Dark Sectors Pvp - A Sane Perspective

[Volt_Cruelerz]

At first glance, it looks that way, but nope. Any time you're playing against something, it's a lot easier to find glaring imbalances (whether perceived or actual). Then the complaining starts. Then the balancing-for-PvP starts. It doesn't matter if it's not supposed to be balanced.

 

The fact that players are controlling proxy frames instead of their normal frames won't keep this from happening.

If the whole premise is actual Tenno attack proxies, I really don't see that happening.  Will some abilities be exceptionally powerful in this game mode?  Of course.  But if that's the case, give the proxies some answer to that, don't nerf the Tenno unless that ability causes problems in PVE too.

Edited April 15, 2014 by Volt_Cruelerz

[notionphil]

 

Find a good way to make what you spent the past couple hundred hours on when playing the proxy and I'll love this system.  Players just need to feel that all that time before was well spent and that it led them to PVProxy.  They need to feel that they can now use what they've found/learned/built.

 

This is the key. The urge to 'catch em all' + the desire to be the most uber 'warrior god' is the answer.

 

Also, remember your weapon collection is still transferable to your Proxy. Sure, your Boltor Prime won't be quite as uber with the Proxy Mods, but it's still a Boltor Prime that your warrior god earned. EG:The grind is semi-transferable.

 

The PvProxy goal is to reward one's distinct and separate 'warrior god' without giving that 'warrior' an advantage over people who don't PvProxy. To that end, lotus tokens should also be obtainable in other systems besides PvProxy.

 

The Lotus Token metagame is a starting point for that. My overall vision is very visible power/weapn customizations with very minor stat alterations.

 

Ex: Your Zephyr can use Lightning Storm instead of Tornado. Same damage, duration and effect, but deals only elec damage and looks like stacks of rolling thunder. 500K lotus tokens

 

Ex: change base damage on your Bronco Prime to Fire for 1M Lotus Tokens.

Edited April 15, 2014 by notionphil

[DocHolliday13]

If the whole premise is actual Tenno attack proxies, I really don't see that happening.  Will some abilities be exceptionally powerful in this game mode?  Of course.  But if that's the case, give the proxies some answer to that, don't nerf the Tenno unless that ability causes problems in PVE too.

 

Have you seen some of the Trinity builds that players do? There's no PvP answer for them. None. With the right build, Trin can keep the entire team immune to damage indefinitely.

 

That's just one example.

 

It doesn't matter when everyone's playing on the same team. The second you introduce PvP, it matters a great deal. And unlike conclaves, they can't just change the abilities just for this content, because it's not PvP content. It's PvE content.

[notionphil]

And who would want to play for the gimped side? 

There would be nothing but outcry for balance. 

 

I didn't make that clear in the OP, my apologies.

 

You're not expecting to win as a proxy. If you can actually defeat the Tenno invasion that would be a massive achievement. That's why balance isn't much of an issue here.

 

You are playing to make it harder for the Tenno to quickly do runs on your tower. We can assume you are also attacking the opposing rail. So you'd play both sides.

 

It's like playing a roguelike. You are supposed to die - winning is basically holding the enemy back long as you can.

 

The more tenno you kill over time, the stronger your alliance defenses will grow, and the harder your tower will be to attack in the future. Also, the more personal cosmetic tweaks/small customizations you'd unlock.

[notionphil]

Have you seen some of the Trinity builds that players do? There's no PvP answer for them. None. With the right build, Trin can keep the entire team immune to damage indefinitely.

 

1) Orokin Ring: dispels existing Tenno abilities/AoEs when cast (they can be recast)

 

2) Orokin Crook: insta-target 5M AoE (with 1.5 sec ground marker warning) that drains a Tenno's energy.

 

3) Shoot

 

As I clarified in the prior post, it's not supposed to be balanced.

 

That's why Proxies have unlimited respawns and the Tenno has 4. Your goal is to hold them off as long as possible, and make them wish they never set foot in your tower. For that, you will be rewarded with personal and alliance goodies.

 

If you can defeat them outright, you deserve major, major kudos.

Edited April 15, 2014 by notionphil

[Aksyl]

I think the the dark sectors need to have a much larger scale and encourage cooperation between alliances to reach an endgame goal. Challenging another clan's or alliance's rail should be an option, and work much the way it does now, if not the way the OP described it, but I feel like there's too much focus on this currently.

 

I'll repost my idea from another thread in which I described what I thought dark sectors were going to be:

A new system with a reusable key (similar to the dojo key), would open up to high level clans/players.

 

This system would include:

A new tileset, maybe something akin to Xen from Half-Life providing a decent test of one's agility (As implied by that crazy hologram in the orokin lab).

 

Dynamically interconnected nodes: when two nodes are within a certain distance they can be connected, the only exceptions being that two rails can't intersect, and each node can only have one rail tax it.

 

Players can choose which path to take through the nodes. The further from the origin they travel, the harder the missions becomes. Your clan/alliance must have beaten a node to create a rail from it.

 

Challenging another clan's claim on a node works much the same as it does here, but is less based on opportunism and the added chore of clicking buttons more than the other guy. More, the people who actually use the node choose which they prefer to use more.

 

A "seasonal" repeated event sweeps through the dark sectors, say, every two months. Without heavy Tenno cooperation, many solar rails can be lost, pushing back progress towards the endgame.

 

If rails become disconnected from the network by an intermediary severance, they begin to rapidly decay.

[Volt_Cruelerz]

I have yet to run out of things to do, I help out in my clan a lot and when Earth had the hell that was Interception I helped out many new players there. I've ran early missions to help out too. I've found it very rewarding to help somebody through something they may consider hard, then offer out a clan invite if they like (note I do not promote my clan when helping them, I do it afterwards so they can get more help faster and enjoy the game)

 

 

 

 

Ultimately everything in a game is consumable content. What we need is enjoyable, perhaps re-playable content.

 

 

 

 

Have not grinded for the Prosecutors or the keys (although I have found fighting them and Vay Hek extremely fun). They are getting better with the content, I am absolutely loving melee 2.0 (the guys in my clan simply know that one dot in the middle of the enemy army is me, having my own party).

 

I'm vastly looking forward to Focus and the quest system. Whether they put in keygrinds or not doesn't matter too much to me, however it will of course matter to many other people. Maybe they'll get better with grinding? Who knows. I've played RO and FFF, so grinding is not unknown to me. I tend to enjoy each run (start run, put on music, go nuts), whatever reward I get at the end.

You sound like a pleasant player to play alongside, but consumable content spam (which is what DE is doing) forces the devs into creating skinner box after skinner box.  That's just not as satisfying over the long haul.

 

Don't get me wrong.  I want quests and Focus.  I think Focus will be really cool.  It's just that it'll be consumable.  People won't play it for its own sake.  We've got too many skinner boxes in this game.  We need to get away from that for a more satisfying experience.

 

This is the key. The urge to 'catch em all' + the desire to be the most uber 'warrior god' is the answer.

 

The PvProxy needs to reward the 'warrior god' without giving it an advantage over people who don't PvProxy. To that end, lotus tokens should also be obtainable in other systems besides PvProxy.

 

The Lotus Token metagame is a starting point for that. My overall vision is very visible power/weapn customizations with very minor stat alterations.

 

Ex: Your Zephyr can use Lightning Storm instead of Tornado. Same damage, duration and effect, but deals only elec damage and looks like stacks of rolling thunder. 500K lotus tokens

 

Ex: change base damage on your Bronco Prime to Fire for 1M Lotus Tokens.

I think you missed my point.  If I grind for a hundred hours to get the loadout of Boltor Prime, Marelok, Rhino Vanguard Prime, Dual Ichors, Carrier, Stinger, do you think I'm going to want to give up all that to play a dumbed down enemy that I could have played as without spending that hundred hours?  Unless your progression in the main game matters when you play as a proxy, no one will want to be a proxy.  It won't be fun.  Endgame is when players play content for its own sake, not to get a specific reward.  Your lotus tokens just turn DS into another skinner box.

[DocHolliday13]

1) Orokin Ring: dispels existing Tenno abilities/AoEs when cast (they can be recast)

 

2) Orokin Crook: insta-target 5M AoE (with 1.5 sec ground marker warning) that drains a Tenno's energy.

 

3) Shoot

 

As I clarified in the prior post, it's not supposed to be balanced.

 

That's why Proxies have unlimited respawns and the Tenno has 4. Your goal is to hold them off as long as possible, and make them wish they never set foot in your tower. For that, you will be rewarded with personal and alliance goodies.

 

If you can defeat them outright, you deserve major, major kudos.

 

And then the players actually playing Tenno will complain, because, like I just said, it's PvE content. The game is about PvE. The players here are playing for PvE. The people actually providing the finances for DE to keep this going, are doing it for PvE. They don't want to have to deal with PvP content to acquire anything, even if it's just cosmetic fluff.

 

And again, as I tried to get across earlier, this entire thread is moot because the issue of longevity is a non-issue. It's not a problem that needs solving. The current system may not be perfect (far from it, I'll agree) but it is keeping players around. I've got nearly 600 hours invested over about a year, and I'm nowhere near done accomplishing what I want. According to Raptr, I'd need to play about 3,000 more hours to be the #1 ranked WarFrame player on their system. I run into players all the time that have a higher mastery rank and more stuff than I do. That should tell you all you need to know about the longevity of this game. Sure, it's not something that appeals to everyone. But then, nothing is. For every player currently playing this game who wants PvP in any format, there's probably at least a hundred who would quit if they made PvP mandatory for any reward of any kind, or if PvP was allowed to influence the game overall in any way. That's what happens when you market your game towards PvE players.

Edited April 15, 2014 by DocHolliday13

[notionphil]

I think you missed my point.  If I grind for a hundred hours to get the loadout of Boltor Prime, Marelok, Rhino Vanguard Prime, Dual Ichors, Carrier, Stinger, do you think I'm going to want to give up all that to play a dumbed down enemy that I could have played as without spending that hundred hours?  Unless your progression in the main game matters when you play as a proxy, no one will want to be a proxy.  It won't be fun.  Endgame is when players play content for its own sake, not to get a specific reward.  Your lotus tokens just turn DS into another skinner box.

 

Sorry, just edited my prior reply to clarify. Yes, that is critical, of course.

 

Yes, you get to keep your weapons when you play as a proxy. You cannot however use your normal mods on them, so DE can set the damage as they feel appropriate for each weapon's proxy version.

 

You can't keep your frame but we can easily remedy that with Warframe Auras (ex: Saryn's Aura) which replicates some of the unique powers of each frame once enough mastery/focus/forma/have been used on that Frame. Some = alot, like multiple forma.

 

EX:

 

Rhino Aura - no stat bonuses (tradeoff compared to the standard auras) but allows you to select Proto Iron Skin and Proto Stomp among your abilities.

[Volt_Cruelerz]

And then the players actually playing Tenno will complain, because, like I just said, it's PvE content. The game is about PvE. The players here are playing for PvE. The people actually providing the finances for DE to keep this going, are doing it for PvE. They don't want to have to deal with PvP content to acquire anything, even if it's just cosmetic fluff.

 

And again, as I tried to get across earlier, this entire thread is moot because the issue of longevity is a non-issue. It's not a problem that needs solving. The current system may not be perfect (far from it, I'll agree) but it is keeping players around. I've got nearly 600 hours invested over about a year, and I'm nowhere near done accomplishing what I want. According to Raptr, I'd need to play about 3,000 more hours to be the #1 ranked WarFrame player on their system. I run into players all the time that have a higher mastery rank and more stuff than I do. That should tell you all you need to know about the longevity of this game. Sure, it's not something that appeals to everyone. But then, nothing is. For every player currently playing this game who wants PvP in any format, there's probably at least a hundred who would quit if they made PvP mandatory for any reward of any kind, or if PvP was allowed to influence the game overall in any way. That's what happens when you market your game towards PvE players.

what's wrong with trying to add content that isn't just a Skinner box?

[notionphil]

And then the players actually playing Tenno will complain, because, like I just said, it's PvE content. The game is about PvE. The players here are playing for PvE. The people actually providing the finances for DE to keep this going, are doing it for PvE. They don't want to have to deal with PvP content to acquire anything, even if it's just cosmetic fluff.

 

And again, as I tried to get across earlier, this entire thread is moot because the issue of longevity is a non-issue. It's not a problem that needs solving. The current system may not be perfect (far from it, I'll agree) but it is keeping players around. I've got nearly 600 hours invested over about a year, and I'm nowhere near done accomplishing what I want. According to Raptr, I'd need to play about 3,000 more hours to be the #1 ranked WarFrame player on their system. I run into players all the time that have a higher mastery rank and more stuff than I do. That should tell you all you need to know about the longevity of this game. Sure, it's not something that appeals to everyone. But then, nothing is. For every player currently playing this game who wants PvP in any format, there's probably at least a hundred who would quit if they made PvP mandatory for any reward of any kind, or if PvP was allowed to influence the game overall in any way. That's what happens when you market your game towards PvE players.

 

I'm pretty sure you can't tell why everyone is paying.

 

I'm a player here, and I'm paying because, and literally only because, I want to see WF succeed. I don't even use plat except for reactors. I have a pretty solid pile sitting around and still buy more whenever I get a deal.

 

I haven't plat bought a frame since my 1st about a year ago, and never bought a weapon.

 

I was as opposed to PvP as many in this thread are. However, I'm even more opposed to the game trickling out fire-and-forget consumable content. That's why I'm making this post.

 

RE: pvp only rewards - agreed. as I've already said in this thread - I'm not a PvP hound, so I have no issue with all of the rewards being obtainable via other means. Don't like the missions, don't run them and get the rewards elsewhere.

 

RE: anecdotal evidence - The entire top 10,000 players are less than 1% percent of the 8M players who have signed up.

 

I'm glad you aren't burned out. Some clearly are.

Edited April 15, 2014 by notionphil

[Volt_Cruelerz]

Sorry, just edited my prior reply to clarify. Yes, that is critical, of course.

 

Yes, you get to keep your weapons when you play as a proxy. You cannot however use your normal mods on them, so DE can set the damage as they feel appropriate for each weapon's proxy version.

 

You can't keep your frame but we can easily remedy that with Warframe Auras (ex: Saryn's Aura) which replicates some of the unique powers of each frame once enough mastery/focus/forma/have been used on that Frame. Some = alot, like multiple forma.

 

EX:

 

Rhino Aura - no stat bonuses (tradeoff compared to the standard auras) but allows you to select Proto Iron Skin and Proto Stomp among your abilities.

even if you keep your gear, you don't get to keep your power level.

[notionphil]

even if you keep your gear, you don't get to keep your power level.

 

this is true, and the only way to see how well it still motivates players would be to put a minimum viable product in action.

 

thankfully, that would be easy - let alliance players control spectres, and give them rare mats when they kill tenno. that will test the basic mechanics.

[DocHolliday13]

what's wrong with trying to add content that isn't just a Skinner box?

 

Nothing. There's lots of ways to add content that isn't just a Skinner box. There's also nothing "wrong" with adding PvP to the game. It's just a big mistake that will cost them a lot of players and a lot of money.

 

I'm pretty sure you can't tell why everyone is paying.

 

 

Everyone, no. The majority, easily.

 

As for getting burned out, you clearly still don't get it. Players will get burned out - regardless of what they add. Nothing they can do will stop that from happening. Some players get more longevity out of PvP. Some get more longevity out of PvE. This game is marketed towards the latter, simple as that.

 

I get it that there's some elements in this game that are very attractive to players who prefer PvP, but aren't available in any PvP game. Guess what: there's lots of things I've found that I've liked in PvP-only games that aren't available in any PvE games, as I wish they were. But that's just how it works. You take what you can get.

 

This thread is nothing more than selfishness on your part. You're trying to get them to invest major resources into a massive change, that only yourself and a very small minority of the community has any interest in at all, while the overwhelming majority not only don't want it; we're actively opposed to it. We can only hope DE is smart enough to realize this.

[LukeAura]

I'm not sure it will attract players no matter how carefully imbalanced you make proxies. I think if you really want to go this path Volt hit on the right idea when he said "We come here to be warrior gods."

By flipping it, we are currently warriors with the strength of gods. But in terms of resiliency, we're quite mortal. We need the durability of gods to fight warriors with the damaging powers of gods.

It'd probably be easier and more attractive just to give players an 'Orokin shield generator' powered by the massive tower core that could turn the 2 shot kill, 10-30k dps, weapons we have in to something that resembles a balanced metagame by giving us 10k+ shields. And then you can let players modify their Orokin Shield Pack with auras and effects earned through the lotus token system that enhances and provide unique bonuses to create skillful counterplay to whatever abilities are still allowed to exist in the PvP matches.

Edited April 15, 2014 by LukeAura

[gell]

I absolutely love asymmetrical PVP, but I am not sure I like this idea (I've read the whole thread, so I am aware of additional clarifications).

 

The mode seems like a lot more work for DE (really, proxy frames with special slots and balances?), which is why it's currently in its brand new state, while using old game modes. The PvE aspect allows a war to be waged regardless of fluctuating numbers of players on at different times, and if you didn't notice, DE wants the Solar Rail conflicts to end. They put a timer on it, and if that timer expires without one side's "health" depleted, DE still calculates the winner based on performance. They need playable missions to keep the bars moving so the conflict may end (so we can get the boosts from that rail).

 

I believe DE's intention here is not actually tons of playable content, but actually a higher level numbers/political game. Sure, right now the alliances are offering 0% fees for helping them, but if EVE online is anything to go by, and by golly it should be for what that game is about, those 0% fees are going to change. The system can't sustain itself with alliances offering no fees. What DE needs to offer is some unique content to the rails, and give players a reason to go there beyond increased resources. Unique items, resources, etc, to make players want to go there more, and the system will regulate itself.

 

You kept bringing up Prosecutors and Hek as if they are not adding to the game. Of course they aren't end game content, but they definitely add a new tactical element to the game when all your ranged weapons do no damage to them and their nearby allies. I would argue they are the biggest change to any enemy type in the game, and they are polished already (I haven't run into bugs, but we can assume any bugs will be fixed). They actually shift how the player plays, unlike fire leaders, or any of the other new types of enemies. DE did ship proper content with the Prosecutors. They are probably a bit too OP if you didn't equip the element type they are weak to, but they were a great addition. They aren't a systemic change (although they really do change tactics), but they can't really be an example of DE doing something wrong for WF.

 

So where does that leave your idea? Like I said, I love asymmetrical PvP. I clocked nearly 1000 hours in Left 4 Dead multiplayer and while it's not asymmetrical, over 2500 in TF2. I love PvP. And your idea isn't a bad idea as a general idea; it sounds fun. It just doesn't seem to fit what you or DE are going for, which is to create systemic replay. I think it creates an entirely new game, which to me, does not fit creating systemic replay in an existing game.

 

Setting up a tower defense type of map as defenders would be interesting. Every fight, win or lose, could add some currency to the defender's pool. It would be PvE, although it could allow for some PvP by allowing players to join in the defending side if the defenders have stations built to allow it (it would take from their existing resources to allow a real player to join in in place of a specter, for example). Like your idea, the defense could be designed to lose, at first. But as they are attacked, their resources for rebuilding are increased (let's say they gather the debris from every downed invader as extra resources, whatever). Basically, I think your PvP idea could be a PvE idea, and it would allow DE much less work to implement it, while giving players something unique to play in solar rails. The Tower is born, it is reinforced, and it is attacked by players. Rather than disconnected missions like survival or defense (why am I playing Defense against Infested on this solar rail?), Specters and hired Corpus/Grineer may defend. Power up those Specters with custom stuff maybe. But that would still be much less work than making PvP work with it all. OP or UP AI is much more forgivable than OP/UP PvP. And we know DE isn't going to balance PvP right, so why suggest it?

 

TL;DR I actually turned your idea into PvE and I think it works better and is much less work for DE.

[Monolake]

I didn't make that clear in the OP, my apologies.

 

You're not expecting to win as a proxy. If you can actually defeat the Tenno invasion that would be a massive achievement. That's why balance isn't much of an issue here.

 

You are playing to make it harder for the Tenno to quickly do runs on your tower. We can assume you are also attacking the opposing rail. So you'd play both sides.

 

It's like playing a roguelike. You are supposed to die - winning is basically holding the enemy back long as you can.

 

The more tenno you kill over time, the stronger your alliance defenses will grow, and the harder your tower will be to attack in the future. Also, the more personal cosmetic tweaks/small customizations you'd unlock.

 

I don't see people wanting to play a rigged pvp with almost no chance to win. And spot on by Volt_Cruelerz "pitting glass cannons against each other" is one of the problem of WF pvp. Because the weapons are made to do excessive damage to kill hordes of high HP enemies they kill other tenno in half a second.  It'd be like playing a roguelike where you are guaranteed to die when the very first monster sees you.

 

Then there is respawn problem, if you give defenders respawns and half a chance to kill invaders this makes it unfair for invaders, who have to use revives. Or you need to make full-blown pvp mode with respawns for all. Then it becomes what, Smite? or DotRa - Defence of the Rail.

Really, you'd need to totally rebalance the game for pvp to be viable.

 

 And of course the server problem. can 4x4 be run at all with current system?

[notionphil]

This thread is nothing more than selfishness on your part. You're trying to get them to invest major resources into a massive change, that only yourself and a very small minority of the community has any interest in at all, while the overwhelming majority not only don't want it; we're actively opposed to it. We can only hope DE is smart enough to realize this.

You have zero idea how wrong your assumptions are.

I strongly prefer PvE, and would go as far as saying I don't even play pvp only games. However as i stated, I do see WF faltering in its approach towards systemic engaging content and am suggesting an alternate route.

I can list 20 PvE solutions I would prefer to this. Yet DE seems to place them on the back burner(or ignore them) in favor abstracted clan v clan. Fine. At least let us get some actual gameplay engagement from the clan v clan starmap intrigue.

This thread is not about the best way to create engaging content. I agree, in WF it's PvE. I've suggested enough of that for the time being.

It's about the best way to make indirect pvp. If you don't want to discuss that I'm not going to keep replying to you.

[notionphil]

I don't see people wanting to play a rigged pvp with almost no chance to win. And spot on by Volt_Cruelerz "pitting glass cannons against each other" is one of the problem of WF pvp. Because the weapons are made to do excessive damage to kill hordes of high HP enemies they kill other tenno in half a second. It'd be like playing a roguelike where you are guaranteed to die when the very first monster sees you.

Then there is respawn problem, if you give defenders respawns and half a chance to kill invaders this makes it unfair for invaders, who have to use revives. Or you need to make full-blown pvp mode with respawns for all. Then it becomes what, Smite? or DotRa - Defence of the Rail.

Really, you'd need to totally rebalance the game for pvp to be viable.

And of course the server problem. can 4x4 be run at all with current system?

Everyone is overlooking the real reason ppl will use proxies. Glory and clan bragging rights.

Proxies are the tool of Alliance defenders. They build Lotus Tokens for the clan. That alone will justify their use (in addition to an arguably engaging game mode)

Do you see alliances spending millions of credits to 'occupy' a node with no benefits and all costs? Only to have a near guarantee it will constantly be challenged? Why do they do that? Glory and clan bragging rights.

If you don't care to defend or be in an alliance, you get to fight against engaging, clever enemies alongside their AI allies.

Oh and proxies are not glass cannons. They will have more HP than Tenno and much less offense.

Edited April 15, 2014 by notionphil

[DocHolliday13]

 

TL;DR I actually turned your idea into PvE and I think it works better and is much less work for DE.

 

Yeah, that's a much better idea. Well-written too.

 

Also, this: "Unique items, resources, etc, to make players want to go there more, and the system will regulate itself."

Edited April 15, 2014 by DocHolliday13

[notionphil]

Yeah, that's a much better idea. Well-written too.

 

Also, this: "Unique items, resources, etc, to make players want to go there more, and the system will regulate itself."

I absolutely love asymmetrical PVP, but I am not sure I like this idea (I've read the whole thread, so I am aware of additional clarifications).

 

The mode seems like a lot more work for DE (really, proxy frames with special slots and balances?), which is why it's currently in its brand new state, while using old game modes. The PvE aspect allows a war to be waged regardless of fluctuating numbers of players on at different times, and if you didn't notice, DE wants the Solar Rail conflicts to end. They put a timer on it, and if that timer expires without one side's "health" depleted, DE still calculates the winner based on performance. They need playable missions to keep the bars moving so the conflict may end (so we can get the boosts from that rail).

 

I believe DE's intention here is not actually tons of playable content, but actually a higher level numbers/political game. Sure, right now the alliances are offering 0% fees for helping them, but if EVE online is anything to go by, and by golly it should be for what that game is about, those 0% fees are going to change. The system can't sustain itself with alliances offering no fees. What DE needs to offer is some unique content to the rails, and give players a reason to go there beyond increased resources. Unique items, resources, etc, to make players want to go there more, and the system will regulate itself.

 

You kept bringing up Prosecutors and Hek as if they are not adding to the game. Of course they aren't end game content, but they definitely add a new tactical element to the game when all your ranged weapons do no damage to them and their nearby allies. I would argue they are the biggest change to any enemy type in the game, and they are polished already (I haven't run into bugs, but we can assume any bugs will be fixed). They actually shift how the player plays, unlike fire leaders, or any of the other new types of enemies. DE did ship proper content with the Prosecutors. They are probably a bit too OP if you didn't equip the element type they are weak to, but they were a great addition. They aren't a systemic change (although they really do change tactics), but they can't really be an example of DE doing something wrong for WF.

 

So where does that leave your idea? Like I said, I love asymmetrical PvP. I clocked nearly 1000 hours in Left 4 Dead multiplayer and while it's not asymmetrical, over 2500 in TF2. I love PvP. And your idea isn't a bad idea as a general idea; it sounds fun. It just doesn't seem to fit what you or DE are going for, which is to create systemic replay. I think it creates an entirely new game, which to me, does not fit creating systemic replay in an existing game.

 

Setting up a tower defense type of map as defenders would be interesting. Every fight, win or lose, could add some currency to the defender's pool. It would be PvE, although it could allow for some PvP by allowing players to join in the defending side if the defenders have stations built to allow it (it would take from their existing resources to allow a real player to join in in place of a specter, for example). Like your idea, the defense could be designed to lose, at first. But as they are attacked, their resources for rebuilding are increased (let's say they gather the debris from every downed invader as extra resources, whatever). Basically, I think your PvP idea could be a PvE idea, and it would allow DE much less work to implement it, while giving players something unique to play in solar rails. The Tower is born, it is reinforced, and it is attacked by players. Rather than disconnected missions like survival or defense (why am I playing Defense against Infested on this solar rail?), Specters and hired Corpus/Grineer may defend. Power up those Specters with custom stuff maybe. But that would still be much less work than making PvP work with it all. OP or UP AI is much more forgivable than OP/UP PvP. And we know DE isn't going to balance PvP right, so why suggest it?

 

TL;DR I actually turned your idea into PvE and I think it works better and is much less work for DE.

I like this idea too. I just don't think DE would actually execute it in any way that will introduce challenge. It's not PvP I want. It's systemic, engaging challenge.

Enemies immune to all but one damage type shows me tha DE is thinking of challenge in the complete wrong direction. Why not enemies only vulnerable after a counter? Why not enemies that you need to knock down first to kill? Enemies with a single weak spot on their back?

Nope. RNG "challenge". Or pure numerical (lv999) challenge.

The reason I made this into a pvp concept is that players are determined to win, and will work creatively to provide a constant challenge whereas AI controlled enemies in WF have shown to, well, not.

[Volt_Cruelerz]

In the end, this PVProxy gameplay won't be motivated because you'll have to sacrifice your power.  It won't be contiguous and will like a gimmick.  It'll be a minigame where half the players get to play the game they love and the other half have to play a minigame they won't.  The only people I see liking playing as Proxies are trolls because that's all you are.  Proxies are speedbumps.  That's all they are.

[notionphil]

In the end, this PVProxy gameplay won't be motivated because you'll have to sacrifice your power.  It won't be contiguous and will like a gimmick.  It'll be a minigame where half the players get to play the game they love and the other half have to play a minigame they won't.  The only people I see liking playing as Proxies are trolls because that's all you are.  Proxies are speedbumps.  That's all they are.

The question is, are there enough "trolls" and people who will do anything for their clan for rest of us to find an evolving challenge. Or would many people enjoy playing proxies for the same reason that they enjoy playing tower defense or dungeon keeper?

I would suspect so, but that's a guess.

And of course, AI would also control proxies when there aren't enough defenders.

[gell]

It's against the forum rules for me to say this blatantly, so I will say it constructively: I think DE's designers have good ideas, good motives, but poor execution.

 

Phil, I empathize with your lack of faith in DE's ability to release content working as they intended. It's not even a disagreement with what DE wants to do. I'm all for it. But we know what Scott says and then what Scott does is almost always inconsistent. He says some stuff about the direction for WF and the things they need to focus on, I agree whole-heartedly, and the updates come out and I wonder if Scott is tied up in a closet. But then he'll appear on a devstream saying the same thing as before, as if what is in the game represents anything he's saying. It almost never does. The warframe's powers almost never reflect what Scott says the frame is about (see: Ember changes, Frost's Snow Globe).

 

For the Prosecutors, I do dislike the RNG aspect of their weaknesses, but I love that they force you to play their way. I can't just Penta my way through them, and that's great, but if I don't happen to have poison damage on me in my fight vs the Grineer (why would I?), that poison-based Prosecutor is probably going to live. Their overall design is great, but why make them so dependent on that one factor? Once again, DE came up with a great idea for an enemy, executed it well, then made the one way to defeat him completely RNG (or require you to carry all 4 energy types or group with people to cover all the bases). Cake covered in frosting covered in bile.

 

But the hope, from what I've seen in 16 months of playing this game is that DE eventually fixes [most] issues, after extensive player feedback and iteration. I like the idea of the Solar Rails conflict, and I'm even okay with playing existing mission types on a few special maps, as it currently is. But as usual, it's DE's first step out of 100 steps and it will take another 5 updates to get right.

 

If DE even attempted your PvP idea, it would take them 100 iterations before it was playable. It would start out as a conclave mission and nothing more. The next change would be tweaking proxy numbers. 98 changes later, we might have what you've proposed. So when it comes to my belief in what DE can do in a timely manner, I'd rather they implemented version 1 of Cells than all the complexities of Proxies or even what Cells has become now. Gotta give them small changes or they get overwhelmed with ambition and release another version 0.1 alpha feature. The trick is to give them an idea that already has 98% of the work done (like using existing mission types and enemies), and layering something on top that can give us the systemic replay Warframe needs.

[OblivionNecroninja]

An interesting idea. I don't know if I like it, but it's certainly worth thinking about.
And certainly better than what we have now!