Tonkor: Let's fix easy mode

[TheLexiConArtist]

5 minutes ago, Ax10mCRO said:

I'm amazed at the lengths to which you'll go to try to control other people EDYInnit, I'm actually gonna stop bothering with you after this post because you are clearly bent on ignoring every single logical point I've made, you're trying to twist my words and accuse me of moving goalposts (while ignoring the fact that you've done it more often than I have)

For some reason you are stuck on the idea that falloff refers only to damage. That's about as far from the truth as it can get. I said that Tonkor loses it's status as the best weapon the lower the level goes, that is the truth. It loses it's advantage/drawback ratio rather quickly because it's only advantage (high damage) is made irrelevant.

Well yes, I do argue that such tournaments were made AFTER people have seen that one of the characters is clearly overpowered and dominates every single tournament. Do you think someone has foreseen the future and randomly banned them before seeing any proof in front of their eyes? I'm sure that knight you're so fond of has dominated a few tournaments before people said "hey you know what, we're kinda bored of this guy maybe we should change the rules".

Again you're sticking to your "race" argument. It's wrong, simple as that. A race is a competition,it's PvP,  warframe is not.

You do not subject yourself to a negative result by playing with tonkor, the mission will be done successfully most of the time (the way you argued you don't lower the success of your team on T1 exterminations by using weaker weapons, the tonkor surely doesn't decrease mission success rate). You may not be satisfied with your position in the team (your ego can't handle that you weren't the best) but that's not really a loss for the team, just your personal issues.

Since you decided not to watch the ENTIRE video but only a few minutes before making your comment here's a few quotes for you:

"What is so horrific about this idea that something exists in the game for someone who isn't you? How selfish do you have to be to demand that the game caters to your desires and only to your desires excluding anybody else?

Customization, options, things to toggle on and off, these are parts of what make games fun.

If it's an option it literally should not ****** matter to you, and yet it does, why?

All this mode is doing is opening the game to potential new crowds. Casual gamers, young children, people with disabilities, and if you think this is a bad thing you're behaving like an elitist spoiled **** who is mad that you have to share your toys.

You get to play any game you want in any way that makes you happy, why the **** do you aim to deprive others of the same"

Well, you get the idea, now you're gonna be "Hurr durr that's a single player game, it's not applied to warframe" and you're right. It doesn't apply to it directly BUT the concept is the same. You are protesting options that you can "toggle off".

I said it before and you conveniently turn blind whenever you reach this segment: You are not forced to play with the tonkor, it is an option that exists in the game to cater to people who have different ideas than you do.

Is it OP? Yes, but why do you give a damn? Make your own clan of tonkor haters if you wish, surround yourself with people who feel the same way, enjoy the game and have fun. Because after all is said and done, games are supposed to be FUN. Tonkor doesn't take it away from you unless you intentionally expose yourself to it. You're trying to control public matchmaking because you can't seem to accept that you're not the most important person in the community.

As for that DLC reference, warframe is an online game, it changes, it has to or people would get bored quickly, but nobody is forcing you to use these new toys that you were given, that decision still remains up to you, you can't blame others for wanting to play with them. Surely you have found enough friends in this thread to be able to play tonkor free games for as long as you like to.Stop trying to control everything, it's not healthy for you, learn to give up on some things especially since you can do it quite effortlessly here and keep having fun.

Even if by some chance devs decide to listen to your demands there's still plenty of other weapons and warframes that are OP, that can do plenty of damage or permanently CC enemies and as such trivialize missions. You won't find balance here unless you create it yourself with your own group, other people will always seek the most OP thing and use it as long as they can.

• Tu quoque.
• The amount by which required damage is exceeded is not relevant. It retains all other benefits and retains the lack of risk. It still clears the same groups with the same no-risk policy, you can't argue that something does it better at a low level while ignoring the damage falloff factor. High performance 100% of the time > Higher performance 20% of the time, increasingly lesser performance over the remaining 80%.
• So it's the rule in the same tournament that was made after the discrepancy was noted, not the players who suffered making their own tournament, you now agree - therefore you agree that the ruling body here (DE) should be able to alleviate the self-evident balance discrepancy (here by rebalancing instead of forbidding completely) in exactly the same correlation?
• One factor that does not precisely correlate in an analogy does not invalidate the entire analogy. Fallacy again. It's still a balance outlier with a detrimental effect.
• Not reducing the success rate by using lesser weaponry only increases the amount of gameplay available to fellow players or leaves it identical (if not fighting together). The Tonkor's overpowering of the content decreases the amount of content by AOE clearing enemies others could be fighting. Also, again with the ad hominem when I've already stated I prefer to be utility and support, not the main damage dealer.
• The video does not apply as it is not referring to trivialisation that can be encountered in public play. If anything, it suggests you should be privately forming teams where your disproportionate impact is not minded. You know it isn't affecting anyone then. You don't know it won't affect people negatively in public grouping.
• I am forced to play with the tonkor by its nature as an imbalanced weapon causing it to see predominant usage. To claim I am not entitled to a reasonably balanced gameplay experience unless I form private groups is segregation.
• If I am not entitled to declare that the Tonkor needs balance changes, you are not entitled to definitively declare the Tonkor is immune to balance changes on the grounds you and others like it currently. If I am trying to 'control' you (wrong, but just assuming); you are therefore, by translating the equation, trying to control me.

[tripletriple]

Quote

On a per-line basis because you flat out aren't worth the effort of structuring the individual quotes:

• Define proof. The best I could give is anecdotes because I don't have access to analytical metrics that could only truly be gathered by code. Perhaps you want my anecdotes to compare against your anecdotes? That would prove so much I'm sure.

Ignoring your snarky remarks, I like how instead of giving me proof you are denying the fact that proof is even obtainable. I'm not going to define proof for you. You are making the claim that the tonkor is the best weapon in the game and that a majority of users in warframe use the tonkor. The tonkor is a powerful weapon sure, but not the best. 

Quote

• "More or less" individually, I said.
  • SySim is also an outlier, especially with the Mirage treatment, but it gets a slight pass due to not being an existing category of weapons. It uses Rifle ammo, disincluding it from launchers that utilise 'special' (sniper, arrow and others) purple ammo drops. It's not conventional ordnance.
  • Sonicor is in the same boat as the SySim, still an outlier and debatably requiring tweaks as well, but not ordnance.
  • Amprex and Atomos have their own issues, not least of which is ammo consumption (as continuous weapons), for the AOE. See earlier in the thread for more deconstructing of the comparable downsides of the Amprex over Tonkor.
  • Bows only count for enemies in a straight line, not radially on impact. Outside of Void Defense, the chance of a line of enemies drastically diminishes. Especially when you need to hit all their heads.

I wish I could make up as many excuses as you do. Pretending that the tonkor doesn't have it's own notable draw backs and closing your eyes to the obvious flaws it has is an example of your bias. I give you a bunch of examples and you label them as outliers, a word you seem obsessed with, and shrug them off as needing nerfs as well. How can every weapon be an outlier, when these weapons are the end game weapons we base our comparisons too. What are you comparing things too the mk 1 braton?

Quote

• Argument by obscuring the question is not getting you anywhere either. The previous explosive weapons all follow the rule, excepting the Tonkor. Arguing semantics does not invalidate this fact.
• Other launchers needing some love does not invalidate that the Tonkor is not what they all should be. Ogris is obsolete because it's a 0.4 RoF primary launcher with the explosion radius of a secondary launcher. Do I need to start naming logical fallacies again? It's a false dichotomy. Call X the Ogris, Y theoretical balance and Z the Tonkor; you're arguing that X<Y and X<Z therefore Y=Z.

Citing Rhetorical devices and logical fallacies doesn't make you look smart, it just makes it seem like you have no point to get across. There is no semantics. You are implying that because A and B = C that D must = ABC. It's a made up imaginary rule that you think explosives must follow. 

Making up an argument I didn't even make. The tonkor is simply Y. The ogris has been under the point of balance for a while now. The tonkor not being the standard is your opinion. Something you like to pass off as fact. A lot of people don't like the tonkor because we have better alternatives. 

Quote

Argument from silence; you're asserting that because I have no evidence that the claim is false. It's unrealistic to expect that I have those datestamped screenshots of the past. I'm not asking for you to prove it wasn't the case, that would be fallacious of me. You're dissociating two parts of an argument. "People used the Penta" is not the claim, "People used the Penta in the past, but the Tonkor is currently used far more" is. Again, I don't have developer privileges to provide such metrics, the proof of the latter and most important part of the whole is there to see for one's self.

Exactly. If you have no evidence for a questionable claim, why should I believe it's true. Because you said it? Get real.

Quote

Argument by ignorance; you're presuming that your counter-claim is true because it has not been proven false, and more importantly cannot be proven false by the parties here present.

You can't prove that the tonkor trivializes gameplay? it's easy to get in a game to demonstrate if other weapons cannot do the same. It's easy to set up scenarios, like missing a tonkor bullet versus missing a Synoid S. bullet (no risk in missing one). You are just ignorant to any other opinion besides yours.

Quote

Nice ad hominem, bro. Actually, I'm happy not doing the most damage in a Sortie, I'm usually the one securing the objective and picking people up instead. Only time I generally approach biggest damage in random groups is when I go full tryhard with Ember and maximum-AOE Ignis. Evidence that you cannot refute weighs against your argument, so you're attacking me instead.

It's not an ad hominem, it's the truth.

Edited March 26, 2016 by tripletriple

[Currilicious]

How about lets not.

I like that gun the way it is.

I don't see it as easy mode, let alone need a fix.

Also, what if it is easy mode? This is a game not a career people.

[SquidTheSid]

I have a solution. Let's nerf Limbo. 

[TheLexiConArtist]

14 hours ago, tripletriple said:

Ignoring your snarky remarks, I like how instead of giving me proof you are denying the fact that proof is even obtainable. I'm not going to define proof for you. You are making the claim that the tonkor is the best weapon in the game and that a majority of users in warframe use the tonkor. The tonkor is a powerful weapon sure, but not the best. 

I wish I could make up as many excuses as you do. Pretending that the tonkor doesn't have it's own notable draw backs and closing your eyes to the obvious flaws it has is an example of your bias. I give you a bunch of examples and you label them as outliers, a word you seem obsessed with, and shrug them off as needing nerfs as well. How can every weapon be an outlier, when these weapons are the end game weapons we base our comparisons too. What are you comparing things too the mk 1 braton?

Citing Rhetorical devices and logical fallacies doesn't make you look smart, it just makes it seem like you have no point to get across. There is no semantics. You are implying that because A and B = C that D must = ABC. It's a made up imaginary rule that you think explosives must follow. 

Making up an argument I didn't even make. The tonkor is simply Y. The ogris has been under the point of balance for a while now. The tonkor not being the standard is your opinion. Something you like to pass off as fact. A lot of people don't like the tonkor because we have better alternatives. 

Exactly. If you have no evidence for a questionable claim, why should I believe it's true. Because you said it? Get real.

You can't prove that the tonkor trivializes gameplay? it's easy to get in a game to demonstrate if other weapons cannot do the same. It's easy to set up scenarios, like missing a tonkor bullet versus missing a Synoid S. bullet (no risk in missing one). You are just ignorant to any other opinion besides yours.

It's not an ad hominem, it's the truth.

Give up like your apologist friend, you're not going to 'win' by shouting louder when your arguments are still just as flawed.

• Your only 'point' was purely anecdotal. I'm not going to provide a flawed argument to combat your own lack of grounded fact. If you cannot define any proof I as a player can give, your argument based on my lack of it has no weight.
• Tonkor drawbacks like missing (which any weapon can do) and reloading (which any non-melee weapon does)? I've already provided mathematical proof that reloading is comparitively not even as big of a drawback on the Tonkor as it is on the Ogris, and the effect of each hitting shot outweighs the drawback of missing and reloading regardless of what you're comparing it against, especially when hitting cannot still be dangerous due to lack of self-damage.
  • I called the SySim and Sonicor potential outliers deserving balance tweaks. Not the Amprex, Atomos or Bows, those were just inconsistent comparisons where you ignored the differences to highlight the single commonality (hitting >1 target per shot).
• All other explosive ordnance in the game has proportional self-damage, the Tonkor is explosive ordnance, therefore the Tonkor should have proportional self-demage. If 20 is divisible by 2, and 60 an integer multiple of 20, is it questionable whether 60 also divisible by 2? No.
• The Ogris' underpowered nature does not mean that a stronger weapon is correctly balanced. Ogris is below 'Y', theoretical balance; Tonkor is above Ogris; Tonkor is GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO  the desired balance Y. Failed argument.
• You can freely believe or disbelieve, but the moment you claim my argument is false on that basis you enter into fallacy.
• Stop moving the goalposts. you said I needed to "prove everyone is using the Tonkor", which is not within my power; I would need game analytics to do this. Also, while we're at it, I didn't say 'everyone' because that would be an exaggeration. I said "almost constantly" and "to the exclusion of other weapons". Any given sortie public group has a self-evident very high chance of having at least 1 Tonkor in it. I cannot give an exact percentage and prove it irrefutably without gameplay analytics (as I predicted and you confirmed, any arbitrary public matchmade group screenshot I took, you would argue was staged).
• Stating that my argument is based on my envy of other players' statistics is ad hominem - attacking me instead of the argument.

Edited March 26, 2016 by EDYinnit

[Fast_98]

Other guns have multiple bullets the tonkor has 2 so the consequences on missing is much greater

[TheLexiConArtist]

21 minutes ago, Fast_98 said:

Other guns have multiple bullets the tonkor has 2 so the consequences on missing is much greater

A bow has 1, technically reloading on every shot. Other guns might only be able to kill one enemy per bullet, or even take multiple bullets per kill.

Consequence of miss is not based solely on the availability of additional shots before reloading. Consequence of hitting can outweigh that miss consequence, as with the Tonkor.

[tripletriple]

24 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

A bow has 1, technically reloading on every shot. Other guns might only be able to kill one enemy per bullet, or even take multiple bullets per kill.

Consequence of miss is not based solely on the availability of additional shots before reloading. Consequence of hitting can outweigh that miss consequence, as with the Tonkor.

This post contains some of the biggest fallacious claims ever made.

I'm going to play your game and instead of citing weapons like the boltor prime we will use bows. The rakta cernos has a reload speed of 0.3 seconds compared to the Tonkor 2.0. That means you have 1.7 seconds longer to get shot at. In those 1.7 seconds you could fire 6 more times with the bow!

Please don't insult the player base by insinuating they would be as stupid as you think they are.

The tonkor is a well balanced weapon that has several flaws to it to keep its damage on check. In fact, before this thread, it was widely agreed upon that it was balanced. 

If you think the Tonkor is the best, fine. But that is your opinion don't pass it off as a fact. 

As a side note, explosives before the Tonkor were considered niche and not end game worthy. 

Edited March 26, 2016 by tripletriple

[TheLexiConArtist]

1 minute ago, tripletriple said:

This post contains some of the biggest fallacious claims ever made.

I'm going to play your game and instead of citing weapons like the boltor prime we will use bows. The rakta cernos has a reload speed of 0.3 seconds compared to the Tonkor 2.0. That means you have 1.7 seconds longer to get shot at. In those 1.7 seconds you could fire 6 more times with the bow!

Please don't insult the player base by insinuating they would be as stupid as you think they are.

The tonkor is a well balanced weapon that has several flaws to it to keep its damage on check. In fact before this thread it was widely agreed upon that it was balanced. 

If you think the Tonkor is the best fine. But that is your opinion don't pass it off as a fact. 

That post right there? You're just reinforcing the point I was trying to make that shots before reload is not the only thing to consider on any weapon.

Also, the Rakta Cernos has 0.6 reload speed, not 0.3. It also has a 0.25 second charge time, bringing the peak output (drawn arrow) downtime up to 0.85 seconds. Also, its property of being uniquely fast on the draw compared to other high-tier bows (Dread, Paris P), is paid for by its comparitively lower crit stat.

Faster firing/reloading -> lower output per shot; slower firing/reloading -> higher output per shot.

By virtue of this, any effect of a miss being an effective drawback for the Tonkor (need to reload after only 2 shots) has already been more than compensated for by the output for a shot that hits.

 

Observable numerical (output and lack of scaling risk) and social factors (usage rate, performance comparison when used) give evidence for the imbalanced risk to reward of the Tonkor. So far the arguments against have been "I like it and/or need it so it's fine", which is passing off opinion as fact, and pure anecdotes like "I get outperformed with it" or "I outperform it myself".

[Ax10mCRO]

7 hours ago, EDYinnit said:

Give up like your apologist friend, you're not going to 'win' by shouting louder when your arguments are still just as flawed.

You know what, I actually tried to stay away but your delusional brain has somehow translated that to  "If he gave up I'm right, so I should totally keep this bulls**t up".

You, sir, are the most arrogant person that I have ever been unfortunate enough to meet, and that is coming from someone that has been playing online games for more than 10 years and has waded through the toxic communities of MOBAs such as dota (1 & 2), LoL, heroes of the storm and others.

Your train of thoughts seems to go along this route:

1. People in public games like to use Tonkor
2. I do not like to use Tonkor but I can't change their minds
3. I gotta form my own group to enforce the ideas that I have so that means I'm segregated
4. If I'm segregated that means I'm a victim
5. If I'm a victim I'll blame it on the Tonkor
6. If it's the Tonkor's fault then we must demand changes for the sake of every single innocent gamer that has ever logged into warframe so we avoid further victims

To which I can only say the same things I have told you countless of times before:

1. Any mission in the game can be completed using setups that do not include Tonkor
2. If people use Tonkor but they don't need it then it's logical to assume they like it and they do not mind that it is OP
3. People in public matches should be allowed to play anything they like, that is what games are about
4. Being a victim of self inflicted segregation doesn't give you any rights, it does not make you special no matter how hard you try to be. Tonkor users don't go around telling people "You are not welcome in public matches if you don't have a Tonkor", you are separating yourself from the majority by refusing to go with the flow

Now you're gonna start repeating the same BS lines that you love so much

1. But it's not fair that he kills faster than me - It's fair that everyone picks their own gear, you chose not to take Tonkor, don't cry because others didn't make the same choice
2. Reasonable expectations - The only thing that is reasonable to expect is that other people might have different playstyles than you do

At the end of the day you have not provided a single valid argument as to why the Tonkor needs to be nerfed. You have not provided any evidence that something which you can avoid is gamebreaking for you. You exposed yourself to the Tonkor on purpose then you cry about it, you can avoid it but you choose not to.

Sadly I have a feeling that your armor of arrogance will once again completely negate any effect that logic might have on a sane person.

[TheLexiConArtist]

Just now, Ax10mCRO said:

You know what, I actually tried to stay away but your delusional brain has somehow translated that to  "If he gave up I'm right, so I should totally keep this bulls**t up".

You, sir, are the most arrogant person that I have ever been unfortunate enough to meet, and that is coming from someone that has been playing online games for more than 10 years and has waded through the toxic communities of MOBAs such as dota (1 & 2), LoL, heroes of the storm and others.

Your train of thoughts seems to go along this route:

1. People in public games like to use Tonkor
2. I do not like to use Tonkor but I can't change their minds
3. I gotta form my own group to enforce the ideas that I have so that means I'm segregated
4. If I'm segregated that means I'm a victim
5. If I'm a victim I'll blame it on the Tonkor
6. If it's the Tonkor's fault then we must demand changes for the sake of every single innocent gamer that has ever logged into warframe so we avoid further victims

To which I can only say the same things I have told you countless of times before:

1. Any mission in the game can be completed using setups that do not include Tonkor
2. If people use Tonkor but they don't need it then it's logical to assume they like it and they do not mind that it is OP
3. People in public matches should be allowed to play anything they like, that is what games are about
4. Being a victim of self inflicted segregation doesn't give you any rights, it does not make you special no matter how hard you try to be. Tonkor users don't go around telling people "You are not welcome in public matches if you don't have a Tonkor", you are separating yourself from the majority by refusing to go with the flow

Now you're gonna start repeating the same BS lines that you love so much

1. But it's not fair that he kills faster than me - It's fair that everyone picks their own gear, you chose not to take Tonkor, don't cry because others didn't make the same choice
2. Reasonable expectations - The only thing that is reasonable to expect is that other people might have different playstyles than you do

At the end of the day you have not provided a single valid argument as to why the Tonkor needs to be nerfed. You have not provided any evidence that something which you can avoid is gamebreaking for you. You exposed yourself to the Tonkor on purpose then you cry about it, you can avoid it but you choose not to.

Sadly I have a feeling that your armor of arrogance will once again completely negate any effect that logic might have on a sane person.

I stated that you did not win by shouting fallacies louder. Already you again fail to understand false dichotomies. You didn't "defeat me" (impress upon me your own viewpoint until I accept it) but that does not mean I "won" (you accepted mine).

I'm surprised we didn't lock horns on the feedback forums of LoL at some juncture if you've spent time there too.

Now on to your numbered stages projected upon me:

1. People in public games use the Tonkor (do not presuppose the cause of a consequence).
2. I do not like to use the Tonkor due to opinion that it is not balanced, and hypothesise that this is the primary cause of the excess usage.
3. Upon providing reasons why the Tonkor can be considered imbalanced, I am told I am not allowed to have and express this opinion because manual matchmaking exists.
4. A victim is anyone who are forced into a lesser freedom of experience or must endure the negative effect upon their experience.
5. If the negative effect is caused by imbalanced Tonkor usage, and if this is not mindlessly accepted then the only alternative is enforced manual matchmaking, as a result the cause is the Tonkor. Other outliers can be substituted but this thread is not titled "Simulor: Let's fix screenshake mode" or somesuch.
6. If the cause can be brought to a level of balance that no longer diminishes the experience of the victim without appropriate limitation upon the enactor, then DO SO. Tonkor can be tweaked to balance, allowing it to be used not abused.

Your own numbered arguments:

1. True, but ignoring outliers does not make them not outliers. If a travel over 100 miles has the ability to be completed on foot, by bicicle, or by teleportation, there is only one choice: Teleportation is an unreasonable outlier, even though the job is done in the end. This imbalance in the context of multiplie participants is unhealthy. The other options might as well not exist. Are you campaigning to remove the non-Tonkor primary weapons from the game? (In before moving the goalposts again.)
2. This is not logical, it's a fallacy: post hoc ergo propter hoc - the correlation of people using it does not define the causation as the fact they like it. You like it, but the next person may have been sick of going out to do damage with other weaponry and getting a 3% share in the end screen, so they began to use the Tonkor from then on for the sake of their personal goal. Usage by necessity.
3. Yes, and people should be able to enjoy using what they like. Tonkor can prevent this. The reason the Tonkor can prevent this is by a bad proportion of risk to reward. So we seek to fix this. Your like of the current Tonkor does not render it immune to being changed, and if it can negatively affect other players it should be changed. People that enjoyed Banishing allies from spawn to extraction as Limbo leaving them unable to act did not prevent Banishment from being changed so that it is escapable by rolling. Neither did the fact that those Banish-trolled players could acquire Limbo and have their own control of Riftwalking.
4. You did not say "You are not welcome in public if you do not USE the Tonkor". You did effectively say that "You are not welcome in public if you do not allow a Tonkor user free reign to negatively affect your gameplay", when that negative effect is possible. Because your argument is a biased fallacy that claims righteous entitlement to the current statistics of the Tonkor 'because you like it'.

If you want to talk segregation, here's another bus seating analogy. A black person at the time in question would suffer a negative experience (reprecussions, verbal abuse) for sitting on publicly available, 'white' seats. They could avoid this by choosing to sit on the back seats. Does that alternative make the racism acceptable? At the time it was considered fine (most people allowed or engaged in it) but it has since been deemed unfair by society and equality (balance) has resulted.

This is of course an extreme example where the negative effects could be especially heinous, but the correlations are right there (and highlighted in bold for your convenience).

 

You obviously don't understand what I mean by a reasonable expectation despite examples, or are being wilfully ignorant because of the harm it does to your argument.

• On WoW there was no way to manually set a mechanical limitation on gear or aptitude to your party.
• Public matchmaking for dungeons (cooperative content) was introduced, allowing people to form parties through the system instead of manual invitations.
• It is possible to enter these dungeons with no equipment, negatively affecting the group as a whole through one person's lack of contribution.
  • However, it may be possible to still complete the content regardless, 'carrying' the dead weight that refused to leave and open the slot back up to another random player.
• Heroic dungeons are more difficult than normal dungeons, and therefore require the group to be well-equipped in order to succeed.
• Because of the reasonable expectation that a player must be geared to a certain level in order to succeed, a minimum level on quality of equipment was instantiated in order to queue into this dungeon.
• It is possible to hold but choose to not use this gear, allowing you to join but fail to meet the reasonable expectation for this cooperative content, making it unwinnable for the other players and therefore providing the strongest of negative effects: abject failure.

1. Sorties with unranked weapons is akin to joining the basic WoW dungeon with no gear. Possible, but negative; better hope you're equipped to succeed based on your warframe alone.
2. Sorties with unranked weapons, and a rank 30 Warframe with no mods slotted is akin to joining the Heroic Dungeon with gear not used. You are not even trying. You fail to meet even the expectations set by the system limitations, much less the expectations of the players within.

So yes. Reasonable expectation against unranked weapons in a Sortie. Would you like an analogous example for reasonable expectations against overpowering content as well?

 

Meanwhile, your ad hominem of the day is that I am literally insane. That's cool, I guess. Sanity is relative. It was considered absurd to claim that the Earth orbited the Sun once, too. Now it just seems like common sense.

[RealPandemonium]

On 3/24/2016 at 9:32 PM, EDYinnit said:

Please provide screenshots to disprove the screenshot I already gave to show headshot multiplier. Make sure to eliminate possible obscuring factors like modded crit multipliers, availability of red crits and damage type shenanigans.

Corpus crewmen seem to nullify the extra x2 multiplier on critical headshots.  Perhaps it is related to their helmets, although shooting off the helmets does not change anything besides adding 100 damage to headshots.  

[TheLexiConArtist]

3 minutes ago, RealPandemonium said:

Corpus crewmen seem to nullify the extra x2 multiplier on critical headshots.  Perhaps it is related to their helmets, although shooting off the helmets does not change anything besides adding 100 damage to headshots.  

Yeah, already explored that one out. Funnily enough I had a screenshot of my own that proved it but my mathsbrain got talked into overriding my observant brain because I couldn't supply myself a reason for "magical headcrit extra multiplier" despite having the proof it exists in front of my face, in another thread before.

Inconsistencies yo.

[Ax10mCRO]

5 hours ago, EDYinnit said:

Are you campaigning to remove the non-Tonkor primary weapons from the game? (In before moving the goalposts again.)

See, that post there describes your entire standing on this thing, twisting words and making it like others are moving goalposts but not you, cute but not effective. The only one trying to limit the choices that players have is you, I said it countless time nobody has ever said "you must use Tonkor" but you are trying to say "you must NOT use Tonkor".

 

I just love how you're trying to complicate something that is extremely simple.

Some people like Tonkor, some people don't.

The only question remaining is quite simple, are you ready for it?

Do we, as players, have any control over the appearance of Tonkor in our team?

And the answer is: Yes, we do.

The devs have seen it fit to give us the freedom to choose how we are going to play this game and who we are going to play with, the only place where we don't have that freedom is public matchmaking (because we can't pick our teammates OR their gear), and that is exactly what's bothering you because you're a special snowflake.

 

Also that WoW analogy is completely pointless and harmful to your point of view because WoW dungeons have minimum requirements, they don't have a maximum iLvL cap that you can't go above. If anything it proves my point that it's ok to bring in weapons far stronger than the content you're doing, but it also claims that what you did with "bringing unranked weapons with the intent to use them" is wrong as it slows down other people.

Again -> reaching a common goal faster (completing the dungeon and enjoying the loot) is acceptable by WoW devs, slowing your team down or causing them to fail is not.Perhaps you should trigger a campaign on WoW forums, asking them to introduce item level caps or other restrictions into WoW, see how well that goes

[TheLexiConArtist]

50 minutes ago, Ax10mCRO said:

See, that post there describes your entire standing on this thing, twisting words and making it like others are moving goalposts but not you, cute but not effective. The only one trying to limit the choices that players have is you, I said it countless time nobody has ever said "you must use Tonkor" but you are trying to say "you must NOT use Tonkor".

 

I just love how you're trying to complicate something that is extremely simple.

Some people like Tonkor, some people don't.

The only question remaining is quite simple, are you ready for it?

Do we, as players, have any control over the appearance of Tonkor in our team?

And the answer is: Yes, we do.

The devs have seen it fit to give us the freedom to choose how we are going to play this game and who we are going to play with, the only place where we don't have that freedom is public matchmaking (because we can't pick our teammates OR their gear), and that is exactly what's bothering you because you're a special snowflake.

 

Also that WoW analogy is completely pointless and harmful to your point of view because WoW dungeons have minimum requirements, they don't have a maximum iLvL cap that you can't go above. If anything it proves my point that it's ok to bring in weapons far stronger than the content you're doing, but it also claims that what you did with "bringing unranked weapons with the intent to use them" is wrong as it slows down other people.

Again -> reaching a common goal faster (completing the dungeon and enjoying the loot) is acceptable by WoW devs, slowing your team down or causing them to fail is not.Perhaps you should trigger a campaign on WoW forums, asking them to introduce item level caps or other restrictions into WoW, see how well that goes

Actually, I didn't state that you were doing that. In fact, the question was rhetorical, you aren't doing that any more or any less than I am telling people they can't use the Tonkor. I'm seeking literally the opposite, fixing the problem without removing the item to which that problem is attached.

You can repeat that claim all you want without it being any truer.

 

You regress the argument back to stages that have already been covered - arguing by repetition at a level of faulty generalisation. And you conveniently avoid actually addressing the actual content of my posts in favour of that tired old rhetoric.

 

The WoW analogy is not pointless. It was a proof of reasonable expectations on the underpowering end of the scale. You claimed Sortie's got no reasonable expectation of ranked and therefore viable weapons, but you have the mechanical capability to go in with an unmodded rank 30 Warframe; that's not the reasonable expectation by virtue of requiring rank 30 warframes, but it's possible.

I did not state that I enter sorties with unranked gear and attempt to use it. You are attacking my statement by presuming an unstated context. No reasonable expectation of using maxed weapons in a Tower 1 filled with level 10-15 enemies you could probably bullet jump to kill (of course you could - it's the best weapon in the game(!)).

Your attempt to defeat my argument by highlighting what it didn't prove that it didn't set out to prove in the first place is a cute red-herring, but here's the followup:

• A player with no guild or friends with which to make a manual dungeon party wishes to use the Dungeon Finder to get a viable group which can clear the dungeon. The player's goal is to experience the content. Clearing is a subtask of this overall goal.
• Due to the lack of upper limit, a Heroic Raidgeared player enters the random party. From their overgeared content (say, late-expansion and therefore several tiers of equipment over the expected gear for a Dungeon that isn't even Heroic difficulty) they completely trivialise the dungeon.
  • They may be a DPS class and kill things before the Tank can even pick them up, trivialising the role experience of said Tank and likely also the Healer, while diminishing the contribution of more appropriately-geared damage players.
  • They may be a Tank who is so overgeared they can match or outpace the DPS of a damage dealer, and/or take so little damage, and have so much personal sustain, that the healer is irrelevant.
  • Healers have a difficult time generating the problem, unless they can deal significant DPS while trivially healing to diminish the contribution of the actual damage players. Tanks may feel a little diminished if they particularly care, however most would welcome the respite from the stresses of tanking at a dangerously close matchup between expected player throughput and dungeon throughput.
• This clears the content without achieving the overall goal of the player; it has negatively affected their experience and left them bored and failed to engage them in the gameplay element.
• Fast forward to more recent Expansions:
• Level limits on normal dungeons were greatly tightened to limit this issue with regards to overshadowing allied players via a level disparity. This precludes some low-end normal dungeons from being available to a player at Expansion max level.
• Once a player reaches certain power levels through levels and gear, they can no longer publicly queue in to those normal difficulty dungeons, removing some of the potential problems of overshadowing by enforcing their would-be compatriots to have a certain minimum level of available throughput. It's not perfect, but it's a maximum gear level restriction for the benefit of the experience of those at a more reasonably expected level.
• They can still manually make a party and go into content they outlevelled and outgeared.

Under your logic, we should surely see WoW allowing level 100 players to queue into level 15 dungeons with random public matchmaking, right? They would clear SO FAST, it'd be a literal walkthrough.

Edited March 27, 2016 by EDYinnit

[Ax10mCRO]

9 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

Under your logic, we should surely see WoW allowing level 100 players to queue into level 15 dungeons with random public matchmaking, right? They would clear SO FAST, it'd be a literal walkthrough.

Currently it is possible for a well geared character to enter a lvl 100 HEROIC dungeon designed for 5 people and solo it. WoW devs are aware of that, they are also aware that reaching your goal fast is NOT A BAD THING. Nobody in their right mind would complain about it, and IF you do mind it, then make your own group and avoid that problem.

PROOF that it can be done solo

Again, nobody gives a damn, they do not see it as a problem because it is not a problem for normal people. It is only a problem for arrogant control freaks that believe they are entitled to their "fair share of gameplay" when they expose themselves to the option that it may not happen by entering a RANDOM MATCHMAKING.

12 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

The player's goal is to experience the content.

Yes, that is exactly why all the loot drops on the first run and nobody ever does the same dungeon more than once. WoW is about grinding and so is Warframe.How many extermination missions do you have to "experience" before you are satistfied?

From all your talking you have yet to supply a reasonable request for Tonkor nerf, it all comes down to you personally not liking it and wanting to deny it from the people that do like it. Not a single mechanic of the entire game has ever forced you (or anyone else, since you like to portray most of Tonkor users as victims who don't really want to use it but still do) to get near a Tonkor, you are not chained to a Tonkor user uppon logging in, it is something you CHOSE yourself, stop crying about it for god's sake.

[TheLexiConArtist]

1 minute ago, Ax10mCRO said:

Currently it is possible for a well geared character to enter a lvl 100 HEROIC dungeon designed for 5 people and solo it. WoW devs are aware of that, they are also aware that reaching your goal fast is NOT A BAD THING. Nobody in their right mind would complain about it, and IF you do mind it, then make your own group and avoid that problem.

PROOF that it can be done solo

Again, nobody gives a damn, they do not see it as a problem because it is not a problem for normal people. It is only a problem for arrogant control freaks that believe they are entitled to their "fair share of gameplay" when they expose themselves to the option that it may not happen by entering a RANDOM MATCHMAKING.

Yes, that is exactly why all the loot drops on the first run and nobody ever does the same dungeon more than once. WoW is about grinding and so is Warframe.How many extermination missions do you have to "experience" before you are satistfied?

From all your talking you have yet to supply a reasonable request for Tonkor nerf, it all comes down to you personally not liking it and wanting to deny it from the people that do like it. Not a single mechanic of the entire game has ever forced you (or anyone else, since you like to portray most of Tonkor users as victims who don't really want to use it but still do) to get near a Tonkor, you are not chained to a Tonkor user uppon logging in, it is something you CHOSE yourself, stop crying about it for god's sake.

People have been campaigning for Blood DK to be nerfed for a while. It's happened (partially) but they're still capable of some mean feats.

So if the top 1% of players with optimal gear, supplementaries and a synergistic class can solo a Heroic at-level., every player should be able to perform at this level while using public matchmaking? Just in case someone or several someones decide to queue in and be intentionally uncooperative?

Also, prove to me that the video was done at minimum restricted ilvl. I rather doubt it. Unfortunately, it didn't start with a used-gear display nor end with it.

 

Moving the goalposts to suit your argument AGAIN. I posited a player whose goal is what I stated. NOT that this is the only reason any player enters the dungeon. The fact this hypothetical player would have to do the dungeon again for their goal is itself proof of the negative effect inflicted by the overshadowing player. And even if it's fair that it should happen, what's to say it wouldn't happen every time, given the lack of control over public matchmaking? Where do you draw the line? 10 retries before they get to enjoy their goal by fairly contributing? 100? Indefinitely attempting to just play the game the way they want, which is the entire thing you say you're arguing for?

 

You are not the authority on what comprises reasonable requests for Tonkor nerfs. You can disagree (and have been doing so vehemently), but it's not your place to make that unequivocal statement that reasonable requests have not been provided. All you are capable of stating is that I have not given a reason that satisfies YOU. We're aware that this is the case. Stop trying to say my opinion is objectively invalid based on your own subjective opinions alone.

 

Just because Warframe happens to have a friendlier community for arbitrary pick-up-groups than other games, doesn't invalidate the core issue:

For any given content, there is a nonzero chance that no manually created group can be formed, due to population, interest or mechanical issues.

If a player's quality of gameplay experience is negatively affected by automated matchmaking, and the player cannot be reasonably expected to complete the content alone, this means that there is a nonzero chance that player's experience is TOTALLY EXCLUDED.

I wouldn't expect every single player in the game to be able to solo a Third Sortie mission with Enhanced Elemental or Enhanced Physical augmentation, that is an otherwise-endless mission type, say Interception. For argument's sake, it's Grineer.

Could a sufficiently skilled and equipped player manage it? Perhaps. But that's not every player.

If the player's experience is negatively affected by, say, Blind Mirage making the entire interception mission an automatic success due to the entire map being repeatedly halted from capturing points (Grineer, so no Nullifier bubbles stop this either), because they wanted to actually engage enemies, there is a chance they cannot find a manually selected group with no Blind Mirage (say the chat is down all day by some happenstance): the player is now enforced into suffering this negative impact or a lack of gameplay altogether. The 'argument' of "well just make a private group then" is nulled by the dead chat. What now legitimises this imbalance?

 

You were honestly better off having cut loose, because I'm happy to keep refuting your every argument. Might I recommend returning to that state? I don't presume a "win" from that: you've left your impact on the thread, your opinion is visible, and people may agree with you and not me.

Back-and-forth between us is redundant by this point, surely you must be as sick of repeating thematically identical arguments and allegories as I am.

[DuskLegendary]

Look, I'm not going to argue with anyone here because it's pointless; I can't change your opinions, you can't change mine. I'm just going to say this though... when I'm doing high level content like Sorties where you're sometimes nerfed in some way, the enemies are buffed, and they're already powerful enough to easily one shot you with basically anything, weapons like the Tonkor are very much needed. I currently don't have access to weapons like the Sancti Tigris or the Synoid Simulator, so they aren't an option for me. My fully modded Soma P, Boltor P, and Dread don't do much to enemies when they start hitting lv. 80+. So then, what options do I have? Should I spend 2 minutes and waste half the clip of ammo before I kill a single enemy, get downed, and have my team baby sit me and ultimately end up failing because they had to baby sit me? Should I cheese my way through every Sortie with an immortal frame like Valkyr, or a frame that has the potential to be immortal, Blessing Trinity? (which by the way, both of those are cheap. Immortal frames present no challenge to the game, so I'm not sure why everyone is whining about a broken weapon when we have stuff like this in the game that make the gameplay just as un-challenging as a weapon that one shots nearly everything) 

What I'm basically saying is that, the Tonkor is basically my only way to deal damage to these high level enemies with the frames and equipment I have. It works, nobody has to carry me, I complete my objective, the entire team gets rewarded, everyone is happy. Yes, maybe it is a little too accessible to low MR people, so why not just heighten the MR requirements instead of destroying one weapon in the already small handful of weapons that holds some sort of "end game" viability? 

I know I don't NEED the Tonkor to complete Sorties and the like, but it certainly does make them a lot easier. To be fair though, with my supportive setups, I'm not really the main damage dealer on the team most of the time anyways. I usually like to go in with a Blessing Trinity and cheese my way through Sorties because I can and will. But I've said my bit. I'm sure I'm about to be pelted with a lot of backlash from somebody, and I'm 100% sure none of it is going to change my mind about the Tonkor.

[Ax10mCRO]

16 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

People have been campaigning for Blood DK to be nerfed for a while. It's happened (partially) but they're still capable of some mean feats.

Tonkor has also been partially nerfed (several times), that argument of yours makes no sense

17 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

every player should be able to perform at this level while using public matchmaking?

Nobody ever said that, but every player should be able to understand the fact that he may run into such players in public matchmaking, something that you clearly can't comprehend.

18 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

Also, prove to me that the video was done at minimum restricted ilvl. I rather doubt it. Unfortunately, it didn't start with a used-gear display nor end with it.

There's no need to prove that, it was simply to show that your arguments about WoW are invalid, such things are clearly allowed in a game with a much larger player base than WF, much larger dev team than WF and therefore you trying to apply it here is just wrong. That same rules that you're trying to force here have been deemed stupid and dismissed at a quite larger scale.

19 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

Moving the goalposts to suit your argument AGAIN. I posited a player whose goal is what I stated. NOT that this is the only reason any player enters the dungeon.

That player has several options to achieve his goal such as premade parties or solo play, in fact, there's no intelligent reason why he would enter a public matchmaking if his goal is to enjoy the experience at his own pace because every intelligent player should understand that it's not everyone's goal to prance around the map and smell the flowers. The goalposts have not been moved since this topic started, you have options for what you're trying to achieve, you're simply butthurt about not being able to control public matchmaking to suit YOUR needs and YOUR needs alone.

22 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

what's to say it wouldn't happen every time, given the lack of control over public matchmaking?

If it happens every single time then clearly people like Tonkor (no they're not some poor victims forced to play it, there are other options to do every single mission in the game so don't even try with that BS victimization again)

24 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

but it's not your place to make that unequivocal statement that reasonable requests have not been provided.

Actually it is, since you have logically done nothing to provide proof Tonkor is gamebreaking and as such requires nerfs. How can something break your game if you don't allow it in your team? Again this is not "my opinion" it's just a simple fact, the one that you choose to ignore again and again, it's getting rather sad really.

27 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

For any given content, there is a nonzero chance that no manually created group can be formed, due to population, interest or mechanical issues.

In which case there's always the option of solo play, again, you won't be forced to play with a tonkor. But I'm glad you're finally starting to let some sense pierce your delusions and have finally accepted that maybe, just maybe, there are options besides public matchmaking.

29 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

If a player's quality of gameplay experience is negatively affected by automated matchmaking, and the player cannot be reasonably expected to complete the content alone, this means that there is a nonzero chance that player's experience is TOTALLY EXCLUDED.

Any content can be completed solo, and if you can't then you need someone to carry you anyway, why be fussy about what they use to carry you? Is it reasonable to beg for free food and then say you like veal more than pork?

Besides after all your yapping you have yet to provide any proof that your claims are reasonable. Have you ever seen someone say "you're clearing the 3rd sortie way too fast"? I haven't, people are just happy they cleared it to get their loot, doesn't matter if i use a tonkor or mag on augmented shield maps, or a mirage on interception sorties. And if you're not happy with that, there's always the option to play that sortie with a group that does satisfy you. (and we just listed 2 "gamebreaking" mechanics that aren't even related to the weapon, proving my point that Tonkor nerfs won't give you the "balance and fairness" you're asking for, it's just one minor detail in the first place)

34 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

because I'm happy to keep refuting your every argument.

Perhaps then it is time you actually start doing so, you have yet to show me how you are forced to play with a tonkor, something that is the entire base upon which you build this "woe is me" argument of yours.

[TheLexiConArtist]

43 minutes ago, Ax10mCRO said:

Tonkor has also been partially nerfed (several times), that argument of yours makes no sense

Nobody ever said that, but every player should be able to understand the fact that he may run into such players in public matchmaking, something that you clearly can't comprehend.

There's no need to prove that, it was simply to show that your arguments about WoW are invalid, such things are clearly allowed in a game with a much larger player base than WF, much larger dev team than WF and therefore you trying to apply it here is just wrong. That same rules that you're trying to force here have been deemed stupid and dismissed at a quite larger scale.

That player has several options to achieve his goal such as premade parties or solo play, in fact, there's no intelligent reason why he would enter a public matchmaking if his goal is to enjoy the experience at his own pace because every intelligent player should understand that it's not everyone's goal to prance around the map and smell the flowers. The goalposts have not been moved since this topic started, you have options for what you're trying to achieve, you're simply butthurt about not being able to control public matchmaking to suit YOUR needs and YOUR needs alone.

If it happens every single time then clearly people like Tonkor (no they're not some poor victims forced to play it, there are other options to do every single mission in the game so don't even try with that BS victimization again)

Actually it is, since you have logically done nothing to provide proof Tonkor is gamebreaking and as such requires nerfs. How can something break your game if you don't allow it in your team? Again this is not "my opinion" it's just a simple fact, the one that you choose to ignore again and again, it's getting rather sad really.

In which case there's always the option of solo play, again, you won't be forced to play with a tonkor. But I'm glad you're finally starting to let some sense pierce your delusions and have finally accepted that maybe, just maybe, there are options besides public matchmaking.

Any content can be completed solo, and if you can't then you need someone to carry you anyway, why be fussy about what they use to carry you? Is it reasonable to beg for free food and then say you like veal more than pork?

Besides after all your yapping you have yet to provide any proof that your claims are reasonable. Have you ever seen someone say "you're clearing the 3rd sortie way too fast"? I haven't, people are just happy they cleared it to get their loot, doesn't matter if i use a tonkor or mag on augmented shield maps, or a mirage on interception sorties. And if you're not happy with that, there's always the option to play that sortie with a group that does satisfy you. (and we just listed 2 "gamebreaking" mechanics that aren't even related to the weapon, proving my point that Tonkor nerfs won't give you the "balance and fairness" you're asking for, it's just one minor detail in the first place)

Perhaps then it is time you actually start doing so, you have yet to show me how you are forced to play with a tonkor, something that is the entire base upon which you build this "woe is me" argument of yours.

• You said that performing the feat of which you supplied video is considered fine. The continuing complaints about performing just such feats almost uniquely available to Blood DKs proves otherwise. There have been nerfs, doesn't mean that it was necessarily enough.
• Your refutation was based on the premise "Look, Heroics with a troll player is K because this one person can do it solo"; the implication being that other people should be expected to be capable of carrying 0-4 trolls out of the team of 5, at the minimum power level at which they too can enter into matchmaking, because no mechanical prevention exists on the automated matchmaking to prevent getting up to 4 trolls.
• Dungeons are not balanced to be reasonably clearable by a single player, and manual matchmaking cannot be guaranteed. Before LFR was added to WoW, many people just couldn't experience current raid content because they couldn't find a manually assembled group that would allow them to join and learn. Failed comparison, sorry. You can add ad hominem but you avoid actually disproving the point rather than repeating rhetoric that has no actual value against the argument that just served to weigh against it.
• No player is allowed to experience a dungeon at a level at which it poses a challenge? Then what is the point of the entire design? It might as well cut out the redundant middleman and generate loot for clicking Join Queue, at least then there'd be no expectation of content to enjoy. It's a two-way street and you continue to ignore what doesn't suit you, while I refute point per point.
• "The option of Solo Play" is not present when you cannot be expected to solo the content. If the content was designed solely with solo play in mind it would not be a multiplayer game. Power creep that indeed allows a player to solo it (with the Tonkor or any other method of imbalanced output) is why such egregiously unsoloable content (without limitation on using what you want, as you profess to campaign for) exists to begin with. DE adds challenge, challenge is cheesed by high-end power imbalance, challenge difficulty is inflated to attempt to provide the level of challenge originally intended.
• What is that analogy even? At least identify the comparison points if you're going to be obtuse. Is it reasonable for an obese man to enter a 4-man relay race as a team of 1 and expect to complete the entire run solo at a comparable time to a full team of 4, because a trained professional runner could do so? No. I'm sure some select people with enough gear could solo, duo or 3-man a Trial, but they are still limited to a 4-man minimum team out of a possible 8.
• Define reasonable as anything but subjective to your opinion? Because the onus is not on me to prove my opinion is objectively correct when it is you saying it is objectively incorrect, that's on you. So far, you've provided no reasonable argument that the Tonkor is balanced. See? I can play that game of non-statement too. All you can come back with is your subjective judgements. Those happen to be your reasons - same as my reasons are my subjective judgements with sourced evidence from which I drew those conclusions.
  • While we're at it, 2 outliers against a sample size of 300 does not implicitly prove that neither of those 2 are in fact outliers. This is a thread about one outlier and balancing that, completely irrelevantly to the current state of, or desired future balance of, the other candidates for being outliers.
• Perhaps it is time you refute mine, as you've currently avoided several of my attempted refutations, and cited examples contained in said refutations, instead of even attempting (regardless of validity of such attempts) to dispute them in any way but repeating an identical statement over and over again.

 

Identify where I have not refuted your arguments - bearing in mind that whether the refutation is valid is an opinionated judgement; I refute your arguments if I make a counter-claim to your point. Obviously I opine that these refutations (where not rhetorical) are valid, and obviously you don't share that opinion. But the statements exist, that is a fact.

Edited March 27, 2016 by EDYinnit

[Mr._Clean]

41 minutes ago, DuskLegendary said:

Look, I'm not going to argue with anyone here because it's pointless; I can't change your opinions, you can't change mine. I'm just going to say this though... when I'm doing high level content like Sorties where you're sometimes nerfed in some way, the enemies are buffed, and they're already powerful enough to easily one shot you with basically anything, weapons like the Tonkor are very much needed.

There isn't really anything like the Tonkor because of it's uniqueness of being a launcher that achieves high damage through launcher status and high crit chance and also has splash damage. Oddly enough unlike other explosive launcher weapons or even the explosives from Thunderbolt or Concealed explosives it doesn't do much self-damage.

What we need is more weapons that compare to the levels of the Tonkor so players do not feel required to bring it to "contribute" or to stoke their e-peen by getting the highest damage. It sticks out like a sore thumb in a good way, but a sore thumb is still a sore thumb.

 

Now, this no longer concerns the quote...

While I don't feel as strongly about this subject as some of this topic participants, I do find it's getting old seeing a Mirage or Joeframe join and then rain grenades down on hordes of enemies. I mean I'm not entitled to it, but I would like to be able to get a kill every once in awhile without having to go into private matches. Having "that guy" who just runs in front of everyone and obliterates entire groups in missions because he can and decided to play publics gets old when "that guy" is in nearly every game. He's entitled to play, but so are we and "that guy" is being very disrespectful by adopting this play style in public.

[Ax10mCRO]

14 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

• The continuing complaints about performing just such feats almost uniquely available to Blood DKs proves otherwise. There have been nerfs, doesn't mean that it was necessarily enough.

Paladins can do it too, does that mean they need to get nerfed?

15 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

• Your refutation was based on the premise "Look, Heroics with a troll player is K because this one person can do it solo"; the implication being that other people should be expected to be capable of carrying 0-4 trolls out of the team of 5

Who said anything about trolls? I said (something that you choose to ignore) is that there is no UPPER LIMIT to a players power, something that you are trying to introduce to warframe so "everyone can get their fair share of gamplay". You can also argue that you can have 3 people afk in a warframe public game with nothing to stop them from doing so, that is beside the point, you are moving goalposts again.

17 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

• many people just couldn't experience current raid content because they couldn't find a manually assembled group that would allow them to join and learn.

Sure they could, that's what guilds are for.

18 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

•  If the content was designed solely with solo play in mind it would not be a multiplayer game.

If you were meant to control every other player then it would also not be a multiplayer game, you would get AI teammates that you can customize to your liking.

19 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

• Because the onus is not on me to prove my opinion is objectively correct when it is you saying it is objectively incorrect, that's on you

Actually it is upon you to prove it, you are the one demanding changes while i'm saying "let tonkor stay the way it is and look for a better, more complete solution ". I simply said that you have no objective reason to complain about something that you can avoid. You have yet to provide proof how something that is not in your game can be breaking that same game for you. You also have yet to provide proof how you are forced to have that tonkor in your game. I already proved there are ways to avoid tonkor (as if making a group or playing solo need proof in the first place), that means you can't prove you are forced to play with it and have your game broken by it.

Besides, the game itself is broken, try doing late game missions without stacking armor reduction? Is that fair gameplay? The entire game is made to challenge you to find ways to break it, to surpass the limitations imposed upon you by that absurd armor scaling. Simply nerfing tonkor won't change anything, the game needs changes on a bigger scale until then let the people have their fun, you can choose to walk away if it bothers you.

[VLKZ-9336]

Tonkor already has some disadvantages. 2 shot magazine is low and you have to learn to aim those projectiles to make every shot count because the explosion delay when it doesn't hit anything is too long for use. When playing with the Tonkor, you spend a lot of time loading the weapon under ennemy fire.

I've not read the whole thread for obvious reasons, maybe this was already syggested, but the only thing I'd change about the Tonkor would not be to lower it's stats or make it self-damaging. Self-damage make such weapons almost unusable in multiplayer because people will run in front of you and thus kill you... If we nerf things that don't need much skill to deal massive damage, what about removing Ash from the game first? Draco with Ash playing means you spend your session just picking up the drops since you don't see any ennemy : they're all in a redish aura all the time, then dead... 

I would keep the no/low self damage feature, but eventually add a status effect on the user if caught within blast radius, such as a 1/2 sec stun for instance. 

[NKDG]

On March 25, 2016 at 6:46 AM, Ax10mCRO said:

All those things that you're crying about, that you keep saying we desperately need, WE HAVE THEM IN THE GAME ALREADY. Do you not grasp that simple fact?

Do you not understand that you have plenty of other weapons that "real pros" use that provide all that you are trying to get? You already have all that you want to have from the game. What you're trying to do now is screw over other people who want other things from the game.

The moment you introduce a valid logical argument to say that tonkor actually NEEDS a nerf, something that is not based on how you feel the game should be, then i will agree with you.

All the posts you made so far fail to explain one simple thing: Why is tonkor actually such a problem for you?

If so many people agree with you, then surely it's not hard to make a group where Tonkor won't be used (in fact, if so many people agreed with you then Tonkor wouldn't even be used in public games often enough to deserve this witch hunt). If it is hard to make such a group, it just means that most of the people prefer the Tonkor the way it is now. Either way you don't have any logical reason to cry here? We're back to you trying to force your personal belief upon the entire player base with no valid reason.

We've been through this so many times, you keep posting random facts but NOTHING you have posted so far has countered that one point of view.

I should be playing solo because I don't demand people in public matches to have certain gear and mods, and expect them not to demand the same from me? That's interesting, especially from a person admitting he uses substandard weapons and slows down his team on purpose without caring that he's impacting the game in a negative way.

 

Actually no, you don't. You have not yet provided any proof that tonkor needs any change. What you're trying to change is what people will use in public games so that it suits your vision of what the game should be. 

We keep coming back to this again and again, you're unhappy with what other people choose to use in public matches.

If the tonkor bothered you personally you would simply not use it, but that is not enough, is it? You have to pick what other people should and shouldn't use.

Aight, I'm about as lazy as your playstyle appears to be, so I won't care to edit or highlight which points each of mine refute, so good luck sorting through it. 

What? That has nothing to do with what he said. We have data points, risk v reward, and reasonable expectations and restrictions ingame?? I guess you don't grasp a few things either... also, tonkor flies in the face of the last two, 50 flat dmg (basically no risk in the scheme of things) for highest launcher dmg ingame when modded properly (high reward), let's now list a reasonable expectation and the main restriction of a launcher. Reasonable expectation: does high damage. Restriction: can do the EXACT SAME amount of damage you'd do to an enemy to you. Many have asked for this restriction removed, but have been met with DEVS replying that it's not happening. (I think the last instance of that was in November/December, but again I'm lazy. Find it yourself) does tonkor have that restriction? NO. It does 50 flat damage. Again, hardly a restriction for the by far highest dmging launcher in the game. That's a valid, logical point as to why it needs some sort of nerf. It's an outlier. We need some semblance of balance in order to encourage changing weapons. 

Youre forgetting the fact that many people use it solely for the reason of relevancy. You wanna be cool and just watch everything get OHKO'd? No? F*** you then, rando timmy tonkor wants to, so you get to watch him kill everything. Now be a good boy and grab a tonkor to fight for your fun. Soma P feels awesome? F*** you, meet rando Timmy tonkor. He reminds you to use tonkor always or you get to watch as he eats your slice of the fun pie. 

The tonkor is pre-rework miasma, except instead of trash mobs, it kills everything. People were up in arms when saryn was (I personally don't think quote on quote's necessary here, but it's all opinion) "broken" not necessarily because it wasn't a 1ndone room nuke regardless, but because she lost her place as a quick trashmob killer. If that place was considered too broken, how much more should a 1ndone completemob killer be?

Again, it's an outlier. It needs to be normalized in terms of power. It's the only gun that fits your vision of this game (easy mode watch everything fall at your feet w/no effort), so I guess your vision of the game's a bit off then?

The reason the tonkor is a problem is rando Timmy tonkor is about every other match, so I'm stuck either watchin him eat my fun pie, or spending anywhere from 5-20 minutes trying to get in a match he hasn't decided to ruin. This also applies to @EvilChaosKnight 's link. The argument that it's not affecting me is simply untrue. The argument "go solo or private if you don't want it to affect you" is the opposite thing Jim says regarding his opinion on Dark Souls having an easy mode, as he specifically stated they shouldn't be able to do some of the online if they play easy mode, as THAT AFFECTS OTHER PEOPLE. If it's making the game wayyy too easy, it's fine as long as it's optional. Requiring me to jump through hoops to make it optional, and you may as well make it mandatory. 

[samuelx43a]

why the hell over a wall of text just to fix one darn weapon that has something that other weapons don't? i'm just asking, i have yet to go in pvp, but i usually play pve, so in my book a more powerful weapon is better, still once i get the suffucient mr i will get myself a penta, for the single fact that you can detonate the rounds, and perhaps the ogris.

 

so for me a couple of guys with a tonkor hasnt given it any problems, so if someone could politely explain me why is a launcher that does less self damage is already broken?