Three Simple Questions For Devs On Goals And The Implementation Thereof

[Volt_Cruelerz]

After seeing the below, I simply have three questions for the devs. None of these questions are remotely inflammatory (not that I can think of anyways). I'm just curious to know what you guys are/were/will be thinking when making a few decisions and how those relate to goals.
 

 

4) The Great Mission Type Overhauls: Removal of Raid, Redoing of Spy, Deception, and Rescue, inclusion of Survival

In last week’s hot topics, the upcoming mission changes got brought up, please see this post: https://forums.warframe.com/index.php?/topic/87926-july-29th-community-hot-topics/page-4#entry990940


This week we have an updated overview of the coming mission changes:

Raid, Deception, Spy, and Rescue are, on average, our least played missions. Raid is too similar to Sabotage and Capture in the designers eyes and needs to go to make room for a new mission type.

Deception, Spy, and Rescue need a complete overhaul to make them more compelling.

The Designers aim is to make Rescue a mission type that no longer has the Rescue Target follow you around levels, but instead you free a prisoner in a deployable escape pod. More details to come on this, this won’t be happening soon but the “Rescue Review” will happen given it is one of the least played mission types.

Raid will be removed for a much desired “Survival” mode game type. I’ve seen a lot of feedback about ways to tweak Raid to keep it in the pool, some which suggest make it the mission for Alerts when you are after a certain item (Reactor, etc). To be relayed and discussed.

5) Armor (Scalability and Difficulty)

Several great posts have emerged that tackle “Armor” and its effectiveness at high levels and how this affects players options when facing high level enemies. This conversation boils down to what kind of changes will Armor undergo, if any? The answer is that Armor is currently working as intended and is unlikely to change.

6) Power Creep/Difficulty/High Level Gameplay

This complements the above topic but from a different perspective. To borrow a quote from the thread from player 11.11.11:

“My point is, a lot of the games current difficulty is, as Litler puts it - not based around player skill or emergent game-play. Its simply about getting weapons that allow you to spit out enough damage per second, to take on incredibly beefed up enemies.”

This is an apt summary of player concerns and something that is being brought up around the office. So many factors can go into “fixing” what is identified here, we are always tweaking and adding new content to allow for new gameplay experiences. Truthfully we like being Elite Tenno: Grineer, Corpus, and Infested killing machines, but we also love creativity in what our players can bring to the table. Finding balance in this is our continued goal.

7) Continued Warframe Buff

Trinity and Ember are currently on Scott’s list to be buffed. Mag, Rhino, and Volt got a brush up in 8.3 and are still being reviewed. The rest of the bunch will eventually be addressed as well, so if you don’t see “insert Warframe here” now, the time for review will come. Baby steps!

8) Buff Weapon “X”

We are rolling out balance changes very quickly. We love the feedback (good and bad) and take it very seriously. Our goal is to avoid having a single dominant weapon, build, mod configuration...

Question 1: Are you going for tiered balance of weapons, and if so, which tiers are to be the most powerful?
Right now, this appears to be the case and that the clan and prime weapons are the best. I just wish to know if this current power tiering is deliberate or whether it has just happened that way. Obviously, you guys want balance and don't want a dominant weapon ruling all. I'm just curious if you're going for a tiered approach (like now), if all things should be balanced against each other (which would mean an overhaul of the current way prime weapons work), or something else entirely?

 

Answer 1: Ideally, all things would be balanced as side-grade.  That said, in practice they're going for a low-level tier and a high-level tier of weaponry.  As such, there is to be, say, a low-level sniper (Vulkar) and a high-level sniper (Lanka).

Question 2: Are you concerned about players avoiding content because a prime may come out in the future, and if so, do you have any ideas on ways to remedy this?
At this point, many players (including myself) are hesitant to use a large amount of the weaponry of the game. Now, I still built a weapon after its prime came out, but I simply found it undesirable to put in a potato or forma into the weapon. From my perspective at least, that seems like having the prime be a straight upgrade is just not good for business. You likely have very good reasons why you chose this. I just can't see them, though I'd like to.

 

Answer 2: No.  Scott is not concerned at all about this.  He is aware that people have suggested overhauls such as skins instead of true weapons, but is hesitant given that it would necessitate changing what a lot of people have already worked hard for.

Question 3: How do you plan to make game modes aside from Defense more fun so the game is no longer defined by that one game type in all its forms (ED, T3D, MD, and the upcoming Survival)?
If armor is working as intended, that means that Defense will continue to be dominated by AI weaponry in all its forms (physics impact, serrated blade, armor piercing). Thus, you are either intending for AI to dominate in Defense, you are ignorant, or have something else in mind. I'm assuming it is the former for obvious reasons. If you do not wish for one weapon class to be dominant, that must mean that you wish for Defense to be toppled from its throne as the dominant game type. How then do you plan to do this? I understand not all plans may be concrete at this point, but could you give at least one hard example of something you are planning? This affects the whole meta of the game because right now, players are suggesting changes to make frames that aren't meant for Defense good at it because that's where most players spend their time, let alone the aforementioned issues with AI weaponry becoming so dominant.

 

Answer 3: while not directly asked or answered, the current damage system shall receive an overhaul and they wish to "diversify gameplay" which could mean toppling defense from its throne.  By the first statement, AI should be less dominant outside of defense and possibly even within it.  When combined with the possibility of defense becoming a smaller part of the game, this should assist in AI becoming less important overall.  Still useful for certain tasks, but not the general end-all-be-all that it is now.

I feel like these questions address the most important issues to the community right now. They are just asking for your reasoning behind some of the decisions you have made and what your plans are for things. I don't particularly care if these get answered in Community Hot Topics, a Livestream, or in this thread, but I would very much like to get a response on these questions at some point.

Thank you for reading.

 

To any devs that may read this: I do really enjoy this game and believe that in a lot of ways, you guys have done a great job.  I don't see eye to eye on everything and don't understand your thought process on certain things.  That's all I'm trying to do here is to find out what reasoning resulted in the decisions and statements that were made.  Obviously there are issues with balance and bugs, but you guys have said balance is important and of course bugs are.  I'm just trying to probe into other things.  Thanks again for reading!

To any players that may read this: please be considerate of the devs in any posts you may make. They work hard, and they are thinking human beings. They do think before acting. The questions asked were to understand their thought process. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

 

EDIT: Rebecca responded below with the following statement

... will get these answered in some form (we have a Livestream Q&A next week with the crew, will aim for then).

 

 

EDIT: there is now a part 2 to this post - https://forums.warframe.com/index.php?/topic/93691-three-more-questions-for-the-devs-on-goals-and-implementation/

 

EDIT: the questions were answered in the livestream and their answers were summarized above.

Edited August 15, 2013 by Volt_Cruelerz

[Silraed]

I would very much like to see these questions answered, specifically questions 1 and 2.

You have a very well put together thread here, have an up vote.

[Hybridon]

You always drop in well elaborated questions, I agree in all points, even though I am a fan of defense mode, the current game makes non lovers have to go to defense in case they want a better progress or higher prizes, therefore people want frames balanced towards that goal, even though it aint what we should be aiming for as each frame is unique and has its pros and cons on each kind of level, like Vauban is a high valued frame on infested defense, but is squishy on grineer normal missions.

[KvotheTheArcane1]

They don't want a "dominant weapon"... but the armor system is "working as intended"... wut. That CLEARLY means there is a "best" weapon, or a "best" group of weapons, namely anything with AI/AP for base damage. (+1 to OP)

[NovusNiveus]

Take all of my yes.

[CelsiusPrime]

I also have begun to notice how more and more of the game is becoming centered around the different defence missions. I think there are 2 reasons for that.

 

1: massive amounts of enemies = massive xp = more levels faster = maxing everything = end game

 

2: not only are there more enemies but they can also reach a much higher level than any of the other mission types.

[[DE]Rebecca]

Continually impressed by your threads, Volt, will get these answered in some form (we have a Livestream Q&A next week with the crew, will aim for then).

[Volt_Cruelerz]

Continually impressed by your threads, Volt, will get these answered in some form (we have a Livestream Q&A next week with the crew, will aim for then).

Very happy to hear that!  Thank you for the quick response and I'll look forward to that.

[Paprika]

I have a love-hate relationship with defense. As it is, it's the go to mission type for challenge. Other than being sort of like end game, I don't think it has much to offer. It's becoming the Vauben and Frost Show. Co-op isn't really required in these mission types, and I don't think the Mission type meshes will with the high-octane, Ninja run-n'-gun action that Warframe is aiming for. 

 

I mean, in other mission types, you could, to a degree, use your wits to skirt around the enemy or cleverly use the environment to great effect (eg. shooting reinforced glass, cutting enemy mobs off at doorways so they have to attack you single file, etc.). In Defense, the goal is to kill everything, and defend something. Unfortunately, you can't really go out and be really clever about the affair because if you leave the pod for too long, it'll get shot at. This is just my opinion.

[InsomniacOvrLrd]

The only reason i play defense is because it's the most rewarding. Get a ton materials, get a ton of xp, get a ton of mods. There are no missions that compare to the reward vs time vs effort that maps like xini and io provide.  I really do hope these questions get answered.

[Lek5tacy]

The only reason i play defense is because it's the most rewarding. Get a ton materials, get a ton of xp, get a ton of mods. There are no missions that compare to the reward vs time vs effort that maps like xini and io provide.  I really do hope these questions get answered.

 This is what I was exactly thinking - Defence is mostly popular because it's the least effort for greater rewards.

 

Question 1: Are you going for tiered balance of weapons, and if so, which tiers are to be the most powerful?

Right now, this appears to be the case and that the clan and prime weapons are the best. I just wish to know if this current power tiering is deliberate or whether it has just happened that way. Obviously, you guys want balance and don't want a dominant weapon ruling all. I'm just curious if you're going for a tiered approach (like now), if all things should be balanced against each other (which would mean an overhaul of the current way prime weapons work), or something else entirely?

This is where I feel the mastery system needs to be explained better (especially for new players) and one of the areas to be expanded into, assuming the weapons are designed with a tier in mind.

[Volt_Cruelerz]

 This is what I was exactly thinking - Defence is mostly popular because it's the least effort for greater rewards.

 

This is where I feel the mastery system needs to be explained better (especially for new players) and one of the areas to be expanded into, assuming the weapons are designed with a tier in mind.

While there are advantages of tying mastery to weapon unlocks, the most common complaint was that it forces you to get weapons you don't like.  To be honest, I've never found a weapon in the game I liked aside from the Fragor before U7 when you could stack mods of the same type and had gratuitously powerful warframe mods that would amp melee damage.  Ever since, grinding mastery on melee weapons has always been a less than pleasant experience.  Sure, there have been some stand-out ones like the Orthos and Dual Ether, but for the most part, I really dislike melee in this game.  At this point, I'm almost to mastery 9, so I've definitely experienced most of what the game has to offer, but the fact remains that at this point, I have exhausted everything I want to grind up.

 

That said, a lot of the mastery-locked weapons like the Supra, Flux, and Dera were fantastic and well worth it.  I'd be fine with more mastery gating; I'm just trying to explain the drawbacks to it.

[Volt_Cruelerz]

Updated OP.

 

Also, I am not an electric doughnut lol.

Edited August 15, 2013 by Volt_Cruelerz