The upcoming IPS changes..

[kuciol]

25 minutes ago, BornWithTeeth said:

I don’t know why you’re even talking about this. You’re basically saying that you do not care what information DE give us, you will flat out refuse to criticise it until the system is 100% finished and locked in place, at which point DE won’t touch it again for years.

What part of "we will put this on and wait for feedback" you didnt understand? Giving feedback based on assumptions is meaningless. All they gave us is their vision as of now. I bet even they dont know the final version.

 

7 minutes ago, Jicematoro said:

a) Why can people post on the Workshop Threads? If it's just for show, why give people an avenue to discuss?

b) Why give any details at all? Just say "We're doing stuff related to IPS damage right now, sit tight!" and keep everyone waiting.

c) Branching off from "b", why give us anything to work with? They know for a fact that any loose info they give is, has, and will be Criticized, often in the most pesimistic "Crybaby" way. Case in point, Focus 2.0 Pre-PoE thread.

d) "If you give no details, Crybabies will cry even more" you might say, but really, the only reason this got to be an issue to begin with is because they gave us details. Speaking on personal experience only, but Pre-Workshop, I noticed there was either no talk about the IPS, or the talk leaned on the positive side and ended as it started: "Yeah, would be cool if they buffed I and P, would be nice if S was left alone"

e) Why did they Delay the changes if they were set? If they knew better than us and we were clearly in the wrong for talking before testing, Why does it read like "We clearly need to look more into this, sorry"? They didn't say more than "Hey, It's Christmass!"

a) to discuss, duh. Believe it or not its not the same as giving feedback.

b) To give us insight on how they see things at that point

c) for hype.

d) here you have to ask DE why they want to change it that way

e) Because the changes were not ready? Because they changed their mind on how this should work? Because they playtested it and were not happy? They have problems with bugs? Pick one.

 

Good thing you brought out focus. Remember how people cried about zenurik? Turns out it is better now! Thats what im talking about. Just wait for "beta" version to see the changes than complain if it will turn out to be bad.

[Tachibana_Hibiki]

Intended changes as DE described them were bad, players pointed out flaws in a system as it was described, DE considered the reaction and made a wise decision to give it more thought.

Good call DE.

[Jicematoro]

 

37 minutes ago, kuciol said:

Good thing you brought out focus. Remember how people cried about zenurik? Turns out it is better now! Thats what im talking about. Just wait for "beta" version to see the changes than complain if it will turn out to be bad.

Yeah, that for sure had nothing to do with the hundreds of posts detailing how the energy economy is f****d, and Zenurik was, among other things, one of the reasons most of the people weren't calling quits.

ALSO, I hate the new Zenurik, the +1 EpS and ability to share did nothing for me, I drop Energy pads more often than before and I have Dash Maxed.

Turns out that at the heat of the moment, when you're busy fighting, jumping and casting, one can completely forget to re-cast EDash and be left fresh out of energy! I started running Energy Siphon again...

The only thing I appreciated about the new Zenurik was the new Passive (+50% Extra energy from Orbs overtime), So freaking really, whether or not is better is up for debate...

Back to the letters...

a) Elaborate.

b) For what reason? It's of no use for us until we test it, right?

c) I don't see the hype here, care to explain why?

d) Oh, so give FEEDBACK!

e) If they were not ready, they would have waited.

If they changed their mind, why did they leave us with no info? Based on everything you've said until now, they would have told us what the expected revisions were gonna be, or waited until they were 100% sure of what they were publishing.

If they only now playtested it and weren't happy, they wouldn't have posted the original Workshop. Releasing info on systems they didn't test properly is counter-productive.

If they needed to stabilize the system (Fix bugs/glitches/exploits) Wouldn't they just say so? Or release the update, get feedback, and hotfix like they usually do? Wednesday's today, they have 3 days before Dec 24th, which falls on a Saturday, so it doesn't conflict much with their regular Schedule.

I dunno man, none of the picks sound reasonable.

Where's the "They posted the workshop to get feedback, and based on it they decided the system needed more time to look into" option?

Edited December 20, 2017 by Jicematoro

[BornWithTeeth]

38 minutes ago, kuciol said:

What part of "we will put this on and wait for feedback" you didnt understand? Giving feedback based on assumptions is meaningless. All they gave us is their vision as of now. I bet even they dont know the final version.

Yet again, we’re not giving feedback based on assumptions. We’re giving feedback on the information which they gave us. That information is as follows:

“Impact and Puncture are being made better at delivering Impact and Puncture procs, but the nature of those Status procs is not actually being changed.

Also Slash procs are being nerfed in their damage calculations.”

 

If that information is incorrect, then that is 100% the fault of DE for giving us bad information. 

If it represents an incomplete vision, and the full version will be better, that’s great. Like you say, we can’t comment on what we don’t know yet...but we can comment on the information which they have given us, and that information is pretty bad. At this stage, we are therefore giving feedback on the information which we do have.

 

Why is it so important to you that people stop criticising this? If someone presented you with something and said ‘here’s the half of the plan which I want to show you,’ and it looked like a really bad plan, would you smile and nod and say “This looks amazing, can’t wait!” or would you say “Hang on a second, I have some reservations which I really hope are addressed by the rest of the plan?”

 

Look mate, you’re doing DE absolutely no favours in this by blindly defending them and insisting that everything is going to be perfect. 

[kuciol]

28 minutes ago, Jicematoro said:

Yeah, that for sure had nothing to do with the hundreds of posts detailing how the energy economy is f****d, and Zenurik was, among other things, one of the reasons most of the people weren't calling quits

Yes im sure. This ability was there the first time they showed the new focus.

 

28 minutes ago, Jicematoro said:

Back to the letters...

a) Elaborate.

Talking about it, not jumping into conclusions.

 

28 minutes ago, Jicematoro said:

c) I don't see the hype here, care to explain why?

It brought attention, didnt it?

 

28 minutes ago, Jicematoro said:

b) For what reason? It's of no use for us until we test it, right?

Thats what dev workshop is for. 

 

28 minutes ago, Jicematoro said:

d) Oh, so give FEEDBACK!

No.

 

28 minutes ago, Jicematoro said:

e) If they were not ready, they would have waited.

They never did.You talk like its their first delay ever.

 

16 minutes ago, BornWithTeeth said:

If that information is incorrect, then that is 100% the fault of DE for giving us bad information. 

If it represents an incomplete vision, and the full version will be better, that’s great. Like you say, we can’t comment on what we don’t know yet...but we can comment on the information which they have given us, and that information is pretty bad. At this stage, we are therefore giving feedback on the information which we do have.

 

Why is it so important to you that people stop criticising this? If someone presented you with something and said ‘here’s the half of the plan which I want to show you,’ and it looked like a really bad plan, would you smile and nod and say “This looks amazing, can’t wait!” or would you say “Hang on a second, I have some reservations which I really hope are addressed by the rest of the plan?”

Ive never said it was incorrect, just we dont know how it will work in game. If somebody came to me like that i would say "show me whole thing first". Im not defending DE by any means, im just criticizing you for giving feedback without having the whole picture. Case closed. 

[BornWithTeeth]

11 minutes ago, kuciol said:

Yes im sure. This ability was there the first time they showed the new focus.

 

Talking about it, not jumping into conclusions.

 

It brought attention, didnt it?

 

Thats what dev workshop is for. 

 

No.

 

They never did.You talk like its their first delay ever.

 

Ive never said it was incorrect, just we dont know how it will work in game. If somebody came to me like that i would say "show me whole thing first". Im not defending DE by any means, im just criticizing you for giving feedback without having the whole picture. Case closed. 

We are giving feedback on what DE have shown us. Stop trying to shut down the conversation. It’s not going to work.

 

Also, did you miss the part where we’re basically saying “This looks really bad based on what DE have shown us. I hope there’s a better, more complete plan here,”? It seems we do agree on wanting to see a better, more complete plan. A shame that DE didn’t show us such a plan so that we could offer feedback on it.

 

And, again, if it rustles your jimmies so spectacularly badly to see people giving feedback on the information which DE freely gave us, you have the choice to let it go. After all, you have unshakable faith that they will come out with a perfect plan which will make all the haters shut up.

Edited December 20, 2017 by BornWithTeeth

[Jicematoro]

1 hour ago, kuciol said:

Yes im sure. This ability was there the first time they showed the new focus.

 

Talking about it, not jumping into conclusions.

 

It brought attention, didnt it?

 

Thats what dev workshop is for. 

 

No.

 

They never did.You talk like its their first delay ever.

 

Ive never said it was incorrect, just we dont know how it will work in game. If somebody came to me like that i would say "show me whole thing first". Im not defending DE by any means, im just criticizing you for giving feedback without having the whole picture. Case closed. 

It's clear you have no intention of properly defending your case.

Whether or not that's because you realised you have no case and have now procceded to shrug all arguments as "They speak from ignorance, workshop or not, so they can't be right", it's for you to know, and take to the grave if necessary. (And if this is the case, well, you're also defending DE out of ignorance, you have as much info as we have on the matter, and all your arguments have been, at best, educated guesses)

Since clearly you're trying to put DE's interest over yours, allow me to tell you that you're doing them a disservice by trying to shut down conversation, that guess what, is feedback, it's the response of the public to the information presented to them.

We spanish speakers have a saying: "Better to prevent it, than fix it", and on cases like this it cannot ring truer.

Had they pushed the update and it was anything like we, the players read into it, it would have been a disaster, and the "Crying" we're engaging in right now, would have felt insignificant. Right then, DE would have actually needed someone to defend them.

Most if not all of the feedback comes from a place of legit concern, not malice, some might be a lot more "passionate" about the way they tackle this, but they wouldn't be had they not genuinely cared for the game.

Take the wool off your ears, the community has been thanked for their feedback innumerable times, and DE has shown just as many times how much they value our support.

The game you're playing now wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the "Cries" of the "Crybabies", if you are not gonna cry, please let the rest cry in peace.

[(PSN)BlitzKeir]

10 hours ago, BornWithTeeth said:

They told us that Slash procs will now be calculated based only on the weapon’s Slash damage component. They have not mentioned anything about increasing the multiplier to compensate, and that leaves two possibilities:

 

The first is that the multiplier is staying at 35% of Slash damage, and that everything is having its Slash potential nerfed.

The second is that the multiplier is being increased to above 80% of Slash damage, which would mean that everything is having its Slash potential nerfed...except the Tigris Prime, Nikana Prime, Galatine Prime, and Atterax, which functionally stay the same or even receive a buff. 

 

Neither of those is a good balance pass.

Those are two ways to interpret it, yes. Many have been worried about slash nerfs since Damage 3.0 came up. But there are two other ways to interpret it.

My initial interpretation was that the modifier is the IPS spread. Slash would be determined by the %slash in IPS spread, as opposed to the current flat 35%. (Scott said something which strongly suggested to me the modifier would become flexible, but I am unable to locate the line that gave me this impression. Sorry.) So Argonak would deal 46% of its base damage per tick, but Destreza would deal only 7% per tick.

The other possibility is that it scales from 0~35% based on proportion of slash to total IPS distrubtion. Not just base damage. So you could increase bleed damage with slash mods.

Either of these would be acceptable in my opinion. Based on DE's phrasing in devstream 103 ("We have a Christmas smash of the status system." "We're taking a hammer to that meta.") I kinda doubt the first method.

Honestly, even if slash ends up getting cut overall, I can't form a proper opinion without seeing the elemental changes.

[BornWithTeeth]

18 minutes ago, (PS4)BlitzKeir said:

Those are two ways to interpret it, yes. Many have been worried about slash nerfs since Damage 3.0 came up. But there are two other ways to interpret it.

My initial interpretation was that the modifier is the IPS spread. Slash would be determined by the %slash in IPS spread, as opposed to the current flat 35%. (Scott said something which strongly suggested to me the modifier would become flexible, but I am unable to locate the line that gave me this impression. Sorry.) So Argonak would deal 46% of its base damage per tick, but Destreza would deal only 7% per tick.

The other possibility is that it scales from 0~35% based on proportion of slash to total IPS distrubtion. Not just base damage. So you could increase bleed damage with slash mods.

Either of these would be acceptable in my opinion. Based on DE's phrasing in devstream 103 ("We have a Christmas smash of the status system." "We're taking a hammer to that meta.") I kinda doubt the first method.

Honestly, even if slash ends up getting cut overall, I can't form a proper opinion without seeing the elemental changes.

That would be an excellent and elegant way of handling it!

[Lion]

10 hours ago, SenorClipClop said:

Your suggestion to puncture just sounds like a weaker version of a Slash proc that you have to work for instead of happening passively like Slash does. It's basically just weaker Slash + more effort.

That's kinda a problem with designing a relevant status effect for Puncture. If it ignores armor completely then it is dipping into Slash's territory. If it strips armor, then it is dipping into Corrosive's territory.

 

Honestly, why does slash ignore armor anyways? Logically it should be puncture for heavily armored targets, not slash. Hence why swords in the middle ages were more effective then thrusted, hardly anyone used them to slash except when they are about to decapitate lol.

[(PSN)BlitzKeir]

2 minutes ago, BornWithTeeth said:

That would be an excellent and elegant way of handling it!

Oops, I screwed up in my description of the second method.  But thank you for saying so.

What I meant to say is that bleed damage would scale from 0~35% based on proportion of slash to total IPS distrubtion, with slash mods further pushing the value, even potentially over 35%. Under this system, Argonak would deal 16.1% bleed damage per tick. With Fanged Fusillade, it would rise to 35.42% per tick.

To be honest, I'm not super enthusiastic about this approach. On paper, it sounds elegant. Building for bleed wouldn't just be a matter of stacking crit, and those lesser slash mods (Jagged Edge, Sawtooth Clip, even Rending Strike on low puncture weapons) would serve a purpose. But on the other hand, some weapons would be harder to build for bleed. Tigris Prime has no modding flexibility, and Sancti Tigris (my preferred variant) would no longer be able to keep up with its counterpart. You could also argue that you are just being forced to use an extra mod for the same level of effectiveness, so some would see Fanged Fusillade as "mandatory".

There are other ways to perform this conversion that don't nerf so aggressively, but it would make building for bleed very complicated. Algebra is fine, but I'm not so sure about doing logarithms and calculus to spec my weapon lol.

Another way to do it is to scale from 0~35% based on proportion of slash to final modded damage (including elemental). This wouldn't be ideal, because some frames can add elemental damage to weapons.

[Kyronz]

I'm glad that they are rethinking the changes they told us about, a huge nerf to slash and keeping impact and puncture useless didn't seem like that great an idea.

[EmberStar]

On 12/20/2017 at 12:55 PM, Kyronz said:

I'm glad that they are rethinking the changes they told us about, a huge nerf to slash and keeping impact and puncture useless didn't seem like that great an idea.

We *hope* they are rethinking the changes.  All they said is that they delayed implementing them, because they would have had two days (or less as it turns out) to hotfix any actual bugs.  Unless I missed a tweet, I don't think they've said that they aren't going to go ahead and do all of this anyway.  They just aren't doing it right before they leave for vacation.

[Astatane]

In my opinion ips should be all about doing damage, leaving the other effects to the elemental damage types. In facts the proposed changes (aside from slash) are only inferior versions to elemental procs anyway, therefore they might as well disappear.

For slash: bleeding, starting with 35%/70%/100% base damage of slash.

For puncture: critical hit, starting with 50%/100%/200% added straight to crit chance and damage (not multiplied).

For impact: shockwaves running through the body weakening all defenses, 50%/100%/200% damage bonus to all incoming damage, so you want to put this on an enemy at first before doing anything else.

The numbers are just made up on the spur, you might want to do some testing to tweak these numbers so all procs are more or less equally powerful (puncture and impact seem a bit high, however they are still affected by armor damage mitigation, so to be on par with slash procs, i guessed them on the high side).