power isnt the devil.

[(PSN)sweatshawp]

12 minutes ago, Gabbynaru said:

Pretty sure that's Destiny 2 in a nutshell. Didn't beat the game cause it didn't feel like I was making progress, so why bother.

That's still 300 freakin' hours, dude. Not a walk in the park. Heck, most games get you to this point in 20, maybe 40 hours at best, but Warframe takes many times that. No effort required my a**.

Again I’d the enemy’s are always better you’d not win.

 

and that’s terrible for a live service or a game that by design is supposed to keep you going it took me 700+ hours for eso to truly ‘master’ it (it’s a mastercraft pun) all my time spent in for honor and I can say with every new character I have to master fighting or defending against them. I can give more examples

[(PSN)sweatshawp]

16 minutes ago, Aldain said:

Its a small forum after all.

Yea it’s the same four - six of us at this time on the forums devouring soul- I mean reading posts and replying 

[Aldain]

Just now, (PS4)sweatshawp said:

Yea it’s the same four - six of us at this time on the forums devouring soul- I mean reading posts and replying 

I mean I recognize about 80% of the names in this topic for better or worse.

All we need is for somebody to mention Revenant and Gears will show up and I think that'll be almost everyone I've seen more than once.

[(PSN)sweatshawp]

1 minute ago, Aldain said:

I mean I recognize about 80% of the names in this topic for better or worse.

All we need is for somebody to mention Revenant and Gears will show up and I think that'll be almost everyone I've seen more than once.

What about revenant being useless?

[Gabbynaru]

1 hour ago, (PS4)sweatshawp said:

Again I’d the enemy’s are always better you’d not win.

 

and that’s terrible for a live service or a game that by design is supposed to keep you going it took me 700+ hours for eso to truly ‘master’ it (it’s a mastercraft pun) all my time spent in for honor and I can say with every new character I have to master fighting or defending against them. I can give more examples

Oh, you'd win. It's still a video game, unless they literally programmed an invincibility to the enemies, their life bar will go down eventually. But that victory would not be worth the effort or investment.

By whose definition is it bad to keep players hooked for "only" 300 hours? EA? Again, it's still 300 hours. I know in an ideal world, they'd love to keep us hooked 24/7 for all our lives, but we don't live in that world, no matter how sad Android Wilson or Bobby Kotick get when they hear that. 300 hours is still far more than they have managed at any other point in history. Just cause they ain't satisfied (cause they'll never be satisfied) doesn't mean 300 hours (HOURS) is anything to be scoffed at.

[(PSN)sweatshawp]

11 minutes ago, Gabbynaru said:

Oh, you'd win. It's still a video game, unless they literally programmed an invincibility to the enemies, their life bar will go down eventually. But that victory would not be worth the effort or investment.

By whose definition is it bad to keep players hooked for "only" 300 hours? EA? Again, it's still 300 hours. I know in an ideal world, they'd love to keep us hooked 24/7 for all our lives, but we don't live in that world, no matter how sad Android Wilson or Bobby Kotick get when they hear that. 300 hours is still far more than they have managed at any other point in history. Just cause they ain't satisfied (cause they'll never be satisfied) doesn't mean 300 hours (HOURS) is anything to be scoffed at.

The typical dedicated or invested player in a rpg or mmmo esque game spends upwards to 500+ hours in a live service game. Given wfs low retention rates and decline in active players  that’s down drastically 

[Gabbynaru]

1 hour ago, (PS4)sweatshawp said:

The typical dedicated or invested player in a rpg or mmmo esque game spends upwards to 500+ hours in a live service game. Given wfs low retention rates and decline in active players  that’s down drastically 

Yeah, and I'm pretty sure the dedicated Warframe players also spend far more than 500 hours in it as well. Plus, upwards doesn't mean average. If 500 is the upper limit, then Warframe's 300 hours is probably well in the average ballpark.

[(PSN)sweatshawp]

55 minutes ago, Gabbynaru said:

Yeah, and I'm pretty sure the dedicated Warframe players also spend far more than 500 hours in it as well. Plus, upwards doesn't mean average. If 500 is the upper limit, then Warframe's 300 hours is probably well in the average ballpark.

The average is about 500+ for live service games like or similar to wf. In that regard wf is underperforming by a good bit 

[(PSN)sweatshawp]

56 minutes ago, Gabbynaru said:

Yeah, and I'm pretty sure the dedicated Warframe players also spend far more than 500 hours in it as well. Plus, upwards doesn't mean average. If 500 is the upper limit, then Warframe's 300 hours is probably well in the average ballpark.

Not to mention that if you’re only getting 300 hours or peak at progression at 300 hours in a game that’s been going on as long as wf that’s not good either 

[Goodwill]

3 hours ago, George_PPS said:

Well said! Nerfing killed many games. Hopefully it isn’t killing warframe slowly. From what I understand and have checked nerfers’ profiles again and again, most nerfing requests are players asking DE to nerf others’ best frames and most powerful weapons. It’s almost universally “if I don’t have it or I don’t know how to build it to be as strong as others using those gears, DE please nerf them so I can kill more” mentality.

This is extremely toxic in a game that isn’t mostly PvE and not much PvP. 

Power creep has also been killing Warframe. Or haven't you noticed the plethora of threads of people saying Warframe is dying, people aren't staying on after updates? No sustainable content? Etc... I recall Warframe being more active back when running a mission was more meaningful. Warframe's popularity or fame probably peaked (not in terms of numbers but positive reception to negative reception) prior to the power creep. So by that logic, nerfing isn't killing Warframe, power creep has. And more power creep isn't going to fix Warframe like how more bandaids will not fix a wound. 

[Raikh]

vor 6 Stunden schrieb 844448:

Here's the question for you, what is the thing you consider as reasonable difficulty? So far endgame content on other games always utilize nonsensical system as difficulty from invincibility to one hit kill/team wipe and with how strong our warframe is, how do you make it reasonable?

You don't need invulnerability or oneshot mechanics at all. Not even games that are designed to be difficult need oneshots. The fewest of attacks in Dark Souls oneshot you unless you yourself made you into an absolute glass cannon on purpose.

Reasonable difficulty would be something like being punished by mistakes but still being able to recover if you do something right after taking a hit and having enemies live long enough to be able to be a threat, to be able to be target of your abilities without evaporizing but not taking ages to kill assuming your weapon/frame builds aren't a total blunder.

I think the main issue with warframe is how far apart the possible and the accessible are. You are so sky high above the power of the enemies you are supposed to fight, that too much of the power progression has no place to exercise that power. People could kill 300+ enemies just fine around the time Second Dream hit and back then we were so much weaker. No Blood Rush, CO, Hunter Munitions, weaker weapons, fewer storng weapons in general, no umbral mods and quite a few Warframes were significantly weaker back then.

But since that time we haven't gotten really any content to even try to match the power increase. Sorties have been around since then and haven't moved an inch and they were trivial back then. ESO and Abritrations only go above Sortie 3 level well into the thing and the difference between 100 and 120 isn't a huge deal, especially for unarmored enemies the health increase up to 200 isn't something hugely concerning for the player. The only thing that gets cocnerning is how hard enemies hit and I find that, too, problematic,

Base survivabiltiy for most frames is a joke. So many frames rely on ludicrous damage reductions on their abilities to operate and so many frames that don't have access to such survivability or similar means like stealth don't see play in that content very much because they can just get deleted out of nowhere. Player survivability and enemy survivability are heavily disjointed and should be rought in line, so that enemies getting tougher and dealing more damage at the same time, so people have to think how they balance that themselves. DIablo 3 figured that out quite decently in the late stages of its lifespan.

Armor and ability nullification are also problematic. Armor on enemies hsouldn't scale with level. Increase their hp x1000 if you have to but make armor a fixed value. Effective health of armored enemies just runs away compared to non armored because armor behaves multiplicatively to health, while shields are additive in nature. It also causes armored enemies to be the squishiest things in the solar system when you remove the armor which has been growing in accessibility, too, and 4x CP is still a thing for groups.
Ability nullification is an issue ebcause more and more frames are built upon constantly using abilities to stay alive or be able to operate as more as a dude with a gun. If enemies cancel or block or are immune to abilities you destroy the inteded gameplay loop for such frames and create a meta where a lot of frames aren't played while others thrive unhindered because they buff weapons or just live indepnedent of abilities. It doesn't solve player power in some cryptonite style way, it simply discrimintaes between different warframe designs.
You can make ability dmg reductions, you can make cc duration reductions. You can make it so a boss is immune to non-weapon damage until you dealt a certain amount of damage and then he opens up to being damaged with abilities and debuffs, so you have dedicated nuke phases without it being mesa standing there in peacemaker 24/7.
If a nullifier decreased abiliy dmg taken in an area around himself by 90% and reduced cc duration by 90% you could still use the abilites, still prepare stuff but you are incetivized to snipe the nulli down before you can really go ham, but your effort isn't undone, your survivability isn't being purged etc. etc.

So all in all, a lot of stuff is numbers. Bring the content closer to player throughput. Bring thorughput and survivability sclaing for enemies and frames closer together. Remove ability cancellations and general immunities and make them conditional reductions or conditional nuke phases, so players can interact with the mechanics and make the game less binary on all ends.

Edited October 27, 2019 by Raikh
typos

[George_PPS]

11 hours ago, Goodwill said:

Power creep has also been killing Warframe. Or haven't you noticed the plethora of threads of people saying Warframe is dying, people aren't staying on after updates? No sustainable content? Etc... I recall Warframe being more active back when running a mission was more meaningful. Warframe's popularity or fame probably peaked (not in terms of numbers but positive reception to negative reception) prior to the power creep. So by that logic, nerfing isn't killing Warframe, power creep has. And more power creep isn't going to fix Warframe like how more bandaids will not fix a wound. 

Correlation doesn’t imply causation. Based on your logic, we can also say that the nerfing has been killing Warframe slowly after it all started nerfing here and there since 18 months ago.  Several of my most enthusiastic friends with many min-maxed loadouts have all left Warframe one by one after their heavily time and plat invested gears got nerfed to the ground. Nerfing what players have invested in is extremely disrespectful to players time and play investment in the name of balance. 

Edited October 27, 2019 by George_PPS

[DeMonkey]

1 hour ago, George_PPS said:

Several of my most enthusiastic friends with many min-maxed loadouts have all left Warframe one by one after their heavily time and plat invested gears got nerfed to the ground. Nerfing what players have invested in is extremely disrespectful to players time and play investment in the name of balance. 

Several of my most enthusiastic friends with many min-maxed loadouts have all left Warframe one by one after their heavily time and plat invested gear caused the game to be an unrewarding mess.

Leaving the game in such a state is extremely disrespectful to players time spent providing feedback and accruing gear that there's no point or value in using, in the name of 'keeping certain people happy'.

This is how anecdotes work.

[Goodwill]

 

30 minutes ago, George_PPS said:

Correlation doesn’t imply causation. Based on your logic, we can also say that the nerfing has been killing Warframe slowly after it all started nerfing here and there since 18 months ago.  Several of my most enthusiastic friends with many min-maxed loadouts have all left Warframe one by one after their heavily time and plat invested gears got nerfed to the ground. Nerfing what players have invested in is extremely disrespectful to players time and play investment in the name of balance. 

 

14 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

Several of my most enthusiastic friends with many min-maxed loadouts have all left Warframe one by one after their heavily time and plat invested gear caused the game to be an unrewarding mess.

Leaving the game in such a state is extremely disrespectful to players time spent providing feedback and accruing gear that there's no point or value in using, in the name of 'keeping certain people happy'.

This is how anecdotes work.

Re-quoting because the monkey took the words right out of my mouth.

[(XBOX)Knight Raime]

Self limiting is only a valid counter point when arguing from power fantasy type games or RPG's.  Warframe is neither.  It's first and foremost a grind based horde game that's based entirely around being efficient.  Of course there is diminishing returns to said efficiency at some point and once you have basically everything gameplay becomes more about finding creative ways to enjoy old content.  but that doesn't change what the game is designed as.

There's nothing wrong with people wanting to have challenging content and we absolutely would need to be nerfed (likely in the energy economy area the most.  Followed by weapon mods,) in addition to adjusting enemies to have decent AI and not be just sponges.  (along with other big meaningful changes.)

The issue is that's basically rebooting the game of which isn't practical or profitable.  So DE's best avenue here is to create a seperate piece of content that doesn't behave like warframe at all i.e railjack and the kuva lich system.

[Loza03]

1: Players shouldn't be expected to do DE's job for them. If there's a balance issue that causes issues with Warframe's replayability, or even its first-time experience, it's on the developers to fix it. if there is a problem with the game, it is the job of the people who make the game to fix it.

2: Not every player will do that, and DE has to design 'hard' content around the highest common denominator. DE cannot introduce 'hard' content and then ask the community to make it hard for them, as said above, so DE will have to make any 'hard' content around the idea that it's 'hard' for the meta-nuts. And that's how we get the Wolf, a pleasant challenge to meta-heads, a boring, dull, bullet sponge slog to anybody who doesn't want to wander around with a Tsar Bomba in their back pocket. In turn, that somewhat forces the people who don't want to be hyper-powerful into being so anyway. In other words, this argument ironically defeats itself long-term.

3: Unrestricted power has effects that aren't immediately obvious. Everyone knows the basics: kill-stealing and the debates around it, 'its too easy', so on, so forth. Thing is, since unrestricted power enables extremely low-effort gameplay, it also leads to low-effort FARMING. In turn, that exacerbates the existing problem of too much stuff going into the economy too fast. Anybody who's read a history book about pre-WW2 Germany  knows what happens when too much 'currency' enters the market too fast. Now, power isn't solely to blame for this (lack of good resource sinks is another), but it's not exactly helping matters either. You want to stop hyperinflation, you don't just get better at burning money - you also slow down how fast people are printing it.

[Aldain]

20 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

Anybody who's read a history book about pre-WW2 Germany  knows what happens when too much 'currency' enters the market too fast.

Zimbabwe was also bad with this, for a while 100 trillion Zimbabwe dollars (which had an actual bill by the way) were worth only 40 U.S. cents.

[(PSN)sweatshawp]

1 hour ago, DeMonkey said:

Several of my most enthusiastic friends with many min-maxed loadouts have all left Warframe one by one after their heavily time and plat invested gear caused the game to be an unrewarding mess.

Leaving the game in such a state is extremely disrespectful to players time spent providing feedback and accruing gear that there's no point or value in using, in the name of 'keeping certain people happy'.

This is how anecdotes work.

Wow we’re agreeing on things I like this sir monkey

[Arcira]

That logic is flawed because Warframe isn´t a sand box game. Creating difficulty in order to provide purpose for the loot chase in a looter shooter is on the developer not the player side.

[(XBOX)Th3BelovedSaint]

22 hours ago, DrakeWurrum said:

You're getting this very wrong.

The game allows us, and encourages us, to build up power and get as powerful as we can. The game constantly rewards us with things that increase our power.

We should feel good about that. We shouldn't have to actively refuse to get more powerful to have challenge. The game should provide us with more challenge to match our increasing power.

If players have to arbitrarily limit themselves rather than making use of the game's systems for improving your character, then the game is designed badly. The choice to be powerful or weak is not a choice.

It makes literally NO sense to gimp yourself just so that you can feel challenged while pursuing rewards that make you powerful, only to not make yourself more powerful.

^this

", then the game is designed poorly."

You nailed it. Crippling a weapon is never the answer. Make scaling work.

[(XBOX)Th3BelovedSaint]

2 hours ago, George_PPS said:

Correlation doesn’t imply causation. Based on your logic, we can also say that the nerfing has been killing Warframe slowly after it all started nerfing here and there since 18 months ago.  Several of my most enthusiastic friends with many min-maxed loadouts have all left Warframe one by one after their heavily time and plat invested gears got nerfed to the ground. Nerfing what players have invested in is extremely disrespectful to players time and play investment in the name of balance. 

Yes, and Amen!

[(PSN)sweatshawp]

10 minutes ago, (XB1)Th3BelovedSaint said:

", then the game is designed poorly."

You nailed it. Crippling a weapon is never the answer. Make scaling work.

If scaling was implemented based off the strongest weapons then we’d be killing things for minutes. You guys don’t want this to be “shot that thing for 5 monutes str8 to kill” simulator right?

[(XBOX)Th3BelovedSaint]

1 minute ago, (PS4)sweatshawp said:

If scaling was implemented based off the strongest weapons then we’d be killing things for minutes. You guys don’t want this to be “shot that thing for 5 monutes str8 to kill” simulator right?

Breaking a weapon does nothing to fix what is broken in the game. It just adds yet another broken thing to the game and insults those who have time and resources invested in the weapon, frame, etc. 

[(PSN)sweatshawp]

Just now, (XB1)Th3BelovedSaint said:

Breaking a weapon does nothing to fix what is broken in the game. It just adds yet another broken thing to the game and insults those who have time and resources invested in the weapon, frame, etc. 

Honestly after all this hubub I went and built a catchmoon tested it and personally it’s a really strong weapon. The fall off is being changed so it works more like an arca plasmore making it more effective at closer range then a sniper aoe. It’s functionality is changing to that of a shotgun really.... big deal

[Raikh]

A lot of the nerfs are happening because the games playground is so vastly outmatched against what players have access to.

Lets take the Catchmoon as it was mentioned and is the next nerf candidate. Catchmoon doesn't have the highest dps among secondaries. Catchmoon isn't a huge AoE room clearer either and there are weapons with a bigger AoE, too. Catchmoon does high damage, has AoE and is very practical. The thing is you simply don't get rewarded by using less practical weapons. If everything just dies in the general direction catchmoon points at why use a weapon that does more damage or covers more area but is more complex to use, requires better aim or has some damage ramp or kills via DoTs. The simple answer is: there is no point.

People simply have realized that there is no point in using anything but Catchmoon because there is no need for anything that isn't as practical as it is even if it were to be vastly more powerful.
What adds to that is that Catchmoon is excellent at dealing with Arbritration drones. Because those like to hide in enemy groups its much easier to just shoot through the group and blow it up rather than trying to aim at it with a higher damage weapon that can't pierce through all the enmies in the way or simply has a better chance of missing.
So atleast for moderate length Arbitrations (sub 2h) you will hardly find a better weapon to deal with that particular mechanic.

Cathcmoon isn't numerically OP. Catchmoon is a product of circumstance. First enemies are too weak for stronger weapons to win over its practicaility. Secondly its favorable against a very badly designed mechanic (Arbi drones) that also stem from players vastly overpowering normal enemies.

And its a lot of nerfs that happen because of these circumstances and a lot the WF meta is deifned by them. Sliding melees also don't really feature staggeringly brutal dps. They are good for sure, but the sheer practicality and the lack of need for more dps is what makes it so dominant and meta defining, not the actual damage the weapon does.

Edited October 28, 2019 by Raikh
typos