70 replies to this topic

[JTAlweezy]

Ryvucz, on 24 December 2012 - 11:39 AM, said:

The large difference in mech performance boost versus someone that just started playing.

It would be different if it was in a larger environment (i.e. EVE, SWTOR, WoW, etc) but this is a very confined world where we are still seeing issues with 8 man sync drops to get a better advantage.

But we have that huge difference between new and veteran players already. Only those who put large amounts of time into this game will have elite skills, this will help balance things.

[Hellreavan]

How about you still have to learn each mech skill for each mech but it costs considerabley less when another mech has the same skill examp: class a-1 mech has cool down skill that costs 100 skill points. so mech a-2 skill will only cost 80-75. mech a-3 skill would cost 60skill points. think of it as tweeking training for each mod of the mechs.

[JTAlweezy]

Hellreavan, on 24 December 2012 - 01:13 PM, said:

How about you still have to learn each mech skill for each mech but it costs considerabley less when another mech has the same skill examp: class a-1 mech has cool down skill that costs 100 skill points. so mech a-2 skill will only cost 80-75. mech a-3 skill would cost 60skill points. think of it as tweeking training for each mod of the mechs.

Thats doing essentially the same thing. You are decreasing the required skill points to learn that skill if you already have it mastered. What I am saying is just have it spread across all chassis, and just require a bit more time to master each.

[JTAlweezy]

hopefully we can get the entire community involved in this thread so we can get more votes ideas and opinions from everyone.

[Necromantion]

My two cents here...

This seems too much like WoW or other game skill systems. Honestly while it allows you to tailor things to your teamplay/playstyle more than the current skill sets do it just removes the level playing field from the game.

The skills that you currently attain benifit every mech, some in bigger ways than others due to weapon hardpoint allocation or torso/arm movement or orientation. The thing is that every player gets them theres no tweaking to it and players are forced to have to play with it.

Being forced to use the same skill sets as everyone else encourages you to learn your weaknesses as a player and in the specific loadout and mech variant you are in.

Over time as this game becomes more polished you will see something happen in this game that in my eyes is fantastic. That is, players who have more skill, who can work to mitigate weakpoints in their mech/loadout or play, people who have better spatial awareness and dexterity as well as who work with a team better with the same tools everyone else have will do better.

OH MY GOD we will have a game where actual skill and teamwork determines the winner rather than gimmicky % goodies that are contextually OP and useless in other contexts?

I dont know about you but it sounds good to me.

Yes i know i know ECM is a pain in the butt right now but honestly other than that and other actual glitches i think this game is great and encourages teamwork and skill over gimmicks. (Yes i know ecm -.-)

[Necromantion]

JTAlweezy, on 23 December 2012 - 02:16 PM, said:

This sstem would push for huge diversity if it were used.

Too much diversity is an issue though. If youve played other multiplayer online games where there were dozens of customization options it is an issue to balance as a developer because with new content releases/weapons/gear(mechs) with different stats(loadout/hardpoint options) these "diverse" and varying options can render one or two of a specific class(mech) to be OBSCENELY overpowered. Right where the mech balance is right now other than ecm i feel a skilled pilot on most chassis can do well and thats how it should be.

When you start introducing % dmg increases and so forth builds that can take that % and benifit from it exponentially due to loadout options will start to be all that you see.

ECM is a big enough issue as it is right now, i GAURANTEE that if they were to go through with something like this you will have the same balancing issues that constantly plague mmos and the like all the time.

The diversity in loadout/hardpoints/physiological (if you will) attributes of mechs afford more than enough diversity to allow you to tailor play to your playstyle.

If you desire balanced gameplay by the time testing is over you would think this though a lot more than you have.

[JTAlweezy]

Necromantion, on 24 December 2012 - 04:04 PM, said:

Too much diversity is an issue though. If youve played other multiplayer online games where there were dozens of customization options it is an issue to balance as a developer because with new content releases/weapons/gear(mechs) with different stats(loadout/hardpoint options) these "diverse" and varying options can render one or two of a specific class(mech) to be OBSCENELY overpowered. Right where the mech balance is right now other than ecm i feel a skilled pilot on most chassis can do well and thats how it should be.

When you start introducing % dmg increases and so forth builds that can take that % and benifit from it exponentially due to loadout options will start to be all that you see.

ECM is a big enough issue as it is right now, i GAURANTEE that if they were to go through with something like this you will have the same balancing issues that constantly plague mmos and the like all the time.

The diversity in loadout/hardpoints/physiological (if you will) attributes of mechs afford more than enough diversity to allow you to tailor play to your playstyle.

If you desire balanced gameplay by the time testing is over you would think this though a lot more than you have.

thanks for the feedback. I can agree with some of your points. I have however; put a lot of thought into this. I believe that some issues in op mechs and players can be worked out over time. Honestly, if you have been playing longer you deserve to have that somewhat op mech. However the next fix would be to matchmake players based on their average DMG done per match. I just want more diversity in the builds and not having to train the same skill over and over again. Otherwise there really is no point to buying another mech ya know?

[Túatha Dé Danann]

Damage done per match does not represent skills. There is a difference between an Atlas and a Commando. While it is possible to pump out 500+ damage with a commando, an Atlas can pull out 1000+ damage a match with the same pilot.

I see the whole thing out of the group perspective and not from the pug-perspective. We play as a group (we do not drop 1 vs 1) and 8 mastered mechs vs. 8 fresh out of the market is already a visible difference.

We could assume, that experienced players can compress the difference between locked and unlocked mechs, but for new players, those modules and skills in the tree will make a huge difference. (Thats what I assume)

I could think about modules, that give you certain boni, and this would be valid, because you can only use a certain number of them.

[neviu]

no period.

its not a freaking arcade game.

[JTAlweezy]

I still think it would work

[Necromantion]

JTAlweezy, on 24 December 2012 - 04:21 PM, said:

thanks for the feedback. I can agree with some of your points. I have however; put a lot of thought into this. I believe that some issues in op mechs and players can be worked out over time. Honestly, if you have been playing longer you deserve to have that somewhat op mech. However the next fix would be to matchmake players based on their average DMG done per match. I just want more diversity in the builds and not having to train the same skill over and over again. Otherwise there really is no point to buying another mech ya know?

What you should ask yourself is do you want a game that is well polished, plays well and has a fair playing field?

What you are suggesting would result in the context that i had mentioned in my previous post. It would require constant balancing of mechs because they would become "OP" so mechs you buy would have things like their slots and hardpoints being altered every week or month due to childish people crying on the forums.

As i also mentioned before the current system gives bonuses that benifit all mechs and pilots in the same way with things that vastly improve mech performance, some mechs more than others but none so significantly that they render a specific mech or two or a specific build to be stupidly overpowered.

The suggestion you have while it seems nice, and dont get me wrong its nice to be able to tweak things to your own play style in games, it would however take the highlight of this game away from skill and focus on gimmick builds that are stupidly OP in specific contexts whether that context is team makeup, enemy team makeup, specific maps, etc.

Players who play for longer periods of time typically are better than players who invest less time unless they are 1) stupid 2) just bad or 3) dont care really and screw around for fun. That being said players who play more will be rewarded just by the fact that they will constantly have the upper edge due to their gaming experience with the game. Whether its improved dexterity, spatial awareness, teamwork, communication, strategy, etc.

Regarding your suggestions on matchmaking based on dmg/match well thats just absurd. There is more to mwo than just dealing damage, properly filling support roles whether its through scouting/tagging/ecm(stupid op crap -.-) and a player who excels at these things can be a bigger factor if not the leading factor on a team winning a match. Sure whatever team does the most damage per armor point on the other team will win but damage doesnt mean a player is skilled. For example teach a 6 year old to move in a mech, give him a missle boat and tell him how to lock on and fire. If other players on the team are tagging and spotting properly and the other teams ecm is negated or non existant this 6 year old with no past experience could possibly pull top dmg in a stalker 5m with a bunch of lrms. No?

Once glitches that are known get fixed and ECM gets balanced were going to have a great game with balanced gameplay where skill > gimmicky fotm builds and talents.

Its simple ask yourself this question, do you want a game where skill is the most important aspect to doing well?

[Reno Blade]

I'm all for many small talents to unlock tons of small things.
I would even go as far as unlocking every mech again and again, if we dont need to unlock 3 mechs everytime.

How about having the current "elite" multiplier(s) as a "bonus" if you have done it for 3 or more mechs of the class.
If we consider like 20-30 skills you can unlock and about 3-5 elite bonus levels, that would add much more to work/play for.
If you now have something like 10 different points for every of the 5 elite levels and just need to unlock 5 before getting to the next elite level, that would make it possible to unlock your elites, before "maxing" your talent tree (you can continue to spend XP after unlocking all 5 elite levels in the talents you skipped).

[WiCkEd]

Seems like they should just delve a little deeper in the specifics of the exp tree's. TT had Gunner and Piloting but in the more advanced rules gunnery was cut into 3 sections: Ballistic, Energy, and Missile. Open up a Pilot EXP tree that has a maneuver section as well as a gunnery section that allows for specialization into 1 of the three listed gunnery fields. On top of these changes also allow experience to be earned for piloting certain mechs variants and have those mech variants possess their own specialized experience tree. As an example to reduce the number of Gauss-Kitties and Smash-Cat's on the field have the CAT-K2's skill tree only give to Gunnery bonus's to Energy weapon use. This could be expressed in the form of a slight increase in projectile velocity for the PPC/ERPPC or percentage boost in laser duration. CAT-A1's variant would obviously have equivalent bonus's to missile weaponry. All of these should stack with your gunnery as a pilot skill. For Mech's that have a good mix of weapons as a standard load-out can give a good mix of bonus's across the board but again that bonus is only for that specific mech variant. In mech's with good mixes of weaponry you will really be able to tell what a pilot's personal specialty is because when he's crunching it you can bet that he'll have in mind that he is a Ballistic specialist in his own Gunnery tree. What do you guys think?

[Necromantion]

Once again wicked see my previous 3 posts as to why this would be a bad idea.

[MagicHamsta]

Too much vertical progression.
Dislike.

[JTAlweezy]

Necromantion, on 25 December 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

Once again wicked see my previous 3 posts as to why this would be a bad idea.

This is being posted fromy phone so excuse any errors.

So necro. On one hand you make a very good point about level playing fields and actual skill vs somewhat op and ridiculous skills. My idea was to spread skills over all varients. So when you buy a new mech you dont have to master the same skills all over again. Wait you mean the last 23 mechs i have mastered this heat containment skill in will actually count towards all my future mechs?

Yes. The idea is instead of 23k exp for training heat containment 23 times on 23 varients. Have different levels of that skill and just train it up to master over time. Yes it will cost more exp but while some people wont have it mastered others will. This way there is more balance created. As one with more time is likely to have thar skill mastered.

MagicHamsta. What do you mean by vertical progression. The way i see it is this system will create diversity. It will also make the game more interesting. As long as there is a % gain for anything this game will not always rely 100% on skill. Im sorry to say necro it just wont. Your ideas work. And work even better if we completely remove the whole idea of a skill system from the game. No bonuses towards anything. This would make your ideas pocture perfect. But as it stands that is not the case. So why not put a little twist on things. Will someones 2% matter that much more than my 10% ? Cause right now if someone does nkt have it trained i get a 10% bonus over them. Now the game at some point becomes skill points and time vs no time. Wait, its still mech warrior and it is still a flight sim. No matter how many bonuses i have its still not going to stop that really skilled commando pilot from using his can opener style method to strip armor from my atlas.

All i am saying is please allow us to tailor the game to our needs and desires. Keeping the current bonus % and math that pgi wants wont change your play style at all or create balance problems at all. I just dont want to have to train the same skils over and over for so many mechs. We all know that we wont be piloting the same chassis of mech forever. One of us will have a clan mech we loved from mw3 or 4 and we will buy all its varients.

Edited by JTAlweezy, 26 December 2012 - 06:47 AM.

[JTAlweezy]

MagicHamsta, on 25 December 2012 - 11:18 AM, said:

Too much vertical progression.
Dislike.

not sure what you mean

[JTAlweezy]

Seems like the game is progressing slow in terms of development, I still want to see something like this though

[JTAlweezy]

- New Pilot Module: Target Decay. Target Decay increases the time it takes to lose a target once line of sight is lost. Default time is 2 seconds.
- Rank 1: Increases target decay time to 2.75 seconds. Costs 5000 XP.
- Rank 2: Increases target decay time to 3.5 seconds. Costs 7500 XP.
- Adding a new rank to the Sensor Range Pilot Module
- Rank 2: Increases the boost to sensor range from 15% to 25%. Costs 7500 XP.

this was posted in the patch notes. Seems heavily similar to what I recommended. Wonder if they used it from my ideas or not.

[Eddrick]

I only say, "Yes" because I like the idea of a, "Specialized skills". I don't like the examples given. But, specialized skills can reinforce, "Role Warfare".