32 replies to this topic

[Antares102]

Before coming to my main point I would like to stress that I am NOT in favour of reducing quirks for IS mechs AT ALL, ok?

Folks, no matter what you think about the skill tree you cannot deny the following facts:

• "Bad" skill tree > no skill tree, no matter how you define "bad". The current "skill tree" has zero options and is one dimensional. Granted ... its so easy that every donkey-*** understands it and you can literally make no mistakes except for not using it.
  
• The skill tree applies to EVERBODY. It's not like you get a bad skill tree and somebody else gets a good one instead. We ALL get the same thing. Only you can *** it up and I think many people are scared about that rather than the skill tree itself.
  
• The new skill tree at least give you SOME ability to customize just like building your mech. This also means that if you assign your skill points (just like your loadout) in a nonsensical way because you do not care about effectiveness/efficiency then the only one you can blame is yourself and not PGI.

I am really pissed about all the whining about the current skill tree proposal.
YES it has its drawbacks,
YES it has its loopholes
YES it still needs improvement (and nobody said this is the final version till the end of MWO)
YES it has a bad UI
BUT it's better than nothing FFS !

To all the skill tree whiners, embrace change folks.
There is no improvement without change.

[PiperJ3]

I agree....tired of waiting around....just get it in the game already as is. ....get it packaged into a patch for downloading...like tomorrow...lets go !

All this talk about needing balance....hogwash.....the every moment decisions of 24 pilots in the heat of battle have far more to do with game results than any built in "balance"...the impact "balance" has is a microfraction of the whole battle equation....yet we spend so much time whining about it.

[Ruar]

There is a drastic difference between getting a raw, half rotten steak or getting a steak that is fully cooked instead of medium rare.

The web design is a raw steak instead of medium rare. If it goes live it's going to make people sick and drive them away. All they have to do is throw the steak back on the stove and send it out with a linear system. No need to delay, just admit it's going to be linear instead of web and release as planned.

The refund system is nice, it's a bit overdone but at least you can eat it. The web design is raw and needs some more cooking. Balance can happen later when they add more items to the menu and we come back to eat again.

They are almost there with this. If only they would listen to the hundreds of posts about the tree being too cluttered and poorly designed and admit they need to go linear.

[FireStoat]

OP, please download the PTS and do two things.

Look over all the IS mech quirk changes and test them in the Academy. Get a feel for the scope of how large the nerfs are for IS mechs. It's really large.

Then look over how much it costs to respec a mech if you want to change out choices involving changed weapon loads. Especially look this over if you own an Omnimech.

Report back with how badly you want this tree to go live after doing these two things please.

[kesmai]

apples=oranges

[Tarogato]

I disagree.

No skill tree > Bad skill tree.


A bad skill tree wastes your time, is not fun to use, and you are forced to use it and find the best paths to stay competitive. It doesn't add anything except a timesink and grind.

No skill tree keeps the playing field level - you don't have to waste time using it, nor do you have to waste the time figuring out the best way to use it. You get to concentrate on the fun part - playing the game and mucking about with builds, not wasting time with some obtuse skill tree.

What we have on live right now is pretty similar to having no skill tree - you don't have to waste time navigating it or figuring out the best way to unlock it. You just earn the XP and fill it out and get the same bonuses as everybody else every time. To be honest, I think I like it better. This whole "skill tree needs to grant players choice!" is I think a bit of a red herring - I think it's a waste of time when we could be getting dev time spent on better mech balance and better NPE.

Edited by Tarogato, 27 April 2017 - 01:12 PM.

[Clownwarlord]

The new skill tree is a good skill tree, that does not mean it is perfect, and neither are you.

[LordNothing]

Ruar, on 27 April 2017 - 11:40 AM, said:

...or getting a steak that is fully cooked instead of medium rare.

sacrilege! if it aint bloody you might as well be eating tofu.

[WarHippy]

Antares102, on 27 April 2017 - 09:07 AM, said:

Before coming to my main point I would like to stress that I am NOT in favour of reducing quirks for IS mechs AT ALL, ok?

Folks, no matter what you think about the skill tree you cannot deny the following facts:

• "Bad" skill tree > no skill tree, no matter how you define "bad". The current "skill tree" has zero options and is one dimensional. Granted ... its so easy that every donkey-*** understands it and you can literally make no mistakes except for not using it.
  
• The skill tree applies to EVERBODY. It's not like you get a bad skill tree and somebody else gets a good one instead. We ALL get the same thing. Only you can *** it up and I think many people are scared about that rather than the skill tree itself.
  
• The new skill tree at least give you SOME ability to customize just like building your mech. This also means that if you assign your skill points (just like your loadout) in a nonsensical way because you do not care about effectiveness/efficiency then the only one you can blame is yourself and not PGI.

I am really pissed about all the whining about the current skill tree proposal.
YES it has its drawbacks,
YES it has its loopholes
YES it still needs improvement (and nobody said this is the final version till the end of MWO)
YES it has a bad UI
BUT it's better than nothing FFS !

To all the skill tree whiners, embrace change folks.
There is no improvement without change.

Your first "fact" isn't a fact it is an opinion.

That being said I think with some solid polish and a few tweaks it will be ready to go live after one last testing round.

[VanillaG]

The best thing about this change is the introduction of SP. It makes it easier for PGI to change the trees AND provide a way for free respecs compared to using the straight XP and CBills. Without the introduction of SP people would be using free respecs as a piggy bank to get their CBills out of mechs.

You may not like the layout of the tree but this implementation is much more future proof compared to the previous version.

[oldradagast]

Wrong.

The new skill maze is utter crap. It is nothing but a tangled, illogical grind-fest packaged inside one of the worst UI's imaginable. It is riddled with false choices, empty promises of "role warfare," and is even burdened with respec costs, which have no place in a game like this.

It is, objectively, inferior to the "almost nothing" we have currently. I'm very tired of listening to people prattle on about how "anything is better than what we have now." That is an objectively false statement and ignore the facts regarding the failures of the skill maze by pretending "different = good." It doesn't.

Finally, the skill maze screws up the ONE THING in the game that is user friendly. The current skill system, as shallow as it is, is literally the one thing a new player cannot mess up. So, yeah, let's replace that with a 7-page long web of illogical skills that make no sense at all in their placement or roles. Idiocy.

[oldradagast]

WarHippy, on 27 April 2017 - 01:54 PM, said:

Your first "fact" isn't a fact it is an opinion.

That being said I think with some solid polish and a few tweaks it will be ready to go live after one last testing round.

This is PGI. If "polishing" things and listening to customer feedback were part of their business plan, we wouldn't be here, months later, pointing out the SAME FAILURES with their damn skill maze system that we told them the first time.

They do not care.

I don't know if the damage they are doing is intentional and part of some stupid plan to try to make money off this failure of game design, or if they are just deluded and angry at the community, so now it's about spite and them "knowing what we want" better than we do. Either way, PGI has never demonstrated any ability to quickly correct game balance errors or fix sloppy design mistakes in a timely matter. Given how this skill maze is clearly personal now - they are going to deploy it over the objections of much of the community - they will not fix it later, or ever.

[RedDragon]

"Better bad than nothing - The history of PGI" available in stores in 90 days!

[FupDup]

It doesn't have to be all or nothing, ya'know...

[Ace Selin]

Tarogato, on 27 April 2017 - 01:10 PM, said:

I disagree.

No skill tree > Bad skill tree.


A bad skill tree wastes your time, is not fun to use, and you are forced to use it and find the best paths to stay competitive. It doesn't add anything except a timesink and grind.

No skill tree keeps the playing field level - you don't have to waste time using it, nor do you have to waste the time figuring out the best way to use it. You get to concentrate on the fun part - playing the game and mucking about with builds, not wasting time with some obtuse skill tree.

What we have on live right now is pretty similar to having no skill tree - you don't have to waste time navigating it or figuring out the best way to unlock it. You just earn the XP and fill it out and get the same bonuses as everybody else every time. To be honest, I think I like it better. This whole "skill tree needs to grant players choice!" is I think a bit of a red herring - I think it's a waste of time when we could be getting dev time spent on better mech balance and better NPE.

Agreed.

After playing the game as is for nearly 4 years, everyone was used to it, no huge influx of players were coming with a skill change, it should have been left as is and PGI could have worked on something more worthwhile.

[Ted Wayz]

Bad might be better than no, but is bad better than current?

Doesn't matter to me, I do not have the time to re specify 300 plus mechs. Most of which I payed real money for early access.

And my opinion is if you are not supporting this game you really should have no say in this matter.

[Mcgral18]

oldradagast, on 27 April 2017 - 02:55 PM, said:

Wrong.

The new skill maze is utter crap. It is nothing but a tangled, illogical grind-fest packaged inside one of the worst UI's imaginable. It is riddled with false choices, empty promises of "role warfare," and is even burdened with respec costs, which have no place in a game like this.

It is, objectively, inferior to the "almost nothing" we have currently. I'm very tired of listening to people prattle on about how "anything is better than what we have now." That is an objectively false statement and ignore the facts regarding the failures of the skill maze by pretending "different = good." It doesn't.

Finally, the skill maze screws up the ONE THING in the game that is user friendly. The current skill system, as shallow as it is, is literally the one thing a new player cannot mess up. So, yeah, let's replace that with a 7-page long web of illogical skills that make no sense at all in their placement or roles. Idiocy.

The idea of a Skill Tree, I can get behind
It reduces the new player Grind, as the main feature


I couldn't really care less about the "customize your quirks!" aspect
I think weapons should be balanced and useful without any of that, and that quirks should be exclusive to mechs who need them (See, Terribad Robots)

Giving ALL mechs, from Trash Tier to God Tier, the same options...seems silly
Their implementation also looks terrible, and STILL lacks Tree Traversal

[vandalhooch]

Tarogato, on 27 April 2017 - 01:10 PM, said:

I disagree.

No skill tree > Bad skill tree.


A bad skill tree wastes your time, is not fun to use, and you are forced to use it and find the best paths to stay competitive. It doesn't add anything except a timesink and grind.

No skill tree keeps the playing field level - you don't have to waste time using it, nor do you have to waste the time figuring out the best way to use it. You get to concentrate on the fun part - playing the game and mucking about with builds, not wasting time with some obtuse skill tree.

What we have on live right now is pretty similar to having no skill tree - you don't have to waste time navigating it or figuring out the best way to unlock it. You just earn the XP and fill it out and get the same bonuses as everybody else every time. To be honest, I think I like it better. This whole "skill tree needs to grant players choice!" is I think a bit of a red herring - I think it's a waste of time when we could be getting dev time spent on better mech balance and better NPE.

I see your point but some counterpoints:

1 - Giving players the feeling of agency (choosing skill nodes) has been shown to increase player retention. Even if there is not really a whole lot of true variation in the choice, just the illusion of choice can be a positive to a game's design. Having said that, not all players will respond to the choices offered in the same way. Some player types (min/maxers) will quickly see through the choices and settle on the optimal route and stick with it. The player choices offered to them has less benefit to the game design compared to explorer players who will spend large amounts of time trying new combinations and looking for "interesting" results.

2 - I think the new system has the potential to be a much more useful tool in the near-constant balancing act that must go on in a game like this. Instead of a PGI developer, who has far less play time than most players, deciding what bonuses to apply to under-performers, the developer can just allow the mech to have 96 or 101 nodes. Let the players decide how best to give the mech more utility.

Edited by vandalhooch, 27 April 2017 - 05:08 PM.

[oldradagast]

NT Hackman, on 27 April 2017 - 04:33 PM, said:

Keiji Inafune said Mighty Number 9 was "better than nothing" too.

As a Megaman fan... ouch... but true...

[oldradagast]

vandalhooch, on 27 April 2017 - 05:07 PM, said:

I see your point but some counterpoints:

1 - Giving players the feeling of agency (choosing skill nodes) has been shown to increase player retention. Even if there is not really a whole lot of true variation in the choice, just the illusion of choice can be a positive to a game's design. Having said that, not all players will respond to the choices offered in the same way. Some player types (min/maxers) will quickly see through the choices and settle on the optimal route and stick with it. The player choices offered to them has less benefit to the game design compared to explorer players who will spend large amounts of time trying new combinations and looking for "interesting" results.

2 - I think the new system has the potential to be a much more useful tool in the near-constant balancing act that must go on in a game like this. Instead of a PGI developer, who has far less play time than most players, deciding what bonuses to apply to under-performers, the developer can just allow the mech to have 96 or 101 nodes. Let the players decide how best to give the mech more utility.

Counterpoints:

1) While choice or the illusion of choice is nice, the skill maze as shown is TOO COMPLICATED with TOO MANY choices. It is a tangled web with no logic whatsoever to its layout, and each choice has so little effect. Look up "analysis paralysis" or the Paradox of Choice.

https://en.wikipedia...radox_of_Choice

In short, the skill maze is too big, too complicated, and utterly off-putting to players. I'm dreading logging into the game and having to click through that stupid mess dozens of times just to make my mechs playable. It's not fun - it's work, and basically another form of grind.

2) Balancing mechs with more or less nodes is NOT balance. Compare an Atlas to a Kodiak. Without quirks, the Kodiak utterly destroys the Atlas. Leaving things that way, with no quirks or at least no major ones - means nobody will play the Atlas unless they want to die horribly. Adding more skill points available to the Atlas which they can eventually grind their way up to fixes nothing since the Atlas starts out horribly inferior and will stay that way for 95% of its career. Even after the Atlas player finally grinds out extra skill quirks to have more than the Kodiak player, the effects of each skill quirk are so small that the Atlas will STILL SUCK.

Go back and look at the rather staggering quirks many mechs have to remain remotely competitive in this game. Now, look at how small the skill bonuses are per skill node. You'd need a huge number of extra points to balance out the crappy mechs, and even then, you'll only achieve balance long AFTER the meta-mech has won nearly every confrontation for 90%+ of the time both mechs are played.

Edited by oldradagast, 27 April 2017 - 05:17 PM.