[NERF] Should be stopped

[XReaperFlameX]

I won't write a thesis on this new topic, but as a true lover and fan of Warframe, I, along with a very large categorical player base believe that Nerfing weapons, Warframes should be stopped, or at the least should be looked into the merits and demerits before nerfing the heck out of them.

Despising anything that is out of reach doesn't make something bad or OP. Getting everything in the game easily would make this game boring fast and it would easily kill the game. The fruit that is out of reach isn't sour.

I strongly believe that creating new content in the game is more important than NERFING AWESOME STUFF in-game.

I fell in love with Warframe like love at first sight. So breaking the game with hopes of building it would be the saddest thing for the future of the game.

DE, please acknowledge my heartiest request (on behalf of the large categorical player base).

 

Thank you for this amazing game.

Edited September 10, 2017 by XReaperFlameX

[NightBlitz]

the people that think that nerfs should be stopped are those that don't understand why they're needed.

[XReaperFlameX]

But you must agree that not all good weapons or Warframes should be nerfed. Right ?

[(XBOX)Grimsley Clause]

I will admit, the way DE goes about nerfing some things could be handled better, but many nerfs are either necessary, either on players or enemies to try to make it so you don't die as fast or ruin the game for other players.

This is why we have, in addition to Nerfs, Buffs. To fix a nerf that went too far. Or to get something into prime nerfing range, so that it may be buffed back up later.

Feel me?

Imagine if we still had Ash's old Bladestorm. Or the old Tonkor. Or Mag's original Pull of death. Or literally other broken item or power. Without Nerfs to tame it and buffs to find a moderation point, there'd be too much chaos.

Edited September 10, 2017 by (XB1)ALG Minuscule36

[XReaperFlameX]

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

I will admit, the way DE goes about nerfing some things could be handled better, but many nerfs are either necessary, either on players or enemies to try to make it so you don't die as fast or ruin the game for other players.

This is why we have, in addition to Nerfs, Buffs. To fix a nerf that went too far. Or to get something into prime nerfing range, so that it may be buffed back up later.

Feel me?

Yeah. I understand that. And my question about that only. Handling nerfs better. Thanks by the way :)

 

[(XBOX)Grimsley Clause]

2 minutes ago, XReaperFlameX said:

Yeah. I understand that. And my question about that only. Handling nerfs better. Thanks by the way :)

 

No problem. I added in some extra info in there by the way, as an example, if you'd pose a second look.

I always enjoy a decent debate.

Edited September 10, 2017 by (XB1)ALG Minuscule36

[XReaperFlameX]

5 minutes ago, (Xbox One)ALG Minuscule36 said:

Imagine if we still had Ash's old Bladestorm. Or the old Tonkor. Or Mag's original Pull of death. Or literally other broken item or power. Without Nerfs to tame it and buffs to find a moderation point, there'd be too much chaos.

 

Agreed. 

[GrumpyTurtles]

Exactly, and not only that,  but the cycle will never end. Once one weapon or frame gets nerfed, another will just take its place and become the new meta. Content should be priority, but I never really minded about the nerfs in general as I do understand dishing out content is an extremely arduous process. The way I see it, nerfs are just there to make players look for the new meta lol. It keeps the game more enticing as well and allows them to explore a variety of more options offered in the game and not just limiting their gameplay experience on just one weapon or frame.

[user_85631]

DE buffs weapons that were mediocre too, the Lex Prime was buffed, Sicarus Prime was buffed, Opticor was buffed.

I had a 6 forma Tonkor that was nerfed because it was used too much by the player base, including me, and that's fine because other weapons should see more play.

[(PSN)CrimsonAxure]

11 minutes ago, (Xbox One)ALG Minuscule36 said:

I will admit, the way DE goes about nerfing some things could be handled better, but many nerfs are either necessary, either on players or enemies to try to make it so you don't die as fast or ruin the game for other players.

This is why we have, in addition to Nerfs, Buffs. To fix a nerf that went too far. Or to get something into prime nerfing range, so that it may be buffed back up later.

Feel me?

Imagine if we still had Ash's old Bladestorm. Or the old Tonkor. Or Mag's original Pull of death. Or literally other broken item or power. Without Nerfs to tame it and buffs to find a moderation point, there'd be too much chaos.

Nox needs a nerf then, I have never been killed by a Nox, but the high armor and health is annoying, and when i kill it, i have to run away as fast as i can, the damage and explosion on death should not be nerfed, but the health and armor needs a nerf

[NightBlitz]

1 minute ago, (PS4)PS_90210 said:

Nox needs a nerf then, I have never been killed by a Nox, but the high armor and health is annoying, and when i kill it, i have to run away as fast as i can, the damage and explosion on death should not be nerfed, but the health and armor needs a nerf

to be fair, nox is kinda supposed to be an elite enemy that makes you think a bit more. or you can just shoot their darn heads off, kills 'em real quick. now what they really need is some kind of actually decent drop...

[-N7-Leonhart]

33 minutes ago, XReaperFlameX said:

But you must agree that not all good weapons or Warframes should be nerfed. Right ?

When "all" of the good ones were nerfed? There are good weapons or Warframes that were never nerfed or otherwise touched.

I would argue that for a few years now, DE nerfs things ONLY when it's absolutely necessary, which is often far too late.

Edited September 10, 2017 by -N7-Leonhart

[Aechmea]

54 minutes ago, NightBlitz said:

the people that think that nerfs should be stopped are those that don't understand why they're needed.

[xXDeadsinxX]

Nerfs, buffs, tweaks/reworks doesn't matter. DE is balancing the game that needs to be balanced. Nerfs should not stop, and will only stop once the game is 100% balanced. They're trying to make things less broken. Nerfs, good or bad need to happen if you like it or not. Until DE makes the game 100% balanced and perfect, then balancing the issues will stay the same way as it currently is.

Edited September 10, 2017 by xXDeadsinxX

[HitokiriGuille]

The main problem is not buffs,f or nerfs etc etc. Many weapons and warframes require a change, a revisit and some even a rework, DE makes something, sometimes looks like they haven't even looked what the hek they have done they just drop it into the game, make us test it and then they see we all use that new super weapon that kills anything without even aiming, then nerf or change, and of course it's undertandable. What we really need is DE to pay a little attention and think things twice or the times required to make something more or less balanced and not completely broken

[XReaperFlameX]

Well, now I see the logic. Thank you all. I agree with the fact that nerf is important. But I do believe that a balance is necessary. When Nidus first came, he lost 10 stacks and went into "Undying", however, after the nerf, he seems perfectly balanced (well at least to me). Same for Mesa, Limbo, Ash, Tonkor, etc. 

My point is every nerf should be compensated with some kind of balance like buffs or new secondary features. Change is good and constant and it should be as long as things are moving towards a positive direction. However, I do also believe that there should be some more categories as well. Say like for example, there should be weapons that would require a higher mastery rank to motivate players to rank up, to get that one weapon they want. 

It's just my personal opinion. Feel free to disapprove. Whatever happens, I like this togetherness of this community. And since Warframe has a great deal of learning curve, I enjoy the game each second I play. Nerf or no nerf. :P

Edited September 10, 2017 by XReaperFlameX

[XReaperFlameX]

I just realized the Topic name is so wrong from what I intended to say :P LOL. Please excuse me guys.

Edited September 10, 2017 by XReaperFlameX

[(PSN)jesuimaneribas]

Nerfs are real simple. If players stop exploiting weapons or frames or any other gear then there wouldnt be any nerfs. Players tend to complain when something is over used or is over powered comparing to their personal builds they used which could be inferior to the gear they use at that period of time. Heres an example mirage and synoid simulor running around in missions killing every single enemy or mesa before nerf where players never got the chance to kill a single enemy on defenses , due to mesa clearing the whole room is seconds. I don't blame nerfs , i blame the players exploiting the game. Dont blame DE for the nerfs , talk to your fellow tennos for the things they cannot tolerate. Another thing about nerfs that tends to happens is when a certain weapon is over used. If warframe players are over using a particular weapon or frame then normally a nerf comes later onwards or they buff other weapons so that you will perhaps start using something different instead of the same thing constantly.

[(PSN)legendaryplay920]

Telos Boltace nerf was completely unneeded imo lol

[(PSN)fullblast35]

its all about balance.  Overtime a new weapon, frame or enemy comes out there are adjustments to be done.  I can easily give you and example, the new corpus hammer is the new best hammer in the game and its not even a primed variant.  If they're not gonna buff the others they will eventually nerf something on it.  and as it may seem like a logical or easy decision to make, the enemies are to think about too.  they also nerf things because of abuse.  when simulor and tinker where untouched you could squad up and just let one player wipe out everything.  its not an issue until everybody starts using these weapons too much and congesting others on a higher scale.  nerfing is inevitable in a game with constant new content like Warframe.

[Fallen_Echo]

On 2017. 09. 10. at 8:30 AM, (Xbox One)ALG Minuscule36 said:

I will admit, the way DE goes about nerfing some things could be handled better, but many nerfs are either necessary, either on players or enemies to try to make it so you don't die as fast or ruin the game for other players.

This is why we have, in addition to Nerfs, Buffs. To fix a nerf that went too far. Or to get something into prime nerfing range, so that it may be buffed back up later.

Feel me?

Imagine if we still had Ash's old Bladestorm. Or the old Tonkor. Or Mag's original Pull of death. Or literally other broken item or power. Without Nerfs to tame it and buffs to find a moderation point, there'd be too much chaos.

They dont just nerf, they straight up overkill stuff and the soo called buffs in most cases are worthless.

Remember the glaxion buff? Extra damage, more ammo economy what never happened, accuracy boost and a range nerf what defeats the prupose of the buff.

Im all up for balance but whenever i hear something got nerfed i already think of the worst and when i check ingame my thought get confirmed.

On 2017. 09. 10. at 10:16 AM, (PS4)legendaryplay920 said:

Telos Boltace nerf was completely unneeded imo lol

It was needed but the way they done it wwas wrong. They could easily fix it by toning down visuals, changing the slash wave into impact and to top it make the weapon unable to use maiming strike. Thats it, the weapon is still usable, kept its original bonus and doesnt work against the user.

[(XBOX)Grimsley Clause]

4 hours ago, Fallen_Echo said:

They dont just nerf, they straight up overkill stuff and the soo called buffs in most cases are worthless.

Remember the glaxion buff? Extra damage, more ammo economy what never happened, accuracy boost and a range nerf what defeats the prupose of the buff.

Im all up for balance but whenever i hear something got nerfed i already think of the worst and when i check ingame my thought get confirmed.

It was needed but the way they done it wwas wrong. They could easily fix it by toning down visuals, changing the slash wave into impact and to top it make the weapon unable to use maiming strike. Thats it, the weapon is still usable, kept its original bonus and doesnt work against the user.

Glaxion has been a primary weapon of mine for a while. Still works just fine buddy.  Have you used it before and after is the question, as the difference isn't really noticeable. Range is slightly, but it's stI'll fine.

 

Boltace had a hard nerf though, I will admit.

[Volinus7]

Even with nerfs, balance is still nowhere to be found in Warframe. 

Why? because it's a game about collecting tools and steamroll/trivialize 99.99 contents of the game, not a game that all items are balanced.

Yes, monetized skinner box is less effective with balanced power.

Edited September 14, 2017 by Volinus7

[IceColdHawk]

19 minutes ago, Volinus7 said:

Even with nerfs, balance is still nowhere to be found in Warframe. 

Why? because it's a game about collecting tools and steamroll/trivialize 99.99 contents of the game, not a game that all items are balanced.

That's why only things get nerfed that ease the grind.

[Voltage]

On 9/10/2017 at 2:24 AM, NightBlitz said:

the people that think that nerfs should be stopped are those that don't understand why they're needed.

No, the people that ask for nerfs are the ones that go "Ember ruins my fun". You cannot balance in this game when the whole point is grinding and the majority want it done as efficiently as possible. People who want fairness across the board are why weapons like tonkor are junk now.