Jump to content
[DE]Bear

Warframe Revised: Removing Self-Damage / Stagger Megathread

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
51 minutes ago, TheLexiConArtist said:

Not really arbitrary. It's moreso categorised by the type of radial - any chemical-reaction explosion has self-damage. A concussive blast (Sonicor) might not. Castanas are indiscriminate tesla chains. An EMP might not. You see this in things like the Quanta (despite blast, the cubes are still clearly something unconventional) whereas the only outlier in its time was the OG Tonkor, and we all know how that went.

There are some legitimate concerns as I mentioned in my thread, and my first post in this - allied collision being the top reason, but also the second lesson of history DE has forgotten; Simulor couldn't be given self-damage because its standard operating distance was already within range of the player. Cyanex projectile homing was not predictable, so self-damage was rightfully removed. The gameplay factor stands to reason why these don't have self-damage. However, now, we have those and things like Shraksun Scaffolds where you almost can't not stagger yourself. Big mistake.

Speaking of history, you bring up Trinity Link but that's got the same misappropriation as Allied Collisions: Self damage was never the root cause of either problem ('problem' in Trinity's case), it was merely a symptom (or catalyst for Trinity).
The collision itself affects more than self-damage, so treating that means suddenly nobody's blowing themselves up because a buddy jumped through them.
For Trinity, the root of the playstyle was additive resistances reaching 100% immunity - a problem which still exists on enemies as anyone who's taken a pure elemental weapon into Corpus or Enhancement Sorties will know all too well. Trinity only didn't have to worry about self-damage at all because the mod selection gave 100% Rad Resistance. Change (cap?) the additive resistance stacking and suddenly Link Trinity is less overbearing while the rest of the game is also healthier without a completely arbitrary and unintentional 'weapon literally does zero' condition.

I think that only "chemical-reaction explosion has self-damage" (if that was even applied 100%) is the very definition of "arbitrary" in a game with a multitude of (area effect) damage types. Using "gameplay factors" as a reason for inconsistent this-or-that is the same as saying that "this doesn't really work, so we have to make another arbitrary decision".

As to Trinity and the "misuse" of link, your definition of root and symptom are, to me, arbitrary 😉🙂. My suggestion would be to look at what was actually changed and what wasn't, Link and immunities still work mainly as before, without problems. Self-damage worked as before (up until now). But the distribution of self-damage through (any, not only Trinity's) link was removed. So there would be your root cause, the propagation of self-damage through (any) link. And that damage propagation might originally have been more of an unintended "coding consequence" rather than an informed design decision (like with Chroma & Vex armor). But my point with Trinity was simply that a niche usage of a single ability on a single warframe as a game mechanic is not something that can or should be used a reason to keep a "generally non-functional" mechanic in the game. Chroma & Vex armor shouldn't be used as a hostage to stop change and progress, since Chroma can be (totally) saved in other ways. Trinity is still a great warframe, even though "Castanas-Trin" is gone.

Edited by Graavarg
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I think that only "chemical-reaction explosion has self-damage" (if that was even applied 100%) is the very definition of "arbitrary" in a game with a multitude of (area effect) damage types. Using "gameplay factors" as a reason for inconsistent this-or-that is the same as saying that "this doesn't really work, so we have to make another arbitrary decision".

As to Trinity and the "misuse" of link, your definition of root and symptom are, to me, arbitrary 🙂. My suggestion would be to look at what was actually changed and what wasn't, Link and immunities still work mainly as before, without problems. Self-damage worked as before (up until now). But the distribution of self-damage through (any, not only Trinity's) link was removed. So there would be your root cause, the propagation of self-damage through (any) link. And that damage propagation might originally have been more of an unintended "coding consequence" than a design decision (like Chroma & Vex armor). But my point with Trinity was simply that a niche usage of a single ability on a single warframe as a game mechanic is not something that can or should be used a reason to keep a "generally non-functional" mechanic in the game. Chroma & Vex armor shouldn't be used as a hostage to stop change and progress, since Chroma can be (totally) saved in other ways.

Shrapnel, concussion and EMP all 'explode' out from their epicentre, but have wildly differing effects, protections-against, and danger thresholds. It's no more arbitrary than reality to allow for each of these to be treated differently as compared to each other, but consistently within themselves. Gameplay factors are an overriding necessity - look at the Shraksun now, it's an absolute travesty thanks to this lack of consideration. It has to be feasible. Either the gameplay forces self-damage to be excepted from those weapons, or their mechanics have to change - see the Simulor, which couldn't be given self-damage to fix it alongside the Tonkor when their meta days came to an end, because players would almost invariably be in that radius. Its reward was too great for a lacking drawback, but because self-damage was non-viable, mechanics were altered instead.

I'm afraid you're committing a 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' fallacy in your judgement of Link Trinity. The decision that was made does not define the constituent factors that led to it. In short - it was a mistake. Reflecting self-damage through link was only 'problematic' because, like Spores on a Molt, it was uncontrolled and removed engagement with enemies. With self-damage not 100% resisted, the dominance of the playstyle would have evaporated because you simply wouldn't be capable of matching the necessary output without overwhelming your risk - just ask any Trinity who messed up their jump so Aviator wasn't contributing, causing them to down themselves immediately. Self-damage transmitting through Link would have governed itself by virtue of its inherent risk.
Conversely, the true problem factor that allowed that playstyle is still present. Even before this mainline, if you could have gotten a pure radiation result on your self-damage weapon, you could have used the same build and point-blanked it without risking yourself, so long as you jumped. Enemies can still stack resistances (Sortie conditions, elemental Eximi auras, the oft-overlooked Shield Osprey resistance-buff mechanic present only in Sorties) to the point where they're fully immune in a completely uncontrolled and arbitrary circumstance that isn't design-intended.

Ergo, 100% additive resistance stacking was the core issue.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Preface: I don't like chroma, rarely play him since his 1 and 4 are useless, and think that the space-furry in a dragon fursuit is too stupid to be worth a whole damn quest.

That being said, the removal of self-damage is the biggest #*!%up for warframe 2020. Because a few genetic defects couldn't aim a weapon, now everyone has to suffer S#&$ like a scourge staggering the shooter with its primary fire. On top of that, the weapons that did self damage are basically useless. Without the risk of self damage and the damage they'd do, we now have a group of weapons that are effectively really S#&$ty bows. No fire-rate, slow projectile travel speed, no real damage anymore since splash damage is pitiful and the "buff" to the radius is piss poor, and now a stun mechanic that's annoying but doesn't do anything but discourage the use of the weapons as a whole.

I know DE isn't going to admit they're wrong on this one because apparently Chroma is such a cardinal sin that they're willing to gimp a #*!%ton of weaposn out of spite, but they're wrong. Any other shooter understands that lobbing explosives should be strong but risky to the player. It rewards careful shots with stupidly high damage. Explosives don't do that here, and since snipers are a thing, there's no reason to use a weapon that will annoy the user  without any payoff for it.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Honestly I'm really starting to feel like these forum posters have played the game much more than anyone in charge of changes. Nobody who plays this game would think these changes are anything but universally counterproductive. I get that warframe requires about as much skill as making tuna salad, but this change has somehow managed to be both pants-pissingly easy, and eternally frustrating.

I blame the forums, regardless. So many instances of "I blew myself up with a bramma" and now this is the result: dozens of weapons made functionally useless. And NOW they decide to say "Aim true", when good aim would have fixed a lot of those instances of bow-based suicide.

Edited by Rankii
I had more to say.
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A big MEH! from my side concerning AoE weapons.

In your efforts to somehow rebalance self-damage, you completely went the wrong way.

Again, I remind you that huge parts of the player base suggested lowering the self-damage to a reasonable amount. Don´t remove it, balance it.

What you now did to AoE weapons though makes them completely (!) irrelevant on higher levels. They will still be good to show off against newbies in lvl 15 defense missions (look at my big badda boom, noobs!) but with a 90% dmg reduction, what´s the purpose of using them in sorties or even arbitrations?? Why would any sane person use a kuva ogris or bramma (clunky, slow) if it only kills with a direct hit while you could easily achieve the same result with a much easier to handle sniper rifle or even a pesky burst rifle? The only reason to ever use a clunky explosive weapon was to blow up a whole room or to launch enemies behind cover into space.

You really dropped the ball here, my dudes

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I have been thinking about the added stagger on self damage and non-self damage AOE weapons and what gets me is..

Before patch people who used self damage weapons used them accordingly and knew there was a range at which they shouldn't fire them or else they would take damage or even die. And thus with the change to stagger the way they played the game didn't really change, only the consequences changed.. So for them it was no big deal, they didn't have to adjust the way they played at all.

But for the people that used non-self damage AOE weapons before the patch and now after, game play was completely changed.. The whole flow of the game was changed for them, which is why it seems sooo many people are speaking up about that change (Myself included). 

 

I believe you hit it out of the park with the self damage weapons, you accomplished your goal and no real game flow change.. win/win. But for the non-self damage AOE weapons it turned out to be a foul ball, you changed the flow of the game for the worse and what goal was accomplished?... lose/lose.

 

Edited by UnknownContent
formatting
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, TheLexiConArtist said:

Shrapnel, concussion and EMP all 'explode' out from their epicentre, but have wildly differing effects, protections-against, and danger thresholds. It's no more arbitrary than reality to allow for each of these to be treated differently as compared to each other, but consistently within themselves. Gameplay factors are an overriding necessity - look at the Shraksun now, it's an absolute travesty thanks to this lack of consideration. It has to be feasible. Either the gameplay forces self-damage to be excepted from those weapons, or their mechanics have to change - see the Simulor, which couldn't be given self-damage to fix it alongside the Tonkor when their meta days came to an end, because players would almost invariably be in that radius. Its reward was too great for a lacking drawback, but because self-damage was non-viable, mechanics were altered instead.

I'm afraid you're committing a 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' fallacy in your judgement of Link Trinity. The decision that was made does not define the constituent factors that led to it. In short - it was a mistake. Reflecting self-damage through link was only 'problematic' because, like Spores on a Molt, it was uncontrolled and removed engagement with enemies. With self-damage not 100% resisted, the dominance of the playstyle would have evaporated because you simply wouldn't be capable of matching the necessary output without overwhelming your risk - just ask any Trinity who messed up their jump so Aviator wasn't contributing, causing them to down themselves immediately. Self-damage transmitting through Link would have governed itself by virtue of its inherent risk.
Conversely, the true problem factor that allowed that playstyle is still present. Even before this mainline, if you could have gotten a pure radiation result on your self-damage weapon, you could have used the same build and point-blanked it without risking yourself, so long as you jumped. Enemies can still stack resistances (Sortie conditions, elemental Eximi auras, the oft-overlooked Shield Osprey resistance-buff mechanic present only in Sorties) to the point where they're fully immune in a completely uncontrolled and arbitrary circumstance that isn't design-intended.

Ergo, 100% additive resistance stacking was the core issue.

Firstly, I have to admit that it is refreshing and fun to argue with someone who actually knows how to argue, kudos & thanks for that. 👍

Secondly, I cannot see a common solution to the "what is arbitrary or not", as it depends on where one draws the line. Having "some types of area damage" deal self-damage while others do not is an arbitrary decision to me, regardless of whether this is then consistently applied within such delineations. So I will simply agree to disagree, but conclude with the discussion having been beneficial to both illuminate and pin down one of the central questions.

Thirdly, I wasn't committing a 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' fallacy concerning Trinity, since I wasn't inferring actual backwards causality (though I'll admit to putting the explanation a bit clumsily). The facts are that from a combination mechanic consisting of several components it was explicitly the "propagation of self-damage" that was removed, and the stated official reason for removing it was "game consistency" (if I remember correctly). Or in other words: DE identified "linking self-damage" as a "game consistency" problem and solved it by removing the "linking of self-damage". Second-guessing DE's stated reasoning and solution might be interesting, but without any facts backing up alternative explanations they are basically futile. The 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' argument then in turn becomes a strawman fallacy (or a "fallacy fallacy", if you like). 😉

Edited by Graavarg

Share this post


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

I have been thinking about the added stagger on self damage and non-self damage AOE weapons and what gets me is..

Before patch people who used self damage weapons used them accordingly and knew there was a range at which they shouldn't fire them or else they would take damage or even die. And thus with the change to stagger the way they played the game didn't really change, only the consequences changed.. So for them it was no big deal, they didn't have to adjust the way they played at all.

But for the people that used non-self damage AOE weapons before the patch and now after, game play was completely changed.. The whole flow of the game was changed for them, which is why it seems sooo many people are speaking up about that change (Myself included). 

 

I believe you hit it out of the park with the self damage weapons, you accomplished your goal and no real game play change.. win/win. But for the non-self damage AOE weapons it turned out to be a foul ball, you changed the flow of the game for the worse and what goal was accomplished?... lose/lose.

Yes there were players who didn't do so well with self damage weapons. Others, like myself, knew what we were getting into and and some of us even found dying to our own Kuva Bramma hilarious. 
 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, (PS4)DoctorWho_90250 said:

Yes there were players who didn't do so well with self damage weapons. Others, like myself, knew what we were getting into and and some of us even found dying to our own Kuva Bramma hilarious. 

I always laughed my ass off like an idiot every time I forgot to switch Zarr modes and shot canon in point blank. Not anymore 😞

Edited by Voghelm
  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Firstly, I have to admit that it is refreshing and fun to argue with someone who actually knows how to argue, kudos & thanks for that. 👍

Secondly, I cannot see a common solution to the "what is arbitrary or not", as it depends on where one draws the line. Having "some types of area damage" deal self-damage while others do not is an arbitrary decision to me, regardless of whether this is then consistently applied within such delineations. So I will simply agree to disagree, but conclude with the discussion having been beneficial to both illuminate and pin down one of the central questions.

Thirdly, I wasn't committing a 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' fallacy concerning Trinity, since I wasn't inferring actual backwards causality (though I'll admit to putting the explanation a bit clumsily). The facts are that from a combination mechanic consisting of several components it was explicitly the "propagation of self-damage" that was removed, and the stated official reason for removing it was "game consistency" (if I remember correctly). Or in other words: DE identified "linking self-damage" as the problem and solved it by removing the "linking of self-damage". Second-guessing DE's stated reasoning and solution might be interesting, but without any facts backing up alternative explanations they are basically futile. The 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' argument then in turn becomes a strawman fallacy (or a "fallacy fallacy", if you like). 😉

Agree to disagree, then. It's an 'arbitrary' decision insofar as each variety offers a fresh opportunity for judging whether it should have, and what kind of, self-damage associated with it. "Inconsistency" was a common claim even back when I was working to get the Tonkor meta fixed, so it's not the first time I've had to try explaining how the theoretical Venn-diagram intersections fall.

I can accept that we had a little miscommunication regarding Trinity, but even so, what DE 'identified' as the problem (post) does not necessarily mean that was the problem (propter). We of course don't have evidence of the alternative outcome and can only theorise what would have happened if the change was made to the resistances while Linking self-damage was allowed to persist, but we can make observations about the elements that surround that hypothetical situation.
Identifying that additive resistances still have problematic potential - the only limitation being whether you can make a certain pure damage type - and exist problematically in the non-player circumstance is evidence in support that it could have been the root problem for Link (it is a problem, it was contributing, therefore could have been the core).
Identifying that self-damage was limiting when not fully resisted - complaints re: self-damage in non-Link scenarios, and the ability for a Link Trinity to kill herself if not accessing the full resistance via Aviator jump - is evidence in support that self-damage is able to govern its own 'abusive' outcome in isolation, as long as it's not circumvented.

So, with support on both the positive and negative variance compared to the outcome that did happen, there is a high likelihood that my hypothesis is correct and additive resistance, not self-damaging, was the problem causing the dominance of Link Trinity.

(For the record though, 'strawman' and 'fallacy fallacy' are different - and it's not so much a fallacious strawman if it's just a genuine misinterpretation, not deliberately mis-representing. But we're discussing like adults, not playing the fallacy game, this time I just used post/propter to contextualise my counter-argument.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Kuva Ogris with Nightwatch Napalm is still doing slef damage, not on the explosion, but on the AoE Effect (But only when the stagger effect is triggered, it doesnt damage when cautious shot protects me).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

the entire game is a freaking pinball machine now. why is the Stagger Knockback that was added for Self Damage, apply to all Staggers and Knockdowns anywhere in the game now?
any time you get hit by anything now we get flung like 40 Meters across the room, and then again when your Warframe gets back up. not to mention that it takes longer to get back up from everything in the game now than before.

also what is this """skillfull""" recovery from Knockdown - your Character just waits until you press a button to get back up. that's not '"skill", that's making you mash random movement buttons. it even doesn't have the decency to make any movement button you were already holding get you back up, you have to mash some random button for it instead.

 

if you want to make Explosive Weapons do this to you instead of Damage you, ok. but this shouldn't be applied to the entire rest of the game too.
otherwise you're trying to make Handspring and Pain Threshold mandatory Mods to even play the game. even if you don't have an Explosive Weapon Equipped.

 

 

 

 

also having basically Exponent2 falloff for Explosive Weapons just means that AoE Weapons don't have an AoE anymore.

2 hours ago, Graavarg said:

As to Trinity and the "misuse" of link, your definition of root and symptom are, to me, arbitrary 😉🙂. My suggestion would be to look at what was actually changed and what wasn't, Link and immunities still work mainly as before, without problems. Self-damage worked as before (up until now). But the distribution of self-damage through (any, not only Trinity's) link was removed.

it literally required stacking Additive Resist Mods together with specifically Radiation Damage (and only Radiation Damage) in order for people to abuse Link in that way. before people discovered that they could reach 100%DR to Radiation Damage with every Additive Resist Mod stacked together, nobody was dealing much self Damage through Link because if you tried, you would just Kill yourself with your own Weapon.
so before some of the most recent Additive Resist Mods were introduced into the game, it was literally impossible to do that with Trinity because to do relevant Damage you also had to Kill yourself in the process anyways.
Trinity got nerfed for something that a few hyperniche Mods caused. and those Mods are still the same now as they were before, so they'll cause problems again in the future.

Edited by taiiat
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To sum it up, after thinking for a while

this is a case of fixing one thing and breaking all the others...we have a very little % of the people asking only to make the bramma deal LESS self damage...most never asked for a complete removal or another mechanic, IT WAS FINE JUST NEEDED A LITTLE BALANCE (but DE decided to take the easier route here)

but being real honest? it was fine before with people dying with these weapons, you can resurrect at least 5 times in this game and with a squad you dont even need to be concerned as they revive you infinitely

just look at arbitrations that are some of the most dangerous missions out there when drones cluster over each other, it is pretty easy to revive the entire squad even if you are the last standing

what i am saying is that dying and losing some affinity is a fine way to LEARN to use your weapon, while staggering only accomplishes as being annoying AF (almost DE saying everyone to play only ignis wraith/amprex/nukor. why even care about bramma anyway?)

DE didn't "fix" anything..if it is so then just remove any kind of death altogether after you unlock the entire starchart, because if you are dying due to your own explosions the damage of enemies does not matter much...in this ""endgame"" i only die when i make some error with timing or press the wrong button for some ability

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, (NSW)Morrigan91 said:

How this patch made it through to live is just beyond me, its like DE doesn't even test their own game. 

And this is my major issue with this. DE really needs that test Server. They are basically using the live game to try out super experimental ideas, buggy patches, etc. They said 90% dmg falloff was a starting point to be conservative and they'd tone it down later if needed. But it's ridiculously excessive and completely defeats the purpose of these weapons. They are ruined on Live atm. This is the sort of extreme experimental stuff that should have been tested on a PTR test Server, not dumped on the live game. And even then, anyone with an understanding of the game and how it feels to use these weapons in missions could have told them what would happen...

Edited by --END--Rikutatis
  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Shrapnel, concussion and EMP all 'explode' out from their epicentre, but have wildly differing effects, protections-against, and danger thresholds. It's no more arbitrary than reality to allow for each of these to be treated differently as compared to each other, but consistently within themselves.

I don't think so. I think you only think that because of familiarity with how Warframe weapons work and which "count". You know, years of playing is plenty of time for it to seem normal and instinctive that red explosions are bad and blue ones are okay, or whatnot. But try to separate yourself from that ingrained awareness and just look at what we're seeing on the screen. Why shouldn't we interact with our own explosions?

For the first time ever, all explosive weapons are consistent with one another, in the sense of everything that has any kind of splatter, and the exceptions that do exist - like point-blank shots with the Quellor charge shot and the three wave guns - feel weird already. Nothing is just a bubble that deals damage, everything feels decidedly physical.

No-sell self-derpage was always stupid looking, we just learned to ignore it. Now everything has a flinch or stagger (with fantastic new animations and fluid recovery) and it's visually and mechanically consistent. As a side benefit, you can no longer protect yourself with the Staticor by shooting your feet. 

So I'm loving this set of changes. Especially for the Staticor, which I'm using again for the first time in ages. My Bramma is still OPAF at sortie levels and too popular to use too much but definitely feels as good as previously. My Acceltra's still fine. Maybe I'll actually try the Ogris again at some point. 

 

Edited by CopperBezel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The stagger radius on the Granmu Prism feels way too large. With it's already pretty low range it feels like you get staggered from >90% of its shots. Longer projectile range or shorter stagger radius would help a lot with making this Prism feel usable again.

Besides the Granmu Prism I'm okay with the added stagger to different weapons. Now I just gotta master the recovery animation...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello - thank you for taking the time to read through the concerns and suggestions.

I wasn't entirely sure where to put this, but since so much was changed in the game without actually taking feedback from players and this is a melee issue I think this is the right place.

Since the mainline I have not been able to "copter" - to launch myself using the Balla - I haven't tried it with other weapons - the heart and soul of this game to me has always been the ability to move around the map like a madman - its completely removed.

is this a mistake or is this now how DE has decided I should be playing?

 

Thanks!

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Il y a 20 heures, RX-3DR a dit :

I'm sorry but this is completely screwed up. This is the state of explosive weapons now. You can literally play as a walking explosion.

temp.gif

You've basically removed Self-Damage completely by applying this change to Primed Sure-Footed. Which also means you've given a massive lazy strategy that people will have to wait years for.

Yeah, thats what I think too, now lot of players will just run and shot all the way like crazy with, orgris, the kuve grinner bow, the lenz and probably some other weapons too.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Primed Sure Footed needed this boost, you know. Being the stupidest Primed mod wasn't enough, it's got ambitions, it wants to be the dumbest mod in the game someday. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Shraksun Scaffold is absolutely unusable now. Please remove this effect from the amps.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, CopperBezel said:

I don't think so. I think you only think that because of familiarity with how Warframe weapons work and which "count". You know, years of playing is plenty of time for it to seem normal and instinctive that red explosions are bad and blue ones are okay, or whatnot. But try to separate yourself from that ingrained awareness and just look at what we're seeing on the screen. Why shouldn't we interact with our own explosions?

To be fair, I'm the one who had no issues with self-damage. You shouldn't just over-generalise though, a healthy amount of nuance is beneficial. I wasn't considering it from the Warframe example standpoint, I was considering it from the abstract, where it makes absolute sense that your 'consistency' can differ between different interpretations of that "AOE" concept. Whether they do or do not is a matter for the game design standpoint, but what was chosen was more consistent than it was exceptional. Bombs went boom.

19 minutes ago, CopperBezel said:

No-sell self-derpage was always stupid looking, we just learned to ignore it. Now everything has a flinch or stagger (with fantastic new animations and fluid recovery) and it's visually and mechanically consistent. As a side benefit, you can no longer protect yourself with the Staticor by shooting your feet. 

I don't know exactly what you're referring to at the start of that (non-self-damage? Instant kills?) but I can honestly say the first thing I did was take my explosives various beanbag guns out for a few spins and the flinching/staggering is anything but fluid and intuitive. You happen to have an Exilus on there softening the impacts or something?

For knockdowns, the 'recovery' window is atrocious and depending on factors like your fashionframe and the game's choice of animation, whatever 'tell' it's supposed to have is able to become completely indistinguishable. From what I can tell, it's also not even statically based on certain animation timing, but on the absolute ragdoll impacting the environment, which makes the fleeting and dubiously-conveyed window even worse since you can't just develop mastery through muscle-memory.

Roller staggers were already incredibly annoying and that's all we get with AOEs. Does that make it a good drawback? No. It's able to mod/frame-select away entirely, and even when you don't it's just.. unengaging. Bothersome, annoying, but not risky. Clunky inconvenience is not a thrill in avoiding.

Edited by TheLexiConArtist
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Il y a 4 heures, IamLoco a dit :

A big MEH! from my side concerning AoE weapons.

In your efforts to somehow rebalance self-damage, you completely went the wrong way.

Again, I remind you that huge parts of the player base suggested lowering the self-damage to a reasonable amount. Don´t remove it, balance it.

What you now did to AoE weapons though makes them completely (!) irrelevant on higher levels. They will still be good to show off against newbies in lvl 15 defense missions (look at my big badda boom, noobs!) but with a 90% dmg reduction, what´s the purpose of using them in sorties or even arbitrations?? Why would any sane person use a kuva ogris or bramma (clunky, slow) if it only kills with a direct hit while you could easily achieve the same result with a much easier to handle sniper rifle or even a pesky burst rifle? The only reason to ever use a clunky explosive weapon was to blow up a whole room or to launch enemies behind cover into space.

You really dropped the ball here, my dudes

well to be fair kuva ogris and bramma are the only "viable" AOE weapons now.
kuva bramma because it still one shot high level mobs.
kuva ogris because of its napalm mod which constently proc fire on 90% of the radial effect (radial effective range of AOE weapons has been increased by +20%) for several seconds.
as for secondary AOE weapons they all sucks now (at least pox should still be good vs corpus when it doesn't hit a zero bubble or high level machinery..)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, TheLexiConArtist said:

It's no more arbitrary than reality to allow for each of these to be treated differently as compared to each other, but consistently within themselves.

It's completely arbitrary because a concussion effect is a concussion effect regardless what's generating it.  The end result is the same whether it's from a block of C4, a plastic pipe full of diesel fuel and fertilizer, or indeterminate space magic.  The only difference would be in how much of it you need to get a given level of boom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...