65 replies to this topic

[SmokedJag]

Wintersdark, on 29 April 2017 - 08:41 AM, said:

Give your head a shake. No matter what PGI does, what you warn about above is going to happen. Even if there's much greater balance between "good skills" and "bad skills", there will ALWAYS BE "the best skills" and there will ALWAYS BE "the best builds".

ALWAYS. It's inevitable.

If you allow players choice, players will make bad choices.



The ONLY way to avoid your complaint is to not allow choice at all, in which case we'd be better off without skills at all and simply have NO skill tree. I can see that as an argument, but it's less fun as progress adds reason to play, and reason to play adds content for other players.


A way better way to approach this is:

Does "everyone" [read, everyone who's being successful] take the same skills? If so, increase value in unused skill trees to make them more competitive. Maybe make Seismic work better, or work at higher speeds. Increase the mid-level skills value, to make Hill Climb actually do something.

In short, buff the trees nobody takes to make them more compelling choices.


But to be honest, I think you're overstating the value of some of the trees. The mobility gain, for example, from the agility tree is noticable but NOT one that's going to let you safely circle an identical mech without it. It WILL give you an edge, but then the mech without that has other advantages - Maybe he's got 2 more UAV's and Seismic, so while once in a brawl you've got a slight edge (again, it's not that huge), he's in a better position to get the first strike, or to avoid someone else getting the drop on him.

Maybe at the very top end of play (well, not maybe) the relative value of trees will be starkly different, but at "normal" play - and particularly in solo queue play - things like Sensors become a lot more valuable, so you need to think of this across all levels of play, not just at top end play.



Ultimately, though, you know this damn well: No matter how well balanced it is, there will ALWAYS be an optimal build, there will ALWAYS be "meta" skill builds.

Always.

I think that the current general skill tree design (including engine decoupling) will be less prone to clear meta builds and everything else than the current arrangement is. Do you use skill points to make the 'Mech better at what it already does, bring subpar attributes up closer to average, replace tonnage for other uses, add something unusual entirely etc.

[Insanity09]

I personally would cheer for a skill tree that automatically pruned out nodes that I have no use for, like removing ballistic nodes for a mech that has no ballistic hardpoints, simply not showing the jj tree for a non-jump mech, etc.. Good thought Gorantir.

However, that would require a significant re-work of the entire skill tree system, or at least firepower, because some of the useful nodes (cooldown/range/etc) are gated behind the (possibly) irrelevant/useless nodes.

Sigh. Which puts us right back to the main problem. The skill tree needs serious revamping before it becomes palatable, meaningful, and entirely relevant.

[MauttyKoray]

My point being, the slate needs to be wiped clean and started anew. I don't agree with them leaving any quirks in after the skill tree implementation honestly. I think they need to remove them all, work on the skill tree, and THEN use quirks again to 'quirk' mechs or give them small balance adjustments. (not the massive balance shifts we've had with some mechs getting huge bonus %'s)

The skill tree DOES still need adjustment as well, but un-gating everything just leaves us with another min/max system where specific nodes will ALWAYS be taken because 'META' and there's no trade off for doing so. The way it plays now, to push your mech to the limits of increasing areas its already effective in, you have to give up SP to take nodes that you may not consider as useful if at all. Otherwise you can decide which nodes you want to prioritize to not reach the maximum value for the node type but also avoid nodes you deem unnecessary.

Some rework to reduce the amount of gating SHOULD be done, but removing it entirely will just leave us with another bad skill system like the place holder was.

[A Really Old Clan Dude]

Issue with the "2.0 skill tree"
70% of the skill tree I selected was Identical for "EVERY" mech
the last 25 points or so was decisions on firepower or a few extra special skills like sesmic.
the 400XP to change a skill point is just rubbish.


Difference between a gated system and a linear.
Gated forces you to take X amount of nodes to reach a option you want, 50% of these are unwanted.
A linear system ca get you the same amount of nodes to get to the desired outcome but the percentage increments per node are lower. eg instead of cooldown =.9% it drops to .6% so you would need several additional nodes to reach the same level.

The only gated area I might consider is sensors where you can only choose enhanced sensors line or enhanced disruption line.

Overall if you have a linear system you will end up with more nodes for a skill type but with a much smaller incremental improvement per node.

[oldradagast]

SmokedJag, on 30 April 2017 - 09:12 AM, said:

I think that the current general skill tree design (including engine decoupling) will be less prone to clear meta builds and everything else than the current arrangement is. Do you use skill points to make the 'Mech better at what it already does, bring subpar attributes up closer to average, replace tonnage for other uses, add something unusual entirely etc.

Except it won't be "less prone to meta builds."

Here's how you win at the new skill maze.

- Find a mech - probably a Clan one - that is already devastating in the current system that has few, if any quirks, since many quirks are either being removed or nerfed heavily. Buy it and learn to play it with a meta build.

- Slap the same skill maze build on it that you will put on 90% of your mechs, with a few small exceptions made for weapons and maybe some things that vary a bit by tonnage or mech design (arm weapons, etc.)

There you go. That's it. That's the new meta. That's the entirety of "role warfare," "mech diversity," and "real choices," that you need to worry about under this laughable new system.

Oh, well, there's also the probable retooling - and resulting expensive respecs - after PGI adds new tech to the game, but we'll worry about that cash grab and regrind for another time.

Edited by oldradagast, 30 April 2017 - 02:07 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Again. Gating doesn't work because it creates unequal trades. Giving up speed tweak and cool running to get seismic just makes you bad at the game. You make 0.5% cool running 1SP, 1% Speed Tweak 1SP, 100m Seismic 1 SP. Currently it's 3% speed tweak plus 2 mobility to get 4 bad sensor quirks and 100m seismic. That's a bad trade.

Another option is a fusion of current + new system. Some quirks like much of the current skill tree, are just linear unlocks. Everyone gets a SP every X unlock on the "universals" they can spend on *either* ammo quirk, velocity, last burn duration, consumable slot/buff, seismic, derp, etc. With a limited total so you only get a few of them. That would give everyone the basics that are universally useful and let them customize the stuff that makes a huge difference.