DUST Search - P.L.E.X for Dust

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

P.L.E.X for Dust

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
alten hilt DUST University Ivy League 65	Posted - 2014.02.11 17:46:00 - [1] - Quote P.L.E.X stands for Pilot License Extension and is an item available to Eve pilots for real money. PLEX lets EVE players do a number of things. It can be used to add 30 days of game time to an account, it can enable extra skill training, character re-sculpturing, and most importantly, can be sold on the player market for ISK. It is a Win-Win-Win situation. CCP wins because it is another revenue stream. New players win because it can give them an influx of ISK early in their careers. Veteran players win because they can fund their Eve account entirely with ISK. DUST 514 needs a PLEX; something that is Win-Win-Win. In my opinion, a purchasable monthly character respec could become DUSTGÇÖs PLEX. Name: Neural Remap Implant Cost: 10000 Aurum Description: Once a month, a cloned soldier can utilize this implant to re-allocate their total SP. Lore: Clone scientists long thought that injected skills and the mental resources devoted to mastery of those skills were permanent. This has certainly held true for the Capsuleers. But it was also thought that clone technology could never be utilized outside of a capsule. The Implant changed everything. This implant, which enables clones soldiers, is still largely a mystery. Recently however, scientists made a startling discovery; with minor modification, the implant can erase a cloned soldierGÇÖs skills, while preserving the total skill capability of the soldier. Once utilized, a clone soldier loses all memory of injected skills and becomes like a new cloned soldier, with one important exception: Their total capacity to learn skills is preserved. By repurchasing skill injectors, the cloned soldier can re-allocated their total mental capabilities. While the exact mechanism that enables this effect is still not understood, scientists have determined that this process can only be used safely once every 30 days. Any sooner and rapid mental and neurological destabilization occurs. There are two keys to making this a Win-Win-Win service. Reasonably priced: It must be something that tempts most of the player base. In my opinion, this is less than 10 dollars a month. Most FPS gamers are not willing to pay MMO prices for their shooters. Keep it competitively priced, and many more players will take advantage of the service. Player-traded item: DonGÇÖt release the option until you have a mechanism for players to sell the implant for ISK. Players need to feel like they have the option to purchase the implant with in-game resources. Everyone needs to be able to benefit from the service Why everyone wins with this service: Revenue. The reason PLEX is so successful is because it has real value to players. It enables things they want. A re-spec service is something players want. The ability to GÇÿbuyGÇÖ ISK is a service players want. The ability to try new things, and play different roles is a service players want. The ability to adjust to additions, buffs, and nerfs is a service players want. Player retention, player return: DUST is unlike any other FPS. This is both good, bad, and different. I wonGÇÖt attempt a full explanation here, but it is safe to say that this difference both intrigues players and drives them away. If players had the ability to try something new every month, or adjust to changes in the game without mindlessly grinding SP for months, more players would stay, and more players would return. Breathing room: We, your players, know that DUST is still in development. We know that you have a ton of stuff to add to the game, we want the game to get better and be more balanced. However, every change, every new thing, every nerf, and every buff hits us hard because it costs us our time. You canGÇÖt change something without angering every user of that thing because we invested a lot of time into that thing. You might be making the game more balanced, and better in the long run, but the GÇÿlostGÇÖ SP hurts. For example, I have A LOT of SP into the flaylock pistol, and I havenGÇÖt touched a flaylock since the last balancing pass. 2+ million SP representing over 2 months of game time invested in something that is now outmatched by another sidearm in which I only have 12k SP invested. If you give us a monthly re-spec option you will get a lot more breathing room to make the game. Changes wonGÇÖt be so forum-rage inducing because your player base can adjust to your changes, balances, and additions. FOTM: Players constantly switching to the Fit of the moment is the most common objection I hear to this idea. But letGÇÖs be honest, FOTM exists because some FPS players are constantly looking for the advantage. Do your best to balance the game, but certain players will always seek out the FOTM. DUST is worse than your average FPS because the inclusion of performance enhancing skills and equipment tiers only compounds the problem. And the biggest problem with FOTM in Dust is that only a few players can immediately exploit the game breaking imbalance, while everyone else suffers because they donGÇÖt have the right SP allocation. At least this way, if there is a game-breaking FOTM, everyone can be on the same playing field, instead of 3 GÇô 6 months of a few players exploiting the FOTM while the rest of the players suffer and wait and hope for CCP to make another balance pass (Patch 1.8, TANK 514 anyone?) I welcome your discussion, but please, try to keep it respectful and constructive.
Dustbunny Durrr ReD or DeaD 87	Posted - 2014.02.11 17:50:00 - [2] - Quote Why not just open up a market where players can trade items bought through aurum (augmentations) for ISK. There you go, there's your $ to ISK trade. A respec is far too powerful, and would over time hinder the implant business.
Viktor Hadah Jr Critical-Impact 2561	Posted - 2014.02.11 17:52:00 - [3] - Quote Dustbunny Durrr wrote: Why not just open up a market where players can trade items bought through aurum (augmentations) for ISK. There you go, there's your $ to ISK trade. A respec is far too powerful, and would over time hinder the implant business. that Buying EVE CE codes for Dust ISK Richest Dust corp per capita, 100% corp activity ;-)
alten hilt DUST University Ivy League 65	Posted - 2014.02.11 20:36:00 - [4] - Quote I'm with you on the player market. Players should be able to sell Aurum items for ISK. However, I don't understand your other statement. How is allowing every player the option to respec "too powerful." So long as everyone has access to it then no one person is "too powerfull". And what is this implant business you speak of?
Maken Tosch Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 6796	Posted - 2014.02.11 20:37:00 - [5] - Quote Um... I like the idea of plex for DUST but not in that fashion. Perhaps if the neutral remap was implemented exactly as it appears in Eve. Please note that the remap in Eve is not a respec since no SP is being moved around. Dedicated Scout // Ninja Knifer Everything I know about the Caldari I learned at Nouvelle Rouvenor
alten hilt DUST University Ivy League 67	Posted - 2014.02.11 20:54:00 - [6] - Quote Maken Tosch wrote: Um... I like the idea of plex for DUST but not in that fashion. Perhaps if the neutral remap was implemented exactly as it appears in Eve. Please note that the remap in Eve is not a respec since no SP is being moved around. Ahh, I think I understand the confusion now. My idea, is related to DUST only. I too think that the ability to re-allocated SP in EVE would be too game changing and would interfere with many EVE mechanics. My idea is for DUST only. The ability to re-allocate SP would be tied exclusively to DUST. Lore-wise, this could be the result of the difference in skill complexity, or the difference in clone technology, or tied to the fact that clone soldiers never remain in one body long enough for the specific information to remain permanent, even though their total capacity is constantly increasing. EVE and DUST already handle SP in different ways, the precedent is already set While one of the neat features of New Eden is the way EVE and Dust draw upon a shared history and universe, they are ultimately different games. While permanent SP works well for EVE, I believe it is bad for DUST.
Awry Barux Paladin Survey Force Amarr Empire 494	Posted - 2014.02.11 20:59:00 - [7] - Quote A well-articulated post for a very good idea. +1 or signed or whatever, I like it.
Maken Tosch Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 6798	Posted - 2014.02.11 21:48:00 - [8] - Quote alten hilt wrote: Maken Tosch wrote: Um... I like the idea of plex for DUST but not in that fashion. Perhaps if the neutral remap was implemented exactly as it appears in Eve. Please note that the remap in Eve is not a respec since no SP is being moved around. Ahh, I think I understand the confusion now. My idea, is related to DUST only. I too think that the ability to re-allocated SP in EVE would be too game changing and would interfere with many EVE mechanics. My idea is for DUST only. The ability to re-allocate SP would be tied exclusively to DUST. Lore-wise, this could be the result of the difference in skill complexity, or the difference in clone technology, or tied to the fact that clone soldiers never remain in one body long enough for the specific information to remain permanent, even though their total capacity is constantly increasing. EVE and DUST already handle SP in different ways, the precedent is already set While one of the neat features of New Eden is the way EVE and Dust draw upon a shared history and universe, they are ultimately different games. While permanent SP works well for EVE, I believe it is bad for DUST. Actually the Eve style neutral remap can safely apply to both games. CCP just needs time to overhaul the skill tree to accommodate for Skillbook attributes like willpower, perception, memory, intelligence and charisma. This will encourage cross training while still retaining the one aspect of New Eden that has been around for 11 years now... accepting the permanent consequences of your choices. Dedicated Scout // Ninja Knifer Everything I know about the Caldari I learned at Nouvelle Rouvenor
Melchiah ARANeAE The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 491	Posted - 2014.02.11 23:27:00 - [9] - Quote No. Respecs have only one acceptable time and that's when a skill and any items attached to that skill are completely overhauled. Being able to choose to have a respec in any other situation goes against the ethos of the EVE universe. Evey single decision you have ever made in the EVE universe should affect your future and giving out respecs on a whim goes directly against this. The only reason respecs are present in other games as there are level caps that prevent you from going down every skill tree. However, there are no limits to how much SP you can gain and, by extension, what you can skill into. We want cake and tea.
Aikuchi Tomaru Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1762	Posted - 2014.02.11 23:40:00 - [10] - Quote Quote: In my opinion, a purchasable monthly character respec could become DUSTGÇÖs PLEX. No, just no. Respecs in a game heavily focused on a skillsystem like Dusts is just stupid. Especially stupid when you have to pay for it. Sign up for Caldari FW and defeat the evil Gallente Overlords!

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1918	Posted - 2014.02.11 23:40:00 - [11] - Quote Viktor Hadah Jr wrote: Dustbunny Durrr wrote: Why not just open up a market where players can trade items bought through aurum (augmentations) for ISK. There you go, there's your $ to ISK trade. A respec is far too powerful, and would over time hinder the implant business. that Yep. SupportSP Rollover & an improved Recruting System
501st Headstrong The Unit 514 111	Posted - 2014.02.12 01:54:00 - [12] - Quote I can't say yes to either yes or no. I am enthralled by the Lore Explanation, and I would like a Respec (Remember it's once a month), but I would throw this in. Since the procedure isn't fully safe, Mercs risk damage to memory. Let it be 30%, and this increases the more Respecs are attempted. So say you go into Flaylock Pistols, and then they are catastrophically nerfed. You can Respec at first with no danger. But if you carry on, eventually there's a chance you lose a Million SP, random, followed by more and more so it cannot be abused by vets. So you can have a Respec, but at the cost of losing a good months worth of grind Risk vs. Reward. I am the reason you rage-quit =D
hgghyujh Expert Intervention Caldari State 273	Posted - 2014.02.12 02:19:00 - [13] - Quote no.
Namirial Kensai Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 32	Posted - 2014.02.12 03:49:00 - [14] - Quote alten hilt wrote: I'm with you on the player market. Players should be able to sell Aurum items for ISK. However, I don't understand your other statement. How is allowing every player the option to respec "too powerful." So long as everyone has access to it then no one person is "too powerfull". And what is this implant business you speak of? its not too powerful BETWEEN PLAYERS, but its too powerful as a game tool. since it would mean, no matter how much CCP rebalanced, how much they tried to keep suits competitive with eachother, the best suit, even if by 1%, would be what EVERYONE would have trained, adn nothing else. it would mean whatever the FOTM was, EVERYONE would have it. without respec, sure, train for FOTm and have your fun, it WILL get nerfed/rebalanced, then someone who trained for something else would find themselves suddenly competitive as everyoen tried to train the enw FOTM, then its rebalanced and the cycle continues. with respecs, how would CCP effectively rebalance, when people would only play one thing? not to mention it would make any player-run market pointless, as there would be no need to get/produce a vast majority of modules because they would be "inferior" and no one would train them, only whats good would be trained. any game with real consequences, or with the intent of the players driving the moving force of the game, can only suffer in the long term with respecs as a mechanic, hell, im iffy about them even after rebalances (never received respecs in EVE, despite numerous "rebalances" over the years, we still do fine)
alten hilt DUST University Ivy League 73	Posted - 2014.02.12 16:05:00 - [15] - Quote Permanent SP is not a permanent consequence of player choice. Rather it permanently chains you to the mercy of the developers. Every patch alters the consequences of your SP allocation. How is this a permanent consequence reflecting player choice? DUST and EVE share the same universe, but they are different games and must be designed differently in order to be successful. You can share the lore, the history, the locations, the conflicts, and the power brokers, but you must allow DUST and EVE to develop separate mechanics if you want them to succeed. How would EVE Pilots feel, if their open and expansive universe was replaced with an 16v16 arena? What if every time they undocked they were randomly placed on grid with 15 random allies and 16 random opponents, and they weren't allowed to leave, except to quit the match. EVE would die within a month. My position is that permanent skill points work as a mechanic in EVE, but break the game when applied to DUST. Reason 1: Imbalances matter less in EVE. Because EVE is an open world sandbox, very few game imbalances are game breaking. This is because EVE gives you the freedom to define the time, place, and participants of your fights. Any equipment imbalance can be countered hundreds of different ways. In EVE SP matters less than player choice. DUST is an arena shooter. There is no freedom to alter the fight. You can't bring more mercs than the enemy, you can't catch them unawares, you can't boost your performance through alt accounts, you can't wait until they are doing PVE to gank them. You can always get better internet, better ping, better equipment, better FPS skills, better hacks, better exploits or play more; but these are all external to the game itself. In game, there is no way to counter game-breaking imbalances except to utilize the same OP equipment (hence FOTM). You can take a chance and put your SP into a tactic you think may be a counter to the FOTM, but if you are wrong, you are stuck with wasted SP. Permanent SP actually makes FOTM worse, because everyone who wants a chance to succeed feels compelled to adopt the tactic, just to have a fighting chance. A monthly remap would ensure that any FOTM could be accessed by everybody. Conversely, players who want to try to counter the FOTM are free to develop various tactics because even if it fails, they can try something else next month, or adopt the FOTM. Reason 2: SP is accumulated differently In EVE, all SP is accumulated passively. This means that the active hardcore player does not have an SP advantage (and thus equipment advantage) over the casual player. Assuming the two players sub at the same time, and make similar neural remap and implant choices they will have access to the same equipment at the same time, and have the same relative power (personal skill aside). In DUST, there is huge disparity between the SP accumulation rate of an active hardcore player who is willing to drop money on boosters and a casual player. This means that paying hardcore players will always have an SP advantage over casual players. And because of Reason 1, this means that there will always be players who have the extra SP necessary to immediately exploit the OP FOTM. While everyone else is building SP to use the current FOTM, those players exploiting the FOTM are accumulating their next batch of SP to apply to the next FOTM created during the next patch. And they are accumulating that SP faster. The casual player will never be able to keep up. Reason 3: FPS players have expectations FPS gamers are all PvPers. They are all interested in pitting their skills against other players. However, they all expect the same thing: an equal playing field where player skill trumps all other factors. This is the core mechanic of every successful FPS ever developed: A level playing field where player tactics and skill are the most important factors. In reality, things like lag, ping, computer equipment, hacks, cheats, and exploits impact the outcome. FPS players want an level playing field. In other FPS games, if the developers put in new equipment, or buff a weapon too much, or nerf a weapon into irrelevance it really doesn't matter. Because everyone can use the new equipment, everyone can use the OP weapon, or freely abandon the nerfed weapon. Even if the changes are game breaking, everyone is free to adapt or adopt, thus preserving the level playing field. Every patch places most players in a lose-lose situation. Spend the next 3 - 6 months getting steamrolled by those fortunate enough to have their choices buffed (or the extra SP necessary to immediately utilize it) or walk away from the game because their choices were invalidated, all the while knowing that they will be even further disadvantaged if they choose to return. The unintended consequence of permanent SP in DUST is a dying game.
Tallen Ellecon KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1452	Posted - 2014.02.12 17:58:00 - [16] - Quote I also have to pay for ALL of my EVE SP, and still have no option to change it. If I want more accounts to aquire SP I have to pay more. Why should free SP in Dust be allowed to be pay to reallocate because stats change? I know you have the right intention but there is more to being against respecs than just fearing FOTM. This game is in an early balancing stage and will constantly be retweaking everything, so repecs have been given out on the rare occasions they had to, which were only when there was a skill tree change, they were never intended to be a mechanic. I've managed to get to 30 mil SP without regretting more than 1 or 2 mil SP, which isn't even useless, just not Gallente (I wanna go full Gallente). I don't see why people who invested a months worth of SP into something in a game they knew was subject to rebalance should be able to take back that decision, it's the risk we all take. The possible monetization from respecs can be offset by the lost gain from boosters and AUR gear. Even if they do make more money it would create a game where those who had money would be able to jump on the next OP thing leaving those without the funds behind and at a distinct disadvantage. This would be pay to win as opposed to pay to speed up and it's one reason why IMO this is one of the more balanced pay schemes, even if it's not perfect. A vets respec would be worth far more than a new players which also creates a very unfair advantage. I'm not annoyed that people want respecs, and getting your gear changed is tough, but that fortunately is the nature of a game like this, things will constantly be changed and added, what annoys me is that people think each one warrants a respec. Like I said, respecs are done because CCP has changed the skills tree itself, not added things or changed the skills, it's not something they want to do or like to do. Now that I got that out I do like the idea of monetizing on Aurum bought stuff on an open market like PLEX. Trading boosters and Aurum gear opens the way for a PLEX like system and I fully support that. Ask for balance, not repecs, balance helps everyone. Where is my Gallente sidearm? 1.8? When is that? SoonGäó514 "No blue tags make Tallen go crazy."
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 485	Posted - 2014.02.12 18:02:00 - [17] - Quote I agree we should have PLEX(MLEX?), but for other reasons: 1) To do away with SP boosters, and let MLEXed accounts earn SP faster 2) To do away with AUR 3) To enable the indirect purchasing of ISK via a PLEX style market interaction But back to your proposition. Your argument basically boils down to this: Everyone being able to spec into FOTM is a good thing. And your motivation boils down to this: I specced into the flaylock because it was overpowered and now I''m sad. Sorry, but that's alot of words, for a lot of nope. The emphasis should not be on making the game unlivable by letting everyone immediately abuse imbalances, the emphasis should be on getting CCP to more quickly resolve imbalances.
Kaius Coriolanus Gothic Wars Consortium 13	Posted - 2014.02.12 19:53:00 - [18] - Quote +1 for the original post, make it happen CCP
alten hilt DUST University Ivy League 76	Posted - 2014.02.12 20:02:00 - [19] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: I agree we should have PLEX(MLEX?), but for other reasons: 1) To do away with SP boosters, and let MLEXed accounts earn SP faster 2) To do away with AUR 3) To enable the indirect purchasing of ISK via a PLEX style market interaction But back to your proposition. Your argument basically boils down to this: Everyone being able to spec into FOTM is a good thing. And your motivation boils down to this: I specced into the flaylock because it was overpowered and now I''m sad. Sorry, but that's alot of words, for a lot of nope. The emphasis should not be on making the game unlivable by letting everyone immediately abuse imbalances, the emphasis should be on getting CCP to more quickly resolve imbalances. With all due respect, you are dead wrong about my motivations. FOTM is not good. FOTM destroys games; even if everybody can switch to the OP thing, many choose not to because of personal preference, roleplaying, personal gaming preference, sportsmanship, etc. The only thing worse than FOTM, is a FOTM that only a few people can (or will) take advantage of. It drives people away from the game, because no one likes to feel like the match is rigged in favor of the few. And how much faster will CCP move to fix something when everyone switches to it and their metrics for that thing go through the roof? Remember the flaylock? Some of us were using it long before it became FOTM. But CCP did nothing till their flaylock kills went through the roof. Speaking of the flaylock, I chose it because I studied out the games deficiencies and choose weapons that augmented my abilities. The flaylock let me deal with speed-tanked scouts during an era when speed tank was king. In those days, many problems made killing fast targets in CQC near impossible. (lag, net code, FOV, aim mechanics, etc). CCP has made many improvements since those days and I wouldn't go back just to have a flaylock. But this the is point of my argument. I made decisions in order to counter conditions that no longer exist in the game because of developer intervention. The game is better as a result, but those SP can never be reclaimed and applied to current conditions.
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1664	Posted - 2014.02.12 21:17:00 - [20] - Quote CCP already said no. I don't see why you idiots keep on asking......... 'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever!

alten hilt DUST University Ivy League 76	Posted - 2014.02.13 16:35:00 - [21] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: CCP already said no. I don't see why you idiots keep on asking......... Because it would be good for the game and the community. I can't tell you how many of my friends have walked away from the game because of the SP grind / imbalance (among other things). Some express interest in returning when new stuff is introduced, but the thought of having to grind SP for months just to use it completely turns them off. I'm the last of a group of FPS gamers playing DUST. Because I'm an EVE player, I'll stick around because I like the concept, and the potential DUST has to integrate with EVE. But my FPS friends won't touch it with a ten foot pole. But when I ask them if they would return if they could re-allocate their SP, many (not all) say that they would give DUST another chance.
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1930	Posted - 2014.02.13 18:42:00 - [22] - Quote Cross Atu wrote: See this thread for all the reasons why an unlimited or 'pay to play" respec system is bad for Dust and bad for New Eden. There are quite a few points raised in that thread, but if you can work out a way around those drawbacks then by all means lets discuss it. Cheers, Cross ps ~ there is however another thread which provided a possible alternative that solves many of the issues raised within the first link, perhaps starting there would be more desirable. Source The second thread listed has the virtue of already being considered by CCP. I'm interested in responses to the material I've linked, it may be from other threads but it's all directly linked to the respec discussion so pretty much directly on topic. If the specific suggestion in the OP evades some(all?) of the problems raised within the first linked thread then do please specify how it does so. 0.02 ISK Cross PS ~ There are some very legit motives that have pushed people towards wanting respecs, most of those however could be at minimum deeply mitigated by CCP adopting a policy of granulated tuning rather than sweeping changes, having the baseline of racial variants in game (coming in 1.8), focusing more on transparency (more interaction in feedback threads, more frequent DevBlogs et al), and a robust/enhanced NPE. All of the above listed things should happen anyway regardless of respec, but they aid in a diminished need for one and so should be given pride of place when addressing the situation. SupportSP Rollover & an improved Recruting System


Pages: 1 :: [one page]

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.