Ember rework soon™?

[(PSN)CoolD2108]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb (PS4)Kairu_Aname:

I'll explain why I personally used ember for cc.

Because I didn't need loads of power strength for the rest of the abilities to work as well. Matter of fact, I didn't need any. 

With the augment for wof I could mostly keep an entire room locked down with no power strength investment. I didn't need bunches of duration, strength or range. I could use a slightly tankier ember, and did take that ember into raids for the cc.

There are other things I can do now, but I only had one prime at the time, ember.

I made the most of her then. Enemies got knocked on their butt 

I personally don't like the change they made to ember because it literally accomplished nothing they said it would, and cut her survivability in high lvl missions. 

Also, some quick math. 

Cutting the radius of a circle in half cuts the overall area of the circle nearly to 1/3rd the overall area covered.

It's more nerf than you think it is.

Strength used doesn't actually change anything about accelerants cc effect though. I've said it before but it can be used on a rage strategy on less strength used....what obviously means that it can fit other kinda uses too. I personally wouldn't use overextendet since it would harshly affect the damage buff but stretch and cunning alone result in a 32m active stun radius. Go for efficiency, or manage your energy however you want and you're still in posession of a passive stun that affects anything in actuall aggro range and a active one that locks down whatever is able to shoot you at all.

A smaller radius also means that it'll attack enemys entering your range more certainly... definitly more certainly then one that chooses an average of 2,5 targets per second in a 60m radius.

I'm definitly not gonna ask why you'd use ember, what i'm curious about is why you'd consider a raise in her actuall Cc quality a downgrade to what it was? I mean let's be real there...20 enemys in 10 seconds doesn't provide much protection. Some waves from a single spawnpoint carry that much enemys with them when you're reaching a certain level. It was much worse back at the beginning of the game when enemy spawn was the multiple of what it is now, what was the reason ember was considered inferior to other frames in theyr corresponding role. You didn't take embers to nuke, nor to Cc... you grabbed a saryn or ash and looked for a propper Cc frame. She only became meta after the spawn was reduced to make her work at all and that enemys grow in quantity with higher levels changed nothing about her innitial position.

What is it that bothers you exactly? Can't be the Cc if you use anything but WoF at all.

Is it the overall efficiency? Can you really not raise it or manage your energy?

[RealPandemonium]

2 hours ago, (PS4)Kairu_Aname said:

I'll explain why I personally used ember for cc.

Because I didn't need loads of power strength for the rest of the abilities to work as well. Matter of fact, I didn't need any. 

With the augment for wof I could mostly keep an entire room locked down with no power strength investment. I didn't need bunches of duration, strength or range. I could use a slightly tankier ember, and did take that ember into raids for the cc.

There are other things I can do now, but I only had one prime at the time, ember.

I made the most of her then. Enemies got knocked on their butt 

I personally don't like the change they made to ember because it literally accomplished nothing they said it would, and cut her survivability in high lvl missions. 

Also, some quick math. 

Cutting the radius of a circle in half cuts the overall area of the circle nearly to 1/3rd the overall area covered.

It's more nerf than you think it is.

So from the first part of your post I can gather that you liked Ember because you only needed power range to make her CC work, freeing slots for other things like durability and utility mods.  That makes sense.

I also took Ember into raids for CC, but I never used Firequake.  Accelerant did and and still does the job better, always.

Their stated reasons for changing WoF do not match with what they did, but it makes the changes no less appropriate or deserved.

The radius argument would be valid for powers that affect all enemies within their radius, but WoF has a target limit which makes it less consistent with high power range.  

 

[LightningsVengance]

She'll get a rework when hr prime comes ar-oh wait...

[(PSN)Kairu_Aname]

1 hour ago, (PS4)CoolD2108 said:

Strength used doesn't actually change anything about accelerants cc effect though. I've said it before but it can be used on a rage strategy on less strength used....what obviously means that it can fit other kinda uses too. I personally wouldn't use overextendet since it would harshly affect the damage buff but stretch and cunning alone result in a 32m active stun radius. Go for efficiency, or manage your energy however you want and you're still in posession of a passive stun that affects anything in actuall aggro range and a active one that locks down whatever is able to shoot you at all.

A smaller radius also means that it'll attack enemys entering your range more certainly... definitly more certainly then one that chooses an average of 2,5 targets per second in a 60m radius.

I'm definitly not gonna ask why you'd use ember, what i'm curious about is why you'd consider a raise in her actuall Cc quality a downgrade to what it was? I mean let's be real there...20 enemys in 10 seconds doesn't provide much protection. Some waves from a single spawnpoint carry that much enemys with them when you're reaching a certain level. It was much worse back at the beginning of the game when enemy spawn was the multiple of what it is now, what was the reason ember was considered inferior to other frames in theyr corresponding role. You didn't take embers to nuke, nor to Cc... you grabbed a saryn or ash and looked for a propper Cc frame. She only became meta after the spawn was reduced to make her work at all and that enemys grow in quantity with higher levels changed nothing about her innitial position.

What is it that bothers you exactly? Can't be the Cc if you use anything but WoF at all.

Is it the overall efficiency? Can you really not raise it or manage your energy?

What bothers me is that it was basically passive cc. Now it's active cc, and there are frames that do that better, and the point of my text was that I could spot-weld the holes in her cc 4 with other abilities. 

Not have you insult me about whether or not I had the efficiency

[(PSN)Kairu_Aname]

1 hour ago, RealPandemonium said:

So from the first part of your post I can gather that you liked Ember because you only needed power range to make her CC work, freeing slots for other things like durability and utility mods.  That makes sense.

I also took Ember into raids for CC, but I never used Firequake.  Accelerant did and and still does the job better, always.

Their stated reasons for changing WoF do not match with what they did, but it makes the changes no less appropriate or deserved.

The radius argument would be valid for powers that affect all enemies within their radius, but WoF has a target limit which makes it less consistent with high power range.  

 

Very true on the last part, but I used only overextended as my range. Wasn't a lot, but it worked. And I just put distance between me and an enemy. Hallways worked wonders.(still do)

The changes I can't agree with in any way. Taken objectively the changes failed to accomplish the goal they intended to, and objectively they hinder her upper lvl survivability.

So either DE lied about the reasons she was changed, or they're so out of touch with their own game they had to make SOME sort of change to shut new players up about embers in low lvl missions, even if it was only for show and made no real difference to them. 

That is something I can't stand. If they wanted to make a change, do it right or not at all. Same thing happened with saryn recently. Lazy changes. 

[RealPandemonium]

3 minutes ago, (PS4)Kairu_Aname said:

Very true on the last part, but I used only overextended as my range. Wasn't a lot, but it worked. And I just put distance between me and an enemy. Hallways worked wonders.(still do)

The changes I can't agree with in any way. Taken objectively the changes failed to accomplish the goal they intended to, and objectively they hinder her upper lvl survivability.

So either DE lied about the reasons she was changed, or they're so out of touch with their own game they had to make SOME sort of change to shut new players up about embers in low lvl missions, even if it was only for show and made no real difference to them. 

That is something I can't stand. If they wanted to make a change, do it right or not at all. Same thing happened with saryn recently. Lazy changes. 

My survivability hasn't changed, because I never relied on WoF for CC.  WoF was just a supplement to Accelerant's CC, and it still works fine in that regard.  Refresh it every 10 seconds and voila, you have old WoF but more expensive.  

DE did mislead players on what the WoF changes would accomplish, whether intentional or unintentional.  That doesn't really matter to me since they do it all the time and show a poor grasp of day-to-day Warframe.  

IMO Ember is better than she's ever been.  What would you guys have done in the old days when WoF had 0% status chance, there were no augments, and WoF required duration mods to maintain it for more than 5 seconds at a time?  

[(PSN)Kairu_Aname]

6 minutes ago, RealPandemonium said:

My survivability hasn't changed, because I never relied on WoF for CC.  WoF was just a supplement to Accelerant's CC, and it still works fine in that regard.  Refresh it every 10 seconds and voila, you have old WoF but more expensive.  

DE did mislead players on what the WoF changes would accomplish, whether intentional or unintentional.  That doesn't really matter to me since they do it all the time and show a poor grasp of day-to-day Warframe.  

IMO Ember is better than she's ever been.  What would you guys have done in the old days when WoF had 0% status chance, there were no augments, and WoF required duration mods to maintain it for more than 5 seconds at a time?  

I've been around since then. I didn't use her. I used mag at that time. Because status and cc is king in this game

[(PSN)CoolD2108]

vor 51 Minuten schrieb (PS4)Kairu_Aname:

What bothers me is that it was basically passive cc. Now it's active cc, and there are frames that do that better, and the point of my text was that I could spot-weld the holes in her cc 4 with other abilities. 

Not have you insult me about whether or not I had the efficiency

Better in what regard? Should hardly matter whether you use it once or more often so long you can feed it, what definitly is quite possible for her. Not to mention that her Cc, may it have been passive as it was, never was up to par to begin with. And i can't exactly think of other frames but nova and maybe excal when it comes to buffing and doing the damage ember does on use of that 1kinda Cc.

She isn't exactly your pure Cc frame. She's been offensive frame with good Cc since day one and the change was benefiting all of those aspects while simply asking for a basic level of input. Can this really be an issue?

Couldn't quite make sense of the last part... it wasn't meant to be an insult though? It's just the only thing i could logically consider an issue. WoF's channeling nature restricts Zenurik, plates and support after all.

Edited July 3, 2018 by (PS4)CoolD2108

[(PSN)Kairu_Aname]

Ember used to have passive cc on her 4 with firequake. I didn't need power strength so I used overextended. I used her other abilities as a patch for her 4's "inconsistent" cc.

Now, if I have to cast her 4 again to get the range back, it might as well be active cc, and there are other frames that do that better. And yes, I have switched to them. 

[(PSN)CoolD2108]

vor 1 Minute schrieb (PS4)Kairu_Aname:

Ember used to have passive cc on her 4 with firequake. I didn't need power strength so I used overextended. I used her other abilities as a patch for her 4's "inconsistent" cc.

Now, if I have to cast her 4 again to get the range back, it might as well be active cc, and there are other frames that do that better. And yes, I have switched to them. 

Would you say that it was ever on par to propper Cc though? The only thing that ever worked for it was that it was even more passive then Duration focused Cc, even if it's just the difference between using something once in a minute or once in a game. The difference between passive gameplay and full afk, what should be a rather reasonable and understandable reason for a change...

I really hope that this isn't the reason for you to be here. So you can complain that you can no longer not play the game with her.

[(PSN)Kairu_Aname]

33 minutes ago, (PS4)CoolD2108 said:

Would you say that it was ever on par to propper Cc though? The only thing that ever worked for it was that it was even more passive then Duration focused Cc, even if it's just the difference between using something once in a minute or once in a game. The difference between passive gameplay and full afk, what should be a rather reasonable and understandable reason for a change...

I really hope that this isn't the reason for you to be here. So you can complain that you can no longer not play the game with her.

And that sounds awful close to an insult. I'll say it ahead of time, if you have to insult people, you have nothing to say in full. 

Now, as for why I'm here, it's because this is a forum and I answered a question of why I used to user ember, and have also explained that the reason for the change was outright a lie. 

[(PSN)CoolD2108]

vor 8 Minuten schrieb (PS4)Kairu_Aname:

And that sounds awful close to an insult. I'll say it ahead of time, if you have to insult people, you have nothing to say in full. 

Now, as for why I'm here, it's because this is a forum and I answered a question of why I used to user ember, and have also explained that the reason for the change was outright a lie. 

If you consider me analyzing your reasoning an insult then you really need to overthink said resoning.

[(PSN)Kairu_Aname]

15 minutes ago, (PS4)CoolD2108 said:

If you consider me analyzing your reasoning an insult then you really need to overthink said resoning.

Analyzing is one thing, I've just been in too many forums and know where that line of thinking was going.(hint. Don't insult)

Now, as for the cc thing. I liked using ember for cc Because it was super cheap cc. I don't use it now because it's not super cheap anymore. It's just regular cheap. 

[(PSN)CoolD2108]

vor 21 Minuten schrieb (PS4)Kairu_Aname:

Analyzing is one thing, I've just been in too many forums and know where that line of thinking was going.(hint. Don't insult)

Now, as for the cc thing. I liked using ember for cc Because it was super cheap cc. I don't use it now because it's not super cheap anymore. It's just regular cheap. 

Was it? I remember it beein at about 0,75 energy/second on max efficiency.

Compared to a maximum of 25 energy for up to a solid minute...

[paul5473]

7 hours ago, EinheriarJudith said:

or you could i dont know..... Adapt. a cut to range killed the frame? last i checked doing 100k+ damage with my x5.35 mult accelerant and corrosive/heat arca plasmor was far from her being dead.

Yet I was talking about WoF...

[paul5473]

7 hours ago, RealPandemonium said:

That doesn't tell me how Firequake was helping you; I have consistently found that it only gives the illusion of helping.  Regular WoF without Firequake is also used for CC, btw, and I refresh its range when I want its CC to reach further.  

I'm not asking what was the CC.  I am asking, why Ember?  Why would you use Ember for CC over Rhino, Loki, Octavia, Nova, Vauban, Frost, Nyx, Equinox, or any other frame with wide-area CC?  What's Ember's advantage?

I'm telling you... the knockdown in high-end 

[(PSN)CoolD2108]

vor 52 Minuten schrieb paul5473:

Yet I was talking about WoF...

I allways like to compare embers WoF to Excals  Sword wave... you know the thing that travels in a line, needs a lotta input and falls off with range.

I mean they both channel, the both work ideally on status, they both can do good damage. That kinda 200+% strength build would make WoF do at the very least 1.800 damage potentionally setting enemys up for another 5.600 damage over 6 seconds.

On a 5x multiplier that's 8.000 damage and additional 28.000 damage in addition to those 100+k. 

Maybe it's just no pure Cc ability, maybe it never was with the low effectivity it had to begin with. Maybe it wasn't even as power efficient as some people claim it to be. Maybe she was a pure low level killer with medicore Cc that simply allowed zero input at some point. 

Maybe the rework pushed her closer to what it was meant to be in the first place. Maybe it didn't even affect her Cc effectivity that much...if you leave aside that you can't afk and that you have to press more then 4 once any longer.

I mean you still can but it doesn't make the impression you participate anymore.

Edited July 3, 2018 by (PS4)CoolD2108

[(PSN)Kairu_Aname]

1 hour ago, (PS4)CoolD2108 said:

Was it? I remember it beein at about 0,75 energy/second on max efficiency.

Compared to a maximum of 25 energy for up to a solid minute...

And how many of those cc frames, that have that 25 energy cost for a minute,  have a damage buff?(any amount)

I failed to mention this I realize. She made the silva and aegis exceptionally better even if it was only 10%.(not that it was bad) I'm guessing here on numbers because I don't remember the actual buff amount with 40% strength. 

[(PSN)CoolD2108]

vor 4 Minuten schrieb (PS4)Kairu_Aname:

And how many of those cc frames, that have that 25 energy cost for a minute,  have a damage buff?(any amount)

I failed to mention this I realize. She made the silva and aegis exceptionally better even if it was only 10%.(not that it was bad) I'm guessing here on numbers because I don't remember the actual buff amount with 40% strength. 

Molecular prime. 

And on a base of x2,5, with 40% power strength it is one. You have a 1x multiplier.

 

However that helped.

[ReshyShira]

On 2018-06-26 at 1:57 PM, Dhrekr said:

I don't regret the reworks. The rework is fantastic. I hated those two-neuron hacks who used a minmaxed Ember to do a level 10 Alert and, if this rework has freed us from them, so much the better.

And I keep using Ember no matter what. Is she the strongest? Arguably not. Does she ruin every public game she's in? Fortunately not.

 

Except you can still walk through levels killing everything with WoF?

 

The only change to Ember was that her high-level viability was reduced while preserving the low-level problems that people didn't like.

[EinheriarJudith]

1 hour ago, paul5473 said:

Yet I was talking about WoF...

and yet you used that to say she is dead rather than saying you dont like the change they made to WoF. ember isnt dead and WoF change didnt kill the ability. i actually like the range reduction since usually im in the enemies face anyway.

[EinheriarJudith]

18 minutes ago, ReshyShira said:

 

~snip~

 

in endless ember cannot stand in one spot, turn WoF on and just go make a pizza. even with toggling its going to come at a cost. you know who else can run across the map in an exterminate and kill enemes with a toggle power? Maimquinox. WoF can no longer kill enemies where you cant see them by just turning it on and leaving it on.

[RealPandemonium]

1 hour ago, paul5473 said:

I'm telling you... the knockdown in high-end 

Why not use any of the other frames I listed instead?

25 minutes ago, ReshyShira said:

The only change to Ember was that her high-level viability was reduced while preserving the low-level problems that people didn't like.

Aside from WoF becoming more expensive, what changed to affect "high level viability?"

[(PSN)Kairu_Aname]

47 minutes ago, (PS4)CoolD2108 said:

Molecular prime. 

And on a base of x2,5, with 40% power strength it is one. You have a 1x multiplier.

 

However that helped.

She has a 2x multiplier at all times and she's not a cc frame. She slows enemies down, or speeds them up. It's not true cc. 

stuns, knock-downs, and sleep are true cc types because they stop the enemy from doing anything to hit you in any way

[(PSN)Kairu_Aname]

19 minutes ago, RealPandemonium said:

Why not use any of the other frames I listed instead?

Aside from WoF becoming more expensive, what changed to affect "high level viability?"

I'll explain. The range was nerfed and any time without cc going on, makes her more vulnerable.