Empyrean bringing new type of grind.. stop!

[DoomFruit]

2 hours ago, Mints said:

Whereas what I mean is that he needs to prove it. His anecdote and opinion are not enough. Evidence is necessary to make claims like this.

That good enough for you? It's basically a Mk1 clantech reactor, but with a minor perk and costing approximately 4x more to build.

[GrimSinner]

2 hours ago, Mints said:

No honey, I don't hunt proof

This has meme written all over it!  lol

[0_The_F00l]

3 hours ago, taiiat said:

in the past when your goals did not have randomization on the items, to make things Rare Digital Extremes simply put Mods or w/e on rare-ish Enemies at astronomical drop rates.

which would you prefer? Kill 1000 Enemies and get nothing unless you 'win the lottery' to get that one thing, or have a range of Stats to deal with and/or tiered versions of Mods?
the way i see it, with Stat ranges and tiered Mods you can get something in the short term and get the final goal of it in the long term. so that you're not just waiting for 100 hours to get that one thing.

but i'm not going to tell you which of these two feels more/less rewarding to you, even if it seems like there's a clear 'winner'.

This is not the whole story ,

The problem is getting a better "Tier" does not mean you get better rewards,

There is already a low drop chance for the good stuff ,

On top of that once you get the good stuff it can be objectively inferior to the lower tier stuff.

I have had zetki 3 reactors better than Vidar (45 reactor vs 35 reactor), and Mk2 engines better than mk 3 (both zetki),

Its like you have to already win one lottery to participate in the chance to win the actual lottery.

[White_Matter]

You grind for hours and get that 2% chance drop only to learn that the drop has also random numbers(I still haven't gotten it btw). 

You finally come across the time gated sentient ship, only to learn that the ephemera has 5% drop chance from a container that doesn't always spawn and shedu parts may not even drop.

DE has gone full DE with this update.

[Olphalarepth]

4 minutes ago, White_Matter said:

You grind for hours and get that 2% chance drop only to learn that the drop has also random numbers(I still haven't gotten it btw). 

You finally come across the time gated sentient ship, only to learn that the ephemera has 5% drop chance from a container that doesn't always spawn and shedu parts may not even drop.

DE has gone full DE with this update.

TFW when what keeps you playing warframw is RNG

 

 

[Fl_3]

52 minutes ago, 0_The_F00l said:

This is not the whole story ,

The problem is getting a better "Tier" does not mean you get better rewards,

There is already a low drop chance for the good stuff ,

On top of that once you get the good stuff it can be objectively inferior to the lower tier stuff.

I have had zetki 3 reactors better than Vidar (45 reactor vs 35 reactor), and Mk2 engines better than mk 3 (both zetki),

Its like you have to already win one lottery to participate in the chance to win the actual lottery.

This hits the nail on the head.

Question, Why is it that after 30,40,50 hours of rail jacking, the game suddenly becomes fun if you play missions around Earth?

The balance feels wrong. The level of power we have when we finish Veil feels like the level of power we should have when we leave Earth. 

Lets look at the regular game mode. By the time you leave Earth for Venus, the mobs in your earth missions are no problem, the ones at Venus are tougher, but nothing that you can't deal with, and it feels that way until you find the balance and the game opens up into the glorious spinning. jumping, everything dies game that we love.

Railjack is the antithesis of that, and it's very unsatisfying.

But, it's only a matter of lack of balance.

Forcing players to rely on RNG to drop multiple things each with a less than 2% drop chance that are pretty much required and need to be maxed out to make the games introductory zone feel like fun?

Forcing players to use one specific archwing simply to have a chance of surviving outside the railjack and then stating that because people are only using that archwing and nothing else it must be op so your going to nerf it? I hate to tell you this, but there's only one archgun that works well as well, are you going to nerf that too? 

Balance can fix all of this and most of the other problems in railjack.

I wish I had the faith in DE that I had at the start of 2019, I wish I could say yes, there are problems but they're working on it, it'll be fixed soon!

It seems that these days they're always too busy working on the next big soon to be released unfinished, unpolished and full of bugs update to go back and finish, polish and debug the previous.

The fact that DE actually seems to believe that the problems in Old Blood were based on pacing and not the mind numbing levels of RNG as stated my many many people on the forums, twitter, reddit and actually voiced that opinion on a dev stream just shows how out of touch they are with the players.

I can see the potential in the past few updates, but, once they're released DE seems to lose interest in them as they start working on the next shiny new thing.

Here's hoping that when the fist devstream of the year arrives they announce that 2020 is going to be the year of fixing all the things and not another year of meaningless words scrawled on a white board.

[(PSN)Navalhabr]

Sigma Reactor MK3 is more than enough to clear Veil Solo. You don't need a  Perfect 100% Railjack for these low level missions. I don't know why veterans and youtuberes are complaining. Really Tenno's, we are better than this. 

My Build can MELT everything on Veil. I'm bored!

Lavan Shild MK3 = 861 Shield
Zekti Engines MK3 = +36.5 Km/h  +0.29 boost
Sigma Reactor MK3 = 50 Avionics, 100 flux
Zekti Cryophon MK3 +54.3% fire rate
Galvarc MK3

Bulkhead[zekti max]
Hull wave[vidar max]
Warhead[lavan max]
Polar Coil [zekti max]
Hyperstrike[Zekti max]
Section Density[Lavan max]  

Void Clock
Fire Supression

Particle Ram

 

[taiiat]

1 hour ago, 0_The_F00l said:

The problem is getting a better "Tier" does not mean you get better rewards,
On top of that once you get the good stuff it can be objectively inferior to the lower tier stuff.

There is already a low drop chance for the good stuff ,

i agree in principle probably. if nothing else would change, then definitely itemss' bottom and top ranges should be touching the Tier above and below it.
but, if i assume things will be a bit less asinine and multiple things will happen - Tiers overlapping on their Stat ranges to some degree could work if there were other systems to either upgrade items over time or increment to new Tiers or.... something so that there could be the feeling of getting "better than 100%" on an item.

this is already not an issue as it's been made very clear that Variants being nonsensically rare was not a good decision and will be remedied atleast to some degree in the future. currently it's silly how many items i had to throw away to just shy of max out my Ship on everything, but that's now how it will be so this time i'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on that aspect.

[nslay]

The way I view bad component/armament drops is that DE actually meant for you to have 225 Dirac instead of that component/armament drop.

Honestly, with a 30 wreckage limit? I kind of want Dirac to drop more often like it used to. But DE probably made components/armaments drop more often so you could have a better chance to find a better component/armament.

[Myscho]

Or they make Wreckage trading for easy plat grab

[IntheCoconut]

5 hours ago, SordidDreams said:

I want the old kind of grind back. The Hema and Sibear kind, where you just had to gather a ludicrous amount of resources. Yeah, sure, it took a long time, but at least you could see you were making steady progress. The average time-to-acquire may be similar, but with sub-2% drop rates and RNG stats on top of that, you're making no progress until you randomly hit the jackpot. And that just doesn't feel good.

Agreed. I like making steady progress toward a goal. When everything is left completely to RNG, it can make me feel pretty hopeless, frustrated, and maybe even feel like I'm losing my sanity when I can't see that I'm a step closer to achieving my goals. I've given up on acquiring certain mods and other rewards after spending days trying because the RNG is so punishing. I've learned from experience now to just look at the drop chance of things on the wiki and decide beforehand if I even want to bother. I can't imagine that's really how DE wants people to approach their content. But I dunno, I might be in the minority, and other people might do this content regardless of how poor their chances are.

[Mints]

5 hours ago, (PS4)Herrwann69 said:

Too bad. To inform yourself prior to make arbitrary statements is one of the best way to be credible on a discussion.

As opposed to making claims without anything to back it up, which I'm sure you think is the peak of reasonable discourse.

5 hours ago, Quimoth said:

You're not going to be able to have a discussion if you discredit things without proof and pretend to know it all better.

Whereas you're not going to be able to have a discussion if you make claims without proving them. If you don't have data to make educated extrapolations your argument isn't valid. Valid premises are required for valid conclusion.

[LSG501]

8 hours ago, Dauggie said:

Yes kuva weapons and rivens had it before but they were fine (I guess since no one bothered to voice against it).

UM... have you been missing the threads/comments about them because they've been pretty prevalent, especially on release.  Players have been asking for ways to lock riven stats, for fixed stats rather than rng and other things on rivens. 

Kuva weapons have had people asking for ways to 'level up' the low stats to higher stats, the removal of forced 5 forma for full xp from and 'better' ways to get the weapons we want.

 

As to the main topic... in all honesty, railjack was released unfinished and likely had next to no testing/balancing done beforehand and sp we're left being the beta testers as always...hopefully DE will listen to us and quickly fix the issues we have with the game modes after they come back from holidays

[Mints]

4 hours ago, DoomFruit said:

That good enough for you?

No, it's not good enough because it shows a reactor with three distinct stats, one of which is very high and the last of which has no determinate value unless someone actually knows the mechanics of how stats are assigned. In fact, Zetki reactors are specifically descibed as sacrificing avionics capacity for flux capacity and that is reflected in what you just posted. Unless you have an image of an MK1 Zetki with identical stats or better you've proven nothing. Next.

The OP of this thread claimed "mk1 has better stats than mk3." Prove it or go away.

P.S. If you post an image of an item that has more stats than the other you're still not proving anything. Example: An MK1 Engine that only has speed bonus has a higher speed bonus than an MK2 Engine that has both speed bonus and boost bonus. Show me an MK1 Reactor that's superior to an MK3 reactor with the same stat types but higher values. I doubt you can.

Edited January 3, 2020 by Mints

[IntheCoconut]

18 minutes ago, Mints said:

No, it's not good enough because it shows a reactor with three distinct stats, one of which is very high and the last of which has no determinate value unless someone actually knows the mechanics of how stats are assigned. In fact, Zetki reactors are specifically descibed as sacrificing avionics capacity for flux capacity and that is reflected in what you just posted. Unless you have an image of an MK1 Zetki with identical stats or better you've proven nothing. Next.

I might not be understanding this correctly, but doesn't the wiki show that you can get an MKIII that has worse stats than an MKII? Granted, I could be interpreting this wrong, and I only looked at reactors because that was the specific example given in this thread. https://warframe.fandom.com/wiki/Railjack/Components

Zetki MKII can roll between 5-30 for avionics, and 30-100 for flux.

The MKIII can roll between 10-50 for avionics, and 50-300 for flux.

So potentially you could get a pretty massive increase, but you still have a 60% chance to get stats that are worse or equal to your MKII range for avionics, meaning you only have a 40% chance of exceeding your MKII. For the flux its better, giving you a 60% chance that you'll roll higher than your MKII stats.

However–given that it costs 12 hours to research and a boat load of resources–it does seem silly to me that you have such a high chance to roll a complete flop on this component.

 

Edited January 3, 2020 by IntheCoconut

[Kaotyke]

11 minutes ago, Mints said:

No, it's not good enough because it shows a reactor with three distinct stats, one of which is very high and the last of which has no determinate value unless someone actually knows the mechanics of how stats are assigned. In fact, Zetki reactors are specifically descibed as sacrificing avionics capacity for flux capacity and that is reflected in what you just posted. Unless you have an image of an MK1 Zetki with identical stats or better you've proven nothing. Next.

¬_¬

Let me guess, a MKII doesnt count?

1 minute ago, IntheCoconut said:

I might not be understanding this correctly, but doesn't the wiki show that you can get an MKIII that has worse stats than an MKII?

It does. Look above for exemples.

[Mints]

9 minutes ago, IntheCoconut said:

So potentially you could get a pretty massive increase, but you still have a 60% chance to get stats that are worse or equal to your MKII range for avionics, meaning you only have a 30% chance of exceeding your MKII. 

You could, but that doesn't mean it's entirely random. From what I've observed in the parts that have dropped for me component modifiers make a significant difference in stat bonuses. For example, I've found an MK1 engine with a higher speed bonus than an MK2 engine, but the MK2 engine had a component modifier on top of its speed bonus. It is just as likely that stats are determined according to a weighted distribution that is partially random.

 

7 minutes ago, Kaotyke said:

Let me guess, a MKII doesnt count?

Your first two images are a pair of MKIIs and your third image has a component modifier (and is also MKIII), so no it doesn't count. Prove that MK1s have better stats than MK3s. That was the assertion. Prove it.

Edited January 3, 2020 by Mints

[IntheCoconut]

2 minutes ago, Kaotyke said:

*snip*

Dang, a nearly max-roll on the MKII and a nearly min-roll on the MKIII 😂

[IntheCoconut]

6 minutes ago, Mints said:

Your first two images are a pair of MKIIs and your third image has a component modifier, so no it doesn't count.

But don't all all MKIII come with a component modifier?  I guess if you think -15 avionics and -40 flux is worth a 10% chance of minor breach repair, okay? But...I dunno, I think you'd have a tough time arguing that one, that's a pretty steep exchange.

[Mints]

4 minutes ago, IntheCoconut said:

But don't all all MKIII come with a component modifier?  I guess if you think -15 avionics and -40 flux is worth a 10% chance of minor breach repair, okay? But...I dunno, I think you'd have a tough time arguing that one, that's a pretty steep exchange.

 I believe they do, but those component modifiers are not fixed either. They are assigned in a range of value as well. Some lower tier parts also have these modifiers. It stands to reason that this may affect how stats are assigned. I have a couple of theories as to why these things are happening, mostly relating to the math by which House-related stats are assigned, but I don't have enough data to say for sure. That's my point: There are a lot of people throwing around a lot of assumptions they can't actually prove in any capacity. First assumptions based on incomplete data are often incorrect.

Edited January 3, 2020 by Mints

[Kaotyke]

4 minutes ago, Mints said:

Your first two images are a pair of MKIIs and your third image has a component modifier (and is also MKII), so no it doesn't count. Prove that MK1s have better stats than MK3s. That was the assertion. Prove it.

Hell no.

None MK1 Reactors dont have any kind of Flux.

None MK2 Reactors dont have any Bonus Perk.

I could show you the best MK1 Vidar Reactor with better Avionics than the MK3 Zekti Reactor, because no one said WHICH House it is. However, if we show you a MK1 With the same/better Avionic as an MK2 you will come "But MK1 doesnt have Flux", if we show comparing a MK2 with a MK3 you will go "But MK3 has the extra perk".

I'm not going into this pigheaded argument.

[IntheCoconut]

2 minutes ago, Mints said:

 I believe they do, but those component modifiers are not fixed either. They are assigned in a range of value as well. It stands to reason that this may affect how stats are assigned. I have a couple of theories as to why these things are happening, mostly relating to the math by which House-related stats are assigned, but I don't have enough data to say for sure. That's my point: There are a lot of people throwing around a lot of assumptions they can't actually prove in any capacity. First assumptions based on incomplete data is often incorrect.

Are they though? The wiki is likely incomplete, but they don't show a range, they display a set number which leads me to believe that if you get the minor breach repair, its always going to be set at 10%. This is further reinforced in the other example at the top of the thread which shows a 50% chance to extinguish a new fire after 5s, which are the exact values listed on the wiki. I also haven't seen any MKII with modifiers, can you post yours as an example as it would be really helpful.

Edited January 3, 2020 by IntheCoconut

[Mints]

1 minute ago, Kaotyke said:

I could show you the best MK1 Vidar Reactor with better Avionics than the MK3 Zekti Reactor, because no one said WHICH House it is. However, if we show you a MK1 With the same/better Avionic as an MK2 you will come "But MK1 doesnt have Flux", if we show comparing a MK2 with a MK3 you will go "But MK3 has the extra perk".

So you conveniently ignore an additional property's value because it's inconvenient to your argument? How fun.

3 minutes ago, Kaotyke said:

I'm not going into this pigheaded argument.

Woe is me, I won't have to endure another logic fallacy.

[IntheCoconut]

1 minute ago, Mints said:

So you conveniently ignore an additional property's value because it's inconvenient to your argument? How fun.

Woe is me, I won't have to endure another logic fallacy.

Multiple people have posted examples of their MKIII having worse stats, the Wiki lists the stats showing its possible, even highly probably, to get worse stats than your MKII with very little trade-off in terms of modifiers. I personally take that as proof and evidence enough that you can waste your time and resources upgrading for a higher tier with worse stats.

If you want to keep debating on whether these modifiers justify their lower-than-MKII stats, so be it. If you want to post your own examples of your MKII having modifiers, or an MKIII with modifiers expressing a range instead of a set number like its shown on the wiki, than have at it.

As for me, I'm moving on and considering the case closed because regardless, the math on the wiki show its easy to get a MKIII that is worse than your MKII.

 

[Mints]

2 minutes ago, IntheCoconut said:

Are they though? The wiki is likely incomplete, but they don't show a range, they display a set number which leads me to believe that if you get the minor breach repair, its always going to be set at 10%.

In regard to your initial question: Perhaps. Though I think you might be misinterpreting me somewhat. I'm not speaking of the modifier's in-game value but rather its value in how stats are distributed. Hypothetically speaking, the way the game assigns stats to MKIII may actually be mathematically flawed when compared to lesser parts because of their intrinsic modifier. That's why it's important to have data and evidence.

6 minutes ago, IntheCoconut said:

I also haven't seen any MKII with modifiers, can you post yours as an example as it would be really helpful.

I checked my inventory but I'm pretty sure I scrapped it the same day. Now that you've mentioned it, in retrospect, I'm not entirely sure it was definitely an MKII. The stats were garbage and its component modifier was shield regen while boost is recharging so it was a waste of a slot to me.