Jump to content

Mwo Skill Tree: An Analysis


2 replies to this topic

#1 Lionheart2012

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 233 posts

Posted 11 March 2017 - 06:10 PM

Hi team,

Here are some simpler solutions for the skill tree:
  • Increase the values of the nodes (e.g. cool run from 2.0% to 2.5%)
  • Create more connections between nodes (vertically and horizontally)
  • Eliminate the parent-child relationship between nodes and allow us to ladder up the tree as well as down.

Reasoning and discussion in video. Please take a look.




#2 Cato Phoenix

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Phoenix
  • The Phoenix
  • 843 posts

Posted 11 March 2017 - 07:05 PM

I'm in agreement with a lot of these points, but a couple housekeeping items first, because things are actually worse than you outlined:

-----------------------------------------------

I'm not sure you calculated double basics - except for accel/decel?

Calculating the changes from base using your nodes:
Operations
-7% cool run - needing an extra 1 node to bring it to -5% cool run.
-3% containment - needing 2 extra nodes to bring it to 0% or equality (and adding 1 node of speed retention)

Mobility:
+1% anchor turn
-1% Torso yaw
-1% Torso twist
+8% Torso Pitch
+12% arm pitch
+15% Hard brake/Kinetic Burst

You also call 'cooldown' cooling efficiency at 11:15.

Gives you 14 points leftover for a mech nerfed in the 'good' areas of cool run (-5%), torso twist (-1%), and the areas where you end up with benefits (Accel/decel and 1% turn rate) are areas that have been nerfed thru quirks or by the total mobility changes.
----------------

But you've hit on -exactly- why I dislike this new skill tree. To regain equivalency you are forced to use nearly all of your points - and you'll never get to equivalency with the paltry number left. You'll never make up the difference that 4-6 modules gave you.

The only choice is in how you hobble your own mech.

Edited by Cato Phoenix, 11 March 2017 - 07:07 PM.


#3 Lionheart2012

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 233 posts

Posted 14 March 2017 - 12:50 AM

You're right Cato. I neglected to account for the doubling of the basic efficiencies, which means our targets for the basic efficiencies should be
  • Heat Dissipation +15%
  • Acceleration +15%
  • Twisting Arc +5%
  • Heat Threshold +20%
  • Deceleration +15%
  • Twist Speed +5%
  • Turning Speed +5%
And this means that the cool run and heat containment nodes should likely be increased in value to 5% per node and 7% per node respectively.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users