63 replies to this topic

[grendeldog]

Wintersdark, on 22 May 2017 - 05:47 PM, said:

What's funny is that I never die with just CT loss; in fact, it's really rare for me to die to a CT loss before losing at least one side torso.

So, extra armor everywhere matters: You're not putting 100% of that 69.8 damage in a CT, unless he's a total potato. I can't think of anything reasonable pushing 70 points of PPFLD. Got SRM's? Lots of that is hitting side torsos. Lasers? Beam duration, bro.

Being able to absorb an average alpha purely in armor alone is huge. That's damage you take before there's a risk of crits and weapon loss/ammo explosions/cooling loss. Even if it's only half an alpha's difference, that's still important.

I make no claims to awesomeness, but I've been involved in a HELL of a lot of fights where surviving one more hit would have been the difference between victory and death. Many, many deaths where I just needed one more shot to kill my opponent.

You say Armor isn't worth it, and use the full SP cost, but at that point your looking at armor+structure. That's a tremendous buff to survivability; moving into two alphas there.

Would you invest into the tree just for armor? No, probably not. You'd not invest into the tree for just Stucture either. But investing in both, given the number of shared nodes, is a no-brainer for many builds. This is true of basically every tree - you kind of need to go all in, or not bother at all, that's just how they're designed.


More directly:

Definitively, the Armor Hardening nodes are not worth less than the Structure nodes. While the Armor percentage is lower, you have twice as much armor as you do structure (before considering quirks), so 1% armor = 2% structure in terms or raw HP gain, but still - as I said earlier - raw armor HP is better than raw structure HP, because of crits.

I appreciate your well reasoned argument.

I disagree simply because just as I feel the CT armor buff is trivial - on the armor quirked AS7 the CT gets 14 points more which is less than 3 ISML hits - so therefor goes the side torso armor buffs as even more trivial. They're even smaller. So they count for even less, because it's all proportional (as would be sensible).

You are spot on - my KGC-0000 is LBX, SRM, MPL. But I can still put so much damage out even with my subpar piloting abilities that an extra 14 on the CT, an extra 8 or whatever on a side torso... it's not going to matter much as far as TTK.

Wintersdark, on 22 May 2017 - 06:04 PM, said:

Looking at my quirkfree executioner, at 95t:

120CT armor, 60CT structure.
80/40 ST.

Skill Tree Buffed:

132CT armor, 76CT structure.
88/50 ST

That's 12+16=28 points of added CT health. That's a large survivability difference, it's a 15% HP increase on a mech with no structure/armor quirks. Roughly the same (14%) to the side torsos.

Now, you MUST take some armor to get Structure, so at most you can save 9 SP points if you don't want armor and the gate nodes (fall damage, crit reduction). Amusingly, NOT taking the armor makes the Reinforced Casing nodes worth more in many ways, because you'll be taking crits a bit earlier and thus losing weaponry/taking extra structure damage earlier.

11 points to max out armor? That's a damned good deal for another 8.8% armor for this mech.

It takes 26 points to max armor because you have to go through other nodes (that are actually useful, like crit reduction on a gauss boat or structure on anything XL). Unless I am misunderstanding you seriously, and I recognize your username as being a solid person on the forums so perhaps I'm misunderstanding. Should I take a screenshot of the survival tree with all the armor hexes selected? I counted 26 total.

SirSoggyDog, on 22 May 2017 - 06:05 PM, said:

The other thing to keep in mind is what those point buy in the other trees. Firepower is going to be taken for almost all mechs in all likelihood, and as a result, it's probably worth assuming that most of one's points are going to go into that tree whether you take armor skills or not. But how does survivability stack up to mobility, operations, and the like? I would argue it does so pretty well, particularly for heat efficient mechs or one's that have damage over time weapons.

You too bring a good point. It's situational. For short ranged builds I want my seismic and 360 targeting maxed out, and radar derp doesn't hurt because you have to close with the enemy and lurms are out in force as of lately with the ECM SP shenanigans and general weirdness since the "treemageddon".

If you have ECM, there goes some more points. If you have a long ranged build I want the range and velocity of applicable.

Now by weight class: lights I want mobility quirks, same for mediums, jump jets perhaps on lights or mediums if applicable. On heavies and especially assaults it gets more important to have sensors because that burrows down to radar and you'll be moving more slowly. Plus all the benefits of sensors for battlefield awareness - I'd trade finding that component I can pop faster for 14 points of armor on my CT any day.

Ops on everything, simply because I run hot and they buried max cool run all the way at the fricken bottom, unless I'm dakka where ghost heat won't be in play (like not double 20s).

Then weapons everywhere, as appropriate.

I'm just saying that the armor hardening hexes don't add enough value for them to be sought out. I would rather move faster, have seismic, have radar derp, shoot more with less heat, and fire faster, further, with less spread and more velocity or less burn time.

Those things are more valuable to me than a measly 14 points of armor on the front CT and less on the sides and less still on the limbs.

My opinion, yes. But I think well reasoned.

Edited by grendeldog, 22 May 2017 - 09:53 PM.

[Xetelian]

The thing about the armor is you can take it off and use the tonnage to fit more DHS and weapons if you're not going to worry about survival.


My legs went from 65 to about 75 with this three so I took 10 off each leg, 10 off each arm and fit another DHS, seems like a good deal along with the 14 CT armor and structure.

[Thorqemada]

Armor/Structure Buffs work best in a 1 on 1 Situation.

In a 1 vs many situation Armor is a Subtraction vs Firepower that is a Multiplikation and Mulitplikation wins allways over subtraction by large and far if you dont use totally disporportional values.

That is why peek and boom wins - mulitplied firepower + infitnite armor (from map structures/cover).

Is this fun?

To some yes and to some no...

[MustrumRidcully]

Viktor Drake, on 21 May 2017 - 04:29 PM, said:

Here is the thing the OP is neglecting to think about. Each and every node in the skill tree is an incremental change which by themselves has virtually zero effect on your mech. However when you invest heavily in a tree, it will add up.

If you invest heavily in a tree, you can add 15-20 points of combined armor and structure to each component. That is a pretty significant boost to your ability to survive.

I think that's really the flaw in the system. You need to go deep into any skill to have a notable effect - so why bother with so many nodes? Keep the number of node slower, and instead raise the impact per node.

There are other ways to ensure the choices matter. And if you have less nodes, you can also balance more easily, as it's more evident which skills are more powerful than other skills. Then you can raise the power level of the weak skills or nerf the skills that are too strong.

[Wintersdark]

grendeldog, on 22 May 2017 - 09:48 PM, said:

I appreciate your well reasoned argument.

I disagree simply because just as I feel the CT armor buff is trivial - on the armor quirked AS7 the CT gets 14 points more which is less than 3 ISML hits - so therefor goes the side torso armor buffs as even more trivial. They're even smaller. So they count for even less, because it's all proportional (as would be sensible).

In a 1v1 situation, the extra armor and structure win. If you're being focussed down it's irrelevant... but then, so is pretty much everything. The extra ~28 points of CT health on my executioner above, one vs. one, is enough to comfortably survive another alpha that I twist roughly half of.

Quote

You are spot on - my KGC-0000 is LBX, SRM, MPL. But I can still put so much damage out even with my subpar piloting abilities that an extra 14 on the CT, an extra 8 or whatever on a side torso... it's not going to matter much as far as TTK.

Not much in terms of raw TTK, but an eternity in a one vs. one situation. Surviving +1 alpha means you deal another alpha yourself. As you note, a single alpha can do a lot of damage - two comparable mechs fighting with comparable pilots, if one can survive one alpha more than the other, he's got a huge advantage in that fight.

It means over a prolonged battle, a PPC blast just hits armor instead of dealing structural damage and potentially disabling weapons.

Quote

It takes 26 points to max armor because you have to go through other nodes (that are actually useful, like crit reduction on a gauss boat or structure on anything XL). Unless I am misunderstanding you seriously, and I recognize your username as being a solid person on the forums so perhaps I'm misunderstanding. Should I take a screenshot of the survival tree with all the armor hexes selected? I counted 26 total.

***snipped good stuff, and stuff which I have no argument whatsoever with***

I'm just saying that the armor hardening hexes don't add enough value for them to be sought out. I would rather move faster, have seismic, have radar derp, shoot more with less heat, and fire faster, further, with less spread and more velocity or less burn time.

Those things are more valuable to me than a measly 14 points of armor on the front CT and less on the sides and less still on the limbs.

My opinion, yes. But I think well reasoned.

The problem with your opinion here is you're waffling back and forth between two different things, and using the pros and cons of each position as they suit you. You need to pick a position here
(I don't have my client open, so forgive me if I'm +/- a SP or two here)


1) You feel the Armor Tree (the whole thing) is not worth taking. This includes the Structure skills and crit reduction skills.
Here's where you're saving a lot of skill points, as you're talking about avoiding the entire tree. However, your use of phrases like "a measly 14 points" indicates you're only talking about armor, not the rest of the benefits.

2) You feel that the Armor skills alone are not worth taking, but that the remainder of the tree is worth taking.
In this case, if you're taking everything you need to get the Structure skills, but none of the Armor skills or gate skills that only lead to more armor (but ARE taking the two points of armor you have to take to get to other structure nodes) then you're only saving 9 Skill Points by not taking the remaining armor nodes. I'd argue the "measly 14 points" of armor is decidedly worth 9 SP. This point also suffers in that your actual health gain from the Armor Hardening skills is nearly identical to the health gain from the Structure skills, except that point for point, Armor is objectively superior to Structure.


My stand: There are lots of cases where the survival tree isn't an optimal choice. I feel the benefits, in practice, are always good - either 1v1 where it makes the most difference, or simple wear throughout a match, either way you're looking at +15% health to every facing, which is definitely a significant gain. It makes no difference if you're being focussed down, but then nothing does. However, there certainly are times where you'd rather go with something else, as there really aren't objectively bad trees except maybe jump jets. That's all good. Still, if you're not going to be right in the thick of things, perhaps another tree is more valuable to a particular build.

But if you're going to invest into the Armor tree, it's just foolish to leave the Armor Hardening skill nodes on the table.


So, which is it? Do you feel the tree as a whole is underpowered? That in the executioner example above, gaining 18/28/18 torso health (also arm+leg health and crit reduction) is not a substantial gain? Do you feel this extends to baseline quirked mechs? Or do you just feel the Armor Hardening nodes are not worthwhile (at their 9SP cost, when you're buying the other nodes), but the rest of the tree is?

Edited by Wintersdark, 23 May 2017 - 12:36 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

This is why the skill tree should be simplified. Each skill requires investment of multiple points for you to even notice a difference. Why offer such granularity when you'll never notice it?

Yep. The skill tree should have about half the number of skill nodes. With half the amount of points to spend. And the choices should be less incremental/granular and a lot more meaningful.

They also need to get rid of all the compulsory skills that everyone always takes. Like who doesnt take anchor turn or speed tweak? Those skills should just be cut out of the skill tree and included in the base stats of all mechs. Because no one is ever not going to take those.

Edited by Khobai, 23 May 2017 - 12:42 AM.

[Wintersdark]

Xetelian, on 22 May 2017 - 10:50 PM, said:

The thing about the armor is you can take it off and use the tonnage to fit more DHS and weapons if you're not going to worry about survival.


My legs went from 65 to about 75 with this three so I took 10 off each leg, 10 off each arm and fit another DHS, seems like a good deal along with the 14 CT armor and structure.

Yeah, an alternative approach is certainly to use the tree to gain free tonnage by simply removing the extra armor. You'd still gain the bonus structure and crit reduction, but then the ~9 points extra spent on the tree buy you an extra ton of payload space. I'd generally not take that approach (there's a reason everyone maxes out their torso armor, after all) but it's certainly an option.

Is 9SP worth an extra payload ton? That'd definitely depend on the build.

[Wintersdark]

Khobai, on 23 May 2017 - 12:40 AM, said:

Yep. The skill tree should have about half the number of skill nodes. With half the amount of points to spend. And the choices should be less incremental/granular and a lot more meaningful.

They also need to get rid of all the compulsory skills that everyone always takes. Like who doesnt take anchor turn or speed tweak? Those skills should just be cut out of the skill tree and included in the base stats of all mechs. Because no one is ever not going to take those.

I don't take any of the Agility tree on some of my mechs, and I just take roughly half the tree on several more.

Taking the Marauder IIC as an example, speed tweak is basically investing a full tree into getting a slightly larger engine. Why not just take a slightly larger engine, and crank up my armor/structure? The MAD IIC is a very agile mech out of the gate (I'd maybe argue too agile, actually) and doesn't struggle at all getting it's guns on target.

In fact, in these days of decoupled engines, I'd argue Anchor Turn and Twist Speed are often worth MORE than Speed Tweak. You can always (well, mostly) run a larger engine if you want to move faster, after all.

Depends on build and the chassis baseline agility, though.

[MOBAjobg]

grendeldog, on 21 May 2017 - 01:42 PM, said:

It's hilariously bad because I do know the difference between UI and game code.

I've worked game development and web development and programmed my arse off. I used Starcraft 2's map editor to make an FPS, I've made a tactical squad based prototype game in Unity, I've recreated 80% of Wordpress features in MySQL and PHP and Javascript.

I know how games are programmed. This is a massive UI fail for normal players, and an even more egregious one for those of us who do understand how games work. I see an integer value I assume it's an integer; I see a floating point (meaning it has a decimal place) and I think floating point.

The actual values in the database file often times are displayed in the UI after it has been truncated or rounded up however most programs take the actual values for computation. As a dev coder, you should have known better.

[MOBAjobg]

Viktor Drake, on 21 May 2017 - 04:29 PM, said:

Here is the thing the OP is neglecting to think about. Each and every node in the skill tree is an incremental change which by themselves has virtually zero effect on your mech. However when you invest heavily in a tree, it will add up.

If you invest heavily in a tree, you can add 15-20 points of combined armor and structure to each component. That is a pretty significant boost to your ability to survive.

I rate to shoot longer distance as more valuable than beefing up on armor.

Edited by MOBAjobg, 23 May 2017 - 01:37 AM.

[Revis Volek]

Wintersdark, on 22 May 2017 - 04:22 PM, said:

Note that the percentage varies by tonnage: lighter Mechs gain a substantially larger percentage than larger Mechs do.

The armor tree is never a bad Choi e, though it may not be an optimal one. For sure, some Mechs gain a lot more...

NO its a bad choice a lot of the time....


Spank beats Tank still 90% of the time but if you have structure quirks to start its really, really nice.


4SP isnt beating the 3M in a 1v1 yet

[Khobai]

Quote

I don't take any of the Agility tree on some of my mechs, and I just take roughly half the tree on several more.

yeah but everyone else does

[QuantumButler]

Bishop Steiner, on 22 May 2017 - 03:27 PM, said:

Auxiliary is the only one worth a "mandatory" 1 node investment, IMO. More don't hurt, if you have them to spare, or your build/role demands some UAV/Strike Love, (or you really need to maximize an emergency coolshot).

But most of the rest... yeah, if you are not dropping 6-10 pts into them, at least, I say you are better off not touching them at all, in most cases. I'm sure there will be a fringe dweller here or there, but not enough to "disprove the rule".

You can drop 5 points in firepower to get a 5% range boost, that's not completely worthless for some builds.

[Templar Dane]

The way I see it, the armor/structure nodes are worth it on most medium+ mechs. If it lets you get at least one more alpha in it's done its job, and on a lot of mechs it can end up being more.

Though mobility also helps survive, so there's that. Some mixture of durability and mobility is probably the right choice on most of the medium and larger mechs.

[LORD ORION]

Incoming fire to LT/RT armor is an important consideration on a Heavy. A few points is the difference between an incoming alpha that might cause crits.

https://kitlaan.gitl...mor%20Structure

Though the 10 nodes to reach the remaining 2 armor nodes will probably be better spent elsewhere.

[Wildstreak]

grendeldog, on 21 May 2017 - 12:45 PM, said:

Any thoughts? Criticisms of my argument? Anybody want to spreadsheet warrior the values for lights, mediums, and assaults?

Lights are not worth it, someone did a video showing you need 6 in any back section minimum to see a result with full armor nodes, almost every Light runs less so they lose in 2-3 back sections.

Not surprised by funky values, before and after patch any Heat Gen modifiers NEVER change the Heat Management number seen in MechLab.

[R Valentine]

Without armor quirks, the survival tree is underwhelming. It is less effective for assaults than it is for heavies. On my Mauler, a 16 point investment yielding a whopping 4 extra armor on either side torso. 4! That's not even a medium laser hit. And all that for 16 points, which was 7 armor hardening nodes. Well, that's a joke. For 15 nodes, I'd expect something more like a 10 point armor increase, which is more like what I see on the Roughneck. But not all skill trees are created equal, so the Mauler now feel squishier than ever.

[Wintersdark]

Khobai, on 23 May 2017 - 03:34 AM, said:

yeah but everyone else does

Why? Are you sure you're not taking it because Speed Tweak was so critical In The Old System?

I mean, I totally get it on a lot of mechs, but there's a bunch where it's really not necessary. See again: Marauder IIC. That thing is a dancer even without the Agility tree. You've got lots of engine cap, so if you want to go faster that's entirely possible.

I question if it's been really thought about and experimented with, or people are just doing it "because".

Most mechs fared pretty poorly in the agility changes, and many definitely need a boost. But there are certainly mechs that benefitted, and which are in a very good place even when compared to others with the Agility tree.

We're still pretty early in things, so be careful about how certain you are that what "everybody" does is always the best thing.

[Wintersdark]

Kiran Yagami, on 23 May 2017 - 07:17 AM, said:

Without armor quirks, the survival tree is underwhelming. It is less effective for assaults than it is for heavies. On my Mauler, a 16 point investment yielding a whopping 4 extra armor on either side torso. 4! That's not even a medium laser hit. And all that for 16 points, which was 7 armor hardening nodes. Well, that's a joke. For 15 nodes, I'd expect something more like a 10 point armor increase, which is more like what I see on the Roughneck. But not all skill trees are created equal, so the Mauler now feel squishier than ever.

It certainly is of mixed value - much like most of the trees, it's much better on some mechs than on others.

However, you've really got to look at whole-tree investment, as there's seriously diminishing returns per point as you spend fewer points in a tree. Getting the Armor and Structure tree is adding 28C/18S health on an unquirked mech at 95t, as well as crit reduction. That's not a joke. But yeah, it's a rare build I'd consider going only half way into Armor. Either take it and use it, or don't bother and spend the points elsewhere.

Revis Volek, on 23 May 2017 - 02:31 AM, said:

NO its a bad choice a lot of the time....

Spank beats Tank still 90% of the time but if you have structure quirks to start its really, really nice.

4SP isnt beating the 3M in a 1v1 yet

Edit: 4SP loses to the 3M because the 3M is a better mech. The Skill Tree doesn't change that. The only question that matters is, does a 4SP with Armor beat a 4SP with, say, Sensors? Or Agility? Or Operations? 1/2 of Firepower?


I said it's often not the optimal choice.

However, this isn't "you can have firepower or structure". It's not Spank vs. Tank.

I'd argue that Armor is almost always superior to Sensors, and a heck of a lot of people still take Sensors. A UAV or two covers basically everything you actually need from sensors (seismic) because if people are killing you with LRM's when Derp isn't there to save you, you're just bad.

There's a lot of things that are helpful in some circumstances, but 100% of deaths result from loss of all your torso (or legs) health. More health is always beneficial, and while this doesn't make the Armor tree always the optimal choice, it does make it always useful.

But even in terms of "spank vs. tank", I'd take 1/2 the firepower tree + the armor tree vs. the full firepower tree most of the time. Losing half the tree is basically some range (which is important for some builds, and worthless for many) and a teensy tiny fraction of heat gen(0.75% per point is a terrible return) and cooldown. The "spank" loss is extremely minor in that case (assuming you've already got the important specific firepower skills). After all, compare raw numbers in the tradeoffs there.

With that said, my point in this thread is not that the Armor tree is always worth taking. It's not. There are lots of situations where you aren't going to want to take it. This applies to basically all the trees though.

My point in this thread, directly in response to the OP, is that the Armor skills are worth every bit as much as the Structure skills; that IF you're already investing in the Armor tree, then you really ought to go all in and get the Armor skills. Leaving them out to save 9 points is silly. See the thread title.

Edited by Wintersdark, 23 May 2017 - 08:13 AM.

[grendeldog]

Wintersdark, on 23 May 2017 - 12:33 AM, said:

In a 1v1 situation, the extra armor and structure win. If you're being focussed down it's irrelevant... but then, so is pretty much everything. The extra ~28 points of CT health on my executioner above, one vs. one, is enough to comfortably survive another alpha that I twist roughly half of.

Not much in terms of raw TTK, but an eternity in a one vs. one situation. Surviving +1 alpha means you deal another alpha yourself. As you note, a single alpha can do a lot of damage - two comparable mechs fighting with comparable pilots, if one can survive one alpha more than the other, he's got a huge advantage in that fight.

It means over a prolonged battle, a PPC blast just hits armor instead of dealing structural damage and potentially disabling weapons.



The problem with your opinion here is you're waffling back and forth between two different things, and using the pros and cons of each position as they suit you. You need to pick a position here
(I don't have my client open, so forgive me if I'm +/- a SP or two here)


1) You feel the Armor Tree (the whole thing) is not worth taking. This includes the Structure skills and crit reduction skills.
Here's where you're saving a lot of skill points, as you're talking about avoiding the entire tree. However, your use of phrases like "a measly 14 points" indicates you're only talking about armor, not the rest of the benefits.

2) You feel that the Armor skills alone are not worth taking, but that the remainder of the tree is worth taking.
In this case, if you're taking everything you need to get the Structure skills, but none of the Armor skills or gate skills that only lead to more armor (but ARE taking the two points of armor you have to take to get to other structure nodes) then you're only saving 9 Skill Points by not taking the remaining armor nodes. I'd argue the "measly 14 points" of armor is decidedly worth 9 SP. This point also suffers in that your actual health gain from the Armor Hardening skills is nearly identical to the health gain from the Structure skills, except that point for point, Armor is objectively superior to Structure.


My stand: There are lots of cases where the survival tree isn't an optimal choice. I feel the benefits, in practice, are always good - either 1v1 where it makes the most difference, or simple wear throughout a match, either way you're looking at +15% health to every facing, which is definitely a significant gain. It makes no difference if you're being focussed down, but then nothing does. However, there certainly are times where you'd rather go with something else, as there really aren't objectively bad trees except maybe jump jets. That's all good. Still, if you're not going to be right in the thick of things, perhaps another tree is more valuable to a particular build.

But if you're going to invest into the Armor tree, it's just foolish to leave the Armor Hardening skill nodes on the table.


So, which is it? Do you feel the tree as a whole is underpowered? That in the executioner example above, gaining 18/28/18 torso health (also arm+leg health and crit reduction) is not a substantial gain? Do you feel this extends to baseline quirked mechs? Or do you just feel the Armor Hardening nodes are not worthwhile (at their 9SP cost, when you're buying the other nodes), but the rest of the tree is?

Very definitely that I think the armor hardening values are underpowered, not that the survival tree is useless.

I think armor values should be commensurate with structure on a percentage basis. It's more important in a battle than structure as you have mentioned yourself, because it prevents crits from taking place. So okay, I see why they would buff armor less on a hed basis than structure since its's more "powerful" than structure. But I believe that the value should be increased per armor hex, even if it remains less powerful on a percentage basis than structure.

Look, I know PGI already doubled armor points initially and then added armor quirks all over the place. But TTK continues to drop as the power creep happens - it's not been an immense reduction in TTK but it has been significant and real. And we have never had an option to quirk armor on the mechs we choose.

In other words there's always been equivalents for cool run and heat dissipation and speed tweak hexes, but never any equivalent for increasing armor. So PGI could have taken this chance to take two objectives with one action: provide more amor per hed so as to ensure people psychologically feel that the new hex system is better than the old system because they see more significant effects, and then secondly increase TTK by further buffing armor *across the board but optionally to each player*. That ensures there would be no Clan versus IS balance whining - it'd be up to each person to decide how much they wanted to extend their potential TTK.

It's a brand new upgrade available to our mechs - invented from whole cloth like the other hex upgrade types in the structure tree. I feel if you're going to bring an armor buff system into the game it should have more of an effect than simply 14 extra points on the CT of the armor-quirked Atlas. I say again that in this environment of such high PPFLD that is an inconsequential increase in armor in exchange for such a high ASAP sink, especially on one of the most heavily armored mechs in the game when quirks are accounted for too.

I fully support your position that on a 1v1 basis that extra armor may be significant. But this game doesn't really involve much in the way of zellbrigen. I've found as I've moved up tiers that people get accordingly better at focusing targets. I'm pretty potato compared to my tier-mates; the tier system is flawed and much more like a measure of how much you've played as opposed to how good you are and I admit to having played way more MWO than was likely sane. But I still see people doing more coordinated plays at higher tiers and it's usually a stomp by one team or the other where a deathball forms and takes initiative and the other team gets mowed down individually.

So my objection to th armor values is on the basis that they don't measure up in value to the rest of the structure tree, to say nothing of the ops or weapons tree, and then also philosophically motivated in that this was an opportunity to increase TTK during the introduction of a totally new system and the opportunity wasn't even recognized, let alone considered or acted upon.

MOBAjobg, on 23 May 2017 - 01:21 AM, said:

The actual values in the database file often times are displayed in the UI after it has been truncated or rounded up however most programs take the actual values for computation. As a dev coder, you should have known better.

Personally, I disagree strongly.

The other skill values are shown as floats in the UI - read your quirk list or hover the mouse over a weapon after you've activated a bunch of hexes in the firepower tree. If you're going to truncate the float values that are added to your armor at least truncate to a tenth of a point so it's obvious there's something going on between whole numbers.

But even if PGI can't figure out that showing tenths of an armor point to show *something* is going on, they committed UI heresy by rounding the value down by integer values. So even if you have .999 points of armor it shows as having added 0 armor!

That's insane - it's absurd! Nobody with any programming experience can possibly be expected to support that or not to be frustrated by such an amateur move!

Showing variables effectively in a way that's easy to interpret and intuitively understand is about as basic as UI design gets. The fact that the devs had to answer that yes, you'll get a decimal bonus even if it's not showing as an integer is proof their work was confusing - confusing is the cardinal sin of user interface.

And as I mentioned all the other values are shown as floats, so not only is armor displayed wrong, their format for displaying buffs is *inconsistant*, which is like the second worst UI thing to do.

My two cents is all.