I am thinking of dynamic rewards based on gear

[0_The_F00l]

I was thinking , Can reward choice be left in the hands of the players to decide?

While most of what I have read is pointing me towards a big glowing NO! (Big surprise ) . I do want to share a risk and reward choice loop that is more dynamic.

This also (partially) relies on disposition as a concept so do bear that in mind.

Currently frames don't have disposition , but we do have the usage stats that we can use to come to a simple enough reverse calculation. 

So heres my thoughts.

Similar to DA you have certain modifiers and certain points and also have preferred RNG loadouts , but you can have more points through other means than just selecting modifiers and loadouts.

Eg. If your gear has 5/5 dispo you get half of that as dynamic points rounded down. So you get 2 of them.  Anything with a dispo of less than 2 gets you no points (just an example)

Maybe , Having fewer "mandatory mods" gives you some more points ,

And perhaps certain , peculiar mods with their own negatives can be considered instead of just not picking mods.

With this you can still just use RNG loadouts , but you can also tweak things to work with the tools available to you. You will still get slightly less points than simply going RNG , but it will be better than choosing nothing.

Would it be complex ? Maybe , will it have more player agency ? Maybe. Would it have players that will complain for some reason or another? Most definitely.

I would like to have this discussion just to gauge the communities views on such things.

Added peculiar mod option.

Edited April 19 by 0_The_F00l

[Venus-Venera]

vor 19 Minuten schrieb 0_The_F00l:

I was thinking ,

heh... how is that supposed to work? They don't even want to sit down and think about balance... instead they just produce new cheap junk food content...

And here they have to think carefully and do a lot of brainstorming.

[AntifreezeUnder0]

We just need game mode where we get to play what we like to use, to get the new shiny stuff. Even if it means current meta getting tad more op, yet opening doors to something like stug join in overkill club.

Game needs to have certain things, like sp circuit for incarnons are grind and effort to get equally good rewards, i do dislike the rng on loadlouts , but for most part rewards are worth the trouble to swith to lesser liked frames and weapons.

Deep archimedia, well it suffers same thign as sp circuit- its as hard as bad your go to loadout rng is. Once you get it or them its just breeze and few hiccups on the modifiers if any.

Pretty much both of theese sytems indirectly forces you to make working builds for things you deemed unworthy , since they give acces to stuff you may need.

Deep archimedia is as good as one gets full set of r5 duplicate and cescendo then its just off chance achon shard and even then those are just meh rewards.

[0_The_F00l]

10 minutes ago, Venus-Venera said:

heh... how is that supposed to work? They don't even want to sit down and think about balance... instead they just produce new cheap junk food content...

And here they have to think carefully and do a lot of brainstorming.

Ah , but we are going to do most of it for them. That's why it's important to have discussions , so others can learn from them.

8 minutes ago, AntifreezeUnder0 said:

We just need game mode where we get to play what we like to use, to get the new shiny stuff. Even if it means current meta getting tad more op, yet opening doors to something like stug join in overkill club.

Game needs to have certain things, like sp circuit for incarnons are grind and effort to get equally good rewards, i do dislike the rng on loadlouts , but for most part rewards are worth the trouble to swith to lesser liked frames and weapons.

Deep archimedia, well it suffers same thign as sp circuit- its as hard as bad your go to loadout rng is. Once you get it or them its just breeze and few hiccups on the modifiers if any.

Pretty much both of theese sytems indirectly forces you to make working builds for things you deemed unworthy , since they give acces to stuff you may need.

Deep archimedia is as good as one gets full set of r5 duplicate and cescendo then its just off chance achon shard and even then those are just meh rewards.

I don't see how this is directly related to my point of letting players pick their own loadouts and tweak things just right to meet certain conditions.

Would you to say , use one less mod if it means you can use your preferred gear.

Edited April 19 by 0_The_F00l

[ominumi]

*Jumps into Grendal mission* yeah man I wish DE made a Deep Archemedea with "no mod" modifier.

[0_The_F00l]

7 minutes ago, ominumi said:

*Jumps into Grendal mission* yeah man I wish DE made a Deep Archemedea with "no mod" modifier.

Yeah man , as if there is nothing between 0 and 100

[SneakyErvin]

Tying it to gear is bad bad bad bad bad bad bad, since the gear wont become better just because people start to use it. Having mission modifiers will however show DE that the gear that isnt used is crap, so they can adjust it instead of leaving it as is because "it is used this much!" due to people wanting more loot.

edit: The RNG pulls are already bad since they will just end up scewing usage stats, meaning the problem with terrible weapons still persist. I'd prefer that system gone and a multitude of extra modifications added for EDA for instance.

Edited April 19 by SneakyErvin

[0_The_F00l]

2 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

Tying it to gear is bad bad bad bad bad bad bad, since the gear wont become better just because people start to use it. Having mission modifiers will however show DE that the gear that isnt used is crap, so they can adjust it instead of leaving it as is because "it is used this much!" due to people wanting more loot.

That's is one aspect of it, it's among other things that this will make obvious as time goes on.

Like always I have multiple wrinkly layers on this , like a cabbage. (Unlike an onion which is usually smooth and results in tears)

Edited April 19 by 0_The_F00l
Onions and opinions

[Venus-Venera]

vor 8 Minuten schrieb ominumi:

*Jumps into Grendal mission* yeah man I wish DE made a Deep Archemedea with "no mod" modifier.

and what is stopping you from doing that now? You can choose all options and try to survive.
That can give you an emotional kick. However, don't forget that someone is doing all the work.

........................I invested more than 7k plat within a week so that others can count on me. and before that I had already maxed almost all the good stuff. Only now all the prime parts have been pimped endlessly. and also all blue weapons and faction trash.

[SneakyErvin]

1 minute ago, 0_The_F00l said:

That's is one aspect of things that this will make obvious.

Like always I have multiple wrinkly layers on this , like a cabbage. (Unlike an opinion which is usually smooth and results in tears)

One thing I'd love to see would be "mission" rivens. Simply a mod or two or three you can slot on your frames that adds modifiers to a mission similar to maps in Path of Exile or Danger Room Chips in Marvel Heroes. Have them drop anywhere with different rarities then let us upgrade them and reroll them a limited amount of times, then after we've used them they are consumed. In return for negative modifications on a mission we'd recieve more loot, while some things seen as negative could be combined into positives given the correct loadout used with it, just like how it works with maps in PoE.

[Zakkhar]

This will sadly lead to numbnuts deleting majorty of their inventory to only have the best outcomes, like they did in Duviri/Circuit (and still complained they cannot delete certain items).

[0_The_F00l]

1 minute ago, SneakyErvin said:

One thing I'd love to see would be "mission" rivens. Simply a mod or two or three you can slot on your frames that adds modifiers to a mission similar to maps in Path of Exile or Danger Room Chips in Marvel Heroes. Have them drop anywhere with different rarities then let us upgrade them and reroll them a limited amount of times, then after we've used them they are consumed. In return for negative modifications on a mission we'd recieve more loot, while some things seen as negative could be combined into positives given the correct loadout used with it, just like how it works with maps in PoE.

Ooh , yes , interesting idea and can work smoothly with my original thoughts.

A mod (peculiar type) that adds modifiers /points , the mod cost itself would be one thing and the negative effects it adds would be another.

I think having conditions to be met (like those needed to unlock rivens) would be an added layer to enable whatever modifier it has (positive and negative) , so you can't just slap on the mod and use it everywhere , you need to actively give up a slot and play a particular way to unlock it.

5 minutes ago, Zakkhar said:

This will sadly lead to numbnuts deleting majorty of their inventory to only have the best outcomes, like they did in Duviri/Circuit (and still complained they cannot delete certain items).

Why do you say that? I am not sure how having a lesser number of gear helps anyone ad it's tied to disposition and not ownership.

[Voltage]

This seems like a convoluted way of re-introducing Conclave rating, and I rather not to be quite honest.

Even within Riven Mods, there are several powerhouse weapons that are just unpopular. The Synapse, Miter, or Convectrix equivalent in Warframes are Banshee, Equinox, Mag, etc.

[Slayer-.]

3 hours ago, ominumi said:

*Jumps into Grendal mission* yeah man I wish DE made a Deep Archemedea with "no mod" modifier.

Well, at least you wouldn't need to be concerned about Deep Archemedea and how to mod your weapon, apart from only a couple we could use like in the Grendel mission. 

[0_The_F00l]

6 hours ago, Voltage said:

This seems like a convoluted way of re-introducing Conclave rating, and I rather not to be quite honest.

Even within Riven Mods, there are several powerhouse weapons that are just unpopular. The Synapse, Miter, or Convectrix equivalent in Warframes are Banshee, Equinox, Mag, etc.

I suppose it is , but if players don't want RNG to control their choices and DE is either unwilling or incapable to set a proper balance between various gear and missions,

i think it's closer to self paced challenges where the rules are defined.

[Voltage]

1 hour ago, 0_The_F00l said:

I suppose it is , but if players don't want RNG to control their choices and DE is either unwilling or incapable to set a proper balance between various gear and missions,

i think it's closer to self paced challenges where the rules are defined.

Nah, it's dumb, just like Riven Disposition. You're just rewarding people who understand that things are now homogenized and punishing those who pick their preferred choices. Stuff like research points that add bonuses for making a build work with flexibility and encouragement for gear completion are more beneficial than creating gear Dispositions for rewards. It creates an even more stale meta once content creators math out the optimal choices and share it to their audiences, then shifting the playerbase towards options that later on get Disposition nerfed for no real reason other than popularity.

Riven Disposition is the exact example of why this idea of a mechanic doesn't work in practice.

If you want "Self paced challenge" do it for yourself, not for me (or anyone else).

Edited April 20 by Voltage

[helioth137]

A little unrelated but could also be merged with your request, 
add dynamic difficulty based on how quickly you're killing, until you're so overwhelmed with mobs that your kill speed slows down a bit. 

[TARINunit9]

18 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

edit: The RNG pulls are already bad since they will just end up scewing usage stats

With how intricate DE's data collection usually is, I would be very surprised if they can't figure out how to exclude Deep Archimedes from usage stats

[Voltage]

1 hour ago, helioth137 said:

A little unrelated but could also be merged with your request, 
add dynamic difficulty based on how quickly you're killing, until you're so overwhelmed with mobs that your kill speed slows down a bit. 

Efficiency Attenuation .... no thanks. ESO exists if you want to play that kind of thing. The engine can't even handle enough enemies to overwhelm a solo player these days.

Edited April 20 by Voltage

[SneakyErvin]

2 hours ago, TARINunit9 said:

With how intricate DE's data collection usually is, I would be very surprised if they can't figure out how to exclude Deep Archimedes from usage stats

It would be hard for them, since in the case of Deep people own the weapons used. So should they then exclude the items from usage stats when used in Deep since they may be used simply to grant points even if someone uses them regularly outside aswell? With Duviri it comes down to both owned and unowned items, so easier to spot why something is used or not since it will also have the owned/unowned flag probably.

[0_The_F00l]

11 hours ago, Voltage said:

Nah, it's dumb, just like Riven Disposition. You're just rewarding people who understand that things are now homogenized and punishing those who pick their preferred choices. Stuff like research points that add bonuses for making a build work with flexibility and encouragement for gear completion are more beneficial than creating gear Dispositions for rewards. It creates an even more stale meta once content creators math out the optimal choices and share it to their audiences, then shifting the playerbase towards options that later on get Disposition nerfed for no real reason other than popularity.

Riven Disposition is the exact example of why this idea of a mechanic doesn't work in practice.

If you want "Self paced challenge" do it for yourself, not for me (or anyone else).

We are having a discussion right now , so currently what I want is to engage in discussions. The reason I made this topic was to  identify means to have a reasonable agency in the hands of players for defining their own difficulty and get some rewards for engaging in said difficulty. It is of course not a replacement for proper balance , but more of a stop gap measure.

I am currently looking at all the ideas and while I personally do not like popularity as a measuring stick it is the closest that can be quantified via disposition.

It's not the only thing I have considered as an option. And am open to more mechanics which will give players to pause and change ho their loadouts.

4 hours ago, helioth137 said:

A little unrelated but could also be merged with your request, 
add dynamic difficulty based on how quickly you're killing, until you're so overwhelmed with mobs that your kill speed slows down a bit. 

If you have played it , I loved how God hand did this. The more flawlessly you played, the more aggressive and deadly the enemies got. It was all tongue in cheek , but it was really effective.

[UnstarPrime]

On 2024-04-19 at 7:08 AM, 0_The_F00l said:

I was thinking , Can reward choice be left in the hands of the players to decide?

The only system I've ever seen that seemed to do this okay was "The World Ends With You".  The basics of the system was that outside of battles, you had a slider that you could move to the left to lower your total HP, which in turn gave you more Luck (for loot drop chance).  You could always change it back so there were no permanent repercussions, but it encouraged the player to try to find their own "difficulty sweet spot" where they were surviving while also getting more loot.

It's worth pointing out that a major reason this worked as well as it did is because "The World Ends With You" is a single-player game; this system quickly falls apart in a multiplayer game because the majority of your fellow players would rather play alongside a strong player than a weak one.  It would lead to a lot of conflict if the devs incentivized players to be less helpful to their squad in exchange for greater rewards.

Even aside from the multiplayer aspect, I think there are some meaningful problems with this system.  While the idea of lowering your HP to increase your rewards and thus finding your own difficulty sweet spot sounds compelling on the surface, what it quickly devolves into through play is a system where the strong become stronger and the weak are at a disadvantage.  A player who's already good at the game can max out their luck and accumulate rewards at a much faster rate than a player who was already struggling with the game.  This actually increases the disparity in loot acquisition rate between more skilled and less skilled players, which exacerbates balance issues.

In addition, how good a system like this feels is highly dependent upon the player's framing of the system.  There are two equally valid ways to view this system:

• The lower my health, the more rewards I get.
• The higher my health, the less rewards I get.

The first framing feels good; the second one feels bad.  And we can see this play out with Archimedea.  Nobody thinks, "Wow, the more of these requirements I meet, the more loot I get!"  We all think, "If I don't meet the number of requirements necessary to get the max reward I want, I'm leaving loot on the table."  In other words, we view the maximum rewards we care about as being the "default", and anything below that constitutes a loss.  And because of that, taking the less difficult path in exchange for less loot feels like a less viable option that feels bad.

I won't say it's impossible to do a system like this right, but there are significant design challenges that need to be overcome.

[TARINunit9]

6 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

So should they then exclude the items from usage stats when used in Deep since they may be used simply to grant points even if someone uses them regularly outside aswell?

Usage means exactly that: USAGE. As in taken into missions and used against enemies. Not ownage, which is seperated and as you point out is much more easily tracked

[SneakyErvin]

19 hours ago, TARINunit9 said:

Usage means exactly that: USAGE. As in taken into missions and used against enemies. Not ownage, which is seperated and as you point out is much more easily tracked

Well yes, but if something is forced on you it doesnt mean you use it out of free will. So that something gets increased usage stats from EDA results in misleading usage stats since they cannot see if you use it because you like it or simply because it is forced and you get points from it. In Duviri they can disregard usage stats on items where the item isnt also owned. With EDA that becomes impossible since we can only use what we own, so it doesnt manage to show why we use it. It is bad as it is with Duviri since you still have many cases where the usage doesnt mean you want to use it even if you own it, but atleast it can remove alot of the usage due to people not owning the items they use.

Also, we have to remember how shoddy WF usage data is. Specters for instance inflate your usage stats for all items that are part of that specter. Protea ended up on my top 5 list for 2023, even though I practically didnt play her at all outside of some Circuit. But since she is my specter her usage still managed to sneak into the top 5, even though I played several other frames far more actively throughout the year, yet she still nabbed the #5 spot. And I'm fairly sure she also stole the secondary weapon spot since the specter used Laetum for most of the year, while I used Furis actively most of the time after obtaining the incarnon on the first rotation it was available. I carried laetum with me for 5-10 minutes per week at most when killing the Archon.

My usage was Kullervo, Lavos, Citrine, Garuda Prime and Protea, where in reality I used Saryn, Frost, Atlas, Styanax and Khora, and potentially also Dagath more actively than Protea. However the specter of her heavily scewed the stats.

[TARINunit9]

1 hour ago, SneakyErvin said:

Specters for instance inflate your usage stats for all items that are part of that specter.

Ooooooh, now that's interesting. Specter usage should be tracked, but not as "Warframe's played," that's just asking for getting nerfed at the wrong time in the wrong way