Buff Veto Menu - because Prevention is better than Cure.

[TheLexiConArtist]

Inspired by 'conversations' about the impact of Volt's Speed "buff" and how it can hinder instead of help, what we need is a way to veto buff effects - make them never happen in the first place, instead of having to perform otherwise-used moves to escape them if we wish.

Proposing a new menu safely buried under an "advanced options" label somewhere (away from the unwise and newer players), that allows us to irrevocably deny abilities we don't want affecting us.

 

• Option 1: Buffing Abilities by Name - Listing team-buffing abilities by name, allowing to toggle yes/no on whether these affect us upon being cast.
  • Caveat: Variant or multifunctional abilities (e.g. Chroma buffs in differing Elements, Ivara Quiver) could experience edge cases where desired effects are denied whether or not undesired factors are present.
• Option 2: Buffing Abilities by Type - Listing buffable statistics/unique effects, and denying the application of any buffs which use these effects (e.g. deny Melee Attack Speed buffs = no Valkyr Warcry or Volt Speed, nor any other effect from these buffs)
  • Caveat: While better permitting variable abilities (as it is the specific buff involved rather than the ability itself), this does still provide instances where desired effects may come tied with undesired effects, causing both to be removed. However, this is identical to the current cases of "roll to remove" mechanics - all effects are taken away indescriminately.
• Option 3: Buffing Effects Individually - Listing buffable statistics/unique effects, and simply locking the specified unwanted effects from functioning, while keeping the buff, and by extension, any other desired effects also present in the same buff entity.
  • Caveat: Likely to be more problematic on DE's side to implement, despite being the absolute best option for precision. Could also involve exploit cases where a tradeoff exists but its negative effect is 'denied' while keeping the positive, although this could be catered for in implementation.

[Tesseract7777]

I have seen this idea before, and just like before I do not want it implemented and I think it would be hurtful to the game. 

This is a coop game where we are meant to use our powers to help each other and work together, etc. etc. If the possibility of another player buffing you is that much of a bother you can always play solo, or set up your own group in recruiting so there won't by any unwanted buffs around. 

But this a cooperative game, meant for squad based play, often between random people. We don't need people loading into the mission with their ability to have buffs activate on them "turned off" to begin with. All this would do is make the game more exclusionary, more toxic and make it feel more like you are playing solo even when you are playing in a group. Which is the whole point though -- players who are that upset by buffs should play solo. 

Getting buffed in coop and mmo games is totally expected and normal, WoW, for example, doesn't give you the option to not let party members buff you -- at least as far as I know, that would be pretty silly if they did. It's just silly, as these games are meant to be played together and people are meant to interact. 

If there really is a horribly huge problem with an ability the interaction involving a particular ability could be looked at, but imo this is not something that would help the game, it would hurt it. 

[Sargeant_Q]

So if I understand correctly.  Under this idea, I would have to stop mid combat to accept the Elemental ward that my brother playing chroma gives me?  Or the link that I give him from Niidus? That 1 second pause to do that will get us killed in some places we play.  So no.  I agree with Tesseract.  If you have that much problems with buffing ability's, than you should just go solo or premade.

[TheLexiConArtist]

10 minutes ago, Tesseract7777 said:

I have seen this idea before, and just like before I do not want it implemented and I think it would be hurtful to the game. 

This is a coop game where we are meant to use our powers to help each other and work together, etc. etc. If the possibility of another player buffing you is that much of a bother you can always play solo, or set up your own group in recruiting so there won't by any unwanted buffs around. 

But this a cooperative game, meant for squad based play, often between random people. We don't need people loading into the mission with their ability to have buffs activate on them "turned off" to begin with. All this would do is make the game more exclusionary, more toxic and make it feel more like you are playing solo even when you are playing in a group. Which is the whole point though -- players who are that upset by buffs should play solo. 

Getting buffed in coop and mmo games is totally expected and normal, WoW, for example, doesn't give you the option to not let party members buff you -- at least as far as I know, that would be pretty silly if they did. It's just silly, as these games are meant to be played together and people are meant to interact. 

If there really is a horribly huge problem with an ability the interaction involving a particular ability could be looked at, but imo this is not something that would help the game, it would hurt it. 

Bury it far enough, and only the people who really don't like certain things will be looking hard enough to find it.

"Play solo or recruit premade" is never an acceptable solution. In most games, you can't turn off buffing (but can often remove them without having to mess around, e.g. right-clicking an icon on WoW), that's true. But even in those where you can remove them if you please, there aren't generally any that really impede you.

 

Limbo's Banish impedes you if there's nothing in the Rift plane to fight. Volt's Speed impedes you if you've developed a deeply-ingrained muscle memory for the fluid parkouring Warframe gameplay involves at a baseline level. You can roll to escape these, but that's still being impeded. Every time the player decides to cast again.

You could even theoretically turn things off like Magnetize bubbles taking all your bullets, so people would stop complaining about that because the ability is such a pain to place and nobody has no real option to remove them once they're down.

 

It's more about promoting cooperative play than reducing it - you don't have to worry about not casting something that I don't operate well with, and I don't have to worry about finding squads without the frame in question or performing a Fatality button combo every two minutes to play as I normally would without. Meanwhile, everything else you're bringing to the table I can still play alongside and enjoy. Win-win.

1 minute ago, Sargeant_Q said:

So if I understand correctly.  Under this idea, I would have to stop mid combat to accept the Elemental ward that my brother playing chroma gives me?  Or the link that I give him from Niidus? That 1 second pause to do that will get us killed in some places we play.  So no.  I agree with Tesseract.  If you have that much problems with buffing ability's, than you should just go solo or premade.

No, you would've already made that decision a long time ago in your Orbiter when you were setting or leaving your options (which would all default to 'allow', of course). Once you're in game, the idea is that everyone keeps their own fluid gameplay going, without having to perform shenanigans to keep unwanted effects at bay.

Edited February 12, 2017 by EDYinnit

[peterc3]

You're asking to play a co-op game without involving other people. This is not the game for you, apparently. Banish gives you energy and makes you essentially invulnerable to anything not on your plane. Speed makes you go fast, melee fast, live out your Sonic fantasy. This is absolutely an instance where you should make your own groups with your own rules, because I don't see DE even entertaining an idea like this.

[TheLexiConArtist]

26 minutes ago, peterc3 said:

You're asking to play a co-op game without involving other people. This is not the game for you, apparently. Banish gives you energy and makes you essentially invulnerable to anything not on your plane. Speed makes you go fast, melee fast, live out your Sonic fantasy. This is absolutely an instance where you should make your own groups with your own rules, because I don't see DE even entertaining an idea like this.

ITT people fail to realise how seamlessly pruning personally identified negative influences from other players promotes cooperative play.

Let me give you an example.

Speed slows me down because the extra movement and momentum (which I have no forewarning for, and varies in strength depending on the Volt's build making it impossible to anticipate) screws up the fluidity of my gameplay. I shouldn't need to ask them not to cast, by which they likely wouldn't abide anyway, and I shouldn't need to be impeded even more by having to repeatedly interrupt my gameplay flow by adding backflips every time the other player feels like casting.

However, I've got no problem with any of the other Volt abilities, so I'm fine with one being in my squad. QED, I'm going to be more likely to play with a person on Volt if I can designate that I wouldn't like to accept his Speed buff.

He doesn't need to know or change his play, I don't need to do anything to constantly cleanse myself in mid-mission, I can still stay in the group and operate with his CC and shields, everyone wins.

[(PSN)salovel1991]

This would be a programmers nightmare. A coding program would have to be implemented for every warframe with a buffing ability, an augment with a buffing type effect, and etc. So then the game has to read the output to each person. It would take more time to read the coding sent out which would effect your game. Instead of just reading the ability cast hitting your player it has to go into your settings and check if it's allowed. After checking your settings it would essentially send a message back saying x ability is allowed to pass or not pass said check. This would cause performance issues within game across most platforms. Currently as glitchy as the game is at points I wouldn't like to risk making it further complicated. 

Edited February 13, 2017 by (PS4)salovel1991

[TheLexiConArtist]

10 hours ago, (PS4)salovel1991 said:

This would be a programmers nightmare. A coding program would have to be implemented for every warframe with a buffing ability, an augment with a buffing type effect, and etc. So then the game has to read the output to each person. It would take more time to read the coding sent out which would effect your game. Instead of just reading the ability cast hitting your player it has to go into your settings and check if it's allowed. After checking your settings it would essentially send a message back saying x ability is allowed to pass or not pass said check. This would cause performance issues within game across most platforms. Currently as glitchy as the game is at points I wouldn't like to risk making it further complicated. 

Depending on which option the effect/implementation trouble would be different, but honestly, you're massively overestimating the impact. There's probably more code legwork involved in a single bullet fired at an enemy than there would be in referencing a setting group to check if it should skip over some statistical changes and/or mechanics.

 

I was challenged to come up with a superior alternative because Volt fans apparently can't handle the idea of a minor inconvenience to them getting their speed buff to avoid a major inconvenience for anyone that doesn't want it throwing them off their flow. This is objectively superior to both "pickup to activate buff" and "roll to clear unwanted buff": opting out seamlessly with neither party having to do anything while in the middle of a mission.

 

How precise and how many potential buffing factors need to be listed is up to DE and/or player feedback telling them people might not like certain factors affecting them, but some things are inarguable - or we wouldn't have "roll to escape" mechanics in the first place.

Edited February 13, 2017 by EDYinnit

[(PSN)Ozymandias-13-]

20 hours ago, EDYinnit said:

Speed slows me down because the extra movement and momentum (which I have no forewarning for

You're telling me that you can't re-calibrate mentally after 2 or 3 seconds of getting the buff on you? It's so detrimental that you'd rather disable buffs entirely instead of adjusting your play for a few moments you have a buff on you? Is it an issue of internet connection? If so, that could be understandable, but the solution might be options to lower graphical effects, not disabling the power.

Just from the perspective of...probably the entire community of gamers world-wide, if we put a buff on you to improve stats and you disable it and you can't keep up with the team in damage output or survivability we're gonna have words. At least in higher end content. Low end content no one would care, i'm sure. But if we're doing any high end planets, or Sorties....you'd be added to my block list.

 

[TheLexiConArtist]

15 minutes ago, (PS4)Riko_113 said:

You're telling me that you can't re-calibrate mentally after 2 or 3 seconds of getting the buff on you? It's so detrimental that you'd rather disable buffs entirely instead of adjusting your play for a few moments you have a buff on you? Is it an issue of internet connection? If so, that could be understandable, but the solution might be options to lower graphical effects, not disabling the power.

Just from the perspective of...probably the entire community of gamers world-wide, if we put a buff on you to improve stats and you disable it and you can't keep up with the team in damage output or survivability we're gonna have words. At least in higher end content. Low end content no one would care, i'm sure. But if we're doing any high end planets, or Sorties....you'd be added to my block list.

Yeah, I'm telling you that, because fluid movement is a fundamental factor of Warframe and having anywhere from 20% to 250+% additional momentum and (inconsistent depending on manouevre in question) velocity is going to get someone caught in walls and missing their intended paths when they have the deeply ingrained muscle memory that comes from playing for a long time.

And it's in effect for anywhere from 1.25 seconds to 28.2 seconds. And it happens whenever someone decides to press their button, which is not a predictable factor.

 

If DE didn't acknowledge that it could be undesirable (from feedback), they wouldn't have used a pickup briefly, nor would they have made it roll-cleansable now. I just don't think that players should have to impede themselves to remove an impediment that they have little or no say in when it gets placed upon them. (Remember this is with a view to improve playing in random co-op, so no, "solo or premade" is not a solution.)

 

I'd happily sacrifice the attack speed buff to avoid the speed effect if necessary. Attack speed doesn't matter if I can't get to enemies because I'm gravitating into the nearest wall from momentum. (Also some people find attack speed undesirable itself, when trying to play with non-basic melee combos)

[DreamsmithJane]

What, you mean actually being able to opt in or out pre-emptively as we choose, rather than having other players choose for us? Sounds too sensible to ever happen.

Honestly, I like the idea. Ignore the self-righteous jerks acting like "cooperation" means they get to ignore your agency. "You will be buffed, and you'll like it!" No. I can outpace a Speed Volt without accepting his buff, because I'm experienced with the parkour system and I have Lightning Dash/Firewalker. Speed just makes me miss all my jumps and slows me down, so I don't want to hear any nonsense about needing unwanted buffs to "keep up with the team". And no, it's not anything like damage enhancement or damage reduction. Those don't change the results of your input, so there'd be no particular reason to refuse them.

Also ignore the person saying it would be a "programmers nightmare" even though they have clearly never written a line of code in their lives, let alone used any modern programming language. The game already checks whether your targets are valid when you use a particular power (see: being downed, nullifiers, scrambus, remaining buff duration on non-recastable powers, bloody everything). There wouldn't be a performance impact.

[TheLexiConArtist]

6 hours ago, DreamsmithJane said:

What, you mean actually being able to opt in or out pre-emptively as we choose, rather than having other players choose for us? Sounds too sensible to ever happen.

Honestly, I like the idea. Ignore the self-righteous jerks acting like "cooperation" means they get to ignore your agency. "You will be buffed, and you'll like it!" No. I can outpace a Speed Volt without accepting his buff, because I'm experienced with the parkour system and I have Lightning Dash/Firewalker. Speed just makes me miss all my jumps and slows me down, so I don't want to hear any nonsense about needing unwanted buffs to "keep up with the team". And no, it's not anything like damage enhancement or damage reduction. Those don't change the results of your input, so there'd be no particular reason to refuse them.

Also ignore the person saying it would be a "programmers nightmare" even though they have clearly never written a line of code in their lives, let alone used any modern programming language. The game already checks whether your targets are valid when you use a particular power (see: being downed, nullifiers, scrambus, remaining buff duration on non-recastable powers, bloody everything). There wouldn't be a performance impact.

Appreciate the support. So many things that could or would be "programmer's nightmares" I'd happily take on as my own nightmare if it meant improving the game.

_{DE hire me, I'll move to Canada I swear.}

 

With regards to the bolded section, in particular 'damage reduction', I actually have observed that being undesirable to a select few. Namely, Chromas when they want to charge up their Vex Armour thresholds. Others might simply not want power or protection buffing because it makes things 'too easy' for what they set out to accomplish, not to mention those melee-combo users I mentioned getting thrown off by significant extra attack speed.

But that's the beauty of a simple personal opt-out menu, isn't it? You can just choose that for yourself before you go, just as the Trinity whose Blessing is vetoed can choose not to pick someone up who bit off more than they could actually chew by going resistance-buffless. Assuming DE opted to place Blessing and/or damage reduction effects on the optionality list, anyway; nobody said they have got to put every conceivable buff up for veto.

-------------

@Thaylien I'm going to drag you over from the Volt thread in person whether you like it or not. :v

On 13/02/2017 at 7:11 PM, Thaylien said:

Now that is something I could get behind, an Advanced Option, similar to the perpetual weapons trail or the allied health HUD always-on option, that simply states that a certain buff does not affect you.

I'm leaning towards the 'by name' option myself, as I feel that would be the easiest to implement, and because I feel that if you wanted to abuse the other methods it would be all too easy to simply state that none of the physical speed buffs affect you, but all of the other benefits do. Think about other speed enhancing abilities, such as Jet Stream Turbulence, which if you're not careful can actually be a speed debuff with a negative power strength, except still counted as a 'buff', but if the speed aspect of it didn't affect you... then what's the downside of it? Not to mention it would also have a 'cost' aspect to the gameplay, so if you really don't want to be affected by an ability, the cost is to not be affected by the whole of the ability. Inconvenient, but far more consistent, and will encourage players to only use the option if they are, like yourself, so adamantly against the buff, and discourage its use to all those that simply want to get the side benefits without the deficits.

In any case, that, my fellow tenno, is an actual idea, and I like it. It's certainly something that could be included by DE and would therefore not inhibit anyone's game play in the slightest by leaving it based on the movement system or on in-game limiting functions.

Concern: Personal Buffs experiencing exploit cases with selective effects.

Response: I imagined that your own buffs would always affect you in every way regardless of settings. Opting-out of buffs whether by name, ability-by-effect or individual effects would be for foreign influences only. Imagine if you will, that you trust your familiarity with your own Volt Speed effect, but don't want an unknown magnitude affecting you from other randomly-matchmade players. This is fine! You keep your familiar speed buff and don't get it replaced/stacked/affected by the other guy.

Concern: Exploit cases with sub-100% power stats causing 'buff' effects reduced below baseline (debuff because of minmaxing).

Response: In addition to previous statement regarding your own buffs always affecting you, arguably it should never be permitted for other players to enforce a limitation below baseline functionality without opting in. This is why we had the Banish fiasco in the first place (and still could in spite of the roll-out, if anyone cared enough to troll that hard) but could easily extend to any team-buffing effects that can cause detriments.

I personally opine that it is perfectly reasonable to opt selectively out of even partial buffs, and definitely reasonable to allow any objectively negative effects from other players to be ignored. After all, the purpose of this addition is to provide players with the ability to make a personal decision on "grey area" gameplay effects provided by other squad members - if a Volt could reduce me to 80% speed instead of the minimised Power Strength buff value being 120% then I don't think anyone would question why we might not want that to ever affect us in the first place, even if we can roll/backflip out.

[Dreddeth]

I feel like a lot of people misunderstand.

This isn't an anti-co-op idea, it's an anti-griefing idea.

No more having to either deal with or abort bad/troll Limbos who drop Cataclysms everywhere, or spamming backflip because they won't stop banishing you. No more suffering through Switch Teleport trollkis. No more surprise "Speed" planting you face-first into a wall or crate because it was cast while you were mid-turn. No more having the timing of your melee combos completely screwed by said Speed, or Warcry. No more getting yanked off of your chosen vantage point with Rip Line.

All thanks to a few settings you'd adjust through Options beforehand, as opposed to the "Accept? Y/N" mechanic some have misinterpreted it to be.

This I can completely understand. I do think it would be a pain in the @$$; to properly implement, though, and performance might suffer.

Edited February 15, 2017 by Dreddeth

[Birdframe_Prime]

15 hours ago, EDYinnit said:

Concern: Exploit cases with sub-100% power stats causing 'buff' effects reduced below baseline (debuff because of minmaxing).

Heyo, glad you included me here, but you mis-understood me on this one ^^

The concern is the ability to ignore debuff effects on abilities in order to only get the buffs. Where players would opt out of a specific effect, such as a speed increase (or in the specific case, a speed decrease) but retain the other buffs that the ability itself attributes.

An example would be another player's Zephyr Jet Stream, where a negative Strength build can make themselves and allies run slower, but since the stat is different for the Projectile Flight Speed buff, that negative Strength would still allow the Projectile Speed to be buffed to positive numbers. In short, you could opt out of the Sprint Speed debuff, but still benefit from the smaller Projectile Speed buff. Similarly another player's Valkyr Warcry, where you could opt out of the Melee Speed buff, but still benefit from the Enemy Slow, which basically leaves you with a single personal buff and no consequence to your melee timing.

There are plenty of abilities from allies that grant what many consider to be two buffs, but may only want one of them, the ability to opt out of just one buff by deciding that you never want specific stats to be modified by others seems exploitable.

That's why I said that opting out of the buffs by the entire ability was fairer, if you don't want the buff/debuff from an allied ability, then you don't get the entirety of it, no chance of getting only part of it and benefiting unfairly from an allied cast.

Other than that, fair points.

After you left that thread, however, somebody also mentioned something that might actually be helpful overall; a highlight function similar to Nidus' first ability. Tapping 2 for Speed casts it on yourself, however holding the ability brings up a ring around you to indicate your casting range, only once the ring is up can you affect your allies, it must be a conscious decision to buff them and thus will never result in accidentally casting it on your team when they might not want it.

I think this would make a good addition and prevent spam casting from affecting people as much.

[TheLexiConArtist]

1 hour ago, Thaylien said:

Heyo, glad you included me here, but you mis-understood me on this one ^^

The concern is the ability to ignore debuff effects on abilities in order to only get the buffs. Where players would opt out of a specific effect, such as a speed increase (or in the specific case, a speed decrease) but retain the other buffs that the ability itself attributes.

An example would be another player's Zephyr Jet Stream, where a negative Strength build can make themselves and allies run slower, but since the stat is different for the Projectile Flight Speed buff, that negative Strength would still allow the Projectile Speed to be buffed to positive numbers. In short, you could opt out of the Sprint Speed debuff, but still benefit from the smaller Projectile Speed buff. Similarly another player's Valkyr Warcry, where you could opt out of the Melee Speed buff, but still benefit from the Enemy Slow, which basically leaves you with a single personal buff and no consequence to your melee timing.

There are plenty of abilities from allies that grant what many consider to be two buffs, but may only want one of them, the ability to opt out of just one buff by deciding that you never want specific stats to be modified by others seems exploitable.

That's why I said that opting out of the buffs by the entire ability was fairer, if you don't want the buff/debuff from an allied ability, then you don't get the entirety of it, no chance of getting only part of it and benefiting unfairly from an allied cast.

Other than that, fair points.

After you left that thread, however, somebody also mentioned something that might actually be helpful overall; a highlight function similar to Nidus' first ability. Tapping 2 for Speed casts it on yourself, however holding the ability brings up a ring around you to indicate your casting range, only once the ring is up can you affect your allies, it must be a conscious decision to buff them and thus will never result in accidentally casting it on your team when they might not want it.

I think this would make a good addition and prevent spam casting from affecting people as much.

Oh no, I understood you just fine on both counts. Hence my counterpoint, arguing that it's never okay for a foreign influence to apply debuffs without your own agency opting into it.

Jet Stream shouldn't scale down to the point at which it reduces speed anyway, so the ability to opt out before it could even come into play is absolutely fair. The modifier should be 1+(base increase * strength) although that would, of course, lower the ceiling of high-strength builds too, or simply have a capped lower limit of no change, 100% 'modifier'. I don't believe there are too many that can scale that low, and I believe Volt's own speed-buff operates on the 1+(base*str) paradigm as 40% strength results in 120% speed mod rather than 60%.

With regards to selectiveness, I don't really see it as an exploit if a player gets one statistical part of a buff without another - bearing in mind none of them should be debuffs from the previous point - it's all wilful limitation below the sum total based on personal preferences at that point, isn't it? Using our familiar reference, I might want to attack things faster but find that the movement speed from Volt stops me from efficiently moving between enemies to take advantage; taking away the movement buff is still overall less of a buff compared to someone comfortable fully utilising both the movement and attack speed modifiers to engage in rapid and efficient melee combat.

I accept that there's a healthy part of personal opinion in that matter, but that's why I presented the different potential approaches to begin with. It's on DE to decide if anything constitutes enough of an exploit case to make it not worth implementing in such a precise manner.

 

I don't see the benefit of holding to cast Speed on allies (but I haven't opted to mention as such back in that thread). One of the bigger problems this solution seeks to alleviate is when people think they're doing you a favor - people that would still try to get you in their highlighted catchment area for group buffing, because they don't know or don't understand why you might not want it at all. Plus, even if you were to state such and acknowledge it, that's still a lot of potential messing around trying to ensure only the people that want the buff are in range (more slowing down, even less seamlessly fluid pace).

[TheLexiConArtist]

Oh, this has been moved to fan concepts. I wondered where you'd gotten to.

Not sure if I agree, it may be a concept, but functional things seem to fall by the wayside over here in favour of shiny fantasies with pictures that aren't actually likely to see the light of day. Which means, through saturation and less chance of conversation on the matter... less likely to be seen and heeded by DE.

[drakegt]

Reading the forums, I've seen some pretty heated debate about how a player should be able to opt-out of an allies ability. For Limbo's banish, you roll. For Volt's Dash, you backflip. Some people like the former, some people like the latter. Personally, I like to backflip opt-out of abilities so I don't do it on accident (most of the time).

Instead of building these opt-outs into ability, why not let players decide how they want to opt out? In the gameplay settings menu, there could be a setting that switch between any number of things (rolling, backflipping, bullet-jumping, keyboard/controller bindings, etc). This allows players to customize how they interact with teammates in a way that's suitable to their play style.

To take it a step further, there could be a drop down menu so that specific abilities have different opt-out bindings. Maybe I want to opt out of Banish with a bullet-jump, but opt-out of Lightning Dash with a backflip. 

The abilities are not balanced around how other players can get out of their effects, so I can't really see this negatively impacting gameplay.

Thoughts?

[Aurea_Hiigara]

Performing the same actions for the same effects is always a plus.

[(PSN)CaptainIMalik]

...

Edited February 19, 2017 by (PS4)CaptainIMalik

[drakegt]

...

Edited February 19, 2017 by drakegt

[(PSN)CaptainIMalik]

3 minutes ago, drakegt said:

I think there might be a misunderstanding...

I'm simply talking about customizing the key bindings for how players get rid of another player's ability effect on them. For instance, if I'm playing Mirage and Limbo puts me in the rift, I need to roll to get myself out of the rift. However, I don't like to roll to get out of abilities; I'd rather backflip. My suggestion is to allow players to customize what action they take to get out of situations like the one I just mentioned. 

I need to get rid of my post

and you pretend it never existed

[drakegt]

Just now, (PS4)CaptainIMalik said:

I need to get rid of my post

and you pretend it never existed

What post?

[TheLexiConArtist]

43 minutes ago, drakegt said:

Reading the forums, I've seen some pretty heated debate about how a player should be able to opt-out of an allies ability. For Limbo's banish, you roll. For Volt's Dash, you backflip. Some people like the former, some people like the latter. Personally, I like to backflip opt-out of abilities so I don't do it on accident (most of the time).

Instead of building these opt-outs into ability, why not let players decide how they want to opt out? In the gameplay settings menu, there could be a setting that switch between any number of things (rolling, backflipping, bullet-jumping, keyboard/controller bindings, etc). This allows players to customize how they interact with teammates in a way that's suitable to their play style.

To take it a step further, there could be a drop down menu so that specific abilities have different opt-out bindings. Maybe I want to opt out of Banish with a bullet-jump, but opt-out of Lightning Dash with a backflip. 

The abilities are not balanced around how other players can get out of their effects, so I can't really see this negatively impacting gameplay.

Thoughts?

It got moved over to Fan Concepts when I posted a serious proposition here, and as functional things tend to do over there, fell into obscurity among the endless cavalcade of people spouting their fantasies of shiny things with pictures.

/shrug

[drakegt]

5 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

It got moved over to Fan Concepts when I posted a serious proposition here, and as functional things tend to do over there, fell into obscurity among the endless cavalcade of people spouting their fantasies of shiny things with pictures.

/shrug

That's bizarre... your post was feedback to solve a problem, not a "Fan Concept".

I agree with your original post that denying an ability's effect could be an option, but I think it could be a little bit more flexible than an on/off switch.

[TheLexiConArtist]

2 minutes ago, drakegt said:

That's bizarre... your post was feedback to solve a problem, not a "Fan Concept".

I agree with your original post that denying an ability's effect could be an option, but I think it could be a little bit more flexible than an on/off switch.

Yeah, I know. I tried petitioning a mod through the report function to have it moved back, but it was either silently refused or hasn't been seen yet.

 

My view with escaping the abilities is that anything the receiving player has to do is an impediment to gameplay (that can repeatedly happen outside of their control), which is why my suggestions are varying flavours of "nipping the problem in the bud" - to remove unwanted influences.

Things like Banish might still have their roll-to-escape functionality as well (or whatever binding as per your suggestion) for players who want to operate with the buff as a possibility (even legitimate Banishment occasionally needs to be cut short), but I feel like it's important to not burden anyone who doesn't want anything to do with it with constant manoeuvres or disallowing them to play in public wherein they may encounter the frame in question.