Players Going Off By Themselves Killing Things Miles Away

[PettiTheYeti]

Increasing enemy level will have opposite effect: it will only stimulate rushing forward. Rushers are not people who are on par with level difficulty - they are able to rush because enemy level isn't any issue for them. If they overestimate their abilities you'll find them lying on the ground anyway. So, increasing enemy level will only promote rushers as higher level enemies will drop loot of higher quality still being no match. At same time it will penalize those who fell back: either a low level layer or player with bad connection - he will struggle to catch up even harder.

All in all, problem is that some guys rush ahead withou thought for others at all. If it's one person there is a chance he'll stuck at closed door that requires two to open (put there specificaly for such cases), but if there are two of them others will struggle to get loot from mission.

 

Devs can very easily fix the drop rates to the map level instead of the enemy level, with the exception of bosses or heavies, etc. So that can be worked around. Obviously, most rushers are higher level, so they can rush forward and fight higher levels, while the lower ranks hang back and fight things more at their level.

 

Then again, perhaps something you mention can be used.. Putting a team-open door every couple of tiles would keep lone rushers from getting too far ahead, but unfortunately they usually come in two's.

 

Of course, maybe the simplest way to fix the issue is enacting a level cap on each level. Since each one says Level 1-5, Level 18-24, or whatever, your Frame has to be within those levels, or more than one piece of your equipment has to be that level (If you level weapons on easier planets or something).

[Aedwynn]

As long as you finish you still get the ? reward.

But what about mods/resources?

 

Devs can very easily fix the drop rates to the map level instead of the enemy level, with the exception of bosses or heavies, etc. So that can be worked around. Obviously, most rushers are higher level, so they can rush forward and fight higher levels, while the lower ranks hang back and fight things more at their level.

 

Then again, perhaps something you mention can be used.. Putting a team-open door every couple of tiles would keep lone rushers from getting too far ahead, but unfortunately they usually come in two's.

 

Of course, maybe the simplest way to fix the issue is enacting a level cap on each level. Since each one says Level 1-5, Level 18-24, or whatever, your Frame has to be within those levels, or more than one piece of your equipment has to be that level (If you level weapons on easier planets or something).

Then what will you do when team splits in two? 2 rushers and 2 low-level players. Who will get harder enemies? How will you distinct two groups? Ho will you deal with issue that two players enough to start final countdown, leaving 2 others with nothing but XP and standard credit award?

maybe implementing something GW like - scaling high level players down to match content will help.

[Tatersail]

yea simply match the mastery 5+ players who are usually the ones rushing, because this is there 97th control module farm run, mobs tickle them and dethcube can keep up with the kill rate, even if they run flat out.

 

and match up the mastery rank 4 and under, who tend to "explore"

 

 

as for the -100 affinity for a lone player,  this could be a problem in a group with 3 rushers and 1 fat rhino togging along at the back as best he can with his belly bouncing up and down.

 

now the Lone Explorer is getting -100 affinity?

Edited July 10, 2013 by Tatersail

[PettiTheYeti]

But what about mods/resources?

 

Then what will you do when team splits in two? 2 rushers and 2 low-level players. Who will get harder enemies? How will you distinct two groups? Ho will you deal with issue that two players enough to start final countdown, leaving 2 others with nothing but XP and standard credit award?

maybe implementing something GW like - scaling high level players down to match content will help.

 

Well, that's how my idea works on two levels.. The rushers combat tougher enemies than the level really has, giving them enough of a challenge to potentially slow them down, but without giving them the higher level drops. The slackers will have weaker enemies still spawning that they can still kill for XP and drops, but since they are lower level, they should still be able to make up the time gap, assuming the tougher enemies hold back the rushers.

 

And as I stated before, it will be based on proximity to objective and how many players are present in the surrounding tiles. If the rushers are two or more tiles ahead (closer to objective), that's when the enemies buff. If a player gets caught up two or more tiles behind the rest of the team (further from objective) then the enemies de-buff. If there are two rushers, and two slackers, then a system can be implemented to find the tile distance between the two groups and average it out. Five tiles between the two groups means the middle two tiles are where the team is at, for example. It would be a complex system of averages to keep it all balanced, though.

 

That could also be said for the OP's affinity suggestion, which would completely ruin the game for anyone who likes to rush (-100% affinity, really?), which ironically brings me to the conclusion that both ideas would be useless in the end, and a level cap against player entry would be the most effective.

[Datsher]

I agree that rushing is a problem, but your solution is bad. It's all stick but no carrot, it won't make people in public games play as a team, it will just make them rage on the forums. Remember what happened when they nerfed slide?

 

I hate the idea that a squad has to consist entirely of people who all maintain the formation at all times and move forward at the same pace as if they were a single body, this sounds like something out of Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia. This is a computer game, not an elementary school where everyone has to slow down to the level of the slowest kid around.

 

Besides, how will your system tell the difference between the ones being left behind and the ones rushing ahead, in a game that features dead ends and - in the future - possibly multiple routes? How will it tell the difference between a sneaky sniper that likes to shoot enemies from a distance and a melee brute that charges straight into combat? How will it recognize a coordinated and friendly team that has simply agreed that some of them care more about resources while others care about kills, and the former will go exploring while the latter will focus on killing and will occasionally wait for the other part of the group?

 

If you want to truly enjoy the early game of any online game that allows newbies and veterans to mingle - then you go solo or private; this isn't exactly something new or secret. The new player you're talking about will have to learn to be fast too sooner or later, otherwise they might never build their own frame or gather enough resources for their coveted weapon. A game that is all about being fast, efficient and well-geared yet punishes players for being fast, efficient and well-geared is up to a short life.

 

 

If you want to fix rushing then fix the cause, not the symptoms. Take away the reasons why people rush and then you will have solved the problems.

 

- Fix the affinity per enemy level curve, currently it sucks and higher-level enemies take much longer to kill but hardly give more affinity than low-level ones. Make it so it pays off more to turtle through high-level missions than rush through low level ones.

 

- Automatically rank down people's modules and frames when they enter low level maps. They'll be much more cautious when their Serration drops down to rank 1 and their shields and health get cut down to 200.

 

- Make it so it pays more to slow down and explore. Add mods and more rare resources to lockers, hide the best stuff behind team doors, platform puzzles, and/or super-elaborate and uncipherable hacking minigames. Void is a step in the right direction and hopefully they are already working on making the other levels be like that.

I agree that rushing and low xp from high lvl stuff are big problems which should be fixed, but on the other side, when you lower the shields in low lvl areas, many people would complain on the forums, I really agree with Quests and minigames and better stuff behind locked doors. 

some things I would add too:

 

+more weakspot based enemys (like kril but weaker)

+extra xp for stealthy gameplay, I only see people playing offensive tanks

+more primary/secondary weapons and doing more akimbo stuff (like a akimbo lex or akimbo Acrid)

+more extra levels like void

+mods drop from lockers and containers too (played 160 hours and still no Fury mod)

+trading

+more colorization stuff and that you can BUILD COLOR PACKS too (killing infested drops infested colors)

+maybe that you can use enemys as human shields

+picking up enemy weapons which have one magazine of the weapon and after it's empty you put a grenade on it and throw it a grineer in the FACE.

+trading

+more secret areas, but these are with traps like dart shooters and that stuff

+when something with module and level lowering than only up to the half of the mod, still kills, but not new warframe on lvl 2 like

+more random spawn enemies, like the stalker

+maybe more teambased missions

+that there are missions where two people are on the ground and doing the objektive and two are in your tenno ship (which brings you to your mission) and giving air support with gatlings and snipers and plasma bombs and that stuff

 

thats all what I have to say, sorry if I wrote in bad english, I am german

[Vovolov]

This is just a case of "YOU CAN ONLY HAVE FUN THE WAY I HAVE FUN".

Edited July 11, 2013 by Vovolov

[Eso233]

I think you're being really too complicated about it, if a player falls too hard behind a notification to teleport them to the bulk of their group will pop up which they can choose to decline, (much like extraction). And there could be more challenges on the map during teamplay that requires at least one more teammate like more team gates, and locked, rooms, and ancients, and etc. Maybe even enemies who specifically target players running off on their own and assassinate them quickly, but are easily killed by a second player paying attention.

[starcolt]

can we all at least agree there are things that can be fixed so everyone has a enjoyable game experience. i understand discussion is important but from my point of view it seems like everyone is disagreeing with each other. not everyone is gunna vote for the same idea but not coming to ideas everyone can agree on is getting us nowhere.

[starcolt]

now one thing i think might be a descent idea that Eso233 bung up is the idea of more teammate like things, tho on his list ide like to add maby a idea for something like a door to a "storage" room but the hack proces is long and complexed and it takes 2 people to hack simultaneously but then needs 1 or 2 people to defend them couse it trips a alarm and enemy start to attack. but inside is tons of resorces however to prevent 1 person from taking it all depending on how many active players there are only a certain number of lockers would open for that player so everyone gets a peace of it, not impossible the code would just be a hell of a lot more complexed but still not impossible. but im thinking like maby 2 common items, 2 uncommon items, and 2 rare items and 2 mods. totaling 8 things if there was 4 players,  12 things if there is 3 players, 16 things for 2 players. basically a reword system that gives more if there is less players involved. also the harder the difficulty  the items can change from practically useless items for difficulty 1 to very useful items for difficulty 4. idk im just giving ideas but anyway thats what i think would be a idea to give people a reason to slow down and give them a reason to look around. 

 

my second idea i thought of well playing ninga gaiden was maby adding in something to where eatch person can be detected individually so if i person gets found the other 3 still are "ghosts" to the enemy but if the found player goes near a "ghost" player and a enemy notices it the other player is also spotted. also ,aby add in somthing to where u can hack a terminal to turn off sencers however 1 terminal will turn off sencers to a area of this ship EXCEPT the one that terminal is in. and a idea i got from playing starwars the old republic is maby adding in the ability to hack terminals to lock doors, turn there own auto turrets against them, and maby do somthing like  mess with internal systems to couse like gas lines to explode or somthin with would be used to get the enemy atenchon diverted  allowing u to sneak by a bit easier.

 

now when u respond to this dont get all pissy "that wont work" or "thats just stupid" bla bla bla, why not just go " that is a idea however  (your idea)"  that way we can acualy get someone more then just ripping each others thoughts out, no idea is going to be agreed to by everyone but at least take in consideration of  what im getting at. i want to help make the game enjoyable for everyone.

[Aedwynn]

now one thing i think might be a descent idea that Eso233 bung up is the idea of more teammate like things, tho on his list ide like to add maby a idea for something like a door to a "storage" room but the hack proces is long and complexed and it takes 2 people to hack simultaneously but then needs 1 or 2 people to defend them couse it trips a alarm and enemy start to attack. but inside is tons of resorces however to prevent 1 person from taking it all depending on how many active players there are only a certain number of lockers would open for that player so everyone gets a peace of it, not impossible the code would just be a hell of a lot more complexed but still not impossible. but im thinking like maby 2 common items, 2 uncommon items, and 2 rare items and 2 mods. totaling 8 things if there was 4 players,  12 things if there is 3 players, 16 things for 2 players. basically a reword system that gives more if there is less players involved. also the harder the difficulty  the items can change from practically useless items for difficulty 1 to very useful items for difficulty 4. idk im just giving ideas but anyway thats what i think would be a idea to give people a reason to slow down and give them a reason to look around. 

 

my second idea i thought of well playing ninga gaiden was maby adding in something to where eatch person can be detected individually so if i person gets found the other 3 still are "ghosts" to the enemy but if the found player goes near a "ghost" player and a enemy notices it the other player is also spotted. also ,aby add in somthing to where u can hack a terminal to turn off sencers however 1 terminal will turn off sencers to a area of this ship EXCEPT the one that terminal is in. and a idea i got from playing starwars the old republic is maby adding in the ability to hack terminals to lock doors, turn there own auto turrets against them, and maby do somthing like  mess with internal systems to couse like gas lines to explode or somthin with would be used to get the enemy atenchon diverted  allowing u to sneak by a bit easier.

 

now when u respond to this dont get all &!$$y "that wont work" or "thats just stupid" bla bla bla, why not just go " that is a idea however  (your idea)"  that way we can acualy get someone more then just ripping each others thoughts out, no idea is going to be agreed to by everyone but at least take in consideration of  what im getting at. i want to help make the game enjoyable for everyone.

I doubt treasure room will work. Rushers rush cause content of level is no match for them. So what will your room do? 2 rushers will just rush to that room and ignore/distract enemies while hacking ( 1 Loki/Frost/Nyx/Vauban/Saryn  is all you need ) So what if they get reduced rewards for only two players present? They still will do more runs/hour compensating for it.

When doors were put to stop rushers rushers ansered going in pairs. But if you create activities requiring more players will start getting problem with slakers/AFKers stopping progress.

Edited July 11, 2013 by Aedwynn

[Aedwynn]

Answers "That won't work" are here for you in first place, to address critics and fix your solution. Otherwise, useless solution will remain useless, flooding chat.

[Sada_no_Fujin]

This lowers the amount of available mobs for everyone else to benefit off of, the overall enjoyment of the other players and team play. Those who do this should be penalized very harshly.

DE has also mentioned that they need to implement a feature that increases team play rather than running off alone to kill.

 

I offer a solution:

Every kill that is outside of a certain range of the rest of the team will cause the player to lose affinity rather than gain it. So long as there is another teammate in range of the player, they will not be losing any affinity. There is no "experience" to be gained when that doesn't offer fair play and discipline.

Also, a feature like this can be implemented where the more players that are in range of each other will have a multiplier added to their affinity gain:

0 players in range: -100% Affinity

1 player in range: 100% Affinity

2 players in range: 115% Affinity

3 players in range: 130% Affinity

 

 

As for solo play, every enemy that gets out of a certain range will also cause the player to lose experience and this will reset once the player has killed 10 enemies. What this does is create a gameplay where the player can occasionally kill and still rush without being penalized.

 

I know this seems harsh but there needs to be a disciplinary check in place for all players to enjoy the game. If one were to unfairly gain affinity apart from the rest of the game then there is no point for online play, and there's always the option of solo play, yet players think they benefit more highly in group play due to the heightened number of mobs.

 

It is clearly a rant but also a point in which DE has also discussed to be an issue in this game in which needs to be addressed. They have made round-about methods by implementing doors and other motion-inhibiting features into the game that have had no avail. A more direct approach is necessary to prevent players like this from ruining the game.

 

If I may offer an anecdote as to how this ruined the game from my perspective:

I ran a Sedna Kappa run to gain some experience for some of my weapons, as it being one of the better places to regularly gain affinity. There was this new player that was experiencing the game and this mission type for the first time.

Another player joined the game and ran down the hallway killing everything in their path leaving nothing for this new player to kill. So the new player and I sat and waited the full 3 minutes for a mob to come so we could get a kill. Nothing came. I complained to the player that entered that they were ruining the fun for the both of us and then they accused me of being (slanderous words) so I proceeded to report them of course. At that point I could not care as much for affinity as I did for how that person may have ruined the experience of a new player entering the game and making my experience as well as the new player that much greater with one player in the population.

 

I know that this game is expanding but the population of players dies quickly when gaining affinity is gimped by other players rushing through content for selfish needs without an incentive to even play the game for enjoyment.

Let me provide an example:

If Terminus or M. Prime had a reasoned to be farmed, how quickly would someone new to the game be turned away when all they see is a level 30 clear the entire map of enemies?

 

That is my argument and solution as to why players who selfishly gain without consideration of other players need to be harshly and strictly penalized.

 

 

No. Play private matches. That is all. I am here to kill the enemy, get the objective, get out. I'm all for team play but if i get stuck in house arrest with some hippy explorer who has to check every corner of every room for nano spores i will flip my S#&$. Rushers are no better.

Edited July 11, 2013 by Varo_Sanumai

[The__Q]

This would really screw over everything because:

 

One: Trinity,Rhino,Ash. Ash has better move speed, Trinity hs no attack abilities and has to (most of the time) has to stay back., Rhino has tons of attacks, But moves slower.Leaving this to chaos.

 

Two:AFKS Nuff said. Votekick system pls.

 

Three: Rushers have to rush because they are FARMING. Farming of all things, for a bosses material. Nuff said.

 

Four: Stupid noobs who keep dieing and then stay back a while letting the more experienced players kill everything does not help, Shared EXP. Nuff said.

 

End of post.

 

~Q

[starcolt]

I doubt treasure room will work. Rushers rush cause content of level is no match for them. So what will your room do? 2 rushers will just rush to that room and ignore/distract enemies while hacking ( 1 Loki/Frost/Nyx/Vauban/Saryn  is all you need ) So what if they get reduced rewards for only two players present? They still will do more runs/hour compensating for it.

When doors were put to stop rushers rushers ansered going in pairs. But if you create activities requiring more players will start getting problem with slakers/AFKers stopping progress.

well that is true it might not work but u get that what im saying tho it seems. if we can make some kind of thing that requires all members to do it, like maby somthing like in darksiders 2 after u get he soul spliter ability you got tose puzzles that require both versions to cooperate to get past some complexed puzzle, maby somthing like that would be a good idea, tho anothing thing i thought of like in army of 2 how sometimes ull get into a situation where u got a ton of fire comming for everywhere and u realy cant move at all and you gota rely on ur allies to take out some of the fire, and it can be changed to where depending on the level of the person who is pined down in the "cage" the more enemys that come out to compinsate for his overpowering abilities making it so even lvl 30s on like a lvl 1-4 planet can get into a situation to where thay cant even just rush though that thay need to take a minute to fire and call for help to get them out of there. 

 

also since ur the only one who seems to be civilized and hasnt flat out called me a morron in responce to one of my posts i would like to ask you, i had a idea for a change to the elimination missions for many lvl 15 and up where instead of there being just a limit to the enemy there is also doors you have to find and hack shut or more enemys will keep comming out  in waves like maby 3 to 5 every 2 minutes or so idk what you think of that idea Aedwynn??

[wfrawn]

I'd take a different aproach: the reason why people play solo while in a squad is because the game is to easy. They run around alone because they can; a squad is not really needed.

Problem there is that even if the game would be so hard for on-level players that they would want to stick with the group, it would still be way to easy for high rank warframes who are in the squad but who (for example) are there just to get Ember's system blueprint.

 

A solution might be downscaling of high rank warframes who play low level missions (as done in Guild Wars 2).
 

Edited July 11, 2013 by wfrawn

[WhisperByte]

In my opinion the best way to solve this "issue" is:

 

Rusher/Normal/Explorer matchmaking filters

This way players can run with other like-minded players (rusher/explorer) or stick to normal matchmaking that exists now

 

AND

 

Blacklists

To deal with trolls who join one matchmaking cue yet play by another one's "rules". Would also help with leachers/afkers

 

Sure, it wouldn't be instantaneous but in few weeks playerbase would weed itself out and the possibility of encountering someone you don't like playing with would become minimal

[wfrawn]

About that xp range, it takes how much time to get out of range?

2, maybe 3 seconds?

One wrong turn, one quick stop at a crate for some loot, and someone misses out on xp.

I guess what i'm saying is, there is such thing as to fast, and i think Warframe has found it.

[wfrawn]

xp range vs weapons range:

What happens if i'm out of xp range of another player and i kill a mob that's standing next to that player?

Do i get the xp because i killed it, and the player who's next to that mob gets no xp? Does he get the xp because he's next to the mob and i get none although i killed it? Or do we both get xp in spite of the fact that we're out of each other's xp range?

I guess what i'm saying is, 45 meters xp range is silly small for such a fast-paced large scale game.
 

[Callback]

Join a clan and play premades if you care so much about how a team plays.

[wfrawn]

There aren't many people who don't care about how a team plays.

If getting a clan - a large disciplined clan (don't want spend much time in-game not playing the game, and don't want clan members who don't understand how to play as a team) is the only way to play the game properly, then DE should advertise it as such: 'serious clans only, not for Joe Random'. But obviously that is not how DE intended this game to be, for it would cut into their revenue pretty deeply.

 

The alternative is to make the game so that it encourages proper team play.

 

At least informing players about how xp (range) works would be a start.

[Ragewolf]

I hate when people join and rush, so I play invite only. Problem solved.

You can't manage soloing? Do stuff your level till you can, there hasn't been one mission other than mobile defense/endless defense I can't solo.

You want to play with other people and not have them rush? Post in chat and say your running missions, not rushing and taking it slow. People will join and accept those terms as they are looking for the same thing. Fixed again.

You insist on playing online? It's your choice and your fault now. Simple.

People complain about rushers, I don't like them either. I never truly rush a mission UNLESS others are and/or it was the intent and all players knew beforehand. That being said, I would never support this as a fix.

Tldr - IF YOU DON'T WANT RUSHERS, PLAY INVITE ONLY OR SOLO. It's your own fault if you expect every person in online to play the same way you do. This is from someone who doesn't rush, and has never had an issue with it due to the invite only option. Ofc unless I forget to switch from online lol.

Edit- this would also hurt players like me, who play duo with a friend in the same

Room. Sometimes we split up to attempt to keep the kills even. So now when we split up we lose xp? This doesn't just hurt rushers. Anyone who unintentionally moves out of the radius would be punished. This is not a fix, this is a new problem.

Edited July 11, 2013 by Ragewolf

[Pendragon1951]

To the OP, before you make a really harsh suggestion I would like to point out a few things, I already did this in another post but I will do it here for you so maybe it will give you a better understanding. There are a group of people that many have dubbed "Defense Heroes" and within this group are three types. The first is the one we all hate, those that just sit at the spawn points with no thought of helping their team mates and are out just for themselves this type just don't care other than seeing how they can mess up your game experience. The second type are the uninformed, they are new and don't know about the shared Xp due to DEV's lack of good tutorials or ingame information, I know this because up until a few months ago after playing for about three months I found this out through game chat and had been completely unaware of this. Now the third type is where I and a few others fall into. Those are the ones who will stand at a spawn point kill what comes out of there then retreat back to help wherever he is needed because we believe the more dead the less that will threaten the pod, we don't care about XP's or how many kills we get we care only about the survival of the pod and how long we can do that. There are actually two benign solutions to what you ask. The first is request the distance of shared XP be extended that way no matter where you are everyone shares the XP despite what trolls will do. The second is if you really need xp for yourself simply do as I do and go to Io on Jupiter plant yourself on top of the boxes and fire away plenty of xp's mods and materials:)

[wfrawn]

The first is request the distance of shared XP be extended that way no matter where you are everyone shares the XP despite what trolls will do.

 

That is how it works in just about every mmo/rpg i have played - and it is never considered to be a problem. The worst that can happen is that clans/guilds use it to quickly level up their alts.

It is Warframe that does it different (kudos or trying something different), and it is this different game mechanic that turns out to be a problem to many people.

If mission/map-wide xp sharing is implemented what might happen in defense missions is that eventually people realize that it is strategically better (probably, at least in some missions) to all camp the pod and combine forces to defend it.

 

The second is if you really need xp for yourself simply do as I do and go to Io on Jupiter plant yourself on top of the boxes and fire away plenty of xp's mods and materials:)

 

You mean, play solo? Playing solo is a nice option. But it doesn't seem like a good solution to this problem, given that it is a multiplayer game.

[NitroMidgets]

Why not make it more of a predatory thing? Predators tend to target the weak of those that stray from the rest of the herd (or the stragglers). Have something Infested based that will prey on those that are too far from the rest of the group? Make it something fast enough and strong enough to be a danger to even high level frames. As a predator it would use the element of surprise, unlike the Stalker who announces his presence.

 

It would be disabled if doing solo runs but if in a group of more then two you have to stay within X distance of each other. Since there is safety in numbers it would prey on the one that is alone and disappear if you either returned to the group or they caught up with you.

 

 

That should make for a nice compromise for everyone.

 

It still leaves the option of denoting what type of mission people are looking for when setting up or opting into missions.

[Pendragon1951]

@Wfrawn with my second suggestion I was simply trying to address him/her wanting XP's if that is part of the issue:)