Trinity Is Still Op Broken

[LazyKnight]

Ill let you figure out the metaphors in that, and decide for yourself how you want to respond to it. I already have it predicted though, and if you don't say it I can guarantee I know a few people who will.

 

The Scale need to be balanced in the sense of 'Player/NPC' as the arms of the scale with weights on them. If they are all balanced in that fashion there will be far less trash tier and broken overpowered tier. The fundamental problem of balancing 'player/player' is they might all end up borked relative to the overall 'player/NPC' scale.

 

Option 1: Nerf or redesigning of her skill-set.

Trinity's Invincibility invalidates the participation of the Ai, and it is the principle reason why a nerf or redesign is likely the best option.

 

Option 2: Without nerf, just buff the NPC.

The ways that DE could get around this would be very limited without nerfing. They can give every major NPC an ability to deactivate the Warframe's powers, but this would mess up a bunch of non-broken Warframes, causing more issues to be fixed.

 

Opption 3: Buff all other Warframes.

They can buff everyone to her level, but it would make it pointless to have the NPC's Ai on, because it would be essential: 'Have the Ai line-up to be killed by the Tenno'. (Broken scale option)

Edited March 30, 2014 by LazyKnight

[ZayTM]

 

They can buff everyone to her level, but it would make it pointless to have the NPC's Ai on, because it would be essential: 'Have the Ai line-up to be killed by the Tenno'.

Even more than it already is :I

Just the notion that permanent invincibility is a good, sustainable feature in this game is really, really silly. Is it fun? For you, possibly in the short term. But it's going to get boring without any threat or difficulty. The game isn't even interactive anymore. It's not even really a game, it's become a movie where your warframe is a main character with plot armor.

It's not sustainable, it's not good game design, and it's not even worth defending.

[Cwierz]

The Scale need to be balanced in the sense of 'Player/NPC' as the arms of the scale with weights on them. If they are all balanced in that fashion there will be far less trash tier and broken overpowered tier. The fundamental problem of balancing 'player/player' is they might all end up borked relative to the overall 'player/NPC' scale.

Balancing NPC/Player is pointless without player/player. You can do NPC/Player second, its a lot harder to do it the other way around.

[GTG3000]

Balancing NPC/Player is pointless without player/player. You can do NPC/Player second, its a lot harder to do it the other way around.

 

Technically, If you balance every warframe against similar level of threat, they will come out balanced between themselves, too.

 

That said, the only way invinsibility doesn't remove AI from the equation is if it's only bestowed on teammate that can't clean out or CC entire rooms in one second.

[LazyKnight]

Balancing NPC/Player is pointless without player/player. You can do NPC/Player second, its a lot harder to do it the other way around.

Wrong, in a PVE centric game the NPC are the benchmark, and they are what the players are balanced against; 'Player/NPC' will result in all players ending up with roughly the same metric of total power, comparatively against the NPC that said player is supposed to have as a challenge.

 

"Player verses environment" is what PVE means. "Player/player" and "player/NPC" can be mutually exclusive, and 'player/player' balance does not equal 'player/NPC'.

Edited March 30, 2014 by LazyKnight

[(PSN)pmnovaroadspilot]

> Permanent invincibility isn't overpowered!

> I am going to defend a blantantly overpowered thing because I find it fun!

> Obviously these overpowered items are going to add to the sustainability of the game!

> I actually know what I am talking about! Well maybe! But I sure do know that mean person over there is spoiling my permanent invincibility.

> It doesn't matter how overpowered you are in a game as long as it isn't pvp! Because screw replay value and sustainability.

> I remember this one time I played a game that let you have cheat codes. The game wasn't that fun when I played through it :(

> Nerfing is badd.... Oh noo, scary nerfs! Nerfs are bad!

 

God, this is the @(*()$ reason I post this S#&$ in the first place.

 

Sometimes I use this close to flawed analogy to help explain this to people.

 

Imagine you have a scale you need to balance. It is a very complex scale, a very delicate scale. Some little creatures believe that the way the scale is right now is good, but haven't noticed their world is angled. The scale has multiple moving parts, pads to place things at, and various objects on them. This scale is very #*($%%@ up right now. The scale is not evened out. There are three ways we can fix this. We can add weight to the lighter parts, and we can remove weight from the heavier parts, or we could do a mixture of both. When we remove things from the scale, rarely we accidentally take something that belonged to the little creatures, but not often.

So we should do the second solution right? Wrong. If you add to much weight to that scale, it is going to break. And when that happens, nearly every little creature on that scale is going to move away. The third is the optimal solution, the lowest margin for error, and the only one that wont F*** over the little creatures. 

Right now, there are a few anvils hanging on a couple of the arms on that scale. 

 

 

Ill let you figure out the metaphors in that, and decide for yourself how you want to respond to it. I already have it predicted though, and if you don't say it I can guarantee I know a few people who will.

look 

again people find that fun 

NO ONE is forcing you to use it but its nice for other to have that option to have a specific build to play that way 

if thats how they feel as long as it doesnt hamper your warframe and whats taking place on your screen i see no issue with it 

are they having fun. then yes i feel its ok 

 

you are trying to dictate what other individuals should see/get out of a game which is inherently wrong.

some people play this game of the long term, some see it as a simple segway until other games come out in which that case your premise of replay value...doesnt matter to them. 

 

you should put up a analogy you know is flawed lmfao 

there are so many holes in it 

 

for one you analogy suggests that everything everybody does on a individual basis adds to the scale and that is simply not true 

if i picked my nose right now would it have a profound effect on whats happening with the rest of the world...no mostly like the build and the premise that something has to be done 

for who? for me, is this more for you then it is for me 

do i care about the scale? what does this do for my fun?

 

 

also this build is OPTIONAL. this is not required for you to build this 

if it was then you might have a point but its not the case

 

customization  is part of the game 

having options is part of the game 

personal preference is part of the game

[ZayTM]

I'm just going to repeat what Cwierz said.
 

> I am going to defend a blantantly overpowered thing because I find it fun!

 

Just because you enjoy watching robot ninja action movies does not mean that it makes for good or healthy game design.

[Nkomo-Sama]

HOW IS THIS THREAD STILL ALIVE??? /thread

[Monolake]

HOW IS THIS THREAD STILL ALIVE??? /thread

yeah Im totally with you, this thread should be long since irrelevant, if only DE put some work into balancing

[ZayTM]

yeah Im totally with you, this thread should be long since irrelevant, if only DE put some work into balancing

Agreed, agreed. They're just really afraid to use the nerf/buff hammers because every time they do there's a huge community backlash (remember the Frost debacle? We all do...). That's why Scott was so specific on not acting unless there's a consensus on an issue.

[Monolake]

Agreed, agreed. They're just really afraid to use the nerf/buff hammers because every time they do there's a huge community backlash (remember the Frost debacle? We all do...). That's why Scott was so specific on not acting unless there's a consensus on an issue.

there will never be consensus, abilities should be judged on facts and testing not just on community opinions

[ZayTM]

there will never be consensus, abilities should be judged on facts and testing not just on community opinions

 

Also very much agreed. There will be dissenters in EVERYTHING, you really can't let them sway you away from fixing the game

[MoyuTheTrinity]

if there's a thing I dislike is whenever someone boldly states "Trinity kills all enemies on the map" ...you only kill 3 at a time, if they're grunts. Heavy units will take an entire magazine to kill regardless, more than that if they're higher levels (35+)...

 

Which brings back the same issue as always:

Fully decked-out warframes with 2-3 formas - complain about how they can run through Venus / Earth / Mars without any enemies being able to touch them. If you put that much time and effort into your frame, you SHOULD be able to do that.

Play Trinity at non-forma'd Rank 30, without Corrupted Mods. Then tell me how viable the playstyle is.

I let my sister have my currupted duration mod trinity's blessing instantly lost all its durration and it became a strugle for energy and time just to survive with her low hp and shield trinity is defenetly not as op as this person thinks

 

it seems like he hates the new link >3> I hate it to can we get trinity back to her old overpowered state? it was more fun and you only killed one thing at a time ;D I only use energy vampire and blessing anyways

 

I use my guns to kill because that is fun for me Brandle Lex Dakra and Trinity skills to support the team so link is pretty usless for me

Edited March 30, 2014 by MoyuTheMedic

[Cwierz]

Wrong, in a PVE centric game the NPC are the benchmark, and they are what the players are balanced against; 'Player/NPC' will result in all players ending up with roughly the same metric of total power, comparatively against the NPC that said player is supposed to have as a challenge.

 

"Player verses environment" is what PVE means. "Player/player" and "player/NPC" can be mutually exclusive, and 'player/player' balance does not equal 'player/NPC'.

I disagree. Yes the NPC are the benchmark for the content. But this is about player/player usability. Sure everything can be usable on the NPC, but what is to stop one from doing better than the other and eclipsing it. Player/Player balance is not just exclusive to pvp, it is in pve as well. If one piece of content is 100% better than another, with no reason to use the other, with them being the same difficulty to acquire what does that mean? That other piece of content will never see use.

 

In better terms:

Yes the players are balanced against the NPCs

However, the players are also balanced against themselves.

Player/Player balance is not mutually exclusive to pvp because in co-op content trivialization can be accelerated or started via player player imbalance and a host of other reasons.

 

At some level I can come close to agreeing with you, because what you say makes sense. But at the other, disregarding this like you say is not the most efficient nor correct solution.

[RealPandemonium]

I disagree. Yes the NPC are the benchmark for the content. But this is about player/player usability. Sure everything can be usable on the NPC, but what is to stop one from doing better than the other and eclipsing it. Player/Player balance is not just exclusive to pvp, it is in pve as well. If one piece of content is 100% better than another, with no reason to use the other, with them being the same difficulty to acquire what does that mean? That other piece of content will never see use.

 

In better terms:

Yes the players are balanced against the NPCs

However, the players are also balanced against themselves.

Player/Player balance is not mutually exclusive to pvp because in co-op content trivialization can be accelerated or started via player player imbalance and a host of other reasons.

 

At some level I can come close to agreeing with you, because what you say makes sense. But at the other, disregarding this like you say is not the most efficient nor correct solution.

He's trying to say that the aim of balance is to make all frames equally useful vs enemies.  The focus should not be on frame vs frame.  The only reason people look at frame vs frame is because several frames are lopsidedly powerful due to exploitable game mechanics or lopsided numbers (Nova has both!)

[Cwierz]

look 

again people find that fun 

Doesn't matter. It is unhealthy for the game. It needs to go. It doesn't matter anyways, you can bet scott already knows this.

NO ONE is forcing you to use it but its nice for other to have that option to have a specific build to play that way 

If u dun liek it dun use it preblem solved!!11! No. The problem would still exist people would just ignore it.

if thats how they feel as long as it doesnt hamper your warframe and whats taking place on your screen i see no issue with it 

This is why I think you shouldn't post feedback. That statement was really dumb.

are they having fun. then yes i feel its ok 

Again, it is unhealthy for the game. It needs to go. I don't care if you like watching ninja casters effortlessly blow  away competition because you are stuck in a skinner box.

 

you are trying to dictate what other individuals should see/get out of a game which is inherently wrong.

I am not attacking anyone. I am  advocating for balance. Get your facts straight and stop generalizing. Just because you are allergic to balance doesn't mean it isn't good for you.

some people play this game of the long term, some see it as a simple segway until other games come out in which that case your premise of replay value...doesnt matter to them. 

Replay value isn't "replay", its more along the lines of how long can this game survive until the players become bored of being gods amongst peasants (hint: not long)

 

you should put up a analogy you know is flawed lmfao 

there are so many holes in it 

Lets see then.

 

for one you analogy suggests that everything everybody does on a individual basis adds to the scale and that is simply not true 

There is one metaphor you didn't get. Figured as much.  The objects on the scale represented the content of the game. The scale represented the game. Balancing the scale represented balance. Without balance this game would die.

if i picked my nose right now would it have a profound effect on whats happening with the rest of the world...no mostly like the build and the premise that something has to be done 

Thats two. You do not understand a thing about balance. 

for who? for me, is this more for you then it is for me 

do i care about the scale? what does this do for my fun?

Thats three.

Damn, you didn't get a single thing. I would explain it to you , but you have the deciphering power of a tree

Like holy crap, I would retort this, but you didn't get a single thing there.

And I guessed it to!

I explicitly said you didn't know what you were talking about. And this just proves it.

 

 

also this build is OPTIONAL. this is not required for you to build this 

This isn't about me, this is about the game.

if it was then you might have a point but its not the case

Good, because your point is S#&$ty and you can't seem to grasp what I am telling you.

 

customization  is part of the game 

Cool, but balance is to.

having options is part of the game 

Balance promotes agency and options. That is flawed.

personal preference is part of the game

K. Well, good thing this isn't about this.

English. Speak it.

 

This entire post is wrong, I will have responses in the quote.

[Cwierz]

He's trying to say that the aim of balance is to make all frames equally useful vs enemies.  The focus should not be on frame vs frame.  The only reason people look at frame vs frame is because several frames are lopsidedly powerful due to exploitable game mechanics or lopsided numbers (Nova has both!)

Duly noted. However, what I don't get is why you think there should be no player/player balance. It simply won't work. 

I understand that there needs to be both, but you seem to want to disregard one side of the equation. It doesn't work.

[LazyKnight]

Duly noted. However, what I don't get is why you think there should be no player/player balance. It simply won't work. 

I understand that there needs to be both, but you seem to want to disregard one side of the equation. It doesn't work.

I should have fleshed out that post. What I mean is that the character should be balanced with the goal of having each character having an equal challenge factor by the Ai.

 

Quick Example:

(Rating is just an example for simplicity, it would be on how strong the character looked on paper by its designer or balancer)

 

Excalibur's ability to handled the Ai could be rated as '4' on a scales(based on his skills and stats), and the Ai ability to handle him is also "4": 4/4=1. This type of balance could be wrong because the designer could have underestimated something. Such as, Excalibur was a 5 and now the game is too easy, or that he was a 2 and the game is way too hard because the NPC have too many counters.  

 

This would be the type of balance that I was talking about. It wouldn't be ignore 'player/player', but use the player/NPC' to keep the application of the balancing consistent.

Edited March 31, 2014 by LazyKnight

[Nkomo-Sama]

yeah Im totally with you, this thread should be long since irrelevant, if only DE put some work into balancing

 

 

Agreed, agreed. They're just really afraid to use the nerf/buff hammers because every time they do there's a huge community backlash (remember the Frost debacle? We all do...). That's why Scott was so specific on not acting unless there's a consensus on an issue.

 

 

there will never be consensus, abilities should be judged on facts and testing not just on community opinions

 

 

Also very much agreed. There will be dissenters in EVERYTHING, you really can't let them sway you away from fixing the game

You all sorely misunderstand. TRINITY IS FINE. She does EXACTLY what she is supposed to do. This thread got far more attention then I think it needed... I am going to unfollow it now though I think...but yet and still I respect all of your opinions I just happen to disagree.

Edited March 31, 2014 by Nkomo-Sama

[Eldhor]

in DnD? No, they have to be Good...particularly Lawful Good.

 

In Warhammer 40K? Take your pick :P (okay...not really...but it's a lot more loose than DnD)

No, in DnD Paladins have to be Lawful, but they can be Good, Neutral, or Evil.

[ZayTM]

You all sorely misunderstand. TRINITY IS FINE. She does EXACTLY what she is supposed to do. This thread got far more attention then I think it needed... I am going to unfollow it now though I think...but yet and still I respect all of your opinions I just happen to disagree.

 

At her base level, she is pretty much fine. If anything, she's underpowered because all of her power is in Blessing. The issue is that with a few corrupted mods and an energy siphon or two, she literally makes the entire team invincible permanently. She can cast blessing off cooldown with no disadvantage, creating permanent indestructibility.

 

But thank you for being polite, that's actually very much appreciated. I respect your opinion as well, though I also disagree.

[(PSN)pmnovaroadspilot]

English. Speak it.

 

This entire post is wrong, I will have responses in the quote.

and you would do that why?

lol 

you answers amounted to a bunch of, 

your wrong. 

I didnt see any thing really intriguing except you trying to be condescending and mark 1, 2, and 3 

and its not a problem because you can not use it.

its only a problem to you 

its fun to the people that want to use that build. 

 

you dont get that people take away different things from the game some may want to replay on and on and others just wanna have their kicks and leave. some want to be overpowered and some dont. 

are you at my house? 

do you use my tv? 

do you tell me what i can and cant use? 

NO and its utterly silly of you to think so. 

 

personal preference is part of the game you can try to ignore it but it remains because i could have not gotten this game but i did and i should be free to play it how i wish as well as many others. 

 

you didnt choose for me to download this game  i did. the sooner you realize this and the sooner you recognize that this doesnt affect your game then then sooner you will stop having to see this argument in your space. 

 

hell your statement with allergic in it is trying to tell me what i want. 

that is laughable and childlike.

willful ignorance that proves its more about me then it is about you. Im doing what i want. 

then you said you wouldnt retort.

you are horrible at defending your stance. 

Edited March 31, 2014 by (PS4)pmnovaroadspilot

[Thaumatos]

No, in DnD Paladins have to be Lawful, but they can be Good, Neutral, or Evil.

Just as a quick derail/aside:  Paladins in 3.5 or earlier had to be Lawful Good, unless you were playing some sort of videogame adaptation of DnD.  In 4.0 they can be whatever they choose based on deity.

 

On topic, Blessing is OP.  If full immunity for everyone, everywhere, indefinitely isn't OP, nothing is.

[Cwierz]

and you would do that why?

lol 

you answers amounted to a bunch of, 

your wrong. 

Because you are.

I didnt see any thing really intriguing except you trying to be condescending and mark 1, 2, and 3 

and its not a problem because you can not use it.

Me ignoring the issue does not prevent it from being an issue. What are you? 5? Do you not understand how reality works. A person who calls out a problem can not simply remove the problem by ignoring it. This is the reasoning I would expect from young children, please tell me you can do better.

its only a problem to you 

its fun to the people that want to use that build. 

Fun does not exempt anything from balance. Period. You can deny this all you want, and maybe if enough people do they might actually kill the game faster. Who knows? I sure know that the oldest games still being alive are alive because of their sustainability and balance. Tribes 2 is a great example. But then again, that would presume you know what tribes 2 is. Maybe CS 1.6 would be a better comparison, or Quake 3. Sadly, I don't know of to many Co-Op games that are still being played outside of MMO's and Diablos if you don't count them as MMO's, but thats mostly due to the fact that this is one of the pioneering types of its kind.

 

you dont get that people take away different things from the game some may want to replay on and on and others just wanna have their kicks and leave. some want to be overpowered and some dont. 

So let me get this straight, you literally just said you want this game, which is not a RETAIL game mind you,  to act like a GTA 4 or whatever have you. That is one of the most idiotic things. Just the sheer fact this isn't a retail game is enough to disprove this. But there is more practical things as well. It doesn't really matter if you like watching one button kills all, or your character getting godmode. It is unhealthy for the game, and bad game design. It is what gives games bad rep. 

 

Sorry to say, but I really think you need to stop trying to give feedback about balance from now on. This isn't condescending, this is genuine concern that some developer might actually take you seriously by accident someday.

are you at my house? 

do you use my tv? 

do you tell me what i can and cant use? 

NO and its utterly silly of you to think so. 

Man, I told you in the last post this isn't about me or you. This is about the GAME. If you can't wrap your head around this, I think its time for you to stop posting for a while, and come back once you can. It doesn't really matter that I love to play as my Loki with permanent invisibility. I know that at some point that needs to go. If you can't see the same way, you are not qualified to be talking about game design, ESPECIALLY relating to balance between player content. 

 

personal preference is part of the game you can try to ignore it but it remains because i could have not gotten this game but i did and i should be free to play it how i wish as well as many others. 

I really don't get your reasoning. Why is it that you feel entitled? We are talking about giving feedback on the warframes. Trinity is overpowered. This is a fact. It does't matter how many ways you say you like trinity. That S#&$ is silly, and it needs to go. Quit trying to justify your flawed reasoning by stating over and over again in various ways that you enjoy playing as her. It doesn't change a damn thing except make you look like a bigger. fool. 

you didnt choose for me to download this game  i did. the sooner you realize this and the sooner you recognize that this doesnt affect your game then then sooner you will stop having to see this argument in your space. 

Once again. This isn't about me. This isn't about you. This is about THE GAME. 

 

hell your statement with allergic in it is trying to tell me what i want. 

I am not trying to tell you what you want. I am giving feedback about the warframes. Notice the subforum we are in? Quit saying illogical things.

that is laughable and childlike.

Yes, so very much so. Enlighten me with your "actual" arguments now. Prove to me that I am wrong. I can change my mind. But until you can actually refute anything that ANYONE here has said, you sir... are wrong.

willful ignorance that proves its more about me then it is about you. Im doing what i want. 

Ironic.

then you said you wouldnt retort.

This is why. Your posts are dumb. I can't stand reading them!

you are horrible at defending your stance. 

I shouldn't have to. This is common sense!

God this post is so ironic.

You obviously don't understand a thing, and you compound it with "you won't argue it cuz u know ur wrong!"

 

Listen man. I know my posts may seem like I am trying to tell you how to play your game, and just straight up attacking the way you play. But I want you to do something. Read the title of this subforum. This is feedback about the warframes. 

Trinity is OP

Something needs to be done, and I don't care what you say. 

The only way you can change anybodies mind is to convince them that trinity isn't game breaking. 

Your argument has no power here. It is illogical, and not in the correct place. If you are looking for a game more similar to what you want, then imfamous second son would be more to your liking.

 

I want to make sure you really get this from the post

"I really don't get your reasoning. Why is it that you feel entitled? We are talking about giving feedback on the warframes. Trinity is overpowered. This is a fact. It does't matter how many ways you say you like trinity. That S#&$ is silly, and it needs to go. Quit trying to justify your flawed reasoning by stating over and over again in various ways that you enjoy playing as her. It doesn't change a damn thing except make you look like a bigger. fool. "

and this as well.

you are horrible at defending your stance. 

I shouldn't have to. This is common sense!

[Thaumatos]

personal preference is part of the game you can try to ignore it but it remains because i could have not gotten this game but i did and i should be free to play it how i wish as well as many others. 

 

you didnt choose for me to download this game  i did. the sooner you realize this and the sooner you recognize that this doesnt affect your game then then sooner you will stop having to see this argument in your space. 

 

I'm not sure how the discussion of Blessing being OP dictates how/why you play.  You're always free to play the game in any way you so choose as long as DE doesn't consider it an exploit.  If they nerf Trinity's Blessing because it's too powerful, you're still free to play Trinity.  If the dev team removes all frames from the game and left only xcal, you'd still be free to play the game the way you choose.

 

The game is what it is.  Nothing outside of DE's set of rules can dictate what buttons you push or which parts of the game you choose to experience.  Just because they haven't made a Zeus frame that is 100% immortal and calls upon lightning bolts to destroy every mob on the entire map (although they're getting close) doesn't mean you can't play the way you choose.

 

You choose to use Blessing, that's fine.  Blessing is also OP.  Those two facts are entirely separate.

 

Now I didn't read through the entire thread and I'm not sure if people are ragging on you for the way you play, but honestly, use Blessing to your heart's content.  I personally don't mind.  I love when I'm invincible.  I just also realize its OP and should change for the overall health of the game.