Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Ham_Grenabe said:

You could be entirely right — there may be no solution without starting over from basic concepts.

Or, say, redesigning missions and enemies so that Warframes aren’t even something they care about — only the mission objective is, and you and they are competing for it. No more trivial exterminates or defenses. It’s a breakneck race every time and you MIGHT win sometimes.

This^ 

Why lemming to death. When Grineer can act strategic and not. 

No I'm convinced it's just easier to nerf than to redesign enemy ai. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

They're easy. Always were, honestly, they just had a propensity to oneshot players, but they were still basically just mannequins to be shot, for the same reasons that Pablo gave.

they do what they're supposed to do - provide Resistance, offer Diversity to keep things interesting.
mostly perfect.

just need the rest of the game to do the same thing instead of making empty excuses. 'dude with a Gun' will never be interesting, or challenging. the Enemy is simply too simple. Venus Landscape Enemies went beyond just being Cardboard cutouts with Guns.

27 minutes ago, Hypernaut1 said:

The enemies in this game are actually VERY varied if you look at what they can do. We just don't get to see it too often because anytime they are effective, people rush to forums to call it unfair. 

that's usually because those Enemies have poor or worse Telegraphing and they're also one of 40 Enemies in the room.
those sorts of Enemies could all be left (mostly) as is, if there weren't 40 other Enemies in the room. 20 other Enemies in the room would go a long way, 15 could potentially be about perfect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

Not sure to the exact nerf here, so I want call out in relation.

if i recall correctly back in the day as ill put it, if more then 4 healer ancients were in eachothers aura they were unkillable, unless you got them to split up, if it grew to 6 or 8 all in the aura everything around you was unkillable

atleast thats what i think they were talking about

i believe you were also able to abuse it with nekros shadows power as if you killed more then 4 healer before casting it the shadows health wouldnt decay cause the healers aura kept raising it

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, (XB1)YoungGunn82 said:

This^ 

Why lemming to death. When Grineer can act strategic and not. 

No I'm convinced it's just easier to nerf than to redesign enemy ai. 

Understand that if one goes back to the design table on missions, Warframes are likely to get redesigned alongside everything else (which probably includes nerfs) to ensure this doesn’t happen again

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

they do what they're supposed to do - provide Resistance, offer Diversity to keep things interesting.
mostly perfect.

just need the rest of the game to do the same thing instead of making empty excuses. 'dude with a Gun' will never be interesting, or challenging. the Enemy is simply too simple. Venus Landscape Enemies went beyond just being Cardboard cutouts with Guns.

No they don't.

I mean, A: they're just as vulnerable to what Pablo's pointed out as the rest of the game (unless at alert 5, which do not get me started on the shield drones), B: Toxin and Viral exists which makes mincemeat of their EHP and C : half of them are just zerg-rushing the player with movement abilities, and the other half are just walking towards you trying to shoot you with shotguns from 50 metres away. Compare that to PoE, which has a couple of zerg-rush enemies yes (namely Ghouls, Baliffs and Flameblades), but also Napalms which provide area denial by shooting the ground around you, Hellions and Dargyns which provide different angles of attack, Mortar Bombards which serve as anti-camping enemies and Snipers which actually use sniper nests

Unless you're talking about the Minibosses, which yeah, those are really cool, more of that please.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Tokens210 said:

if i recall correctly back in the day as ill put it, if more then 4 healer ancients were in eachothers aura they were unkillable, unless you got them to split up, if it grew to 6 or 8 all in the aura everything around you was unkillable

atleast thats what i think they were talking about

Goodness gracious...

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Aldain said:

All that would do is cause weapons and Warframes to be made obsolete because they can't deal with the exponential increases, imagine if they decided "Ok now everything is balanced for the Kuva Bramma. What's that? X weapon can't damage anything? Too bad, get the Bramma because nothing else matters.".

At that point they might as well just start deleting everything that isn't the meta, because all the variety would be literally worthless.

You hit the nail on the head with that one. Far too many tools in our arsenal already fall flat, balancing content around the "meta chad deluxe" modes would be like shooting yourself in the foot. It isn't too much to ask for legitimate weapon balance patches, right? Riven "balancing" is an impractical joke anyways, I'd do anything for DE to destroy the very definition of MR fodder.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

Goodness gracious...

it wasnt usually as bad as it sounds tho since ancients usually only seem to spawn 2 or 3 at a time and any other group tends to come from a different direction

it was pretty simple to stop, just priorities ancients, and if it did happen hopefully you had a team member that could push or throw or move them apart in anyway and they could be killed again right away, it was the fact that their auras were so powerful and could stack forever, but it actually made it more interesting alot of the time

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is a lot of potential with enemies that directly affect the mission's objective.

Like imagine during a Grineer Capture mission, a 'Manic Retriever' will eventually spawn in and have the chance to take back the captive from the Warframe who did so, causing him to become the new Capture target but with faster movement and being harder to hit. This would make these missions turn from basic missions with a single task to coordinated races to the Extraction, as you could involve teamwork to prevent the Manic from taking back by attacking it during it's animation.

I wouldn't see this being implemented in the early nodes of the Star Chart, or at least only in Hard Mode, but there is ways to turn objectives into the actual focus of the current mission. I see a lot of complaints for nerfs tied specifically to the reason of being able to kill things easily. And while it can be valid to an extent (as it can trivialize the game and causes specific frames/weps to only be viable in certain areas), it distracts from the way how we could be indirectly nerf without having to actually change us at all.

It's why I like Disruption a lot, not just because the Demos remind me of Sentry Busters from TF2's MVM, but because it's mainly about the objective. Most of the mission types feel like the objectives were put in as afterthought, as they don't have much interaction besides "go here, press button, do this".

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, (PS4)IndianChiefJeff said:

I'd do anything to DE destroy the very definition of MR fodder.

I know the feeling, one of my favorite weapons is the Veldt...

Sadly I have a Tiberon Prime so using the Veldt is like saying "I want to not be able to kill anything unless I'm playing solo".

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

No they don't.

I mean, A: they're just as vulnerable to what Pablo's pointed out as the rest of the game (unless at alert 5, which do not get me started on the shield drones), B: Toxin and Viral exists which makes mincemeat of their EHP and C : half of them are just zerg-rushing the player with movement abilities, and the other half are just walking towards you trying to shoot you with shotguns from 50 metres away. Compare that to PoE, which has a couple of zerg-rush enemies yes (namely Ghouls, Baliffs and Flameblades), but also Napalms which provide area denial by shooting the ground around you, Hellions and Dargyns which provide different angles of attack, Mortar Bombards which serve as anti-camping enemies and Snipers which actually use sniper nests

Unless you're talking about the Minibosses, which yeah, those are really cool, more of that please.

the entire Venus Landscape. all of the Enemies together create a diverse fighting force that applies real pressure on the Player without having to rely on Level Scaling or spam to do so.

Earth Landscape Enemies are mostly the same as Grineer everywhere else. the only real difference is Sniper Towers, and that Bombards are cooler than they are elsewhere. Mortar Units are a neat show.
so basically Earth Landscape has Guard Towers, and 3 Bombard variants to offer as new stuff. but these attacks don't usually matter. they put on a decent movie-style show, but they aren't much of a threat to the Player.
Hellions largely miss since you're not locked into a Hallway, Dargyns aren't relevant because they don't fly like anything normal so they also can't aim normal, and after that you've just got Lancers Gunners and 'dude with a Sword' left over.

if the Enemies were more effective at using their Weapons then maybe, but that isn't the case. but Venus Landscape Enemies, do match that bill.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

From what I've heard, they were dangerous because they basically behaved as any other enemy did, no/limited indicator, super high accuracy and super high damage, in hitscan. In other words, just dying out of nowhere. Is that dangerous? Yes. Is that realistic? Yes. Is that FUN? No, because there's no meaningful choices at work.

 

No, it wasnt unfair. it was simple situation awareness! The laser dot was a good addition, but nerfing their reaction time, aim and damage was unnecessary. Sure, make them easy at lower levels, but players going up against lvl 100+ enemies should be aware enough to know that they cant just waltz into a room without being prepared to evade. THAT is real difficulty to me. Most players begin to understand when certain enemies spawn. You simply knew that when you heard them winding up, you had to use your parkour skills, get out of the way and hunt that sniper down...then go about killing fodder.  Now with shieldgating and 6 revives, theres even less of a reason to keep them nerfed. The snipers today may as well just be a grunt.

32 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

Homing rockets have no place in a horde shooter. Especially ones with as little conveyance as Bombard rockets, which give absolutely no indication as to whether or not they're currently tracking you,  are quite hard to see, and are highly inconsistent (I've had more than one time when getting directly behind a bombard rocket hasn't caused it to drop it's lock on me).

To my understanding, these were in the same place as Snipers - instant-kill enemies with minimal ways to fight back.

 

i think this about situation awareness again. I remember the times when at 20 min in survival/defense, we had to constantly scan the spawn horizon for bombards, beeline to them, and take them out. In defense missions, we actually had to agree on who was going to take out bombards while the rest stayed near objective. I do agree they needed better indicators, but even without them, it was better to assume a rocker was on its way towards your location and react accordingly. It really wasnt that hard to make the rocket miss if you kept moving. It prevented you from sitting still and mowing down enemies with your OP weapon, abilities or CC. it was a natural limit to us just spamming powers in one place. 

 

32 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

Not sure what situation they were in before, though even now they are inconsistent from bursa to bursa. Some will reward movement if you jump over them by letting you hit their weakspot, others twirl like ballerinas, others just don't have a weak spot. Enemies should reward you for having knowledge of how to beat them, not sike you out with 'oh, you used previous knowledge? Well, sorry, even though I'm otherwise the exact same enemy, I don't work by those rules!"

They stunlocked you to death, right?  Dying for making a single mistake with no chance for recovery is not good design.

They were over-nerfed. The current indicator fields with the original behaviour would have been fine. They were broken because their ability disabling had no conveyance - it was literally an invisible field with no way to tell where it was that bypassed line of sight, so in some tilesets they could hide above you or below you and you'd have absolutely no idea where it was coming from.

Bursas used to require good parkour skills to get behind them. At a certain point (level 100 enemies) players should know what to expect with enemies. I dont agree with the idea that they need to be heavily telegraphed and slow. There is skill in anticipation. To me, that is satisfying. A skilled player should go into a scenario and be thinking 2 steps ahead of the enemy at all times. Enter a room, seek out the trouble makers, counter the attacks you KNOW they are going to do, react to things that dont go as planned. This is how high level play should look like. This is what i would love hard mode to feel like. 

32 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

My point is all those enemies were poorly designed. That's why players didn't like them. Not because they were getting killed, but because the enemy wasn't designed in a way that was fun to fight. Often because they'd punish you for making a single mistake, or even not making a mistake at all, for doing what was otherwise the right thing - some still do. Bombard rockets can still home in on you after you've dodged them - punishing you for successfully dodging it by blindsiding you.

Don't look at times when DE changed bad enemy design that was ganking players and say "oh look, people complained about this enemy that was hard". That's like saying that people who play Super Meat Boy and complain about Little Horn don't want to be challenged.

 

They're easy. Always were, honestly, they just had a propensity to oneshot players, but they were still basically just mannequins to be shot, for the same reasons that Pablo gave.

The enemies may have needed tweaks, but they were not poorly designed. What do you consider players doing the "right thing"? Standing in one place spamming powers? Waltzing into a room without any thought to self defense. Walking up to enemies that you know want to grab you? That shouldnt be the right way to play at a high level at all. Players werent even really punished that much. Especially now, we are rarely punished with 6 revives, shield gating and operator mode. Part of the game should be working your way out of a hole anyway. Yeah, sometimes you need to start a battle flat on your back. So what. Get up, deal with it, get your revenge

Im starting to think its the players that need a buff in "A.I" because most of these enemies were easily countered with a bit of foresight.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree, I think nerfing things can result in people that aren't in the forum complain because the "loud minority" in forum doesn't like seeing them having fun nuking and tanking as their reward for their effort and progress to be unstoppable until it cools down and everyone praising DE to take risk and make the game better.

To me? Instead of nerfing nukes, I prefer to put some strain from using abilities too much in a short time like countermeasures in railjack for example where energy consumed per cast is increased if you spam it

The second path I prefer is making the failure condition bigger so you can't turn off your brain and wipe because that means the level will be harder to adapt against you

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Tokens210 said:

it wasnt usually as bad as it sounds tho since ancients usually only seem to spawn 2 or 3 at a time and any other group tends to come from a different direction

it was pretty simple to stop, just priorities ancients, and if it did happen hopefully you had a team member that could push or throw or move them apart in anyway and they could be killed again right away, it was the fact that their auras were so powerful and could stack forever, but it actually made it more interesting alot of the time

it was interesting to me. They provided a focus to the horde killing. There was a bit of strategy. You see an ancient spawn, gameplay changed from mowing down grunts to making your way to ancient, while also anticipation his awful hook attack. They werent perfect, but with some tweaks, they couldve maintained the challenge without just being bigger walking targets that practically do nothing. Back then, i actually knew what each ancient did specifically and when they spawned. now, i'm not even sure if they have different abilities. Their effect on the battle field is barely felt now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i wish they nerf sll our frames and weapons like 3 times (most of them, obviously OP). Would make like a rral challenge and not boring. But also yhis means we will need new real rewards for those tryhard missions everywhere...not just 10k credits and 1000 ferrite. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Hypernaut1 said:

it was interesting to me. They provided a focus to the horde killing. There was a bit of strategy. You see an ancient spawn, gameplay changed from mowing down grunts to making your way to ancient, while also anticipation his awful hook attack. They werent perfect, but with some tweaks, they couldve maintained the challenge without just being bigger walking targets that practically do nothing. Back then, i actually knew what each ancient did specifically and when they spawned. now, i'm not even sure if they have different abilities. Their effect on the battle field is barely felt now. 

oh i 100 percent agree, just needed to priorities ancients always that was a strategy/tactic whatever you wanna call it

only thing they should have changed was lower how effective the aura was when a nekros killed one and used the shadows power, so it didnt make the shadows run forever, if you killed atleast 4 of them before casting it

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Hypernaut1 said:

No, it wasnt unfair. it was simple situation awareness! The laser dot was a good addition, but nerfing their reaction time, aim and damage was unnecessary. Sure, make them easy at lower levels, but players going up against lvl 100+ enemies should be aware enough to know that they cant just waltz into a room without being prepared to evade. THAT is real difficulty to me. Most players begin to understand when certain enemies spawn. You simply knew that when you heard them winding up, you had to use your parkour skills, get out of the way and hunt that sniper down...then go about killing fodder.  Now with shieldgating and 6 revives, theres even less of a reason to keep them nerfed. The snipers today may as well just be a grunt.

So, basically the suggestion I made.

10 minutes ago, Hypernaut1 said:

i think this about situation awareness again. I remember the times when at 20 min in survival/defense, we had to constantly scan the spawn horizon for bombards, beeline to them, and take them out. In defense missions, we actually had to agree on who was going to take out bombards while the rest stayed near objective. I do agree they needed better indicators, but even without them, it was better to assume a rocker was on its way towards your location and react accordingly. It really wasnt that hard to make the rocket miss if you kept moving. It prevented you from sitting still and mowing down enemies with your OP weapon, abilities or CC. it was a natural limit to us just spamming powers in one place. 

I've dodged tons of Bombard rockets. I used to load up 20 into the simulacrum as my stress-test for weapons. I am intimate with Bombard rocket behaviour.

Situational awareness plays absolutely no part in fighting them. You've either got a force field that completely negates them up (via death field, enemy CC or you're just flat-out immortal), or running around like a headless chicken because they break lock when they feel like it and the only way to deal with it is to just run. Not dodging, mind you, because dodging implies that you've made an informed movement based on prediction of the attack which is entirely pointless with Bombard rockets.

12 minutes ago, Hypernaut1 said:

Bursas used to require good parkour skills to get behind them. At a certain point (level 100 enemies) players should know what to expect with enemies. I dont agree with the idea that they need to be heavily telegraphed and slow. There is skill in anticipation. To me, that is satisfying. A skilled player should go into a scenario and be thinking 2 steps ahead of the enemy at all times. Enter a room, seek out the trouble makers, counter the attacks you KNOW they are going to do, react to things that dont go as planned. This is how high level play should look like. This is what i would love hard mode to feel like. 

And when you skillfully get behind the Bursa only to have it turn around in half a second to negate that entirely, or realise it doesn't actually have a weak spot?

13 minutes ago, Hypernaut1 said:

The enemies may have needed tweaks, but they were not poorly designed. What do you consider players doing the "right thing"? Standing in one place spamming powers? Waltzing into a room without any thought to self defense. Walking up to enemies that you know want to grab you? That shouldnt be the right way to play at a high level at all. Players werent even really punished that much. Especially now, we are rarely punished with 6 revives, shield gating and operator mode. Part of the game should be working your way out of a hole anyway. Yeah, sometimes you need to start a battle flat on your back. So what. Get up, deal with it, get your revenge

Im starting to think its the players that need a buff in "A.I" because most of these enemies were easily countered with a bit of foresight.

Several of these enemies didn't, or still don't, encourage that mindset. In fact, the very topic of this discussion agrees with you. This isn't a generic 'Warframe endgame', or even a talk about AI specifically, this topic is in response to Pablo talking about how we're way too powerful and spamming instant-win ability whilst standing perfectly still is straight up the best way to play Warframe. Because guess what? Bursas, Snipers, Manics - they all get affected by powers and thus die or get frozen the nanosecond they spawn into a level.

Combas and Scrambus counter that, yes, but not only is that two enemies, but it hard counters it. When Nullification is overused, then the opposite problem happens - Warframe loses part of its spark. Whilst I'm a strong believe that Warframe's core gameplay is the movement and guns (because that's what all frames can do), abilities and the use of those abilities is a major part of what makes Warframe unique. There shouldn't be an arms race as to whether players or enemies can turn what's unique about each other off faster, it should be a natural give-and-take where powers complement gameplay, not ignore gameplay.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jarriaga said:

In Halo, Master Chief experiences recoil from firing a puny pistol.

And here, we have that Halo logic meme

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQh9VX00BLz4flyhq5J70q

So where did that superhuman strength go to suddenly unable to control recoil from a pistol?

2 hours ago, Jarriaga said:

In Pokémon, you can somehow capture Arceus, which is God.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSskLpWvOZhRKJUigHJuVr

As you can see, it becomes a joke

Link to post
Share on other sites

Smart environments. 

Allow enemies to lock us in or out of certain areas that then become volitile. Too hot, too cold, no oxygen, toxic gas. Cant cc the map. This would be a meta ai thing and not enemy specific. Outside of special shields and grinees blunts (smote weeb everyday) and eximus weakpoints we never got save for bursas and glass enemies in nw, not sure what they could do. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Want challenge:

Sekiro, Dark Souls series, Demon Souls, Blood Borne. 

Sorry but War Frame is not designed around challenge. Pick something else. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Buffing enemies. Reducing enemy health/armor. Buffing weapons. Nerfing X weapons/abilities. Seems to go around in circles. When DE releases new content like Liche's or RJ it always buggy (a given) but it always seem they start out arguably hard then they put fixes in place which does seem to make things a lot easier (after many compaints). is this because people find thing too grindy or too difficult?. Seems to happen all the time.The point about more minibosses ie along the line of more Nox types makes more sense than buffing/nerfing..Enemy AI...im not a programmer but would aside from complexity to program, wouldn't it make the backend processing etc more bloated etc? (sorry if im talking out of my ass haha) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

 

Combas and Scrambus counter that, yes, but not only is that two enemies, but it hard counters it. When Nullification is overused, then the opposite problem happens - Warframe loses part of its spark. Whilst I'm a strong believe that Warframe's core gameplay is the movement and guns (because that's what all frames can do), abilities and the use of those abilities is a major part of what makes Warframe unique. There shouldn't be an arms race as to whether players or enemies can turn what's unique about each other off faster, it should be a natural give-and-take where powers complement gameplay, not ignore gameplay.

i definitely agree that overuse of nullification powers is NOT the way to go. The grineer could use those nullification drones from the old raids, and that should be about it. 

Bombards were not perfect, they did need tweaks. I think DE nerfs the enemy too much though. The rockets couldve been made a little slower and have a distinct color to their exhaust. That said, sometimes i think it should be on the player (in high level play) to anticipate a rocket from a bombard that spawned, same goes for some other enemy attacks. You should be planning to evade a rocket the moment they appear. The rockets do need a proper counter, like rolling to lose lock or something. 

Bursas would've been more effective if at least the eximus versions still were min-boss like in their difficulty, but rare. 

I honestly dont think we are too OP. I think the enemies are more over nerfed. Fortuna is an example of that. Those enemies kicked peoples butts without ridiculous scaling. Overall, i think DE needs to tweak enemies, but not turn them into fodder. We dont want to be annoyed by enemies, but i dont like them being pushovers either, 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Grineer Lancer #86721 should never be a threat and should be fodder to our godly Warframe powers. AoE DPS isn't inherently bad, mass CC isn't inherently bad, these two things feel great to do to a mindless army.

Challenging enemies should be unique, named enemies. An enemy that can resist abilities (a mechanic DE debut years ago when Bursas were released but has not fully implemented to the full game), something that looks and feels like it should be a challenge. If only DE had already created a large suite of unique enemies that would fit perfectly in the common spawn pool...

Request #38 to add Arena (Index/Rathuum) enemies to the common spawn pool.

 

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water, much like how it is sometimes stupid to buff everything to the level of an OP toy it is stupid to nerf everything when you could just add one thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...