814 replies to this topic

[SuperFunkTron]

Brandiment, on 09 February 2017 - 11:06 AM, said:

Because it kills variety. I like to use multi weapon mechs like the Bushwhacker, Atlas, and King Crab, but with this tree it will hurt even more to do builds like that.

justcallme A S H, on 09 February 2017 - 11:07 AM, said:

Have a look at something a friend whipped up.




So a good mech now becomes insane, because quirks? A SB with extra torso pitch, no longer are lights safe around the legs.

This totally unbalance the game. Sorry, bit poorly thought out and adding in far too much complication for new players. The game knowledge gap just extended a football field.

These two posts together have got me wondering about the weapon diversity issue. There are some mechs that are built as boats (nova, catapult), but does spreading nodes across multiple weapons trees provide a comparable benefit to those that max out a single tree? It'd be great if someone could make a screen shot of mixed weapon specs compared to one tree being maxed out like Ash provided for us.

Ash, the trade off for the spirit bear is that lights can also buff their durability and mobility (PTS has shown it to be quite significant for lights), but I can see where new mechs will suffer.

[justcallme A S H]

Yep, go make a 5LPL BLR2C, see what happens

Skill tree as it stands encourages single weapon boating to insane levels.

[Brandiment]

Probably Not, on 09 February 2017 - 11:09 AM, said:

Why would it kill variety though? In order for it to do that, boating would have to be an objectively better way to play the game. So, I mean, why would it be so much objectively better that it kills variety?

Because If you just have one set of weapons like energy for example, you can depending on what you use spec out entirely for that weapon load out and have a very effective boater, at that point you can go into survival, equipment, sensors, or mobility almost fully and have a force to be reckoned with. Now lets say you have a Bushwhacker with LRMs, Dual AC-5s and a med laser, now to make all of those weapons very effective you must put points into ballistics, LRM, and lasers leaving you with very little room to put into other skills, thus putting you behind the curb of the one gun boaters, because you cant put points into the things that will make your mech survive longer or target better, but if you put points into all but the weapons, you just made your load out less effective and still behind the curb.

Edited by Brandiment, 09 February 2017 - 11:19 AM.

[UnleashThePwniez]

justcallme A S H, on 09 February 2017 - 11:16 AM, said:

Yep, go make a 5LPL BLR2C, see what happens

Skill tree as it stands encourages single weapon boating to insane levels.

I'm currently downloading the PTS, but I have a question for you.. You say 5LPL.. Is there still ghost heat? Can't wait to get in and test things!

[SuperFunkTron]

justcallme A S H, on 09 February 2017 - 11:16 AM, said:

Yep, go make a 5LPL BLR2C, see what happens

Skill tree as it stands encourages single weapon boating to insane levels.

The question now is, "does the skill tree encourage it anymore than the old module system does?" I remember thinking current modules really encouraged boating of a specific weapon to maximize the investment of putting that module in. Spending 3 million to get er Large range and cooldown really made me think that those should've been the only weapons on that mech. I don't play IS enough to know their loadouts,but aren't 5LPL BLR2C's already ravaging the clanners in FP? I just want to get a clear picture of the pros,cons, and tradeoffs for each of the systems.

[SuperFunkTron]

UnleashThePwniez, on 09 February 2017 - 11:19 AM, said:

I'm currently downloading the PTS, but I have a question for you.. You say 5LPL.. Is there still ghost heat? Can't wait to get in and test things!

Try focusing on what you want the mech to be able to do when you are testing out the nodes. Also, try out a variety of mechs that you already use for particular tasks (scout, assault attack, assault tank, boat, mixed loadouts). It'll take about 5 or 6 games but you'll start to see a big difference in how it plays out as you buy nodes in certain fields, especially durability and mobility.

[kuma8877]

SuperFunkTron, on 09 February 2017 - 11:14 AM, said:

These two posts together have got me wondering about the weapon diversity issue. There are some mechs that are built as boats (nova, catapult), but does spreading nodes across multiple weapons trees provide a comparable benefit to those that max out a single tree? It'd be great if someone could make a screen shot of mixed weapon specs compared to one tree being maxed out like Ash provided for us.

Ash, the trade off for the spirit bear is that lights can also buff their durability and mobility (PTS has shown it to be quite significant for lights), but I can see where new mechs will suffer.

I've noticed that the boating is actually brought on by the mindset that there is a need to max out all the non weapon trees as a default (max armor, max ammo, max twist...etc.) And then you're left with only enough SP's to fill one weapon tree out.

I think if we change our mindset a bit and use the tree to make up for the deficiencies of a variant (possibly low base armor or speed) and then sharpen the tools each variant has (ecm, narc and hardpoint locations for example) you will end up with better more efficient blended builds.

This whole tree actually brings up the viability of FW. It's a much more conducive environment for the skilltree with larger payouts, more accommodating for role friendly builds and such.... hmmmm.

[Ustarish]

what rebalance in normal games is trying to achieve:
- more entertaining progression system
- lowered skill floor - entry level player experience.
- balancing skill ceiling.

what i see in this rebalance:
- enormously increased grind per mech.
- difference between new and experienced [mastered mech] player going trough the roof.
- skill ceiling changed to the game of numbers [more = better]

Edited by Ustarish, 09 February 2017 - 11:29 AM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

The previous module system encouraged boating a single weapon (AC/5 for example) because modules were weapon-specific, with Mechs that had weapon-specific quirks.

The current system encourages boating classes of weapons (Autocannons, for example).

I don't see any reason to complain about how the new system encourages boating more than the last system, and the Hunchback 4P would like to speak with you about your boating complaints.

[EXEOBUREC]

SuperFunkTron, on 09 February 2017 - 11:07 AM, said:

Opening up all nodes to every mech is a terrible idea. It would eliminate any diversity this system actually creates (and those infotech/durability/mobility trees create a lot of welcomed diversity). Further, those who have the c-bills would end up with such a substantial advantage over standard mechs that it would open up a whole new can of worms in balancing. We need to embrace the roles that those trees rather than try to maintain the current "jack of all trades" warrior we have. Cutting costs so new guys have a chance is definitely important, and being able to focus on buffing your mech to help it excel in the role you are building it for will increase the number of strategies seen and the variety of situations you will see based on how your enemies spec their mechs.

are u really think that 91 points add diversity? u sure that someone will chose narc node instead of free hp? or %twist speed instead of radar deprivation? Reality is terrible thing for you then - 99% of players will use same skill builds with all hp\max radar depr\energy weapon\etc max effecting for current mech - and belive me 99% WILL chose the mech with maximum number of 1-2 typed slots like 6 laservomit - NOT mechs with 2 energy 1 ballistic 2 rocket slots

[Brandiment]

Probably Not, on 09 February 2017 - 11:26 AM, said:

That strikes me as a failing of the skill tree system, not boating. Remove skill tree system from the equation, and presto, that particular advantage of maximized skillpoint benefit disappears.

I realize I'm getting a little off topic here, but I see so much flak for the idea of boating in the first place that it seriously makes me ask why. There are canonical boats in BT/MW and I don't think anyone would have ever deemed them screamingly OP beastly killing machines from hell before MWO.

Because the reason for boats in the first place was to make it easier on supply lines and training. Lets look at the Crab for instance, that mech was made to stay out in the grind for days without resupply or repairs, and the repairs you did have to do on it could have mainly been done by the pilot. The Supernova was also built because the clans did not have enough AC shels for their King Crabs so they made the Supernova to be like a King Crab but without the reliance on supply lines or ammo.We don't have those kinds of problems in game, if we did you would not hear a peep out of me about boating.

Edited by Brandiment, 09 February 2017 - 11:31 AM.

[metallio]

Just make the mech module level items separate and unlockable across your entire stable.

Refund people all their modules, and if they want to buy the new unlock, they'll have a ton to spend on other skills or mechs.

I always thought the "modules" were a terrible idea anyway if you had to move them around. Should have just been a selectable list showing the modules you'd purchased from the beginning.



Honestly I don't think the current level of complexity is that bad. I think it needs customization to each mech with some random "neat" things thrown in that are unique to some mechs just for "fun" (that thing we don't have when grinding too much).

Then the cbill numbers need ratcheted back to a tenth of what they currently are and re-skills shouldn't cost a damn thing.

[SuperFunkTron]

EXEOBUREC, on 09 February 2017 - 11:28 AM, said:

are u really think that 91 points add diversity? u sure that someone will chose narc node instead of free hp? or %twist speed instead of radar deprivation? Reality is terrible thing for you then - 99% of players will use same skill builds with all hp\max radar depr\energy weapon\etc max effecting for current mech - and belive me 99% WILL chose the mech with maximum number of 1-2 typed slots like 6 laservomit - NOT mechs with 2 energy 1 ballistic 2 rocket slots

91 adds huge diversity when you have to choose how much of each you want and what will most benefit the mech you choose. This system isn't designed to create a single, ultimate meta, but rather allows weaker variants or chassis to compensate what they are lacking. I'm very sure that lots of people will try to run a few generic builds at first, but my testing with my hellbringers very quickly showed me that this mentality is not the best way to go about it. Those who want to quirk the whole mobility/durability section will have less points for weapons and vice versa. That already creates a diversity in damage output versus the ability to take damage and keep on going. Then you have mechs that can provide better info warfare, be it ecm cover, spotting, enemy locking.... If everyone goes to one loadout, people will find another loadout to counter that eventually and it turns into an arms race of trying to figure out what you are going to deal with and how to best approach it in the mech you customized. That is a HUGE game of cat and mouse and creates a whole lot of variety where our current "advanced sensor" mech is a cyclops that gets an extra 100 m sensor range. This systems allows scouts to improve intel gathering, tanks to tank harder, specialists specialize, generalists stay general..... on top of all of that, PGI stated that they intend on adjusting it over time so if one set of buffs is overperforming compared to the rest, I'm sure we'd see it pulled back in line.

Let those who believe that this game is all about max armor and 1 weapon type play that way while the rest of us have fun discovering the benefits of mobility, info tech, auxiliary nodes and mixed load outs.

[justcallme A S H]

Prosperity Park, on 09 February 2017 - 11:28 AM, said:

The previous module system encouraged boating a single weapon (AC/5 for example) because modules were weapon-specific, with Mechs that had weapon-specific quirks.

The current system encourages boating classes of weapons (Autocannons, for example).

I don't see any reason to complain about how the new system encourages boating more than the last system, and the Hunchback 4P would like to speak with you about your boating complaints.

Because boating is more heavily rewarded that it is currently, based on how things stand at the moment.

So there is every reason to complain. Someone brings a mixed loadout they are at a further disadvantage than before.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 09 February 2017 - 11:52 AM.

[Sixpack]

Ok, I do not know if I have the time to actually play on the PTS or not. But having read a few comments and looked over the newspost here are some suggestions:

Cost:

Half the C-Bill cost from 100k to 50k c-bills per skill node.
Maybe increase the XP cost.
Maybe switch out skill node removal to 50% xp and 50% C-Bill refund.

While I understand that you want C-Bill sinks in this game to get them out of the system again your original idea of having them in Faction Warfare is the right way to go. Having another large C-Bill sink for mechs after aquireing them and fitting them out is not a good idea in my opinion. But a higher XP cost should be fine as it is a natural rewarding system for playing the actual mech.

Skill point worth.

Maybe try to frontload the effect of weapon skills.

Right now let's say we get -15% laser duration with all -% laser duration skill points.
This goes as follows:
Laser Duration 1: -3%
....
Laser Duration 5: -3%

This is a linear system and very much favours boating.

A frontloaded system on the other hand makes boating still viable but could potentially make a multitude of weapons a favourable choice:

Laser Duration 1: -5%
Laser Duration 2: -4%
Laser Duration 3: -3%
Laser Duration 4: -2%
Laser Duration 5: -1%

Now, I am believe this to be a good idea for the weapon systems, but it might very well be a bad idea for all ther other parts of the skilltree.

[EXEOBUREC]

[color=#B27204]SuperFunkTron[/color]

well then just try to duel someone who choose hp\damage line without using this lines - i think u fast understand that from 91 points most will be better to spend on exactly same skills no matter what mech u use and when no one stops u to spend all points on "less popular" skills to show ur unic vision of mech most people will simply choose skill set that allows em to live longer and hit harder instead of all tree filler skills
All this 100 meter sensorrange and 5% faster twist are like imaginated friends - they SOOOO cool when YOU think of it but when things get real it is simple 7 hit till death vs 8,5 hit till death that makes difference in most cases/

Edited by EXEOBUREC, 09 February 2017 - 11:58 AM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Magazine capacity? I missed this one, WOW.

now that was a little treat

[justcallme A S H]

kuma8877, on 09 February 2017 - 11:26 AM, said:

I've noticed that the boating is actually brought on by the mindset that there is a need to max out all the non weapon trees as a default (max armor, max ammo, max twist...etc.) And then you're left with only enough SP's to fill one weapon tree out.

I think if we change our mindset a bit and use the tree to make up for the deficiencies of a variant (possibly low base armor or speed) and then sharpen the tools each variant has (ecm, narc and hardpoint locations for example) you will end up with better more efficient blended builds

This whole tree actually brings up the viability of FW. It's a much more conducive environment for the skilltree with larger payouts, more accommodating for role friendly builds and such.

'LORE' builds in FP, don't work. Simple as that.

And logically, why would you select multi weapon tiers over better armour/structure? You're instantly putting yourself at a major disadvantage by doing so. Structure/armour/twist are massively important than a mixed loadout.

[kuma8877]

justcallme A S H, on 09 February 2017 - 11:51 AM, said:

Because boating is more heavily rewarded that it is currently, based on how things stand at the moment.

So there is every reason to complain. Someone brings a mixed loadout they are at a further disadvantage than before.

How exactly? It's the class of weapons (All AC's, All lasers, all LRM etc.) you are spending SP on. The current system is one or two weapons (ML, or AC5 or PPC etc). It's now less specific and more open to choice in your actual build. Your small lasers get the same bonus as your ML's LL's and PL's, and your AC2 gets the same as your AC-5,10,20.... on the same chassis variant.

[SuperFunkTron]

EXEOBUREC, on 09 February 2017 - 11:52 AM, said:

[color=#B27204]SuperFunkTron[/color]

well then just try to duel someone who choose hp\damage line without using this lines - i think u fast understand that from 91 points most will be better to spend on exactly same skills no matter what mech u use and when no one stops u to spend all points on "less popular" skills to show ur unic vision of mech most people will simply choose skill set that allows em to live longer and hit harder instead of all tree filler skills

That's fine by me. If you think its all about who has the most armor, you've clearly not dealt with opponents who use cover and mobility to create an advantage, or scouts who provide intel in FP which helps their team set up in a more favorable position. I'd love to see teams start taking advantage of mobility quirks that will allow them to get behind the armor giants and take them out as a group rather than going juggernaut vs. juggernaut and not allowing variety.

Those who want to find new tactics will have that available, those who don't want to don't have to.