154 replies to this topic

[Duke Nedo]

Biggest worry: PGI will reason that the best clan mechs needs enough skill tree bonuses to correspond exactly to what they have now in terms of the old skills and modules, and not realize that that is in fact a buff because it adds min-max potential and the best clan mechs will run around without arm speed bonus and fast ignition, but with additional armor...

I can totally see that happening.

Edited by Duke Nedo, 02 February 2017 - 12:54 AM.

[RestosIII]

KinLuu, on 02 February 2017 - 12:40 AM, said:

I
I AM PREPARED.

Now I'm just imagining this playing in some Meta Lord's mechbay.

[Kuaron]

Evil Goof, on 01 February 2017 - 05:33 PM, said:

Second, which sort of is a continuation of my first issue is that now I will just buy two Raven 3L's and there is no reason for me to get any of the other variants. Especially 2X and 4X....

Yes, wouldn’t it be great if PGI had a real reason to balance the different variants of each chassis?


And buying Mechs because you actually want to play them instead of just for mastering the best variant?

But I don’t see non-ECM-variants becoming obsolete yet, after all they keep their quirks for compensation.

[sneeking]

I haven't played for ages i just read the forums to follow the state of things and always what i read leaves me thinking why come back.

Im waiting for the reset its actually got me excited i can't wait !

When it drops I'll have the first compelling reason to jump in my outdated nerfed to hell mechs and see whats what.

Bring it on !

Probably my biggest most burning question that's driving my desire is WILL IT LET ME FIX MY HUGINN ?

Edited by sneeking, 02 February 2017 - 01:26 AM.

[Vellron2005]

RestosIII, on 02 February 2017 - 12:53 AM, said:

Now I'm just imagining this playing in some Meta Lord's mechbay.

Oh, I love that one! Be prepared! Lol

Personally, I think the Skill tree will add some much-needed control and put it in the hands of players..

I hope it will make under-performing mechs better and not over-buff the top-tier metamechs.. I hope it will replace the quirks system with "choose your own quirks" and add some structure and power of choice to each player, making mechs distinctive and different..

Biggest worry is that it will be poorly implemented, and throw the game even more out of balance

[Darth Hotz]

I look forward to it, but I am also worried.

Best thing is that the rule of 3 is gone and you dont have to buy and level 2 unloved mechs to get the 3rd one going. I also see a great chance to get some overall balancing done.

But on the other hand...a company that failed in implenting a new minimap...how good are the chances they implent a new core feature that just works right?

[sneeking]

Im not worried because I've got nothing more invested in it other than all my prior invetments which I've already emotionally separated my self from due to them all been trashed by the devs.

So in essence my pain is passed and my losses already cut.

There is nothing but opportunity in this for me and if it fails i haven't lost anything more.

[jjm1]

Seismic... on everything. WTF else competes with that.

Anything left over goes on heat management. I haven't really thought about it so I could be wrong, but it seems too obvious -which is kinda disappointing.

[Tristan Winter]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 01 February 2017 - 05:16 PM, said:

Of course those aren't analogous, because the skills have a very different role compared to this game.
Skill trees in RPGs are more like tech trees in this one. For example only having access to standard ACs, MGs, LRMs, SRMs, standard Lasers, and the sole PPC at the beginning and slowly unlocking newer tech is more analogous to skill trees in RPGs than any skill tree expected for this game. I would also say more often than not those skills slowly get power creeped as you level up, which doesn't make for a very good PvP only game (this is something that isn't really comparable between the two as well, unless talking the PvP version of Guild Wars).

It doesn't really matter if they're not analogous. At least, it doesn't matter to the point I was making. And it certainly doesn't matter if you look at "EMP Blast" as new tech while "Electric blast" is a skill. If you look at Star Conflict, for example, a lot of starship upgrades are basically the same as MMORPG skill trees. So it's not just a matter of buying a new gun, as in EVE Online.

I'm not saying that MWO should be Star Conflict or EVE Online or World of Warcraft. I'm saying that other games have increasing complexity over time, and MWO does not. And even if you disregard other games and just look at PGI's old dev logs from 2012, it sounded like MWO would offer increasingly complex gameplay as you levelled up, and increasing amounts of synergy between different "roles", and now I doubt there will be much of either.

[Marius Evander]

Big Tin Man, on 01 February 2017 - 05:02 PM, said:

No PTS yet, no discussion of what it actually is, so let's start the wagering!

Over/under dates from the Big Tin Sports Booking agency, accepting wagers on:

PTS live by 3/3/17 12:01 AM PST
New Skill tree pushed to the game May 2017 patch (under includes the feb, mar, apr patches only)
Number of PTS sessions/pts patches before going live (or being scrapped) = 2.5

Assuming you meant AFTER/BEFORE by over/under
3/3/17 under
May 2017 Patch over
PTS sessions over

What is this magical PTS thing you all speak of, how doth one access it ?
Does it giveth CBILLS earnt from time spent testing it to your real account ?

PERSONALLY, im expecting it to be BROKEN AS F***

I am also expecting PGI's MC for respecs to kill the game completely when they fail to give you a free respec every time they readjust skills THAT YOU WERE USING/ effected you directly (no not every time a patch adjusted skills for everyone, just everytime it adjusted skills you were using)

[DrxAbstract]

Tristan Winter, on 02 February 2017 - 03:25 AM, said:

It doesn't really matter if they're not analogous. At least, it doesn't matter to the point I was making. And it certainly doesn't matter if you look at "EMP Blast" as new tech while "Electric blast" is a skill. If you look at Star Conflict, for example, a lot of starship upgrades are basically the same as MMORPG skill trees. So it's not just a matter of buying a new gun, as in EVE Online.

I'm not saying that MWO should be Star Conflict or EVE Online or World of Warcraft. I'm saying that other games have increasing complexity over time, and MWO does not. And even if you disregard other games and just look at PGI's old dev logs from 2012, it sounded like MWO would offer increasingly complex gameplay as you levelled up, and increasing amounts of synergy between different "roles", and now I doubt there will be much of either.

Wouldn't mind having multiple variations of weapons with traits specific to their manufacturers--That was probably the most interesting idea I've seen presented on these forums, not to mention the depth it would add to Mech building conceptualization and strategic ideologies...

I just hope they allow the KGC-000 or KGC-000B to have reduced UAC jam chance in the trees... Omnomnomnomnom.

[Bud Crue]

sneeking, on 02 February 2017 - 02:04 AM, said:

Im not worried because I've got nothing more invested in it other than all my prior invetments which I've already emotionally separated my self from due to them all been trashed by the devs.

So in essence my pain is passed and my losses already cut.

There is nothing but opportunity in this for me and if it fails i haven't lost anything more.

Well, there is the potential draw back of them killing the game.

They are changing a core aspect of the game while at the same time changing the primary way they fund its maintenance and presumed profitability via removal of the rule of three. If the do something as trivial of getting the wrong price point for the new "you only need one mech" purchasing model, and now you have a potential serious $ shortfall.

But that's not all: part of the new system is the premise that they intent to move to more micro transactions by making the players pay real money (MC) for respecing, if the player wants to keep their skill tree nodes. Sounds fine on paper, but if PGI does what it always has done, and {Richard Cameron} with the quirks and performance values at seemingly random but frequent intervals, thus forcing players to respec against their will; how's that gonna go over? Make players happy to spend or drive them out?

That's just the tip of the ice-berg of the potential ways this could blow up. Add in the new tech and the associated power creep, combined with the one mech model and suddenly you have a situation where one good mech is all the comp folks might need or want and...boom...watch spending drop like a rock. Oh! But then they just add new power creep to encourage new sales! How ya think that is going to fly? How will that affect balance and long term game stability and player satisfaction?

I sure hope they have thought this through.

[Mudhutwarrior]

It is difficult for me to comment as I have no faith in PGI. The years have made sure of that.

If in fact fresh blood developed it absent of the original devs it might just be the difference that turns the game around.

Waiting but holding no faith or hope.

[Kasumi Sumika]

I hope that respec with c-bills is reasonable cheap. On side note I'm glad that mastering 3 mechs rule is gone so I can trying more mechs quite easily. But this change will took more longer grind to mastering one mech.

[Big Tin Man]

Cadoazreal, on 02 February 2017 - 04:28 AM, said:

Assuming you meant AFTER/BEFORE by over/under
3/3/17 under
May 2017 Patch over
PTS sessions over

You assumed correctly. There's gotta be some others out there willing to put their pride or cbills on the line. Less hand wringing, more wagering!

[Big Tin Man]

Cadoazreal, on 02 February 2017 - 04:28 AM, said:

I am also expecting PGI's MC for respecs to kill the game completely when they fail to give you a free respec every time they readjust skills THAT YOU WERE USING/ effected you directly (no not every time a patch adjusted skills for everyone, just everytime it adjusted skills you were using)

How I read the respec thing was you can respec for free, but you'll lose the spent XP. If you pay the MC, you keep the spent XP.

[Mcgral18]

Big Tin Man, on 02 February 2017 - 07:14 AM, said:

How I read the respec thing was you can respec for free, but you'll lose the spent XP. If you pay the MC, you keep the spent XP.

And it can be done Node to Node, and presumably all subsequent Nodes
As such, you can't get Arm Speed->Speed Tweak->Remove Arm Speed to get the node back

As I understand it.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Tristan Winter, on 02 February 2017 - 03:25 AM, said:

I'm not saying that MWO should be Star Conflict or EVE Online or World of Warcraft. I'm saying that other games have increasing complexity over time, and MWO does not. And even if you disregard other games and just look at PGI's old dev logs from 2012, it sounded like MWO would offer increasingly complex gameplay as you levelled up, and increasing amounts of synergy between different "roles", and now I doubt there will be much of either.

Complexity doesn't directly translate to depth which is the problem. I don't want complexity added to the game for the sake of complexity because it only works at distracting the player (specifically new ones) with unnecessary crap. That's where the problem stems from.

DrxAbstract, on 02 February 2017 - 04:35 AM, said:

Wouldn't mind having multiple variations of weapons with traits specific to their manufacturers--That was probably the most interesting idea I've seen presented on these forums, not to mention the depth it would add to Mech building conceptualization and strategic ideologies...

It wouldn't add depth, because the choice would eventually fall to one that is most optimal for the role of that weapon. For example if there were different PPCs, the one that most fits with the high heat PPFLD role the PPC currently enjoys would be the one that is used over all the others. Sure it is nice to discover yourself which one that is, in a single player game, but in a multiplayer game, especially one that doesn't gate players much that is bad.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 02 February 2017 - 09:23 AM.

[WarHippy]

Kasumi Sumika, on 02 February 2017 - 05:36 AM, said:

I hope that respec with c-bills is reasonable cheap. On side note I'm glad that mastering 3 mechs rule is gone so I can trying more mechs quite easily. But this change will took more longer grind to mastering one mech.

Big Tin Man, on 02 February 2017 - 07:14 AM, said:

How I read the respec thing was you can respec for free, but you'll lose the spent XP. If you pay the MC, you keep the spent XP.

Any costs for respec just needs to die. Out of all the possibilities good or bad these skill trees might bring to the game what they have described for respec is entirely unacceptable to me.

[MechaBattler]

With quirks going away or being baked into base performance. Will we have velocity, duration, jam chance, and other weapon skills?

I was going to get another Vindicator. But since it relies HEAVILY on quirks and we're not sure of the extent they're being removed, I'm not gonna spend time and c-bills on a mech that might be junk without quirks.

Edited by MechaBattler, 02 February 2017 - 10:36 AM.