The addition of several Archon Shards has to come with an overhaul to the massive gating to earning them

[Voltage]

1 hour ago, Jarriaga said:

DE are known to hand-down heavy nerfs to entire systems when powercreep runs rampant. That has happened so many times it is not debatable.

The more people get access to the top of the line, the higher the risk. Thus I am compelled to gatekeep and argue in favor of controlled/minimized powercreep just so other people don't get me nerfed. So yes: Abundant access to the top of the line directly diminishes my experience by causing nerfs.

If someone who started playing today can somehow farm 100 red tau by late December by virtue of making it "accessible and fair to farm at your pace" we'll see it happen to the entire Archon Shard system as well. This is not an "if" case if we go by history because the exact same doors that lead towards "fairness of acquisition" also leads to powercreep and system abuse until the door is closed via a heavy nerf.

While true, your gatekeeping prolongs an inevitability. If we assume Shards are unbalanced (atleast the current ones as we can't test the upcoming ones), then they've been unbalanced the whole time. Wouldn't you prefer something gets fixed in a week than sitting for years like Maiming Strike did? The longer something sits without a balance change when it deserves one, the more time you waste investing in an experience that will be altered or revoked. 

The volume of Shards someone has isn't really a large concern, because the slot limit is 5 anyway. Having such a restricted nature to the system further encourages people to only care about their most powerful equipment. We've seen this with Riven Mods as well as Incarnon Adapters. 

[PublikDomain]

9 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

I'm talking out of the PoV of fusing. Where fusing several shards to make a Tau for a frame that doesnt really benefit from the 50% increase to the stat is pointless. Since you consume potential breakpoint options for several other frames in the process.

Pointless to who? Who gets to decide what's pointless or not? It's a pretty familiar topic of conversation for you and I. As I've discussed with you before on other topics, it's my belief that everyone is capable of deciding for themselves how they choose to approach things. Fusing regulars to Taus is no different of a choice than the upcoming fusing of base colors to fused colors, or the choice of installing a potato, or forma, or a lens, or any other upgrade. If you're that concerned about "losing" breakpoints on other frames then you don't have to fuse. Simple as. You should be able to pursue those breakpoints in whatever way you'd like. And for those of us that don't care about breakpoints on frames we don't play, with Tau fusion we could find some other value where there currently is none, and fuse up items to use on the frames we do.

10 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

Something that doesnt happen with the current system since we only gain shards overtime, we never lose any.

The fusion I've talked about could be both reversible and lossless by allowing Taus to just be split back down into regulars. There's no reason for you to lose anything. And from what we've seen so far of DE's upcoming changes, their idea of fusing colors is both permanent and reductive. In about a week we'll all be losing Shards to the new colors in a way that so far can't be undone.

[Skoomaseller]

On 2023-11-28 at 10:49 AM, RichardKam said:

Here we go again.

Yeah, it has been discussed since its introduction, and I do not know why the same argument was brought up again knowing that it had been resolved since last year.

Archon shard was never a problem people claimed to be. It was a non-problem. Given the powercreep, the margin of benefit provided by any archon shard was minimal. And in 2023 we have more powercreep on top of the powercreep in 2022, when we did not have incarnon lex and torid and Kullervo collective curse and all the crazy stuff. And in WITW update we will have even more powercreep as well, while the game was not made particularly more difficult since like 2021.

People moved on already. No one really care about archon shards except a handful of Tenno on this particular forum. You can't even see the have-a-tau-bless-tomorrow guy here. I have said it last year and I will say it again, it is entitlement. It is asking for the new shiny right now because I want it right now. Play the game and earn the reward. As simple as that. 

taking everything voltage said and boiling it down to """entitlement""" or """wanting it now""" (both are not even the case btw) is the same as plugging your ears with your fingers and going "lalalala can't hear you" 

you don't see people bringing the topic up on the forums anymore because everything bad about farming, or perhaps the complete lack of an avenue to farm archon shards, has already been talked to death. 

that doesn't mean the problem has gone away. it is still there. it is opening up again because fusing shards is going to be a thing, as recently announced on the last devstream.

the problem persists, it is very real. unless you are a fan of sweeping things under the rug, which I suppose was the angle DE was gunning for.

Edited November 30, 2023 by Skoomaseller

[RichardKam]

1小时前 , Skoomaseller 说:

taking everything voltage said and boiling it down to """entitlement""" or """wanting it now""" (both are not even the case btw) is the same as plugging your ears with your fingers and going "lalalala can't hear you" 

you don't see people bringing the topic up on the forums anymore because everything bad about farming, or perhaps the complete lack of an avenue to farm archon shards, has already been talked to death. 

that doesn't mean the problem has gone away. it is still there. it is opening up again because fusing shards is going to be a thing, as recently announced on the last devstream.

the problem persists, it is very real. unless you are a fan of sweeping things under the rug, which I suppose was the angle DE was gunning for.

This single thread is possibly the only place in the entire observable Internet that is still drilling on the archon shard system. And you take the lack of discussion as a proof of your statement? That's a very difficult mental gymnastics to pull off. 

By Occam's Razor I will give an easier argument. The current system is widely accepted so there is no more debate about it. Why it is widely accepted? Because no one is going to religiously play 55 frames to the point of wanting 5 shards on every single one of them. This thread is the outlier. 

This forum never failed to amuse me.

[Skoomaseller]

1 hour ago, RichardKam said:

This single thread is possibly the only place in the entire observable Internet that is still drilling on the archon shard system. And you take the lack of discussion as a proof of your statement? That's a very difficult mental gymnastics to pull off. 

By Occam's Razor I will give an easier argument. The current system is widely accepted so there is no more debate about it. Why it is widely accepted? Because no one is going to religiously play 55 frames to the point of wanting 5 shards on every single one of them. This thread is the outlier. 

This forum never failed to amuse me.

I'm saying that because you said archon shards were a non-problem, not something people discussed, as if you weren't there when people raised a stink about tauforged RNG (and rightfully so).

just because this is one of the most active threads currently about the whole thing, doesn't mean the problem has gone away. it persists. it is only "mental gymnastics" as you say if you have the object permanence of a literal newborn (might be unfair to newborns, sorry little guys!).

your statement is also incredibly stupid, firstly you present a supposed fact but it is born out of a even stupider assumption, with nothing to back it up. you the authority on how people want to mod their frames? rack off.

secondly it doesn't matter if someone wants to or doesn't want to socket all 5 shard slots on literally every frame, the point is that the rate of acquisition is so laughably bad that DE should really, REALLY take a hard look at how we acquire shards before implementing fusion for new shards.

yeah the forum is funny when clowns like yourself love putting on a show. I suggest looking in a mirror before saying S#&$ like that (provided it doesn't break first).

Edited November 30, 2023 by Skoomaseller
outlined and bolded in case you wanna "lalala can't hear you" again

[kamisama85]

3 hours ago, Skoomaseller said:

I'm saying that because you said archon shards were a non-problem, not something people discussed, as if you weren't there when people raised a stink about tauforged RNG (and rightfully so).

Yes, because it is a non-problem.

DE's decision to add another layer to the archon shard system by allowing combination of existing shards indicates to me that they feel enough people are engaging with the system and people have a healthy amount of shards sitting around, both normal and taoforged, to create a couple combo-shards with. Call me naive if you want, but if they truly winged every decision like a handful of people want to believe, this game wouldn't have made it 10 years and going. You can only get so far on luck.

How do they know this?
Obviously, DE has visibility into the statistics of players interacting with the archon battles, how many total shards have been collected, equipped, left unused, and by color and type. It's a no brainer. They can read these concerns, and then go check their data and decide if that's actually a thing that's happening or not.

Remember when they went back and changed stuff like Railjack requirements? Pretty sure it wasn't because they went to the forums and saw the same 10 people who complain about stuff saying "Railjack sucks" to warrant action. Probably looked at their data and realized a very small % of the playerbase actually had railjacks completed or even started. They will go back and fix stuff that is truly messed up. Of course they can't get to it all, but they prioritize what is critical and players just have to accept that sometimes the thing they think is the absolute most critical and important world-altering bug is not as high on the list of concerns as they would like to believe.

In my opinion, they will have a far more reliable understanding about the player base and what state this system should be in than people on the forum loosely arguing their point based on the scattered number of people they probably saw complaining about it on the forums. That said, might not be a good idea to call out someone as stupid for making an argument on assumptions when you're in the same boat.


 

Edited November 30, 2023 by kamisama85

[Skoomaseller]

1 hour ago, kamisama85 said:

Yes, because it is a non-problem.

DE's decision to add another layer to the archon shard system by allowing combination of existing shards indicates to me that they feel enough people are engaging with the system and people have a healthy amount of shards sitting around, both normal and taoforged, to create a couple combo-shards with. Call me naive if you want, but if they truly winged every decision like a handful of people want to believe, this game wouldn't have made it 10 years and going. You can only get so far on luck.

How do they know this?
Obviously, DE has visibility into the statistics of players interacting with the archon battles, how many total shards have been collected, equipped, left unused, and by color and type. It's a no brainer. They can read these concerns, and then go check their data and decide if that's actually a thing that's happening or not.

Remember when they went back and changed stuff like Railjack requirements? Pretty sure it wasn't because they went to the forums and saw the same 10 people who complain about stuff saying "Railjack sucks" to warrant action. Probably looked at their data and realized a very small % of the playerbase actually had railjacks completed or even started. They will go back and fix stuff that is truly messed up. Of course they can't get to it all, but they prioritize what is critical and players just have to accept that sometimes the thing they think is the absolute most critical and important world-altering bug is not as high on the list of concerns as they would like to believe.

In my opinion, they will have a far more reliable understanding about the player base and what state this system should be in than people on the forum loosely arguing their point based on the scattered number of people they probably saw complaining about it on the forums. That said, might not be a good idea to call out someone as stupid for making an argument on assumptions when you're in the same boat.

i am not assuming anything. the rate at which we get shards, let alone a tauforged, is bad, plain and simple.

dude above is silly, and assumed this discussion was born out of player entitlement and "want-now" attitude. this is not helpful.

but that's not the point here.

they want to throw shard fusing into the mix. again, they need to make sure that we do get more ways to gain shards if they wanna go down this road. that is all I am saying. 

1 hour ago, kamisama85 said:

Remember when they went back and changed stuff like Railjack requirements? Pretty sure it wasn't because they went to the forums and saw the same 10 people who complain about stuff saying "Railjack sucks" to warrant action. Probably looked at their data and realized a very small % of the playerbase actually had railjacks completed or even started. They will go back and fix stuff that is truly messed up. 

i am certain player feedback, constructive or otherwise, played a part in the whole revamp of railjack. otherwise there wouldn't be a use for the forums other than constant S#&$-flinging at each other. 

I want you and the guy above to understand: these are not demands. this is feedback, something for DE to consider. is it guaranteed that DE will 100% listen and implement changes players have been clamoring for? of course not. but it's better to let them know, instead of shutting up about it. we all want the game to be the best it can be, no?

while i do not know the extent of how helpful said feedback is, as i am not working with DE, i believe they do not gather feedback via statistics & metrics alone.

Edited November 30, 2023 by Skoomaseller

[Jarriaga]

14 hours ago, Voltage said:

While true, your gatekeeping prolongs an inevitability. If we assume Shards are unbalanced (atleast the current ones as we can't test the upcoming ones), then they've been unbalanced the whole time. Wouldn't you prefer something gets fixed in a week than sitting for years like Maiming Strike did? The longer something sits without a balance change when it deserves one, the more time you waste investing in an experience that will be altered or revoked. 

Shards are balanced by acquisition control. Same goes for Incarnon adapters.

Maiming Strike is a great example of what happens when you open the accessibility floodgate because it only became a recurrent problem once you could consistently see 1-2 people using it in public matches.

It's less likely for something very powerful but hard/limited to acquire to be nerfed while the likelihood of a nerf grows exponentially when it starts to become the norm due to accessibility. You know when the Kuva Bramma became a target? When the Lich trading system went live and a bunch of MR5 players swarmed it as if it was the only weapon in the entire game. This would have taken at least another year (If not more) if you had been required to be MR14 to use it, and the nerf wouldn't have been as drastic.

14 hours ago, Voltage said:

The volume of Shards someone has isn't really a large concern, because the slot limit is 5 anyway. Having such a restricted nature to the system further encourages people to only care about their most powerful equipment. We've seen this with Riven Mods as well as Incarnon Adapters. 

I'm not getting the impression people are arguing from the point of their most powerful equipment when you yourself poisoned the well by highlighting people who are OK with the current rate likely use a small number of WF's. Unless you wish to imply the average/standard user behavior is a bad thing per se your argument comes off as trying to go left and right at once.

If average user behavior was recognized as the default position people here would not question what DE means with "extra shards" because most people are not trying to fit every WF they own with shards.

Edited November 30, 2023 by Jarriaga

[SneakyErvin]

11 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

Pointless to who? Who gets to decide what's pointless or not? It's a pretty familiar topic of conversation for you and I. As I've discussed with you before on other topics, it's my belief that everyone is capable of deciding for themselves how they choose to approach things. Fusing regulars to Taus is no different of a choice than the upcoming fusing of base colors to fused colors, or the choice of installing a potato, or forma, or a lens, or any other upgrade. If you're that concerned about "losing" breakpoints on other frames then you don't have to fuse. Simple as. You should be able to pursue those breakpoints in whatever way you'd like. And for those of us that don't care about breakpoints on frames we don't play, with Tau fusion we could find some other value where there currently is none, and fuse up items to use on the frames we do.

The fusion I've talked about could be both reversible and lossless by allowing Taus to just be split back down into regulars. There's no reason for you to lose anything. And from what we've seen so far of DE's upcoming changes, their idea of fusing colors is both permanent and reductive. In about a week we'll all be losing Shards to the new colors in a way that so far can't be undone.

To everyone practically. I mean it is a common phenomena in games with gear progression, people do pointless things because they most often think more is better or higher rarity is better when the benefit has no meaning whatsoever. And since you cleared up what you ment, that both systems should be active at once, I dont see why you keep arguing, since this is not an issue at that point, since getting Tau would not be locked to either or, so if people want to fuse pointlessly they can knock themselves out. And again you kinda oversimplify what is said by assuming shards are used on breakpoints for frames not played. That isnt the case, since less played =//= not played, it means... well... less played.

The upcoming fusion adds additional shards per week aswell, so the impact of fusing wont be as severe as fusing while only getting 2 shards per week. We are also far far after the release of Velibreaker, so right now most of us have plenty of extra shards just sitting there. My comment to you was made regarding the system we got versus the fusion system you wanted at that point in time. Since you werent clear in that post that you wanted both at the same time, it really didnt look like you implied that due to your wording and your either or comparison in shard yield between the systems in that post.

Plus if we want to with WitW we can even utilize the systems individually, so whatever is gained from WitW is used for fusion while we keep Veilbreaker shards as they are. Personal player budget setup and so on. Since WitW fusion is likely designed in a way to promote using fusion, by rewarding us more shards to play with.

[SneakyErvin]

30 minutes ago, Jarriaga said:

I'm not getting the impression people are arguing from the point of their most powerful equipment when you yourself poisoned the well by highlighting people who are OK with the current rate likely use a small number of WF's. Unless you wish to imply standard user behavior is a bad thing per se your argument comes off as trying to go left and right at once.

If average user behavior was an acceptable position people would not question what DE means with "extra shards", because most people are not trying to fit every WF they own with shards.

We really have no data that tells us either. While the vocal that are OK with the gating play few frames it doesnt mean it is the standard, avarage or anything similar. Reducing or removing the gate could also see an increased use for more frames, since you'd be able to try more combinations and not just bet safe. Even with excess shards I have a hard time placing them on frames I could find myself trying out with shards, since the removal costs are high and it is a #*!%ing drag aswell to engage with the system because it is menu upon menu upon menu for each #*!%ing shard removed.

I mean the whole shard system is a #*!%ing cluster #*!% atm to put it mildly. From gate to UI and everything else, it is utter trash.

Just look at the poor execution of how removal works on a frame with all shards. Engage with chair (or through menu), access shard menu, click shard, click accept, click nect shard, click accept, escape to general helminth UI, click feed, click bile, click food times X, hit esc, confirm feeding, click shard menu, click shard, accept removal, click shard, accept removal, esc to general helminth UI, click feed, click bile, click food times X, hit esc, confirm feeding, click shard menu, click shard, accept removal.

That is all to remove 5 measly #*!%ing shards. Who the hell in their right mind designed it that way?

Edited November 30, 2023 by SneakyErvin

[Jarriaga]

20 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

We really have no data that tells us either. While the vocal that are OK with the gating play few frames it doesnt mean it is the standard, avarage or anything similar.

It is an an industry-wide trend. People gravitate towards 5-10 playable characters on average when large rosters are involved from fighting games to MMO. If this doesn't apply to WF we'd be looking at the exception rather than the norm, and educated guesses on average/standard behavior are not done based on exceptions.

20 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

Reducing or removing the gate could also see an increased use for more frames

I don't think so unless we're talking about a frame you already gravitate towards but find underpowered. Most people gravitate towards some playable characters based on theme or appearance, with performance being secondary.  This means there's no power level buff that would ever get me interested in playing Saryn or Mesa over Valkyr, and this is true for most people on their thematic preferences (Hence why even Yareli had day 1 fans despite performance).

I agree with the rest of your post on shard removal/replacement clunkiness.

Edited November 30, 2023 by Jarriaga

[SneakyErvin]

1 minute ago, Jarriaga said:

It is an an industry-wide trend. People gravitate towards 5-10 playable characters on average when large rosters are involved from fighting games to MMO. If this doesn't apply to WF we'd be looking at the exception rather than the norm, and educated guesses on average/standard behavior are not done based on exceptions.

I don't think so unless we're talking about a frame you already gravitate towards but find underpowered. Most people gravitate towards some playable characters based on theme or appearance, with performance being secondary.  This means there's no power level buff that would ever get me interested in playing Saryn or Mesa over Valkyr, and this is true for most people on their thematic preferences.

There arent enough games of this type to claim a trend. Fighting is of a completely different make up since there is no power or role difference between characters. And the MMO that was similar to WF died 6+ years ago and there has been nothing similar since.

Already gravitating towards or not doesnt matter, since more freedom would increase the potential of that frame which someone gravitates towards sees use from that person. I have several frames I gravitate towards and feel like trying out but I cannot be bothered to do so due to the restrictions of the shard system in its current state, where the gating and the unbinding of shards are the main reasons. For instance, I have all loadout slots unlocked that are available to me at L1, all but 2 of them are used for a different frame I could see myself playing, but only around 10 of them actually have shards installed. Which means I practically never use any loadout but those 10.

Which in itself also means the gating is utterly pointless. It really just adds more problems to the game, problems that DE at the time of the release of Veilbreaker already tried to solve, problems that were so grand that they recently tried to pitch a cash option for one of them. And that problem is new players or those that have been on a break are left far behind with no real way to catch up. And shards being gated is a far bigger issue than quest progress. DE acknowledged the problem of time gating regarding quests and though "wait a whole day" was bad, but for some reason they completely miss how a 1 week gate impacts players that return to the game or arrive fresh. Kinda contrasting and shocking to say the least.

[PublikDomain]

10 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

The upcoming fusion adds additional shards per week aswell, so the impact of fusing wont be as severe as fusing while only getting 2 shards per week.

But aren't you still "losing" total Shards? A big sticking point for you was/has been the "loss" of total Shards, and that was a common issue brought up by many others opposed to fusing to Taus during the hubbub when the system was introduced, and here you're about to be losing total Shards in the exact same way to a new system - but it's actually OK and you can justify it? That's what I don't get. And not in an accusatory way, I mean I just don't get it. I feel like if you're going to oppose something then that opposition ought to at the very least be consistently applied. If tertiary changes like additional acquisition methods make one OK then shouldn't it make the other OK too?

10 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

My comment to you was made regarding the system we got versus the fusion system you wanted at that point in time.

I mean even then fusion would have been better than pity, for all but one situation I can think of that's ultimately a temporary one.

• Over a 15-week period the old, pre-pity system yielded on average 1 Tau and 9 regulars of all 3 colors if you did all of your stuff.
• With the pity system the same 15-week period yields on average 2 Tau and 8 regulars of each color.
• With 3:1 fusion instead of pity the total drop rates would be the same as before at 1 Tau and 9 regulars of each color, but you could then fuse/break them down into 4 Taus or 12 regulars or any valid combination in between.

So it'd be a straight up better choice for anyone that wants Taus (4 > 2), anyone that wants as many total of any grade (12 > 10), or a neutral choice for anyone that values Taus and regulars equally and doesn't care (10 == 10). The only situation where this wouldn't be faster to reach some goal than with pity alone is when fusing only one set of regulars per unit of time for a yield of 2:6 (compared to 2:8 with pity), but if you only want that one extra Tau for idk a specific breakpoint and then wanted as many regulars as possible for other things you'd more than make up for those two "lost" regulars by breaking down future Taus you don't want as much. Plus there are the other benefits of fusing up to Tau like promoting additional gameplay like Kahl content and providing more reasons to go out and get "wrong" colors. It's just... better.

Edited December 1, 2023 by PublikDomain

[Jarriaga]

4 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

There arent enough games of this type to claim a trend. Fighting is of a completely different make up since there is no power or role difference between characters. And the MMO that was similar to WF died 6+ years ago and there has been nothing similar since.

The trend is not per game type. People are prone to be overwhelmed by too many choices in every aspect of life, which results in falling back to a comfortable minimum. Being a fighting game, an MMO, a racing game, D&D or a looter/shooter doesn't change this. Choice Overload is a well-researched phenomena:

https://thedecisionlab.com/biases/choice-overload-bias
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/27/your-money/27shortcuts.html
https://bigthink.com/thinking/choice-analysis-paralysis/
 

Most people don't make exceptions per game type ("Limit my choices in fighting games, but not in shooters"). That's a gamer mentality divorced from real life.

4 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

Already gravitating towards or not doesnt matter, since more freedom would increase the potential of that frame which someone gravitates towards sees use from that person. I have several frames I gravitate towards and feel like trying out but I cannot be bothered to do so due to the restrictions of the shard system in its current state, where the gating and the unbinding of shards are the main reasons. For instance, I have all loadout slots unlocked that are available to me at L1, all but 2 of them are used for a different frame I could see myself playing, but only around 10 of them actually have shards installed. Which means I practically never use any loadout but those 10.

 

More freedom will only lead the average joe to choice overload. Again: Unless they were already interested in something but found a roadblock (Performance) they are unlikely to want to try something new that requires additional investment. At most they'll test if the "new shiny" makes their previous intentions viable.

 

4 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

Which in itself also means the gating is utterly pointless. It really just adds more problems to the game, problems that DE at the time of the release of Veilbreaker already tried to solve, problems that were so grand that they recently tried to pitch a cash option for one of them. And that problem is new players or those that have been on a break are left far behind with no real way to catch up. And shards being gated is a far bigger issue than quest progress. DE acknowledged the problem of time gating regarding quests and though "wait a whole day" was bad, but for some reason they completely miss how a 1 week gate impacts players that return to the game or arrive fresh. Kinda contrasting and shocking to say the least.

And thus we get nerfs when the top of the line becomes the common access tools.  

[SneakyErvin]

21 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

But aren't you still "losing" total Shards? A big sticking point for you was/has been the "loss" of total Shards, and that was a common issue brought up by many others opposed to fusing to Taus during the hubbub when the system was introduced, and here you're about to be losing total Shards in the exact same way to a new system - but it's actually OK and you can justify it? That's what I don't get. And not in an accusatory way, I mean I just don't get it. I feel like if you're going to oppose something then that opposition ought to at the very least be consistently applied. If tertiary changes like additional acquisition methods make one OK then shouldn't it make the other OK too?

I mean you even quoted the reason why I'm OK with the idea in WitW. We will get more shards, either more of the current or the new colors. So if we get more current shard colors we'll have an "abundance" per week compared to now. The system has also been live for quite a long time, so we already also have shards sitting un-used. My stance has been based on what we had way back then, what would have been better at that point between failsafe or fusion. And again, since you specified both at the same time, the either or isnt a factor anymore. Since obviously both together would be the best for player choice.

21 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

I mean even then fusion would have been better than pity, for all but one situation I can think of that's ultimately a temporary one.

• Over a 15-week period the old, pre-pity system yielded on average 1 Tau and 9 regulars of all 3 colors if you did all of your stuff.
• With the pity system the same 15-week period yields on average 2 Tau and 8 regulars of each color.
• With 3:1 fusion instead of pity the total drop rates would be the same as before at 1 Tau and 9 regulars of each color, but you could then fuse/break them down into 4 Taus or 12 regulars or any valid combination in between.

Well yes and no. While over a specific period of time the two would break even there are a few downsides. First being that you would actually have to wait the whole time (or nearly) to get any actually use out of being able to fuse, unless all you care for is the rarity of the item you slot and not the actual stats you can slot in total. Obviously it would differ for some frames, like those that make use of several different colors in a build. Secondly, if you are interested in more than a single frame, this would all repeat with each frame you decide to progress with the shard system. Since there would be no hand me downs if frames share colors for instance. With the failsafe system everything practically ends up on the next frame in line. Sure after a while we will be at a point where we dont want to invest in more frames, but that isnt something that we would have ran into at the point when the system was added. Right now though the system would likely be favorable, since we have shards to play around with.

19 hours ago, Jarriaga said:

The trend is not per game type. People are prone to be overwhelmed by too many choices in every aspect of life, which results in falling back to a comfortable minimum. Being a fighting game, an MMO, a racing game, D&D or a looter/shooter doesn't change this. Choice Overload is a well-researched phenomena:

That really doesnt apply to gaming overall, hence why the altoholic is such a wide phenomena within multiclass games like MMORPGs and Online games like WF and always has been. While in fighting games and racing games you often stick to the aestethics, because the gameplay doesnt actually change between your choices. And in a shooter like BF you likely find a gun that is compatible with your skill in the game, one that allows you correct handling with X attachments etc. And when you find that gun you likely wont change since the gameplay doesnt changed much if you change to another gun. So you will have one go to LMG, DMR, Assault, Sniper, Shotgun, PDW and Pistol most likely.

19 hours ago, Jarriaga said:

More freedom will only lead the average joe to choice overload. Again: Unless they were already interested in something but found a roadblock (Performance) they are unlikely to want to try something new that requires additional investment. At most they'll test if the "new shiny" makes their previous intentions viable.

That is a silly notion to have regarding WF out of all games. Freedom of choice is the very core of WF, hence why we have 55(!) #*!%ing frames, hundreds of weapon, both melee and ranged etc. So the whole "avarage joe choice overload" is utter and total bull as a reason for the limitations within the shard system. Marvel Heroes is also a game that contradicts this idea of yours, since it was a game with even more playable options (nearly 80 iirc) than WF, along with 3 talents/skill trees for each hero and full Diablo-esque itemization, including runewords etc. And no one was overwhelmed or confused by the insane amount of choice. Not to mention PoE and Grim Dawn and their advanced and expansive skill talent systems and nearly classless freedom in building. There is a reason people play these games, to build, experiment, find new playstyles to oblitirate the enemies and modes etc. And it is possible due to freedom and options.

20 hours ago, Jarriaga said:

And thus we get nerfs when the top of the line becomes the common access tools.  

How on earth do you even consider that a response to what was said or a justification to people falling behind? The top of the line is common access tools eitherway, it just happens to be hidden behind numbers of "inactive" players. Things arent suddenly better because more people have them. So if a certain shard suddenly is deemed too powerful, it is already too powerful at this very moment.

[Hexerin]

Oh look, the new system doesn't do anything to alleviate this issue. Feigns surprise.

[Dunkelheit]

vor 6 Stunden schrieb Hexerin:

Oh look, the new system doesn't do anything to alleviate this issue. Feigns surprise.

You can get more in a shorter timeframe. It has been said time and time again that they don't want a flood of Archon Shards, but that they will push out more Archon Shards when the game becomes older. The game became older, you can get more shards. So everything is developing like they said they would?

[Kaiga]

8 hours ago, Hexerin said:

Oh look, the new system doesn't do anything to alleviate this issue. Feigns surprise.

You can roll 5 additional times per week for a chance at an archon (and tauforged!) shard in the netracell activity, as well as reducing the cost of, and adding more resources to bile along with almost everything from duviri.

This post is a blatant lie.

Edited December 14, 2023 by Kaiga

[(PSN)iuvenilis]

2 hours ago, Kaiga said:

You can roll 5 additional times per week for a chance at an archon shard

Yeh, a chance. Could do all 5 and get none.

How long until they add the pity mechanic to this new mission.

At least with khal and archon hunt the base archon shards are guaranteed. What was the point to add a new mission but only have a CHANCE at an archon shard. 

I thought we'd learnt some lessons with the tau forged issues... hence the pity system. But we've got the exact same thing again, now it's for base archon shards as well.

[(PSN)Spider_Enigma]

5 minutes ago, (PSN)iuvenilis said:

Yeh, a chance. Could do all 5 and get none.

How long until they add the pity mechanic to this new mission.

At least with khal and archon hunt the base archon shards are guaranteed. What was the point to add a new mission but only have a CHANCE at an archon shard. 

I thought we'd learnt some lessons with the tau forged issues... hence the pity system. But we've got the exact same thing again, now it's for base archon shards as well.

this is my problem, i got NONE

i also rolled 40 packs and got no legendary arcane

[(XBOX)RaeOvSunshyn]

3 hours ago, Kaiga said:

You can roll 5 additional times per week for a chance at an archon (and tauforged!) shard in the netracell activity

I'm confused... Is it 5 tries for a chance of 1? As in, once you've gotten that 1, no need to run it again? Or is it 5 tries for a chance to get 5?

[(XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA]

7 hours ago, (XBOX)RaeOvSunshyn said:

I'm confused... Is it 5 tries for a chance of 1? As in, once you've gotten that 1, no need to run it again? Or is it 5 tries for a chance to get 5?

Dont take this as gospel but im pretty sure its like this. 

 

You get 5 "passes" each week. Each time you complete the netracell mission you use a pass and the dice roll on the reward. The reward *could be* a tau shard or a regular shard or something else.

As far as i know, you could theoretically get the same reward 5 times. Or any given specific reward not one single time.

I dont think theres "bad luck protection" here.

If you get an archon shard, be it tau or not, it can be any of the base colors.

I dont know what the drop chances actually are.

Once you've done the activity 5 times, you can still get resources and whatever drops from the activity but you wont get the special stuff you need a pass for. Its like archon hunts or sorties in that regard.

 

So if you wanted to play with a friend and one of you has already used their passes you can still do it.

[asdf3011]

10 hours ago, Kaiga said:

You can roll 5 additional times per week for a chance at an archon (and tauforged!) shard in the netracell activity, as well as reducing the cost of, and adding more resources to bile along with almost everything from duviri.

This post is a blatant lie.

I did all 5 runs, all 5 had zero shards, not sure if I got super unlucky or the numbers are against us. Either way feels kinda bad to not get even a single extra shard this week. 

[(XBOX)RaeOvSunshyn]

27 minutes ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

You get 5 "passes" each week. Each time you complete the netracell mission you use a pass and the dice roll on the reward. The reward *could be* a tau shard or a regular shard or something else.

As far as i know, you could theoretically get the same reward 5 times. Or any given specific reward not one single time.

Seems to be so. I've gotten 2 ambers and have 3 more runs I can do.

Based on the growing amount of players mentioning they've gotten none... I expect this mode's rewards will somehow be changed in the future.

[Hodor_Roe]

let us farm endlessly for basic archon shards or let us have them applied to any number of frames like mods or arcanes. The system is just painful how it currently stands.