SneakyErvin Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 15 hours ago, Merkranire said: Just because you don’t have a problem with it does not mean you should expect others to be like you, or worse, make them feel like they’re doing something wrong. If you feel you might be doing things wrong based on what someone else does then the truth might be you are actually doing something wrong. 15 hours ago, Merkranire said: I showed you examples of an alternative, explained the thinking, described how it lets this third person shooter be a third person shooter, complete with balanced gameplay and intrinsic/extrinsic incentives, and you turned your nose up at it and acted like the right way to play is your way. Don’t do that to people! You do what you want in solo, but you’re a useless vet with a narrow view, who would be someone not worth talking to because all you can do is act like there’s one right way to play and that’s how you play. You talk about your builds and playstyles like I’m supposed to be impressed with the variety you’re referencing, but when alternatives that draw upon every other way to build a Frame and its loadout for whatever mission (if not using the same frame build you’re referencing but different loadouts) are presented you think they make zero sense and I have to hit you over the head repeatedly with why it’s a thing and why the game lets it work and actively rewards using it from both a gameplay and reward perspective. No I didnt act like my way was the right way. I've only implied that it is the common and accepted way, the majority approach players take to these types of games. And we play solo if we want something specific to be the outcome, that applies to both of us. In public, the majority rules and sets the pace, we either live with that or avoid public. It is the democratic (to put it in political terms) way to handle it, so the most common playstyle decides how a public mission will turn out and be played. No one is trying to impress you. I'm simply poiting out that there is already enough diversity in playing like I (and many others) do. It's your personal view that more builds need to be used in order for things to be fun, fun which is a subjective idea that is only true to you. My fun takes the shape of what I explained, it is as simple as that. Or are you the kind of person that thinks someone is wrong for enjoying a certain genre within movies/music/books etc? Or the person that cannot bend their head around the whole "eye of the beholder" thing? Because this is just that, we find enjoyment in different things, some are more mainstream than others. You happen to not like the mainstream approach in this case, which results in you being upset at the majority of players you end up with. I dislike rap (to put it mildly) along with several other music genres, but I wont go to someones party and demand rap or any of the other genres arent going to be played if the majority at that party wants that music. I went to a public gathering, the majority sets the pace, I have to accept that since I went there, even if that means I'll leave that party slightly closer to a neanderthal in mental capacity. 15 hours ago, Merkranire said: And all of this would be fine in Solo (I’d absolutely every-so-often play like you in solo, it can be fun in moderation), but when you jump into multiplayer thinking you don’t need to reconsider anything you’re doing, you’re enforcing your playstyle on others because the mission simply can’t fit you and three other people. I wouldn’t have a problem with you either if you didn’t end up hogging the game, but as it stands you take all the kills, defend the objective alone, and sideline your teammates who want something to do alongside other players. Yes and it is also fine in publics since most people enjoy and/or benefit from that playstyle. And no, it is fun at all times, atleast to me. So dont try to imply what you find fun is fact, since it clearly isnt, because it is subjective to everyone. I'm enforcing the idea of democracy really, the popular approach for these types of games. I also dont take all the kills. I just did Mirror Defense today in a group in order to get the bounty done by the end of objective 2 i.e gathering enough glyphs for 4x defense buffs. I did this with Saryn, with my total stripper (hue hue) build that has AoE out the whazoo, with a 9m Influence Bo Prime Incarnon, Nourish, Torid and so on. I did not hog all the kills, I played the objective (must be a shocker to someone that seems to think everything is about how much you kill?), this was with an obvious "SP build" in non-SP content. I did this 6 times over with the exact same outcome every run. I also did the GotL with my Kullervo and his bonkers build, and everyone got their share of the cake since that is how the mission works. So maybe dont do the missons of the lowest of lowest levels that are only about killing while you carry a wet noodle to fight with? I mean you talk alot about fighting alongside, but you only do the most dumb-dumb missions that have zero reason for grouping in the first place outside of speeding them up. 15 hours ago, Merkranire said: Of course you don’t have a problem with my playstyle, I could be gone and you wouldn’t miss me that’s how much of an impact I have on you in multiplayer, but when you step onto the scene, you have a huge impact on not just mine but anyone else’s gameplay, and what’s particularly egregious is that you think that other players are of the same mindset as you, so when you sideline them you’re imagining they’re like “Fair play, I’d do the same to you” Yes you could practically be gone if you run something like the build you brought up, because you wouldnt add anything. But with a decent build you would have had an impact without a doubt since the notion of people hogging kills is a fantasy for the most part rooted in the lowest of content the game has to offer. And the reason I think other players are of the same mindset is because it is the norm. Like I said earlier, you are a very unique individual since you are practically the first with your mindset that I've ran into throughout the last 20+ years across a multitude of these types of games and tens upon tens of thousands of hours. And another reason why I think they are OK with the playstyle is because they freely signed up to a public mission, so agreed on that anything goes the moment they clicked the button. I wont go poo flinging monkey mad if I join a PuG, do the mission, head to EZ and then have to wait for aslong as the mission took us because some guy wants to smash boxes and loot lockers. I'm perfectly fine with that since I freely joined a public run, even if it just doubled my clear time having to wait the full time at the EZ. So if I can live with things not going my way in PuGs, why cant you? Also for those that do not know this secret. Rap = ***ards Attempting Poetry. RnB = Really not Beautiful. Hip Hop = Hardly Intellectual Person Hopelessly Obliterating Poetry. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skoomaseller Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 49 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said: Also for those that do not know this secret. Rap = ***ards Attempting Poetry. RnB = Really not Beautiful. Hip Hop = Hardly Intellectual Person Hopelessly Obliterating Poetry. cmon man rnb and hiphop are cool 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SneakyErvin Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 (edited) 17 hours ago, PublikDomain said: Mathematically, yes they are. 2X = Y is the same as X = Y/2. If you are saying that this is not true, I welcome you to try and prove me wrong with some mathematics of your own and not just blind repetition. Show your work as I have. It goes beyond math, since it isnt as simple as just numbers. Which you've showed that you've missed further down in your post aswell. 17 hours ago, PublikDomain said: I think you might have missed the entire point of that example? You can replace Weapon A and Enemy with anything. Weapon A and Weapon B. Enemy A and Enemy B. Player A and Player B. Player A and Enemy B. Car 1 and Car 2. A and B. X and Y. It's just an example to illustrate the incredibly basic elementary school math principle that 2X = Y is the same as X = Y/2. But I can expand the example for you if that helps you better understand it? That is still buffing or nerfing, not buffing to nerf or nerfing to buff, since it isnt targetted, so misses the intended target of the action or targets something not intended aswell. As I said, if you buff enemy health it will also target the floor even if that wasnt intended, so those weapon below the target of the buffnerf (lol) that were never intended as targets still end up as targets since suddenly they can no longer push as far as their weaker state allowed them. Same as if you reduce health in order to help lower weapons, which also has a side effect of giving the already strong weapon the means to push even further. But if you were to actually apply a buff to the weapons that need it, only those weapons would be targetted, meaning the health of the enemies are still effectively the same. So no, clearly buff and nerf are not the same or interchangable. 17 hours ago, PublikDomain said: Here, here are some (very old) gifs showing what my horrible, no-good, slow-paced ,"not WF overall" evil plans to ruin the game would do: 17 hours ago, PublikDomain said: Anyways. The thread these are from has already been linked here, btw. I even told you who linked it, and told you that they linked it, and invited you to talk to me about my specifics there. You're free to read up whenever you like. You show missions where AoE isnt really needed to begin with instead of showing missions were AoE is promoted. You also make the missions look rather slow and dull yes. How would those vipers or stubbas hold up in endless? And are you seriously showing it in sorties? I mean, living in the past is a thing I guess. But we are years and years and years beyond that in content we do on a regular basis, and in progression. You have to consider the highest content we can run aswell regarding how nerfs would impact the outcome there for both how long we can push and how loot is affected. I mean heh, what you show is even lightyears slow compared to Outriders, which is a tactical looter shooter and not even a horde game in that sense, nor with movement even close to that of WF. I mean it is even slow and unengaging compared to games like Shadow Warrior 2 and Borderlands to be honest. And slow would in itself not be a big issue if it was engaging, but it isnt even that. 17 hours ago, PublikDomain said: But why? I won't dispute that there is a sort of power progression through MR locks, but given that it ends up not actually doing anything I definitely do question its purpose. For example, you can just buy your way past it. So does it serve to limit your power progression, or is it really just a F2P monetization strategy to get you to skip the wait and buy the cool shiny? When you can get Kuva Weapons as early as MR5, well, what are these limitations actually doing? More generally, what good does having "high level" and "low level" items do for us as players besides give us fewer items to play with when we all inevitably hit the "high level" part of the game? I imagine you'll say the typical things about protecting some "progression", as Ayin has, and you can refer to my reply to them about that. It serves both purposes. That isnt really the point though, the point is that DE wants a form of progression between lower and higher gear. While Kuva are MR5, they still come with their own limitations tied to the mode. Everything else is unlocked on the basic star chart when tied to MR, but with Kuva it further limits it through the need to be able to handle a lich/sister. Which also allows them to be more powerful since you are effectively doing a "hard" mastery rank test when you do the content. What it does? Give us an actual sense of progression. And the notion in your answer to Ayin, that horizontal progression provides you with something always just isnt true. It's as likely to be a bust as vertical progression. Since whatever sidegrade mechanic is tied to it, it may very well be worse than what you currently use, or if there are no new sidegrade mechanics tied to it, it will just be another skin compared to what you already use, so just as likely to get skipped if it isnt someones cup of tea. Though WF is both vertical and horizontal, horizontal for the most part. The vertical progression practically ends with variants and even there if there are several it is horizontal for the most part outside of the very lowest versions. Most do however have power progression tied to their horizontal benefits, since some stats are more appealing than others quite obviously since they enable specific setups that grant you more power over another. The reason we end up with so many fodder items is because they are just sidegrades that lack that little extra to make them competative to items already accessible. I wouldnt mind pure vertical progression if it also guaranteed that items are unique enough so I might want to use them, unique enough to enable a whole new build etc. But we just arent at that point. So we will get alot of uninteresting fodder no matter if we try to get stats as equal or possible or not. Which is why I think the whole idea of trying to normalize things is pointless and a waste of time, since it wont really do anything in the end in comparison to the shear undertaking it will be to go through all items. Another game did something similar and it took them about a year to sort it out, which ended up bleeding the playerbase since content releases were practically halted. 17 hours ago, PublikDomain said: And yet they're both still disruptive, and both should be addressed. "Progressing a mission" doesn't excuse it. Limbo's old Stasis might have "progressed" defensive missions by making the objective nigh unkillable, but it was still disruptive as hell and did eventually get changed despite the insistence from Limbo players at the time that they were just being efficient and that they were actually helping and that you should just go play solo if you don't like it and so on. According to whom? DE have already made their statement on AoE damage together with the fixes they saw fit literal years ago. I've also never really seen Limbo as disruptive, because I took some time to learn how he works and what he can do. So when I entered missions where I knew a wild Limbo is likely to appear I used frames with casting abilities, frames most often also useful for the type of objective a Limbo was good for. Sure CC is still disruptive and effectively on "1HK" levels of trivializing content. Which I think should get fixed/nerfed, since it not only trivializes missions by removing enemies as threats, it also impact mission flow if you dont have LoS ignoring AoE damage with you. Not that it happens often, just like the "issues" with AoE damage. People are making mountains out of ant hills really. We can just see it with the changes coming to Inaros aswell, and by the looks of it the design in Dante. Clearly AoE, ridiculous AoE is still very much on the table. 17 hours ago, PublikDomain said: How does what I say "remove" it? I only said that I don't think it should have ever been necessary, not that it should be removed. Like you say, it's now a part of the game, so what does DE do about it? Well, nothing! It gets left right where it is, and if adjustments actually end up being necessary to make it hard like it's supposed to be then it can just be adjusted. Adjusting the multipliers is a trivial task that already happened once before in the weeks before its addition to the game, so it's not like this would be a big ordeal. It removes it from the question I asked instead of answer the actual question which clearly refers to what can be done now with SP as a part of the game. It's as if you have this very hard time comprehending the context of what others say in relation to what has been said earlier and what you yourself have said recently. Adjusting SP multipliers would not be a solution on its own, since as said before, you'd also need to adjust loot etc. at that point to respect our time and what the norm currently is. It is easy to say "adjust numbers" when ignoring everything else that gets affected by a simple numbers adjustment to something. Everything ties together for an end sum. 17 hours ago, PublikDomain said: "They didn't actually do anything really, but they were also totally fixed and are no longer disruptive". Yes, I didnt notice any impact from the changes, yet according to DE it did something which was according to them the appropriate fix to the "problem" of "disruptive" AoE damage. And others clearly felt the fix, hence why we saw "bwawawawawah! zarr unusable, cernos unusable, whatever else unusable, bwawawawa revert bwawawawa nerfs!" when I kept using probo cernos, bramma, zarr and whatever else just the same as before. So uhm DE goal achieved, otherwise it would be odd with years of silence. I mean sure they've talked about re-adding self damage, but that isnt due to AoE being "disruptive", it is because they dont want the progression to reach QoL with AoE locked behind a crazy amount of login days. Since swapping self stagger for self damage wouldnt really reduce "disruptive" AoE if that was still a thing. 17 hours ago, PublikDomain said: Cue the "you should go play more games then" retort you like so much. The benefits of AoE can be balanced by adjusting things like ammo and damage economy to give it some downside that prevents it from being the right answer to every problem. An AoE weapon might deal insane damage to a large area, but that's almost always paired with having severely limited ammo that only appears in controlled amounts. An AoE weapon could also deal a small amount of damage over a large area repeatedly, like a poison cloud or something. Then it probably doesn't need as strict of an ammo economy. AoE weapons can also have self-damage so the user needs to be mindful of when and where they use it, a limitation not present for other weapons. Even in MMORPGs, powerful AoE abilities will be paired with an appropriately high resource cost like mana or a long cooldown. It's super basic game design. That has already been done, so AoE issues are then solved. It currently isnt the right answer to every problem, which is why we've seen the cries from people that used it versus everything when the ammo changes went live. So again, problem solved. Or do you not consider Bramma, Kzarr and Probo as having limited ammo? Yes they clearly have those massive pools of ammo reaching insane amounts in the ballpart of 5-10 total ammo. MMORPGs mostly leave AoE pointless versus single targets, more so than making it expensive or with long CDs. They practically deal alot of damage in AoE encounters since trash tends to be fragile, so the damage that would kill the trash most often only tickles a heavy unique target, meaning it is often a waste to cast the AoE skill on that single target in the first place, both due to the cost and the time spent casting the skill. Sometimes an AoE might sync with other skills, so you use the AoE on a single heavy target in order to either increase the damage of another skill or possible proc an instant freecast of another skill each time the AoE deals damage. But there have never been a game with the "bright" idea of making AoE less attractive to use on crowds in order to increase the common use of single target instead, no the games instead create single target encounters to keep single target in your spec relevant on a regular basis. 46 minutes ago, Skoomaseller said: cmon man rnb and hiphop are cool And Steven Segal should recieve acting rewards. Edited February 24 by SneakyErvin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PublikDomain Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 18 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said: That is still buffing or nerfing, not buffing to nerf or nerfing to buff, since it isnt targetted, so misses the intended target of the action or targets something not intended aswell. I fail to see what intent has to do with simple mathematics. 21 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said: You show missions where AoE isnt really needed to begin with instead of showing missions were AoE is promoted. 17 hours ago, PublikDomain said: I can't simulate higher spawn rates this should entail, so you'll just have to look at how long it takes to kill individuals and use your 🌈 imagination 🌈 to do the rest. Right, sorry, it seems this is all too much for you. 27 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said: That isnt really the point though, the point is that DE wants a form of progression between lower and higher gear. And yet they also seem to want there not to be this progression, since they themselves chose to add mechanics like Rivens, Incarnons, Invigorations, and their recent forays into gear RNG which are all expressly intended to get players to go back and use "lower" gear. They also let you skip this progression entirely with money, and have things like Kuva weapons as mentioned before which break this progression entirely. So while there might be some intent to have some sort of overall item power progression, like I said before these kinds of restrictions are very clearly failing to achieve this supposed intent and there's plenty of very quotable statements showing the developer's clear intent to encourage the exact opposite. The only thing MR locks actually does accomplish is put pressure on players to either buy their way past these restrictions or spend a bunch of time grinding their way past. It's just monetization. 42 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said: While Kuva are MR5, they still come with their own limitations tied to the mode. Everything else is unlocked on the basic star chart when tied to MR, but with Kuva it further limits it through the need to be able to handle a lich/sister. Which also allows them to be more powerful since you are effectively doing a "hard" mastery rank test when you do the content. You don't need to "handle" anything when your three squadmates are going to turn everything around you into a fine paste anyways. All you have to do is walk up and press a button a few times. You can get carried in PUGs through the whole process of spawning, fighting, and killing a Lich. 33 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said: What it does? Give us an actual sense of progression. And what good is this "sense of progression"? Like I asked Ayin, does it excite you to get a bunch of S#&$ty weapons you won't use? Does wasting your time on garbage really fulfill your sense of pride and accomplishment? And when you reach the end of this progression, what then? This "progression" you guys keep placing on your pedestal is just so shallow. 46 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said: And the notion in your answer to Ayin, that horizontal progression provides you with something always just isnt true. It's as likely to be a bust as vertical progression. Since whatever sidegrade mechanic is tied to it, it may very well be worse than what you currently use, or if there are no new sidegrade mechanics tied to it, it will just be another skin compared to what you already use, so just as likely to get skipped if it isnt someones cup of tea. Then in this worst case scenario you've done exactly what you already do here: acquire a weapon and level it up just for the Mastery. Oh no, the worst case scenario is what we already have! But since the item you've freshly acquired will be less worse than what you currently use, the only reason to move on is because it's not your cup of tea. And that's fine! What's not fine is having to move on even when it is your cup of tea because it still isn't good enough. 36 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said: Adjusting SP multipliers would not be a solution on its own, since as said before, you'd also need to adjust loot etc. at that point to respect our time and what the norm currently is. What, SE drops? The temporary in-mission resource boosters? We already have this. 52 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said: I didnt notice any impact from the changes 52 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said: So uhm DE goal achieved "It failed, goal achieved!" Ok, champ. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merkranire Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 (edited) 8 hours ago, SneakyErvin said: If you feel you might be doing things wrong based on what someone else does then the truth might be you are actually doing something wrong. No I didnt act like my way was the right way. I've only implied that it is the common and accepted way, the majority approach players take to these types of games. And we play solo if we want something specific to be the outcome, that applies to both of us. In public, the majority rules and sets the pace, we either live with that or avoid public. It is the democratic (to put it in political terms) way to handle it, so the most common playstyle decides how a public mission will turn out and be played. No one is trying to impress you. I'm simply poiting out that there is already enough diversity in playing like I (and many others) do. It's your personal view that more builds need to be used in order for things to be fun, fun which is a subjective idea that is only true to you. My fun takes the shape of what I explained, it is as simple as that. Or are you the kind of person that thinks someone is wrong for enjoying a certain genre within movies/music/books etc? Or the person that cannot bend their head around the whole "eye of the beholder" thing? Because this is just that, we find enjoyment in different things, some are more mainstream than others. You happen to not like the mainstream approach in this case, which results in you being upset at the majority of players you end up with. I dislike rap (to put it mildly) along with several other music genres, but I wont go to someones party and demand rap or any of the other genres arent going to be played if the majority at that party wants that music. I went to a public gathering, the majority sets the pace, I have to accept that since I went there, even if that means I'll leave that party slightly closer to a neanderthal in mental capacity. Yes and it is also fine in publics since most people enjoy and/or benefit from that playstyle. And no, it is fun at all times, atleast to me. So dont try to imply what you find fun is fact, since it clearly isnt, because it is subjective to everyone. I'm enforcing the idea of democracy really, the popular approach for these types of games. I also dont take all the kills. I just did Mirror Defense today in a group in order to get the bounty done by the end of objective 2 i.e gathering enough glyphs for 4x defense buffs. I did this with Saryn, with my total stripper (hue hue) build that has AoE out the whazoo, with a 9m Influence Bo Prime Incarnon, Nourish, Torid and so on. I did not hog all the kills, I played the objective (must be a shocker to someone that seems to think everything is about how much you kill?), this was with an obvious "SP build" in non-SP content. I did this 6 times over with the exact same outcome every run. I also did the GotL with my Kullervo and his bonkers build, and everyone got their share of the cake since that is how the mission works. So maybe dont do the missons of the lowest of lowest levels that are only about killing while you carry a wet noodle to fight with? I mean you talk alot about fighting alongside, but you only do the most dumb-dumb missions that have zero reason for grouping in the first place outside of speeding them up. Yes you could practically be gone if you run something like the build you brought up, because you wouldnt add anything. But with a decent build you would have had an impact without a doubt since the notion of people hogging kills is a fantasy for the most part rooted in the lowest of content the game has to offer. And the reason I think other players are of the same mindset is because it is the norm. Like I said earlier, you are a very unique individual since you are practically the first with your mindset that I've ran into throughout the last 20+ years across a multitude of these types of games and tens upon tens of thousands of hours. And another reason why I think they are OK with the playstyle is because they freely signed up to a public mission, so agreed on that anything goes the moment they clicked the button. I wont go poo flinging monkey mad if I join a PuG, do the mission, head to EZ and then have to wait for aslong as the mission took us because some guy wants to smash boxes and loot lockers. I'm perfectly fine with that since I freely joined a public run, even if it just doubled my clear time having to wait the full time at the EZ. So if I can live with things not going my way in PuGs, why cant you? Also for those that do not know this secret. Rap = ***ards Attempting Poetry. RnB = Really not Beautiful. Hip Hop = Hardly Intellectual Person Hopelessly Obliterating Poetry. Your argument from popularity is noted, but I question the trust you place in the popular view for this game in particular considering how much of a stink the community raises when any sort of gameplay is forced onto them because they can’t choose it themselves while I’m watching you and Publik argue and you say things that make me think you’re interested in what I’m talking about, but can’t bring yourself to do it despite the options for build and loadout it’d open up because you've got some hangup about it Because most things I see players (including yourself) talk about as needing improvement, things like balanced gameplay and increased variety and a reason for the rewards we earn, already exists, but you’re not looking for that and your actions bear that observation out so I’m thinking you’ve got a real double-faced approach going on here. Given the choice between leeching for rewards and playing some game for rewards, I’m hard pressed to believe that anyone would opt for the first unless they were beaten down and they gave up on expecting an alternative, because at the end of the day they’re still getting a reward and just need to treat what happens in multiplayer as a necessary evil (despite the fact that multiplayer itself need not be treated as such if players like you would, y’know, spare a thought for the others on the team instead of assuming that they’re fine with being sidelined, and no, accidentally giving them space does not support your claims that you’re being considerate, it just means you lucked out while not giving any consideration at all) I don’t feel like I’m doing something wrong, I feel like I’m playing the game to its fullest until I jump into a multiplayer mission and you’re there trying to get me to grind as fast as you and as narrowly as you when I’m actively choosing game over grind. I see your comments like using a “decent build” and think you’re just… a real character for saying you’re not acting like your way is the right way. I can experience massive destruction and easy gameplay in Solo and know that I’m the one doing it, I make builds that are different to the one-man-army and then join multiplayer for something other than what I was doing Solo and then you storm into the room and put me into what my one-man-army Solo run is like, but now I’m not even the one doing anything so it’s like, a worse experience because I’ve got this build designed with multiplayer in mind and it’s completely unnecessary at best Edited February 24 by Merkranire 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)slightconfuzzled Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 6 hours ago, Skoomaseller said: cmon man rnb and hiphop are cool Agreed. Plus there is a wide variety and range present. There are all sorts of different styles, sounds, philosophies, approaches, ethics, to different individuals and bands involved with Hip Hop and RNB. Then like many different musical genres, there is the mainstream, there is the underground, and people and groups in-between, or are alternative, there are different nations and countries with their own overlap and subcultures, that very often weave into other cultural aspects present. You might not like Travis Scott, I don't, but he sounds different to Future. They sound different to A Tribe Called Quest, who are different to Outkast, who are different to Bubba Sparx, is different to Missy Elliot, is different to Ying Yang Twins, is different to Roots Manuva, is different to Wu Tang, is different to Biggie is different to Bone Thugs, is different to Queen Latifah, is different to De La Soul. is different to Black Milk, is different to MIA, is different to MF Doom, is different to LL Cool J. If someone was open minded and had the sincerity to find something they would enjoy and appreciate, they probably would if they looked. Granted, you might need some assistance to narrow your tastes down. There is as much variety, skill, sincerity, honesty, legitimacy and depth as anything else. As well as raw beauty, charisma, zest, influence, story telling, cultural importance. Its like the people that think "video games" is just Call of Duty and Fortnite. "Abstract art" is just Picasso and Dali. "Poetry" is just Edgar Allan Poe and William Blake. There are more to those mediums as well, for those willing to look. Its also really easy to reduce them to the superficial elements, to frame them as lacking value or significance or inferior to the glory of what preceded them. Hip Hop and Rhyme and Blues are very cool, and very legit. That being said, I think I get what SneakyErvin was saying. IIRC and this is just my assumption, and memory about the country they are from, but they probably haven't been exposed to a lot of variety of rap. Probably mostly just mainstream popular hip hop, and if that means, figures like Travis Scott, Kanye West and Nicki Minaj, probably not the best first impression. Per their example of attending a random party and not liking the music, I'd probably be the same, just because I don't really like a lot of modern pop music in general. Just like I don't really like Call of Duty or Fortnite either. Or how I might prefer Remedios Varo and Goya over say... Picasso (I can't really think of any artists I dislike though). More on topic, I still think this is a framing issue. Like there is so much "this is what you assume, and said", into, "no, I actually mean this, and you said this, and as per usual you don't get that, and no, thats not what I mean" and its happening from multiple sources. Like not that I think there is anything wrong with online arguing, can be good sometimes for people to vent, but the conversation doesn't seem like its going anyway... Just in circles, and for some participants that can be fulfilling. I know I can be guilty of carrying on conversation to the annoyance of others, but most of the time, I am legit enjoying myself. That, and I always try to sincerely understand the other person. Not every conversation has to be an argument, and sometimes, its good of participants acknowledge that if so many misunderstandings and misinterpretations are happening, even if they think the other person is responsible, can be good to try let them elaborate for clarity and understanding, as opposed to accusingly holding stuff over their head based on your own interpretation. Like i maintain some people aren't so specific about their experiences in game. I play with nukers and non nukers and people who could nuke harder if they wanted, but are more aware of others play styles. This is most obvious to me in Eidolons, and being paired with people who can do 5x3, 6x3 based on the first two runs, but slow down if we get a new player who is less skilled, slower, (sacrificing shard at the shrine), asking questions, dying more etc some people will slow down to make sure that player feels welcome and enjoys themselves. Thats also something that can happen elsewhere in the game. I don't go into Archon Hunts thinking or assuming anything. I can solo and I can solo fast, but I don't necessarily find it negative or judge those that can't, or can. I'll usually read the room. If I see the other three players have Kuva Heks, Felarxs, Xata Whisper, Roar subsumed, I'll go a bit faster, or keep up, if they are really fast. If they are just trying to survive and a bit more nervous (certain ways you can tell, some might even mention that in game text), I'll usually try to be more supportive and act off assumptions I make (like if they seem like they are firing at the Archons head, thats different than if they are jumping around, trying to hide from enemies. Not that I also delay the death a lot either, just depends on the situation and what I have gathered. Its possibly to be generally accomodating of different players though, often enough (but not always). Plus the difference in gameplay style never bothers me, and barely influences my own enjoyment, its usually just if people cause drama in chat, with bad behaviour there. Thankfully in my experience thats rare as well. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SneakyErvin Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 20 hours ago, PublikDomain said: I fail to see what intent has to do with simple mathematics. It is uhm the definition of nerfs and buff that they are targetted adjustments to something. Has zero to do with math since buffing and nerfing is not rooted in numbers only. 20 hours ago, PublikDomain said: Right, sorry, it seems this is all too much for you. But lol, you can simulate higher spawn rates, since you can actually use the highest content we have access to, which still needs to be playable and accessible and roughly come out on par with what it does now incase a nerf happens. Why you use a several year old piece of content to try and show something I really have no clue about. We've gotten so many other pieces of content since then that are arguably "harder". 20 hours ago, PublikDomain said: And yet they also seem to want there not to be this progression, since they themselves chose to add mechanics like Rivens, Incarnons, Invigorations, and their recent forays into gear RNG which are all expressly intended to get players to go back and use "lower" gear. They also let you skip this progression entirely with money, and have things like Kuva weapons as mentioned before which break this progression entirely. So while there might be some intent to have some sort of overall item power progression, like I said before these kinds of restrictions are very clearly failing to achieve this supposed intent and there's plenty of very quotable statements showing the developer's clear intent to encourage the exact opposite. The only thing MR locks actually does accomplish is put pressure on players to either buy their way past these restrictions or spend a bunch of time grinding their way past. It's just monetization. That are all either straight tied to MR aswell or they have an activity tied to them that equals something equal or being far more of a skill check/progression check than MR. So their idea of "levels" is still there tied to power in practically everything. Or do you often end up doing MR tests that equal SP circuit? Liches? And the RNG is more to mix up the meta. It is rare that it gets us to use "lower" gear since we have so many options that circumvents the system, such as really only needing 1 good pick and in the absolutely worst case we can cheese with the operator and frame we get. And again, Kuva weapons do not break the progression, since the content itself is the MR check even if the lich system is accessible at a lower MR level than the highest MR weapon. So I dont see how any of that is failing. The only thing it isnt is linear. 21 hours ago, PublikDomain said: You don't need to "handle" anything when your three squadmates are going to turn everything around you into a fine paste anyways. All you have to do is walk up and press a button a few times. You can get carried in PUGs through the whole process of spawning, fighting, and killing a Lich. So? What does that have to do with anything? That just shows what I've stated far earlier, that the game isnt actually a co-op game and instead a single player game with optional co-op that lacks content scaling. And are you then of the opinion I and others that prefer and love solo play should be punished with nerfs because someone decides to get carried and circumvents the difficulty? Then I guess the best of the best raid gear in say uhm WoW should also be the power of a grey level 1 item since you can effectively carry a level 1 player through the raids? Which practically applies to every single game out there. Like when I carried my friend through T13 in D3 because he wanted quick levels and gear long before he could reliably even touch that trivial content with his own character. 21 hours ago, PublikDomain said: And what good is this "sense of progression"? Like I asked Ayin, does it excite you to get a bunch of S#&$ty weapons you won't use? Does wasting your time on garbage really fulfill your sense of pride and accomplishment? And when you reach the end of this progression, what then? This "progression" you guys keep placing on your pedestal is just so shallow. No. But uhm... garbage isnt progression, that is kinda the whole point here. Sidegrades = massive amounts of actual garbage since they are practically the same as what you have while lacking things to make them worth swapping in. Upgrades = barely no garbage since you obtain new gear since they are effective upgrades to what you currently have. And at the end, we min-max, try new builds etc. to improve farming and prepare the best for the next content release. But like I said, WF is practically mostly a sidegrade game, it has enough of an upgrade progression still. There are plenty of generic pointless sidegrades aswell, which you apparently want even more of. Out of all the dual swords for instance I use Dual Ichor, since it adds unique upgrades not part of other dual swords, out of the staffs I use Bo, out of the hammers I use Sancti Magistar, out of the machetes I use Nami Solo. All of these result in the weapons being effective power progression upgrades compared to other weapons of their class, leaving a large amount of unused weapons within their class. 21 hours ago, PublikDomain said: Then in this worst case scenario you've done exactly what you already do here: acquire a weapon and level it up just for the Mastery. Oh no, the worst case scenario is what we already have! But since the item you've freshly acquired will be less worse than what you currently use, the only reason to move on is because it's not your cup of tea. And that's fine! What's not fine is having to move on even when it is your cup of tea because it still isn't good enough. That is because WF is already mostly a sidegrade progression game. So you can actually see what your idea does since it is already part of the game. The thing you pretty much fail to see is that even in sidegrades there is direct power. We have so many weapons without unique mechanics that are far less powerful due to it, even if the stats are nearly identical. My point is pretty much that a sidegrade system is not better than a vertical one and vice versa. The main difference is that a vertical system will always add new upgrades you want to chase since they are guaranteed upgrades. If that is better or not is a matter of taste. I prefer the WF approach where a mechanic can get me to use a less powerful weapon since the mechanic results in it being better. But we also have many sidegrades that end up DoA because they have some mechanic that seems super powerful in DEs mind, so the weapon itself is S#&$e, while in reality it all turns out as S#&$e since the mechanic isnt very useful either in combination with how the weapon works. Rauta being a prime example. If it was a weapon released during an earlier iteration of the melee combo system it might have filled a role, but now when we fill the combo in seconds through melee hits the whole weapon turns utterly pointless since it isnt fast at doing the unique thing it is supposed to do. 21 hours ago, PublikDomain said: What, SE drops? The temporary in-mission resource boosters? We already have this. Everything but SE drops pretty much, since those are more or less timed and near static. Other drops would need to be analyzed incase of a nerf to see how much slower things are dying, how much less is killed per minute, how much longer a defense rotation takes, how much longer a demo kill would take and so on. That we already have different mechanics for it doesnt matter, since they'd still need to know how much to compensate in order to implement a change. The change could either be adjusted mob tables for SP mobs, increased static drop rate or something else. 21 hours ago, PublikDomain said: "It failed, goal achieved!" Ok, champ. It also succeeded massively as seen with the forum crying as I pointed out, which you apparently ignored for some reason. It wasnt long ago that someone made a new thread about reverting the ammo "nerfs". So yeah, DE apparently succeeded and met the goal they had in mind to combat this "disruptive" AoE thing the game was plagued with according to some. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SneakyErvin Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 16 hours ago, Merkranire said: Your argument from popularity is noted, but I question the trust you place in the popular view for this game in particular considering how much of a stink the community raises when any sort of gameplay is forced onto them because they can’t choose it themselves while I’m watching you and Publik argue and you say things that make me think you’re interested in what I’m talking about, but can’t bring yourself to do it despite the options for build and loadout it’d open up because you've got some hangup about it I'm not interested in your approach to the game. I'm interested in the other, where the game creates content over time that allows us to test our builds more and more and more the further we progress, where we get a chance to fully kit ourself out and then put that to the test versus harder content. Like how I enjoy(ed) pushing my limits in Grifts in D3, testing harder Expeditions in Outriders, jumping into the next tier in Borderlands etc. to test the best setup I had access to and so on. I'm already using enough old things in WF without any need to degrade myself and remove items I've gathered. I want to use everything I've gathered together, since it allows me to combine the most things at a time. Your style would also pretty much remove my option to play the operator which I enjoy. Since lower missions are either too weak or too tough since there are too few options on the operator you can actually remove for a middle ground performace. Remove arcanes and he'll still wipe the lowest SC with a sneeze, slot in a worse amp and that still holds true, but he'll also be rather pointless to use at that point in higher SC missions. In SP I can use him to his fullest. 16 hours ago, Merkranire said: Because most things I see players (including yourself) talk about as needing improvement, things like balanced gameplay and increased variety and a reason for the rewards we earn, already exists, but you’re not looking for that and your actions bear that observation out so I’m thinking you’ve got a real double-faced approach going on here. They dont exsist though. Because when you "balance" yourself, then you also make the rewards worse, since they are intended and designed around a fast gameplay. So if I cut my kills per minute in half within survival I suddenly end up getting half the loot for twice the work, and it doesnt leave room to improve efficiency. That isnt balance, hence why we cant actually balance the game ourselves. I'd have no problem if the game slows down by design so instead of killing 100 enemies per minute I kill 50 if those 50 reward me the same as the 100 did and if those 50 incentivice and allow me to build for efficient farming beyond the avarage, so those 50 are effectively the same as the 100 were previously in all regards. Since I enjoy min-maxing, pushing builds to do better and so on, which is a massive part of my fun in addition to the farming itself. 16 hours ago, Merkranire said: Given the choice between leeching for rewards and playing some game for rewards, I’m hard pressed to believe that anyone would opt for the first unless they were beaten down and they gave up on expecting an alternative, because at the end of the day they’re still getting a reward and just need to treat what happens in multiplayer as a necessary evil (despite the fact that multiplayer itself need not be treated as such if players like you would, y’know, spare a thought for the others on the team instead of assuming that they’re fine with being sidelined, and no, accidentally giving them space does not support your claims that you’re being considerate, it just means you lucked out while not giving any consideration at all) I'm not sure why you keep pushing it on us to be considerate and not you. Maybe you should stop and consider the fact that the majority of people do not share your view, that most want to get the generic missions in this soon 11 year old game over with as fast as possible. And accidentally giving them space? No, when something happens the same 6 times in a row it isnt accident. It means that the content below SP is still high enough to allow a massive AoE murder frame to murder without stealing from others and leaving them with nothing to do. And how can something get more considerate than when someone focuses on the objective(s) and mostly makes sure to keep everything debuffed for the other 3 players? You sound like the only thing that matters to you is getting kills, while everything else is of no concern to you in missions. And it's fun with Saryn too, since you can easily test and see how exaggerated the whole "I dont get to kill anything!" is. Since if my group ended up with no chance to kill it would be odd that my spores still spread while not using miasma and instead relied on nourish to spread viral through buffing the group. 16 hours ago, Merkranire said: I don’t feel like I’m doing something wrong, I feel like I’m playing the game to its fullest until I jump into a multiplayer mission and you’re there trying to get me to grind as fast as you and as narrowly as you when I’m actively choosing game over grind. I see your comments like using a “decent build” and think you’re just… a real character for saying you’re not acting like your way is the right way. I can experience massive destruction and easy gameplay in Solo and know that I’m the one doing it, I make builds that are different to the one-man-army and then join multiplayer for something other than what I was doing Solo and then you storm into the room and put me into what my one-man-army Solo run is like, but now I’m not even the one doing anything so it’s like, a worse experience because I’ve got this build designed with multiplayer in mind and it’s completely unnecessary at best I dont act as if it is the right way, just as if it is the most common a popular way, which it is. I play for fun, since I enjoy that gameplay approach. You also have this odd idea that multiplayer is somehow different from solo, when multiplayer is just 4x solo. Joining groups to get more engaging gameplay is a very backwards idea, since the game only gets easier and less engaging by simply joining multiplayer, because things still have the same HP while there are 4x the dps. So even if the whole group would degrade in a scenario where they'd otherwise steal kill, there would still be someone in the group doing nothing. Degrade to 50% and only 2 players are realistically doing anything, the two first to fire more or less. Degrade to 33% and one player will still practically be left with nothing to do since the enemies are still only having the same health as solo. Or are you now also demanding that people are to use only single target? Well you just went full on inconsiderate towards anyone that likes melee and AoE, or frames etc... 16 hours ago, (PSN)slightconfuzzled said: That being said, I think I get what SneakyErvin was saying. IIRC and this is just my assumption, and memory about the country they are from, but they probably haven't been exposed to a lot of variety of rap. Probably mostly just mainstream popular hip hop, and if that means, figures like Travis Scott, Kanye West and Nicki Minaj, probably not the best first impression. Per their example of attending a random party and not liking the music, I'd probably be the same, just because I don't really like a lot of modern pop music in general. Just like I don't really like Call of Duty or Fortnite either. Or how I might prefer Remedios Varo and Goya over say... Picasso (I can't really think of any artists I dislike though). Oh I grew up with old school rap and hip hop here. I was honestly poking at newer artists that refer to themselves as rap and hip hop. I'm not a huge fan of rap and hip hop overall (it's really the "music" that destroys it for me, not the lyrics of the old), but I can stand/enjoy things like Wu-Tang or Method Man if it is played, or Ice-T, which I dont mind in his collab with Six Feet Under on the One Bullet Left song. And I can accept if Eminem is played. Pop (most) and the newer pop hip hop, rap and rnb is just a different abomination though, that is truely ears bleeding because it is a mix of music I have a hard time standing and horrible braindead lyrics. That artists like Kanye, Minaj, Scott and others have a following makes me question the future and survival of the human race. Or when artists the make songs like W.A.P manage to get rewards I'm like "aprils fools joke right?", "no it's real?", "whats next? 4 horsemen coming? a ship of nails sailing and giants marching? meteors dropping or just some good old fashioned zombie or alien apocalypse?". I'm fairly wide in my music although it is all hewn from rock so to speak. But it can be some Dire Straits and ZZ-Top, through AC/DC, Alice Cooper and Led Zep to the very heavy and extreme like Nile, Marduk and Watain, along with the geniusly silly or semi-silly like Alestorm. Rammstein, Soad and Helloween. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeathOfASaint Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 this thread is so #*!%ing funny when u realize the context is an argument over people completing fissures too quickly 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)slightconfuzzled Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 1 minute ago, SneakyErvin said: Oh I grew up with old school rap and hip hop here. I was honestly poking at newer artists that refer to themselves as rap and hip hop. I'm not a huge fan of rap and hip hop overall (it's really the "music" that destroys it for me, not the lyrics of the old), but I can stand/enjoy things like Wu-Tang or Method Man if it is played, or Ice-T, which I dont mind in his collab with Six Feet Under on the One Bullet Left song. And I can accept if Eminem is played. Pop (most) and the newer pop hip hop, rap and rnb is just a different abomination though, that is truely ears bleeding because it is a mix of music I have a hard time standing and horrible braindead lyrics. That artists like Kanye, Minaj, Scott and others have a following makes me question the future and survival of the human race. Or when artists the make songs like W.A.P manage to get rewards I'm like "aprils fools joke right?", "no it's real?", "whats next? 4 horsemen coming? a ship of nails sailing and giants marching? meteors dropping or just some good old fashioned zombie or alien apocalypse?". I'm fairly wide in my music although it is all hewn from rock so to speak. But it can be some Dire Straits and ZZ-Top, through AC/DC, Alice Cooper and Led Zep to the very heavy and extreme like Nile, Marduk and Watain, along with the geniusly silly or semi-silly like Alestorm. Rammstein, Soad and Helloween. Oh nice! Thanks for sharing. I get that. My own unpopular hip hop opinion is, that I'm not really a big Eminem fan. That also being said, most of the artists I enjoy, (especially more in the present or last couple of years) are lesser known, and smaller, because often thats where you (at least as far as my subjective opinion) get more creativity, you get more originality. You don't have bigger musical labels trying to push people into certain beats or trends to try to capitalise on. So in that sense, there may be artists that might appeal to people who enjoyed what they consider exceptions to the rule. Like as a generalisation, I know there are a lot of older hip hop fans, who prefer hip hop and rap thats more about truth to power, or more about story telling, or creating their own identity, and about authenticity but are against excess and crudity for the sake of it, thats less about shocking the system, and more about being formulaic, repetitive and edgy in its most diluted and sell out sense. Or they just can't really find the strength to get behind a song thats called "You think you the ^%^% but you the fart" and its not necessarily that such a song can't have merit, it may just be a generational thing as well, maybe also its not meant to be taken too serious. Afroman and 2 Live Crew had some solly goofy songs, around crude ideas. but I get it, and peoples reservations. Cheers (and some nice mentions from those other genres). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SneakyErvin Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 4 minutes ago, (PSN)slightconfuzzled said: Oh nice! Thanks for sharing. I get that. My own unpopular hip hop opinion is, that I'm not really a big Eminem fan. That also being said, most of the artists I enjoy, (especially more in the present or last couple of years) are lesser known, and smaller, because often thats where you (at least as far as my subjective opinion) get more creativity, you get more originality. You don't have bigger musical labels trying to push people into certain beats or trends to try to capitalise on. So in that sense, there may be artists that might appeal to people who enjoyed what they consider exceptions to the rule. Like as a generalisation, I know there are a lot of older hip hop fans, who prefer hip hop and rap thats more about truth to power, or more about story telling, or creating their own identity, and about authenticity but are against excess and crudity for the sake of it, thats less about shocking the system, and more about being formulaic, repetitive and edgy in its most diluted and sell out sense. Or they just can't really find the strength to get behind a song thats called "You think you the ^%^% but you the fart" and its not necessarily that such a song can't have merit, it may just be a generational thing as well, maybe also its not meant to be taken too serious. Afroman and 2 Live Crew had some solly goofy songs, around crude ideas. but I get it, and peoples reservations. Cheers (and some nice mentions from those other genres). Good points. Especially the one regarding less known and smaller often being more creative. We can see when creation goes to die due to popularity in bands like Metallica and Dimmu Borgir. Though we have serious success stories too where bands have grown massively while retaining their creativity and sound. Just as we have those that have gotten severely lost along the way and managed to get back to their roots, like In Flames that got hooked on the Nu hype and managed to thankfully mostly shake it eventually. And no hate on the Nu, I can enjoy Slipknot, when I wanna listen to Slipknot, which is not when I wanna listen to Metallica or In Flames, since I wanna listen to Metallica or In Flames at that point, otherwise I'd listen to Slipknot. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merkranire Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 (edited) 7 hours ago, SneakyErvin said: I'm not interested in your approach to the game. I'm interested in the other, where the game creates content over time that allows us to test our builds more and more and more the further we progress, where we get a chance to fully kit ourself out and then put that to the test versus harder content. Like how I enjoy(ed) pushing my limits in Grifts in D3, testing harder Expeditions in Outriders, jumping into the next tier in Borderlands etc. to test the best setup I had access to and so on. I'm already using enough old things in WF without any need to degrade myself and remove items I've gathered. I want to use everything I've gathered together, since it allows me to combine the most things at a time. Your style would also pretty much remove my option to play the operator which I enjoy. Since lower missions are either too weak or too tough since there are too few options on the operator you can actually remove for a middle ground performace. Remove arcanes and he'll still wipe the lowest SC with a sneeze, slot in a worse amp and that still holds true, but he'll also be rather pointless to use at that point in higher SC missions. In SP I can use him to his fullest. They dont exsist though. Because when you "balance" yourself, then you also make the rewards worse, since they are intended and designed around a fast gameplay. So if I cut my kills per minute in half within survival I suddenly end up getting half the loot for twice the work, and it doesnt leave room to improve efficiency. That isnt balance, hence why we cant actually balance the game ourselves. I'd have no problem if the game slows down by design so instead of killing 100 enemies per minute I kill 50 if those 50 reward me the same as the 100 did and if those 50 incentivice and allow me to build for efficient farming beyond the avarage, so those 50 are effectively the same as the 100 were previously in all regards. Since I enjoy min-maxing, pushing builds to do better and so on, which is a massive part of my fun in addition to the farming itself. I'm not sure why you keep pushing it on us to be considerate and not you. Maybe you should stop and consider the fact that the majority of people do not share your view, that most want to get the generic missions in this soon 11 year old game over with as fast as possible. And accidentally giving them space? No, when something happens the same 6 times in a row it isnt accident. It means that the content below SP is still high enough to allow a massive AoE murder frame to murder without stealing from others and leaving them with nothing to do. And how can something get more considerate than when someone focuses on the objective(s) and mostly makes sure to keep everything debuffed for the other 3 players? You sound like the only thing that matters to you is getting kills, while everything else is of no concern to you in missions. And it's fun with Saryn too, since you can easily test and see how exaggerated the whole "I dont get to kill anything!" is. Since if my group ended up with no chance to kill it would be odd that my spores still spread while not using miasma and instead relied on nourish to spread viral through buffing the group. I dont act as if it is the right way, just as if it is the most common a popular way, which it is. I play for fun, since I enjoy that gameplay approach. You also have this odd idea that multiplayer is somehow different from solo, when multiplayer is just 4x solo. Joining groups to get more engaging gameplay is a very backwards idea, since the game only gets easier and less engaging by simply joining multiplayer, because things still have the same HP while there are 4x the dps. So even if the whole group would degrade in a scenario where they'd otherwise steal kill, there would still be someone in the group doing nothing. Degrade to 50% and only 2 players are realistically doing anything, the two first to fire more or less. Degrade to 33% and one player will still practically be left with nothing to do since the enemies are still only having the same health as solo. Or are you now also demanding that people are to use only single target? Well you just went full on inconsiderate towards anyone that likes melee and AoE, or frames etc... Every time you open your mouth about balance and gameplay and rewards (which I’m talking about things like the weapons and Warframes and mods we earn, the main draw of the game), I’m just… so strongly reminded that in your meta-chasing and efficiency-first approach, you’ve learned so little about anything else. I find the idea that you would refine a build with the expectation that the game would get harder instead of easier kind of bizarre, where the goal of the refinement doesn’t align with the expectation. Like, you’ve made the builds and tested them and found them overkill for some of the hardest content, which is something I do as well and is one of the reasons I appreciate Steel Path. But then it seems like it’s not enough for you to learn that and then temporarily set it aside, secure in that knowledge that the build is merely doing what it was designed to do and that thing it was designed to do was break the game as thoroughly as possible Edited February 25 by Merkranire 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(XBOX)zThulsaDoomz Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 7 hours ago, DeathOfASaint said: this thread is so #*!%ing funny when u realize the context is an argument over people completing fissures too quickly Shhhhh Don't spoil the entertainment with a plot twist. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SneakyErvin Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 15 hours ago, Merkranire said: Every time you open your mouth about balance and gameplay and rewards (which I’m talking about things like the weapons and Warframes and mods we earn, the main draw of the game), I’m just… so strongly reminded that in your meta-chasing and efficiency-first approach, you’ve learned so little about anything else. No I've learned it all and that is why I stick to what I enjoy, love and have fun with. You are just stuck in your own mind since you dont see the fun and automatically ties it to problems since you happened to burn out on it. It is the most common way to play, some people play that way while not enjoying it simply because they want the most loot. Those are the people you often see complain about "the grind". I do not only want the most loot, but I also immensly enjoy the farm, always have, always will. It's why I barely ever play "one and done" or "finite" games, and instead enjoy MMORPGs, ARPGs, Looter Shooters and so on. 15 hours ago, Merkranire said: I find the idea that you would refine a build with the expectation that the game would get harder instead of easier kind of bizarre, where the goal of the refinement doesn’t align with the expectation. Like, you’ve made the builds and tested them and found them overkill for some of the hardest content, which is something I do as well and is one of the reasons I appreciate Steel Path. But then it seems like it’s not enough for you to learn that and then temporarily set it aside, secure in that knowledge that the build is merely doing what it was designed to do and that thing it was designed to do was break the game as thoroughly as possible No idea what you even try to say here. It just seems you didnt get what I said at all, since you seem to completely fail to grasp what I refer to with test. And the bolded part... that is a conundrum, wrapped in a riddle, locked in a box and sent to mystery city. I'm starting to get the feeling that you arent at all familiar with progression in games, since it is the only thing that explains you thinking that I expect content to get harder the more a build is refined, and your way of interpreting what is refered to with "test". You are also again showing your complete ignorance to what others see as fun. It's as if you completely forgot that farming and efficiency is fun for me, even though you acknowledged that earlier. Since here you say "set it aside", talking as if those builds used arent used in order to achieve the fun in combining farming with utmost efficiency. You fall back to a point where you think everyone gets burnt out and should try your "remedy". Which instead would bore me and burn me out since that is not my idea of fun. Plus the problem persists that you are so focused on our damage. At the same time you ignore that we are still too powerful in that content since the damage output of enemies is so abyssmal that we practically cannot get downed unless we just decide to stand there and take it. That is without TTL stats added to the frames. How is that even remotely engaging compared to high content where even if you are invested in TTL stats you can actually get downed when you slip up? And with archon shards added, it is even more cumbersome to get to an "engaging" point in low content, unless you are happy to constantly waste your hard earned bile based on content you run. Since you might happen to have some blue shards for armor/health, or a red or two for power strength etc. I mean, ask yourself. How hard were actually the Grendel missions? Those were missions that allowed zero mods while being of the higher levels of the SC. The only part in those missions that was "hard" ended up being us dealing low damage so things were slow and objectives potentially getting wrecked. Us dying was never really an issue. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PublikDomain Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 (edited) On 2024-02-25 at 7:56 AM, SneakyErvin said: It is uhm the definition of nerfs and buff that they are targetted adjustments to something. Has zero to do with math since buffing and nerfing is not rooted in numbers only. Ok, and what I'm saying is that any targeted adjustment can be made by both buffing and nerfing. If you intend to make X and Y more equal, you can either increase the smaller number (buffs) or decrease the larger number (nerfs). Both achieve the same intended goal of adjusting the numbers to be more equal. The two actions have end identical results and are completely interchangeable. Buffs and nerfs are two sides of the same coin. On 2024-02-25 at 7:56 AM, SneakyErvin said: But lol, you can simulate higher spawn rates, since you can actually use the highest content we have access to, which still needs to be playable and accessible and roughly come out on par with what it does now incase a nerf happens. Why you use a several year old piece of content to try and show something I really have no clue about. We've gotten so many other pieces of content since then that are arguably "harder". I use several year old pieces of content because... the examples were made several years ago. Crazy, right? But for your overall comment about being able to simulate higher spawn rates, maybe if you read my thread where I explain all of this you'd be able to understand that no, you can't. It's simple! E Prime, the lowest level SP mission in the game, produces the simulated equivalent of lvl42,500 SP enemies. This is over four times levelcap, so it is not a useful example. E Gate, one of the lowest level SP Corpus missions, still produces the simulated equivalent of lvl500 SP enemies. This is something you might actually face ingame, but only after milling around for a few hours while the enemies warm up. So it's still not a very useful example either. I could simulate in the Simulacrum, but the density would still be limited to just 20 enemies and you'd just complain that my examples don't show "real" gameplay. On 2024-02-25 at 7:56 AM, SneakyErvin said: That are all either straight tied to MR aswell or they have an activity tied to them that equals something equal or being far more of a skill check/progression check than MR. So their idea of "levels" is still there tied to power in practically everything. Or do you often end up doing MR tests that equal SP circuit? Liches? And the RNG is more to mix up the meta. It is rare that it gets us to use "lower" gear since we have so many options that circumvents the system, such as really only needing 1 good pick and in the absolutely worst case we can cheese with the operator and frame we get. And again, Kuva weapons do not break the progression, since the content itself is the MR check even if the lich system is accessible at a lower MR level than the highest MR weapon. So I dont see how any of that is failing. The only thing it isnt is linear. If you're using MR tests as some sort of standard or expression of progress, I think you might need to re-evaluate. These tests are a joke, and have never once reflected anything about a player's skill. Edit: and worth noting, no Warframe has an MR restriction. Even weapon MR restrictions end at only MR16, which requires just 640k/2,840k total Mastery. If MR really is such an important progression system, why do the restrictions end only a fifth of the way through? Why are Warframes exempt? Where's the MRL4-restricted gear? Nowhere: because it's not as important as you seem to think it is. And yeah, the RNG DE uses is intended to mix up the meta. IE to get you to play outside of the meta. To use other gear. The weaker gear which are not meta. That gear. And while yeah, this can be circumvented or cheesed, that's why I say it's a failure: because it fails to do what it's intended to do when it can just be sidestepped and ignored. Kuva weapons as well: the "content itself" that you say is actually the "MR check" can be accessed as low as MR5. It's not difficult content to play, either. My test account has almost exclusively used Broken War with a slapped-together whatever build, and when I tried it out the Lich content is even easier than I expected it to be! Spoiler The Grineer, even with their higher EHPs compared to the Corpus, still die in a whole 1-2 melee hits. Thralls die in about 6. You just hold melee for a second and they're done. Wow, so gated. And as you can see quite plainly by looking at the official usage statistics, usage of Kuva Weapons start as low as - you guessed it - MR5. On 2024-02-25 at 7:56 AM, SneakyErvin said: Upgrades = barely no garbage since you obtain new gear since they are effective upgrades to what you currently have. Upgrades to old gear, old gear which then becomes garbage. You're not actually using any of this garbage gear you've replaced and you know it. You haven't even gotten a lot of this garbage in the first place and have just skipped straight ahead in your supposed """progression""" to the upgrade. Unless there's another SneakyErvin out there, your ingame profile shows this quite plainly. On 2024-02-25 at 7:56 AM, SneakyErvin said: And are you then of the opinion I and others that prefer and love solo play should be punished with nerfs because someone decides to get carried and circumvents the difficulty? Of course not. This is an irrational fear you've invented all on your own. It's also rather hypocritical, since you yourself have also suggested repeatedly that the game is in need of nerfs. It's only a problem if I say it. 🙄 On 2024-02-25 at 7:56 AM, SneakyErvin said: Everything but SE drops pretty much, since those are more or less timed and near static. Other drops would need to be analyzed incase of a nerf to see how much slower things are dying, how much less is killed per minute, how much longer a defense rotation takes, how much longer a demo kill would take and so on. That we already have different mechanics for it doesnt matter, since they'd still need to know how much to compensate in order to implement a change. The change could either be adjusted mob tables for SP mobs, increased static drop rate or something else. Right, so....? Oh no, they might need to pick a number!... I'm sure they can figure it out. Edited February 26 by PublikDomain 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merkranire Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 (edited) 8 hours ago, SneakyErvin said: No I've learned it all and that is why I stick to what I enjoy, love and have fun with. You are just stuck in your own mind since you dont see the fun and automatically ties it to problems since you happened to burn out on it. It is the most common way to play, some people play that way while not enjoying it simply because they want the most loot. Those are the people you often see complain about "the grind". I do not only want the most loot, but I also immensly enjoy the farm, always have, always will. It's why I barely ever play "one and done" or "finite" games, and instead enjoy MMORPGs, ARPGs, Looter Shooters and so on. Look, you don’t know it all, and that’s fine until you act so confident about it and try to paint what you don’t know in such a bad light while I’m seeing you lament about things that are already in the game. Why would you know anything about the alternative side when all you’ve done from the start is pulled the grinding aspects from this game and focused on that? I know that in moderation acquiring for the sake of acquiring can be enjoyable, so what you find fun is a lot less of a mystery than you might think, and I’m still saying that when you jump into multiplayer and enshroud yourself in the idea of “I’m fine with other playstyles [because they can barely affect me], so others should be fine with mine”, I’m seeing you take that idea of what you find fun and enforcing it on others and acting like they always want to play (in a loose form of the word) like you when no, that’s not always the case when there’s so many reasons to not play like you, especially in this game. 8 hours ago, SneakyErvin said: No idea what you even try to say here. It just seems you didnt get what I said at all, since you seem to completely fail to grasp what I refer to with test. And the bolded part... that is a conundrum, wrapped in a riddle, locked in a box and sent to mystery city. I'm starting to get the feeling that you arent at all familiar with progression in games, since it is the only thing that explains you thinking that I expect content to get harder the more a build is refined, and your way of interpreting what is refered to with "test". You are also again showing your complete ignorance to what others see as fun. It's as if you completely forgot that farming and efficiency is fun for me, even though you acknowledged that earlier. Since here you say "set it aside", talking as if those builds used arent used in order to achieve the fun in combining farming with utmost efficiency. You fall back to a point where you think everyone gets burnt out and should try your "remedy". Which instead would bore me and burn me out since that is not my idea of fun. I’m saying that what you’re chasing and what you ask for are mutually exclusive, and this game in particular’s progression is more than the narrow view you have of it. I see you banging on about nerfs and balance with Publik, while what you want is not any of that because that would literally slow your grind down or at least make it variable in time once you start having to engage with the content and actually potentially die, and the cruel irony in your case is that the core progression of this game, earning and using all the stuff we earn, involves doing things like having to set aside the most powerful builds we can make if we want to use more of the stuff we earn. The game’s designed to allow for more than just whatever minmaxing you do while you efficiently grind, and sometimes you’re crashing headlong into that fact, especially when you start interacting with others And don’t worry, when someone else jumps into my mission and sidelines me, I’m not forgetting that it could very well be you doing what you find fun. The “Temporarily set aside” is a thing to consider doing when you jump into multiplayer, because you can do whatever you want in single; I know how to do it, why are you so incapable? 8 hours ago, SneakyErvin said: Plus the problem persists that you are so focused on our damage. At the same time you ignore that we are still too powerful in that content since the damage output of enemies is so abyssmal that we practically cannot get downed unless we just decide to stand there and take it. That is without TTL stats added to the frames. How is that even remotely engaging compared to high content where even if you are invested in TTL stats you can actually get downed when you slip up? And with archon shards added, it is even more cumbersome to get to an "engaging" point in low content, unless you are happy to constantly waste your hard earned bile based on content you run. Since you might happen to have some blue shards for armor/health, or a red or two for power strength etc. I mean, ask yourself. How hard were actually the Grendel missions? Those were missions that allowed zero mods while being of the higher levels of the SC. The only part in those missions that was "hard" ended up being us dealing low damage so things were slow and objectives potentially getting wrecked. Us dying was never really an issue. Damage is only part of the picture, but do you remember what happened when you tested that Argonak build? Because I remember what I told you to start with regarding the unspecified rest of the kit, but you knew better, and now you’re telling me you’ve run into a snag with wrapping your head around what engagement can look like. Not sure why you bring up the Grendel missions; they’re situated at that crossover level between being able to do it modless and potentially having to start thinking of how to build. Maybe you found a particularly potent modless combination that’s not all of the combinations someone might want to use, which good for you, but the game only scales up from there (though once it hits Steel Path, the rulebook goes out the window) and I’m pretty sure enemies like Corrupted do double damage (unless it’s just a Void thing or DE changed it) and we mod our frames and weapons individually, which means it’s not one damage mod on gun = one survival mod on frame or… whatever you’re thinking the rules are Edited February 26 by Merkranire 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)AyinDygra Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 I don't like sports, but this analogy came to mind involving Baseball, and I think it fits well. It's not a perfect one-to-one situation, but bear with me. The game has set rules and goals. A person (batter) hits the ball, and has to run around the four bases to reach home to score. The batter might hit the ball and reach 1st base. What happens if that batter decides they don't want to run the rest of those bases? They have decided that it's more fun to them, to walk in the nice summer weather, "stopping to smell the roses" so to speak. They still intend to go to all four bases, but they're taking their sweet time about it. They don't know why everyone else is rushing to get to home base. Maybe the batter likes practicing their skipping, moonwalking, minstry of silly walks, or what have you... that's all way more fun than running from base to base to reach home and score. Bringing in a loadout that doesn't kill enemies fast enough to achieve the objective is akin to walking the bases while the enemy team throws a ball to the base in front of you, tagging you out. Even if they don't tag you out for some reason (there are a few reasons for mission failure that come from going too slowly: not capturing a capture target, killing too slowly in survival, not killing the demolysts, and failing to control all the interception points can also result from this), you're still holding up all the runners behind you, who can't reach home base until you do (extraction, in this case). I said it wasn't a perfect analogy. Maybe you can convince your whole team to walk the bases on your terms, or find others who already want to, but, if you were drafted onto a pickup team on a playground, you can't expect everybody to follow your personal rules. That's not a problem with showing the batter consideration. That's the batter expecting everybody to change how they expect to play, to meet the batter's personal whims. You can try to argue that the person who first came up with Baseball as a game intended the batters to all walk between the bases, taking in the wonderful summer weather, stopping for tea and biscuts at each base, and engaging in wonderful conversations with the people at each base as they sit under umbrellas... but the popular sport that everybody knows as baseball expects the batters to run the bases and reach home ASAP. Remember, I said, not a perfect analogy, but maybe, JUST MAYBE, you can see what's going on here. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aruquae Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 On 2024-02-25 at 11:26 AM, DeathOfASaint said: this thread is so #*!%ing funny when u realize the context is an argument over people completing fissures too quickly Oh so there’s a point in their mindless chatting now? Huh… I thought they were just using this thread for typing practice. One day they’ll realize changing someone’s opinion doesn’t work when both parties are stubborn. I always say you should go into an argument knowing someone’s opinion can change, including your own. That is the point of an argument… if that doesn’t happen… then it’s just a useless convo. As constructive feedback is a thing, constructive arguments are too. Once again, this is not one of those. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SneakyErvin Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 17 hours ago, PublikDomain said: Ok, and what I'm saying is that any targeted adjustment can be made by both buffing and nerfing. If you intend to make X and Y more equal, you can either increase the smaller number (buffs) or decrease the larger number (nerfs). Both achieve the same intended goal of adjusting the numbers to be more equal. The two actions have end identical results and are completely interchangeable. Buffs and nerfs are two sides of the same coin. No. If you have a weak and a strong weapon and want the weak weapon to become better and more even to the strong weapon you cant just nerf the strong weapon. Since that still leaves the weak weapon weak against the enemies. And you cant nerf the enemies since then the gap is still the same between the weak and the strong weapon. And this is a case with a very isolated issue. When it comes to a whole game like WF with hundreds of weapons and enemies, nerfing something to "buff" something else or vice versa will be even more unlikely to ever succeed, since there are so many variable of things that will get affected when it shouldnt. So no, nerf and buff are not interchangable at all, not even when you talk about number buffs and nerfs. And if you say "but then we can nerf both enemies and the strong weapon". Well that isnt going to end with the same result, since you just now took two steps instead of one. So are there 3 sides on that coin now? 17 hours ago, PublikDomain said: I use several year old pieces of content because... the examples were made several years ago. Crazy, right? But for your overall comment about being able to simulate higher spawn rates, maybe if you read my thread where I explain all of this you'd be able to understand that no, you can't. It's simple! E Prime, the lowest level SP mission in the game, produces the simulated equivalent of lvl42,500 SP enemies. This is over four times levelcap, so it is not a useful example. E Gate, one of the lowest level SP Corpus missions, still produces the simulated equivalent of lvl500 SP enemies. This is something you might actually face ingame, but only after milling around for a few hours while the enemies warm up. So it's still not a very useful example either. I could simulate in the Simulacrum, but the density would still be limited to just 20 enemies and you'd just complain that my examples don't show "real" gameplay. Clearly, so not up to date with what has happened in the game. No, SP would be SP. There would be no imaginary extra levels to the test that your simulation solves. Since I dont talk about your vipers or stubbas, I'm talking about how the simulated nerf would end up in SP, which you can simply test in SP to see how a nerf to AoE would end up there. You can in reality also test your buffs to those single target examples, you just need to simulate them instead of the content with proxy weapons to achieve the same. Which would give you better data since you'd be able to test it versus max density aswell in the most "recent" content we have. And Sim could surely work in a vaccuum to see TTK, but it wouldnt compare a live test for endless modes. I'm saying this since you cant just ignore that SP exsists and that things must work there aswell. So not testing it there with its specific conditions will not give you any accurate idea of how the weapons will perform aside from a potential TTK for a single enemy. It will give no good estimation how it holds up in content with adjusted spawn rates, different penalties tied to KPM etc. Which is all part of SP, which is a very relevant part of the game where we are at now. 17 hours ago, PublikDomain said: If you're using MR tests as some sort of standard or expression of progress, I think you might need to re-evaluate. These tests are a joke, and have never once reflected anything about a player's skill. Edit: and worth noting, no Warframe has an MR restriction. Even weapon MR restrictions end at only MR16, which requires just 640k/2,840k total Mastery. If MR really is such an important progression system, why do the restrictions end only a fifth of the way through? Why are Warframes exempt? Where's the MRL4-restricted gear? Nowhere: because it's not as important as you seem to think it is. And yeah, the RNG DE uses is intended to mix up the meta. IE to get you to play outside of the meta. To use other gear. The weaker gear which are not meta. That gear. And while yeah, this can be circumvented or cheesed, that's why I say it's a failure: because it fails to do what it's intended to do when it can just be sidestepped and ignored. Kuva weapons as well: the "content itself" that you say is actually the "MR check" can be accessed as low as MR5. It's not difficult content to play, either. My test account has almost exclusively used Broken War with a slapped-together whatever build, and when I tried it out the Lich content is even easier than I expected it to be! I dont, but DE does. Which is why I'm saying Lich content itself serves as the MR test for those weapons, which justifies their higher potential when we compare things to the intent of MR and their tests. And why MR stops at 16, because they might have wanted to stop mandatory MR leveling? And why frames arent tied to MR? Because they recently removed it since frames arent intended to be more or less powerful than another, they are just ment as the right tools for a job. Then that DE completely misses the mark in design is another thing. Or it could be that they wanted things to be... you know... rogue like. Where you are presented with both good and bad gear to simply shake things up each run. Which was practically the whole selling point of the mode where we are offered random gear. A system that actually is designed to promote re-visiting weak gear is the genesis system, since it actually improves old gear so it is used again frequently. So? It is still more difficult than MR tests, which is my point as to why MR5 on lich weapons doesnt matter, since the power justification lies within the mode you need to clear. They could have been MR0 and had the power they have, since you still need to clear that content which is more difficult than MR tests that unlock access to new gear. Same as Kitguns that are practically lock behind a long MR test i.e farming the standing, doing the bounties etc. in an isolated mode. MR is a mark of progression, same as things locked behind a syndicate or a specific mode. You did this, now you get this, that is slightly better than that which you got there. The point is, DE has progression in mind, where some things are worse than others. 17 hours ago, PublikDomain said: Upgrades to old gear, old gear which then becomes garbage. You're not actually using any of this garbage gear you've replaced and you know it. You haven't even gotten a lot of this garbage in the first place and have just skipped straight ahead in your supposed """progression""" to the upgrade. Unless there's another SneakyErvin out there, your ingame profile shows this quite plainly. I'm also talking about vertical systems in general. And I was pretty clear that WF is for the most part a horizontal system already, where most things are sidegrades. However you conveniantly left that part out of the quote. It is also a game with way too many weapons, where too many are the same. Which is also present at each MR that unlocks new ones, you wont use all, you will use some. Which shows the flaws of your own thinking, that a horizontal system will somehow give players a reason to grab everything, when clearly that isnt the case since WF is already for the most part horizontal. It's as if you dont even read half of what is written. Or maybe you read it an just leave it out in order to just have something to argue about? 18 hours ago, PublikDomain said: Of course not. This is an irrational fear you've invented all on your own. It's also rather hypocritical, since you yourself have also suggested repeatedly that the game is in need of nerfs. It's only a problem if I say it. 🙄 And you ignore or forget that I've said that while I want nerfs I dont see a need for nerfs to our current content. Nerfs to bring the ceiling down so future content can get more meaningful is what I seek. Since we can reduce the ceiling, all that would do is reduce how far people can push in endless, which is optional and not tied to a risk where rewards are also impacted. Those players will simply hit the wall earlier than now while regular farming stays intact. This gives DE better room for future content that can then start higher to be more challenging for the masses, with enough room to min-max and so on aswell. Some will still find it trivial, and that is OK. 18 hours ago, PublikDomain said: Right, so....? Oh no, they might need to pick a number!... I'm sure they can figure it out. And that is the whole point. It would be a waste of time to nerf and be required to test and adjust the old instead of nerfing with just future content in mind. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SneakyErvin Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 (edited) 16 hours ago, Merkranire said: Look, you don’t know it all, and that’s fine until you act so confident about it and try to paint what you don’t know in such a bad light while I’m seeing you lament about things that are already in the game. Why would you know anything about the alternative side when all you’ve done from the start is pulled the grinding aspects from this game and focused on that? I know that in moderation acquiring for the sake of acquiring can be enjoyable, so what you find fun is a lot less of a mystery than you might think, and I’m still saying that when you jump into multiplayer and enshroud yourself in the idea of “I’m fine with other playstyles [because they can barely affect me], so others should be fine with mine”, I’m seeing you take that idea of what you find fun and enforcing it on others and acting like they always want to play (in a loose form of the word) like you when no, that’s not always the case when there’s so many reasons to not play like you, especially in this game. But I do know, since I can know, because we all go through the "alternative side" as we master things constantly. We get to know what we enjoy and not as we go through that process several times over in the game. We go through that as we go through the game for the first time, since we experience that "alternative side" as we progress and are limited in our choices through lacking capacity etc. Nope, you dont know that in relation to moderation. You percieve and assume it must be in moderation since you have experienced it that way. I'm here as the exact bloody opposite, that moderation is not a requirement since I enjoy this 24/7 and have done so for well over half my life. I've practically enjoyed the idea of "farming" since I as a kid experienced the voice of the neon, tech or if you wanna call it mecha god as it spoke to me in Legend of Zelda. The god said "let there be farm!" and the farm was good. Then he outdid himself with Diablo and some other cool games, the repeated outdoing himself for years to come. Then royaly screwed up in between, he was probably on a bender or stuck in a celestial crack house when he shat out Diablo 3 and a couple of other games (many oddly with the name Diablo in them). And people accept that others might have my idea of fun, which is why they hit up public instead of pre-mades or solo. I'm also not enforcing it on others any more than I also enable it for others that might not yet be at the point but still strive for it. And since it is the majority approach, more people will be impacted positively by it, since they seek quick runs and lots of loot. It's natural, since the main reason people join others for random groups is in order for things to go faster and be more efficient compared to solo. I did a few runs a couple of days ago in public that ended up being far slower for me, since people were slow to get to the EZ. Did you see me throw a fit on the forums over that? Nope, because I was in public groups, so it was my choice to open myself to that potential outcome. I also did the weekly Disruption in a group, where one guy ended up dying because he was running around far off from the conduits. If the rest of us hadnt been built to counter his death the mission would have failed, since we just lost all the dps from one guy while the demos still stayed scaled all the same. 16 hours ago, Merkranire said: I’m saying that what you’re chasing and what you ask for are mutually exclusive, and this game in particular’s progression is more than the narrow view you have of it. I see you banging on about nerfs and balance with Publik, while what you want is not any of that because that would literally slow your grind down or at least make it variable in time once you start having to engage with the content and actually potentially die, and the cruel irony in your case is that the core progression of this game, earning and using all the stuff we earn, involves doing things like having to set aside the most powerful builds we can make if we want to use more of the stuff we earn. The game’s designed to allow for more than just whatever minmaxing you do while you efficiently grind, and sometimes you’re crashing headlong into that fact, especially when you start interacting with others And don’t worry, when someone else jumps into my mission and sidelines me, I’m not forgetting that it could very well be you doing what you find fun. The “Temporarily set aside” is a thing to consider doing when you jump into multiplayer, because you can do whatever you want in single; I know how to do it, why are you so incapable? They arent mutually exclusive. Since that is a multitude of things that can be implemented to increase difficulty and really put players and their builds to the test. We also have a very high ceiling that can be drastically nerfed so future content gets more engaging without impacting the current activities. Actual heavy priority targets thrown into the mix would be a massive thing to shake things up. It works in other games really well, where people blow through trash like a maniac and then suddenly face something that isnt a pushover, something that requires dedicated attention in order to not ruin your day. And one of the things I'm mostly advocating to be nerfed is really AoE, more notably the range of skills. So we cant lock down a whole map. For me all AoE should be 10-15m at most, either 10m targetted areas or 15m PBAoE/cones. It's just absurd that we have 25, 30, 40, 50, 60 and even 70m+ AoE. I mean, 50m AoE can cover 100m of a map, 70m can cover 140m of a map if they are radial skills. I mean seriously, WTF DE!? I'm also not saying I want to use everything as in everything. I'm saying I want to use everything together i.e arcanes, mods (slots), shards, operator (with arcanes etc) and so on in a single build. So that investment in forma and taters have a reason, the credits and endo spent on mods having a meaning, farming out arcanes seeing a return etc. Things that will see no use if I "build for low content". Also, temporatily set aside things is not something to consider when jumping into multiplayer, since we have no clue what others bring unless we run pre-mades. You can do whatever you want in PuGs aswell, since it is a random group thrown together in order to make things faster or more efficient than normal. Solo is there to do whatever aswell, to goof around or be efficient, same as pugs. Just dont expect pugs to allow you to goof around. If you want to make sure to be able to goof around with others and play in a certain way you have invite/friends only i.e pre-mades. Where people agree to play a certain way, where only likeminded individuals are grouped up. Where things arent randomly decided by the game. 16 hours ago, Merkranire said: Damage is only part of the picture, but do you remember what happened when you tested that Argonak build? Because I remember what I told you to start with regarding the unspecified rest of the kit, but you knew better, and now you’re telling me you’ve run into a snag with wrapping your head around what engagement can look like. Not sure why you bring up the Grendel missions; they’re situated at that crossover level between being able to do it modless and potentially having to start thinking of how to build. Maybe you found a particularly potent modless combination that’s not all of the combinations someone might want to use, which good for you, but the game only scales up from there (though once it hits Steel Path, the rulebook goes out the window) and I’m pretty sure enemies like Corrupted do double damage (unless it’s just a Void thing or DE changed it) and we mod our frames and weapons individually, which means it’s not one damage mod on gun = one survival mod on frame or… whatever you’re thinking the rules are Which is what I said and you clearly ignore the other part when you ask why I bring up Grendel missions. They are clearly situated where you can go modless, which shows just how little danger there is on the star chart. The last few levels wont change much of that. It would also require me to want to play the planets that add those extra levels on the SC, which likely is not the case considering what drops there. Also, you seem to not get my point at all considering how you talk about mods here (damage mod on gun = survival mod on frame). The point is we cannot downgrade our health to a point where the SC becomes dangerous. Me adding more survival mods to the frame would just further increase that "issue". However, playing that same content on SP allows us to both mod how we want, all the way from going slower like you want, to being highly efficient. In addition to that the mobs can actually down you even when you build to avoid getting downed. All you can do with the SC is make it go slower, but it will never increase in danger. The one exception to that is potentially T3 void tiles. But like I said, that would also require me to have a reason to go to those void tiles. Plus, those tiles still end up more interesting and lethal on SP, even with modding for TTL. Right now though I'm farming uhm Pluto, Mars and Phobos, since those 3 planets have what I need when it comes to old content. And dropping down to SC for those would just be an utter waste, since they'd turn 100% trivial and they'd have a fraction of a fraction of the spawns on SP, which leads further to their triviality aswell as gimping loot severely, not only from having far lower spawns, but because they dont have an innate increase to rare material drop chance. Which is the same if I'd jump in to play Mot for Argon. Zero reason to gimp lethality, mobs spawns and innate drop chance increase for rare and mod for higher "engagement" aswell. There are so many layers as to why downgrading or doing the star chart is out of the question for me. Same reason why I practically only run Defense arbitrations, since they are fast while trivial, as opposed to survival which is a low density snoozefest where you cant really increase efficiency for loot gain. Edited February 27 by SneakyErvin 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merkranire Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 (edited) 8 hours ago, SneakyErvin said: But I do know, since I can know, because we all go through the "alternative side" as we master things constantly. We get to know what we enjoy and not as we go through that process several times over in the game. We go through that as we go through the game for the first time, since we experience that "alternative side" as we progress and are limited in our choices through lacking capacity etc. And people accept that others might have my idea of fun, which is why they hit up public instead of pre-mades or solo. I'm also not enforcing it on others any more than I also enable it for others that might not yet be at the point but still strive for it. And since it is the majority approach, more people will be impacted positively by it, since they seek quick runs and lots of loot. It's natural, since the main reason people join others for random groups is in order for things to go faster and be more efficient compared to solo. I did a few runs a couple of days ago in public that ended up being far slower for me, since people were slow to get to the EZ. Did you see me throw a fit on the forums over that? Nope, because I was in public groups, so it was my choice to open myself to that potential outcome. I also did the weekly Disruption in a group, where one guy ended up dying because he was running around far off from the conduits. If the rest of us hadnt been built to counter his death the mission would have failed, since we just lost all the dps from one guy while the demos still stayed scaled all the same. You don’t know because you barely touched the alternative side once you were able to build higher than the content. I know what it’s like to chase the farm and what motivations surround it and what actions enable it, I’ve done it. Do you seriously think you didn’t stick to low and safe while built for higher while you farmed? The whole point of farming is safe and consistent, which is why I said what you’re asking for and what you want are mutually exclusive, and we already have the means to put our various builds to the test until you very specifically and with strong intent design a build/loadout that breaks every test, as was the point of making that build/loadout in the first place If you knew the alternative side, we’d be speaking the same language and we’d be discussing real balance for the content at the various levels including how much survival we have at Grendel-level-and-below (which again, I was pretty sure we were talking about a broader range of content and that Argonak build was introduced in context of Arbitrations), but you have no idea what building for the content even means (other than the tiny bit of enforced gameplay that happens in Grendel missions that are not representative of most of the game) otherwise you’d know that your little story about how you had to carry someone entails that yes, it’s worth questioning whether that dude was built for the content if they weren’t doing their part. Instead you cite them as an example of… what, not building for the content and ultimately being incapable of doing their part? Or was he just bad? Do you even know? Because you don’t know what the content asks for, I’m thinking you can’t tell whether he’s just playing bad, though running off on his own seems like playing bad, but where’s your observation that he made bad decisions in the mission and that his build could have been perfectly fine? Do you know? Personally I’d question the actions taken first, the build they brought second, because if someone plays well then the build is less of a problem (and there’s more free slots and capacity available for customisation) And that’s part of the crux of joining multiplayer while not knowing what your teammates are built for; you don’t need to build to your mercurial random teammates and their various levels of skill, you just need to build to the content which is far less mercurial, and building for multiplayer falls into place because of knowing what you’re built for. 8 hours ago, SneakyErvin said: I'm also not saying I want to use everything as in everything. I'm saying I want to use everything together i.e arcanes, mods (slots), shards, operator (with arcanes etc) and so on in a single build. So that investment in forma and taters have a reason, the credits and endo spent on mods having a meaning, farming out arcanes seeing a return etc. Things that will see no use if I "build for low content". Also, temporatily set aside things is not something to consider when jumping into multiplayer, since we have no clue what others bring unless we run pre-mades. You can do whatever you want in PuGs aswell, since it is a random group thrown together in order to make things faster or more efficient than normal. And we’re back to your irrational fear that your investments are only worthwhile if you’re constantly built for as high as possible. Your forma and tater are for more capacity, not just more damage. Your arcanes and Galvanised can be used in more builds than just the ones that you superglued into place, and may even find more value for their impact on an alternative build in alternative content. I fully-rank my mods and have not looked back, you don’t need to juggle half-ranks. The game is more than just whatever is the highest-level content, from both a content standpoint but also a gameplay and build-making standpoint, and this game is extremely non-linear while we jump all over the place for build or gameplay or rewards or whatever this game lets us do or earn And temporarily setting aside is absolutely a thing worth considering for multiplayer, otherwise you’re just jumping in and hoping for the best and in your case assuming that everyone’s fine with you just not considering them outside of “Hey, I carried you guys, how about some thanks?”; I potentially temporarily set aside that Argonak build, with all its free slots and capacity, when jumping into multiplayer for Arbitrations even if I’d probably bring it to a multiplayer level 50 mission. The different content already asks for different builds, jumping into multiplayer and potentially reconsidering what to bring is par for the course. 8 hours ago, SneakyErvin said: Which is what I said and you clearly ignore the other part when you ask why I bring up Grendel missions. They are clearly situated where you can go modless, which shows just how little danger there is on the star chart. The last few levels wont change much of that. It would also require me to want to play the planets that add those extra levels on the SC, which likely is not the case considering what drops there. You’re going to have to point out what I missed, because up until that point I was pretty sure I was talking about a) the modless baseline and how it’s the broadest canvas for buildcrafting, which is the modless baseline regardless of whether a mission type forces it on us or not, and b) Arbitrations and in general the entire game and building for the various levels of content, regardless of where that content sits (though yes, at low enough even modless can do things and it’d take a bleeding and decaying dragon key to add some spice to the fights even though abilities aren’t affected), though the Void may have something to say due to the damage modifier on enemies. 8 hours ago, SneakyErvin said: Also, you seem to not get my point at all considering how you talk about mods here (damage mod on gun = survival mod on frame). The point is we cannot downgrade our health to a point where the SC becomes dangerous. Me adding more survival mods to the frame would just further increase that "issue". However, playing that same content on SP allows us to both mod how we want, all the way from going slower like you want, to being highly efficient. In addition to that the mobs can actually down you even when you build to avoid getting downed. Okay, I agree to that point about not being able to adjust our modless health outside of Dragon Keys (though unlike players who claim that a dragon key letting them go infinitely far is merely a balancing tactic, I wouldn’t say that the game is balanced around always running around with bleeding and decaying in sub 40-50 content, it just adds some spice). But that’s applicable to like 40ish-and-below, because as the enemies scale beyond that level, we start potentially needing to consider what we’re going to do about survival (if we’re not doing something like open world which seems to follow a slightly different balance to the standard missions). I don’t know why you would burn a modslot on survival if you don’t need it unless you were intent on building higher than the content because it results in a chiller experience; there’s tons of other mods worth equipping that can be more interesting to use according to how you want to play, even Peculiar mods have more value if you’re fine with how your survival is, and a warframe like Inaros is so much more interesting to play using his self-sustain abilities to actively keep himself alive while freeing up slots for something other than redundant amounts of health. And if you want to load up on survival and figure out all the esoteric ways to break the game where some of them make zero sense and are clearly exploits of some sort, going to SP makes absolute sense since it was intended for players to do that, refining their builds so that they crushed anything that non-SP could throw at them but they still wanted a place to go. But it’s not the only way to build and play, and taking full advantage of everything this game has to offer while also playing nice in multiplayer means identifying what you’re built for and where you’re taking it and how they match up Edited February 27 by Merkranire 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SneakyErvin Posted February 28 Share Posted February 28 (edited) 17 hours ago, Merkranire said: You don’t know because you barely touched the alternative side once you were able to build higher than the content. I know what it’s like to chase the farm and what motivations surround it and what actions enable it, I’ve done it. Do you seriously think you didn’t stick to low and safe while built for higher while you farmed? The whole point of farming is safe and consistent, which is why I said what you’re asking for and what you want are mutually exclusive, and we already have the means to put our various builds to the test until you very specifically and with strong intent design a build/loadout that breaks every test, as was the point of making that build/loadout in the first place What does when have to do with anything? We all go through the same content and experience these things as we do. If we dont enjoy those things we wont force them upon ourself more than needed. There is also not much knowledge to be had in those parts of the game since everything is a pushover the moment you start to add building blocks. Farming all of that gear requires us to go through all of that "alternative" content over and over. Unless you have magic and exclusive access to getting all those items out the door. I ran around with broken mods, half leveled mods, no corrupted mods etc. for quite some time experiencing that "alternate" content. Which was OK at the time due to the carrot of progress. And no one said the game doesnt put our builds to the test. I said it is what I enjoy, being constantly tested by higher and higher content as the game lives on. The Star Chart does not allow me to get tested, since I simply cannot nerf myself to a point where it gets challenging. It also doesnt reward us for that, it just makes everything slower when the intent of the game genre is to hunt loot and farm in a rewarding fashion. 17 hours ago, Merkranire said: If you knew the alternative side, we’d be speaking the same language and we’d be discussing real balance for the content at the various levels including how much survival we have at Grendel-level-and-below (which again, I was pretty sure we were talking about a broader range of content and that Argonak build was introduced in context of Arbitrations), but you have no idea what building for the content even means (other than the tiny bit of enforced gameplay that happens in Grendel missions that are not representative of most of the game) otherwise you’d know that your little story about how you had to carry someone entails that yes, it’s worth questioning whether that dude was built for the content if they weren’t doing their part. Instead you cite them as an example of… what, not building for the content and ultimately being incapable of doing their part? Or was he just bad? Do you even know? Because you don’t know what the content asks for, I’m thinking you can’t tell whether he’s just playing bad, though running off on his own seems like playing bad, but where’s your observation that he made bad decisions in the mission and that his build could have been perfectly fine? Do you know? Personally I’d question the actions taken first, the build they brought second, because if someone plays well then the build is less of a problem (and there’s more free slots and capacity available for customisation) But there isnt real balance. Since risk vs reward or even the potential to face risk isnt there. You are still stuck in how much damage we deal while ignoring how little damage the enemy deals to us. You still dont get my point regarding Grendel missions. If you can do those naked as intended, how is the star chart going to become engaging? Killing things slowly as they pose no actual threat to you is not engaging, it is tedious. And the dude being built for the content or not doesnt matter. He still increases the health of the Demos, so him dead or not built for the mission has the has outcome, the rest having to do enough to make up for his scaling increase to the objective of the whole mission, which mainly means making up for his slice to the point where the 3 can kill the heaviest type of Grineer Demo encountered on Mars. Also who said anything about carry? We did a fine job all 3 of us being able to pull our weight and the dead guys. That isnt carrying, that is making up for, covering etc. Like uhm what people should mostly be prepared to do incase S#&$ hits the fan. That said, the dude dying simply ran into poor luck since it happened quite far in. There is simply plenty of dangers on the Mars Archon tiles, some of the specific Narmer Grineer hit very hard with special attack, so if you are caught without a shield/OG its often buh-bye. Some of them can 1HK both my Lavos and Kullervo, while those two frames at the same time treat the Archons as a tickle fest. 17 hours ago, Merkranire said: And that’s part of the crux of joining multiplayer while not knowing what your teammates are built for; you don’t need to build to your mercurial random teammates and their various levels of skill, you just need to build to the content which is far less mercurial, and building for multiplayer falls into place because of knowing what you’re built for. No I dont need to build for the content. What I need to build for is what I consider fun. DE allows me to do that, those are the rules and the intent, so I do that. If the game didnt allow for that I wouldnt do it and it wouldnt be possible. But it is possible so the game tells me to play the way I find it fun. Not the way you or anyone else find it fun. Since you are not prepared to allow me to have my idea of fun in public, according to you only I am supposed to bend and change, even though we both entered public and abide by the rules and limitations DE has placed on the game. 17 hours ago, Merkranire said: And we’re back to your irrational fear that your investments are only worthwhile if you’re constantly built for as high as possible. No. They are simply not worthwhile if I cant use them at all. Lower content, if building for it to be "engagning", means no arcanes, no operator, no shards, barely no mod, barely building towards what is enjoyed in a specific frame kit etc. It also removes the option to combine X with Y and Z etc. All while not actually getting engaging in the end, since I'm still stuck with the baseline stats as the minimum. 17 hours ago, Merkranire said: Your forma and tater are for more capacity, not just more damage. Your arcanes and Galvanised can be used in more builds than just the ones that you superglued into place, and may even find more value for their impact on an alternative build in alternative content. I fully-rank my mods and have not looked back, you don’t need to juggle half-ranks. The game is more than just whatever is the highest-level content, from both a content standpoint but also a gameplay and build-making standpoint, and this game is extremely non-linear while we jump all over the place for build or gameplay or rewards or whatever this game lets us do or earn Empty capacity is empty capacity, which ends up not giving any value to the forma and taters spent. Because you can barely cram in the full baseline 30 capacity and innate polarity matches without trivializing low missions. And no, you practically cant make use of arcanes or galv mods if you want engaging content. And through all of this TTL still trivializes low missions. Unless we start going into territories where we go "dont use this frame, dont use that weapon, dont use that skill, dont use that playstyle", which just results in the question "why play if you arent going to play something you atleast find fun?". Since going slow for the sake of going slow while also not even enjoying the items you use is just self torture and borderline self destructive behavior. 17 hours ago, Merkranire said: And temporarily setting aside is absolutely a thing worth considering for multiplayer, otherwise you’re just jumping in and hoping for the best and in your case assuming that everyone’s fine with you just not considering them outside of “Hey, I carried you guys, how about some thanks?”; I potentially temporarily set aside that Argonak build, with all its free slots and capacity, when jumping into multiplayer for Arbitrations even if I’d probably bring it to a multiplayer level 50 mission. The different content already asks for different builds, jumping into multiplayer and potentially reconsidering what to bring is par for the course. And why should you not set aside your idea of fun? You are in the end the minority yet want to be the one that makes decisions for the masses? And again you use "carry"... when we talk about trivial low level content and people simply playing the game as it is supposed to. No, people dont carry, people just play the game. Carry is when someone would be there that isnt actually supposed to be there since they cant actually handle it. Does that mean you think you shouldnt be there since you do too little and need a carry in such trivial content with the "builds" you bring? 17 hours ago, Merkranire said: You’re going to have to point out what I missed, because up until that point I was pretty sure I was talking about a) the modless baseline and how it’s the broadest canvas for buildcrafting, which is the modless baseline regardless of whether a mission type forces it on us or not, and b) Arbitrations and in general the entire game and building for the various levels of content, regardless of where that content sits (though yes, at low enough even modless can do things and it’d take a bleeding and decaying dragon key to add some spice to the fights even though abilities aren’t affected), though the Void may have something to say due to the damage modifier on enemies. The point you miss is that we have too much TTL even without mods when it comes to the Star Chart, meaning that no matter how you build in order to make things engaging by nerfing your damage, you will still not end up with engaging content since you cannot die. That is what the Grendel missions show, they arent engaging, since you practically cant die, they are just slow because you deal low damage. The only thing modding more does is speed up the gameplay, so you might aswell go for the fastest clear speed since the threat will not increase by you going slower. Dragon keys are not an excuse, that is going out of your way since you are suddenly below the baseline now. Your whole jig to start with was regarding SP being imbalanced and not allowing for builds. Now you sit here and bring up dragon keys aswell in order for the SC to be engaging. While SP is all open for you to mod and build practically as you like while providing the exact same missions as the SC you go out of your way to play. All while having thrown your so prescious "modless baseline" straight out the window. And again, you name random SC places. What would be the reason to run them? Or should I not farm the loot I'm actually looking for? So I need to go even further out of my way to experience "engaging" gameplay on the start chart and remove even more of my fun? Or I can just build however I want and farm whichever region I actually need loot from on the SP, which facing a more hectic and fun density, more special units like nullifiers and eximus while having a chance to get downed, even if thing die faster. Like hmm, hard choice... more fun+more mobs+more threats+more loot+more build freedom+operator available vs no threats, having to narrow builds into the negative, barely able to pick any mods, cant really utilize arcanes, operator would break everything, likely need to pick just the weakest frames, preferably without any skills to use, horrible loot yield, snooze slow gameplay and practically forced to specific regions only in order to get "engaging" content. Can I please have a massive serving of option one!? 17 hours ago, Merkranire said: Okay, I agree to that point about not being able to adjust our modless health outside of Dragon Keys (though unlike players who claim that a dragon key letting them go infinitely far is merely a balancing tactic, I wouldn’t say that the game is balanced around always running around with bleeding and decaying in sub 40-50 content, it just adds some spice). But that’s applicable to like 40ish-and-below, because as the enemies scale beyond that level, we start potentially needing to consider what we’re going to do about survival (if we’re not doing something like open world which seems to follow a slightly different balance to the standard missions). I don’t know why you would burn a modslot on survival if you don’t need it unless you were intent on building higher than the content because it results in a chiller experience; there’s tons of other mods worth equipping that can be more interesting to use according to how you want to play, even Peculiar mods have more value if you’re fine with how your survival is, and a warframe like Inaros is so much more interesting to play using his self-sustain abilities to actively keep himself alive while freeing up slots for something other than redundant amounts of health. And if you want to load up on survival and figure out all the esoteric ways to break the game where some of them make zero sense and are clearly exploits of some sort, going to SP makes absolute sense since it was intended for players to do that, refining their builds so that they crushed anything that non-SP could throw at them but they still wanted a place to go. But it’s not the only way to build and play, and taking full advantage of everything this game has to offer while also playing nice in multiplayer means identifying what you’re built for and where you’re taking it and how they match up And you keep rambling about "higher than the content". What content? Are you only ever running one-off missions? Do you not get the idea of the QoL in building for things far higher? So you can stay longer if you or others happen to want to. I cant count the times I've joined pugs and we've just kept going and going and going, things that wouldnt be possible if you "build" just for the bare minimum. Which is why I'd never set foot in Arbitrations in a group unless I have a build that can allow me to go as far as I like, since it is always endless and the more people we are and the longer we go the more vitus and chances and unique things like aura formas we get. More importantly if it is a really good node location for the current hour. Which is why you with a "fun" build doesnt matter, since you cannot push, you arent there considering others will to push, so no one should consider you and your discomfort the slightest. If you decide to "push" you will practically just end up being a leech at that point. There are many times I've gone into arbis and thought "eh I'll give it 20 mins", but then people have wanted to go further and I've stayed since I've been able to, even if I've gotten some drops I wanted already. Simply because it has been a chill group, a good tile and a beneficial mission type. Resulting in removing the RNG of the next hour incase we can stay past that. So there are many reasons to "overbuilding" and not just about wanting utmost efficiency and seeing it as fun. You building to only go the minimum doesnt only mean you do less, you also impact others when you leave if it is endless, since suddenly those guys that could see themselves going an hour in a group now only have 3/4 player density for the rest of the run, or if you stay a potential EMT job getting you up over and over. However, that is all fine, since in the end all of us are afterall in PuG. So if people drop out before the expected time of someone else is reached, or you using something that can only go 5 minutes, it really doesnt matter. Since if I or someone else wants to go an hour or two, or you want to build a certain way and have a specific outcome with that we'd not sit in a PuG. We'd be logical people and seek out a pre-made or go solo depending on what it is we seek. With your own logic and weight on considerate builds you are really in an unachievable situation. Since I'm fairly sure that you arent considerate enough to always bring a build to arbitrations (or SP) that can go for say an hour and you are likely not considerate enough to always go an hour if others want it. So there is no reason those players should caster to your needs either, neither in arbitrations or anywhere else, since in the end, you are as much about the I as I am bout the I in me. The common part in an endless is going to rota C, which is where most people bow out, just as the most common way to play the game is speed running efficiently. So the guys and gals wanting to go further than C end up going into the minority, just as your way of playing is in the minority. However, the people wanting to go further have more of a chance to find people considerate to them due to others mostly being built to speed run by "overbuilding" for the content, so can join those that want to go further on the fly. You however, a person that enjoys "building for the content" will end up being far less considerate to those that want to go further, since you will be limited by your build and not able to make those on the fly decisions. Is that really being considerate of you? Edited February 28 by SneakyErvin 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PublikDomain Posted February 28 Share Posted February 28 (edited) On 2024-02-27 at 6:52 AM, SneakyErvin said: No. If you have a weak and a strong weapon and want the weak weapon to become better and more even to the strong weapon you cant just nerf the strong weapon. Since that still leaves the weak weapon weak against the enemies. And you cant nerf the enemies since then the gap is still the same between the weak and the strong weapon. This is just mathematically untrue. If Weapon A deals 10 DPS, and Weapon B deals 100 DPS, and Enemy has 100 EHP... Enemy takes 1 second to die to Weapon B, and 10 seconds to die to Weapon A. The difference between Weapon A and Weapon B is 10x. If Weapon A is buffed to deal 50 DPS... Now Enemy takes 1 second to die to Weapon B, and 2 seconds to die to Weapon A. The difference between Weapon A and Weapon B is now 2x. Using only buffs, you can get a gap of 2x. If Weapon B is nerfed to deal 20 DPS, and Enemy is nerfed to have 20 EHP... Now Enemy takes 1 second to die to Weapon B, and 2 seconds to die to Weapon A. The difference between Weapon A and Weapon B is now 2x. Using only nerfs, you can also get a gap of 2x. Yes, you can nerf the enemies like in the second example because no, the gap is not "still the same". 2 is not the same as 10. You're just plain wrong. Nerfs can achieve the exact same gap reduction as buffs. Edit: I realize I've explained this to you already: On 2024-02-23 at 3:34 PM, PublikDomain said: But I can expand the example for you if that helps you better understand it? Quote Weapon A has 10 DPS. Weapon B has 100 DPS. Enemy has 100 EHP. Enemy takes 10 seconds to die to Weapon A and 1 second to die to Weapon B. Spending 10 seconds killing a single enemy is so slow and bad compared to Weapon B that barely anyone ever uses Weapon A. If you want to make Weapon A and Weapon B more equally desirable choices, you can: 1. Buff Weapon A to deal 50 DPS? Now Enemy takes 2 seconds to die to Weapon A and 1 second to die to Weapon B. This is a buff to Weapon A, and a nerf to Enemy and Weapon B. Enemy now dies faster to more weapons, and Weapon B is now only 2x faster than Weapon A instead of 10x faster. 2. Nerf Enemy to have 20 EHP and nerf Weapon B to have 20 DPS? Now Enemy takes 2 seconds to die to Weapon A and 1 second to die to Weapon B. This is a buff to Weapon A, and a nerf to Enemy and Weapon B. Enemy now dies faster to more weapons, and Weapon B is now only 2x faster than Weapon A instead of 10x faster. Expand See? You can achieve identical outcomes by applying either nerfs or buffs. Nerfs and buffs both achieve the same outcome. They do the same thing. They're two sides of the same coin. That's what I was showing with that example. But if you didn't get it the first time or the second time, then the third time is probably going to be just as futile. I can simplify this and color code it and draw pretty pictures for you, but as long as you continue to deny grade-school maths and refuse to consider these simple examples you'll never understand what I'm saying. On 2024-02-27 at 6:52 AM, SneakyErvin said: Clearly, so not up to date with what has happened in the game. That's the fun thing about math: it never goes out of date. The math is the same today as it was when I made my thread, and the idea still works. You can even try the idea out and see this yourself, not that you will. On 2024-02-27 at 6:52 AM, SneakyErvin said: I'm saying this since you cant just ignore that SP exsists and that things must work there aswell. So not testing it there with its specific conditions will not give you any accurate idea of how the weapons will perform aside from a potential TTK for a single enemy. It will give no good estimation how it holds up in content with adjusted spawn rates, different penalties tied to KPM etc. Which is all part of SP, which is a very relevant part of the game where we are at now. Ignore it? Not test there? I did test there. Like I told you in the very section you quoted, the Corpus in the lowest real SP missions produce the equivalent of lvl500 SP enemies. Why do I know this? Because I tested it and then checked my work. Everything works fine, and the missions are totally doable as long as you don't suck, it's just that you're playing in SP simulated at lvl500. This is all in my thread you apparently still haven't bothered to read despite your complaints that I won't give you specifics. On 2024-02-27 at 6:52 AM, SneakyErvin said: So? It is still more difficult than MR tests, which is my point as to why MR5 on lich weapons doesnt matter, since the power justification lies within the mode you need to clear. So the power level of some of the strongest and most popular weapons in the game is justified because... Newbie MR5 players can melee their way through an easy game mode? On 2024-02-27 at 6:52 AM, SneakyErvin said: And why frames arent tied to MR? Because they recently removed it since frames arent intended to be more or less powerful than another, they are just ment as the right tools for a job. They only removed it from Prime Warframes, regular Warframes didn't have any such restriction: Quote Reduced the Mastery Rank restriction of all Prime Warframes to 0. Only 11/34 frames had any Mastery Rank restrictions, so we decided to make these consistent with the rest (there were no Mastery Rank restrictions on any non-Primed Warframes). But now we're getting somewhere! Why do you think DE did this? They looked at Primed Warframes - the more powerful, more advanced, further progressed versions - and removed that restriction. So where's the progression from regular to Prime? It doesn't seem to have been all that important if DE got rid of it in a hotfix. Maybe this is because, like you suggest, frames aren't intended to be more or less powerful than another. Why do you think that might be? There's certainly a reason for it, no? And if you can understand this about frames, why do you have such trouble applying that idea elsewhere? On 2024-02-27 at 6:52 AM, SneakyErvin said: And I was pretty clear that WF is for the most part a horizontal system already, where most things are sidegrades. However you conveniantly left that part out of the quote. I left it out because it's just not true. You're pointing to the small plateau on top of the mountain to suggest that the mountain as a whole is actually flat. Some of Warframe is horizontal, like the powerful bits at the very tippy top. If you want an AoE weapon, then the Kuva Ogris, Kuva Bramma, Kuva Zarr, Tenet Envoy, various AoE Incarnons, etc. will all horizontally fill that role just as good as the next. They are, for the most part, sidegrades of each other. But this does not apply to the game as a whole, where weapon progression overall remains very much vertical. Most weapons, even the sidegrades and upgrades you suggest, tend to suck and go unused compared to the very best which sit vertically above them. The four years of officially published usage statistics should make this fact obvious. If the game was "for the most part a horizontal system already", then these official figures would be for the most part... horizontal! Yet they're obviously not. This... Spoiler ... is not very "horizontal". It wasn't in 2020, or 2021, or 2022, or 2023. In fact, the only "horizontal" part is the fodder barely anyone uses. On 2024-02-27 at 6:52 AM, SneakyErvin said: while I want nerfs I dont see a need for nerfs to our current content. Nerfs to bring the ceiling down so future content can get more meaningful is what I seek. Since we can reduce the ceiling, all that would do is reduce how far people can push in endless, which is optional and not tied to a risk where rewards are also impacted. Those players will simply hit the wall earlier than now while regular farming stays intact. This gives DE better room for future content that can then start higher to be more challenging for the masses, with enough room to min-max and so on aswell. Some will still find it trivial, and that is OK. Right, so like I said we're saying the same things. It's just wrong when I say it. On 2024-02-27 at 6:52 AM, SneakyErvin said: And you ignore or forget that I've said that Ironic, no? Edited February 28 by PublikDomain 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merkranire Posted February 28 Share Posted February 28 (edited) 6 hours ago, SneakyErvin said: What does when have to do with anything? We all go through the same content and experience these things as we do. If we dont enjoy those things we wont force them upon ourself more than needed. There is also not much knowledge to be had in those parts of the game since everything is a pushover the moment you start to add building blocks. Farming all of that gear requires us to go through all of that "alternative" content over and over. Unless you have magic and exclusive access to getting all those items out the door. I ran around with broken mods, half leveled mods, no corrupted mods etc. for quite some time experiencing that "alternate" content. Which was OK at the time due to the carrot of progress. And no one said the game doesnt put our builds to the test. I said it is what I enjoy, being constantly tested by higher and higher content as the game lives on. The Star Chart does not allow me to get tested, since I simply cannot nerf myself to a point where it gets challenging. It also doesnt reward us for that, it just makes everything slower when the intent of the game genre is to hunt loot and farm in a rewarding fashion. But there isnt real balance. Since risk vs reward or even the potential to face risk isnt there. You are still stuck in how much damage we deal while ignoring how little damage the enemy deals to us. You still dont get my point regarding Grendel missions. If you can do those naked as intended, how is the star chart going to become engaging? Killing things slowly as they pose no actual threat to you is not engaging, it is tedious. And the dude being built for the content or not doesnt matter. He still increases the health of the Demos, so him dead or not built for the mission has the has outcome, the rest having to do enough to make up for his scaling increase to the objective of the whole mission, which mainly means making up for his slice to the point where the 3 can kill the heaviest type of Grineer Demo encountered on Mars. Also who said anything about carry? We did a fine job all 3 of us being able to pull our weight and the dead guys. That isnt carrying, that is making up for, covering etc. Like uhm what people should mostly be prepared to do incase S#&$ hits the fan. That said, the dude dying simply ran into poor luck since it happened quite far in. There is simply plenty of dangers on the Mars Archon tiles, some of the specific Narmer Grineer hit very hard with special attack, so if you are caught without a shield/OG its often buh-bye. Some of them can 1HK both my Lavos and Kullervo, while those two frames at the same time treat the Archons as a tickle fest. No I dont need to build for the content. What I need to build for is what I consider fun. DE allows me to do that, those are the rules and the intent, so I do that. If the game didnt allow for that I wouldnt do it and it wouldnt be possible. But it is possible so the game tells me to play the way I find it fun. Not the way you or anyone else find it fun. Since you are not prepared to allow me to have my idea of fun in public, according to you only I am supposed to bend and change, even though we both entered public and abide by the rules and limitations DE has placed on the game. No. They are simply not worthwhile if I cant use them at all. Lower content, if building for it to be "engagning", means no arcanes, no operator, no shards, barely no mod, barely building towards what is enjoyed in a specific frame kit etc. It also removes the option to combine X with Y and Z etc. All while not actually getting engaging in the end, since I'm still stuck with the baseline stats as the minimum. Empty capacity is empty capacity, which ends up not giving any value to the forma and taters spent. Because you can barely cram in the full baseline 30 capacity and innate polarity matches without trivializing low missions. And no, you practically cant make use of arcanes or galv mods if you want engaging content. And through all of this TTL still trivializes low missions. Unless we start going into territories where we go "dont use this frame, dont use that weapon, dont use that skill, dont use that playstyle", which just results in the question "why play if you arent going to play something you atleast find fun?". Since going slow for the sake of going slow while also not even enjoying the items you use is just self torture and borderline self destructive behavior. And why should you not set aside your idea of fun? You are in the end the minority yet want to be the one that makes decisions for the masses? And again you use "carry"... when we talk about trivial low level content and people simply playing the game as it is supposed to. No, people dont carry, people just play the game. Carry is when someone would be there that isnt actually supposed to be there since they cant actually handle it. Does that mean you think you shouldnt be there since you do too little and need a carry in such trivial content with the "builds" you bring? The point you miss is that we have too much TTL even without mods when it comes to the Star Chart, meaning that no matter how you build in order to make things engaging by nerfing your damage, you will still not end up with engaging content since you cannot die. That is what the Grendel missions show, they arent engaging, since you practically cant die, they are just slow because you deal low damage. The only thing modding more does is speed up the gameplay, so you might aswell go for the fastest clear speed since the threat will not increase by you going slower. Dragon keys are not an excuse, that is going out of your way since you are suddenly below the baseline now. Your whole jig to start with was regarding SP being imbalanced and not allowing for builds. Now you sit here and bring up dragon keys aswell in order for the SC to be engaging. While SP is all open for you to mod and build practically as you like while providing the exact same missions as the SC you go out of your way to play. All while having thrown your so prescious "modless baseline" straight out the window. And again, you name random SC places. What would be the reason to run them? Or should I not farm the loot I'm actually looking for? So I need to go even further out of my way to experience "engaging" gameplay on the start chart and remove even more of my fun? Or I can just build however I want and farm whichever region I actually need loot from on the SP, which facing a more hectic and fun density, more special units like nullifiers and eximus while having a chance to get downed, even if thing die faster. Like hmm, hard choice... more fun+more mobs+more threats+more loot+more build freedom+operator available vs no threats, having to narrow builds into the negative, barely able to pick any mods, cant really utilize arcanes, operator would break everything, likely need to pick just the weakest frames, preferably without any skills to use, horrible loot yield, snooze slow gameplay and practically forced to specific regions only in order to get "engaging" content. Can I please have a massive serving of option one!? And you keep rambling about "higher than the content". What content? Are you only ever running one-off missions? Do you not get the idea of the QoL in building for things far higher? So you can stay longer if you or others happen to want to. I cant count the times I've joined pugs and we've just kept going and going and going, things that wouldnt be possible if you "build" just for the bare minimum. Which is why I'd never set foot in Arbitrations in a group unless I have a build that can allow me to go as far as I like, since it is always endless and the more people we are and the longer we go the more vitus and chances and unique things like aura formas we get. More importantly if it is a really good node location for the current hour. Which is why you with a "fun" build doesnt matter, since you cannot push, you arent there considering others will to push, so no one should consider you and your discomfort the slightest. If you decide to "push" you will practically just end up being a leech at that point. There are many times I've gone into arbis and thought "eh I'll give it 20 mins", but then people have wanted to go further and I've stayed since I've been able to, even if I've gotten some drops I wanted already. Simply because it has been a chill group, a good tile and a beneficial mission type. Resulting in removing the RNG of the next hour incase we can stay past that. So there are many reasons to "overbuilding" and not just about wanting utmost efficiency and seeing it as fun. You building to only go the minimum doesnt only mean you do less, you also impact others when you leave if it is endless, since suddenly those guys that could see themselves going an hour in a group now only have 3/4 player density for the rest of the run, or if you stay a potential EMT job getting you up over and over. However, that is all fine, since in the end all of us are afterall in PuG. So if people drop out before the expected time of someone else is reached, or you using something that can only go 5 minutes, it really doesnt matter. Since if I or someone else wants to go an hour or two, or you want to build a certain way and have a specific outcome with that we'd not sit in a PuG. We'd be logical people and seek out a pre-made or go solo depending on what it is we seek. With your own logic and weight on considerate builds you are really in an unachievable situation. Since I'm fairly sure that you arent considerate enough to always bring a build to arbitrations (or SP) that can go for say an hour and you are likely not considerate enough to always go an hour if others want it. So there is no reason those players should caster to your needs either, neither in arbitrations or anywhere else, since in the end, you are as much about the I as I am bout the I in me. The common part in an endless is going to rota C, which is where most people bow out, just as the most common way to play the game is speed running efficiently. So the guys and gals wanting to go further than C end up going into the minority, just as your way of playing is in the minority. However, the people wanting to go further have more of a chance to find people considerate to them due to others mostly being built to speed run by "overbuilding" for the content, so can join those that want to go further on the fly. You however, a person that enjoys "building for the content" will end up being far less considerate to those that want to go further, since you will be limited by your build and not able to make those on the fly decisions. Is that really being considerate of you? Dude, you know so little that I’m getting kind of blindsided why you keep talking about 30-ish and below content (I apparently forgot what the level of Grendel content was and kept thinking it was 40, so that’s 10 levels lower) when a) I’m talking about the whole game outside of unbalanced Steel Path, and b) one of the points I was talking about was Arbitrations, maybe level 50, until you brought up Grendel missions and I literally agreed that our baseline survival against that level of content and below is sufficient on its own, which means we don’t need any survival mods but can slot other things (and play around with dragon keys as an option though I would hesitate to say the game is necessarily balanced for it) outside of the Grendel kissions, so like… I don’t know what you want me to say when I already acknowledged it You miss so many points that I’m becoming less annoyed and more straight up confused as to what you’re even reading. And no, overbuilding for the content without thinking about it is not consideration, it’s accidental consideration at best and outright disruptive at worst Edited February 28 by Merkranire 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aruquae Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 14 hours ago, Merkranire said: (I apparently forgot what the level of Grendel content was and kept thinking it was 40, so that’s 10 levels lower) when a) Used to be 40+ before they reduced it after the Eximus change. 14 hours ago, Merkranire said: I’m talking about the whole game outside of unbalanced Steel Path Wouldn’t that be half the game then? Steel Path has always been a part of the game, especially now that the Devs are really pushing for levels that high. 14 hours ago, Merkranire said: And no, overbuilding for the content without thinking about it is not consideration, it’s accidental consideration at best and outright disruptive at worst There’s a fine line in getting a build that’s perfect for specific content that doesn’t leak outside of that window. It’s like cake, you make too much batter for a “medium sized cake” and end up having it spill over into what’s considered a large sized cake. Mmm yes, my analogies are something. I want cake now Anyways, this is getting old. Tbf this got old like 20 pages ago. Are you really going to stay doomed to write walls of texts to people you don’t agree with? At least this thread reminded me that coffee cake exists. Toodaloo 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now