41 replies to this topic

[MechaBattler]

I would keep playing. I might even play more. The c-bill cost is the only thing I still don't approve of. But it is technically cheaper than the module system and 3xMech mastering.

[ForceUser]

I've returned in anticipation of the skill tree. Someone else is free to leave the game in my place

Seriously though it's a lot of noise that won't amount to much. People won't stop playing because of this.

[R Valentine]

MechaBattler, on 07 March 2017 - 09:32 AM, said:

I would keep playing. I might even play more. The c-bill cost is the only thing I still don't approve of. But it is technically cheaper than the module system and 3xMech mastering.

That's assuming you have modules on every single mech and aren't transferring them between mechs. Most people are moving them around, so it is technically not cheaper than the module system.

[MechaBattler]

I was thinking more from the perspective of a new player.

Cost of 3 mechs. 3x1.5mill for dubs. 3xEndo. At least 1 set of weapons and equipment to swap between the three. Then at least 2 weapon modules to swap between them, probably 6 mill. Granted you can sell stock equipment, but it sells for so much less, I hang on to my weapons and only sell stock engines if I have multiples.

PTS version

Cost of 1 mech, 1.5 mill dubs, endo, weapons and equipment. Then 5.6 mill for reaching mastered in skills.

Really it seems like it's hurting people with large hangers more. Should give mechs a legacy discount if they're already mastered when it goes live.

[R Valentine]

MechaBattler, on 07 March 2017 - 11:04 AM, said:

I was thinking more from the perspective of a new player.

Cost of 3 mechs. 3x1.5mill for dubs. 3xEndo. At least 1 set of weapons and equipment to swap between the three. Then at least 2 weapon modules to swap between them, probably 6 mill. Granted you can sell stock equipment, but it sells for so much less, I hang on to my weapons and only sell stock engines if I have multiples.

PTS version

Cost of 1 mech, 1.5 mill dubs, endo, weapons and equipment. Then 5.6 mill for reaching mastered in skills.

Really it seems like it's hurting people with large hangers more. Should give mechs a legacy discount if they're already mastered when it goes live.

Even then, it's still taxing new players. Before(now), new players needed 3 variants to completely master. But variants all play different, especially IS since you can't swap omnipods. Different quirks, hard points, etc. So even though you need to grind up exp through playing a mech, the C-bills you get while doing that can go into buying another mech. Even if you do put them towards modules, those modules are universal. They can go on any mech. So you're still putting it towards another mech or something that can be used on another mech.

New system, not so much. NOT ONE DIME OF THOSE C-BILLS YOU SPEND SKILLING UP GOES TOWARDS NEW MECHS. Not in any way, shape, or form. No modules you can shuffle later. Even weapons can be moved around. Engines are highly valuable. But skills, you're SOL. Those c-bills you've been getting while grinding xp? They go NOWHERE. They go towards 1 mech and 1 mech only. It will be FOREVER before you can afford the c-bills for a new mech, let alone trying to skill up that one. EVERYONE gets screwed with this system. Not just old players. It just takes newer players longer to figure that out.

[MechaBattler]

That is the biggest downside, not being able to gather c-bills as you farm exp. The swappable modules is very much a target of this new system. They don't want you to avoid this c-bill sink like you could with those. I honestly think that we'll have to take this one in the knee. They seem pretty intent on not letting you get out of paying up.

[soapyfrog]

And that is why they will lose many paying customers.

The supposed value add of the skill tree is not in any way worth the c-Bill price tag they are slapping on it. The punitive nature of the costs and the outright loss of XP when you respec are very demotivational.

[FireStoat]

The key to getting a gamer addicted to a game is a sense of accomplishment, challenge, and the ability to deliver variety that appeals to a wide range of players. The new system is taking several steps back in some of those areas rather than forward in comparison to what we already have, period. The degree in which players will feel the grind will have to be weighed against the fun there is to be had in the game, which is balanced by that sense of accomplishment.

PGI's about to be in for a rude awakening.

Edit - to be more clear, the #1 game on Twitch streaming is League of Legends, another Free to Play format game, and I firmly believe it's in that position for several reasons. One of the key reasons, in my opinion, is that a new player starts earning game credit and has the ability to spend that game credit directly in places they want and will be happy with. In instances where the player has to 'level up' their account more to access other things they might want for their account, they are given the ability to just keep playing and save their credit until the unlock is met.

Under no circumstances is a player forced to play, then pay, to unlock anything that is undesired. Nothing. If someone could point out a top performing / high population game that follows that trend of play, I'd love to see it. Because successful games don't use it at all.

Edited by FireStoat, 07 March 2017 - 12:25 PM.

[R Valentine]

FireStoat, on 07 March 2017 - 12:19 PM, said:

The key to getting a gamer addicted to a game is a sense of accomplishment, challenge, and the ability to deliver variety that appeals to a wide range of players. The new system is taking several steps back in some of those areas rather than forward in comparison to what we already have, period. The degree in which players will feel the grind will have to be weighed against the fun there is to be had in the game, which is balanced by that sense of accomplishment.

PGI's about to be in for a rude awakening.

It's a suicidal business model. With every mech costing c-bill to skill up, no one will buy new mechs anymore. Why would you? You haven't even finished the ones you have. You haven't even gotten the chance to play your current mechs at their full potential. No new mechs = no new money for PGI. I'll play the new skill tree for a time after its release, but once my current c-bill reserve dries up I'm out. I will not purchase premium time to run on the hamster wheel, nor will I buy new mechs only to suck in them because I don't have the almighty skills. I'll find other games to play.

[FireStoat]

MechaBattler, on 07 March 2017 - 11:22 AM, said:

That is the biggest downside, not being able to gather c-bills as you farm exp. The swappable modules is very much a target of this new system. They don't want you to avoid this c-bill sink like you could with those. I honestly think that we'll have to take this one in the knee. They seem pretty intent on not letting you get out of paying up.

I honestly feel you are correct, but it could have been handled better. Here's my thought on what could have been tried, just off the top of my head.

Keep the current system as is, including 3 mechs to Master.
Remove all modules from all accounts. Refund Cbills and GXP that was required to purchase them on each account.
Add a new small charge of Cbills for a player to unlock the Basic tree of a mech to allocate points.
Add a moderately larger CBill charge for a player to unlock the Elite portion of the tree to allocate points.
Add a final Cbill charge to unlock the Master part of the tree, ie, the extra module space.
Allow all players to retain their current skill progression with mechs as-is, with no charge. They are grandfathered in.

Put in a new, wider range of Modules into the game. Make their costs a much lower percentage in CBills and GXP than they are in the current game. Modules selected and purchased are now locked to a particular mech, held in an available pool for that mech to slot in or remove back to the pool. No more module swapping between mechs.

Conduct a review of modules and strength and severely nerf or eliminate 'must have' modules such as radar deprivation, seismic sensor, and so forth. Do what is necessary to put all modules on a more even footing. Where necessary, adjust the price of the lowest performing modules to be a much cheaper selection to make them attractive for a player to purchase for a 'what if?' scenario they might contemplate.

Review the lowest performing mechs for possible additional module slotting to accommodate the new, larger range of modules to assist their play value. While doing so, review inherent quirks for mechs as well.

Done. The C-bill sink is established, the older players don't have to re-skill or pay an extortion-level fee just to play the mechs they were used to, and a newer range of bonuses for mechs is created. If curbing weapon boating is desired, the weapon modules could have a base, decent value of bonus they offer for a particular area that increases by a moderate amount when a module of an entirely different weapon system is mounted as well.

Example - an Atlas player decides to slot in a module of some sort for each of autocannon, lasers, and short range missiles. Rather than each module providing a base value, the values are increased upwards two steps each to a new, larger value by the player making this choice.

[Malrock]

FireStoat, on 07 March 2017 - 12:42 PM, said:

I honestly feel you are correct, but it could have been handled better. Here's my thought on what could have been tried, just off the top of my head.

Keep the current system as is, including 3 mechs to Master.
Remove all modules from all accounts. Refund Cbills and GXP that was required to purchase them on each account.
Add a new small charge of Cbills for a player to unlock the Basic tree of a mech to allocate points.
Add a moderately larger CBill charge for a player to unlock the Elite portion of the tree to allocate points.
Add a final Cbill charge to unlock the Master part of the tree, ie, the extra module space.
Allow all players to retain their current skill progression with mechs as-is, with no charge. They are grandfathered in.

Put in a new, wider range of Modules into the game. Make their costs a much lower percentage in CBills and GXP than they are in the current game. Modules selected and purchased are now locked to a particular mech, held in an available pool for that mech to slot in or remove back to the pool. No more module swapping between mechs.

Conduct a review of modules and strength and severely nerf or eliminate 'must have' modules such as radar deprivation, seismic sensor, and so forth. Do what is necessary to put all modules on a more even footing. Where necessary, adjust the price of the lowest performing modules to be a much cheaper selection to make them attractive for a player to purchase for a 'what if?' scenario they might contemplate.

Review the lowest performing mechs for possible additional module slotting to accommodate the new, larger range of modules to assist their play value. While doing so, review inherent quirks for mechs as well.

Done. The C-bill sink is established, the older players don't have to re-skill or pay an extortion-level fee just to play the mechs they were used to, and a newer range of bonuses for mechs is created. If curbing weapon boating is desired, the weapon modules could have a base, decent value of bonus they offer for a particular area that increases by a moderate amount when a module of an entirely different weapon system is mounted as well.

Example - an Atlas player decides to slot in a module of some sort for each of autocannon, lasers, and short range missiles. Rather than each module providing a base value, the values are increased upwards two steps each to a new, larger value by the player making this choice.

Way more complicated than it needs to be. Keep the basic and elite tree everyone has currently. Refund module costs and eliminate all the skills from the PTS tree that mimic the current trees. Leave all module specific nodes in the trees and all new skills that aren't represented in previous skill tree. Let people spend c bills and exp for those. Because you now have less nodes it is ok to have less skill points and perhaps less convoluted trees. Boom problem solved. You shouldn't replace skills and modules with the same system because that is what is causing so much of a problem. You replace just modules and things are in a way better place.

[FireStoat]

Malrock, on 07 March 2017 - 12:50 PM, said:

Way more complicated than it needs to be.

I'll confess that your thoughts are probably correct. The thing that is killing the current 2nd revision of the tree is its complexity and forcing players to purchase thing they don't need or want. I totally understand that PGI thinks that players are currently not paying enough to skill up mechs, with a huge percentage of players having massive CBill totals banked and Premium time stored and gathering dust. I get it. Your idea is a good one, and certainly better than what the company is about to force on the players. Again, the game doesn't exist in a vacuum and it is going to be compared against other games for its mechanics. This new system is really going to stand out as being grindy and abusive.

[oldradagast]

Probably now and then, but any real interest in the game would be killed by this mess.

Rumor has it they may have done away with respec costs - for now... - but that's just a small part of the whole.

The brutal reality is that this skill maze punishes poor performing mechs by reducing the quirk levels. Great, so most non-meta mechs are dead. On top of that, we have vast reductions in mobility across the board and the engine decoupling from mobility. What does that mean? Less mobile mechs, which punishes brawling playstyles as well as IS XL engine since they will now have a hard time twisting damage and will be blasted apart. Additionally, the lower need to mount a bigger engine means "MOAR GUNZ!" which will just compound the high alpha problem and low TTK that already exists in the game. Final ironic joke - jump-sniping with a huge amount of long-range firepower will be even more effective since lower mech mobility means people have will have a hard time avoiding your shots and effectively brawling with you.

Didn't we already prove that a game full of a handful of viable mechs with little but long-range sniping, overwhelming alpha strikes, and jump-sniping was boring? Why the heck are we going backwards to that meta?! And why play in such a game if it goes live?

Dee Eight, on 07 March 2017 - 05:45 AM, said:

I'm not going to quit just because short-sighted folks on a forum complain about the skill tree. Improvise, adapt and overcome.

This isn't life. This is a game. There is no need to "improvise, adapt, and overcome" if the game is no longer fun. There are plenty of other things many of us could do with our time, and plenty of other games we could be supporting with our money. And PGI is going to be learning that the hard way in less than a month if they choose to continue on their way to oblivion.

[Gaeb]

I'm actually just coming back and while I like the idea of skill trees in some sense, I really don't like everything I've read.

In order, my main beefs are:

• Insane amount of clicking / too many options to max out a mech. Too many options. Too much clicking. Bad UI / unimpactful choices.
  
• Massive CBill Grind paired with xp (half new - only modules required it before).
  
• Scary balance changes

So, IDK. I'm very leery of a 90 point skill tree. Seriously, what are people smoking.

[Cato Phoenix]

FunkyT, on 07 March 2017 - 07:34 AM, said:

And I kinda don't see why people are so freaked out about these useless nodes.
The way I see it, this is completely intentional.
From what I gathered from some of their posts, they don't want obvious, powerful skilltrees that just say "take me or derank to T5". They want kind of "give and take" scenarios, where getting the most out of something like the defensive tree requires you to spend a lot of points, potentially even on useless nodes.
If there were only good nodes in this skilltree, there would be no discussion if you should take it or not. By sprinkling useless nodes in there, the system will make you think twice before investing all those points into a few more %-points of defensive bonuses. So in my eyes, this is actually smart design.

So in a well designed system, you would have a choice between useful nodes. Currently the choice is just 'which crap do I want to live with to get X or Y that I want?'. And moreover, it just makes the skill tree a sort of numb glob of salad skills.

[Taxxian]

@OP

Stop making those meaningless polls!

Every opinion poll needs at least 3 types of answers: positive/negative and indifferent

Your poll has 3 times negative and 1 indifferent... so you shut out everyone who likes the changes and then expect your poll to mean anything? Thats plain dumb. Sorry but a have no softer and nicer word for that...

[Wibbledtodeath]

Meta changes frequently, it will again. The trick is to adapt.

Besides, The game is Soooo much better than it was when I (& it) started- netcode was broken for many years- only weapon that would reliably hit were guided (from Australia least). . So no, a change to the skill tree system wont bother me much at all. Only time I really had to take a break was when the UI for mechlab changed and didn't support my monitor resolution.

Frankly skill tree incurrent implementation is broken, so I wont lament its loss.

[Domenoth]

I lean towards "stop playing because it isn't feasible anymore" for the following two reasons:

1. Pokemech is effectively dead unless they change something. It's going to cost me more than 700,000,000 CBills to "spend my refund" and I'm only going to get back 360,000,000 CBills from modules. That's going to take me around 2 years just to get to the point where I can pick up where I left off. I'm not saying they can't change things up. I'm only saying we've got 5 years of an economy that influenced how I spent my XP and CBills. This drastic of a change retroactively is demoralizing. Don't give me a refund I can't even spend half of. That's the same as no refund at all.

2. I can't support respecs the way they are right now. I think we should be purchasing Skill Points instead of nodes. If I already have 50 nodes unlocked, I should be able to pick any combination of 50 nodes I want for free. My 51st+ nodes can cost the usual amount. Anything short of this, and I'm severely unlikely to unlock anything just because I have no idea what it will do. For me to be willing to experiment, I have to feel like I've got nothing to lose.

Edited by Domenoth, 08 March 2017 - 03:30 AM.

[D V Devnull]

Gaeb, on 07 March 2017 - 08:09 PM, said:

I'm actually just coming back and while I like the idea of skill trees in some sense, I really don't like everything I've read.

In order, my main beefs are:

• Insane amount of clicking / too many options to max out a mech. Too many options. Too much clicking. Bad UI / unimpactful choices.
  
• Massive CBill Grind paired with xp (half new - only modules required it before).
  
• Scary balance changes

So, IDK. I'm very leery of a 90 point skill tree. Seriously, what are people smoking.

I'll add one more to that, although I've linked to this thought in an earlier post of mine in this thread... 100 meter loss in LRM Range BaseLine... PGI must be smoking something awful, shortening the range limit so close to Clan Large Pulse Lasers, just amongst other weapons. Even worse, they're particularly doing it to a weapon that has no travel of any kind beyond it's optimal range limit. It just blows up at the limit without doing any damage, if it doesn't hit something first. Stack on top of this the fact that shortening LRM Range also helps all those Ballistic-Boating and Energy-Boating Pilots who use...

• Gauss Rifles
  
• LB 10-X AC or smaller forms
  
• AC/10 or smaller forms
  
• UAC/10 or smaller forms
  
• PPC or ER-PPC
  
• Any form of Large Laser weapons

...and probably a few things I have not thought of, and PGI has set up to totally deprecate LRM usage right out of MWO once again. This comes just when I thought everyone was going to develop an equal appreciation of all weapon systems. Crazy note of the matter? I'm NOT as LRM-crazy as some think I am. I've got a bunch of Mechs that don't use LRMs, but I end up wanting to use LRMs more because it helps me to not do Team Damage, avoids Team Kills, and still allows me to support teams to my full potential ability. Heck, I was even looking forward to extending my reach further under the New Skill Trees, but PGI instead smoked something dumb, and turned LRM Range into a mandatory, required skill instead just to get back to any kind of useful levels.

With that accidental rant now done, I can point out even more useful information. More generally, PGI's killing everything but the Meta by only allowing 91 Skill Nodes. Why? Because Meta is always a "Best Bang For The Buck" matter, and can dodge most short-comings. In order to not harm Non-Meta, Player-Styled Builds, they would have to allow more Skill Nodes, say about 120 (perhaps more, but I'm not THAT pushy). Players who don't follow the Meta are going to be the ones most hurt by these changes, because they won't be able to design their Mechs to actually be useful to their team without enough Skill Nodes. I'm going to be caught in that backlash directly because I'm not a Meta-Build-Compatible type of Mech Pilot. I've tried many different things in that direction, but between several issues (non-"Top of the Line" computer, lack of battle instinct, lack of "World Championship"-Class reflexes) at my end, I've instead used combinations that are actually compatible with my "Anything but a Brawler" abilities. Strangely, I'm reasonably sure that there are many players out there with similar problems to myself, people who just want the game to be fun, who are limited to being Casual-Level because of their Real Life Existences, who want it to lack a "HardCore Gamers Only, Everyone Else Can Get Out"-type of Learning Curve. But the way PGI is going will kill that entire area of the player base off, and pretty much drive MWO into the ground as being some bloody stupid niche game again.

Also of reference, I'm not just some stupid ForumWarrior. I actually have been out on the battle fields a bit here in MWO, as many know, and I can tell what's damaging the game's sense of enjoyment. But since PGI isn't properly looking at a lot of posts and listening, I'm currently in the "Likely To Quit" boat, should they launch these Brainless-type New Skill Trees without picking up on the rest of the problems. However, I've ranted and howled enough for now, so I'm hitting the Post Button and getting back to trying to level up a Mech or two.

~Mr. D. V. "This junk makes me so sore that I can't stop Wall-Of-Text'ing!" Devnull




(p.s.: Heck, many know about the balance issues with XL engines! But is PGI doing anything to actually fix it? Nope!)

(p.p.s.: Damnit! I just noticed that I've been spending about an hour typing this, give or take 15 minutes! That's frankly not freaking funny at all!)




[Edit by Post Author for a Wording Error.]

Edited by D V Devnull, 08 March 2017 - 03:35 AM.

[oldradagast]

Wibbledtodeath, on 08 March 2017 - 02:17 AM, said:

Meta changes frequently, it will again. The trick is to adapt.

Besides, The game is Soooo much better than it was when I (& it) started- netcode was broken for many years- only weapon that would reliably hit were guided (from Australia least). . So no, a change to the skill tree system wont bother me much at all. Only time I really had to take a break was when the UI for mechlab changed and didn't support my monitor resolution.

Frankly skill tree incurrent implementation is broken, so I wont lament its loss.

Again, we don't have to "adapt." This is not life. If the game ceases to be fun because all of our mechs are deleveled and turned into stumbling oafs and it costs a fortune to grind them back up to subpar performance, why bother? Why play and why spend any money? I don't have to play MWO - this isn't my job or something, and there are plenty of other games to play. World of Warships is fun, for example, and the list keeps going.

The current skill tree is not "broken." It is functional, it does not make a mess of the game, and it is literally the only thing a new player can't mess up in this game. They can buy bad mechs and use bad builds, but they'll level up the same as everyone else for the same benefits. The same cannot be said of the proposed skill maze. It is huge, confusing, and annoying to use, and since it's a mess full of false choices and trash, new players will end up wasting resources on the wrong skills. Just another nail in the coffin for this game and a kick in the face to new players... on top of the kick in the face to existing players with lots of mechs who will never be able to get them back up to fully leveled, which will still suck compared to the current production version of the mech!