44 replies to this topic

[Appogee]

This just in...

Edited by Appogee, 24 May 2017 - 07:53 AM.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

If we keep up criticizing it as bollocks it may get the attention of Bullock.

[Bud Crue]

I love the passive aggressive posts on that thread of his twitter account. The whole vibe of "Skills Tree ROCKS! GJ Russ! But... LRMS/Spriti Bear/UI/gated nodes/node values/etc. need work". Nearly every tweet reads the same way. Ah, the not so subtle requirements of complaining via twitter.

Also, Russ's tweet under the one cited by the OP...the one reminding us that PGI is (under?) monitoring balance closely. Does make me wonder just exactly what have they been doing with balance over the last several years? Monitoring it from afar? Monitoring it occasionally? Monitoring it when it strikes their fancy? Monitoring it through the lens of Russ's desire for an e-sport platform? What does it it mean to say you are monitoring balance closely? Does it mean that they are monitoring the Panther 10P and are going to do something to it if it is not as good as a Cheetah? That they are going to redo the entire skills tree and all mechs quirks to ensure that this one mech is competitive against all other 35 ton mechs, against all lights, against all mechs (like Paul has asserted is the goal of balance)? Inquiring minds want to know! Help us understand Russ!

[HGAK47]

Bud Crue, on 24 May 2017 - 08:20 AM, said:

I love the passive aggressive posts on that thread of his twitter account. The whole vibe of "Skills Tree ROCKS! GJ Russ! But... LRMS/Spriti Bear/UI/gated nodes/node values/etc. need work". Nearly every tweet reads the same way. Ah, the not so subtle requirements of complaining via twitter.

Also, Russ's tweet under the one cited by the OP...the one reminding us that PGI is (under?) monitoring balance closely. Does make me wonder just exactly what have they been doing with balance over the last several years? Monitoring it from afar? Monitoring it occasionally? Monitoring it when it strikes their fancy? Monitoring it through the lens of Russ's desire for an e-sport platform? What does it it mean to say you are monitoring balance closely? Does it mean that they are monitoring the Panther 10P and are going to do something to it if it is not as good as a Cheetah? That they are going to redo the entire skills tree and all mechs quirks to ensure that this one mech is competitive against all other 35 ton mechs, against all lights, against all mechs (like Paul has asserted is the goal of balance)? Inquiring minds want to know! Help us understand Russ!

That made me chuckle, especially the "monitor from afar". Hey bro the panther 10P gets nearly 45-48% quirks on that AC/10 if you slap that on his arm!

ARE THOU NOT SATISFIED!?

[Bud Crue]

HGAK47, on 24 May 2017 - 08:37 AM, said:

That made me chuckle, especially the "monitor from afar". Hey bro the panther 10P gets nearly 45-48% quirks on that AC/10 if you slap that on his arm!

ARE THOU NOT SATISFIED!?

I used the 10P as my foil because I was just trying to imagine what Russ sees as his e-sport dream: a pretty fast and nimble soldier...I mean mech...running around with a single rifle...I mean gun...I mean auto cannon...firing away at targets but can only take a couple of hits...I mean alphas before he dies, with all the other soldiers...I mean mechs...being pretty much the same.

But seriously, PGI says they want the skills tree to be about mechs having diversity and choice and above all "balance" but when ever I see that written I always think of mechs like the Panther 10P, or the Locust 3V or the Spider 5K, etc. There just isn't a lot of diversity of builds that are viable and balanced no matter what PGI does. And I think it is a fool's errand to try and "balance" such niche mechs relative to all other mechs (which Paul has stated repeatedly is the goal of balance: all mechs should have equivalent value within their roles down to the variant level). I just don't think it is possible to balance a 35 ton 2B hardpoint and 2M hardpoint mech relative to a Kodak, ya know what I mean? To balance that differnce AND have that mech allow the player to choose from a variety of viable and diverse builds as stated in the most recent Q&A? It's just not gonna happen. But, hey, at least that are monitoring that "balance".

[Cy Mitchell]

It was stated in the patch notes that there would be changes to the Skill Tree as data was collected and needs for adjustments were determined in addition to changes needed to accommodate the new Civil War tech.

InnerSphereNews, on 15 May 2017 - 06:39 PM, said:

• The Skill tree will be monitored heavily after release. We will have new nodes introduced with the new tech in July, and we will continue to refine the overall Skill Tree balance as we move towards introducing the nodes for that new tech.

• The final balance point we can briefly highlight now involves Engine types. Better balance across the Standard, XL, and Clan XL Engine types is a major change that we are evaluating for a future patch. We are still in the very early stages of this evaluation, with gameplay and technical considerations to be made; the impact of a change to Engine type dynamics has the potential to be a significant and positive change, but it is also a delicate one. At this time, there is no solid ETA on the planned release for this change.

Although these are the only things that we are able to address now, many more things are being looked into behind the scenes as the design team continues to prioritize balance as a whole. We want to assure everyone that balance remains a core focus of the design team, and we will be working heavily to monitor and improve it after the release of the Skill Tree in May, the release of new tech in July, and on into the future.

Russ simply repeated what was already said. How is this a revelation?

[/center][/center][/center]

[Bud Crue]

Promessa, on 24 May 2017 - 09:37 AM, said:

IS structure nerfs incoming

I've harped on this enough already, but folks really need to go read that Q&A more closely. They don't claim that offensive quirks are tha cause of all of MWO's balance issues. No, they state that presence of "overall" quirks are the cause of power creep and that it is their goal to eliminate "overall" quirks. Enjoy those Cataphracts, Hunchback 4SPs, etc. while you can. The QQing over respec fees when the inevitable nerfs come is going to be epic.

[Karl Streiger]

PNT-10P is an abomination and need to be exterminated

Thing is what is correct each Mech should be balanced vs any other?
But by what game logic - you can't drop with 4 KDKs in CW but 4 PNTs???
Tonnage 80ton better 75ton?
What is it?
Its like rolling dice with 6 concepts for 1 year - so MWO would be terminated in year 7???

[CDLord HHGD]

Not..... Unexpected.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

haha monitoring the tree and will balance it out....sort of like how they are still balancing weapons and mechs YEARS down the road. They can't seem to get that right. Don't hold your breath here.

I have a feeling they do these weapon and mech passes so they can create the illusion of progress. They still won't admit that most IS mechs got shived during the resize.


If they nerf quirks anymore or get rid of them entirely, we'll be back to closed beta and "launch" days when there was no reason to take more than a couple of available mechs. They will make even MORE mechs/variants completely obsolete.

What's the point of buying a mech pack with a half dozen copies of the same mech with very little difference?

I loved quirks. It brought back mechs we hadn't seen used in any numbers for a long time.

We're going back to the Dark Ages.

If I don't care about the % range increased on the skill tree I also don't care about +5% range as a mech quirk. Similar drops of quirk are absolutely pointless.

Edited by Mechwarrior1441491, 24 May 2017 - 11:03 AM.

[Appogee]

Rampage, on 24 May 2017 - 09:36 AM, said:

Russ simply repeated what was already said. How is this a revelation?

I think you missed the nuance of the Tweet...

[Mechwarrior1441491]

Months from now we'll be distracted by new mechs and gear.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Mechwarrior1441491, on 24 May 2017 - 11:07 AM, said:

Months from now we'll be distracted by new mechs and gear.

You mean Month from now?

(Edit) nope, itnis months. I thought it was June not July.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 24 May 2017 - 11:15 AM.

[Alexander of Macedon]

On the bright side, once they remove armor+structure quirks it'll be even easier to make new and original choices like only running clan 'mechs and not using the survival tree.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

Ya, so they'll be worrying and paying attention, closely monitoring how those features pan out. Tree works-ish. It's going to sit pretty until 2018.

I've been enjoying an Atlas acting like an Atlas. Atlas brings the D to the yard, that's for sure.

Edited by Mechwarrior1441491, 24 May 2017 - 11:26 AM.

[MechaBattler]

I'd be more worried if they weren't going to keep changing things. The lull after Steam launch was annoying.

[TheArisen]

You guys do know balance in an online game is an ongoing thing right? The skill tree needs work but it's not that bad.

[Felicitatem Parco]

I don't expect them to perform extensive tree tuning prior to the release of new tech. I would not want them to, either.

Raise your hand if you think PGI should focus more effort on "balancing" the tree now with current tech, prior to their energy weapons balancing and civil war equipment...

[Aggravated Assault Mech]

Appogee, on 24 May 2017 - 11:04 AM, said:

I think you missed the nuance of the Tweet...

What? That there probably isn't going to be any more balancing done before the Civil War tech is released?

[jonfett]

Soon^TM...