29 replies to this topic

[oldradagast]

Trev Firestorm, on 12 March 2017 - 05:10 PM, said:

What? Whats this have to do with what I said?
Edit: precisely what is the 'Not quite' referring to? You just described what I mean by fair refund and squaring all players. Everyone gets back exactly what they earned and no content is blocked behind a new barrier.

Except your once fully mastered mechs are no longer mastered. Go back and regrind what you already bought. Fun, fun, fun... Hey, have time to buy a mech-pack? Yeah, right.

Monkey Lover, on 12 March 2017 - 10:20 AM, said:

If they didn't listen they would have put the tree out on the last patch. The have now dropped the price over 50% and redid the skill tree a few times. Sure its not perfect but nothing will ever be to everyone.

If you're at a restaurant and order a steak with soup and instead receive a slab of rotting meat with sewer water in a bowl for the "soup," you'd complain, right? And if the manger came over and nicely seasoned the sewer water, would you then be okay with your meal since "well, he listened."

They did NOT listen. They are still going to force this idiotic system into a game that does not need such imbalance and increase in grind. Tweaking the details of their mistake isn't going to fix things anymore than adding +1 structural point to every underperforming mech will "make them balanced."

Amazing that people are already justifying how "the respec cost isn't too high" while happily ignoring how the current system HAS NO RESPEC COST. Unreal how easily people are duped.

[Monkey Lover]

Trev Firestorm, on 12 March 2017 - 10:59 AM, said:

A simple PR trick, they announced a new tax at 40,000 I believe it was, then gave us a test at 100k, said OK reduce to 60k, FIIINE reduce to 45k... and you think this is a reduction? Nevermind we are paying for skills that were previously XP only, even starting with the cbill cost we are still paying more than the original plan.

PR to you I was fine with it at 100k. Now i dont have to buy two mechs i dont want to skill up the mech i care about. Now modules are around 75% cheaper.


If they balance the quirks more before the release it will be a great Tuesday

Edited by Monkey Lover, 12 March 2017 - 06:30 PM.

[50 50]

oldradagast, on 12 March 2017 - 05:18 PM, said:

Amazing that people are already justifying how "the respec cost isn't too high" while happily ignoring how the current system HAS NO RESPEC COST. Unreal how easily people are duped.

That's because you can't respec at all.
Why do we need to get increase torso twist range for urban mechs to elite them.
Why can't I unskill points off one of the weapon skills because I need that XP for a different one instead.
400xp to respec, if it's still that, could be one game. More if you have a bad run.
But what sane player is going to respec all 91 nodes? One tree maybe... 20-25 nodes? But what sane player is going to keep swapping the skill trees around every match or every day on that single mech?
Does the system need a respec cost? Maybe not.
Is it a big deal? Not really.

[soapyfrog]

50 50, on 13 March 2017 - 06:08 PM, said:

Does the system need a respec cost? Maybe not.

Exactly. Nothing is lost by removing it, and whether you think the gain is small (for you) or large (for me), we both win.

[Trev Firestorm]

oldradagast, on 12 March 2017 - 05:18 PM, said:

Except your once fully mastered mechs are no longer mastered. Go back and regrind what you already bought. Fun, fun, fun... Hey, have time to buy a mech-pack? Yeah, right.

?? But "mastery" means additional capability now so why not go back and play them? The problem (cost wise) was that we couldn't maintain current capability unless we were also cbill rich. There's certainly other issues with the skill web but that's not what these posts were about.

[Fearlanghen McHaggis]

Your not cheap just thrifty (as a friend of mine likes to say)

Nope. I am cheap. Scrooge McTightwad. Low modules/high stable count. And I refuse to take being called such as an insult. Cheapskate, tightwad, miser, etc. are all good with me. Just don't call me late for dinner!

[Athom83]

Trev Firestorm, on 14 March 2017 - 10:56 AM, said:

?? But "mastery" means additional capability now so why not go back and play them? The problem (cost wise) was that we couldn't maintain current capability unless we were also cbill rich. There's certainly other issues with the skill web but that's not what these posts were about.

And something people keep getting wrong is that they equate current system "mastery" with 91 nodes. The math has been done before, in order to get the same bonuses as the current system you only need to put in 45 nodes. This also includes the "useless" nodes that have benefits that you have to go through to get the skill that people keep complaining about.

[soapyfrog]

Athom83, on 15 March 2017 - 04:17 AM, said:

And something people keep getting wrong is that they equate current system "mastery" with 91 nodes. The math has been done before, in order to get the same bonuses as the current system you only need to put in 45 nodes. This also includes the "useless" nodes that have benefits that you have to go through to get the skill that people keep complaining about.

I doubt your math. If you spend ~50 points in mobility and operations, you can get back much of what the old tree offered. A lot of the agility bonuses are increased but you need to account for the overall reduction in agility, in general with the agility tree maxed out mechs on the PTS felt about the same as mechs on live, with heavier mechs tending to be a touch more sluggish even with the increased bonuses.

However, heat containment is capped at 9% compared to live server 20%, for example. Quick Ignition is touch slower. Fast fire you cannot get back without investing quite a lot in firepower. yes you will pick up extra bonuses this way but pretty minor ones.

If you include module capabilities, you need a lot more points to get those back. Yes you can get the benefits of multiple modules but this is really of questionable value, certainly not worth the sacrifice for many mechs.

For many mechs that relied on quirks, even 91 nodes was big nerf over previous capabilities, and that's ignoring module benefits.

All in all, there is not enough benefit to the new skill tree to say that 91 nodes in the new tree is somehow better than mastery in the old system. Yes there are mechs that win big (mechs that are already so good they don't need quirks), but many many more mechs that simply lose overall.

[Athom83]

soapyfrog, on 15 March 2017 - 05:27 AM, said:

I doubt your math. If you spend ~50 points in mobility and operations, you can get back much of what the old tree offered. A lot of the agility bonuses are increased but you need to account for the overall reduction in agility, in general with the agility tree maxed out mechs on the PTS felt about the same as mechs on live, with heavier mechs tending to be a touch more sluggish even with the increased bonuses.

(skip to 5:20 for the math of the current mastery to skill tree)

soapyfrog, on 15 March 2017 - 05:27 AM, said:

However, heat containment is capped at 9% compared to live server 20%, for example. Quick Ignition is touch slower. Fast fire you cannot get back without investing quite a lot in firepower. yes you will pick up extra bonuses this way but pretty minor ones.

But heat generation reduction skills affect all weapons, reducing overall heat gen. Also, it is to balance out the disparity over the difference between a "mastered" mech and a "stock" one.

soapyfrog, on 15 March 2017 - 05:27 AM, said:

For many mechs that relied on quirks, even 91 nodes was big nerf over previous capabilities, and that's ignoring module benefits.

That is true for the boating of a singular weapon type. However as most of the skills are more general,you get benifits for weapons you didn't previously. Also, when keeping in mind the goal of increasing Time To Kill, isn't a buff to survivability and a nerf to firepower just a way to get to that goal?

soapyfrog, on 15 March 2017 - 05:27 AM, said:

All in all, there is not enough benefit to the new skill tree to say that 91 nodes in the new tree is somehow better than mastery in the old system. Yes there are mechs that win big (mechs that are already so good they don't need quirks), but many many more mechs that simply lose overall.

The point of the change wasn't to make something with more benefit that the current system, but to give some change to the formula. They wanted to change the balance of things instead of copying the effects of an old system into a new one.

[soapyfrog]

Athom83, on 15 March 2017 - 06:57 AM, said:

The point of the change wasn't to make something with more benefit that the current system, but to give some change to the formula. They wanted to change the balance of things instead of copying the effects of an old system into a new one.

So I am totally totally cool with that. I would prefer to limit powercreep as much possible, and I am happy to see them try and shake up the balance (even if they kinda suck at that).

However, it is not worth the cost. All they need to do is make the cost more reasonable and I would never have even have logged on to these forums to complain. All the rest of the features of the skill tree can be modified going forward (although this is VERY hard if the charge per skill node and MUCH easier if they charge per skill point).

They don't have to change much about this thing to make it viable. It may not be interesting, but at least it won't drive people out of the game.