152 replies to this topic

[C E Dwyer]

It needs I think a major overhaul.

It's again far to complex just like energy draw and the targeting system from before, so nothing learned by the past mistakes.

It costs to much for a new start, it's far more expensive than the old system, in XP and C-bills, in this a lone should have sent out massive signals to P.G.I that it doesn't work.

It pays lip service to an attempt to balance tech, which I suppose is at least more than the place holder we've had for years, but it needs to effect it more, or quirks will never go. so the values have to be upped.

You have to take redundant skills you don't want in many of the trees, now this quite clearly supposed to be a balancing device, or some sort, but again I'd hate to be using this if I was a genuine newbie player.

Respecing for M.C in a game where the developers change things, is a big NO, this will lead to accusations of defrauding customers if there are quirk or game changes that alter meta and make builds redundant.

This penalises people for not understanding things, because they're new.

It's a system that promotes boating, this is very bad, this is the flaw that makes it a waste of time in my opinion.

Currently as an example the system uses a consistent bonus for each weapon hex of the same type you change green so if SRM range 1 gives 4% increase in range, by picking srm range 2 that gives a second 4% bonus for a total of 8% this goes on up until the maximum of five hexagons worth bring the total to 20%

It needs to be front loaded a much bigger bonus for the first skill point and a diminishing return for each additional skill point.

8+4+3+2+1 would be far better values in the example above, it brings out a lower total value, it doesn't penalise people for having hybrids.

This system should not go live in my opinion, without the above change.

[Odanan]

FlynnTheAvatar, on 10 February 2017 - 06:53 AM, said:

And converting the historical XP is a nightmare. You have to enter the HXP you want to convert? Really? And the number changes when you start typing? Good luck remembering the 4 - 5 digits long HXP amount.

Nightmare is the adequate word.

[Kael Posavatz]

A single pay-point with slider bars to control Xp/HXP/GXP

[Mordodrukow]

The main problem of the new skill system: it doesn't give us any interesting choises. I ll explain:

Interesting choise (it is just an example):
1) I get radar deprivation
2) I get seismic sensor
3) My weapons get tripled chance of making critical hit
4) I dont get my ECM disabled and any disturbance in my HUD because of getting PPC hits
5) My ammo deals only 1/5 damage if explode
And so on.

Not so interesting choise:
1) -1% weapon cooldown
2) +2% weapon range
3) +2% to torso twist speed
...

I mean: quality > quantity. Skill branches need to have some really good nodes, giving you a new interesting ability. And if you choose one ability, you pay for that by spending your skill points on nodes from "not so interesting" category and lacking the skill poins you need to get to another good ability. More to say, some abilities must look good for some mechs and look not so good for other mechs. If skill system have mandatory abilities - it gives no real choise to player.

The second problem of that game is that we have a Quick play... and a second Quick play, named "Faction play". FP must have a strategical part. The mechs must present on a planet physically. For example, we have a contested planet. One unit conquers it by a lot of LRM mechs. This LRM mechs now present there. And the second unit, knowing that, can recap the planet, using many ECMs and AMSs. It is just a basic example. The system need to be more complex so every mech will be needed in some situations. It will heal the "meta" problem that we have now.

[CrazyBullets]

Dear admins please rename description on some skills like ENCHANCED ECM. I'ts hard to understand for new players and may be for many peoples : "how it works" without any game experience. You added a new quirq, why you do this? When need to remove all Quirks you adding more than we have now.
1 IMHO: А lot of opposition from IS mechs to Clans. Inner Sphere AC-20 (10 slots 12 tonns has 25hp) > clan AC-20 (9 slots 12 and only 16.5 hp) IS 25 hp > Clan 16.5 and it can see in other weapons.
2nd IMHO If you want to add that skills tree you need to block all todays quirqs. For example an Atlas has a lot of quirqs on armor, you add another 10% of armor to it by that new skills, i think it's not good. This changes will provoke a lot of whining.
3 IMHO By that quirqs you doing over maneuverable assoults, and other mechs.
4 IMHO By that quirqs you will provoke alot of players to play on meta mechs more than now.
5 IMHO for what you increase radius to target enemy from Target 360 Retention module? You added other 200m increase from 200m to 400m. It's overpowerfull than radar deprivation with new 200 meters ( Radar deprivation range reduced from 250 m to 200 ).
This is my little imho about that patch. Need more changes in that skills, and in a game mechanic in that patchnote.

Edited by CrazyBullets, 10 February 2017 - 10:07 AM.

[Zainadin]

The 3 mech rule is better for new players/pilots; 'forces' players to play at least three variants of a mech if they want to master it, encourages purchases of mech packs, entices the poke-mech collectors, modules can be carried from one mech to another.(switching module maybe a pain but it's a boon to new players.)

Tree specific suggestions; cost and amount of skill points available. Personally I feel the skill tree needs...

• diminishing returns of how powerful the weapon tree unlock is (+5%,+3%,+2% down the tree)(@fantasticTuesday) to promote a more diverse build.
  
• deeper into the tree the more cbills it costs to unlock, again to promote a more diverse build.
  
• Variable skill points per mech or weight class.

As is everything cost way too much cbills and XP. TOO MUCH GRIND ON THE HORIZON!

[0bsidion]

FlynnTheAvatar, on 10 February 2017 - 06:53 AM, said:

I really do not like the new skill system. A lot of the reasons were already discussed:

• It still rewards boating - like the old system (maybe worse)
  
• A lot of interesting nodes are hidden behind useless skills (fall damage, I am looking at you)
  
• It will discourage diverse skill builds. Everybody will use basically the same skills (most nodes of survival, Infotech and lower body mobility). The only difference will be the weapons skills (based on the weapon you are boarding).
  
• It discourages having multiple variants of the same chassis. There is no reason for not picking up the best variant ("meta variant").
  
• CBills costs are too high. Yeah, I am a cheapskate, I only bought a couple of modules and now I will pay for it (literally). I will run out of CBills way before I can get two CW drop deck mastered.
  
• Related to the issue above. After mastering out a mech, you will not have money for another mech. Not sure what PGI thought about that one. This means people will stick to their mechs longer, grinding more but still buying less mech bays and MC.
  
• Also, this system really discourages changing your build. (CBill respec cost).
  
• And if you have the same mech multiple times (like two MX-90) - have "fun" grinding for the second one. Only the first one gets XP back. Or you have to split the HXP to use for both mechs and need more grinding for each.

I did not see this issue in the discussion yet. But it the point why I am not liking the new skill system at all:


The new UI is overly complicated with too many information, too many currencies involved (XP, GXP, CBills, MCs), and too many clicks need to do something.

And converting the historical XP is a nightmare. You have to enter the HXP you want to convert? Really? And the number changes when you start typing? Good luck remembering the 4 - 5 digits long HXP amount.

And if you do not see on what node you used GXP and on what other mech XP. If you want to buy multiple nodes, you have to be very careful to select the correct type. Basically, you have to reset everything if you used too many XP or GXP. You do not see where you made the mistake.

And it takes too long to allocate the skills per mech.

Please PGI, do not push this out in February. If you really have to, please consider following changes to make it less painful:

• Get rid of HXP, convert all spent and unspent mech XP to GXP. You can remove the HXP conversion UI completely as it not needed anymore. Furthermore that allows people to master their favorite variant right away
  
• Give people back their CBills when reverting nodes. MC or CBills for reverting might stay if you really think is it needed. But I personally would get rid of it - make reverting nodes free.
  
• Lower the XP and CBill requirements to unlock nodes - reduce the grinding. It will not help you with sales of mech bays.

I agree with much of this. I don't know why they felt they needed yet another XP type or why they felt like we should need to enter it in manually, as far as I can tell it's not like we can do something else with HXP so we have to be careful how much we convert.

Just keep XP as XP, the HXP conversion mini game is unnecessary and cumbersome. Keep in mind some of us have in excess of 100 mechs, I'd rather not do this 300 times, thanks.

I also agree with skills you want being locked behind skills you could care less about. It seems like they were trying to artificially bottleneck your NPs. If you what to limit NP choices, reduce the amount of NPs you get, it's that simple.

That said, I like the concept, it's the execution where things need some reworking.

[Big Tin Man]

Comments:

https://mwomercs.com...a-skill-system/

[Bishop Steiner]

Odanan, on 09 February 2017 - 03:25 AM, said:

This topic is intended to unify the feedback for the new Skill Tree Public Test Session.

PS: Criticism is better when followed by solutions.

PPS: I recommend giving your feedback AFTER testing.

PPPS: this poll and topic are not sanctioned by PGI.

https://mwomercs.com...-customization/

my review is there, no need to repost it all.. But essentially it has made the game even less new player friendly because of the convoluted Skill Tree which actually minimizes diversity and forces even more focus on specialization (weaponry) since there are no real rewards for any role but Gunbag in MWO.

At an additional 9.1 Million Cbills (if you don't have to re-spec...something new users will likely do SEVERAL times) on top of your various inherent Upgrade Taxes (endo, ferro, DHS, XL engines, etc) it becomes prohibitive, not counting that most players will be gobsmacked by the difference in efficacy between locked and unlocked robots. New User experience will tank hard.

The basic Concept I like, but much like Energy Draw just devolved into Ghost Heat 2.0, the Devs have taken a lazy approach to the new Skill Tree, and just made it a less transparent 2.0 of the system we already had. And in the process have buried a little "F-you" message to all us layers with huge stables who were smart before and didn't fall prey to the their Grind Gimmick by buying separate Modules for every mech, like they hoped we would. Now, that grind which we were once able to transfer, is inherently locked into base development of all our robots, and before, if you owned multiple of one variant.. you only paid once.... now there is another "F-You" to CW players who now may have to spend the extra Cbills, XP and GXP on their Decks for the sin of having multiple of one chassis.

And about that... Cbills, XP AND GXP to unlock skills? Really. Yeah way to convolute stuff.

[BloodKnight101]

I am going to be honest. It costs too much xp. Right now it takes over twice as much XP as previously capable. A more reasonable cost would be 1000xp or even 1250xp if the devs are sadistic. Nodes using gxp should be 1000, period. If there isn't a differential, GXP is now useless.

It costs real $$$ to convert,
so make it worth our while to do so,
if 1 xp is worth 1 gxp there is no value in gxp anymore.

Additionally, the tree has little to no benefit to creative players who like to use more than one weapon type, let alone weapon system. It might help to combine all the weapon system trees and create 3 weapon type trees that apply to all systems within that group. You would just have to combine ppc velocity and laser duration onto one node. That is an example of how to handle quirks unique to specific weapon systems, and was off the cuff. It could work better to just add specific nodes into the energy, ballistic, or missle skill tree. This would also allow for the addition of new weapon systems without there being a riot over having to respec when, let's say, MRMs are added to the game.

Edited by BloodKnight101, 10 February 2017 - 02:34 PM.

[The Basilisk]

By the look of the voting results it seems devestating but i don't think its THAT bad.

It needs some work in hinsight on not encouraging boating that much and a better, less overwhelming visual make up to clear up the UI of the skill system (intuitiveness).

BUT ... its realy fun and adds a lot to the possibilitys the game offers in hinsight of customization.

It needs some work but isnt outright terrible.

[Fox2232]

The Basilisk, on 10 February 2017 - 01:59 PM, said:

By the look of the voting results it seems devestating but i don't think its THAT bad.

It needs some work in hinsight on not encouraging boating that much and a better, less overwhelming visual make up to clear up the UI of the skill system (intuitiveness).

BUT ... its realy fun and adds a lot to the possibilitys the game offers in hinsight of customization.

It needs some work but isnt outright terrible.

I think most negativity comes from experience. People are afraid that if they are too positive, system will be placed into live game without further/later tunning.
But as for questions:
1st) only 30% are actually against.
2nd) What percentage of voters are actually "New Players"? I am New Player and I prefer new system even with all those flaws it currently has. I think Old players are out of touch a bit and can't imagine how game is actually played from nothing.
3rd) Answers are fundamentally wrong. As disrupting current meta will actually help game. And boosting current meta will hurt game. So, it is more of a CONTROL QUESTION where people see: words: "Improve/No change/worse".

So, 3rd question shows mindset of voters. That they incline to be negativistic due to their nature or experience with PGI's methods of implementing changes.

Edited by Fox2232, 10 February 2017 - 02:14 PM.

[Stone Wall]

Quote

How does it affect the meta?

• It improves the meta and the health of the game [color=#747474](51 votes [20.32%])[/color]
  
• No significant changes to the meta [color=#747474](59 votes [23.51%])[/color]
  
• It makes the meta and the game worse [color=#747474](141 votes [56.18%])[/color]

There we have it. Please halt this like you did Energy Draw.

The Basilisk, on 10 February 2017 - 01:59 PM, said:

By the look of the voting results it seems devestating but i don't think its THAT bad.

It needs some work in hinsight on not encouraging boating that much and a better, less overwhelming visual make up to clear up the UI of the skill system (intuitiveness).

BUT ... its realy fun and adds a lot to the possibilitys the game offers in hinsight of customization.

It needs some work but isnt outright terrible.

It sucks IMO. Mechs don't need quirks or skills, you are the only skill that should be involved in a Mech. Having some skill that makes your lasers have extended range or do more damage are crutches. For this to be some sort of esports game, you won't be seeing real skill but who paid the most in C-Bills for their Mechs.

[Void Angel]

0bsidion, on 10 February 2017 - 11:32 AM, said:

I agree with much of this. I don't know why they felt they needed yet another XP type

The "Historic XP?" They're using that because they want you to be able to use the 'mech experience to buy skills for any variant. (It may be that your earned 'mech XP on any given variant can be applied across the chassis, but I didn't check.)

[Amary]

Fox2232, on 10 February 2017 - 03:02 AM, said:

Do you really think that New system is worse for new players?
Old system:
Get 1st mech, have no basic skills. Spend 16 games to get those Basic Efficiencies. No money to buy 2nd mech, so another 36 games on those Basic Efficiencies.
Buy 2nd mech and have no basic skills again. Spend 16 games to get those Basic Efficiencies. (no experimentation with weapon this time, but you started with no money) so 44 additional games on basic Efficiencies.
Buy 3rd mech and have no basic skills again. Spend 16 games to get those Basic Efficiencies.
- - - -
Go to 1st mech and use XP from 36 excessive games for Elite Efficiencies.
Go to 2nd mech and use XP from 44 excessive games for Elite Efficiencies.
Go to 3rd mech where you just got Basic and grind 26 games for Elite.
- - - -
Go to 2nd mech where you have largest excess of XP and play 7 games to mastery (Module slot)
= = = =
Summary:
48 games in between no basics and full Basic Efficiencies
96 games on Just Basic Efficiencies
26 Games in between Basic and Elite Efficiencies
7 Games to move from Elite to Full Mastery
= = = =
I do not want to be pushy, but old system placed new players at bottom of power curve for most of their leveling.
And I did not even got to point that This is best case scenario where new player buys just mechs and ignores modules. Because buying modules for 14 million would easily prolong this Basic mastery suffering by another 100 games.

Now player plays 40 games which will grant him 23SP and that's enough to significantly boost survivability and gain few "Modules".
In other words ability to pick important stuff 1st drastically increases initial boost to the mech and new player.

Before, new player spent 80% of his 1st mech plays as super weak. Now, he spends only 20% of his 1st mech plays as super weak.

Hell, putting last 12 points in trees is quite hard choice as I had to think which node does not suck that badly. In the end I picked 10 JumpJets nodes (Which are really weak). That demonstrate that more nodes you spend, lesser impact they deliver as you already picked all those most important things.
= = = =
From all perspectives this system is better to new players.
Even the funny question like: "Which of those modules I have to unlock to to boost Clan ER Large Laser range?" Because looking for right thing to unlock in old system is just meh. Now it's just intuitive.

The reason why i said bad for new players is that on first mec builds offen in my experience it ends up changing before you even mastered. Unless they look up whar skills are good on the internet a new player may put points also in incorrect order or area. I would agree this system would be better than the old if it wasn't for respect cost for the trial and error phase as both cost and exp is cheaper in this new system

[Void Angel]

New players have no idea what skills are good or not - and skilling up a 'mech so they're not playing at a handicap in addition to their undeveloped skills costs nine point one million c-bills.

[Malcolm Vordermark]

I like the general idea, but the implementation needs work. My general impressions of the new skill tree are as follows.

- Expensive. 9 million may be less than a fully moduled mech, but I also wouldn't put modules on all of my mechs. I would have a drop deck or two's worth, but beyond that they were just too expensive to outfit all my mechs with. This leaves me without that option. I'm ok with there being a cost, but it needs to come down (though new players may not see it the same way).

- Respec Cost. Paying 2 million + 9 million to reallocate the skill points is a deal breaker. Respec should not have a cost.

- Half the points are basically already decided. In general, 55-56 SP are already accounted for filling up the Defensive, Lower Chassis, and Operations trees. I'm a bit torn here, I like the things those 56 points bring my mech, but its the illusion of choice at best and a noob trap at worst.

- Undesirable nodes. Fall damage, AMS Overload, Arm Pitch, and Arm Speed need to be moved to the edges of the trees. These just end up being SP tax to get to better nodes, something that is not needed in a system where 56/91 points are pretty much going to be the same on each mech.

[JC Daxion]

Seams like there are to many nodes, Just makes it confusing especially for new players. How much they add, like twist, or speed retention is kinda vague. Perhaps for min/maxers this might be a good thing.. tweaking everything by 1%, but i think over all it complicates things to much for new players. Cutting the number of nodes but still giving the same final bonus might be a very good thing.


Even knowing how to play the game, i was very overwhelmed by the number of choices.

A few mechs i did try, really seamed to liven up, and get more mobile for sure, but it makes me wonder if it does that with all mechs. For balance, it makes me think perhaps under-performing mechs should have a multiplier. Again with less nodes this would make that an easier thing to understand and perhaps easier to balance.


Mech XP.. This one i think is a huge issue.. IMO all variants should be in the same pool. Give people a reason to try a new mech of the same class.. let all that banked XP be able to be spent on another mech with out having to pay MC to convert it. It still keeps the C-bill sink, and gives people a reason to buy mech packs and get a bonus.. Play the mech you like first.. earn tons of XP.. and play around with another.

I think pooled XP, would make people much more likely to play around with skills, and make it feel like much less of a grind



Lastly, locking certain skill trees on certain variants/mechs might be a good thing for flavor.. Perhaps some mechs should only have SRM's,, or perhaps others LRMs.. Some might only have UAC's while others AC's ect..

Some mechs might not be able to unlock mobility, or maybe higher tier mobility.. that sorta thing. For balance reasons, and to help simplify the players choices a bit.



I think things need more feed back as well.. what does +1 vector in jumping mean? Or burn rate? Does +1 mean one second? does +1 mean 1 meter? What does +3 turn mean? ext


Simplifying the tree to have less nodes, and give us more feedback to what they actually do, along with blocking certain trees on certain mechs and we really might have something that lets us customize our mechs, but keep them in a certain class so to speak.


Lastly, I dunno how this would be possible, But what about a way to unlock skills, and "test" them in testing grounds for a trail run before spending money? Basically,, Have a big ol "TEST" button option.. and then if fired up a psuedo skill tree thingy, that you can play around with the skills.. (maybe even as a brand new mech with no XP or c-bills) then you can spend away, and master it.. and play around with many different builds launching into testing grounds and seeing how things work. give yourself an idea of what you wanna build towards as you actually start to earn XP/cbills the game would save the config to launch nito another map.. and give you the option to reconfig and try again. Perhaps it could save a few configs, or a way to save your favorite so you can reference it for when you actually config the mech you own.

this would let players mess around a lot before committing the money and knowing what they really want to do.. and i think would let players have more info about how the things effect their mechs, leading to less people trying something and then having regret and needed to respect. Less buyers remorse so to speak..



SO basically..

Skill trees a bit smaller, less options but they do more, and cost more points.. (maybe 3 or 5 points per option) even if that cost goes up a bit in XP/c-bills

More feedback on what exactly the numbers do. Does the Medium pulse range get boosted by 20m? does it reduce the heat by 1 or .5? Is heat cap increased by 10 points? ect

Pool the chassis XP, giving people a greater reason to buy more mechs, and giving better value to mechpacks.

Practice test grounds for any mech,, Mastery would only work in test grounds but play around till your heart is content.


that's what i got after a few hours of screwing around... Thanks for reading

[Mordodrukow]

Quote

- Half the points are basically already decided. In general, 55-56 SP are already accounted for filling up the Defensive, Lower Chassis, and Operations trees. I'm a bit torn here, I like the things those 56 points bring my mech, but its the illusion of choice at best and a noob trap at worst.

IMO, thats the main reason of why the new system is completely bad. I dont wanna say that the previous system is better. No. It is on the same level, i guess... And i want a new system with a real choices.

I mean: look at the D&D system, for example. You have a limited resource: total character levels (max = 20). You can spend those levels, gaining levels in some classes. Each class have some abilities. Some abilities are better, than the others, and those abilities present on the high levels. If you gain one of those "big" abilities - you pay for it by spending so much levels, that you can't get another "big" ability from the other class, cause you don't have enough levels remaining.

Now compare it to our new skill system. Yes, we have limited resource: 91 nod max. But it is too much. I can get all abilities, i need. And we have no balance between abilities. Some of them are significantly better than the others. I will purchase those abilities on 100% of my mechs. Thats the problem.

New system needs individual skill tree for each mech at least. If we get, for example, a system, when some mechs can get radar deprivation, and the other mechs - can not, it will look like the difference between the mechs with ECM and without it. It still will be the poor choice. But it is much better, than nothing.

[Nimnul]

I like it: it's a step in the right direction.

Piranha do not listen to all the whiners. Do this as needed. no matter what.

Edited by Nimnul, 11 February 2017 - 04:30 AM.