8 replies to this topic

[HerrRed]

I must say I do like this new skill tree business and indeed I have some quite interesting mech builds that I am happy with. However this increase in flexibility is indeed courageous on PGI's part since it will make balancing the game problematic, not to put a too fine a point to it, and increase the complexity of a system that PGI has shown time and again is not quite, shall we say, large and focused enough to really make, as it were, ends meet.

I do foresee a lot of threads complaining about the state of things because, let's be honest, whatever you do, you will hang.
However, I think we are heading for a spot of necessary trouble since the skill tree as released is quite uneven and will need a bit of tinkering. And the crux of the issue does seem to lie here since before you had 're facto the same build for every mech bar the modules that only a small percentage of players used, changes of this magnitude will now impact everyone and tweaks to these lists can cause some builds to become worthless leading to much grieving and frustration, Of course the right way to do things would be to reset every mech tree over and over again which will make people (such as yours truly) who own an appreciable amount of mech begin to equate if the consecutive rebuilding of mechs is truly worth spending one's time instead of just entertain ourselves with other options in the same medium.

I think what I am saying, with fear of being too straightforward, is that you probably need to throw a couple of bribes... eh I mean "incentives" our way with the inevitable resets that will happen.

Yours truly:
Sir Humpfrey Appleby

[Johnny Z]

I have been called a white knight on this and that's not true. I actually think its an amazing balancing job that was done for hundreds of mechs and thousands if not millions of variations.

Also amazing MEANINGFUL depth, and its straight forward and clear. So deep and easy to learn.

2 degrees torso turn per second sounds deep, and it is considering, but the skill tree made it easy.

Edited by Johnny Z, 19 May 2017 - 01:21 PM.

[HerrRed]

Johnny Z, on 19 May 2017 - 01:19 PM, said:

I have been called a white knight on this and that's not true. I actually think its an amazing balancing job that was done.

Also amazing MEANINGFUL depth, and its straight forward and clear. So deep and easy to learn.

2 degrees torso turn per second sounds deep, and it is considering, but the skill tree made it easy.

My point was not if this is meaningful or not. I think it is a decent step. However, I fail to see a way for this to move forward with balancing patches without the need to redo all of your mechs over and over again. That will be a chore. Either PGI is very sure they don't want to change a thing (which they might not want to) or they are in for a World of hurt as people will get fed up of redoing their mechs over and over again. Of course another way would be for PGI to give everyone 10 free SP or something every time they do a rebalancing act.

Still, the global impact these changes can have will create a lot of whining and some of it justified. For instance, at this moment I believe you are better off going down the weapon tree for the heat gen quirks and forego the Operations tree for cool run and heat threshold. Those require a lot of useless perks that are better off spent on mobility or armour (save for some steamy mechs who need both). Another tree I completely ignore on my brawlers is the sensor tree. I don't need it and I only put one point on the support tree to get one extra slot. So if PGI makes changes that affect the way things are balanced I will have to start redoing all my mechs again in order to accommodate the new balance. Annoying.

[sycocys]

Johnny Z, on 19 May 2017 - 01:19 PM, said:

I have been called a white knight on this and that's not true. I actually think its an amazing balancing job that was done for hundreds of mechs and thousands if not millions of variations.

I still can't figure out how you conclude there's anything balance being created with this system.

[Felicitatem Parco]

sycocys, on 19 May 2017 - 02:03 PM, said:

I still can't figure out how you conclude there's anything balance being created with this system.

The "balance" under discussion is how skills' output values, and the effects they have on gameplay [that contains MANY different Mechs, variants, and configurations] are balanced against each other.

Here's a point - how many people have said "this tree is useless, use that tree" only to be met with another thread about "that tree is useless, use this tree"?

Edited by Prosperity Park, 19 May 2017 - 02:16 PM.

[Johnny Z]

HerrRed, on 19 May 2017 - 01:29 PM, said:

My point was not if this is meaningful or not. I think it is a decent step. However, I fail to see a way for this to move forward with balancing patches without the need to redo all of your mechs over and over again. That will be a chore. Either PGI is very sure they don't want to change a thing (which they might not want to) or they are in for a World of hurt as people will get fed up of redoing their mechs over and over again. Of course another way would be for PGI to give everyone 10 free SP or something every time they do a rebalancing act.

Still, the global impact these changes can have will create a lot of whining and some of it justified. For instance, at this moment I believe you are better off going down the weapon tree for the heat gen quirks and forego the Operations tree for cool run and heat threshold. Those require a lot of useless perks that are better off spent on mobility or armour (save for some steamy mechs who need both). Another tree I completely ignore on my brawlers is the sensor tree. I don't need it and I only put one point on the support tree to get one extra slot. So if PGI makes changes that affect the way things are balanced I will have to start redoing all my mechs again in order to accommodate the new balance. Annoying.

First of all maybe that is why they left this for so long. Second, all games make balance changes players have to deal with in exactly the same way, I am not sure why this game is expected to be different.

Taken to far balancing changes can become a legitimate complaint, but that remains to be seen.

A big change like this, many years after beta, to a known place holder is not taking it to far or nearly so.

If players are complaining the game is growing like when the new tech is added or maybe other additions then there is a problem on the players end. Not even close to being taken to far to justify complaints.

Edited by Johnny Z, 19 May 2017 - 02:48 PM.

[sycocys]

Prosperity Park, on 19 May 2017 - 02:17 PM, said:

The "balance" under discussion is how skills' output values, and the effects they have on gameplay [that contains MANY different Mechs, variants, and configurations] are balanced against each other.

Here's a point - how many people have said "this tree is useless, use that tree" only to be met with another thread about "that tree is useless, use this tree"?

How many people have said that both trees are useless because neither addresses any balance issues?

[Wyald Katt]

Hated the Skill Tree at first. I've downgraded, upgraded (?), to a strong dislike. It is what it is and it is here.

I say it had to happen before they came out with the new tech stuff. More modules for the new weps and whatnot? That wasn't going to happen with whatever ST they came up with.

I'm just hoping the balance thing gets worked out with the new tech closing the Clan / IS gap. Oh, and whatever they're planning on doing to energy weps in general?

I'm hoping for the best, because what else can I do.

[KekistanWillRiseAgain]

sycocys, on 19 May 2017 - 04:20 PM, said:

How many people have said that both trees are useless because neither addresses any balance issues?

PGI explicitly stated that this destroys the not very good Balance that there was in their "Q&A"... so when even the devs acknowledge that this royally screws over the overwhelming vast majority of mechs, How do these white knights keep claiming that it is not so????