AoE/Single Target Balancing

[(XBOX)BARLEYDAWG]

To start with I will use some examples to establish fundamental differences in scaling between single target weapons and AoE weapons. Then I will offer thoughts on how balance the two categories. 

 

Weapon A: single target, 100 damage per shot (no fall-off), can hit only one enemy per shot

Weapon B: AoE, 20 damage per shot (no fall-off), can hit five enemies per shot

Example 1: five enemies with 100 health each.

Weapon A takes five shots to kill every enemy with one kill per shot while Weapon B also takes five shots to kill every enemy with all five dying on the last shot. I am going to consider this as "balanced" since both weapons require the same amount of shots/time to kill all the enemies in this example.

Example 2: five enemies with four of them with 100 health and one of them with 1000 health.

Weapon A takes 14 shots to kill every enemy while Weapon B takes 50 shots to kill every enemy with nearly all of the shots spent on trying to kill the last enemy.

Example 3: five enemies with two of them with 100 health and three of them with 1000 health.

Weapon A takes 32 shots to kill all the enemies while Weapon B still takes 50 shots to kill all the enemies.

Example 4: five enemies with one health each.

Weapon A takes five shots to kill all the enemies while Weapon B only needs one shot to kill them all. This is more or less the state Warframe is in now with mods and abilities being able to buff damage to the point of one-shotting most enemies in most content.

 

From this we can see AoE is dependent on the max health of a single enemy whereas single target depends on both each enemy's health and the number of enemies. This makes single target weapons almost always objectively worse at dealing with large groups of enemies.

Some steps that could be taken to close the gap between the two weapon types (where necessary) would be to...

A: Increase multi-hit capacity of single target weapons by adding things such as ricochet, punch through, and/or AoE/detonation effects. Ricochet would be an interesting addition with general mods for guns that add effects like +X Bounce (basically expand what glaives and drakgoon already have to other weapons) or something like On hit (or headshot): shot bounces to nearest enemy X times. For punch through, having a 1m minimum for all non-AoE primary weapons (3m minimum for sniper rifles) would probably help. For adding AoE/detonation effects to guns that don't already have an AoE, it would just be trying to fit single target weapons into the current AoE meta which isn't super desirable though detonation after X number of hits might make for an interesting mod or weapon effect.

B: Decrease AoE multi-hit capabilities by doing things such as decreasing their AoE size, decreasing the damage of the AoEs, adding line of sight to AoE (with follow through mechanic from melee), and/or increasing damage fall-off rates (might want to increase the damage of the projectile with this option to compensate for overall lower AoE damage). This would probably cause the most outrage, but given that the some of the AoEs have higher base damage than even sniper rifles (which should have the highest single shot damage at mid-to-long range) it might be necessary if other options are not taken.

C: Decreasing reload speed and/or fire rate of AoE weapons to the point that single target weapons could get the same number of kills as a single shot from an AoE weapon in the same amount of time it would take for the AoE to fire that single shot (damage wouldn't need to be nerfed with this option and the fire rates of single target weapons could be buffed as well to reduce the necessary nerf to AoE). This is more for semi-auto AoE weapons like Kuva Bramma, (Kuva) Zarr, and (Kuva) Ogris.

D: more game modes that don't require killing X number of enemies in Y amount of time and/or high health enemies that have better drop rates/amounts for stuff like life support and resources to make single target weapons viable in more content.

Other games also add ammo scarcity/high ammo cost and self damage, but Warframe has ammo mutation mods which gets rid of ammo scarcity and self damage was removed by the devs already.

[(PSN)Silver1593]

Just buff the bad weapons and leave aoe alone

[(XBOX)BARLEYDAWG]

33 minutes ago, (PSN)Silver1593 said:

Just buff the bad weapons and leave aoe alone

When literally one person can ruin the rest of the squads experience with the game something needs to get nerfed and that is precisely why nerfs happen. Buffing literally every other weapon would effectively be the same as a nerf to the overpowered item so just directly nerfing the item in question is easier and more cost effective. Also, my suggestions are intended to have single target and AoE weapons reach a middle ground, not just nerf AoE.

[gamingchair1121]

1 hour ago, (PSN)Silver1593 said:

Just buff the bad weapons and leave aoe alone

so now both single target and aoe one shot everything. the problem still remains that aoe is still killing multiple enemies.

and you think this will solve anything?

[(PSN)Madurai-Prime]

It's not a good idea to add bandaids by trying to make single target AOE. 

Nerf aoe and let players actually make an effort to learn how to aim and debuff and buff.

[(PSN)c1234567890alvi]

vor 8 Minuten schrieb (PSN)Madurai-Prime:

It's not a good idea to add bandaids by trying to make single target AOE. 

Nerf aoe and let players actually make an effort to learn how to aim and debuff and buff.

I think this is less about learning to aim and more about the fact that AoE is the only thing keeping the grind in check. 

[Tyreaus]

1 hour ago, (XBOX)BARLEYDAWG said:

D: more game modes that don't require killing X number of enemies in Y amount of time ... [with] better drop rates/amounts for stuff like life support and resources to make single target weapons viable in more content.

Something like this feels like the better solution out of the list.

The issue with A and B is that they tend away from what makes particular weapon types unique.

C is, given the rate at which we can kill enemies with AoE, likely to lead to absurd reload times. Like, 7+ seconds.

Meanwhile, D is already in practice: missions like Capture or Disruption either don't care about weapon choice or lean toward targeted weapons. The only thing it's missing is just numbers. AoE has missions like Defense, Survival, Exterminate, and ESO. Targeted weapons have Disruption and...that's about it. EDIT: Oh, Eidolons too. Other missions don't tend to care what you bring. It just needs a little bit more on the targeted weapon side.

I would say there is also an E, or perhaps a D.2 option: tweaking enemy spawn rates, e.g. per faction. AoE works well with groups. If you're not fighting against groups, like if the tanky Grineer have fewer numbers, it's tends not to be as good. Ammo scarcity alone becomes more prominent.

In either case, you're creating a niche for targeted weapons that doesn't call for a change to armament balance. That doesn't mean they couldn't use one - a few AoE weapons have higher single-target damage than many targeted weapons - but it's a lot less crucial.

Now, I say "out of the list" because my preferred solution is retooling kill-heavy missions and drop mechanics to promote weapon agnosticism. Take Capture, for example: barring the "change of plans" malarky and enemy drops, as long as you can get in, take down the target, and get out, it doesn't really matter what armaments you bring. This agnosticism idea applies not just to weapons but, to a lesser degree, Warframes. Trinity is a more viable idea if you aren't having to worry about maintaining particular kills-per-second in Survival and your focus is on, well, surviving.

Plus, while my personal taste, I do feel the less "mass murdery" sorts of missions better fit much of Warframe. Players are agile and strong but seldom tanky. We're not often built to take on an army head-on, especially not in lore. Murdering entire armies is more a "Necramech" sort of job than a Warframe one. So us being tasked to take out a large platoon of marines is...strange. It feels more appropriate for us to take out commanders of that platoon than anything.

[(XBOX)BARLEYDAWG]

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

It's not a good idea to add bandaids by trying to make single target AOE. 

Nerf aoe and let players actually make an effort to learn how to aim and debuff and buff.

All the examples I had made already assume a 100% hit rate. Buffs and debuffs will just lead to stuff like example 4 where you one-shot everything which leads to AoE being objectively better simply because it can hit (and thus kill) more enemies at once.

[(PSN)Madurai-Prime]

35 minutes ago, (XBOX)BARLEYDAWG said:

All the examples I had made already assume a 100% hit rate. Buffs and debuffs will just lead to stuff like example 4 where you one-shot everything which leads to AoE being objectively better simply because it can hit (and thus kill) more enemies at once.

You can already do this.....Have you actually built a team of 2 or 3 warframe utilizing each others synergy? 

There's a new arcane that gives 300CC. Multiple frames that buff CC, damage, fire rate and reload speed, and multiple frames that strip armor, make enemies more susceptible to taking damage etc.

[(XBOX)BARLEYDAWG]

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

You can already do this.....Have you actually built a team of 2 or 3 warframe utilizing each others synergy? 

There's a new arcane that gives 300CC. Multiple frames that buff CC, damage, fire rate and reload speed, and multiple frames that strip armor, make enemies more susceptible to taking damage etc.

I am well aware that damage can be buffed to one-shot everything (you don't even need multiple warframes buffing each other to do so in most content). It is why I added example 4. That does not change the fact that AoE weapons will still outperform single target weapons with the same buffs.

[(PSN)Madurai-Prime]

2 minutes ago, (XBOX)BARLEYDAWG said:

I am well aware that damage can be buffed to one-shot everything (you don't even need multiple warframes buffing each other to do so in most content). It is why I added example 4. That does not change the fact that AoE weapons will still outperform single target weapons with the same buffs.

This is called physics and will never change. Is there something specific you are farming for? Plenty of people play for fun and aren't rushing. 

For single target to match AOE....every projectile would need to actually do 13m of AOE damage....

Does this sound even remotely reasonable to you?

[KitMeHarder]

I'd personally prefer opinion A or D.

• A) Add stance-like slots to guns, allowing you to add a multi-target function to guns with <3m AoE (and change their trigger type, aka semi, burst, auto, etc..). Stuff like punch through, homing ricochets, damage/status transfer, chaining, death detonation, etc...
• D) More modes like Disruption and Cascade. Where killing is still encouraged, but mandated killing is very little. (I.E. you only need to get 8 kills per rotation in Disruption, compared to the hundreds you'll get in survival.) This keeps enemy density high, without it being the focal point. (Or less so, modes like Kuva Flood. Where you don't have to kill or defend anything, but you still have time to kill. Thus you can just have fun and kill at any pace you like, if at all.)

Or option E, add more AoE (weapon) resistant enemies like Guardian eximus (without the shields). That way there's a pace breaker, where you either need to bring out a single target weapon, or you have to directly aim your AoE weapon. 

On 2022-08-20 at 10:45 AM, (XBOX)BARLEYDAWG said:

B: Decrease AoE multi-hit capabilities by doing things such as decreasing their AoE size, decreasing the damage of the AoEs, adding line of sight to AoE (with follow through mechanic from melee), and/or increasing damage fall-off rates (might want to increase the damage of the projectile with this option to compensate for overall lower AoE damage). This would probably cause the most outrage, but given that the some of the AoEs have higher base damage than even sniper rifles (which should have the highest single shot damage at mid-to-long range) it might be necessary if other options are not taken.

• LoS will never be coded well enough in this game for it to be a good option.
• Follow through is a bad mechanic, even on melee, and it defeats the purpose of AoE.
• And unlike snipers, AoE doesn't have shot combo, scope bonuses, hit-scan headshots, high firerate, or the ammo to be used in single target. That's why you never see AoE weapons used for Eidolons, Condrix, Profit-Taker, etc...

And just to say it, AoE will always be the overarching meta, be it past, present, future, a completely different game, etc...

[(XBOX)BARLEYDAWG]

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

This is called physics and will never change. Is there something specific you are farming for? Plenty of people play for fun and aren't rushing. 

For single target to match AOE....every projectile would need to actually do 13m of AOE damage....

Does this sound even remotely reasonable to you?

There is also a fire rate option. If a single target weapon can fire off more shots by the time the AoE weapon can fire one then the kills per second can be the same without having obsurd amounts of AoE. Exactly how little have you thought about how to actually balance something?

[Artekkor]

Say it with me:

SELF DAMAGE WAS JUSTIFIED

[KitMeHarder]

1 hour ago, Tyreaus said:

Take Capture, for example: barring the "change of plans" malarky and enemy drops, as long as you can get in, take down the target, and get out, it doesn't really matter what armaments you bring. This agnosticism idea applies not just to weapons but, to a lesser degree, Warframes. Trinity is a more viable idea if you aren't having to worry about maintaining particular kills-per-second in Survival and your focus is on, well, surviving.

But Capture effectively takes no weapons, and (i.e.) Trinity would be used just as little, if not less. Your capture example would turn the game into just soloing with Wukong/Titania/Nova (because that's what Capture already is). If survival was mostly just about surviving, everyone would just AFK with Inaros. Etc...

Killing is the most engaging and (IMO) fun way to center gameplay around. And I personally hate how much of a "running simulator" most of these mission types are already (by that I mean 0 killing).

[Tyreaus]

32 minutes ago, KitMeHarder said:

But Capture effectively takes no weapons, and (i.e.) Trinity would be used just as little, if not less. Your capture example would turn the game into just soloing with Wukong/Titania/Nova (because that's what Capture already is). If survival was mostly just about surviving, everyone would just AFK with Inaros. Etc...

Killing is the most engaging and (IMO) fun way to center gameplay around. And I personally hate how much of a "running simulator" most of these mission types are already (by that I mean 0 killing).

I think you're treating the issue as too much of a binary. Perhaps that's my bad for being a tad too vague in my ideas, so for something more concrete:

Imagine something like power carriers from Excavation, but for Survival. Kill those and you get guaranteed life support capsules.

That still has killing, but because it skirts the mass part of "mass killing", the design enables the use of an AoE or a single-target weapon - whatever will get the job done per the player's preference. That's the point: not to become pacifists, but to enable off-meta options. Is there a super easy, meta way to do it? Sure. AoE is still easier to aim, after all, and Wukong has a clone to take care of everything. I don't pretend to have an answer to that. But that sort of change better enables an off-meta choice like Trinity to handle the mission, while currently she may struggle due to lacking the KPS necessary for mission completion.

EDIT: Indeed, I agree capture is too much of a running simulator. Frankly, I think it'd be much improved if we had at least a few targets. Maybe instead of it being linear, we could have n+1 targets in a sprawling Survival-like area - n being the squad size - so the squad has to chase down their targets. _{Maybe not "chase" so much but, you know, generally "hunt down and capture".} And I also think some maps, like Spy, could be much more compact, too. So, to be clear, I'm not saying to copy Capture in "running simulator" mode. I'm thinking more along the lines of "fewer priority targets among a horde" sort of deal.

[KitMeHarder]

18 minutes ago, Tyreaus said:

Imagine something like power carriers from Excavation, but for Survival. Kill those and you get guaranteed life support capsules.

Gatcha, so like option D. I too like that option, and I endorsed it in my post to the OP. But IMO there's problems with incorporating it into too much of the game...

1. Some game modes (i.e. survival) are primarily played to get enemy drops/affinity, so it'd still be AoE centric.
2. I'd still really like the horde shooter nature of Warframe to stay it's primary role.

------------

Also, capture is the one mode I prefer as a running simulator. I'd mainly like something done with ones such as rescue, spy, sabotage, etc...

[(XBOX)BARLEYDAWG]

46 minutes ago, KitMeHarder said:

I'd personally prefer opinion A or D.

• A) Add stance-like slots to guns, allowing you to add a multi-target function to guns with <3m AoE (and change their trigger type, aka semi, burst, auto, etc..). Stuff like punch through, homing ricochets, damage/status transfer, chaining, death detonation, etc...
• D) More modes like Disruption and Cascade. Where killing is still encouraged, but mandated killing is very little. (I.E. you only need to get 8 kills per rotation in Disruption, compared to the hundreds you'll get in survival.) This keeps enemy density high, without it being the focal point. (Or less so, modes like Kuva Flood. Where you don't have to kill or defend anything, but you still have time to kill. Thus you can just have fun and kill at any pace you like, if at all.)

Or option E, add more AoE (weapon) resistant enemies like Guardian eximus (without the shields). That way there's a pace breaker, where you either need to bring out a single target weapon, or you have to directly aim your AoE weapon. 

• LoS will never be coded well enough in this game for it to be a good option.
• Follow through is a bad mechanic, even on melee, and it defeats the purpose of AoE.
• And unlike snipers, AoE doesn't have shot combo, scope bonuses, hit-scan headshots, high firerate, or the ammo to be used in single target. That's why you never see AoE weapons used for Eidolons, Condrix, Profit-Taker, etc...

And just to say it, AoE will always be the meta, be it past, present, future, a completely different game, etc...

Your last bullet point and your last sentence are contradictions of each other... there are hypothetical situations where single target is better (such as examples 2, 3, and a number of boss fights not necessarily related to Warframe) but when it comes to groups of enemies AoE is usually the meta. Other than that thank you (and everyone else with constructive feedback) for the input.

[Tyreaus]

22 minutes ago, KitMeHarder said:

Gatcha, so like option D

Basically, just applied a bit more to existing missions, rather than purely adding new ones.

22 minutes ago, KitMeHarder said:

Some game modes (i.e. survival) are primarily played to get enemy drops/affinity, so it'd still be AoE centric.

Yeah, I mentioned that in my reply too, that drops / affinity systems would have to be looked at. Pushing a lot more toward objectives / objective kills and end-of-mission, more likely than not. But, I mean, we have Eximus units, so it's not like "chonky affinity and loot pinatas" is entirely new either.

22 minutes ago, KitMeHarder said:

I'd still really like the horde shooter nature of Warframe to stay it's primary role.

I don't think you'd need to get rid of that at all. You look at something that's a veritable horde shooter, like Left 4 Dead, and it stays a horde shooter even when the objective is just getting to the other end. And that's at the extreme other end.

22 minutes ago, KitMeHarder said:

Also, capture is the one mode I prefer as a running simulator. I'd mainly like something done with ones such as rescue, spy, sabotage, etc...

Huh. I mean, I still think multi-target capture could be fun, but if it is your jam, I'm not gonna step in it. Lol.

The others...yes, definitely. The only thing I might suggest in that is making sure we don't end up with one mission that's stupidly faster to run than the others. But that ought not to be too hard: a good run-time is approximate, so something complex like Spy could sit on the lower end of the estimate, and more straightforward ones like Rescue could sit a little higher up.

Also is it just me or do larger maps feel more samey, too? I get into big maps and repeated play-throughs just feel like remixes of the same map. I already saw all those tiles from the first run, after all. Meanwhile something with smaller maps - Sanctuary Onslaught being the extreme example - feel like genuinely different maps, because there's actually new stuff thrown in there.

[Venus-Venera]

vor 6 Stunden schrieb (PSN)Silver1593:

Just buff the bad weapons and leave aoe alone

I agree. with single target buff it is solved.
this constant crying with wet tears about nerfs is just embarrassing.

if the game is too easy, you can play without mods or start a new account. so where is the problem?

[(PSN)Madurai-Prime]

35 minutes ago, Venus-Venera said:

I agree. with single target buff it is solved.
this constant crying with wet tears about nerfs is just embarrassing.

if the game is too easy, you can play without mods or start a new account. so where is the problem?

Can you take a few guesses as to why aoe is being nerfed? I just want to see what you say.

[(XBOX)BARLEYDAWG]

On 2022-08-20 at 4:53 PM, Venus-Venera said:

I agree. with single target buff it is solved.
this constant crying with wet tears about nerfs is just embarrassing.

if the game is too easy, you can play without mods or start a new account. so where is the problem?

I already explained why nerfs are necessary here:

 

On 2022-08-20 at 10:31 AM, (XBOX)BARLEYDAWG said:

When literally one person can ruin the rest of the squads experience with the game something needs to get nerfed and that is precisely why nerfs happen. Buffing literally every other weapon would effectively be the same as a nerf to the overpowered item so just directly nerfing the item in question is easier and more cost effective. Also, my suggestions are intended to have single target and AoE weapons reach a middle ground, not just nerf AoE.

But since you still seem to fail to grasp the situation I will make an adjacent hypothetical situation to show the current issue with AoE.

Criteria for the hypothetical situation: you can't roll out Limbo's rift and abilities did not bypass Limbo's rift (this also applies to the subsumed version of Banish in this situation). What happens with that is it becomes possible to actively grief other players by using Banish on them which ends up denying them the ability to kill things (reducing player engagement and thus enjoyment with the game). This is what people with AoE weapons are doing now (in addition to denying people affinity if they are out of affinity range). The solutions for the hypothetical situation would be to make it possible to escape the rift or add ways to bypass the rift, but with AoE the only way to keep it from preventing other people being to enjoy the game is to nerf it as just buffs to single target weapons (especially just damage buffs) won't be enough to make single target equally viable without nerfs to problematic AoE weapons such as Kuva Bramma, (Kuva) Ogris, and (Kuva) Zarr (which happen to be far few in number than the weapons that would need buffs to match). That isn't even accounting for the problems power creep brings to games over long periods of time.

The whole "why don't you just play solo" response can be replied with asking the same question to the person who asked it first, and the answer the second person will receive from the first person will be the same reasons why the second person doesn't want to play solo either.

[(NSW)warfare3376]

1 hour ago, (XBOX)BARLEYDAWG said:

Criteria for the hypothetical situation: you can't roll out Limbo's rift and abilities did not bypass Limbo's rift (this also applies to the subsumed version of Banish in this situation). What happens with that is it becomes possible to actively grief other players by using Banish on them which ends up denying them the ability to kill things (reducing player engagement and thus enjoyment with the game). This is what people with AoE weapons are doing now (in addition to denying people affinity if they are out of affinity range). The solutions for the hypothetical situation would be to make it possible to escape the rift or add ways to bypass the rift, but with AoE the only way to keep it from preventing other people being to enjoy the game is to nerf it as just buffs to single target weapons (especially just damage buffs) won't be enough to make single target equally viable without nerfs to problematic AoE weapons such as Kuva Bramma, (Kuva) Ogris, and (Kuva) Zarr (which happen to be far few in number than the weapons that would need buffs to match). That isn't even accounting for the problems power creep brings to games over long periods of time.

Nerfing AoE will not fix that hypothetical situation at all actually. Warframes core gameplay revolves around and rewards killing hordes of trash enemies as fast as possible. What do you think will happen if AoE does get nerfed? What will happen is people will find a new way to achieve that same goal most likely via warframe abilities like saryn and mesa, then we will be in the same exact problem with people complaining they cant get any kills cause the sayrn in the squad is nukeing enemies too quickly. The only actual way to fix this AoE meta problem is adding content that doesnt revolve around nuking groups of thrash mobs and give single target a reason to exist. Nerfs or buffs wont change anything, nerfing the current meta will just lead to a similar new meta that does the same thing and buffs are just a band-aid that wont help a whole lot as buffed single target will still more than likely under perform to AoE with the current gameplay of warframe. 

[Lutesque]

On 2022-08-20 at 4:45 PM, (XBOX)BARLEYDAWG said:

Some steps that could be taken to close the gap between the two weapon types would be to...

-Snip

D: more game modes that don't require killing X number of enemies in Y amount of time and/or high health enemies that have better drop rates/amounts for stuff like life support and resources to make single target weapons viable in more content.

Literally the only Solution.... 

 Nerfing AoE in Warframe is like Nerfing AoE in Dynasty/Hyrule Warriors.... It doesnt Make Sense.

On 2022-08-20 at 4:45 PM, (XBOX)BARLEYDAWG said:

Other games also add ammo scarcity/high ammo cost and self damage, but Warframe has ammo mutation mods which gets rid of ammo scarcity and self damage was removed by the devs already.

 Other Games like what ? What Other Game has Warframe's Kill Count WITHOUT some type of way to Deal with Multiple Enemies 🤔 ?

 

[Venus-Venera]

vor 11 Stunden schrieb (XBOX)BARLEYDAWG:

I already explained why nerfs are necessary here:

 

But since you still seem to fail to grasp the situation I will make an adjacent hypothetical situation to show the current issue with AoE.

Criteria for the hypothetical situation: you can't roll out Limbo's rift and abilities did not bypass Limbo's rift (this also applies to the subsumed version of Banish in this situation). What happens with that is it becomes possible to actively grief other players by using Banish on them which ends up denying them the ability to kill things (reducing player engagement and thus enjoyment with the game). This is what people with AoE weapons are doing now (in addition to denying people affinity if they are out of affinity range). The solutions for the hypothetical situation would be to make it possible to escape the rift or add ways to bypass the rift, but with AoE the only way to keep it from preventing other people being to enjoy the game is to nerf it as just buffs to single target weapons (especially just damage buffs) won't be enough to make single target equally viable without nerfs to problematic AoE weapons such as Kuva Bramma, (Kuva) Ogris, and (Kuva) Zarr (which happen to be far few in number than the weapons that would need buffs to match). That isn't even accounting for the problems power creep brings to games over long periods of time.

The whole "why don't you just play solo" response can be replied with asking the same question to the person who asked it first, and the answer the second person will receive from the first person will be the same reasons why the second person doesn't want to play solo either.

I don't even want to know if this is meant seriously.
because since when is solo gameplay not possible? or have premade groups been abolished?

or should no one play frost in public because some ..... joker writes negative experiences about it in the forum?