Why people dont want melee to be nerfed?

[Silvertap]

I really don't get it...

Melee is so overpowered, it actually kills the game... Look at this

 

 

 

[Godmode_Ash]

Really? Another one?

[Loza03]

People refuse to acknowledge that melee's current and immediate future state precludes much of the other stuff they want, such as interesting content, more variety in gameplay, Co-Op, Raids, decent enemy AI, less RNG and fewer progression gates.

[(PSN)Madurai-Prime]

Why do people need videos to tell them how to think? 

Why do people need rules in a video game that doesn't affect real life? We're not talking about nerfing rolling stops because they're potentially dangerous. 

If I wanted to, because of how the game is designed.....I could take those 5 to 15 extra duplicate mods I have and rank them up only to Rank 2 and play the game just fine with less damage....but I should also have the choice to switch those rank 2 mods out for rank 10 whenever I feel like it....because they were put in the game and sometimes I may want to do a 2 hour mission instead of a 2 min capture.

[Silvertap]

20 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

People refuse to acknowledge that melee's current and immediate future state precludes much of the other stuff they want, such as interesting content, more variety in gameplay, Co-Op, Raids, decent enemy AI, less RNG and fewer progression gates.

Man... I can't add more to that...

2 minutes ago, (PSN)Madurai-Prime said:

Why do people need videos to tell them how to think? 

Why do people need rules in a video game that doesn't affect real life? We're not talking about nerfing rolling stops because they're potentially dangerous. 

If I wanted to, because of how the game is designed.....I could take those 5 to 15 extra duplicate mods I have and rank them up only to Rank 2 and play the game just fine with less damage....but I should also have the choice to switch those rank 2 mods out for rank 10 whenever I feel like it....because they were put in the game and sometimes I may want to do a 2 hour mission instead of a 2 min capture.

People refuse to acknowledge that melee's current and immediate future state precludes much of the other stuff they want, such as interesting content, more variety in gameplay, Co-Op, Raids, decent enemy AI, less RNG and fewer progression gates. (lol)

22 minutes ago, Godmode_Ash said:

Really? Another one?

Why not? U can just chose not read this, but i do understand you... i think xD

[JaycemeSwain]

Its mainly because instead of buffing primaries and secondaries to put it in line with melee while only nerfing the dispo of stat sticks, they instead nerf a handful of the mods, with impact status and try to push people to do their "we can't make endgame" content. Melee might still be overpowered but its a case of DE not touching the right things, which is normal for them(looking at the time pre-ember rework when they nerfed her & banshee but left equinox & Gara)

[(PSN)Madurai-Prime]

40 minutes ago, Silvertap said:

Man... I can't add more to that...

People refuse to acknowledge that melee's current and immediate future state precludes much of the other stuff they want, such as interesting content, more variety in gameplay, Co-Op, Raids, decent enemy AI, less RNG and fewer progression gates. (lol)

Why not? U can just chose not read this, but i do understand you... i think xD

Raids had nothing to do with melee....it was bugs and the 1% of people playing them.

[Silvertap]

18 minutes ago, JaycemeSwain said:

Its mainly because instead of buffing primaries and secondaries to put it in line with melee while only nerfing the dispo of stat sticks, they instead nerf a handful of the mods, with impact status and try to push people to do their "we can't make endgame" content. Melee might still be overpowered but its a case of DE not touching the right things, which is normal for them(looking at the time pre-ember rework when they nerfed her & banshee but left equinox & Gara)

Maybe the real question is: Do we want equilibrium in very high damage or in a lower damage? Think about this, this coment translates my concercerns about high damage at least.

"melee's current and immediate future state precludes much of the other stuff they want, such as interesting content, more variety in gameplay, Co-Op, Raids, decent enemy AI, less RNG and fewer progression gates."

[Loza03]

3 minutes ago, (PSN)Madurai-Prime said:

Raids had nothing to do with melee....it was bugs and the 1% of people playing them.

Raids being removed was due to this.

The production of new raids, however, specifically in terms of the combat aspect, would be greatly hindered. Largely due to the fact that meaningful combat with a variety of approaches is impossible to develop when the disparity between Melee and Guns exist. 

[Leqesai]

51 minutes ago, (PSN)Madurai-Prime said:

Why do people need videos to tell them how to think? 

I hate to be 'that guy' but most people need videos because most people are relatively incapable of critical thinking and analysis. School does not train kids to think critically.

[Jarriaga]

It's because most vocal people here don't want nerfs no matter how justified they are. Once the best thing is found, the next thing added to the game must match it or exceed it in a never-ending uncontrolled escalation of power creep until they get to shoot enemies in Venus missions and kill enemies in Pluto due to leftover damage.

The fact equipping an extinguished dragon key and cutting off your damage by 75% still allows you to obliterate TSP with melee just serves to highlight the level of gun powercreep these people wanted.

[Loza03]

1 minute ago, Silvertap said:

Maybe the real question is: Do we want equilibrium in very high damage or in a lower damage? Think about this, this coment translates my concercerns about high damage at least.

"melee's current and immediate future state precludes much of the other stuff they want, such as interesting content, more variety in gameplay, Co-Op, Raids, decent enemy AI, less RNG and fewer progression gates."

There's a pretty good reason why we shouldn't seek equilibirum with very high damage. Hypothetically speaking, there's no meaningful difference, or rather, there should be no meaningful difference.

However, Warframe's mod system, and specifically, the critical hit system, favours weapons with higher base stats. This is in such a way that, with higher base stats or with higher multipliers - such as would be necessary to achieve an higher equlibirum - makes that equilibrium harder and harder to sustain the bigger the numbers. Either fix this core problem (which has it's own issues, as demonstrated in this thread: )

Spoiler

 

or bring that equilibrium down to a more easily-controllable level.

 

[quxier]

1 hour ago, Loza03 said:

People refuse to acknowledge that melee's current and immediate future state precludes much of the other stuff they want, such as interesting content, more variety in gameplay, Co-Op, Raids, decent enemy AI, less RNG and fewer progression gates.

Reaaaaaaaallly?

No.

Really?

That's so stupid that I don't think I need to explain.

[(XBOX)Ampathetiic]

2 minutes ago, quxier said:

That's so stupid that I don't think I need to explain.

Then why even comment? This doesn't achieve anything for anybody.

[(XBOX)C11H22O11]

9 minutes ago, quxier said:

Reaaaaaaaallly?

No.

Really?

That's so stupid that I don't think I need to explain.

Can you explain though?

[Loza03]

1 minute ago, quxier said:

Reaaaaaaaallly?

No.

Really?

That's so stupid that I don't think I need to explain.

That's fair, I suppose burden of proof is on me anyway.

 

1: Interesting content. Arguably, all of the list falls under this moniker, so lets stick with the example of mission types. It's been widely criticised that mission types recently have simply become 'wait out a timer'. Which is not only true, but deeply boring, because they player has no agency. But, in modes where the player does have agency, the problem emerges that the player is so absurdly powerful that there's functionally no problem solving, which is pretty much what all 'interesting' content ultimately boils down to. This also applies in cases where the designer over-compensates with huge health bars, because then only the overtuned items work. The designer either has to remove agency from the player, or accept that one option is so overwhelming dominant that the player is unlikely to practically make use of that agency.

2: more variety. Indicated above, but in more detail, the overwhelming power of melee means that using guns is in high-end settings, a play too sub-optimal to consider. Since it also works in low-end settings, especially since in the aforementioned situations where the player does have agency it's often faster, the player is rewarded most for using the most optimal strategy. Whilst the other strategies exist, due to how human psychology works, players are in a majority of cases going to use what produces the most reward, ignoring those other options, meaning that they may as well not exist. Of course, whenever DE makes a Steel Path or railjack 1.0 ground troops in order to match player power creep, only the items that have matched said power creep are practical, which also limits player choice. Even alternate weapon designs get left behind, as Warframe's very limited combat loop only rewards a very particular kind of weapon.

3: Co-op. Pretty simple. If one player can do everything, then why would four players need to co-operate? Usually, co-operative shooters achieve co-operation in combat by giving players complementary strengths and weaknesses. Warframe's current design allows the player to completely circumvent weakness, meaning that co-op ultimately suffers. Nobody wants to play second fiddle or feel useless, after all, and if one person happens to be the best at the one thing that the game tests (killing vast swathes of functionally identical mooks) then that's going to happen more often than not.

4:Raids. These are basically a culmination of all of the above - which is the point of a Raid, since it's supposed to be the pinnacle of PvE content.

5: Decent enemy AI. In brief, it's not worth the time or money to develop an enemy that won't have the opportunity to actually do damage to the hypersonic blender dealing a million damage per second. (That's not an exaggeration, by the way).

6: Less RNG and fewer progression gates. Let's look at point 1 again. Let's say you're a designer, and you want to make something that's rare and valuable in the game. Something that players want. Obviously, a good part of making them want it is to make it powerful, but the other way, which is often just as or even more important, is to make it hard to get. This is a concept called 'Aspirational play' - the player Aspires to something. I know there's a degree of controversy surrounding that around here, but for now, let's put that aside. How do you do that. Do you lock it behind a tough boss fight? You run into point 5. Do you lock it behind a really hard mission. Point 1 shows up. Maybe it's a reward for winning an awesome raid with your friends! Point 4. OK, maybe just go with making it desirable for gameplay purposes. How do you do that without just making it a boring statistical increase? Well, you could add a side grade to something else, but as pointed out, if it's not falling into the very particular niche that 'the meta' is, then it'll be cast aside for something more practically effective. The only way to make something difficult to acquire is make it either take a really long time to get, or have a really low chance to drop.

[Famecans]

I don't care about the changes but I don't support the melee nerf and this intermittent up and down cycle is out of balance.

Your correctly question should be:
*Why enemies were nerfed?*

[Famecans]

On 2021-06-28 at 5:08 PM, (PSN)Madurai-Prime said:

Why do people need videos to tell them how to think? 

Why do people need rules in a video game that doesn't affect real life? We're not talking about nerfing rolling stops because they're potentially dangerous. 

If I wanted to, because of how the game is designed.....I could take those 5 to 15 extra duplicate mods I have and rank them up only to Rank 2 and play the game just fine with less damage....but I should also have the choice to switch those rank 2 mods out for rank 10 whenever I feel like it....because they were put in the game and sometimes I may want to do a 2 hour mission instead of a 2 min capture.

you're wrong because some features affect real life, the time taken to manufacture a single forma is 12h or 24h if you are playing little daily.
many builds/weapons/forma's are abandoned or revised after changes.

[o0Despair0o]

51 minutes ago, Leqesai said:

I hate to be 'that guy' but most people need videos because most people are relatively incapable of critical thinking and analysis. School does not train kids to think critically.

By now I'm convinced that people are just too damn dense for it.

[BiancaRoughfin]

2 hours ago, Silvertap said:

Why people dont want melee to be nerfed?

Because many Warframe players are Spoiled by power, others cant do Math and dont understand why its easier to nerf 100 items instead of buffing 400.

[(PSN)robotwars7]

because people don't like change. sure, you can dress it up in all sorts of ways, but once you debunk someone's arguments, it all boils down to them simply not wanting the system to change, likely because of the fear of it becoming worse, but until we actually get the update, we won't know for sure. on paper it seems to me that the changes to melee will be noticeable, but not completely overkill. even though they're nerfed, your Condition Overloads and your Blood Rushes aren't being taken away from you.

 

[quxier]

29 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

1: Interesting content. Arguably, all of the list falls under this moniker, so lets stick with the example of mission types. It's been widely criticised that mission types recently have simply become 'wait out a timer'. Which is not only true, but deeply boring, because they player has no agency.

(1) But, in modes where the player does have agency, the problem emerges that the player is so absurdly powerful that there's functionally no problem solving,

(2) which is pretty much what all 'interesting' content ultimately boils down to.

This also applies in cases where the designer over-compensates with huge health bars, because then only the overtuned items work. The designer either has to remove agency from the player, or accept that one option is so overwhelming dominant that the player is unlikely to practically make use of that agency.

(1) There are other ways to makes enemies harder to beat. For example Sentients. You can hit them for hours but if you don't have good damages or you don't reset it then you will have hard time.

(2) Interesting content isn't only based on power. However in this game I think people rarely wants something else.

36 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

2: (1)more variety. Indicated above, but in more detail, the overwhelming power of melee means that using guns is in high-end settings, a play too sub-optimal to consider.

(2)Since it also works in low-end settings, especially since in the aforementioned situations where the player does have agency it's often faster, the player is rewarded most for using the most optimal strategy.

(3)Whilst the other strategies exist, due to how human psychology works, players are in a majority of cases going to use what produces the most reward, ignoring those other options, meaning that they may as well not exist. Of course, whenever DE makes a Steel Path or railjack 1.0 ground troops in order to match player power creep, only the items that have matched said power creep are practical, which also limits player choice. Even alternate weapon designs get left behind, as Warframe's very limited combat loop only rewards a very particular kind of weapon.

(1) And that's a problem of Primaries/Secondaries NOT melee.

(2) In low level settings, when I'm bored but I "have to" do something I often go with guns because they are easier to use.

(3) And that's the problem with whole game not only weapon balance. Nerfing melee won't help balancing game too much. But it's easier. Why I go with Mesa when I've been playing POE bounties? Enemy spawn is bad and Mesa's autobot helps. Melee won't help here.

45 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

3: Co-op. Pretty simple. If one player can do everything, then why would four players need to co-operate? Usually, co-operative shooters achieve co-operation in combat by giving players complementary strengths and weaknesses. Warframe's current design allows the player to completely circumvent weakness, meaning that co-op ultimately suffers. Nobody wants to play second fiddle or feel useless, after all, and if one person happens to be the best at the one thing that the game tests (killing vast swathes of functionally identical mooks) then that's going to happen more often than not.

To be honest when I used to play with other people CO-OP were like you described: everyone can do the same job, sometimes maybe giving some energy/hp. It was before melee buff. So I don't think only melee is responsible for lack of or weak state of CO-OP.

49 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

4:Raids. These are basically a culmination of all of the above - which is the point of a Raid, since it's supposed to be the pinnacle of PvE content.

I had no idea (more than simple info) what Raids were so... let's skip this.

50 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

5: Decent enemy AI. In brief, it's not worth the time or money to develop an enemy that won't have the opportunity to actually do damage to the hypersonic blender dealing a million damage per second. (That's not an exaggeration, by the way).

That's wrong and there other problem.

First if enemy is smart it can show some treat. For example Comander teleporting you. They have probably similar hp/armor like other enemies (I mean not much stronger) but they can teleport you to some place. If you are not careful you can get stunlocked for some time.

Secondly we are expecting to kill many enemies. They could do much better AI but it will slow down fights. They don't want it. That's what I heard.

56 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

6: Less RNG and fewer progression gates. Let's look at point 1 again. Let's say you're a designer, and you want to make something that's rare and valuable in the game. Something that players want. Obviously, a good part of making them want it is to make it powerful, but the other way, which is often just as or even more important, is to make it hard to get. This is a concept called 'Aspirational play' - the player Aspires to something. I know there's a degree of controversy surrounding that around here, but for now, let's put that aside. How do you do that. Do you lock it behind a tough boss fight? You run into point 5. Do you lock it behind a really hard mission. Point 1 shows up. Maybe it's a reward for winning an awesome raid with your friends! Point 4. OK, maybe just go with making it desirable for gameplay purposes. How do you do that without just making it a boring statistical increase? Well, you could add a side grade to something else, but as pointed out, if it's not falling into the very particular niche that 'the meta' is, then it'll be cast aside for something more practically effective. The only way to make something difficult to acquire is make it either take a really long time to get, or have a really low chance to drop.

Players will always find a method to deal more damage. You would have to nerf a lot of weapons, frames, companions etc.

 

[(PSN)Madurai-Prime]

29 minutes ago, (PSN)robotwars7 said:

because people don't like change. sure, you can dress it up in all sorts of ways, but once you debunk someone's arguments, it all boils down to them simply not wanting the system to change, likely because of the fear of it becoming worse, but until we actually get the update, we won't know for sure. on paper it seems to me that the changes to melee will be noticeable, but not completely overkill. even though they're nerfed, your Condition Overloads and your Blood Rushes aren't being taken away from you.

 

I never had an issue with it anyways due to frames like Valkyr or Gauss, Volt etc. Not to mention some rivens having 60+ attack speed in addition to other good stats like range or cc CD etc.

This was just a political move to appease the whiners in my opinion. 

[(PSN)Madurai-Prime]

1 hour ago, Loza03 said:

 

"it's not worth the time or money to develop an enemy that won't have the opportunity to actually do damage to the hypersonic blender dealing a million damage per second. (That's not an exaggeration, by the way)."

 

There's currently a feedback thread trying to nerf the grineer with the yellow shield, cause some players can't take a dose of their own medicine and can't handle a measly 7m aoe explosive that can crit.

Some parts of the community (some) probably doesn't even want a difficult enemy. 

[Traumtulpe]

3 hours ago, Silvertap said:

Melee is so overpowered, it actually kills the game... Look at this

Turns out, if you are literally invincible it doesn't matter how little damage your melee does, you can't run out of ammo, so you'll kill the enemies eventually.

How is it that people get shown videos of players being literally invincible and killing very slowly, and the conclusion they come to is "That very slowly killing weapon is overpowered! Oh, and the player being completely and utterly invincible? That's fine."