Why just 90?

[Sunai_Moonswing]

I've been collecting rivens for quite some time. And... I now can't! I'm going to have to sell, transmute or dissolve them. I can't make a storage account, since that breaks the TOS... Not all rivens are good but.. It's one of those I want to try them all!

Anyone else have the problem?

[GinKenshin]

Then try them and then get rid of them after that. You’re not realistically gonna use all 90 weapons every time you play. The cap is here since rivens take up too much space 

[sharkstrangler]

53 minutes ago, Sunai_Moonswing said:

Anyone else have the problem?

It's called transmutation. I haven't bought any riven slots.

[(XBOX)GearsMatrix301]

Because server storage is limited.

[krc473]

Why 90? Because DE was nice enough to increase the cap to 90 instead of just 60. Storage space and load times are apparently the issue with having more.

 

I have 70 rivens. I use 10 of those semi-regularly. I use three of them regularly. Do you honestly need 90+ rivens? 

Edited June 13, 2019 by krc473

[k05h]

vor 7 Stunden schrieb Sunai_Moonswing:

Anyone else have the problem?

Everybody will tell you that this is your problem because it makes total sense that you can store ten-thousands unused and useless mods of all rarities but have to limit youself to 90 with the real fun stuff 😈

Let's all vote for more arbitrary caps on other stuff we like ... floofs, prime warframes, primed mods, tennogen, logins per week or bossfights per hour. 

*sarcasm-off*

[Helch0rn]

45 minutes ago, k05h said:

Everybody will tell you that this is your problem because it makes total sense that you can store ten-thousands unused and useless mods of all rarities but have to limit youself to 90 with the real fun stuff 😈

Let's all vote for more arbitrary caps on other stuff we like ... floofs, prime warframes, primed mods, tennogen, logins per week or bossfights per hour. 

*sarcasm-off*

the thing is: normal mods do not need nearly as much storage as a riven

a normal mod stores its rank and amount in the database plus some otherbit and bobs

for example: Serration rank 5 amount 9

so the game knows you have 9 serrations at rank 5

 

a riven stores : up to 4 stats, percentage of the stats, rolls, rank, polarity (because not every riven has the same polarity) plus some other bits and bobs

so a single riven needs a lot more space in the database than a normal mod and where 5 billion normal mods need only one entry in the database 5 rivens need 5.

a bigger database means more server side storage, which in turn means longer load times. while longer load times won't affect me due to my 3k$ PC others are not so fortunate and I don't want them to spend an eternety to load into a mission that is over in 2 minutes

Edited June 13, 2019 by Helch0rn

[dagre2]

9 hours ago, Sunai_Moonswing said:

I've been collecting rivens for quite some time. And... I now can't! I'm going to have to sell, transmute or dissolve them. I can't make a storage account, since that breaks the TOS... Not all rivens are good but.. It's one of those I want to try them all!

Anyone else have the problem?

i would be rather satisfied if there was enough riven slots to have one for each weapon but as others have said, you're not going to be using the vast majority of weapons anyways and you'll get another one for that weapon either way. so dissolve the junk rivens or whatever you want to do with them to make them vanish. there's no reason to hold onto a large chunk of rivens, especially since you're bound to get another at some point.

this situation really doesn't help push players to use the 'lesser' weapons. since they're just junking the rivens for them instead of keeping them and playing with said weapons.

 

1 hour ago, Helch0rn said:

the thing is: normal mods do not need nearly as much storage as a riven

a normal mod stores its rank and amount in the database plus some otherbit and bobs

for example: Serration rank 5 amount 9

so the game knows you have 9 serrations at rank 5

 

a riven stores : up to 4 stats, percentage of the stats, rolls, rank, polarity (because not every riven has the same polarity) plus some other bits and bobs

so a single riven needs a lot more space in the database than a normal mod and where 5 billion normal mods need only one entry in the database 5 rivens need 5.

a bigger database means more server side storage, which in turn means longer load times. while longer load times won't affect me due to my 3k$ PC others are not so fortunate and I don't want them to spend an eternety to load into a mission that is over in 2 minutes

i know there's a reason that creates this issue, whether it be software or hardware or a combination, i'm unsure. though storage space itself is rather cheap so i doubt its that specifically. it would be nice to finally have a dev give a detailed explanation of the reason. all i know is they aren't the only devs to have similar issues. diablo 3 locks extra storage space behind seasons because the majority won't do seasons for them and it eases their load. last patch they tried to give everyone several extra stash tabs and it was bugging out peoples normal stashes while it was released only on the ptr. so they reversed the decision and locked the new ones behind a long season grind. which you can only unlock one per season.

though i should add that all gear in diablo has random stats, within a range. just like rivens. and you can keep far, far more than just 90 different pieces of gear. they also have to keep all pieces loaded for all players(in group) just in case someone decides to dump their entire stash. so the limits are a bit beyond 90 but we're comparing what blizzard can do to what DE can do. i'm sure DE would like more than 90 riven slots also.

Edited June 13, 2019 by dagre2

[(PSN)Eluminary]

I probably regularly use around 30 rivens regularly. The 60 others are mostly kept in thoughts of maybe getting a cool prime/vandel/wraith version that could make them worth using someday.  Also the cap is technically 91 after you have 91 you can't get anymore it won't let you do sorties and will yell at you to get rid of some.

[DeadVoid118]

4 hours ago, Helch0rn said:

the thing is: normal mods do not need nearly as much storage as a riven

a normal mod stores its rank and amount in the database plus some otherbit and bobs

for example: Serration rank 5 amount 9

so the game knows you have 9 serrations at rank 5

 

a riven stores : up to 4 stats, percentage of the stats, rolls, rank, polarity (because not every riven has the same polarity) plus some other bits and bobs

so a single riven needs a lot more space in the database than a normal mod and where 5 billion normal mods need only one entry in the database 5 rivens need 5.

a bigger database means more server side storage, which in turn means longer load times. while longer load times won't affect me due to my 3k$ PC others are not so fortunate and I don't want them to spend an eternety to load into a mission that is over in 2 minutes

It doesn't. They really aren't that intensive unless you're coding horribly wrong.

A riven is 4 stats, stat-modifiers (AKA stat variance for the specific riven), roll #, rank, polarity, image.

The most comparable mods are 2 stats, rank, polarity, image.

Now, granted, you can load the mod easier by having it client-side and just giving the amount of a certain rank.

However, rivens aren't too bad. Chat would be worse, in fact. All you have to do is load 12 digits corresponding to the specific thing (e.g. a 1 = a certain stat for the first digit, the first 4 digits are stats). Any chat message with 12 or more characters immediately becomes more intensive. Now, granted, the numbers might be more nuanced and each digit might be a float or 8-bit. However, that doesn't change much since letters are much the same in terms of intensity.

But this is all when looking at mods. This shouldn't be part of the loading when going into a mission. You simply need to look at stats, and maybe a few Booleans (I.E. a toggle) for certain mods like ones that make your arrows explode. So, the load for each mission should remain the same. Nothing changes outside mod browsing, and even then the effect on load time for browsing would be so minimal it wouldn't even be noticeable to the naked eye.

In fact, most of your load time in the first place should always be graphics and clientside limitations unless you have an internet connection slower than molasses. It's why all the Tenno in relays are shadow-Excaliburs.

And don't get me started on storage space. A 1-terabyte external hard drive costs around $50. That should be enough space to double the riven limit for everybody, at the very least.

So, quite frankly, the given reason seems like misdirection from the actual reason, unless they've coded something terribly wrong in which case they should just... fix that code.

[Ham_Grenabe]

90 rivens seems like a staggering number. My Riven cap is 27, and I haven't found enough worth keeping to fill even that.

[(PSN)chubbslawson]

I am sitting on 94 at the moment but I cannot do the sorties now. Kind of a drag

[Oreades]

13 hours ago, GinKenshin said:

Then try them and then get rid of them after that. You’re not realistically gonna use all 90 weapons every time you play. The cap is here since rivens take up too much space 

No but in a game with something like 400 weapons or some such you're never going to know what weapon you're going to want to use or will get reworked to become a weapon you'd use on the regular. 

Rivens are a constant source of annoyance either from the standpoint of literally not being able to sortie because youre at 91/90 and the game is CONSTANTLY going to remind you of that fact with an interact prompt until you finally sit down and painstakingly decide what Riven you are going to delete......... Only to have the weapon for the riven you just deleted either get a total rework/side mod that makes it a weapon you would totally main OR having it flat out get a primed variant a month after you delete it (I'm looking at you Gram Prime). 

But hey lets just pretend that there are no gigantic glaring issues with the Riven system and that everything is just hunkydory.~ Yeah the database consumption on rivens is an issue for DE but everything else is an issue for the players. 

At the VERY least they could let us transmute Rivens without that stupid "gotta fight a Hydrolist" BS, ya know like literally every other Mod that can be transmuted without needless extra steps. I humbly await someone popping in and saying "I fight 20 Hydrolists a day so transmutes totally aren't an issue"... because it's bound to happen, just assume I've already placed my hand to my face and let out an audible sigh. 

Edited June 13, 2019 by Oreades

[(PSN)Tactless_Ninja]

I don't like being shoehorned into 3 or 4 weapons. With focus lenses in the equation, even less reason to switch up builds. 

So with that in mind, if I want a specific riven for a weapon I need to roll against a very large population of weapons until I get the one I want. That makes deleting rivens less desirable as rng almost guarantees you'll probably never see it again. 

If they really have an issue with saving a scorecard with random numbers on it, maybe they should simplify the system a bit more. 90 slots just isn't enough for a collector. 

[(XBOX)zThulsaDoomz]

Because 100 is too much and 80 is too few

[(XBOX)Demon Intellect]

8 hours ago, k05h said:

Everybody will tell you that this is your problem because it makes total sense that you can store ten-thousands unused and useless mods of all rarities but have to limit youself to 90 with the real fun stuff 😈

Let's all vote for more arbitrary caps on other stuff we like ... floofs, prime warframes, primed mods, tennogen, logins per week or bossfights per hour. 

*sarcasm-off*

Those mods are static though, my rank 10 serration is the same as yours. Rivens will almost literally be like snowflakes with no 2 being the exact same.

Edited June 13, 2019 by (XB1)Demon Intellect

[SilentMobius]

3 hours ago, Keylan118 said:

It doesn't. They really aren't that intensive unless you're coding horribly wrong.

A riven is 4 stats, stat-modifiers (AKA stat variance for the specific riven), roll #, rank, polarity, image.

The most comparable mods are 2 stats, rank, polarity, image.

Now, granted, you can load the mod easier by having it client-side and just giving the amount of a certain rank.

However, rivens aren't too bad. Chat would be worse, in fact. All you have to do is load 12 digits corresponding to the specific thing (e.g. a 1 = a certain stat for the first digit, the first 4 digits are stats). Any chat message with 12 or more characters immediately becomes more intensive. Now, granted, the numbers might be more nuanced and each digit might be a float or 8-bit. However, that doesn't change much since letters are much the same in terms of intensity. 

But this is all when looking at mods. This shouldn't be part of the loading when going into a mission. You simply need to look at stats, and maybe a few Booleans (I.E. a toggle) for certain mods like ones that make your arrows explode. So, the load for each mission should remain the same. Nothing changes outside mod browsing, and even then the effect on load time for browsing would be so minimal it wouldn't even be noticeable to the naked eye. 

In fact, most of your load time in the first place should always be graphics and clientside limitations unless you have an internet connection slower than molasses. It's why all the Tenno in relays are shadow-Excaliburs.

And don't get me started on storage space. A 1-terabyte external hard drive costs around $50. That should be enough space to double the riven limit for everybody, at the very least.

So, quite frankly, the given reason seems like misdirection from the actual reason, unless they've coded something terribly wrong in which case they should just... fix that code.

Wow, You aren't a developer for a living are you, or if you are, I wouldn't work with you.

Firstly, when you have a live service that is paying everyone's salary there are frequently codepaths that you cannot risk altering. Things that would just cost too much money/time to get right again. In that situation if a new feature requires a change in that code path then it just doesn't happen.

This is even worse in gaming, where developers have massivly compressed timescales and have to integrate work from non-programmers at a scale greater that most other industries by an order of magnitude.

Now often "fab" new features are constructed as proof-of-concepts based on what can already be made (Emperyan/Railjack was one of these) I'll bet rivens are just that. And given Steves tweet some time ago about switching to binary JSON representation with a database upgrade I'll bet that a number of new features are done as JSON documents in a generally RDBMS.

So now we're talking about JSON blobs stored in rows in a DB that normaly stores minimal data. What is the performance penalty on what critical data retreval paths if that one table gets "Too big" and what is "Too big" in this case?

I can't tell you, but I'll bet DE have an idea, and that riven limit is driven by that consideration.

Remember we don't just care about just storage we care about storage per unit of read or write performance. No one cares about $50 consumer HDD's when server-side item queries start timing out.

Never assume malice when ignorance is a more likely explaination, in this case, our ignorance as (where appropriate) non-developers and more importantly people-without-any-visibility-of-the-Warframe-codebase-and-historical-decisions.

Assumuing you can school a developer in their own field is the height of hubris.

Edited June 13, 2019 by SilentMobius

[Sunai_Moonswing]

I hadn't thought of it that way. Well, a lot of my unused rivens tend to be for desirable weapons. So, I will get to selling rather than deleting.

Thanks for your answers everyone!

[0_The_F00l]

It does take relatively more space, and it can add up to a lot depending on the number of people that have rivens. 

But I call BullS#&$ on it being the main reason. 

There is already 90 we can have, 

The number of weapons are almost 4 times as much, 

I can create a lot lot more combinations of kitguns and Zaws if I had a mind to it. So the space for custom weapons that have a varied stat range, stance, forma, Polarity, appearance is much larger. 

Last time I checked there is no limit on number of kitguns or Zaws, 

And getting to 90 rivens requires you to purchase slots, just as it does new weapons. 

If space was a constraint they should have limited the variation of the rivens to integers or multiples of it instead of the floating number values they have. 

The reason for a limit is so that there is always a market for sell and purchase of Rivens, 

I would have much rather preferred having purchasable riven slots for weapons than separate category with a cap. 

[DeadVoid118]

19 hours ago, SilentMobius said:

Wow, You aren't a developer for a living are you, or if you are, I wouldn't work with you.

Firstly, when you have a live service that is paying everyone's salary there are frequently codepaths that you cannot risk altering. Things that would just cost too much money/time to get right again. In that situation if a new feature requires a change in that code path then it just doesn't happen.

This is even worse in gaming, where developers have massivly compressed timescales and have to integrate work from non-programmers at a scale greater that most other industries by an order of magnitude.

Now often "fab" new features are constructed as proof-of-concepts based on what can already be made (Emperyan/Railjack was one of these) I'll bet rivens are just that. And given Steves tweet some time ago about switching to binary JSON representation with a database upgrade I'll bet that a number of new features are done as JSON documents in a generally RDBMS.

So now we're talking about JSON blobs stored in rows in a DB that normaly stores minimal data. What is the performance penalty on what critical data retreval paths if that one table gets "Too big" and what is "Too big" in this case?

I can't tell you, but I'll bet DE have an idea, and that riven limit is driven by that consideration.

Remember we don't just care about just storage we care about storage per unit of read or write performance. No one cares about $50 consumer HDD's when server-side item queries start timing out.

Never assume malice when ignorance is a more likely explaination, in this case, our ignorance as (where appropriate) non-developers and more importantly people-without-any-visibility-of-the-Warframe-codebase-and-historical-decisions.

Assumuing you can school a developer in their own field is the height of hubris.

Firstly, it doesn't take a train conductor to know the train is off the tracks. Developers are humans with flaws that can mess up just as much as anyone. Even assuming I am indeed not a developer, which is irrelevant and has nothing to do with the actual argument but instead only changes credibility, I can still very well know things about developing games, coding, and so on that are outside the experience of said developers, or even something simply overlooked.

Secondly, you'd be right that certain code cannot be altered. Rivens are not included in that distinction. There should be no other major system in the game that is reliant upon Rivens and any dependencies shouldn't be too hard to replace or not need replacing at all. Again, this is contingent upon things being coded properly, which is my argument in the first place. Unless somebody screwed up big time, which they very well may have, things should be relatively simple and easy to expand for more Riven space.

Thirdly, your argument of compressed timescales and excessive work isn't so relevant when we consider the amount of work DE put into making their own lighting system and other such tasks. They constantly and consistently do things well beyond expanding mere Riven space, which--again, if coded properly--should simply be a variable they need to change and storage to expand.

Fourthly, as stated prior, I am assuming the developers did their job and coded properly, not made a demo and then attempted to adapt that demo into the Riven system as you so kindly point out might have happened with the system. That would break the fundamental crux of my original points, that being things were... sensibly coded and prepared for future use.

So, really, you ignored the fundamental assumption of my original argument and decided to call me hubristic while also assuming my actual background, which is by the way programming (not games, but programming) among other duties, all while pointing out my original idea--that things either aren't coded properly or DE is lying--is in fact... true. So thanks for agreeing, I guess. 

Oh, and a database change is not past DE, they've done far more intensive work on Warframe before, and they could very well change the entire structure to be more... viable. They've made their own lighting system, which granted is still bugged in places, but what isn't in Warframe? Sure, fixing Rivens might seem unimportant, but if DE plans on expanding the Riven system, or tying it into anything else, or adding features to it... it'd be nice to not place another book atop an unstable stack.

[SilentMobius]

10 hours ago, Keylan118 said:

Firstly, it doesn't take a train conductor to know the train is off the tracks.

No, but this is not one of those situations, if you had the background experience you'd know that.

10 hours ago, Keylan118 said:

 Rivens are not included in that distinction. There should be no other major system in the game that is reliant upon Rivens and any dependencies shouldn't be too hard to replace or not need replacing at all.

So much nonsense.

10 hours ago, Keylan118 said:

 this is contingent upon things being coded properly, which is my argument in the first place. Unless somebody screwed up big time, which they very well may have, things should be relatively simple and easy to expand for more Riven space.

The fact you think there is a definitive "properly" here is so telling, and it's not a good look.

10 hours ago, Keylan118 said:

Thirdly, your argument of compressed timescales and excessive work isn't so relevant when we consider the amount of work DE put into making their own lighting system and other such tasks. They constantly and consistently do things well beyond expanding mere Riven space, which--again, if coded properly--should simply be a variable they need to change and storage to expand.

Ignorance and hubris, the classic Dunning Kruger combination.

10 hours ago, Keylan118 said:

So, really, you ignored the fundamental assumption of my original argument and decided to call me hubristic while also assuming my actual background, which is by the way programming (not games, but programming) among other duties, all while pointing out my original idea--that things either aren't coded properly or DE is lying--is in fact... true. So thanks for agreeing, I guess.

I'm not. You're just too ignorant to get it. And I mean really painfully ignorant, you-would-have-failed-an-interview ignorant, I wasn't-this-ignorant-and-unaware-15-years-ago (And I was pretty full of myself back then) kind of ignorant

You keep pontification all you want, you're obviously doubling down (Classic Dunning Kruger again) and you're not worth my time, given your complete lack of humility in an area you know (quite obviously) worse-than-nothing about.

It's time for the sweet silence of the block button.

 

Edited June 15, 2019 by SilentMobius

[DeadVoid118]

10 hours ago, SilentMobius said:

No, but this is not one of those situations, if you had the background experience you'd know that.

So much nonsense.

The fact you think there is a definitive "properly" here is so telling, and it's not a good look.

Ignorance and hubris, the classic Dunning Kruger combination.

I'm not. You're just too ignorant to get it. And I mean really painfully ignorant, you-would-have-failed-an-interview ignorant, I wasn't-this-ignorant-and-unaware-15-years-ago (And I was pretty full of myself back then) kind of ignorant

You keep pontification all you want, you're obviously doubling down (Classic Dunning Kruger again) and you're not worth my time, given your complete lack of humility in an area you know (quite obviously) worse-than-nothing about.

It's time for the sweet silence of the block button.

 

Firstly, thank you so much for your well-thought-out, logical, structured argument that isn't just a bunch of "that's not true"s without evidence and some infantile insults thrown in. It's great to see a well-adjusted individual that doesn't just assume the worst in people, much like your argument about how we shouldn't assume the worst in DE without any substantial, non-circumstancial evidence to back it up. You truly are a champion of truth and well-mannered discussion, good sir!

Secondly, I much appreciate you pointing out the Dunning-Kruger effect and claiming it's influence upon my comments. I'm sure everyone here loves to have someone snidely imply they are stupid while also being called extremely ignorant and proud. It was quite the wake-up call for me that seemed very well-deserved and not at all like a belligerent drunk snapping at me for stepping within three meters of their personal space, which is itself two meters as the drunk so kindly claims and something I'm obviously expected to know. If I didn't know that, I'd clearly be some sort of proud idiot under the Dunning-Kruger effect if I pointed out that two meters seems a bit excessive.

Thirdly, thank you ever so much for the clearly-deserved block. I'm sure my eyes and mind shall be much better rested without your wonderful discourse, and that every other person perusing the forums can clearly see you were completely reasonable to block someone after they showed disagreement to your disagreement of their original comment, which is definitely unreasonable for any user on this site to do and needs blocking.