132 replies to this topic

[Averen]

Jettrik Ryflix, on 08 February 2017 - 10:21 PM, said:

For anyone complaining about boating, just a heads-up: the module system already encourages boating.

If anything, the skill trees give you the choice to improve multiple weapon systems (at the expense of other upgrades, of course).

Heads up for you, boating was already an issue everyone knew about. Weapon module system was already bad and useless, just another cbill sink.

This is going to make it worse, however. You can improve multiple weapon systems, sure. But you'll have a lot more points left when you just improve 1 type of weapon system, to boost every other aspect of your mech. A mech using 2 types of guns will have to cut back heavily in another area; one using 3 types will be heavily limited.

And that's only further snowballing the current problem of boating already being very strong.

Edited by Averen, 09 February 2017 - 01:07 AM.

[Roadbuster]

So XP will still be useless once you "mastered" a mech.
The CB-sink will be even bigger, a great thing for new players without premium time and +30%CB mechs.
And mech diversity will be lower.

Why not unlock the skills with XP and allow players to select a limited number of them for use?
Changing the skills could cost CB. But the cost should be low enough to let even new players mess around with different skills without having to farm CB.
I just don't see any way how to implement costs for "respeccing" without hurting new player experience.

Getting higher tiers of a skill shouldn't force you to unlock skills you don't want or need.

They could create a "link" system, where selecting specific skills will unlock another bonus or increase the bonus of the linked skills. This could be used to encourage the use of mixed loadouts and reduce boating by offering an effective alternative.

But ~2 weeks before implementation?...
I guess the best we can hope for are changes to values of skills and skill costs.

[JudauAshta]

what do mwo and league of legends have in common??

clueless devs and bad balance

[Xarchus]

Man this is a crazy change! Encourages boating, bad tree design, discourages build creativity and seems to be a massive fudging cash grab. This is before we mention the fact that running a single clan chassis type with multiple different omnipods for different builds and weapon types wont be viable anymore.

I think I prefer the current system, even with having to master three different chassis types. At least that actually lets you be creative and learn the game by swapping modules, without having to pay through the nose to respec!

This skill change sounds like it might be the MWO death warrant for a lot of players, old and new, and is a million miles away from the changes the community have been asking for.

Edited by Xarchus, 09 February 2017 - 08:29 AM.

[Jon Gotham]

FupDup, on 08 February 2017 - 02:56 PM, said:

Yeah, Papa Smurfys says they're at 10 right now (the gold standard).

I'm not really sure what PGI is trying to fix with this 2.5 health nerf.

I think they think that by making mechs that have to facetime their opponents to actually deliver their proper damage more fragile that will balance things out.
I think it'll just accentuate what some people already realise......short duration, high durability mechs will win short contact trades...
Oh hang on they already do!

[Quicksilver Aberration]

This definitely discourages build diversity since weapon skills are tied to the same pool as the other ones. I get that they wanted players to have the illusion of choice, but those of us min/maxers already have discovered that with the way this is setup boating will be on the rise since you make the most of the skills be doing that.

[Vxheous]

FupDup, on 08 February 2017 - 06:31 PM, said:

That still means you only need a maximum of 4 duplicates of each module, and for only a few specific modules get used on every build anyways (e.g. Seismic).

Technically its more like 17+ duplicates. Clan deck example:

Standard: Timber 2lpl/4ml + 2 ebons 2lpl4ml + cheetah
Hot: 2 Night Gyr 2Gauss/PPC + hunchback 2c 6ml + cheetah (cheetah duplicate)
Range: Timber 4erll + hellbringer 4erll + 2 hunchback 2c 2erppc
Conquest: 2 Timber 2lpl/4ml + 2 Ice ferret (1 timber duplicate)
Front load: marauder 2c + timber 2lpl/5ml + hunchback 2c 2lpl/3ml + cheetah (cheetah duplicate)

That is 17 distinct mechs for FW, all that I use on a fairly consistent basis based on map/mode. I havent even mentioned niche mechs that sometimes fit in like kodiaks

[Gas Guzzler]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 February 2017 - 07:33 AM, said:

This definitely discourages build diversity since weapon skills are tied to the same pool as the other ones. I get that they wanted players to have the illusion of choice, but those of us min/maxers already have discovered that with the way this is setup boating will be on the rise since you make the most of the skills be doing that.

Its already like that with modules. Someone has yet to come up with a meaningful build where not having all 4 different weapon types skilled up is actually a noticeable hindrance. I get what the anti-boating folks are saying, I just feel like if PGI makes changes to address the feedback, we are going to get kicked in the nuts somewhere else.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 09 February 2017 - 08:37 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Gas Guzzler, on 09 February 2017 - 08:37 AM, said:

Its already like that with modules.

Not quite, because some mechs have more than 2 weapon module slots, so for builds that boat cERML and cLPL you could get 3/4. There is also the problem that with weapon modules you could select the ones that made the most sense for each weapon (cERML range and cLPL cooldown for example to sync both as much as possible) where you have trouble doing that with the new layout.

[Xarchus]

I think the worst part of the changes I have seen thus far are the consumables. If you want anything more than a cool shot 9, That's gonna cost you MC. Want a half decent UAV? You need to spend SP in the Aux. tree or buy them for 15MC a pop. Few enough people take UAVs as it is, and making them less effective, or putting them behind a pay wall, will only further discourage their use.

I hate to be cynical, but it's almost like one last shameless grasp to get as much as possible, before moving on to Mercenaries.

Edited by Xarchus, 09 February 2017 - 09:18 AM.

[lazytopaz]

Oh one more thing.
Russ said something about some mechs that do really need their quirks should get them incorporated into the skill tree.
So I presume that on release of skill tree to public server LBX cooldown will give you more than 5% cooldown reduction eh?
(I know that's only PTS.. but I have my doubts .. and it's PGI at the helm and we all know how that can turn out ergo I want mah cn9-d to be as it was with the lbx's ;P)