I'm Really Disappointed in the Decision to Keep Mandatory Mods

[Unholyrequiem]

The issue with mandatory mods isn't that they exist, but the number of mandatory mods which in turn limit the number of unique mods that you could place onto the weapon. 

[deothor]

On 7.01.2017 at 6:38 PM, DiabolusUrsus said:

You need certain mods to survive and succeed against the most challenging enemies the game has to offer.

I don't see anything wrong with 1hitting 200 level mobs using melee with blood rush & Maiming strike (which goes for ~900p).

Isn't that what devs wanted? To have 3-5 OP weapons, 10-20 OK'ish and 300 bad ones?

/s

[TessaraVejgan]

I'm sort of ok with them keeping mods such as serration, hornet strike around as is. Lvling them did cost me a lot of time and effort so I can't say I would be pleased to see them gone on the other hand there are more and more mods added to the game like rivens, weapon specific mods such as vulcan blitz, etc so mod space is becoming tight and its getting harder to fit everything. Would be nice if weapons dmg would scale with the enemy lvl or your mr or something, I don't know, who knows what they have in plans if they have anything at all.

[Naqel]

On 1/7/2017 at 6:56 PM, TARINunit9 said:

That said, your argument doesn't just vanish, because Warframe does it wrong. In a good tabletop game, the more you focus on making your aspects non-random, the more you give up to do so.. It's specialization. Meanwhile in Warframe, there are two god-tier stats: raw damage, and crit chance. Whereas in DnD you're absolutely screwed if you load up for raw damage without any non-combat skills, or in 40k you're screwed if you load up for pure melee focus without any ranged cover fire, in WF you can load up with any Frost and focus everything, literally EVERYTHING on damage/crit for your primary and be perfectly effective

You are comparing apples to oranges here.

A tabletop game uses dice rolls to simulate things happening that the player has no direct control over.
A critical hit in a TT or PnP is a hit that, through skill or luck, strikes a critical location, not a randomly supercharged attack.

In a game where we can aim our weapons with pinpoint precision, a random critical hit is simply unnecessary.

[Tyrian3k]

What DE could have done with corrupted mods for example is made them mutually exclusive with the non-corrupted mod that gives the same stat. Either use the standard mod or use the more powerful corrupted version with a drawback... or the dual-stat variant that gives less, but two stats.

Players will not make a choice if they can just say "Why not both?" and to accomplish that, choices need to be limited.

[DiabolusUrsus]

21 hours ago, Azrael said:

This has nothing to do with removing RNG. People increase crit chance because that's what's best for their average dps, not to avoid randomness. If people wanted to avoid randomness, they would remove crit mods, not add them. Relying only on damage mods often decreases dps but increases reliability. This may be desirable in stealth missions, but is not the usual approach. The fact that most builds are crit builds shows that players are not concerned with RNG damage.

Wat. Why does increasing crit chance increase average DPS? Because there's less times when the weapon doesn't crit. Why? Because when they reach 100% it's no longer random. Sure, some weapons can't hit 100%... but you get them as close to non random as you can. You can't seriously be suggesting that people only stick crit chance mods on the Soma when building for stealth.

21 hours ago, Azrael said:

Some people appreciate those. Anyway, removing them would be a huge buff to status weapons.

Then they can mod for them when it's possible to determine what status procs you inflict. Don't see why buffing status weapons would be a problem.

21 hours ago, Azrael said:

Not really. By this logic, the only way to avoid "monetizing" everything is to remove trading altogether. DE monetizes weapons by making them take a while to get, then selling them for plat. But the trading of mods is done entirely by players, DE's only part is to allow trading at all.

Yes, really. There is no arguing this point. The in-game economy bolster's DE's ability to make money. Maybe you don't think so, but that's how it is.

Though if they wanted to remove that aspect... they could always remove the ability to trade platinum instead of removing trading as a whole. Not that they'll do that, though, because the whole point of adding in trading is that it helps them make money while simultaneously pleasing their players.

19 hours ago, Vilmera said:

so... do you have any thoughts of how it should looks, to be "customisation" not "progression"?

Yep. Buff the base stats of weapons so that they are viable. Shrink the benefits added by damage-increasing mods, and add noticeable trade-offs to all mods.

Then, modding becomes about changing your weapon to improve the stats you want while making sacrifices that bother you the least. Modding becomes about changing how you use the weapon as opposed to "it can now effectively kill enemies up to level X."

We can still have progression, we just shouldn't rely on mods to achieve it.

[DiabolusUrsus]

14 hours ago, TessaraVejgan said:

I'm sort of ok with them keeping mods such as serration, hornet strike around as is. Lvling them did cost me a lot of time and effort so I can't say I would be pleased to see them gone on the other hand there are more and more mods added to the game like rivens, weapon specific mods such as vulcan blitz, etc so mod space is becoming tight and its getting harder to fit everything. Would be nice if weapons dmg would scale with the enemy lvl or your mr or something, I don't know, who knows what they have in plans if they have anything at all.

Okay, but this is DE we're talking about. It's hard to imagine they'd simply remove mods without running sort of script to refund the resources that went into them.

I'm not saying mods shouldn't be useful or hold value, but if mods are intended to be for customizing then there's no good reason to attach progression to certain mods. Otherwise what DE could do is distribute the damage stats and such across various mods, so rather than "Serration" simply adding a full loadout of mods to your weapon buffs the damage equivalently.

The point is there's no real consideration when choosing between something like Serration and, say, recoil reduction. Especially given the level of recoil most Warframe weapons have.

10 hours ago, Tyrian3k said:

What DE could have done with corrupted mods for example is made them mutually exclusive with the non-corrupted mod that gives the same stat. Either use the standard mod or use the more powerful corrupted version with a drawback... or the dual-stat variant that gives less, but two stats.

Players will not make a choice if they can just say "Why not both?" and to accomplish that, choices need to be limited.

Essentially this, though I would rather see something like this:
 

Normal Mod: Small benefit, smaller drawback.

Corrupted Mod: Larger benefit, larger drawback.

Legendary Mod: Ideally removed because they were a horrible idea, but could be same benefit as a normal mod, lower cost when fully upgraded.

[Harutora-Joushiro]

If a feature is working without any giltch or bug or breaking the game code, then don't touch it. As far as i can see the mod feature is working without any of those criteria. DE should not be touching this at all. There are other more important matters they need to focus on.

[DiabolusUrsus]

1 minute ago, Harutora-Joushiro said:

If a feature is working without any giltch or bug or breaking the game code, then don't touch it. As far as i can see the mod feature is working without any of those criteria. DE should not be touching this at all. There are other more important matters they need to focus on.

So, following that logic...

• Dark Sectors are fine, don't touch them.
• Fissures are fine, don't touch them.
• Archwing is fine, don't touch it.
• Drop chances across the board are fine, don't touch them.
• Warframes (e.g., Zephyr, Limbo, et. al) are fine, don't touch them.
• Enemy scaling is fine, don't touch it.
• Don't add new content to the game until all the bugs are fixed, because that will inevitably introduce tons of new bugs.

Correct?

The idea that bug-fixing is the ultimate and overriding prerogative of development strikes me as... misinformed.

[Azrael]

9 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

because the whole point of adding in trading is that it helps them make money while simultaneously pleasing their players.

Then what's the problem? I honestly don't know what point you're trying to make about the monetization.

 

12 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Wat. Why does increasing crit chance increase average DPS? Because there's less times when the weapon doesn't crit. Why? Because when they reach 100% it's no longer random. Sure, some weapons can't hit 100%... but you get them as close to non random as you can. You can't seriously be suggesting that people only stick crit chance mods on the Soma when building for stealth.

You totally misunderstood. Players avoid crit mods when building for stealth, because they might fail and thus not do enough damage. Crit mods are more RNG based than damage mods on weapons that can't hit 100%, so using crit mods is the opposite of avoiding RNG. If you use crit mods then you are dependent on RNG for your damage, if you get a bad roll you won't do very much. But using only damage mods raises the minimum amount of damage you can do, so that you aren't dependent on RNG for your dps. Since you didn't dedicate those mod slots to crit mods, you can be assured of always doing a certain minumum amount of damage, whereas using those slots for crit means that your average dps is higher but it is possible to struggle killing when they get bad rolls.

That's why I said that most players don't worry about RNG-based damage. If they worried about RNG-based damage they would avoid crit mods except on very high crit chance weapons.

[DiabolusUrsus]

3 minutes ago, Azrael said:

Then what's the problem? I honestly don't know what point you're trying to make about the monetization.

Because the mods are monetized, there are outlying motivations regarding changes to mods entirely unrelated to the merit those changes hold for gameplay purposes. Selling a mod that players NEED is going to fetch a better price than a mod that players imply want. 

4 minutes ago, Azrael said:

You totally misunderstood. Players avoid crit mods when building for stealth, because they might fail and thus not do enough damage. Crit mods are more RNG based than damage mods on weapons that can't hit 100%, so using crit mods is the opposite of avoiding RNG. If you use crit mods then you are dependent on RNG for your damage, if you get a bad roll you won't do very much. But using only damage mods raises the minimum amount of damage you can do, so that you aren't dependent on RNG for your dps. Since you didn't dedicate those mod slots to crit mods, you can be assured of always doing a certain minumum amount of damage, whereas using those slots for crit means that your average dps is higher but it is possible to struggle killing when they get bad rolls.

That's why I said that most players don't worry about RNG-based damage. If they worried about RNG-based damage they would avoid crit mods except on very high crit chance weapons.

It seems like you are refusing to actually address the issue at hand. I never said "players always mod for crit." Of course high base-damage weapons are going to be favorable in say, stealth scenarios.

BUT

When modding for crit, the main priority is increasing crit chance. IDEALLY to 100%+ because at that point, it is no longer random and thus free damage. If you give a player a choice between a 100% crit chance Soma and a 20% crit chance Soma, please don't try to tell me that they will choose the 20% option under any circumstance.

If the whole point of crit is that it gives more damage with the drawback of being random, and all we do is try to eliminate that randomness, what makes crit weapons mechanically compelling next to base damage weapons?

[Azrael]

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

When modding for crit, the main priority is increasing crit chance. IDEALLY to 100%+ because at that point, it is no longer random

You are ascribing something to crit builds that has no real basis. Increasing crit chance is a priority because it benefits average dps, not because it "eliminates randomness." The reason that nobody chooses a 20% crit chance soma is that a 100% crit chance one does more average damage. People also use crit mods on other weapons with much lower crit chance, such as the Prisma Gorgon. People don't choose a non-crit prisma gorgon to avoid randomness, they use crit mods to improve average dps.

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

what makes crit weapons mechanically compelling next to base damage weapons?

Actually crit weapons reward headshots more than non-crit weapons, so achieving max dps requires more skill with crit builds than non-crit builds.

[Naqel]

28 minutes ago, Azrael said:

Actually crit weapons reward headshots more than non-crit weapons, so achieving max dps requires more skill with crit builds than non-crit builds.

No, they do not.

Headshots(and other weakspots/hardspots) have the same damage multiplier for all weapons, the only thing that's different about critical hit weapons is that if the headshot is also a critical one, the resulting number is even bigger compared to a non-crit.

You are mistaking "wow, such big, very numbers, much meme" for actual mechanical advantages.

[Azrael]

9 minutes ago, Naqel said:

No, they do not.

Headshots(and other weakspots/hardspots) have the same damage multiplier for all weapons, the only thing that's different about critical hit weapons is that if the headshot is also a critical one, the resulting number is even bigger compared to a non-crit.

You are mistaking "wow, such big, very numbers, much meme" for actual mechanical advantages.

Headshots have a 2x multiplier in most cases. Crit headshots have an additional 2x multiplier in addition to the 2x location multiplier and the critical multiplier. So a typical crit headshot with a weapon that has 4.2x crit multiplier does 16.8x damage, while it will only do 2x damage if the shot is not a crit. Crit builds are much more likely to produce crit headshots, and thus reward headshots more.

 

*Edit: learn more at http://warframe.wikia.com/wiki/Critical_Hit

Edited January 10, 2017 by Azrael

[blackheartstar_pc]

I am happy about the decision to keep the primary mods for each weapon group. As I have seen several here say the current system is good and very enjoyable. The customization is one of my favorite things about this game. Not everyone builds for the min/maxed meta dps bs and it looks as if all arguments about this system seem to be based off of the idea everyone does.

[TARINunit9]

20 hours ago, Naqel said:

You are comparing apples to oranges here.

A tabletop game uses dice rolls to simulate things happening that the player has no direct control over.
A critical hit in a TT or PnP is a hit that, through skill or luck, strikes a critical location, not a randomly supercharged attack.

In a game where we can aim our weapons with pinpoint precision, a random critical hit is simply unnecessary.

Which is part of why my end of the conversation shifted to the Killing Floor 2 example later on:

On 1/7/2017 at 1:06 PM, TARINunit9 said:

Hmm...

You know, Killing Floor 2 had this discussion last year. Certain weapons had stagger and knockdown and stun procs, and the fanbase HATED it. It was retooled into a "proc threshold" system. Whereas before a weapon might stagger a zombie roughly 20% of the time, it was changed to a system where roughly four consecutive shots had a guaranteed stagger proc

Think that might work for Warframe?

 

[(XBOX)Skode]

I can live with mandatory mods or builds because there's so much variety we can still see regardless of using them. So many frames, so many modes, so many weapons... Cept people all run the same tiny pool of weapons, frames and modes so it's all futile whatever builds you have.

Rivers terrible idea too as it can only create a monopoly where people make OP cheese even more OP. Ive been watching videos lately of other players and I realise im the minority STILL after all these years of content. I'm still an Atlas main, Xbox player since launch and MR22 with most used weapons Latron Prime, Akzani and normal Scindo. I like Kubrows and I like Archwing.

People are too mandatory in what they feel works... That's the issue not a Serration or Hornet Strike. Look at build videos - more or less one size fits all, only difference is crit or status etc. Yet in game do you care? Nope, but what you do care is if they're wiping entire rooms with a Tonkor or Syndicate Synicor. There's a reason frames got reworks for being one button wonders - I hate Riven Mods, buffing or nerfing weapons to make more viable and others less viable would have been so much better.

Been having fun with the niche, that's what this "veteran" has been doing. Running Synapse, Pox and Heliocor lately. Just messing about the mundane using unorthodox weapons or ones which feature different mechanics.

[Tyrian3k]

8 hours ago, Azrael said:

You are ascribing something to crit builds that has no real basis. Increasing crit chance is a priority because it benefits average dps, not because it "eliminates randomness." The reason that nobody chooses a 20% crit chance soma is that a 100% crit chance one does more average damage. People also use crit mods on other weapons with much lower crit chance, such as the Prisma Gorgon. People don't choose a non-crit prisma gorgon to avoid randomness, they use crit mods to improve average dps.

On automatic weapons, I can see that people only care about DPS, not whether that dps comes from crits or raw damage. On the other hand, people have been complaining that snipers can't reach 100% crit chance like bows and that multishot should be changed to 100% to eliminate those pesky single shots that constantly prevent them from oneshotting enemies.

With a Rubico for example an aimed headshot has a vast range in the damage it can deal, ranging from a simple 2x multiplier on a single non-crit bullet to two bullets with 4x headshot multipliers with a 8.1x crit damage multiplier (with Vital Sense at full Zoom) on top. This means that the best case scenario deals ~32x more damage than the worst case scenario without any fault with the shooter.

On snipers, you don't fire enough bullets to be able to even things out very quickly like you can with machine guns and other fast firing weapons.

Bows may also fire slowly, but at least they always crit and a red crit is less than double the damage of a yellow crit, so that a single yellow crit (worst case scenario) still deals more than a fourth of the damage of a double red crit (best case scenario), which gives the bows a much more stable damage output than snipers.

[Azrael]

4 minutes ago, Tyrian3k said:

On snipers, you don't fire enough bullets to be able to even things out very quickly like you can with machine guns and other fast firing weapons.

Yes of course this can be problematic. This is why I mentioned stealth missions as a place where players may want to avoid RNG, even at the cost of average damage. OP didn't say "there are some situations where RNG-based damage makes certain things hard." OP said that the first priority is to eliminate RNG as much as possible regardless of what weapon or situation we're talking about, and that's just a ridiculous statement.

I like the idea of moving to more skill-based combat, with weakpoints and balanced weapons. But if you want to make an argument for that, it should at least be a reasonable and true argument. Honestly I don't think the existence of serration and hornet strike are much of a problem for the game, any system I've seen for removing them either accomplishes nothing or makes things worse. The very term "mandatory mods" is basically meaningless, it seems to be used to mean any mod which is a good choice on most builds. There are so many problems with the proposal to remove serration and hornet strike it's not at all surprising that DE didn't end up doing it.

Btw, on the subject of "mandatory mods," my favorite build on one of my favorite melee weapons (zenistar) doesn't use pressure point. I have enough formas on it to fit my maxed prime pressure point, but there's no room for it so I don't use it. It does its job quite well, all the same (I mainly use it for CC, but I kill things with it quite frequently). No mods are mandatory.

[Tyrian3k]

3 minutes ago, Azrael said:

Btw, on the subject of "mandatory mods," my favorite build on one of my favorite melee weapons (zenistar) doesn't use pressure point. I have enough formas on it to fit my maxed prime pressure point, but there's no room for it so I don't use it. It does its job quite well, all the same (I mainly use it for CC, but I kill things with it quite frequently). No mods are mandatory.

(Primed) pressure point is not necessarily the most powerful mod you can put on a melee weapon in the first place, unlike most other damage mods. Blood Rush, Drifting Contact/Body Count, Organ Shatter and Maiming Strike are all insanely powerful mods... not necessarily individually, but in combination with each other.

Other than that, you liking the build does not make it a good build. I doubt you're going to oneshot rooms full of level 100+ enemies with that kind of build.

[PatternistSlave]

On 1/8/2017 at 8:51 PM, DiabolusUrsus said:

Not quite sure I follow on an "overemphasis on gunplay." Powers just need to not be cast constantly. When the enemies have a chance to fight back we can have fair enemies. Until then, cheese will be used to trump cheese and nothing else. Don't see much variety in that, personally. If you're not spam-casting CC you still have guns and melee with plenty of differentiation, and it's not like powers will be removed. Just moderated.

Guns as a requirement I would call an overemphasis.  We don't all want to play the same way and I don't see it as a problem for players to have a good variety of options.  You want every frame to be completely reliant on their primary and that's BS.  What the hell kind of magic ninja needs a machine gun?

[DiabolusUrsus]

20 hours ago, Azrael said:

You are ascribing something to crit builds that has no real basis. Increasing crit chance is a priority because it benefits average dps, not because it "eliminates randomness." The reason that nobody chooses a 20% crit chance soma is that a 100% crit chance one does more average damage. People also use crit mods on other weapons with much lower crit chance, such as the Prisma Gorgon. People don't choose a non-crit prisma gorgon to avoid randomness, they use crit mods to improve average dps.

Actually crit weapons reward headshots more than non-crit weapons, so achieving max dps requires more skill with crit builds than non-crit builds.

Either you can't be serious or you're being purposefully obtuse. Why does 100% crit offer better more average damage? Because unlike the 20% it is not random. If you want to get into semantics and say "95% is still just as random as 20%," then I'll say "The point still stands that the goal is (ideally) to remove (rather than reduce) randomness by reaching 100% crit chance."

There. My phrasing has been corrected. You done quibbling?

On the subject of crit headshots vs normal headshots, my point about free damage still stands. If you look at crit vs non-crit damage on 100% body shots, there's a huge difference with crit damage in the lead. If you look at 100% headshots, the gap increases astronomically.

Saying "Reaching max DPS with crit weapons requires more skill to reach maximum DPS" is not a logical argument. Why? Because how do you achieve maximum DPS with non-crit weapons? 

Oh, that's right. By getting nothing but headshots.

The only difference between the two is one awards players with several times more damage for no good reason.

[DiabolusUrsus]

5 hours ago, PatternistSlave said:

Guns as a requirement I would call an overemphasis.  We don't all want to play the same way and I don't see it as a problem for players to have a good variety of options.  You want every frame to be completely reliant on their primary and that's BS.  What the hell kind of magic ninja needs a machine gun?

You are grossly exaggerating my position.

I want primaries to be useful, but balanced.

I want melee to be useful, but balanced.

I want powers to be useful, but balanced.

If you want to forgo one of those tools, fine. You'll have less options at your disposal, but it should still be viable for you to do so.

Nowhere have I expressed the desire to make a Warframe reliant on its firearms. Point out where you're getting this from, please, so that I can better explain the point I was trying to get across. Let me go ahead and take a stab at guessing what you're going on about, but if I'm wrong please quote the post that got you thinking like that so I can respond accurately.

If you're going off of my example about killing the Grineer...

NO. You don't need more than one weapon to accomplish your goal. The whole point of that post was making the example of options in how to approach killing an enemy based on desired loadout. You can build so that you only need one weapon that makes some stat sacrifices, or you can specialize multiple weapons that work in a complementary fashion to take out your foes. Or you can do some of both.

It amuses me to no end how many people come around saying "you're trying to take away our choices!" when the entire purpose of the thread is arguing in favor of something that will increase the number of available options. Like, really?

[DiabolusUrsus]

12 hours ago, (Xbox One)Skode said:

I can live with mandatory mods or builds because there's so much variety we can still see regardless of using them. So many frames, so many modes, so many weapons... Cept people all run the same tiny pool of weapons, frames and modes so it's all futile whatever builds you have.

Rivers terrible idea too as it can only create a monopoly where people make OP cheese even more OP. Ive been watching videos lately of other players and I realise im the minority STILL after all these years of content. I'm still an Atlas main, Xbox player since launch and MR22 with most used weapons Latron Prime, Akzani and normal Scindo. I like Kubrows and I like Archwing.

People are too mandatory in what they feel works... That's the issue not a Serration or Hornet Strike. Look at build videos - more or less one size fits all, only difference is crit or status etc. Yet in game do you care? Nope, but what you do care is if they're wiping entire rooms with a Tonkor or Syndicate Synicor. There's a reason frames got reworks for being one button wonders - I hate Riven Mods, buffing or nerfing weapons to make more viable and others less viable would have been so much better.

Been having fun with the niche, that's what this "veteran" has been doing. Running Synapse, Pox and Heliocor lately. Just messing about the mundane using unorthodox weapons or ones which feature different mechanics.

I agree with your position on Rivens.

I somewhat agree with your position on mandatory mods. Are they enough to make things miserable?

No.

Does that mean I'm not disappointed with DE waffling on this issue?

No.

Especially when the reasoning behind the change in all likelihood boils down to fear of over-entitled players throwing hissy-fits over perceived loss. Do mods like Serration and Hornet Strike (for standard weapons) or Point Strike and Vital Sense (for crit weapons) add anything notable to gameplay? No. They just define whether or not your weapon works properly.

If modding is supposed to be customization, then forcing it to share space with progression (i.e. Damage+/Crit mods) is problematic.

Is the system necessarily broken as is?

No, but it doesn't mean the system is ideal, which is kind of the point of feedback like this. It could be better, and I'd certainly like to see a greater emphasis placed on weapon diversity, both through modding loadouts and standard mechanics.

[Azrael]

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Because unlike the 20% it is not random.

A weapon with 0% crit chance is also not random. This is like saying "a weapon that does 3000 damage is better than one that does 2786 damage, because 3000 is a nice round number." You're correct that 100% crit chance is better than 20%, but the "level of randomness" isn't really the point. You're ascribing a false reason for crit builds being good. Crit builds are good because they do more damage, not because they are more reliable.

 

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Do mods like Serration and Hornet Strike (for standard weapons) or Point Strike and Vital Sense (for crit weapons) add anything notable to gameplay? No. They just define whether or not your weapon works properly.

First of all, ranking up those mods is a form of progression in this game. Forget MR, that barely matters at all, the real progression is getting weapons, frames, and mods, putting formas on those weapons and frames, and ranking up those mods. But removing serration and hornet strike you are short-cutting a lot of progression for new players.

But let's ignore that, and suppose we DO remove them. How do we do it? There are a couple of clear options, and they all stink.

1) remove them and leave the mod slot, baking that damage boost into the weapon. This is a huge powercreep, equivalent to simply adding a mod slot to every weapon and giving every new player a maxed serration/hornetstrike. Players will immediately find a new mod to always put in that slot, and will then start complaining about how there's no new diversity really because they basically just have one extra mod slot. And do we really need another huge buff? We do too much damage as it is!

2) same as above, but lose the mod slot as well. Now we've accomplished nothing at all, except to give everyone a free maxed serration/hornetstrike and no option to remove it. Other than that there are no differences at all. In fact there is less variety because we don't have the option to gain a mod slot by removing serration.

3) same as either 1 or 2, but instead of baking that damage into the weapon we leave it out and nerf enemies instead. It's still exactly the same, we either get a massive buff (if we keep the mod slot), or get no new variety at all (if we don't keep it). We've still accomplished nothing.

4) throw everything about the game away, and start from scratch. Rework all mods, enemy scaling, the combat system (including status, weakpoints, and crit), and player progression. In other words, make Warframe 2 and throw away the old warframe that's currently making them a bunch of money.

 

So which one do you want DE to do? Would you like them to accomplish nothing except for removing progression, for no reason? Would you like them to abandon warframe and make a new game? Or can you manage to deal with the fact that doing enough damage will usually (but not always) require a base damage mod?

If you think there's a better option, then please explain. Just make sure it's actually a good solution that provides answers to all of the above issues. otherwise it's going to be hard to take seriously.

Edited January 11, 2017 by Azrael