What would you do about CC frames?

[Ikyr0]

1 hour ago, Vanilla_nuka said:

I have never personally seen that happen,  I would have to test this later. from everything that I have seen, enemies shielded by the drone can not be affected by CC abilities, and the enemies that are affected prior to the drone protecting them, have the ability dispelled when the drone comes near them

damn, now that i think about it i could be wrong.

[Vanilla_nuka]

32 minutes ago, Brian770 said:

ok...i give up, what does CC mean....

Crowd Control

[Vanilla_nuka]

3 minutes ago, moostar95 said:

Cc is pointless and a waste of energy.there are no use for them in the game's state as long as we have brainless kill everything missions. Nyx and vauban are my go to punching bags as frames that come from a by gone era. What's the point of wasting time tossing foes around when you can just kill them. It's the main reason I also get frustrated with inaro's sandstorm and zephyr's four. Throws enemies around barely killing anything. There are frame that have both cc and proper dmg. I would play frames that have that then nyx and trash vauban. 

Nyx has CC and proper damage, her 4 gives her a damage buff capped at 400%, and her 2 gives her a flat dps increase by stripping armor. CC at higher levels is a near requirement for most frames to have any kind of survivability unless you use inaros or a tank frame. You not liking them is fine, but they are far more useful and great to have around then you give them credit for.

[TARINunit9]

If I was forced to do anything at all... feel free to grab the pitchforks but I would rebalance most of our options, which means some inevitable nerfs. Blood Rush down from +165% to +100%, Maiming Strike down from +90% to just 90%, maybe tweak the Arca Plasmor (but maybe not, that one is delicate), etc.

It wouldn't all be nerfs. I would also buff things like giving Wukong's Celestial Twin AI to Mind Control slaves and Nekros Shadows, make it easier to headshot blinded or stunned enemies (maybe make their hands intangible?) and make Naramon Focus less unbearably terrible

These are just scratching the surface but I would like to test out some really big brainstorming sessions and see if balancing for slightly more skill and slightly less "I automatically win because I have these mods" is at all viable

[Oreades]

About the only short term patchwork that springs to mind for CC immune enemies is instead of just being all "NOPE!" when hit with a CC ability they have a vulnerability exposed. 

Kinda like (and I hate to say this because I hate this fight) Profit Taker. However instead of being THE ONLY way you can damage them this would be more like a damage bonus. So instead of just being blanket immune to CC they take a debuff from the CC ability they just walked through.  Tho the problem with debuff roulette is what happens when your CC debuffs to a damage type that you don't have and you can't hit it with a new debuff until it falls off.

I guess kinda leaning towards "All powers will at least do something even if it isn't always what the powers are supposed to do" scenario.... and I mean it's a step up from them just hard ignoring CC abilities now. 

[Vanilla_nuka]

5 hours ago, moostar95 said:

If vauban is great. Why are there so many happy that now he is getting a rework. Right, cause his cc is unneeded and doesn't do anything. I don't want to rain on your enjoyment of frames. I'm glad you are happy to use nyx. I just don't. Nyx can tank and dmg with her 4. Cool. Nidus can do both of those better with his one and two then her and vabuan combine. Nidus also can semi support teams with 3 and four. I don't play nidus as much. But if for some reason I want to. I'll be having a better time. 

I never said vauban was great, if you would have read a little further up, I say the exact opposite, actually its not because his cc is not needed or doesnt do anything, his vortex and bastille are two of the best cc skills in the game bar none, hes getting a rework because he has two other abilities that are absolute garbage. Id argue the opposite, nyx and vauban cc much better then Nidus, nidus cant do anything in a team environment, all it takes is someone to take his kills, and he cant build stacks, making him essentially useless. You do you bud, obviously you have a strong dislike for CC frames and thats cool. I have a strong dislike for aoe frames like saryn and equinox, but you dont see me trashing them.

This thread was meant as a discussion to come up with ideas to try and make cc frames better or more relevant, the only thing youve added to the conversation amounts to "Theyre garbage, and there not worth the investment". If you have nothing further to add thats helpful, there no need for you to continue replying.

Edited July 27, 2019 by Vanilla_nuka

[Ham_Grenabe]

Ship ‘em off to the Isle of Misfit Frames. 

They cannot be relevant in the game as it stands. When the game changes, look at them then and do reworks. 

[RX-3DR]

5 hours ago, Vanilla_nuka said:

I never said vauban was great, if you would have read a little further up, I say the exact opposite, actually its not because his cc is not needed or doesnt do anything, his vortex and bastille are two of the best cc skills in the game bar none, hes getting a rework because he has two other abilities that are absolute garbage. Id argue the opposite, nyx and vauban cc much better then Nidus, nidus cant do anything in a team environment, all it takes is someone to take his kills, and he cant build stacks, making him essentially useless. You do you bud, obviously you have a strong dislike for CC frames and thats cool. I have a strong dislike for aoe frames like saryn and equinox, but you dont see me trashing them.

This thread was meant as a discussion to come up with ideas to try and make cc frames better or more relevant, the only thing youve added to the conversation amounts to "Theyre garbage, and there not worth the investment". If you have nothing further to add thats helpful, there no need for you to continue replying.

Nidus can pull enemies together over a wider range than Vauban, allowing for the entire team to bomb his Larva to clear a crowd. It's a mix of damage support by gathering enemies and CC because enemies are held incapacitated in that location. Vauban has the benefit of setting up multiple lockdown spots with Bastille and Vortex while Nidus needs to have this previous Larva expired before being able to fire off another one. I wouldn't say one is outright better than the other, there's a lot to consider, but when you apply it into the context of the game, both will be unappreciated simply because there will always exist an option to either lockdown the entire map with a single press of a button, or a step further, sweep the entire map with a single button.

In the current state of the game, because we live in an age where ability ranges are often times maximized to cover entire rooms and the neighboring rooms, the value of locking down multiple chokepoints, something that Vauban does really well, is not properly valued anymore. It all boils down to the alternatives slowly inching their way to completely shadow everything else with damage and range.

[Learicorn]

On 2019-07-26 at 3:32 AM, Datam4ss said:

Actually, all that was uttered is Platitudes.

DE murdered CC with their own game design of "everything that means something and needs to be CCed is immune to CC". Changing damage doesn't change anything. Limiting mods doesn't change anything. Pressing a button for zero effect is why CC died. There are tonnes of enemies that simply switch off CC. At least when you use damage, you do ... something.

Nerfing damage will not make CC relevant when it fails to do anything that really matters in the first place.

 

This!!!!!!! SO MUCH THIS!!!!!

[stormy505]

On 2019-07-25 at 11:28 PM, RX-3DR said:

44448 has it right. The best way to tackle the problem with CC being weak now, is to stop prevent damage abilities from sweeping the map every 5 seconds. The question is, what is the preferable way to achieve it and will the community not whine about it?

doubt. even in a world without nuke dps frames I would still prefer to get defense, tank, support etc frames over cc frames since they don't effectively slow down the mission. The only mission types where cc frames were/are used was interception and raids. Where killing enemies wasn't the way to progress the mission.

if you want cc frames back in the meta, give us a reason to fight level 1000 enemies and give us a means TO fight them.

[carbman95]

Some enemies should have partial cc immunity instead of total cc immunity, so if some enemy has 50% cc resistance, your cc ability will work half the duration it has. That way cc will be useful against them, but they will still be able to get out of it quickly so you need to keep a close eye to keep the enemy cc-ed. Also maybe give some of them a short time period after cc effect ends to be immune to that cc so the enemy doesn't get perma-cc. 

[RX-3DR]

52 minutes ago, stormy505 said:

doubt. even in a world without nuke dps frames I would still prefer to get defense, tank, support etc frames over cc frames since they don't effectively slow down the mission. The only mission types where cc frames were/are used was interception and raids. Where killing enemies wasn't the way to progress the mission.

if you want cc frames back in the meta, give us a reason to fight level 1000 enemies and give us a means TO fight them.

Increasing their health or decreasing your damage is effectively the same thing. It all boils down to how easy it is to kill enemies in a 50 meter radius with a single press of a button and that is what you to address. Making a game mode where enemies have 9999x their original health is about as good as cramming CC abilities into a minigame and calling it a day because, "It has uses there". 

You want a way to stop CC from slowing down missions, cut down the range of abilities in general so that you're not freezing enemies that are outside of LOS and sitting in the adjacent room. CC slows down things like Defense missions because enemies are immobilized far away from where everyone is. CC has been treated as a toggle AI button as opposed to a way to mitigate damage taken by stopping enemies from firing at you.

[Loza03]

1 hour ago, RX-3DR said:

Increasing their health or decreasing your damage is effectively the same thing. It all boils down to how easy it is to kill enemies in a 50 meter radius with a single press of a button and that is what you to address. Making a game mode where enemies have 9999x their original health is about as good as cramming CC abilities into a minigame and calling it a day because, "It has uses there". 

You want a way to stop CC from slowing down missions, cut down the range of abilities in general so that you're not freezing enemies that are outside of LOS and sitting in the adjacent room. CC slows down things like Defense missions because enemies are immobilized far away from where everyone is. CC has been treated as a toggle AI button as opposed to a way to mitigate damage taken by stopping enemies from firing at you.

This. Having abilities that strip out portions of the game with very few limits is inevitably going to have a negative effect on the gameplayt, no matter how positive the short-term benefits may be.

Rebalancing this may be easier on some frames than others, since some frames rely more or less on their CC potential. Khora, for example, has other places to go, whereas Limbo (a frame who thrives on being a CC/defender style frame) might struggle with it, but some additions that give him softer options for survivability and area denial/defence, and rebalancing stasis's energy economy to punish overuse - possibly something like Hysteria's energy ramp-up, but more significant. That makes it more of a fallback than Limbo's main option.

[Stargazer_Libra]

After reading through all this and some other similar posts and points, this game really does have issues with it's systems at their core that I don't know if it can be said enough is being done soon enough. Maybe that's why DE seems focused a lot on PR for the game in bringing more and more players than tackiling problems veterans are facing and new players will inevitably run into themselves, when one batch is burnt out, another fresh batch will come in. But could there be a solution with the upcoming Railjack? Would going back to more of a focus on teamwork curve things around in some way or not? One thing is true though, any major rework or slowing down of the pace of the game (which I see more people are saying) is going to cause a huge drop in player numbers, moreso the casual group that blows through missions and is out of the game just as quick. There is more content with Railjack, the Duviri Paradox, two new frames, and.....what else was there again? I really can't recall at the moment.

Anyone think any form of rework could be coming in the same span of time or could anything in that time frame be enough to at least start to curve things in another dirtection. It just seems like Warframe is charging headfirst into a wall and all it can do is keep running into the same thing, or the overall issues that really need to be addressed. The looter shooter, horde setup is a recipe for burnout, hell, look at the Division 2. As well as it sold in the beginning with a consistent player count, it now has dropped off in players drastically and recent analytics showed Anthem (of all things) is scoring higher in overrall interest (albeit negative) in online searches. How long would anyone suppose it would be before Warframe could face a similar issue if no susbstatial change happens?

As much as I like this game and want it to do better, I find myself wanting more than the constant farming and wiping out hordes generally the same way. In the beginning there was a heavier focus on lore and feeling of some kind of progression, albeit slower, and skill as it was at that point. Now it's heavily reliant on mods and clearing large groups as quick as possible. Even the new finishers seem out of place as cool a feature as they are, it seems more fitting in a game that isn't horde based. Like I said before, maybe with the coming content there could be changes, such as the Damage rework was it? I remember something mentioned once in the roadmap, just haven't heard it brought back up to say when it would be happening. 

(What the hell, first I couldn't get my avatar on the Forums to change, when that fixes, I notice my rank is now incorrect? I give up.)

Edited July 28, 2019 by Stargazer_Libra

[stormy505]

6 hours ago, RX-3DR said:

Increasing their health or decreasing your damage is effectively the same thing.

It's not. When you nerf nuke frames (which is what was said in the original post.) Weapons become meta over abilities. And there's still no reason to run cc frames because there's no threat in the game that requires cc to actually deal with.

Sure, if you nerf every abilitys range then cc frames don't slow down the mission. But their abilities can't speed up the mission.

And if you want to go down the rabbit hole that is nerfing litterly everything so that level 60 enemies are a threat. I doubt that will happen with how much work it will require vs going the other way of increasing level caps. Or even going the easiest route of just making cc frames not pure cc. Which is the direction I see de going with the rework to vauban coming.

[stormy505]

5 hours ago, Stargazer_Libra said:

at the Division 2. As well as it sold in the beginning with a consistent player count, it now has dropped off in players drastically and recent analytics showed Anthem (of all things) is scoring higher in overrall interest (albeit negative) in online searches. How long would anyone suppose it would be before Warframe could face a similar issue if no susbstatial change happens?

with division2 the game lacked content so people got bored with doing the same thing over and over. Negitive press isn't good for a game. Over media, sure. But when you're selling a product, negative advertising is really bad. Look at fallout 76, had the most buzz on the media after launch compared to last fallout games but it sold like 1/10 the copies. (Not a real number, I just know it did horrible Compared to past games.)

[garbenzine]

The only real solution I can think of without completely nuking the current gameplay mechanics is to develop several new mission types where CC is the golden ticket to finishing them hassle-free.  Now as to how those would even work... I can only make bad guesses.  Missions where stuff can't be killed?  Or revives a second after dying?  Change Clem's mission from just survival, to something where you're actually raiding the place for goodies with constantly spawning caches that have to be hacked to be opened so you can find the "I win" item and leave?  A Sentient tileset where the damage adaptation is constant and mission-wide?  Something where you have a machine collecting dudes and launching them, but to do that you have to stun them with relevant procs or CC abilities?

[Lutesque]

Nothing.... 

The problem isn't CC frames.... the problem us the game is a "Do More Damage" Power Creep Cluster #*!%.... This needs to stop.... for the sake of Vauban.... please.... no more Killing.... 😞

[kotex073]

Did never understand the class clasifications in warframe, healer,tank and dps suggest there is content that needs those classes to combine strenght to tackle it.

Still didn't find that content.

[Cubewano]

1 hour ago, stormy505 said:

It's not. When you nerf nuke frames (which is what was said in the original post.) Weapons become meta over abilities. And there's still no reason to run cc frames because there's no threat in the game that requires cc to actually deal with.

Sure, if you nerf every abilitys range then cc frames don't slow down the mission. But their abilities can't speed up the mission.

And if you want to go down the rabbit hole that is nerfing litterly everything so that level 60 enemies are a threat. I doubt that will happen with how much work it will require vs going the other way of increasing level caps. Or even going the easiest route of just making cc frames not pure cc. Which is the direction I see de going with the rework to vauban coming.

Nerfing nukes is a necessary step in making enemies a threat to deal with, when we have self scaling extremely high range not even los restricted map clearers with no limit to how many bodies it can drop at a time there is close to no way enemies can be made a threat against the player, they die too quickly and with no chance to respond, lowering the pace and scale at which we completely decimate enemy forces gives them more potential to be an opposition, and to create enough of a grouping to try and overwhelm us. Everything dying more or less as they spawn, a room and a half away, isn't going to ever be able to press us into discomfort or risk, it's never going to be a threat. Lessening the ease by which we dispatch large quantities of enemies will improve their ability to be a threat, and with more of a threat level there comes more of a desire or otherwise need to disable them so we can properly handle their opposition. 

If the alternative to CC is an actual risk of failure, or being k.o'd (which will slow down the mission more) it makes them far more attractive as a choice, and a proper alternative to doing missions effectively. It's even feasible to tie in some level of debuff to their CC if we rework damage extensively enough, so that could be a further boon that helps progress combat. All of that does require some significant change to the pacing of this game however. 

And creating balance is creating balance, adding new levels to rebalance around isn't any different from just editing current levels outside phrasing/presentation. And DE have put far more work in trying to create upward boundaries of difficulty/balance with at least several new mission types and game rebalances that it's hardly saving them effort. Of course they could just turn everything into a dps as well, I don't believe that is the easier route in the least, and it has its own issues to address (namely its impact on the co-op nature of the game, and kit creativity for new frames) but if that's what DE chooses so be it. It doesn't seem the direction DE want, which is why they've been so hesitant to address Vauban over the last year or two, they still have no explicit plans on what they are going to do with him, and they've expressed clear conflict with how they want to fix him and whether its to go with the flow or try to fix cc, apparently they've even considered the potential of reducing general durability of frames to create more desire for CC frames which leans towards wanting to still give it value, but really who knows. DE are stuck inbetween a rock and a hard place, they clearly want to pull some things back, Steve acknowledged that openly one stream, but they're also reserved about when to do it because they are aware whatever they do would have a rather critical reception. 

Edited July 27, 2019 by Cubewano

[stormy505]

27 minutes ago, Cubewano said:

Snip

you're not getting my point. Nerfing DPS frames only slows our ability to kill things. It still doesn't require us to use cc frames over support, defense, tank etc. to make cc frames viable via nerfing. Nerfing doesn't stop at nuke frames. To make level 60 enemies a threat. EVERY frame outside of cc frames would need nerfing. And EVERY weapon, item, operator, etc would need nerfing to make cc frames viable.

In long endurance runs people use cc frames over DPS frames cause cc scailes as far as your weapons. If you make high levels more readily available then cc frames would see more use.

At the end of the day this argument is kinda pointless. I imagine de will take the route with the least work, ie reworking cc frames to not be pure cc. Nerfing everything will make everyone who enjoys the current frames in the game unhappy. (Not just nukes, supports, tanks, buffers, etc.)

[Cubewano]

4 hours ago, stormy505 said:

you're not getting my point. Nerfing DPS frames only slows our ability to kill things. It still doesn't require us to use cc frames over support, defense, tank etc. to make cc frames viable via nerfing. Nerfing doesn't stop at nuke frames. To make level 60 enemies a threat. EVERY frame outside of cc frames would need nerfing. And EVERY weapon, item, operator, etc would need nerfing to make cc frames viable.

In long endurance runs people use cc frames over DPS frames cause cc scailes as far as your weapons. If you make high levels more readily available then cc frames would see more use.

At the end of the day this argument is kinda pointless. I imagine de will take the route with the least work, ie reworking cc frames to not be pure cc. Nerfing everything will make everyone who enjoys the current frames in the game unhappy. (Not just nukes, supports, tanks, buffers, etc.)

It doesn't appear you are getting mine, so long as we can have infinitely scaling high range near instant death dps tool cc isn't going to make any notable return in value. High levels or not. Regardless of if we might need more steps following the nerfs to find a perfect balance, it doesn't negate nerfing our aoe clear is a necessary step to make it happen. We can't kill enemies from extremely safe distances in high numbers with great efficiency into perpetuity while also ever expecting them to ever pose a genuine threat. This is why even boss encounters who can scale to any level of balance still rely on abilities immunities and iframes and other limiting mechanics to present a challenge, because tweaking up scaling alone doesn't work as a counter to our powersets anymore. 

In the past people used CC in long endurance runs, when we didn't have half the power creep we have now, but in the present? I can't recall the last time I've done a remotely long endurance run where we needed or even used CC in combat, its just saryns and octavias and meme strikers, with a nekros and maybe trinity. We're no longer particularly vulnerable to enemies so we don't have to worry about staving off their bullets, we kill them faster than they generally get a chance to fire (even towards the higher levels) and worse comes to worse and someone gets downed we no longer need CC as a panic button to save someone since operators are a high duration quickly renewable iframe pickup (with built in healing and their own cc if you've progressed with them) so the desire for protections is just at an all time low. You might use a CC if you're just feeling really lazy, but otherwise they are highly nonessential when we can handle enemies so easily now. An Octavia alone can more or less hard carry a full team into infinity with moderate awareness. 

And perhaps the argument is pointless, but there is no harm in having it all the same, especially if it helps drive DE in a direction even slightly. I already said I doubt your direction is the least work, there are more things that have fallen behind in this game than things that have greatly soared ahead, but I similarly don't think DE are actually that lazy and they won't chose a direction just because its easy to do. I'm also not sure you get to speak for the community on what they want or would feel, whether in the short term or long term, maybe they'll dislike it, maybe not, plenty of people seemed to enjoy and see potential in this game long before power creep started to soar, let it get this far matter of fact. 

Edited July 28, 2019 by Cubewano

[stormy505]

1 hour ago, Cubewano said:

I'm also not sure you get to speak for the community on what they want or would feel, whether in the short term or long term, maybe they'll dislike it, maybe not, plenty of people seemed to enjoy and see potential in this game long before power creep started to soar, let it get this far matter of fact. 

people don't like the frames they play being nerfed. if you take the route of nerfing frames to make cc frames viable. it doesn't stop at nuke frames. it goes down the list of EVERY role, and i highly doubt that people are going to sit back and not complain at DE for nerfing their mains.

the easier route that won't cause the community to rage at DE, is reworking frames like vauban or nyx into not one trick ponys.

"seeing potential in this game before power creep." goes both ways, a lot of people currently like the power fantasy that warframe provides.

to the rest i'll just agree to disagree cause at this point the argument isn't going anywhere.

[Stargazer_Libra]

6 hours ago, stormy505 said:

with division2 the game lacked content so people got bored with doing the same thing over and over.

Thus current issues with Warframe, though it is yet to be seen if Railjack and the Duviri Paradox will solve that really. I will say, Warframe may have some real competition on it's hands come September when Destiny 2 drops free to play on Steam, if the grind is less intense and more enjoyable with a better balance to it's gameplay, that would speak for itself. From what I've followed, ever since splitting from Activision Bungie has been doing much better than before, so if it brings some needed competiton in the free to play, looter shooter arena (more like farm shooter in Warframes case) it could light a needed fire under the devs asses to crack down in areas the game needs it. Or has for some time.

Edited July 28, 2019 by Stargazer_Libra

[Cubewano]

2 hours ago, stormy505 said:

people don't like the frames they play being nerfed. if you take the route of nerfing frames to make cc frames viable. it doesn't stop at nuke frames. it goes down the list of EVERY role, and i highly doubt that people are going to sit back and not complain at DE for nerfing their mains.

the easier route that won't cause the community to rage at DE, is reworking frames like vauban or nyx into not one trick ponys.

"seeing potential in this game before power creep." goes both ways, a lot of people currently like the power fantasy that warframe provides.

to the rest i'll just agree to disagree cause at this point the argument isn't going anywhere.

that's your take sure. people also don't like a bad gameplay experience. which one wins out more is up in the air. I'd hazard better balance trumps just instant perception however in the long haul. 

and that's the more convenient route for what you think would be most appealing, not the easiest route objectively. And people will complain regardless, how much flack have de gotten for recent boss and enemy designs because it tries to combat our power creep without directly nerfing us? Nullifiers were one of their first methods to try and combat out power without nerfs, and they became the most hated enemy type in the entire game, and that hate lasted eons longer than the reactions DE got when they nerfed things. Complaints happen, that's just the cost of existing as a large platform, how people act overall is more important, and nerfs have yet to kill warframe or cause any visible loss in interest for their game. (also i'd imagine expecting all frames to eventually become nukes is more of a homogenizing gesture than giving value to support playstyles/designs)

not relevant to my point

disappointed to hear that, was hoping for a more open conversation. 

Edited July 28, 2019 by Cubewano