Jump to content
Lion

Archwing Variety Fix (Itzal Nerf), K-Drive problems

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, stormy505 said:

There's litterly zero reason to pick anything but Loki or Ivara in spy missions. but they certainly are not broken. In normal archwing modes itzal is on the weaker side similar to Loki in a way. But because archwing is such an underused mode, a niche factor (transversing the plains/vallis) became the main reason to even bother getting an archwing.

I don't think Spy mission are a good example. They are easy to do with any frame or even with your operator. That means you can achieve similar results with different frames.

You cannot achieve similar results with other archwings and k-drives when compared to Itzal. 

Also I don't think Itzal is underpowered in regular archwing modes. Back in the day I used it all the time. Blink in solo Interception missions, stealth to dodge incoming rockets, cosmic crush to pull/kill enemies or finish them with melee etc.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, TARINunit9 said:

Nerfing archwings because K-drives aren't being used is similar to the old "wallpapering over a crack" idiom. 

This happened to Tonkor because of its damage and the fact other launchers have self damage making them undesirable in comparison. History repeats itself in Warframe occasionally.

Edited by Voltage
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, NeroAugustine said:

Okay, well, what about the players, like me, who are at odds with those seeking absolutely no change in game balance, in order to make more frames and thus 'player choice' more viable in gameplay, as opposed to letting meta slice through what counts as trash and top tier?
Are they not listening to us too?

And if so, what kind of compromise will be reached?
Because again, this is the second time this year, that the devs have openly spoken about nerfing frames/equipment because they can be overclocked. First time was Steve. I doubt the "I play the things the devs wanna nerf, and I don't want them to, so they won't" argument is going to stand on its own.
Not when the active state of Warframe's balance is being, in their eyes, negatively effected as a whole, by the current state of imbalance.

Things will eventually change. I'm okay with that. But I hope that they can find a middleground that doesn't involve straight up kneecapping players who play the current meta, like it might if they come up with no alternative.

Except this is a situation where the kit of an archwing perfectly fits what the players want to do, masking several underlying issues such as:

  • Archwing movment is total garbage, and teleport makes movement sane and somewhat fun
  • The loot vacuum of the Itzal helps on the Plains because the skywing turns off vacuum
  • Archwing is about as popular as conclave, and since the Itzal fixes the above two problems, Itzal has a disproportionately high usage share because of the open world content
  • There's little point in running archwing content beyond MR grinding and farming Atlas

While I'm hopeful railjack can fix some of these issues, nerfing the Itzal into the ground isn't going to address the above.

  • Applause 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Itzal's Penumbra relies on Blink to move around so this reduces the effectiveness in synergy. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Xzorn said:

DE's Development style is their own worst enemy.

  • Lets make Eidolons immune to status effects and abilities / Crap players are using the highest damage single target weapons.
  • Lets make Archwings good for nothing but travel / Crap players are only using the one that's fastest.
  • Lets counter CC with a buncha Area denial and Dispells / Oh now players are just stacking eHP and DPS.

They're digging their own holes. The only real Meta conditions in Warframe are the ones DE has created by limiting the players.

Like the old system, creativity is what got people out of the original content.  Instead, we have people listening to Mogamu, awe blade, and AGGP that are influencing keyboard warriors to hate the current meta and instead of expanding the boundaries their hive mind is influenced to get it watered down to novelty.

 

Archwings here do not need nerfing; but reworks to revamp them, so all of the, are better. So far Amesah and Itzal have been on the spotlight since the old raids were removed. That is when we wanted to bring the others like Odonata Prime to the Golem. Now in this state we have to admit that there are K - Drive mods that speed up the hover boards enough. Slowing down the Itzal to be slower than the default k drive will make it unsuitable for the Pursuit mode in Archwing, which sounds pointless; but would keep people 1 mission away from playing Arbitration.

 

Such crowds may be crying out for another round of nerfs to D E; but they will ruin the frame work the game stands on now. We gave up the void tower keys for specters of the rails and our classic end game missions, characters, and weapons; but breaking down the game with watered down characters, a delayed Vauban   revisit, and technical scaling with enemies is not the answer. We already had playable content toned down for the negative crowd and we still supported the game to get Umbral Excalibur to come out. If people would go to the Overwatch forums and got Diva nerfed into the ground, then and then, would people have to support this game than trolling the forums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kialandi said:

I don't think Spy mission are a good example. They are easy to do with any frame or even with your operator. That means you can achieve similar results with different frames.

You cannot achieve similar results with other archwings and k-drives when compared to Itzal. 

Also I don't think Itzal is underpowered in regular archwing modes. Back in the day I used it all the time. Blink in solo Interception missions, stealth to dodge incoming rockets, cosmic crush to pull/kill enemies or finish them with melee etc.

The spy example was mostly to show the design logic done correctly. Giving something a niche in exchange for taking away power in other modes.

Two options that I suggested in another thread are.

1. Buff kdrives so we can use abilities/guns on them in exchange for being slightly slower than archwings.

2. Wait for railjack which will make tank archwings and DPS archwings far more important.

Although not underpowered it's on the weaker side. And railjack I'm expecting a lot more endgame esk archwings. In Loki's case he's still really good in standard play but doesn't outshadow DPS frames designed for that content.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Almagnus1 said:

Except this is a situation where the kit of an archwing perfectly fits what the players want to do, masking several underlying issues such as:

  • Archwing movment is total garbage, and teleport makes movement sane and somewhat fun
  • The loot vacuum of the Itzal helps on the Plains because the skywing turns off vacuum
  • Archwing is about as popular as conclave, and since the Itzal fixes the above two problems, Itzal has a disproportionately high usage share because of the open world content
  • There's little point in running archwing content beyond MR grinding and farming Atlas

While I'm hopeful railjack can fix some of these issues, nerfing the Itzal into the ground isn't going to address the above.

Hence the premise of this thread's opening remarks.
Railjack is going to make space combat much more important. In that case, any rebalance needed to the archwings will probably involve a nerf to the Itzal anyways. But instead of a complete nerf, just make the other types more useful in atmosphere, or the water.

I'm sure it's feasible for them, as they have shown other examples of it in-game already, it will probably cheer up non-itzal players, as their archwings won't be left in the dust in every situation, but at the same time, it won't obliterate what people who do main the itzal for love.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NeroAugustine said:

On Devstream #126 [DE]Scott brought up serious points on why he believed the Itzal needed to be drastically nerfed.
He explained that he disliked the current premise that IF you want to go faster than any other Archwing, THEN you need the Itzal.

He spoke then on nerfing the Itzal.
I've made another recent post about a similar disparity between the uses of Warframes in 'end-game' and my opinion is similar in this regard as well.

Instead of nerfing the Itzal completely, do what you have done with the heavy weapons, to the Archwings themselves.
There are three Archwing environments:
-Space
-Aquatic
-Atmosphereic

There are four archwings, the default, and three unique ones.
So why not modify the speeds of each of these three, where each one has an advantage in one of the three environments?
Yes, that does mean nerfing the Itzal some, but not in every case. Additionally, you'd be buffing other archwings, and providing a situational advantage.
The positive of this route is that it provides balance of equipment, without manually balancing stats, so instead of making every archwing equally good in all cases, thus limiting the point of possessing a certain model, you are providing heightened performance for each one, in a varied spectrum.

If I were to personally contribute to what I thought made sense:

Amesha would be perfect for mastering atmospheric flightspace. Aoe, and support needs a present but malleable element to flourish in.
Itzal would be space, as it deals in gravitational and light manipulation. No need to muddy up the playing field with air and gravitational pull.
Elytron, lastly, would be a good aquatic archwing. It's powerful thrusters, and heavy duty explosives need a medium to reverberate through.
Odonata would, of course, be a good jack of all trades, specifically balanced to perform reasonably well in all environments.

In a game that is due to only broaden its horizons, why not simply broaden the capabilities and situational utility of each archwing as opposed to limiting them?

dont worry jeez they said they we joking around and werent actually going to nerf it more than likely they gonna make changes to put more stuff at its level 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reson I use arch-wing is to get around faster. and the only reason I maxed out Hyperion thrusters and built an Itzal was to get around on the plains. otherwise, I probably wouldn't use arch wing if the Kdrives where esior to transverse tarrain with, but becasue you can fall off them and the fact that they cant go up some inclines just makes it a task in some areas. It should feel fast, not sloged down.

Origenal archwing was almost ok. new archwing sucks.

Sharkwing sucks more.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kingvaldemir said:

Thing is, open world doesn't require you to use any other archwing's kit because we use warframe for combat, not arch-wing. The only purpose for archwing there is to traverse the open world quicker. Nerfing itzal would simply increase our time spent on traversing open world area while also not effectively make K-drive and any other archwing a viable option.

they are a viable option IF the itzal is no better at movement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nerfing the Itzal would be a bad idea, it doesn't need a change. I can imagine as well the Eidolon meta-hunting groups would also cry out in anger too if the Itzal ended up being touched. It's probably expected mandatory for those specialized hunting groups that the Itzal be used for that exact reason, being able to quickly speed across the PoE because Terry could spawn on the farthest point of the map, relative to the temple shrine at the lake. People who chase 6x3 runs would probably outcry in anger if the Itzal would get touched, since they want to shave as many seconds as possible to be able to get a 6x3 run in one night.

Putting that aside, I switch between the Itzal and Amesha here and there depending on what I will be doing with things. But my reason for the Itzal is like many others, I want to traverse large open maps very quickly to get to the next objective. Granted, sometimes I value Amesha for defending objectives in bounties more (because I play solo a lot), so there's a trade in between there.

30 minutes ago, auxy said:

The argument as I understand it is that people want to use K-drives, but doing so is (at least) inconsiderate to other players who will use their archwings to get around.

People want to use their K-Drives for traversal, when that's simply not a good way to play. Basically, people want them to be more than toys. 

People who race around in Itzals in public bounties, finish objectives, then head to the next objective shouldn't consider players who use the k-drive to move around as being inconsiderate. It's a public bounty. You don't get to dictate how others play and calling your teammates out for being "too slow" to get to the next objective while you speed run in Itzal can be a $&*^ish move on that player's part. A public bounty is that, a public game where you get matched with anybody with any type of gear and any type of skill level/knowledge of the game. Maybe they don't have an archwing built, or maybe they are trying to multi-task and get vent-kid standing inbetween bounty objectives. Either way, it's a public bounty and one in which you don't get to tell teammates what they can or cannot play with, you don't control people's actions, they do what they want to. And telling people off is probably a good way to get screenshotted for being toxic in public and being reported to support desk. Not something worth fighting over either. That is the nature of public bounties, people should learn that. However, asking people politely if they could hurry up a bit is fair game I feel, as long as one is being polite about asking. 

If one doesn't like that then pre-made matchmaking/clanmates/friends exist as well if you want to play with others at speed running level. Or just do your bounties solo if you don't want to wait on others. Solves problems either way.

PS - what I wrote above isn't directed at you specifically. I'm sorry if it gave the impression of that. I'm just only typing my thoughts about 'realistic expectations' in public bounties. Sorry, a bit ranty about extreme examples and off-topic, back to k-dries. 

K-drives kind of feel like side toys to me as well since primarily you use them to do tricks/races to get points for more vent-kid standing and collect and upgrade parts. They're a self-contained toy. I'll come back to them eventually to level, they're really just not a top priority to me. If I want to use the K-drive for real usage, then I'll just focus on using the K-drive for its above mentioned self-contained activities, I wouldn't bother doing bounties at the same time. Maybe K-drives should get buffed and I wouldn't mind, but nerfing the Itzal would just cause negative outcry I feel.

 

  • Applause 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, (PS4)Page8988 said:

 But I also can't say it's unreasonable to nerf it from a gameplay and balance perspective.

It's pointless to nerf it. Any archwing is faster than any K-Drive. Even if archwings were moving slower than a K-Drive, they would still be faster for getting from A to B because they can, duh, fly over obstacles.

You nerf the fastest AW and get the next fastest one as the most used. Since the only thing they are used is transportation. You'll have everyone using, say, odonata. Which will have the same problem and by this logic should be nerfed next... until archwings are slower than bulletjumping or a combination of void dashing and slam attacks.

Of course Itzal overperforms in open world. It's an AW that's best at moving, and you use AW for moving there. Saying that itzal overperforming is bad is basically saying that going fast is unfair, and you should not be able to move faster than a running frame.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Xzorn said:

DE's Development style is their own worst enemy.

  • Lets make Eidolons immune to status effects and abilities / Crap players are using the highest damage single target weapons.
  • Lets make Archwings good for nothing but travel / Crap players are only using the one that's fastest.
  • Lets counter CC with a buncha Area denial and Dispells / Oh now players are just stacking eHP and DPS.

They're digging their own holes. The only real Meta conditions in Warframe are the ones DE has created by limiting the players.

You deserve a medal for this post. This threatens to be another universal vacuum-type issue all over again, but we already have the "univac" in this case and Scott wants to take it away... ugh. It's a game about space ninjas, we shouldn't HAVE to slow down unless we want to (because there's a reason for it. Like fighting or collecting something, or just admiring the scenery because, at that moment in time, we feel like it.) Sometimes it feels like certain people are pushing for turning Warframe into something very different than what a majority of the playerbase plays it for... which is fine when it's optional, but when we're FORCED to play farmville or simcity or pac man or whatever in our space ninjas game to do main content, with our other options more in keeping with the fast-paced play REMOVED, there's an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, (XB1)RDeschain82 said:

DE Scott: let's nerf Itzal so K drive will suck less. 

tenor.gif

That is what happened basically.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dark_RRiderr said:

Making the game more and more unattractive to play because more and more fun options (or options in general about what WE like to play not the devs enforcing us to play what they want us to play.... hint hint DE ....)

I like Warframe also for the many choices you can make about which weapons you use with which warframe, now.... they shrink our options of choices, they force us to play other weapons even if that is NOT fun for us and we dont want that. 

 I'm struggling to comprehend this.

  1. Everyone is using the same one best thing because it's the best
  2. DE is trying to bring the best thing to everything else's level to encourage the use of everything else
  3. DE is limiting your choices by making people use more than one thing?
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, NeroAugustine said:

Hence the premise of this thread's opening remarks.
Railjack is going to make space combat much more important. In that case, any rebalance needed to the archwings will probably involve a nerf to the Itzal anyways. But instead of a complete nerf, just make the other types more useful in atmosphere, or the water.

Why does the Itzal need a nerf?

It's mediocre to bad in combat as (IMO) the Odonata Prime is a better combat frame than the Itzal.  However, there are no archwing missions hard enough to justify bringing anything other than the Itzal.  The problem here is the lack of Archwing content and the Archwing controls, NOT the Itzal.

The archwing should NOT control as badly as it does, as it's design reeks of someone that has zero knowledge of physics designing a space sim, especially when we have a fly-by-wire jetpack that should be able to stop us from sliding all over the place with controls that should be precise enough to allow you to fly through a cave on Fortuna (it's doable but very, very slow now, and should be faster if the controls were halfway decent).

  • Applause 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LoL... wait... for real ? They're killing Itzal just because its convenient ?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Voltage said:

This happened to Tonkor because of its damage and the fact other launchers have self damage making them undesirable in comparison. History repeats itself in Warframe occasionally.

I really don't think it's analogous at all

A better comparison would be when the archgun deployer was first released. All the minmaxing vets were all like "why do I need this? My Rubico Prime outdamages all my archguns". But you don't see DE rushing to nerf all our non-archguns, because the archgun deployer was never intended to be the new meta. It's a novelty.

(slight bit of irony because in archwing missions, archguns are hilariously overpowered; this is due to the power discrepancy in archwing missions)

K-drives and Archwing launchers are both sorta novelties too, they just happen to give a QoL benefit: moving around open worlds faster. The fact that one is stronger than the other because one was designed for actual combat in a completely different game mode is not cause for a nerf

Nerfing Itzal in open worlds only but not in archwing missions might work, but then what's Scott going to do? Nerf Nova? Nerf Z-kids? they're all faster than K-drives

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Swagernator22663 said:

That is what happened basically.

Doesnt matter how S#&$ty they make flying. Flying will still be better than driving. Cause ya know ..flying.tenor.gif

Edited by (XB1)RDeschain82
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Variks_Prime said:

You deserve a medal for this post. This threatens to be another universal vacuum-type issue all over again, but we already have the "univac" in this case and Scott wants to take it away... ugh. It's a game about space ninjas, we shouldn't HAVE to slow down unless we want to (because there's a reason for it. Like fighting or collecting something, or just admiring the scenery because, at that moment in time, we feel like it.) Sometimes it feels like certain people are pushing for turning Warframe into something very different than what a majority of the playerbase plays it for... which is fine when it's optional, but when we're FORCED to play farmville or simcity or pac man or whatever in our space ninjas game to do main content, with our other options more in keeping with the fast-paced play REMOVED, there's an issue.

There's nothing wrong with red lights in gameplay. And they are only red lights if you aren't prepared for them, or it's not your play style.
For example, my playstyle is a non-AOE non-CC frame. My "Red Light" is late gave survival. That exists already, as I can't play that more with my current build. So I have to change the way I play to suit the needs of other players.

I don't see why there shouldn't be some situations where players who can press 4 and win late game have to take a breath and deal with mechanical difficulty as opposed to stat-difficulty.

If your response to me for not being able to play long survival games is "Get good and change your setup" then there should be different situations where I can make that argument for you. No warframe should be perfect for almost all missions.
There's really no good reason to have an objective issue with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not the one who started the conversation about nerfing it. Scott did.
It's possibly on the table, and the reasons he gave for it were not "It's not fair to non-Itzal mains" but that it ruined the balance of the game; something that is both the domain of the devs and their responsibility.

When something is too powerful, it tends to be nerfed. I'd rather see a situational nerf, as opposed to a total statistical nerf.
If I just thought that saying "No! Don't nerf!" was enough, then I wouldn't have made this thread, because there's already a bunch of people doing that.
This is a 'If it's gonna happen, can we try something a bit less drastic' thread.
Don't tell me "It shouldn't be nerfed at all." I'm not the one who that needs to be directed to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BlindStalker said:

People who race around in Itzals in public bounties, finish objectives, then head to the next objective shouldn't consider players who use the k-drive to move around as being inconsiderate. It's a public bounty. You don't get to dictate how others play and calling your teammates out for being "too slow" to get to the next objective while you speed run in Itzal can be a $&*^ish move on that player's part. A public bounty is that, a public game where you get matched with anybody with any type of gear and any type of skill level/knowledge of the game. Maybe they don't have an archwing built, or maybe they are trying to multi-task and get vent-kid standing inbetween bounty objectives. Either way, it's a public bounty and one in which you don't get to tell teammates what they can or cannot play with, you don't control people's actions, they do what they want to. And telling people off is probably a good way to get screenshotted for being toxic in public and being reported to support desk. Not something worth fighting over either. That is the nature of public bounties, people should learn that. However, asking people politely if they could hurry up a bit is fair game I feel, as long as one is being polite about asking.

Well, I think we have a bit of a philosophical disagreement there. This is a question of where your rights end and mine begin.
Do you have the right to waste my time? I mean, that's what you're doing when you join my bounty and derp around on a K-Drive.
You can bloviate about personal freedom all you want but the reality is:

  • You signed up for a task and are lollygagging instead of doing the task efficiently.

Your post is pretty aggressive, by which I actually mean defensive.
It seems like someone got onto you for using a K-Drive in bounties.
I'm not saying that happened. That's just what it sounds like.

Whether or not it happened, you clearly have the opinion that people aren't responsible for how their actions affect others.
So if I decide to bring a bunch of unranked weapons with no mods into a level 50-60 mission, that's fine, right?
Or if I elect to participate in voice chat by shouting in the mic, that's OK too?
After all, "you don't control people's actions, they do what they want to."
And I shouldn't get annoyed with them for doing what they want, right?

I hope those extreme examples have made you realize the error of your ways. It's a very silly viewpoint.
Obviously, people are responsible for how their actions impact the experiences of others.
There's "controlling another person," and then there's "having reasonable expectations for the behavior of others."
They're not the same thing. Flouting conventional expectations of behavior might be fun, but it's also inconsiderate and self-indulgent.

If you want to K-drive around in bounties, sure! I'm down for that. I like K-Drives; I think they're fun, and I like riding them.
But if you don't say "hey let's ride K-drives" I'm going to use my archwing as any reasonable player would expect others to do.
And then I'm going to be annoyed at you for lollygagging instead of efficiently working toward completing the objective as a team.

  • Applause 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Kialandi said:

Interesting logic. I guess everything should be as tanky as Inaros and Nidus. Everything should be as "room-clearing" as Saryn and Equinox. Right?

It's not bad to be good. It's bad to be overwhelmingly overpowered. There is literally 0 incentive to use anything else but Itzal when moving around Plains and Vallis.

Also they didn't just remove coptering and leave it at that. They replaced coptering with bullet-jumping. I would expect something similar in this case.

Itzal was designed to be fast. We're using it for what it was designed for. What's wrong with that?

  • Like 2
  • Applause 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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

×
×
  • Create New...