@de: Why I Give Up On Balancing Warframe's Components

[Volt_Cruelerz]

I actually also take issue with Serration being the current system of weapon progression, considering it requires players to a) have the mod, and b) have the hefty quantities of resources to rank it up. Though, a rank 10 Serration is hardly necessary for decent performance. My best Serration is Rank 8, and even then I use a rank 4 Serration fairly often. For what I think might be a better idea, let me redirect you to this thread:

https://forums.warframe.com/index.php?/topic/131201-mastery-system-changes-and-weapon-tiering-a-moderated-system/

It's long dead, so just read the OP and understand that some information is a bit outdated. (I wrote it before I knew that there were already 30 Mastery Ranks. I want mods to focus on customization, not progression. My suggestion for Forma also addresses the same issues your proposed cap does, and only necessitates re-ranking the weapon once. Maybe, maybe allow adding an extra polarity to weapons that start out with one polarity for a max of two.

PS: Volt, sorry, I know this is still off-topic as far as you're concerned, but I think the original topic has kind of died a bit. As before, I can only say "yes, I agree," so many times. We need more dissenters.

I'm actually disappointed I didn't see your thread at the time.  It contains some good content and I would have supported it had I seen it.  It also reminds me of the idea I once had of making event weaponry scale with mastery rank.  Of course, now that I think about it, that idea is exactly what I've done to every weapon in the game lol.

 

 

 

 

EDIT: also, I forget when recently, but in the event that people didn't notice, I did recently change the title of the thread to hopefully be more clear.

Edited March 5, 2014 by Volt_Cruelerz

[http404error]

https://forums.warframe.com/index.php?/topic/131201-mastery-system-changes-and-weapon-tiering-a-moderated-system/

 

Hm, interesting concept. I'm not really sure how that fits into DE's vision of the game, since they just love releasing tons of new weapons and this reduces that mileage significantly.

 

Also, I think that if overall progression is made to be more linear, the tier gap could pose much less of a problem. Even in the current state of the game, some players live and die by the Braton. If scaling is toned down significantly, perhaps upgrades won't even be necessary for most weapons to be viable at any stage.

[DiabolusUrsus]

Hm, interesting concept. I'm not really sure how that fits into DE's vision of the game, since they just love releasing tons of new weapons and this reduces that mileage significantly.

 

Also, I think that if overall progression is made to be more linear, the tier gap could pose much less of a problem. Even in the current state of the game, some players live and die by the Braton. If scaling is toned down significantly, perhaps upgrades won't even be necessary for most weapons to be viable at any stage.

 

I'm definitely one of those "live and die by the Braton" players, though that's only because I particularly like the way it handles. I'd love for scaling to be toned down, but keep in mind that the thread was made with the intention of placating both the "make weapons sidegrades" and "we want weapon-tiered progression" crowds. It's essentially the tiered-progression system with a sort of player-override function. As such, DE would still get plenty of mileage out of the weapons they release, because new weapons would be useful to both new and veteran players alike. The biggest advantage presented is effectively shutting down power-creep with a hard cap on what players can hope to expect from their weaponry. 

In sum, it fits into DE's game by forcing them to throw out some hard numbers rather than haphazard estimations of power through abstract Mastery ranks.

[Volt_Cruelerz]

I'm definitely one of those "live and die by the Braton" players, though that's only because I particularly like the way it handles. I'd love for scaling to be toned down, but keep in mind that the thread was made with the intention of placating both the "make weapons sidegrades" and "we want weapon-tiered progression" crowds. It's essentially the tiered-progression system with a sort of player-override function. As such, DE would still get plenty of mileage out of the weapons they release, because new weapons would be useful to both new and veteran players alike. The biggest advantage presented is effectively shutting down power-creep with a hard cap on what players can hope to expect from their weaponry. 

In sum, it fits into DE's game by forcing them to throw out some hard numbers rather than haphazard estimations of power through abstract Mastery ranks.

It only stops power creep if DE would actually abide by the parameters.

[http404error]

I suppose I wouldn't be opposed to a mastery-based progression for weapons, but I'd rather have something more like Volt's Proficiency system where it directly affects your mods and perhaps passive perks, so that weapon power can be assessed through the mod screen alone. Even Forma works through mods - it makes sense to keep all systems unified through mods.

 

That's also why I'm giving more thought to Volt's model for ranking up Serration and co. through Proficiency, since it utilizes the mod system as its means.

[DiabolusUrsus]

It only stops power creep if DE would actually abide by the parameters.

 

Hm. Yes, I suppose that is a bit optimistic of me.

 

I suppose I wouldn't be opposed to a mastery-based progression for weapons, but I'd rather have something more like Volt's Proficiency system where it directly affects your mods and perhaps passive perks, so that weapon power can be assessed through the mod screen alone. Even Forma works through mods - it makes sense to keep all systems unified through mods.

 

That's also why I'm giving more thought to Volt's model for ranking up Serration and co. through Proficiency, since it utilizes the mod system as its means.

 

I'd be fine with most systems, provided they tie a weapon's damage output to the weapon itself, rather than the mods attached to it. Of course, if they start handing out copies of Serration and other "essential" mods upon completing the tutorial for the first time, I would no longer have an issue with mod-based progression. As it is, I want mods to be separated from "progression" so that progression isn't so strongly connected with RNG. RNG makes things fun when it doesn't matter what you find. Mods would be a lot more fun if they were just cool toys that you could find, but didn't actually NEED.

[http404error]

I'd be fine with most systems, provided they tie a weapon's damage output to the weapon itself, rather than the mods attached to it. Of course, if they start handing out copies of Serration and other "essential" mods upon completing the tutorial for the first time, I would no longer have an issue with mod-based progression. As it is, I want mods to be separated from "progression" so that progression isn't so strongly connected with RNG. RNG makes things fun when it doesn't matter what you find. Mods would be a lot more fun if they were just cool toys that you could find, but didn't actually NEED.

 

Or even just readjusting the drop tables and making Serration a common drop from Lancers or something.

[Liminal]

You know what? I agree. Damage and health scaling limit the game's potential.

It should go away and take all +%damage mods along with it. There have been millions of alternatives suggested around here.

 

Sigh... just imagine how amazing it would be to be able to pick any frame and weapon for a mission, and have them perform similarly well (not "the same", of course some would be best suited for certain situations).

Edited March 5, 2014 by The_Doc