30 replies to this topic

[Tiewolf]

What could PGI do that the players embrace the new skilltree system?

What I like in PGIs new approach:

1. I like the approach of the old skillsystem refund. Even if i have to pay when i want to take any other nodes then the first 91 nodes from the refund, I do think its a good way for the transition to the new skilltree.

2. with the changes it is now worth it to compromise to achieve highvalue utilities like target info gathering or ECM

3. I like the idea to pay XP for a respec but the value should be lesser, so that the fun of trying new and silly builds is not corrupted by sensless grinding

4. ...?


What to change that i actually like and support the new skilltree:

1. One currency is enough for one purpose

Get rid of XP or GXP and take only one currency for XP bound to a specific mech or mechchassis. No c-bills for nodes! C-bills currency only for acquiring mechs and "physical" material. XP currency only for skillnodes. Its much easier for new players and it makes much more sense. Plz PGI stop that confusing c-bill + 2 XP currencies nonsense and keep it simple.

2. Less nodes

Bigger values on nodes and maybe only 20-40 nodes. Maybe special nodes for certain mechchassis to add flavor or the old idea of having certain amount of max nodes for certain mechs/variants in the different skilltrees. The skilltrees in their current form are still just too large for me and too confusing. Again plz keep it simple and noobfriendly.

3. Don´t build up paywalls to achieve the status quo

Even If i like the idea to achieve full ECM, sensors, consumables or other important utilities via skillnodes and that you have to compromise I dislike to pay c-bills/XP only to reach the status quo again. I guess I and many other playerss are feeling uncomfortabile when something is taken away and then you have to pay/grind again only to get it back. So plz PGI make the necessery losses more playerfriendly in the transitionphase and e.g. give the ECM nodes or lost weapon quirks for free to mechs that already had ECM or the quirks before.

4. don`t take away nonmobility quirks from already underpreforming mechs

self explanatory...i don`t want to see only Kodiaks on the battlefield

[oldradagast]

There are plenty of things they COULD do:

- Make a skill tree that is not a tangled web of lunacy, false choices, and skills that are effectively or literally useless. Also, stop gating the skills everyone needs behind trash. That's not "choice" - it's just more grind.

- Get rid of respec costs. A game like this, which depends heavily upon the ability of players to customize mechs often, will only suffer with such a foolish penalty for creativity and change.

- Stop trying to replace content with grind. The skill maze is nothing but grind.

- Offer real roles and choices vs. wandering down a tangled web only to put the same skills on nearly every single mech in the game.

- Improve the skill tree UI so it's not an insanity inducing maze that overwhelms the player with endless clicking and reading.

- Find a way to refund people their module investments that doesn't manage to piss everyone off in creative ways.

But I'd be surprised if any of the above happens.

[Baba_Yaga]

Scrap it...!Period!

[SuomiWarder]

I was just messing with it. The number of choices are large so that the first several nodes you buy won't add up to much, but overall it didn't seem too bad.

[Elizander]

Let's go on with it. A lot of people I know want it to go through so we can move on from 3-mechs-to-master and to get something new.

[Destructicus]

My two biggest issues are that the double efficiency bonus is gone without a trace and that a lot of the more important nodes are locked behind trash nodes placed in the way for the sole purpose of consuming another node

Edited by Destructicus, 25 April 2017 - 04:21 PM.

[mr bear]

Frankly,
Looking at the planned roll out and all the PTS Sessions and feedback from the community I think it's showing to me (at least) that PGI is actually listening to some of the voices on the ground.

To be honest, I'm probably going to be upset the first few days after the Patch is released as I'm going to have to get used to the new skill tree system and I've going to have to respec 100+ mechs which is the main gripe. But I figure if in the long run it makes the game more accessible to new players and we get new blood coming in, I'll all for it.

Change is coming. I'll admit it ain't perfect but having been in a business before I also realize that it's neigh impossible to please everyone, so better for PGI to take them lumps and roll it out. As players we can either accept it or quit playing.

I know what I'll be doing..

[Ruar]

I really like the refund system now. The GUI is clunky and needs some work, but the system itself is nice.

The skill tree is horrid with the tangled mesh of nodes and gates of unwanted skills. They just need to make it linear with higher costs on skills with more value/demand. It's not that hard to figure out but they consistently refuse to listen to what the players want when it comes to the tree layout. We full expect to have a reduction in overall capability in some areas at the end of the skill tree in order to slow down the speed at which mechs die, but that doesn't mean we have to be forced to use an inefficient, illogical, and confusing skill tree to get there.

I didn't even get into a match to test out the decoupling because I have a little OCD and trying to wade through the skill tree made me so mad and upset that I just had to log off and walk away. That said, I like the idea of decoupling and I assume they'll tweak it until they get it right.

[A Really Old Clan Dude]

oldradagast, on 25 April 2017 - 03:52 PM, said:

There are plenty of things they COULD do:

- Make a skill tree that is not a tangled web of lunacy, false choices, and skills that are effectively or literally useless. Also, stop gating the skills everyone needs behind trash. That's not "choice" - it's just more grind.

- Get rid of respec costs. A game like this, which depends heavily upon the ability of players to customize mechs often, will only suffer with such a foolish penalty for creativity and change.

- Stop trying to replace content with grind. The skill maze is nothing but grind.

- Offer real roles and choices vs. wandering down a tangled web only to put the same skills on nearly every single mech in the game.

- Improve the skill tree UI so it's not an insanity inducing maze that overwhelms the player with endless clicking and reading.

But I'd be surprised if any of the above happens.

Agree with this, respec cost whether they are cbills or xp are just painful. I dont want to spend my whole time trying to work out the build I want in some other app before trying it out. I want to have some fun builds and try different things with the skills but now I am being penalized and have to grind out every change on the skill tree.

eg I want to try the jump jet full build, accepting that I have to open up the nodes to try, i can accept that cost.
if its not what I thought or want it will take 20 nodes to be changed back. That's 20 X 400XP = 8000XP or 5+ games to respec back to what I had.
I can handle some grinding but this is just painful.

[L1f3H4ck]

At this point, the only thing I don't support is another delay.

[El Bandito]

Tiewolf, on 25 April 2017 - 03:27 PM, said:

What could PGI do that the players embrace the new skilltree system?

When they stop making Clan vs. IS balance even worse by nerfing a lot of IS mechs that didn't deserve the nerfs. At this rate, I'm just gonna stick to meta Clan mechs (which will be pumped up by a lot of skills they didn't have before), and PGI, in their infinite wisdom, will probably increase CW tonnage instead of addressing the core issue.

Edited by El Bandito, 25 April 2017 - 05:46 PM.

[Bud Crue]

El Bandito, on 25 April 2017 - 05:44 PM, said:

When they stop making Clan vs. IS balance even worse by nerfing a lot of IS mechs that didn't deserve the nerfs. At this rate, I'm just gonna stick to meta Clan mechs (which will be pumped up by a lot of skills they didn't have before), and PGI, in their infinite wisdom, will probably increase CW tonnage instead of addressing the core issue.

This. This. And This.

I don't care about specing out mechs, the silliness of the nodes and their organization, the awful UI, my past progress, my refunded c-bills or xp or whatever.

Why would I or should I care about any of that when the mechs that all that stuff applies to are rendered MORE handicapped in the new system than they already are? Why do I care to "skill out" a low tier IS mech that PGI just made even more useless than it already was.

If my content was being improved above mere viability to competitive, then perhaps I would care about these things. But seeing as how my content is going from hardly viable to less so, I just can't get worked up over the rest of this crap. Oh some of you have more xp being refunded than you could ever apply to a zillion mechs? Boo hoo. I have a 150 low to mid tier IS mechs that were just rendered into dross and all the XP in the world will not make one them viable compared to an unquirked meta mechs. Who gives a shi7 if I got my modules refunded or if respec costs are reduced when PGI has decreed that your mechs are to be garbage?

[Dollar Bill]

Tiewolf, on 25 April 2017 - 03:27 PM, said:

What could PGI do that the players embrace the new skilltree system?

I don't think PGI can do anything. The whole skill tree is built on a bad foundation with its non-linear arrangement. We should have a linear tree so we can build mechs the way WE want them (like PGI said we could in their sales pitch coming out of beta.) Not FORCED by Russ into something that he thinks we should like. Given his track record of bad ideas, he really should not be the guy to have the final word on how the game should be played.

Also, a linear tree would look much more organized than this road map to frustration. Chinese algebra is easier to figure out. If I were a new player coming into this game, I'd take one look at this skill tree, then uninstall and move on to the next game. Just can't see how this is noob-friendly.

Edited by Dollar Bill, 25 April 2017 - 08:47 PM.

[MischiefSC]

The refund is actually excellent. The only reason you'd need cbills is new mechs and stuff - which you would have to skill up. You're going to buy SP sooner or later; it's an inevitable expense.

Think of it like buying a house cash so you don't pay interest and mortgage insurance. Yes, you'd probably like the extra money to buy taco bell right now and stupid stuff right now but the reality is that you're saving a huge amount in the long run and time will continue to tick past at a relentless 60 seconds every minute.

You'll use the GSP. The value you're getting for the GSP is far superior to the cbill value.

Don't be stupid.

[Nicodemus Rosse]

DrVoodooAUS, on 25 April 2017 - 04:44 PM, said:

Agree with this, respec cost whether they are cbills or xp are just painful. I dont want to spend my whole time trying to work out the build I want in some other app before trying it out. I want to have some fun builds and try different things with the skills but now I am being penalized and have to grind out every change on the skill tree.

eg I want to try the jump jet full build, accepting that I have to open up the nodes to try, i can accept that cost.
if its not what I thought or want it will take 20 nodes to be changed back. That's 20 X 400XP = 8000XP or 5+ games to respec back to what I had.
I can handle some grinding but this is just painful.

Would it help if you could take the configuration into the Testing Grounds without committing the changes and paying?

One of the things about the UX of this game that drives me bats is that I have to pay for a configuration before I can test-run it in a dummy sim. We should have an option in the Mechlab to run with the current config in the Testing Grounds without committing the changes, and I really don't get why it's set up the way it is.

I'm going to load up the PTS tonight and try it out tomorrow, because I don't like the idea of having to figure this system out through trial and error with live account currency. Some kind of grace period or something for people to get a handle on it seems like a necessary step, especially for new players. Having to commit ____ XP every time you want to see if a thing even works is just...really?

I'm looking forward to dropping the rule of 3, at least. The grind to level 'mechs in this game is brutal when coupled with the steep learning curve.

Edited by Nicodemus Rosse, 25 April 2017 - 10:07 PM.

[Marius Romanis]

Im pretty happy and want it to go live asap to get rid of rule of 3, I do wish they had combined Laser duration and weapon velocity into 1 set of nodes to help decrease the benefit of boating.

Im going to be sitting on so much GSP and gxp I will never have to level a mech again >_<

Only thing I would like to know is, Does the new skill tree allow you to have a mech of the same ability / stats / power / armor / sensor strength / speed bonus / heat reduction / Seismic and Radar dep as you could before this new system or are we going to have to miss out on stuff our mechs had before, or are mechs going to have more stuff than before?

[Ruar]

Nicodemus Rosse, on 25 April 2017 - 10:04 PM, said:

Would it help if you could take the configuration into the Testing Grounds without committing the changes and paying?

One of the things about the UX of this game that drives me bats is that I have to pay for a configuration before I can test-run it in a dummy sim. We should have an option in the Mechlab to run with the current config in the Testing Grounds without committing the changes, and I really don't get why it's set up the way it is.

I'm going to load up the PTS tonight and try it out tomorrow, because I don't like the idea of having to figure this system out through trial and error with live account currency. Some kind of grace period or something for people to get a handle on it seems like a necessary step, especially for new players. Having to commit ____ XP every time you want to see if a thing even works is just...really?

I'm looking forward to dropping the rule of 3, at least. The grind to level 'mechs in this game is brutal when coupled with the steep learning curve.

This would help tremendously. The amount of c-bills I've spent tweaking builds is sad. Now add in the cost of respecing skill nodes with exp on top of the equipment costs and it's going to get old quick. There should be a test lab where you can build and hit the test grounds free of charge. Then if you like something you simply save it as a loadout, go into the mech lab and load it up, pay, go fight.

[PhoenixFire55]

Tiewolf, on 25 April 2017 - 03:27 PM, said:

What could PGI do that the players embrace the new skilltree system?

Make it non-sh!t perhaps?

[B0oN]

<- stopped caring, just wants to play stompy robots from both sides of the fence and shoot people with ERPPCs .

[Kerrisis]

MischiefSC, on 25 April 2017 - 08:36 PM, said:

The refund is actually excellent. The only reason you'd need cbills is new mechs and stuff - which you would have to skill up. You're going to buy SP sooner or later; it's an inevitable expense.

Think of it like buying a house cash so you don't pay interest and mortgage insurance. Yes, you'd probably like the extra money to buy taco bell right now and stupid stuff right now but the reality is that you're saving a huge amount in the long run and time will continue to tick past at a relentless 60 seconds every minute.

You'll use the GSP. The value you're getting for the GSP is far superior to the cbill value.

Don't be stupid.

I'll use all 13,934 GSP, will I? I'll be buying 153 mechs and fast-skilling them all, will I?
I'd rather have the 627mil cbills that the refund represents and have the option of spending it on skill points, thank you very much (especially with the enormous swathe of new tech on the horizon). It might give be something to use the 1mil+ MXP I've accrued on chasses like the KGC-000 and MDD-Prime.

tl;dr - Not everyone's in the same boat as you. Stop making assumptions based on your situation and telling everyone else they're wrong.