814 replies to this topic

[Brandiment]

Probably Not, on 09 February 2017 - 01:02 PM, said:

They don't put out good damage in MWO? This is news to me. I'll be the first to admit that the whole 2 AC20s/3+ AC2s/etc = surprisingly severe heat penalty thing is really dumb though. Ghost heat in general was and is dumb.

Where did I say they didn't put out good damage?

[BLOOD WOLF]

Some of you need to know, this is not the feedback thread. Making a thread in general forums are not the feedback threads. The feedback thread is where

https://mwomercs.com...ee-public-test/

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 09 February 2017 - 01:16 PM.

[Hastur Azargo]

PSA: Nothing you introduce in the game counts as "new choices" or "diversity" if you hide it behind an astronomical grindwall.

I mean, will anyone be surprised if they drop into a match on 21st and find out they're riding with 20+ TBR-S / Warrants? I wouldn't.

[SuperFunkTron]

BLOOD WOLF, on 09 February 2017 - 01:15 PM, said:

Some of you need to know, this is not the feedback thread. Making a thread in general forums are not the feedback threads. The feedback thread is where

https://mwomercs.com...ee-public-test/

Thanks for pointing that out, I need to copy and paste something now

[Hawk819]

I'm not advocating a `Mech to become OP by skills alone. Seriously though, there are some skill trees that need more points to distribute in my opinion. Ninety-one skill points is just too short of the mark. I know we have to pick and choose which skills we want most. In order to do this, we have leave some skill trees totally by the wayside, and regret our decisions made. I love how we can revert the skills back into the pool, however, to do so means spending insane amounts of C-bills, for those of us who have not garnered above $1 billion by now.

If I miss my guess, I'm quite certain this will be taken care of in future patches to come. Still, ninety-one points is way too modest at this point.

[Kael Posavatz]

Is there a way to not split the experience cost between XP and GXP?

[Tordin]

Gonna try to test this as much as possible.
Though I do fear that PGI might ignore real good feedback from open minded and reasonable people and shoot themself in the foot again as with the Info warfare and energy draw trainwrecks.

Also another group, from the side of community that are blindsided and sitting fearful in their comfort zone (non changing meta heads, cryhards and tryhard etc) bubbles will do everything in their power to draw as many players and create a big enough mob to scare/ threat/ dissuade PGI's plans to ever trying this promising change, and see it alive and well.

In the end as with all new things it needs fine tuning and good communication between us and PGI.

[UnleashThePwniez]

Here's the best possible feedback I can give after playing a few matches with all of my old builds and a couple of new ones.

This is yet, in a more complex manner, nothing more than a nerf to the old skill tree's damage capabilities, and seems to be somewhat of a buff to movement and durability. You now have to consider using skill tree points in order to get advanced zoom, seismic, radar derp, etc., which makes you greatly say **** that since it was simply bought before.

This skill tree is very linear and I really hope you guys consider buffing damage in a way rather than nerfing it, because you already did that and now the gameplay is much different, and I don't like it compared to how it was back then.

Seems as if the only people saying certain mechs were severely buffed were people that didn't have mastered mechs.

EDIT: Before the nerf to all mechs a long time ago, I was able to fire off almost 4 sets of 5 erm lasers from my Ferret before overheating. Now, I can't even fire 3 off without overheating. It's just not as fun anymore.

Edited by UnleashThePwniez, 09 February 2017 - 01:41 PM.

[kuma8877]

Probably Not, on 09 February 2017 - 01:33 PM, said:

I'm still really confused by the lack of Flamer, MG and TAG consideration at all in the skilltrees. Is this PGI admitting that they've given up on these weapon systems and we should too? I'm sure as hell not going to pony up for, say, an Arrow when there's no skill tree support for the MG.

Or they could be wrapped up into the additions that will need to be made when the timeline shifts forward with the new tech. Just guessing but, maybe in their current state they didn't warrant an impartial tree that wouldn't make sense without the new additions of things like HMG's to allow for a variety of skills to make up a full tree? Just spitballing...

[kuma8877]

UnleashThePwniez, on 09 February 2017 - 01:38 PM, said:

Here's the best possible feedback I can give after playing a few matches with all of my old builds and a couple of new ones.

This is yet, in a more complex manner, nothing more than a nerf to the old skill tree's damage capabilities, and seems to be somewhat of a buff to movement and durability. You now have to consider using skill tree points in order to get advanced zoom, seismic, radar derp, etc., which makes you greatly say **** that since it was simply bought before.

This skill tree is very linear and I really hope you guys consider buffing damage in a way rather than nerfing it, because you already did that and now the gameplay is much different, and I don't like it compared to how it was back then.

Seems as if the only people saying certain mechs were severely buffed were people that didn't have mastered mechs.

EDIT: Before the nerf to all mechs a long time ago, I was able to fire off almost 4 sets of 5 erm lasers from my Ferret before overheating. Now, I can't even fire 3 off without overheating. It's just not as fun anymore.

Well, overall time to kill has gone up via all the changes combined, which helps it feel more stompy robots to me. And also more tactical, as in, weapon groups and trigger management play a larger role again during engagements to avoid shutdowns. It'll likely curb some liberal alpha usage.

[SuperFunkTron]

EXEOBUREC, on 09 February 2017 - 12:14 PM, said:

just lets agree that instead of creating normal skill tree with black jack and ..ores where all skill are +-equially good depending of your playstyle pgi just fills too many banches with useless or low effected skills like 5 skills of +0,8% instead of 1 skill +5% and i only try to suggest real way for pgy to fix some fail -they for sure cant do normal skill tree and current situation are even worst with so limited amount of skill point restriction

I can't say that I agree though. Sure we could eliminate what many people consider "useless" tiles are really benefits you get instead of pricing advanced abilities at a higher cost. If the trees were linear for specific abilities, then we would see certain abilities become absolute priorities and without any trade off cost to them. In this case, the trade off is that you can't spend your nodes on all the skills that lead to a mech that overpowers new comers entirely. Not being able to buy all the nodes you want, forcing you to choose between the different categories and thus create a build that is aimed at a role. I really hope that they allow for larger groups to play in the PTS so that non juggernaut mechs can show their newly defined value.

The more I think about boating the more I am seeing its less of an issue as roles are introduced. The weapons at a baseline are generally fairly well balanced. Allowing someone to specialize in a single primary weapon, or split the bonuses between the primary and secondary weapons at the cost of other fields seems more and more reasonable as you will be able to come up with counters to those builds. A great example is that if you have a group of laser vomit specialists moving together, the become vulnerable to a mech with advanced infotech and UAVs who happens to be group up with some LRM boats or mechs that have some amount of LRMs on them. That scout is now critical to the team strategy by offering intel that provides the rest of the team with what they need for better battlefield tactics. Teams spamming one weapon type will become increasingly susceptible to opponents running a more diverse group of builds and balance will start to reestablish itself.

Of course only time will tell, and who knows how I'll feel about it tomorrow, but I think that the skill tree (lets start calling it "Customization tree" for those stuck on the semantics of "skill tree") will actually go a long way in constructing the foundation of more depth in FP and allow them to create more interesting scenarios for us in FP.

I still agree that the costs are too high, especially with the desire to respec mechs. Someone suggested a one time cost for unlocking a moveable node for the mech and that seems to be a better justification for the 100k price tag per node.

[Odanan]

One question: why my mechs have no XP at all? Wasn't the XP to be refunded?

[SuperFunkTron]

Odanan, on 09 February 2017 - 01:52 PM, said:

One question: why my mechs have no XP at all? Wasn't the XP to be refunded?

you have to do the conversion of your historical xp in the top right corner. I don't know how to use GXP to pay for things, but the historical is there

[Odanan]

SuperFunkTron, on 09 February 2017 - 01:57 PM, said:

you have to do the conversion of your historical xp in the top right corner. I don't know how to use GXP to pay for things, but the historical is there

Oh, I have to type the amount of converted XP. Why do I need to do this? Why all the "historical XP" is not converted with 1 click? Is there any advantage for keeping this "historical XP"? If not, why complicating things?

[SuperFunkTron]

Odanan, on 09 February 2017 - 02:03 PM, said:

Oh, I have to type the amount of converted XP. Why do I need to do this? Why all the "historical XP" is not converted with 1 click? Is there any advantage for keeping this "historical XP"? If not, why complicating things?

I believe that XP gets tied to a specific mech. For example, I have two nova primes. If you assign all of the historical XP to one nova, the other won't have access to it because it got locked to the first nova. Say you have 500,000 HXP, you could potentially outfit almost 5 nova primes that way. I hope that makes sense in type and not just my head.

[Ravenlord]

Tordin, on 09 February 2017 - 01:37 PM, said:

Gonna try to test this as much as possible.
Though I do fear that PGI might ignore real good feedback from open minded and reasonable people and shoot themself in the foot again as with the Info warfare and energy draw trainwrecks.

Also another group, from the side of community that are blindsided and sitting fearful in their comfort zone (non changing meta heads, cryhards and tryhard etc) bubbles will do everything in their power to draw as many players and create a big enough mob to scare/ threat/ dissuade PGI's plans to ever trying this promising change, and see it alive and well.

In the end as with all new things it needs fine tuning and good communication between us and PGI.

Just because you find it promising that doesn't mean that actually is an incontrovertible fact and people not liking the direction these changes would make the game go doesn't make them "cryhards" ot "tryhards" or "meta heads", and you calling them those names doesn't make their opinions any less valid than yours but just makes you look like a dikk.

Edited by Ravenlord, 09 February 2017 - 02:22 PM.

[Outlaw]

My 2 cents.

I will start off saying i do like the basic idea of what is going on here, and i really like that the mechs are feeling more durable and that heat management skills are making a comeback. I will however say that I do see a few flaws with this system. As it sits single weapon type boats seem to be getting a lot of buffing out of this as they can spend all their points on that weapon type and still get all the mobility and survivability skills. So what i would like to see is a build in the PTS where the number of max node unlocks is reduced from 91 to about 45-50, just to see if this encourages people to either specialize in tanky-ness, their preferred weapons or even a mix bag of skills. As a side not this will also have the side effect of cutting the grind nearly in half which IMO is a very good thing.

Edited by Outlaw, 09 February 2017 - 02:34 PM.

[SuperFunkTron]

We are coming up to a point in this game's life where a large group will be made upset regardless of what happens. A massive change on the scale of what this PTS proposes will definitely piss off a lot of people, especially since there has been so much invested into the old system. The only thing we can hope is that if they proceed with some variant of the new PTS, that it will be more of a difficult adjustment rather than a step backward in terms of improving the game. Objectively speaking, both Battletech and MWO are complicated games. Adding more depth through the skill trees does increase the time it takes to learn, but at some level provides some direction by giving new players an idea of how to develop a mech from stock into something more specialized over time. After having spent as much time as I have in MWO over the last few years, a big change will sting for sure, but knowing that this system provides depth and not only creates roles, but provides them with purpose, is enough for me to cut my "lost elites" and explore this new system. One point that I haven't seen yet is that they lack a video tutorial explaining the system. If they implement that at the time they add Customization trees to the game, that will greatly reduce the number of bad investments and choices players make while trying to figure out how the system works. I'm convinced that in the next 6 months, we'll be looking at a very different, and hopefully improved game with this being the next brick after FP 4.1.

Edited by SuperFunkTron, 09 February 2017 - 02:34 PM.

[AnimeFreak40K]

Probably Not, on 09 February 2017 - 01:33 PM, said:

I'm still really confused by the lack of Flamer, MG and TAG consideration at all in the skilltrees. Is this PGI admitting that they've given up on these weapon systems and we should too? I'm sure as hell not going to pony up for, say, an Arrow when there's no skill tree support for the MG.

Flamer and MG, due to how they work, would not gain any benefit from a skill tree. Things like cooldown, ROF bonuses and the like are pointless for them as is range.

The TAG isn't even a weapon. Seriously. It's quite literally a laser pointer.

[mad kat]

I thought this change was **** when it was proposed as more detail came out it just got reinforced.

Now having the details I can truly say this is nothing short of a joke and damn right insulting. The sheer audacity of this set up beggars belief.

I have played this regularly for four and half years and spent a good deal of cash and now it stands that everything I've done in that time is now effectively worthless.

This game is almost entirely built around customising mechs and how on earth are you supposed to do that with this system.

Problem is PGI have proved their incompetence repeatedly. Not that anyone cares but this really is grounds to expect a refund and uninstall. They will learn one way or another and this really won't help with their new child mw5.

Edited by mad kat, 13 February 2017 - 07:01 AM.