Roll to Remove Volt's Speed Buff instead of Backflip

[TARINunit9]

1 hour ago, TheLexiConArtist said:

and let's not forget, Nezha even has a mod to turn off his own passive if it's unwanted.

I might heavily disagree with the entire rest of your post, but at least this part we see eye to eye on

[Lutesque]

Considering how many people are complaining about this.... They should just created a dedicated section in the settings that allow you to Opt in or Out of Every single Warframe's Ability that can directly influence Squad Mates....

I mean If Octavia is allowed to have such an option then you may aswell do it for EVERY WARFRAME !!! 🤔

 

[Xyngrr]

Sometimes, the speed buff is nice. Most of the time, it's annoying. Also, most of the time it's being spammed every 10-15 seconds meaning 10% of your time is spent opting out of it instead of shooting/slashing/etc. If I had wanted to run around like a maniac I would have taken Nezha, Gauss, Volt, Wisp, or other speedy frames.

I keep seeing 'can't handle it' 'it's free speed!!' 'git gud' etc. 
In some cases newer folks may not be able to, granted. However in the overwhelming amount of cases where these threads come up it's about play being altered by other supposed allies to the detriment of the person playing, or they have personal issues which the change in gameplay significantly impacts them negatively. In either case, having a speed spamming Volt when you're not onboard with it sucks. Costs you time and/or discomfort which diminish your fun value from the game, and retreating to weak 'git gud' elitist rhetoric simply illuminates not giving a crap about the supposed 'team' you are ostensibly 'buffing', and instead are serving your own ends to the detriment of said team. In a pub game you work with what you have which means communicating about intrusive abilities like that or self regulating so other folks can have fun as well, unfortunately the same folks that are pushing it for selfish ends also tend to be jeering asshats about self-regulating for the good of ACTUAL teamplay fun.

All that said, I'm not for having basic combat roll cancel the speed buff- I roll alot as it provides basic DR for free. Backflip is fine for it but it's still not a perfect solution. Having an opt-out of the speed buff autonatically opt-out of future buffs for a period of time after having done it manually once is a much better solution and also low hanging fruit as far as improving the situation for those afflicted with frustrating speed trolls.

Having a toggle opt-out of specifical categories of external 'team buffs' ( speed, fire rate, rift, etc. ) tied to each loadout is another option with a far shorter list and complexity than having to list every frame abilities, but even so could prove problematic so it's not my first choice. 

[TheLexiConArtist]

2 hours ago, Xyngrr said:

In either case, having a speed spamming Volt when you're not onboard with it sucks. Costs you time and/or discomfort which diminish your fun value from the game, and retreating to weak 'git gud' elitist rhetoric simply illuminates not giving a crap about the supposed 'team' you are ostensibly 'buffing', and instead are serving your own ends to the detriment of said team. In a pub game you work with what you have which means communicating about intrusive abilities like that or self regulating so other folks can have fun as well, unfortunately the same folks that are pushing it for selfish ends also tend to be jeering asshats about self-regulating for the good of ACTUAL teamplay fun.

This is the thing. They complain about the request for true opt-out as if it's 'not co-op' and the solution is to solo (no co-op allowed), but having that agency be personally with the recipient is the most co-op thing there is.

Where someone who wants the buff is A, and someone who does not is B, there's a matrix we can follow of what influence one is trying to have over the other:

A=A: Everyone using the buff affects everyone who wants to allow the buff in every normal circumstance with no special means required.

A ! B: Everyone using the buff does not cause those who disallow the buff to be impacted in any way during the flow of the mission itself.

B ! A: People who do not want the buff do not have to insist that people using/wanting the buff change their gameplay in order to avoid them receiving the unwanted effect.

And it all happens whether you matchmake randomly or not.

That's seamless co-op. It just falls into place without anyone needing to go out of their way.

2 hours ago, Xyngrr said:

All that said, I'm not for having basic combat roll cancel the speed buff- I roll alot as it provides basic DR for free. Backflip is fine for it but it's still not a perfect solution. Having an opt-out of the speed buff autonatically opt-out of future buffs for a period of time after having done it manually once is a much better solution and also low hanging fruit as far as improving the situation for those afflicted with frustrating speed trolls.

Having a toggle opt-out of specifical categories of external 'team buffs' ( speed, fire rate, rift, etc. ) tied to each loadout is another option with a far shorter list and complexity than having to list every frame abilities, but even so could prove problematic so it's not my first choice. 

I had a few potential approaches, and I'm sure I went over them in greater detail in one of my older posts while forming them, but here's at least a quick summary of 3 types of categorisation:

• Option 1: Buffing Abilities by Name - Listing team-buffing abilities by name, allowing to toggle yes/no on whether these affect us upon being cast.
  • Caveat: Variant or multifunctional abilities (e.g. Chroma buffs in differing Elements, Ivara Quiver) could experience edge cases where desired effects are denied whether or not undesired factors are present.
     
• Option 2: Buffing Abilities by Type - Listing buffable statistics/unique effects, and denying the application of any buffs which use these effects (e.g. deny Melee Attack Speed buffs = no Valkyr Warcry or Volt Speed, nor any other effect from these buffs)
  • Caveat: While better permitting variable abilities (as it is the specific buff involved rather than the ability itself), this does still provide instances where desired effects may come tied with undesired effects, causing both to be removed. However, this is identical to the current cases of "roll to remove" mechanics - all effects are taken away indiscriminately.
     
• Option 3: Buffing Effects Individually - Listing buffable statistics/unique effects, and simply locking the specified unwanted effects from functioning, while keeping the buff, and by extension, any other desired effects also present in the same buff entity.
  • Caveat: Likely to be more problematic on DE's side to implement, despite being the absolute best option for precision. Could also theoretically involve exploit cases where a tradeoff exists even for the recipient, but its negative effect is 'denied' while keeping the positive, although this could be catered for in implementation.

 

I'd see the list of effects not only affecting base stats/functions too, also hitting more esoteric factors such as Limbo's Rift-state (being able to attack and be attacked by all enemies in either state, unless playing the Limbo yourself) and if DE could manage it, Bullet Attraction effects so there's less reason to meme-hate on Mags with long-lasting bubbles.

[Unibot]

Instead of this garbage workaround with flips and rolls to remove stuff - a more robust option need to be added to options so people could SELECT which buff they want to receive and which don't. And its not hard to implement - a boolean toggle in the option and a condition in effect implementation code, it's just DE don't care enough to do it.

[Birdframe_Prime]

So, to interject.

A lot of newer players (and by newer, I mean 'since 2018 or so') may not know that this discussion has not only happened hundreds of times before, it's actually been addressed by the Devs in one of the most awkward and inconvenient series of Hotfix tests to Volt in the history of the game. It lasted a couple of months and confused everyone that wasn't part of the Speed debate.

The points about non-consensual buffing that affects basic proprioception and muscle memory are completely valid, and DE wanted to find a way to do something about it.

What they found, with testing via dropping the idea right onto the live system, was that overall the player base wants both Speed and the ability to Roll forwards without losing the buff. Rolling forwards is a part of the game flow, as many of Speeds supporters and detractors have pointed out as opposite sides of the argument, and it's something that all players learn to do in order to move faster.

Unfortunately for the people who don't want Speed, the forward Roll to dispel method means that that massive majority of people then complained about how having a Volt on the team was now pointless because they couldn't maintain Speed for the duration, especially when the Volt player wasn't spamming, but had actually built Speed to be the team buff it's designed to be. The backlash of making the change was substantial from all the people that used Speed and wanted Speed, far in excess of the people that were now happy that Speed could be dispelled the way they wanted it.

They also found a few other things, like having other methods of removing Speed, were simply not as easy to use as a backflip. Yes, the backflip needs multiple button presses, but it's easier than some of the alternatives they tested.

In testing, in the great Confusion caused by these changes, the data came back. Rolling forward to dispel Speed simply upset more people than it helped. The minority are the people who don't want Speed, and so while the method to remove it has to be there so that they are catered for, it cannot be the method that the majority use to maintain Speed.

Your problems were heard.

Your problems were actioned on.

The solution to your problems caused the opposite problem for all the people that want to keep Speed.

Regrettably, the people that like and want to keep Speed and want to Roll forward while maintaining Speed, are in such a majority that your problems cannot be solved in the specific way you want them to be solved.

So no, there will not be a 'roll forward to dispel Speed' change, because it already happened and DE immediately changed it back after the test because it didn't go well.

You're more likely to get a rework to Speed that changes what it does or how it affects allies, than you are to get a change of how you currently dispel it on yourself.

[TheLexiConArtist]

5 hours ago, Birdframe_Prime said:

In testing, in the great Confusion caused by these changes, the data came back. Rolling forward to dispel Speed simply upset more people than it helped. The minority are the people who don't want Speed, and so while the method to remove it has to be there so that they are catered for, it cannot be the method that the majority use to maintain Speed.

Was that part of the change whereby Speed was also turned into a pickup you had to run through to activate, or was that a totally separate and equally-failed attempt?

The fact that a pickup was both more aggravating for the Wants and still not good enough for the Don't-Wants (because it was possible, and often, put in chokepoints where you had no way to avoid it) was the bigger point to cause reversion, if so.

 

Either way, it's not a simple game of majority-minority, when it comes to forced negative influences the negative experience should be given additional weight even if minority. If I gave two people money but kicked every third person in the balls, they'd still have every reason to complain to whoever was encouraging me to go around ball-kicking even if the majority are getting cash prizes.

Slightly absurdist, but the point is there. Speed in particular is a core control issue, and the more fundamental a potentially-negative influence is, the less 'good for the many, bad for the few' stands as an argument.

[Birdframe_Prime]

1 hour ago, TheLexiConArtist said:

Was that part of the change whereby Speed was also turned into a pickup you had to run through to activate, or was that a totally separate and equally-failed attempt?

Yeah, that was the next patch, in the same two month period.

1 hour ago, TheLexiConArtist said:

Either way, it's not a simple game of majority-minority, when it comes to forced negative influences the negative experience should be given additional weight even if minority.

Me, messenger, you, receiver.

I didn't make the decision, and while I completely agree with your points, I'm not the one making any decisions.

As far as DE is concerned, the status quo is not 'good', but it is 'the least of possible evils'.

And, as I said in my comment, you're more likely to get a rework to Speed itself, what it does and how it affects allies at base, than get a change to how you opt out of it at this point.

[sitfesz]

There is really no other option than a toggle if you don't want to backflip. I would grab my pitchfork if volt 2 was nerfed for the sake of anti-backflip snails.

Actually I would love toggles, however I already stated why DE probably wouldn't do them. It's their problem though, toggles would make the game great and players should keep demanding it, because they are right in the need and use of toggles (like default sprint and negating the buffs that are harmful for them).

Edit: I know players are not developers and most of us have no clue about coding and solutions for methods like this, but we are the users/consumers and if we keep up the demand, the supplier can have an interest to deliver. There is a chance they simply ignore it, because they find it too complicated and unworthy for the effort, but the issue is still present if we are vocal about it. They can't let that many issues be present simultaneously, so devs will address one or another by time when they feel they have to, as the user base grows more unpleasant. Yes, it is pressure, but we only have balance if we have pressure from both sides and this topic isn't even a balance issue, it's a request for QOL changes or self nerfs actually.

[(XBOX)Rez090]

On 2021-06-14 at 1:06 AM, TARINunit9 said:

Yes, that's the point. You can only cleanse the buff by stopping moving. That's on purpose

So, we have to stop our forward movement to get rid of a buff that we DIDN'T WANT in the first place? You don't get the point of this thread then.

[TARINunit9]

14 hours ago, (XBOX)Rez090 said:

So, we have to stop our forward movement to get rid of a buff that we DIDN'T WANT in the first place? You don't get the point of this thread then.

Neither do you and OP. Because yes, if you want the "going fast" buff to go away, you yourself have to stop going fast. I cannot think of a single situation where, if you and OP got your wish, it would actually fix the problem you two are having

"Roll to remove buff" would create a scenario where you "go fast to go slow." That is just not how mechanics are supposed to work, it's a terrible idea. The existing "backflip to remove buff" is a scenario where you "go SLOW to go slow."

[(XBOX)Rez090]

2 hours ago, TARINunit9 said:

Neither do you and OP. Because yes, if you want the "going fast" buff to go away, you yourself have to stop going fast. I cannot think of a single situation where, if you and OP got your wish, it would actually fix the problem you two are having

"Roll to remove buff" would create a scenario where you "go fast to go slow." That is just not how mechanics are supposed to work, it's a terrible idea. The existing "backflip to remove buff" is a scenario where you "go SLOW to go slow."

The existing backflip doesn't work either because some of the player base cannot even perform a backflip, since there is no tutorial about how to do this. So we need something else to deal with this. Since we roll to get out of the Rift from Limbo, the same should just be applied to Volt's Speed as well. Either this or a toggle is sorely needed. If you truly can't understand why we need this QoL change, you will never get it then.

[TARINunit9]

32 minutes ago, (XBOX)Rez090 said:

The existing backflip doesn't work either because some of the player base cannot even perform a backflip, since there is no tutorial about how to do this. So we need something else to deal with this. Since we roll to get out of the Rift from Limbo, the same should just be applied to Volt's Speed as well. Either this or a toggle is sorely needed. If you truly can't understand why we need this QoL change, you will never get it then.

I do understand your problem, better than you do:

You just flat-out do not want Volt's buff at all. And adding roll-to-remove would neither help your situation, nor be a good idea for everyone else who DOES want Volt's buff. What you REALLY want, is to turn back the clock about three years to when Volt's buff was opt-in, not opt-out

[Perfectly_Framed_Waifu]

3 hours ago, (XBOX)Rez090 said:

Since we roll to get out of the Rift from Limbo

You can roll but you can't escape the Cataclysm.

[Birdframe_Prime]

6 hours ago, Perfectly_Framed_Waifu said:

You can roll but you can't escape the Cataclysm.

Wasn't that the event where a giant dragon changed up the map and gave everyone a new level cap?

[TheLexiConArtist]

17 hours ago, TARINunit9 said:

Neither do you and OP. Because yes, if you want the "going fast" buff to go away, you yourself have to stop going fast. I cannot think of a single situation where, if you and OP got your wish, it would actually fix the problem you two are having

"Roll to remove buff" would create a scenario where you "go fast to go slow." That is just not how mechanics are supposed to work, it's a terrible idea. The existing "backflip to remove buff" is a scenario where you "go SLOW to go slow."

That's not objective, though. It's a theoretical ideal.

The problem is that some of us want to go fast by our own standards but the overriding control influences of Speed actually hinder us from going that fast OR faster.

In those circumstances, backflip-remove is a lose-lose situation. We're either slowed by the buff interfering with control or slowed because we have to backflip every 5 seconds.
Roll would be superior for that circumstance but at the cost of those who want to integrate rolling with the buff. That's not what we're trying to do, and that's why those of us who've been observing the issue for longer conclude that preventative opt-out is the correct solution.

4 hours ago, Birdframe_Prime said:

Wasn't that the event where a giant dragon changed up the map and gave everyone a new level cap?

No, that was the Scataclysm.. or is that just what me and my buddies called it on account of all the quests asking you to go digging through literal turds?

[TARINunit9]

1 hour ago, TheLexiConArtist said:

 That's not what we're trying to do, and that's why those of us who've been observing the issue for longer conclude that preventative opt-out is the correct solution.

Yeah, "backflip to remove, grants a 20 second grace period" does sound like an ideal for you. Too bad you're the only member of the anti-buff crowd who doesn't just immediately go "give me roll-to-remove, and screw everyone else".

[(XBOX)Rez090]

16 hours ago, Perfectly_Framed_Waifu said:

You can roll but you can't escape the Cataclysm.

I mean, I can just  on out of there ;)