No idea when self reviving was added. Do not like.

[Troll_Logic]

Not a good addition.

[PsiWarp]

But why?

[FerroCutem]

Just don't press x when down.

[Neo3602]

You could always self revive, all the change did was make it so you could choose to skip the bleedout timer.

[motorfirebox]

Then don't use it...?

[NekroArts]

It's good to use in situations where your teammate(s) are occupied with something else and can't help you, but it's clear that you need to get back up asap. Perfect example that happen to me before this was implemented: a sortie mobile defense where we were swarmed by corpus and three of us were downed; the fourth could not help us because he needed to protect the terminal. Our secondaries weren't doing enough to help him and soon we failed the mission.

Edited August 8, 2017 by NekroArts

[Troll_Logic]

8 minutes ago, NekroArts said:

Perfect example that happen to me before this was implemented: a sortie mobile defense where we were swarmed by corpus and three of us were downed; the fourth could not help us because he needed to protect the terminal. Our secondaries weren't doing enough to help him and soon we failed the mission.

Exactly.  That's the point.  There should be some penalty. It happens rarely but there should be a penalty when things really go wrong.  As of now, there isn't.  The teams revives as fast as possible.

 

Now, if DE wanted to add a mod for a single or double revive mod so a sentinel or pet could revive, that would be different.

 

19 minutes ago, FerroCutem said:

Just don't press x when down.

 

10 minutes ago, motorfirebox said:

Then don't use it...?

Missing the point.  It significantly changes gameplay as the example above shows.  Sometimes things aren't as simple as "Don't use it."  What if DE added unlimited magazine ammo and never required a reload.  Would the game be the same if "someone just decide not to use it?"

[DatDarkOne]

WTF?!?!  I QoL change happened and you're complaining about it?  I don't see anything wrong with it or how it could be bad.  

edit:  Oh yeah, there is a down side.  You lose a revive.  Getting rez'd you don't.  :D

Edited August 8, 2017 by DatDarkOne
additional info

[Nez-Kal]

Here's why it was added:

A: "Crap! I'm down!"

B: "Seriously?! We needed you here though! Ugh. Well, there's no one near you, so just die and Revive and haul *ss over here so we don't all die as well and lose this thing!"

A: "Uh, I WOULD, but your buddy's stupid Oberon's Renewel is keeping me on a literal minute long Down Timer!"

B: "What?! Sh*t!!! Well.......Sh*t!"

 

Now you have the option to hurry your downed state, get back up, and get to your teammates. I see literally no reason to complain about this system, as it fixed a VERY major problem for competitive players and situations like the one above. And.....you LITERALLY DON'T HAVE TO PUSH "X" when you're downed. This is your Choice. The game gave you more Choices. You're literally complaining about being given more Freedom in the game and your play-style.

 

[NekroArts]

12 minutes ago, Troll_Logic said:

Exactly.  That's the point.  There should be some penalty. It happens rarely but there should be a penalty when things really go wrong.  As of now, there isn't.  The teams revives as fast as possible.

Now why would you want a penalty on something that's to help players in tight situations? Is this idea too lax for being able to quickly get back up?

Edited August 8, 2017 by NekroArts

[BaIthazar]

11 minutes ago, Troll_Logic said:

Now, if DE wanted to add a mod for a single or double revive mod so a sentinel or pet could revive, that would be different.

no god please no.
nobody wants more useless mods taking up slots.
nobody would use this mod

[Nez-Kal]

Just now, NekroArts said:

Now why would you want a penalty on something that's to help players in tight situations? Is this idea so lax for being able to quickly get back up?

He's probably also is one of those guys who supports the "We should lose our Warframes when we fail a mission" or "Remove Vacuum entirely from that game because it wastes a mod slot to add it in" folks. Just.....don't give him anymore attention than you already have.

[Troll_Logic]

1 minute ago, Tangent-Valley said:

He's probably also is one of those guys who supports the "We should lose our Warframes when we fail a mission" 

You're wrong

 

1 minute ago, Tangent-Valley said:

"Remove Vacuum entirely from that game because it wastes a mod slot to add it in" folks.

And wrong again.

That usually happens when someone assumes something to "prove" his opinion.

[Troll_Logic]

4 minutes ago, NekroArts said:

Now why would you want a penalty on something that's to help players in tight situations? Is this idea too lax for being able to quickly get back up?

I explained my reasoning above.

[Nez-Kal]

1 minute ago, Troll_Logic said:

You're wrong

 

And wrong again.

That usually happens when someone assumes something to "prove" his opinion.

Shush. Shhhhhhhhhhh..............I'm making you into a Strawman to create support for my opinions~

Edited August 8, 2017 by Tangent-Valley

[Troll_Logic]

8 minutes ago, Tangent-Valley said:

Now you have the option to hurry your downed state, get back up, and get to your teammates. I see literally no reason to complain about this system, as it fixed a VERY major problem for competitive players and situations like the one above. And.....you LITERALLY DON'T HAVE TO PUSH "X" when you're downed. This is your Choice. The game gave you more Choices. You're literally complaining about being given more Freedom in the game and your play-style.

I explained why I didn't like in the example above.  I also explained why it's important in the example above and in your example.  I also provided an example of a chnage that will affect the game even if someone decides not to use it.

[Troll_Logic]

2 minutes ago, Tangent-Valley said:

Shush. Shhhhhhhhhhh..............I'm making you into a Strawman to create support for my opinions~

I don't think strawman means what you think it does.

 

 

Pssst.....

Getting called out because your're accusing someone of supporting ridiculous things just so you can "invalidate" their opinion isn't a strawman.

Anyways, you probably like to kill hobos and kick puppies so people shouldn't give you any more attention.  (See how stupid that sounds)

[BaIthazar]

you're complaining about a QoL change.

a minor change that involves you pressing a button that you could just as easily not press if you wanted to

Edited August 8, 2017 by BaIthazar

[Nez-Kal]

5 minutes ago, Troll_Logic said:

I explained why I didn't like in the example above.  I also explained why it's important in the example above and in your example.  I also provided an example of a chnage that will affect the game even if someone decides not to use it.

Heh. Actually:

" Not a good addition. "

That was your entire OP opinion and feedback on the issue. Forum Commenters are not expected to read through you comments and replies AFTER the Original Post to see how your opinions were explained out to other commenters, especially when they begin their comment around the time the post first started, wrote out their reply to it, hit "Submit Reply", and suddenly found it buried under a mountain of other comments just posted because they took so long to think it over and type out their opinion on the issue.

Or, should I have just hurried my message and posted something like: "Lol no you stupid whut dumb OP is dumb"
That certainly would have taken much less effort and time for sure.

 

EDIT: Yes. It took me half an hour to write my original comment. I had to go in-game and see how long my Oberon's Renewel's BleedOut Timer was for my example. Had to be thorough.

Edited August 8, 2017 by Tangent-Valley

[Kaokasalis]

4 minutes ago, Troll_Logic said:

I explained why I didn't like in the example above.  I also explained why it's important in the example above and in your example.  I also provided an example of a chnage that will affect the game even if someone decides not to use it.

You didn't explain anything. You just said there should be a penalty based on your own opinion that you find the game to easy, with the lowest amount of effort possible. Its because that you aren't properly justifying it that people wont understand you.

[BaIthazar]

2 minutes ago, Tangent-Valley said:

-snip-

what Tangent said..

if your thread forced commenters to post

"but why?"

for more information, than your thread needs more work

[Troll_Logic]

2 minutes ago, Tangent-Valley said:

Or, should I have just hurried my message and posted something like: "Lol no you stupid whut dumb OP is dumb"
That certainly would have taken much less effort and time for sure.

That would have been a better reply than the one where you made baseless accusations. 

 

3 minutes ago, BaIthazar said:

you're complaining about a QoL change.

a minor change that involves you pressing a button that you could just as easily not press if you wanted to

Nope.  Again, it changes the game whether the player chooses to use it or not.

[Nez-Kal]

Hey Moderators. This post is obviously just click bait and "Opinion Smashing", and just seems to be devolving from there. Think it's time to delete it yet?

Edited August 8, 2017 by Tangent-Valley

[Troll_Logic]

Just now, Hieracon said:

You didn't explain anything. You just said there should be a penalty based on your own opinion that you find the game to easy, with the lowest amount of effort possible.

Nice.  You're trying to discredit my opinion by saying I'm saying that  I'm claiming I'm elitist.

I said no such thing.

[Flaezon]

I'm just here for the comments.