Jump to content

Do people like "exclusive" ability modding?


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Teridax68 said:

By contrast, what @Tyreaus is proposing, and what I fully endorse, is that we take our min-maxing to individual abilities: for those wondering what tradeoffs that would entail, rest assured, the tradeoffs would still exist at the level of each individual ability.

The problem with this is that there are abilities that have little to no use of the other stats making some of the trade-offs nonexistent. Take Inaros and Nidus for example - because they're pure HP and high armor, using just Rage, they are allow to completely neglect efficiency. Using Nova for example:

  • Null Star
    • Duration: high for more particles for damage reduction (DR)
    • Range: none because even if you maxed power strength the damage is still small for high-lvl missions. It's better to just keep them close for the DR
    • Strength: none. again, not strong enough when maxing it and does not affect the DR
  • Antimatter Drop
    • Duration: none, doesn't affect
    • Range: none, the explosion radius is a flat unchangeable value
    • Strength: max it
  • Wormhole
    • Duration: flat 100%. 16 secs is already long enough for everyone to have a chance at using it,
    • Range: add stretch. It has a flat 50m, that's far already; adding Stretch pushes it to 73m
    • Strength: none, doesn't affect it
  • Molecular Prime
    • Duration: high for map wide coverage and longer slow
    • Range: flat 100%. 10m radius (20m diameter) is actually a good size, adding Stretch puts that to 14.5m radius (29m diameter).
    • Strength: you can increase it for the Blast damage which would yield 2,272 (Max Blind Rage, Transient Fortitude, and Intensify - 284% power strength), but minimally you want just a total of 145% as that's the value in which the slow is cap at 75% slower movement speed.
Edited by NekroArts
Link to post
Share on other sites

only lightly skimmed the post, so something like each ability has its own modding slots ?

It seems cool on paper but would be really complicated when you think about. Leveling a frame is already pretty painful without a friendly sleepquinox + adaro, to have to forma each ability to fit a build, for all the 40+ frames we have, that sounds like a lot of work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Padre_Akais said:

Conflicts with.

 which, incidentally,  also seems to conflict with 

 

Perhaps it's just me...My understanding of Min-maxing for the last 20 years has always been enhancing strengths to the point where they cover weaknesses even if it's at the expense of moderate abilities. I.E. the the player trades a well rounded build for more directed power in one area and accepts the consequences.

What you are describing sounds more like "max-maxing" which is what DE guarded against by making attributes be the decider to begin with. Granted, the way those attributes used to be assigned didn't always mesh so well (Old Frost/Rhino spring immediately to mind) but subsequent reworks introduced synergy to keep that from being a pain-point.  

I'm rather confused here, not simply because I fail to see the conflicts in what I've said, but because "max-maxing" seems to describe your own philosophy far better than mine. Specifically, this bit:

2 minutes ago, Padre_Akais said:

Perhaps it's just me...My understanding of Min-maxing for the last 20 years has always been enhancing strengths to the point where they cover weaknesses 

Emphasis mine. If your strengths are so strong that your weaknesses don't matter... what's the point of having weaknesses? Meanwhile, my point is that we should be making these weaknesses unavoidable, by forcing individual abilities to have both drawbacks and strengths in equal measure.

This is, by the way, different from simply asking to give us individual mod tables per ability in the game's current state, because it is obvious that in a current game state where most abilities scale well with at least one stat, and scales poorly or not at all with one or more other stats, one would be able to max out individual abilities without tradeoffs. Thus, switching our mode of min-maxing would also require changing the way warframe modding works, so that we can't just dump stats into each individual ability and get away with making no tradeoffs.

1 minute ago, Chappie1975 said:

In a system like warframe in which you have numerous systems interacting with each other in which each system actually has some depth you NEED to basically get over the concept of "real balance".    I understand what you are getting at...but here is the thing...a lot of "ideal system" have no real translation into actual reality.    In any typical RPG..you are dealing with system with a FRACTION of the complexity...and even then they can be broken pretty easily by the player unless your GM is a twat and just keeps swinging the nerf bat everytime somebody gets creative.; those GM's don't last long.  

But I'm not advocating balance, and current min-max builds are anything but creative: it is in no way difficult to see which stats a frame scales with, and it is in no way original when someone decides to capitalize fully on those scalings to max out the best among them and leave the rest in the dust, making for gameplay that leaves less room overall for creativity. You complain about overly strict GMs, but just as detrimental to a game session, if not worse, is the munchkin who obsesses over min-maxing to the point where even the concept of fun falls apart in the face of their need to win. I'm not blaming players for min-maxing here, because ultimately we're all just following the lines of design set to us by DE, but those lines of design have led to patently shallower, sometimes abusive gameplay. DE themselves have partially acknowledged this, which is why their reworks typically seek to make all four of a frame's abilities worth using at all times, almost regardless of build.

3 minutes ago, NekroArts said:

The problem with this is that there are abilities that have little to no use of the other stats making some of the trade-offs nonexistent. Take Inaros and Nidus for example - because they're pure HP and high armor, using just Rage, they are allow to completely neglect efficiency.

I'm well aware, which is why the method by which we mod our frames would need to change. Currently, almost every ability has a dump stat of some sort, meaning that if we were to transition directly to per-ability mod tables, it would just power creep nearly all of our frames, as we'd get to choose different stats to dump according to the ability. Thus, if we are to mod individual abilities, we need to either change our mods, or change the stat scalings on those abilities so that it becomes impossible to avoid making a tradeoff.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Teridax68 said:

I'm rather confused here, not simply because I fail to see the conflicts in what I've said, but because "max-maxing" seems to describe your own philosophy far better than mine. 

Yes, I discerned that in the initial post which is why I noted that I felt that your comments conflicted.

You comments suggest that you want your weaknesses to matter but want a way to mod around them as well. That removes the specific downside Min-maxing is supposed to present.

Arguing that," the downside doesn't exist anyway so why not?" is obviously circular.

44 minutes ago, Teridax68 said:

If your strengths are so strong that your weaknesses don't matter... what's the point of having weaknesses?

Unless you are also talking about a wholesale leavening of power as well, it, basically, amounts to a request to have your cake and eat it too... through the process of getting more cakes.  

Since I don't see the standard " nerf everything" tropes being trotted about, how exactly do you propose DE should enact your idea?

Let us mod all of our abilities individually?... Players can do this now and choose not to in favor of min-maxing. Solved

Concoct a way to limit attribute stacking to encourage build diversity? Love the idea (have asked for that for years)... Would kill the game at this point. 

Do know that I am not a min-maxer and I can't even see a reason why someone modded specifically to that end would opt to reduce their power to cover weaknesses they don't (per you) have.

Right now your idea amounts to either asking for "all the cakes" or some mechanic to stop attribute stacking to encourage mod diversity which would be the mother of all nerfs.

Tell me what I am missing.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BiancaRoughfin said:

I usually build my frames focusing on a specific ability wile trying not to cripple the rest, example wile most build Mesa for Energy efficiency and completely cripple her other skills due to low duration, i focus on Duration which keeps her 2 and 3 useful wile her 4th drains slower too, Nova is another good example as you can build her for being tanky tho her 3rd gets crippled but the other 3 skills remain very powerful.

(Meta Mesa builds are about maximum duration because duration provides bonus efficiency for her 4, the dump stat on mesa is range.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not so much that they want to do it as it results in better effectiveness. 

But some frames just have abilities that do not assist or have very niche or unreliable effects in regular gameplay. 

Very few frames have good synergy and utility in all their abilities (Nezha, Oberon, Equinox, Nidus, Octavia are a few examples) 

Why put effort into an ability of I can do something else better? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the best example I can think of is Wisp.  Wisp's kit is really well designed; it has good CC, good healing, good buffs, and a splash of utility on top.  Using her abilities together in different ways triggers lot of great effects too.  However there's another way to play her which involves dumping range and efficiency.  Then you just have a high mote values for your heal and speed motes, and your other abilities are night unusable.  She then becomes about as interesting as a tax return.  Nevertheless, still effective.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Padre_Akais said:

Yes, I discerned that in the initial post which is why I noted that I felt that your comments conflicted.

You comments suggest that you want your weaknesses to matter but want a way to mod around them as well. That removes the specific downside Min-maxing is supposed to present.

Where did I ask for players to circumvent their weaknesses? As should be clear in my initial post and my response to yours, I specifically don't want players to be able to avoid their weaknesses. Meanwhile, you outright advocated what you're accusing me of in the part of the post I'd quoted.

Quote

Arguing that," the downside doesn't exist anyway so why not?" is obviously circular.

... where did I ever say this? Are you sure you're not getting me confused with someone else?

Quote

Unless you are also talking about a wholesale leavening of power as well, it, basically, amounts to a request to have your cake and eat it too... through the process of getting more cakes.  

... "leavening" of power? What?

Quote

Since I don't see the standard " nerf everything" tropes being trotted about, how exactly do you propose DE should enact your idea?

So because our current abilities tend to have one or more dump stats, that means that if the design of how we mod them doesn't change, we'd be able to max them out and suffer no real consequences. As such, our ability modding needs to change, and I think the broad lines could go one of two ways:

  1. We change the stats and scalings on problem abilities so that they all scale well with every current stat, thereby forcing us to experience tradeoffs no matter which stat we dump.
  2. We switch to more bespoke per-ability mods that provide more tailored advantages and drawbacks.

Personally, I'm more in support of number 2, because although it would require a lot more work (every mod would basically be an augment), it would have the advantage of a) forcing tradeoffs that are practically guaranteed to matter, as they'll be tailored to the ability, b) enabling much more interesting customization via more tailored bonuses, and c) potentially make balancing easier, because ability-related problems could be solved by fixing one ability or mod, rather than reworking the entire frame.

Quote

Let us mod all of our abilities individually?... Players can do this now and choose not to in favor of min-maxing. Solved

Uh, no we can't. We mod our entire warframes at a time, which means any set of changes you apply to one ability, you're also applying to all the others, and cannot dissociate between them, for better and for worse. That is the opposite of what the word "individually" means.

Quote

Concoct a way to limit attribute stacking to encourage build diversity? Love the idea (have asked for that for years)... Would kill the game at this point. 

Why?

Quote

Do know that I am not a min-maxer and I can't even see a reason why someone modded specifically to that end would opt to reduce their power to cover weaknesses they don't (per you) have.

I don't see a reason either, which is why I never suggested such a thing to begin with.

Quote

Right now your idea amounts to either asking for "all the cakes" or some mechanic to stop attribute stacking to encourage mod diversity which would be the mother of all nerfs.

I fail to see how this would be the case when I'm specifically advocating to force players to deal with weaknesses as well as strengths, and thereby not enjoy "all the cakes" or whatever at the same time. I'm also not specifically advocating to stop attribute stacking, nor did I ever such a thing in my posts, so that problem comes purely from you.

Quote

Tell me what I am missing.

Without being too rude, I think there may be a bit of a language barrier here, as some words are being used in ways that make strictly no sense (what does "leavening of power" even mean? Are you trying to tie this into cakes?), but beyond that you appear to believe I've said things that I have never at any point even implied in my posts. Somehow, you've managed to attribute to me the exact opposite of my thesis on this thread, and I'm at a loss as to how that happened, because I've not only labored my point, but also complemented it with secondary arguments on how our ability modding would need to change in order for tradeoffs to still exist. I very clearly do not want players to have their cake and eat it too, and if after all this you still don't believe me... well, I'm not quite sure what I can do to help you.

Edited by Teridax68
Link to post
Share on other sites

This took off while I was gone...

Not sure how well I can reply to anything since so much was brought up, but one thing I did want to input on a bit was ability design. The big thing about Defy, for example, is that no matter the stats it's given, it does something useful. Its efficacy changes (it might get better at granting armour or better at CC), but its average usefulness over every situation doesn't diminish a great deal. If all abilities had that kind of property, it'd be a godsend IMO, because modding those abilities changes 'how' rather than 'how good'.

But it's also a lot of work (and not necessarily always possible) to get that kind of effect with every ability, even if some abilities can be "dragged along" by synergizing with those godsend abilities. And if people like effectively dumping abilities to get one or two optimized, is it worth the effort to try to reach that point?

Probably, yes...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Teridax68

I have to agree that there does appear to be a language barrier in play as well...

I think you are confusing my speculating what you mean, due to lack of anything specific, with attributing such intents to you.

...I genuinely didn't know what your intent was (hence all those pesky questions and requests for specifics) but see now that it was precisely the leavening term I used that you are so mystified by.

leav·en
/ˈlevən/
verb
gerund or present participle: leavening
 
2.a quality or element that permeates and modifies or transforms something for the better.

 

... Which appears to be yet more evidence still.

 

On Topic:

What you are describing sounds closer to how builds are/were done in CoH (or even in AO) and simply would not work in this game without either a complete re-tool or an entirely separate system. DE is not stellar at either and Warframe has too many dependencies, conditions, and moving parts as it is to not be both a monumental task, headache and risks player attrition.

In short, what you propose sounds like an awesome idea for an entirely different game.

The idea doesn't suck...Unless the game is already six years old.

An idea like yours, if implemented would, likely, be the last big thing DE did because it would be the last big thing DE got to do before the game shut down due to lack of players.

...That is, precisely. how dramatic your idea is.

That said, I would advise that you consider refraining from internalizing every post you read as they aren't all aimed at dissenting... This is my second draft of this post so far and I had to re-do it when I realized I had spent more time correcting you than I was discussing the merits of your idea.

It's ok to not understand words you read and you should feel free to look them up when you don't. If I am using words this time that similarly escape you just list them in order and I'll snag some definitions for you. Ok?

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Padre_Akais said:

@Teridax68

I have to agree that there does appear to be a language barrier in play as well...

I think you are confusing my speculating what you mean, due to lack of anything specific, with attributing such intents to you.

But don't speculate, then, ask for clarification. "Speculating" about the intent of the person you are talking to doesn't go down well when your speculation is wrong, as was the case here.

35 minutes ago, Padre_Akais said:

...I genuinely didn't know what your intent was (hence all those pesky questions and requests for specifics) but see now that it was precisely the leavening term I used that you are so mystified by.

leav·en
/ˈlevən/
verb
gerund or present participle: leavening
 
2.a quality or element that permeates and modifies or transforms something for the better.

 

... Which appears to be yet more evidence still.

Okay, so this is why you don't go by Google definitions blindly:

  1. As noted even in the definition you copy-pasted (and you copy-pasted wrong, taking a definition for a noun rather than a verb), that is not even the first definition of the term, as leaven is a rising agent for dough, and the secondary meanings follow from this by borrowing the imagery of mixing in some component into something else to make it more enjoyable. Thus, "leavening" is not the appropriate word to use.
  2. Even if we were to take this secondary meaning, the expression "leavening of power" still makes no immediate sense: what are you incorporating into power? How are you improving power? What does it mean to do either?

So even with you pulling out the Google definition, I am still at a loss as to what you actually meant, because you have yet to actually explain yourself on your intent by any amount. Nobody uses that word that way, and I don't think one would even be able to without producing a similarly incoherent expression.

35 minutes ago, Padre_Akais said:

On Topic:

What you are describing sounds closer to how builds are/were done in CoH (or even in AO) and simply would not work in this game without either a complete re-tool or an entirely separate system. DE is not stellar at either and Warframe has too many dependencies, conditions, and moving parts as it is to not be both a monumental task, headache and risks player attrition.

In short, what you propose sounds like an awesome idea for an entirely different game.

Except as mentioned already, augments already exist, and DE is in fact good at massively redoing systems, or at least once was: we have them to thank for Parkour 2.0, and that did in fact basically turn Warframe into an entirely different game, for the better too. Not that long ago, they overhauled melee, and rebalanced hundreds of weapons. I'm not denying that what's being suggested would require a lot of work, but it is not a workload unfamiliar to DE. "This would fit another game but not this one" is an argument thrown around far too commonly on these forums for feedback one personally dislikes, usually missing the point of what makes a suggestion truly inappropriate for Warframe.

35 minutes ago, Padre_Akais said:

The idea doesn't suck...Unless the game is already six years old.

An idea like yours, if implemented would, likely, be the last big thing DE did because it would be the last big thing DE got to do before the game shut down due to lack of players.

...That is, precisely. how dramatic your idea is.

"If you do this, the game would literally die" is also an overused and nonsensical excuse designed more to shut down discussion than provide any sort of meaningful information. How do you get to predict that this suggestion would single-handedly kill the game? What is it about it that would be so fatal? Just admit that you personally don't like the idea, instead of dressing it up in hyperbole while attempting to speak for literally every player in the game.

35 minutes ago, Padre_Akais said:

That said, I would advise that you consider refraining from internalizing every post you read as they aren't all aimed at dissenting... This is my second draft of this post so far and I had to re-do it when I realized I had spent more time correcting you than I was discussing the merits of your idea.

Except as noted in my post above my previous one on this thread, I'm not internalizing responses, whether or not they disagree with my opinions, and in fact I welcome disagreement as an opportunity to come to a mutual understanding. This is slightly different from the manner in which I've had to engage with your own posts, because your posts in particular told me directly that I've said things I haven't said, and hold opinions I explicitly disagreed with on this same thread. It is not possible to have a sane discussion unless we have at least some basic understanding of what the other is saying, and that much has yet to be fully reached between us.

35 minutes ago, Padre_Akais said:

It's ok to not understand words you read and you should feel free to look them up when you don't. If I am using words this time that similarly escape you just list them in order and I'll snag some definitions for you. Ok?

This is a monumentally arrogant claim to make when the only reason I failed to understand you was because you attempted to use a word you yourself did not understand, which did not even make sense with the context and intended meaning you established. If anything, this feels more like you lashing out at being corrected on your malapromism than a genuine suggestion, as it is clear who has better command of the English language here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2019-09-25 at 6:29 PM, Padre_Akais said:

l (Old Frost/Rhino spring immediately to mind) but subsequent reworks introduced synergy to keep that from being a pain-point.  

New rhino is pretty much old rhino;  funny how that worked out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2019-09-25 at 6:29 PM, Padre_Akais said:

l (Old Frost/Rhino spring immediately to mind) but subsequent reworks introduced synergy to keep that from being a pain-point.  

New rhino is pretty much old rhino;  funny how that worked out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2019-09-25 at 6:29 PM, Padre_Akais said:

l (Old Frost/Rhino spring immediately to mind) but subsequent reworks introduced synergy to keep that from being a pain-point.  

New rhino is pretty much old rhino;  funny how that worked out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...