Warframe needs a proper Warframe pvp and not unreal tournament pvp

[Strife-]

5 minutes ago, Bigamo said:

Can it be what's the new war is about? I am always thinking to myself if that morality system will have any use in the future. We already have teams sun and moon on pvp... So the morality working as sun and moon seems catchy.

I think it is more related to the acolytes or stalker... since it is all sentient thing... keep in mind that Conclave is considered a sport by teshin.

and DE said they wanted the acoytes to come back in a new way.

and if you check the acolytes sigil, we get on the Operation shadow debt you'll see the stalker symbol with a sentient... but that is just mere speculation off the topic I believe.

Edited July 16, 2018 by Strkiller16

[Strife-]

1 minute ago, Bigamo said:

Can you please specify how exactly my suggestion would "water down" the game?

I believe improving PvP improve the whole game... I don't see how it would damage the game... it could even be very benefical.

[xXDeadsinxX]

I absolutely agree with what @FashionFrame stated. DE is an amazing company, they take a lot of risks that could fail or could be a huge success. Lunaro and PvP as a whole was a massive failure, and DE have acknowledged that it failed and they likely aren’t ever going to put anymore time and resources into it. That doesn’t mean they won’t ever redo the entire PvP system, but for them to do that, they would need to put a lot of time into it which I’m guessing that they don’t have.

Edited July 16, 2018 by xXDeadsinxX

[Dromeos-Prime]

1 minute ago, Strkiller16 said:

I believe improving PvP improve the whole game... I don't see how it would damage the game... it could even be very benefical.

If 100% taxation on rewards is what you call beneficial i'd rather not have any of it.

[Strife-]

5 minutes ago, xXDeadsinxX said:

I absolutely agree with what @FashionFrame stated. DE is an amazing company, they take a lot of risks that could fail or could be a huge success. Lunaro and PvP as a whole was a massive failure, and DE have acknowledged that it failed and they likely aren’t even going to put anymore time and resources into it. That doesn’t mean they won’t ever redo the entire PvP system, but for them to do that, they would need to put a lot of time into it which I’m guessing that they don’t have.

You can't mark gamemode a failure judging by your opinion... instead here is a fact:

this post was submitted same day The sacrifice quest was launched on PC. said by DE Steve, also I watched the stream and Steve did said that. not sure about the stalker thing... but he confirmed pvp on a shady syndicate.

Edited July 16, 2018 by Strkiller16

[Strife-]

3 minutes ago, reptillicus said:

If 100% taxation on rewards is what you call beneficial i'd rather not have any of it.

Well that gets you competiitive to fight for what you want... what's the point of fighting without a reason? of course the winners are the benefied... the art of war.

[WidescreenJohn]

9 minutes ago, Strkiller16 said:

You can't mark gamemode a failure judging by your opinion... instead here is a fact:

this post was submitted same day The sacrifice quest was launched on PC. said by DE Steve, also I watched the stream and Steve did said that. not sure about the stalker thing... but he confirmed pvp on a shady syndicate.

So if you join a shady syndicate you have the option to invade/grief other people's games? The "not cool at all" alarms are going off on that one unless they have some way of making sure that there's a balance with the levels of whoever they're targeting. It would totally suck if someone playing a low MR warframe with okay weapons suddenly gets invaded by a player with MR 20 and fully loaded arca plasmor. That has more potential for pissing people off than by making it an enjoyable experience. Existing syndicate attacks are already a pain because they break the flow of the mission, but at least you get items with the Stalker.

The other part of it would be to do what Ubisoft did in Watch_Dogs: give people the choice to opt out of being invaded by others.

[TrockBronze]

they need to just remove PvP

[Strife-]

1 minute ago, WidescreenRules said:

So if you join a shady syndicate you have the option to invade/grief other people's games? The "not cool at all" alarms are going off on that one unless they have some way of making sure that there's a balance with the levels of whoever they're targeting. It would totally suck if someone playing a low MR warframe with okay weapons suddenly gets invaded by a player with MR 20 and fully loaded arca plasmor. That has more potential for pissing people off than by making it an enjoyable experience. Existing syndicate attacks are already a pain because they break the flow of the mission, but at least you get items with the Stalker.

The other part of it would be to do what Ubisoft did in Watch_Dogs: give people the choice to opt out of being invaded by others.

I honestly...  Want and I hope... that if they implement pvp on pve... is used with the purpose of pvp only... restraining trolling or stuff like that... I think is obvious for winners who kills the "invader" get a reward. but I can't really talk about the functionality of what is stated... but is logical and DE is aware of trolling as shown in the famous "Stalker mode" but they must do something for players to not troll. to just join, fight and do the PvP.

 

I believe DE is aware that in the "stalker mode" you can harm defense targets. They said themselves is just a little project still developing.

If they throw it to the public of course those conditions might be added... well I suppose, we would have to wait and see...

[(XBOX)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy]

44 minutes ago, Bigamo said:

There is a leveled field, making a strong frame is part of the fight. You need to make the better Warframe and use it well enough to achieve victory.

That's not a test of skill.

You literally just have to Google a mathmaticaly min/max'ed build then farm the pieces.

It's a test of Google's ability and how much free time you have + your "skill" at RNG for the drops.

And for the above? You get rewarded with advantages over the competition. No level playing field. You straight up get an edge that can sway the game from the better player to the lesser one.

PvP is best done in games where skill is the only factor. Otherwise what's the point?

[Bigamo]

30 minutes ago, (XB1)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy said:

That's not a test of skill.

You literally just have to Google a mathmaticaly min/max'ed build then farm the pieces.

It's a test of Google's ability and how much free time you have + your "skill" at RNG for the drops.

 And for the above? You get rewarded with advantages over the competition. No level playing field. You straight up get an edge that can sway the game from the better player to the lesser one.

 PvP is best done in games where skill is the only factor. Otherwise what's the point?

If your logic was correct anyone that built the same deck of the world champion of magic the gathering would become the world champion too. And min/max builds sre super squishy and sacrifice a LOT to reach the max. You can be sure that balanced builds would totally rule pvp. 

Edit: plus, its a test of patience to farm and level mods and design a good frame. I see no point in "equal playing field" when talking about warframe, that being said i played several RTS at high level, THERE even playing field is a thing, but the WHOLE POINT of warframe is to try to make the best warframe possible! Why would PVP be different? 

Edited July 16, 2018 by Bigamo

[(XBOX)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy]

53 minutes ago, Bigamo said:

If your logic was correct anyone that built the same deck of the world champion of magic the gathering would become the world champion too.

No, we're talking about skewing odds.

According to my logic if you hand the "world champion of magic" a deck with nothing but one terrible card... he won't be the world champion anymore. You've removed his tools and hampered his ability to succeed. So if you beat him under those conditions are you actually -better- than him? No (he is the "world champion" after all), you just took advantage of an unfair challenge, and won because it was unfair.

53 minutes ago, Bigamo said:

Edit: plus, its a test of patience to farm and level mods and design a good frame. I see no point in "equal playing field" when talking about warframe...

Then what is the point? If there's no level playing field then you aren't testing your skill against your opponents and that alone. So you will never have an outcome which is simply decided by who is better. And if you remove that from player vs player, if you create an unfair competition, then what's the point of competing at all? If you aren't testing each other to see who is better, who comes out on top... you may as well just play PvE.

[Wesgile]

Inb4 operator only PvP.

[OniDax]

7 hours ago, Genoscythe said:

I think no more (warframe Pve)-dev time or rewards should be moved to PvP.

 

At 20 million registered loosers accounts and the current PvP player stats they might as well do a PvP spin-off that does not affect the actual game in any way and has its own reward system. This would allow for a complete rebuild of mechanics with PvP-focus and a dev team dedicated to only that.

 

DE is already working on a PvP game, though, the amazing eternals, so this is not bound to happen probably.

Amazing Eternals failed hard.

@BigamoThe only PvP I want to see in Warframe is a melee-focused dueling mode inspired by For Honor.

2 minutes ago, Wesgile said:

Inb4 operator only PvP.

I thought PvP couldn't be more dead than it already is. Then you said that...

Edited July 16, 2018 by A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n

[Bigamo]

41 minutes ago, (XB1)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy said:

No, we're talking about skewing odds.

According to my logic if you hand the "world champion of magic" a deck with nothing but one terrible card... he won't be the world champion anymore. You've removed his tools and hampered his ability to succeed. So if you beat him under those conditions are you actually -better- than him? No (he is the "world champion" after all), you just took advantage of an unfair challenge, and won because it was unfair.

Then what is the point? If there's no level playing field then you aren't testing your skill against your opponents and that alone. So you will never have an outcome which is simply decided by who is better. And if you remove that from player vs player, if you create an unfair competition, then what's the point of competing at all? If you aren't testing each other to see who is better, who comes out on top... you may as well just play PvE.

 And who is talking about removing the frames of the better players? I am talking about the exact opposite, to let people fight with their own tools.
 
 Using your logic there is no point in ANYTHING. The current conclave pvp just uses a single set of skills, that aren't even that necessaire in the true warframe, hand eye cordination to jump and land headshoots at the same time. Meanwhile all the other set of skills are useless, but you are just playing rethoric. 

 You are testing each other to see who is better, but even so, making a good frame is a vital part of "who is better". the other part is using it. 

 Watch Gundam build fighters to understand what i mean. 😄

[cghawk]

this is like the multiplayer craze all over again ''IF IT DOESN'T HAVE MULTIPLAYER, I WON'T BUY IT'' and then dozens of games got released with multiplayer in them which no one used,. remember the overlord series? people were outraged'' WE DEMAND MULTIPLAYER'' so they implemented multiplayer, and how many people played it multiplayer on the day of release? about 1-5, gosh so worth it!

and nowadays it's ''WE WANT PVP, IN EVERYTHING'' same with warhammer 40k vermintide 2, people be begging for PVP, but, how about, NO, let PVE games be PVE, not everything needs PVP, if a game got popular because of it's PVE then investing in PVP is an utter waste of time, PVP has already taken content away from PVE, namely the solar rail conflicts when they got changed from PVE to PVP, PVP has been done what 3/4 times now? and it failed all 3 times, sure the PVP lovers will say ''but because the pvp was bad!!11!! herp derp'' or how about you come to the realization that pvp in a game that got popular through PVE isn't going to become popular, simple as that, it didn't fail because of any of these ''excuses'' it failed because it's PVP and to people like me PVP is worthless and clearly to the vast majority PVP is worthless to them as well.

how selfish can you be that you demand PVP in a PVE game, I know you will probably try to twist words on me ''you're the one being selfish'' no I'm not, warframe is a PVE game, the only game modes that have ever been popular in warframe have been PVE and the only reason these useless PVP mode got implemented in the first place is because of selfish PVP players demanding there be a PVP mode, you don't see me going to PVP games and demanding PVE games, no, instead I go play a game that's PVE simple as that.

 

I'll tell you right now if that new PVP syndicate has gameplay items locked behind it I'll be done with this game, no valid reason would exist to lock gameplay content behind pvp that almost no one likes or wants

[Bigamo]

6 minutes ago, cghawk said:

this is like the multiplayer craze all over again ''IF IT DOESN'T HAVE MULTIPLAYER, I WON'T BUY IT'' and then dozens of games got released with multiplayer in them which no one used,. remember the overlord series? people were outraged'' WE DEMAND MULTIPLAYER'' so they implemented multiplayer, and how many people played it multiplayer on the day of release? about 1-5, gosh so worth it!

 and nowadays it's ''WE WANT PVP, IN EVERYTHING'' same with warhammer 40k vermintide 2, people be begging for PVP, but, how about, NO, let PVE games be PVE, not everything needs PVP, if a game got popular because of it's PVE then investing in PVP is an utter waste of time, PVP has already taken content away from PVE, namely the solar rail conflicts when they got changed from PVE to PVP, PVP has been done what 3/4 times now? and it failed all 3 times, sure the PVP lovers will say ''but because the pvp was bad!!11!! herp derp'' or how about you come to the realization that pvp in a game that got popular through PVE isn't going to become popular, simple as that, it didn't fail because of any of these ''excuses'' it failed because it's PVP and to people like me PVP is worthless and clearly to the vast majority PVP is worthless to them as well.

 how selfish can you be that you demand PVP in a PVE game, I know you will probably try to twist words on me ''you're the one being selfish'' no I'm not, warframe is a PVE game, the only game modes that have ever been popular in warframe have been PVE and the only reason these useless PVP mode got implemented in the first place is because of selfish PVP players demanding there be a PVP mode, you don't see me going to PVP games and demanding PVE games, no, instead I go play a game that's PVE simple as that.

  

I'll tell you right now if that new PVP syndicate has gameplay items locked behind it I'll be done with this game, no valid reason would exist to lock gameplay content behind pvp that almost no one likes or wants

 Sorry,  but this game had PVP on it since before you began playing... oh, and it still have!!! Oh, and it have items locked behind it!!! So what about quiting already? 

[Corvid]

1 hour ago, Bigamo said:

 Sorry,  but this game had PVP on it since before you began playing... oh, and it still have!!! Oh, and it have items locked behind it!!! So what about quiting already? 

Note the phrase:

1 hour ago, cghawk said:

gameplay items

 

[KeladorUK]

9 hours ago, Bigamo said:

Edit, and not many new stuff would have to be created, even the old Dark Sectors maps can be used, that's not the problem, Warframe totally needs proper pvp to become the complete game it aims to be.

Adding PvP to a game does not make it complete... thats like saying adding player housing or a marriage system makes a game complete... PvP if anything hurts PVE games as it takes dev time and sometimes becomes the focus over the PVE side of things look at Destiny 2.... that game has a stronger PvP focus than PVE and it was what helped destroy the franchise....

PvP is good for twitch streams until the next best PvP game comes along its the PVE players that support a game long term so makes sense to not cater to PvP players.

Edited July 16, 2018 by KeladorUK

[Lanadra]

I'm going to say something else, heartfelt: Warframe does not need PvP, at all.

10 minutes ago, KeladorUK said:

Adding PvP to a game does not make it complete... thats like saying adding player housing or a marriage system makes a game complete... PvP if anything hurts PVE games as it takes dev time and sometimes becomes the focus over the PVE side of things look at Destiny 2.... that game has a stronger PvP focus than PVE and it was what helped destroy the franchise....

PvP is good for twitch streams until the next best PvP game comes along its the PVE players that support a game long term so makes sense to not cater to PvP players.

One word: Fortnite

The original ''Fortnite: Save the World'', a PvE cooperative game, was sacrificed the moment Battle Royale proved to be more profitable and more succesful.

Edited July 16, 2018 by Lanadra

[Bigamo]

23 minutes ago, Lanadra said:

I'm going to say something else, heartfelt: Warframe does not need PvP, at all.

One word: Fortnite

The original ''Fortnite: Save the World'', a PvE cooperative game, was sacrificed the moment Battle Royale proved to be more profitable and more succesful.

So your worst fear is that PvP becomes good? That's so sad... DE isn't Epic Games.

 

Edit: and what I suggested would NOT remove the focus of PvE, quite the opposite, would give it meaning and something for look forward when doing so many missions that the only benefit they can offer is to make those same missions even easier.

Edited July 16, 2018 by Bigamo

[(XBOX)N7 Sinner]

8 hours ago, Strkiller16 said:

Actually... Steve on periscope the same day they released The sacrifice on PC said, "We always have been thinking about a shady syndicate that involves PvP, and we have it ready we just need a way to implement it according to the Lore." so.. Yeah.

I cannot help but to feel that Steve was alluding to the Stalker Invasion system that was demoed at last year's TennoCon. The Stalker and his Acolytes are a shady as they come. Never mind the fact that they are all covered in smoke. They scream Angst-y (pun intended) and shady. Personally, I would love it, but I understand the concerns surrounding it.

I have never played a game with such mechanics, Dark Souls included. There. I said it. As much as I want this to be a thing as the Shadow Stalker is a chump and needs to be more menacing, DE should be looking into how this feature is balanced before releasing it, disable it by default, and give us the option to opt-in and opt-out of it if we so choose.

[Lanadra]

13 minutes ago, Bigamo said:

So your worst fear is that PvP becomes good? That's so sad... DE isn't Epic Games.

 

Edit: and what I suggested would NOT remove the focus of PvE, quite the opposite, would give it meaning and something for look forward when doing so many missions that the only benefit they can offer is to make those same missions even easier.

No, not at all. Nor did I ever imply I feared any such thing. I was simply giving an example to add to the point @KeladorUK was making.

PvP in Warframe is never going to ''become good'', DE has tried several times and it has always failed. Get it through your head, the larger Warframe player base does not want it. That's the signal that has been sound off just about every time DE made an attempt at it, both in words and in actions.

You should know this, being a founder just like me, you've surely seen all of the iterations of Warframe PvP and that despite however much DE tried to make it better, it never caught on. That is why they stopped trying, because it was a waste of time and effort.

[Wesgile]

40 minutes ago, Lanadra said:

The original ''Fortnite: Save the World'', a PvE cooperative game, was sacrificed the moment Battle Royale proved to be more profitable and more succesful.

I know everyone hates Fortnite and that it's uncool if you don't straight up jump into the hate-bandwagon, but that is not really true. Playerbase issues aside, many people actually bought in to the PvE mode (because you can actually earn the cosmetic currency there) and the development for the PvE mode isn't slowing at all, in fact it actually gains speed. A bit unrelated to the issue at hand though, just want to point out stuff (fake news bla bla bla).

6 minutes ago, (XB1)N7 Sinner said:

I cannot help but to feel that Steve was alluding to the Stalker Invasion system that was demoed at last year's TennoCon. The Stalker and his Acolytes are a shady as they come. Never mind the fact that they are all covered in smoke. They scream Angst-y (pun intended) and shady. Personally, I would love it, but I understand the concerns surrounding it.

I have never played a game with such mechanics, Dark Souls included. There. I said it. As much as I want this to be a thing as the Shadow Stalker is a chump and needs to be more menacing, DE should be looking into how this feature is balanced before releasing it, disable it by default, and give us the option to opt-in and opt-out of it if we so choose.

If you want to see that kind of mechanic on a multiplayer co-op game, try/take a look at "Raiders of the Broken Planet", tl;dr reception was awful because no opt-in/out. Aside from their monetization issues, a lot of people prefers an option to not have an antagonist on their co-op runs, or rather play solo. Devs were adamant on their ways though and it shows.

[Bigamo]

3 minutes ago, Lanadra said:

No, not at all. Nor did I ever imply I feared any such thing. I was simply giving an example to add to the point @KeladorUK was making.

PvP in Warframe is never going to ''become good'', DE has tried several times and it has always failed. Get it through your head, the larger Warframe player base does not want it. That's the signal that has been sound off just about every time DE made an attempt at it, both in words and in actions.

You should know this, being a founder just like me, you've surely seen all of the iterations of Warframe PvP and that despite however much DE tried to make it better, it never caught on. That is why they stopped trying, because it was a waste of time and effort.

Disagree, dark sectors conflicts were a lot of fun, people complained about the time to kill and the overall system out of match, the matches were VERY close to what I suggested here (but the damage mitigation) and was very fun!

 

And DE did really bad in PvP. The damage mitigation suggestion isn't new, it have been suggested in dark sectors before. Instead they put this conclave system that doesn't feel like Warframe at all.

 

 Warframe always have been a sidegame for me, exactly for this lack of meaning, recently I have been playing Warframe in a VERY hardcore manner, but then the problem stroke again, why I put so much time and effort for leveling my account (right now at rank 15 but improving super fast) when the next PvE content will be way under the amount of power my main frame can deliver? The only real reason to keep trying to improve my frame would be to use it to actually fight other frames. Without it, why put so much effort into improving when there is nothing to fight against?