Jump to content

Skill Tree Idea For You Pgi: Dedicated Sp

Skills

6 replies to this topic

#1 Duke Nedo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2023 Top 12 Qualifier
  • CS 2023 Top 12 Qualifier
  • 2,184 posts

Posted 08 December 2016 - 10:22 AM

Here's a thought after a few days of foruming about the skill tree and boating. What if...

The max SP for each mech variant is bucketed into Firepower, Survival/Mobility and Infotech? If a mech has 75 SP, it would get:

25 SP to spend on Firepower trees
25 SP to spend on Survival/Mobility trees
25 SP to spend on Operations/Infotech trees

The point is to separate the weapon skills from the pool, so you could merge the two last groups into one without causing any balance problems. By doing that (just like modules today are reserved for weapon modules), you remove a lot of the big advantage that single-weapon-boats would get by saving SP by only having to spend on one weapon for full effect on total damage output and get lots of spare SP to buff itself on armour/structure/mobility/heat management etc.

With this method you would mitigate a lot of the benefit of boating without actively nerfing it. This is not a call to destroy boating, but a way of making boating merely the best way to play, not the only way to play after the skill tree is launched.

Thoughts?

TLDR:Do we want to across the line blanket buff ALL builds that boat a single weapon over any other builds that use 2 weapons or more. That is: 19/37 of the builds listed as Tier 1 competitive builds @ metamechs will be buffed.

Edited by Duke Nedo, 09 December 2016 - 12:53 AM.


#2 Dimento Graven

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Guillotine
  • Guillotine
  • 6,208 posts

Posted 08 December 2016 - 11:00 AM

Hmm...

I'd kind of like to try the skill tree as they currently have it planned first.

Then I'd be better able to discuss this.

#3 Duke Nedo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2023 Top 12 Qualifier
  • CS 2023 Top 12 Qualifier
  • 2,184 posts

Posted 08 December 2016 - 11:28 AM

View PostDimento Graven, on 08 December 2016 - 11:00 AM, said:

Hmm...

I'd kind of like to try the skill tree as they currently have it planned first.

Then I'd be better able to discuss this.


I see your point, but it's a bit messy if they have after a two months of cynical single-weapon boating have to say that "OK guys, time to respec all your mechs again". :) Though I agree one shouldn't cry disaster without trying it... but at least I feel that it's given that single-weapon only builds benefit too much if all SP are completely free to cherry pick with. I wouldn't mind skipping straight to skill-tree 1.1 or even 2.0.

#4 Dimento Graven

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Guillotine
  • Guillotine
  • 6,208 posts

Posted 08 December 2016 - 11:32 AM

View PostDuke Nedo, on 08 December 2016 - 11:28 AM, said:

I see your point, but it's a bit messy if they have after a two months of cynical single-weapon boating have to say that "OK guys, time to respec all your mechs again". :) Though I agree one shouldn't cry disaster without trying it... but at least I feel that it's given that single-weapon only builds benefit too much if all SP are completely free to cherry pick with. I wouldn't mind skipping straight to skill-tree 1.1 or even 2.0.
I've seen vids and read about it, I'm still ignorant enough to not feel comfortable even speculating about the effects of 'single weapon' builds.

The values provided in the vids were 'place holders' according to subsequent tweets from Russ, so even the impact on single weapon system 'mechs is, right now, not even moot.

It's 'fun' and/or probably 'proactively thinking' trying to come up with ideas and what not, just in case the worst case scenario happens, I totally agree.

Carry on, I'll read this discussion in interest to see how it goes!

#5 Duke Nedo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2023 Top 12 Qualifier
  • CS 2023 Top 12 Qualifier
  • 2,184 posts

Posted 08 December 2016 - 02:09 PM

View PostDimento Graven, on 08 December 2016 - 11:32 AM, said:

Carry on, I'll read this discussion in interest to see how it goes!


I hope someone is willing to bite, would be interesting to hear some opinions. There has been a few extreme suggestions on this so I kind of find this one pretty sensible... but it's difficult to get any attention to the more sensible suggestions. :)

#6 Uncle Stickyfinger

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The Roughneck
  • The Roughneck
  • 37 posts

Posted 08 December 2016 - 03:15 PM

When I saw this I thought it was going to be a thread about using Lore-style brands for weapon lines (eg: Lord's Light PPC vs the Ceres Arms Smasher PPC) - which would actually be easier to do now with the node system. Say, if there are prerequisites for each brand, they could sit at a bonus level 6 on a skill tree, but include negative modifiers for the skill line you do not buy into, using a rocks/paper/scissors concept. Something like:
  • Lord's Light PPC: gain a further +5% range and +5% cooldown for +10% heat (arbitrary numbers are arbitrary) Cost: 2SP
  • Ceres Arms Smasher PPC: Gain +5% Cooldown and -5% heat generation for -10% range Cost: 2SP

So you could get even greater bonus stats beyond the base tree (and sink even more points into a weapon tree to limit your ability to pick up utility/survival skills), but take on a not-insignificant penalty in the area you neglected.

This would introduce some real variety and hard choices I think, as the amount of SP is limited and min maxers will have to decide just how much efficiency they want to squeeze out of a weapon. It would also add a little flavor to a mech and allow for true overspecialization- that makes a mech SUPERB at its intended role but also now has handicapped itself to get there. Don't want them? Don't buy them, be happy with the level 5 bonuses.

But they'd still be there . . . just in case . . .

#7 Duke Nedo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2023 Top 12 Qualifier
  • CS 2023 Top 12 Qualifier
  • 2,184 posts

Posted 08 December 2016 - 11:58 PM

Sorry if the title is misleading, perhaps dedicated is a better word... not my native language. Posted Image

Back to topic, any good reasons why this would not be a good idea? It would ensure that no more than 50 SP could be spent on the essentials like survivability, mobility, operations and infotech, i.e. if you boat one weapon and save up SP by only picking the essential weapon buffs for a single weapon you could no longer convert these SP inte armor, structure, speed, agility, heat management etc.

Some examples:

An Oxide would not get an extra significant buff relative to the JNR-D.
A BLR-1G with 5x LPL would not get an extra significant buff relative to a BLR-1G with 3x LPL+3x MPL
A WHM-BW boating ACs would not get an extra significant buff relative to WHM-BW with UAC+PPC
An ACH with 6x SPL would not get an extra significant buff relative to a ACH with 4x SPL+2x SRM4
etc, etc

Forget balance between specific examples for a moment, just consider if we want to across the line blanket buff ALL builds that boat a single weapon over any other builds that use 2 weapons or more. I don't say this because I am a mixed build champion, I'll boat as much as my fellow man. It's just that I think it's smarter to build a system that is a little less easily exploited.

Edited by Duke Nedo, 08 December 2016 - 11:59 PM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users