Please Stop With That Stupid Damage Cap.

[Davoodoo]

Aren't you guys too harsh on the situation?

 

Warframe is in beta, subject to any changes whatsoever? we just had an early and unfinished introduction of a new mechanic, of course it's bound to tweaks later on. but as i said, you are mixing 2 problems with different solutions. So please refocus the topic beacause i'm lost at what the point is?

 

The damage cap is not only affecting one weapon class in particular, going full melee will give more damage over time than the high dps full auto.

 

And as far as i read this topic, you only used a single class of weapons in a certain situation, and never thought about a tactic to go around it?

Especially because its called beta and things are maybe subject to change we should critize what we believe is bad design. 

 

If we dont give our feedback now then when will we give it?? after things are gonna be set in stone??

Edited June 6, 2015 by Davoodoo

[Autongnosis]

They SHOULD invalidate entire classes of weapons to force build variety and using strategy and tactics to take out your opponents.

That WOULD be a good thing, IF they weren't constantly invalidating the same classes over and over again.

 

EVERY high damage single shot weapon got shafted over and over again, first the Nullifier and its bubble, then the Manic, then the Juggernaut.

Pray tell me were strategy and build variety and tactics factor in when the best choice for dealing with every enemy in the game is always Soma/Boltor P and their like.

 

You're telling me that a sniper rifle should, in your opinion, be far less effective at taking down a boss than a glorified SMG? Wat?

 

Want to know what a good boss with timed opening is? Lephantis. It's actually REWARDING to land a bow salvo, a Tonkor grenade, or a Vectis shot in its mouths.

Want to know the bad ones? All the damage-capped per bullet ones.

[lightini]

Especially because its called beta and subjects are maybe subject to change we should critize what we believe is bad design. 

 

If we dont give our feedback now then when will we give it?? after things are gonna be set in stone??

 

There is a way in saying things, and when you see the tittle from the topic you already get an idea of biased opinion.

So far, there is a great deal of feedback, but the discussion get messed up because we have two situations:

-The damage cap from new mobs.

-The sniper and shotgun weapon class.

 

The two are not entertwinned and should be dealt separatly ofr easier and more constructive solutions.

[StonedMakak]

 

You said it, just another "cheap" method to stay alive, wether it's weapons, CC, one shot finisher or whatever, there is no difference.

 

 

We agree on this point, the problem in question is the damage mitigation, not the weapon class

 

Yeah, we are not saying "hur dur nerf soma nao!", it's only that both weapon classes should be viable. A great suggestion was already made: every "opening phase" should allow to deal X damage to the boss and whether you do that in one powerful shot or a series of weak ones is up to you. Unfortunately it got buried under all the flame. 

 

There it is.

 

Yeah, per hit damage cap is silly for this very reason.

 

If you insist on having a cap then make it maximum damage taken per opening... aka every time that weakspot opens it can take X amount of damage and then make that cap a bit higher.

 

QFT.

[Autongnosis]

The total damage cap on the opening is a pretty good idea yeah. Don't know how easy hard it would be to implement but it would be much better.

[lightini]

Yeah, we are not saying "hur dur nerf soma nao!", it's only that both weapon classes should be viable. A great suggestion was already made: every "opening phase" should allow to deal X damage to the boss and whether you do that in one powerful shot or a series of weak ones is up to you. Unfortunately it got buried under all the flame. 

 

Well then, case closed, what are we nitpicking about?

But is seems a lot like Mutalist Aalad V? he has phases when he is vulnerable?

[StonedMakak]

Well then, case closed, what are we nitpicking about?

But is seems a lot like Mutalist Aalad V? he has phases when he is vulnerable?

 

According to the wiki (haven't fought him since I got Mesa, I detest the RNG chance to fight the bosses in this game), yes, he is vulnerable when he's mind controlling Tenno, doesn't say anything about a damage cap tho, and frankly, I don't remember either. I'll take your word on that. 

[DietEbolaCola]

 

And in what situations are rifles invalidated? Or any other high ROF weapons for that matter? Genuine questions, have not ran into situation like that myself. 

 

 

Answer: Conclave (your low ROF fire high damage weapons work better here), Manics (I use melee to take them down.. high ROF weapons seems way inefficient on them).

 

People that use low ROF high damage primaries usually balance out with high ROF secondaries, or vice versa.

 

You swap weapons as you encounter different enemies in game. It's called adapting to your circumstances. That's what I was getting at.

[NN13]

Man gotta love those whiners.

Push # to win, OP weapons, OP warframes, once you put together some ennemies to give "challenge" everybody come back ramming beating on a dead horse...

 

That's what the community asked! and that's what we get, the juggernaut. if you're not happy with him, take a mesa use peacemaker and be done with it... you just forgot what his purpose was. 

Wasn't really thinking of commenting, but I just want to ask you something -

 

So, according to you Soma Prime and Boltor Prime are not OP, but Hek and Dread and Paris Prime are?

[EvilChaosKnight]

Answer: Conclave (your low ROF fire high damage weapons work better here), Manics (I use melee to take them down.. high ROF weapons seems way inefficient on them).

YES! Because bringing PVP in a PVE balance discussion totally makes perfect sense! (Also not touching that PVP)

 

You swap weapons as you encounter different enemies in game. It's called adapting to your circumstances. That's what I was getting at.

Hm, so when will AR users will have to adapt to anything and switch weapons? I've been there for well over a year now...

[NN13]

People want a challenge, but when you give it to them they whine about it being challenging. It's really weird.

Except it's only challenging with single-shot weapons.

 

Its not that challenging with Soma or Boltor or Braton prime for that matter.

 

And Its way too easy with a Torid.

[StonedMakak]

Answer: Conclave (your low ROF fire high damage weapons work better here), Manics (I use melee to take them down.. high ROF weapons seems way inefficient on them).

 

People that use low ROF high damage primaries usually balance out with high ROF secondaries, or vice versa.

 

You swap weapons as you encounter different enemies in game. It's called adapting to your circumstances. That's what I was getting at.

 

Explanation: Conclave is PvP, I should have specified that I was talking about PvE as the issue at hand (vulnerable phases) is non-existent in PvP.

 

Counter-Argument: I have no problem with Manics using high ROF, proper burst fire + dodging works just fine. Moreover high ROF comes out on top here as well IMHO in comparison to snipers, because missing a shot form low ROF weapon in close quarters, against an enemy like Manic, is more painful. 

 

Statement: I am all for weapon switching for different situations having an edge over sticking to one gun. However this should affect all weapons to the same degree, and it is not the case currently and you know it. Moreover there is another thread in Weapons where a guy argues that he should be able to do all content solo (including T4 Surv up to 40 min) using just his secondary and some melee for coptering. So we might be in the minority here. 

Edited June 6, 2015 by tisdfogg

[DietEbolaCola]

Hm, so when will AR users will have to adapt to anything and switch weapons? I've been there for well over a year now...

 

AR Answer: There are situations where the AR is just doing suppressive fire on an entrenched enemy and grenades are used to take them out or flush them out so the squad can advance.

[lightini]

Wasn't really thinking of commenting, but I just want to ask you something -

 

So, according to you Soma Prime and Boltor Prime are not OP, but Hek and Dread and Paris Prime are?

 

No nothing of the sort, i was talking about ANY weapons or warframe, over forma, and overmodded against basic ennemies or bosses, forgetting about gameplay and tactics, and it just becomes farming, nothing more nothing less, just a vegetable droning around.

[NN13]

Just quoting my calculations about Nullifiers from another thread here for "lightini" and people alike so you guys can see why this is unfair towards single-shot weapons -

 

This first one uses linear equation for the sake of simplicity for people not belonging to maths background but this is not the actual calculation -

So, we are at square one?

"Equip something else" again?

Did you read all those posts before?

 

Click for Not much Sarcasm (No offense to you or anyone,for that matter)

You like Shotguns. And most Shotguns can do what they are good at. Traditional idea of a shotgun is that they can dispatch enemies at CQC quickly. And SGs in Warframe is no different(with exception to the fact that really high level enemies can't be one-shotted).

 

SGs are not supposed to hit sniper crewmen at 50m. But Bows and Snipers are supposed to hit Sniper Crewmen at 70m. But I struggle to hit a Sniper Crewman with an unfair shield(read: Nullifier) from 50m,while Auto-rifles(all of them,not just Soma/Boltor) can do it without a problem.

 

In case of Nullifiers, slow RoF ranged/CQC weapons can not perform the functions they are supposed to do. That includes Shotguns as well(Except Boar(prime)). I mentioned Hek in one of my posts. If only you read it,you wouldn't have been so sarcastic(though it does not feel sarcastic to me).

 

As a dedicated Bow user(not really a sniper), I know that Nullifiers are unfair towards Bow(and other slow RoF weapons). Thats why I do equip a fast firing Secondary. But as I mentioned, that is the bandaid we all use.

 

As for you missing something, I think you missed all the previous posts. Because you are technically repeating what KnotOfMetal already said.

 

As for your second point:

Since you feel like hours and MR means a good understanding of game, I am halfway to MR20. I have 1500+ hours. I am only missing Boar,Braton Vandal, Lato Vandal, Snipetron Vandal and founder's items.

I have used everything else in the game, played every type of mission thoroughly and literally mugged up the wiki. So,by your logic(and not mine), I have a far better understanding about the game.

So maybe, check out our accounts first and see if we are just noobs before you go on about what you have achieved.

So you are saying snipers and bows are not the right tool for taking out an enemy with a sniper?

I fail to see your logic,sorry.

 

What is the point of buffing Snipers if they do a constant 400 damage per shot?

And I wanted to leave that discussion but apparently, this thread has already gone the other way. So, might as well put forward my arguments.

 

"Why do you think every weapon in the game should be viable in every situation? Because Soma/Boltor Prime?"

No, because every auto-rifle outperforms my Dread/PP against nullifiers. Even MK1-Braton,as I showed below.

 

Since you are not understanding the point just by our theoretical talk, lets go into some maths,shall we?

Let's take my 4 Forma Dread with all the mods. I do an average of 20-25k non-red-crit-body-shot on other units. So lets,take that as our damage for my Dread. Firerate is 0.7.

 

Now, let's buy a MK1-Braton from the market. It is un-potatoed, un-forma'ed, without any mods. It's damage is 18 and firerate is 7.5.

 

Lets take a Vulkar as well, as the 3rd case. It comes with mods. Damage > 400. RoF = 1.5.

 

Let's consider a nullifier with 10k Bubble-Shield.

 

Let's keep it simple so that people who are not good with maths can understand as well.

 

Game 1 : Using Dread. My Dread's damage is hard capped at 400 against Nullifier Shield.Starting after my first shot, I am doing 280(400*0.7) damage to the shield per second.

 

So,if I make an equation of total damage with 'x' as the total time taken :

 

400+ 280x= 10k

Solving for x,

x = 34.2= 34 secs(approx.). This is considering I need 0 secs to draw an arrow.

Now, I draw a total of 24 arrows after my first shot,to take down the whole Nullifier Shield. So, 12 secs to draw 24 arrows at 0.5s reload.

So, actual duration to take down Nullifier shield = 34+12= 46 secs.

 

Game 2  : Using MK1-Braton. MK1-Braton's 18 damage is buffed to 100 against Nullifier Shield. Starting after my first shot, I am doing 750(100*7.5) damage to the shield per second.

 

So,if I make an equation of total damage with 'x' as the total time taken :

 

100+ 750x= 10k

Solving for x,

x = 12.8= 13 secs(approx.) Not considering Reloads.

Now, I take 99 bullets to take down the whole Nullifier shield after my first shot (9900/100=99). So, thats one reload. That's an additional 2 secs. Lets take an additional approx. value of time, in case the shield regenerates to some extent during reload. Say, 5 secs.

So, actual duration to take down Nullifier shield = 13+2+5= 20 secs.

 

Game 3  : Vulkar

I have used the charge shot in Bows. But we usually snapshot bows against Nullifiers. But then also, we cant snapshot at more than 1.5 rof.

 

Even if I use Vulkar, it has RoF of 1.5 and max. damage of capped 400. (Damage per sec = 400*1.5 = 600)

Still 'x' will come out to be 16 secs. (400 + 600x = 10k)

I need 24 more bullets after my first shot. (9600/400=24)

That is a total of 5 reloads. (Since I actually need a total of 25 bullets)

So, 15 secs reload time(at 3.0 secs per reload).

As in the case of Braton, lets assume 5.0 secs extra time everytime it regenerates during reloads.

That's an extra of 25.0 secs.

So, total time = 16+15+25 = 56 secs.

 

You still think Nullifier design is not unfair towards slow RoF weapons?

 

Disclaimer: I didn't use the actual calculation to keep it simple. I used Linear Equation, but actually this is not the case. Nonetheless, real calculations give similar logical results but with different answer values.

 

 

Anyone who is good at Maths might want to check out the actual calculation as per my understanding from the Wiki and tell me if its right or wrong - https://forums.warframe.com/index.php?/topic/468546-nerf-nullifer-spawn-rate-to/page-3#entry5226119

 

Just so I am clear, I am actually against nerfing their spawn rates. Instead what I want is that Slow RoF weapons to be as viable as High RoF weapons against them.

 

This second calculation is the original one, based on the Wikia information -

I know....But for the sake of simplicity, I used a Linear Equation.

 

As I said in the disclaimer, actual values give similar logical results.

 

But for the sake of my clarity, how are you doing the actual calculation without the initial radius value of the sphere?

 

Looking at your post, I think you mistook the numbers.I checked the Wikia and it says that Normal Nullifier bubble has a shrinkage rate 6% / 24% of the current size for 100 / 400 damage. That 6 / 24 is not the number of bullets.

 

For corrupted Nullifier, its 4% / 16% .

 

Original Calculation as per my understanding  from Wiki:

 

Assuming the initial radius to be 5m.

 

I am using Normal Nullifier values. Thats 6% / 24% . Or rather as rate , 0.06 / 0.24. For visibility,I am taking 0.06 = 'x' and 0.24 = 'y'.

 

For Min damage:

1st Hit : 5 - 5x = 5(1-x)

2nd Hit : 5(1-x) - [x * 5(1-x)] = 5(1-x)^2

3rd Hit : 5(1-x)^2 - [x * 5(1-x)^2] = 5(1-x)^3

...

...

...

Nth Hit : 5(1-x)^N

 

Radius in the end is 0m. So,

5(1-x)^N = 0

For the simplicity, I am replacing 0 with 0.01m, so that I can directly use Log.

 

So,

=> 5(1-x)^N = 0.01

=> (1-x)^N = 0.002

=> N = Log 0.002 to the base (1-x) = (log 0.002)/log (1-x)  {both to the base 10}

Replacing x with 0.06 and solving for N,

N = 100.4 or 101 (Approx)

So, number of bullets/arrows needed if damage is min = 101.

 

For Max damage,

use y in place of x and substitute its value with 0.24.

N = 22.6 or 23

So, number of bullets/arrows needed if damage is max = 23.

 

SO, for weapons without fire rate mods-

1. Boltor Prime at max damage - 2.3 secs without reload.

                            min damage - 10.1 + 2.4(reload once) = 12.5 secs

2. MK1-Braton at max damage - 3.06 secs

                            min damage - 13.4 secs with one reload - Total time = 13.4+2.0 = 15.4 secs.

3. Dread at max damage - 46 secs + 15.4(22 reloads) = 61.4 secs

                            min damage - 202+70(100 reloads) = 272 secs

4. Vulkar at max damage - 15.3+9.0(3 reloads) = 24.3 secs

                            min damage - Not possible. Base damage of vulkar is 200.

Edited June 6, 2015 by NN13

[NN13]

No nothing of the sort, i was talking about ANY weapons or warframe, over forma, and overmodded against basic ennemies or bosses, forgetting about gameplay and tactics, and it just becomes farming, nothing more nothing less, just a vegetable droning around.

 

Then why should Auto-rifles be more effective in general against priority targets, whereas it is the job of snipers to take out priority targets?

 

Just so you know, most of us do not want to one-shot juggernaut or Nullifiers. What we want is that if Boltor does 50 damage per bullet to Juggernaut Armor, Dread and Opticor should do 500.

 

As for Nullifers, I do feel that their shields should not stop bullets, be it auto-rifle or single shot. Nullifiers are supposed to "nullify" warframe abilities, not bullets.

Edited June 6, 2015 by NN13

[(PSN)IIIDevoidIII]

Thread cleaned of rude and off topic replies once more.

If you see rule breaking behavior, report it; please don't add to it.

Thank you.

[Vance.Stubbs]

Thread cleaned of rude and off topic replies once more.

If you see rule breaking behavior, report it; please don't add to it.

Thank you.

 

Ok, thank you, it won't happen again. I just couldn't resist making that guy mad :>

[CapedBaldy]

@NN13: You would know that the Dread doesn't need 61.4 seconds to break a Nullifier bubble if you tried it in game. The bubble appears to have a minimum size and that's when it collapses and it definitely isn't 0.01.

 

This is why we use values obtained from in game rather than calculations. The value from the other thread we talked about of 6/24 and 9/36 of shots required at max/min for corpus/corrupted just happen to be the same for the shrinking percentage for corpus nullifiers.

 

Nullifiers are still a pile of tosh and should be scrapped.

[Vance.Stubbs]

@NN13: You would know that the Dread doesn't need 61.4 seconds to break a Nullifier bubble if you tried it in game. The bubble appears to have a minimum size and that's when it collapses and it definitely isn't 0.01.

 

This is why we use values obtained from in game rather than calculations. The value from the other thread we talked about of 6/24 and 9/36 of shots required at max/min for corpus/corrupted just happen to be the same for the shrinking percentage for corpus nullifiers.

 

Nullifiers are still a pile of tosh and should be scrapped.

 

I also "like" how due to bug/balance issue/engine limitation Nulifier Buble doesn't protect them from explosions caused by Bolto augment and some other AoE stuff. Totally makes sense!

[NN13]

@NN13: You would know that the Dread doesn't need 61.4 seconds to break a Nullifier bubble if you tried it in game. The bubble appears to have a minimum size and that's when it collapses and it definitely isn't 0.01.

 

This is why we use values obtained from in game rather than calculations. The value from the other thread we talked about of 6/24 and 9/36 of shots required at max/min for corpus/corrupted just happen to be the same for the shrinking percentage for corpus nullifiers.

 

Nullifiers are still a pile of tosh and should be scrapped.

I know you said that. But the fact remains that both your and my methods of calculations will give similar logical results, but different arithmetic results.

 

You can just quote your post as well, you know, so people get the overall idea of why it is unfair. I really didn't feel like doing the calculations again, so just quoted those, seeing as they arrive at the same logic.

[lightini]

Then why should Auto-rifles be more effective in general against priority targets, whereas it is the job of snipers to take out priority targets?

 

Just so you know, most of us do not want to one-shot juggernaut or Nullifiers. What we want is that if Boltor does 50 damage per bullet to Juggernaut Armor, Dread and Opticor should do 500.

 

As for Nullifers, I do feel that their shields should not stop bullets, be it auto-rifle or single shot. Nullifiers are supposed to "nullify" warframe abilities, not bullets.

 

Here we have to see the juggernaut and the nullifier as 2 separate entities, as they introduce 2 different mechanics but with the same general idea.

One is a shield with capping damage, an overshield if you would.

The other is a damage capping on armor, with weakspots.

 

Here i only focus on the juggernaut, as the nullifier has come from a long way and is still question of tweakings.

 

Obviously the juggernaut with his armor and weakspots affect all weapons, and his tweaking on damage reduction is especially harsh on snipers and shotguns. but it ends here.

Actually going full melee berserker you will deal more damage over time rendering ANY weapon class almost obsolete against him. it's a problem of mechanic tweakings, not weapons class.

[CapedBaldy]

I also "like" how due to bug/balance issue/engine limitation Nulifier Buble doesn't protect them from explosions caused by Bolto augment and some other AoE stuff. Totally makes sense!

Seems to have been fixed/nerfed recently. Torid doesn't seem to work against them ever since last patch. Some people report Penta and Ogris not working.

[CapedBaldy]

I know you said that. But the fact remains that both your and my methods of calculations will give similar logical results, but different arithmetic results.

 

You can just quote your post as well, you know, so people get the overall idea of why it is unfair. I really didn't feel like doing the calculations again, so just quoted those, seeing as they arrive at the same logic.

I know that too, but people tend to try and pick out the weakest points of the argument, which would be that the numbers while relatively correct when scaled up are not the ones in game.

 

I agree with you, Nullifiers are unfair, but people will just say that your calculations are wrong and therefore have no place in the argument. And that would be quite a shame, seeing the work you put into it.

[NN13]

Here we have to see the juggernaut and the nullifier as 2 separate entities, as they introduce 2 different mechanics but with the same general idea.

One is a shield with capping damage, an overshield if you would.

The other is a damage capping on armor, with weakspots.

 

Here i only focus on the juggernaut, as the nullifier has come from a long way and is still question of tweakings.

 

Obviously the juggernaut with his armor and weakspots affect all weapons, and his tweaking on damage reduction is especially harsh on snipers and shotguns. but it ends here.

Actually going full melee berserker you will deal more damage over time rendering ANY weapon class almost obsolete against him. it's a problem of mechanic tweakings, not weapons class.

 

And OP is infact saying that it is the problem of the game mechanics and not the weapon class. Because other that these damage-capping units, Single-shots weapons do just fine. Except that the Sniper class needs a buff. Bows and Opticors are fine against others. I am not an avid Shotgun user, so I will refrain from commenting on those.

 

A better mechanism for the juggernaut would have been complete damage negation from all sources on its armor and huge damage on weakspots. Huge as in about 20 shots from Boltor Prime and Soma Prime and 5-6 shots from Dread, Opticor and the likes on a level 50 Juggernaut.

 

Something similar to Lephantis.

Edited June 6, 2015 by NN13