Hotfix 18.13.1

[TakeEmToChurch]

update downloaded, then i just got stuck on checking for new content thing. DE please 

[magikninjaa]

3 minutes ago, superbot34 said:

Nerfs?? i like her the way she is now i use the ev build if any one is low on shields i spam the bless then continue to vamp leech :D

[Sennera]

I wish they'd make the blessing damage reduction take into account shields replenished, or at least added a base damage reduction that always applied which would be affected by power strength.

As said above, when you've got a team mate with 900 shield and 200 HP in a T4S or T4D all you can do is spam blessing when they're under direct fire to recharge those shields, because letting the enemies scratch that frame's meager HP pool is instant death with no time to cast for that sweet damage reduction.

Unless you're self-inflicting damage for 99% (or w/e the new max is) damage reduction from blessing, you're NOT going to get that damage reduction on a team with shield-focused frames.

[CptKornflake]

24 minutes ago, ZaeXithos said:

Okay DE.  I'm going to step back from the actual decisions being made here.  I want to talk about the philosophy behind them, and what you, as developers, need to be thinking about when you make these changes.  They smack of kneejerk reactions, without understanding the deeper meanings of why things happen the way they do.  So as someone who's worked in game development myself, I'm going to help you bridge the gap between player's-eye viewpoint and dev's-eye viewpoint.

Now, with any content you make, people are going to look for strategies that beat it.  That's the nature of the game.  It's the nature of every video game - to overcome the challenges the devs have put before you and reap the rewards, then use those rewards to meet and overcome the next set of challenges.  Your goal, as a developer, is to provide a challenge to your playerbase that is difficult enough to require strategy and tactics and preparation, but is also winnable within a margin of error that is humanly achievable.

Warframe's highest-end content has a serious problem with that.  Once enemy levels get into the 60s, 70s, 80s+, survival becomes increasingly binary.  You are either alive and strictly invulnerable, invisible, or sheltered behind tens of thousands of intervening effective health points, or you are dead the moment you are exposed to enemy fire.  First it's the bombards, who deal ridiculous damage over huge AoE.  Then you notice that seekers and eviscerators are one-shotting you too, and soon enough you fear stepping outside that Frost's bubble for even a half second lest you catch a stray Grakata round and spontaneously evaporate into a cloud of gore.

Some people look at that and go 'nope, not playing that, that's not fun.'  In the interest of full disclosure, I'm one of 'em, typically.  I've never been fond of games where one slight mistake will end you.  This is why I don't play sorties, despite the rewards.  I don't know a lot of people, I don't like trying to put together a team for it, and it has such strict requirements on what you can and cannot bring to the table that most of my arsenal is useless in it.

Others, however, look at that and go 'challenge accepted.'  They will look for ways to overcome even this extreme difficulty.  Like Ivara surviving while invisible and using sleep arrow and covert lethality to score kills regardless of armor and HP.  Or Blind Mirage rendering entire spawns comatose across an entire map and then merrily obliterating them one after another.  Or Ash using a combination of invulnerability and finisher damage to kill enemies he could never take in a straight fight.  Or Excalibur utilizing EB's range and blind-spin to get free finishers and stay out of reach of enemies while still benefitting from his sword boost passive.

The fact is, players look for ways to trivialize content because there's content that's very good at trivializing players.  It is, in fact, using content-trivializing strategies is the only way to survive player-trivializing content.

When health and armor don't matter, and shields are merely a formality between enemies and your health, your best guns take off mere slivers of enemy health, and all the buffs in the world won't fix either of those situations, that's when players reach for the nuke options - invulnerability, invisibility, scaling damage absorption, finisher damage, finisher openers, and instant-kills.

What's important to remember is that players are right to do this.  You made the content capable of obliterating anyone without these tools; therefore, players are going to use the tools you gave them that work.  And they're going to keep using them, until you either take the tools away (nerfing), or the tools are no longer necessary and there are more efficient and less-drastic means of accomplishing the mission.  If my guns started to deal damage again, and my shields and health could actually survive a bullet or two, I might decide to use them over wtfhax bladestorm/stacked snowglobes/BLIND BLIND BLIND SLEEP SLEEP SLEEP FINISHER FINISHER FINISHER.

So here's what you, as game devs, need to do.  Ask yourselves the question, "What are players SUPPOSED to do to defeat this content?"  And gear your changes towards THAT.  You need to make a hard decision as to what gear and what methods players are allowed to use, and which are exploitative and need to be either nerfed-out or compensated for.  The answer "Players aren't supposed to defeat this content" isn't an acceptable answer; it's a terrible GM that measures success in trashed character sheets, and likewise it's a terrible developer that measures success in Game Overs.

Finally, you need to look at rewards in the light of the effort required to get them.  If defeating a piece of content is supposed to be a difficult task and a momentous event when you and your cell succeeds, then the rewards should be commensurate.  The rewards need to be something immediately good and useful.  If you throw out player-trivializing content, and then say to those who beat it "Congratulations, now run it five hundred times more if you want a reasonable chance to get the actual good rewards from it" then they're going to look at you, scoff, and walk out.

This is how you make good gameplay.

This

This right here

 

There was a point in the dev stream today where an old question came up concerning whether or not people were playing how expected. The answer given was that people were not playing as they should and that is the reason for changes to put them back on the path.

 

This concerned me. If players we're playing how they wanted it was probably because they had more fun foing so. Some players enjoy the challenge of level 150 enemies, yet it sounded like the Devs were seeking to remove that experience from the game.

 

In my personal opinion devs should be looking to build off of thise experiences instead of removing them.

A good example of this was in a game called Planetside 2. In this game there were fightet/vtol aircraft called ESF's. People found ways to fly them backwards, boost straight up and give themselves significant advantages in dogfights. The devs themselves said that it was never expected yet even though it offered advantages they encouraged it by add upgrades to boost and vertical thrust, yet also adding upgrades that allowed a different way to dogfight.

 

Instead of saying: "This is an exploit", I believe the question "why is this player doing this?" should be asked. It is my opinion that the developers should be expanding off of these "exploits" and "OP frames" instead of restricting everyone to what they personally want.

 

People enjoyed speedrunning levels. Yet all we got was 1 course in the dojo and then coptering was removed because people "couldn't keep up"

People enjoyed getting into locked rooms by glitching, yet instead of hiding eastereggs or rewards you removed the rooms or patched the glitch

People enjoy going as far as they can in t4 void and yet you seek to limit how far people can go. What is the point of having a T4 survival record if it is no longer possible to beat?

 

If DE continues to constrict the players to their vision instead of expanding on what the players want to do and actively do, people will find another game to explore and test the limits of.

[IronWolfSaber]

28 minutes ago, ZaeXithos said:

 

*Snip*

Overall I feel this thought process is wasted energy and more should be used into constraining oneself from the perspective as a player and not a ill-informed developer. Focus on the identifying problems, subject POSSIBLE solutions for presentation and spend far less time on the sign laden road-maps leading to nowhere useful. 

DE are humans, and dehumanizing them isn't the best use of their time, love, resources and devotion to the game. If you fail to understand what DE wants out of the game (which is what you've clearly demonstrate so far) then one has to question if you're even qualified to be giving feedback of such 'passionate' nature. 

Edited May 28, 2016 by IronWolfSaber

[TheMortemShadow]

@[DE]Rebecca With the newly added passives, will there be changes coming to the passives that player feedback has deemed not useful or hurtful to the Warframes? I just want to make sure you guys will be listening to player feedback since much of the feedback on some of the passives, such as Ember's, Nyx's, Oberon's, etc. has been negative and I just wish to determine if there will be changes along with it. 

Thank you. 

[Youre_Waifu]

5 minutes ago, IronWolfSaber said:

Overall I feel this thought process is wasted energy and more should be used into constraining oneself from the perspective as a player and not a ill-informed developer. Focus on the identifying problems, subject POSSIBLE solutions for presentation and spend far less time on the sign laden road-maps leading to nowhere useful. 

DE are humans, and dehumanizing them isn't the best use of their time, love, resources and devotion to the game. If you fail to understand what DE wants out of the game (which is what you've clearly demonstrate so far) then one has to question if you're even qualified to be giving feedback of such 'passionate' nature. 

So, what you're saying is you didn't read his post?

[Bazools]

12 minutes ago, IronWolfSaber said:

Overall I feel this thought process is wasted energy and more should be used into constraining oneself from the perspective as a player and not a ill-informed developer. Focus on the identifying problems, subject POSSIBLE solutions for presentation and spend far less time on the sign laden road-maps leading to nowhere useful. 

DE are humans, and dehumanizing them isn't the best use of their time, love, resources and devotion to the game. If you fail to understand what DE wants out of the game (which is what you've clearly demonstrate so far) then one has to question if you're even qualified to be giving feedback of such 'passionate' nature. 

Nothing of the sort... He was giving a valid point of view on a matter that as been pointed out over and over again by many players, youtubers and streamers ( scaling issues). Have u not noticed this problem?  He was asked to give constructive criticism and that's what he did.... A lot of people have been pointing this out for 3 years, that's how long scaling as been a problem. 

 

Edited May 28, 2016 by Bazools

[IrmaLair]

I would like to stadte my diaappiontment for the mag rework.

specificly talking about polarize. i can get behind the idae of the new effects added to the abilyty, but for me anyway the intadt cast to dmg nuka was the selling point.

now that it scales with all the different parameters it is a pain in the &#! 2 find a good balance between them, after all all tzhe mods that u want u also dont want cause the reduce another important parameter (narrow minded, tarncient fortitude, overextended, just to name the most obvious [ and dont tell me i need a bunch of spare ones so i can ajust the parameters bedder]) and the most #*($%%@ up thing is simply put!! WHY THE F*** DOESE IT HAVE TO BE A SLOW MOVING WAVE? CANT I JUST PRESS A BUTTON AND SEE S#&$ DIE THE INSTEND I PRESS THE BUTTON? EVERY OTHER ABILITY IN GAME THAT JUST A PREE X TO WIN BUTTON HAS ME WAITING TO KILL S#&$ ( LOOKING AT ASH) ALL I WANT IS AND INSTAND CAST NUKE. 

eevery time a delay or travel time is added it makes the game slower and less exiting!

[Sonicmycr]

Please... bring back the old valkyr and old mag. valk's Energy goes to 0 in no time and mag is pretty useless now.... damn DE whose Idea was to nerf Valkyr and mag so bad?...

[PunkLycanroc]

6 minutes ago, Sonicmycr said:

Please... bring back the old valkyr and old mag. valk's Energy goes to 0 in no time and mag is pretty useless now.... damn DE whose Idea was to nerf Valkyr and mag so bad?...

Valkyr was literally unkillable with Hysteria. You could easily kill enemies fast enough to recover energy through orb drops. She was broken, and they balanced her.

Edited May 28, 2016 by SwoobatFanatic

[Guest]

how about fixing mag shooting herself while standing inside of magnetize?  you almost have to bring a kubrow because you'll kill yourself and any sentinel you may bring...

[IronWolfSaber]

14 minutes ago, Youre_Waifu said:

So, what you're saying is you didn't read his post?

Why should one give effort to something he is completely ignoring over the fact that we are having damage 3.0/weapons 2.0/ and enemies 3.0 scaling looming on the horizon. The issue was thoroughly identified and being tackled in a manner that is rather very expansive and unfortunately may likely be complex enough to not be deployed alone (if they want to save themselves unnecessary amounts of work.)

 

Yes its an issue, yes pointing out the problem over and over again gives volume to the level of interest of concern among the players, yelling louder with vitrol doesn't make DE work faster on the monumental task.

 

So the question we need to ask is mag's rework done in mind with current game mechanics in mind? or future game mechanics in mind or maybe hybrid both?

 

For now we're probably better to focus on specific tanget of the issue blocking the changes from being remotely useful in the current meta instead of yelling at DE over the massive picture every patch. 

Edited May 28, 2016 by IronWolfSaber

[Sennera]

3 minutes ago, Sonicmycr said:

Please... bring back the old valkyr and old mag. valk's Energy goes to 0 in no time and mag is pretty useless now.... damn DE whose Idea was to nerf Valkyr and mag so bad?...

Valkyr wasn't meant to always sit in Hysteria, I'm sure it was meant to be used when you're getting pissed that enemies just won't stop hitting so hard... It gives you a moment of beating the crap out of everyone without worrying about repercussions! Anyway, she's still got her insane armor value, the ability to slot in rage, and the possibility of equipping life strike.

 

As for the mag rework, you've said nothing to back up your nerf claim. If you haven't noticed, Mag permanently strips armor off of enemies. PERMANENTLY STRIPS ARMOR!!! That means in the void she's pulling the massive damage reductions off of the big units.

[Youre_Waifu]

3 minutes ago, IronWolfSaber said:

Why should one give effort to something he is completely ignoring over the fact that we are having damage 3.0/weapons 2.0/ and enemies 3.0 scaling looming on the horizon. The issue was thoroughly identified and being tackled in a manner that is rather very expansive and unfortunately may likely be complex enough to not be deployed alone (if they want to save themselves unnecessary amounts of work.)

 

Yes its an issue, yes pointing out the problem over and over again gives volume to the level of interest of concern among the players, yelling louder with vitrol doesn't make DE work faster on the monumental task.

 

So the question we need to ask is mag's rework done in mind with current game mechanics in mind? or future game mechanics in mind or maybe hybrid both?

 

For now we're probably better to focus on specific tanget of the issue blocking the changes from being remotely useful in the current meta instead of yelling at DE over the massive picture every patch. 

So, that's a yes then.

[CptKornflake]

Just now, IronWolfSaber said:

Why should one give effort to something he is completely ignoring over the fact...

Literally admits to not even reading the post

you can't make this sh!t up

Welcome to the forums

Edited May 28, 2016 by CptKornflake

[hammerheathen]

2 hours ago, Alanthier said:

Also, chroma is being affected by energy drain from eximus, not supposed to happen if i'm not mistaken...

it is, all channeled abilities are now. Have been since a few patches back. Still can't gain energy while channeling an ability either.

[IrmaLair]

3 minutes ago, Sennera said:

Valkyr wasn't meant to always sit in Hysteria, I'm sure it was meant to be used when you're getting pissed that enemies just won't stop hitting so hard... It gives you a moment of beating the crap out of everyone without worrying about repercussions! Anyway, she's still got her insane armor value, the ability to slot in rage, and the possibility of equipping life strike.

 

As for the mag rework, you've said nothing to back up your nerf claim. If you haven't noticed, Mag permanently strips armor off of enemies. PERMANENTLY STRIPS ARMOR!!! That means in the void she's pulling the massive damage reductions off of the big units.

did u acually try the armor redution? its a coll effect but it takes 4 ever 2 strip a meaning full portion of the armor, void enemys are still killed with reative eas´ up 2 lv 70 and that whre the armor debuff starts dropping off .....

[Webstermeister]

 

8 minutes ago, IronWolfSaber said:

Why should one give effort to something he is completely ignoring over the fact that we are having damage 3.0/weapons 2.0/ and enemies 3.0 scaling looming on the horizon. The issue was thoroughly identified and being tackled in a manner that is rather very expansive and unfortunately may likely be complex enough to not be deployed alone (if they want to save themselves unnecessary amounts of work.)

 

Yes its an issue, yes pointing out the problem over and over again gives volume to the level of interest of concern among the players, yelling louder with vitrol doesn't make DE work faster on the monumental task.

 

So the question we need to ask is mag's rework done in mind with current game mechanics in mind? or future game mechanics in mind or maybe hybrid both?

 

For now we're probably better to focus on specific tanget of the issue blocking the changes from being remotely useful in the current meta instead of yelling at DE over the massive picture every patch. 

Please, do tell. How was XaeZithos' post vitriolic?

 

Overall I feel this thought process is wasted energy.

 

[Ethice]

Thanks for the patches and updates, DE. Looking forward to improvements you'll make in the future.

 

Note: Harkonar Syandana, as well as a few other back accessories, still place off center on Ash.

Edited May 28, 2016 by Ethice

[Kairo-Kuraku]

2 hours ago, Hittokiry said:

so you want to make a warframe that doesnt relly on the warframe's skill set? ...

We have more and more people asking to dumb down this game.

DE Listen.. we like hard stuff (no pun intended), most of us just dont know it.... yet.

Sorry i can't tell if you are dissing me Here.

I mean the whole thing about having to be in the rift is $&*&*#(%&, that's not a passive, that's an ability add-on. A passive is something that happens on its own without the player needing to do something to activate it.

 

Besides, they need to make the game harder i agree. I shouldn't be able to go to a Sortie and have no problem with it ya'know?

[Magneu]

2 hours ago, NecromancerX69 said:

Chroma's Effigy after the update looks a bit light headed.

This is actually hilarious. Just imagining it making *angry tiny lizard noises*.

[MercuryDoll]

1 minute ago, Kairo-Kuraku said:

Besides, they need to make the game harder i agree. I shouldn't be able to go to a Sortie and have no problem with it ya'know?

You could always try to take Oberon or Zephyr to the next Eximus Survival.

[FedorHooch]

1 hour ago, ZaeXithos said:

Okay DE.  I'm going to step back from the actual decisions being made here.  I want to talk about the philosophy behind them, and what you, as developers, need to be thinking about when you make these changes.  They smack of kneejerk reactions, without understanding the deeper meanings of why things happen the way they do.  So as someone who's worked in game development myself, I'm going to help you bridge the gap between player's-eye viewpoint and dev's-eye viewpoint.

Now, with any content you make, people are going to look for strategies that beat it.  That's the nature of the game.  It's the nature of every video game - to overcome the challenges the devs have put before you and reap the rewards, then use those rewards to meet and overcome the next set of challenges.  Your goal, as a developer, is to provide a challenge to your playerbase that is difficult enough to require strategy and tactics and preparation, but is also winnable within a margin of error that is humanly achievable.

Warframe's highest-end content has a serious problem with that.  Once enemy levels get into the 60s, 70s, 80s+, survival becomes increasingly binary.  You are either alive and strictly invulnerable, invisible, or sheltered behind tens of thousands of intervening effective health points, or you are dead the moment you are exposed to enemy fire.  First it's the bombards, who deal ridiculous damage over huge AoE.  Then you notice that seekers and eviscerators are one-shotting you too, and soon enough you fear stepping outside that Frost's bubble for even a half second lest you catch a stray Grakata round and spontaneously evaporate into a cloud of gore.

Some people look at that and go 'nope, not playing that, that's not fun.'  In the interest of full disclosure, I'm one of 'em, typically.  I've never been fond of games where one slight mistake will end you.  This is why I don't play sorties, despite the rewards.  I don't know a lot of people, I don't like trying to put together a team for it, and it has such strict requirements on what you can and cannot bring to the table that most of my arsenal is useless in it.

Others, however, look at that and go 'challenge accepted.'  They will look for ways to overcome even this extreme difficulty.  Like Ivara surviving while invisible and using sleep arrow and covert lethality to score kills regardless of armor and HP.  Or Blind Mirage rendering entire spawns comatose across an entire map and then merrily obliterating them one after another.  Or Ash using a combination of invulnerability and finisher damage to kill enemies he could never take in a straight fight.  Or Excalibur utilizing EB's range and blind-spin to get free finishers and stay out of reach of enemies while still benefitting from his sword boost passive.

The fact is, players look for ways to trivialize content because there's content that's very good at trivializing players.  It is, in fact, using content-trivializing strategies is the only way to survive player-trivializing content.

When health and armor don't matter, and shields are merely a formality between enemies and your health, your best guns take off mere slivers of enemy health, and all the buffs in the world won't fix either of those situations, that's when players reach for the nuke options - invulnerability, invisibility, scaling damage absorption, finisher damage, finisher openers, and instant-kills.

What's important to remember is that players are right to do this.  You made the content capable of obliterating anyone without these tools; therefore, players are going to use the tools you gave them that work.  And they're going to keep using them, until you either take the tools away (nerfing), or the tools are no longer necessary and there are more efficient and less-drastic means of accomplishing the mission.  If my guns started to deal damage again, and my shields and health could actually survive a bullet or two, I might decide to use them over wtfhax bladestorm/stacked snowglobes/BLIND BLIND BLIND SLEEP SLEEP SLEEP FINISHER FINISHER FINISHER.

So here's what you, as game devs, need to do.  Ask yourselves the question, "What are players SUPPOSED to do to defeat this content?"  And gear your changes towards THAT.  You need to make a hard decision as to what gear and what methods players are allowed to use, and which are exploitative and need to be either nerfed-out or compensated for.  The answer "Players aren't supposed to defeat this content" isn't an acceptable answer; it's a terrible GM that measures success in trashed character sheets, and likewise it's a terrible developer that measures success in Game Overs.

Finally, you need to look at rewards in the light of the effort required to get them.  If defeating a piece of content is supposed to be a difficult task and a momentous event when you and your cell succeeds, then the rewards should be commensurate.  The rewards need to be something immediately good and useful.  If you throw out player-trivializing content, and then say to those who beat it "Congratulations, now run it five hundred times more if you want a reasonable chance to get the actual good rewards from it" then they're going to look at you, scoff, and walk out.

This is how you make good gameplay.

Quality post. Completely agree.

Abysmal drop rates (20 minutes for 1 roll of 5% chance drop) and limited supply of mission tries (keys, which need grinding to get and are RNG) naturally force people to try and maximize the amount of rolls they get per mission. 

[ivalec]

why allways deploy updates without testing?