Jump to content

Archived

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

Slaytanic93

On the change to Venari Heal

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

And again, tips are not 100% accurate descriptions of a skill and how it interacts, they are just tips.

And if you want it to be 100% accurate then it was never intended to work on anything besides static Defense objective aswell as sortie/arbi Defense objectives. Excavators are Excavation objectives, Kuva survival siphons are Kuva Survival objectives and so on.

The whole 100% accuracy in a tip doesnt just go one way. So make up your minds about what you really claim they nerfed that was intended.

The tip was introduced after the fact, and it corroborated the existing behaviour.

It is not exclusive (no matter which way you judge the capitalisation semantics); so it working on things that are not within its mentioned catchment does not mean they are unintended.

However, it does confirm that Defense Objectives should be affected, which at the very least defines that Cryopods, Artifacts and Power Cores, all inanimate static objectives, should be included as well as Operatives found in Sorties etc. This is no longer the case.

Ergo, the 'fix' was not a fix, it was an objective behavioural change, i.e. a nerf to some existing behaviours with evidential intent.

 

There is no statement anyone has been able to cite that states any given object (besides OpLinks for the purpose of the event) should not be a valid target for any abilities or healing sources that do happen to affect them currently.

Removing OpLinks from viable targets was acceptable. Removing anything else was not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Long story short they nerfed cat i had to 8 forma it and gave nothing in return, given old bugs with Venari it was always like that take, take, take, give nothing in return to compase it. Just remove problem by swaping it under rug. Try fixing event without removing existing features next time. If Vazarin mending tides can't heal optlinks but venari could meybe there is your solution, dont lunch nukes were there are other options to squash a bug.

Share this post


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

The tip was introduced after the fact, and it corroborated the existing behaviour.

It is not exclusive (no matter which way you judge the capitalisation semantics); so it working on things that are not within its mentioned catchment does not mean they are unintended.

However, it does confirm that Defense Objectives should be affected, which at the very least defines that Cryopods, Artifacts and Power Cores, all inanimate static objectives, should be included as well as Operatives found in Sorties etc. This is no longer the case.

Ergo, the 'fix' was not a fix, it was an objective behavioural change, i.e. a nerf to some existing behaviours with evidential intent.

 

There is no statement anyone has been able to cite that states any given object (besides OpLinks for the purpose of the event) should not be a valid target for any abilities or healing sources that do happen to affect them currently.

Removing OpLinks from viable targets was acceptable. Removing anything else was not.

Introduced after the fact of what?

The capitalisation of D very much defines the meaning of the word in question. So going by the proper english wording, then no, the other things were definently not ment to be effected., so that behavior was very much unintended since those modes arent Defense.

Yes and no, since tips arent 100% accurate when it comes to full descriptions and we already know how static objectives interact with other healing, which is to say not at all. The tips arent part of the actual skill tooltip, they are tips for the kit as a whole. It isnt stated on the skill itself. Sortie operatives are still effected, just as arbi operatives.

And agreed there is no statement, but you can see it in game that no healing works on the static objectives, atleast not healing provided by frames, which the power in question originates from. Not that statements are common regarding anything since most thing we find out on our own, what does or doesnt work.

Removing all static objectives was acceptable, since it wasnt part of the tip to begin with, except for the possiblity of static Defense pods. So in reality they nerfed one thing, star chart Defense missions, but only in a reality where the tips are 100% accurate in their very short descriptions.

Either the tip you and others so happily cite is 100% correct in all situations, or it is flawed and inaccurate and something that cannot be used as proof or facts. It cant be both.

Share this post


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

Introduced after the fact of what? 

The capitalisation of D very much defines the meaning of the word in question. So going by the proper english wording, then no, the other things were definently not ment to be effected., so that behavior was very much unintended since those modes arent Defense.

Yes and no, since tips arent 100% accurate when it comes to full descriptions and we already know how static objectives interact with other healing, which is to say not at all. The tips arent part of the actual skill tooltip, they are tips for the kit as a whole. It isnt stated on the skill itself. Sortie operatives are still effected, just as arbi operatives.

And agreed there is no statement, but you can see it in game that no healing works on the static objectives, atleast not healing provided by frames, which the power in question originates from. Not that statements are common regarding anything since most thing we find out on our own, what does or doesnt work.

Removing all static objectives was acceptable, since it wasnt part of the tip to begin with, except for the possiblity of static Defense pods. So in reality they nerfed one thing, star chart Defense missions, but only in a reality where the tips are 100% accurate in their very short descriptions.

Either the tip you and others so happily cite is 100% correct in all situations, or it is flawed and inaccurate and something that cannot be used as proof or facts. It cant be both.

  1. After the fact of the ability itself. Unless I'm very much mistaken, Tips were not a thing before Khora and Venari were in the game. Therefore, behaviour first, tips second.
  2. False dichotomy again. If I state that you can eat bread, this does not mean you cannot eat a potato as it is not bread. It confirms a non-exhaustive selection of things that are true.
  3. Counterpoint: Just off the top of my head I can think of two healing factors usable on static targets. Amesha's 2 and Vazarin's Protective Dash. The former we can't clarify on 'Defense Objectives' by the narrowest definition of such, since they're not open-world missions, but Vaz Dash has been a safe backup for anyone not wanting to be pigeonholed into a defense frame.
  4. See 3. 'At least not healing by frames' is just moving the goalposts.
  5. Again inaccurate as the tip is a non-exhaustive confirmation of what definitively was intended.
  6. We can play semantics all day, but the proof is evident that some static objectives were inarguably intended, therefore it is a valid argument to extend that to any other static objective to which no direct statement has been made (any non-OpLink; the patch note stating it as a 'fix' does not count as this is proven as fallible by virtue of contradicting in part what the tip does confirm)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Jarriaga said:

So now you're moving the goalpost from "You can't mark cryopods" (Implying she could not do so before) to "What has changed is what you can mark"?

How does that address the fact that the previous function, now deemed "a bug", did exactly what it did it said but it's now suddenly a bug? Again, since the point is flying over your head, circling around the planet, and flying over your head 50 times more, I don't care about the actual ability being changed. If DE had a change of heart on what the ability is allowed to do then fine. My problem is them calling it a bug despite having direct in-game evidence from in-game text to in-game functions contradicting that label, which either shows a blatant lie on their end, or a terrible lack of communications with debuggers that don't actually play the game yet assigned to change it.

I certainly am not moving the goal posts and had no intention of implying she could not mark cryopods before. 

It is possible for something to be a bug and still fall within the parameters of the tip description. Example is oplinks. DE stated they were not intended to be healed.

The tip before the fix was true. You mark an oplink and it would be healed. They removed the ability to heal oplinks and yet the tip is still true. You cannot mark oplinks therefore they cannot be healed. Any target you can mark can be healed.

Your assumption is that the fix put into place was not a fix. It was either a lie or the debuggers made a mistake.

The evidence being used against DE is the tip, but the tip is still true as it is written. If a Defense objective is marked it will be healed. That is not a lie. .  

Did the debuggers make a mistake? I guess we can't definitively answer that, but the current evidence suggests this was not a mistake. 

The evidence:

They fixed the oplink issue and while fixing that issue made further adjustments. 

The adjustments they made are in line with other warframe heal abilities.

So no I haven't missed the point. A change was made and your response was to assume DE are liars, incompetent, or both.

DE absolutely make mistakes. We might find out this was one. What is the point of assuming the worst? If that's you feelings, why are you supporting a company you revile?

Why not choose being objective and rational instead of assuming people are just trying to screw you over.. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand why they'd nerf something like Ivara's quiver arrows in the past for making the defense targets invisible basically forever and never targeted.

I understand that the objective is supposed to be "Defended" and not "cheesed to never die" ideal.

That being said,
What was the point of removing this intended feature? The enemy has NO problem deleting Venari if you leave them alone to fend for themselves if the enemy scales high enough and/ or you neglect your cat long enough.

To top it off doesn't mending splinters from Gara's 2ed ability heal the target oplinks. (or do oplinks heal over time naturally?I never noticed.) I was thinking of switching to Khora since Gara gets annoying to keep her defense all the time after 10 murax runs but I guess we can't have choices. (Yes Limbo and Frost are there, but one's too boring to the point I could just leave my desk for half a minute nothing bad will happen and the other I can't shoot through the balls of ice outside)
It's nerfs like this that just are underwhelming, unnecessary and limit the player flexibility of using different frames in different missions. (also F for all Trinity mains, eclipsed by x100 large energy pad craft)

I bet they'll nerf every defensive frame but limbo at this rate during this event with this backwards thinking personally. Or make it so that the objective in the void still gets shot by enemies outside the rift.

Share this post


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

I can understand why they'd nerf something like Ivara's quiver arrows in the past for making the defense targets invisible basically forever and never targeted.

I understand that the objective is supposed to be "Defended" and not "cheesed to never die" ideal.

That being said,
What was the point of removing this intended feature? The enemy has NO problem deleting Venari if you leave them alone to fend for themselves if the enemy scales high enough and/ or you neglect your cat long enough.

To top it off doesn't mending splinters from Gara's 2ed ability heal the target oplinks (or do oplinks heal over time naturally I never noticed since they'd just d? I was thinking of switching to Khora since Gara gets annoying to keep her defense all the time after 10 murax runs but I guess we can't have choices. (Yes Limbo and Frost are there, but one's too boring to the point I could just leave my desk for half a minute nothing bad will happen and the other I can't shoot through the balls of ice outside)
It's nerfs like this that just are underwhelming, unnecessary and limit the player flexibility of using different frames in different missions. (also F for all Trinity mains, eclipsed by x100 large energy pad craft)

I bet they'll nerf every defensive frame but limbo at this rate during this event with this backwards thinking personally. Or make it so that the objective in the void still gets shot by enemies outside the rift.

Gara only gives damage reduction and small AoE damage with her 2 if you cast on a defense target. I think the healing came either from other warframe using Rejuvenation or someone giving support from the relay. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I initially thought that Khora should not be able to heal OpLinks... but given that defense frames like Limbo, Gara, Frost can outright deny damage (especially Limbo!) to OpLinks, I think allowing Khora to heal OpLinks would give her a niche purpose in the event. When the event started, I already figured a lot of frames would not be appropriate for the event... and that thought included Khora! Khora's CC is not very useful for this event.

Share this post


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

Gara only gives damage reduction and small AoE damage with her 2 if you cast on a defense target. I think the healing came either from other warframe using Rejuvenation or someone giving support from the relay. 

He's talking about the Mending Splinters augment. I could see that working... I don't have the augment to test it though. Rejuvination definitely doesn't work now.

https://warframe.fandom.com/wiki/Mending_Splinters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, TheLexiConArtist said:
  1. After the fact of the ability itself. Unless I'm very much mistaken, Tips were not a thing before Khora and Venari were in the game. Therefore, behaviour first, tips second.
  2. False dichotomy again. If I state that you can eat bread, this does not mean you cannot eat a potato as it is not bread. It confirms a non-exhaustive selection of things that are true.
  3. Counterpoint: Just off the top of my head I can think of two healing factors usable on static targets. Amesha's 2 and Vazarin's Protective Dash. The former we can't clarify on 'Defense Objectives' by the narrowest definition of such, since they're not open-world missions, but Vaz Dash has been a safe backup for anyone not wanting to be pigeonholed into a defense frame.
  4. See 3. 'At least not healing by frames' is just moving the goalposts.
  5. Again inaccurate as the tip is a non-exhaustive confirmation of what definitively was intended.
  6. We can play semantics all day, but the proof is evident that some static objectives were inarguably intended, therefore it is a valid argument to extend that to any other static objective to which no direct statement has been made (any non-OpLink; the patch note stating it as a 'fix' does not count as this is proven as fallible by virtue of contradicting in part what the tip does confirm)

1. That doesnt really matter, because it doesnt change what the tip says. I'm not really seeing your point here to be honest.

2. Not the same. There is only 1 Defense mode in WF, it refers to that mode. If it did say defense without a capital letter it could imply anything we defend. Also, what the frick is with all vague food analogies on the net? Come up with something more accurate if you need to have an analogy when it really isnt needed since the meaning being discussed is rooted in english grammar.

3. We are talking warframes here, not archwing or operator. Also, the wording is "Defense objective" not "Defense Objective", resulting in two widely different meanings in the context it is presented. The first one refers to something very specific, the second refers to a wider collection of things.

4. Again, we are talking about frame abilities. We dont really know if the others are intended or not. So we can only go on what is available within the same "class" of items.

5. It still says Defense objective as in the specific mode. Again, simple english grammar to differentiate meaning and intent.

6. It isnt proof for one single thing when it can be interpreted both ways and the other way is also backed up by a capitalisation of a specific name, refering to a specfic part/use. It is there in black and white. It is you and others who sway from the proper use of grammar since it doesnt benefit your opinion. My own opinion is that it simply isnt 100% accurate eitherway, so it is really on DE what they actually intended or not. If you go by the actual wording only Defense mode objectives should be open to Venari healing, both static and mobile, while everything else should not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ShaperOfForm said:

Your assumption is that the fix put into place was not a fix. It was either a lie or the debuggers made a mistake.

The evidence being used against DE is the tip, but the tip is still true as it is written. If a Defense objective is marked it will be healed. That is not a lie. .  

Just because the tip remains "technically true" doesn't mean it was factually false under it's previous incarnation. What was there to fix that fell outside the parameters of the tooltip? The Oplink? Fine. What about excavators, cryopods, and mobile defense terminals that can no longer be marked? Are they not "defense targets" as well? If you have to add "stationary" to "clarify" what the tip meant even though it didn't need clarification before and did what it was described to do with no discrimination, then what is there to fix as in "not working as intended" despite what in-game info states? Why not call it a change? Why not call it a rework?

Your insistence on semantics and "technically still true" statements just show not that the point is flying over your head, but rather that you don't care about the point per se. It's obvious no one is going to get you to care because all that matters is that "it's still technically true" while the context surrounding it be dammed. And you are not going to get me to not care either, because the problem I am highlighting with the way DE have handled this has not been addressed, nor can it be addressed by you.

1 hour ago, ShaperOfForm said:

Did the debuggers make a mistake? I guess we can't definitively answer that, but the current evidence suggests this was not a mistake. 

The evidence:

They fixed the oplink issue and while fixing that issue made further adjustments.

That argument goes both ways.

The evidence:

In-game information matching the previous in-game function 100% with no exceptions indicates otherwise. It looks more like a change of heart than a bug fix. 

And it's fine if it's a change of heart. I'm fine with nerfs. But just call it what it is instead of pretending it's something else. 

1 hour ago, ShaperOfForm said:

The adjustments they made are in line with other warframe heal abilities.

In line with other abilities? Sure.

Do other abilities make a point in their tooltips towards healing targets you want to protect? No? Why is that? Could it be perhaps that Venari, being unable to scale in range or duration while at the same time locking Khora out of Venari's other functions and Venari herself being a killable target was made an exception that required a tooltip in order to highlight how that function could still be useful despite all other drawbacks when compared to other healing abilities? 

No?

OK.

1 hour ago, ShaperOfForm said:

So no I haven't missed the point. A change was made and your response was to assume DE are liars, incompetent, or both.

And I stand by this based on the evidence, applied to this case and also historical accounts. It's not like Split Flights happened last Friday and they didn't tell anyone about its limitations until after 2 hours later when people had spent their Ducats in vain, and didn't refund them.

1 hour ago, ShaperOfForm said:

What is the point of assuming the worst?

Because even when I try to give them the benefit of the doubt, they prove me wrong.

Example? Me trying to calm down people on the proposed values for AG as initially shown before release.

On 2020-03-03 at 9:42 AM, Jarriaga said:

So I'd have to go out of my way to be cynical-enough as to believe that Guardian's proposed values are not a typo. 

Actual outcome: Hard nerf. Not a 1.5 increment to compensate lack of double stacking. You have 1.5 the buff value at R5, but at a lower proc chance than previous R3 and can not be refreshed. So I ate crow for expecting better and trying to defend DE.

1 hour ago, ShaperOfForm said:

If that's you feelings, why are you supporting a company you revile?

I am definitely reaching a tipping point with them as of SS pricing, Split Flights, and now this. Sure they make mistakes. How many times do they have to make the same mistakes before actually avoiding them? Did Dog Days reward pricing not work as a lesson for them? No, because SS reward pricing is in a close scale. But that's off topic.

At this rate I will leave the game soon. DE have been on a streak of souring my opinion of them.

1 hour ago, ShaperOfForm said:

Why not choose being objective and rational instead of assuming people are just trying to screw you over.. 

Screwing me over? It's not like my life resolves around this game. Just because I feel disappointed in the way they have handled recent issues doesn't mean I feel personally attacked beyond feeling lied to, which only serves to disappoint and nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok   I'm on ps4.  So per nerf.  And I play khora alot with 3 other frames. .  Venari can not protect or heal stationery    defense objectives. . I tested it myself just to be sure. .....  Venari will walk up to a target you try to tag , but the symbol wont highlight the target .  So sum may be confused. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, (PS4)SolarPhantom82 said:

Ok   I'm on ps4.  So per nerf.  And I play khora alot with 3 other frames. .  Venari can not protect or heal stationery    defense objectives. . I tested it myself just to be sure. .....  Venari will walk up to a target you try to tag , but the symbol wont highlight the target .  So sum may be confused. 

I supposed I've never noticed she can heal stationery objectives, but maybe it's different in the PS4 version then? Someone on XB1 can test this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What in the world is all this?

 

What is going to happen is either the tip gets removed or the behavior gets reverted. Objectives that are nonstatic (hostages operatives etc) are referred to as "allies" by the game instead of "defense objectives" which instead refers to static entities (consoles cryopods etc). Why is there a debate on what the tooltip means when the tooltip simply needs to be deleted to throw the debate down the river?

 

Still very much eagerly waiting on the official statement from DE on the matter btw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SneakyErvin said:

1. That doesnt really matter, because it doesnt change what the tip says. I'm not really seeing your point here to be honest.

2. Not the same. There is only 1 Defense mode in WF, it refers to that mode. If it did say defense without a capital letter it could imply anything we defend. Also, what the frick is with all vague food analogies on the net? Come up with something more accurate if you need to have an analogy when it really isnt needed since the meaning being discussed is rooted in english grammar.

3. We are talking warframes here, not archwing or operator. Also, the wording is "Defense objective" not "Defense Objective", resulting in two widely different meanings in the context it is presented. The first one refers to something very specific, the second refers to a wider collection of things.

4. Again, we are talking about frame abilities. We dont really know if the others are intended or not. So we can only go on what is available within the same "class" of items.

5. It still says Defense objective as in the specific mode. Again, simple english grammar to differentiate meaning and intent.

6. It isnt proof for one single thing when it can be interpreted both ways and the other way is also backed up by a capitalisation of a specific name, refering to a specfic part/use. It is there in black and white. It is you and others who sway from the proper use of grammar since it doesnt benefit your opinion. My own opinion is that it simply isnt 100% accurate eitherway, so it is really on DE what they actually intended or not. If you go by the actual wording only Defense mode objectives should be open to Venari healing, both static and mobile, while everything else should not.

  1. Clarifying precedence guides how the tips can be interpreted with regards to existing behaviour. If it was an at-launch you could argue that non-Defense objectives were possibly below intent. Tips happening afterwards signifies that the behaviour was observed in its existing way, and the conclusion drawn from that - its target viability was not considered a bug but a feature, and a tip written about part of the benefits that result.
  2. You're attempting to obfuscate the point. The point is not what the tip does state, it is clarifying the nature of what it does not. It does not make any declaration for or against any targets not "Defense Objectives". It doesn't state they should be acceptable, but their omission does not state that they are absolutely not acceptable.
  3. They are still healing factors, you are moving the goalposts. Archwings operate exactly as Warframes, having their own dedicated ability sets attached to the same mechanical usage as Warframes do. So Amesha is the strongest proof of concept for its ability to heal static objects. Since this is shared with Vazarin Dash, we can assume safely that regardless of the textual semantics, there are no programmatical semantics which treat an Excavator and a Defense objective differently - ergo, if we could summon an Amesha in Defense, it would heal the Defense objective. 
  4. As above.
  5. If you want to cite English grammar you should probably start with reading comprehension. A non-exhaustive listing structure, as the tip clearly is (the only logical definition, otherwise Venari wouldn't heal Khora much less anything else) is often explained with the phrase "including, but not limited to". So Venari can heal entities including, but not limited to, Defense objectives.
  6. I'll indulge myself a little tu-quoque here: Grammar rules include apostrophes on contractions, which you're lacking severely right there. But, rather than quibble over capitalisation and the debatable catchment thereof (DE are not paragons of absolutely flawless English either, and capitalisation is often used for Dramatic Emphasis as well, it could be merely leading the player's eye to the Important Words) I have instead defeated the argument by proving that no matter how narrow that catchment is, it has been violated by this change.

In conclusion:

Cryopods are a (D/d)efense (O/o)bjective by any distinction. Cryopods can no longer be healed by Venari now that Venari cannot heal static, inanimate entities. QED, it was not a 'fix' as it removed behaviour that was intended

Furthermore, since we can see other abilities treat a Cryopod no differently to any other objective that is to be defended (including but not limited to MobDef consoles, Excavation drills, Kuva Survival siphoning towers), we can extend that determined intent to said other objectives - they inherit from the same code class for governing health and effects, but just use a different geometry model and have different events bolted on to work with the mission design - since there has been no statement made that they should differ (unlike OpLinks).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TheLexiConArtist said:
  1. Clarifying precedence guides how the tips can be interpreted with regards to existing behaviour. If it was an at-launch you could argue that non-Defense objectives were possibly below intent. Tips happening afterwards signifies that the behaviour was observed in its existing way, and the conclusion drawn from that - its target viability was not considered a bug but a feature, and a tip written about part of the benefits that result.
  2. You're attempting to obfuscate the point. The point is not what the tip does state, it is clarifying the nature of what it does not. It does not make any declaration for or against any targets not "Defense Objectives". It doesn't state they should be acceptable, but their omission does not state that they are absolutely not acceptable.
  3. They are still healing factors, you are moving the goalposts. Archwings operate exactly as Warframes, having their own dedicated ability sets attached to the same mechanical usage as Warframes do. So Amesha is the strongest proof of concept for its ability to heal static objects. Since this is shared with Vazarin Dash, we can assume safely that regardless of the textual semantics, there are no programmatical semantics which treat an Excavator and a Defense objective differently - ergo, if we could summon an Amesha in Defense, it would heal the Defense objective. 
  4. As above.
  5. If you want to cite English grammar you should probably start with reading comprehension. A non-exhaustive listing structure, as the tip clearly is (the only logical definition, otherwise Venari wouldn't heal Khora much less anything else) is often explained with the phrase "including, but not limited to". So Venari can heal entities including, but not limited to, Defense objectives.
  6. I'll indulge myself a little tu-quoque here: Grammar rules include apostrophes on contractions, which you're lacking severely right there. But, rather than quibble over capitalisation and the debatable catchment thereof (DE are not paragons of absolutely flawless English either, and capitalisation is often used for Dramatic Emphasis as well, it could be merely leading the player's eye to the Important Words) I have instead defeated the argument by proving that no matter how narrow that catchment is, it has been violated by this change.

In conclusion:

Cryopods are a (D/d)efense (O/o)bjective by any distinction. Cryopods can no longer be healed by Venari now that Venari cannot heal static, inanimate entities. QED, it was not a 'fix' as it removed behaviour that was intended

Furthermore, since we can see other abilities treat a Cryopod no differently to any other objective that is to be defended (including but not limited to MobDef consoles, Excavation drills, Kuva Survival siphoning towers), we can extend that determined intent to said other objectives - they inherit from the same code class for governing health and effects, but just use a different geometry model and have different events bolted on to work with the mission design - since there has been no statement made that they should differ (unlike OpLinks).

Your problem is you dont read the tip correctly and I will leave it at that. You keep miss quoting the tip over and over with your "Defense Objective" when that isnt at all what the tip says. Get the grammar right and you might understand it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

Your problem is you dont read the tip correctly and I will leave it at that. You keep miss quoting the tip over and over with your "Defense Objective" when that isnt at all what the tip says. Get the grammar right and you might understand it.

You can't defeat a rebuttal to your argument by spouting the same nonsense that has already been shown to be completely beside the point. Whether or not your blind deification of casing is making a salient difference in what it governs, it doesn't change the outcome because every definition has been defied by the change, even your hyper-specific one.

But you know, since we're full of logical fallacies today, I suppose a straw-man should be expected at some point. I'm not arguing the varying catchment of (D/d)efense (O/o)bjective because I don't need to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TheGrimCorsair said:

And good riddance, no frame should be able to heal static defense targets.

Going by that logic, maybe only one frame should be allowed to heal anyone or anything period. Just keep trinity and scrap everyone elses abilities that can heal. 🤔

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused now, I just did a solo defense mission, and I was able to mark the defense target with Venari's heal posture, I let it take some damage first and then she healed it right back up. I have no idea what's happening now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Lord-Taco-the-Great said:

I'm so frustrated with DE, that's not how bugs work. If they didn't like it call it a CHANGE since that's what it is. DE saying venari healing defense targets was a bug is a blatant lie.

It worked and was another strategy used for the event so therefore it needs "fixed".

Just how apparently porting enemies out of the map only suddenly became an "exploit" during hostile mergers which got peoples score removed. Even though it has always worked like this and BY THE WAY STILL DOES.

Typical.

But Limbo trivializing the whole event is fine apparently. I don't even know what to say anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TwistedLogic81 said:

I'm confused now, I just did a solo defense mission, and I was able to mark the defense target with Venari's heal posture, I let it take some damage first and then she healed it right back up. I have no idea what's happening now.

Plot twist: nothing changed, it all was just an April's Fool joke!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, (PS4)Viveeeh said:

Plot twist: nothing changed, it all was just an April's Fool joke!

One that I would welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, IceColdHawk said:

But Limbo trivializing the whole event is fine apparently. I don't even know what to say anymore.

I think the solution to Limbo is two fold:
- Aerolyst (the annoying one) shall gain immunity to Cataclysm. This doesn't matter so much for the event... just give Sentients their Disruptor/Nullifier unit! I've also seen certain Index units like 002-ER just fly through Cataclysm and score... so basically Aerolyst should be like this IMO. Also, more Aerolysts please. One sometimes on Wave 2 of a Condrix is not enough.
- The new Grineer shield unit we see in the event shall have a magic shield that allows him to walk through Cataclysm and Mass Vitrify along with anybody immediately behind him. Just give the Grineer a Disruptor/Nullifier unit already!

So there... Mass Vitrify can be broken, Frost bubbles can be walked through/broken, and certain Grineer/Sentient units can ignore Cataclysm. Everyone has a weakness!

EDIT: The name of those Grineer units are "Heavy Shield Lancer". Warframe Wiki does not have an entry for him yet:
Listed under "Heavy":
https://warframe.fandom.com/wiki/Grineer#Heavy

Missing page:
https://warframe.fandom.com/wiki/Heavy_Shield_Lancer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, TwistedLogic81 said:

I'm confused now, I just did a solo defense mission, and I was able to mark the defense target with Venari's heal posture, I let it take some damage first and then she healed it right back up. I have no idea what's happening now.

Likely the default self-healing. I did a test with over 300 power strength to get Venari to 167 then allowed the cryopod's health to drop about 6,000 points before activating Venari. Even though she still marked the cryopod, it was only healing 10 points, the default value. Definitely not 167 per second. I on the other hand went to full health from under 500 in around 4 seconds or so:

Warframe0125.jpg

So it is definitely not working with defense targets even though you can still mark them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...