953 replies to this topic

[PirateLincoln]

process, on 18 May 2017 - 10:45 AM, said:

Yeah, it would have been nice if there was a single pool of HSP per chassis, instead of per variant, to help us downsize.

I thought that was exactly what they were going to do, since the whole "unwanted variants" thing is part of what this whole skill system change was supposed to fix.

And I don't need help downsizing, hah! I have more loyalty/founder 'mechs in my hangar (five, three of which I don't want) than I have 'mechs that I've purchased in-game (two). I got those unwanted variants up to where they needed to be and then immediately sold them because I needed C-Bills more than I needed an unwanted 'mech cluttering up my inventory.

Oh well, I guess it serves me right for not being willing or able to spend the prodigious amounts of money and/or time necessary to be a completionist (aka: the only market segment PGI caters to).

[MovinTarget]

I won't deny that the forum vitriol is real.

I am liking it as I can see a difference in how my mechs play and I don't see a drop off in perf (unless I do something boneheaded).

I just wanted to point out that changes like this tend to bring those that dislike it to the forums/polls a whole heck of a lot more than the ones that love it, kinda like it, or just don't care.

I am not saying there is a hidden majority out there that loves the change and just just doesn't say anything (I don't know what the active population is tbh) only making sure its understood that the poll results are not necessarily representative of the community as a whole.

For example, there were over 17,000 unique accounts involved in the BoT III event that ended Monday. I am not ready to say that the 486 that responded to the poll represent accurately that many players. Heck cut it ini half, assume everybody had an alt so that 486 only constitutes 5.7% of 8500...

So the poll shows that half the readers of this thread that felt like doing the poll do not like the changes. Going back to my original statement, that makes sense.

Edited by MovinTarget, 18 May 2017 - 11:09 AM.

[HuntingU]

Instead of o7 or glhf, my new statement is, "skill tree ruined mwo."

[PirateLincoln]

For the record, I like the skill tree a lot. For one thing, Jump Jets are useful now. Needs time to see how balanced it is, and probably needs a lot of work, but it's a great start. It'll be better once they actually fix movement stats for everything (that they released with placeholders is just...actually par for the course for PGI), but I definitely like the skill tree, I do.

But doing HSP/HXP/etc by variant instead of by 'mech is just dumb as all crap. I'm glad they fixed the "unwanted variant" problem for future players, but as usual, the old casuals get the shaft.

[Ronald McDonald]

Thx for the invasion of ultra heavy light mechs....30-35ton mechs tanking more dmg then kingcrabs....im out...preorder canceled...maybe deinstallation of the hole game to save my hdd and foremost my time so i am more likely playing a game which actually makes fun and is balanced and all that stuff, like you know, pgi, "a fun game" and not a unbalanced, grind and pay to win game like yours

[WarmasterRaptor]

I'm salty about all the salt being salted here...
It's so salty even salt is having salt problems !

Man, I can't believe people thought it was better before lol
There was NOTHING before XD
Only op quirks and a ladder.

Now that they are addressing balance (next month) and giving more customization,
People are crying like newborns... sorry, even worse than newborns that actually!!

It is a FIRST STEP you pool of upsetted kids, help them balance it instead of running to your moms !!
It's frustrating to see this childish reaction over 36 pages. It's been publicized for months now, it should NOT even remotely be a surprise, except for the very very very occasional player.

This change needed to happen. Evolve with it and make it evolve in return

Rant over and flame away, I know the kind of reply I'll get

Edited by WarmasterRaptor, 18 May 2017 - 11:44 AM.

[NocturnalBeast]

TheLuc, on 18 May 2017 - 10:01 AM, said:

Is the HBS Battletech out yet ?

The backer beta is supposed to start on June 1st.

[Horseman]

TheLuc, on 18 May 2017 - 10:01 AM, said:

Is the HBS Battletech out yet ?

Backer beta starting June 1st. See you there.

Blockpirat, on 18 May 2017 - 10:22 AM, said:

https://docs.google....g/viewanalytics
And here, especially for our spreadsheet warriors, is the raw data. I am looking forward to any conclusions one might draw from it:
https://docs.google....t#gid=345765850

It seems that the higher the tier, the more negative their opinion on the tree. I am not surprised by this at all, nor by the overall results.

PirateLincoln, on 18 May 2017 - 10:32 AM, said:

The old system forced me to waste a great deal of time leveling up variants that I never wanted to use and will never use again, so that I could fully level up the variant I actually did want to use.

Somewhat different experience here... I looked for variants I might like and often found builds that I genuinely enjoyed, leading me to keep the chassis. There were only three exceptions - AWS-8T, DRG-1C and KGC-0000.

WarmasterRaptor, on 18 May 2017 - 11:43 AM, said:

It is a FIRST STEP you pool of upsetted kids, help them balance it instead of running to your moms !!

Let's look at it realistically...
The feedback from the PTS repeatedly pointed out very basic issues with usability and player experience, and repeatedly criticized the design's excess of form over function. Most of that feedback has been disregarded. Does that indicate PGI is likely to listen to any future feedback on the system? Not really.
And seeing how making that first step from a placeholder took them four years, I'm not optimistic about the mythical second step happening in foreseeable future.

Edited by Horseman, 18 May 2017 - 12:00 PM.

[FreakinLazerbeams]

ya I don't know what kind of logic/reasoning your using when u say " 30-35 tons tanking more dmg then kingcrabs" or any 90-100 ton assaults. Even if you max out survivability for any light mech, any assault mech will always tank more then a light based on armor and internal hard points.

[PeeWrinkle]

WarmasterRaptor, on 18 May 2017 - 11:43 AM, said:

It is a FIRST STEP you pool of upsetted kids, help them balance it instead of running to your moms !!
It's frustrating to see this childish reaction over 36 pages. It's been publicized for months now, it should NOT even remotely be a surprise, except for the very very very occasional player.

This change needed to happen. Evolve with it and make it evolve in return

Rant over and flame away, I know the kind of reply I'll get

I don't disagree with you, but here is the rub. This game is basically still in beta, meaning it has been in beta for over 5 years now.

I want a polished game, not a release that is going to require 6 months (most likely more) of patching to make it right.

I have played a lot of online games, and while many release patches that have bugs especially after a major expansion (which is how I view this patch - it is more of an expansion), none release expansions that ruin the player experience that will require several more iteration to get it right. If they do they go out of business.

Knowing that PGI will eventually fix this, get it balanced and streamlined, I am like why waste my time playing the game until they do.

Once they get a finished product and release that I will play this game again. Until then they are wasting my time.

And so I am not going to be a cry baby here are some of my suggestions on how to make this system work.
1. Get rid of half the nodes
2. Give a set number of skill points to use in each category
3. Completely change each category around so they have to pick and choose what nodes will actually be unlocked.
4. Design it in such a way that you can actually take a node you want without having to take 20 others first.
5. To add more variable builds in addition to having a set number of skill points per category have a small number of general skill points that can be used in any category.
6. If jump jets and ECM require purchasing nodes to make them effective all mechs should have the ability to equip them. If not you are cheating those mechs who actually have those hard points out of investing in other areas.

Maybe not the best ideas, but it would be better than having to try and find all the nodes of a particular type in a skill tree and figure out how to most effectively get those. And believe it not if they cut the nodes in half and made each a little more powerful that would probably make a difference as well. Just make is so that if you want to make a particular type of node you have to the earlier values of that node type.

[NocturnalBeast]

Horseman, on 18 May 2017 - 11:59 AM, said:

Backer beta starting June 1st. See you there.

Assuredly you will, BATTLETECH will consume at least 50% of my Mech time.

[F Wulf]

PGI say they want to bring more diversity to the players, more choices to make. Of course you can now better customize your mech, but what for?
One of the ingredients I miss are much greater rewards for let's say souting or on scouting missions for collecting data.
If you chose to take special roles and specialize your mech for it you should be rewarded for it, not "punished" bcause you don'kill as many enemies than in a mech specialized for combat.

Edited by F Wulf, 18 May 2017 - 12:41 PM.

[NocturnalBeast]

F Wulf, on 18 May 2017 - 12:40 PM, said:

PGI say they want to bring more diversity to the players, more choices to make. Of course you can now better customize your mech, but what for?
One of the ingredients I miss are much greater rewards for let's say souting or on scouting missions for collecting data.
If you chose to take special roles and specialize your mech for it you should be rewarded for it, not "punished" bcause you don'kill as many enemies than in a mech specialized for combat.

There are already rewards for scouting, holding targets narc'ing an tagging mechs shielding mechs with ECM and other role-based rewards in the game.

[Jaegon]

Damnit. I think I'm out. I'm sure this system must allow for very fine control over a mech's upgrades, but it's just SOOOO fiddly. I fired up my beloved Warhammer 6R and was just utterly buried in interface for a good half hour trying to make some meaningful decisions. It's like Menu Warrior Online right now. Mucking around in that system is far too much of the game now.

Hell, I've watched a couple videos on the system in earlier states, and it still took me an embarrassing amount of time to figure out why it wasn't letting me "accept" the changes I was doing. The conversion process is just like a salad bowl of random acronyms that don't mean anything intuitive.

Anyway. I think I'm finally successfully unplugged from the game. Kind of relieved honestly, it has taken up so much of my gaming time over the last couple years, it's good to move on.

Very sincerely, thanks to PGI for the great times in the past. You definitely earned the couple hundred bucks I spent. This just didn't do it for me.

Edited by Jaegon, 18 May 2017 - 02:13 PM.

[Duilliath]

Ed Steele, on 16 May 2017 - 01:38 PM, said:

Yes, but those same players no longer have to buy and level two additional variants that they don't want. Basically you will spend the same amount of time levelling one variant as it did to level 3.

So, before you got three mechs fully leveled up, and now you only get one? Taking three apples and giving us back one lemon hardly seems like an equivalent exchange.

Cherry Garden full of Blue Roses, on 16 May 2017 - 01:58 PM, said:

Well, I like new skill tree. In my opinion it's really great. One thing makes me sad - to unlock all heat containment I have to improve gyro, sometimes other things which I never will use... Well, it makes making well skilled mech harder, maybe that was the point? To not allow to make overpower builds...?

Anyway, I really like the idea. IMO new skill tree is great - when I skill up old mechs. With new one - maybe the skill tree will be harder to use.

At this moment, I am glad PGI made that upgrade. And for all of you who just have to complain always - you were complaying that you, to unlock master skills (additional module slot etc), needed to skill up three mechs. Now you are complaying for another thing... Please, stop.

You, sir, are a masochist. Please seek help.

[NocturnalBeast]

Seriously, people are acting like you have to respec your MECH everytime you log in, you don't. You spec your mech once, save it and then play all you want. Yes, it is probably a good idea to take some time and spend your skill points wisely, since you only get half back when you respec, but you only HAVE to do it once.

Duilliath, on 18 May 2017 - 01:15 PM, said:

So, before you got three mechs fully leveled up, and now you only get one? Taking three apples and giving us back one lemon hardly seems like an equivalent exchange.

I don't know about "lemons", I am doing as well or better than I ever did in the MECHs that I have respec'd so far. And no, the new Skill Tree has not miraculously made me better with the MECHs that I never was good with.

Edited by Ed Steele, 18 May 2017 - 01:19 PM.

[Duilliath]

Ed Steele, on 16 May 2017 - 02:11 PM, said:

Excuse me, it also includes the time it would take to fully unlock three or four modules and gives you bonuses equivalent to three or four modules.

The actual cost of modules when divided between even a small number of mechs becomes negligible. With that in mind, they seem to have increased C-bill grind significantly, and XP grind to a lesser degree.

[Horseman]

Ed Steele, on 18 May 2017 - 01:18 PM, said:

Seriously, people are acting like you have to respec your MECH everytime you log in, you don't. You spec your mech once, save it and then play all you want. Yes, it is probably a good idea to take some time and spend your skill points wisely, since you only get half back when you respec, but you only HAVE to do it once.

Until it turns out - usually on your first match - that your spec doesn't perform as you expected it to, or anywhere near. Another session with the tree to replan your node purchases so that they address the deficiencies.

[Duilliath]

Ed Steele, on 18 May 2017 - 01:18 PM, said:

Seriously, people are acting like you have to respec your MECH everytime you log in, you don't. You spec your mech once, save it and then play all you want. Yes, it is probably a good idea to take some time and spend your skill points wisely, since you only get half back when you respec, but you only HAVE to do it once.



I don't know about "lemons", I am doing as well or better than I ever did in the MECHs that I have respec'd so far. And no, the new Skill Tree has not miraculously made me better with the MECHs that I never was good with.

No offense, but I think you missed my point. I wasn't referring to the viability of mechs under the new system. I was referring to the time required to skill them up. If it took me "X" amount of time to skill up three mechs, including both the required xp and c-bills to master them, then one would expect to be able to skill up three mechs in the same or at least similar amount of time under the new system. As the previous post stated, though, you only get one mech skilled for the same amount of effort now. The "Rule of Three" was admittedly annoying, but instead of simply allowing us to pick which three mechs we wanted to spend our time skilling, they've effectively tripled the grind.

[Captain Grayson Lighthorse]

First off, there are some nice new features I find in this new Skill Tree; and some problems that need to be addressed.


The Good...

> The entire Auxiliary Tree is EXCELLENT! Being able to "add" extra cool shots, artillery strikes, and UAVs is GREAT! However, this tree allows us 2 UAVs, but if I take the 2 cool shots and 2 artillery strikes that we are now allowed, it will only let me load 1 UAV because there are only 5 consumable slots. Can 1 more consumable slot be added to this tree so we can use the 2nd UAV also? The consumable slot window already has the space for this extra slot. Why not let us use it?


> The Firepower Tree also has nice features. The Missile Rack, Missile Explosive, and Magazine Capacity are very nice additions. The node type dispersion is also good throughout this tree. The Gauss Charge? Why? This is a band-aid on a broken leg. I believe that the Gause Charge Mechanic was supposed to be removed entirely with this Skill Tree release, isn't that correct?


> The Mobility Tree... Good options, decent dispersion of nodes with the exception of the Speed Tweaks. Need some of them closer to the top of the tree. One idea... Why not just introduce the Super Charger into the game and let that be a selection in this tree? It could replace the Speed Tweaks and is an actual part of the BattleTech Technology and lore...


> Operations Tree... Nice options. Would be nicer to have a couple of the Cool Runs closer to the top of the tree to balance dispersion.


> Survival Tree... Good options. Entire tree, with the exception of AMS Overload, is pretty much mandatory for any IS 'Mech in order to recover from the quirks being taken away.

> Jump Jets Tree... Could be good for lighter, more mobile 'Mechs. Heavies and Assaults probably won't benefit a lot from this tree.


The BAD...

> Sensor Tree... This tree is upside-down. The most used nodes are pretty much all at the bottom of the tree. I use Seismic Sensors and Advanced Zoom 98% of the time and have not found many of the others useful. To get these 3 nodes, I have to use up 14 skill points! There is no way that this is a fair transfer from the previous skill system! I'm being FORCED to WASTE 11 skill points for nodes that I DON'T want, or can't use in my 'Mech build to get the 3 that I do want. And, since we can no longer transfer modules between 'Mechs, I have to do this over, and over again for each and every 'Mech I have and want to use these same nodes in? This is going to result in hundreds of wasted skill points in very short order. No, not fair to the players in the least.

> Skill point allocation per 'Mech too low... PGI calculated that there were 91 skill points per Mastered 'Mech in the previous skill system. In that skill system, we could directly choose ONLY the modules we wanted to use without any wasted C-Bills, XP, or GXP. In this new Skill Tree system, we are FORCED to spend skill points for nodes that we DO NOT WANT in order to "UNLOCK" the nodes we DO want. In this new system, 91 skill points per 'Mech is NOT ENOUGH!

As an example: In order to try to recover one of my Mastered Victor's capabilities, I had to use all of the 91 skill point allocation on the Survival, Firepower, Operations, and Auxillery trees. And due to the FORCED WASTE of skill points, it left nothing to reach the Sensor and Mobility tree nodes my 'Mech needed.

Possible Solutions:

>>Skill Point allocation should be raise to at lease 120 per 'Mech to compensate for the 20 or 30 WASTED skill points that we are FORCED to spend on what we either don't want, or that cannot benefit the 'Mech build we are using.

>> OR... Allow us to navigate backwards UP through the tree instead of just from the top down. This would at least eliminate PART of the FORCED WASTE of skill points.

>> OR... Remove the forced navigation linkage and allow us to just pick the nodes we want from anywhere in the tree and leave the 91 limit in place. This would facilitate equality with the previous system in this area.


There is a 400XP re-activation cost of a skill node to the SAME 'Mech. In the previous skill system we could put our modules into ANY 'Mech once we paid the double cost of GXP and CB to purchase it.

How about this for a fair trade off? To put the skill node back into the SAME 'Mech there is no cost. If we wanted to "transfer" it to a different 'Mech, then there is a cost associated as it would require removing it from one 'Mech and installing it into another. (I know this would have to be implemented in the game as we no longer have the ability to transfer modules/skill nodes between 'Mechs). I really don't see the reason for the 400XP re-activation cost. Once we have purchased the skill node for a particular 'Mech, it should be available for us to add/remove when desired. After all, it costs us 45,000CB and 800XP to purchase each node for each and every 'Mech we own. In order to master a 'Mech now, it will cost us 4,095,000CB and 72,800XP for each 'Mech. In the previous skill system it only cost us around 139,750XP to master a 'Mech (if my memory serves). I don't think there should be a cost to put it back into the SAME 'Mech once we have paid to purchase it.

And another note...
Some of the 'Mechs I own were bought with real money; i.e. Master Packs etc. My 'Mech purchase decisions were based in part on the quirks and other bonuses inherent within the 'Mechs. Now many or all of those quirks and bonuses that were part of my purchasing decision have been stripped from my 'Mechs as a result of a bunch of "less is more" believers that think that the 'Mechs/weapons in this game are somehow "overpowered" and to try to stop/block/reduce this so-called virtual "power creep" that I keep hearing about, but have yet to see in any facet of the game other than maybe the amount of armor on the light 'Mechs.

This "stripping of capabilities" leaves me with the same feeling as if I'd bought a new car, and a year or more later, the dealer came by my house and stripped the AC, power seats, sun roof, and climate control system out of my car and then told me that I would have to go to the salvage yard and buy these things used and install them myself to regain the functionality. This is pretty much what we have here and it leave a very "not-so-friendly" feelings toward those that performed this act. Stripping the 'Mechs bought with CB and stripping their capabilities is one thing, part of this "in-game" cost was refunded. But taking my real money for a product and then stripping part of that product's capability is another thing entirely, as there was no refund on that real money purchase. And it will NOT continue...

Edited by Captain Grayson Lighthorse, 18 May 2017 - 07:26 PM.