117 replies to this topic

[Vonbach]

Andi Nagasia, on 19 May 2017 - 09:24 AM, said:

im sorry but i have to disagree,
the SCR / TBR / MAD-IIC / KDK not turn like dump trucks if you dont take the mobility tree,
many IS mechs can run amazing Structure & armor and are inately more mobial than clan mechs,
Brawling dead? i was able to solo a KDK in my 6MPL CRB(Full Structure Tree) it was a good fight,
Meta worse? PopTarts did get better, but ive also seen LRMs AMS, Brawlers, Dakka DRGs, all seem better,
if you think IS is so much worse than clan now i would suggest you go test abit more, as such has not been my experience,

The survival tree is pretty useless. It gets you very little for the investment.
A kodiak is a 100 tonner and all 100 tonners are basically a sitting duck in any
brawl now. They are useless thanks to the engine decouple. Trying to brawl
now basically gets you killed now. Especially in a heavy. LRMs coming back is not
really a good thing. Getting killed in three voleys by clan dakka boats isnt a good thing
either.

Edited by Vonbach, 19 May 2017 - 09:43 AM.

[Acehilator]

MischiefSC, on 19 May 2017 - 09:00 AM, said:

I used to think that. However I'm finding, having talked with about 100 people now (all good players on good teams) that there's some very different ways to approach it. There's tons of top tier people who put up 700-1k matches consistently in QP and group queue who fill Firepower and Survival and 6 Aux and some Ops and ignore sensors and mobility. Running mediums and heavies, btw.

Conversely there's some people who do no ops, just firepower, mobility and some sensors and maybe a bit of aux. Again, great players who play consistently in the 700-1k range and 2k-3k in FW.

There's not really a default skill tree I'm finding. It lets you really drill down on your personal strengths and the strengths of a mech to get something tuned to how you play.

Absolutely there's some changes I'd like to see. Fewer 'general' nodes, more 'specialized' nodes and such but the concept is better than I had predicted. I like it.

I know. It is just a simple way to skill up mechs to get into games and get an idea of what's going on, and for people who don't want to tinker around a lot. You can use that setup without fear of gimping your mech.

[CDLord HHGD]

The new skills are great! People can tailor they mechs to their play instead of quirk shopping. No more "I bought X mech because of Y quirks and PGI just nerfed so they stole from me I want my money back whaaaaaaa!"

Bravo PGI, bravo. This is a much better game now.

[KodiakGW]

Dino Might, on 19 May 2017 - 08:36 AM, said:

Snip

but what they are not doing is trying to stifle any recommendations for improvement.

You have not provided any solution to the problem.

If you want more constructive discussion, identify the problem and propose a solution.

Problem is, yes they are stifling recommendations. We have provided solutions to the problem. Maybe it is not happening in this thread, but check the onther ones.

Anyone who dares to call into question the skill tree has been labeled "toxic" by the pro-skill tree ones. Yet they are the same ones dropping such useful comments like "I LOVE THE SKILL TREE. LEARN TO SKILLZ!" So, who is being toxic?

They are also the ones claiming that those of us who oppose it are trying to "hijack the game to the way we want to play it." Are they not doing the same? They are not even willing to listen and compromise.

The thing the really gets me is one of the ones who was one of the biggest proponents of the new Skill Tree, who claimed to me that he did "extensive testing" (and suggested I didn't) on the three PTS, started a post requesting PGI for special programming for one mech because he "just noticed" that nodes were useless in one tree. Yes, one mech, "just noticed", and requesting special programming be done. The same thing can be accomplished by rearranging the skill tree, like many of us have requested multiple times, to take useless nodes out of the way of useful nodes. Now which would make a larger amount of the player base happy, and take the least amount of time for PGI to do?

You want constructive feedback? Here, I'll post up two. But, this is the last time because I KNOW that it will be ignored AGAIN.

1) Remove gating useless, or near useless, nodes from accessing useful nodes. I already gave the instance of the Locust wil Hill Climb and Advanced Gyros. I've seen the Locust skate up hills without Hill Climb. And, pretty much any mech under 40 tons trying to fire through getting hit enough to make Advanced Gyros useful, is dead. How about Speed Retention? Any mech running fast enough will be over the 50KPH cap by unlocking one node. Also, why is the upgrade to ECM gated behind Radar Deprivation, twice? You have full ECM, Radar Derp is useless.

Should I instead ask PGI to make special programming that if my mech can run over 100KPH that when I unlock one Speed Retention, the other ones are set so I can bypass them. Or, if my mech is 40 tons or under, that Advanced Gyros are set to be bypassed? No, that would be ridiculous. But, rearranging the skill tree to take into account every mech seems to be a reasonable request.

2) Consider different values for Range, Cool Down, and other generic nodes on the weapon tree. Short range weapons benefit the least from 1% range increases. They figured out how to make Magazine Capacity change for every ballistic weapon type, why can't they give short range weapons a 2% boost, while keeping longer ranged ones at 1%. Same goes for Cool Down and high recycle weapons, etc.

There. I've suggest both of those before and was ignored or met with pro-skill tree vitriol. I'm done with arguing with those people, because PGI evidentially only listens to them. If those seem reasonable to you, claim them as your own idea and copy/paste whenever you see fit. Maybe you will get noticed. I'm done trying to help keeping player retention for this game.

Edited by KodiakGW, 19 May 2017 - 09:56 AM.

[Ultimax]

Lupis Volk, on 18 May 2017 - 09:25 PM, said:

I have yet to have seen any other gaming community so set on stopping the developer from developing like you guys have.

His post is about getting people like yourself help FIX the system with constructive criticism - not remove or delete it.


Constructive criticism is how things get done in the real world where big boys and big girls run projects and make money.

Blindly accepting anything a company gives you in some misguided dedication as a white knight just allows for companies to shovel substandard product at you.

Edited by Ultimax, 19 May 2017 - 10:57 AM.

[Coolant]

Ted Wayz, on 18 May 2017 - 08:42 PM, said:

And then start working to help PGI to fix this garbage.

Not garbage, loving every aspect. Just needs to be tweaked like they have in the past for other parts of the game.

Quote

And if you are not supporting this game...if you choose to comment with your one mech earned from academy c-bills and haven't spent a cent on this game...just stop. If PGI was smart you wouldn't even be able to post because frankly you do not matter to their bottom line.

Have supported it plenty with pocketbook

[Deathticle-ThatsNoMoon]

What we have here is a failure to communicate.

Simply put, your opinion on what would make the game better only belongs to you. You may find a group of like minded people, you may even find yourself in a majority of complainers. None of that means anything.

So go ahead, rant on the forums. Disparage other people who do not agree, simply because they have a different opinion. This is the place for us to express ourselves, so do it up.

I personally like the changes. I will continue to support this game because I like it. You don't have to and no-one can make you. Vote with your wallet, whine cry and yell. Call other people names, whatever. It doesn't add any legitimacy to your opinion it just makes you seem like a fool to me.

Finally, just to be clear. If you had the capability of doing what PGI has done, wouldn't you just do it? Wouldnt we all be playing your game? Wouldnt you have to listen to people who may or may not know anything about what it takes to do this type of thing offer up their opinions on what you must do to conform to their idea of "better"
Objective or Subjective means NOTHING here. +1 for an excellent troll

[Vonbach]

Coolant, on 19 May 2017 - 09:56 AM, said:

Have supported it plenty with pocketbook

Me too. Not anymore.

[Andi Nagasia]

Vonbach, on 19 May 2017 - 09:41 AM, said:

The survival tree is pretty useless. It gets you very little for the investment.
A kodiak is a 100 tonner and all 100 tonners are basically a sitting duck in any
brawl now. They are useless thanks to the engine decouple. Trying to brawl
now basically gets you killed now. Especially in a heavy. LRMs coming back is not
really a good thing. Getting killed in three voleys by clan dakka boats isnt a good thing
either.

many mechs can brawl effectivly, and can have fun doing so,
i have a WubHawk i brawl with, a wubCrab as well and both brawl amazingly, and both have full defense trees,
i think the LRMs coming back is that Radar-Dep isnt as easy to get now, also the ECM nerf as well matteres some,
and also many feel others are running unskilled/underSkilled mechs so LRMs are just easy C-bills,

that said everyone should equip AMS as i have till the LRMs die down alittle,

[Vonbach]

Quote

Right now the IS is in the weakest position it has been in. Mechs overall response is slower, heat is higher, torso twisting is difficult, weapon quirk removal seriously nerfed the offensive potential of most mechs, and overall the range of IS mechs dropped.

]The clans picked up armor and structure, better range, lower heat, duration, cooldown, more agility, etc. Clans have not been this strong since clan wave 2.
It seems like PGI nerfed the IS in preparation for the new weapons in July.

Basically this.

Edited by Vonbach, 19 May 2017 - 10:16 AM.

[sycocys]

I just wanted to finally see them actually develop some balancing mechanics, value to mixed builds, roles and information warfare like they've been saying they were doing since closed beta right up through all the posts from them I saw on this skill tree.

Then they just release a system that's just a new, pretty objectively worse buffing system than was in place before.

[Dashen]

So many accomplished game designers on this forum...

[Nemesis Duck]

Vonbach, on 19 May 2017 - 10:06 AM, said:

Me too. Not anymore.

Would you or anyone else who shares your opinion be more supportive if there was a button that when pressed would assign some or all of the HSP from a mastered mech into a generic skill template that you could customize you mech further from, like a baseline template with the goal of simplifying the reassignment of skills to previously mastered mechs?

[Mechwarrior1441491]

Dashen, on 19 May 2017 - 10:51 AM, said:

So many accomplished game designers on this forum...

Since when do you have to be something to comment on how well it works?

Why do you all vote if you aren't politicians? Surely you aren't informed enough to bother with politics.

Also, I wouldn't even put PGI in the accomplished dev category.

Edited by Mechwarrior1441491, 19 May 2017 - 10:59 AM.

[Wintersdark]

Lupis Volk, on 18 May 2017 - 09:41 PM, said:

Uuuh this ain't Sonic mate. This is development to change a placeholder. Whooooooo so bad, pls staph.


please who me valid criticisms about the skill tree. 99% is just hyperbolic ramblings.

To be fair, there's a few valid criticisms of the skill tree:

1) There's so damn many nodes, it's kind of overwhelming and tremendously awkward to assign skills to a large number of mechs

2) The user interface is tremendously complicated and really tough for new users to parse with so many different currencies.

3) balance between trees while not horrible could be better

4) Base line tech balancing should have happened alongside quirk removal (though this is timing and balance but not really actually skill tree related)

---

All very valid criticisms. Most are "growing pains" due to the transition, though - I still think there's too many nodes regardless, but it's made worse when you're looking at a stable of dozens to hundreds of mechs to transition.

And while trying to figure out GSP, GXP, HSP, SP, XP, cbills, and how they all interact is a huge mess (particularly for those who didn't RTFM, which is always going to be the majority) it's a transition issue, not one that'll matter later.

Balance is always an ongoing problem, but otherwise the vast majority of issues with the new skill tree are transitioning issues. A difficult transition is no reason not to move past a broken placeholder system. I wanted something better too, but this is what we've got. It is (ignoring temporary transition issues) a clear improvement over the old system.

[Wintersdark]

Vonbach, on 19 May 2017 - 09:14 AM, said:

The skill tree is awful. It nerfs IS into the floor and buffs clans who were already too powerful to begin with.
The meta is even worse now with poptart snipers added to the mix and boy is that getting old.
Brawling is dead thanks to the torso twist nerf. All of this IS pilots saw coming. I'm having a hard time finding reasons to even bother playing. It simply isn't fun anymore.

Yes, balance is kind of crappy right now (but ISN'T the worst it's been, clearly you weren't around for clan release) and yes, we saw this coming.

Take solace at least in that PGI knows this and is change the base tech balance now instead of relying on offensive quirks which force you into cookie cutter builds. Engine balancing (to improve balance between STD/XL/cXL) will help a lot, and next patch has a full energy weapon balance pass.

I do agree it's ****** to put that one month lag time in there between IS losing offensive quirks and the weapon balancing meant to compensate though.

---

Brawling is dead?

Lolno. While AS7/KDK brawlers took it hard, I've got medium brawlers sporting assault level amour who beg to differ. The survivability differences are pretty substantial, and a mech skilled for brawling has a substantial advantage over one skilled for ranged play.

[Nemesis Duck]

Why is there even HSP? Why not have those automatically assigned to SP 'bucket' initially?

I guess what I'm getting at is the question no one could answer in the chat last night:

Is there some advantage to not assigning all 91 HSP into SP?
What is the case for not doing this?

[Wintersdark]

MischiefSC, on 19 May 2017 - 09:00 AM, said:

I used to think that. However I'm finding, having talked with about 100 people now (all good players on good teams) that there's some very different ways to approach it. There's tons of top tier people who put up 700-1k matches consistently in QP and group queue who fill Firepower and Survival and 6 Aux and some Ops and ignore sensors and mobility. Running mediums and heavies, btw.

Conversely there's some people who do no ops, just firepower, mobility and some sensors and maybe a bit of aux. Again, great players who play consistently in the 700-1k range and 2k-3k in FW.

There's not really a default skill tree I'm finding. It lets you really drill down on your personal strengths and the strengths of a mech to get something tuned to how you play.

Absolutely there's some changes I'd like to see. Fewer 'general' nodes, more 'specialized' nodes and such but the concept is better than I had predicted. I like it.

I know I'm finding that while I used a generic initial setup for many Mechs (skilling 160mechs is a nightmare) I'm definitely using different configurations for different Mechs, depending on role/load out.

I'm still sure people will settle on "meta" skillets, because of course, but I feel there's a lot more room for flexibility. Tree to tree balance is much better than I expected​.

[Jay Leon Hart]

Nemesis Duck, on 19 May 2017 - 11:27 AM, said:

Why is there even HSP? Why not have those automatically assigned to SP 'bucket' initially?

I guess what I'm getting at is the question no one could answer in the chat last night:

Is there some advantage to not assigning all 91 HSP into SP?
What is the case for not doing this?

If you buy a duplicate 'mech, you can give that some of the HSP. That's about all I can think, tbh.

[Nemesis Duck]

Jay Leon Hart, on 19 May 2017 - 11:33 AM, said:

If you buy a duplicate 'mech, you can give that some of the HSP. That's about all I can think, tbh.

That makes sense. Thanks!