8 replies to this topic

[Naaaaak]

Remove complications, effort, and make reasoning easy.

• Use lists of skills with various levels, not a hex maze. Functional UX beats nostalgic disarranged hexagons.
  
• Don't make us invest into crap points we don't want or need.
  
• Every skill point should provide a tangible benefit. You will never actually feel "1% this" or "1.5% that" in game. PGI doesn't even quirk anything so low themselves.
  
• In association with the above, reduce the number of clicks. Instead of 10 levels of a skill that each give 1.5% benefit, give 3 levels that each add 5%. Charge more points at higher levels, like 2 points for level 1, 3 points for level 2, 5 points for level 3 (or whatever). Keep the levels of a skill no higher than 5.
  
• Make it a clean 100 points since people work better with nice numbers. 91 points is very arbitrary unless you plan to add some consumable / premium that allows players to boost their points by 10% to 100 (which would be lame).
  
• 0 cost to un-spec or re-spec once a node is unlocked. I don't care if you make skill points more expensive to attain. Paying any XP or C-Bills to re-spec ruins the experimentation pillar of the game.

The above proposal makes min-maxing take a commitment, vastly reduces the number of clicks, makes every level something you'll actually feel, removes the maze, prevents buying crap we don't need, and preserves experimentation.


Mass Effect is the example to use, not the maze that exists now.

[Naduk]

the investing points in things you might not want is a good part of the new system

it encourages exploration of other options instead of just pure min max reinforcement

it will all depend on how much you value what your chasing

lets say you pick through the weapon tree, you grab 90% of what you want
there is 5 additional nodes you want, but to get them you must "waste" an additional 5 nodes
so for your specific build or setup, these 5 nodes will be seen as wasteful and devalue the other 5 nodes

this causes you to consider using those 10 nodes in a different place where you get a stronger benefit from them

if your build was different
you might benefit equally from the original 10 node selection as your weapon/gear mix matches is benefited by all gains
in this scenario you will see it as a clear choice to take all of those nodes and potentially explore additional near by options

another set of players may see these 5 nodes as crucial to their build and the extra 5 nodes sacrificed are of little consequence in comparison

lastly another set of players will see those 5 nodes as an opportunity to tweak their build and include a weapon to take advantage of those 5 nodes so they are not wasted

the mass effect style only enforces meta building and stale min/max thinking

[AngrySpartan]

Naduk, on 28 April 2017 - 04:02 AM, said:

the investing points in things you might not want is a good part of the new system

it encourages exploration of other options instead of just pure min max reinforcement

it will all depend on how much you value what your chasing

lets say you pick through the weapon tree, you grab 90% of what you want
there is 5 additional nodes you want, but to get them you must "waste" an additional 5 nodes
so for your specific build or setup, these 5 nodes will be seen as wasteful and devalue the other 5 nodes

this causes you to consider using those 10 nodes in a different place where you get a stronger benefit from them

if your build was different
you might benefit equally from the original 10 node selection as your weapon/gear mix matches is benefited by all gains
in this scenario you will see it as a clear choice to take all of those nodes and potentially explore additional near by options

another set of players may see these 5 nodes as crucial to their build and the extra 5 nodes sacrificed are of little consequence in comparison

lastly another set of players will see those 5 nodes as an opportunity to tweak their build and include a weapon to take advantage of those 5 nodes so they are not wasted

the mass effect style only enforces meta building and stale min/max thinking

What you are saying is: 'Every time you want to buy a steak you also need to buy 10 pounds of salt cause that's what " encourages exploration of other options instead of just" eating what you want
Very logical isn't it? That's exactly how the meat stores work! That's exactly what people do in real life and how they make their decisions, right?

Sorry for being sarcastic, but that's how the new skill tree design works. And don't tell me that video game is different from real life, I know that. Logic and reasoning are universal things and apply to both of them.

Edited by AngrySpartan, 28 April 2017 - 04:20 AM.

[Bud Crue]

Naduk, on 28 April 2017 - 04:02 AM, said:

the investing points in things you might not want is a good part of the new system it encourages exploration of other options instead of just pure min max reinforcement

Seriously? The nodes I waste on arm pitch and torso yaw are "encouraging exploration" of these "options?

1) they are not options...I am forced to take them to get to where I want to go.
2) how is forcing me to take them encouraging exploration of anything? Are you suggesting that having built my mech I will have a revelation in match along the lines of "I say, that 3% torso yaw that I had to waste nodes on has made my mech perform amazingly! I think I shall go in and drop radar deprivation and any other nodes necessary to allow me to fully maximize that yaw option!" Some how I don't think that sort of "exploration" is encouraged nor will it happen...ever.

All the crap nodes do is take up space and make the webs bigger than they need to be. Most of them are exactly the sort of thing that ought to comprise the mythical base characteristics of mechs so as to differentiate them before application of the skills tree. Cest la vie.

Edited by Bud Crue, 28 April 2017 - 04:36 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

Bud Crue, on 28 April 2017 - 04:36 AM, said:

Seriously? The nodes I waste on arm pitch and torso yaw are "encouraging exploration" of these "options?

1) they are not options...I am forced to take them to get to where I want to go.
2) how is forcing me to take them encouraging exploration of anything? Are you suggesting that having built my mech I will have a revelation in match along the lines of "I say, that 3% torso yaw that I had to waste nodes on has made my mech perform amazingly! I think I shall go in and drop radar deprivation and any other nodes necessary to allow me to fully maximize that yaw option!" Some how I don't think that sort of "exploration" is encouraged nor will it happen...ever.

All the crap nodes do is take up space and make the webs bigger than they need to be. Most of them are exactly the sort of thing that ought to comprise the mythical base characteristics of mechs so as to differentiate them before application of the skills tree. Cest la vie.

To be forced to take a note you don't want is the "bandaid" for negative effects you should have otherwise
You know those fast moving arms reduce the protection, were as more protection on the arms reduce their mobility.

Like they might have planed for the quirks from the beginning - remember the HBK-4G shitstorm when there was a "negative cooldown" - considering that it got more range and more v0 for the AC20 this was a fair exchange - and would habe been a good addition - instead afterwards the gun was cooler, faster and produced more dps - bad decision is bad

[Excalibaard]

Wow yeah, the ME2 system would work brilliantly here. The certain stats they're scared about for example weapon cooldown can be hidden behind 'needs lvl 3 heat dissipation', together with the increased skill point cost would heavily inflict builds that bee-line for only 1 particular stat for boating.

I hope something like this is introduced.

[Naduk]

AngrySpartan, on 28 April 2017 - 04:19 AM, said:

What you are saying is: 'Every time you want to buy a steak you also need to buy 10 pounds of salt cause that's what " encourages exploration of other options instead of just" eating what you want
Very logical isn't it? That's exactly how the meat stores work! That's exactly what people do in real life and how they make their decisions, right?

Sorry for being sarcastic, but that's how the new skill tree design works. And don't tell me that video game is different from real life, I know that. Logic and reasoning are universal things and apply to both of them.

really
a steak ?
i would of gone with a car metaphor but ok lets roll with it

you go to get a steak

you can pay $ to get a steak by its self
or
you can pay $$ to get it a steak deal with chips, salad and a beer

the deal is a little more, but its value will depend on how hungry you are (your build) and your budget (other skills you want)

so to use your own example
yes it encourages exploration
maybe you dont like the beer locked in the special, perhaps your not that hungry
you might even say screw it , ill have a chicken parma instead

[MustrumRidcully]

I guess a problem here is psychological. You have to take skills that you don't need or want to get what you actually want.

It might be better to give rewards to people that use non-standard combinations. In the firepower tree, this might be the most obvious - people like to boat, so unlock some skills that benefit non-boats only for people that make "non-boating" mechs.

So, say if you took a Laser and a Ballistic skill, you can get a "weapon system synergy" Skill:
If your build contains at least 2 slots or 3 tons of ballistic weapons, all beams gain x % heat reduction and y% range.
If your build contains at least 2 slots or 3 tons of energy weapons, all ballistics gain +y % range and z % cooldown reduction.
You might get something worth 3 skill unlocks normally, but for two separate weapons, if you meet the right conditions.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 28 April 2017 - 08:51 AM.

[AngrySpartan]

Naduk, on 28 April 2017 - 07:11 AM, said:

really
a steak ?
i would of gone with a car metaphor but ok lets roll with it

you go to get a steak

you can pay $ to get a steak by its self
or
you can pay $$ to get it a steak deal with chips, salad and a beer

the deal is a little more, but its value will depend on how hungry you are (your build) and your budget (other skills you want)

so to use your own example
yes it encourages exploration
maybe you dont like the beer locked in the special, perhaps your not that hungry
you might even say screw it , ill have a chicken parma instead

I would have agreed with your assesment if the extras PGI is offering were even moderately usefull. When was the last time you used 360 target retention or hill climb or anything except radar derp, seismic or zoom (ok, there are couple of highly situational modules as well)? So change the Beer and Chicken in your parallel for something less attractive to eat to you and look at it again (nails, glue, used oil, etc., i'll leave it for you imagination)

And again, there are things like Arm speed for mechs with no LAActuators and mandatory missile skills for mechs with no missile hardpoints (hmm, milk bottle for someone who can't digest milk products?)

Yet, all of these is not that important in comparison with F*cked up tree structure, UI and game balance problems in package with the new skill tree.

Edited by AngrySpartan, 28 April 2017 - 10:10 AM.