"If It Was Painful for Me, It Should be as Painful for Thee"

[Birdframe_Prime]

1 hour ago, FrostDragoon said:

It was a bad idea to begin with, worrying about popularity. I don't get what's so difficult about that for you.

What you fail to understand about this idea of popularity is that popularity in Warframe is defined by what is powerful, it’s literally what drives the meta.

While, yes, DE did initially make the mistake of not also including the base power of weapons into the mix to prevent over-powering of certain ones, they do now, and the result is better than either one consideration would be on its own.

Worrying about popularity means that powerfully weapons, which are only popular because of that power, then shouldn’t become massively more powerful with Rivens, while ones that aren’t popular can have a boost from Rivens to make them viable alternatives.

DE don’t want there to be only five or six viable ways of killing an Eidolon, or only a particular Zaw build for clearing rooms, they want players to use more, play with more, heck they even just want to sell more Forma.

There’s a multitude of things that play off and influence ‘popularity’ and failing to use that as a tool is not only short-sighted, it’s missing out on one of the driving forces of the game.

And you not recognising that? You saying it shouldn’t be a factor when it always has been, long before Rivens were released? Hey, that’s a you problem.

[FrostDragoon]

That entire premise is logically flawed because there isn't a disposition you can give to Furis to make it competitive with Akstilleto Prime without its riven. Popularity is and always was a bad metric. The entire thing is based on a bad idea which isn't true:

21 minutes ago, Birdframe_Prime said:

which are only popular because of that power

Some weapons are definitely less powerful yet more popular for other reasons--like Ignis. This is why I've always said that Popular =/= Powerful, and the white knights (like you) who defended DE doing it were always in the wrong. Still are, btw.

[000l000]

Il y a 3 heures, Vethalon a dit :

Dude, I don't and I've been playing tons of Derelict, I remember the old ODD days when that was basically our endgame XD I also always have a resource booster active. I spend like 30h with my clanmate and a nekros in ODS to get around 2000 Mutagen samples. The main problem is, that it's only Derelict and while Derelict is fun and you can use it to level, you never go there while doing anything else. I hate repetitive stuff. I always change up what missions I do, what frames, what weapons. In playing this way I acquired 3000 Mutagen Samples over 6 years / 2000h playtime. They should just make them drop on Eris too.

"Dude" one definitely doesn't need 30hrs to get 2k mutagens in derelict missions. My wife and I did get enough samples for our own clan with a 3 days boost only, and we were running 40min survival mission (Nekkros+Khora - rare and double ressource boosts - Smeeta). If i ain't wrong we ran something like 5 or 6 missions, i was getting around 400 samples alone per mission.

As usual people are whining cause they can't solve their own issues by themselves, and tbh if every member was getting this samples to help the whole clan it'd be even easier but most people don't care or are just lazy - Coming here telling us it should be nerfed instead of actually playing the game is easy though. I was levelling my gear up during this so-called grind so it's a win-win, and one can also get a dragon key and get some rare mod.

If you're running your clan solo or if other members don't care about helping that's definitely a different issue, most related to human nature than game's balance.

So no Hema isn't a 2000hrs challenge, it's barely a few days, it doesn't even need platinium if you're greedy enough cause as i said you can also wait for a daily/sortie reward to go find some. If you want mutagens, you can get them - But i agree with your whole point, mutagens alone won't come by themselves.

Edited September 17, 2019 by 000l000

[Aldain]

1 hour ago, 000l000 said:

So no Hema isn't a 2000hrs challenge, it's barely a few days

And somehow still not actually worth it.

[Velothed]

2 hours ago, FrostDragoon said:

Some weapons are definitely less powerful yet more popular for other reasons--like Ignis.

This is actually a perfect example, why balancing rivens only around power is a bad idea. Ignis disposition is so extremely low, because so many people are using it, if it weren't balanced with popularity in mind, the disposition would be higher and pretty much everyone would be using it.

There is a lot wrong with Rivens in my opinion, but I appreciate at least the attempt of breaking the meta. If I could have my way, Disposition would be mostly balanced around popularity, would go even higher and lower, like 0.4 to 1.6 and be adjusted monthly, now that would be fun.

1 hour ago, 000l000 said:

If i ain't wrong we ran something like 5 or 6 missions, i was getting around 400 samples alone per mission.

Well, I'm happy for you, but even with Smeeta, Nekros and booster, I was getting nowhere near that amount. I mean everyone has a different perspective, in another thread, someone was complaining about the cryotic price for the Sibear, the only thing he hasn't build yet, while I didn't even notice the cost of that thing when I build it and am sitting on hundreds of thousands of unused cryotic, but at least Excavations happen on multiple different tilesets, you can do fissures, get relics, do arbies, even level.

How about we introduce a weapon research that costs like 1000 Neural Sensors or Orokin cells? I have so damn many of those things lying around and I keep getting tons and tons of those.

I'm not arguing for myself here, I'm done with the grind and I'm happy my clanmates will not have to do it, almost all of them are new players.

I'm pretty sure they set the Hema research requirements that high to force clans to cooperate, I would really love to see the numbers, but I bet almost 50% of the playerbase are solo players.

I also vaguely remember them saying something about depleting the massive stockpiles of vets a bit when the Hema was released, which I found really weird, as Mutagen samples are the online resource none of the vets I was playing with then had stockpiled.

[000l000]

il y a 42 minutes, Aldain a dit :

And somehow still not actually worth it.

Did you actually read me ? If you can't run a few survival missions (5 for instance as far as i was concerned) that's up to you but don't blame DE cause you don't want to play the game to actually get something from it. You'll need a few days if you don't want to spend plat, if not that's only a 4hrs worth of missions at worse.

A few hours of survival isn't what anyone could call grind, it's definitely some basic gameplay. How much time did you spend in this forums instead of getting it ? That would be an interesting debate as opposed to an upteenth "DE sucks, they don't give me anything for free" thread.

If one can't run survival missions, he should definitely quit the game. I'm pretty sure most people here did spend much more time getting the two last guns from disruption missions than actually trying to get the Hema, as always people like to complain about anything.

Edited September 17, 2019 by 000l000

[(PSN)sweatshawp]

1 minute ago, 000l000 said:

Did you actually read me ? If you can't run a few survival missions (5 for instance as far as i was concerned) that's up to you but don't blame DE cause you don't want to play the game to actually get something from it.

A few hours of survival isn't what anyone could call grind, it's definitely some basic gameplay. How much time did you spend in this forums instead of getting it ? That would be an interesting debate as opposed to an upteenth "DE sucks, they don't give me anything for free" thread.

Hi I do endurance runs. Don’t got the Hema cause it’s not really worth it. And I’m fine ?

[Aldain]

14 minutes ago, 000l000 said:

Did you actually read me ?

Oh I read you, and I don't even want the Hema, I just don't think it is even remotely worth it no matter how fast it can be done.

It is like going to a farmers market and seeing one person selling a square watermelon for $100 while another is selling normal shaped ones for $10, I don't need to want watermelon at all to say "That square watermelon isn't worth it for that price".

The problem to me isn't that the cost of it is higher than most other research items, it is that it is higher than most other items for NO DEMONSTRABLE REASON.

[Velothed]

3 minutes ago, 000l000 said:

A few hours of survival isn't what anyone could call grind, it's definitely some basic gameplay. How much time did you spend in this forums instead of getting it ? That would be an interesting debate as opposed to an upteenth "DE sucks, they don't give me anything for free" thread.

Dude, chill. I for example am checking the forum because I'm at work right now. Also, no, this isn't a "DE sucks, they don't give me anything for free" thread, jesus, are you always this aggressive? You keep throwing strawman left and right and put words in other peoples mouths. I really like survival, it's my second favorite gamemode after disruption, I play it a lot.

I do actually want to play the game instead repeating the same gamemode with the same tileset against the same enemies, with the same farming loadout for hours without end, that's exactly my point. Like I stated before, I'd really like it if Mutagen Samples would also drop on Eris, so people could switch it up a bit and maybe even get some while doing other stuff, this won't effect me of course, as I'm pretty sure we won't need that many Mutagen Samples for anything in the near future.

In my opinion this is one of the biggest design flaws in the game, specific stuff, that's either extremely hard to get or is needed in extreme quantities, only being available from one specific thing. We have a huge starchart, yet people are only playing very specific nodes because they can't really choose what and how to play.

I really like the assassin drops for example, it may take a year or more for a new player, but at some point he'll have Hate, Despair, etc. simply by playing the game.

[Hammerhead_FireCaste]

On 2019-09-16 at 7:38 PM, Vethalon said:

No, he is saying that the Vets that act entitled and want everyone to suffer like they did, are a vocal minority of all the vets in the game. From what I gather the vocal vets that want an endgame are not a minority of vets, but a sizeable group. Those two groups are subsets of Veterans and while the may overlap, noone (in this discussion) said they are the same people. Wanting something to do, ergo an endgame, is not entitled, wanting a stupid grind to stay as it is, because they already had to endure it, is.

There we go. Now we're on the same page.

Edited September 17, 2019 by Hammerhead_FireCaste
Cut out the other part because it was referring to something else.

[Birdframe_Prime]

6 hours ago, FrostDragoon said:

That entire premise is logically flawed because there isn't a disposition you can give to Furis to make it competitive with Akstilleto Prime without its riven.

No, but then again, you're still missing the point.

Rivens are supposed to make unpopular and less powerful weapons viable, to make them popular, not make them the new meta.

They're a way to make people interested in less powerful and less popular weapons. A way to make them into something that you can, with the right Riven and build, take to any mission on the star chart and succeed with.

Are they supposed to be level 300+ meta? No, of course they aren't (although the right Warframe could actually make them do that).

Again, again, again, because you're not getting the concept that the popularity function is the cause of Rivens existing. They aren't supposed to make every weapon equal, they're not supposed to make every weapon meta, because from a factual basis not all weapons are created equal.

If you discard the idea of popularity from your considerations of what Rivens are and do, then you discard Rivens as a concept. Because that's what DE put them in for. To adjust the popularity of weapons.

You can say it's a bad premise all you like, you can say that popularity is a bad metric all you like, but that literally doesn't matter because popularity is the point of Rivens. It's what they're for.

And you basing any faith in them staying the same, saying that you spent thousands of plat on them and now your 'investment' is devalued, is plain stupid because they aren't any kind of investment. They're flash-in-the-pan trends based on the popularity of the weapon. Nothing more, nothing less.

You might as well try to make a currency based on Meme Culture as Rivens, because that's how reliable it is, the culture will stay around, but the parts that make it up will rise and fall like a bad juggler's clubs.

[(XBOX)dude1286]

The only reason some vets don't want these things reduced is because this game's only challenge is the grind walls or the rng. Nothing in this game is difficult to obtain, even the Eidolons' only difficulty is whether or not you got on after work at the right time to farm them. The way I see these things, it will just speed newer players onto the cliff that veterans are on, deciding whether or not to drop this game due to the content droughts of 2018 and 2019.

The Hema is actually a great support weapon for Condition Overload builds. Used it and Galatine when I did my John Prodman run in the Index. Hema has a 100% status build with Viral built in, so it can get 2 more combo statuses on it.

The Riven's disposition being based on popularity should have never used the weapon's usage once it had a Riven on it in part of the calculations. It feels like a user who gets a Riven for an unpopular weapon, gets it perfect, and then their usage at that point is used against the Riven they either worked for or bought. It feels counter-productive to the user.

Edited September 17, 2019 by (XB1)dude1286

[FrostDragoon]

27 minutes ago, Birdframe_Prime said:

You can say it's a bad premise all you like, you can say that popularity is a bad metric all you like, but that literally doesn't matter because popularity is the point of Rivens. It's what they're for.

And you basing any faith in them staying the same, saying that you spent thousands of plat on them and now your 'investment' is devalued, is plain stupid because they aren't any kind of investment. They're flash-in-the-pan trends based on the popularity of the weapon. Nothing more, nothing less.

First of all, I say it because it's true. Secondly, I didn't say anything at all about them staying the same or about "investment." My argument is that their changes are usually arbitrary because of their weak foundation based in popularity. Even if you think that's why they exist, it doesn't change the fact that it was a bad premise to go with. Even weapons with a minimum riven disposition (the most popular/meta) are better with rivens than without them and hasn't accomplished much in the way of changing that. Sure, some weapons can see more use for awhile--until that usage is the reason for their rivens to get nerfed and those weapons go back to being useless trash while the meta weapons stay meta.

 

3 hours ago, Vethalon said:

This is actually a perfect example, why balancing rivens only around power is a bad idea. Ignis disposition is so extremely low, because so many people are using it, if it weren't balanced with popularity in mind, the disposition would be higher and pretty much everyone would be using it.

Your idea fails because it doesn't take into account that if the disposition was only based on the weapon's relative effectiveness that the Ignis would have a fairly low disposition due to its high utility. It's not the popularity that would make it so. It would see a low disposition in either case because it's so good--hence its place in the meta, not the other way around. To rephrase, "It's in the meta because it's good. It's not good because it's meta."

[Marine027]

vor 6 Stunden schrieb 000l000:

(Nekkros+Khora - rare and double ressource boosts - Smeeta)

Yet something like this was nerfed you need to consider by now, so not as easy anymore, since Loot frames cancel each other out now.

Overall it is easy but then the main problem stays that it is something you do only once for one medicore weapon, its nothing that happens nearby or you do for other weapons aswell, THAT is the main issue, it's so niche that it is a niche inside another niche.

[FrostDragoon]

That's a good point too, Marine.

[Cibyllae]

On 2019-09-16 at 4:38 AM, Vethalon said:

wanting a stupid grind to stay as it is, because they already had to endure it, is.

But you act like vets haven't already asked for the hema to be reduced? Do you actually think this has not been pleaded over and over to be reduced when it first came out? So no its not about entitled vets, DE already said no to changing its costs, or otherwise ignored the suggestions to have it be changed. 

[FrostDragoon]

2 minutes ago, Cibyllae said:

But you act like vets haven't already asked for the hema to be reduced? Do you actually think this has not been pleaded over and over to be reduced when it first came out? So no its not about entitled vets, DE already said no to changing its costs, or otherwise ignored the suggestions to have it be changed. 

Don't you find it funny that they might care enough about unpopular weapons to introduce a broken mods system into the game, but not enough to make the resource farm requirement reasonable?

[Cibyllae]

2 hours ago, FrostDragoon said:

Don't you find it funny that they might care enough about unpopular weapons to introduce a broken mods system into the game, but not enough to make the resource farm requirement reasonable?

I find many decisions DE makes funny. If anything the riven system, although completely broken, is probably the only real thing keeping people around when they have nothing else to do so I'm grateful for it. Like removing T4 void, that was funny.

[Educated_Beast]

I farmed for it and it was not as bad as your making it sound.  I did it slowly when I got a x2 booster from raid combined with log in rare booster, or x2 weekend (or wait for one of booster and buy other).  I used a smeeta, a nekros, a hydroid, and a speed Nova along with a nuke frame (sayrn).  

I am a solo clan.  It wasn't that bad if spread it out over x2 boosters (which are free) with strategy above.  At time it was easy to make a pug willing to go to 20+ in ODD.

Other than the nerf to hydroid / nekros and maybe low amount of players in ODD, it was not nearly as bad as say grinding for khora or most of these emphermas.

Seems odd to complain about something you can grind small amounts over time or bypass completely by joining a clan and leaving.  

I got an open spot, join mine, make your hema, and your welcome to go.  

Edited September 17, 2019 by Educated_Beast

[(XBOX)dude1286]

My clan has only 3 active players, with myself being the most active (although right now it is a dead clan because the content drought us real). I had about 2k mutagen before the Hema was even announced, with the other 2 having about 1.5k between them. We spent about 2 weeks in ODS 1 hr runs a night with only a Nekros. With this type of grind, you just have to find what works for you and your clanmates. It was one of the few times clans actually took a look at their member list and also work together toward a goal that didn't involve an event (and DE is allergic to these since the terrible event that added Deception). If a ghost clan had its roster full with active players, each person would only need to provide 1k, I'm pretty sure that was where DE was looking when they created the research cost.

[Velothed]

4 hours ago, Cibyllae said:

But you act like vets haven't already asked for the hema to be reduced? Do you actually think this has not been pleaded over and over to be reduced when it first came out? So no its not about entitled vets, DE already said no to changing its costs, or otherwise ignored the suggestions to have it be changed. 

Yes, we did ask when it came out, while others where complaining that that would devalue their time spent because they where grinding for a week streight, so DE stated they weren't gona change it because of those complaints. Vets don't have a single mind when anyone (of the sane poeple that is) complains about entitled vets, he isn't talking about every single vet, but a vocal minority of them. It's always vocal minorities though, the vets (and other players) complaining about the cost where also a vocal minority, because in every single playerbase of every game, over 90% don't engage with forums, etc.

[Velothed]

5 hours ago, FrostDragoon said:

Your idea fails because it doesn't take into account that if the disposition was only based on the weapon's relative effectiveness that the Ignis would have a fairly low disposition due to its high utility. It's not the popularity that would make it so. It would see a low disposition in either case because it's so good--hence its place in the meta, not the other way around. To rephrase, "It's in the meta because it's good. It's not good because it's meta."

I thought the alternative was balancing around it's stats, I don't think anyone involved with disposition has the time to gauge the effectiveness of every single weapon in the game, which is why they used popularity, as that is a pretty good indicator as to what is most effective in the game right now.

Of course, balancing every disposition around a weapons effectiveness in the current meta, would be a perfect world scenario, but that would require a whole team constantly testing weapons in all scenarios, it's much cheaper and nearly as effective to use popularity. Most of the community is going to use what is most effective, except a few outliers (like me for example) that just use a weapon soley because they like it.

[el_chanis]

On 2019-09-15 at 4:21 AM, Hammerhead_FireCaste said:

the new players, or the entitled vets?

This should be rephrased as "entitled players" only, and even then, still would miss the mark. Many times the veteran community has proven that the vast majority support and encourage easier access for newer players, even with controversial and adamant stuff like Excalibur, Skana and Lato Prime.

But... given how supportive the vets has been, and how unresponsive DE remained over the years with stuff like this..... i wouldn't hold hopes too high. DE is overall very conservative with their policies, it takes a REALLY FCKING BIG scandal to make them change something (like Rahetalius's video about mods, or Sterling about prime unvaults), specially if they expressed about the issue before.

So... as much as i hate to let the entitled players off the hook, it's really DE's fault.

[FrostDragoon]

3 hours ago, Vethalon said:

but that would require a whole team constantly testing weapons in all scenarios

It actually doesn't. They can track which scenarios where weapons are used and see other factors that might be altering them. For example, is the Burston only viable as a stealth weapon or with the help of damage buffs? If you see Rhinos, Volts, Novas, Chroma, etc., you see a pattern. They don't have to look at every fringe case. Just starting with the most common use scenarios and then adjusting if some outlier case becomes too problematic would accomplish a lot more with a lot less resources put into it. In other words, if you want to apply the 80/20 rule, you get 80% of the results for 20% of the effort. It's very efficient. I doubt any of us are asking them to be perfect, but there are very obvious things they could be doing better.

[Grahark]

There IS NO META in this game. Camping Mot for hours is not META. This game is about Fun. Like fun or leave fun. DE don't care if you want to camp and "feel" like you a re E-Peen "winner".