Rework your Rework Ideas

[Feyangol]

Heyho,

this goes to both DE and the community here. I am sincerely concered about all the threads and all the talk about reworks, because most of them simply are not reworks. First of all you have to ask yourself what a rework is. And imo this is quite clear:

 

A significant change in the way a Warframe plays with the conservation of his/her previous role as a playable character.

 

A rework should first foremost change how a Warframe plays. It does not mean that the Warframe will be buffed or nerfed, you just change how his abilities are used. With that in mind the goal of a rework should always be to remove toxic and boring play. But what we see more and more often, that these things get confused with each other. Not only by the community, but also by DE. The reworks that were last seen were just straight up buffs. Let me explain on the example of Nyx and Titania, where one was a (small) rework and the other was a buff:

- Nyx has mostly changed how play. Your 1 minion actually has influence as a kind of "turret" on the game now and your 2 bolts have a use against especially tough enemies, where before you did not cast either at all. But her change to her 4 does not change much of how she plays, therfor isn't really part of her "rework". While these changes are not as impactful as you might have liked, they still change how Nyx is played. Undependently of her small rework, she might need buffs or nerfs to her abilities, but this is at least some kind of rework attempt, succesful or not.

- Titania is different tho. Her base energy is higher - buff; you don't need to cast her 2 as often - buff; her 3 can best casted and uncasted on multiple enemies - buff, her 4 has a vacuum - buff. Does this change in any way how she is played? It is still tedious af to keep your buffs up, you still don't cast her lantern, because it unreliable, Pixy mode still feels lackluster. This is not a rework, this is a buff.

My plea for the community and for DE is to actually think about how the changes they propose, will change the playstyle in a direction that is benifcial for the fun of playing a Warframe. I read too often things like "increase movement speed from 0.9 to 1" or "increase duration from 8 sec to 10 sec" and people calling it "rework". It is not wrong to call for buffs, if an ability is underperforming, but reworks should be used to fix toxic and boring playstyles.

Edited January 2, 2019 by Feyangol

[GinKenshin]

Some frames need tweaks, some buffs and some reworks. We’re just wrongly using the term, I don’t see how that’s such a big problem. If it ends up making the frame better to play then it’s a up from me 

[Feyangol]

That's not really what I am saying ... You can propose as many buffs and tweaks as you want, if the way a Warframe plays sucks, then people will not start enjoying the frame once it gets buffs. They will only like the power and move on, once there is a better option. Reworks should be used to make something enjoyable, buffs to make something viable.

[Dabnician]

1 hour ago, Feyangol said:

this goes to both DE and the community here. I am sincerely concered about all the threads and all the talk about reworks, because most of them simply are not reworks.

Most reworks are "hey i have a great idea that makes this easy mode", a lot of players lack the ability to suggest things that wouldn't be to their benefit.

[Teridax68]

The OP basically just made up their own definition of what constitutes a rework in Warframe, and then expressed surprise that not everyone is running on that same, made-up definition. I don't get it.

On a more serious note, I can agree that the term "rework" does get used in a pretty clickbaity way in threads that's basically just asking for a numbers buff ("Give Chroma another 100 base armor" isn't a rework). However, in general the standards for what qualifies as a "rework" in Warframe are pretty lax: changing the gameplay on even a single ability can be enough to call the change a rework to the frame, and even a series of serious enough balance changes sometimes gets interpreted as a rework, as happened with Saryn (she got a "real" rework, by the OP's standards, then got rebalanced so hard that that too got called another rework). Imo, this doesn't really matter, and I don't really see the importance in arguing on semantics: perhaps we shouldn't call all of our proposed changes to warframes "reworks" if we're just asking for pure numerical buffs or nerfs, but the end goal is nonetheless the same, in that we're all here to discuss how to improve the game, and in this particular case how to improve certain warframes.

[Kevyne_Kicklighter]

8 hours ago, Feyangol said:

That's not really what I am saying ... You can propose as many buffs and tweaks as you want, if the way a Warframe plays sucks, then people will not start enjoying the frame once it gets buffs. They will only like the power and move on, once there is a better option. Reworks should be used to make something enjoyable, buffs to make something viable.

Players liked how Mag played before, but the REWORK of her -- caused a meltdown. Why was she changed 3 years later (that's a long time playing a character to be so radically changed)?

Sorties, because of one ability.

Players wanted a rework so she wasn't a one trick pony with Corpus only, but what finally got DE to REWORK her? Wasn't players wanting something to do with Grineer than make her a pincushion ... but how she could strip the Corpus shields. THAT was BAD THEN because of the Sorties design.

There's a buff and nerf cycle players can deal with, because their toon plays the same. There's a REWORK after years of playing a toon, that totally changes how it plays all together. THAT causes meltdowns.