Jump to content
Koumei & the Five Fates: Share Bug Reports and Feedback Here! ×

Why does DE insist on such a huge disparity between prime/nonPrime riven dispositions.


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, (XBOX)Tucker D Dawg said:

IMHO the prime version should be better than the non prime.

 

Has nothing to do with Prime vs non-Prime. Riven disposition is controlled by usage stats. And *all* new weapons start with a usage of 0 (.5 dispo). Dispositions are updated every 3 months or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, (PSN)isbergen said:

Has nothing to do with Prime vs non-Prime. Riven disposition is controlled by usage stats. And *all* new weapons start with a usage of 0 (.5 dispo). Dispositions are updated every 3 months or so.

I understand that - and it makes sense for cmopletely new weapons.  But it doesn't (IMO) make any sense when releasing a prime version of an existing weapon.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, (PSN)Ragology said:

At some point, De decided to make it so that all new weapon rivens start at low level so that when the riven disposition changes happen, they are guaranteed to get buffed.

 

 

Just now, (PSN)isbergen said:

Whether it's a variant or not, if it gives new MR it's a new weapon. That's just how it works

As I said - I understand the lazy coding they did "If new, disposition=crap"

But I don't understand "WHY", the context of prime vs non-prime, this should be the case.  Is anyone making the case that the non prime variant should be better than the prime version?

How hard would it be to change the code from
if new dispo=crap  to

if prime disp=nonprimedisp
     else disp=crap

as for rebalancing - things like the nikana prime are still 1 vs nikana is 3.  Why would they want to encourage the use of the non prime version of the same weapon over the prime version?  its not for game diversity - because the machanics, feel, etc are exactly the same.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, (XBOX)Tucker D Dawg said:

But I don't understand "WHY", the context of prime vs non-prime, this should be the case.  Is anyone making the case that the non prime variant should be better than the prime version?

As I said prime means diddly. It is strictly this: "is new weapon ? set dispo to .5; else set dispo = usage[weapon]". I understand you want prime to matter, but it does not. DE is not going to change this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because DE knows they don't balance well or evaluate balance well, they hate the idea of evaluating new weapon power without some crowdsourcing.  And they've experienced plenty of community rage whenever dispos get lowered.

5 minutes ago, (XBOX)Tucker D Dawg said:

But it doesn't (IMO) make any sense when releasing a prime version of an existing weapon.

If Primes were consistently better than the original by a certain margin.  Or, better yet,  if all primes came out at a specified power level.  But neither one is the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, (XBOX)Tucker D Dawg said:

just makes the prime version mr fodder.

This may be the case, but only for a very narrow subset of Warframe players.  Most players don't have good Rivens for most of their weapons, so most players are going to gravitate towards the shiny new Prime weapons.  If the players with Rivens gravitate towards the non-Prime weapons, that's actually a good thing as it encourages diversity and mitigates the non-Prime weapons becoming obsolete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This should be rather obvious , 

1) The "objective" of rivens is to give some bonus to the less used or unpopular weapons (doesn't quite work though), new weapons aren't quite classified as popular or unpopular cause 0 day.

2) Primes are almost always better than their non prime weapons , it makes sense for them to have lower disposition than them, and some can be significantly different,

3) How much better primes are from non primes (i.e popular) can be difficult to identify , and is something DE sucks at gauging , so might as well start at the bottom and climb up.

4) Increasing Riven disposition is better recieved than lowering it by most ,

5) it reduces the trade surges (though i don't know if that is the intention) at time of new weapon realeases.

 

i personally feel DE is intelligent enough to guess what should be the disposition , but i think they don't want to risk it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, (XBOX)Tucker D Dawg said:

As I said - I understand the lazy coding they did "If new, disposition=crap"

Your outlook of the devs being lazy for doing this is the root problem, actually.

They got tired of players like you nit-picking the choices and constantly complaining like children bereft of birthday cake, so they made it work the way it works now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

Your outlook of the devs being lazy for doing this is the root problem, actually.

or perhaps they are lazy for not thinking about the perks (or lack thereof) of prime vs non prime weapons before releasing them into the wild?

or perhaps they are lazy for not attempting to balance the riven disposition based on actual strength of the weapon rather than a simple popularity contest?

My point is simple: The prime variant should be better than the non prime variant.  things like riven disposition are included in that calculation.

If they just want to make it a cosmetic improvement and all else equal, I'd be fine with that too.  But making a prime variant objectively worse than its non-prime counterpart feels wrong.

btw - I suppose in one respect you are correct - its not the dev's fault as they were likely just handed instructions from whomever is in charge of game 'balance'.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, (XBOX)Tucker D Dawg said:

or perhaps they are lazy for not thinking about the perks (or lack thereof) of prime vs non prime weapons before releasing them into the wild?

or perhaps they are lazy for not attempting to balance the riven disposition based on actual strength of the weapon rather than a simple popularity contest?

My point is simple: The prime variant should be better than the non prime variant.  things like riven disposition are included in that calculation.

If they just want to make it a cosmetic improvement and all else equal, I'd be fine with that too.  But making a prime variant objectively worse than its non-prime counterpart feels wrong.

btw - I suppose in one respect you are correct - its not the dev's fault as they were likely just handed instructions from whomever is in charge of game 'balance'.

My point is simple as well.

Why would anyone have any desire as a game maker based on your outlook of them to do anything you might desire?

No matter what they do, they get an army of nitpickers calling them stupid.

So, why NOT just do what they think is best and ignore the nitpickers?

You guys make the holes, DE just fills them with your tears.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, (XBOX)Tucker D Dawg said:

or perhaps they are lazy for not thinking about the perks (or lack thereof) of prime vs non prime weapons before releasing them into the wild?

or perhaps they are lazy for not attempting to balance the riven disposition based on actual strength of the weapon rather than a simple popularity contest?

My point is simple: The prime variant should be better than the non prime variant.  things like riven disposition are included in that calculation.

If they just want to make it a cosmetic improvement and all else equal, I'd be fine with that too.  But making a prime variant objectively worse than its non-prime counterpart feels wrong.

btw - I suppose in one respect you are correct - its not the dev's fault as they were likely just handed instructions from whomever is in charge of game 'balance'.

 

There are different strengths for different weapons. 

People play differently, and one person's strength may be another person's weakness. 

So what is this all encompassing "strength" you're referring to? 

Prime weapons are better than their counterparts. You're assuming that a riven literally comes with a prime weapon like some mandatory attachment.....it's not. Remember that some players don't even use rivens....so if you're using the weapon without a riven...it literally is an upgrade. It has higher CC which automatically makes it better...even if it goes from 2% CC to 3% CC....that's still an upgrade.

It's already been explained why all weapons start at 0.5. Blame warframe players for creating their own demise.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you think low riven dispo makes a weapon MR fodder you have a very poor understanding of how rivens work and why they exist.

Tho in the particular case of phantasma, which I'm assuming is what this is about, you're probably right that the stat increases are so low it's currently a lot worse than the base one if you have a riven for it, and this has been a common issue with prime weapons since the change to what riven dispo weapons release with. But hardly mr fodder as it's still a better weapon for people that like Phantasma and don't have a riven for it, or avoid rivens like the plague that they are.

The stupid thing about releasing weapons with low dispo is that the dispo is inherently going to stay low for a long time because the usage of a newly released thing always starts very high as people try it out. If a prime only has a few tiny stat buffs over it's non prime counterpart, like Phantasma, it should probably be released with an equal or slightly lower disposition than it's non prime and just be left that way for a good long while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

You're assuming that a riven literally comes with a prime weapon like some mandatory attachment

I am making no such assumption.

Lets take a hypothetical weapon with a hypothetical stat bump:

A sword where the prime variant has a 2% higher crit chance.

  • They could have said "ok, riven dispo on that prime variant is 2% lower than stock".  Easy to set at time of prime weapon creation.  The prime is better than stock if neither has a riven, and has a _chance_ (but not guaranteed) to be at least as good as stock if both have the same riven.
  • They also could have said "ok, riven dispo is the same.  so the prime is better than stock if neither has a riven, and the prime is better than stock when both have the same riven."

But with their current method, the prime is better when neither has a riven (no argument there) but a drop from a 3 (or 4 or 5) pip to a 1 pip virtually guarantees the prime is worse when both have the same riven.

and I can't be convinced that diversity is a valid argument when its essentially the same weapon - its not like trying to convince brammaBoys to switch to the daiyku.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, PollexMessier said:

Tho in the particular case of phantasma, which I'm assuming is what this is about,

no its not about phantasma - which while I do have a riven for it I haven't bothered looking it.  
What got me thinking about it was the Tatsu  and I was about to start throwing forma's at T.Prime when I realized there was no way to make it as good as plain jane tatsu.  
Presumably the same will be true for Phantasma however, and is certainly true of plenty of legacy prime weapons.  

A usage based system that pits prime vs non-prime variants of the SAME weapon against each other, IMO is flawed.

And I whole heartedly agree with what you say below and it goes doubly for prime vs. non prime.  

9 minutes ago, PollexMessier said:

The stupid thing about releasing weapons with low dispo is that the dispo is inherently going to stay low for a long time because the usage of a newly released thing always starts very high as people try it out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, (XBOX)Tucker D Dawg said:

and I can't be convinced that diversity is a valid argument when its essentially the same weapon - its not like trying to convince brammaBoys to switch to the daiyku.

There is nothing to convince of or about, you just don't like it, that's all, that's it.

You can choose to grouse about it, have a party!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, PollexMessier said:

The stupid thing about releasing weapons with low dispo is that the dispo is inherently going to stay low for a long time because the usage of a newly released thing always starts very high as people try it out.

Could be different strokes for different folks, but personally I'd say this is a smart thing.  If the Riven disposition started out higher and then sharply tanked because of the high usage, that would probably lead to a lot of Riven-users having a jarring experience, especially since the bulk of the player base is casual players who aren't going to understand how Riven Disposition is adjusted.  And it would lead to an even more predatory Riven market because those in the know would be trying to offload Rivens to green players who didn't understand that their new Riven was about to tank.

In short, having Riven disposition start on the ground creates a foundation that mitigates misunderstanding, scamming, and unexpected shocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...