Taking ARCHON SHARD off should be free by now!

[Venus-Venera]

vor 10 Minuten schrieb (PSN)MYKK678:

And the fix exists

which fix? from our universe? ???
But for some, it's okay to close your eyes and stay "positive" while your house is burning. If you ignore a problem long enough, it will solve itself????

And it's hard to ignore the fact that people are dissatisfied... and the proposed solutions are more than satisfactory - regardless of whether they are new or old accounts. But here the devs have to get up from the sofa and finally respond to player feedback for the first time in their lives.

Edited May 11 by Venus-Venera

[Xylena_Lazarow]

2 hours ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

my Valkyr uses reds for Melee Crit

You warn people to be careful about planning their builds, yet purples are strictly better than reds on Valkyr for melee cd, since they provide the same buff at base and double it just for slotting Primed Flow, which many Valkyr builds already want to do. That's 75% each single purple tau, so you either got screwed by the introduction of purples which arbitrarily made your carefully planned red build obsolete, or you didn't carefully plan your build and will need to pay up in Bile if you want Valkyr's max damage.

[Voltage]

4 hours ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

I must have missed that somehow. Because my Ivara has yellow shards to increase Parkour Velocity to speed up her Stealth Gameplay, my Valkyr uses reds for Melee Crit, and I haven't had a need for 1 single green shard so far. How were so many people affected by this but apparently I alone wasn't?

Or can we just admit right now that theory is more overdramatization and factually incorrect?

What if I want to play Zipline Ivara where a yellow parkour shard is useless? That's what the person you quoted is trying to say. When you make experimentation a non-trivial tax, players are just encouraged to make more boring or generic choices (such as Reds for Duration/Strength and Yellows for Cast Speed). This happened back in the day with Arcanes. When they were tied to cosmetics and had a cost to removing them, people wore the exact same syandana on everything and that syandana had Energize on it. This issue applies to Shards in an extra layer as they are a universal bonus to all mod configs, further encouraging generic choices for bonuses.

The much better way of draining resources is making the Archon Shard slots themselves have a large cost to unlock, but once they are unlocked, you may move Shards around freely. I'm talking like 75% Bile per Shard slot.

Edited May 11 by Voltage

[Xylena_Lazarow]

29 minutes ago, Voltage said:

What if I want to play Zipline Ivara where a yellow parkour shard is useless?

Pay Bile to remove the yellow parkour shard, replace it with a red strength shard. This will buff her movement speed on the stealth build, buff her crit damage augment on the zipline build, as well as buff her Artemis Bow and most other stuff she does. Can't go wrong with generic power that won't go dead.

Edited May 11 by Xylena_Lazarow

[(PSN)MYKK678]

1 hour ago, Xylena_Lazarow said:

You warn people to be careful about planning their builds, yet purples are strictly better than reds on Valkyr for melee cd, since they provide the same buff at base and double it just for slotting Primed Flow, which many Valkyr builds already want to do. That's 75% each single purple tau, so you either got screwed by the introduction of purples which arbitrarily made your carefully planned red build obsolete, or you didn't carefully plan your build and will need to pay up in Bile if you want Valkyr's max damage.

Well, that or my Valkyr doesnt use either Flow or Primed Flow and already does enough damage with Reds, making any Purples redundant. Was that not meant to be an option? Kinda throws a spanner in the works right?

3 hours ago, Venus-Venera said:

which fix? from our universe? ???
But for some, it's okay to close your eyes and stay "positive" while your house is burning. If you ignore a problem long enough, it will solve itself????

And it's hard to ignore the fact that people are dissatisfied... and the proposed solutions are more than satisfactory - regardless of whether they are new or old accounts. But here the devs have to get up from the sofa and finally respond to player feedback for the first time in their lives.

.......cool. If you had kept reading the answer was in the next line. Good effort with the meme but it hasnt made the point any less relevant.

[(PSN)MYKK678]

44 minutes ago, Voltage said:

What if I want to play Zipline Ivara where a yellow parkour shard is useless? That's what the person you quoted is trying to say. When you make experimentation a non-trivial tax, players are just encouraged to make more boring or generic choices (such as Reds for Duration/Strength and Yellows for Cast Speed). This happened back in the day with Arcanes. When they were tied to cosmetics and had a cost to removing them, people wore the exact same syandana on everything and that syandana had Energize on it. This issue applies to Shards in an extra layer as they are a universal bonus to all mod configs, further encouraging generic choices for bonuses.

The much better way of draining resources is making the Archon Shard slots themselves have a large cost to unlock, but once they are unlocked, you may move Shards around freely. I'm talking like 75% Bile per Shard slot.

Well first off why would a yellow shard be useless to a Zipline Ivara? Granted putting Cast Speed is pointless as it doesn't affect Quiver from what I recall, but the Parkour bonus certainly does apply. Any movement outside of walking/running/standard jump is "Parkour", including the bonus jump distance you can get from jumping forwards from a Zipline. So now not only do you have the ability to roll out of danger if you had to get down to the ground for an item/objective, but now your ability to travel great distances has been enhanced. Feel free to check this in open area tilesets or open world areas if you'd like.

So to be clear, your solution is that tomorrow, DE locks everyone out of all 5 slots and now everyone has to go and farm an unreasonably high amount of resources just to get back what they already had? Instead of someone taking an extra few seconds to think about their choice.

[Voltage]

58 minutes ago, Xylena_Lazarow said:

Pay Bile to remove the yellow parkour shard, replace it with a red strength shard. This will buff her movement speed on the stealth build, buff her crit damage augment on the zipline build, as well as buff her Artemis Bow and most other stuff she does. Can't go wrong with generic power that won't go dead.

I was creating a hypothetical to showcase why general buffs are more appealing than niche ones when you're charged to swap.

I have two Ivara Primes. One is for Stealth/Conservation/etc, and one just for Empowered Quiver with Umbra Forma and maximized power strength for camping with buffs.

31 minutes ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

Well first off why would a yellow shard be useless to a Zipline Ivara? Granted putting Cast Speed is pointless as it doesn't affect Quiver from what I recall, but the Parkour bonus certainly does apply. Any movement outside of walking/running/standard jump is "Parkour", including the bonus jump distance you can get from jumping forwards from a Zipline. So now not only do you have the ability to roll out of danger if you had to get down to the ground for an item/objective, but now your ability to travel great distances has been enhanced. Feel free to check this in open area tilesets or open world areas if you'd like.

So to be clear, your solution is that tomorrow, DE locks everyone out of all 5 slots and now everyone has to go and farm an unreasonably high amount of resources just to get back what they already had? Instead of someone taking an extra few seconds to think about their choice.

See above. I'm just making a case why the current Bile cost doesn't really achieve much past encouraging players to make boring universal choices. I'm one of those players who's never going to have any kind of resource shortage, but I'm also not going to waste my resources when I know I can make a more efficient choice by sticking to generic bonuses. A good example of this is Mesa. Lots of people go for Tauforged Topaz, but I'll have more peace of mind using Tauforged Crimson and knowing that if I ever want to swap off Heat, I won't be punished for doing so.

[Venus-Venera]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Xylena_Lazarow:

You warn people to be careful about planning their builds, yet purples are strictly better than reds on Valkyr for melee cd, since they provide the same buff at base and double it just for slotting Primed Flow, which many Valkyr builds already want to do. That's 75% each single purple tau, so you either got screwed by the introduction of purples which arbitrarily made your carefully planned red build obsolete, or you didn't carefully plan your build and will need to pay up in Bile if you want Valkyr's max damage.

So I found at least 2 builds where purple or orange tau shards are absolutely godlike. So damage and especially performance are far from normal and hopefully they won't become known so quickly.
and warframes like Valkyr in particular benefit the most from this and will most likely become top picks. Just like unpopular warframes like Excal Umbra, you can kill 3k lvl enemies in SP circuit almost instantly with 5m range sword...

That's why I think it's very good that you address an important topic. Hopefully it gets more attention!

[(PSN)MYKK678]

50 minutes ago, Voltage said:

I was creating a hypothetical to showcase why general buffs are more appealing than niche ones when you're charged to swap.

I have two Ivara Primes. One is for Stealth/Conservation/etc, and one just for Empowered Quiver with Umbra Forma and maximized power strength for camping with buffs.

See above. I'm just making a case why the current Bile cost doesn't really achieve much past encouraging players to make boring universal choices. I'm one of those players who's never going to have any kind of resource shortage, but I'm also not going to waste my resources when I know I can make a more efficient choice by sticking to generic bonuses. A good example of this is Mesa. Lots of people go for Tauforged Topaz, but I'll have more peace of mind using Tauforged Crimson and knowing that if I ever want to swap off Heat, I won't be punished for doing so.

You realise the entire post above is basically an example of exactly what I've been saying right? Someone actually took time to think about where they wanted their shards, and so they very likely spend little-to-no time removing/replacing them, thus the cost of removing them isn't a problem.

The only actual genuine problem in here is anyone thinking that dragging this thread on for 6 pages is going to change anything. 6 whole pages and nobody has brought up a single reasonable example of why the cost is a real problem as opposed to poor choices made by players. When the Archon Shards released I made a few poor choices too so its not like I'm exempt, I just learned from the mistakes instead of looking for scapegoats.

If I want to subsume Blood Altar onto a frame it'll cost me 47% Oxides, 14% biotics and 37% Bile. Question remains, why is that reasonable (which it is) but 30% Bile to remove a stat increasing shard isn't?

Edited May 11 by (PSN)MYKK678
.

[Voltage]

17 minutes ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

You realise the entire post above is basically an example of exactly what I've been saying right? Someone actually took time to think about where they wanted their shards, and so they very likely spend little-to-no time removing/replacing them, thus the cost of removing them isn't a problem.

The only actual genuine problem in here is anyone thinking that dragging this thread on for 6 pages is going to change anything. 6 whole pages and nobody has brought up a single reasonable example of why the cost is a real problem as opposed to poor choices made by players. When the Archon Shards released I made a few poor choices too so its not like I'm exempt, I just learned from the mistakes instead of looking for scapegoats.

If I want to subsume Blood Altar onto a frame it'll cost me 47% Oxides, 14% biotics and 37% Bile. Question remains, why is that reasonable (which it is) but 30% Bile to remove a stat increasing shard isn't?

You're missing the nuance of intrinsic feeling in the way a game like this asks for an investment from a player. Charging a player to add something and charging a player to remove something feel entirely different.

I don't understand why you seem to take the stance of a meta-complaint that it's everyone commenting who's to blame for something feeling bad to someone personally. Plenty of players are drawing the correct parallels to Arcane Distillers and how these Shards are applied. The expectation that you're charged a tax for experimentation (which is a core pillar of Warframe's customization) feels bad for many players, myself included. It's not because I can't afford it, but because it goes against the grain of how Warframe encourages creative build options. Opting to slot Tauforged Amber and Crimson Shards on most of my builds while ignoring the rest of the system because otherwise I'm arbitrarily taxed for trying something new is the way to go, honestly speaking. This is especially the case with how powerful your gear is already. These bonuses aren't core mods, they are gravy on existing powercreep.

If we want to talk in doomer absolutes, all the posts you or I have ever written, are writing, or will ever write have such a small chance of making an impact that it's generally not worth communicating. However, it's nice to be frequently reminded that sharing these discussions do provide value as players come up with good ideas that are shared by others later, or even eventually added. DE wouldn't have lowered the Bile cost to 30% (similar to how Arcane Distillers were lowered by 50%) if it weren't for feedback on the matter. I think in due time, just like how we eventually received Coalescent Fusion to turn normal Shards into Tauforged, we will eventually see this Bile cost removed, just like what happened to Arcane Distillers.

It's a bit unfortunate how often DE repeats mistakes of the past, even when the game is 11 years old and often has examples on how game systems are received by players with their solutions.

Edited May 11 by Voltage

[(PSN)MYKK678]

2 hours ago, Voltage said:

You're missing the nuance of intrinsic feeling in the way a game like this asks for an investment from a player. Charging a player to add something and charging a player to remove something feel entirely different.

I don't understand why you seem to take the stance of a meta-complaint that it's everyone commenting who's to blame for something feeling bad to someone personally. Plenty of players are drawing the correct parallels to Arcane Distillers and how these Shards are applied. The expectation that you're charged a tax for experimentation (which is a core pillar of Warframe's customization) feels bad for many players, myself included. It's not because I can't afford it, but because it goes against the grain of how Warframe encourages creative build options. Opting to slot Tauforged Amber and Crimson Shards on most of my builds while ignoring the rest of the system because otherwise I'm arbitrarily taxed for trying something new is the way to go, honestly speaking. This is especially the case with how powerful your gear is already. These bonuses aren't core mods, they are gravy on existing powercreep.

If we want to talk in doomer absolutes, all the posts you or I have ever written, are writing, or will ever write have such a small chance of making an impact that it's generally not worth communicating. However, it's nice to be frequently reminded that sharing these discussions do provide value as players come up with good ideas that are shared by others later, or even eventually added. DE wouldn't have lowered the Bile cost to 30% (similar to how Arcane Distillers were lowered by 50%) if it weren't for feedback on the matter. I think in due time, just like how we eventually received Coalescent Fusion to turn normal Shards into Tauforged, we will eventually see this Bile cost removed, just like what happened to Arcane Distillers.

It's a bit unfortunate how often DE repeats mistakes of the past, even when the game is 11 years old and often has examples on how game systems are received by players with their solutions.

Yeah I'm going to go ahead and skip past all the intentional deflection in that post and keep the focus where it belongs. Nobody said I disagree with someone having an opinion, as its pretty clear I'm here wondering why this has been dragged on for 6 pages with a 0% chance of it achieving anything.

There's no nuance to this either. That's such a strange description of a menu in a game. If you want Nuance then we could technically just twist what I asked:

I just spent 47% Oxides, 14% Biotics and 37% Bile to get Blood Altar onto a frame, but then I changed my mind. When I removed the power, I didn't get my resources back, so I just lost 47% Oxides, 14% Biotics and 37% Bile. So why is that reasonable (which it is) but 30% Bile to undo a choice that has a literal warning screen pop up, isn't?

Edited May 12 by (PSN)MYKK678
.

[L3512]

2 hours ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

The only actual genuine problem in here is anyone thinking that dragging this thread on for 6 pages is going to change anything.

Coming from someone that cried about the Dante nerfs, this is hilarious.

[(PSN)MYKK678]

10 minutes ago, L3512 said:

Coming from someone that cried about the Dante nerfs, this is hilarious.

I cried? Weird, thought I gave feedback and moved on. The same thing that should have happened here. Don't remember crying though, and considering you're not here with me I can't imagine you'd know if I cried or not.

Does that happen to you often? Seeing people you don't know cry? Has that been going on for a while now?

[L3512]

8 minutes ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

I cried? Weird, thought I gave feedback and moved on. The same thing that should have happened here. Don't remember crying though, and considering you're not here with me I can't imagine you'd know if I cried or not.

Does that happen to you often? Seeing people you don't know cry? Has that been going on for a while now?

Can you at least try and stay consistent? Two posts from you and there is like an 85% chance you contradict yourself and come across as a hypocrite.

[L3512]

8 hours ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

More disrespectful than trying to portray a half baked opinion as a fact, essentially lying to someone's face?

3 hours ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

The only actual genuine problem in here is anyone thinking that dragging this thread on for 6 pages is going to change anything. 6 whole pages and nobody has brought up a single reasonable example of why the cost is a real problem as opposed to poor choices made by players.

 

Like this; #*!%ing NPC level of argument, it's embarrassing.

[Voltage]

1 hour ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

Yeah I'm going to go ahead and skip past all the intentional deflection in that post and keep the focus where it belongs. Nobody said I disagree with someone having an opinion, as its pretty clear I'm here wondering why this has been dragged on for 6 pages with a 0% chance of it achieving anything.

Deflection? I (as well as many others in here) provided loads of evidence to support why DE's choice of where to place the resource cost is off-putting. Players would be much less likely to ask for Shards to move for free if that wasn't a core pillar of Warframe's arsenal customization. You're not charged to remove a Focus Lens, you're charged to add a new one. You're not charged to remove an Arcane, you're charged to unlock the slot to add them. You're not charged to remove an Incarnon Genesis Adapter, you're charged to install them. There's a good reason 99% of the game charges you to gain something rather than taxing you to remove it. 

If you believe this discussion has a 0% chance at achievement, where do you think the 20% Bile reduction came from? That change was a direct result from feedback, as alluded to in this interview with Rebecca prior to Whispers in the Walls (link):

Quote

Q: Wonderful. With the addition of the new Archon Shards, I believe you're bringing up the total to six if I'm not mistaken. Are there any plans to rebalance bile for shard removal?

A: Yeah. Actually, in the Whispers in the Walls update, we're reducing the amount of bile needed. So yes, absolutely.

Better yet, if this conversation offers so little value in your eyes, why continue contributing?

1 hour ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

There's no nuance to this either. That's such a strange description of a menu in a game. If you want Nuance then we could technically just twist what I asked:

I just spent 47% Oxides, 14% Biotics and 37% Bile to get Blood Altar onto a frame, but then I changed my mind. When I removed the power, I didn't get my resources back, so I just lost 47% Oxides, 14% Biotics and 37% Bile. So why is that reasonable (which it is) but 30% Bile to undo a choice that has a literal warning screen pop up, isn't?

Because there's a massive [emotional] difference between spending a resource to gain something, and spending a resource to lose something. This is the difference between paying for shipping on merchandise you're receiving, and paying for shipping to return that same merchandise. You can't tell me both situations are interchangeable. The latter feels significantly worse.

Obfuscating your original comment with semantics doesn't suddenly lend it more credibility. I completely understand your position. You're looking at this from the technicality of the cost of resources. I'm looking at it from the value of emotional investment. Paying to remove Shards feels like crap, especially for those of us who were here 8 years ago when this was the case with Arcanes and that cost was reduced and removed due to feedback. Arcanes are in a way better spot now than they were in 2015 and 2016. There is no question about it. Archon Shards could absolutely stand to gain that same benefit Arcanes were given so many years ago.

I'm really curious to hear your side on why you think it's better for the game that you're charged to lose something instead of an alternative.

Edited May 12 by Voltage

[PublikDomain]

28 minutes ago, Voltage said:

I'm really curious to hear your side on why you think it's better for the game that you're charged to lose something instead of an alternative.

Hot take: because there are some around here who believe not that "DE can do no wrong", but that "other players can do no right". It's better the way it is because you're the one asking for it to change.

[Voltage]

13 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

Hot take: because there are some around here who believe not that "DE can do no wrong", but that "other players can do no right". It's better the way it is because you're the one asking for it to change.

Which is ironic, because DE has only earned this success because they are "in the trenches" when it comes to feedback, bug reporting and making changes over time.
_{I could always stroke my own ego and list the things resulting from yours truly >:)}

I would very much recommend DE keeps Archon Shards and Helminth in general as a resource sink. I just don't feel the application of that sink should be on removing Shards, especially when they can't be tied to configs and are instead universal loadout bonuses. I'm not even against experimentation having a cost, but that cost should be palatable and within the scope of always earning something out of the cost. 

Edited May 12 by Voltage

[(PSN)MYKK678]

1 hour ago, L3512 said:

 

Like this; #*!%ing NPC level of argument, it's embarrassing.

Difficulty with English then. That's okay. I'll clarify. Your example isn't at all a contradiction. I'll put this in bulletpoints so it's easier to follow;

- I've previously stated I have no problem with people having opinions on the matter

- That's still true

- What you quoted, but obviously didn't read, is not me complaining because someone had an opinion.

- It's that someone tried to portray their opinion as an actual fact. An absolute. Not a "I think X", but a "this is 100% X and can't be anything else".

- A contradiction between the two cannot exist by definition. Because one is about someone simply having an opinion, whilst the other is about someone lying about what the opinion itself actually is.

- The irony here is your posts so far amount to nothing except "shut up and go away", which is exactly what you were trying to portray my non-existent contradiction as. And my answer is no.

You'll probably have difficulty even with that breakdown so please feel free to send on any questions.

[(PSN)MYKK678]

1 hour ago, Voltage said:

Deflection? I (as well as many others in here) provided loads of evidence to support why DE's choice of where to place the resource cost is off-putting. Players would be much less likely to ask for Shards to move for free if that wasn't a core pillar of Warframe's arsenal customization. You're not charged to remove a Focus Lens, you're charged to add a new one. You're not charged to remove an Arcane, you're charged to unlock the slot to add them. You're not charged to remove an Incarnon Genesis Adapter, you're charged to install them. There's a good reason 99% of the game charges you to gain something rather than taxing you to remove it. 

If you believe this discussion has a 0% chance at achievement, where do you think the 20% Bile reduction came from? That change was a direct result from feedback, as alluded to in this interview with Rebecca prior to Whispers in the Walls (link):

Better yet, if this conversation offers so little value in your eyes, why continue contributing?

Because there's a massive [emotional] difference between spending a resource to gain something, and spending a resource to lose something. This is the difference between paying for shipping on merchandise you're receiving, and paying for shipping to return that same merchandise. You can't tell me both situations are interchangeable. The latter feels significantly worse.

Obfuscating your original comment with semantics doesn't suddenly lend it more credibility. I completely understand your position. You're looking at this from the technicality of the cost of resources. I'm looking at it from the value of emotional investment. Paying to remove Shards feels like crap, especially for those of us who were here 8 years ago when this was the case with Arcanes and that cost was reduced and removed due to feedback. Arcanes are in a way better spot now than they were in 2015 and 2016. There is no question about it. Archon Shards could absolutely stand to gain that same benefit Arcanes were given so many years ago.

I'm really curious to hear your side on why you think it's better for the game that you're charged to lose something instead of an alternative.

What am I missing? Someone asked Reb if a rebalance was happening and the answer was a slightly longer version of yes. Where's the "direct result from feedback" part that you mentioned?

While we're on questions, I never got an answer to one from before. So your master plan is to have all 5 slots locked out for everyone tomorrow, and everyone has to go and farm resources to unlock what they already had, right? Wasn't that your idea? Was that meant to be one of the reasonable solutions?

Let's be very clear about this, you shouldn't let the number of pages fool you. A thread reaching 6 pages doesn't automatically mean there's any good ideas in there. Nor does it mean there's a lot of people partaking in its continuation. Hell the Heirloom thread reached over 100 pages and by page 70 or so that was only  being dragged forward by 5 or 6 unhealthy people.

I know it's rather fun adding phrases like Nuance and Emotional Difference/Investment into conversations but it's just not working here. You're talking about a menu in a videogame. It has one viewpoint, there is no nuance. And if someone is getting Emotionally Invested in fake resources in a fake universe in a videogame, that's genuinely just odd behaviour. It's 100% understandable for someone to do so for a story, or a big unwanted change being made, or even a game shutting down. But you're basically trying to portray this as some poor kid out there is depressed because of Argon Crystal's...... Not happening.

Oh and to clarify, this isn't me "continuing to contribute". The contribution is done and dusted. Theres a post here now spotlighting how most of the relevant info stopped back on page 3 or 4 and it's just another dead issue being dragged. A reply is not necessarily about contributing, it's just mannerly when folks keep replying to me with questions.

Edited May 12 by (PSN)MYKK678
.

[L3512]

54 minutes ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

snip-

I think it's that fact that even though you can't form a basic argument and flip flop all over the shop with consistency, you still manage to sound condescending. Like there are plenty of bad takes on the Forums but this is somewhat unique.

It's just funny.

[(PSN)MYKK678]

56 minutes ago, L3512 said:

I think it's that fact that even though you can't form a basic argument and flip flop all over the shop with consistency, you still manage to sound condescending. Like there are plenty of bad takes on the Forums but this is somewhat unique.

It's just funny.

Thanks.

Anyway you apparently didn't get that so here's an easier version;

Is there a difference between:

- You having a problem with someone owning a knife?

- You having a problem with how a person chose to use a knife?

Obviously we both know you won't answer that truthfully. If you did everyone would have to question if you even understand what contradiction is in the firstplace. But it's not really there for you to answer truthfully, it's there to show how much effort you'll put in to NOT answer truthfully. Think of it like a win-win situation, but the opposite.

[SneakyErvin]

22 hours ago, Xylena_Lazarow said:

I have no problem planning out my builds, but if you want a Shard arrangement that doesn't fall flat when you change gear or walk into a different type of mission, you're heavily incentivized to go for the same generic meta on everything. Reds for strength or duration, maybe one yellow for cast speed, maybe the two green for armor strip. That's it, don't waste time thinking about niche builds or experimenting, especially not when the expensive fused Shards are even more niche, just stick to the meta.

Yeah that is a major issue with the system. There are so many frames that I would like to use different builds on that make use of different shards. So the whole investing falls flat because I cant truely invest, because it will be a mish-mash between the configs just to cover all somewhat.

21 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

When Sneaky and I openly agree on something you know it's a good idea. That or the sun's about to implode.

Hehehe. I had those same thoughts. Well maybe not the sun exactly, just the end of the world in general. So far though, no giants, nor Satan, or a meteor inbound when looking out the window. Also no zombies or aliens running amok on the street. I guess it means a good idea. 🤘

13 hours ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

You realise the entire post above is basically an example of exactly what I've been saying right? Someone actually took time to think about where they wanted their shards, and so they very likely spend little-to-no time removing/replacing them, thus the cost of removing them isn't a problem.

That only goes so far since we have several configs and potential playstyles on every single frame. You cant for instance make an "optimal" Ivara with a single setup, since you might want everything invested in parkour to go through spy as fast as possible, but then for survival you might instead want full reds or some mix since you no longer have a need to move around. And this goes for practically any frame.

Take Frost for instance, where in a defense build you might want to increase one stat with shards, then in a more offensive build you go with other shards so you can free slots for range while maintaining full strip etc. Currently that isnt possible, since you are stuck with one type of build due to the cost of removing shards.

 

[Venus-Venera]

vor 3 Minuten schrieb SneakyErvin:

Yeah that is a major issue with the system. There are so many frames that I would like to use different builds on that make use of different shards. So the whole investing falls flat because I cant truely invest, because it will be a mish-mash between the configs just to cover all somewhat.

true. Harrow would be an example here. With only 2x tau orange shards I can get red headshot crits. the damage is then brutal.

But otherwise I would actually do another build with completely different shards.
and here the devs have to program the option. So something like helmith skills, where I can install the shards for build A-B-C etc.

But I bet it will be years before it will be possible (if ever). Otherwise they are too slow with features

[SneakyErvin]

39 minutes ago, Venus-Venera said:

true. Harrow would be an example here. With only 2x tau orange shards I can get red headshot crits. the damage is then brutal.

But otherwise I would actually do another build with completely different shards.
and here the devs have to program the option. So something like helmith skills, where I can install the shards for build A-B-C etc.

But I bet it will be years before it will be possible (if ever). Otherwise they are too slow with features

I think there is a bigger chance I'll find God and accept Jesus Christ as my savior.