New Railjack isnt Railjack anymore

[Steel_Rook]

51 minutes ago, TheSarkY said:

and this is another your argument that you can waste more time to find more stuff to kill. instead actually doing objective to get reward and have fun killing in space. 

I want to unpack this, because you're making a few statements here that I'm not sure you're aware that you're making. You seem to assert that any time spent in Corpus Proxima missions is to "find more stuff to kill instead of doing objectives." I disagree. At least from my personal anecdotal experience, I spend the majority of my time doing objectives - just not the primary objective. This is no different from finding all Caches in a Sabotage mission or hacking all three Spy consoles in a regular Spy mission where only 2 are required. What ships I end up shooting, I shoot in the process of doing secondary objectives.

I don't really think you can hold this against me. More to the point - I don't think I'm doing it wrong, because I seem to be having tons of fun in Corpus Railjack and you apparently aren't. To each his own, obviously, but if I'm trying to explain how I have managed to enjoy Corpus Proxima... Is it not worth taking that into advisement, at least? Delivering sick burns to me doesn't actually improve your in-game experience, I wouldn't think.

Secondly and more importantly, you're equating "have fun" and "killing in space" as though they're the same thing, while drawing an arbitrary distinction between "have fun" and "ground mission." While you're free to accuse me of pushing my own subjective preference onto you, I feel justify in claiming that "this is Warframe." If you find a side activity (space combat) more fun than the core gameplay loop (ground combat), that speaks to either a fundamental flaw of ground combat design (which should be addressed separately) or a fundamentally flawed expectation from one aspect of a ground combat game.

There's nothing inherently "more fun" about space combat relative to ground combat. Indeed I'd argue that space combat as we have it now is incredibly shallow and unable to sustain long stretches of uninterrupted gameplay. That's kind of why DE keep putting ground objectives in it. That's obviously not true for everyone - some do prefer space combat. Fair enough, but I don't think that's sufficient reason to make demands. And sure, I know I'm opening myself up to "But you hate Defence!" or "You hate Sanctuary Onslaught!" and "How would you like it if we forced you to do those!" Obviously I wouldn't like it, but not for the presence of ground combat in them. I would, in fact, like it just as little as if I were forced to play Railjack against my will.

That's my point here - Railjack is not another game. It's not Call of Duty Zimbies inside of an otherwise modern military shooter. It's a general mission type category, same as Free Roam missions. Railjack space combat is the setting in much the same way as large(ish) open maps are the setting of Free Roam. However, Free Roam still often sets the player in close-quarter environments, fighting in caves and building interiors. That doesn't go against the spirit of Free Roam, because the spirit of Free Roam isn't restricted to just under the open sky.

I know I'm not going to convince you, but I hope that you'd hear at least enough for maybe a bit of perspective.

 

27 minutes ago, Taiepii said:

This is not true, if you open your Tactical View and click over spectator mode on a Crew member, you will see that your Crew in the other Layer, is very much active and moving around

Oh? I should have a look at what they're doing. You say "active and moving around." Are they fighting enemy craft, though? The Railjack interior itself isn't part of the space layer, so I guess it makes sense that that would still be simulated, but I would be VERY surprised if enemy craft still moved around and had dogfights with the Railjack AI crew. For one thing, there'd be no purpose in simulating combat where the player can't see it. For another, that would defeat the purpose of airlocking us into the ground instance, in which case I would be convinced that the airlock is unnecessary. My statements here are conditional as I don't know if I'll have the opportunity to check this in the immediate future.

 

21 minutes ago, Nichivo said:

ps.  I have not actually used an ad hominem. I can if you would like... If you had a clue you wouldn't have misspelled "realized". There you go.

I had no intention of engaging with you, but this forum's alerts system brought this across my screen and I had to laugh.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/realize-vs-realise-difference

[Taiepii]

52 minutes ago, Steel_Rook said:

Yeah, you guys keep repeating that, but not a single person so far has addressed this point. There's plenty of Railjack space fighting in the new missions, and you don't have to sit on your hands waiting for it to happen. With two to three Points of Interest in every mission and constantly-respawning enemies, you have to actively try to avoid the Railjack aspect as much as possible for this argument to make sense. Because you argue that "some of us prefer to fight," yet the only way any of this makes sense is if you deliberately DON'T fight and speed through the Railjack section as quickly as possible.

Wait what ?! not a single person address this point ? Are you kidding me, this is the first point of my post. 
Im sorry but the very first thing I tried as soon as I logged was actual combat, not objective. And the spawn is super low & slow. You have max 5 fighter and maybe 1 crewship every 30sec only after you killed them all. 
Skirmish at least had the very pleasant spawn of about 20 fighter and fast spawn. Sometime 3 Crewship at once as well. Making the fight appealing.

Don't come here giving argument by judging our gameplay, you never met me in-game, we never played together. You have absolutely no founding in saying we just rush Objective when its absolutely wrong.
 

[Nichivo]

5 minutes ago, Steel_Rook said:

I had no intention of engaging with you, but this forum's alerts system brought this across my screen and I had to laugh.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/realize-vs-realise-difference

It was supposed to be funny, but for some reason I am doubting you laughed. Irony as usual is wasted on some.

[Steel_Rook]

7 minutes ago, Taiepii said:

Don't come here giving argument by judging our gameplay, you never met me in-game, we never played together. You have absolutely no founding in saying we just rush Objective when its absolutely wrong.

That's understandable. You're pretty much the first person to directly address it, though, and that was about the fourth time I brought that argument up. Everyone else seems to phrase their criticism as there being "too much ground combat." What you're saying here sounds like the opposite issue - not enough space combat. It might sound like the same thing, as they're both relative to total mission length, but the way to solve them is different.

See, my argument so far has been predominantly around not reducing the amount and presence of ground combat in Corpus Proxima missions. I've no criticism at all for calls to increase the space combat in those modes. I'll admit right away that spawn rates seem excessively low, but I'd assumed this was just because I haven't unlocked higher-level planets yet. Still making my way through the Railjack Chart.

Let me make this clear - if your argument is for increasing enemy spawns in Corpus Proxima or creating more "kill" objectives, then you're really not going to see any disagreement from me. I do feel the need to reduce Railjack spam combat a little bit, since Veil Proxima kill objectives are needlessly high, at 80 fighters and 6 Crew Ships. However, I don't see a reason to reduce them by this much. More numerous enemy craft would be welcome.

[TheSarkY]

4 minutes ago, Steel_Rook said:

I want to unpack this, because you're making a few statements here that I'm not sure you're aware that you're making. You seem to assert that any time spent in Corpus Proxima missions is to "find more stuff to kill instead of doing objectives." I disagree. At least from my personal anecdotal experience, I spend the majority of my time doing objectives - just not the primary objective. This is no different from finding all Caches in a Sabotage mission or hacking all three Spy consoles in a regular Spy mission where only 2 are required. What ships I end up shooting, I shoot in the process of doing secondary objectives.

I don't really think you can hold this against me. More to the point - I don't think I'm doing it wrong, because I seem to be having tons of fun in Corpus Railjack and you apparently aren't. To each his own, obviously, but if I'm trying to explain how I have managed to enjoy Corpus Proxima... Is it not worth taking that into advisement, at least? Delivering sick burns to me doesn't actually improve your in-game experience, I wouldn't think.

Secondly and more importantly, you're equating "have fun" and "killing in space" as though they're the same thing, while drawing an arbitrary distinction between "have fun" and "ground mission." While you're free to accuse me of pushing my own subjective preference onto you, I feel justify in claiming that "this is Warframe." If you find a side activity (space combat) more fun than the core gameplay loop (ground combat), that speaks to either a fundamental flaw of ground combat design (which should be addressed separately) or a fundamentally flawed expectation from one aspect of a ground combat game.

There's nothing inherently "more fun" about space combat relative to ground combat. Indeed I'd argue that space combat as we have it now is incredibly shallow and unable to sustain long stretches of uninterrupted gameplay. That's kind of why DE keep putting ground objectives in it. That's obviously not true for everyone - some do prefer space combat. Fair enough, but I don't think that's sufficient reason to make demands. And sure, I know I'm opening myself up to "But you hate Defence!" or "You hate Sanctuary Onslaught!" and "How would you like it if we forced you to do those!" Obviously I wouldn't like it, but not for the presence of ground combat in them. I would, in fact, like it just as little as if I were forced to play Railjack against my will.

That's my point here - Railjack is not another game. It's not Call of Duty Zimbies inside of an otherwise modern military shooter. It's a general mission type category, same as Free Roam missions. Railjack space combat is the setting in much the same way as large(ish) open maps are the setting of Free Roam. However, Free Roam still often sets the player in close-quarter environments, fighting in caves and building interiors. That doesn't go against the spirit of Free Roam, because the spirit of Free Roam isn't restricted to just under the open sky.

I know I'm not going to convince you, but I hope that you'd hear at least enough for maybe a bit of perspective.

 

Oh? I should have a look at what they're doing. You say "active and moving around." Are they fighting enemy craft, though? The Railjack interior itself isn't part of the space layer, so I guess it makes sense that that would still be simulated, but I would be VERY surprised if enemy craft still moved around and had dogfights with the Railjack AI crew. For one thing, there'd be no purpose in simulating combat where the player can't see it. For another, that would defeat the purpose of airlocking us into the ground instance, in which case I would be convinced that the airlock is unnecessary. My statements here are conditional as I don't know if I'll have the opportunity to check this in the immediate future.

is it warframe ground ninja  or space ninja? no its not separate game but every game has different game modes so does this one. and my standing is not that everything is bad, if you read my feedback you will see. just that its not good in this state it needs to be changed. also make your posts shorter, you can make your point alot shorter.

[TheSarkY]

8 minutes ago, Steel_Rook said:

Let me make this clear - if your argument is for increasing enemy spawns in Corpus Proxima or creating more "kill" objectives, then you're really not going to see any disagreement from me. I do feel the need to reduce Railjack spam combat a little bit, since Veil Proxima kill objectives are needlessly high, at 80 fighters and 6 Crew Ships. However, I don't see a reason to reduce them by this much. More numerous enemy craft would be welcome.

Ok now i think you are here just to troll, if people said there is too much ground that means there has to be more space, and you thinking differently just because people didnt say it like you wanted to is ... well... also read my feedback if you want to know my exact standing.

[Darkuhn]

vor 25 Minuten schrieb Steel_Rook:

I'll admit right away that spawn rates seem excessively low

The Veil defense mission dose have a nice spawn rate, it has secondary objectives that spawen additional Figters and Crewships ittl keep you buisy while another player is doing POI or the secondary objectives. But the spawn rate depends on those secondary objectives. it could also be the typical 4 figters each time the previous 4 are destroyed.

Also if you want entertaining space battles i would advise you not to use the Gunner crewmates with Vidar Pulsar MK II as those are shredding through the fighters like a hot knife through butter.

[_Tormex_]

On 2021-03-20 at 1:45 AM, Taiepii said:

Lets be honest. Your Railjack now is a Taxi from spawn point to objective ship.

This is a gross exaggeration and if you're making this point, you clearly don't understand how vehicles function in games. Vehicles are never designed to be a completely separate game form the base, but to expand upon the game that already exists by adding a new dimension. The new railjack missions model that well, though I think that the defense missions specifically could be modified to better reflect the railjack environment better. Also, we shouldn't assume that this version of railjack is the final version, because DE literally told us that the next two updates are also adding more Railjack content.

I also prefer nodes with more scale for the fun of playing the game (see: the Volatile nodes), but the exterminate nodes are nice for farming. So I am glad that we have both options. I don't think all railjack nodes should be identical. It would be nice if some volatile nodes required slightly more railjack-specific targets (like crewships) compared to others so that we have more options in terms of speed and balance.

On 2021-03-20 at 1:45 AM, Taiepii said:

Second point : 

I agree with individual Railjack build, I mean for the Plexus. 
But when it come to individual Forge. Its wrong. 
I mean I get that in random group, thing go wrong, but they will even with this new system. Cause random group = random action = High chance for Bad experience. That will always be the case. 
On the other hand, the old shared Forge system, invited to an actual teamplay gameplay. People used to ask for role. ( Forge / Artillery / Gunner or Omni / Pilote ). People use to communicate ( Need more Dome charge, Need more energy ). 
With individual system, we welcome the anarchism system instead of collaboration. 

The new plexus is too abstract for me to completely understand at the moment after having been so used to the old system, but I do miss the necessity of cooperation from before even though it could be annoying at times.

On 2021-03-20 at 2:16 AM, Taiepii said:

A copy paste mission & Gameplay = Future ? 
Im sorry I played the exact the same Defense mission that I been playing for over the last 4year

Yeah the defense mission is the only one that I actively did not enjoy. Partly because that tileset is just kinda annoying to traverse, and partly because it is so long and tedious and takes you completely out of the railjack. I actually had an idea for a last stand game mode to replace it that you might find more interesting Railjack: Last Stand

[_Tormex_]

1 hour ago, Steel_Rook said:

I had no intention of engaging with you, but this forum's alerts system brought this across my screen and I had to laugh.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/realize-vs-realise-difference

This just blew my mind. I didn't realize how weird we pronounce/spell wise, franchise, etc. until I started recoiling at the realise spelling and realizing that we do the same thing with other words in American English. Also, my spell check insists that the British realise is a typo lol

[Steel_Rook]

1 hour ago, TheSarkY said:

Ok now i think you are here just to troll, if people said there is too much ground that means there has to be more space, and you thinking differently just because people didnt say it like you wanted to is ... well... also read my feedback if you want to know my exact standing.

First of all, look at the quality of the arguments I'm dealing with. "Railjack is just a bus now." "Railjack is just a taxi now." When prodded as to why, you guys give me a litany of responses that boil down to "I play Railjack for Railjack, stop making me play ground missions." Then you accuse me of trolling you because I presume you're asking for... A reduction of the ground component. When I expressly challenge people on the fact that space combat still exists and that I've had what feels to me a decent amount, you guys tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about and that I'm wrong. From all of this, I was somehow meant to deduce that your calls to stop forcing you into Railjack combat was a clever use of metonymy, standing in for "keep forcing me into ground combat but ALSO give me more space combat as well."

And I still don't know if even THAT is your argument, because the bulk of what I've gotten back from you so far is "read my posts" and "make shorter posts." The irony of these two things stated back-to-back doesn't seem to register. You'll also notice - if you've looked through the thread - that there are no fewer than four, possibly five people talking at me at once, each expecting me to remember in precise detail their specific argument and how it differs from the other half-dozen people giving me superficially similar arguments that boil down to the same thing. I make long posts because I try to be explicit and cover all my bases, specifically to ensure that we're all on the same page. Then people don't read them, don't address them and tell me off for not knowing what-all they actually want to happen.

If you want to affect change, have a clear point and specific propositions. "Defeating" me in this thread isn't going to accomplish much.

 

49 minutes ago, Darkuhn said:

The Veil defense mission dose have a nice spawn rate, it has secondary objectives that spawen additional Figters and Crewships ittl keep you buisy while another player is doing POI or the secondary objectives. But the spawn rate depends on those secondary objectives. it could also be the typical 4 figters each time the previous 4 are destroyed.

This is precisely why I tried to not comment on enemy spawns. The missions I've run so far have consisted of 4 fighters spawning at a time, but I've only had the time of day to clear Venus Proxima and part of Neptune Proxima. I've not touched Pluto Proxima, let alone any of the Veil Proxima missions yet. Low-level Grineer Railjack missions, like those found on Earth, have spawn rates exactly as low as Venus Proxima. They spawn more ships per wave (8-10 vs. 4, if I recall), but the ships are weak and almost no Crew Ships turn up. I look at this amount of combat, I think "looks about right" and move on. Then people start telling me there's "too much ground combat," which I'm supposed to read as "too little space combat," which doesn't appear true. So I ask what the issue is, and I get called a troll for my efforts. All the while, I suspect but can't prove that Veil Proxima missions will spawn more craft, if not as many as your standard Skirmish.

If you've run enough Veil Proxima missions, I'd like to hear what the spawn rates are - genuinely interested, plus it might help the discussion.

[Raso719]

Really let down that the new Railjack direction seems to be shameful shrinking away from Railjack as a means of integrating Railjack into the game.

Unpopular opinion time.  The Exterminate and Defense missions tacked onto the Railjack gameplay is the part of Railjack missions that's a chore, NOT the Railjack parts. If I wanted to play defense or Extermination I could have done that without the depressingly short reminder that cool spaceship stuff is also kinda sorta in the game. 

This is not how it should have been integrated. It's almost like DE is ashamed of Railjack gameplay, not the glitches or ballance stuff I mean like ashamed that people have to go into a cool spaceship and do cool spaceship stuff in space. Like, boo-hoo, we're so sorry we accidentally gave you a cool AF spaceship and now you can do cool stuff like fight other spaceships in space so let's just have you do waaaay less of that and then just do the other stuff you already regularly do........ or the player could just NOT do any of the space stuff and jump right into an extermination mode without having to be bothered by doing cool spaceship stuff.

DE needs to DOUBLE DOWN on the cool spaceship stuff, not hide it under the guise of a taxi service. Make assaulting larger spaceships cooler. Give it more guns and other bits to shoot off the superstructure. Right now the larger spaceships are insultingly easy to work around. Crew Ships are ten thousand times more dangerous than an entire armada of Grineer Gallons. My only guess is that something thought that people are too stupid to figure out that you have to shoot the glowing bits the the UI LITERALLY DRAWS LITTLE RED CIRCLES OVER to make the big spaceship gang stop going pew pew so they put as few weapons and shield generators on them as possible for the benefit of the player so they don't accidentally get shot out of the sky while drooling over their keyboards. I mean why else would they make dealing with capital ships so utterly trivial? And the fighter screen in Corpus missions is pathetic. 4 or 5 fighters at a time? So, 5 fighters, 2 or 4 turrets on the capitalship that can actually track you simultaneously, torpedo barrages that you can't stop by taking out the missile batteries but it doesn't matter anyway because they always miss........ what's the point? Why would I go through those motions just to then play a normal Defense mission?

I want Railjack to BE RAILJACK not a Space Taxi simulator and certainly not a game mode where DE is afraid to even dip into what it should be about, let alone terrified to double down on or shamed to put front and center. 

 

See me other topic for a more complete rant...... 

 

 

[TheSarkY]

10 minutes ago, Steel_Rook said:

First of all, look at the quality of the arguments I'm dealing with. "Railjack is just a bus now." "Railjack is just a taxi now." When prodded as to why, you guys give me a litany of responses that boil down to "I play Railjack for Railjack, stop making me play ground missions." Then you accuse me of trolling you because I presume you're asking for... A reduction of the ground component. When I expressly challenge people on the fact that space combat still exists and that I've had what feels to me a decent amount, you guys tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about and that I'm wrong. From all of this, I was somehow meant to deduce that your calls to stop forcing you into Railjack combat was a clever use of metonymy, standing in for "keep forcing me into ground combat but ALSO give me more space combat as well."

And I still don't know if even THAT is your argument, because the bulk of what I've gotten back from you so far is "read my posts" and "make shorter posts." The irony of these two things stated back-to-back doesn't seem to register. You'll also notice - if you've looked through the thread - that there are no fewer than four, possibly five people talking at me at once, each expecting me to remember in precise detail their specific argument and how it differs from the other half-dozen people giving me superficially similar arguments that boil down to the same thing. I make long posts because I try to be explicit and cover all my bases, specifically to ensure that we're all on the same page. Then people don't read them, don't address them and tell me off for not knowing what-all they actually want to happen.

If you want to affect change, have a clear point and specific propositions. "Defeating" me in this thread isn't going to accomplish much.

Thats exactly why i told you to read my feedback, i did say it all there and im not here to make change, im here to agree with other people that you dont agree with. as simple as that.

[-ViperStrike-]

Thank you OP because I was starting to think I was the only one. My Railjack is gone. I understand why it has been done and I like the idea, integration it is a dream I want to see happening. But the cost was really heavy in a place it really didn't need to. The Plexus (because it takes the feeling that your ship matters, it doesn't, its just a set of mods) and the inability to host your own ship at will. Just two things, massive disappointment, my ship doesn't look like a bus, it just look like some bigger archwing I just have to invoke and do the mission. This wasn't what they promised on that beautiful Railjack reveal years ago. But I guess that the masses needs always wins in the end.

[Taiepii]

1 hour ago, Steel_Rook said:

Let me make this clear - if your argument is for increasing enemy spawns in Corpus Proxima or creating more "kill" objectives, then you're really not going to see any disagreement from me. I do feel the need to reduce Railjack spam combat a little bit, since Veil Proxima kill objectives are needlessly high, at 80 fighters and 6 Crew Ships. However, I don't see a reason to reduce them by this much. More numerous enemy craft would be welcome.

I'm just asking that DE give us the option. 

We want Space battle only ? Give us Skirmish with Space battle only ( Like an exterminate mission ) 
We want to play with objective ? Give us Sabotage mission ( Which is sort of already the case, but too much of it actually, way too much ) 

Right now, All mission FORCE us to ground mission, ALL of them. That is the real problem. 
Again reason people were spamming Giant Point, isnt simply for the XP value of it. It also cause it was one of the only mission were you didn't have to go out of the Ship. 

If you do want to go out of the Ship, there is plenty of mission offering this option. But right now DE deliberately removed mission were we could stay in our Railjack. And that what make a part of the community mad about the update. 

Everyone would agree if we had options. 

[Darkuhn]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Steel_Rook:

If you've run enough Veil Proxima missions, I'd like to hear what the spawn rates are - genuinely interested, plus it might help the discussion.

On R-9 Cloud you can expect about this many fighters present till the "kill fighters" objective is completed, after that there will be no more fighters spawning:

Fun fact is that all those fighters are getting mowed down in about 10- 20 sec by my crew. So if you want space battles to be entertaining dont use gunners as the Fighter kill part will be done in a minute or two if you have a maxed out Railjack/Crew.

Here is a gif of how that can look:

 

On the Corpus missions its quite dependable on what OPI you get, with the carrier and the experimantal Crewship Dock the spawnrates are as high as about 8 fighters everytime they are being shot down plus a shielded Crewship every couple minutes this combination was the only time my Gunners where overwhelmed (as i wasnt onboard doing the loot dungeon) and a Ramsled made it onto the ship.

If you dont get this combination the mission will look like this:

-As you Spawn in the Mission:

A Crewship and 4 Fighter.

- When you get close another 4 fighters will spawn(see the right side of the image):

after that there will spawn 4 fighters everytime you destroyed the previous ones. The delay between Spawns seems to be about 5-10 sec.

 

If they would increase the spawnrates to about 20 fighters being present at any time plus a crewship spawn every 1,5-2 min it would be much more entertaining.

[Raso719]

There seems to be 2-ish main schools of thought from what I've seen on the forums so far. 

School 1: I want them to integrate Railjack into the game by removing it from the game almost entirely and making it a meaningless prelude to the same stuff we already do and can still do without having to go through the prologue. 

School 2: I want to do fun and meaningful stuff in my Railjack that revolves around doing cool spaceship stuff in space with/to other spaceships.

 

It seems,to me at least, that School 1 by and large, isn't consciously asking Railjack to be all but removed from the game but is asking to double down on a direction wherein Railjack becomes such an insignificant minor part of a mission that there are no "Railjack" missions just "missions". However the result of going further down this line is that Railjacks literally become multi-million credit taxicabs where you put all this work and effort into tricking out this ride with cool weapons and armor and mods just to do 3 minutes of meaningless content as a prelude to the same stuff you already do. Warframes require far less investment to make them functionally worthwhile to use in a mission and yet the mission will still be dominated by doing normal Warframe stuff. Whether or not the realize it, they seem to view the Railjack as a waste of time and be advocating for less and less of an emphasis on the Railjack they will only ensure it becomes more of a waste of time. I genuinely believe they want it removed from the game entirely. They say they don't want the content to end up as "another island" but everything they seem to call for has the effect of ensuring that Railjack content is trivialized to the point that whether or not is siloed off doesn't matter because it's barely even content anymore.

School 2, meanwhile, wants the investment in the Railjack to be rewarding by making the gameplay more engaging.  They want MORE THINGS TO DO with their Railjack not less things to do with the Railjack. They seem to be genuinely interested in all the cool stuff that you can do to another spaceship with your own spaceship. They seem to view the act of flying a combat capable spaceship around shooting other spaceships as... idk enjoyable or something. Like, it's not just an empty and annoying means to an end. Those of this school of thought seem to not mind the idea of idea of integration into more "traditional" gameplay but they seem to also expect something less identical to what's already in the game. Like, there are so many things we could be doing that aren't just Starchart missions.... Fly the Archwing though a dangerous obstacle course inside of a massive capitaship to get to a ship's reactor, go on foot and defend the reactor while it's hacked then run over and do something devious to the coolant tanks and then evac to the Railjack to take out exposed radiators but FIRST you need to fight past waves of fighter screens, frigates armed to the brim that maneuver around the larger vessel which need to be avoided or disabled and then you need to weaken the capitalship by taking out a section of the ship's shield grid and then blast a hole into the armor to infiltrate through. That seems like balance and integration to me. People from the 1st School of thought seem like they would be thrilled if you HAD to boost past the whole lot of that nonsense and then just shoot, like 2 things (if that) and then just void beam over to the ship where you would then proceed to run a full 40 waves of just a normal Sedna Tile defense mission. 

I think School 2 is much more aware of what they want and expect and has done a great job at vocalizing what it is they want. I think the 1st school of thought doesn't grasp that the consequence of what they say they want is for Railjack to basically from the game in any meaningful way. I think why it's so hard to discuss this with them is because there is a fundamental difference in how both sides understand not Warframe but what a game is in general. The 1st school seems to have almost a full on loathing of gameplay while the 2nd school seems to view playing games as.... well as gameplay. I think the 2nd school of thought is much more intune with the sort of gameplay they want while the 1st school is so infatuated with the idea of being awarded loot than they see anything new gameplay as nothing but an obstacle between them and their serotonin injection. 

[Darkuhn]

I like how the Railjack part feel when you pilot your ship.

For the connection of Railajck and the normal mission types i'd like to see a new twist to the modes, like in defense missions the Railjack crew has to shoot down reinforcements that try to enter the ship from the outside, and thus reducing the spawns for the waves of the awaycrew making the waves finish faster etc.

Or really big ships with multiple shields that have to be taken down from the inside in a Spy/Sabotage like mission while the Railjack has to fend off waves of enemies and is bombarded by the Capitalships weapons as it poses as the Distraction, so you cant park the ship outside of the weapon range.

This would be a great way to combine Railjack with normal mission types.

[Nichivo]

3 hours ago, Steel_Rook said:

 I do feel the need to reduce Railjack spam combat a little bit, since Veil Proxima kill objectives are needlessly high, at 80 fighters and 6 Crew Ships.

3-5 minutes of combat is what you consider needlessly high spam combat? There are corpus Veil nodes where you likely will not see more than 2 Crew Ships.

 

@Raso719 I am firmly in school 2.

[CyborgJellyfish]

Was it just me looking at the Defence nodes of the Railjack thinking "I hope that's an Archwing defence and not another ground"
Or looking at the Exterminate nodes wondering if it was going to be another Gian Point "Kill X fighters / crewships" and leave?

I like the volatile missions, and I like the notion of having to go into different sub-objectives while your railjack is fighting everything above you. The ONLY thing that gets to me is the inability to do the ground mission while also doing the railjack. That airlock is a content lock. Nothing more, nothing less. It would make sense on say a 30 minute Assault style mission with beefed up rewards, It would make sense to have our own tileset for railjack missions like the Kuva Fortress. I honestly feel like the biggest issue is the literal copy-paste of the "New Corpus Tileset" as if we've not seen it enough yet. Although its gotta be said, it makes the space garbage chutes seem functional, but surely that'd be an ideal archwing extraction spot? If we weren't airlocked in then it would be engaging. You could leave the map in more spots. There would be an actual reason to think "The defence mission is scaling too high, we need backup" or "the railjack is being overwhelmed, extract ASAP" since you'd effectively have to balance BOTH sides of the equation.

I did consider what if they made another wave of railjack after the ground mission to envelope the experience, but then after 50 waves of defence do you really wanna lose everything to a bugged out crewship spawn? Its only gonna work if both railjack and ground teams work simultaneously. Railjack could fight off landing parties who are going to attack the defence mission nodes. Do we let them land for higher level troops on the ground, or fight them for higher level fighters against the railjack? If we let them land we get a slightly higher Necramech / Archwing mods and if we keep them in the air we get more chances at Railjack mods. Sure the railjack mods aren't as useful for higher level railjacks, but thats where you decide between fun and profit -- maybe the rare mods are actually rare and therefore worth more trade plat at that point. Either way, it would link the "content island" by literally taking out one thing: That airlock.

Lastly: Archwing Rush. This was literally their chance to bring more of this style of mission to the game. Instead we get a generic ground exterminate (again).

[Steel_Rook]

13 hours ago, Taiepii said:

We want Space battle only ? Give us Skirmish with Space battle only ( Like an exterminate mission ) 
We want to play with objective ? Give us Sabotage mission ( Which is sort of already the case, but too much of it actually, way too much ) 

Right now, All mission FORCE us to ground mission, ALL of them. That is the real problem. 
Again reason people were spamming Giant Point, isnt simply for the XP value of it. It also cause it was one of the only mission were you didn't have to go out of the Ship. 

That's a fair point, for the most part, though I don't think it's quite that simple. Let me approach this from two directions:

Firstly, I don't think that the removal of Gian Point was an attempt to reduce space combat. It was simply an attempt to remove a "loot cave" and spread people around the other nodes - a prudent thing to do when implementing new nodes. I'm not ideologically opposed to having "space only" combat scenarios any more than I'm opposed to having Archwing-only mission. Steve Sinclair suggested removing those nodes on a Dev Stream, but I personally feel that's unnecessary. They work fine for what they are. Same idea here. I've no issue with re-implementing Gian Point as its own mission type - maybe call it Dogfight or some such, maybe add a bit more complexity to it. As long as the reward structure doesn't end up massively over-rewarding grinding those nodes and those nodes only, it should be fine.

Secondly, I suspect this - or something like it - is still coming. There's a suspicious lack of Corpus Skirmish missions, for instance, not to mention Grineer "other" missions. For as much as DE did with Railjack 3.0, I think the system is still well beyond their development capacity, which is why we keep getting only bits and pieces. I'm going to make a prediction right now that we'll eventually get those missing mission types in some later update - feel free to save that and make me eat my words if that ends up not happening for another few years. Hopefully it won't. I'm not so sure that space only battles themselves will be introduced, but I do believe that DE can be convinced to do so.

For the time being, most of the old Skirmish nodes are still there, except for Gian Point. Legacy railjack space combat should still be mostly intact. If you want to request a return of that node in some fashion, then I can support this. The only thing I take issue with in this discussion is slagging the new Corpus missions as fundamentally flawed. Adding more space-heavy missions is not an issue. Removing or reworking the current space/ground combo missions is not a solution.

 

13 hours ago, Darkuhn said:

If they would increase the spawnrates to about 20 fighters being present at any time plus a crewship spawn every 1,5-2 min it would be much more entertaining.

I have a sneaking suspicion that DE might have reduced the number of space fighters in order to increase the number of ground soldiers, even outside of the airlocked main objectives. Corpus Proxima in general seems to have substantially more enemy density on the ground pretty much everywhere. I don't know this for a fact, but my gut tells me so...

That aside - no disagreement there. I'd love to see more enemy space units on-screen. I don't know what number I'd call "enough" - it depends on ship, weapons and playstyle. But more than 4 fighters and 1 crew ship would be nice, absolutely. I can excuse some of the new mission design with technical issues, but that only goes so far. If space combat doesn't improve in Veil Proxima, then that's a problem. I... Guess I'm willing to accept that some missions will have more emphasis on space dogfights and some more on ground combat, but more fighters during ground combat would still be nice.

[Steel_Rook]

13 hours ago, Raso719 said:

School 1: I want them to integrate Railjack into the game by removing it from the game almost entirely and making it a meaningless prelude to the same stuff we already do and can still do without having to go through the prologue. 

School 2: I want to do fun and meaningful stuff in my Railjack that revolves around doing cool spaceship stuff in space with/to other spaceships.

With all due respect, this breakdown is so one-sided and tone-deaf that it borders on dishonest. You spend so much time telling people what they think in their heart of hearts, even if they may not believe that's what they think. You spend so much time completely misrepresenting the arguments given. It frankly reads like propaganda. I'm willing to give you the benefit of a doubt that you somehow managed to read through this entire thread without catching any of the counter-arguments presented (which in itself is problematic), and so explain the following:

Nobody that I've seen enjoying Corpus Proxima is asking for Railjack to be removed or made meaningless. I myself have spent the better part of two days explaining why I DON'T think that the Railjack layer of Corpus Proxima is meaningless at all. I'll freely admit that if what you want is Warframes of Icarus or Eve Warframe or Descent: Warframe, then no - Corpus Proxima is probably not going to be for you. I'm not saying that YOU do. All I'm saying is that attempting to turn Railjack into a standalone game mode where you do Railjack and nothing but Railjack is a non-starter. That's what happened with Archwings. It wasn't until Archwings themselves became "a bus" in Free Roam maps and "a taxi" between Railjack and ground objectives that they actually gained a meaningful use.

Unlike Archwings, Railjack can't be implemented into other game modes due to the nature of its implementation, which is why DE did the reverse - they implemented other game modes into Railjack. The majority of Warframe's playerbase spend the majority of their time playing with Warframes. Things like Archwings, Operators, even Necramechs have exceptionally low adoption - only improved when they're allowed to be used alongside Warframes. Integrating core Warframe gameplay into Railjack is about the only way to give it wider adoption. And yes, that does mean mixing in "other things" into Railjack, but those "other things" are what brings in said adoption.

Your assertion that "the they" just want Railjack removed fundamentally misses what "the we" have been saying. I'm a Railjack early adopter. I love the concept, I like the gameplay and I'm absolutely ecstatic about what that system can bring. However, I also assert that that system has the potential to bring so much more than yet another generic space fighter sim. Those are a dime a dozen, and Warframe's version isn't even particularly good. The primary draw of the system FOR ME is the physicality of it, the interaction between Railjack, Archwing and ground missions. Being able to seamlessly transition from commanding a large vessel to EVA space flight to ground combat IS the draw for me. Space combat is certainly important, but it's only one part of a complete package. Compare this to ground combat. Just guns, just melee, just parkour - none of these systems alone are compelling enough to last. It's these systems in combination which elevate Warframe above your average generic shooter or hack-n-slash.

I don't want less Railjack. I want more Railjack missions - potentially migrating ALL ground missions to the Railjack format. Yes, sometimes that's going to mean parking the Railjack outside while I do fighting inside. Sometimes that's going to mean having a massive dogfight before I can go inside. This is the same experience for which I go to the likes of GTA. The physicality of having a vehicle with presence in the map - a vehicle which doesn't teleport to me, a vehicle I need to consider where leave and so on - that's the main draw for me. Hell, GTA Online's Kostakta sub is pretty much a proto-railjack. I can use it to fire torpedoes and cruise missiles to clear out heavy vehicles, then leave in my submarine car to attack an enemy submersible, boarding it in order to grab some loot, then get out of there before enemy reinforcements turn up.

I can get ground combat elsewhere. Frankly, I enjoy the likes of Payday 2, Vermintide 2, Deep Rock Galactic, Division 2, etc. far more than Warframe combat. I can get space combat pretty much anywhere. Hell, I can buy Star Wars Squadrons for €20 right now, and that's just off the top of my head. Very, VERY few games offer any sort of shared physicality, however. Off the top of my head, I can only think of Carrier Command: Gaea Mission (which is terrible and also 8 years old) and Star Citizen (which I'm convinced is more scam than game). That's it. Maybe stuff like No Man's Sky and Elite Dangerous count, but neither has particularly good ground combat, from what I hear.

To each their own, obviously. I'm not opposed to having more Railjack-heavy content just as I'm not in favour of removing the old Archwing nodes. If DE can figure out how to implement space-only missions like Gian Point without turning them into loot caves, all the better. I don't think that's nearly enough, however. Without integrating other game modes into it, Railjack is going to stay "that expensive forgotten game mode for diehard fans only," exactly like PvP.

 

3 hours ago, CyborgJellyfish said:

Was it just me looking at the Defence nodes of the Railjack thinking "I hope that's an Archwing defence and not another ground"
Or looking at the Exterminate nodes wondering if it was going to be another Gian Point "Kill X fighters / crewships" and leave?

I'm of the opinion that Railjack's mission and reward structure is flawed at inception. Warframe's ground mission reward structure is already "not great," with its all-or-nothing approach. Either you win "the mission" or you lose your rewards. This works when a ground mission is short and insular, since you don't waste a lot of time. A single Railjack mission, however, is the equivalent of several ground missions strung back-to-back, yet you void all rewards if you fail even a single one - or indeed the space sim inbetween. I'm of the opinion that player rewards should be "saved" at the completion of any point of interest and indeed after completing the main mission. No, it's not as realistic, but it's also the only way to make long-form content like this work for a general audience.

 

3 hours ago, CyborgJellyfish said:

Lastly: Archwing Rush. This was literally their chance to bring more of this style of mission to the game. Instead we get a generic ground exterminate (again).

Agreed, though DE did seem to explain that this is only the first batch of new Railjack missions. Supposedly, they didn't want to throw in new missions before revamping Railjack itself - which is good practice. It makes sense, then, that we'd get the most dirt-simple, basic mission types in the game to start. I'm still surprised they'd pick Defence (rather than kill it with fire), though. Could have had anything else, from Capture to Survival to Mobile Defence (itself a terrible mission) but nope. Defence. Ugh...

More to the point - I have in the past proposed Archwing-only points of interest. Say you have an asteroid field too narrow for the Railjack, or a Corpus ship too heavily shielded for it. Approach in your Archwing, zone into an Archwing instance and play that for a bit. It should be technically possible to do, since all the Railjack locations are just rooms elsewhere on the map surrounded by portal windows or a sky box. Might as well do the same for Archwing. Hopefully something to come soon.

[TheSarkY]

27 minutes ago, Steel_Rook said:

That's a fair point, for the most part, though I don't think it's quite that simple. Let me approach this from two directions:

Firstly, I don't think that the removal of Gian Point was an attempt to reduce space combat. It was simply an attempt to remove a "loot cave" and spread people around the other nodes - a prudent thing to do when implementing new nodes. I'm not ideologically opposed to having "space only" combat scenarios any more than I'm opposed to having Archwing-only mission. Steve Sinclair suggested removing those nodes on a Dev Stream, but I personally feel that's unnecessary. They work fine for what they are. Same idea here. I've no issue with re-implementing Gian Point as its own mission type - maybe call it Dogfight or some such, maybe add a bit more complexity to it. As long as the reward structure doesn't end up massively over-rewarding grinding those nodes and those nodes only, it should be fine.

Secondly, I suspect this - or something like it - is still coming. There's a suspicious lack of Corpus Skirmish missions, for instance, not to mention Grineer "other" missions. For as much as DE did with Railjack 3.0, I think the system is still well beyond their development capacity, which is why we keep getting only bits and pieces. I'm going to make a prediction right now that we'll eventually get those missing mission types in some later update - feel free to save that and make me eat my words if that ends up not happening for another few years. Hopefully it won't. I'm not so sure that space only battles themselves will be introduced, but I do believe that DE can be convinced to do so.

For the time being, most of the old Skirmish nodes are still there, except for Gian Point. Legacy railjack space combat should still be mostly intact. If you want to request a return of that node in some fashion, then I can support this. The only thing I take issue with in this discussion is slagging the new Corpus missions as fundamentally flawed. Adding more space-heavy missions is not an issue. Removing or reworking the current space/ground combo missions is not a solution.

 

I have a sneaking suspicion that DE might have reduced the number of space fighters in order to increase the number of ground soldiers, even outside of the airlocked main objectives. Corpus Proxima in general seems to have substantially more enemy density on the ground pretty much everywhere. I don't know this for a fact, but my gut tells me so...

That aside - no disagreement there. I'd love to see more enemy space units on-screen. I don't know what number I'd call "enough" - it depends on ship, weapons and playstyle. But more than 4 fighters and 1 crew ship would be nice, absolutely. I can excuse some of the new mission design with technical issues, but that only goes so far. If space combat doesn't improve in Veil Proxima, then that's a problem. I... Guess I'm willing to accept that some missions will have more emphasis on space dogfights and some more on ground combat, but more fighters during ground combat would still be nice.

now this is post i totally agree with.

and for reducing space units for ground units thats pretty simple, enemys on ground should spawn in waves as you progress rooms. i mean its same on grineer space, they spawn in waves when ones die others spawn.

for removing gian point i think its just bad because if people like it then you should actually use it and see how to implement it in other missions. of course people used it to farm affinity, just reduce it and problem solved.

[Kaiune]

On 2021-03-20 at 12:45 AM, Taiepii said:

Solution :

-Give us actual Dog Fight mission. Extermination /Survival / Defense whatever with endless spawn of enemy. And just forget about using Frame for at least 1 of the optional mission. We want to stay, and I mean the whole squad, want to stay inside the Railjack, and work as a team to Survive & bring down enemy. 
-Before trying to put a split Squad mission that require a minimum of communication between the squad, maybe keep the Forge for everyone, cause that will be a first step to Team communication. 

100% we need a dog fight style mission. If the whole goal was to add variety why remove a mission type? 

[Steel_Rook]

9 minutes ago, TheSarkY said:

for removing gian point i think its just bad because if people like it then you should actually use it and see how to implement it in other missions. of course people used it to farm affinity, just reduce it and problem solved.

Yeah, the feedback for removing Gian Point seems so heavily negative that I'd be surprised if DE didn't return it at some point - probably with its own independent game mode. The issue with Gian as a "loot cave" is that the Skirmis game mode is a hot mess. It varies drastically between the type and number of Points of Interest (so in terms of mission length), yet all missions in a Proxima have the same drop tables. Crucially - a lot of the loot actually drops off fighter kills. Obviously, people will do the mission with most fighters and least everything else to grind those low% drop rates faster.

Reimplementing space dog fights as a separate mission type with a separate loot table could work, though. I'd go one further and pull those component drops OFF of the fighters and put them in either secondary objectives or "rotation" rewards for the missions. Generally speaking, rewarding players for just kills tends to breed very mindless behaviours. Attaching rewards to objectives tends to at least introduce some complexity. Call it "Dogfight," give it its own reward table, implement it across most if not all of the Proxima regions, everybody wins.

[CyborgJellyfish]

People above me like Steel_Rook pretty much summed it up. That being said I had the same idea so I might as well voice it.

Yeah the "loot cave" argument I totally understand from DE's perspective, The gameplay was too good to completely remove in my opinion. My immediate solution off the top of my head may was the same -  take out the non-forge drops from the fighters / crewships and make it a complete dogfight. Maybe even as a survival style / endless that drops a new currency on wave completion. Reverse the role of Ticker's "random stuff for debt bonds" and let us trade in "salvage tokens" (or whatever they wanna call them) for a mission reward. They could make it so you only get X tokens daily, which could probably be solved by making it tied to a faction cap style limit. Or they could make it like vitus / steel essence where the chance of getting a token is low, and the incentive to play is just like the existing defence endless we already have. I'm just thinking on the fly off the top of my head, I'm no drop table statistician and I'm certainly not an expert on game balance. All I'm saying is, there's probably enough of us that would do the mission even without considering the rewards out of it. There's still gonna be the people that want everything easy that are gonna hate the idea of any "gian point affinity nerf" concept, but that's no excuse to remove it completely.

I guess my point is that the people who love it for the content don't care how quick we level - most of us are probably already maxed (or close to) anyways. Personally I'm 10/9/10/10/9 with 313 intrinsics so far and I've forma'd my Plexus once already. Seriously considering an Aura Forma on it just because I want to, though one forma was already overkill so it isn't necessary in the slightest for progression...