368 replies to this topic

[Uncle Totty]

Maybe if you guys tell us what causes these delays and/or set up deadlines you know you can reach there may be far less anger right now.

Edited by Uncle Totty, 01 March 2017 - 01:54 AM.

[Doctor Dinosaur]

Uncle Totty, on 01 March 2017 - 01:53 AM, said:

Maybe if you guys tell us what causes these delays and/or set up deadlines you know you can reach there may be far less anger right now.

That's communications 101 (literally, had some course 2 months ago)

[Summoner6]

I for one welcome the changes it will bring. It will completely change the meta and maybe, just maybe get rid of boating weapons for insane alpha strikes. Time to kill is another welcome change for newer players and will make this game far more forgiving. I know when I first started, I was dying quite regularly from making mistakes I didn't even know I was making. The skill ceiling can be quite high for this game, knowing weapon ranges etc and most importantly staying calm when being peppered with fire.

I will keep an open mind and will be definitely trying the PTS when it comes out. Looking forward to the developments. Keep up the good work PGI credit where credit is due after all

[Racerxintegra2k]

MovinTarget, on 27 February 2017 - 08:18 AM, said:

I keep saying it... instead of refunding XP/GXP, each variant should simply get a pool of available skillpoints based on how far they got leveled. So if you mastered the mech, you get 91 SP when the trees go live. Granted you only get 91 regardless of how many copies of that variant you own, but it would ensure that you get exactly what you put into the mech.

Yes, PGI, I know the new process is more expensive and grind-y, so from your perspective it may not seem fair, however, if you are looking for players to "buy in" to the new system, this is about the only way I see you fully placating all players, casual to whale.

I think a lot of the ire and salt would dissipate if you just did this, moving forward, most people could live with the change, they just want applicable credit for what they've done to this point.

This sums up how i feel 100% .. 115 mechs how many will actually be at the same level after the minor refund. I rarely buy modules but master most of my mechs.

[RjBass3]

Rhialto, on 20 February 2017 - 07:44 PM, said:

Oh, can you add a clock in the MechLab? I always need to ALT-TAB to know the time. I think I requested this 2 years ago... but if too complex, I just can keep using ALT-TAB and crash once every 5-10 games. I've heard there is less crash using Windowed Mode but I must play Full Screen to trigger 3D Vision. Huge sacrifice to have depth I suppose.

Do you monitor bro?

[Appogee]

LOL.

Please PGI, slow down!

If you maintain this breakneck pace of development, quality could suffer!

[DAYLEET]

Rhialto, on 20 February 2017 - 07:44 PM, said:

Oh, can you add a clock in the MechLab? I always need to ALT-TAB to know the time. I think I requested this 2 years ago... but if too complex, I just can keep using ALT-TAB and crash once every 5-10 games. I've heard there is less crash using Windowed Mode but I must play Full Screen to trigger 3D Vision. Huge sacrifice to have depth I suppose.

Maybe someone already said it but just use Steam and bring the overlay in view when you need the clock.

[Wintersdark]

Doctor Dinosaur, on 01 March 2017 - 12:31 AM, said:

I'm still wondering how PGI will re-balance the fact that mechs have a different number of available module slots. This buff/nerf will vanish and be replaced with nothing, usually (I think) resulting in a buff for clanners or a nerf for IS.

I play clans, I am ok with that...

(not really)

Obviously not, as modules are rolled into the new skill tree. But +/- 1 module is trivial at the best of times and only has an impact at all if someone uses and needs the extra modules. Even if you're talking a rare example like the timber wolf with 1/1/1/2, that's enough to get seismic or radar derp, and either CD+range for your main weapon or either for two. Most clan Mechs are 1/2/1, though, so they don't even have to be that picky.

Frankly: having one more module slot is neat, but not a significant balance concern either way, and most clan Mechs have the same number of module slots as IS Mechs.

[Evantas]

I think the cost is still too great for c-bills, 50k or 40k per pt unlock would have made it still steep, but less of a burn for people who want to master multiple mechs. XP-wise I think it's fine.

[Righter8]

Rhialto, on 20 February 2017 - 07:44 PM, said:

Oh, can you add a clock in the MechLab? I always need to ALT-TAB to know the time. I think I requested this 2 years ago... but if too complex, I just can keep using ALT-TAB and crash once every 5-10 games. I've heard there is less crash using Windowed Mode but I must play Full Screen to trigger 3D Vision. Huge sacrifice to have depth I suppose.

SOLVED:
option 1


option 2


option 3

Edited by Righter8, 01 March 2017 - 09:15 AM.

[Manny Rhyde]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 20 February 2017 - 07:54 PM, said:

These mostly look like good changes. My only reticence comes from the apparent retention of the spiderweb system instead of an actual tree with branches.

Edit: I've been advocating for the agility change for a long time. I am extremely pleased to see it joining the next test build.

One thing that i do not like about the skill tree is that add a skill with MC and Cbills is on the same icon, just different sides. There needs to be a toggle to buy with C bills or MC

[mp00]

I hear many still upset with cbill costs. I do hope PGI can include the actual refund in this or another PTS instead of just a blanket amount. So people can get a real feel what the cost difference will be.

[WarHippy]

Wintersdark, on 27 February 2017 - 10:28 AM, said:

This difference is that ALL lights will have and advantage vs all big assaults, not just fast vs. slow. Speed will still matter, as they can pounce quickly and retreat as fast, but agility will be tunable per weight class and even per individual mech, something that isn't possible right now. I'm not getting involved with theory crafting about where specific values will be (how agile will 100t assaults be?) As that's tunable. It's the fact that after this change, well have more balance ***** across the board

This is where you lose me. What you are describing is a hard counter system and frankly that always makes for bad game play. Hard counters or even pseudo hard counters are not "more balanced ***** across the board". lights<mediums<heavies<assaults<lights should not be a thing.

Wintersdark, on 27 February 2017 - 10:55 AM, said:

Right now, any changes to mobility have very varied impacts because of that. Add a +turn rate perk, and mechs with large engines gain massively while mechs with smaller engines don't gain anything. Having all these mobility values being calculated values instead of specified just means they're not really adjustable.

Say PGI feels Mediums need to be more agile as a chassis. Sure, they could quirk all mediums with +10% turn rate, but that means that the mediums which already turn fast (and thus don't really benefit) turn super-fast and the rest still turn slowly(staying too clumsy to benefit). Once that percentage is high enough to allow slow mediums to turn quickly, then fast mediums are just broken. Because we can change engines, it's not enough to just only apply the quirk to "the slow mechs" as a mech can be fast or slow.

In this system, you can tune a specific chassis (or a whole weight class) and have it have a fixed impact. All the mechs just gain or lose whatever amount of turn rate you want.

It's a balance point that can be adjusted simply with a fixed impact. Want a Phoenix Hawk to be more agile, regardless? No problem. Feel the Dire Wolf isn't quite agile enough, but don't want the Kodiak to twist like a dancer? Or want the KDK-2 to turn quicker at low speeds but not over-buff a 400XL equipped KDK-2? No problem.

Other than the underlined the quirk system could have done and did all of that. Even the underlined they probably could have made a quirk that excluded engines above a certain rating. None of what you have described appears to be fixing anything other than making mechs that didn't have mobility quirks that much less desirable. Sure, it will depend on base value that are given which is why I am more than willing to try it out, but I am not nearly as optimistic as you are.

Wintersdark, on 27 February 2017 - 10:28 AM, said:

There's really no disadvantage here. The worst thing that happens is that you lose some customization of mobility [but note, we have mobility skills you can choose to take or not], but that customization of mobility is the least important aspect of engine size except in cases where you want to go low in rating for whatever reason. If the baseline mobility levels are Good Enough without mobility skills, then perhaps you won't take all the mobility skills to be able to take something else. Aaaand then, there you have it, customization again. In exactly the same way you have it with engines now.

That is a mighty big If. Those mobility skills also are to make up for the mobility skills in the old tree not just what was lost from decoupling then engines from mobility. I'm not sure I agree that we have all this customization you seem to think we have when in all likelihood it is still going to be a net loss across the board. I just hope I am wrong.

[Kuaron]

So what has been updated in the post?

[MovinTarget]

Kuaron, on 01 March 2017 - 11:21 AM, said:

So what has been updated in the post?

Just that little blurb at the very top:

"STATUS UPDATE[color=#EEEEEE]
Tuesday February 28th[/color]
[color=#EEEEEE]
[/color]
[color=#EEEEEE]
We're in the process of finalizing the changes outlined in this post before we hit the launch button on the upcoming PTS update. The update is still set for this week, so keep an eye out for the update and a more detailed summary of changes in the coming day or two."[/color]

[Delta1262 Scorch]

So, yeah. What was in the end of the week, and then in early beginning of the next...it's already that next week, middle of it, and even next month)...i really do hope to see it in closest day or something, before another weekend. Checking the main page like 10 times or more during every day.

[Baron Zen]

I don't udnerstand what happens to all the grind we did until now (mech xp and Gxp)? Just reset and restart all blank or they are refounded? Also, what about modules that cost even more than a new mech? Also i am not agree about the expense of the already low CB incoming for xp, you guys are making this game too much grind like a korean mmorpg, to grind in the same 4-5 maps and 2-3 modes is funny like shotting a Gauss directly in the own BEEEP.

[MechaBattler]

You get all your GXP back. You get the combined XP of all variants for the same mech chassis.

[C E Dwyer]

So Friday then as a guess

[Oberost]

Cathy, on 01 March 2017 - 01:42 PM, said:

So Friday then as a guess

Nope:

"The next update to the PTS Skill Tree build – the contents of which are outlined below – is currently slated for early next week."