Dev Workshop: Warframes Revisited

[atejas]

Another suggestion I'd make for Gara is to have her Mass Vitrify gain additional health if it passes through any active Splinter Storms, with a percentage of the overall damage being turned into health. This would enhance the synergy between the two powers and make it somewhat advantageous to cast a wall even if there aren't any enemies nearby.

[(XBOX)NeutralSilence]

3 hours ago, (PS4)Regiampiero said:

Exactly. She is now going to be able to erase shields, buff overshields, and actually do damage all at the same time. A good Mag makes absolutely short work of Corpus enemies already, now no one will be safe. 
 

Mag can already do all that. Her Polarize still falls off hard at higher levels, but she can already give overshields and do damage. These changes are lackluster.

[phoenix1992]

3 minutes ago, (Xbox One)NeutralSilence said:

Mag can already do all that. Her Polarize still falls off hard at higher levels, but she can already give overshields and do damage. These changes are lackluster.

Totally, Mag is one of the few frames that synegizes with rivens and hits damage cap, but we do need more buffs on top of buffs.

PS: Almost every potato shooter gets buffed as well, guess who will feel the kick the most (hint : Frames that have synergy with gear)

Edited February 6, 2018 by phoenix1992

[firefrostI]

ya most of it is fine except for ember , they used an ember build for wof and  after the 15 secs it wasnt hitting anything over 7 meters, which makes it pointless since she gets 1-2 shot anything over  lvl 50 , even as it is now i run with taters build and only get the higher lvl stuff down about 1/2 3/4 hp  - even then i have to be resed all the time , i keep seeing the rebecca person teleporting around going stealth and stuff using the focus idk what thats all about . im guessing like the entirety of the game we need to youtube or wiki how to do stuff - like a ton of people were saying its only gonna get worse you forma out something 6x spec for stuff then they come along and nerf it so you can forma out something else more $ lol. the noobs get mad cause you kill everything as ember at low levels so why not just fix the issue and allow the same bracket range in the missions instead of placing god like frames in with players that dont know how to use abilities. i sit there in low lvl stuff all the time and not get 1 kill from mirage and limbo and a few others that pop around and do stuff , so its not just ember.

[Leodegrance]

Feedback on Chroma adjustments:

So Chroma is my main go-to frame so naturally I don't like seeing him nerfed.  However, I get it since he clearly clobbers eidolons, and it is different seeing so many others using Chroma right now.  I'm glad to hear the Vex will still be powerful, which it needs to be.  My thoughts are, don't just mess around with him to revisit him later.  It you must do something, give him a good rework.  I really liked Tactical Potatoes thoughts on this as far as spectral scream really not being worth it.  I'd like to see the ability to change out his elements and honestly a buff to Elemental Ward in general.  I'd like to see Fire and Lightning do real damage.  Take away the negligible damage that Ice does, its pointless anyway.  Toxin needs range and a spreading affect.  

I am glad to see tweaks in general however.  Always gives me something to experiment with!  Please keep the goodness coming DE.

[(PSN)domtotscatmad]

Way to f up ember idiots

[DiabolusUrsus]

2 hours ago, Aegni said:

It is, because you're suggesting that there is a right or wrong here that is objective.  It isn't, the issue is an entirely subjective one with no clean method of resolving outside of causing harm to everyone in the game.

Objectively speaking, it is in DE's best interest to ensure players can have fun playing Warframe. Consequently, they have previously (and will continue to) dismantle playstyles that enable 1 player to prevent 3 others from playing the game.

NOTE: I'm using "you" for lack of a better pronoun, so if something I say doesn't apply to you don't take it personally.

2 hours ago, Aegni said:

If I am in a game with 2 other people, and we're running a farming set up with Banshee, Trinity, and a Rhino, and the 4th person comes in and is unhappy because they aren't getting as many kills as they want, then by the basis of your argument, it would be discourteous for them to not follow the way we are choosing to play.

Get my point?

No, because you're presenting this as some sort of difficult or confusing issue. It's really not. In that case yes, the onus is on the dissatisfied player to leave. And the inability to distinguish which side is the minority in every case is the only reason these sorts of playstyles can't be made bannable.

2 hours ago, Aegni said:

You missed the point, what valid reason do they possess that overrides my own? When does the individual playing the game cease to matter in terms of what they desire?

You mistakenly think you have a point. Arguments over who can override whom are inevitably circular, so it makes infinitely more sense to assess the situation based on common ground between players: ability to play the game. When your playstyle is the one causing problems for everyone else you are the one who should get overruled. Such it has been, and so it will be.

2 hours ago, Aegni said:

Let me be the terrible devil here and say, how are they owed anything?  This isn't a case where someone eats all of the cookies and there are no more. In this game, the enemies are constantly generating because itis a horde based shooter. The idea that an ember is managing to kill 100% of the enemies (not possible), Equinox, Mesa, and ther AOE clearing  fframes, invalidate the ability for everyone to play is terribly false.

If you were correct there wouldn't be a problem, and this nerf wouldn't exist. Obviously, reality contradicts your interpretation of events.

2 hours ago, Aegni said:

Furthermore, what would you define as just?

The goal is to be objective, right?

2 hours ago, Aegni said:

If just is "you are outweighed by popular opinion" then the design of the game becomes terribly unstable because the desires of people, as a whole...is selfish

No, it doesn't. Proper limitations to wide-AOE effects is the only thing required to stabilize the game. Which is why I would agree that the nerf itself is a bad one, though the motivation for the nerf is 100% appropriate.

2 hours ago, Aegni said:

"I don't like you playing Ember because I am not getting to play the way I want.'

So can you generate an argument that doesn't rely completely on defaming the opposition through projection?

2 hours ago, Aegni said:

The suggestion that a singular player is being selfish when the very crux of your argument is that of selfishness is not at all just.

Let's ditch the circular reasoning, yeah? Your entire argument rests on accepting that expecting all players to have an opportunity for participation is somehow "selfish." Good luck defending that one.

2 hours ago, Aegni said:

Okay, and in what way is that individual being prevented from playing?

Are you seriously suggesting that being consigned to running after another player picking up loot qualifies as "playing the game?"

2 hours ago, Aegni said:

Let us say the Ember nerf goes through as is, and an Ember player drops down for a Lith fissure exterminate on Earth. That ember player is still going to clear everything much faster than the MR 1 player not only because their frame is higher level along with their weapons, but their grasp of game mechanics is higher as well.

Suggesting that a singular player, a singular frame, is preventing everyone from playing is hyperbole and such a thing should not be engaged.  on top of this, if you attempt to balance everything based on low level players who struggle to keep up with vets, then none of the frames capable of AOE should be allowed to scale beyond the starmap of level 30.  That's just the reality of the situation due to the multiplicative effect of mods and game knowledge.\

Which is, again, why I disagree with the details of the nerf. It's a faulty approach to the problem at hand.

2 hours ago, Aegni said:

Provide a real example where 3 players are unable to participate or play the game due to the behavior's of a single player outside of level 30.

Who are you to say that <30 isn't just as important as >30? The new player experience is the most critically important to the game's survival, and Ember is causing the problem for newer players. Notice that I didn't say Ember could completely dominate a Sortie.

2 hours ago, Aegni said:

Yes they do, because such changes should not be treated as if they exist in a vacuum. If Ember is reliant upon a singular ability to be viable beyond starmap, weakening the ability to the point where it impacts other aspects of her gameplay negatively would suggest not going through with the change.  This is how game balancing works.

I never said the changes should be treated as if they exist in a vacuum. Even so, saying "but her 1 and 3 are terrible" does not justify leaving her 4 alone if the 4 needs to be nerfed. You just improve 1 and 3 at the same time. Obviously this isn't what DE has done, but there's a difference between what "should" be done and what "is" done. All I'm saying is that it's perfectly possible to address multiple problems at the same time, and it is.

2 hours ago, Aegni said:

This is why games such as the Guiltygear series have even low tier characters getting to 2nd place in tournaments, while games such as MvC2 only really had 7 characters viable out of a roster of 40+.  Or games like League of legends where altering a champ's singular ability when they rely upon it destroys their viability.

Now am I talking out my backside?

Negative ghostrider. I have experience with game rulesets and was one of the leader's of the gaming community I was a part of before I became occupied with adult things.  When you balance the game, you need to consider the effects of such a change outside of a vacuum.  DE is too focused on resolving the immediate, short term issue at hand. They aren't taking into consideration the long term.

Again, notice that I'm not defending the specifics of the nerf.

2 hours ago, Aegni said:

So, for example if they absolutely had to make the change because people are complaining they can't get as many kills or contributye as much, then the answer would be to make the doubling effect on Ember's WoF be modified by power strength.  This would ensure that she can deal damage as the game scales.  It also ensures she cannot scale infinitely because after all, eventually you should be extracting.

This would make both parties happy because late game ember users would then have a viable build they can utilize outside of CC ember, who suffers quite a bit from this change.

I would support this change stacked on top of the upcoming ones.

2 hours ago, Aegni said:

"I am not getting as many kills as Ember."

That is the argument.

It isn't

 

"I can't play the game because everything is dead before i get to it."

It's not

"Ember shuts off my abilities/weapon effects"

It's not

"She makes 3 other people invalid in being there."

 

It's

"I am not doing as much as she is."

Yes.

Says who? I'm not seeing any posts saying "I'm not getting 1st spot in terms of kills, NERF EMBER." Are you? If so, please link them.

If you can't do that, you are inferring an ulterior motive for your opposition because it happens to be more convenient for you. Sorry, but that doesn't cut it. I can't speak for anyone else, but I can speak for myself in telling you that I don't give a rat's behind about kill count or damage distribution or any of that bunk. What I care about is being able to stay actively engaged with playing the game, and that means doing more than run around picking up loot while someone else does all the entertaining work.

[Cytobel]

6 hours ago, BornWithTeeth said:

As people have been pointing out for the entire duration of this thread, the change to WOF is nothing but a huge nerf to Ember's CC and survivability. Doubling WOF's damage but more than halving its range is...not an improvement. The double damage is pointless, because it's basically an extra couple of thousand Heat damage every few seconds. At high levels, that is nothing. Just, nothing.

 

You're seeing Ember mains saying "Dudes, we would prefer if you made it so that WOF did literally no damage but kept its range and CC," right?

You can find Volt mains saying something similar, and for similar reasons.

Thing with Discharge is that the potential damage output is going to be abused.  I know, because that's what I'm going to do.

[Cytobel]

6 hours ago, BornWithTeeth said:

As people have been pointing out for the entire duration of this thread, the change to WOF is nothing but a huge nerf to Ember's CC and survivability. Doubling WOF's damage but more than halving its range is...not an improvement. The double damage is pointless, because it's basically an extra couple of thousand Heat damage every few seconds. At high levels, that is nothing. Just, nothing.

 

You're seeing Ember mains saying "Dudes, we would prefer if you made it so that WOF did literally no damage but kept its range and CC," right?

You can find Volt mains saying something similar, and for similar reasons.

Thing with Discharge is that the potential damage output is going to be abused.  I know, because that's what I'm going to do.

[ChromaUmbra]

23 hours ago, Trichouette said:

Huge nerf ?

The 3.5 armor multiplier (that is, by default, without strength mods) will be applied to his base armor instead of base armor + mods.

That means you'll multiply his 350 armor by 3.5, instead of the 735 armor you have thanks to steel fiber.

With that so called "nerf", you'll have 1225 armor without steel fiber, instead of the 2572.5 you get with steel fiber + vex

1225 armor means a 80% damage reduction, while 2572.5 armor is a 89% damage reduction.

 

Does that sound like a HUGE NERF to you ? And here i'm talking about 100% strength, without even adding intensify or blind rage.

Now my math could be completely wrong, but if they are not, I could even remove steel fiber (since it'll be obsolete compared to vex) and add even more strength or duration.

For any Chroma that mods for strength (like most Chromas do), it is a huge nerf.  Try that math with more strength and see what happens.

[steelblueskies]

double damage, which means accelerant multiplies that, okay. i trend to negative str builds, but okay.

range reduction? uh see, no. just no.

increased costs, unavoidable as one either eats recast base cost of multiplied tick cost.

 

non afk engagement that recast on a timer gets in the way of?

reloading, shooting, bulletjump, aim glide, roll, casting 1, 2, 3, operator use in air movement control/guidance and more.

does it stop the nuking on most mission types leaving "nothing to do" where something to do is now codified officially as "kill S#&amp;&#036; only", NO.

does reduced range and cost per tick negatively impact performance in unavoidable scenarios.. ex: energy leech eximus aura radius(invisible) or venemous eximi? YES.

does the 4 change impact the don't oneshot our plaguestar boss with 3 that was going on with her? NO.

does it negatively impact builds reliant already on efficiency+duration+range instead of str, focused on other than damage applied via 4? quite a lot.

 

i get the terrornaut types stance, but their thread demonstrates they are not playing up "ember", they are playing a frame is a melee buff tool style, already being accomodated by nearly a dozen possible approaches. while this does not diminish their stance, it does mean that the role niche and use case is not removed from the game by discounting it as first priority validation.

 

i think i have to side with the nuke the 4 damage, keep range impart positively motivated desire to press more buttons by kit integration, instead of tempt the truly stand still afk people to improperly use macros or rig up some drinking bird style contraption over the key. arguably the repeating cast animation lock in for such would be EVEN MORE incentive to move less, and i heard the but couldn't it be macro'd on a timer.. oh wait thats not okay dozens of times as people turn over the play impact. its push a button on a timer to eat LESS negatives. placed on a frame generally played around emphasizing focusing on other gameplay elements and pressing other buttons for BENEFIT that suffer from too much situationality for said benefit to cost ratio.

for solo i definitely can see the armor scaling issue, lacking 4x aura options for fullstrip cp.

with it however it remains binary. its heat so its extra effective on flesh/health types, which reduces it to "damage output above hp/needed ttk or not above" flash accelerant like the base damage change is just a shift along the plane by altering the B variable in this quadratic equation plot sitting atop the scaling hp/level plot.

 

i waffled, i tried to read all as every reload found me seeing things i'd already read 10, 20, 40 pages later due to merges added to the beginning-ish.

i spent a few days hammering out thoughts arguments counterarguments and presentations then tossing them when they came back as hostile or confrontational in sentiment analysis.

 

so i give.

 

i will state that fundamentally pressing 4 and working to keep it on as long as humanly possible is not inherently bad.

i will favor the range over damage for the 4.

 

my first effort i would chance to actually attempt to implement as a kit changeup would look something like this:

specific to general form.

1 remains fireball. reduce base cost. add a charge effect that leaves duration affected trails similar to madurai focus trees dash enhancement. 1 may now ignite the new 3 listed below either by casting into it, or casting 3 onto a trail from charged 1. augment can retain function and additionally gain functionality by being capable of applying buff via persisting duration trail. 

2 no longer accelerant as per live. now a duration ability changing damage and cc functions of 4. still capable of applying augment buff to friendly targets based on range. old 2 debuff side moved to 3. while 2 duration active 4 ceases to apply heat damage and procs to affected targets for duration. applies magnetic and corrosive instead. magnetic for shield hit, corrosive for armor hit. both are WEAKER than heat versus flesh alone but better versus alternate types. choose which you wish for 2 active application of 4 on flesh. objective is less 4 damage while active to UNARMORED AND UNSHIELDED TARGETS with MORE options and general utility for armored and shielded or general group play.

3- now a reticle targeted ranged aoe, similar to limbos present cataclysm cast at location setup. cast is not a fire ring as now, instead an aoe accelerant cloud applying debuff to units in cloud or entering. can be ignited for old fireblast effect by: ignited enemy entering cloud, cast of 1 into cloud, casting onto trail from charged 1, casting such that ember with 4 active but not 2 active is inside cloud. provides distance keeping but not multiroom, incentive to use 1+3 for debuff control and for alternate damage application. provides choices for application of kit. augment still applies to targets hit by explosion fire portion of 3 as is. retains synergistic nature with 2 augment and heat proc applying weapons for self AND team. this or 1 or both as damage emphasis if anything.

4- remains low drain high range. cut the basic heat damage to a quarter of live or even possibly an eighth .stop rapid or instant nuking of things beyond earth certainly.

deemphasize 4 as damage itself consider inserting firequake as base functionality and shifting augment to reduce range and increase damage+drain. with 2 active instead of heat, deals corrosive and magnetic damage isntead, becomes incapable of igniting enemies or 3 accelerant clouds directly. this is the place to begin looking at percentual health effects as well. consider debuff that allows percentage health effects from other abilities on targets previously hit by 4. certainly focus on weaker magnetic when hitting health with 2 active over corrosive if adding any percentage health damage to direct 4 damage.

 

still able to melee synergize. incentives to cast more things or combo with sufficient range and variance for long or shorter styles. playstyle most affected is literal afk. second most affected is growing power+energy conversion combo for "win by damage" at higher levels if firequake not altered to base damage massiv eincrease with range reduction and drain increase. CO melee design still doable. raw cc and team buff support "living" in 4 and focusing on movement, gunplay, and augmented buffing still viable. new options tactical and otherwise and incentive to use them present.

presses buttons for to get MORE, not to avoid punishment/less. and not definitively on a timer either.

 

would seriously consider lowering 1 uncharged cast cost with proposal, also possibly increasing base energy pool by right about 25.

either approach to extra damage entailed (1-3 add percentages of damage to 4 hit targets, or percentages and damage and proc typing on 4).

less one and done decisions, but those that exist are largely spurred by the choice the player has already made for a short while in using 2.

ex: enemy manages to close range as a clump. livechoices? press 2, press 3, jump away, slam attack, die.

automatic 3 would no longer apply if 2 active still.. use 3+1, or if enemy present is ignited somehow from other source save the 1 cost by being attentive. 

 

shrug. i suppose the gist of it is being less flat. a little less everyone has the ability to stomp on this niche plus some more.

you could make the aoe effect hit all targets 100%. less interactive, arguably better cc, but that isn't what really breaks the cc game for her anyway while trying to keep it interesting. what breaks it is all the times yo bullet into a room with 4 on, hit 2 and watch ground eruptions cleanly choose to avoid the clearly visible enemies because they are "cc'd non threats" until it wears off, then begin nuking again. or the firequake backside slide maneuvers enemies do. or the knockdown grants cc immunity for a bit issues. 100% hard cc on 100% of targets isn't really the thing. its the "works more as a distance closing slow getting enemies in their own ways" deal. 

which is also related to why i don't suggest it as an always on passive or the like. putting aside not being able to mod proper for a passive, it has the ability to be turned off if one CHOOSES like this, while retaining its small (according to user capacity and tolerance and taste) drain over time. it is thus better to leave it on as acceptable for its minor costs and impacts to survival reaction time gained to enemies and many other functions while incentivizing much burstier costs with positively chosen ability uses at the same time. press the buttons because you want to, not because "muh timer". 

 

i want to be fair on that too. while it would have worked better as a charge cast, you were faced with needing the range reduction for over time if increasing damage with it, but got sidetracked by timer spam as interactivity and engagement. that or you really wanted the absolute obnoxious intrusion of cast animation interference from recasting, which i refuse to accept given how bad it would get, i do not believe even the most community maligned among you would approach it that way just to be malicious or "take a jab".

 

nor do i think that this proposal is without flaw and a gift from on high. the 3 is heavily loaded and trades coverage per cast for it. if enabled to be ignited by any enemy suffering heat proc can be possibly chaotic or reduced control for attempting to maximize targets per cast in uncoordinated groups. shrugs. i tried to take cues from my play AND your proposal and S#&amp;&#036; the playstyle less and the INCENTIVES around choices more. i also tried to rectify what appears to be a non solve for lower level missions and quite likely encouraging some with poorer impulse control to get themselves banned trying to live with the timer. i tried to provide more options to find a way or comfort zone, and also yes, to demonstrate that leaving 4 on is not the core problem. leaving it on AND relying on it to do ALL the work is the problem. let leaving it on work for your desire to have that base drain. let people moderate the speed they dig a hole be based on their desire to nuke faster and harder in active and positively selected ways. i went with a quadratic plot b shift too to resolve the lower level issue pushing it down to a probably sub 10 enemy level and hope that it covered enough to provide incentive to use her at higher levels still. not easy 1 button room nuke, but definitive incentive paths. i worry over possible interactions with saryn, but i also have to presume these are NOT all the frames being touched, just the ones in THIS BATCH/first.

 

sigh. i'll just post this now and start searching for someone who sources asbestos underwear, otherwise i'll be weeks before i do post anything on it. i also want to be clear, i think you tried here and had some clever approaches theoretically. thats great. keep on with that. and good luck with actually settling on an approach scott, that is a hot hot seat indeed to be tinkering with.

[BowlerHat]

So we all know the Ember change is dumb and doesn't do anything to address her inability to even take on the whole star chart. Which is ironic as she is labelled as the original damage caster frame. It also doesn't address the other reason people feel like they don't participate in low level missions which potato'd/forma'd weapons. 

But really my thought is why nerf a frame that is going to be unvaulted.. tomorrow... That had to come up in a meeting.

[Trichouette]

il y a 55 minutes, Bladefeather a dit :

For any Chroma that mods for strength (like most Chromas do), it is a huge nerf.  Try that math with more strength and see what happens.

As you wish.

I almost added that in my previous post though.

 

Let's use all strength mods available

• Intensify +30%
• Augur secrets +24%
• Transient fortitude +55%
• Blind rage +99%
• Energy conversion +50%
• Power drift +15%
• Growing power +25%

All this for a total of +298% power strength, and with the default 100% that's a huge 398% power strength.

Now let's take a look at this armor multiplier. The default max value is x3.5, add that much power strength and you get a x13.93 multiplier.

 

Pre-fix chroma with steel fiber : 735 armor * 13.93 = 10 238.55 armor, that is a 97% damage reduction.

POST-fix chroma with steel fiber : 350 armor * (13.93 + 1.1) = 5 355 armor, that is a 94% damage reduction.

 

The difference is by 3%, not too much of a huge nerf I'd say. Instead of taking 3% of the damage, you take 6%.

That won't matter until VERY high level (which is unbalanced and useless anyway).

Edited February 6, 2018 by Trichouette

[CandyDragon]

"World on fire is too strong"

Atterax/Scoliac +  Maiming strike exists.

Pick one balance team.   These design changes feel from the hip yet again.  

 

[Haeen]

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Objectively speaking, it is in DE's best interest to ensure players can have fun playing Warframe. Consequently, they have previously (and will continue to) dismantle playstyles that enable 1 player to prevent 3 others from playing the game.

NOTE: I'm using "you" for lack of a better pronoun, so if something I say doesn't apply to you don't take it personally.

I do not takeit personally, but, I also know for a fact that in the time I, and many other clanmates have been playing, not a single player quits the game over Ember clearing an entire room. IN fact, you know why?  Primarily because people quit for the following reasons.

1.  They feel the content is lacking and do not have anything to do.

2. Cannot surpass an obstacle due to difficulty and become frustrated then quit.

3. Anything involving money.

 

Never does anyone ever quit because a weapon is too strong, or an ability is too strong, or a warframeis too strong.  Only time people due such a thing is when its a competitive matter and the aspect in which Ember acts is not competitive in anyway.

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

No, because you're presenting this as some sort of difficult or confusing issue. It's really not. In that case yes, the onus is on the dissatisfied player to leave. And the inability to distinguish which side is the minority in every case is the only reason these sorts of playstyles can't be made bannable.

itis because there is no objective "wrong" is why they cannot make such play styles bannable.  Not because they cannot determine who is the minority which btw, easily accomplished through a report system.  If you agree that the onous is the unhappy person is to leave, then you are suggesting that the majority is always right.  They are not.

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

You mistakenly think you have a point.

That's cute, don't do it again.

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Arguments over who can override whom are inevitably circular, so it makes infinitely more sense to assess the situation based on common ground between players: ability to play the game. When your playstyle is the one causing problems for everyone else you are the one who should get overruled. Such it has been, and so it will be.

Prove that there is a problem.  you're hearing from a very vocal minority and suggesting that therefore, the majority have an issue with it.  Even if they did, it doesn't mean anything would necessarily need to be changed.  For example, the majority of players still hate Limbo despite the fact his design has made him much more agreeable.  The majority of players hate Frost players who leave snowgloves in a state where it inhibits gameplay.

Shall we change them because the majority are unhappy whenever they encounter such an issue? Not really...no

Ember falls in this category except only a minority of people are complaining about it and an even smaller number leave the game over it if any. I'd be money on it

 

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

If you were correct there wouldn't be a problem, and this nerf wouldn't exist. Obviously, reality contradicts your interpretation of events.

No. Often times such nerfs are to make those complaining be silent. For example, people complaining the McDonald's coffee was too hot.  They then started putting labels that said "THIS IS HOT" just to shut them up.  Just because someone says there is a problem, doesn't mean there is a problem.  Often times, changes are done just so those complaining can be silenced at the expense of actual gameplay.

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

The goal is to be objective, right?

Yes, and there is no objective measure demonstrating Ember's 4 is toxic to the game.

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

No, it doesn't. Proper limitations to wide-AOE effects is the only thing required to stabilize the game. Which is why I would agree that the nerf itself is a bad one, though the motivation for the nerf is 100% appropriate.

Limbo was reworked because he made the game literally unplayable for whomever he felt like making the game unplayable for.  Changes are made when it hurts the game. DE doesn't have issue with you clearing an entire room so long as you pay for that power. Ember's room clearing ability is relevant only in areas where player's are still raising their MR from a very low area.  The starmap essentially.  Anything actually relevant towards the strength of weapons and you don't see an issue at all.

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

So can you generate an argument that doesn't rely completely on defaming the opposition through projection?

Hardly defamation because the issue is AOE clearing, a.k.a, kills.  Another individual has no reason to complain aboutanother player getting the majority of the kills by AE clearing an area unless, they were unhappy they were not getting as many kills or felt they weren't getting the kills they deserve.  Predicting the behavior of an individual in a vacuum is impossible. Predicting their behavior when you place certain obstacles in front of them is horrifically easy.  Just like predicting whether or not a relationship is doomed to fail.

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Let's ditch the circular reasoning, yeah? Your entire argument rests on accepting that expecting all players to have an opportunity for participation is somehow "selfish." Good luck defending that one.

Negative, my argument is that individual's complaining are simply feeling that they aren't participating enough, which is an impossible measurement because that varies from one individual to the next. It is an entirely subjective issue in itself.  Don't rephrase my argument for me, if it is unclear simply ask for clarification.

People are naturally selfish creatures.  The idea that you need to participate to X level to be satisfied is a selfish notion in itself, and varies immensely as well.  The motivations for this nerf is bad.

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Are you seriously suggesting that being consigned to running after another player picking up loot qualifies as "playing the game?"

When I was an Mr 1 player enteringa fissure mission yadda yadda yadda.

Shall we nerf everything in the game so that a player who has just started is also capable of competing with an MR 25 player who understands the mechanics of the game and has modded their WF, weapons., and companions?  That is exactly what you are arguing for because the reason other players fall behind is usually a matter of skill and not due to abilities in the game sans exceptions which are few in number.

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Which is, again, why I disagree with the details of the nerf. It's a faulty approach to the problem at hand.

Fair enough

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Who are you to say that <30 isn't just as important as >30? The new player experience is the most critically important to the game's survival, and Ember is causing the problem for newer players. Notice that I didn't say Ember could completely dominate a Sortie.

No she isn't!  Provide data where new player's quit the game and state "It's because Ember is clearing the entire tileset and all I did was collect loot."

You can't, and the data that would be available would be so extremely small as to make it utterly irrelevant.  Why?

1. you're a new player. You go in, Ember is in your game.  She clears everything and you only get a few kills.  Do you see a problem?  no.  Primarily because you lack the information to make such a judgement.  Someone who is new to the game is never going to immediately suggest nerfs and buffs because they haven't experienced enough to make such an assessment.  They are more likely to go "Cool, I wonder how he is doing that."  

2.  A new player is more liely to quit because they are frustrated with the way the game is progressing.  For example, "How do I go to the Mars relay?"  Very common question in Warframe, large amount of google results.  Or for example "Having a hard time at raptor help."  or "Issues with Lich Kril. "  So on and so forth. 

New player's NEVER quit because of balance issues in the game because they never reach a level to be capable of recognizing it.  In fact, just now, I just ran some newbies through general Sargas Ruk, as Ember, and one shot the boss over and over and over.  Their response.  "Thanks, that really helped speed things up."  "Makes farming so much easier."

New player's are interested in progression, and Ember assists in progression.  This is a psychological fact, there is tons of research dedicated towards determining what makes new player's stay. 

 

Now...why does >30 matter?

We shall go objectively.

If you attempted to balance everything about the content below level 30, you would need to nerf everything possible in the game capable of one shotting an enemy. You would need to horrifically butcher every single mod in the game.  You would need to completely destroy the progression of gaining strength, of the power fantasy.  These two being very important for making new players stay in the game long term.  If a new player advances and they don't feel any progression because everything dies at the same speed?  No progression. No power.  This is part of why Destiny 2 struggled to maintain its player base.

Furthermore, any new content you introduced into the game would need to be, again, balanced around that less than 30 content. So player's don't feel they are getting any stronger. Longer term player's don't feel they are gaining any strength despite facing new challenges and more intricate puzzles.  Just like...Destiny 2.  A lot of crazy things right?

The most successful games never balance for lower level content. Ever.  You think WoW goes and balances the lower level content because a Mage just AOE blitzed through the entire map while farming for cosmetic armor? Nope.  Did RIFT?  Nope. Did any MMO?  Nope.

 

This goes for...anything that has an interest of maintaining a playerbase.  You don't balance lower level content around powerful weapons/abilities.

Disagree?  That's fine.  You can.  Building a franchise successfully though?  That's how you do it.

So..you're wrong.  New player's dont quit over ember.  Only someone who has stayed in the game a long time would...and for different reasons than balance.  Selfish reasons.

 

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Says who? I'm not seeing any posts saying "I'm not getting 1st spot in terms of kills, NERF EMBER." Are you? If so, please link them.

Says anyone who goes "Ember is clearing the entire map and its an issue."

What does Ember's 4 do? It kills anything below 30 instantly.  Just like how my frost can kill everything below level 60 instantly (its hilarious really).

Ember is just more popular than Equinox, Banshee, Frost, Mesa, and others for clearing that low level content very quickly.  Shall we nerf everything based on a complaint that can be summarized as "I don't get as many kills as I want."

 

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

If you can't do that, you are inferring an ulterior motive for your opposition because it happens to be more convenient for you. Sorry, but that doesn't cut it. I can't speak for anyone else, but I can speak for myself in telling you that I don't give a rat's behind about kill count or damage distribution or any of that bunk. What I care about is being able to stay actively engaged with playing the game, and that means doing more than run around picking up loot while someone else does all the entertaining work.

Ember's 4 is the same as Maiming strike...in fact its much weaker than people sliding all over the place because of how the ability scales.  At anything below level 30, she is just going to kill everything because of how the ability is designed and that's okay. It is less than 30, you can't design your game on an area of progression otherwise, there is no progression.

 

If Ember was clearing everything in a room at level 50 without a single issue.  Sure. Maybe...MAYBE....there might be an issue.  In consideration of the fact that at such levels everyone gets nearly the same kills, especially in survival/defense where spawns  can be exploted.  it isn't an issue.

 

So if Ember's 4 isn't an issue in content that is relevant to the power given to us weapon wise, and only clears low level content just like Equi, Frost, MAG, and any other frame with room clearing AOE, then why are we nerfing the ability? Who is being satisfied outside of a vocal minority that (probably) wouldn't quit the game?

[courierjack]

i really like ember when doing quick missions and alerts, i dont really understand why nerf her like that. if this is how DE handles these things, i should've picked another game to spend my time on 

[(PSN)SirLongJonBremne]

So I like most of the changes not gunna lie, im actually quite curious how banshee will play with augment now, which is always fun. The ember changes are the only thing I'm not really on board for at first glance (will play test to develop a real opinion). My main concern is that I genuinely don't think they'll change the experience of killing everything on the map at low to mid levels. Not only that but I don't think it will even require a change in playstyle or a significant change in build. 

With max efficiency and two range mods (stretch and auger reach) even after ramp up the range would be 13m and I'd only be draining 1.5 energy/sec, but since I'm doing double damage I can move more quickly through low to mid levels as everything will die even faster. Or if that doesn't suit my tastes I can just toggle wof to the tune of 13 energy every so often and keep moving. So in in low to mid level content where embers squishyness doesn't matter the change doesn't doing anything at all really. The only people who might see a big difference are those who run high level content with ember. The damage increase may help against the corpus and the infested, but against the grineer...... Going from 900 to 1800 DMG against an enemy with an effective health pool of 3+million won't have much of an impact. Even with accelerant adding a 6x multiplier. What would be noticeable is that without cc from wof ember is going to die, even with the 13m cc, one bombard from 14m will one shot ember. So all I'm saying is this really only hurts her in the high levels and changes nothing in anything under level 50 ish. 

I've heard you guys say your taking a look at her 1-3 which is great since she's kind of a one trick pony. But maybe also look into some sort of survivability buff. Like damage reduction the longer wof is on cause the heat melts projectiles or something. I'm still open to trying the changes but I have the above concerns. Looking forward to the update.

[V38M2Y69T]

Ember is the only frame I have left that I enjoy playing that you haven't absolutely @(*()&#036; destroyed with nerfs and "reworks" that turn frames from useful and strong in a niche to bland and mediocre across the board. Nerfing world on fire would kill the last build I enjoy running as a default in any piece of content and kill my last reason to even play.

[DiabolusUrsus]

40 minutes ago, Aegni said:

I do not takeit personally, but, I also know for a fact that in the time I, and many other clanmates have been playing, not a single player quits the game over Ember clearing an entire room. IN fact, you know why?  Primarily because people quit for the following reasons.

1.  They feel the content is lacking and do not have anything to do.

2. Cannot surpass an obstacle due to difficulty and become frustrated then quit.

3. Anything involving money.

Never does anyone ever quit because a weapon is too strong, or an ability is too strong, or a warframeis too strong.  Only time people due such a thing is when its a competitive matter and the aspect in which Ember acts is not competitive in anyway.

itis because there is no objective "wrong" is why they cannot make such play styles bannable.  Not because they cannot determine who is the minority which btw, easily accomplished through a report system.  If you agree that the onous is the unhappy person is to leave, then you are suggesting that the majority is always right.  They are not.

Dude(ette?)... this is a public game, not a sovereign state. Don't try to bring that "tyranny of the majority" crap into this when it isn't relevant. What matters is the game experience, not the individual "rights" of specific players. The only "right" you have in common is the ability to play, and even then that's a privilege. Emphasis mine in the quote; notice how having something to do is - by your own admission - important? Consequently it's important for players to not be left with nothing to do.

Players don't play when they're not having fun, and it is in DE's best interests to have public matchmaking be sufficiently fun. The fact of the matter is you have the same amount of "data" proof that I do, where the defining difference is that DE has already ruled in favor of my perspective. You can repeat yourself all you like, but until policy reflects otherwise you're just spouting platitudes.

40 minutes ago, Aegni said:

That's cute, don't do it again.

Then don't make it accurate?

40 minutes ago, Aegni said:

Prove that there is a problem.  you're hearing from a very vocal minority and suggesting that therefore, the majority have an issue with it.  Even if they did, it doesn't mean anything would necessarily need to be changed.  For example, the majority of players still hate Limbo despite the fact his design has made him much more agreeable.  The majority of players hate Frost players who leave snowgloves in a state where it inhibits gameplay.

DE made a change.

There's your proof.

"There's no problem!"

Yeah, well, DE saw fit to solve something. And with the backlash these changes beget they certainly aren't something DE does lightly.

40 minutes ago, Aegni said:

Shall we change them because the majority are unhappy whenever they encounter such an issue? Not really...no

I'd say we shouldn't make sweeping generalizations over which changes are or are not required based solely on "majority" perspective and take it on a case-by-case basis.

40 minutes ago, Aegni said:

Ember falls in this category except only a minority of people are complaining about it and an even smaller number leave the game over it if any. I'd be money on it

Keep telling yourself that. By default any feedback found on the Forums is strictly a "vocal minority," though, so keep that in mind.

40 minutes ago, Aegni said:

No. Often times such nerfs are to make those complaining be silent. For example, people complaining the McDonald's coffee was too hot.  They then started putting labels that said "THIS IS HOT" just to shut them up.  Just because someone says there is a problem, doesn't mean there is a problem.  Often times, changes are done just so those complaining can be silenced at the expense of actual gameplay.

Yes, and there is no objective measure demonstrating Ember's 4 is toxic to the game.

Limbo was reworked because he made the game literally unplayable for whomever he felt like making the game unplayable for.  Changes are made when it hurts the game. DE doesn't have issue with you clearing an entire room so long as you pay for that power. Ember's room clearing ability is relevant only in areas where player's are still raising their MR from a very low area.  The starmap essentially.  Anything actually relevant towards the strength of weapons and you don't see an issue at all.

Which is when RQ Banshee enters the picture, and she's getting changed too. See a pattern? Me too.

40 minutes ago, Aegni said:

Hardly defamation because the issue is AOE clearing, a.k.a, kills.  Another individual has no reason to complain aboutanother player getting the majority of the kills by AE clearing an area unless, they were unhappy they were not getting as many kills or felt they weren't getting the kills they deserve.  Predicting the behavior of an individual in a vacuum is impossible. Predicting their behavior when you place certain obstacles in front of them is horrifically easy.  Just like predicting whether or not a relationship is doomed to fail.

Negative, my argument is that individual's complaining are simply feeling that they aren't participating enough, which is an impossible measurement because that varies from one individual to the next. It is an entirely subjective issue in itself.  Don't rephrase my argument for me, if it is unclear simply ask for clarification.

People are naturally selfish creatures.  The idea that you need to participate to X level to be satisfied is a selfish notion in itself, and varies immensely as well.  The motivations for this nerf is bad.

Again, says you. Except you won't let anyone actually argue a different perspective, and you repeatedly insist that your opposition is saying one thing when I'm sitting here arguing something completely different.

40 minutes ago, Aegni said:

When I was an Mr 1 player enteringa fissure mission yadda yadda yadda.

Shall we nerf everything in the game so that a player who has just started is also capable of competing with an MR 25 player who understands the mechanics of the game and has modded their WF, weapons., and companions?  That is exactly what you are arguing for because the reason other players fall behind is usually a matter of skill and not due to abilities in the game sans exceptions which are few in number.

No she isn't!  Provide data where new player's quit the game and state "It's because Ember is clearing the entire tileset and all I did was collect loot."

You can't, and the data that would be available would be so extremely small as to make it utterly irrelevant.  Why?

1. you're a new player. You go in, Ember is in your game.  She clears everything and you only get a few kills.  Do you see a problem?  no.  Primarily because you lack the information to make such a judgement.  Someone who is new to the game is never going to immediately suggest nerfs and buffs because they haven't experienced enough to make such an assessment.  They are more likely to go "Cool, I wonder how he is doing that."  

2.  A new player is more liely to quit because they are frustrated with the way the game is progressing.  For example, "How do I go to the Mars relay?"  Very common question in Warframe, large amount of google results.  Or for example "Having a hard time at raptor help."  or "Issues with Lich Kril. "  So on and so forth. 

New player's NEVER quit because of balance issues in the game because they never reach a level to be capable of recognizing it.  In fact, just now, I just ran some newbies through general Sargas Ruk, as Ember, and one shot the boss over and over and over.  Their response.  "Thanks, that really helped speed things up."  "Makes farming so much easier."

New player's are interested in progression, and Ember assists in progression.  This is a psychological fact, there is tons of research dedicated towards determining what makes new player's stay. 

Covered this already.

There's a difference between "more powerful" (encouraging progression) and "too powerful" (damaging to the game experience). Having stronger gear for new players to work towards does not have to mean "Ember, pre-nerf." It just has to mean "stronger than what they have now."

40 minutes ago, Aegni said:

Now...why does >30 matter?

We shall go objectively.

If you attempted to balance everything about the content below level 30, you would need to nerf everything possible in the game capable of one shotting an enemy. You would need to horrifically butcher every single mod in the game.  You would need to completely destroy the progression of gaining strength, of the power fantasy.  These two being very important for making new players stay in the game long term.  If a new player advances and they don't feel any progression because everything dies at the same speed?  No progression. No power.  This is part of why Destiny 2 struggled to maintain its player base.

Furthermore, any new content you introduced into the game would need to be, again, balanced around that less than 30 content. So player's don't feel they are getting any stronger. Longer term player's don't feel they are gaining any strength despite facing new challenges and more intricate puzzles.  Just like...Destiny 2.  A lot of crazy things right?

The most successful games never balance for lower level content. Ever.  You think WoW goes and balances the lower level content because a Mage just AOE blitzed through the entire map while farming for cosmetic armor? Nope.  Did RIFT?  Nope. Did any MMO?  Nope.

Again, I agree that you shouldn't balance for level <30. But that's different from excluding it from consideration entirely as "irrelevant," when the new player experience (<30) is extremely important. That's why I would support a nerf to energy economy (important to all levels) and a buff to damage scaling (important to high levels).

40 minutes ago, Aegni said:

This goes for...anything that has an interest of maintaining a playerbase.  You don't balance lower level content around powerful weapons/abilities.

Disagree?  That's fine.  You can.  Building a franchise successfully though?  That's how you do it.

So..you're wrong.  New player's dont quit over ember.  Only someone who has stayed in the game a long time would...and for different reasons than balance.  Selfish reasons.

Okay.

40 minutes ago, Aegni said:

Says anyone who goes "Ember is clearing the entire map and its an issue."

So, me? You clearly have better insight as to my personal thoughts and motivations than I do myself. That's amazing.

40 minutes ago, Aegni said:

What does Ember's 4 do? It kills anything below 30 instantly.  Just like how my frost can kill everything below level 60 instantly (its hilarious really).

Ember is just more popular than Equinox, Banshee, Frost, Mesa, and others for clearing that low level content very quickly.  Shall we nerf everything based on a complaint that can be summarized as "I don't get as many kills as I want."

Ember's 4 is the same as Maiming strike...in fact its much weaker than people sliding all over the place because of how the ability scales.  At anything below level 30, she is just going to kill everything because of how the ability is designed and that's okay. It is less than 30, you can't design your game on an area of progression otherwise, there is no progression.

If Ember was clearing everything in a room at level 50 without a single issue.  Sure. Maybe...MAYBE....there might be an issue.  In consideration of the fact that at such levels everyone gets nearly the same kills, especially in survival/defense where spawns  can be exploted.  it isn't an issue.

So if Ember's 4 isn't an issue in content that is relevant to the power given to us weapon wise, and only clears low level content just like Equi, Frost, MAG, and any other frame with room clearing AOE, then why are we nerfing the ability? Who is being satisfied outside of a vocal minority that (probably) wouldn't quit the game?

I'm not going to sit here and try to justify the nature of the nerf, because as I said earlier I don't agree with it. Nerfing WoF specifically is not related to the core issue and in all honesty won't fix the problem at hand. We're on the same page in that respect.

But you cannot convince me that wanting a full group of players to be allowed to fully engage with the game instead of 1 player doing everything and the other 3 following along is somehow "selfish." It's true that the "tyranny of the majority" or GHP is something to be wary of, but in this instance it is both applicable and appropriate. The interests of the group (the game experience) necessarily trump the interests of the individual (player power potential) because power can be throttled to within reasonable limits without making the game un-fun.

The problem - as I see it - is not that a change is being made but rather that the wrong change is being made.

Now, I promise you that I will read your next reply but I'm not going to waste my time with a response to a rehash of everything we just said. For your benefit, a summary of my perspective:

• Wanting everyone to participate is not selfish. Given that it requires a sacrifice of some individual power, it is arguably altruistic.
• Having anything - Ember or otherwise - capable of killing everything in a wide area for the duration of the mission damages the multiplayer experience.
• A nerf of some sort is required.

Those 3 points are non-negotiable to me. You are free to disagree, but you're not going to succeed in convincing me otherwise unless you have something completely new and profound to say.

If you'd like to further discuss the specifics of how best to nerf wide-AOE killing powers, I'm happy to participate.

 

[YohSL]

Well, I can't tell whether these changes are good or bad, since I don't use these warframes.

But generally speaking I'd prefer change, as more then a few of the warframes designed terribly well in the first place, or rather have abilities that never really fit with their role or ascetic design.  With that said I would love to see my girl Valkyr get some love, as I was quite disappointing to return after a long absence to see her nerfed quite heavily.

To be fair her Hysteria ability was over powered to the point of being broken, but at the same time it was the only ability in her kit really worth using.  So now she is just a big bag of meh.  At this point I'd like to see her just get an ability overhaul to modernize and re-balance out her kit, with the berserker playstyle in mind. Like if her Hysteria was built around kill streak/rampage like mechanic, that gives her sustain and power, and can be maintained indefinitely by murdering the S#&amp;&#036; out of everything as quickly as possible, bare handed.

I want her to be able to rip and tear through her foes as brutally as possible, like a good beserker should.  However her current kit simply doesn't work that way, outside of Hysteria to a limited extent.    So I hope she's a candidate for further development this year.  It would probably bring me back to play the game some more, and yes probably spend some money.

[Angelid]

Is there any chances that Trinity is going to go into review at some point in the future, or if she's even brought up in the conversation? Many old warframes have been reworked to reduce redundancy, improve spamming, and given so many QoLs. Many can do most of her jobs better, the only real niche she has is to spam her EV to allow everyone else to spam too. She's got terrible gameplay, and isn't rewarding to play in the slightest, only punished when she doesn't do her job correctly or even mistimes an ult. Please tell me she's at least brought up in discussions!!

[jiminatorx]

I took a non-ember frame into a axi defense fissure today. What did I find? The mission took a god-awful long time. Enemies had to be tracked down to locations where they get stuck. Everyone left at 5. That is what we have to look forward to. Gate the missions. Solve the actual problem instead of breaking frames and builds.

[dragonmaster61]

Isn't this game a game for people to play however you want to play it? Why would nerfing stuff do this game any good in the 1st place? I'm was looking at overwatch and now this game's getting bad... And why did DE take any note from people who probably don't have the frame that someone's using to clear the mission and make a fuss about not having any kills just because 4th skills are doing the killing.

Edited February 6, 2018 by dragonmaster61

[(XBOX)ShoulderCliff66]

22 hours ago, (PS4)Rasmus_ep88 said:

Most of the feedback regarding Chromas isn't aimed at his damage, which prob need a toning down, but more how much this 'fix' will negatively affect his survivability

Even before this fix, if you were even only a few minutes on Mot and your 2 and 3 ran out, you'd still get melted.  I think his defenses will still be good enough to go a long time at high level, play sortie 3, or whatever.  I mean, I still bring Mag, Volt, and other squishies into those.

[NowImMotivated]

On 03/02/2018 at 5:33 AM, [DE]Connor said:

At its simplest, we do not want our Eidolons one-shotted.

Just make eidolons tougher then, dont nerf the lizard