193 replies to this topic

[Koniving]

Andi Nagasia, on 23 September 2017 - 08:04 AM, said:

personally i feel the New-Skill-Tree is better than the Old-Skill-Tree + Modules,
it gives more options for how you can build a mech and allows better variety,

that said, respecing costs though harsh for a full respec(you should never full respec)
i feel are actually in a good place, i dont see them as a peoblem, even for new players without much C-Bills,
(i know because my Nephew started playing and hes enjoying MWO and changes his CN9s skill way too often)


i keep hearing that respecs should be free, but i cant really think of a game that offers 100% free Respecs,
many if not mostly all games ive played you have to pay to respec, its just a facet of what makes choices hard,

I'm surprised anyone respecs.

Personally, I just double click some nodes that I'm not using, and then double click some nodes that I want to use instead. Allocate new skill points as necessary. Done. No cost, no ********.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Koniving, on 09 October 2017 - 07:19 AM, said:

Personally, I just double click some nodes that I'm not using, and then double click some nodes that I want to use instead. Allocate new skill points as necessary. Done. No cost, no ********.

Anytime you change to using an already unlocked node, it costs you. That's technically a respec (even if not a full respec).

[Koniving]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 October 2017 - 07:22 AM, said:

Anytime you change to using an already unlocked node, it costs you. That's technically a respec (even if not a full respec).

Ah, I see. The XP or GXP cost.

Meh. Since I rarely change nodes I've barely noticed it.

[MischiefSC]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 October 2017 - 06:47 AM, said:

And honestly, given that they still haven't changed their release model, I would prefer the old skill tree because once you did master something, changing things due to a meta shift or change because of drop types was much easier.

You're still spending less total cbills, even with regular respec, than you did mastering a new mech when the meta changed.

The new system has a lot more variety in approaches. Some people go survival, some mobility. Yes, there's some stuff (core Firepower and on hot mechs Operations, and of course everyone needs the Aux tree tax) that's the same but people have different approaches and it shows in how they play.

Not that it couldn't use a lot of tightening up but I still dramatically prefer the new system to the old one.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MischiefSC, on 09 October 2017 - 11:05 AM, said:

You're still spending less total cbills, even with regular respec, than you did mastering a new mech when the meta changed.

Am I though? I can reuse the main modules after a meta switch (seismic and radar derp) unlike what we have now. The ability to reuse modules on any mech once you get them was a big boost when it came to costs of switching.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 09 October 2017 - 11:12 AM.

[Brizna]

Appogee, on 23 September 2017 - 06:54 AM, said:

I've clicked (conservative estimate) more than 18,000 of those bloody Skill Nodes by now.

How ridiculous that we still can't cut/paste existing trees onto new Mechs.

If anyone at PGI played their game and had to grind their own Mechs, they'd realise by now what a PITA it is.

At the very least there each tree should have a select all nodes button so you can deactivate the unwanted node just by clicking the first unwanted one.

[Appogee]

Brizna, on 09 October 2017 - 11:14 AM, said:

At the very least there each tree should have a select all nodes button so you can deactivate the unwanted node just by clicking the first unwanted one.

Great idea.

[MischiefSC]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 October 2017 - 11:11 AM, said:

Am I though? I can reuse the main modules after a meta switch (seismic and radar derp) unlike what we have now. The ability to reuse modules on any mech once you get them was a big boost when it came to costs of switching.

So if mech X gets a quirk boost next pass and you don't have it, how many do you have to buy?

Suppose micro lasers and ersmls are the next big thing and brawling comes back, you'd need new modules just for the new weapons both for range and cooldown.

I agree it's overly fussy and certainly has some flaws but the reality is that I can take ballistics and missiles together on one mech and the velocity buff, cooldown and range benefits them all. This makes something like a UAC20 + SRMs heavy way more viable now than it was in the old system.

While mixed loadouts are never going to be the meta like that, at least in the new system they suck significantly less. The difference between a light with mobility quirks and a heavy with 0 mobility and all survival creates the difference between fast/mobile and slow/tanky that almost touches the edge of role warfare.

I get a lot more out of the new system. I spend less cbills on it overall and I respec a *lot*, but once I unlock nodes I get them back for a tiny bit of XP. So when I fiddle with a build either having ACs/UACs/Gauss or just wanted to test out LBX (why, yes. Yes they still suck) I spend like 1 match worth of cbills 1x and then a few XP whenever I go back and forth. It's no more trouble than switching modules was and I get more value and the mech XP is functionally free, once you've played enough. Not like I need 200k XP on a mech in the future other than the odd GXP conversion in a sale or something.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MischiefSC, on 09 October 2017 - 12:12 PM, said:

So if mech X gets a quirk boost next pass and you don't have it, how many do you have to buy?

Given that most balance passes are horrible and rarely expand the meta, I would potentially only have to get weapon modules and that is only if the meta shift was a weapon based shift and not a mech shift.

MischiefSC, on 09 October 2017 - 12:12 PM, said:

I agree it's overly fussy and certainly has some flaws but the reality is that I can take ballistics and missiles together on one mech and the velocity buff, cooldown and range benefits them all. This makes something like a UAC20 + SRMs heavy way more viable now than it was in the old system.

You don't always want that. For example the old ERPPC/Gauss builds you wanted cooldown at least for the Gauss, you never bothered with ERPPC modules. Now had they added heat gen modules, you would've taken that with the cooldown module to sync them up better. Or another example, Gauss vomit, you would take range for lasers (Gauss doesn't need it) and cooldown for Gauss. Now you generally avoid cooldown nodes because heat gen is so important to a majority of builds. Even with velocity, you want to avoid using that sometimes because it can exacerbate velocity differences.

MischiefSC, on 09 October 2017 - 12:12 PM, said:

I get a lot more out of the new system. I spend less cbills on it overall and I respec a *lot*, but once I unlock nodes I get them back for a tiny bit of XP.

This is actually even more painful an experience because respecs cost you XP which can be painful for newer players (for me I still have boatloads of GXP). Honestly though, I don't know that I've spent less c-bills because most of my mechs didn't have modules in the first place (given I have 400+), now they just sit untouched or unskilled because of how painfully tedious the process is (whereas almost all were mastered before, just left unmoduled which is not near as painful to swap).



Either way, for comp and just as a general collector, I preferred the old skill tree. It was simple and left most choices to the mechlab rather than putting emphasis on two separate areas for customization that I now need to manage.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 09 October 2017 - 12:22 PM.

[SPNKRGrenth]

If this game went back to modules and took the skill tree away, I'd quit outright. It was horribly limiting and I hated it. It punished mixed builds and forced nothing but boating single weapons types for the best loadouts. For every 1 thing that modules had over the new tree, the new tree has 5 things over modules.

The tree needs a lot of work. It needs to be simplified and made more user friendly. The Respec button needs to be removed. Un-equipping and re-equipping unlocked nodes should take little to no XP. As well as more fine tuning of some of the numbers in different trees more.

But going back to modules? That's like saying Windows didn't work out, so go back to Apple.

[MischiefSC]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 October 2017 - 12:21 PM, said:

Given that most balance passes are horrible and rarely expand the meta, I would potentially only have to get weapon modules and that is only if the meta shift was a weapon based shift and not a mech shift.


You don't always want that. For example the old ERPPC/Gauss builds you wanted cooldown at least for the Gauss, you never bothered with ERPPC modules. Now had they added heat gen modules, you would've taken that with the cooldown module to sync them up better. Or another example, Gauss vomit, you would take range for lasers (Gauss doesn't need it) and cooldown for Gauss. Now you generally avoid cooldown nodes because heat gen is so important to a majority of builds. Even with velocity, you want to avoid using that sometimes because it can exacerbate velocity differences.


This is actually even more painful an experience because respecs cost you XP which can be painful for newer players (for me I still have boatloads of GXP). Honestly though, I don't know that I've spent less c-bills because most of my mechs didn't have modules in the first place (given I have 400+), now they just sit untouched or unskilled because of how painfully tedious the process is (whereas almost all were mastered before, just left unmoduled which is not near as painful to swap).



Either way, for comp and just as a general collector, I preferred the old skill tree. It was simple and left most choices to the mechlab rather than putting emphasis on two separate areas for customization that I now need to manage.

I recently rolled back into an alt of mine and while I was a bit irked at the cbill costs it was way, way cheaper than buying 3 mechs. The XP costs were almost irrelevant; 3 or 4 matches was enough XP swap any nodes I wanted to swap and I was throttled far more by the cost of components than skill tree stuff. The NPE is atrocious because you have absolutely no idea what's good for what or why. The skill tree is a pretty tiny hurdle compared to finding out that the 6 million cbill IS XL engine you just bought is a death trap and you needed the 3 million LFE and to just take less ammo/DHS/smaller weapons. Ah well, that's just 60 matches worth of grinding you threw away, right?!?

I've got 300-some odd mechs and most never get played. Some probably will never get played (like the PHX or my old Trebs) but at this point I can skill a mech up in less than 3 minutes. Before it took me longer than that to find a Radar Derp that I didn't need on another mech - though, to be fair, that was also back before the changes in the mech lab that made it load faster.

I am hoping Chris does well on the next balance pass. However I'm honestly not expecting much to take the emphasis off lasers and gaussvomit. The most I hope for is getting a few more mechs into the competitive range. Shouldn't be too much drama for skilling. Honestly how often do you actually need to respec a mech by more than a handful of nodes? How often did you really need to switch all your modules around? For me it is and was uncommon.

Again, skill tree needs plenty of love and could stand to be compressed but for me, far more enjoyable than the old one.

[Burke IV]

SPNKRGrenth, on 09 October 2017 - 03:22 PM, said:

If this game went back to modules and took the skill tree away, I'd quit outright.

I already have quit because of the tree. I feel that PGI have been dishonest and unless the tree goes away i will not return, i will not buy mechwarrior 5 and i will wait until the battletech game is cheapest of the cheap before i buy it. See the problem? Spring this on paying customers....they shoulda left the game alone. It was really rather good before all this skill tree nonesense.

Edited by Burke IV, 10 October 2017 - 02:14 AM.

[Curccu]

Burke IV, on 10 October 2017 - 02:14 AM, said:

I already have quit because of the tree. I feel that PGI have been dishonest and unless the tree goes away i will not return, i will not buy mechwarrior 5 and i will wait until the battletech game is cheapest of the cheap before i buy it. See the problem? Spring this on paying customers....they shoulda left the game alone. It was really rather good before all this skill tree nonesense.

Skill tree didn't change the game much really, you are just being emo.
There is no way PGI is going to dump this skilltree, they might evolve it but dump it... nah not gonna happen.

[Burke IV]

Emo? like the forums hvnt seen their fair share of posts crying about lost agility. They mucked up a pretty decent game. They made changes that nerfed the individuals ability to swing the game (eg player skill) and they nerfed fun. If they did this when the game was 2 months old, ok, i guess. But after so many people payed up? Thefty

[Curccu]

Burke IV, on 10 October 2017 - 02:27 AM, said:

Emo? like the forums hvnt seen their fair share of posts crying about lost agility. They mucked up a pretty decent game. They made changes that nerfed the individuals ability to swing the game (eg player skill) and they nerfed fun. If they did this when the game was 2 months old, ok, i guess. But after so many people payed up? Thefty

Most agility loss is because of engine decoupling really.
12v12 stole much of the ability for a single player to swing the game, I still have same capability to carry than before skilltree.

PGI promised this skill tree to replace that old placeholder when this game was "2 months old", it just took them many years to create it. Like clan autocannons are placeholders for working LB-AC ammo switching, which we will never get because PGI cannot code it.

PS. your leaderboard stats are better after skilltree than before...

[Dr Cara Carcass]

CMDR Sunset Shimmer, on 23 September 2017 - 08:40 AM, said:

Look at what you're saying here, carefully.

You're essentially, asking for a change to the web because "I don't want to be forced to take things I don't want."

Which translates into: "I want to min-max my mech easier without having to compromise."

This, is what's lead to inherent balancing issues to begin with.

Thats not what is means. It means harder descisions. Now you get velocity and cooldown while you want to get some range. Make it less nodes and only range. That way your descision is harder because you dont get stuff on top of waht you actually wanted. You get less and your descision is ahrder because you dont get eerythig else on teh way to your goal too.

[Snowbluff]

Ugh, modules were so expensive. Much more expensive than the mechs I put them on. >.>

Being able to buy the module equivalent point over time has encouraged me to actually max out mechs. Sure, I lose like 45k on a skill point every match, but over time it's like 4 million to max a mech, which was less than the cost of a lot of modules.

[Burke IV]

Curccu, on 10 October 2017 - 04:51 AM, said:

PS. your leaderboard stats are better after skilltree than before...

Iv probabaly played like 10 games with the skill tree.

Curccu, on 10 October 2017 - 04:51 AM, said:

I still have same capability to carry than before skilltree.

Not using ammo weapons you dont cause you have to chew thru that much more armour and the skill tree nodes dont compensate enough.

Edited by Burke IV, 10 October 2017 - 06:35 AM.

[Curccu]

Burke IV, on 10 October 2017 - 06:33 AM, said:

Iv probabaly played like 10 games with the skill tree.

106 games season12, june (skilltree patch was may) according to leaderboards, or did you not even master your mechs with HSP? If not how can you claim something doesn't work if you didn't even try it really?

Burke IV, on 10 October 2017 - 06:33 AM, said:

Not using ammo weapons you dont cause you have to chew thru that much more armour and the skill tree nodes dont compensate enough.

I have not seen this problem once so far, you must have run builds with very limited ammo. Just out of interest what kind of ammo builds have you used before that don't work anymore, because not enough anymore ammo?

[ForceUser]

Burke IV, on 10 October 2017 - 06:33 AM, said:

Not using ammo weapons you dont cause you have to chew thru that much more armour and the skill tree nodes dont compensate enough.

You do know you get 20% more ammo/damage potential (and yes, it is enough) because of the skill tree right? Also that the range/cooldown/duration/etc. now applies to all weapons you have on your mech, not just the ones you put modules on your mech for.

Also YOU get more armour and structure TOO. That means you're able to survive longer to help carry as well.

Edited by ForceUser, 10 October 2017 - 09:29 AM.