Nerf Ammo Capacity

[notionphil]

How about suggesting a way to improve the bad frames and mods instead of making the good one's bad. 

Here you go. [Flexibility] Bring All Frames To Nova Tier Without Buffs

[(PSN)billy-d-squid]

that's not the reality here. the reality is rank 0's with somas from the nekros bundle and rank 1's rhino prime access and boltor.

 

And how many people are dropping 850 platinum on it? I've seen one so far who's done that with the Nekros pack. Can't stop that, it's the nature of FTP games. 

 

The vast majority don't drop that amount of plat. when they can get the stuff for free

[LukeAura]

Wait, so is this actually about you not liking people with plat getting good weapons?

You mean people with no experience or gametime buying a top tier gun, growing bored because they jumped by all the ranks of progression they should have gone through and quitting way early? 

[(PSN)billy-d-squid]

OP is a secret operative for not wanting the game to funnel all players into the same 10 weapons and 4 frames bc they are better in every way.

 

Yeah, you'll just funnel everyone into using Nova, Rhino or situationally Volt, Mag and Saryn instead because they have buffs and debuffs or faction specific powers which would make them useable.

[notionphil]

Wait, so is this actually about you not liking people with plat getting good weapons?

 

not at all, was responding to an inaccurate statement. I think weapon power should be related to some mitigating factor no matter how mastery locked they are.

 

Also note, my overall preference is actual balance. However, we're going on how long? and that concept seems to be 99% elusive, so its time to start introducing stop-gap measures and bandaids.

[(PSN)billy-d-squid]

You mean people with no experience or gametime buying a top tier gun, growing bored because they jumped by all the ranks of progression they should have gone through and quitting way early? 

 

Well that's their own problem if they get bored.

[Varzy]

You mean people with no experience or gametime buying a top tier gun, growing bored because they jumped by all the ranks of progression they should have gone through and quitting way early? 

Yes, I do. Are we proposing nerfing weapons because people who don't actually want to play the game aren't playing the game?

[Varzy]

not at all, was responding to an inaccurate statement. I think weapon power should be related to some mitigating factor no matter how mastery locked they are.

 

Also note, my overall preference is actual balance. However, we're going on how long? and that concept seems to be 99% elusive, so its time to start introducing stop-gap measures and bandaids.

Well, see I agree with that. But I disagree about nerfing strong weapons so severely.

 

Each weapon needs to have it's own individual, balanced ammo pool, because right now efficiency vs dps trumps all. Penta, Ogris, I can see having 20 - 24 shots each and still being powerful. Soma, 400; Boltor Prime, 440. Boltor Prime is a projectile, non-hitscan weapon, that's a downside in of itself.

 

But, I notice now in the comments you said that the 'Boltor Prime ammo = 180' suggestion was hyperbole to bring attention to this matter. How are we meant to judge it on good faith if you're not being clear about your suggestions? More than that, blowing big holes in usability and telling us to mod to fix it leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

[Ketec]

nerfing ammo capacity doesn't make weak weapons stronger. Weak stays weak.

 

If penta ends up having 50 grenades it becomes useless - unless you sacrifice aura or a mod slot for ammo mods - which is  absolutely stupid.

 

Saying oyu have ammo restores is idiotic - they restore too slowly and NO ONE EVER NEVER EVER uses them in public groups.

 

If you go this capacity nerf route - add ammo restore nodes to certain positions on map ( 1x use per node for every player or  1x every wave etc).

[notionphil]

Well, see I agree with that. But I disagree about nerfing strong weapons so severely.

 

Each weapon needs to have it's own individual, balanced ammo pool, because right now efficiency vs dps trumps all. Penta, Ogris, I can see having 20 - 24 shots each and still being powerful. Soma, 400; Boltor Prime, 440. Boltor Prime is a projectile, non-hitscan weapon, that's a downside in of itself.

 

But, I notice now in the comments you said that the 'Boltor Prime ammo = 180' suggestion was hyperbole to bring attention to this matter. How are we meant to judge it on good faith if you're not being clear about your suggestions? More than that, blowing big holes in usability and telling us to mod to fix it leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

 

It's not hyperbole - it's an extreme case bc it's the strongest (or one of) primary rifle in game. most weapons would have less of a reduction.

 

EX: synapse might be 360 for example

[Shanicus]

...eeeeeehhhhhhhhhhhh.

While some weapons can do with an ammo nerf (if  you ever use up 540 Penta/Ogris rounds, you've done something amazing) and others with a much needed buff (maxed ammo mods on Twin Vipers = zero ammo after 2 rooms instead of 1), the call of 'CUT AMMO OF STRONG GUNS' is kinda... well, not a good call. The high-tier weapons like Boltor Prime and Soma might seem ammo-efficient at lower levels, at the higher end stuff (you know, what high-end guns are best at) their ammo burns up REALLY quickly - my Soma has 120 per clip and I eat through that like no tomorrow if I need to focus down a Heavy Grineer or pack of mobs.

Instead of just doing a blind nerf/buff of ammo values... why not just increase the damage output of some of the weaker weaponry? It's just not going to be possible to take everything to Wave 50 T3 level of damage (scaling/balancing issues with the rest of the game result from trying that), but making more things more viable at higher levels would fix these 'problems', alongside DIRECTED ammo buffs/nerfs like Ogris or Twin Vipers.

As a side note: the argument of 'Oh, Newbies can buy Soma/Boltor Prime from the get go' is a absolutely terrible argument to use - while it's possible to do that, it's not common enough that it's anything you should be remotely considering for Balance. A Handful of wallet-warriors does not justify balance changes - otherwise there'd be some serious arguments for Mercury and Venus to be increased to level 25+ zones due to 'everyone' running around with Somas, Primes and Rhinos.

[Varzy]

It's not hyperbole - it's an extreme case bc it's the strongest (or one of) primary rifle in game. most weapons would have less of a reduction.

 

EX: synapse might be 360 for example

 

Except you said it was hyperbole here:

 

Obviously I had to use big numbers and an attn grabbing title to get my point across :D

 

But yes, some of these changes are logical even at a smaller scale.

 

That the severe numbers were there to grab attention.

 

Saying to knock a fast firing, projectile weapon down to 180 is ludicrous regardless of what your main point is, especially since the nature of the game is to throw unrelenting hordes of enemies at you. There's no justification for an assault rifle to have anything less than 300-400 ammo unless you want every automatic weapon to perform like the Dual Wraith Vipers.

Edited March 13, 2014 by Varzy

[Calayne]

The numbers themselves, I feel, are unimportant.

 

What I feel is really important is the concept: Less flexibility for more powerful guns, more flexibility for less powerful guns; Choose either more power for less room for error, or be satisfied with doing less damage, but having more chances.

 

I personally feel this suggestion is on the right track, if you don't crunch numbers: Min-maxers will do that anyways, but I love the premise of this idea. And like his other threads, I don't think you can take this as a stand-alone. They tie in to one another very nicely, and I feel that if you're going to take one of his threads seriously, it's because you've seen the bigger picture he's thinking of. 

 

Granted, this could somehow work by itself given the right number balancing stunt, but like many other changes, we can't really move that much forward until we address gaping issues: Primarily, damage scaling for weapons (Specifically, how ridiculous the damage gap becomes for various weapons).

[LukeAura]

That the severe numbers were there to grab attention.

 

Saying to knock a fast firing, projectile weapon down to 180 is ludicrous regardless of what your main point is, especially since the nature of the game is to throw unrelenting hordes of enemies at you. There's no justification for an assault rifle to have anything less than 300-400 ammo unless you want every automatic weapon to perform like the Dual Wraith Vipers.

It's not hyperbole, he's just giving the most extreme case. his number for the Boltor Prime wouldn't have changed if he didn't say it. 

 

[notionphil]

Except you said it was hyperbole here:

 

 

That the severe numbers were there to grab attention.

 

Saying to knock a fast firing, projectile weapon down to 180 is ludicrous regardless of what your main point is, especially since the nature of the game is to throw unrelenting hordes of enemies at you. There's no justification for an assault rifle to have anything less than 300-400 ammo unless you want every automatic weapon to perform like the Dual Wraith Vipers.

 

You are able to present your argument with logic, which I welcome and helps get to any kernel of a good idea within the OP, so lets not divert into semantics.

 

I used a big number, that I feel could be a possible value, to be attention grabbing and spur discussion. To attract the debate which is needed for a variety of reasons, one being bringing visibility to the fact that weapon balance is possible on other factors than simply TTK and DPS - something overlooked in this game.

 

The exact numbers are not important to me, the trends are what matters. The 10 or so weapons that spike above the power curve need mitigating factors. Flexibility, movement speed, affinity gain, reduced aiming modes etc are all viable ways to mitigate - however, those cannot be player countered easily by the in game weapon modding systems.

 

Ammo capacity, is a clear and obvious balance factor that can be countered by mods, and an already present ammo restore mechanic.

 

If you have a more parsimonious suggestion to make weapon choice about something other than DPS/TTK, I would love to hear it.

Edited March 13, 2014 by notionphil

[notionphil]

 

 Less flexibility for more powerful guns, more flexibility for less powerful guns; 

 

This is the key.

 

We can find other factors to add and reduce flexibility - however, ammo happens to be the only one that

 

1) exists in the game but is totally underused/misused (twin vipers should have 400 ammo, penta should have 40, not vice versa)

2) we already have mods to easily counteract (need buffs)

3) we have an nearly infinite gear item to counteract (need a buff)

4) doesn't affect optimum DPS/TTK or ability to engage an encounter unless you choose to mod for it. You can still perform in any single encounter as effectively; however you might not be able to use your DPS gun for every encounter.

[LukeAura]

In a game where we can buy our way through progression locks and milestones to get the rewards on the other side we definitely need some kind of skill-mitigatable limitation on upper tier weaponry. A game without a healthy progressive system does not keep as many potential players as it could. And Warframes progression is incredibly unhealthy, although a lot of things are when concerning new players and early progression.  

Because upper tier weaponry is upper tier due to its power, you can only balance so far based on dps/ttk before it falls out of the upper tier. Comfort and flexibility, range, spooling time, ammo count, accuracy, travel time, draws increased aggro. something that needs to be worked around or thought on in advance. 

The higher up in weapons one goes, the more potential for deviation and other limiters you find, the more skill and knowledge is required to use that weapon. 
You get an elemental based weapon in an rpg, usually it's pretty strong for that stage in progression, but it also has the detriment of some enemies being resistant/immune/healed by that element. You can't expect to use it without first considering what enemy you're targeting. 
 

[Volt_Cruelerz]

I think you are incorrect on this, notion.

 

Fundamentally, whether you realize it or not, you are trying to resurrect the idea of sidegrades (which, for the record, I still prefer on a theoretical level).  Let me explain.  What you are doing here is balancing weapons and treating ammo capacity like any other component of a weapon.  Thus, according to you, you are allowing a tradeoff.  The thing is though, this will inevitably lead to players gravitating towards whatever weapon is perfect for their playstyle and the given situation.  When each player gravitates towards their own preference rather than power, you have achieved sidegrades.

 

There is one fundamental problem with sidegrades: they don't produce profit.  Or at least, not as much.  In order to make an income with sidegrades, the studio would have produce a much larger volume of weapons, which naturally leads to much smaller profit margins.  As such, we're faced with a choice of optimal player experience or game survival.  Naturally, we are forced to accept the latter.  That is why in practice, I support tiered sidegrades.

 

Now, why don't I support this if I supported your prime thread previously?  That is simply because it allowed primes to function as a "pro-mode" for weaponry which is a sidegrade I support.  It in no way precluded tiering throughout the main body of weapons, only that top-tier weapons would have such alternatives, which I've been supporting forever anyways.

 

EDIT: also, this thread suffers from a case of what I call "Neon Title Syndrome"

Edited March 13, 2014 by Volt_Cruelerz

[Thundervision]

Jesus...

 

Ok then.

There's no «weak» weapon. You have guns for low-lvl, mid-lvl, high-lvl and your own customization (forms & builds) for end-game.

 

Nerf Penta, Ogris, Stug's ammo cap and buff Vipers? Yes. But... (see p.1)

Nerf other weapons? No. Why? Because it depends on play style.

 

And, ah, yes.

1. There are things more important, than crap ammo capacity. I thought It's the last thing you should care about (-_-")

2. Too much ammo? Stop wasting it at 50% and change your weapon. I don't see any troubles.

3. It's still Beta (see p.1)

 

P.s. Oh, i forgot the last thing. Not everyone a pro like you (about "experts" quote). So, please, don't speak for all.

Ok, it was rough, sorry.

Edited March 13, 2014 by Spectre-Agent

[notionphil]

I think you are incorrect on this, notion.

 

Fundamentally, whether you realize it or not, you are trying to resurrect the idea of sidegrades (which, for the record, I still prefer on a theoretical level).  Let me explain.  What you are doing here is balancing weapons and treating ammo capacity like any other component of a weapon.  Thus, according to you, you are allowing a tradeoff.  The thing is though, this will inevitably lead to players gravitating towards whatever weapon is perfect for their playstyle and the given situation.  When each player gravitates towards their own preference rather than power, you have achieved sidegrades.

 

There is one fundamental problem with sidegrades: they don't produce profit.  Or at least, not as much.  In order to make an income with sidegrades, the studio would have produce a much larger volume of weapons, which naturally leads to much smaller profit margins.  As such, we're faced with a choice of optimal player experience or game survival.  Naturally, we are forced to accept the latter.  That is why in practice, I support tiered sidegrades.

 

Now, why don't I support this if I supported your prime thread previously?  That is simply because it allowed primes to function as a "pro-mode" for weaponry which is a sidegrade I support.  It in no way precluded tiering throughout the main body of weapons, only that top-tier weapons would have such alternatives, which I've been supporting forever anyways.

 

EDIT: also, this thread suffers from a case of what I call "Neon Title Syndrome"

 

 

Thanks for the feedback!

 

I'm not opposed to tiering; in fact I welcome it.

 

I believe the Bratton should have 1200 ammo and the Supra also having 1200 ammo, bc they are both under the power curve for their particular tier.

 

I didn't want to explain this in the OP but maybe I'll put it into a spoiler. My lack of numbers, and desire to not go into too much numerical details in the OP left a large grey area for interpretation.

[Varzy]

You are able to present your argument with logic, which I welcome and helps get to any kernel of a good idea within the OP, so lets not divert into semantics.

 

I used a big number, that I feel could be a possible value, to be attention grabbing and spur discussion. To attract the debate which is needed for a variety of reasons, one being bringing visibility to the fact that weapon balance is possible on other factors than simply TTK and DPS - something overlooked in this game.

 

The exact numbers are not important to me, the trends are what matters. The 10 or so weapons that spike above the power curve need mitigating factors. Flexibility, movement speed, affinity gain, reduced aiming modes etc are all viable ways to mitigate - however, those cannot be countered easily by mods.

 

Ammo capacity, is a clear and obvious balance factor that can be countered by mods, and an already present ammo restore mechanic.

 

If you have a more parsimonious suggestion to make weapon choice about something other than DPS/TTK, I would love to hear it.

First, some weapons simply should serve as stepping stones to higher-end gear. Your Bratons, Burstons, Struns, your Sicarus' and Paris', they should be treated as early weapons players use to get a feel for different playstyles and think about what directions they like in the game, strong enough for early levels but still encouraging progression.

 

Some of the newer weapons -- Drakgoon, Phage, etc -- have been very hard hitting with their own quirks as balancing factors. Other weapons need to be elevated in terms of damage to be comparable to Boltor Prime/Soma etc at higher levels.

 

Fundementally, yes, Soma and Braton Prime can do with less ammo but not so little it runs out in a room. Dual Wrait Vipers need more ammo, as do many side arms, etc. Ammo needs to be adjusted on a gun-by-gun basis.

 

Re: flexibility, Soma and Synapse have something in common -- being crit weapons they're very mod dependent and don't have as much space for flexibility. Adding an ammo mod would shave 20-30% off it's DPS output and limit elemental combinations, but depending on the increase in ammo capacity it might be offset by sustained damage. But even approx 300 ammo is too low for these weapons. You burn through it too fast in any moderately long lv35 enemy mission. Ammo restore items restoring 100% of ammo would make this frustration meaningless, too.

 

Boltor Prime, I'll grant you, is more flexible mod-speaking, but it's still a gun whose projectiles have travel time and does actually require a degree of skill to use even mid-range. It's power comes from its firing speed so even a slight drop in ammo will force the user to be more attentive and tactical about it's use.

 

180 ammo is just... ridiculous, though. You can say you were suggesting it for the sake of discussion but in my mind it totally derailed anything else you had to say. I mean, I've read your topics and I generally like your input but this was just... what.

[Calayne]

Varzy, you focus too much on the details. The numbers are inconsequential. He could have mentioned any arbitrary number, and that is without consequence, because the big picture is all that matters. Whether it's too low, or too high, is in the end redundant. Some guns simply need to have more ammo than others.

 

As for lowering DPS for ammo... That is the whole point. You either choose ammo, or you choose damage. You can't eat your cake and still have it. Would certainly make mods' presence a little more felt, wouldn't it?

[Varzy]

Varzy, you focus too much on the details. The numbers are inconsequential. He could have mentioned any arbitrary number, and that is without consequence, because the big picture is all that matters. Whether it's too low, or too high, is in the end redundant. Some guns simply need to have more ammo than others.

 

As for lowering DPS for ammo... That is the whole point. You either choose ammo, or you choose damage. You can't eat your cake and still have it. Would certainly make mods' presence a little more felt, wouldn't it?

I've said multiple times I agree with the concept, but I'll focus on the details as much as I need to when the details offered obfuscate discussion like they have.

 

And I should have elaborated that Crit weapons, going through so many damage multipliers, are far more sensitive to base damage changes than other weapons, so the ammo advantage might not be viable regardless.

Edited March 13, 2014 by Varzy

[Archistopheles]

You guys are forgetting the technical side of things: Ask yourselves "Why are there only 4 different ammo quantities? And why are they all different types of ammo?"

 

We really need a Dev to tell us the technical limitations they are facing before we continue.

 

Examples:

 

Miter

Drakgoon

Edited March 13, 2014 by Archistopheles

[notionphil]

First, some weapons simply should serve as stepping stones to higher-end gear. Your Bratons, Burstons, Struns, your Sicarus' and Paris', they should be treated as early weapons players use to get a feel for different playstyles and think about what directions they like in the game, strong enough for early levels but still encouraging progression.

 

Some of the newer weapons -- Drakgoon, Phage, etc -- have been very hard hitting with their own quirks as balancing factors. Other weapons need to be elevated in terms of damage to be comparable to Boltor Prime/Soma etc at higher levels.

 

Fundementally, yes, Soma and Braton Prime can do with less ammo but not so little it runs out in a room. Dual Wrait Vipers need more ammo, as do many side arms, etc. Ammo needs to be adjusted on a gun-by-gun basis.

 

Re: flexibility, Soma and Synapse have something in common -- being crit weapons they're very mod dependent and don't have as much space for flexibility. Adding an ammo mod would shave 20-30% off it's DPS output and limit elemental combinations, but depending on the increase in ammo capacity it might be offset by sustained damage. But even approx 300 ammo is too low for these weapons. You burn through it too fast in any moderately long lv35 enemy mission. Ammo restore items restoring 100% of ammo would make this frustration meaningless, too.

 

Boltor Prime, I'll grant you, is more flexible mod-speaking, but it's still a gun whose projectiles have travel time and does actually require a degree of skill to use even mid-range. It's power comes from its firing speed so even a slight drop in ammo will force the user to be more attentive and tactical about it's use.

 

180 ammo is just... ridiculous, though. You can say you were suggesting it for the sake of discussion but in my mind it totally derailed anything else you had to say. I mean, I've read your topics and I generally like your input but this was just... what.

 

note - I do believe in upgrades and tiers, and have added a spoiler abt that to the OP. Weapons should be balanced per tier, not just in a vacuum. This is the 'improving' of the post that I was referring to, which happens only via feedback.

 

I love the quirks of weapons as balancing factors. I would greatly prefer that to this idea. The Phage, Castanas and Stug are pure genius and are way above their power curve YET balanced.

 

However, I doubt DE will go back and re-quirk a number of weapons, which are already a part of the ecosystem.

 

Essentially what we're doing here is adding a faux-quirk; any weapon above its power curve (for its tier) can now run out of ammo during missions (gasp!) and you will have to pop an essentially free team ammo restore, and stand by it for a few seconds before you can continue.

 

That is the price of using a weapon significantly above its power curve.

-Or you could mod it for ammo, which would make it less above its power curve for that tier.

-Or you could use it more sparingly.

 

RE: 180 ammo. As stated my numbers are flexible and should be taken as trends. My point is that it should be among the lowest ammo pools for assault rifles in the game, as it is far above the power curve for a mastery 0 weapon.