Could Empyrean/Squad Link be Added to Raids when they return?

[(PSN)cardinalphoenix]

I'll grant you, I've never raided in any game before, however seeing the playback of Tennocon 2018 when Railjack was announced, and watching Tennocon 2019 live, taking down the Kuva Lich capital ship seemed tantamount to a mini raid to me. Multiple steps, separating the team to cooperate to accomplish goals, tons of action and an epic finish with the assassination of the Lich.

It got me thinking. Could Railjacks and Squad Link, after they release and are in good shape, be leveraged as part of raids when they come back?

Hypothetically, tomorrow, the devs could say raids are coming back, we could get 6-8 person squads, 6-8 people go in, they do a thing (albeit a bigger more epic thing than normal), come back, rinse and repeat. But by adding Railjacks to the mix, part of the group could be on the ground or on an enemy ship while another part is in the Railjack. Or the raiding party could put down a Squad Link beacon and people in a completely unrelated game could help out a raiding party without directly interacting.

To me, that not only seems like it lifts up raiding as an activity, by raising the amount of people involved in a single raid, it also lifts up basic missions and allows even solo players to help out raiding parties by doing basically what they were already doing anyway.

Thoughts?

Edited October 22, 2019 by (PS4)cardinalphoenix
copyedit for grammar

[Senguash]

Alternatively, could they please not?

If you think it's a cool feature for casual play, fair enough, but it's going to be an incredibly annoying roadblock to face in the middle of a raid.

You essentially have to wait for a different squad elsewhere to do something completely unrelated.

You have the potential for 1 guy doing plains bounties to hold up 8 people in a raid.

I like the idea of a different squad "assisting" the raid on a conceptual level, but that's not at all what they showed.

What they showed was the squad in space just being unable to progress having to wait for the squad in plains to finish their thing.

Edited October 22, 2019 by Senguash

[lighthoof]

5 minutes ago, Senguash said:

Alternatively, could they please not?

If you think it's a cool feature for casual play, fair enough, but it's going to be an incredibly annoying roadblock to face in the middle of a raid.

You essentially have to wait for a different squad elsewhere to do something completely unrelated.

You have the potential for 1 guy doing plains bounties to hold up 8 people in a raid.

I like the idea of a different squad "assisting" the raid on a conceptual level, but that's not at all what they showed.

What they showed was the squad in space just being unable to progress having to wait for the squad in plains to finish their thing.

They did mention though, that it is possible to finish a mission without assistance, it would just be much harder to do so.
As I understood it, assistance beacons can be either tuned to your clanmates or just works only for them, so you basically can have a team ready to help you at the moment you need it if you wish to run using squadlink

[(PSN)cardinalphoenix]

5 minutes ago, Senguash said:

You essentially have to wait for a different squad elsewhere to do something completely unrelated.

You have the potential for 1 guy doing plains bounties to hold up 8 people in a raid.

 

I get what you're saying, but...first of all, Squad Link is opt-in. Meaning, if you don't want to engage with it, or you don't want to engage with it at the current moment, you don't have to. If you're just on the Plains for Bounties, for example, and you don't want to be involved with other squads elsewhere, don't put a beacon down, that's why it's opt-in. Agreed that it'd suck if it were required, but...doesn't seem like it is.

Second, and admittedly, I don't have a lot experience with raids, but from what I've seen and heard of others...there's plenty of times when a single squad gets split up and certain members have to wait for other party members to finish "what they're doing" in order to progress. The entire concept of Raids is that they're much bigger engagements that REQUIRE coordination and cooperation, and if some people are holding things up, they either need to find a more understanding team to help them through and forgive them if they fail, or do more research to learn the mechanics before jumping. It's why I've defended Bungie, for example, not having matchmaking with their Raids in Destiny. Granted, it's excluded people (like me) who just want to engage the content, but I'd rather look for a dedicated group and get together with a coordinated squad or fire team than be teamed up with randoms and have exactly what you mention occur...people just trolling or holding up the line because they're slow or whatever else.

My point is, since Squad Link is opt-in, it would likely take care of what you're talking about.

[Loza03]

I could see squad link be used as the concept for a raid. Instead of relying on the potentially very buggy mess of 8 people on one host, you link two (or maybe more!) squads into the same mission via the squad link system. So they're all in the raid together, but they're not all in the same instance, if that makes any sense. Say, the raid has a ground team and a space team - both are doing the raid at the same time, and they're considered part of the same raid team, but they're not all doing the same thing, but instead running two missions that both effect each other. So, like...

It's a siege thing. The Grineer have captured a Tenno-allied colony and are using it to resupply a ship with a mission-critical commander on board. One team attacks the ship, and can (and must) occasionaly take over cannons to bombard enemy walls/strucutres or sends supply drops to the colony team, who are in turns going through to free the colony and can send up assisting AI helpers. Or something like that, just an idea of two permanently linked missions, instead of the one-and-done squad link we see in the Demo.

Obviously, random elements could be implemented as well, but like @Senguash said, that much should be optional.

[(PSN)cardinalphoenix]

3 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

Obviously, random elements could be implemented as well, but like @Senguash said, that much should be optional.

But that's just it, the way they showed Squad Link, it's opt-in. So if you don't want to do it, you don't have to it. You'd only put down a beacon if you're ready to help out other people. Which is nice. 

[Senguash]

55 minutes ago, (PS4)cardinalphoenix said:

My point is, since Squad Link is opt-in, it would likely take care of what you're talking about.

A feature being opt-in or opt-out isn't an argument for that feature being a good idea. In fact it's often the opposite.

It means that you already know a lot of people might not like it.

Your run is either gonna be easier/faster by opting in or by opting out, and you're going to feel compelled to do whichever is beneficial even if it's the option you don't like. And it's probably going to be faster/easier if you opt in, because that's the incentive, right?

So here's what that means...

If you have someone willing to be on standby to help out the raid, good, but that person can't actually be part of the group and get rewards, that kinda blows doesn't it?

If you don't have someone, maybe you can rely on pubs. But what if the pubs turn out not to be good? Some random people could hold up the raid. That sounds frustrating.

Maybe you opt out. It's going to be slower, that sucks, but less annoying since you don't need to get outside help. But how do you make that decision? Is it up to the person hosting? What if it's a pub squad and someone else wants to opt in but you want to opt out? 

What if you're trying to put together a squad with opt-out, but finding people is slow because everyone is looking for opt-in runs?

 

So why not just have everyone who's participating in the raid as part of the actual raid group? That seems more fun and more inclusive.

I get why you think it's a cool feature. It is a fun idea conceptually. It's one of those things that's cool the first couple of times, but then after that it's just annoying.

Edited October 22, 2019 by Senguash

[lighthoof]

5 minutes ago, Senguash said:

can't actually be part of the group and get rewards

We don't know that. There are rewards for helping out and they may as well be mission specific, so rewards for helping a raid may be worth all the wait.

[(PSN)cardinalphoenix]

7 minutes ago, Senguash said:

A feature being opt-in or opt-out isn't an argument for that feature being a good idea. In fact it's often the opposite.

It means that you already know a lot of people might not like it.

Okay, I read your whole comment, but honestly, I feel like you're severely overthinking it to a point where it would hold things back...

I get that people love "metas" and doing whatever's most "efficient" or "easy" or "fastest" or "best," but opting-in or opting-out doesn't mean people immediately won't like it. "Opt" literally suggests "option." Having different ways of playing. Yes, someone who opts-in to helping a raid party could fail, but if you're afraid you might fail, then be smart and don't opt-in. Wait till you're stronger or can handle the objective. Plus, by the looks of the interface at Tennocon 2019 (work in progress, obviously), there was a Decline button. Meaning, if Drew had seen the objective and he said "hmmm, I don't think I want to do that one," he could've Declined it and instead maybe gotten a different objective cycled through if other people need help, Accepted that one instead, and succeeded there where he would've failed the previous one.

That's what Warframe is mostly about. Choosing content you can do at the rate you want to play it. Look at leveling, the "meta" for that is to "hang out on Hydron" because "fastest." But it ultimately breeds awkward moments. Do I take unranked gear in there and join randoms and leech XP and risk dying repeatedly because no one feels like carrying, or being left behind and getting next to nothing? Do I beg people to carry me in recruit chat? Or, the other way, do I go to Hydron with maxed gear and risk HAVING to carry others? On the other hand...is someone wrong for kicking the meta to the curb and leveling unranked gear by replaying the same level 1-2 Exterminate over and over if they like that style better? Answer: no, they're not wrong. Following metas is fine for a lot of bored vets, but metas deteriorate the ability to choose that this game is supposed to offer.

You're right that randoms and pubs could cause a problem with raids and squad link, but ultimately, Warframe is a coop game. It's very good that this coop-focused game has ways of soloing it, for people who don't like interacting or prefer doing things themselves. I'm usually one of those people. But bigger engagements will ultimately require more dedicated coordination, and for Warframe to take a cue from, say, Apex Legends, which has a ping system that doesn't require people to be on mics or type anything, and offer a way for squads to help each other without directly interacting, is a really awesome thing.

Would there be a heap of concerns incorporating that into raids? Sure, I'll agree with you 100% on that. May not ever happen, that's why I asked the question. But if raids are just placed back into the game without any real innovation or evolution, they stand to just be the same type of engagements as any other games' raids. What would make "Warframe Raids" different from "Destiny Raids?" 

Warframe is all about evolution of game systems and making them better (albeit really slowly, many could argue TOO slowly). Squad Link and Empyrean both stand to do things other games aren't doing or can't do or just haven't done yet. That's why I'd love to see them incorporated into raids when they return. You're totally right, tons of concerns would need to be worked out, but I think it's very worth it in the end to offer an experience other games don't. Could just mean slightly different raid modes (one for Squad Link possibility, one without) or perhaps dynamic ways to regroup to accommodate an assisting squad failing their attempt to help, or trolling or leaving or quitting or whatever, which to me, seem like easy solutions to this issue.

[DrBorris]

1 hour ago, Senguash said:

Alternatively, could they please not?

If you think it's a cool feature for casual play, fair enough, but it's going to be an incredibly annoying roadblock to face in the middle of a raid.

You essentially have to wait for a different squad elsewhere to do something completely unrelated.

You have the potential for 1 guy doing plains bounties to hold up 8 people in a raid.

I like the idea of a different squad "assisting" the raid on a conceptual level, but that's not at all what they showed.

What they showed was the squad in space just being unable to progress having to wait for the squad in plains to finish their thing.

"Not at all what they showed"

... because they showed the entire depth of the system in a five minute preview of a very, very early build.

Squad Link is just that, linking squads. Linking separate instances of gameplay with a singular greater objective. It doesn't have to be match-made, it could easily use the same matchmaking system of the Raid. You could have Raids that will split up the group for certain parts then bring them back together (with seamless loading screens courtesy of Railjack tech). It could even be used to make 16+ player raids, while you would not see all 16 people at the same time you would all be working together.

This is definitely a stretch, but imagine twisting this into fleet battles. In theory there could be hundreds of players on the same "mission", just all with separate objectives.

 

Squad Link is another tool in DE's toolbox for mission design, it is borderline insulting to DE to assume that Squad Link is only what was showed. On the contrary, I would not be surprised if its actual implementation was nothing like what was showed (the whole beacon thing is just... bad).

[(PSN)cardinalphoenix]

2 minutes ago, DrBorris said:

Squad Link is another tool in DE's toolbox for mission design, it is borderline insulting to DE to assume that Squad Link is only what was showed. On the contrary, I would not be surprised if its actual implementation was nothing like what was showed (the whole beacon thing is just... bad).

While I tend to shy away from grander statements like calling things "insults," I can agree in the sense that the majority of awesome things added to Warframe over the years had aspects and factors that we either didn't expect or didn't see all of when it was first pitched to us. I'm at work, so I'm not exactly in Warframe History research mode, but...I wouldn't doubt a list of things exist for that.

In terms of the beacon...what's wrong with the beacon? I kinda like the beacon, nifty little device or whatever. 🙂

Eh...the system itself is more important to me than the beacon, though. I can do without the beacon. Could be a switchable line in the options screen for all I care.

[SilentMobius]

2 hours ago, (PS4)cardinalphoenix said:

Could Empyrean/Squad Link be Added to Raids when they return?

What makes you think the trials, as were, will ever return. DE haven't said they will, they said:

Quote

“We are looking to repurpose existing Raid content to make the game mode accessible for lower-level players while also preparing them for this end-game content as they continue to progress.”

And they have been rebuilding those systems to be more inclusive, the results are the Teralyst+ Eidolons and the Orbs Weavers.

We may even see more reuse of the Trial assets one day, even some more inclusive content under the "Trial" name, but I see no reason to assume that this specific content will ever return and I personally hope that forced-teaming content like the Trials never returns

[(PSN)cardinalphoenix]

3 minutes ago, SilentMobius said:

What makes you think the trials, as were, will ever return. DE haven't said they will, they said:

And they have been rebuilding those systems to be more inclusive, the results are the Teralyst+ Eidolons and the Orbs Weavers.

We may even see more reuse of the Trial assets one day, even some more inclusive content under the "Trial" name, but I see no reason to assume that this specific content will ever return and I personally hope that forced-teaming content like the Trials never returns

I'll be honest, I didn't experience the Trials as they were in the game before I got geared up enough to handle them. As such, you may be right, they may never return as they were, maybe the assets will just be reused somehow, and they may simply be working on the concept of "raids" to be included later which would be both endgame for vets and accessible, not the actual Law of Retribution Revisited or Jordan Precept Revisited. What you've said there is very possible.

However, the devs, Steve especially, have declared many times over the game's life that Warframe is a coop game. Granted..."forced" coop isn't always so good for people who prefer to play alone. As I may have said here or elsewhere, I'm glad things like Railjack missions will be soloable for people who don't like teaming up with other humans. But to emphasize and enhance the coop features is ultimately good thing. And for Squad Link to be opt-in, like I said, is a healthy addition.

Can/should DE find other ways of making certain rewards through Squad Link available elsewhere? Sure. Or else, just offer certain rewards through there that can already be acquired elsewhere, that way it's just an extra bonus. However, I think the reason Squad Link is a great feature is because it doesn't require direct interaction. You opt-in if you want, do your own thing however you feel like, and you can help others without actually being around other people. A mercenary of sorts.

Outside of mechanical issues (and there will surely be mechanical issues), I see no problem with that. Feedback on how to implement to make everyone happy, though, we should keep that flowing, for sure.

[SilentMobius]

25 minutes ago, (PS4)cardinalphoenix said:

I'll be honest, I didn't experience the Trials as they were in the game before I got geared up enough to handle them. As such, you may be right, they may never return as they were, maybe the assets will just be reused somehow, and they may simply be working on the concept of "raids" to be included later which would be both endgame for vets and accessible, not the actual Law of Retribution Revisited or Jordan Precept Revisited. What you've said there is very possible.

However, the devs, Steve especially, have declared many times over the game's life that Warframe is a coop game. Granted..."forced" coop isn't always so good for people who prefer to play alone. As I may have said here or elsewhere, I'm glad things like Railjack missions will be soloable for people who don't like teaming up with other humans. But to emphasize and enhance the coop features is ultimately good thing. And for Squad Link to be opt-in, like I said, is a healthy addition.

Can/should DE find other ways of making certain rewards through Squad Link available elsewhere? Sure. Or else, just offer certain rewards through there that can already be acquired elsewhere, that way it's just an extra bonus. However, I think the reason Squad Link is a great feature is because it doesn't require direct interaction. You opt-in if you want, do your own thing however you feel like, and you can help others without actually being around other people. A mercenary of sorts.

Outside of mechanical issues (and there will surely be mechanical issues), I see no problem with that. Feedback on how to implement to make everyone happy, though, we should keep that flowing, for sure.

I have no problems with Squad link. If a form of non-PvP-Player-Created-Content, as long as there is isolation from the potential for griefing, I'm fine with it.

Forced-teaming content (Which is one of the things people commonly assume when using the lable "raid") always ends up as proxy-PvP content (where the PvP is social rather than in-game) cliquism, elitism, gaming social expecations all run rampant.

One of the problems with anything labled as a "Raid" is the implication of high-difficulty and high-rewards, because with that comes even higher sensitivity to griefing which would be amplified further by the increased annonimity of squad-link, if DE can solve the problem of people who would choose to screw over squad link partners for fun, then I'm all in, but increasing dependencies between teams is the opposite of that.

I'm no games designer, so I'm very much looking forward to seeing how DE handle squad-link, it has a lot of potential... But I am very nervous of anything that gets the "raid" moniker because many of the attributes commonly applied to the label "Raid" are notable toxicity-amplifiers.

Edited October 22, 2019 by SilentMobius

[(PSN)cardinalphoenix]

1 minute ago, SilentMobius said:

I have no problems with Squad link. If a form of non-PvP-Player-Created-Content, as long as there is isolation from the potential for griefing, I'm fine with it.

Forced-teaming content always ends up as proxy-PvP content (where the PvP is social rather than in-game) cliquism, elitism, gaming social expecations all run rampant.

One of the problems with anything labled as a "Raid" is the implication of high-difficulty and high-rewards, because with that comes even higher sensitivity to griefing which would be amplified further by the increased annonimity of squad-link, if DE can solve the problem of people who would choose to screw over squad link partners for fun, then I'm all in, but increasing dependencies between teams is the opposite of that.

I'm no games designer, so I'm very much looking forward to seeing how DE handle squad-link, it has a lot of potential... But I am very nervous of anything that gets the "raid" moniker because many of the attributes commonly applied to the label "Raid" are notable toxicity-amplifiers.

Completely fair to say, however I feel as if almost anything can be seen as proxy-PvP. Hell, a Lith Exterminate Level 5-7, for example, turns into "who can use the best nuking frame to speed rush through and leave a trail of reactant first?" It's not just high difficulty content. Hell, we now have Look Link, so people can get super vain over their FashionFraming, it's nuts. competition is all over the place, even in a coop setting. 😉

Gameplay wise, that's not to say grievers and toxicity aren't a concern, they always should be. But that's also not to say we should do nothing and let them run rampant. I just don't think DE shouldn't go forward with this due to grievers or toxic players.

There are ways to either incentivize people away from griefing, or punish those who do it all the time or whatever, and I do hope DE implement those things in to make it easier to identify players like that. I do think that if it were forced, as in, not opt-in and everyone is required to do Squad Link stuff that it's more likely to see griefers, as a way to act out and fight having to do it. Being opt-in, we're still likely to see griefers, but I'm going to estimate it won't be as much.

Still, I'm with you that DE should find ways to monitor it so it doesn't get out of hand and become a meme.

[SilentMobius]

15 minutes ago, (PS4)cardinalphoenix said:

Completely fair to say, however I feel as if almost anything can be seen as proxy-PvP. Hell, a Lith Exterminate Level 5-7, for example, turns into "who can use the best nuking frame to speed rush through and leave a trail of reactant first?" It's not just high difficulty content. Hell, we now have Look Link, so people can get super vain over their FashionFraming, it's nuts. competition is all over the place, even in a coop setting. 😉

Nothing you mention there actually excludes people from gameplay or rewards. Forced-teaming content does by creating cliques that end up regulating access to the content/rewards. (I.E."50 DKP minus" territory)

15 minutes ago, (PS4)cardinalphoenix said:

There are ways to either incentivize people away from griefing, or punish those who do it all the time or whatever, and I do hope DE implement those things in to make it easier to identify players like that. I do think that if it were forced, as in, not opt-in and everyone is required to do Squad Link stuff that it's more likely to see griefers, as a way to act out and fight having to do it. Being opt-in, we're still likely to see griefers, but I'm going to estimate it won't be as much.

Still, I'm with you that DE should find ways to monitor it so it doesn't get out of hand and become a meme.

My understanding is that no mission will require squad link (from the Tennocon reveal) Nor will it require a squad-link-related sucess to progress, but we shall se.

I think that any mechanism that ties one players rewards to another player's actions needs careful attenuation of possible behaviour modes. Warframe is very good in that, as in many cases a lone Warframe can carry a mission with other players having very few options to actively work against that. Compare other MMOs that require some balance of team-members for basic content where anyone witholding actions can tank the chance of rewards across the board.

Edited October 22, 2019 by SilentMobius

[(XBOX)ShadowBlood89]

4 hours ago, (PS4)cardinalphoenix said:

Multiple steps, separating the team to cooperate to accomplish goals, tons of action and an epic finish with the assassination of the Lich.

squad link is optional as they did say you could take out shield without ground team help just would be harder

 

4 hours ago, (PS4)cardinalphoenix said:

Hypothetically, tomorrow, the devs could say raids are coming back, we could get 6-8 person squads, 6-8 people go in, they do a thing (albeit a bigger more epic thing than normal), come back, rinse and repeat. But by adding Railjacks to the mix, part of the group could be on the ground or on an enemy ship while another part is in the Railjack. Or the raiding party could put down a Squad Link beacon and people in a completely unrelated game could help out a raiding party without directly interacting.

squad link would work with players in the railjack, an in any mission not just the open world as it would just add a different objective, but that doesnt make it a raid. as squad link a system to allow for additional help in various ways.
those who pick up the squad link call get rewarded with unknown item(s) while the squad link requesting party i dont think they get anything 

[(PSN)cardinalphoenix]

1 minute ago, SilentMobius said:

Nothing you mention there actually excludes people from gameplay or rewards. Forced-teaming content does by creating cliques that end up regulating access to the content/rewards.

True on the first part. But like I said...literally everything has cliques. Even if the reward is simply "I have the best fashion frame," with no in-game DE provided reward, there are cliques in games for literally everything. Are we going to assume that MMOs back in the day like Everquest didn't have the exact same thing? They all have that. I'm not saying it's good or okay, just that it's inevitable.

I get what you're saying, that forcing people to play together can feel restricting, but at the same time...while DE are removing Nightwave Acts like "complete XYZ with friends," because apparently playing coop is not something people wanna do in a coop game...more than likely, Squad Link will have some type of balance so that it isn't required, or solo players have a way to acquire things. That said, just because some people want to solo everything and be super Rambo Ninjas, that doesn't mean the game should be held back from including such a feature for those who want to feel like what they're doing has a community wide effect. A lot of times, the experience of this game can feel supremely isolated and lonely and like what we do doesn't really matter. Squad Link seeks to address that with as little invasiveness or direct interaction as possible. Like, I'm out on the Plains or in a Corpus mission, I activate Squad Link, oh good, people need help, lemme go help them...and I don't even need to communicate with them, I just do my thing however I want, and they get a benefit because I helped them all by myself.

Instead of "proxy-PvP," I see it more like "player centric quest/mission generation." In PvP, the experience is unpredictable, because competing against players make it that way. Whereas here, PLAYERS need help, as opposed to, a random NPC saying the same exact thing over and over and we get bored helping them because we've done it a hundred times and the sheen of the illusion wears off. Players will always need help, and the more players there are, the more different players we can aid.

I completely understand your concern that it opens the door for toxicity, these days, just about everything does, as jerks will find any way they can to ruin other peoples' fun. But we should be finding ways around that, rather than risking being too fearful to encourage them to go forward.

I mean, we still don't have enough information to know what the rewards for Squad Link participation will even be yet. For all we know, the rewards will be things you can get elsewhere, and there will be literally no reason to do it outside of getting extra if you feel like it. In that case, it won't be forced at all, and instead, may be ignored by some people. Which, in a way, would be worse.

[(PSN)cardinalphoenix]

1 minute ago, (XB1)ShadowBlood89 said:

squad link is optional as they did say you could take out shield without ground team help just would be harder

 

squad link would work with players in the railjack, an in any mission not just the open world as it would just add a different objective, but that doesnt make it a raid. as squad link a system to allow for additional help in various ways.
those who pick up the squad link call get rewarded with unknown item(s) while the squad link requesting party i dont think they get anything 

I know it's optional. It would just be harder without the help. We don't know how much harder yet, though. If it's barely felt, Squad Link may not feel worth it. If it's too hard without Squad Link, it might feel forced. We'll have to wait and see the numbers and implementation.

And I just meant it was similar to a raid, in the simplest sense, not exactly the same. Cooperation, coordination, communication, using different methods and techniques to accomplish a big giant goal. I know taking down a Lich capital ship won't be involved enough to fill the gap left by Trials/Raids, but the bare bones of what raids tend to offer might actually whet peoples' appetites for raids. Hopefully just in time for them reintroduce them. Fingers crossed, 😉

As for what the requesting party "gets"...they get the help. Their mission becomes easier. The helping party gets an actual reward for helping out, but the requesting party gets the reward of their mission being easier. That's the nature of cooperation. 😄 

[SilentMobius]

13 minutes ago, (PS4)cardinalphoenix said:

True on the first part. But like I said...literally everything has cliques. Even if the reward is simply "I have the best fashion frame," with no in-game DE provided reward, there are cliques in games for literally everything. Are we going to assume that MMOs back in the day like Everquest didn't have the exact same thing? They all have that. I'm not saying it's good or okay, just that it's inevitable.

Cliques aren't the problem. Cliques (and all the other things) that exclude other players from gameplay and rewards are.

Yes Everquest et-al did, indeed, do this, and it was bad. Forcing teaming requires players to engage with those cliques and allows them to monopolize content and rewards, that is the problem, and that is not inevitable.

13 minutes ago, (PS4)cardinalphoenix said:

I get what you're saying, that forcing people to play together can feel restricting, but at the same time...while DE are removing Nightwave Acts like "complete XYZ with friends," because apparently playing coop is not something people wanna do in a coop game.

Indeed, and this illustrates the problem that forcing teaming creates and the fact that Warframe has generally not done this.

13 minutes ago, (PS4)cardinalphoenix said:

more than likely, Squad Link will have some type of balance so that it isn't required, or solo players have a way to acquire things.

As I said, this has already been confirmed in the tennocon stream.

13 minutes ago, (PS4)cardinalphoenix said:

That said, just because some people want to solo everything and be super Rambo Ninjas, that doesn't mean the game should be held back from including such a feature for those who want to feel like what they're doing has a community wide effect. A lot of times, the experience of this game can feel supremely isolated and lonely and like what we do doesn't really matter. Squad Link seeks to address that with as little invasiveness or direct interaction as possible. Like, I'm out on the Plains or in a Corpus mission, I activate Squad Link, oh good, people need help, lemme go help them...and I don't even need to communicate with them, I just do my thing however I want, and they get a benefit because I helped them all by myself.

Instead of "proxy-PvP," I see it more like "player centric quest/mission generation." In PvP, the experience is unpredictable, because competing against players make it that way. Whereas here, PLAYERS need help, as opposed to, a random NPC saying the same exact thing over and over and we get bored helping them because we've done it a hundred times and the sheen of the illusion wears off. Players will always need help, and the more players there are, the more different players we can aid.

I completely understand your concern that it opens the door for toxicity, these days, just about everything does, as jerks will find any way they can to ruin other peoples' fun. But we should be finding ways around that, rather than risking being too fearful to encourage them to go forward.

I mean, we still don't have enough information to know what the rewards for Squad Link participation will even be yet. For all we know, the rewards will be things you can get elsewhere, and there will be literally no reason to do it outside of getting extra if you feel like it. In that case, it won't be forced at all, and instead, may be ignored by some people. Which, in a way, would be worse.

I think you're miunderstanding my objection and we are talking at cross-purposes.

I object to mixing "squad-link" (Which is a new, and potentially good addition to the game if implimented well) with "Raids" (Which many people see as a mix of "Forced teaming content", "Difficult content", "High and exclusive reward generating content" among other things)

My objection is to the addition of forced teaming (AKA Raid-like content), not to squad-link.

Edited October 22, 2019 by SilentMobius

[(PSN)cardinalphoenix]

1 minute ago, SilentMobius said:

I think you're miunderstanding my objection and we are talking at cross-purposes.

I object to mixing "squad-link" (Which is a new, and potentially good addition to the game if implimented well) with "Raids" (Which many people see as a mix of "Forced teaming content", "Difficult content", "High and exclusive reward generating content" among other things)

My objection is to the forced teaming part, not squad-link.

Fair enough, thank you for clarifying...

But I think you're missing how I've said numerous times that we literally have no idea how "forced" this will be. You keep saying "forced" like this is guaranteed to be hefted onto your shoulders with no escape, and we just have to grin and bear it...yet we have barely any information on how it will be implemented, regardless of my idea to POTENTIALLY include them as additional ways to engage with raid activities.

As I said to others as well...this is opt-in. There's LITERALLY nothing "forced" about the idea at the moment, even with as little as we know currently. You can make the argument it'll be "forced" IF rewards from participation are 100% necessary for crafting or upgrading or whatever. THAT would make it "forced" and THAT would be kinda sucky if there is enough of a collective of people who don't want to be "forced" into engaging with others, even indirectly, if they don't want to.

But...again...we have no idea about that yet. They pitched it out there during the Tennocon demo, and like everything else in this game, they're working out the kinks. Even after it launches...there will most likely be kinks. Par for the course. Even the devs will tell you that. 

My entire purpose for this post was basically to say this..."big activities like RAIDS are coming back, as the devs have said. Wouldn't it be nice to make those raids even bigger and more interesting by incorporating more people working toward a similar goal?"

If your issue is with "forced teaming," then that's more of an issue with where rewards come from, and whether or not we can opt-out of joining peoples' games...both of which seem like they're relatively easy issues to tackle, so I'm very confused why you're pushing this idea of it being "forced" when we haven't gotten a single reason to think it's going to be "forced."

[SilentMobius]

42 minutes ago, (PS4)cardinalphoenix said:

Fair enough, thank you for clarifying...

But I think you're missing how I've said numerous times that we literally have no idea how "forced" this will be. You keep saying "forced" like this is guaranteed to be hefted onto your shoulders with no escape, and we just have to grin and bear it...yet we have barely any information on how it will be implemented, regardless of my idea to POTENTIALLY include them as additional ways to engage with raid activities.

I'll say this again: The thing I object to is "raid activities" (Specifically the part of "Raids" that is forced teaming) not this prospective "team-link"

I have accepted multiple times that team-link is quite likely a net positive. As you said, implimentation is vague but potentially very good.

Raids/Trial are not good, we know how the trials worked and we know what people mean when they said "Raid" that is what I'm objecting to.

To summerize:

• The thing we don't know about: "team-link" is fine.
• The thing we do know about "Raids"/"Trials are not and should not be shuffled in with team-link.

 

 

[(PSN)cardinalphoenix]

4 minutes ago, SilentMobius said:

I'll say this again: The thing I object to is "raid activities" (Specifically the part of "Raids" that is forced teaming) not this prospective "team-link"

I have accepted multiple times that team-link is quite likely a net positive. As you said, implimentation is vague but potentially very good.

Raids/Trial are not good, we know how the trials worked and we know what people mean when they said "Raid" that is what I'm objecting to.

To summerize:

• The thing we don't know about: "team-link" is fine.
• The thing we do know about "Raids"/"Trials are not and should not be shuffled in with team-link.

That's fine. We can agree there, for the most part. Trust me, despite our argument here, I know the feeling of rewards and such being exclusive to certain activities that involve teaming up.

I played a ton of Destiny 1 since close to launch, for instance, and although I've heard the Vault of Glass raid was spectacular, I never got to experience it. I'm disappointed that I missed out, but I'm disappointed in myself that I was too scared to look around on Bungie.net and find a group to run me through it, even just for the experience and lore aspects and not for the gear.

Maybe I say this as a guy who just turned 39, is recently divorced and lives by myself now, but I really regret not being more social in gaming over the years. I may be a cripplingly shy introvert, but in regard to games, I can at least feel comfortable once in a while in the fact that we're all engaging in a game we like. If we all have nothing else but that one thing in common, that's one thing more than meeting a random person in a bar and crossing my fingers we have anything at all in common. 🙂

So...I get what you're saying about Raids/Trials, regardless of Squad Link. That said...I'm still eager to see them return. If DE wants to spread the reward pool out a bit and make it so Raiding isn't necessary to receive certain rewards, I'm not opposed to that. But an increasingly angry subset of Warframe players are upset because there isn't any big, gigantic engagements to work toward and conquer with all the gear and power they've built up. Hell, even if those big gigantic engagements have separate solo modes, which are significantly nerfed or changed to accommodate only one person at a time (kinda like how solo Railjack missions will allow NPCs on your ship to man guns and stations, allegedly), that'd still be fine. Your concern is valid about gating people out of content that requires teaming up, it is disappointing.

At the same time, though, a lot of people have wanted massive engagements in Warframe to work toward, and amazingly powerful rewards attached to succeeding in them...and I think their concern is valid as well.

There are ways around it. Hopefully DE will find the best way to make both sides happy.

[Autongnosis]

Tbh I'd rather have them design a raid that's meant for two separate groups of people, one in empyrean and one on the ground - IE an assault on a grineer fomorian done properly where the ground team infiltrates the insides of the ship while the empyrean team does bombing runs and other objectives outside. 

 

Locking a raid behind the cooperation of randoms will never be a good idea. 

[SilentMobius]

4 minutes ago, (PS4)cardinalphoenix said:

Maybe I say this as a guy who just turned 39, is recently divorced and lives by myself now, but I really regret not being more social in gaming over the years. I may be a cripplingly shy introvert, but in regard to games, I can at least feel comfortable once in a while in the fact that we're all engaging in a game we like. If we all have nothing else but that one thing in common, that's one thing more than meeting a random person in a bar and crossing my fingers we have anything at all in common. 🙂

As a married 45 year old who has been playing MMO's since MUDs I have learnt the hard way that forcing people together is always a net negative. Positive relationships flourish in the absense of coersion.

People who want to team are the best teammates.

4 minutes ago, (PS4)cardinalphoenix said:

So...I get what you're saying about Raids/Trials, regardless of Squad Link. That said...I'm still eager to see them return. If DE wants to spread the reward pool out a bit and make it so Raiding isn't necessary to receive certain rewards, I'm not opposed to that. But an increasingly angry subset of Warframe players are upset because there isn't any big, gigantic engagements to work toward and conquer with all the gear and power they've built up. Hell, even if those big gigantic engagements have separate solo modes, which are significantly nerfed or changed to accommodate only one person at a time (kinda like how solo Railjack missions will allow NPCs on your ship to man guns and stations, allegedly), that'd still be fine. Your concern is valid about gating people out of content that requires teaming up, it is disappointing.

At the same time, though, a lot of people have wanted massive engagements in Warframe to work toward, and amazingly powerful rewards attached to succeeding in them...and I think their concern is valid as well.

There are ways around it. Hopefully DE will find the best way to make both sides happy.

Those who are pro-raid will happily tell you that if you can solo it, it's not a "Raid". I don't make those rules I just have to live with them. I have nothing against large-scale content involving bots or cut down objective combinations when approached with smaller groups or solo.

But "raids" have meaning to people and at least part of that meaning is forcing a group and unique rewards for that group event.