Asking for fire immunity is meaningless

[watermelen671]

Just now, Shpee said:

as a closing argument, well, at this point its more a few last words to what i have deduced to be a gang of people beaning me, willow is the fire starter, not the bear troupe leader.

And Winona was the techy engineer. 

Now she's an industrial mechanic. 

What I'm saying is, things change. Characters change. Willow hasn't been the Fire Starter since DST left Beta, and they've been trying to actively move away from that idea. Now she's just a pyromaniac with an army of teddy bears.

[reverentsatyr]

1 minute ago, Shpee said:

as a closing argument, well, at this point its more a few last words to what i have deduced to be a gang of people beaning me, willow is the fire starter, not the bear troupe leader.

She got a bunch of fire-related perks, including being immune for 6 whole seconds and not taking full fire damage. That sounds plenty like a fire starter. Sorry, I'm not trying to bean you, I just strongly disagree with what you and others on your side say.

[watermelen671]

3 minutes ago, Trenix said:

[Snip]

THANK YOU!

1 minute ago, reverentsatyr said:

Sorry, I'm not trying to bean you, I just strongly disagree with what you and others on your side say

What does beaning someone even mean?

[Spep]

6 minutes ago, Trenix said:

You get extra hits on mobs when they're on fire because they flee, along with that extra fire damage from making be on fire. Also fire is a mechanic in the game, it shouldn't be immune to any character. You will deal with fire, whether it's from mobs, summer, or whatever. I already mentioned this several times throughout the forums. Imagine being immune to any other aspect in the game which is supposed to be a challenge, how fair is that?

*ahem*, ladies and gentlemen i would like to present webber, his perk is to make himself and other players with him immune to starvation via a endless source of bacon and eggs, along with a unlimited amount of health restoring items.

[reverentsatyr]

2 minutes ago, watermelen671 said:

What does beaning someone even mean?

something like assaulting or being mean with words, i think.

I'm not trying to be mean or anything

[Spep]

i really don't have the energy to deal with this endless cycle of madness, im gonna go do something fun now, like playing webber.

[reverentsatyr]

2 minutes ago, Shpee said:

i really don't have the energy to deal with this endless cycle of madness, im gonna go do something fun now, like playing webber.

Hokay have fun

[GenomeSquirrel]

5 minutes ago, Trenix said:

You get extra hits on mobs when they're on fire because they flee, along with that extra fire damage from making be on fire. Also fire is a mechanic in the game, it shouldn't be immune to any character. You will deal with fire, whether it's from mobs, summer, or whatever. I already mentioned this several times throughout the forums. Imagine being immune to any other aspect in the game which is supposed to be a challenge, how fair is that?

If you have a torch, which every character can make, then you can do that, no fire immunity needed.

And since most characters spend 99.999 percent of the time not in a fire, fire is very far down the list of active threats to the player, there are still a long list of active, challenging threats.

[reverentsatyr]

4 minutes ago, GenomeSquirrel said:

If you have a torch, which every character can make, then you can do that, no fire immunity needed.

And since most characters spend 99.999 percent of the time not in a fire, fire is very far down the list of active threats to the player, there are still a long list of active, challenging threats.

She has fire immunity anyways! just not forever.

Besides, I'm sure that the devs know what they're doing. They probably have a good purpose to not giving full immunity.

[GenomeSquirrel]

4 minutes ago, reverentsatyr said:

She has fire immunity anyways! just not forever.

Besides, I'm sure that the devs know what they're doing. They probably have a good purpose to not giving full immunity.

I really want to hear them though.

[watermelen671]

11 minutes ago, GenomeSquirrel said:

If you have a torch, which every character can make, then you can do that, no fire immunity needed.

And since most characters spend 99.999 percent of the time not in a fire, fire is very far down the list of active threats to the player, there are still a long list of active, challenging threats.

Then...why do we need it? If 99.99% of the time we're not going to ever need it, then what is the purpose of having it?

Why not instead focus on making something cooler and will have a more useful purpose?

[minespatch]

I'm pretty sure the forums will calm down by next month. A big update usually causes the floodgates to open with nitpicking.

Still, let's see what the new features with Willow are before we complain. Actually see, not assume.

[Charsis]

4 hours ago, watermelen671 said:

So if, in a hypothetical scenario, Klei gave Willow fire immunity, would people actually be satisfied?

Probably not, as then the forums would then be flooded with people whining about how Willow is now too OP because she has fire immunity, or something else that's "wrong" with her perks/weaknesses.

I guess what I'm trying to say, in my own cynical way, is that Klei tries so hard to re-balance a character and nobody cares because it's not EXACTLY what they wanted it to be.

We saw this with Wheeler. People were complaining about her 5 slot inventory, so Klei boosted it to a 15 slot inventory, and then people started complaining about her 15 slot inventory.

With how OP her other perks is, I read lots of people like the idea of 5 less inventory slot now, it's good drawback for bigger speed and OP ranged weapon!

[GenomeSquirrel]

19 minutes ago, watermelen671 said:

Then...why do we need it? If 99.99% of the time we're not going to ever need it, then what is the purpose of having it?

Why not instead focus on making something cooler and will have a more useful purpose?

We need immunity to create scenarios where standing in fire is useful

I would be ok if she received an alternative that made her unique, the Bernie buff seems too much like what Abigail already has.

[Toroic]

This thread is honestly embarrassing to read.  Some of you really think you're putting coherent arguments forward based on an accurate understanding of the game and none of that is true.

I think the fundamental assumption is that the devs always know what their doing, which is an absurd position to take if you were paying attention this week at all.  I've seen a number of "breakdowns" based on Willow's announced changes and I'm blown away by how bad most of them are.

Whether Willow is immune to fire or not is irrelevant.  She's already functionally immune, that immunity is improving, and even if she had zero immunity at all fire is such a trivial threat that no one uses scaled armor already.  People want Willow to be immune because it would be a trivial quality of life change for her with effectively no mechanical difference.

Anyone who is saying that fire immunity would be OP does not understand DST or DS mechanics enough to be able to provide worthwhile feedback. It is impossible to arrive at that conclusion when:

1) Willow is middle of the pack in DS in terms of mechanical strength already, with fire immunity + inventory burning + fire mechanics that benefit her more than they do in DST.

2) People aren't using fire immune strats with Willow and scaled armor now

3) Willow is functionally fire immune already.

The vast majority of proposed perks for Willow are either trivial or already possessed (unless JoeW actually meant fire instead of smoldering) with the exception of Bernie buffs, who we can't really judge the magnitude of until we see hard numbers.

It is true that Willow and Woodie were reworked for griefing and pvp concerns for DST, and the consensus after years of testing is that not only did their changes not remotely curb griefing, they also made both characters weaker and less fun to play.  Maxwell's DST rework, in contrast, was well-received and he's quite popular in DST for his unique advantages.

I'm hoping the hypersensitive mod hammer doesn't come down on me for this, because I'm not saying you're dumb and I'm certainly not trying to be disrespectful.  But it is abundantly clear you fundamentally don't understand the necessary mechanics enough to generate an informed opinion on the matter.

It should already raise alarm bells for you when you're going against the consensus of players with hundreds to thousands of hours more than you, many of which with Willow, and your conclusions are diametrically opposed.  Now, that doesn't inherently mean you're wrong, but it would be very unlikely that you would see some truth that hundreds of hours of play over years would miss.  Especially when Willow has been bottom or near bottom ranked on tier lists since her original DST rework.

There's an enormously unhelpful anti pattern at work here which we as a community should avoid.

1) We need to recognize most of the people on the forums do not have a strong understanding of the mechanics or design

2) We need to recognize that the style of moderation here (where disagreements are seen as toxic where "agree to disagree" is seen as the best solution) encourages providing massive amounts of feedback

3) We need to recognize Klei is being bombarded with large amounts of uninformed feedback, which in the case of Wheeler they incorporated into their designs by overbuffing her.

It's fantastic that Klei is listening to feedback, but that is only as helpful as the feedback we as a community can provide.

[Canis]

God, the amount of people that deliberately choose to ignore counterarguments is insane. Like, this is anti-vax levels of ignorance here.

Fire Immunity is great because it allows usage of strats that would otherwise not work, such as setting a mob on fire and then tanking it while it's panicking, and capitalize as sanity. The former allows use of a pseudo-stun mechanic that no other character has a niche in.

I have said this numerous times and not one person has picked this apart and told me *why* this is a bad idea without simply saying "this is OP" or "you don't need immunity to do that" (which is false).

[Bluegeist]

I will say that the intent of this thread I disagree with, it is not meaningless to talk about fire immunity. Talking things out is good, as long as it is respectful.

I honestly wouldn't care if willow gets full immunity or not. But I am interested in the challenge that a 6 sec limit has. I find it more intriguing to have to do whatever it is immunity helps with, but within 6 seconds.

[reverentsatyr]

43 minutes ago, Toros said:

We need to recognize most of the people on the forums do not have a strong understanding of the mechanics or design

I have at least 320 hours on the game and have killed every boss on console (no dumb mods or cheats or anything like that). I'd say that's enough to have a strong understanding of the game mechanics. If 320 hours doesn't seem like a lot, it's because I have school and a life and other activities. I still stand on my side of the opinion.

Are you saying that pretty much everyone in the forums doesn't have enough understanding, but you're an exception? (trying not to be rude, I'm just asking)

I'm just going to stop talking about Willow because at this point it seems like we're all just insulting each other.

[OMERICA]

Umm... guys,  this is a video game, no need to be so aggressive and political about it. My argument was instead of focusing the perks that has slight effect on the game like fire immunity, devs should  focus on more interesting things like controlling fire(I read on a thread idk seemed cool). After all we want interesting and cool characters not bland and boring ones. Aaand again this is a game. It’s for fun. Have a nice day ladies and gentlemen. 

[h2mk]

Point of this thread was to say that the argument is stale and unintresting.

Then people use said thread to argue.

[Mr.Mulk]

Spoiler

1 hour ago, Toros said:

This thread is honestly embarrassing to read.  Some of you really think you're putting coherent arguments forward based on an accurate understanding of the game and none of that is true.

I think the fundamental assumption is that the devs always know what their doing, which is an absurd position to take if you were paying attention this week at all.  I've seen a number of "breakdowns" based on Willow's announced changes and I'm blown away by how bad most of them are.

Whether Willow is immune to fire or not is irrelevant.  She's already functionally immune, that immunity is improving, and even if she had zero immunity at all fire is such a trivial threat that no one uses scaled armor already.  People want Willow to be immune because it would be a trivial quality of life change for her with effectively no mechanical difference.

Anyone who is saying that fire immunity would be OP does not understand DST or DS mechanics enough to be able to provide worthwhile feedback. It is impossible to arrive at that conclusion when:

1) Willow is middle of the pack in DS in terms of mechanical strength already, with fire immunity + inventory burning + fire mechanics that benefit her more than they do in DST.

2) People aren't using fire immune strats with Willow and scaled armor now

3) Willow is functionally fire immune already.

The vast majority of proposed perks for Willow are either trivial or already possessed (unless JoeW actually meant fire instead of smoldering) with the exception of Bernie buffs, who we can't really judge the magnitude of until we see hard numbers.

It is true that Willow and Woodie were reworked for griefing and pvp concerns for DST, and the consensus after years of testing is that not only did their changes not remotely curb griefing, they also made both characters weaker and less fun to play.  Maxwell's DST rework, in contrast, was well-received and he's quite popular in DST for his unique advantages.

I'm hoping the hypersensitive mod hammer doesn't come down on me for this, because I'm not saying you're dumb and I'm certainly not trying to be disrespectful.  But it is abundantly clear you fundamentally don't understand the necessary mechanics enough to generate an informed opinion on the matter.

It should already raise alarm bells for you when you're going against the consensus of players with hundreds to thousands of hours more than you, many of which with Willow, and your conclusions are diametrically opposed.  Now, that doesn't inherently mean you're wrong, but it would be very unlikely that you would see some truth that hundreds of hours of play over years would miss.  Especially when Willow has been bottom or near bottom ranked on tier lists since her original DST rework.

There's an enormously unhelpful anti pattern at work here which we as a community should avoid.

1) We need to recognize most of the people on the forums do not have a strong understanding of the mechanics or design

2) We need to recognize that the style of moderation here (where disagreements are seen as toxic where "agree to disagree" is seen as the best solution) encourages providing massive amounts of feedback

3) We need to recognize Klei is being bombarded with large amounts of uninformed feedback, which in the case of Wheeler they incorporated into their designs by overbuffing her.

It's fantastic that Klei is listening to feedback, but that is only as helpful as the feedback we as a community can provide.

 

This is awesome.

And yeah, I support it being readded, not because fire immunity is some sort of insane OP perk (like so many people are claiming, but suspiciously can't give a good example of how), but because it already existed and was removed for reasons (griefing) that it didn't help satisfy in the slightest, so there's no reason to not bring it back. It's an integral part in my opinion of what made DS Willow so much fun, and since its purpose in DST was a flop (its removal didn't help griefing at all) it should be brought back.

Also on the opinions and experience thing it's apparent that a lot of people don't understand the impacts of their ideas and how it relates to the entire game's cast of characters. So please, no matter what your stance is actually take some time to think things through before posting.

[watermelen671]

1 hour ago, Canis said:

Fire Immunity is great because it allows usage of strats that would otherwise not work, such as setting a mob on fire and then tanking it while it's panicking, and capitalize as sanity. The former allows use of a pseudo-stun mechanic that no other character has a niche in.

So...you're basically asking for fire to function as Abigail. 

That's what Abigail does, stunning a mob and allowing the player to capitalize and tank it. 

Even has the added benefit of a non-corporeal meat shield too! 

And IIRC you were previously complaining about how you didn't want that with Bearny.

Also, just use scaled armor! Literally, that's what people here have been harping on and on and on about!

55 minutes ago, Mr.Mulk said:

And yeah, I support it being readded, not because fire immunity is some sort of insane OP perk

Am I missing something? I don't think anybody's even said it'd be OP. 

What people (including me) have been saying is that it's kinda worthless. There's no point because it's situational. Why bother adding a super situational perk when you can add a much better one instead!

2 hours ago, Toros said:

This thread is honestly embarrassing to read.  Some of you really think you're putting coherent arguments forward based on an accurate understanding of the game and none of that is true.

I feel attacked.

[Mr.Mulk]

Just now, watermelen671 said:

Am I missing something? I don't think anybody's even said it'd be OP. 

What people (including me) have been saying is that it's kinda worthless. There's no point because it's situational. Why bother adding a super situational perk when you can add a much better one instead!

Take some time to look around the other threads. I had two people make up some conspiracy that fire immunity is an OP perk that made Willow "too powerful" in Don't Starve. There is definitely been a bunch of people claiming it's some sort of God-tier perk. My response is a general one, beyond the confines of just this thread.

And I already explained why it should be readded, you didn't address those points at all.

[Canis]

1 minute ago, watermelen671 said:

1 - So...you're basically asking for fire to function as Abigail. 

That's what Abigail does, stunning a mob and allowing the player to capitalize and tank it. 
And IIRC you were previously complaining about how you didn't want that with Bearny.

 

2 - Also, just use scaled armor! Literally, that's what people here have been harping on and on and on about!

Am I missing something? I don't think anybody's even said it'd be OP. 

 

3 - What people (including me) have been saying is that it's kinda worthless. There's no point because it's situational. Why bother adding a super situational perk when you can add a much better one instead!

 

1 - No, Im asking for fire to be able to be used in combat, aka as a Weapon. Abigail has her own uses, such as AoE and not setting things on fire.

Also, what are you on about, I have specifically stated before that I like the new Bernie changes.

 

2 - So players should have to rely on armor that you get from a *raid boss* (which means mid-late game) just to raise Willow from garbage tier? Not to mention that the armor itself is redundant because when you get hit it sets things on fire, when more often than not you don't want it to.

Also yes, you are definitely missing something if you didn't see the plethora of people complaining about Immunity being OP.

 

3 - There are plenty of uses for Immunity, especially combat uses. It's honestly very worrying to see so many people flat out not acknowledge counter-arguments. Please, go read some threads before you dive into an argument.

 

 

[Toroic]

2 hours ago, Canis said:

God, the amount of people that deliberately choose to ignore counterarguments is insane. Like, this is anti-vax levels of ignorance here.

Fire Immunity is great because it allows usage of strats that would otherwise not work, such as setting a mob on fire and then tanking it while it's panicking, and capitalize as sanity. The former allows use of a pseudo-stun mechanic that no other character has a niche in.

I have said this numerous times and not one person has picked this apart and told me *why* this is a bad idea without simply saying "this is OP" or "you don't need immunity to do that" (which is false).

Combat in DST is done for essentially two, and only two reasons.

1) Loot

2) Self-defense

Setting an enemy on fire means if it dies while burning the loot is reduced or destroyed completely, which means the only reason you would burn is in self defense.

The problem with this is that even in self-defense, you generally still want the loot.  Which is why while there are setups that use fire damage to kill enemies, they never involve setting the enemies on fire.

If setting enemies on fire was a powerful ability, people would use that strategy coupled with scaled armor.  Most people don't use scaled armor at all, and certainly not in that way.

I think if it was a technique with merit, it would already be employed because fire immunity is already something we can use.

Note: As you've replied while I was responding, I'll just continue my response.

Farming scales off of Dragonfly can be done rapidly and easily if you really wanted a supply of scaled armor.  Dealing enough damage in a short window will stun Dfly and then pop off a scale.  You can then leave and let Dfly reset, and pop off another scale.  3 people with hambats, 2 people with dark swords, or Wolfgang solo with a dark sword can easily farm scales off of Dfly taking fairly low damage in return.

Fire has uses in combat, but setting enemies on fire doesn't.

1 hour ago, reverentsatyr said:

I have at least 320 hours on the game and have killed every boss on console (no dumb mods or cheats or anything like that). I'd say that's enough to have a strong understanding of the game mechanics. If 320 hours doesn't seem like a lot, it's because I have school and a life and other activities. I still stand on my side of the opinion.

Are you saying that pretty much everyone in the forums doesn't have enough understanding, but you're an exception? (trying not to be rude, I'm just asking)

I'm just going to stop talking about Willow because at this point it seems like we're all just insulting each other.

If you stand by that fire immunity is OP, then it hasn't been enough time.  That isn't to say that time directly equals knowledge and experience (there's plenty of pvp game players with thousands of hours who are still "bronze" tier or the equivalent) but when everyone with lots of hours of playtime has one opinion, and yours disagrees it's fairly likely it was something they considered already and then found good reasons not to hold that opinion anymore.

No one has insulted anyone, to suggest that disagreeing or questioning credentials when we're talking about design and balance is an insult is exactly the sort of thing that leads to bad feedback because people assume dissension is disrespect.  Not everyone can speak with knowledge about balance, which is a problem that has plagued major studios for literal decades at this point.

1 hour ago, hl3bekliyenadam said:

Umm... guys,  this is a video game, no need to be so aggressive and political about it. My argument was instead of focusing the perks that has slight effect on the game like fire immunity, devs should  focus on more interesting things like controlling fire(I read on a thread idk seemed cool). After all we want interesting and cool characters not bland and boring ones. Aaand again this is a game. It’s for fun. Have a nice day ladies and gentlemen. 

Again, no one is insulting anyone, and truth is apolitical by nature.  I'm suggesting that not every bit of feedback comes from the same place of knowledge the same way I would advice professional sports stars to listen to their coach over random fans.