DUST Search - Why we should have Respecs: Vet Perspective

All Channels

General Discussions

Why we should have Respecs: Vet Perspective

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 7355	Posted - 2013.08.16 10:30:00 - [1] - Quote DCUO maxes out at 16 hours game time, argument example entirely invalid. Respecs are offered as they're more convenient to not hassel a player to not start a new character to experience the game in another fashion.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 7375	Posted - 2013.08.17 01:16:00 - [2] - Quote Dust does offer alts though because in all theory, that new alt isn't your main character as a person. He did not graduate from the Caldari Army Academy, he did not take up the caldari logistics he certainly didn't make the mistake of training on how to use flaylocks. Your main character however regrets his life decisions but has to live with them.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 7386	Posted - 2013.08.17 09:17:00 - [3] - Quote Then why are so many respeccers so opposed to an untrainer boosters? That is something we can almost give away every month easily verses a full respec?
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 7387	Posted - 2013.08.17 10:04:00 - [4] - Quote Ninjanomyx wrote: Proposal Revision 1.0: 1. Upon the 1.5 Update release, 1 Mass Respec (Be it Optional or Serverwide) should be provided. Only Lifetime SP and Skill Book ISK would be refunded. Patch Notes & ingame News Ticker/Info Tab upon login should note to players that specialization in each Type (IE: Light/Medium/Heavy Dropsuit & LAV/HAV/Dropship) are finalized, and those who did not yet receive a Racial Variant will receive a Partial SP Refund when the content becomes available. Considering this is to be a major Vehicle & other content Update (Hopefully Vehicle Racial Variants & Pilot Dropsuit included), it would clear the slate for the following functions. Side Note: SP Sinkholes should be locked. If Level 4 & 5 still have no Unlock/Bonus associated with them by now.....then you should not be able to allocate SP past the Level where Unlocks are attained. If not possible in 1.5 then hopefully by 1.6. 2. Hopefully by this point we may have revised Battle Academy. Upon exiting Battle Academy a player should be allotted 1 SP Respec within 30 Days. An onscreen notification/reminder would pop-up, informing the player of time remaining before the Respec expiration date, making sure to note it as a 1 time only availability. This should give the player ample time to research forums, form bonds, ask questions of Adepts & Vets, gather data, and maybe even join a Corporation. This would disable the "Punishment Factor" for the new player without diminishing the value of the traditional MMO experience. 3. Partial SP Refund as each Racial Variant is released. At this point it would only apply to those who specialized in the specific Type being provided Racial Variants at the time. This would obviously have no effect on the Medium Frame Dropsuits as they already have their Racial Variants available. Should the Pilot Suit receive no Racial Variants as of 1.5 they would receive their Partial SP Refund along with the Light Dropsuit releases. The same applies to Heavy & Commando Dropsuits respectively. 4. Upon the alteration of the Skill Tree (IE: SP Sinkholes remedied, SP Value changes, Unlock alterations & Bonus applications) there should be a Partial SP Refund to the affected Skills. I believe this set of proposals to be the most median/acceptable compromize between the feedbacks that were provided. Within the next day or 2, should this format be generally acceptable to the majority of subsequent posters, I will edit the opening post to reflect these alterations so as to generate feedback on the new proposal format. This is a combined effort and I thank those of you who provided valuable feedback for your time & consideration. Your feedback was well received +1
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 7387	Posted - 2013.08.17 10:10:00 - [5] - Quote Ninjanomyx wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Then why are so many respeccers so opposed to an untrainer boosters? That is something we can almost give away every month easily verses a full respec? B/C it is.....counterproductive??? If someone is to pay for something it would be to progress, not regress or stay static until said "Booster" wears off. I read that proposal.....(In its initial phase before it was dropped), and to halt Passive SP Gain to untrain a single Skill over time (How do you account for per Level drain over time???) when you could rather productively potentially double the initial Passive SP Gain (Passive Omega Booster) is completely undesireable. It is so undesireable that it is essentially "Pay-to-Lose"..... Anyone willing to subject themselves to this is a total masochisc and/or utterly ignorant. There are more than one proposals out for that booster though. Should take a third slot instead and be effective for one whole skill level unlike traditional boosters, each booster has a 'sp limit' instead so they would be tiered off into various multipliers and skill levels. Selecting the skill for un-training in the skill window only brings up the purchase of the one to do the job completely. overall IMO all booster prices need to be cut down by anywhere from 1/2 of current to 1/4th Untrainer boosters being the absolute cheapest of them. Third slot should also allow for 'spike' boosters that increase the SP spent into a category and also has an SP limit and should not be aurum purchasable but droppable from EOM instead. Or alternatively an active booster that's based on skill points alone. Hell while we are at it lets throw in more weaker boosters that drop from battle as well like a 12hr passive booster or a salvaged active booster that only gives 1.25 instead of 1.5 bonus. .
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 7536	Posted - 2013.08.20 02:20:00 - [6] - Quote I don't think NinjamonkeyX should be balancing vehicles either. :P Just sayin, because we already tried the method outlined by the like for a while and its gotten nowhere closer to a balanced feel of the game. Time to gut the whole machine and start over. As for my entire theory on how to fix vehicles would be to define the following: Role of said vehicle to match the endurance window long enough to successfully complete at the cost of a reasonable down time for doing so. That mission and based on pilot and av decisions whoever can slam the window shut (pilot escapes), or force it open (AV screws up the pilot) wins the outcome. If you look at this extremely subjectively you'll notice this has a similarity to something already existing in Dust.. But that's just my theory, feel free to disagree with the theory with your own, because I highly doubt this whole, "tweak numbers slightly" is going to work even without a purpose. If we tweak them up too high we'll get zitro to come back, tweak them too low and you get plenty of upset pilots, there doesn't seem to be a sweet spot with skill into account. Where Meta-Skill in = power out and most of the current number tweakings I have seen suggested by pilots is to ensure that AV Meta-Skill in = power out is extremely low versus that of the the vehicles. Which is how we got to the whole zitro tank in the first place. As for identifying things that are overpowered, CCP typically finds out real quick, after all they do track who buys what.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 7539	Posted - 2013.08.20 03:13:00 - [7] - Quote Ninjanomyx wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: I don't think NinjamonkeyX should be balancing vehicles either. :P Just sayin, because we already tried the method outlined by the like for a while and its gotten nowhere closer to a balanced feel of the game. Time to gut the whole machine and start over. As for my entire theory on how to fix vehicles would be to define the following: Role of said vehicle to match the endurance window long enough to successfully complete at the cost of a reasonable down time for doing so. That mission and based on pilot and av decisions whoever can slam the window shut (pilot escapes), or force it open (AV screws up the pilot) wins the outcome. If you look at this extremely subjectively you'll notice this has a similarity to something already existing in Dust.. But that's just my theory, feel free to disagree with the theory with your own, because I highly doubt this whole, "tweak numbers slightly" is going to work even without a purpose. If we tweak them up too high we'll get zitro to come back, tweak them too low and you get plenty of upset pilots, there doesn't seem to be a sweet spot with skill into account. Where Meta-Skill in = power out and most of the current number tweakings I have seen suggested by pilots is to ensure that AV Meta-Skill in = power out is extremely low versus that of the the vehicles. Which is how we got to the whole zitro tank in the first place. As for identifying things that are overpowered, CCP typically finds out real quick, after all they do track who buys what and what is killing who. LOL.....I have a lot more experience with Vehicles & AV than most. You have no idea wtf you are doing with a lot of things.....and I have no clue whatsoever what you tried posting in your above "Theory".....Something about a Minigame I presume..... BTW "Zitro's Tank" happened b/c the Playerbase looked @ AV & said "WTF is this Non-AR piece of Sorcery???) The minute Proto AV Naders & Wyki Swarmers started popping up you could practically smell his "Rage-Face" coming from miles away. And as more Tankers went Shield-Rail the "Rage-Face" got stronger. You are oblivious to everything around you like a Lemming on a cliffside..... Just jump already, the "Big Boys" are trying to have Grown-up Discussions here Operators of vehicles are not engineers for vehicles. Proof point you failed to present a counter theory let alone shoot mine my theory down.

Copyright © 2013-2024, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,02s, ref 20241231/1100
EVE-Online™/DUST514™ and EVE/DUST514 imagery © CCP.

bitcoin: 1CHRiBBArqpw5Yz7x5KS2RRtN5ubEn5gF

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.