Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

HomicidalGrouse

Please Remove the Stagger from Cleaving Whirlwind

Recommended Posts

As the title says, I'd like to see the pointless stagger effect when spamming Cleaving Whirlwind's spin attack removed. It's mildly amusing that your frame apparently gets "dizzy" and stumbles around for a second when you spin too much, but the fact that none of the other weapon stances seem to have this issue makes Cleaving Whirlwind mildly annoying to play.

Here's a short video showing the stagger effect of Cleaving Whirlwind, as well as a couple of similar stances for different weapon types, which you're free to spam all day long without any consequence whatsoever.
 


This most recent update was all about introducing some consistency across Warframe's various systems... please add a little consistency here. Remove the stagger animation from Cleaving Whirlwind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, I'm not saying this stagger animation isn't stupid and inconsistent , because it is, BUT-
The fact is that it doesn't matter. It doesn't bother me at all.  The stagger speed scales with Attack speed, so it's mostly unnoticeable with a single Berserker mod (And if urn Arcane Strike with that weapon- Even better), or you can just do a slide attack to break off the sequence... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, (PS4)SrebX said:

Look, I'm not saying this stagger animation isn't stupid and inconsistent , because it is, BUT-
The fact is that it doesn't matter. It doesn't bother me at all.  The stagger speed scales with Attack speed, so it's mostly unnoticeable with a single Berserker mod (And if urn Arcane Strike with that weapon- Even better), or you can just do a slide attack to break off the sequence... 

Or they can remove it and make our lives easier. Stagger was justified when this combo had a big damage multiplier. Now it doesn't have one, there is no reason to keep the stagger. No other stance punishes the player for using combos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The entire reason they have that stagger is so people can't just slap melee attack on a macro with a heavy blade and AFK. The entire point of it is to force players to be engaged, and as a balance point for Cleaving Whirlwind itself. Taking that away would not only allow people to just be braindead (something DE has been trying to avoid/fix for years) but would also entirely invalidate Tempo Royale as a stance because of the huge DPS disparity it would create.

When you talk about removing a hindrance on a stance, you have to look at the big picture, not just something you get mildly annoyed at because you can't AFK with it.

As for your "proof" of other stances, neither Gleaming Talon nor Vermilion Storm have non-stop spins like Cleaving Whirlwind. The damage output of those two "spins" are very limited because they don't go on forever like your dream version of Cleaving Whirlwind would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to interrupt the combo with a slide attack right before the stagger, then resume the combo. it's not hard, and it works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

21 minutes ago, Skyward_Knight said:

The entire reason they have that stagger is so people can't just slap melee attack on a macro with a heavy blade and AFK. The entire point of it is to force players to be engaged, and as a balance point for Cleaving Whirlwind itself. Taking that away would not only allow people to just be braindead (something DE has been trying to avoid/fix for years) but would also entirely invalidate Tempo Royale as a stance because of the huge DPS disparity it would create.

When you talk about removing a hindrance on a stance, you have to look at the big picture, not just something you get mildly annoyed at because you can't AFK with it.

As for your "proof" of other stances, neither Gleaming Talon nor Vermilion Storm have non-stop spins like Cleaving Whirlwind. The damage output of those two "spins" are very limited because they don't go on forever like your dream version of Cleaving Whirlwind would.

That's a poor excuse. Forward combo isn't even the most powerful one on Cleaving Whirlwind. What prevents someone from macroing forward block combo that has higher damage multipliers and has no hindrance? You can spam it to you heart's content.

Besides, using a macro in any scenario is a risk of a ban, so there's that.

There are numerous stances with spinning attacks. It is true that none of them has continuous spins, but none of them has long combo interrupts either. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Genitive said:

Besides, using a macro in any scenario is a risk of a ban, so there's that.

Where the hell is that stated? People, myself included, have been using macros for years for certain actions like slide attacks and bullet jumps. I've used one for turbo-fire melee attacks when I made a Dual Keres build that attacked at the speed of light. Nowhere in the rules of Warframe is it stated that all macros are bannable, just the ones that completely automate the game.

6 minutes ago, Genitive said:

There are numerous stances with spinning attacks. It is true that none of them has continuous spins, but none of them has long combo interrupts either.

Also, Cleaving Whirlwind's stagger isn't even long enough to interrupt your combo counter if you have a single maxed combo duration mod on. While I do agree that the F-B combo is much more powerful, it also requires aiming and timing, and is more or less a single-target attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, (XB1)Red Dough Boy said:

Or if you can use Tempo Royale since it's arguably a better stance. 

The argument of TR vs. CW has been going on forever, and I believe that now more than ever it truly doesn't matter. Both can do massive damage, and it's really up to personal preference with the current state of the stances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Skyward_Knight said:

Where the hell is that stated? People, myself included, have been using macros for years for certain actions like slide attacks and bullet jumps. I've used one for turbo-fire melee attacks when I made a Dual Keres build that attacked at the speed of light. Nowhere in the rules of Warframe is it stated that all macros are bannable, just the ones that completely automate the game.

Hence why I wrote "risk of a ban". Macros are a grey zone and you use them at your own responsibility.

 

3 minutes ago, Skyward_Knight said:

Also, Cleaving Whirlwind's stagger isn't even long enough to interrupt your combo counter if you have a single maxed combo duration mod on. While I do agree that the F-B combo is much more powerful, it also requires aiming and timing, and is more or less a single-target attack.

It isn't, but at this point it is better to switch to Tempo Rolale that has no nonsense interrupts and go on with your day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Skyward_Knight said:

The entire reason they have that stagger is so people can't just slap melee attack on a macro with a heavy blade and AFK. The entire point of it is to force players to be engaged, and as a balance point for Cleaving Whirlwind itself. Taking that away would not only allow people to just be braindead (something DE has been trying to avoid/fix for years) but would also entirely invalidate Tempo Royale as a stance because of the huge DPS disparity it would create.

When you talk about removing a hindrance on a stance, you have to look at the big picture, not just something you get mildly annoyed at because you can't AFK with it.

As for your "proof" of other stances, neither Gleaming Talon nor Vermilion Storm have non-stop spins like Cleaving Whirlwind. The damage output of those two "spins" are very limited because they don't go on forever like your dream version of Cleaving Whirlwind would.

The stagger doesn't stop you from using a macro anyway. It's a speedbump. You can continue spamming the attack as soon as the stagger animation is finished. Nothing is stopping you from doing that, least of all a brief stagger animation.

And it really doesn't matter what the animations are. Gleaming Talon and Vermillion Storm can both output massive damage. I actually noticed this while spinning to win with Vermillion on Garuda's Talons. Spinning like crazy and slicing everything to bits with absolutely nothing hindering my movement.

One of the points of melee 2.0 was to give more control over your combos and movement to the player. I can move and spam attack with literally every single stance in the game... EXCEPT for Cleaving Whirlwind... for no reason at all. None of what you said justifies it. It's a nuisance imposed upon the player, and it's exclusive to CW for no reason.

Share this post


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

It isn't, but at this point it is better to switch to Tempo Rolale that has no nonsense interrupts and go on with your day.

I don't like Temp Royale's combos, which is why I use Cleaving Whirlwind. This stagger effect isn't enough to make me not use it. It just makes absolutely no sense that it's literally the only stance in the game that interrupts your combo for using it too often. There's no other stance that does that, and you can spam all of the others with impunity.

#FixCleavingWhirlwind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

 It just makes absolutely no sense that it's literally the only stance in the game that interrupts your combo for using it too often. There's no other stance that does that, and you can spam all of the others with impunity.

Yeah, that's essentially my point, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Skyward_Knight said:

The argument of TR vs. CW has been going on forever, and I believe that now more than ever it truly doesn't matter. Both can do massive damage, and it's really up to personal preference with the current state of the stances.

I wasn't sure about TR for a while too, but the more I used it the more I appreciated the main spiining combo and impact it deals. It is up to preference I just don't see why someone would use a stance with a clear negative at this point. Berserker also does make just about any stance insane though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

One of the points of melee 2.0 was to give more control over your combos and movement to the player. I can move and spam attack with literally every single stance in the game... EXCEPT for Cleaving Whirlwind... for no reason at all. None of what you said justifies it. It's a nuisance imposed upon the player, and it's exclusive to CW for no reason.

I don't think you can say that DE wanting to tone down brain-dead combos is unjustified reason. Look at what they did to Ember and Banshee, for instance.

As for the why, it was made as a balance when Broken Bull had a damage increase and 7 spins. It may not have justified it to you, but there are reasons for it.

10 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

And it really doesn't matter what the animations are. Gleaming Talon and Vermillion Storm can both output massive damage. I actually noticed this while spinning to win with Vermillion on Garuda's Talons. Spinning like crazy and slicing everything to bits with absolutely nothing hindering my movement.

As a whole, heavy blades using Cleaving Whirlwind's forward combo will kill faster and more effectively than claws with Vermilion Storm and glaives with Gleaming Talon. Using the spin-to-win attacks has always been something DE wanted to keep under control. They simply don't have a reason to give those two combo's a drawback because they just can't match the damage output of Cleaving Whirlwind. Yes, Garuda's Talons can rip through crowds at breakneck speeds, but with a Gram Prime you could to the same in about half the time, and that's without a riven.

12 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

I don't like Temp Royale's combos, which is why I use Cleaving Whirlwind. This stagger effect isn't enough to make me not use it. It just makes absolutely no sense that it's literally the only stance in the game that interrupts your combo for using it too often. There's no other stance that does that, and you can spam all of the others with impunity.

Tempo Royale DOES have drawbacks. If you don't kill enemies with your first combo, they will be suspended mid-air and most likely fly away because of the physics of heavy blades and the fact that almost every Tempo Royale combo has a hit that suspends enemies. Just because Cleaving Whirlwind is the only one with a stagger doesn't mean there aren't drawbacks to other stances.

Share this post


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

I don't think you can say that DE wanting to tone down brain-dead combos is unjustified reason. Look at what they did to Ember and Banshee, for instance.

I can absolutely say that because they haven't bothered to do it with literally anything but CW and the nerf to maiming strike, which was only really broken because it allowed you to hit through walls, which justified the change. Every other stance is just as "braindead".

 

4 minutes ago, Skyward_Knight said:

As a whole, heavy blades using Cleaving Whirlwind's forward combo will kill faster and more effectively than claws with Vermilion Storm and glaives with Gleaming Talon. Using the spin-to-win attacks has always been something DE wanted to keep under control. They simply don't have a reason to give those two combo's a drawback because they just can't match the damage output of Cleaving Whirlwind. Yes, Garuda's Talons can rip through crowds at breakneck speeds, but with a Gram Prime you could to the same in about half the time, and that's without a riven.

And? One weapon does more damage than another weapon. Welcome to Warframe.

This doesn't justify imposing a movement penalty upon the player for using a certain move too often. I can wipe an entire map of enemies with Saryn faster than any stance on any melee mod. Why isn't there a penalty there?

The entire argument that it would be too OP if they removed the stagger falls completely on its face when you realize that pretty much everything in the game is extremely overpowered, and most methods of killing things are still going to be preferred over a certain weapon with a certain stance.

Hell, up until recently, everyone was just using Catchmoon. It wasn't because Cleaving Whirlwind had a stagger, it was because Catchmoon was OP as hell.

I hold, there is no reason for there to be a combo that causes you to be staggered when using it, which only exists on one stance in the entire game.

 

9 minutes ago, Skyward_Knight said:

Tempo Royale DOES have drawbacks. If you don't kill enemies with your first combo, they will be suspended mid-air and most likely fly away because of the physics of heavy blades and the fact that almost every Tempo Royale combo has a hit that suspends enemies. Just because Cleaving Whirlwind is the only one with a stagger doesn't mean there aren't drawbacks to other stances.

I didn't say it was the only stance with drawbacks, I said it's the only stance that interrupts your combo for using it. That has nothing to do with any other stances beyond the fact that none of them interrupt your combo for using their combo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cleaving whirlwind is fine as is. Broken Bull's stagger can be avoided altogether just by taking a break from that one combo in particular, and not even for that long. The "stagger" in and of itself requires an input completely separate to the 5th, and can even be interrupted with a roll in a worst case scenario. The combo is balanced around stopping every five hits because other than that, it really has minimal weaknesses as far as I'm concerned. If anything, Broken Bull is a standout in that you don't actually have to put up with the attack's real endlag. Hammers' Shattering Storm, for example, has a block combo (Rising Thunder) with absolutely awful endlag that can only be avoided by rolling out of the animation, and that combo is really not good enough to warrant dealing with it.

Broken Bull is Cleaving Whirlwind's core combo for a reason. Even against singular targets it's the fastest hitting combo and has guaranteed stagger, meaning that it locks enemies down and is the best for stacking statuses and building combo meter. It also has great coverage that makes it much easier to combine with movement and still hit your target. You can't spam any of the other combos in the same way.

As stated by someone else earlier in the thread, DE care about not making the game "braindead", and for good reason (I'm not even saying they succeed, I'm just saying that they do care and that their balance decisions have slowly been going in that direction.). Interactivity makes the game much less of a chore and keeps the player on their toes. Hell, IMO Broken Bull is still pretty braindead in the grand scheme of things, even if it does require a little bit more awareness to be truly optimal.

Yes Cleaving Whirlwind's Broken Bull stands out, but definitely not in a way that makes it inherently worse than anything else, unless you really do want to just mash the button over and over again for maximum reward, which really isn't a good argument. Even if they took out the stagger animation, there's a good chance that the endlag would be the same as Broken Bull without the stagger input right now anyway. The only problems I can seriously perceive with Broken Bull as a combo are aesthetic ones - the attacks all looking the same is deceptive to new players, and the stagger looks a little silly compared to the endlag of other weapons' combos.

[Edit]: Just wanted to add as well that the examples in that video are really bad examples for your point. By using the same strategy to avoid the stagger in Broken Bull, you can use the 360 hits of those combos exclusively in the same way, and it would actually be harder to do because you would have to stop consistently. Comparative to Broken Bull, which only has to stop every 5 hits and has slowly growing damage for each input within it's combo, those are really bad combos for 360 coverage. Yes, the "breaks" in 360 damage for those other combos are in fact still attacks, but those attack animations are genuinely longer than the time it takes to stop after every 5th Broken Bull input to avoid the stagger.

Share this post


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

I can absolutely say that because they haven't bothered to do it with literally anything but CW and the nerf to maiming strike, which was only really broken because it allowed you to hit through walls, which justified the change. Every other stance is just as "braindead".

Maiming Strike allowed for no such thing. That was simply map walls being weird.

They DID nerf spin-to-win in a few other places, and have been doing so since long before you started playing. A very long time ago, spin attacks would also give a massive movement burst, and was basically the only thing people did for a while.

The Telos Boltace used to be able to use their AoE attack every time you used spin attack, and was promtly changed to nerf the ever-loving S#&$ out of using them for spin-to-win.

5 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

And? One weapon does more damage than another weapon. Welcome to Warframe.

Exactly my point. They kept the stagger so it's more balanced and people use different weapons based off what they want. The entire point of Melee 3.0 was to diversify the playing field of melee weapons.

6 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

This doesn't justify imposing a movement penalty upon the player for using a certain move too often. I can wipe an entire map of enemies with Saryn faster than any stance on any melee mod. Why isn't there a penalty there?

Is there a drawback to using Nezha's Divine Spears for map-wide enemy clear? No. Is there a drawback to using Trinity's Blessing? No. How about Rhino's Iron Skin? Nope, no drawback here either.

Warframe abilities aren't meant to have drawbacks. They're balanced entirely on the player and how they build the Warframe. Getting that amount of power requires sacrifice in other places, be it health armor and shields, or range/efficiency/duration. They balance themselves.

9 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

Hell, up until recently, everyone was just using Catchmoon. It wasn't because Cleaving Whirlwind had a stagger, it was because Catchmoon was OP as hell.

Comparing a melee weapon to a kitgun isn't a valid argument. They do entirely separate things, and are used in completely different situations. They're completely unrelated and cannot be logically compared. That would be like comparing a refrigerator to a car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, (NSW)Conn1496 said:

Just wanted to add as well that the examples in that video are really bad examples for your point. By using the same strategy to avoid the stagger in Broken Bull, you can use the 360 hits of those combos exclusively in the same way, and it would actually be harder to do because you would have to stop consistently. Comparative to Broken Bull, which only has to stop every 5 hits and has slowly growing damage for each input within it's combo, those are really bad combos for 360 coverage. Yes, the "breaks" in 360 damage for those other combos are in fact still attacks, but those attack animations are genuinely longer than the time it takes to stop after every 5th Broken Bull input to avoid the stagger.

You're ignoring the fact that every two spins for CW has a buildup that isn't significantly shorter than the attack or two between the 360 degree coverage of the other two stances/weapons I showed in the video.

The fact that ALL of CW's attacks are spins and only every other attack of the other two are spins... isn't relevant.
 

1 hour ago, Skyward_Knight said:

Maiming Strike allowed for no such thing. That was simply map walls being weird.

It was still a nerf to maiming strike, and got people to stop using it.

1 hour ago, Skyward_Knight said:

Exactly my point. They kept the stagger so it's more balanced and people use different weapons based off what they want. The entire point of Melee 3.0 was to diversify the playing field of melee weapons.

The entire point of melee 3.0 was to make weapons feel more responsive and give more control to players. That's why they simplified the combos in the first place, and implemented things like instant-melee switching, the ability to interrupt combos, and implemented more intuitive controls that allow you to specify whice attacks you want to use based on which buttons you use, as opposed to trying to memorize different combinations of mashing E.

These are words and phrase used by DE in dev streams... and interrupting the player's input by keeping the stagger in CW does the exact opposite of achieving those goals.
 

1 hour ago, Skyward_Knight said:

Comparing a melee weapon to a kitgun isn't a valid argument. They do entirely separate things, and are used in completely different situations. They're completely unrelated and cannot be logically compared. That would be like comparing a refrigerator to a car.

No they're not. They're both used in missions to kill enemies to varying degrees of efficacy. Same as Warframe abilities. Same as pretty much everything else in this game. The point is that there are a broad range of weapons in every category that perform entirely differently. Some are good. Some are bad. Some are in-between. The idea that CW would be so OP as to invalidate all other stances and remove player choice if they just removed a two-second stagger... is asinine.

If you're really that worried about balance, you could always argue to also slightly decrease the base attack speed of CW to balance it out. I don't get the stagger, and you don't get to act as though the difference is actually relevant. Everyone's happy.

But I have a feeling you're only arguing against this to be contrarian, not because you actually care about balance.

Share this post


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

No they're not. They're both used in missions to kill enemies to varying degrees of efficacy. Same as Warframe abilities. Same as pretty much everything else in this game. The point is that there are a broad range of weapons in every category that perform entirely differently. Some are good. Some are bad. Some are in-between. The idea that CW would be so OP as to invalidate all other stances and remove player choice if they just removed a two-second stagger... is asinine.

My point with that statement was that it had nothing to do with the stagger. Bringing up a gun when we're talking about a sword doesn't help your point. In fact, that's called a logical fallacy, and makes your argument look worse.

Removing it wouldn't get rid of player choice, but it would go against what DE is working for. My entire point this whole time is that, while it wouldn't be the most broken thing ever, it would make the game less interesting. If there's an easy, overly effective option for crowd killing, people jump on it. DE isn't removing the player's choice, the players are simply choosing the boring, easy option. It's a trend that's repeated itself every time something like this has come up.

It's exactly why they nerfed Catchmoon and Status shotguns. Players were using them too much, and the game was getting stale.

12 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

The entire point of melee 3.0 was to make weapons feel more responsive and give more control to players. That's why they simplified the combos in the first place, and implemented things like instant-melee switching, the ability to interrupt combos, and implemented more intuitive controls that allow you to specify whice attacks you want to use based on which buttons you use, as opposed to trying to memorize different combinations of mashing E.

These are words and phrase used by DE in dev streams... and interrupting the player's input by keeping the stagger in CW does the exact opposite of achieving those goals.

The end-result they were going for with Melee 3.0 was to make every melee fun. They buffed overall damage so the mid-tiers were useful, added new combos and flashier stances, and gave players more options to utilize melee weapons. Of course they're going to make it harder to rely on a single combo. Doing otherwise would be the exact opposite of what they were going for. They wanted to make melee more fun and inviting to options, not more monotonous and boring.

26 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

It was still a nerf to maiming strike, and got people to stop using it.

That was their goal, yes. It was overused and almost mandatory to have the high DPS needed to clear stuff like Arbitrations. And there are in fact some weapons that can still abuse the absolute hell out of it. It's nowhere near as broken and laughably overpowered as it used to be, but is still able to be used to a large advantage with the right setup.

30 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

But I have a feeling you're only arguing against this to be contrarian, not because you actually care about balance.

Contrarian: Someone who opposes or rejects a popular opinion. This is hardly a popular opinion. So far you and the one other guy who argued with me on this are the only two people I've seen that can't deal with this one tiny detail.

Also, I've been playing this game for 7 years. Balance has always been a good thing, and the game suffers when things are unbalanced. People stop playing, the game gets boring, and you start to get people who exclude players that don't have the specific mod/weapon that fits the meta at the time. Balance is how this game moves forward and evolves.

 

Now. Let's start over, from your side. If you want to argue this, we're going to do it debate style. I want to hear your reasons for why it should be removed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Skyward_Knight said:

My point with that statement was that it had nothing to do with the stagger. Bringing up a gun when we're talking about a sword doesn't help your point. In fact, that's called a logical fallacy, and makes your argument look worse.

No it doesn't. You're trying to invalidate the fact that there are hundreds of more effective ways to kill things than using a specific melee weapon stance, which is the point of the comparison. You opened the door for this when you brought up balance and tried to suggest that removing a stagger animation was going to make something OP.

1 hour ago, Skyward_Knight said:

Removing it wouldn't get rid of player choice, but it would go against what DE is working for.

The same DE that removed self-damage, right? They've repeatedly said that they're trying to make things consistent. CW is inconsistent with the rest of the roster of stance mods.

1 hour ago, Skyward_Knight said:

The end-result they were going for with Melee 3.0 was to make every melee fun.

Which they've mostly done. Now they could finish the job by removing the thing that makes CW less fun, hindering player movement for no reason.

1 hour ago, Skyward_Knight said:

It was overused and almost mandatory

It was nowhere near mandatory, same as Catchmoon. Meta =/= necessary. I've yet to even build a Catchmoon. I didn't get a maiming strike until after the nerf (because that's when they finally brought back Acolytes).
 

1 hour ago, Skyward_Knight said:

Contrarian: Someone who opposes or rejects a popular opinion. This is hardly a popular opinion. So far you and the one other guy who argued with me on this are the only two people I've seen that can't deal with this one tiny detail.

You know what it means in that context. Argumentative then, if a different word pleases you. You want to talk about logical fallacies, yet appeal to popularity? Beyond that, I'd bet if you could poll every Warframe player, you'd find this to be a popular opinion. The fact that there aren't many people in this one thread who have decided to post in agreement isn't really relevant. The point was that you're just disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing. I've yet to see an actual reason for why the stagger shouldn't be removed. You claim it's because it would make the stance too powerful, but there are very simple ways to circumvent that anyway. You don't care about that though... you just want to argue.

1 hour ago, Skyward_Knight said:

I've been playing this game for 7 years.

Who cares?
 

1 hour ago, Skyward_Knight said:

People stop playing, the game gets boring, and you start to get people who exclude players that don't have the specific mod/weapon that fits the meta at the time.

No one is going to stop playing Warframe if Cleaving Whirlwind's stagger gets removed. Absolutely no one.
 

1 hour ago, Skyward_Knight said:

I want to hear your reasons for why it should be removed.

I've already explained it multiple times. Again, ignoring that is just proof that you want to argue and disagree for the sake of it. But I'll play along once...

  •  Having a stagger for using a combo too often is annoying because it temporarily removes control from the player. .
  •  It's inconsistent with the rest of the stance mods in the game which have no such mechanic.
  •  It's not necessary because the stagger isn't relevant, all it does is hinder the player's movement for a couple seconds, doesn't prevent spamming the ability in any relevant way, and can easily be circumvented by throwing in one separate move.
  •  Taking control away from the player is the opposite of what DE has claimed they want for melee 3.0.
  •  If balance were an actual issue (which I don't think it is), there are other ways to balance the stance that don't involve taking control away from the player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

You're ignoring the fact that every two spins for CW has a buildup that isn't significantly shorter than the attack or two between the 360 degree coverage of the other two stances/weapons I showed in the video.

The fact that ALL of CW's attacks are spins and only every other attack of the other two are spins... isn't relevant.

If what we're talking about is getting to the best attacks in a combo the fastest, then we're effectively talking about the efficiency, and therefore balancing, of melee weapons in general, and range/coverage definitely is something else that needs to be considered - 360 hits absolutely are a valid point to bring up then, especially in a game where AoEs are clearly valuable more often than not (coverage is a main reason why melee is often considered better than Primaries/Secondaries). The examples used in the video definitely make it seem like hitting with good coverage is also a factor for you as well.

--and that's not even getting into the balance between individual weapon types. Glaives, for example, are basically inherently weaker than heavy blades are - I think most people would agree with that without any further thought - and therefore probably do need better combos to compensate for their weaker stats. Though I wouldn't say that the Glaive combo you used as an example is even better than Broken Bull, faster or not (almost exclusively due to it being a glaive combo in the first place). I don't think speed is a factor that ruins Broken Bull either, unless you intend on including the completely skippable stagger animation of the combo every time.

Let's get back to the initial point though, the stagger, because it absolutely is also a balancing decision (Usability in general is a balancing decision.). Your initial point is that it's clunky, and inconsistent to have a stagger animation on the end of the combo (Honestly, I don't find it a real issue, but let me give you the benefit of the doubt for this.). That is absolutely intended in the same way that being able to play around the stagger (which you definitely can) is also intended. It's also the same reason some combos have incredibly good attacks placed in the middle or at the start of them, as opposed to the end. It's not always about finishing the combo, it's about knowing what attacks are worth using. Things like guaranteed procs, multihits, slams, or 360s are all valuable in their own way, and DE clearly want you to think about the attacks you're doing beyond mashing the melee button.

To consider Broken Bull as a 6 input string for a moment (including the stagger input), the combo wants you to press the attack button 5 times, then take a break as an artificial "endlag" of sorts so you don't use the stagger animation (which fills in as a bad, unfavourable, or worse "attack") - or alternatively, don't break the flow of combat by inputting the first attack of a different combo instead. As a less blatant example, the Stinging Thorn Dagger stance has the combo Carving Spike a 5 input combo in which the second input clearly does the most damage (if we include the guaranteed slash procs), while also having the most hits.

In both cases, you theoretically have to stop inputting to get the best results, in this case we're exclusively talking about getting to the best attacks - how easy it is to use those best attacks. The only real difference is that Broken Bull is much, much more extreme in it's approach to telling the player this is what is meant to happen - and I think rightfully so considering that otherwise it would both be much less skill-based (and interesting) to use the stance, and also slightly less evident that the final hit is the final hit of a combo (at least in my opinion).

This isn't even considering other cases where you might just have a personal preference for the properties of a certain attack within a combo. To use Stinging Thorn's Carving Spike again as an example, you get two bleed procs from the second input, which could be very good for building combo in relentless combination builds - something I have personal experience with. As another example of this, alternating between the first hits of Automatic Rhumba and Magnum Mambo (Bullet Dance stance) is the fastest way to build combo with my Redeemer Prime, since the attack animations are shorter, and therefore I get more hits. I don't use them for their power, and I definitely don't use the whole combo basically any of the time.

I don't know if DE thought about it this deeply, but it certainly feels that way (I also wouldn't be too surprised given that the free-flowing nature of swapping between combos was a goal of 3.0, if I remember correctly). Yes, Broken Bull is "clunky" if you spam it (again, spam being something that DE want to avoid), sure. But having the stagger is... -not actually hurting the combo in a practical sense if you use the same skills you should be using with other melee weapons.

Ultimately, in the same way you wouldn't use the Stug for anything other than giggles, no-one is forcing you to use the stagger animation of Broken Bull. All it's doing is stopping you from mashing, which other melee weapons also gain clear benefits for doing.

If you ask me, upon further thought, Broken Bull in it's current state is probably teaching some people how to play the game.

Share this post


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

Or they can remove it and make our lives easier. Stagger was justified when this combo had a big damage multiplier. Now it doesn't have one, there is no reason to keep the stagger. No other stance punishes the player for using combos.

Again, I'm not disagreeing with you, just saying- It's hardly an issue at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

I've already explained it multiple times. Again, ignoring that is just proof that you want to argue and disagree for the sake of it. But I'll play along once...

  •  Having a stagger for using a combo too often is annoying because it temporarily removes control from the player. .
  •  It's inconsistent with the rest of the stance mods in the game which have no such mechanic.
  •  It's not necessary because the stagger isn't relevant, all it does is hinder the player's movement for a couple seconds, doesn't prevent spamming the ability in any relevant way, and can easily be circumvented by throwing in one separate move.
  •  Taking control away from the player is the opposite of what DE has claimed they want for melee 3.0.
  •  If balance were an actual issue (which I don't think it is), there are other ways to balance the stance that don't involve taking control away from the player.

First off: I did not ignore your points. I simply wanted a clear and concise statement for your reasoning of wanting it gone. Thank you for giving me a nice, easy to follow list.

9 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

No one is going to stop playing Warframe if Cleaving Whirlwind's stagger gets removed. Absolutely no one.

Absolutely correct. I never once said it would be an end-all kind of thing, I was simply using examples. DE is trying their hardest to try to avoid any and all loopholes like that, be they small and pointless or massive and game-breaking.

11 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

No it doesn't. You're trying to invalidate the fact that there are hundreds of more effective ways to kill things than using a specific melee weapon stance, which is the point of the comparison. You opened the door for this when you brought up balance and tried to suggest that removing a stagger animation was going to make something OP.

Once again, not once did I say or insinuate that the removal of the stagger would make CW incredibly broken or even remotely OP. What I said is that it would make it boring and mundane, just spamming one attack over the rest and not fully utilizing the fun, dynamic stance that it is, and would make TR an objectively worse stance because of it .

20 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

Beyond that, I'd bet if you could poll every Warframe player, you'd find this to be a popular opinion. The fact that there aren't many people in this one thread who have decided to post in agreement isn't really relevant.

I've presented this whole situation to my guild, about 500 players strong, and almost all said they didn't care.

21 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

I've yet to see an actual reason for why the stagger shouldn't be removed.

And you say that I was ignoring your points? I have given several reasons as to why it doesn't need to be removed. Allow me to reprise:

  1. DE is trying to make the game more interesting and dynamic. Removing this stagger would do the opposite.
  2. There is a very easy and trivial way to get around the stagger.
  3. Removal of the stagger would cause Tempo Royale to become irrelevant for heavy-blades in the eyes of "meta slaves", once again defeating the purpose of making the game more interesting.
28 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

Having a stagger for using a combo too often is annoying because it temporarily removes control from the player.

And having combos that launch you forward for an entire second and with more endlag than the stagger animation isn't?

29 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

It's inconsistent with the rest of the stance mods in the game which have no such mechanic.

Once again, just because CW's is more obvious doesn't mean it doesn't happen in other stances.

42 minutes ago, HomicidalGrouse said:

You want to talk about logical fallacies, yet appeal to popularity?

This is called the Bandwagon fallacy, yet there aren't any opinions here to bandwagon with. As stated above, nobody really cares about this. Please read up on fallacies before you attempt to call someone out on them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, I wish they would remove it, otherwise I won't use it.

I hate stagger personally, this whole new stagger system is decreasing my enjoy-ability of the game. I would rather accidentally kill myself on occasion from an explosion than get staggered every other shot.

Having a stagger on a forward melee combo feels unnecessarily punishing, bad, unfun, and not worth the gains over other stances. If they think this combo is too strong I would rather they slightly nerf the damage of it then put such a frustrating mechanic on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...