Its time to remove affinity range - in every gamemode

[DreisterDino]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Nexeroff:

What would be a better option?  By removing range you negate the reward itself so there would be no affinity at all.  So remove affinity, what would be a better option to encourage people to play closer to others?  You have not mentioned anything better, affinity range remains the best current option.

[...]

You see how crazy that is right?  "change the game so I can earn more xp without doing anything to earn more XP because I want to play as a solo player in a group effort"  Yeah, you sound like a spoiled child that doesn't know any better.  That's the truth, you sound as if you just don't understand but want more more more without earning it.  Not going to happen anyway, you would get further kicking rocks.

@NexeroffMaybe try to take a step back and look at the topic as a whole again.

And while discussing, maybe try that without calling other players "spoiled childs" and stuff like that, it really doesnt help proving the point you are trying to make.

 

Btw: What exactly do you mean with "if you remove affinity range you remove the reward and there would be no affinity"?

This doesnt make sense to me, nobody asks to remove shared affinity, we ask to increase the radius so we can benefit from this bonus more often.

 

Can you really not see that in most cases, an increased affinity range has nothing to do with "spoiled childs wanting something they didnt earn"?

Teamplay is really important for you (and thats fine), and you want the affinity range to make sure that people are teamplayers.

But in many missions, the affinity range does the opposite, it punishes people who are playing the mission as intended, it punishes teamplay.

 

vor 10 Stunden schrieb Nexeroff:

So how about this, explain why they deserve a reward for playing against the team in such a way that it reduces the effectiveness of the team.  Why should a player be rewarded?  What did they do to earn the reward?  What did they do as a team player?

Example 1: In an Interception, a good teamplayer might guard a far away capture tower even if not much is going on there.

And what is the reward for that? he doesnt get any affinity from the other players although he does whats best for the team.

An increase of affinity range would fix that.

 

Example 2: You are playing ESO or Defense with a Saryn and a Volt in your squad. They are killing everything, but in far corners there are enemies they cant reach (and which are also outside of affinity range). In higher zones it is important to also kill those enemies, but the affinity range punishes players who actually move out to kill those enemies. With a larger affinity range, the others players could take care of those enemies and everyone would benefit from it both in regards of mission progress and affinity reward. This is Teamplay, everyone has a distinct task and does whats best for the team. But if you play like that right now, everyone gets punished.

 

Don't you think that there are many scenarios even outside of Railjack where Teamplay is not = staying together in one tiny spot?

Don't you see that in actual gameplay staying together means that half of the team has absolutly nothing to do in many cases?

 

vor 10 Stunden schrieb Nexeroff:

You get buffs, you get kills for procing your arcanes, your warframe stacks or requirements, your mod requirements and you most likely will not get those same things, nor as often, if everyone runs off outside affinity range. 

In many scenarios, 3 out of 4 players will have trouble proccing any arcanes or abilities with on kill conditions if there is a Nuke like Saryn/Volt/Mesa around if they have to stay within affinity range, which is comparable to the range of those Abilities. And in most of the games content those buffs doesnt matter anyway. I mean, you even say it yourself:

 

vor 1 Stunde schrieb Nexeroff:

and receive buffs by doing so which although I don't need them, they are nice to get.

You want us to stay together so we can buff each other with buffs we dont need and get XP for an unnecessary task and call that teamplay?

Most of the games content is so easy that nobody needs buffs, but we still have to do that because its "nice to get" and to see higher numbers?

 

I have said it a few times, but in my experience players will stay together naturally and buff/heal/revive/help each other as soon as the mission or the gameplay demands that from the players. When people are doing Eidolons, Liches, Sisters, Orbs or high level Steel Path they will do exactly that, even if affinity range would be unlimited. In short:

 

Teamplay is tied to gameplay and will result from mission design.

Teamplay is not the result of a limited affinity range in my opinion.

[Nexeroff]

29 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

Seems to me that you mind quite a lot.

Well, regardless of what you think you know about me, I am telling you specifically differently. 

What I care about is rewarding players who don't play selfishly and happily, that is currently what is happening with the current affinity range.  So nothing needs to be done about anything in my view.  Changing it would just encourage more selfish behavior, and that as a community of team players we need less of, not more of.

[PublikDomain]

7 minutes ago, Nexeroff said:

Changing it would just encourage more selfish behavior

And once again let me reiterate that expanding Railjack's sharing mechanics would turn the "selfish behaviour" you've spent the last 4 pages complaining about (even though this totally doesn't bother you at all) into beneficial behaviour. Me running off to "selfishly" break crates or kill enemies on my own would give the rest of the team Affinity and resources instead of taking that Affinity and resources away. Or we could do what you want and do nothing at all and you can continue to put up with all of this selfish, leeching, lazy, entitled, and undeserving behaviour for the rest of time.

And while I agree that there would be some increase in real leeching, like I said earlier this is already an issue that already needs solving regardless of the Affinity Range which does nothing to prevent it. Real leeching would be better addressed with better anti-AFK detection and reporting.

[Nexeroff]

14 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

And once again let me reiterate that expanding Railjack's sharing mechanics would turn the "selfish behaviour" you've spent the last 4 pages complaining about (even though this totally doesn't bother you at all) into beneficial behaviour. Me running off to "selfishly" break crates or kill enemies on my own would give the rest of the team Affinity and resources instead of taking that Affinity and resources away. Or we could do what you want and do nothing at all and you can continue to put up with all of this selfish, leeching, lazy, entitled, and undeserving behaviour for the rest of time.

And while I agree that there would be some increase in real leeching, like I said earlier this is already an issue that already needs solving regardless of the Affinity Range which does nothing to prevent it. Real leeching would be better addressed with better anti-AFK detection and reporting.

You are trying to hard to justify what you have asserted, you have traveled so far down this path and seemingly unable to admit you are wrong so continue to throw bad logic after bad assertions as if you can change facts.  Fact is, the system works perfectly well as is, to remove it and replace it with free XP you did not ear would be exceedingly idiotic.  You can continue to present yourself in this thread any way you desire, but no matter how hard you try to argue this, you are wrong it's not me saying you are wrong it's the facts, which I have nothing to do with except to express them.

If you do not contribute to a group effort, in a mission that is a group effort, then you do not deserve a reward of extra XP, that is fairly straightforward and currently the way things operate.  No need to change it.  I understand people that like to leach, to get something for no effort, that like others completing the mission for them while they run outside affinity range, those people would love to benefit for not contributing to the team effort.  I understand, there are always people who want to just let everyone do everything for them while they reap rewards.  It's selfish, but I understand that's what they want.  Happily however that's not what they get, they have to comply with how the reward functions in order to receive that reward.  I'm very happy with exactly the way things currently are, and happy that they are not going to change to benefit people who intend to leach, play selfishly, that negatively affect the people they queued to play with.

There is no good reason to want to play solo, not contribute to a group effort and then queue with a group, unless you specifically wanted to leach and/or could not do the content on your own.  If you cannot do content on your own, and you wish to complete a node and this is the only reason you are entering a group queue then perhaps you should ask your friends if you can leach from them instead.  Doing so in a group of randoms is just bad selfish behavior, and thus you are not rewarded for behaving poorly in this way.  And rightfully so.

If you honestly do not need the affinity reward, and you do not need the benefit of any buffs from others, and you wish to play as if you are solo then I see no good reason why you shouldn't play solo.  Why wouldn't you want to play solo instead of dealing with all these things you want to change?  Playing solo solves all those problems.  If you want no benefit from others whom you play with, if you want to play as if you are solo, then I don't understand why you don't do exactly that.  It's not logical, you claim something that simply makes absolutely not any sense at all. You do realize this is what you are putting forth as an argument right?  You want to do everything you would do if you play solo, but for some weird, strange, unknown reason you want to do that with a group when you don't want anything to do with that group.

Now how does that logic make any sense at all?

[PublikDomain]

10 minutes ago, Nexeroff said:

If you honestly do not need the affinity reward, and you do not need the benefit of any buffs from others, and you wish to play as if you are solo then I see no good reason why you shouldn't play solo.

Because I don't want to and you can't make me. So you can either continue to rely on systems that clearly do nothing to stop the behaviour you're so mad about, or the systems can change so you at least benefit from the way that I play.

[Nexeroff]

1 hour ago, DreisterDino said:

Btw: What exactly do you mean with "if you remove affinity range you remove the reward and there would be no affinity"?

This doesnt make sense to me, nobody asks to remove shared affinity, we ask to increase the radius so we can benefit from this bonus more often.

Affinity is an XP reward.  You get XP you deserve when you kill something, you get that XP in different ways depending on if you kill with a frame ability, with a weapon, how many weapons you have equipped, if your pet or companion killed enemies, etc.  That you earn by killing enemies.

Affinity is a reward for playing within a specific range of other players.  Affinity is also XP, but called affinity because when you are within range of other players, you have a relationship of sorts with them.  You are sharing a goal, working towards mission objectives, you are pulled towards them, etc.  The word itself is a dead giveaway of the intent of affinity.  So being that affinity is specifically a reward, and intended as a reward for being pulled towards the group, interacting with them, benefiting each other because you are working close, because it's a reward for these things if you remove the conditions of the reward, then you no longer give the reward.

If a reward was being given to people who donate food to a food bank, and that reward was called affinity and then someone came along as asserted that everyone should receive that reward regardless if they donate anything to the food bank or not, would that reasoning make any sense at all?  It wouldn't.  And yet, people in this thread are attempting to argue that it does make sense.

So you remove the reasons for rewarding people, that removes the reward.  You don't reward people if they don't meet the conditions of the reward, and if you remove those conditions you remove the reward.  Make sense now?

If you tell a child to clean their room, and as a reward they can have a bowl of ice cream a spoiled child might want the reward without cleaning their room.  In the case of this thread, people want the benefit of the reward, that being affinity XP, without complying with the conditions of receiving that reward, that being staying within a range of other people they are playing a mission as a team with.  That is behaving like a spoiled child, actually it's behaving more like a spoiled brat if we are being honest.  They want the benefit but they don't want to do what is required to receive the benefit.  They want to be spoiled.  This is certainly not an adult trait, but one almost exclusively expressed by children, so spoiled child is an excellent example.

1 hour ago, DreisterDino said:

Example 1: In an Interception, a good teamplayer might guard a far away capture tower even if not much is going on there.

And what is the reward for that? he doesnt get any affinity from the other players although he does whats best for the team.

An increase of affinity range would fix that.

You are talking about an increase in affinity range for a specific mission type.  Like the increase in affinity range for archwing missions.  But when are you outside affinity range on a tileset for interception?  That makes no sense at all.  You almost never see anyone outside affinity range on interception missions.  You understand what you are suggesting, right?  You are making a claim that the towers are so far apart that each person is outside affinity range and is not getting affinity.  First you are assuming people stand on their tower, and that almost never ever happens.  Even if they did, they would all be within affinity range.  The only time people on interception missions are outside affinity range is when they run all the way to the very end of halls looking to kill as many enemies as possible to increase their final results.  It's not needed, it's not required, it's not smart but they do so anyway.  In that case, yeah, behaving outside the conditions of the reward, you do not get the reward.

1 hour ago, DreisterDino said:

Example 2: You are playing ESO or Defense with a Saryn and a Volt in your squad. They are killing everything, but in far corners there are enemies they cant reach (and which are also outside of affinity range). In higher zones it is important to also kill those enemies, but the affinity range punishes players who actually move out to kill those enemies. With a larger affinity range, the others players could take care of those enemies and everyone would benefit from it both in regards of mission progress and affinity reward. This is Teamplay, everyone has a distinct task and does whats best for the team. But if you play like that right now, everyone gets punished.

All enemies on defense missions move toward the objective you are protecting.  If you run out to the far reaches, to the corners, to kill something you essentially are killing something at their spawn location, people do this it's true.  It's silly and bad tactics.  Those enemies will quickly come to the objective you are protecting without any work on your part. 

If someone is using a frame that kills everything on the map, and you are training something and need affinity, because as we all know you get far more xp from other people killing things than you do killing enemies yourself, then sit back and enjoy their hard work, try to contribute in ways you can like buffing them for example.  Bring a fast nova to make it even easier for them to kill and make the mission even faster so everyone cuts their training time dramatically, or bring a frame you can buff damage, or whatever.  There are always ways you can contribute to the team effort, no need to leach.  And it would be silly to run out to the far corners to kill enemies before a Saryn or Volt could when you can be far more effective just standing on the target you are protecting and playing a supporting role instead.

It's wanting to glorify your contribution that causes people to try to get as many kills as they possibly can.  I am more interested in completing the objective personally.  And I am more interested when playing in a group, to play with that group as a supporting team member.  I have no problems letting people who want to kill everything do so, so long as I am enjoying the company and having fun.

Both of your examples are bunk.

If you really want to train lets say, a single weapon, and you want to do it as fast and efficiently as possible then you should do a Hydron or SO mission where everyone is always in affinity range.  You should only equip that one weapon, and only use that weapon, not frame abilities, to kill enemies.  You will find that you gain XP far faster by doing your training this way.  In regular missions, regardless of the reward for playing closer within affinity range, a lot of people just simply do not.  So it's not idea to train in those missions.

I did almost all my training in SO and Hydron, I enjoyed training that way, it is far better than training in random public groups.  I have also trained some weapons passively while doing pub missions, it takes forever but sometimes it doesn't matter how long it takes so I have done that as well.  If you are focused on training, then there are the options I mentioned, there are also other options.  For example, I needed nanospores, and a clan mate needed to train a frame.  So we went to my favorite spot, I used Khora, it was steel path and all my clan mate did was just stand there, they got coffee while I did my thing.  It worked perfectly and I have done this with other people many times over the years.  So you can train that way as well, or do missions with premade groups and agree before hand that you are going to play the mission however you want to play it.  There is no end to how easy it is to train anything in this game.  There is no need to remove affinity range even if it wasn't the perfect solution to encourage people to play as a team when they queue as a team.

It's even more simple, if you want to play as a solo player, then queue and play solo, that's why there is that option.  If you want a reward of XP, then play the way you need to in order to realize that reward, and stay within affinity range.  Simple, easy, no need to change anything at all.

[Joezone619]

If railjack has one good thing, its this. It makes nearly every mission barrable in terms of leveling.

Though railjack really needs a rework, if i wanted to do an exterminate, defense, etc i wouldn't go to railjack to have an added taxi onto it, i'd just do the damn normal mission, and for this is will not play railjack until there are some fundamental changes to how missions are structured for railjack.

[Nexeroff]

57 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

Because I don't want to and you can't make me. So you can either continue to rely on systems that clearly do nothing to stop the behaviour you're so mad about, or the systems can change so you at least benefit from the way that I play.

You have said the "you can't make me" statement before.  I'm not sure why you have that chip on your shoulder, it's kinda weird.  But let me be clear, I wouldn't want to make you even if I could.  I have no desire to make anyone do anything, or force them to play in any particular way.  Nobody is trying to make you do anything, you understand that right?  I couldn't care less what you do, but you won't get a reward if you don't play a certain way and that seems to bother you.

I did ask a question however that you repeatedly avoid answering.  I will ask one more time.  If you don't want to contribute to a team effort, if you want to run outside affinity range and do your own thing, if you don't need the affinity reward, or buffs from other players and don't want to do anything as a team, then why would you even want to queue with other people.  You are giving them no benefit, you are receiving no benefit, you are not contributing to the group effort so...  Only reason I can dream up is that you want to leach from other players, you want the reward of completing the mission without doing any of the work?  What other reason could you have, I'm asking.  I'm not telling you to play solo, I'm asking why in the world with all your complaints, and gripes, and desire to change a well oiled and functioning game mechanic, wouldn't you just simply save yourself all the grief it seems to cause you, and just play solo?

I have been enjoying laughing, I couldn't possibly be mad about anything you have said.  I would have to know you personally, respect you, and then care about whatever your opinion about me might be, and then you would have to say something horribly negative for me to even be remotely upset.  To be mad, you would have to do something pretty bad before I would be mad.  But since none of those things have taken place, I cannot possibly be mad.  I have laughed however, your logic is weird, your insisting you are in some way right is odd, if you put it all together it's actually really funny.  So mad?  Naw...  If you think I'm mad about anything then you are adding far too much incorrect emotion to the words I'm imparting.  Isn't happening.  I feel you keep suggesting I'm mad because your really just trolling, and that too is childish and in this as well you will fail.

TO be crystal clear, I am maxed out on everything, I am max MR, even if I wanted to benefit from your game play, even if I would allow you to play in the same group as me, I couldn't use XP I might get from you as affinity, so you would add no benefit to me in regards to XP or affinity rewards.  None.  I wouldn't play with you anyway but that's beside the point.

[PublikDomain]

21 minutes ago, Nexeroff said:

I did ask a question however that you repeatedly avoid answering.  I will ask one more time.  If you don't want to contribute to a team effort, if you want to run outside affinity range and do your own thing, if you don't need the affinity reward, or buffs from other players and don't want to do anything as a team, then why would you even want to queue with other people.

The reason I didn't give you an answer is that I don't owe you one. I don't expect you to understand why and you don't need to, all you need to understand is that I will continue to play however I please. No matter how much you complain about or insult other players, calling them selfish and childish and entitled among other things, they're gonna continue to roam and do all the things you're complaining about and there's not a single, solitary thing you can do to stop them. So instead of expending all this energy typing up your essays arguing for the preservation of the very status quo causing all the negative things you're so upset about, maybe it'd be better to look for an alternative? Like, for example, if roaming actually benefited the team effort instead of harming it.

40 minutes ago, Nexeroff said:

I couldn't use XP I might get from you as affinity, so you would add no benefit to me in regards to XP or affinity rewards.  None.

And likewise, you'd add no benefit to me in regards to Affinity either. None. Which is exactly why I'm free to roam and do as I please.

If neither of us actually benefit from shared Affinity, then we're both talking about helping our teammates, right? You think teammates should only benefit from a party member's actions if they're nearby. But as you've pointed out so many times, teams often don't stick together. This expectation that teams will always stick together is nothing more than a fantasy. Which is why I think teammates should benefit from party members' actions no matter where they are in the map, because in reality the team will not always stay within the limited Affinity Range. Whether this is because of roaming or because of the mission structure itself doesn't actually matter, because the reality is that as you've told us so many times teams don't stick together and players often run off. This despite the "well oiled and functioning game mechanic" (🤣) that is limited Affinity Range.

[Nexeroff]

22 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

The reason I didn't give you an answer is that I don't owe you one. I don't expect you to understand why and you don't need to, all you need to understand is that I will continue to play however I please. No matter how much you complain about or insult other players, calling them selfish and childish and entitled among other things, they're gonna continue to roam and do all the things you're complaining about and there's not a single, solitary thing you can do to stop them. So instead of expending all this energy typing up your essays arguing for the preservation of the very status quo causing all the negative things you're so upset about, maybe it'd be better to look for an alternative? Like, for example, if roaming actually benefited the team effort instead of harming it.

And likewise, you'd add no benefit to me in regards to Affinity either. None. Which is exactly why I'm free to roam and do as I please.

If neither of us actually benefit from shared Affinity, then we're both talking about helping our teammates, right? You think teammates should only benefit from a party member's actions if they're nearby. But as you've pointed out so many times, teams often don't stick together. This expectation that teams will always stick together is nothing more than a fantasy. Which is why I think teammates should benefit from party members' actions no matter where they are in the map, because in reality the team will not always stay within the limited Affinity Range. Whether this is because of roaming or because of the mission structure itself doesn't actually matter, because the reality is that as you've told us so many times teams don't stick together and players often run off. This despite the "well oiled and functioning game mechanic" (🤣) that is limited Affinity Range.

Here is a solution, remove affinity totally, nobody gets any extra XP in any normal mission.  Instead, one mission where no matter where you are on that particular tileset you receive extra XP, it's not called affinity you just get extra XP when you train on that node only.  So everywhere else, XP functions when you kill something yourself.  There is still all the other game mechanics that require you to stay closer rather than further away, so you don't split the spawn of enemies, so you can res people when they go down and them you, so everyone can benefit from killing enemies thus proc their required mods and arcanes and weapons and warframes, etc.

Oh, but wait, we already have that, we have Hydron and SO where everyone goes to train.  No need to remove affinity at all.  And hey, we also have the option to play solo, so people who want to play solo can do so, instead of taking up a slot on a team where the intention is to play as a team member.

You realize you still have not answered my question.  Why would you want to play solo, in a team?  Why wouldn't you prefer to play solo as a solo player that chooses the solo option for a mission?  You say you play solo in a team, but that isn't possible, you either play in a team, or you play solo.  And when you play in a team, and do not contribute, that's playing selfish not playing solo.  Lets not play games with words, lets call it like it is.  You like playing selfish in teams for some weird, strange, unknown reason.  And you are afraid to answer a simple question, you avoid it and I suspect that's because you have no answer you can give, or none that you feel comfortable giving because of how that might make you look.

So what good reason could you possibly have for playing selfishly in a team effort when you could play solo and not be selfish at all?  We have been talking about selfish players that run off, and you seem focused on it, so maybe you can shed light on the subject, why do you personally play selfishly in a team, why would you want to?  What reason could you possibly have that makes any sense at all?

[PublikDomain]

3 hours ago, Nexeroff said:

Here is a solution, remove affinity totally, nobody gets any extra XP in any normal mission.  Instead, one mission where no matter where you are on that particular tileset you receive extra XP, it's not called affinity you just get extra XP when you train on that node only.  So everywhere else, XP functions when you kill something yourself.  There is still all the other game mechanics that require you to stay closer rather than further away, so you don't split the spawn of enemies, so you can res people when they go down and them you, so everyone can benefit from killing enemies thus proc their required mods and arcanes and weapons and warframes, etc.

Ok, let's assume they remove shared Affinity altogether. Since I don't need Affinity, being an L1 and all, I still have no reason to stick around my teammates. I didn't have a reason before, and I still don't. In fact, in that case it'd be far better if I didn't stay near my teammates because otherwise I'd steal the kills my teammates potentially need to level up their gear. It's the same case now when you mention proccing mods and Arcanes: me being near my teammates leaves them less to kill and less to proc off of. All this would do is drive up competition over kills, incentivize roaming, and make it harder for players who actually need Affinity to get it outside of your hypothetical designated leveling node... So I'm not really sure how this would be an improvement, nevermind the weird rhetorical nature of this scenario.

3 hours ago, Nexeroff said:

Why would you want to play solo, in a team?

If you want a real, heartfelt answer, it's probably because playing solo is really lonely. Warframe has a very empty world when played solo, and it's nice to see other human beings. But again - this doesn't matter. My point remains that players in PUGs are going to behave however they like for whatever reason they like and you've got no control over that. It doesn't matter why players play in PUGs, only that they do. And as long as they do, you're going to have to put up with random players playing randomly.

3 hours ago, Nexeroff said:

So what good reason could you possibly have for playing selfishly in a team effort when you could play solo and not be selfish at all?  We have been talking about selfish players that run off, and you seem focused on it, so maybe you can shed light on the subject, why do you personally play selfishly in a team, why would you want to?  What reason could you possibly have that makes any sense at all?

And what good reason can you possibly have for insisting that this selfish behaviour remain detrimental, when it could instead be made beneficial?

[Nexeroff]

2 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

Ok, let's assume they remove shared Affinity altogether. Since I don't need Affinity, being an L1 and all, I still have no reason to stick around my teammates. I didn't have a reason before, and I still don't. In fact, in that case it'd be far better if I didn't stay near my teammates because otherwise I'd steal the kills my teammates potentially need to level up their gear. It's the same case now when you mention proccing mods and Arcanes: me being near my teammates leaves them less to kill and less to proc off of. All this would do is drive up competition over kills, incentivize roaming, and make it harder for players who actually need Affinity to get it outside of your hypothetical designated leveling node... So I'm not really sure how this would be an improvement, nevermind the weird rhetorical nature of this scenario.

If you read my suggestion then no, you would harm yourself if you didn't play closer rather than further away, and you would harm those you are playing with just as you harm those you play with currently.

The point in this exercise of thought, which you readily missed totally, is that all these things take place right now except, that you have the option of earning affinity if you stay closer to your team mates rather than further away.

This just further proves my point, and than you for doing that for me.  You are insisting that things would be better in a specific way, it has been pointed out for you, many times, where you are wrong and way way outside the realm of logic and yet you still assert your idea is a better way.  No, you don't benefit anyone, not even yourself.  It seems to me you are the type of person who urinates against the wind, and as it blows back into your own face claim it's rain and needed.  It's really funny.

When you run off in any direction away from your team mates, you are stealing enemies.  You see, enemies spawn according to where people are on the map.  I would assume if you have any experience and have played for any length of time you would already know this, but it seems it escapes you so allow me once again, to educate you.

So if there are four corners on a map, and you are on the opposite corner of the map from your team, a certain number of enemies will spawn at your location outside the ability of your team mates to kill those enemies unless they travel to where you are, which means they miss enemies spawning where they are.  You just screwed your team mates by behaving selfishly, playing as if you were not playing with other people in a team effort, as if you were a single player in the mission when you are only 25% of the people in that mission and not contributing.

A max number of enemies spawn in any given mission, and if you have paid attention you would also realize that as you traverse a map, if you didn't kill enemies that they re-spawn once you get to a certain point on the map and when they do have less health.  This is because of the spawn limit, and because enemies are not de-spawned.  So as you traverse the map you run away from enemies at some point they spawn when you have traveled far enough away from the original spawn.  So if you re not stationary, and running all over the map, you are actually causing enemies to spawn all over the place and if you are not killing them outright, no more enemies spawn.  So running around causing enemies to spawn all over the place will cause fewer and fewer enemies to spawn for your team mates, you know the people you are suppose to be working with, not against.  So you are doing even more harm to them than you can imagine and yet it seems that you lack even experience to understand these simple game mechanics.  Test it out, you will see exactly what I am talking about.

There are even cases when you pass a certain point on certain missions where the enemies will start running towards the exit, and this is harming those you are suppose to be playing in a team effort with even more than the two previous explanations I gave you, because the enemies run towards the exist and the other people you chose to queue with are left with fewer and fewer enemies if they are not running in the same direction as you, towards the exit.

So you create a situation where the resources that drop are all over the map, where you and everyone else get fewer resources, and all because what, nobody is going to tell you how to play the game?  Nobody is going to force you to play with other people as a team player and you are going to what, prove it by behaving in an antisocial, selfish way for no good reason at all?

Lol, you sound like someone and it makes it seem like you are just trying to copy that someone even though they have been proven to be delusional.  It's really weird you think the way you do, it makes no logical sense.  And this huge gigantic chip on your shoulder, I have to wonder who in your real life made you do things or play in a team that you hated so much it has molded you into who you are.

Yeah, you have no clue what you are suggestion and obviously you have little or no actual experience in the game or totally clueless as to game mechanics that are obvious if you are paying any attention at all.  I just have to say, wow.  You are really this way?  Wow.

3 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

If you want a real, heartfelt answer, it's probably because playing solo is really lonely. Warframe has a very empty world when played solo, and it's nice to see other human beings. But again - this doesn't matter. My point remains that players in PUGs are going to behave however they like for whatever reason they like and you've got no control over that. It doesn't matter why players play in PUGs, only that they do. And as long as they do, you're going to have to put up with random players playing randomly.

You have mentioned this control things several times.  To be clear, the reward that being xp for staying within a specific range, that is called Affinity, is to "encourage" people to stay within a certain range.  I'm sure if DE wanted to force you to play within a certain range, they could create a situation where you hit an invisible barrier so that you could never move out of a certain range, that would be forcing you to play as they want but they don't.  Personally I feel encouraging people to do the better thing, giving them an incentive is the better option, just as it seems DE has coded this encouragement.  Just like in real life, no matter what the laws are a certain percentage are going to behave as bad actors and break the law.  When they do, they are punished for doing so.  In Warframe, when you do not play as a team player in a team queue you are not punished, instead you are not rewarded, you are not given extra xp for playing selfishly.  And rightfully so.  If you don't meet the requirements of the reward you don't get the reward.  Nobody is stopping you from playing as poorly or as selfishly as you wish.  I imagine you don't contribute much playing in the antisocial selfish way you have described, so I don't imagine people care for you much at all and just ignore you, blow you off, watch you run all over the map while they do the mission objectives together and I dunno, if it were me I would laugh, those people who play as you suggest you play always seem angry and confused to me, or watching them on the map they seem desperate, afraid they are missing something if they don't crack every container.  As if, yes, they are chickens with their head cut off.  So while you might see yourself as being overly important in any given mission, people are laughing at you, heartily.  At least you serve some sort of entertainment for those of us that understand the game mechanics.

But forcing you?  Controlling you?  There is this theme in your posts about those things that is disturbing.  Do you live in a place where your freedoms are being infringed upon?  Sometimes those of us that live places where we enjoy freedoms others do not, we take those freedoms for granted.  We miss the fact that other people who live in places where they are not afforded simple everyday freedoms others of us take for granted, might express their craving for those freedoms in a game.  But listen buttercup, nobody is making you play any specific way.  Nobody is forcing you, or controlling you or even cares to.  In the grand scheme of things, you are far, far less important than you think you are.  You would have to be useful to other people for them to even want to control you, and you simply are not, nor are you important enough for anyone to even care.  Run off and play however you want and don't realize a reward you claim to not want or need anyway.  The rest of us will play as adults and friendly, sociable team players and work together towards the goals required to complete the mission.  We will carry you along with our success no matter how poorly you contribute to the group effort.  None of us wants to, nor will we try to control you because frankly, why?  Why would anyone want to control you?  You attempt to flatter yourself for no reason at all.  Laughable.

3 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

And what good reason can you possibly have for insisting that this selfish behaviour remain detrimental, when it could instead be made beneficial?

Selfish behavior is simply selfish, inconsiderate, self serving, ant-social etc.  There is nothing about playing selfish that benefits anyone else.  Since you didn't answer the question, I'll ask a different one instead.

Why would you want to promote selfish behavior by rewarding it?  That's what you are suggesting, to make selfish behavior beneficial by giving selfish people a reward they did not earn.  Why would you even suggest that, it seems to me you want to promote anti-social behavior in a game that is built on being a social game.  Maybe you should go play a single player game where you can behave however you want.  Not that I care, I'm not ever going to play in any mission you are a part of anyway.  But seriously, why do you want to reward selfish behavior?  I am guessing simply because you are a selfish person and want to be rewarded for your own selfish behavior.  Only reason that makes any sense right?  Unless you have some sensible reason you can impart, that's what I'm going to assume.

[DrivaMain]

31 minutes ago, Nexeroff said:

A max number of enemies spawn in any given mission, and if you have paid attention you would also realize that as you traverse a map, if you didn't kill enemies that they re-spawn once you get to a certain point on the map and when they do have less health.  This is because of the spawn limit, and because enemies are not de-spawned.  So as you traverse the map you run away from enemies at some point they spawn when you have traveled far enough away from the original spawn.  So if you re not stationary, and running all over the map, you are actually causing enemies to spawn all over the place and if you are not killing them outright, no more enemies spawn.  So running around causing enemies to spawn all over the place will cause fewer and fewer enemies to spawn for your team mates, you know the people you are suppose to be working with, not against.  So you are doing even more harm to them than you can imagine and yet it seems that you lack even experience to understand these simple game mechanics.  Test it out, you will see exactly what I am talking about.

This is somewhat not accurate. If you left enemies wandering around they "teleport" to the room nearest to a player. I've tested this myself. I wandered around the room while leaving others do their own thing camping for loot. Once I returned, I found out enemy spawns are good enough for them. This could be Survival specific and the issue you are presenting seems to be Exterminate spawn related. 

After big wall of texts and bringing fair points, it seems you two are remain unconvinced and the debate is in a stalemate. The best solution for the both of you is "Let's agree to disagree" and move on. The decision of this topic isn't yours to decide anyway, it's DE's.

Some form infinite affinity range outside of Railjack already exist anyway. It's those things called fosfor blaus and rahds. Spam 20 of them and you have 1000 meter range, which is big enough to be considered "infinite". Yes, they are stackable.

 

[DroopingPuppy]

On 2021-09-03 at 4:49 AM, Tesseract7777 said:

I strongly disagree. 

Affinity range is one of the only carrots that actually encourages Tenno to stay roughly near each other when doing stuff like Survival, etc. 

It would just make the game more anti-coop, as we could all run off to completely different corners of the map and share xp, playing together but alone. 

What's the fun of playing with random Tenno if your idea of playing with random Tenno is to be so far apart that you aren't interacting with them? 

And some people are willing to and/or do abuse it to NOT let the others to get the affinity, you know. Agreed on to fight on an area but one choose to not follow this and kills the enemy elsewhere and spread out the lootable items through the tiles and also prevents to spawning the enemy near of the other tenno, for example.

Yes leech is a serious problem, and I do avoid to be close enough to share the affinity with the leechers if I cannot about it right now, but having the affinity range makes more worse problem such as the mission encourages or even requires us to be separated and out of the 50m affinity range.

[Nexeroff]

9 minutes ago, DrivaMain said:

This is somewhat not accurate. If you left enemies wandering around they "teleport" to the room nearest to a player. I've tested this myself. I wandered around the room while leaving others do their own thing camping for loot. Once I returned, I found out enemy spawns are good enough for them. This could be Survival specific and the issue you are presenting seems to be Exterminate spawn related. 

After big wall of texts and bringing fair points, it seems you two are remain unconvinced and the debate is in a stalemate. The best solution for the both of you is "Let's agree to disagree" and move on. The decision of this topic isn't yours to decide anyway, it's DE's.

Some form infinite affinity range outside of Railjack already exist anyway. It's those things called fosfor blaus and rahds. Spam 20 of them and you have 1000 meter range, which is big enough to be considered "infinite". Yes, they are stackable.

 

My experience has been vastly different, and I have tested it along with clan mates just to make sure.

Perhaps you didn't cross a threshold or I don't know, maybe it was the tileset, or something else.  I have seen this repeatedly through many missions over many years so I know it's a fact.

Walls of text that take only seconds to read, it looks like a lot but really isn't.  But if it's too much for you, you don't have to read any of it.  I am not needing to be convinced, I am not making a choice to believe anything particular I am only imparting facts.  Those facts cannot be altered or changed by me, they simply are.  No stalemate at all.  So long as I am only imparting facts, there is no concern for me about being right or wrong or otherwise, no bias, no emotional attachment to being correct I just state facts.  It's up to the other person on the other side of the conversation to be fair and honest, or to continue attempting to defend a belief that comes into conflict with facts. 

Anyway, the game mechanics function in a very specific way.  There are always mitigating factors.  If you feel things function different than how they actually do, I am not sure what to tell you.  I wish you luck if understanding the game mechanics better.

[FishMcCool]

I just want to thank this thread for making me aware of those Cetus flares. I had no idea this was a thing... Obviously they don't solve the problem in ESO, but they are absolutely amazing for everything else, keeping the hallway heroes into leeching range even while actually minding the objective.

[(NSW)NehiJG]

On 2021-09-02 at 2:45 PM, Uhkretor said:

... That your definition of "Remove" and "Unlimited" were merged somewhere during your current lifetime up until now.

I was confused as well

[(PSN)Madurai-Prime]

2 hours ago, FishMcCool said:

I just want to thank this thread for making me aware of those Cetus flares. I had no idea this was a thing... Obviously they don't solve the problem in ESO, but they are absolutely amazing for everything else, keeping the hallway heroes into leeching range even while actually minding the objective.

Vazarin gives 25 extra meters making it 75. This affects covenant, penance and blessing too.

[PublikDomain]

10 hours ago, Nexeroff said:

So if you re not stationary, and running all over the map, you are actually causing enemies to spawn all over the place and if you are not killing them outright, no more enemies spawn.

Then it sounds to me like the spawn system is already broken, and already needs to be addressed? This has nothing to do with the Affinity Range, and everything to do with the broken spawning system.

And if we can use our imagination to imagine a Warframe where the spawns aren't broken by players walking around the map, then the only real downside to "stealing enemies" is this:

10 hours ago, Nexeroff said:

So you create a situation where the resources that drop are all over the map, where you and everyone else get fewer resources

Which is a bad thing, and I'm not arguing that it isn't. I can totally see why you'd be so upset by this.

But too bad. It's going to happen anyways. This is the "control" thing: you cannot control what happens in a PUG. No one can. You can complain and berate and insult people as much as you want, but no one is going to listen to you because no one cares about what you have to say.

So if it's going to happen anyways, wouldn't it be nice if this wasn't so detrimental? Like, say, if the "friendly, sociable team players" got the drops and Affinity collected by those darned selfish antisocial people? Then we can answer your ultimate question:

10 hours ago, Nexeroff said:

Why would you want to promote selfish behavior by rewarding it?

Because then it would no longer be selfish.

✨ Magic ✨

Edit: And do chill with the insults, ok? For being so "friendly" and "sociable" you're really pushing it.

[Nexeroff]

8 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

Which is a bad thing, and I'm not arguing that it isn't. I can totally see why you'd be so upset by this.

But too bad. It's going to happen anyways. This is the "control" thing: you cannot control what happens in a PUG. No one can. You can complain and berate and insult people as much as you want, but no one is going to listen to you because no one cares about what you have to say.

So if it's going to happen anyways, wouldn't it be nice if this wasn't so detrimental? Like, say, if the "friendly, sociable team players" got the drops and Affinity collected by those darned selfish antisocial people? Then we can answer your ultimate question:

You are trying way way too hard buttercup.  One more time so you might understand.  I like this just as they are, I have no issues, no problems with the affinity system as it stands.  A lot more people would leach, and use others selfishly if they were rewarded for unfriendly, ant-social behavior.

I'm really happy that DE has made it clear they are not going to reward selfish, anti-social, no MMO type of player behavior. 

You continue on this control thing, who is trying to control you or what happens in a pub?  Nobody.  You are acting like you matter far more than you might to even the most desperate of people.  Nobody cares enough to want to control you.  I have no desire to control you or anyone else in a pub.  DE has created a situation where you are rewarded for playing as a team member, and not rewarded for not playing as a team member.  You don't get any reward for playing as a solo player in a team effort and rightfully so.  No control, you just simply do not meet the requirements of the affinity reward.

Like my example of the child that doesn't clean their room for the ice cream.  You can't do the requirements of the reward, you don't get the reward, no control.  Lol, where you get this whole control thing, I have not the slightest clue, it's really really really strange and you keep attempting to interject it.  Why in the world would anyone care enough about whatever you are doing, specially in a game, to try and control you.  Nobody cares, DE doesn't care, other players don't care.  You either comply with the requirements of the reward and deserving get a reward for doing so, or you continue to play as you do, selfishly, and do not get the reward.  That's it, done and done.  No control, nobody wants to control you, ease up and chill out buttercup that huge giant control chip on your shoulder has no place in a conversation where nobody is suggesting that anyone needs to be controlled.  Relax.  That knee jerk emotional response is a little bit creepy.

There is nothing detrimental about people who play selfishly not getting a reward for not meeting the requirements.  I think it's great when selfish players that queue to play as a team, and then do not, do not meet the requirements of an XP reward.  I think it's really funny to be honest, when they come here to the forum and then beg to have affinity range removed, to receive XP for not doing anything at all, not contributing, not being a significant contributor to the group effort.  I am happy when I see selfish people complain about not receiving something they didn't earn, just like you.  Why in the world do you think I continue to respond, because I like watching you try to justify your selfish behavior and exposing yourself as that type of person.  Like I said before, it's like you are urinating into full gale force winds, it's all blowing back into your face and you are claiming it's just rain.  Just keep doing that, I promise I will keep responding so long as you make no logical sense, and keep suggested incorrectly people are trying to control you, through your computer, through a game, Lol.  omg it's funny.  You really think people want to control you?  Why?  Why would anyone care enough to control you, what benefit could it be for anyone, to actually really control you and how in the world might you suggest they do so?  It's sounds so outrageous to even suggest.  Do you still live at home with your parents, are you going through that point in your teenage years where you are trying to identify as an individual and rebelling against anything you feel is control?  And bringing that garbage here?  I feel something like this must be the case, the control thing is crazy.

I'm so happy you do not earn rewards you do not deserve for playing the way you do.  It makes me smile, please continue to tell us all how you play selfishly, and do not receive any rewards for not meeting the requirements of the reward.  Please, do continue, it's entertaining.  I'm wondering what you are going to suggest next, something equally crazy perhaps?

[Nexeroff]

29 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

But too bad. It's going to happen anyways. This is the "control" thing: you cannot control what happens in a PUG

It's like you are the Q-Anon of Warframe or something, okay, so who wants to control you and how.  Is it multiple people which would make it a conspiracy?  Do you have proof, or not because if you have no proof it's a theory not a fact.  And what about you are they trying to control?  You sound like some people do about not doing certain things to not spread a certain something because someone is trying to make them and control them.  Is this what all this control stuff is really about?

[PublikDomain]

23 minutes ago, Nexeroff said:

DE has created a situation where you are rewarded for playing as a team member, and not rewarded for not playing as a team member.

Right, and that's fine.

But they've also created a situation where you're also punished when someone else doesn't play as a "team member". If someone else runs off and roams, which they are entirely free to do, the "friendly, sociable players" get less Affinity and less drops and less spawns. Not because they weren't being good "team members", but because someone else ran off and had other plans.

Is that fair?

[Nexeroff]

27 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

Right, and that's fine.

But they've also created a situation where you're also punished when someone else doesn't play as a "team member". If someone else runs off and roams, which they are entirely free to do, the "friendly, sociable players" get less Affinity and less drops and less spawns. Not because they weren't being good "team members", but because someone else ran off and had other plans.

Is that fair?

I'm not punished at all by you playing selfishly.  I do not receive a reward for interacting with you, but it's not punishment, it's not receiving a reward, that is vastly and utterly different.  You are calling it a punishment to cause people to rally to your argument, it's not happening.

If you received an affinity reward for playing selfishly, then more players would play selfishly and there would be less buffs, less procs on your mods, your weapons, pets, frames, everything.  Less enemies, because they would spawn all over the map, the mission would take longer because there would come the requirement for people to run all over the map to kill enemies and so on and so forth.  It would encourage a situation far worse than exists now and would require massive change to base game mechanics.  It makes absolutely no logical sense.

I am not being punished when people play selfishly, I am not realizing a reward that otherwise we both would benefit from.  I'm okay with that, so long as the person playing selfishly does not receive a reward they do not deserve.  Let them play as selfishly as they want.  If I need to train something I will go to Hydron or do SO and not concern myself with people who play selfishly.

Whenever anyone queues for a team effort and then plays as a solo player, under any scenario, they are not doing anyone any good they are actually reducing the effectiveness of the team effort.  It's selfish behavior.  It's going to happen because there are a lot of selfish people in the world that for whatever reason, like to be selfish and play in a team group but be selfish in that group.  They are just plain old ordinary not special, selfish people.  It will always happen.  But rewarding them for their bad behavior?  Happily DE does not.  Happily things are the best they can possibly be with the current game mechanics the way they work now.  Thankfully DE is not going to reward you for your selfish behavior.  You can continue to play however you want to play, you will just not receive a reward.

If it concerned me, then I would just simply go with clan mates or friends.  And I do when it's important, I only farm with people I know who play as a team and not with selfish people who run off selfishly to do whatever it is they do.  I don't need affinity, but if I did I would go to Hydron or SO so it's not an issue nor problem in that regard either.  And so far as resource drops are concerned, I always run a booster and I actively farm so I'm not concerned about that either.  I feel bad for other people who are negatively affected by selfishly players like yourself, but so far as I am concerned?  Your gameplay is not going to significantly impact my gameplay enough for me to be concerned about it.  You just keep playing as selfishly as you desire, and I will keep laughing at you for being so short sighted, and DE is not going to reward you something you did not earn, nor deserve.  That means just simply keeping things the way they are, it's the very best option for anyone not playing selfishly.  It might not be for you, but then who really cares about people who play selfishly in an MMO.  Not me, I could not care less about selfish players who play as you do.  So no worries on that score either.

I could not care less what you do, I want nothing to do with people like you.  I find that people who are selfish and play selfishly are also most often toxic and behave badly, as trolls.  As a matter of fact, I just did sorties, and there was some guy that sat at the start and never contributed at all.  Other people mentioned it, and you wouldn't believe how toxic the guy was, it was crazy.  I imagine he's toxic because people call him out on his leaching all the time.  I thought to myself, why would anyone want to play a game where everyone hated them for playing selfishly, for leaching selfishly.  Why would anyone want to subject themselves to the humiliation of being called out for their selfish behavior, and how sad that person's life must be to want to play that way.  Why would you even want to play the game if you are not playing the game.

You see, it makes no logical sense no matter how you look at it.  None.

You will not get rewards you do not deserve.  You should be okay with that, are you?  Is it that people call you out on your selfish behavior and it's humiliating and instead you want them to be okay with your selfish behavior in a mission?  Well bub, if you play selfishly and present yourself as a selfish person then you also must weather the consequences of your actions, or in this case your lack of action.  People are going to call you out on your behavior, they are going to expose you, talk about you and might even say things to you that otherwise you would not be subjecting yourself to, that might make you feel bad or whatever.  You play that way, you get treated that way.  Not by me, because your type have never mattered to me.  But others will speak out, speak up, expose you and you will continue to feel the way you do.  Sorry, that's reality and you cannot control what people do when you do what you do.

That is fair, it's the golden rule, you treat others how you want to be treated.  Treat them with a lack of disrespect and teamwork, and you can expect them to do the same to you. 

[PublikDomain]

1 hour ago, Nexeroff said:

I do not receive a reward for interacting with you, but it's not punishment, it's not receiving a reward, that is vastly and utterly different.

I guess there's a distinction that can be made, but in either case it's a negative outcome: either the "friendly, sociable player" is punished, or the "friendly, sociable player" is not rewarded which is basically the same as a punishment. In both cases the "friendly, sociable player" gets less because of the "selfish" player's actions, and that it's a bad thing. I agree with you on that, which is why I think those "selfish" players should contribute to the team by having their drops and Affinity shared. There's nothing you can do to make these players not be selfish, and if you can't beat them then you might as well profit from them.

1 hour ago, Nexeroff said:

Let them play as selfishly as they want.

Then stop complaining when they do.

[Tesseract7777]

11 hours ago, FishMcCool said:

I just want to thank this thread for making me aware of those Cetus flares. I had no idea this was a thing... Obviously they don't solve the problem in ESO, but they are absolutely amazing for everything else, keeping the hallway heroes into leeching range even while actually minding the objective.

Combine them with Vazarin's affinity range increase which I always have turned on in public games, and I do mean ALWAYS. I always use Vazarin in pubs. 

You will get so much affinity range its crazy. And like someone mentioned already, they can affect Blessing (which has a nice new augment coming out soon) and Covenant as well. 

Vazarin is underrated, at least for pubs. eight free rez's, 25 extra meters affinity. A dash power that heals people and makes them invincible for five seconds and works on defense operartives and stuff btw. A second dash upgrade that stuns enemies and temporarily opens them to finishers, only briefly though compared to the Naramon finisher dash/stun upgrade. Either way, Vazarin is just so amazing in public games. 

Vazarin is one of the few ways Focus feels like it should be, that you can be the healer and dps/seflish frame at the same time. I can be Ash the assassin and secondarily be a healer/damage stopper with my operator. 

To me the others give you a lot of utility, but none of that have that same feel of "I can use this focus school to be a true hybrid class along with my Warframe".