74 replies to this topic

[El Bandito]

Gas Guzzler, on 02 March 2017 - 08:33 AM, said:

Bandito, you realize that the velocity affects LRMs as well right? I honestly don't think this is a big deal, and weapons still won't sync up any better because you can't just boost your PPCs to be close to your Gauss like you could last time. Also, I thoight velocity only took like 6 nodes last time through the skill tree... soo its more costly now, espeically because survival and mobility are much more costly.

1. I do realize that velocity affect LRMs. Which is why I said this early on in this thread:

El Bandito, on 02 March 2017 - 06:07 AM, said:

At least my ARC-5W can lurm with +30% missile speed cause its velocity hasn't been nerfed...

However, LRM base speed is just so low, the skill difference of 20% is mere +32 m/s, compared to +260 m/s for CERPPC. And CERPPC is meta right now. So this velocity change is further helping the meta, by reducing PPC limitation in speed.

2. Velocity nodes were easier to get for a single weapon type in the old skill tree, but if you are mixing weapons (as in the case of many mechs), it is much easier to get good velocity in this new skill tree, since you had to get velocity separately for each weapon type in the old one. And in the old skill tree at most you can get 12.5% velocity boost, but in the new skill tree you can get 20% velocity easily.

Edited by El Bandito, 02 March 2017 - 08:59 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

El Bandito, on 02 March 2017 - 08:45 AM, said:

1. I do realize that velocity affect LRMs. Which is why I said this early on in this thread:



However, LRM base speed is just so low, the skill difference of 20% is mere +32 m/s, compared to +260 m/s for CERPPC. And CERPPC is meta right now. So this velocity change is further helping the meta.


2. Velocity nodes were easier to get for a single weapon type in the old skill tree, but if you are mixing weapons (as in the case of many mechs), it is much easier to get good velocity in this new skill tree, since you had to get velocity separately for each weapon type in the old one. And in the old skill tree at most you can get 12.5% velocity boost, but in the new skill tree you can get 20% velocity easily.

Okay, which in the case for the meta isn't really a huge benefit. All you want is the ER PPC velocity, not the Gauss velocity as well.

And in the old tree, I was certain you could get the 20% velocity on PPCs. CONFIRMED: it was 20% velocity in the old tree, and it took 5 points.

You also can't get the same heat gen for PPCs without delving into the laser side of the tree which is pretty much useless for any PPC mech.

So... compared to the first PTS, the new system is:

1) More costly to get the velocity buff
2) Less effective for syncing PPC and Gauss
3) An improvement for mixed builds, who now have the velocity buff apply to all of their weapon types (AC20/SRMs, LB/SRMs, etc)
4) Hotter for PPCs as you can't get the same heat gen bonus.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 02 March 2017 - 08:55 AM.

[Jetfire]

DaZur, on 02 March 2017 - 05:09 AM, said:

I don't have an issue with the stacking advantages... It's the fact that there is no compensatory trade off of equal value.

IMHO the skill tree should be more like a sliding scale. The more you invest in one area, the less availability there is elsewhere.

Yes, I understand the point allocation system is similar to this but I don't think the trade-off is harsh enough.

As I see it... Fine, you want to commit to a PPFLD build? Understand "all" your other attributes will be stunted to afford you that luxury.

This is my opinion as well. There should be a max point allocation per category so that choosing X means forgoing Y until a respec. This is like in older WoW if you could just max out arcane, frost and fire specs all at the same time.

[Gas Guzzler]

Jetfire, on 02 March 2017 - 09:02 AM, said:

This is my opinion as well. There should be a max point allocation per category so that choosing X means forgoing Y until a respec. This is like in older WoW if you could just max out arcane, frost and fire specs all at the same time.

This is not WoW. Why does MechWarrior need an RPG like system?

I mean seriously, I still play the old Neverwinter Nights game on an online server that is still active, and its always a give and take, minmaxing classes and feats and bonus feats, and that's great, but then you look at MechWarrior, and we are all doing the same thing... the roles in the game aren't as rigidly defined as in Neverwinter Nights. A scouting light will benefit from most of the same skills as a sniper. Its easy to see how mobility and durability are desired for pretty much every mech in quick play.

Frankly, as cool as the skill tree looks and feels to give yourself all the bonuses, once you realize that EVERYONE is getting the same bonuses its just like... what's the point.

[Zergling]

Gas Guzzler, on 02 March 2017 - 09:11 AM, said:

This is not WoW. Why does MechWarrior need an RPG like system?

To be fair, the skill tree system is quite similar to the talent trees in earlier WoW, before they were replaced with mutually exclusive talent picks around the time of the Cataclysm expansion.

Edited by Zergling, 02 March 2017 - 09:13 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Zergling, on 02 March 2017 - 09:12 AM, said:

To be fair, the skill tree system is quite similar to the talent trees in earlier WoW, before they were replaced with mutually exclusive talent picks around the time of the Cataclysm expansion.

And where is it written in stone that mutually exclusive skill picks are the right thing for MWO? Just because they decided that was the right way to go for WoW doesn't mean that it is for MWO.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Gas Guzzler, on 02 March 2017 - 09:39 AM, said:

And where is it written in stone that mutually exclusive skill picks are the right thing for MWO? Just because they decided that was the right way to go for WoW doesn't mean that it is for MWO.

Since it is a core identity of several mechs to be mixed it doesn't really make sense. What DOES make sense is for chassis or variants to have unique trees. That however requires all 350+ variants to have unique skill trees which is more work than I think anyone is looking for. More reason they should trim down the number of variants even if it means refunding c-bills, MC, or actual money.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 02 March 2017 - 09:49 AM.

[Dark Wooki33 IIC]

Gas Guzzler, on 02 March 2017 - 09:39 AM, said:

And where is it written in stone that mutually exclusive skill picks are the right thing for MWO? Just because they decided that was the right way to go for WoW doesn't mean that it is for MWO.

I dont know ... but one of the things that made BT appealing for many is the customization of mechs ... or in other words min/max shenanigans.

A good skill tree gives us even more min/max stuff to play with.

So we have more fun in the future, maybe?

A fun tree for example is the one from Paths of Exile ... but not sure how you could adapt it nicely for mwo.

[Gas Guzzler]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 02 March 2017 - 09:48 AM, said:

Since it is a core identity of several mechs to be mixed it doesn't really make sense. What DOES make sense is for chassis or variants to have unique trees. That however requires all 350+ variants to have unique skill trees which is more work than I think anyone is looking for. More reason they should trim down the number of variants even if it means refunding c-bills, MC, or actual money.

At that point you might as well do quirks, unless you want to purposely run something on a Mech with huge bonuses for something else. Like if a HBK-4G had huge bonuses to an AC20 in its unique tree, but you wanted to ignore that and put points into Gauss. Why would anyone choose to do that instead of going and running Gauss in something with a unique Gauss tree?

Its the same idea as quirks, you just have to count on PGI to balance the bonus trees correctly (just like they do with quirks), so I don't really see the benefit from that compared to the current system.

[R Valentine]

When is this monstrosity supposed to come out again?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Gas Guzzler, on 02 March 2017 - 09:58 AM, said:

At that point you might as well do quirks, unless you want to purposely run something on a Mech with huge bonuses for something else. Like if a HBK-4G had huge bonuses to an AC20 in its unique tree, but you wanted to ignore that and put points into Gauss. Why would anyone choose to do that instead of going and running Gauss in something with a unique Gauss tree?

Its the same idea as quirks, you just have to count on PGI to balance the bonus trees correctly (just like they do with quirks), so I don't really see the benefit from that compared to the current system.

It is pretty much a similar idea, the only difference is that you would need quirks on that mech to make it equal without any skills to something like the HBK-IIC-A which gets complicated fast.

Honestly I would prefer the skill tree just be dumped and the leveling up process just unlock customization for that chassis or model but that's just me. Kinda similar to how faction levels work.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 02 March 2017 - 10:03 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 02 March 2017 - 10:02 AM, said:

It is pretty much a similar idea, the only difference is that you would need quirks on that mech to make it equal without any skills to something like the HBK-IIC-A which gets complicated fast.

Honestly I would prefer the skill tree just be dumped and the leveling up process just unlock customization for that chassis or model but that's just me. Kinda similar to how faction levels work.

I don't mind the current system actually. Its not a major buff, but the pinpoint skill could be something cool like 5% velocity/duration/spread, and they could even add a 5% structure and armor boost at the mastery level. Just a very minor bump up, nothing ground breaking.

I actually think the skill tree on the PTS buffs mechs too much, making the gap between unmastered mechs and mastered mechs way too big.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Zergling, on 02 March 2017 - 08:35 AM, said:

No, my idea was for velocity bonuses to be balanced in points requirements with other bonuses.

The actual value of the points in my examples are irrelevant as they are only placeholders figures; it could just as easily be +20% velocity for 20 points as it could be for 5 points, so long that it is balanced against other bonuses.

Well, the concept that "all skills should be equal" is a fallacy... Not all Mechs/playstyles place equal reliance on weapons, maneuverability, and sensors. You can't make the Sensor skills "equal" to agility skills and weapon skills because some people don't feel that the sensor skills are as needed as weapons skills, and scouts might put more of an emphasis on UAVs and sensors than the weapons...

It is true that some skills are more valuable than others, but the skill tree branching does accomplish one thing: forcing people to buy a variety of skills does curb min/maxing

Edited by Prosperity Park, 02 March 2017 - 10:15 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Gas Guzzler, on 02 March 2017 - 10:07 AM, said:

I don't mind the current system actually. Its not a major buff, but the pinpoint skill could be something cool like 5% velocity/duration/spread, and they could even add a 5% structure and armor boost at the mastery level. Just a very minor bump up, nothing ground breaking.

Then the question is what about modules in the current system? Do you think they should just add more modules, remove them, etc?

[Felicitatem Parco]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 02 March 2017 - 10:14 AM, said:

Then the question is what about modules in the current system? Do you think they should just add more modules, remove them, etc?

The current system is lame. It's just:

"You got XP! Click here to redeem buffs"

No thought or real involvement of choice. Every single Mech gets the same buffs. It's lame.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 02 March 2017 - 10:17 AM.

[Duke Nedo]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 02 March 2017 - 09:48 AM, said:

Since it is a core identity of several mechs to be mixed it doesn't really make sense. What DOES make sense is for chassis or variants to have unique trees. That however requires all 350+ variants to have unique skill trees which is more work than I think anyone is looking for. More reason they should trim down the number of variants even if it means refunding c-bills, MC, or actual money.

What they could do is to make like 4 different "role" trees and assign each mech variant to one of these roles. That could add some variety I guess.

What they also could so is to just use the scaling factor they already added more aggressively on a variant basis. I.e. KDK-3 gets the 0.5 multiplier, KDK-1 gets the 1.0 multiplier and DRG-1N gets the 3.0 multiplier.

Seems like they are more or less just keeping the quirks and calling them base stats instead and add the skills on top of that. That works too, as long as they stop nerfing the IS quirks when they in fact need buffs...

[Gas Guzzler]

Prosperity Park, on 02 March 2017 - 10:16 AM, said:

The current system is lame. It's just:

"You got XP! Click here to redeem buffs"

No thought or real involvement of choice. Every single Mech gets the same buffs. It's lame.

Who cares, this is MechWarrior not WoW/DnD/Neverwinter Nights etc. You can choose what modules to bring though.

Besides, its not like most people aren't going to be selecting more or less what we got in the old system by default, plus the survival tree.

I mean really... its MechWarrior, its a game with real time interaction, not set up a build and roll some dice to see what happens. I don't see why we need such a heavy skill system.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 02 March 2017 - 10:21 AM.

[Pika]

Prosperity Park, on 02 March 2017 - 10:16 AM, said:

The current system is lame. It's just:

"You got XP! Click here to redeem buffs"

No thought or real involvement of choice. Every single Mech gets the same buffs. It's lame.

And that's different from pretty much any RPG... how exactly? Or any other game for that matter? How is that different than what we already had except with more granularity and no way to get "every" skill now?

I honestly think this is _exactly_ what the game needed, personally.

[Gas Guzzler]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 02 March 2017 - 10:14 AM, said:

Then the question is what about modules in the current system? Do you think they should just add more modules, remove them, etc?

I don't mind them personally. Maybe add some different ones? Like velocity/spread/duration.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Prosperity Park, on 02 March 2017 - 10:16 AM, said:

No thought or real involvement of choice.

Why does it need choice exactly? The skills you are gonna pick are dictated by your build, so the idea that skill trees magically add choice is silly since those "choices" are dictated by the real choices which are your builds.

Duke Nedo, on 02 March 2017 - 10:18 AM, said:

What they could do is to make like 4 different "role" trees and assign each mech variant to one of these roles. That could add some variety I guess.

I feel like this would be too generic since specific quirks like spread/duration/etc related skills are going to have different levels of usefulness depending on the mech.

Duke Nedo, on 02 March 2017 - 10:18 AM, said:

What they also could so is to just use the scaling factor they already added more aggressively on a variant basis. I.e. KDK-3 gets the 0.5 multiplier, KDK-1 gets the 1.0 multiplier and DRG-1N gets the 3.0 multiplier.

No, because it means un-basiced bad mechs like DGN-1N are even worse than mastered KDK-3s. The skill tree should NOT be balancing mechs (or weapons for that matter).