73 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

1) That it needs a massive tutorial section added to MW Academy

2) That one should be able to test any nodes out in the Testing Grounds BEFORE having to buy them?

I'm doubly concerned for NPE, though admittedly, if a person if getting enough to unlock a node here, or a node there, like a new player, I'm not sure how much testing would help them. But all one can do is give them as much familiarization as possible... and maybe as cadets, make re'speccing easier somehow? Because I see a lot of Vets making some frankly, wrong assumptions on what is or isn't crucial on the new Skill Trees, meaning New Guys are quite simply going to be screwed.

But even for those Vets... being able to actually test out and SEE if unlocking JJs is worth it on their Summoner (or whatever mech), for what they want to do.... without having to commit to buying, then respecting and buying again....can only encourage experimentation, and thereby, a little more diversity, than the "play it safe" mentality the current cost system will bring on.

The change is coming, little can be done about that, now. But maybe it's not too late to push PGI to add features which will minimize some of the impact of it?

[RestosIII]

I agree with both. I also believe that, even if the prices don't change, people should get a discount on speccing mechs they leveled before the new skill tree was added. Otherwise I'm screwed.

[WrathOfDeadguy]

Yeah, pretty much this. Without some quality-of-life improvements, especially to the tutorials, the rollout is going to be a total nightmare. This game did not need to become any less accessible to new players, but now that it has PGI needs to tie off the other end of the line, or there's going to be a huge problem with new folks wasting gigantic amounts of XP and cbills on crap they'll just have to redo when they finally learn how to do it correctly. They can't just keep depending on the community to fill in the gaps between the game's barely-even-skeletal tutorials and the actual gameplay experience- not if they want any significant percentage of new free-players to become paying customers, anyway.

I still hate the whole thing, and I think it'll do more harm than good regardless of any other improvements, but... that ship has clearly sailed. Either the regrind will be bad enough to quit over, or it won't, and life will go on with a bit more of a salty taste to it than before.

[Wintersdark]

I really wanted to count out how many Skill Nodes it would take to get back the skills we have right now, so I could push for a cbill refund of that amount. Not for the "added" skill nodes, mind you, but the ones we've already got like Anchor Turn, Speed Tweak, etc, so at least getting back the skills we already had won't cost us.

But...


That ship has sailed, I guess.

*shrugs*


I'm on board with both suggestions in the OP.

[Deathlike]

You know, it was asked way back for UI 2.0 for a full ability to test out custom built mechs that you do not own into the Testing Grounds...

Today, we still have nothing of the sort.

Inevitably, the NPE is ignored indefinitely... for reasons.

[Bishop Steiner]

Deathlike, on 09 March 2017 - 03:08 PM, said:

You know, it was asked way back for UI 2.0 for a full ability to test out custom built mechs that you do not own into the Testing Grounds...

Today, we still have nothing of the sort.

Inevitably, the NPE is ignored indefinitely... for reasons.

because the "enraged salt minders of MWO" will pitch fits about what they don't like..but never are willing to work together to pitch a fit to push a positive change with the same vehemence?

Seriously...it's easy to be negative..but hard ot work for something positive. If people put half the energy demanding stuff like in the OP that they put into raging over the new PTS in general, PGI would likely have to listen. Be we don't, and so they are let off the hook...by us.

[Dr Mlem]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 March 2017 - 03:30 PM, said:

because the "enraged salt minders of MWO" will pitch fits about what they don't like..but never are willing to work together to pitch a fit to push a positive change with the same vehemence?

Seriously...it's easy to be negative..but hard ot work for something positive. If people put half the energy demanding stuff like in the OP that they put into raging over the new PTS in general, PGI would likely have to listen. Be we don't, and so they are let off the hook...by us.

Completely agree. I always feel odd having to speak about the positives or even trying to be understanding of development time. But at times that's all you can do really, is try to be on the business side of it or at least try and see both sides. And there is no real easy way to go about this. PGI has backed themselves into a corner with the 3 chasis system as is.

The skill tree does have massive issues. The inability to test, try out, without being punished for experimenting. I would even forgo the ability to test in the mechwarrior academy for the ability of free respecs for the abilities you unlocked point wise. They really have gutted the big draw for me in this game. Experimentation.

On the salt part, unfortunately it's the nature of forums. Players are attached to games, or not changing things. Unfortunately as we have seen, most are unwilling to give things a try. Even if for 3 days or 2 days. Thus the PTR is a ghost town (well that and you have redownload everything)

Edited by Lazy Badger, 09 March 2017 - 03:43 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Lazy Badger, on 09 March 2017 - 03:41 PM, said:

Completely agree. I always feel odd having to speak about the positives or even trying to be understanding of development time. But at times that's all you can do really, is try to be on the business side of it or at least try and see both sides. And there is no real easy way to go about this. PGI has backed themselves into a corner with the 3 chasis system as is.

The skill tree does have massive issues. The inability to test, try out, without being punished for experimenting. I would even forgo the ability to test in the mechwarrior academy for the ability of free respecs for the abilities you unlocked point wise. They really have gutted the big draw for me in this game. Experimentation.

Yeah, but I also see the desire to keep people from just insta respeccing everything anytime the Meta shift, for no real investment.... so it's a bit of a catch 22, IMO.

I'm fine with paying to respec... I just should be able to test drive my purchase FIRST to see if it's worth it, which minimizes the meta abuse of just free and simple respeccing.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 March 2017 - 03:46 PM, said:

Yeah, but I also see the desire to keep people from just insta respeccing everything anytime the Meta shift, for no real investment.... so it's a bit of a catch 22, IMO.

The cost also imposes a cost to experimentation (which ironically is what helps drive meta shifts) which is one of the fun things about this game and having open customization like we do. I don't like the idea of taxing a fun core component of learning in this game.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 09 March 2017 - 03:51 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 March 2017 - 03:49 PM, said:

The cost is that also imposes a cost to experimentation (which ironically is what helps drive meta shifts) which is one of the fun things about this game and having open customization like we do.

hence the point of my post.... with such and extensive shift in skill tree... we really need to be able to test out full nodes before committing. Which allows for that experimentation, but not insta jump from one meta to another, for free.

maybe I'm missing something, but it would seem to address both concerns, yeah?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 March 2017 - 03:52 PM, said:

maybe I'm missing something, but it would seem to address both concerns, yeah?

Some things just aren't testable without a live fire trial to really get a feel. Testing grounds is only good for so much.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 09 March 2017 - 03:53 PM.

[Bud Crue]

I've posted elsewhere about this, and maybe we should start now (I was going to hold off until the skills tree formally drops but what the hell). Assuming the skills tree is similar to its current 91 nodes over seven severed branches of a "tree", and assuming PGI doesn't drop it with an Academy guide/walk thru of the type Bishop is suggesting, I think we need to help out and provide such a guide for new players.

So I think we, the community need to start thinking of an idealized node path for each weight class that is tailored to the new player experience that we all can still recall and provide not just a path but an order of advancing along that path to help the new player maximize their potential build as efficiently as possible.

Yes, there will be disagreement as to what such an "idealized" path will be and I think that discussion will be part of the process of selecting a winner. The winner of this little endeavor gets a mech pack. One winner for each class and an overall winner who gets a basic plus hero pack. But I think this is where we should start: trying to help make the best of the situation and focus on the NPE.

Form a practical stand point I guess participants will need to go in with a "new player friendly" mech of their choice in the given weight class and build out the path. I am thinking screen shots of the relevant branches in their completed state (imgur links) and then a step-by-step description of the order of selecting the nodes; zero to ninety-one.

Ideally I think we should try to come up with paths that keep a root base of like 60-70 nodes wherein the remainder are open to change (firepower and auxiliary perhaps) with the idea that the core is largely impervious to all but the most significant nerf passes or mechanics changes...we don't want to come up with a NPE focused path that needs a complete respec every time the dart board sends forth its balance decrees. This may be too difficult or convoluted to do, but I think it ought to be one of the goals.

Anyway, that is what I am thinking we ought to do, especially if PGI doesn't update the academy. If folks have a better idea or a better way of starting this process I am open to it and I will gladly sponsor their idea instead. But for starters I think an NPE focus as suggested by Bishop is where we need to focus initially (I plan on doing this three or four times for more specific role based paths if this proves successful) so please start thinking about it. I'll start a thread on this when the skills tree drops.

Edited by Bud Crue, 09 March 2017 - 03:54 PM.

[Dr Mlem]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 March 2017 - 03:52 PM, said:

hence the point of my post.... with such and extensive shift in skill tree... we really need to be able to test out full nodes before committing. Which allows for that experimentation, but not insta jump from one meta to another, for free.

maybe I'm missing something, but it would seem to address both concerns, yeah?

It would, I think your thing is reasonable. Although I don't agree that their should be some adversion to instantly changing. The whole goal at least to me is finishing all the mechs. But I think that stems from MWO having no end goal. We could subjectively have different opinions on what the tree should limit.

But yes, their is a sort of catch 22 really. Something that will really have to be nailed down. But I ask this, more for your opinion. Why do you think the Meta is such a bad thing? Weapon diversity? While I agree boating shouldn't really be the most powerful thing.

Edited by Lazy Badger, 09 March 2017 - 03:55 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Lazy Badger, on 09 March 2017 - 03:54 PM, said:

Why do you think the Meta is such a bad thing?

I think the better question, is why is making the meta more stagnant a good thing (or the very least, takes longer to trickle down).

[KodiakGW]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 March 2017 - 02:13 PM, said:

1) That it needs a massive tutorial section added to MW Academy

2) That one should be able to test any nodes out in the Testing Grounds BEFORE having to buy them?

Hate to burst your bubble, but..

How many years did it take before we got the Academy we have now?
How long have many of us been asking to be able to take mechs not owned into Testing Grounds before purchase (still unrealized)?

By the time they get around to your requests (if even considered), the Skill Tree will have long been implemented, and results from its implementation have been positively or negatively felt.

See, what you are thinking is part of a good business plan. Make sure to address any issues for NPE BEFORE implementation.

[Dr Mlem]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 March 2017 - 03:57 PM, said:

I think the better question, is why is making the meta more stagnant a good thing (or the very least, takes longer to trickle down).

I think that is a very good question as well. There has always been a prevailing sense that the meta is naturally a bad thing. Most of it is biproduct of human behavior.

Not to derail the thread, but to tie it in. Does the skill tree and experimentation help stem or hinder anything? And does it need hindering in the first place.

Edited by Lazy Badger, 09 March 2017 - 04:03 PM.

[TheLuc]

Bishop,
While I would like to be positive and constructive I just can`t. Already I saw the salt storm coming back when it was announced at Mechcon and I did warn about the issues the Skill Tree had back then.

So far best route I found is to play my Mechs with no skill at all, since I play mostly Inner Sphere Mechs and don't run meta builds it should not change my current matches by much.

If I see its unplayable, there is plenty of other games out there.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 March 2017 - 03:53 PM, said:

Some things just aren't testable without a live fire trial to really get a feel. Testing grounds is only good for so much.

and compromises have to be made. Since there is no way to do it as you want, without leaving the door open to free and ez meta migrations, which most people outside of the comp circles seem to think is a good idea to limit, this is the impasse.

[Bishop Steiner]

Lazy Badger, on 09 March 2017 - 04:00 PM, said:

I think that is a very good question as well. There has always been a prevailing sense that the meta is naturally a bad thing. Most of it is biproduct of human behavior.

Not to derail the thread, but to tie it in. Does the skill tree and experimentation help stem or hinder anything? And does it need hindering in the first place.

There is ALWAYS a meta, in very game. MWO's issue has also been how pronounced the distance between the Meta and the Next Best Thing always seems to be. Most other decent games seem to do a nice job closing that gap a bit.

This has nothing to do with that. It does have to do with impacting the returns for just re minmaxxing everything , everytime time the FotM changes. PGI has been pretty up front with their desire to slow that down, whether you agree with, or like it, or not. Sorry if I believe in finding compromise instead of "my way or the highway".

[Mister Blastman]

I don't care what they do. If they think they can make me grind c-bills to level up robits I leveled before, forget it. I don't have time for oppressive customer policies such as these. I'll spend my time doing other things, but definitely not these shenanigans.

Of course, the developers could still change their minds, and do the right thing and figure out it isn't right to hose their players...

Edited by Mister Blastman, 09 March 2017 - 04:21 PM.