It's the optimization that I'm against. This system will eventually be solved. I want to see real trade offs between skills chosen. Agility and Armor buffs shouldn't be able to both be completely unlocked, there should be a limit to how much you can boost your agility if you're taking armor buffs, and vice versa. Same with Range Cooldown and Heat Generation on weapons, you shouldn't be able to unlock all three in full, there needs to be a real choice to be made. The availability of 91 nodes with no other restrictions aside from these pointless filler nodes will lead to the optimization of the new skill tree. That is not a good thing.
2
Why Do We Need This New Node System ?
Started by C E Dwyer, Apr 28 2017 12:43 PM
31 replies to this topic
#22
-
-
- The Death Wish
- 551 posts
Member
Posted 03 May 2017 - 03:35 PM
Regarding my KDK-1/3 example, as I said, I totally made up numbers, I could have said LCT-3V/S just the same. Or compared more apples to oranges and said ACH-P and HBK-P. The point was absolutely NOT about specific models or variants, but just that in any system where some mechs are inherently of greater or lesser capability (not all equivalent), any universal nerf (which does seem to be the case) hurts weaker mechs worse.
Anyhow, speaking for myself, I have played with the new skill tree.
Purely by the numbers then...
Cool Run: Old system 15%, New System 10% (nerf)
Heat Containment: Old 20% New 15% (nerf)
Quick Ignition: Old 33%, New 35% (probably not a significant difference)
Speed (Tweak): Old 7.5%, New 7.5% (no change)
So much for numbers directly comparable, more nerf than buff thus far. And the nerfs are to heat management, which hurts.
Now, on mobility it is extremely difficult to judge whether the new skill tree is a boon or curse because of the engine decoupling and accompanying agility related alterations, along with the numerous quirk changes.
All in all, I will say that the new skill tree appears to be an advantage over the old in this department, but since so many of the factors are hidden and vary widely between weight class and mech/variant, I would not want to state authoritatively in either direction.
Similarly, the survival tree is difficult to measure nerf/buff-wise. I'd suggest that this tree is mostly a buff (but I didn't have time to directly compare every chassis' quirks and possible numbers before and after). However, a passive buff, such as this tree, doesn't immediately feel any stronger, and with the encouragement to ppfld meta as a result... hmm.
The same problem relates to weapon cooldown, heat, and range. Quirk changes and module loss make it very difficult to determine whether there has been a nerf here. Ostensibly, the +15% range offered by the new skill tree is better than the 12% for a module, but many of the quirks I looked at were reduced or gone, and the module+old quirk was usually greater than 15%. As for cooldown, the new number is 10% (ok, 9.9%), which is marginally less than the 12% for a module. So, some weapons get buffs, others nerfs. However, I will state that it seems likely that folks have typically played to a variants strengths, so I suspect, at least for main (previously quirked) weapon systems on a mech, it is still an overall nerf (or zero sum).
That said, for ammo capacity and missile crit chances, there are obvious buffs (significant? not? <shrug>). Other areas, gauss charge, lbx/missile spread, I think buffs more mechs than previously had related quirks, but for most builds? Meh.
In the case of sensors and parts of the operations, significant parts of the trees could be considered a buff overall, but the difficulty is that the buffs are in areas that were all modules previously, modules that were frequently unused because players didn't think the benfits were worth it. Advanced zoom, radar deprivation, and seismic sensors were frequent, and everyone can have them now, to some degree, but again, is this truly a buff or simply a change in the way those capabilities are applied? I'd suggest the latter, since people had already been choosing exactly what they wanted on a mech, and they can still do so.
As for the aux tree, all about consumables, I suppose it is a buff, but that buff is entirely dependent upon continual cbill expenditure. Helps vets, hurts newbies. On the whole, given that I believe newbies need more help, I think this is a bit of a nerf.
A wider gap between new players and old makes the game less inviting, which is fine for folks that think of themselves as MWO elitists, but it does drive new players away, and attrition will cause pain in such a circumstance.
So, ultimately, for numbers that bear direct comparison, it is a nerf, albeit seemingly mild on the surface.
Anyhow, speaking for myself, I have played with the new skill tree.
Purely by the numbers then...
Cool Run: Old system 15%, New System 10% (nerf)
Heat Containment: Old 20% New 15% (nerf)
Quick Ignition: Old 33%, New 35% (probably not a significant difference)
Speed (Tweak): Old 7.5%, New 7.5% (no change)
So much for numbers directly comparable, more nerf than buff thus far. And the nerfs are to heat management, which hurts.
Now, on mobility it is extremely difficult to judge whether the new skill tree is a boon or curse because of the engine decoupling and accompanying agility related alterations, along with the numerous quirk changes.
All in all, I will say that the new skill tree appears to be an advantage over the old in this department, but since so many of the factors are hidden and vary widely between weight class and mech/variant, I would not want to state authoritatively in either direction.
Similarly, the survival tree is difficult to measure nerf/buff-wise. I'd suggest that this tree is mostly a buff (but I didn't have time to directly compare every chassis' quirks and possible numbers before and after). However, a passive buff, such as this tree, doesn't immediately feel any stronger, and with the encouragement to ppfld meta as a result... hmm.
The same problem relates to weapon cooldown, heat, and range. Quirk changes and module loss make it very difficult to determine whether there has been a nerf here. Ostensibly, the +15% range offered by the new skill tree is better than the 12% for a module, but many of the quirks I looked at were reduced or gone, and the module+old quirk was usually greater than 15%. As for cooldown, the new number is 10% (ok, 9.9%), which is marginally less than the 12% for a module. So, some weapons get buffs, others nerfs. However, I will state that it seems likely that folks have typically played to a variants strengths, so I suspect, at least for main (previously quirked) weapon systems on a mech, it is still an overall nerf (or zero sum).
That said, for ammo capacity and missile crit chances, there are obvious buffs (significant? not? <shrug>). Other areas, gauss charge, lbx/missile spread, I think buffs more mechs than previously had related quirks, but for most builds? Meh.
In the case of sensors and parts of the operations, significant parts of the trees could be considered a buff overall, but the difficulty is that the buffs are in areas that were all modules previously, modules that were frequently unused because players didn't think the benfits were worth it. Advanced zoom, radar deprivation, and seismic sensors were frequent, and everyone can have them now, to some degree, but again, is this truly a buff or simply a change in the way those capabilities are applied? I'd suggest the latter, since people had already been choosing exactly what they wanted on a mech, and they can still do so.
As for the aux tree, all about consumables, I suppose it is a buff, but that buff is entirely dependent upon continual cbill expenditure. Helps vets, hurts newbies. On the whole, given that I believe newbies need more help, I think this is a bit of a nerf.
A wider gap between new players and old makes the game less inviting, which is fine for folks that think of themselves as MWO elitists, but it does drive new players away, and attrition will cause pain in such a circumstance.
So, ultimately, for numbers that bear direct comparison, it is a nerf, albeit seemingly mild on the surface.
#23
-
-
- 1,271 posts
Member
- LocationOntario, Canada
Posted 03 May 2017 - 04:26 PM
You could find a few more Nerf/Buff/Unchanged numbers here:
https://mwomercs.com...hese-skills-do/
Generally, what the skill tree does, it does for all mechs. Overall, it is a buff for most mechs (looking at skill tree separately from de-quirking and engine de-sync). Meaning, you can get more total functional bonuses on a mech, using 91 nodes, than you previously could using the current skill tree and 3-5 modules. You can also gain bonuses that did not exist before (torso pitch, armor, higher torso twist speed, etc)
61 nodes roughly replaces the current skill tree (seen here: https://mwomercs.com...ter-comparison/)
That means you have 30 nodes left to replace the bonuses your mech had from Modules. If you can get more from 30 nodes than from your current modules, you are buffed. If you cannot, you are nerfed.
(The actual significant 'nerf' issue is that IS mechs are hurt more than Clan mechs by the reduction in quirks, and this is bound to cause further problems)
To directly address the OP, we don't 'need' this new skill system. Presumably PGI is putting it in because they think it will make some aspects of the game more enjoyable, more workable, or is required to deal with elements they have in the works that have not made it into game yet. Some people look forward to the new tree, some appear to hate it.
We are, however, getting this system, whether we agree with it or not. So we might as well learn what the best we can do with it is and see if we can find a few useable advantages in it.
https://mwomercs.com...hese-skills-do/
Generally, what the skill tree does, it does for all mechs. Overall, it is a buff for most mechs (looking at skill tree separately from de-quirking and engine de-sync). Meaning, you can get more total functional bonuses on a mech, using 91 nodes, than you previously could using the current skill tree and 3-5 modules. You can also gain bonuses that did not exist before (torso pitch, armor, higher torso twist speed, etc)
61 nodes roughly replaces the current skill tree (seen here: https://mwomercs.com...ter-comparison/)
That means you have 30 nodes left to replace the bonuses your mech had from Modules. If you can get more from 30 nodes than from your current modules, you are buffed. If you cannot, you are nerfed.
(The actual significant 'nerf' issue is that IS mechs are hurt more than Clan mechs by the reduction in quirks, and this is bound to cause further problems)
To directly address the OP, we don't 'need' this new skill system. Presumably PGI is putting it in because they think it will make some aspects of the game more enjoyable, more workable, or is required to deal with elements they have in the works that have not made it into game yet. Some people look forward to the new tree, some appear to hate it.
We are, however, getting this system, whether we agree with it or not. So we might as well learn what the best we can do with it is and see if we can find a few useable advantages in it.
#24
-
-
- Shredder
- 95 posts
Member
Posted 03 May 2017 - 04:43 PM
I generally like the idea of the new skill tree - if it was a tree after all. It's a little to bush-y for a tree, and this is something I just can't get my head around.
For example:
Why do I have to unlock "LBX-spread"-nodes to get to "Gauss cooldown"?
As mentioned before by someone else: Being forced to burn skill points to useless (or at least: undesired) nodes is frustrating, to say the least.
I believe, a combination of some of those aforementioned suggestions might make more sense:
First: Make that tree a tree again. Or a (bundle of) stick(s), for that matter, I don't care. There is nothing wrong with a linear noding system! Of course it's easier to optimize, but isn't that what it's supposed to be?
Second: For the min-max-frightened: It will be much easier to optimize the mech to ones personal taste ("I don't need that much Seismic range, I'd rather take some more AMS range for that skill point" - and such stuff), and many qualities will weigh equal - and then you run out of points. AND THAT'S FINE! At some point every player will have to chose if his LPL should have one 'WUB-WUB' less - or have better heat management!
Third: Being as it is, the skill bush will be "optimized" by the top-tier players in so far, as you will know what nodes nerf your beloved mech the least. That's why I'd rather stick to my suggestions as mentioned above. Again: The forced burning of skill points is frustrating and should really, really not ever go live. Let the players build their mechs.
For example:
Why do I have to unlock "LBX-spread"-nodes to get to "Gauss cooldown"?
As mentioned before by someone else: Being forced to burn skill points to useless (or at least: undesired) nodes is frustrating, to say the least.
I believe, a combination of some of those aforementioned suggestions might make more sense:
First: Make that tree a tree again. Or a (bundle of) stick(s), for that matter, I don't care. There is nothing wrong with a linear noding system! Of course it's easier to optimize, but isn't that what it's supposed to be?
Second: For the min-max-frightened: It will be much easier to optimize the mech to ones personal taste ("I don't need that much Seismic range, I'd rather take some more AMS range for that skill point" - and such stuff), and many qualities will weigh equal - and then you run out of points. AND THAT'S FINE! At some point every player will have to chose if his LPL should have one 'WUB-WUB' less - or have better heat management!
Third: Being as it is, the skill bush will be "optimized" by the top-tier players in so far, as you will know what nodes nerf your beloved mech the least. That's why I'd rather stick to my suggestions as mentioned above. Again: The forced burning of skill points is frustrating and should really, really not ever go live. Let the players build their mechs.
#25
-
-
- 1,271 posts
Member
- LocationOntario, Canada
Posted 03 May 2017 - 06:52 PM
@b1ackadder:
It is pretty clear from past comments that PGI doesn't want min-maxing of skill nodes. People say 'it will be optimized so why not let us ultra-optimize it?'. In case it wasn't clear, in a game where mechs often die in 2 seconds of alpha/focused fire, 'less optimized' is something that gets asked for a lot.
This tree is meant to cut back on heat management, range boosts, firing rates, and other 'offensive' options, and give you more 'survival/utility' options. 'Linear' trees need to make 'powerful' choices cost more than 'less powerful' (since it is impossible to make every skill/ability worth the same to everyone). So you can pay 3 points per 'Cool Run', or you could use a tree that makes you select 6 nodes to unlock 2 cool runs.
Linear tree gives you 2 Cool Run for 6 points and nothing else. Non-linear gives you 2 points of Cool Run, 2 Quick Ignitions, a Heat Containment and a Hill Climb (theoretical comparison only). Even if you don't really want those extra nodes they are of more use than just making Cool Run 'expensive'.
'Easier optimized mechs' only means everyone who is better at the game/skill tree will be even more ahead of everyone who isn't. (Hint: This is a bad thing)
As for your issue with the tree, there are no 'Gauss Cooldown' nodes. There are 'Gauss Charge' nodes - you don't have to take anything that does not benefit Gauss rifles to take them all. There are generic 'Cooldown' nodes that apply to all weapons, you can take all the cooldown nodes on the 'Ammo weapons' side of the tree without taking a single node that doesn't benefit Gauss Rifles.
If you want to start taking Cooldown nodes from the Laser side of the tree, yes then you have to start selecting nodes that don't help your Gauss. It's designed that way so min-maxers can't merrily pick up all the heat reduction, all the cooldown, all the range, all the other 'power' nodes and run around 1-shotting mechs with PPFLD alphas of doom.
If you have an example of a problem that is based on the actual skill tree, please list it and we can discuss the best way to deal with it.
You can use the Skill Tree lab here: https://kitlaan.gitlab.io/mwoskill/
It is pretty clear from past comments that PGI doesn't want min-maxing of skill nodes. People say 'it will be optimized so why not let us ultra-optimize it?'. In case it wasn't clear, in a game where mechs often die in 2 seconds of alpha/focused fire, 'less optimized' is something that gets asked for a lot.
This tree is meant to cut back on heat management, range boosts, firing rates, and other 'offensive' options, and give you more 'survival/utility' options. 'Linear' trees need to make 'powerful' choices cost more than 'less powerful' (since it is impossible to make every skill/ability worth the same to everyone). So you can pay 3 points per 'Cool Run', or you could use a tree that makes you select 6 nodes to unlock 2 cool runs.
Linear tree gives you 2 Cool Run for 6 points and nothing else. Non-linear gives you 2 points of Cool Run, 2 Quick Ignitions, a Heat Containment and a Hill Climb (theoretical comparison only). Even if you don't really want those extra nodes they are of more use than just making Cool Run 'expensive'.
'Easier optimized mechs' only means everyone who is better at the game/skill tree will be even more ahead of everyone who isn't. (Hint: This is a bad thing)
As for your issue with the tree, there are no 'Gauss Cooldown' nodes. There are 'Gauss Charge' nodes - you don't have to take anything that does not benefit Gauss rifles to take them all. There are generic 'Cooldown' nodes that apply to all weapons, you can take all the cooldown nodes on the 'Ammo weapons' side of the tree without taking a single node that doesn't benefit Gauss Rifles.
If you want to start taking Cooldown nodes from the Laser side of the tree, yes then you have to start selecting nodes that don't help your Gauss. It's designed that way so min-maxers can't merrily pick up all the heat reduction, all the cooldown, all the range, all the other 'power' nodes and run around 1-shotting mechs with PPFLD alphas of doom.
If you have an example of a problem that is based on the actual skill tree, please list it and we can discuss the best way to deal with it.
You can use the Skill Tree lab here: https://kitlaan.gitlab.io/mwoskill/
Edited by MadBadger, 03 May 2017 - 06:55 PM.
#26
-
-
- The Death Wish
- 551 posts
Member
Posted 03 May 2017 - 09:38 PM
If you wish to evaluate the benefit or disadvantage of the new skill tree, you cannot simply consider it alone, it must be done with respect to the other changes being made. Those include the quirks (lowering or removal), modules, and the engine decoupling.
You need to take a look at the values you have on a mech at present, including all of the above, then check the new values under the skill system (impossible unless the PTS is online).
I know on several of my IS mechs I either broke even or lost as far as firepower goes. Of course heat stuff was worse. (not even counting turn rate or accel/decel, since who knows on that?).
The new skill tree still forces you to buy useless skills (effectively). Saying that you can choose not to unlock the useless nodes to get the gated ones may be technically true, but honestly, that is a bit of a cop out when some crucial things are behind those unwanted nodes.
enter more detailed wall of text (tldr;)
Yes, it is true that the new skill system brings many buffs that were part of previously unused modules, things like hill climb and speed retention, among others. But who cares? There is a reason those modules are not widely used.
Do I care if I can climb 15% steeper slopes (hill climb). Not really, but I'm forced to take at least one node if I want all the cool run and heat containment I can get (which as I said before, still doesn't match the current skill values).
Speed retention? Please. So, instead of going at 40kph while legged, I can now go a whopping 52kph (40kph +30%)? Be still my beating heart, I've still been legged, and if that was in a light mech I'm still toast. (plus the fact the better (?!) speed won't kick in for a few seconds.
Improved gyros? Honestly, those occasions where I'm being nailed hard enough to worry about my screen shake, I've got bigger things to deal with (namely that I'm likely dying to all that incoming fire).
The sensor tree isn't awful. Again though, several of the node types are for things that most people never bother with. Target decay, target info gathering, and sensor range? Now, I like all those things, but most of my mechs have zero use for the decay, and while info gathering and sensor range are okay I still object being forced into it for something I do consider necessary (radar deprivation, possibly some seismic). Thank goodness they don't force you to buy the ECM nodes, given that most mechs don't have it. I will also point out that given that people are pretty much always going to have target decay to some degree, you are effectively forced to have full radar dep, since it now works on a percentage (and then, get this, would seem to totally nullify every target decay node that people were forced to take, sigh).
How about in agility? If I want all the turn speed and speed tweak I can get, I am still forced to unlock at least 3 arm pitch nodes (4 if I want full torso speed). No value for mechs without arm weapons, and very questionable for mechs that are minimally armed (heh) (of course, arm pitch is wonderful for my PXH and many omnis). Better torso pitch sounds great, but a max of 10%? I can tell you that will frequently not make a big difference, so that is more wasted nodes. Is the new tree better or worse? Dunno. if you can directly point me at comparison stats for current and post new skill/engine decouple/quirk change so I can accurately judge what I'm gaining or losing, I'd thank you. Until then I remain skeptical.
As for the survival tree, in some cases you may be better off with the new tree, but in others, the bonuses you get are relatively small and may not match previous structure/armor quirks. Further, even if you are better off, the numbers are not very impressive. I know on my 70 ton ARC-R (no current armor quirks, but with all the armor it could hold) by maxing the armor nodes I got 7 (arms), 8 (legs and sides), and 12 (ct) armor points (2 head, w/e). I couldn't decide where to put the points, they were just evenly distributed (no points to the back torsos, still gotta add that manually). That said, based on other people's posts, the armor bonuses when given in areas that still have quirked bonuses are rather impressive. Also, I admit quite happily that you don't need to pay additional tonnage for the armor bonuses and that is honestly great (and should be the way quirks work now, but anyhow...).
On structure, it was difficult to judge, since the values are hidden, but I'd extrapolate similar bonuses. (structure is half value, but the bonuses are larger per node).
Maybe the reduced crit chance (8% max) is a big deal, I'm can't say.
Perhaps you are wowed by those numbers, I'm not.
Firepower. Heh. I know that on some of my mechs my main weapons took a cooldown hit, even when I waded through the maze of nodes with no use to me to get all the needed stuff. The same is true for heat gen in many cases I recall. Yes, both those things (and range) are universal now, but why should I care if my mech can only use energy weapons, or missiles? Given that all those basic value nodes are gated behind all three weapon types, that is more of me being forced to unlock things that have zero value to me in a slow and repetitive grind. Should I even mention not wanting range boosts for any of my missile weapons? (heck, on my ARC-5W, with missile hardpoints only, the all range nodes in Firepower are truly of no real benefit) I will admit that the ammo boosts are nice, perhaps not great, but nice, and the laser duration will be of benefit on mechs that didn't have it pre-quirk change (though most of those did not focus on energy hardpoints, but still). And, as I said above, what I noticed in several cases was that at best, some mechs retained (through reduced quirks) the various range/cooldown/heat gen bonuses they used to get through quirks for their main weapons, most had lost out in one or more areas. I'm sure there were some minimally quirked mechs that will be boosted. (as an example, iirc, my LCT-PB currently has 20% energy cooldown and 10% energy range, under the new system, both are reduced by 10%, net result? Questionable. If I buy a bunch of nodes I cannot afford, including some I do not need, I can get back to similar values (increased range, in fact).)
I still don't mind the jump and auxiliary trees, they are very workable for my needs. However, they are very much secondary considerations, not usually related to the what I think of as the primary functions of my mechs. Of course, I dislike relying on consumables, other's mileage may vary.
Woe betide me if I need to ever respec.
Edit: got hold of actual change numbers, (thx to MadBadger) and altered post to reflect them.
You need to take a look at the values you have on a mech at present, including all of the above, then check the new values under the skill system (impossible unless the PTS is online).
I know on several of my IS mechs I either broke even or lost as far as firepower goes. Of course heat stuff was worse. (not even counting turn rate or accel/decel, since who knows on that?).
The new skill tree still forces you to buy useless skills (effectively). Saying that you can choose not to unlock the useless nodes to get the gated ones may be technically true, but honestly, that is a bit of a cop out when some crucial things are behind those unwanted nodes.
enter more detailed wall of text (tldr;)
Yes, it is true that the new skill system brings many buffs that were part of previously unused modules, things like hill climb and speed retention, among others. But who cares? There is a reason those modules are not widely used.
Do I care if I can climb 15% steeper slopes (hill climb). Not really, but I'm forced to take at least one node if I want all the cool run and heat containment I can get (which as I said before, still doesn't match the current skill values).
Speed retention? Please. So, instead of going at 40kph while legged, I can now go a whopping 52kph (40kph +30%)? Be still my beating heart, I've still been legged, and if that was in a light mech I'm still toast. (plus the fact the better (?!) speed won't kick in for a few seconds.
Improved gyros? Honestly, those occasions where I'm being nailed hard enough to worry about my screen shake, I've got bigger things to deal with (namely that I'm likely dying to all that incoming fire).
The sensor tree isn't awful. Again though, several of the node types are for things that most people never bother with. Target decay, target info gathering, and sensor range? Now, I like all those things, but most of my mechs have zero use for the decay, and while info gathering and sensor range are okay I still object being forced into it for something I do consider necessary (radar deprivation, possibly some seismic). Thank goodness they don't force you to buy the ECM nodes, given that most mechs don't have it. I will also point out that given that people are pretty much always going to have target decay to some degree, you are effectively forced to have full radar dep, since it now works on a percentage (and then, get this, would seem to totally nullify every target decay node that people were forced to take, sigh).
How about in agility? If I want all the turn speed and speed tweak I can get, I am still forced to unlock at least 3 arm pitch nodes (4 if I want full torso speed). No value for mechs without arm weapons, and very questionable for mechs that are minimally armed (heh) (of course, arm pitch is wonderful for my PXH and many omnis). Better torso pitch sounds great, but a max of 10%? I can tell you that will frequently not make a big difference, so that is more wasted nodes. Is the new tree better or worse? Dunno. if you can directly point me at comparison stats for current and post new skill/engine decouple/quirk change so I can accurately judge what I'm gaining or losing, I'd thank you. Until then I remain skeptical.
As for the survival tree, in some cases you may be better off with the new tree, but in others, the bonuses you get are relatively small and may not match previous structure/armor quirks. Further, even if you are better off, the numbers are not very impressive. I know on my 70 ton ARC-R (no current armor quirks, but with all the armor it could hold) by maxing the armor nodes I got 7 (arms), 8 (legs and sides), and 12 (ct) armor points (2 head, w/e). I couldn't decide where to put the points, they were just evenly distributed (no points to the back torsos, still gotta add that manually). That said, based on other people's posts, the armor bonuses when given in areas that still have quirked bonuses are rather impressive. Also, I admit quite happily that you don't need to pay additional tonnage for the armor bonuses and that is honestly great (and should be the way quirks work now, but anyhow...).
On structure, it was difficult to judge, since the values are hidden, but I'd extrapolate similar bonuses. (structure is half value, but the bonuses are larger per node).
Maybe the reduced crit chance (8% max) is a big deal, I'm can't say.
Perhaps you are wowed by those numbers, I'm not.
Firepower. Heh. I know that on some of my mechs my main weapons took a cooldown hit, even when I waded through the maze of nodes with no use to me to get all the needed stuff. The same is true for heat gen in many cases I recall. Yes, both those things (and range) are universal now, but why should I care if my mech can only use energy weapons, or missiles? Given that all those basic value nodes are gated behind all three weapon types, that is more of me being forced to unlock things that have zero value to me in a slow and repetitive grind. Should I even mention not wanting range boosts for any of my missile weapons? (heck, on my ARC-5W, with missile hardpoints only, the all range nodes in Firepower are truly of no real benefit) I will admit that the ammo boosts are nice, perhaps not great, but nice, and the laser duration will be of benefit on mechs that didn't have it pre-quirk change (though most of those did not focus on energy hardpoints, but still). And, as I said above, what I noticed in several cases was that at best, some mechs retained (through reduced quirks) the various range/cooldown/heat gen bonuses they used to get through quirks for their main weapons, most had lost out in one or more areas. I'm sure there were some minimally quirked mechs that will be boosted. (as an example, iirc, my LCT-PB currently has 20% energy cooldown and 10% energy range, under the new system, both are reduced by 10%, net result? Questionable. If I buy a bunch of nodes I cannot afford, including some I do not need, I can get back to similar values (increased range, in fact).)
I still don't mind the jump and auxiliary trees, they are very workable for my needs. However, they are very much secondary considerations, not usually related to the what I think of as the primary functions of my mechs. Of course, I dislike relying on consumables, other's mileage may vary.
Woe betide me if I need to ever respec.
Edit: got hold of actual change numbers, (thx to MadBadger) and altered post to reflect them.
Edited by Insanity09, 08 May 2017 - 12:04 PM.
#27
-
-
- The Devoted
- 13,891 posts
Member
- LocationOn a dropship to Terra
Posted 04 May 2017 - 12:16 AM
because someoen decided it has to be a skill tree, and skill tree susually have nodes.
I would have prefered a more scientific approach where we get sliders and triangles to adjust soem weapons, like lasers a triangle of beamduration, heat reduction and range.
I would have prefered a more scientific approach where we get sliders and triangles to adjust soem weapons, like lasers a triangle of beamduration, heat reduction and range.
#28
-
-
- The Serpent
- 22 posts
Member
Posted 04 May 2017 - 02:16 AM
Basically WE DON'T NEED A SKILL TREE.
The concept is simple, why put on a skill system that take away from the mech the specificity of the mech itself?
At the moment we have mech more suitable for cold map, others for hot...others for long range, etc. etc. etc....
With the skill tree, in theory, every mech could be skilled (theory eh....) to match a particular game mode or map...but...why in the Battletech Universe they produce different mech? Only to have different model like our cars today?
No..they produced different mech to match specify task, environment etc. etc.
So please, don't kill definitively this game....we don't need a skill tree...
We need game mode, we need map, we need terrain editor to give the community the possibility to design new maps, we need more players to have bigger battles and a game mode that let You feel that You are fighting in a battle, with objectives that change during the game, reinforcement, asym conditions...
We need this...not a skill tree that serve only one purpose, to let PGI farm a little more money (in their intents) but that will put the
RIP word above this game.
One more thing, if You look at the most successful FPS on market You will se that all have Classes (the mech models) and within the classes You could do a little customization (the modules, the weapons and the hardpoints) but a rifleman for example will be forever a rifleman...nor a grenadier or a sharpshooter....
A wizard could be more specialized in a certain type of magic...but will be never a fighter....
The concept is simple, why put on a skill system that take away from the mech the specificity of the mech itself?
At the moment we have mech more suitable for cold map, others for hot...others for long range, etc. etc. etc....
With the skill tree, in theory, every mech could be skilled (theory eh....) to match a particular game mode or map...but...why in the Battletech Universe they produce different mech? Only to have different model like our cars today?
No..they produced different mech to match specify task, environment etc. etc.
So please, don't kill definitively this game....we don't need a skill tree...
We need game mode, we need map, we need terrain editor to give the community the possibility to design new maps, we need more players to have bigger battles and a game mode that let You feel that You are fighting in a battle, with objectives that change during the game, reinforcement, asym conditions...
We need this...not a skill tree that serve only one purpose, to let PGI farm a little more money (in their intents) but that will put the
RIP word above this game.
One more thing, if You look at the most successful FPS on market You will se that all have Classes (the mech models) and within the classes You could do a little customization (the modules, the weapons and the hardpoints) but a rifleman for example will be forever a rifleman...nor a grenadier or a sharpshooter....
A wizard could be more specialized in a certain type of magic...but will be never a fighter....
Edited by Hunter Joker, 04 May 2017 - 02:26 AM.
#29
-
-
- Shredder
- 95 posts
Member
Posted 04 May 2017 - 02:48 AM
MadBadger, on 03 May 2017 - 06:52 PM, said:
@b1ackadder:
It is pretty clear from past comments that PGI doesn't want min-maxing of skill nodes. People say 'it will be optimized so why not let us ultra-optimize it?'. In case it wasn't clear, in a game where mechs often die in 2 seconds of alpha/focused fire, 'less optimized' is something that gets asked for a lot.
It is pretty clear from past comments that PGI doesn't want min-maxing of skill nodes. People say 'it will be optimized so why not let us ultra-optimize it?'. In case it wasn't clear, in a game where mechs often die in 2 seconds of alpha/focused fire, 'less optimized' is something that gets asked for a lot.
Changing the game because things are getting asked for? That'd be a first-timer.
Quote
This tree is meant to cut back on heat management, range boosts, firing rates, and other 'offensive' options, and give you more 'survival/utility' options. 'Linear' trees need to make 'powerful' choices cost more than 'less powerful' (since it is impossible to make every skill/ability worth the same to everyone). So you can pay 3 points per 'Cool Run', or you could use a tree that makes you select 6 nodes to unlock 2 cool runs.
Linear tree gives you 2 Cool Run for 6 points and nothing else. Non-linear gives you 2 points of Cool Run, 2 Quick Ignitions, a Heat Containment and a Hill Climb (theoretical comparison only). Even if you don't really want those extra nodes they are of more use than just making Cool Run 'expensive'.
Linear tree gives you 2 Cool Run for 6 points and nothing else. Non-linear gives you 2 points of Cool Run, 2 Quick Ignitions, a Heat Containment and a Hill Climb (theoretical comparison only). Even if you don't really want those extra nodes they are of more use than just making Cool Run 'expensive'.
Cutting back on the "offensive options" does not exclude what I was proposing. How linear or non-linear a skill-tree is is not even relevant. The point is: I want the choice where to invest the skill points and where not. I'll get back to that in a moment.
Quote
'Easier optimized mechs' only means everyone who is better at the game/skill tree will be even more ahead of everyone who isn't. (Hint: This is a bad thing)
So like with the min-max loadouts that we have since forever and that led to nerf-to-death for so many mechs (anyone seeing Victors lately? Or Dragons?)?
I disagree with your statement. The easier optimized mechs (in my opinion) would lead to a more diverse and 'personalized' role play (as in: every mech has its role, i.e. scouting etc.) as I mentioned before.
And thank god you included your hint, which is absolutely pointless, because we're talking about a skill tree that does not even exist and as such neither shows your point nor mine.
Quote
As for your issue with the tree, there are no 'Gauss Cooldown' nodes. There are 'Gauss Charge' nodes - you don't have to take anything that does not benefit Gauss rifles to take them all. There are generic 'Cooldown' nodes that apply to all weapons, you can take all the cooldown nodes on the 'Ammo weapons' side of the tree without taking a single node that doesn't benefit Gauss Rifles.
If you want to start taking Cooldown nodes from the Laser side of the tree, yes then you have to start selecting nodes that don't help your Gauss. It's designed that way so min-maxers can't merrily pick up all the heat reduction, all the cooldown, all the range, all the other 'power' nodes and run around 1-shotting mechs with PPFLD alphas of doom.
If you have an example of a problem that is based on the actual skill tree, please list it and we can discuss the best way to deal with it.
You can use the Skill Tree lab here: https://kitlaan.gitlab.io/mwoskill/
If you want to start taking Cooldown nodes from the Laser side of the tree, yes then you have to start selecting nodes that don't help your Gauss. It's designed that way so min-maxers can't merrily pick up all the heat reduction, all the cooldown, all the range, all the other 'power' nodes and run around 1-shotting mechs with PPFLD alphas of doom.
If you have an example of a problem that is based on the actual skill tree, please list it and we can discuss the best way to deal with it.
You can use the Skill Tree lab here: https://kitlaan.gitlab.io/mwoskill/
It seems my faulty example was already enough to throw you off track. I apologize, that was not my intention. I'll try it in easier words and with a working example.
The intention was: I don't want to spend skill point on nodes that I don't want to buy in the first place to get to another node. Let's get to the skill tree you linked (which is indeed helpful):
I want to reduce my LBX spread. Therefore I have to unlock 8 other skill nodes until I get to the first LBX-node there.
This might be the better example and that is actually the problem I am having with the skill tree as it is. Why give us 91 points when we have to burn half of it anyway for things we don't want?
This having said, I realize that the manners in these halls haven't changed that much since I last commented on anything and that I did not miss this a tad. I should rather stick to the game itself than try a thoughtful discussion.
#30
-
-
- 1,271 posts
Member
- LocationOntario, Canada
Posted 04 May 2017 - 04:18 AM
True, addressing the issues in someone else's post with actual facts, alternative solutions, and providing functional useable information instead of unsupported/incorrect opinion is the height of bad manners. I'll try to cut back on that in the future.
You can unlock all the LBX spread there is (5 nodes at 2% per node) by taking 3 Range, 2 Velocity, 2 Cooldowns, 1 Heat Gen, and 1 magazine capacity. So you do have to take 9 'extra' nodes to unlock full LBX spread, every single one of which benefits not only your LBX but nearly every other weapon system as well.
I suppose you could consider those 'wasted' choices if you like, but it seems odd to want to boost LBX spread without wanting to increase the effectiveness of LBX in other ways as well.
You can unlock all the LBX spread there is (5 nodes at 2% per node) by taking 3 Range, 2 Velocity, 2 Cooldowns, 1 Heat Gen, and 1 magazine capacity. So you do have to take 9 'extra' nodes to unlock full LBX spread, every single one of which benefits not only your LBX but nearly every other weapon system as well.
I suppose you could consider those 'wasted' choices if you like, but it seems odd to want to boost LBX spread without wanting to increase the effectiveness of LBX in other ways as well.
#31
Posted 04 May 2017 - 05:22 AM
Insanity09, on 03 May 2017 - 03:35 PM, said:
So, ultimately, for numbers that bear direct comparison, it is a nerf, albeit seemingly mild on the surface.
Hunter Joker, on 04 May 2017 - 02:16 AM, said:
Basically WE DON'T NEED A SKILL TREE.
The concept is simple, why put on a skill system that take away from the mech the specificity of the mech itself?
At the moment we have mech more suitable for cold map, others for hot...others for long range, etc. etc. etc....
With the skill tree, in theory, every mech could be skilled (theory eh....) to match a particular game mode or map...but...why in the Battletech Universe they produce different mech? Only to have different model like our cars today?
No..they produced different mech to match specify task, environment etc. etc.
So please, don't kill definitively this game....we don't need a skill tree...
We need game mode, we need map, we need terrain editor to give the community the possibility to design new maps, we need more players to have bigger battles and a game mode that let You feel that You are fighting in a battle, with objectives that change during the game, reinforcement, asym conditions...
We need this...not a skill tree that serve only one purpose, to let PGI farm a little more money (in their intents) but that will put the
RIP word above this game.
One more thing, if You look at the most successful FPS on market You will se that all have Classes (the mech models) and within the classes You could do a little customization (the modules, the weapons and the hardpoints) but a rifleman for example will be forever a rifleman...nor a grenadier or a sharpshooter....
A wizard could be more specialized in a certain type of magic...but will be never a fighter....
The concept is simple, why put on a skill system that take away from the mech the specificity of the mech itself?
At the moment we have mech more suitable for cold map, others for hot...others for long range, etc. etc. etc....
With the skill tree, in theory, every mech could be skilled (theory eh....) to match a particular game mode or map...but...why in the Battletech Universe they produce different mech? Only to have different model like our cars today?
No..they produced different mech to match specify task, environment etc. etc.
So please, don't kill definitively this game....we don't need a skill tree...
We need game mode, we need map, we need terrain editor to give the community the possibility to design new maps, we need more players to have bigger battles and a game mode that let You feel that You are fighting in a battle, with objectives that change during the game, reinforcement, asym conditions...
We need this...not a skill tree that serve only one purpose, to let PGI farm a little more money (in their intents) but that will put the
RIP word above this game.
One more thing, if You look at the most successful FPS on market You will se that all have Classes (the mech models) and within the classes You could do a little customization (the modules, the weapons and the hardpoints) but a rifleman for example will be forever a rifleman...nor a grenadier or a sharpshooter....
A wizard could be more specialized in a certain type of magic...but will be never a fighter....
I think of this, exactly the same way! One thing to do is: DO US THE MAPS, and those most voted maps, insert them
Edited by XtremeAlex, 04 May 2017 - 05:26 AM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
