No Matter How Hard I Gimp Myself, To Me, Warframe Will Never Be Challenging.

[Chipputer]

where they wanna change / retune / rework EVERY single bit of this game?

Stop right there.

 

Nobody wants to rework the entirety of the game. People who want to do that want to play an entirely different game and do so. You aren't grasping the nuance of the varied opinions if this is what you're taking from them.

[Phatose]

Lets use a quick example to demonstrate what I mean. Imagine a Loki is running around on a T4 survival wrecking face as usual. Lets say he isn't using a perma-invis build and is maintaining his invisibility with energy drops and restores. The current situation isn't necessarily difficult but it would classify as a challenge. The player chose an appropriate build and is executing his strategy. The only factor influencing his success is his own actions. Then he bottoms out on energy and runs out of energy restores, so what next. The only two options he has is to either take cover or utilize parkour to avoid damage. Meanwhile he will also need to be doing enough damage to kill a decent number of enemies so that an energy orb can potentially drop. At this point, challenge is already gone.

 

Why? Because the player no longer has control of the situation. Invisibility is his only reliable source of protection. Taking cover becomes increasingly less sustainable as the enemy count grows. So, in his current situation, that will fail to provide enough defense to allow him to survive. Parkour, on the other hand, provides imperfect protection at best. The only way of achieving an 100% avoidance rate is to stay outside of the enemy's effective range. Which becomes impossible when the player is in certain tile sets or gets surrounded by certain enemy types. The second the player lost the capability to use their abilities, they lost the capability to defend themselves. At that point their success became dependent on some factor outside of themselves.

 

The player no longer has control because he's already failed.  Losing your control is an acceptable outcome of failure across pretty much all of gaming.  Once Mario has fallen into the hole, it's too late - you screwed up already.

 

And that is what you've described.  Multiple strategic failures on the players part.  He's chosen a build which is reliant on energy and thus luck, complete with the foreknowledge that his reserves will run out.    He's chosen it anyway. 

 

He's then pressed onward despite that knowledge after his reserves run out - beyond the point where his shields and health can sustain him.

 

 

He failed to account for the dangers he's faced with in a way that allows him to play in a mission as long as he'd like.  He failed to obtain and use sufficient reserves to allow him to continue after beyond the point his energy could sustain though kills.  And then to top it all off, he failed to extract when the mission became unsurvivable.

 

 

This is not a pure action game.   Action skills do not need to be able to save you if you fail at the strategic RPG portion of the game. 

 

It's perfectly acceptable if I fail to dodge or shoot straight, die, and thus lose control for my action skills failure.  It's perfectly fair for people to fail and lose control for their failure to recognize a situation and react accordingly.

[DiabolusUrsus]

The player no longer has control because he's already failed.  Losing your control is an acceptable outcome of failure across pretty much all of gaming.  Once Mario has fallen into the hole, it's too late - you screwed up already.

 

And that is what you've described.  Multiple strategic failures on the players part.  He's chosen a build which is reliant on energy and thus luck, complete with the foreknowledge that his reserves will run out.    He's chosen it anyway. 

 

He's then pressed onward despite that knowledge after his reserves run out - beyond the point where his shields and health can sustain him.

 

 

He failed to account for the dangers he's faced with in a way that allows him to play in a mission as long as he'd like.  He failed to obtain and use sufficient reserves to allow him to continue after beyond the point his energy could sustain though kills.  And then to top it all off, he failed to extract when the mission became unsurvivable.

 

 

This is not a pure action game.   Action skills do not need to be able to save you if you fail at the strategic RPG portion of the game. 

 

It's perfectly acceptable if I fail to dodge or shoot straight, die, and thus lose control for my action skills failure.  It's perfectly fair for people to fail and lose control for their failure to recognize a situation and react accordingly.

 

I will agree with this the second the player can choose a playstyle that doesn't rely on luck from the beginning of the game.

 

Don't have Energy Siphon/Rage/etc.? You're relying on drops and restores for your energy. Don't have Redirection/Vitality/Steel Fiber? You're relying on parkour for evasion. 

 

It's true that Warframe is not a pure action game, but the RPG progression side of it is so broken that the action elements are the only reliable ones. 

[MythBringer]

Remove immunity to damage, replace it buy damage reduction.

Implement reselience so enemies can gain immunity to that S#&$y infinite crowd control.

Revise warframe abilities, so that they have cooldowns, moments of weakness and moments of great power.

Add more abilities to all warframes, instead of launching new warframes.....

 

gg

[Eminem2420]

Rage inducing difficulty?

 

You literally don't understand what people who want any form of challenge are asking for.

That is your only comeback? Saying that i am misunderstanding what he is saying? I know exactly what he is saying. Don't try to talk down to me. 

 

Rage inducing? You mean like how enemies become near unkillable AND 1 shot you after you've dumped 2 mags in them? or the one where you get hooked and stun locked into eternity before finally being put out of your misery? Or the one where a ring of fire destroys you behind cover because it was behind u? Oh, or what about the one where you face 3+ nullifier that have bubbles that overlap and you have single shot high dmg weapons to take down high level enemies but by the time you destroy 1 bubble, another one covers him and starts to regenerate the first one?

You've also missed the point of the OP which was to increase the depth of player-npc interactions. It only creates difficulty in the sense that you need to familiarize yourself with how to approach types and groups of enemies and use ur brain a bit more when using powers to make everything about as much fun as shooting crates for 2 hrs.

" Players like me who want something that is both challenging and difficult aren't able to get that from Warframe. We can either have an easy challenge or a difficult gamble. Neither are satisfying." I didn't miss anything. Don't try to say that i don't understand, because i understand what he is saying perfectly. 

[Eminem2420]

Please stop exaggerating challenge into pseudo-hardcore elitism. (Not you, specifically, but people with your general perspective.) 

 

When I say I want the game to be more challenging, I mean...

 

I want enemies that put up a fight without using cheap handicaps like Corrupted Bombards and their ability to have four missiles in the air before your knockdown takes effect.

 

I want balance that allows me to appreciate powerful weapons without being so universally powerful that I can't really distinguish between different enemies let alone factions when it comes to pacing or tactics.

 

I want a game where the end-game challenges test my ability to control my Warframe, not the extensiveness of my collection.

 

I want more challenge, because enemies that can only effectively fight you by tying your hands behind your back and killing you in a split-second strike me as boring, frustrating, and decisively un-fun. The fact that these same enemies can be rendered completely ineffectual with the right exploits is equally infuriating. 

 

I don't want Warframe to become rage-inducingly difficult. I want it to stop being that way. 

I am not "exaggerating" anything. Challenge and difficulty go hand in hand. You can't increase one without increasing the other. 

[DiabolusUrsus]

I am not "exaggerating" anything. Challenge and difficulty go hand in hand. You can't increase one without increasing the other. 

 

Yes, you are. Why is asking for the game to be more challenging the same thing as asking for rage-inducing difficulty? I feel like you're purposefully ignoring the point I'm trying to make, though, so that's that I guess. 

[ranks21]

and when all these suggested changes theoretically takes place and players become used to it and knowing how to beat it we are back to where we are today so in this I would have to say no<< simply because it solves nothing.

[Mr.Lube]

If you're so awesome and warframe is too easy no matter what you do, just don't equip mods.

 

If warframe is so easy after that, then I'll call you a great player.

People need to stop suggesting that gimping yourself in order to find good and challenging gameplay is okay. It's not.

[Phatose]

People need to stop suggesting that gimping yourself in order to find good and challenging gameplay is okay. It's not.

 

And people need to stop suggesting challenge should exist in this progress based game when you're at the top.  It shouldn't.  That's the whole point of progress.

[Xarteros]

To make the game more challenging, get rid of anything that completely or effectively negates any particular part of your arsenal. Negating something doesn't make the game more of a challenge, it just makes it difficult. Make attacks that CAN negate something (grapples, ability block) require a clear line of sight to your enemy, and more evident animations (like the Drekgar masters throwing their Halikar, really clear)

If Stalker can negate your powers, it should be a specific attack that you can dodge, and otherwise your powers should at least have some limited effect against him.

Nullifiers as they are shouldn't exist any more, since we have the 'Nul' corpus enemies now. Nullifier fields should now only block incoming abilities as a shield, but allow projectiles to pass through (so a nullifier shielding a frost eximus actually shields everyone properly until one of their fields is broken). Nul units can only effect you within a certain range, and you get the visuals to know when they are close, they might just need to be made more obvious to be balanced (glowing/pulsing effects when their nullification is active). Frankly, I don't think nullification should work as is anyway. Nullification should make all durations tick 2-3X as fast (or cost that much more energy drain if it's a toggle) so they don't completely negate your ability by lightly grazing your ankle through the floor, they just make it run out a lot faster. You could even make it that you can cast abilities within a nullifier bubble, but it costs more energy (or does less damage) and has the 2-3X less duration penalty. If you're an all-melee character like Valkyr, Nullifiers aren't a challenge, they're just stupid. With these changes, you could charge in with War Cry or Hysteria on and actually have a fighting chance against them, as long as you are really quick.

No enemy should gain damage reduction while CC'd, sleeping people aren't magically bulletproof and far too many frames depend on CC'ing their enemy so they can do damage without being one-shot. Every warframe in that category would need to be overhauled to make them playable if this were the case. Your idea about building up resistance to CC over repeated use is great, but hitting them with a different CC needs to reset their 'CC defense' buildup. If you've been staggering an enemy with soundquake and they're becoming resistant to the stagger, hit them with a knockdown and you can stagger them again. If an enemy is resisting your Radial Blind, a Nekros Terrify will reset them etc. This rewards people using multiple skills/special attacks or synergising with other warframes to keep enemies CC'd.

Special attacks made against you such as grapples, shield bashes etc need a window of fast reaction to counter, instead of completely removing them. We have mods and warframe powers designed to reduce the effects, so removing the effects makes those powers and mods less useful. Bombard rockets should be able to be shot down or destroyed with abilities, instead of removed. Grineer Commander switch teleport is only annoying because it locks you in an animation. If you made it counterable with a reaction button, and took out the forced animation (maybe even a short delay in enemies targeting you), it would be a nice challenge to quickly adapt to new surroundings

 

If CC counter is ever going to exist, it needs to be a separate enemy type, needs to have a visual like Trinity's Link to show you are targeted, must require line-of-sight so you can shoot them and needs to take a few seconds before it actually reflects the CC. Otherwise, warframes built around toggled CC like Banshee would just be instantly nuked out of nowhere and that's not a challenge.

I'm rambling because I'm tired, but hopefully the points i've raised help generate some more concise ideas that are inclusive to all warframes.

[unknow99]

I don't agree with everything, but there's a bunch of good ideas here... (enabling some kind of awareness of the player's dangerous power, and nerfing Trinity)

[YasaiTsume]

Because Tenno are essentially god among mortals.
 

I came into Warframe expecting some Ninjaesque action, but I found out that I can actually choose if I wanna be a ninja, or break out the big fireworks.

I chose the fireworks route because I enjoyed it alot.

This is a screenshot of a very messy game which was just packed full of fireworks, never went back to ninja ever again. (taken some time back) 

 

[(PSN)KaxMcc]

Your entire notion of challenge and difficulty is convoluted and confuses your point. the difficult something is the more of a challenge it is to overcome.They are intertwined. (Poker is challenging... well winning is, playing and loosing is both not difficult and not a challenge, while playing and winning, over time, is both difficult and challenging).

 

Regardless, the rest of your post is clearly what WF has needed - a general outlook of giving limited powers, limited usages (so players have to make choices) and giving players more agency in attack and defense rather than just bullet sponging. Anything that moves WF in that direction is good for the game.

 

My definitions for challenge are only really for clarification. Like I said, everyone has their own personal definition of challenge & difficulty. When you say that gambling is challenging it is because you most likely define challenge differently than I do. Due to the difference in definition, when I say "X is challenging" and when you say "X is challenging" we are actually saying two completely different things.

 

 

I am not "exaggerating" anything. Challenge and difficulty go hand in hand. You can't increase one without increasing the other. 

 

Based on this response, you seem to be using your personal definition of challenge when reading my post. So, most likely, you are misunderstanding what I am saying. Any time I say challenge I am using it to convey the meaning that I attached to that word(the one I defined) and not the meaning that you may have previously come to define for yourself. Which is the reason why I defined both challenge and difficulty in the first place.

 

You also seem to be exaggerating the level of difficulty I am asking for when I never really said so to begin with. I expressed a desire to have more difficulty, yes. But I never said how much. This game doesn't need to become Dark Souls. It just needs to be both challenging and difficult in certain areas for the folks like me who like that sort of thing.

 

 

I'm not a fan of the "unable to miss unless maneuvering" It becomes too binary. I'd much prefer a scale of sorts depending on distance

 

Binary is good. I say that because when players are put in situations on a regular basis that can have a large number of possible factors influencing their success, a binary action leading to a temporary win state is much more controllable and thus much more comfortable to adapt to from a player's perspective.

 

If you imagine every encounter like a series of tests I think you may understand where I'm coming from. Say someone throws a multiple choice question your way and you have 5 seconds to answer it. So you pick one, submit your answer and NOPE…wrong. Then, a couple minutes later you get tested again, same question, same 4 choices. This time you choose another answer and congrats, you get it right. You keep getting tested and eventually more and more questions of varying types get thrown at you. Eventually you get to the point in which the second you see a question you immediately know the answer. After this point, things get tougher. Now you only get 3 seconds to answer every question. Now 2. Now 1. After a certain point it isn't about the questions at all it's about immediately recognizing how you are being tested and reacting. That is combat design in a nutshell. Each enemy is a test and each player action is a potential answer.

 

Now imagine a similar situation but instead of multiple choice…you get open ended questions. Even worse, there are questions that are very similar to one another but end up having different types of correct answers. The player being tested ends up focusing on the minute details. Reading over each question thoroughly and correcting different parts of their written response to ensure they get a correct answer. But wait, you only have like 5 seconds or less to react. So how do you get the correct answer in time?

 

Answer is, you usually don't. That’s the big difference between challenge design in fast paced games and more tactical ones. You really have to pay attention to the way you are testing your players to ensure that they can reasonably overcome the challenges you implement.

 

That being said, since Warframe is fast paced it lends itself better to more binary challenges. There isn't anything wrong with scaling based on distance. It's more a question of how the scaling would affect the way in which the player needs to react in order to reach the win state and how to ensure that the player is able to reach the win state regardless of the various factors that may be present.

 

To be honest, I can't really think of a way in which that could be implemented and still turn out good.

 

 

 

"CC'd enemies are nigh invincible" Problem with this is that it removes one of the biggest reason to CC, which is to give you an opening to attack without being attacked yourself.

 

 

There's two things I want to say this. First, once players have the capability to reach perfect evasion through parkour they will be able to gain the capability to attack without being attacked by utilizing the movement system in conjunction with their ranged weapons.

 

Second, the main reason that CC is so troublesome, from a challenge standpoint, is that it is capable of providing that capability without limitation or difficulty. People are very adverse to any sort of extra limitations being added to CC at this point and it is impossible to make dealing CC more difficult to execute without fundamentally changing the way that CC abilities work.

 

With these changes, the role that CC serves would be offset so that it remains useful in its own way but in exchange the parkour system would be buffed so that it replaces the need to utilize the old CC.

 

 

And one last point on evasion. I think you're somewhat underestimating just how much you can dodge by simply maneuvering. During todays Sortie Survival(Corpus) I was left as a squishy Loki with no teammates(they all died), ammo, energy, 15% Life support with 2 minutes left to survive. Yet during those 2 minutes + 30 seconds when running to extraction, I only got hit once. That one shot almost sone-shot me but I dodged everything else. I did this through 5 tiles, all of them containing countless nullifiers, tech, sapping ospreys, detron crewmen and railgun moas, tightly packed into 5 big balls of death. Yet I came out scot-free. (I was within 1-5 meter distance to these crowds most of the time too)

 

Now, that only applies to Corpus and somewhat to Void. The grineer and their hitscan is still a problem though. (Which is why they should have projectiles too, but faster of course)

 

I don't doubt that what you described is possible but the issue I brought up was more in concerns to consistency and player control. There are a wide number of situations that a player will inevitably run in to in which their survival or lack thereof is the result of luck rather than skill. While parkour is still useful(sometimes incredibly) I'm convinced, at this point, that it is fundamentally unreliable as a primary source of defense.

[GeoffFromAccounting]

There's two things I want to say this. First, once players have the capability to reach perfect evasion through parkour they will be able to gain the capability to attack without being attacked by utilizing the movement system in conjunction with their ranged weapons.

 

Second, the main reason that CC is so troublesome, from a challenge standpoint, is that it is capable of providing that capability without limitation or difficulty. People are very adverse to any sort of extra limitations being added to CC at this point and it is impossible to make dealing CC more difficult to execute without fundamentally changing the way that CC abilities work.

 

With these changes, the role that CC serves would be offset so that it remains useful in its own way but in exchange the parkour system would be buffed so that it replaces the need to utilize the old CC.

 

The problem is however you're talking about CC used purely for defensive use, while some people (like myself) use it for mostly offensive purposes by opening enemies up to extra damage while they're busy being asleep/mind controlled/knocked down/staggered .etc, as such your idea to make enemies nigh invulnerable when CC'd would negatively impact a large portion of users who use CC for offensive uses instead of defensive

 

Binary is good. I say that because when players are put in situations on a regular basis that can have a large number of possible factors influencing their success, a binary action leading to a temporary win state is much more controllable and thus much more comfortable to adapt to from a player's perspective.

 

If you imagine every encounter like a series of tests I think you may understand where I'm coming from. Say someone throws a multiple choice question your way and you have 5 seconds to answer it. So you pick one, submit your answer and NOPE…wrong. Then, a couple minutes later you get tested again, same question, same 4 choices. This time you choose another answer and congrats, you get it right. You keep getting tested and eventually more and more questions of varying types get thrown at you. Eventually you get to the point in which the second you see a question you immediately know the answer. After this point, things get tougher. Now you only get 3 seconds to answer every question. Now 2. Now 1. After a certain point it isn't about the questions at all it's about immediately recognizing how you are being tested and reacting. That is combat design in a nutshell. Each enemy is a test and each player action is a potential answer.

 

Now imagine a similar situation but instead of multiple choice…you get open ended questions. Even worse, there are questions that are very similar to one another but end up having different types of correct answers. The player being tested ends up focusing on the minute details. Reading over each question thoroughly and correcting different parts of their written response to ensure they get a correct answer. But wait, you only have like 5 seconds or less to react. So how do you get the correct answer in time?

 

Answer is, you usually don't. That’s the big difference between challenge design in fast paced games and more tactical ones. You really have to pay attention to the way you are testing your players to ensure that they can reasonably overcome the challenges you implement.

 

That being said, since Warframe is fast paced it lends itself better to more binary challenges. There isn't anything wrong with scaling based on distance. It's more a question of how the scaling would affect the way in which the player needs to react in order to reach the win state and how to ensure that the player is able to reach the win state regardless of the various factors that may be present.

 

To be honest, I can't really think of a way in which that could be implemented and still turn out good.

 

 

The problem is if everything is purely binary it becomes predictable to the point where it's boring, and the game then just becomes muscle memory to counter a situation instead of any real skill, while a degree of randomness (not too much mind you) still leaves players with the need to adapt to multiple situations, far more than just binary alone can allow. However if we go too far into randomness we then get to the point where it's more luck than skill. What I would suggest is a fine tuned balance of the two, without going fully into one or the other

[Mr.Lube]

And people need to stop suggesting challenge should exist in this progress based game when you're at the top.  It shouldn't.  That's the whole point of progress.

Then what is the point of playing when you get to the top? e-Peen?

Edited February 2, 2016 by Mr.Lube

[(PSN)KaxMcc]

The problem is however you're talking about CC used purely for defensive use, while some people (like myself) use it for mostly offensive purposes by opening enemies up to extra damage while they're busy being asleep/mind controlled/knocked down/staggered .etc, as such your idea to make enemies nigh invulnerable when CC'd would negatively impact a large portion of users who use CC for offensive uses instead of defensive

 

It would force adaptation, sure, but I don't know whether I'd consider that a negative impact. All it would really mean is that instead of opening up enemies to attack the same way you always have you would need to do so a little differently.

 

There may be some people who would like to continue to use casting as their primary way to reach that goal instead of using parkour, but unfortunately without any limitations on powers it makes it impossible to implement that in such a way that actually allows the action to be difficult to execute.

 

The capability to "attack without being attacked back", that is offered by CC, is pretty much a definite win state. The only ways to create a challenge when players have access to such a powerful capability is to either limit the use of the capability(various ideas already shot down), increase the difficulty of accessing that capability(impossible without changing power usage significantly), or changing the capability itself.

 

I think the third option is the most reasonable. Since, at worst, it would just force players to adapt to a new form of challenge.

 

 

The problem is if everything is purely binary it becomes predictable to the point where it's boring, and the game then just becomes muscle memory to counter a situation instead of any real skill, while a degree of randomness (not too much mind you) still leaves players with the need to adapt to multiple situations, far more than just binary alone can allow. However if we go too far into randomness we then get to the point where it's more luck than skill. What I would suggest is a fine tuned balance of the two, without going fully into one or the other

 

I'd have to disagree on that. Some of the most difficult games ever created are entirely binary in their challenge design. For example, both Dark Souls and Devil May Cry have binary challenges. The difficulty comes from the execution aspect. While the "correct" action may be easily identifiable, performing advanced combos, timing your button presses perfectly, reading enemy tells quickly and actions of that sort are difficult to execute in practice. Additionally, many of which take practice before being able to perform them on demand. So, to that degree, binary games can still be significantly difficult despite being predictable.

 

I think, rather than randomness, the issue you brought up would be better solved with enemy variation. Binary challenges aren't necessarily bad but when they are few in number the player is presented with the same few challenges constantly and can easily become bored, like you said.

 

That can ultimately be solved with the addition of various forms of execution and various enemy types that each force a certain level of execution. Since the number and type of enemies has a direct effect on the player's optimal execution the player will constantly need to adapt based on enemy composition. The more different you can make the various forms of execution the more things the player will need to focus on doing at once when combatting multiple enemies.

 

For example, in DaS fighting a single enemy would be a very different challenge than fighting 4 or 5 different types of enemies simultaneously. That kind of thing.

Edited February 2, 2016 by (PS4)KaxMcc

[Phatose]

Then what is the point of playing when you get to the top? e-Peen?

 

What is the point of playing any game after you've reached the top?  Whatever you make it to be.

[Shiniko]

Maybe you guys should try Firefall. Some of the missions there have elements to skilled combat/teamwork that you challenge-desirers seem to want. The only problem is that Firefall is buggy as hell right now. Give it a try. 

 

Firefall seems to be the other side of the same coin to Warframe. There are notable similarities, but also good differences. It's the game I go to when I get burnout from cheesing things in Warframe.

[Chipputer]

And people need to stop suggesting challenge should exist in this progress based game when you're at the top.  It shouldn't.  That's the whole point of progress.

So the extra, more powerful than the final boss, bosses shouldn't exist in a Final Fantasy game because once you get to the maximum level there shouldn't be any more challenge in a progress based game, right?

 

I suppose your favorite pass-time is to sit in Apollodorus with a 200% power strength World on Fire Ember, then?

[Phatose]

So the extra, more powerful than the final boss, bosses shouldn't exist in a Final Fantasy game because once you get to the maximum level there shouldn't be any more challenge in a progress based game, right?

 

I suppose your favorite pass-time is to sit in Apollodorus with a 200% power strength World on Fire Ember, then?

 

Really they shouldn't, but that's mostly cause they've been formuaic since FF7 and didn't exist before then.  And in a very real way, they don't exist - they're fundamentally puzzles.  Which is why you can't repeat them.

[weirdee]

Suggestion for Scorpion telegraph: the sound of cord with a weight on the end being wound up before launching through means of a mechanical gauntlet made out of parts from mining equipment. Also, make the cord not automatically track the target perpendicular from the launch vector.

[Chipputer]

Really they shouldn't, but that's mostly cause they've been formuaic since FF7 and didn't exist before then.  And in a very real way, they don't exist - they're fundamentally puzzles.  Which is why you can't repeat them.

They are still reasonable challenges for someone who has everything maxed out. Sure, some of them you need to basically perform a specific strategy to win, but not all of them.

 

The point is, they exist. You don't have to do them and they're there for those who want them to attempt them. They exist to give players who have finished everything else something to do.

 

It is entirely selfish of you to suggest that players in Warframe shouldn't have the same opportunities. It's actually detrimental to DE, as a business. You might not see the players who leave, as the ones who make quitting declarations are a minority, but there are plenty of people who up and vanish once they've seen an end-game player rush through a mission spamming their ultimate and everything dying.

 

But I'm clearly arguing with someone who, as I said, sits in Apollodorus for a long time feeling like a god amongst Men-like-creatures. There is simply no other way to interpret your stance and anything you say won't change it.

[NinthAria]

I've expressed similar thoughts here on these forums in the past. Don't know if I agree with some of the specifics, but I definitely agree that difficulty (especially in higher tiers of play) ought to be based on "solving" enemies--that is to say, reacting to certain mechanics in a way that counters them, rather than just overpowering them. Not to say that you shouldn't ever be allowed to just power through a tough enemy, but it A) shouldn't be the norm, and B) shouldn't be the more efficient way of doing things, barring instances where you grossly overlevel the content.

 

My beef, personally, is with Grineer seekers. It baffles me that they have a power that requires some counterplay (latchers), but all their power is concentrated in the thing with minimal counterplay options (basic Kraken shots). It should be the other way around.

 

While I'm at it, I'd also like to see enemy sniper units get a targeting laser like Ven'kra Tel.

 

...in fact, just, in general, things that do tons of damage should be clearly telegraphed. They did an excellent job of this with some of the more recently added enemies like the Shadow Stalker and both Sentient units; they just need to do a pass on older units to bring them up to par and add some clarity.

[DiabolusUrsus]

What is the point of playing any game after you've reached the top?  Whatever you make it to be.

 

Translation: Everybody else should stop throwing ideas around and talking about things they would find interesting because I'm content with the game the way it is. 

 

If sitting at progression completion puts the obligation of creating fun on the player, then you ought to have no problems with making your own fun out of whatever Warframe may become in the future so long as you sit at the progression cap. By your own philosophy this entire discussion is irrelevant to you. 

 

The fact of the matter is that even in completed games where continued development is not on the table, players will gravitate toward finding ways to extend the progression available to them. A sustainable end-game is becoming a popular concept across a broad variety of developing games, and while I can't really name any of them that have come up with something more than a specific take on New Game +, there's no reason why DE should not take a stab at keeping players occupied past game completion. The first step in the process is ensuring that there is content to challenge them.