369 replies to this topic

[DjPush]

PLEASE DON'T GIVE UP ON THIS PGI.

[metallio]

xXJ35T3RXx, on 16 March 2017 - 12:29 AM, said:

So what you're telling me is that if this were real life in order for me to master driving a mustang - I'd have to buy 3 of them from a dealership. WHAT version of the MCU does this make sense???

Yeah, I want the new system but...actually yes it really is something like that. If you're a car guy you know that you get better at driving your preferred pony car by learning the quirks of other cars. You focus on the one you're going to race, but you get a feel for the bigger and smaller cars, the ones that corner on rails compared to yours and the ones that are sloppy. You get better at managing your revs by seeing how it works with a big block compared to a turbocharger or sequential turbochargers.

People who ride are almost universally aware of the skill boost that comes from learning to ride other bikes, especially dirt bikes.

So yes, there is definitely something to learning to drive more than one variant if you REALLY expect to become a "master" of your machine. In real life. Mirroring that on MWO probably wasn't the intent, it was probably just a cbill sink and trying to get people to try different variants...but it's not hard to defend as a reference to the real world.

[metallio]

Final note (I hope) about the "mastery" discussion: It's not about BIG NUMBERS ™. It's about whether or not you're undereperforming by design. The currently mastered mechs aren't underperforming, they're on par with everyone else. As soon as the skill tree comes out if they don't have 91 (or whatever) nodes then they'll be back to underperforming like when you were Basic'd and didn't have your elite skills. It's not that you can't play them, and it's not that those mechs aren't going to put out the same numbers they do right now if you give them 57 (or whatever) nodes, it's underperformance.

It's like every time an MMORPG like WoW kicks out a new expansion. Yeah, you still do the same damage you used to with your epic Wrath gear, but there's no way in he11 you're going to get to bring that toon along to play with your friends who want to hit up some dungeons or go raid.

This isn't WoW. I hope we don't want it to be. I know I don't.

[The Unstoppable Puggernaut]

Wow, just read through this original post. Thank you very much PGI for listening, it really does sound like they will be taking our points onboard so we'll have to wait and see what on the table for the next round. Hopefully it could get rolled out correct first time (bar any mini patches).

I am pretty sure everyone here wants to be able to tailor make mechs to their liking so ST gets a big thumbs up. Once the main issues are ironed out, I honestly can't wait for this to come out.

The PTS environment will obviously have to be re-opened for business again. While I couldnt get a match (when I had the time), I was still able to provide feedback on the actual building process.

I hope this will come out way before the Civil war happens as it will still require some tweaks and adjustments once rolled out.

10/10 update though and I really wasn't expecting that.

p.s. I can't wait to get a refund on those modules, I am absolutely spent.

p.p.s. What if the ST was purely based off XP's, and that you could convert C-bills into this (for a heavy price of course). This would benefit those billionaries (seriously how did you even get that much money?!).

[TheLuc]

I do hope guys you realize it took a storm equal to the mini map one, Makes me wonder if the company actually did listen or its the wallets that made them postpone the Skill Tree.

On a side note the Skill Tree should be called Optimization Tree, as it has nothing to do with skill.

[MrHufic]

C'mon devs this is no fun anymore!

I spent so many C-Bills recently for modules which I'd never bought whithout the announcement of getting a total refund.
I was just that close to having all I needed for a real competitive drop deck, changed the idea because I wanted to see the impact of the new skill tree on FP and it's means for drop deck design, and that for started to mess around with C-Bills, buying modules I always wanted but never aquired because of their low importance for competitive loadouts.

Now you come out telling us that it was just a joke?! I mean April 1st is yet to come!

I can understand the necessity of rethinking several aspects of such large changings in the game and the process of transition, but I don't get the point of announcing the uncertain, that's just like forecasting the weather in the 90's!

Edited by MrHufic, 16 March 2017 - 11:43 AM.

[D V Devnull]

DjPush, on 16 March 2017 - 05:43 AM, said:

PLEASE DON'T GIVE UP ON THIS PGI.

Agreed. I just don't want PGI to mess it up before they release it.

MrHufic, on 16 March 2017 - 11:40 AM, said:

Now you come out telling us that it was just a joke?! I mean April 1st is yet to come!

MrHufic, the New Skill Tree is NOT some kind of joke. It's just that it wasn't ready enough to have a set date for release yet. Calm down, for there are people who just want it done right the first time. Would you prefer to patch just once and enjoy endlessly? Or would you rather to make everyone angry because they had to patch repeatedly and reload the game several times over, therefore having their game experience constantly interrupted? I think you know what the more sensible answer is here, as having an incomplete addition now requires a ton of extra patching as we go along.


~Mr. D. V. "You don't want me angry. I'm ugly when I'm angry." Devnull

[Storyteller]

K O N D O, on 16 March 2017 - 01:50 AM, said:

The only issue with comparing old and new in regards to modules, is most people swap module. Therefore the CB and XP used to purchase these would normally be spread over all variants owned in the old system.

I agree with most what you have written. But I must add something to this particular point:

If you save 18 million credits, like you have shown in your example by not buying 2 obsolete variants of the same mech, you would have this amount of money saved to toy around for additional upgrades/nodes. So it's not like having those 6 million credits for the 1 module, it's the 6 + 18 million credits in this case.

Let's follow your example any further:

If it costs 2,025,000 CB to skill a mech in the NEW system until the "mastered level" of the OLD system, you could do this with about 12 mechs (6 + 18 = 24 / 2 = 12) . Given that you spare a lot more credits on even more costly mech variants you don't want to own (9 millions is mediocre, if you look at the prices of heavy clan or assault IS mechs) and given that the people used more than one module, you would have much more credits at your disposal:

In average 4 modules per mech (2x weapons, 2x mech)
= 16 modules at least for 4 mechs in 1 FP dropdeck

16x 4 million credits (estimated average price of 1 module)
= 64 million credits total
= ~32 mastered mechs

If you add your savings of the not bought obsolete variants, you could skill even more up to the actual master level.

In terms of costs the new skill system would be a great gain for the majority of the players.
Only a little intersection of people would have a drawback:

Those who have A LOT mechs and only VERY FEW modules.

I for example own about 100 mechs.
Maybe 10-20% of them are fully equipped with modules.
Let's pretend it's 10%.

4 million credits x 4 modules per mech x 10 mechs
= 160 million credits / 2 million credits per mech (costs of the new system to reach "master level")
= 80 mastered mechs

And I know a lot of people who own many more modules than I do.

So I really don't understand the problem of all the vets and "losing their progress".

Edited by Storyteller, 17 March 2017 - 08:25 AM.

[Trev Firestorm]

Storyteller, on 17 March 2017 - 08:23 AM, said:

I agree with most what you have written. But I must add something to this particular point:

If you save 18 million credits, like you have shown in your example by not buying 2 obsolete variants of the same mech, you would have this amount of money saved to toy around for additional upgrades/nodes. So it's not like having those 6 million credits for the 1 module, it's the 6 + 18 million credits in this case.

Let's follow your example any further:

If it costs 2,025,000 CB to skill a mech in the NEW system until the "mastered level" of the OLD system, you could do this with about 12 mechs (6 + 18 = 24 / 2 = 12) . Given that you spare a lot more credits on even more costly mech variants you don't want to own (9 millions is mediocre, if you look at the prices of heavy clan or assault IS mechs) and given that the people used more than one module, you would have much more credits at your disposal:

In average 4 modules per mech (2x weapons, 2x mech)
= 16 modules at least for 4 mechs in 1 FP dropdeck

16x 4 million credits (estimated average price of 1 module)
= 64 million credits total
= ~32 mastered mechs

If you add your savings of the not bought obsolete variants, you could skill even more up to the actual master level.

In terms of costs the new skill system would be a great gain for the majority of the players.
Only a little intersection of people would have a drawback:

Those who have A LOT mechs and only VERY FEW modules.

I for example own about 100 mechs.
Maybe 10-20% of them are fully equipped with modules.
Let's pretend it's 10%.

4 million credits x 4 modules per mech x 10 mechs
= 160 million credits / 2 million credits per mech (costs of the new system to reach "master level")
= 80 mastered mechs

And I know a lot of people who own many more modules than I do.

So I really don't understand the problem of all the vets and "losing their progress".

In another thread on this I worked out my own case and it ended up leaving me with a minimum of 1250 games to reacquire my lost progress... and I was not even the extreme edgecase for # mechs vs # modules. Because of my activity level in the game that works out to around a year of making no NEW progress, just reacquiring what I obtained over the past several years, which is simply unacceptable.

[MrHufic]

D V Devnull, on 16 March 2017 - 02:07 PM, said:

MrHufic, the New Skill Tree is NOT some kind of joke. It's just that it wasn't ready enough to have a set date for release yet. Calm down, for there are people who just want it done right the first time. Would you prefer to patch just once and enjoy endlessly? Or would you rather to make everyone angry because they had to patch repeatedly and reload the game several times over, therefore having their game experience constantly interrupted? I think you know what the more sensible answer is here, as having an incomplete addition now requires a ton of extra patching as we go along.

I totally agree on what you say, D V Devnull, I want the devs deliver the best job they can too, and have them done the new skill tree right at first time, even if that means delays on release.

But that's not the point I argued about, so let me make clear three points.

First:
When writing 'joke', I refered to the announcement of total C-Bill and XP/GXP refund on modules and skills aquired/unlocked in the past, which would be coming along with the introduction of the new system, but now is subject to changes.

Second:
I critiziced the communication towards the players/the community, more precice I don't understand why upcoming changes are announced being final, when they are still object of actual testing and balancing.
Such communication is misleading, and can create confusion and, in at least one case (mine ), led to disappointment.
I mean they could just say: 'Folks we're planning a new skill tree, maybe this and that and so will be subject of changes, but as the impact on the game, on what it is and should remain to be, is not clear at the moment, we can not say how theese changes finaly will look like, before extensive testing.'
That would have been enough for a first announcement, later on they could have made public the results of first, second and so on testing sessions, giving first outlooks on the ongoing work and changes.
As an experienced studio PGI should know when and when not to announce things.

Third:
I won't calm! I am
I was just disappointent seeing my hard earned C-Bills going down the river, and would like to apologize for having left the impression of being upset.

So what I wish for the future, is MWO become a balanced and more 'fun again' game to play even for loyalists.

Best regards and wishes,
a proud soldier of the Kungs Armé

p.s.: It's not that I don't have fun, but it could be more^^

Edited by MrHufic, 17 March 2017 - 11:43 AM.

[H 4 R B I N G E R]

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

we had failed to provide adequate weight toward players who owned fewer Modules, swapping them from ‘Mech-to-‘Mech as needed and as facilitated by-design.

Those ones like me who have a small number of Modules Profit the most from the new system. There is no need for a change in compansation because the new Skilltree itself benefits these players way more than players with large amount of Modules.

In my opinion the Balance patch should come as fast as possible and the all the finetuning should take place after it gets life on the Game Server, to make this large step finaly.

We wait too long for it and I feel most of my mechs aren't that good as they could be because of the old system.
So plz give us the Patch and let us expirience the game is new manners.

[MrJeffers]

Welldoneworker, on 17 March 2017 - 11:52 AM, said:

Those ones like me who have a small number of Modules Profit the most from the new system. There is no need for a change in compansation because the new Skilltree itself benefits these players way more than players with large amount of Modules.

In my opinion the Balance patch should come as fast as possible and the all the finetuning should take place after it gets life on the Game Server, to make this large step finaly.

We wait too long for it and I feel most of my mechs aren't that good as they could be because of the old system.
So plz give us the Patch and let us expirience the game is new manners.

How do you figure that people with few modules profit the most? That's the exact opposite of what happens in the system that was on the PTS.
Each mech has 91 possible skill points to buy. Each skill point cost 800XP and 60,000 C-Bills.
Meaning that when the new system went in place it would cost 72,800 XP and 5,460,000 C Bills to skill up your existing mechs.

XP getting refunded wasn't the issue, it's the C-bill costs.
If you have 20 mechs you want to skill, that means you needed 109,200,000 C-bills to skill your mechs back up. Do you have that sitting in your account now? Most people don't. How long would it take you to earn that much? That's where PGI thought the module refunds would cover everyone. Short answer is that it didn't.

PGI was saying they were looking at reducing the costs down to 45,000 C-Bills per skill point, or 4,095,00 C-bills per mech. But I guess after looking at the data PGI found it still wasn't going to work out for a lot of players to skill their mechs back to their current state.
Most people don't want their mechs reset to zero XP and then have to reskill them up, they should migrate over at some level that is equal to their current skill level - without cost. I fully understand that there are additional skills that can take the mechs beyond their current skills so they shouldn't just be completely unlocked, but they should at least get back the ones they have now, or something determined to be equal in X number skill points for their current level.

[D V Devnull]

MrHufic, on 17 March 2017 - 11:42 AM, said:

I was just disappointent seeing my hard earned C-Bills going down the river, and would like to apologize for having left the impression of being upset.

Well, one bright side... Until we change over to the New Skill Tree systems, your Module purchases are NOT a waste, and therefore your C-BIlls () have NOT gone down the river, because they actively help whichever Mechs you have them equipped on. Of course, that includes the caveat of having the right weapon modules to go with the weapons you're using, but other than that, you're good to roll.

So be happy and don't sweat it. I hear those saunas up in the FRR cause people to get overheated into unnecessary aggression anyway...



By the way, I can see one way that PGI could have sidestepped the whole need for a New Skill Tree. They could have just allowed one more Mech Module and Weapon Module on ALL the Mechs, give or take those pesky little lights that already have too many Weapon Module slots. But would PGI ever do that? I don't think they are crazy enough to even try it, even though people would sing praises to PGI for it. Heck, PGI could have even given additional Master Module Slots beyond the first on some Mechs, and even provided "Master Mech Skill Abilities" uniquely for each variant as well, all under the current system that exists. Maybe PGI could even do some "Master Consumable Slots" too! It's unfortunate that we couldn't see an expansion to this Older Skill Tree system.


~Mr. D. V. "Showing you the upside of modules..." Devnull

[Void2258]

Good. The iteration we saw was WAY too shotgun and way to insanely click heavy and obtuse. I'm still hoping for mech chassis to get special tree points unique to each chassis to make things less generic.

[Captain Arctic]

Thank you very much PGI for heard us!
I hope you will also reread our detailed PTS feedback and find the most optimal way to improve The Skill Tree, so it will be something really good that we all can say "Yeah, that's what I like!" about it.

[Dodger79]

MrJeffers, on 17 March 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

How do you figure that people with few modules profit the most? That's the exact opposite of what happens in the system that was on the PTS.
Each mech has 91 possible skill points to buy. Each skill point cost 800XP and 60,000 C-Bills.
Meaning that when the new system went in place it would cost 72,800 XP and 5,460,000 C Bills to skill up your existing mechs.

XP getting refunded wasn't the issue, it's the C-bill costs.
If you have 20 mechs you want to skill, that means you needed 109,200,000 C-bills to skill your mechs back up. Do you have that sitting in your account now? Most people don't. How long would it take you to earn that much? That's where PGI thought the module refunds would cover everyone. Short answer is that it didn't.

PGI was saying they were looking at reducing the costs down to 45,000 C-Bills per skill point, or 4,095,00 C-bills per mech. But I guess after looking at the data PGI found it still wasn't going to work out for a lot of players to skill their mechs back to their current state.
Most people don't want their mechs reset to zero XP and then have to reskill them up, they should migrate over at some level that is equal to their current skill level - without cost. I fully understand that there are additional skills that can take the mechs beyond their current skills so they shouldn't just be completely unlocked, but they should at least get back the ones they have now, or something determined to be equal in X number skill points for their current level.

Very true. And, sadly, quite easy to overcome, in my opinion: do not make every node cost CB but only the ones representing former modules. Avoid to have to unlock a "module-skill" like hill climb in order to get sth useful, make the costs high but not unreasonably (100-250k range perhaps? Still not few money, but fast earned [heck, only 1 very good match would earn that] and on a number of Mechs it would work as the intended CB-sink. This way everybody could skill his Mechs back to a level he had before without spending a single CB. And while they're on it they can also consider making skill nodes cost different amounts of skill points OR upgrading single nodes by using more skill points on it. Idea behind it: getting a decent bonus would cost more then the usual x +0,1%.bonus-sh*t that does not achieve anything besides the players needing to click around in the new tree for _ages_ to get some decent buffs on a large number of Mechs. The modules right now have levels 1-5, too. Just aply that to the skill tree: range 1 buffs +1,5% and costs 1 skill point, range 2 is +3% and 2 sp, 3 is 4,5% and 3 sp, 4 is 6% and 4 sp and 5 is 7,5% and 5 sp. So, for 15 skill points spent in range you get 22,5% buff to range. Sounds too high? Well, the problem with % is, that longe range weapons have a waaaaaay better standing with %-buffs then short range weapons like SL/SPL, AC/20, SRM, ISML and ISMPL. These gain almost nothing (ingame noticeable) due to to the very low base value, so they definetely need high %-buffs to make it worthwhile. Pure numbers on the other hand (e.g. add 10m, 15m, 20m, 25m, 30m [with Clans 5m less in every step, perhaps]) would result in comparatively low buffs to long range weapons (only 100m gained) but would extend the range of the MG for example to almost double it base-range. On the other hand: it's still quite short range. Then range skills for Clans are not worth it? Great! That gives IS the cance to catch up on range through skills! But then Clans have more skill points to spend elsewhere? Well, right. But: with the March-Patch we will see a new crit system which benefits IS way more then Clans, so make crit reducement skills and Clans can spend their "spared range skill points" there to lower the advantage in this field compared to IS.

These examples show, that a skill tree should be more then just a couple (or a sh*tload) of +1-clicks to max out a Mech, it should offer opportunities, decisions, if/or-choices (you can only skill range OR heat for example, duration OR cooldown) and that you either have to have a skill tree in an environment where it can iron out "built in" flaws of one tech-level without too many points left to buff the strenghts of it even more OR you need different skill trees/number of skill points depending on the tech level and role of the Mech. The old "same for all"-approach was just not good.

[Duerre]

I'm a new player, just started playing last month. What I can say about the new system is it's good, for new players, of course. Because we don't need to buy other variants to master a mech, and we don't need to buy additional mech bays.(Well, that's what I understand about the new system.)

But still, I understand the veterans' point of view, some did invest on additional mech bays to get the different variants and to master this certain one mech. For those people complaining about the modules because they only have certain amount of sets for a lot of mechs, let's just think about it this way, we always get c-bills whenever we play anyway. I've always wondered where the c-bills of veterans went, and I'm guessing it mostly went to MECH purchases. seeing some certain people with 300 to a 900?(afair in a youtube vid) is ridiculous.

For a new player, having to think of buying additional mech bays for certain variants to master one, is really not enticing. Well, I still do really hope for PGI to compensate the veterans the right amount/way, and I hope the direction PGI took is going to make the game greater. I think it is going the right way.

[Aramuside]

K O N D O, on 16 March 2017 - 01:50 AM, said:

Ryoken is correct MGEEZ.

If a mech is mastered in the old system, it simply gives you the option to add more modules. This option costs 21,500XP to get an extra module slot. It does not give you any extra skills or the modules themselves.
The skills come from unlocking basic and elite, then if you wish to fit mech or weapon modules, you can do so but at a huge cost. Most people fit 6-12 million CB worth of modules. Some people fit none.

From all the tests I have done and others probably have done, it takes approximately 45 nodes to unlock the same Basic and Elite skills. To be honest, it actually takes 50 nodes but that includes some extra skills that you have to pass through to get the Basic/Elite equivalents.
In the new system, it actually takes only 57 nodes to unlock all Basic, Elite, and get Seismic.
So in reality, it you purchased a brand new mech for 9 Mil CB and that was the only variant you liked, in the new system to get it viable it would cost you:
1 x Mech variant cost = 9,000,000
57 x 800XP = 45,600XP
57 x 45,000CB = 2,025,000 CB

In the old system you would have to purchase 3 variants, grind the basics on all 3, then grind the Elite on the 1 variant you liked, and then pay 6Mil CB for Seismic. So the old system cost would be:
3 x Mech = 27,000,000 CB
1 x Seismic Sensor (x1 cost) = 6,000,000 CB + 30,000XP
3 x Basic Skills = 42,750 XP
1 x Elite Skills = 21,500 XP

Quite a bit cheaper in the new skill tree system hey?

The only issue with comparing old and new in regards to modules, is most people swap module. Therefore the CB and XP used to purchase these would normally be spread over all variants owned in the old system.
The new system doesn't let you swap modules, but as you can see the cost to put a Seismic module on a single mech in the new system cost approximately 2 - 4 faction warfare games. That is it!!!
The XP grind is also very close per mech.

The thing PGI needs to work out for themselves is:
- How many nodes equals the basic/elite skills?
- automatically unlock that particular number of nodes (at zero CB cost) on each variant that has skills unlocked based on what basic or elite skills have been unlocked.
- if they come up with 45 nodes like I did, it is pretty easy to refund current mech skills progress using a node allocation method.

I cover it all in the below post.

https://mwomercs.com...d-and-proposal/

That's the most one sides description of the system in a while. Why don't you revisit it from the perspective of a player with a lot of mechs where the triple requirement is irrelevant...

The new system (which I semi like tbh in its last version on pts) forces you to sacrifice a lot to get full seismic and radar dep something we currently can just add to each mech with a one off cost that's small in the scheme of things. Compare that to the insane requirement to pay it 306 times for just my current mechs...... before we even look at the opportunity cost of what I could take instead.

Some mechs I tested on PTS did very well out of the system so I can see why people with small budgets or whose builds benefit hugely from unlinking modules from slots want it (yes LRMers I'm looking at you) but theres a lot of people who lose too despite your protestations.

[K O N D O]

Aramuside, on 18 March 2017 - 10:09 AM, said:

That's the most one sides description of the system in a while. Why don't you revisit it from the perspective of a player with a lot of mechs where the triple requirement is irrelevant...

No.... it is an attempt to be fair for module poor (mech rich) and mech poor (module rich) and new players coming in to the game, and to also prevent repeated grind on what skills has already been unlocked for ALL players.
Remember some players chose to invest in more mechs while others chose to invest in more modules. The point is, they both spent similar amounts of CB's either way and neither should get an unfair compensation or progress.
Hence why I have said on numerous other threads that if modules are refunded, then players who invested in mechs should have the option to get a full refund on a mech if they wish so they can use that refund similar to how the module rich players can use the CB's.
If you think that is one sided.... you are completely incorrect.

If you want to keep all your mechs and get all nodes fully unlocked for each mech even though you haven't purchased any modules.... then you are greedy.

Aramuside, on 18 March 2017 - 10:09 AM, said:

The new system (which I semi like tbh in its last version on pts) forces you to sacrifice a lot to get full seismic and radar dep something we currently can just add to each mech with a one off cost that's small in the scheme of things. Compare that to the insane requirement to pay it 306 times for just my current mechs...... before we even look at the opportunity cost of what I could take instead.

Wrong again.... you do not have to pay the full cost seismic and radar derp (which is 12Mil CB) on all mechs. The cost to fit a large number of equivalent modules on your existing mechs in the new tree is only approx. 2 Mil CB per mech.
The only caveat to this is that PGI do not make players lose their skill progress of Basic/Elite when transitioning to the new tree by allocating approx. 45 nodes per mech to cover the transition. 45 nodes is about the equivalent to unlocking Basic/Elite skills.

We are moving to a new system..... New means something different to the old (who would have known) and therefore you will never make an exact one for one transition. There will be some give and take.

PGI are going to take away our ability to swap modules and the requirement to purchase 3 variants, but they are giving us the ability to fully module all mech at a far far cheaper cost than before.

Aramuside, on 18 March 2017 - 10:09 AM, said:

Some mechs I tested on PTS did very well out of the system so I can see why people with small budgets or whose builds benefit hugely from unlinking modules from slots want it (yes LRMers I'm looking at you) but theres a lot of people who lose too despite your protestations.

No I am not protesting.
My point was that the introduction of engine decoupling and new tech, a new balance has to be made. The quirk changes is an anticipation of where the balance will be. However, the balance will not fully be known until all changes have been implemented into the game.

Unlinking modules from slots benefits or impacts everyone the same, and this is where balance comes in to it. If a mech or weapon system becomes too over powered or under powered, it will be balanced. Either by base quirks and by skill tree.

Yes, unlinking the modules now gives overpowered mechs which previously could only fit 3 modules, the ability to fit more. But also under powered mechs can also fit the same number. Again this is where balancing comes in to it.

[D V Devnull]

And someone hits a sore spot with me...

Aramuside, on 18 March 2017 - 10:09 AM, said:

Some mechs I tested on PTS did very well out of the system so I can see why people with small budgets or whose builds benefit hugely from unlinking modules from slots want it (yes LRMers I'm looking at you) but theres a lot of people who lose too despite your protestations.

You think LRM'ers would get anything out of it? WRONG. Why? PGI was talking about taking 100 meters off the LRM BaseLine, causing the Range Skill Nodes to become MANDATORY. Even with all those Range Skill Nodes enabled again, LRMs would not even reach 1000 meters. Worse, the STK-5M Stalker that has a large Missile Range Quirk would be the only Variant overly benefitted versus all other possible LRM users, imbalancing LRM use in the favor of the Inner Sphere, while leaving the Clans at a hard disadvantage. If PGI is talking about balancing things, taking away LRM Range is not a way to do it, as Missiles only travel to their Maximum Range and then blow up if they don't do damage. Worse, there would be further unbalance from LRMs losing Range, because Energy-users and Ballistic-users would then gain more of a Range Advantage, and Non-Missile Weapon Boaters would become even more powerful.

By the way, before you think me an LRM-loving freak... I should note that I've got some designs not using LRMs, and I do use those as well. I just don't see the damn point in deprecating a weapon which happens to be part of the BattleTech/MechWarrior Universe into complete disuse.

~Mr. D. V. "Trying to keep the game fun for all..." Devnull