7 replies to this topic

[Andi Nagasia]

just as it sounds,
ill collect feed back and your Ideas and make Polls for people to Vote on,
(Ill Start to show you how the Format will Work)

(Way To Encurage Diversity With Trees!)

Spoiler

Andi Nagasia, on 10 February 2017 - 02:04 PM, said:

personally i see many discussions about the Weapon Boating problem,
and people moving to Fill out whole Trees(All or Nothing Mentality)


this can be done in 2 ways,

1) Increasing Costs per Consecutive Skills, Ex:
Cost of (JJ Lift Speed Lv1) = 1 Skill Point,
Cost of (JJ Lift Speed Lv2) = 2 Skill Points,
Cost of (JJ Lift Speed Lv3) = 3 Skill Points,
Cost of (JJ Lift Speed Lv4) = 4 Skill Points,
Cost of (JJ Lift Speed Lv5) = 5 Skill Points,

2) Decreasing Percents per Consecutive Skills, Ex:
Percent of (JJ Lift Speed Lv1) = 10% Percent,
Percent of (JJ Lift Speed Lv2) = 8% Percent,
Percent of (JJ Lift Speed Lv3) = 6% Percent,
Percent of (JJ Lift Speed Lv4) = 4% Percent,
Percent of (JJ Lift Speed Lv5) = 2% Percent,

(Skill Tree Should Take Inconsideration Number Of Harpoints!)

Spoiler

Andi Nagasia, on 11 February 2017 - 04:40 PM, said:

Just as the Topic says,

many of the Trees seem to be identical,
a LCT with 1E should not have the same Quirk %s as a LCT with 6E,
i think Mechs with Fewer Hardpoints should get higher Quirk %s,

=0=Formula=0=
(#HardPoints + 1 / #HardPoints)

LCT-1V = 1Energy
(1E +1 / 1E = 2.00)
all Energy Quirks x2.00,

LCT-1M = 2Energy
(2E +1 / 2E = 1.50)
all Energy Quirks x1.50,

LCT-PB = 4Energy
(4E +1 / 4E = 1.25)
all Energy Quirks x1.25,

LCT-3M = 5Energy
(5E +1 / 5E = 1.20)
all Energy Quirks x1.20,

LCT-1E = 6Energy
(4E +1 / 4E = 1.16)
all Energy Quirks x1.16,

as you can see this formula would buff Mechs&Trees with less HardPoints,
Mechs like the LCT-1V, CDA-3M, CN9-A, HBK-4H, having 1E or 1B would benefit,
and it being a formula could be easily incorporated into the Skill Tree,

(Solution To Cost Of Nodes)

Spoiler

Fox2232, on 09 February 2017 - 02:00 AM, said:

Hi, I have one big problem which applies to all skill trees. They go only in downward direction, as result players have to take many nodes they do not want as much (but are still helpful somehow).
That goes for Lasers, Autocannons, ...

But when it goes to UPPER CHASSIS: taking all those Arm nodes on mech where you have no weapons on arms...
That's so bad, it visually hurts as they do absolutely nothing for mech.


Other than that some boosts look bit too big and some bit too small. But in general I love them. Much more diversity.

What's good IMHO:
+ refund cost = one tree refund can be done in one or two matches so it is not prohibitive for people who will want to change stuff on mech. Increasing cost would be bad, and decreasing it below 15k would be bad too. so 20~25k seems about right with current rewards for matches.
+ All that stuff which is in trees

What's Bad:
- Initial skill cost in ComStar Bills is way too high since it is thrown away once "refunded"
- values: stuff like "Target info Gathering +3%" is nothing in comparison to "+1.25 AMS overload" or "Armor Hardening +3%"
- placement of some upgrades: Players who want Advanced Zoom are likely going to play outside of their sensor range anyway = yet another wasted points to get one point you want from entire tree.


Change Suggestions:
=> Trees: Trees should have multiple entry points (points from which player can start taking skills based on different play-styles)
=> Trees: moving to any connected node (current "Only Downwards" is very bad)
=> Cost: Initial skill cost increase from 100k to 125k. Removal cost reduced to 0k. Skill is not thrown away as it is re-attachable module to system and can be inserted back at 5k cost (cleaning pins, solder, whatever reason). If player decides to sell this removed upgrade, it will refund 25k (so total cost of gaining and throwing away upgrade will be 100k).
= = = =
Defensive Tree:
It is apparent that increasing 400 Armor by 15% is much greater bonus than increasing 150 armor by 15%.
Proposed changes based on weight class (trade-off):
Assault: Armor Hardening +3% (Speed -0.1%); Skeletal Density +6% (speed -0.1%)
Heavy: Armor Hardening +3.5% (Speed -0.2%); Skeletal Density +6.5% (speed -0.2%)
Medium: Armor Hardening +4% (Speed -0.4%); Skeletal Density +7% (speed -0.4%)
Light: Armor Hardening +4.5% (Speed -0.8%); Skeletal Density +7.5% (speed -0.8%)
"AMS Range Increase" is missing.
= = = =
Lower Chassis
Only Speed Tweak has proper value, other are way too big. (total +50% acceleration/deceleration, +30% turn speed). While I love Arctic Cheetah, this is too much.
+30% total to Acceleration/deceleration is just fine. +25% turn speed is still quite high, but with reduced acceleration, it will likely be OK.
= = = =
Jump Jets
They are kind of underwhelming and this tree is quite a waste.
Vent Calibration should give +2% bur time instead of 1%
Lift Speed should give 2.5% maybe even 3% boost to initial speed as total 5% increased starting speed is nothing.
+ Add 4th branch to tree: "Fall Damage Threshold" = increases minimum required speed at which mech has to collide with ground to take damage. (While "Defensive - Fall Damage" is for everyone, jumping mechs are much more likely to hit the ground at higher velocity.) => Make Jumpers Jump Again.
= = = =
Mech Operations
Looks like it is mostly about heat. Yet I feel like it should be only about all the non-heat related parts of tree.
(I wonder what's logic behind taking all those heat reducing nodes on mech which benefits from "Magazine Capacity" placed at very bottom)
=> Move Heat to its own tree, enrich it with "Engine Heat Reduction" = Engine generates 30% less heat while running in total 5 nodes taken (6% per node).
=> "Hill Climb" Can as well be moved to "Lower Chassis"
Remains: "Speed Retention", "Quick Ignition", "Improved Gyros", "Magazine Capacity". I would move "Advanced Zoom" Right next to "Improved Gyros".
"Magazine Capacity" does not improve AMS ammo magazine capacity?
= = = =
Sensors
"Target Info Gathering" should give same benefit to all Weight Classes. +7% Lights have would not hurt Assault Mechs too (Currently +2% = total waste).
"Seismic Sensor" should be different based on weight of mech: Light +80, Medium +90; Heavy +100; Assault +120 (Better contact with ground.)
"Target Retention" as above, size matters when it gets to signal processing: Light +180, Medium +200; Heavy +220; Assault +240
"Enhanced ECM" Should favor Light mechs over Heavy ones: Light +22.5%, Medium +20%, Heavy +17.5%, Assault +15%

(Upper Chassis Vs Mechs Without Ability To Move Arms Sideways)

Spoiler

Fox2232, on 09 February 2017 - 02:00 AM, said:

Hi, I have one big problem which applies to all skill trees. They go only in downward direction, as result players have to take many nodes they do not want as much (but are still helpful somehow).
That goes for Lasers, Autocannons, ...

But when it goes to UPPER CHASSIS: taking all those Arm nodes on mech where you have no weapons on arms...
That's so bad, it visually hurts as they do absolutely nothing for mech.


Other than that some boosts look bit too big and some bit too small. But in general I love them. Much more diversity.

What's good IMHO:
+ refund cost = one tree refund can be done in one or two matches so it is not prohibitive for people who will want to change stuff on mech. Increasing cost would be bad, and decreasing it below 15k would be bad too. so 20~25k seems about right with current rewards for matches.
+ All that stuff which is in trees

What's Bad:
- Initial skill cost in ComStar Bills is way too high since it is thrown away once "refunded"
- values: stuff like "Target info Gathering +3%" is nothing in comparison to "+1.25 AMS overload" or "Armor Hardening +3%"
- placement of some upgrades: Players who want Advanced Zoom are likely going to play outside of their sensor range anyway = yet another wasted points to get one point you want from entire tree.


Change Suggestions:
=> Trees: Trees should have multiple entry points (points from which player can start taking skills based on different play-styles)
=> Trees: moving to any connected node (current "Only Downwards" is very bad)
=> Cost: Initial skill cost increase from 100k to 125k. Removal cost reduced to 0k. Skill is not thrown away as it is re-attachable module to system and can be inserted back at 5k cost (cleaning pins, solder, whatever reason). If player decides to sell this removed upgrade, it will refund 25k (so total cost of gaining and throwing away upgrade will be 100k).
= = = =
Defensive Tree:
It is apparent that increasing 400 Armor by 15% is much greater bonus than increasing 150 armor by 15%.
Proposed changes based on weight class (trade-off):
Assault: Armor Hardening +3% (Speed -0.1%); Skeletal Density +6% (speed -0.1%)
Heavy: Armor Hardening +3.5% (Speed -0.2%); Skeletal Density +6.5% (speed -0.2%)
Medium: Armor Hardening +4% (Speed -0.4%); Skeletal Density +7% (speed -0.4%)
Light: Armor Hardening +4.5% (Speed -0.8%); Skeletal Density +7.5% (speed -0.8%)
"AMS Range Increase" is missing.
= = = =
Lower Chassis
Only Speed Tweak has proper value, other are way too big. (total +50% acceleration/deceleration, +30% turn speed). While I love Arctic Cheetah, this is too much.
+30% total to Acceleration/deceleration is just fine. +25% turn speed is still quite high, but with reduced acceleration, it will likely be OK.
= = = =
Jump Jets
They are kind of underwhelming and this tree is quite a waste.
Vent Calibration should give +2% bur time instead of 1%
Lift Speed should give 2.5% maybe even 3% boost to initial speed as total 5% increased starting speed is nothing.
+ Add 4th branch to tree: "Fall Damage Threshold" = increases minimum required speed at which mech has to collide with ground to take damage. (While "Defensive - Fall Damage" is for everyone, jumping mechs are much more likely to hit the ground at higher velocity.) => Make Jumpers Jump Again.
= = = =
Mech Operations
Looks like it is mostly about heat. Yet I feel like it should be only about all the non-heat related parts of tree.
(I wonder what's logic behind taking all those heat reducing nodes on mech which benefits from "Magazine Capacity" placed at very bottom)
=> Move Heat to its own tree, enrich it with "Engine Heat Reduction" = Engine generates 30% less heat while running in total 5 nodes taken (6% per node).
=> "Hill Climb" Can as well be moved to "Lower Chassis"
Remains: "Speed Retention", "Quick Ignition", "Improved Gyros", "Magazine Capacity". I would move "Advanced Zoom" Right next to "Improved Gyros".
"Magazine Capacity" does not improve AMS ammo magazine capacity?
= = = =
Sensors
"Target Info Gathering" should give same benefit to all Weight Classes. +7% Lights have would not hurt Assault Mechs too (Currently +2% = total waste).
"Seismic Sensor" should be different based on weight of mech: Light +80, Medium +90; Heavy +100; Assault +120 (Better contact with ground.)
"Target Retention" as above, size matters when it gets to signal processing: Light +180, Medium +200; Heavy +220; Assault +240
"Enhanced ECM" Should favor Light mechs over Heavy ones: Light +22.5%, Medium +20%, Heavy +17.5%, Assault +15%

(Blank)

Spoiler

Post Below and Ill Add your Ideas into the Above Polls,
No commenting on Things in this List, please comment in the individual Topics,
(this is too keep this Topic Clean of Differing ideas and Conflict)

Thoughts, Comments, Concerns?
Thanks,

Edit- Added 2 more Choices,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 11 February 2017 - 04:43 PM.

[Ori Disciple]

I fail to see how this is going to stop people from going for specific builds. For those who like those builds, even the lowered bonuses are you level won't deter them, and making it cost more points is counter-intuitive and will only cause people to pick the same low-level skills.

[Fox2232]

Tree Changes.
Economy Changes.

[Kuaron]

I linked in the other thread my version of about the same proposal, and therein there are linked, IIRC, three further thread of other people with ideas against boating.

[Andi Nagasia]

2 more Topics added, Keep Posting Topics you like, and ill keep adding them

[Pyed]

Quote

Upper Chassis Vs Mechs Without Ability To Move Arms Sideways

What am I voting for here? It's unclear.

[Kuaron]

Foxes list of proposed changes and spontaneous ideas, apparently.

@ Andi:
If you are actually interested in a list of promising ideas and a poll with useful results, you could stop being lazy and search this forum for such. It’s full of them, I assure you, I’ve seen them myself!

[Andi Nagasia]

Kuaron, on 11 February 2017 - 04:01 PM, said:

If you are actually interested in a list of promising ideas and a poll with useful results, you could stop being lazy and search this forum for such. It’s full of them, I assure you, I’ve seen them myself!

ive been bissy at work, ill update it more tomarrow,