36 replies to this topic

[Skribs]

This is what I envision could work as a viable skill tree for MWO. Hopefully the image gives plenty of information for how I can see it working, but I'd like to give a big description of my plan.

Basically, MMOs like World of Warcraft used to have complex skill systems, and have gone the way of going instead for big-decision trees. For example, you might get a choice between different ways to freeze an enemy, or you might get a choice between a constant damage increase, a skill-based damage increase, or a burst damage increase. The idea is make it so you only have 6-7 talents out of 18-21 instead of 80+, but you also get a big bang for your buck out of each one. Now, personally, I wish for a bit more customization than that in an MMO, but as MWO already has the MechLab, I don't see it as a big issue. We can already fine-tune the amount of heat sinks and ammo we have, what we need is a system that would allow us to select our role.

In my example, I have created a 6-tier system, where you can put 1 point into each tier with 3 options, and 2 points into each tier with 5 options. I tried to keep the options fairly generic (i.e. not limited to a particular build), but I understand most Gauss builds will get advanced zoom and anyone who doesn't have AMS, ECM, TAG, or NARC will get Capture Assist because that point won't do any good anywhere else. While that isn't ideal, it's also not too big a problem, as there is still customization everywhere else.

You'll also notice the Bonus Points. How I envision these working is a combination of the Elite bonuses, as well as the quirk system. It also allows you to focus on an area (i.e. you could use multiple bonus points in Firepower if you want to get the most firepower) or to pick up a second option in a tier you weren't really expecting to get.

Every Mech would get a bonus point at 8/8 points spent. Mechs that are heavily quirked now would get bonus points at other levels as well. For example, a Stalker 3F, 5M, or Misery might get 1 bonus point (the default), a 5S might get 2 bonus point, and a 3H or 4N might get 3 bonus points (assuming quirks are going away). Something more heavily quirked, like a Locust 1V, might get 7 bonus points.

XP costs would scale up as you spent more. For example, your points could cost:

• 750
  
• 1500
  
• 2500
  
• 4000
  
• 5000
  
• 7500
  
• 15000
  
• 25000

That would be a total of 56,250, which is similar to what we have now. I'd be fine with anything up to 80,000 total, but more than that is punishing for new players, or for players who are in higher tier matches trying to level.



Bonus Points would be granted at specific points. In the case of a Hunchback 4G that gets 4 bonus points total (as an example), it might get them at 1, 3, 6, and 8 points. That means after spending 750 XP and placing a point, you can place an additional point. After spending 2500 XP on the third point (or 4750 total) you get another bonus point, and so on. Some Mechs might get a bonus point at 0.

Respec costs would be in XP. Respeccing any point, whether it is a standard point or a bonus point, would be 1000 XP per point. This is enough to make you play a little bit with the Mech, but not so much as to be punishing.

C-Bills and MC should be kept out of the leveling experience. The rule of 3 should also be removed to give new players who do not have a lot of Mechbays a chance to compete.

A quick look at each tier and why I chose what I chose:

• Firepower is designed to increase your effectiveness against the enemy. The options here are for higher burst DPS (fast fire), higher sustained DPS (Cool Run), or to simply have an easier time hitting the enemy (because misses do 0 damage).
  
• Mobility is designed to affect how you can move around. Agility and Dexterity are strong because they're up against Speed Tweak. Someone who gets legged a lot or has trouble on maps like Alpine and Canyon might want Dexterity, while someone who peeks a lot, backpedals a lot, or wants to be unpredictable might prefer Agility.
  
• Defensive gives you the option between simple damage padding, sensory defensiveness, or a reduced chance of losing weapons or dying to ammo explosions.
  
• The purpose of each utility option should be obvious. Capture accelerator would be the default if none of the other apply to you. This is the tier I am honestly least proud of, and I wanted to find ways to put in improvements to consumables, and possibly a Tracking buff (i.e. +2 seconds to how long it takes after you shoot someone before they can start capping a resource point again). However, I couldn't figure out how to balance it without increasing to a 5-point tier, which would then allow you to get 2 points, and then half the team would likely have Capture Assist and Tracking.
  
• The Sensory Tier replaces most of the common modules, so it's fitting that you can get 2 of them. I combined Target Info Gathering and Improved Sensor Range, although either or both of those could be combined with others, as could 360 targeting. I just felt combining them in any other arrangement would make another one too powerful.
  
• The Flexibility Tier is there to allow you to control how well you can move. Torso Twist would be good defensively, turn speed for mobility, torso pitch if you have a lot of torso-mounted weapons, arm movement if you need it, and improved gyros if you find you have trouble staying on target.

Overall, this type of a tree would give you some control over how you enhance your Mech, and give you more control in specialization (especially as you get more and more bonus points on various chassis). It also takes away most of the complaints people have about the current system, which include:

• Too expensive C-Bill wise
  
• Too long to level a Mech
  
• Respec Costs
  
• Too easy to get all the defensive, mobility, and sensory skills
  
• Individual Weapon Skills encourage boating
  
• Cookie Cutter builds ignore roles and desired gameplay strategy
  
• Nerfs to torso twist
  
• Too big to fit on the screen
  
• Too complex for newer players
  
• Loss of quirks

Edited by Skribs, 19 February 2017 - 02:12 PM.

[soapyfrog]

Thoughtful, streamlined, easy to visualize. Well done.

[Skribs]

soapyfrog, on 19 February 2017 - 01:58 PM, said:

Thoughtful, streamlined, easy to visualize. Well done.

Thank you!

[maxdest]

Good concept, meaningfull clear choices.

I think more flavourfull would be some bonus points may be restricted to trees (e.g. Atlas may get +2 bonus in definsive and one free bonus point to freely spend). Also, I think the actual values could use tweaks to even things up and not make obvious choices for any one build, my suggestions would be:

Down from 6 'trees' to 4:

Firepower:
-Move duration to Fast fire, and add jam chance.
-Add Range, projectile spread to aim assist.
-Add ammo capacity to cool run, rename to 'Sustained firepower'

Merge Mobility and Flexibility trees.
- keep speed tweak
- merge torso twist range,torso pitch range and and Arm movement range
- Add a new torso twist speed and arm twist speed
- merge Agility tweak and turn speed, but minus jump distance
- Merge dexterity tweak and imprived giros jump distance and fall damage


Merge Sensory and utility:
-Remove scouting package
-Add sensor range to 360 targeting
-Add Target Info to Advanced zoom
-Move radar derp from defensive here, and add Utility package
-Add a UAV , Strike quirk and spotter package to Target Decay

Defensive:
-Add +15% structure to internal hardening
-Change Reinforced armour to alblative armour (15% vs balisics / missiles)
-Add reflective armour (15% vs laser / PPC)

Edited by maxdest, 19 February 2017 - 03:31 PM.

[Skribs]

I like your firepower ideas, but the reason I kept duration on aim assist is because it's easier to get your full damage on target. I can understand why you'd go either way.

Your mobility/flexibility ideas make sense. I don't know if it's better than mine, just a good alternative.

Don't know that I'd make the changes you suggest to armor.

Either way, your changes are obviously thought out and not just some "your idea sucks, here's mine." I appreciate it!

[maxdest]

I think its a challenge to keep the flavour of the choice, whilst also looking at balance.

Ideally every choice should have a benefit to every build. e.g. the guass build on firepower gets nothing from 'cool running' unless you add an ammo quirk. Mechs with no arms get no benefit from arm movement.

Also ideally you dont want a simple choice for every meta build. e.g. seismic is by far the best meta choice for sensors, so the other choices need a boost to compete.

Edited by maxdest, 19 February 2017 - 03:44 PM.

[Skribs]

maxdest, on 19 February 2017 - 03:38 PM, said:

I think its a challenge to keep the flavour of the choice, whilst also looking at balance.

Ideally every choice should have a benefit to every build. e.g. the guass build on firepower gets nothing from 'cool running' unless you add an ammo quirk. Mechs with no arms get no benefit from arm movement.

Also ideally you dont want a simple choice for every meta build. e.g. seismic is by far the best meta choice for sensors, so the other choices need a boost to compete.

In some cases, yes there would be an ideal choice or bad choices for your build, and that's entirely okay. Would a Gauss build benefit more from firing faster or from having an easier time hitting? That's up to the player to decide (a better player may opt for the DPS increase, while I would go for the aim assistance). As long as most builds benefit from multiple items, or as long as multiple items let you further customize your Mech to the role you want, the system works.

Seismic is good, but there are situations when most of the others would be better. LRM boats would by far prefer target retention, and snipers would prefer advanced zoom. Mechs that move around a lot wouldn't make as much use of seismic.

Overall, the complaints you have about this system apply to the currently proposed system. Lots of skills provide 0 benefit (such as arm skills on a torso-only Mech), lots of skills are "must-haves" that you will basically get the mobility/defensive/sensory tree maxed and then figure it out from there. This would probably lead to greater variety than the current skill trees, because players would actually make a choice.

[maxdest]

Make no mistake, I think your proposal is worlds above the 'choose 91 linked incremental hexes' model, and I am trying to help build on the concept.

From a casual play perspective the values you have will definatly see more variety of builds. However, whilst I make no claim to be an elite player, I don't think many elites run e.g. LRM or advanced zoom (wheras seismic is the best module). Ideally the balance should apply to all levels, so some skill choices probably need a boost.

[Skribs]

maxdest, on 19 February 2017 - 04:10 PM, said:

Make no mistake, I think your proposal is worlds above the 'choose 91 linked incremental hexes' model, and I am trying to help build on the concept.

From a casual play perspective the values you have will definatly see more variety of builds. However, whilst I make no claim to be an elite player, I don't think many elites run e.g. LRM or advanced zoom (wheras seismic is the best module). Ideally the balance should apply to all levels, so some skill choices probably need a boost.

I agree, but balancing around the casual player is loads easier than balancing around the elite players who run only meta builds. In any skill system there will almost always be a "best" and that best will be chosen by most elite players for competitive purposes. It's a nice goal to have, but one not so easily obtained.

Thank you for saying it's loads better than their hex system.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

I love this, this is exactly what a skill tree should be. The most important thing here is that the choices you make are meaningful. I thought about my top 4 mechs and went through the table deciding where I would put points with each of them. Sufficed to say I had fun envisioning it, and it felt fair and balanced. I would definitely support this system.

[The Jerol]

Well done, Skribs. I like it.

I'm a returning player (coming back after a 3-year hiatus) and still consider myself very new. I like the skill choices you set out in your example. Hopefully, it will allow the quirk system to remain as I see any change in that system to be very worrisome for game balance. IS mechs needed the quirks to remain competitive and a lot of the mechs I currently run take advantage of those quirks. Forcing the players to make choices will definitely still result in established "meta" builds (as it does in every game) but it beats the pigeon-holing that will come from the proposed 91-skill system.


TJ

[Skribs]

Jack Shayu Walker, on 20 February 2017 - 07:38 AM, said:

I love this, this is exactly what a skill tree should be. The most important thing here is that the choices you make are meaningful. I thought about my top 4 mechs and went through the table deciding where I would put points with each of them. Sufficed to say I had fun envisioning it, and it felt fair and balanced. I would definitely support this system.

I appreciate it! Just curious, were all 4 builds different?

The Jerol, on 20 February 2017 - 08:45 AM, said:

Well done, Skribs. I like it.

I'm a returning player (coming back after a 3-year hiatus) and still consider myself very new. I like the skill choices you set out in your example. Hopefully, it will allow the quirk system to remain as I see any change in that system to be very worrisome for game balance. IS mechs needed the quirks to remain competitive and a lot of the mechs I currently run take advantage of those quirks. Forcing the players to make choices will definitely still result in established "meta" builds (as it does in every game) but it beats the pigeon-holing that will come from the proposed 91-skill system.


TJ

The Bonus Point system I put in there is meant to replace the quirks. That way you get a choice of how you upgrade your Mech and it doesn't lock you into specific builds on specific Mechs.

[The Jerol]

Skribs, on 20 February 2017 - 08:51 AM, said:

The Bonus Point system I put in there is meant to replace the quirks. That way you get a choice of how you upgrade your Mech and it doesn't lock you into specific builds on specific Mechs.

Replacing the quirks worries me (and this must be taken with a huge grain of salt as I really am a very new player, experience-wise). Clan mechs have so many advantages to begin with (better damage, better XL engine, better slot requirements, and often better hardpoint locations) that eliminating the IS quirks would be a tacit buff to Clan mechs. When both IS and Clan get access to the exact same skills, the inherent advantages of the Clan would become too pronounced (in the absence of quirks). And I guess that's my main issue with the entire skill tree change. It essentially blows up a 5-year system which has been honing game balance.

Perhaps allowing IS mechs to have additional skill points to spend would remedy the problem?


TJ

[Skribs]

That is the bonus point system. A Mech that needs no quirks or very few would get 1 bonus point as a reward for going 8/8. Other Mechs may get more. So a Dire Wolf would only get the 1, but an Atlas may get 2-3, and something like a Spider 5V would get like 8 bonus points.

[Excalibaard]

Very interesting idea.

With your example of the LCT-1V / SDR-5V though I think a problem with the current system is highlighted. The 1V might get 7 extra points, but where would he put all 15 without some becoming essentially useless? Some of the locust variants are simply extremely undergunned compared to other lights and therefore receive a massive cooldown quirk for that one weapon that they can mount. Same for the SDR-5V. The amount of utility that the mechs can potentially get from the other trees is not up to par for the handicap in firepower that these mechs have. And if it's made more powerful, other mechs will get too large bonuses.

Here are some ideas that may improve the concept further to aid with fringe cases such as these:

It may be good to allow mechs to spend (a certain amount of) bonus points only in a certain 'tree' as their 'quirk'. Or have a skill unlocked by default (basically a bonus point, but you don't get to choose where to put it). They could have a lore-based background on how the mechs were sturdy, therefore they get a defensive bonus point. Or they were incredibly agile, so they get Agility by default.
A few mechs have need for quirks due to specific structural differences, such as the Centurion's shield arm or Hunchback's shoulder, which can be added as a mech-specific skill that you can put a point into if you want or get by default, instead of a bonus point.

An advanced additional option would be to reduce the trees to skills which benefit a certain playstyle. For example: Scout, Brawler, Support, Tank. Each mech would get a main class and sub-class assignment in the store/mechlab screen that indicates what roles it's best at performing.
That gives a few options for the overlap that I suggested earlier without needing multiple levels in a skill. There could be a few semi-duplicate skills such as 'increased front armor by 15%' (Brawler) or 'increase all armor by 10%' (Tank) which, if people have the points and really want to, can both be taken for a very defensive mech. It reduces the other available options in 'Brawler' however, thus is likely less of an offensive option.

Here are some skill ideas as I envision them in their respective classes:
Scout: Radar dep., Target decay, Targeting Info, Mech speed, Sensor range, TAG/NARC bonuses, accel/decel, Turn rate, Seismic
Brawler: Accuracy*, Velocity**, Coolrun, Turn rate, +front armor, twist rate, arm rate, twist angles.
Support: Velocity**, Range***, Fast Fire, accel/decel,+back armor, Lock speed, Target decay, AMS
Tank: Reduce damage taken from energy, - ballistic, AMS, + component health, arm rate, twist rate, +structure, +leg armor, less shake.

*Accuracy: Lower spread Missiles&LBX, Lower burn time lasers
**Velocity: Higher speed Ballistics, Missiles & PPC
***Range: Slower damage drop-off Ballistics & Energy

Each mech would get 1 point in a non-class, and 2/4 or 3/3 for their 'sub/main class' respectively. The problem here is that Coolrun and Fast Fire are no longer exclusive and have to battle it out against turn rate skills, which many players will undervalue, but that could be fixed with specific numbers balancing.

Another idea is to stick with the skills the way you have them now, but you could make it a bit like the Mastery system in LoL. where you could choose several tiers of a same skill or spread your points over multiple (though unlike league of legends, here spreading may actually have a benefit and will be limited by the amount of points that a mech is allowed to put in a certain tree). The amount of points is increased, but each skill can only have a certain maximum of points assigned, different for each mech. Maybe bonus points can be used to increase past the maximum, (perhaps at a cost of 2 points for 1 rank).
Something like that would also improve the case for very underpowered mechs besides 'just get more points'.

Edited by Excalibaard, 20 February 2017 - 10:35 AM.

[Skribs]

Regarding the extra points vs. quirks:

I agree, it's not perfect, but it would allow your Mechs who have less hardpoints to provide other utility. That Locust, for example, might be able to get all the sensory, defensive, and a couple of the mobility quirks, which would make it a very effective scout. It's damage potential wouldn't be the same, but it would be great at sensing enemies.

It is also possible with this system to keep the quirks and then keep the bonus points at 1 or slightly vary them (i.e. how some Mechs get a bonus module slot). The system doesn't have to eliminate quirks, I was merely pointing to a way it could be done, and it would be a lot more customizable and simpler to illustrate.

Your last idea might also play in as well, although it would be kind of hard to balance. For example, putting 3 points into cool run might start to get excessive and allow high-energy boats too easy a time. Putting 5 points into fast fire would be good for a Locust, but overpowered for other Mechs. There are netcode issues with speed (to my understanding) so a Locust with 4 bonus points in Speed Tweak might break the game. I guess things like Seismic Sensor could have a range increase. Might not be a bad way to do bonus points.

Regarding Classes:

I don't particularly like the idea of classes, because I feel it makes it harder to make a Mech your own. We already have enough restrictions in our build.

[WolvesX]

I really like this!

[Osis]

It is better than what is being put forth, but I do have to ask "why". With all the other areas needing improvement did anyone ask for this?

Was this on the top of anyone lists?

S!

[Skribs]

Osis, on 20 February 2017 - 01:46 PM, said:

It is better than what is being put forth, but I do have to ask "why". With all the other areas needing improvement did anyone ask for this?

Was this on the top of anyone lists?

S!

A lot of people want a new skill system as the current system has not been changed since beta, barring nerfing Speed Tweak. Nobody likes the Rule of 3 and want that removed (although that could happen without a new skill system). At the very least, Pinpoint needs to change since it literally does nothing since they changed how convergence works in early beta.

A lot of people want a system where they make choices instead of just get everything

[Bellum Dominum]

Skribs, on 20 February 2017 - 02:01 PM, said:

A lot of people want a new skill system as the current system has not been changed since beta, barring nerfing Speed Tweak. Nobody likes the Rule of 3 and want that removed (although that could happen without a new skill system). At the very least, Pinpoint needs to change since it literally does nothing since they changed how convergence works in early beta.

A lot of people want a system where they make choices instead of just get everything

Skill Tree is being worked on right now. I think Osis point is why you came along with a completely different type of skill tree while one is in the process already of being worked on.

As to your skill tree. Personally I'd be completely done with this game if they implemented such a simplistic system. It appears to me as all you have done is take the current skills and modules and refaced them while at the same time lowering their costs.

No thank you.