My Concerns for Damage 3.0

[Airyllish]

Just now, duhadventure said:

Was referencing this.

I'm still really hesitant to say that the overall aim of this damage re-work is to stop "one hitting" bosses, just because DE has geared all of their bosses to deal with damage through having invulnerable phases and very short windows where you can damage them. If the rework is extreme, a lot of current mechanics would need to be reconsidered massively.

Not saying it won't happen, mind you! I could be totally wrong.

I just feel like Damage 3.0 is more a generic step towards a direction that tries to move away from the endless scale, rather than outright trying to solve oneshot problems.

Of course if I am totally wrong and damage 3.0 is so radically changed to the point one shots on the higher tier enemies and bosses, they would also need to look at damage those same enemies do. Currently Warframe is "who can nuke who fastest" so if they remove our ability to nuke... we really need to hope they remember that the then un-one-shottable mobs can't be allowed to do the same. Heh.

[duhadventure]

10 minutes ago, Airyllish said:

I'm still really hesitant to say that the overall aim of this damage re-work is to stop "one hitting" bosses, just because DE has geared all of their bosses to deal with damage through having invulnerable phases and very short windows where you can damage them. If the rework is extreme, a lot of current mechanics would need to be reconsidered massively.

Not saying it won't happen, mind you! I could be totally wrong.

I just feel like Damage 3.0 is more a generic step towards a direction that tries to move away from the endless scale, rather than outright trying to solve oneshot problems.

Of course if I am totally wrong and damage 3.0 is so radically changed to the point one shots on the higher tier enemies and bosses, they would also need to look at damage those same enemies do. Currently Warframe is "who can nuke who fastest" so if they remove our ability to nuke... we really need to hope they remember that the then un-one-shottable mobs can't be allowed to do the same. Heh.

Inb4 One punch Grineer

OH NO

Edited February 25, 2016 by duhadventure

[(PSN)FriendSharkey]

Someone shoots into the cave, somebody has to sit in it, because they can't figure out how to not give a F*** about other people doing things they don't like. 

 

This is why eventually solo gaming is so darn appealing at times. 

[Guest]

On 23.2.2016 at 1:19 PM, Clovis15 said:

I want it to be clear up front that I am not against balance, and - should Damage 3.0 actually do that - I would be all for it. I however don't believe it'll bring balance, and I also believe it will cause much damage while failing to achieve its intended goal: to increase build diversity. This is because the dream of forcing build diversity upon the community is illusory at best, since you must understand that meta-chasers - despite what certain vocal people cheering the devs on happen to claiming - are actually happy with their meta.

The meta-chasers did their math to find the best blind-idiot DPS possible, regardless of all the real downsides involved in any such given weapon, and then married themselves to it because they are married to the idea of achieving blind-idiot DPS. These people chase the best epeen results available in any game they associate themselves with, and - rather than becoming diverse - will merely recrunch the numbers if a game is rebalanced. Afterwards - through a process they'll finish in less than a week, if even that - they'll discover a new singular meta, and christen that their new got assortment of mods and weapons.

You can't make them diverse because these people only crave the blind-idiot advantage of being theoretically number-wise better, even if they don't have the actual skills to compensate for the inherent faults found in the weapons and/or mods they chosen. Yet the devs are coming up with Damage 3.0 precisely because people upset at the existence of meta-chasers have long begged them to do so, and claimed the game would be better if the meta-chasers were using a diverse assortment of gear. Yet people only use a diverse assortment of gear if they like variety, no rebalancing will ever change the meta-chasers need to proclaim they have the highest possible blind-idiot DPS advantage in any group they find themselves within.

Ergo, we are about to have a massive rebalancing that will inherently fail its intended goal. This would be a problem if evidence suggests Damage 3.0 was going to make things better, or at the least probably be over all benign in nature. However - and keep in mind that I dearly do love this game - but the evidence historically available suggests quite the opposite, and in reality those with a lot for a diversity of weapons already are about to severely punished, while the meta-chasers will only be prevented with a miniscule speed bump they'll soon climb over and afterwards forget even happened.

Let's look at - for example - irreparable damage caused previously in the wake of other system changes, that have permanently wrecked diversity in the games by rendering many weapons without their niche any longer:

The Machete Wraith used to have Serrated Damage on normal non-charged strikes to compensate for the weak-damage and awkward animations inherent to the weapon-type, this ensured that despite these out comings it was - in light of it being a reward weapon - still worth using. You still had to get right up in someone's face to use it, so it wasn't the be all and end all of power either. Unfortunately someone thought it was a good idea to give serrated damage to long-range pistols, and such Serration became the thing that the anti-meta crowd banded against claiming that removing it would destroy the meta and finally improve build diversity. All it really did was push the meta away from the Acrid, and leave many melee weapons in a very awkward place for a long time when their inherently bad damage levels no longer benefitted from armor bypass. The Machete Wraith itself never recovered at all, so much for an event reward.

I am not complaining - however - about what happened to the Brakk, that thing really did need a few pegs knocked out of it.

im with you here and i cant see that you whine or insult, you create facts

i for myself start meeting this people rarely and im glad about, as for example

jumped into draco with my nova and as i ulted the first time, a player which used a ash prime was pleased that i dont ult because they are farming here

first i was a lill bit puzzled and then i said if he have problems with whatever "technically" in warframe he should go to DE

and the answer was that he will leave before the next waves will happen

im shure this people fall under the category youre talking about

all what i can say to damage 3.0 is, its useless, it would be better to buff and rework the lot of weapons we have spoken for diversity in the game and as a answer to steves "sorry for that but useless"-polls at twitter

i stopped caring about who ruins warframe first FOR ME, some strange players or a even more strange development ...

i say it again, i dont wanna re-forma whatever frame or weapon ... i dont wanna get strange expiriences, running out of bullets or more, i even dont wanna get spammed with things like BURSAS because of somebody is bored, got bored or think we real customers are stupid, thats all =)

Edited February 25, 2016 by Guest

[Noabettiet]

I agree, while i do like the idea of weapon damage not be bound to mods*, i also know that this is certainly not the holy grail of weapon balance and i dare to say that it will just switch the table for the new, the next and more powerful meta.

This change won't just change weapon balance or even just give diversity, it will change the entire game and the way it is played. And apparently everyone likes to forget how hard it was for new and old players alike to adapt to damage 2.0/ elemental 2.0 .

 

 

...
But if i have to praise damage 3.0 for something is: the fact that will make the new player experience much more lax and easy. 
This is exactly what i mean by liking the change of making "weapons damage not bound my mods". It is because of changes like that, that leveling a weapon won't be arbitrary unless if you have the mods for the weapons.

[(PSN)Lord_Gremlin]

This twitter poll should be judged as having extraordinary percent of DE fanboys and white knights. I'd really love to see this rework scrapped. All it really brings are problems with little to no benefits. Removing mandatory mods is impossible, some mod combination will always be superior. And I'd rather keep current system then have 25 primed mods that each add like 30% damage.

Just scrap it. Weapon getting damage only from mods actually feels pretty good. Same bullet won't hit harder just cause you got more experience with a weapon. 

[Lost_Cartographer]

16 minutes ago, (PS4)Lord_Gremlin said:

This twitter poll should be judged as having extraordinary percent of DE fanboys and white knights. I'd really love to see this rework scrapped. All it really brings are problems with little to no benefits. Removing mandatory mods is impossible, some mod combination will always be superior. And I'd rather keep current system then have 25 primed mods that each add like 30% damage.

Just scrap it. Weapon getting damage only from mods actually feels pretty good. Same bullet won't hit harder just cause you got more experience with a weapon. 

Bullets don't hit nearly twice as hard just because the tip is now jagged or lathered in inflammable material either...

And there's a difference between mandatory mods that work for everything, all the time, with no draw backs, and mods that do add benefits, but they're still situational, even if only slightly so.  They're mostly targeting those mods that work for everything.  Elemental mods might just lose some kick behind their damage percentiles.  The game could do with overall slower scaling of our enemies such that DE has a bit more control over power levels.  Right now, a weapon that does 60 damage per shot can be upgraded to doing well over a thousand per shot.  That's a bit extreme for any shooter game, especially one full of players screaming for a challenge from enemies that isn't power neutralization and invulnerability frames (well, addressing weapon damage and enemy stats will address one of those issues.)

3 hours ago, Airyllish said:

I'm still really hesitant to say that the overall aim of this damage re-work is to stop "one hitting" bosses, just because DE has geared all of their bosses to deal with damage through having invulnerable phases and very short windows where you can damage them. If the rework is extreme, a lot of current mechanics would need to be reconsidered massively.

Not saying it won't happen, mind you! I could be totally wrong.

I just feel like Damage 3.0 is more a generic step towards a direction that tries to move away from the endless scale, rather than outright trying to solve oneshot problems.

Of course if I am totally wrong and damage 3.0 is so radically changed to the point one shots on the higher tier enemies and bosses, they would also need to look at damage those same enemies do. Currently Warframe is "who can nuke who fastest" so if they remove our ability to nuke... we really need to hope they remember that the then un-one-shottable mobs can't be allowed to do the same. Heh.

I don't think we'll ever see the day when enemies can't one shot us.  The point in endless modes is for scaling to eventually get the enemy to that point.  We can only go as far as we do because of oversights in how CC scales indefinitely, since they're kind of on/off rules.  I once suggested a change to armor mechanics that would greatly mitigate the chance for being one-shot except in the more extreme damage values but it didn't get much traffic.

Edited February 25, 2016 by Littleman88

[Silvus-Sol]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and trust DE on this one. I mean, after 1.0 and 2.0 they theoretically should have enough info and experience to make 3.0 into something good.

 

Edited February 26, 2016 by Silvus-Sol

[Omnimorph]

I must admit, I don't think the game needs a new system, what it needs is an overall adjustment of the systems that exist - a re-balancing of all the numbers across the board, with some numbers moving by a lot, and some maybe only + or - 1, type of thing.

I also think getting rid of damage mods like Serration (if that's the intention) would be a terrible idea.  I understand the arguments, but I think they're weightless versus the addictiveness of having your damage be something you are directly responsible for building up over time, and juggling against tank and utility.  Auto-levelling damage would be boring and lose some of Warframe's uniqueness.

And while I'm at it, I'm worried that the devs are pursuing a doctrinaire "one size fits all" playstyle across the frames.  This would also be a terrible mistake.  The concept of the "superhero" should determine the gameplay.  If that means some frames are p42w, and some have cross synergies between abilities, so be it.  The variety of playstyles is good.

[kilerskull]

Where can I find a thread on this damage 3? Will I still be able to face lvl 50 enemies with my gammacor on tonkor? Or would wave 10 be a max afterwards?

[Bakim0n0]

My primary concern about damage 3.0 is that it will be just like damage 2.0

Wildly shift the balance of weapons that I put a lot of time and sometimes money into to forma an optimal build into.

My acrid still cries tears from going to one of the most OP weapons in the game to being practically useless.

this is compounded by lenses I might add; meaning the potential to totally scratch my favorite builds is *worse* than damage 2.0

Edited February 26, 2016 by Bakim0n0

[MumblesMcphatty]

31 minutes ago, kilerskull said:

Where can I find a thread on this damage 3? Will I still be able to face lvl 50 enemies with my gammacor on tonkor? Or would wave 10 be a max afterwards?

Don't bother looking - you'll find plenty but it's all speculation just like most of this thread.

Steve's recent Twitter polls are the ONLY dev communication on Damage 3.0 - and since he specified it was mostly boss related - doesn't qualify. Other than that all DE have said is "we're looking at it" and that was months ago.

Damage mods are the new axe to grind for some folks - though I think the ire is misplaced. Serration ain't going anywhere anytime soon and its removal will change a big, fat zero. 

[(PSN)VariantX7]

On 2/23/2016 at 1:08 PM, Airyllish said:

In a game where enemy level scales well beyond the "level cap" available to players, and thus to achieve the ability to fight against the steadily exponentially scaling enemies you have to start consider min-maxing and equipping specific mods to achieve the best effect, you are always going to have an "efficient meta". The game forces you to, in fact, because at a certain point in end-game content being inefficient will cost you your life - enemies will out-scale you and decimate you in seconds if you cannot blow them up first.

That's the gist I get from end-game Warframe. It's not a skill-based battle, it's a simple war of attrition. How long can your build and your resources keep you fighting until your resources dry up and the scaling enemies out-number, out-damage and out-live you? 

Therefore, the game actively promotes finding efficient metas. No changes made to damage are ever going to change or fix this because the very foundation of the game in the very end-game missions basically demand that you have the set ups that can deal the most reliable damage you can manage so that you can blow up everything before it blows up you. It's not damage that would need to change but gameplay, if you want to try and "eradicate" the idea of a meta. The end-game of Warframe would need to be fundamentally and drastically re-worked to be a mode that isn't the current "war of attrition" mode it currently is. Enemies cannot be allowed to delete you off the face of the planet in three hits or less - because those are the situations when yes, you do need to have the optimal build in order to delete that enemy before it deletes you.

So honestly, bring on Damage 3.0. Your concern of encouraging a meta is null and void because there will always be a meta, and the way damage works won't change that. Enemy scaling, enemy AI and even resource management (in terms of health, shields and energy and your access to them at any given moment either through orb drops, gear you take or mods) would need to be revised in order to change the standing meta of "what is the fastest way I can delete the current strongest enemy I can fight" because those are the things that decide why damage needs to work the way it does. /shrug

I really like this post. It articulates some of my feelings on this subject far better and smarter than I could. The margins for error on the high level content are razor thin, and get thinner. That build that you had tons fun with on the starchart is not viable at all if its not the most efficient way or even the correct frame for that content when you want to raid with some of your clan mates or do that sortie. I don't mind that meta builds are good bit more effective than your "whatever is fun builds", but when the meta builds are dozens of times more effective than the fun builds worries me. I'm not saying the builds and weapons I like should be the most effective, but I would hope they'd be effective at all in the endgame stuff.

Edited February 26, 2016 by (PS4)VariantX7
Spelling, Punctuation...

[CY13ERPUNK]

nothing wrong with the idea of a 'meta' in theory

the problem atm with weapons in WF is there is basically not enough viable build diversity/choice, although there is a LOT of 'false' or horribly underperforming build variety 'choices'

case in point : best build for a frame? maybe tons of hp/shield? or how about lots of efficency? or maybe range/duration? ... there are a LOT of different viable options largely dictated by playstyle and not many objectively better/worse than others, some just preferred more/less by each individual, this is good [even though there are still plenty of garbage frame mods, but thats another issue]

how about guns? : max core base dmg mod, max multishot, THEN : does the weapon have high crit dmg/chnc? then build for max crit and add whatev elems afterwards, if the weapon doesnt have good crit stats, then u just build as much elem dmg as possible and/or possible a 120% IPS mod if the weapon has 1 of its IPS heavily weight like 80/20/20

thats pretty much it, sure u could take 1-2 of the crit/elem mods out for maybe some QoL stuff like firerate/reload/shred/etc, but still the core base dmg mods are 'required' for anything that is not objectively underperforming, and that is a problem ; certainly there are thousands of potential builds, but if 99% of those options all perform objectively worse, then thats bad

melee is not quite as bad as primary/2ndary, but its still got the core base dmg mods problem ; and its got smaller niche cases like the throwing melee that are stuck between building the necessary dmg, or the QoL mods that make the weapons MUCH more user friendly/viable ; the gunblade actually does not have the same problem and can just build huge dmg without the downside/drawbacks that the glaive-types suffer from

hopefully DE understands the issues that Dmg v3 need to address

personally i think we need at least 1-2 more elemental combo types {think slag from borderlands 2}, that either combine 3 or 4 elements, to truly put the nail in the coffin for the 'rainbow' build, or have a more flexible way to pick/choose at max 2-3 elementals at will based on the mods equipped {ie be able to both have fire and elec at the same time, or fire and radiation, but not say fire and cold} as well as new proc effects for impact

certainly if the new system only removes the core base dmg mods and just gives all weapons +5% dmg per rank and makes multishot increase ammo consumption, then ppl can just 'adjust fire' and toss some more elem in those new 'free' slots, BUT STILL, even just those changes alone both help the new player experience AND still give ppl more viable options, so even if those were the only changes, that wouldnt necessarily be ideal, but it would be better than what we have atm

Edited February 26, 2016 by CY13ERPUNK

[Kaotyke]

16 hours ago, Airyllish said:

I'm still really hesitant to say that the overall aim of this damage re-work is to stop "one hitting" bosses, just because DE has geared all of their bosses to deal with damage through having invulnerable phases and very short windows where you can damage them. If the rework is extreme, a lot of current mechanics would need to be reconsidered massively.

Not saying it won't happen, mind you! I could be totally wrong.

I just feel like Damage 3.0 is more a generic step towards a direction that tries to move away from the endless scale, rather than outright trying to solve oneshot problems.

Of course if I am totally wrong and damage 3.0 is so radically changed to the point one shots on the higher tier enemies and bosses, they would also need to look at damage those same enemies do. Currently Warframe is "who can nuke who fastest" so if they remove our ability to nuke... we really need to hope they remember that the then un-one-shottable mobs can't be allowed to do the same. Heh.

Maybe enemies will have a "damage cap"? From what I've heard, Damage 3.0 will take a look at everything, from multishot to damage to armor to scalling. Not being able to be 1-shot by enemies is already a plus in my book.

Edited February 26, 2016 by Kao-Snake
damn typos, why you do this to me, keyboard?

[Airyllish]

26 minutes ago, Kao-Snake said:

Maybe enemies will have a "damage cap"? From what I've heard, Damage 3.0 will take a look at everything, from multishot to damage to armor to scalling. Not being able to be 1-shot by enemies is already a plus in my book.

This would be preferable at least as a first step / foundation building block to try and pull Warframe away from the nuke it till it dies meta. Damage caps placed on enemies allow players to evaluate how much eHP is necessary and then decide if they want to boost it further for safety, or if they want to work with the minimum and then build for efficiency in other areas.

 

Similarly a damage cap on players might encourage diversity insofar as, if your weapon can reach the cap, you can play it.

 

But, like all things, a hard damage cap would still produce a race to hit the damage cap of weapons and tank the damage cap of enemies in the most efficient mix of mods. Not that I wholly mind - every game generally builds up metas eventually - but it would still bring into question which frame best reaches the cap efficiently. 

But, certainly, a hard cap completely eliminates infinite and exponentially scaling enemies.

[Atlas.0-5]

9 hours ago, CY13ERPUNK said:

hopefully DE understands the issues that Dmg v3 need to address

personally i think we need at least 1-2 more elemental combo types {think slag from borderlands 2}, that either combine 3 or 4 elements, to truly put the nail in the coffin for the 'rainbow' build, or have a more flexible way to pick/choose at max 2-3 elementals at will based on the mods equipped {ie be able to both have fire and elec at the same time, or fire and radiation, but not say fire and cold} as well as new proc effects for impact

 

a bit off topic, but a "borderlands type slag" element would be an interesting idea. It would also, in my opinion, inject some team-play back into the game. Which is something that has rapidly been disappearing in this game. 

[Zebiko]

Is Damage 3.0 meant to only fix killing enemies too fast? Sortie Missions have up to level 100 enemies. Their armor, health, shields, and damage scale with level. If you have a weapon capable of killing these enemies, then you are capable of one shotting enemies on normal missions in the solar system. Nerfing our damage would make completing high level missions really hard.

Also, our damage can be scaled really high with the right mods. There are many mods to choose for increasing damage. Our defense scaling is far more limited. You can't just add more defensive mods at a certain point, there aren't enough. You have to change tactics. I use Rhino because it's the only frame that allowed me to progress early in warframe's progression. I look at other frames and just worry how squishy they are because they don't have defensive capabilities like Rhino. I don't have the mods to spam certain abilities and "cheese" missions.

I noticed, you can go the glass cannon "cheesy" build that most use for the non-tanky frames. The tactic is to kill everything before it can horribly kill you. Having good energy duration, efficiency, power strength, etc. are key to spam your abilities for crowd control or some other cheese tactic. Some frames need those corrupted mods (I have none atm) to pull it off.

When I research new frames or weapons I'm thinking of using, I look them up and watch videos of their performance. I look to see how well they can kill enemies in level 80-100 sorties. If it does well there, it's a frame or weapon worth buying and putting a potato in.

What I'm getting at is that the one-shot gameplay is common because it's a needed survival tactic with most frames. Also it's pretty damn satisfying killing hordes of enemies quickly. I sometimes wish survival missions, my favorite kind of mission, spawn more enemies to increase the horde slaughtering mode. But that's a different topic xD

[LordCasimiro]

For 3.0 I would love a melee to get stronger

[(PSN)Lord_Gremlin]

On 26/02/2016 at 3:38 AM, MumblesMcphatty said:

Don't bother looking - you'll find plenty but it's all speculation just like most of this thread.

Steve's recent Twitter polls are the ONLY dev communication on Damage 3.0 - and since he specified it was mostly boss related - doesn't qualify. Other than that all DE have said is "we're looking at it" and that was months ago.

Damage mods are the new axe to grind for some folks - though I think the ire is misplaced. Serration ain't going anywhere anytime soon and its removal will change a big, fat zero. 

Well he did tweeted that this damage rework may never happen. Which would be for the best tbh. You already have a working system.