Request: More power cancellers

[Jiminez_Burial]

1 hour ago, Ryunokage said:

It stands to reason that other players are going to recognise this, and only pull out a power canceller if they should chance upon someone who is doing something that irrevocably damages their game experience.

Chaos, bastille, molecular prime, these are all abilities that help, rather then hinder gameplay. I see little reason for them to use a canceller in the face of those skills, since it does not force passivity on them as compared to WoF, Stasis or soundquake.

I'm just going to point out a VERY bit crack in the arguments you are making.  You claim "to be better" than other people, but then you claim that "it stands to reason that other players are going to recognize this" effectively saying they (in your mind) will think like you which is the equivalent of saying they are the same as you in terms of reasoning.

You've made the argument that you are of a higher intellect and from what I can tell you are therefore claiming that your logic must be right.....  but it doesn't work that way.

You claim a significant difference from most people but even I who values myself as an intellectual (saying I value intelligence, this itself is not a claim of superiority - though you won't have to wait long for that), am on the higher end of the intelligence scale due to having an incredibly high functioning form of autism, and looks at situations from a purely logical perspective can't disagree with you more.  Get your head out of your &#! you self entitled brat.

Yes I agree that something more could be done to lessen the annoyances people like you have due to - in your own words - abilities that force passiveness, but what you are suggesting is not civility enforced by Mutually Assured Destruction, it is a tool of mass disruption that could be wielded by anyone (even those people you obviously have disdain for) which would result in mass conflicts tearing the Warframe community apart.  What you want to do would be comparable to the USA government nuking the entirety of America in order to stop the spreading of a small common cold outbreak that had been reported in ONLY one suburban community somewhere in Nevada.

[SilencerMuto]

Give us cancel skill power so I can go in-game and cancel everyone skill. Please DE. See mesa in sortie that spam 4 boom I use weapon to cancel it and see him die.. lol.. if I see ivara invisible I can cancel her Invisibility when she close to enemy.  This would make this game much better... Yessssss...... Totally uninstall the game after that. 

 

[Ryunokage]

1 hour ago, Wiz3rd said:

So all I could gather from this thread is that OP is narcisstic, cannot possibly bear other people having fun THEIR way, and is overall ignorant, trying to sound all intelligent and refined without realising no one wants to hear his elitist remarks.

You have summed up the underlying issue that makes compromise in warframe impossible to achieve without some threat that players can wield over one another. If no one wants to listen to an argument or be willing to reach a compromise, however reasoned or not, force is always the next step. Players like myself, who find methods like limbo's stasis, or anything else in that vein, to be distasteful, have no means of reclaiming our time and effort spent thus far. Hence we will always fall on the losing side of any in game disputes.

Other players are going to pay any such requests a greater deal of attention if it means that the person being dumped upon can pull the rug from under everyone's feet.

@Starfreak911

1. Less civilised people tend to recognise very well the concept of force and how to negotiate to avoid its use. I'm presuming that this holds true for warframe's community, especially those incapable or disinclined to heed the concerns of the people around them.

2. A high functioning autistic is colloquially known as the "idiot-savant", i trust that you do not need me to expound on the term or its etymology.

3. The warframe community is already polarised between people like myself, who cleave to what i can only describe as "honest" gameplay. And those who simply want easy rewards for everything they do. Ergo, its already ripped apart, especially by the actions of the latter who can very much act with impunity and without fear for retaliation. Providing power cancellers merely balances the scales and gives people on my side of the divide a position of equal strength to negotiate from. For those like myself, there is much to gain and very little to lose. While you are not wrong in saying that there will be vermin who will use power cancellers indiscriminately for misery's sake...

• Its a p2p lobby game, automatically divides the population by region and then subdivides that region by connectivity.
• There are only a limited population within each aforementioned region.
• Ignore lists exist and can be used to screen out undesirables.
• Vermin will quickly alienate everyone in their region, everyone outside of their region will have ping rates that make for a less then ideal experience.
• Ergo, self-resolving problem.

4. I consider my independence and free agency of far greater import then any community's idea of cohesiveness. The inverse of my preference ultimately results in communism or socialism, something I detest with every fibre of my being.

5. Do you have an alternative that

• Is immediately available
• Can be kept up to date with emerging exploits and player behaviours as they occur
• Can be employed without delay
• Possess sufficient power to curb and shape player behaviour?

If you do, I would like to hear it. Until then, I see no better alternative then what I have already suggested.

@Serien5

When you devise a metric that is as repeatable and reproducible as the IQ test, with scores that provide a better predictive value for intelligence and abstract reasoning, I'll use it.

In the absence of anything better, i'll stick with what's been validated, thank you.

[PsionicSt0rm]

Here's the thing, while I understand that you are trying to attempt to give more control back to non-ability users (for lack of a better label) they have every "right" (as much as there is in an online shooter) to do as they please just as much as you have the "right" to also not conform to their meta. 

However, the fact of the matter is that the meta is mostly defined by the players and not by DE. DE may try and shape the meta by nerfing "abusive mechanics" such as [Mirage + Simulor] or [Radial Javelin Excal]. But it is clear that the "gofastclearspeed" meta is here to stay. Even if we could shoot nullifier bubbles at team mates, at best is that they do conform, more often than not is that they will just leave, or they will become more salty and threads like these would appear but in favour of nullifying weapons etc.

Also, the purpose of MAD succeeded because both sides would know that if they fire, there is no future - no significant after struggle. It would literally be the end of the world. Applications of MAD to a game like Warframe just wouldn't work as well since both sides can still speak and interact. Even if neither side is having "fun" the game hasn't ended. What it does is tip the scales in favour of the "non-ability user" as the "ability user" does not have a way of combating it. This would be more of an arms race than a MAD situation since MAD ends in both sides losing.

 

1 hour ago, Ryunokage said:

4. I consider my independence and free agency of far greater import then any community's idea of cohesiveness...

 

• Possess sufficient power to curb and shape player behaviour?

I find this somewhat ironic as your desire to shape player behaviour is exactly what the meta is trying to impose on you. This also defeats the point of playing Public random groups as it is assumed that there is to be some sort of base level cohesion, which is the meta. Beyond that requires communication and agreement between people; something that you claim to be on the losing side of. If the solution requires "reconditioning" of player attitudes, then what standard should be chosen? Who would be exempt from this process.

Simply put, if you don't like co-op cohesion, express that freedom in solo. If you do like co-op cohesion, then you are also free to choose a pre-made team or clan who share the same opinion. Either way, DE cares a lot about the community despite your distaste for it, and it doesn't seem like they would do something this drastic.

[CeePee]

There's a reason the game doesn't have a kick function, this same reason applies to why we don't need players being able to cancel each others powers.

[rand0mname]

Why so few bother with something more then simple no?

I was thinking that for someone of your intellect it will be obvious that there is something wrong with a solution for something that stops everyone from using range weapons being an abilty that will stop everyone from using their Warframe powers.

Players like you are pretty rare, but they are notorious enough to be recognizable and known to be very adamant in their views. You think that your rules should apply to everyone because "fair play", "cheap tactics" and "no challenge". You seem to not be able to comprehend that if you will cancel Embers WoF she is NOT going to be "considerate" and will follow you around and cancel your powers non-stop. Why would she not? Her idea of fun and you just ruined it.

Waaaaaait...

Annoyed by a fact that no one plays by his own personal rules? Check.

Absolute confidence that he/she is right and the world is too stupid to admit that? Check.

Dislike and contempt for Tenno while probably being one? Check!

Wants to spam power canceling abilities? CHECK!

Ladies and Gentlemen we found the young Stalker!

So, how do you find working for the Sentients (the one who played a big role in that Orokin massacre you are so angry about) so far?

Edited May 30, 2017 by rand0mname
Spelllling.

[Ryunokage]

11 minutes ago, HiMeToEu said:

Here's the thing, while I understand that you are trying to attempt to give more control back to non-ability users (for lack of a better label) they have every "right" (as much as there is in an online shooter) to do as they please just as much as you have the "right" to also not conform to their meta. 

However, the fact of the matter is that the meta is mostly defined by the players and not by DE. DE may try and shape the meta by nerfing "abusive mechanics" such as [Mirage + Simulor] or [Radial Javelin Excal]. But it is clear that the "gofastclearspeed" meta is here to stay. Even if we could shoot nullifier bubbles at team mates, at best is that they do conform, more often than not is that they will just leave, or they will become more salty and threads like these would appear but in favour of nullifying weapons etc.

Also, the purpose of MAD succeeded because both sides would know that if they fire, there is no future - no significant after struggle. It would literally be the end of the world. Applications of MAD to a game like Warframe just wouldn't work as well since both sides can still speak and interact. Even if neither side is having "fun" the game hasn't ended. What it does is tip the scales in favour of the "non-ability user" as the "ability user" does not have a way of combating it. This would be more of an arms race than a MAD situation since MAD ends in both sides losing.

Finally, a reasoned argument.

To your first point, the current balance is power is skewed to favour people who abuse mechanics. Abilities can't be reversed by anything players do, while they in turn ultimately dictate how we might engage in any particular mission, soundquake in a small defense map for example. Once another player activates it, it immediately removes the sense of tension that danger brings, while at the same time removing anything at all for me to engage with, there are no enemies in sight, nothing to shoot and nothing to do but sit around and wait. More-over there's nothing that I can do if someone like that were to join my game, i'm forced to do as he pleases or leave.

Implementing a power canceller, as you describe, would indeed shift the balance of power. And impose the same penalties upon meta-users that already exist on people who do not wish to. In this regard, there rights of either party may be better balanced, since both now share an equal measure of power.

Moreover its a power that both possess, a meta-user would have the same access to power cancellers as anyone else. And people like myself will often depend on the occasional use of powers to succeed, thus they have the power to stop me as I might stop them. And while you are right that MAD in that context involves utter annihilation, few people would be happy to lose all the effort, time and expended consumables and start over. The risks and rewards remain in proportion.

To your 2nd point. Even if the meta is defined by players seeking to "gofastclearspeed" the consequences of their behaviour are for all of us to bear. Look at the hema as a good example, would DE have set the mutagen cost so high if they knew players we not intentionally gaming the system enmass to farm with minimal effort and engagement? Or would they need to alter existing weapon mechanics, at the detriment to normal users, just to curtail those who use the meta? Look at real world examples, like drug abuse, smoking or alcohol, the consequences to the community far outweigh and outstrip the burdens faced by the individuals responsible in the first place. If you have more people willing to impose the use of violence and force on smokers for example, who is to say that they are wrong in doing so, smoking imposes a harm to health to anyone near by, why should we not have the right to harm the other person in defense?

11 minutes ago, HiMeToEu said:

I find this somewhat ironic as your desire to shape player behaviour is exactly what the meta is trying to impose on you. This also defeats the point of playing Public random groups as it is assumed that there is to be some sort of base level cohesion, which is the meta. Beyond that requires communication and agreement between people; something that you claim to be on the losing side of. If the solution requires "reconditioning" of player attitudes, then what standard should be chosen? Who would be exempt from this process.

Simply put, if you don't like co-op cohesion, express that freedom in solo. If you do like co-op cohesion, then you are also free to choose a pre-made team or clan who share the same opinion. Either way, DE cares a lot about the community despite your distaste for it, and it doesn't seem like they would do something this drastic.

I take the same standard that i exercise when encountering other people in a public space. It is there for all to use and all of us should there fore behave in a manner that does not adversely affect another person, when that compact is broken, there are consequences like becoming confronted, often violently if a person were to remain stubborn. Hence there should be no exemptions and that standard should apply to everyone.

Solo significantly detracts from the game experience. Co-op cohesion does not work for my region, DE in its overzealousness to localise the game into a multitude of languages, has made it all but impossible trying to communicate in channels more often then not, flooded by people with whom i cannot communicate, and i certainly consider learning so isolated as bahasa malaysia, bahasa indonesia, tagalot, mandrin and the like to a colossal waste of my time.

[IceColdHawk]

20 hours ago, Ryunokage said:

• My money, my machine, my bandwidth, my time. If i don't get a return on my investment(ie fun), all those resources are wasted.

After further reading this thread and shaking my head multiple times, i think you should be more worried about your keyboard longevity, honestly. And if you actually value your time, you would finally admit that this idea isn't going anywhere...

17 hours ago, Ryunokage said:

I am always willing to compromise if a convincing argument is made. None of you have made convincing arguments.

Just because you don't like the arguments because they don't agree with your idea of ruining everyone's enjoyment doesn't mean there are none. Go read the posts again. We don't have to write essays and repeat the discussion for 100 pages straight.

Also who are you to tell us that we need to convince you? The only one who needs to be convinced is DE. And i'm fairly sure they won't be convinced by an idea that kills their game.

7 hours ago, Ryunokage said:

You cannot argue against emotion or any other personal experience, throwing out emotion into a debate is sure and certain way to kill it.

Says the one who gets so emotional about their fun, that they resort to ideas that ruin pretty much everyone's game but your own. So yeah, you pretty much killed your own discussion.

7 hours ago, Ryunokage said:

And I don't think i'm superior to the people I often run into on warframe, I know I am.

And i know for a fact that you are wrong and that you won't get anywhere with this idea.

Seriously, drop it, value your poor keyboard and time as you say it and drop it already. You might have experienced lots in life. You also might have a well-paying job. But you definitely don't understand how coop gaming works. Not with that egoistic mindset.

[aidan890]

Hey All,

As many of you have predicted I am going to go ahead and lock this post. The discussion here has devolved beyond anything useful or constructive and that is not how we like to do things on this forum. I would like to remind you all to read up on the community guidelines before posting in the future and also remind you that there is no point in continuing participation in a destructive argument. It is always better to move on to new topics.

Thanks all,

[DE]Aidan