Can we have DE look at Limbo again instead of harassing players that are "doing it wrong"?

[MuscleBeach]

54 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

First: No, Booben doesn't stop people playing. That was a targeted response to someone saying that I was singling Limbo out for the enemy non-interaction, which is pretty effectively identical to a well-upkept Bastille (once the issue of player bullets in stasis is out of the way per my suggestion).

Sorry, it's hard to follow all the sub-topics inside a topic sometimes. That's fine if enemies can't interact. That's the point of CC. It's when players can't interact (stasis, old Bladestorm, World on Fire on star chart missions) that it's an issue. 

1 hour ago, EDYinnit said:

Second: It's not an option menu 'just for Limbo'. It can affect all sorts of Warframes. Bullet Attractors, Speed buffs, invulnerability for self-damaging Chromas, the Rift and/or Stasis...

If they alter the ability they've changed the Limbo players' playstyles. Contrarily, if they allow people to opt out of unwanted buffing effects, everyone carries on pretty much ignorant of each others' personal grievances and is happier for it.

That, to me, sounds much better.

I disagree (and this is probably as far as me and you are going to get on this lol). If you want to edit the abilities, just change the abilities to whatever these options you want are. Consistency in what an ability does is important. I'm not saying no to what you want these advanced options to do. I'm saying no to making them an option. Just implement them into the skill or find another solution. I still stand by my "Stasis reduces movement and flight speed by 90+%" because it will allow guns to work while still achieving the same effect and also nerfing the most OP defensive skills in the game. The only thing you have to watch out for are nullifiers. That's about it. You can protect any area you want permanently. There's not much talk about its power levels because it's annoying in squad play. As a slow, enemies will still attack, bullets will still fly but all in super slow motion. 

[chainchompguy3]

35 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

Arguably, having effects that impede your allies is also against the spirit of co-op, even if the intentions are good. I don't mind people enjoying and using Volt's speed, but goddamn does it mess with my 3000 hours' worth of ingrained muscle memory. Some would say it's against the spirit of co-op to enforce your personal ideals on others (hence why the defense against broken mechanics and OP weaponry like old Tonkor/Simulor is typically "go solo then"). Therefore, the solution is to not step on each others' toes.

If the game didn't have public matchmaking, maybe it'd be more reasonable to place the burden on communication, but anonymous matchmade games throw that out. By the time you're in game, you shouldn't expect to change someone's playstyle and build. But at the same time, you shouldn't be forced to abort because of those effects.

Arguably. It only arguably impedes allies. It's a straight buff. Invincibility is better protection than any other you might have had. Speed is a better movespeed than you might have had. It's just that situations can dictate the usefulness of anything.

It happens like this in all Co-op games.

I kill the mega-zombie that was coming towards you, now you just have to deal with the fodder. That's a straight "buff" to your situation. But you have an explosive-shot sniper that deals explosive damage based on max health of the target killed. With the mega-zombie, you could have 1 shot the whole group with a single headshot. Now, you're scrambling to back out of the way while you try to pick off each cluster of fodder bit by bit.

Is what I did against the spirit of Co-op? I don't think so, not completely. If I don't know that I'm about to harm your experience by attempting to help you, I'm still playing the game Co-operatively: I'm attempting to help a teammate. Now, a GOOD teammate would communicate with his allies, and learn about your weapon, and make sure to keep that in mind as he/she evaluates the situation. But not doing that doesn't inherently make you uncooperative.

 

The solution is exactly as you said: just try not to step on each others toes. You WILL. It's inevitable that someone will have an unlucky situation in a game with endless possible situations. But if they inform you, you can make sure to not do it again. And then you can try not to.

 

That's still the case when it comes to public matches. Communication is still possible. If an issue arises, play separate parts of the objective. Payload, send Chroma to clear the path ahead, so he's out of the range of Harrow's Covenant. Spy, go to different vaults. Defense, defend different hallways, etc.

 

If Joe hates the anti-synergy between Chroma and Harrow so much that he's not willing to negotiate, he just wants Harrow players to not ever Cast that ability, then that's HIS problem. Joe's the one with the problem with everybody else. So he aught to either get over himself, and learn to communicate with Harrow players, or go to alternatives, such as organized squads in recruiting chat, or accept the occasional mission abort.

 

Yes, it would be convenient if these anti-synergies didn't exist in the first place, but it's just an unfortunate fact of having multiple playstyles: some don't work well with others.

A healer who needs protection is going to have issues in a squad of nothing but charge-ahead-blindly dps-ers, etc.

 

TL;DR: Co-operation works best with Communication.

 

 

56 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

It might be clunky at first, but people will just deal with it the same way they just have to deal with swapping Arcane sets between cosmetics right now. Perhaps at some point these opt-outs could be tied to advanced loadout options, which would reduce the potential for a 'whoops' moment like that.

True enough, I guess. Just like people are asking for Arcanes/focus to be added to arsenal UI, so to would they ask for this system to be as well.

 

 

1 hour ago, EDYinnit said:

Your final comment is a fair criticism. That could happen, mild inconvenience as it is, but it also has an opposite side: Having a 'cure' doesn't communicate the reason either. A Volt who sees an ally lacking their Speed buff will often just re-cast it on them, thinking they're helping, despite the real reason being that the target had backflipped the unwanted buff away. _{(see just about every fissure mission I run ever)}

Then request that DE add communication. Just like how when Phoenix renewal augment triggers, it gives the casting Oberon a red-UI icon by that players name, have the same apply to volt.

A player who just opted out of Speed will have a red speed icon next to their name, letting the volt know that this player doesn't want speed.

Of course, that player could have just asked in chat, but icons work too.

 

1 hour ago, EDYinnit said:

In your example, the Harrow might be inconvenienced for wasted energy, but the Inaros dying isn't an argument against the option: it's portrayed as an "advanced" setting for a reason. You turn things like healing/DR/invulnerability off at your own risk!

I meant that more as a detriment to the squad: a dead player can't help with the objective. Yes, it is the Inaros's fault. But through his death he not only wasted Harrow's energy, but also his own ability to hold agro from Harrow/the objective, kill enemies that would have hurt Harrow/the objective, etc.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, robbybe01234 said:

As a Limbo in training, I do like the idea of getting a queue when the shots would kill the enemy, I would even find it fun and reassuring.  But when is damage calculated? Can we get a confirmation here?  I was under the impression that it was calculated at the time of impact not trigger pull.  If that's the case, I wouldn't even begin to know how they would adjust damage calculation to accommodate that feature.  Would they have to create a whole new damage prediction model? 

Hitscan: Damage is stored, but not applied. At the end of the ability, it is all applied at once, status effects and all.

Melee: Damage is applied instantly, as usual. Completely unaffected by stasis.

Projectile: Damage is not calculated. Projectiles must hit the enemies to apply damage, but they cannot hit enemies until the ability ends. They might possibly apply stored damage if thrown directly into an enemy, where the area they are frozen in time in is also where an enemy is, but that's impractical.

 

Yes, I was making the suggestion that DE attempt to make a program to predict projectile flight patterns (Fire a second, invisible projectile unaffected by stasis?), and display damage to an enemy if said program detects that a projectile will hit.

Obviously, this is a rather work-intensive option, that probably wouldn't be worth the effort. It's mostly just there for those who really like having a swarm of bullets held suspended, but don't want Delayed damage feedback.

The other, much more practical option is to allow all allied projectiles to move as normal during stasis. This runs the issue of messing with the uniqueness of the ability. But if the ability innately prevents players from getting feedback on their weapon, it needs changes, however they detract from it's uniqueness.

 

 

 

30 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

Now we throw in Stasis and the enemy AI is basically removed at the cost of immediate feedback of guns while inside the bubble all the while having map wide protections.

29 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

Essentially, is the 'drawback' of Stasis effective and engaging for the player? I would argue that it's partially effective (forced melee and powers) but not particularly engaging (hence being considered troll-ish). Because this fails to meet both qualifiers, having the ability to ignore it if you don't have direct control of the effect is valid.

No ability should force statistical drawbacks onto another player. abilities that give +X stats, but at the cost of -X stats, should always be at least somewhat opt-in.

It's no longer a straight buff at that point. Nor is it a situational issue arising from innate anti-synergies. It's a trade-off that can directly impede a player.

Stasis shouldn't either, but thankfully it only has one drawback, which could be fixed: loss of feedback on weapons.

That needs some changes. Hence why I suggested that stored damage be better shown.

 

Stasis does not force melee and powers, though. that's only to bypass the existing downside that should, indeed, be removed.

Using primary and secondary weapons still works just fine. It's just delayed.

 

That, and Stasis in undoubtedly effective. Arguably the strongest CC in the game, besides Death.

And it can be engaging. With a good limbo, it is for everyone. With a bad one, it is for him.

[ZodiacShinryu]

5 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

An important note is that this conceptually only affects foreign abilities. You cannot play Limbo and have Stasis' effect on bullets ignored.

I wasn't suggesting Limbo get around Stasis with your suggestion. It was that even if he could he wouldn't because the point being Limbo would mean you want to benefit from your own abilities otherwise why even be Limbo.

1 hour ago, EDYinnit said:

Similarly, shots that connect with targets have to check the Rift Plane status of both the target unit and the source. You can imagine this with the pseudocode if (Target.isInRift == Source.isInRift) then {damage can be dealt}. In our new case, this becomes if (Player.ignoreSettings.Rift == true || Target.isInRift == Source.isInRift) then {damage}. A simple backreference check to the player (be they source or target) to solve most of the Limbo Trolling issues quietly and without demanding changes to abilities or playstyles.

I am not sure what this fixes. Limbo's biggest trolling comes from sudden plane changing through Banish and overdone Stasis. Sometimes hacking with Cataclysm. Honestly I don't think you should be ejected from hacking once you start hacking from plane shifts. You can still hack with your Operator too. Most Banish mishaps are accidental and wouldn't hinder you immediately because they enemy should be pulled with you. Besides that what are the odds you have 3 other people that cant do any ability damage with how few frames have no damaging abilities. That's all considering that Limbo is pulling things and not killing them on purpose to which just report them and move on. I mean have you seen full duration Mind Control Nyx trolling? So much worse imo. This does nothing with Stasis and the problem with allowing others "overriding the necessary drawbacks" of it.

7 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

Your supposition that it "overrides the necessary drawbacks" of using Stasis at all (for Limbo's allies alone, per the above) is not quite well-founded. On paper, perhaps that seems to be the case. In practice, you can just imagine the Stasis effect as being the same as bringing an equally-wide Bastille as their ally's Snowglobe... Outside doesn't shoot in, inside doesn't act or move.

True you could consider it as something like Bastille (even though Stasis/Cataclysm is leagues beyond Bastille even with the augment) or Snowglobe (same reasoning as Bastille even with the augment) but that wasn't what I was trying to illustrate. The point is that you leverage the situation by selectively deciding what affects you. One (or more) member(s) ignores the drawback of Stasis giving them full power in the best CC and protective zone in the game. Even if they forfeit the protection of Cataclysm (letting any enemy attack them even from the outside) it just becomes an annoyance because at least one person is still going to be protected by Cataclysm (Limbo at the least not that he needs the Cataclysm) meaning they can deal with reviving because they are still safe. Simply there is no downside for using Stasis and having your allies ignore it. It is a direct boost to an already arguably overpowered ability combo. When used in a coordinated group this skill already outperforms everything just to add even more power to it for what now? You create a situation where it is objectively better just to ignore it.

If you are suggesting that you can opt out of them (Stasis and Cataclysm) separately that makes your suggestion exactly a "just make Stasis affect Limbo only" suggestion. Why should people gain all the benefits and none of the drawbacks? Cataclysm is the perfected Snowglobe. it doesn't break by damage like Snowglobe (I mean they just nerfed Gara over that and she did less than Snowglobe). It is very easy to get hit from the outside by explosions in Snowglobe. Enemies inside Snowglobe can still kill you the moment they get in (if they aren't affected by his augment if equipped) Bastille technically has an enemy limit though it can sort of be bypassed my throwing more of them. It takes 2 frames to get the results of a single Limbo otherwise constantly spending more energy and effort than Limbo. At this point we should just remove the energy consumption on Valkyr Hysteria and allow her to use her normal weapons just because.

[TheLexiConArtist]

3 minutes ago, chainchompguy3 said:

Arguably. It only arguably impedes allies. It's a straight buff. Invincibility is better protection than any other you might have had. Speed is a better movespeed than you might have had. It's just that situations can dictate the usefulness of anything.

But if the invulnerability prevents you from sustained survivability (charging up Chroma armour) then it's only a strict upgrade while it lasts. Speed is a straight upgrade on paper but affects the whole physics of mobility to the point where it is easy to actively slow someone down by 'increasing' their speed.

3 minutes ago, chainchompguy3 said:

It happens like this in all Co-op games.

Spoiler

 

I kill the mega-zombie that was coming towards you, now you just have to deal with the fodder. That's a straight "buff" to your situation. But you have an explosive-shot sniper that deals explosive damage based on max health of the target killed. With the mega-zombie, you could have 1 shot the whole group with a single headshot. Now, you're scrambling to back out of the way while you try to pick off each cluster of fodder bit by bit.

Is what I did against the spirit of Co-op? I don't think so, not completely. If I don't know that I'm about to harm your experience by attempting to help you, I'm still playing the game Co-operatively: I'm attempting to help a teammate. Now, a GOOD teammate would communicate with his allies, and learn about your weapon, and make sure to keep that in mind as he/she evaluates the situation. But not doing that doesn't inherently make you uncooperative.

 

The solution is exactly as you said: just try not to step on each others toes. You WILL. It's inevitable that someone will have an unlucky situation in a game with endless possible situations. But if they inform you, you can make sure to not do it again. And then you can try not to.

That's still the case when it comes to public matches. Communication is still possible. If an issue arises, play separate parts of the objective. Payload, send Chroma to clear the path ahead, so he's out of the range of Harrow's Covenant. Spy, go to different vaults. Defense, defend different hallways, etc.

 

If Joe hates the anti-synergy between Chroma and Harrow so much that he's not willing to negotiate, he just wants Harrow players to not ever Cast that ability, then that's HIS problem. Joe's the one with the problem with everybody else. So he aught to either get over himself, and learn to communicate with Harrow players, or go to alternatives, such as organized squads in recruiting chat, or accept the occasional mission abort.

Yes, it would be convenient if these anti-synergies didn't exist in the first place, but it's just an unfortunate fact of having multiple playstyles: some don't work well with others.

A healer who needs protection is going to have issues in a squad of nothing but charge-ahead-blindly dps-ers, etc.

 

TL;DR: Co-operation works best with Communication.

I think you're committing a bit of a logic fallacy here. No, we can't cater to every little nuance of every single situation; as you say, that's inevitable.

But that doesn't mean we can't try to alleviate some of the potential problems with a relatively simple solution when it's appropriately compartmentalised! The factors contributing to the (spoiler section) hypothetical are dependent on a hundred factors and changing it one way or another affects both players. It's a bi-directional conflict of interest that we can't expect to solve.

However, the anti-synergy issue is mono-directional conflict of interest. It doesn't hurt a Volt directly to have their buff not hit one squadmate. It's no different to them having been out of range. It might be a mild impediment to a Harrow's mitigated damage bank to not hit every target, but it's not a zero if it doesn't charge from everyone else in the area.

 

Having the potential for quiet opt-out of antisynergies promotes co-op, as I've stated previously. Instead of "there's a Volt in this fissure mission, better abort", it's "there's a Volt in this fissure mission, but Speed won't hurt me so I can keep playing with them".

This is exactly Joe the Chroma seeing Covenant as hindering his gameplay and instead of saying "I don't like it, so you can't cast it (or I quit)", he says "Okay, please feel free to use this on others because it won't hurt me now." Which feeds into the next part:

3 minutes ago, chainchompguy3 said:

True enough, I guess. Just like people are asking for Arcanes/focus to be added to arsenal UI, so to would they ask for this system to be as well.

Then request that DE add communication. Just like how when Phoenix renewal augment triggers, it gives the casting Oberon a red-UI icon by that players name, have the same apply to volt.

A player who just opted out of Speed will have a red speed icon next to their name, letting the volt know that this player doesn't want speed.

Of course, that player could have just asked in chat, but icons work too.

It's impossible for the Volt to select that player as a non-target of Speed. At best you save recast energy, but that same user's going to have to backflip every time others get their buff refreshed, so they're still being impeded without an opt-out.

You're also misappropriating 'opt-out'. Backflipping doesn't opt out. It cancels the buff. Opting out is a prevention measure, canceling in this way is a curative measure.

A prevention measure that doesn't impact any other player who doesn't share that opinion is the ideal solution.

5 minutes ago, ZodiacShinryu said:

I am not sure what this fixes. Limbo's biggest trolling comes from sudden plane changing through Banish and overdone Stasis.

...

I mean have you seen full duration Mind Control Nyx trolling? So much worse imo. This does nothing with Stasis and the problem with allowing others "overriding the necessary drawbacks" of it.

So opt-out of Rift Plane and suddenly Limbo can't troll you any more.

Full duration Mind Control is solved by 'banked damage' being applied at end of duration. Nyx has no way to extend the Mind Control survival of a unit indefinitely. Within two minutes, if you've shot that 'friendly' target, it'll die. Hell, I use that productively on Bursas sometimes. Tag them, shoot them while friendly, cancel it off and no more Bursa problem.

5 minutes ago, ZodiacShinryu said:

True you could consider it as something like Bastille (even though Stasis/Cataclysm is leagues beyond Bastille even with the augment) or Snowglobe (same reasoning as Bastille even with the augment) but that wasn't what I was trying to illustrate. The point is that you leverage the situation by selectively deciding what affects you. One (or more) member(s) ignores the drawback of Stasis giving them full power in the best CC and protective zone in the game.

etc etc

 

The drawback is effective but not engaging. See this quote:

32 minutes ago, chainchompguy3 said:

No ability should force statistical drawbacks onto another player. abilities that give +X stats, but at the cost of -X stats, should always be at least somewhat opt-in.

It's no longer a straight buff at that point. Nor is it a situational issue arising from innate anti-synergies. It's a trade-off that can directly impede a player.

Essentially, if you do not have agency over a tradeoff benefit/drawback, you should not be forced to endure that drawback. You're massively overselling Stasis because you're including Cataclysm with it. The benefit of Cataclysm (no shots from outside) should be considered separately from the benefit of Stasis (frozen enemies) when comparing it to the drawback (shot freezing).

CataStasis can be considered as the following:

In a radial area, all enemies are locked in place and take no actions, while player bullets are also locked in place for the duration.

Therefore, when you remove the cataclysm specific external protection, this drawback is not shared for other abilities that perform the same action, e.g. Bastille.

Ergo, opting out of the Stasis effect is absolutely permissible.

[ZodiacShinryu]

37 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

Nyx has no way to extend the Mind Control survival of a unit indefinitely.

Neither can Limbo. I have never seen/met a Limbo with that much control especially against me. You have to wait for Nyx, you don't have to wait for Limbo. I can only agree that they both can make it difficult.

45 minutes ago, EDYinnit said:

Essentially, if you do not have agency over a tradeoff benefit/drawback, you should not be forced to endure that drawback. You're massively overselling Stasis because you're including Cataclysm with it. The benefit of Cataclysm (no shots from outside) should be considered separately from the benefit of Stasis (frozen enemies) when comparing it to the drawback (shot freezing).

CataStasis can be considered as the following:

In a radial area, all enemies are locked in place and take no actions, while player bullets are also locked in place for the duration.

Therefore, when you remove the cataclysm specific external protection, this drawback is not shared for other abilities that perform the same action, e.g. Bastille.

Ergo, opting out of the Stasis effect is absolutely permissible.

I am not overselling Stasis for linking Cataclysm to it because they are linked for the simple reason of as you said "agency". Stasis only works in the Rift where the outside is the normal plane (things outside the Rift cant hurt you). If Stasis is affecting you outside Cataclysm it is because you are in the Rift where the same rules apply except you can leave the Rift whenever you want outside that bubble. Cataclysm is the only place where non-Limbos have to suffer it. You don't want its protections because you want to the feedback of your gun immediately then get out of the bubble/rift, it is that simple. I have literally watched base/min range Limbos put up Cataclysm have a random person run in complain about not being able to shoot things then proceed to try to break it. The problems with Limbo are largely exaggerated because people can't be bothered.

And I'll just put this one more time, if you can benefit from actions/effect only meant for the Rift without also the drawbacks of that mechanic you break the balance of the intention by creating situations where you increase the effectiveness by opting out. Bastille has never protected you from the unaffected. To cover a map a Vauban has to constantly throw them involving both energy and placement and with Plains there are threats that aren't simply avoided with Bastille. A Limbo needs only to get the enemy to the Rift and press a button and with Rift Surge it can be a fairly simple task and he gets energy for it. Simply Bastille =/= Stasis.

[TheLexiConArtist]

5 minutes ago, ZodiacShinryu said:

Neither can Limbo. I have never seen/met a Limbo with that much control especially against me. You have to wait for Nyx, you don't have to wait for Limbo. I can only agree that they both can make it difficult.

On the other hand, Nyx keeps one target safe, and as far as your guns are concerned, Limbo keeps any number of them safe. Hell, even melee being usable isn't always sufficient, depending on your approach. I have a Dual Ichors build intended to proc blast and kill even the most armoured of targets with the forced slash of down-finishers. Too bad those enemies are trapped in their standing position.

8 minutes ago, ZodiacShinryu said:

I am not overselling Stasis for linking Cataclysm to it because they are linked for the simple reason of as you said "agency". Stasis only works in the Rift where the outside is the normal plane (things outside the Rift cant hurt you). If Stasis is affecting you outside Cataclysm it is because you are in the Rift where the same rules apply except you can leave the Rift whenever you want outside that bubble. Cataclysm is the only place where non-Limbos have to suffer it. You don't want its protections because you want to the feedback of your gun immediately then get out of the bubble/rift, it is that simple.

Going outside of Cataclysm and into the middle of crossfire can be a great risk. What you're saying here is that it's okay for a given player to tell three other fellow people they're not allowed to play in a certain area, and they have the 'agency' in just accepting it or otherwise obeying that player's whims?

That's not healthy. That one player shouldn't be allowed to do that, but in contrast, they shouldn't be forced to not use the abilities given to them. Therefore we allow players to opt out of an effect. I'll say it as many times as I need to. It promotes co-op by giving a player the final say in what affects them without that decision restricting others.

 

Something something in the rest of the post, more disproven fallacy that somehow catastasis' effect on enemies isn't just the same as a Bastille'd area inside a protective bubble except player-hindering.

You can keep moving the goalposts all you like, the fact remains that the same effect as Stasis exists without the supposed-balance-necessary drawback.

Besides; it was never intended as a drawback. It was intended as a cool bonus effect, to wind up shots and then let them fly. Too bad players got hold of it and minmaxed it into a troll-mode.

[(PSN)psycofang]

On 1/9/2018 at 4:24 PM, (PS4)Crixus044 said:

I'm gonna say it.....you're doing it wrong.

Now before you press that button, hear me out. limbo is very well known for max range builds to freeze the world and stop the game, but have you considered negative range builds?

No

 I have PERSONALLY experienced a NOVA running into my negative ranged cataclysm that had 5s left and BLAMED ME for them not being able to shoot when the enemies were on the other side of the map.

 

A Nova.

 

Let that sink in. 

 

The player base will go out of their way to inconvenience themself if a Limbo os around regardless of how good you are.

 

Play solo you dont need others anyway.

[chainchompguy3]

5 hours ago, EDYinnit said:

But if the invulnerability prevents you from sustained survivability (charging up Chroma armour) then it's only a strict upgrade while it lasts. Speed is a straight upgrade on paper but affects the whole physics of mobility to the point where it is easy to actively slow someone down by 'increasing' their speed.

I think you're committing a bit of a logic fallacy here. No, we can't cater to every little nuance of every single situation; as you say, that's inevitable.

But that doesn't mean we can't try to alleviate some of the potential problems with a relatively simple solution when it's appropriately compartmentalised! The factors contributing to the (spoiler section) hypothetical are dependent on a hundred factors and changing it one way or another affects both players. It's a bi-directional conflict of interest that we can't expect to solve.

However, the anti-synergy issue is mono-directional conflict of interest. It doesn't hurt a Volt directly to have their buff not hit one squadmate. It's no different to them having been out of range. It might be a mild impediment to a Harrow's mitigated damage bank to not hit every target, but it's not a zero if it doesn't charge from everyone else in the area.

 

Having the potential for quiet opt-out of antisynergies promotes co-op, as I've stated previously. Instead of "there's a Volt in this fissure mission, better abort", it's "there's a Volt in this fissure mission, but Speed won't hurt me so I can keep playing with them".

This is exactly Joe the Chroma seeing Covenant as hindering his gameplay and instead of saying "I don't like it, so you can't cast it (or I quit)", he says "Okay, please feel free to use this on others because it won't hurt me now." Which feeds into the next part:

It's impossible for the Volt to select that player as a non-target of Speed. At best you save recast energy, but that same user's going to have to backflip every time others get their buff refreshed, so they're still being impeded without an opt-out.

You're also misappropriating 'opt-out'. Backflipping doesn't opt out. It cancels the buff. Opting out is a prevention measure, canceling in this way is a curative measure.

A prevention measure that doesn't impact any other player who doesn't share that opinion is the ideal solution.

I was mostly arguing on whether or not these abilities were impeding allies, and thus going against the spirit of Co-operation.

I said that intent does matter, and seeing as how these abilities have no direct downsides, there can only be good intent, and thus, they are in the spirit of co-op.

You said intent doesn't matter, because in the end it hurt your ability to survive long term / move appropriately.

I gave a much more fleshed out example, so I can point to more specifics, rather than just talk in vague terms. In this example, I don't make a perfect analogy, but the main point that a harmful-to-you event can and often will be done in the spirit of co-op still remains.

You cunningly see the error in my analogy, but neglect to comment on the point I was trying to make, no doubt in part caused by you having to argue multiple points with multiple people at once, and probably also caused by my own inability to stay on-topic as I ramble.

 

 

5 hours ago, EDYinnit said:

It's impossible for the Volt to select that player as a non-target of Speed. At best you save recast energy, but that same user's going to have to backflip every time others get their buff refreshed, so they're still being impeded without an opt-out.

A prevention measure that doesn't impact any other player who doesn't share that opinion is the ideal solution.

I don't know what your missions look like, but in my missions, allies bounce in and out of range constantly. It is Quite possible to choose who to buff, by simply waiting until the one not wanting it is out of range, or going to the edge of the group if everyone is standing relatively still.

 

Yes, in the end, a system to keep problem-having players from dealing with their issues would be ideal.

But it's a lot of work for a minor sect of players who can't just talk with their allies, make their own squad, opt to play solo, or "get good".

and no matter the system implemented, it'd have it's flaws. Our current system is flawed because some anti-synergies cause some players grief.

the new system would probably cause any player of a frame involved in such an anti-synergy to be hesitant about buffing allies, as they'd probably just be wasting energy.

It'd especially hurt for limbo. One of the major selling points of the Rift is being able to set up an ally for success. If you're in a squad full of players who all opted out of Rift mechanics, you're basically just playing solo, with some of your kills being stolen.

So suddenly we could have limbo players aborting missions because nobody in that mission wants to play that way.

and suddenly we're back to the origin point of this thread: limbo's abilities would still need tweaking to make them more co-op friendly, because now everybody else is happy, but limbo players aren't.

 

 

3 hours ago, EDYinnit said:

Going outside of Cataclysm and into the middle of crossfire can be a great risk. What you're saying here is that it's okay for a given player to tell three other fellow people they're not allowed to play in a certain area, and they have the 'agency' in just accepting it or otherwise obeying that player's whims?

That's not healthy. That one player shouldn't be allowed to do that, but in contrast, they shouldn't be forced to not use the abilities given to them. Therefore we allow players to opt out of an effect. I'll say it as many times as I need to. It promotes co-op by giving a player the final say in what affects them without that decision restricting others.

 

Something something in the rest of the post, more disproven fallacy that somehow catastasis' effect on enemies isn't just the same as a Bastille'd area inside a protective bubble except player-hindering*So long as it continues to prevent feedback on damage. That's the only player hinderance that isn't also found in bastille-in-a-bubble*.

You can keep moving the goalposts all you like, the fact remains that the same effect as Stasis exists without the supposed-balance-necessary drawback.

Because Limbo's kit is built around just that; telling other players who they can and cannot fight. He puts up non-physical, but still quite real, walls between players and enemies.

If you think it's utterly stupid to let one player have that much agency, so as to control the degree of agency other players have, you ought to be attacking limbo directly.

 

Also, fixed that for you with the bold faced.

 

 

My points:

1. A team-buff is Co-operative, no matter how f***ed you are for receiving it.

2. Communication is the ultimate means to co-operation. We can add systems all day long, but regardless of the system, you'll need to communicate.

3. If we're relying on communication properly, these issues don't have nearly as much of an effect, and thus I question the necessity of your proposed system. Your system would, however, help. Not very much for the most part, but where it would, it'd help in spades. I encourage this idea, but I want to make sure you consider as many possible places where it can break down, or lead to further problems, because every system has them.

4. Limbo only hampers allies in 2 ways: delaying weapon feedback, which should absolutely be changed, and putting walls between players and enemies. The latter cannot be fixed without detracting from the core reason of playing Limbo, so it'd really a choice to either kill the soul of Limbo, or let players whine about him. Otherwise, he just banks damage, and is just fine.

4.5. A minor fix for Limbo's stasis issues, changing it to have a set, more reliable timer lets players work with stasis: they know it only lasts exactly X seconds, so they can keep that timer going in their head while they shoot other targets, and wait for the stasis'ed ones to die from banked damage.

4.5.5./ Point 2 again: A great fix would be to add communication to stasis: maybe change the color of the rift while it's active, and have it fade back to normal as it wears off.

 

[TheLexiConArtist]

7 hours ago, chainchompguy3 said:

I was mostly arguing on whether or not these abilities were impeding allies, and thus going against the spirit of Co-operation.

I said that intent does matter, and seeing as how these abilities have no direct downsides, there can only be good intent, and thus, they are in the spirit of co-op.

You said intent doesn't matter, because in the end it hurt your ability to survive long term / move appropriately.

You might have slightly misinterpreted. My perspective is more that because the intent is likely to be positive, that the player with a personal grievance with any given buff is the one who needs to be able to handle it without impacting anyone else.

Comparatively, when the intent is not to help your fellow player, then a change is necessary. The self-serving intrusions of lazily locking down defences and interceptions (Prism pre-line-of-sight, Soundquake with augment now) are an example of this. The pre-balance-pass weapons that needed to be brought down (and arguably, current melee weapons like the Atterax with the usual mod loadout) are examples of this. Those need/ed to be changed.

7 hours ago, chainchompguy3 said:

I don't know what your missions look like, but in my missions, allies bounce in and out of range constantly. It is Quite possible to choose who to buff, by simply waiting until the one not wanting it is out of range, or going to the edge of the group if everyone is standing relatively still.

Yes, in the end, a system to keep problem-having players from dealing with their issues would be ideal.

But it's a lot of work for a minor sect of players who can't just talk with their allies, make their own squad, opt to play solo, or "get good".

and no matter the system implemented, it'd have it's flaws. Our current system is flawed because some anti-synergies cause some players grief.

the new system would probably cause any player of a frame involved in such an anti-synergy to be hesitant about buffing allies, as they'd probably just be wasting energy.

Trying to manage that accurately when everyone is either incentivised to stay on one place (defending) or are all racing along the same path (fast fissures) would be a nightmare, if not impossible. You only have the metric of the affinity range icon, and even that's not a static figure. Could be a Vazarin user.

Furthermore, that still places the agency upon the source of the buff, and therefore the human error or abject ignorance is out of the receiver's hands.

That's why the proposed system exists for buff effects as a whole. It's also a simple fix in concept. List out the menu, store settings, sprinkle in some quick checks in conditional codeblocks and it's implemented.

 

As for making players hesitant about buffing allies, well, even if there's no UI element to hint that something might be awry, most ally-buffing is pretty much a side-benefit. The player's still going to be buffing themselves for the most part.

7 hours ago, chainchompguy3 said:

It'd especially hurt for limbo. One of the major selling points of the Rift is being able to set up an ally for success. If you're in a squad full of players who all opted out of Rift mechanics, you're basically just playing solo, with some of your kills being stolen.

So suddenly we could have limbo players aborting missions because nobody in that mission wants to play that way.

and suddenly we're back to the origin point of this thread: limbo's abilities would still need tweaking to make them more co-op friendly, because now everybody else is happy, but limbo players aren't.

 

Because Limbo's kit is built around just that; telling other players who they can and cannot fight. He puts up non-physical, but still quite real, walls between players and enemies.

If you think it's utterly stupid to let one player have that much agency, so as to control the degree of agency other players have, you ought to be attacking limbo directly.

Also, fixed that for you with the bold faced.

In my very first post I said the issues with Limbo could be greatly softened by the Veto Menu, not completely removed. It could even help to highlight the need for change to DE if they can metric out the number of active public players who turn off Limbo's unique effects in particular.

I'm not saying no changes could or maybe even should be made to Limbo's kit, but returning agency to the rest of the squad would do a lot for people's perceptions.

I don't really play public unless forced to because of degenerate players and intrusive experiences like these, so I can't really say how much Limbo is used in the day-to-day, but judging by the thread alone, people are getting complained at simply for being Limbo in any given mission.

I'd say it's a better outcome for a Limbo to choose to solo for not having an effect on allies and not welcoming their presence otherwise than for the Limbo to be forced to solo through abuse from unwilling recipients.

 

(w/r/t boldfaced, that's again a different line of conversation. Specifically the point being that the equivalent effect exists without player hindrance, so players avoiding the hindrance through stasis opt-out isn't countermanding balance.)

[(PSN)Crixus044]

15 hours ago, (PS4)psycofang said:

No

 I have PERSONALLY experienced a NOVA running into my negative ranged cataclysm that had 5s left and BLAMED ME for them not being able to shoot when the enemies were on the other side of the map.

 

A Nova.

 

Let that sink in. 

 

The player base will go out of their way to inconvenience themself if a Limbo os around regardless of how good you are.

 

Play solo you dont need others anyway.

You're experience differs on mine, and we're on the same platform. Could just be Master Rank elitist trying to find a way to rank on ya about anything, because with my max range builds, I always see one guy tryna bust my stasis because he's not getting any kills, but I bring my negative range build, and I get praise for "playing him fairly" while still getting the most kills. Please ignore the haters and continue to do what you do best.

[Bigflufy]

Limbo is fine he is a fun warframe with abilities that make sense. If someone is being annoying or doing something you dont like just kindly ask them to stop. If they dont you can leave. its that simple

[Vance.Stubbs]

Limbo is cancer to the teamplay, period. No other Warframe comes even CLOSE to his harassing potential, selfish elitists don't understand that and suggest that it is "player problem". No, it's not. My Ivara doesn't disrupt teamplay. My Harrow doesn't distrupt teamplay. My Chroma also doesn't. But all of them become 100% useless in mission with another Limbo who thinks that he is "the most advanced player in the world" by pressing 4 and 2 buttons from time to time.

I don't care how many thousands of meaningless cryotic you get by using Limbo from a single excavation mission,I also don't care how good do you consider him for sortie defense/rescue, and especially I don't care that some of you consider him "fun", because your fun stops at the tip of my nose. I DO NOT have to "communicate" with Limbo players just to be allowed to use the weapons or Warframes I worked for.

Garbage known as "Limbo" needs to be either completely reworked again or there should be an option to restrict Limbos from joining the squad. 

[Fallen_Echo]

On 2018. 01. 09. at 10:04 PM, peterc3 said:

Stasis doesn't stop melee and frame abilities. Maybe use your entire loadout?

Okay dude, lets see how you can do your stuff playing harrow on a bow only survival sortie with cata stasis

OR

the even better variant the surge stasis with harrow.

 

Limbo needs 2 main changes enemies in the rift should be attackable normally at the cost that they shoot back and stasis needs to only affect limbos shots or not affect shots at all.

[CaptainJLP]

On 1/9/2018 at 7:04 PM, Chaos.Blades said:

Seriously this needs to stop. Limbos powers are toxic to other players period. I can't even forma him without players threatening to report me. Don't give me that "your playing him wrong" bull crap. We need to stop harassing other players into stop using his powers and start harassing DE (don't actually do this) to remove the toxic nature of his powers. The only time with very few exceptions Limbo is good is when you play him solo because then you can play his GOOD rework without shutting down other players play styles.

I don't want limbo changed, he is a really good frame, but he needs his own special way of leveling instead of the current warframe XP system because none of his abilities can deal any damage and are a huge annoyance to people not running with melee weapon or don't want his abilities set down due to how bullets are frozen and well you get what I mean, if anything, I would rather a better XP system. And also they probably should reduce the the very very fast effects on his 4th because he is nearly like the king of eye cancer, Frost with neon colors on his snow globe.

[Vance.Stubbs]

1 hour ago, Fallen_Echo said:

Okay dude, lets see how you can do your stuff playing harrow on a bow only survival sortie with cata stasis

OR

the even better variant the surge stasis with harrow.

 

Limbo needs 2 main changes enemies in the rift should be attackable normally at the cost that they shoot back and stasis needs to only affect limbos shots or not affect shots at all.

Don't bother arguing with Limbo elitist. Because he wants you to be ALWAYS prepared for the way HE likes to play. Bring Harrow with Glaive, or Chroma to assault rifle only sortie? Too bad lol, momma's little Limbo player doesn't want you to be able to use the arsenal you worked for.

[(PSN)Ozymandias-13-]

On 1/9/2018 at 3:11 AM, Pizzarugi said:

He's also amazing in rescue missions without being a troll to the team.

Less than 2 weeks ago I did a rescue as Limbo and I banished the Target to keep them safe. Right as i cast it my teammate ran right next to them and got banished as well. This happened one time in the mission.

The teammate, who was also the host, typed in chat "STOP BANISHING ME!!!!!" and quit the team immediately which kicked everyone out before I could respond and explain what happened...

Unfortunately even his first power is unintentionally trollish since they make it a cone power, which makes it very difficult to control it's targets.

[P0Pz]

Am 9.1.2018 um 09:04 schrieb Chaos.Blades:

...

Question;

I did't logedIn to WF since like 6 months. Was there no fix until now?

Well. If so, the current fix is using MAG's bubble and shoting 2/3 times pox in. Stays up for 20 something seconds. Since every bullet is repeated shoted (counts as such) The troll is trolled off. He can't place at that area another of his trolling skills. Well if he trys to pop somewhere else...just bubble another enemie at that location. Free all from this pain. Repeat bubbling the first targeted bubbles enemie shortly before time runs off. For ever free.

Bandaid. But direct stops a Trolling Limbo and keeps him away to repeat that. 

Almost forget this was a annoying visually disaster (everything in black and white glowing almost couldn't see your hands), bubble a enemie...free..

 Free 4 ever. 

DE should have fix that already. Rework for teamplay is needed. And ofc his forcing to melee weapons... if someone does not enjoy it atm and prefere to use guns NoOne should be allowed to take away another players weapon layout and limits it to 1 typ down.

A pain. Not players foult. Even trolls using it to heavy trolls not foult for it. They use what is enabled. DE's foult. Incompetence is shouting out of it. Unnecessary ragewar between players...

[(PSN)psycofang]

On 1/12/2018 at 9:03 AM, Vance.Stubbs said:

Don't bother arguing with Limbo elitist

See this response? This is why i play solo, youre probably just like that nova who ran across the map into a 3 meter bubble then yells at a Limbo. 

Youre all just as ugly and toxic as the people you generalize, you and people like you are the reason i play solo, cant be arsed to put up with this savage mindset. 

All this community has done for me in the last 2 out of 4 years is give me nothing but pure vitrol and sheer hatred no matter how harmless i play and i hate almost everyone around in a game, i hate logging in now, i hate playing this game now.

This is the first community is 20 years to ever frustrate me to this extent, i browse 4chan and the deep, im part of the fgc and compete irl, i deal with angry dying residents/ resident family day in and day out being their punching bag and ive never felt the burning hate i feel right now. 

I legit hate this community. 

Even the FGC is healthier than this

Warfame is a great game but this game isnt worth coming here or accidentally loading in a pug and getting twisted up, no game is worth my mental health.

I cant even begin to articulate the sheer ugly poison in my chest and i wont, ill shut up and go. You can have warframe and you can have this place, i dont want it anymore.

[Vance.Stubbs]

1 hour ago, (PS4)psycofang said:

See this response? This is why i play solo, youre probably just like that nova who ran across the map into a 3 meter bubble then yells at a Limbo. 

Youre all just as ugly and toxic as the people you generalize, you and people like you are the reason i play solo, cant be arsed to put up with this savage mindset. 

All this community has done for me in the last 2 out of 4 years is give me nothing but pure vitrol and sheer hatred no matter how harmless i play and i hate almost everyone around in a game, i hate logging in now, i hate playing this game now.

This is the first community is 20 years to ever frustrate me to this extent, i browse 4chan and the deep, im part of the fgc and compete irl, i deal with angry dying residents/ resident family day in and day out being their punching bag and ive never felt the burning hate i feel right now. 

I legit hate this community. 

Even the FGC is healthier than this

Warfame is a great game but this game isnt worth coming here or accidentally loading in a pug and getting twisted up, no game is worth my mental health.

I cant even begin to articulate the sheer ugly poison in my chest and i wont, ill shut up and go. You can have warframe and you can have this place, i dont want it anymore.

You are purposly using a poor-designed Warframe that cripples teamplay in PUGs, therefore you are a ruiner and must meet the consequences.

Bring Limbo in pub = terrible player. No excuses. Whine as much as you want how this community is unfair to you, and good riddance. One less frustration to meet in matchmaking.

PS: I haven't used Nova in PUG for at least a year.

Edited January 14, 2018 by Vance.Stubbs

[RikerWatts]

It might just be how you play him, actually.
People hate stasis but people also don't realize meleeing in stasis is like meleeing enemies in a frost lock.
In general, people just don't know how to handle Limbo, even if you aren't trolling.

[Bobtm]

3 hours ago, RikerWatts said:

People hate stasis but people also don't realize meleeing in stasis is like meleeing enemies in a frost lock.
In general, people just don't know how to handle Limbo, even if you aren't trolling.

There's a very key difference here however, you can shoot a Frozen enemy.  You cannot shoot an enemy locked in Stasis.

[RikerWatts]

21 minutes ago, Bobtm said:

There's a very key difference here however, you can shoot a Frozen enemy.  You cannot shoot an enemy locked in Stasis.

Of course, but it's just people don't want to play with stasis even though it can make Mobile defense an absolute joke.
I've only recieve thanks from when I played limbo just because the way I play limbo. It's all in how you use his abilities to help your team instead of yourself.

[Bobtm]

7 minutes ago, RikerWatts said:

Of course, but it's just people don't want to play with stasis even though it can make Mobile defense an absolute joke.

Case-in-point issue here, lots of ability sets can make Mobile Defense an absolute joke in terms of difficulty.  Limbo is by no stretch alone in this capability, he's the easiest to setup for it yes, but most of the frames we have currently can make this mission type a literal walk in the park.

However, most of those frames who also do that, don't act in a massively obtrusive manner towards allied play options.  While Limbo is indeed powerful, he's unnecessarily obtrusive just by his core ability design, which is a design flaw at the end of the day.  Which is why Limbo does need to change, speaking objectively on the subject.  The flaw is purely with the frame's design and nothing more, because it is purely the frame that allows these inappropriate situations to exist.

[RikerWatts]

Lot of what limbo is can be played around. The most trolley thing any player can do is banish a target and stasis without allowing anyone else into the rift to kill these targets.
Another is loot pickups that are only affected when a teammate is banished.

Yeah it IS intrusive, but with where Limbo is now and how unique he is? I'd prefer people to learn what Limbo is and how to work with him rather than accuse all limbo players to be trolling. If we notify people who are ignorant to the matter that you can melee every target in the rift, they might just be happy to slice and dice instead.

[Bobtm]

And the problem here is that you're assuming it's impossible to change Limbo to remove/lessen his obtrusive nature while also retaining his unique feel.  Because that can be done.  For starters they need to simply revert Banish back into a single-target ability by default, and give it a hold mechanic to charge up a small AoE on it.  This would prevent players from needlessly Banishing allies when trying to Banish an enemy/capture target, and reinvigorate the old and now mostly lost "Assassin-Limbo" playstyle.  Next up is modifying the rules that Stasis follows so that it doesn't always ruin gunplay.

There are a few roads that Stasis can go down that would retain its useful nature but drastically alleviate its obtrusive nature.  One of these would be to turn Stasis into a high powered slow rather than a full-freeze, of course this is a bit boring.  The second is a little more mechanically complex, but retains Stasis' ability to freeze time both for gunfire and enemies, without removing gunplay options from allies like it does now.  For this, Stasis would cycle on its own on a set time-frame.  For example numbers, After casting Stasis time freezes for around 4 seconds, then once that time hits Stasis unfreezes all time, both enemy/allied, for 0.75 seconds.  This means that any ranged attack that was fired would then launch right then and there.  Then once that "go" ends time freezes once more for another 4 seconds.  The pattern repeats like this for the duration of Stasis.

Implementing either of those ideas would allow Stasis to remain both powerful and viable, as well as staying unique in concept.  But would instantly remove Limbo's "now you have to only melee because I said so" selfish capabilities.

There are a few other things that do need cleaned up after this of course, but those too can be done without compromising the unique ability set that Limbo has.

Removing Limbo's poor design does not mean removing Limbo's unique traits.