What would you do about CC frames?

[seprent]

too many things need to stop being immune to CC because magical reason 

DE: we need a enemy that cant be stopped easily lets make it immune to CC or be practically immune after one CC effect hits it

Playerbase: killframes as CC players want to die more 

DE: surprised face then makes demolysts in a attempt to spite both sides 

but yeah the amount of enemies that have either immunity to CC or oh it was CCed one time not it has super ancient disruption power is boggling 

[Jarriaga]

I made a thread some time ago to exclusively discuss ideas for making a game mode that rewards CC over DPS with an individual failure state per player if you are killing enemies indiscriminately while letting those players picking and killing target enemies proceed with the mission. There was only backlash. This community is always quick to point out why CC doesn't work without proposing how it could work and any idea on how to make it work is instantly shut down with the disclaimer that they are not game developers and it's not their job to find out how to make it work for DE (Losing the irony of how easy it is point out flaws). If not, the power fantasy argument is used instead as to why DPS is preferred and better, if not untouchable.

Why? Because you can not make CC viable without giving some nerf or disadvantage to DPS. People point out some enemies can just ignore or disable CC abilities, but they'd be even more upset if there was an enemy affected by Vauban's Bastille while taking 0 damage from Saryn's 4 or Mesa's 4 or Equinox's 4. This is the primary point of contention, because if an enemy can be CC'd, why wouldn't you just rather kill it? Why prolong the inevitable? It's a power fantasy after all.

At this point I don't think CC can be fixed without DE accepting massive blowback from the community by forcing CC in some situations in which damage from Ultimate abilities is negated in some enemies. Some months ago Steve mentioned on a Devstream that they are making some enemies with a special armor type that only takes melee damage. This in turn implies that 175% efficiency Mesa players that jump room to room using Peacemaker for a second and moving on to use Peacemaker on the next room will be pissed because they are no longer killing everything.  However, those new melee-only enemies could in theory be affected by Vauban's Bastille since it is not a damage ability per se. If those enemies are unaffected by non-melee Ultimate abilities from Saryn and Mesa, the community's reaction to them (Which I expect will be extremely negative) will dictate how DE moves forward with CC frames if they are still working on this concept.

There is a point in which adding new enemy types or game modes to spice things up will inevitably clash with established formulas, which is a form of a soft indirect nerf to the meta (Hence Exploiter Orb and Ropalolyst). Otherwise, you will see Vauban's rework having a DPS or damage increment component to it considering the community will not accept CC at the cost of DPS.

Edited July 28, 2019 by Jarriaga

[FerockQuartz]

On 2019-07-27 at 2:44 AM, Brian770 said:

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

XD crowd control? or maybe something else in mind?

[Volinus7]

12 minutes ago, FerockQuartz said:

XD crowd control? or maybe something else in mind?

Color correcting cream

Cosmetic abbreviations nowadays...

AA BB CC DD EE

Edited July 30, 2019 by Volinus7

[SenorClipClop]

On 2019-07-26 at 2:28 PM, RX-3DR said:

The question is, what is the preferable way to achieve it and will the community not whine about it?

People are going to whine about it no matter what it. It's unavoidable. Some people say they want a challenge, some people get mad when a one-button-instant-win feature is nerfed, and if there's any overlap in those groups, I wonder if the people who profess both see their own hypocrisy. Probably not.

Anyway, the way I see it best working out for all playstyles is not to nerf the damage of Damage-leaning frames, but instead to increase the amount of effort or risk they need to input to make that damage happen.

If I recall correctly, a lot of the "CC is dead, Damage is Queen" came out around the time that Mesa Prime released. Mesa has things very easy: one-button buffs, one-button significant DR, one-button auto-aiming massive damage. Mesa is probably the easiest frame to play, she plays pretty much the same way at all levels (2 and 3 always up, spam 4), and she's arguably the strongest frame we have. And while her buffs are fine (and BB is even really cool), Peacemaker causes some problems in the Power:Effort balance. It's so easy to use and so effectively lethal that players often don't bother to play the game any other way than the braindead strategy that works every time. (Other frames, like Saryn, have this problem too, but Mesa's easy to spell out).

Back to my point, I think lowering Peacemakers' damage would be a bad idea; the better way to fix this issue would be to make Peacemakers harder to effectively use. Change: Peacemakers fire when you pull the trigger, regardless of a target being in the crosshairs or not. Peacemaker no longer auto-targets. And/or, make Peacemaker's Energy cost be per shot rather than per second. This would make marksmanship actually matter in playing Mesa effectively.