221 replies to this topic

[Dimento Graven]

This pisser and moaners against it, those who either didn't understand it, or those that were so f'ing cheap throughout the YEARS of gaming they've only bought ONE of each module they and insist on making their groups wait at least 5 minutes while they go search all their 'mechs for that missing module, and those that just can't stand change because change scares them, MAY, have had an effect on the release of this...

HOWEVER, this is PGI and we've been putting up with this BS from them for YEARS.

Promise a release date, miss it.
Promise a feature, don't deliver on it.
Have a glaring piece of BattleTech balance missing, ignore it, slap half-assed bandaids on instead.

This is pretty much been how they've conducted business from the get go.

[Cest7]

don't believe his lies

[Alexander of Macedon]

I'm baffled that people don't understand the concept of having a good thing later being better than having a questionable thing now.

That said, arrogant people like Dimento Graven can screw off, not all of us are teenagers or streamers who can play 8 hours a day to grind CB, and not all of us play FP or group queue.

[Dimento Graven]

Alexander of Macedon, on 19 March 2017 - 07:54 AM, said:

I'm baffled that people don't understand the concept of having a good thing later being better than having a questionable thing now.

You're not new here are you? This is PGI we're talking about.

We're STILL going to get a 'questionable thing later'...

Quote

That said, arrogant people like Dimento Graven can screw off, not all of us are teenagers or streamers who can play 8 hours a day to grind CB, and not all of us play FP or group queue.

Listen, I don't play 8 hours day (I maybe play 8 hours a week at best), nor anywhere near it and have, through only moderate effort and a very basic understanding of the nearly non-existent economy of this game, been able to build up stockpile of cbills sufficient to not have to worry about purchasing an engine, module, or Omni-pod ever again.

If, within a few hours of play, you're not able to add several million to your bank, you have absolutely got to be doing something wrong.

It's not 'arrogance', it's the voice of authority.

Edited by Dimento Graven, 19 March 2017 - 08:06 AM.

[Bud Crue]

Dimento Graven, on 19 March 2017 - 07:40 AM, said:

This pisser and moaners against it, those who either didn't understand it, or those that were so f'ing cheap throughout the YEARS of gaming they've only bought ONE of each module they and insist on making their groups wait at least 5 minutes while they go search all their 'mechs for that missing module, and those that just can't stand change because change scares them, MAY, have had an effect on the release of this...

HOWEVER, this is PGI and we've been putting up with this BS from them for YEARS.

Promise a release date, miss it.
Promise a feature, don't deliver on it.
Have a glaring piece of BattleTech balance missing, ignore it, slap half-assed bandaids on instead.

This is pretty much been how they've conducted business from the get go.

This is actually one of the more reasonable positions I've seen regarding this whole debacle.
Those of us who "whined" (I prefer criticized, but whined works) MAY have indeed had an impact in the skills tree being delayed. But, PGI also has a history of screwing stuff up all on their own. Yes, and yes.

Add the first possibility to the historical reality of the second and it is what one might call the status quo, for good or ill.

[Dimento Graven]

Bud Crue, on 19 March 2017 - 08:16 AM, said:

... "whined" ...

I don't think I said 'whined', 'piss and moan' has less negative connotation than 'whine' (to me anyway).

You can be justified in 'pissing and moaning' about something, but 'whining'? Well, you're just being a big unreasonable baby then...

Edited by Dimento Graven, 19 March 2017 - 08:19 AM.

[Nightmare1]

Bud Crue, on 19 March 2017 - 06:48 AM, said:

Yes. An interesting aside is Russ's statement on twitter that "engine decoupling has to come with skills tree". It was never even mentioned or hinted at until PTS 2.0 but now it goes hand in hand with the skills tree?

Yeah. He also said that they have been as "communicative as possible" following PTS 2.0 despite not a single post on the forums following the announcement and only a few tweets during that time.

And yet they seem truly bewildered when there is QQing about this stuff. Sigh.

Exactly. That is the thing that burns me more than anything else, is how PGI never actually says what they mean, and then acts surprised when the community throws it back at them.

I think that, had they been more forthcoming from the start, we may actually have the skill tree in-game by the end of the month. No one likes surprises though, so it's not really unexpected that the community would push back hard when it saw all the extra baggage that went along with this skill tree revamp.

[C E Dwyer]

Have to question the wisdom of taking an action on the basis of what might be.

Personally I think it would have been far more sensible to have tried out those mechs on P.T.S than do it on the live severs.

While I have some sympathy for your situation, as we all make mistakes. You seem to be looking around to blame others for your actions, of which only you are responsible, and for that I have none.

[Mystere]

Bush Hopper, on 19 March 2017 - 05:39 AM, said:

I am sure, you wouldn't have survived spending some skill points on fillers. Poor you.

It's about good clean design. But I guess you wouldn't know anything about that as you seem to just accept what is given to you.

[FallingAce]

Alexander of Macedon, on 19 March 2017 - 07:54 AM, said:

I'm baffled that people don't understand the concept of having a good thing later being better than having a questionable thing now.

Whatever PGI releases , you'd better be ready to live with it. PGI has a proven track record of releasing things and not addressing them later.

P.G.I. released clan mechs promising "aggressive balancing". Years later still not balanced.
P.G.I. released faction play 3 and the GOD TOM and then ignored FW for 5 months.
P.G.i. released FP 4.1 promising to fix certain things (~2 months) later like the rewards system. Didn't happen.

Some people can can understand the consequences,and some don't.

FallingAce, on 05 December 2016 - 03:15 AM, said:

I'm not really sure what the incentives are for

1. Loyalist
2. Small units.
3. I.S. side in general.

With the launch of the Maurader IIc this month, most mercs will be on the clan side. We will still have a population imbalance and a tech imbalance. Add to that the pugVpug scouting imbalance and you will have most of the same ingredients for failure as phase 3.

At this point I'd rather PGI waited to launch phase 4 until the new rewards system and the new skills system are in place.

Bad enough faction warfare is once again dead because of half-baked changes, do we really need to do that to the game in general?

[Bud Crue]

FallingAce, on 19 March 2017 - 08:43 AM, said:

Whatever PGI releases , you'd better be ready to live with it. PGI has a proven track record of releasing things and not addressing them later.

Nonsense.

PGI introduced broken flamers, and they got fixed! Albeit after the forums when nuts and the community pointed out how they were broken.

PGI introduced a new minimap, and it got fixed (mostly)! Albeit after the forums when nuts and the community pointed out how it was broken.

PGI introduced nuclear long tom, and it got fixed! Albeit after the forums when nuts and the community pointed out how it was broken and then a town hall of that community made it crystal clear.

See PGI fixes things. It just takes a lot of QQing or whining or pissing and moaning to get them to do it. And thankfully this community is willing to do that.

[Hoaggie]

Shifty McSwift, on 18 March 2017 - 02:13 AM, said:

Feeling a little like a kid excited for christmas getting a lump of coal and a slap in the face from santa.

Welcome to the PGI that the rest of us know

[FallingAce]

Bud Crue, on 19 March 2017 - 08:53 AM, said:

PGI introduced nuclear long tom, and it got fixed! Albeit after the forums when nuts and the community pointed out how it was broken and then a town hall of that community made it crystal clear.

5 months later after the patient had died.

[Davers]

Nightmare1, on 19 March 2017 - 05:08 AM, said:

I actually don't mind the nerfs so much. It's the way that PGI went about it that bugs me. Think about it:

1) PGI announces Skill Tree overhaul and says nothing about nerfs.

2) PGI immediately slips a large array of nerfs into the system.

3) Community becomes angry at the deception.

4) Skill Tree tests become a muddled and emotional bomb.

5) Skill Tree gets postponed.

My frustration, as I posted back during the live testing, is that PGI never stays within the lines when it tries to color the page. They can't set an objective and stick to it. Had their objective been to revamp the skill tree and institute balance changes at the same time, and had that objective been communicated at the outset, then we likely wouldn't have had half of the drama, frustration, and push-back that we did.

People don't like to feel hoodwinked, which is basically what happened with this skill tree. They went into it, all bright-eyed and eager, and discovered that the resource and time cost to master a Mech had been raised by a ludicrous amount, that the important nodes were buried beneath a mound of trash nodes, and that Mechs and skills had all been heavily nerfed to rebalance the game. Add to that Russ's very public insults of the community, and you get a very frustrated fan base.

PGI needs to take a lesson from other game devs. Look at STO, for example. When the devs over there revamped their skill tree, they kept to the tree only. They didn't touch any other aspects of the game. Now that the skill tree revamp is done and all kinks have been thoroughly worked out of it, the devs have announced a complete rebalance of the game. They are taking certain skills and weapons and are going with just a few at a time, making slight tweaks. It will be a long process, but they are dedicated to doing it right.

PGI, on the other hand, wants to leap in swinging the nerf hammer like Thor. While many of the nerfs are needed, there is no tact, communication, or respect for the player base in PGI's approach. That's what has frustrated so many of us.

Well, PGI has to bundle everything together to minimize the time spent away from MW5. Maybe they will allocate some of the budget next year to have another look at it.

[MechaBattler]

Nightmare1, on 19 March 2017 - 05:08 AM, said:

I actually don't mind the nerfs so much. It's the way that PGI went about it that bugs me. Think about it:

1) PGI announces Skill Tree overhaul and says nothing about nerfs.

2) PGI immediately slips a large array of nerfs into the system.

3) Community becomes angry at the deception.

4) Skill Tree tests become a muddled and emotional bomb.

5) Skill Tree gets postponed.

My frustration, as I posted back during the live testing, is that PGI never stays within the lines when it tries to color the page. They can't set an objective and stick to it. Had their objective been to revamp the skill tree and institute balance changes at the same time, and had that objective been communicated at the outset, then we likely wouldn't have had half of the drama, frustration, and push-back that we did.

People don't like to feel hoodwinked, which is basically what happened with this skill tree. They went into it, all bright-eyed and eager, and discovered that the resource and time cost to master a Mech had been raised by a ludicrous amount, that the important nodes were buried beneath a mound of trash nodes, and that Mechs and skills had all been heavily nerfed to rebalance the game. Add to that Russ's very public insults of the community, and you get a very frustrated fan base.

PGI needs to take a lesson from other game devs. Look at STO, for example. When the devs over there revamped their skill tree, they kept to the tree only. They didn't touch any other aspects of the game. Now that the skill tree revamp is done and all kinks have been thoroughly worked out of it, the devs have announced a complete rebalance of the game. They are taking certain skills and weapons and are going with just a few at a time, making slight tweaks. It will be a long process, but they are dedicated to doing it right.

PGI, on the other hand, wants to leap in swinging the nerf hammer like Thor. While many of the nerfs are needed, there is no tact, communication, or respect for the player base in PGI's approach. That's what has frustrated so many of us.

Deception? Dude. Please. It's not like they didn't put the description of the changes in the PTS posts. Just because they didn't announce it at mechcon with the skill tree, it's a deception? They're trying to make the most of the PTS. And they clearly had intent to do these other changes to go with the skill tree. They tie into it.

Even if they hadn't added those things. The thing that postponed the skill tree is people losing mastered on most of their mech collections. That's a real reason to cancel your pre-orders and get up in arms.

[Nightmare1]

Davers, on 19 March 2017 - 09:14 AM, said:

Well, PGI has to bundle everything together to minimize the time spent away from MW5. Maybe they will allocate some of the budget next year to have another look at it.

Lol, we can only hope, right?

MechaBattler, on 19 March 2017 - 09:29 AM, said:

Deception? Dude. Please. It's not like they didn't put the description of the changes in the PTS posts. Just because they didn't announce it at mechcon with the skill tree, it's a deception? They're trying to make the most of the PTS. And they clearly had intent to do these other changes to go with the skill tree. They tie into it.

Even if they hadn't added those things. The thing that postponed the skill tree is people losing mastered on most of their mech collections. That's a real reason to cancel your pre-orders and get up in arms.

Well, it's apparent that you didn't really read my post and just cherry picked out what you wanted.

Here's the TL:DR for you: People don't like surprised, and PGI's skill tree revamp went beyond what they said it would involve, sparking lots of surprises. Add to the the incredible amount of lost time people would experience due to PGI moving the mastery goal posts, and you get a lot of angry customers. It's as simple as that.

[MechaBattler]

Nightmare1, on 19 March 2017 - 09:40 AM, said:

Lol, we can only hope, right?



Well, it's apparent that you didn't really read my post and just cherry picked out what you wanted.

Here's the TL:DR for you: People don't like surprised, and PGI's skill tree revamp went beyond what they said it would involve, sparking lots of surprises. Add to the the incredible amount of lost time people would experience due to PGI moving the mastery goal posts, and you get a lot of angry customers. It's as simple as that.

So because you and others felt offended by the surprise, they can't continue development on those features? Features that tie into the skill tree changes?

[Moomtazz]

Here's how I see it, PGI has tried to balance the game by varying quirk values at no cost to players, aside from wanting to buy OP mechs or scrapping underperforming ones. The new skill tree seemed to give the players some control over many of the characteristics that quirks affect. If you add the skill tree and continue to tweak quirks, players will be caught in a constant cycle of grinding to pay for respecs as they chase the meta. I think that would end up killing the game.

If they want to implement a skill tree, they need to make respecs free of charge.

[Nightmare1]

MechaBattler, on 19 March 2017 - 09:52 AM, said:

So because you and others felt offended by the surprise, they can't continue development on those features? Features that tie into the skill tree changes?

Not at all. Once again, you're cherry picking my words. I said in my post that I was actually looking forward to the skill tree. I wasn't one of the ones who advocated for killing it. I simply wanted PGI to get it right.

I had already accepted the fact that it would be implemented imperfectly, and just wanted PGI to continue to work on it post-implementation as a kind of continuous improvement. All I am doing here on this thread is positing my own theory as to why the community at large reacted the way that it did.

...But you, the butt-hurt, can continue to cherry pick and twist my words as much as you like if that is what soothes your bruised ego. I'm good with that too.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

Dimento Graven, on 19 March 2017 - 07:40 AM, said:

This pisser and moaners against it, those who either didn't understand it, or those that were so f'ing cheap throughout the YEARS of gaming they've only bought ONE of each module they and insist on making their groups wait at least 5 minutes while they go search all their 'mechs for that missing module, and those that just can't stand change because change scares them, MAY, have had an effect on the release of this...

HOWEVER, this is PGI and we've been putting up with this BS from them for YEARS.

Promise a release date, miss it.
Promise a feature, don't deliver on it.
Have a glaring piece of BattleTech balance missing, ignore it, slap half-assed bandaids on instead.

This is pretty much been how they've conducted business from the get go.

Then those people are $tupid and bad at time management... it is super easy to strip a mech of modules after you are done using it. You should never be "hunting" for modules, they should all be available in one pool thereby alleviating the time waste of searching. That is of secondary concern to me in that the skill maze was an absolute dumpster fire that Nerf'd IS mechs unilaterally in a multitude of ways while further increasing the OP Clan mechs by giving them Quirks they never had access to before. Thereby widening the already preexisting imbalance while in no way accomplishing ANYTHING that the skill maze was predicated upon achieving.

The real problem is those that think that change for the sake of change is beneficial, but utterly lack any ability to percieve the outcome of what that change will actually transpire to be.

Edited by I_AM_ZUUL, 19 March 2017 - 10:44 AM.