12 replies to this topic

[Revis Volek]

Thought id throw this out here and see what everyone thought. What else should the skill tree do? How can we help with what we already have in place?


IF the nodes in the survival tree for Structure gave a .5 health pt. boost to weapons to help combat some of the MG lights we see in the game would you think it was too much? Too little or nonsense?


We have structure for the mechs to keep living, but we have no game to play once your weapons are gone? So whats the point in staying alive if you cannot help the team anymore? If you survive a light rush or something of the sort but lost all weapons in the process you are for all intents and purposes dead in a game where doing dmg and killing mechs is our only real game play.

Maybe .5 is too much as that would lead to double health weapons and stuff but i think it is very silly to have the mech survive but its arsenal gone leaving them useless. I usually just let myself die when this happen unless it conquest since base capping with no weapons is also a death sentence most the time and you cant even win the game mode in Incursion if you cannot do dmg.


So what do we think? Do weapons need to buff with structure? what other way can we get some more beneficial things from the skill tree we already have in place?

Edited by Revis Volek, 27 January 2018 - 01:05 PM.

[FupDup]

Here are the short-term easy things I think the skill tree should do:


>Reinforced Casing bonus doubled (-2% crit chance receiving per node), maybe also add increased item health on top of that

>Missile spread and LBX spread consolidated into one single node type, with a higher possible max value (but you need more SP to get there); also include MG and RAC spread in there

>Magazine capacity now helps AMS

>Speed Retention no longer has the 40% speed cap, also reduces LFE/CXL penalty (if possible in the coding)

>Increase Hill Climb bonus, or redesign it to increase your minimum slowdown angle instead of decrease your deceleration rate

>Buff Improved Gyros a bit

>Torso pitch bonus now gives a static +2 degrees rather than +2%

>Torso yaw (max amount, not speed) bonus changed to +2 degrees per node rather than +2%

>Agility nodes based on turn/twist/accel/decel speed should scale by weight class so they aren't useless on bigger mechs

>Restore Clan heat gen to old values, instead directly nerf certain main offenders like the CERML and HLL (skill tree should not be used to balance the factions)

>In spirit of the above, also let Clans have the same cooldown bonus as the IS

>Not gonna equalize laser duration for now as the one exception, reasoning should be obvious

Edited by FupDup, 27 January 2018 - 01:09 PM.

[Revis Volek]

FupDup, on 27 January 2018 - 01:01 PM, said:

(skill tree should not be used to balance the factions)

This 10000000000000x please.

[Luminis]

FupDup, on 27 January 2018 - 01:01 PM, said:

(skill tree should not be used to balance the factions)aSDF

It shouldn't be used to balance other issues, either; if MG boating is considered an issue, the MGs or the boats need to be addressed.

The most important changes for the skill tree, imho, are a drastically reduced number of nodes with significantly higher values per node, the ability to save and important templates and nodes and far less available points so you actually have to decide between, say, more firepower and more survivability.

Similarly, I'd actually like to see nodes that make certain aspects of your 'Mech worse while giving significant buffs to other aspects. Dunno, receive a damage penalty to reduce the heat your weapons generate significantly. Reduce your Mechs armour and structure by a good chunk but get a Null Sig.

Basically like how the old skill trees back in Vanilla World of WarCraft had high impact skills at certain points in their specific trees that made your character play different after picking them.

[MechaBattler]

I wholeheartedly endorse anything that adds to the diversity and depth of the tree. And I would also encourage PGI to consider consolidating the tree nodes to higher percentages. So it's visually less of a clustercuss. It's completely unnecessary. Blizzard figured this out years ago.

[Khobai]

there is no way to add diversity to the current skill tree

because the current skill tree doesnt evoke any meaningful choices whatsoever

you always take the same skills on every mech to the severe detriment of the game. yes skills that let you spam strikes are negative for the game. skills that let you squeeze out damage as quickly as possible are negative for the game. a lot of the skills are no brainers to take and you always take them. and a lot of them are useless skills youre forced to take anyway to get the skills you want. its bad. really bad.


if we want the game to have actual diversity they need to divide mechs upto roles and give each role its own unique skill tree. that way every mech cant do everything. your role limits what skills you have access to and you have to rely on other roles to do the things you cant do.

for the most part all the mechs in the game are already assigned roles in battletech. the roles are brawler, skirmisher, sniper, missile boat, striker, scout, and juggernaut.

There should be a unique skill tree for each of those roles.


brawler- specialized for close combat and sustained dps. heat skills, cooldown skills, survivability skills

skirmisher- specialized for midrange combat and flanking. agility skills, beam duration skills, skills that reduce facetime in general.

sniper- long range sniping. range skills, velocity skills, advanced zoom, etc...

missile boat- missile skills, sensor skills, target decay skills, etc...

juggernaut- survivability skills, heavy weapon skills, more survivability skills, etc...

striker- speed skills, agility skills, light weapon skills, jumpjet skills, etc...

Edited by Khobai, 27 January 2018 - 03:36 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Khobai, on 27 January 2018 - 03:20 PM, said:

if we want the game to have actual diversity they need to divide mechs upto roles and give each role its own unique skill tree. that way every mech cant do everything. your role limits what skills you have access to and you have to rely on other roles to do the things you cant do.

for the most part all the mechs in the game are already assigned roles in battletech. the roles are brawler, skirmisher, sniper, missile boat, striker, scout, and juggernaut.

There should be a unique skill tree for each of those roles.

I think the problem is that people (i think just you) just use the same builds over and over and doesn't see the value of different roles. It's the builds that usually define the role, not the skills. If you have to master a mech just to make it viable to a single role, you're (PGI) doing it wrong, the roles themselves should be viable in the first place enough to be a choice.

[Khobai]

Quote

I think the problem is that people (i think just you) just use the same builds over and over and doesn't see the value of different roles.

there are no different roles

go watch mechdane's video thats EXACTLY what its about

how everything has become muddled together because of the awful generic skill tree that has no choices whatsoever

how the weapon rebalance has completely killed any weapon diversity so everyone uses lasers now

how scaling and engine desync have destroyed mechs that were once viable and reduced the pool of playable mechs considerably

the only role in this game is squeezing out damage. and everyone only puts skill points into the skill nodes that help them do that.

if you think this game has actual different roles youre even more disillusioned than I thought.


to promote diversity, the game needs well defined roles for each mech. and to create well defined roles you need different skill trees for each role. theres no better way to do it. its why other games do it that way.

Edited by Khobai, 27 January 2018 - 03:48 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Khobai, on 27 January 2018 - 03:39 PM, said:

there are no different roles

Really? People cannot build for narc/tag spotters? for brawlers and juggernauts? For snipers? For LRM support? For strikers?

Or do you mean balance have been swerved that people don't do those anymore? Because that is a completely different issue. It's not that they don't exist, it's just that they aren't being used anymore.

Khobai, on 27 January 2018 - 03:39 PM, said:

go watch mechdane's video thats EXACTLY what its about

how everything has become muddled together because of the awful generic skill tree that has no choices whatsoever

how the weapon rebalance has completely killed any weapon diversity so everyone uses lasers now

how scaling and engine desync have destroyed mechs that were once viable and reduced the pool of playable mechs considerably

You think that's a "gotcha moment"? I watched the video, there's MORE than just skill-tree in there, PGI has a lot of cascading mistakes needed to be fixed, and those need to be addressed.

It's funny how you'd throw in an idea to make the skill define roles cause it's supposedly awful to define roles, yet you'd cite something that proves that the cluster **** was more than just skill-tree.

Khobai, on 27 January 2018 - 03:39 PM, said:

the only role in this game is squeezing out damage.

Pretty sure that's not a role. It's how you do your damage, and affects the team and enemy.

Khobai, on 27 January 2018 - 03:39 PM, said:

and everyone only puts skill points into the skill nodes that help them do that.

There's no incentive to do so, it's a lot more different than people not doing it. Unless of course you're "everybody", and I'm "nobody".

You aren't the only player in the game.

Khobai, on 27 January 2018 - 03:39 PM, said:

to promote diversity, the game needs well defined roles for each mech.

I agree.

Khobai, on 27 January 2018 - 03:39 PM, said:

and to create well defined roles you need different skill trees for each role. theres no better way to do it. its why other games do it that way.

So what will happen if there isn't enough skill investment? You mean to tell me i have to put grueling hours into my mech so that i could have it do any role to be decent, instead of have it be decent in the first place and then better with skill investment?

Ludicrous, stupid. You're not solving a problem, you're creating another problem. While the bonuses needs to be good, it needs to be generic to not add another layer of balancing.

No, you don't need different skill trees (although better skill bonuses is welcomed), you need address the real problem which is the god damn balance between techs, equipment and mechs, it needs to be consistent with or without skill nodes.

It's mech-mastery, not role-mastery.

Khobai, on 27 January 2018 - 03:39 PM, said:

if you think this game has actual different roles youre even more disillusioned than I thought.

Lol, just lol, says the one who's too hung up single things and incapable of looking at a grander scale.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 27 January 2018 - 06:18 PM.

[Mystere]

Just dump the skill tree. It does not really involve actual "skills" anyway. <shrugs>

[TLBFestus]

The current skill tree does not do a good job of forcing players to select an advantage and forcing a disadvantage.

Something along the lines of having the option of Increasing damage output with a corresponding loss of armor value.

Smaller, simpler skill tree options for both postive and negative outcomes would help.

[0Jiggs0]

There are three things that stand out to me regarding the skill tree:

• Percent value nodes - With most nodes giving a percentage boost to a base value (such as structure or range), mechs and weapons with higher values receive a greater net benefit from the skill tree than those with smaller base values, creating a sort of "rich get richer" situation. For example; A low-damage weapon with a fast cooldown gains little from cooldown nodes to improve its performance, while a high-damage weapon balanced by a long cooldown has its balance point mitigated significantly. Introducing alternative skill nodes that provide a set value bonus (-.1 Cooldown instead of -1%), would allow weapons that normally gain little from the tree to become more viable and increase build diversity.
  
• Investment vs. Choice - The skill tree does not create meaningful choices beyond the degree in which the user is willing to invest in a particular branch. Want all Survivability? Take all Survivabilty. Nothing is denied to the player for proceeding down a particular path, which is in conflict with the rest of the game's balancing concepts. Long-range, high damage weapons are generally balanced by cooldown and heat, but range, cooldown, and heat bonuses are all available with no antagonism between them. If parameters such as range and cooldown are to be exclusive, the skill tree should behave similarly. In this case, taking a cooldown node should lock out a range node, creating a choice of specialization for the mech. Generalist builds would be simple matter of evenly distributed nodes, while specialized ones would be require surrendering nodes outside their specialty.
  
• Weight Class Distinction - Light and Assault mechs have the same skill tree options. While the values vary somewhat, the overall layout is identical. Mechs from different weight classes serve (or are intended to serve) distinctly different roles in gameplay, necessitating different skills in order to be successful. Further differentiating the trees by weight class would make each class feel distinct, and encourage role-based gameplay.

Edited by 0Jiggs0, 27 January 2018 - 11:56 PM.

[Xetelian]

Weapon health needs a boost. Skills would be nice but we shouldn't have to invest skill points to get something that is much needed.