Survival Mission Tweak

[Illegal_Squirell]

How do we feel if DE change the timer into a percentage (that would take 5 mins to passively reach 100%) and we would be given objectives (capture, rescue, sabotaged, etc) that can boost it?

[Venus-Venera]

Gerade eben schrieb Illegal_Squirell:

How do we feel if DE change the timer into a percentage (that would take 5 mins to passively reach 100%) and we would be given objectives (capture, rescue, sabotaged, etc) that can boost it?

works well as it is now. and with loot warframe you have to be 100% sure that you can camp there for hours.
and you want to convert it into another mission that already exists? what for? then you can also play mob def. and camp comfortably until the end.
but this is about “endless”. At least for a few hours, otherwise you will supposedly be banned. I read complaints about it a few years ago.

[Illegal_Squirell]

4 minutes ago, Venus-Venera said:

works well as it is now. and with loot warframe you have to be 100% . . .

I can understand the value, but survival mission isn't like a mission at all currently, start -> watch youtube -> check back occasionally.

I mean with the tweak you can still do that, but you also have optional objectives that pops up from time to time to boost the timer.

Edited November 23, 2023 by Illegal_Squirell

[Venus-Venera]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb Illegal_Squirell:

I can understand the value, but survival mission isn't like a mission at all currently, start -> watch youtube -> check back occasionally.

I mean with the tweak you can still do that, but you also have optional objectives that pops up from time to time to boost the timer.

Oh right. I think it's an interesting idea. because there are no balance for rewards and time invested. ext/cap are more popular because you're out after 1-3 minutes.

So that could be a really good feature.

Edited November 23, 2023 by Venus-Venera

[(NSW)Greybones]

Is the idea that you figure out how to complete the optional objectives while watching Youtube and grind even faster or… what?

Why not just ask that the timer be reduced? Survival’s pretty fun to just jump in and kill a bunch of dudes and see how far I can go with a build, not sure I want to be juggling alternative objectives introduced to… I guess force players who aren’t interested in doing anything to do something when I’m already getting what I want out of survival

[Voltage]

1 minute ago, (NSW)Greybones said:

Is the idea that you figure out how to complete the optional objectives while watching Youtube and grind even faster or… what?

Why not just ask that the timer be reduced? Survival’s pretty fun to just jump in and kill a bunch of dudes and see how far I can go with a build, not sure I want to be juggling alternative objectives introduced to… I guess force players who aren’t interested in doing anything to do something when I’m already getting what I want out of survival

Because having a sense of influence over mission results makes those missions feel vastly more rewarding. This is why Disruption and Void Cascade are really solid game modes while Void Armageddon is extremely boring.

[(NSW)Greybones]

Just now, Voltage said:

Because having a sense of influence over mission results makes those missions feel vastly more rewarding. This is why Disruption and Void Cascade are really solid game modes while Void Armageddon is extremely boring.

So why not just make it like the timer is reduced based on how many enemies get killed or something? It’ll reward the most efficient ways to mass-kill enemies with the least amount of effort, so that’d be extra rewarding

[Voltage]

Just now, (NSW)Greybones said:

So why not just make it like the timer is reduced based on how many enemies get killed or something? It’ll reward the most efficient ways to mass-kill enemies with the least amount of effort, so that’d be extra rewarding

So solo players as well as console players get strictly worse Survival efficiency? That sounds worse than what we have now. Having side objectives would encourage the player to have a more diverse loadout for the mission.

[(NSW)Greybones]

3 minutes ago, Voltage said:

Because having a sense of influence over mission results makes those missions feel vastly more rewarding. This is why Disruption and Void Cascade are really solid game modes while Void Armageddon is extremely boring.

Also, hey, I like Void Armageddon, but I’m also built to fight alongside the turrets so I get more options to choose from

Just now, Voltage said:

So solo players as well as console players get strictly worse Survival efficiency? That sounds worse than what we have now. Having side objectives would encourage the player to have a more diverse loadout for the mission.

I can’t imagine players would be too happy to have to diversify their loadouts when they’ve already settled on their one-build-to-rule-them-alls. If you’re that concerned about efficiency just jump into a multiplayer group, extra bonus being that you can sit back while someone else does all the work

[Voltage]

3 minutes ago, (NSW)Greybones said:

I can’t imagine players would be too happy to have to diversify their loadouts when they’ve already settled on their one-build-to-rule-them-alls. If you’re that concerned about efficiency just jump into a multiplayer group, extra bonus being that you can sit back while someone else does all the work

A player who doesn't participate in the change would see no alteration in gameplay. 

I'm advocating for a way to make the gamemode more interesting, not trying to preserve some lazy-man's clicker gameplay. Survival is objectively uninteresting. It's just a timer. It's the worst Circuit mode for this reason as well. It's very dated and there are hardly enough enemies to feel like "survival" and more like "enemy funnel simulator".

You want to encourage players to actually participate in the game more, not just be playing a game of timers.

6 minutes ago, (NSW)Greybones said:

Also, hey, I like Void Armageddon, but I’m also built to fight alongside the turrets so I get more options to choose from

Void Armageddon is just a modern version of Archwing Defense or Uranus Submersible Defense. It's Mobile Defense with tons of downtime and little going on for it to be an interesting mode. You can completely ignore the turrets too.

[(NSW)Greybones]

19 minutes ago, Voltage said:

A player who doesn't participate in the change would see no alteration in gameplay. 

I'm advocating for a way to make the gamemode more interesting, not trying to preserve some lazy-man's clicker gameplay. Survival is objectively uninteresting. It's just a timer. It's the worst Circuit mode for this reason as well. It's very dated and there are hardly enough enemies to feel like "survival" and more like "enemy funnel simulator".

You want to encourage players to actually participate in the game more, not just be playing a game of timers.

You gotta actually build to sit around waiting for a timer to count down, so if someone’s going to go out of their way to figure out the best way to do that, let them watch Youtube or shoot the breeze while the grind just happens

It’s a gamemode of “Kill for however long you want”, it doesn’t need to be hugely complex and it gives a chance to just make builds built around endless fighting. There’s a sweet spot where enemies die and threaten at a good rate and the fight works well, but if someone doesn’t want that and builds to avoid it you’re just going to annoy them by forcing them to mix it up for the sake of more efficiency.

19 minutes ago, Voltage said:

Void Armageddon is just a modern version of Archwing Defense or Uranus Submersible Defense. It's Mobile Defense with tons of downtime and little going on for it to be an interesting mode. You can completely ignore the turrets too.

It’s a “Defend objective” mission with turrets. I find it sufficiently different to Mobile defence once you actually work alongside the turrets and have to manage your resources and placement; there’ve been a few close calls that were made or broken by what I spawned and where I put it. You can build your loadout in the Orbiter as if you’re doing a higher-level mission than what you’re jumping into to ignore the turrets (like a lot of this game, and sometimes I do just because I can or feel like it), but that just makes for initially-fun-but-eventually-boring gameplay as well as not using the builds and loadouts I want to use for the fight

Edited November 23, 2023 by (NSW)Greybones

[Illegal_Squirell]

1 hour ago, (NSW)Greybones said:

Is the idea that you figure out how to complete the optional objectives while watching Youtube and grind even faster or… what?

I want survival to be more engaging by popping up optional objectives, players who want to do it get rewarded efficiency, those who don't can keep going as usual. And maybe have a timer for the objectives to complete, so if someone doesn't want that particular objective, they can ignore it, and get another one.

1 hour ago, (NSW)Greybones said:

So why not just make it like the timer is reduced based on how many enemies get killed or something?

A set of fixed objectives is fine, but I feel like the extra randomness would hit my dopamine nerve a bit harder.

1 hour ago, Voltage said:

I'm advocating for a way to make the gamemode more interesting, not trying to preserve some lazy-man's clicker gameplay. Survival is objectively uninteresting. 

Exactly, as of right now they might as well tell the players to stare at the wall, at least then the players can completely ignore it until the timer run out.

1 hour ago, (NSW)Greybones said:

You gotta actually build to sit around waiting for a timer to count down, so if someone’s going to go out of their way to figure out the best way to do that, let them watch Youtube or shoot the breeze while the grind just happens

Even my poor man Khora can use her high strength small Strangledome to juiced up enemies in most survival missions, I'll only have to check on it every one minute, and if something were to happened, such as if I get distracted for too long, or an eximus crash the party, well what's the worst that could happened? I get downed? My poor man focus build with Last Grasp can fix that real quick. And this is coming from someone who never check on what the optimal way to afk in survival mode.

And don't get me started on public party, don't get me wrong, I'm grateful for the chance to afk, but it's just not fun.

[(XBOX)Lord ChibiVR]

2 hours ago, Voltage said:

So solo players as well as console players get strictly worse Survival efficiency? That sounds worse than what we have now. Having side objectives would encourage the player to have a more diverse loadout for the mission.

 

7 hours ago, Illegal_Squirell said:

How do we feel if DE change the timer into a percentage (that would take 5 mins to passively reach 100%) and we would be given objectives (capture, rescue, sabotaged, etc) that can boost it?

Why can't we just get a new game mode that's like this?

(I agree with this post because survival by itself is kinda boring/annoying when I'm killing enemies but somehow I hit 30% oxygen because of how weirdly scaled the support drops are.)

Edited November 23, 2023 by (XBOX)Upl0rdYT

[(PSN)robotwars7]

no thanks, if I want to do objectives, I'll play one of the many other objective-based game modes we have. Survival is all about kicking back and enjoying the mass murder as it unfolds, warframe's wonderful combat in all it's glory! no need to sully it with objectives, unless they're purely optional and give decent enough rewards, if that's the case, then it might be worthwhile.

all I really want for survival is more spawns, more spawns, and a few extra spawns. 

 

[SneakyErvin]

3 hours ago, (NSW)Greybones said:

So why not just make it like the timer is reduced based on how many enemies get killed or something? It’ll reward the most efficient ways to mass-kill enemies with the least amount of effort, so that’d be extra rewarding

That would just reintroduce what made Steel Path so boring at first, a very narrow choice of frames to increase KPM as much as possible for more Eximus spawns. And if survival was based on KPM it would end up exactly as Khora/Baruuk Path.

As to the OP idea. Sounds like a good reason to create a new game mode. Pablo said during tennocon 2022 iirc that they arent keen on reworking current modes, since players may enjoy their current state, so they rather make new modes. Which is why we probably saw all the Zariman modes that are similar to other modes but different without impacting other modes.

[(PSN)slightconfuzzled]

Eh, would rather this be something else entirely. Subjectively preference based reasons. 

Think of it this way, "Survival mission isn't like a mission at all currently, start -> watch youtube -> check back occasionally." totally foreign way to play the game to how I do. When I play Survival, I like to pick certain Warframes, weapons, builds, and just run around killing enemies, usually in various ways. Usually in ways I find enjoyable and satisfactory, within the act of. I am very focused on that and enjoying the experience for what it is, or perhaps, better phrased, what I make it. 

Now I am not claiming that everyone does or should play this way... but some do. Like, personally I could sit here and talk to anyone about how the inconsistent nature of Kuva Chakkhurr spread can make it feel satisfying, even if inconsistent over long ranges. Or how the sound design of the Exergis makes it more satisfying to use as a weapon, or how certain weapons ground attacks are really satisfying, so worth using with combos to let you get to see that animation, or how there are certain finisher animations that won't kill an enemy, but are really fun to spam. Or how certain Warframe abilities synergise really satisfyingly with certain weapons, and so setting up and performing that combo over and over again and feel satisfying. 

Then you can have another play who just likes the weapon with the highest DPS... and thats totally fine and fair as well. 

So for me, Survival is as engaging and fun as I can make it, which I can. Its also Warframe though, so I can also make most modes effortless and passive, and easy to have in background whilst watching Youtube. Enough practice with anything can let you autopilot, but you do want to be careful as far as the interaction between what you can get away with, and the effort and interest that can be inserted if you care, because chances are, there will be stuff you will enjoy and appreciate others can be apathetic to, and see no reason to exist as is, and the complexities that ensue with such conflict. 

 

[(PSN)FirmBizkit]

Sounds like a fun idea but would rather see it as a separate mission type.

[(NSW)Greybones]

9 hours ago, Illegal_Squirell said:

I want survival to be more engaging by popping up optional objectives, players who want to do it get rewarded efficiency, those who don't can keep going as usual. And maybe have a timer for the objectives to complete, so if someone doesn't want that particular objective, they can ignore it, and get another one.

A set of fixed objectives is fine, but I feel like the extra randomness would hit my dopamine nerve a bit harder.

Even my poor man Khora can use her high strength small Strangledome to juiced up enemies in most survival missions, I'll only have to check on it every one minute, and if something were to happened, such as if I get distracted for too long, or an eximus crash the party, well what's the worst that could happened? I get downed? My poor man focus build with Last Grasp can fix that real quick. And this is coming from someone who never check on what the optimal way to afk in survival mode.

And don't get me started on public party, don't get me wrong, I'm grateful for the chance to afk, but it's just not fun.

You might want to look at how you’re building for the content you’re doing.

Like, why are you built the way you are for the content you’re doing if it’s so boring? From the sounds of things, if you gave me your build, I’d probably tear it down and rebuild it in a different way, or take it somewhere else. I could stand around semi-AFK as well, but I don’t typically build to do it unless I’m looking for what that gives me. And I’m thinking that introducing extra objectives is just going to be treated the same way where you figure out the best way to semi-AFK and we’re back to square one

🤔 Thinking about it overnight, despite my jumping into Survival to do Survival, I may not necessarily mind a bit of randomness. I do like the “Change of plans” that sometimes pop up (though they’re few and far between, unfortunately). But I randomise my loadout sometimes through the “Randomise Loadout” button and build according to the content I’m doing and what randomness has given me, as opposed to sticking to consistent builds and loadouts that make for low-effort grind in particular content. I’m fine with rebuilding often, but that’s not true of a lot of players

edit: Thinking more about it, I like the idea as a different mission type while leaving pure Survival as an option

Edited November 23, 2023 by (NSW)Greybones

[(NSW)Greybones]

As a different mission type, I could get onboard. I’m not sure how it’d work from a mission narrative perspective (I’ll leave DE to figure that out), but a morphing mission might be kind of cool

[o0Despair0o]

All I want from survival is individual extraction.

 

Please, I beg you, DE.

[(PSN)jaggerwanderer]

DE tried something like this. Voruna. it kinda works. Just not popular. 

[(XBOX)ShadowBlood89]

On 2023-11-23 at 12:20 AM, Illegal_Squirell said:

How do we feel if DE change the timer into a percentage (that would take 5 mins to passively reach 100%) and we would be given objectives (capture, rescue, sabotaged, etc) that can boost it?

Survival missions have always been one that a big time sync, along with it being one that team work, cooperation an common sense is needed.
your suggestion of adding in something that would honestly make the mission much harder an more prone to failing.

Like Jagger said we had the lua survival mission where we could get lua thrax plasmin by killing enemy that would spawn at each rotation.
it not very liked due to how players often like to scatter across the map cause THEY want to kill everything an not care about how enemies spawns get messed up.

[Tsukinoki]

On 2023-11-23 at 5:49 AM, Voltage said:

So solo players as well as console players get strictly worse Survival efficiency? That sounds worse than what we have now. Having side objectives would encourage the player to have a more diverse loadout for the mission.

And then the solo and console players will still get strictly worse survival efficiency with the suggested additions....it literally does nothing to change that as groups will still be able to do far better, even more so with the objectives where they don't have to dedicate everything to completing the side objectives.

Solo and console players will be faced with "Do I sacrifice some kill speed, and therefore oxygen that can already be a bit tight due to spawns, to focus on completing an objective that will speed up the timer a bit and hope that the math works out so I come out in the lead?  Or do I just continue to kill enemies?"  after all running off to get the capture target, or going off to do the sabotage portion, will leave enemies scattered and will just further mess up the spawns and string them out.
Groups will just be "Ok, you go off and do the side objective, everyone else will continue getting life support, so now the mission progresses faster and is just as easy as it was before!"

This idea doesn't help out the poor solo and console players and in fact just widens the gap in efficiency between them and groups even more than it already can be in survivals.

 

Also I have to disagree that it will make for more diverse loadouts.
If my loadout can handle minute XX of survival then I can handle whatever side objectives it throws at me because most of them rely on either killing one enemy (capture) or not having to really worry about killing enemies (sabotage, rescue, etc.)

So the loadouts will remain exactly the same as they are now.

Edited November 24, 2023 by Tsukinoki