I support DE's decision not to add new abilities, but wish the process could be worked on.

[(PSN)WINDMILEYNO]

I like frosts rework the most, out of any frame thats ever been reworked. He was one of the first big ones, and alot of creativity went into that one. I cant remember if Excal was actually first, but frosts was more effective.

Frost and Excalibur both are examples of two succesful ways of doing a rework, but at the same time, one was better than the other. Excal required several more additional fixes and changes long after the fact. Limbo is probably a succesful version of excaliburs rework. Some frames need it. I hesitat to say he is succesful, because the frame has always been bad in pubs. If you can ignore that because its been a constant problem, its a sucess, but ignoring problems doesnt make them go away. 

Frost has, had and probably always will have a specific role, and his rework didnt change that. He received buffs in every area aside from a limit of snowglobes, which was more of a side grade to the original snow globes than a nerf. And while those buffs werent extremely powerful on all his powers, they were still a step forward. 

While his rework had some changes that didnt seem to really add much, like freeze having a small aoe on impact and leaving a tiny area frozen for a short unmoddable time...it wasnt a limitation, which still makes it a step forward. 

Another frame who didnt lose much, or just generally took steps forward with their kit was oberon. And his rework was done pretty much the same way.

Even if nerfs are deemed necessary, i still feel a rework goes alot further if the frame is compensated for what it lost.

DE does good reworks when two things happen: when they generally leave kits the same and when they take away as little as possible from the frame, or replace what they take with something similar. Some frames cant be helped, and what works for one might not work for every other frame. I like where they tried to go with Excals rework, and was never a fun of super jump, but imo, super jump should have become a parkour ability like the tombs of the sentients trailer...

And then you have the unpopular reworks...the ones that go on for months and some years and receive multuple fixes and changes and just quite never hit the mark.

I feel like it should be clear by now what works and what doesnt.

Again, Frost and Excalibur both define what a reworked frame can be like when done right (if excal is right), but one is more succesful than the other, and the other will always take more work.

And then theres something that DE does that isnt quite "Frost" or "Excalibur". The third (and possibly fourth) option which is the one that happens the most often is my least favourite. I will call it "Saryn". (The fourth option would be zephyr which is actually probably like a warped version of option number 1 because i havnt played her and havnt heard of any nerfs). This is the one that causes most of the toxicity on the forums. 

Saryn was cut down to size. She was built up a little too big and DE went in to fix her. But they took several things no one mentioned anything about, her health namely, to the ire or delight of those involved. She has innate energy regen though. These are the reworks i like the least. This was done to volt originally, valkyr, alot of frames. Its the most common. Some frames deserve it, but when nerfing, rather than giving the frame something equally as useful or upgrading some other lacking part of the kit, they mainly just take alot of things from the frame under the belief it was all fine and needed no change. Saryn may actually be able to be considered "succesful", and an even better example of this would be mesa, but these are reworks for the "fine as is" group and dont excite everyone.

1. Upgrading a frames abilities and shifting some stats around on one or more abilities for an overall positive change - frost. 

2. Removing an ability or making it an effect of an already existing ability and implementing a new ability.

3. Nerfing a "powerful" frame for balance where the frame recieves no noticeable "positive change".

4. Whatever zephyr is.

I think #1 is the most succesful type of warframe rework and should be perfected, thats the only kind of rework that typically recieves the most support, or least opposition and leaves the frame performing mostly the same or better.

Edited February 26, 2018 by (PS4)WINDMILEYNO
Edit. Ill fix it more

[Dreddeth]

As a regular player of Saryn both pre- and post-rework, I say that her pre-rework state is objectively better. What her 4th "used to do" was stupid things with negative duration which made her a nuke frame, and not even a very good one, rather than the DoT frame she was intended to be, and which her reworked form is.

And just what are these "QoL changes" that "we" wanted added? Not only are you being deceptively vague by not specifying them, you're also assuming that these undefined "QoL changes" were supported by a plurality, or even a majority, of players.

Finally, claiming there was "no noticeable positive change" when Saryn now scales into higher level play than she did previously thanks to relying on stacked status procs rather than flat damage is simply untrue, and that's setting aside the fact that changes with a net negative impact are sometimes necessary to preserve a degree of challenge. If player cheese isn't brought to heel with nerfs where appropriate, then that necessitates adding new enemies which cheese the players right back to preserve some degree of challenge. This not only creates an environment which is outright hostile towards new players who do not yet have access to cheese, but also a feedback loop in which the enemy cheese is answered by worse player cheese, which is answered by worse enemy cheese, and so on and so forth until the game becomes too convoluted to sustain itself.

Take Valkyr for example. Before Hysteria had a ramping energy cost, you could easily stay invincible for the whole mission so long as your squadmates hosed down Nullifiers and you didn't touch Disruptor Ancients. Thus, she was more often than not used as a means of holding an objective, hacking, reviving, standing on a switch, or doing some other dangerous task since she could do so risk free, on top of having high close-range damage output thanks to slide attack spam. DE could have let her continue to exist as she did and simply introduced enemies that could threaten her even in Hysteria, like a Disruptor Bombard or some other cancerous abomination, but that would have been overkill for everyone not playing as either Infinite Hysteria Valkyr or whatever the player-base created to deal with Disruptor Bombards. Then, whatever countered the Disruptor Bombard would end up taking Hysteria Vallkyr's place, and require another answer from DE, which would just continue the spiral into unplayability if it came in the form of another souped-up enemy with unfair mechanics.

Or instead, DE could, and ultimately did, restrict Hysteria's up-time and add risk to its use through the ramping energy cost and the potential to take stored damage. This meant that no new super-enemy was added into the game, which meant that players had no additional pressure to MacGyver up something even worse than Infinite Hysteria.

Edited February 26, 2018 by Dreddeth

[(PSN)WINDMILEYNO]

20 minutes ago, Dreddeth said:

As a regular player of Saryn both pre- and post-rework, I say that her pre-rework state is objectively better. What her 4th "used to do" was stupid things with negative duration which made her a nuke frame, and not even a very good one, rather than the DoT frame she was intended to be, and which her reworked form is.

And just what are these "QoL changes" that "we" wanted added? Not only are you being deceptively vague by not specifying them, you're also assuming that these undefined "QoL changes" were supported by a plurality, or even a majority, of players.

Finally, claiming there was "no noticeable positive change" when Saryn now scales into higher level play than she did previously thanks to relying on stacked status procs rather than flat damage is simply untrue, and that's setting aside the fact that changes with a net negative impact are sometimes necessary to preserve a degree of challenge. If player cheese isn't brought to heel with nerfs where appropriate, then that necessitates adding new enemies which cheese the players right back to preserve some degree of challenge. This not only creates an environment which is outright hostile towards new players who do not yet have access to cheese, but also a feedback loop in which the enemy cheese is answered by worse player cheese, which is answered by worse enemy cheese, and so on and so forth until the game becomes too convoluted to sustain itself.

Take Valkyr for example. Before Hysteria had a ramping energy cost, you could easily stay invincible for the whole mission so long as your squadmates hosed down Nullifiers and you didn't touch Disruptor Ancients. Thus, she was more often than not used as a means of holding an objective, hacking, reviving, standing on a switch, or doing some other dangerous task since she could do so risk free, on top of having high close-range damage output thanks to slide attack spam. DE could have let her continue to exist as she did and simply introduced enemies that could threaten her even in Hysteria, like a Disruptor Bombard or some other cancerous abomination, but that would have been overkill for everyone not playing as either Infinite Hysteria Valkyr or whatever the player-base created to deal with Disruptor Bombards. Then, whatever countered the Disruptor Bombard would end up taking Hysteria Vallkyr's place, and require another answer from DE, which would just continue the spiral into unplayability if it came in the form of another souped-up enemy with unfair mechanics.

Or instead, DE could, and ultimately did, restrict Hysteria's up-time and add risk to its use through the ramping energy cost and the potential to take stored damage. This meant that no new super-enemy was added into the game, which meant that players had no additional pressure to MacGyver up something even worse than Infinite Hysteria.

Oh, i dont think its wise to assume I can speak for everyone, hopefully no one actually does that, ill make some edits, but the we was referring to the people i remebered asking for qol. I also remebered the people who objected to that qol. But didnt say anything about them. Will do. 

Saryn specifically was with spores, molt and toxic lash and her ehp. Little things that some people pay attention to and some dont. Thats why i was so vague. If Saryn had been reworked like Frost, toxic lash would nor have been left vitually untouched. Frost rework was creative and without limitation. Same goes for valkyr, with rip line not being left untouched. But to get specific about those things only opens up multiple cans of worms. I like way Frost was reworked. Thats not how Saryn was done. She is a different approach to the problem i dont approve of, but should not discredit. Ill make some changes to the post. Thank you.

Edited February 26, 2018 by (PS4)WINDMILEYNO
Edit.

[Photon95]

You mention what they took away from Saryn without saying why or what she got in return. Spores became savage even at higher levels, Toxic Lash actually has a use beyond damage, and molt not only removes status now, but it makes for a great on the fly spore target. As for energy and sustainability, the aforementioned status removal, Lash's block % bonus, energy on spore rupture, RAGE, not to mention Molt's augment is very much a thing, and these were all before Focus even existed. Miasma became icing on the cake, which I feel is what an ult should be. Yes, they nerfed miasma, and for the right reason, it's damage calculation was abused to the point where the only "good" Saryn build was reducing duration to the point that her other abilities had no use whatsoever. As a Saryn main I was ecstatic when the changes were made, because they made her actually interesting to play.

I'm not trying to attack anyone, just do your research a bit more please.

Edited February 26, 2018 by Photon95
I feel old, Contagion changed to Toxic Lash

[(PSN)WINDMILEYNO]

Just now, Photon95 said:

You mention what they took away from Saryn without saying why or what she got in return. Spores became savage even at higher levels, contagion actually has a use beyond damage, and molt not only removes status now, but it makes for a great on the fly spore target. As for energy and sustainability, the aforementioned status removal, contagion's block % bonus, energy on spore rupture, RAGE, not to mention Molt's augment is very much a thing, and these were all before Focus even existed. Miasma became icing on the cake, which I feel is what an ult should be. Yes, they nerfed miasma, and for the right reason, it's damage calculation was abused to the point where the only "good" Saryn build was reducing duration to the point that her other abilities had no use whatsoever. As a Saryn main I was ecstatic when the changes were made, because they made her actually interesting to play.

I'm not trying to attack anyone, just do your research a bit more please.

I wasnt vague enough then and showed too much bias. I might remove the details about saryn. If it can be agreed upon that saryns rework was differemt then frosts, then i would like to say again i prefer one method over the other. Im not actually sure why they cut saryns health down or left her molt as squishy as it is. I wasnt very satisfied with the changes. And i wasnt a fan of the new meta, where you could just take an aoe weapon, namely an ignis, and sit in one spot and cast spores. But this is all too specific. Saryn is an example of a certain way of doing reworks. Its not wrong per say, but i am just tryimg to make a case that these "types" of reworks give different results.

[(PSN)WINDMILEYNO]

Saryn might be ok, but if i were to pick a succesful version of a "saryn" type rework, id choose mesa. Though, i personally wouldnt use the word succesful because her first ability wasnt touched up, thia is still a valid option for reworks. It operates under the "fine as is" mantra/motto that i am so vehemently against though, so thats why this post was so biased. I really dont see whats so fine bout mesa's first ability, but she would be the frame id consider a success.

Frost lost only one thing and he was compensated for it, and so the only ones who were left to be upset with it were the ones who wanted more. There was nothing to get upset about losing because he didnt lose anything.

Oberon is the same. Thats my point. Very few frames get these kinds of reworks.

Edited February 26, 2018 by (PS4)WINDMILEYNO
Edit.