DE: Heres a Baseline for a casual player as far as Nightwave...

[Kontrollo]

1 hour ago, Steel_Rook said:

Nobody's asking to be rewarded for not playing. Rather, people are complaining about a system which locks you out all but entirely if you miss a few weeks - at least in its original incarnation before it had to be extended. At the end of the day, this is a game and not a job. Docking my pay because I didn't show up for work is not good game design.

...

Non sequitur. You get as much out of it as you put into it, you're not locked out entirely.

All challenges together could be completed in a few hours every week, of which you had to complete about 3/5th only, even before the extension (roughly including the fugitives, as well).

I'm still going to maintain that the best reward was at rank 25 anyway. That's 250k required standing out of how much again?

Don't treat it as a job, that's the biggest mistake to make. The rewards will return if not in this, then in another form. Latest example: Baro's Wraith weapons. Play Nightwave for fun -- get your rewards now or later. They're not mandatory, at all.

[(PSN)Agent_CHAR]

On 2019-05-18 at 7:36 AM, (PS4)AbBaNdOn_IGN said:

So I ran none of those endgame challenges and still made it to that prestige.

---

Gilding challenge is pretty rough,  this basicly forces people to build amps,zaws,moa, kitguns etc,  but what happens if you dont WANT any more of that crap.

These two statements are going in complete opposite directions.  If you don't like the gild challenge then simply add it to the list of stuff you don't do.  The whole system has plenty of slack to skip lots of stuff all over the place, you said so yourself.

To be perfectly honest though the gilding challenge isn't that big of a deal.  You can craft a crap zaw for 3k standing and some nominal resources that the new thumpers dump on you by the bucket full.  Gilding it is another 5k in standing.  That's basically running 2 bounties and a doma or two.  And ranking that dumb thing to 30, but that isn't hard either with the various affinity farming methods (ESO, Hydron, stealth exterminate, etc).  When it's done you donate it back to get a partial refund on the standing spent.

 

[Steel_Rook]

2 hours ago, Chipputer said:

That's not what an echo chamber is. Each of those veterans have different opinions and are frequently at odds with one another. Please avoid using terms that you clearly do not understand.

Yeah, I should have known better to respond when you were clearly looking to pick a fight. Fair enough, lesson learned.

[DiabolusUrsus]

2 hours ago, Chipputer said:

If you're taking a break of a week or two then you have nobody to blame but yourself. Point blank. Period. You don't get rewarded for not playing. That's asinine.

That is not what the point was at all. The whole selling point of NW was that it was supposed to let players play the game on their own terms instead of being required to log in and play during a narrow window to get a specific reward.

Players should absolutely be required to actually play to earn their rewards, but there is NO REASON why they should be required to play on a daily/weekly schedule. If a player wants to take a break for a few weeks and then come back to do a longer grinding session to catch up... They should be able to do that.

That's why I originally said that the catch-up mechanic will resolve that particular concern.

2 hours ago, Chipputer said:

Not every Elite Weekly required you to do Profit Taker or required you to do things with friends. A good portion of them were tasks like, "kill 1500 enemies."
60 minute survivals, 40 wave defenses, Eidolon Tricap-- these are all things that anyone can participate in with the final one simply requiring the completion of The War Within to get full function of the required system. If your point is simply that you didn't want to do those then that's on you, not DE. If your point is that you didn't have time, they're cutting the requirements in half for most of them for Season 2.

And that criticism was obviously aimed at Season 1, not Season 2. The criticism is still valid, and DE has already acknowledged that many of those challenges were excessive.

2 hours ago, Chipputer said:

As I've pointed out numerous times-- Aside from the obvious examples of challenges that required flat time input (60 minute survival, etc), Nightwave challenges were literally able to be completed within a few hours every week. This wasn't something that only the best of the best veterans could do. This was something any player who looked at them and planned their loadouts/what missions they were going to run accordingly.

Again, you're missing the point by a mile. The issue - aside from the 60 min type Acts - is not the time required to complete the individual requirements but the regularity and limited availability of those Acts.

NW Season 1 more or less forced players to play the game on DE's schedule instead of the player's, which was precisely what it was supposed to put an end to by replacing Alerts.

2 hours ago, Chipputer said:

If a few hours per week is too much then maybe Warframe is too much for you.

GTFO with that toxic empty rhetoric. Who are you to set the standard for what is an appropriate degree of time investment in the game?

Does playing every week somehow make you better than a player who plays every couple of weeks? Why should it matter whether playtime is spread evenly over the entire season or offloaded to the last week if the player ultimately puts in the same amount of grinding work?

Telling people to simply not play because they have different commitments and priorities is pointless.

[Chipputer]

48 minutes ago, Steel_Rook said:

Yeah, I should have known better to respond when you were clearly looking to pick a fight. Fair enough, lesson learned.

Not my fault you're using divisive language to load your point. 

[Chipputer]

43 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Telling people to simply not play because they have different commitments and priorities is pointless

I'm only gonna quote this because wall.

Nightwave still allowed you to play on your own terms. Just like any other thing in the game, though, if you wanted to get the top tier rewards you had to put the time in.

And I'm sorry but if you're going to get upset at that few hours remark then I have no sympathy for you. A few hours is nothing in comparison to all of the other grinding this game has.

[DiabolusUrsus]

15 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

I'm only gonna quote this because wall.

So grammatically correct and properly punctuated responses are "walls" now. Ok.

Nevermind the length of your own response.

15 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

Nightwave still allowed you to play on your own terms.

Really? Please explain rather than just handwaving what I said with an assertion.

15 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

Just like any other thing in the game, though, if you wanted to get the top tier rewards you had to put the time in.

But why does that time need to be spread over the entire season? If I want to play other games for 5 weeks and spend the remaining 5 catching up, why should I not be able to do that?

Obviously, this will be fixed come Season 2, but you are neglecting to explain why that isn't a valid criticism of Season 1.

15 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

And I'm sorry but if you're going to get upset at that few hours remark then I have no sympathy for you. A few hours is nothing in comparison to all of the other grinding this game has.

You're continually missing (or evading) the point, which is that there is no reason why time commitment needs to occur on a set schedule. What difference does it make if a player commits to Warframe over each season or puts in the work to catch up at the end? The sum of effort required is the same.

Players are free to approach the game at their own pace and make their own determinations regarding what is/is not too much. Your lack of sympathy does not somehow make your editorializing less BS.

[Chaemyerelis]

Well DE has stated their changes due to feedback so suck it up "veterans".

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

53 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

But why does that time need to be spread over the entire season? If I want to play other games for 5 weeks and spend the remaining 5 catching up, why should I not be able to do that?

People made it to rank 60. That suggests that it was entirely possible to play half of the time and still hit rank 30.

Kinda makes the whole argument that you're posing invalid. So.....

[Chipputer]

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

So grammatically correct and properly punctuated responses are "walls" now. Ok.

Nevermind the length of your own response.

Yes. They are. That doesn't mean I don't appreciate them. I'm just not going to litter the thread with giant walls quoting giant walls. Don't presume malice.

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Really? Please explain rather than just handwaving what I said with an assertion.

The whole discussion is assertion. As previous threads have detailed, people play in different ways. One guy only plays spies and uses trade chat so Nightwave won't work for him.
I should have, more accurately, said that Nightwave still allows you to play the game in the intended manner. A little bit of everything but still focusing on what you enjoy, most.

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

But why does that time need to be spread over the entire season? If I want to play other games for 5 weeks and spend the remaining 5 catching up, why should I not be able to do that?

Obviously, this will be fixed come Season 2, but you are neglecting to explain why that isn't a valid criticism of Season 1.

Because my experience says that it wasn't a problem. This thread says it wasn't a problem.

I never said it wasn't a valid complaint. I just disagree with it. I feel that if you want to not play the game then you should have rewards that reflect not playing the game. As in none or less than the guy who did.

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

You're continually missing (or evading) the point, which is that there is no reason why time commitment needs to occur on a set schedule.

Once per week. Any time during that week. A few hours. DE is already giving you an extreme amount of flexibility and you're here complaining about wanting to play other games for weeks on end and still reap the rewards that others are putting in time for. Am I really missing the point or is your point just completely asinine?

[DiabolusUrsus]

11 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

People made it to rank 60. That suggests that it was entirely possible to play half of the time and still hit rank 30.

You're dodging the point.

11 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Kinda makes the whole argument that you're posing invalid. So.....

Then you don't understand the argument, because the people who make it to 60 are undoubtedly those who play Warframe regularly and for long periods of time.

They are the ones playing to 100% completion every week, and playing for long enough to make noticeable gains out of fugitives.

Nobody called into question whether or not it was strictly "possible" to reach 30. Nobody claimed that anyone should be given rewards without earning them.

More importantly, nobody has thus far explained why catching up on NW is unreasonable. As I pointed out previously, the simple inclusion of a catch-up mechanic completely resolves the valid FOMO criticisms of Season 1.

4 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

Yes. They are. That doesn't mean I don't appreciate them. I'm just not going to litter the thread with giant walls quoting giant walls. Don't presume malice.

No, they are not.

It's fine to snip quotes or ignore talking points, but don't rhetorically misrepresent what my responses are. They are not in any way difficult to parse.

4 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

The whole discussion is assertion. As previous threads have detailed, people play in different ways. One guy only plays spies and uses trade chat so Nightwave won't work for him.

Did I say that players should be able to complete NW by only playing 1 type of content? No.

4 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

I should have, more accurately, said that Nightwave still allows you to play the game in the intended manner. A little bit of everything but still focusing on what you enjoy, most.

And if you had said that, I wouldn't have disagreed with it. I'm only talking schedule, not what players actually do in the time they spend playing.

4 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

Because my experience says that it wasn't a problem. This thread says it wasn't a problem.

I never said it wasn't a valid complaint. I just disagree with it. I feel that if you want to not play the game then you should have rewards that reflect not playing the game. As in none or less than the guy who did.

Emphasis mine. Don't misrepresent my position on this issue.

I am not suggesting that players should get equal rewards for less effort. However, I have yet to encounter any rational justification for why effort must be made on a weekly basis as dictated by an automated schedule.

4 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

Once per week. Any time during that week. A few hours. DE is already giving you an extreme amount of flexibility and you're here complaining about wanting to play other games for weeks on end and still reap the rewards that others are putting in time for. Am I really missing the point or is your point just completely asinine?

Yes, you are missing the point, because I am perfectly willing to put in the time needed to earn the rewards. I am not saying "give me rewards for less standing/effort."

Why is it unreasonable for me to put in extra time later to make up for time skipped earlier? Why is playing WF a little bit every week superior to playing WF for longer every few weeks? Why do I need to commit to playing Warframe EVERY week for it to count?

If anything, your insistence that your own standard for what is reasonable commitment is common-sense fact is what is asinine here.

What difference does it make if a player finishes NW gradually over 10 weeks or rushes to catch up during the last week? They still need to earn the same amount of standing, i.e., put in the same amount of effort.

Your perspective on what constitutes "extreme flexibility" is entirely subjective and limited to your personal circumstances.

Yes, the existing schedule works for many players. However, it also doesn't work for others. Why are those players less important? What is the problem with more flexibility? DE doesn't seem to see anything wrong with it; they are already making a change to resolve that concern.

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

2 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

You're dodging the point.

No I showed why it's invalid. 

2 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Then you don't understand the argument, because the people who make it to 60 are undoubtedly those who play Warframe regularly and for long periods of time.

Oh but I do. And as long as they are able to do so, it's totally understandable that they will earn more rewards than people who can't. 

2 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

They are the ones playing to 100% completion every week, and playing for long enough to make noticeable gains out of fugitives.

Yes. A bit overboard if you ask me, but they're certainly doing more than I would so I have no reason to begrudge them their rewards. 

2 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Nobody called into question whether or not it was strictly "possible" to reach 30. Nobody claimed that anyone should be given rewards without earning them.

Oh there was definitely someone suggesting that that if people only played half of the event that they would be unable to earn the rewards. The people making it to rank 60 make this a demonstrably false statement. 

2 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

More importantly, nobody has thus far explained why catching up on NW is unreasonable. As I pointed out previously, the simple inclusion of a catch-up mechanic completely resolves the valid FOMO criticisms of Season 1.

Catching up would have been fine with everyone, as long as they got it done by the end of the event. The FOMO was mostly unreasonable and irrational as the number of people who participated and completed the event would show. I mean seriously, you're trying to claim that someone who misses out on large swaths of time and can't afford the leisure time to get their rewards, should be rewarded all the same, that's nonsensical. 

People who fear missing out in life because they are irrational, have much bigger issues than a video game not pandering to their ridiculous fears. 

[DatDarkOne]

[Chipputer]

On 2019-05-20 at 8:41 PM, DiabolusUrsus said:

Don't misrepresent my position on this issue.

Alright, buddy. First you get angry because I used the word wall and then you're claiming that me clarifying my own position is misrepresenting your position. You're done.

[DiabolusUrsus]

44 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

No I showed why it's invalid.

Only if my argument actually is what you say it is, which it is not.

44 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Oh but I do. And as long as they are able to do so, it's totally understandable that they will earn more rewards than people who can't.

Seriously, can you finish even 1 discussion without falling back on strawmen? I never said that players should receive equal rewards for less effort/time invested, nor would I say that. I absolutely agree that players who play more should earn more rewards - which they do, and will continue to do.

44 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Yes. A bit overboard if you ask me, but they're certainly doing more than I would so I have no reason to begrudge them their rewards.

Who is begrudging anyone anything when it comes to rewards? Seems like a disingenuous comment to make given the actual content of the discussion here.

44 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Oh there was definitely someone suggesting that that if people only played half of the event that they would be unable to earn the rewards. The people making it to rank 60 make this a demonstrably false statement.

Was that someone me? No. That's also not what I said, which was that nobody called into question whether it was strictly possible to reach 30. Also note that statement is only within the context of this thread specifically.

Therefore your statement does not in any way invalidate my argument, which is simply that players should not be forced to play regularly throughout the entire season (i.e., on DE's schedule) and instead be allowed to put in the effort needed to catch up on their own terms.

44 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Catching up would have been fine with everyone, as long as they got it done by the end of the event.

Great, then we are in complete agreement on that point.

44 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

The FOMO was mostly unreasonable and irrational as the number of people who participated and completed the event would show. I mean seriously, you're trying to claim that someone who misses out on large swaths of time and can't afford the leisure time to get their rewards, should be rewarded all the same, that's nonsensical.

You're lying. Stop lying. That is not what I am saying at all.

I'm saying that players should not be required to spread out their work towards rewards evenly across the season. If DE wants players to earn NW rewards on a strictly weekly basis, then they should make Seasons occur on a weekly basis. If DE is going to set the "deadline" for NW Seasons at spanning 10 weeks, then players should be able to work towards completion at their own pace throughout the entirety of the 10 weeks.

It makes sense to measure out standing to prevent players from finishing within the 1st week, but it doesn't make sense to block players from finishing later in the Season simply because they missed the first part. Players should still be required to earn rewards like everyone who did it before them.

44 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

People who fear missing out in life because they are irrational, have much bigger issues than a video game not pandering to their ridiculous fears. 

Where is this even coming from? Why do you think this is relevant to anything I said?

4 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

Alright, buddy. First you get all in a tizzy because I used the word wall and then you're claiming that me clarifying my own position is misrepresenting your position. You're done.

Calling something a "wall of text" suggests that it is excessively long and incomprehensible. If you want to abbreviate your response, that's fine, but just say you can't be bothered/aren't interested instead of suggesting that I've handed you something you can't work with.

You also did repeatedly misrepresent my position, even as I clarified it to you.

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

17 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

You also did repeatedly misrepresent my position, even as I clarified it to you.

I am only quoting the last line, even though its not directed to me. 

I do this because you keep claiming that others are lying, strawmanning or generally misrepresenting what you said. 

When several people are all taking away the same thing from your posts, then perhaps you may want to consider that maybe your posts don't communicate what you wanted them to. 

Or from our point of view the goalposts are moving so much you're creating a series of Doppler shifts. 

Most recently you're pushing the "I didn't say that someone who only plays for 5 weeks out of the 10 wouldn't be able to get the rewards," and the "what I am saying is that we shouldn't be have to play every week to get the rewards". Which both get the same treatment: "you could have gotten all the rewards in half of the weeks which does not in any way imply that they needed to be in any particular order or evenly spaced out". 

If you are still unable to grasp that, there's nothing more that I can say that will help you to grasp the concept. 

[DiabolusUrsus]

8 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

I am only quoting the last line, even though its not directed to me. 

I do this because you keep claiming that others are lying, strawmanning or generally misrepresenting what you said. 

When several people are all taking away the same thing from your posts, then perhaps you may want to consider that maybe your posts don't communicate what you wanted them to.

Oh, so this is just an innocent misunderstanding caused by my failure to articulate my perspective clearly. I'm so sorry. I certainly wouldn't want to hold you accountable for my mistake. By all means, please explain to me how you can read this:

On 2019-05-20 at 10:59 AM, DiabolusUrsus said:

But why does that time need to be spread over the entire season? If I want to play other games for 5 weeks and spend the remaining 5 catching up, why should I not be able to do that?

Obviously, this will be fixed come Season 2, but you are neglecting to explain why that isn't a valid criticism of Season 1.

Or this:

On 2019-05-20 at 12:41 PM, DiabolusUrsus said:

What difference does it make if a player finishes NW gradually over 10 weeks or rushes to catch up during the last week? They still need to earn the same amount of standing, i.e., put in the same amount of effort.

And come to this conclusion:

On 2019-05-20 at 4:03 PM, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

I mean seriously, you're trying to claim that someone who misses out on large swaths of time and can't afford the leisure time to get their rewards, should be rewarded all the same, that's nonsensical.

Because given the context and using either of the standard American/British English lexicons:

• Catching up means putting in effort to make up for lost time.
• Put in the same amount of effort means that players wouldn't be given any rewards they didn't earn
• This will be fixed come Season 2 means that the relevant issue is resolved by the officially confirmed catch-up mechanic, as I mentioned previously.

There are multiple indicators that I am not even remotely close to suggesting that players who don't earn rewards should get rewards anyway, or that they should get equal rewards for less effort/time invested. So where did I go wrong? Can you quote text from my posts that caused you to think I said players should be given rewards they didn't earn or that they should get equally rewarded for less effort?

8 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Or from our point of view the goalposts are moving so much you're creating a series of Doppler shifts.

I'm not moving any goalposts. You are arguing the technicalities of a generalized example. When I first wrote the 5 week split comment, I didn't sit down and calculate out the exact standing that was available after the halfway mark. It was an approximation intended to illustrate a concept, not set a standard for when the schedule becomes acceptably flexible.

8 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Most recently you're pushing the "I didn't say that someone who only plays for 5 weeks out of the 10 wouldn't be able to get the rewards," and the "what I am saying is that we shouldn't be have to play every week to get the rewards". Which both get the same treatment: "you could have gotten all the rewards in half of the weeks which does not in any way imply that they needed to be in any particular order or evenly spaced out".

You are missing the forest for the trees when it comes to what I am saying, so let me try again.

• X is the total standing a player earns.
• Y is the total standing available for the season.
• Z is 300,000 (the standing needed to reach max. rank).
• N is the standing available per week.
• T is the number of weeks elapsed.

The player's goal is naturally X ≥ Z, but X ≤ Y. Therefore, the player needs Y ≥ Z to succeed.

In NW Season 1, Y = N * (10 - T), because Acts expire every week and the standing is lost forever. Therefore, Y decreases over time, and it is possible for Y < Z before the Season actually ends. For players with volatile schedules, this creates a hidden earlier deadline because once Y < Z by enough of a margin that they can't compensate with fugitives there is no realistic way for them to finish even if they now have the time and motivation.

ALL I am saying is that Y < Z should NEVER occur before the Season actually ends. I agree that some players have overreacted to the FOMO, but I also believe that there is no good or ethical reason to create FOMO unnecessarily. There are plenty of other ways to encourage player participation, and I think you'll be hard-pressed to argue that we should keep the FOMO just to spite overreacting players at the expense of all the players who didn't overreact.

That's why I said the planned catch-up mechanic resolves the FOMO issue completely, because it changes things so that Y = N * 10.

NOTE: The maths are not 100% exact, because daily acts will still expire. However, weeklies/Elite weeklies alone are more than enough to keep Y ≥ Z, so ignoring them doesn't change anything important.

You already made it clear that you agree the catch-up mechanic is fine. We both agree that players should need to grind until X ≥ Z.

So step back and ask yourself: why are you arguing with me about this?

The answer is simple: because, deliberately or not, you are misrepresenting my argument and attacking a strawman.

8 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

If you are still unable to grasp that, there's nothing more that I can say that will help you to grasp the concept. 

Right back at ya, buddy. If you're gonna bother responding, please make sure to address these 2 critical points:

1. Can you please quote text from my posts that suggested I want players to get rewards they didn't earn, or that players should get equal rewards for less effort?
2. If we both agree that a catch-up mechanic is satisfactory and that players need to earn their rewards... why are you arguing with me?

Cheers!

[(PSN)JustJoshinEnt]

On 2019-05-20 at 12:47 PM, DiabolusUrsus said:

That is not what the point was at all. The whole selling point of NW was that it was supposed to let players play the game on their own terms instead of being required to log in and play during a narrow window to get a specific reward.

Players should absolutely be required to actually play to earn their rewards, but there is NO REASON why they should be required to play on a daily/weekly schedule. If a player wants to take a break for a few weeks and then come back to do a longer grinding session to catch up... They should be able to do that.

That's why I originally said that the catch-up mechanic will resolve that particular concern.

And that criticism was obviously aimed at Season 1, not Season 2. The criticism is still valid, and DE has already acknowledged that many of those challenges were excessive.

Again, you're missing the point by a mile. The issue - aside from the 60 min type Acts - is not the time required to complete the individual requirements but the regularity and limited availability of those Acts.

NW Season 1 more or less forced players to play the game on DE's schedule instead of the player's, which was precisely what it was supposed to put an end to by replacing Alerts.

GTFO with that toxic empty rhetoric. Who are you to set the standard for what is an appropriate degree of time investment in the game?

Does playing every week somehow make you better than a player who plays every couple of weeks? Why should it matter whether playtime is spread evenly over the entire season or offloaded to the last week if the player ultimately puts in the same amount of grinding work?

Telling people to simply not play because they have different commitments and priorities is pointless.

 Everyone DOES have the same "opportunity" to put in the effort....and get the same rewards...

The fact that some would rather spend that opportunity playing other games or doing other things irl instead means they chose NOT to pursue those NW rewards.  Plain and simple.

I know that people have lives.  I know people have obligations that are far more important than a game... But that's not DE's problem.  They've gotta focus on the people who DO show up, not the ones that don't. That's their business model.  They're not here to be "nice", they're here to run a business and profit. People who are more involved (or as you put it, "constantly playing") are obviously more invested in the game, and thus more likely to make monetary investments, as well!  Therefore, yes...they are "more valuable" in the way that they are more likely to result in positive outcome for the business, meaning DE can feed their families.

It's not like DE locks the game off from anyone. It's always there, for free, to login to... 

I mean, it's like expecting a bus to wait at the bus stop for like an hour instead of leaving, citing that "Well, some people are maybe running late! Some people can't make it on time every day! Life happens! What about those people?  They're paying the same fee! Why are they less important!?"  
DE was clear about what they promised, set rewards for set work, and over the course of a set timeframe.  Show up or don't.  People that DO, especially that do so MORE OFTEN, should absolutely be favored.

And this is coming from a guy who had to stop playing for the first THREE WEEKS of NW to get irl stuff done.   .....Still made it to Rank 33, btw.

6 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Oh, so this is just an innocent misunderstanding caused by my failure to articulate my perspective clearly. I'm so sorry. I certainly wouldn't want to hold you accountable for my mistake. By all means, please explain to me how you can read this:

Or this:

And come to this conclusion:

Because given the context and using either of the standard American/British English lexicons:

• Catching up means putting in effort to make up for lost time.
• Put in the same amount of effort means that players wouldn't be given any rewards they didn't earn
• This will be fixed come Season 2 means that the relevant issue is resolved by the officially confirmed catch-up mechanic, as I mentioned previously.

There are multiple indicators that I am not even remotely close to suggesting that players who don't earn rewards should get rewards anyway, or that they should get equal rewards for less effort/time invested. So where did I go wrong? Can you quote text from my posts that caused you to think I said players should be given rewards they didn't earn or that they should get equally rewarded for less effort?

I'm not moving any goalposts. You are arguing the technicalities of a generalized example. When I first wrote the 5 week split comment, I didn't sit down and calculate out the exact standing that was available after the halfway mark. It was an approximation intended to illustrate a concept, not set a standard for when the schedule becomes acceptably flexible.

You are missing the forest for the trees when it comes to what I am saying, so let me try again.

• X is the total standing a player earns.
• Y is the total standing available for the season.
• Z is 300,000 (the standing needed to reach max. rank).
• N is the standing available per week.
• T is the number of weeks elapsed.

The player's goal is naturally X ≥ Z, but X ≤ Y. Therefore, the player needs Y ≥ Z to succeed.

In NW Season 1, Y = N * (10 - T), because Acts expire every week and the standing is lost forever. Therefore, Y decreases over time, and it is possible for Y < Z before the Season actually ends. For players with volatile schedules, this creates a hidden earlier deadline because once Y < Z by enough of a margin that they can't compensate with fugitives there is no realistic way for them to finish even if they now have the time and motivation.

ALL I am saying is that Y < Z should NEVER occur before the Season actually ends. I agree that some players have overreacted to the FOMO, but I also believe that there is no good or ethical reason to create FOMO unnecessarily. There are plenty of other ways to encourage player participation, and I think you'll be hard-pressed to argue that we should keep the FOMO just to spite overreacting players at the expense of all the players who didn't overreact.

That's why I said the planned catch-up mechanic resolves the FOMO issue completely, because it changes things so that Y = N * 10.

NOTE: The maths are not 100% exact, because daily acts will still expire. However, weeklies/Elite weeklies alone are more than enough to keep Y ≥ Z, so ignoring them doesn't change anything important.

You already made it clear that you agree the catch-up mechanic is fine. We both agree that players should need to grind until X ≥ Z.

So step back and ask yourself: why are you arguing with me about this?

The answer is simple: because, deliberately or not, you are misrepresenting my argument and attacking a strawman.

Right back at ya, buddy. If you're gonna bother responding, please make sure to address these 2 critical points:

1. Can you please quote text from my posts that suggested I want players to get rewards they didn't earn, or that players should get equal rewards for less effort?
2. If we both agree that a catch-up mechanic is satisfactory and that players need to earn their rewards... why are you arguing with me?

Cheers!

Maaaaan, if you put as much time and effort into playing Warframe as you do replying and arguing here on the forums, you should have no trouble completing Nightwave 😛

[DiabolusUrsus]

3 hours ago, (PS4)Taishin_Ishu said:

 Everyone DOES have the same "opportunity" to put in the effort....and get the same rewards...

*Snip*

And this is coming from a guy who had to stop playing for the first THREE WEEKS of NW to get irl stuff done.   .....Still made it to Rank 33, btw.

False.

1. As I said previously, if DE wants players to play EVERY week or else miss out on rewards, they should reset NW every week. If the deadline is 10 weeks, players should actually get the full 10 weeks. That's not unreasonable.
2. A player who plays a little bit every week does not necessarily spend more money than one who plays a few times every month. If anything, DE's business model is "money or time," which means that players with less time have more incentive to spend money... And are often the ones who have money to spend.
3. Your bus example is terrible, because I am not suggesting DE needs to accommodate players who miss the Season deadline (when the bus leaves). However, NW Season 1 effectively required players to show up 15 minutes early for the bus or else be blocked from boarding. I am saying that players should be allowed to board all the way up until the bus leaves.

Quote

Maaaaan, if you put as much time and effort into playing Warframe as you do replying and arguing here on the forums, you should have no trouble completing Nightwave 😛

Huh. Didn't realize NW could be finished in 30 minutes on any single day anytime in the Season.

Edited May 22, 2019 by DiabolusUrsus

[(PSN)JustJoshinEnt]

35 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

False.

1. As I said previously, if DE wants players to play EVERY week or else miss out on rewards, they should reset NW every week. If the deadline is 10 weeks, players should actually get the full 10 weeks. That's not unreasonable.
2. A player who plays a little bit every week does not necessarily spend more money than one who plays a few times every month. If anything, DE's business model is "money or time," which means that players with less time have more incentive to spend money... And are often the ones who have money to spend.
3. Your bus example is terrible, because I am not suggesting DE needs to accommodate players who miss the Season deadline (when the bus leaves). However, NW Season 1 effectively required players to show up 15 minutes early for the bus or else be blocked from boarding. I am saying that players should be allowed to board all the way up until the bus leaves.

Huh. Didn't realize NW could be finished in 30 minutes on any single day anytime in the Season.

1.  NW tasks ARE weekly.  The "dailies" last for THREE days, even! What's the issue?  Who is being asked to be inconvenienced here, REALLY?  The players...or DE?

Buses board continuously..but they still have schedules.  Here you could pick up NW any time during the season and still make their deadlines. 

I, myself, have REPEATEDLY stated how I missed THREE WEEKS of NW and still landed at Rank 33.  I don't see the issue.

and 30 minutes on any single day was more than enough time to finish MOST tasks for the week, save the 1 hour missions...and those could be skipped.

So, what's your next excuse?

[DiabolusUrsus]

9 minutes ago, (PS4)Taishin_Ishu said:

1.  NW tasks ARE weekly.  The "dailies" last for THREE days, even! What's the issue?  Who is being asked to be inconvenienced here, REALLY?  The players...or DE?

The players, because the system is automated and requires no continued effort to run past implementation. You missed the point of what I said, though, which is that NW itself should reset weekly if DE wants players to play every week.

If DE allots 10 weeks, players should be allowed to play whenever they want as often/infrequently as they want through the whole 10 weeks. Season 1 did not support that. Season 2 will, thanks to its catch-up mechanic.

9 minutes ago, (PS4)Taishin_Ishu said:

Here you could pick up NW any time during the season and still make their deadlines. 

Objectively false.

9 minutes ago, (PS4)Taishin_Ishu said:

I, myself, have REPEATEDLY stated how I missed THREE WEEKS of NW and still landed at Rank 33.  I don't see the issue.

Utterly irrelevant. Nobody here is claiming that NW was impossible to finish, so your personal anecdote serves no purpose in this discussion.

Gasp, you missed THREE WHOLE WEEKS. Lucky for you that left you with enough standing available to finish. That would not necessarily be true for players with schedules different from your own.

9 minutes ago, (PS4)Taishin_Ishu said:

and 30 minutes on any single day was more than enough time to finish MOST tasks for the week, save the 1 hour missions...and those could be skipped.

So, what's your next excuse?

Sigh.

Didn't realize I could run Warframe on my phone while not having access to my PC at home.

[MirageKnight]

43 minutes ago, (PS4)Taishin_Ishu said:

I don't see the issue.

And that's the problem. You're incapable of seeing past your own biased experience. Lotus forbid other people MIGHT have a different experience than you. Someone's experience not matching up with yours doesn't necessarily make them wrong.

Last I checked, believing that there isn't an issue doesn't actually preclude an issue from existing.

43 minutes ago, (PS4)Taishin_Ishu said:

So, what's your next excuse?

Might want to lay off with the hostile, condescending attitude there, bucky. It's not doing you any favors here.

Edited May 22, 2019 by MirageKnight

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

29 minutes ago, MirageKnight said:

And that's the problem. You're incapable of seeing past your own biased experience. Lotus forbid other people MIGHT have a different experience than you. Someone's experience not matching up with yours doesn't necessarily make them wrong.

Last I checked, believing that there isn't an issue doesn't actually preclude an issue from existing.

Might want to lay off with the hostile, condescending attitude there, bucky. It's not doing you any favors here.

No mate. We do see what points are being made. But we disagree that they're valid. 

Look at the posts above. There is someone claiming that we couldn't have caught up if we missed half of the event. When presented with the fact that some people were able to get twice the required amount of standing in the available time, and that this means that it was entirely possible to get done, they just post walls of text hoping that nobody will be able to do the basic math which shows that it could be done. 

T

[DiabolusUrsus]

1 hour ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

There is someone claiming that we couldn't have caught up if we missed half of the event. When presented with the fact that some people were able to get twice the required amount of standing in the available time, and that this means that it was entirely possible to get done,

As I pointed out, you are arguing the technicalities of a generalized example intended to illustrate a concept, NOT set an acceptable standard.

I was not arguing that NW Season 1 would be fine if players only needed to play 50% of the time, so showing that it was possible to finish with 50% participation doesn't actually disprove my argument.

Quote

they just post walls of text

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you were honestly trying to understand me. I provided extra specifics to clarify my points, but I guess you weren't actually interested in understanding them.

I also gave you 2 very succinct points you needed to address, allowing you to bypass that "wall of text."

Edited May 22, 2019 by DiabolusUrsus
Point > Points Typo

[DebrisFlow]

1 hour ago, (PS4)Taishin_Ishu said:

Buses board continuously..but they still have schedules.  Here you could pick up NW any time during the season and still make their deadlines. 

Buses and schedules, in my experience of 2 and 1/2 years (and i admit i'm ignorant about how it was before) were not a part of Warframe. I continued to play warframe till now because, no matter breaks or holidays, i could catch up anything at my leisure. Missed events gave a una tantum reward (like a weapon, once you have it, no need for more) that could later be re-obtained from baro.

Now there is the umbra forma, that is not una tantum, it's a performance resource that is limited (to 1 x player, currently), stackable (more are coming), consumable (the more you have, the better), but its specific bus runs for 2 months only. Meaning that a player that starts playing warframe today for its first time cannot be in pair with other players regarding this item. Meaning that missing 2 months of game will let anyone behind other players, with no catch up possibility. IF this is the current reality, it's revolutioning the pace of the game from "i play whenever i want and i can stay at par" to "i need to play these specific 2 months if i want to stay at par". And i guess this is the main reason why NW is making a portion of players turn their nose: for the first time the game is separating players with an exclusive performace reward. Before everyone was walking, fast or slowly, your decision, now you need to catch the bus.

I said "IF this is the current reality", because this is what i know with the current information that i have now. If, in my ignorance, DE already officially and clearly stated the opposite, that is to say, season 1 umbra forma is not lost forever,  then please link the source.