Make Ash A Starter Frame!

[DaWolv]

Ok Internet stop screaming for a second and hear me out!

 

I had a discussion with Guild mates the other day and we discussed how to make Ash worthwile, since we all pretty much hate him. "Hate" not in the sense that he is garbage, but that he has little to no use in late game compared to other frames:

 

1) Ash has no real late game use

Ash is great for Solo play, but when you are in a group he brings little to no utility to the group. His damage can't compare to frames like Volt and Rhino, hell even Oberon and Trinity have better damage output if played right.

This is the same situation with Excalibur. He's not terrible , by any means, but he's not really viable in late game if you have other options.

 

2) Loki is also a stealth frame:

If you really want stealth (building your Frame around the idea of being invisible 24/7) then Ash can go home and cry a bit, coz Loki's got him beat easily.

 

3) Loki is considered a Frame "for advanced players"

The game even admits that in his tooltip!

Loki is great in certain situations, but he is a Frame you take for a specific role, not as a general attack-dog/defender that is needed in most game types. He is a niche Frame for a niche role - he's good at what he's build for, just what he's build for is not the majority of the game!

 

4) Loki vs. Ash as Starter Frames:

a) Loki does no real damage!

As the devs just yesterday admitted in the Livestream, the early game is really hard, since you haven't acquired the important mods yet to make your weapon hit hard enough. A strong backup ability on your Warframe is what can save you in most situations. Loki however does little to no damage. Not only is this suboptimal in early game, as stealth isn't really an option yet, but also, consider this: New players want to feel powerful to make them stick with the game!

I started as a Loki - without friends to pull me through some missions, I would've probably not played as much as I have.

 

b) Ash is visually appealing:

Not only are his moves really strong (power wise) for early game, they also look cool!

Early players won't realize he's garbage in late game and they will have more fun with him than someone that is telling himself "Just level him for the mastery and then you can finally go back to playing ...."

 

_____________

Thus I think it would make more sense to remove Loki from the Starter Frames list and include Ash.

New players will appreciate him far more than long-time players and he will be of much more use in the early game than Loki, enabling more players to progress further to the real meat of the game.

 

 

Any comments, do any of you strongly disagree?

Edited March 22, 2014 by DaWolv

[TheImmortalHotDog]

I second this idea. Loki can be considered the squishiest Warframe in the game. If you rage-quit quite often, (points to self) you're probably gonna uninstall or make another account to choose Excalibur.

[Thrymm]

I agree completely(and fair warning, last time I suggested it in a thread I got a whole earful from Ash fans feeling like calling him a starter was insulting or something).

 

Ash does pretty much exactly what a "starter" stealth frame needs.  He's got a solid health pool which is significant at the start of the learning curve, damage abilities that function very nicely at that level, and he's just plain cool to play.

[Egg_Chen]

Idea is fine, and I think yes Ash may suit starting players better, having some damage output, and being far less squishy.

 

...but you almost lost me at Excal being "not really viable late game".

Radial Blind.

 

Anyway +1

[EDeN153]

Well, I just think he needs a rework...

 

Honestly, all frames should be able to be viable late game without having to dump major amounts of forma into the frame.

[Anatolius]

Using the excuse that loki does no damage is poor evidence on your claim.

That being said, a game about ninjas should have a ninja as a starter and Loki would be an upgrade of some sort. Especially since loki is housed under one of the hardest bosses in the game right now.

Ash is more of a survivalist. MY only problem is that he is so self oriented that it can take away from the idea of team work (as his abilities help no other frame besides revival)

[SquirmyBurrito]

TL;DR- I strongly disagree with some of it.

1. I disagree with that bit about Excal, but other than that I have no big disagreements.

 

2. No disagreement.

 

3. I disagree with that bit about him not being needed in most of the game types. He can and is useful in virtually every situation.

 

4. Here is where most of my disagreement lies.

 

A) Doing no damage does not matter, being direct damage focused is actually Ash's downfall. I started with Loki and zero friends. I didn't get friends and a clan until a little before clans were added to the game. I also had the added disadvantage of having to deal with an intel integrated graphics card (so I couldn't play infested missions and get fps in the double digits). Loki forced me to rely on my weapons and learn not to take damage. That was a good thing. Ash and Excalibur (and Mag to an extent) fall into the same basic category of frames. They have direct damage abilities, are average (or slightly above) in most stats, and they play about the same (with excal being slightly more focused on large movements, and ash having a stealth lean). Replacing Loki with Ash doesn't introduce much into the starting line-up, but it takes away a great deal. If Loki is going to be replaced by any frames, it should be Banshee or Oberon. Not Ash.

 

B) That's your opinion. I never liked how Ash looked, and I always hated having to sit through a ~15 second cut scene of him stabbing people every time I used my ult. Especially when my teammates could wipe out crowds with less time and effort (crush/radial javelin). Do not bring up things that are purely a matter of opinion as reasons for why something should be changed. Is you want to claim that having direct damage can be beneficial early on, go for it. But don't claim 'he looks cool' as if everyone agrees.

 

_______________

 

Replacing Ash with Loki just introduces another Excal like frame to the line-up. Currently we have Damage-Mobility(Excal), Damage-CC(Mag), and Utility(Loki). Ash is Damage-Mobility.

Edited March 22, 2014 by SquirmyBurrito

[Paradoxbomb]

You make a compelling point, since Ash is kind of a happy medium between Excalibur's damage abilities and Loki's stealth, he probably would be the more fitting starter frame. Plus aesthetically Ash is pretty badass looking, who wouldn't want to play as that guy? (not implying that Loki doesn't look good either).

 

Then again I got along just fine with Loki, but I don't know if the player experience has gotten better or worse compared to U7 (I'm gonna guess worse though).

[Brahmastra]

Right now there are 3 modes when it comes to starter frames:

 

Easy mode: Excalibur

Normal mode: Mag
Hard mode: Loki

 

Maybe if they added some damage to Radial Disarm he would be a bit easier to use for new players.

But having to fight the hyena pack to acquire Loki is too much IMO.

[Nox-Lamina]

 

Replacing Ash with Loki just introduces another Excal like frame to the line-up. Currently we have Damage-Mobility(Excal), Damage-CC(Mag), and Utility(Loki). Ash is Damage-Mobility.

 

Pretty much. I'd support Oberon over Ash being a starter. Healing should be a greater boon to newer players than either invisibility. And Oberon has slightly more HP than Excal so there is that benefit as well.

[Edgedemon]

i'm not sure, Ash damage + utility ability set may make him a direct competition to Excalibur and would not give the chance for an early try of different game play styles depending on your first selection.

 

Also while Loki do lack direct damage skills his invisibility melee bonus make him the most powerful of the 3 starters, as such i think a FRAME SPECIFIC TUTORIAL so you can learn to use the frame that you selected  would benefit new players a lot more than this.

[Edgedemon]

Maybe if they added some damage to Radial Disarm he would be a bit easier to use for new players.

 

that would break his utility sense how about a stun or better yet a knockdown its supposed to be a shock wave isn't it

 

 

But having to fight the hyena pack to acquire Loki is too much IMO.

 

by the time you get to hyena pack they're not that much, they're almost at the farthest planet, a good shotgun can kill one hyena  with  a single clip, so just take any frame with a single stun and they are done for.

 

edit:

actually that the starting frames are so far away in the system makes sense to me. Loki is a good frame and you didn't choose it it seems fair that you have to put some effort if you want it now. 

Edited March 22, 2014 by Edgedemon

[Seanjuju]

Seconded.

[Brahmastra]

by the time you get to hyena pack they're not that much, they're almost at the farthest planet, a good shotgun can kill one hyena  with  a single clip, so just take any frame with a single stun and they are done for.

 

Not sure if we are fighting the same hyena pack...

[Edgedemon]

Not sure if we are fighting the same hyena pack...

 

i soloed them 10+ times because they only gave the dang helm, and my brother had the loki so he didn't wanna help me

[AndThnWhaHappnd]

All frames should be viable - from the start on. I started Loki and in my opinion he still holds the top frame spot, whether I like it or not. I don't run him as often (I like to run all of the frames and mess with builds a bit), but most of the opinions I read about Loki and Ash seem to come from Tenno that favor "instant AoE damage" and "record time runs" over any kind of stratagy(=ninja) or exploration(=secrets?). Adding to the starter frame lineup would be a backstep I think because the "new Tenno" title wears off too quickly to trash any one frame that way. My Ash actually does very well on most Survival runs, especially if they only last 30 mins or so. So to me it's clear he just needs the same sort of makover every other frame has been getting, and just hasn't recieved it yet. With an updated 4th, and perhaps some slightly adjusted cosmetics, I wouldn't be surprised if he fell into his rightful spot at or near the top. Hopefully this happens soon, with all the Melee 2.0 hype, an Ash update would seemingly be a plausable inclusion as his 4th = Melee. Fingers crossed....either way, both Loki and Ash are still just as much team assets as they are solo runners. 

[Monolake]

Loki should be replaced as a starter, been discussed many times already. Squishy frame that needs mods and skills which the new players lack, has no damage abilities that new player need to compensate for their weak unmoded guns.

Ash could be a good replacement.

 

Also OP doesnt know how to play the frames, but thats irrelevant to the subject.

Edited March 22, 2014 by Monolake

[Jin_Kazama]

I agree with the OP.

Loki only becomes really good once hes got some good mods in him, and hes a stealth frame, thats only does a significant amount more damage when stealthed.

New players need to kill people at the beginning of the game in order to get mods, its better if they had Ash, who has the slight stealth element, and still comes up for it with damage.

 

[SlapClown]

I like it that ash is has a higher skill lv than Loki .But putting him as a stater is not good .. 

[HazaRD-WARRIOR]

I disagree completely.

 

1) smoke screen vs invisibility-

How on Earth is Invisibility better? They are balanced respectively.

 

Invisibility- last twice as long, however, it does not stun anyone or interrupt attacks, enemies keep firing at spot you did it as well, your hearing is impaired making your understanding of surroundings more difficult (say 1 or a couple Napalms and the sort firing in your direction??). AoE still gets you in both Smoke Screen and Invisibility, and although Invisibility lasts twice as long, Loki is twice as easy to kill off.

 

Smoke Screen- last shorter, though stuns and interrupts. People keep complaining he has no CC, but they don't realise how many times I have saved them by interrupting attacks (Ancients charging, grineer bosses slamming the ground, grineer bosees firing and especially the ones with the rapid fire -Grataka is it?- which by the time they get out of the stun and start firing again to even hope to get to full rapid fire we have obliterated them all. (As of today my Smoke Screen lasts even shorter, from 18 seconds 12? If this is not a bug then it looks like they are deliberately screwing with Ash. He was balanced vs Loki invisibility, now he still has the stun over him but at this length it is a little ridiculous.... Still effective though).

 

2) Blade Storm vs Disarm. How on Earth is Blade Storm useless? Even in late game? Seriously? So 2000 damage (that goes through anything) on every enemy in the area is useless? Especially when EVERYONE is having a hard time killing enemies off at this point? On the contrary if it doesnt get kills it pretty much weakens the entire opposition so your team has it off better. How is that a problem? You aren't getting any kills with Loki either. Drawback of Bladestorm, it sucks on defence missions in a tight moment, but that all depends on who your friends are as well. The point to it most times is also to start attacking enemies groups at a distance to weaken them before they come close. Hence its long aiming range and attacking range as well. Sure it has its drawbacks, but disarm doesnt? Disarm is completely useless against an entire faction, Infested! And all enemies with mounted weapons.

 

Learn to play with Ash people. Simple.

 

Decoy is indeed better than shurikens, especially at late level, and that is the only skill that truly makes Loki feel like true utility over Ash. Shurikens late level is just a waste of energy, I simply dont equip it. You are all telling me that there isnt at least 1 skill on each frame you don't equip? lol.

 

Ash is definitely the more offensive player and better at survivability, Loki is more utility, Ash is not meant to wipe enemies out with single massive skills, and that is why he is more tankable than warframes that actually do that much damage. Smoke screen and invisibility are both useless for defence in late levels, half the missions end up having a million and one explosions around you. However, Smoke Screen stuns everyone around you and gives you a chance to strike criticals as you change location and get out of danger. Loki doesn't stop anything. He can be simply killed while he is trying to go invisible. There are ways around it sure (decoy, then invisibility, perhaps even disarm) hence a frame that needs more energy as well. What do you do in the cases the enemy depletes your energy to zero? With Loki, nothing, just die out.

 

Personally, I love both. I enjoy Ash more, in a hard situation the smoke screen really helps more than anything, as does bladestorm to recharge shields and like I said weaken everyone. Teleport is also something I use with Ash to quickly get around, Loki can only use it to place strategic attacks on enemies, much harder to use because the speed and conditions, as well as team coordination, don't allow for it to be that useful.

 

The real question is, why is LOKI a starter frame? Not if Ash should be. Both should not be starter frames. Top of my head, Im thinking Nyx would better fit the spot, or someone else. Even frost. Or Trinity. Extreme choices? I think not. The idea of the game at start should be to give options between balanced, damage, and support. Loki is support/utility, but he is too advanced for beginners to play with.

 

As for people complaining about Ash being worthless late game.... lol.... Seriously? Before today (again, I'm thinking my game bugged out? Somebody tell me if they reduced Smoke Screen duration) with smoke screen I would tare new holes into everything against us with my melee criticals, as well as stun entire hordes of enemies. I don't think my team-mates mind it when I stun all the shield-holding Grineer in the vicinity making them easy prey. Even with reduced smoke screen duration I kicked &#! today. Actually, I could now stun more often!

 

Both frames are good, but in the end Ash is an off-stealth, same way Oberon is off-healer (if one may call it that). We have like 20 warframes in the game, Ash is the perfect pick for those that like aggressive stealth and not by a long-shot useless. I actually die less with Ash in really hard late game conditions than I do with Loki, and always get more kills than Loki as well. Not as much as other warframes, but thats the point, he isnt meant to deal the same amount of damage, otherwise he'd be more squishy as well. And before anyone jumps to conclusions that I don't know how to play with Loki that good.... No, I do. Like I said I love both of them.

 

I'm starting to wonder if people actually know how to play Ash, not Loki. They all go in expecting to do what exactly? Wreck havoc? lol.

 

On a balanced on average round, no matter if it is early or late game, if Loki gets 100 kills and damage-heavy frames get 300 kills, Ash will be on the 200 mark. He is were he is meant to be. Stock up in the right weapons and use him right, and he is exactly as good as he is meant to be.

 

p.s. I was so angry today that they reduced (again, unless I am bugged out) the Smoke Screen duration.... But now that I think of it, I use the stun of it as much as the invisibility of it, so maybe this is a good thing. In the end I done way more interrupts than usual today. And that is the point people are missing out on Ash. Throw some mods on him to increase range on skills, and watch how far away he stuns enemies ;) Till now I have also being using energy siphon, Flow, streamline, along with range modifiers. Basically I am smoke screening and bladestorming when need be like hell and all the time. After recent changes I might think of increasing damage outputs on bladestorm. Again, it is useless in some situations, but in other occasions it can mean the difference between winning and losing simply by weakening everyone. Disarm is useless in many occasions too. Expecting more from an off-stealth frame is wrong and really, how many times am I going to hear this same argument before players start getting the point to Ash?

[SlapClown]

HAZARD-WARRIOR  +1  . 

[DaWolv]

The real question is, why is LOKI a starter frame? Not if Ash should be.

 

Yes, you are right, that is the better question.

Though to be fair I don't think Nyx and Trinity are so great choices for that.

Healing Warframes in general are rare to come by! I would not give early players healing abilities, as they should learn how to stay alive by acting proactively. So Oberon, Trinity, (Nekros and Nyx) are out in my books.

[EDIT: Yes I know Nyx isn't a "healing frame" but she can heal by proxy and do great support. That said, she is far to advanced for early play and she is a frame very suited for endgame - thus she's a great goal to set if people want to acquire her]

 

Ash is the most like Loki, has Damage abilities and is a lot more balanced than Loki is.

 

The point of this Thread isn't to pick the one that is objectively "worse" (as if thats even possible to decide) and make him the starter frame.

All I'm saying is that, considering that new players that choose Loki are in a huge dissadvantage early on because they have no real damage output. Sure with Max Duration mods and a powerful mellee weapon Loki shreds everything but:

1) A new player probably doesn't know about the damage bonus to mellee while invisible!

2) A new player most assuredly does not have any mods that make Lokis powers better. Same goes for the weapons.

3) With the low basic defense stats, new players (that do not have maxed out Vitalities and Redirections) are dead quicker.

 

All things considered, Ash seems the best replacement for Loki.

 

And those who want to get into the bosses:

Does it make sense that the most-picked starter Warframe is dropped by the highest level boss in the game, while the first boss (in correct play-order on the starchart) that drops a Warframe drops one that cannot be equipped with a Mastery Rank below 2?

Edited March 22, 2014 by DaWolv

[HazaRD-WARRIOR]

 

All things considered, Ash seems the best replacement for Loki.

 

 

Yes, if we are comparing it in that way you are right. Of the two, Ash being an off-stealth simply means that he has that extra edge for starters that Loki does not. The problem is that he counters Excalibur after that, he is much stronger and makes the existance of Excalibur pointless. Not to mention that the diversity between the starter warframes chosen in this way will be much smaller.

 

Again I think that the logical way to go about it is a choice between balanced, damage, support or tank. Loki is support but kinda hard/advanced for new players. Ash is, well, he is kinda tankable with his smoke screen, but it also makes him (like Loki) very strong. Within a short time he will be too strong for a beginner whilst his support is only the stun so he is a semi support, a little tankable at low levels, and good at damage, hence kinda a balanced warframe as well.

 

Personally, if I was making the game, I would have made Rhino a starter warframe and reduced his "tank" outputs. That ofcourse would ruin Rhino as he is (which is again wrong) so that is why I went to Frost or Oberon. Perhaps overpowered? Ok, then what about Valkyr? She offers for a utility like warframe with some support, and not too strong? Im just saying with regards to the other starter players, both Ash and Loki feel wrong.

[Seasonsofclarity]

Already beat this to a pulp the last time it was suggested.

 

Loki is indirect/support (one distract, one stealth, two support).

Ash is direct/assault (two damage, one stealth, one mobility).

 

You can't replace one with the other when talking about the choice of starter frames.

 

The only viable replacer is for Excalibur, and that isn't a good idea either.

Excalibur is direct/assault (two damage, one support, one mobility).

[.Talia.]

Ash is better suited to be a starter than Loki. Ash is a soloer. 

 

Loki is for advanced players. Newbies have a hard time playing with Loki and end up having the wrong impression that Loki is a bad warframe.

Edited March 23, 2014 by RexSol