Latest Nerfs

[DiabolusUrsus]

56 minutes ago, BlackVortex said:

Obvisously Ember, since a range build wasn't really that usefull in Endgame anyway and now you just have to recast it, making just Energy Conversion totally useless on the build, but I guess you agree there.

Yep, we agree.

Quote

The chorma nerf was uncalled for

Not true.

Quote

the problem with this nerf is that now it adds base damage instead of total damage, I used to hit around +560-570% over total damage iirc, now its ~888 over base damage

if you i.e. had 100 damage on your rifle, +165 serration +165 heavy calibur + 300 riven, and a +500% buff over total, you would get 730*6= 4380 damage

now the calculation with +800% goes: 730+800 = 1530, thats almost 1/3rd of the old damage

so they killed Chroma, 

Chroma is not dead. He is still very strong; just less ridiculously OP. Which, interestingly enough, is the goal of balance. Preventing things from being overpowered OR underpowered.

What I see is a successful nerf. It reduced his potential damage output, true, but not to the extent that he is useless. They also added the ability to share the damage buff with teammates, so the net damage potential actually increased. 1530 x 4 > 4380.

Quote

butAFAIK Octavia is still a total damage modifier... so why nerf Chroma and not Octavia?

Because DE is terrible at consistency and they don't think far enough ahead. Octavia will be brought into line, make no mistake. It'll probably just take a while for them to get there.

Quote

now the real problem lies with Banshee

about 2 years ago DE released an augment for Soundquake, now I know the DE team is pretty good and math, or at least some of them are, because there are some very nice mathematical calculations in combinations of certain mods which just cannot be a coincidence, so Im pretty sure they made Soundquake and meant for it to be used in the way it was used

Well, if they come out and change how it will be used then that means even assuming that resonating quake was working "as intended," then that means the intent changed. DE isn't contractually bound to not change their minds.

Quote

if you say DE wasn't aware it was going to be used in this manner, you are just saying that DE is incompetent in game design, because they made something that could be abused so easily without their knowledge... 

Oversight does not indicate incompetence. It indicates humanity, and the potential for error that entails.

If this were some matter of national security I would agree with you, but it's a video game.

Quote

wellIm pretty sure they were aware of it prior to releasing it,

Pure speculation.

Quote

and thought it was a nice element in the game and the only reason it got nerfed(it can still be abused, just not as good as before, you cast Resonance, and start macro spamming your Resonating Quake meanwhile getting energy from Zenurik to infinitely spam) was because there were people in PUBLIC matches that were getting annoyed by it

And here you have the real source of nerfs: problems. Things that cause problems get fixed.

Quote

I put PUBLIC in capitals because those matches you just have to suck up any of the gameplay style your teammembers is rolling, 

Nope. This is you pushing your values on others.

It's true that playing with random people requires some degree of flexibility and tolerance. HOWEVER, that doesn't mean "anything goes."

Playing the game implies the baseline guarantee of the ability to participate. When something prevents 3/4 people from effectively participating, it will be changed.

DE's stance on this has not changed at all. They clearly stated that everyone gets to participate when they first nerfed Tonkor and Mirageulor, it was the same reasoning behind the Ember/Banshee nerfs, and they will continue to change things to prevent this sort of play.

Quote

youknow this in advance, whether they are rushing or slow as a snail, leveling gear or killing everything, you just deal with it, or don't go public

Nope. It is YOUR responsibility to play solo or form a unified group if your playstyle encroaches on other players' ability to play the game.

Think of it like this: if you ONLY play with people who aren't bothered by you doing all the work and are happy to just leech off of you, nobody will complain and you won't get nerfed.

The only issue is that you would rather use public matchmaking because it's faster and more convenient. You're essentially treating other players as resources to be exploited (for extra spawns and loot), and that's not okay.

Abuse your toys and they get taken away; it's pretty simple.

[BlackVortex]

4 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Nope. This is you pushing your values on others.

Nope, that is exactly what you are doing, by demanding change so that I cant play the way I want, so that everyone has to play the way you can enjoy the game more

for me everyone can do and play the way they want, if I dont like it, I just leave the group, simple as that

when people like you dont like it, you cry and make DE change things so that it suits YOUR needs

[DiabolusUrsus]

16 minutes ago, BlackVortex said:

Nope, that is exactly what you are doing, by demanding change so that I cant play the way I want

You CAN play the way you want. You just have an obligation to not appropriate simple participation from your teammates, or find teammates who don't mind.

16 minutes ago, BlackVortex said:

sothat everyone has to play the way you can enjoy the game more

It's not that everyone has to play the same way, it's that everyone has the right to participate instead of being forcibly reduced to leeching.

16 minutes ago, BlackVortex said:

for me everyone can do and play the way they want, if I dont like it, I just leave the group, simple as that

So get a dedicated farming group through recruiting chat. Both more efficient and less obnoxious.

16 minutes ago, BlackVortex said:

when people like you dont like it, you cry and make DE change things so that it suits YOUR needs

Nope. I haven't written a single thread on these sorts of issues, mostly because I rarely play public.

You are literally perpetuating your own problem. Once again, public does not mean "anything goes."

You can rush, you can explore, you can do pretty much anything you want EXCEPT prevent your teammates from participating. DE has been both clear and mostly consistent on this matter.

[BlackVortex]

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

You CAN play the way you want. You just have an obligation to not appropriate simple participation from your teammates, or find teammates who don't mind.

It's not that everyone has to play the same way, it's that everyone has the right to participate instead of being forcibly reduced to leeching.

So get a dedicated farming group through recruiting chat. Both more efficient and less obnoxious.

Nope. I haven't written a single thread on these sorts of issues, mostly because I rarely play public.

You are literally perpetuating your own problem. Once again, public does not mean "anything goes."

You can rush, you can explore, you can do pretty much anything you want EXCEPT prevent your teammates from participating. DE has been both clear and mostly consistent on this matter.

lol just looked at your profile ingame

not going to take whatever you say serious anymore

cheers!

[PatternistSlave]

6 hours ago, PatternistSlave said:

We are.

 

4 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

A good example of this would be the proposed Damage 2.5 getting postponed for further revision based on the community rejecting it (due to good reasoning, like impact ragdoll being counter-productive or puncture damage debuffs being useless when applied to single enemies).

 

[DiabolusUrsus]

1 hour ago, BlackVortex said:

lol just looked at your profile ingame

not going to take whatever you say serious anymore

cheers!

Hah! Okay.

You can believe whatever you want, but you should at least be aware of the official stance on the issue.

DE's statement there and continued nerfing of similar issues suggest that my perspective on this issue is the accepted one. Until you (and others) can conform to the accepted social norms of playing with strangers, you're gonna continue seeing these sorts of nerfs.

1 hour ago, PatternistSlave said:

Quotes of posts with nothing but quotes are empty.

I think there's a disconnect of understanding here.

I am not saying that feedback doesn't INFLUENCE what DE decides to do, but DE makes the ultimate decision: listen/ignore, exact changes to make, etc.

To better illustrate what I am saying:

If I write 3 threads a week whining that Zephyr is OP and should be nerfed and pay 100 other players to do the same for 6 months, do you think that DE will actually nerf Zephyr?

The forums don't dictate changes. DE decides to change things based on feedback, but decides how to change them on their own, so they bear the ultimate responsibility for those changes.

Damage 2.5 demonstrates that DE will listen to supported reasoning, but I rarely see that out of these sorts of "nerfs are poison" threads. They tend to be dogmatic rather than rational.

Edited March 6, 2018 by DiabolusUrsus

[PatternistSlave]

9 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

If I write 3 threads a week whining that Zephyr is OP and should be nerfed and pay 100 other players to do the same for 6 months, do you think that DE will actually nerf Zephyr?

Problem being they might.  It would make about as much sense as nerfing Ember.  She was trash tier already at high levels.  Hell.  Zephyr was better.

[DiabolusUrsus]

37 minutes ago, PatternistSlave said:

Problem being they might.

Really?

Quote

It would make about as much sense as nerfing Ember.  She was trash tier already at high levels.

High levels may be all that matters to you, but that hardly suggests that high levels are all that matter.

Low levels are where the problem was, so the nerf was warranted. The main problem is that it failed to actually resolve the problem and neglected to give her better high level scaling as compensation. Same with the RQ "nerf."

Quote

Hell.  Zephyr was better.

Now that's just being obtuse. The issue at hand was map-nuking, and Zephyr hasn't been ever been particularly suited to that purpose.

[Cappucchino]

Welp... the thing that I want to say is...

"You create the suicide post" ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[BlackVortex]

11 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Hah! Okay.

You can believe whatever you want, but you should at least be aware of the official stance on the issue.

DE's statement there and continued nerfing of similar issues suggest that my perspective on this issue is the accepted one. Until you (and others) can conform to the accepted social norms of playing with strangers, you're gonna continue seeing these sorts of nerfs.

I think there's a disconnect of understanding here.

I am not saying that feedback doesn't INFLUENCE what DE decides to do, but DE makes the ultimate decision: listen/ignore, exact changes to make, etc.

To better illustrate what I am saying:

If I write 3 threads a week whining that Zephyr is OP and should be nerfed and pay 100 other players to do the same for 6 months, do you think that DE will actually nerf Zephyr?

The forums don't dictate changes. DE decides to change things based on feedback, but decides how to change them on their own, so they bear the ultimate responsibility for those changes.

Damage 2.5 demonstrates that DE will listen to supported reasoning, but I rarely see that out of these sorts of "nerfs are poison" threads. They tend to be dogmatic rather than rational.

oh you naive soul

DE doesn't want too many people complaining about things on the forum because its bad publicity and they will do anything to stop that

Warframe has ALWAYS been about map nuking(it being cc or dps wise), with a little bit of shooting and melee in it, but I guess from the lack of hours you played your experience in this game is a joke

cheers!

[PatternistSlave]

6 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Really?

Based on the nerfs they've done.  Actually very likely.

6 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

High levels may be all that matters to you, but that hardly suggests that high levels are all that matter.

All that matters?  I'd settle for them being taken into account at all when making nerf threads and nerfs.  The game has meaningful progression.  Which means everything is "OP" to lower levels.

6 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

The issue at hand was map-nuking, and Zephyr hasn't been ever been particularly suited to that purpose.

She was more powerful than Ember so more deserved of a nerf was the point.  Should convenience doing content not intended and isn't challenging regardless always warrant radical imbalance for intended content?  The problem doesn't lie in the tools being used on low leveled content.  The problem is with said content not being dis-advantageous enough compared to intended content.

[DiabolusUrsus]

6 hours ago, BlackVortex said:

oh you naive soul

DE doesn't want too many people complaining about things on the forum because its bad publicity and they will do anything to stop that

Warframe has ALWAYS been about map nuking(it being cc or dps wise), with a little bit of shooting and melee in it, but I guess from the lack of hours you played your experience in this game is a joke

cheers!

I am confused as to how 2k+ hours in-game and 1.5k+ hours in-mission is "a joke," but then again I suppose not all of us are at the age for full-time employment and personal obligations to another human being.

Certainly my inability to play 8h a day 7 days a week indicates I have no valuable perspectives on the experience.

Have fun with your conspiracy theories, I suppose.

1 hour ago, PatternistSlave said:

Based on the nerfs they've done.  Actually very likely.

... If you say so.

1 hour ago, PatternistSlave said:

All that matters?  I'd settle for them being taken into account at all when making nerf threads and nerfs.  The game has meaningful progression.  Which means everything is "OP" to lower levels.

Fair enough, but what are you using as a reference point for "high levels?" It's rather ambiguous and every tryhard (not you, personally) you meet will have a different idea of what qualifies.

Something needs to be standardized or balance is impossible.

1 hour ago, PatternistSlave said:

She was more powerful than Ember so more deserved of a nerf was the point.

No, because the issue at hand was map-nuking. Ember could map-nuke, Zephyr could not.

1 hour ago, PatternistSlave said:

Should convenience doing content not intended and isn't challenging regardless always warrant radical imbalance for intended content?

No, it shouldn't.

Which is why I disagree with the details of the nerfs if not the intent behind them.

The problem is when 1 player appropriates participation from up to 3 others and leaves them with nothing to do. That doesn't mean map-nuking is bad. It means constant, unending map-nuking is bad.

Until energy economy and power spam are addressed, the problem will persist.

1 hour ago, PatternistSlave said:

  The problem doesn't lie in the tools being used on low leveled content.  The problem is with said content not being dis-advantageous enough compared to intended content.

What is intended content, though? This issue occured at various "high" (for the starchart) level farming points as well.

You're gonna have a hard time convincing me that anything over Sortie 3 is "intended."

[BlackVortex]

Just now, DiabolusUrsus said:

I am confused as to how 2k+ hours in-game and 1.5k+ hours in-mission is "a joke," but then again I suppose not all of us are at the age for full-time employment and personal obligations to another human being.

Certainly my inability to play 8h a day 7 days a week indicates I have no valuable perspectives on the experience.

Have fun with your conspiracy theories, I suppose.

you fail to see the joke, because you only have 1.5K hours and think you know everything better xD

[DiabolusUrsus]

47 minutes ago, BlackVortex said:

you fail to see the joke, because you only have 1.5K hours and think you know everything better xD

Here are some fun facts:

1. Accumulation of experience is not linear. The difference between 2k and 3k hours is a lot smaller than that between 5 and 500.

2. Warframe in particular is a game where in-game time is not directly linked to knowledge. In fact, the majority of crucial information regarding mechanics and min-maxing comes from outside sources like the wiki.

Even setting that aside, I'm not the one who has been reduced to petty provocations in place of rational argument.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[BlackVortex]

15 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Here are some fun facts:

1. Accumulation of experience is not linear. The difference between 2k and 3k hours is a lot smaller than that between 5 and 500.

2. Warframe in particular is a game where in-game time is not directly linked to knowledge. In fact, the majority of crucial information regarding mechanics and min-maxing comes from outside sources like the wiki.

Even setting that aside, I'm not the one who has been reduced to petty provocations in place of rational argument.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Here's a fun fact:

1. The difference between 1.5K and +4K is pretty big

2. Not directly linked to knowledge, but seeing as how you are talking about certain things, I would say you are a casual player and casual players have a very different playing style than hardcore gamers. Where for casual players its all about the experience, for hardcore gamers, once they've run through all the content a thousand times, it starts to become about efficiency and speed
The more hours you play, the better you understand things, the better you play, so there is definitively a correlation between hours spent playing and knowledge of the game
Also, the real know-hows are rarely ever shared on the Wiki, in fear of nerfs

Setting that aside, I'm not the one who thinks everything should revolve around his pleasure and then tells others not everything revolves around their pleasure
saying I don't know what DE is thinking, but uses arguments that presume he does

if you want to know something about the way I deconstruct and play this game, I've made beautiful video's about three years ago on youtube and a nice guide on rivens on the forum, don't be shy to share yours

https://www.youtube.com/user/MasSaCreS9

cheers!

[PatternistSlave]

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

over Sortie 3

So take sortie level.  Have you tried Ember in sortie level?  She was trash even before the nerfs.  Bounties?  Good luck.  But why are we limited to sorties?  Endless fissures grant affinity bonus.  Which is what I'm talking about.  Incentive to do these type of activities as opposed to "map nuking" noob disturbing content.

[DiabolusUrsus]

15 minutes ago, BlackVortex said:

Setting that aside, I'm not the one who thinks everything should revolve around his pleasure and then tells others not everything revolves around their pleasure

saying I don't know what DE is thinking, but uses arguments that presume he does

 

I'm going strictly off the official statement of intent I already linked for you, in combination with the continued pattern of nerfs following the same stated intent.

You are allowed to play how you want, except when that interferes with your teammates' ability to participate.

That's not me guessing at what DE thinks. That's not me trying to force you to play how I want you to. That's me reading what DE has announced and understanding what it meant.

You can insist that anything goes all you like. You can continue playing however you like. But when you cause problems for other players, those problems will be resolved - forcibly.

I've pointed out to you that you have tools at your disposal to avoid causing a  problem. You can choose to use them, or deal with the consequences. That's the reality of the situation; take it or leave it.

14 minutes ago, PatternistSlave said:

So take sortie level.  Have you tried Ember in sortie level?  She was trash even before the nerfs.  Bounties?  Good luck.

Agreed, which is precisely why I disagree with the implementation of the nerf and painful lack of adequate buffs to the rest of her kit.

14 minutes ago, PatternistSlave said:

But why are we limited to sorties?

For the sake of discussion, we're not. But it's impossible to establish balance without a static reference point.

Consequently, using endless scaling as a balance reference without defining a maximum balanced level is inadvisable.

14 minutes ago, PatternistSlave said:

Endless fissures grant affinity bonus.  Which is what I'm talking about.  Incentive to do these type of activities as opposed to "map nuking" noob disturbing content.

True, and fair point. But Endless Fissures also don't start at level 100, so they still fall within the scope of "normal" balance. I just wanted to be sure you weren't talking strictly about level 150/200/300 content.

I will readily agree that the affinity benefits should ramp up a little faster.

[BlackVortex]

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

I'm going strictly off the official statement of intent I already linked for you, in combination with the continued pattern of nerfs following the same stated intent.

You are allowed to play how you want, except when that interferes with your teammates' ability to participate.

That's not me guessing at what DE thinks. That's not me trying to force you to play how I want you to. That's me reading what DE has announced and understanding what it meant.

You can insist that anything goes all you like. You can continue playing however you like. But when you cause problems for other players, those problems will be resolved - forcibly.

I've pointed out to you that you have tools at your disposal to avoid causing a  problem. You can choose to use them, or deal with the consequences. That's the reality of the situation; take it or leave it.

official statement? quote to prove your statement: "You are allowed to play how you want, except when that interferes with your teammates' ability to participate." please!

it sure as hell is not in the link you posted!

 

[DiabolusUrsus]

1 hour ago, BlackVortex said:

official statement? quote to prove your statement: "You are allowed to play how you want, except when that interferes with your teammates' ability to participate." please!

it sure as hell is not in the link you posted!

"At its core, Warframe is a co-operative game; having powerful tools is a boon to a team rather than a disadvantage. However, there are a few weapons that have such a dominating effect in missions that co-operative missions essentially become solo."

Literally in the first paragraph.

Unless you seriously lack basic reading comprehension, the message is crystal clear: everyone gets to participate. Outside of dedicated farming groups, watching someone else do everything isn't a reasonable standard of "fun."

This particular set of changes applied to specific weapon/Frame combinations, but the applicable problem - 1 person killing everything while 3 others stand around and watch - is the same. Ember/Banshee got changed because of the exact same complaints.

I will readily agree that the actual nerfs were terribly designed and unsuccessful at resolving the problem, but the intent behind the nerfs is what matters.

You are expected to be actively engaged in playing the game, and you don't get to ruin other players' ability to also have fun.

If speed and efficiency are really what matter most to you, why are you so resistant to recruiting dedicated farming groups? Coordinated teams are indisputably faster and more efficient than ragtag groups of strangers.

[BlackVortex]

1 hour ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

"At its core, Warframe is a co-operative game; having powerful tools is a boon to a team rather than a disadvantage. However, there are a few weapons that have such a dominating effect in missions that co-operative missions essentially become solo."

Literally in the first paragraph.

Unless you seriously lack basic reading comprehension, the message is crystal clear: everyone gets to participate. Outside of dedicated farming groups, watching someone else do everything isn't a reasonable standard of "fun."

This particular set of changes applied to specific weapon/Frame combinations, but the applicable problem - 1 person killing everything while 3 others stand around and watch - is the same. Ember/Banshee got changed because of the exact same complaints.

I will readily agree that the actual nerfs were terribly designed and unsuccessful at resolving the problem, but the intent behind the nerfs is what matters.

You are expected to be actively engaged in playing the game, and you don't get to ruin other players' ability to also have fun.

If speed and efficiency are really what matter most to you, why are you so resistant to recruiting dedicated farming groups? Coordinated teams are indisputably faster and more efficient than ragtag groups of strangers.

no it doesn't say that, that is just your way of interpreting things

twisting words to accommodate your opinion to push your views on others

[DiabolusUrsus]

21 minutes ago, BlackVortex said:

no it doesn't say that, that is just your way of interpreting things

twisting words to accommodate your opinion to push your views on others

Then can you explain how else that could possibly be interpreted as a reason behind the nerfs?

[(PSN)johnsoigne]

No. It still demands less attention than Hearthstone or UNO. I too like the fact that I can listen to radio show or just think about something else when I play low level stuff but you’re just too lazy to even build your goto loadouts. I undersatand that you want to just wind down a little when it comes to video games but you’re not being lazy enough so you came here complained. How about making another afk loadout. There’s plenty other builds to do that. Octavia for instance. Or just play other games like Destiny 2 maybe. There’s a lot of hate going on for that game but it definitely is less stressful to eyesight when it comes to shooting. Trying to play Warframe like a regular shooter game everyday will make me blind someday. As others have suggested, melee weapon is a good middle ground IMO.

Edited March 7, 2018 by (PS4)johnsoigne

[BlackVortex]

48 minutes ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

Then can you explain how else that could possibly be interpreted as a reason behind the nerfs?

people cry, and to stop the crying, they nerf and to not have to say, we nerfed because of the cries, they just give the reason that people turn mutliplayer games into solo missions to justify the nerf

you add all kind of reasons and assumptions to the equation, things they never mentioned in the so called "official statement" (which was just a patch note)

[(PSN)HAVOCS-Regret]

On 3/2/2018 at 1:32 AM, SaiTaMa_OpM said:

I love that Warframe updates as much as it does. How it pumps out new Warframes often enough for the players to keep hooked and work the existing Warframes as well. 

But I feel that it's catering to a certain type of players and abandoning the rest of the player base. The Nerfs to the Warframe force players to be active or be #*($%%@. For players who are working and studying and just play Warframe for their daily those of fun it's becoming boring, annoying. After a long day I would rather chill and farm exp and rank my weapons, progress in the game without constantly being forced to put in energy I am depleted of. 

If the players want action they can try harder game modes or try out new builds and have fun. I would just like some Warframes to be left as they are.

The game feels so demanding. I can't play the game for fun and relaxation anymore. When I look at Warframe in my library I don't feel eager to play, rather I feel an overwhelming wave of annoyance. 

 

I feel DE is catering to the new players at the expense if the old players.  Most of the nerfs have been to try make it so that new players can compete with the old ones, so that they can get their ninja moments.  And by compete of course I’m only referring to within low level grindy and tedious content.  

The reason that experienced players keep defaulting to the most efficient strategies is that the missions for them are boring, repetitive, non-challenging, and mostly non-rewarding.  Experienced players have run these missions literally thousands of times, at this point they just want to get them over and done with so they can move on to something else which is hopefully more interesting.

It doesn’t matter what you nerf, as long as the grind is too excessive for these worn out players, something will always emerge as the most efficient tactic, so those things will get overused, and new players will complain about having their kills stolen (as if there is even such a thing, particularly in a co-op game).

The answer is not nerfs, there are two methods you can employ to counter these problems.

1. Introduce challenge, reward, and Significantly reduce the grind for experienced players.  This will keep them playing the game, they won’t get sick or bored of the game.  They also won’t be motivated to use cheese tactics because it will no longer be necessary for them to do so.

2. Instead of nerf, buff other things to bring them up to an equivalent level, though perhaps in a different way.  This will increase variety and diversity of gameplay, which equals more fun and interest.

[(PSN)HAVOCS-Regret]

2 hours ago, DiabolusUrsus said:

"At its core, Warframe is a co-operative game; having powerful tools is a boon to a team rather than a disadvantage. However, there are a few weapons that have such a dominating effect in missions that co-operative missions essentially become solo."

Literally in the first paragraph.

Unless you seriously lack basic reading comprehension, the message is crystal clear: everyone gets to participate. Outside of dedicated farming groups, watching someone else do everything isn't a reasonable standard of "fun."

This particular set of changes applied to specific weapon/Frame combinations, but the applicable problem - 1 person killing everything while 3 others stand around and watch - is the same. Ember/Banshee got changed because of the exact same complaints.

I will readily agree that the actual nerfs were terribly designed and unsuccessful at resolving the problem, but the intent behind the nerfs is what matters.

You are expected to be actively engaged in playing the game, and you don't get to ruin other players' ability to also have fun.

If speed and efficiency are really what matter most to you, why are you so resistant to recruiting dedicated farming groups? Coordinated teams are indisputably faster and more efficient than ragtag groups of strangers.

How bout the other way round, if you are worried that a random is going to ‘steal all your kills’, its your job to recruit a few friends so you can go play a mission the way you want to.  

If you have a problem, you deal with it.  Don’t expect a random person to change the way they want to play to cater to you.

How is a random supposed to know how you want them to play anyhow?!  Lots of people appreciate someone else doing all the hard work for them.  

I bet if a random used a Rhino, stood in the middle of the map on Hydron, roared often to buff the entire squad, let you kill everything, you would then complain that he was lazy, useless, and afk.