84 replies to this topic

[sycocys]

I've honestly wondered why mechs have skills in the first place? Afaik they aren't autonomous.

[Duncan1dah0]

Bumping this. Great ideas. I like having a real tree that forces you to make decisions and tailor a mech to a play style within the chassis style. Remember, part of the appeal of this game is the "Barbie effect." Using the basic roles for the branches will bring real substance to the mech and your play style.

There needs to be a reset mechanism, but it needs to have an in game penalty. Costing GXP to respec and loss of the mech XP used before would be a reasonable trade. At the same time, I'm thinking a chassis XP refund when the new system goes into effect would be needed.

[Morggo]

I don't know if I'd go so far as to get rid of the whole skill system.

I mean, me and a professional race car driver for example can both get into the same exact car and the pro is going to drive that car around the track a little bit faster, cleaner, take turns better, etc. I think certain types of skills make sense, i.e. where skill would influence the use of equipment/mech.

Where I DO agree with you they aren't needed is skills that magically make equipment physically better.. say increasing the range of a weapon. You squeeze a trigger while pointing the barrel downrange... how is being super awesome 1000 hour mech pilot cause the laser to travel further. It's all power and lenses... just my opinion.

Overall though.. really looking forward to something more robust with the skills... go PGI!

Edited by Morggo, 11 December 2015 - 12:07 PM.

[Mystere]

Just use this for inspiration, but less cartoonish.

[Kraftwerkedup]

Well "mech skills" represent basically your techs doing field modifications, along with representing becoming more familiar with it.

If youre a noob in an ME-109, you wont be able to get the same performance out of it as an expert. An expert knows how to trim his control surfaces, what altitude is the best for the aircraft, and get a higher top speed for instance.

Pilot skills are a separate thing and id assume MOST of us would love to see Mech AND Pilot skills, and they to be separate things.

Pilot skills are global and attached to you, and Mech skills are attached to the Mech.

Either then give us cheap resets, or multiple pilots. Or even 3 or 4 profiles. You could even sell more profile tabs for MCs.

Morggo, on 11 December 2015 - 12:06 PM, said:

I don't know if I'd go so far as to get rid of the whole skill system.

Yeah we should get rid of the whole system we have now.

[pwnface]

Honestly, we should get rid of the skill tree completely.

Return all mechs to their previously mastered states and scrap the entire skill tree system. Getting XP to level up should only exist in CW as a role playing aspect, requiring XP as basically a tax on making a chassis fully operational is a terrible mechanic. If a new player jumps into a brand new mech, I don't need a skill tree to give me an edge of any kind against them, in fact the reverse is true.

I say this as someone who has multiple mechs with over 1 million banked XP on them. The skill tree system is r3tarded.

Edited by pwnface, 11 December 2015 - 12:14 PM.

[Kraftwerkedup]

In the short term, if they could just replace the useless one that doesnt work (convergence) with just something silly like a sensor range boost at least it would do SOMETHING rather than nothing. As it has now for two years.

[MoonUnitBeta]

Scrap the skill trees.
Scrap them entirely.
Since skills are basically just static quirks that everyone gets eventually anyways, how about we offer some variation/specialization/control over those quirks? XP can be used to “Rank up” these selections. There are 15 ranks per option. Once each one is unlocked to rank 5, you’re mech will go up in mastery. Such as achieving Rank 5 = Basic, Rank 10 = Elite, Rank 15 = Master.

Simply implement 3 options for mechs that can be chosen and upgraded in the Mechlab
Lights: Scout, Skirmisher, Support
Mediums: Brawler, Skirmisher, Support
Heavies: Brawler, Sniper, Support
Assaults: Vanguard (defense), Command (mobility), Stationed (increased offensive capabilities, with mobility/defense trade offs)

• Scout ... role gives longer sensor range, passive radar option, and ability to spot a location on map to show enemy positions on friendly player's huds momentarily.
  
• Skirmisher ... role offers slight boost in weapon ranges and cooldowns, faster target data acquisition, and accel/decel rates.
  
• Sniper ... role offers innate range boosts, Increased zooming, and increase visibility range with vision modes.
  
• Support ... role let you target and keep lock on two mechs in LOS at a time (only one if they're not line of sight), increased AMS, BAP, and ECM ranges.
  
• Brawler ... role offers increased firepower by increasing heat thresholds, with slight boost to torso and arm movements, and slight reduction to ghost heat multipliers. Turning and accel/decal rates are moderately reduced.
  
• Vanguard ... role offers increases in structural integrity for internal Structure and Weapon/Equipment HP.
  
• Command ... role puts a cap on rear armor and reduces overall armor by a %. Increases top speeds, acceleration, and lowers the Movement Archetype by One. Speed is the name of the game here.
  
• Stationed ... role is meant to hunker down and be a bunker to create a heavily defensed holding point. Weapon velocities, burn times, and cooldowns are reduced/increased respectfully to offset the sheer abundance of survivability provided by this option.

Quick breakdown on Specialty progression and pacing:

• Each specialty has 15 Ranks. They are locked behind 3 tiers (5 ranks per Tier)
  
  • Rank 1-5 = Tier 1 = Basic
    
  • Rank 6-10 = Tier 2 = Elite
    
  • Rank 11-15 = Tier 3 = Mastered
• You start in Tier 1, allowing each specialty to reach a max of Rank 5. Tier 2 allows a max of Rank 10. Tier 3 = Rank 11-15.
  
• Each specialty for that Mech chassis must be their maximum rank for that Tier before you may progress into the next Tier.
  
• You can only choose one specialty per mech.
  
• Specialties and their current Ranks are shared across variants of the same chassis. You do not need to “Basic” one mech before you can upgrade another Chassis. All of your Jenners can be Rank 5 Scouts. If you want them to be Rank 15 scouts, you must grind the XP to upgrade the other specialties.
  
• Tier 1 upgrades = 1500xp ea (22500xp until next Tier)
  
• Tier 2 upgrades = 3500xp ea (52500xp until next Tier)
  
• Tier 3 upgrades = 5500xp ea (82500xp to max all)
  
• A total of 157,500xp to bring all the specialties for a mech to Rank 15. This is acceptable because you do not need to own 3 mechs of the same Chassis to max out the specialties, you only need one mech and a bunch of XP.

Edit: Oops, I got "Stationed" description confused with "Vangaurd"'s. I'm going to leave it because I don't feel like typing out a description for Vangaurd. lol You get the idea, I'm sure.
2nd edit: Added breakdown on Specialty progression and stuff.

Edited by MoonUnitBeta, 11 December 2015 - 03:12 PM.

[pwnface]

Also, the skill tree system largely exists to force people into buy 3 variants of the same chassis. Nobody should have to pilot a SDR-5V just so their SDR-5D is fully effective. This is a terrible mechanic and PGI should scrap it. Stop trying to coerce people into running bad variant so they can play a good one. New players already have an uphill battle in learning the game mechanics, they don't need actual in game features working against them as well.

[pwnface]

MoonUnitBeta, on 11 December 2015 - 12:15 PM, said:

stuff

I think your skill tree system would be fine if it were for CW only. CW is much more role playing centric and would make it stand out even more compared to your standard queue. I don't want to see any kind of XP system in regular matches to improve the performance of your mech. I want a new player jumping into a chassis to have the least amount of handicaps possible (they already won't have modules) when playing against veterans.

[Lyoto Machida]

Big Tin Man, on 11 December 2015 - 11:13 AM, said:

Skill tree has been on the docket for revamping for at least 18 months, but they have been frying bigger fish.

Interesting that they couldnt at least replace pinpoint with hill climb or something useful in that entire time as a placeholder...

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Revamped skills:

Three levels. One universal (we could even keep the current Basics if we wanted to), then several mutually exclusive trees, then a single reunifying level (like current Master level but with more unlocks).

The current reduced Basics work just fine, as does the 2x upon finishing Elite.

Elite gets replaced with a number of specialized trees: Recon, Support, Cavalry, Brawler, Defender, maybe more. Each tree has four efficiencies. There can be partial overlap. For instance, Recon and Cavalry both get speed buffs, but Recon also gets sensor buffs while Cavalry gets some combat things. Lots of Infotech stuff would go here, too.

Master brings things back together. The current module slot unlock is fine, but I'd add a c-bill boost (say, +10%, so a small bump but it'd add up) and maybe something else as well.

Charge MC or GXP (or offer both options) to change your selected Elite Specialization.

The idea here, then, is to retain a general, minor increase to mech performance as the pilot becomes better synced to his mech. Then, once he's comfortable in his ride (finished with Basic), he begins to tweak his mech to specialize it toward a particular role. Direct combat buffs (rate of fire, range, mech travel speed, etc.) would need to be small, while indirect ones (lock-on timers, sensor ranges, etc.) would need to be larger, otherwise everyone will always go for the direct combat ones.

[Big Tin Man]

What I would really love (for immersion's sake), is mech trees for individual mechs that offer small quirks, tradeoffs, whatever, and a pilot tree with adding MULTIPLE PILOTS.

Same as everyone else has mentioned, branched tree approach, more choices than you can level up to so you have to make hard decisions for both pilot and mech. However, you're not as limited by the pilot as you have have a light specialist and an assault specialist as a pilot. More grinding, sure. Would make CW more interesting as well, as you could assign pilots to mechs.

Probably want to cap the # of pilots at 4, or you can buy more "bunks" for MC or something.

[pwnface]

Lyoto Machida, on 11 December 2015 - 12:33 PM, said:

Interesting that they couldnt at least replace pinpoint with hill climb or something useful in that entire time as a placeholder...

Speaking of hill climb... The hill climb module is pretty garbage as are several other modules. There is absolutely no reason to take them over Seismic, Advanced Zoom, Radar Derp, TIG etc. Hill climb should BOTH reduce momentum lost as well as shift the mech to a lower movement archetype. It doesn't help my Atlas climb hills at all if I can't climb a 25% incline no matter how much momentum I have.

Reference for movement archetypes: http://mwomercs.com/...ement-behavior/

[Bad tactics]

Lots if great ideas here. I would also add that if a pilot would like to add other skills out of the chosen skill branch they can but at a much, much higher EXP cost which greatly increases for each one that is chosen.

My argument will be that if a pilot actually puts time in a mech and earns EXP they can greatly invest in their ride.

Cheers
Bad

Edited by Bad tactics, 11 December 2015 - 02:28 PM.

[KHETTI]

Pilot skill tree focusing on specialization on a particular weight class, skills are based on how the mechwarrior directly effects his/her mech.
Pilot skills only apply to their given weight class choice.
Separate mech skill tree, focusing on the main attributes of a mech (Sensors,mobility,armor,firepower), players choose to "boost" a particular attribute of their mech.

The 3 variant rule would be gone, skills would require significant time investment, no more unlocking a chassis/variant in a couple of play sessions.
Skills/perks/quirks unlocked would be small, but stackable with pilot skills, letting players plan a career/specialization path.

I want to have to make hard choices, done right, it basically forces players in roles, which is what we have wanted from the beginning.

[Lyoto Machida]

pwnface, on 11 December 2015 - 01:29 PM, said:

Speaking of hill climb... The hill climb module is pretty garbage as are several other modules. There is absolutely no reason to take them over Seismic, Advanced Zoom, Radar Derp, TIG etc. Hill climb should BOTH reduce momentum lost as well as shift the mech to a lower movement archetype. It doesn't help my Atlas climb hills at all if I can't climb a 25% incline no matter how much momentum I have.

Reference for movement archetypes: http://mwomercs.com/...ement-behavior/

Haha...was in no way advocating that Hill Climb as a module was useful but it would be better as a skill than a completely useless Pinpoint skill. I always liked the idea of the module dropping your climbing archetype by a class...same with having hand actuators (conveying the idea of being able to grab things helping your climbing ability.

[MoonUnitBeta]

pwnface, on 11 December 2015 - 12:23 PM, said:

I think your skill tree system would be fine if it were for CW only. CW is much more role playing centric and would make it stand out even more compared to your standard queue. I don't want to see any kind of XP system in regular matches to improve the performance of your mech. I want a new player jumping into a chassis to have the least amount of handicaps possible (they already won't have modules) when playing against veterans.

?
Why strip the only means of progression from new players (remember, I did say to scrap the current skill tree)? CW is no place for new players, but they need some sort of progression in standard queue.

Rather than eliminating it from Standard Queue, it would be best if PGI limited the intensity of Specialties based on Tier level to equalize and lessen the spikeyness of roles. It will encourage gameplay that’s simpler in the lower tiers, and push those in higher tiers to take advantage of what the Specialties offer.
T5 receive a 75% debuff in effectiveness.
T4 -50%
T3 -25%
T2 and T1 have no debuff.

This way, Specialties have their effect in higher standard queue tiers, but still exist in lower Tiers so players can feel some kind of difference and get used to what does what. I think it’s important to at least have some kind of progression in standard queue and for newer players so that they can work towards something.

Also, I added a Specialty progression and pacing breakdown in my original post. It should be fairly easy for new players to max our their T1 specialties. I also clarified that it spans across all Mechs. I’d be OK if maxing out the middle tiers gave higher rewards, and for players who want to compete, they will have to pay more XP but the yield is much less. It’s a Min/Max thing, right?
Newer players can reap the rewards of progression and playing the game. As they get better, their investment will have greater effects.
But if they don’t want to invest months into leveling their mechs, they’re not at a huge loss if they choose not to, or can’t.

Edited by MoonUnitBeta, 11 December 2015 - 03:16 PM.

[Dassh]

Khobai, on 11 December 2015 - 11:44 AM, said:

There is definitely a need for skill trees in order to promote role warfare. That element of the game is completely lacking.

But the inclusion of skill trees doesnt necessitate giving some players an unfair advantage. Its simple really: just give all players the same number of skill points regardless of whether theyve been playing 1 day or 3 years.

Remove the grind entirely and just add the skill tree for the sake of making the game more enjoyable.

No, there's no need for skill trees for role warfare at all. To be honest, solving the role warfare issue in other games with skill trees and playable classes was a very cheap and easy way. Just think out of the box for a second and focus on the problem not some ready-made half-solution.

There are already roles in MWO. Like there are scouts, brawler, mid-range "traders", skirmishers, ECM carriers,.. ain't it?
You just have to balance them, that's all. There's no need to implement invalid roles like "TAG spotter" or anything. Nor to make them into classes and give them related skills bound to the role. Like giving +5% range to laser snipers, why? He's already running with ER LL so he has the range. All what you could get that no other roles would use ER LL just the weapons quirked for them and this would kill the whole costumization in the game way way more tthan even the pre-patch metabuilds.

It would be just a bad and cheap solution.

But following your reasoning with "just give all players the same number of skill points": What if they just make some actually usable modules for this what you can buy with some C-Bills (and optionally MC to make some money)? Like extended sensor range, hardened "hyper-lamellor" infrastructure or anything. Just keep them usable and balanced in any combinations (and useful not like the rest of the current modules).

I know it's popular in current casual games - because it is the easy way opposite to make the game really interesting and balanced - to just use the MMo features and give classes and skill trees, but please, just think outside the box a bit.

[Tyler Valentine]

Anything would be nice at this point.

Probably a little involved but I would love a system that has 2 skill trees, one for the pilot and one for the mech. You're pilot would have skills related to mobility, heat and possibly cooldowns. His/her skills would follow him regardless of what 'mech he was in. Your 'mech would have skills related to weaponry, heat, JJs and structure/armor. The trees for each mech would have some differences based on what that chassis was designed to do.

Again, too involved for PGI at the moment but the more RPG they add to this game the better IMO.