221 replies to this topic

[R Valentine]

Bud Crue, on 20 March 2017 - 09:12 AM, said:

Well, mostly. We did also get some defensive nodes that are certainly not represented by the current "skills" or modules. Also the jump jet tree, is a straight up buff to jets though likely to be ignored. But other than those, yeah pretty much its what we have just arranged to force you to pick bad with the good.

As to your cbill comments. Russ pretty much said exactly this in the NGNG stream. They need the skills tree to be a cbill sink so as to address the potential "millions of cbills floating around". They need to suck up those cbills so as to give...encouragement...to players to buy new mechs with real money. Without such a sink the one mech system will fail (reading between the lines of Russ's actual statements).

Meh. I don't care about costs, refunds or the re-grind. I just care about my already low tier mechs being made worse. If they go forward with that aspect, I will likely keep playing but I'll likely be playing the same boring meta mechs and builds that everyone else will be playing. So much for increasing mech and build diversity.

And everything Russ said was complete garbage. He just wants to milk existing customers for as much as he can. He's given up on new players completely. No one in their right mind would think that massive maze of skills was going to be good for any potential new players. And the skill tree wasn't even going to touch boating or current meta mech picks. If anything it was going to make the problem worse. They should just cancel the Fed-Com civil war and declare that the clans have taken over the Inner Sphere, thus we all play clan mechs now. At least they should have if they released that monstrosity he called a "skill tree".

[Bud Crue]

Dimento Graven, on 20 March 2017 - 09:18 AM, said:

What I got from the statements I read from PGI on the matter is that compensating those of us who have invested XP/GXP and cbills, isn't the issue. It's the people who play as 'lean' (read: CHEAP AZZMOFO's) as possible that are the problem. The folks who have only purchased a single set of modules who would end up being compensated much less than those of us who said, "F'it, I'm not bothering switching the damn modules out every f'ing time I want to switch a 'mech. Switching modules isn't fun, getting into a match as quickly as possible and blowing up stompy robots is fun, so I'm investing cbills in MORE modules to avoid that particular delay and frustration."

It's those incredibly cheap so-and-so's that have malf'd it for everyone.

It's about lost progress. The lord speaketh:

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

I few thoughts on the subject.

Many might view this as similar to power draw in that it might seemingly be delayed indefinitely, at this point in time that is certainly not the case. While energy draw showed some interesting promise and I would like re explore that at some point it was ultimately an experimental feature. 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 to the skill tree, I think some levels of disagreement on the right path for balance or the layout of the skill tree nodes would be expected and could be accepted. As the shortcomings in our transition process became clear and we could see that certain players were going to lose progress that became obviously unacceptable and we had no choice but to delay.

As Alex mentioned this discovery helped us realize we had to adjust our refund plan to one of refunding progress.

As we rectify these problems we will also take time to further refine the user interface as well as continue to make as many balance improvements as possible.

[Dimento Graven]

Bud Crue, on 20 March 2017 - 09:23 AM, said:

It's about lost progress. The lord speaketh:

Yeah, but there's another quote floating around that clarified what that "progress" actually was, namely that the primary feature of modules is that you CAN get away with being a CHEAP AZZMOFO and have JUST ONE set and use it interchangeably between ALL your owned 'mechs.

By mostly eliminating modules people would have to spend on the skill tree, for each 'mech, to get those same features they had.

HOWEVER, given that, THEORETICALLY there's a large pool of earned, yet unspendable XP on those 'mechs anyway, I can't imagine that the potential 'lost progress' (a misnomer if you ask me, I would call it 'consequences of playing excessively lean') is actually as great as these people are panicking about.

[R Valentine]

Dimento Graven, on 20 March 2017 - 09:28 AM, said:

Yeah, but there's another quote floating around that clarified what that "progress" actually was, namely that the primary feature of modules is that you CAN get away with being a CHEAP AZZMOFO and have JUST ONE set and use it interchangeably between ALL your owned 'mechs.

By mostly eliminating modules people would have to spend on the skill tree, for each 'mech, to get those same features they had.

HOWEVER, given that, THEORETICALLY there's a large pool of earned, yet unspendable XP on those 'mechs anyway, I can't imagine that the potential 'lost progress' (a misnomer if you ask me, I would call it 'consequences of playing excessively lean') is actually as great as these people are panicking about.

Yea, no. It doesn't matter how many times you keep calling people "cheap". It doesn't make it true. If a lame personal insult is your only real argument then we know you don't really have one. The system was always bad and I would much rather have them axe it completely than ever attempt to release it in its last iteration. I am also very doubtful it will go the way of Energy Draw and Info Tech, although they did muck it up just as bad as those initially.

[Dimento Graven]

Kiran Yagami, on 20 March 2017 - 09:32 AM, said:

Yea, no. It doesn't matter how many times you keep calling people "cheap". It doesn't make it true. If a lame personal insult is your only real argument then we know you don't really have one. The system was always bad and I would much rather have them axe it completely than ever attempt to release it in its last iteration. I am also very doubtful it will go the way of Energy Draw and Info Tech, although they did muck it up just as bad as those initially.

You can be offended all you want, but that's the actual gist of the situation.

The only 'progress' lost was the interchangeable abilities of the modules. If you invested in a lot of modules you were going to be compensated and be able to pretty much skill up every 'mech out of t he gate. If you refused to purchase additional modules and used only one set, or as few as possible, then you would have 'mechs that you'd eventually have to spend uncompensated XP/cbills to regain those abilities.

Be as butthurt as you like, but THAT was the reality of the situation, and frankly I find it absolutely hilarious we can't make an attempt to progress the development of the game because it.

[R Valentine]

Dimento Graven, on 20 March 2017 - 09:46 AM, said:

You can be offended all you want, but that's the actual gist of the situation.

The only 'progress' lost was the interchangeable abilities of the modules. If you invested in a lot of modules you were going to be compensated and be able to pretty much skill up every 'mech out of t he gate. If you refused to purchase additional modules and used only one set, or as few as possible, then you would have 'mechs that you'd eventually have to spend uncompensated XP/cbills to regain those abilities.

Be as butthurt as you like, but THAT was the reality of the situation, and frankly I find it absolutely hilarious we can't make an attempt to progress the development of the game because it.

And you can be salty and throw temper tantrums all you want, but the reality of the situation is no one wants to deal with lost progress and thus the skill tree was put on hold to address that issue. I have nothing to be "butthurt" about. I got what I wanted. You're the butthurt one here, hence why you have to resort to personal attacks to express your saltiness. I find it absolutely hilarious that chaps your hide so much.

[Bishop Steiner]

Xetelian, on 20 March 2017 - 09:14 AM, said:

You mean the people who wanted refunds? I've spent over 50,000,000 on modules.
I've spent 100,000 GXP on unlocking modules for both innersphere and clan.
I've built up millions in Mech XP.

I should be compensated for this. If they can't compensate me then they will lose a customer, not that they care since we're all on an island and cheapskates.

and the original plan included refunding all of that.

[Dimento Graven]

Kiran Yagami, on 20 March 2017 - 09:54 AM, said:

And you can be salty and throw temper tantrums all you want,

LOL, >>I<< am the one throwing a salty temper tantrum?!? LOL...

Quote

but the reality of the situation is no one wants to deal with lost progress and thus the skill tree was put on hold to address that issue.

Yeah, the "lost progress" being modules people refused to buy...

Quote

I have nothing to be "butthurt" about. I got what I wanted.

If you mean you don't have to change anything, and can continue using ONE set of modules for all of your 'mechs, yeah, I suppose you got what you wanted...

Quote

You're the butthurt one here, hence why you have to resort to personal attacks to express your saltiness. I find it absolutely hilarious that chaps your hide so much.

Exactly WHO did I personally attack? If you feel insulted it's because you at some level believe you're being a 'cheapazz mofo'.

I never called any specific person any sort of name.

What 'chaps my hide' is the lack of game development because people come out of the wood work who don't like that their current 'gaming of the system' is going to be changed/eliminated and raise all 'holy heck' fighting against it.

Had people just broken down and invested in the modules their 'mechs needed instead of continuously swapping their ONE set out every time they changed 'mechs, they'd be in a position to enjoy instantaneously skilling their 'mechs up to the features they previously had in module form.

The downside to this 'delay' in the skill tree is that, most probably, a lot of those same 'cheapazz mofos' will have to continue to purchase and skill up 3 'mechs to enjoy the mastery boost, and acquire the extra module slot.

Effectively grinding close to two thirds extra. The new skill tree eliminates that little 'chore' and will actually end up saving effort and Cbills previously wasted on unwanted 'mechs.

I'm not upset, I'm laughing at their own short sightedness, and their idiotic smug self-righteous mistaken certainty that now that they've delayed this, they're actually better off.

It's hilarious!

[WarHippy]

Dimento Graven, on 20 March 2017 - 09:46 AM, said:

You can be offended all you want, but that's the actual gist of the situation.

The only 'progress' lost was the interchangeable abilities of the modules. If you invested in a lot of modules you were going to be compensated and be able to pretty much skill up every 'mech out of t he gate. If you refused to purchase additional modules and used only one set, or as few as possible, then you would have 'mechs that you'd eventually have to spend uncompensated XP/cbills to regain those abilities.

Be as butthurt as you like, but THAT was the reality of the situation, and frankly I find it absolutely hilarious we can't make an attempt to progress the development of the game because it.

That really isn't an accurate understanding of the lost progression a lot of us were complaining about. The problem boils down to there being a cost on all nodes rather than just on the nodes that had a direct connection to the old modules such as Seismic and Radar Derp. While we were being refunded the XP earned on our mechs we were not able to use that XP because it is now behind a c-bill wall. That is essentially a loss of progress already made. If you have 200 mastered mechs under the old system moving over to the new system(assuming 50 of 91 skill points at 60k a pop) it would require 600,000,000 additional c-bills outside of the modules side of things to kind of sort of put you back at a similar place as you were at before the skill tree. The time spent leveling those mechs wasn't being compensated for under the skill tree as it was only the XP earned without means to use it that was being provided.

Honestly, all PGI had to do was move all of the c-bill costs to the nodes that dealt with things like Radar Derp and Seismic etc. and leave the nodes that were a replacement for the old skill tree and quirks as XP only. Had they done that most of us that had a problem with the tree would have been fine with it being released even in its rough state.

[Andi Nagasia]

PGI reworked the system to use both C-Bills and EXP they felt that was how they wanted to do it,
so that is the way it was done, no every rework in a game need to work the exact way the old was done,
if so then why would they be reworking to change it,

personally im ok with the C-Bill & EXP Cost,
i see it as gaining Experience with a Mech War Machine,
then using that Experience to Mechanically Tune my Mech,

[Jay Leon Hart]

WarHippy, on 20 March 2017 - 02:39 PM, said:

Honestly, all PGI had to do was move all of the c-bill costs to the nodes that dealt with things like Radar Derp and Seismic etc. and leave the nodes that were a replacement for the old skill tree and quirks as XP only. Had they done that most of us that had a problem with the tree would have been fine with it being released even in its rough state.

I agree

[Wildstreak]

Still other problems with the Tree were and are ignored. If released, there would have been players leaving that had nothing to do with refunds.

Amazing how some players have been known for a LONG time to buy modules and switch them between Mechs, only now does this become a cause for hostility misplaced.

[Alex Morgaine]

I picked up a crab and even basic'd will drive it. Not seeing LAC hurts more tbh

[InspectorG]

Dimento Graven, on 20 March 2017 - 09:28 AM, said:

By mostly eliminating modules people would have to spend on the skill tree, for each 'mech, to get those same features they had.

HOWEVER, given that, THEORETICALLY there's a large pool of earned, yet unspendable XP on those 'mechs anyway, I can't imagine that the potential 'lost progress' (a misnomer if you ask me, I would call it 'consequences of playing excessively lean') is actually as great as these people are panicking about.

Coincidentally, as the new mechpacks come with reduced Premium Time...

[Xetelian]

Bishop Steiner, on 20 March 2017 - 09:54 AM, said:

and the original plan included refunding all of that.

Maybe I missed something but I thought the proceedings fell apart when we WEREN'T getting full compensation for these things?

I don't want a 4th currency, I don't want free nodes, I want my full refund.


Also the trees were terrible. You'd use only 3 for EVERY mech outside a few outliers. Basically everything would need some firepower, some armor and some cool-run/containment. Only a tiny amount of mechs would consider getting speed tweak or accel/deccel improvements and that would be AFTER they got armor and cool-run.


Almost no one would be able to get Seismic sensor and Radar Dep.


As it stands right now, with modules and our pathetic excuse for a skill tree I can have speed tweak, I can have cool run and I can have Seismic and Radar Dep.


With the new trees I want to be able to skill right back into what I have now. -10% laser duration is not attractive enough to give up a radar dep for. There is no way to make myself equal to what I get now. 12% cooldown 10% range + Dep + Seismic + Speed Tweak + two Coolshots = better than what they're giving me.



Also, the wasted nodes, there are TONS of wasted nodes. If I want cool run comparable to what I have now I have to get hill climb two or three times and speed retention 3 or 4 times.



I want to have the equivalent to what I run now, without having to lose a bunch of stats.

Edited by Xetelian, 20 March 2017 - 07:19 PM.

[fat4eyes]

Xetelian, on 20 March 2017 - 07:06 PM, said:

Also the trees were terrible. You'd use only 3 for EVERY mech outside a few outliers. Basically everything would need some firepower, some armor and some cool-run/containment. Only a tiny amount of mechs would consider getting speed tweak or accel/deccel improvements and that would be AFTER they got armor and cool-run.

Not true for everyone. I play escort mediums and I'd take sensors and mobility before anything in defense or firepower. Not everyone is a brawler or a poker, and even with those there would be variation (dual gauss mechs have little incentive to take heat nodes).

[WarHippy]

Andi Nagasia, on 20 March 2017 - 04:02 PM, said:

PGI reworked the system to use both C-Bills and EXP they felt that was how they wanted to do it,
so that is the way it was done, no every rework in a game need to work the exact way the old was done,
if so then why would they be reworking to change it,

personally im ok with the C-Bill & EXP Cost,
i see it as gaining Experience with a Mech War Machine,
then using that Experience to Mechanically Tune my Mech,

If that is how they did it all along it would have been fine, however because it wasn't done like that for years they can't simply nullify the time and effort people put into the old system. In the end they came to the same conclusion which is why it was delayed and why they said this "As the shortcomings in our transition process became clear and we could see that certain players were going to lose progress that became obviously unacceptable and we had no choice but to delay.".

Jay Leon Hart, on 20 March 2017 - 04:08 PM, said:

I agree

Yeah, I made a similar thread during the first testing phase. It would have been a much more tolerable way to do it.

[R Valentine]

Dimento Graven, on 20 March 2017 - 10:05 AM, said:

LOL, >>I<< am the one throwing a salty temper tantrum?!? LOL...

Yeah, the "lost progress" being modules people refused to buy...

If you mean you don't have to change anything, and can continue using ONE set of modules for all of your 'mechs, yeah, I suppose you got what you wanted...

Exactly WHO did I personally attack? If you feel insulted it's because you at some level believe you're being a 'cheapazz mofo'.

I never called any specific person any sort of name.

What 'chaps my hide' is the lack of game development because people come out of the wood work who don't like that their current 'gaming of the system' is going to be changed/eliminated and raise all 'holy heck' fighting against it.

Had people just broken down and invested in the modules their 'mechs needed instead of continuously swapping their ONE set out every time they changed 'mechs, they'd be in a position to enjoy instantaneously skilling their 'mechs up to the features they previously had in module form.

The downside to this 'delay' in the skill tree is that, most probably, a lot of those same 'cheapazz mofos' will have to continue to purchase and skill up 3 'mechs to enjoy the mastery boost, and acquire the extra module slot.

Effectively grinding close to two thirds extra. The new skill tree eliminates that little 'chore' and will actually end up saving effort and Cbills previously wasted on unwanted 'mechs.

I'm not upset, I'm laughing at their own short sightedness, and their idiotic smug self-righteous mistaken certainty that now that they've delayed this, they're actually better off.

It's hilarious!

So much salt. Let me get my popcorn.

Bishop Steiner, on 20 March 2017 - 09:54 AM, said:

and the original plan included refunding all of that.

The original plan half-hazardly touched on that, but it was extremely short sighted, which only tells me that PGI has no idea what actually goes on in their game or how it works. Was the math really that hard, because anyone with a calculator on their start bar could tell you that the module refund was only a half measure. They even sell you modules as a one and done deal with their in game tool tips, so if you have one set of modules and 20 mechs then the math doesn't add up.

[Dimento Graven]

Kiran Yagami, on 21 March 2017 - 07:23 AM, said:

So much salt. Let me get my popcorn.

Lol, whatever little girl, whatever...

[Deathlike]

Dimento Graven, on 20 March 2017 - 09:00 AM, said:

Exactly, as long as it doesn't end up looking something like:



I think we'll be ok.

To try and cater to those who were too cheap to buy extra modules is silly.

I understand there'll be a period of time where IS 'mechs will suck absolute balls due to losing all/some quirks, but then after a few months, PGI will add them back, OR, create TWO skill trees, one for Clan, one for IS, where the IS skill tree gets IS 'mechs back to where they are now.

Honestly a two skill tree system would be more flexible (but more work) for our type of game (the one I linked is essentially 5 or 6 trees interlinked, even then it's probably NOT the most complicated skill tree in the gaming world).

I'm willing to at least give it a shot...

Uh, when the Path of Exile tree has actual depth compare to MWO... you're already losing the argument.

You have to consider that you only deal with putting up that kind of tree with as many characters as you'd want to run (which isn't that many, unless you create 1 character per day or something). In MWO, you'd have to do this with as many mechs as you'd want to apply it to, so those with super-large pokemech collectors... this would be a chore. Then again, you won't expect Spider-5Vs getting a full tree (it would be a waste of time to even consider in the first place) because it wouldn't be worth it.

People really need to think this through before spouting out "it would've been fine"... because it wouldn't have been.