138 replies to this topic

[-=Heloc=-]

Yeah, I'm not seeing the problem. Is the argument here that the new skill tree is supposed to discourage boating? Or rather, that it should be eliminating the existing advantages to boating?

I don't think that was one of the stated goals of the skill tree revamp so that might be your own expectation and it's not really fair to hold PGI accountable for that.

As far as boating, remember that this replaces weapon modules. Before you had a choice of a shorter cooldown or longer range. You could usually fit the both for one weapon type or use a single module for two weapon types. Obviously, some 'mechs let you fit a 3rd weapon module in it but two weapon modules is, I think, the most common.

If you're boating, it makes sense to use both modules for one weapon type and maximize your most abundant weapon system, if you're not boating, it makes sense to mix them depending on your build. If it's hot, you don't need cooldown so grab a pair of range modules, for example.

The skill tree still makes you make the same compromise. You can either max out the benefit from a single weapon type, or get a less broad buff on more than one weapon type.

What you're really got to do is build a pair of 'mechs with the same build but different skill tree setups so you can compare their damage output and reach. There are going to be trade-offs between the two approaches but I don't think they'll be huge and you might not even notice them. But then we're talking about a question of balancing the skill tree, not some new incentive to boat particular weapon types.

I ran my Jester with 2xML and 2xERPPC (I think they're ERs any way). I maxed out the PPC tree (minus a couple of the velocity nodes) and it felt about the same to me as the same 'mech in the live build running both ERPPC weapon modules. I haven't done the math here though so that should be taken with a grain of salt. Also remember that the plural of anecdote is NOT 'data'.

[MechaBattler]

It penalizes having more than one weapon type. You have to devote more points to get those other types, for essentially the same gain as just getting one weapon type.

I at least am not saying penalize boating. I just want the system not to penalize people for using different weapon types on the same build. How that happens is pretty much up to PGI, since they rarely lift ideas wholesale from the forum.

Letting multiple weapon types get the same bonuses doesn't hurt boating. Boating is still the better way to go. But at least you don't further wall off multi weapon builds.

[Nightmare1]

Gas Guzzler, on 09 February 2017 - 10:58 AM, said:

With the time between you can spread the damage though. It also almost doubles the effective duration of IS LPLs. Also, for stationary targets you have the option of alphaing different weapon systems and doing more damage then you would be able to boating and having to do the .5 second delay.

Also, there are no macros that help with dakka unless you are talking about troll AC2 builds... which don't help them, they are just annoying.

So.. how many MLs do you have on this hypothetical build and what are your other weapon systems? Just trying to understand what the role of the MLs is.

With regard to the quad weapons, you can still alpha strike and then step back to cool off, so, again, it doesn't actually stop you from alpha striking. Just fyi.

As for spreading damage, you're assuming that my target will actually attempt to do that. Half the player in this game don't though, making it a moot point.

*Shrug* If you say so. I don't use macros personally, but some buddies of mine are always griping about how they get around Ghost Heat.

For the LRM boat we were discussing, it's a BLR-1S with 2xLRM15s, 2xLRM10s, and 2xMLs. I have, on many occasions, gotten into knife fights with the MLs that I won because I had 12% Cooldown bonus on them. Now it's only 5%, but I would take that too just because I've learned how helpful it is to have them in the past.

Now, however, I don't have enough nodes to do that, so I would have to ditch them in favor of ammo, of which I already have more than enough. It needlessly nerfs an already ineffective, but fun, build.

-=Heloc=-, on 09 February 2017 - 11:36 AM, said:

Yeah, I'm not seeing the problem. Is the argument here that the new skill tree is supposed to discourage boating? Or rather, that it should be eliminating the existing advantages to boating?

I don't think that was one of the stated goals of the skill tree revamp so that might be your own expectation and it's not really fair to hold PGI accountable for that.

As far as boating, remember that this replaces weapon modules. Before you had a choice of a shorter cooldown or longer range. You could usually fit the both for one weapon type or use a single module for two weapon types. Obviously, some 'mechs let you fit a 3rd weapon module in it but two weapon modules is, I think, the most common.

If you're boating, it makes sense to use both modules for one weapon type and maximize your most abundant weapon system, if you're not boating, it makes sense to mix them depending on your build. If it's hot, you don't need cooldown so grab a pair of range modules, for example.

The skill tree still makes you make the same compromise. You can either max out the benefit from a single weapon type, or get a less broad buff on more than one weapon type.

What you're really got to do is build a pair of 'mechs with the same build but different skill tree setups so you can compare their damage output and reach. There are going to be trade-offs between the two approaches but I don't think they'll be huge and you might not even notice them. But then we're talking about a question of balancing the skill tree, not some new incentive to boat particular weapon types.

I ran my Jester with 2xML and 2xERPPC (I think they're ERs any way). I maxed out the PPC tree (minus a couple of the velocity nodes) and it felt about the same to me as the same 'mech in the live build running both ERPPC weapon modules. I haven't done the math here though so that should be taken with a grain of salt. Also remember that the plural of anecdote is NOT 'data'.

It's not that it's supposed to penalize boating, so much as it shouldn't penalize mixed builds. Under the current system, both types are treated the same. Under the new system, boats get preferential treatment, while mixed Mechs are actively discouraged.

Basically, you go from, "I've got a dozen meta Mechs and two dozen fun, freestyle Mechs," to "I have a dozen meta Mechs that need slight tweaking, and two dozen junk Mechs I need to sell in order to afford all the nodes for my meta Mechs since these old companions of mine will never be viable again."

Put simply, the new system forces us to turn our old favorites out to pasture while only keeping the meta cheese.

[Gas Guzzler]

Nightmare1, on 09 February 2017 - 11:50 AM, said:

With regard to the quad weapons, you can still alpha strike and then step back to cool off, so, again, it doesn't actually stop you from alpha striking. Just fyi.

As for spreading damage, you're assuming that my target will actually attempt to do that. Half the player in this game don't though, making it a moot point.

*Shrug* If you say so. I don't use macros personally, but some buddies of mine are always griping about how they get around Ghost Heat.

For the LRM boat we were discussing, it's a BLR-1S with 2xLRM15s, 2xLRM10s, and 2xMLs. I have, on many occasions, gotten into knife fights with the MLs that I won because I had 12% Cooldown bonus on them. Now it's only 5%, but I would take that too just because I've learned how helpful it is to have them in the past.

Now, however, I don't have enough nodes to do that, so I would have to ditch them in favor of ammo, of which I already have more than enough. It needlessly nerfs an already ineffective, but fun, build.

Point by point

Quad weapons: With LPLs sure. With ER PPCs you are shutting down.

Spreading damage: Balance by potato is not balance

Macros: You mean they use macros to fire the weapons at the proper time so they get the exact .5 second gap? That's not really worth a macro, especially for dakka.

Okay.. your knife fights with 2 MLs probably aren't going to be affected much by 5% cooldown, but I'm pretty sure you can get that 5% cooldown with a measly 5 skill points... that's nothing. Then you can put cooldown and spread on your LRMs. All the fuss over skills on 2 MLs... that is objectively such a little impact, I can't believe you would even consider putting the cooldown module on it in the current system.

[Nesutizale]

While I also started out at the "Boating bad train" after some fiddling around and asking for what people use most and my own experiance I have to say the Gas guy kinda has a point.

We where limited in weapon modules and other modules. You can build most of the stuff again within the new system and people don't seam to focus that much on weapon skills anyway.

Most people pick tank, sensorstuff and then weapons.
Currently we can't decide to get more armor/structure so that is a new thing but dosn't do anything for boating.
Sensorstuff could be added through modules, it can now be too.
As for weapons, 20 points in one weapon is equal to 3 modules, giveing up one slot of...whatever and its similar here. Maybe not as hard but to me it seams just using half a weaponstree makes more sense.

Using my own mixed builds I find me with more skill for my weapons and still haveing a good number of other skills then I had before.

So do boats have an advantage in the new system? Yes but its by far not as extrem as people make it.
I think most of the problem comes from the mindset, I had myself, of trying to get everything to max. That is not possible and not the point.
A lesson I had to learn.

Frankly I would even reduce the number of nodes you can get. Maybe to 80? Make it a realy hard choice to either boost weapons or get the sensonr upgrades or the armor. Not everything !
That would realy diversify the bulds that are beeing used. Giving your mech a specific role on the field.
You can be either the tank, or the supporter or the spotter. Not the Tank-Spotter you can currently be.

I had a match with a Urbi where I used all the Tank-skills you can get. I never before survived that much fire from a Thunderbold while standing still.
I also used the JJ skills and sensors and some laser skills, all nearly maxed. Makes the Urbie quite a interesting thing but its to much.

Yes its cool but I should settle to a role and not be the "super-urbie" I can be now

[Dee Eight]

I have very few 1-2 weapon type boats in my inventory of nearly 209 mechs. I like mixed builds. And while its obvious PGI is after increasing the TTK between the LRM range reduction, weapon cool down rate reductions, less cooling/capacity bonuses, and less heat reduction for weapons, and easy to max out defensive nodes.... I'm actually OK with that. And yeah I'm disappointed my shotgun centurion will be taking a loss in total cool down rate (from 57 to 30%) but its not the flipping end of the world.

Edited by Dee Eight, 09 February 2017 - 01:05 PM.

[Ragedog4]

Sorbic, on 08 February 2017 - 11:25 PM, said:

Playing around with it I did feel like boating would be rewarded by not having to split up points. I wonder if they could make some kind of system where players with just one category of weapon loses access to say 4-5 skill points.

Im right there with you.

Here is a possible solution: https://mwomercs.com...14#entry5606914

[Nightmare1]

Gas Guzzler, on 09 February 2017 - 11:56 AM, said:

Quad weapons: With LPLs sure. With ER PPCs you are shutting down.

So? I still got my pinpoint damage in and the shutdown damage is minimal. I'm far enough away that my enemy can't react.

If it's a heated battle, I trigger two at a time and just wait a half second. Instead of shooting the same target twice, I'll pick out two damaged targets and shoot deal pinpoint to their weak components.

My point, is that the pinpoint is still there and still viable despite Ghost Heat, and that Ghost Heat is not a valid argument for claiming that there is a reliable counter to the boating that this new skill tree demands.

Gas Guzzler, on 09 February 2017 - 11:56 AM, said:

Spreading damage: Balance by potato is not balance

I agree, which is why Ghost Heat is ineffective.

Gas Guzzler, on 09 February 2017 - 11:56 AM, said:

Macros: You mean they use macros to fire the weapons at the proper time so they get the exact .5 second gap? That's not really worth a macro, especially for dakka.

I'll defer to you on this one since I've never used macros before.

Gas Guzzler, on 09 February 2017 - 11:56 AM, said:

Okay.. your knife fights with 2 MLs probably aren't going to be affected much by 5% cooldown, but I'm pretty sure you can get that 5% cooldown with a measly 5 skill points... that's nothing. Then you can put cooldown and spread on your LRMs. All the fuss over skills on 2 MLs... that is objectively such a little impact, I can't believe you would even consider putting the cooldown module on it in the current system.

Once again, you are forgetting that this is a fun "for lols" build. It's not supposed to be competitive or impactful. It's just for kicks. I have a BLR-1G with a meta build that I use for comp play; I would never use my LRM boat BLR-1S for that. It's just for lolling about in the solo pugging queue.

My point, is why does PGI feel the need to penalize people like me who enjoy running lols builds, while simultaneously pandering to the meta crowd by crafting a skill tree that not only reinforces the meta, but actively discourages people from running fun, casual builds? That's just poor design.

[Gas Guzzler]

Nightmare1, on 09 February 2017 - 01:53 PM, said:

Once again, you are forgetting that this is a fun "for lols" build. It's not supposed to be competitive or impactful. It's just for kicks. I have a BLR-1G with a meta build that I use for comp play; I would never use my LRM boat BLR-1S for that. It's just for lolling about in the solo pugging queue.

My point, is why does PGI feel the need to penalize people like me who enjoy running lols builds, while simultaneously pandering to the meta crowd by crafting a skill tree that not only reinforces the meta, but actively discourages people from running fun, casual builds? That's just poor design.

And my point is that the 0.128 DPS that you are missing out on is not going to impact your fun "for lols" build in a noticeable manner.

[Nightmare1]

Gas Guzzler, on 09 February 2017 - 01:59 PM, said:

And my point is that the 0.128 DPS that you are missing out on is not going to impact your fun "for lols" build in a noticeable manner.

Which is why I said that I would be forced to ditch the MLs in favor or ammo. It seems you missed that a couple posts ago.

My point, is my fun build is being forced into a pigeonhole because PGI has presented us with no other options than to min/max our Mechs even when we do not wish to min/max out Mechs. That's not kosher, in my book.

[Gas Guzzler]

Nightmare1, on 09 February 2017 - 02:01 PM, said:

Which is why I said that I would be forced to ditch the MLs in favor or ammo. It seems you missed that a couple posts ago.

My point, is my fun build is being forced into a pigeonhole because PGI has presented us with no other options than to min/max our Mechs even when we do not wish to min/max out Mechs. That's not kosher, in my book.

You are not getting the point. You dropped the MLs because the skill tree wouldn't let you get that extra 0.128 DPS from the cooldown skills. Do you realize that you are ditching your 2.56 DPS pair of MLs, because of not being able to increase your DPS by 0.128 because of the 5% cooldown skills that you don't want to spend the 5 skill points on? You wouldn't even notice the 0.128 DPS in game with lasers, which aren't even DPS weapons. Cooldown difference is 3 seconds vs 2.85 seconds, can you notice 0.15 seconds in the heat of battle? It my compound with AC2s or AC5s, but for MLs that you shoot a couple times? Nah.

I'm trying to express to you how little the 5% cooldown skill actually affects your fun "for lols" build.

[Nesutizale]

No one forces you to min/max. Mixed mechs in MWO where allways not the top performers, so no loss there.
Did you max out your mech before with all the option avaible now?

[Nightmare1]

Gas Guzzler, on 09 February 2017 - 02:09 PM, said:

You are not getting the point. You dropped the MLs because the skill tree wouldn't let you get that extra 0.128 DPS from the cooldown skills. Do you realize that you are ditching your 2.56 DPS pair of MLs, because of not being able to increase your DPS by 0.128 because of the 5% cooldown skills that you don't want to spend the 5 skill points on? You wouldn't even notice the 0.128 DPS in game with lasers, which aren't even DPS weapons. Cooldown difference is 3 seconds vs 2.85 seconds, can you notice 0.15 seconds in the heat of battle? It my compound with AC2s or AC5s, but for MLs that you shoot a couple times? Nah.

I'm trying to express to you how little the 5% cooldown skill actually affects your fun "for lols" build.

You miss the point. It's not about not being able to get the DPS. It's about the fact that I no reason to run those two MLs now.

In the current game, the BLR has quirks that, when combined with the 12% Cooldown Module, enable me to use the MLs effectively. However, now that the quirks are reduced or removed across all chassis, and the best Cooldown bonus you can get is only 5%, there really is not reason to run those weapons. They will not be able to output enough damage to make a difference anymore.

Even if I did keep them and try to level them, there is not reason to do so, since my meat and potatoes are the LRMs. I do not have enough nodes to effectively support both systems. I have to focus on a single system now.

The end result, is a Mech with reduced effectiveness. That is what I am driving at. Regardless of whether I keep the MLs or not, the Mech itself has been nerfed and marginalized even further. There was already small reason to keep the Mech as an LRM platform, and now there is even less. I would probably be better off converting it to SRMs and pulse lasers instead, which is, again, playing into the min/max meta.

My Warhawk with pulse lasers, SRMs, and a UAC is no longer viable. My Victor with an AC/20, SRMs, and MPLs is also no longer effective. My Atlas with MLs, AC/20, and SRM4s was no longer as effective, and I found myself having to drop the MLs.

That is my point. We can no longer effectively run what we want to run. We must kowtow to min/maxing. PGI has taken away our ability to choose and to experiment. Now we all just have to use the same cookie cutters.

Nesutizale, on 09 February 2017 - 02:09 PM, said:

No one forces you to min/max. Mixed mechs in MWO where allways not the top performers, so no loss there.
Did you max out your mech before with all the option avaible now?

Another nitwit who misses the point.

I'm not asking that mixed Mechs be top performers. I'm simply asking that they remain viable. I can score >1,000 damage with any number of mixed builds in my garage right now because they are viable builds, even if they are not as effective as their min/maxed counterparts. However, the new skill tree forces us to min/max because the quirks and modules that enable mixed Mechs to remain viable are gone, or significantly nerfed. Now you have to pick one, or at most two, weapon systems and dedicate your Mech to those systems.

We've gone from having the luxury of being able to do what we want, how we want it, to building the Mech around the weapon systems and skills that PGI has permitted us to retain.

[Gas Guzzler]

Nightmare1, on 09 February 2017 - 02:18 PM, said:

You miss the point. It's not about not being able to get the DPS. It's about the fact that I no reason to run those two MLs now.

In the current game, the BLR has quirks that, when combined with the 12% Cooldown Module, enable me to use the MLs effectively. However, now that the quirks are reduced or removed across all chassis, and the best Cooldown bonus you can get is only 5%, there really is not reason to run those weapons. They will not be able to output enough damage to make a difference anymore.

Even if I did keep them and try to level them, there is not reason to do so, since my meat and potatoes are the LRMs. I do not have enough nodes to effectively support both systems. I have to focus on a single system now.

The end result, is a Mech with reduced effectiveness. That is what I am driving at. Regardless of whether I keep the MLs or not, the Mech itself has been nerfed and marginalized even further. There was already small reason to keep the Mech as an LRM platform, and now there is even less. I would probably be better off converting it to SRMs and pulse lasers instead, which is, again, playing into the min/max meta.

My Warhawk with pulse lasers, SRMs, and a UAC is no longer viable. My Victor with an AC/20, SRMs, and MPLs is also no longer effective. My Atlas with MLs, AC/20, and SRM4s was no longer as effective, and I found myself having to drop the MLs.

That is my point. We can no longer effectively run what we want to run. We must kowtow to min/maxing. PGI has taken away our ability to choose and to experiment. Now we all just have to use the same cookie cutters.

Ah, so you are upset that your BLR-1S lost its weapon quirks for MLs? That's a different issue, that doesn't have anything to do with the skill tree promoting boating. If this is the actual point you are making, you moved the goal posts, because earlier you were arguing that the MLs weren't worth bringing because you didn't have skill points to spend on them.

But... you are also using the terms "no longer effective" and "no longer viable" pretty loosely here.

Without this skill tree, the best way to go with an Atlas is to only take 24 SRMs and an AC20. MLs require too much face time and make the build run hotter.

The Warhawk is arguably no more or less viable than it is now.

The Victor is arguably no more or less viable now. For the Victor, leaving the skills out on your 2 MPLs isn't going to hurt you anymore than not including the weapon modules for it are.

The Warhawk, if you just focus the skill tree on what you put modules on it, you end up pretty similar. Depending on how many SRMs and UAC you have, I would probably put most skills into the SRMs and UAC. The lasers are just going to make you hot.

Honestly, you are identifying problems that already exist. It already, no skill tree involved at all, is not ideal to run more than just an AC and SRMs, or Lasers and SRMs. The extra weapons aren't worth the ammo/DHS, if you really want to be optimal. If you don't want to be optimal, you can throw lasers on a Victor or do whatever you want. My 9S currently has an AC20 with SRMs and 2 MLs. It has an AC20 cooldown module and SRM range. In the skill tree, I would only give it weapon skills for the AC20 and the SRMs, wouldn't even bother with the MLs since they are such a small amount of firepower added, any skills added to them aren't going to make a big difference. I'll leave them in there just because I like having them on the build, but they don't need skills.

I think we just need to agree to disagree. I don't think the skill tree really changes the relationship between boating and non boating (boating is still better, just like it is in the current game).

And stop personally attacking people. This is the MWO forum not a presidential debate.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 09 February 2017 - 02:29 PM.

[Nesutizale]

What made a mixed Mech vaible in your opinion?
Quirks, modules, skills? What was it?

[Gas Guzzler]

Nesutizale, on 09 February 2017 - 02:29 PM, said:

What made a mixed Mech vaible in your opinion?
Quirks, modules, skills? What was it?

It first it was the cooldown module on the MLs I thought, but it has since changed to quirks.

[Dee Eight]

Myself I thought the reason to run medium lasers was that six of them were 30 damage for 6 tons at 270 meters all to the same spot.

[Nightmare1]

Gas Guzzler, on 09 February 2017 - 02:27 PM, said:

Ah, so you are upset that your BLR-1S lost its weapon quirks for MLs? That's a different issue, that doesn't have anything to do with the skill tree promoting boating. If this is the actual point you are making, you moved the goal posts, because earlier you were arguing that the MLs weren't worth bringing because you didn't have skill points to spend on them.

I haven't moved the goal posts. From the start, I was speaking about how it impacts Mechs across the board, and you asked for a specific example. Off the top of my head, the BLR-1S was the first Mech I thought of, so I ran with it.

All this time, you've yet to actually listen to what I had to say, because you were already prepared with a reply that fit your predisposed interpretation of what I was saying. In short, you expected me to argue a certain point, so you have been counter-arguing that this entire time, without ever stopping to realize what it is I'm actually saying.

Gas Guzzler, on 09 February 2017 - 02:27 PM, said:

But... you are also using the terms "no longer effective" and "no longer viable" pretty loosely here.

Not really. A lot of the Mechs are already barely viable. This skill tree makes them less so, to the point where there really isn't any reason to run them.

Gas Guzzler, on 09 February 2017 - 02:27 PM, said:

Without this skill tree, the best way to go with an Atlas is to only take 24 SRMs and an AC20. MLs require too much face time and make the build run hotter.

Once again, you miss the point. In the current system, I can run MLs and still be effective because the Mech quirks and my design mesh. Now, however, I have to focus on either the AC/20 or the SRMs. There's zero reason to take the MLs now and, if I focus on the SRMs, then the AC/20 is also much less effective.

Once again, you are looking at this from the perspective of a meta player who expects everyone to just follow his example, rather than from the perspective that not everyone wants to run the exact same, boring Mech all the time.

Gas Guzzler, on 09 February 2017 - 02:27 PM, said:

Honestly, you are identifying problems that already exist.

That's my point; the problems already exist, but the skill tree is making them worse. Rather than the skill tree being fairly impartial, as it currently is, the new skill tree actively pushes you into running cookie-cutter meta builds that you may not want to use.

Gas Guzzler, on 09 February 2017 - 02:27 PM, said:

Is not ideal to run more than...

This is why you can't discuss things with a meta tryhard. As I said, you expect everyone to do exactly as you do and absolutely cannot comprehend how anyone can have fun running anything that did not come out of your cookie cutter.

Frankly, mixed builds are not as viable as meta Mechs. That's a given. There's no need to further marginalize them though, as this new skill tree does. That's the issue I'm driving at.

Gas Guzzler, on 09 February 2017 - 02:27 PM, said:

I think we just need to agree to disagree. I don't think the skill tree really changes the relationship between boating and non boating (boating is still better, just like it is in the current game).

Boating is always better, yes. I'm not even asking that the skill tree favor one side or the other. Nor am I asking that it be used to balance the two. I'm simply asking that PGI not push boating on us. The current skill tree is impartial, so why can't the new one be too?

Gas Guzzler, on 09 February 2017 - 02:27 PM, said:

And stop personally attacking people. This is the MWO forum not a presidential debate.

I haven't attacked you yet. Nothing I've said has been anything other than fact. If you take offense at being a meta tryhard, then stop expecting everyone to be happy min/maxing the way you are. Not everyone wants to be a meta flunky.

[Nesutizale]

So I have taken my most mixed build that I still find fun to play and skilled it as I had before.
The config is (and I know its silly but strangly works for me as a support for others)

Loki
ER-PPC+ Cooldown module
LRM10
ECM
TC II
3ERMED
4ERSmall
Radar-Derp

Trying to mimic this I spend 71/91 points, leaving out upper mech. That needs a rework of placements IMO.
My PPC not only has a cooldown now but also a velocity quirk and heat quirk. So its better then before.
Got the entire lower chassis quirks, nearly all MechOperation and Sensor quirks.

So with the last 10 points I can either improve one of the weapons, armor, structure or upper chassis.
In result my mech can perform even better with the new set then the old rules. Now tell me that you can't do the same.

Edited by Nesutizale, 09 February 2017 - 02:51 PM.

[Nightmare1]

Nesutizale, on 09 February 2017 - 02:29 PM, said:

What made a mixed Mech vaible in your opinion?
Quirks, modules, skills? What was it?

For a mixed Mech to be viable, you need a mix (no pun intended) of things.

1) You need the quirks.
2) You need the modules.
3) You need the hardpoints.
4) You need the personal skills to make up for the gap between it and all the meta Mechs.
5) You need the thorough enjoyment of running that build.

Number 5) is the most important. Without it, even if you have the first four, you won't be able to enjoy it. However, conversely speaking, you also need the first 4) in order to get to number 5). The current PTS effectively removes or nerfs points 1) and 2) to the point where you have to try too hard to make it work to actually enjoy it. As a result, it's not longer worth using.

Gas Guzzler, on 09 February 2017 - 02:36 PM, said:

It first it was the cooldown module on the MLs I thought, but it has since changed to quirks.

It never changed, but has always, from post #1, been about the combination of quirks and skills or quirks and modules. You just keep misinterpreting it though because that suits your predilection for how you perceive my argument.