Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
4369
   |
Posted - 2014.01.23 17:50:00 -
[1] - Quote
Jadd Hatchen wrote:NobIesse Oblige wrote:I however, am against Respecs outside of massive and fundamental changes to skill/weapons/suits you specced. Why? CCP has yet to ever do this in DUST. They have done "resets" during beta several times. But none of those were because of major changes in the game. They were doing it to see people start over again and to test things out. The thing in 1.7 with the vehicles was NOT a respec either. It was a skill point REFUND for skills that were removed from the game entirely. So knowing that CCP has NEVER given a respce for "massive and fundamental changes", are you still in favor of no respecs for any other reason? Respec really only help with new player retention. New players need time and experience to learn that, "OMG that rail rifle is cool! I want one." or to discover that the heavy suit doesn't do the tings that they had hoped. But by then they've wastes a large percentage of the points that they have. So do we tell them tough luck just grind away with your newb militia fits until you earn the SP to get the stuff you really wanted? Hell that's what makes most of the players quit. Grinding is BORING and this makes people not want to play the damned game. So instead offer them a respec. This mostly benefits the newer players more than it would any vet player. A vet player already knows what's what and has the skills he needs to survive on the battlefield. The new guy has to be extremely knowledgeable about the game to know what to spend points into to even come close to competing. And if they make a mistake they are setback for months as a result. I dunno about you guys, but I would rather help the new guys than let them die in a rut and never see them play again.
A skill respec is when you get the points that were allocated so skills removed from those skills and returned to your unallocated SP pile.
A skill refund is when you get the points that were allocated so skills removed from those skills and returned to your unallocated SP pile.
You'll notice how those two terms mean exactly the same thing. The vehicle respec was a PARTIAL respec, because only PART of your SP was refunded and available for reassignment.
A full respec happened when we came into Uprising, and some players got a second respec after finding that several skills had incorrect descriptions and didn't work as advertised. All SP was refunded to those players, which is what respec MEANS.
Yes, there is a valid argument for - as vehicles got for 1.8 - a partial respec with the addition of racial suit variants and some new racial weapons, when considering we also had - without a respec - the remaining racial rifle variants added recently.
Back on-topic though, there will ALWAYS be a measure of FOTM play in DUST as long as there is even the slightest hint of imbalance anywhere in the game. As long as there is that sense of advantage, AUR respecs will always - A-L-W-A-Y-S - be pay to win. And pay to win is not what DUST should be, so no. Keep arguing that you see logic behind it. I see NOPE. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
4369
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 18:39:00 -
[2] - Quote
Jadd Hatchen wrote:I do not deny that some players will think that they are doing the FOTM thing and that is honestly a valid tactic in both EVE and this game. However i would also argue that someone that already has a solid base in something that he likes (tanks for instance) won't be re-spending those skill points anytime soon. The only people that will be doing this are those that skilled into lets say rail rifles because they are so good now, but later on if the rail rifles get nerfed, then they will want to go back to scrambler rifles or something else. This only lasts until such time as they have maxed out one weapon type and are working on a second or third or fourth one... Then they no longer have a reason to PAY for a respec anymore.
In EVE, you can make it easier to skill into the current FOTM - or to TRY and anticipate the next FOTM and skill into that.
In DUST, the suggestion being made would allow players to UN-train the skills they've trained, not to make future training into the relevant skills easier. There's a MASSIVE difference there.
Quote:You have to remember there is a COST to the respec and that it isn't free. So a vet player isn't likely to do it because they have the core stuff they needed already. Anything else is kinda fluff to them.
THAT'S WHY THIS PROPOSAL IS PAY TO WIN. There's a cost involved and it's a cost based in REAL MONEY, not in-game TIME like the cost involved in EVE. You spend time in EVE to train your skills. You can target the FOTM or an anticipated near-future FOTM to train your character into in EVE. BUT YOU STILL NEED TO CONTINUE TO INVEST TIME TOWARDS THOSE NEW SKILLS.
If there was a system where players could designate a certain number of skills as "preferred skills" in DUST, and upgrading those skills would use 10% less SP, then it would be reasonable for players to be able to reassign their preferred skills with some kind of delay like the one proposed. But even then, it shouldn't cost real money. Just like changing your specialisation in EVE Online doesn't cost real money (at least not above the amount you're paying on the subscription). Even if something like this happens, IT WOULDN'T BE A RESPEC, IT WOULD ALLOW YOU TO MORE EFFICIENTLY INVEST IN FUTURE SKILLS. Like the system used in EVE. You don't get SP back after spending them in EVE, unless the skill tree changes and the skill you had trained is removed. You shouldn't get SP back in DUST unless there are major changes to how skills work or what they mean - like what happened with vehicles coming into 1.7, and to a lesser degree, like what will be happening with 1.8 when we get new racial weapons and suits.
Quote:I understand your argument for it being a possible pay to win option, but assuming that CCP ever finishes the verisimilitude of the game, then they will be able to finally do a final balance pass and there will no longer be the imbalance that would make a respec pay to win.
Until every single weapon, suit and item in the game has identical stats (pro-tip: That will happen NEVER), there will always be some form of imbalance, and there will be players who find the ideal weapon/suit combo. It might be that a particular combination is better for some maps, but another loadout will beat it somewhere else, but people will learn that too, and will take advantage as well as they can..
Quote:So if your argument is that aurum for respecs is pay to win because the game is broken, then duh the game is broken and that is the real reason for the imbalance, not the respecs in and of themselves.
My argument is that the nature of diversity means the game will always be unsuitable for the proposed system.
Even if my previous comment didn'were invalidated, the fact that New Eden is constantly growing and changing means that the perfect balance you're talking about will never last even if it can be reached for a moment. By the time people can be sure the game is truly balanced, a new item will be released, and that will need balancing as well, and will probably necessitate changes to other items because of how it interacts with them.
CCP didn't finish perfectly balancing tanks against Swarm Launchers and Forge Guns before adding Plasma Cannons. They didn't have perfect balance between Shotguns and Assault Rifles before adding Scrambler Rifles. They didn't get everything before that point perfect before we got Combat Rifles and Rail Rifles added. THE GAME WILL NEVER BE PERFECT.
Your suggestion can only work in a game that is already perfect and unchanging. Not only is perfection an impossible goal in the first place, but an unchanging DUST isn't what anyone who plays the game is here for. |