Petition (Or Discussion!) To Remove Or Redesign The Grineer Rollers

[Huitzil]

It doesn't address a problem because if all that needs to be do is increase your level of playing, there IS no problem. Any problem. Ever.

 

Players are always going to be unhappy about things in any game. The difference is that DE should be looking at which problems are actual legitimate problems, and not the simply cry of players who have not yet learned to fight the element properly. I'm sure a majority of players don't like the fact that if you die with all your continues used up, you are ejected from the level. Should DE change this too?

Actually, no, I am certain a majority of players have no problem with that. Because it is something clearly communicated and in line with our expectations. (Also you aren't ejected you stay in spectator mode). We go down when our health is depleted, and crawl around on the ground bleeding out. The game gives us a chance to keep fighting long enough for a teammate to revive us. If no teammate can revive us, then we have an option to use a limited resource to revive ourselves. It's fair. It is in line with our expectations. We are given multiple chances and the limited resource only comes into play once two other failures occurred (we lost all our health and nobody could revive us). You are once again assuming that anyone who has a problem must want things to not be challenging, and then assuming that they would also want everything else that would make the game less challenging.

 

Now let's assume for a moment that you are right, and rollers are fine. You aren't, of course, but let's pretend Sid Meier descends from a cloud and says Grineer Rollers as they exist now are perfectly fair and perfectly balanced. DE has still done something wrong. If an enemy IS balanced, and a large number of players feel as though it is unfair, that is the fault of the developer. They have not successfully communicated the state of the game and its rules, they have not successfully worked with the player's expectations to create an enjoyable experience. They created an emotional experience where the player is frustrated and feels powerless. And if the player shouldn't feel powerless, then that's DE's job to convey that feeling.

[OrokinNoob]

I have just been jumping on top of a structure (telling teammates to follow) and we just shoot them that way. I thought of it as more of a change of strategy.

 

I like them the way they are, it keeps me (Excalibur) from just trying to charge and slash dash into every situation, keeps redundancy down.

[AndryB94]

Also, a small note:

Somebody made a wikipedia poll asking whether people like rollers or want them tweaked/redesigned.

Last time I checked, out of 70 voters, only 7 said they are fine with the rollers.

Just saying.

[greymalken]

Also, a small note:

Somebody made a wikipedia poll asking whether people like rollers or want them tweaked/redesigned.

Last time I checked, out of 70 voters, only 7 said they are fine with the rollers.

Just saying.

because 70 players is a statistically significant representation of the playerbase, right?

Edited May 6, 2013 by greymalken

[Tsukinoki]

because 70 players is a statistically significant representation of the playerbase, right?

Its up to 72 wanted rollers to be changed/removed 8 for keeping them as it is.

Its a live poll on the warframe wiki and as it goes the numbers will slowly rack up.

[Law_Abiding_Engineer]

I think their hitboxes need to be changed.  once that happens, then Ill see what I think of them.  For the most part, they are a key part f the gameplay, but I think they need to be tweeked a bit.  Also, i think the hitboxes are slightly larger than they should because it makes it easier for people to hit them.

[Cpl_Facehugger]

I'm frankly amazed at how bad the side supporting the rollers is arguing.

 

"Learn2play", basically the pro-roller side's only argument, is not a counterargument to "these things are poorly designed." Any more than the response to a poorly designed car is "learn2drive so you can compensate for its terrible design."

 

Also, stunlock is a bad mechanic in general because it takes away player agency, which is not something you want to do unless absolutely necessary. Even Dark Souls, a game built around its stunlocking, allowed players a mechanic to avoid stunlock. Mass Effect 3 had a whole side who's whole deal was stunlocking (and the playerbase generally hated it), but even then they included classes who are immune or highly resistant to stunlock.

 

Removing grinders and replacing them with, say, improved grenade use logic (ie grenades to flush Tenno out of cover), or improved suppression fire and flanking AI mechanics would do much better. Doing that and adding in some kind of enemy that's actually fun to fight would be so much better it's not even funny.

[AndryB94]

because 70 players is a statistically significant representation of the playerbase, right?

It's called a trend, and ratio.

I honestly bet than when 1000 players will have voted, there'll still be a ratio of about 8 to 1 (which seems to be the current ratio. 72/8 is about that much).

[greymalken]

To me, the discussion has taken the following shape:

 

party A: "grineer rollers are bad!"

 

Party B: (decides to focus on what they, as a player, can contribute to the topic, which is to offer advice on workable strategies in the hopes that their struggling fellow tenno will find them helpful while they wait on the devs to respond or not) and they say "Well, you can defeat the rollers by methods A, B, C, D, etc...

 

Party A: "You like rollers you suck!!!! grrr! nerf rollers!"

 

party B: is now insulted/offended that their profferred assistance has been rejected, spat upon, and they themselves personally insulted, they now descend into the muck - "Learn 2 Play newb!!!!"

 

 

The argument degenerates.

[Cpl_Facehugger]

To me, the discussion has taken the following shape:

 

party A: "grineer rollers are bad!"

 

Party B: (decides to focus on what they, as a player, can contribute to the topic, which is to offer advice on workable strategies in the hopes that their struggling fellow tenno will find them helpful while they wait on the devs to respond or not) and they say "Well, you can defeat the rollers by methods A, B, C, D, etc...

 

Party A: "You like rollers you suck!!!! grrr! nerf rollers!"

 

party B: is now insulted/offended that their profferred assistance has been rejected, spat upon, and they themselves personally insulted, they now descend into the muck - "Learn 2 Play newb!!!!"

 

 

The argument degenerates.

 

Probably, but the reason party A is getting offended is because "oh hey, you can compensate for rollers through method A/B/C/etc" is not an actual response to "these things are poorly designed because stunlock." Further, it implies that they aren't poorly designed, but doesn't actually provide any argumentation as to why that is so.

 

If Party B were really interested in fair and even handed argument, they'd say something like "well, I think rollers are a bit excessive, but until DE decides to take a look at them, here's what you can do... [list methods, all of which boil down to learn2play or ]" or "Personally I don't find rollers that bad, but if you do, here's how to deal with them... [list methods]". Or, ideally, they'd say something like "Well, I disagree, and here's why... [list counterarguments for why rollers aren't poorly designed, ones that don't boil down to learn2play.]"

 

Instead, we get stuff like this:

 

 

adapt or perish

 

Or this:

 

No they are fine. No need for a nerf of any kind.

 

Wait untill the roll towards you in a straight line and shoot just under them. Easy kills if you relax and follow <--- that. 5-6 of them and yeah your gonna get spammed so always keep their numbers down as much as possible.

 

Which might be valid advice, but which also does nothing to actually address the argument that they're badly designed. People in Side B are assuming grinders are fine because they don't think they're too bad, but they're not actually arguing at all for why they're fine, while Side A has been providing plenty of argumentation for why rollers are broken and need to be changed/removed.

 

Edit: Even Moonicus' first post in the thread is "learn2play" with a side of "punishing people for not being good is fine".

Edited May 6, 2013 by Cpl_Facehugger

[TheHeraldXII]

 

So anyone telling you to "Get Better" isn't incorrect. Every player is capable of getting better at the game. Some just get there sooner than others.

Ok, look, as a guy who does solo runs on Pluto, Ceres and Eris regularly, I'll tell you this isn't about difficulty or "getting better", this is about having a ridiculously annoying enemy that is just painful to fight. All they do is take control away from you for a period of time, over and over and over.

 

I would propose that perhaps they are larger, slower, less maneuverable, self destructing or a combination of the above so that the player has a greater opportunity to make a countermove instead of being caught by one and then taken out of the fight until the Roller's pathfinding bugs up and leave them alone.

[MoonicusMaximus]

Actually, no, I am certain a majority of players have no problem with that. Because it is something clearly communicated and in line with our expectations. (Also you aren't ejected you stay in spectator mode). We go down when our health is depleted, and crawl around on the ground bleeding out. The game gives us a chance to keep fighting long enough for a teammate to revive us. If no teammate can revive us, then we have an option to use a limited resource to revive ourselves. It's fair. It is in line with our expectations. We are given multiple chances and the limited resource only comes into play once two other failures occurred (we lost all our health and nobody could revive us). You are once again assuming that anyone who has a problem must want things to not be challenging, and then assuming that they would also want everything else that would make the game less challenging.

 

Now let's assume for a moment that you are right, and rollers are fine. You aren't, of course, but let's pretend Sid Meier descends from a cloud and says Grineer Rollers as they exist now are perfectly fair and perfectly balanced. DE has still done something wrong. If an enemy IS balanced, and a large number of players feel as though it is unfair, that is the fault of the developer. They have not successfully communicated the state of the game and its rules, they have not successfully worked with the player's expectations to create an enjoyable experience. They created an emotional experience where the player is frustrated and feels powerless. And if the player shouldn't feel powerless, then that's DE's job to convey that feeling.

 

If it's easy for people to understand and accept the death and lives mechanic of Warframe, than I do not see how it is impossible for people to accept the purpose and practice of the Roller, which from what I experience, is fair as it is.

 

When I first started playing, I too disliked Rollers. I did not know what was happening and was frustrated by it. However, instead of dropping the game, I continued to play, and as I continued to play I progressively became more aware of the strengths and weaknesses that Rollers have, as well as what sorts of methods I can use to both avoid their troublesome-but-not-overly-troublesome stagger and kill them before they have a chance to employ their method of attacks. Now, when I hear Rollers, I know what to expect, and am prepared, and as such I can enjoy the variety and additional layer of challenge that they represent when I fight on Grineer maps. Every single player in Warframe is capable of learning about Rollers in the way I did; DE doesn't need to make a tutorial on each enemy type so that all the players are properly informed about every element in the game before they even experience it. You are meant to progress naturally through the game, with newer enemies being introduced at higher frequencies at later levels of the game.

 

Rollers are small and fast, but have low health. They are easily identified, through visual and audio cues. Their attacks will stagger you for but a single second, and will do very little damage to you. They attack you infrequently, as after leaping they take time to move a distance away from you before turning around again. They have a purpose as a utility unit to the Grineer, which is meant to be a large difference to normal Grineer enemy types; normal Grineer units are slow, large and cannot pursue you at certain distances, while Rollers are meant to actively chase and are able to keep up with players and occupy them long enough for Grineer units to utilize their slow advances while imparting little to no damage themselves. Rollers add unit variety and gameplay variety to the otherwise stale Grineer gameplay. What exactly is it about this set of facts about the Roller is deemed unfair?

 

 

I'm frankly amazed at how bad the side supporting the rollers is arguing.

 

"Learn2play", basically the pro-roller side's only argument, is not a counterargument to "these things are poorly designed." Any more than the response to a poorly designed car is "learn2drive so you can compensate for its terrible design."

 

The problem with this line of thought is that, so far, nobody has convinced me as to why they think Rollers are poorly designed. I actually think the opposite. As I have stated before, briefly outlined in my above paragraph. If I do not think it is poorly designed, I cannot tell people to Lrn2Ply to compensate for bad design. I can only tell them that they are capable of learning how to not be so troubled by this mechanic, explain why, and provide them with strategies against them. All of which I did.

 

Also, stunlock is a bad mechanic in general because it takes away player agency, which is not something you want to do unless absolutely necessary. Even Dark Souls, a game built around its stunlocking, allowed players a mechanic to avoid stunlock. Mass Effect 3 had a whole side who's whole deal was stunlocking (and the playerbase generally hated it), but even then they included classes who are immune or highly resistant to stunlock.

 

I have stated countless times that I am not a fan of stunlocking.

 

What my argument is trying to preserve is the ability for Rollers to actually disrupt players in a meaningful way with their stagger effect, NOT to preserve their ability to keep you stunned for prolonged periods of time. I've advocated ideas for grace periods after stuns to facilitate this.

 

Removing grinders and replacing them with, say, improved grenade use logic (ie grenades to flush Tenno out of cover), or improved suppression fire and flanking AI mechanics would do much better. Doing that and adding in some kind of enemy that's actually fun to fight would be so much better it's not even funny.

 

Rollers do not only provide a method of disruption, but a new unit with an entirely different set of goals from standard Grineer units. Rollers actively pursue Tenno at speeds that can match Tenno speed. A Grineer with grenade mechanics cannot do this. Rollers are small and agile and are more difficult to hit. A Grineer with grenade mechanics is still large, slow and as such, easy for fast, agile Tenno to either kill or avoid entirely. As a matter of fact, Rollers are the ONLY unit in the game that accomplish such feats. Infested large also large and easy to kill as a result with your weapons. Osprey are small, but their methods of support are directed at their allies, not indirectly by means of disrupting enemies, save for leech osprey. Moas can chase you, but they stop completely in order to attack you, making them essentially large stationary targets. Rollers are really the only unit that can physically challenge a players in a meaningful way by testing their aim, coordination, positioning, and prediction, rather than a vast majority of the roster whose sole measure of providing difficulty is high damage bullet sponge.

 

Removing Rollers removes all of that. I do not condone the removal of Rollers because they are a step in the RIGHT direction; an enemy that is difficult through actual mechanics, not artificially inflated numbers.

 

Probably, but the reason party A is getting offended is because "oh hey, you can compensate for rollers through method A/B/C/etc" is not an actual response to "these things are poorly designed because stunlock." Further, it implies that they aren't poorly designed, but doesn't actually provide any argumentation as to why that is so.

 

If Party B were really interested in fair and even handed argument, they'd say something like "well, I think rollers are a bit excessive, but until DE decides to take a look at them, here's what you can do... [list methods, all of which boil down to learn2play or ]" or "Personally I don't find rollers that bad, but if you do, here's how to deal with them... [list methods]". Or, ideally, they'd say something like "Well, I disagree, and here's why... [list counterarguments for why rollers aren't poorly designed, ones that don't boil down to learn2play.]"

 

...

 

Which might be valid advice, but which also does nothing to actually address the argument that they're badly designed. People in Side B are assuming grinders are fine because they don't think they're too bad, but they're not actually arguing at all for why they're fine, while Side A has been providing plenty of argumentation for why rollers are broken and need to be changed/removed.

 

Edit: Even Moonicus' first post in the thread is "learn2play" with a side of "punishing people for not being good is fine".

 

My posts were never simply learn to play. I provided plenty of useful information about Rollers, because I WANT people to get better at this game, rather than sit on the forum and complain until the game magically becomes easier. Don't cherry pick, please.

 

... and punishing players for poor play is fine, as long as its reasonable. I think stagger effects are reasonable in relation to the Roller. Although I think the stunlock, in which a player is stunned consecutive times without a way to escape, is not a good mechanic and would like to see it give some measure of grace period between sequential stuns.

[MoonicusMaximus]

Ok, look, as a guy who does solo runs on Pluto, Ceres and Eris regularly, I'll tell you this isn't about difficulty or "getting better", this is about having a ridiculously annoying enemy that is just painful to fight. All they do is take control away from you for a period of time, over and over and over.

 

Again, solo play mode is not balanced for solo play. If you would like it to be so, please ask DE to change the spawn ratios in solo play so that Rollers are less frequent, or something of that nature. Do not ask to change the fundamentals of a unit MEANT FOR COOP because of issues you have IN SOLO PLAY.

 

I would propose that perhaps they are larger, slower, less maneuverable, self destructing or a combination of the above so that the player has a greater opportunity to make a countermove instead of being caught by one and then taken out of the fight until the Roller's pathfinding bugs up and leave them alone.

 

Rollers are small and fast, but have low health. They are easily identified, through visual and audio cues. Their attacks will stagger you for but a single second, and will do very little damage to you. They attack you infrequently, as after leaping they take time to move a distance away from you before turning around again. They have a purpose as a utility unit to the Grineer, which is meant to be a large difference to normal Grineer enemy types; normal Grineer units are slow, large and cannot pursue you at certain distances, while Rollers are meant to actively chase and are able to keep up with players and occupy them long enough for Grineer units to utilize their slow advances while imparting little to no damage themselves. Rollers add unit variety and gameplay variety to the otherwise stale Grineer gameplay. What exactly is it about this set of facts about the Roller is deemed unfair?

...

Rollers do not only provide a method of disruption, but a new unit with an entirely different set of goals from standard Grineer units. Rollers actively pursue Tenno at speeds that can match Tenno speed. A Grineer with grenade mechanics cannot do this. Rollers are small and agile and are more difficult to hit. A Grineer with grenade mechanics is still large, slow and as such, easy for fast, agile Tenno to either kill or avoid entirely. As a matter of fact, Rollers are the ONLY unit in the game that accomplish such feats. Infested large also large and easy to kill as a result with your weapons. Osprey are small, but their methods of support are directed at their allies, not indirectly by means of disrupting enemies, save for leech osprey. Moas can chase you, but they stop completely in order to attack you, making them essentially large stationary targets. Rollers are really the only unit that can physically challenge a players in a meaningful way by testing their aim, coordination, positioning, and prediction, rather than a vast majority of the roster whose sole measure of providing difficulty is high damage bullet sponge.

 

Removing Rollers removes all of that. I do not condone the removal of Rollers because they are a step in the RIGHT direction; an enemy that is difficult through actual mechanics, not artificially inflated numbers.

 

I would much rather have some sort of prevention system for actual, legit stunlocking than turn a perfectly good idea (Roller) into yet another large, slow moving bullet sponge. Seriously, we have so many of that unit type that its getting to be plain silly. And yet we only have on Roller-type enemy that can impart some semblance of challenge beyond being a bullet sponge, and people want it canned.

 

All that is is lessening variety and coming closer to unit stagnation. That's not the best course of action for a growing game, in the slightest.

[MJ12]

Again, solo play mode is not balanced for solo play. If you would like it to be so, please ask DE to change the spawn ratios in solo play so that Rollers are less frequent, or something of that nature. Do not ask to change the fundamentals of a unit MEANT FOR COOP because of issues you have IN SOLO PLAY.

 

 

 

I would much rather have some sort of prevention system for actual, legit stunlocking than turn a perfectly good idea (Roller) into yet another large, slow moving bullet sponge. Seriously, we have so many of that unit type that its getting to be plain silly. And yet we only have on Roller-type enemy that can impart some semblance of challenge beyond being a bullet sponge, and people want it canned.

 

All that is is lessening variety and coming closer to unit stagnation. That's not the best course of action for a growing game, in the slightest.

 

So instead they can replace the Roller with, I don't know, some kind of Grineer teleporting gun/grenade guy with the ability to stick to walls/ceilings and actively dodges your fire who is "only" about as tough as a Shield Lancer. No large, slow-moving bullet sponge. Now you can be threatened from any angle and there are units which can flush you out of cover.

 

And Rollers are gone. Fact is, there are plenty of enemy types which can serve the same purpose as the rollers, which aren't slow-moving bullet sponges, which can provide far more entertainment with far less frustration, and you  know, may actually make the game harder.

[CrazyCanadian24]

Which might be valid advice, but which also does nothing to actually address the argument that they're badly designed. People in Side B are assuming grinders *rollers are fine because they don't think they're too bad, but they're not actually arguing at all for why they're fine, while Side A has been providing plenty of argumentation for why rollers are broken and need to be changed/removed.

 

Fixed. You're welcome.

[CookieStorm]

Yesterday I was playing with a couple friends and I could hear a Roller nearby.  After following the sound, I found it had fallen down into the small ditch that elevator platforms normally occupy.  I called my friends over and we laughed at its misfortune.  Then it sprouted spikes, jumped out of the pit, and ran me over.

 

Moral of the story: do not taunt happy fun ball.

 

I despise Rollers because they can keep you stumbling around, but it would be hypocritical of me to complain about getting stunlocked when I have come to rely on Gram's stagger effect to deal with Ancients.  One handy way I've found for dealing with Rollers is Shade's Ghost ability.  Once you are cloaked then hold still and the balls will eventually stop rolling around too so long as they stay close enough for you to remain cloaked.  Even I can make the shot against a stationary target at close range.

[Depar]

Yesterday I was playing with a couple friends and I could hear a Roller nearby.  After following the sound, I found it had fallen down into the small ditch that elevator platforms normally occupy.  I called my friends over and we laughed at its misfortune.  Then it sprouted spikes, jumped out of the pit, and ran me over.

 

Moral of the story: do not taunt happy fun ball.

you sir, made my day :D

[MJ12]

I despise Rollers because they can keep you stumbling around, but it would be hypocritical of me to complain about getting stunlocked when I have come to rely on Gram's stagger effect to deal with Ancients.

 

I really don't get this idea that it's hypocritical for players to have abilities NPCs don't. Is this a thing from people who play primarily symmetric PvP games or something?

 

Anyways, even hypothetically assuming a player in the opposition role that doesn't make sense. Assume that a player controls the entire opposing faction. Spawns, unit deployment, orders, etc. If you stunlock one of the heavies he deploys, he has 4 or 5 more on the field, so he can still act without any impairment.

 

If he stunlocks you, you can do nothing. Thus Tenno having the ability to stun enemies is much less punishing for the enemies, even assuming that's actually a valid rationale for giving them stuns (it isn't, because the AI doesn't exist to play a fair game, it exists to lose). Notice that most of the single enemies in existence are resistant or outright immune to CC. Vay Hek, for example, is immune to freeze, knockdowns, most stuns, and so on. This is because it was easy to trivialize him (and any other boss) before that was implemented.

 

The reverse is also true.

[Cpl_Facehugger]

 

The problem with this line of thought is that, so far, nobody has convinced me as to why they think Rollers are poorly designed. I actually think the opposite. As I have stated before, briefly outlined in my above paragraph. If I do not think it is poorly designed, I cannot tell people to Lrn2Ply to compensate for bad design. I can only tell them that they are capable of learning how to not be so troubled by this mechanic, explain why, and provide them with strategies against them. All of which I did.

 

 

I have stated countless times that I am not a fan of stunlocking.

 

What my argument is trying to preserve is the ability for Rollers to actually disrupt players in a meaningful way with their stagger effect, NOT to preserve their ability to keep you stunned for prolonged periods of time. I've advocated ideas for grace periods after stuns to facilitate this.

 

Removing Rollers removes all of that. I do not condone the removal of Rollers because they are a step in the RIGHT direction; an enemy that is difficult through actual mechanics, not artificially inflated numbers.

 

 

My posts were never simply learn to play. I provided plenty of useful information about Rollers, because I WANT people to get better at this game, rather than sit on the forum and complain until the game magically becomes easier. Don't cherry pick, please.

 

... and punishing players for poor play is fine, as long as its reasonable. I think stagger effects are reasonable in relation to the Roller. Although I think the stunlock, in which a player is stunned consecutive times without a way to escape, is not a good mechanic and would like to see it give some measure of grace period between sequential stuns.

 

That you aren't convinced isn't a failing of the arguments, it's a failing of yourself. People have provided plenty of argumentation about why rollers are a bad design from a gameplay perspective. Constant protestation about how you don't think it's too bad is meaningless. Until you can come up with an actual argument for why it's not bad design, one that can actually counter the ones that claim it is, it's really hard to take you guys seriously.

 

Seriously. "It's not a bad design because players can compensate through skill... Unless they get bushwhacked by a random spawn or one roller sneaks up behind them when they're ninjaing around those four heavies and their attendant lancers in which case welp" is not an argument, because you can compensate for just about any difficulty in any game through sheer skill. Case in point: Dark Souls.

 

So yes, why should the most terrible aspect of the entire Grineer lineup be maintained? It's like the nervos. They were so terrible that DE rightly removed them, from what I hear. And do you know why they were so terrible? Because they removed player agency. The game is a game, which means it has to be fun, which means the players have to have agency in some fashion. And generally, the more agency, the better. Taking away that agency by stunlocking and stagger mechanics is bad.

 

Rollers do not only provide a method of disruption, but a new unit with an entirely different set of goals from standard Grineer units. Rollers actively pursue Tenno at speeds that can match Tenno speed. A Grineer with grenade mechanics cannot do this. Rollers are small and agile and are more difficult to hit. A Grineer with grenade mechanics is still large, slow and as such, easy for fast, agile Tenno to either kill or avoid entirely. As a matter of fact, Rollers are the ONLY unit in the game that accomplish such feats. Infested large also large and easy to kill as a result with your weapons. Osprey are small, but their methods of support are directed at their allies, not indirectly by means of disrupting enemies, save for leech osprey. Moas can chase you, but they stop completely in order to attack you, making them essentially large stationary targets. Rollers are really the only unit that can physically challenge a players in a meaningful way by testing their aim, coordination, positioning, and prediction, rather than a vast majority of the roster whose sole measure of providing difficulty is high damage bullet sponge.

 

The problem being, those goals are bad. Intrinsically. Small fast bullet sponge targets are bad, because they generally induce lots of frustration for little gain that cannot be replicated elsewhere. This also applies to chargers, but it's not nearly as onerous there because chargers are not tiny little bullet sponges that autostagger you if they touch you, with their staggering only applying if you let them hit you. With them not being so ridiculously tough and tiny that it's hard to kill them before they've reached stagger distance.

 

If Grineer need to be more difficult, give them a flameblade with a grenade launcher to flush players out of cover. Give them machinegun troops with gorgons that are more common than heavies and work together keep you suppressed/flush you into the open where you can be gunned down. Nearly anything would be better. Don't give them a small bulletsponge enemy with stunlock that appears in multiples and zooms along extremely quickly such that any missed hit is extremely punishing.

 

There's also the stylistic issue. A tiny murderous robot feels more like it should be in the corpus arsenal than the Grineer one; Grineer are otherwise all about space marines with combined arms. Lancers and troopers working in tandem with shield lancers and seekers, with heavies anchoring the entire platoon and snipers/commanders harassing the enemy.

 

Of course, Corpus have their own stunlock unit, but shockwave moas are a lot less onerous than rollers because it doesn't take l33t twitch shooting skills to avoid being stunlocked to death.

 

My posts were never simply learn to play. I provided plenty of useful information about Rollers, because I WANT people to get better at this game, rather than sit on the forum and complain until the game magically becomes easier. Don't cherry pick, please.

 

... and punishing players for poor play is fine, as long as its reasonable. I think stagger effects are reasonable in relation to the Roller. Although I think the stunlock, in which a player is stunned consecutive times without a way to escape, is not a good mechanic and would like to see it give some measure of grace period between sequential stuns.

 

Your first post in the thread was learn2play. That you provided some advice as to how to go about learning2play doesn't matter. Pretty much every subsequent argument your side has made in this thread has been a derivative of learn2play.

 

Indeed, you just said that punishing players for poor play is fine. The issue being that this punishes players who simply aren't as good as you.

 

I'll be honest here, I mostly solo high level systems, and I don't have much trouble with rollers even then. I whip out my lex and nail them repeatedly whenever I see them. I'm a skilled enough player that I can do that reliably.

Thing is, that's not very fun. Fighting other grineer is. I have a choice of tactics to use against them - I can hang back and trade fire with them from cover, or I can take a risk and rush in aggressively, trusting in my melee weapon or powers to give it to them at close range. Rollers have pretty much one viable tactic, and that's shooting them before they can stun you. Melee doesn't work - you just get staggered when you try and connect. Jump attacks don't work since they can stagger you out of midair.

 

Giving Grineer more options in the sense of better grenade use or more shooty units would be much more fun than pausing to take out a half dozen bothersome tiny damage sponge stagger machines before getting back to dealing with the enemies who're actually fun to fight.

 

The other issue being that I'm pretty skilled as a player. But what about all the other players who aren't as skilled as I am? You know, the guys who form the backbone of the game's revenue stream? The casuals? In general, when devs cater to the hardcore crowd, they drive off the casuals by making things too hard.

[jadith]

Rollers are fine, and they fit well into the Grinner aresenal.  Only annoying part is their damage radius is a bit too large, so it makes it very difficult to move around them sometimes. 

[11.11.11]

I don't really give a damn for your wall-of-text pussyfights, but for the first, only, and last time... THEY'RE NOT GRINDERS. They're ROLLERS. Get it right, people!

 

They were called grinders when they were first released in update 6. I don't see any harm in using either term. We all know what we're talking about here. 

[MoonicusMaximus]

That you aren't convinced isn't a failing of the arguments, it's a failing of yourself. People have provided plenty of argumentation about why rollers are a bad design from a gameplay perspective. Constant protestation about how you don't think it's too bad is meaningless. Until you can come up with an actual argument for why it's not bad design, one that can actually counter the ones that claim it is, it's really hard to take you guys seriously.

 

I'm not convinced because the arguments are thin and flimsy, at best, and are mostly aimed at their supposed difficulty due to their size and movement, and the fact that they stagger. Both of which are not good arguments, for reasons I have already explained. I haven't seen an actual legitimate argument beyond those two that wasn't generally encompassed by them. And it's the same feeling, it's really hard to take it seriously when it's just repeated ad nauseum. Nobody has actually told me why Rollers are a bad design, in counterpoint to how I explained how they are of good design. Until somebody does, I can't agree with how they are badly designed.

 

Seriously. "It's not a bad design because players can compensate through skill... Unless they get bushwhacked by a random spawn or one roller sneaks up behind them when they're ninjaing around those four heavies and their attendant lancers in which case welp" is not an argument, because you can compensate for just about any difficulty in any game through sheer skill. Case in point: Dark Souls.

 

So, because you can compensate for any difficulty, including Rollers, in any game through sheer skill, this somehow makes the point of saying "you are fully capable of dealing with Rollers with some practice" somehow invalid? What? I mean, this would make sense if Rollers were an insurmountable enemy, but otherwise this just reads like nonsense, because they are hardly insurmountable, or even that lethal.

 

So yes, why should the most terrible aspect of the entire Grineer lineup be maintained? It's like the nervos. They were so terrible that DE rightly removed them, from what I hear. And do you know why they were so terrible? Because they removed player agency. The game is a game, which means it has to be fun, which means the players have to have agency in some fashion. And generally, the more agency, the better. Taking away that agency by stunlocking and stagger mechanics is bad.

The nervos wasn't removed because it removed player agency. It was cut because it removed player agency for an indefinite amount of time based on if your teammates could remove it from you, combined with the fact that it was the same size and speed as a Latcher, making it incredibly difficult to shoot. The punishment for failure did not correlate well to the effort needed to deal with the Nervos.

 

Short-lasting stuns and staggers are not inherently bad, but long-term stuns are, for all the reasons you yourself have stated. And I am against long-lasting stuns because they are indeed frustrating. Being stunned for half a second or so by a Roller is only frustrating if I let it be, because I should have the ability to retort after the stagger, which in the case of Rollers, you are given an overwhelming majority of the time.

 

Why are staggers that last such short amounts of time somehow inherently bad to you? Dieing during a mission removes your player agency, too, before you move to the mission fail screen; does this need to be removed? Of course it doesn't, because it's avoidable if you make an effort to not die. Rolling when you touch ground after a long jump removes agency, should this be removed? Doubtful, considering that you can slide if it bothers you that much. The same goes for Rollers; if you don't want to be staggered, make an effort to not be staggers. The difference being that a stagger imparts little actual detriment beyond a single second of stumbling. Whether you actually die or not to that isn't up to the Roller, it's up to the player.

 

The problem being, those goals are bad. Intrinsically. Small fast bullet sponge targets are bad, because they generally induce lots of frustration for little gain that cannot be replicated elsewhere. This also applies to chargers, but it's not nearly as onerous there because chargers are not tiny little bullet sponges that autostagger you if they touch you, with their staggering only applying if you let them hit you. With them not being so ridiculously tough and tiny that it's hard to kill them before they've reached stagger distance.

 

These goals are not bad. Rollers are small and fast, but they most certainly are not bullet sponges. A bullet sponge implies that you are striking your target but only having marginal, slow effect on it. A Roller will only act as a bullet sponge if you are constantly missing, which is, again, player skill involvement. And frustration? Frustration is inherently something that you will always face when you are presented with an actual challenge, because frustration is what one experiences when faced with opposition. Am I frustrated when I frolic my way through gangs of Grineer Lancers? I am not, and I am also not challenged by them and them alone. Am I frustrated when I face a handful of Rollers mixed in with those Lancers? Yes, somewhat, because I know I will have to actually expend some effort if I want to succeed. Some handle frustration from challenge better than others, but challenge, real challenge, always means adversity and the opportunity to overcome it.

 

And a majority of my own fun is derived from receiving and overcoming a challenge. Some people may be vocal about how Rollers are difficult, but an overwhelming majority of vocal players are also complaining about how the game is too simple, too easy, that they are not being challenged and thereby are not having that much fun. I enjoy a delightful romp through a level with my friends, shooting the S#&amp;&#036; on skype just like anyone else would, but I also want to appreciate the challenges a game gives me when I'm not using my friends as a means of enjoyment rather than the actual game.

 

And little gain? Success is your reward for good gameplay. Rollers don't drop cookies and pats on the back for you upon death, but you might get a mod, maybe, and now they are no longer around to disrupt you. Congratulations. You've overcome this challenge and now you move on to the next, until you complete the mission. If there's a supposed issue with the gain from killing Rollers, then there must be one with every single unit in this game, because your reward for killing all of them is largely the same, a chance for a little loot and the opportunity to progress further into the game.

 

If Grineer need to be more difficult, give them a flameblade with a grenade launcher to flush players out of cover. Give them machinegun troops with gorgons that are more common than heavies and work together keep you suppressed/flush you into the open where you can be gunned down. Nearly anything would be better. Don't give them a small bulletsponge enemy with stunlock that appears in multiples and zooms along extremely quickly such that any missed hit is extremely punishing.

 

There's also the stylistic issue. A tiny murderous robot feels more like it should be in the corpus arsenal than the Grineer one; Grineer are otherwise all about space marines with combined arms. Lancers and troopers working in tandem with shield lancers and seekers, with heavies anchoring the entire platoon and snipers/commanders harassing the enemy.

 

Of course, Corpus have their own stunlock unit, but shockwave moas are a lot less onerous than rollers because it doesn't take l33t twitch shooting skills to avoid being stunlocked to death.

 

I have no issue with adding new Grineer units. I encourage it.

 

But adding new Grineer units is not a valid reason to have Rollers removed.

 

And again, they are not bullet sponges.

 

And again, stuns and stunlocks are two different things, one I agree with, one I do not. I already agreed that stunlocks are bad and should be fixed. You need to retire that argument.

 

Rollers are just bigger Latchers. Corpus robots have a much more elegant theme going on for their mechanized units. Moa are bipedal bird-like machines that utilize both shields and ranged weapons against you, while Osprey are hovering machines with several specialized functions. Rollers, which used to be called Grinders, are simplistic ball drones with extendable blades, grinding gears and sparking bits. They are gritty, dirty and brutally simplistic. They fit the Grineer theme much, much more than the Corpus, but they provide the Grineer with unit diversity that would otherwise not be present. Your suggestions for new units are all well and good, but gameplay involved against them is the same as other Grineer units; shoot them in the face and avoid the gunfire. I'm very happy that Rollers are present at the moment, because if they were not, I know I'd be just straight up bored of using the same tactics on these Grineer soldiers endlessly.

 

Your first post in the thread was learn2play. That you provided some advice as to how to go about learning2play doesn't matter. Pretty much every subsequent argument your side has made in this thread has been a derivative of learn2play.

 

Indeed, you just said that punishing players for poor play is fine. The issue being that this punishes players who simply aren't as good as you.

 

If you aren't good at a game, the game tells you this by beating you. It is meant to be challenging, and meant to be surpassed through continued play and just simply getting better at the game. It punishes everybody, including myself, for doing poorly, because that is meant to be an incentive to continue and receive the gratification of overcoming the challenge that you once couldn't not. I still don't see how this is an issue.

 

If you aren't good at your job, you get fired. But you can get better and get paid. If you aren't good at chess, you don't beat your opponent. But you can get better and 'mate him next time. If you aren't good at a sport, you don't beat other players. But you can get better and beat the other competitors. If you aren't good at a game, you don't win. But you can get better and win.

 

It's the same thing. Put in more effort. Be rewarded.

 

These days, however, the trends for many online games seems to be: Put in little effort. Fail. Complain until changed. Put in little effort. Be rewarded.

 

I'll be honest here, I mostly solo high level systems, and I don't have much trouble with rollers even then. I whip out my lex and nail them repeatedly whenever I see them. I'm a skilled enough player that I can do that reliably.

Thing is, that's not very fun. Fighting other grineer is. I have a choice of tactics to use against them - I can hang back and trade fire with them from cover, or I can take a risk and rush in aggressively, trusting in my melee weapon or powers to give it to them at close range. Rollers have pretty much one viable tactic, and that's shooting them before they can stun you. Melee doesn't work - you just get staggered when you try and connect. Jump attacks don't work since they can stagger you out of midair.

 

Giving Grineer more options in the sense of better grenade use or more shooty units would be much more fun than pausing to take out a half dozen bothersome tiny damage sponge stagger machines before getting back to dealing with the enemies who're actually fun to fight.

 

From my perspective, fighting regular Grineer without Rollers is not very fun, at least not nearly as those with Rollers mixed in. There is much more to Rollers than "shoot them before they can stun you", just like there is more to Lancers and Troopers than "shoot them before they can shoot you."  Cherry-picking your experiences between the two doesn't make the Rollers any less meaningful. When I see a group of Rollers, I look to my surroundings; are there not enough ranged Grineer to threaten me if I remain in the open? If so, I can focus my efforts on fighting Rollers right then and there, dodging them and counterattacking them to dispatch them quickly so that I can move on to the straggling Grineers, which I expend little to no actual effort dealing with. Are there actually several dangerous ranged Grineer around? Then I should look for a place in which to deal with the Rollers first, hopefully before the Grineer advance towards me. Alternatively I can forgo killing the Rollers for a moment and attempt to dodge them as I kill off a few of the more dangerous Grineer units to soften the blow should I fail to dodge a Roller's leap and become staggered for a short second.

 

The amount of possible tactics are enormous, factoring in unit variety, area, what Tenno you are using, your equipment... countless possibilities. Removing Rollers completely only detracts from the experience. It doesn't enhance it, it only serves to make the gameplay have less variety. If anything, Warframe needs MORE variety of units. More fast, small units, more units that present actual danger. Removing units just because they provide a larger amount of challenge to players is hardly a good reason.

 

The other issue being that I'm pretty skilled as a player. But what about all the other players who aren't as skilled as I am? You know, the guys who form the backbone of the game's revenue stream? The casuals? In general, when devs cater to the hardcore crowd, they drive off the casuals by making things too hard.

 

You are skilled because you worked to become skilled. I want players to do that and overcome difficulty presented to them, not hang back and shirk away from a real challenge just because it's somehow perceived as frustrating.

Edited May 7, 2013 by MoonicusMaximus

[11.11.11]

 

You are skilled because you worked to become skilled. I want players to do that and overcome difficulty presented to them, not hang back and shirk away from a real challenge just because it's somehow perceived as frustrating.

 

Just pointing out - that not everyone has the time, money, or patience to do that Moonicus. 

[MJ12]

Ahahaha "frustration is what you'll always feel when faced with a real challenge". Funny, I was never frustrated in Post-Human Warrior in Crysis 2 and 3, or Delta difficulty in Crysis 1. Meanwhile, Veteran in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare was probably not nearly as 'difficult' (in the sense that it was way easier to just grind my way through checkpoints over time) but way more frustrating. Vanquish was quite challenging, even on normal, but not really frustrating. And you know, Warframe, despite being way the hell easier than PHW Crysis 3 is still more frustrating. No, you are objectively wrong. Frustration doesn't happen when a challenging enemy exists. Frustration happens when a frustrating game mechanic, in other words, fake difficulty, is added in.

 

If you're right, and Rollers are easy to fight, they should be removed and replaced with a better enemy, because they're frustrating without being challenging. If you're wrong, and Rollers aren't easy to counter, they should be removed and replaced with a better enemy, because they're frustrating and create fake difficulty. Interestingly enough your "argument", Moonicus, if you can even call it that, is wrong no matter how correct you are. Because either way they're unfun agency removal things. If  they create difficulty it's bad difficulty and they should be removed. If they don't create difficulty they fail at what they're intended to do and should be removed.

 

And also, your job analogy is hilarious. Jobs are allowed to be unfun and frustrating because you get paid for them. If DE wants to pay me to play Warframe, they can put in all the Rollers they want. Until then, I'm going to argue for maximizing fun and minimizing frustration, and I don't give a single whit if some toxic customers who play solely for the schadenfreude of less-skilled players suffering leave the game. In fact, I welcome it and DE probably should welcome it. People who think "you have to EARN your fun" is a good philosophy should be shoved right back into the Tomb of Horrors where they belong.

 

Tabletop RPGs have realized for the longest time ever that "you have to EARN your fun" is a &#036;&amp;*&amp;*#(%&amp; statement and anyone who insists on this should rightfully be mocked and marginalized. Computer games really need to take the same stance.

Edited May 7, 2013 by MJ12

[BobDillinger]

I was going to make a post about how frustration and difficulty are not in anyway intertwined but MJ12 just nailed it.

Here's an extension of games that are hard but not frustrating:

Demon's/Dark Souls

Bayonetta

Almost any classic/ Classic-inspired FPS, on higher difficulties, these almost always provide a solid challenge and frustration exists because of ones failures as a player.