Jump to content

Riven mods of Cernos not working with Mutalist Cernos


AritroSinha
 Share

Recommended Posts

Instead, I vouch for it. It says "Cernos". It's "Cernos" series, not "Mutalist"
If I was to find a "mutalist" riven mod, then shouldn't I be able to find a prisma/prime riven one and put it wherever I want? Think about it.

If you have a riven for gorgon, you can put it on Prisma Gorgon, Gorgon Wraith and Gorgon. It doesn't say "Prisma Gorgon". If you have a riven for Burston you can put it on Burston and Burston Prime.
Mutalist Cernos only has a different effect, but it's the same exact item coming from THAT (it doubles the fact that it doesn't make sense) item.

It's the name that matters. I even doubt that there's a mod exclusively for "Mutalist Cernos" if that's the case, in fact, I was searching for both "Mutalist Cernos Riven mod" and "Mutalist Riven Mod" and nothing comes out (yet).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, shyguyk said:

Only the mutalist quanta functions so differently that it should be seperate.

in the end, mutalist cernos is still just a cernos. Just has a poison pool

That's not the point. They are two separate weapons. It is not whether they function the same or similarly, but rather whether they are the same to begin with. The Mutualist Cernos is not a clone nor a Prime version of the Cernos, therefore they are not the same weapon. There is no precedent for a weapon being able to use the exclusive stuffs of a completely different weapon.

The Prisma Grakata for example is exactly the same as the Grakata except for stats and color pattern. Same goes for the all Prisma and such weapons. The only exceptions to this are Primes (which are allowed due to very popular demand) and Dex (because they are still exactly the same as their regular counterparts except for thematic Lotus symbols).

Plus the Mutualist Cernos functions very differently than the Cernos. Yes, they are both a bow, and require you to shoot an "arrow", but beyond that they are completely different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Making a gas cloud really differs a bow from being a weapon that uses a rope and an arrow from being a bow that much then?
Just for funsies, you know flaming arrows were a thing, right? They are bows, yes, but they were used to burn stuff too, but it still posses the same exact functions

Edited by RyuGold
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Insizer said:

 

Plus the Mutualist Cernos functions very differently than the Cernos. Yes, they are both a bow, and require you to shoot an "arrow", but beyond that they are completely different.

Compared to one that shoots lasers and explosive cubes (quanta) versus pellets and a floating radiation ball.

Mutalist cernos and regular cernos function the same. You shoot the arrow and it does damage. Mutalist cernos just has more DoT applications

You're making it sound like the difference between mutalist cernos and regular is the difference between regular quanta and paracyst (which are both technically quanta's)

Guy above me makes a good argument with flaming  arrows not changing the bow

Edited by shyguyk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, shyguyk said:

Compared to one that shoots lasers and explosive cubes (quanta) versus pellets and a floating radiation ball.

Mutalist cernos and regular cernos function the same. You shoot the arrow and it does damage. Mutalist cernos just has more DoT applications

You're making it sound like the difference between mutalist and regular is the difference between regular quanta and paracyst (which are both technically quanta's)

they function similarly, not the same. Also, did you read the rest of my post?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Insizer said:

they function similarly, not the same. Also, did you read the rest of my post?

So do the boltor prime and the boltor. Should that be an exception just because it's a prime.

Even then, it's just dilution of the total mod pool if they separate weapons with the same name

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, shyguyk said:

So do the boltor prime and the boltor. Should that be an exception just because it's a prime.

Even then, it's just dilution of the total mod pool if they separate weapons with the same name

Read:

14 minutes ago, Insizer said:

That's not the point. They are two separate weapons. It is not whether they function the same or similarly, but rather whether they are the same to begin with. The Mutualist Cernos is not a clone nor a Prime version of the Cernos, therefore they are not the same weapon. There is no precedent for a weapon being able to use the exclusive stuffs of a completely different weapon.

The Prisma Grakata for example is exactly the same as the Grakata except for stats and color pattern. Same goes for the all Prisma and such weapons. The only exceptions to this are Primes (which are allowed due to very popular demand) and Dex (because they are still exactly the same as their regular counterparts except for thematic Lotus symbols).

Plus the Mutualist Cernos functions very differently than the Cernos. Yes, they are both a bow, and require you to shoot an "arrow", but beyond that they are completely different.

It's not the name persay that is important, rather if they are the same weapon, whether they function the exact same to begin with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you're telling me that just because the mutalist cernos isnt popular it should require another mod?

Boltor prime is not the boltor. the boltor is a cheap imitation of the prime. An adaptation

So is the mutalist cernos. If prime dont require separate mods, this case shouldnt either

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mutalist Cernos is functionally not an alternate form of the Cernos.  It is an entirely different weapon.  It is no more complicated than that.  From the Wiki, take note:

Bows AtticaCernos (Rakta)DaikyuDreadMutalist CernosParis (MK1, Prime) • Zhuge

The argument you should be making is whether or not the Mutalist Cernos should be a subtype of Cernos, because it currently is not, and I don't think it should be, because it works fundamentally differently other than being technically a bow.  The Paris has more in common with the Cernos than the Mutalist Cernos does, at least it just fires an arrow.

Apart from the Dragon Nikana and Mara Detron (which we don't know about yet because we only have Rifle Mods), no other weapon does this sort of thing.  The only subtypes of weapons are Syndicate, Prime, Prisma, MK1, Vandal, and Wraith, which only offer generally minor stat adjustments (plus a Syndicate Proc) without affecting the mechanics of the weapon itself, and with a few exceptions can share exclusive mods AFAIK.

Edited by Vox_Preliator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RyuGold said:

Just for funsies, you know flaming arrows were a thing, right? They are bows, yes, but they were used to burn stuff too, but it still posses the same exact functions

 

27 minutes ago, Vox_Preliator said:


The argument you should be making is whether or not the Mutalist Cernos should be a subtype of Cernos, because it currently is not, and I don't think it should be, because it works fundamentally differently other than being technically a bow.  The Paris has more in common with the Cernos than the Mutalist Cernos does, at least it just fires an arrow.

And this is where I think that this is debatable. Let's just go in more of an hardcore way then.
You say that Paris is similar to Cernos, but I fail to see it since I see no comparisons being made at all, hence why I'll make it.

Let's remove the bow shape (arrow and rope), 'cause that's applicable to both (even crossbow for some reasons):
-Paris has a different name than Cernos. Paris is a Puncture Bow. Paris has a completely different shape than Cernos
-Mutalist Cernos: the word Mutalist is added to Cernos. Mutalist Cernos is an Impact Bow. Mutalist Cernos has a similar shape to Cernos

Now, back to my example.
Other than setting the arrow to fire in order it to make it flammable, people used to make arrows venomous by immerging their edge them into some very strong poison.
All of those things never changed how a bow works. It did instead, added an effect to the arrow.

Now, time ago I made a post about changing the arrows using skin could change their stats/effects, but in order to unlock them, you had to craft the bow instead. Obviously, the request hasn't been made.

Now my/our point is: we're trying to make something more simple and pointing why it makes sense that X mod should be able to affect this weapon
I don't see what your is. Is your point just to sass him out? "Oh, it says Cernos not Mutalist Cernos. Mutalist Cernos makes a gas cloud" so I can reply "Oh, it shouldn't affect Rakta Cernos because it's a syndicate weapon that has a proc" or "Oh, simulor riven mod shouldn't go on Synoid Simulor because it's obviously better than the vanilla one that caused the Synoid one to exist in the 1st place"

Edited by RyuGold
picky typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, RyuGold said:

snip

In addition to this, what about the heliocor?

Regular heliocor and synoid heliocor act very differently. One is physical damage and crit, the other magnetic damage and status, with a specter ability. Those two weapons are more different than the mutalist cernos and regular cernos. Yet they would get the same mod. Does it not sound like nonsense yet?

Edited by shyguyk
Didnt know there were no melee mods yet, but they still would get the same mod
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, shyguyk said:

So you're telling me that just because the mutalist cernos isnt popular it should require another mod?

Boltor prime is not the boltor. the boltor is a cheap imitation of the prime. An adaptation

So is the mutalist cernos. If prime dont require separate mods, this case shouldnt either

  1. No its not because the Cernos isn't popular... I said that popular opinions made Primes be treated as the regular weapons in these cases. Perhaps, I should have explained myself better I guess. But at some point (I forgot when) the case was made on the forums and received very popular support, and considering it was accepted by the devs they must have had some agreement ahead of time.
  2. I never said anything about imitations. I only said functions. The Boltor Prime and Boltor function exactly the same. Again, Primes and such are exemptions to the trend. The Mutualist Cernos and Cernos do not function exactly the same. And no, them both being bows does not count, because under that definition the Dread and Cernos would be the same, just with different models and stats. The Mutualist Cernos is not just an upgraded Cernos, no matter how much you think it is. It is a completely different weapon.
  3. Just to restate what I said above: The fact that both the Cernos and Mutualist Cernos are bows and thus shoot arrows is not significant similarity because the Paris, Paris Prime, Dread, and Rakta Cernos all shoot arrows.
33 minutes ago, shyguyk said:

In addition to this, what about the heliocor?

Regular heliocor and synoid heliocor act very differently. One is physical damage and crit, the other magnetic damage and status, with a specter ability. Those two weapons are more different than the mutalist cernos and regular cernos. Yet they would get the same mod. Does it not sound like nonsense yet?

  1. Frankly, I'd be surprised if syndicate primaries could also receive the mods of the regular versions, because the Vaykor Hek cannot use the Hek syndicate mod. Granted you could also say that its this way because it already has the syndicate effect, but... that doesn't roll with me (possibly because I hate syndicate bursts, and think they, along with buff bursts, are significant enough to call the two weapons separate). Can you confirm whether the Rakta Cernos can use the mod or not? I'm actually interested in hearing the answer.
  2. We all have already assumed that stats are not significant enough to call two weapons different. If it was significant enough then not only would it invalidate both of our arguments, but it would mean every single weapon would be considered different.
    1. No, I'd say that they are about equal in terms of their degree of their differences. One has a fairly substantial channeling feature difference, the other has its basic attack being completely different (minus the bow part... because its a bow)
  3. Nonetheless, I've still yet to see an argument saying why, beyond being a bow (like many others), the Mutualist Cernos functions the same as the Cernos. As @Vox_Preliator said, "the Paris has more in common with the Cernos than the Mutalist Cernos does, at least it just fires an arrow."
Edited by Insizer
edited format of reply.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Insizer said:

No its not because the Cernos isn't popular... I said that popular opinions made Primes be treated as the regular weapons in these cases

If the mutalist cernos was popular (which is isnt) then popular opinion would make it be treated as the regular weapon no? You'd hear all sorts of whining if the soma prime had a different mod from the soma. (those two actually do function the same tho)

8 minutes ago, Insizer said:

And no, them both being bows does not count, because under that definition the Dread and Cernos would be the same

Wouldn't that make the rakta cernos different than the regular cernos? Why do they get the same mod then? I can say this because i have a boltor riven mod, which i promptly put on my telos boltor. It's the start of another circular argument.

"These two are different"

"So are these two"

"Who cares, one is another version of the other"

"... So is the third"

Hell, you need a cernos to even make the mutalist cernos. is that not enough to say that it is indeed a cernos?

13 minutes ago, Insizer said:

We all have already assumed that stats are not significant enough to call two weapons different. If it was significant enough then not only would it invalidate both of our arguments, but it would mean every single weapon would be considered different.

From the wiki:

  • Mutalist Cernos, compared to the Cernos:
    • Higher base damage (225.0 vs. 200.0).
      • Higher Impact b Impact damage (202.5 vs. 180.0).
      • Higher Puncture b Puncture damage (11.25 vs. 10.0).
      • Higher Slash b Slash damage (11.25 vs. 10.0).
    • Higher Status chance (45.0% vs. 10.0%).
    • Lower Critical chance (15.0% vs. 35.0%).
    • 1xNaramon Polvs. 1xMadurai Pol
    • Innate Toxin b Toxin AoE.
  •  Mutalist Cernos, compared to the Rakta Cernos:
    •  Lower base damage (225.0 vs. 250.0).
      • Lower Impact b Impact damage (202.5 vs. 225.0).
      • Lower Puncture b Puncture damage (11.25 vs. 12.5).
      • Lower Slash b Slash damage (11.25 vs. 12.5).
    • Slower charge rate (1.0s vs. 0.25s).
    • Higher Status chance (45.0% vs. 15.0%).
    • Lower Critical chance (15.0% vs. 35.0%).
    • Innate Toxin b Toxin AoE.
    • No Innate Blight effect.
    • Missing 2xMadurai Pol

They're All impact bows. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Insizer said:
  1.  
  • Nonetheless, I've still yet to see an argument saying why, beyond being a bow (like many others), the Mutualist Cernos functions the same as the Cernos. As @Vox_Preliator said, "the Paris has more in common with the Cernos than the Mutalist Cernos does, at least it just fires an arrow."

 

1 hour ago, RyuGold said:

 


You say that Paris is similar to Cernos, but I fail to see it since I see no comparisons being made at all, hence why I'll make it.

Let's remove the bow shape (arrow and rope), 'cause that's applicable to both (even crossbow for some reasons):
-Paris has a different name than Cernos. Paris is a Puncture Bow. Paris has a completely different shape than Cernos
-Mutalist Cernos: the word Mutalist is added to Cernos. Mutalist Cernos is an Impact Bow. Mutalist Cernos has a similar shape to Cernos

You didn't see or didn't want to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, shyguyk said:

If the mutalist cernos was popular (which is isnt) then popular opinion would make it be treated as the regular weapon no? You'd hear all sorts of whining if the soma prime had a different mod from the soma. (those two actually do function the same tho)

Wouldn't that make the rakta cernos different than the regular cernos? Why do they get the same mod then? I can say this because i have a boltor riven mod, which i promptly put on my telos boltor. It's the start of another circular argument.

"These two are different"

"So are these two"

"Who cares, one is another version of the other"

"... So is the third"

Hell, you need a cernos to even make the mutalist cernos. is that not enough to say that it is indeed a cernos?

From the wiki:

  • Mutalist Cernos, compared to the Cernos:
    • Higher base damage (225.0 vs. 200.0).
      • Higher Impact b Impact damage (202.5 vs. 180.0).
      • Higher Puncture b Puncture damage (11.25 vs. 10.0).
      • Higher Slash b Slash damage (11.25 vs. 10.0).
    • Higher Status chance (45.0% vs. 10.0%).
    • Lower Critical chance (15.0% vs. 35.0%).
    • 1xNaramon Polvs. 1xMadurai Pol
    • Innate Toxin b Toxin AoE.
  •  Mutalist Cernos, compared to the Rakta Cernos:
    •  Lower base damage (225.0 vs. 250.0).
      • Lower Impact b Impact damage (202.5 vs. 225.0).
      • Lower Puncture b Puncture damage (11.25 vs. 12.5).
      • Lower Slash b Slash damage (11.25 vs. 12.5).
    • Slower charge rate (1.0s vs. 0.25s).
    • Higher Status chance (45.0% vs. 15.0%).
    • Lower Critical chance (15.0% vs. 35.0%).
    • Innate Toxin b Toxin AoE.
    • No Innate Blight effect.
    • Missing 2xMadurai Pol

They're All impact bows. 

  1. Are you reading what I'm typing? It isn't about the popularity of the weapon. It was the popularity of idea of having Primes receive stuff like the skins of their regular counterparts.
    1. I can't tell you definitively whether prime weapons can use riven mods for their regular counterparts. But after doing a little bit more research it looks like precedence can go both ways with Primes, meaning they too might not be capable of using their regular counterparts riven mods. This new info comes from the fact that the Burston cannot use the syndicate mod for the Burston Prime. Regardless, their base functionality is the exact same.
  2. Thank you for that confirmation. I'm actually surprised and dislike the fact that they can do that. Regardless, I was pointing out that the Rakta Cernos also shoots arrows, not why it should be able to use the Cernos' riven mod. But I suppose that I have to begrudgingly justify it now... If I had to then I'd have to say that the Rakta Cernos has more in common with the Cernos than the Mutalist Cernos does.
    1. It shares the exact same model/shape unlike the Mutalist Cernos which only looks similar.
    2. It's primary damage types and primary damage method is the same is the same as the Cernos. Whereas the Mutalist Cernos deals mostly Impact and Toxin, using both initial impact and a stacking and procing DoT cloud (which accounts for basically a 3rd of the Mutalist Cernos' damage).
      1. I personally do not count the syndicate burst here because I view it as a gimmick designed by a kindergartner that was bootstrapped to the Cernos. I will not go further than this because I want to prevent me going to full rant mode.
  3. The manufacturing reqs don't mean anything. If it did then should the Zarr use the riven mod of a Drakgoon. The same with the Tiberon and Latron, and the Miter and Panthera. If riven mods came out for secondaries and melees then should the Akjagara use both the Akboltos and Dual Skana riven mods?
  4. Stats have nothing to do with this. The fact that the Cernos only does Impact, Slash, and Puncture (mainly Impact) while the Mutalist Cernos does all of that plus innate toxin damage (which does nearly half as much as its Impact damage) only reinforces this.
  5. Other points of your justifications:
    1. They both have "Cernos" in its name.
      1. This logic would mean that the Mutualist Quanta should be able to use a Quanta riven mod. You yourself have said it shouldn't be this way.
    2. They function alike because they both fire arrows.
      1. This logic would mean that a Cernos riven mod should be able to be used on the Paris, Paris Prime, and Dread as well.

I apologize for the "i haven't seen any reasons" bit. I added it at the last second and it really wasn't called for.

Yes, I'm surprised that syndicate weapons can also use the regular's riven mods. But I guess that means that even versions with special secondary features are considered clones.

I don't see how I'm using circular logic at all. 

35 minutes ago, RyuGold said:

You didn't see or didn't want to?

No I've seen the points and am refuting them. But saying "I haven't seen a argument" was excessive and flamebait. For that I apologize. I added it last second and wasn't really called for. 

That said, The only point that I dislike having to support (because I believe they shouldn't tbh) is why the Rakta Cernos should be able to use their base version's riven mods. The only answer I can give is that it is more the Cernos than the Mutalist Cernos because it is just a clones with different stats and additional, bootstrapped secondary functions. See above for more.

Also, your flaming arrows example is just a modification made in-situ to bow's arrows. You don't just modify a Cernos on the spot to be infested. Furthermore, it is more than a simple "lets modify it". The Mutalist Cernos involves firing a what is essentially a beacon for the infested bug things in the hive on your back to fly towards, and them staying at the impact area for 10 seconds and dealing DoT with a 100% proc chance. Also, the DoT damage is not a negligible aspect of the the weapon as damage and elemental mods modded into the Mutalist Cernos affect it, even combining elements and allowing additional elements to proc on top of the toxin damage. This is functionally a completely different weapon.

That is why I was somewhat seriously agreeing with his statement saying that the Paris and Paris Prime have more in common with the Cernos than the Mutalist Cernos.

  • As for the name issue: that's irrelevant because that would mean that the Mutalist Quanta should use Quanta riven mods.
  • As for the damage type issue: The Mutalist Cernos does toxin damage on top of physical damage. The toxin damage is about half as much as its Impact damage so it isn't negligible. And it procs multiple times per strike whereas the Rakta Cernos only procs once.
  • As for the damage issue with your Synoid Simular rebuttal... the amount of damage has nothing to do with it. It still functions the same, but with a bootstrapped bomb.

Lastly, its not sass to argue that the main focus of this argument is why the Mutalist Cernos should/shouldn't be considered a sub-type of the Cernos. Because that is what this is about, whether the Mutalist Cernos is close enough to the Cernos that is should be considered a clone and should be allowed to use the Cernos riven mod. To me the differences are too great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that was a blunt genuine question, not really intended for flame.

The sass part isn't just about you and as I'm seeing, you're almost surprised too about the fact that syndicate/prime weapons can use the Riven Mods as well. Wether I'm certain that most people are extremely happy about the fact that they can use Synoid Simulor (wich is a total upgrade) instead of the "bad" one, while kinda making fun of this. It would be straight up hypocritical.

Now, to think why it should be done aside any similarities is the name and many weird things.
For what I understood, Riven Mods target the NAME of X weapon (since they can even go on DEX series wich is a unique one).

But now with the oddities: you yourself in fact said that it's weird that Burston can't use the augment that goes for the Burston Prime, however, the mod itself specifies "Burston PRIME", HOWEVER, scattered justice for Hek doesn't go on "Vaykor Hek" and there's no specification, just the hint that a syndicate mod that procs the syndicate effect goes on a syndicate weapon (then there's rakta dark dagger and gleaming blight, but rakta dagger itself can't proc).

There's the other fact that IF there's a riven mod for "Mutalist" it would either go on both, resulting Quanta and Cernos having the possibility to use two Riven Mods, but I searched for a Mutalist one and nothing comes out.

If someone could confirm that riven mod for Quanta CAN'T be used on Mutalist Quanta, then it'll be checkmate

Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...