Ember feedback. Not good.

[AsffluffyZ]

4 hours ago, MadelnAbyss said:

Did you even read what anyone said in this post? Its not about playstyle. Ember is objectively worse then she was before this update and this is not an opinion it's a fact. The numbers don't lie.

Comparing apples to oranges in terms of what kind of damage output one frame has compared to another as a basis for whether something is good or not is not OBJECTIVE, it is SUBJECTIVE.

Enemies got a health buff and you are complaining that your specific build can no longer 3 shot grineer without using a weapon. This isn't a nerf to ember, but a change to the sandbox that serves to benefit the game as a whole. Though it's a great thing that there are plenty of other builds that work with ember that can still one shot groups of enemies by using guns buffed by using abilities against enemies.

This is why playstyle matters because if a change makes one build pointless, a different playstyle or a different build can take the place of the build hurt by changes. If ember gets a buff that's great, but acting like these changes ruin the frame in all levels of content is daft.

[MadelnAbyss]

I can't dumb it down anymore then I already have man if you still can't understand after this then I'm at a loss for words. The basis for whether something is good or not is infact OBJECTIVE. Do you hear yourself right now???? Going off your logic I could claim old hydroid before the rework was a OBJECTIVELY GOOD FRAME which is complete bs. Do you think the numbers in this game are just for show??? EVERYTHING IN THIS GAME IS BASED OFF SIMPLE ARITHMETIC there are videos of old hydroid doing 100 damage to fully armor stripped enemies. But going by your logic no THATS GOOD he shouldn't have gotten a rework right???? WRONG (--READ THIS TWICE BEFORE COMMENTING--) : embers damage before the update was ALREADY MEDIOCRE you had to jam pack strength to.do anything meaningfull at sp. AFTER THE UPDATE with enemy health increased her damage is now even more mediocre BECAUSE A NEW OBJECTIVE STANDARD WAS SET. Most frames had very good damage before the update therefore they were able to perform indifferently some even better after this change. That's not the case for ember. If a frame outputs damage numbers far lower then most other damage frames in the game then you can consider said frame bad. This is common sense what your doing right now is trying to cope and say ember is good when in reality shes not. And for you to sit here despite the evidence I've given you and still hold that position is just straight up disingenuous. Sure there are plenty of other builds you can use but your only handicaping yourself. I'm not saying you cant play ember if you find her fun then go ahead BUT you absolutely cannot say she's a good frame relative to every other frame in her category. 

Edited June 23 by MadelnAbyss

[doc_crazy]

Il y a 4 heures, MadelnAbyss a dit :

I can't dumb it down anymore then I already have man if you still can't understand after this then I'm at a loss for words. The basis for whether something is good or not is infact OBJECTIVE. Do you hear yourself right now???? Going off your logic I could claim old hydroid before the rework was a OBJECTIVELY GOOD FRAME which is complete bs. Do you think the numbers in this game are just for show??? EVERYTHING IN THIS GAME IS BASED OFF SIMPLE ARITHMETIC there are videos of old hydroid doing 100 damage to fully armor stripped enemies. But going by your logic no THATS GOOD he shouldn't have gotten a rework right????

This hydroid bit is a total straw man argument.

[AsffluffyZ]

15 hours ago, MadelnAbyss said:

I can't dumb it down anymore then I already have man if you still can't understand after this then I'm at a loss for words. The basis for whether something is good or not is infact OBJECTIVE. Do you hear yourself right now???? Going off your logic I could claim old hydroid before the rework was a OBJECTIVELY GOOD FRAME which is complete bs. Do you think the numbers in this game are just for show??? EVERYTHING IN THIS GAME IS BASED OFF SIMPLE ARITHMETIC there are videos of old hydroid doing 100 damage to fully armor stripped enemies. But going by your logic no THATS GOOD he shouldn't have gotten a rework right???? WRONG (--READ THIS TWICE BEFORE COMMENTING--) : embers damage before the update was ALREADY MEDIOCRE you had to jam pack strength to.do anything meaningfull at sp. AFTER THE UPDATE with enemy health increased her damage is now even more mediocre BECAUSE A NEW OBJECTIVE STANDARD WAS SET. Most frames had very good damage before the update therefore they were able to perform indifferently some even better after this change. That's not the case for ember. If a frame outputs damage numbers far lower then most other damage frames in the game then you can consider said frame bad. This is common sense what your doing right now is trying to cope and say ember is good when in reality shes not. And for you to sit here despite the evidence I've given you and still hold that position is just straight up disingenuous. Sure there are plenty of other builds you can use but your only handicaping yourself. I'm not saying you cant play ember if you find her fun then go ahead BUT you absolutely cannot say she's a good frame relative to every other frame in her category. 

Not just apples and oranges, but your pulling out the pears too. Soon you'll have a whole fruit basket.

Damage is not the end all be all in this game, so it is odd that you think it is.

An opinion is Subjective, a fact is Objective. Saying ember is bad is Subjective as this is an opinion, and saying that ember does less damage than other warframes is objective because this is a fact. At the same time saying that ember is good is subjective as this is again an opinion, and again saying ember does more damage than other warframes is objective because this is also a fact. The margins by which things are judged are more often than not subjective because they are based on opinions, yet opinions are not always fact.

Here is Objective evidence about my prior statement.

https://www.dictionary.com/e/subjective-vs-objective/

Sorry to hear your niche build was hurt by some sandbox changes and that you don't like the QOL changes ember got. It's just completely odd that you think that ember would be the only warframe impacted by these changes and that you think that SP is the benchmark for gameplay.

[MadelnAbyss]

This is just pure stupidity at this point it's like you didn't even read the comment I just posted I don't know why I bothered to waste my time on these forums. DAMAGE AND KPM IS EVERYTHING every warframe can survive and be invincible because Vazarin is a thing. I've played missions to level Cap many times and Ive never went down once due to Vazarin. Since health and survivability is not an issue. All that matters FOR MOST MISSIONS is damage and kpm. ---------->EVERY WARFRAME APPEALS TO AN OBJECTIVE STANDARD SET BY THE OTHER WARFRAMES IN THE SAME CLASS<-------- Ember is a SPAM CASTER. HMMM.... LETS SEE WHICH OTHER WARFRAMES FALL UNDER THE SAME CATEGORY: Quorvex, Lavos, Saryn, Gyre, Mesa, Dagath, Equinox, Gara are the few that I can name off the top off my head. Please tell me which of these frames or any frame in the same category does less damage then ember??? YOU CANT BECAUSE THERES NOONE IN THE SAME CATEGORY THAT DOES LESS DAMAGE THEN HER. All of these characters do way more in terms of ability damage then her. She is at the bottom of her class in both gun buffing and ability damage. SOOOOO ----->OBJECTIVELY<------ COMPARED TO ALL THE OTHER WARFRAMES IN HER CATEGORY SHE IS A BAD WARFRAME. YOU LIKING A FRAME DOESNT DICTATE WHETHER SAID FRAME IS GOOD OR NOT.  Your sitting her trying to tell me that numbers are subjective. If your not going to use logic and reason, please don't reply to me again 😭 

Edited June 24 by MadelnAbyss

[AsffluffyZ]

11 hours ago, MadelnAbyss said:

This is just pure stupidity at this point it's like you didn't even read the comment I just posted I don't know why I bothered to waste my time on these forums. DAMAGE AND KPM IS EVERYTHING every warframe can survive and be invincible because Vazarin is a thing. I've played missions to level Cap many times and Ive never went down once due to Vazarin. Since health and survivability is not an issue. All that matters FOR MOST MISSIONS is damage and kpm. ---------->EVERY WARFRAME APPEALS TO AN OBJECTIVE STANDARD SET BY THE OTHER WARFRAMES IN THE SAME CLASS<-------- Ember is a SPAM CASTER. HMMM.... LETS SEE WHICH OTHER WARFRAMES FALL UNDER THE SAME CATEGORY: Quorvex, Lavos, Saryn, Gyre, Mesa, Dagath, Equinox, Gara are the few that I can name off the top off my head. Please tell me which of these frames or any frame in the same category does less damage then ember??? YOU CANT BECAUSE THERES NOONE IN THE SAME CATEGORY THAT DOES LESS DAMAGE THEN HER. All of these characters do way more in terms of ability damage then her. She is at the bottom of her class in both gun buffing and ability damage. SOOOOO ----->OBJECTIVELY<------ COMPARED TO ALL THE OTHER WARFRAMES IN HER CATEGORY SHE IS A BAD WARFRAME. YOU LIKING A FRAME DOESNT DICTATE WHETHER SAID FRAME IS GOOD OR NOT.  Your sitting her trying to tell me that numbers are subjective. If your not going to use logic and reason, please don't reply to me again 😭 

You went and did it, you made the whole basket of fruit.

Equinox is a support frame given most of the frames abilities, Saryn relies on spores which does not need to be spammed for damage output, Garage is a defensive frame who only spams if trying to build splinter storm stacks, and mesa is literally the gun frame who stays toggles her 4 for kills with the other abilities not needing to be spammed. This makes me absolutely curious about what categories you think every warframe falls in.

As for warframes with worse damage output as I stated no specific categories just in the game in its entirety there is nyx, caliban, banshee for non single target, atlas has terrible damage scaling against armored enemies, loki, Trinity, Oberon, ivara, and nekros are just a few examples of frames with not great damage output. But the damage output of these frames abilities isn't what makes them matter because there is more to the game then just damage and kills per minute.

Since all damage and kills can be done using just guns, it is also a matter of how a warframe impacts gameplay as a whole such as how they improve survivability or help complete missions. In regards to spy missions few frames are a better choice than Ivara, for defense missions frames the specialize in crowd control or grouping enemies can perform better than a pure damage based warframe. There is a reason revenant is the most played Warframe and it is not because of his abilities damage output it is because of the playstyle.

This however is far removed from anything important to the topic, because it seems like you just want to complain and argue without trying to add anything to this post except say you think ember deals bad damage.

[MadelnAbyss]

I'm done if you cant even comprehend what im saying then theres no point in trying to explain things further. Everything I said in that last post was true. All youve said was theres no classes in warframe and the proceeded to start yapping. The reason why Rev is so popular is because he has a 1 cast and forget invulnerability. Vazarin does the exact same thing but requires more effort. Most people don't have their focus maxed out and even the ones that do find it too tedious to protective dash every once ina while. Only at the higher levels of play willl you see Vazarin actually being used. So revenant is the more accessible option.

Edited June 24 by MadelnAbyss