I support the skill tree and I didn't even bother testing it.
Why?
Because what we have currently is broke beyond sh*t, anything is better. I've seen similar trees in other games and it works great. Makes you choose carefully and tailor your skills to your style or adjust your style to the skills.
1
How To Get The New/old Players To Support The New Skilltree?
Started by Tiewolf, Apr 25 2017 03:27 PM
30 replies to this topic
#21
-
-
- Legendary Founder
- 9,190 posts
Member
- Location"You're not comp if you're not stock."
Posted 26 April 2017 - 04:50 AM
#22
-
-
- Ace Of Spades
- 170 posts
Member
- LocationNew Jersey
Posted 26 April 2017 - 05:09 AM
CDLord HHGD, on 26 April 2017 - 04:50 AM, said:
...Because what we have currently is broke beyond sh*t, anything is better. ...
I don't love the current skill system, and it could be better. There is only one skill that does not work (pinpoint), but that does not make it "broke beyond sht".
Under the new system you will be forced to take ALOT of useless skills to get to the useful stuff. THAT is what broke looks like.
#23
-
-
- Legendary Founder
- 9,190 posts
Member
- Location"You're not comp if you're not stock."
Posted 26 April 2017 - 05:10 AM
kazlaton, on 26 April 2017 - 05:09 AM, said:
I don't love the current skill system, and it could be better. There is only one skill that does not work (pinpoint), but that does not make it "broke beyond sht".
Under the new system you will be forced to take ALOT of useless skills to get to the useful stuff. THAT is what broke looks like.
No, that is what strategy and sacrifice looks like.
#24
-
-
- Ace Of Spades
- 170 posts
Member
- LocationNew Jersey
Posted 26 April 2017 - 05:18 AM
CDLord HHGD, on 26 April 2017 - 05:10 AM, said:
No, that is what strategy and sacrifice looks like.
No, that is bad design. You can easily get strategy and sacrifice without forcing people to buy skills they don't want/can't use.
Nobody is saying that the skill tree shouldn't have strategy and sacrifice built into it. Just that this version is bad. There were loads of designs presented by other players in the forums from the previous PTS. Most of them included a cost/sacrifice to get the good stuff, and NONE of them forced you to buy something bad to get it.
Check them out if you haven't. It was eyeopening to me. https://mwomercs.com...ee-pts-archive/
#25
-
-
- The God
- 801 posts
Member
Posted 26 April 2017 - 05:26 AM
IMO, everyone needs to just STFU and let PGI do something. They are being yanked around because 1/2 the population wants 1 thing and the other 1/2 wants another. I'm guilty of this as well. Let the developers develop and then adjust. These knee jerk reactions are destroying our community and game.
#26
-
-
- The Jaws
- 1,775 posts
Member
- LocationNE USA
Posted 26 April 2017 - 05:41 AM
Why waste your time making suggestions. It's obvious who they are listening to. Only the whales and NDA white knights who are spamming any thread with "better this than no change", "I'm leaving if this gets delayed again", "it looks fine to me", "maybe you should try it, you'll see it is fine" (which I have, and it doesn't) and slamming anything that doesn't get this in it's current form rammed down our throats in May.
Just give up, they won't listen.
Just give up, they won't listen.
#27
-
-
- Bridesmaid
- 2,051 posts
Member
Posted 26 April 2017 - 08:33 AM
I have a good feeling we will get new skill tree this time.
The refunds looked weak at first, Im only getting 81M cbills, but I think it's fair as I will get a lot of skill points too. Haven't yet managed to get into a game to try out the mobility of some mechs, but I quirked two.
The refunds looked weak at first, Im only getting 81M cbills, but I think it's fair as I will get a lot of skill points too. Haven't yet managed to get into a game to try out the mobility of some mechs, but I quirked two.
#28
-
-
- Philanthropist
- 65 posts
Member
Posted 26 May 2017 - 02:07 PM
Linear skill tree would be exponentially better.
However, since PGI is bent on making the community deal with current obtuse skill tree, PGI would do well to reference perhaps Path of Exiles skill tree. You still have your "sacrifice" for the "good stuff" but not nearly as punishing.
I too agree with the "try it before you buy it" idea especially since this game has no in game economy, there is no need for a c-bill sink. You still get the XP grind if you like what you see when you go for the test drive.
However, since PGI is bent on making the community deal with current obtuse skill tree, PGI would do well to reference perhaps Path of Exiles skill tree. You still have your "sacrifice" for the "good stuff" but not nearly as punishing.
I too agree with the "try it before you buy it" idea especially since this game has no in game economy, there is no need for a c-bill sink. You still get the XP grind if you like what you see when you go for the test drive.
#29
-
-
- Ace Of Spades
- 210 posts
Member
- LocationLost in the Skill Maze.
Posted 27 May 2017 - 08:39 PM
a
PGI could have done away with 3 mech mastering under the old system. Didn't need the Skill Maze for that, so stop giving it credit for it.
Elizander, on 25 April 2017 - 04:14 PM, said:
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.
PGI could have done away with 3 mech mastering under the old system. Didn't need the Skill Maze for that, so stop giving it credit for it.
#30
-
-
- Ace Of Spades
- 17,133 posts
Member
Posted 27 May 2017 - 09:28 PM
just use it and you will start liking it.
and let go of that silly idea about a perfect mech. you are completely free to configure how you want but you are also completely free to screw it up.
and let go of that silly idea about a perfect mech. you are completely free to configure how you want but you are also completely free to screw it up.
Edited by LordNothing, 27 May 2017 - 09:29 PM.
#31
-
-
- The Merciless
- 12 posts
Member
- LocationEdmonton Alberta
Posted 27 May 2017 - 10:45 PM
The skill tree is terribly laid out, most of us can agree on that. The road to fixing it starts with giving the players the ability to invest their points into what they want their mech to do, not dictating how they should want to play it. Yes linear would be better, no pgi won't entertain that. Three rehashes of this abomination and they came up with a terrible solution.
The engine desynchronization also contributed to this monkey-sht-fight. Even more importantly, the removal of doubling skills (at the lower end) had further reduced the playability of this game. It's clunkier than ever. Truly, I can't wrap my brain around why a video game company would reduce the quality of their gameplay in hopes to retain players and attract new ones. The game handles like a third gen ps2 game.
The only value I have found in this venture so far is that this is an elaborate demonstration of what not to do to your current and future customer base.
Yes, the old system needed a revamping. that should have been accomplished in beta. It wasn't, add it to the never ending list of bad choices, moving on. So how should they fix it? My two cents:
1. Overhaul the skill tree. Make it linear, or at least much more linear.
2. Remove respec costs. Once you buy a node, you own it, it's a toggle switch from that point on.
3. Consider returning the 2x factor for elite equivalency. Most mechs operated just fine being elited.
4. Don't reinvent the wheel by starting with a square. This skill tree could have been a cake walk to success, it doesn't need to be an art of mental gymnastics paired with a greater grind to accomplish frustration. Simplicity should be your starting point and your end result.
5. Create a format to test what you are buying for skills.
6. Less clicking, easier enabling of nodes. Yup, even that is driving us nuts.
7. Listen to your player base. No, you can't please everybody, but it is quite possible to piss off the majority.
Most importantly, don't create a format that makes players not want to play. At the end of the day what the developers want and what the players want should be fairly parallel. If they are not, chances are your players will not change their views, even when it's forced onto them. Be flexible and intuitive enough to recognize the difference. We want the game to be better, we'd rather be playing it instead of spending time in the forums complaining about it.
I have personally dropped from 20+hrs a week of gameplay to 4hrs a week, and that's diminishing by the day. I have had very few posts since 2012, however in the last week I have posted more than I had in the past 5yrs.
The engine desynchronization also contributed to this monkey-sht-fight. Even more importantly, the removal of doubling skills (at the lower end) had further reduced the playability of this game. It's clunkier than ever. Truly, I can't wrap my brain around why a video game company would reduce the quality of their gameplay in hopes to retain players and attract new ones. The game handles like a third gen ps2 game.
The only value I have found in this venture so far is that this is an elaborate demonstration of what not to do to your current and future customer base.
Yes, the old system needed a revamping. that should have been accomplished in beta. It wasn't, add it to the never ending list of bad choices, moving on. So how should they fix it? My two cents:
1. Overhaul the skill tree. Make it linear, or at least much more linear.
2. Remove respec costs. Once you buy a node, you own it, it's a toggle switch from that point on.
3. Consider returning the 2x factor for elite equivalency. Most mechs operated just fine being elited.
4. Don't reinvent the wheel by starting with a square. This skill tree could have been a cake walk to success, it doesn't need to be an art of mental gymnastics paired with a greater grind to accomplish frustration. Simplicity should be your starting point and your end result.
5. Create a format to test what you are buying for skills.
6. Less clicking, easier enabling of nodes. Yup, even that is driving us nuts.
7. Listen to your player base. No, you can't please everybody, but it is quite possible to piss off the majority.
Most importantly, don't create a format that makes players not want to play. At the end of the day what the developers want and what the players want should be fairly parallel. If they are not, chances are your players will not change their views, even when it's forced onto them. Be flexible and intuitive enough to recognize the difference. We want the game to be better, we'd rather be playing it instead of spending time in the forums complaining about it.
I have personally dropped from 20+hrs a week of gameplay to 4hrs a week, and that's diminishing by the day. I have had very few posts since 2012, however in the last week I have posted more than I had in the past 5yrs.
Edited by Skidwax, 27 May 2017 - 10:56 PM.
4 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users
