Nullifier's Bubble Isn't Affected By Damage, And Here's Proof

[Eric1738]

thanks for the explanation, still i want devs to re-balance it, because as long as nullifiers exist in their current form, snipers and shotguns(traditional ones like hek, strun. phage and kohm are doing well against nullifiers) are DEAD in corpus/void mission. 

Edited January 27, 2015 by Eric1738

[Issun135]

It be nice if their bubbles were a bit more durable BUT BECOME A HELL OF A LOT SMALLER.

[MechaKnight]

I still like the nullifiers as they are. What Rebecca showed essentially means they have a lower limit to not be harsh on new players, and an upper limit so veterans don't ram these enemies dead instantly. One can say the nullifier is the only enemy at this time with dynamic scaling, which provides a similar amount of difficulty across all player levels, within the calculated lower and upper limits.

[CapedBaldy]

If the shield must be kept the way it is, can we actually get a change on the damage output of the unit? I'm sick of all these 'support' units dealing enough damage to one shot a 300/300 Ember Prime. I'm looking at you, Tar Moa on wave 5 of Ceres Dark Sector Defense and Viver. Also at you, Nullifiers in any T4 non-endless setting.

[taiiat]

-snip-

explaining the exact mechanics for people to see is good, less people will be wildly confused.

 

 

however, i'm ultimately not that thrilled that simultaneous Impacts gets hit so hard.

since the Shotgun Archetype of Weapons doesn't really get a break anywhere, giving them a break really can't hurt.

such as perhaps allowing them to be more effective against the Shield. rather than capping their total to 400, it could be as much as 1000 (though probably more like 800).

 

considering Shotguns still almost all have Damage Falloff, you'll still only be able to use that effectiveness at Close Range.

 

it would be the first break Shotguns have gotten in a long time. rather than getting their spine broken. again.

(hah, i made a funny. atleast it was funny to me).

[MechaKnight]

-snip-

So long as it only applies to shotguns somehow I'm okay. Perhaps a per-pellet/total pellet calculation. It must be done so or else everyone will use bows and Opticor instead.

[HyokaChan]

Now, clearly to me it's the mitigation within the formula that has all of our Arsenals at a loss on the 'best way' to deal with this enemy- but if you are a Corpus you say 'Yes, our Damage Reduction system technology is working quite well'. If you fire with your 4x Forma'd Dread and expect your usual damage output to be reflected, it won't.  This leads us to where we are today with our Nullifier feedback and experiences. 

 

Even if the enemy isn't perfect, they're different, and a change of tactics is a welcome addition in principle to me. I am playing a variety of games right now that have 'that one enemy' that when appears sets me on a different course of action. Definitely open to more discussion and thoughts here. Thanks for your patience while this reply was put together (with details from the dev team). 

 

This is where we must complain. 400 max damage?

 

The problem we've had in warframe before the introduction of the Nullifier is that shotguns, snipers and similar long range weapons (with the exception of the Paris Prime and Dread) were a niche that didn't need to be fulfilled in the current style of gameplay.

 

Then with the Nullifier, they are heavy-hitting long-range units that rejected warframe abilities, making them ideal for sniping targets.

 

Except they resist bullets, too, making it impossible to snipe them before they snipe you assuming both of you have no cover. Do you understand the problem?

 

You've devalued long range weapons even further. Cue complaints, whining, blah blah this is year of balance blah. We have 18 pages of this argument already, I think whatever that has need of saying has already been said in these past 18 pages.

 

This is not right and needs change. What to? Well, look around, we've got 18 pages of this stuff.

[Kyte]

I knew there was a damage cap!

 

But seriously 400 is way too low. Especially considering there's also a lower cap of 100. Almost every full auto gun will spit far over 4x the number of bullets a slower gun would.

 

It devalues the heck out of big damage slow fire rate guns.

Edited January 27, 2015 by Kyte

[xylonez]

Another thing to consider - the shield responds to damage per frame. So if you shoot it with a weapon like the Hek that hits it with multiple pellets in a single frame, it's the cumulative damage of those shots that is considered. So hitting it with 3 pellets at once, each doing 1000 damage really isn't any different than hitting it once for 1000 damage. Since in both cases, that damage is normalized down to the max multiplier of 4x.

That would explain why Kohm/Detron/Mirage's HoM doesn't increase the rate at which it shrinks. Still, that's pretty broken, because essentially, you can only shrink Nullifier's shield by 24% of his current shield per frame (16% if Corrupted).

[burnoutsniper]

The nullification shield is not what bothers me about nullifiers, its that Lanka of theirs. Was playing in a T4 void (around 40 min survival) and a single nullifier downed all 4 players in a matter of 1 and a half seconds. And we were all moving around as well. The fire rate on their lankas is just too damn high. 

[xAzazyel]

Well....the nullifiers kinda kill al the shotguns, snipers and bows in the void, if the purpose was adding a new enemy that needs a different tactic for killing them...this kinda fails lol, in void now just see a lot of people using boltor/soma prime, i mean, i REALLY love my paris prime, hell i even expend 5 formas on it...but now its kinda useless vs the nullifiers.....and worst than that i feel kinda forced to always bring a weapon with a big mag and decent firerate because all the other weapons feel useless or not powerfull enough to deal with the nullifiers :/

[(PSN)IIIDevoidIII]

According to Rebecca's post, a piece-wise function with such a large damage mitigation is the reason our bows tend to end up being quite useless.

My suggestion then, is to set the max reduction of the shield when using a bow or similar to 50% of the current value of the shield. (If the max is 1.5 then it is depleted to .75. If the current value of the shield is less than half the max value of the shield, then the bow shot is allowed to be capable of destroying the shield.
This equation, then, is ever changing.

Should you use a bow on a Nullifier shield at 1.5 scale, the max shrinkage can be .75, as calculated by the equation

1.5(.5)=.75
Which is then plugged into the equation to find possible damage.
D=(0.75/0.06)100 D=1250

This new damage value is then plugged into the original equation as the cap for bows, disregarding 400. (1250/100)0.06=0.75 The shield is now reduced by 0.75.
The max reduction is then not changed, meaning a well placed bow shot with Split Chamber can completely negate a Nullifier shield, otherwise it will take a minimum of two shots.

Now, this may not make total sense since I don't see the whole system, but at least my example provides a sense of what I mean.

[zavienh5]

According to Rebecca's post, a piece-wise function with such a large damage mitigation is the reason our bows tend to end up being quite useless.

My suggestion then, is to set the max reduction of the shield when using a bow or similar to 50% of the current value of the shield. (If the max is 1.5 then it is depleted to .75. If the current value of the shield is less than half the max value of the shield, then the bow shot is allowed to be capable of destroying the shield.

This equation, then, is ever changing.

Should you use a bow on a Nullifier shield at 1.5 scale, the max shrinkage can be .75, as calculated by the equation

1.5(.5)=.75

Which is then plugged into the equation to find possible damage.

D=(0.75/0.06)100 D=1250

This new damage value is then plugged into the original equation as the cap for bows, disregarding 400. (1250/100)0.06=0.75 The shield is now reduced by 0.75.

The max reduction is then not changed, meaning a well placed bow shot with Split Chamber can completely negate a Nullifier shield, otherwise it will take a minimum of two shots.

Now, this may not make total sense snice I don't see the whole system, but at least my example provides a sense of what I mean.

Wow, ppl actually calculate lol, im always too lazy, but ur claculations do kinda make sense

[Halser]

I think a 400 damage cap is far too low considering how much 'health' those shields have and how slow most high damage weapons fire. Semi autos and slow weapons in general are already inefficient compared to automatic weapons, and this enemy just further reinforces that.

 

 

'That one enemy' should be an enemy that makes me rethink my strategy and the way I play the game, not one that just confirms that, in fact, shotguns, bows and snipers are inherently worse than automatic weapons.

[MechaKnight]

Honestly I think the nullifiers and their damage cap really are fine. This is DE's first step to implementing enemies who can survive the powercreep. The limit of 400 may seem small, but at least it's a limit. I feel like balance limits on damage should be applied to more special units honestly. Sure there can be a way to incorporate niche weapons for advanced function against these enemies, but for now I'm pretty happy that there's one thing in this game that won't succumb to power creep in its current implementation.

[Halser]

Honestly I think the nullifiers and their damage cap really are fine. This is DE's first step to implementing enemies who can survive the powercreep. The limit of 400 may seem small, but at least it's a limit. I feel like balance limits on damage should be applied to more special units honestly. Sure there can be a way to incorporate niche weapons for advanced function against these enemies, but for now I'm pretty happy that there's one thing in this game that won't succumb to power creep in its current implementation.

Ignoring the results of time spent grinding weapons, mods and frames with a damage cap is possibly the worst solution to this problem in a game about grinding weapons, mods and frames.

 

If you worked hard to build a weapon that can deliver a solid 50k damage per shot with a low fire rate(or some number like that) I believe you deserve the pleasure of knocking those nullifier shields off in one attack. I think nullifier shields should reward high single shot instead of punish it, since that class of weapon needs all the help it can get.

Edited January 27, 2015 by Halser

[FuzzyRamen]

The nullification shield is not what bothers me about nullifiers, its that Lanka of theirs. Was playing in a T4 void (around 40 min survival) and a single nullifier downed all 4 players in a matter of 1 and a half seconds. And we were all moving around as well. The fire rate on their lankas is just too damn high. 

 

Its a Snipertron, and that Nullifier is a beast.

[Althran]

According to Rebecca's post, a piece-wise function with such a large damage mitigation is the reason our bows tend to end up being quite useless.

My suggestion then, is to set the max reduction of the shield when using a bow or similar to 50% of the current value of the shield. (If the max is 1.5 then it is depleted to .75. If the current value of the shield is less than half the max value of the shield, then the bow shot is allowed to be capable of destroying the shield.

This equation, then, is ever changing.

Should you use a bow on a Nullifier shield at 1.5 scale, the max shrinkage can be .75, as calculated by the equation

1.5(.5)=.75

Which is then plugged into the equation to find possible damage.

D=(0.75/0.06)100 D=1250

This new damage value is then plugged into the original equation as the cap for bows, disregarding 400. (1250/100)0.06=0.75 The shield is now reduced by 0.75.

The max reduction is then not changed, meaning a well placed bow shot with Split Chamber can completely negate a Nullifier shield, otherwise it will take a minimum of two shots.

Now, this may not make total sense since I don't see the whole system, but at least my example provides a sense of what I mean.

 

I have one problem.

 

Given DERebecca's explanation, and your suggestion, my concern with the damage output from single RoF weapons has now gone through the roof.

 

My reasoning behind this is because even though what you are suggesting would essentially buff single RoF weapons, it does not buff it enough.  High RoF weapons can already destroy this shield in under 2 seconds.  It takes a little more time to draw an arrow and shoot it, and certainly more time to take a shot, reload, and take another shot.

 

Now, the way to solve this is to either A) give single RoF weapons punchthrough on all shields, which would put both high RoF weapons and Single RoF weapons in the same position where they both have utility again versus single RoF weapons being kindasorta useless against nullifier shield or B) make the shield just not block bullets in the first place.

 

As it stands, even with your suggestion, it wouldn't change much other than putting single RoF weapons in a slightly better standing/situation.  Currently, High RoF is king in this game, and little brother Single RoF does not get a lot of attention.  There's not a lot of reason to use weapons that can't fire fast.

Edited January 27, 2015 by Althran

[[DE]Momaw]

Nulllifiers:

- Block warframe abilities, preventing direct measures against them and also AOE abilities that might include them in the radius

- And have an impenetrable shield that forces you to invest significant time to bring them down, while making a variety of weapons simply ineffective

- And remove buffs from warframes that enter their bubble to deal with them directly

- And have extreme firepower with zero chance of evasion at short range

- And become a relatively common enemy at higher levels, so the extent that they can stack up into super-bubbles

 

Something's gotta give.  If you guys want them to be as crazy as they are now, i.e. practically a miniboss, you have to limit their spawn rate. If you want them to be everywhere, they can't negate offensive magic, defensive magic and weaponry all at the same time.

 

:|

[CedarDpg]

If there's a damage cap...why not shunt some of the excess damage elsewhere? Perhaps to enemies that are in the vicinity that may not be inside of the shield bubble along with the nullifier. Or save up the excess damage (if there is any above the maximum cap) and then release it unto the nullifier (and nearby enemies) once the bubble collapses.

Edited January 27, 2015 by CedarDpg

[Snydrex]

Even if the enemy isn't perfect, they're different, and a change of tactics is a welcome addition in principle to me. I am playing a variety of games right now that have 'that one enemy' that when appears sets me on a different course of action. Definitely open to more discussion and thoughts here. Thanks for your patience while this reply was put together (with details from the dev team). 

 

Hypothetically, calling Boltor Prime and Rhino a "change of tactics" is a tad inaccurate.

[Chroia]

<snip>

Even if the enemy isn't perfect, they're different, and a change of tactics is a welcome addition in principle to me.

Once again, thank you for the information.

 

I agree that a change of tactics is a welcome addition.

Nullifiers' shields don't count as that, though, as there is no change of tactics.

*In arsenal, before mission, equip a fullauto primary or secondary*

*Play game*

Edit:

Or, as Snydrex said: 'Just bring a Rhino/Boltor'.

And +1 to Momaw's post, above, which I'm not going to quote.

As Turnoverman so succinctly put it: Nullifiers are three balanced enemies, but one unbalanced one.

 

 

The changes in game play that they bring are all related to the fact that, whether their own, (them Lankas... Why can't mine be that effective?,) or shielded units', you suddenly have a huge amount of incoming damage that you can't do anything about until the shield's down.

(Oh, sure. You can shrink the shield enough to expose a unit, kill the unit, and repeat. ... Right.)

Imagine fighting, say, Ruk. And whenever his 'flaps' were closed, every Grineer within 12 meters became invulnerable.

If by "Change of Tactics" (in this case) you mean 'cower behind something that breaks LoS until you can knock down the shield (and hope that they don't have a Bombard)' then, respectfully, you and I have wildly divergent ideas on what constitutes 'Tactical' gameplay.

 

I'm all for a Gauntlet game-mode. Look forward to something along those lines in Archwing, specifically.

But it should be a gauntlet because it's supposed to be a gauntlet, not because 'Oh lol, guess I'll just spawn these 2 Arctic Nullifiers with a pair of Bombards and a Heavy Gunner. glhf!'

Edited January 27, 2015 by Chroia

[(PSN)IIIDevoidIII]

-snip-

Relooking, I think my calculations are incorrect and don't follow the system. 

Regardless, at 1.5 scale (which we don't even know if it is the max scale), we don't know where the healthy minimum is, but let's assume it is less than .1 scale (where it dissipates), the shield will take a massive 18 bow shots to take down.

The point of my suggestion is to remove that huge minimum of 18, (or at .2 scale 14, or at .3 scale 11) down to a more reasonable minimum of 2.

[JJ842]

Nulllifiers:

- Block warframe abilities, preventing direct measures against them and also AOE abilities that might include them in the radius

- And have an impenetrable shield that forces you to invest significant time to bring them down, while making a variety of weapons simply ineffective

- And remove buffs from warframes that enter their bubble to deal with them directly

- And have extreme firepower with zero chance of evasion at short range

- And become a relatively common enemy at higher levels, so the extent that they can stack up into super-bubbles

 

Something's gotta give.  If you guys want them to be as crazy as they are now, i.e. practically a miniboss, you have to limit their spawn rate. If you want them to be everywhere, they can't negate offensive magic, defensive magic and weaponry all at the same time.

 

:|

This here, this person gets it. You can't give an enemy _all_ that and say it's "an interesting gameplay challenge". It's just cheap, artificial difficulty. Why on earth does this seem so difficult for the devs to comprehend?

[Halser]

This here, this person gets it. You can't give an enemy _all_ that and say it's "an interesting gameplay challenge". It's just cheap, artificial difficulty. Why on earth does this seem so difficult for the devs to comprehend?

Because Nullifiers weren't created with 'let's make an interesting challenging enemy' in mind. They were created with 'I don't like ability spam and I don't understand why people do it, so I'll try to kill it without actually handling the core issue that leads people to spam abilities in the first place' in mind.

 

The 1 hit kill lankas are just a detail.

 

Compare those enemies to the mutalist additions. Aside from borked numbers from the tar moas, I think they're all pretty interesting. Those were enemies created to mix up the infested play a bit. Nullifiers were created with the sole purpose of pissing the player off for playing in a way the devs don't like.

Edited January 27, 2015 by Halser