221 replies to this topic

[dario03]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 March 2017 - 09:41 AM, said:

Let's be honest. Unless it's Solahma's or another very straight to boating Tree, there will be a storm on the forums. I can get Russ trying to figure out what to do with the refund, but hope he sticks to his guns about the PTS itself.

Figuring out what to do for module refunds isn't even hard. Change module resale price from 50% to 100%. EZPZ and can be done without any skill tree.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Dogstar, on 18 March 2017 - 03:30 AM, said:

>thank the folks who flipped out and QQ'd it to death

I'm usually with you Bish but this is bollocks, the skill tree was about to screw over a bunch of paying players, who, like me, cancelled their pre-orders. That's what made them change their minds, they don't listen to players, the don't listen to the forums, they listen to their wallets.

So what you are saying is that the forums are P2W?

[Bud Crue]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 March 2017 - 09:58 AM, said:

Can't argue with that. Well played.

[Mcgral18]

Not at all

[Khobai]

people are right to complain about the skill tree

it does nothing to differentiate mechs or promote role warfare

what PGI needs to do is divide all the mechs up into several different "roles" and give each role its own unique skill tree

so mechs would have different skills depending on their role, and it would actually give us role warfare. the choices made would also be more meaningful since not every mech would have access to every skill.



or if they went a step farther they could allow us, as the pilot, to choose our role and control what skill set each mech has. kindve like what they were originally going to do in the developer notes.

Edited by Khobai, 18 March 2017 - 10:27 AM.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Khobai, on 18 March 2017 - 10:25 AM, said:

people are right to complain about the skill tree

it does nothing to differentiate mechs or promote role warfare

what PGI needs to do is divide all the mechs up into several different "roles" and give each role its own unique skill tree

so mechs would have different skills depending on their role, and it would actually give us role warfare



or if they went a step farther they could allow us, as the pilot, to choose our role and control what skill set each mech has.

Letting us choose our own roles with the mechs is exactly what the skill tree did by not having set roles in the first place. I could go and boost mobilty, or sensors, or firepower, or defense, or some combination. The values just weren't very high overall.

[Khobai]

Quote

Letting us choose our own roles with the mechs is exactly what the skill tree did by not having set roles in the first place. I could go and boost mobilty, or sensors, or firepower, or defense, or some combination. The values just weren't very high overall.

Wrong. The current skill tree is just about min/maxing in the most efficient way to pick up all of the compulsory skills. Eventually it will degrade into everyone always picking the same exact skill nodes because they give the biggest returns for the least expenditure (i.e. min/maxing)

There is a huge difference between that and having to choose roles which are mutually exclusive with other roles. Where choosing one role means youre locked out of the skills that belong to other roles. That is an actual CHOICE.

For example choosing the assault role would mean you cant access mobility or sensor skills. Or choosing the recon role would mean you cant access to armor, structure, stability skills. etc... you would actually have to make a meaningful choice when it comes to picking a role instead of just min/maxing a generic skill tree.

PGI is doing it wrong. period.

Edited by Khobai, 18 March 2017 - 10:40 AM.

[Bud Crue]

Khobai, on 18 March 2017 - 10:25 AM, said:

people are right to complain about the skill tree

it does nothing to differentiate mechs or promote role warfare

what PGI needs to do is divide all the mechs up into several different "roles" and give each role its own unique skill tree

so mechs would have different skills depending on their role, and it would actually give us role warfare



or if they went a step farther they could allow us, as the pilot, to choose our role and control what skill set each mech has.

Can't imagine that happening. PGI's official announcement regarding the delay of the skill's tree ( https://mwomercs.com...e-status-update ) mentioned only two issues of note. One, and most dominant was the economic aspect and the interwoven concept of Mastery equivalence int the new system vs the old system; and two, the UI. That's it. No comment as to gated nodes, nerfing mechs, making entire classes of redundant variants, destroying balance, or any of the other criticisms leveled at the skills tree and its implementation. So I don't think that if it does come back that it is going to be in a significantly different state or layout to advance roles or encourage or discourage min/maxing, or make any other substantive changes to the nodes.

Edited by Bud Crue, 18 March 2017 - 10:34 AM.

[InspectorG]

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

I changed up my entire set of mechs and spent wild amounts of cbills and gxp on things I just wanted to experiment with before the skill tree change, personally.

Dont do that. Whenever PGI makes a statement of intent to make some grand change, wait until after it is implemented.

Not to sound toxic, but PGI has a history of doing this.

'Small Iterations' regarding Quirk changes after the Quirkening made the IS too strong(Too far a balance swing away from the OP-ness of Invasion Clans)

Infotech

Energy Draw

Tweaks to Assault Objective

The Rescale that screwed over most lights

Objectives in CW/FW

Long Tom

Jump Jets on Assault mechs

...just to name a few of the proposed 'improvements' and balance fixes.


My advice is to always stay reserved about improvements to this game.

Personally, im glad the Skill Tree was pushed back. I hope it was not cancelled though if cancelled, i think thats better than PGI's proposed changes.

Yes, i own @70 mechs. Yes, i own @15 modules. Yes, im a cheapskate.

But i didnt like to see it cancel because of Cbill costs or time re-levelling. I could care less about Russ's(humorous at this point) comment about us cheap module-swappers.

The Tree Structure was ludicrous.

The Consumable tree was borked in its costs.

The Info Tree was lackluster

It favored quirkless mechs(which were, by nature of being quirkless, already strong) via not having to stretch 91 unlocks over a new baseline of performance as well as catching up to old quirks.

...etc.

You will come across players who cry about how a 'small segment' was to blame for the postponement of the tree, and they are right.

Fact of the matter is: PGI either didint know how, or just winged the tree together and then upon seeing how it would affect their play or investment, some whales and some Comp players threatened to leave.

Crybabies over here on the forum, bemoan that that happened, wanting change for change's sake.(they dont play all that competitively so they dont care about balance or didint have the skills needed to even worry about said balance. OR they are Pokemech collectors who will buy any new shiny anyhow, and just want some shake-up when they bother to drop into matches in their various pokemechs.)

Me, im a student of history.

Given that PGI's track record towards 'iterative balance', i say its a good thing the Tree got postponed. I hope they use a model like So1ahma's where i dont have to choose stupid AMS nodes to get that one node i really want.

I dont want the new Tree to end up like the Rescale, where several trouble mechs were fixed, but a whole weightclass(that was already suffering) was gimped more(Lights over 25 tons).

But this is just the opinion from a casual try-hard wannabe.

[Maurice Thorez]

Shifty McSwift, on 18 March 2017 - 02:53 AM, said:

Yeah because people who just read news and play the game without screaming bloody murder at every change, don't yell those opinions at devs

Sometimes I wish I was more proactive in expressing my enjoyment, but having fun and then breaking down in a forum post why I am having fun, seems like a self destructive process lol.

Well, I will take the time now to say, that the skill tree changes excited me hugely and I have played much more than usual under the expectation of seeing them soon (like 2 weeks ago), I would have loved to see it go live and am now a little depressed about not only its position and fate, but the fate of all the seemingly lackluster mechs that were waiting for it or made with it in mind.

I pretty much felt the same way. The delay for an uncertain period of time has really dampened my enthusiasm. I offered feedback on the skill tree and was indeed critical of elements of it, but I was still looking forward to its' implementation in this March's patch.

Edited by Maurice Thorez, 18 March 2017 - 11:21 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Bud Crue, on 18 March 2017 - 10:32 AM, said:

Can't imagine that happening. PGI's official announcement regarding the delay of the skill's tree ( https://mwomercs.com...e-status-update ) mentioned only two issues of note. One, and most dominant was the economic aspect and the interwoven concept of Mastery equivalence int the new system vs the old system; and two, the UI. That's it. No comment as to gated nodes, nerfing mechs, making entire classes of redundant variants, destroying balance, or any of the other criticisms leveled at the skills tree and its implementation. So I don't think that if it does come back that it is going to be in a significantly different state or layout to advance roles or encourage or discourage min/maxing, or make any other substantive changes to the nodes.

which means you should rejoice! Another opportunity to massively pitch a fit is being lobbed to Redditnation sometime in the presumably near future! Because we know that short of PGI capitulating to it's Mob captors and instituting Saint Solahma's Perfect Progression System^tm (hereby to be referred to as the SSPPS for simplicity), verbatim, the usual suspects will explode and prognosticate doom and bankruptcy, etc.

As per pretty much any attempt PGI makes to change things.

I just hope I have time to make some popcorn beforehand.
(Man I kind of get it now... hyperbole IS fun!)

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 18 March 2017 - 11:41 AM.

[Johnny Z]

Just going to do the event and pick up some MC and creds, not to worried about it.

There are a few new systems they have in the works it seems, the mech tree, energy draw and new equipment and new mechs so its a wait and see kind of thing.

Edited by Johnny Z, 18 March 2017 - 11:43 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Johnny Z, on 18 March 2017 - 11:43 AM, said:

Just going to do the event and pick up some MC and creds, not to worried about it.

There are a few new systems they have in the works it seems, the mech tree, energy draw and new equipment and new mechs so its a wait and see kind of thing.

Energy Draw is dead, decapitated, staked and buried, bruh.

And since Russ and company just got lazy and turned it into GH 2.0 instead of an actual Energy Draw system...good riddance.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 18 March 2017 - 11:48 AM.

[Scout Derek]

Bush Hopper, on 18 March 2017 - 04:35 AM, said:

My favourite whine was: "Bwaaah I must buy "useless" nodes to get the ones I want baaawaaha waaaah". Geez...

I actually liked the node system, I just wanted them to compensate for the economy it was going to kick in the *** and for those who didn't have modules for all of their 75+ mechs, but... they never did for it, or the other issues.. so I was against it.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

The Nerf Bat, on 18 March 2017 - 09:43 AM, said:

It's not even about that(balance)

It's about a PTS with long tom enabled. The community response was overwhelmingly: too often, too powerful. Maybe Russ/PGI would've listened to PTS feedback. Instead Russ/PGI ignored the community(forums) and killed 99% of the population.

Fast forward to 4.1. Anybody with a clue knows that the phase 3 contract system makes no sense in 4.1 Merc contracts still based on overall population? Merc contracts based on faction? Merc contracts should have been based on buckits. Clan buckit offers one contract. I.S. buckit offers it's contract. Instead, all the mercs pour into one buckit, leading to population imbalance, leading to wait times, leading to people leaving the mode.

PGI need the community to point out the glaring shortcoming in it's game design. Cause PGI(game design hard)
So the community tries to help with PTS feedback.

Some reason, some people on these forums want PGI to deliver them crap.

They all poured into one buckit... because it is OP, the only reason I have not switched is cause I have lore based feelings and really cause I do not want to give up 200k in LP with that 25% penalty. So I just do not play cause it is trash... the imbalance is what leads to under and over representation in the buckits. Make Clan NOT so OP and the buckits could stabilize but as long as there are very clearly defined winners & losers, then people will pick the Winner side or at the minimum refuse to play the Loser side.

[FupDup]

I feel slapped in the face by the fact that people keep making threads about this topic.

It's even worse because the same strawman arguments keep getting repeated, too.

[MauttyKoray]

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

The skill tree system was hyped for release in what early march? I remember I had people in february telling that I was an idiot to buy certain mechs (or multiple of the same mech etc), was told other things were a massive waste of time with the skill tree incoming and should be ignored, and that selling those excess mechs was all you could and should do with the skill tree update so close to being put out.

Not to mention the hanging question of quirks, the notion of refunded points for the older skills systems and the meta changes many people were prepping with this very much high expectation and well defined series of events that was supposed to happen in early march.

I changed up my entire set of mechs and spent wild amounts of cbills and gxp on things I just wanted to experiment with before the skill tree change, personally.

Now to hear that the skill tree update is basically a non promise that faded back to a "maybe later on" addition? If you were expecting to release it by the start of march and were delayed by the whole month for that, that does not fill me with confidence for the release date with such a "meh" attitude toward it. So what will we maybe see this update in 6 months now? in 2018 or 19 maybe? Or is it just a lol, whoops moment that we should forget about now?

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

Would you rather have a half assed, broken system? For once I agree with PGI that it needs to be delayed. The system is a good idea, but it still needs fine tuning. The second PTS was better than the first, but nowhere near what we need to be thrown into the Live servers.

[InspectorG]

FupDup, on 18 March 2017 - 11:53 AM, said:

I feel slapped in the face by the fact that people keep making threads about this topic.

It's even worse because the same strawman arguments keep getting repeated, too.

U no leik salt?

[I_AM_ZUUL]

Dakota1000, on 18 March 2017 - 10:27 AM, said:

Letting us choose our own roles with the mechs is exactly what the skill tree did by not having set roles in the first place. I could go and boost mobilty, or sensors, or firepower, or defense, or some combination. The values just weren't very high overall.

Dakota1000, on 18 March 2017 - 10:27 AM, said:

Letting us choose our own roles with the mechs is exactly what the skill tree did by not having set roles in the first place. I could go and boost mobilty, or sensors, or firepower, or defense, or some combination. The values just weren't very high overall.

Since the current system already provides higher bonuses across the board for the "roles" you are trying to say the skill maze defined... then your point is invalid. The problem is not the skill and th eskill maze was only going to drive the meta even further then the current one does... the problem is that NO ONE is rewarded for anything but Damage/Kills. Iron Dome Kitfoxes are amazing and help their teams win so many games... they get no recognition for sharing ECM or shielding from LRM fire. TAG/NARC RVN-3L are the MVP of their teams lots of time but again they get no recognition for doing so... the C-Bill/XP & Stats only reflect a very narrow of everything that is happening or done in a Match but it is the ONLY thing that is rewarded. Why is puzzling to people that the only thing being recognized and rewarded is the only thing people design and play their mechs around???

This is game theory & macro economics 101 basic level stuff... the skill maze was a dumpster fire and I question the cognitive functioning capacity of anyone who thought it was going to the things that people claimed it would do, especially in light of the fact that the ability to do those roles BETTER already exists and yet no one ever does them currently.

Edited by I_AM_ZUUL, 18 March 2017 - 12:10 PM.

[Bud Crue]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 March 2017 - 11:40 AM, said:

which means you should rejoice! Another opportunity to massively pitch a fit is being lobbed to Redditnation sometime in the presumably near future! Because we know that short of PGI capitulating to it's Mob captors and instituting Saint Solahma's Perfect Progression System^tm (hereby to be referred to as the SSPPS for simplicity), verbatim, the usual suspects will explode and prognosticate doom and bankruptcy, etc.

As per pretty much any attempt PGI makes to change things.

I just hope I have time to make some popcorn beforehand.
(Man I kind of get it now... hyperbole IS fun!)

I don't care either way as long as whatever they decide to do doesn't make the worst mechs worst and add a UI designed to terrorize potential new players. Beyond that...whatever. But I can tell you one thing...it still won't be the communities fault if it is held back.

MauttyKoray, on 18 March 2017 - 11:55 AM, said:

Would you rather have a half assed, broken system? For once I agree with PGI that it needs to be delayed. The system is a good idea, but it still needs fine tuning. The second PTS was better than the first, but nowhere near what we need to be thrown into the Live servers.

Nonsense! PGI is held hostage! The QQers are running the show,! Anyone who says otherwise is guilty of hyperbole!