155 replies to this topic

[tokumboh]

Reno Blade, on 26 April 2017 - 09:06 AM, said:

I just ask this again.
whats the difference between linear skill points with diminishing return that you can skill without "wasting" points vs the "mess" we have where you "waste" points to get the same benefit for the same investment?

You get more side-effects in the mess (which can make it better to use mutliple weapon systems) compared to the linear system everyone is asking for.

e.g.
spend 20 points in linear tree for -15% heat generation (where you get less % over time - diminishing return)
vs
spend 20 points in mixed (messed) tree to get -15% heat generation + 2% cooldown + 3% useless stuff (e.g. velocity or laser duration)

= net win is 2% cooldown increase with the messy tree we have now.

In fairness this is a good question no pretend you don't have a mountain of SP/XP and C bills and spend 10 SP on your mech and tell me if it is an upgrade?

let compare that with the old tree 750 XP gets you 5% cooldown, 750 XP on the new skill tree what do you get that is useful?

It make no sense. So when I buy a new mech in a years time and I am grinding my mech can climb hills but not much else.

Much of the argument from my perspective is that if you have 91 SP it becomes an issue of time and effort, andf yes I have an argument about that too, I did not come to play hexagon maze warrior. But if you are grind 10 SP at a time your mech remain meh in most aspects until you get enough XP. The progression is just poor if you ask me.

The tree can have either approach one gives the someone whom is grinding a direct path to improvement, allowing something that would give his mech a boost, the other means he has to grind more to have the same effectiveness compared to those that are mastered.

[Dee Eight]

Source Mystic, on 27 April 2017 - 07:55 AM, said:

I am waiting for Battletech myself and if pgi goes though with this it will be their loss as their servers empty into Battletech and Harebrained Schemes new game. But really if they do that against all the community's wishes they deserve what they get.

Because there's that many real time FPS gamers who are actually going to want to go to a turn based system... If I wanted that.. i'd still be playing mechcommander...or ACTUAL battletech.

[AngrySpartan]

Dee Eight, on 27 April 2017 - 01:20 PM, said:

Because there's that many real time FPS gamers who are actually going to want to go to a turn based system... If I wanted that.. i'd still be playing mechcommander...or ACTUAL battletech.

You do understand that there is a certain number of players who keeps eating cactus playing MWO because there is no alternative modern Battletech game, don't you? Also there are some players who enjoy the lore in the first place and want to touch it by playing BT universe video game.

HBS Battletech was expected to draw some of the community away from MWO. Assuming HBS game will be decent I don't see that part of the community to be back here, especially with all the salt new skill tree is making.

[oldradagast]

Myc, on 27 April 2017 - 11:48 AM, said:

As for people giving positive feedback on this system, I don't know where that is coming from. I don't think it's tied to their gaming skill though; and that's off topic anyway.

Many of the people giving positive feedback either have no understanding of the actual problems with the skill maze - for example, they think it actually "promotes role warfare" - it doesn't - or they've been so beaten into submission by PGI's stubborn refusal to fix the problems that they've given up and just want it to go live to end the waiting and anger. It's not unlike parents giving into a stubborn, bratty child who keeps saying, "No!"

No, we won't fix the skill maze. No, we won't give you roles. No, we won't get rid of respec costs. No, we won't do a damn thing you want or that meets the bare minimum of decent game design expectations. Would you like to buy a mech pack?

No.

[Andi Nagasia]

oldradagast, on 27 April 2017 - 05:00 PM, said:

Many of the people giving positive feedback either have no understanding of the actual problems with the skill maze - for example, they think it actually "promotes role warfare" - it doesn't - or they've been so beaten into submission by PGI's stubborn refusal to fix the problems that they've given up and just want it to go live to end the waiting and anger. It's not unlike parents giving into a stubborn, bratty child who keeps saying, "No!"

No, we won't fix the skill maze. No, we won't give you roles. No, we won't get rid of respec costs. No, we won't do a damn thing you want or that meets the bare minimum of decent game design expectations. Would you like to buy a mech pack?

No.

just because you dont like the system doesnt mean others wont or dont like it,
but to make a deceleration that most of those posting positive have no understanding of the problems?
just wow,

personally i think it does promote role warfare,
their are benefits to investing into each Tree, and each build can be different,
-
you can make a Brawler(Weapon/Defense Trees)
you can make a Skirmisher(Weapon/Agility Trees)
you can make a Sniper(Sensor/Weapon Trees)
-
you can make different Roles work for mechs they didnt have before,
a PPC SHC for instance, will work better now with the Skill Tree,


its up to PGI to make sure all the Skill Trees are all balanced to each other so all choices are Viable,
the skill tree can work, and it could add alot to MWO, no its not Perfect but then again no Skill Tree ever has been,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 27 April 2017 - 05:09 PM.

[MookieDog]

Andi Nagasia, on 27 April 2017 - 05:09 PM, said:

its up to PGI to make sure all the Skill Trees are all balanced to each other so all choices are Viable,
the skill tree can work, and it could add alot to MWO, no its not Perfect but then again no Skill Tree ever has been,

Seems like you have been playing for a few weeks and not a few years. The sad fact is that mechs will be skilled without ever touching the agility, jumpjet, or consumable skill shrubs.

This means that mechs after the skill tree is released will fall far short of what they are currently in the game. This has been stated ad nauseum, is directly affects the IS more so than clan mechs, also stated ad nauseum.

Bottom line up front, play clan mechs until the tech jump comes to the IS sometime this summer. Then pick up the pieces of the playerbase of whats left.

[Lionheart2012]

Source Mystic, on 27 April 2017 - 08:56 PM, said:

Be patient they say

It will take time you say

I call b.s.


Has patience improved hit registration ? You know the hit registration that lets a damaged arctic cheetah take 66 damage to the ct in the front and then another 66 to the back ct and it is still running around like superman.

How about the constant disconnects in every-other game? Hell how about letting the first guy that dies take over the disconnect so you are not at a disadvantage.

But we should wait ...wait... wait... look at the original Jenner it been 2 1/2 years and no fix to that nerfed up mess people would rather play a urbie than that Jenner..... but we should wait.

Wait for more players to enter the community so they can stop putting tier 1 competive players in the same games as tier 5 beginners......

sorry I anm tired of waiting and giving pgi the benefit of the doubt.

I do not want a new mwo and I can not see why pgi picks the most complicated methods and systems and then changes like 24 things at the same time how can that not be a mess.

Everyone should just play a urbie if they implement this tree nothing but army's of urbies running urbie derbys. All day long if mwo is going to be a joke lets just make it the biggest joke of all time. Lets urbie derby the $hit out of this.

All I see here is hyperbole and ranting without any real data to back it up. The fact that the game will change means that there is a lot to shake out. The quirk system was a hot mess begging each player to complain that their favorite mech was under performing and therefore should be quirked. And syncing accel/decel characteristics to engines was the surest way to give clan 'mechs especially clan battlemechs agility advantages. Eliminating these systems, means change and change requires time. Your priorities and mine may not be implemented fully in a time frame that we might prefer, but it is neither your game, nor my game, nor our game, but the community's game. And appeal to the majority fallacies aside, the priorities are determined by the developers who have better insights in the status of the game as a whole.

You want to see more Jenners on the field? Perhaps we saw more when there were only 8 mechs to choose from, but now that there are Panthers, Wolfhounds, and Firestarters, perhaps there is a good reason for seeing fewer. Have you played an Oxide? Oh wait, you are FTP only. People would rather play an Urbie than a Jenner? That turret is awesome and can be deadly in the hands of a skilled pilot.

Tier 1 in with Tier 5? More than likely hyperbole, or you are playing at low population times. Probably indicates an aversion to playing with anyone other that Tier 1.

Have I seen an ACH take way too much damage to the torso? Yes. But have I seen them fall quickly due to leg damage? Also true.

Nerfing everything down? Sounds to me that they are trying to solve the min/max problem caused by the previous tree, where mastered mechs made it a bad day for novice pilots in their trial mechs. Having played in the open beta against the founders, that probation was hell.

Double the armor and the ammo? Guess what, they did that already. Sometimes when you are being focused by four mechs, you will not have a snowball's chance in hell of surviving until reinforcements arrive.

This is not to say that I love everything about the tree (Heat dissipation should be at 4% per node, and Heat containment should be at 5% per node), but it is not the falling skies that it has been purported to be.

Edited by Lionheart2012, 27 April 2017 - 11:00 PM.

[Outcast1six]

Source Mystic. I seriously believe that you need to seek professional help with whatever problems you're having. If you even remotely think that the way you speak in this forum is ok I feel really bad for you. I've read every rant you've written here, with your giant font and erratic language and threats. Do you really think you're adding anything to the feedback forum for this public test? I hope not. In fact, I believe, that you are hurting your case with your posts. I thought the uninstall post was particularly juvenile.

There are skill trees in almost every other game made. Especially games that have and experience point mechanic.

Why don't we make all the trees linear, even though PGI stated that wasn't the point? Why don't we make all the nodes 10%? Would that be adequate? Lets refund your modules for c-bills AND GSP. That sounds nice. Your idea of balance isn't mine, and mine isn't someone else's. I think the game is doing well for balance, considering the imbalance in the original lore. Also considering it's made into a FPS, from a turn based table top game. I sit mid tier 2 and I play CW regularly. My stats suck because I Leroy Jenkins and I was playing at 13 FPS for 2 and a half years.

I came to this forum to add my thoughts and read so other people's ideas. Instead I get you.

You want PGI to change ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, keep this **** up. Or, at least reasonably try to add something useful.

[Meihru]

AngrySpartan, on 27 April 2017 - 04:00 PM, said:

You do understand that there is a certain number of players who keeps eating cactus playing MWO because there is no alternative modern Battletech game, don't you? Also there are some players who enjoy the lore in the first place and want to touch it by playing BT universe video game.

HBS Battletech was expected to draw some of the community away from MWO. Assuming HBS game will be decent I don't see that part of the community to be back here, especially with all the salt new skill tree is making.

Exactly.
I'm here since day 1 of closed beta and spent several thousands of dollars until now but with THIS tree and refund system I'm definetly going to quit this game and refund everything I have preordered which is not yet released. And I am not the only one that will do this, i talked to some people who all think the same about this.
I play this game because it's mechwarrior/battletech and not to be robbed of YEARS of grinding and clicking the **** out of a completely messed up skilltree which will probably(!) Severely harm the game balance in favour of thing like even more boating (to name just a single issue of many)

[Dr Cara Carcass]

Dee Eight, on 25 April 2017 - 06:02 PM, said:

Which Russ already covered in the NGNG podcast in mid-march. They looked at it. It offers no advantage for the greater player base in terms of options/variety of builds and only appeases a minority from the forums.

You write this as if Russ was right with what he said....

[Dr Cara Carcass]

Andi Nagasia, on 27 April 2017 - 05:09 PM, said:

just because you dont like the system doesnt mean others wont or dont like it,
but to make a deceleration that most of those posting positive have no understanding of the problems?
just wow,

personally i think it does promote role warfare,
their are benefits to investing into each Tree, and each build can be different,
-
you can make a Brawler(Weapon/Defense Trees)
you can make a Skirmisher(Weapon/Agility Trees)
you can make a Sniper(Sensor/Weapon Trees)
-
you can make different Roles work for mechs they didnt have before,
a PPC SHC for instance, will work better now with the Skill Tree,


its up to PGI to make sure all the Skill Trees are all balanced to each other so all choices are Viable,
the skill tree can work, and it could add alot to MWO, no its not Perfect but then again no Skill Tree ever has been,

Yeah, go play the pts - the shc doesnt get better. Pls before you write this here actually go and test it.

Edited by Cara Carcass, 28 April 2017 - 04:42 PM.

[oldradagast]

Naaaaak, on 27 April 2017 - 03:56 AM, said:

I'm noticing a trend that players of below average skill with less game knowledge think the proposed skill tree is positive, while players who are actually good with more experience think the opposite. Whether PGI wants to listen to forum cheerleaders or actual players is up to them.

Many of the people who "like" the skill maze are also either:

- White Knights who are professional contrarians. They have no understanding of game design or what people even like about MWO, but they do know that if the MWO community hates something and dares back that opinion up with facts, they must disagree with everyone and support that something, whatever it is. This is a variation of people who need to prove how much "smarter" they are than everyone else by spitting in the face of experts, pretending facts don't matter, always disagreeing and picking fights with everyone, etc.

- Stockholm Syndrome victims / parents worn out by PGI's tantrums: These types don't like the skill maze, but they've basically given up on getting it changed, so they feel it may as well go live because nothing is going to stop it. Not unlike a parent worn down by a bratty child's screams, they give in not because they really want to, but because they are just tired of fighting. PGI is the bratty child in this example: No! No, we won't fix the skill maze! No, we won't get rid of the dead nodes! No, we won't get rid of the respec cost! No, we won't make a logical skill system based on role warfare with a UI that's useful.

Yeah, well, when they ask "Do you want to buy a mech pack?" the answer will be "no!"

Edited by oldradagast, 28 April 2017 - 07:13 PM.

[Mycroft000]

So you're thinking Agility and Armor right?

[Coolant]

Source Mystic, on 25 April 2017 - 02:48 PM, said:

I warned you that if the mechs do not feel the same you were playing with fire and would alienate your die hard player base and that is what you are about to do

Not alienating me at all, and I've been playing as long as most.

[B0oN]

<- core player, since CB .
Not alienated .

Please stop using blanket statements, at first it was mildly irritating and piqueing my interest (went to PTS, had a nice look around with Palfatreos and also some 1vs1 testgames with Ilya Markelow), now it´s getting embarassing .

[The Basilisk]

Same as Coolant here...and watching with fascination the tantrums some of the self styled ultra experts are trowing here...and its the effin same with any bigger change.
What realy screwed up the game and drew slowly populance away was the total lack changes and real development of the game....so actually the only thing that is wrong here are the people taking the game hostage with their little hysterical fits they are trowing daring to speak for the "core gamers".

You are not you are just a very loud and annoying minority.

The new skilltree isn't perfect.
It isn't even good, or nice or what ever.
It is change and is overdue.

[oldradagast]

The Basilisk, on 03 May 2017 - 02:39 PM, said:

Same as Coolant here...and watching with fascination the tantrums some of the self styled ultra experts are trowing here...and its the effin same with any bigger change.
What realy screwed up the game and drew slowly populance away was the total lack changes and real development of the game....so actually the only thing that is wrong here are the people taking the game hostage with their little hysterical fits they are trowing daring to speak for the "core gamers".

You are not you are just a very loud and annoying minority.

The new skilltree isn't perfect.
It isn't even good, or nice or what ever.
It is change and is overdue.

You're confusing "change" with "good change," as is par for the course around here. Yes, a lack of "change" - as in "improvements" - has caused harm to the game. There still has been no evidence presented that the skill maze is an objective improvement. Instead, we just get lots of white knights slinging personal attacks at other people for daring to present facts or even opinions, and change-lovers who are so suffering from Stockholm Syndrome that they really do now honestly think the skill maze is "great because it's change, and PGI said so."

Banging your head against a wall for an hour a day will bring change to your life. Making all weapons deal double damage is change. Making mechs less mobile in a game that already encourages hiding and long-range sniping is change. Taking a simple skill system and replacing it with a stupid, tangled web that still fails to achieve roles or real choices is change. But none of those are GOOD changes.

Edited by oldradagast, 04 May 2017 - 03:24 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

even quoting basilisk and mention the white knight in the same post is like icebergs in hell.

i know I don't like the skill tree
I know i clearly don't like the decoupling
I know that there are better and more simpler trees, suggested in the past
I clearly don't understand the multiple xp sp system - every time i try to understand I'm going nuts

But like in real life not everything need to make sense to be happening: look i need to pay 8000 bucks for 400m³ of sand to be removed from my estate. Does this make sense? No - but it will happen.
Same for the Skill Tree....so bring it on

[Bad Electric]

Ok, so I have been playing since closed beta (approximately 5 years) and have a couple hundred mechs. Probably 70 or more that have 100% maxed modules I am going to get screwed out of C bills and mech XP/GXP? Are you kidding me?
When I first heard about this idea months ago, I figured PGI would find a way to screw the player base. Then again, the player base in FP has dropped so low anyway. You guys should have some sort of morals or ethical compass that would make you ashamed of screwing your customers.
I for on have at least $3,000.00 US on this game (probably more) and this is how you reward a loyal customer who has spent money in an honest attempt to support PGI in order to keep a mech game viable.

So, you don't give a crap about the player base, We all know that from 5 years of experience but...
Have you people no shame?

[The Basilisk]

oldradagast, on 04 May 2017 - 03:24 AM, said:

You're confusing "change" with "good change," as is par for the course around here. Yes, a lack of "change" - as in "improvements" - has caused harm to the game. There still has been no evidence presented that the skill maze is an objective improvement. Instead, we just get lots of white knights slinging personal attacks at other people for daring to present facts or even opinions, and change-lovers who are so suffering from Stockholm Syndrome that they really do now honestly think the skill maze is "great because it's change, and PGI said so."

Banging your head against a wall for an hour a day will bring change to your life. Making all weapons deal double damage is change. Making mechs less mobile in a game that already encourages hiding and long-range sniping is change. Taking a simple skill system and replacing it with a stupid, tangled web that still fails to achieve roles or real choices is change. But none of those are GOOD changes.

I am realy not a fan of PGI and lots of their developtment positions.
Things like calling people cheapasses and propagating minimum viable product strategies.
What they do is most of the time walking the line between vaporware and outright scam.

The sad thing is they are the ones doing MWO because no other companie wanted to do it because of the smal but annoying fanbase and the high risk low reward prospects that come with this.

So what shall we do.

They have proven over and over again they can not and will not do it in a way that is right from the start and then adding to it.

They will do it in a way that is wrong but easy to do and then improve it from there and call it development pointing the finger at everyone that complains telling him/her "we don't know what you want, you wanted an improved skill tree we made one, you wanted improvements to the skill tree we did them"

The only way to get through with this to a state that is quite okish is to accellerate this process by getting over the "complete bullsh.. phase" quickly and then move on.

Edited by The Basilisk, 05 May 2017 - 12:04 AM.