My argument against nerfing weapons based on popularity. (Please read DE)

[(PSN)FK2P]

DE nerf weapons based on popularity. This is not a good system for multiple reasons.

Firstly, the content most players play within 99% of the time (level 30-45) is not effected by OP weapons, and therefor, if I am hitting a 300.000 crit with my Daiyku, it still only kills ONE or TWO enemies. This is the problem with nerfs. They don’t EFFECT the games core content at all.

I can one-shot a group of enemies in an average public match with a semi-built soma with about 3 or 4 mods on it. I can also one-shot a group of enemies with a fully built and riven modded soma. The effect on gameplay is minimal. A Soma Prime with a 5 disposition would offer me NO advatange between the levels casual players play at. My TTK is the same as anyone else even with that extra damage, but it would however allow me to play very high into the levels which I like doing very much, after all, what’s the point of having a game where you flex your gear when there’s nothing really to flex?

Think about the chroma/tonkor nerf all those years ago, was it really needed? Sure it did huge numbers, but only to a small area and only twice per reload. Also take into account that you are synergising with a DPS warframe, which was the main role of chroma? Are we not allowed to have DPS role warframes and synergy while simultaniously you design DPS warframes, then a year later nerf them to the ground after our money has been spent?

Secondly, for the argument of bosses and eidolons being one shotted, most bosses have multiple stages and invunerable stages, also times when you have to use operator etc, multiple ways around this potentaial issue. Most players use one single warframe for hunting which boosts DPS anyway. Most of the new bosses such as the orb mother and the ropololist only are vulnerable to weapon damage at the very end of the mission...

Thirdly: If I pay 2000-8000 platinum for a perfect riven, YES, I am going to use that weapon most of the time from now on, I just spent potentially 300$ on a riven, 

It might be able to kill effectively at level 170 instead of 140, but... does that really matter? What exactly does that change. Why is a nerf to that weapon valid just because I choose to use it often.

I don’t use this weapon 90% of the time because it’s the only good weapon in the game, I use it that often because I have rolled or bought a great riven for it, and it’s miles better than any of my other weapons out there BECAUSE I don’t have rivens for them yet.

Fourthly, when you have weapons like the HARPAK, which literally has a bandaid mod for it which increases its crit chance by 300%, and a riven on top with high disposition still cannot push that weapon into the top tier weapons. ITS TIME TO BUFF THE DAMN WEAPON.

If I was employed at DE, i could balance out the weapons within a day, it’s really easy to see the ones that fall behind. They have low base damage, low crit and status or low slash potential. If a weapon doesn’t have 2 or 3 of these, it’s not going to be used at all by anyone, riven or not.

If the synapse for instance had about 10-30 extra base elemental damage added to it, it would be a top tier weapon. Just the smallest changes to these older weapons is required. 

The twin kohmak, perhaps a small buff again to the base slash damage, perhaps buff it to 27% status to allow for the damage to build up through modding.

The Veldt, an absolute train wreck of a weapon, I’ve seen it max modded, and it’s a slow weapon which fires bullets with similar damage to an assault rifle. Who then thinks, hey let’s punish players who don’t use these weapons that are poorly designed and largely ignored by the entire community.

I do agree however that the catchmoon was too powerful but not because of its numbers, but because of how wide and long the projectiles are and how easy it made everything in the game like arbitrations. I hope the range is the only thing they nerf because to nerf numbers would be a useless and obnoxious thing to do to people who have spent a lot of money on this gun.

The KUVA weapons are a little bit of a joke to me too because your taking some bad weapons like the KARAK, giving it more “accuracy” and then slapping a really high MR on it for no reason. Surely this weapon which has a smaller clip than the soma prime should have at least 30% crit chance to bring it up to the soma’s level (not that the soma has been widely used because of how single shot projectiles do not scale well)

I don’t trust developers which say they are trying to balance weapons, but then simultaneously give a KARAK variant more accuracy, and give the KOHM more status chance? This to me feels like a CASH GRAB, and the next big nerf down the line. People spending up to 8000 platinum on kohm rivens might want to cool off. 

 

Edited November 14, 2019 by (PS4)FK2P

[Jutzo]

Couldn't bother with reading all of it but from what I've gathered from looking at it for 15 seconds I got this.

They won't make them better, it's not about 30-45 level content that makes them nerf it, it of course is about all the high level content. If what you propose (what I think you propose)is, that DE should bump up the riven dispositions or make the stats overall better, people who play endgame would make high level missions easier as your weapons could become even more stronger and potentially buffing most melees too hard, as every little damage gets multiplied by blood rush and condition overload (and other various mods). I think it's good as it is right now, except for when a riven is worse for a gun than a normal non riven build, if the weapon gets worse with a riven, DE has to make a change to the riven dispositions.

Edited November 14, 2019 by Jutzo

[(PSN)AyinDygra]

Balance by popularity will never be a good basis for balance changes.

It's a symptom stat.

It's not a reason stat.

It doesn't necessarily mean something is overpowered... it could be "just right" powered to deal with content in the game... feels comfortable to use, good handling, good physics, good hitboxes... whatever... it could be that nebulous of a reason.

Other options could just be that bad for the people who like the popular option instead. It doesn't mean the other weapons are necessarily underpowered (though, usually they are), or they just handle in a clunky manner, bad reload speeds, bad hitboxes, jerky movements, bad stances, whathaveyou. The difference could be as simple as projectile vs hitscan.

Then you have to look at the role the weapon is filling... and how other options compare in filling that role, which is largely not stat dependent. Such as:

Clearing trash enemies quickly (which doesn't require power, but good hitboxes and handling and reload speed or magazine size to reduce downtime while reloading and being mauled to death by the hordes that just got in range because you weren't killing them.) Is it a status spreading monster that supplements the now extinct Condition Overload mechanic? Do you need to empty a clip into a priority target to make a dent in them? Can you "spray and play", or does that eat too much of a limited ammo capacity?

Or is it a weakspot/elite/boss killer that deals out big hits to take out priority targets? Does it have good sights, good ammo economy, good handling (because recoil pattern can kill a sniper for me). What is the zoom level? Some zooms are useless to me.  I mean, you'll need such a weapon to be strong, even if it's popular... because that's what it's for. What is it's niche? Does it deal elemental damage? Crits? (Snipers won't be status over time weapons - unless there's some unique mechanic that makes those status effects stronger, so one hit that inflicts the status will kill the enemy before they can become dangerous to you...) Does it have a useful niche? Does it matter if only one weapon fills one niche, and that's the biggest niche in the game for that weapon type?

 

There is SO MUCH that goes into GOOD balancing, that watching a stream where they cite "50%+" of the playerbase is using this weapon means it's overpowered... is garbage reasoning. Sorry.

 

 

Edit: (added this part)

Then you have the "outside forces" factors, like limited inventory space meaning that people will latch onto the most effective weapon they've found so far, or the most comfortable weapon for their gameplay style. I know I did this - I found that I liked a certain weapon and how its hitbox worked and it fit my playstyle perfectly. There were other stronger weapons, but I used the one I liked.

Then there's the cost/rarity of catalysts, reactors & forma. People sink resources into weapons. If they don't have the resources to put into the next better thing, the thing they've already invested in will be better, regardless of the rest of the stats.

Or, as mentioned, they got a riven for that weapon, and will not take it off until they get a riven for another weapon that makes a competitor item for that same slot actually worth using.

 

I could keep going...

Edited November 14, 2019 by (PS4)AyinDygra
added outside forces that lead people to stick to one weapon

[(PSN)FK2P]

21 minutes ago, (PS4)AyinDygra said:

Balance by popularity will never be a good basis for balance changes.

It's a symptom stat.

It's not a reason stat.

It doesn't necessarily mean something is overpowered... it could be "just right" powered to deal with content in the game... feels comfortable to use, good handling, good physics, good hitboxes... whatever... it could be that nebulous of a reason.

Other options could just be that bad for the people who like the popular option instead. It doesn't mean the other weapons are necessarily underpowered (though, usually they are), or they just handle in a clunky manner, bad reload speeds, bad hitboxes, jerky movements, bad stances, whathaveyou. The difference could be as simple as projectile vs hitscan.

Then you have to look at the role the weapon is filling... and how other options compare in filling that role, which is largely not stat dependent. Such as:

Clearing trash enemies quickly (which doesn't require power, but good hitboxes and handling and reload speed or magazine size to reduce downtime while reloading and being mauled to death by the hordes that just got in range because you weren't killing them.) Is it a status spreading monster that supplements the now extinct Condition Overload mechanic? Do you need to empty a clip into a priority target to make a dent in them? Can you "spray and play", or does that eat too much of a limited ammo capacity?

Or is it a weakspot/elite/boss killer that deals out big hits to take out priority targets? Does it have good sights, good ammo economy, good handling (because recoil pattern can kill a sniper for me). What is the zoom level? Some zooms are useless to me.  I mean, you'll need such a weapon to be strong, even if it's popular... because that's what it's for. What is it's niche? Does it deal elemental damage? Crits? (Snipers won't be status over time weapons - unless there's some unique mechanic that makes those status effects stronger, so one hit that inflicts the status will kill the enemy before they can become dangerous to you...) Does it have a useful niche? Does it matter if only one weapon fills one niche, and that's the biggest niche in the game for that weapon type?

 

There is SO MUCH that goes into GOOD balancing, that watching a stream where they cite "50%+" of the playerbase is using this weapon means it's overpowered... is garbage reasoning. Sorry.

 

 

Edit: (added this part)

Then you have the "outside forces" factors, like limited inventory space meaning that people will latch onto the most effective weapon they've found so far, or the most comfortable weapon for their gameplay style. I know I did this - I found that I liked a certain weapon and how its hitbox worked and it fit my playstyle perfectly. There were other stronger weapons, but I used the one I liked.

Then there's the cost/rarity of catalysts, reactors & forma. People sink resources into weapons. If they don't have the resources to put into the next better thing, the thing they've already invested in will be better, regardless of the rest of the stats.

Or, as mentioned, they got a riven for that weapon, and will not take it off until they get a riven for another weapon that makes a competitor item for that same slot actually worth using.

 

I could keep going...

Oh, fantastic post dude. Upvoted. Absolutely

[(PSN)FK2P]

1 hour ago, Jutzo said:

Couldn't bother with reading all of it but from what I've gathered from looking at it for 15 seconds I got this.

They won't make them better, it's not about 30-45 level content that makes them nerf it, it of course is about all the high level content. If what you propose (what I think you propose)is, that DE should bump up the riven dispositions or make the stats overall better, people who play endgame would make high level missions easier as your weapons could become even more stronger and potentially buffing most melees too hard, as every little damage gets multiplied by blood rush and condition overload (and other various mods). I think it's good as it is right now, except for when a riven is worse for a gun than a normal non riven build, if the weapon gets worse with a riven, DE has to make a change to the riven dispositions.

Endgame missions have no unique reward. There is no reason to need weapons that don’t interrupt gameplay. Things get nerfed because of two reasons, 1: one shooting bosses and eidolons, and 2: room clearing. These disrupt gameplay.

[peterc3]

16 hours ago, (PS4)FK2P said:

Thirdly: If I pay 2000-8000 platinum for a perfect riven, YES, I am going to use that weapon most of the time from now on, I just spent potentially 300$ on a riven, 

And this is supposed to mean what to DE? You didn't pay that Plat to DE, so they don't care. You merely moved Plat to another player.

16 hours ago, (PS4)FK2P said:

If I was employed at DE

You would never make it past the first interviews. You can't see past your own view and your logic is shaky, at best. Things aren't just nerfed because they are popular, they are nerfed because they are beyond popular. There's never a good reason why the vast majority of your players are all using the same weapon. Beyond the gameplay, this basically removes any RoI for other weapons.

[Tenno76856]

Balance by popularity = DE encouraging people to try and use the other weapons.No point making new ones if people think a certain weapon will just kill everything. Lets face it. Average player wont try and mod stuff, look at crits red orange or otherwise etc. They just want stuff that kills fast and simple ... OP kills fast... Many will just got simple route.

[Taiepii]

As you said in one line. "Buff the damn weapon". 

Nerfing is a problem already. 

But never buffing other weapon is a bigger deal. Cause many weapon out there are fun and have amazing alt-fire or passive but just not interesting due to the lack of fire power. 

 

Buzlok is my very best exemple. Who ever heard Buzlok in-game and know its alt-fire ? One of the funiest against Boss ? 

There is other weapon I have in head but couldnt bother find the name if no Dev would actually read the post. 

[SenorClipClop]

On 2019-11-14 at 2:07 PM, (PS4)FK2P said:

DE nerf weapons based on popularity. This is not a good system for multiple reasons.

This is a gross misunderstanding. DE uses popularity as a form of diagnostic, but it is far from the only figure they use to balance weapons.

Overwhelming popularity of a certain weapon or frame typically indicates that the popular thing is significantly stronger than all other choices, and so when the metrics get really skewed it causes DE to focus in on that weapon and consider why it's so popular. Then if the weapon's apparent strength or particular setup is so strong that it's hedging out player choice, something changes. This can be in the form of a nerf (like the Catchmoon range nerf after it was accounting for 60% of all Secondary use), a buff (like moving Vacuum to all Sentinels after Carrier was accounting for 75% of Companion use) or a more nuanced change (Bladestorm is stronger but must be aimed after everyone kept spamming Ash). Popularity brings attention to potential imbalances, they aren't just witch-hunting popular things. The newest frames are typically the most popular for a while and they don't hand out nerfs to those.

 

TL;DR:

What OP thinks is going on in the studio: "It's really popular" -> "Nerf it".

What's actually going on: "It's really popular" -> "Why?" -> "Oh, it's so much stronger than everything in its class that it removes any incentive for players to use anything else" -> "Nerf it". 

[Gurpgork]

On 2019-11-13 at 11:07 PM, (PS4)FK2P said:

Think about the chroma/tonkor nerf all those years ago, was it really needed? Sure it did huge numbers, but only to a small area and only twice per reload.

It's worth pointing out here that most of the other good guns at the time had either AoE or good damage, and not both. The Tonkor was one of the only exceptions to that, having tremendous damage and AoE while also being incredibly easy to use and really easy to acquire (MR 5 and 2 argon crystals lol). It was also a time before almost all of the powerhouse weapons we have today, so it was competing with the likes of the Soma Prime, and not, say, the Lenz or the Tigris Prime, and melee couldn't exactly compete with it either, because this predated Condition Overload. 

Like maybe today the Tonkor wouldn't necessarily overshadow the entire catalog of weapons in this game, but at the time, it eclipsed pretty much everything else, and that context is pretty important to consider. There was almost no situation where it was possible to justify using any other weapon (except for the Synoid Simulor, which did less damage, but was even easier to use, had better AoE, and restored energy, so it was just as much of a problem child). 

Also, Chroma was nerfed because his calculations were bugged. Vex Armor's math multiplied elemental damage twice, which created a damage buff that was impossible to compete with. It was almost as good as Sonar without the aiming requirement. 

[(XBOX)GearsMatrix301]

Catchmoon needed a nerf regardless of popularity.

[BegunValkery]

I really wish they would buff other weapons instead of nerfing others. I have weapons and rivens for them, and they are still not as good.

[Aadi880]

19 minutes ago, BegunValkery said:

I really wish they would buff other weapons instead of nerfing others. I have weapons and rivens for them, and they are still not as good.

I think there is a line that DE does not want to cross, where buffing things too much ends up making the game lose any potential in difficulty. However, considering how easy we have made lv 200 enemies, it seems that DE does not want to buff anything anymore.

Buffing weapons would mean you need to buff enemies that can take the weapon on to prevent content being trivialised, which in turn makes the weapon feel weak. Nasty little paradox there.

[kapn655321]

There are weapons you craft yourself, color your way, invest exilus/forma/catalysts/endo into
to experience it's furthest extents..

Many of those weapons, Post investment- within the core body of content are so laughably
off the mark from the damage one needs for a mission, that players will occasionally be
Demoralized to see them brought in game. Players can become demoralized, because such
Clear Better Options Exist. "To Not take them, is to Want To Fail."

"Why dont you just use X??" Undermines the whole purpose of customizing, and trades it for
a puzzle game with only a few right answers. This only occurs when the difference between
using X, and not using X, is so Obviously and importantly better or worse for all the same jobs.

I see no problem with weapons doing crazy murderous damage; exceptions must be made
when others are So low against the same enemies, that it's very existence sabotages a
mission. Ideally, they don't touch those better options for being better.. they make the others
able to compete significantly enough in ways to not be a drag to have invested time, effort,
and personal preference into. However, practically from DE's perspective.. they're still not
done putting a massive chunk of the main story line in. Could you imagine? I'd be pretty darn
eager to get to tell the story I've been trying to tell for a decade straight.

Can they achieve spinning that many plates at once? Just rework every darn weapon from the
ground up while doing everything else? ...Regardless, they've endeavored to try with Melee.

If you were in their position, Do you?..:
Forget about literal hundreds of weapon options that are threateningly bad as relics and pitfalls
to mindlessly churn through and be dissatisfied with? Do you make all other weapons do 1
million to spare them? Then what of all the enemies being so instantly and thoroughly trivialized?

When everyone already knows the outcome is a certainty if you do the one special technique..
That has it's moments where coordinating and executing that is good, but then the game is too
easy as a whole, and the numbers are totally arbitrary. There can't be one clear special
technique that can always happen just so, and outshines all else to most players.

The nerfs are bandaids, when there is absolutely no other choice at that time in development.
For those weapons to be so good, the others can't be So Bad at the same time. There will need
to be a narrower margin of difference going forward with new expectations. Old mechanics have
also returned at times within the context of broad sweeping changes. This may yet happen as a
result of Primary Kit Guns,  as well as gun/damage in general. Judging by melee changes, I
have no reason to assume it wouldn't.

-Rework the enemy to not need millions of damage through cracks in exponential functions.
-Change up damage types to where they are all uniquely the best in more expressive ways.
-Make all elements stack in effect to give a result that expands on condition overload,
but not just damage for damage sake, in a way that outstrips other playstyles so clearly.
-Reward the intensity of a weapon on it's tier through mechanics that makes either end of the
scale more unique instead of better. (ex. Bigger AoEs aren't always better than well controlled
AoEs. Longer duration bonuses aren't always better than brief bonuses if the utility is the same.)

Just raw damage potential isn't the right way to make expressive and functional weapons across
this many options. 'Looks' should kill, too... because as we all know, fashion frame is end game.

Edited November 17, 2019 by kapn655321

[Monolake]

Yeha they should've changed Catchamon stats right way because it was bloody obvious to everyone it was an outlier - highest damage and innate punchtrough! Thats why everyone and their kubrow started to use it. Only DE couldn't see it for some reason.

Same with Ignis - it's just too convenient to mow down the hordes AND with high damage, so everyone uses it. And now the Acceltra.  Was it so hard to DE to see this and adjust the stats right away?

Popularity is just an inevitable outcome, the symptom of the underlying disease - wrecked balance when few weapons/frames are heads above the rest and kill everything much quicker so everyone picks them and the rest gathers dust. And ofcourse you will pick up Ignis/Acceltra and AOE spam frame too after you see that you simply have nothing left to kill with your bow after AOE-using player sweeps the room.

[BegunValkery]

On 2019-11-17 at 10:53 AM, Aadi880 said:

I think there is a line that DE does not want to cross, where buffing things too much ends up making the game lose any potential in difficulty. However, considering how easy we have made lv 200 enemies, it seems that DE does not want to buff anything anymore.

Buffing weapons would mean you need to buff enemies that can take the weapon on to prevent content being trivialised, which in turn makes the weapon feel weak. Nasty little paradox there.

Some weapons are just not as powerful as they should be. They're best being used to rank up and toss away. I can be using a weapon that I forma'd and even have a riven mod for, and it would still not be all too useful on npc's. Low-level npc's of course would be no trouble, but 60 and above are just too much of a hassle most of the time. And the Devs have no problem making that work, they programmed the game after all. I would rather look at buffing other weapons first and then nerf other ones.

[(PSN)RazorPhoenix970]

On 2019-11-14 at 8:07 AM, (PS4)FK2P said:

Thirdly: If I pay 2000-8000 platinum for a perfect riven, YES, I am going to use that weapon most of the time from now on, I just spent potentially 300$ on a riven, 

It might be able to kill effectively at level 170 instead of 140, but... does that really matter? What exactly does that change. Why is a nerf to that weapon valid just because I choose to use it often.

I don’t use this weapon 90% of the time because it’s the only good weapon in the game, I use it that often because I have rolled or bought a great riven for it, and it’s miles better than any of my other weapons out there BECAUSE I don’t have rivens for them yet.

An overvalued riven is your reason for using a certain weapon, speak for yourself...that is not universal logic. Weapon usage is based on use with and without rivens, a popular weapon means it is good for dealing with the content as stated here👇

 

On 2019-11-14 at 5:42 PM, (PS4)AyinDygra said:

It's a symptom stat.

It's not a reason stat.

It doesn't necessarily mean something is overpowered... it could be "just right" powered to deal with content in the game

However when a weapon becomes excessively popular like the catchmoon was then there is obviously something it does that few to no other weapons can hope to do in the eyes of the playerbase. Under normal circumstances there are other factors to consider when balancing ultimately leading to "do we bring other options to this level or do we bring this down" The answer is almost always the latter wherever you go.

 

On 2019-11-14 at 8:07 AM, (PS4)FK2P said:

If I was employed at DE, i could balance out the weapons within a day, it’s really easy to see the ones that fall behind. They have low base damage, low crit and status or low slash potential. If a weapon doesn’t have 2 or 3 of these, it’s not going to be used at all by anyone, riven or not.

It won't be used by you, again your word is not universal. If I'm reading this right you would more or less homogenise all weapons to tick your 2 or 3 boxes, if you were employed I guess we would be able to predict a weapon's stats well before launch since you're this predictable.

 

On 2019-11-14 at 8:07 AM, (PS4)FK2P said:

This to me feels like a CASH GRAB, and the next big nerf down the line.

Kuva weapons are obtained for free, rivens are luxury optionals which people make a big deal out of for some reason allowing themselves to be exploited in the player market. Balancing weapons is what DE has to do, whether that means you feel like your 800+ plat investment has gone to waste isn't DE's concern. That's also how investment tends to work in real life funny enough, consider it an accidental life lesson I guess.

On 2019-11-14 at 5:42 PM, (PS4)AyinDygra said:

There is SO MUCH that goes into GOOD balancing, that watching a stream where they cite "50%+" of the playerbase is using this weapon means it's overpowered... is garbage reasoning. Sorry

Like you said it's a symptom. A symptom of DE leaving balancing until it was too late and a backlash was inevitable

[DCaedus]

On 2019-11-14 at 12:07 AM, (PS4)FK2P said:

DE nerf weapons based on popularity. This is not a good system for multiple reasons.

I agree with this 100%

Specially for riven dispo.

[Uthael]

On 2019-11-14 at 7:07 AM, (PS4)FK2P said:

Fourthly, when you have weapons like the HARPAK, which literally has a bandaid mod for it which increases its crit chance by 300%, and a riven on top with high disposition still cannot push that weapon into the top tier weapons. ITS TIME TO BUFF THE DAMN WEAPON.

I have a great Harpak riven! ... It's still too hard to use to actually be useful. I mean... I'm better with Lanka than with Harpak for some reason.

Panthera would be a favorite weapon of many if they buffed the range on alt-fire. Right now, that range is a waste of a mod slot (=8th damage multiplier), which puts it beneath usable.

As for the Synapse... It's not Synapse that needs a buff, it's the Acceltra that needs the nerf. Compare ammo efficiencies, range, DPS and the number of targets affected by each.

[Chaemyerelis]

On 2019-11-16 at 12:32 AM, (XB1)GearsMatrix301 said:

Catchmoon needed a nerf regardless of popularity.

I was going to say the same thing. Catchmoon really trivialized a lot of content.

[DrBorris]

DE doesn't nerf things that are the most popular, they nerf things that are overwhelmingly most popular. And there is a pretty big difference between those two things. There will always be a most popular, but it is quite rare that anything breaks past "most" to "overwhelmingly most". When something does break past that it is generally because it is breaking some portions of the game, generally by trivializing combat to some degree.

Then if something is trivializing content, then the solution isn't to make everything else trivialize combat.

 

If you can't tell the difference between something being popular and being overwhelmingly popular, then honestly that is on you. DE is extremely predictable in what they nerf.

Edited December 8, 2019 by DrBorris