Nerf Ammo Capacity

[Calayne]

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.

 

Do as you please, really. I'll not stop you. I simply believe that debating numbers on such an ephemeral subject and nitpicking on semantics does the idea a disservice. The numbers should really only serve as an illustration, and not the meat-and-bones. DE handles that.

 

I'm glad you agree with the concept, though that has never really been in any doubt. It's simply your focus which I find somewhat odd.

 

Don't worry, though. Just a matter of perspective. Your attention to detail will certainly help, though it would probably do well to simply continue with the discussion after the OP himself declares that numbers aren't his focus. Numbers, as I said, are supposed to be an illustration.

[(PSN)supramurkat]

Another "Master" bored with "His" game.

 

No.

 

go play with a sling shot in "your' game.

[Calayne]

Another "Master" bored with "His" game.

 

No.

 

go play with a sling shot in "your' game.

 

Edited March 13, 2014 by Calayne

[LukeAura]

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.

I feel it'd only become anything close to a sidegrade once players are in to the long term levels of gameplay. 

Once you hit doing level 35+/T3 missions, when enemy levels start causing ammo efficiency and pool to count you've probably already shelled out your share, or are never going to for these weapons. 

In lower and shorter levels, where the weapons with enough dps and ammo efficiency that they need reduced ammo pools, they will never bottom out unless used unnecessarily recklessly. While weapons that still tend to net negative ammo per encounter will have more trouble regardless of level.

Just theoretically but the idea that they're now sidegrades might be moot. 

I really wish I could see the image Calayne just posted right now. 

[Volt_Cruelerz]

 

I really wish I could see the image Calayne just posted right now. 

It's batman grinning contemptuously.

Edited March 13, 2014 by Volt_Cruelerz

[Virtus_Dei_Est]

i like the idea of balance, i really do , but you have a problem here.

 

is called high level content AKA "bulletsponges"

 

i would agree on weapons like ogris, or penta, but automatics weapons will eat you ammo on high level, because the enemies STILL does not scalate properly.

 

when we have a system that awards you because you have skill (crits by hitting weak spots on enemies, headshots being really a difference, or enemies being stuned because you shoot them in the foot, i dont know, something) i will agrre to start finding balance, but the core system still lacks the complexity to start adding those.

 

and your post brings the problem with unbalanced frames also, those are by far worse than any weapon.

 

TL:DR

 

* Balance frames powers not to be 1 hit button stage erasers

*Give EVERY weapon an unique property or power trade off

*fix enemy variety and weak points, also make the procs works as they should (every proc really making a difference against enemies types)

*get rid of proc chances being driven by RNG, or at least lessen it.

 

prolly forgetting something else.

 

After all of these, balance the ammo pools, because they are not the main problem, just one more problem in the list, and not the most urgent at all.

[Calayne]

It's batman grinning contemptuously.

 

I'd call it just a smirk, really.

 

But at any rate, I think there are enough direct upgrades in the game as it is. The Prime weapons are certainly one of those, and we can still balance the damage of weapons based on their Mastery Rank requirement. If we do believe Warframe is a Beta (and no doubt, it is), we can still change these very minor details which will eventually snowball into a bigger issue if not correctly handled.

 

I was quite enamoured with his thread of dual weapons, primes, vandals and wraiths as well. It was quite inspired, and would certainly be a joy to see implemented. But of course, I hold my breath when it comes to DE actually implementing any of these. Quite sad indeed.

[notionphil]

 

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

 

Actually, there are many weapons which are significantly weaker than others, but are still harder to obtain. EX: Supra < Soma.

 

Simply saying "this gun is for high level" doesn't justify a weapons power over other guns, if you can obtain that gun at low or mid level.

 

 

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.

 

No problem about that. However it's a good point to address:

 

If you want to use a gun which is stronger than other weapons in its tier (AKA a "gun for high level" that you get at low level), then you are accepting the challenge to play like an expert. Otherwise, use a gun which is within the appropriate power for its tier. (AKA gun for mid level, that you get at mid level)

Edited March 13, 2014 by notionphil

[Calayne]

Actually, there are many weapons which are significantly weaker than others, but are still harder to obtain.

 

Simply saying "this gun is for high level" doesn't justify a weapons power over other guns...if you can obtain that gun at low or mid level.

 

 

 

No problem about that. However it's a good point to address:

 

If you want to use a gun which is stronger than other weapons in its tier (AKA a "gun for high level" that you get at low level), then you are accepting the challenge to play like an expert. Otherwise, use a gun which is within the appropriate power for its tier. (AKA gun for mid level, that you get at mid level)

 

 

I've seen many posts regarding the distribution of weapons that would certainly tie in well with this: The issue of upgrades and sidegrades have been pretty prevalent, since Mastery Rank limitations haven't really been set for each weapon based on the desired power level. 

 

When the weapons are properly distributed according to the method of obtaining it and the difficulty of the method, then we can clearly define what we wish to be sidegrades, and what we wish to be upgrades, or perhaps, even unique weapons that will always have a role to play (Such as the Tysis, or any other funky weird gun). 

[notionphil]

i like the idea of balance, i really do , but you have a problem here.

 

is called high level content AKA "bulletsponges"

 

i would agree on weapons like ogris, or penta, but automatics weapons will eat you ammo on high level, because the enemies STILL does not scalate properly.

 

when we have a system that awards you because you have skill (crits by hitting weak spots on enemies, headshots being really a difference, or enemies being stuned because you shoot them in the foot, i dont know, something) i will agrre to start finding balance, but the core system still lacks the complexity to start adding those.

 

and your post brings the problem with unbalanced frames also, those are by far worse than any weapon.

 

TL:DR

 

* Balance frames powers not to be 1 hit button stage erasers

*Give EVERY weapon an unique property or power trade off

*fix enemy variety and weak points, also make the procs works as they should (every proc really making a difference against enemies types)

*get rid of proc chances being driven by RNG, or at least lessen it.

 

prolly forgetting something else.

 

After all of these, balance the ammo pools, because they are not the main problem, just one more problem in the list, and not the most urgent at all.

 

Agreed with your TLDR. I wish all of those would happen INSTEAD of this idea - but clearly they aren't. So, now I'm suggesting other ways to balance, which are 'easier'.

 

Note I am only suggesting that weapons ABOVE the power grade for their tier get less capacity. EX: the Supra would have 1k ammo bc its mastery 6 clantech and weak for its tier. If DE releases another automatic weapon at MR10 for example, which has slightly more DPS than the Soma, it might have 600 ammo bc its higher tier - and its DPS/TTK is on target for its tier.

 

Please note that I'm also suggesting a single team ammo restore would fill you to max cap. All bulletsponge content in WF occurs in defense/survival...where you are not constantly rushing. Thus, you can find a moment to use a team restore.

Edited March 13, 2014 by notionphil

[(PSN)DanteVincent]

LOL you're outta your mind, i can see this argument regarding the penta, the ogris, maybe the stug, but that's about it.

[notionphil]

LOL you're outta your mind, i can see this argument regarding the penta, the ogris, maybe the stug, but that's about it.

 

LOL yeah its crazy to think that weapons which are really powerful for their tier might have some kinda tradeoff.

 

<<<<----This guy!

[Shehriazad]

I would agree that weapons like the Latron should get sniper Ammo...simply because they function like one.


And Boltor Prime gets half the ammo capacity of a standard rifle (260 + first clip)


P.s. I own all of the top dps weapons...and it's getting a little ridiculous.

[Virtus_Dei_Est]

Agreed with your TLDR. I wish all of those would happen INSTEAD of this idea - but clearly they aren't. So, now I'm suggesting other ways to balance, which are 'easier'.

 

Note I am only suggesting that weapons ABOVE the power grade for their tier get less capacity. EX: the Supra would have 1k ammo bc its mastery 6 clantech and weak for its tier. If DE releases another automatic weapon at MR10 for example, which has slightly more DPS than the Soma, it might have 600 ammo bc its higher tier - and its DPS/TTK is on target for its tier.

 

Please note that I'm also suggesting a single team ammo restore would fill you to max cap. All bulletsponge content in WF occurs in defense/survival...where you are not constantly rushing. Thus, you can find a moment to use a team restore.

 

i am glad we agree and can have a civil conversation even if we dont, is not usual around here.

 

i guess my point is DE should wait to cripple anything until the system is finally balanced, is not that i dont agree with your concept, is only that with the game as it is now, And knowing DE "fixes" i am afraid would be more harm than good right now.

[Calayne]

LOL yeah its crazy to think that weapons which are really powerful for their tier might have some kinda tradeoff.

 

<<<<----This guy!

 

 

You gotta admit, most of the stuff you put out are pretty dope. Like the knowledge of the Universe. Shatters the mind of mortal men, and all. 

 

The funny thing is? If this were actually implemented, everyone would find this perfectly acceptable in due time. It's just the unknown that scares those which are already quite comfortable with their 640 bullets with their Soma. Eventually, like Damage 2.0's burhuahua, it'll die down. And the change would be for the better.

[notionphil]

You gotta admit, most of the stuff you put out are pretty dope. Like the knowledge of the Universe. Shatters the mind of mortal men, and all. 

 

The funny thing is? If this were actually implemented, everyone would find this perfectly acceptable in due time. It's just the unknown that scares those which are already quite comfortable with their 640 bullets with their Soma. Eventually, like Damage 2.0's burhuahua, it'll die down. And the change would be for the better.

 

Thanks!

 

I know this solution couldn't be applied retro-actively without some other buff. People would throw a fit - this thread is exhibit A.

 

Steve mentioned a potential way to create mod slots a few livestreams back. That would be the PERFECT opportunity for a change like this - so everyone's precious Soma would actually "be getting a boost in overall ammo", bc of the new slot + mod.

 

I have all of these weapons too, most with a couple/few forma - I want to dominate my enemies too, but I also want the game to give us meaningful choices which keep us engaged - it can't do that if we're all using the same frame, weapon and build bc it's the best in every situation.

Edited March 13, 2014 by notionphil

[Calayne]

Thanks!

 

I know this solution couldn't be applied retro-actively without some other buff. People would throw a fit - this thread is exhibit A.

 

Steve mentioned a potential way to create mod slots a few livestreams back. That would be the PERFECT opportunity for a change like this - so everyone's precious Soma would actually "be getting a boost in overall ammo", bc of the new slot + mod.

 

I have all of these weapons too, most with a couple/few forma - I want to dominate my enemies too, but I also want the game to give us meaningful choices which keep us engaged - it can't do that if we're all using the same frame, weapon and build bc it's the best in every situation.

 

There'll always be an upper limit, though, and the extra slots really won't increase your damage output that much, even if it were present.

 

Cause as it is, most people just stuff the whole 8 slots with (mostly) damage mods anyways. The rest will finally be for utility, which I somewhat applaud. 

[HansJurgen]

Ammo restores would now fill you to 100% in one use. I solo all the time.

 

Choose ammo efficiency when picking your loadout.

 

 

Admittedly, I do not use ammo restore. I tried it once, it did not work. I completely forgot to follow up on it since.

 

Nevertheless, that makes the OP completely moot. What is the point of nerfing ammo, when ammo restore basically breaks that nerf.

 

Consequently, such a nerf would artificially add a gimmick mechanic that forces players to burn resources if they wish to keep using whatever weapons are ammo nerfed.

Edited March 13, 2014 by HansJurgen

[HansJurgen]

I play solo all the time and never have a problem with Boltor Prime ammo, or Strun Wraith, most shotguns in general. 

No ammo mutation either. 

I would say though, ammo drops would need to become more deterministic than they are with this idea. Risks need to be accurately calculable, no emergency I needed to spray ammo down the hall but don't get back a single piece. 

Some weapons have more ammo than they'll ever need. Some don't have enough(Afuris for example absolutely chew ammo to achieve their dps levels, and it's no way sustainable, even with mutations)

 

 

 

That is your personal experience. Maybe you have amazing mods, 6+ forma on your weapon or whatever. I run out of ammo on Boltor Prime all the time. I gave up on using it.

[notionphil]

Admittedly, I do not use ammo restore. I tried it once, it did not work. I completely forgot to follow up on it since.

 

Nevertheless, that makes the OP completely moot. What is the point of nerfing ammo, when you can use ammo restore? And, as an indirect consequence (I personally dislike), artificially add a gimmick mechanic that forces you to burn resources so you can use whatever weapons you like.

 

Ammo is also not a gimmick - it's just overlooked in this game. It's used just like this in, i dunno...1000s of other games? Ever heard of a little doozie called 'Doom' for example?

 

Why do you think rocket launchers in games typically have single digit ammo counts? To mitigate the fact that they are super-frigging-powerful, and prevent you from playing the entire game with a rocket launcher.

 

My proposal gives you a reasonable, easy to mitigate flexibility restriction on weapons that are above the damage curve for their tier.

 

Stopping for X seconds to recharge ammo, potentially in the middle of a firefight, or having to switch to your secondary or spending a mod slot on Ammo Cap are flexibility restrictions.

 

The fact that you can easily counter them is what makes them reasonable.

[LoGicMoTion]

Only penta/orgis need ammo nerf 500 rockets/grenades no

[luanle21]

ITS A PVE GAME

STOP WITH THE NERFS, THIS ISNT A PVP GAME

[notionphil]

ITS A PVE GAME

STOP WITH THE NERFS, THIS ISNT A PVP GAME

 

True, balance doesn't matter against enemies right?

 

Let's make a new rank 0 primary with a 100M AoE, 10k base damage, and see how long we keep playing for.

[RogueFit]

There can never be true balance in any game, especially in a game with micro transactions. There has to be progression and in a game like this power is progression.  More powerful the newer items from previous items, the more likely to sell. That is how this works. Selling new content and new items. If every weapon was even in power than there is no need to get new items. DE is doing just fine. Nerf nothing

[Nexus730]

Absolutely not. With weapons like the Soma, we'd run out of ammo in 10 seconds flat with it's incredible fire rate(worse if modded right) and thus render them wasteful and useless.

It's like me wanting the military to nerf the ammo capacity of this

How is it supposed to do what it's supposed to do with only a clip size of 30 instead of like 200 or something?

Also why 180 for Boltor PRIME and 700 for normal Boltor? Do you realize that Primes aren't that much better than their non-primed counterparts? I think you need to seriously rethink your proposal.

What the devil is that?!