Jump to content
Jade Shadows: Share Bug Reports and Feedback Here! ×

i have question about the new update and ammo changes? (in general)


dizontix

Recommended Posts

so...is the end game/goal, to make sure players will eventually, at some point run out of ammo, in any and all missions? regard less of gun or build/mods? or to turn every enemy into bullet sponges? or is it a new rule to nerf the top? or was it to encourage players to use other guns too? then idk, why not improve guns like [stug] (improve other guns mentality)?


))) there are guns even now that do not follow the same pattern as, the doomed, AOE guns. (and any other gun that is not AOE but was affected anyway)
guns that do not run out of ammo and are OP and are disruptive cause lower MR won't get to kill anything (guns that you can get kills with 1 or 2 shots, if moded right, and get multiple bullets back from ammo cases, so you won't run out of ammo and yet have a huge impact with minimum effort)
where does this leave infinite mag/recharge guns like kit guns and beam pistols and other crowd control guns that are not exactly AOEs (shoulder mounted guns)?
what about Archguns? should those Archguns, ammo reserve be lower?


))) with a couple of buffs from either chroma or mirage, harrow, saryn, or wisp, or any other "weapon buffing frame" you can turn >some< Archguns and recharge guns and shoulder-mounted guns and crowd control pistols (beam or high fire rates) to a disruption of gameplay to others and not having to really aim.
as pointed out by others, ""nerf anything that is on top, something else will show its ugly head again"". (either from guns or frames or anything else, I'm not that smart, my builds are straightforward and simple, instead of complex with dragon keys xd)


))) I can't help but notice that there is something wrong with/between the player's impact on enemies AND survivability of enemies (their health and AI (decision making) and movements and quantity and quality) that is not satisfying to DE and some high MR and low MR players.


the AI does not react to player's decisions, or weapons of choice, enemies don't work together to stay inside the shield or close to the support drone, or stay away and shoot from far at players, most of them dont take cover they dont setup traps or camp, they/enemies just run at players like a stream of the river.


so AI is not interesting or engaging (smart enough) to make you wanna play with it (unlike games like alien isolation)


))) in games like this, there will always be HUGE efficiency differences between low and high MR players someone will be carrying/better than the other 3 players. (just look at the in-game codex mods page and how LONG IT IS)


))) until they (DE) find the equilibrium/balance again, and with these experimentations, whether you and i like it or not, changes on a such massive scale (ammo mods, ammo drops, holster animations, hoster mods, arcanes, frames, guns ammo) some players (old or new) will be upset.


so considering these things :

1. vast differences between old and new players

2. imbalance between players and AI/enemies

3. there will always be some sort of META
maybe I'm soo stupid... what was the point of all this, how is lower ammo realy going to fix those thing i mentioned?

the game was working fine, and if you end up with an AFK wukong... leave or report (as others have said to me, don't like a mission, don't play it) you can play solo you can group up with friends, or go play easy parts of the game or the hard missions, and the players that were taking advantage/abusing of the game's real-world economy were getting banned (i have heard and read about a few bans).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, dizontix said:

so...is the end game/goal, to make sure players will eventually, at some point run out of ammo, in any and all missions?

No, its just a change aimed to balance explosive weapons without 'nerfing' them directly. Any other changes were tohelp support this, but also to make ammo pickups something you think about / notice rather than something that just happens and you take for granted.

40 minutes ago, dizontix said:

or is it a new rule to nerf the top?

Yes, but not as you might be putting it. When the top weapons used are all explosive, theres something wrong. They've always rebalanced a gun that unintentionally becomes used in more than 40% of missions. In this case it was a weapon type, not a specific gun.

43 minutes ago, dizontix said:

then idk, why not improve guns like [stug] (improve other guns mentality)?

This isnt about making you play EVERY gun, just making it so you dont feel like you have to use only the top 10 gens or you're missing out. MR5 players need to use something.

44 minutes ago, dizontix said:

guns that do not run out of ammo and are OP and are disruptive cause lower MR won't get to kill anything (guns that you can get kills with 1 or 2 shots, if moded right, and get multiple bullets back from ammo cases, so you won't run out of ammo and yet have a huge impact with minimum effort)

Most of these have some sort of drawback. The most OP oneshotters are limited by high reloads or small magazines / firerates. The highest fire rates often have low damage. AoE has high damage and AoE multi target. In most games this is balanced by either self damage or ammo efficiency. We used to have self damage, but that got QoL'd out (and it was a good thing too). Think of these ammo changes as a long delayed ballance pass on that.

47 minutes ago, dizontix said:

where does this leave infinite mag/recharge guns like kit guns and beam pistols and other crowd control guns that are not exactly AOEs

Leaves them mostly where they are. Most dont have huge damage, and rely on status. The problem was high damage + high AoE.

48 minutes ago, dizontix said:

what about Archguns? should those Archguns, ammo reserve be lower?

Archguns are on a recharge and ammo is sporadic for them anyway.

49 minutes ago, dizontix said:

with a couple of buffs from either chroma or mirage, harrow, saryn, or wisp, or any other "weapon buffing frame" you can turn >some< Archguns and recharge guns and shoulder-mounted guns and crowd control pistols (beam or high fire rates) to a disruption of gameplay to others and not having to really aim.

Sure, but with othr frames you can nearly never die. The point with alot of these is you have to keep up a system of casting powers and a stategic, if laxidasical aim. The point was that for alot of AoE you dont need to even use skills, and bearly need to worry about ammo. Now at least you need to move around to pick up the ammo, or use a skill for similar effect.

52 minutes ago, dizontix said:

""nerf anything that is on top, something else will show its ugly head again""

Its true, but its backwards thinking. Its more like the expression "A balancing act". Once you balance 1 thing, you notice another thing is unbalanced, or that the thing you just balanced has, by virtue of being balanced, made another thing less balanced. Its a constant process, which will only be solved the day DE stop adding new things to WF. And thats the day the game dies.

56 minutes ago, dizontix said:

the AI does not react to player's decisions, or weapons of choice, enemies don't work together to stay inside the shield or close to the support drone, or stay away and shoot from far at players, most of them dont take cover they dont setup traps or camp, they/enemies just run at players like a stream of the river.


so AI is not interesting or engaging (smart enough) to make you wanna play with it (unlike games like alien isolation)

Thats because your basing your expectations for the AI on a very different style of game. Think about the kind of games that have that level of AI, you wont find many common points with Warframe. They do tend to be games with a much smaller array of weapons, enemies and levels. Its not because the AI is 'smarter', but because each AI behaviour is pre-written, and this is managed by keeping the variables low (such as weapons, enemies and levels).

59 minutes ago, dizontix said:

in games like this, there will always be HUGE efficiency differences between low and high MR players someone will be carrying/better than the other 3 players. (just look at the in-game codex mods page and how LONG IT IS)

Yes. Whats the point your making on this one? In games like this: mostly equpment driven MMOs.

1 hour ago, dizontix said:

until they (DE) find the equilibrium/balance again, and with these experimentations, whether you and i like it or not, changes on a such massive scale (ammo mods, ammo drops, holster animations, hoster mods, arcanes, frames, guns ammo) some players (old or new) will be upset.

Sure, but its happened before. Damage 2.0, Damage 3.0, Status 2.0, Melee 2.0, Melee3.0, Parcore 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0. Big change happens, and some people get pissed about it. But a year later we all look back and say 'that was probably a good thing for the health of the game in the long run'.

1 hour ago, dizontix said:

1. vast differences between old and new players

2. imbalance between players and AI/enemies

3. there will always be some sort of META
maybe I'm soo stupid... what was the point of all this, how is lower ammo realy going to fix those thing i mentioned?

Maybe you are, and it isnt and wasnt ever ment too. The ammo fixes were mearly the first stage at an attempt to make AoE explosive weapons alittle less dominating as the top, go to weapon of choice without nerfing the weapons directly. None of these other points were ment to be adressed by these changes.

1 hour ago, dizontix said:

the game was working fine, and if you end up with an AFK wukong... leave or report (as others have said to me, don't like a mission, don't play it) you can play solo you can group up with friends, or go play easy parts of the game or the hard missions, and the players that were taking advantage/abusing of the game's real-world economy were getting banned (i have heard and read about a few bans).

The game wasnt working fine, as 60% or the playerbase using less that 5% of the weapons says somethings not right. And the wukong AFK issue wasnt so much an AFK issue, but more that it was quickly becomming the most efficient choice for gameplay by a mile, and thats not good for the games longevity.

Also, the bans thing is a weird Uturn in this toppic to be put in your conclusion. This isnt new, theres always something about that going on. If you take advantage or abuse something you know isnt ligit, then get found out and banned over it, you should at least have the decency not to maon about it on a forum post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have taken some of the fun out and want you to use melee more. They should remove problematic weapons and if Wukong’s twin is equipped with a gun, should only shoot when you do. Instead with the ammo changes, they really hurt Wukong where you unequip melee, nerfed a whole bunch of guns making some upset. You just get the tryhards now saying there is no ammo issue, because they are soooooo good at the game. I rarely run out of ammo myself, but now I always need Carrier, ammo case, ammo drum on some weapons, ammo mutation mods, etc. it’s now restricting me more than ever on my builds where before I had more flexibility trying out different loadouts.

That said, they also introduced some QoL changes, added some fun with Kahl and Styanax, so there’s that. And if you really like melee, this update made you very happy. Hack and slash my friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to answer the questions part of the "questions", since that's the thread title:

1 hour ago, dizontix said:

so...is the end game/goal, to make sure players will eventually, at some point run out of ammo, in any and all missions?

Nope.

1 hour ago, dizontix said:

regard less of gun or build/mods?

See above (though some builds almost explicitly don't have ammo problems, e.g. anything with Dispensary).

1 hour ago, dizontix said:

or to turn every enemy into bullet sponges?

Unlikely, but also, welcome to Warframe's excessively multiplier'd damage system.

1 hour ago, dizontix said:

or is it a new rule to nerf the top?

Not really a new rule. Also, unlikely it's explicitly intended. It's just game design.

1 hour ago, dizontix said:

or was it to encourage players to use other guns too?

In a way: using other weapons the player has equipped. Which means:

1 hour ago, dizontix said:

then idk, why not improve guns like [stug] (improve other guns mentality)?

That doesn't work because you're still using the one weapon. Not to mention, like so many others who propose this, people don't seem to say how to improve it. Just because you can type "buff all the weapons so they all become equally used" doesn't mean it's doable.

1 hour ago, dizontix said:

where does this leave infinite mag/recharge guns like kit guns and beam pistols and other crowd control guns that are not exactly AOEs (shoulder mounted guns)?

They're watching and waiting to see how that dust settles. Battery weapons were nerfed, then reverted pending future changes. It's a process, and DE has been explicit about that since introducing the ammo changes on devstreams.

1 hour ago, dizontix said:

what about Archguns? should those Archguns, ammo reserve be lower?

People use those? Also, no: they don't have mutators and their ammo drops have been rare from the start. In a way, they're the standard other weapons were lowered toward. Nerfing them in some way would be moving the goalposts.

1 hour ago, dizontix said:

what was the point of all this, how is lower ammo realy going to fix those thing i mentioned?

1. To boost player interaction. 2. It's not, certainly not by itself. It's an iterative process and this is step one.

EDIT:

10 minutes ago, m_a_r_c_h_ said:

They should remove problematic weapons

IDK if I like this thought because it'd mean getting rid of so much of the AoE stuff and hopefully solidifying a healthy weapon-Warframe relationship (e.g. weapons for single targets, abilities for groups)

Or because it'd create so much of a louder storm that it'd be like a trainwreck and I couldn't help but watch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Tyreaus said:

IDK if I like this thought because it'd mean getting rid of so much of the AoE stuff and hopefully solidifying a healthy weapon-Warframe relationship (e.g. weapons for single targets, abilities for groups)

Or because it'd create so much of a louder storm that it'd be like a trainwreck and I couldn't help but watch.

But all they did now is makes a few hundred guns worst, so not sure if that’s better. I would rather see 5 guns go away. But not the Acceltra, lol. That would be a very sad day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, m_a_r_c_h_ said:

But all they did now is makes a few hundred guns worst, so not sure if that’s better. I would rather see 5 guns go away. But not the Acceltra, lol. That would be a very sad day. 

I don't know if it's better either - I've got my own ideas on how I think the game should be structured, which I think would make it better. But "better" is also contingent on what the overarching populace likes. And if anyone could figure that out reliably, the gaming industry would have its own religious sermons, praying to the deity of audience knowledge to gain favour and wisdom in their new project.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Tyreaus said:

I don't know if it's better either - I've got my own ideas on how I think the game should be structured, which I think would make it better. But "better" is also contingent on what the overarching populace likes. And if anyone could figure that out reliably, the gaming industry would have its own religious sermons, praying to the deity of audience knowledge to gain favour and wisdom in their new project.

Seeing as you are one of the few people on this forum that actually has a brain and are not toxic, I would love to hear your thoughts on how to structure it whenever you have some time. Should be a whole different thread though, so it won't get lost. 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dizontix said:

so...is the end game/goal, to make sure players will eventually, at some point run out of ammo, in any and all missions? regard less of gun or build/mods?

Very clearly not.  I don't know where you could even get this idea unless you think there are only a few weapons in Warframe and your ideas about modding those weapons are extremely narrow.  It sounds like you haven't explored things nearly enough.  Or more likely, you're  trying to make  dishonest rhetorical points under the pretext of asking questions.

I'd say the main goal was to tamp down on AoE weapon use, effectiveness, and monotone spamminess a bit.  Oh, and (apparently) to cut down on automation.   These were very clearly stated before the fact.

Another goal wasn't explicitly stated beforehand SFAIK, but it seems like in general they wanted ammo to have more meaning as a mechanic, and not just for AoE weapons.  Not that they were totally successful in this.  There are still many weapons that seem to have zero issues AFAICT.  Although maybe that has something to do with the way I've always used them.  (i.e., not holding down the trigger and shooting walls.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chaotea said:

No, its just a change aimed to balance explosive weapons without 'nerfing' them directly. Any other changes were tohelp support this, but also to make ammo pickups something you think about / notice rather than something that just happens and you take for granted.

The ammo changes, and the AOE changes coincide but the ammo changes are not solely to help support nerfing AOE...

I think one of the primary reasons for the ammo change is to address people using only one weapon for the full duration of missions, which devalues the importance of rotating between primary and secondary weapons. 

Following the trend of changes this year, the ammo change is consistent with what was done with operators. Operators were altered to encourage fluidity (melee now goes directly into warframe melee) which promotes mixing things up. The ammo changes are similar insofar as you're now encouraged to swap between weapons more often by virtue of running out of ammo if you linger on one weapon for the full duration of a mission and don't have some manner of ammo conservation built into your loadout (ammo mods are more valuable as are mutation mods). 

The ammo changes have had a direct impact on AOE gameplay, for sure, but mostly when it comes to a few specific weapons (Kuva Zarr is probably hit the hardest). For the most part if you use ammo mutation you can offset most of the negatives associated with ammo, from Veilbreaker. If you don't slot mutation, or spam like crazy, then you will have to rotate your weaponry more often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Tiltskillet said:

Another goal wasn't explicitly stated beforehand SFAIK, but it seems like in general they wanted ammo to have more meaning as a mechanic, and not just for AoE weapons.  Not that they were totally successful in this.  There are still many weapons that seem to have zero issues AFAICT.  Although maybe that has something to do with the way I've always used them.  (i.e., not holding down the trigger and shooting walls.)

Personal opinion? Complete fail. I love them, I am still positive about update 32, but basically when it comes to this it's just fail ^^;

A mutation mod solves most issues for rapid firing weapons with shallow reserve ammunition and makes it so that ammunition isn't awful, but at a cost. Variety in Exilus mods and supporting options for players to use, playstyle freedom, and basically something completely unrelated to the original issue of AoE spam. Mutation / Carrier have become compulsory items now if you want to use a lot of weapons, and they remain usable, but now picking those weapons becomes a punishment where you need to start making sacrifices in build variety?

It doesn't change very much for the core function of the weapon when you can solve the issue of something like a machine gun running out of ammo now by putting an Exilus mutation mod on it, but that now eats up the mod slot a player could have used to make a silenced machine gun, play with aerial ace and other Exilus and explore "B tier" play options.

It pushes me away from using stuff like Furis and Rattleguts without making a sacrifice somewhere else in the build while encouraging ways to do more damage with less ammo. It pushes me away from even trying to make a weird, fast firing kitgun when I know the typically slow firing meta builds are now just that much better.

I stopped using Rattleguts, Vermisplicer especially after the ammunition massacre, and Gaze as well.

My weapon of choice is now JUST TOMBFINGER (the most powerful, AoE based Kitgun) because the others no longer support the ammunition economy to do anything with the Exilus slot and with Vermisplicer in particular it's basically "Pax Charge and pray they do not alter the deal any further"

This is really the sore spot of the update for me. The rest is great. This is stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, cute_moth.npc said:

A mutation mod solves most issues for rapid firing weapons with shallow reserve ammunition and makes it so that ammunition isn't awful, but at a cost. Variety in Exilus mods and supporting options for players to use, playstyle freedom, and basically something completely unrelated to the original issue of AoE spam. Mutation / Carrier have become compulsory items now if you want to use a lot of weapons, and they remain usable, but now picking those weapons becomes a punishment where you need to start making sacrifices in build variety?

That's seems too bleak to me.  Granted, I still have a ton of weapons to revisit since the update, so maybe my outlook won't be any better once I have.

I'll just point out that many of the problems can be worked around without special modding or Carrier, Dispensary, etc.  The natural and semi-satisfying way (to me) is mixing in some use of other weapons.  The cheesy and brain-numbing way that still works in too much content is an ammo pad hotkey.

I still feel confident they'll make some adjustments that will bring it together better.  It's only been two weeks.    We should give them at least two years!...since that's how long it took them to recognize that AoE weapons were kind of a problem they should do something about.

That's a joke by the way.  Ha ha ha.  Ha. Ha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tiltskillet said:

That's a joke by the way.  Ha ha ha.  Ha. Ha.

It's not ultra bleak but I literally am now just using my AoE gun because my single target machine gun, chain beam gun and um.. Gaze.. whatever class of weapon Gaze is, all suffer from issues that mean I'm sort of stuck using ammo supports on them (mom I just want to use Aerial Ace!) the AoE gun is literally the last one left that can do that comfortably which leaves me wondering why?

I used to use Furis with Umbra because it was fun to just play Operator and have Umbra heal himself so he doesn't just go to sleep after he gets hit a few times.. Now it's Sporelacer, because he isn't able to use up all of that ammo even when he tries very hard. Using Furis is basically coming back to no gun. I sort of think they're going to eventually figure out that they missed Sporelacer and come back for it, I will pick something else very powerful now because the actual utility guns aren't holding enough ammo.. This is the opposite of what they were trying to do.

I think to me if I had a problem with AoE I would be working hard to make single target weapons more enticing and I know they did that with the headshot multiplier, it feels really good.. But then they went sort of backwards too with making other weapon classes more dependent on solving an ammo problem instead of being able to enjoy the variety of Exilus mods for them? Developers should literally be encouraging the use of bullet hose weapons, not introducing stressful moments where 6-7 kills have gone by and ammo has not dropped yet for a machine pistol that only has enough reserve ammo for like 9-10 kills. It makes me want to use the weapon that I know kills 5-6 things in a shot.

I don't think the ammo changes are the end of the world but I do think they are very misguided.

To be fair I am still optimistic that they do something in the span of less than 2 years, but let's find out ^^;

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...