105 replies to this topic

[Reno Blade]

Kojak Bear, on 10 February 2017 - 07:54 PM, said:

Here's a long,detailed list of my recommendations on the Skill Tree System. Please read, share and feedback. Thanks.

https://drive.google...N3NUMEx2MmhUNE0

One other note: PGI should give us the option to pay a one-time fee of XXXX C-Bills (maybe 4 million?) and YYYY XP (20,000?) or even the equivalent MC's (maybe 100? 200?), after which we get to enjoy UNLIMITED FREE re-specs. That way, the grind is more feasible and we get all customization opportunities after hurdling the pay wall. This will also encourage people to buy premium time to grind out the C-Bills/XP for the goal of free re-specs.

Great changes in your document!

I was also considering "Elite" skills or just adding more (so the same as 4 SP for the Elite skill) in my list here, but I also listed few more concerns.

I like your way to limit the maximum amount of Elite skills by locking one if using another one in the branch.
This was something I struggled with, so my "limit" was just a total SP per Skill-Class.

What I don't see in your suggestion is a way to prevent "boating" being better than multi-classing.
Outside of the "good starting point" skills in each weapon branch, most people will still likely put more points into mobility/survival/mechops than weapon.
Or am I overlooking something in this direction?

I was thinking that there could be some way to improve multi-weapon builds, by maybe adding extra effects on the branch Elite skills (e.g. adding bonus to the skill value if you use more than one weapon branch).
What do you think about this part?

[Soviet Alex]

Currently, most IS mediums have an extra Mech Skill module slot. PGI considers this necessary for balance. I haven't heard anything about what would replace that under the new system, or if non-boaty IS mediums were just going to be nerfed across the board. The obvious option would be a higher node cap for the affected chassis.

Also, it currently requires 57250 XP to master a mech. That's only 38 nodes under the new system as it stands. So much for Russ Bullock's tweet just after MechCon about the total grind to mastery being about the same. If all my skill modules are removed from the game, I'd like to spend at least some of the rebate C-bills on mechs. At the moment, the C-bill cost of purchasing nodes with all the XP I have is greater than the cashback total. So I would agree with all of the above comments about reducing the C-bill & XP cost per node. You have to do both together because of the linkage between them. Players should reach the C-bills required to purchase a node before they earn enough XP, so that they can save up for their next mech.

[Knighthawk26]

I have been on the pts server and reading the feedback all over the forums.

First, Thanks PGI for doing a play test and seeking our input.

Now, let me offer the following summary and suggestions. I encourage others to add to this, anything important that I miss.

Summary:

1. Most of the negative comments are legitimate.
2. This process had produced some very positive ideas to fix / improve not only the skill tree but MWO


Suggestions:

1. Take the time to get this right. The skill tree system is not yet ready to go online.
2. Respec should be free, or involve a one time investment (and then free), or have a very minimum cost
3. The c-bill costs for skills must be reduced significantly, the xp costs also seem too high to your customers
4. Protect your current players from suffering loss. As it stands, many players will lose. I have 40 elite/master level mechs now. Under the new system, I could only get 19 of these back to the same level with the refund I would receive. That would be a huge loss in terms of time and money already invested in your game and many other players are in the same situation.
5. Make the system friendly / positive for new players so they stick around and grow your player base.
6. The game isn't broken right now, so don't break it by trying to improve it. Balance must be maintained and we know that is hard but it is essential as well.
7. Take the time to get this right (worth repeating)

[Knighthawk26]

Kojak Bear, on 10 February 2017 - 07:54 PM, said:

Here's a long,detailed list of my recommendations on the Skill Tree System. Please read, share and feedback. Thanks.

https://drive.google...N3NUMEx2MmhUNE0

One other note: PGI should give us the option to pay a one-time fee of XXXX C-Bills (maybe 4 million?) and YYYY XP (20,000?) or even the equivalent MC's (maybe 100? 200?), after which we get to enjoy UNLIMITED FREE re-specs. That way, the grind is more feasible and we get all customization opportunities after hurdling the pay wall. This will also encourage people to buy premium time to grind out the C-Bills/XP for the goal of free re-specs.

If you haven't read Kojak Bear's attached file you should. He has developed the kind of skill tree that I think most of the players expected and wanted in the first place. Something like this would be a good restart point for PGI to consider.

[Chris Puetz]

Try this!

i will try to explain my thoughts and give Examples.

1. Balance Problems.

There were many cut offs by the IS Quirks.
I Think this need not be.

Look at the Quickdraw IV-4
for now, pre new Skill Tree:
Ballistic Cooldown +30% plus Module max 12% for the Ballisticweapons where a max of 42%.
with the new Skill Tree:
Ballistic Cooldown +20% plus max 5% from the Skill Tree makes max 25%
so far so good.
Take a look at the Kodik KDK-3
pre new Skill Tree:
no Quirk + max 12% from the Modules makes 12% (and he is still a Beast)
with new Skill Tree:
no Quirks + 5 times 8% Cooldown makes 40% Cooldown for the Ballistics.
If you use 4 LB10-X in the KDK-3 it is like a LB10-X Machinegun, absolute outstanding Firepower.

Give the IS the Quirks back and make it in Skill Tree at 3 or 4% and it works

2. The Costs

Today you need only 57250 XP to Master a Mech, for a Module there were max 15000 XP once.
After that you need only C-Bill for Modules and you don't need a Module in each Mech.
Normally you need the Modules in each of your FP/CW-Dropdeck-Mech. For the other Mechs you can rebuild it in the MechLap.
100000 C-Bills and 1500 XP for a Node is too much.
Maybe 75000 C-Bills and 750 XP.

3. The historic XP

Please kick them away.
Make the in GXP.
Why, many of us with plenty of Mech had Level Mech that we do not like, but we must Level it because of the 3 Mech politics.
If the historic XP came and there can only transfer in XP for that Mech-Chassis it is dumped.
For Player like me, (Truck Driver with only 1 Day a Week to play because of Real-Life-Things)
we had pay to convert XP in GXP to Level a Mech. And with your historic XP Issue we pay twice.
PGI Take a look at my Account and you see what I mean.

4. The Skill Tree himself

There were many Node points I don't want to enable but I must do it because there where other thinks deeper in the tree I need.
That is not your promised freedom to customise a Mech!
Make the tree straight, so we don't waste Nodes for some stupid things or give us more Nodes ( but then we had this cost issue a little bit more)!

But note, the new Skill Tree will decrease the TTK!

Edited by Chris Puetz, 12 February 2017 - 09:23 AM.

[Gorgo7]

First, I like the new system a lot.
I would recommend the following changes.
Mobility/Upper Chassis;
Incorporate a secondary Upper Chassis chart for Mechs that do not have Arms capable of laterally tracking(Yaw). Having to tunnel through Arm speed and pitch in order to get to Torso speed is punitive (as well as unrealistic) on mechs with no yaw in the arms. Twisting is what some mechs must do in order to get weapons on target.

Infotech/Sensors;
Reduce the stock level of sensors to 4-500m and increase the Sensor range bonus so that it nets out at the max normal range with enhancements. This will make taking the Sensor tree enhancements more relevant to the game.

My two cents.

Otherwise, it looks great!

Edited by Gorgo7, 12 February 2017 - 09:44 AM.

[Kojak Bear]

Reno Blade, on 12 February 2017 - 04:10 AM, said:

Great changes in your document!

I was also considering "Elite" skills or just adding more (so the same as 4 SP for the Elite skill) in my list here, but I also listed few more concerns.

I like your way to limit the maximum amount of Elite skills by locking one if using another one in the branch.
This was something I struggled with, so my "limit" was just a total SP per Skill-Class.

What I don't see in your suggestion is a way to prevent "boating" being better than multi-classing.
Outside of the "good starting point" skills in each weapon branch, most people will still likely put more points into mobility/survival/mechops than weapon.
Or am I overlooking something in this direction?

I was thinking that there could be some way to improve multi-weapon builds, by maybe adding extra effects on the branch Elite skills (e.g. adding bonus to the skill value if you use more than one weapon branch).
What do you think about this part?

Thanks! I tried as much as possible to balance between those who want to specialize and those who want to be more general-purpose (some chassis are really not good at boating). But realistically, specialists will always have the edge over generalists. The best I could do was try and mitigate the disadvantage of those who could not (or did not want to) boat. Maybe increasing the locked skills into the lower levels (maybe level 3-4?). If you have any suggestions, let's make PGI listen to them.

Knighthawk26, on 12 February 2017 - 06:12 AM, said:

If you haven't read Kojak Bear's attached file you should. He has developed the kind of skill tree that I think most of the players expected and wanted in the first place. Something like this would be a good restart point for PGI to consider.

Thank you for your kind words! Let's make PGI listen.

[Supersmacky]

Introduction:
I posted something similar to this years ago as a way to improve/revamp the skill system. I wanted to suggest something that would actually add some variety and take away the dependence on modules. I know my model flies in the face of the current proposed skill tree system on PTS (and may be discounted because of that), but the proposed system itself fails to meet the criteria and purpose PGI outlined. Because of that I wanted to revisit my earlier idea with some additions and modifications. While it may not be perfect, I believe it is both better than what we currently have and what is currently proposed as a replacement by PGI. Thank you for your consideration and remarks.

Principles:
- All tweaks per tier should be relatively equal in value
- Remove the add-on modules (with the exception of consumables)
- Maintain the 'meat' of the current three tier system
- Eliminate the need to buy three mechs of a given chassis
- Limit the advantages of boating weapons
- Provide the ability of pilots to modify the skills/tweaks of a given mech based on the role they choose or current 'meta' of the game
- Provide a simpler (as opposed to more complex) skill/tweak system
- Eliminate skills/tweaks that are (frankly) pointless/useless
- Provide better customization for game-play preferences
- Force trade-off choices for the pilot when building a mech
- Be forgiving of pilots that make poor choices when building a mech
- Globalize certain skills/tweaks to apply to more specific weapons within a class (Energy, Ballistic, Missile) rather than pigeon-holing a mech pilot into a skill/tweak for a specific type of weapon
- No 'extra' current involved (skill points)
- The cb cost is to unlock a skill/tweak slot, not to buy a skill
- Some skills/tweaks in a tier should complement, while others should counter

Model:
- Tier 1 (Basic) would have 16 skill/tweak choices but only eight can ever be active
- Tier 2 (Elite) would have 12 skill/tweak choices but only four can ever be active
- Tier 3 (Master) would have 3 skill/tweak choices but only one can ever be active
- Once 'x' number of skills/tweaks for any tier are unlocked they can be changed on the fly (between matches) without additional cost (CB), but would require the appropriate cost in xp or gxp
- Tier 1 skills/tweaks would all cost 2000 xp or gxp and 25,000 cb to unlock
- Tier 2 skills/tweaks would all cost 4000 xp or gxp and 50,000 cb to unlock
- Tier 3 skills/tweaks would all cost 16,0000 xp or gxp and 100,000 cb to unlock
- Eight Tier 1 skills/tweaks would need to be unlocked in order to unlock anything in Tier 2
- Four Tier 2 skills/tweaks would need to be unlocked in order to unlock anything in Tier 3

Example Tree:
- Tier 1
> Heat Containment (10%)
> Heat Dissipation (10%)
> Turn Rate (5%)
> Torso Twist Rate (10%)
> Torso Twist Amount (5%)
> Structure Increase (5%)
> Accel Boost (10%)
> Deccel Boost (10%)
> Energy Heat Generation Decrease (10%)
> Ballistic Heat Generation Decrease (10%)
> Missile Heat Generation Decrease (10%)
> Crit Chance Increase (5%)
> Target Retention (3 secs)
> Sensor Range Increase (10%)
> Improved UAV (As with current game)
> Improved ECM (As with current ECM)

- Tier 2
> Speed Boost (10%)
> Rate of Fire Boost (5%)
> Jump Range Increase (10%)
> Energy Range Increase (10%)
> Ballistic Range Increase (10%)
> Missile Range Increase (10%)
> Energy Cool-down (5%)
> Ballistic Cool-down (5%)
> Missile Cool-down (5%)
> Radar Deprivation (As with current game)

- Tier 3
> Armor boost (10%)
> Overheat Damage Reduction (10%)
> Weapon Damage Boost (10%)

Example Build:
- Tier 1
> Heat Containment (10%)
> Heat Dissipation (10%)
> Energy Heat Generation Decrease (10%)
> Ballistic Heat Generation Decrease (10%)
> Crit Chance Increase (5%)
> Target Retention (3 secs)
> Improved UAV (As with current game)
> Improved ECM (As with current ECM)

- Tier 2
> Speed Boost (10%)
> Rate of Fire Boost (5%)
> Energy Range Increase (10%)
> Energy Cool-down (5%)
> Ballistic Cool-down (5%)
> Radar Deprivation (As with current game)

- Tier 3
> Weapon Damage Boost (10%)

NOTES:
- The numbers plugged in here can be changed to provide a better model, gameplay, prevent OP builds, etc
- The number are only intended as an example
- The skills/tweaks can be changed, moved to a different tier, removed, etc to better suit the Principles of the system as outlined
- The number of skills/tweak per tier could be increased to provide even more flexitibility
- The number of active skills/tweaks should not be increase and it diminishes the idea of making choices concerning a build

[Ayrmoon]

Hi all,

Just a couple of notes I took on the new skill tree function:

1 - It would be nice to have some way to describe what each selection can do for the Mech. Some of the selections may seem striaght forward, but others, I had no idea why I would need that node or what it would do for the Mech. Having an area of the node where a tool tip could be used to describe what that node does would be helpful.

2 - Once the node is selected, a list of items/quirks show up on the right in list form. When reviewing this list the player may notice a node that he/she wants to change. It would be nice to have those items as links back to the node group that it belongs to. That way a player could click the link and be taken straight to that node group. This would help the player to make any changes whithout having to guess at where the node is or slide the node groups left and right until the correct node can be found.

Thanks for your consideration,
Ayrmoon

[Chound]

Sixpack, on 11 February 2017 - 07:36 AM, said:

Your decision to push back the release of the skill tree was the right one. Considering the ammount of time until release that was still available the current version of the skill tree would have been a desaster.

I would also like to request that you give your reasons for the changes you will make to the skill tree. We are all here in the hopes of making this a better gaming experiance for everyone involved. But to do that we need to know what road we are driving on.

I would like to add that we need more nodes maybe 100? I had quite a few nodes where I didn't want the skill but had to take it to get what I wanted. I ran out of space a LOT when you do the copy of the database you should have included player settings as well. I found out the hard way thiat the settings in my acount had changed.

[baddagger]

Hi guys,

I wanted to give my opinions based on what I've seen so far with the new skill tree. I've played Battletech since the 80's and I want MWO to not get too far away from the original Battletech play.

ISSUES:
- You will destroy ECM for no reason. ECM is suppose to give you an advantage!!! This is complete garbage that we have to use the skill tree to get the original ECM. Especially since Radar Dep. won't be available without using skill tree. LURMS are bad enough, they are for softening up the enemy before the brawl - not to replace brawling.

- Boating of same weapons will be increased with new skill tree. You will force players boat all of one weapon type - why don't use have skill tree for all lasers, all ballistics, all missiles. And make them mutually exclusive down the line.

- New players will be at a huge disadvantage without being able to afford getting the new skill tree completed.

- It will force us to not be able to easily try different load outs because of the skill tree costs.

- With the defensive points being so powerful it will increase time to kill, which isn't a bad thing.
But I see a problem - for example - I know that I can take on a linebacker with my Hellbringer 1vs1 in our current state, but not a fresh Black Knight. With the defensive quirks added I'm not going to be sure how strong the enemy mech is going to be. I really have a problem with this because it's not part of the battletech lore. Hardened Armor had major drawbacks and not rolled out to all mechs. If you're going to use it, at least drop top speed to match lore.

- Are you going to get rid of all mech quirks with skill tree, it doesn't make sense to keep mech quirks if your going to this.

- This is going to take a long time to do if you have a lot of mechs. Maybe copy over to other mech's? Also, cost really needs to be lowered and for changes also.

Thanks.

[Cy Mitchell]

Kojak Bear, on 10 February 2017 - 07:54 PM, said:

Here's a long,detailed list of my recommendations on the Skill Tree System. Please read, share and feedback. Thanks.

https://drive.google...N3NUMEx2MmhUNE0

One other note: PGI should give us the option to pay a one-time fee of XXXX C-Bills (maybe 4 million?) and YYYY XP (20,000?) or even the equivalent MC's (maybe 100? 200?), after which we get to enjoy UNLIMITED FREE re-specs. That way, the grind is more feasible and we get all customization opportunities after hurdling the pay wall. This will also encourage people to buy premium time to grind out the C-Bills/XP for the goal of free re-specs.

I was also contemplating writing up a proposal for Elite (or Master Skills as you call them). My idea would be to reduce the effectiveness of individual skill nodes such as Velocity, Speed Tweak, Turning Speed, Armor, Structure, Jam Reduction, Radar Deprivation, Seismic Sensor or some of the other most desirable attributes by as much as half their currently proposed value and then create an Elite skill at the bottom of the skill tree that gives a significant boost to one individual skill. However, each Mech could utilize only one or at the most two Elite Skills in its build.

As it stands right now, almost any Mech can get nearly all the desirable skill quirks with the 91 SP that it is allotted. There is not much specialization and there are not many hard choices being made. By limiting the selection of Elite skills that a player is allowed to use, it forces the player to make a conscious choice and chose the big boost that would benefit his intended role or suit his style of play the most.

The cost of the individual nodes needs to be lowered for both XP and C-Bills but the Elite Skill nodes would be multiple times more expensive than the standard skill nodes.

[Shin Ken]

I think the most important thing is diminishing returns on subsequent (weapon) skill lvls of the same skill down the skill tree.

Doing it linear heavily encourages boating and will make the game boring because the most effective way to skill is dumping all points into one weapon category.

With diminishing returns skilling multiple weapons is at least an option. Also it's easier to compete for new players when the first skills are more rewarding.

Edited by Shin Ken, 13 February 2017 - 12:35 PM.

[Chound]

Rampage, on 10 February 2017 - 04:47 PM, said:

Great to know that you are listening and preparing to address the players concerns in a timely manner. Delaying it a month is a good choice considering the depth of impact it will have on the game. There is a lot to like there and a few concerns. I am just glad the work to improve it is ongoing and there is no talk of scrapping it.

the big question is how much will this actually affect the GUI. We can talk but if they ignore us and do theire own thing

[Philosophical]

Knighthawk26, on 12 February 2017 - 06:12 AM, said:

If you haven't read Kojak Bear's attached file you should. He has developed the kind of skill tree that I think most of the players expected and wanted in the first place. Something like this would be a good restart point for PGI to consider.

yes do this, it actually makes sense.

its extremely cryptic having to pick unrelated skills to get to the ones you want, how do you explain that. this game is supposed to be a simulation, maybe make some effort to make the upgrade system logical.

[Bummer960]

Just a quick question: Does anyone know if you will still need to buy three of the same mech in order to unlock all the skills?

[JadePanther]

Soviet Alex, on 12 February 2017 - 05:07 AM, said:

Currently, most IS mediums have an extra Mech Skill module slot. PGI considers this necessary for balance. I haven't heard anything about what would replace that under the new system, or if non-boaty IS mediums were just going to be nerfed across the board. The obvious option would be a higher node cap for the affected chassis.

Also, it currently requires 57250 XP to master a mech. That's only 38 nodes under the new system as it stands. So much for Russ Bullock's tweet just after MechCon about the total grind to mastery being about the same. If all my skill modules are removed from the game, I'd like to spend at least some of the rebate C-bills on mechs. At the moment, the C-bill cost of purchasing nodes with all the XP I have is greater than the cashback total. So I would agree with all of the above comments about reducing the C-bill & XP cost per node. You have to do both together because of the linkage between them. Players should reach the C-bills required to purchase a node before they earn enough XP, so that they can save up for their next mech.

its not just IS mediums there is other mechs that have extra slots.

But the XP to master is indeed different.. and espcially if you have 3 in a class mastered prior to trying to master another.. If you have 3 masters in a class you can master one in the same class once you've made it elite which only requires basic on 2 other varients.. i think it ends up like somewhere in the 80k ballpark all in all

[Kael Posavatz]

Soviet Alex, on 12 February 2017 - 05:07 AM, said:

Currently, most IS mediums have an extra Mech Skill module slot. PGI considers this necessary for balance. I haven't heard anything about what would replace that under the new system, or if non-boaty IS mediums were just going to be nerfed across the board. The obvious option would be a higher node cap for the affected chassis.

And some clan mechs (such as the stormcrow) have one less. PGI hasn't addressed it either.

More expansively. They said definitively at MechCon that they were going to remove quirks entirely. They probably left it in when someone rubbed a couple of neurons together and realized it'd be easier to make arbitrary changes to quirks in the name of 'balance'--or rather likely to blow up less--than it would to make changes to skill nodes. That being the case, I can see them going 'flat rate' on the number of nodes, if only because making changes latter is likely to provoke a dramatic backlash.

Soviet Alex, on 12 February 2017 - 05:07 AM, said:

Also, it currently requires 57250 XP to master a mech. That's only 38 nodes under the new system as it stands. So much for Russ Bullock's tweet just after MechCon about the total grind to mastery being about the same. If all my skill modules are removed from the game, I'd like to spend at least some of the rebate C-bills on mechs. At the moment, the C-bill cost of purchasing nodes with all the XP I have is greater than the cashback total. So I would agree with all of the above comments about reducing the C-bill & XP cost per node. You have to do both together because of the linkage between them. Players should reach the C-bills required to purchase a node before they earn enough XP, so that they can save up for their next mech.

If you price out the XP as to the rule of three it comes more in-line. it costs 79500 (less than what it took to elite 2 mechs under the old system) to bring a mech to roughly 'elite-equivalent' (worse heat dissipation and no weapon cooldown, but generally better otherwise with some skills you didn't previously have). Of course, it used to cost no c-bills to get there and it now costs 5.3mill, but that's what PTS2 should address (among the very many things it hopefully addresses).

Bummer960, on 14 February 2017 - 02:38 AM, said:

Just a quick question: Does anyone know if you will still need to buy three of the same mech in order to unlock all the skills?

Nope. Rule of three was defenestrated.

Edited by Kael Posavatz, 14 February 2017 - 08:22 AM.

[Cy Mitchell]

Kael Posavatz, on 14 February 2017 - 08:21 AM, said:

If you price out the XP as to the rule of three it comes more in-line. it costs 79500 (less than what it took to elite 2 mechs under the old system) to bring a mech to roughly 'elite-equivalent' (worse heat dissipation and no weapon cooldown, but generally better otherwise with some skills you didn't previously have). Of course, it used to cost no c-bills to get there and it now costs 5.3mill, but that's what PTS2 should address (among the very many things it hopefully addresses).

I know this example has been given before and even used by PGI to justify the cost but it is an illusion. Most people went ahead and Mastered all their Mechs. They did not stop at just basics or elites. For example, I have 5 Mastered Hellbringers. Under the new skill system, I will only be able to master 2 of them and the others will be shelved or sold. Out of my 30 Mechs I have 6 Mastered and something like 10 more Elited. Pooling all my GXP for the purpose of Mastering as many as possible, I may be able to Master 4 or 5 if I use MC to convert XP to GXP.

I get that a Mastered Mech with 91 SP is stronger than an old Mastered Mech but that, IMO, is wrong too. Different is fine but making all the Mechs stronger and some of the Mechs much stronger just leads to power creep and imbalance.

I will be happy if they reduce the XP and C-Bill cost significantly and put some limits on SP (at least on the currently OP Mechs.).

[Lung Butter]

Kojak Bear, on 10 February 2017 - 07:54 PM, said:

Here's a long,detailed list of my recommendations on the Skill Tree System. Please read, share and feedback. Thanks.

https://drive.google...N3NUMEx2MmhUNE0

I like this. PGI should definitely take a look at it.

Edited by Lung Butter, 14 February 2017 - 10:23 AM.