Dog Days Exploit Hot Fix Red Text, Don't talk down at your supporters DE

[Brey223]

1 minute ago, Klokwerkaos said:

I will agree nightwave is a net positive in that it makes you cycle through old content you'd never play otherwise because it's unrewarding by making it rewarding.

That said, I heavily disagree with the changes to arbs, and the fact that they were billed as endgame content when really, I can't count how many people under MR 10 I've seen hit rotation C without a problem because they invested properly in their build, which is usually a cheap as rhino build that you get so early in the game that calling this endgame is absolutely insane when players can clear it before doing even half of the game's current progression.

MR means nothing as you said “properly invested in their build.” They don’t need to be MR27 in order to do end game content. 

[VanFanel1980mx]

2 minutes ago, Sean said:

The messaging was so out of touch that I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't even touch the game mode at all.

I thought it was clear as day that a tiny minority on the staff actually played the game like a regular player, that's even shown in devstreams, if you had to scale the level of "really playing the game" for most of DE's staff I would place them like this, Veteran player---> Average player---> Streamer (putting on a show sometimes) ---> Devstreams ---> E3 Demo (those who spew "tacticool" lingo but are really going by a script.)

[VanFanel1980mx]

7 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

In this regard I believe that the problem comes from how that's the only way of providing any challenge for us. If enemies weren't capable of ignoring our powers we'd either kill them before they get to us, or CC them so that they don't get to us. If enemies don't deal unreal amounts of damage that unfortunately results in insta-death for squishier frames, then frames like Inaros and Chroma will never even break a sweat.

People will keep denying the fact that you can't have both the power fantasy and the "challenge" in the same game, I would rather have my power fantasy, I hate to play certain frames just because they are the only ones allowed in a certain game level (not even game mode, level.)

[Oreades]

31 minutes ago, Klokwerkaos said:

Here's the thing... Dog Days WAS indeed a great bit of fun... for four missions... however, grinding out 2000+ peals with the current rewards system to obtain some silly cosmetic items that have literally no bearing on gameplay and a few trash mods that maybe five people will find useful,

Almost like the answer is "Gee self I don't really need every one of those cosmetics or the mods, guess I'll do something else" 

31 minutes ago, Klokwerkaos said:

 well... guess what, that means if TONS of people are using that exploit that it's PREFERABLE to your designed gameplay loop AND THAT IS THE CORE PROBLEM.

That humans are by our nature lazy creatures and if we figure a way to exploit a system to get a percieved payout for nothing a lot of unscrupulous people are going to do it even if it's only for "silly cosmetics" and "a few trash mods"

On one hand you essentially say the rewards are trash and on the other you say they are compelling enough to spend hours exploit the system......eh?

 

31 minutes ago, Klokwerkaos said:

Like everything else, DE will band aid the situation rather than addressing the core issue, which is to either lower the cost, or incentivise the intended gameplay loop to a point where it feels rewarding, which is what many people did... by suggesting kills grant pearls, which is entirely reasonable.

No no it really isn't reasonable, nothing is going to turn into a toxic quagmire faster than incentivising kill stealing and if you can't see that from a mile away......

At most they might concede to borrow a traditional kill cap from game modes like Rathum or The Index so being active will at most speed the process along somewhat. 

[Circle_of_Psi]

30 minutes ago, Klokwerkaos said:

The game, like all other scummy publisher games, is built on hype, not content.

This is what has been said for years and has been proven by fact by quite legit every Devstream and Tennocon, Railjack (2018-2019) for the latest example. War Within is a massive prime example and "Umbra" (who I do bealive was in 2015 all the way until 2019). Now they try something new and thus only delays content more.

Thus being:

1. Gauss and Grendel will be released together in true BFF style a future update: This means that they are going purposely DELAY the release of Gauss, so they can do this "BBF" thing 

2. Our goal is to release Dry Dock before Empyrean to help you prepare. The new Orbiter will probably be included with this: This means that, we'll be getting a Drydock that will be sitting in our dojo doing absolutely nothing, along side the Orbiter

And last of all: 

Deluxe Skins Glory & Minor QOL, Along with Nitpicks: As of fact: Skins/QOL and nitpicks (the playable Shawzin) are not content, period.

 

IIRC the timestamp for The New War is Dec (end of the year, again, like the other massive update, I forgot what one). Thus Railjack need to be "Out" before then, but they said "this fall" Looking it up on the net: Autumn 2019 in Northern Hemisphere will begin on 23 September ( 9 weeks away, 2 whole months without anything). I am not sure if this is correct, cuz some places have it different.

This meaning Sep-Nov (Cuz Dec is meant to be New War right?) So I have no clue how they'll pull it off, cuz in this rate, you'll be correct.

[DeMonkey]

Just now, VanFanel1980mx said:

People will keep denying the fact that you can't have both the power fantasy and the "challenge" in the same game, I would rather have my power fantasy, I hate to play certain frames just because they are the only ones allowed in a certain game level (not even game mode, level.)

That's just it, endgame is supposed to be a challenge. That's why I have so much trouble with people wanting both the power fantasy and an endgame, because I personally cannot see any way possible for it to actually work.

As for having to play certain frames because they're the only ones allowed in a certain level, I strongly believe that all frames should be viable, and that removing a lot of the cheese would go some way towards that. If we didn't have such fantastic self sufficiency with regards to energy via Zenurik/Pads then energy giving frames would have a use, if enemy damage was actually a threat then healers would have a place, if single frames weren't already capable of clearing everything on the map then damage buffers would have a place, you know?

I don't think anyone should be forced to play a certain frame just to be able to play certain content, although I can definitely see a place for expecting people to fulfil a certain role for the top end of content, in much the same way that you want certain roles for the top end of content in an MMO.

All that said, that's only what I want to see from the game, not what I actually expect from it.

[Imbarator]

I really was thinking about creating a topic about this myself, but I was hesitant, due to it possibly attracting gatekeepers and whiteknights.

You, OP, have more courage than me. Thank you for this.

[VanFanel1980mx]

3 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

As for having to play certain frames because they're the only ones allowed in a certain level, I strongly believe that all frames should be viable, and that removing a lot of the cheese would go some way towards that. If we didn't have such fantastic self sufficiency with regards to energy via Zenurik/Pads then energy giving frames would have a use, if enemy damage was actually a threat then healers would have a place, if single frames weren't already capable of clearing everything on the map then damage buffers would have a place, you know?

This clashes a bit with solo players though.

[Klokwerkaos]

3 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

All of my suggestions revolve around reducing our power so that level 100-150 is actually challenging (because that's roughly the enemy level where the "game" ends), rather than trying to create a challenge for the frames that can go beyond that.

Can you provide some examples and how their solutions would be applicable to Warframe?

Not in a, "I don't think you can, so this is a rebuttal" but rather that I'm genuinely curious because I can't think of any off the top of my head.

That's why I have several bottles under my desk.

In this regard I believe that the problem comes from how that's the only way of providing any challenge for us. If enemies weren't capable of ignoring our powers we'd either kill them before they get to us, or CC them so that they don't get to us. If enemies don't deal unreal amounts of damage that unfortunately results in insta-death for squishier frames, then frames like Inaros and Chroma will never even break a sweat.

I'd have to do some seriously tedious digging, to be honest, I've seen probably half a dozen seriously good and well thought out ideas over the years, but to find them would be... very very tedious, like hours upon hours, and I hope you'll understand I'm not excited to take that on at this time, but I assure you I've seen some good ideas, and I know you've seen a lot of good ideas from players over the years about many things, so please trust I'm not lying, but understand I don't really have anything to lie about here, and I will understand if you don't want to take my word for it, but I assure you there have been some really good ideas from the player base.  If there was a way to save certain stuff as a favorites thread, that would be cool, but I don't consider that a mandatory feature to clamor for.

That said, I'm fairly certain you'll agree as a pretty reasonable chap, that while many players put forth absolutely garbage ideas, there are definitely some gems that come up every once in a while, and I'm only advancing that point by saying it applies in this situation as well, which I think is a fair assumption to make, even if there is reasonable skepticism due to lack of provided evidence.

I don't necessarily agree with your idea of stripping power that players have already grinded thousands of hours to earn, but I understand the appeal of the idea, and I think there is a time and place for a level playing field, such as with dog days, or some other rare instance, but on the whole players should feel rewarded for their time and skill investment by being able to take advantage of that investment in most situations in my opinion. 

I think the solution is to make content that more relies on mechanical aspects (a recent example, being gas city rework that requires players to even understand the basics of parkour to progress) and has higher bars for entry, but that's strictly opinion and also antithetical to a lot of what DE's mission is with their level design since they keep saying they want to cater to 20 min casuals, while forgetting that many players are NOT 20 min casuals and frankly 20 minute casuals already have 2000 hours of content to sift through, and by the time they do, they won't be 20 min casuals anymore. 

I also get that DE got a lot of pushback on the parkour in Jupiter, but I honestly think it's good because while MR does require you to learn parkour, the star chart doesn't require you to progress that far to advance past Jupiter prior to this (ie, just MR 5).  Obviously parkour is not the answer to replacing endgame raids, but I'm talking about stuff like that which puts your skill in question, rather than if you have X mod or frame.

I know there was one post I did about a year ago that actually fixed the warframe is boring issue, by addressing every single game mode at the time and adding an additional mechanic to it that rewarded team composition (that didn't rely on power level) and coordination without making solo players get the short end of the stick, and that said, I'd be damned If I could find that post at this point, who knows what happened to the other posts if I can't even find my own posts at this point...

I did also make another one that was before railjack was announced about ship combat to have a new game mode that would allow players to have a new source of progression to work on.  To be honest I'm actually excited about some of what they have shown with that, as it's not what I initially envisioned, but it's not that far off either.  My main concern is that the modular notion of it, may mean that the grind for it is very very short lived and then railjack becomes just another thing that you only do for nightwave, but I am remaining hopeful on that.

 

[Meishou]

10 minutes ago, Oreades said:

No no it really isn't reasonable, nothing is going to turn into a toxic quagmire faster than incentivising kill stealing and if you can't see that from a mile away......

There's a pretty easy fix for that, have assists count for the pearl as well.  We already know the game tracks damage output, not just kills.

Or just base the overall pearl reward on total team kills, with a threshold of a few so people don't totally afk.

Or a half dozen other ways to incentivize actually participating in the mode while simultaneously reducing the level of time needed as effort input increases.

[Oreades]

3 minutes ago, Meishou said:

There's a pretty easy fix for that, have assists count for the pearl as well.  We already know the game tracks damage output, not just kills.

Or just base the overall pearl reward on total team kills, with a threshold of a few so people don't totally afk.

Or a half dozen other ways to incentivize actually participating in the mode while simultaneously reducing the level of time needed as effort input increases.

If kill assists are something that the game is capable of tracking then so be it. 

Tho to be honest I've not really seen that many people who push past 30kills, tho I suppose with kill assists that number is a little fluid but I'm not even sure with kill assists if that would wiggle the number to a number larger than what we are getting right now at 50pts at Tier 4. 

I think I've seen exactly one player who got up into the 50s (I think like 57) in one game. 

So most people would probably end up getting fewer points than they are now, unless the unspoken proposition is that the game give us the base 50 pts for showing up and the additional pts for the kills(+kill assists) that we are scoring. 

[Klokwerkaos]

7 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

That's just it, endgame is supposed to be a challenge. That's why I have so much trouble with people wanting both the power fantasy and an endgame, because I personally cannot see any way possible for it to actually work.

As for having to play certain frames because they're the only ones allowed in a certain level, I strongly believe that all frames should be viable, and that removing a lot of the cheese would go some way towards that. If we didn't have such fantastic self sufficiency with regards to energy via Zenurik/Pads then energy giving frames would have a use, if enemy damage was actually a threat then healers would have a place, if single frames weren't already capable of clearing everything on the map then damage buffers would have a place, you know?

I don't think anyone should be forced to play a certain frame just to be able to play certain content, although I can definitely see a place for expecting people to fulfil a certain role for the top end of content, in much the same way that you want certain roles for the top end of content in an MMO.

All that said, that's only what I want to see from the game, not what I actually expect from it.

I honestly do think you can have both.  It's a tricky problem, but not one without a solution.

I reference other games that have done this in the past successfully.  The thing is, your power counts in certain areas and certain times, but eventually you need to create a challenge for a player that relies on more than raw DPS output, and that can be done.

In a way, Many of DE's solutions to other game's problems are indeed a testament to their devs, but in other ways they create new problems, but I would hold that these problems don't become impossible just because they aren't currently solved in game.

Consider that not everyone, for example, solo players, can bring an energy frame.  For most content that means they need energy pads.  That is a viable solution.

That said, the challenge is then to create content for players that actually make them use both along with squad coordination, advanced techniques and everything else available to them, while having the current power level be the main barrier for entry, rather than something that trivializes the content.

I already know the criticism here... "Why should they make something for 1% of players!?!?!" because the vets pay to keep the lights on while casuals quit out at MR 9, plus casuals have more content than they know what to do with, and by the time they reach the end of it, they certainly aren't casuals anymore, thus, giving them more content is ridiculous, and having NO ENDGAME, is precisely the problem.  Warframe has a super beefy and complicated system, and frankly like others have stated, they could do a lot to make the new player experience more friendly and that would go a long way for the game's popularity, but it would also help with player retention if they considered even giving a small amount of a fraction of time they have invested in new content for new players, towards the endgame players, and would also give players aspirational content, which is just... absolutely necessary.

To be fair, adding WISP in as they did, is actually a step in the right direction, but that's aspirational content that is applicable at mid game, not endgame.

[Klokwerkaos]

2 minutes ago, Oreades said:

If kill assists are something that the game is capable of tracking then so be it. 

Tho to be honest I've not really seen that many people who push past 30kills, tho I suppose with kill assists that number is a little fluid but I'm not even sure with kill assists if that would wiggle the number to a number larger than what we are getting right now at 50pts at Tier 4. 

I think I've seen exactly one player who got up into the 50s (I think like 57) in one game. 

So most people would probably end up getting fewer points than they are now, unless the unspoken proposition is that the game give us the base 50 pts for showing up and the additional pts for the kills(+kill assists) that we are scoring. 

I'm also leveling a criticism against their argument...

Since players are on an even playing field, the difference then becomes skill, and isn't that what we've all been screaming about for years?  To have skill matter at all?

Since all players get a bonus 50 for reward, which is decent for participation, and if you reward 1 pearl per kill, or maybe 2 and 1 for an assist, that won't 100% solve the issue, but I'm willing to bet it would make it a non issue.

Edited August 6, 2019 by Klokwerkaos

[DeMonkey]

16 minutes ago, VanFanel1980mx said:

This clashes a bit with solo players though.

Whilst I'll likely get some hate for this, I don't believe the top end of content in a co-operative game should be completable by solo players.

15 minutes ago, Klokwerkaos said:

That said, I'm fairly certain you'll agree as a pretty reasonable chap

Flattery will get you anywhere.

Whilst yes, I certainly recall seeing several ideas over the years, I also recall many of them having huge flaws that ultimately wouldn't have worked out or would have been detrimental in the long run. Fairly safe to say that I will have done my part in pointing out said flaws over the years.

As for not wanting to strip players of power they've earnt over thousands of hours, I get that, really I do. There are however very few instances of "power" that I would outright strip from people, and would much prefer that things were just nerfed, so whilst I wouldn't strip Wukong of his powerful staff I would reduce it's damage so that enemies survive more than a single hit. As an example of something that I would outright strip however, corrupted mods are the main thing to come to mind. If I had control of the game for a day I'd just delete every single one and see what changes people would make to their builds and how far they'd be able to take them. It's easier to consider balancing an ability when you don't have to think about how it'll perform with +250% range or +300% power.

Edited August 6, 2019 by DeMonkey

[VanFanel1980mx]

2 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

Whilst I'll likely get some hate for this, I don't believe the top end of content in a co-operative game should be completable by solo players.

I think it should be accessible to both, maybe a bit harder to complete by solo players but not something like a Solo Nova vs Profit-Taker Orb scenario.

[(PSN)Onder6099]

2 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

Whilst I'll likely get some hate for this, I don't believe the top end of content in a co-operative game should be completable by solo players.

[sungod1]

In all the years Warframe has been around, how many games have come and gone?  There is a reason why that is... 

DE makes choices based on player activity and their limited resources.  The argument is not circular there is no end game because nobody was playing the trials.

Simple as that... 

[OneYenShort]

37 minutes ago, VanFanel1980mx said:

The only problem with the usual "we want challenge" is how the new content is designed to allow only a few frames and weapons to shine on it, and I don't mean to break it, I mean something like walking 3 steps without getting instantly killed, nullified and CC'd.

I don't know what "end game" is in this game, let alone I know I don't play at that level.

But in the aspect of challenge, this is what I have found through observation of many games.

• No one uses the words to the same definition which results in arguments without any resolution.  The game company has to take control of a conversation to get anywhere with such.  Most companies do not.
• Intelligent design that leads itself to well thought out challenging content (see the lack of definition in the terms used already?) is costly in money, and possibly costly in computation as well which can be a design breaker.
• Being a "jerk" of a game master, I.E. insta kills, power removals, lack of heath/energy to make use of your actual abilities is easy and very cost effective both in monies and computation, but player wise it is not necessary fun.
• The balance of cost effectiveness and fun are normally at huge odds such that cost effectiveness normally wins out.

[DeMonkey]

Just now, VanFanel1980mx said:

I think it should be accessible to both, maybe a bit harder to complete by solo players but not something like a Solo Nova vs Profit-Taker Orb scenario.

Each to their own I guess. I do believe it is better for gameplay design to actually require a co-operative group for the hardest of the hard however, because otherwise you have to find a way to scale the enemies down so that it's completable for the solo player. Due to the nature of the balance changes I'd like to see the solo player will only be able to fulfill a singlular role in a team, whilst the content that they'll be fighting is designed for a team with someone in every role.

In that regard, you would in fact be forced to play a certain frame much to your disliking, as you'd have to pick a jack of all trades and perform every role at once against enemies designed to be fighting 4 people.

[Klokwerkaos]

4 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

Whilst I'll likely get some hate for this, I don't believe the top end of content in a co-operative game should be completable by solo players.

Flattery will get you anywhere.

Whilst yes, I certainly recall seeing several ideas over the years, I also recall many of them having huge flaws that ultimately wouldn't have worked out or would have been detrimental in the long run. Fairly safe to say that I will have done my part in pointing out said flaws over the years.

As for not wanting to strip players of power they've earnt over thousands of hours, I get that, really I do. There are however very few instances of "power" that I would outright strip from people, and would much prefer that things were just nerfed, so whilst I wouldn't strip Wukong of his powerful staff I would reduce it's damage so that enemies survive more than a single hit. As an example of something that I would outright strip however, corrupted mods are the main thing to come to mind. If I had control of the game for a day I'd just delete every single one and see what changes people would make to their builds and how far they'd be able to take them. It's easier to consider balancing an ability when you don't have to think about how it'll perform with +250% range or +300% power.

I absolutely agree that content designed for endgame progression absolutely should require a social element, and frankly it already does (sort of) if you have a decent barrier for entry, because you can't even access dojo weapons without a clan.  Yes, you can play solo all the time forever, in a solo clan, all the way to 27, but I would wager most players don't and I'd be surprised if more than 5% of players at that level have never played more than 10 coop missions.  Solo play is usually for newer players trying to figure stuff out for themselves as their own sort of fun, or in rare cases for advanced players where a group will make content harder (like a sortie spy or rad proc defense where other players can fail the mission and waste your time, and frankly I like that those things exist).

Additionally, while you can play solo all the time forever, raids didn't and shouldn't work that way and even other modes like railjack highly incentivise group and coop aspects and I think that's entirely the way to go where 99% of content can be done solo, but is incentivised so that players benefit more from group activities.

There is also a flip side to that though... wukong's staff could be nerfed... or... for the endgame content you could just buff the enemies... 

Remember, buffs are almost always better than nerfs, this is basic game design 101.  There is a time and a place for nerfs, but they have to be very very carefully implemented, in such that they either address a direct OP exploit, and more preferably, empower the player in some way.  Street fighter (something or another edition) was a good historical example of this where they nerfed an ability but in doing so, empowered players to more or less show their skill by using a move as a glory move to show they were just superior to their competition.

This means Players get their wukong power fantasy, but it isn't always applicable, and that seems entirely reasonable.

Does this mean the barrier to entry goes up?  Yes.

Will that make some players mad because they can't do it because they don't have the most OP set up because they feel entiteled to play and succeed all content all the time for free?  Yes.

Is that any different from any other game at all ever?  No.

Is every fandom full of this kind of toxic entitlement once it reaches a certain size?  Yes.

Should DE cater to that?  No.

[Imbarator]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb DeMonkey:

Each to their own I guess. I do believe it is better for gameplay design to actually require a co-operative group for the hardest of the hard however, because otherwise you have to find a way to scale the enemies down so that it's completable for the solo player. Due to the nature of the balance changes I'd like to see the solo player will only be able to fulfill a singlular role in a team, whilst the content that they'll be fighting is designed for a team with someone in every role.

In that regard, you would in fact be forced to play a certain frame much to your disliking, as you'd have to pick a jack of all trades and perform every role at once against enemies designed to be fighting 4 people.

The problem here is, that Warframe is not designed with coop and balanced groups in mind.

Take the role of a classic support/healer for example: The is no reason ti pick anything but trinity. Instaheal whenever you want, with 75% dmg reduction. There is literally no limitation to that would make the experience "balanced", and therefor challenging. Warframe as a whole would need to change for that, and while I am completely up for the idea, imagine the backlash this would cause. DE will never do that.

[Klokwerkaos]

15 minutes ago, sungod1 said:

In all the years Warframe has been around, how many games have come and gone?  There is a reason why that is... 

DE makes choices based on player activity and their limited resources.  The argument is not circular there is no end game because nobody was playing the trials.

Simple as that... 

Was nobody playing trials because they didn't want trials, or was it because the matchmaking and plethora of bugs made them a trash experience and players would hoping that would be fixed?
 

Surely some felt it was the former.

Many, many, many endgame players have been screaming for this to come back for a long long long time.

That isn't because they want the bugs and crappy matchmaking back.

Hell even fixing lunaro and concalve would be a great start where it doesn't have the gross ping it does to make it unplayable.

The problem is, your argument sounds reasonable, but it isn't because you aren't coming from a place of addressing the underlying core issues.

Additionally, no endgame content will be played by "MOST" of the player base, that's kind of how endgame works, because most players will not be at that level.

Edited August 6, 2019 by Klokwerkaos

[DeMonkey]

2 minutes ago, Klokwerkaos said:

I absolutely agree that content designed for endgame progression absolutely should require a social element, and frankly it already does (sort of) if you have a decent barrier for entry, because you can't even access dojo weapons without a clan.  Yes, you can play solo all the time forever, in a solo clan, all the way to 27, but I would wager most players don't and I'd be surprised if more than 5% of players at that level have never played more than 10 coop missions.  Solo play is usually for newer players trying to figure stuff out for themselves as their own sort of fun, or in rare cases for advanced players where a group will make content harder (like a sortie spy or rad proc defense where other players can fail the mission and waste your time, and frankly I like that those things exist).

Additionally, while you can play solo all the time forever, raids didn't and shouldn't work that way and even other modes like railjack highly incentivise group and coop aspects and I think that's entirely the way to go where 99% of content can be done solo, but is incentivised so that players benefit more from group activities.

There is also a flip side to that though... wukong's staff could be nerfed... or... for the endgame content you could just buff the enemies... 

Remember, buffs are almost always better than nerfs, this is basic game design 101.  There is a time and a place for nerfs, but they have to be very very carefully implemented, in such that they either address a direct OP exploit, and more preferably, empower the player in some way.  Street fighter (something or another edition) was a good historical example of this where they nerfed an ability but in doing so, empowered players to more or less show their skill by using a move as a glory move to show they were just superior to their competition.

This means Players get their wukong power fantasy, but it isn't always applicable, and that seems entirely reasonable.

Does this mean the barrier to entry goes up?  Yes.

Will that make some players mad because they can't do it because they don't have the most OP set up because they feel entiteled to play and succeed all content all the time for free?  Yes.

Is that any different from any other game at all ever?  No.

Is every fandom full of this kind of toxic entitlement once it reaches a certain size?  Yes.

Should DE cater to that?  No.

Unfortunately the fact that solo players in certain frames are able to play endless missions for hours on end kinda detracts from that. In a perfect world in which an endgame exists, that shouldn't be possible.

As for the staff, that's literally what I'm proposing. If ever the game got rebalanced fully I would gladly accept a nerf to Wukong's staff, because it absolutely is far too powerful to exist in such a state in the game that I would want Warframe to be.

I'm sure there's probably some logical basis for buffs being better than nerfs, but honestly I see both as exactly the same and I mean that. I'm as keen on buffing weak things as I am on nerfing strong things, and as triggered by nerfs to weak things as I am to buffs to strong things.

6 minutes ago, Imbarator said:

The problem here is, that Warframe is not designed with coop and balanced groups in mind.

Take the role of a classic support/healer for example: The is no reason ti pick anything but trinity. Instaheal whenever you want, with 75% dmg reduction. There is literally no limitation to that would make the experience "balanced", and therefor challenging. Warframe as a whole would need to change for that, and while I am completely up for the idea, imagine the backlash this would cause. DE will never do that.

I disagree. Warframe absolutely was designed with co-operative play, and to some extent balance as well, in mind. If it wasn't then you wouldn't be able to buff teammates with your abilities, there'd be no revive mechanic in Arbitrations, there'd be no attempts to provide players with any semblance of challenge whatsoever.

I'm not saying that the co-operative gameplay and balance are good mind you, because I think they're awful, but DE have certainly tried to design Warframe with that in mind.

[Oreades]

19 minutes ago, Klokwerkaos said:

I'm also leveling a criticism against their argument...

Since players are on an even playing field, the difference then becomes skill, and isn't that what we've all been screaming about for years?  To have skill matter at all?

Since all players get a bonus 50 for reward, which is decent for participation, and if you reward 1 pearl per kill, or maybe 2 and 1 for an assist, that won't 100% solve the issue, but I'm willing to bet it would make it a non issue. 

Assuming they maintain the base 50 pearls and he per kill was in addition to those along with kill assists to nip kill stealing/toxicity concerns in the bud would seem amicable.

Hypothetically they could even make the change along with awarding any "back pearls" that would have been earned if the bonus on kills had always been in place via script.

[Klokwerkaos]

4 minutes ago, Imbarator said:

The problem here is, that Warframe is not designed with coop and balanced groups in mind.

Take the role of a classic support/healer for example: The is no reason ti pick anything but trinity. Instaheal whenever you want, with 75% dmg reduction. There is literally no limitation to that would make the experience "balanced", and therefor challenging. Warframe as a whole would need to change for that, and while I am completely up for the idea, imagine the backlash this would cause. DE will never do that.

I mean, I think it's completely reasonable if you implement it correctly.

Literally look at any other MMO.  You can buff and nerf certain things to have a semblance of balance without making players freak out as long as you don't remove core functionality.

That's where DE messes up all the time.

Consider trinity castanas nerf.  That sucked, not because it didn't need to be addressed (because you shouldn't have infinite auto tile nuke), but because it removed the functionality wholesale.  If they instead brought it in line with game balance it would have been absolutely fine, but they didn't, and that sucks.

It could, would and should have been done differently.

Fixing auto heal is easy too.  Put a percentage as auto heal, and a percentage as HoT.  Then maybe give players an augment for it, which eats up a mod slot reduces other functionality.  Boom, problem fixed.  Same function is achieved if desired, but at a lesser degree, and main core issue is addressed.  Will people gripe?  Absolutely.  Will they then just farm whatever and come up with a new meta in an hour?  Yes.