Tonkor: Let's fix easy mode

[TheLexiConArtist]

10 minutes ago, Tureynul said:

If you think there are secondary factors that need to be included, please name them.

Well, the correlation is "DE have made excessive nerfs", implied causation says "DE will make an excessive nerf"... but you can't know that for certain until it happens because the correlative data suggests it, it does not prove it. Here's some correlations that suggest absurd and almost certainly incorrect causes for your entertainment.

[Tureynul]

The correlation is close enough to causation (imho) to make it advisable to avoid it altogether.

If I give you a S#&$ty chinese lighter that doesn't ignite in 1 of 5 cases, then offer to give you a few thousand dollar if you cover yourself in gasoline and then proceed to switch on said lighter once you'll decline knowing that most likely you'd be immolated. There's no reason for optimism here, no reason to switch the lighter just because the chance of it turning on isn't 100%.

Once the change (i.e. damage) is done, there's little hope that it will be reverted or improved upon. While I don't know the outcome 'for certain', I know that it likely will be poor.

[(PSN)aiptekfanboy]

5 hours ago, Magneu said:

Coming back after a weekend of clearing my head by riding a death machine too fast for my own good (a great cure; highly recommended if you can pilot two wheeled engines);

I feel as though the reason the Tonkor is too powerful is because it supersedes its own weapon class's intended role (speaking only for primaries)

 

Assault rifles are the "do everything pretty well" class.

Semi-autos drop a bit of multi-target/ease of use for stronger single target damage, with the added bonus of ammo efficiency.

Burst weapons hold a middle ground between autos and semi-autos, combining the good and bad from both.

Shotguns excel against groups/single targets in close range, with the ability to demolish packed squads, but lack ranged damage.

Beam weapons *should* be similar to assault rifles, but have increased status/critical stats in exchange for more ammo consumption/limited range (ticks per second break this as of now though), and excel against groups with special bonuses (Amprex), or the sheer effectiveness of punch-through mods. 

Snipers excel at single target damage (perhaps the highest burst damage on a single target with headshots/combo counters in game), but pay for being non-versatile against groups/smaller targets.

Bows lose a bit of single target damage in exchange for ease of use, close range potential, and group punch-through.

Launchers should be the undisputed kings of destroying groups from afar...but should pay by having less single target DPS. Essentially, they should spread moderate damage over a large area to affect all enemies in the area (total DPS is equal to or greater than other weapons, but you have to deal with travel time, self-damage, limited ammo, etc).

I played an hour T4 recently with two friends, running a Nekros with a Secura Penta. My job was life support from Desecrate when needed (emergency spam), Terrify CC, additional firepower/meat-shields with SotD, and revives with Soul Survivor. My Secura Penta wiped the floor with the Lancers, Crewmen, most Moas, and even some Bombards (Radiation/Viral build; Bombards that didn't die due to raw damage were gunned down by allies while being Radiation procced/half-health from Viral). In exchange, my DPS against Gunners was practically worthless, I couldn't take down Nullifier shields, and proccing Ancients happened more than outright killing them.

I fulfilled a vital role in the squad by reducing enemy numbers substantially, but my friend with the Dread was in charge of Gunners/Ancients, while my other friend with a Boltor Prime (he actually brought it to be ironic, as he hates it) took down Nullifiers bubbles/mopped up remaining trash mobs/supplied additional firepower against heavies. It was a hyper-effective strategy, enabling us to hit an hour with little trouble, only ever going down due to neglecting to look behind us for spawns, or a Moa that snuck in our globe and slammed us out).

(It's why I consider snipers so important in high level runs, as they isolate key units like Ancients and Eximus heavies, then eliminate them before they can make a substantial impact on the battle-field (let me say, Vulkar Wraith stacking headshots...OHKO on level 120-140 Gunners is a beautiful thing).)

The reason for that story is to explain how effective (ammo economy, ease of use, AOE) launchers are at certain, important roles. Now, the problem with the Tonkor.

The Tonkor essentially combines the role of launchers with that of snipers; it takes extreme single-target DPS, and applies it in a massive AOE. A single person, (with even a Specter with an auto-rifle to take down Nullifer bubbles) could have replaced our three-man team (frame abilities not-withstanding) with just a Tonkor. Fight against Infested or Grineer, and it just becomes easier.

Fixing AOE headshots should help, reducing the critical multiplier on the weapon should help, even reducing the base damage should help (self-damage could help, but only with the people who run around with the Tonkor as a glorified shotgun). However it's done, the Tonkor needs to be toned down from the extreme outlier it is. 

 

I use a tonkor as a backup weapon with a 15 shot sonicore as my main reason 2 shot tonkor no cc versus 15 shots sonicore with cc knockdown when at enemy level 150 to 300 as its funny to watch the sonicore knockdown then add avalanche plus a melee strike then more sonicore shots with tonkor only as a derp no more sonicore ammo backup weapon 

[TheLexiConArtist]

13 minutes ago, Tureynul said:

Once the change (i.e. damage) is done, there's little hope that it will be reverted or improved upon. While I don't know the outcome 'for certain', I know that it likely will be poor.

Poor for the Tonkor; all other weapons will still gain benefit.

As I said, if deemed necessary, even excessive is better than nothing... and only DE can make the decision on it being necessary. All we can do is lend weight to the two options, "act" or "do not".

[(XBOX)Skode]

I like the first option, launchers by nature should be the most high risk/reward weapons in game. Tonkor has no risk for same easy reward - like how Soma/Boltor primes dominate as theyve no recoil issues to balance high damage output.

The passives for it make it unique though and should stay, damage out put not so much.

Edited March 28, 2016 by (XB1)Skode

[Lyravain]

I cannot believe this topic has actually been going on. Or that so many people are against the Tonkor -what's next, people wanting Karak buffs?

Tonkor is fine as-is. High gain, high risk -and don't tell me 'no risk' because all you have is 2 shots and unless firing from safe-zones (Loki's Invis or Frost's Bubble for example), you will get steamrolled in high enough levels, where your 1second reload is 2 seconds too long.

You don't like the Tonkor? Don't use it. You feel annoyed other people use it? Don't play with them. For crying out loud, stop complaining about everything that doesn't suit your own little version of what the game should be like and deal with it. It's complaining like this that has harmed the game far more than anything else DE has done. It's a challenging weapon to learn to master, one that needs you to play a bit differently from many others (I for example am rubbish at Penta, but devastating at Tonkor and no, it's not the Penta's self-damage, I just can't get them to go where I want them to go). Not a matter of 'getting gud', but a personal play-style.

Instead of asking for pointless nerf/buffs, how about giving advice to the actual problems of the game (inclding but not limited to the enemy scaling, for example)?

[Ax10mCRO]

14 minutes ago, Lyravain said:

You don't like the Tonkor? Don't use it. You feel annoyed other people use it? Don't play with them. For crying out loud, stop complaining about everything that doesn't suit your own little version of what the game should be like and deal with it.

That won't work on our special snowflakes here, they can't comprehend the game doesn't revolve around them.

The entire logic is "why should I put in any effort to make this game suit my needs, it should be auto tuned to do so in the first place"

Edited March 28, 2016 by Ax10mCRO

[Irorone]

7 hours ago, EDYinnit said:

I'm glad you actually tried. Already your arguments are stronger.

1. I already mentioned this in the example with Ember on Mercury, it is not valid to expect new players to solo (maybe they can't do a Defense for 5 waves solo while unfamiliar with the game) nor is it valid to expect them to make manual groups (no interest in recruiting chat, perhaps they don't even know it exists). The burden is on the one with power to not abuse it where it can have a negative effect; to expect the opposite (limitations on the one without the power) is just bullying. But we can't rely on everyone being responsible, so we seek to reduce the capacity for negative impact the system allows them instead.
2. You cannot possibly name 10 weapons in each slot with comparably immense power (and very limited drawbacks) as the Tonkor enjoys. Since you mentioned Ivara, how's this: I have a build for my Ivara and Ogris that maximises the size and minimises the scaling time of Navigator's damage amplification to make the rockets strong enough and controllable enough (including Heavy Caliber) to one-shot-kill Sortie 3 armoured enemies at little risk to me. That doesn't mean that the Ogris is as good as the Tonkor on its own merits. I could get the same output with the Tonkor (especially thanks to Headcrits) with 100% power strength Navigator, a full 10 less on the multiplier, which would allow me to do so more often and more efficiently due to fire-rate differences, lack of Corrupted Mod drawbacks, etc. It'd also make Ivara's other abilities suffer less for achieving that power level with Navigated explosives.
3. I wanted to agree to disagree, that was the premise of the end of the debate: no repetition of arguments, nobody says the other isn't allowed their perspectives to exist, the reasons proposed and opposed that far remain in the thread for judgement by anyone interested. But, what's-his-face was bent on saying I wasn't allowed to say I thought the Tonkor needed changing at all... speaking of which, it does seem to have finally been heeded, mercifully enough.
4. It's an opinion. And at least from my arguments, it's not analogous to breaking toys - I want to make more of the available toys closer to being as fun as the 'best' toy, which can be done by enhancing all the others, or slightly reducing the properties that contribute to the 'best' toy being so fun. Occam's Razor - the simplest answer is often the correct one. Path of least resistance (and least overall balancing and testing issue) is to alter the one, not the many.
5. There are 5 damage values, and the only one that matches the base damage stat is the projectile impact 75. All 4 others are headshots and amplified the 325 base blast accordingly. I can't possibly have struck all 4 heads with the projectile. I can also provide a screenshot of the Penta doing the same from a grenade that was resting on the ground (not airburst).
6. Reverse the equation though, and you can't treat the whole without treating the parts. This thread is about the Tonkor as the biggest weapon power-balance outlier, not about Warframe power-balance against each other, wholly or individually, nor about weapon power-balance against warframes as categories. They are valid things to be discussed, but those situations existing doesn't mean this situation doesn't.
7. The question should not be "do some people want to be Taxied" (opinion, inarguable) but "can the option of Taxiing people result in a negative influence" (arguable), I would reason yes - but whether or not it's to a degree that warrants limiting the ability to Taxi mechanically is not my decision though (and I'm undecided if it is bad enough in my opinion, for what that's worth).
8. That it is a good weapon may not intrinsically mean it is too good, but how it is a good weapon more consistently than most other options, and against what proportion of expected content it enjoys this prestige, is a reason why it is too good. I hate the Sonicor too, but that's for another thread to debate the particle spam annoyance generation device. Also, expected content matters. For example, it is not expected content once enemy levels are over roughly 130 (sortie 3 + 'endless' mission type), as only manually going that long in an endless mission generates these, and endless missions are meant to eventually defeat players anyway; this means that if the Tonkor begins to significantly fall off at level 150, it is effectively devoid of falloff in terms of balanced-for content.
9. Sorties are artificially difficult when these augmentations have ways in which they cannot be reliably compensated for without resorting to specific tactics. Here's a few:
   1. Radiation procs do not show on ally UI, but you can damage, affect and kill that ally. Not reasonable because you lacked adequate information.
   2. Some augmented damage enemies kill in a single shot, particularly sniper-class enemies. Grineer Ballistae have pinpoint accuracy at high levels with no telegraphing and little delay. You are not provided with adequate information to compensate for this, it just happens and you're dead unless you CC all enemies forever or exist solely in a snowglobe (specific warframes not mechanically mandated to be present)
   3. Hijack missions in sorties uniquely generate a Nullification globe on the rover/power core that cannot be temporarily deactivated by player shots. This means that in addition to high levels and the augments, you have another restriction: "Use powers OR push the objective, not both", adding an extra arbitrary restriction that significantly increases difficulty.
   4. Excavation missions do not scale Extractor effective health at all, therefore without preventing all attacks from touching the device (through universal-CC or mandatory shield against shots) you do not have a reasonable chance to deal with enemies that enjoy incredibly high resilience and incredibly high damage before they get that one shot in and gib the machine.
10. The Brakk was nerfed not because it was the most powerful weapon evar, but because of its balance against primary shotguns which, as primaries, generally have a slightly higher spot on the power curve. Primary shotguns have since been buffed significantly, both directly (stat changes to weapons) and indirectly (Primed Point Blank and Primed Ravage), yet the Brakk has not seen its nerfs reverted whatsoever. Probably the most significant improvement it got access to since time of nerf is slotting Primed Heated Charge, I suppose. Regardless of this, it's still my favoured secondary and second most-used weapon of all. If I can take my baby being nerfed without it becoming unusable (I still use it, because I like it), why can't the Tonkor be nerfed and still used by people that want to use the Tonkor, not people that just want to win as hard as possible (who will just use whatever's meta regardless)?

See point 10. Other guns being (arguably) overnerfed when they were judged to need one doesn't mean that no nerf is needed here.

1.  Yet that example DOESN'T change the fact that new players CAN solo through most of the content it just takes longer than leeching off a draco these days you're example doesn't prove that new players CAN'T solo.  About abusing power? AGAIN if other players bugs players too much SOLO; literally the only times this isn't an option in game is pvp and raids and I know for a fact you can solo sorties if you have the right gear/adapt to it.  It takes LONGER to solo it is not IMPOSSIBLE to solo.

2.  Paris prime headshots with thunderbolt if you're gonna complain about aoe, ignis/amprex/torid aoe and fire rate with saryn spores active to pop spores at a machine gun pace, any weapon with corrosive modding and a decent base stat proc chance since that removes the armor scaling that you say cripples so many other weapons, syndicate viral proc weapons since those can literally one shot lesser enemies on draco in a fairly large aoe do to viral proc doubling the damage on it, quantas/simulor weapons for spammable aoe that with a mirage can get absolutely ridiculous in clear speed and damage which also is easier to reload/keep fed than a tonkor which is better at burst aoe, tigris for pellet burst aoe or it's even more powerful syndicate version, dex sybaris/soma prime for rapid fire single target damage (which is still plenty viable and technically can have aoe if you consider piercing an aoe), vectis prime now that snipers have a melee combo system equivalent, and finally the zhuge which is practically the hodgepodge of all of the above depending on how you mod it since it can be modded for crit/status/aoe.  That's eight different categories of competitive weapons in just the PRIMARY weapons with some that are double down options within that so yes 10+ competitive options, all I had to do was go to wiki to remember what all of them were.

3. Then say you agree to disagree and leave it at that, again saying you're allowing somebody to leave a debate without claim of victory IS arrogant.  So far people have said why they don't think your opinions and you actually haven't offered solid counterpoints, the power exists but there are options for newer players to experience the game without being victims of it.  Players who have been around longer are generally gonna have more "power" between having more resources stocked up/knowing the mechanics better if you're looking for a competitive baseline for everybody PLAY PVP then having "weapon balance" as you refer to it IS A VALID CONCERN.

4.  It is analagous to breaking toys I LOVED THE BRAKK pre nerf.  I used broncos for the longest time because I loved secondary shotguns back in the day.  They literally broke one of my favorite items in the game because of complaints like yours.  You've been saying how we don't add anything to the conversation yet you haven't provided one undeniable/arguable counterpoint.  Also this feeds back into three.

5.  Do you have any idea how fragmentary explosives work? Simple fact is only way it's NOT possible for it to strike all four heads the only two reasons it wouldn't be is if somebody jumped on it to basically catch all the flak the squad would've taken or they're so closely clustered to the grenade that the trajectory wouldn't allow fragments to hit the head.  That's how realistic combat fragmentation works.  The only reason that isn't in the game is it would have to calculate that much fragmentation trajectories up to 12x the sustained fire of an aoe weapon because of mirages (which was nerfed down from potentially 20x).  Auto headshotting isn't right but explosives can headshot in real life, again offer options don't just scream NERF.

6.  Wanna know what the   Problem is? Treat the parts individually with no focus on the whole and all you get is endless treating the symptoms and not the problem (which I can only assume from your arguments is power creep and perceived "easy mode").  Treat the symptoms with nerfs and all you do is wreck people's fun.  I like moon launching ancients with my tonkor.

7.  IT IS RELEVANT some people may not want to have their hand held but if they join a pub than mr 21 veterans CAN join and speedrun it.  Taking that away is ACTUALLY negative because some people apparently still haven't cleared out the star chart and it CAN cost them an alert/conflict reward like a potato.  It may be negative on the experience but it IS negative to do that to the rewards.

8.  I'll let the commenters read that one for themselves but I'll just add this little jab, why put a challenge in the game that players can never beat #artificialdifficulty ?

9.  SIgh

    a. The different enemy capabilities force team comps to adapt with their loadouts that is not artificial that is what is traditionally called a challenge.

    b. Invisibility, Invincibility, Decoys actual modding for survivability LOOK AT A.

    c. NOT EVERYBODY in a squad has to stand in the hijack and if you're talking about the soloing aspect? jump off the payload for a second to toss out some cc powers.  It's very hard to solo not impossible.

    d. HENCE WHY POWERS LIKE SNOWGLOBE ARE EVEN RELEVANT FOR THE LOVE OF GOD.

10.  Yeah and now primary shotgun VASTLY outpower secondary shotguns so now THAT'S ANOTHER BALANCE CONCERN AND A RESULT OF ENDLESS NERF TWEAKING BECAUSE OF THIS VERY ARGUMENT.  Also they DID rebuff the brakk on the base damage so it wasn't COMPLETE garbage post original nerf it was pretty much a pre melee 2.0 with a trigger.  Finally it's not about whether YOU can handle your SECOND MOST USED secondary being NERFED it's about the player base WHICH IS THE WHOLE POINT.

 

P.S. I'm done with this thread good lord.  I'm only even on the forums since I can't even log in to the game.

 

[(XBOX)Snicket002]

On 3/14/2016 at 7:32 PM, felixsylvaris said:

Rocket jumps are fun even if stupid idea. Cant destroy it. Concept of secondary fire rocket jump only thrustle without blast) is neat.

AoE damage should not seek headshot on their own. Only when fire in in projectile mode.

If DE nerfs Tonkor one way or another, then it will rise popularity of Synoid Simulor. I think OP may be Suda recruiter.

Rocket jump is pointless with parkour 2.0.

Edited March 28, 2016 by (XB1)Snicket002

[(PSN)FriendSharkey]

The Tonkor is obsolete, get yourself a Vaykor Hek. Properly modded you can one shot the same amount you'd kill with a Tonkor blast, if they line up of course. Smash Sentients, cut Corrupted Vor in half, destroy the Shadow Stalker...yet....Self damage still needs to go. Other players are awful and will troll launcher users, while using a Kubrow is just asking for it. But...

The Tonkor will fade away thanks in part to the new meta weapons meant for Sorties being introduced. I enjoy the Tonkor, but my Vaykor Hek supplies health, and creates a AOE effect, and since I maxed out the Shotgun Prime cards and forma'd it to god tier level it's exactly what I wanted when I crafted my first Hek...so long ago.

So the Tonkor, while still enjoyable, it is basically starting to gather dust for most of the game, save Sorties. 

Also, Rocket Jumps are not pointless, they are even more fun with Parkour 2.0. Not my fault some are just challenged with using a controller, or keyboard, and can't pull off some dope kills using them both. 

[TheLexiConArtist]

9 hours ago, Irorone said:

1.  Yet that example DOESN'T change the fact that new players CAN solo through most of the content it just takes longer than leeching off a draco these days you're example doesn't prove that new players CAN'T solo.  About abusing power? AGAIN if other players bugs players too much SOLO; literally the only times this isn't an option in game is pvp and raids and I know for a fact you can solo sorties if you have the right gear/adapt to it.  It takes LONGER to solo it is not IMPOSSIBLE to solo.

2.  Paris prime headshots with thunderbolt if you're gonna complain about aoe, ignis/amprex/torid aoe and fire rate with saryn spores active to pop spores at a machine gun pace, any weapon with corrosive modding and a decent base stat proc chance since that removes the armor scaling that you say cripples so many other weapons, syndicate viral proc weapons since those can literally one shot lesser enemies on draco in a fairly large aoe do to viral proc doubling the damage on it, quantas/simulor weapons for spammable aoe that with a mirage can get absolutely ridiculous in clear speed and damage which also is easier to reload/keep fed than a tonkor which is better at burst aoe, tigris for pellet burst aoe or it's even more powerful syndicate version, dex sybaris/soma prime for rapid fire single target damage (which is still plenty viable and technically can have aoe if you consider piercing an aoe), vectis prime now that snipers have a melee combo system equivalent, and finally the zhuge which is practically the hodgepodge of all of the above depending on how you mod it since it can be modded for crit/status/aoe.  That's eight different categories of competitive weapons in just the PRIMARY weapons with some that are double down options within that so yes 10+ competitive options, all I had to do was go to wiki to remember what all of them were.

3. Then say you agree to disagree and leave it at that, again saying you're allowing somebody to leave a debate without claim of victory IS arrogant.  So far people have said why they don't think your opinions and you actually haven't offered solid counterpoints, the power exists but there are options for newer players to experience the game without being victims of it.  Players who have been around longer are generally gonna have more "power" between having more resources stocked up/knowing the mechanics better if you're looking for a competitive baseline for everybody PLAY PVP then having "weapon balance" as you refer to it IS A VALID CONCERN.

4.  It is analagous to breaking toys I LOVED THE BRAKK pre nerf.  I used broncos for the longest time because I loved secondary shotguns back in the day.  They literally broke one of my favorite items in the game because of complaints like yours.  You've been saying how we don't add anything to the conversation yet you haven't provided one undeniable/arguable counterpoint.  Also this feeds back into three.

5.  Do you have any idea how fragmentary explosives work? Simple fact is only way it's NOT possible for it to strike all four heads the only two reasons it wouldn't be is if somebody jumped on it to basically catch all the flak the squad would've taken or they're so closely clustered to the grenade that the trajectory wouldn't allow fragments to hit the head.  That's how realistic combat fragmentation works.  The only reason that isn't in the game is it would have to calculate that much fragmentation trajectories up to 12x the sustained fire of an aoe weapon because of mirages (which was nerfed down from potentially 20x).  Auto headshotting isn't right but explosives can headshot in real life, again offer options don't just scream NERF.

6.  Wanna know what the   Problem is? Treat the parts individually with no focus on the whole and all you get is endless treating the symptoms and not the problem (which I can only assume from your arguments is power creep and perceived "easy mode").  Treat the symptoms with nerfs and all you do is wreck people's fun.  I like moon launching ancients with my tonkor.

7.  IT IS RELEVANT some people may not want to have their hand held but if they join a pub than mr 21 veterans CAN join and speedrun it.  Taking that away is ACTUALLY negative because some people apparently still haven't cleared out the star chart and it CAN cost them an alert/conflict reward like a potato.  It may be negative on the experience but it IS negative to do that to the rewards.

8.  I'll let the commenters read that one for themselves but I'll just add this little jab, why put a challenge in the game that players can never beat #artificialdifficulty ?

9.  SIgh

    a. The different enemy capabilities force team comps to adapt with their loadouts that is not artificial that is what is traditionally called a challenge.

    b. Invisibility, Invincibility, Decoys actual modding for survivability LOOK AT A.

    c. NOT EVERYBODY in a squad has to stand in the hijack and if you're talking about the soloing aspect? jump off the payload for a second to toss out some cc powers.  It's very hard to solo not impossible.

    d. HENCE WHY POWERS LIKE SNOWGLOBE ARE EVEN RELEVANT FOR THE LOVE OF GOD.

10.  Yeah and now primary shotgun VASTLY outpower secondary shotguns so now THAT'S ANOTHER BALANCE CONCERN AND A RESULT OF ENDLESS NERF TWEAKING BECAUSE OF THIS VERY ARGUMENT.  Also they DID rebuff the brakk on the base damage so it wasn't COMPLETE garbage post original nerf it was pretty much a pre melee 2.0 with a trigger.  Finally it's not about whether YOU can handle your SECOND MOST USED secondary being NERFED it's about the player base WHICH IS THE WHOLE POINT.

1. We are not defined by what we do, we are defined by what we don't do. Do I have to make the racial segregation analogy again? Could subject themselves to their 'permitted' experiences, but we've moved on from that as a civilisation now and realised the onus is on everyone else not to put them in that situation.
2. That's a lot of things that have a property of the Tonkor's power but completely fail to match up to the lack of drawbacks. Thunderbolt doesn't scale and only has 30% chance of triggering. Syndicate procs only happen once-per-X. Synergy with specific frames is irrelevant, obscuring the facts. Torid and Ignis have the drawback of Over-Time damage, not instant killing. Continuous weapons have range issues and ammo economy issues for the most part. Most of all, none of them even reach the damage allowed to the Tonkor thanks to the 2*2*critdamage multiplier auto headcritting.
3. I have offered counterpoints, others just refuse to acknowledge them as counterpoints as if that somehow invalidates them. Sticking fingers in one's ears and shouting "LA LA LA I'M NOT LISTENING" does not mean the other is not saying something just because you wilfully refuse to hear it.
4. I loved the Brakk pre-nerf too. I still use it. It's not broken trash, it's still reasonably powerful. It deserves buffing back up because of the context around the nerf no longer applying, but still.
5. You now agree that they do automatically headshot. I did not say that it should be changed, you said that it didn't do so in the first place.
6. Treating the symptom rather than the cause is actually what power creeping to more difficult enemies accomplishes. The cause of current levels being still trivial is the overpowering weapons and tactics, the symptom being a lack of challenge, add difficulty and you fail to fix the problem.
7. Again, we are defined by what we choose not to do. If a player avoids clearing the star chart which can be done easily enough in quite a short amount of playtime, that's their fault for not doing it, they aren't entitled to alert rewards or they'd just be sent to our inbox without doing anything, just to be sure. Does that mean that Taxiing should be removed? It's up for debate, but I'm not sure it's harmful enough given that the act of Taxiing ensures that a player who has earned the right to be in the mission is there to carry the lazy player.
8. Going infinitely in an Endless Mission is a challenge players generally can't beat. When the challenge is ramping up, there is an intended point where players should be forced to consider leaving because of performance falloff. Of course, there's also the legend of Defense Wave 231 where the game crashes anyway...
9. You miss the point entirely.
   1. Allied rad procs are unseen, therefore it's cheap that you can kill them. Solution: Rad procs affect outgoing only? Or just put the debuff on the UI.
   2. I put Redirection and Vitality on all my frames, it still takes one shot. Everything else is you lose because you brought what you wanted. Artificial difficulty because there is no skill to be involved in attempting to avoid instant, hitscan, one-shot damage from a unit you probably can't even see.
   3. Just because the artificial difficulty does not instantly cause failure, does not mean it is not artificially difficult. It's an arbitrary extra reason that serves to do nothing skilful except force you to lose all buffs and eat enemy damage at any point where you're pushing the objective.
   4. Snowglobe is relevant when it is nice and functional to have it. Not when it's enforced by a mission that doesn't mechanically force a squad to have a Frost. You people love your "play what you want" rhetoric, why are you now defending an example that almost completely removes playing what you want, to have a reasonable chance at winning?
10. Clarify your non-statements. The Brakk isn't useless (although it deserves returning to former glory). I use it, and I see it show up from time to time.. only nobody really cares what's in their secondary slot when they have a Tonkor or SySim in their primary, so you're just as likely to see a Lato in the end. Clarification: Brakk is my second-most-used WEAPON. It's my most-used secondary, but overall I have used the Sheev as a melee more than I have used the Brakk as a secondary. (59% versus 54% in profiled usage). I switch primaries out more often, but my Brakk is pretty much always there as the 'serious time' backup.

 

[Magneu]

12 hours ago, Lyravain said:

I cannot believe this topic has actually been going on. Or that so many people are against the Tonkor -what's next, people wanting Karak buffs?

Tonkor is fine as-is. High gain, high risk -and don't tell me 'no risk' because all you have is 2 shots and unless firing from safe-zones (Loki's Invis or Frost's Bubble for example), you will get steamrolled in high enough levels, where your 1second reload is 2 seconds too long.

You don't like the Tonkor? Don't use it. You feel annoyed other people use it? Don't play with them. For crying out loud, stop complaining about everything that doesn't suit your own little version of what the game should be like and deal with it. It's complaining like this that has harmed the game far more than anything else DE has done. It's a challenging weapon to learn to master, one that needs you to play a bit differently from many others (I for example am rubbish at Penta, but devastating at Tonkor and no, it's not the Penta's self-damage, I just can't get them to go where I want them to go). Not a matter of 'getting gud', but a personal play-style.

Instead of asking for pointless nerf/buffs, how about giving advice to the actual problems of the game (inclding but not limited to the enemy scaling, for example)?

 

11 hours ago, Ax10mCRO said:

That won't work on our special snowflakes here, they can't comprehend the game doesn't revolve around them.

The entire logic is "why should I put in any effort to make this game suit my needs, it should be auto tuned to do so in the first place"

Using the Tonkor requires putting the built-in guide line on the target and firing, adjusting for most likely minimal travel time compared to enemy distance. How very difficult. The reward ratio is much too high compared to risk, as your get the highest DPS in the game in a large AOE, with no conceivable way to kill yourself. Who needs CC when the enemy is dead (and for those arguing "I need the Tonkor for level 200+ enemies!"; the game is balanced for enemies level 120 at most, what you see at the end of a sortie 3 survival, what is supposed to be the most challenging mission types. Yet the Tonkor still wrecks there compared to every other weapon)?

And Ax10; our (Tonkor "nerf-criers") viewpoint is that we're tired of loading into any "high-level" match, and seeing a minimum of one Tonkor. I personally usually see two, with a Synoid Simuloar/Mirage combo thrown in as well. Our logic is that an easy to obtain, easy to use grenade launcher shouldn't be taking away from our game experience (if a player has even a modicum of skill, they will land 90% of Tonkor shots and fly ahead) at the rate it does. Telling us "make your own group" is completely against the co-op theme of the game. If a single weapon is making people want to start making their own groups just to avoid it, that weapon needs to be changed. Our argument is not "why should I have to put effort into this game to be considered good?", it's "why can that new player outperform a majority of other players all due to a single weapon?"

When a single weapon can influence the game as a whole like this, it needs to be changed.

The Tonkor isn't needed for high levels. Bad players "need" the Tonkor to compensate for lack of playing skill/desire to play casually in what is considered the highest level of the game. I understand making stuff go "boom" is fun, but a line needs to be drawn on how devastating that "boom" can be, especially when it poses no risk to the user aside from requiring a slight ability to aim. 

 

[TheBrsrkr]

13 hours ago, Ax10mCRO said:

That won't work on our special snowflakes here, they can't comprehend the game doesn't revolve around them.

The entire logic is "why should I put in any effort to make this game suit my needs, it should be auto tuned to do so in the first place"

Now wait just one candy picking minute. You think people who don't like the Tonkor use it? That's not the problem here. The problem is that everyone else using it detracts from the game experience. 

"Don't like it, don't use it" is not valid criticism for things such as these because whether or not you use it, you WILL be affected by it. Because it's a multiplayer team based game. If you using the Tonkor didn't affect the way anyone played at all, do you think people would care? No. But it does. Every time you blow a group of enemies into orbit, it's one less group your other three teammates can play against. This wouldn't be a problem with, say,  the Penta, as it has several glaring drawbacks that justify it blowing up a group, the most glaring being self damage. However, the only real drawback of the Tonkor is the accuracy and small clip, both compensated for with a short reload time, a lack of self damage,  a freaking aim guide and absolutely obscene amounts of damage.

 

Just one of these is enough to suck the fun out of a match in the name of efficiency. But pair it with it's cousin the S. Simulor, Mirage or just another person with a Tonkor and you have 2 people of a team of 4 preventing the other 2 from doing anything else. It doesn't matter if I don't use it, my experience is still being affected. Also, when the next balancing pass comes around, which weapon do you think will be balances around, rendering all other weapons even more ineffective than they are at the moment? The difference of me making a group of like minded people and you is that I don't force everyone else to play around me. Yet somehow we're the snowflakes? 

[IceColdHawk]

1 hour ago, TheBrsrkr said:

Now wait just one candy picking minute. You think people who don't like the Tonkor use it? That's not the problem here. The problem is that everyone else using it detracts from the game experience. 

"Don't like it, don't use it" is not valid criticism for things such as these because whether or not you use it, you WILL be affected by it. Because it's a multiplayer team based game. If you using the Tonkor didn't affect the way anyone played at all, do you think people would care? No. But it does. Every time you blow a group of enemies into orbit, it's one less group your other three teammates can play against. This wouldn't be a problem with, say,  the Penta, as it has several glaring drawbacks that justify it blowing up a group, the most glaring being self damage. However, the only real drawback of the Tonkor is the accuracy and small clip, both compensated for with a short reload time, a lack of self damage,  a freaking aim guide and absolutely obscene amounts of damage.

 

Just one of these is enough to suck the fun out of a match in the name of efficiency. But pair it with it's cousin the S. Simulor, Mirage or just another person with a Tonkor and you have 2 people of a team of 4 preventing the other 2 from doing anything else. It doesn't matter if I don't use it, my experience is still being affected. Also, when the next balancing pass comes around, which weapon do you think will be balances around, rendering all other weapons even more ineffective than they are at the moment? The difference of me making a group of like minded people and you is that I don't force everyone else to play around me. Yet somehow we're the snowflakes? 

I actually didn't want to post here anymore but it looks like i have to mention it again.

Do NOT use: "I can't have fun anymore because some people with tonkor get more kills than me :(" as an argument for a nerf!!

There will almost always be that one guy who gets more kills than you. Be it ash, ember, mag, s. simulor, tonkor, a crazy-a** gamer on steroids or just someone using orthos prime and slicing through whole groups. Remember, this game isn't only about killing. You won't get better rewards for having more kills. You see 1 or 2 guys dishing out the damage, taking care of the enemies? Awesome. Then maybe think about playing the support, tank, CC'er or buffer for once. Saying that 2 people with tonkor prevent you from doing anything else is just plain bs. Even if you're only guarding the pod with your globe, you are CONTRIBUTING!

Would you rather have people in your team who are doing almost nothing? Well, i don't. This behaviour is typical from LoL: "Mid or feed!!", "Me wants ADC pl0x!!". Most people don't wanna play support. Why? Because no kills. And this behaviour is sick.

Damn, i for one am a happy frost player for corpus defenses. And i would find it awesome to have a mag in my team that takes care of the offensive part while i take care of the defensive part. This is a COOP game. Not a tournament about who gets the most kills. And now let's be honest instead of implying wrong things: First of all, not everyone runs s. simulor or tonkor. Second of all, even if they do, you'll ALWAYS be able to get kills. There are ALWAYS some enemies waiting for you get shot. Don't even get me started on nullifiers! Apparently some people, when they see a tonkor in their group, tend to instantly go all: "Nope nope, i'm not playing anymore. I will just stand here and do nothing cuz im not needed lalala".

Okay, now we got that one situation where you like to try out a weapon but can't because of an ember or mag in your team. Hm. What can we do about it? Simple. Try playing it with friends! Or regroup! Or ride solo just like jason derulo! Always remember, if you appear to encounter PUGS that you don't like, feel free to regroup. There is always a decent group available. Man i play draco because i don't prefer taking ages to level my stuff (R.I.P stephano since U17). I encounter groups i don't like often enough. Still, you won't see me here on the forums wanting draco removed just because leechers tend to live there.

 

Hey, don't get me wrong. I'm not arguing for anyone nor am i defending anything. Tonkor is the strongest weapon i don't deny it. But it also doesn't bother me. The thing is, when people get all too sensitive about little things, like if it's all about killing and then demanding a "nerf" because of THAT, now that really is unnecessary. Please refrain from using this absurd argument when explaining why you want this weapon nerfed, thanks!

Edited March 29, 2016 by IceColdHawk

[(PSN)aiptekfanboy]

4 hours ago, EDYinnit said:

1. We are not defined by what we do, we are defined by what we don't do. Do I have to make the racial segregation analogy again? Could subject themselves to their 'permitted' experiences, but we've moved on from that as a civilisation now and realised the onus is on everyone else not to put them in that situation.
2. That's a lot of things that have a property of the Tonkor's power but completely fail to match up to the lack of drawbacks. Thunderbolt doesn't scale and only has 30% chance of triggering. Syndicate procs only happen once-per-X. Synergy with specific frames is irrelevant, obscuring the facts. Torid and Ignis have the drawback of Over-Time damage, not instant killing. Continuous weapons have range issues and ammo economy issues for the most part. Most of all, none of them even reach the damage allowed to the Tonkor thanks to the 2*2*critdamage multiplier auto headcritting.
3. I have offered counterpoints, others just refuse to acknowledge them as counterpoints as if that somehow invalidates them. Sticking fingers in one's ears and shouting "LA LA LA I'M NOT LISTENING" does not mean the other is not saying something just because you wilfully refuse to hear it.
4. I loved the Brakk pre-nerf too. I still use it. It's not broken trash, it's still reasonably powerful. It deserves buffing back up because of the context around the nerf no longer applying, but still.
5. You now agree that they do automatically headshot. I did not say that it should be changed, you said that it didn't do so in the first place.
6. Treating the symptom rather than the cause is actually what power creeping to more difficult enemies accomplishes. The cause of current levels being still trivial is the overpowering weapons and tactics, the symptom being a lack of challenge, add difficulty and you fail to fix the problem.
7. Again, we are defined by what we choose not to do. If a player avoids clearing the star chart which can be done easily enough in quite a short amount of playtime, that's their fault for not doing it, they aren't entitled to alert rewards or they'd just be sent to our inbox without doing anything, just to be sure. Does that mean that Taxiing should be removed? It's up for debate, but I'm not sure it's harmful enough given that the act of Taxiing ensures that a player who has earned the right to be in the mission is there to carry the lazy player.
8. Going infinitely in an Endless Mission is a challenge players generally can't beat. When the challenge is ramping up, there is an intended point where players should be forced to consider leaving because of performance falloff. Of course, there's also the legend of Defense Wave 231 where the game crashes anyway...
9. You miss the point entirely.
   1. Allied rad procs are unseen, therefore it's cheap that you can kill them. Solution: Rad procs affect outgoing only? Or just put the debuff on the UI.
   2. I put Redirection and Vitality on all my frames, it still takes one shot. Everything else is you lose because you brought what you wanted. Artificial difficulty because there is no skill to be involved in attempting to avoid instant, hitscan, one-shot damage from a unit you probably can't even see.
   3. Just because the artificial difficulty does not instantly cause failure, does not mean it is not artificially difficult. It's an arbitrary extra reason that serves to do nothing skilful except force you to lose all buffs and eat enemy damage at any point where you're pushing the objective.
   4. Snowglobe is relevant when it is nice and functional to have it. Not when it's enforced by a mission that doesn't mechanically force a squad to have a Frost. You people love your "play what you want" rhetoric, why are you now defending an example that almost completely removes playing what you want, to have a reasonable chance at winning?
10. Clarify your non-statements. The Brakk isn't useless (although it deserves returning to former glory). I use it, and I see it show up from time to time.. only nobody really cares what's in their secondary slot when they have a Tonkor or SySim in their primary, so you're just as likely to see a Lato in the end. Clarification: Brakk is my second-most-used WEAPON. It's my most-used secondary, but overall I have used the Sheev as a melee more than I have used the Brakk as a secondary. (59% versus 54% in profiled usage). I switch primaries out more often, but my Brakk is pretty much always there as the 'serious time' backup.

 

Lies as the sonicore is better but we all remember the brakk being nerfed due to whiners, the penta nerf, the synoid gammacor nerf and every time theres a buff the aksilletto thread it gets shot down by whiners 

[TheLexiConArtist]

1 hour ago, IceColdHawk said:

I actually didn't want to post here anymore but it looks like i have to mention it again.

Do NOT use: "I can't have fun anymore because some people with tonkor get more kills than me :(" as an argument for a nerf!!

Would you rather have people in your team who are doing almost nothing? Well, i don't. This behaviour is typical from LoL: "Mid or feed!!", "Me wants ADC pl0x!!". Most people don't wanna play support. Why? Because no kills. And this behaviour is sick.

And now let's be honest instead of implying wrong things: First of all, not everyone runs s. simulor or tonkor. Second of all, even if they do, you'll ALWAYS be able to get kills. There are ALWAYS some enemies waiting for you get shot. Don't even get me started on nullifiers! Apparently some people, when they see a tonkor in their group, tend to instantly go all: "Nope nope, i'm not playing anymore. I will just stand here and do nothing cuz im not needed lalala".

Hey, don't get me wrong. I'm not arguing for anyone nor am i defending anything. Tonkor is the strongest weapon i don't deny it. But it also doesn't bother me. The thing is, when people get all too sensitive about little things, like if it's all about killing and then demanding a "nerf" because of THAT, now that really is unnecessary. Please refrain from using this absurd argument when explaining why you want this weapon nerfed, thanks!

Outside of context, that is accurate. However, when you consider the magnitude of the disparity between two players going in with the same goal of getting the most kills, the problem becomes evident.

If 2 players' goals are both to be the main killer in a squad, obviously one will probably win. However, when one using the Tonkor versus the other using, say, a Soma Prime (a very high tier weapon in its own right, and the clear power in its category of LMGs) causes the kill ratio based on only weapon usage, not warframe abilities to become 20%/80% in the Tonkor user's favour, then there's a problem there, wouldn't you say? Unless the Tonkor user had a great risk that they overcame to achieve that disparity (as a launcher, self damage) then that's just unacceptable power imbalance.

There might always be enemies, but when you get to kill 3 out of a pack of 10 before the Tonkor-using ally flies past and instakills the other 7, while also fighting their own packs, that's negative if you're setting out with the goal of amassing kills. It's not the same as a Frost player built for globes accepting that they're not going to get the kills of a Mag built for Shield Polarise damage in aug-shield Sorties. The warframes are in different categories.

 

Now, you and I might not care about being the best killer, but that doesn't mean that other people who don't want to use the Tonkor or SySim don't want to achieve that. Those people get directly affected by that imbalance of power. And really, isn't the whole argument "use what you like"? That supports reducing the power imbalance so that more weapons are comparably viable without making the item originally imbalanced unviable.

Edited March 29, 2016 by EDYinnit

[Ax10mCRO]

5 hours ago, EDYinnit said:

If 2 players' goals are both to be the main killer in a squad

Then he would use the best weapon in the game, not a toothpick. You don't bring a toothpick to the swordfight and complain that you got stabbed

Edited March 29, 2016 by Ax10mCRO

[TheLexiConArtist]

4 minutes ago, Ax10mCRO said:

Then he would use the best weapon in the game, not a toothpick. You don't bring a toothpick to the swordfight and complain that you got stabbed

No, but you should expect to be able to wound an unarmoured target with more or less the same ease no matter if you're using a sword or an axe or a mace.

Bring what you want, remember? Why be forced to use that single weapon?

A skilled bowman and a skilled rifleman both have a good chance of hitting a target with comparable accuracy at a distance within the effective range of both weapons. Assuming the competition doesn't progress into anything that exceeds the other's limitations, the two very different weapons can both achieve the same result, and either could win with a greater degree of skill than the other. You'd have a choice depending on which you like and are more skilled with.

Meanwhile, our good friend Timmy doesn't need anywhere near as much skill with his Tonkor to still completely overshadow someone using almost any other weapon. Other launchers with their self-damage cause a delay in situations where it can be dangerous to use the weapon, needing to relocate in order to continue doing the job. Tonkor users can just yolo no matter what, so they never get this counterbalancing downtime.

[Ax10mCRO]

14 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

Bring what you want, remember?

Exactly, bring what you want and DON'T complain about what the other person brought. You can also bring a vaykor hek instead of a soma prime, it can contest Tonkor if modded well. Tonkor is not the only option, the only reason you see so much of it is because it's not locked behind mastery 12 like other good weapons.

[TheLexiConArtist]

28 minutes ago, Ax10mCRO said:

Exactly, bring what you want and DON'T complain about what the other person brought. You can also bring a vaykor hek instead of a soma prime, it can contest Tonkor if modded well. Tonkor is not the only option, the only reason you see so much of it is because it's not locked behind mastery 12 like other good weapons.

As an effort to not respark our back-and-forth on single subjects ad infinitum, I'll avoid asking for evidence of that ability to contest. However, I'm pretty sure you'd need to awkwardly mod for increased spread+punch-through to get a shotgun to compare to the AOE innately available to the Tonkor, which obviously harms the actual damage per target, unlike the Tonkor doing full damage to everything in the radius.

That aside, is that last part not also considerable as a problem, though? Where's the sense of progression if you get your Sonicor at MR2, beating out pretty much everything else in the secondary slot (and many things in primary) with a mix of good damage and immense utility, then the Tonkor at MR5 and nothing else matters in the game after that because you have the best weapon?

Remember that you have MR2 at 10,000 mastery, not even fully maxing your starter weapon loadout and Warframe, then MR5 at 62,500 mastery, which requires any combination between an additional 8 warframes and 16 weapons (after initial gear) to achieve, not counting extra Mastery from star chart completion (up to almost 5 weapons' worth)?

As a perspective on this, you can almost get to MR5 and unlock the most powerful gun (in terms of risks to reward) in the game by mastering no more than the credit-purchasable weapons and your initial Warframe. Add in map completion and you do hit that not-exactly-loftiest of heights.

Edited March 29, 2016 by EDYinnit

[Ax10mCRO]

3 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

As an effort to not respark our back-and-forth on single subjects ad infinitum, I'll avoid asking for evidence of that ability to contest. However, I'm pretty sure you'd need to awkwardly mod for increased spread+punch-through to get a shotgun to compare to the AOE innately available to the Tonkor, which obviously harms the actual damage per target, unlike the Tonkor doing full damage to everything in the radius.

By contest i did not mean "copy it's ability exactly" the vaykor hek also has capacity of 8 instead of 2, you seem to ignore that fact. I said that vaykor hek has the potential to wipe out things on high level sorties and thus contest the tonkor.

[TheLexiConArtist]

41 minutes ago, Ax10mCRO said:

By contest i did not mean "copy it's ability exactly" the vaykor hek also has capacity of 8 instead of 2, you seem to ignore that fact. I said that vaykor hek has the potential to wipe out things on high level sorties and thus contest the tonkor.

Also falloff at range, requiring you to be close to the group you're killing (or risk even further damage reduction).

So you have more shots to reach the same damage, let's understand the effect of magazine size.

On the V.Hek, you have a 15% longer reload time (2.3 seconds instead of 2) and a firerate that eats through those 8 shots at 3/second, 8/3 = ~2.67 seconds to empty the magazine.

Reload downtime quotient is calculated as such:

 

(magsize / firerate) / ((magsize / firerate) + reloadtime)

 

For the Vaykor Hek, this is 2.67 / (2.67+2.3) = 0.5369, or ~53.69% burst damage is sustained through reloads.

For the Tonkor, with 2 rounds, firerate of 2, and 2 seconds of reloading, this is 1 / (1+2) = 0.3333, or ~33.33% burst damage sustained through reloads.

There, I have not ignored the fact. As a result of this discrepancy, yes, 2 Tonkor shots must accumulate more damage than 8 Vaykor Hek shots to win out in damage. 53.69% / 33.33% = 1.6108; the Tonkor's magazine must do 161.08% of the damage of the Vaykor Hek's magazine to compensate for reload time in sustained DPS.

 

Of course, that doesn't account for the falloff issues in the V.Hek limiting peak uptime, the spread and mod sacrificed to punch-through probably already accounting for more than that damage disparity, and the need to consistently, perfectly aim 8 shots at a time instead of 2 for peak output. Yes, that limits the loss of a single shot compared to the Tonkor, but simultaneously it increases the cumulative probability of missing... and Vaykor Hek shots don't get a second chance to deal damage unlike Tonkor grenades.

 

Did I miss anything, or miscalculate?

Edited March 29, 2016 by EDYinnit

[Ax10mCRO]

2 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

Also falloff at range, requiring you to be close to the group you're killing (or risk even further damage reduction).

You mean the same thing you have with Tonkor accuracy? The closer you are the more damage you do (since you won't miss)?

Also you seem to only be comparing the burst damage of the weapons, I agree Tonkor has the bigger burst, but that just means Vaykor Hek deals with enemies such as nullifiers and frozen eximus a lot easier. Tonkor will have a rougher time dealing with enemies coming from multiple directions due to it's low magazine size.

As for the weapons potential you CAN avoid the Vaykor Hek falloff damage if you know what you're doing, basically converting it to a ridiculous sniper rifle.Thats why I keep pointing out the potential of a weapon, if you use a volt the math changes a lot, the same thing is if you use any form of hard CC to keep things in place while aiming with the Tonkor.

You can contest it's damage (especially after the nerfs tonkor got in 18.5) if you set up properly and THAT is the entire point. You claim that people who don't bring a Tonkor don't stand a chance to top the damage/kills stats, I claim that's not true.

[TheLexiConArtist]

4 minutes ago, Ax10mCRO said:

You mean the same thing you have with Tonkor accuracy? The closer you are the more damage you do (since you won't miss)?

Also you seem to only be comparing the burst damage of the weapons, I agree Tonkor has the bigger burst, but that just means Vaykor Hek deals with enemies such as nullifiers and frozen eximus a lot easier. Tonkor will have a rougher time dealing with enemies coming from multiple directions due to it's low magazine size.

As for the weapons potential you CAN avoid the Vaykor Hek falloff damage if you know what you're doing, basically converting it to a ridiculous sniper rifle.Thats why I keep pointing out the potential of a weapon, if you use a volt the math changes a lot, the same thing is if you use any form of hard CC to keep things in place while aiming with the Tonkor.

You can contest it's damage (especially after the nerfs tonkor got in 18.5) if you set up properly and THAT is the entire point. You claim that people who don't bring a Tonkor don't stand a chance to top the damage/kills stats, I claim that's not true.

Accuracy suffers over range with any weapon, though. It's harder to get the sweet-spot aiming into a pack with your ludicrous-spread punchthrough shotgun at range, and even when you hit you do less damage because falloff (which is not as bad as it used to be, at least on primary shotties, I admit). Linear spread also means your shotgun AOE has a very certain zone of effectiveness. Add enough extra spread and past a certain range you're hitting mostly above enemies and the floor in front of them.

I was exactly not comparing the burst damage by detailing the reload quotient as it applies to burst vs. sustained damage. In essence, you were only comparing burst by only highlighting magazine size and not addressing the effective reload downtime that results.

Nullifiers will be nullifiers, shotguns work a little better on them than single-shots and the Tonkor but from what I've experienced with the Brakk, all that multishot doesn't seem to really count properly as multiple shots in terms of the capped shield decay, it still takes more shots than it ought to. I'm assuming that Arctic Eximus shields don't explode Tonkor grenades on contact based on your response.. yeah, all those things could use fixing a bit.

Warframe specific synergy obscures everything. I can compete the damage of a vanilla Tonkor user with an Ogris by using my 15x Navigator Ivara, doesn't mean they compare as weapons. Was the Volt Shield approach your method of avoiding the damage falloff of the V-Hek? Invisible bullets make it difficult to really test, but I'm inclined to believe the spread issue still puts an effective limit on viable AOE and accumulated damage at range, even if the individual hitting pellets haven't been reduced in damage further.

 

I'm not seeing any Tonkor changes outside of Conclave in 18.5 in the notes, can you enlighten me on that one?

[Ax10mCRO]

1 minute ago, EDYinnit said:

I'm not seeing any Tonkor changes outside of Conclave in 18.5 in the notes, can you enlighten me on that one?

The tonkor damage was nerfed roughly 40%, for example i used to crit 150k on hieracon it's been reduced to 90k, also I have noticed a lot less headcrits than before (the 90k crits are more rare these days) after some of the hotfixes. It's not something that was in the patch notes, but it's something that every Tonkor user should have noticed by now.

On a personal note: I find it a bit funny that you're still advertising Tonkor nerfs without even knowing that it HAS been nerfed recently.