392 replies to this topic

[BenWhiskeyjack]

This is a disappointing announcement. This feature is good, but needs more testing/review. In particular:

--whether we use a web or an actual tree - the majority consensus has pushed for a more linear, less confusing method to do the upgrade trees, and many have proposed options that are in line with the spirit of what PGI is trying to do. But there's been no acknowledgement of those posts or ideas - not even an indication why they are sticking with the current web method when there are plenty of other options that the community generally agree make more sense.
--the additional respec costs - another consensus point that we don't want that and it doesn't add value. My take is that many of us could get to a level of acceptance with the costs to acquire nodes, but having the respec costs means that we can't play and tinker with the builds to really decide what's optimal for our play style and a given chasis/variant.
--the actual values in the tree - the survival changes could be good, but we can't provide any feedback since we're not going to see them live. many have pointed out things that don't really quite make sense or that could be improved.

Personally I know this isn't a democracy decision, but given that many people are active and engaged on this topic it seems odd that there was ZERO response to many of the discussions that have been brought up in the various discussion mediums. Certainly makes me question why I spent any time thinking about this or reading the various posts or trying to participate in the discussions.

[PeeWrinkle]

I like the idea behind the skill trees, but I think they need at least one more set of changes and another round of PTS before they should even entertain making this live.

I realize they have been working on it a while and feel it is ready to go. While there are things I'd like to see changed, I do think it adds depth and wont be as bad as many think it will. I still can't help but thing this feels a bit rushed.

It seems to me that PGI has two choices. Release it now to get it out before it is truly ready and then just tweak it till oblivion, or wait a bit longer and ensure it is going to achieve all there goals and keep the player base mostly content.

Looks like rush it out is going to win that debate. Not that I am complaining, as it could be that this is the absolute finished product and we all have to suck up items we wish were different. I can handle that. But if they completely overhaul it several times in the first year of release I will then be very disappointed and know for a fact they rushed the release.

[Marius Evander]

Sereglach, on 08 March 2017 - 08:47 PM, said:

Allow me to enlighten you since you weren't around at the time of the modules release. They were actually advertised as an end game grind

meta of kill, kill, kill.

Paragraph:

1 "optional boost to your mechs" so it could be argued the entire skill tree is optional boost to your mechs, if using weapons modules was that. "major selling point to get people to approve" since when do pgi take the majority of the communities ideas and manage to please everyone ? wait... its not possible. "as it was intended." pgi dont even know what they intend half the time.

2 disagree already stated my view.

3 they should do that.

4 "players are not going to want to re-grind their entire roster of mechs" im sure theirs plenty of 3rd chassis you only got to level the other 1 or 2 that you dont need to regrind and should leave(in case rebalanced though highly unlikely)/sell

5. Requiring some point investment to ....
agree

6. 07

7. (this is not my 1st account but is my forum account.) Interesting, surprised they haven't added firemoth/Dasher if the game can cope with that hit reg, thought I had seen dozens of people use engine cant cope as reason why its not in game.

8. 07

Edited by Cadoazreal, 08 March 2017 - 09:33 PM.

[JC Daxion]

thanks, can't wait!

[Marius Evander]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 08 March 2017 - 08:15 PM, said:

Edited by Cadoazreal, 08 March 2017 - 10:08 PM.

[DavidStarr]

So, the main problem with the skill tree system is not fixed - we need to take a lot of **** nodes to get to the good ones. And to prevent weapon boating, they expanded the offensive tree with even more **** nodes! Good job!

[Sereglach]

Cadoazreal, on 08 March 2017 - 09:31 PM, said:

1 "optional boost to your mechs" so it could be argued the entire skill tree is optional boost to your mechs, if using weapons modules was that. "major selling point to get people to approve" since when do pgi take the majority of the communities ideas and manage to please everyone ? wait... its not possible. "as it was intended." pgi dont even know what they intend half the time.

PGI has had their ups and downs, but they even stated (Russ can be directly quoted on Twitter) that the grind for a mech in the old system "is going to be about equal" to the grind in the new system. That's patently false beyond any shadow of a doubt. That in and of itself has plenty of players irate.

Also, you're cherry-picking the debate, which is just bad form if you want people taking you seriously. MODULES were advertised and implemented as an optional end-game grind for enhancing mechs which has absolutely nothing to do with the skill system. Skilling up mechs was an expected part of building up your roster as you played the game and earned XP. There was nothing optional about it. The c-bills you earned were expected to be used to customize mechs and buy new mechs. Using xp and c-bills on modules was, again, optional.

Cadoazreal, on 08 March 2017 - 09:31 PM, said:

2 disagree already stated my view.

And your view is flawed as coming from a new player who isn't sitting in the same shoes as the overwhelming majority of the player base (especially if it's not your first account, then you've probably only invested in a select meta of mechs would be my guess on why you're so content with this setup; and I'd like to hope you're not violating MWO EULA by posting from multiple accounts). Players should have some form of alternative to unlocking nodes that doesn't involve the massive c-bill costs of the new system and allows players to reacquire what they had under the old system (at least a comparable amount of value in nodes under the new system). Pure XP node purchasing options achieves that.

An MC and XP option would give PGI a third alternative in such a system to even allow them a level of monetization to allow players with limited time (and often are the people with the most disposable income) another option to help bypass grind. However, it only works well for PGI IF you have a pure XP option available, as well, otherwise it can easily be construed as Pay to Win by completely subverting grind options.

Cadoazreal, on 08 March 2017 - 09:31 PM, said:

4 "players are not going to want to re-grind their entire roster of mechs" im sure theirs plenty of 3rd chassis you only got to level the other 1 or 2 that you dont need to regrind and should leave(in case rebalanced though highly unlikely)/sell

Myself, for example, have ~116 mech variants in my roster; and every last one of them is mastered. Even after module refunds I'll be able to remaster MAYBE 10-15 mechs (because I had enough modules for a full CW roster -which is all you actually needed as the old system was intended- plus a few extra from preorders). There are others out there with nearly 300 mechs that also have their entire roster at a currently mastered state. They're even worse off than I am.

You think all of those players should just be screwed and/or sell off half their roster to master others? HA! How is PGI supposed to make money with people doing that? They'll be stuck with enough of a grind on their current roster to prevent them from spending money with PGI for YEARS! What makes you think people even want to do that?! What makes you think the people with large rosters who've invested large quantities of real money into PGI will continue to do so after being presented with such a punt to the groin with extreme prejudice?!? I'll answer it for you . . . they won't; and gaming history and precedent proves it.

If PGI doesn't fix their issues on this matter then they're doomed; and that's not just being a naysayer or hating on PGI. That's monetary reality; and I've watched it happen to other games (one reason I mentioned Star Wars Galaxies earlier . . . they died in under a few months after a very similar change to their XP and grind system). You can't completely overhaul your games grind this far into the lifespan of the game, especially in such a way that adds so much extra grind to the players, and not expect extremely severe negative repercussions from your player base. PGI better have this all squared away before the 21st or there'll be hell to pay; and more than one game company has made that mistake . . . of which every last game died in short order.

Cadoazreal, on 08 March 2017 - 09:31 PM, said:

7. (this is not my 1st account but is my forum account.) Interesting, surprised they haven't added firemoth/Dasher if the game can cope with that hit reg, thought I had seen dozens of people use engine cant cope as reason why its not in game.

Then I'd be curious to know, first off, what your other account is, because it's against the EULA to post from multiple accounts on the forums.

On the other hand, again, just look at my post history. One such explanation happened not too far back, so you could just look at this post HERE which is the most recent time I outlined all of it for people. Speeds past 170 are no problem and speeds past 200 are certainly achievable by now.

Why they haven't implemented them is simple. Heavies still rule the battlefield and, because of that, lights don't sell -and won't sell well- until game balancing lifts them from being the lowest queue out there.

Edited by Sereglach, 08 March 2017 - 10:21 PM.

[I cant want to]

direct from the twitter page of Russ Bullock:

"Why does the updated skill tree force me into selecting skills I don't want to get to the best ones ?


to directly combat boating - was a player asked for change that we agreed with. The idea is to make min maxing take more skill point"


this is planned and deliberate - do not expect this to change to a more linear system where we can actually choose the upgrade we want without wasting points on a bunch of unwanted / useless crap

Edited by chaothulhu, 08 March 2017 - 10:25 PM.

[-Ramrod-]

Welp...1 more nail in the coffin that is MWO. And I really don't have any suggestions to make it any less DOA. It would be like giving driving tips to a 5 year old.

Edited by Ramrod AI, 08 March 2017 - 10:36 PM.

[Appogee]

The tweaks don't address the key problems which have been pointed out time and again, the most damaging of which was...

The system nerfs all Mechs - including those that were quirked to make them competitive in the first place. Then the system enables us to buff both good Mechs and bad ones.

The result is that the best Mechs - with the best hardpoint numbers and locations, geometry etc - will widen their starting advantage over the worst ones.

There are plenty of other issues - eg. grinding Mechs for a lot longer, while competing against fully Mastered Mechs, before you even get a change to unlock key skills like Radar Dep or Seismic.

Edited by Appogee, 08 March 2017 - 10:40 PM.

[I cant want to]

"The result is that the best Mechs - with the best hardpoint numbers and locations, geometry etc - will widen their starting advantage over the worst ones."

and with 3/4 of the top tier mechs being clan, this can only improve the Clan/IS balance, right?

[Sereglach]

chaothulhu, on 08 March 2017 - 10:25 PM, said:

direct from the twitter page of Russ Bullock:

"Why does the updated skill tree force me into selecting skills I don't want to get to the best ones ?


to directly combat boating - was a player asked for change that we agreed with. The idea is to make min maxing take more skill point"


this is planned and deliberate - do not expect this to change to a more linear system where we can actually choose the upgrade we want without wasting points on a bunch of unwanted / useless crap

However, there are other ways to do it that are more logical and make more sense within the skill trees. These options have been explained on the PTS forums in numerous posts. If PGI fails to take that into account then I have a feeling that any credibility PGI had left (which isn't much anymore) in listening to their player base will have just died.

. . . Also, they'll probably lose a lot of their player base in the process, which is something they cannot afford to do.

[Kmieciu]

Press f to pay respects.

[Marius Evander]

Sereglach, on 08 March 2017 - 10:19 PM, said:

Your saying buffs (modules) to range and cooldown are optional I am saying they are not.

[Marius Evander]

Appogee, on 08 March 2017 - 10:36 PM, said:

There are plenty of other issues - eg. grinding Mechs for a lot longer.

Doesn't 91 SP on 1 mech take less xp
than
2 mechs mastered and 1 elited + the gxp earnt during that time (which we now get refunded from skill tree) ?

[Oberost]

So, this is going to get live this month?

Ok, and what will happen with all the balance passes that PGI will have to do (because the system is not ready yet)?

Should I spend all my HXP on the few mechs that I'll be able to "remaster" or should I wait for the upcoming balace passes?

Will PGI declare a "truce" during the rest of the testing (right now on live servers!) so re-skilling could be done for free or they are going to force us to spend more XP and C-Bills while they throw the darts?

So many questions...

[jjm1]

Prosperity Park, on 08 March 2017 - 03:44 PM, said:

and I never have to hunt down or swap modules again.

That is the best part.

It should have been something done years ago because it hardly needed months spent on new skill system to achieve.

[The Unstoppable Puggernaut]

I think there is a bit of a misunderstanding.

I understood this new system was designed to nerf all mechs (indirectly but obviously). You can see that just by comparing all the benefits from eliting a mech to the current system+modules. I cannot revert any mechs to how they were/performed. Basically you can only choose what's important to you.

While this was probably done to lessen the TTK. However believe me you can actually create a different monster now.

Anyways, I am looking forward to the rollout but I really was expecting another pass before it goes live. The most real testing you can get is live testing, unfortunately that's the one that hurts the most.

I can see none of my ideas to skill out a mech were implemented e.g. making a base template (like assault template) or one click fills out a whole tree (then you remove what you dont want).

My main bane is the length of time to skill out one mech then x100-200 mechs. That won't be fun.

I really wished lights could get a discount on certain trees like mobility and the recon aspect
As assaults should have had a small discount on the tank tree.

[Arkhangel]

EgoSlayer, on 08 March 2017 - 06:46 PM, said:

This announcement just goes to show how truly disconnected PGI is from their player base.

actually, it more shows how disconnected they are from salty whiners who don't like change.

also.... you guys that are doing so do realize roughly 10% of MWO's player base actually posts on the forums, right? and roughly half the posts so far in here LIKE the incoming changes. You're really not as important as you seem to think you are. If you're going to leave the game, leave. And to be blunt.... you guys say they're going to lose people... ever thought they might gain back quite a few BECAUSE of the skill tree being added? Because that's going to happen too. Add to that that having it go live means they can tweak it BETTER than thePTS, because the PTS only helps them figure out stuff so far.

Only way to REALLY highlight what's best and worst is to actually get it out to everyone, figure out what works and what doesn't, and fix what needs to be on a patch that follows up.

the game needed a shakeup anyways.

Edited by Arkhangel, 08 March 2017 - 11:48 PM.

[cougurt]

Arkhangel, on 08 March 2017 - 11:41 PM, said:

And to be blunt.... you guys say they're going to lose people... ever thought they might gain back quite a few BECAUSE of the skill tree being added?

lol