Pablo acknowledges why better AI alone will not be enough for good difficulty in WF: We need to be nerfed first

[(XBOX)ShonOfDawn]

17 minutes ago, (PS4)DoctorWho_90250 said:

I don't want the player to have their enjoyment of the game trivialized nor disregarded because people get upset at the frames they see in public missions. I don't complain about Saryns, I don't complain about Limbos, I don't complain about frames nor weapons. Sorry, I'm just not like that. The more you ask for nerfs, the more you're demanding DE cater specifically to your precious needs rather than letting players enjoy the game. 

Also, DE doesn't need to nerf frames to make great story content. Look at Second Dream, War Within, Chains of Harrow & Sacrifice. 

No one is saying though that their enjoyment should be trivialized, just that the power of some of the clear outliers should be brought in line, without damaging their mechanics and the elements that make those frames unique. As I've stated, the problem with outliers is that they severely limit enemy and mission design, because everything can be shut down by their powers. Pablo has stated himself that attempting better AI is almost wasted resources because it doesn't matter how smart an enemy is if he dies as soon as he enters a 40m bubble around some frames. Story content, while being extremely appreciated from my part, is unfortunately one and done. Improving moment to moment gameplay would on the other hand massively benefit the game, especially if it manages to shift the focus from "grind to get x" to "play because combat is fun and engaging", and unfortunately that just cannot be done without keeping those frames as they are, or balancing everything around them and ruining the experience for everyone else.

[(PSN)OmegaSlayer]

Difficulty is a flase problem imho

I'm MR28, 1300 days in, almost 4k hours in, and there's still things that I have to farm because DE keeps adding stuff that have 0.1% chance to drop, so I wonder when I will find the time to play harder content if I still have to go through Railjack missions and Arbitrations...because that's a problem; unless you purchase the mods/arcanes/etc...with plats you have to farm it

Would I like harder content? Yes, generally speaking, but would I have the time? I don't think so

Self damage? Introduce a mod for weapons that removes the fallout of the explosions with self damage as the handicap

[SocialFox]

I'd like a game-mode where we fight as any of the enemies in this game, against a group of specters performing "Missions". Put some interesting rewards behind it to try and get people to figure out ways to best our warframes.

Fight as a lich against a group of specters trying to Survive, smash life support, break windows, etc. FUN!

[(PSN)sweatshawp]

34 minutes ago, (PS4)DoctorWho_90250 said:

I didn't say anything about buffing. I just don't like seeing players enjoyment with frames and weapons be trivialized because others join missions, see a Saryn, Limbo, Mesa, Equinox etc. and get upset for whatever reason. It happens with every frame sadly. Give it time and Gauss will get nerfed because players complained (or already have, I don't know I don't visit all the different sections of the forums) they couldn't go as fast as Gauss can in public missions. It is quite annoying. Happens with every frame. Players see something a frame does, don't like it, come on to the forums and demand a nerf. After Limbo had his sentient freezing nerfed I saw players demand a nerf to Frost for some reason. Sigh, I'm in a tiny minority of players. 

EDIT: I've been in missions with multiple Saryns, and I still don't ask her to be nerfed.

Nerfing and buffing go hand in hand however which is why I brought it up. 

Also nerfs should happen within reason. 

a los to nuke abilities or a range nerf is fair. That dosent trivialize a play style but rather bring it line with others trivializing Saryn would be something along the lines of capping spore dmg to 500 and only allowing 3 enemies at a time to be affected by full damage. For example. Also you’re speaking from your experience which is valid. But this is a and(heavy use on the quotations) “co-op based looter shooter”.  They want people to be active in these game modes and such. Not having one player turn of the game for others in a sense. If anything Saryn in a defense mission or limbo trivializes content. And do I believe that’s fair to who Evers in that mission? Well imo that’s a case to case basis. But in general knowledge it’s not acceptable for one player in a mission to. Stop engagement for 3 others. What’s the point of playing in a group setting if that’s the case?  Also amongst petty complaints like the outlandish “gauss moves too fast” there is some validity amongst “hey I joined this mission with a frame but I can’t kill anything because Saryn wipes the map before I can.” 

[Felsagger]

1 hour ago, (XB1)GmanM1 said:

An enemy speed increase would do wonders...

 

 

 

 

This is the best post in the thread. 

 

Why many despised a fast nova in Hydron and Draco? Enemy augmented DPS. 

[Loza03]

47 minutes ago, (PS4)DoctorWho_90250 said:

I don't want the player to have their enjoyment of the game trivialized nor disregarded because people get upset at the frames they see in public missions. I don't complain about Saryns, I don't complain about Limbos, I don't complain about frames nor weapons. Sorry, I'm just not like that. The more you ask for nerfs, the more you're demanding DE cater specifically to your precious needs rather than letting players enjoy the game. 

Also, DE doesn't need to nerf frames to make great story content. Look at Second Dream, War Within, Chains of Harrow & Sacrifice. 

Not nerfing frames also disregards people enjoyment of the game.

Not only does it make public games, which are a pretty significant part of this game, less fun, not only does it quash co-operative play (since one player can do everything), it also does, in fact, hinder story content.

DE have proven themselves to be great writers, but in three of those quests, they've been great writing because they actively take power away from the player in order for there to be any kind of stakes or tension. The Second Dream? You can't shoot Hunhow, and you barely interact with them. The War Within? You are actively powerless for most of it. Chains of Harrow? Invincible enemies. The Sacrifice also side-steps it, as the conflict is emotional, not physical. But DE can't do that forever. They cannot keep coming up with new reasons why we can't use our incredible powers to instantly resolve the problem. And, right now, any kind of climactic boss they make will be a disappointment, because it's either going to be a cheesy fest where we can't use what we've built up the whole game, or it'll be too easy and not properly pay off the build up. So they just don't have us ever confront the villains anymore. Hunhow hasn't appeared in the story for years, and we don't get a satisfying boss fight against him. Ballas didn't get a boss fight. 

What they've made already is great, don't get be wrong, but narrative payoff is important, and good balance makes a satisfying conclusion way easier.

[(XBOX)ShonOfDawn]

17 minutes ago, LSG501 said:

Actually if you note I've actually been replying to other posts while you were gone and we've actually come up with workable solutions to the issue of AoE while not dismissing the fact that some people actually like using AoE...

If it did appear I'd steeped away it's more to do with the tedious nature of replying to someone who isn't even willing to consider alternative options to 'nerfing AoE' because in their opinion it's the only solution to 'improving gameplay' and essentially trying to force their own preferences onto some players who don't agree with them and actually like using AoE abilities.

Firstly, in your discussion with SneakyErwin (who by the way, is also of the opinion AoEs shouldn't go through walls as stated here "It also means the mobs need tweaking, which would have a point to it after AoE's are no longer being able to go through walls and instagib everything 50m+ away.") you just mentioned how defense maps need a rework. I'd agree with that, except that it doesn't change the fact that if AoE can go through walls, no amounts of vantage points or cover for the enemies can save them from dying 40m away from you, while behind cover. Secondly, you touched on some sort of grenade that could nullify your abilities. Again, great, I'd love for more enemies to cause disruptive effects on the frames. Still does not change the fact that those who throw this nades would probably be dead, through walls, before even having a chance to get near you, without changing AoE. If you have other workable solutions you somehow discussed without me noticing, please show them. 

It's not that I'm unwilling to consider alternative options. It's that those alternatives either don't exist, or negatively impact the game while there's a much easier solution. The whole point of this thread is challenging gameplay, no? It's even in the title. We can all agree that in order to have challenging gameplay we need more interesting units that can cause particular effects or have specific mechanics that can pose a threat to us, the players, while still being avoidable and telegraphed. The problem is that, unless you make these enemies immune to AoE or change how AoE works, they will never get close to a competent players that runs meta load outs and get the chance to fulfill their purpose. And, preferably you'd like these enemies to be pretty frequent, each with his own mechanic, otherwise nothing would change in gameplay other than having a single enemy every once in a while to utterly focus and destroy with your guns (see Nox, which while being a very well designed unit that can pose a threat, is so infrequent and generally isolated from other threats that you can just 100% focus on him and mow him down in instants). Let's say 25% of enemies have some new mechanic. If you want to make them relevant and not die like everything else without getting to you, and without changing how AoE works, you need to make them immune to said AoE. How would that even work? The game doesn't discriminate Equinox's, Volt's, Mesa's 4 or Saryn's spores (to name the worst offenders) from other abilities, so, do you code a specific immunity for just 4 frames? Or just make them immune to all abilities? Both are cheap solutions, and both make no sense from a gameplay standpoint. You'd have a bunch of units that arbitrarily resist some or all abilities, just to allow them to fulfill their role, and you'd be, anyways, undermining the power of those frames. So, instead of having to design around them, and go the long way to reach the same goal, why not just bring them in line? It entails less work from DE, and a more coherent and balanced gameplay experience for the players, one in which they do not have to question what enemy is vulnerable to what ability. Anything you can see, you can destroy. It's that simple: just add a LoS requirement.

[Aldain]

6 minutes ago, (PS4)sweatshawp said:

What’s the point of playing in a group setting if that’s the case?

Considering the response often comes down to "Go solo if you don't want the map nuked" I don't think there is one anymore.

Guess they should just remove public matchmaking then, if not playing with others is supposed to be the only way to actually play the game.

[Felsagger]

1 minute ago, Loza03 said:

Not nerfing frames also disregards people enjoyment of the game.

Not only does it make public games, which are a pretty significant part of this game, less fun, not only does it quash co-operative play (since one player can do everything), it also does, in fact, hinder story content.

DE have proven themselves to be great writers, but in three of those quests, they've been great writing because they actively take power away from the player in order for there to be any kind of stakes or tension. The Second Dream? You can't shoot Hunhow, and you barely interact with them. The War Within? You are actively powerless for most of it. Chains of Harrow? Invincible enemies. The Sacrifice also side-steps it, as the conflict is emotional, not physical. But DE can't do that forever. They cannot keep coming up with new reasons why we can't use our incredible powers to instantly resolve the problem. And, right now, any kind of climactic boss they make will be a disappointment, because it's either going to be a cheesy fest where we can't use what we've built up the whole game, or it'll be too easy and not properly pay off the build up. So they just don't have us ever confront the villains anymore. Hunhow hasn't appeared in the story for years, and we don't get a satisfying boss fight against him. Ballas didn't get a boss fight. 

What they've made already is great, don't get be wrong, but narrative payoff is important, and good balance makes a satisfying conclusion way easier.

Aha, we are getting there. 

 

When a "nerf" or downgrade is introduced as an element in the story or the lore, it gets a free pass because it helps to tell the story. DE has good writers. That is their strongest point. It is unbelievable how we let that one pass. DE has everything to push the game forward. It is the LORE. With it, they can justify changes, provoke mystery, allow game changing rules due to the story and of course the narrative. 

That is the sweet spot of War Frame. We should see more explanations like this one because I'm still playing this game because the story is very enigmatic. I DON'T want all the questions answered but somehow a narrative should be well defined. We grew up with this game for ten years. A great story is the reason why such game can roll out seven more years. 

With the lore DE can justify the tech upgrade on Grineer and Corpus units. With the lore DE can introduce Octavia. With the Lore DE is able to take risks and poetic licence introducing new changes in the game. I want this because it gives coherence to even the grinding. It's the story and the single player quests that made War Frame awesome. 

[(XBOX)ShonOfDawn]

8 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

 

 

 

 

This is the best post in the thread. 

 

Why many despised a fast nova in Hydron and Draco? Enemy augmented DPS. 

Them being more reactive in general would be great. Sometimes it's just sad to seem them slowly approach you, take cover painfully slow, switch from ranged to melee like if they were dipped in honey. God I miss Elites and Brutes from the Halo series. Those were scary enemies, that would charge you, outmaneuver you, and position themselves for advantage.

[(XBOX)ShonOfDawn]

12 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

Not nerfing frames also disregards people enjoyment of the game.

Not only does it make public games, which are a pretty significant part of this game, less fun, not only does it quash co-operative play (since one player can do everything), it also does, in fact, hinder story content.

DE have proven themselves to be great writers, but in three of those quests, they've been great writing because they actively take power away from the player in order for there to be any kind of stakes or tension. The Second Dream? You can't shoot Hunhow, and you barely interact with them. The War Within? You are actively powerless for most of it. Chains of Harrow? Invincible enemies. The Sacrifice also side-steps it, as the conflict is emotional, not physical. But DE can't do that forever. They cannot keep coming up with new reasons why we can't use our incredible powers to instantly resolve the problem. And, right now, any kind of climactic boss they make will be a disappointment, because it's either going to be a cheesy fest where we can't use what we've built up the whole game, or it'll be too easy and not properly pay off the build up. So they just don't have us ever confront the villains anymore. Hunhow hasn't appeared in the story for years, and we don't get a satisfying boss fight against him. Ballas didn't get a boss fight. 

What they've made already is great, don't get be wrong, but narrative payoff is important, and good balance makes a satisfying conclusion way easier.

Man, this is so accurate. Bravo, sir.

[Felsagger]

1 minute ago, (XB1)ShonFr0st said:

Them being more reactive in general would be great. Sometimes it's just sad to seem them slowly approach you, take cover painfully slow, switch from ranged to melee like if they were dipped in honey. God I miss Elites and Brutes from the Halo series. Those were scary enemies, that would charge you, outmaneuver you, and position themselves for advantage.

Yes, indeed. Halo 2 was one of the best schools in enemy game design. Bungie nailed the Brutes and the Brute shot grenade ricochet launcher. The other one was the hunter Mgalekgolo and the Sangheilli elite.  If we don't mention them we should not deserve to be here discussing the topic. Those A.I.s are deeply important in game development. They settled standards on enemy behavior. 

 These enemies forces you to prioritize, get position, define a preference and focus on preservation of your health. Few shots suffice for Chief's end. Few enemies like these could make a huge difference in War Frame. Can you imagine aggressive enemies with initiative? Can you imagine these aggressive enemies with initiative and team formation? This is when you start respecting your enemy because you take cover, you capitalize small windows of opportunity and focus on skill and gear at the same time. 

[nslay]

Well, how about make more enemies like Cephalites or Aerolyst? You have to shoot bits off these enemies to open them up to vulnerabilities.

Imagine this... an example... a Defense mission with a mixture of classical enemies and these Cephalites/Aerolyst-like enemies in each wave (and hopefully smarter AI!). What's a Saryn, Volt or Equinox going to do these guys? They can't be damaged without blowing off their bits first!

So, there you have it! Everyone can keep their Power Fantasy theme but some enemies that are initially invulnerable to damage can slip through and reach the Defense target (nukes can't hurt invulnerable enemies).

[Loza03]

11 minutes ago, nslay said:

Well, how about make more enemies like Cephalites or Aerolyst? You have to shoot bits off these enemies to open them up to vulnerabilities.

Imagine this... an example... a Defense mission with a mixture of classical enemies and these Cephalites/Aerolyst-like enemies in each wave (and hopefully smarter AI!). What's a Saryn, Volt or Equinox going to do these guys? They can't be damaged without blowing off their bits first!

So, there you have it! Everyone can keep their Power Fantasy theme but some enemies that are initially invulnerable to damage can slip through and reach the Defense target (nukes can't hurt invulnerable enemies).

I've discussed, in length, elsewhere that this is a problem, generally in the form of it not really being that great design encounter-wise if overused. It's paint-by-numbers encounter enemy design. It works to break up existing enemy design (i.e. Cephalites, Aerolysts and Noxes) but making the majority of enemies you fight, either directly or via nukes killing everything else removes a degree of freedom. Moreover, it also presents the same problem that nullification does - nullifiers affect some frames more than others and therefore make metas stricter. Weak point design either overtargets AoE weapons (doubly so, since nuke powers are still rampant taking over their role) or if they're like the Cephalites and Aerolysts, the AoE can actually hit the weak points, making precision weapons even more useless. Either way makes the meta more strict.

[nslay]

Just now, Loza03 said:

I've discussed, in length, elsewhere that this is a problem, generally in the form of it not really being that great design encounter-wise if overused. It's paint-by-numbers encounter enemy design. It works to break up existing enemy design (i.e. Cephalites, Aerolysts and Noxes) but making the majority of enemies you fight, either directly or via nukes killing everything else removes a degree of freedom. Moreover, it also presents the same problem that nullification does - nullifiers affect some frames more than others and therefore make metas stricter. Weak point design either overtargets AoE weapons (doubly so, since nuke powers are still rampant taking over their role) or if they're like the Cephalites and Aerolysts, the AoE can actually hit the weak points, making precision weapons even more useless. Either way makes the meta more strict.

OK, I missed that. I've only been mildly paying attention to thread.

Can Warframe abilities hit the Aerolyst canisters? I know they're trivial to kill with a Catchmoon. I'll have to try against the Cephalites.

Well, Nullifier has the Miter and a lot of frames that are especially susceptible to Nullifiers in endurance runs carry a Miter to deal with them. I think these kinds of Cephalite/Aerolyst enemies have their own tool: high AoE weapons like Ignis or Catchmoon. How about design ability-resistant enemies that require precision weapons? I think Ambulas is a weak example of this since they're very tanky unless you shoot their tiny head (no matter their level, you can usually one shot them if you hit their head with a powerful weapon).

There is also a respawning Infested enemy that has some potential. Although I'm not sure if it's vulnerable to Warframe abilities while it's respawning or not. If that enemy could be immune to Warframe abilities while it respawns, it would force players to engage it with weapons to finally kill it off.

I think the kind of solution DE will settle on is something that doesn't outright remove this "Power Fantasy" theme while adding more challenging units (through AI, special bits, special properties, etc...).

I also think factions should have their own Air Support Charges. I know we rarely use them, but they could use them to help occasionally open up the map.

[Loza03]

5 minutes ago, nslay said:

OK, I missed that. I've only been mildly paying attention to thread.

Can Warframe abilities hit the Aerolyst canisters? I know they're trivial to kill with a Catchmoon. I'll have to try against the Cephalites.

I'm not sure about the catchmoon, but if I've been having a spot of trouble, I've been giving them a spray with my Operator's Klamora Prism, which is that wide beam.

7 minutes ago, nslay said:

Well, Nullifier has the Miter and a lot of frames that are especially susceptible to Nullifiers in endurance runs carry a Miter to deal with them. I think these kinds of Cephalite/Aerolyst enemies have their own tool: high AoE weapons like Ignis or Catchmoon. How about design ability-resistant enemies that require precision weapons? I think Ambulas is a weak example of this since they're very tanky unless you shoot their tiny head (no matter their level, you can usually one shot them if you hit their head with a powerful weapon).

Ability resistant enemies already crop up, and personally, I'm pretty fond of them. The likes of the Orb Vallis Hyenas, Kuva Guardians. In the process, you'd probably also want to make them relatively tanky to make precision - or more accurately 'pick' - weapons valuable. Pick being a PvP term (I heard it from Team Fortress) for a high-damage single target weapon, which many precision weapons fall into, but also covers things like stealth attacks and shotguns. Weapons that thrive best when there's beefy or otherwise high-priority targets, since their damage is not only high, but focused, unlike their counterparts 'power' weapons, which deal high or wide-ranging damage, but struggles at really quickly reaching or dealing with high-priority or beefy targets. AoE powers (and weapons) somewhat choke this out in Warframe right now, largely thanks to the most powerful AoE options also being high-powered enough to do what most pick weapons do. Engagements should involve the player juggling 'pick' strategies and 'power' to some degree.

12 minutes ago, nslay said:

There is also a respawning Infested enemy that has some potential. Although I'm not sure if it's vulnerable to Warframe abilities while it's respawning or not. If that enemy could be immune to Warframe abilities while it respawns, it would force players to engage it with weapons to finally kill it off.

I think the kind of solution DE will settle on is something that doesn't outright remove this "Power Fantasy" theme while adding more challenging units (through AI, special bits, special properties, etc...).

Forcing players to engage with weapons is probably one of the few 'force players to' things that's acceptable. Unlike Nullifiers or other elements where it disproportionately affects one player or playstyle, everyone has weapons. It's not really a sin for these to be used more often.

 

(By the by, the post you're responding to - mine - happened to be the 666th post in this thread. Guess I'm evil)

[Aseraan]

17 hours ago, Xaero said:

Lack of proper testing.

I still remember mirage using simulor it was a pain for the eyes and now the brama nad lezs fiesta.......just "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa my eyes" straight from under the sea

[nslay]

1 minute ago, Loza03 said:

I'm not sure about the catchmoon, but if I've been having a spot of trouble, I've been giving them a spray with my Operator's Klamora Prism, which is that wide beam.

I'm sure about it. I've run so many SS ground missions man... Even level 180 Aerolyst canisters are usually entirely busted with one or two shots from a Corrosive/Heat Catchmoon.

[SneakyErvin]

3 hours ago, Loza03 said:

Addressing the Limbo point I made - about how he's untouchable - changing how stasis works would, on its own, be enough to enable enemies like this. My suggested change is limit its area of effect to a bubble the size of a full shrunk cataclysm (i.e. the size just before it pops), and have projectiles (not hitscan) be destroyed when they contact. This means that, since Limbo's abilities don't cleanly affect only the area stasis effects anymore, that there'd be a region of Limbo's operation where he is in the rift, and the enemy is in the rift, and he can be touched. A chink in the armour to be exploited.

I think it would even be possible for them to just remove the stun and keep the bullet blocking to the whole cataclysm bubble. I mean currently, what purpose does the stun fill except for allowing afk gameplay? Stasis already stops bullets, so in reality the stun is only there to stop possible melee units. They could remove the stun and increase the cap of bullets that can be stopped. It would make cata+stasis work more like a stationary duration based disarm. They could even make it an effective disarm for enemies inside the rift in order to remove even more of Limbo's extremely passive gameplay. So the mobs would try to attack in melee instead.

That would still keep Limbo unique and a top defensive pick without completely trivializing everything. It would also require him to be played. In return for these changes, cataclysm could also get a DoT effect against enemies inside, the same damage per tick an enemy would recieve for licking the wall of the dome. This would also improve #3, since it could be used with stasis to get enemies to come running by disarming them, instead of having it be the usual hindrace when used by an inexperienced Limbo.

It would also bring him inline with Frost and Gara.

[Loza03]

Just now, SneakyErvin said:

I think it would even be possible for them to just remove the stun and keep the bullet blocking to the whole cataclysm bubble. I mean currently, what purpose does the stun fill except for allowing afk gameplay? Stasis already stops bullets, so in reality the stun is only there to stop possible melee units. They could remove the stun and increase the cap of bullets that can be stopped. It would make cata+stasis work more like a stationary duration based disarm. They could even make it an effective disarm for enemies inside the rift in order to remove even more of Limbo's extremely passive gameplay. So the mobs would try to attack in melee instead.

That would still keep Limbo unique and a top defensive pick without completely trivializing everything. It would also require him to be played. In return for these changes, cataclysm could also get a DoT effect against enemies inside, the same damage per tick an enemy would recieve for licking the wall of the dome. This would also improve #3, since it could be used with stasis to get enemies to come running by disarming them, instead of having it be the usual hindrace when used by an inexperienced Limbo.

It would also bring him inline with Frost and Gara.

I'd personally prefer my suggestion because it has more flavour. Plus, it'd let him keep some of the legitimately fun things Stasis can do (like helping him focus down bosses) whilst removing its propensity for AFK due to the 'no-mans-land'.

Also, this would actually kill his defensive abilities, as how it works now, the bullets restart and would shoot the objective anyway. We don't want to completely kill his defensive abilities, just bring him in line.

[LSG501]

2 hours ago, (PS4)DoctorWho_90250 said:

I'm not alone. 

Yeah I'm one of the ones trying to point out the obvious too....

[SneakyErvin]

1 minute ago, Loza03 said:

I'd personally prefer my suggestion because it has more flavour. Plus, it'd let him keep some of the legitimately fun things Stasis can do (like helping him focus down bosses) whilst removing its propensity for AFK due to the 'no-mans-land'.

Also, this would actually kill his defensive abilities, as how it works now, the bullets restart and would shoot the objective anyway. We don't want to completely kill his defensive abilities, just bring him in line.

Couldnt the bullets just be completely negated instead? So the cata+stasis combo turns into something more like a duration based globe or wall that is also restricted by a certain amount of projectiles that can be stopped. His #3 skill would be kinda lethal with your idea, since it would place a bunch of enemies in the rift while no longer stunning them, but they'd be able to freely shoot into the dome, since statis would only effect the center part of the cataclysm area if I understood your stasis change correctly. Or would it still stun enemies in the rift?

[Loza03]

1 minute ago, SneakyErvin said:

Couldnt the bullets just be completely negated instead? So the cata+stasis combo turns into something more like a duration based globe or wall that is also restricted by a certain amount of projectiles that can be stopped. His #3 skill would be kinda lethal with your idea, since it would place a bunch of enemies in the rift while no longer stunning them, but they'd be able to freely shoot into the dome, since statis would only effect the center part of the cataclysm area if I understood your stasis change correctly. Or would it still stun enemies in the rift?

How my idea works is effectively stasis's current behaviour, but limited to its own bubble. You stand inside it, enemies are frozen in time (unless they're bosses, where they behave like you suggested). Projectiles (such as Bombard Rockets) get stopped on contact, whilst hitscan bullets or beams pass into it as normal. The stasis isn't limited to the exact centre of cataclysm, although that would be the prime real estate for a defensive setup - it can be placed anywhere like cataclysm itself can, meaning it can be used for banished enemies as well - it does only work in the rift still.

Basically, it acts as a barrier like Frost or Gara that, instead of having a health bar, has absolute resistance to projectile and melee enemies, but not hitscan ones.

 

My idea is a part of an idea for a larger rework - so giving him a means to not be completely helpless against hitscan, whilst further encouraging a more active playstyle. Discussing a full rework of a single frame isn't really the point of this thread though.

[nslay]

4 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

How my idea works is effectively stasis's current behaviour, but limited to its own bubble. You stand inside it, enemies are frozen in time (unless they're bosses, where they behave like you suggested). Projectiles (such as Bombard Rockets) get stopped on contact, whilst hitscan bullets or beams pass into it as normal. The stasis isn't limited to the exact centre of cataclysm, although that would be the prime real estate for a defensive setup - it can be placed anywhere like cataclysm itself can, meaning it can be used for banished enemies as well - it does only work in the rift still.

Basically, it acts as a barrier like Frost or Gara that, instead of having a health bar, has absolute resistance to projectile and melee enemies, but not hitscan ones.

 

My idea is a part of an idea for a larger rework - so giving him a means to not be completely helpless against hitscan, whilst further encouraging a more active playstyle. Discussing a full rework of a single frame isn't really the point of this thread though.

How about keeping Stasis as it is but draining duration faster the more enemies that are trapped in it? That way you still need to kill the enemies much like you would if you were playing Gara or Frost where enemies can otherwise damage their defenses.

[DestroyerF5]

Le 17/5/2020 à 17:26, Jarriaga a dit :

In consideration of the upcoming hard mode and discussions surrounding it, this part of Shy's recent interview with Pablo is particularly relevant.

At the 40:05 mark, Pablo makes the following remark with regards regards to Jizo and Triburos asking why can't AI be improved so it reacts better to our behavior by changing their tactics and getting new attack patterns as difficulty/level increases:

Then again this topic comes back at around the 50:55 mark. This time Jizo asks why not program the AI with anti-cheese tactics. For example, by having Grineer identify that you're camping in survival and throw a "gas grenade" that deals very high damage and forces you to move:

That's something many people have been highlighting in the forums for months now, myself included:

Entonces, el problema con el equilibrio de WF y por qué DE ha tenido que recurrir a cosas como enemigos invulnerables y anuladores está directamente relacionado con lo poderosos que son algunos marcos hasta el punto de invalidar el juego. Mientras existan en sus formas actuales, hay poco que puedan hacer más allá de las esponjas de bala y los enemigos invulnerables. Como señaló Pablo, la mayoría de los jugadores aquí no aceptarían cambios masivos y nerfs en el área de nuking y CC, así que, literalmente, ¿qué más pueden hacer?  Entonces, me parece que DE es muy  consciente de cuál es el problema: la fantasía de poder en sí misma y cuán fuertes somos. Anula cualquier intento de equilibrio o desafío a través de mejoras enemigas.

Entonces, ¿qué va a hacer DE si no permitimos nerfs? Parece que al menos a Pablo le parece interesante que los enemigos te hagan fallar en la misión si no pueden llegar a ti . Por ejemplo, al hacer que los enemigos ataquen las cápsulas de soporte vital en supervivencia para que no puedas acampar en un solo lugar, como menciona solo unos minutos más tarde.

Curiosamente, eso también es algo que sugerí el año pasado :

Eso, creo, es a donde DE se dirigirá. Así es como se introducirá la dificultad.

Dare mi opinion: yo pienso que no deberian añadir esa dificultad asi, ya que la dificultad dificil ya esta en el juego y esa son los arbitramentos, lo que pienso que deberian hacer es simplemente añadir arbitramentos en todo el sistema origen y que las misiones las pudieramos elegir y tambien elegir en donde va a ser esa mision, y tambien que obviamente se den las recompensas de arbitramentos en el modo expandido, porque de nada sirve añadir dificultad cuando la dificultad dificil ya existe pero no le dan uso y no te recompensan bien, y si añadieran esa dificultad dificil separada de los arbitramentos estarian haciendo las cosas mal porque estarian olvidando los arbitramentos, pero ellos siempre hacen lo mas facil que es abandonar los modos de juegos que no funcionan en vez de arregrarlos y hacerlo funcionar ( esto lo dijieron en una entrevista que le hicieron a scot y ningun partner le pudo decir que no podian hacer eso olvidad los modos de juego asi porque si, y lo que le dijieron es que estamos falta de contenido y eso es mentira no es que estemos falta de contenido si no que el contenido que nos traen es mediocre y no es divertido ni rejugable). 

Espero que con mucho respeto expresen su punto de vista hacia mi y opinen si estoy equivocado o en lo cierto. 

Fuente: yonki de los videojuegos (youtuber)