Jump to content

Skill Tree Agility Nerfs Probably Go Too Far


12 replies to this topic

#1 JernauM

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 132 posts

Posted 25 November 2015 - 10:39 AM

I think the agility nerfs on the skill tree go too far and should be less drastic.

I understand that PGI intends to give back agility benefits selectively to certain mechs via quirks, and I think that does make some sense. For the mechs that don't get those quirks, however, life is going to be less fun as pebbles, tree roots, moderate gradients, and other bits of map geometry that impede movement become a bigger problem.

I think the agility nerfs will probably also reduce TTK, since they will reduce players' ability to mitigate incoming damage by torso twisting, retreating to cover, etc. While I'm not personally convinced that TTK is especially low at the moment, many other players apparently consider it a real problem.

What do you think? How much does the game need agility nerfs, if at all?

#2 Gas Guzzler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 14,257 posts
  • LocationCalifornia Central Coast

Posted 25 November 2015 - 11:05 AM

I agree, they were pretty severe. Maybe an even half would have been more appropriate. Basically when mastered with double basics its like being unmastered now. It is still a hit, but what they did is pretty harsh.


And yeah "number one way to increase fun is to increase TTK" and less agile mechs die faster so....

#3 Valkran

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 20 posts

Posted 25 November 2015 - 11:15 AM

View PostJernauM, on 25 November 2015 - 10:39 AM, said:

I think the agility nerfs on the skill tree go too far and should be less drastic.

I understand that PGI intends to give back agility benefits selectively to certain mechs via quirks, and I think that does make some sense. For the mechs that don't get those quirks, however, life is going to be less fun as pebbles, tree roots, moderate gradients, and other bits of map geometry that impede movement become a bigger problem.

I think the agility nerfs will probably also reduce TTK, since they will reduce players' ability to mitigate incoming damage by torso twisting, retreating to cover, etc. While I'm not personally convinced that TTK is especially low at the moment, many other players apparently consider it a real problem.

What do you think? How much does the game need agility nerfs, if at all?


The main complaint was people saying mech movement wasn't "realistic" enough (Sci-fi game.. anyone?).
They're big lumbering robots, not highly-advanced and mobile war machines.

In my opinion this wasn't needed at all, like you said, almost everyone constantly claims TTK is too low and then they're in favor of nerfs that would lower TTK even more. I really don't get this community sometimes..

And yes, the other issue is getting stuck, something else they must've forgotten when asking for lower agility/speed.

#4 Cold Darkness

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 290 posts

Posted 25 November 2015 - 02:23 PM

View PostValkran, on 25 November 2015 - 11:15 AM, said:


The main complaint was people saying mech movement wasn't "realistic" enough (Sci-fi game.. anyone?).
They're big lumbering robots, not highly-advanced and mobile war machines.

In my opinion this wasn't needed at all, like you said, almost everyone constantly claims TTK is too low and then they're in favor of nerfs that would lower TTK even more. I really don't get this community sometimes..

And yes, the other issue is getting stuck, something else they must've forgotten when asking for lower agility/speed.



i think the issue is, that if mechs feel non-heavy, you could just play some random gundam game instead. (and a higher tech-level machine wouldnt be much more agile anyways)

#5 SkippyT72

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • The Blade
  • The Blade
  • 96 posts

Posted 25 November 2015 - 03:02 PM

View PostValkran, on 25 November 2015 - 11:15 AM, said:


The main complaint was people saying mech movement wasn't "realistic" enough (Sci-fi game.. anyone?).


Yet we have weapons quirks for some mechs that give huge range differences to certain mechs with the exact SAME weapons mounted.............

#6 Darian DelFord

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 3,342 posts
  • LocationFlorida

Posted 25 November 2015 - 07:28 PM

The agility quirks they gave to Jenner's to make up for it are useless at best, laughable at worse.

#7 Gattsus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 843 posts

Posted 25 November 2015 - 07:58 PM

The issue is that the skill tree is the problem. It's just a very poor abstraction to convey 'progress'.

#8 Aiden Skye

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Galaxy Commander II
  • Galaxy Commander II
  • 1,364 posts
  • LocationThe Rock

Posted 25 November 2015 - 09:16 PM

Skill tree nerf sucks. I hate having to grind mechs for meaningless tiny upgrades where you can barely even notice a difference...its just not satisfying.

#9 Wraith 1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 721 posts

Posted 25 November 2015 - 11:53 PM

Entire skill tree needs a rework, but that's a whole other hard drive full of threads.

The only complaint I have about current mech agility is how agility is scaled by top speed rather than weight or chassis. My 85T Battlemaster shouldn't have the same turning rate, accel/decel, etc. as my 50T Hunchback with the same top speed. I guess I could also go for a general turning speed decrease, if we absolutely have to nerf something.

Otherwise, agility is one of the few things I really like about MWO compared to previous MW titles. Slow enough to feel like I'm in a giant machine, responsive enough to feel like skillful piloting actually matters.

If PGI really feels like a blanket efficiency nerf is the way to go, I think simply removing the 2x elite bonus would be a better way to start. As-is on PTS4, it takes a lot longer for a new player to get any real benefit from their XP.

#10 Widowmaker1981

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Widow Maker
  • The Widow Maker
  • 5,031 posts
  • LocationAt the other end of the pretty lights.

Posted 26 November 2015 - 02:51 AM

Tbh, the skill tree values are probably ok in the sense of not wanting a night and day difference between new and fully mastered, for the new player experience. However, the agility values are now imo too low - the best thing to do would be to increase the base agility values such that overall agility is somewhere closer to where the old mastered values were.

That means changing way too many values though and PGI will never do it, so id be fine with them raising the skill values a bit (say twice what they are now, or a 50% nerf instead of a 75% nerf)

#11 Tuann

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 203 posts
  • LocationIn your backyard, with a beer, chocolate and waffles

Posted 27 November 2015 - 03:01 AM

i feel the nerfs on the skill trees are far too harsh.
no good.

#12 KodiakGW

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Jaws
  • The Jaws
  • 1,775 posts
  • LocationNE USA

Posted 27 November 2015 - 07:34 AM

View PostW A R K H A N, on 25 November 2015 - 09:16 PM, said:

Skill tree nerf sucks. I hate having to grind mechs for meaningless tiny upgrades where you can barely even notice a difference...its just not satisfying.


This. Especially considering they are about to release this to draw in players who are used to some sort of progression tree. Some lowering was needed. But, 2.5% increases is just too little.

I also suggest just settling on what to do with Pinpoint now. They will get railed by new players questioning why nothing was done for 2+ years. Many suggestions were made. I like the idea of just doing 5% range boost.


#13 PraetorGix

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Warden
  • The Warden
  • 754 posts
  • LocationHere at home

Posted 27 November 2015 - 07:44 PM

And they are going to be on the live server now. GG all.





4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users