Jump to content

So Now The Outcry About Change In The Game Has Died Down, Post Skill Tree Launch, I Am Enjoying It A Great Deal....


104 replies to this topic

#61 SQW

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • Little Helper
  • 1,039 posts

Posted 30 May 2017 - 04:52 PM

View PostSarsaparilla Kid, on 30 May 2017 - 08:22 AM, said:

So, for all those that can spec a mech in 2 minutes...how exactly did the new trees give us the diversity and customization that we were looking for if you're just using the same cookie-cutter builds for every mech? If you're not putting a little thought into what type of mech you are skilling up, what existing quirks it already has, how the engine desync affected its mobility, what kind of weapons you are likely to equip it with and what role you want it to have (brawl, long-range, etc.), then we should have just stuck with the old system and PGI's time could have been better spent elsewhere...like on new maps that we haven't had for 7-8 months.


As much as I hate how the skill web is an over designed PITA, it DOES offer a few more options.

My Banshee, Atlas, CTF, MAL, RVN and HBK are actually speced quite differently. My BCN for example has half of mobility and operation but only 5 nodes in survival for AMS. Atlas has full survival and most of mobility but nothing in operations. The Raven is a narc/scout so has nothing in firepower, operations and only a few nodes in mobility for torso twist but max sensor, survival and all of artillery nodes. The CTF is built similar to the Atlas but with far more pts in firepower for cooldown and range because I use it for medium range trades.

Maybe because when I choose to buy mechs, I have a role for each in mind. I wouldn't buy Thunderbolt or Battlemaster since I have Banshee for example. PGI's loadout mechanics means most mechs are different in cosmetic only so someone with a massive stable will naturally feel half of his mechs are 'samey' despite the options offered by the skill web.

In short, the new skill web does more to emphasis particular ROLE of a mech (sniper, brawler, scout, mid range, LRM boat, jack of all trades, suicide capper) rather than trying to differentiate each MECH individually.

#62 Burke IV

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Guardian
  • Guardian
  • 1,230 posts

Posted 31 May 2017 - 02:23 AM

View PostHumpday, on 30 May 2017 - 08:19 AM, said:

More so I like the unpredictability of not instantly knowing if you can kill that mech with an open CT or not. This makes many players screw up as many over commit tryinh to commit to a kill,


This was already in the game, just implemented differently

#63 Scyther

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,271 posts
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 31 May 2017 - 02:34 AM

@Sarsaparilla Kid:
Diversity and customization doesn't mean every player has to make all his mechs use different trees. Any more than the previous system meant putting Radar Dep modules on your mechs was using a 'cookie cutter build'.

I might make about 76 nodes the same on about 80% of my mechs. Then I customize with the remaining 15 or so. My 76 node 'base' tree is there to suit the way *I* play. Your base tree and Bill's base tree and Jane's base tree will be different. Harry will use a different base tree for each weight class, and Jenny will use a different base tree for Brawlers, Snipers, and Support mechs. And Crazy Bob will handcraft a custom tree for each and every mech he makes.

That's diversity.

#64 SQW

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • Little Helper
  • 1,039 posts

Posted 31 May 2017 - 03:06 AM

View PostMadBadger, on 31 May 2017 - 02:34 AM, said:

@Sarsaparilla Kid:
Diversity and customization doesn't mean every player has to make all his mechs use different trees. Any more than the previous system meant putting Radar Dep modules on your mechs was using a 'cookie cutter build'.

I might make about 76 nodes the same on about 80% of my mechs. Then I customize with the remaining 15 or so. My 76 node 'base' tree is there to suit the way *I* play. Your base tree and Bill's base tree and Jane's base tree will be different. Harry will use a different base tree for each weight class, and Jenny will use a different base tree for Brawlers, Snipers, and Support mechs. And Crazy Bob will handcraft a custom tree for each and every mech he makes.

That's diversity.



But what is the BEST choice? How can I play if I don't use the most OPTIMIZED loadout/skills? F*ck choices and free will, just TELL ME what I need!

I think a lot of complaints about lack of diversity with the new skill web stems from a desire for simplicity. With the old system, it is blindingly obvious which mech is superior (high mount, big engine cap, small hit box). Now, combined with the engine decouple, a lot of people suddenly don't have ONE go-to choice and are forced to think on their own feet.

#65 C E Dwyer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,274 posts
  • LocationHiding in the periphery, from Bounty Hunters

Posted 31 May 2017 - 03:51 AM

View PostSpheroid, on 29 May 2017 - 12:04 PM, said:

Really you can't think of any downsides? How about reduced mech variety on the battlefield. Given enough time only about half a dozen mech variants out of three hundred will be seen at all. Also I would argue that the new business model is harmful to the bottom line. What exactly is going to make up the difference in revenue? Clan heroes? LOL. I predict fewer mechbay sales as well. Server costs are real, office rental and taxes are real. Reducing the ability to meet these expenses brings the end of the game sooner had the three mech model system remained. As they are a privately held company though the owners can do as they see fit sadly.


This was my biggest concern, business model.

How much longer are people going to continue to buy 3 mech packs when they no longer need to.

I only see increasing prices and reducing the in game economy further, so practically forcing people into Premium time, as the only long term solution, which will be extremely unpopular.

I guess we find out in the next six months

#66 Baba_Yaga

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 97 posts

Posted 31 May 2017 - 05:22 AM

Nope,still ******* hate this **** tree!

#67 J0anna

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Merciless
  • The Merciless
  • 939 posts

Posted 31 May 2017 - 05:53 AM

Overall, I like the Skill Tree, but the UI needs work.

1) I can delete an entire tree by removing the top node, but I can't select the shortest path by selecting a lower node?

2) I have to search for all the heat gen or range nodes - why not allow us to hover our mouse and right click to 'highlight all' - hell just copy kitlaan's UI for this. PGI it took you years to realize Smurfy's UI was better than yours, when will the light come on for Kitlaan's ST?

3) I have to select each skill along a path (and don't click too fast or the UI doesn't see it). How about allowing me to pick the nodes I want and then backfill my way to the top (if you can't show the shortest path)? You could have just made sure the tree was valid before we 'apply changes'

4) How about letting me see my mech (and even take it to the test grounds) before I 'apply changes', no I have to incrementally add changes, save the mech then see, how it performs in the test grounds to figure out if I have enough acceleration, de-acceleration, turn speed, heat removal, jump jet lift, heat capacity, etc. Then go back and add or remove to get the feel I want.

5) Yes I know selecting an extra consumable slot when I haven't mounted consumables yet, results in me having skills that don't apply to the current mech - the error message (every time) is a bit of overkill.....

Like I said, I don't want to go back to the old skill tree, but would definitely appreciate some 'ease of use' adjustments......

#68 Burke IV

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Guardian
  • Guardian
  • 1,230 posts

Posted 31 May 2017 - 06:09 AM

View PostMadBadger, on 31 May 2017 - 02:34 AM, said:

@Sarsaparilla Kid:
Diversity and customization doesn't mean every player has to make all his mechs use different trees


Not even every mech, every build. Its too much, somebody took the simulation thing way too far :)

#69 R Valentine

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Heavy Lifter
  • Heavy Lifter
  • 1,744 posts

Posted 31 May 2017 - 06:16 AM

The skill tree grows on me right up until I need a skill up a new mech. Then it makes me embed my head into my desk. Seriously, the exp gains need to be what they are now during the event, double. Either that or the cost needs to be halved. Anything else is just pure agony. You aren't going to keep any new players around that way.

#70 KodiakGW

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Jaws
  • The Jaws
  • 1,775 posts
  • LocationNE USA

Posted 31 May 2017 - 06:44 AM

View PostDee Eight, on 30 May 2017 - 12:57 AM, said:


Well you're welcome to your wrong opinions. We won't miss you or them around here.


Do you have proof he is wrong? Because I have proof he is. I finally convinced five of my old team to join the game in December. We actually met up with one we have not played with since prior to War!Online who also joined about the same time. Collectively we all spent over $1000, me personally gifting them $290 worth of mech packs.

Since the Skill Tree dropped only me and the guy we met up with have been active. That is five lost active players. They will probably drop back in for the new tech and see what Skill Tree 3.0/Rebalance looks like. But, they certainly are no longer spending money. Personally, I've just cracked 100 games this season, which is barely active. Yet, I'm about 11,700 on the Matches leaderboard. Far short of a healthy gaming community. We really cannot stand to lose more active players.

You dev buddies can check and see I'm right. So, please provide your proof...or shut it. Especially with your toxic attitude - "We won't miss you or them around here."


#71 process

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Star Colonel II
  • Star Colonel II
  • 1,667 posts

Posted 31 May 2017 - 06:48 AM

View PostJ0anna, on 31 May 2017 - 05:53 AM, said:

Overall, I like the Skill Tree, but the UI needs work.


As usual, the third party options are ahead of PGI's UI: https://kitlaan.gitlab.io/mwoskill/

#72 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 31 May 2017 - 07:11 AM

View PostCathy, on 31 May 2017 - 03:51 AM, said:


This was my biggest concern, business model.

How much longer are people going to continue to buy 3 mech packs when they no longer need to.

I only see increasing prices and reducing the in game economy further, so practically forcing people into Premium time, as the only long term solution, which will be extremely unpopular.

I guess we find out in the next six months


Except that model was always bas. Make people buy what they didn't want. Virtual goods have a tiny imbeded cost to produce beyond original development time and repackaging costs are minimal.

So you periodically rebalance quirks to make bad robbits good. Changing the meta. Before we had bought and stockpiled bad mechs. Now we'll buy what's good but that will cycle more often.

Why not package 3 different mechs? Plus it reduces dev costs of they don't have to make 3 different variants of everything up front.

I can build you a dozen business models for PGI that are better than the old one that will work with the new one. All this did was give mech packs more flexibility.

#73 Zzan

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 24 posts
  • LocationPlant City, FL

Posted 31 May 2017 - 07:43 AM

View PostDavegt27, on 30 May 2017 - 05:34 AM, said:

HSP and XP are the same still cost 800 and 45K C-bills


This is incorrect. I think you meant to say HXP and XP are the same cost which is accurate. The only difference between HXP and EXP is that HXP can be applied to any chassis of the same variant, EXP can only be spent on the specific chassis in which it was earned.

HSP are skill points which can be spent without the cost of XP or c-bills. They are already skill points and do not need to be converted.

Edited by Zzan, 31 May 2017 - 07:46 AM.


#74 ForceUser

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 894 posts

Posted 31 May 2017 - 08:20 AM

View PostSarsaparilla Kid, on 30 May 2017 - 08:22 AM, said:

So, for all those that can spec a mech in 2 minutes...how exactly did the new trees give us the diversity and customization that we were looking for if you're just using the same cookie-cutter builds for every mech? If you're not putting a little thought into what type of mech you are skilling up, what existing quirks it already has, how the engine desync affected its mobility, what kind of weapons you are likely to equip it with and what role you want it to have (brawl, long-range, etc.), then we should have just stuck with the old system and PGI's time could have been better spent elsewhere...like on new maps that we haven't had for 7-8 months.

I have 186 mechs and I've skilled out probably 40 of them by now. Sometimes, yea, it takes me 2min to skill out a mech but sometimes it takes me an entire night. What's the difference you wonder? It depends entirely on if I have a clearly defined build and role for the mech I'm skilling. This is mostly something that will happen with my older mechs that I have a lot of gametime on. I know exactly how they play, or rather how I want them to play. I know if I need more agility, more armor, more heatgen, more range, more cooldown, radar dep, adv zoom, ECM and what kind of consumable I want (I limit myself to max of 2).

The exact process goes like this: I look at my ERLL Cicada that has ECM. I know it runs redonk hot and I know it's fast enough to evade most lights for long enough to get back to the team usually but a little extra doesn't hurt so I bank on 3 speed tweak nodes. Agility is fine otherwise. I want as much range as possible and I want both ECM nodes and I want Adv zoom but I can skip any radar dep I don't need to get to ECM. Extra armor isn't needed on the ECM Cicada but my non ECM Cicada sniper runs with a lot of armor and Radar dep 60%). I know I can skip cooldown nodes where possible but I want at least 3 of the 4 duration nodes. I wont ever use UAVs or Seismic but I'll want two strikes.

Now this doesn't take me any time to figure out, I already know all of this from having played the mech a lot. I also know roughly what nodes to pick up and that takes me about 1 minute or so. I then fine tune it by deselecting a few nodes here and there and adding them elsewhere. This kind of refinement on a build I already know inside and out takes another minute. So 2 minutes is probably what I'd expect it to take for an initial skill of a well known mech. I'll tend to maybe move a few nodes, no more than say 10 or 15 after a couple more matches just to get it perfect for that specific mech if I feel a really need seizmic, or Radar Dep or I don't need as many nodes in Ops or if I need more etc.

On the other hand when I buy a brand new mech (I have plenty of GSP) and I really don't have a clue what to do wit it I spend half an hour or more in the mechlab trying out different things, seeing what inherent bonuses it has in terms of quirks, agility, hardpoints or omnipods. I get a feel for what kind of a build would work best on it or If I can do some kind of crazy fun/party build, something only it can really do. Once I have it I start experimenting in the skill tree and regularly check how it effects weapon stats, agility, armor, etc. This can take an hour or more, sometimes I'll scrap it completely and start over. Once I'm happy I'll save the skill tree and build, take it into a match or into training grounds and see how it goes. I'll then refine the build as I get to know it more intimately, take it on long walks on river city, make her hot on tourmaline or go cliff climbing on canyon.

Each one of my mechs has their own, personalized skill trees, each point has been considered and placed for a reason because either the node is something I want or it goes to a node I want and I'm happy with paying the cost to get to it. Each one of my mechs are unique, they are mine.

#75 Sarsaparilla Kid

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 664 posts
  • LocationGold Country

Posted 31 May 2017 - 08:41 AM

Glad to see some people are putting some thought into the trees...there is definitely a way to min-max the benefits out of each tree, but then for each mech/loadout/role, how far you want to go into a particular tree and which trees you might skip altogether is an entirely different decision.

#76 J0anna

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Merciless
  • The Merciless
  • 939 posts

Posted 31 May 2017 - 08:43 AM

View Postprocess, on 31 May 2017 - 06:48 AM, said:



As usual, the third party options are ahead of PGI's UI: https://kitlaan.gitlab.io/mwoskill/


I use it myself, it's absolutely fantastic. I normally have it open in one monitor while I have MWO open in another. Like Li Song, I couldn't imagine playing MWO without it.....

#77 Raidflex

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 63 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 31 May 2017 - 09:32 AM

The skill tree was a step in the right direction but was executed poorly. Why should I have to choose skills that do not benefit my play-style and mech loadout. Certain skills like Hill Climb should have nothing to do with heat/cooling based ones. This setup actually promotes less unique builds, because you are forced to activate skills that you may not need/want for a particular mech, it also increases time trying to figure out the best path for skills, instead of just select the needed ones.

Also if you have over 100 mechs there is a big time aspect to this, to make this easier on players PGI could have implemented the ability to save templates for specific skill layouts. This way you could have layouts for light, medium, heavy or laser, missiles, cannons, etc. The templates would be more of a starting point for a lot of the basic skills that are usually necessary for particular builds.

Also as we know there will be tweaks to the skill tree. I am curious on how PGI will handle this going forward. If I spend all my SPs on a particular mech and PGI tweaks the skill tree, I now have to go back and "pay" to change the skills. This would be more of a moot point if I could just change skills around as needed without a penalty. Again if you had even 50 mechs at 5 minutes per mech you are talking almost 5 hours to skill these mechs out. Then I would need to go back again after potential tweaks that PGI does to the skill tree.

I always felt that mechwarrior was more of a player skill based game and not one that would need to rely on unlocking new skills to improve your performance.

#78 WarHippy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,836 posts

Posted 31 May 2017 - 09:54 AM

It was certainly a step in the right direction but I think it needs more work, and unfortunately PGI doesn't have the best track record with timely revisits of things that already hit live. My biggest complaint is only partially related to the tree and that is the engine decoupling which I feel was a mistake.

#79 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 31 May 2017 - 10:10 AM

View PostReza Malin, on 29 May 2017 - 11:08 AM, said:

No more rule of 3, no more module swapping, tailoring mechs to play to their strengths.

Loving it.

The more i play it, the less i see any downsides.

Thoughts? (beyond, "waaah, i have to reskill 100 mechs", because so do i)


I have not played MWO in a week. That says plenty. <shrugs>

#80 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 31 May 2017 - 10:24 AM

You can't criticize someone's personal opinion on it really. If someone doesn't like it because they don't like it, well okay.

I do like it and so do the people I play with. There's a lot of variety in builds between players for the same mech. It's doing what it's supposed to do.





6 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 6 guests, 0 anonymous users