138 replies to this topic

[Orville Righteous]

rook, on 10 February 2017 - 11:21 AM, said:

I see going from 1 to 2 primary weapons as a big problem; and I totally agree that you might need to just start disregarding any 3rd or 4th weapons system on the frankenmechs that you run. The extra percentage just doesn't justify the cost.

Wouldn't you disregard the 3rd weapon type in the old system? Most mechs only had 2 mechs module slots. If you wanted to support a 3rd weapon group, you'd have to use a mech module/weapon module slot, which I never did.

I'm not seeing much of a difference with the skill trees for my mechs with 2 weapon slots. I'd usually get range for both, recharge for both, or mix it up, but I still only had 2 slots. The cool down is decreased in the new system, but I also get things like velocity.

[Gas Guzzler]

Orville Righteous, on 10 February 2017 - 11:35 AM, said:

I'm not seeing much of a difference with the skill trees for my mechs with 2 weapon slots. I'd usually get range for both, recharge for both, or mix it up, but I still only had 2 slots. The cool down is decreased in the new system, but I also get things like velocity.

I think the only time I would value the 5% cooldown, would be on a dedicated DPS mech. Maybe on SRMs as a brawler. But 5% is so tiny I just don't know.

[kptkohle]

if PGI split up the SP-pool into weapon SPs and "other-skills" SPs it would disencourage boating. E.g. if you have a weapon SP-pool of 40 SPs, you could only spend 25 if you have only one weapon type. So there would be no (or at least only a small disadvantage if you have more different weapon types).

[rook]

Orville Righteous, on 10 February 2017 - 11:35 AM, said:

Wouldn't you disregard the 3rd weapon type in the old system? Most mechs only had 2 mechs module slots. If you wanted to support a 3rd weapon group, you'd have to use a mech module/weapon module slot, which I never did.

I'm not seeing much of a difference with the skill trees for my mechs with 2 weapon slots. I'd usually get range for both, recharge for both, or mix it up, but I still only had 2 slots. The cool down is decreased in the new system, but I also get things like velocity.

Yes, I would also disregard the weapon in the old system too. Case in point: I usually like to throw those extra ML's on my atlas, even though there was no modules for it (reserved for the AC20 and SRMs).

Splitting the node points into two groups (weapons and other stuff) would still help solve the 1 weapon vs 2 weapon disadvantage in other nodes. It seems in general, PGI has always made us choose some mostly mandatory skills in favor of interesting things. IE - I've never used Advanced Gyro or Hill Climb. In the new system, why would I take anything in the Auxiliary tree before I finish any other tree? It seems to me that there are just more buttons to press without any more choice.

[Widowmaker1981]

It does encourage boating a single type, though modules already do that, and at least this groups weapon families (you'll be seeing more LPL+MPL builds rather than the LPL+ML builds you see now i think).

I dont see it as an enormous problem, i could build skills for two weapon types in fairly easily by skipping some stats (AC range, laser cooldown) and still get the essential other stuff (full speed tweak, defensive, seismic, radar derp, cool run etc) .. and i wont run mechs with more than two weapon families regardless.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Widowmaker1981, on 10 February 2017 - 12:12 PM, said:

It does encourage boating a single type, though modules already do that

Which one could see as a problem with the module system. Especially since they used modules as a "balancing" mechanism even though mechs like the LCT-1E really don't have a reason to mix weapon types such that it requires more than 2 weapon modules.

[Widowmaker1981]

kptkohle, on 10 February 2017 - 11:42 AM, said:

if PGI split up the SP-pool into weapon SPs and "other-skills" SPs it would disencourage boating. E.g. if you have a weapon SP-pool of 40 SPs, you could only spend 25 if you have only one weapon type. So there would be no (or at least only a small disadvantage if you have more different weapon types).

Its not a bad idea, but i think there needs to be some useful non weapon stuff in the weapon SP group, because a lot of lights and mediums have no choice but to boat if they want to be at all effective, and those mechs dont need nerfing in comparison to bigger stuff.

[rook]

Widowmaker1981, on 10 February 2017 - 12:12 PM, said:

I dont see it as an enormous problem, i could build skills for two weapon types in fairly easily by skipping some stats (AC range, laser cooldown) and still get the essential other stuff (full speed tweak, defensive, seismic, radar derp, cool run etc) .. and i wont run mechs with more than two weapon families regardless.

Other problems I see with current, non-linear type of tree's is that if you just wanted all the laser heat gen, you can only skip like 2~4 skills in the tree. That's not much of an advantage for skipping. Or if I DIDN'T want a skill, I can't deactivate it. If I'm running a hot build, I don't really need PPC cooldown.

[Nesutizale]

I just played a few rounds with 3 weapon systems skilled, each a little bit with about 5-7 points. Rest was devided into several of the other categories.

In the end I had what was comparable to 6 Modules.
PPC Velocity and heat
LRM Range and spread
Streak Range und cooldown
all together 26 points
12/17 in defance
10/25 upper chassis
9/20 lower chassis
14/22 Operations
20/44 Sensors (Seismic + Radar derp)

So you see very mixed weapons (atdd 2MGs to the above list) and very spread out skilled. Nowhere I maxed out any of the stats.
Got around 400-900 DMG (I am quite the casual player. Better ones might get better results) but the point is, that is not different to what I am currently doing.
Mech feelt a little bit more sligush/slow but not so much that it realy mattered.

With the weapon skills I got my PPC to the velocity that feelt good. My LRMS had more Range and less spread and the SRMs had a good range (didn't fell that different to be fair). Will have to try out spread reduction at some point...

So overall, except for the little bit more slugish feeling I don't experiance any drawbacks. On the contrary I never used Radar and Seismic together in a mech and only had PPC cooldown instead of the velocity.
I like the new way it plays.

Had similar experiances with my other mechs, though I focused more on a single aspect with these but I can't say, so far, that I feel more or less to be in a disadvantage then I was before. So thumbs up from me for the new Skilltree.

Edited by Nesutizale, 10 February 2017 - 12:39 PM.

[kptkohle]

Widowmaker1981, on 10 February 2017 - 12:15 PM, said:

Its not a bad idea, but i think there needs to be some useful non weapon stuff in the weapon SP group, because a lot of lights and mediums have no choice but to boat if they want to be at all effective, and those mechs dont need nerfing in comparison to bigger stuff.

Thats true, but the wouldn't have a disadvantage. They just would save money and XPs for not using all SPs.

[Adamski]

It doesnt matter how you spin it.

A mech with multiple weapons will now perform worse because it:

1) Has less weapons that function the same with the same range brackets
2) Has less specialization points to boost those weapons / boost the mech driving it

The fact that the module system had similar limitations, but not as severe, is no excuse not to fix/improve the new system.

[Adamski]

To add to my point above:

IF PGI makes the weapon skills multi purpose
(ie: a single skill for weapon range, instead of 6 range skills for AC, UAC, Laser, Pulse, LRM, SRM, PPC, etc.)

THEN
It improves mechs that are unable to boat due to hardpoint limitations, without penalizing mechs that like to boat.

WHICH
Would increase balance between different mechs, which should be the goal of any new system being implemented.

[Gas Guzzler]

Adamski, on 10 February 2017 - 12:58 PM, said:

It doesnt matter how you spin it.

A mech with multiple weapons will now perform worse because it:

1) Has less weapons that function the same with the same range brackets
2) Has less specialization points to boost those weapons / boost the mech driving it

The fact that the module system had similar limitations, but not as severe, is no excuse not to fix/improve the new system.

I strongly agree when comparing the 2 weapon builds to 1 weapon builds, but I think that 3+ weapon builds are in more or less the same boat as the 2 weapon builds. There is simply no tangible loss in not skilling out your smallest weapon.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 10 February 2017 - 01:28 PM.

[Spunkmaster]

Thank you, @Gas Guzzler. This thread has been the most constructive that I have found on the PTS.

Correct me if I'm wrong. The skills in the new tree seem to fall into three categories:

-Those that attempt to replicate the current skill system.
-Those that attempt to replicate the current modules.
-Those that, essentially, allow a pilot to customize their 'Mechs with chassis quirks (ie. ballistic/PPC velocity & missle/LBX spread)

PGI could charge 1000 XP/5000 cbills for each node in the first group; 5000 XP/150,000 cbills for the second and 25,000 XP/2 million cbills for the last. (Or whatever makes the most sense.)

The tree layout would have to be tweaked, so you didn't have to go through a group three node to get to a group one node, etc. I also believe that allowing activation of a node, adjacent to any activated node, whether above OR below, would lessen the occurrence of having to purchase unwanted skills.

Once the nodes are unlocked and purchased with XP & cbills, they are permanent on the 'Mech. The pilot would get to enable/disable at will, so long as no more than 91 are enabled at any one time.

Heat management, cooldown and range bonuses have essentially been lowered, effectively nerfing all weapon systems. A Kodiak may be able to gain a cERPPC velocity buff, but firing them will require longer cooldowns and produce/retain more heat. Is that enough balance to the velocity buff? I don't know. It certainly doesn't make my 2xPPC TDR OP by any means. Any further balancing to the Kodiak needs to happen at the chassis level, not the skill tree.

Anecdotally, I've been running a CTF-1X for a couple of months now, with only basic skills and Radar Dep. It's loaded with 2xLPL and 1xLB10x (1.5x heat mngmt). It's a good build under the current system and retains all its chassis quirks under the new system. I now have a CTF-1X that has the armor of a Kodiak, running at >80 kph, with no heat issues whatsoever. Meta? Hardly. Fun AND effective? Absolutely. It's a great skirmisher or second line damage amplifier (while sharing armor). It can also lead a push as long as buddies push with it.

I like the CTF better than my TBR, that essentially gets nerfed a bit. PGI has effectively achieved its goal of increasing TTK, without greatly altering the resulting gameplay. It is, however, difficult to tell with 4v4 matches. Often your 'Mech is forced into roles it's not designed to fill.

From what I've experienced in the PTS thus far, the new skill system is an improvement over the current one. The only resulting drawback is the cbill demands, especially for those with 150+ 'Mechs in their hangar. My above suggestions on tiered costs should alleviate this. It should also address the concerns of new players getting their 'Mechs "mastered" to the current level without an exceptional grind. "Module" and "chassis quirk" nodes are icing on the cake and completely optional. Many pilots, under the current system, run their builds successfully without modules. Under the new system, the "module nodes" are even less effective and, hence, less necessary. It looks to me that the "tryhards" will be negatively effected the greatest. I think most of the concerns being expressed on the forum center on human hatred of change and fear of the unknown.

Only time will tell. But the new skill system may very well provide a better game.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

Gas Guzzler, on 10 February 2017 - 01:27 PM, said:

I strongly agree when comparing the 2 weapon builds to 1 weapon builds, but I think that 3+ weapon builds are in more or less the same boat as the 2 weapon builds. There is simply no tangible loss in not skilling out your smallest weapon.

When we can have a skill tree without any artificial unbalances promoting already optimal solutions, we should have those. Skill tree change gives a chance to easen up a bit on the boating issue, but instead it just bolsters it. What I'm afraid, is that PGI will leave things as they are here and then later, when the general population on the live server starts complaining, PGI will start to add some arbitrary artificial bandaids to punish boating to make things even again. So why have all that mess when we can just make thing more even in the first place?

It doesn't matter if the mech with 3 weapons systems will get only about 1% (or whatever) penalty to overall effectiveness, there just shouldn't be any penalty at all. Especially than NOW we have one of a kind opportunity to improve balance without any artificial bandaids. We don't use this chance, we'll get more bandaids in the future to fix that mess

[burning wisky]

it looks like the quirks a running , lower but they are there ????

Edited by burning wisky, 11 February 2017 - 08:22 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Prof RJ Gumby, on 11 February 2017 - 07:07 AM, said:

When we can have a skill tree without any artificial unbalances promoting already optimal solutions, we should have those. Skill tree change gives a chance to easen up a bit on the boating issue, but instead it just bolsters it. What I'm afraid, is that PGI will leave things as they are here and then later, when the general population on the live server starts complaining, PGI will start to add some arbitrary artificial bandaids to punish boating to make things even again. So why have all that mess when we can just make thing more even in the first place?

It doesn't matter if the mech with 3 weapons systems will get only about 1% (or whatever) penalty to overall effectiveness, there just shouldn't be any penalty at all. Especially than NOW we have one of a kind opportunity to improve balance without any artificial bandaids. We don't use this chance, we'll get more bandaids in the future to fix that mess

Well, I agree there should be no penalty for bringing multiple weapons.

PGI said they are going to work on it for another month so we will see what they come up with.

[Leopardo]

I think playr that want go deeper in like Large laser tree must spend some points to open higher branches .... so it must cost some more points. like you going deeper and to do that you must open sub branch - and spend like 3 points only to open the way to branch with nodes. it will give you a difference and 2 ways : take 1 more weapon or go deeper with only 1 like Large laser .

[Mark Brandhauber]

It's more simple than most make out,
boat or not; most in tier 1 will be boating... using the skills to maximum effect 1 weapons type maxed allowing 71 free points for other useful trees