Says A Lot About The Community..

[gunsmoke77]

yes please, tired of getting yelled at because someone wants to bring an excal and mk1 braton to my t4 S...

at lest the mk1 has a ammo pool lol 

[DietEbolaCola]

I'm liking the ideas of having Void Tower keys rank locked, even if it was just a 1:1. 

 

T1 = MR1+

T2 = MR2+

T3 = MR3+

T4 = MR4+

Etc..

 

It's not only about drops they've gotten.. but it is about weapon unlocks they have access to, too..

 

I'd probably through Orokin Derelicts around the MR2+ area..

Edited August 19, 2014 by DietEbolaCola

[BlutAdler]

Well technically you didn't, but I can read between the lines. Perfectly understand your gripe in this issue. But you correlate rank to skills. I don't agree with that and showing one example, even forgot to tell that one player even use a Karak and still kick @ss.

 

I want people to not read between the lines because there is no underlying meaning. I'm trying to be as concise and clear about my points as possible. I don't personally believe, skill level as vague and subjective that term may be to be of the same meaning as master rank. I DO believe however that certain instances of the game do require some level of skill and mastery rank (for load-out purposes and general knowledge of game mechanics)

[BlutAdler]

at lest the mk1 has a ammo pool lol 

 

LOL.

[BlutAdler]

I'm liking the ideas of having Void Tower keys rank locked, even if it was just a 1:1. 

 

T1 = MR1+

T2 = MR2+

T3 = MR3+

T4 = MR4+

Etc..

 

It's not only about drops they've gotten.. but it is about weapon unlocks they have access to, too..

 

I'd probably through Orokin Derelicts around the MR2+ area..

 

This this this and more this. However I'd up the ante and make it

T1= MR1-3

T2= MR4-5

T3= MR5-8

T4= MR8+

[Dalawantahr]

I want people to not read between the lines because there is no underlying meaning. I'm trying to be as concise and clear about my points as possible. I don't personally believe, skill level as vague and subjective that term may be to be of the same meaning as master rank. I DO believe however that certain instances of the game do require some level of skill and mastery rank (for load-out purposes and general knowledge of game mechanics)

Yep I can agree to that, but base on ranks with the current state of the game, nope. I can make a new account, give mods and weapons and do T4 no problem.

Base on conclave rating makes more sense.

Edited August 19, 2014 by Dalawantahr

[Abenoki]

I want people to not read between the lines because there is no underlying meaning. I'm trying to be as concise and clear about my points as possible. I don't personally believe, skill level as vague and subjective that term may be to be of the same meaning as master rank. I DO believe however that certain instances of the game do require some level of skill and mastery rank (for load-out purposes and general knowledge of game mechanics)

 

 

The only thing youre saying is that "I dont want to have to say no to lowbies wanting to enter my run because people yell at me"

 

to which I say you're going to have to get over it, you didnt bring some new fangled phenomenon to attention here in the forums, youre just another in a long line of people saying that they dont want lowbies in their runs. This, again, is 100% fine, but its not something that should be forced on the player base as a whole. You are essentially suggesting the entirety of the player base be forced into following your ideology of how you pick team members via rank locking. Some of us do not share your view and that is why they should continue to be open, because some of us will invite those people, enjoy the run, teach them, etc. 

 

Just get over it dude, go play, say no to people you dont want in. They might get crabby but hey, thats what the ignore button is for or you can just ignore it and not reply. I on the other hand, will invite that player and if he/she wastes my key oh well, they're a renewable resource and I love this game enough to drop even more time in it so I dont care.

 

on another note, can anyone else put anything in the larger gardens? I cant put any decorations in there unless the are REALLY small.

Edited August 19, 2014 by Echoa

[vaugahn]

I want people to not read between the lines because there is no underlying meaning. I'm trying to be as concise and clear about my points as possible. I don't personally believe, skill level as vague and subjective that term may be to be of the same meaning as master rank. I DO believe however that certain instances of the game do require some level of skill and mastery rank (for load-out purposes and general knowledge of game mechanics)

 

The problem is MR is a fundamentally flawed system. In the vast majority of games it's all well and good to base a general assessment of player skill on their game rank, but the way rank is handled in warframe makes that incredibly illogical.

 

If rank was based off, say, a combined total mission score then you'd be set guessing at skill based off rank, but since rank is solely based off the amount of items a person has ranked to 30 using it as an indicator of anything is flawed. That's what people are responding to here. Also, an MR lock for towers is a bad idea, for the same reasons outlined above.

 

Mastery 2.0, anyone?

[BlutAdler]

The only thing youre saying is that "I dont want to have to say no to lowbies wanting to enter my run because people yell at me"

 

to which I say you're going to have to get over it, you didnt bring some new fangled phenomenon to attention here in the forums, youre just another in a long line of people saying that they dont want lowbies in their runs. This, again, is 100% fine, but its not something that should be forced on the player base as a whole. You are essentially suggesting the entirety of the player base be forced into following your ideology of how you pick team members via rank locking. Some of us do not share your view and that is why they should continue to be open, because some of us will invite those people, enjoy the run, teach them, etc. 

 

This is not what I am saying at all. And As I have stated several times before (this is really getting old) I take lowbies ALL. THE. TIME. Most of my clan is under rank 5. And I take them on runs all the time. So I really have no idea what you keep poking at, and you shouldn't be putting words in my mouth. I don't care if you guys yell at me for talking about something. I am not a child, so I won't act like that. 

I think you just have stuck in your head that you want to argue against me for something. That's fine! if you want to find something to argue, by all means, go for it. However, the things you are bringing up are not correct. I'm not suggesting anyone be forced to anything ideological by me. I am talking about game mechanics and the game structure. Mastery ranks are a feature of the game that suggest the time and effort spent on the game.

I am stating that I find it illogical to be upset/frustrated at the fact that people want to usurp the system in place because of outliers which I understand because I take lowbies on high leveled missions all the time. 

[Mkilbride]

You kidding? At Rank 3 I could do T4 Survival. You have weird stndards.

[BlutAdler]

The problem is MR is a fundamentally flawed system. In the vast majority of games it's all well and good to base a general assessment of player skill on their game rank, but the way rank is handled in warframe makes that incredibly illogical.

 

If rank was based off, say, a combined total mission score then you'd be set guessing at skill based off rank, but since rank is solely based off the amount of items a person has ranked to 30 using it as an indicator of anything is flawed. That's what people are responding to here. Also, an MR lock for towers is a bad idea, for the same reasons outlined above.

 

Mastery 2.0, anyone?

 

 

I do agree on a harder determination of skill in the game.

 

+1

 

However, MR as it is the closest thing to classifiers, as anything else in the game. I can't sit here and look at a person's stats before each match. However, I'm gonna do what I'm gonna do to assure myself a bang for my buck, so to speak.

[Abenoki]

The problem is MR is a fundamentally flawed system. In the vast majority of games it's all well and good to base a general assessment of player skill on their game rank, but the way rank is handled in warframe makes that incredibly illogical.

 

If rank was based off, say, a combined total mission score then you'd be set guessing at skill based off rank, but since rank is solely based off the amount of items a person has ranked to 30 using it as an indicator of anything is flawed. That's what people are responding to here. Also, an MR lock for towers is a bad idea, for the same reasons outlined above.

 

Mastery 2.0, anyone?

 

Im game for this, mastery has needed an overhaul for a long time. maybe then we can finally stop having these kinda of threads.

[BlutAdler]

You kidding? At Rank 3 I could do T4 Survival. You have weird stndards.

 

Still no awareness for the majority of the community I see. 

[BlutAdler]

Im game for this, mastery has needed an overhaul for a long time. maybe then we can finally stop having these kinda of threads.

 

There's nothing wrong with these kind of threads, as it incited discussion. People just need to stop taking things so personal and turning discussion into heated passion-sweltering debates when bringing up one of the elephants in the room.

[vaugahn]

However, MR as it is the closest thing to classifiers, as anything else in the game. I can't sit here and look at a person's stats before each match. However, I'm gonna do what I'm gonna do to assure myself a bang for my buck, so to speak.

 

MR is a terrible classifier though. Going by it will more often than not screw you. Beyond that, that attitude is just terrible in general.

 

The vast majority of players in this game never go past MR5. They stick with a few weapons and frames and max mods as progression. I'd go as far as to say if they're above MR1 them being good is probably the norm instead of the outlier. The easiest way to tell if someone's good or not is just to look at their profile. It has a wonderful assortment of stats that can give you a decently accurate assessment of them as a player.

[Abenoki]

There's nothing wrong with these kind of threads, as it incited discussion. People just need to stop taking things so personal and turning discussion into heated passion-sweltering debates when bringing up one of the elephants in the room.

 

 

This has been discussed a million times and has been brought to the attention of DE since I've been playing. This thread hasnt discussed anything that hasnt been before, and Mastery 2.0 has already been suggested. Its just disappointing that DE hasnt done anything to change it so that mastery isnt anything but a marker of how much you decided to grind gear.

Edited August 19, 2014 by Echoa

[Abenoki]

MR is a terrible classifier though. Going by it will more often than not screw you. Beyond that, that attitude is just terrible in general.

 

The vast majority of players in this game never go past MR5. They stick with a few weapons and frames and max mods as progression. I'd go as far as to say if they're above MR1 them being good is probably the norm instead of the outlier. The easiest way to tell if someone's good or not is just to look at their profile. It has a wonderful assortment of stats that can give you a decently accurate assessment of them as a player.

 

I think that the extra stats, since they are there, should have some sort of weight in your mastery. Most of the stats they list are there for no other purpose but to be there. DE needs to give the stats some sort of meaning or get rid of them IMO.

[Dalawantahr]

I do agree on a harder determination of skill in the game.

 

+1

 

However, MR as it is the closest thing to classifiers, as anything else in the game. I can't sit here and look at a person's stats before each match. However, I'm gonna do what I'm gonna do to assure myself a bang for my buck, so to speak.

Well again I would say Conclave rating would be a better classifier, at least we can know they are properly upgraded they're gear.

[WhiteCr0w]

This is kind of pointless. I've played with Rank 16s with decent Conclave rating who are utter garbage. It happens more often than you think.

[BlutAdler]

Thank you all for your viewpoints and input, by the way. 

[vaugahn]

Well again I would say Conclave rating would be a better classifier, at least we can know they are properly upgraded they're gear.

 

No, conclave is a bad judgement system too. Try pressing autoinstall on your mods screen (it automatically creates the highest conclave loadout possible) and see what you get.

[LukeAura]

Conclave rating can at least be balanced in to an accurate classifier while remaining exactly what is meant to be.
Mastery Rank could be redone in to a classifier, but it would drastically alter its nature. 

[BlutAdler]

This is kind of pointless. I've played with Rank 16s with decent Conclave rating who are utter garbage. It happens more often than you think.

 

While this may be correct, if within a 10 second window of adding someone to a series of instances that came out-- lets say T5 hit the tables. 

 

First day of the update, you get a bunch of requests for invites as you have a key for survival.

 

If you had to choose between two MR4 and one MR12 or two MR12 and  one MR4 what would you pick?

[Dalawantahr]

Then there's no point, for now, to limit void mission.

[vaugahn]

If you had to choose between two MR4 and one MR12 or two MR12 and  one MR4 what would you pick?

 

It depends. I'd want to see everyone's loadout/profile first.