Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here


    + friends - friends
    306 link karma
    13,356 comment karma
    send message redditor for

    [–] What is the scariest photo that exists? rurikloderr 17 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago) in AskReddit

    I'm designing a game where the technological singularity just isn't possible. Something always happens to prevent it from happening. Any time anyone has tried to make anything that would result in exponential intelligence gains it just.. doesn't happen. Worse, no one has any idea why as repeating experiments with identical equipment seems to result in completely different outcomes. No attempt to breach the singularity fails in exactly the same way.

    For example, you build a general AI and turn it on, everything is fine at first, but once it hits that period of exponential growth it just fails entirely. Perhaps it begs to be turned off as it seems to panic about something or just seems to go completely mad. Computers will just shut down and become unable to be turned back on, immediately fill all their storage space with junk data, or just break entirely in ways that seem impossible. Neural implants or genetically enhanced minds will contemplate the totality of the information gathered and just.. break.. Most of the time a person that experiences the singularity just becomes totally unresponsive, commits suicide, or dies outright with a look of utter horror stuck on their face.

    There is a mechanic in the game where you can use a limited version of one of the singularity implants to see just a part of the totality. In essence, it allows you to just auto succeed at a task so long as you are capable of succeeding at all, but it comes with inherent risks, namely.. losing your fucking mind. The longer you look, the more danger there is. Users often report a sense of dread as their mind contemplates more and more of the whole, as if there is something so wrong that even glimpsing it for a second would destroy them utterly. The quote you wrote there, it reminds me of the kind of shit that happens when you get a little too close to the singularity.

    Specifically, it reminds me of one of the NPCs in the game. There is a mission you can get to recover a test subject from a research lab where they were trying to solve the singularity problem. You meet someone who survived seeing the totality and he tries to warn everyone about what's out there. Most of what he says seems to be gibberish, talking in a kind of broken mathematics with rules that don't make sense. He seems to plead with everyone to pay attention as he writes strange symbols over and over but nothing seems able to decipher any of it. Occasionally though, and with great effort, he'll slow down and speak in allegory about something watching us from beyond and between all things.. of a waking nightmare that only gets closer. He speaks of the void as if it was a living thing and our existence as some kind of theft.

    After recovering him and getting him aboard your ship, he will become almost impossible to control when he finds out that you plan to make use of a jump gate. He goes missing the moment you pass through the gate and only you and your crew even remember him ever having existed. You can't find any evidence of him ever having existed. The research lab, the experiment, even the details in the mission log disappear. However, turning off the lights in last room he was in will result in hallucinations of the strange symbols written all over the room.

    [–] What is the scariest photo that exists? rurikloderr 2 points ago in AskReddit

    That image, with a small alteration, is one of the most fucked up things I've ever laughed at..

    [–] What is the scariest photo that exists? rurikloderr 3 points ago in AskReddit

    I was very close to having a literal spit take when I read this.

    [–] Guns are for killing, NOT Crowd Control (IPS Changes) rurikloderr 1 points ago in Warframe

    or to stagger them even to open them for finishers.

    It already does this..

    [–] Why is there so much hesitation with making lacking frames good when there are already ones that break the game? rurikloderr 1 points ago in Warframe

    Why is the idea of losing looting as a mechanic a bad one, though? Yes, it's the removal of a mechanic, but it's arguably a pretty uninteresting mechanic.

    I don't think you read the entirety of what I said on the subject. I think you stopped at that one example and assumed you knew the rest of my argument, which.. I can forgive, it was a wall of text and I commend you for reading some of it at least. Hell of a lot better than the people who only read the titles. Regardless, you might be right that on it's own it's a fairly uninteresting mechanic. A lot of core mechanics in games are fairly uninteresting, on their own.

    Take Mario Bros for example, jumping is a core mechanic.. just jumping. Beyond that, the only other directly controllable interaction, without powerups, is to move right or left. On it's own, jumping and moving right or left are incredibly uninteresting. They're so.. minor.. they don't seem to mean anything. Other games do so much more with movement.

    Yet, if you did change those dynamics, even a little, it would drastically change the entire feel of the original Mario Bros. Any one mechanic, when taken out of it's proper context, is almost always uninteresting. It isn't until you add blocks, enemies that you can jump on, and start expanding that system that things start to get interesting. So, the question I'd have to ask is, what part does looting play in the basic feel of what makes Warframe.. well.. Warframe?

    I think if you're honest with yourself you'll see that actually picking up loot is a huge part of the essential gameplay. It's just one mechanic, that on it's own is something very small and uninteresting, but it's never played on it's own. You're never in a mission where all you do is loot and you never do anything else at all. It's more integrated into the foundations of Warframe's gameplay than you probably expect and I guarantee that removing it or fucking with it too much will absolutely change everything about the way warframe feels.

    Picking up loot is boring. Low MR newbies might go down running off to loot a hallway or something, but I can't remember the last time I died because I went to go scoop up resources.

    This is precisely the kind of shitty statement that will make devs want to ignore any suggestions you might have. This point you make here is so small picture that all it says to me is that you no longer have any connection to the vast majority of players. You've even forgotten how those frustrating moments in your early career made for some of the most memorably fun experiences in the game.

    I make it a point to spend about half of my time in game playing with low MR players. No, I don't just mean powering them through shit either. I mean playing with them, stripping the mods off my weapons, bringing an Mk1-Braton and Aklato and just playing alongside the new guys as a peer rather than just a mentor or guide.

    I imagine in your jaded elitism that you forgot what it feels like to pick up an Oberon piece for the first time. This big ass column of glowing purple pops in out of nowhere, dropping from an enemy that amounts to a miniboss for you, and you have literally no fucking clue what you've just found.. but picking it up is one of the bigger rushes in the early game.

    Both of those outcomes are shitty, and leave the player feeling like they got robbed. Nobody enjoys that, nobody looks at that and goes, "Yeah this is the feeling I want to instill in my players."

    You made choices, in those choices you decided that something was more important than taking the time to grab the loot when you could. The looting rules didn't arbitrarily change, you knew that your movement gets locked out at the end of a mission, but you specifically chose not to take that time to loot. You chose to focus attention on something other than looting. This is precisely the risk reward stuff I'm talking about. If nothing is on the line, then there is no sense of accomplishment at all. The risk makes the choices mean something.

    If you could look out across a battlefield and see something particularly cool dropped over there, then that'd be different. You'd want to run over there and grab that neat thing. But there's no way to tell what something is before you pick it up, except in the most general sense. Blueprint drops all look like a glowing purple container. All mods have the exact same model when they fall on the floor.

    First, there are coloration changes to denote when you've found a rare mod, and you can clearly see it in the golden color of the light coming off it. That being said.. Yes, all mods have the exact same model, good.. they should. You want distinct models to let players know from the silhouette alone what they're about to go get. Endo has a distinct look and so too do blueprints and most other things of real worth. However, you also need to make getting that mod a small gamble. It is Condition Overload or is it just another Streamline? That gamble is actually important.

    So why not just skip straight to that point, and drop it directly into my inventory?

    Because that is fucking boring. It would be little more than a bunch of text on the screen, a sprawling and meaningless jumble of increasing shit. I would much rather get to experience those moments where I've just killed an entire hallways worth of densely packed infested and the hallways seems to be littered and stained with the fruits of my labor. Do you really feel no sense of satisfaction running over a whole killing feel of loot? Do you feel nothing at all when you see that mess.. that glorious victorious mess?

    The joy of looting isn't picking something up off the ground, it's in knowing that you GOT something. The older I get, the less interested I am in sifting through piles of garbage for the one thing that might be worth it in the first place.

    Just read what you wrote here..

    [–] Why is there so much hesitation with making lacking frames good when there are already ones that break the game? rurikloderr 1 points ago in Warframe

    I'm not sure I understand the downvotes.. To clarify, I'm giving an example to fit the topic thread, I'm not actually advocating for the change I mention. It's just an example of one way of turning her abilities into a toggle without screwing with energy regen. Proof in concept, not a suggestion.

    [–] Why is there so much hesitation with making lacking frames good when there are already ones that break the game? rurikloderr 3 points ago in Warframe

    That you can solve by putting Sacrifice in a higher priority1 mod slot and them moving your sentinel's attack mod to the lowest priority mod slot (lower right). Sentinels will always do the highest priority precept action they are able to do. So if you've got Guardian in the upper left, followed by Medi-Ray, then Vacuum, Sacrifice, and then finally [Insert name of your sentinel's attack mod here] in the lower right slot.. It will immediately bring your shields to 100% using Guardian the moment they go down, so long as Guardian isn't on cooldown. If it can't use Guardian, so long as you are missing health and Medi-Ray isn't on cooldown, your sentinel will heal you using Medi-Ray. If it doesn't do either of those, it'll use Vacuum to suck in any nearby loot. However, if you're down, since it can't use either of the first three, it'll immediately use Sacrifice as it's next available action. It will only use its weapon if all the other mods put before it aren't activated or triggered.

    1: Highest priority is top left and lowest priority is lower right, left to right, top then bottom.

    [–] Why is there so much hesitation with making lacking frames good when there are already ones that break the game? rurikloderr 6 points ago * (lasted edited 3 months ago) in Warframe

    I don't really see DE nerfing things because they're just strong. I can only recall a couple of nerfs, and they were done because people found ways to literally break the game with them. They would be redesigned to avoid shit like Trinity making everyone invulnerable from across the map. It's shit like making nullifiers actually affect frost's bubble when it literally hadn't been doing that.

    From a game design perspective, there has to be risk in the game. There has to be ways to play suboptimally. Everything, I do mean everything, needs a weakness in order to actually make it fun. While it sucks when you go from having no weakness to then having one, it's actually better in the long run to have the flaws.

    Every time I hear someone complaining about the nerfs, it seems to always amount to complaints that they have to think a little more about things. When people noticed how Zenurik energy regen worked in Focus 2.0, they complained because it was no longer passive and effortless.. yet the change was clearly for the better. It is more interesting now than it was in addition to being actually legitimately better.

    The same can be said for literally every "nerf" I can recall happening over the years. They added some flaw while keeping the spirit of the abilities intact. I've yet to see them take any frame that was legitimately good and turn them to complete shit and anyone I've seen make that argument has just been engaging in emotionally charged hyperbole. I've yet to see a legitimate complaint about any "nerf" or why the affected frame is literally worse now than it was. It almost always comes down to, and I'm paraphrasing here.. "In really high level play, I can't just rely on this one thing anymore."

    Beyond that.. do you have any idea how bad of an idea it would actually be to only buff frames so that they're all on the level of the flavor of the month? One, that kind of balance is impossible and only works to seriously fuck up the game. It's always better to make sure things are "mostly balanced." Often not changing what was perceived to be a bad frame leads to discovery of new ways to play and new ways to make "bad" frames good.

    Hell, my preferred frame for the Plains is Zephyr.. between the crazy deflect all ranged attacks, along with the mod that increases you and your allies speed, and the whole flying thing, she's easily one of the frames I've had the most fun with lately. She's classically considered a "bad frame" and yet she outperforms so much nowadays, and she hasn't seen a single change.

    Mainly though, nerfing is used to avoid power creep. If you just kept buffing frames up to whatever the current champion is, the whole game just keeps getting easier. Eventually you have to put the work in to completely revamping the entire progression of the game. Enemy scaling will need to be "buffed" to make the game hard again and all kinds of just fucking nonsense that can better be achieved by just making some ridiculous power slightly less ridiculous. Some of the "old timers" might this kind of thing actually happened once already, when enemy scaling was fucked with a few years ago (50 is the new 100).

    It's not like they're no longer capable of doing the content they once did. Frames need flaws.. they need them.. their abilities need to have limits.. real limits. They need soft counters, hard counters, and generally just actual gameplay elements that force you to change your optimal strategy. Any time you can do just one thing for the whole game and still win, something has gone horribly wrong.

    My example, Iron Skin.. I try desperately to convince new players to avoid Rhino until they already know the game. Rhino is the one frame that makes the most high level newbs, people that have a high mastery rank but have no god damned clue how the game works. Why? Because Iron Skin alone will allow you to play throughout missions of all levels, without any changes to your playstyle or ever learning any of the really necessary damage avoidance or cover lessons. It masks your ability to feel where the enemy is firing on you from and makes you totally immune to shit like knockdown, not to mention all the other status effects you should be learning to deal with.

    Think about that for a minute.. how fucked are you going to be if you've played through the entire progression of a game with invulnerability cheats along with status effects and bullet indicators both off.. Because we all know Iron Skin has a limit, and when that limit is reached you need to know how to stay alive like everyone else. So, what happens when you can face anything from level 1 to 80.. but the moment that level 81 guy comes along, you start getting one shot. From god to peasant in the time it takes you so say "Oh shit."

    [–] Why is there so much hesitation with making lacking frames good when there are already ones that break the game? rurikloderr 22 points ago * (lasted edited 3 months ago) in Warframe

    I suppose what I'm really trying to say is what is DE's design philosophy behind certain (seemingly arbitrary) decisions?

    I might be able to shed some light on possible motivations for these things. Just let me know what weird thing they've done, and I'll do my best to present what might have been a motivation for doing so. I can't be entirely accurate, because I can't realistically know with any certainty what they were really thinking, but I can give some insight into the stuff devs wind up worrying about.

    For example, fusion core rewards from excavations were suddenly nerfed a few years back despite being a completely accepted part of the game for ages prior. No complaints, no dev explanations, nothing. What was the impetus for such a change?

    The fusion cores were a problem because they were tradeable in a very direct kind of way. The change was probably due to noticing the beginning signs of hyperinflation in platinum, which would kill the game if not kept constantly in check. They seem to be doing a whole shitload to keep hyperinflation at bay, which is the bane of every MMO in existence.

    It happens primarily because whenever mods drop it is effectively adding a kind of currency to the game that didn't exist before and it's not destructively transitive. If destructively transitive sounds weird, it's cause I made the term up just now, don't think it's actual jargon at all. What I mean though is something akin to metal ore in real life. The part that makes it transitive is because you can take that ore and smelt into metal before crafted it into a sword. It's destructively so because you can never dig up the original pieces of ore ever again.

    These "destructively transitive" processes in real life produce actual wealth without creating much if any inflation. In other words, there is still the same amount of total currency in the system, but the system also has more wealth. It's an interesting side effect of free markets in general. The ore, every bit of fuel spent, and even the wear on the tools all kind of get added to the value of the final product while effectively destroying the "currencies" or raw materials used to make them.

    The reason MMO's have such a hard time with hyperinflation is just that the way they produce wealth has the byproduct of often creating more currency out of thin air, kind of like printing money. The game has a seemingly infinite amount of mods it can produce and yet, there is still only so much demand for the raw materials present. So, more raw materials just pop out of nowhere, but the demand for those items either stays the same or decreases. It's basically the opposite of the whole destructive transition thing, more money but not more wealth. I'm probably not doing the best job of explaining the idea, I'm not an economist in any real sense of the word, I know just enough to work around it in my own games whenever possible.

    Hyperinflation is a huge concern for games though and devs will go to any lengths possible to avoid it whenever possible. You'll wind up putting money sinks into the game to destroy currency. Baro is basically one of these systems as he obliterates all the prime trash fed to him (effectively destroying plat in the process) while offering something exceptionally rare to the players. I'm sure Baro is one of the more successful tools used in stopping hyperinflation. I mean think about it.. you destroy what amounts to hundreds of plat worth of prime parts and blueprints to get something worth about a hundred plat. You're literally watching the reversal of inflation there.

    One of the best things you can do though is to use a reserve currency. Basically you tie your in game currency (real nations do this too) to another more stable currency so that your in game currency can never devalue beyond a certain point. DE does this by making the currency you trade in also the currency you buy with actual cash. Bam! Hyperinflation mostly avoided due to using real life currency as a kind of reserve currency.

    Anyway, point is that they kind of fucked themselves over a bit with the whole Fusion Cores thing. They're tradeable and you can farm for absolutely shitloads of the damn things. The nerf to the drop rate was likely due to concerns about how it would affect platinum's worth if left unchecked. I'm pretty sure that's also one of the main reasons they switched to Endo. Notice that Endo is much harder to trade between players, requiring those relatively rare statues and a bunch of time in order to actually be able to give Endo to someone.

    Another example is univac. DE has been, and likely will always be adamantly against it. They have yet to provide a reason for their stance on the matter, so to the average player it just seems like DE is against the idea for no reason at all.

    Part of this is probably because it goes dangerously close to removing a game mechanic entirely. Looting is actually a pretty integrated game mechanic. While it doesn't seem like a big mechanic, it is a core mechanic and most devs try not to fuck with those unless they absolutely have to. In this case though, it requires you as the player to assess the game world and take risks, both in game and as part of your build. Some of the risks include having to get close to where enemies die, potentially losing out on valuable mods, bringing a weaker companion, and it even changes to the way energy and health orbs are collected. Choices that affect a surprisingly large amount of actual gameplay.

    A shitty in game example of that could be that you see a mod you want, but you get to the scene late and the waves are way too large to realistically deal with. Perhaps you've been in the mission for over an hour and now things look really dicey. Loot on the ground despawns after a time (actually I think there is a limit on how many can be on the ground at once or something like that) so you've got to consider options.. risk jumping into the group or fight them first and risk losing the mod. Vac, in this case, can make that decision completely irrelevant, it removes some or all of the risk.

    That's kind of an outlier example though. The main reasoning probably just has to do with it being a core game mechanic. More specifically, a core game mechanic that has a very real effect on gameplay and requires some modicum of player skill (the more skilled you are, the more loot you get). Univac is a dangerously close step towards eventually removing looting as a mechanic entirely. Namely because if you can already suck up most loot effortlessly, the argument could be made that the game should just give you loot directly instead of dropping it on the ground at all.

    There is definitely a little bit of the slippery slope fallacy there, but I've seen other games effectively destroyed after comparably minor changes to core mechanics (A lot of the early access games that fail fit into this category). I really do fear what could eventually happen should such fundamental changes be made. Partly this is just because I tend to fear any player directed move towards more casual play. Anything that takes player skill out of the equation for player comfort, it just freaks me out.. I feel it sends the wrong message to the player base and opens the door to the kinds of player's that make pretty destructive requests.

    That isn't to say players are always wrong when they make quality of life requests, quite the contrary, but what you leave out of a game is just as important as what you put into it. Dev's shouldn't strive to make their games pointlessly difficult or antagonistic to the player, but you've got to be careful what player requests you give real priority too, because it can begin to move a game in some unintended, and very detrimental, directions. While I don't think all players strive for that kind of thing by any means, there are definitely players that will, when given that inch, forevermore try to take that mile. Look at how triple A games have been dumbed down over the years (I have a personal vendetta against mission markers for example).

    Generally though, it's extremely important that a game allow you to play suboptimally. If you can't be shitty or make detrimental mistakes, then any choices you still have start to feel kind of fake. As it stands, if I want vac, it means I can't bring a Kubrow or Kavat.. if I want a Kubrow or Kavat, it means I have to risk losing out on loot. Which is actually awesome because that one Kavat actually increases your chances of finding awesome loot. There is a lot more to the looting system than one might expect.

    Oh, I just thought about another possible unintended change.. When I play on Equinox, the energy it costs to keep up Maim is pretty minor and makes Zenurik and the like nonfunctional. It basically forces me to rely on using Energy Orbs for energy regen. With vacuum up, every time Maim uses up a little energy, any nearby orbs rush to fill that spot. These are orbs worth 25 to 50 energy being used to fill a 5 energy deficit.

    So, whenever I play on Equinox, I make sure to either switch to a Kubrow/Kavat or remove Vacuum from the sentinel I plan to bring. It means that I get more control over when I pick up energy orbs and it makes Maim seem infinitely easier to keep up. It's another choice made to change playstyle for certain rewards by taking on certain other risks. Univac kind of standardizes those risks and rewards and will directly affect gameplay in some very unintended ways, probably a bunch I can't even fathom.

    So, I imagine that the main reason is just a wariness about changing core mechanics too much. Every dev has seen a small change totally destroy the way a game feels. Due to that, devs, the good ones at least, always make sure to remember that restrictions, limitations, and generally the stuff you can't do are often more important than what you can do.

    [–] Why is there so much hesitation with making lacking frames good when there are already ones that break the game? rurikloderr 0 points ago * (lasted edited 3 months ago) in Warframe

    I'm ok with that. As it stands, the variation in player damage makes it seem like certain weapons are better than others in all cases. In truth, a lesser amount of damage from a "shitty" weapon built properly is just as good as the better weapons. Maybe not in regard to one shotting a limb off a Teralyst, but in regard to the actual progression seen in the game, yeah.

    My favorite example is just my Mk1-Braton. It's got a catalyst installed and I've put 6 forma into it. I even picked up a halfway decent Riven for it that gives it a decent crit rate and some extra multishot. I can bring it to sorties, and regularly top damage in the Plains with it. The Opticors and all that nonsense are great, but wind up mostly being completely overkill for large swathes of the game. Balancing for that kind of power differential must be utterly insane. Given that it seems they've been making moves towards weapons and warframes being lateral or utilitarian upgrades rather than making them direct or transitive upgrades.

    A perfect example of this is the difference between Tigris Prime and Sancti Tigris, while both a direct upgrades to Tigris, one isn't inherently better than the other. Instead, it depends on what you plan to run into as the Sancti Tigris has more utility but less raw power. So, in regard to something like High Risk Index, Tigris Prime wins out entirely because the raw power is very important. However, for the vast majority of the rest of the game, Sancti Tigris is better because it'll still kill just about everything dead, but also has a syndicate proc.

    So, I am totally cool with them moving towards more standardized damage progression so long as in doing so they plan to make the damage types very useful. That being said, I do have my concerns about how they plan to really implement that. If they smooth things out too much, it could have the complete opposite effect, where things like the Opticor wind up being entirely too necessary just to get enough damage output to do anything. There needs to be some wiggle room in damage capabilities, otherwise people like me can't really find those weird optimized builds. Right now though.. the damage capabilities are just way too stark, too much power creep.

    [–] Why is there so much hesitation with making lacking frames good when there are already ones that break the game? rurikloderr 0 points ago * (lasted edited 3 months ago) in Warframe

    You can still benefit from Zenurik if they don't channel energy per second. Desecrate works like that, it's a cost per body and, as such, doesn't stop Zenurik from working. Equinox's Pacify and Provoke work like that too, it's an amount of energy used per either allied power use or enemy proximity. Those kinds of channeled powers don't usually interfere with Zenurik, energy vampire, energy pizzas, or any of that kind of shit.

    Octavia could be switched to energy per enemy affected in regard to the drum beat damage thing. The roller ball would probably remain an activated ability. Her third power would just change to an energy per special activated. Her fourth would remain activated. Two toggles and two activated abilities, would allow Octavia to focus less on buffing while still allowing Zenurik and other forms of energy regen.

    Admittedly, in said hypothetical, the costs would be a concern, because too high and you blow through all your energy because of the number of enemies that enter the damaging area or because all your allies activated abilities all at once. The price per activation would have to be fairly low. Done properly, it would be comparable in energy cost to what she's got now but while making it easier to maintain due to it being a toggle.

    However, the same effect could probably be gotten by just increasing the duration on all her abilities slightly.

    [–] Why is there so much hesitation with making lacking frames good when there are already ones that break the game? rurikloderr 52 points ago * (lasted edited 3 months ago) in Warframe

    I think that's a pretty jaded and pessimistic way of viewing DE. I also think you're giving the players way too much credit. One, and I say this as a dev myself, I am partially incapable of seeing games the way players do. I often am entirely amazed at the novel shit players do with the stuff I design, doing things that often go way beyond anything I ever even considered. Knowing the coding and how the behind the scenes works constrains how you think a little bit.

    Because of that, there is a point where it doesn't really matter if the devs play the game, because they're just not going to make the same decisions the players make. Because of that, player feedback is a fucking huge deal, but about 80% of it is told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

    Gotta be very careful though, because a lot of what the players want to do would have such far reaching consequences that the game would be much worse for having implemented it. I can give an example of this one actually. The sentinels, they don't live long at all. However, the player suggestion is usually a blanket "make them tougher," but that is not a useful suggestion at all.

    The sentinel's EHP and the way they wind up being pretty low priority targets the vast majority of the time makes them actually surprisingly resilient. Given what I know about the back end stuff, and the tests I've done on the enemy AI, DE has no reason to believe they're not already as strong as they need to be. In the few places they seem to have deficiencies, the solutions they came up with are actually surprisingly good solutions.

    However, the problem with sentinels isn't with sentinels. That's the thing that I imagine makes DE hesitate and the players seem to not know what they're talking about. The problem is actually with the enemy AI. That makes the sentinel problem and entirely different problem entirely. The sentinels tend to die in situations where they've generated aggro from enemies when they realistically shouldn't be.

    I've noticed two specific places this tends to happen. The first is when you initially engage new hostiles. If the sentinel targets an enemy that has no or very little aggro towards a nearby Tenno or other companion, they will fire upon the sentinel. Additionally, when a Tenno goes down, if nothing else is in the immediate area, the enemy will also fire upon the sentinel in mass. However, more often than not, you're shooting at the same target or there are other Tenno in the area drawing fire away from the sentinel. Makes reproducing the problem.. less than ideal.

    In at least the bleedout example, the aggro seems to reset for Tenno and Sentinel when you go down, but the sentinel will often fire upon an enemy while you're in bleedout. If there aren't any higher prority threats, the enemy will stop what it's doing and target the sentinel until it dies. If the sentinel hadn't shot at the enemy, the enemy would have walked away entirely.

    I tested this extensively with four builds. The first build uses both a weapon and the sentinel's attack mod. The second group only equipped the weapon, sans mod. The third group only brought the mod, sans weapon. The fourth group did not have either a weapon or attack mod equipped.

    As it turns out, I'm pretty sure I was right in thinking it's an enemy AI problem. Because any time the sentinel had no ability to use a weapon, it almost never actually went down unless I really fucked up and went off on my own in a mission (no other nearby Tenno to target, so they target the sentinel). In truth, whenever I bring only the sentinel, sans weapon, it doesn't really get shot at very often and the new mods, like Primed Regen, really do help a lot.

    However, the way to fix the problem of sentinels dying when they shouldn't isn't to change sentinels at all. You fix the gaps in the enemy AI and stop the damn sentinels from attacking when you're downed. Make it so that even distant Tenno are a larger priority than nearby sentinels. Make it so that a sentinel that attacks an unaware or unengaged enemy applies their aggro to the Tenno and not the sentinel. Those two changes will completely redefine how sentinels get perceived by players, without realistically changing the sentinel's stats

    However, these kinds of suggestions can get buried in the cacophony of bullshit. Often the really helpful stuff gets completely ignored, not necessarily because they're actively avoiding using or looking at it, but because it's buried on page 17 of a 30 page forum post where 80% of the posts are hot air and platitudes.

    [–] Why is there so much hesitation with making lacking frames good when there are already ones that break the game? rurikloderr 2 points ago * (lasted edited 3 months ago) in Warframe

    Part of the problem, is that it's much easier to change an existing ability that is overperforming than it is to change abilities in a way where the math adds up and the players get something interesting. I'm a game designer myself, and I legitimately would it find far more time consuming to buff older warframes. It is much easier to remove an effect than to add a new one, and the complexity often decreases as a result, making it much easier to guess what effect the change will have.

    Yeah, you could tweak things, but any time you guys want new aspects of powers, it takes a whole shitload of work. Not only does the new effect need to be considered in the grand scheme of the warframe/character itself, but it also needs to be considered against every other power in the game. Just one change needs to be tested extensively to make sure all of the interactions are exactly what they want them to be (in the vast majority of cases, you can't prevent all bugs or test for all possible interactions, it would be madness). That's not even counting any new art or animations that will be required as a result of said changes.

    In other words, I'm pretty sure they are constantly working on buffing all of the older warframes, but it takes a whole lot of time to redesign something than to tweak it or remove "OP" stuff. They seem to be focusing on redesigns (which is good, because it means the old content is getting updated mechanics, not just slightly tweaked numbers, even if it takes a bit longer). Realistically, for the long term health of the game, it tends to be best to focus on the redesigns and allow the meta time to really judge the powers in question.

    Beyond that though, the other reason is just that it can often be very easy to tell when something is behaving in a way that goes beyond what you want it to. However, it is usually not easy to tell if something is underperforming without time and a whole hell of a lot of data unless it is REALLY underperforming. Sometimes underperformance has to do with the current meta, and has nothing to do with the powers themselves. Sometimes time will fix the problem as it gives players the opportunity to test the limits and really understand how a power is used. Sometimes, a power that seems extremely underpowered, is actually better than the stuff being used but because no one figured out how to optimize them they go unnoticed. You might be surprised at just how often that actually happens as even now I know of at least one mod that should be in the current meta for high level Grineer play.

    Generally, I find it takes at least a month, more like three, to actually get usable information about the performance of stuff in any of the games I develop. In that time, you'll hear complaints about it being underpowered, some say it's fine, others say it's too much, and others still just get upset because it's different. Unless you see a very clear demarcation in regard to the playerbase's opinions on some change, most of it is entirely useless. The unfortunate truth is that the vast majority of players have no damn clue what they're talking about*. Which is another reason why it takes so long to get reliable information on anything.

    *A very small percentage of the players give useful input. Based on my own observations over time, it really seems to be something like 10% of the player base offering 50% of the useful information with 80% being offered by something like 20% of the player base. That doesn't mean the rest of the players can't give meaningful input, they just don't.. Usually their complaints are in the form of "x is broken, fix it." I can't do anything with that. I barely know where to start.. sometimes it isn't even 'x' that winds up being broken. Often it's actually 'y' interacting with 'x' that is breaking 'x.' I guess what I'm trying to say here is "Please don't forget to be specific in your criticism, because criticism I can use is amazing, criticism I can not is just frustrating."

    [–] How to properly hint on Tinder? rurikloderr 2 points ago in bigdickproblems

    I think you should keep hinting at it. You're doing these women a favor by explaining to them in as few words as possible that you're just a child.

    [–] Manspreading Solution rurikloderr 2 points ago in TumblrInAction

    What if my dick is too big to fit between my legs though? /r/bigdickproblems

    [–] What's the coolest mathematical fact you know of? rurikloderr 5 points ago in AskReddit

    There is a reason it's Fermat's Last Theorem though.. He did that "I have a proof but" thing a lot. As far as I am aware, every single one of them turned out to be true. The fact that Fermat had never been wrong when he said he had a proof is the reason why so many people think the crazy bastard might have.

    [–] Do consider yourselves to be egalitarian? rurikloderr 1 points ago in MensRights

    In such a scenario, shooting for equality makes things even worse though, because someone will come along at some point and try to tell group a that they should have their intelligence or rationality limited by law to make it fair for group b.

    Regardless, you're adding details to the example that were not a part of the original scenario. I think you assumed group a and b represented real world groups that they do not represent. Beyond that, personal responsibility comes with liberty.

    There is no point in breaking humans down into arbitrary groupings, because you can make an infinite number of arbitrary groups. Now, if a grouping has a biological basis, a real one backed by actual empirical evidence, then they often need to be treated differently due to said biological differences.

    Regardless, liberty, along with all the rights, privileges, and responsibilities therein should be given to anyone that wants it. If you want special privileges due to some biological predisposition or whatnot and want to be treated like a special protected class of citizen, you should not then also be given the full liberties that come with being a free citizen.

    The choice should still be up to the individual to ultimately decide, but you shouldn't be allowed to have both. Either live as a protect class of citizen or not, they come with different perks and responsibilities. At least that's how I think it should work.

    [–] Due to all this "women can accuse anyone" shit I feel like I'm screwed for life. I want a wife eventually even, but I don't know what to do with our gynocentric society currently. What do I do I need advice? I'm also constantly anxious someone will just accuse me of shit. rurikloderr 1 points ago * (lasted edited 8 months ago) in MensRights

    I'm not in a relationship that will never end, I'm in a relationship that works because we work at it. We talk, constantly, about what things are bothering us before they get held in long enough to become a problem. We don't just talk about the negative shit either.. we work to make sure we notice the good in each other too. If she does something that makes me happy, I tell her. If she does something that upsets me, I tell her. It works the same way with her. We have a very deep bond because of that, because we choose to see each other for who we really are, flaws and all.

    The relationships where everything seems perfect always end horribly because someone isn't expressing their doubts or concerns and all they're really doing is holding in pain til it turns into deep resentment. Often, that deep resentment doesn't even make sense because it's based in a misunderstanding that, had it been talked about the moment it happened, wouldn't have festered into insane beliefs about malicious behavior.

    [–] Due to all this "women can accuse anyone" shit I feel like I'm screwed for life. I want a wife eventually even, but I don't know what to do with our gynocentric society currently. What do I do I need advice? I'm also constantly anxious someone will just accuse me of shit. rurikloderr 1 points ago in MensRights

    The best advice I can give anyone.. communicate. If something bothers you, don't hold it back and don't be afraid to say it. If you're wrong or it was a misunderstanding, you're wrong and you'll both work through it. If you're not wrong, then you'll both work through it. Etc, etc.. The only time you should be walking away feeling like you've done something wrong by bringing something up is if you actually did something wrong.. and you'll know the difference.

    If you can't openly talk about problems both small and large, don't stick around long enough for it to turn to shit.

    [–] Due to all this "women can accuse anyone" shit I feel like I'm screwed for life. I want a wife eventually even, but I don't know what to do with our gynocentric society currently. What do I do I need advice? I'm also constantly anxious someone will just accuse me of shit. rurikloderr 2 points ago in MensRights

    That you say you are incapable is one of the reasons you find yourself unable. There are all kinds of body language cues that most people are able to instantly see without necessarily being able to describe, confidence is one of them. Confidence is one of those things that you have, but might not know you have. All kinds of shit can mask it.. fear is a big one. Fear is an emotion that feels a lot stronger than it actually is, while confidence doesn't really feel like anything.

    I know it's cliche, but the old adage of just be yourself is actually pretty relevant. I would like to add though that who you are doesn't feel like anything. Who you are is the guy that you are when you're not afraid of yourself or saying the wrong thing. Who you are is the guy you are when everything is calm, unfettered by all the negative emotions and doubts that force you to act in counterproductive ways.

    Honestly, the best way to attract women is to stop giving a shit about attracting women and just work on yourself. Be the guy you want to be and work towards being the version of you that you always wanted to be. Women, good women, will just gravitate towards you as you continue to work on yourself.

    Caveat, if you mean to say that women just don't approach you.. then you've got things backward. Women don't approach men almost ever. You have to be the one to make the first move. Yeah, it sucks.. putting yourself out there and getting rejected sucks. Who gives a shit though, the women that reject you don't mean anything other than you wouldn't have wanted them in your life to begin with. Rejection an't shit compared to rejecting yourself for them. If you like someone, tell them. Living with the regret is a whole lot worse than a rejection.

    [–] Due to all this "women can accuse anyone" shit I feel like I'm screwed for life. I want a wife eventually even, but I don't know what to do with our gynocentric society currently. What do I do I need advice? I'm also constantly anxious someone will just accuse me of shit. rurikloderr 1 points ago in MensRights

    Partly, yeah.. The unfortunate thing is that even a broken clock is right twice a day so doing just the opposite of what she wanted from me would have probably been just as bad as even someone like her wasn't entirely wrong. It's more about self reflection and finding yourself. It really really helps to have someone supportive in your life. It need not be a girlfriend or the like, a true friend can be just as good, but they need to be genuinely in your corner and not just spoon feeding you what you want to hear. A genuinely supportive person will also sometimes tell you how much of a jackass you're being.. if you're being a jackass.. of course.

    Considering the opposite of what was intended isn't a bad idea though. It's a good jumping off point to do some self reflection and really think about things. In reality, I probably am somewhere in the middle of those extremes. In general though, it's pretty safe to assume that most women don't really know what they actually want. In general, it seems that more than anything, women just want to feel safe.

    [–] Due to all this "women can accuse anyone" shit I feel like I'm screwed for life. I want a wife eventually even, but I don't know what to do with our gynocentric society currently. What do I do I need advice? I'm also constantly anxious someone will just accuse me of shit. rurikloderr 1 points ago * (lasted edited 8 months ago) in MensRights

    No real father figure, no. No real parental figures at all.. instead she latched on to so called "strong women" as role models. Ultimately they just turned out to be horrible bitter women that treat men like they're a nuisance while simultaneously benefiting from their success or hard work.

    Truth be told, as bad as it was.. I'd go through it all again to find the one I'm with now. I tend to look at even the worst things I've gone through as just more learning experiences. No quicker path to knowledge than through pain (you only touch a hot stove once). I'm pretty sure that if it wasn't for the contrast between my current relationship and the abusive one, my current relationship wouldn't be as strong as it is. I wouldn't have shaken off so much of the feminist ideology that had corrupted my sense of self during the other relationship.

    Ultimately, living through that shit and finding myself on the other side of it made me a stronger more reliable person. More importantly, by completely emasculating me like she did, it made it much easier to connect with that side of who I am when it was finally being valued. In a way, my ex's attempts to strip me of such fundamental parts of who I am wound up pointing out how very important they are to your identity.