Teridax68 Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 I do agree that Warframe could do a better job of giving us more of a challenge, and punishing us better for bad play. However: Taking damage or or losing revives from parkour is not a good idea IMO, because the freeform nature of parkour is what makes it fun, and parkour is already one of the game's best and most nuanced tests of skill. Falling into a pit resets us, which makes us vulnerable, and one can demonstrate skill in parkour by traversing the map much faster than others. We don't need fall damage, which is obnoxious already on Operators, much less deaths from pits, to be tested on our skill when parkouring, and implementing those is more likely to just lead to accidental deaths, particularly among those newer to the game, than anything else. Self-damage is, similarly, not actually a good skill test, because there are many different factors that may cause us to get caught in our own blast radius, such as jagged level geometry, other players moving in front of us, or some tilesets just being way too tight oftentimes. This is one of the reasons why it didn't work when it existed, because players were getting punished disproportionately for small mistakes, or issues that sometimes weren't even fully within their control. I do think Warframe isn't challenging us enough on some things, but I think it's also important where that challenge comes from: Warframe is generally amazing at giving us lots of agency, and so I think any sort of punishment mechanic that impedes our moment-to-moment play is liable to undermine that. What we need is for its challenge to come from how we interact with enemies, and this is where the game falls severely short: not only are enemies too weak to challenge us, most of them are too simplistic to test us on anything even if they were to last more than a few seconds. Our balance is so off that even high-level enemies die too quickly without ever becoming a threat, and that I think is what ought to change. Ideally, our combat should test both our aim and our parkour, plus our tactical awareness and decision-making when we factor in warframe abilities, but we're clearly not anywhere close to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silligoose Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 11 hours ago, (XBOX)General Poke said: When falling into a chasm or lava, whatever, I think it should take a life. I also want self-damage back so that you kill yourself if you're lazy with aiming a weapon (including shooting your foot with a Lato by accident or something like that). As a measure for fall damage, we could have companion mods that use tractor beams that lift us back out at the cost of being vulnerable to enemy damage (a Grineer could still shoot the drone or hound to cancel the rescue attempt). So yeah, bad parkour and bad aim could fail the mission. I want that element of risk. Why was that taken away? I still don't understand why self-damage was switched off. Not sure if fall damage/death was ever a thing before. I only started playing 2 years ago so have no idea about before then. If a compromise is necessary, what if we have the option to turn on these risk factors in settings ourselves with reminders on loading screens that they're on? Self damage being taken away has caused a massive imbalance in my opinion and is one of the reasons why AoE dominates. Paired with ammo not being an issue, extreme AoE damage (relative to other weapon types and enemy durability) output at lategame and a mod that can negate the stagger effect 99.99%, or abilities that negates it 100% of the time, it is no surprise that the imbalance has become game-breaking. I'd be on board regarding out-of-bounds movements costing a life, but only when out-of-bounds areas are mapped properly and the life-cost is applied when falling into lave/chasms etc as mentioned, not a an area where the ground is clearly visible, or when one still has time to save oneself, or when "jumping too high" as can be seen on some maps. Fall damage I'm not sold on. How far would one have to fall in order for the damage to apply? To what degree would damage apply? Can it be mitigated through slides and rolls, as the current heavy landing is? Would going into aimglide negate fall damage just before landing? 11 hours ago, (PSN)CommanderC2121 said: Hell no. Find a different game if you want this type of “challenge”. OP did find that game. Prior to March 2020, everyone here found that game. It's called Warframe. DE needs to realize the coddling of one demographic is leading to massive imbalances and the loss of other demographics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silligoose Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 1 hour ago, Teridax68 said: Self-damage is, similarly, not actually a good skill test, because there are many different factors that may cause us to get caught in our own blast radius, such as jagged level geometry, other players moving in front of us, or some tilesets just being way too tight oftentimes. This is one of the reasons why it didn't work when it existed, because players were getting punished disproportionately for small mistakes, or issues that sometimes weren't even fully within their control. I agree on most of your post, but I disagree with this. Self-damage is a skill-test and two of the three factors you mention is a player failing that skill-test due to improper aim, positioning. situational awareness and/or proper use of the weapon: employ some skill and use it appropriately within the right situations, reap the rewards of good AoE damage. Use it inappropriately, for example by shooting a rock right in front of you, in a small room, get punished accordingly. A lack of proper use, proper positioning, lack of skill, punishes players for their own mistakes. Even shooting teammates in front of you is, at least in part, a skill-test failure due to not having proper situational awareness, or placing oneself in a more risky position given the weapon being used and arguably slow reactions and improper aim, though I am can admit I'm reaching a bit here. We could debate how often unavoidable friendly fire does occur, but regardless of whether that is in 20% of games, or 1% of games, I can understand the frustration with regards to self-damage when hitting an ally that jumps in front of you as well as the frustration of having to re-position yourself to avoid hitting a teammate (compared to use of other weapons), however, a mechanic removing the explosion when hitting a teammate would have served game balance much better than total removal of self-damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(NSW)Greybones Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 Yikes. You’re choosing to be so powerful, that with these ideas, your worst and only enemy is yourself. Pass; stagger can be dangerous enough as it is, and some of the out-of-bounds areas need adjustment and/or signposting, and even then I’d hate to lose my last life to accidental geometry weirdness that for some reason I didn’t get the jump working on because I came at a funny angle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teridax68 Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 2 hours ago, Silligoose said: I agree on most of your post, but I disagree with this. Self-damage is a skill-test and two of the three factors you mention is a player failing that skill-test due to improper aim, positioning. situational awareness and/or proper use of the weapon: employ some skill and use it appropriately within the right situations, reap the rewards of good AoE damage. Use it inappropriately, for example by shooting a rock right in front of you, in a small room, get punished accordingly. A lack of proper use, proper positioning, lack of skill, punishes players for their own mistakes. Even shooting teammates in front of you is, at least in part, a skill-test failure due to not having proper situational awareness, or placing oneself in a more risky position given the weapon being used and arguably slow reactions and improper aim, though I am can admit I'm reaching a bit here. We could debate how often unavoidable friendly fire does occur, but regardless of whether that is in 20% of games, or 1% of games, I can understand the frustration with regards to self-damage when hitting an ally that jumps in front of you as well as the frustration of having to re-position yourself to avoid hitting a teammate (compared to use of other weapons), however, a mechanic removing the explosion when hitting a teammate would have served game balance much better than total removal of self-damage. I've seen this line of reasoning repeated quite often, though exclusively on the internet, because it doesn't survive much past that: from the comfort of one's own armchair, it is easy to imagine that players can and must have total awareness of everything displayed on-screen, zero reaction delay, and pinpoint precision, but the reality of the matter is that that's not how the human mind or body work, and it is unreasonable to ask players to perfectly anticipate confused and sometimes invisible boundaries, players shooting up from behind them, predict where their random multi-projectile explosive will land ahead of time, and so while performing multiple other tasks simultaneously. The real problem at hand isn't that players are too unskilled to deal with self-damage, but that the people asking for it back are ignorant, incidentally or otherwise, of basic human limitations, and lack the ability to conceptualize them when discussing them out of game. Point being, Warframe is not a game made for self-damage on explosions, which is why its removal was requested for years and eventually implemented to the joy of most, save for a vocal minority. What I can empathize with, however, is that some explosive weapons are just too good, and removing what was once their one true drawback (self-staggers can be negated with Primed Sure Footed) exacerbates that problem on weapons like the Bramma. Something needs to change, and for some that has expressed itself as misplaced pining for a mechanic that had failed to balance the problem weapons even while it still existed. Personally, I think the issue isn't so much with explosive weapons as a class, but with individual explosive weapons: we don't see the Kulstar, Lenz, or even the Kuva Ogris and Tonkor being overused (or used much at all), but we do see far too many Brammas, and perhaps a few too many Envoys right now. The problem isn't that explosives in general are too strong (most among them fail to go much beyond the level of okay), but that some outliers are far, far too good, which to me is all the less reason to reintroduce a weapon class-wide mechanic. Whichever weapons are doing too much need more severe nerfs (the Bramma in particular I think needs a serious reduction to its initial shot's damage), and if the intent is to introduce more skill-testing, I'd say explosive weapons ought to be balanced around having very long times in-between shots: being able to kill multiple enemies in one go is obviously a defining strength of AoE weapons, but that I feel ought to be tempered by the fact that if you're not killing enough enemies per hit, you should be killing them slower than if you had attacked them individually with a single-target weapon. This would encourage aiming far more consistently than self-damage, and the punishment I think would be far more acceptable: not very many people enjoy getting staggered or damaged by their own weapon, but I'm willing to bet a lot more would consider it normal for a poorly-placed explosive shot to lead to a lull in combat (and moment of vulnerability) before they can try again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silligoose Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 1 hour ago, Teridax68 said: I've seen this line of reasoning repeated quite often, though exclusively on the internet, because it doesn't survive much past that: from the comfort of one's own armchair, it is easy to imagine that players can and must have total awareness of everything displayed on-screen, zero reaction delay, and pinpoint precision, but the reality of the matter is that that's not how the human mind or body work, and it is unreasonable to ask players to perfectly anticipate confused and sometimes invisible boundaries, players shooting up from behind them, predict where their random multi-projectile explosive will land ahead of time, and so while performing multiple other tasks simultaneously. The real problem at hand isn't that players are too unskilled to deal with self-damage, but that the people asking for it back are ignorant, incidentally or otherwise, of basic human limitations, and lack the ability to conceptualize them when discussing them out of game. Point being, Warframe is not a game made for self-damage on explosions, which is why its removal was requested for years and eventually implemented to the joy of most, save for a vocal minority. What I can empathize with, however, is that some explosive weapons are just too good, and removing what was once their one true drawback (self-staggers can be negated with Primed Sure Footed) exacerbates that problem on weapons like the Bramma. Something needs to change, and for some that has expressed itself as misplaced pining for a mechanic that had failed to balance the problem weapons even while it still existed. Personally, I think the issue isn't so much with explosive weapons as a class, but with individual explosive weapons: we don't see the Kulstar, Lenz, or even the Kuva Ogris and Tonkor being overused (or used much at all), but we do see far too many Brammas, and perhaps a few too many Envoys right now. The problem isn't that explosives in general are too strong (most among them fail to go much beyond the level of okay), but that some outliers are far, far too good, which to me is all the less reason to reintroduce a weapon class-wide mechanic. Whichever weapons are doing too much need more severe nerfs (the Bramma in particular I think needs a serious reduction to its initial shot's damage), and if the intent is to introduce more skill-testing, I'd say explosive weapons ought to be balanced around having very long times in-between shots: being able to kill multiple enemies in one go is obviously a defining strength of AoE weapons, but that I feel ought to be tempered by the fact that if you're not killing enough enemies per hit, you should be killing them slower than if you had attacked them individually with a single-target weapon. This would encourage aiming far more consistently than self-damage, and the punishment I think would be far more acceptable: not very many people enjoy getting staggered or damaged by their own weapon, but I'm willing to bet a lot more would consider it normal for a poorly-placed explosive shot to lead to a lull in combat (and moment of vulnerability) before they can try again. It doesn't require "total awareness of everything displayed on-screen, zero reaction delay, and pinpoint precision" to not blow yourself up. It requires mediocre skill in those categories. It also stretches far beyond my armchair, or the internet, or computer games. Paintball, dodgeball, team sports in general, even just plain 'ol driving requires situational awareness, decent reactions and decent precision. You exaggerate far too much. Don't shoot objects too close to you. It's that simple. Self-damage weapons in first-and third person shooters, PvE or PvP, co-op, or solo, is not a new concept. It is not a mechanic that players are unable to learn to use properly and players aren't so inept as to not be able to place themselves and their aim in a position to not hit an object or enemy close to them, even if the terrain incorporates assets with jagged boundaries in the form of rubble, trees, rocks, containers etc. Invisible boundaries should be considered a bug or poor mapping and is not a valid reason to be against self-damage: Bugs and poor mapping need to be fixed, not circumvented. Why would you think players can't predict where the shots will land with reasonable accuracy? That's the premise of a shooter - predict where your shots will go. Players can hit enemies a good distance away from them with explosive weapons just fine and they don't need perfect prediction to estimate whether their explosive weapon could damage them Just like any shot fired, where it ends up isn't random. Players employ a thing called aim - aim accounts for direction of shot, spread, arc, travel time, distance and target vector. Not everyone can do it equally well, but most players can see a rock or wall in front of them. I did say the skill-check fail regarding hitting allies was a bit of stretch, but it still is a failed skill check and it falls on both the shooter and the ally. I also said I understand the frustration of of getting killed by hitting an ally that jumps in front you and gave an alternative solution. Though not explicitly stated, I agree self-damage punishment due to failing that specific skill-check may be a bit to harsh, given the movement in Warframe and ping. We don't actually know what percentage of the player base was happy with the changes. More may be happy with self-damage removal, but we don't know if it is the vast majority and of course it wasn't only the vocal minority that was displeased with the change as you claim - not everyone who wants it back is vocal. Some players probably simply quit as a result of the impact it had on gameplay, either shortly after the change, or in the time following the change. Even now we see players stating they play solo instead of co-op, simply because AoE is taking the fun and even tactical depth out of co-op. Beyond that, there needs to be a consideration regarding the impact lack of self-damage has on the balance of the game and mechanics. Melee was nerfed recently, in part due to how ridiculous it was that players were zipping around the map doing melee combos, regardless of whether there were enemies around or not and still being exceedingly efficient. What do we have now? Players running around the map shooting at their feet with AoE. No need for much tactics or aim, although more than the melee-spam crowd. Just run around and shoot your feet. it is still pretty ridiculous. AoE is strong. The other AoE weapons don't see as much play because of the Kuva Bramma's and Kuva Zarr's outlier performance, but they are still very strong. Even the normal MR7 Zarr is pretty damn strong. Personally I think AoE should be strong. It shouldn't quite compete with single target weapons (within the same tier) in terms of single target damage, but there should still be a good payoff and viability even against smaller groups of enemies and that power should have some sort of inherent disadvantage. Your suggestion of the disadvantage forces a lull in the action, whilst not addressing the ridiculous "shoot at your feet" tactic, whereas self-damage does not force a lull if played properly. If not self-damage, self-stagger should bypass status immunity. That way a lull in the action is not forced, but self inflicted and can be bypassed with proper play. With great power comes great responsibility, so use it wisely and don't shoot whatever is right in front of you. Players aren't as inept as you make them out to be. They can figure out how to not blast themselves in the face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BDT_Flames Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 This post is soo useless does not apply to the game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(XBOX)Big Roy 324 Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 I'm just thinking about the fall loop that can occur. Especially in open worlds or the jupiter tile set. Where fall off the level has your frame appear mid air only to fall straight out of bounds again. Until the game jumps you back even further. Such would be instant game over. Or players deciding to fall off the map to get carried the rest of the mission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonXX Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 The self-damage is about the only element I personally would budge on in some form of middle ground. Fall damage & out of bounds = Nope, throw that b.s. in a dumpster bin and never bring it into this game ever. This isn't Soulsborne nor should it be with that garbage that more times than not bugs into unfairly killing players. Its already bad enough having out of bounds remove ability effects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)CommanderC2121 Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 33 minutes ago, 73yearsold said: I guess Warframe is supposed to be easier than Minecraft now. A cuddle space for care bears who want all power fantasy with no compromise. There is compromise and there is blatant failure to understand a games mechanics. Whats the OP proposed is not a challenge, in the same way liches instantly killing for you getting a murmur wrong was a challenge. Both are attempts at simply lowering life count with little to no player control in the matter. If you want warframe to have challenge, you’d need to remake the game from the ground up, tone down mod scaling, reduce weapon and power effectiveness, reduce enemy scaling to compensate, reduce grind, as grind is the main “difficulty”, rework gamemodes like survival or disruption, change tile spawns to better funnel enemies, and more. At that point, you are playing a different game. Warframe never really had challenge except in the days where you had to pay plat for revives because we had few survival tools then. That however is not a bad thing. Some games can be cathartic, and not every games needs to be someone that constantly tests you when you play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teridax68 Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 53 minutes ago, Silligoose said: It doesn't require "total awareness of everything displayed on-screen, zero reaction delay, and pinpoint precision" to not blow yourself up. It requires mediocre skill in those categories. It also stretches far beyond my armchair, or the internet, or computer games. Paintball, dodgeball, team sports in general, even just plain 'ol driving requires situational awareness, decent reactions and decent precision. Bringing up dodgeball, paintball, team sports, and driving to discuss the subject of not blowing oneself up in a video game with explosive weapons suggests no relevant experience in the aforementioned activities. Just because we have the capacity to perceive our surroundings and exert a degree of precision does not mean that needs to be expected to an unreasonable degree, nor applied to a context where they do not in fact address the issues being discussed. 53 minutes ago, Silligoose said: You exaggerate far too much. Don't shoot objects too close to you. It's that simple. And you minimize and dismiss far too much in order to deliberately misrepresent an issue that was widely criticized and resolved. You are fighting a battle that has already been lost. 53 minutes ago, Silligoose said: Self-damage weapons in first-and third person shooters, PvE or PvP, co-op, or solo, is not a new concept. It is not a mechanic that players are unable to learn to use properly and players aren't so inept as to not be able to place themselves and their aim in a position to not hit an object or enemy close to them, even if the terrain incorporates assets with jagged boundaries in the form of rubble, trees, rocks, containers etc. Invisible boundaries should be considered a bug or poor mapping and is not a valid reason to be against self-damage: Bugs and poor mapping need to be fixed, not circumvented. You are correct, other games feature self-damage... and are designed around that. Warframe isn't, and I'd say that's more reasonable than to believe the game somehow managed to amass an exceptionally inept playerbase. If that were the case, by the way, it would still have to accommodate that. Another common problem with those advocating the return of self-damage is that they place too much emphasis on how unskilled they perceive everyone else to be: it doesn't matter how skilled we collectively are or not as a playerbase, if self-damage doesn't work, which it didn't, it doesn't work, plain and simple. Applying elitism to video game design is as pointless as it is conceited. 53 minutes ago, Silligoose said: Why would you think players can't predict where the shots will land with reasonable accuracy? That's the premise of a shooter - predict where your shots will go. Players can hit enemies a good distance away from them with explosive weapons just fine and they don't need perfect prediction to estimate whether their explosive weapon could damage them Just like any shot fired, where it ends up isn't random. Players employ a thing called aim - aim accounts for direction of shot, spread, arc, travel time, distance and target vector. Not everyone can do it equally well, but most players can see a rock or wall in front of them. Because as mentioned already, the shots can catch on level geometry, which isn't always very well-displayed or bounded, and suddenly appearing allies, or rebound in unpredictable way given the random spread and numbering of multishot, all in the middle of very chaotic and rapid combat, including fast movement rarely seen in other games. Believing that "the premise of a shooter" is to "predict where your shots will go" suggests no awareness of what hitscan is either, and how prevalent it is in shooters (including Warframe). 53 minutes ago, Silligoose said: I did say the skill-check fail regarding hitting allies was a bit of stretch, but it still is a failed skill check and it falls on both the shooter and the ally. I also said I understand the frustration of of getting killed by hitting an ally that jumps in front you and gave an alternative solution. Though not explicitly stated, I agree self-damage punishment due to failing that specific skill-check may be a bit to harsh, given the movement in Warframe and ping. How is it a "failed skill check" when an ally suddenly moves into the line of fire? What was the player expected to do during the split-second where the shot was travelling and the ally suddenly veered into a collision course? 53 minutes ago, Silligoose said: We don't actually know what percentage of the player base was happy with the changes. More may be happy with self-damage removal, but we don't know if it is the vast majority and of course it wasn't only the vocal minority that was displeased with the change as you claim - not everyone who wants it back is vocal. Some players probably simply quit as a result of the impact it had on gameplay, either shortly after the change, or in the time following the change. Even now we see players stating they play solo instead of co-op, simply because AoE is taking the fun and even tactical depth out of co-op. "We don't know" is a rather weak attempt to obfuscate the fact that feedback for removing self-damage was always much more frequent than the reverse, and that to this day the handful of advocates for self-damage on these forums tend to be met with greater opposition. The fact that this change was implemented, and so in response to player feedback, should itself be enough of an indicator. 53 minutes ago, Silligoose said: Beyond that, there needs to be a consideration regarding the impact lack of self-damage has on the balance of the game and mechanics. Melee was nerfed recently, in part due to how ridiculous it was that players were zipping around the map doing melee combos, regardless of whether there were enemies around or not and still being exceedingly efficient. What do we have now? Players running around the map shooting at their feet with AoE. No need for much tactics or aim, although more than the melee-spam crowd. Just run around and shoot your feet. it is still pretty ridiculous. Players shooting at their feet with AoE was happening before the melee nerfs, and the post you are replying to proposes solutions already. 53 minutes ago, Silligoose said: AoE is strong. The other AoE weapons don't see as much play because of the Kuva Bramma's and Kuva Zarr's outlier performance, but they are still very strong. Even the normal MR7 Zarr is pretty damn strong. Personally I think AoE should be strong. It shouldn't quite compete with single target weapons (within the same tier) in terms of single target damage, but there should still be a good payoff and viability even against smaller groups of enemies and that power should have some sort of inherent disadvantage. Your suggestion of the disadvantage forces a lull in the action, whilst not addressing the ridiculous "shoot at your feet" tactic, whereas self-damage does not force a lull if played properly. If not self-damage, self-stagger should bypass status immunity. That way a lull in the action is not forced, but self inflicted and can be bypassed with proper play. With great power comes great responsibility, so use it wisely and don't shoot whatever is right in front of you. If the other AoE weapons "don't see as much play", how are they "still very strong"? What is their play rate relative to other weapons? The Zarr, which you seem to believe is one of these "very strong" weapons, had a 0.47% usage rate in 2020, at a time when the Kuva Bramma dominated already. Before we start talking changes, it would help to first get one's facts right. 53 minutes ago, Silligoose said: Players aren't as inept as you make them out to be. They can figure out how to not blast themselves in the face. You are the one assuming mass ineptitude out of the playerbase, not me. Clearly, players did not like having to "figure out how to not blast themselves in the face", and so enough to push for its removal which, it bears repeating, happened already, and quite some time ago now. I would rather move forward and see how to address outliers (because again, the issue is with outliers, not an entire class of weapons), rather than even attempt to reintroduce an almost universally loathed mechanic out of sheer deliberate ignorance of why that mechanic was removed to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silligoose Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 23 minutes ago, Teridax68 said: Bringing up dodgeball, paintball, team sports, and driving to discuss the subject of not blowing oneself up in a video game with explosive weapons suggests no relevant experience in the aforementioned activities. Just because we have the capacity to perceive our surroundings and exert a degree of precision does not mean that needs to be expected to an unreasonable degree, nor applied to a context where they do not in fact address the issues being discussed. You stated: 6 hours ago, Teridax68 said: I've seen this line of reasoning repeated quite often, though exclusively on the internet, because it doesn't survive much past that: from the comfort of one's own armchair, it is easy to imagine that players can and must have total awareness of everything displayed on-screen, zero reaction delay, and pinpoint precision, but the reality of the matter is that that's not how the human mind or body work, I pointed out your nonsense: It applies to many factors beyond the armchair and beyond the internet. It doesn't take a genius to not kill kill themselves with rocket launchers in games. It doesn't take an unreasonable amount of perception or precision to not hit something 7m away from you in Warframe. 25 minutes ago, Teridax68 said: And you minimize and dismiss far too much in order to deliberately misrepresent an issue that was widely criticized and resolved. You are fighting a battle that has already been lost. Again, it only requires mediocre skill in those categories. Your weapon has a 7m explosive radius? Shoot things more than 7m away. Enemy closer than that? Jump away from it, or don't shoot. use your melee, or your secondary, or an ability. Really not hard. That's not minimizing the skill requirement, that's just how little skill it requires. Not sure why you make it sound like some amazing feat or why you stated the factors I mentioned were barely applicable "beyond the internet" in the first place, other than an attempt at ridicule. They are everyday things people do without even needing to consciously focus on it. Your attempt at ridicule failed miserably. Don't feel shame. Just learn from it. 2 hours ago, Teridax68 said: You are correct, other games feature self-damage... and are designed around that. Warframe isn't, and I'd say that's more reasonable than to believe the game somehow managed to amass an exceptionally inept playerbase. If that were the case, by the way, it would still have to accommodate that. Another common problem with those advocating the return of self-damage is that they place too much emphasis on how unskilled they perceive everyone else to be: it doesn't matter how skilled we collectively are or not as a playerbase, if self-damage doesn't work, which it didn't, it doesn't work, plain and simple. Applying elitism to video game design is as pointless as it is conceited. Self-damage was in the game for the majority of it's run. Of course it was designed around that. At some stage, the game did change, however. It seems as though balance, especially endgame balance, was neglected for quite some time in the past. That time seems to be coming to an end, given some of the recent content focused more on endgame and more recent rebalancing. This isn't about perceiving the playerbase as unskilled, it's about unskilled play being rewarded to greatly, whilst at the same time, impacting other players negatively. There is a big difference. I believe most players have the skill to use explosive weapons effectively, but they choose not to because it is more efficient, or at the very least, easier, not to. This isn't about elitism. Players are doing missions at endgame while watching something else, because that's just how easy it has become. Ease breeds lack of interest, which breeds disinterest and eventually, lack of retention. The upcoming New War's enemy and/or boss mechanics will show us if DE has decided to continue with easy, shallow gameplay or not, based on how the enemies and/or bosses in the new content function: If the gameplay lacks deeper mechanics, they probably chose for Warframe to go into the more shallow route. If the mechanics lead to the potential of more dynamic play and counterplay, they probably chose for Warframe to be more than a superficial shooter. Time will tell, though based on more recent content, I'm leaning towards the latter. 31 minutes ago, Teridax68 said: Because as mentioned already, the shots can catch on level geometry, which isn't always very well-displayed or bounded, and suddenly appearing allies, or rebound in unpredictable way given the random spread and numbering of multishot, all in the middle of very chaotic and rapid combat, including fast movement rarely seen in other games. Believing that "the premise of a shooter" is to "predict where your shots will go" suggests no awareness of what hitscan is either, and how prevalent it is in shooters (including Warframe). Poor mapping, or bugs, need to be fixed, not circumvented. "Level geometry", ie walls, containers etc... Don't shoot it if it is close. Not that hard for most people to see those things when they are literally right in front of them. I've addressed allies and the frustration that hitting allies can lead to and provided two solutions that won't force a lull as your suggestion would and the lull can be bypassed with some skill, unlike your suggestion. Players predict where hitscan shots will go by aiming - aim accounts for direction of shot (applicable), spread (applicable), arc (not applicable), travel time(not applicable), distance(applicable in terms of damage falloff) and target vector (not applicable for flick shots styles, applicable for leading aiming styles, even with hitscan weapons). I stated that quite clearly, but I put spread in bold for you this time around so you don't miss it and went so far as to show how the various aspects of aiming comes into play with hitscan in brackets. For what it is worth, those aren't the only factors. I suggest you take the time to understand the mechanics that goes into taking a shot. This is your second failed attempt at ridicule. Learn from it. 36 minutes ago, Teridax68 said: How is it a "failed skill check" when an ally suddenly moves into the line of fire? What was the player expected to do during the split-second where the shot was travelling and the ally suddenly veered into a collision course? Shooting an ally is failed skill check due to relative positioning to teammates, target selection given your position, selected projectile travel path and reaction time. The ally also failed a skill check in terms of the ally's positioning and vector. Is it a tough skill check? Yes. Is self-damage a harsh penalty given how easy it is to fail that skill check and given the skill check can be failed mainly due to the ally, especially given the movement in Warframe and ping? Yes. I already stated that as well. 43 minutes ago, Teridax68 said: "We don't know" is a rather weak attempt to obfuscate the fact that feedback for removing self-damage was always much more frequent than the reverse, and that to this day the handful of advocates for self-damage on these forums tend to be met with greater opposition. The fact that this change was implemented, and so in response to player feedback, should itself be enough of an indicator. I'm keeping perspective whilst your wording is deceptive. Saying the removal of self-damage was done to the joy of most, save for the vocal minority, implies only the vocal minority was opposed to it. This is not the case. Truth is, we actually don't know what percentage of the playerbase was happy about the change initially and we don't know how many of them are still happy about it, directly or indirectly. What I do know, is I find more and more players saying they aren't playing co-op, because everything gets nuked by allies using AoE weapons. They find it boring and subsequently quit, because they played Warframe for the co-op aspect. I find players seeing missions as boring because everything gets killed by AoE weapons before they can get to it and they eventually they quit as well. I'm trying to keep an objective perspective. I say "We don't know", because we don't know. A majority of players may still be happy with the removal of self-damage, but it doesn't appear to be the vast majority, not anymore at least (if it ever was), but we don't know to what degree. Based on more recent threads, which is an incomplete sample, it doesn't appear the vast majority (85%+) are happy about it as you people like you would have others to believe, but perhaps the majority (50%+) still is - there are threads praising the removal of self-damage removal with many agreeing in those threads and there are threads advocating for the return of self-damage, with many agreeing in those threads. Hell, look at the replies in this very thread. 1 hour ago, Teridax68 said: Players shooting at their feet with AoE was happening before the melee nerfs, and the post you are replying to proposes solutions already. Players shooting at their feet is a tactic encountered far more often post self-damage removal, because the inherent disadvantage (self-damage) was replaced by a more easily bypassed mechanic. We had the ridiculousness of melee spam, now we have the ridiculousness of "AoE at feet" spam, since ranged weapons recently got an update and buff. 1 hour ago, Teridax68 said: If the other AoE weapons "don't see as much play", how are they "still very strong"? What is their play rate relative to other weapons? The Zarr, which you seem to believe is one of these "very strong" weapons, had a 0.47% usage rate in 2020, at a time when the Kuva Bramma dominated already. Before we start talking changes, it would help to first get one's facts right. Look up "Appeal to Popularity". Popularity doesn't equal strength. By your logic the Dread is stronger than both the Bubonico and Kuva Tonkor. Even the MK1-Paris is apparently stronger, because it is more popular? That's not how you measure how powerful a weapon is. What's next? Excalibur is stronger than Excalibur Umbra because it is more popular? Third failed attempt at ridicule, Definitely learn from this one. That was a terrible attempt at discerning whether a weapon is strong or not. You can feel a little shame for this one. 1 hour ago, Teridax68 said: You are the one assuming mass ineptitude out of the playerbase, not me. Clearly, players did not like having to "figure out how to not blast themselves in the face", and so enough to push for its removal which, it bears repeating, happened already, and quite some time ago now. I would rather move forward and see how to address outliers (because again, the issue is with outliers, not an entire class of weapons), rather than even attempt to reintroduce an almost universally loathed mechanic out of sheer deliberate ignorance of why that mechanic was removed to begin with. How am I assuming player ineptitude if I very clearly state I believe players can learn to play with that mechanic? There you go again with the "almost universally loathed mechanic". Have you read through the replies on this very thread? A few people don't want it back, some of whom seem more concerned about dying due to hitting teammates than the environment, a few people do want it back, one is willing to budge on it and one player wants it back and wants to kill teammates with it as well. Self damage was not as universally loathed as you claim. There is no ignorance as to why it was removed, though I will say I don't believe the "Chroma abused the mechanic for buffs" was the biggest reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)Lollybomb Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 Obviously you never play on most of the tilesets because if you did you'd know how absurdly touchy the "out of bounds" areas are. "Oh, you went 2 inches below this platform, but still caught yourself and were halfway to jumping out? Screw you. Have a reset and hard landing just because." And that's when there's an obvious pit. There are so many places that are "out of bounds" that don't even look like it, it's not even funny. Oh yeah, sometimes there are even out of bounds areas mistakenly put IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROOM. Hey, anyone else remember when doing isolation vaults, you couldn't enter them without getting reset like 3 times in a row? Good times... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teridax68 Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 11 hours ago, Silligoose said: You stated: I pointed out your nonsense: It applies to many factors beyond the armchair and beyond the internet. It doesn't take a genius to not kill kill themselves with rocket launchers in games. It doesn't take an unreasonable amount of perception or precision to not hit something 7m away from you in Warframe. Again, it only requires mediocre skill in those categories. Your weapon has a 7m explosive radius? Shoot things more than 7m away. Enemy closer than that? Jump away from it, or don't shoot. use your melee, or your secondary, or an ability. Really not hard. That's not minimizing the skill requirement, that's just how little skill it requires. Not sure why you make it sound like some amazing feat or why you stated the factors I mentioned were barely applicable "beyond the internet" in the first place, other than an attempt at ridicule. They are everyday things people do without even needing to consciously focus on it. Your attempt at ridicule failed miserably. Don't feel shame. Just learn from it. Whoosh. To clarify: you've completely missed the point, because while basic dexterity for sure does apply to aiming in general, the issue is that you have no concept of its limitations, and try to attribute all of the problems of self-damage to avoidable human error, which is something one only does when arguing on the internet, rather than actually experiencing the thing in question. Sure, a lot of instances of self-damage and self-stagger do come down to human error... but not all of them do, and that's the issue. When a projectile catches on level geometry it should normally pass through due to poorly-set boundaries, that's not an error on the player's part. When an exploding projectile catches on a player who suddenly moved into its line of fire, that's not the fault of the player who shot the projectile. When a projectile rebounds at a weird, unpredictable angle, or has a delay in its explosion as sometimes happens, that's not something the player can always anticipate. The faster the player moves through the environment, and the faster things move around them, the more difficult it becomes to anticipate where shots will land, and players in Warframe move very fast. Pontificating about how you find it all so easy may perhaps make you feel better about yourself, but it does nothing to explain the reasons why self-damage was removed in the first place. 11 hours ago, Silligoose said: Self-damage was in the game for the majority of it's run. Of course it was designed around that. By this asinine logic, this game was designed around Operators, fishing, and mining, and in a few years will cease to have been designed around self-damage. This game's initial tilesets are all cramped and had players fight the majority of the time in close combat, which is still largely the case. That is the opposite of being designed around explosive self-damage. 11 hours ago, Silligoose said: At some stage, the game did change, however. It seems as though balance, especially endgame balance, was neglected for quite some time in the past. That time seems to be coming to an end, given some of the recent content focused more on endgame and more recent rebalancing. This isn't about perceiving the playerbase as unskilled, it's about unskilled play being rewarded to greatly, whilst at the same time, impacting other players negatively. There is a big difference. I believe most players have the skill to use explosive weapons effectively, but they choose not to because it is more efficient, or at the very least, easier, not to. This isn't about elitism. Players are doing missions at endgame while watching something else, because that's just how easy it has become. Ease breeds lack of interest, which breeds disinterest and eventually, lack of retention. The upcoming New War's enemy and/or boss mechanics will show us if DE has decided to continue with easy, shallow gameplay or not, based on how the enemies and/or bosses in the new content function: If the gameplay lacks deeper mechanics, they probably chose for Warframe to go into the more shallow route. If the mechanics lead to the potential of more dynamic play and counterplay, they probably chose for Warframe to be more than a superficial shooter. Time will tell, though based on more recent content, I'm leaning towards the latter. Being convinced that the game is being tailored towards unskilled people is elitism, whether you like it or not. There are plenty of ways to advocate for better skill-testing in a manner that does not revolve so obsessively around perceived levels of playerbase skill. 11 hours ago, Silligoose said: Poor mapping, or bugs, need to be fixed, not circumvented. "Level geometry", ie walls, containers etc... Don't shoot it if it is close. Do you even play Warframe? 11 hours ago, Silligoose said: Not that hard for most people to see those things when they are literally right in front of them. I've addressed allies and the frustration that hitting allies can lead to and provided two solutions that won't force a lull as your suggestion would and the lull can be bypassed with some skill, unlike your suggestion. So, effectively, your solutions solve nothing. 11 hours ago, Silligoose said: Players predict where hitscan shots will go by aiming - aim accounts for direction of shot (applicable), spread (applicable), arc (not applicable), travel time(not applicable), distance(applicable in terms of damage falloff) and target vector (not applicable for flick shots styles, applicable for leading aiming styles, even with hitscan weapons). I stated that quite clearly, but I put spread in bold for you this time around so you don't miss it and went so far as to show how the various aspects of aiming comes into play with hitscan in brackets. For what it is worth, those aren't the only factors. I suggest you take the time to understand the mechanics that goes into taking a shot. This is your second failed attempt at ridicule. Learn from it. I don't think I need to attempt to ridicule anyone else for it to happen here organically. To be clear, hitscan means your shot has no projectile, and hits the target as soon as the shot is fired. This means there is no prediction whatsoever: you point at whatever you want to hit, and you hit it. Learn from it. 11 hours ago, Silligoose said: Shooting an ally is failed skill check due to relative positioning to teammates, target selection given your position, selected projectile travel path and reaction time. The ally also failed a skill check in terms of the ally's positioning and vector. Is it a tough skill check? Yes. Is self-damage a harsh penalty given how easy it is to fail that skill check and given the skill check can be failed mainly due to the ally, especially given the movement in Warframe and ping? Yes. I already stated that as well. How does "relative positioning to teammates" count as a failed skill check? Or "target selection", for that matter? Everyone in a team is going to be attacking the same crowd of enemies, and no player is going to be able to control where their three teammates will be going from moment to moment. You seem to be asking for players to split off and each cover some entirely separate corner of the tileset in order to avoid the mere possibility of accidentally running into each other which, I'm sorry to say, is not how Warframe works. With a bit more time spent playing Warframe, perhaps even an immediate refresher, this should be obvious. 11 hours ago, Silligoose said: I'm keeping perspective whilst your wording is deceptive. Saying the removal of self-damage was done to the joy of most, save for the vocal minority, implies only the vocal minority was opposed to it. This is not the case. Truth is, we actually don't know what percentage of the playerbase was happy about the change initially and we don't know how many of them are still happy about it, directly or indirectly. What I do know, is I find more and more players saying they aren't playing co-op, because everything gets nuked by allies using AoE weapons. They find it boring and subsequently quit, because they played Warframe for the co-op aspect. I find players seeing missions as boring because everything gets killed by AoE weapons before they can get to it and they eventually they quit as well. I'm trying to keep an objective perspective. I say "We don't know", because we don't know. A majority of players may still be happy with the removal of self-damage, but it doesn't appear to be the vast majority, not anymore at least (if it ever was), but we don't know to what degree. Based on more recent threads, which is an incomplete sample, it doesn't appear the vast majority (85%+) are happy about it as you people like you would have others to believe, but perhaps the majority (50%+) still is - there are threads praising the removal of self-damage removal with many agreeing in those threads and there are threads advocating for the return of self-damage, with many agreeing in those threads. Hell, look at the replies in this very thread. Yes, I have looked at the replies on this very thread, and seeing a majority of opposition to self-damage. It is your own wording that is deceptive, as you are deliberately trying to create a climate of uncertainty that you then want to rely on to artificially inflate support for your dead cause. Moreover, you seem to be trying to appropriate criticism that doesn't actually relate to it -- I too have seen players post that they don't want to play co-op, but because enemies get nuked by warframes with innate nuking capabilities, like Mesa or Saryn, not explosive spammers, who are comparatively far less effective. If the only arguments you can rely on are manufactured ignorance and outright falsehoods, how solid a position do you think you have, really? 11 hours ago, Silligoose said: Players shooting at their feet is a tactic encountered far more often post self-damage removal, because the inherent disadvantage (self-damage) was replaced by a more easily bypassed mechanic. We had the ridiculousness of melee spam, now we have the ridiculousness of "AoE at feet" spam, since ranged weapons recently got an update and buff. None of this goalpost shifting does anything to counter the fact that shooting at one's feet existed before the melee nerfs or gun buffs, particularly as once again, the Bramma was a popular weapon even before then. Once again, the solution I proposed would help with this, since one would then only shoot at one's feet if that's what catches the most enemies at a time. 11 hours ago, Silligoose said: Look up "Appeal to Popularity". Popularity doesn't equal strength. By your logic the Dread is stronger than both the Bubonico and Kuva Tonkor. Even the MK1-Paris is apparently stronger, because it is more popular? That's not how you measure how powerful a weapon is. What's next? Excalibur is stronger than Excalibur Umbra because it is more popular? Third failed attempt at ridicule, Definitely learn from this one. That was a terrible attempt at discerning whether a weapon is strong or not. You can feel a little shame for this one. Okay, so now we're misunderstanding statistics now, got it. Usage statistics aren't an "appeal to popularity", because it has nothing to do with people believing in an opinion that may be right or wrong. What they do reflect, however, is a rough measure of how strong those frames, weapons, etc. are relative to one another, which is why the Bramma and Ignis Wraith are predictably at the top. You talk about how I try to ridicule you, but seem unaware that trying so hard to condescend while demonstrating wilful ignorance of absolutely basic stuff will do the trick regardless of others' input. 11 hours ago, Silligoose said: How am I assuming player ineptitude if I very clearly state I believe players can learn to play with that mechanic? Putting aside how you did state outright that this game had become geared towards unskilled players, the very fact that you assume players have some sort of skill deficit that they need to learn to overcome is itself a pretty dead giveaway. 11 hours ago, Silligoose said: There you go again with the "almost universally loathed mechanic". Have you read through the replies on this very thread? A few people don't want it back, some of whom seem more concerned about dying due to hitting teammates than the environment, a few people do want it back, one is willing to budge on it and one player wants it back and wants to kill teammates with it as well. Self damage was not as universally loathed as you claim. There is no ignorance as to why it was removed, though I will say I don't believe the "Chroma abused the mechanic for buffs" was the biggest reason. Ah yes, the existence of a handful of vocal complainers on one forum thread makes all the difference... but only if they also believe in the same thing as you. If it's a majority of people who believe in the opposite, either we don't know, or they don't matter. As it stands, players advocated for the removal of self-damage for years, something DE themselves were against for a time, until they eventually caved and removed it. It is perhaps time you dealt with that, and moved on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silligoose Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 1 hour ago, Teridax68 said: Whoosh. To clarify: you've completely missed the point, because while basic dexterity for sure does apply to aiming in general, the issue is that you have no concept of its limitations, and try to attribute all of the problems of self-damage to avoidable human error, which is something one only does when arguing on the internet, rather than actually experiencing the thing in question. Sure, a lot of instances of self-damage and self-stagger do come down to human error... but not all of them do, and that's the issue. When a projectile catches on level geometry it should normally pass through due to poorly-set boundaries, that's not an error on the player's part. When an exploding projectile catches on a player who suddenly moved into its line of fire, that's not the fault of the player who shot the projectile. When a projectile rebounds at a weird, unpredictable angle, or has a delay in its explosion as sometimes happens, that's not something the player can always anticipate. The faster the player moves through the environment, and the faster things move around them, the more difficult it becomes to anticipate where shots will land, and players in Warframe move very fast. Pontificating about how you find it all so easy may perhaps make you feel better about yourself, but it does nothing to explain the reasons why self-damage was removed in the first place. I've gone through what could cause self-damage. I've addressed factors beyond a player's control. 1 hour ago, Teridax68 said: By this asinine logic, this game was designed around Operators, fishing, and mining, and in a few years will cease to have been designed around self-damage. This game's initial tilesets are all cramped and had players fight the majority of the time in close combat, which is still largely the case. That is the opposite of being designed around explosive self-damage. The game was designed around explosive weapons doing self-damage, but not exclusively around that one mechanic alone, as it was balanced around various mechanics. Both you and I should have used "balanced with self-damage in mind", instead of "around", since it can be misunderstood. Here is a video from 2014, showing even back then some tilesets are tight, some tilesets are more open and within the tilesets, certain sections will be more cramped, while other areas are open. Your assertion that all maps were cramped is inaccurate. Players choosing close quarter combat is a choice based on player preferences, not a forced choice as a result of the most map designs only being cramped. You can clearly see long sightlines were available in tilesets 7 years ago. 1 hour ago, Teridax68 said: Being convinced that the game is being tailored towards unskilled people is elitism, whether you like it or not. There are plenty of ways to advocate for better skill-testing in a manner that does not revolve so obsessively around perceived levels of playerbase skill. We'll have to agree to disagree. 1 hour ago, Teridax68 said: Do you even play Warframe? Yes. 1 hour ago, Teridax68 said: So, effectively, your solutions solve nothing. They'd solve the issue people had getting killed by self-damage as a result of hitting an ally, which played a massive role in why people were upset with self-damage and still plays a massive role regarding why some do not want self-damage in the game. They'd alleviate the AoE spam we currently have. They'd introduce a better balance to AoE ranged weapons (though damage needs to be addressed as well in some cases) than we currently have and decrease the use of "shoot at your feet" tactics. 1 hour ago, Teridax68 said: Yes, I have looked at the replies on this very thread, and seeing a majority of opposition to self-damage. It is your own wording that is deceptive, as you are deliberately trying to create a climate of uncertainty that you then want to rely on to artificially inflate support for your dead cause. Moreover, you seem to be trying to appropriate criticism that doesn't actually relate to it -- I too have seen players post that they don't want to play co-op, but because enemies get nuked by warframes with innate nuking capabilities, like Mesa or Saryn, not explosive spammers, who are comparatively far less effective. If the only arguments you can rely on are manufactured ignorance and outright falsehoods, how solid a position do you think you have, really? I'm not creating a climate of uncertainty, there is one. In this very thread it is quite even regarding whether people are against self damage or not. Even some of those who are against what self-damage was in Warframe, don't seem against the idea of self-damage, but rather how self-damage penalties were too harsh in terms of instant deaths resulting from a mistake, or how self-damage resulted from shooting allies. I'm sure there are players who also don't want to play co-op as a result of Warframe AoE abitlities, both in terms of damage or stunlocking. In SP you'll hardly ever see a Saryn nuking the map though. Mesa sometimes makes an appearance. You will find ranged AoE range weapons nuking rooms far more often than Warframe abilities doing so. Seems AoE being too effective overall is a reason some players go solo and/or quit. Thanks for the contribution. 2 hours ago, Teridax68 said: None of this goalpost shifting does anything to counter the fact that shooting at one's feet existed before the melee nerfs or gun buffs, particularly as once again, the Bramma was a popular weapon even before then. Once again, the solution I proposed would help with this, since one would then only shoot at one's feet if that's what catches the most enemies at a time. I didn't say the tactic started when melee was nerfed. I said we encounter it more now since the melee nerf. It started when self-damage was removed. That is pretty obvious. It has become more prevalent at all levels of play since the recent release of Primary and Secondary Arcanes and nerf to melee. Why are you trying to debate this? Your suggestion would help, as I've stated before, but it forces a lull. Personally I am not a fan and feel there are better solutions. To each his own. 2 hours ago, Teridax68 said: Okay, so now we're misunderstanding statistics now, got it. Usage statistics aren't an "appeal to popularity", because it has nothing to do with people believing in an opinion that may be right or wrong. What they do reflect, however, is a rough measure of how strong those frames, weapons, etc. are relative to one another, which is why the Bramma and Ignis Wraith are predictably at the top. You talk about how I try to ridicule you, but seem unaware that trying so hard to condescend while demonstrating wilful ignorance of absolutely basic stuff will do the trick regardless of others' input. Determining whether a weapon is strong or not, based solely on usage statistics, is an Appeal to Popularity. That is what you did. That was your argument: The Zarr isn't strong because it isn't used much. Wrong. Usage statistics shows what is popular, but not necessarily what is strong. Popularity is dependent on many factors, including availability, hype, ease of use, how enjoyable it is etc and yes, relative power, amongst other things. You made the mistake of equating popularity to strength alone. 2 hours ago, Teridax68 said: I don't think I need to attempt to ridicule anyone else for it to happen here organically. To be clear, hitscan means your shot has no projectile, and hits the target as soon as the shot is fired. This means there is no prediction whatsoever: you point at whatever you want to hit, and you hit it. Learn from it. I know this. It is why I said travel time and arc are not applicable regarding the mechanics factored in when aiming with hitscan (in brackets). Lol. 2 hours ago, Teridax68 said: How does "relative positioning to teammates" count as a failed skill check? Or "target selection", for that matter? Everyone in a team is going to be attacking the same crowd of enemies, and no player is going to be able to control where their three teammates will be going from moment to moment. You seem to be asking for players to split off and each cover some entirely separate corner of the tileset in order to avoid the mere possibility of accidentally running into each other which, I'm sorry to say, is not how Warframe works. With a bit more time spent playing Warframe, perhaps even an immediate refresher, this should be obvious. It is a skill check in any game where one's bullets can hit and be stopped by allies, regardless of whether you can damage allies. It is still a skill check in Warframe, even without self-damage. If an ally is between you and a target, you either move to attain line of sight (LoS) and have a clear line of fire, or you choose a different target to which you have LoS. and a clear line of fire. If you don't do either and shoot anyway with an ally in the way, you fail this skill check, due to improper relative positioning and target selection, with the penalty being your shot goes to waste and you can get staggered, depending on gear. Players pass this skill-check almost continuously in most co-op missions. You make it out to be some high-skill play requiring tremendous skill in various categories, but it isn't. You probably passed that skill-check almost continuously in your last co-op Warframe mission without even realizing it. 2 hours ago, Teridax68 said: Ah yes, the existence of a handful of vocal complainers on one forum thread makes all the difference... but only if they also believe in the same thing as you. If it's a majority of people who believe in the opposite, either we don't know, or they don't matter. As it stands, players advocated for the removal of self-damage for years, something DE themselves were against for a time, until they eventually caved and removed it. It is perhaps time you dealt with that, and moved on. Well, a handful of players here, a handful of players there, another handful somewhere else. It adds up. How much do these players matter? I honestly don't know. It depends on the impact it has on the game. on player retention, income generated etc. If more and more people stop playing as a direct, or indirect result of the removal of self-damage and the current replacement, it may matter quite a bit. Beyond that, DE's vision for the game could trump whichever view is prevalent. Time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teridax68 Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: I've gone through what could cause self-damage. I've addressed factors beyond a player's control. Where? All you've done is still try to blame the player for those factors. 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: The game was designed around explosive weapons doing self-damage, but not exclusively around that one mechanic alone, as it was balanced around various mechanics. Both you and I should have used "balanced with self-damage in mind", instead of "around", since it can be misunderstood. Here is a video from 2014, showing even back then some tilesets are tight, some tilesets are more open and within the tilesets, certain sections will be more cramped, while other areas are open. Your assertion that all maps were cramped is inaccurate. Players choosing close quarter combat is a choice based on player preferences, not a forced choice as a result of the most map designs only being cramped. You can clearly see long sightlines were available in tilesets 7 years ago. It is disingenuous to use the Defense map from the old Corpus tileset as an example of the tileset itself, given that it's a static tile, and even then, as you should recall, that area is itself full of cramped spaces, in a tileset whose tiles were consistently cramped themselves. 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: We'll have to agree to disagree. As pointed out already, your disagreement is irrelevant. Out of all the ways to argue for challenge, pretending that the entirety of a game's playerbase is beneath your preferred skill level is elitist, whether you like it or not. 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: Yes. I have to question this, because if you did lately at all and were expressing yourself honestly, you would have noticed that this game is full of bugs and poor implementation. This extends to tilesets that are full of random bits and pieces of level geometry whose extensions aren't always easy to catch (or visible at all), but that are easy to snag onto when moving and shooting. 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: They'd solve the issue people had getting killed by self-damage as a result of hitting an ally, which played a massive role in why people were upset with self-damage and still plays a massive role regarding why some do not want self-damage in the game. They'd alleviate the AoE spam we currently have. They'd introduce a better balance to AoE ranged weapons (though damage needs to be addressed as well in some cases) than we currently have and decrease the use of "shoot at your feet" tactics. So, effectively, they would mitigate a problem you would yourself want to create, nerf an entire class of weapons where most do not need to be nerfed, while only having a chance to address the actual problem cases. Given how self-damage failed to balance the Bramma while it was still around, the only evidence around suggests that your proposal would not in fact succeed at its stated goals, and only reintroduce problems that DE has already addressed. Remind me again why any of this is a good idea? 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: I'm not creating a climate of uncertainty, there is one. No, there isn't. Self-damage has already been removed, and so in response to player feedback. The existence of a vocal minority on one forum thread does not contradict this, and as such you are continuing to grasp at straws to give your position more credence than it actually has. 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: I'm sure there are players who also don't want to play co-op as a result of Warframe AoE abitlities, both in terms of damage or stunlocking. In SP you'll hardly ever see a Saryn nuking the map though. Mesa sometimes makes an appearance. You will find ranged AoE range weapons nuking rooms far more often than Warframe abilities doing so. Seems AoE being too effective overall is a reason some players go solo and/or quit. Thanks for the contribution. Yes, AoE from warframes, not explosive weapons. If you disagree, feel free to list the threads where players talk about quitting due to explosive weapon spam, instead of trying to hijack and distort entirely different threads to suit your agenda. 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: I didn't say the tactic started when melee was nerfed. I said we encounter it more now since the melee nerf. So this is a lie: 21 hours ago, Silligoose said: Beyond that, there needs to be a consideration regarding the impact lack of self-damage has on the balance of the game and mechanics. Melee was nerfed recently, in part due to how ridiculous it was that players were zipping around the map doing melee combos, regardless of whether there were enemies around or not and still being exceedingly efficient. What do we have now? Players running around the map shooting at their feet with AoE. No need for much tactics or aim, although more than the melee-spam crowd. Just run around and shoot your feet. it is still pretty ridiculous. You should perhaps avoid drawing further attention to your slip-ups through easily disprovable denial if you wish to avoid the ridicule you so fear. 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: It started when self-damage was removed. That is pretty obvious. It has become more prevalent at all levels of play since the recent release of Primary and Secondary Arcanes and nerf to melee. Why are you trying to debate this? I am not debating whether or not this strategy exists, I am pointing out that you first relied on an improper chronology to write a false narrative, then backtracked by flat-out lying when it was pointed out you had missed such a "pretty obvious" fact. You were wrong, it happens to us all. Why are you trying to debate this? 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: Your suggestion would help, as I've stated before, but it forces a lull. Personally I am not a fan and feel there are better solutions. To each his own. Ah, so it's not even about improving the game, it's about changing the game to suit your own personal preferences, regardless of facts or reason. Interesting. 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: Determining whether a weapon is strong or not, based solely on usage statistics, is an Appeal to Popularity. That is what you did. That was your argument: The Zarr isn't strong because it isn't used much. Wrong. Usage statistics shows what is popular, but not necessarily what is strong. Popularity is dependent on many factors, including availability, hype, ease of use, how enjoyable it is etc and yes, relative power, amongst other things. You made the mistake of equating popularity to strength alone. The popularity of those weapons stems directly from their strength, and no plausible argument exists for why those weapons would be used in disproportion to their effectiveness. As pointed out already, this is not an appeal to popularity, this is an appeal to independently verifiable statistics that you are attempting to dismiss because they do not suit your personal narrative. Meanwhile, you have failed to suggest an alternative hypothesis for why the Zarr would be unpopular despite presumed excessive power, much less shown any equivalent evidence supporting your claim that it is overpowered. Once again, your position is directly contradicted by established fact, and in response to this your strategy has been to try to erode and dismiss any and all facts on the matter, while simultaneously expecting to be taken on your word. Why should anyone do that, anyway? 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: I know this. It is why I said travel time and arc are not applicable regarding the mechanics factored in when aiming with hitscan (in brackets). Lol. If you knew this, then why would you insist that hitscan shots are predictive? The shot is instant. Again, you are plainly wrong on this, but continue to try to argue, rather than simply move on. 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: It is a skill check in any game where one's bullets can hit and be stopped by allies, regardless of whether you can damage allies. It is still a skill check in Warframe, even without self-damage. If an ally is between you and a target, you either move to attain line of sight (LoS) and have a clear line of fire, or you choose a different target to which you have LoS. and a clear line of fire. If you don't do either and shoot anyway with an ally in the way, you fail this skill check, due to improper relative positioning and target selection, with the penalty being your shot goes to waste and you can get staggered, depending on gear. This is physically impossible to do if allies move while your projectile is in-flight, and even with hitscan weapons, the unpredictable and rapid nature of player movement makes blocking shots a matter of accident, not skill-testing. It is idiotic to argue that anything that exists exists to test the player's skill, particularly when this kind of "skill check" pits players against one another, with the punishment being frustration induced by one player against another. 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: Players pass this skill-check almost continuously in most co-op missions. You make it out to be some high-skill play requiring tremendous skill in various categories, but it isn't. You probably passed that skill-check almost continuously in your last co-op Warframe mission without even realizing it. If by "passing the skill check" you mean that my gameplay did not involve being continuously blocked by an ally, yes. If you mean that this was an act of deliberate gameplay against my allies, no, even though that is what a skill check would incur. At this point, you are distorting the very meaning of skill checks so much that they're ceasing to make sense: why is this a skill check? Why does it have to be a skill check? What is the benefit to skill-checking the player against their allies when firing, particularly when the only instance of punishment comes from occasional random moments of frustration? 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: Well, a handful of players here, a handful of players there, another handful somewhere else. It adds up. How much do these players matter? I honestly don't know. Ah, so because you don't know, it can be anything you want it to be, presumably. That's unfortunately not how it works, particularly since even on here you are in the minority. What you appear to have failed to acknowledge is that while the number of proponents of self-damage may add up by whichever insignificant amount over a handful of threads, so does the amount of opponents of self-damage, and if this thread is anything to go by, they add up more. 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: It depends on the impact it has on the game. on player retention, income generated etc. If more and more people stop playing as a direct, or indirect result of the removal of self-damage and the current replacement, it may matter quite a bit. Ah, so now the game will die unless the developers do exactly what you want, in this case reinstate self-damage. Again, how exactly are you expecting to convince me or anyone else with this? 19 minutes ago, Silligoose said: Beyond that, DE's vision for the game could trump whichever view is prevalent. Time will tell. Indeed, and so far DE's vision for the game is one without self-damage, QED. Thanks for the contribution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silligoose Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 6 hours ago, Teridax68 said: Where? All you've done is still try to blame the player for those factors. On 2021-10-04 at 9:43 PM, Silligoose said: Invisible boundaries should be considered a bug or poor mapping and is not a valid reason to be against self-damage: Bugs and poor mapping need to be fixed, not circumvented. On 2021-10-04 at 9:43 PM, Silligoose said: I agree self-damage punishment due to failing that specific skill-check may be a bit to harsh, given the movement in Warframe and ping. Should I specifically explain how bugs, inaccurate mapping and ping is beyond a player's control? 6 hours ago, Teridax68 said: It is disingenuous to use the Defense map from the old Corpus tileset as an example of the tileset itself, given that it's a static tile, and even then, as you should recall, that area is itself full of cramped spaces, in a tileset whose tiles were consistently cramped themselves. What is disingenuous is you claiming all maps were cramped when they weren't. What is disingenuous is you ignoring the first map in that same video also showing very clearly open spaces. 6 hours ago, Teridax68 said: As pointed out already, your disagreement is irrelevant. Out of all the ways to argue for challenge, pretending that the entirety of a game's playerbase is beneath your preferred skill level is elitist, whether you like it or not. I do not think the playerbase is beneath my preferred skill level. I think the player base is good enough to deal with self-damage. I've made this clear. 6 hours ago, Teridax68 said: I have to question this, because if you did lately at all and were expressing yourself honestly, you would have noticed that this game is full of bugs and poor implementation. This extends to tilesets that are full of random bits and pieces of level geometry whose extensions aren't always easy to catch (or visible at all), but that are easy to snag onto when moving and shooting. I don't facecheck walls and when using explosive weapons. I am proficient enough not to shoot walls right, or rocks, or containers, or just terrain in general when it is right in front of me. That may be why our experiences differ. 6 hours ago, Teridax68 said: So, effectively, they would mitigate a problem you would yourself want to create, nerf an entire class of weapons where most do not need to be nerfed, while only having a chance to address the actual problem cases. Given how self-damage failed to balance the Bramma while it was still around, the only evidence around suggests that your proposal would not in fact succeed at its stated goals, and only reintroduce problems that DE has already addressed. Remind me again why any of this is a good idea? 6 hours ago, Teridax68 said: The popularity of those weapons stems directly from their strength, and no plausible argument exists for why those weapons would be used in disproportion to their effectiveness. As pointed out already, this is not an appeal to popularity, this is an appeal to independently verifiable statistics that you are attempting to dismiss because they do not suit your personal narrative. Meanwhile, you have failed to suggest an alternative hypothesis for why the Zarr would be unpopular despite presumed excessive power, much less shown any equivalent evidence supporting your claim that it is overpowered. Once again, your position is directly contradicted by established fact, and in response to this your strategy has been to try to erode and dismiss any and all facts on the matter, while simultaneously expecting to be taken on your word. Why should anyone do that, anyway? The Bramma was overpowered even with the self-damaging mechanic, but the self-damage mechanic was at least a balancing factor. Following removal of self-damage, the Bramma's use spiked to a point where it was almost three times more popular than anything else, because it was even more overpowered and the self-damage balancing mechanic, the inherent risk to wielding such a powerful weapon, was removed. Source: My suggestions are balancing mechanics that would decrease the efficiency and overall effectiveness of the "shoot at your feet" tactic. Your suggestion was to nerf the fire rate of explosive weapons. That nerfs the category as well and doesn't even address the problem of nuking things by shooting your feet. It seems you have absolutely no idea how strong explosive weapons are these days. Forget about your popularity contest graph and go see how strong they are. I have, in-game, but that is an unreasonable request to make of you, seeing as it would take multiple forma and potatoes for you to do so and it assumes you have access to endgame mods, which you may not. so at least the next best thing is to just take a look at what kind of damage the lesser explosive weapons can deal: MR5 Tonkor can deal 724,000+ damage in a single hit. Sustained DPS is stated to be around 359,0000, but it doesn't account for Primary Merciless' reload speed bonus. I can change the build around decrease damage per hit and increase increase the sustained DPS to over 450,000 by swapping out Bladed Rounds for Precision Strike. Make sure you apply the conditionals:https://overframe.gg/build/new/965/tonkor/?bs=WzEsOTY1LDMwLDEsW1s2MDQsNSwwXSxbNTUyMSwxMCwwXSxbNjA5LDEwLDBdLFs2MjUsNSwwXSxbNTUxOSwxMCwwXSxbNjUyLDUsMF0sWzYxMSwxMCwwXSxbNTUyMCwxMCwwXSxbMCwwLDNdLFs1NTA1LDUsMF1dXQ== I can set up a viral slash build with Hunter Munitions pumping out sustained DPS of over 460,000. I'm sure you know how strong Hunter Munitions is (personally I don't like to use it, but it is incredibly effective in-game)https://overframe.gg/build/new/965/tonkor/?bs=WzEsOTY1LDMwLDEsW1s2ODgsNSwwXSxbNjA5LDEwLDBdLFs2MjUsNSwwXSxbNDU1NCwzLDBdLFs1NTE5LDEwLDBdLFs2NTIsNSwwXSxbNjExLDEwLDBdLFs1NTIwLDEwLDBdLFswLDAsM10sWzU1MDUsNSwwXV1d What about that "weak" little secondary, the Kulstar, that the bad man wants to nerf? Here's a little Viral Heat setup doing 275,000+ damage per hit, burst DPS of a little over 440,000. This is a secondary weapon, MR5 no less, doing that kind of damage. I don't believe Overframe accounts for the little cluster rockets, which means just under a third of the weapon's potential damage output is not even accounted for:https://overframe.gg/build/new/996/kulstar/?bs=WzEsOTk2LDMwLDEsW1szOTUsNSwwXSxbNDE2LDEwLDBdLFs1NTE4LDEwLDBdLFsxNDA3LDEwLDBdLFs0MTMsMTAsMF0sWzQzMyw1LDBdLFs0NDksNSwwXSxbNTUxNywxMCwyXSxbMCwwLDNdLFs1NTA4LDUsMF1dXQ== Go play around with those weapons in-game, or even just in overframe and see how they stack up against weapon that are more popular, like the Baza Prime, like the Arca Plasmor, like the Kuva Kohm, like the Dread, like the Hek, like the MK-1 Paris. Just see how their numbers stack up at the very least. Then account for the fact that explosive weapons can innately hit 5, 6, 10+ targets in an area without the need to line enemies up and it should be clear even though the other weapons mentioned are more popular and some can get close to the Tonkor's single-target damage numbers. even exceed them on paper in some cases, actual in-mission performance isn't even close, because the weapons mentioned above will almost never be able to hit 10+ enemies. They aren't as popular for a variety of reasons, as already mentioned, but it is not because they aren't powerful. Fact is, they are powerful - more powerful and efficient than many of the weapons more popular than them. The popularity contest is a poor measuring stick for weapon power. No one has to take my word for it. The maths is right there and the weapons are in the game ready for use. You wanted facts. There they are. Nice numbered facts showing their power, not biased, sentiment-based statistics foolishly misinterpreted and put forward as a means to assess power, as well as to attempt to ridicule (the irony is still hilarious). 6 hours ago, Teridax68 said: No, there isn't. Self-damage has already been removed, and so in response to player feedback. The existence of a vocal minority on one forum thread does not contradict this, and as such you are continuing to grasp at straws to give your position more credence than it actually has. It isn't just one thread. It isn't just the vocal minority either. That's what you don't understand or choose to be blind to. 6 hours ago, Teridax68 said: If you knew this, then why would you insist that hitscan shots are predictive? The shot is instant. Again, you are plainly wrong on this, but continue to try to argue, rather than simply move on. Aiming incorporates prediction. When using a weapon with spread, do you know exactly where it will hit? No. You have to predict where it is most likely to hit, even with hitscan. 6 hours ago, Teridax68 said: This is physically impossible to do if allies move while your projectile is in-flight, and even with hitscan weapons, the unpredictable and rapid nature of player movement makes blocking shots a matter of accident, not skill-testing. It is idiotic to argue that anything that exists exists to test the player's skill, particularly when this kind of "skill check" pits players against one another, with the punishment being frustration induced by one player against another. The skill is in the positioning. This is a basic principle in team games. Since you couldn't figure it out yourself, I'll just tell you: The vast majority of times you died due to self damage was your fault, at least in part. Your target selection was not suitable, or your positioning was not suitable, or your aim was bad, or your reaction time was too slow, or it was a combination of those things. Had your target selection been better, or your positioning been better, or your aim been better, or your reaction time been better, or a combination of those factors been better, you wouldn't have blown yourself up so much. You can pretend it was all random and beyond your control, or you can learn from your mistakes, improve and free up a mod slot, or use Frames with AoE ranged weapons without status immunity. I don't need status immunity to use AoE ranged weapons, because I learned from my mistakes. I learned what I could do better to prevent 99% of the self-damage/self-stagger shots. Up to you. 6 hours ago, Teridax68 said: If by "passing the skill check" you mean that my gameplay did not involve being continuously blocked by an ally, yes. If you mean that this was an act of deliberate gameplay against my allies, no, even though that is what a skill check would incur. At this point, you are distorting the very meaning of skill checks so much that they're ceasing to make sense: why is this a skill check? Why does it have to be a skill check? What is the benefit to skill-checking the player against their allies when firing, particularly when the only instance of punishment comes from occasional random moments of frustration? This skill-check is innate to physics: If something gets in your way, you are going to hit it. That the way it works. Don't want to hit something that is beyond your control? Change the situation so it is less likely to happen. Adjust your position. Adjust your target. Adjust your aim. The only way to get this innate skill check out of team games is to allow for bullets to pass through teammates, which feels stupid in a lot of games. 6 hours ago, Teridax68 said: Ah, so because you don't know, it can be anything you want it to be, presumably. That's unfortunately not how it works, particularly since even on here you are in the minority. What you appear to have failed to acknowledge is that while the number of proponents of self-damage may add up by whichever insignificant amount over a handful of threads, so does the amount of opponents of self-damage, and if this thread is anything to go by, they add up more. 6 hours ago, Teridax68 said: Ah, so now the game will die unless the developers do exactly what you want, in this case reinstate self-damage. Again, how exactly are you expecting to convince me or anyone else with this? 7 hours ago, Silligoose said: Well, a handful of players here, a handful of players there, another handful somewhere else. It adds up. How much do these players matter? I honestly don't know. It depends on the impact it has on the game. on player retention, income generated etc. If more and more people stop playing as a direct, or indirect result of the removal of self-damage and the current replacement, it may matter quite a bit. Beyond that, DE's vision for the game could trump whichever view is prevalent. Time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonXX Posted October 6, 2021 Share Posted October 6, 2021 17 hours ago, 73yearsold said: Asserting something doesn't make it so. I don't recognize either of those names. Believe whatever you want, if anything this is a step back as its in the denial vein from the "yeah, so what if I am" step forward. Quacks like a duck, waddles like duck, has feathers like a duck = its a duck. Good for you I guess? Once again don't need to know the thing to push towards it. Though ngl I find it a bit hard to believe in this time that someone hasn't heard at the very least of Soulsborne (Nioh could fly under the radar). 17 hours ago, (PSN)DoctorWho_90250 said: Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, Bloodborne, Nioh etc. etc. CrimsonXX believes it somehow gets you sexually aroused. I know, I know. An outrageous statement but that's the point being asserted...for some outrageous reason. Getting beaten down and "punished", then getting an ego boost to make up for a sad life outside of whatever = BSDM kink-ville. Also not remotely outrageous, tryhards have a near obsession with satisfying themselves in the "punish me harder" vein. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)DoctorWho_90250 Posted October 6, 2021 Share Posted October 6, 2021 2 hours ago, CrimsonXX said: Getting beaten down and "punished", then getting an ego boost to make up for a sad life outside of whatever = BSDM kink-ville. Also not remotely outrageous, tryhards have a near obsession with satisfying themselves in the "punish me harder" vein. Absolutely worthless take. If that's your only takeaway to those types of games, and you believe sexual arousal is attached to it somehow, then you truly one warped gamer. 2 hours ago, 73yearsold said: anything else you can tell me about my life with your magical crystal ball? CrimsonXX is truly beyond hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emolition Posted October 6, 2021 Share Posted October 6, 2021 It's time for Darkframes instead all the combat mechanics of dark souls but with the enemy amount of warframes and 2-3 hits will kill you if you don't block or dodge 50 enemies at the time =P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonXX Posted October 6, 2021 Share Posted October 6, 2021 16 hours ago, 73yearsold said: anything else you can tell me about my life with your magical crystal ball? rofl, well the username definitely fits given that out-dated cliche of "magic crystal ball". Setting that aside its basic reading of someone based on what they've presented, so unless you present more details and assuming I actually cared to put effort into reading more about your life I don't have any real interest on anything outside of what fits in regards to this thread. 13 hours ago, (PSN)DoctorWho_90250 said: Absolutely worthless take. If that's your only takeaway to those types of games, and you believe sexual arousal is attached to it somehow, then you truly one warped gamer. CrimsonXX is truly beyond hope. Do I think those people literally get shaking in their pants? No (I mean I wouldn't completely discount it but it'd be a minimal amount). Do I think there's a serotonin rush that they chase and that they likely do in fact swim in BDSM circles or would if they explored it? Definitely. I've also made it no secret that I have absolutely no respect or liking towards tryhards, so if you're aiming for some "have some respect" vein you're not going to find a target with me. Tryhards are the absolute worst, most elitist, most whining, and try to push their b.s. into every game they can; in other words no better than s$%t on the bottom of a shoe. rofl, yeah see that might count worth something if you were in any manner carrying of any significance to me. You're just some random likely tryhard on a forum. Though I also never asked or said I'm seeking "hope" anyway. Then again what's new with a tryhard acting like someone else needs to shift towards where they are? Absolutely nothing as its the usual case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)robotwars7 Posted October 6, 2021 Share Posted October 6, 2021 -never mind - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)Hooligonzo Posted October 6, 2021 Share Posted October 6, 2021 It cannot be understated that they did that, they did that for years, and they decided that wasn't working well for the game. Just like getting rid of Stamina. Just like wall running was clumsy so they got rid of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teridax68 Posted October 7, 2021 Share Posted October 7, 2021 On 2021-10-06 at 12:21 AM, Silligoose said: Should I specifically explain how bugs, inaccurate mapping and ping is beyond a player's control? You literally tried to blame the players still immediately after that part of your quote: On 2021-10-05 at 12:56 AM, Silligoose said: Poor mapping, or bugs, need to be fixed, not circumvented. "Level geometry", ie walls, containers etc... Don't shoot it if it is close. Strangely, your edited version of that quote seems to have omitted that part. You really should think twice about lying when you can be quoted on-demand. On 2021-10-06 at 12:21 AM, Silligoose said: What is disingenuous is you claiming all maps were cramped when they weren't. What is disingenuous is you ignoring the first map in that same video also showing very clearly open spaces. What is disingenous is you insisting maps weren't cramped when they not only were, but were infamous for it, the old Corpus Ship tileset in particular. What is disingenuous is you picking the Defense tile for the old tileset, its least characteristic tile and still one full of cramped spaces, as its illustrative example. On 2021-10-06 at 12:21 AM, Silligoose said: I do not think the playerbase is beneath my preferred skill level. I think the player base is good enough to deal with self-damage. I've made this clear. So this is a lie: On 2021-10-04 at 1:28 PM, Silligoose said: DE needs to realize the coddling of one demographic is leading to massive imbalances and the loss of other demographics. You spiel clearly seems to be that DE is pushing out the game's truly skilled players (presumably yourself included among them) while "coddling" its unskilled players. Moreover, your entire line of argumentation here for bringing back self-damage is that the playerbase needs to "get gud" and straight-up ignore all the valid reasons why self-damage was unpopular in the first place. On 2021-10-06 at 12:21 AM, Silligoose said: I don't facecheck walls and when using explosive weapons. I am proficient enough not to shoot walls right, or rocks, or containers, or just terrain in general when it is right in front of me. That may be why our experiences differ. Case in point: as with most other proponents of self-damage, you are overly focused on aggrandizing yourself at the expense of others, particularly those who disagree with you. You believe yourself to be one of the chosen few to truly know what it is to be skilled in Warframe, and anyone who opposes self-damage must only be doing so because they themselves are unskilled. As a result, you have locked yourself in an ivory tower of your own making, where you lament how distant Warframe and its playerbase have become from you, all while failing to realize that you are the one creating that distance in the first place. On 2021-10-06 at 12:21 AM, Silligoose said: The Bramma was overpowered even with the self-damaging mechanic, but the self-damage mechanic was at least a balancing factor. Following removal of self-damage, the Bramma's use spiked to a point where it was almost three times more popular than anything else, because it was even more overpowered and the self-damage balancing mechanic, the inherent risk to wielding such a powerful weapon, was removed. Source: By your own admission, the Bramma was dominant before even the removal of self-damage, despite what the above post suggests. How then was it a balancing factor? If not even one-shot damage was enough to rein it in, what would be? Losing all of your revives in one go? On 2021-10-06 at 12:21 AM, Silligoose said: My suggestions are balancing mechanics that would decrease the efficiency and overall effectiveness of the "shoot at your feet" tactic. Your "balancing mechanics" once again nerf a whole bunch of weapons that do not need nerfing, would be easily abusable by any frame that abused self-damage in the past, and as per the above would fail to address the actual outliers. It would make the game flat-out worse. On 2021-10-06 at 12:21 AM, Silligoose said: Your suggestion was to nerf the fire rate of explosive weapons. That nerfs the category as well and doesn't even address the problem of nuking things by shooting your feet. So this is also a lie: On 2021-10-04 at 4:11 PM, Teridax68 said: Whichever weapons are doing too much need more severe nerfs (the Bramma in particular I think needs a serious reduction to its initial shot's damage), and if the intent is to introduce more skill-testing, I'd say explosive weapons ought to be balanced around having very long times in-between shots: being able to kill multiple enemies in one go is obviously a defining strength of AoE weapons, but that I feel ought to be tempered by the fact that if you're not killing enough enemies per hit, you should be killing them slower than if you had attacked them individually with a single-target weapon. This would encourage aiming far more consistently than self-damage, and the punishment I think would be far more acceptable: not very many people enjoy getting staggered or damaged by their own weapon, but I'm willing to bet a lot more would consider it normal for a poorly-placed explosive shot to lead to a lull in combat (and moment of vulnerability) before they can try again. As per the above, I suggested to balance explosive weapons around a slow rate of fire. This necessarily implies that if reducing a weapon's rate of fire were to nerf it unduly, it should receive buffs that should counterbalance at least that, if not bring the weapon up to par if it is currently underperforming. If the only way you can attack my position is to straw man it, ask yourself if your own position is really that stable. On 2021-10-06 at 12:21 AM, Silligoose said: It seems you have absolutely no idea how strong explosive weapons are these days. Forget about your popularity contest graph and go see how strong they are. I have, in-game, but that is an unreasonable request to make of you, seeing as it would take multiple forma and potatoes for you to do so and it assumes you have access to endgame mods, which you may not. so at least the next best thing is to just take a look at what kind of damage the lesser explosive weapons can deal: "Trust me bro" isn't exactly a valid argument. Having played Warframe for a multiple of the time you have (you don't seem to have yet spent a night in the Plains of Eidolon, nor even maxed out a whole bunch of explosive weapons you are asking me to brush up on), I am aware of these weapons and how powerful they actually are, which is to say no more than the average weapon, save for a few notable exceptions. On 2021-10-06 at 12:21 AM, Silligoose said: MR5 Tonkor can deal 724,000+ damage in a single hit. Sustained DPS is stated to be around 359,0000, but it doesn't account for Primary Merciless' reload speed bonus. I can change the build around decrease damage per hit and increase increase the sustained DPS to over 450,000 by swapping out Bladed Rounds for Precision Strike. Make sure you apply the conditionals:https://overframe.gg/build/new/965/tonkor/?bs=WzEsOTY1LDMwLDEsW1s2MDQsNSwwXSxbNTUyMSwxMCwwXSxbNjA5LDEwLDBdLFs2MjUsNSwwXSxbNTUxOSwxMCwwXSxbNjUyLDUsMF0sWzYxMSwxMCwwXSxbNTUyMCwxMCwwXSxbMCwwLDNdLFs1NTA1LDUsMF1dXQ== I can set up a viral slash build with Hunter Munitions pumping out sustained DPS of over 460,000. I'm sure you know how strong Hunter Munitions is (personally I don't like to use it, but it is incredibly effective in-game)https://overframe.gg/build/new/965/tonkor/?bs=WzEsOTY1LDMwLDEsW1s2ODgsNSwwXSxbNjA5LDEwLDBdLFs2MjUsNSwwXSxbNDU1NCwzLDBdLFs1NTE5LDEwLDBdLFs2NTIsNSwwXSxbNjExLDEwLDBdLFs1NTIwLDEwLDBdLFswLDAsM10sWzU1MDUsNSwwXV1d What about that "weak" little secondary, the Kulstar, that the bad man wants to nerf? Here's a little Viral Heat setup doing 275,000+ damage per hit, burst DPS of a little over 440,000. This is a secondary weapon, MR5 no less, doing that kind of damage. I don't believe Overframe accounts for the little cluster rockets, which means just under a third of the weapon's potential damage output is not even accounted for:https://overframe.gg/build/new/996/kulstar/?bs=WzEsOTk2LDMwLDEsW1szOTUsNSwwXSxbNDE2LDEwLDBdLFs1NTE4LDEwLDBdLFsxNDA3LDEwLDBdLFs0MTMsMTAsMF0sWzQzMyw1LDBdLFs0NDksNSwwXSxbNTUxNywxMCwyXSxbMCwwLDNdLFs1NTA4LDUsMF1dXQ== Go play around with those weapons in-game, or even just in overframe and see how they stack up against weapon that are more popular, like the Baza Prime, like the Arca Plasmor, like the Kuva Kohm, like the Dread, like the Hek, like the MK-1 Paris. Just see how their numbers stack up at the very least. Then account for the fact that explosive weapons can innately hit 5, 6, 10+ targets in an area without the need to line enemies up and it should be clear even though the other weapons mentioned are more popular and some can get close to the Tonkor's single-target damage numbers. even exceed them on paper in some cases, actual in-mission performance isn't even close, because the weapons mentioned above will almost never be able to hit 10+ enemies. Okay, so a few things: Your selected builds are really obviously stilted, such as using a faction mod and Creeping Bullseye to artificially inflate the damage per shot. The very site you are using lists the Tonkor and the Kulstar as C-tier. Notably, the strongest secondaries for a while have been beam weapons, specifically the Kuva Nukor. Piling on mods and conditional does very little to support the presumed overpoweredness of these weapons, because guess what, those mods can be slotted on every other weapon too. The only thing you have managed to achieve with the above is that a) we deal crazy damage numbers in Warframe in general, and b) paper DPS itself remains a noob trap that the very site enabling it actively contradicts via a separate classification system. In fact, the resource you've listed gives a pretty damning indictment of explosive weapons, as only a minority among them rise above mediocrity. On 2021-10-06 at 12:21 AM, Silligoose said: They aren't as popular for a variety of reasons, as already mentioned, but it is not because they aren't powerful. Fact is, they are powerful - more powerful and efficient than many of the weapons more popular than them. The popularity contest is a poor measuring stick for weapon power. No one has to take my word for it. The maths is right there and the weapons are in the game ready for use. You wanted facts. There they are. Nice numbered facts showing their power, not biased, sentiment-based statistics foolishly misinterpreted and put forward as a means to assess power, as well as to attempt to ridicule (the irony is still hilarious). Ironically, you did put forth facts, just not the ones you expected. It seems the very site you linked provided a tier list that agrees entirely with what I've been saying so far, and overlaps pretty well with Warframe's own official stats to boot. Whoops. On 2021-10-06 at 12:21 AM, Silligoose said: It isn't just one thread. It isn't just the vocal minority either. That's what you don't understand or choose to be blind to. Okay, so which proportion of the playerbase is it, then? I am merely asking for evidence that you are not in fact the vocal minority you plainly are, and your only response seems to be shrill insistence that there could be more. Forgive me if that only manages to come across as a tad pathetic. On 2021-10-06 at 12:21 AM, Silligoose said: Aiming incorporates prediction. When using a weapon with spread, do you know exactly where it will hit? No. You have to predict where it is most likely to hit, even with hitscan. Hitscan weapons with a spread of shots, such as shotguns, still hit at the center, as you would know if you had ever hit a target with the center shot. When a weapon has less than 100% accuracy, the "spread" of where their shot will land is random, and therefore by definition impossible to predict. My best recommendation is that you drop this, as your attempts to argue on semantics here are embarrassing and do not particularly support your stance on explosive self-damage. On 2021-10-06 at 12:21 AM, Silligoose said: The skill is in the positioning. This is a basic principle in team games. Relative positioning to teammates isn't a "basic principle" in Warframe, unless you're talking about staying within Affinity range. You would perhaps know this by playing Warframe, but players bounce across the map at high speeds, each doing their own thing. A player could appear in front of another at any time, particularly as the game intentionally tries to funnel players around the same general zones within a tileset or larger map, and that is not an exercise or fault in positioning skill. You are, at best, improperly applying principles from other video games that evidently do not apply to Warframe, and at worst simply inventing excuses out of thin air, as you have done before. On 2021-10-06 at 12:21 AM, Silligoose said: Since you couldn't figure it out yourself, I'll just tell you: The vast majority of times you died due to self damage was your fault, at least in part. Your target selection was not suitable, or your positioning was not suitable, or your aim was bad, or your reaction time was too slow, or it was a combination of those things. Had your target selection been better, or your positioning been better, or your aim been better, or your reaction time been better, or a combination of those factors been better, you wouldn't have blown yourself up so much. You can pretend it was all random and beyond your control, or you can learn from your mistakes, improve and free up a mod slot, or use Frames with AoE ranged weapons without status immunity. I don't need status immunity to use AoE ranged weapons, because I learned from my mistakes. I learned what I could do better to prevent 99% of the self-damage/self-stagger shots. Up to you. This is a strangely bitter and personal diatribe coming from someone who hasn't actually seen me play. Not only did I not argue against self-damage from personal experience, even if I had, you have never actually witnessed me playing the game, given that we haven't yet played in the same mission. You are inventing the excuse that I am arguing from lack of skill not because that is the case (you couldn't even know even if it was), but because like the small handful of people arguing the same tired old points around this, this isn't actually about self-damage, this is about you desperately trying to feel superior to others in whichever way you can. This is why you lash out at my perceived lack of skill as you start to lose the argument more and more badly, and why you are unable to acknowledge the validity of opinions other than your own. On 2021-10-06 at 12:21 AM, Silligoose said: This skill-check is innate to physics: If something gets in your way, you are going to hit it. That the way it works. Don't want to hit something that is beyond your control? Change the situation so it is less likely to happen. Adjust your position. Adjust your target. Adjust your aim. The only way to get this innate skill check out of team games is to allow for bullets to pass through teammates, which feels stupid in a lot of games. Actually, I think allowing shots to pass through teammates would be a great idea for Warframe. Given how stupid it is to assume that players should "skill-check" themselves in a pub game by somehow trying to never find themselves in any other player's line of fire at any given moment (remind me how they do this, exactly?), having players simply not step on each others' toes in this manner would make combat flow much more smoothly, and reduce instances of players accidentally inconveniencing one another. Good suggestion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kentar_Evil Posted October 7, 2021 Share Posted October 7, 2021 No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.