56 replies to this topic

[DAYLEET]

Deathlike, on 16 February 2017 - 01:33 PM, said:

See, the thing is.. they don't really know who they are targeting.

Even in the MWOWC, PGI still managed to screw things up on their own... whether it was putting together rules or just decals for the winning groups.

For anything PGI has done, they are not always "fully committed" to anything, and doing everything half arsed or "minimally viable", which pleases noone really.

This pisses me off so much because id love a skill tree system, id revel in it. but its not designed to be "usable" or i should say Affordable. It certainly need to be tweaked to hell and back but id love to have same variant with different quirks.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

RussianWolf, on 16 February 2017 - 07:37 AM, said:

The place your math goofs is in the current system, you only have to buy 1 module and move it around as you change mechs. New system you have to buy that module for each and every mech.

To be fair, what would the difference be if they changed the current system to "you pay a respec fee to move a module" so you would be encouraged to buy a module for every mech like the new system?

Not saying either is good, I rarely used modules other than UAV and Artillery.

Look again.

Quote

Costs for:
-1 Seismic Sensor: 6,000,000
-1 Radar Dep: 6,000,000
-1 LPL Range: 3,000,000
-1 ERML Range: 3,000,000
-1 Gauss Cooldown: 3,000,000
Total mod costs: 21,000,000

That's the cost of five modules for those three mechs if you shuffle. To kit each of those three mechs individually would cost:
TBR-Prime:
-1 RaDerp/Seismic: 6,000,000
-1 LPL Range: 3,000,000
-1 ERML range: 3,000,000
TBR-C
-1 RaDerp/Seismic: 6,000,000
-1 Gauss Cooldown: 3,000,000
-1 ERML range: 3,000,000
TBR-S
-1 RaDerp/Seismic: 6,000,000
-1 Gauss Cooldown: 3,000,000
-1 cERPPC Cooldown: 3,000,000
Total CBill cost: 36,000,000

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 February 2017 - 08:01 AM, said:

don't forget that to Master that ONE Variant, you only really need to Basic the others.... and that the Mechs are 99% Playable once elited. Modules are currently only a true necessity if you are playing Comp Level matches.

Now all of this stuff is becoming sort of mandatory to purchase. And they are making you unlock stuff you don't want/need to get to the stuff you do.

The Big Gimp in the current system is CBills, with a mech costing 16,000,000 and a rate of 171,000 CBills a match you're looking at needing to play 94 matches with it to pay for the next variant. In that time if you make 1,000 MXP per match, you've gotten 94,000 MXP. More than enough to master it. So then you buy the second variant and once you've gotten enough CBills to play that third and final mech needed for Mastery, the second one has an over abundance of MXP. So then you just play enough to Basic out the third one and sell the ones you don't care about. Which means you needed to play 200 matches just to get a mech to Mastery level.

I don't remember exactly, but you need to at least Basic three to unlock Elites. Is it still required to unlock all three Elites to unlock Mastery if you haven't Mastered any mech in that weight class? I remember it being once you fully Mastered a heavy, then you just needed to unlock the Basics on the three variants of chassis for full Mastery of a variant. I don't recall if they ever did away with that retardation or not.

As for the upcoming system, it potentially makes diversifying your stable easier so that getting one Light, one Med, one Heavy, and one Assault to Mastery is much quicker and cheaper by reducing the overall cost by about 2/3. It's cheaper in the short run, but MUCH more expensive in the long run.

It also feels like it stifles diversity and absolutely kills experimentation (the only reason for me to play anymore).

Edited by Saint Scarlett Johan, 16 February 2017 - 11:55 PM.

[Weeny Machine]

What galls me most and shouldn't be forgotten: if you want to use another loadout on a mech you need to re-learn quite a bunch of nodes which is expensive on the long run

[Mawai]

Hi All,

Just a couple of comments that may or may not go over well. I've read a lot of the feedback on the skill tree on PTS. There are a number of important issues that PGI probably needs to address and I am hoping that they do so.

However, I am not sure that costs are such a big deal.

1) MWO is grindy. It will ALWAYS be grindy since that is how every free to play game makes money. They charge real money to reduce the grind time. Period. If they make the game smooth, easy to play, everything available with limited effort ... then NO ONE WILL PAY FOR IT. Really that simple, if you could play a perfect game and not have to pay ... why would you pay?

So the discussion should not be about whether the new system will be grindy but about how grindy.

2) The new skill tree represents a paradigm shift in MWO. The old skills and module capabilities have been folded into the one tree. This means that every mech will essentially have to be equipped with their own modules (a practice that a lot have avoided by module swapping). However, a typical mech would have 2 weapon modules and 2 to 3 mech modules which represents a total module cost of anywhere from 12 million to 24 million Cbills/mech just for modules (which is why many swapped modules). Maxed out the new skill tree costs 9.1 million cbills/mech.

For small numbers of mechs this is fine. It is actually cheaper. For folks like me with 80+ mechs and only one or two copies of most modules the new system will be substantially more expensive if I want to obtain equivalent capabilities on each of my mechs.

However ...

3) This is a paradigm shift. Folks will no longer need or likely even want 3 variants of each mech. They will buy one variant, they may buy a second if it offers something different (though with most clan mechs I think folks will probably just swap omni-pods in most cases). For these folks, never having experienced the old system, it works out cheaper to get their mech in the game and level it up because the first few sets of module equivalent skills will cost far less than the modules in the old system.

The people who will feel the pain of the transition most are the long time players (like me) who have many mechs but only a limited number of modules that were swapped between builds. On the other hand, I think the basic design of the new system is actually much better though the skill trees need a better job done on layout and values.

-----------------

Anyway, the costs can't go down much because they are already much less for new players working on the first four to six mechs. The real cost differences only come into play when you look at mastering many mechs and using module swapping. If you did NOT module swap, equipped each mech with its own modules, then the new system actually costs FAR less cbills (~50% to 65% less/mech) than the old one. (However, the folks who equipped every mech with its own weapon and mech modules are few and far between I think).

Finally, respec costs are also part of the grind. Keep in mind that folks aren't that likely to respec the entire tree at once and more likely to either respec an individual node or sub-tree if they change the weapon focus of a mech. The full 2.275 million cbill respec cost applies if you refund all 91 nodes. If you have spent the time and earned the cbills to fund 91 nodes in the first place then are you likely to need to refund ALL of the skill nodes? Are you unlikely to be able to afford to do so? And given that the boosts from individual nodes are virtually meaningless will it actually make any difference?

However, it might be worth considering reducing the respec cost for weapon nodes since it then reduces the cost of maximizing a loadout though, to be honest, perhaps it will motivate folks to take skill nodes in multiple weapon trees in order to already support both changing loadouts and mixed loadouts.





--------------------

[DAYLEET]

Mawai, on 17 February 2017 - 07:09 AM, said:

Anyway, the costs can't go down much because they are already much less for new players working on the first four to six mechs. The real cost differences only come into play when you look at mastering many mechs and using module swapping. If you did NOT module swap, equipped each mech with its own modules, then the new system actually costs FAR less cbills (~50% to 65% less/mech) than the old one. (However, the folks who equipped every mech with its own weapon and mech modules are few and far between I think).

You're new for about a hundred hours.

Edited by DAYLEET, 17 February 2017 - 03:33 PM.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

http://mwomercs.com/...tree-pts-update

Quote

Changes to Skill Tree Economy

Unlocking 1 Skill Node for the first time (for the individual ‘Mech whose Skill Tree you are working with) will now only require 60,000 C-Bills and 800 XP. This is a reduction from the 100,000 C-Bills and 1,500 XP required in the previous PTS build.

There is no longer any C-Bill, MC, or Experience cost for removing a Skill Node once you’ve unlocked it.
Removing a Skill Node you’ve already unlocked (for the individual ‘Mech whose Skill Tree you are working with) has no cost associated with it whatsoever.
In light of the above change, removing a Skill Node you've already unlocked will no longer return the XP spent to acquire it. However, that brings us to the next change.

If you wish to re-acquire a Skill Node you previously removed (from the individual ‘Mech whose Skill Tree you are working with) you will not be required to repurchase that Skill Node at the initial purchase cost.
Re-acquiring Nodes you previously purchased at full cost will only require 400 XP.

This is a step in the right direction.

Instead of 9.1mil CBills and 136,500 MXP to master out a mech, you're looking at 5,460,000 CBills and 72,800 MXP to master out a chassis.

No more respec fee, too.

[Roughneck45]

Saint Scarlett Johan, on 21 February 2017 - 11:52 AM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...tree-pts-update
[/size][/font]

This is a step in the right direction.

Instead of 9.1mil CBills and 136,500 MXP to master out a mech, you're looking at 5,460,000 CBills and 72,800 MXP to master out a chassis.

No more respec fee, too.

Indeed.

I still think we should get cost reductions for multiple variants.

[TercieI]

Saint Scarlett Johan, on 21 February 2017 - 11:52 AM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...tree-pts-update
[/size][/font]

This is a step in the right direction.

Instead of 9.1mil CBills and 136,500 MXP to master out a mech, you're looking at 5,460,000 CBills and 72,800 MXP to master out a chassis.

No more respec fee, too.

A step in the right direction, but still pretty brutal for collectors.

I have 395 mechs, all mastered. I will need 2.156B CB to "master" them all. Between module refunds and CB on hand, I currently have 1.295B CB, a shortfall of 861MM CB or 157 mechs. This still seems needlessly punitive, especially when you consider how many of those mechs I've bought with real dollars.

Edited by TercieI, 21 February 2017 - 12:02 PM.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

TercieI, on 21 February 2017 - 12:01 PM, said:

A step in the right direction, but still pretty brutal for collectors.

I have 395 mechs, all mastered. I will need 2.156B CB to "master" them all. Between module refunds and CB on hand, I currently have 1.295B CB, a shortfall of 861MM CB or 157 mechs. This still seems needlessly punitive, especially when you consider how many of those mechs I've bought with real dollars.

Roughneck45, on 21 February 2017 - 11:59 AM, said:

Indeed.

I still think we should get cost reductions for multiple variants.

Honestly, it actually makes sense to roll the XP trees into Chassis wide trees and not variant trees.

[Roughneck45]

TercieI, on 21 February 2017 - 12:01 PM, said:

A step in the right direction, but still pretty brutal for collectors.

I have 395 mechs, all mastered. I will need 2.156B CB to "master" them all. Between module refunds and CB on hand, I currently have 1.295B CB, a shortfall of 861MM CB or 157 mechs. This still seems needlessly punitive, especially when you consider how many of those mechs I've bought with real dollars.

I'm hoping when its all said and done the total number for the garage will come in under a billion, but I'm not holding my breath.

Edited by Roughneck45, 21 February 2017 - 12:08 PM.

[TercieI]

Roughneck45, on 21 February 2017 - 12:08 PM, said:

I'm hoping when its all said and done the total number for the garage will come in under a billion, but I'm not holding my breath.

I hope when it's all said and done I care at all. It's not looking good.

[Tremendous Upside]

Still way too expensive. The XP cost to me isn't a big factor. C-bills is bunk. So the idea is that I'm punished for not buying oodles of worthless modules? Module buyers get full refunds... OK, so people like me that spent space bux on mechs... can we get full refunds for the ultra low sales prices we sold equipment/mechs for? I've spent real money on mech packs, and real money on skilling many of them up. It's money down a hole... but the module guys are keeping the game afloat... lol.

Bottom line is this. PGI has put themselves in a no-win situation. They cannot remove the rule of three without a replacement sink for cbills. They also can't remove it AND create a more new player friendly XP system without having a sink in place to replace the variants they no longer have to buy. Instead of the obvious solution of separating these two things and working on just the skill tree itself, they're willing to hose a lot of long-time players instead. The more mechs, the more you could be hosed.... Good luck with that . No cbills required, or a refund system that's fair to all of your vets or no thanks.

[Kdogg788]

Saint Scarlett Johan, on 21 February 2017 - 12:06 PM, said:

Honestly, it actually makes sense to roll the XP trees into Chassis wide trees and not variant trees.

While I agree with what you said above about it being a step in the right direction, they have to do away with Cbill costs. I'd rather see a higher XP requirement and little to no Cbills.

-k

[VVonka]

The fundamental problem here is: If you look at whales like Terciel who have spent a ton of real money on this game and own almost 400 mechs, when they have not earned enough cbills from the time their accounts were created to kit out their mechs..... Its a problem. In Terciels case we are talking about a shortfall of 40%. You cant disincentivize people from buying mechs.

[Malrock]

Tremendous Upside, on 21 February 2017 - 12:38 PM, said:

Bottom line is this. PGI has put themselves in a no-win situation. They cannot remove the rule of three without a replacement sink for cbills. They also can't remove it AND create a more new player friendly XP system without having a sink in place to replace the variants they no longer have to buy. Instead of the obvious solution of separating these two things and working on just the skill tree itself, they're willing to hose a lot of long-time players instead. The more mechs, the more you could be hosed.... Good luck with that . No cbills required, or a refund system that's fair to all of your vets or no thanks.

That is why you keep the current skill tree and just add all the rest of the points onto it. See this thread https://mwomercs.com...ready-mastered/

Achieves everything they want to accomplish and prevents horrible results for people who have already mastered.

[Grayseven]

I want to make sure I understand this right: If I want to change my load out, either for some experimentation or to try something different, I have to spend CBills in order to respec skill trees in order to get max effectiveness out of my mech and loadout?

[Roughneck45]

Grayseven, on 21 February 2017 - 02:12 PM, said:

I want to make sure I understand this right: If I want to change my load out, either for some experimentation or to try something different, I have to spend CBills in order to respec skill trees in order to get max effectiveness out of my mech and loadout?

60,000 c-bills and 800xp to unlock the node.

Free to remove the node.

400xp to get back a node you removed.

C-bills and XP for initial cost, XP only for respecs.

Edited by Roughneck45, 21 February 2017 - 02:18 PM.

[soapyfrog]

TercieI, on 21 February 2017 - 12:10 PM, said:

I hope when it's all said and done I care at all. It's not looking good.

I am right there with you. It is ******* depressing.

[soapyfrog]

Roughneck45, on 21 February 2017 - 02:17 PM, said:

400xp to get back a node you removed.

This btw is a HUGE no no, way worse than charging c-bills for respec. You should never ever ever lose xp on a mech. Ever.

That charge for a significant respec could require dozens of games to recover. I would much MUCh rather just pay a c-bill fee which is one and done, but even in that case why charge for respecs at all????

It's like they want to tax every bit of fun in the game.