Nuke Builds Are Ruining Gameplay Enjoyment

[PublikDomain]

3 minutes ago, (PSN)AyinDygra said:

*sigh*

🤷‍♀️

There's a way forward if you can allow yourself to see it. We can share.

[--Leyenda-yight6]

hace 1 hora, MirageKnight dijo:

People that don’t see a problem with power creep and nuke abilities will never compromise due to a sense of entitlement and the need to feel superior.

 

That said, thanks to you and Merk for being voices of reason in this discussion despite some vocal and stubborn opposition.

another who falls into the same pit, at least Merk will no longer be alone.

Edited March 7 by --Leyenda-yight6

[Merkranire]

11 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

That is very subjective and based on personal experience only. For me, it isnt true. Like I said earlier, I enjoy the farm. If there is nothing left to farm and I want to play similar content I pick that other similar content that still has something to farm. Also as pointed out earlier regarding arbis, just staying 20 min is a waste for me, since it is on a 1h CD with a random selection of modes. So if a good and enjoyable mode pops I'll make sure to stay until I feel I need a break, since the next reset may offer a mode I'm not that fond of, or versus an enemy I dont feel like fighting. Also not sure why you think this is about levelcap, or where you got the idea from that it is even hinted. There is a vast difference having a build that can handle 20 min and 1 or 2 hours. And 2h is not even close to level cap aside from a very few select modes.

Claiming others being insane because they dont share your view of fun is silly. Sanity would be doing what the individual enjoys, insanity would be the individual putting itself through what it doesnt enjoy in the case of a hobby.

Sigh all you want. It doesnt make your statement less false.

You as in me you or you as in people in general? Eitherway you couldnt be more wrong. Since specialization, min-max etc. depends highly on the frame or weapon in question, there is no must to go with full formas. And no, half formad does not guarantee more variety, that is a baseless assumption since it fully depends on the item in question. We also lack a variety in modding based on different polarities. So you are most often able to swap in low max cap mods of a different polarity in a high formad build if you "build" for lower content. Looking at some of my own frames for instance, I can replace an Umbra or two and have 16-32 capacity freed up on whatever I like, while most low mods will cost 1-2 capacity more than the most expensive properly polarized that are currently part of the build, that is if those low mods only have the option to go into those unmatching polarities. We are in the end not looking at all mods suddenly going into unmatched polarities just because we swap to a different build.

And why you treat Umbra with great caution I dont really see the point of. Are you that starved on simaris rep that you cant afford alternate versions, so instead of running Intensify in a low build you instead run UI at a far lower rank? Oh right, no you, the spokes person for building for content refuse to use the biggest options for build freedom, that of partially ranked mods. Since they are a "nightmare to work with" eh? 👀❔

No wonder you cant see that SP allows for wide build variety when you refuse to use large parts of a full system. You refusing to use partially ranked mods is as if you played an RPG and either maxed skills/talents or didnt use them at all. You've honestly never sat there in WF and thought "Hmm I could use that strength from Transient, but I also need the duration that I would then lose... Oh hey Blind Rage at partial ranks offers the same strength, for a lower cost and it reduced efficiency instead of duration, which I can actually spare in this build!"? Or for any other mod for that matter where you only need parts of the stats and there is no other option?

Sigh again as you miss points, make wrong statements, jump to wrong conclusion, twist logic (like seriously, juggling partial ranks and partial effects just to try and cheat the polarities system that by design causes mods to cost more capacity if they don’t match? yikes, ), at times agree with me seemingly without realising it(?), and in general continue to show your ignorance when you’ve made it clear you’ve never tried exploring the other side with any sort of interest since you’ve made it clear it’s not something you’re personally interested in even while the game supports it and is designed around it and others take advantage of it (and they’re also doing what you do because there’s nothing particularly special, so… there’s that). I don’t care what you do in solo and the game doesn’t either until you jump onto the forums and start complaining about how for some bizarre reason the game doesn’t seem to work like you expect it to, but when you join multiplayer you’re going to have to reconsider what you’re doing and bringing, at the least using the content itself as a guide since it’s impossible to know what other randoms are going to bring, for the sake of others because you’re running headlong into what the game is designed to do in order to keep its variety of gear and gameplay valid and fresh and its rewards rewarding even while you think otherwise because you’re so insistent that there’s one way to play and you’re going to force it on anyone who gets in your way.

11 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

And why you treat Umbra with great caution I dont really see the point of.

You… seriously don’t see a reason to treat Umbral polarity with caution.

I’m not saying I never use them, I’m saying I treat them with caution and give consideration as to what I put them on and why I’m putting it on.

Surely you can imagine a reason to not apply a hyper-specialised polarity?

Edited March 8 by Merkranire

[Psianide73]

2 hours ago, Merkranire said:

Sigh again as you miss points, make wrong statements, jump to wrong conclusion, twist logic (like seriously, juggling partial ranks and partial effects just to try and cheat the polarities system that by design causes mods to cost more capacity if they don’t match? yikes, ), at times agree with me seemingly without realising it(?), and in general continue to show your ignorance when you’ve made it clear you’ve never tried exploring the other side with any sort of interest since you’ve made it clear it’s not something you’re personally interested in even while the game supports it and is designed around it and others take advantage of it (and they’re also doing what you do because there’s nothing particularly special, so… there’s that). I don’t care what you do in solo and the game doesn’t either until you jump onto the forums and start complaining about how for some bizarre reason the game doesn’t seem to work like you expect it to, but when you join multiplayer you’re going to have to reconsider what you’re doing and bringing, at the least using the content itself as a guide since it’s impossible to know what other randoms are going to bring, for the sake of others because you’re running headlong into what the game is designed to do in order to keep its variety of gear and gameplay valid and fresh and its rewards rewarding even while you think otherwise because you’re so insistent that there’s one way to play and you’re going to force it on anyone who gets in your way.

You… seriously don’t see a reason to treat Umbral polarity with caution.

I’m not saying I never use them, I’m saying I treat them with caution and give consideration as to what I put them on and why I’m putting it on.

Surely you can imagine a reason to not apply a hyper-specialised polarity?

Is this post meant to be ironic? Because it is. 

[Merkranire]

3 hours ago, Psianide73 said:

Is this post meant to be ironic? Because it is. 

Explain

[SneakyErvin]

21 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

Yes, you're getting stuck on useless details like the specific words being used and not what's being said. Why would you buy a plane ticket to cross a pond? We need to drop everything and argue about what the word "pond" means because this is so important that we use words for their purpose. There's no way "across the pond" could mean anything other than traveling to the other side of a small body of still water. Completely worthless.

You missed my uhm point. Car = plane, pancake = ticket, go across the pond = travel through the air. since we are using words to mean something they usually dont.

21 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

You continue to insinuate that I want everything to be "bland and the same". I have never said this. I have refuted this over and over again. You're just making stuff up. The gifs I shared were in response to another insinuation of yours that the balancing you think I'm suggesting "would just be walls of health doing little in return". Which I was refuting, since you were just making stuff up. And in those gifs you can clearly see the same kinds of sub-second TTKs and one-shots we have today. Edit: And just for the inevitable "well what's the point then", the point is that all the other stuff can enjoy a similar level of performance. Turrets, explosive barrels, pets, Amps, abilities, etc.

But amps and abilites etc. along with barrels do quite well already. And your gifs dont show anything but walls doing little in return, since that is practically WF enemies overall. My point was that making them more durable (including the trashiest trash) would not help, since they'd just be slower to kill while still doing little in return. Hence why I advocate new enemy mechanics that actually do something to shake up the combat. Plus with the density in WF the weapons wouldnt keep up with those that deal with several enemies at once, so you wouldnt really solve anything for the single target weapons until you start adding things similar to incarnons that allows you to morph the weapon into something else, something that can actually handle with tons of enemies.

I know people are comfortable going through an endless survival and relying on life support tower interaction. But that is highly ineffective in a game that centers around farming, since the loot obtained at the end of the mission is several times lower for someone that needs to interact with life support towers. And it ends up being the same for defense that would just be slower if you got here with something not able to handle multiple enemies effectively, since you'd spend that much more time per wave/rotation. There is a reason I go with Protea nearly exclusively to arbitration defense, and alone at that, since it results in spending 40-45 minutes on the same amount of waves/rotations that would otherwise take 60 minutes (or more). That is one free run every 3-4 runs, not only that, but a whole hour you've saved in. Those are also things to consider when thinking about longer TTK and nerfs.

22 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

That's why, like you say, I keep mentioning it. Weird, right? It's almost like it's the thing I'm talking about. Which is why, as I've said before, I don't care about this "blandness" you're complaining about. It's a non-issue. I don't care. Nothing needs to become any more or less "bland", and the weapons you personally think are currently "bland" can remain just how they are...

The blandess isnt a non-issue. Your first comment I commented on in this thread was about the idea of bringing weapons closer. That will not happen if you have the amount of bland/generic weapons we have no, no matter what systems you change, since those weapons will still be just another generic weapon within their class. So then you dont really solve anyhting of what you set out to do, since those weapons will still be considered bad by most people. Meaning such a rework would be meaningless since things should in reality not be reworked to cater to a minority. It would just result in those bland weapons switching positions a bit with other bland weapons far down on the usage chart.

And if you really do like those bland weapons, there is nothing stopping you from using them now. They all either have variants or are strong enough when modded to jump into and beat the hardest content. Maybe not in the best possible way, but they can handle it.

22 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

See? You're so close to getting it! Just gotta connect those few remaining dots.

Well I'm talking about weapons that have actually gotten strong, just with the wrong mechanics to speak to me. Not weapons that just have something slapped onto them that is objectively weak. Which kinda also proves your idea that if everything is good everything is worth getting wrong. I'm for instance not using Lex or Latron, both being good competative weapons now, just not worth using for me. Or are you meaning that "everything is worth getting" really means "everything is worth getting to someone"? You mean like what we already see?

22 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

No, but you do?

Nope, and not sure how you got that idea. You calling incarnons the same stat squish however leads me to believe you think stat squish is faster. Stat squish would effect all weapons, most likely all at once. Which would require a pre-determined mark to adjust all weapons towards. This means all weapons would need to be checked prior to this in order to decide where the mark should be at, which would likely also need to include modding potential and so on. Incarnons are individual weapons changed in batches with little relation to anything else but themselves. Not to mention that they also add gameplay incentives.

22 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

That DE has shared their consistent belief that no, being disruptive is bad, and that yes, having a more level playing field is good. Duh.

And no one has argued otherwise. I've only mentioned that AoE weapons are no longer considered disruptive since according to patch notes etc. that issue has been solved with provided reasoning behind why those specific changes happened. Other things might still be disruptive. You provided the patch notes explaining why AoE got nerfed as some form of evidence to AoE still being disruptive, when the notes talk about what was done to solve the disruption. Then you bring up them considering self damage to make it back and claiming it is to further nerf AoE when in reality it is in order to open for better AoE QoL for players that want to reduce the penalty of AoE. By implementing self damage and removing self stagger, so people wont need to rely on something locked behind a very long login day reward to mitigate it.

[SneakyErvin]

15 hours ago, Merkranire said:

Sigh again as you miss points, make wrong statements, jump to wrong conclusion, twist logic (like seriously, juggling partial ranks and partial effects just to try and cheat the polarities system that by design causes mods to cost more capacity if they don’t match? yikes, ), at times agree with me seemingly without realising it(?), and in general continue to show your ignorance when you’ve made it clear you’ve never tried exploring the other side with any sort of interest since you’ve made it clear it’s not something you’re personally interested in even while the game supports it and is designed around it and others take advantage of it (and they’re also doing what you do because there’s nothing particularly special, so… there’s that). I don’t care what you do in solo and the game doesn’t either until you jump onto the forums and start complaining about how for some bizarre reason the game doesn’t seem to work like you expect it to, but when you join multiplayer you’re going to have to reconsider what you’re doing and bringing, at the least using the content itself as a guide since it’s impossible to know what other randoms are going to bring, for the sake of others because you’re running headlong into what the game is designed to do in order to keep its variety of gear and gameplay valid and fresh and its rewards rewarding even while you think otherwise because you’re so insistent that there’s one way to play and you’re going to force it on anyone who gets in your way.

Uhm lol? Cheat the modding system? Are you high or drunk? It's a very much intended and available option to have multiple copies of the same mod with various ranks. I'm not sure where you find any "cheating" in this. It's part of the ultimate way to build diversity at any level of progress you want. Also, when was there ever a mention of partially leveled mods and opposite polarites? No it is about using partially leveled mods in neutral or matching polarities really since you only need a vertain amount of stats. 

Like say you want to max channeled efficiency. You have a frame that doesnt needs duration, so with Streamline and Fleeting maxed you can attain maximized channeled efficiency at 40% duration. But if you have a frame that benefits from neutral or higher duration then you cap efficiency and channeled efficiency at 75% i.e Streamline and Fleeting both -1 rank from max. Or like mentioned you need 50% strength, you can either go with a maxed transient for 55% or a partially modded Blind Rage for the exact 50%, no need to go with a max Blind Rage for pointless strength and higher than needed penalty. It comes down to which you need the most in the build, duration or efficiency and how much capacity you have to play around with. It's the same with Inaros currently, you dont actually need strength on him, but armor and helth is nice, so you can utilize a rank 0 Umbra Intensify on him to get the 3 set bonus from Vit and Fiber for a cost of 6 capacity instead of 8 or 16 at max. Or for weapons, you only want "enough" of the stat that can only stack to 10, so you can do that with two rank 0 elemental mods instead of 2 max ranked ones, which result in getting the element you need at a level you want while costing less and having less impact on stat spread.

If DE didnt intend for that we'd never be able to own more than one copy of each mod. That is what enables true build diversity within the modding system.

15 hours ago, Merkranire said:

You… seriously don’t see a reason to treat Umbral polarity with caution.

I’m not saying I never use them, I’m saying I treat them with caution and give consideration as to what I put them on and why I’m putting it on.

Surely you can imagine a reason to not apply a hyper-specialised polarity?

No, because you can use partially ranked umbra mods to achieve the same effects as regular vit, fiber and intensify at rank 5, 5 and 4 if you use them together. And you likely have more than enough capacity to spare in "low" builds so the unmatched polarities wont matter. so no, there is no real reason to not apply a "hyper-specialised" polarity.

And if you do run Umbra polarities you most likely wont have more than two, which also leaves atleast one slot unpolarized i.e the slot that houses the third umbra mob. Which means you have 16 capacity from that alot to play around with in lower builds to cover for missmatched polarities, which wont be every single mod you place in that lower or alternate build, since we only have so many mods to pick from that actually does something for a build.

The one polarity that is risky would really be the one tied to augments, since there is pretty much nothing else offered by that specific polarity.

[MirageKnight]

On 2024-03-07 at 5:11 PM, --Leyenda-yight6 said:

another who falls into the same pit, at least Merk will no longer be alone.

At least we’re interested in balanced gameplay where the goal is cooperation and inclusivity…which is sadly unpopular.

Unlike certain parties here who fear losing their ability to trivialize just content but also 1 up other players because it makes them feel better about themselves.
 

y’all are selfish and toxic and the reason I play solo. You play AGAINST others, not with. It’s just a race to see who can get to the end the fastest and with the biggest numbers. The sad thing is the game’s balance only serves to encourage this toxic mentality and y’all are only too happy to exploit an arguably broken system to pump up your egos at the expense of other people's fun.

Edited March 8 by MirageKnight

[Merkranire]

6 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

Uhm lol? Cheat the modding system? Are you high or drunk? It's a very much intended and available option to have multiple copies of the same mod with various ranks. I'm not sure where you find any "cheating" in this. It's part of the ultimate way to build diversity at any level of progress you want. Also, when was there ever a mention of partially leveled mods and opposite polarites? No it is about using partially leveled mods in neutral or matching polarities really since you only need a vertain amount of stats. 

Like say you want to max channeled efficiency. You have a frame that doesnt needs duration, so with Streamline and Fleeting maxed you can attain maximized channeled efficiency at 40% duration. But if you have a frame that benefits from neutral or higher duration then you cap efficiency and channeled efficiency at 75% i.e Streamline and Fleeting both -1 rank from max. Or like mentioned you need 50% strength, you can either go with a maxed transient for 55% or a partially modded Blind Rage for the exact 50%, no need to go with a max Blind Rage for pointless strength and higher than needed penalty. It comes down to which you need the most in the build, duration or efficiency and how much capacity you have to play around with. It's the same with Inaros currently, you dont actually need strength on him, but armor and helth is nice, so you can utilize a rank 0 Umbra Intensify on him to get the 3 set bonus from Vit and Fiber for a cost of 6 capacity instead of 8 or 16 at max. Or for weapons, you only want "enough" of the stat that can only stack to 10, so you can do that with two rank 0 elemental mods instead of 2 max ranked ones, which result in getting the element you need at a level you want while costing less and having less impact on stat spread.

If DE didnt intend for that we'd never be able to own more than one copy of each mod. That is what enables true build diversity within the modding system.

No, because you can use partially ranked umbra mods to achieve the same effects as regular vit, fiber and intensify at rank 5, 5 and 4 if you use them together. And you likely have more than enough capacity to spare in "low" builds so the unmatched polarities wont matter. so no, there is no real reason to not apply a "hyper-specialised" polarity.

Juggling partial ranks is an option, yes, I even acknowledged it earlier as I’ve done it before and sometimes consider doing it today, but it’s not something I would expect the game to encourage nor be designed around; it can open options, but when DE are designing their game and I’m trying to figure out that design for the sake of knowing what I’m built for, my expectations are going to be based around max-rank mods first with partial-ranks and the options they bring being a mere side effect of the ranking system. Plus it’s a lot less of a hassle to just use max-ranks since it becomes a case of “I feel like X effect or Y damage or Z survival for this mission, regardless of leftover capacity and knowing I’m getting the maximum effect”; you’d have an idea of just how nightmarish it can get to try and fill every slot of capacity and how a partial-rank is often just not worth the modslot necessary to min-max that tiny bit more compared to something else fitting in that slot if you used more than the few builds you told me about pages ago, and you’d know how little stressing over minute number adjustments is actually needed just to make a build for the content.

This idea of primarily using partial-ranks to build for lower content is frankly kind of odd and seems more trouble than it’s worth; if you want to lay on me some kind of partial-rank build for Arbitrations, I’ll have a look at it

6 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

And if you do run Umbra polarities you most likely wont have more than two, which also leaves atleast one slot unpolarized i.e the slot that houses the third umbra mob. Which means you have 16 capacity from that alot to play around with in lower builds to cover for missmatched polarities, which wont be every single mod you place in that lower or alternate build, since we only have so many mods to pick from that actually does something for a build.

The one polarity that is risky would really be the one tied to augments, since there is pretty much nothing else offered by that specific polarity.

Yes I’d probably not have more than two, as part of that “Treating Umbral with caution” thing that blindsided you. The fewer I can get away with the better unless there was some particularly special build, and in that case I’d probably have a second piece of gear without the polarity. You’re not the one to make the call on what mods are worth equipping in a game designed around letting us equip whatever we want for whatever customisation we can get, and I’m pretty sure I already mentioned that somewhat-half-filled with forma is the ideal for build range so… I’m… not sure what that extra 16 to cover mismatched polarities is supposed to be for since that’s not really a problem…? 16 capacity (if not more) is a lot and I can imagine a few mods I’d fill it with instead of using it to absorb too many polarity’s worth of cost, not to mention what I’d do with the saved Forma and time investment

Edited March 8 by Merkranire

[--Leyenda-yight6]

hace 6 horas, MirageKnight dijo:

At least we’re interested in balanced  gameplay where the goal is cooperation and inclusivity…which is sadly unpopular.

Unlike certain parties here who fear losing their ability to trivialize just content but also 1 up other players because it makes them feel better about themselves.
 

y’all are selfish and toxic and the reason I play solo. You play AGAINST others, not with. It’s just a race to see who can get to the end the fastest and with the biggest. The sad thing is the game’s balance only serves to encourage this toxic mentality and y’all are only too happy to exploit an arguably broken system.

It's nothing like that, it never bothered me that some things were nerfed for balance, what's happening here is that you and merk are so sunk in that pit of misery that you think that all of us who complete the missions quickly do it out of pure malice and I despise others, obviously this is not the case, we do it to optimize time for different reasons and others like fast play, which is usually the majority, not liking it does not make us toxic people, you just think that your idea is the only true one, feigning consideration.

[Merkranire]

2 hours ago, --Leyenda-yight6 said:

It's nothing like that, it never bothered me that some things were nerfed for balance, what's happening here is that you and merk are so sunk in that pit of misery that you think that all of us who complete the missions quickly do it out of pure malice and I despise others, obviously this is not the case, we do it to optimize time for different reasons and others like fast play, which is usually the majority, not liking it does not make us toxic people, you just think that your idea is the only true one, feigning consideration.

There is no feigning consideration, there is actual consideration like I said there is.

Here’s you: “Oh I’ll just play like I want and people will love it or hate it but haters gonna hate anyways so I’m not changing anything and they need to be as accepting of my potentially huge impact on their gameplay as I am of someone else who barely impacts me”.

Here’s me: “I play as I want in Solo and then when I jump into Multiplayer I reconsider what I’m doing and how I’m building, trying to be as least-disruptive as I can by doing things like building for the content so that if someone else is also built likewise we can play together and if someone’s built way beyond then they can do their solo-in-multiplayer thing that they literally build for while I either race to keep up or drop out of the mission and take the extra spawns and other multiplayer scaling mechanics that they no longer need to deal with with me”.

Like seriously, when was the last time you wanted to rely on a teammate? The game only sort of forces it on you, but given the option you’re making your preference clear by how you build and where you take it, and that preference is “I can handle everything alone and am entirely self-sufficient”, where right now if there’s any sort of co-op it’s either accidental or the game hasn’t given you the tools to build the co-op away.

Edited March 9 by Merkranire

[(PSN)AyinDygra]

When I build my frames and weapons, I create builds. Those are THE builds. I don't change those builds between missions. I forma my frames and weapons, locking away potential flexibility to get my build to fit on those frames and weapons. We only get 3 build slots per frame, unless you build a whole other copy of the frame. Generally, I create builds around maximizing 3 different ways of playing, so they're all geared to the max, not to various levels of star chart enemies.

It's not "considerate" to change your build to fit content... that's a personal preferred way of playing, and you can't expect others to do the same. That's just not reasonable...

 

[Psianide73]

43 minutes ago, (PSN)AyinDygra said:

When I build my frames and weapons, I create builds. Those are THE builds. I don't change those builds between missions. I forma my frames and weapons, locking away potential flexibility to get my build to fit on those frames and weapons. We only get 3 build slots per frame, unless you build a whole other copy of the frame. Generally, I create builds around maximizing 3 different ways of playing, so they're all geared to the max, not to various levels of star chart enemies.

It's not "considerate" to change your build to fit content... that's a personal preferred way of playing, and you can't expect others to do the same. That's just not reasonable...

 

You get 6 build slots if you're willing to pay. 

[Merkranire]

35 minutes ago, (PSN)AyinDygra said:

When I build my frames and weapons, I create builds. Those are THE builds. I don't change those builds between missions. I forma my frames and weapons, locking away potential flexibility to get my build to fit on those frames and weapons. We only get 3 build slots per frame, unless you build a whole other copy of the frame. Generally, I create builds around maximizing 3 different ways of playing, so they're all geared to the max, not to various levels of star chart enemies.

It's not "considerate" to change your build to fit content... that's a personal preferred way of playing, and you can't expect others to do the same. That's just not reasonable...

 

Gee, what a real shocker that you lock yourself into a build while not thinking what that really means and what cost power asks. What a surprise that the more forma you sink after a certain point, the narrower your options. What an utter astonishment that when you chase numbers and build to stick to a few options, you’re stuck chasing numbers and using a few options 

Good thing Steel Path and other high-level content is an every-so-often thing, isn’t it? We got powerful gear like Kuva weapons that innately are more powerful than most standard and thus requires less investment, and our individual capability of play can push builds with less forma higher if we play well.

[(PSN)AyinDygra]

No, it's absolutely not a shocker... it's the blatant obvious truth of the matter, and the logical, most easily seen outcome from such circumstances created by game systems and the design of how it all works.

[--Leyenda-yight6]

hace 1 hora, Merkranire dijo:

There is no feigning consideration, there is actual consideration like I said there is.

Here’s you: “Oh I’ll just play like I want and people will love it or hate it but haters gonna hate anyways so I’m not changing anything and they need to be as accepting of my potentially huge impact on their gameplay as I am of someone else who barely impacts me”.

Here’s me: “I play as I want in Solo and then when I jump into Multiplayer I reconsider what I’m doing and how I’m building, trying to be as least-disruptive as I can by doing things like building for the content so that if someone else is also built likewise we can play together and if someone’s built way beyond then they can do their solo-in-multiplayer thing that they literally build for while I either race to keep up or drop out of the mission and take the extra spawns and other multiplayer scaling mechanics that they no longer need to deal with with me”.

Like seriously, when was the last time you wanted to rely on a teammate? The game only sort of forces it on you, but given the option you’re making your preference clear by how you build and where you take it, and that preference is “I can handle everything alone and am entirely self-sufficient”, where right now if there’s any sort of co-op it’s either accidental or the game hasn’t given you the tools to build the co-op away.

If the other players in the multiplayer were bothered, they would have told me something, but I never received a single complaint, just as you think that the idea of going fast is annoying, your idea would be annoying for others, why even if you don't believe it, Not everyone has the time to spend day and night playing like you.

Seriously, with every response of yours you have only demonstrated your incredible selfishness by trying to impose your way of playing, no one believes those lies about consideration anymore.

Edited March 9 by --Leyenda-yight6

[Merkranire]

55 minutes ago, (PSN)AyinDygra said:

No, it's absolutely not a shocker... it's the blatant obvious truth of the matter, and the logical, most easily seen outcome from such circumstances created by game systems and the design of how it all works.

The design of how it all works being that in a build-crafting game designed around enabling variety, you taking the tools on offer and specialising like you do is an optional thing that you choose to engage in.

Knowing what specialising actually means in this game and then cautiously choosing whether or not to engage in it instead of sitting there thinking big numbers and easy gameplay are the end-all-be-all is not being unreasonable, it’s playing to the game’s strength and is what the game encourages and is designed around; if you’re running into problems caused by such specialisation, problems that include being incapable of comfortably changing, then that’s on you.

You get understanding, but no pity, and when you jump into a mission and you’re not built for it while acting like you’re only being logical, you’re going to get eyerolls and headshakes from players who know better

Edited March 9 by Merkranire

[Merkranire]

40 minutes ago, --Leyenda-yight6 said:

If the other players in the multiplayer were bothered, they would have told me something, but I never received a single complaint, just as you think that the idea of going fast is annoying, your idea would be annoying for others, why even if you don't believe it, Not everyone has the time to spend day and night playing like you.

Seriously, with every response of yours you have only demonstrated your incredible selfishness by trying to impose your way of playing, no one believes those lies about consideration anymore.

What would you even listen to, eh? If they haven’t given up on expecting multiplayer to be any sort of multiplayer, what would you need to hear to reconsider your stance?

[(PSN)AyinDygra]

2 minutes ago, Merkranire said:

Knowing what specialising actually means in this game and then cautiously choosing whether to engage in it instead of sitting there thinking big numbers and easy gameplay are the end-all-be-all is not being unreasonable, it’s playing to the game’s strength and is what the game encourages and is designed around; if you’re running into problems caused by such specialisation, problems that include being incapable of comfortably changing, then that’s on you.

This isn't a problem for me... it's a problem for you, from your perspective. I'm perfectly happy with the builds I've created. I have no intention of changing them as much as you do. I WOULD like a way to add more polarities to slots, so they're more flexible, but that idea has been proposed for years, and they've not acted on it, because I am fairly certain, their highest selling item in the cash shop is Forma, and they're not willing to mess with that formula.

[Merkranire]

Just now, (PSN)AyinDygra said:

This isn't a problem for me... it's a problem for you, from your perspective. I'm perfectly happy with the builds I've created. I have no intention of changing them as much as you do. I WOULD like a way to add more polarities to slots, so they're more flexible, but that idea has been proposed for years, and they've not acted on it, because I am fairly certain, their highest selling item in the cash shop is Forma, and they're not willing to mess with that formula.

It’s a problem for you because even if you wanted to, you can’t change due to how you’re so specialised.

So not only are you incapable of wanting to change how you play for the sake of others, you’ve backed yourself into a build corner that you could see coming from a mile away. And then what, want to use that as an excuse? Hah!

[(PSN)AyinDygra]

I need no excuse for how I play. I'm having fun, using the tools provided, in the way the game is designed.

You expect something specific from the people you are playing with, without any formal or informal agreement to play to those expectations. The exact opposite is the case, in that everyone is free to play as they wish, cooperatively completing game objectives.

If the Devs want more reliance of team members on each other, and less autonomy, requiring more communication and teamwork, like Railjack when it first released, they're free to introduce things that encourage this... but I don't think this will be greeted with open arms from the community. That's not the "fun" that most people playing warframe seem to be seeking, at least when they play Warframe.

[--Leyenda-yight6]

hace 22 minutos, Merkranire dijo:

What would you even listen to, eh? If they haven’t given up on expecting multiplayer to be any sort of multiplayer, what would you need to hear to reconsider your stance?

You are the one who has to reconsider your point of view, people will not do what you want, you have neither the authority nor the right to tell others how to play, this is not your game, you are just another player and if you don't You like how others play, you put up with it or you leave.

[Merkranire]

12 minutes ago, --Leyenda-yight6 said:

You are the one who has to reconsider your point of view, people will not do what you want, you have neither the authority nor the right to tell others how to play, this is not your game, you are just another player and if you don't You like how others play, you put up with it or you leave.

Uh oh.

27 minutes ago, (PSN)AyinDygra said:

You expect something specific from the people you are playing with, without any formal or informal agreement to play to those expectations. The exact opposite is the case, in that everyone is free to play as they wish, cooperatively completing game objectives.

Name the specific thing

[SneakyErvin]

17 hours ago, Merkranire said:

Juggling partial ranks is an option, yes, I even acknowledged it earlier as I’ve done it before and sometimes consider doing it today, but it’s not something I would expect the game to encourage nor be designed around; it can open options, but when DE are designing their game and I’m trying to figure out that design for the sake of knowing what I’m built for, my expectations are going to be based around max-rank mods first with partial-ranks and the options they bring being a mere side effect of the ranking system. Plus it’s a lot less of a hassle to just use max-ranks since it becomes a case of “I feel like X effect or Y damage or Z survival for this mission, regardless of leftover capacity and knowing I’m getting the maximum effect”; you’d have an idea of just how nightmarish it can get to try and fill every slot of capacity and how a partial-rank is often just not worth the modslot necessary to min-max that tiny bit more compared to something else fitting in that slot if you used more than the few builds you told me about pages ago, and you’d know how little stressing over minute number adjustments is actually needed just to make a build for the content.

This idea of primarily using partial-ranks to build for lower content is frankly kind of odd and seems more trouble than it’s worth; if you want to lay on me some kind of partial-rank build for Arbitrations, I’ll have a look at it

So you are a mundane builder that yells at people that actually enjoy to make "perfect" builds? Min-max in this game also really comes down to hitting actual soft caps to not waste capacity and slots, like hitting 100% slash proc chance on Garuda, so you dont need to waste a red archon shard on her and can instead use a normal, or adding just 25% strength on Nyx to reach full strip, or not adding more range to Khora than the amount that allows Whipclaw to reach it's hardcap. You dont min-max for the content, you min-max the needs of the frame.

And who said using primarily partially ranked mods for low content? I said you can run with partially ranked mods to avoid restricing your polarity choices, since it allows for more build options across all levels. It is only if you also obsess with having to use a specific mod even if it does the same as another that it becomes an issue. But there is really no reason to use the mod with the other name when it does the same thing in the end. If you get +100% health from a partial umbra vit or a vit it doesnt matter, since it is serves the same purpose in the build. 

And why would I sit down and waste my time on an "arbitration" build suiting your idea of fun? If you enjoy that knock yourself out, I wont limit myself to short runs, it is as simple as that.

17 hours ago, Merkranire said:

Yes I’d probably not have more than two, as part of that “Treating Umbral with caution” thing that blindsided you. The fewer I can get away with the better unless there was some particularly special build, and in that case I’d probably have a second piece of gear without the polarity. You’re not the one to make the call on what mods are worth equipping in a game designed around letting us equip whatever we want for whatever customisation we can get, and I’m pretty sure I already mentioned that somewhat-half-filled with forma is the ideal for build range so… I’m… not sure what that extra 16 to cover mismatched polarities is supposed to be for since that’s not really a problem…? 16 capacity (if not more) is a lot and I can imagine a few mods I’d fill it with instead of using it to absorb too many polarity’s worth of cost, not to mention what I’d do with the saved Forma and time investment

That isnt "Treating Umbral with caution", that is just common sense since using 3 umbra forma on anything is in the end practically a straight up waste of a forma.

Honestly no idea what you try to say in the bolded part. You claim half filled is the ideal, then you say that you dont know what you'd do with 16 free capacity. That is 16 capacity in an otherwise fully polarized build. Not counting lower cost matching polarities in a lower build aswell, which would give you even further capacity to play around with free in unmatched polarity slots. So that means "half-filled" is not ideal, since that removes the whole upper end because it cannot fit expensive mods in return. Those nearly fully polarized builds have likely done so to house several 16 cost mods. So you are looking at 8 capacity per slot there currently. Meaning if you slot in mismatches for a lower build you are very likely replacing 16 cost mods with 7-9 mods, meaning those end up at a cost of 9 or 11 in those mismatched slots. But again, this doesnt account for you actually also using lower cost matching mods in some. So with that nearly fully polarized build that can remove a 16 cost umbra, you suddenly end up with alot of free capacity to play around with for lower mods that happen to be mismatched. I wouldnt be surprising if you end up with well over 20 capacity to play around with as you like in a build polarized so heavily.

 

[MirageKnight]

14 hours ago, --Leyenda-yight6 said:

You are the one who has to reconsider your point of view, people will not do what you want, you have neither the authority nor the right to tell others how to play, this is not your game, you are just another player and if you don't You like how others play, you put up with it or you leave.

Hostile and unreasonable much? I have to reconsider and not you?

I'm only ASKING that in light of demonstratable gameplay imbalances that people be able to do the bare minimum in co-op games and be considerate and not ruin the experience for others. But I guess that's too difficult a concept to grasp and asking for too much of most people these days.

You have a lot of chutzpah telling me that I basically have no right to post an opinion you don't like. Last I heard, this is a public forum where people share opinions and make observations that you may not necessarily agree with. If you can't deal with that and are incapable of engaging in civil discourse, then maybe you're the one that ought to leave.

Thanks for underscoring my point that there's some decidedly toxic, disrespectful and entitled players in this discussion.