369 replies to this topic

[Serpentine Shel Serpentine]

I've been playing avidly for about a month and love the game and the community. I'm a grizzled old gamer and my son is just getting started in this genre but we both appreciate the depth, excitement and science fictional elements. I thought I could add my perspective on the skill tree discussion, as a newbie.

1. The biggest negative is the uncertainty about whether the current system is worth using. I like that the company is making a commitment that no achievements will be lost, although the mechanics of how that will be done are unstated. I want to be able to play the game in full without fear of wasted time or money. I'm not completely confident of that yet, but this message gives some comfort.

2. The new system in general sounds better but with the biggest problem being the loss of across the board improvements like the modules. On the other hand removing the idea of mastery requiring multiple mechs is a big improvement -- that felt like a gimmick to sell mechs for real money. But I get that if you worked that multi-mech skill system, the new one would feel like a betrayal of sorts.

3. If the developers mean that in some way the old achievements are "grandfathered" for current mechs and players, that would be the best solution. So for example if own Radar Dep now and can use it on all mechs by transferring it -- which is a feature not an exploit as the devs acknowledge -- I should be able to do that under the new system even if other folks who are new cannot do that. In other words all my currently owned mechs (but not the new ones) should have radar dep activated or at least switchable so one at a time can have it. Same with other Modules and skills -- they should all still be there, unless the player chooses to trade them in for a "refund" to work the new skill system. Other than modules and skills I already have, the new system should apply to existing mechs.

4. The new skill trees should be automatically populated for existing players but modifiable for free. That should reduce the time needed to adjust to the new system dramatically. Alternatively there could be single click presets that can be modified. If all the old modules and skills are grandfathered there is no need for a refund unless the player wants to wipe the skill tree and start from scratch.

5. I applaud PGI for listening to its community and supporting the community of players in general.
Many companies are afraid of such communities, but in fact they vastly improve the player engagement and loyalty to he product. You can see this too in developments at Games Workshop - also an evolving, complex game system with an opinionated but dedicated community. Without the community there is no game.

Hope to see MWO flourishing for many years to come. Thanks to all!

Edited by DeloresAbernathy, 14 March 2017 - 11:38 AM.

[Rizzwind]

Dakota1000, on 13 March 2017 - 06:39 PM, said:

Really sad its being delayed for a second time. I was looking forward to the 21st. Now we don't even have a static date, I guess I'll just take a break from the game for a few months until they get it.

Same here. Was the only thing really bringing me back. 8 months of the same meta is just stupid not to mention boring. Guess I'll watch for a PTS update thread now and then.

[DESTRUKTROTRON]

I don't understand why everyone is clamering over so1ahmas tree. To me it will just lead to even bigger exploits of the current system, thus leading to an even bigger disparity between the mechs. It's modules but in trees, that doesn't look fun. It just means meta mechs will sink all their points into that one tree. I liked the tree as it was now because you had to make those choices, hard choices about what you wanted to do. The best nodes shouldn't be available to you from the start. If you want your mech to kick *** then play it and get it there.

[Almond Brown]

Rizzwind, on 14 March 2017 - 09:27 AM, said:

Same here. Was the only thing really bringing me back. 8 months of the same meta is just stupid not to mention boring. Guess I'll watch for a PTS update thread now and then.

Strange. The Community railed about the changes, got it stopped, and you feel that should not "delay" the process? How do you figure they could not "delay" and yet change the whole Skill system, as so many seem to want? Could you clear up how that might be done please. Seriously...

[Jay Leon Hart]

Thank you

[MovinTarget]

Rizzwind, on 14 March 2017 - 09:27 AM, said:

Same here. Was the only thing really bringing me back. 8 months of the same meta is just stupid not to mention boring. Guess I'll watch for a PTS update thread now and then.

Let me take you back on a trip down memory lane...

None of the CW/FP changes over the years went through PTS... we just had to take 'em as they came... A lot of the stuff they were putting in sounded good, some of the stuff we even begged for... when we got it, it was not how we'd imagined.

I'll take additional PTS time to get it right.

I'll take delays so that when it does arrive, it can "change the meta" and hopefully do it by not driving players away.

The difference here, is that while Energy Draw was "interesting" and "different", I'm not sure a large contingent of the community ever asked for it.

This was promised, and if you could wait 4 years for it, you can wait another month (or 3? Max?) for it to be something most of us can get behind, whether its the implementation itself or the means of transitioning everyone's work and progress into it.

[Fr0z7y]

russ, while you guys are at it, can we get a dislike button on the forums for some of the trolls to get dislikes to their comments?? lolz, but for real, thanks in advance for making the progress we have made still be viable in this future vision of mwo, as i have stated to my unit it will be like playing a new mechwarrior game but instead of coming into it with nothing but trial mechs, i'll have all this cool stuff to tinker with, which is for me one of the great concepts of a game like this that keeps me in a more love than hate relationship with it.

i do skip over the comments that aren't "productive", including those that constantly throw out opinions that won't work towards your end goals of both making the company money and being fun/competitive/originaldesigns/etc.., like a big box of legos i think is what you guys are shooting at with this new skill tree system for diversifying builds, but making it a bit harder to cooky cut clanners into poptarting death dealers not a single is mech wants to deal with.

truly understandable as i see most of the people complaining more than likely have more than just a few clan mechs, however, i do have many is mechs that i need to redo and the way you will be going about making my progress carry over is much appreciated, and several people complaining also are in the same boat.

i still think clan mechs are easy mode, and will make it just as much so if not even more so after this skill tree update.

[Mcgral18]

Rizzwind, on 14 March 2017 - 09:27 AM, said:

Same here. Was the only thing really bringing me back. 8 months of the same meta is just stupid not to mention boring. Guess I'll watch for a PTS update thread now and then.

Just as a PSA, the Meta wasn't going to change

It was just going to get more powerful.
Remember, the God Tier Clams now get velocity quirks on top of TCs

[Ruar]

DESTRUKTROTRON, on 14 March 2017 - 09:34 AM, said:

I don't understand why everyone is clamering over so1ahmas tree. To me it will just lead to even bigger exploits of the current system, thus leading to an even bigger disparity between the mechs. It's modules but in trees, that doesn't look fun. It just means meta mechs will sink all their points into that one tree. I liked the tree as it was now because you had to make those choices, hard choices about what you wanted to do. The best nodes shouldn't be available to you from the start. If you want your mech to kick *** then play it and get it there.

Because the hard choices shouldn't be about which crappy, unneeded skill you had to wade through in order to get to the skill you want. The hard choices should be about choosing skill X or skill Y because you want both but can only afford one.

The linear tree can provide that through the simple method of having the nodes cost more than one point. Radar deprivation is the easy example. If it is in it's own linear branch with five nodes. The nodes go down the line with 30%, 25%, 20%, 15%, 10% and the costs start at 1 and go to 5. Maybe that's too cheap so the costs start with 2 and end up costing 25 points for the full amount. This means a player has to make hard choices but they are easy to see, they make sense, and they don't require wading through a tree to figure out how to get what you want.

There are multiple ways of making it so the players have to make decisions about which skills they want and which they have to skip. Having a linked web of mashed together skills is on way, but it's one of the worse ways to do it. Having a linear tree with variable returns and costs is the simplest and most logical method. It's easier for new players to understand, it's easier for older players to select across multiple mechs, and it's easier to adjust later.

There is no negative about the linear method and no positive about the intertwined mesh.

[Ghostrider0067]

While this is a step in the right direction, it is evident that there isn't enough communication with the devs here, on the game's actual forums. I'm aware that Reddit is popular and what not, but this is where the focus needs to be. Period. That focus needs to come regularly, too. It cannot be relegated to a one-in-a-while post from Russ or whomever or a stream of 140 character tweets on a platform not many care to follow. Do your community right and do it HERE.

That said, the skill tree obviously needs work on many fronts and it's good that PGI has accepted the dialogue from the community no matter where it has come from and taken it into consideration for tweaking said tree for a future release. It's far better to postpone a system and iron it out in more finite detail than to release something that was clearly lacking polish and was not going to be beneficial to those who are heavily invested in the game. Unless there is a true 1:1 mechanic in place for exchanging the modules that doesn't leave a significant hole when it comes to refitting your much will skills, I personally don't think it's going to be satisfactory. There should not be a shortfall between what someone has currently and with what they get once the changeover has been made.

Again, this is just my perspective. I'm hopeful that PGI takes a more well rounded approach to the game going forward and uses the best and brightest ideas the community has to offer to shape the game we all love. That's the most important part of it, guys: We all want to see the game succeed. While I understand that there will be promoters and detractors, it all needs to be considered going forward.

Best wishes. We all await future development with anticipation and hope.

[Peiper]

I am heartened to see the players are being listened to. Now, how about some more maps, an economy, supply lines, salvage - you know, depth and meaning. We need more than death matches. Of course, we've been saying that for years.

I'll go back to my island now and shut up...

[Trev Firestorm]

InnerSphereNews, on 13 March 2017 - 06:21 PM, said:

Whether you own a hundred Modules or none, there will be no lost progress in the relative Skill statuses of your ‘Mechs. The work you’ve already put in to achieve Mastery, or any other degree of Skill status under the current system, will carry over into an equal capacity for acquiring any desired Skills under the new Skill Tree.

I'm shocked, they have finally learned to listen to us for real? Wonderful news!

[Dran Dragore]

PGI, i am realy disappointed. Again a good idea is gone away for unknown time because of, in my opinion, dubious reasons. So, i expect the next patch will bring just another new Mech for real money and all in all just some bugfixes. No new required content since the Escort game mode. Every month just new Stuff for real money, but so less Stuff that brings the game ahead.

Well, i could have lived if you keep the modules for no Cbill Refunds (even if i lost around 400-500 Mio. CBills) if this is the reason why it wont released. I hope realy you will find the courage for bringing something new even if some Players are against it in future...

[palu12]

BattleBunny, on 14 March 2017 - 04:29 AM, said:

I have been buying modules like crazy for weeks, ever since they said "full refund on modules".

I was doing this as well, buying modules I would have otherwise done without to test how cooldown reduction affected the heat on a certain build, see if range boosted my dps, etc... This is a source of disappointment now that the devs can't meet the date they laid out.

Rogue Jedi, on 14 March 2017 - 07:11 AM, said:

my biggest request from a redesign would be to make it so you do not have to take the weapon cooldown (rate of fire) skills to get to the heat reduction skills, the reason I would want the heat reduction is because the Mech runs hot, it is seriously counter productive to take rate of fire if the Mech was already running hot.

This is actual constructive feedback that isn't based in nonsense (ie. I don't want to click to many times, I don't want to lose all my 'mastered' mechs that I never play, etc...)

Cathy, on 14 March 2017 - 08:09 AM, said:

Seriously, we've waited over three years for this, another two or three months working together, to get it right, wasn't going to hurt anyone, because everyone could see progress, and we wanted more progress before it hit live.

What is to say that we won't be waiting another 3 years, rather than the 2-3 months you suggest? The part of the community that is against it will likely still be.

Tordin, on 14 March 2017 - 08:58 AM, said:

...I hope PGI listened to people with truly good ideas and NOT bending over backwards for L33ts, boaters only and trolls that just want to see this game stay stale and dont want to get out of their comfort zone and adapt to a fundamentaly, promising change.

Outside of new mechs, this game is stale. It seems there is dev effort going on but nothing coming out of it.

Ghostrider0067, on 14 March 2017 - 10:00 AM, said:

While this is a step in the right direction, it is evident that there isn't enough communication with the devs here, on the game's actual forums. I'm aware that Reddit is popular and what not, but this is where the focus needs to be. Period. That focus needs to come regularly, too. It cannot be relegated to a one-in-a-while post from Russ or whomever or a stream of 140 character tweets on a platform not many care to follow. Do your community right and do it HERE.

Reddit should never be used as community forum, and if you want everyone to weigh in, it should be done here.


As I said earlier, there seems to be a lot dev effort going on but nothing making it into the game. This leaves the game feeling like it lacks progress and while the diehards will likely always be around, that prevents new players from staying long. You can't kill ideas because people don't want to click 91 times, you can fix that after its live.... Granted there are other issues that need to be worked out before release (ie refunds), but if that is the real work going on, it shouldn't prevent PGI from providing an estimated date of delivery. I fear we will never see this change/system, much like we haven't see some of the others.

[Mister Bob Dobalina]

At that point it uses way more effort to keep track of the discussion and the different opinions than to just give a cr4p and play with what we've got. Seriously.

[Mochyn Pupur]

You have my interest now, having been a critic and still reticent about the PTS, that takes a lot of doing . . . please don't disappoint.

[SCHLIMMER BESTIMMER XXX]

i dont get why people are so stubborn on holding onto this barebones skill system we had in the past oO? THE WORK WE PUT INTO THE OLD SKILL TREE xD xD xD xD
what work? it is basically clicking 1 field after another without any noticable effect for gameplay.
Be happy! you can keep this boring system (which many requestet to undergo change for more
variability) and look at your golden starts above your mechs d(@_@)d telling yourself you achieved something

[Sickario]

Thank you. If I may add my own suggestions, next time you put this on Test please don't give us an arbitrary amount of C-bills and MC's in order to play around with the skill trees. I'm not sure if it's possible, but on other games I've played they gave us a button that basically updated Test with our current Mechs, currency, etc. It resets any changes we had made to mechs before that in test (if any).

That way we can see exactly how much we're going to have when it goes live, and we'll know if we'll have enough to update all our current Mechs. Allow us to get new Mechs for free (just in test) so we can have an idea of what would be involved with upgrading those.

I think the lack of this information was part of the problem with the execution of the Skill Tree Test. The other problem was having to spend points on skills we didn't want/need in order to get to those we DID want. There's many ways you can change this. For weapons, make each skill box we buy affect all weapons in some equitable way (cooldown to all, etc.) and don't make it a chain, but something that we can pick as we want. Make a big button (or a few that give in stages) that gives every weapon something everyone would really want the most, perhaps something such as reduced spread for missiles and LBX's, reduced jam chance for UAC's, reduced charge time for Gauss, etc.) so that way whether people boat or not they'd not feel penalized.

For non-weapon choices, once again it should be direct choices. However perhaps for the former modules such as derp, seismic, etc., perhaps make the cost for them higher as they get more and more of them. This way they have to prioritize as they see fit instead of just getting everything. Or not, if you think it won't affect balance if everyone can get them easily.

I'm a n00b so my perspective isn't as important as veteran players, but I hope to become a veteran player in time. I really like this game so far.

Edited by Sickario, 14 March 2017 - 11:12 AM.

[zachyattacky]

Again PGI bending to the will of the plebeians. Pathetic.

[Morticia Mellian]

Flitzomat, on 14 March 2017 - 05:05 AM, said:

If you think the design is wrong it does not make sense to go live and tweak it.

I think much of uproar comes from those who want a perfect skill for free with no grind or consequences have zero real knowledge understanding of game design for a massive multiplayer free-to-play game, and PGI needs to stop trying to placate them.

There is no progression lost. In both PTS patches, we each gotten the cbills for the modules and XP from all of the mechs, from an old system to be applied to a new one. Respec costs are pretty standard for these sort of games, and PGI made even more generous for the second PTS.

The complaint is people do not want to grind for more, and want the whole cake right meow and free. This change is the overall equivalent of game like WoW raising the level cap, and you 'cheapstakes' want to be given the ten new levels for free simply because to managed to reached the last level cap.

For sure the Skill Tree and UI needs tweaking, but it is overall good enough for live, from which will be able to get their proper precious stats.