Shield Dargyns Are Op Or Bugged

[Telogor]

Shield Dargyns used to be okay enemies.  They were upgraded versions of Dargyns and nobody had a problem with that.  Now, they function more like Shield Lancers, but worse.  Their shields are impervious to all types of damage, don't have a hole at the top, and can't even be punched through with the Velocitus.  The only ways to kill them are to flank them, which is often impossible due to trying to defend a comm tower or them just constantly turning towards you, and using AoE weapons, i.e. the Grattler.

 

Removing choice in player weapons and play styles is never a good thing, and when it forces the player to use a certain weapon that's terrible in most situations, it's even worse.  Either fix the bug or revert the change to the Shield Dargyn's shield.

 

(This also applies to the Shield Hellion Dargyn.)

Edited October 16, 2015 by Telogor

[Drunkenbagel]

I'd rather keep it. I actually like having to think for once instead of just constantly "point there press this is ded k gud next go shoot point press buton ded k finsh missun".

[AdunSaveMe]

I'd rather keep it. I actually like having to think for once instead of just constantly "point there press this is ded k gud next go shoot point press buton ded k finsh missun".

Starting to get sick of people defending stuff like this with "you/I actually have to think for once". That's not how it works. If this is intended it's just plain horrible and lazy design, and it's just as braindead as anything else, because now instead of actually aiming with your guns, you just mash melee. because everything else is slowly being phased out.

 

Don't defend crappy design.

[-Kryptyk-]

melee works fantastically on them as well, which happens to still be one of the most viable fighting styles in archwing.  

 

now, be careful with this post and its wording.  I wouldn't say that those are reducing options, but rather encouraging other styles of gameplay.  So what if you can't use your primary weapon on them?  Use a different means - it's all about adaptability and flexibility.  

I'd rather keep it. I actually like having to think for once instead of just constantly "point there press this is ded k gud next go shoot point press buton ded k finsh missun".

this ^

Edited October 16, 2015 by Firefly0037

[Arachne.]

just melee

[-Kryptyk-]

Starting to get sick of people defending stuff like this with "you/I actually have to think for once". That's not how it works. If this is intended it's just plain horrible and lazy design, and it's just as braindead as anything else, because now instead of actually aiming with your guns, you just mash melee. because everything else is slowly being phased out.

 

Don't defend crappy design.

It's not crappy design.  That would be surrounding the entire enemy with an impenetrable shield, not just a frontal shield.  so butthurt over having to do anything other than just point and shoot, jeez >.>

[Drunkenbagel]

Starting to get sick of people defending stuff like this with "you/I actually have to think for once". That's not how it works. If this is intended it's just plain horrible and lazy design, and it's just as braindead as anything else, because now instead of actually aiming with your guns, you just mash melee. because everything else is slowly being phased out.

 

Don't defend crappy design.

Actually mashing melee doesn't work. Flanking is still required. At least for me it's always been like that. If that isn't the case then it probably should be.

[AdunSaveMe]

It's not crappy design.  That would be surrounding the entire enemy with an impenetrable shield, not just a frontal shield.  so butthurt over having to do anything other than just point and shoot, jeez >.>

Oh boy, here we go. We draw ever closer to the inevitable "you just don't like it because you suck", like it always seems to turn out whenever someone criticizes enemy mechanics.

 

How about this; it is crappy design, because it does nothing to promote skill.

-Your aim doesn't matter because it's arbitrarily invincible from the front

-Flanking doesn't matter because it can turn as fast as you can and you have to hope it goes somewhere else, which is all the more fun as a client because they can do anything they want

-It limits gear options and does absolutely nothing to promote different styles of play at all

-It is lazy design 101; "make thing invincible for some reason"

 

But yeah, pointing and shooting is so bad, right? We can't have players doing that, in a THIRD PERSON SHOOTER.

There's definitely nothing good about a game requiring you to hit a moving target at range, let's just completely ignore a player's skill with a weapon for luls, right?

 

I'd love to know why you think it isn't lazy design. "ur mad cus u have 2 think" is not an argument.

 

Actually mashing melee doesn't work. Flanking is still required. At least for me it's always been like that. If that isn't the case then it probably should be.

It does work. It goes right through the shield.

 

If the shield blocked fatal damage once and then burst, THAT would work.

That's a mechanic that holds some actual weight, however small.

Edited October 16, 2015 by AdunSaveMe

[Kthal]

The reason Shield Lancers work is because you can handle them by aiming for the slit at eye level, making them fully vulnerable if you take the time to aim. Shield Dargyns do not have a simple vulnerability, and the hittable area around the edge of the shield is small to begin with, but is massively reduced in size because of the typical distance of enemies in Archwing.

 

I can imagine them being made much more fair if their shields were changed to being circular, slightly smaller than the target, and maybe with a small cutout at the bottom for their gun. I would also have their shield temporarily disabled while the Dargyn is sprinting.

[Drunkenbagel]

Oh boy, here we go. We draw ever closer to the inevitable "you just don't like it because you suck", like it always seems to turn out whenever someone criticizes enemy mechanics.

 

How about this; it is crappy design, because it does nothing to promote skill.

-Your aim doesn't matter because it's arbitrarily invincible from the front

-Flanking doesn't matter because it can turn as fast as you can and you have to hope it goes somewhere else

-It limits gear options and does absolutely nothing to promote different styles of play at all

-It is lazy design 101; "make thing invincible"

 

But yeah, pointing and shooting is so bad, right? We can't have players doing that, in a THIRD PERSON SHOOTER.

There's definitely nothing good about a game requiring you to hit a moving target at range, let's just completely ignore a player's skill with a weapon for luls, right?

 

It does work. It goes right through the shield.

Well as I said, probably should tweak it some. I've always had to flank around them to destroy them. 

Lazy design? Sure, probably. Does it make you try something else other than "point and shoot"? Definitely.

[AdunSaveMe]

Well as I said, probably should tweak it some. I've always had to flank around them to destroy them. 

Lazy design? Sure, probably. Does it make you try something else other than "point and shoot"? Definitely.

Yes, it makes you try melee spam or pressing a button to fire a power and forgetting about it.

 

Why is that better than actually using your skill with a weapon to aim at a moving target? Why is pressing E or dropping a thumper better than tracking and leading a target and dropping them with a charged shot?

 

Different, yes. More skilled, hell no. Nowhere near enough to warrant such a binary mechanic.

 

If I come across as aggressive, I apologize. It just irks me when people throw around that "it makes u think or adapt lel" rubbish without actually providing any arguments as to why it apparently does that.

Edited October 16, 2015 by AdunSaveMe

[Drunkenbagel]

Yes, it makes you try melee spam or pressing a button to fire a power and forgetting about it.

 

Why is that better than actually using your skill with a weapon to aim at a moving target? Why is pressing E or dropping a thumper better than tracking and leading a target and dropping them with a charged shot?

 

If I come across as aggressive, I apologize. It just irks me when people throw around that "it makes u think or adapt lel" rubbish without actually providing any arguments as to why it apparently does that.

Maybe I'm defending it because it's just "different". Everything else you either just shoot it or just spam a button. Not saying it isn't lazy design, it probably is. It's just something that makes me do something different so I like it.

 

As for being aggressive, it's all good. I'm a sarcastic butthole a lot of the time so I'm used to it.

[-InV-igo95862]

This unit only promotes press E to win mentality in archwing.

[AdunSaveMe]

Maybe I'm defending it because it's just "different". Everything else you either just shoot it or just spam a button. Not saying it isn't lazy design, it probably is. It's just something that makes me do something different so I like it.

 

As for being aggressive, it's all good. I'm a sarcastic butthole a lot of the time so I'm used to it.

Think of it this way;

Regular units - equal option of killing with gun, melee or powers

Shielders - stifled option of killing with gun, preferable to kill with melee or powers

Regular units - open to skilled aim or easy lock-on melee and powers

Shielders - basically immune to skilled aim and pushes you towards easy lock-on melee and powers

 

It pushes you towards the easy fire-and-forget solution. Just because guns are a primary source of damage doesn't make them easymode, it doesn't make them brainless, and it doesn't warrant the "u jus mad cus u cant shoot em 2 deth lol" thing I keep seeing, because melee and abilities are far more simple and binary.

 

Different =/= good. If there was an enemy that could only be killed with heat damage fired from a velocitus, that would be different too, but it wouldn't be good either. Bit of an exaggeration, but basically the same concept.

Edited October 16, 2015 by AdunSaveMe

[Airwolfen]

I melee like 90% of the time so I have no real problems with them.

 

I have more hate for the Hellion Dargyns at high level. One-shots everywhere...

[Phased-Aura]

You're literally in gosh dang space, you can fly around them or melee them. Just like regular enemies you can't melee every one, some bosses are impervious to powers, and this one cant get shot from the front. There are tons of ways to deal with archwing and given the fact that you're in space I find it easy to get around.

[Numbsky1]

This unit only promotes press E to win mentality in archwing.

Next thing people will complain about: Press any button to win.....

[Yami666]

fly a bit against him, turn around, so he can see your back, he will not be able to slow down enought and will fly around you and you will see his back and then do what do you like

[Drunkenbagel]

Think of it this way;

Regular units - equal option of killing with gun, melee or powers

Shielders - stifled option of killing with gun, preferable to kill with melee or powers

 

Different =/= good. If there was an enemy that could only be killed with heat damage fired from a velocitus, that would be different too, but it wouldn't be good either. Bit of an exaggeration, but basically the same concept.

Stifled, yet not completely out of the question. You're still able to use whatever method you see fit. Sure, it may be a little more difficult, but melee also suffers from enemies that are impossible to kill. 

 

I think it should be: Some methods work better than others, yet not all are off the table. That way people can keep whatever playstyle they like.

[AdunSaveMe]

Stifled, yet not completely out of the question.

But it's not even stifled for a good reason. It doesn't promote different styles of play or anything like that. It's the most boring kind of anti-player effect; the kind that means your skill doesn't matter half as much as your gear does, just because the game says so.

 

When an enemy creates less options without promoting or allowing a counter, it's bad. If it's done in a lazy way, for example, making a front-facing shield completely invincible, then it's bad design.

[Drunkenbagel]

But it's not even stifled for a good reason. It doesn't promote different styles of play or anything like that. It's the most boring kind of anti-player effect; the kind that means your skill doesn't matter half as much as your gear does, just because the game says so.

 

When an enemy creates less options without promoting or allowing a counter, it's bad. If it's done in a lazy way, for example, making a front-facing shield completely invincible, then it's bad design.

How could it promote another style of play? Everything dies so fast that it's not worth putting in some advantageous effect when doing something different. 

 

That seems to be the problem. Nothing lives long enough so there is no point in trying to design it well.

[AdunSaveMe]

Nothing lives long enough so there is no point in trying to design it well.

Wrong. So, so wrong.

 

How could it promote another style of play?

Shielding other units; priority. Single fatal-blocking shields; more threat than basic units. There are multiple ways, and most of them are better than the boring crappy idea of just making the shield invincible.

[Drunkenbagel]

Wrong. So, so wrong.

 

Shielding other units; priority. Single fatal-blocking shields; more threat than basic units. There are multiple ways, and most of them are better than the boring crappy idea of just making the shield invincible.

Let's just agree to disagree. I've got nothing, and I want to take a break from Warframe for a while.

[AdunSaveMe]

Let's just agree to disagree. I've got nothing, and I want to take a break from Warframe for a while.

Fair call. Not the worst discussion I've ever had.

Edited October 16, 2015 by AdunSaveMe

[-Kryptyk-]

Let's just agree to disagree. I've got nothing, and I want to take a break from Warframe for a while.

 

Fair call. Not the worst discussion I've ever had.

welcome to the warframe forums! how may we argue with you today to the point of insanity?? :D