369 replies to this topic

[Garegaupa]

I have mixed feelings about this...

On the one side, I had looked very much forward to seeing the new skill tree go live next week, and it's disappointing to have to wait even longer - and even worse that there is now no fixed date. If they had at least said it will be ready for the April patch I would would still be a bit bummed out, but I would be OK with it. I really don't like indefinite delays like this, though...

On the other side, this will hopefully make the skill tree more palatable to those who felt robbed of the mastery status for many of their 'Mechs. While I may see things differently, I do respect that other players have different opinions than me, and want to see as many players as possible as happy as possible. Hopefully this will all end up in an even better skill tree system than the current proposal!

I do have one request for PGI, though: PLEASE give us a target date for the skill tree release ASAP. For my part, even if you say April and have to delay it to May, it will still show a commitment towards releasing it as soon as possible, and that this is a priority. Indefinite delays are not good.

In any case, good luck with the continuing work on the skill tree - I for one am really, really looking forward to seeing the finished results!

Edited by Garegaupa, 14 March 2017 - 12:26 AM.

[deathlord]

Props for acknowledging that you done goofed with the progress/refunds issue. That's genuine progress for this game.

[Storyteller]

Damn! I want this new skill tree! I can not stand the old system anymore.
I don't want to buy three mechs just for skilling one! It's a waste of credits/money, XP and my lifetime.

And real balancing tests can only be performed in a real environment like the live servers.
Having a few people doing 4on4 for a few hours or days is hardly comparable to thousands playing 12on12 in the group queue or faction play for weeks and months.

So I think this is a bad call since the last version of the skill tree system was definitely okay.
It surely needed some finetuning, but in my opinion this can only be achieved on the life servers.

[Widowmaker1981]

Goddamit. This is one i didnt want to see die on the PTS. RIP.

Imo largely scuppered by people whos only objective in this game is to get a little 'tick' next to every chassis to show they mastered it. I bet half these people dont even play the mechs after they are mastered (which i will NEVER understand the point of)

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 14 March 2017 - 12:40 AM.

[Kmieciu]

Russ Bullock, on 13 March 2017 - 07:04 PM, said:

The new skill tree is still viewed internally as a solid improvement to the balance of the game and the starting point for so many new balance methods.

As for balance: If you reduce quirks on the under-performing mechs (Dragon) and leave the strong mechs intact (because they don't have any quirks), that only makes the strong mechs even stronger.

[Taxxian]

The haters win again...

[joergen]

Jman5, on 13 March 2017 - 08:16 PM, said:

Will any of the non-skill tree changes be introduced next patch like the Critical hit changes?

I second this question. Would be nice to get an answer.

[Burning2nd]

man i was really looking forward to chaos and confusion , but thanks for listen to the greater good of the people who actually work in this game

[Knighthawk26]

Just want to add my voice to the rest and say thanks for listening. The skill tree is a great idea and almost everyone supports it in principle. The problems arose in the specifics, in how the good idea was to be applied in the game.

We want MWO (and PGI) to succeed and prosper. For that to happen you need to keep your loyal customers happy and attract more new players as well. Let me offer a couple of suggestions for the way forward:

1. Just focus on making the skill tree a positive change to the game. Don't try to use the skill tree to fix too many other issues (Clan vs IS balance, power creep etc). It will be hard enough to get the skill tree right and maintain the current balance in the game.
2. Try to make it so players will have goals we want to strive for, without having to just grind eternally. We like to buy improvements to our mechs, We don't mind working for them, if the return is worth the time invested.
3. Don't punish your loyal players with this change. If I have 40 Elite / Mastered mechs before the change, I should be able to keep roughly the same afterwards.
4. Remember how important new players are and how hard this game is for most in the beginning. Don't handicap them further with whatever you do
5. Implement win-win solutions. For example, let players activate/deactivate a limited number of skill nodes on a mech, but let us buy all the nodes on a mech if we want. Players getting back massive amounts of c-bills and xp in the change will have something to spend it on. And players will be able to respec at will without LOSING anything. Players will simply buy the new nodes they need to respec. PGI gets a c-bill / xp sump, and the players get options for optimizing new loadouts by simply buying the additional nodes (and deactivating old ones without losing them). This takes away most of the player stress from buying the wrong node, going down the wrong path on the tree, and respecing. If I want to change my omnimech from a laser vomit to a dakka, I can. I will have to buy the additional skill nodes (once) and omnipods/weapons (PGI wins from this) but then they are mine and I can go back to the laser vomit if the dakka doesn't work out or if the game meta changes. Players hate your current idea of respec. But we will gladly pay c-bills and xp to buy the additional skill nodes as long as we know we won't lose the previously bought nodes!!! Putting in a big cost / penalty to respec removes a lot of "play" (fun) from the game. And you, PGI, get very little for it. That is a lose - lose solution. We players lose and I can't really see what PGI might gain but it is definitely offset by the dissatisfaction and frustration created for your customers.So, just sell us all the nodes, let us keep them in the warehouse to be put back on our mechs if we want to swap loadouts. We will also buy additional weapons etc. to play around with. And we all know that we can only put a limited number of nodes on our mech at any given time. We get to modify our mechs as often as we want (after we buy all the nodes) while you sell more stuff -- Everyone is happy!
6. Don't try to make it too "real world". Yes in a real imaginary world, the mech owner would have to pay someone to "respec" his mech. But he would also have to pay for repairs, destroyed weapons, etc. We don't pay for repairs anymore in MWO (because that would be a disaster for the game) so why should we pay for respecs. Make it a priority to do what is best for the game. Most of us play MWO to escape the real world, LOL.

[Knighthawk26]

A WIN - WIN SOLUTION! I am reposting a part of my above post. I don't take credit for this idea but I want to point out how GREAT this idea really is and why it is a win/win solution for both PGI and players.

Let players activate/deactivate a limited number of skill nodes on a mech, but let us buy all the nodes on a mech if we want. Players getting back massive amounts of c-bills and xp in the change can spend it on more than 91 nodes per mech. And players will be able to respec at will without LOSING anything. Players will simply buy the new nodes they need to respec. PGI gets a c-bill / xp sump, and the players get options for optimizing new loadouts by simply buying the additional nodes (and deactivating old ones without losing them).

This takes away the player stress from buying the wrong node, going down the wrong path on the tree, and respecing. If I want to change my omnimech from a laser vomit to a dakka, I can. I will have to buy the additional skill nodes (once) and omnipods/weapons (PGI wins from this) but then they are mine and I can go back to the laser vomit if the dakka doesn't work out or if the game meta changes again. Players hate the current idea of respec. But we will gladly pay c-bills and xp to buy the additional skill nodes as long as we know we won't lose the previously bought nodes!!! Putting in a big cost / penalty to respec removes a lot of "play" (fun) from the game. And you, PGI, get very little for it. That is a lose - lose solution. We players lose and I can't really see what PGI might gain but it is definitely offset by the dissatisfaction and frustration created for your customers.

So, just sell us all the nodes, let us keep them in the warehouse to be put back on our mechs if we want to swap loadouts. We will also buy additional weapons etc. to play around with. And we all know that we can only put a limited number of nodes on our mech at any given time. We get to modify our mechs as often as we want (after we buy all the nodes) while you sell more stuff -- Everyone is happy!

[kesmai]

I have 250 mechs mastered and have unlocked all modules.
I bought a lot of modules too. With time spent in the game as active player.
I do not care about my 'mastered status' of my mechs, i care about the promise pgi gave regarding the module refund policy.
KEEP YOUR PROMISE PGI.

[50 50]

Cpt Leprechaun, on 13 March 2017 - 07:36 PM, said:

Posting this for exposure please watch in full

So1ahma skill tree Proposal

Have watched.
It's got some good points and is well presented, this is how we should present feedback guys.
However, his suggestion has some bad flaws, so.. not quite there yet.

[Knighthawk26]

Oh and one last thing. Change the whole thing from a "skill tree" to a "modification or optimization" tree. Skills refer to pilots. It makes no sense to talk about respec for a pilot. He or she either has the ability (skill) to do something or not. It does make sense to speak of respec for a mech. Mechs, just like military aircraft for example can change loadouts, and can be modified.

I am a former Attack Helicopter pilot and unit commander. No amount of pilot training or skills would make my missiles fly farther or faster, or my infrared jammer more effective. Yes, a skilled pilot can use his weapons more effectively, but this skill aspect is already in the game. Skilled mech pilots know to stay close to cover and quickly put terrain or buildings between their mech and incoming LRM's for example. (And a military helicopter pilot might do the same thing against an enemy SAM. A skilled mech pilot does not launch LRM's at a target 999 meters away, he knows his chance to hit is near zilch. He either waits or moves in to a more optimal launch range. These are the "skills" used by pilots and do allow them to better utilize their mechs in combat.

However, most of what is proposed for the "skill tree" would better fit the category of mech modifications or improvements. My aircraft were modified several times. These modifications improved the capabilities of the aircraft or its systems, not the pilot. There was only room for a certain number of missiles or specialized pods on an aircraft. But I never met a pilot who only had the ability to use exactly 91 skills, much less a whole unit of pilots with such a limitation.

[4XS]

Hello Piranha Games Devs,

as I am a relatively new player my main fear is not the loss of already achieved skills, but the inability to test new skills (or weapon loadouts) without grinding all XP and C-Bills again after I reset the skilltreee.
In addition, the new skilltree will make Omnipods more or less useless as the loadout of a Mech will be mostly static after its skilltree is leveled.


Greetings,

Andy

[Sergei Pavlov]

I understand you were concerned that some whales would leave as a result of the new Skil Tree, but what about old whales that would have come back thanks to it?

I haven't played the game in a few months, and I was very much looking forward to playing again when the Skill Tree was released. I guess I'll have to wait a bit longer.

The decision to equate current mastery with future mastery looks sensible. That way you can disconnect Mech XP and Module reimbursements. But what are we (players with hundreds of Modules) going to do with hundreds of millions of CBills, if we are not going to spend them back on our current Mechs? Buy dozens of Timber Wolves? I already have more Mechs I can play, and every piece of equipment available in the game times 100. I don't need CBills sitting idle on my account. I don't want them. I want new gameplay and something exciting to look forward to.

I really hope you find a solution, but the chances of any alternative satisfying everyone in this community are nil.

Edited by Sergei Pavlov, 14 March 2017 - 01:48 AM.

[pacifica812]

[Thomas G Wolf]

While I am a tad niffed that it is being delayed kundos for working with the player base PGI, it was most certainly a hard descision on your part, but the hard ones are usually the good ones, well done guys!!
I for one now do not mind waiting for a bit (or more) longer because I reconize the fact that you guys are really trying to give us the best possible solution and that takes time and testing.
One fact will remain though, you will never ever be able to satisfy all the players no matter what you do, but you are trying to in my eyes and that is good enough for me to accept the fact that some things will not be to my liking while other things will hit the nail straight on the head.
I would be very please (even with my wallet) if you keep this dedication to the game up no matter what the nay sayers will sream and rant about.

[Knighthawk26]

kesmai, on 14 March 2017 - 01:43 AM, said:

I have 250 mechs mastered and have unlocked all modules. I bought a lot of modules too. With time spent in the game as active player. I do not care about my 'mastered status' of my mechs, i care about the promise pgi gave regarding the module refund policy. KEEP YOUR PROMISE PGI.

PGI has never even suggested not refunding your c-bills and xp. But in the first version of the skill tree the cost in c-bills and xp was so high for skill nodes that most players could not get even half their elite or mastered mechs back to the same level in the new system. So if you get back 2 billion c-bills but it will cost 20 billion to "re-master" your current mechs then you have lost something of value in the exchange. That is what I was talking about. And PGI lowered the cost for skill nodes in the last PTS so that most players will "break even" if they re-master their currently mastered mechs.

[mad kat]

That's great news that they've seen sense and not succumbed to haste.

As for the Cbills i'm still crossing my fingers that they will refund the necessary cbill requirement to match the skill level that we're already at or even better scrap the cost entirely. ; )

How about a swot analysis chart scale similar to the diamond thing that shows in the mech stats that we can drag to a particular orientation like a compass, armour (defence), Firepower, mobility and Infotech at each bearing. Meaning the mech specialises in one particular role. I.e. Assaults drag it towards firepower, lights towards mobility or info. It wouldn't have to be locked to four positions of course you could make it more an eight point compass so you can mix the best of two.

This of course means you can benefit one or two areas but sacrifice others. I mean this is 'skills' we're looking at and some of us specialise in different roles i for one am primarily a brawler so i'd drag the indicator towards mobility and firepower but i'd sacrifice info and defence. The limit would obviously be capped and the more the xp you get the bigger you can deform the core circle in your chosen orientation.

something like this but simplified of course

You can use those 'bands' as xp and cost points.

Edited by mad kat, 14 March 2017 - 03:17 AM.

[Sergei Pavlov]

Here's an idea. Divide the Skill Tree 2.0 in two parts:

Part 1: Nodes that provide the same functionality as the current Skill Tree. People with mastered Mechs will be able to fill-in these nodes for free.

Part 2: Nodes that provide extra functionality, equivalent to modules and quirks. These need to be bought. People with Modules get some kind of currency to apply to these Nodes.