Frames and weapons you wish would get a nerf

[(PSN)MARXIANapparel]

Just play the game without out mods or solo, then you could be content. Self nerf in 3,2...

Nothing should be nerf unless it breaks the game literally, otherwise if we find cool gameplay mechanics hidden within the art of being a tenno then we should be allowed to keep them and given new enemies that contend with that gameplay mechanic. Which makes the game progressive.

[(PSN)MARXIANapparel]

Just now, (PS4)MARXIANapparel said:

Just play the game without out mods or solo, then you could be content. Self nerf in 3,2...

Nothing should be nerf unless it breaks the game literally, otherwise if we find cool gameplay mechanics hidden within the art of being a tenno then we should be allowed to keep them and given new enemies that contend with that gameplay mechanic. Which makes the game progressive.

 

[Loza03]

9 minutes ago, (PS4)MARXIANapparel said:

Just play the game without out mods or solo, then you could be content. Self nerf in 3,2...

Nothing should be nerf unless it breaks the game literally, otherwise if we find cool gameplay mechanics hidden within the art of being a tenno then we should be allowed to keep them and given new enemies that contend with that gameplay mechanic. Which makes the game progressive.

We do have a bunch of stuff that breaks the game. Like it or not, immortality, infinite CC or Nukes basically make combat irrelevant as you either can't fail a combat encounter (die) or don't need to interact with enemies past shooting their immobile bodies, if that.

This is a game about combat. Having abilities that make combat either trivial or non-existent means you are making the gameplay trivial or non-existent. I have no issue with stuff that just makes you really good at fighting enemies - like Wukong's clone proving extra firepower, or Harrows big crits on headshots - as long as they mean that you're still fighting enemies, engaging with the core systems - playing the game.

A game where you don't need to engage with the gameplay is a game that has significant problems.

[spirit_of_76]

19 hours ago, Vortuna said:

People requesting nerfs in this thread never played in missions with more than level 40 enemies.

These people belong to Destiny 2.

I have played in missions with enemies over level 100 and do so with some regularity I want changes to saryn so I don't sit in missions board out of my mind she is awesome in ESO or if I am leveling weapons but a dammed nuisance if I am trying to level a frame or have fun killing things with a meme build.  

as for D2 watch datto he wants stuff nerfed bad (think 6 ft under the earth ) because there are a few completely broken mechanics in the game that are making the content boring or out right impossible (one of the two there is no in between).  as it stands outside of DE's bad scaling equations the game is ok with only a few exceptions.  

1 we need a reason to do harder content ESO was a good step but the void is pointless out side of unvaultings (and even then it still is) the hardest mission level is still sub 50 and the "hard content" is a ones daily mission at LV 100 (still not hard) or arbitrations which needs better loot. 

2 better math over all (enemy scaling, weapon damage, stauses, frame damage, health types, elemental dis/advantage...)

3 a "rewarding" self perpetuating grind rivens and relics are ok but rivens need changes to the system so that they are a slightly more consistent but harder farm relics are fine as is but should be changed so that they each contain one prime access worth of kit at a time.  

after all of that then frame balancing can really start.  

 

as for what I want from saryn changes less damage/kill hogging and more utility and team support.  if toxic lash worked like war cry or shatter shield it would be a better ability.  molt could be a form of CC if DE ever fixed the agro system letting spores or miasma eat a LOS requirement Nerf (personally I would say miasma) 

[IIDMOII]

I don't like nerfs. I certainly don't like nerfs in a pve game. Especially considering this stuff can be bought with real money. Nerfs just cheapen your investment and erode trust in the developer.

I'd rather see a list of frames and weapons that could be buffed or reworked. Or perhaps suggestions to improve AI to counter some outliers.

I can't say I ever wanted to see someone else's investment and fun be ruined because i chose an underperforming frame.

[Firedtm]

4 hours ago, Cubewano said:

Ember was improperly balanced sure, but she wasn't unfairly nerfed, she was an unengaging cast and forget room clearer for speed runs who melted enemies before you really could see them and made early to mid game pretty much meaningless as she could literally just walk through all that content and everything would die. That is absolutely cause for a nerf in that area of proficiency and was without question warranted. Nobody was surprised when it was announced she was getting rebalanced, and people had been expecting it long before it came. The only problem with how the nerf went over is that they didn't factor in how she functioned after the nerf to make sure she was still balanced, they more or less prioritized addressing her ult over fixing the full character, and that's the primary fault with her rework. They weren't wrong for going in there and trying to reduce her ult, just wrong for the method they ultimately went about doing it. 

there is a difference between balance and unfairly being nerfed, how many Embers do you see in game any more? I have seen two maybe three in the past month.

AoE Warframes should not be shunned like it is, people cryed about Ember than about Banshee, both got nerfed in to the ground to the point where they are useless now.

like Ember, I have only seen one Banshee in the past month, maybe two in the past three months.

Right now people want to nerf any AoE warframes that we are using right now like, Saryn, Limbo, Mesa, Khora, Nidus, Equinox, Octavia. and to a lesser degree, Oberon, Vauban, Rhino, Nova, Nezha.

People if they are not doing the damage, they feel like they are being left out, even though they are getting the same affinity as if they killed them...

 

[Firedtm]

1 hour ago, xV3NOMx said:

Nothing.

Too many warframes and weapons already have been nerfed due to Players whining about how well other Players out perform them on missions.

R.I.P. List

• Ash (blade storm)
• Ember (world on fire)
• Valkyr (everything)
• Wukong (everything)
• Loki (teleport)
• Rhino (ironskin)
• Hydroid (tentacle swarm)
• Vauban (bastille and mines)
• Nekros (desecrate)
• Trinity (ability efficiency loss, blessing)
• Frost (snowglobe)
• Telos Boltace
• Tonkor
• Synoid Simulor
• Synapse
• and more, and more

This needs to stop!

@Cubewano here is one of the lists I was thinking of, too bad I did not see his post before I replied to you.

[(PSN)MARXIANapparel]

1 hour ago, Loza03 said:

We do have a bunch of stuff that breaks the game. Like it or not, immortality, infinite CC or Nukes basically make combat irrelevant as you either can't fail a combat encounter (die) or don't need to interact with enemies past shooting their immobile bodies, if that.

This is a game about combat. Having abilities that make combat either trivial or non-existent means you are making the gameplay trivial or non-existent. I have no issue with stuff that just makes you really good at fighting enemies - like Wukong's clone proving extra firepower, or Harrows big crits on headshots - as long as they mean that you're still fighting enemies, engaging with the core systems - playing the game.

A game where you don't need to engage with the gameplay is a game that has significant problems.

Most people have yet to do a 2hr run in warframe are the ones crying about nerfs. High lvls require your skill as a player no matter the frame. Not every player can play every frame well on top of that so really no need to nerf anything ever. Player look at end game stats competing not understanding game modes or player roles is the problem. Some players can make a dps frame a defense frame just because of knowledge of the or skill or turn the roles on any frame to suit the situation thats why theres a modding system. At the end of the day you can only go so far even the best players, step yah game up.

[Arniox]

16 hours ago, Cubewano said:

That was a buff, she used to not scale, now she's a nuke that goes on infinitely against any level of enemy. 

They stopped large frame nerfing a while ago, and the balance has gotten all the worse because of it. Also how is buffing enemies to reduce our damage any different from just reducing our damage, except it being more complicated and easier to do wrong? 

How would you design enemies to counter infinite scaling high range aoe dps? 

First of all, saryn doesn't actually infinitely scale. She has a fininite damage upper limit. At much higher levels she's more of a CC character than damage. The problem I'm pointing out is that the entire star chart is filled with missions way way bellow the enemy level that would automatically ballance out most frames. 

Second, most of the recent changes to frames have been absolutely amazing. Wukong especially is now a #*!%ing god. He's so insanely strong and deals massive damage far above that of saryn. 

Thirdly, the reason I say they buff enemies is because that way we can still feel powerful on lower level missions but get a ligitamtely decent challange from higher level enemies. The other idea I had is leave the current enemies alone and the frames and instead keep adding more and more mini bosses like the nox. Warframe has a unique gameplay that has always intrigued me for over 4 years and that is that you can feel like a god. Murdering everything instantly. I think that should stay but there should be challanges sprinkled in, in the form of minibosses that pop up in missions. The nox is great because it has weak spots, has alot of health and does lots of damage but isn't really immortal or cheating. It's skill based. The juggernaut is a bad example of challange. It has an annoying immortality phase 

Fourthly: to counter infinite scaling abilities, simply follow my idea above. The damage from frames only scales sometimes and only with level. Not enemy type or health (besides trinity but we don't count her) so just make mini bosses all over the place that have a much higher health pool and thus don't get nuked and take skill to take down

[Arniox]

16 hours ago, InfinitusPhoenix said:

Everything is easy because of noob frames like Saryn

At lower levels yes. And as I was trying to point out, most of the entire star chart is too low level. Making saryn appear to be strong. But at higher levels that you start to see on sedna or the void, she doesn't do as well. 

[Cubewano]

25 minutes ago, Firedtm said:

there is a difference between balance and unfairly being nerfed, how many Embers do you see in game any more? I have seen two maybe three in the past month.

AoE Warframes should not be shunned like it is, people cryed about Ember than about Banshee, both got nerfed in to the ground to the point where they are useless now.

like Ember, I have only seen one Banshee in the past month, maybe two in the past three months.

Right now people want to nerf any AoE warframes that we are using right now like, Saryn, Limbo, Mesa, Khora, Nidus, Equinox, Octavia. and to a lesser degree, Oberon, Vauban, Rhino, Nova, Nezha.

People if they are not doing the damage, they feel like they are being left out, even though they are getting the same affinity as if they killed them...

 

Exactly, my point is the nerf was entirely fair, the end state however wound up remaining imbalanced despite it. I don't approve of the current state Ember is in, and I do hope that one day she sees the iterations she deserves to make her a better rounded and full experience for the game, but that does not make the cause for her initial nerfs any less founded. Her state warranted a nerf without question, why it didn't work out was unrelated to that and just a matter of doing a bad balance job following the attempted nerf.  

You're assuming those results are universal however, and the only possible end result, is just being unreasonable and is founded in no patterned history. Many frames have been reworked, very few becomes ruined in the long haul by a rebalance, Banshee and Ember are exceptions not the rule, and even then they had struggles long before they were looked at, struggles only augmented by persistent power creep.

And from my observation most people just want to target the highest performers right now, so primarily aoe dps frames, aka saryn, octavia, mesa, and volt, then work from down from there. I don't see anyone asking about nerfing Oberon, Vauban, Rhino, Nova, etc. That said, I do side with blanket reductions in our aoe capabilities as a long term goal myself. 

And people feel they are being left out because they are being left out, the power of aoe damage coverage we have right now just does not make room for multi team play, even amongst a group of meta players. You'd just wind up competing over being able to get the room clear first, because that's what the state have balance has arrived at now where co-op is concerned. That isn't a good experience, and that isn't something everyone wants, while you might be satisfied just getting affinity and someone else doing all the involvement, that is not universal, some people enjoy playing the game, and want to play it actively, it is their core aim while on the game the actually be involved in its systems, and to them just getting affinity isn't enough. They want to experience gameplay, and its sad that it even has to be a debate if they deserve that. 

 

[BansheePrime]

1 hour ago, Firedtm said:

AOE Warframes should not be shunned like it is, people cryed about Ember than about Banshee, both got nerfed in to the ground to the point where they are useless now.

Heh. You think a crappy low level press 4 to win augment made Banshee.

3 hours ago, Cubewano said:

When one thing is "UP" nerfing is how you bring them in line with everything else, you don't nerf the down things. I think you are confused about how a power gap is closed. 

And us having fewer broken frames means all the more we should just rebalance them since they'd take much less work to do as opposed to re-balancing the majority. Rebalancing 5 things > rebalancing 35 things. 

I think he was trying to spit my own words back at me reversed and failed horribly or something. I'd have responded to him but I'm really not sure what of what he said had anything to do with my comment and the guy I had been, myself, responding to.

Edited July 30, 2019 by BansheePrime

[Kotsender_Quasimir]

vor 5 Stunden schrieb Phoenix42Lord42:

No one cares.

Tip: Read the thread you're responding to. You might be in for a surprise.

[Loza03]

18 minutes ago, (PS4)MARXIANapparel said:

Most people have yet to do a 2hr run in warframe are the ones crying about nerfs. High lvls require your skill as a player no matter the frame. Not every player can play every frame well on top of that so really no need to nerf anything ever. Player look at end game stats competing not understanding game modes or player roles is the problem. Some players can make a dps frame a defense frame just because of knowledge of the or skill or turn the roles on any frame to suit the situation thats why theres a modding system. At the end of the day you can only go so far even the best players, step yah game up.

That's a complete non-sequitur to my post. My whole point being 'there is game breaking stuff in Warframe that completely negates the need for interaction with the game'. Nuking might be the most apparent, but CC or even humble immortality and invisibility do too, and they scale better.

 

But, entertaining this idea that in order to beat high levels you need skill, I have a retort: Octavia. She has two out of the three 'OP' options - a nuke and immortality via invisbility. 

Spoiler

 

I mentioned before that I'm aware Octavia is ludicrously broken. This is why. She's literally hiding in a corner and being rewarded for it.

 

And we can go further. I actually consider Ivara to be one of the frames closer to balanced due to the fact her invisibility does at least require a shift in gameplay (unlike, say Loki who can move freely), but in the right environment she too utterly snaps the game in half.

Spoiler

 

You don't need skill to deal with enemies that can't fight back. There is a longer Ivara survival I could find, but it was in a fissure so the scaling was weird.

 

And bringing CC into the mix, let's look at that too. Limbo can also pull off this kind of stuff. Sure, this wasn't in Mot, but that's because Nullifiers are literally the only thing that requires players engage with the game with these setups

Spoiler

 

Obviously, this was significantly shorter than the other two (indeed, on the short side to my limited knowledge of these kinds of runs), but it can be seen when the player is extracting that this is by choice, due to the exact timing and having plenty of life support available.

 

This is a game about combat. All of these endurance runs focus around not aggroing enemies, or turning off their AI. In a game about fighting enemies, we are mechanically rewarded for not fighting enemies, and have many methods to do so, several of which go infinitely.

In other words - it's broken the game.

[stormy505]

11 hours ago, Cubewano said:

but this was about something being up, not down. 

and not really, we have a handful of extreme preformers like saryn/equinox/octavia who have moved the power margin way ahead. fixing them beats making everything a nuke, at least in terms of being efficient among other things. (they also have not said their plans for vauban, nor indicated any plans in the near future for nyx at all)

Yea, no. How often do you actually see Octavia being played? Cause I haven't seen one in the past month. Similar case for equinox. Outside of eso, the playground for DPS frames. I hardly see them in normal missions. if you really think that the only way to match this fictional 'extreme performer' is by making nuke frames. Then I'm really glad you're not a dev.

People have quoted during a prime time, "moving forward with reworks we will try to focus on the more positivity received reworks." Kinda a paraphrase but I digress. I assume they're planing to make vauban actually able to kill things and I imagine they will do the same for the few underpowered frames in the game. 

[Teridax68]

14 hours ago, (XB1)EternalDrk Mako said:

but then we also still have enemy scaling issues which is the direct cause why frames with DPS are now on the rise. im honestly not sure of great implementation of user vs NPC enemies. id love better Ai dev on enemies (like in fear) , I know its become a lot better since earth rework (i actually enjoyed testing this ) but still more AI dev and tactics on the enemies side besides being cannon fodder would be great, it wouldnt solve much more then immersion and game play dynamics i think. I honestly dont have a singular all encompassing great solution to the balance of both frames & enemies myself and probably why DE has had such a problem with this, it is tricky.

This I can agree with. Enemies in general are dumb as rocks and not really all that diverse, which often generates really flat and samey gameplay where it's all too easy to press a button and sit back as enemies pour in and give free Affinity. On one hand, I think part of this will need to be solved through actual enemy diversity, which I think the Corpus Gas City improved on significantly via their new and updated Corpus units, especially those with jetpacks, though beyond this I also agree that the AI needs a facelift: there was another thread that suggested putting enemies into formations, which I very much agree with, and I think Grineer units especially need to have this squad command structure that gives more tactical options to the player, whereas Corpus units should be individually complex, but fewer in numbers, so that they can use a lot of quirky tools that need to be played around as well. Of course, the smartest AI in the world isn't going to have much time to do anything if we can still kill most enemies instantaneously, which I think is all the more reason to tone down our own damage overall (and I think our ability to one-shot enemies up to some really high level threshold is one of the reasons why they tend to feel so dumb).

Beyond that, though, I also agree that this fully wouldn't solve all of the game's combat issues, and honestly I feel making enemies scale is not a good idea in itself: not only does it break the core fantasy of being this elite magic warrior who's meant to be one of the most powerful things alive (you don't get that fantasy when fodder enemies become stronger than you), it also implement difficulty only by breaking the game's balance, to a point where it becomes either unpleasant (when the player gets one-shotted and has to contend with spongey health bars), or completely ineffective (when the player can ignore the scaling completely via invisibility or the like and cheese endurance missions like Survival). Because the scaling takes the form of more damage and effective health, it just places more importance on the player having more of those same stats. In this respect, it might be better to put enemies at some fixed power level, but instead scale the mission condition in difficulty, e.g. by having Life Support drain increasingly faster in Survival, by progressively lowering the objective's maximum health/shields in Defense, etc. This wouldn't fix balance by itself either, but a stable enemy power benchmark would likely allow our own frames, weapons, mods, etc. to be balanced much better as well, and so without needing to scale with enemies in order to keep functioning.

[DeMonkey]

54 minutes ago, stormy505 said:

Yea, no. How often do you actually see Octavia being played? Cause I haven't seen one in the past month. Similar case for equinox.

What's that thing people say about Riven balancing?

Oh yeah, the popularity of an item isn't an accurate measurement of how powerful it is, and shouldn't be a basis for balancing decisions.

There are links, but that's all they are, links.

[-VS-Zany]

There is only 1 thing I think that needs a Nerf: The Nerf-Culture.

[Xolgys]

Am 30.7.2019 um 03:49 schrieb spirit_of_76:

snippedysnip~

there have been enough threads with essays about this topic, i dont like copy pasting my own stuff neither repeating it just because someone writes "discuss !"

there is not a single frame that really needs "brain" and there are enough frames who clear the starchart the same/better than she does. she needs enemies who actually allow her to ramp her spore up and keep it going. ESO is the start of where saryn can shine and noone has to play anything above that level for sure but then u wont really meet a lot of saryns and anything especially significantly below doesnt care about her anti-armor or corr/viral/toxin elemental combo. u can use volt just the same, hell even frosts 4 can be built to wipe. mesa is much faster and her dps is also much higher, her only limit is LoS but on many maps thats not an issue, even in ESO ive outdmged a saryn with mesa. equinox can also easily wipe and nothing about any of these requires "brain".

Am 30.7.2019 um 07:11 schrieb (PS4)Dishinshoryuken:

You are getting your wish.

WARFRAME 2 is coming for next gen systems. Heard Steve says it.

Imma stick to Warframe unless I get a free next gen system. And that happening is as much as getting the woman I love to ask me to marry her.

Who else gonna get in WARFRAME 2 (or will it be II or TWO or....)

u heard ur own imagination, nothing else.

vor 2 Minuten schrieb -VS-Zany:

There is only 1 thing I think that needs a Nerf: The Nerf-Culture.

its funny how ppl scream for nerfs more than for "buff underperforming frames to 2019 level !" even tho that would be way more sensible.

warframes are super powerful so enemies/difficulty is a topic too but i guess not here.

Edited July 31, 2019 by Xydeth

[InfinitusPhoenix]

16 hours ago, Firedtm said:

It not that she needs a nerf, it that some of the other frames need a buff.

Example Ember, she was unfairly nerfed into the ground, another example is Banshee, she gets a buff to where she is useful for once again and people start to cry about her so DE nerfs her into the ground.

Need I say more... DE needs to stop over nerfing warframes that work and start looking into why the other ones need to be buffed.

Buff other frames to her level? You want every dps to erase entire map in seconds? 

Game will be even more braindead and easy.

No, the problem is in the walking cancer that is Saryn.

[-VS-Zany]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb Xydeth:

its funny how ppl scream for nerfs more than for "buff underperforming frames to 2019 level !" even tho that would be way more sensible.

Yes! There are so many Frames and Weapons that needs to be buffed, so that they can compete with other stuff.
Instead, everybody wants to nerf things. ye. sounds about right. Lets ask other games who did that, how it worked out for them in the past. OH EVERYBODY HATED IT WHAT A SURPRISE
 

[Lutesque]

13 hours ago, Cubewano said:

Reworks aren't a static end result, and while what happened to Ember is unfortunate there's no reason to assume that's the end result for any rework

Pretty Sure That's not I said.... you just assumed thats what I said.... which is ironic....

[-VS-Zany]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb InfinitusPhoenix:

No, the problem is in the walking cancer that is Saryn.

Actually Saryn is in a good spot right now. Don't call for nerfs cause you don't like her.

[InfinitusPhoenix]

1 minute ago, -VS-Zany said:

Actually Saryn is in a good spot right now. Don't call for nerfs cause you don't like her.

Good spot? Are you joking?

She is top 1 braindead broken frame.

[-VS-Zany]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb InfinitusPhoenix:

Good spot? Are you joking?

She is top 1 braindead broken frame.

Oh. Okay. Pls explain me that 🙂