DE please give this problem attention

[iceyShardZ]

 

in this video he explained something ive been saying for a long time

in my opinion,in order to not eliminate player choice,i think that all primaries,all secondaries,and all melee should be balanced according to each other

what do i mean by that?

i don't mean that all melee weapons for example should have the same attack speed  value and the same damage value,im saying if you make a weapon slow,give it damage accordingly,if you make a weapon fast,let it have a lower damage output,makes sense right?

but then you see things like the galatine prime and the sheev

where the F is the balance? this is not okay,look at their stats,such differences should not happen in this game

but if not all melee,definitely all primaries should be balanced according to each other,because if not,if a primary has a cool concept,but its too weak,no one is going to use it,and your time and effort of making that weapon would be wasted on air,and it gives the player base a bad impression of the game's balance,and that's not too smart

ALSO the same should be applied to conclave,do you think that in a balanced conclave game,it should be allowable that one player loses just because another had a better weapon setup?

how is that even gonna be skill based if not all weapons are balanced according to each other? having band aid fixes like quick steel and all opticor mode,is not a way to fix the problem

i want you the person reading this to try and kill someone with the glaxion in conclave, while they are bullet jumping all over the place,with the weapon's innacurate beam,and don't give me the "its a combo weapon" because no weapon should be ONLY a combo weapon,and even as a combo weapon its so difficult to even hit for 1 second on a non stupid mobile enemy,especially considering the other player might have a furis and he will burst you down before you can even switch weapons,i don't get it,the glaxion already has a low base damage,why did they reduce it to 5 is beyond me,also why nerfing such an underused weapon?? why did you make the beam wubbly,just why??? 

maybe if they fixed the amazingly innacurate beam,that feels like you have an innate heavy caliber but without the damage part...

honestly these and armor scaling and adding end game content are the biggest issues in the game

also im not saying nerf the galatine,im saying buff the sheev

Edited February 3, 2017 by iceyShardZ

[Dextral]

31 minutes ago, iceyShardZ said:

in my opinion,in order to not eliminate player choice,i think that all primaries,all secondaries,and all melee should be balanced according to each other

An almost impossible task 

 

31 minutes ago, iceyShardZ said:

im not saying nerf the galatine,im saying buff the sheev

and this is why... people dont want bad weapons... people want the good weapons. by actively saying don't nerf the good stuff your basically saying fix everything else. whats more realistic buffing the 300+ bad weapons and keeping them unique. or flat out nerfing the 20ish weapons which over rule all others.

 

thing is people dont forma the 300 bad weapons for the most part. people dont realise this game and its weapons are pretty well balanced its just the minority 20+ weapons which are hand in hand better which make the balance look bad.

PS - there is ALWAYS a BiS weapon no matter how well the game is balanced. there is always a min maxer that figures out weapon 1 is better than all others by 5.4% etc

Edited February 3, 2017 by Dextral

[AlphaSierraMike]

There's a heck load of weapons to re-balance.

That's probably why Rivens exist, an attempt to rebalance via RNG, because the back catalog of weapons won't make people buy plat.

Conclave will probably never be balanced as long as they don't simplify some aspects. It's a complete crapshoot whether you're on equal ground with the opponent or not, with ISP, shield/health, abilities, hitbox variations, etc.

[Sziklamester]

They created all they could balance all if they take their time instead adding stuffs to the game which later makes harder to balance the game.

That is a very narrowminded says there is almost impossible. If the basics are good and balanced well then those aren't problem anymore and they can balance around the good ones. Nerfing the oply created stuffs just cause more trouble for peoples whom spent money on items because their items suddenly become less effective.

Personally I prefer the balance things which can means buffs and nerfs equal instead of riven mods which not solve any problem.

Also there are a tons of core mechanic issues since the open beta begins and not fixed. When they wish to fix it? When the game is nearly dead or when too buggy to bearable?

[Bibliothekar]

1 hour ago, iceyShardZ said:

in my opinion,in order to not eliminate player choice,i think that all primaries,all secondaries,and all melee should be balanced according to each other

Bad idea. You can't balance everything with everything else. Especially not when mods that increase a certain stat by 120% and more come into play. Best thing DE could do is to put the weapons into a number of tiers (3-4 I'd say) and try to balance within those tiers and the weapon families as good as they can. So a tier 2 secondary would be better than a tier 1 secondary, but primaries might generally be better than secondaries of the same tier.

That way, you'll get a bit more balancing than now (and can stop people who ask to buff a certain weapon by pointing out that it's on par for its tier), but if you truly wanted to balance everything, every weapon would be the same and we wouldn't need that huge variety.

1 hour ago, iceyShardZ said:

but then you see things like the galatine prime and the sheev

You're comparing a giant, two-handed sword and a shiv and expect them to perform the same? That's like taking the Snipetron and the Lato and expecting the same. Yes, this is a game, but you'd still expect a bidenhander and a knife to excel in different situations. One is better when you want to bash your way through large crowds, the other when you can sidle up to an enemy and stick it where it hurts (that you need a mod to achieve this, is a different topic).

[iceyShardZ]

3 hours ago, Dextral said:

An almost impossible task 

 

and this is why... people dont want bad weapons... people want the good weapons. by actively saying don't nerf the good stuff your basically saying fix everything else. whats more realistic buffing the 300+ bad weapons and keeping them unique. or flat out nerfing the 20ish weapons which over rule all others.

 

thing is people dont forma the 300 bad weapons for the most part. people dont realise this game and its weapons are pretty well balanced its just the minority 20+ weapons which are hand in hand better which make the balance look bad.

PS - there is ALWAYS a BiS weapon no matter how well the game is balanced. there is always a min maxer that figures out weapon 1 is better than all others by 5.4% etc

tell me then why did they change the sicarus?

it was a good change right?

so what reason do you have to argue against doing it to all other weapons?

it would take a long time sure,but its time to start working,when 20 weapons are godly and around 300 are not,then either nerf the 20 or buff the 300,i think that idealy buffing the 300 might be a better idea,because of enemy scaling,the game would be much more fun if all of those other weapons were buffed.

and it IS realistic,and its NOT impossible,by saying that its unrealistic and impossible you are giving DE exactly 0 reasons to change some of these weapons,and the change they did to the icarus was great and all weapons deserve it end of discussion.if itakes long to do it then so be it,but they should start working on that,if they fix that,enemy scaling,and add an end game mode,the game would be near perfect,don't tell them to start work because that's utterly useless to do

[iceyShardZ]

if they buff 5 weapons per week,after 60 weeks we will get around all weapons balanced,its VERY realistic and VERY possible

[iceyShardZ]

1 hour ago, Bibliothekar said:

Bad idea. You can't balance everything with everything else. Especially not when mods that increase a certain stat by 120% and more come into play

that's exactly why i said when a weapon has low fire rate buff the damage and if it has high fire rate lower the damage and if it has a high crit chance either make it have low fire rate or low damage and low status,get it?? i think all weapons should be top tier and different builds should realize their potential,what im aiming at is making it so that at the end all riven mods are neutral,because each weapon would have its own way to shine.

[iceyShardZ]

guys even if it doesn't end up perfect,SOME work has to be done and you CAN'T deny that,stop arguing if you want your game to improve ffs

[iceyShardZ]

1 hour ago, Bibliothekar said:

Best thing DE could do is to put the weapons into a number of tiers (3-4 I'd say) and try to balance within those tiers and the weapon families as good as they can. So a tier 2 secondary would be better than a tier 1 secondary, but primaries might generally be better than secondaries of the same tier.

therefore i would only use tier 1 weapons... genius

"

That way, you'll get a bit more balancing than now (and can stop people who ask to buff a certain weapon by pointing out that it's on par for its tier), but if you truly wanted to balance everything, every weapon would be the same and we wouldn't need that huge variety.

"

every weapon should be unique,if a weapon is low tier why the F would i ever F'ing use it

"

You're comparing a giant, two-handed sword and a shiv and expect them to perform the same? That's like taking the Snipetron and the Lato and expecting the same. Yes, this is a game, but you'd still expect a bidenhander and a knife to excel in different situations. One is better when you want to bash your way through large crowds, the other when you can sidle up to an enemy and stick it where it hurts (that you need a mod to achieve this, is a different topic).

"

well then make the shiv have a passive,

its like that in a moba ALL champions are good,some may shine in one aspect and others may shine at another,but each is unique,that's what i want

[Bibliothekar]

17 minutes ago, iceyShardZ said:

i think all weapons should be top tier

Again, that doesn't work, much less in a game that's so much focused on progress as Warframe. No matter what game you take, you'll always have weapons that are objectively better than others. Because you need stronger weapons to fight stronger enemies.

16 minutes ago, iceyShardZ said:

SOME work has to be done and you CAN'T deny that

But I don't I'm saying that nothing should be done. However, there should be a clear tier system for weapons. You can't hand a newbie who faces level 1-5 enemies a weapon that's as powerful as you need it for Sortie missions. He'd blast those guys into atoms and then, as he progresses through the game, wonders why his weapon becomes less and less effective (even with mods leveling up). That's even worse than what we have now.

A tiered approach would also allow DE better planning when it comes to new weapons. You have a launcher in tier 1, 2 and 4, but none in 3? Gather some ideas and fill that gap. They could decide "hey, weapon X is so old now, we'll downgrade it from 3 to 2 (and adjust it's stats accordingly) and bring out a new one of that type for 3". Players whining because weapon Y can't keep up with weapon Z? One is tier 2, the other tier 4, both are perfectly in line with their tier, so shut up.

13 minutes ago, iceyShardZ said:

if a weapon is low tier why the F would i ever F'ing use it

Because it's all you have access to at that moment? The tiers would obviously be mastery-locked (unless you bought Prime Access which circumvents mastery locks already), so you'd only get access to better weapons when you've progressed far enough with the game that you need them. Plus, it'd stop silly stuff like Boltor Prime being MR2 (same as the regular Boltor, btw), yet having better stats than Telos Boltor which is MR12. How does that even make sense?

18 minutes ago, iceyShardZ said:

its like that in a moba ALL champions are good,some may shine in one aspect and others may shine at another,but each is unique,that's what i want

Except MOBA champions == warframes. I agree that frames should be roughly equal, but weapons? No, not at all.

[iceyShardZ]

1 hour ago, Bibliothekar said:

You can't hand a newbie who faces level 1-5 enemies a weapon that's as powerful as you need it for Sortie missions. He'd blast those guys into atoms and then, as he progresses through the game, wonders why his weapon becomes less and less effective (even with mods leveling up). That's even worse than what we have now.

and this is where your WHOLE point falls apart,until he maxes serration,heavy caliber,point strike,fever strike,and AAAAAALLL the rifle mods,and then AAAAALL the secondary mods,and then ALLLL the melee mods,he would probably be mastery rank 12 by that point,so no

its not that he gets Sh!t weapons and then good ones (except for mk1 weapons and non prime versions of weapons because that's fine)

its that he gets no mods and no formas and no catalysts,and then he progresses with those things,a newbie should be abled to choose whatever weapon he wants,the progressions should be with the mods,not ditching weapons,im not saying mk1 kunai should be in par with the akstilleto prime,im saying,when they release kunai prime,make it as good as the akstilletto prime.

Edited February 3, 2017 by iceyShardZ

[Dextral]

6 minutes ago, iceyShardZ said:

,im not saying mk1 kunai should be in par with the akstilleto prime,im saying,when they release kunai prime,make it as good as the akstilletto prime.

you just undermined your whole argument 

1 hour ago, iceyShardZ said:

i think all weapons should be top tier and different builds should realize their potential

Mk1 weapons should be as powerful as every thing else in the secondary when the correct build is used. your words not mine

 

also saying that any weapon should be less effective than another means by your reasoning that a tier system that should not exist

As someone who 7 forma's a mk1 braton and other mk1 weapons. they are pretty damn powerful easy enough to kill anything on star map and even most things level 50-60 they only fall off after 80

Edited February 3, 2017 by Dextral

[iceyShardZ]

first off level 80 is nothing,

secondly

i think all mk1 weapons should be equal

i think all non prime weapons should be equal

all syndicate weapons should be equal

and all prime weapons should be equal

thats all.

[Dextral]

9 minutes ago, iceyShardZ said:

first off level 80 is nothing,

anything past level 80 is only reachable by endless and select sorties - my point was MK1's are the worse weapons, and even they can preform that well so unless your doing a long endless there is no reason to judge weapons outside of the average joe content. which makes majority of weapons balanced for average players doing average content. Min maxers like my self will ALWAYS find a BiS weapon because unless its stats and preformance is the same as all others just a different model then one gun is always better no matter how small the margin.  

 

secondly

9 minutes ago, iceyShardZ said:

i think all mk1 weapons should be equal

i think all non prime weapons should be equal

all syndicate weapons should be equal

and all prime weapons should be equal

Im taking this as you want MK1 to be equal, but worse than non primes, but non primes should be worse than syndicates, and primes should be the best.
If this is what you mean. 

Your contracting your self again... 

5 hours ago, iceyShardZ said:

,definitely all primaries should be balanced according to each other,because if not,if a primary has a cool concept,but its too weak,no one is going to use it,and your time and effort of making that weapon would be wasted on air,and it gives the player base a bad impression of the game's balance,and that's not too smart

Literally all your suggesting is moving the imbalanced into nice and easy to see categories.

in which case your big problem still exists. 

why would i use a Lanka by your model a bad weapon (tier 2)  beat by all syndicates (tier 3) and primes (tier 4) over a victus prime  which by your category system would be the best sniper. 

 

 

Edited February 3, 2017 by Dextral

[iceyShardZ]

On 3.2.2017 at 5:11 PM, Dextral said:

Why would i use a Lanka by your model a bad weapon (tier 2)  beat by all syndicates (tier 3) and primes (tier 4) over a victus prime  which by your category system would be the best sniper. 

you have a point there mate,

maybe the weapons should be categorized as corpus/grineer/tenno

because the lanka can't be primed

maybe what they should do is

release vandal versions for the lanka,and balance it next to the primes category idk

and balanced around each other,

also i wasn't saying syndicates should be tier 3,i just suggested they should be balanced within themselves

but i just think that the sicarus shouldn't be inferior to the lex,there is no reason for it,and also i don't think the flux rifle should be weaker than the quanta,again,you get my point

 

[CephalonMcLaubs]

There's no reward to farming a Gallatine prime up for 6 hrs and it's stats being insignificant compared to basic melee weapons. You can wish that it were not so but most of the choices you have end game are the most time consuming to acquire or cost you plat. That is how the game is monetized and designed. Same thing with the prime frames as opposed to the regular frames. In all reality you can build out just about any weapon for end game but don't expect a regular weapon to be on par with something more difficult to acquire.

[iceyShardZ]

time consuming? one of the easiest to get primes for me...

are you crazy? akbronco prime? that takes WAY longer to farm

tigris prime is easy to farm as well....

the only prime that i can justify its stats based on your logic is the axtiletto

[Fallen_Echo]

On 2017. 02. 03. at 2:12 PM, iceyShardZ said:

if they buff 5 weapons per week,after 60 weeks we will get around all weapons balanced,its VERY realistic and VERY possible

Heres something i said in another post.

The current riven disposition system is depending on how much a certain weapon is used. That means DE has data on which weapons are actively used and which ones are not.

Now all they need to do is to choose the least used weapon on the list and start buffing it slightly.

Lets say the least used weapon is the Paracyst.

They start the buffing crit chance first. They increase it to 10%. Buffing done they sit back for 2 months and wait for the usage data. If it increased significantly to the avarage usage level of all weapons then they leave it like that, if not they buff up the next stat.

They repeat the process by buffing the stats slightly, till the weapon is now used as much as others avaragely.

From my point of view this is the easiest way to buff stuff up and with this they could only work with one weapon for an entire year if they really dont want to hurry up.

[(PSN)MrNishi]

3 hours ago, Fallen_Echo said:

Heres something i said in another post.

The current riven disposition system is depending on how much a certain weapon is used. That means DE has data on which weapons are actively used and which ones are not.

Now all they need to do is to choose the least used weapon on the list and start buffing it slightly.

Lets say the least used weapon is the Paracyst.

They start the buffing crit chance first. They increase it to 10%. Buffing done they sit back for 2 months and wait for the usage data. If it increased significantly to the avarage usage level of all weapons then they leave it like that, if not they buff up the next stat.

They repeat the process by buffing the stats slightly, till the weapon is now used as much as others avaragely.

From my point of view this is the easiest way to buff stuff up and with this they could only work with one weapon for an entire year if they really dont want to hurry up.

I'm going to say this from the mechanics perspective.

 

Because Paracyst has Projectile Travel Time...There is going to be a large number of players that do not like the weapon.

-People were complaining about Kela rework when their Boltor Primes shots were missing her.

I cannot see all weapons being made equally balanced while having different firing mechanics.

Some weapons being able to utilize Max Heavy Caliber and others basically becoming useless with it ... Is along the lines of the mechanics.

Beam weapons having a Range deficiency, Shotguns having Pellet spread (sometimes damage fall off), Spool or wind-up, burst fire mechanics, Unique Alt-fire orbs.

(How are all of these supposed to be balanced to be the same under all conditions?)

For bosses/enemies that can be more than 15m away a non-Range modded Spectra is useless. (Raptors/Vay Hek) 

-Slotting Range mods would make it inferior damage wise to another weapon with equal stats because the other weapon can utilize a damage mod.

Niche Status resistant enemies like Tomb Guardians (Rock creatures) make low damage status weapons useless. Instead catering to Raw or Crit damage. (Seriously I'm waiting for DE to add them to a Sortie to mess with people. In which case players will want to keep their distance, so beam weapons are out)

 

I have never come across a game where all the weapons were equal or even close to being equal.

In most games I have played Burst-fire and Semi-auto seem to always lose out to full-auto weapons.

 

Also with Horde mode enemy spawns .. the enduring question of why take a Sniper vs AoE Launcher?(Especially when the majority of maps/Tilesets are tight indoor corridors)

[Fallen_Echo]

16 hours ago, (PS4)MrNishi said:

I'm going to say this from the mechanics perspective.

 

Because Paracyst has Projectile Travel Time...There is going to be a large number of players that do not like the weapon.

-People were complaining about Kela rework when their Boltor Primes shots were missing her.

I cannot see all weapons being made equally balanced while having different firing mechanics.

Some weapons being able to utilize Max Heavy Caliber and others basically becoming useless with it ... Is along the lines of the mechanics.

Beam weapons having a Range deficiency, Shotguns having Pellet spread (sometimes damage fall off), Spool or wind-up, burst fire mechanics, Unique Alt-fire orbs.

(How are all of these supposed to be balanced to be the same under all conditions?)

For bosses/enemies that can be more than 15m away a non-Range modded Spectra is useless. (Raptors/Vay Hek) 

-Slotting Range mods would make it inferior damage wise to another weapon with equal stats because the other weapon can utilize a damage mod.

Niche Status resistant enemies like Tomb Guardians (Rock creatures) make low damage status weapons useless. Instead catering to Raw or Crit damage. (Seriously I'm waiting for DE to add them to a Sortie to mess with people. In which case players will want to keep their distance, so beam weapons are out)

 

I have never come across a game where all the weapons were equal or even close to being equal.

In most games I have played Burst-fire and Semi-auto seem to always lose out to full-auto weapons.

 

Also with Horde mode enemy spawns .. the enduring question of why take a Sniper vs AoE Launcher?(Especially when the majority of maps/Tilesets are tight indoor corridors)

I dont say we should equalize all weapons, hell that would make it really boring.

I just say that we should try to bring up these weapons to reach an atleast decent level of use. Lets say that people avaragely use every weapon they own for 30% of their playtime after it reaches max rank. I believe we would be happy if we could say that a weapon is viable and not just a mastery fodder.

There are plenty of weapons out there in need of serious buffs and because of this people dont use em at all.

Stadavar,Gorgon,Panthera,Glaxion,Mitter, etc...

They dont need many changes to become viable and on another aspect this would mean more money for DE since people would buy these weapons again just to see if they became useful.

[(PSN)MrNishi]

8 hours ago, Fallen_Echo said:

I dont say we should equalize all weapons, hell that would make it really boring.

I just say that we should try to bring up these weapons to reach an atleast decent level of use. Lets say that people avaragely use every weapon they own for 30% of their playtime after it reaches max rank. I believe we would be happy if we could say that a weapon is viable and not just a mastery fodder.

There are plenty of weapons out there in need of serious buffs and because of this people dont use em at all.

Stadavar,Gorgon,Panthera,Glaxion,Mitter, etc...

They dont need many changes to become viable and on another aspect this would mean more money for DE since people would buy these weapons again just to see if they became useful.

I completely agree with the weapons being brought up.

Miter when it had bug 300% Damage on full charge up would have been closer to on-Par with Opticor and recently buffed Lanka. Why they removed that mechanic and then introduced Opticor afterwards is beyond me.(Opticor and Miter could both benefit from wider Hitbox projectiles)

(Although the Raw Status only mods[Sure Shot, Rifle Aptitude, Shotgun Savvy, Melee Prowess] are still in dire need of being adjusted, same with Ice Storm and Stunning Shot...)

Gorgon and Stradavar need larger damage values, which is a simple fix to make them near Supra/Sybaris level.

Panthera - This and Halikur, I take as being broken weapons because their mechanics don't work with current mods. (Halikur auto-flight aiming at weakest targets instead of just using the soft-curve other Glaives have and Galive charge throw being so slow and klunky, ruins this potential Status Glaive) Panthera is a mess because base damage valise are too low, Multi-shot doesn't necessarily increase how one would expect, Heavy Caliber severely hurts weapon just like precursor Miter, and then you have the Ammo magazine mechanic not helping correctly with Mods.

-On other weapons Ammo mods seem to round up to nearest full shot, but because Panthera needs 5 ammo for next full shot the mods will not round up by 5.  Instead leaving you with an obscure amount of Primary shots* (Feels unfinished and I really like the clean-lines of design model)

Innate Crit-damage weapons in my opinion should have had doubled or tripled status affects applied. So instead of Bleed doing 35% damage it would be 70% or 105% on Miter, Panthera, Seer, and Deconstructor. This in addition to Raw Status Mods being buffed should have made them better end-game alternatives then what they currently are.(Or let Crit-less weapons be able to slot 2 Rivens, just because...)

(Riven Mods could have been a little better where strong disposition would have always been beneficial stats for the weapon, rather than this RNG that can make your Strong Disposition weapon unusable)*

 

I think there is a lot DE can do to make all weapons viable choices at least on Sortie/Trial without 4xCP being needed. Even with buffs on these unused weapons, I can't see the community upping their usage. 

(Why invest in others weapons that might be on-Par but have different trigger/firing mechanics....Other than for looks or change of play?)

[(PSN)wildcats1369my]

balance in warframe