Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

-TSA-Swaggi

Why Inaros Passive is kinda useless

Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, chainchompguy3 said:

So, to boil down your argument to an extremely concise point, you are saying the following:

Because each warframe, designed in a team/multiplayer scenario, needs to not only help their teammates, but also to help themselves, a well-designed warframe will be inherently self-serving enough to function in solo play.

Correct enough?

Basically, yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, chainchompguy3 said:

I thought so too, and it does.

Not necessarily because...

53 minutes ago, chainchompguy3 said:

Thus, he feels that Inaros's "Passive" should be considered the heal-on-finisher-kills, because it is self-serving and co-op friendly. urthermore, the alternate bleedout state is just a thematic tack-on.

Which basically means complaining about the death coffin is like complaining about the default skin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Almagnus1 said:

Which basically means complaining about the death coffin is like complaining about the default skin.

skin has no effect on gameplay, coffin does

 

the "its just thematic" part is ur assumption, it could be right but there is nothing that suggests it being the case besides it being weak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Almagnus1 said:

Not necessarily because...

Which basically means complaining about the death coffin is like complaining about the default skin.

If we take the Alternate bleedout state on it's own, and assume that is a passive in it's own right,

And we agree that the Alternate bleedout state is not effective at reviving yourself in solo,

 

then it would follow to say that Inaros has a passive that is designed in such a way that does function well in a team scenario, but does not trickle down to work well in solo, as a well-designed frame's passive would (following your design philosophy).

Thus, by your own design philosophy, you would think that Inaros's passive is poorly designed, and needs a rework.

 

 

But, as I pointed out, you've said something to that effect already.

Quote

If the death coffin was the only passive Inaros had, I'd grab a pitchfork and torch and join the mob, but since there's also the finisher healing passive (which is arguably the best passive in the game), I'm willing to overlook the death coffin passive.

I was just lazy and didn't want to actually go out and quote it before.

 

So I was trying to point out that you do, in a sense, agree with us, because you too agree with the idea that the Coffin on it's own makes for a rather Crap passive.

 

The key difference is that @TKDancer believes that just because 1 passive is good, does not excuse the other to be so poor it is comparable to just a fashion statement.

Whereas you believe that 1 good passive, especially one as good as Inaros's, is enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, TKDancer said:

skin has no effect on gameplay, coffin does

 

the "its just thematic" part is ur assumption, it could be right but there is nothing that suggests it being the case besides it being weak

Mechanics play a part in thematics as well, though.

 

Ember can have the model and skin of destructive-fire-chick all day long, but if her kit was nothing but summoning shields and healing, she wouldn't be seen as destructive-fire.

 

It is possible that DE wanted to add in just one more undying-vampire-of-the-sand theming to Inaros's kit, but knew that it wouldn't work gameplay wise: being undying all the time is boring. So instead, they made it weak and unreliable on purpose.

It's still there, affecting gameplay, and giving the impression that Inaros is some unkillable sand vampire god, (So good, in fact, that you were upset that Inaros wasn't living up to that).

But it's not affecting gameplay enough to cause problems.

So, assuming this is all true, DE knew it'd affect both thematics and gameplay, but only wanted it for the thematics that the mechanic suggested about Inaros, so they made it "Useless" to gameplay intentionally.

 

That is what they are trying to say there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, chainchompguy3 said:

Mechanics play a part in thematics as well, though.

 

Ember can have the model and skin of destructive-fire-chick all day long, but if her kit was nothing but summoning shields and healing, she wouldn't be seen as destructive-fire.

 

It is possible that DE wanted to add in just one more undying-vampire-of-the-sand theming to Inaros's kit, but knew that it wouldn't work gameplay wise: being undying all the time is boring. So instead, they made it weak and unreliable on purpose.

It's still there, affecting gameplay, and giving the impression that Inaros is some unkillable sand vampire god, (So good, in fact, that you were upset that Inaros wasn't living up to that).

But it's not affecting gameplay enough to cause problems.

So, assuming this is all true, DE knew it'd affect both thematics and gameplay, but only wanted it for the thematics that the mechanic suggested about Inaros, so they made it "Useless" to gameplay intentionally.

 

That is what they are trying to say there.

yes they can, but as we all know, there is a difference between a  thematic mechanic and a purely cosmetic skin

 

however as you have said before, there is always the possibility(however small i believe it to be) that DE truly wanted this to just be a silly thematic thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TKDancer said:

yes they can, but as we all know, there is a difference between a  thematic mechanic and a purely cosmetic skin

 

however as you have said before, there is always the possibility(however small i believe it to be) that DE truly wanted this to just be a silly thematic thing

Which goes back to what he said:

50 minutes ago, Almagnus1 said:

Not necessarily because...

Which basically means complaining about the death coffin is like complaining about the default skin.

He is making the analogy that, assuming the Coffin is there ONLY for thematics, then complaining about it is just as bad as complaining about any other thing that's just there for thematics, such as a skin.

 

This would be better demonstrated by bringing in Arcanes.

Some players think that the thing-only-meant-for-thematics (Helmets) should also give some worthwhile gameplay effect (Arcanes).

Some players think that the thing-only-meant-for-thematics (Helmets) should also give some worthwhile gameplay effect (Arcanes).

You think that the thing-only-meant-for-thematics (the Coffin) should also give some worthwhile gameplay effect (Usable self-revival).

 

Again, that's all under the assumption that the Alternate bleedout state of the Coffin is for thematics only, because that's what he believes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, chainchompguy3 said:

It's still there, affecting gameplay, and giving the impression that Inaros is some unkillable sand vampire god, (So good, in fact, that you were upset that Inaros wasn't living up to that).

Saying that I'm upset's being very hyperbolic.  I understand it's garbage because of the finisher heal.  I'm fine with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Almagnus1 said:

Saying that I'm upset's being very hyperbolic.  I understand it's garbage because of the finisher heal.  I'm fine with that.

Er, sorry, guess I wasn't clear there.

29 minutes ago, chainchompguy3 said:

It's still there, affecting gameplay, and giving the impression that Inaros is some unkillable sand vampire god, (So good, in fact, that you were upset that Inaros wasn't living up to that).

"You" = @TKDancer, because he at least appears to be upset about the Coffin not being viable-in-solo.

 

That post was directed specifically to TKdancer, to eventually lead in to explaining the analogy.

I hoped that the fact that his comment was the only one I quoted was evidence enough of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Funcooker said:

Its a sarcophagus you racists.
 

sarcophagi existed in many cultures, but nice not funny joke

 

and they are coffins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/8/2018 at 6:32 PM, TKDancer said:

you already admitted to just being here to make me "fail at an argument" so i really have 0 reason to keep engaging with ya but what the heck, lets just keep souring my mood

 

i didnt admit anything, but okay

nidus, and 15 stacks is pretty easy to get

 

 

u screaming "you're wrong" or  "i destroyed you" repeatedly doesnt exactly fit the bill of making me wrong  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

 

as @chainchompguy3 says unfortunately neither of us can say with 100% certainty whether it is merely a flavor thing or if it was intended to truly allow inaros to keep cheating death as neither of us are [DE]velopers

 

i'll stand by my stance in that it was the latter but they hecked up considering they did the concept of the passive right when nidus came around, but if the only thing u are gonna say is "its not meant to be relevant" and so on, guess we'll just keep going back and forth

 

Nope, what I admitted was that slight ad hominem was added in for flavor and to throw you off balance(causing you to fail more than you already did).

" mostly useless " -you

Mostly means it's not completely useless
Nope, it works like QT but gives health...etc. on top.

I posted all the evidence for everyone to see but hey, you already gave up since you refuse to look at them (or rather you just say "you're wrong" without any real argument, exactly what you accused me of doing).

Nice try, you threw in "allow inaros to keep cheating death" and tried to paint that argument as mine to attack.

Nidus actually has a significant cost to his passive; it consumes 15 stacks and you have to build up the stacks(lining up at least 15 1s that hit 5 enemies or a combination of 1 and 4, which requires stationary gameplay).

Once again you tried to alter my words in attempt to post something against it.  You tried to imply I said it's not meant to be relevant at all.
My exact words were: "less relevant"
And my reasoning is sound, as backed up by evidence that literally rest of his kit contributes to Inaros not going down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ComradeHX said:

Nope, what I admitted was that slight ad hominem was added in for flavor and to throw you off balance(causing you to fail more than you already did).

" mostly useless " -you

Mostly means it's not completely useless
Nope, it works like QT but gives health...etc. on top.

I posted all the evidence for everyone to see but hey, you already gave up since you refuse to look at them (or rather you just say "you're wrong" without any real argument, exactly what you accused me of doing).

Nice try, you threw in "allow inaros to keep cheating death" and tried to paint that argument as mine to attack.

Nidus actually has a significant cost to his passive; it consumes 15 stacks and you have to build up the stacks(lining up at least 15 1s that hit 5 enemies or a combination of 1 and 4, which requires stationary gameplay).

Once again you tried to alter my words in attempt to post something against it.  You tried to imply I said it's not meant to be relevant at all.
My exact words were: "less relevant"
And my reasoning is sound, as backed up by evidence that literally rest of his kit contributes to Inaros not going down.

nice necro, see ya bub

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/8/2018 at 5:29 PM, chainchompguy3 said:

Hah, I didn't even think of that. Nice reference.

Of course, I hope you'll understand if I don't take that as a legitimate argument against what I said.

 

And as for your comment on justifying your Ad-hominem attacks....

If you are going into an argument, not with the intent to honestly convince the other of your opinion, but that you simply want to trip them up, and get them to fail...

You aren't Arguing, by definition.

You're pointlessly fighting, just using words, rather than physical violence. Fighting a particularly meaningless fight, trying to "Win".

Ironically, then, you don't actually "Win" the argument by the normal standards of an arguement (Those being, convincing the other person).

You instead cement their current opinion in place, because they feel like they now have to defend it against unreasonable and unnecessarily aggressive antagonism.

 

In short, that's Trolling.

So please, if this IS, in fact, your intentions behind this argument, then let me know, so I can flag you and/or your posts.

 

Well I first tried to convince him that his notion that Inaros' passive is bad is...simply unfounded...by debunking what "reason" he used to construct his whole post.

But he just says "no ur wrong."

What option did he leave me?  Evidence and logic do not mean anything to him.  If anything, he is the troll.
And he's not going to admit it until he is so thoroughly humiliated that he's going to tell everybody that "hey guys jk i wuz troll."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TKDancer said:

nice necro, see ya bub

>attempt to dismiss post by calling it necro despite last post being from less than a week ago

Sure I'll wait and see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, ComradeHX said:

>attempt to dismiss post by calling it necro despite last post being from less than a week ago

Sure I'll wait and see.

no i simply dont wish to interact with you, believe what you will keep thinking you "won" or whatevs, this thread is done for me, buh bye :highfive:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, TKDancer said:

no i simply dont wish to interact with you, believe what you will keep thinking you "won" or whatevs, this thread is done for me, buh bye :highfive:

I highly doubt that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey all,

I have locked this thread as it has devolved into petty argumentation and ad-hominem. Clearly, it has outlived its usefulness.

[DE]Aidan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.