7 replies to this topic

[SeventhSL]

Any compensation systems needs to reimburse for:

• XP used to unlock variant skills
  
• CB’s used to purchase modules
  
• GXP used to unlock modules
  
• Mech XP locked to variants
  
• The skill status of each Mechs in a player’s collection

Any compensation system must prevent:

• Players from losing value they have earned under the existing system which will also exist under the new system. This includes indirect value such as status and function.
  
• Player using large pools of XP, GXP and CB’s to game the compensation system and gain more value than they have earned.

The proposed compensation system:

• Give each Mech a player owns free skill points proportional to the skills that have been unlocked for it. MechFreeSkillPoints = XPSpentToUnlockMechSkills / TotalXPRequiredToMasterMech * TotalNumberOfSkillPointsRequiredToMaster. Rounded up.
  
• Give the player a CB refund for modules owned less the cost of the free skill points provided above. CBRefund = TotalCBSpentOnModules – (TotalFreeSkillPointsProvided * CBCostOfASkillPoint). If the number is negative, then the player receives no CB refund.
  
• Give the player a GXP refund for XP/GXP spent on Mech skills and GXP spent unlocking modules. GXPRefund = ToalXPGXPSpentUnlockingMechSkills + TotalGXPSpentUnlockingModules – (TotalFreeSkillPointsProvided * XPCostOfASkillPoint). If the number is negative, then the player receives no GXP refund.
  
• Implement PGI’s proposed historic XP system which allows players transfer XP currently locked to a variant to individual Mechs of that variant.

Respec considerations and suggestions:

• Once a Mech is mastered, Mech XP is currently only useful for GXP conversion. Under the new skill system this additional Mech XP will gain value as it can now be used to respec mechs.
  
• Under the current system players can respec Mechs at no additional XP/CB cost using previously purchased modules and equipment. The CB value of modules will be lost under the new system however the XP value will be compensated for with the increased value of Mech XP.
  
• To compensate for the CB respec value I suggest the following. Once a skill node has been purchased with a combination of XP/GXP and CB’s it refunds only XP and is repurchased with only XP/GXP.

[tokumboh]

SeventhSL, on 16 March 2017 - 04:50 PM, said:

Any compensation systems needs to reimburse for:

• XP used to unlock variant skills
  
• CB’s used to purchase modules
  
• GXP used to unlock modules
  
• Mech XP locked to variants
  
• The skill status of each Mechs in a player’s collection

Any compensation system must prevent:

• Players from losing value they have earned under the existing system which will also exist under the new system. This includes indirect value such as status and function.
  
• Player using large pools of XP, GXP and CB’s to game the compensation system and gain more value than they have earned.

The proposed compensation system:

• Give each Mech a player owns free skill points proportional to the skills that have been unlocked for it. MechFreeSkillPoints = XPSpentToUnlockMechSkills / TotalXPRequiredToMasterMech * TotalNumberOfSkillPointsRequiredToMaster. Rounded up.
  
• Give the player a CB refund for modules owned less the cost of the free skill points provided above. CBRefund = TotalCBSpentOnModules – (TotalFreeSkillPointsProvided * CBCostOfASkillPoint). If the number is negative, then the player receives no CB refund.
  
• Give the player a GXP refund for XP/GXP spent on Mech skills and GXP spent unlocking modules. GXPRefund = ToalXPGXPSpentUnlockingMechSkills + TotalGXPSpentUnlockingModules – (TotalFreeSkillPointsProvided * XPCostOfASkillPoint). If the number is negative, then the player receives no GXP refund.
  
• Implement PGI’s proposed historic XP system which allows players transfer XP currently locked to a variant to individual Mechs of that variant.

To my mind the there are two simple solutions to this.

Full refund for any and everything

The issue is about how people spend their XP and C bills.
I spent some on mechs because of the rule of three and I spend some on modules I am getting a full reimbursement of my modules but not my mechs. So the simplest solution is to allow all equipment to be sold at full price for a period. That would allow people to make the choice between mechs versus skill points. I accept this is ugly and still their will be people whom would lose out but it is simple and fairer than the module only reimbursement.

The second solution is that we give current master mechs a proportion of SP essentially equal to the nodes that the could be unlocked trying to get equivalence which is approximately between 40-50 SP for a currently mastered mech. so there will be no mech XP refunds. Modules will be refunded in terms of XP and C bills.

This solution allows the idea of progress to be preserved but in truth the complication is that the number of skill point of each level will be needed to be agreed.

I don't think a currently fully mastered mech is equivalent to 91 SP of the skill tree

SeventhSL, on 16 March 2017 - 04:50 PM, said:

Respec considerations and suggestions:

• Once a Mech is mastered, Mech XP is currently only useful for GXP conversion. Under the new skill system this additional Mech XP will gain value as it can now be used to respec mechs.
  
• Under the current system players can respec Mechs at no additional XP/CB cost using previously purchased modules and equipment. The CB value of modules will be lost under the new system however the XP value will be compensated for with the increased value of Mech XP.
  
• To compensate for the CB respec value I suggest the following. Once a skill node has been purchased with a combination of XP/GXP and CB’s it refunds only XP and is repurchased with only XP/GXP.

I think that all XP and GXP should just be GXP there should be no distinction
but that is just me

[soapyfrog]

tokumboh, on 17 March 2017 - 02:46 AM, said:

I don't think a currently fully mastered mech is equivalent to 91 SP of the skill tree

Depends on the mech. Mechs with no or few quirks can technically get buffs out of the full tree, but mechs that previously relied on quirks cannot actually regain their previous potential even with all 91 nodes.

The new tree does not really represent an increase in capability. A mastered mech in the new system feels more or less like a mastered mech in the old system. For some mechs it is a buff for many mechs it is an overall nerf.

So I would say that mastery in the old system actually does merit all 91 skill points in the new system. This is a side grade, not an upgrade, no one should have to pay extra for it.

[tokumboh]

soapyfrog, on 17 March 2017 - 03:38 AM, said:

Depends on the mech. Mechs with no or few quirks can technically get buffs out of the full tree, but mechs that previously relied on quirks cannot actually regain their previous potential even with all 91 nodes.

The new tree does not really represent an increase in capability. A mastered mech in the new system feels more or less like a mastered mech in the old system. For some mechs it is a buff for many mechs it is an overall nerf.

So I would say that mastery in the old system actually does merit all 91 skill points in the new system. This is a side grade, not an upgrade, no one should have to pay extra for it.

Here I don't agree since the quirk were set differently to what was a mastered mech. The quirks were hardwired they were player controlled additions. So my view is that equivalent mech is that which has old mastered functionality. The debate about the quirks is about balance mastering your mech is not about balance.

Now there is a debate to be had about quirks but that is not part of the skill tree since everyone can get the same skills as PGI said that the tree had to common.

[A Cane Toad with a XXXX]

soapyfrog, on 17 March 2017 - 03:38 AM, said:

Depends on the mech. Mechs with no or few quirks can technically get buffs out of the full tree, but mechs that previously relied on quirks cannot actually regain their previous potential even with all 91 nodes.

The new tree does not really represent an increase in capability. A mastered mech in the new system feels more or less like a mastered mech in the old system. For some mechs it is a buff for many mechs it is an overall nerf.

So I would say that mastery in the old system actually does merit all 91 skill points in the new system. This is a side grade, not an upgrade, no one should have to pay extra for it.

Wrong Soapy.
A fully mastered mech in the new tree system includes all modules. A fully mastered mech in the old system only gave you the ability to fit an extra module. The modules themselves had to be unlocked with GXP and then purchased for CB. Fitting modules in the new tree system will be similar to purchasing nodes 46-91.
The changes to engine decoupling, quirks changes, and the upcoming weapons changes is an attempt at balancing, and this will have an impact on all mechs. Some more than others, but the notion of thinking a mastered mech (without modules) in the old system is equal to having all 91 nodes is simply incorrect.
So forget about trying to get a mech back to an equal performance level or trying to match the old system and the new tree. The point of compensation is about not losing a mechs progression when converting basic and Elite skills to the new tree and not making players re-grind what they have already unlocked.

If someone has not purchased a single module, not one single module, but has Mastered every mech they own. Why should they then received all 91 nodes unlocked when 50% of those nodes are equivalent to fitting seismic, radar derp, target decay, weapon modules and other modules. If PGI did give all mastered mechs all 91 nodes and then refunded all modules CB and XP, the CB economy will be wrecked.
A mastered mech should receive an equivalent unlock to that of Elite and the HXP removed from their mech for equivalent Elite status, and all remaining HXP that was grinded to unlock the old mastery module slot is still available for purchasing nodes 46-91.

Some people invested in modules while others invested in more mechs.
So to make it fair on all, PGI needs to:

• refund all module CB and XP costs
  
• allow players to sell mechs at full refund for one month so they have the choice stay invested in more mechs, or sell some of their mechs to re-invest those CB's in more nodes equivalent to buying modules.
  
• Work out how many nodes equal the Basic/Elite skills and allocate that number of nodes free of charge depending on what Basic/Elite unlock progress was made.
  
• Work out what cost (XP & CB) to attach to nodes above the Basic/Elite number considering you no longer have to purchase 3 variants, no longer have to grind the basic XP on 3 just to master one, no longer have to unlock module XP in order to purchase modules, the module cost is now built into the tree, and you can't swap module between mechs any more.

In reality, fully mastering a mech beyond the equivalent Basic/Elite skills and fully equipping with all modules now only costs approx. 2,000,000 CB.


Pretty cheap to master a mech now!!! That's if the a new tree system comes in.

Edited by K O N D 0, 17 March 2017 - 05:04 AM.

[Chound]

tokumboh, on 17 March 2017 - 02:46 AM, said:

To my mind the there are two simple solutions to this.

Full refund for any and everything

The issue is about how people spend their XP and C bills.
I spent some on mechs because of the rule of three and I spend some on modules I am getting a full reimbursement of my modules but not my mechs. So the simplest solution is to allow all equipment to be sold at full price for a period. That would allow people to make the choice between mechs versus skill points. I accept this is ugly and still their will be people whom would lose out but it is simple and fairer than the module only reimbursement.

The second solution is that we give current master mechs a proportion of SP essentially equal to the nodes that the could be unlocked trying to get equivalence which is approximately between 40-50 SP for a currently mastered mech. so there will be no mech XP refunds. Modules will be refunded in terms of XP and C bills.

This solution allows the idea of progress to be preserved but in truth the complication is that the number of skill point of each level will be needed to be agreed.

I don't think a currently fully mastered mech is equivalent to 91 SP of the skill tree



I think that all XP and GXP should just be GXP there should be no distinction
but that is just me

It's a lready been posted the following itemsz will be refundwed:
ALL XP used on mechs
All gxp used on mech pilot skills
Cbills for modules purchased
the problem becomes that the time it would take to manually spec the individual mechs if you have a large number of Mechs. New skills have been added. I would prefer just replacing the skills modules already in use for an equivale in nodes. without a refund of GXP/XP modules would be a refund of C bills and GXP since both are used. GXP for the skill and C bills for the modules.

[tokumboh]

Chound, on 17 March 2017 - 05:30 AM, said:

It's a lready been posted the following itemsz will be refundwed:
ALL XP used on mechs
All gxp used on mech pilot skills
Cbills for modules purchased
the problem becomes that the time it would take to manually spec the individual mechs if you have a large number of Mechs. New skills have been added. I would prefer just replacing the skills modules already in use for an equivale in nodes. without a refund of GXP/XP modules would be a refund of C bills and GXP since both are used. GXP for the skill and C bills for the modules.

You seem to misunderstand what the complaints were about.

The refund of the modules would not be enough to allow people to remaster their mechs or even come close to it previously you only used XP to master the mechs and you used C bill to buy modules after using XP to unlock them

PGI tried to use the idea that for every mech you bought that you bought modules for each mech where as most people swapped their modules as they needed to have enough for their drop decks for FW

I have around 80 modules but 87 mechs. The simply miscalculated or did not understand. that people using the C bills for other parts of the game.


PGI basically put in a system that would compensate people with lots of modules but few mechs with enough C bills and XP to get their mechs mastered but people whom are mech rich and module poor I think you need something close to 2 modules per mech to break even or so you end up losing progress,

Basically if you have stable of over 80 Mechs and you bought one of every module and swapped them then you were going to have grind billions of C bills basically or sell the mechs to master the ones you have left

[Tesunie]

Although I will comment that your system of reimbursement probably would stop a lot of complaining and is a very good idea...

I don't get what people are complaining about. If the Skill Trees had been implimented all it would mean is I could afford to get a few mechs to mastery (ones that had large amounts of EXP because I enjoy playing them), and then I'd have to... continue to play the game to finish leveling all my other mechs again. Seen as I'd already be intending to continue to play the game, I don't see that as overly harmful. (At least in relation to experience on mechs.)


I do agree with you that the C-bill costs could use to be compensated for, as if you owned lots of mechs and few modules, than you wouldn't be able to afford to get back on your feet. Though, to be honest, I disagreed with the C-bill requirement to unlock skills anyway. While playing one mech, I'm normally saving my C-bills for my next project. I'm sure I am not the only one.


I'd rather EXP only be used to unlock skills, and that if you "take back" that skill you'd loose that experience. This provides reasons sometimes to continue to play a mech, as experience starts to become less a "oops, I'm over full and can't use any more" to "I might need more later, so I can continue to play this mech if I want to". I say this as someone who likes to have a project mech to work on and level up as a drive to play the game.


Last thing I wished PGI would do (sorry if I'm falling farther off topic, consider this post a bump for you) would be to take the specific EXP from a mech and toss it into the HXP, but that HXP would be open for any variant of that chassis. This is how we would go about and around the higher costs of those new skill trees. If you do what most people did, purchase and elite two mechs and sell them to keep a mastered third, you wouldn't have wasted floating HXP, but instead could still get a single "mastered" mech from the pooled experience of all three variants of that chassis. (AKA: Lets you keep using experience forced to earn from the old in the new system.)


Just my opinion on the mater. Much of which seems to be related or similar to the proposal in this thread.