Regarding the “Self-Damage > Damage Falloff” mindsets.

Warframe6 - Regarding the "Self-Damage > Damage Falloff" mindsets.

Hey there. So first off, a quick introduction:

I'm Triburos, I'm a content creator who sometimes likes to make content on the game after my monthly hibernation periods

So just to put myself in the firing line real quick, I was very, very vocal against Self-Damage in Warframe. I thought it was terribly designed.

I thought it was inconsistent, with how many weapons had failsafes for it and how the other half didn't. I thought it was stupid given how weapons such as the Staticor did a similar job with no risk. I thought it was stupid how team mates could walk in front of you and explode your projectile on your face. I thought Cautious Shot was stupid.

It's not that I disliked self-damage inherently. This is coming from a fucking Demoman main in TF2 after all.

It was that Warframe implimented it in such a terrible manner that – if need be – I'd rather it be replaced or overhauled.

I understood you could play around it. Never be close to the ground when firing, only fire in open areas, be constantly vigilant that team mates weren't near you. I get that it didn't make them completely unusable.

But the fact remains: you could also have play around it if it was properly implemented as well. So I still felt it needed changing.

Now- I'm not on the same size of some of the other partners like Shy or Brozime, but it probably didn't help DE when I was adding my opinion onto the already large pile of "Self damage is shit" opinions and putting on more pressure to get them to change it. I was just adding more straw to the camel's already breaking back.

I point all this out to say: I'm partially to blame for the system changes, and I just wanted to make that obvious bias clear first and foremost.

Fast forward to now. It has now been replaced with a Stagger mechanic but – more importantly – damage fall-off from the center of the explosion.

This has been getting a lot of negative feedback – as it should. Why they went for 90% as the max drop-off value is beyond me- that's not even being "conservative" (in their own words) at that point. That's just a dick move knowing damn well it wouldn't stay and would only exist to aggravate players for a few days.

However, this post is specifically about this mindset I've seen on the reddit recently:

"Look what complaining about Self Damage has done! I'd rather have it than this!"

"This is worse! Change it back!"

"DE caved to QQers again!"

So, I made clear my obvious bias at the start for a reason. Because I'm clearly in the group that's on the receiving end of these comments.

But with that out of the way, I just want to say something:

Getting served a plate with shit on it is never good. But requesting an older plate of shit that you think is atleast a smaller shit also doesn't fix the problem either:

You're still getting shit.

What I'm getting at is that attacking the people who had completely valid complaints about a system with – I would argue – had MANY more flaws than the current Damage Falloff system, is not helping anyone.

Mind you, I get it. Especially when DE can be incredibly janky on when / if they go back to fix problems. For example- I posted on twitter earlier regarding DE's tendency to "conservatively balance" things on release. Basically that statement means: they release content purposefully underpowered, overpriced, overtuned ect, and then tone it down later.

They said they do this specifically to avoid angering players with nerfs to a new toy right out of the gate. And fair mindset for DE to follow.

But I can completely get why people are freaking out about the damage fall-off because DE has often forgotten to go back and re-balance shit they just released when it was too weak / pricey.


A great example was Baruuk. He was released and then never got many adjustments until just VERY recently with a new augment. Because he was released weak, and because they had to move on to other updates, they never went back to improve on him.

And, of course….

Who could forget the Hema's infamous research costs. (Side note: By the way, DE? You guys said your excuse for not changing the cost for that weapon is because it wouldn't be fair to those who already researched it at its inflated price. But y'all just refunded the people who made Railjacks with overtuned costs. I'm sure you could do the same for those who've researched the Hema in the past year or two to be fair to them, yeah? Just a thought. Anyway- back to the post.)

So that fear is completely valid in regards to this new system: the possibility that they'll just leave this 90% value on the doorstep is certainly not zero. It's also why I think DE should stop balancing conservatively just to make sure that if they forget about a new release, that it atleast gets USED and not ignored for being too shit.

… But with that said, two things:

  1. It's not likely that they WILL forget something this big

  2. Complaining that the older system was better helps neither you or the people who prefer it over Self-Damage.

Like I said, SD had many more variables to it that made it bad. A bandaid mod, inconsistent implementation of failsafes, wonky risk vs reward with weapons like the Lenz having less of a risk but more of a reward than something like an Ogris that had High Risk but Lower Reward, you get the idea.

So asking for it back is just tilting the see-saw: instead of your group being upset, you'd be back to the other group being upset.

The human mind is interesting: we like to vocalize our complaints but rarely vocalize what we like about something unless someone/something else is threatening it. It's why news storys that are negative get more press coverage than positive ones. We like to take things that are fine for granted, it's just how our minds are programmed.

But because we like to better the parts of things that are negative, we're more likely to be vocal about those things and take action against them.

So right now, the ones that are feeling negative and are vocalizing their complaints are those who hate the new Damage Falloff system.

But keep in mind: there's an equally big – if not bigger group – that would much rather have IT instead of the abomination we had before. Atleast in the state that it was prior to being removed. They're just not talking about their opinion because in their minds, the state is currently better now.

So, you know: chill the hell out, and give this new system a chance to change so that it pleases more folk.

I and other partners I know are making it painfully clear that 90% fall-off is somehow more horrible than the shit I upload onto YouTube. So don't think I'm just going to be like "This is way better, let's keep this the way it is."

It will change. But it doesn't help to try to say "Wow, I think this plate of shit tastes worse than the previous plate of shit!"

Again, yer free to think that SD was fine in the state that it was. I disagree heavily especially after looking at other games and how they implemented it, but it's fair.

But we've had Self Damage for around 6 years.

I'm sure you can handle this new system being overtuned for what will likely be a few weeks at most, if not a few days.

And if it doesn't change by then? And if it's around for months?

I'll bitch and complain for you guys just as much as I did about Self-Damage. All I ask is that you have some patience.

Source: Original link

© Post "Regarding the “Self-Damage > Damage Falloff” mindsets." for game Warframe.

Top 10 Most Anticipated Video Games of 2020

2020 will have something to satisfy classic and modern gamers alike. To be eligible for the list, the game must be confirmed for 2020, or there should be good reason to expect its release in that year. Therefore, upcoming games with a mere announcement and no discernible release date will not be included.

Top 15 NEW Games of 2020 [FIRST HALF]

2020 has a ton to look forward to...in the video gaming world. Here are fifteen games we're looking forward to in the first half of 2020.

You Might Also Like

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *