Jump to content

Do you think that balance is possible with the current state of warframe.


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, SortaRandom said:

Don't get me wrong, I totally agree with concerns that the devs either can't or won't balance certain frames/items/enemies in the ways that we'd like to see them balanced. At least, not for a painfully long time, since they like to hold off balance tweaks in favor of addressing a crapton of issues at once in gigantic overhaul updates.

My point, though, is that these things can be balanced, at least to a reasonable level. The devs see the feedback. They know what we want. But, like you said, it's just a question of whether the devs will actually implement these balance changes. And I get that it's a big "if", and that balance passes are already few and far in between, but there's little denying that the balance passes that the devs already implemented (even if imperfect) haven't moved the game in a significantly better direction.

See that kind of change takes man power as well as an understanding of how to balance different systems. AI coding, weapon reassessment, enemy abilities as well as our own being reevaluated. It is all very doable and could be carried out with time, but DE pushes out content at such a pace that it isn't feasible to get done in one fell swoop. I wish this game was more like ME3 with a healthy AI instead of bullet sponges, but the developers have a different ideals on enimy tactics. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, AdunSaveMe said:

Must be why he specified 'you' in response to OP then listed a bunch of things that don't apply to this thread at all.

Look you can think what you will. However, while your worried about which pronouns I am using, the discussion has continued as to why OP wants a rebalance and why I oppose said position. Attacking my position will not aid your argument so stay on topic please.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, (PS4)KikoEschobar said:

Look you can think what you will. However, while your worried about which pronouns I am using, the discussion has continued as to why OP wants a rebalance and why I oppose said position. Attacking my position will not aid your argument so stay on topic please.

...What? Are you even replying to the right comment? Because what you're saying makes no sense in the context of my response.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, AdunSaveMe said:

...What? Are you even replying to the right comment? Because what you're saying makes no sense in the context of my response.

My mistake I thought you were referring to the you in my original statement as a personal attack on OP's opinion. Ignore me I am an idiot who doesn't understand context lol.

Really sorry again, the internet is a scary place sometimes. ;)

Edited by (PS4)KikoEschobar
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, (PS4)KikoEschobar said:

See that kind of change takes man power as well as an understanding of how to balance different systems. AI coding, weapon reassessment, enemy abilities as well as our own being reevaluated. It is all very doable and could be carried out with time, but DE pushes out content at such a pace that it isn't feasible to get done in one fell swoop. I wish this game was more like ME3 with a healthy AI instead of bullet sponges, but the developers have a different ideals on enimy tactics. 

In ME3 you weren't able to leap over half the enemies heads and run away.

 

In WF, the devs can program Skynet but that doesn't do anything if we can simply just leap over them. If the level of mobility present in ME3 was the same as WF, much of ME3's fights would be a snooze fest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Aimop95 said:

In ME3 you weren't able to leap over half the enemies heads and run away.

 

In WF, the devs can program Skynet but that doesn't do anything if we can simply just leap over them. If the level of mobility present in ME3 was the same as WF, much of ME3's fights would be a snooze fest.

Very true. I think the closest thing to WF's mobility in ME3 were those turians with the jet packs. Even with those, you could only move laterally or forward and back.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In many cases yes.

  1. Level 60+ is generally fair against drain 60 frames
  2. Lowering overall damage on both sides (less dmg from mods, less scaling from enemies) and overall less one shotting and overkill is possible
  3. More content on lv 60+ is possible
  4. You need cheese slicer to fight cheese... that was mumbling.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Balance is actually easy to do, if you're any good at balancing.  DE have shown they can balance stuff but also they take forever to do it and put out OP stuff faster.

To balance stuff:

1. How easy is the game?  If it's as easy as Warframe, focus on nerfs or buffing enemies.
2. Look at the median power level.  Where are most frames at?  Where are most guns at?  Anything which is stronger (in the same tier), nerf it.  Anything which is weaker, buff it.
3. Buff enemy HP to reach the desired difficulty.  Reduce in-mission scaling and grind to compensate.

Simple.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, (PS4)Lord_Gremlin said:

It's pretty balanced. You should just play a different game. Warframe is dynasty warriors sci-fi edition. So yes, mash button to win.

No, it's horribly balanced.  Most frames don't get a look in.  Most weapons don't get a look in.  The OP ones make the game Care Bear easy and seriously boring, bar the odd Sortie 3 (yesterday's was awesome).

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fifield said:

No, it's horribly balanced.  Most frames don't get a look in.  Most weapons don't get a look in.  The OP ones make the game Care Bear easy and seriously boring, bar the odd Sortie 3 (yesterday's was awesome).

Everything you've just said is extremely subjective. I play every frame I have, I play with every weapon I make, and that "Care Bear easy" perspective isn't productive. Lord_Gremlins has a point regarding dynasty warriors. This is essentially that game with guns and spaceships. Horde based shooters cannot go overboard difficulty wise or else they run the risk of deterring the consumer from playing. 

One other thing, there seems to be this idea that DE understands true difficulty, which in recent events has been proven inaccurate. There version of difficulty is vastly different than ours. We call for quality, they give us quantity instead

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, (PS4)KikoEschobar said:

Horde based shooters cannot go overboard difficulty wise or else they run the risk of deterring the consumer from playing.

Been to Earth recently?  Warframe will always have easy difficulty for the low MR.  What it has almost none of is challenging difficulty for anyone who has eg a potatoed Boltor Prime.

Secondly, all the supposed difficulty is about being 1-shot.  But even that doesn't matter because you have 4 lives per mission and getting revived doesn't cost one.

Thirdly, they've already deterred thousands of players from playing.  My whole clan quit because of this very issue.  I'm the only one who came back.

As long as the difficulty is optional, there's nothing to scare players away.

Lastly, I'd much rather have 'quantity' difficulty than a game which is just too boring to play.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Frame health should go up into tens of thousands for balance. 

if you want to fight enemies higher than level 200 wich i see rather common, you will die in one shot or Suffer insanely and pray you can jump away from the next. its all just trinity + vauban + frost + banshee + OP Weapons + + + + +

most frames are useless in higher level missions and other frames are good for medium missions, there should be a % warframe dmg / hp based on Enemy level or Mission level, and then downgrade the one hit kill weapons thats so OP.

if you ask me Snipers should be the absolute most powerfull weapons in the game, but its not, its a grenade launcher that deals Houndreds of thousands of damage in one shot and blows up everything. and when you compare that thing to other weapons its like, bahamut against ant.

Edited by SoulEaterReaper
Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel the game should at least be sort of balanced when it comes to warframes.

But first DE needs to decide when the game is supposed to end and make sure all warframes can compete at a similiar level to that point. After that point is reached all warframes should be affected by whatever mechanic DE chooses to "make" you leave an endless mission.

There is already a tier system for weapons it should be more spelled out than it is though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardly. We'd need some radical changes and DE don't want to alienate their fanbase, understandably in a way... For example in my humble opinion EV would have to just freaking GO entirely but imagine the outcry... So yeah, not much hope on my side either. I'm not saying the game (and i'm seriously reluctant to even call it that way*) can't be fun the way it is, but there's still so much potential untouched, it's sad really.

 

*Lazy Wiki definition pasting edit: " Key components of games are goals, rules, challenge and interaction . "

Edited by Kotsender_Quasimir
Link to post
Share on other sites

According of some posts on wiki and calculating with those formulas...

http://warframe.wikia.com/wiki/Enemy_Level_Scaling

http://warframe.wikia.com/wiki/Damage_2.0

 

Quote

going by these formulas, with no alteration to the enemys stats, a level 999 corrupted heavy gunner leech eximus has  45209344825.2075 EHP.(calculated after rounding to 1dp, so significantly off, because doing math with 25 decimal places got boring), and aroung 3 billion EHP with 3 corrosive projections and one coaction drift, yet with 4 projections, 30937651.5 EHP.

moral of the story:corrosive projection is best weight loss tool, he lost more than 40billion.EHP, oh, and never bother against level 999s. it's not worth it

The game is 100% broken, mathematically speaking and i can't understand why your beloved DE not fixed this until now. Is easy, but guess what they don't have the experience in this part. In other hand A+ for the graphics, super great work.

Anyway this game works on what community wants but DE should say "NO! You are now going on our hands."

And i can not believe is just an re-tar-ded easy way to fix all this things but it will come to a price, some people will not be pleased by seeing a frame with 3-4000 HP and maybe Inaros with over 10000 HP?? and the starting planets it will be so easy lame and the mid planets are going to be a bit too hard for beginners and they will need help(tutorials and forcing them to do some things). In the end it won't matter are just some numbers, big numbers who can be calculated better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/03/2016 at 1:15 AM, SoulEaterReaper said:

remove trinity and game is fixed.

Near enough.

Energy regen needs to be capped at something like 10 energy per second.  A hard cap would be stupid.  Instead, you do it like this.

Imagine this is your energy bar:
<=======--------------->

The thicker line indicates usable energy.  The thin line indicates unusable energy.  All energy buffs go into the latter and then get converted into usable energy at 10/s.

Starting energy would be maxed (it makes no sense that you haven't used energy pads or similar in your liset).

Lastly, Fleeting Expertise would have to go since reduces energy cost by 60% (75% including Streamline).  Trin's skills could be made cheaper if necessary.

Secondly, Trin's invulnerability needs to be transferred to the paladin frame, Oberon, who will never get a look in otherwise.

Edited by Fifield
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fifield said:

Been to Earth recently?  Warframe will always have easy difficulty for the low MR.  What it has almost none of is challenging difficulty for anyone who has eg a potatoed Boltor Prime.

Secondly, all the supposed difficulty is about being 1-shot.  But even that doesn't matter because you have 4 lives per mission and getting revived doesn't cost one.

Thirdly, they've already deterred thousands of players from playing.  My whole clan quit because of this very issue.  I'm the only one who came back.

As long as the difficulty is optional, there's nothing to scare players away.

Lastly, I'd much rather have 'quantity' difficulty than a game which is just too boring to play.

Again you are looking at it from your subjective perspective while others don't see it the same way you do. 

I haven't been to earth or any node outside the void in a while but I get your point. However, there is no way you can obtain the resources necessary to process in this game through one planet. 

Your clan's leaving  the game is sad to hear, but for every thousand players that leave this game there are at least another thousand that return. This game sees significant amounts of player declines periodically (especially on console) between updates, only to have them return at a later date.

There is no difficulty option in this game, only waiting until scaling gets out of hand.

"Quality" difficulty offers veteran players challenging objectives that test areas such as teamwork and skill. "Quantity" difficulty is the changing of numbers in order to negate player advancement. The last few tactical alerts on PC are a perfect example of this difficulty. On the surface you get exciting enemies that require attention, only to find out they have invincibility phases and you have to kill them 100 times to get the rewards you want. Are you really certain that is what you want m8?

Edited by (PS4)KikoEschobar
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah and everyone is wrong about Trinity.

This game can give us enemies with level 9999.

Guess what, with trinity 99% damage reduction in a level 2000 enemies you get 1 shoted.

You see the problem are not frames right now, are enemies.

Practically now we are fighting with the lowest enemies tier in the game. Let's say tier 1=lvl 1000; tier 2=lvl 2000; etc. we can't even touch "tier 1".

Right now the game is build on the CC gaps/resistance gaps because you can't fight normal (with every frame you want) with an level 300 enemy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, (PS4)KikoEschobar said:

I haven't been to earth or any node outside the void in a while but I get your point. However, there is no way you can obtain the resources necessary to process in this game through one planet. 

Which planet exactly are you struggling with?

All the planets are easy.  Yet we're forced to do them.  Making content challenging means grind can be reduced.

I've already said all challenging content should be optional.  The debate ends there.

Zari2015 -- your argument is ridiculous.  Nobody has ever seen a level 300 enemy.  Nor does anyone want to sit in an endless mission for 6 hours to see one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Fifield said:

Which planet exactly are you struggling with?

All the planets are easy.  Yet we're forced to do them.  Making content challenging means grind can be reduced.

I've already said all challenging content should be optional.  The debate ends there.

Zari2015 -- your argument is ridiculous.  Nobody has ever seen a level 300 enemy.  Nor does anyone want to sit in an endless mission for 6 hours to see one.

I didn't mean to make it sound as though the star chart is difficult because it isn't once you get all your mods. But the players you are referring do not have said mods and can find and Eris mission challenging due to that. 

And Zari2015 has a point. I have seen enemies at that level around 2 hrs into a survival. At 6 hrs with the way the scaling system works hostile lvls will be well into the thousands. This isn't me pandering either, go look up endurance runs longer than an hour and a half. You want a challenge....you got it lol (referring to the way armor scales BTW).

Edited by (PS4)KikoEschobar
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SoulEaterReaper said:

Frame health should go up into tens of thousands for balance. 

if you want to fight enemies higher than level 200 wich i see rather common, you will die in one shot or Suffer insanely and pray you can jump away from the next. its all just trinity + vauban + frost + banshee + OP Weapons + + + + +

most frames are useless in higher level missions and other frames are good for medium missions, there should be a % warframe dmg / hp based on Enemy level or Mission level, and then downgrade the one hit kill weapons thats so OP.

if you ask me Snipers should be the absolute most powerfull weapons in the game, but its not, its a grenade launcher that deals Houndreds of thousands of damage in one shot and blows up everything. and when you compare that thing to other weapons its like, bahamut against ant.

Potential solution for oneshots.

I do agree that snipers should be the heaviest hitting weapon in the game or should be buffed to explosive weapon levels. They should have a pretty decent innate punch through too.

 

55 minutes ago, Zari2015 said:

Yeah and everyone is wrong about Trinity.

This game can give us enemies with level 9999.

Guess what, with trinity 99% damage reduction in a level 2000 enemies you get 1 shoted.

You see the problem are not frames right now, are enemies.

Practically now we are fighting with the lowest enemies tier in the game. Let's say tier 1=lvl 1000; tier 2=lvl 2000; etc. we can't even touch "tier 1".

Right now the game is build on the CC gaps/resistance gaps because you can't fight normal (with every frame you want) with an level 300 enemy.

Potential solution for oneshots.

This will allow for a bit of leeway on enemy scaling, but they should still get armor scaling looked at.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, (PS4)KikoEschobar said:

But the players you are referring do not have said mods and can find and Eris mission challenging due to that. 

And?  Are you saying new players without any equipments should be able to do the hardest planets?  If so, I think you're missing the point of progression in game design.

Armor scaling is made irrelevant by 4x Corrosive Projection (another issue but less urgent).

At 2 hours, enemies get up to 170ish in T4 unless they've changed it since I quit  But that's irrelevant.  You can only last that long by camping anyway, which should be heavily nerfed.   And there's no reason for anyone to need stay longer than 40 mins anyway. So no, he doesn't have a point.

@EmptyDevil Interestingly, shield gates were one of my suggestions many months ago.  I didn't even know ME3 had it.

Proof: 

 

Edited by Fifield
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...