Jump to content
Dante Unbound: Share Bug Reports and Feedback Here! ×

Why is the Plasmor so weak now?


JackyDee
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Thrymm said:

The huge list of buffs brought most weapons into more or less sortie ranges.  They mostly peter out shortly thereafter.

With regard to that last bit, that's more than likely due to exponential enemy scaling. So (IMO at least) perfectly understandable and reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

You're assuming that popularity is the sole driving factor behind the nerf, which isn't necessarily the case. Also, the existence of overpowered weapon Y does not justify the continued existence of overpowered weapon X. The fact that there are other problems does not make singular problems untouchable.

Wrong. You're cherry-picking your point of reference to criticize a perfectly reasonable nerf.

Obviously, if you compare Plasmor to level 30 mobs only it is overpowered, and if you compare it to level 200+ mobs it is probably underpowered. Which is why Sortie (level 100) is used as the maximum "balanced" level. If Plasmor is decent for killing level 100 mobs and starts to fall off in effectiveness afterward, then it is balanced.

Wha?

Continually advancing power-creep by demanding extra power to fight excessively scaled enemies is about as anti-new-player as you can get. I'm sorry that you find Sorties boring, but that's the current maximum balanced level. You have to take what you can get when fighting anything past that.

Endless scaling is not supposed to be balanced. It is supposed to overpower the player and force them out of "endless" missions. Thus, a maximum balanced level is required to maintain a constant reference point.

At the very least I can recognize a baseless assertion for what it is, whereas you continue to insist that you are somehow right. How would you quantify your interpretation as "more obvious" than mine? It's entirely subjective.

No, it is the most pointless thing to do in a situation like this. What would you consider a balanced level, hm? Level 150? 160? 200? If the point of reference for "balanced" is variable then it is impossible to maintain consistency.

Except it's not, when tested properly. The weapon still works fine in all content that should be balanced.

So you admit that you're trying to balance the game for levels higher than Sortie 3, then?

Listen I get it, you don't go beyond low level content so for you nothing changed. That doesn't change the fact that this nerf was actually very severe.

Edited by -Trey-
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, -Trey- said:

Listen I get it, you don't go beyond low level content so for you nothing changed. That doesn't change the fact that this nerf was actually very severe.

Except it doesn't matter, because all of the severe effects you speak of occur outside of the balanced range. Balance requires an unchanging reference point to obtain, so ambiguous "endurance" runs where level is ridiculously variable and nobody ever seems to use the same qualification for "high level" is completely useless for balancing purposes.

Remember, if all you can do is blow smoke, be condescending to your opposition. That way, you can feel like you actually made valid points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DiabolusUrsus said:

Except it doesn't matter, because all of the severe effects you speak of occur outside of the balanced range. Balance requires an unchanging reference point to obtain, so ambiguous "endurance" runs where level is ridiculously variable and nobody ever seems to use the same qualification for "high level" is completely useless for balancing purposes.

Remember, if all you can do is blow smoke, be condescending to your opposition. That way, you can feel like you actually made valid points.

Bolding text won't make you right, despite what you seem to be thinking. All of the sever effects occur in this game, it's just part you choose to ignore. Balancing should never be done around sorties, because they are far too easy for it. There was no reason to buff Soma, or completely overbuff Supra for sorties. They were perfectly fine there already and now they are extremely good so they arent balancing it around sorties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, -Trey- said:

Majority of them were at sortie ranges already even beyond that, there might have been few where it might have been needed. Others they either overbuffed or just did something so it can be said it got buffed, like 1% of tenora which was a change for a sake of changing something. To actually make them balanced in normal content, which was discussed here, most of them would need to be nerfed not buffed.

 

 

So again. Plasmor was nerfed not to "balance" it for normal content, but because it was simply used too much. At some point they said it had like 60% usage or something. So called balance of normal content does not exist if everything dies from 1 hit. But good luck creating your own rules where nerfs/buffs or weapons in general cant be compared against high level enemies, who are also part of this game. I'm sure you will go far with that.

I think our ideas of balanced are quite different, as well as our idea of "sortie range", as well as our idea of "majority".

There where a number of weapons that received nominal or no adjustment.  These weapons where already sortie range weapons.  However, THE MAJORITY of the weapons that where adjusted where brought to a more scalable point within their stats, largely through increases to crit or status or both, especially on weapons that where flat, base damage weaponry in the past.

Clearly, there was a target in mind when these changes where made.  I'm not basing that on some wishful fantasy, I'm basing it on not only the methodology behind the changes---most weaponry was made with relative "weight" parity in crit versus status, with commensurate base damage increases/decreases to allow these items to mod into the scalable range that was aimed at.  In addition to that, I'm also basing it on the general weapon TTK that I'm observing---and the point that this seems to converge squarely upon is the general level range of sortie 3.

That TTK number is key, as there are plenty of weapons that can still kill enemies above that range.  The differences come in when they start to do so without proper ammunition efficiency to continue on, as well as increasingly longer time to kill on target.  Please do keep in mind that this is the weapons themselves(when modded, so I suppose mods as well), but not synergy factors like warframe buffs or auras that can actually boost this effective level much higher.

The Tenora is actually a good example for displaying actual method theory---it was a fine weapon in the first place, realistically within the proper damage range for its mastery rank and whatever target effectiveness that this is supposed to reach.  Apparently it was a grand total of 1% boost away from already hitting that target, else it would have seen nothing at all because---really?  1% increase at random?  Something that trivial is done deliberately.

It is outright untrue that "most of them would need to be nerfed".  Quite simply, they putter out shortly after that point.  The only way to keep "most" of them moving is with artificial boosts gained through team synergy damage buffs and auras.  The vast majority, including many of the untouched weapons, simply do not stand up on their own past this point before experiencing a noticeable falloff.

There is further factor to considering sortie 3 level as the target point that this was aimed at.  The first to consider is that it IS the highest static level area in the game.  This includes Eidolons, incidentally.  Beyond that, it is also the highest static level can effectively utilize all weaponry because it is the highest "normal" mobs in the game, which is to say no gimmicks, no weakpoint targetting, etc.  Eidolons cannot be used as this target as they do not allow for equal utilization of all weaponry due to the dynamic of their fight.

  The second is that endless missions are irrelevant, in so far that they are, well, endless.  There is no target point to aim at.  A person can't point into the nothing that is the end of endless missions and say "over there! that's the target to balance off of!" because that point does not exist.

In fact, endless missions are a poster child for LESS powerful weaponry, as well as a static, finite target point.  Without this point, the true basis of the endless mission, the concept of "how far past that point can you go", is effectively moot.  With it, a player is able to know when they have passed the mechanical boundry and are pressing beyond content that their equipment is designed to handle.

 

I'll be the first to admit that this is all theory, only a fool would perceive that as "creating rules"(seriously, what idiot would believe we can do anything but theorycraft on stuff like this?).  I am, however, offering this theory based upon observable and repeatable fact and logic.  Fact is, the highest actual game level is sortie 3.  Logically, this is a point that could be targeted.  Coincidentally(not coincidence at all, in my opinion), the majority of weapon adjustments brought weapons very close together in overall power.  Through logical deduction and experience with using these weapons, I can surmise that this is at approximately level 100.

Enough of methodology, on to the actual subject, the Plasmor.  I can take the Plasmor, which saw a significant damage reduction very close to the same time as all of the other weaponry saw changes, and notice that it performs well at level 100.  I can further test that weapon and find that it falls off fairly quickly thereafter due to armor scaling.  From this, I can logically deduce that the target range of this damage reduction was approximately the same as the level range targeted by all the other changes.  As far as the timing difference goes(they did it early)?.....I don't know.  You could be right and it was to reduce usage.  It could even be to prevent it from ballooning into a two week Harrow meta(can't see how, it still works with that).  But the ultimate end effect was a weapon that more or less competes with everything else in that range and this is what leads me to believe that it was based upon targeting overall effectiveness at the same level range.

 

Now, understanding that my methodology points me to this conclusion, let's look at the counterpoint.  The counterpoint appears to be "herpa derp, it's all randomly based on usage! lalalala!", and this is logically deduced because Eidolons and endless. 

Did I miss anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, -Trey- said:

Bolding text won't make you right, despite what you seem to be thinking.

I don't bold text to increase being "right," I bold text to create emphasis to ensure that you don't miss the point that I'm making. It's supposed to make reading easier.

5 minutes ago, -Trey- said:

All of the sever effects occur in this game, it's just part you choose to ignore.

I didn't say the effects didn't exist; I said they didn't matter.

5 minutes ago, -Trey- said:

Balancing should never be done around sorties, because they are far too easy for it.

Says you, but that's not your decision to make now, is it? You're also conveniently ignoring that proper balance would actually make Sorties more challenging. Wow, how inconvenient it would be to not have to venture 2 hours into survival to encounter tough enemies!

5 minutes ago, -Trey- said:

There was no reason to buff Soma, or completely overbuff Supra for sorties.

They were perfectly fine there already and now they are extremely good so they arent balancing it around sorties.

Did I say DE was perfect, or did I openly acknowledge that they miss the mark sometimes?

You're mistakenly assuming "balancing for Sorties" means a weapon has to only be effective up to Sortie level. It stands to reason that stronger weapons will experience a degree of spillover into higher levels. That's what makes "endurance runs" possible, but it doesn't mean that they should be considered when making balance changes.

Why?

Because using "endurance runs" as a reference instead of a singular maximum level destroys the possibility of achieving balance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

I don't bold text to increase being "right," I bold text to create emphasis to ensure that you don't miss the point that I'm making. It's supposed to make reading easier.

You are wrong. I hope that made it easier.

Quote

I didn't say the effects didn't exist; I said they didn't matter.

To you. *

Quote

Says you, but that's not your decision to make now, is it? You're also conveniently ignoring that proper balance would actually make Sorties more challenging. Wow, how inconvenient it would be to not have to venture 2 hours into survival to encounter tough enemies!

It's not your decision either, yet you insist it's made around sorties. Try post buffs Supra with decent riven or even without it in sorties, then come back here and tell me how challenging that is. Try to slide with a whip 1 shotting entire room, tell me how challenging and balanced that was. You seems to be seeing balance around sorties, I don't.

I'd like to see proper balance in this game, but I don't believe it's ever going to happen.

Quote

Did I say DE was perfect, or did I openly acknowledge that they miss the mark sometimes?

You're mistakenly assuming "balancing for Sorties" means a weapon has to only be effective up to Sortie level. It stands to reason that stronger weapons will experience a degree of spillover into higher levels. That's what makes "endurance runs" possible, but it doesn't mean that they should be considered when making balance changes.

Why?

Because using "endurance runs" as a reference instead of a singular maximum level destroys the possibility of achieving balance.

I'd say they miss mark most of the time, mainly because there is no real mark. With system like this it's impossible to actually balance weapons and when rivens come into play it's virtually impossible. But the only place to actually use that power are endurance runs so can you blame poeple for going there to do it ? everything else dies 1 shot. Introducing proper balance would require removing scaling missions, removing rivens and then starting to think about how much dmg enemies should take before dying. If the answer is 1 hit ko, balance doesnt exist.

So in the end we have to ask ourselves does this change make sense considering everything else that is going on in this game like sliding whips, generally completely overpowered melee that arent really melee with range that they have. Already extremely good weapons like boar having their dmg almost doubled. Was plasmor really game breakingly overpower, or was it just too popular, which they admited to in one of streams/prime times giving exact percentage. I guess it's for you to decide, but you already have your answer : Sorties. Where it still kills everything and yet there is content beyond sorties in this game aswell.

 

Edited by -Trey-
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, -Trey- said:

To you. *

K.

8 minutes ago, -Trey- said:

It's not your decision either, yet you insist it's made around sorties. Try post buffs Supra with decent riven or even without it in sorties, then come back here and tell me how challenging that is. Try to slide with a whip 1 shotting entire room, tell me how challenging and balanced that was. You seems to be seeing balance around sorties, I don't.

I use Sorties as a solid reference point because they are the maximum non-scaling enemy level. Endless missions are not supposed to be balanced; they are supposed to out-scale the player and force them out.

Can you actually provide an appropriate maximum level to balance around? Because while I'll freely acknowledge that there are a multitude of OTHER overpowered weapons requiring nerfs, everything I've seen suggests to me that level 100 is the max.

  • No higher non-endless level exists.
  • Recent balance changes buffed lots of weapons that started to fall off harshly leading up to Sortie 3, and nerfed some of the ones that far outperformed it.
  • Although not yet finished, changes to beam weapons and melee weapons (that's right, whips too!) are incoming.

Your argument, on the other hand, is that you prefer playing at higher levels.

8 minutes ago, -Trey- said:

I'd like to see proper balance in this game, but I don't believe it's ever going to happen.

So let's just throw our hands in the air and give up, right?

8 minutes ago, -Trey- said:

I'd say they miss mark most of the time, mainly because there is no real mark. With system like this it's impossible to actually balance weapons and when rivens come into play it's virtually impossible. But the only place to actually use that power are endurance runs so can you blame poeple for going there to do it ?

Did I say you shouldn't do endurance runs? Did I say that you should feel bad for doing them?

No. It's a perfectly legitimate way to play, and I actually don't want to see them remove it in its entirety.

I said you shouldn't balance around them, because it ruins any chances of consistency. Your assessment of what is sufficiently "challenging" is entirely fueled by your own ego (not a criticism, just a fact), so if you insist on using that as a reference point for balance you eliminate any possibility of objective discussion regarding specific changes.

8 minutes ago, -Trey- said:

everything else dies 1 shot. Introducing proper balance would require removing scaling missions,

No, it wouldn't. It would require keeping the community continually cognizant of the fact that scaling missions are not supposed to be balanced from start to finish.

8 minutes ago, -Trey- said:

removing rivens and then starting to think about how much dmg enemies should take before dying. If the answer is 1 hit ko, balance doesnt exist.

That's not true. It's perfectly fine to have enemies that die in 1 hit in a balanced game. You just can't have weapons that spew out 200-round magazines at ridiculously high RPM with superb accuracy.

Rivens can also be made balanced; the stats just need to not be fully random and disposition needs to be determined by base stats.

definitely agree that DE needs to put more thought into their balance though; I think the recent changes were determined via Excel without looking too closely at individual weapons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

You just can't have weapons that spew out 200-round magazines at ridiculously high RPM with superb accuracy.

Then it's a good thing Supra Vandal has 300 not 200. Now after these umm.... balance changes it's finally just barely sortie viable, these are level 150 btw not 80~ like in sorties. Sorry I couldn't resist, but seriously this is exactly my point, compare changes like this to plasmor. Imo something is wrong here, but I guess we have to agree to disagree. If you think stuff like that will ever be balanced, more power to you.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, -Trey- said:

Then it's a good thing Supra Vandal has 300 not 200. Now after these umm.... balance changes it's finally just barely sortie viable, these are level 150 btw not 80~ like in sorties. Sorry I couldn't resist, but seriously this is exactly my point, compare changes like this to plasmor. Imo something is wrong here, but I guess we have to agree to disagree. If you think stuff like that will ever be balanced, more power to you.

  1. That video uses a RIVEN, which I will readily agree with you are heavily imbalanced.
  2. I didn't say OHKO enemies were appropriate for Warframe, though they do have a place - I would really like to see trash mobs that die quickly combined with elite enemies that take more work to take down (not talking about Eximi, mind you). My point was that "OHKO" does not mean a game is imbalanced or cannot be balanced.
  3. Remember, I'm talking about Arca Plasmor here. I would agree that the Supra buff wasn't entirely necessary and went a bit far. But that doesn't make the Plasmor change "bad." You also have to account for the fact that some Sortie modifiers can actually make the resident enemies tougher than "normal" enemies scaled to a higher level.

I'm fine with agreeing to disagree that balance is possible, but I will NOT acknowledge that balancing against endless scaling can possibly be a valid or effective method.

Unless DE comes out tomorrow and states that they will try to balance for all levels of scaling, at which point I will accept that Warframe will only ever be a game about out-haxxoring your AI foes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, -Trey- said:

You are wrong

Because you say so? That's...not how arguments work.

 

33 minutes ago, -Trey- said:

Then it's a good thing Supra Vandal has 300 not 200. Now after these umm.... balance changes it's finally just barely sortie viable, these are level 150 btw not 80~ like in sorties. Sorry I couldn't resist, but seriously this is exactly my point, compare changes like this to plasmor. Imo something is wrong here, but I guess we have to agree to disagree. If you think stuff like that will ever be balanced, more power to you.

 

This is a demonstration of a Riven. In a sandbox environment. All this proves is that Rivens are not even remotely balanced in a highly controlled situation...and this has what to do about the Plasmor again?

The reason I ask is because last I checked we're supposedly discussing the effectiveness of the Plasmor after the nerf / fix.

Anyway, getting back on topic...

The answer to OP's original question...Modded properly, the Arca Plasmor still wipes the starmap and is still Sortie worthy. So the argument that it's "weak" now is, quite frankly, ridiculous. It's "weaker" against really high level content now...but then again, like every other weapon out there, it should be. Really high level content scales in such a way that a player inevitably runs into an uphill battle that gets steeper and steeper until it ultimately convinces us to say "Screw it - I'm outa here."

35 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Unless DE comes out tomorrow and states that they will try to balance for all levels of scaling, at which point I will accept that Warframe will only ever be a game about out-haxxoring your AI foes.

I actually wish DE would come out and say "X is the enemy level at which your weapons and abilities will be guaranteed to work. After that level, good luck trying to stop anything...".

Honestly, the fact that exponential scaling appears to start at least around level 50 lends me to believe that Sortie 3 might be the very upper limit of what our gear is balanced for dealing with. But again we need a solid confirmation from an official source.

Sadly, what some people want is to be able to break the very thing that's supposed to provide escalating challenge and ultimately stop us. DE needs to stop catering to this mentality and put their foot down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, MirageKnight said:

Because you say so? That's...not how arguments work.

Taken out of context. I don't see your arguments through.

Quote

 

This is a demonstration of a Riven. In a sandbox environment. All this proves is that Rivens are not even remotely balanced in a highly controlled situation...and this has what to do about the Plasmor again?

It's demonstration of a recently buffed weapon at it's full potential. Argument was that weapons are balanced around sortie level, that video of recently buffed weapon proves they arent.

Quote

The answer to OP's original question...Modded properly, the Arca Plasmor still wipes the starmap and is still Sortie worthy. So the argument that it's "weak" now is, quite frankly, ridiculous. It's "weaker" against really high level content now...but then again, like every other weapon out there, it should be. Really high level content scales in such a way that a player inevitably runs into an uphill battle that gets steeper and steeper until it ultimately convinces us to say "Screw it - I'm outa here."

Moded properly anything wipes starmap, that doesn't prove anything. It is certainly weaker than it used to be, also weaker than many of recently buffed weapons, example of one can be seen on that video. Last time I checked it was quite weak in index for example, it wasn't before. It's quite weak against eidolons too, when built with full radiation and crit build. I actually used it like that couple of times before nerfs.

So I actually do think that OP has a point.

 

Edited by -Trey-
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, -Trey- said:

It's demonstration of a recently buffed weapon at it's full potential. Argument was that weapons are balanced around sortie level, that video of recently buffed weapon proves they arent.

A single counter-example doesn't completely collapse a generalization; you have to show that the majority of the affected weapons scale to similar degree.

21 minutes ago, -Trey- said:

Moded properly anything wipes starmap, that doesn't prove anything. It is certainly weaker than it used to be, also weaker than many of recently buffed weapons, example of one can be seen on that video. Last time I checked it was quite weak in index for example, it wasn't before. It's quite weak against eidolons too, when built with full radiation and crit build. I actually used it like that couple of times before nerfs.

The problem vs. Teralyst and its bigger palette swaps is that the projectile is too big. If it hits anything other than the weak point (even if it hits the weakpoint at the same time) it doesn't deal damage.

I'd actually be more upset about the fact DE hasn't bothered fixing that in addition to the headshot issue.

21 minutes ago, -Trey- said:

So I actually do think that OP has a point.

Fair enough, but it's only "weak" in cherry-picked circumstances. Are you suggesting that Arca Plasmor still can't perform decently even with a Riven to "maximize" potential?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, -Trey- said:

 

It's demonstration of a recently buffed weapon at it's full potential. Argument was that weapons are balanced around sortie level, that video of recently buffed weapon proves they arent.

 

 

Actually, it goes a long way to prove the theory.  Thank you for that.

You used 140 rounds of Supra ammunition to kill ten enemies.  This is not a sustainable pace without outside intervention(again, weapon balancing on an island, the other items have not been reviewed nor are they necessarily going to be, to my knowledge).  The weapon has already started, and will continue to fall off.

Interestingly enough, I don't have a Supra riven and could not replicate these results because of that.  Without the Riven mod I used almost 500 rounds.

Redoing the test at level 100 gives a more "normal" play experience with a more obviously sustainable ammunition cost and time to kill that allows greater player survivability(not an issue here, obviously, but ten heavies at once in the actual game will cause this to be a consideration).

That doesn't mean that outside restores, riven,  sentinel modding, or damage addition from warframe mods can't improve the situation, but the reality is that you're already edging into an unsustainable rate for the weapon itself, even with the Riven.

Interestingly, the Plasmor kills the whole group in approximately 20 rounds of ammunition.  It actually kills it in 15 rounds if you can get it to squeeze some butchers in there (the procs bounce around and kill the heavies faster, but it's a pain to get them to stand around each other).  The individual TTK is quite a bit lower but the group TTK is only slightly higher.  In the case of shotgun ammunition, this is also not particularly sustainable, but not markedly different than the supra.

In no way had I ever made the claim that outlier items don't exist, nor had I claimed that other influences(such as Riven mods, the "reward" from sorties to enhance weapons above their normal capabilities) would make progressing above level 100 impossible.  I think we all know that is not the case and those that do not can readily test it for themselves.

So we can learn two things from this test:

1.  Can Rivens boost power levels?  I'm reaching here, obviously, because I don't think we needed to learn that---we already knew they could.  I think it's fair to point out that an item from already completing sorties can boost weaponry above sortie level is not a surprise development.  In fact, when it can not, I would argue that it is failing and at an incorrect disposition.

2.  Even with Riven boosted DPS, can even the best weaponry sustain itself at levels above 100?.......For a time, yes, but it's already showing signs of fatigue in that area and other means of ammunition sustainability will have to be used.  Again, I think we already knew that.

EDIT: Legibility

Edited by Thrymm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

to be fair plasmor is still powerful and maybe better performance around 80level.What I don't understand is chance to a successful weapon comes too easy without asking for a advice or discussion. And personally I like old version. It's ok to delete headshot dmg, the problem is you should give back more to balance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thrymm said:

 

Interestingly enough, I don't have a Supra riven and could not replicate these results because of that.  Without the Riven mod I used almost 500 rounds.

actually im not using a riven and its taking me only 250 shots.

to be clear, im not disagreeing with your points. just think your supra build needs some tweaking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Muao said:

to be fair plasmor is still powerful and maybe better performance around 80level.What I don't understand is chance to a successful weapon comes too easy without asking for a advice or discussion. And personally I like old version. It's ok to delete headshot dmg, the problem is you should give back more to balance.

It was compensated already, given additional shots in the clip.

And people are still saying this "nerfed cause harrow augment" thing?
It still works perfectly fine with the Augment.
It's hard for DE to take your argument of balance seriously if you don't even know whats happening in the game.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, -Trey- said:

-snip-

At this point, I don't care what your opinion is because you're close-minded and you don't seem to have any respect for any point of view that clashes with your own. Myself - and others - have tried to explain things in a reasonable, respectful and logical manner, yet you continue to put your fingers in your ears and chant "you're wrong because reasons" and even point to barely related things to prove that you're right and everyone else that doesn't agree is wrong.

But hey, you've got a couple of fans that are willing to cheer you on...so congrats I guess?

It's obvious there's an impasse here and I'm not going to waste any more time trying to reason with unreasonable and inflexible people. Suffice to say that a couple of people have proven your arguments to be flawed and shown you the facts a few times, yet you're unable or unwilling to see that.

Now, if you'll excuse me, there are some mobs that need to be culled with my "weak" Plasmor. 

62A669E61A71A0F7A23B139C2C3BF24362ED7A36

^This one right here.

Yeah Primed Point Blank needs to be fully ranked, but there's another weapon that uses it that needs Forma first.

 

And for those of you that saw fit to "downvote" me for having the apparent audacity to say that weapons and abilities should be kept in check to actually PROMOTE challenge from high level content, you simple proved how ignorant, entitled, and desperate to feel powerful you really are.

I'm done with you children.

 

Edit: And thanks for proving and underscoring my point.

Edited by MirageKnight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, MirageKnight said:

At this point, I don't care what your opinion is because you're close-minded

I'm done with you children.

Quite frankly I don't really care about your opinion either, mostly because you have tendency to attack people on this forum. Your post history is quite frankly full of instances where you join a thread and unload on someone, usually it's done in places where you know that would yield alot of upvotes which you seem to care alot about. As demonstrated there, you struggle to give people respect they deserve. Disagreeing with them really isn't a reason to act that way. I'm sorry but I feel like it had to be said.

Think what you will, but saying it's fine because it clears starchart is rather weak argument.

 

Now seeing you can't be reasoned with I'm going to block you to avoid situations like this in future. Good day sir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Il y a 16 heures, Kayll a dit :

It was compensated already, given additional shots in the clip.

And people are still saying this "nerfed cause harrow augment" thing?
It still works perfectly fine with the Augment.
It's hard for DE to take your argument of balance seriously if you don't even know whats happening in the game.
 

thank you for put me into "don't know what's happen in the game". If you simply want to attack me by word mistake you won. I don't have to calculate math with one who only want to argue, all you need to know is plasmor is a easy head shot weapon and by delete head shot damage lost huge sum of damage, I like headshot instead of clip, attack me if you find more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Muao said:

plasmor is a easy head shot weapon and by delete head shot damage lost huge sum of damage

Not trying to insult you or anything.  It's just that the statement you said above just might be the exact reason the headshot multiplier was removed.  This isn't much different than when DE removed the auto headshots that AoE weapons like the Tonkor used to do.  When you consider just how wide a Plasmor shot is and that it has punch through, that would have been a hallway size area of nothing but headshots.  

For those who might not know, this is just the second nerf the Plasmor has received in the last few months.  The first one was stopping it from working with Ivara's Navigator.  A change that also happened to the Sonicor. 

If you guys really want to blame someone for these nerfs, then look no further than this Youtuber.  This is the video that caused DE to look heavily at the Plasmor and a few other weapons.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...