Jump to content
(PS4)Hopper_Orouk

Heat procs shouldn't reduce armor

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, DrakeWurrum said:

Because past level 100, health and armor scaling is game-breakingly ridiculous.

That's really not a problem then, considering you don't encounter enemies over level 100 outside of simulacrum.

 

To clarify:

I believe the current scaling works great, making it clear you're NOT intended to fight enemies over level 100.

The problem isn't the scaling, it's the players trying to go for e-peen survivals for no reason. The scaling is fine, you trying to break it isn't.

STOP trying to fight these enemies. Stop trying to make DE break their game even harder so you can move the level goal post higher.

A rule of thumb: If the enemy's scaling is getting out of hand, extract. Done.

Edited by HugintheCrow
  • Like 4
  • Applause 5
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, HugintheCrow said:

That's really not a problem then, considering you don't encounter enemies over level 100 outside of simulacrum.

 

To clarify:

I believe the current scaling works great, making it clear you're NOT intended to fight enemies over level 100.

The problem isn't the scaling, it's the players trying to go for e-peen survivals for no reason. The scaling is fine, you trying to break it isn't.

STOP trying to fight these enemies. Stop trying to make DE break their game even harder so you can move the level goal post higher.

A rule of thumb: If the enemy's scaling is getting out of hand, extract. Done.

Oh, I'm in full agreement on that. No reason to fight enemies post level 100. I dunno why people are so obsessed with 3-hour survivals. I don't have the patience or the free time to do such a thing, myself.

I'm personally more concerned with terrible enemy AI and the fact that we don't really encounter a real challenge in the game.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DrakeWurrum said:

Oh, I'm in full agreement on that. No reason to fight enemies post level 100. I dunno why people are so obsessed with 3-hour survivals. I don't have the patience or the free time to do such a thing, myself.

I'm personally more concerned with terrible enemy AI and the fact that we don't really encounter a real challenge in the game.

Alright, good to know.

Agreed on the AI thing. Just cause Saryn can melt them doesn't mean they cannot have more intelligent behaviours than walking into a wall, or jumping up and down in a loop.

 

I think the best way to challenge is introduce stuff that makes us really use the parkour mechanics (you know, the best designed part of the game).

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Djego27 said:

Because heat is allready the only CC proc that has a dot, the CC proc that does the most damage

You forgot Gas/Toxin also.  😄 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, DrakeWurrum said:

Because past level 100, health and armor scaling is game-breakingly ridiculous.

Really? I usually don't bother to go that far. Isn't the viral, slash combo enough for enemies like those?

Share this post


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

You forgot Gas/Toxin also.  😄 

Gas or Toxin has no CC component to it, it is just a straight up AOE or single target dot.

  • Like 1
  • Satisfied 1
  • Applause 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Djego27 said:

Gas or Toxin has no CC component to it, it is just a straight up AOE or single target dot.

You are correct.  I was thinking AoE and confused it with CC.  My bad.  Proof that I haven't had enough coffee yet.  😄   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Djego27 said:

This is a very novice look at things.

And yours is an elitist look at things. 

The levels at which this becomes relevant are far beyond what we actually have for content.

2 hours ago, Djego27 said:

given that 25% of 5000 armor are still 1250 armor what equals still over 90% damage reduction and 75% more to lets say 400 damage after that 90% reduction are just 300 extra damage.

Because screw maths, amirite?

  • Like 1
  • Applause 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, (PS4)Shustas said:

Is de out of ideas? Hm lets see we have this fire thingy that nobody uses but everyone uses corrosive hm oh oh oh lets make fire corrosive. Oh and magnetic best idea is to make it corrosive as well. Damage v3 done. Tara

DE will not make damage v3: they still can't make melee 3.0 and canceled damage types rework. So I'm fine for everything to be corrosive. Magnetic and heat procs are useless right now so at least it will be useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JackHargreav said:

I don't get what's the problem with armor scaling. It makes enemies tougher as they go up in levels. Isn't that how it should be?

Enemies getting tougher with levels should be a thing, the solution DE went with isnt the correct one. Few games rely on infinitely scaling armor or mititgation on mobs, those games instead have proper mechanics in place to actually make the mobs tougher and more dangerous while also being possible to build counters against. DE simply went with the age old sponge/bullet hell solution, which is as lazy as it can get. It is also the reason why this game lacks any type of actual challenging content since they cant find a good balanced middle ground between the two.

The system in this game fits better in settings where the player also has the option to infinitely scale their stats. In WF a far more restricted system for both players and mobs would be needed due to how the game and levels works. Heck even a system from a strategy/turn based rpg like Age of Wonders would work better here, because the increases are far small and have a direct relation to eachother while also being able to be built around and tailored to your need. WF simply allows stats to spiral out of control which results in no counter options for the players to build for and mobs getting way out of hand in damage, This in turn makes us end up with extremely samey builds across the board with all the same needs no matter the weapon or frame really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, (PS4)Hopper_Orouk said:

Well because there are alot of abilities now and weapons that strip armor

And heat is easier to optain than corrosive 

Add on that you can have corrosive and heat builds

Having 2 elementals that can strip armor is too much in my opinion 

What i would suggest however is to give it that magus accelerant treatment where further heat procs makes enemies more vulnerable to heat damage ticks, or heat damage

Still 6 seconds

Still doesn't stack

But increase in damage ticks as you build in more heat

And don't underestimate heat ticks when they are huge, i've learned that from gauss 

Heat damage is good...it's only negative is against proto shields...it's neutral towards armor

Heat should be the damage amplifying type not the CC or the armor debuffing type

 

There is real-world precedence, honestly.  Heat has many modes of action.  

Flame-throwers melt flesh but not armor (not immediately, anyway).  Perhaps that is your “pure damage” type.

An A-10 Warthog fires Uranium-tipped rounds that generate a tremendous heat upon impact and sear through tank armor.  This represents your armor-reducing, status effect.

Until we know the relationship between corrosive and heat, this is all just verbal ping-pong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HugintheCrow said:

That's really not a problem then, considering you don't encounter enemies over level 100 outside of simulacrum.

 

To clarify:

I believe the current scaling works great, making it clear you're NOT intended to fight enemies over level 100.

The problem isn't the scaling, it's the players trying to go for e-peen survivals for no reason. The scaling is fine, you trying to break it isn't.

STOP trying to fight these enemies. Stop trying to make DE break their game even harder so you can move the level goal post higher.

A rule of thumb: If the enemy's scaling is getting out of hand, extract. Done.

That would be a reasonable argument if ALL enemies got crazy hard to kill at that level, but they don't- only the armored enemies scale that hard. Health and shield based enemies get harder to kill, but NOWHERE NEAR at the rate of armored enemies. If enemies are supposed to be very hard to kill at level 100+, then health and shield scaling should be improved to match. Alternatively, it could just be that the scaling of armoured units specifically is the problem, and the scaling of health and shield based units are how things SHOULD be.

 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Frenotx said:

That would be a reasonable argument if ALL enemies got crazy hard to kill at that level, but they don't- only the armored enemies scale that hard. Health and shield based enemies get harder to kill, but NOWHERE NEAR at the rate of armored enemies. If enemies are supposed to be very hard to kill at level 100+, then health and shield scaling should be improved to match. Alternatively, it could just be that the scaling of armoured units specifically is the problem, and the scaling of health and shield based units are how things SHOULD be.

 

I'm all for buffing the poor Corpus sods.

I have a concept thread where I did try to give them quite a few new tricks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, HugintheCrow said:

I'm all for buffing the poor Corpus sods.

I have a concept thread where I did try to give them quite a few new tricks.

My point was 2 of the 3 factions scale linearly, and one of the three factions scales non-linearly. That odd man out also makes % max health based attacks (a mechanic that's usually added to make something scale) trivial past like level 30, while such abilities remain useful for all levels of the non-armored units. It's inconsistent, and makes armor bypass / removal overly important even in (upper) star chart levels. Not sure why armour needs to increase with level at all, rather than just increasing the health underneath it.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Frenotx said:

My point was 2 of the 3 factions scale linearly, and one of the three factions scales non-linearly. That odd man out also makes % max health based attacks (a mechanic that's usually added to make something scale) trivial past like level 30, while such abilities remain useful for all levels of the non-armored units. It's inconsistent, and makes armor bypass / removal overly important even in (upper) star chart levels. Not sure why armour needs to increase with level at all, rather than just increasing the health underneath it.

And my point is that the armored target survavibility should be the base point for enemies, not the unarmored one.

Corpus should be brought up, Grineer can stay were they are.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

And my point is that the armored target survavibility should be the base point for enemies, not the unarmored one.

Corpus should be brought up, Grineer can stay were they are.

Even if the corpus health is increased to match, they'd still be nowhere near as durable in practice. Due to things like the various %HP-based effects, toxin outright ignoring shields, and magnetic hugely reducing shields from a single proc, a bunch of changes across many games elements would need to be made (and thus huge amounts of balance work) to be about to make anything compete with armour in practice.

Share this post


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

a bunch of changes across many games elements would need to be made (and thus huge amounts of balance work)

Yup, that's what I meant.

Share this post


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

Yup, that's what I meant.

Well just have to agree to disagree, then. That's an enormous amount of dev resources spent for something that's, imo, a very inefficient way to reach the goal of consistent difficulty ramping. A much easier way would be to simply remove armour increasing with level, and have the armoured units just increase their health with level like everyone else. Now everything ramps up consistently. The rate at which health inceases with level can then just be easily adjusted until desired difficulties are reached at desired levels.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, JackHargreav said:

Heat melts stuff. Heat melts metal for example. Armor is metal so, heat melts armor. Armor is melted then armor is reduced.

I might as well add that just making enemies more vulnerable to fire wouldn't be useful at all. Since their armor will just outscale whatever dmg you do to them. If you melt their armor -as fire should do- then you can deal actual damage.

And also your idea would make an arcane pointless. So good job on that one.

Actually, there are armor types that dont effect the armor but do effect the body inside.

To the OP: Fire already makes enemies panic. If they are panicked, they arent attacking you. Same as AC reduc IMHO. How? Less time they're attacking you means more damage you can do before they do.  It's so easy to get multiple damage types on all 3 weapons that you can swap to a different weapon to use that. Cor/blast on primary, viral/rad on secondary and mag/gas on melee. Then then there's CP+ your abilities... Im thinking there's no real reason to change anything. Maybe a better balance of the types but no changes to how they work.

Even with the nerfs that have happened to Ember, she is still my most used. I run her a LOT. It's called adapt and overcome. Instead of changing the game, change your tactics.

  • Haha 1
  • Applause 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, ThumpumGood said:

Actually, there are armor types that dont effect the armor but do effect the body inside

I'm not sure what you meant.

Armor types that don't effect armor? 

It might be just my somewhat poor english, but this doesn't make sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We already have statuses that share their affects. Gas and toxin. No one complains about that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

Sure the game has several flaws when it comes to logic, that doesnt mean they should add more.

A simply damage multiplier to targets effected with heat would be better since it would naturally reflect lack of situational awareness of a target that is engulfed in flames, making it easier for the attacker to get off cheap shots on exploited areas. Reducing armor is an extremely fringe option since it makes zero sense really, especially with the armors in the WF universe. We are afterall talking regular fire for the most part here versus armors that are so much more advanaced than what we have today and in our day and age we already have armor options that are more or less immune to fire and heat.

In the end they went with a lazy solution.

Okay, but isn't a ramping damage multiplier already happening since the Procs will stack like other effects?

DE's adding the Armor Shred mainly to buff Ember and to give Fire as a whole more use, since it's reduced by almost everything at the moment. If you just kept stacking damage you wouldn't really do anything, if Ember's old Rework was anything to go by.

Wanting an entire Proc essentially nerfed so that it makes more logical sense is just not necessary.

On a side note, why are you comparing this game to our world? Who says metals and the armor they're made out of in Warframe are just like ours? Just about everything catches on fire without some kind of catalyst, so who's to say the Grineer don't use awful flammable armor because it's cheap to mass-produce in their world? Multiverse theory and all that jazz.

Edited by (XB1)Graysmog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, DeMonkey said:

And yours is an elitist look at things. 

The levels at which this becomes relevant are far beyond what we actually have for content.

Because screw maths, amirite?

How so? I simply state that the innate damage increases and armor reduction capabilities of corrosive are not as useful at they do appear against the armor scaling system we have in the game. While it is certainly less relevant then it was 2014, the amount of people that ask for weapon buffs or anti armor abiilties here on the forums did stay mostly the same, even if both of this things are not needed at all, given that you could play the relevant content with things form 2014 without any buffs to them just fine. Now we are just on the next best thing that does not need a buff and pages full of people that believe we do need it.

On a status weapon you only put it for the proc, because it loses all the extra damage after the armor strip anyway and I do not believe heat needs a massive buff or status weapon that focus around that. This is also from somebody that uses corrosive/heat status weapons every day and plays Ember every day. On a damage weapon that kills the targeted content level instant or in less then 05.s sure it will stay good as a damage type, but at this point you do not need a debuff to armor, given that it is no issue and therefore also no reason to add armor stripping to heat damage.

I am sorry sir, I do not do armor calculations(because why would I) and yes, 1250 armor is like a 80% resistance however the gist of it stays the same.

Btw I was called a elitist before on the subject of damage application in a MMO, by somebody that did not do pvp and made several videos how little damage he does. What I told him was the opinion of somebody that organizing and tell 9 other people in pve content what to do where the main focus was to keep a high level of damage on targets. I post in Ember threads since years that Ember is very good against armor, however you have multiple times per week always a new thread about Embers issues with armor, same as there where only a few people in a 30 page long thread 2015 that did agree with me that the status nerf destroys the boar prime, while there where tons of people suggesting raising the base damage and crit so the gun becomes more interesting for them(this is why I have to use a riven to fix the base status chance on it today, while nobody uses the gun with that buffed damage, acording to the riven disposition). 

Now I am here, posting a thread about heat damage, with 5 years of using corrosive/heat damage weapons to deal with armor behind me, about how it is stupid to add armor strip to heat damage.

Edited by Djego27

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Djego27 said:

I am sorry sir, I do not do armor calculations(because why would I)

Because you're attempting to argue something?

Attempting to argue something when you don't even have a basic grasp of the math is.... not a good idea? That's a pretty good reason why you should do armour calculations, imo.

Your post is also nonsensically irrelevant to my point, a point you already validated for me here.

6 hours ago, Djego27 said:

Technically the 75% armor reduction will do next to nothing for you at high levels, given that 25% of 5000 armor are still 1250 armor what equals still over 90% damage reduction and 75% more to lets say 400 damage after that 90% reduction are just 300 extra damage.

Corrosive damage allows you to deal more damage to certain enemies regardless of procs, thereby rendering it not... what was it you said again?

Oh yeah, "massively devalued" by heat also reducing armour. Because, again, heat doesn't get a numerical advantage. Why are you arguing? You've already agreed with me.

  • Like 1
  • Satisfied 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, (XB1)Graysmog said:

Okay, but isn't a ramping damage multiplier already happening since the Procs will stack like other effects?

DE's adding the Armor Shred mainly to buff Ember and to give Fire as a whole more use, since it's reduced by almost everything at the moment. If you just kept stacking damage you wouldn't really do anything, if Ember's old Rework was anything to go by.

Wanting an entire Proc essentially nerfed so that it makes more logical sense is just not necessary.

On a side note, why are you comparing this game to our world? Who says metals and the armor they're made out of in Warframe are just like ours? Just about everything catches on fire without some kind of catalyst, so who's to say the Grineer don't use awful flammable armor because it's cheap to mass-produce in their world? Multiverse theory and all that jazz.

It would all depend how they'd implement a damage multiplier. With all the already available armor strips a multiplier would serve everyone much better than yet another way to strip armor. The multiplier I'm talking about wouldnt only apply to the heat damage source, but to all attacks inflicted on a heat effected target.

It would be the opposite of a nerf in the end because another armor strip mechanic is simply a redundant mechanic in a vast sea of several ways to remove armor already. We have corrosive, shattering impact, a multitude of armor stripping frame abilities aswell as a cat that can do it in a yiffy.

The reason I compare it to our world is because it is our universe in an alternate future. How would grineer have a flammable armor when in reality they actually use a compound based on iron i.e ferrite? Same as with their alloy armor. It is Orokin evolved tech derived from our own time pretty much. It is one thing that it may burn, it is a whole different thing to get it to actually melt all over again. As I said you'd need temps that far exceeds what the user inside the armor could ever withstand in order for it to melt due to heat.

Share this post


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...