Fewer, but tougher enemies?

[SangosTophat]

I was thinking about the Ignis, the Simular(?) and the many AoE warframe skills...I thought you'd want to know.

Nah, just joshing. Anyway, and I was thinking about how single target weapons seem so completely...suboptimal, despite requiring more effort. Sure, you can kill things with a single shot...but there are still 49 other things all trying to melee you. This is particularly troublesome with the slower weapons such as Bows and the Opticore. "Oh, look that guy not only killed the entire screen in the time it took me to charge...but also killed the one guy I was aiming at..."

The Soma requires taking at least a bit of time to see what you're aiming at, and shoot (or fire wildly if a crowd is dense enough, since it's automatic). Meanwhile the guy with the Ignis just holds down the fire button and spins in a circle....and that's actually more effective. And let's not forget that you may as well just AFK if someone brought that passively-kill-everything-with-fire warframe.

Don't get me wrong. I want brain dead options to be viable. Hell, there are times that I enjoy it for being brain dead. But with the sheer vastness of the roster of guns...very, very few are of the brain dead variety, which makes for a very lackluster gameplay loop, where you're collecting loot to build...objectively inferior weapons, which you need to swap to in order to level up. Yes. We know that the weapons are intentionally not balanced. But it would be nice if the brain dead options weren't the *best* options.

But, there's a situation where I feel it's not completely gimping myself to take a Soma Prime over an Ignis, Assassination missions. Primarily because you are fighting relatively few if any side enemies. But, you can still just point in the general direction of your assassination target, and do relatively decent damage with an Ignis, or actually have to aim, and do quite a bit better damage with the Soma.

So, I don't propose nerfing or buffing any guns (even if that request would ever be heard), but just collecting the same amount of health in to a fewer number of bodies (maybe up each individual unit's damage proportionally as well). This would increase the number of at least workably viable guns, even if doesn't shift around the tier list.

 

Also, this could just be confirmation bias, but I just recently watched someone live stream of someone playing the new Mass Effect multiplayer, which basically spawned the majority of moderate threat creatures, though in relatively small numbers compared to Warframe where you get swarms of trivial threat enemies. There wasn't the blanket of enemies surrounding any high threat target, and people seemed to enjoy that.

[Trichouette]

Devs can't decide between mass enemies with some strong ones and fewer but tougher enemies.

Instead we have both, low level is filled with puny meatbags and very high level is just armored tanks everywhere.

 

And this is why snipers are completely useless compared to stuff like tonkor/simulor

I would prefer fewer but tougher enemies that require skill and optimization to be slain instead of what we currently have...

Edited March 18, 2017 by Trichouette

[CherryPauper]

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. You're saying that we should have fewer enemies, but they have to be stronger? I read your post and understand that you are frustrated that "brain-dead" AOE weapons are far more effective than anything else, but I don't see how your proposed solution of "collecting the same amount of health in to a fewer number of bodies" will solve that. I don't see how this would give non-AOE weapons a better chance at being more viable over AOE weapons. 

Fewer enemies means that AOE weapons (which already do insane damage) will eat up those enemies and still leave you with nothing. And buffing enemy health without buffing weapons would be a bad idea for those newer players who are just starting out.

Edited March 18, 2017 by CherryPauper

[Voltage]

"tougher" in DE terms means BS like nullifiers. I welcome mini bosses that are actually challenging on top of the hoards, but we do not need less enemies but mostly corpus techs + nullifiers.

[SangosTophat]

So, how's bout I try and explain it, then?

You're not buffing or nerfing enemies. If you reduce the number of enemies by 1/2, and double their health/damage (just as an example), then you're still working through the same health, and taking the same damage.

The amount of damage AOE weapons do is a factor of [base damage] times [enemies hit]. Thus, reducing the number of enemies, reduces enemies hit. 

The largest delay for Single Target weapons is the target acquisition (finding and aiming at a target). AoE weapons have a much lesser target acquisition phase, because all they need to do is see there's something in that general direction, and press the trigger. Again, this is fine, but it shouldn't be the best way to play (in my opinion). With 50 enemies, you're in that phase 50 times with a single target weapon (while an AoE weapon might only have to be in that phase 4-5 times, because it can hit and kill 10 with each "aim"). If the number of enemies were reduced to 25, there's more firing, and less delay. Lining up 25 head shots is going to take less time than 50 head shots. (It's generally easier to keep aim on a head, than to swap to a different creature's head, from personal experience.)

And, AoE weapons do just that. AoE damage. They struggle a bit against really strong single targets. But that's supposed to be the point. And for charge-weapons, there's little point to dealing 10k damage to something, if it only has 1k health.

[SangosTophat]

47 minutes ago, --Q--Voltage said:

"tougher" in DE terms means BS like nullifiers. I welcome mini bosses that are actually challenging on top of the hoards, but we do not need less enemies but mostly corpus techs + nullifiers.

I agree, Nullifiers are really just not fun, especially for warframes that rely on self buffs, because shields don't seem to care about damage taken or speed of attacks, just the amount of time it's being attacked, and gets buggy when it's nearly run out (an assertion based on nothing but personal experience, and having no in-game feedback about it).

But what you're saying is not what's being proposed.

Edited March 18, 2017 by SangosTophat

[Azamagon]

This is a big general problem with Warframe in general, and I feel it is kinda hard to point a finger at the main issue. Maybe because it has many issues? A lack of overarcing direction in regards to the combat balance? I mean, look at these:
1) The RPG nature of having scaling levels
2) The enemy design.
3) Weapon and ammo design.
4) Warframe abilities

The fact that scaling levels exist means that you can't balance anything correctly. On low levels, something like an ignis can destroy EVERYTHING, even the heavy units. So, already there you notice a glaring issue.

Then, the difference in enemies (as in heavy vs light) feels like it's too reliant on elemental damage modding, and they don't feel anywhere near different enough. Why bring a single target focused weapon (like a Sniper), when you can so easily spray it with an assault rifle using the right mods?

Add to the fact that the game is either far to scarce in regards to number of heavy units on the field, or they are completely SWARMING. It has no fine balance whatosever.

Then look at the weapons themselves weapons.
Submachine guns, great for hordes, but with abysmal amounts ammo. So they lose their anti-weakling point and are looked upon as "mastery fodder".
Then you have the snipers, with limitted ammo and very slow to use. Why use them when a DMR, or even just an assault rifle, does just fine against heavies (or better), while also being good against hordes?
Then you have other superpowerful oneshotting weaponry, like Opticor and Ferrox etc, with near unlimited ammo. Since they are so ammo efficient, you can spam them nonstop. But, due to there being so many enemies, it is useless anyway, because you can't kill quickly enough.

Then you get to the AoE weapons, especially weapons like Synoid Simulor: Easy to restore ammo. Huge AoE with no need to really aim. Damage is more than good enough to take care of heavies, not mention that it can permastagger them. Why use anything else (aside from not wanting to fall asleep from boredom)?

The weapon balance in this game is one of the worst I've seen many shooters.

Add in the horrible Warframe balancing and no wonder the game is considered impossible to balance. It's a surprise the game hasn't crumbled upon itself yet.

I... actually have no idea where I'm going with this. Just throwing out things that bother me I guess? I'm tired :P

Only last thing I'd like to say is: Look at games like Killing Floor and Brutal Doom. Those are good games. No need for scaling levels. Just awesome fun, with generally balanced weaponry. Meh. Good night xD

[(XBOX)Grimsley Clause]

Isn't this a hoarde game though?

[Doomsknightmare]

DE should listen to this, its a good advice

[.Murk.]

How about better punch through range on all mods and punchthrough actively seeks closest targets in a cone behind the target from initial trajectory and or a mod that ricochets bullet off enemies into nearby enemies instead of less enemies oh and more native punch through on certain weapons

Edited March 18, 2017 by Murkar

[Azamagon]

29 minutes ago, Murkar said:

How about better punch through range on all mods and punchthrough actively seeks closest targets in a cone behind the target from initial trajectory and or a mod that ricochets bullet off enemies into nearby enemies instead of less enemies oh and more native punch through on certain weapons

This is another way, yes.

You can either make the enemies more "quality over quantity" (as per the op's suggestion), or you can make the weapons better at taking out many enemies at once (Snipers, in particular, we are looking at you!). Either one is a good idea. Considering how this game has developed though, I guess the latter (improving weapons to be better against hordes) is a more viable route.

[SangosTophat]

1 hour ago, (Xbox One)ALG Minuscule36 said:

Isn't this a hoarde game though?

Yes. Being a horde game, however, does not mean having so many that it makes single target weapons pointless.

 

55 minutes ago, Murkar said:

How about better punch through range on all mods and punchthrough actively seeks closest targets in a cone behind the target from initial trajectory and or a mod that ricochets bullet off enemies into nearby enemies instead of less enemies oh and more native punch through on certain weapons

I personally like Punch Through as it is. It's quite satisfying to double/triple headshot some fools. Although, perhaps have overkill damage give innate punchthrough? A mod that gives ricochet/arcing damage probably would be nice, though it would just make some AoE weapons better which probably wasn't the goal.

23 minutes ago, Azamagon said:

This is another way, yes.

You can either make the enemies more "quality over quantity" (as per the op's suggestion), or you can make the weapons better at taking out many enemies at once (Snipers, in particular, we are looking at you!). Either one is a good idea. Considering how this game has developed though, I guess the latter (improving weapons to be better against hordes) is a more viable route.

I'm glad someone understood my stream of consciousness :)

1 hour ago, Doomerang said:

DE should listen to this, its a good advice

Thanks

1 hour ago, Azamagon said:

This is a big general problem with Warframe in general, and I feel it is kinda hard to point a finger at the main issue. Maybe because it has many issues? A lack of overarcing direction in regards to the combat balance? I mean, look at these:
1) The RPG nature of having scaling levels
2) The enemy design.
3) Weapon and ammo design.
4) Warframe abilities

The fact that scaling levels exist means that you can't balance anything correctly. On low levels, something like an ignis can destroy EVERYTHING, even the heavy units. So, already there you notice a glaring issue.

Then, the difference in enemies (as in heavy vs light) feels like it's too reliant on elemental damage modding, and they don't feel anywhere near different enough. Why bring a single target focused weapon (like a Sniper), when you can so easily spray it with an assault rifle using the right mods?

Add to the fact that the game is either far to scarce in regards to number of heavy units on the field, or they are completely SWARMING. It has no fine balance whatosever.

Then look at the weapons themselves weapons.
Submachine guns, great for hordes, but with abysmal amounts ammo. So they lose their anti-weakling point and are looked upon as "mastery fodder".
Then you have the snipers, with limitted ammo and very slow to use. Why use them when a DMR, or even just an assault rifle, does just fine against heavies (or better), while also being good against hordes?
Then you have other superpowerful oneshotting weaponry, like Opticor and Ferrox etc, with near unlimited ammo. Since they are so ammo efficient, you can spam them nonstop. But, due to there being so many enemies, it is useless anyway, because you can't kill quickly enough.

Then you get to the AoE weapons, especially weapons like Synoid Simulor: Easy to restore ammo. Huge AoE with no need to really aim. Damage is more than good enough to take care of heavies, not mention that it can permastagger them. Why use anything else (aside from not wanting to fall asleep from boredom)?

The weapon balance in this game is one of the worst I've seen many shooters.

Add in the horrible Warframe balancing and no wonder the game is considered impossible to balance. It's a surprise the game hasn't crumbled upon itself yet.

I... actually have no idea where I'm going with this. Just throwing out things that bother me I guess? I'm tired :P

Only last thing I'd like to say is: Look at games like Killing Floor and Brutal Doom. Those are good games. No need for scaling levels. Just awesome fun, with generally balanced weaponry. Meh. Good night xD

A lot of good points. Although levels, I feel, don't really take away from the game. As some MMO players like to say, "It's nice to go back to some guy who was kicking your ***, and just do the same to them but 5x worse." I think they are just taking out RL frustrations though, lol. Also, their business model is "Pay us money to skip the grind for the most powerful gear," and levels facilitate that. Killing Floor is a Buy to Play game, so they don't need to keep you playing after you've bought it. They got their money. Also, some people like the grind (not me, but the gameplay, when I'm not sick and tired of the Ignis, keeps me engaged). 

So long as there's still a challenge somewhere when you reach max level, and it actually gives a decent reward for the effort, what's it matter? 

Edited March 19, 2017 by SangosTophat

[(XBOX)Graysmog]

1 hour ago, Azamagon said:

This is a big general problem with Warframe in general, and I feel it is kinda hard to point a finger at the main issue. Maybe because it has many issues? A lack of overarcing direction in regards to the combat balance? I mean, look at these:
1) The RPG nature of having scaling levels
2) The enemy design.
3) Weapon and ammo design.
4) Warframe abilities

The fact that scaling levels exist means that you can't balance anything correctly. On low levels, something like an ignis can destroy EVERYTHING, even the heavy units. So, already there you notice a glaring issue.

Then, the difference in enemies (as in heavy vs light) feels like it's too reliant on elemental damage modding, and they don't feel anywhere near different enough. Why bring a single target focused weapon (like a Sniper), when you can so easily spray it with an assault rifle using the right mods?

Add to the fact that the game is either far to scarce in regards to number of heavy units on the field, or they are completely SWARMING. It has no fine balance whatosever.

Then look at the weapons themselves weapons.
Submachine guns, great for hordes, but with abysmal amounts ammo. So they lose their anti-weakling point and are looked upon as "mastery fodder".
Then you have the snipers, with limitted ammo and very slow to use. Why use them when a DMR, or even just an assault rifle, does just fine against heavies (or better), while also being good against hordes?
Then you have other superpowerful oneshotting weaponry, like Opticor and Ferrox etc, with near unlimited ammo. Since they are so ammo efficient, you can spam them nonstop. But, due to there being so many enemies, it is useless anyway, because you can't kill quickly enough.

Then you get to the AoE weapons, especially weapons like Synoid Simulor: Easy to restore ammo. Huge AoE with no need to really aim. Damage is more than good enough to take care of heavies, not mention that it can permastagger them. Why use anything else (aside from not wanting to fall asleep from boredom)?

The weapon balance in this game is one of the worst I've seen many shooters.

Add in the horrible Warframe balancing and no wonder the game is considered impossible to balance. It's a surprise the game hasn't crumbled upon itself yet.

I... actually have no idea where I'm going with this. Just throwing out things that bother me I guess? I'm tired :P

Only last thing I'd like to say is: Look at games like Killing Floor and Brutal Doom. Those are good games. No need for scaling levels. Just awesome fun, with generally balanced weaponry. Meh. Good night xD

Honestly, I think the first step towards making enemies feel as if they have a sort of "tier" system in mind, would be to have every enemy scale differently and independently based on type. So, for example, weaker enemies don't really get much tougher or stronger (Lancers, Crewmen), and hit a cap on said stats early on, but they make up for it by appearing far more often in clumps and by having consistent, moderate damage with great accuracy at every turn. The problem would then happen to be how to balance that ideology for every enemy, including Mini-Boss and Heavy enemies.

Having it so every enemy just get's tougher and gains more damage over time isn't really helping. I've personally never been a fan of the whole "getting infinitely stronger" schtick with enemies, and I'd prefer to gain more and more traits to make them tougher to take down instead of getting a flat damage and defense boost.

As for weapons like Killing Floor, they're far more easy to balance since they have far fewer resources to work with. No matter what, each gun will always deal a specific amount of damage, and if they don't, they have a far easier to follow progressive path then we do with our abilities, Aura's, Arcanes, summonables and weapons.

Edited March 19, 2017 by (XB1)Graysmog

[(PSN)robotwars7]

2 hours ago, Trichouette said:

Devs can't decide between mass enemies with some strong ones and fewer but tougher enemies.

this^ there are two approaches with games like Warframe:

- a horde-based shooter, where enemies can only use their numbers and whatever weapons they have to swarm your position, but you are a god-like Space Ninja with magic powers who can destroy armies with ease. Dynasty Warriors is supposedly in this vain.

- a tactical game, where you have to work for every single kill against fewer but tougher enemies that actively fight back, and even the smallest unit can potentially kill you. games like Dark Souls and Nioh work like this.

DE haven't yet decided what they wan this to be, though personally I think it should play as advertised, and it so happens it's advertised as the former: you are a badass Space Ninja with crazy powers, futuristic guns and a mastery of all known forms of Martial Arts, and everything else is just cannon fodder with varying degrees of resistance. so technically in this way, tougher units like Bursas and Bombards, as well as power-nullifying units (which btw, aren't in ANY of the trailers) go against what the game is supposed to be about. DE have tried adding in both to try and please everyone and "balance" the game, but it's simply not enough.

perhaps they should have based the game on a system where enemies scale based on the player's Mastery Rank, so higher MR players who have a more diverse and effective arsenal (and arguably more experience and skill) have to face off against tougher mobs to make the game feel more challenging, while lower MR's get lower levels so they can better learn the game and make the initial grind for gear a bit easier until they "git gud", so to speak.

another option could be to give each mission an optional difficulty setting: newer players just looking to complete nodes, do alerts etc. can pick the easier difficulty without being punished unfairly, and the more experienced veterans can pick harder versions of that mission with greater rewards. people who want a challenge have the option to take it, if they want.

it never hurts to have options available.

 

 

[SangosTophat]

1 hour ago, (PS4)robotwars7 said:

this^ there are two approaches with games like Warframe:

- a horde-based shooter, where enemies can only use their numbers and whatever weapons they have to swarm your position, but you are a god-like Space Ninja with magic powers who can destroy armies with ease. Dynasty Warriors is supposedly in this vain.

- a tactical game, where you have to work for every single kill against fewer but tougher enemies that actively fight back, and even the smallest unit can potentially kill you. games like Dark Souls and Nioh work like this.

DE haven't yet decided what they wan this to be, though personally I think it should play as advertised, and it so happens it's advertised as the former: you are a badass Space Ninja with crazy powers, futuristic guns and a mastery of all known forms of Martial Arts, and everything else is just cannon fodder with varying degrees of resistance. so technically in this way, tougher units like Bursas and Bombards, as well as power-nullifying units (which btw, aren't in ANY of the trailers) go against what the game is supposed to be about. DE have tried adding in both to try and please everyone and "balance" the game, but it's simply not enough.

perhaps they should have based the game on a system where enemies scale based on the player's Mastery Rank, so higher MR players who have a more diverse and effective arsenal (and arguably more experience and skill) have to face off against tougher mobs to make the game feel more challenging, while lower MR's get lower levels so they can better learn the game and make the initial grind for gear a bit easier until they "git gud", so to speak.

another option could be to give each mission an optional difficulty setting: newer players just looking to complete nodes, do alerts etc. can pick the easier difficulty without being punished unfairly, and the more experienced veterans can pick harder versions of that mission with greater rewards. people who want a challenge have the option to take it, if they want.

it never hurts to have options available.

You propose a false dichotomy - that there is no in between. You can still be a horde based shooter while still letting non-AoE weapons be viable. It's been done many, many times. You also seem to completely miss the premise of the thread.

Also, god no. Don't scale enemies on Mastery Rank. Why would you want to scale the shooty part of the game off of the "platforming" part? Especially when the game's movement controls are more like suggestions than anything that has any right to have a "platforming" section. But this is off topic anyway.

New players already get lower level missions....they are literally marked with their levels. And new players must unlock the planets to even see the alerts. 

Edited March 19, 2017 by SangosTophat

[(PSN)RenovaKunumaru]

I think the best thing DE can do to fix this issue is for enemy units to have a redesign and for them to have better AI. 

For example:

Instead of Grineer having armor applied to their skin, when you go higher into level, give Grineer actual physical armor that they wear. Make the armor imperfect, showing parts of their vulnerable skin at perhaps the eyes or an arm. 

The current armor scaling we have should apply to only the Grineer armor, granting corrosive proc to rupture the armor and eventually break it. Players with precision may choose not to run corrosive and attempt to challenge their Grineer by shooting their open areas while Tenno of distinction can aimlessly shoot and wear the enemy armor down.

Corpus should be cowardly and tactical applying Reinhart esque shields in front of them when they fight and holding choke points. Magnetic proc should disrupt them. Enemy health should scale in both cases so the enemies aren't too squishy.

That's what I'd do. That way corrosive wouldn't rule and weapon viability should increase in regards to precision weapons. We wouldn't need a massive amount of enemies on the field at once if every firefight has a bit of thinking involved. Then there's melee but nobody wants to hear me go on I'm sure.

 

 

[Blacksonfive]

meaningful combat
thats what i miss from this game

although i like to play emberdozer WoF, it's also nice to have interesting combat mechanics, not always plowing trough minions 99% of the time

[SangosTophat]

1 minute ago, (PS4)RenovaKunumaru said:

I think the best thing DE can do to fix this issue is for enemy units to have a redesign and for them to have better AI. 

For example:

Instead of Grineer having armor applied to their skin, when you go higher into level, give Grineer actual physical armor that they wear. Make the armor imperfect, showing parts of their vulnerable skin at perhaps the eyes or an arm. 

The current armor scaling we have should apply to only the Grineer armor, granting corrosive proc to rupture the armor and eventually break it. Players with precision may choose not to run corrosive and attempt to challenge their Grineer by shooting their open areas while Tenno of distinction can aimlessly shoot and wear the enemy armor down.

Corpus should be cowardly and tactical applying Reinhart esque shields in front of them when they fight and holding choke points. Magnetic proc should disrupt them. Enemy health should scale in both cases so the enemies aren't too squishy.

That's what I'd do. That way corrosive wouldn't rule and weapon viability should increase in regards to precision weapons. We wouldn't need a massive amount of enemies on the field at once if every firefight has a bit of thinking involved. Then there's melee but nobody wants to hear me go on I'm sure.

That might be a way of solving a different problem (although it would certainly be much more work), but it doesn't have much relevance towards this thread.The problem with precision weapons is by no means their damage. It's their lack of ability to keep up with the numbers in the hordes.

[(PSN)RenovaKunumaru]

9 hours ago, SangosTophat said:

That might be a way of solving a different problem (although it would certainly be much more work), but it doesn't have much relevance towards this thread.The problem with precision weapons is by no means their damage. It's their lack of ability to keep up with the numbers in the hordes.

I got lost in my train of thought. I meant for my suggestion to lead to get fewer enemies spawned at once as their level increased as well. 

With fewer enemies spawned and this armor idea, then precision has a role.

Armored targets with these weak points. AoE works but precision is rewarded with quicker and higher damage. 

Combat gets more engaging as players must analyze the thread level of each Target as they appear and potentially take cover. 

Also with this idea we can scale down enemy damage back to something normal as they won't have to worry about being massively killed instantly.

Edited March 19, 2017 by (PS4)RenovaKunumaru

[.Murk.]

2 hours ago, SangosTophat said:

though it would just make some AoE weapons better

Which ones? also they could limit what it works on.

2 hours ago, SangosTophat said:

I personally like Punch Through as it is. It's quite satisfying to double/triple headshot some fools.

the punch through overhaul I was describing would allow for that it would just add a little leeway onto how enemy pathing has become... in the old days enemies walked a straight line and clumped up tight, nowadays they are usually too split up for it to benefit fully/consistently. It would either preserve height or body part and just veer to additional enemies within a reducing cone of each additional trajectory (curving bullets) or be a 1-2m line radius to anything behind the initial enemy (similar to Nidus virulence radius) bouncing to each enemy

Edited March 19, 2017 by Murkar

[.Murk.]

Oh and honestly I do not think there is enough enemies. I also want them to spawn closer by getting dropped off by aircraft or popping out of vents/bunker or hidden in underground cubby holes or in other words I think ambushes would be a nice way to spruce up the difficulty.

[Zeclem]

since when non aoe weapons arent viable?

ok lets see here, sure aoe weapons are strong. but they dont make non aoe weapons "unviable". not even close. what youre saying would mean like %99 of our arsenal is unviable. thats just not the fact.

you wanna make single target weapons compete with aoe weapons? great! cus only snipers as a class suck. rest of the non aoe weapon classes are very much viable, yes even weapons like opticor. proper modding works wonders. and all the snipers need is to fix their damn hipfire accuracy and add innate punchtrough to their shots. there, you just fixed the only firearm class thats actually weak. rest is perfectly fine.

people need to learn what viability is. im fairly sure a good amount on forums do not know it and throw the word around. i also very much like "i want stuff to take skill" whats this skill are we talking about? when devs actually put something that takes skill all people do is complain about how "unfun" it is. prime example is nullifiers. dealing with these require doing something thats not slashing or shooting w/e is in front of you. only change it needed is that drone on the bubble thing, and im very much sure people will still complain about it. another one is bombards. im sorry, but just because it requires you to dodge some shots and move around a little bit doesnt make them "unbalanced". you need to focus on these. deal with w/e is shielding them and all that. if that doesnt require some skill to do, i dont know what does.

[SangosTophat]

Nullifiers suck because they counter buffs, some of which are nontrivial to renew, such as Inaros's scarabs. "OK, well...I could walk in there, and then spend a couple minutes restoring my buff...or I could spend a couple minutes shooting at it as the horde grows exponentially. Fun." 

Now, back to the part from before you veered off to talk about irrelevant stuff on the forums instead of this thread. You might also want to learn capitalization and grammar. It would make your comments easier to read.

And yeah. Most of the weapons (especially the non-prime ones) are mastery fodder, and nothing more, unless you have infinite potatoes, forma, and time to grind out 60+ levels. And even then, the majority of the weapons straight just under perform, because of their nature... Which is what I meant by "suboptimal." The only reason to switch to the single target weapons is from sheer boredom of the AoE ones. You're just straight up not helping anywhere near as much as someone who is using one, even just along the lines of kills, and not status-locking the entire mob. 

And I don't believe anyone even said the non-aoe weapons are "unviable", so not sure who you're quoting. Unless you're talking about where I said "You can still be a horde based shooter while still letting non-AoE weapons be viable". That could probably be construed as implying that this is entirely the case with Warframe. I'll make note of that. 

And no one's asking for things to "take skill", but for single target to be comparable in impact to AoE.

Edited March 19, 2017 by SangosTophat

[SangosTophat]

4 hours ago, Murkar said:

Which ones? also they could limit what it works on.

the punch through overhaul I was describing would allow for that it would just add a little leeway onto how enemy pathing has become... in the old days enemies walked a straight line and clumped up tight, nowadays they are usually too split up for it to benefit fully/consistently. It would either preserve height or body part and just veer to additional enemies within a reducing cone of each additional trajectory (curving bullets) or be a 1-2m line radius to anything behind the initial enemy (similar to Nidus virulence radius) bouncing to each enemy

Well, Ignis for example, unless they coded it to not behave like a hitscan projectile. And generally, if you want a change to happen, it needs to take as little work as possible.They would then after need to remember that this mod exists when they make new weapons. Although, in general, I like the ideas you present. 

[SangosTophat]

4 hours ago, Murkar said:

Oh and honestly I do not think there is enough enemies. I also want them to spawn closer by getting dropped off by aircraft or popping out of vents/bunker or hidden in underground cubby holes or in other words I think ambushes would be a nice way to spruce up the difficulty.

An interesting thought, to be certain.