5 replies to this topic

[Pr8Dator2]

Too many hate threads about the skill tree! Its time to consolidate the opinions of those who actually likes it! If you like the skill tree, please post your opinions here so that PGI do not again get swayed by these vocal haters.

First off, I like the skill tree and engine decoupling EXACTLY why the haters are saying... its a global nerf! This game has power creeped to a point where casual gamers are finding it hard to play without dying in seconds! Everything has to come down a notch to make this game fun again for everyone and not just the veterans. DPS has to come down, Agility has to come down.

Lights will be less nimble, less survival and therefore less of a nuisance to assaults, thereby closing the light / assault gap.

Quick heavies should never have behaved like a light / medium mech.

KDK3 should not have insane DPS that makes playing other assualts very foolish.

Sure, my mechs don't handle like they used to and my HBK IIC don't feel as bossy as it used to but this is not about me, every other player's mechs are like this as well and therefore the playing field is going to be level. Its going to feel like a new game but I think a bettter new game!

So much is solved with this!

Edited by Pr8Dator2, 27 April 2017 - 06:54 PM.

[ForceUser]

The new tech will go live in 2 1/2 months time. Anyone complaining about a)nerfed mechs b)dequirked IS c)Engine decoupling d)global reduction in 'module' related bonuses is incredibly short sighted as to the amount of power creep we're in for. For once PGI is ahead of the curve and the community is woefully behind. Once we get the PTS for the new tech hopefully people will start to realize what we're in for.

[Y E O N N E]

I'm not lamenting the loss of offensive quirks except in cases where they are very specific to weapon types that are bad and will remain bad regardless of new Tech, i.e. the standard AC/5, the IS Small Laser, Clan and IS SRM2, etc. I also lament it in cases where the chassis simply doesn't have enough hard-points to lay it out like the competition, i.e. MLX, MAD-5D, etc.

That being said, PGI very clearly thinks ballistics are the boogeyman, and you can tell by looking at how of all the quirks getting whacked in the PTS, it's the ballistics that are getting hit the hardest.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 27 April 2017 - 07:54 PM.

[ForceUser]

Yeonne Greene, on 27 April 2017 - 07:54 PM, said:

I'm not lamenting the loss of offensive quirks except in cases where they are very specific to weapon types that are bad and will remain bad regardless of new Tech, i.e. the standard AC/5, the IS Small Laser, Clan and IS SRM2, etc. I also lament it in cases where the chassis simply doesn't have enough hard-points to lay it out like the competition, i.e. MLX, MAD-5D, etc.

That being said, PGI very clearly thinks ballistics are the boogeyman, and you can tell by looking at how of all the quirks getting whacked in the PTS, it's the ballistics that are getting hit the hardest.

IS single shell UAC10s/20s and RACs. I'm kinda seeing the bogeyman.

The AC5 and UAC5s are still going to be as good as ever on the right chassis. On mechs where you can't mount 3 or 4 of them, a RAC or two could easily outperform them depending on how they are implemented. There is some really strong tech being implemented, some of it a straight up buff like a near global 25% decreased engine weight and much closer weapon parity.

Most people would (begrudgingly) admit that the balance has been pretty ok recently. That means if you give a huge boost to the combat capabilities of IS and to a lesser degree clans, wouldn't it make sense to start testing removing the quirks that was put in place to try and balance IS and Clans at a lower combat power level? The less quirks that there are, across the board, the easier it will be to accurately measure what the new tech does to both historically strong and weak mechs (not to mention what the removal of modules and the skill tree will do). We're going to get the new tech PTS soon after the skill tree goes live if they want to make the 18th July release date.

Edited by ForceUser, 27 April 2017 - 08:10 PM.

[Pr8Dator2]

ForceUser, on 27 April 2017 - 08:09 PM, said:

IS single shell UAC10s/20s and RACs. I'm kinda seeing the bogeyman.

The AC5 and UAC5s are still going to be as good as ever on the right chassis. On mechs where you can't mount 3 or 4 of them, a RAC or two could easily outperform them depending on how they are implemented. There is some really strong tech being implemented, some of it a straight up buff like a near global 25% decreased engine weight and much closer weapon parity.

Most people would (begrudgingly) admit that the balance has been pretty ok recently. That means if you give a huge boost to the combat capabilities of IS and to a lesser degree clans, wouldn't it make sense to start testing removing the quirks that was put in place to try and balance IS and Clans at a lower combat power level? The less quirks that there are, across the board, the easier it will be to accurately measure what the new tech does to both historically strong and weak mechs (not to mention what the removal of modules and the skill tree will do). We're going to get the new tech PTS soon after the skill tree goes live if they want to make the 18th July release date.

Exactly the point haters are missing!

[Y E O N N E]

ForceUser, on 27 April 2017 - 08:09 PM, said:

IS single shell UAC10s/20s and RACs. I'm kinda seeing the bogeyman.

As much as I feel that the large UACs should retain single shells because the 20 will be gimmicky in pairs and the 10 would just be a UAC/5 with a little bit better DPS and worse weight, slots, and range, I doubt they will be. RACs can potentially mitigate the fact that IS can't boat UACs like the Clans can, we'll see. That said, I meant the current ballistics options on the IS side aren't exactly shining brightly. The UAC is alright, the rest are underwhelming in the brackets they are designated for.

Quote

The AC5 and UAC5s are still going to be as good as ever on the right chassis

The UAC/5 is good, the AC/5 is not. Single-shot buys you nothing when you can only bring two and then are hard-pressed to bring anything else to supplement them because everything with complementary range weighs nearly as much. A pair of 5s and a pair of PPCs is the IS analogue to Clan Gauss+PPC, but it's inferior on every front save the snap-shot capability which, IMHO, isn't enough to offset the necessary isXL or lack of range. Light and Heavy PPCs will, together, replace the AC/5 in just about every capacity.

Quote

. On mechs where you can't mount 3 or 4 of them, a RAC or two could easily outperform them depending on how they are implemented. There is some really strong tech being implemented, some of it a straight up buff like a near global 25% decreased engine weight and much closer weapon parity.

Pending ghost heat and other implementation specifics. RACs are also dramatically shorter ranged than cUAC/5 and cUAC/2. meaning they won't be trading each other.

Much closer weapon parity is probably true, but a few weapons are inflection points that will dictate everything else. Like, the Medium Laser and ER Medium Laser. Because of their weight and slot efficiency, they are bread and butter weapons. But, the MedLas runs too hot for its brawl range right now and, if it doesn't come down, the ER MedLas will run too hot for its mid-range to combine with Larges and have a competitive heat profile with the Clan vomit given the number of heatsinks. They still have isML ghost heat set to 6x instead of 8x despite the cMPL and cERML being able to rip out 48 and 42 damage at the same threshold, which is another thing they need to change. Another inflection point is the Heavy PPC; If it doesn't do 15 PPFLD, then the IS will continue to lack anything that can answer a KDK-3 volley and even then they won't have the splash or range boons.

That's the kind of thing PGI has to watch out for and I'm not confident that they will.

Quote

Most people would (begrudgingly) admit that the balance has been pretty ok recently.

At risk of sounding like a d*uche, most people wouldn't be qualified. Balance was pretty okay in mid-2015. It really went to hell when they surged the quirks on the IS in late 2015 to the point of complete absurdity and then killed them off to a point below where they started in response. It's been getting steadily worse throughout 2016, with notable jumps in disparity with the release of the KDK, MAD-IIC, NTG, and HMN while precisely zero IS releases have done anything to help that faction. Adding insult to injury, none of the 'Mechs on the docket are looking to change that trend. It's getting ridiculous.

As much as I like them, I really hope they do not release the Locust IIC, RFL-IIC, WHM-IIC, Nova Cat, etc. any time soon.

Quote

That means if you give a huge boost to the combat capabilities of IS and to a lesser degree clans, wouldn't it make sense to start testing removing the quirks that was put in place to try and balance IS and Clans at a lower combat power level? The less quirks that there are, across the board, the easier it will be to accurately measure what the new tech does to both historically strong and weak mechs. We're going to get the new tech PTS soon after the skill tree goes live if they want to make the 18th July release date.

No you are right, that does make sense. The jist of what I am trying to say is that there is equipment in this game that is flat-out bad and needs to be adjusted directly, not through quirks. There are also 'Mechs that aren't going to get the help they need through the new tech that need to keep their quirks (i.e. MLX) and, in fact, could probably use more than what they have on live.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 27 April 2017 - 08:31 PM.