So with DE looking into abilities that heal defense target

[TheLexiConArtist]

1 hour ago, IEtherI said:

You shouldnt be able to solo events and endgame content.

Citation needed.

Does the mission force you to squad up? No.

Are there situations where matchmaking is unlikely or inadvisable? Yes. (bad internet, off-peak/low population region)

Since there's no physical barrier stopping you attempting the content why should you absolutely not be able to strategise as a solo player enough to succeed? You are already being limited by a single loadout and single point of agency. Sometimes DE considers this (recapturing the inevitable Interception points faster since you can't physically defend all 4 areas at once by yourself). Sometimes they actively design against it (Oplinks are 4 times slower for solo despite one of the missions being directly stated as solo-friendly, which is ironically the one most stacked against soloing for other reasons as well). Other times it's just a neutral, natural caveat - you can't explore all the directions a Demolisher/Demolyst might be approaching a Conduit from at once, if you are but one physical being.

Solo players are permitted and should therefore be considered. _{Same goes for solo clans, which DE routinely sodomise with event scoring thresholds, because the min-to-max clan capacity ratios beyond the first tier are grossly inequal to that initial 1:10.}

[Yamazuki]

14 hours ago, AzureTerra said:

Maybe you will actually have to DEFEND the target better than heal it.

If it's a low heal over time, healing is riskier than making them flat out immune to damage, as enemies would be able to out-dps the heal at least, where as it wouldn't matter how much damage enemies do if they aren't allowed to; either due to cc spam, protection, or area denial. Warframes that fit any of that, don't really put any effort into defending, which is why Limbo got nerfed for Murex as he could just afk and not fail while just using two abilities occasionally.

[(XBOX)GearsMatrix301]

Just a reminder if they remove defense target healing, defection is going to be even more cancer than it already is.

[(XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA]

5 minutes ago, (XB1)GearsMatrix301 said:

Just a reminder if they remove defense target healing, defection is going to be even more cancer than it already is.

This 1000x. 

2 hours ago, TheLexiConArtist said:

Citation needed.

Does the mission force you to squad up? No.

Are there situations where matchmaking is unlikely or inadvisable? Yes. (bad internet, off-peak/low population region)

Since there's no physical barrier stopping you attempting the content why should you absolutely not be able to strategise as a solo player enough to succeed? You are already being limited by a single loadout and single point of agency. Sometimes DE considers this (recapturing the inevitable Interception points faster since you can't physically defend all 4 areas at once by yourself). Sometimes they actively design against it (Oplinks are 4 times slower for solo despite one of the missions being directly stated as solo-friendly, which is ironically the one most stacked against soloing for other reasons as well). Other times it's just a neutral, natural caveat - you can't explore all the directions a Demolisher/Demolyst might be approaching a Conduit from at once, if you are but one physical being.

Solo players are permitted and should therefore be considered. _{Same goes for solo clans, which DE routinely sodomise with event scoring thresholds, because the min-to-max clan capacity ratios beyond the first tier are grossly inequal to that initial 1:10.}

Also this. 

[(XBOX)Graysmog]

12 hours ago, (XB1)ECCHO SIERRA said:

>you cant heal the target. That makes it too easy!

 

>but you can co ahead and completely remove any chance of the enemy actually being able to harm the target with limbo or frost.

 

Perfect DE logic.

Pretty sure the easiest fix is just to have the defense target heal faster on its own, as that's really the core of the issue for immobile objectives. Defending the pod is incredibly easy, but mobile defense targets are really not fun when they constantly move out of your protective zones and just decide to never stay still. Defection and Arbitration are notorious examples of how annoying this can be.

I don't necessarily mind players not being able to heal the objective if the objective doesn't need it, but at the moment it's pretty apparent the objectives do. Honestly, it may just be better for objectives to receive less healing than we would. That way, you still need to defend them and make sure they aren't burst down by enemies, but now healing can still function to a degree. I've never really been a fan of DE's "oh well it's too good so we should just make it immune" line of thought. It's why I don't like Eidolons or Orbs all that much, we have all these Warframe abilities at our disposal and 90% don't work at all. 

Maybe DE should focus more on making our abilities less effective on certain things instead of just making them fail to work entirely. 

Edited April 3, 2020 by (XB1)Graysmog

[(XBOX)Graysmog]

22 minutes ago, (XB1)GearsMatrix301 said:

Just a reminder if they remove defense target healing, defection is going to be even more cancer than it already is.

I still can't believe they gave us Stims through the event and the bloody things are some of the most expensive, useless gear items we've ever gotten in this game.

 

[SneakyErvin]

My biggest question is just.

If it does get changed, what is the actual harm in it? Wouldnt it be kinda interesting to actually be able to fail something once in a while?

I mean honestly. When was the last time you actually failed a sortie or arbi defense/defection and thought "man I sure could have used X now for healing!". I think the last time I failed either of those it was a rad sortie defection, where it wouldnt have mattered jack or S#&$ if we'd have a healer or not, since well, healers cannot ress dead NPCs and they cannot heal through a 1HK.

Last time I remember losing a long arbi defense wasnt due to lack of healing either, it was due to someone losing attention and dragging the target with them into a mass of mobs getting it killed near instantly. Now if only we would have had a healer there to coun... nope wait, not enough healing (except for maybe Trin) to counter the incoming damage.

So when would it actually matter? It would only matter at levels where the mobs arent actually hitting hard enough yet, at levels where killing would still be the best option, where other defensive options would be better and more reliable already (and also scale further). I think the exception to this when it comes to healers is Trinity, she is the only reliable one that actually provides healing in amounts big enough to counter incoming damage up to the 1HK point.

Who here that complains and think it would be the end of the world actually plays Trin willingly? Now come on, raise your hands all of you!

[Lancars]

With the Ai basically being aimbots we should be able to heal the defense target. No matter how fast you kill or how much you CC the enemy will get enough hits in to do damage to something. Instead of nerfing things how about you expand on things DE. nerfing something is the EZ and sad route.

[BornWithTeeth]

So I take it folks in this thread would like to see the Workshop on healing defence targets?

 

 

Edited April 4, 2020 by BornWithTeeth

[Ikserdok]

18 hours ago, zakaryx said:

I'm just sad that the entire event wasn't based around sentients adapting to us in the first place. Imagine if we were warned on the Scarlet Spear event page that the sentients would be "adapting" to our tactics and abilities over time. Have little duck mention it too.  Have the first week be fairly easy with the second week slightly harder than the last by nerfing/changing the most common 'meta' abilities to be slightly less effective. Third week they could block the ribs on the Murex and give the Condrix some kind of new ability we would need to overcome plus more ability tweaking. Fourth week would be very hard but rewards would be increased to compensate as to not make it unfair for players that can't get past the first few waves.

At the end of the event we could be left wondering "Wow! How are we going to beat the sentients when they come back to murder us all?" Base the next events around finding ways to combat the sentients adaptation.

 

I don't know maybe I'm just crazy. I just feel that it would have been a better stance for DE to have by making any temporary changes literally part of the lore of warframe.

 

and at the end after time doing this event sentients get everything needed about us - tenno - making them literally impossible to us to beat their single smallest unit in for example "new war" because after hey! they learned about us durning this event! we dont have any single secret about our arsenal against them as they have adapted to literally everything after this long battle!

I see now big plan here - you dont need to release new content with sentients if we wont be able to even scratch them so why even starting? we are on lose since beggining

[Morthal]

22 hours ago, AzureTerra said:

Maybe you will actually have to DEFEND the target better than heal it.

Yeah, more AFK gameplay starring your boi Limbo. 
Any changes outside of the mission variables itself are ultimately pointless. How many Warframes can completely defend an objective from Bombard/Napalm Snipers? Maybe 2?
The benefit of someone in the group having Vazarin dash, was to enable people to use Warframes they enjoyed playing, rather than being forced into the same 2-3 'defense' frames. Especially considering the reduced viability of CC in these trying times. 

[IggySnow]

Well would you look at that...

Kudos DE, you did the right thing.

[SneakyErvin]

16 hours ago, BornWithTeeth said:

So I take it folks in this thread would like to see the Workshop on healing defence targets?

 

 

The funny part are all the complaints about how those changes will "nerf" healing, when most of the right collumn says "on live does nothing". I bet most of the people complaining about it didnt read the bold text saying "Effect on all types of static Defendable objects" and likely assume this will apply to movable targets aswell.

12 (13 if you count current Venari) out of the 19 mentioned does nothing on live. Obviously it is now a nerf to buff 12 abilities while nerfing 2 (Vaz and Sancti) and keeping the rest the same.

IMO good changes overall.

Edited April 4, 2020 by SneakyErvin

[(XBOX)Graysmog]

11 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

The funny part are all the complaints about how those changes will "nerf" healing, when most of the right collumn says "on live does nothing". I bet most of the people complaining about it didnt read the bold text saying "Effect on all types of static Defendable objects" and likely assume this will apply to movable targets aswell.

12 (13 if you count current Venari) out of the 19 mentioned does nothing on live. Obviously it is now a nerf to buff 12 abilities while nerfing 2 (Vaz and Sancti) and keeping the rest the same.

IMO good changes overall.

I think my only issue thus far is that the healing being a flat amount isn't very good when Defense Target Health scales so high. 

Of course everything's still subject to change, but Healing should probably be more % based. You could easily have it be 5 or 10% of the targets overall Health over five seconds, with values depending on the ability of course.

That way, there's still a delay that stops spam healing, and it still takes quite a few casts to heal the objective.

Edited April 4, 2020 by (XB1)Graysmog

[SneakyErvin]

1 hour ago, (XB1)Graysmog said:

I think my only issue thus far is that the healing being a flat amount isn't very good when Defense Target Health scales so high. 

Of course everything's still subject to change, but Healing should probably be more % based. You could easily have it be 5 or 10% of the targets overall Health over five seconds, with values depending on the ability of course.

That way, there's still a delay that stops spam healing, and it still takes quite a few casts to heal the objective.

But we have so many possible layers of defense and it is a game for groups of up to 4 people. Healing should not be a primary defense option, it should be a good support back up along with the actual defense frames. They shouldnt snatch the job from frames like gara or frost.

100 per second is still a decent amount if the target is also protected, as it should be. We can just see how rediculous HP % healing gets very quickly. My Grendel with around 3k health cannot die versus a group of mixed level 150 corrupted heavy gunners and bombards with grace equipped. So even if a defense target would only heal 1% per second for 5 seconds, it would still be a massively overpowered amount given they have 40k health or something already in Hydron. Not to mention that several frames will probably be able to stack heals together, or keep constant healing on the target like Wisp and Oberon.

[TheLexiConArtist]

20 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

But we have so many possible layers of defense and it is a game for groups of up to 4 people. Healing should not be a primary defense option, it should be a good support back up along with the actual defense frames. They shouldnt snatch the job from frames like gara or frost.

100 per second is still a decent amount if the target is also protected, as it should be. We can just see how rediculous HP % healing gets very quickly. My Grendel with around 3k health cannot die versus a group of mixed level 150 corrupted heavy gunners and bombards with grace equipped. So even if a defense target would only heal 1% per second for 5 seconds, it would still be a massively overpowered amount given they have 40k health or something already in Hydron.

Your Grendel doesn't have 3000 naked health and zero armour. Defense targets also won't have the new benefit of weakness-neutral health types we do. Two potential EHP layers right there not being considered. Gonna assume you're sitting on an Adaptation as well, there's a third layer. By this point you've probably got more like 300k effective health, even considering Adaptation being a fickle and misleading mistress.

And why shouldn't a support frame be able to do the job? Why should we be pigeonholed into 3 perfect-guard frames any more than we invariably are and still would be with these weakened abilities, because prevention is always superior to a cure and mitigation?

[IggySnow]

Im wondering if the healing will scale with power strength like it does regularly.

[(XBOX)Graysmog]

10 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

But we have so many possible layers of defense and it is a game for groups of up to 4 people. Healing should not be a primary defense option, it should be a good support back up along with the actual defense frames. They shouldnt snatch the job from frames like gara or frost.

100 per second is still a decent amount if the target is also protected, as it should be. We can just see how rediculous HP % healing gets very quickly. My Grendel with around 3k health cannot die versus a group of mixed level 150 corrupted heavy gunners and bombards with grace equipped. So even if a defense target would only heal 1% per second for 5 seconds, it would still be a massively overpowered amount given they have 40k health or something already in Hydron. Not to mention that several frames will probably be able to stack heals together, or keep constant healing on the target like Wisp and Oberon.

That won't be the case, DE already said the healing won't stack in the chart itself for almost every Healing option. I'm afraid DE is also in complete disagreement with you in how they want these changes to impact the game.

"Now that that we have reviewed it, we feel like healing these objectives can serve well as an alternative or a complement to the commonly used defensive abilities, such as Frost's Snow Globe, Gara's Mass Vitrify, Limbo's Cataclysm. 100% heals is not what we want to do, so we are instead trying to allow the effects but adjusted as to not trivialize the game modes."

So you're pretty much dealing with 500 Health at max every five seconds, from what the chart is telling us. Other options may add 3 or 5 Health every second constantly, but it obviously won't matter in general considering most people will run one or two Healthframes at best and at least one Defenseframe regularly. I'm pretty sure that's less than the regular objective heal.

DE also stated they wanted Healingframes to serve as an alternative option to Defenseframes, that implies that they'd like them to offer something comparable to defense, to allow them to keep the Objectives going on their own. At current, Healing is a very passive upside and not a real option, if these values are the absolute max as the chart seems to say. That's going against what DE stated already, and is only not going to allow Healing to be an alternative to Defense at almost any level.

You're also comparing a defense objective, which easily reaches over 40k Health, to a Warframe, where the maximum you usually see is around 5k. Just from that alone the amount restored and the amount per second restored is going to be quite different.

5% of 40,000 is 2000 Health over five seconds, while 10% would still only be 4000 over five seconds. Warframes obviously have much higher percentages (or flat amounts) for their Healing and receive it instantly without a delay and can stack on top of each other. Objectives will not have this as an option, and remember that Objectives have very little inherent DR (I'm pretty sure it has less than 10%, while Warframes with 100 Armor alone have a higher DR, if you decide to ignore our Shields 25% DR on top of that).

With the previous values of healing, it would only take an enemy or two to outpace the healing entirely per second. Objectives will also only receive 50% DR at max, and while this will help, this will still not allow the current values of healing to outpace even a few enemy units damage at higher levels. At that point, Healing is very obviously not an alternative option to defense and is only a slight upgrade to the objectives passive healing, and can only really be a tangible benefit with DR and some defense. That's taking a lot of effort just to make Healing noticeable.

So this would pretty much make Healing the only thing you'd need for lower-level defenses, but will obviously not be enough alone for higher-level missions. That seems fair to me while still making Healing valuable. There's a delay and a max amount of HP it can restore during that time, with most abilities not stacking, and that one's that do are healing less than 10 HP per second with three people. Warframes that are more orientated towards support and healing in general will help the defense target massively just on their own every five seconds while Warframes with healing through Augments or as a secondary function do not heal for as much but can stack with each other, which again sounds fair.

If you're worried about the passive healing from abilities that do not have a delay, just make the percentage incredibly small, like 0.5%. You could also go an alternative route and have them run with flat healing, as that should allow them to still help without becoming stronger than Healerframes due to the no stacking schtick.

Edited April 5, 2020 by (XB1)Graysmog

[(XBOX)Graysmog]

32 minutes ago, HerpDerpy said:

Im wondering if the healing will scale with power strength like it does regularly.

Considering that the chart says 500 max, I'm not too sure. 

[TioMegaManX]

On 2020-04-02 at 10:03 PM, (XB1)GearsMatrix301 said:

On a scale from 1-10 how likely are we to completely lose the ability to heal defense targets?

They call that an exploit now so you can guess they will be completely removed.

[SneakyErvin]

15 hours ago, TheLexiConArtist said:

Your Grendel doesn't have 3000 naked health and zero armour. Defense targets also won't have the new benefit of weakness-neutral health types we do. Two potential EHP layers right there not being considered. Gonna assume you're sitting on an Adaptation as well, there's a third layer. By this point you've probably got more like 300k effective health, even considering Adaptation being a fickle and misleading mistress.

And why shouldn't a support frame be able to do the job? Why should we be pigeonholed into 3 perfect-guard frames any more than we invariably are and still would be with these weakened abilities, because prevention is always superior to a cure and mitigation?

The objectives have no real wekness either. the impact bonus to their shields along with the slash bonus to the health is neglectable.

With armor, guardian and health my grendel sits at around 22k ehp, ontop of that adaptation removes around 67% incoming damage from a gorgon at max stacks. That would make the ehp end up at 45k or so when everything is accounted for. Probably 50k since my hp isnt exactly 3000, it is a bit higher.

15 hours ago, (XB1)Graysmog said:

That won't be the case, DE already said the healing won't stack in the chart itself for almost every Healing option. I'm afraid DE is also in complete disagreement with you in how they want these changes to impact the game.

Yeah they wont stack with themselves, so having 2 trinity wont make it 200/tick, but they will stack with other healing sources. Otherwise there will be endless crying and S#&$storms of complaints in missions. "Hey you stupid oberon #*!%face! Dont you #*!%ing dare heal the objective cos mama Trin/Vaz slave is here!".

You are also just focusing on trinity/enox healing. You forget that Venari, Oberon and Wisp will scale with power strenngth and have no cap. So a group that wants to go a healer route for defense can stack several if they like. It would also be very wrong if those mentioned would have to rely on power strength while suddenly Trinity and Enox get a pass and have their heals turned into percent based heals. Heck, they already get a free pass since they get a higher per second heal value than the frames that are already per second based heal frames. Even versus a highly invested strength based Oberon or Wisp, both enox and trinity are ahead by roughly 20% per tick. And this is without counting in Trinity's free DR% and Enox free shield replenish.

It also doesnt matter if the objective has 40k hp and frames have more mitigation. If the frame has 40k ehp, that is the same as an objective having 40k health and 0% DR i.e 40k ehp. Also, an objective doesnt take constant damage, unless of course players are afk. Which I dont think they should balance the game around. So an objective doesnt have to be healed for alot if you just kill as you should while healing the objective as needed.

And people say DE doesnt play their own game, it kinda sounds like the players arent either. The heals really just need to be a sustain, because when you get to the point where the objectives die, healing wont have an impact even if they heal for 100%, because you cannot heal that which gets one-shot. Which genrally is the biggest issue with the static objectives. We only ever bump into cryopods on the star chart, those missions are already as easy as they can get. Excavators and siphons are expendable objectives that get removed after defending them, in the cases where you'd need healing for them the damage will be greater than what the heals will provide, so other options will be far more useful if you are seriously considering a push. DE should probably focus on the complement side of things, instead of going down the path of trivilizing lower level objective missions even more.

The thing is. Static objectives benefit from more defensive frames. Mobile objectives can be massively outhealed in return, while not being very optimal for static defense frames (aside from Limbo).