes to Slash proves it.

Your second point is invalid, it's like saying "since people get upset by nerfing something, that something must be broken". No correlation at all, nothing to prove your non-existant point, all skin and no flesh.

Your judgement of slash being broken is backed up by absolutely nothing.

Puncture useless outside lines of enemies? Lines of enemies are everywhere. Add on to that my suggestion about the weakspots.

Impact being a weaker version of corrosive, not true unless you are talking about single shot weapons. I recommend that on impact proc the shattering impact debuff is applied in an AOE radius if you want to even things out.

Edited by Cephalycion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Puncture making the projectile deal MORE damage is weird. It should deal less, if anything. Preferably just the same amount. What would make more sense for me is if a Puncture proc highlighted an area of an enemy, similar to Detect Vulnerability, and did basically the same thing. The idea is that you're poking a hole in their armor and making a weakspot.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2018-11-19 at 6:00 AM, Cephalycion said:

 too many people have invested too much time perfecting their slash builds and I admit I am one of them

Whoopty. Frickin'. Doo. 

Do you know how many times DE has rebalanced, reworked, buffed, and nerfed things in this game as needed? Every time it changed builds and invalidated current forma polarization by players. And it's always for the better.

If something is broken it can and should be fixed either by improvement or replacement. If you have a system where one option invalidates the other options that often then it's broken. Players that threaten to leave the game over those kind of changes almost never do, and the ones that do only prove they were only hanging on by a thread to begin with. My most used Primary is Dread (mostly because I prefer bows and it's just awesome) and I have it built for slash procs so I will be affected by any changes as well. That means you adapt, change your build and become better. That's all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, (PS4)Riko_113 said:

Whoopty. Frickin'. Doo. 

Do you know how many times DE has rebalanced, reworked, buffed, and nerfed things in this game as needed? Every time it changed builds and invalidated current forma polarization by players. And it's always for the better.

If something is broken it can and should be fixed either by improvement or replacement. If you have a system where one option invalidates the other options that often then it's broken. Players that threaten to leave the game over those kind of changes almost never do, and the ones that do only prove they were only hanging on by a thread to begin with. My most used Primary is Dread (mostly because I prefer bows and it's just awesome) and I have it built for slash procs so I will be affected by any changes as well. That means you adapt, change your build and become better. That's all.

 

4 hours ago, Cephalycion said:

Your second point is invalid, it's like saying "since people get upset by nerfing something, that something must be broken". No correlation at all, nothing to prove your non-existant point, all skin and no flesh.

Your judgement of slash being broken is backed up by absolutely nothing.

Puncture useless outside lines of enemies? Lines of enemies are everywhere. Add on to that my suggestion about the weakspots.

Impact being a weaker version of corrosive, not true unless you are talking about single shot weapons. I recommend that on impact proc the shattering impact debuff is applied in an AOE radius if you want to even things out.

Argument already done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cephalycion said:

 

4 hours ago, Cephalycion said:

Your second point is invalid, it's like saying "since people get upset by nerfing something, that something must be broken". No correlation at all, nothing to prove your non-existant point, all skin and no flesh.

Your judgement of slash being broken is backed up by absolutely nothing.

Argument already done.

You say that as if your point was valid in the first place...

I liked your ideas for improving Puncture and Impact, for sure. That doesn't mean Slashing doesn't doesn't make the others irrelevant currently, or even after your suggestions are added. Why use anything else that can be resisted when Bleed bypasses resistances entirely from the start? And Bleed procs stack (unlike fire), so dealing the damage over time is really no drawback since they grow stronger with each proc as you continue attacking when the alternative is resisted damage over a longer time from every other damage source...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, (PS4)Riko_113 said:

You say that as if your point was valid in the first place...

I liked your ideas for improving Puncture and Impact, for sure. That doesn't mean Slashing doesn't doesn't make the others irrelevant currently, or even after your suggestions are added. Why use anything else that can be resisted when Bleed bypasses resistances entirely from the start? And Bleed procs stack (unlike fire), so dealing the damage over time is really no drawback since they grow stronger with each proc as you continue attacking when the alternative is resisted damage over a longer time from every other damage source...

Finally a debater that makes a good point.

In Warframe, we can argue the damage types comparatively or not. Slash in the current meta is better than magnetic or heat by a thousand miles. Yes. I do admit that Slash is stronger than most other procs in most situations. However, most other procs are bad. Almost useless in fact, cold slows and heat has no place in high levels and hordes, toxin damage is strongly negated by armor and magnetic nukes shields that get regenerated over time anyway. Only a select few of damage procs scale into endgame, slash, viral, corrosive included. Hence we really shouldnt use the comparative method of judging if a damage type is broken unless you want them to all become useless.

Now lets take the non comparative method. Right now in the game, slash takes time to build up. The playstyle of an efficient slash build revolves around shooting a target to half and running away.

Here is my argument; slash isnt broken.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Cephalycion said:

most other procs are bad. Almost useless in fact

That's partly what proves that Slash is broken though, by comparison. This whole campaign by DE the past year or so has been about overhauling everything the light touches for the purpose of diversity in use. That's their goal. Having one final correct end-game build using Slash&Viral or Corrosive is what they are trying to stray away from which contributed to their development in Damage 2.5, and Melee 3.0 and most of the recent Warframe reworks.

15 minutes ago, Cephalycion said:

Now lets take the non comparative method.

The problem with this perspective is that it intentionally leaves out all other relevant data specifically to reach your desired outcome rather than an accurate one. That's bad science. Lol.

The reason it has to be compared goes back to my previous post. Slash procs take time, but everything else takes longer because the same amount of damage takes longer when resisted by armor. With slash you can run away at half way, almost everything else literally requires you to stay until 100% of the health is gone. More time + more effort = less efficient. Paraphrasing my favorite post I've read on these forums - Having a meta is ok, unless that meta makes everything else useless by comparison.

Edit: If they can rework all damage types to have more comparable use (not necessarily pure damage) then the disparity wouldn't be so blatantly in favor of Slash procs and it wouldn't need to be looked at.

Edited by (PS4)Riko_113
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, (PS4)Riko_113 said:

That's partly what proves that Slash is broken though, by comparison. This whole campaign by DE the past year or so has been about overhauling everything the light touches for the purpose of diversity in use. That's their goal. Having one final correct end-game build using Slash&Viral or Corrosive is what they are trying to stray away from which contributed to their development in Damage 2.5, and Melee 3.0 and most of the recent Warframe reworks.

The problem with this perspective is that it intentionally leaves out all other relevant data specifically to reach your desired outcome rather than an accurate one. That's bad science. Lol.

The reason it has to be compared goes back to my previous post. Slash procs take time, but everything else takes longer because the same amount of damage takes longer when resisted by armor. With slash you can run away at half way, almost everything else literally requires you to stay until 100% of the health is gone. More time + more effort = less efficient. Paraphrasing my favorite post I've read on these forums - Having a meta is ok, unless that meta makes everything else useless by comparison.

Edit: If they can rework all damage types to have more comparable use (not necessarily pure damage) then the disparity wouldn't be so blatantly in favor of Slash procs and it wouldn't need to be looked at.

Good point, still comparative but I'll elaborate a little further.

In my opinion, the current damage system is just an illusion of what the game is, the real deal is how you play the game. Currently damage feels very outdated and useless in endgame. If the devs could find a way to make all damage types viable in endgame, that would be better than nerfing the select few that scale into endgame at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Cephalycion said:

Good point, still comparative but I'll elaborate a little further.

In my opinion, the current damage system is just an illusion of what the game is, the real deal is how you play the game. Currently damage feels very outdated and useless in endgame. If the devs could find a way to make all damage types viable in endgame, that would be better than nerfing the select few that scale into endgame at all.

I do agree with this entirely. The entire failure of the current damage system falls back to the failure of enemy scaling and them trying to work damage around that instead of the other way around. They have said in the past they would be reviewing enemy scaling, but now years later they have instead decided to focus on reworking damage and ignoring the broken scaling that caused the mess in the first place. I don't foresee the situation improving too much in that regard if they don't fix scaling to go with Damage 2.5, but fingers crossed.

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...