The Nukers are stealing my kills : matchmaking solution instead of nerf ?

[Leyvonne]

2 hours ago, DrivaMain said:

If me or other people want to ban a certain setup from appearing in our games then just let us. In fact it will be beneficial for you because it will allow you the banned setup user avoid us so we don’t go full keyboard warrior or going full toxic mode regarding your setup when you join our games. 

 

 

Why do you have to be toxic towards another player that is simply playing the game using a frame or weapon they enjoy? Why do you join a public game if you can't deal with how others play the game? Why can't you use the tools we are already given to setup that perfect squad you want to play with? Friends, clans, alliances and recruit chat should be more than enough to do that. There is no need to start excluding people from public games over personal perferences.

[DrivaMain]

7 hours ago, Leyvonne said:

Why do you have to be toxic towards another player that is simply playing the game using a frame or weapon they enjoy? Why do you join a public game if you can't deal with how others play the game? Why can't you use the tools we are already given to setup that perfect squad you want to play with? Friends, clans, alliances and recruit chat should be more than enough to do that. There is no need to start excluding people from public games over personal perferences.

Why should you care? Sometime I want a quick game free of setups that takes away my fun. You can still play pub like normal even DE decided to include this feature. Not every Warframe player will ban frames like Saryn in their matchmaking preference. 
 

[Leyvonne]

20 minutes ago, DrivaMain said:

Why should you care? Sometime I want a quick game free of setups that takes away my fun. You can still play pub like normal even DE decided to include this feature. Not every Warframe player will ban frames like Saryn in their matchmaking preference. 
 

Because a public mission is just that; public aka anyone can join. There should never be limitations or rules set by individual player for that. Again, plenty of tools for picking and choosing who you play with or you know solo is great for when you just want to run a quick one.

I'm not actually worried that this system would limit me at all because I don't do publics in Warframe. I simply think there is something fundamentally wrong in a system where a player is allowed to limit who can join a public game.

[DrivaMain]

10 minutes ago, Leyvonne said:

There should never be limitations or rules set by individual player for that.

Actually other games have limitations in matchmaking. Overwatch has “avoid player” feature to prevent getting matched by the player who is in the list. Payday 2 has a configurable “set minimum player level to join” so only players at the minimum level threshold or above can join.
 

Uncontrolled public games can get messy very fast, at least allow us to have some control on who can join our games to prevent fights.

 

Edited May 25, 2020 by DrivaMain

[Leyvonne]

41 minutes ago, DrivaMain said:

Actually other games have limitations in matchmaking. Overwatch has “avoid player” feature to prevent getting matched by the player who is in the list. Payday 2 has a configurable “set minimum player level to join” so only players at the minimum level threshold or above can join.

 I never said that those limitations don't exsist, I said they shouldn't.
 

43 minutes ago, DrivaMain said:

Uncontrolled public games can get messy very fast, at least allow us to have some control on who can join our games to prevent fights.

Why do you need to fight with people in a public game? You are free to leave and free to setup your own group or just do your thing while they do theirs. And it is a public game, it isn't yours or anyone else's to control. When I end up in a group I don't like in other online games I either suck it up to grab the reward or just leave and do something else or try again.

[MacIntoc]

12 hours ago, Leyvonne said:

public aka anyone can join.

That would be still the case : anyone can join you. It's just you could saying to not join some stuffs.

 

12 hours ago, Leyvonne said:

There should never be limitations or rules set by individual player for that.

I simply think there is something fundamentally wrong in a system where a player is allowed to limit who can join a public game.

Can you develop, pls ?

 

11 hours ago, Leyvonne said:

it isn't yours or anyone else's to control

But they claim nerfs on stuffs that they don't want that other players play with when they're in squad with them. It's just another way to ban stuffs, but more definitive than the way i propose.

[Leyvonne]

@MacIntoc Ok I'll just explain what having matchmaking filters is like. Majority of players will block non-meta frames and weapons because they want to do things as fast as possible. Players who don't play meta have to wait for a group much longer than those who do which creates inequality between players. Does that sound like a fair system to you?

[Rixuel]

who cares about kill counts? i just want my mission done asap giving me good drops

[HunterDigi]

My main issue is actually that other people DON'T kill enough xD Especially when I need the affinity for a new warframe/weapon or for syndicates.

Edited May 26, 2020 by HunterDigi

[MacIntoc]

2 hours ago, Leyvonne said:

@MacIntoc Ok I'll just explain what having matchmaking filters is like. Majority of players will block non-meta frames and weapons because they want to do things as fast as possible. Players who don't play meta have to wait for a group much longer than those who do which creates inequality between players. Does that sound like a fair system to you?

Indeed. This can be avoided by only allowing to exclude stuffs that make some complains or by limiting the number of things a player can exclude.

[Aesthier]

On 2020-05-24 at 5:40 AM, MacIntoc said:

@Aesthier

Except that don't work.

It does work.

You can't get jealous over other players stealing your kills if you no longer have the ability to play with other players.

 

 

[DrivaMain]

8 hours ago, Leyvonne said:

@MacIntoc Ok I'll just explain what having matchmaking filters is like. Majority of players will block non-meta frames and weapons because they want to do things as fast as possible. Players who don't play meta have to wait for a group much longer than those who do which creates inequality between players. Does that sound like a fair system to you?

To be honest, I would rather have an extra wait time or less people in pubs for a more controlled public game. Games like Payday 2 and Overwatch still has a lot of filled public games even with those feature on. 

Also according to DE’s Warframe usage, all warframes almost used equally with 1-3% difference between the meta frames. So I don’t think this will create empty pub games in matchmaking.
 

[SignatureChewy]

To be honest, this suggestion strikes me as a waste of time. This seems like the type of system that would go unnoticed by the majority of players at all, and utilized by an even vaster minority. Blacklisting people from your lobby because their equipment is "too effective"? In a PvE game? Cmon. If you include every weapon/warframe in the game on the exclusion list, it would be way too cumbersome and people would just blacklist non-meta equipment. If you only include "problematic" equipment, then you open up another can of worms determining what should be included, and having to update that list every time buffs/nerfs are made and new stuff comes out. I would much rather DE work on other things than implementing and maintaining such a niche system.

If you want a slower pace, play solo. If you want to be better than your squadmates, play low level missions. If you want specific team setups, find some friends or a clan.

 

 

[MacIntoc]

12 hours ago, Aesthier said:

It does work.

If it does, why there is still players complaining that some stuff are to powerfull and prevent them to make kill ? And why DE nerf them ?

 

10 hours ago, SignatureChewy said:

If you only include "problematic" equipment, then you open up another can of worms determining what should be included,

This question has already arisen at least every time DE made the decision to nerf a stuff because the complaints around it became too loud. It's not a new problematic. Just a new way to resolve it instead of nerf hammer.

 

10 hours ago, SignatureChewy said:

having to update that list every time buffs/nerfs are made and new stuff comes out. I would much rather DE work on other things than implementing and maintaining such a niche system.

It would be faster for DE to add a stuff on a list than to nerf a stuff.

[AzureTerra]

Game doesn't need any fancy lockout X from mission settings since there is already the ability to lock yourself out from any "nasty kill stealers" that might happen along in a public mission with Solo, Invite and Friends (slightly dubious that one since not everyone in your clan maybe someone you want to play with randomly). I am sure if you took some time and poked about in recruiting you could find like minded people to run with if you have no clan or friends online.

Edited May 27, 2020 by AzureTerra

[MacIntoc]

@AzureTerra

You perfectely know that the only solution for now is nerf. You write it yourself about Bramma in a topic where a player complain about this weapon because he have to play solo otherwise he can't make kill.

Instead of nerfing the Bramma, i think it would be better to let him the choice to not play in a squad where a player is using it.

[AzureTerra]

45 minutes ago, MacIntoc said:

@AzureTerra

You perfectely know that the only solution for now is nerf. You write it yourself about Bramma in a topic where a player complain about this weapon because he have to play solo otherwise he can't make kill.

Instead of nerfing the Bramma, i think it would be better to let him the choice to not play in a squad where a player is using it.

Which he can do by setting one of the three non public squad types. One of which you will never see a "offending weapon/frame" in unless you bring it and the other two you can ask people to not "offend your delicate sensibilities with X weapon/frame" . Its really not that hard to move the mouse up and select the game mode that you want so as to not be bothered by the whims of other players.

Nerfing a weapon/frame because its popular/ offending the sensibilities of delicate players is not a valid or sensible reason to change a weapon/frame, it will likely have some changes eventually due to its overuse, that has been proven several times before. When it becomes even slightly less efficient to play with the people who seem to only be able to play that way will change up to the next thing and then we will have endless whining about whatever that new OP thing is. Meanwhile the way to avoid it is there and waiting for these people to utilize as its always been.

Edited May 27, 2020 by AzureTerra

[MacIntoc]

So for you, all the nerfs done by DE are only justified by overused stuff ?? Look for topic from player complaining about old Ember (not the rework, the one before WoF nerf), Saryn, Bramma, old Ash, Simulor, Tonkor,... and search topic complaining about Catchmoon. Catchmoon is the one of the only nerf that can be justified by overuse. Others nerfs are justified by complaining. Almost nothing would be overused if the players had a real way to not undergo it. And "play solo" or "spend more time to recruit a squad than making a mission" is not a real way. It's not even a bandaids.

From a certain point of view, adding a filter to exclude nuke stuff is just an automation of recruiting your own team without wasting time recruiting it.

[AzureTerra]

1 hour ago, MacIntoc said:

So for you, all the nerfs done by DE are only justified by overused stuff ?? Look for topic from player complaining about old Ember (not the rework, the one before WoF nerf), Saryn, Bramma, old Ash, Simulor, Tonkor,... and search topic complaining about Catchmoon. Catchmoon is the one of the only nerf that can be justified by overuse. Others nerfs are justified by complaining. Almost nothing would be overused if the players had a real way to not undergo it. And "play solo" or "spend more time to recruit a squad than making a mission" is not a real way. It's not even a bandaids.

From a certain point of view, adding a filter to exclude nuke stuff is just an automation of recruiting your own team without wasting time recruiting it.

Players will always overuse something, its not designed to be done that way but invariably someone will find that X does things slightly faster then Y and the herd will rush to use it and that will make DE pay attention to why maybe its being used so much and if it is found to be being used to much for reasons that they don't want they will change it (nerf as any change is seen by the herd). Things do get changed because of complaining, if its changed because of some sensibilities were ruffled then that is a bad change vs complainants that something needs fixing for legitimate reasons. Adding a filter to "screen" select weapons and frames is a slippery slope downhill, not a fix.

[DatDarkOne]

6 hours ago, AzureTerra said:

Which he can do by setting one of the three non public squad types. One of which you will never see a "offending weapon/frame" in unless you bring it and the other two you can ask people to not "offend your delicate sensibilities with X weapon/frame" . Its really not that hard to move the mouse up and select the game mode that you want so as to not be bothered by the whims of other players.

I have never understand why this easy concept is so hard for so many to understand.  

[NoSpax]

Am 19.5.2020 um 12:45 schrieb MacIntoc:

Saryn, Mesa, Ignis, Kuva Bramma,

*sings* One of those is not like the others.

Spoiler: It shoots paint. The enemies just go up in flames, because their neatly cleaned armor is stained.

 

[MacIntoc]

3 hours ago, AzureTerra said:

Players will always overuse something, its not designed to be done that way but invariably someone will find that X does things slightly faster then Y and the herd will rush to use it and that will make DE pay attention to why maybe its being used so much and if it is found to be being used to much for reasons that they don't want they will change it (nerf as any change is seen by the herd). Things do get changed because of complaining, if its changed because of some sensibilities were ruffled then that is a bad change vs complainants that something needs fixing for legitimate reasons. Adding a filter to "screen" select weapons and frames is a slippery slope downhill, not a fix.

Have you some exemple of stuff DE find it don't work as expected after it become overused ? I eventually see Chroma after Eidolon out or Limbo after Scarlet Spear out (even if both are more a bad anticipation that an unexpected usage).

From my experience, DE fix unexpected use before it would become meta (like Vazarin, Arca Titron, 100% damage immunity thanks to 25% damage reduction from shield with Titania or thanks to shield gating with Dark Dagger,...), even if there is some exceptions (like Chroma or Limbo). They don't wait there is complains or a stuff become overused, because that would make useless badbuzz.

But if a stuff work as expected but make a S#&$storm despite this, they will nerf it too. Most of time it's this case wich justifie the nerf (Ember, Ash, Simulor, Tonkor, Bramma, Saryn,...).

The only exception i see at this two case is Catchmoon, wich was nerfed only because it was overused.

Edited May 27, 2020 by MacIntoc

[SignatureChewy]

10 hours ago, MacIntoc said:

This question has already arisen at least every time DE made the decision to nerf a stuff because the complaints around it became too loud. It's not a new problematic. Just a new way to resolve it instead of nerf hammer.

You seem to be under the impression that equipment is nerfed solely because people complain about it. While that is one factor, the main reason things are nerfed are because they blow through game content too easily, regardless of whether the user is playing solo or in a squad. Blacklisting equipment from being in your squad is not an alternative to nerfs, nor will it prevent OP stuff from being nerfed. Can a kuva bramma user be annoying to the rest of their squad? yes. But that's not why it will be nerfed, it will be nerfed because it is too efficient at killing enemies and trivializes gameplay. This isn't a matchmaking issue, it's a balance issue.

Edited May 27, 2020 by SignatureChewy

[Xolgys]

"my kills"

if u want them to really be your kills then play solo.

if u dont then everyone has the right to kill enemies and the faster one usually wins. if u care so much about kills/dmg dealt then play solo or with friends/premade teams without AoE nuke setups.

Edited May 27, 2020 by Xydeth

[MacIntoc]

@SignatureChewy

Because when DE find a stuff unbalanced, they nerf it almost immediately. There is many exemple, Chroma and Limbo, like i already said, but also Exodia Contagion working through rift nerfed just after the end of Scarlet Spear, Magus Lockdown, Catchmoon, Vazarin,... they try not to wait until the stuff is widely used to avoid complaints against nerf.

21 hours ago, Xydeth said:

with friends/premade teams without AoE nuke setups

Yes, but filters would make that a lot faster.